Current Russian nuclear doctrine doesn’t require an enemy state to use nuclear weapons against it as justification for its own strike. While the use of nuclear weapons to protect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Russian state might sound reasonable, the illegal annexation of Crimea in 2014 shows how available such justifications might be. ‘Unpredictable consequences’The worst has so far been avoided because the US and its NATO allies are not belligerents in the Ukraine war, having carefully avoided direct involvement, declining appeals for a NATO-enforced no-fly zone. Read more: Ukraine crisis: how do small states like New Zealand respond in an increasingly lawless world? In return, Russia continues to ramp up the rhetoric, warning the West of “unpredictable consequences” should military assistance continue.

Source: The Guardian April 22, 2022 02:31 UTC