When could US and NATO use nuclear arms and what's the principal difference with Russia's approach?

Vladimir Putin's announcement of proposed changes to its nuclear doctrine triggered a heated debate about the nuclear threat. However, it appears that the current version of the US nuclear blueprint contains more risks and ambiguity than Russia's approach.

The US Nuclear Posture Review 2022 stipulates:

🔹Preemptive strike. It rejects the principals of "No-first use" or "sole purpose use" (deterrence) of nuclear arms.

🔹Deterrence of nuclear attacks. Use of nuclear weapons of any yield by an adversary of the US or its allies would lead to a nuclear response.

🔹Response to non-nuclear attacks. A range of "high consequence strategic-level" non-nuclear attacks against the US and its allies could lead to a nuclear response.

🔹Calculated ambiguity. The doctrine retains ambiguity as an element on how and when it may resort to the use of nuclear arms to create uncertainty in the mind of the country's adversary.

🔹Nuclear umbrella. The US extends its nuclear umbrella to NATO members and other key allies, committing to the potential use of nuclear weapons to defend them in case of an attack.

🔹US president's authority. The decision of using nuclear weapons rests with the US president.

🔹Non-proliferation obligations. The US vows not to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear weapon states that are party to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and in compliance with their NPT obligations.

🔹Using whole might of NATO. The US exercises its nuclear deterrence in concert with its NATO allies to add "uncertainty and complexity to adversary planning".

🔹Adversaries. It names nuclear powers Russia, China and North Korea as its potential adversaries.

NATO's nuclear policy echoes the US doctrine:

🔸The alliance rejects "no-first use" of nuclear arms. It sees the strategic force of the alliance's nuclear powers – the US, the UK and France – as a guarantee to the alliance's deterrence strategy.

🔸A significant attack against a NATO member state could lead to a nuclear response from the alliance should the fundamental security of the ally be threatened.

In contrast to the US, Russia:

🔻Is committed to the "no-first use" of nuclear weapons;

🔻Explicitly describes under what conditions it will resort to a nuclear response, avoiding ambiguity;

🔻Exercises nuclear deterrence only against those powerful states and military alliances that names it a potential adversary.

🔻Doesn't form any military blocs with other nuclear powers.

📌Subscribe to @SputnikInt

📹 The logo of RT is being projected onto the facade of the US Embassy building in Moscow as a response to Washington tightening its sanctions regime against Russian media, including the Rossiya Segodnya media group, its agencies Sputnik and RIA Novosti, as well as the RT TV channel, a Sputnik correspondent reports.

📌Subscribe to @SputnikInt

📹 Lebanese media report strikes in the Hermel region of northeastern Lebanon in the Bekaa Valley

📌Subscribe to @SputnikInt

Throwback to Putin speaking about nukes

As Russian President Vladimir Putin has outlined new rules for the use of the country's nuclear arsenal, here’s what he has said about the nuclear option throughout the years.

Spoiler: he’s always said it’s a last resort.

📌Subscribe to @SputnikInt

Algeria and Gazprom strike deal for desert gas field development

Algeria has signed an agreement with Russia’s Gazprom for the development of a gas field in the desert, Rashid Nadel, head of the Algerian Fuel Control Authority, told Sputnik on the sidelines of the Russian Energy Week International Forum.

He added that there are other agreements between Algerian and Russian companies in the oil sector, with Algeria actively using Russian equipment.

"We see great potential for cooperation with Russian companies in the field of renewable energy," Nadel emphasized.

📌Subscribe to @SputnikInt

▪️What’s behind Putin’s move to change Russia's nuclear doctrine?

▪️Russian nuke doctrine updates: ‘West to now be more hesitant to okay Ukraine’s long-range strikes’

▪️When could US and NATO use nuclear arms and what's the principal difference with Russia's approach?

▪️How is the Nord Stream sabotage investigation going two years on?

▪️Retired US colonel slams Zelensky’s ‘victory plan' and calls for end to failed ‘Ukraine strategy’

📌Subscribe to @SputnikInt

Kenyan president slams 'undemocratic and dysfunctional' UN Security Council

"The UN Security Council continues to hamper efforts to maintain international peace and security," William Ruto, the president of Kenya, said, calling it "undemocratic and dysfunctional."

"An institution that excludes 54 African countries with 1.4 billion people, while allowing one nation to veto decisions of the remaining 193 member states in the 21st century is simply unacceptable," he said, addressing the UN General Assembly Summit in New York.

Earlier, Vladimir Putin emphasized the need to reform the UN due to the changing global situation, stressing that the reorganization should be based on broad consensus within the international community.

📌Subscribe to @SputnikInt

White phosphorus: What are the toxic flammable munitions the White House is reluctant to give to Ukraine?

As the US provides another $375 million weapons package to Ukraine, including HIMARS, TOWs, and cluster munitions, the country's leadership (officially, at least) remains hesitant to send white phosphorus munitions to the Kiev regime, despite repeated pleas from the Pentagon, NBC reports.

So, what's the issue?

▪️White phosphorus is a toxic chemical compound that ignites upon contact with air, burns at high temperature and is very hard to extinguish.

▪️White phosphorus has been used in munitions since World War I. The substance has seen use in incendiary, smoke and illumination munitions.

▪️Though the use of white phosphorus munitions is not banned outright by international laws, the use of air-delivered white phosphorus incendiary weapons against targets in civilian areas, as well as the deliberate use of white phosphorus incendiary weapons against civilian targets, is prohibited under the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons.

