Deterrence or Nuclear War?


Following the statements of Kremlin Spokesperson Dmitry Peskov, who was a guest on CNN, the possibility of Nuclear War came to the fore again and began to be discussed hotly. I would like to explain to you what this means.

According to us experts, a one-in-a-million-to-million probability is a value that must be taken into account. In the defense field, the nuclear option is a file that should always be kept on the table. Preparations are made completely so that the “nightmare plans” are kept up to date.

The USA and Russia have already been inclined to not renew the agreements on nuclear issues for a while. Even the Intermediate Range Force Agreement (INF) was not renewed under the previous US President Donald Trump. Nuclear weapons and launch vehicles in Europe began to be modernized. Europe was already nervous. On the other hand, China’s 2035 target was calculated as 1,000 nuclear warheads. After that, what would be the equivalence of the earth to talk about? These are strategic issues, they need long-term reckoning. Calculations had already begun.

In my articles, I wrote that the Ukraine issue has evolved into the nuclear threat of Russia. (Reminder: Saying there is a threat does not mean the war has started.) I also drew attention to the fact that nuclear plans will be discussed by experts at the NATO summit (March 24). Then there was the statement of Kremlin Spokesperson Peskov. On top of that, we heard the USA’s response in the same tone. Suddenly the nuclear debate started.


What does “existential threat” in Peskov’s statement mean? This is not an existential threat meant to break up Russia, occupy its lands. It is about Moscow’s regime, policy and the protection of global spheres of influence. It is not a word spoken against Ukraine; on the contrary, it is clear that it was said against the USA and its Partners. This is a high-pitched statement meant to strike or deter a warning.


The issue of deterrence applies to two possibilities: 1) For an honorable exit; 2) To come out completely victorious (victory).

If Russia wants to exit the Ukraine war with dignity and settle into peace, it can give a warning in this tone. If he wants to end the war in Ukraine in his own favor, he may have felt the need to give such a warning again.

Among these possibilities, Peskov used verbal threats. But let’s not forget that Russia constantly exposes its nuclear launch vehicles. In fact, the use of hypersonic missiles, as required by the dynamics of the operation, is also in question for this purpose. In other words, all this is a show of determination. Thus, we will be able to see if the other party will back off or give up on their claims.

What if there is no withdrawal or waiver? Limited use of nuclear weapons! That in itself would mean changing the game. This situation is already a cause of war in terms of international law and may be irreversible.

Let’s take a look at the general nuclear warfare option. Either this phase can occur directly, which no one wants to happen, or it is tested to see if there will be a withdrawal or abandonment after limited use, otherwise it is said that nuclear war will be inevitable.


There are plans for such situations. There is a fundamental plan in action. Contingency plans that support this and that will be put into action according to the possibilities are ready. Politicians put them forward. Their aim is to increase the pressure as much as possible. But why? Simply, to win. What if losing was inevitable, could this be the way to go? Yup. This door is open.

Simply nuclear weapons; They can be classified as tactical, mid-range and strategic. Currently, there are means of hitting a short-range point on Ukrainian territory with artillery, tactical bombers, or rockets on ships. They can preferably use low kiloton nuclear munitions. Having this ability is one thing, really applying it is another.

While throwing a nuclear weapon, the explosion location, altitude and angle, yield, kilotons, fallout distribution are calculated. The details of these also constitute a justification for understanding the message given by the ammunition. Experts in this business can interpret this.


What stage are we at? Deterrence, determination. The road taken is the honorable way out for the warring parties. Russia holds its hand high and wants to repay the comprehensive sanctions imposed in this way. We will carefully monitor the messages from the G7 and NATO summits to be held on March 24.

It is essential to look at nuclear weapons as the great powers, at least as Russia, the USA, Europe, and even NATO and the G7. (It may be necessary to consider China or other powers later on in the first place.) There are plans, capabilities, but using them is another matter. From the very beginning, Europe was saying, “There should be no world war over the Ukraine issue.” The United States and NATO, on the other hand, always said, “We don’t want to go to war.” Let’s see what will happen now?

NOTE: Due to intellectual property rights, you can use this information by reference.

Gursel Tokmakoglu

Bir cevap yazın

Your email address will not be published.


Nükleer Savaş Riski


Harp Prensipleri Yönüyle Ukrayna-Rusya Harekât Değerlendirmesi

Güvenlik 'ın son yazıları


Depremin yükü bir hayli ağır. Henüz yaralarımızı sarma aşamasındayız. Yapılacak çok işimiz var. Benin konum; ne

Stratejik Dönüm Noktası

Rusya’nın 18 Ocak 2023 Dnipro saldırısından bugüne hangi gelişmeler oldu? Önümüzdeki günlerde Ukrayna’daki savaşın cephesi, Rusya-NATO

Stratejiyle Kazanmak

Çok Alanlı Operasyonlar bahsinden ne anlıyoruz? Ukrayna’daki savaşta ABD, Rusya’yı nasıl yıpratıyor? ABD, Çin ile hangi