We have updated our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use for Eurasia Group and its affiliates, including GZERO Media, to clarify the types of data we collect, how we collect it, how we use data and with whom we share data. By using our website you consent to our Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy, including the transfer of your personal data to the United States from your country of residence, and our use of cookies described in our Cookie Policy.
Immediately after Russia invaded Ukraine, the odds of Moscow using nuclear weapons were low because it seemed likely they'd overrun the country with conventional weaponry. New York Times national security correspondent David Sanger credits NATO.
"Without the NATO support, I don't think the Ukrainians would have held on," Sanger tells Ian Bremmer on GZERO World.
But now, he warns, we're dealing with the 'Ukraine Paradox': the more successful Ukraine gets, the more likely Vladimir Putin will consider using non-conventional weapons. Will that include nukes? Perhaps.
For Sanger, the risk of Putin going nuclear has gone significantly up since the war began in late February.
