Prague: NATO’s military non-intervention in Ukraine stems from the harsh reality of Russia’s nuclear capabilities, according to Rob Bauer, Chair of NATO’s Military Committee.
Nuclear Weapons Shape NATO Strategy
Speaking at the Prague Defense Summit, Bauer highlighted the pivotal role of Russia’s nuclear arsenal in influencing NATO’s approach.
“I am absolutely convinced that if the Russians didn’t have nuclear weapons, we would be in Ukraine and would have driven them out,” said Bauer, a Dutch Navy admiral, as reported by the Ukrainian outlet Zerkalo Nedeli.
Bauer further explained, as cited by L’Independent, that the primary reason NATO forces have not been deployed to Ukraine is the risk posed by Russia’s nuclear arsenal.
Russia’s Nuclear Arsenal: A Global Threat
With over 4,400 operational warheads, Russia maintains the world’s largest nuclear stockpile. This includes intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), submarine-launched ballistic missiles, and air-delivered nuclear weapons, granting Russia the ability to strike targets anywhere globally.
Bauer emphasized that NATO’s involvement in Ukraine is not entirely ruled out but warned of significant consequences. “If NATO intervened directly, it would risk its survival as an organization,” he stated, underlining that the decision is as much political as it is military.
Also Read | EU Urges Withdrawal of North Korean Troops from Russia
Nuclear Allies and Escalation Risks
Russia’s nuclear deterrence is further bolstered by potential support from allies. China’s growing nuclear arsenal, North Korea’s dozens of warheads, and Belarus’s agreement to host Russian nuclear weapons all add to NATO’s caution.
The doctrine of mutual assured destruction (MAD) also looms large. Any direct conflict between nuclear-armed powers, such as NATO and Russia, risks catastrophic global consequences, which has historically deterred such escalations.
