[simonh]

>A tactical nuclear weapon detonation over Ukrainian combat units that disrupts Ukrainian offensive, western military support for Ukraine, and global markets suffer lasting disruption.

A single tactical nuke would have virtually no impact on Ukrainian military operations. It would only affect a few square km, maybe a battalion strength unit. To decisively influence a significant front like Kherson would take at least a handful of them. To relieve pressure along the whole front would take dozens. Strategic warheads used on the front would do more, but then the radiation and fallout effects would also impact Russian units, and Russia itself. there's also no way to use and EMP pulse to impair Ukrainian front line units without also impairing Russian front line units.

>Western coalitions have disrupted the Russian economy with sanctions, but China/India provide two major energy export customers.

Using nukes would remove all the remaining support Russia has, including that from China and India in terms of trade. It's likely the west would impose a total blockade and interdiction of all Russian ports, sea traffic and air transport anyway.

[chriselles]

It might be worth looking at Russia’s unusual nuclear doctrine of “escalate to deescalate.”

I agree numerous tactical nuclear weapons would be required for combat operations, but not necessarily for information operations designed to shape western democratic citizenry.

People like us in the west can more easily afford to have opinions on Ukraine.

People in China, and particularly India can’t afford to have as many opinions when they are struggling to afford food and energy,

COVID related fiscal and monetary inflation is eating a chunk of the real gains made in recent decades.

A bit hyperbolic I know, but India has continued and will continue to purchase energy from Russia as will China even if a small number of nuclear weapons are used within Russian territory, within Russian controlled territory, or within Ukraine.

Food and energy price inflation pressures matter more to many countries than whatever is happening in Ukraine, 3rd world problems rather than 1st world privilege.

Just my 0.02c

[simonh]

True that food and energy security are primary concerns for India and China. Does Russia detonating nukes in Ukraine improve or harm food and energy security? Especially if the west interdict Russian trade in response, as they have with North Korea. The answer to that will shape the response of these governments.

[dirtyid]

Will west escalate to interdicting Indian and Chinese flagged vessels used to circumvent embargo to bring home even more discounted fuel and food? Because ultimately that's what directly harms the food and energy security of these two other nuclear powers. At the end of the day RU isn't the one disrupting their bilateral trade with "friendly" partners. The real question is how will west make it worthwhile not to trade with RU, and so far it's been mostly sticks instead of carrots which is unlikely to work when it comes to fertilizer and fuel.

[simonh]

India and china do not benefit from turning a blind eye to active use of nuclear weapons for military or blackmail purposes. Remember that both India and Pakistan have a few nukes each. It's absolutely against India's interests to accept the principle that military use of nuclear weapons, or threat of their actual use, is acceptable internationally.