> Unless the Russians are bluffing about using their nukes...
Of course they're bluffing. They've made these sorts of threats for decades; "if you let Finland join NATO we'll be super mad!" Giving in to nuclear blackmail just gives the bully the go-ahead to do the same thing again.
And incidentally it was nuclear blackmail by the USA that ended the Cuban Missile Crisis. It has precedent and a successful track record. And Ukraine is a lot closer to Russia than Cuba is to the USA.
Ask yourself what’s worse for Putin: using nukes and declaring victory, or an ignominious defeat and spending the rest of his life in whatever circumstances a deposed Russian leader is likely to get. Are you really so certain he won’t send up the balloon?
What’s win though? If his mobilization manages to keep Ukraine forces at bay and he goes through with joining Luhansk, Donetsk, Kherson and Zaporozhia to Russia - is that the win scenario?
He can probably pull that together pretty easily by dumping 1-2 million russians in it.
If he stalls things for 2-3 years with the new borders, the West is likely to give up and just have them be another Crimea. NATO certainly won’t send troops in.
It's highly suspect if he can mobilise 1-2 millions. The latest mobilisation sought 300k and is already causing civil unrest and hundreds of thousands of people fleeing Russia.
Nuclear war will also cause hyperinflation, although at that point it will probably be academic.