With recent events taking place in Ukraine, the world, again, is living through the situation that was normal just some 40 years ago; a large, but fading superpower is threatening nuclear war on everyone who dares to stand up against it. There have been a few major nuclear blackmail events; almost all of them involved the US, UK, USSR, or China. Russia’s Mr. Putin vs Ukraine and the West is not just about blackmail anymore. We argue that in nuclear blackmail, certainly, the “nuclear” part is important, precisely because, as claimed by the Atomic Scientists Bulletin Kristensen and Korda (Kristensen and Korda 115), Russia has 1. strategic nuclear rockets 2. non-strategic nuclear rockets 3. nuclear stations in Ukraine 4. nuclear stations built in Europe by the Russian army 5. all nuclear stations in Europe where a Russian rocket can reach. However, we argue that for blowing up an entire country, it does not even have to be a direct use of such a destructive weapon and there is a whole other strategy to reach chaos not using nuclear weapons. There is a name to this strategy; we call it “the Nuclear”; Mr. Putin’s way is using old low-precision rockets and Soviet tanks, but his favorite activity is to blow up countries from the inside — with corruption, unfair money, hybrid, and cyberwars, spy webs, endless quid-pro-quos and espionage through IT companies, by monopolizing oil and gas sector, by hacking elections and with many other technologies developed during the Soviet rule and being constantly updated by the egg-headed pale men. Nuclear is the strategy of chaos but without the use of nuclear weapons, though threatening with them. Many scholars and analysts cannot differentiate between The Nuclear strategy and the nuclear weapons threat; the leverage is the same, and the tools are different, though depending on one another.
We will analyze the situation, along with presenting the reader with media reactions and cultural perceptions of the current crisis. We will also say a few words about the 1961 UK-China case, but from a very different perspective and rather briefly; we argue that the 1961 situation may soon happen again, as the tensions between China and the collective West may soon be even more irritating. Both the 1961 and 2022 cases are acute but one should not assume that the scenario of UK-China nuclear blackmail was less important; it was a serious occasion when one major superpower considered threatening another major country in order to prevent it from unfolding war on Hong Kong. Still, even this past case is less serious than that of Russia’s Mr. Putin has been unfolding in Ukraine over the last four weeks. In 1961, a war was possible, too, but for other reasons. This time, the difference is that war is already an ongoing reality and nuclear rocket blackmail has got an “upgrade”: the Russian army has occupied Chornobyl and another major nuclear power plant in Ukraine, thus using them both as leverage against Ukraine and Europe; “if you do not play ball, you should know I am crazy enough to end it once and for all,” — says Mr. Putin, but will he really do it?
Save your time!
We can take care of your essay
- Proper editing and formatting
- Free revision, title page, and bibliography
- Flexible prices and money-back guarantee
We do not think so.
At a certain point, nuclear blackmail becomes nuclear terrorism. What is blackmail, then? Blackmail means a lot of words, and a high probability of a conflict, but a low to average probability of the worst-case scenario. What is nuclear terrorism? Here, nuclear terrorism means even more words, more lies, and a low probability that the Russian military actually bombs a foreign country or lets the occupied nuclear stations go out of control on purpose: one could argue that Russia may not be able to control every process taking place on the power plants, for two reasons: 1. Ukrainian scientists, responsible for the Chornobyl station, according to The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, are being held captive at the station (Field and D’Agostino) and they have been there for three weeks already; they are not supposed to be there for such a long time. there have always been established shifts that now have been canceled by the Russian military that occupied Chornobyl; the scientists are in danger of having serious health problems due to excessive radiation, and if they perish, there are not that many specialists ready to replace them; this is the Slow Violence that Nixon described so well in the “Slow violence and the environmentalism of the poor” (Nixon) 2. The Russian military is using a lot of low-precision Soviet bombs that have been used in Syria and Afghanistan; if one of them misses a target and hits one of the nuclear power plants, Ukraine is definitely in danger, but there are strong technologies that can clean up such consequences in a very short time: Japan, China, and NATO have such tools.
There is also a real scenario where Russia, having mistakenly or deliberately caused a minor nuclear spill, may be able to divert radioactive cloud away from its territory and spread it around Ukraine, and yes, Russia, just like the US, has a climate weapon; it is not classified, a station in the US is called H.A.R.P (Wiki contributors), and in Russia, it is S.U.R.A (Wiki contributors) and it uses ionospheric pressure to cause heavy winds, floods, and tectonic shifts. Since the US has the climate weapon, it can help Ukraine and theoretically divert the nuclear cloud towards Russia — and that is exactly why Russia will not cause even a minor nuclear spill. But the statement “Russia will not do it because the nuclear cloud would cover them, too” is absolutely worthless; the less cautious Europeans are now, the better for Mr. Putin, and it has always worked that way: to calm Europe with sweet words and sweet gifts, then do what he wants anyway, ignoring EU, US, and NATO. It would be a grave mistake to spread statements such as “Russia will definitely cause a nuclear catastrophe,” because such words serve Mr. Putin’s propaganda, too — the more fear, the less logic, the lesser logic, the more control for the aggressor; but frankly, there will be no nuclear catastrophe. The only Mr. Putin’s aim is to spread panic, genocide, and chaos, not necessarily radiation.
There is one way of fighting both the propaganda and the nuclear blackmail — by bringing more investment into the cyber might of the EU, US, and NATO — which has been done on March 25th, with the EU establishing the first-ever European army under the “Strategic Compass” plan (Borrel).
