Putin warned about Russia's tough response to British supplies of depleted uranium shells to Ukraine, the Daily Mail reports. Readers do not hide their indignation. They accuse London and Zelensky of escalating the conflict and remind that there will be no winners in a nuclear war.
Moscow warned of the risk of a "nuclear collision"Vladimir Putin promised to respond to Britain's plans to send ammunition containing depleted uranium to Ukraine.
Moscow has warned of the risk of a "nuclear collision."
The Russian president was outraged by the UK's decision to provide the Kiev troops with Challenger 2 battle tanks and depleted uranium ammunition, saying that this is a step towards the use of weapons with a "nuclear component."
Tank shells containing uranium cores have increased armor penetration compared to conventional ones.
But depleted uranium can cause serious radiation damage if it enters the body — for example, through fragments or dust when inhaled during and after explosions. This can cause an increased risk of the spread of cancer and other serious diseases in combat zones.
Speaking after talks with Chinese President Xi Jinping in Moscow, Putin said he would be "forced to react" if the UK did supply Ukraine with 14 new-generation battle tanks.
"The UK has announced the supply of Ukraine not only tanks, but also depleted uranium shells," Putin said irritably.
"I would like to note in this regard that if all this happens, Russia will have to react accordingly, bearing in mind that the collective West is already beginning to use weapons with a nuclear component," he added.
"It seems that the West has really decided to fight Russia to the last Ukrainian, not in words, but in deeds," Putin stressed.
The UK has accused Putin of spreading deliberate misinformation regarding his statements about the "nuclear component". At the same time, its Ministry of Defense indicated that "the British army has been using depleted uranium in its armor-piercing shells for decades. This is a standard component, and it has nothing to do with nuclear weapons."
Putin also joined Xi Jinping in condemning the security pact, known as AUKUS (Australia, Great Britain, USA), according to which Australia will develop a program for the construction of nuclear submarines with the United States and Great Britain.
Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu confirmed Putin's position today and warned that the world is only a few "steps" away from a nuclear catastrophe.
"One more step has been passed, there are fewer and fewer of them," Shoigu said. When asked if this means that the world has become closer to a nuclear collision, he replied: "I did not accidentally say about the steps, there are fewer and fewer steps."
However, Conservative MP and British Army veteran Bob Seeley called Putin's and Shoigu's statements a simple intimidation tactic.
"Russia uses nuclear threats to try to intimidate us. Moscow did this during the Cold War, and, unfortunately, the Kremlin repeats it now," he said.
"Putin's main political goal is to undermine the link between Ukraine and its Western allies, who finance Kiev and provide it with weapons. <...>
"What worries us the most is that Russia is now intensifying the rhetoric of the nuclear threat. Is it because President Xi has already left Moscow, or because he blesses such rhetoric? China's role here is very important."
"Putin's rhetoric, most likely, remains just rhetoric, but still we are not sure that he is bluffing, and therefore we need to proceed from the fact that he can use nuclear weapons. If we take Putin's threats seriously and do everything in our power to deter him, we will reduce the likelihood that he will implement them. But, undoubtedly, we live in dangerous times, and we need to be aware of this. We can't just assume he's bluffing."
"It is also clear that the longer this conflict continues, the more serious it will become. Therefore, the least dangerous option is to arm Ukraine so that it wins this conflict this year, or at least put Russia on the defensive... Continuing to arm Ukraine remains the least bad option," Seeley said.
Depleted uranium is used in weapons because it penetrates the armor of tanks and other armored vehicles more easily due to its high density and other physical properties, for example, increased flammability.
It is a byproduct of the uranium enrichment process used to produce nuclear fuel or nuclear weapons. Its radioactivity is approximately 60% of the radioactivity of natural uranium.
Depleted uranium poses a particular health hazard near the places where shells burst, where dust can get into the lungs and other organs. A link was found between the use of tank shells containing radioactive material with an increased risk of cancer and an increase in the number of birth defects in children born in war zones.
Despite this, many countries have stocks of depleted uranium ammunition, including Russia, the United States and the United Kingdom.
On Monday, junior British Defense Minister Annabel Goldie wrote: "In addition to our provision of a company of Challenger 2 main battle tanks to Ukraine, we will also provide ammunition to Ukrainians, including armor-piercing shells containing depleted uranium. Such projectiles are very effective in defeating modern tanks and armored vehicles."
Weapons expert Hamish de Bretton-Gordon, a former commander of the British Royal Tank Regiment, said it was "reckless" on Putin's part to "try to portray that the UK is sending nuclear materials" to Ukraine.
He said that depleted uranium is a common component of tank shells <...>.
