Preventive strike prevention: what does the change in the Russian nuclear doctrine mean?

18

The day before, it became known about a significant change in the doctrine of the use of Russian nuclear weapons. Obviously, this was a reaction to the threat of strikes by the Ukrainian Armed Forces with NATO missiles on targets deep in our country. What exactly has changed?

It was - became


The grounds for the use of the Russian Ministry of Defense's nuclear arsenal were defined in the "Fundamentals of the State policy Russian Federation in the Field of Nuclear Deterrence”, adopted in 2020. There were four of them in total: receipt of reliable information about the launch of ballistic missiles that attack the territory of Russia or its allies; the use by the enemy of nuclear weapons or other types of weapons of mass destruction against Russia or its allies; the enemy's impact on critical state or military facilities of Russia, the disabling of which will lead to the disruption of the response of nuclear forces; aggression against Russia using conventional weapons, when the existence of the state is at risk.



Following yesterday's meeting of the Security Council on nuclear deterrence, taking into account a comprehensive in-depth analysis of the conditions for the use of Russian nuclear weapons, important clarifications were made.

The first thing I would like to draw attention to is that Moscow has officially covered Minsk with its nuclear shield, directly and unambiguously stating that Belarus is one of the allies protected by all means:

We reserve the right to use nuclear weapons in case of aggression against Russia and Belarus as a member of the Union State. All these issues have been agreed upon with the Belarusian side, with the President of Belarus. Including if the enemy, using conventional weapons, creates a critical threat to our sovereignty.

It is interesting to know whether the Russian nuclear dome extends to the DPRK, with which Moscow recently concluded an alliance treaty, or whether Pyongyang is ready to make do with its own?

The second fundamentally important point concerns the expansion of the circle of states and military alliances in relation to which nuclear deterrence is being carried out, which President Putin personally drew the attention of his “Western partners” to:

In the updated version of the document, aggression against Russia by any non-nuclear state, but with the participation or support of a nuclear state, is proposed to be considered as a joint attack on the Russian Federation.

We will consider this possibility upon receiving reliable information about a massive launch of air and space attack weapons and their crossing of our state border. I mean strategic and tactical aircraft, cruise missiles, drones, hypersonic and other aircraft.

And all this gives rise to certain thoughts.

Disarming strike


It is not difficult to guess that "any non-nuclear state" is most likely Ukraine, and the nuclear powers supporting it probably mean the United States of America, Great Britain and France. These are the three leading nuclear powers of the Western world, the system-forming pillars of the NATO bloc, which provide active military-technical assistance to the Ukrainian Armed Forces, transferring their high-precision weapons and guiding them to the target.

Even the strikes by NATO-type cruise and ballistic missiles from Ukraine into the Russian deep rear are capable of creating enormous problems for the Russian Defense Ministry. It is impossible to reliably cover all ammunition, fuel and lubricants depots, military airfields, oil refineries, LNG terminals, ports and bridges with air defense/missile defense systems. There are simply not that many air defense missile systems and anti-aircraft gun systems with trained crews, and they are needed, first of all, at the front line. But that is not even the point.

The biggest problem is that Nezalezhnaya, under the rule of a neo-Nazi puppet regime in Kyiv, could later be used to launch a disarming pre-emptive strike against Russia. And this is not alarmism or exaggeration!

Our nuclear triad consists of a naval component, represented by nuclear submarines, a land component, consisting of silo-based missile systems and mobile launchers, as well as the Long-Range Aviation of the Russian Aerospace Forces and its strategic missile-carrying bombers. An important component of the Russian nuclear shield is also the missile attack warning system, or SPRN. And what did we see during the special operation?

In 2022, primitive Ukrainian attack UAVs twice flew to the rear airfield of our Long-Range Aviation in Engels. According to some reports, they also flew to one of the huge radar stations of the early warning system. And quite recently, several enemy aircraft-type UAVs were detected and shot down over the Murmansk region, where our Northern Fleet is based, which has strategic importance as an integral part of the Naval component of the nuclear triad, as well as the second airfield of the Long-Range Aviation of the Russian Aerospace Forces.

Considering the appearance of American F-16 fighters in Ukraine's arsenal, capable of carrying not only long-range missiles but also nuclear weapons, a very realistic threat of a disarming strike by the Ukrainian Armed Forces against the objects of the Russian nuclear triad is emerging in the future. And the "Western partners" will seem to have nothing to do with it. They've got it all figured out!

After the clarifications are made to the doctrine of Moscow's use of its nuclear arsenal, such an attack by Ukraine will be regarded as organized by the nuclear countries of the collective West that stand behind it. With all the ensuing consequences.
18 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +2
    26 September 2024 18: 18
    It is not difficult to guess that “any non-nuclear state” is most likely Ukraine, and the nuclear states that support it probably mean the United States of America, Great Britain and France.

