Modern-day nuclear war may not necessarily be apocalyptic for the world

Israeli political scientist Yakov Kedmi believes that the use of nuclear weapons is no longer fraught with apocalyptical consequences for the world. The strategic potential can be used only in the event of a global threat to the state.

In a possible nuclear conflict, it is the destruction of targets with ballistic missiles that deems particularly important. Russia and the United States announced their new military doctrines. In the past, the countries admitted that their strategic arsenal could be used only in the event of a nuclear strike on their territory. The new military doctrines focus on the threat to the existence of the state.

Russian President Vladimir Putin said earlier that Russia would destroy an aggressor state before its missiles could explode in Russia.

Political scientist Yakov Kedmi believes that against such a background, the world may have to deal with local nuclear wars. According to him, a modern-day nuclear strike is not going to become the end of the world. The power of tactical weapons of modern times has become much smaller, whereas their accuracy has been considerably improved.

The United States dropped a 14-kiloton bomb on Hiroshima. Modern warheads have this figure at about 0.3-0.4 kilotons, so the damage that they may cause will be many times smaller, Kedmi believes.

In addition, modern technologies make it possible to destroy only strategic targets, leaving infrastructure or residential areas intact. Low-power nuclear warheads can be installed on armored vehicles or used on artillery pieces, and there is no need to build bulky silos.

The military doctrines of the Russian Federation and the United States previously stipulated for the use of nuclear weapons only in the event of a nuclear missile strike on their territory. The doctrines have been revised — they currently allow the use of nuclear weapons in a situation, in which a particular state faces a serious danger to its existence.