By Smartencyclopedia Newsroom *

Minsk and Moscow share strong military cooperation, and Belarus has been seen as a potential launching point for potential military actions in neighboring Ukraine.

Vladimir Putin’s recent announcement regarding the deployment of tactical nuclear weapons in Belarus seems to be a strategic move aimed at escalating the ongoing conflict in Ukraine. This announcement follows Putin’s previous warnings that Russia is prepared to utilize “all available means,” including its nuclear arsenal, to defend its territory against potential attacks.

Belarus, in response, stated on Tuesday that it had made the decision to host these weapons after facing significant pressure from the United States and its allies, who have been actively seeking to influence Belarus’ political and geopolitical trajectory.

The statement made by the Belarusian foreign minister highlights that Belarus has faced significant political, economic, and information pressure from the United States, the United Kingdom, NATO allies, and EU member states over the past two and a half years. As a result of these circumstances and the associated concerns and risks to national security, Belarus feels compelled to enhance its own security and defense capabilities.

Belarus further clarified that the Russian nuclear deployment plans would not violate international non-proliferation agreements, as Belarus would not have direct control over these weapons. This suggests that the deployment would be carried out in coordination with Russia and under Russian control.

Analyzing Putin’s statement and its implications reveals that this move represents a significant development in the ongoing conflict in Ukraine. By announcing the intention to deploy tactical nuclear weapons in Belarus, Putin is signaling a heightened willingness to escalate the conflict and defend Russian interests. The deployment of such weapons carries substantial geopolitical implications and has the potential to further strain relations between Russia and the international community. It underscores the importance of closely monitoring the situation and its potential impact on regional stability and global security.

According to Putin’s explanation, President Alexander Lukashenko of Belarus has long requested Moscow to deploy nuclear weapons in Belarus due to their close military ties and Belarus’s role as a staging ground for the invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.

Putin also mentioned that Russia has already assisted in modernizing Belarusian warplanes to make them capable of carrying nuclear weapons, a point repeatedly emphasized by Belarus’s authoritarian leader.

The immediate trigger for the deployment of Russia’s tactical nuclear weapons in Belarus, as stated by Putin, was the UK government’s decision to supply Ukraine with armor-piercing shells containing depleted uranium. Although Putin later corrected his initial claim that these rounds had nuclear components, he argued that they pose an additional danger to the civilian population and could contaminate the environment.

Furthermore, Putin asserted that Russia’s deployment of tactical nuclear weapons in Belarus follows the precedent set by the United States, which has stationed its nuclear weapons in countries such as Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, and Turkey for decades. He argued that this move does not violate international treaties on nuclear weapons proliferation, despite previous Russian arguments that the U.S. breached the pact by deploying nuclear weapons on the territory of its NATO allies.

It is essential to consider multiple perspectives and monitor developments to gain a comprehensive understanding of the situation.

Putin’s recent action stands in contrast to a statement issued by him and Chinese President Xi Jinping following their discussions at the Kremlin last week. In that statement, they expressed their opposition to the deployment of atomic weapons by nuclear powers beyond their own territories, seemingly aimed at the United States.

What do tactical nuclear weapons entail? Tactical nuclear weapons are designed to engage and neutralize enemy troops and weaponry on the battlefield. They possess a shorter range and a lower yield compared to the nuclear warheads found on long-range strategic missiles that have the capacity to devastate entire cities.

Unlike strategic weapons, which have been subject to arms control agreements between Moscow and Washington, tactical weapons have not been restricted by such pacts. Russia has not disclosed specific details or numbers regarding their tactical nuclear weapons arsenal.

The United States government estimates that Russia possesses approximately 2,000 tactical nuclear weapons, including aircraft-deliverable bombs, short-range missile warheads, and artillery rounds.

While strategic nuclear weapons are deployed on land or submarines, ready for immediate launch, tactical nuclear weapons are stored in tightly secured facilities in Russia. Transporting them to combat units requires time and coordination.

Certain Russian factions have advocated for the Kremlin to demonstrate a warning to the West by positioning some tactical nuclear weapons in closer proximity to the aircraft and missiles intended for their deployment.

