{"id":2736,"date":"2022-03-16T01:43:11","date_gmt":"2022-03-16T01:43:11","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/worabia.com\/news\/top-trends\/2736\/"},"modified":"2022-03-16T01:43:11","modified_gmt":"2022-03-16T01:43:11","slug":"ukraine-war-could-russia-use-tactical-nuclear-weapons","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/worabia.com\/news\/top-trends\/2736\/","title":{"rendered":"Ukraine war: Could Russia use tactical nuclear weapons?"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Shortly after Russia invaded Ukraine, President Vladimir Putin said he was moving his “deterrent forces” \u2014 that is, nuclear weapons \u2014 to “combat-ready” status. <\/b><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

This has raised fears that Moscow may use “tactical” nuclear weapons, not all-out nuclear war, but a dramatic development.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Tactical nuclear weapons are those that could be used over relatively short distances. <\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

This distinguishes them from “strategic” nuclear weapons. In the Cold War, these were the bombs that the two superpowers, the US and the Soviet Union, could drop long distances on each other’s homeland. <\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

However, the term “tactical” encompasses many types of weapons, including smaller bombs and missiles used as “battlefield” weapons.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Russia is believed to have some 2,000 tactical nuclear weapons. <\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

These can be placed on various types of missiles that are normally used to deliver conventional explosives.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

They can even be fired like artillery shells on a battlefield. <\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

They have also been developed for aircraft and ships, for example torpedoes and depth charges for targeting submarines. <\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

These warheads are believed to be in storage facilities, rather than deployed and ready to fire. <\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

But one concern is that Russia might be more willing to use smaller tactical weapons than larger strategic missiles. <\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

“They might not see it as this big nuclear threshold crossing. They might see it as part of their conventional forces,” says Dr. Patricia Lewis, head of the international security program at the Chatham House think tank.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Tactical nuclear weapons vary greatly in size and power. <\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

The smallest can be a kiloton or less (equivalent to a thousand tons of the explosive TNT); the largest can reach 100 kilotons. <\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

The effects would depend on the size of the warhead, how far from the ground it detonates, and the local environment.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

But for comparison, the bomb that killed about 146,000 people in Hiroshima, Japan, during World War II, was 15 kilotons. <\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Russia’s largest strategic weapons are believed to be at least 800 kilotons.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

President Putin has made more than one reference to Russia’s nuclear weapons, apparently trying to create a sense of fear.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

US spies see this as a signal to the West to persuade it not to intervene further in Ukraine, not as a sign that it is planning a nuclear war. <\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

But others worry that while the chances are low, Russia may, under certain conditions, be tempted to use a smaller tactical weapon in Ukraine.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

“Putin is comfortable in the world of ‘stability-instability,’ while the West is deterred by his nuclear bravado as if NATO’s billion-dollar deterrent is nothing more than a paper tiger.” tweeted Dr. Mariana Budjeryn<\/a>a nuclear expert at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at the Harvard Kennedy School.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

US intelligence says Russia has a theory called “escalation to de-escalation” if it is in a conflict with NATO.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

This involves doing something dramatic, such as using a tactical weapon on the battlefield, or demonstrating somewhere, or threatening to do so.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

The idea is to scare the other side into backing off.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

The concern is that if Putin feels cornered and his Ukraine strategy is failing, he could use tactical nukes as a “game changer”, to break an impasse or avoid defeat. <\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

But the situation would probably have to get worse in the Ukraine, or back in Russia, for him to consider this. <\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

James Acton, a nuclear expert at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington DC, says: “I’m legitimately concerned that, in that circumstance, Putin could use a nuclear weapon, most likely on the ground in Ukraine, to terrorize everyone and get out. with yours. We’re not at that point yet.”<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Dr. Heather Williams, a nuclear expert at King’s College London, says one problem is that it’s unclear what it would look like for Putin to “win” in Ukraine, and thus what might lead Russia to use a nuclear weapon.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Putin claims that Ukraine is part of Russia, so using nuclear weapons on its territory seems strange. <\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Russia itself is close and “the consequences could cross borders,” warns Patricia Lewis. <\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

The only time nuclear weapons were used in a conflict was by the United States at the end of World War II against Japan. Would Putin want to become the first leader to break the taboo and use them? <\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Some worry that he has shown a willingness to do things that others thought he would not, whether it be invading Ukraine or using a nerve agent in Salisbury.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Dr Williams says there is another reason Russia might not use nuclear weapons: China.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

“Russia relies heavily on Chinese support, but China has a ‘don’t be the first to use’ nuclear doctrine. So if Putin used them, it would be incredibly difficult for China to support him. If he used them, he would probably lose China.” .”<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

No one knows exactly where the use of tactical nuclear weapons would lead. It could escalate and Putin would not want a nuclear war. But miscalculation is always a risk.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

“They figured the whole world would capitulate,” says Patricia Lewis. “What would happen is that Nato would have to go in and respond.”<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

The United States says it is monitoring the situation closely. <\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

It has an extensive intelligence-gathering machine to watch for Russian nuclear activity, for example if tactical weapons are being pulled from storage or if there is any change in behavior at launch sites. <\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

So far, they say they haven’t seen any significant changes. <\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

It is difficult to predict how the United States and NATO would respond to any nuclear use. They may not want to escalate the situation further and risk all-out nuclear war, but they may also want to draw a line. <\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

This could mean a harsh conventional rather than nuclear response. But what would Russia do then? <\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

“Once you’ve crossed the nuclear threshold, there’s no obvious stopping point,” says James Acton. <\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

“I don’t think anyone can trust what that world would be like.”<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n
    \n
  • LIVE: Latest updates from Ukraine and surroundings<\/li>\n
  • KYIV: Ukrainian generals explain why kyiv will not fall easily<\/li>\n
  • PROTEST: Cracks in Kremlin’s war message exposed <\/li>\n
  • MARIUPOL: Infection and hunger while hundreds hide in the basement<\/li>\n
  • IN DEPTH: Comprehensive coverage of the conflict<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n