Why did Vladimir Putin launch his “Oreshnik”

Two stages of escalation

The first stage of the current military-political escalation began with Putin's statement on September 12. If Western governments, he said, give Ukraine permission to strike deep into Russian territory with its long-range weapons, this “will mean that NATO countries, the United States, European countries are at war with Russia. ... We will make appropriate decisions based on the threats that will be created for us.” In his opinion, Ukrainian Armed Forces officers are not able to independently enter flight missions into American and British missiles, and can only receive target coordinates from Western allies. Less than two weeks later, on September 25, Putin announced changes to the “Fundamentals of the State Policy of the Russian Federation in the Field of Nuclear Deterrence,” expanding the list of conditions under which Russia “reserves the right to use nuclear weapons.”

However, the signing of the decree approving the updated nuclear doctrine was postponed, which contradicted the established order. Usually, after public notification of the discussion of such documents at the highest level, they are approved, if not on the same day, then the next. This delay could be a signal - as long as Washington prohibits Kyiv from using ATACMS over internationally recognized Russian territory, Moscow will refrain from enacting a new nuclear doctrine. But perhaps Moscow was waiting for the results of the US presidential election. The potential victory of Kamalla Harris, presumably, was perceived quite calmly in the Kremlin: the combination of militant rhetoric typical of Democrats with minimal assistance to Ukraine did not cause serious concerns there.

The second stage of escalation began shortly after the results of the US presidential elections were determined. Joe Biden gave the reason for this by allowing Ukraine on November 16 to use missiles with a range of up to 300 kilometers on Russian territory. Kyiv took advantage of the permission: on the night of November 19 and 21, ATACMS and Storm Shadow missiles struck military targets in the Bryansk and Kursk regions. The Kremlin seems to have expected this. Immediately after the first strike, on November 19, Putin signed a decree approving a new nuclear doctrine, and after the second, he announced the use of a medium-range missile at the Ukrainian Yuzhmash missile plant in Dnepr. In the following days, he talked a lot and rather stupidly about the new Russian miracle weapon, against which, according to him, no one has protection. The media have once again started talking about the fact that the world is on the brink of a nuclear war in Europe.

What Moscow is afraid of and what it wants

Moscow explains its actions by saying that permission to use the American ATACMS and the French-British Storm Shadow/SCALP changed the nature of the conflict and means the direct involvement of Western states in the war in Ukraine. The question immediately arises: what exactly has changed? Throughout the war, the United States provided Ukraine with coordinates of targets on Russian territory and in occupied areas: Ukraine does not have space assets that would allow this to be done with the necessary accuracy. Against these targets, Ukraine regularly carried out drone strikes deep into Russian territory at a distance of up to two thousand kilometers. American ATACMS and French-British Storm Shadow/SCALP were used against targets in the occupied regions of Ukraine, which Moscow considers its territory, as enshrined in the Constitution. All this was perceived in the Kremlin quite calmly: in a war - as in a war.

Moscow's reaction cannot be explained by purely military circumstances. ATACMS and Storm Shadow/SCALP can hit Russian targets in a relatively narrow zone no more than 300 kilometers wide from the border with Ukraine or the line of combat contact. The number of such missiles that Ukraine has or may have in the future is small, a maximum of 100–200 units. Considering that several missiles are required to reliably hit a well-protected target, neither ATACMS nor Storm Shadow can have a serious impact on the course of the war.

Most likely, Putin used Biden's permission for the sole purpose of demonstrating to the world that he has a new medium-range missile and that he is ready to use it if Ukraine and the West do not comply with his demands. And the reason for this is the victory of the Republicans, which could lead to large and unfavorable consequences for Russia, which Putin intends to prevent by threatening a nuclear missile crisis in Europe.

In particular, the plan to end the Russian-Ukrainian war being developed by Donald Trump’s circle, the contours of which are gradually becoming clearer, in no way suits the Kremlin. Lavrov made this clear in an interview with Tucker Carlson. He repeated Putin’s words that Russia is ready to “negotiate on the basis of the principles that were agreed upon in Istanbul,” which in a number of ways fundamentally contradicts the approach of Donald Trump and his team. For example, Trump's plan calls for a ceasefire, followed by the start of negotiations, strengthening Ukraine's military security and, possibly, the creation of a demilitarized zone with the deployment of European troops there. Moscow, on the contrary, first demands Kyiv’s consent to its terms and only then a ceasefire, strict restrictions on Ukraine’s armed forces and a categorical ban on any foreign troops on Ukrainian territory.

If the US president-elect insists on his plan, does not accept the ultimatums presented by Moscow to America and NATO in December 2021, and does not meet Putin halfway on a wide range of international issues, an acute crisis in Europe is inevitable, distracting Trump for a long time from his goal, which he considers the main one: the confrontation with China. “The message that they wanted to convey by testing this hypersonic system in real conditions,” Lavrov said , for example, in an interview with Tucker Carlson, “is that we will be ready to do everything to protect our legitimate interests... But Russia’s security interests were completely ignored.” . Western countries, Lavrov continued, rejected Russian proposals, the drafts of which were presented to the West in December 2021.

