UKRAINE:A DEFINITIVE TARGET FOR A TACTICAL NUCLEAR STRIKE
By General Monzer El Ayoubi
Translation: Dr. Pierre A. Sarkis
In a deliberate and non-arbitrary decision included on the list of military options within the equation of proportionality or parity with the size of the goals achieved, both at the geostrategic level and the “staged” political level, Russian President Vladimir Putin approved decrees annexing the four regions of Donetsk, Lugansk, Zaporizhzhia and Kherson to the Russian federation in a required ceremony after a four-day referendum conducted by pro-Moscow administrations.
In direct proportion, a mathematical equation read and adopted by the Russian General Staff Command in the sense that the size of the results achieved is equal to the combat effort and battles on the field, whether in progress and victory, or failures and withdrawals. Based on this logical equation, the annexation decision is enough as a price to draw the boundaries of the confrontation or stop it immediately; on the other hand, there is no Ukrainian victory that can be talked about, even if the withdrawal of Russian forces was unorganized in contrast to the pattern of tactical retreat or delayed combat, as failures can be investable even if it is not scheduled as pawns on the chessboard.
In reading intentions with the anticipated, as well as, the surprising, the retreat of Russian forces gives way to the use of tactical nuclear bombs, which is a matter of course that awaits the right timing, whether based on field developments or what it definitely sows in threats and warnings and international reactions. As for the location and size of the strike, it can be calculated with the impact of targets by determining the destructive size, the force of the blast, and the extent of radiation spread with the need to study weather factors and appropriate wind directions, etc. which secures the margin of protection and confines the destruction to the enemy’s location, without collateral damage that may affect friendly forces.
By extension, the rule of proportionality is not fixed in time or space, as well as, the surrounding facts and circumstances, it is one of the foundations of international humanitarian law that must be adopted by the military commander in the sense of balancing the methods of fighting the enemy and the humanitarian considerations in the protection of civilians. From this point of view, the resort to tactical nuclear weapons becomes overlapping and may take a justified direction or explanation, to avoid violating the rules of international law.
In solving proportionality, President Putin adopted the annexation of the four regions equally while saving the effort of the fighting forces and in parallel, with resorting to partial military mobilization, securing the protection cordon and the defensive front lines awaiting the strikes of the Ukrainian Army, allowing it to make a deceptive field advance, making the shocking tactical nuclear response a decisive justification for ending the military operation and sufficing with the victory achieved to ensure:
1- The Russian strategic missile system Sarmat-RS 28 remains cool in its silos. NATO calls the Samat Missile the devil in its specifications, “nuclear payload estimated at 10 ton- explosion 2,000 times stronger than the Hiroshima Bomb- hypersonic speed- range up to 11,000 km- maneuverability to change altitude, direction and speed- high level of active protection.”
2- Fixing the position of Russia as the planet’s other nuclear-striking power without hesitation; as well as, the position of President Putin as the leader of Greater Russia and its prestigious history.
3- Stop the automatic depletions of the resources of European countries in support of Zelensky’s forces, and thus, the satisfaction and livelihood of their peoples while giving them the warmth that protects them from the frost of winter hibernation, in contrast to the policy of their leaders even at the expense of the Ukrainians, as well as, offering some serum to heal the continent’s dilapidated economies, with the opening of the gas energy pipelines, even gradually.
On the other hand, in the rules of engagement, it is decided that there is no Third World War and no all-out nuclear war, since the use of one or two bombs with a payload of 1 kiloton out of 2,000 bombs non-strategic nuclear tactical bombs lurking in the warehouses of Northern Siberia, is more enough to secure the resounding silence on Ukrainian and European soil. Raising the level of nuclear vigilance in Western Countries is not a decisive factor or deterrent to the Russian military leadership, as it is possible for the European Union to implement the “rescue program” which acknowledged the beginning of the war on Ukraine, and includes steps of contingency plans to deal with the disasters, including confronting nuclear attacks, such as, the preparation of competent teams and equipment, besieging the spread of nuclear radiation, using the EU’s strategic reservoir of medicines and vaccines, etc. It remains established that the rapid response to any chemical or nuclear attack, as well as, the boundaries of the game, are limited and precisely well-known.
In the US response, Washington has so far adopted the equation of “strategic ambiguity” in the face of everything that happens, and despite warning the Kremlin against the use of tactical nuclear weapons, US President Joe Biden has refused to disclose the details of the response, commenting that the reaction would depend on “how much they do.” On the other hand, the obligations of the American military response remain non biding, as Ukraine is neither an ally of the US nor a member of NATO, as the American Administration sees that any direct US military response against Russia would lead to a wider war between the nuclear-fanged superpowers, which makes avoiding it a priority.
Next, Ukrainian forces and vital military and strategic points will be a field-weighted target for the 9K 720 Iskander 300 km short-range ballistic missile carrying the first tactical nuclear bombs. From here we can conclude the article, with Lawrence Friedman, an expert in war studies at Kings College, saying that the potential targets of limited nuclear strikes are those identified for conventional strikes, i.e. the most critical infrastructure more than cities, and the uninhabited Black Sea Snake Island, for example, could be bombed with nuclear weapons, as evidence of Russia’s power to sow fear in Ukraine and the West. In addition, the EU Foreign Minister warned that Putin’s comments on the use of nuclear weapons are not a joke. Finally, the Financial Times quoted European officials as saying that “many of the red lines that have been established in dealing with nuclear weapons have changed after Putin’s speech.”
Scholar in Security and Strategic Affairs