What Mr. Putin does with the power plants in Ukraine can be classified as 10 percent nuclear terrorism, and 90 percent blackmail; the goal is to let NATO and especially the US know they should not interfere in the war, but also to threaten health problems among the Ukrainians; Mr. Putin does not care about his own soldiers staying at the power plants. In a way, one could say his plan is working: NATO is not sending any troops to Ukraine and is not closing the sky, though it does send weapons now. But is the reluctance because of Russia’s blackmail, or is it simply because NATO is always being, to put it mildly — cautious?
The most prominent opposition thinkers of Russia, from Yuriy Felshtinsky to Yulia Latynina, consider that Russia’s Mr. Putin will not stop on Ukraine (“Russia-Ukraine Crisis: What Does Putin Want?”); the next could be Moldova or Poland, the Baltics, Georgia or Kazakhstan. The question should be “how.” Nuclear or “The Nuclear”? We lean towards the non-nuclear “nuclear.”
We read many media reports and articles, including from Yuval Noah Harari saying that Russia’s Mr. Putin is losing the war and that its military might will soon be deprived of key personnel (Harari). Indirectly and not with evil intent, such statements, especially from a renowned scientist like Harari, could serve Mr. Putin’s propaganda and his attempts to mislead the West. Russia’s population is quite large and there are many men who can be called into military conscription, given basic weapons, and sent to the bloodshed; yes, there will be thousands of deserters, but certainly not everyone; but would that help Mr. Putin's cause? We do not think so. Soldiers will give up weapons and f Russian citizenship — this is already happening. Yes, nothing prevents Russia from introducing a wartime situation law and thus completely regrouping the country into the “alarm” mode, where a few thousand Russians may truly believe that their country is “in danger from NATO” and they will, at least many of them, go and try to “stop the “evil West.” Yes, Russia’s Mr. Putin could theoretically continue this war for a few more months and of course, the official active and inactive military personnel have, according to Mr. Putin and AS.TV, but also judging by the other sources, is from 1.9 to almost 3 million people (Nelson) and even more if we count a possible obligatory wartime military conscription law. Mr. Putin says that Russia has plenty of rockets, and the stock is large enough to destroy the whole of Eastern Europe and the Caucasus; true, Mr. Putin does not even need to send soldiers to Europe; he can simply press all sorts of buttons. But the answer to the claim that he will soon unfold a full-scale European war is “wrong, untrue”: 1. By the time Mr. Putin introduces the military law, Russian citizens will drown in economic problems; we estimate default and later hyperinflation at the beginning of May this year; Russians will not have time for this war: most of them will be busy trying to leave the country, even if the military conscription law is introduced 2. Russia’s rockets, as we stated, are ridiculously old and can barely fly; true, there are a few hypersonic ones, but they are mostly useless and cannot alter the course of the war 3. Do not forget about the main fear of Mr. Putin — NATO. He is scared of it. The last thing he needs is a full-scale conflict with NATO. He wants to poke the tiger, not fight it openly.
The key leverage number 1 is still the physical nuclear threat. Russia still has over a thousand nuclear warheads, so says Mr. Putin; it has the Chornobyl. Kaliningrad-Konigsberg is also at Mr. Putin’s disposal; there are nuclear weapons there, too; one could say that nothing prevents Russia from making a preemptive strategic nuclear blast on the territory of Poland or Ukraine, but does it really? Mr. Putin sees the reluctance of NATO’s Secretary-General, Mr. Stoltenberg; for Mr. Putin, he is “too civil” and Mr. Putin is counting on Mr. Stoltenberg to stay “polite” and to repeat the phrase “we will not close the sky and will not take Ukraine to NATO” as often as possible, which has been done by Mr. Stoltenberg with incredible punctuality; if only NATO was as punctual in closing the sky over Ukraine a month ago and accepting Georgia and Ukraine to NATO on time — around 17-20 years ago when the Baltics were accepted. However, Mr. Stoltenberg’s position might save the day for Western Europe. The mantra is working, and Mr. Putin sleeps tight at night, knowing that NATO will not get involved directly. The indirect involvement does not bother him that much — his soldiers die, not him, he never cared — and we remember it with the “Kursk” submarine drowning worthlessly while Mr. Putin rejected help from a nearby American submarine; responding to a reporter’s question “where is the Kursk” he stated “drowned” and laughed.
Late, but still, on March 24th, NATO announced unprecedented support for Ukraine: drones, anti-tank missiles, anti-rocket systems, anti-nuclear-chemical-biological equipment, and billions of euros in humanitarian and other military assistance. With such help from NATO, Ukraine will defeat Russia within a few months; the question is, how long will it take for the weapons to arrive in Ukraine, and will they arrive at all? Russia has been threatening to blow up every convoy carrying weapon help for Ukraine, regardless of location. Six days ago, the Internet saw the main Russian propagandists drawing vector lines on the live map on the first state channel of Russia “Rossiya 1”; the lines pointed at Goteborg, a Swedish island in the Baltic Sea, in the Baltics and Poland. There are always “rats” who move and show what might be the next move; one of them, a Russian priest Artemiy Vladimirov, known for his ties to KGB FSB and for his faschist-ultra-nationalist-monarchic views, has voiced an opinion that soon “Ukraine will be liberated, and after Ukraine, it will be Poland, the Baltics, Georgia, Armenia, Kazakhstan and others” (Yugova).
Such opinions are more and more frequent in the Russian media, but NATO’s Mr. Stoltenberg seems to have realized that his native Norway and the whole of Scandinavia are included in Mr. Putin’s appetite; Mr. Stoltenberg knows Russia has engaged in multiple wars against Norway and that when Mr. Putin senses fear and reluctance, he becomes more aggressive. Thus, the best decision Mr. Stoltenberg could make is to send weapons to Ukraine, and this is all he can come up with without engaging in a full-scale war with Russia.
Stuck on your essay?
