What would happen to Romania if Russia used nuclear weapon in Ukraine. A NATO's former official response
Former head of the Defense Section of the Permanent Delegation of Romania to NATO, the security expert and international relations Claudiu Fingratu, explains, in an analysis for “Adevărul”, which are the risks of a nuclear confrontation in Ukraine or in another hot point of the globe and as Romania is affected.
Nuclear attack. Photo shutterstock
The world is closer than ever to a nuclear apocalypse, the head of the national intelligence services in the US, Tulsi Gabbard, warned.
“This is the reality of what is in the game, what we face now. Because, while we are here today, closer than ever to nuclear annihilation, the warriors of the political elite carefully feed the fear and tensions between the nuclear powers.”said Gabbard, according to the New York Post.
However, the message of the head of American espionage is not a singular one at all. Experts in nuclear weapons and military analysts have lately fired alarm about the risk of nuclear confrontation. Nuclear confrontation that would most likely equate with an Armageddon and would irretrievably destroy the Earth, questioning not only the existence of man.
Recently, the destruction of Russian strategic bombers through the “spider cloth” operation has caused fears that a major climbing will be reached, especially that, according to the new nuclear doctrine of Moscow, the Russians would now have to respond nuclear.
The statement of the head of the American espionage, decoded
Former head of the Defense Section of the Permanent Delegation of Romania to NATO, the Security Expert and International Relations Claudiu Fingratu explains, in an analysis for “Adevărul”, how real is the risk of nuclear confrontation and how Romania could be affected.
In his opinion, Tulsi Gabbard's terrifying statement wants a warning for Russia and Ukraine, so as not to escalate their war. This does not mean that there is no risk of such a nuclear war.
Claudiu Degeratu. Photo: Adevărul archive
“I believe that Tulsi Gabbard's official statement is more related to the current context and also belongs to the dissatisfaction of the US president vis-à-vis the evolution of the negotiations for an armistice in Ukraine. Negotiations.“Says Degeratu.
Nuclear risk vs. nuclear threat
At the same time, says the expert, the difference between the terms of nuclear risk and nuclear threat should be made.
“The nuclear risk is one, nuclear threats are quite something else. The risk is almost permanent. That is, as it is known, Vladimir Putin has raised since 2022 the level of alert of nuclear forces, no matter what happens on the ground, at the conventional level. And, as it has been seen, immediately after that special operation, it did not Nuclear. The Russian space and then did not happen to appeal to tactical nuclear blows.“Explains Degeratu.
Otherwise, things are if the discussion refers to the nuclear risk, which is as real as possible and does not cease to exist.
“The nuclear risk exists permanently, especially since we alert the nuclear forces in the general way after 2022, and this is part of the psychological blackmail strategy with nuclear blows. But we do not enter a nuclear scenario. We talk about a nuclear risk, not about an imminent threat. Not about NATO and, of course, that means it is monitored and is permanently evaluated ”points out Claudiu Degeratu.
A permanent risk
In history there were several moments of compassion, culminating with the crisis of rockets in Cuba, when an imminent nuclear war. On the other hand, there is the risk of accidental triggering of such a war, even if every state holding nuclear weapons tries to prevent this.
“We have to be honest, there is always this risk. The problem is what kind of probability it has and what could be the effect. But the risk exists permanently. Whether we are talking about a risk that would be of a human error or that it is a risk associated with a conventional crisis, that it is a risk associated with a conflict in progress and which is a conventional conflict, but this risk is. Based on a preventive nuclear blow or a nuclear war scenario, it is very long distance. strategic nuclear is completely something else and is harder to do”, Stress the expert.
At this moment, the main nuclear powers, the United States and Russia, have different nuclear doctrines.
“The Russian nuclear doctrine says that if there is a military action that endangers its territorial sovereignty, or another type of evolution that affects all territorial sovereignty, then it has the right to initiate a preventive nuclear blow. They have a strategy to use nuclear weapons.“Adds Claudiu Degeratu.
How affected would Romania be
If, however, the war in Ukraine would climb, and the Russians would decide to use a nuclear weapon, the consequences would be catastrophic. However, it is difficult to estimate what would happen exactly and how neighboring countries, including Romania. It all depends, says Claudiu Degeratu, on the nuclear weapon that would decide to use the Russians.
“One is to hit with a nuclear tactical blow that has an effect of 60 kilometers in Kiev and the other is to hit with a tactical blow with a larger range of action, say, a 500 -kilometer effect at Odessa. I am huge of many variables in the game and it is difficult to simulate, the hard -to -anticipate, the more I have to anticipate the nuclear Direct and more obvious indirect. Let us panic.”, Concludes Claudiu Degeratu.
