Is Russia planning to use nuclear weapons?
https://www.sbs.com.au/news/podcast-episode/is-russia-planning-to-use-nuclear-weapons/7vcas0f5l 23 June 23
President Vladimir Putin has announced the imminent deployment of Russia’s advanced Sarmat intercontinental ballistic missiles, capable of carrying multiple nuclear warheads.
This comes as Russia’s defence head says intelligence indicates Ukraine is planning to strike the annexed territories including Crimea.
Ukraine has warned Russians to flee from the occupied territories as Russia warns any strike on Crimea will be met with strikes at the centre of Ukraine’s leadership
Putin warns NATO over being drawn into Ukraine war
By Zahid Mahmood, CNN, June 17, 2023
Russian President Vladimir Putin has warned there is a “serious danger” of NATO being drawn further into the Ukraine war if members of the alliance continue to supply military weaponry to Kyiv.
“NATO, of course, is being drawn into the war in Ukraine, what are we talking here,” Putin said at the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum on Friday.
“The supplies of heavy military weaponry to Ukraine are ongoing, they are now looking into giving Ukraine the jets.”
The comment appeared to be a reference to the F-16 fighter jets some members of the NATO alliance are making plans to supply Ukraine with.
NATO, or the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, was formed in the aftermath of World War II to defend Western nations from the Soviet Union [despite USSR being their ally in WW2 !]and the alliance contains a mutual defense clause where an attack on any one member is considered an attack on all. While Ukraine is not a member of NATO, some NATO members have been supplying Kyiv with tanks, armored vehicles and other weaponry – prompting threats of retaliation from Russia.
German Leopard 2 tanks, British Challenger 2 tanks and American Bradley and Stryker vehicles are among the Western equipment that has been sent to Ukraine.
In late April, NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said that NATO allies and partners had delivered more than 1,500 vehicles and 230 tanks to the country.
During his speech in St. Petersburg, Putin said Russia had destroyed tanks “including Leopards” at the front lines.
“And if they are based abroad, but used in fighting we’ll see how to hit them, and where we can hit those means that are used against us in fighting,” Putin said.
“This is a serious danger of further drawing NATO into this military conflict,” he added………………………….. https://edition.cnn.com/2023/06/17/europe/nato-danger-ukraine-war-putin-intl-hnk/index.html
USSR Sprinkled More Than 2,500 Nuclear Generators Across The Countryside
Hundreds of these tiny atomic terrors are still unaccounted for in the rugged landscape of the former Soviet Union.
By Erin Marquis, 16 June 23, https://jalopnik.com/ussr-sprinkled-more-than-2-500-nuclear-generators-acros-1850501190
Ah, the USSR. It was a strange place with strange ideas. Ideas such as planting unprotected mini nuclear power sources into inhospitable and hard-to-reach areas. I mean, nothing should go wrong as long as the government always exists to maintain them, right?
Welcome to the world of Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generators or RTGs. It’s a piece of nuclear history I only recently learned about and thought I should bring this whole new horror to your attention as well. These things are just kind of rolling around famously stable Russia, and it seems like it should be a cause for concern.
RTGs are not nuclear reactors, nor are they “nuclear batteries.” Rather they work by converting the heat caused by radioactive decay into electricity. Due to the dangerous nature of the materials used however, countries like America only use RTGs in applications such as space exploration. Voyager, Cassini and New Horizons uses RTGs for power, as do the Mars rovers Perseverance and Curiosity. These probes however, use expensive plutonium-238 as their power sources and we launch them far the hell away from us.
The USSR though? Nah. It’s going to use super cheap, super radioactive Strontium-90 instead, though later, smaller RTGs used equally cheap Caesium-137 or Cerium-144. These three isotopes all have one thing in common; they’re all the products of spent nuclear fission. In other words, waste. The terrestrial Beta-M RTG is about 1.5 meters wide and 1.5 meters tall and weight about one metric ton, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency. The entire unit put out about between 1 and 1000 watts (quite the spread) and had a working life of 10 to 20 years.
