Since the beginning of the war, Vladimir Putin’s threats, veiled or not, to use nuclear weapons have increased. Russian generals even mentioned such a strike in mid-October.
The New York Times revealed on Wednesday that Russian generals raised the possibility of a tactical nuclear strike in Ukraine in mid-October, discussing the nature and timing. The American newspaper relied on sources within American intelligence to publish this information and stated that neither Vladimir Putin nor his Secretary of Defense took part in these exchanges.
Since the beginning of the war in Ukraine, there have been countless threats to use nuclear weapons, veiled or not, from Vladimir Putin, who has repeatedly recalled that the use of nuclear weapons is an option on the table when the vital interests of the Russian nation should be threatened. At the beginning of October, during a private meeting, Joe Biden estimated that mankind had never been so close to a nuclear apocalypse since the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962.
“Always take threats seriously”
The New York Times revelations confirm for the first time that the strategic details of such a strike have been discussed at the highest level. When asked about the issue, John Kirby, spokesman for the US National Security Council, said:
“We take this information very seriously. We have monitored this as closely as possible from the start and we always do.”
A view shared by Claude Blanchemaison, French ambassador in Moscow from 2000 to 2004. “We must always take the thinly veiled threats of the enemy seriously,” BFMTV said.
Especially since, according to General Jérôme Pellistrandi, defense advisor to BFMTV, the use of nuclear weapons in Russia is a more widely accepted idea than in France: “In Russian doctrine, the use of tactical nuclear weapons is more tactical, while in France there is a very clear division. We are in deterrence, in non-employment.”
difficulties on the ground
For the New York Times, the conversation reflects the concern Russian officers have gained as backlash on the ground for Moscow multiplies. Since the end of the summer, Kyiv has been conducting a successful counteroffensive in the east of the country and has managed to recapture several locations. The city of Kherson, captured by Russia at the beginning of the invasion, was even evacuated from Moscow in the face of the advancing forces from Kyiv.
A situation that can explain the discussion of the Russian generals. “There is an internal problem for the Russian armed forces, which are in a tactical impasse. It is normal that the Russian generals are trying to find a solution,” General Jerome Pellistrandi said on Thursday.
For Héloïse Fayet, a researcher at the IFRI Security Studies Center, the New York Times revelations do indeed report a predictable situation.
“It is quite normal for generals to plan to consider multiple departures that go unreported to the Defense Ministry and President Putin. We are still planning, which we hope other countries will do as well,” he said the researcher .
“In Case of Extreme Last Resort”
France has no tactical nuclear weapons, only strategic ones. Still basing its nuclear strategy on that of General De Gaulle, Paris believes that the use of the atom in a conflict, whatever the size of the bomb, represents a point of no return.
As a reminder, a tactical nuclear weapon has a limited range, less than 500 km, and its power is limited. However, current tactical nuclear weapons would have the same power as that dropped on Hiroshima in 1945. Either consequences, which would be terrible in any case and which invite caution when interpreting Vladimir Putin’s alleged wishes.
“The Russians would only use it in extreme emergencies, such as the day Putin was in a situation where he might want to capitulate. We’re a long way from that, so the hypothesis raised isn’t a current hypothesis,” explained Claude Blanchemaison on our set.
An analysis shared by General Jérôme Pellistrandi: “We have entered a war that will last a very long time. Putin knows he has resources, Russian history shows that the country has strategic depth. He has very big difficulties for his defense industry, but it fits in the long term with the idea that if the West faces a complicated winter, it could no longer support Ukraine.”
A flight to serve American interests?
Another element to put the situation in perspective: the elements on which the New York Times article is based. CNN reported that the conversation conducted by the Russian generals was not recorded and transmitted unaltered to US intelligence, but that the latter relied on several raw intelligence elements which, analyzed together, led to the discovery of this discussion.
The leak that allowed the New York Times to reveal the existence of this discussion is not insignificant on the American side either. At least that’s what Claude Blanchemaison said on our set.
“We are only a few days away from the midterms. It is probably not entirely insignificant that the leak took place at the time the aid to Ukraine shows that this is not the right time,” said the former ambassador.