“There can be no winners in a nuclear war, so it should never happen.” This joint statement was made earlier this year by China, France, Russia, the UK and the US – the five official nuclear powers.
The very next month, Russia invaded Ukraine. Since then, world leaders have faced the threat that nuclear war might indeed begin—and soon. From the outset, Vladimir Putin called the conflict existential for Russia and hinted that he might use nuclear weapons to win.
Just over a week ago, Western intelligence officials rushed to their offices over the weekend, alarmed that Moscow’s accusations that Ukraine was ready to use a “dirty bomb” could be a signal that Russia itself was looking for a pretext for a nuclear strike.
Although the immediate crisis has subsided, the overall threat that Russia will use nuclear weapons remains looming. One scenario being discussed within the US government is that Russia’s humiliating defeat at the Battle of Kherson could persuade Putin to use tactical nuclear weapons against Ukrainian forces to turn the tide on the battlefield.
It is objected that Putin would not use nuclear weapons so close to Russian territory for fear of contaminating his own country. But senior U.S. officials point out that tactical nuclear weapons could kill hundreds, not thousands, and devastate and irradiate an area of just a few square miles.
The United States and its allies are focused on preventing Russia from crossing the nuclear threshold through a combination of deterrence and diplomacy.
But they are also thinking about the global consequences of Russian nuclear weapons. As one senior US official put it: “People will study in history classes how they handled this crisis.”
In general, there are four main scenarios: nuclear normalization, nuclear blackmail, war prevention and Armageddon.
It is not difficult to see how the use of Russian nuclear weapons could escalate into a full-scale nuclear war and lead to what President Biden has called “Armageddon.”
Washington warned that if Moscow used nuclear weapons, there would be a response with “catastrophic” consequences for Russia. The Americans have not publicly explained what this response will be. Many commentators think it will be military, but not nuclear. General David Petraeus, the former head of the CIA, said that NATO forces could attack Russian troops in Ukraine using conventional weapons and sink the Russian Black Sea Fleet.
The argument for a Western military response is that if Russia manages to use nuclear weapons and even change the course of the war, then the nuclear taboo that has persisted since 1945 will be broken.
But direct Western military intervention is likely to provoke further Russian reaction.
Then the West and Russia can quickly climb the “escalation ladder”, which will make “Armageddon” quite possible.
Because the prospect of escalation is so dire, there is also a real possibility that even the use of Russian nuclear weapons will not provoke a direct military response from the West – the US will instead try to orchestrate complete economic and diplomatic isolation of Russia.
But it will open the door to another troubling future: “nuclear normalization.” This will show that nuclear weapons are a tool that can be used in an aggressive war, not just for deterrence.
Russia and even China may be tempted to cross the nuclear threshold again. And non-nuclear states, such as Japan, South Korea, Germany and many others, will rush to acquire their own nuclear weapons.
In addition, markets will collapse and the public around the world may panic, which could lead to a massive exodus from cities. Fear of such consequences is leading to increased talk about the need to begin peace negotiations with Russia in advance.
But Western officials are resisting the move now, fearing a third scenario—successful nuclear blackmail. If Russia discovers that it can succeed in wars of aggression simply by threatening to use nuclear weapons, the world will face another dystopian future. What will stop Moscow from further nuclear threats, perhaps directed against Eastern Europe? And what conclusions will China or North Korea draw regarding future conflicts over Taiwan or the Korean Peninsula?
The three worst scenarios – Armageddon, normalization and successful nuclear blackmail – are much more likely than we would like.
But taken together, they are less likely than the fourth possibility—the possibility of avoiding nuclear war. In every previous nuclear crisis since 1945, great power leaders have retreated from the brink. The realization that the wrong move could result in the deaths of millions of people or even destroy the planet is extremely sobering. It has held the world since 1945. And it should work again. More likely.