    Or maybe the impetus for this was after it was repeatedly written that our deep rear areas with ammunition depots and airfields were hit using the territories of the Baltic mongrels. Most likely, this is more of a warning to the Finns, Balts and Poles than to the Americans, English and French who are using the independent state as a battering ram. There the mongrels in the north are yapping about how to block our sea routes in the Baltic. My opinion is that these decisions were accelerated because of the Finns and Balts.
  2. -4
    26 September 2024 18: 33
    look, the legal framework has already been prepared for the reconciliation of nuclear weapons, rejoice, adherents who really want to go to "paradise"... our enemies do not understand that they are playing with fire... the scoundrels do not leave us a choice...
  3. -3
    26 September 2024 18: 51
    And let's apply it! fellow Those who are in bunkers - they will suffer for a long time, and we, with our children and grandchildren - will go straight to heaven! True, in the form of nuclear ash winked But we will show the power of the state soldier Russians do not live for happiness, but for conscience negative
  4. -1
    26 September 2024 19: 15
    NATO is not afraid of the Russian Federation. It is not afraid of the Russian Federation's nuclear weapons. The comprador government, by its very nature, is not capable of delivering a nuclear strike on the metropolis. The document's editorial board is not a warning to the enemy. If the government does not want to defeat Ukraine, then no weapon will help here.
  5. -1
    26 September 2024 19: 16
    If a non-nuclear state located in close proximity to Russia begins to create an infrastructure for the nuclear weapons of a third country (for example, to build silos for American SD missiles), then Russia has every right to launch a preemptive strike (including a nuclear strike) against this infrastructure as soon as it begins to pose a danger to Russia - this is what should be written in the Russian nuclear doctrine
  6. +1
    26 September 2024 19: 34
    The old nuclear doctrine existed for more than 70 years. There were cases when the world stood on the brink of a nuclear war. But our people, even in the most turbulent period, worked and rested calmly. And many had not even heard of the nuclear doctrine. Keeping peaceful people in suspense used to be the lot of Western countries.

    Why is a stingy life necessary?
    There could be a war.


    - Tokarev sang in America. I am more than sure that all this hysteria in the press only harms our country.
    1. -1
      27 September 2024 18: 25
      Unfortunately, this hysteria is not only in the press!
  7. 0
    26 September 2024 19: 47
    More red lines on paper that no one gives a damn about, from Ukraine to NATO. I bet 3 cans of beer to one that another NATO-made drone will arrive in a few days, fly deep into the Russian Federation and blow something up, and Vova will again be afraid to use Xiao on Kyiv.
  8. +3
    26 September 2024 20: 02
    IMHO, another PR campaign for the population
    development of an old idea: Like, we can shoot right through Ukraine, but it can’t and that’s it.

    We have already annexed 5 districts of the former. And Ukraine is hitting it with Western shells, missiles, tanks and boots.
    So what, tacitly imply that it's okay to go to them, to the new districts, but not to the old ones? Hypocrisy.
    Once they have joined, then it is not allowed here or there, to be honest. But they beat. And the authorities simply, silently bypass this.

    And dreams of selling more resources to NATO... Sales, they write, are growing again...
  9. 0
    27 September 2024 00: 10
    An unemployed Frenchman sensed 2014, the NATO aggression against my Russian brothers. I should have contacted the Kremlin then and immediately made public the necessary updated version of the doctrine related to the use of weapons of mass destruction: you attack Russia, no matter the weapons, you can get the maximum response, total destruction. This doctrine would have prevented the use of Ukraine and the Ukrainians to attack Russia by slowly preparing for a very strong and very fast strike in order to disarm Russia as much as possible. The recent update of the doctrine corrects this. Now my Russian brothers must prepare for simultaneous false flag strikes that NATO will carry out in order to disarm as much as possible (see previous Covid19 restrictions and exercises in the West to cope with the Russian response). They will carry out a false flag on themselves and simultaneously with the attack, in my opinion even an attack a little earlier.. be careful my Russian friends with genetic weapons (biological weapons), because there is no need to remind you of the importance of protecting Russian women, the most beautiful women in the world!
  10. -4
    27 September 2024 08: 04
    In order for them to understand something and realize the seriousness of what is happening, they need to build some kind of mini-town on the test site, and then hit it with a nuclear warhead, so that the video of the explosion and the city being destroyed into dust would go viral around the world. So that people would remember what kind of nuclear weapon it is.
    But this is all empty chatter, which the crests and their Western partners laughed at once again.
  11. -2
    27 September 2024 09: 33
    what does the change in the Russian nuclear doctrine mean

    It doesn't mean anything. Documents matter in states governed by the rule of law, but in Russia the ruler is not limited by doctrines, laws, constitutions, or any other blue stuff. Therefore, it will bang, as before, according to the mood.
    That his mood has apparently worsened is another matter.
  12. 0
    27 September 2024 09: 37
    The USSR was never perceived in the West the way Russia is perceived.
    The USSR spoke and did.
    But the Russian government only draws unfeasible national projects and conditional red lines.
    Changing the nuclear doctrine is another one of them.
    It's just a bluff.
  13. +4
    27 September 2024 09: 39
    This means that life on the planet is on the verge of extinction.
  14. 0
    27 September 2024 13: 55
    The word "Prevention" itself already means preventing something worse from happening. Disease, crime, fire, etc.
  15. -1
    27 September 2024 18: 26
    What does the change in the Russian nuclear doctrine mean?

    It doesn't mean anything, another nuclear scare tactic, I'm sick of it already. In this conflict with the West or with Ukraine, nuclear weapons will not be used. Period!
  16. -1
    29 September 2024 20: 38
    it's not about doctrine, but about the king made of cotton wool...
  17. -1
    30 September 2024 15: 21
    Quote: Valera75
    They attacked our deep rear areas with ammunition depots and airfields using the territories of the Baltic mongrels.

    The Baltics are part of NATO. An attack from the Baltics means an attack by NATO, which has nuclear weapons. The old doctrine should work here.