What actions will Russia take? Putin has announced that Russia has already assisted in upgrading ten Belarusian aircraft to enable them to carry nuclear weapons, with training for their crews scheduled to commence on April 3. Additionally, Russia has supplied Belarus with the Iskander short-range missile systems, capable of accommodating conventional or nuclear warheads.

Putin stated that the construction of storage facilities for nuclear weapons in Belarus will be finalized by July 1. However, he did not disclose the number of nuclear weapons that will be stationed there or the timeline for their deployment.

Putin emphasized that Russia will maintain control over any nuclear weapons stationed in Belarus, similar to the United States’ control over its tactical nuclear weapons located on the territories of its NATO allies.

If Russia proceeds with sending nuclear weapons to Belarus, it would signify the first deployment of such weapons beyond Russian borders since the early 1990s. Following the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991, Belarus, Ukraine, and Kazakhstan inherited substantial nuclear arsenals but agreed to transfer them to Russia in subsequent years.

What are the potential consequences? Putin’s recent statement once again employs the nuclear threat as a means to signal Moscow’s preparedness to escalate the conflict in Ukraine. This move carries significant implications and underscores Russia’s willingness to leverage its nuclear capabilities in the ongoing regional tensions.

The potential deployment of tactical nuclear weapons in Belarus, which shares a 1,084-kilometer (673-mile) border with Ukraine, would enable Russian aircraft and missiles to reach potential targets in Ukraine more swiftly and conveniently, should Moscow decide to employ them. Moreover, it would expand Russia’s ability to target multiple NATO members in Eastern and Central Europe.

This development coincides with Kyiv’s preparations for a counteroffensive to reclaim territories currently occupied by Russia.

Dmitry Medvedev, the deputy head of Russia’s Security Council, issued a warning last week that any attempts by Ukraine to regain control over the Crimean peninsula pose a threat to the “very existence of the Russian state,” a situation that, according to Russia’s security doctrine, would warrant a nuclear response. It is important to note that Russia annexed Crimea from Ukraine in 2014, an act deemed illegal by the international community.

Medvedev further asserted, “Every day of supplying Western weapons to Ukraine makes the nuclear apocalypse closer.” His statement reflects the view that the provision of additional weaponry to Ukraine by its Western allies could escalate the conflict and increase the risk of a nuclear confrontation.

Ukrainian military analyst Oleh Zhdanov suggests that Putin’s objective with this move is to dissuade Ukraine’s Western allies from providing further weapons to Kyiv prior to any potential counteroffensive.

These statements and actions underscore the complex and tense dynamics surrounding the conflict in Ukraine, with potential implications for regional stability and international relations.

According to Zhdanov, Putin’s deployment of tactical nuclear weapons is seen as a form of “nuclear blackmail” aimed at influencing the battlefield and pressuring Western partners to reduce their supplies of weapons and equipment, using the threat of nuclear escalation as leverage. Zhdanov further states that this move by Putin creates a constant threat, raises tensions, and unsettles both Ukrainians and their Western allies, with the looming presence of Belarus as a potential nuclear platform.

In response to Putin’s actions, Ukraine has called for an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council, emphasizing the need for global unity against someone who endangers the future of human civilization, as stated by the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry.

The United States, on the other hand, has indicated that they have not observed any movement of tactical nuclear weapons following Putin’s announcement regarding Belarus. The US officials have maintained their strategic deterrent posture, as there have been no indications prompting a change.

NATO has rejected Putin’s assertion that Russia’s actions mirror what the US has done for decades, emphasizing that Western allies act in full compliance with their international commitments. The alliance considers Russia’s nuclear rhetoric to be dangerous and irresponsible, though they have not observed any immediate changes in Russia’s nuclear posture.

Lithuania, which shares a border with Belarus, has characterized Putin’s statement as yet another attempt by both regimes to threaten neighboring countries and the entire European continent. They view these moves as desperate attempts to create further tension and destabilization in Europe.

Russia’s Foreign Ministry has responded to Western criticism by highlighting the disregard for Russian calls to withdraw US nuclear weapons from Europe. They reaffirm Moscow’s right to take necessary additional steps to ensure the security of Russia and its allies.

These responses reflect the varied positions and perspectives of Ukraine, its Western allies, NATO, and Russia, highlighting the tensions and complexities surrounding the situation. Monitoring further developments and diplomatic efforts will be crucial in understanding the evolving dynamics.

Source: With Agencies