War in Ukraine: Is Russia’s Nuclear Threat One of Its ‘Mass Distraction’ Weapons?

Russian President Vladimir Putin announced last weekend that he had reached an agreement with his Belarusian counterpart Alexander Lukashenko, known as “Europe’s last dictator”, to transfer Russian tactical nuclear weapons to Belarus, a country as a vassal state from Moscow. Putin used the nuclear threat again.

European policy makers flocked. The chancellor of the European Union, the Spanish-Argentinian Josep Borrell, said the movement “will constitute an irresponsible escalation and a threat to European security. He also addressed Minsk: “Belarus can still stop him, it’s their decision. The European Union is ready to react with new sanctions”.

From NATO, its spokesman Oana Lungescu said that “Russia’s nuclear rhetoric is dangerous and irresponsible” and added: “NATO is vigilant and we are monitoring the situation closely. But for now we have not seen any changes in the nuclear device Russian that causes us to adjust ours.

Following the announcement, the Ukrainian government requested an emergency meeting of the United Nations Security Council. Strong words also from the German government which denounced “the new attempt at nuclear intimidation”.

doubts and speculations

Official reactions have all been along the same lines, but the reality of the threat may be quite another. European diplomatic sources they believe that Putin is once again trying to divert attention using the nuclear threat because he knows it generates a lot of headlines.

For this reason, the statement by the NATO spokesman who has not seen any changes in Russia’s nuclear deployment is as important as the words of condemnation.

The diplomats themselves assure this it does not appear that Russia is actually considering sending nuclear weapons in the foreseeable future in Minsk. The cards on the table would change if the absorption of Belarus by Russia ends up being confirmed in the medium term and Moscow comes to control de facto and de jure the Belarusian territory.

Putin never said when he announced the expedition when he would do it and sources consulted in Brussels recall that every time he suffers a setback on the battlefield, as now with his inability to continue advancing in the Donbass , the Kremlin responds talk about nuclear weapons to generate fear.

One such source explains: “Russia says four Ukrainian provinces it occupied in recent months are now Russian territory and therefore covered by the nuclear umbrella, but Ukraine has retaken large parts of Kherson province, including its capital. , without Russia overcoming the threats ”.

These sources also downplay the importance of the ad when verifying it Russia has had tactical nukes for years and medium-range Iskander missiles capable of carrying nuclear warheads in its Kaliningrad enclave between Poland and Lithuania. Those weapons are closer to European capitals than those that could move to Belarus.

The only senior official who made statements confirming suspicions that Russia is simply trying to create fear was the American John Kirby, spokesman for the National Security Council: “We have not seen any movement of tactical nuclear weapons or anything like that.” kind since the announcement and we have seen no indication that Putin has made any kind of decision on the use of nuclear weapons.