Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation

Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation

  • Policy Issues
    • Fact Sheets
    • Countries
    • Nuclear Weapons
    • Non-Proliferation
    • Nuclear Security
    • Biological & Chemical Weapons
    • Defense Spending
    • Missile Defense
    • No First Use
  • Nukes of Hazard
    • Podcast
    • Blog
    • Videos
  • Join Us
  • Press
  • About
    • Staff
    • Boards & Experts
    • Jobs & Internships
    • Financials and Annual Reports
    • Contact Us
  • Donate
  • Search
You are here: Home / Nukes of Hazard blog / Little or Too Much

April 14, 2022

Little or Too Much

By John Erath

Sometimes, seemingly little things can mean much.

On April 14, former Russian President turned Putin’s attack bear Dmitry Medvedev warned that Russia would deploy nuclear weapons to the Baltic should Sweden and Finland join NATO. At first, this would seem to mean little; Russia already has hundreds of nuclear weapons, especially nonstrategic weapons, around the Baltic coast and has for years resisted suggestions that it could remove them. In addition, Russia maintains thousands of strategic nuclear weapons that could strike the Nordic countries as well as anywhere else.

As Russia prepared its invasion of Ukraine, it made use of threats of nuclear consequences to dissuade other governments, particularly those of NATO allies, from aiding the victims. In this context, Medvedev’s most recent bluster can be seen as a sign of weakness, desperately trying to convince the Nordic neutrals that moving toward joining the Alliance will undermine their security. But given that the Russian exclave of Kaliningrad on the Baltic is already heavily militarized, and rife with nuclear weapons, the posturing from Moscow would seem to have little value.

There is, however, a big problem illustrated by this small threat. Once again, Putin’s government is using threats of nuclear weapons as an instrument of statecraft. Russia is not keeping nuclear weapons for the “fundamental purpose” of deterrence, but as a tool to achieve its near term foreign policy goals. Should this become normalized, it would bode ill for hopes of future arms control reducing numbers of nuclear weapons and the threat they pose. Nevertheless, that should remain a goal. The world will be safer with fewer nuclear weapons and with no further proliferation. The attempts of a declining power to retain legitimacy through nuclear blackmail should not be permitted to change this.

Posted in: Europe, Factsheets & Analysis on Russia, Nukes of Hazard blog, Russia, Ukraine

Tweets by Nukes of Hazard

Recent Posts

  • No, We are not Going to War February 1, 2023
  • US says Russia is violating key nuclear arms control agreement January 31, 2023
  • What’s in a Name? January 25, 2023
  • ‘ARMS CONTROL MATTERS’: STATEMENT ON SETTING THE DOOMSDAY CLOCK TO 90 SECONDS TIL MIDNIGHT January 24, 2023
  • Putin’s Military Strategy Ignores Key Principles of War: Ukraine Adviser January 13, 2023
Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation

820 1st Street NE, Suite LL-180
Washington, D.C. 20002
Phone: 202.546.0795

Issues

  • Fact Sheets
  • Countries
  • Nuclear Weapons
  • Non-Proliferation
  • Nuclear Security
  • Defense Spending
  • Biological and Chemical Weapons
  • Missile Defense
  • No First Use

Countries

  • China
  • France
  • India and Pakistan
  • Iran
  • Israel
  • North Korea
  • Russia
  • United Kingdom

Explore

  • Nukes of Hazard blog
  • Nukes of Hazard podcast
  • Nukes of Hazard videos
  • Front and Center
  • Fact Sheets

About

  • About
  • Meet the Staff
  • Boards & Experts
  • Press
  • Jobs & Internships
  • Financials and Annual Reports
  • Contact Us
  • Council for a Livable World
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Instagram
  • Facebook

© 2023 Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation
Privacy Policy

Charity Navigator GuideStar Seal of Transparency