<div id="firstBodyDiv" data-bind-html-content-type="article" data-bind-html-compile="article.body" data-first-article-body="
The Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskywarned earlier this April that it may be used Putin Tactical nuclear weapons in his war on Ukraine.
However, Russia denied, according to its foreign minister, Sergey Lavrovits intention to resort to such a weapon, stressing "At this stage we are only considering the option of conventional weapons".
And in turn, he sees the site "National Interest" That Putin has options for using nuclear weapons, and his previous threats to use them are not reassuring.
Western experts discussed the possibility of the outbreak of World War III as a result of the war in Ukraine, and they touched on the possibility of using a mini-nuclear weapon, given Russia’s large stockpile of tactical nuclear weapons of relatively low power, so that it can, for example, destroy a city or parts of it, unlike strategic nuclear weapons that It can destroy entire countries.
They considered that Russia’s possession of a large amount of tactical nuclear weapons increases the likelihood of their use in Ukraine.
This possibility generated a debate among experts about the best US strategy to deter Russia from carrying out attacks with these weapons. Is it the threat of a massive and catastrophic nuclear response in the event of the use of nuclear weapons? Is this threat credible in the event of the use of tactical nuclear weapons by Moscow?
Or should the United States put its arsenal of ballistic nuclear weapons on alert to ensure a response proportional to what the Russians would do? Will US nuclear threats increase Putin’s boldness in this field? What are the limits of the risk to be taken?
There is no clear answer to these questions. The ambiguity that decision-makers in Moscow and Washington must live with makes controlling the escalation difficult.
However, the possibility of a nuclear weapon being used in Ukraine raises the possibility of a nuclear war "mini"an idea rejected by nuclear weapons analysts, in fact it seems difficult to imagine any scenario in which could be victorious in a nuclear war "mini"without an escalation from the other party.
When US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin was asked when he traveled to Germany to participate in the Ukraine Support Conference last week about the possibility of a nuclear war, he replied: "Nobody wants to see a nuclear war happen".
she says "National Interest" Fortunately for now, both countries are still interested in avoiding direct confrontation or nuclear war, but how long this fragile situation can continue is another question.
“>
The Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskywarned earlier this April that it may be used Putin Tactical nuclear weapons in his war on Ukraine.
However, Russia denied, according to its foreign minister, Sergey Lavrovits intention to resort to such a weapon, stressing, “At this stage, we are studying the option of conventional weapons only.”
In turn, the National Interest website believes that Putin has options to use nuclear weapons, and his previous threats to use them are not reassuring.
Western experts discussed the possibility of the outbreak of World War III as a result of the war in Ukraine, and they touched on the possibility of using a mini-nuclear weapon, given Russia’s large stockpile of tactical nuclear weapons of relatively low power, so that it can, for example, destroy a city or parts of it, unlike strategic nuclear weapons that It can destroy entire countries.
They considered that Russia’s possession of a large amount of tactical nuclear weapons increases the likelihood of their use in Ukraine.
This possibility generated a debate among experts about the best US strategy to deter Russia from carrying out attacks with these weapons. Is it the threat of a massive and catastrophic nuclear response in the event of the use of nuclear weapons? Is this threat credible in the event of the use of tactical nuclear weapons by Moscow?
Or should the United States put its arsenal of ballistic nuclear weapons on alert to ensure a response proportional to what the Russians would do? Will US nuclear threats increase Putin’s boldness in this field? What are the limits of the risk to be taken?
There is no clear answer to these questions. The ambiguity that decision-makers in Moscow and Washington must live with makes controlling the escalation difficult.
However, the possibility of a nuclear weapon being used in Ukraine raises the possibility of a “mini” nuclear war, an idea that nuclear weapons analysts reject. In fact, it seems difficult to envision any scenario in which a “mini” nuclear war would be victorious without an escalation of the other party.
When US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin traveled to Germany to participate in a conference in support of Ukraine last week, when asked about the possibility of a nuclear war, he replied: “No one wants to see a nuclear war happen.”
Fortunately for now, the National Interest says, both countries are still interested in avoiding direct confrontation or nuclear war, but how long this fragile situation can continue is another question.