Since the beginning of the Ukraine war Russia has been verbally and repeatedly building up its nuclear threat. EMP weapons in particular, with their disruptive electromagnetic pulses, pose a supra-regional threat.
Russian President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly threatened to use nuclear weapons since the start of the war in Ukraine a year ago: “If the territorial integrity of our country is threatened, we will of course use all the means at our disposal,” the Kremlin leader recently said again in a speech to his people. Ominous postscript: “Our country has various means of destruction at its disposal, which in some cases are more modern than those of NATO countries.”
“If the territorial integrity of our country is threatened, we will of course use all the means at our disposal!
”
Russlands Präsident Wladimir Putin
What exactly does Putin mean by this? On the one hand, of course, conventional “large” nuclear weapons, the use of which would certainly not go unanswered and can therefore be practically ruled out. On the other hand, Russia also has “tactical nuclear weapons” with a supposedly smaller range and lower explosive power. In fact, the smallest tactical nuclear weapons have an explosive force of “only” 0.5 kilotons (kT). The largest, however, can reach up to 50 kT, making them two to three times more powerful than the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. If they were used, they would therefore contaminate a large area, even for our own troops, and possibly even hit our own contingents on the battlefield. And since an attack on Ukraine is likely to strengthen the will of the entire population to resist and would hardly bring any military advantages, a deployment is probably just as unrealistic – close to the ground. The situation is different with a possible deployment at high altitude. The radioactivity released by a tactical nuclear weapon detonated high in the air would hardly result in fallout and endanger human life, but the electromagnetic pulse triggered by it could temporarily paralyze or even permanently disable the electronic and digital infrastructure of entire countries away from hardened networks. This includes military computers, radar systems, communication systems and precision weapons. The threat of nuclear and 1 to 10 kT EMP (electromagnetic pulse) weapons has been evident since the 1960s. https://militaeraktuell.at/boeings-saabs-glsdb-fuer-die-ukraine/ The high-energy charge field generated by the gamma rays released during the explosion could – so the West fears – not only take Ukraine off the grid, but also plunge the whole of Europe into lasting chaos. And with practically no means of defense: the US/NATO missile defenses in Poland and Romania and the US Navy’s Aegis ships stationed in Europe would certainly intercept some of the approaching systems. But would this be completely successful? And whether an attack would even be carried out by conventional means? In contrast to conventional nuclear weapons, such a weapon would need neither re-entry vehicles nor heat shields or shock absorbers. It could even be deployed by ground-to-ground missiles and military aircraft. Yes even – keyword hybrid warfare including its concealment – from civilian aircraft or with the help of meteorological balloons.
“Unlike conventional nuclear weapons, an EMP weapon would need neither reentry devices nor heat shields or shock absorbers.
”
A 2017 scenario from a now-disbanded commission to assess the threat to the USA from EMP attacks shows just how devastating the effects would be. This assumed a nuclear weapon explosion – although the magnitude was not defined – around 60 kilometers above the NATO headquarters in Brussels. In this case, the resulting EMP field would extend over a radius of 850 kilometers and thus cover not only the Benelux countries, but also the whole of Germany, Denmark and Switzerland, practically all of France, large parts of the UK, the east of Ireland, the north of Italy and the west of the Czech Republic, Austria and Poland. This would result in a widespread collapse of the connected European power grids (blackout) far beyond the 850-kilometer radius. Furthermore, in the scenario, which is now five years old, the Baltic states would be more or less defenceless against a subsequent Russian attack. According to the authors of the study, Russian tanks could “roll through the Baltic states via the exclave of Kaliningrad and the mainland in just 60 hours”. Within six months, Russia could bring all European territories of the former Soviet Union under its control. It is doubtful whether a current assessment of the Russian army would even allow such a successful run in view of its immense problems and difficulties in Ukraine. What is undisputed, however, is the danger that a possible EMP attack would pose to Europe and Eastern Europe in particular. Russia is still likely to try to achieve its war aims in Ukraine by other means. But who knows whether a disillusioned Putin might not resort to other means in five, six or seven months’ time if there are no resounding successes by then.
