Philip Giraldi, the American Conservative's intelligence gossip columnist writes:
"Reports that Russia has moved SS21 medium range missiles close to the front armed with tactical nuclear weapons have been hard to find in the US media. The Russian General Staff believes that it can only offset the huge advantage that the US and NATO have in precision guided weapons by using battlefield nukes if attacked by western forces."
By the way, right after General William Odom died earlier this year, I read his book The Collapse of the Soviet Army. It was quite illuminating on why the Soviet Army was so elephantine in 1985: 5,300,000 personnel and 53,000 tanks. You might think that they would have decided that nuclear weapons had changed war fundamentally, making giant armies irrelevant, but that overlooks the role of ideology in the Soviet Union. Since Lenin and Marx didn't say anything about nuclear weapons, well, then, the Clausewitzian verities still applied. Nuclear weapons were just a quantitatively more destructive version of cannonballs and artillery shells, so the Soviet Union just needed enough tanks to lose tens of thousands to tactical nukes and still reach the Atlantic.
Khrushchev didn't really believe that nuclear weapons hadn't changed anything, but ideology continued to have a huge effect on how the Soviets organized and armed the Army.