A Tactical Nuke Would Do Nothing to Change the Ukrainian Battlefield
Medium, Oct 5, 2022
There is no military reason to use a tactical nuke at this phase in Putin’s war.
But first, what exactly is a “tactical” nuke?
Strangely, there is no real definition of “tactical nuclear weapon.” Many arms control wonks simply use the term “tactical” or “battlefield” nuke to distinguish them from their strategic big brothers — the city-annihilating strategic nukes.
Typically, tactical nukes are between one and fifty kilotons, (although a few may venture into the hundreds of kilotons), and some weapons give its users the ability to ‘dial-in’ the destructive yield… A variable yield function, if you will.
What a time to be alive!
But here’s the thing — nukes, either tactical or strategic, don’t take territories. They don’t hold territories either. They simply make the area where they exploded impassible for a few hundred years.
Putin might be able to freeze the current conflict by nuking the front lines, but that would take hundreds of tactical nukes to accomplish.
Even though they’re smaller, tactical nuclear weapons are best for blowing up big things — carrier strike groups, tank columns, massed infantry, etc.
Because Ukraine is smartly fighting a dispersed war — almost acting like insurgents — Putin would be starved for targets.
So, any Russian use of nuclear weapons at this point would be exclusively as a show of force — a reminder to both the world and to his opponents at home that Vlad still has control of enormous destructive potential.
If I may be so bold… That’s the real danger here.
The danger lies in the possibility of a bad decision on Putin’s part that triggers a Western response that escalates out of control.
And let’s face it — The Kremlin isn’t making good decisions lately.
My fear is that Putin explodes a nuke. The West responds conventionally by killing Russia’s Black Sea fleet, and Putin escalates by attacking U.S. forces somewhere else.
That is a dangerous ‘tit-for-tat’ that may lead to an endgame that gives me the chills to think about.
It’s self-evident that if these two nuclear superpowers go to war, the odds of the apocalypse increase dramatically.
I mean, humanity likely wouldn’t go completely extinct. Pockets of humans would survive, and the Southern Hemisphere in general would fare much better.
But I happen to be a U.S. military guy who hates nukes. You’d be surprised how many of us there are.
Something that can kill so completely and indiscriminately is patently offensive to my military instincts of avoiding civilian casualties and surgical precision.
So, if Putin can’t use a nuke to change his fortunes in Ukraine, but wants to demonstrate that he’s still ‘large and in-charge’, what options does he have available?
Alarmists in the media are quick to point out that Russia’s nuclear trains are heading for the front lines and Putin’s doomsday sub, the one with the Poseidon nuclear torpedo, has put to sea.
But realistically, intelligence analysts believe that Putin’s options are limited.
Remember, these are the same U.S. analysts who accurately predicted Putin’s initial invasion, Russia’s accurate casualty count, and that Putin sabotaged his own gas pipelines — Nord Streams one and two.
They are currently batting a thousand — so I listen when they talk, which is usually way off the record.
The most likely option is a 15-kiloton tactical nuke attached to an Iskander Missile — a mobile, short-range ballistic missile that he would likely fire at an unoccupied area of Ukraine, but along the coast or within visibility of Kyiv.
Why the coast?
If it’s a show of force, Putin would want a daytime strike in fair weather so that he could document the mushroom cloud for future propaganda purposes. The coast along the Black Sea gives him the ability to have Russian navy assets in place to record.
Putin is no stranger to nuclear showmanship.
The question of the hour is — is he bluffing?
Whether Putin is bluffing has quickly become the most important topic at Washington D.C. cocktail parties.
By the way, let’s pause and appreciate how insane it is that it’s 2022 and we’re talking about nuclear war.
That dread that I felt as a child of the 1980s, that all life could be extinguished in a flash, is something I thought I left behind in 1991.
Now, I’m mad.
Pissed, really.
Pissed that the ghastly specter of nuclear war is back to haunt my own kids — all because of one man’s doomed quest for power and legacy.
Putin can use any excuse to demonstrate his nukes anytime he wants. But it won’t be to achieve any clear battlefield objective.
Instead, it will be because he thinks he’s backed into a corner, and nuclear demonstration is his only way out.
What an asshole…
Multi-Branch Veteran | Military & Global Security Writer for War is Boring, GENmag, OneZero, Edge | Law Student at WMU | TEDx Speaker | Dad to 3 | Hates nukes
Multi-Branch Veteran | Military & Global Security Writer for War is Boring, GENmag, OneZero, Edge | Law Student at WMU | TEDx Speaker | Dad to 3 | Hates nukes
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário