After invading Ukraine in February, Vladimir Putin warned the West not to intervene in Ukraine or face “consequences that you have never encountered in your history.” In a speech to the United Nations, a Russian diplomat said it could resort to nukes in response to “direct aggression” from the West. Nonetheless, the Biden administration has announced another $600 million in military aid to Ukraine to maintain its recent momentum against Russia. 

In an interview on “60 Minutes,” President Biden responded to a question about what he would say to Putin if he is considering using chemical or tactical nuclear weapons against the United States, saying “You will change the face of war unlike anything since World War II.” Straight Arrow News contributor Peter Zeihan doesn’t believe Putin will resort to nuclear weapons, but also wonders what would happen if he did.

Excerpted from Peter’s Sept. 18th “Zeihan on Geopolitics” newsletter:

“What about Russian nukes?”

It’s a question I hear in some form or another almost daily while I’m traveling to speak and meet with clients, or in response to my newsletters. My attitude most days is “well, what about them?”

Let’s consider Russia’s strategic aims in Ukraine. Ukraine, as a buffer state, only continues to perform as such if it’s under Russian control. If not, well… your enemies, perceived or in reality, can flood the space with arms and combatants and use it as a launching pad to strike at the heart of the Russian state. More important, Russia needs to regain control of Ukraine so that if (read: when) it’s deemed necessary, Russian forces can move into places like Poland and Romania and occupy the critical geographies used to move troops and materiel overland to invade Russia.

So-called “tactical,” or small-scale, nuclear weapons aren’t great for holding territory. Nuked territory isn’t great for stationing troops. And long-range ICBMs lobbed at the U.S. or London or Paris are even worse for holding territory, or keeping Russian presidents and a socio-politico-economic mafia elite alive.

This is especially true if we consider the state of Russia’s nuclear arsenal. There are some arguments that even if Russian troops and armored transports and planes and tanks and fuel trucks and MREs and intelligence and cyber and logistical capabilities are at levels far below what the world was expecting, they’re still keeping the crown jewels of Russian defense–the nuclear arsenal–in top operating condition. 

I’m less than convinced. The only thing more foolhardy and full of risk than a cornered, losing Russian president trying to fire nukes willy-nilly? The same-such president pushing the red button and having the world witness a failure to launch.