Can the US Ever Initiate a Nuclear First Strike on Russia?

The American actions in the past three decades have significantly altered perceptions and threats associated with a US nuclear first strike on Russia. This article explores the key factors that contribute to this increasing concern and examines the potential impacts on global stability.

Key Factors Increasing the Perception of a US Nuclear First Strike on Russia

The core contributing factors to the heightened fears of a US nuclear first strike on Russia are:

US Withdrawal from the ABM Treaty (2002) and Continued Missile Development: The United States withdrew from the Antiballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty in 2002, allowing for more advanced missile defense systems. This development gives the US a more effective capability to intercept Russian second-strike missiles, thereby reducing the threat of mutually assured destruction (MAD). US Withdrawal from the INF Treaty (2018) and Hypersonic Glide Vehicles (HGVs): The United States departed from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty in 2018, leading to the deployment of longer-range missiles in Eastern Europe and Germany. This allows for rapid strikes on major Russian cities and military installations. The possible deployment of HGVs further reduces warning times and complicates Russia's strategic response. NATO Expansion and Strategic Decapitation Weapons: The expansion of NATO has brought its member states closer to Russia's borders, potentially providing a platform for non-nuclear strategic decapitation attacks. This shift in military positioning has been a significant cause for concern among Russian leaders. US Space Force and Space Assets: Investing in the Space Force and space-based assets increases the ability to detect and neutralize Russian nuclear warheads mid-flight, posing a new threat to Russia's strategic deterrent. Complete Breakdown in US-Russia Relations: The complete breakdown in relations, dialogue, and treaties between the two countries has exacerbated mistrust and heightened the risk of a first strike scenario. The lack of communication and cooperation further erodes the foundation of mutual strategic security.

The Russian Response and Implications for Global Stability

Russia's response to these developments includes the deployment of advanced weapons like the Avangard and the modernization of its nuclear arsenal. Additionally, Russia has placed some nuclear weapons in Belarus and provided support to nuclear-armed states like North Korea. While these measures enhance Russia's survivability, they also increase the stakes in a potential nuclear exchange.

Due to systems like Dead Hand SLBMs and the robustness of Russian ICBMs, a US nuclear first strike may not necessarily degrade Russia's strategic deterrent as significantly as initially feared. However, the lack of mature ABM technology and limited interceptor capabilities leave room for potential strategic advantages for the US.

The Most Dangerous Developments

Among the most critical threats to global stability are:

Lack of Warning Times: Proximity of European bases to Russia makes it difficult for both sides to detect and respond to launches with sufficient warning. Complete Breakdown in US-Russia Relations: The absence of trust and cooperation between the two superpowers dramatically increases the risk of a miscalculated or accidental first strike. Militarization of Space: The increased militarization of space poses new and complex challenges to global security, making it more difficult to predict and respond to potential threats.

In conclusion, the actions by the United States have significantly shifted the balance of power and increased the risk of a nuclear first strike on Russia. While Russia has taken steps to modernize its arsenal, the complete breakdown in relations and the militarization of space continue to pose significant challenges to global stability and mutual deterrence.