RIA
Part 1: https://geofor.ru/en/news/1356/
- You mentioned hybrid wars. How do you see future wars: nuclear clashes, fighting in large cities, what else?
- Combat operations will be carried out with conventional weapons systems. However, the side that will be defeated, and this defeat is fraught with serious consequences for the internal political stability of the country (I’m not saying which one — Russia, the US — it doesn’t matter), the loss of a significant part of the territory, the loss of sovereignty, then this side may decide to use nuclear weapons. So far we are not talking about Russia, but about other countries, such as Israel or the United States. The United States has adopted the concept of a limited nuclear war. We do not deny it either.
The USSR denied it. The essence of this concept is that the United States, Russia and China, to a lesser extent (its nuclear potential is small), can use tactical nuclear weapons on the territory of third countries without affecting the territory of the United States and Russia. That is, if there is a clash of Russian and American proxy forces (Israeli, German, NATO, the same Polish) on some territory, for example, on the territory of Poland, Western Ukraine or Germany, in this case the U.S. might resort to the use of tactical nuclear weapons on our troops to prevent a catastrophic scenario. In turn, Russia will also use tactical nuclear weapons against the areas where U.S. nuclear weapons are stored and against the aggressor’s troops if this threatens the security of our country. This is written in our Military Doctrine. Today, a military conflict with the use of nuclear weapons has already reached the level of unlikely. Earlier it was practically ruled out, then it was extremely unlikely, and today this level has reached the level of unlikely. That is, the probability of this conflict is growing. So far, the scale of a direct nuclear conflict between Russia and the United States is at the level of almost impossible. Unfortunately, I must state that the likelihood of either side using nuclear weapons in the conditions of growing military confrontation in the Middle East with the risk of escalating into a major Middle East war is growing. I state this with bitterness. Most likely, Russia will not resort to the use of nuclear weapons. There are no reasons for that.
Talking about the use of nuclear weapons against some countries is criminal! Now, when the world is heading towards a classic World War III, such talk is not allowed.
- The Sarmat missile is on combat duty. Does this seriously change the balance of power in the world?
- Sarmat is a weapon that provides nuclear deterrence and does not affect the balance of power in any way. It prevents the United States from threatening us with nuclear weapons. The emergence of such weapons as Sarmat should force the Americans to come to the negotiating table regarding nuclear weapons. Because now the Americans are behaving inadequately. They have withdrawn from the INF treaty, and the appearance of Sarmat may make them think twice. Secondly, this weapon may force the Americans to reduce their aggressiveness in general on a geopolitical scale towards Russia. This will certainly have an impact, albeit very indirectly, on all conflicts, including Ukraine. But so far this is not visible, as there are very few Sarmats in service. When they will be in sufficient numbers and, most importantly, when Russia demonstrates that we have a particularly innovative type of weapons with a high destructive power, the balance of power in the world will change.
For example, Russia must create and present to the world a nuclear munition of super-powerful caliber — 100 or more megatons of TNT equivalent, which is capable of causing detonation of, for example, the Yellowstone Caldera — i.e. a doomsday weapon. Then, they will probably change their rhetoric.