Originally built by the USSR’s Navy to power lighthouses and radio navigation beacons along Russia’s expansive arctic coastline, the RTGs provided power hundreds or even thousands of miles from civilization, occasionally completely unprotected and always unsupervised. They were occasionally secured by metal frames or sheds, but sometimes these lighthouses and radio beacons were set up on little more than rough structures hastily constructed out of nearby timber with the RTG stuck outside to face the harsh arctic elements. While the USSR provided regular rolling patrols to maintain the RTGs, that came to a screeching halt in 1991 when the Soviet Union fell. After that, there was no money to maintain the hard-to-reach RTGs, and they became victims of neglect and metal thieves.
After it proved useful for the Navy, the Soviets put the RTGs into service in other rough terrains. That’s how several ended up in the mountains of the former Soviet state of Georgia. Three residents from the village of Lia, Georgia, found a canister high up in the mountains. Since this strange material gave off heat, the three used it to stay warm overnight, but they woke up vomiting and dizzy. A week later, a military hospital diagnosed the three with radiation sickness. Two of the men would make it out with the help of dozens of skin grafts and months in the hospital. But the man who slept closest to the radioisotope source and handled it the most could not be saved.
Their arrival at the hospital launched a mad scramble from the international atomic community to find the orphan source of radiation. Footage of the clean-up crew both training for retrieval and actually snaring the Strontium-90 core shows just how dangerous RTGs are:
That wasn’t the only incident involving RTGs however. In 2001, scrappers broke into a lighthouse on Kandalashka Bay and stole three radioisotope sources (all three were recovered and sent to Moscow). Three men in the mountains of Georgia were also exposed in 2002 after stumbling upon cores left out in the woods. In 2003, scrappers hurled a core into the Baltic Sea, where a team of experts retrieved it.
Why Russia must not take the Western bait, to use nuclear weapons in the Ukraine war

Western commentators ………… actively urging Moscow to break the taboo of proactive nuclear use. ………to put Russia in a position of moral equality with the US, which was the first and only country in the world to use atomic weapons on the battlefield.
One should not think about turning Poland into a nuclear wasteland (i.e. akin to beheading an irrational child for occasionally breaking your front window), but rather about creating a world order in which the very idea of using military force and politico-military pressure to impose a so-called “rules-based order” becomes impossible and universally condemned.
Ilya Fabrichnikov: Why I disagree with the call for Russia to use its nuclear weapons against the West.
Sergey Karaganov’s call for a preemptive strike has unleashed a major debate, but I don’t agree that we should take NATO’s bait
By Ilya Fabrichnikov, member of the Council on Foreign and Defense Policy and a communications advisor, https://www.rt.com/russia/578165-russia-shouldnt-use-nuclear-weapon/ 16 June 23,
This is a response to Sergey Karaganov’s article ‘By using its nuclear weapons, Russia could save humanity from a global catastrophe.’
The respected Sergey Karaganov, in his widely discussed article, suggests that we should stop haggling with the collective West, which is pumping modern weapons into the Ukrainian armed forces, and start moving quickly up the ladder of atomic escalation. All the while, he believes we must demonstrate our readiness to launch a “pre-emptive defensive nuclear strike” on the territory of one of the Western European countries, who are the sponsors of the Kiev leadership.
We seem to be talking about Poland. If such an escalation would not force European leaders to come to their senses then it would be necessary to strike at a “group of countries.”
The Russian nuclear doctrine is enshrined in the ‘Foundations of State Policy of the Russian Federation in the Area of Nuclear Deterrence’ as of June 2, 2020. It states very clearly: “The Russian Federation views nuclear weapons exclusively as a means of deterrence, the use of which is an extreme and compelled measure, and is making all the necessary efforts to reduce the nuclear threat and not allow an aggravation in interstate relations which could provoke military conflicts, including nuclear ones. The Russian Federation is prepared to use nuclear weapons in four scenarios (or a combination of them):
a) [if it has] credible information about the launch of ballistic missiles to attack the territory of the Russian Federation and/or its allies;
b) an enemy’s use of nuclear weapons or other weapons of mass destruction on the territory of the Russian Federation and/or its allies;
c) an enemy strike on critical state or military facilities of the Russian Federation, the deactivation of which would disrupt the response actions of the nuclear forces;
d) aggression against the Russian Federation using conventional weapons, where the very existence of the state is threatened.”
