David Sanger, a seasoned national security correspondent for The New York Times and author of "New Cold Wars," dives into the escalating conflict in Ukraine. He discusses the U.S. decision to allow Ukraine to use ATACMS missiles and the subsequent Russian nuclear doctrine changes. Sanger explores the complex geopolitical landscape, including military strategies and the involvement of North Korean troops. The potential for nuclear escalation looms large, as he reflects on the shifting ideologies and global security implications amid growing tensions.
Read more
AI Summary
AI Chapters
Episode notes
auto_awesome
Podcast summary created with Snipd AI
Quick takeaways
The U.S. decision to allow Ukraine to use ATACMS missiles signifies a major escalation in military support amid evolving war dynamics.
Putin's revised nuclear doctrine reflects an alarming shift in Russia's military strategy, indicating potential consequences for Western involvement in Ukraine.
Deep dives
The Current State of the War in Ukraine
The ongoing conflict in Ukraine has evolved through three distinct phases since Russia's initial invasion. Initially, the United States aimed to deter Russia through intelligence sharing to prevent the invasion, which ultimately did not dissuade President Putin. In subsequent phases, the war saw intense fighting for key territories, with Russia failing to capture Kyiv and facing significant military setbacks. Recently, however, there has been a resurgence of Russian advances, partially attributed to the involvement of North Korean troops, indicating a shift in the war's dynamics and raising concerns about potential negotiations driven by geopolitical factors.
Escalation and Military Assistance
The recent authorization for Ukraine to use U.S.-made ATACMS missiles represents a significant escalation in military involvement. Initially, there were restrictions to prevent strikes deep into Russian territory, reflecting a cautious approach to avoid provoking a broader conflict. However, the changing landscape of the war, particularly with the influx of North Korean troops into Russia, led to the decision to lift some restrictions on missile usage. Despite this, concerns remain about the efficacy and availability of these weapons, as the supply of ATACMS is limited and costly, raising questions about their overall impact on the conflict.
Nuclear Threats and Political Implications
Putin's recent revision of nuclear doctrine allows for the use of nuclear weapons if Russia perceives a significant threat, which many view as an alarming shift in military strategy. This change is seen as a direct response to Western support for Ukraine, indicating that Moscow may interpret actions against Ukraine as provocations against itself. While experts do not anticipate an immediate use of nuclear weapons, they express concern over the gradual erosion of nuclear taboos, potentially leading to more aggressive posturing by Russia. The evolving political landscape, especially with the upcoming U.S. elections, could influence support for Ukraine and shape future negotiating positions, complicating the resolution of the conflict.
Earlier this week, after months of debate and hesitation, the U.S. decided to allow Ukraine to use American made ATACMS missiles on targets inside Russia. Escalations followed, such as Russia signing a new doctrine that lowered the threshold for nuclear attacks.
As the tensions ratchet up, there’s still the question of what will happen once Donald Trump takes office.
To break down the gravity of this moment, we talk to David Sanger, longtime New York Times national security correspondent and the author of “New Cold Wars: China’s Rise, Russia’s Invasion and America’s Struggle to Defend the West”.