Putin raises spectre of nuclear war in Europe

The nuclear stand-off in Europe between US and Russia

By Kim Sengupta

Published: 05 June 2007

Vladimir Putin's threat to once again target western Europe with
Russian missiles brought back the spectre of the worst days of the Cold
War and the start of a new arms race.

Taken at its bleakest interpretation this would mean that a whole
swathe of military targets, some in cities such as London and Brussels,
will in future be considered legitimate targets for Russian attack.

But the current strategic positioning between Russia and Nato, and
the working relationship by the two sets of military, does not support
such an apocalyptic scenario.

Russian and Western analysts agree that President Putin's
declaration shows anger at the US plans to build a missile defence
system in eastern Europe, and aims to please hardliners in the Russian
administration. But it is hardly a declaration of war.

The Americans say they are putting the radars and interceptor
missiles in Poland and the Czech Republic as a shield against possible
nuclear strikes by so called "rogue" states, especially Iran and North
Korea. They pose no threat, says Washington, to the massive Russian
nuclear arsenal across the border.

For the Russians, however, positioning the missiles on their
doorstep, in former Warsaw Pact countries, is a provocation which, if
not countered, may be followed by the stationing of more offensive
strike capabilities.

Last week Russia conducted the test launch of a new intercontinental
ballistic missile capable of penetrating US anti-missile defences. In
theory, they could in the future be passed on to a third party. Moscow
has also been carrying out exercises with its mobile rocket launchers
and strategic bombers.

The US, in response, has insisted that the Polish and Czech projects
were to combat threats not from Russia but further afield. And it is,
indeed, the case that Iran would have to fire missiles to the west if
it aims at America, across Europe and the north Atlantic.

However, Col Christopher Langton, a senior fellow at the
International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) in London, points
out: "They did not have to be in Poland or the Czech Republic. They
could, just as well, have been in Scotland. So, in a sense, by putting
them in those two countries the Americans are showing that they will go
ahead and do what they want and they don't care overmuch for Russian
sensibilities.

"What is interesting is that Putin has not really complained about
the American missile shields being put up in the Asia Pacific region,
also close to Russian territory. Is it the case that because they are
in the east, away from Moscow and St Petersburg, and thus he is not
that bothered, or is it because he is keen to try to detach European
Nato opinion away from America by saying it is the Americans creating a
dangerous situation. While these threats are being made by Putin, we
have Nato officers in Moscow discussing European missile defence in
talks which appear to be quite constructive."

Robert Emerson, a security analyst, added: " The Americans admit
that they have been slow to explain the shield to the rest of Nato, and
Putin is trying to exploit this. If Russian missiles really are
re-targeted on the West then military installations close to cities
like London could obviously be hit and there would be a ballistic
missile exchange. But this is highly unlikely."

A Russian observer of the Kremlin, now in London, agreed: "This is
more a political than a military problem. Putin's comments were given
to selected journalists from the G8 countries but it was really meant
for effect. It was also meant for internal consumption. President Putin
is now surrounded by some powerful nationalist hardliners and they want
to test Nato's will."