Russia Warns US Against Using Low-Yield Nukes, Threatens Full Nuclear Retaliation
State Dept argues low-yield nukes needed to counter Russia, China
Jason Ditz
Russia’s Foreign Ministry issued a statement Wednesday warning the US against putting low-yield nuclear weapons on their submarines and using them, saying any use of a low-yield weapon against Russia would yield to a very full retaliation.
The US State Department has been pushing arguments to deploy such missiles as a way to counter Russia and China at sea, arguing that the submarines need low-yield nuclear options. They argue that having such weapons makes nuclear war less likely.
Russian officials, however, say that’s only the case if the US isn’t attacking people with those nuclear weapons, noting that Russia has a long-standing nuclear retaliation policy that would proscribe retaliation against a low-yield nuclear strike like any other nuclear strike.
That’s been the criticism since the US went down the path of developing new low-yield options. While officials argue that the lower yield lowers the threshold for use, many have warned all along that more usable nuclear arms will just make nuclear strikes more routine, and nuclear exchanges far more risky.
The US State Department has been pushing arguments to deploy such missiles as a way to counter Russia and China at sea, arguing that the submarines need low-yield nuclear options. They argue that having such weapons makes nuclear war less likely.
Russian officials, however, say that’s only the case if the US isn’t attacking people with those nuclear weapons, noting that Russia has a long-standing nuclear retaliation policy that would proscribe retaliation against a low-yield nuclear strike like any other nuclear strike.
That’s been the criticism since the US went down the path of developing new low-yield options. While officials argue that the lower yield lowers the threshold for use, many have warned all along that more usable nuclear arms will just make nuclear strikes more routine, and nuclear exchanges far more risky.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home