Russian Nuclear Weapons: Past, Present, and Future

on states; individual states violating international accords
and noncompliance with existing treaties; the
use of military force close to Russia in violation of the
United Nations (UN) Charter or other norms of international
law; the emergence of armed conflict and
possible escalation of such conflicts on the territories
of states close to Russia and its allies; the spread of
international terrorism; and the emergence interfaith
tension, international armed radical groups in areas
adjacent to Russian borders and those of its allies, and
the growth of separatism and religious extremism in
various parts of the world. Internal dangers stem from
efforts to compel change to the constitution; undermine
the sovereignty, unity, and territorial integrity
of the state; and disrupt the functioning of the organs
of state power, state and military facilities, and the
information infrastructure of Russia (Section II.8.a-k;
9.a-c). 53 The proliferation of WMD and the increase in
the number of states with nuclear weapons as well as
international terrorism, according to the military doctrine,
pale in comparison with NATO.
As noted, the reference to NATO is not new. What
is new is the way it is presented more exactly as a
“danger,” which probably also reflects dissatisfaction
with the lack of western interest to date in Medvedev’s
European security architecture initiative. The
second seems to be an insertion that fails to make clear
to what it might refer, while the next appears a more
nebulous variant on a similar statement in the previous
doctrine. An additional new danger appears to
relate not only to Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) but
also obliquely to U.S. “global strike” planning. Reference
to territorial claims against Russia has been condensed
in the new doctrine, since the old formula had
an additional element concerning a multipolar world.
The next two dangers were absent in the old doctrine:
58