Biden warns of “Armageddon” risk, is the US president’s speech alarmist?

In a solemn and serious tone, President Joe Biden said the risk of an “Armageddon” is the highest since the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis on Thursday from New York. The goal, according to senior US officials, was to send a clear message to humanity: no one should underestimate the great risk that Russia would deploy nuclear weapons in the war in Ukraine.

“Putin is not kidding when he talks about the use of tactical nuclear weapons or biological or chemical weapons,” Biden said, shocking attendees of the Democratic Party fundraiser.

His comments quickly spread around the world and went beyond what the US government itself had anticipated. All despite the fact that top US officials maintain they have no proof that Russian President Vladimir Putin is planning an imminent nuclear attack.

Russia’s losses on the ground in the war in Ukraine have raised alarms of a redoubling of offensives. Especially after the Russian president said in a speech that he “will use all necessary means” to “defend Russian territory”, shortly before Russia annexed several Ukrainian provinces to its territory after referendums not recognized by the international community.

“The atomic bombs that the United States launched on Hiroshima and Nagasaki created a precedent,” Putin said in that televised intervention, in what experts define as a threat not only to Ukraine, but also to the United States.

“We are trying to find out: What is Putin’s exit door? (…) Where will he find a way out? What will he plot to lose not only his integrity, but significant power?” asked the US president at the conference. press.

Biden’s references to “Armageddon” are highly unusual for any US president. Rarely since the Cold War have the occupants of the Oval Office spoken so seriously about the use of nuclear weapons, especially as a possible “exit door” to war.

When reporters tried to ask White House spokeswoman Karine Jean-Pierre about it, she did not respond directly, but assured that Biden’s comments are not intended to escalate the situation.

“If the Cuban Missile Crisis taught us anything, it is the value of reducing nuclear risk and not brandishing it,” Jean-Pierre told the media.

Europe’s response to Biden’s statements

Following the US president’s statements, European leaders chose to downplay the seriousness of the situation and urged calm.

“I have always refused to enter political fiction, especially when it comes to nuclear weapons. On this issue, we must be very careful,” French President Emmanuel Macron said from the European Union summit in Prague.

For his part, the president of the European Council, Charles Michel, told reporters that the European Union takes “every escalation very seriously.” “The threats are not going to intimidate us. On the contrary, we are going to remain calm. We are going to keep a cool head and we are going to denounce the irresponsible nature of these threats every time,” Michel said from the same summit in Prague.

The European Union’s strategy continues to focus on imposing sanctions against Russia for its actions in Ukraine, reducing its dependence on Russia for energy, which serves to finance the war.

A position very contrary to that of Volodímir Zelenski, who in a videoconference with the Lowy Institute in Australia suggested a “preventive action” against Moscow to avoid a nuclear attack. Something that many interpreted as a request for the use of nuclear weapons, despite the fact that Zelensky later clarified that he was referring to “sanctions”.

“From the point of view of symptoms, it is a very dangerous phenomenon,” Kremlin spokesman Dimitri Peskov said in this regard on Friday.

Russia regretted that Ukraine’s Western partners do not condemn such “incendiary” comments by Zelensky, as they also contribute to escalation.

How feasible is a nuclear threat?

In the midst of all these crossed accusations and threats, US officials assure that this historical moment cannot be compared to the Cuban Missile Crisis and that the nuclear threat is much less.

“The chances of Putin using an atomic weapon are still really low,” government sources told the newspaper ‘The New York Times’.

However, they do point out that Russian military doctrine or tradition considers the use of tactical weapons as a potential tool in a land conflict. Experts also note that Russia may consider using short-range nuclear weapons in specific areas of Ukraine, expecting a limited response from Western nations.

Many nuclear weapons are short-range, in fact most cannot be compared to the ones the United States launched against Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945.

On the other hand, political analysts point out that this is not the first time that President Biden has made a comment of this style, which goes against the characteristic cautious policy of the White House.

In March, Biden hinted at Putin’s impeachment from Warsaw. “For the love of God, this man cannot continue in power,” said the US president. After his statements, his aides had to clarify to the press that he was not asking for Putin to be removed from power.

That same month, Biden also called Putin a “war criminal”, comments for which the White House had to retract, since such accusations must be accompanied by an investigation to support them. Jen Psaki, a White House spokeswoman at the time, had to come to his rescue.

“Biden was speaking from his heart,” Psaki said, trying to downplay the comment.

However, some nuclear experts consider these comments dangerous and do not represent the official position of the country.

“We have to be very careful about using grand allegations like this, which in themselves can unintentionally escalate nuclear tensions,” Hans Kristensen, director of the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists, told the Associated news agency. Press.

Biden’s words could also create a sense that Putin is managing not only to scare Ukraine, but also the West.

With AP and local media