“Real threat, 100 Twin Towers risking”

Die Samson with all the Philistines, is this Putin’s syndrome? “The signs are there and it is to be feared. The Alliance must also take the worst case into account. The nuclear option. The Poseidon torpedo would have devastating but limited effects, albeit over large areas. At that point, NATO’s response should be equal to or greater, no one would survive, it would be the end. Like a hundred twin towers ».

Leonardo Tricarico, president of the Icsa Foundation, former Chief of Staff of the Air Force and military adviser to three prime ministers, sees black. “From the initial threats on the maximum readiness of nuclear weapons, Putin has arrived at an explicit prospect of a threat that is no longer obscure but is emerging: the use of the tactical weapon if Russian territory is attacked, including the 4 newly annexed regions “.

Putin, tactical nuclear strike? The Tsar, locked in a bunker, more and more alone (new doubts about his health)

What has changed, general?
«Putin today is more formidable. The state of weakness, frustration and moral and material wear and tear of the military instrument, and the erosion of internal consensus, are evident. If the drift unfavorable to him continues, the intention to use the nuclear weapon will become serious. We are witnessing confirmation of the possibility that Putin is using the most frightening weapon, the torpedo capable of causing the radioactive tsunami, with terrifying effects ».

Or the nuclear-equipped train to Ukraine?
«It seems to me the piece of an exercise, as there are in NATO. Rather, it should be emphasized that in adherence to the spirit of defensive alliance, NATO does not envisage the “first strike”, the first nuclear attack; while the response to a Russian first strike remains inscrutable, also to increase the sense of deterrence. Biden and NATO Secretary General Stoltenberg do not say how the Alliance will react. The Russian doctrine, on the other hand, provides for the tactical weapon if the traditional ones fail to neutralize some difficult objective. Among the many paradoxes is that an invaded country, victim of all kinds of barbarism and war crimes already documented by the prosecutors in The Hague, cannot defend itself outside its borders, while Russia is preparing to respond to a simple bombing on lands that he considers his with the Bomb. A macroscopic disproportion ».

How should we react then?
«NATO cannot respond to an attack on Ukraine, which is not a member of the Alliance. The Committee must decide. If the risk is for everyone and is not limited to economic damage but can be gigantic, a single State cannot dictate how to react, it takes concertation. In such serious conditions of danger, no one dares to act in solitude ».

The first strike leaves no time to negotiate. What’s now?
“But you can’t play poker in potentially disastrous situations. Will we continue to supply Kiev with deep-penetrating weapons, systems that can induce Putin to carry out the worst threats? It would take a reflection of the government and Parliament, or should we continue to send weapons without asking ourselves what will happen to us? It is not a question of giving Putin victory, but of discussing a possible way out, without leaving everything in the hands of the “snarling dogs” and wanting to see Putin in the dust ».