Will Russia really use nuclear weapons?

U.S. Air Force B-52H Stratofortress bombers support a routine, pre-planned Dynamic Targeting and Close Air Support training event at the Grafenwoehr Training Area, Germany, March 4, 2022 in support of NATO allies and regional partners. The B-52H's are manned by aircrew assigned to the 5th Bomb Wing from Minot Air Force Base, North Dakota. Bomber Task Force rotations demonstrate the U.S.’ ironclad commitment to promoting regional security alongside our NATO allies and regional partners. (U.S. Army photos by Kevin Sterling Payne)

Recently Russian President Vladimir Putin warned the world that “this is not a bluff,” about using nuclear weapons to complete his Ukraine take over.

It is clear to most world leaders that use of nuclear weapons, in almost any circumstance, would prove catastrophic to all of humanity.

The fervent hope is that the Russian dictator, and already an obvious war criminal, is not really prepared to commit suicide and bring utter destruction to his country and untold millions.

Any Russian attack using nuclear weapons anywhere near Ukraine would undoubtedly trigger Article 5 of the NATO agreement because the fallout would impact  NATO nations and perhaps much of the world depending on the type of device used. That means all of NATO would necessarily be engaged against Russia and any country that attaches itself to Russia’s defense.

The question of the response of the NATO is something that we can only hope has been discussed at length behind closed doors and includes detailed planning.

The current focus is rightly on preventing a nuclear attack in the first place. Putin is counting on the response to be one of hesitation in the west to continue supporting Ukraine or at least reduce the level of support to date.

The U.S., and other nations, was slow to respond to Ukrainian needs in the early days of the war. As Kori Schake, from the American Enterprise Institute, wrote in the New York Times (no enemy of Biden) the administration prides itself for not provoking bully Putin.

“Mr. Biden’s foreign policy team speaks of putting up guardrails in the conflict and congratulates themselves on their slow increase in assistance not provoking Mr. Putin,” wrote Schake.

Nonetheless U.S. provided support, and at a far greater level than from fellow NATO and other nations, in the form of firepower to Ukraine that is currently making a difference.

The planning for a Russian nuclear strike has been something planners have been devising since the former Soviet Union developed their own nuclear arsenal.

Planners likely have the following ideas in mind.

A response must be swift, not necessarily nuclear, but clearly overwhelming.  Any use of such weapons must be seen as a criminal act that requires the end of Putin’s regime. His toppling will need to be part of the plan.

NATO would require a massive and nearly instant callup of armed forces, including a full mobilization of reserve components. We have to be ready and willing to swarm Russia and any country that provides support to it.

The military response would not necessarily require a concerted colossal attack with conventional means across the vast expanse of the country is likely. Unfortunately, nuclear responses would be a part of the consideration in response and would remain on the table as a possibility.

The military response would, however, require a liquidation of Russia’s capability to conduct follow-on nuclear attacks, no matter how limited the first attack may be. Land-based silos, aircraft, and navy platforms capable of nuclear delivery would necessarily be attacked with the intent to be disabling them beyond repair. All of them.

Next, large troop formations whether in Ukraine or Russia must face attack by all the nations of NATO as well as other allies such as Japan, South Korea, Australia, and many others.  The remnants of the Russian army cannot be trusted to discontinue the fight.

Any nation actively hindering such allied attacks should be considered for targeting as well. No leader of any country should feel it is safe to support Russia in any fashion.  Military equipment, munitions, advisors, fighting forces, or financial support to Russia would instantly be seen as an act of war.

Rogue nations such as North Korea and Iran need to be notified to demonstrate that they are not preparing to reenforce Russia, including through direct or indirect intervention, supplying Russian forces, or allowing Russian transit. Any such support should be seen as hostile and potentially result in attack.

A nuclear attack by Russia would be tragic in many ways. It would be the end of Russia as we know it. It would undoubtedly mean the deaths of many thousands of human beings. It would necessitate an immense response.

We will not be safe until Putin is no longer in power.

---

James Hutton is a former assistant secretary at the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs and is a retired colonel in the U.S. Army. Follow him on Twitter @jehutton, GETTR @jehutton, and Truth Social @jehutton