Vladimir Putin placed Russia’s strategic nuclear weapons forces on high alert during the first weekend of his war with Ukraine, sparking fears around the world about what might happen next .
The Russian president blamed “hostile actions in the economic sphere”, a reference to the punitive economic sanctions imposed on his country by Western allies, and claimed that the main members of NATO had made “aggressive statements”, him forcing his hand.
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov duly blamed the rise in tensions on comments made by British Foreign Secretary Liz Truss, an ally of whom in turn hit back and denied that all she had said in a series of Sunday morning interviews “justified this kind of escalation”.
Three weeks later, the invasion of Russia continues at a much slower place than Mr Putin seems to have anticipated due to the resilience and courage of the Ukrainian people, who stood up and fought bravely while its cities, from kyiv to Kharkiv and Mariupol, were bombarded remorselessly and blindly.
The Russian dictator himself now looks increasingly belligerent and isolated, seemingly ready to do anything to secure the victory he dreams of.
But what could happen now following Mr. Putin’s orders?
Here’s everything you need to know.
What did Vladimir Putin say about nuclear weapons?
At a meeting on Sunday February 27, Russian TV footage showed Mr Putin meeting with his defense minister and chief of staff and ordering them to place nuclear weapons under a “special regime of duty”. of fight”.
Explaining what this means, Patricia Lewis, director of the international security program at the Chatham House think tank, told the Palestinian Authority news agency: “What we believe happened is is that in peacetime, Russia has checks and balances in place so that they can’t launch nuclear weapons.
“So in order to be able to launch nuclear weapons, President Putin has to change the status from peacetime to combat, hence the phrase that he’s ‘putting his forces into special combat mode’. I think we’d probably call that combat readiness, but it’s difficult because of the different languages and different meanings.
“What he seems to have done is create the legal platform to be able to jump in if he wants to,” she added.
RUSI (Royal United Services Institute) deputy chief executive Professor Malcolm Chalmers said the wording had not been used before so it was not “entirely clear” what it meant.
“I haven’t seen any reports of changes in the postures of Russian nuclear forces,” he told the AP. “Obviously I don’t have access to classified information, but I haven’t seen any reports as such.
“So it’s not clear how it’s changing. It may be something to do with the particular authorization mechanisms between the president and the nuclear forces or it may be nothing at all. What’s clear is that it’s designed to be something we need to listen to. It is designed as a reminder that Russia is a nuclear power.”
What is the probability of a nuclear attack?
British Defense Secretary Ben Wallace tried to throw cold water on fears of nuclear war, saying that while he understood the concerns, the wording was a “rhetorical battle”.
In media interviews, he told Sky News he was “not going to speculate” on what Mr Putin might do in the future.
Later he told BBCTo eat lunch“We don’t see or recognize in the kind of phrase or the status he described as anything that is a change from what they currently have as a nuclear posture.
“It’s mainly about Putin putting it on the table just to remind people, to remind the world, that it has a chilling effect.
“We won’t do anything to escalate in this area, we won’t do anything to fuel miscalculation, we take this very, very seriously.
“But right now, it’s a rhetorical battle that President Putin is waging, and we just have to make sure we handle it properly.”
Tom Tugendhat, chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee, meanwhile said that Russia sees battlefield nuclear weapons as just “a bigger hit” and could issue a military order to use them.
Some experts said it was unclear whether or not Mr Putin would carry out a nuclear attack, while others dismissed the possibility, saying mutual destruction would be too great.
Ms Lewis said: “Now that he’s moved into a combat situation, he can [launch a nuclear attack]. But will he? We do not know. This is the problem.
“Of course he wants to scare us. And I think Russia has long understood that the West is much more afraid of Russian nuclear weapons than Russia is afraid of Western nuclear weapons, and I think that’s true.
She added: “There is a possibility of retaliating against conventional force with nuclear weapons under Western doctrines, but it is widely believed that this would be a last resort.
“I think over the last decade there has been a feeling that Putin, with [North Korean leader] Kim Jong Un and [former US president] Donald Trump, are people who could have launched a nuclear weapon. So there’s always been this unpredictability… I don’t want to overdo it but I don’t want to minimize it either.
Professor Chalmers meanwhile said he thought it was ‘unlikely’, adding: ‘Because any use of nuclear weapons would open such a Pandora’s box, and the possibility of an escalation towards the use other nuclear weapons once a country has used them, the pressure on other nuclear weapon states to use them in response would be very considerable…the Russians understand that and so does the West. So it’s a paradox.
What could happen in a nuclear attack?
If Russia launched an attack on a NATO country, experts said there could be retaliatory strikes from other NATO countries, sparking a conflict which Professor Chalmers said would lead to ” orders of magnitude worse than World War II”.
The number of casualties would depend on the area attacked. Nuclear weapons have the capacity to kill hundreds of thousands of people depending on the population of the targeted area.
Others could be injured from radiation poisoning if a specific facility is targeted instead.
What nuclear weapons does Russia have?
The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, which has published an account of the world’s nuclear arsenals compiled by leading experts from the Federation of American Scientists since 1987, updated its archive on Russia’s nuclear arsenal last week.
He said the stockpile is about 4,477 warheads, of which about 1,588 are strategic warheads that can be deployed on ballistic missiles and heavy bomber bases, while about 977 additional strategic warheads, as well as 1 912 non-strategic warheads, are kept in reserve.
what about the rest of the world?
According to the Federation of American Scientists, the latest figures indicate that the UK has a stockpile of around 225 nuclear warheads, while the US has 5,428, France has 290, Pakistan has 165. , China has 350, India has 160, Israel has 90 and North Korea has 20.
The Independent has a proud history of campaigning for the rights of the most vulnerable, and we launched our first campaign to welcome refugees during the war in Syria in 2015. Today, as we renew our campaign and launch this petition to Following the unfolding crisis in Ukraine, we are asking the government to go further and faster to ensure the delivery of aid. To learn more about our Welcome to Refugees campaign, Click here. To sign the petition, click here. If you would like to donate, please Click here for our GoFundMe page.