Russia would be able to disable Britain and France‘s nuclear deterrents ‘within one day’ if World War Three breaks out, a Moscow military expert has claimed.
Dr Yuri Baranchik, Deputy Director of the RUSSTRAT Institute, declared that within 24 hours of the conflict in Ukraine hypothetically descending into nuclear war Russia would ‘eliminate the nuclear potentials of Britain and France’.
Writing on Telegram, he said targeting British and French nuclear arsenals would ‘[deprive] Europe of its military-geopolitical status’ and reduce the number of nuclear powers from nine to seven.
‘If we pull out the nuclear teeth of Britain and France, then the NATO bloc will no longer have any blackmail in the European theater of operations,’ he asserted.
Dr Baranchik, who earlier this year urged an attack on a British Type 45 Destroyer capable of intercepting missile threats, said it would be straightforward to defeat Britain’s waning deterrent as ‘its entire nuclear potential since 1998’ has been the four Vanguard-class submarines based in Faslane, Scotland.
The comments came as plans were disclosed for ‘mobile modular shelters’ in Russian cities, planned to ‘protect the population from the effects of all types of modern weapons’, including nuclear.
Baranchik suggested Russia would be able to knock out Britain’s submarines ‘within one day’
Geopolitics expert Yuri Baranchik, Deputy Director of the RUSSTRAT Institute, undated
The KUB-M supposedly provides protection for 48 hrs from air shockwaves and light radiation
The dingy inside of a KUB-M mobile nuclear shelter, built to protect the population in a war
Dr Baranchik wrote that destroying the arsenals of Britain and France would allow Russia to give the European Union ‘an ultimatum’, with the United States not willing to engage Russia in direct nuclear conflict.
‘This must be done at a time of shift change in the White House,’ he assessed in a lengthy post this week.
The geopolitics expert stopped short of saying how Russia would carry out attacks on Britain’s submarines and bases, judging it a matter for military officials, but noted the waning capacity of Britain’s deterrent stretched around the UK and undergoing repairs.
He added that France would be ‘more complicated’ to take out than Britain as its deterrent is more widely spread.
‘But it is still solvable. Moreover, within one day.’
‘Instead of a protracted war of attrition, within one day we deprive France and Britain of their nuclear weapons and destroy the whole of Europe,’ he wrote, before redacting the last clause.
‘We deprive them of their status as nuclear powers and radically change the entire security system in Europe.’
The post highlighted the perceived priorities of Russia, Dr Baranchik going on to suggest that such measures would allow the Kremlin to strongarm the United States into ending its military and financial support for Kyiv.
Only last week, the United States issued a new round of funding up to $275mn for Ukraine, with Kyiv calling for desperately-needed missiles to push back the Russian advances around Kharkiv.
A Moscow-installed official in the northern city today claimed Russian forced have taken control of strategic hills near Lyptsi, allowing troops to ‘control all supply routes’ in the Strilecha-Lyptsi area.
Still, with the war now in its third year, some European leaders have taken a stronger stance against Russia, met with threats of nuclear retaliation from the Kremlin.
The Castle Bravo nuclear test: the detonation of the most powerful thermonuclear device ever tested by the United States, on March 1, 1954
Russian President Vladimir Putin with former president Dmitry Medvedev (right)
Plans have now been revealed for ‘mobile modular shelters’ in Russian cities to ‘protect the population from the effects of all types of modern weapons including nuclear weapons’.
The so-called KUB-M includes two modules: sheltered rooms for 54 people and a technical block.
The key advantage of KUB-M over other civil defence structures is mobility, according to plans revealed in Russia.
‘If necessary, they can be transported by road or rail to a new location for construction and connected to existing utility networks.’
The KUB-M supposedly provides protection for 48 hours from air shock waves and light radiation from a nuclear explosion, penetrating radiation and radioactive contamination of the area, high-explosive and fragmentation effects of conventional weapons, falling debris from building structures, as well as hazardous chemicals and fires.
They are designed by the All-Russian Research Institute of Civil Defense and Emergency Situations.
Putin’s mouthpiece, and former president, Dmitry Medvedev again urged today that Russia’s constant nuclear war rhetoric was ‘not intimidation or a nuclear bluff’.
‘The current military conflict with the West is developing according to the worst possible scenario,’ he warned.
‘There is a constant escalation in the power of applicable NATO weapons.
‘Therefore, today no one can rule out the transition of the conflict to its final stage.’
With the US having now set aside $61bn in aid for Ukraine, approved late April, and NATO seeking a minimum of $40bn a year from members in additional support, Russia has looked to unsettle those opposing the invasion with continued threats of Armageddon.
Only on Tuesday, Putin warned that western countries would suffer ‘grave consequences’ if they allowed their weapons to be fired from Ukraine into Russia.
‘In Europe, especially in small countries, they should be aware what they are playing with,’ the Russian president said during a visit to Uzbekistan.
‘They should remember that, as countries with small, densely populated territories… They should keep this in mind before talking about striking Russia.’
Among those staring down the Russian invasion, Poland, which does not have a nuclear deterrent, has refused rule out sending troops to meet its historic foe as it plans to field the biggest army in Europe by 2035.
It is not clear how quickly Russia would be able to produce the ‘mobile bunkers’
What looks from the outside like a shipping container could shelter 54 people on the inside
Poland’s foreign minister said the country should not exclude the possibility of sending troops to Ukraine and should keep Putin in suspense over whether such a decision would ever be made.
‘We should not exclude any option. Let Putin be guessing as to what we will do,’ Sikorski said in an interview with the Gazeta Wyborcza daily when asked whether he would send Polish troops to Ukraine.
Earlier this month, President Emmanuel Macron echoed Sikorski’s sentiment, suggesting he would not be ‘ruling anything out’ – comments that experts said reflected a will to play Putin at his own game of ‘strategic ambiguity’.
‘Putin doesn’t take anything off the table; neither should we. And that includes sending troops, in whichever capacity that is feasible,’ Vlad Şutea, founder and lead analyst at early warning and threatcasting group T-Intelligence, told MailOnline.
‘Macron is one of the few Western European leaders to understand the value of strategic ambiguity,’ he said.