If Donald Trump has the will, Russia’s aggression can still be repulsed and Ukraine’s sovereignty assured
Con Coughlin Defence and Foreign Affairs Editor
03 December 2025
One of Russian president Vladimir Putin’s less convincing tactics during the long-running Ukraine conflict has been to threaten the Westwith doomsday scenarios whenever he finds himself in a fix.
Early in the conflict, when the Biden administration was debating whether to provide Kyiv with tanks and other heavy armour, Putin raised the prospect of the conflict escalating into all-out nuclear war. Similar threats were made when similar discussions took place about providing Kyiv with Western warplanes, such as F-16 fighters, which have subsequently made a significant contribution to Ukraine’s ability to defend itself from Russian ground offensives and drone attacks.
Putin has even gone so far as to authorise Russia’s strategic nuclear forces to conduct a number of drills designed solely for the purpose of intimidating Western leaders. By continuing to provide military support, the West is running the risk of forcing the Kremlin to resort to its nuclear arsenal.
Putin’s latest threat, that Russia is ready for war with Europe if European leaders fail to accept Moscow’s maximalist territorial demands for ending the Ukraine conflict, therefore needs to be seen in the context of Putin’s meaningless bluster, rather than as an existential threat.
Putin made his warning after European leaders, together with Ukraine, intervened to tone down the Trump administration’s initial peace offer to Moscow, which was widely condemned as an abject capitulation to Russia’s demands.
But rather than being intimidated by Putin’s latest bully-boy threats, Nato leaders need to understand that, in the event of a direct military confrontation with Russia, they unquestionably have the upper hand.
As Nato secretary-general Mark Rutte pointed out in October after Russian warplanes deliberately violated the airspace of several member states, Moscow needed to take care because the alliance’s overall firepower was “much stronger” than that available to the Russians.
That is not to say that Putin’s rants have always missed their target. One of the reasons the war in Ukraine has lasted for nearly four years is because former US president Joe Biden was terrified of doing anything that might provoke the Russian despot into escalating the conflict.
Time and again, Biden dithered over providing Kyiv with the high-end weapons Ukraine required to maintain military operations. The result was that the US and its allies ended up giving the Ukrainians the means to defend themselves from Russian aggression, but not the ability to win the war.
It is vital that, in the current round of negotiations aimed at ending the conflict, the Trump administration and its allies in Europe do not fall into the same trap as Biden, and take Putin’s outlandish threats at face value.
There have already been encouraging signs that US president Donald Trump, far from being intimidated by Putin, is more-than-willing to play him at his own game.
Trump is no stranger to indulging in his own form of brinkmanship, arranging for a B-2 nuclear bomber, which has the firepower to destroy large tracts of Russia, to lead the US Air Force flypast staged to mark Putin’s arrival in Alaska in August.
Since then Trump has dramatically raised the stakes in his stand-off with Putin by ordering the Pentagon to resume US nuclear weapons tests.
Trump will also be well aware of the weakness of Putin’s domestic position – which no doubt explains the Russian leader’s latest claims that Russia is winning on the battlefield, and that the Russian economy remains strong.
The opposite is the case. The Russian military may have made some marginal gains in eastern Ukraine, but they have been achieved at a terrible cost in terms of Russian casualties. The Russian military’s inherent weakness was evident in recent pictures of its frontline soldiers being required to fight without basic protection such as helmets and body armour.
Trump’s latest round of economic sanctions, in which he blacklisted Russia’s two main oil producers, Rosneft and Lukoil, has already had a dramatic impact on the country’s war-ravaged economy, with recent estimates suggesting the measures have already resulted in Russia losing one third of its monthly export revenues.
There are a further range of punitive measures, moreover, that the Trump administration could impose – in the event of Putin refusing to agree to a ceasefire – that could have an even more profound impact on Russia’s ability to maintain its military offensive in Ukraine.
Foremost among them would be greater enforcement of sanctions imposed against countries, such as China and India, that continue to buy Russian oil. Another course of action would be to target Russia’s shadow fleet of tankers that are used to transport illicit cargoes of Russian oil across the globe.
And Trump still retains the option of approving the transfer of long-range Tomahawk missiles to Kyiv, which would give the Ukrainian military the ability to strike targets deep within the Russian heartland, a capability that could turn the tide of the conflict decisively in Kyiv’s favour.
If Trump is really serious about ending this dreadful conflict, then he must understand that Putin will only agree to a peace deal when he finally realises that he has no other viable option but to end his “special military operation” to conquer Ukraine.
Comment from :
Peter Porcupine
The problem with this assumption is the reality that Russia’s waging of war in Ukraine is not solely the work of Putin. The chattering classes of Russia, the money men and the people with power and influence support it as well, perhaps more so than Putin himself in some cases. If they did not, Putin’s war effort would have collapsed years ago. So we would have to hope that someone would overthrow Putin at the last moment if he did try to push the button, but that goes back to the point that we have to assume someone in a position to do so has the motivation to do so. We keep hearing about Putin’s collapsing domestic position, but he keeps going and going.
Charles Rogerson
Any first-use of a tactical nuclear weapon by Russia would result in a very quick limited conventional response by the US, NATO, or both, against Russian assets far removed from the Ukraine theatre. These plans are already in place.
It would likely consist in the stand-off destruction of several important Russian non-strategic (non-nuclear-capable) military and economic assets using submarine-launched cruise missiles or other conventional means. This would severely impact the state of Russia’s military and economy and further demonstrate the low quality of Russian air-defense assets.
In addition there would be immediate secondary sanctions and seizure of off-shore Russian assets. Russia and its citizenry would become even more of a pariah. India and China would certainly reduce their support. Most support for Russia in India, the Middle East, SE Asia, South America, and Africa would dry up.
It would be a catastrophe for Russia and I doubt that Putin would weather the resulting storm.
Nigel Ashworth
It is not possible to read Putin’s thinking exactly. We just cannot tell how far he would go just as he cannot tell how far NATO might go; that is the logic of the NATO/Russian standoff we live with. However, Putin does know that the US President is a patsy, unwilling to engage force and fatally motivated by flattery. We also do know what Putin wants in relation to NATO and Ukraine and the current situation is more favourable to his geostrategic goals than it has ever been.
NATO members in Europe now realise that the US does not have their back, that Trump is an unreliable ally and that Putin is breathing down our neck. Ukraine now really understands the folly of giving up its own nuclear weapons in 1994. Up until that point it was the third-largest nuclear power, having inherited 1,700 warheads with the collapse of the Soviet Union. It accepted the reassurance of security within its borders from the USA, the UK and Russia.
The lesson for us is clear: Europe must defensively re-arm at pace and meanwhile support Ukraine as much as we possibly can. Putin’s aggression cannot be neutralised but must be deterred.
Arthur Pewty
Agreed. First, call Putin’s bluff and admit Ukraine into NATO. Tell Putin that ANY further attacks in Ukraine will be met, in Ukraine, by NATO supported force. Tell Putin that should he try and escalate the conflict beyond Ukraine and against a NATO member, the full force of NATO will be brought against HIM and Russia.
Let’s see how long he lasts in Russia after that statement.
There was, is, and never will be a danger of nuclear war over Ukraine. None of the wealthy cockroaches want to end their lives, permanently stuck in a bunker, as Earth outside is a dead, contaminated hellhole. Whoever believes the opposite is a complete fool.