"Light my fire! possible escalation in Ukr" Topic

link

CATASTROPHIC SUCCESS: WHAT IF THE UKRAINIAN COUNTEROFFENSIVE ACHIEVES MORE THAN EXPECTED?
Alex Betley | 05.08.23

"If the counteroffensive is surprisingly successful, Putin will be forced to respond in one of two ways—negotiation or escalation. Given Putin's belief in the value of a long-game scenario, his willingness to absorb significant costs, and the potentially disastrous domestic political consequences of unfavorable negotiations, it is more likely than not that Putin would choose escalation. In a situation where Russian forces are routed, Putin would face only two realistic escalation options: throw more human bodies at the Ukrainians or use a nuclear weapon."

Much debate has surrounded Russian nuclear doctrine, particularly when, how, and why Russia might choose to employ a nonstrategic weapon on the battlefield. Nonetheless, one aspect of doctrine Russia has been consistent on is that Russia would at least consider the use of a nuclear weapon if Russian territory is being attacked. Since its annexation of Crimea almost a decade ago, Russia very much considers Crimea part of the Russian homeland. Therefore, any serious threat to Crimea, at a minimum, runs the risk of nuclear use. This risk is significantly enhanced by an effective counteroffensive threatening Crimea in which momentum appears to be clearly with the Ukrainians.

Thus, the stakes of such a scenario are extremely high.

If Putin uses a nuclear weapon in this conflict, the stakes for HIM would be very high. It might give him a temporary tactical or operational advantage, but the downside -- either direct intervention in the war by the US or NATO, or retaliatory strikes against Russia itself with nuclear weapons, would both be disastrous for Russia. Direct involvement by the US would almost guarantee a sound defeat in Ukraine, while a nuclear exchange might mean Russia ceases to exist. I think either option would be very unpalatable, either for Putin himself, or for his lackeys surrounding him. Thus I don't think nuclear weapons will be used. But in war, things can be hard to predict, so I still allow for the possibility (i.e. the Russians are still quite demonstratably capable of doing something stupid).

Damon.

Yes, it's possible the Russians will crack like an egg under the Ukrainian counter-offensive.

While I would wish for such an outcome, most experts are predicting the war will continue into 2024.

Also, the Russians can probably be starved out of Crimea, if the Ukrainians advance elsewhere.

A good analysis. Thanks Doc!

Doubt that Ukr has sufficient weaponry and AMMO… or manpower, for MAJOR offensive. Certainly can bite chunks… but troops getting tired. Western Armour.. not very Much on Strategic scale… helpful but not War Winning! AMMO ESSENTIAL!

There are a number of fascinating questions here such as do the Ukrainians have the manpower and ammo for an offensive? Will they just take back a few strategic towns, crossroads, etc., and go on the defensive? If they do penetrate the Russian defenses, do the Russians use a tac-nuke on the leading elements? What happens then? Trying to cut through the propaganda, the various news outlets who are basically guessing, and so on, it's hard to know what is really going on there.

It may be illuminating that the little Ukrainian spoiling attack south of Bakhmut has resulted in two days of advance.

Plenty of reasonable detail and then off the "Putin's going to use nukes" deep end…. No bounding scenarios, no sense of why or even target and nothing about the geo-political consequences for Russia. China and India already don't have Putin's back in any meaningful way and China specifically has made its position very clear regarding nuclear weapon use. If Putin was going nuke just a Ukrainian breakthrough it would have happened already! If the Russian military catastrophically folds its going to be quick. The distances involved could plausibly mean that the occupation could unravel very quickly – possibly quicker than Russian decision making has typically been. And what's Putin planning to nuke? This matters because its about how that escalation will stop what ever is happening. Russian territory, Kyiv, a Ukrainian troop concentration? Actually name checking the government of the day in a opinion piece like that rather gives away its true purpose…. Frankly I'd hope that the relevant bits of the US state department and DoD are worrying about economic aid, equipment supplies and intelligence sharing rather than gaming out improbable scenarios.

If Putin uses a nuclear weapon in this conflict, the stakes for HIM would be very high

Actually, the stakes of him ORDERING their use would be very high, since it would put the Russian military leadership to a loyalty test, where they could either:

1.) launch the nuclear weapons, with all the direct and indirect risks that involves, OR
2.) refuse to launch the weapons, and instead start a coup against the political leadership (which presumably would not be willing to idly watch the military refusal for long).

Also, actually launching nuclear weapons at targets located in Ukraine could result in radioactive fallout well beyond the Ukrainian borders – depending on the wind direction, it could well be blown towards Belorus or Russian Federation territory.

Adding to Griefbringer's analysis, it's likely that the nuclear weapons have suffered from the same corruption as the rest of the military, and now they won't work properly or at all.

I don't think Putin is getting a lot of sleep these days. part two of Griefbringer is only what he deeply fears already and another reason not to risk it.

I think the Ukraine will be successful if the US & NATO, etc. just keep supplying them.