And this without taking into account the risk of an accident – or worse – at Europe’s largest nuclear power plant, Zaporizhzhia, in Ukraine. Russia uses it as a base from which to launch missiles. The commander on the ground has been reported to be Major General Vasiliev, who some claim is the head of the Russian Army’s Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear (CBRN) Forces. This is the same role I had in the British Army, but I am trained to deal with and prevent a CBRN attack. I expect the General’s expertise is more in his offensive use. The worldwide contamination that would result from blowing up the factory is not to be thought of. I don’t buy the skepticism that Putin would not use nuclear capabilities for offensive purposes. It has already attacked the UK with nuclear material, Polonium 210, which was used to kill Alexander Litvinenko. Is Putin so unlikely to use a nuclear weapon, even a small one, to achieve his goals now? Soviet doctrine, which Russia appears to be following in Ukraine, allows commanders to use nuclear weapons on the battlefield to prevent defeat, which looks more likely by the day in some areas. Our own nuclear arsenal is intended to act as a deterrent to a direct attack on the West. But can we be sure that even that would be left up to Putin, given his complete disregard for collateral damage and civilian casualties in Syria and Ukraine? During the Cold War, there was training for the public on what to do in the event of a nuclear attack. Some will remember the black and white BBC cartoons: apart from terrifying our parents and grandparents, they gave them some reassurance. But to be more resilient to a nuclear attack, we need to rethink our entire strategy. Local Resilience Forums have proven their value during the pandemic and should be strengthened to cover nuclear as well. We need to restore the knowledge and equipment we enjoyed during the Cold War that have been left behind. We could follow the model of the Nordic countries, South Korea and Singapore, which have prepared networks of shelters and kits. Even school children are trained on how to react to a strike. It is also important that all the checks and balances are in place to ensure that mistakes or miscalculations do not trigger Armageddon, and NATO must work with Russia and China to ensure this. The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons is our best hope for containing this threat. It is a tragic irony that the nuclear threat has become so great just as civilian nuclear power has become so necessary. It is the most sustainable way to save the planet and ensure domestic security of supply. But this nuclear conundrum must be resolved as a matter of priority. If not, everything else that bothers us right now will turn out to be terrifyingly irrelevant. Hamish de Bretton-Gordon OBE is a former commander of the UK and NATO CBRN forces. He is now a fellow at Magdalene College, Cambridge