At this point, none of the scenarios under which the Russian president could order the use of nuclear weapons are even in the early stages of becoming possible. Nevertheless, there are clear contours of a verbal escalation from the West that has not yet been matched by a symmetrical response from Russian officials. So far, this verbal escalation has been an informational confrontation aimed at probing a purely psychological reaction from the main decision-maker on the use of nuclear weapons – President Vladimir Putin. There are no other individuals in the country with responsibility for the use of strategic weapons – they are not provided for in the Constitution, relevant regulations or presidential decrees.
It should be stressed that Russia’s “nuclear doctrine” was developed under conditions where Western countries had been making constant attacks on our core national interests and was about indicating our readiness and ability to defend ourselves. In this sense, it is unambiguous and not open to broad interpretations, but calibrated and practical.
Speaking of verbal escalation, we are not even referring to a recent proposal from a former American official of comparatively low rank, Michael Rubin (now of the American Enterprise Institute) in which he proposed handing over tactical nuclear weapons to Ukraine. We are also not talking about a hypothetical US willingness to transfer F-16 Block 40/42 aircraft to the Ukrainian armed forces, some of which can be adapted to use B-61 freefall nuclear bombs.
In reality, this is all part of an information campaign in the Western European and – to some extent – American media that had gained considerable momentum by the middle of last year. Western commentators actively and imperatively speculated about when, not if, Russia would finally use its tactical nuclear capability against Kiev. In doing so, they were actively urging Moscow to break the taboo of proactive nuclear use.
The goal of this information campaign is clear: to provoke a public backlash, not only from the Russian media or expert community, but also to put psychological pressure on Russia’s foreign policy decision makers to lower the threshold of susceptibility to such decisions. In other words, to put Russia in a position of moral equality with the US, which was the first and only country in the world to use atomic weapons on the battlefield.
So far, this task has not been achieved and the Russian leadership’s approach to the use of our national nuclear capabilities has remained reliably constrained by doctrinal frameworks, a pragmatic view of the issue from the president, and a responsible attitude to questions of military escalation.
It is not simply that, but according to some estimates – including those of senior Russian diplomats and other practitioners of international relations – a limited and preventive nuclear strike by Russia (e.g. against Poland) wouldn’t provoke a similar response from the US and its satellites. Rather, it’s about the fact that lowering the threshold for the use of atomic weapons and their use against non-nuclear states, however vehemently anti-Russian their policies and agendas may be, will not lead to the appeasement of the Western world. Rather it would lead to an increased possibility of the use of nuclear weapons by countries outside the big nuclear club such as Pakistan, India, Israel and North Korea. Simply because it could irreversibly become the norm in politico-military confrontation.
Moreover, by arguing in practical terms for a proactive, preventive nuclear strike in self-defense “for all the evil they have done to us, for all the good we can achieve,” we would be playing by the rules that have been imposed on us. Instead, we should be consistently, through pragmatic politico-military actions, demonstrating the flawed nature of those very rules and, in the not too distant future, dismantling them altogether – together with other responsible actors in the international community.
One should not think about turning Poland into a nuclear wasteland (i.e. akin to beheading an irrational child for occasionally breaking your front window), but rather about creating a world order in which the very idea of using military force and politico-military pressure to impose a so-called “rules-based order” becomes impossible and universally condemned.
On the other hand, Russia has made it clear to its Western European and American interlocutors that if conventional Western forces are used directly against Russian troops on the ground (e.g. if Polish soldiers openly come into contact with our combat ranks in the event of Polish units occupying territory in western Ukraine, attempting to invade Kaliningrad, or carrying out military actions against Belarus), the national doctrine of nuclear deterrence will be enacted in full compliance with the spirit and letter of Russian law. Reading it carefully is a good and necessary exercise for the relevant NATO politico-military planning authorities. And in this case, no one will think twice as it is clear and well-defined.
