In a dramatic escalation of both rhetoric and military activity, Russian President Vladimir Putin has ordered preparations for nuclear weapons testing, a move that comes on the heels of former U.S. President Donald Trump's announcement that the United States would resume such tests. The world now finds itself watching, with bated breath, as the two countries that together control 87 percent of the globe’s nuclear arsenal edge closer to a new era of nuclear brinkmanship.
Putin’s directive, issued on November 5, 2025, was unequivocal. “I am instructing the Foreign Ministry, the Defence Ministry, the special services and relevant civilian agencies to do everything possible to collect additional information on the issue, analyse it at the Security Council and make agreed proposals on the possible start of work on the preparation of nuclear weapons tests,” Putin declared, according to official Russian sources. Russia’s Defence Minister, Andrei Belousov, reinforced the urgency of the moment, telling Putin that the United States’ recent statements made it “advisable to prepare for full-scale nuclear tests” without delay.
This nuclear saber-rattling is set against the backdrop of an intensifying and deeply attritional war in eastern Ukraine, where Russian forces have concentrated their efforts in the Donbas region, particularly around the city of Pokrovsk. According to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, the Russian military has amassed approximately 170,000 troops on the front lines near Pokrovsk alone—a staggering number that underscores the scale of Moscow’s commitment to its campaign.
The situation on the ground is, by all accounts, dire. Senior sergeant "Ron" of the UAV platoon with Ukraine’s 42nd Separate Mechanised Brigade described the scene to the “We — Ukraine” TV channel as “extremely heavy.” He detailed the Russian tactic of breaking their forces into small assault groups, sending waves of infantry—sometimes in pairs or groups of four—toward Ukrainian positions. “If you put a company there and say 'guys, forward,' the company might even shoot the commander themselves. Because they are going to the embrasure,” he explained, highlighting the grim morale and discipline issues facing Russian troops.
Despite the massive build-up, Russian progress has been slow and costly. As reported by multiple sources, including Ukrainian analyst Mykola Bielieskov of the National Institute for Strategic Studies, the Russian military has suffered nearly 30,000 casualties per month over the past three months—an attrition rate that matches Russia’s current ability to replace its losses through so-called “shadow mobilization.” The life expectancy of Russian contract soldiers engaged in this fighting is, alarmingly, about one month.
Pokrovsk itself, once home to around 60,000 people, has become a focal point not only for its residents but for the broader strategic calculus of the war. The city sits atop crucial transportation routes and functions as a vital logistics hub. If Pokrovsk were to fall, it could open the way for further Russian offensives against the larger cities of Sloviansk and Kramatorsk to the north. Yet, as Bielieskov notes, the outcome of the battle for Pokrovsk depends on whether Ukrainian forces can execute an orderly retreat or descend into chaos under pressure.
What makes the current phase of the war unique, even historic, is the technological transformation of the battlefield. “This is no longer the battlefield of 2022,” Bielieskov observed. The widespread use of FPV (first-person view) drones, sensor surveillance, and autonomous systems has fundamentally altered tactics and strategy. Artillery, once the dominant force, now shares the stage with drones capable of delivering precision strikes in real time. The result? The traditional “no man’s land” has expanded dramatically, now stretching 15 to 20 kilometers on both sides of the front lines, as Bielieskov described. Russian forces have responded by avoiding the use of tanks and heavy vehicles—too vulnerable to drone attacks—and relying instead on “barefoot infantry,” lightly armed and slow-moving, often protected by makeshift measures like aluminum blankets to evade thermal sensors.
These technological shifts have not produced a clear stalemate, but they have slowed the pace of territorial change and increased the cost of every advance. Russian offensives, when they do occur with mechanized units, involve massed armor moving under the cover of poor weather to disrupt reconnaissance. Yet, as Bielieskov points out, “They cannot change direction so quickly, and it is still dozens of kilometers to Sloviansk and Kramatorsk.” The current operations, in his view, are laying the groundwork for another year of grinding conflict rather than signaling a decisive breakthrough.
Beyond the battlefield, the war is being fought on multiple fronts—political, informational, and psychological. Sabotage, propaganda, and psychological operations have become as critical as kinetic action. “Even the First World War did not end with a breakthrough on the front,” Bielieskov remarked. “It ended with the collapse of systems and states.”
One of the most concerning developments for Ukraine is the faltering support from its Western allies. Despite NATO’s agreement in July 2025 on a procurement and financing mechanism (PURL) to support Ukraine, actual contributions have plummeted. Ukraine needs between $16 and $18 billion annually to sustain its defense, but since July, only $3 billion has been paid into the fund. Bielieskov attributes this shortfall to a lack of political leadership and a dangerous complacency among Western politicians, warning that the illusion of Ukraine “sorting things out” on its own could prove disastrous.
Meanwhile, on the Russian side, the renewed focus on nuclear testing signals a willingness to escalate tensions far beyond the Ukrainian theater. The prospect of both Russia and the United States resuming nuclear tests has alarmed observers and raised the specter of a new arms race. With the world’s two largest nuclear powers posturing and preparing, the risks of miscalculation or unintended escalation have rarely felt more acute.
As winter approaches and the war in Ukraine grinds on, the stakes continue to rise—not just for those on the front lines, but for the entire international community. The coming months could well determine whether the world edges closer to a dangerous new nuclear era, or whether diplomacy and resolve can pull it back from the brink.
