Problem is that using an ICBM without a nuclear payload doesn't send a very strong message to begin with. If this is indeed Russia's response to the use of Western weapons on its territory, after so much time spent insisting on red lines and nuclear threats, it makes Russia looks incredibly weak.

Sending a second ICBM without a warhead into Ukraine would just look pathetic.

Another comment - even if Russia wanted to nuke Ukraine, they’d probably do it with an SRBM or MRBM.

I believe when Russia is threatening to use longer range missiles they are talking about MRBMs/IRBMs. It makes no sense to waste an ICBM on something you can hit with a smaller/cheaper/more accurate missile.

@EmilyConn What repertoire of MRBMs/IRBMs do they have? Wikipedia does not seem to list any

@skibidist Until 2019, US/Russia had a treaty (INF) banning M/IRBMs. Until this year we haven’t really seen them do anything to actually take advantage of their newfound ability to make/use M/IRBMs.

However, in June Putin officially announced they were resuming MRBM production (although he didn’t actually say it what they were making). So very likely we will see them use them using an MRBM variant of the Iskander.

Another possible path to Russian I/MRBM use is for them to import DPRK missiles, something they already did with SRBMs.