"Oreshnik", aka "Rubezh"

Naturally, the question arises: does Russia have the resources to impose its terms on Washington? In particular, what is the notorious “Hazel Tree”? It appears to be a slightly modernized version of a missile developed in Russia in the 2010s called Rubezh. This version was put forward by the American Department of Defense. Something is known about Rubezh. This is the Yars intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM), from which one stage was removed and, accordingly, the range of which was reduced by approximately half and ranges from two to more than five thousand kilometers. The combat load of the Rubezh, that is, the weight of the warheads, is, according to some sources, 800 kilograms, according to others - 1200 kilograms. “Rubezh”, also known as “Oreshnik”, like any medium-range missile with a throw weight of one or two tons, is designed to deliver nuclear weapons. Using a rocket costing tens of millions of dollars to launch a ton of non-nuclear explosives at a target is the height of absurdity. It is equally pointless to use Oreshnik against Ukraine: Russia has many other, much cheaper, means of destroying Ukrainian civilian and military targets.

Actually, Putin did not hide the fact that the targets for Oreshnik are actually in Europe. “We are developing medium- and shorter-range missiles as a response to US plans to produce and deploy medium- and shorter-range missiles in Europe and the Asia-Pacific region... Today, the United States not only produces such equipment, but has worked out the issues of transferring it to different regions of the world, including to Europe, their promising missile systems.” It seems that while demonstrating his readiness for a limited nuclear war in Europe, Putin is threatening to unleash a new military-political crisis there, similar to the one that took place in the 1970s and 1980s of the last century.

Crisis of the 1970s–1980s

In the mid-1970s, the USSR began deploying missiles, known in the West as SS-20, with a range of about five thousand kilometers. It was a weapon designed for a limited nuclear war in Europe, allowing Moscow to deprive NATO countries of the ability to resist with one blow. At the same time, a strike by a hundred or two nuclear warheads on European countries presented the United States with an existential choice: either come to terms with the fact that Europe was defenseless against a Soviet invasion, or respond with its strategic weapons against targets on Soviet territory. The latter meant the transformation of a limited nuclear war into a total one and the destruction of both the USSR and the USA. Moscow hoped that Washington would not risk its own death in order to avenge the defeat of the Allies. Naturally, there were similar concerns in European countries. In other words, the very appearance of the SS-20 called into question the basis of NATO security - the reliability of American nuclear guarantees to Europe. The latter was the most important goal of the foreign policy of the Soviet Union.

The Western response turned out to be very effective: American Pershing ballistic missiles and Tomahawk cruise missiles began to be deployed in Europe. High-precision Pershings with a flight time of 10–15 minutes could destroy the headquarters of the Soviet political leadership and key command centers, leaving no time for the Kremlin to decide on a retaliatory strike. In a broader context, the West had the opportunity, in a nuclear war limited to the geographical boundaries of the European continent, to inflict heavy damage on the Soviet Union and force Moscow to face the very choice it tried to force America to face: either accept defeat in a limited war and save the country, or respond to the USA and die with them. Ultimately, the Soviet leadership was forced to capitulate and agree to the elimination of the entire class of intermediate and shorter-range missiles.

Moscow's Miscalculation

These days, Putin appears to be making the same mistake that the Soviet leadership made in the 1970s and 1980s: by displaying Oreshnik, he threatens the West with a limited nuclear war in Europe, believing that it will not be able to withstand forceful pressure. Moscow's attempt to blackmail the West by deploying the SS-20 failed because its originators underestimated the resolve of the United States and Europe to respond with force to force. To what extent the current leaders of the Western world are ready to repeat the experience of their predecessors - Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher and Helmut Kohl, who understood that blackmailers can be dealt with only by confronting them with force and the willingness to use it, is still unclear. But several circumstances inspire some optimism.

The leaders of NATO member states have gotten rid of naive illusions regarding Russia. The latter, according to the declaration of the NATO Washington summit held in July 2024, “seeks to fundamentally change the Euro-Atlantic security architecture; The cross-cutting threat that Russia poses to NATO will continue in the long term.” Western countries are gradually moving from words to action. Thus, in 2023, European companies sold almost $160 billion worth of weapons , or 17 percent more than in 2022, and this trend is likely to continue for a long time.

Putin decided to begin mass production of Oreshnikov. It is known that the Oreshnik can only be produced at the plant in Votkinsk, which also produces the Yars ICBM, the Bulava naval missile and the Iskander short-range missile. The capacity of this enterprise is limited, and increasing it is extremely difficult, if not impossible. According to Ukrainian intelligence (you can believe them or not, but we have no other information), the annual production of Oreshniki may be 25 units. It is difficult to say by what time the Votkinsk Machine-Building Plant will reach this level; however, it is clear that this will not happen in the coming months. In other words, Putin is threatening the West with a missile that he does not have and it is unknown when and in what quantity he will have it.

In Russia, the decision has only just been made on serial production of the Oreshnik, while the United States already has medium-range weapons - the Tomahawk cruise missile of the latest modification and the Typhon ballistic missile (an SM-6 ship-based anti-aircraft missile, adapted for launching from the ground at ground targets), capable of hitting enemy targets with high accuracy at ranges from 500 to 2500 kilometers. In addition, Europe is developing its own weapons for similar purposes in order to achieve “strategic autonomy.” Russian politicians, political scientists and propagandists tend to forget about this when they threaten the West with a limited nuclear war.

Help “Important Stories” Thank you for reading Support

Trump’s victory will result in unfavorable consequences for Russia: it will be necessary to end the war in Ukraine without achieving the main goal - the destruction of Ukrainian statehood; the establishment of “strategic autonomy” will accelerate in Europe; Iran is already looking for the possibility of normalizing relations with America and so on. Moscow reacts to this in its usual way: with nuclear threats. The United States and European states, in turn, allowed Putin a lot, but the threat to destroy Europe with nuclear weapons is unacceptable to them. And therefore, the West may, or may have already, come to the conclusion: it is necessary to eliminate this threat.