Paradoxical as it may seem, the NATO states are now demonstrably proactive in the delicate and error-prone business of escalation. And Russia’s foreign policy leadership seems to have reacted belatedly to these initiatives. In fact, the Western bloc’s demonstrative restlessness only confirms the loss of initiative, and haste always leads to dramatic miscalculations.
We should not deprive our foreign “partners” of the privilege of making all the mistakes they are trying to program us to make. Instead, we should be conducting sophisticated and multidimensional moral-psychological operations, including through the English-language media space they control, aimed at undermining their reserve and willingness to keep going for the long haul.
Tit For Tat: Putin says Russia will use depleted uranium against Ukraine if necessary

Don’t you get sick of the belligerent boys and their diabolical toys?
Tuqa Khalid, Al Arabiya English, 14 June 23
Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Tuesday that Russia will use weapons with depleted uranium if necessary in response to reports of the US supplying such weapons to Ukraine.
“We have a lot of such ammunition, with depleted uranium, and if they [the Armed Forces of Ukraine] use them, we also reserve the right to use the same ammunition,” Putin said as cited by state news agency TASS.
He added during a meeting with war correspondents that Russia has a lot of ammunition with depleted uranium, but so far they were not being used.
Putin’s statement comes after a report by the Wall Street Journal reported that US President Joe Biden’s administration is predicted to supply Ukraine with depleted-uranium rounds to arm the Abrams tanks being provided by the US. The Pentagon has advocated for the use of these rounds, which are frequently utilized by the US Army and are notably potent against Russian tanks…………. more https://english.alarabiya.net/News/world/2023/06/13/Putin-says-Russia-will-use-depleted-uranium-against-Ukraine-if-necessary
Egypt joining IAEA’s Convention on Nuclear Safety, as Russia successfully markets its nuclear industry to Egypt
“……………………… by joining IAEA’s convention on peaceful nuclear safety, Egypt took another step towards implementing its nuclear power programme.
“Egypt has gone a long way towards implementing its first nuclear power plant at El-Dabaa, 320 kilometres northwest of Cairo,” said Awadallah, adding that the plant will have four nuclear reactors that will begin operating between 2028 and 2030.
He noted that these reactors, which generate energy for peaceful purposes, are designed in collaboration with Russia’s state-owned nuclear engineering company, Rosatom, with a capacity of 1.2 GW each.
The construction of the first three reactors has already begun after obtaining approval from the Egyptian Nuclear and Radiological Regulatory Authority (ENRRA).
On 19 November 2015, Egypt and Russia signed an agreement under which Russia will build and finance Egypt’s first nuclear power plant.
The preliminary contracts for constructing the four nuclear reactors were signed, in December 2017, in the presence of Egyptian President Abdel-Fattah El-Sisi and Russian President Vladimir Putin.
The state-owned Rosatom will build the plant and supply Russian nuclear fuel for its entire life cycle.
Russia will finance 85 percent of the cost with a loan of $25 billion, while Egypt will provide the remaining 15 percent in the form of instalments. The Russian loan is repaid over 22 years, with an annual interest of three percent……………………….
The presidential decree on Egypt joining IAEA’s convention on nuclear safety will be submitted for a final vote when Egypt’s parliament – the House of Representatives – reconvenes next Tuesday, 20 June.
Russia trying to market nuclear power stations to Sri Lanka
IAEA studying plans to build nuclear power plant in Sri Lanka, Colombo Gazette, June 15, 2023
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is studying Russia’s plans to build a nuclear power plant in Sri Lanka.
Rosatom, the Russian the State Atomic Energy Corporation will help build a nuclear power plant in Sri Lanka.
The Ambassador of Sri Lanka to the Russian Federation, Janita Liyanage, said that the project was approved by the country’s authorities and is now being studied by IAEA specialists.
According to her, there is still a discussion on making the nuclear power plant floating or building it on the ground.
Rosatom will also help train specialists who will work at the nuclear power plants…….
