Yes, they have access to 'vaccines' with discutable effectiveness.
Sputnik-V is just fine, if you want to dispute it then you can publish your own Lancet article disproving the one about Sputnik-V.
Though the level of confidence of the Russian population in its government, or, for the matter, of the former WP countries' population... is pretty telling on the living conditions.
That has nothing to do with living conditions, it's a cultural thing. We think differently about our rulers, it goes double for Eastern Slavs' culture. Trying to govern over Russians is like herding cats, and they're a nation of natural anti--vaxers precisely because of that. As soon as their government proposes something, they start to look for the catch, no matter the government. Their approach to COVID is very interesting, it's like the people and the government have an unspoken agreement - the government doesn't force people to vaccinate and doesn't take it too far with the QR codes and lockdowns, and the people don't criticize it for the excess deaths that could be prevented. But it has nothing to do with the vaccine - whoever wants it, can get it, it's free, and it's just as effective as any other good vaccine. And the economy works just fine, better than ours, so basically the government's job's been done.
That's a nice hypothesis, but then I take the industry's claims on future performance of their stuff with a healthy eyebrow because I've got to see enough such claims in my life facing reality in a harsh and often humiliating manner. And, once again, since you seem to ignore the point: even if ICBM become outdated, it doesn't change MAD, since MAD is a philosophy rather than a tech. Build a Strangelove device or FOBS, or designer bioweapons, etc.
You're still not getting what I'm saying. The situation isn't black or white, have full sovereignty or be radioactive dust. A massive cobalt-salted device able to depopulate the whole Earth could be theoretically built, but would it be used if faced with the choice of either suffering a surgical nuclear attack that would disarm you, or surrendering sovereignty over one's natural resources and political choices? It would take a madman to do so, it's just not a practical threat that anybody would believe, and even if somebody attempted it, they would very likely be stopped by their own people. That is why you need to be able to deliver a
measured response, and that is where BMD comes in - it will take that ability from you, unless you are able to overcome it.
Dr Strangelove was a fantastic movie, and it helped explain MAD very well, but its idea has been make unworkable by technological development. When your opponent can use nukes to render you defenseless without actually killing you, threatening to commit suicide just to harm him is not a serious threat. Btw that is why the Russians consider also mass strikes by non-nuclear cruise missiles a strategic threat, as they could potentially achieve a similar result - you are defenseless and the enemy can rule over you without killing you.