Russian President Vladimir Putin once once more showed the nuclear card this week to dissuade the West from taking another step in its support for Ukraine. “All this threatens [desatar] a conflict with nuclear weapons and, therefore, the destruction of civilization,” the president declared before the Russian Parliament following the statements of the French leader, Emmanuel Macron, who said on Monday that the deployment of military personnel “might not be excluded.” of NATO. This statement was qualified the next day in the sense that the president was not referring to these troops entering combat, but rather that they would limit themselves to training kyiv’s troops in the rear. The Kremlin has a very large arsenal that totals around 6,000 nuclear warheads, a figure similar to what the United States has. The difference, however, is marked by its 2,000 tactical warheads, “small” nuclear bombs that do not appear in the disarmament treaties and that are the focus of an important debate among Western experts: Would the Kremlin cause an explosion that would cause a mushroom cloud as a warning? in the case of being cornered in Eastern Europe?
The US and Russia take over 90% of the planet’s nuclear bombs. Just a year ago, Putin suspended the treaty with Washington for the non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, the New Start agreement. Frozen in practice since the pandemic, since Moscow has not allowed the Americans to supervise its arsenals since 2020, this pact limits the destructive power of both powers: up to 700 active means of attack between intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM), submarines and bombers, and 1,550 nuclear warheads, in addition to another 800 “inactive” undeployed assets. In practice, both sides are suspected of having regarding 200 more nuclear warheads each.
These are weapons that might destroy the world in a few minutes. Added to these are thousands of Cold War nuclear warheads that remain locked in warehouses and whose deployment would take time. The actual figures are classified, although the Stockholm Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) estimates that Russia and the United States had 5,889 and 5,244 nuclear warheads in 2023, respectively.
Here the so-called “tactical bombs” come into play, designed to destroy specific targets – a fleet or a base – and not entire cities, but also fearsome ones. According to the Pentagon, Russia has regarding 2,000 nuclear warheads of this type.
Official Russian military doctrine would accept the use of the most powerful weapons in the world “when the very existence of the State is in danger,” according to the latest revision of the document that Putin signed in 2020. However, the Kremlin began to consider the use of these weapons in conflicts came to light two decades ago, when he observed the technological superiority of NATO in wars such as that of Yugoslavia and the two in Iraq.
Western experts do not agree on the possibility of Moscow resorting to the “escalation to de-escalate” tactic. That is, employ a tactical bomb first to force the opponent to negotiate. Mark Schneider, former senior official of the US Department of Defense, recalls that Russian doctrine contemplates this option “in response to large-scale aggression with conventional weapons.” Kristin Ven Bruusgaard, an analyst at Chatham House, assures for her part that the Russian doctrine “is not that simple” and Moscow would be more hesitant regarding NATO’s possible response following this action.
The problem for the Atlantic Alliance is that it does not know what to expect with Putin. “The contradiction between the official line—of the Kremlin—and reality casts doubt on all past and future Russian nuclear doctrines,” warns Nikolai Sokov, researcher at the Center, in the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists—created by Manhattan Project researchers. of Disarmament and Non-Proliferation in Vienna.
“In its war once morest Ukraine, Russia has “used” its nuclear weapons as a form of offensive deterrence, to cover its aggression, and not for defensive deterrence purposes – to avoid being attacked. “All this contradicts what is written in all official documents, from national security concepts to military doctrines,” adds Sókov, who was one of the Russian negotiators of the first disarmament treaties with the United States and also sees it possible that Moscow resort to “escalation for de-escalation.”
The most serious step taken so far by the Kremlin since the start of its offensive on Ukraine has been the deployment of a small arsenal of nuclear weapons in Belarus in 2023. “Given the short range of the weapons, the nuclear signal seems clearly aimed at “Poland, a full member of NATO and which has adopted the most proactive position in assisting Ukraine,” warns Sókov regarding a measure that changes the geostrategic map in Eastern Europe in the coming years.
Testing ground
The Kremlin has modernized its strategic force in recent years. “Russia’s opponents must remember that we have weapons capable of hitting targets on their territory,” Putin emphasized last Thursday before his parliamentarians. During his speech, the president reviewed the new generation of weapons that he has to deter NATO, both in a regional and large-scale conflict, and two of them have already been tested on the Ukrainian battlefield. .
kyiv claims to have evidence that the Russian army used the 3M22 Zircon hypersonic missile once morest several Ukrainian cities in February. The rocket, capable of carrying a nuclear warhead, can reach its target 1,000 kilometers away at a speed of Mach 9, at regarding 11,100 kilometers per hour. Testing it once morest Ukrainian air defenses—which include American Patriot batteries—would be yet another test of Putin’s weapons, who have already used Kinzhal hypersonic missiles extensively in the war.
Powerful weapons, but not infallible. Many Kinzhals – made from Western parts – have been shot down in Ukraine, while new nuclear-powered weapons, the Poseidon underwater drone and the Burevestnik missile, remain out of service. For its part, the new generation of Russian intercontinental ballistic missiles is an unknown. The RS-28 Sarmat, with a range of 18,000 kilometers, is the successor to the backbone of Russian ICBMs, the R-36M Satan. The problem is that it was manufactured in Ukraine, and since the breakup a decade ago the Kremlin has been forced to put its Sarmat into production with barely a single known successful test.
Follow all the international information on Facebook y Xor our weekly newsletter.
to continue reading
_