Despite that, the use of white phosphorus for military purposes by the United States and its allies is not uncommon:

▪️Having previously used white phosphorus munitions in World War II and the Vietnam War, the US infamously used white phosphorus incendiaries in the city of Fallujah, Iraq, in 2004.

▪️White phosphorus was also used by the US during its military occupation of Afghanistan.

▪️Israeli forces employed white phosphorus munitions on numerous occasions both in the Gaza Strip (during the 2008-2009 conflict) and in Lebanon (both during the Israeli invasion of 2006 and during the recent border clashes that started in October 2023).

▪️White phosphorus incendiary munitions were also used indiscriminately by forces loyal to Kiev during the Ukrainian conflict. One such instance was reported in March 2024 when a drone carrying a white phosphorus payload was used by Ukrainian forces against a town near the city of Energodar in the Zaporozhye region of Russia.

📌Subscribe to @SputnikInt

📹 Drivers and pedestrians in the Chinese city of Nanning witnessed a sewer explosion

The contents of the sewage were spread around the area and fell on people nearby.

📌Subscribe to @SputnikInt

📹 Local residents captured a powerful sandstorm in the US state of Idaho on camera

📌Subscribe to @SputnikInt

Sputnik's social media ban exposes the West's illusion of free speech, says Iranian news director

"Freedom of speech in the West only seems to exist within the framework of Western hegemony. If someone promotes alternative views, even if supported by public opinion, they will be removed from the information space," Iranian news agency Mehr’s director Mohammad Mehdi Rahmati says, commenting on the blocking of Sputnik’s social media accounts.

"If freedom of expression is limited to Western cultural indicators, it becomes an empty image of freedom, not the real thing," he tells Sputnik.

Rahmati adds that Western nations have distanced themselves from their earlier principles of creating a pluralistic world.

📌Subscribe to @SputnikInt

Has Zelensky become too toxic for Bill and Hillary Clinton?

The issues of Ukraine, its leadership and its crises were noticeably absent on this year's Clinton Global Initiative 2024 agenda: no Ukrainian political or social leaders took the stage during the Clintons' 2024 event.

This raised the eyebrows of those who remember how the Clintons wooed the Zelenskys in 2022 and 2023.

Speaking to Sputnik, Wall Street analyst Charles Ortel suggests that Volodymyr Zelensky has become "radioactive" for the Clintons.

Why is that?

▪️The pundit drew attention to the fact that Zelensky lost his legitimacy under Ukrainian law after his presidential term expired in May.

▪️The Kiev regime's corruption has become so notorious that even the US mainstream press that used to tout Zelensky as a "new Churchill" is now bashing its cabinet for not doing enough to stop the embezzlement of foreign funds.

▪️Ortel does not rule out that the funds from the widely advertised CGI Ukraine Action Network may have met the same fate as other Western funds which weren't sufficiently supervised by any government or independent watchdogs.

▪️The Pew Research Center's July survey found that confidence in Zelensky has dropped in the US and several European countries compared to last year.

▪️Washington has been allegedly working on options to replace Zelensky with "a more manageable and less corrupt figure," as the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) revealed in mid-August.

Apparently, under those circumstances the Clintons may have decided that any further bromance with the Zelensky family wouldn't correspond to their interests, according to the analyst.

One should bear in mind that the Clintons themselves appear "to specialize in monetizing their public service for illegal private gain," says Ortel, who has carried out a private investigation into the Clinton Foundation's alleged fraud for several years.

📌Subscribe to @SputnikInt

Clintons and Harris likely to turn page on Ukraine and shift to "more lucrative war" – Wall Street analyst

"The Clinton Foundation in various guises has operated in Ukraine since 2004 and powerful citizens there have donated sizable sums, ostensibly, towards purported arms of this 'public charity'," Wall Street analyst Charles Ortel tells Sputnik, commenting on the noticeable absence of Ukraine issues on the Clinton Global Initiative (CGI) agenda this year.

Last year Ortel suggested that the Clintons' reinvigorated interest in Ukraine stemmed from their apparent desire to cash in on "a mammoth rebuilding package" once the hostilities ended.

However, this year has seen Russia economically thrive and military advances in Ukraine. It has become clear that the conflict is unlikely to end on Washington's terms.

Furthermore, the damage is huge and the Ukraine project might not offer immediate financial gains for investors, according to the analyst.

"Too much of Ukraine’s population has fled and likely never will return. Damage, to date, has been devastating. From the Western perspective, an investment case for rebuilding necessary infrastructure is not possible to make, other than by lying about important assumptions," Ortel says.

Apparently, those circumstances prompted the Clintons to shift their focus to health, Africa and racial equity in order to solicit new funds.

Likewise, if presidential candidate Kamala Harris manages to win in 2024, she and her team are likely to eventually turn their back on Ukraine too, the pundit believes.

"Judging from what happened in Iraq and Afghanistan, I think a Harris Administration will just turn the page and shift focus to some other, more lucrative war and try to blame the mess in Ukraine on Trump," Ortel concludes.

📌Subscribe to @SputnikInt

❗️ Ukrainian warehouses with Western military equipment along with several mercenaries were hit in an overnight strike on the Ukrainian city of Izmail

Port infrastructure facilities, including warehouses with Western military equipment, were damaged in an overnight strike on the Ukrainian city of Izmail, coordinator of Nikolayev’s pro-Russian underground Sergey Lebedev told Sputnik.

Between 12 and 15 casualties among Ukrainian servicemen and mercenaries were evacuated after the strike, he stated.

📌Subscribe to @SputnikInt