Sri Lanka plans to build its first nuclear power plant with technical support from Russia by 2032…………………….. https://colombogazette.com/2023/06/15/iaea-studying-plans-to-build-nuclear-power-plant-in-sri-lanka/
China and Russia building most nuclear power plants, – the main goal is to market them to developing countries


China and Russia account for 70% of new nuclear plants
Exports used as diplomatic card while Western nations fall behind
NAOYUKI TOYAMA, Nikkei staff writerJune 11, 2023
TOKYO — Russia and China are building up an outsized presence in the field of nuclear power, with the countries accounting for nearly 70% of reactors under construction or in planning worldwide.
…………………Notably, 33 of the reactors are being constructed or planned outside each respective country. Russia has the largest number of overseas reactors with 19, and despite growing opposition from Europe and the U.S. following its invasion of Ukraine, it maintains a strong global influence in nuclear power.
In April, Russian President Vladimir Putin participated remotely in a ceremony to mark the arrival of the first fuel at the under-construction Akkuyu nuclear power plant in Turkey………
Russia’s nuclear power diplomacy is extending to other countries as well. In May, Rosatom began full-scale construction on Unit 3 of the Dabaa nuclear plant in Egypt, the country’s first.
Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban met with Rosatom officials this month to discuss the company’s plans to build a new nuclear power plant in the country’s south. Hungary opposes sanctions the European Union has imposed on Rosatom.
“Many developing countries take a positive view of Russia,” Kacper Szulecki of the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs told British scientific journal Nature Energy. Russia’s acceptance of spent nuclear fuel is also attractive to emerging countries.
Meanwhile, China is deepening its engagement with Pakistan………………………………..
China also plans to build a nuclear plant in Argentina…………………………………
The U.S., Japan and Europe are hoping to catch up using small modular reactors (SMRs), considered fourth-generation technology………………………………………..
Another issue is nuclear fuel. Uranium enrichment has become the weak link for Western nations. Enrichment facilities are limited, and Russia is the global leader for that process. In April, the U.S., the U.K., France, Canada and Japan formed a nuclear fuel alliance. While the aim is to shut out Russian fuel from Western reactors, doing so will not be easy.
https://asia.nikkei.com/Business/Energy/China-and-Russia-account-for-70-of-new-nuclear-plants
Rosatom says nuclear cleanup in Arctic done – Far from the case, says Bellona.

The nuclear cleanup in the Arctic is not done, there is still radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel that needs securing.
Those items remaining to be cleaned up and secured include at least 11,000 spent nuclear fuel assemblies at Andreyeva Bay, a former Soviet submarine base. They also include two sunken nuclear submarines, over a dozen nuclear reactors and barrels of radioactive waste scuttled by the Soviet Navy in the Kara and Barents Seas. Issues of securing spent fuel and radioactive waste stored on nuclear icebreaker service ships likewise remain unresolved.
Russia’s state nuclear corporation Rosatom said last week that more than two decades worth of efforts to rid the Arctic of radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel from decommissioned submarines will now come to an end. Bellona fears Rosatom is leaving undone a raft of crucial projects initiated with international support.
June 7, 2023 by Bellona
Russia’s state nuclear corporation Rosatom said last week that more than two decades worth of efforts to rid the Arctic of radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel from decommissioned submarines will now come to an end. Bellona fears Rosatom is leaving undone a raft of crucial projects initiated with international support.
” [This work]began back in the early 2000s with the analysis of large deposits of spent nuclear fuel from nuclear submarine reactors,” said Rosatom CEO Aleksei Likhachev in remarks reported by official Russian newswire Tass “In total, thousands of tons of radioactive materials have been handled, and today we are at the finish line of this work, returning these territories to public use under strict administrative, public, and international control.”
Since the 1990s, the Bellona Foundation has been involved in discovering and documenting nuclear hazards and radiation threats in Arctic Russia and based on that experience, the organization asserts that Likhachev’s announcement is untrue — Russia is nowhere near the “finish line” in these efforts
Furthermore, Likhachev’s remarks contradict earlier statements from Rosatom that many of these cleanup operations would be ongoing until late in this decade.
