Do Russia’s military setbacks increase the risk of nuclear conflict?
Tactical nuclear weapons are smaller, but using them would carry huge risks
THE SPECTACULAR collapse of Vladimir Putin’s army in Kharkiv province has revived concerns that Russia might resort to nuclear weapons. “I fear that they will strike back now in really unpredictable ways,” warned Rose Gottemoeller, a former deputy secretary-general of NATO, “and ways that may even involve weapons of mass destruction.” Ms Gottemoeller, speaking to the BBC, said she was not worried about Russia’s massive intercontinental ballistic missiles, which cross oceans and can destroy cities, but its so-called tactical nuclear weapons. What are these, and might Mr Putin use them if he is losing the war?
This article appeared in the The Economist explains section of the print edition under the headline “Do Russia’s military setbacks increase the risk of nuclear conflict?”
More from The Economist explains
What do Greenlanders think of being bought?
Donald Trump’s desire for Greenland, and a shabby visit by his son, reignite the independence debate
What would Donald Trump gain from seizing the Panama Canal?
The president-elect claims the crossing is controlled by China and rips off American consumers
Where does Santa come from?
How a miracle-working Greek bishop, Dutch folk figure and early New York icon became the ubiquitous symbol of Christmas
Who are the main rebel groups in Syria?
They were united against the country’s dictator. Now they have little in common
Is RFK junior right to say America allows more toxins than the EU?
He is, but things are slowly beginning to change
What would it cost to kill coal?
The price of shutting down coal power, and what would be gained