A Russian lawmaker has issued a dire warning of nuclear retaliation, declaring that “nothing would be left” of the United States, following reports that Washington has authorized Ukraine to use US-supplied long-range missiles for strikes deep inside Russian territory.
Andrei Gurulev, a deputy in Russia’s State Duma and a former deputy commander of the Southern Military District, made the threat during a televised appearance on the state-controlled Russia-1 network. He accused the US of pushing the conflict toward catastrophic escalation.
“There will essentially be nothing left of America, which is trying to drag us into escalation,” Gurulev declared. He added, “There will be no Biden or Trump. America is being inflicted with 95 percent total damage.”
Gurulev further suggested that Russia might target the nuclear capabilities of the United Kingdom and France in retaliation. He added that such measures could serve as a deterrent to US actions.
These statements come in response to reports that the Biden administration has approved the use of long-range Army Tactical Missile Systems (ATACMS) by Ukraine to conduct strikes within Russian territory.
The US had previously refrained from such a move, fearing it could provoke a significant escalation in the conflict.
The Kremlin was quick to denounce the shift in US policy. Dmitry Peskov, spokesperson for Russian President Vladimir Putin, accused Washington of “adding fuel to the fire” and provoking further escalation in the ongoing conflict.
At a United Nations Security Council meeting marking 1,000 days since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, Russia’s UN Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia criticized Western leaders, stating that Britain and France were “playing into the hands of the exiting administration” in Washington. He warned that Europe could face “large-scale escalation with drastic consequences.”
The timing of the US decision marks a significant shift, as it coincides with North Korea’s reported involvement in the conflict.
According to officials from the US, South Korea, and NATO, North Korean troops are believed to be assisting Russian forces in countering Ukrainian advancements near Russia’s Kursk border region.
A US official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, revealed that North Korea’s entry into the conflict was a major factor in President Biden’s decision to relax missile usage restrictions for Ukraine.
The policy change was reportedly finalized shortly before Biden departed for the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in Peru.
Russia’s Nuclear Threats Escalate As West Doubles Down On Ukraine Support
The recent statement from Russian lawmakers continues a pattern of nuclear rhetoric from Moscow directed at the West over its support for Ukraine.
This nuclear saber-rattling began in September 2022 when Russia, facing the potential for a large-scale Ukrainian counteroffensive, first invoked the threat of nuclear escalation. However, this rhetoric was quickly dialed back.
In 2023, as Russian military progress stalled and NATO nations provided Ukraine with more advanced weaponry, some Russian analysts suggested that Russia might lower its threshold for nuclear use.
Sergey Karaganov, a Russian security expert, even proposed limited nuclear strikes against Western Europe to reinstate the West’s fear of Russia’s nuclear capabilities. However, his proposal was rejected by both Russian experts and President Putin.
Despite this, the Kremlin has increasingly embraced the idea of using nuclear threats to deter further Western support for Ukraine. Russian military exercises involving tactical (non-strategic) nuclear weapons have been more prominently showcased, with the most recent instance occurring last spring.
In September, Putin further revised Russia’s “nuclear doctrine” to include scenarios where Russia might respond with nuclear weapons to a critical threat to its sovereignty, particularly if a non-nuclear state attacks Russia with the backing or involvement of a nuclear power.
“Aggression against Russia by any non-nuclear state, but with the support of a nuclear state, is proposed to be considered as their joint attack on Russia,” Putin stated during a televised Security Council meeting.
Steven Pifer, a non-resident senior fellow at the Brookings Institute, observed that these changes introduce more ambiguity into Russian nuclear doctrine.
This ambiguity, he argued, may be intended to sow doubt within Western capitals about the wisdom of sending increasingly sophisticated weapons to Ukraine or lifting restrictions on their use.
While such threats may have delayed some Western decisions on military aid, they have not been enough to prevent them. The weaponry now provided to Ukraine, such as main battle tanks, ATACMS missiles, and F-16 fighters, represents a significant leap in sophistication compared to what was supplied before 2022.
Pifer also pointed out that nuclear weapons have proven most useful as a deterrent against nuclear or major conventional threats, not as a means of influencing smaller-scale conflicts.
The long history of nuclear weapons—almost 80 years—suggests that their power to sway outcomes beyond the threat of nuclear retaliation or massive conventional warfare is limited.
For instance, despite its nuclear arsenal, the US was unable to achieve victory in Vietnam, just as the Soviet Union’s nuclear capabilities did not prevent its failure in Afghanistan.
- Contact the author at ashishmichel(at)gmail.com
- Follow EurAsian Times on Google News