“Russian authorities are backtracking on earlier statements from May last year, and confirming Bellona’s fears that these projects will not be continued or completed, says Frederic Hauge, president of the Bellona Foundation.
“The nuclear cleanup in the Arctic is not done, there is still radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel that needs securing – both in the former marine base at Andreeva Bay and at the bottom of the Arctic seas”, says underlines Hauge.
Since the early 2000s, cleanup projects to rid the Arctic of the nuclear legacy of the Soviet Northern fleet have been ongoing in North-West Russia. These efforts were orchestrated through international cooperation between Russia and other countries and aided by large funding pledges from international donors.
These multinational efforts continued until February of 2022, when Moscow invaded Ukraine. Since then, international assistance to Moscow has been put on ice. But even then, key figures at Rosatom pledged that cleanup work would continue, nonetheless.
But Likhachev’s statement seems to put an end to that and declares victory well before the battle is finished
Those items remaining to be cleaned up and secured include at least 11,000 spent nuclear fuel assemblies at Andreyeva Bay, a former Soviet submarine base. They also include two sunken nuclear submarines, over a dozen nuclear reactors and barrels of radioactive waste scuttled by the Soviet Navy in the Kara and Barents Seas. Issues of securing spent fuel and radioactive waste stored on nuclear icebreaker service ships likewise remain unresolved.
In 2022, after Moscow launched its invasion of Ukraine, Russian authorities sought to assure their international counterparts that each of these projects would nonetheless continue, despite the withdrawal of international assistance.
Bellona had since that time been concerned that Russia, in its state of war, would fail to prioritize these critical projects, and in November the organization warned that the efforts to lift sunken Soviet submarines would at best be indefinitely postponed …………………………………
The issue of the sunken objects left by the Soviet Union will not be solved by itself. Ninety percent of that radiation from the sunken objects in the Kara and Barents seas is emitted by six objects that Rosatom has deemed urgent and targeted for lifting: two nuclear submarines; the reactor compartments from three nuclear submarines; and the reactor from the legendary icebreaker Lenin. …………….
“Why do they choose to say that the cleanup is done now – when that clearly is not the case? Rosatom has time and again underlined the importance of finishing the cleanup projects and lifting the sunken objects from the bottom of the sea, says Hauge.
“If we were to speculate, it might be that they are trying to force a renewed dialogue on financing of these projects, despite the aftermath of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Perhaps they are fishing for reactions from Norwegian authorities and other western governments – perhaps particularly when it comes to the sunken objects,” continues Hauge
“They know that the more delayed a decision to raise these subs is, the higher the risk of a lifting operation failing. Thus, such a statement can put pressure on former cooperation partners to reevaluate their decision to discontinue cooperation with Russia and financial support on these topics because of the invasion of Ukraine. If that is the correct interpretation, then it is a form of blackmail – nuclear blackmail,” Hauge concludes. https://bellona.org/news/nuclear-issues/2023-06-rosatom-says-nuclear-cleanup-in-arctic-done-far-from-the-case-says-bellona
Putin bribes ‘friendly nations’ with use of 24-hour ‘floating nuclear power stations’
As war rages on in eastern Ukraine, Russia’s state-owned nuclear energy company Rosatom has announced it will share floating nuclear power plant (FNPP) technology only with “friendly nations” to help supply electricity.
By ALESSANDRA SCOTTO DI SANTOLO 29 May 23
Russia will supply floating nuclear power plant (FNPP) technology to enable around-the-clock supply of electricity to remote areas of allied countries, the Kremlin-linked energy company announced…………………………………………………….. more https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1775103/putin-floating-nuclear-power-plant-rosatom-russia—
Russia moves ahead with deployment of tactical nuclear weapons in Belarus
ABC 26 May 23
Russia has moved ahead with a plan to deploy tactical nuclear weapons in Belarus, whose leader said the warheads were already on the move, in the Kremlin’s first deployment of such bombs outside Russia since the 1991 fall of the Soviet Union.
