![]() Russia's non-strategic nukes are "in central storage and would have to be brought out of their bunker first and transported out to the launch units that would fire them," Kristensen explained, adding that it's "reasonable to assume" Western intelligence would detect whether this is occurring given the number of steps involved. "I don't think there's a red button on his desk that he can press and then suddenly the nuclear weapons start flying," Kristensen said, and it would likely "take longer," he continued, to use a tactical nuclear weapon than a strategic one given that these weapons are not immediately available. "But of course, like in the United States, the military has to cooperate," he said. Kristensen, director of the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists, explained during the ACA webinar. ![]() The whole process starts with a decision by Putin, Hans M. But there's no way of knowing if anyone would dare stand against the Russian leader, whose opponents have a history of winding up in prison or dying in violent ways. ![]() If Putin ordered a nuclear strike, it's possible that at some stage his orders could be refused. "And you would have to do that very much in cold blood." You really would have to kill a lot of people - we are talking about tens, maybe hundreds of thousands of people," he said. "It won't be enough just to have an explosion over the Black Sea somewhere to deliver the shock. If the Kremlin were seeking an effective demonstration, he argued, "it would have to be shocking," like nuking an entire city. "It's not easy."Įven if the intent of such a strike were to simply demonstrate Russia's resolve and willingness to escalate, Podvig does not think it would achieve that with a battlefield nuke - it could in fact be read as Moscow being hesitant. You need to deal with all the contamination," he said. It would also, among other things, be a logistical nightmare for a military that at least early on struggled to even feed its own troops. At best, a single tactical nuclear weapon could destroy about a dozen tanks, Podvig said. Ukraine's forces are dispersed, meaning there likely would not be an opportunity to take out thousands of soldiers in a strike. Unlike the ICBMs whose explosive power is measured in often measured in megatons, tactical nukes are not emergency-use weapons ready to be fired at a moment's notice, arms control experts said they are aging weapons of questionable reliability that must be taken out of storage and shipped to a frontline unit for use. Russia has the world's largest arsenal of tactical nukes, weapons whose battlefield impact may be limited to destroying a dozen armored vehicles but could still kill tens of thousands if used against a city. The use of a tactical nuke would be a deliberate act - made "in cold blood," an expert said - that requires a multi-step process that US spy agencies may detect so far, US officials have said they've seen no signs of it. In September, Putin made a veiled reference to nuclear weapons while vowing to defend Russia's "territorial integrity," emphasizing that "this is not a bluff." Putin has continued to make threatening references to Russia's nuclear arsenal in the time since. Russian President Vladimir Putin has made a lot of very unsettling nuclear threats since the start of Russia's unprovoked war in Ukraine, and concerns are growing as his forces lose ground that he could resort to the unthinkable and order the use of weapons of mass destruction - a nightmare scenario. Account icon An icon in the shape of a person's head and shoulders.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |