• Could the apparently failed attack on Kyiv force Russia to question its

    From a425couple@21:1/5 to All on Wed May 17 19:51:32 2023
    XPost: sci.military.naval, soc.history.war.misc

    from
    https://news.yahoo.com/could-apparently-failed-attack-kyiv-173940249.html

    Could the apparently failed attack on Kyiv force Russia to question its
    nuclear capabilities?
    305
    Fabian Hoffmann
    Tue, May 16, 2023 at 10:39 AM PDT·2 min read

    Russian multiple launch rocket systems firing at Ukrainian military
    positions - Ministry of Defense of Russia/Newsflash

    The missile attack on Kyiv on Monday night was described by Ukrainian authorities as “exceptional in its density”.

    According to the Ministry of Defence in London, Russia launched a total
    of 27 missile and drone systems against Kyiv, including Kinzhal
    ballistic missiles, Kalibr cruise missiles, and Iranian-supplied Shahed
    drones.

    However, perhaps more remarkable than the sheer rate of fire is
    Ukraine’s – and by association the West’s – ability to absorb it. Kyiv says it shot 100 per cent of the projectiles out of the sky, a claim
    impossible to verify at this stage.

    What is clear is that most – if not all – were neutralised, severely undermining the alleged potency of Russia’s missile arsenal.

    In addition, the events may force Russia’s nuclear strategists to ask uncomfortable questions.

    Some of the missile systems that were probably intercepted in Monday
    night’s attack, including the much-touted Kinzhal hypersonic missile,
    are dual capable.

    This means they can, in theory, be deployed in conventional or nuclear configurations, and constitute a cornerstone of Russia’s non-strategic,
    or tactical, nuclear arsenal.

    Tactical nuclear weapons are primarily intended to achieve battlefield
    effect. For example, in the case of a hypothetical contingency, in which
    Russia is fighting a war with Nato, and Nato’s troops threaten to break Russian lines, Russia may conduct a tactical nuclear strike to halt
    Nato’s advance.

    Given the apparent effectiveness of Ukraine’s missile defences against Russian short-range ballistic and cruise missiles, this may bring into
    question Russia’s ability to successfully deploy its tactical nuclear arsenal.

    Russian propagandists have threatened the UK with missiles that can
    cause nuclear tidal waves to wipe out London.

    This was always clearly an exaggeration but even Vladimir Putin himself
    has claimed the Kinzhal is unstoppable, saying in 2018 that it could “overcome all existing and, I think, prospective anti-aircraft and anti-missile defence systems”.

    Russian decision makers may now start to question if they can bring
    their tactical nuclear weapons to their targets, if push comes to shove.

    Importantly, this does not mean that this week’s events have nullified
    the potency of Russia’s overall nuclear deterrent. Russia remains,
    together with the United States, the largest nuclear power in the world, deploying a diverse arsenal of strategic nuclear weapons.

    National security is usually discussed in terms of worst-case scenarios.
    This is especially the case when it comes to nuclear strategy. Nuclear
    weapons are, after all, the weapon of last resort and the ultimate
    guarantor of national sovereignty.

    As such, the “what ifs” may loom a bit larger today in the Russian
    ministry of defence than usual.

    Fabian Hoffmann is a missile technology expert and Doctoral Research
    Fellow at the University of Oslo

    Someone Other Than You
    1 day ago

    Russia wouldn’t try to use nukes now that the nations they’re trying to scare know that their air defense systems can stop a barrage like the
    one Kyiv just stopped. Russia hasn’t been talking about nuking Ukraine, they’ve been using nukes as a deterrent to try to stall Western support
    for Ukraine. Those Western countries now have much less reason to fear
    Russia.


    Alejandro
    1 day ago

    It's not really less of a worry, just one nuke making it through and
    striking is enough to get a strong point across. Nukes today aren't like Hiroshima, the smallest yield is at least 5x stronger than
    Hiroshima....and Russia has nukes that are 200x stronger than Hiroshima.
    The sheer mass destructio...

    See more


    Al
    1 day ago

    You are so smart. When a nuclear armed missile is shot down, you don’t
    get just the debris, but also the radiation.


    DB


    Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The
    Telegraph free for 1 month, then enjoy 1 year for just $9 with our
    US-exclusive offer.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)