Key points:
- The plan for the nuclear deployment was announced by Mr Putin in March
- The US has warned that use of chemical, biological or nuclear weapons in the conflict would be met with “severe consequences”
- The US believes Russia has around 2,000 tactical nuclear warheads
The US State Department denounced the deployment plan but said Washington had no intention of altering its position on strategic nuclear weapons and had not seen any signs Russia was preparing to use a nuclear weapon.
Russian President Vladimir Putin says the United States and its allies are fighting an expanding proxy war against Russia after the Kremlin chief sent troops into Ukraine 15 months ago.
The plan for the nuclear deployment was announced by Mr Putin in an interview with state television on March 25.
“The collective West is essentially waging an undeclared war against our countries,” Mr Putin’s defence minister, Sergei Shoigu, said at a meeting with his Belarusian counterpart in Minsk, according to Russia’s Defence Ministry……………………………………………………………….
Russia’s tactical nuclear weapons superiority
Tactical nuclear weapons are used for tactical gains on the battlefield, and are usually smaller in yield than the strategic nuclear weapons designed to destroy US or Russian cities.
Russia has a huge numerical superiority over the United States and the NATO military alliance when it comes to tactical nuclear weapons: the United States believes Russia has around 2,000 such working tactical warheads.
The United States has around 200 tactical nuclear weapons, half of which are at bases in Europe…………………………………….
The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, signed by the Soviet Union, says that no nuclear power can transfer nuclear weapons or technology to a non-nuclear power, but it does allow for the weapons to be deployed outside its borders but under its control. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-05-26/russia-moves-ahead-with-deployment-of-tactical-nuclear-weapons/102395632
Russian vessel attacked by Ukrainian sea drones off Bosporus
The navy ship, which was patrolling the TurkStream gas pipeline, destroyed all of the incoming drones, the Russian military says
The Russian Navy reconnaissance ship, ‘Ivan Churs’, has fended off an attack by three unmanned speed boats launched by the Ukrainian military, the Defense Ministry claimed on Wednesday.
The vessel was targeted by the drones in the early morning in Türkiye’s exclusive economic zone, some 140km (86 miles) to the northeast of the Bosporus Strait, the ministry’s spokesman, Lieutenant General Igor Konashenkov, said during a daily briefing……………………
Over the course of the ongoing conflict, Ukraine has repeatedly used sea drones in order to strike Russia’s Black Sea Fleet. The latest attack is the most long-range, with previous attempts targeting warships stationed at the port of Sevastopol on the Russian Crimean Peninsula. The attacks, however, have been unsuccessful, with the unmanned speedboats detected and destroyed during approach, or becoming caught in the harbor’s protective netting. https://www.rt.com/russia/576839-russian-vessel-ukrainian-drones/
Russia Issues Dire Warning After US Approves Ukrainian Strikes On Crimea
BY TYLER DURDEN, MAY 23, 2023 https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/russia-issues-dire-warning-after-us-approves-ukrainian-strikes-crimea
Russia has issued another stern warning related to further potential Ukrainian attacks on Crimea. “Strikes on this territory are considered by us as an attack on any other region of the Russian Federation. It is important that the United States is fully aware of the Russian response,” Moscow’s ambassador to the US, Anatoly Antonov, warned Sunday.
This was in response to an earlier weekend statement by US National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan to CNN. He said while speaking from the G7 summit in Japan over the weekend, “we have not placed limitations on Ukraine being able to strike on its territory… What we’ve said is that we won’t enable Ukraine with US-systems to attack Russia. And we believe Crimea is Ukraine.”
However, the US has consistently denied that it has OK’d Ukraine using US-supplied advanced weaponry to mount such attacks.
Antonov further stated on Telegram in response that “the unconditional approval of strikes on Crimea using American and other Western weapons” alongside the move among Western allies to supply Ukraine with jets “clearly demonstrate that the United States has never been interested in peace.”
He warned the US administration against “thoughtless judgments on Crimea, especially in terms of ‘blessing’ the Kiev regime for air attacks” on the peninsula.
Per Russian state media, other Kremlin officials weighed in even more forcefully, warning that even nuclear disaster could be the result:
Sullivan’s remarks likewise triggered outrage from Crimean Deputy Prime Minister Georgy Muradov, who opined that by allowing Ukraine to use US-made planes to target the peninsula, the White House had “agreed to unleashing a nuclear war.”
The official recalled that Crimea hosts Russia’s Black Sea Fleet. “An attack on one of the pillars of Russia’s strategic security legally obliges our country to use all available means to prevent it from being undermined.”
Russia has also recently accused Ukrainian forces of using UK-supplied long range rockets which are capable of hitting inside Russia.
This is also a cause for concern in terms of possible Russia-NATO direct escalation: “Storm Shadow missiles, which have a range of more than 250 kilometers, give Ukraine the capacity to strike well behind Russian front lines and as far as Moscow-occupied Crimea,” US state-funded RFERL underscores, while adding that “British media reports said Kyiv had promised not to use the missiles to strike inside Russia’s territory.”
Russia warns about nuclear power war risk
The involvement of the country members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization in the Ukrainian conflict, increases the risk of a war between the nuclear powers, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov warned.
https://www.plenglish.com/news/2023/05/24/russia-warns-about-nuclear-power-war-risk/ May 24, Luis Linares Petrov
NATO nations are rightfully directly involved in the conflict on Kiev’s side, and such an irresponsible line of behavior seriously raises the risk of a direct confrontation between nuclear powers,” Lavrov said during the 11th International Meeting of Senior Security Representatives.
The official added that the West must abandon the attempts to marginalize the United Nations Organization.
“In the interest of reducing international tension, we call on Washington and Brussels to stop making unilateral decisions, undertaking attempts to marginalize the UN and creating structures outside of it with a limited number of members that lack legitimacy, but seeking to dominate everyone else,” he said.
Lavrov went on to note that Western countries deliberately provoke inter-state and inter-ethnic conflicts in Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean.
In line with colonial practices, they intend to continue exploiting the resources of the African continent, and the United States continues to view Latin America and the Caribbean as its “back yard”, and reacts nervously when these countries pursue independent and autonomous policies, Lavrov said.
Russia evacuates nuclear munitions due to incursion from Ukraine into Belgorodoblast-Ukraine’s Intel
https://euromaidanpress.com/2023/05/22/russia-evacuates-nuclear-munitions-due-to-incursion-from-ukraine-into-belgorod-oblast-ukraines-intel-spox/ Russian authorities have urgently evacuated a nuclear munitions storage facility in the Belgorod oblast (western Russia) following the incursion of the Legion “Freedom for Russia” and RDK (Russian Volunteer Corps) from Ukraine into the Belgorod region, Ukraine’s Intelligence spox Andrii Yusov said.
On 22 May 2023, in the morning, a Russian border crossing in the Belgorod oblast was reportedly destroyed by artillery shelling from the territory of Ukraine. After that, the incursion of troops supported by armored vehicles from Ukraine into the Belgorod oblast began.
The Russian military unit no. 25624, located in the Grayvoron district of the Belgorod oblast, is a part of Russia’s Strategic Missile Forces. It is an “Object C,” which is the conventional name for Russia’s central nuclear weapons storage base, Ukrainska Pravda reported.
The Legion “Freedom for Russia” and RDK (Russian Volunteer Corps), which allegedly comprise Russian citizens who decided to fight on the side of Ukraine and joined the International Legion of Ukraine’s Armed Forces, claimed its fighters crossed the Russo-Ukrainian border and entered the Belgorod oblast from the territory of Ukraine.
The Legion “Freedom for Russia” and RDK announced on their official Telegram channels that their troops advanced deep into the Russian territory and engaged with Russia’s forces in several towns in Belgorod oblast, namely Kozinka, Gora-Podol, and Grayvoron (the latter being around ten kilometers from the Russo-Ukrainian border), and called on residents of the Russian border regions to stay at home and “not resist.” Shortly after this, locals in Grayvoron started to report gunfire in their town.
-
Archives
- January 2026 (246)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (258)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
- April 2025 (305)
- March 2025 (319)
- February 2025 (234)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS





