Russia nuclear threat is real and 'cornered rat' Putin 'will target UK first'
The nuclear threat from Russia is very real and "cornered rat" Vladimir Putin will be eyeing Britain as one of his first targets, an expert has warned.
Ever since the Russian President launched his war in Ukraine in February 2022, the vague threat of such devastating strike action has always loomed in the background - with the Kremlin holding much of the world's nuclear warheads. And the West has been hesitant to participate, as a result. Some experts argue former KGB strongman Putin would have already pushed the button if he was going to resort to nukes - but Professor Matt Qvortrup, Professor of Political Science and International Relations at Coventry University, is not so sure.
He told the Mirror: "The situation is not as rosy as we'd like it to be and especially not here because we would be a target, I'm afraid." He added: "I remember the time when you would wake up in a cold sweat in the '80s because you thought we’re going to be nuked by the Russians. I think we are in a position which is as dangerous, certainly for Europe, as we were back then."
It comes after the Ministry of Defence (MoD) this week confirmed an "anomaly occurred" during a Trident exercise that took place on January 30 on board the nuclear-powered submarine HMS Vanguard. A source claimed the incident saw the dummy missile leave the sub "but it just went plop, right next to them".
Prof Anthony Glees, security and intelligence expert at the University of Buckingham, told the Mirror earlier this week that Putin is "laughing at us right now". Of the failure, he said: "Terribly embarrassing at best, devastating to our national security at worst. The top brass in the Navy have got a lot of explaining to do."
UK and EU reach customs deal that could end Northern Ireland logjam, says report
Putin gestures while taking part in the wreath laying ceremony at the Unknown Soldier Tomb (Getty Images)However, Prof Qvortrup said while the failure was "taken out of context" and should not be seen as a way of writing off Trident as something out of Dad's Army, the UK's nuclear deterrents are not up to scratch to ward off the Kremlin. He continued: "What is more fundamental is the kind of missiles we have on Trident and those missiles - ballistic missiles - aren’t the most sophisticated type - they can be shot down from the ground. Not that I'm saying it's easy. You can compare them to cruise missiles - which Russia has and the Americans have - that are literally flying by themselves...but we don’t have those.
"When we upgraded Trident, we should have upgraded properly, but at the time that would have been impossible to do. My argument back then, if we have to have nuclear weapons, at least have proper ones. At the moment we have nuclear weapons that aren’t a credible threat to what the Russians have.
RS-24 Yars, a Russian MIRV-equipped thermonuclear armed intercontinental ballistic missile (SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images)"We’ve got the gloves on, we look like fighters - but we’re pretending to be fighters. I’m not saying Putin is going to do it, but there is a danger that he might do this and I think that that danger is greater, personally, than almost ever before. In Britain, we've been very on the front foot in Ukraine. They’re [Russia] not going to nuke the Poles, somebody who is close by because the wind is going to blow radioactive dust in their face. We would be one of the first targets."
Prof Qvortrup went on to say: "There are roughly 20,000 nuclear warheads in the world, and about six or seven thousand are Russian. The Americans have a handful, and the Chinese…but the Russians have the majority of all nuclear weapons in the world, and that should make us very afraid. When in the corner, the rat jumps up and bites you in the neck."
He referred to a story that Putin himself is reported to have told himself about a time when he was a schoolboy and had cornered a rat in his parents' basement and was poking it with a stick. "The rat was totally panicked and jumped up and bit him in the neck," he added
"When cornered, you do irrational things," he explained. "Putin himself has told that story and I think to a degree Putin is the rat and is someone who when cornered will do things not necessarily rational and that is the greatest danger. If the rat is in the corner with nuclear weapons we should be not just afraid but very afraid."
Young Putin always wanted to be a spy (Russian Archives/ZUMA Wire/REX/Shutterstock)Prof Qvortrup - who has a background in nuclear defence - emphasised: "I don’t think the risk is imminent, I don’t think the risk is high. But we shouldn’t rule it out... Trident will have to be upgraded in a completely different way if it were to be a deterrent. We rely entirely on the American deterrent.
"I think the Russians wouldn’t see much of a deterrent from western Europe. And with a Trump presidency, where we wouldn’t be able to count on American support… the scenario is Trump pulls out of Ukraine, the Europeans will have to foot the bill and Putin says 'if you do this we are going to nuke you'. I really don’t like saying this, nuclear war is not inevitable."
Prof Qvortrup said things could have been "very, very different" had former US President Bill Clinton and ex-British PM John Major "not agreed for Ukrainians to give up their nuclear weapons" 30 years ago. "Ukraine is the only country in the world that officially had nuclear weapons and gave them up," he said. "The Ukrainians had nuclear weapons in 1994 and gave them up as part of a deal called Partnership for Peace and the Americans and the Brits said 'if anything happens we’ll come and help you'.
John Major and Bill Clinton (AFP via Getty Images)He continued: "Nuclear weapons are a terrible thing in every sense of the word, but they are the sort of thing where you think twice about going to war. That deterrent would have prevented the war in Ukraine. We don’t have a credible nuclear deterrent to the Russians."
Rishi Sunak must suspend Dominic Raab during bullying inquiry says union chief
However, Prof Qvortrup said the war in Ukraine could come to an end within the next 18 months or two years - and "certainly nowhere near before" if a peace deal or ceasefire is reached, likely seeing Kyiv giving up the Donbas or Crimea. "That freezes the status quo. The Russians had that area beforehand and they will continue to have that," he explained. "I think there will have to be some way in which it can be portrayed that’s acceptable to all parties and that’s going to be difficult."
On the other hand, he said Ukraine can certainly continue to exploit Russian weaknesses on the ground and hold them off. "If Ukraine is able to get the weapons then they’ll probably be able to have a push - if Ukrainians can just about keep the situation as it is, they are going to be okay," he said.
"The most interesting development, the Russians are not very good at sea. They have never really had a navy to speak of because Russians have mainly had to go through the Baltic, so past Denmark and Sweden and so on, or they have to go through the Arctic. So the Russians have only really had the Black Sea and Vladivostok, which is too far away.
Putin is shown around the cabin of a nuclear icebreaker (REUTERS POOL/AFP via Getty Images)"The Ukrainians have been able to inflict damages on them, which means they can get some of their grain out. That is a thing that I have not foreseen. They have been struggling on the battlefield, land war-wise, but...that’s obviously a thing that can make the Russians look very vulnerable."
Asked if an outright defeat for Putin is out of the question, Prof Qvortrup said: "I don’t think it’s completely impossible. I think maybe if one were to look at history then Finland were invaded by Russia in 1941. A young country established in 1917 and the Russians weren’t backed like they had been with Lithuania and Estonia. It wasn’t as if the Finns beat the Russians, but they were able to get back to the position they were in before the war.
"I think Ukrainians are able to do that and the difference now is things will start to bite in Russia. The more the economy in Russia is turned into a war economy, the more there will be people starting to drag their feet and Putin will have to start to look over his shoulders.
"And even dictatorships like Russia is now, require some level of legitimacy, they need the money. If they don’t have access to grain and they can’t just rely on North Korean weapons, and the Chinese aren’t going to write a blank cheque, they can’t afford it. Remember Russia invaded Afghanistan back in the day and they lost that war.
Ukrainian soldiers of 3rd Assault Brigade are seen in Avdiivka in Donetsk Oblast (Anadolu via Getty Images)"Losing wars to a very committed population is not unheard of. You need the military equipment and you need skilled soldiers and so on, but you also need to have that element of fighting spirit. Finland was able to beat Russia because of that, that element of ballsiness about them, which the Ukrainians still have, to a degree."
And while Prof Qvortrup does not take much notice of reports suggesting Putin's health is deteriorating, he said he is more concerned of his mental well-being, particularly the longer Russia fails to claim a victory. A well-known story claims while a student Putin attacked a stranger on a train who teased him about his height. "When provoked he is someone who hits out, who lashes out," the expert said, adding Putin's KGB superiors never saw him as having the attributes for fieldwork because of it.
"He would have known he wouldn’t qualify for a spy if he just hits people and so on, but he has got this romantic idea of a spy and he used to read the Russian equivalent of James Bond novels. He came to the KGB when he was 10 years old and said he wanted to be a spy, and how do I do it. They said get a law degree, we need people who can think.
Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelensky seen addressing the world's media (POOL/AFP via Getty Images)"But he still likes to be the sort of He-Man and he’s got a chip on his shoulder about that and about his height. Psychologists say a psychopath is someone who doesn’t have a conscience, and he very much is in that mould."
On the flip side, Prof Qvortrup said Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky - who also trained as a lawyer - is someone who is able to delegate. "Zelensky is basically the figure head, he’s not calling the shots. The thing about good leaders is that good leaders are the ones who delegate. [Fellow ex-actor] Ronald Reagan used to get his briefings on eight-minute video tapes, Eisenhower used to be briefed on the golf course, our own Tony Blair, he wanted everything boiled down in three bullet points in 30 seconds because you need to be able to take the full perspective.
"Good leaders are people who are able to delegate. The problem with Putin is he’s not a natural delegator, he thinks he actually knows this stuff and he has a high opinion of himself. Be confident but also be aware of your limitations. Zelensky is aware of his limitations and a bright enough guy. Putin is not aware of his limitations and that is a danger."
Read more similar news:
Comments:
comments powered by Disqus
