By John Q. Hosedrinker 
To bolster its flagging offensive in Ukraine, Russia has deployed assault units formed from personnel of its Strategic Rocket Forces (RVSN). These units, initially observed near the Russian-Donetsk Oblast border in November 2024, are now engaged in combat around Toretsk. The redeployment includes personnel from the RVSN’s 12th Main Directorate, responsible for nuclear weapons storage, and elements of the 132nd Motorized Rifle Brigade. Formation of these RVSN-based infantry units began as early as mid-2024, highlighting Russia’s increasing reliance on unconventional troop sources to sustain its war effort.
Read the original article here
Russia’s deployment of infantry units formed from its nuclear forces to Toretsk signals a dramatic escalation of the conflict, revealing a concerning depletion of readily available military personnel. This move directly contradicts the long-held assumption that Russia’s nuclear arsenal remains untouched by the widespread corruption and resource mismanagement plaguing other sectors of its military. The decision to send these highly trained specialists, typically responsible for maintaining and protecting critical nuclear systems, into direct combat suggests a desperate shortage of manpower. This is a stark indicator of a military operating far below its stated capacity.
The sheer fact that Russia is resorting to such drastic measures highlights the immense pressure on its military forces. Toretsk, a heavily contested area experiencing intense drone activity, has been a significant battleground, where Russia has suffered substantial losses and stalled progress. Deploying personnel from the nuclear sector indicates a severe lack of alternative options, forcing Russia to deplete its pool of highly skilled and irreplaceable individuals. This raises serious questions about the long-term viability and readiness of Russia’s nuclear deterrent.
The financial disparity between the US and Russia’s nuclear programs further emphasizes the gravity of the situation. While the US dedicates roughly $60 billion annually to maintaining its nuclear stockpile alone, Russia’s total pre-war military spending was a fraction of that figure. This budgetary contrast, coupled with the deployment of nuclear personnel to Toretsk, strongly suggests severe underfunding and mismanagement within Russia’s nuclear forces. It also raises questions about the actual serviceability and readiness of its nuclear warheads, despite possessing a large stockpile.
This action could be interpreted in several ways, none of them positive for Russia. It might reflect a deliberate de-prioritization of nuclear deterrence in favor of immediate battlefield gains, highlighting a severe miscalculation of priorities. Alternatively, it could represent a purge of dissenting elements within the nuclear forces, an attempt to silence internal opposition to the war effort. Regardless of the underlying motivation, the consequence remains the same: a significant weakening of Russia’s nuclear capabilities and an admission of a critical manpower shortage.
The move also challenges previous claims about Russia’s military strength and its nuclear threat. The image of a powerful nuclear state is sharply contradicted by the reality of its highly trained personnel being deployed as infantry. The deployment is reminiscent of a non-paper tiger strategy, demonstrating desperation rather than strength. This raises serious concerns about the credibility of Russia’s past nuclear threats, suggesting they might be more bluster than substance. Furthermore, it raises questions about the security and functionality of the nuclear arsenal itself if its dedicated personnel are being reassigned to frontline combat.
The redeployment of these specialists raises concerns about the security and maintenance of Russia’s nuclear weapons. These personnel are responsible not only for guarding the weapons but also for ensuring their proper maintenance and operational readiness, skills vital for the continued viability of the nation’s nuclear deterrent. Their absence from their core duties could have potentially serious implications for the security and functionality of the nuclear stockpile. The removal of personnel from essential roles also exposes vulnerabilities, a risk that would not be taken lightly by a country prioritizing nuclear readiness.
The overall implication is troubling. By deploying personnel from its nuclear forces to Toretsk, Russia isn’t merely sacrificing manpower; it’s potentially jeopardizing its strategic nuclear capability. This act underscores a deeper crisis within the Russian military, one that extends beyond simple resource shortages to encompass issues of corruption, misallocation of resources, and perhaps even a fundamental miscalculation of strategic priorities. The situation demonstrates a far more precarious state of affairs than previously understood, casting doubt on Russia’s ability to sustain its military operations effectively while simultaneously maintaining its nuclear arsenal. The long-term consequences of this decision remain uncertain, but it undoubtedly represents a significant turning point in the conflict and Russia’s overall geopolitical standing.