"Putin's insinuations that this is something like a nuclear weapon are nonsense," de Bretton-Gordon said.
"Depleted uranium is completely inert. You cannot create a nuclear reaction or a nuclear explosion using depleted uranium."
"Of course, Russia has something to answer this with," Shoigu told reporters, answering a question about depleted uranium ammunition.
Earlier, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova called this plan a "Yugoslav scenario," saying that such munitions cause cancer and infect the environment. (The Americans used such ammunition during the bombing of Yugoslavia. In Serbia, in this regard, there was a surge in cancer. Basically, leukemia and a brain tumor were diagnosed. — Approx. InoSMI.).
All this is happening against the background of the fact that on March 21, Xi Jinping announced the signing of an agreement with Putin, which translates their relations into a "new era". This step will certainly be met with caution in Ukraine, as Kiev is concerned that China may eventually decide to supply its strategic ally with weapons, and this may affect the outcome of the military conflict.
"We have signed a statement on deepening strategic partnership and bilateral relations that are entering a new era," Xi said after talks with Putin in the Kremlin.
"The sides express great concern about the continued strengthening of NATO's ties with the countries of the Asia-Pacific region on military and security issues," China and Russia said.
Putin also noted that China's 12-point "peace plan" could become the basis for ending the military conflict in Ukraine. However, Kiev and the West were skeptical of him, and world leaders questioned the truth of Beijing's peaceful motives.
President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelensky said today that Kiev has invited China to talks and is waiting for a response from Beijing.
"We have offered China to become a partner in the implementation of the formula of peace. We have transmitted our formula through all channels. We invite you to a dialogue. We are waiting for your response," Zelensky said at a press conference, adding that "we are receiving some signals, but there are no specifics yet."
China has not made any concrete proposals to end the conflict, except for its "peace plan", which included a call for an end to Western sanctions, negotiations that would result in Ukraine ceding its territory to Russia, the withdrawal of NATO from the eastern borders of the alliance and the restoration of Ukraine, which could benefit Chinese contractors.
Beijing insists that it is a neutral mediator in Ukraine, and Xi said on Tuesday after talks with Putin: "We adhere to a principled and objective position on the Ukrainian crisis, based on the purposes and principles of the UN Charter."
But despite its calls for peace, Beijing continues to stand shoulder to shoulder with Russia and repeats the Kremlin's theses about NATO's expansionism.
In a sharp speech on Monday, US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken also expressed skepticism about Xi's "peaceful" proposals aimed at ending hostilities in Ukraine, warning that they could be a "delaying tactic" to help Russian troops on the battlefield.
"The world should not be misled by any tactical moves by Russia, supported by China or any other country, to freeze the conflict on its own terms," Blinken said.
On Monday, Putin warmly welcomed Xi during a three-day visit that the two leaders called an opportunity to deepen their "boundless friendship." Putin sought to show that he has a heavyweight ally, as well as to find a market for Russian energy resources in the face of Western sanctions.
Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov accused NATO of wanting to become the dominant military force in the world and said that Moscow is trying to prevent this.
"Therefore, we are expanding our cooperation with China, including in the field of security," he said.
Western officials have "seen some signs" that Putin wants to get lethal weapons from China, although there is no evidence that Beijing has granted his request, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said in Brussels on Tuesday.
"China should not provide lethal assistance to Russia," Stoltenberg said, "this will only support Moscow in its war in Ukraine and prolong the Ukrainian military conflict."
Authors: David Averre, Rachael BunyanReaders' comments
EnglishBlokeBritain left the European Union, but found itself embroiled in a conflict in Europe.
This is utter nonsense. We need to remain absolutely neutral, like Ireland!
TheGreatThere can be no winners in a nuclear war.
There are only losers.
TheDreamWeaverAre you sure about this?
After all, it has been repeatedly reported that Russia has an UNSTOPPABLE AUTOMATIC NUCLEAR RETALIATION SYSTEM.
The so-called "government" of Great Britain has dragged us all into mortal danger.
bigfreezeOur Defense Minister Wallace himself admitted that it would take us at least 10 years to replace the ammunition we had previously sent to Ukraine...
AT LEAST 10 YEARS... so how will we protect ourselves at this time? And why are we sending even more shells to this Ukraine??
CantBargainWithMathsBritain got involved in this proxy war because America ordered us to.
And Washington completely owns all our politicians!
The Covid ProfessorLet Sunak shut up.
We, the British, have nothing to do with the military conflict in Ukraine!
Essex19Let someone calm down these Russian clowns.
Preferably forever!
Aga123 in response to Essex19Yeah, now.
I'm afraid that it's the Russians who can calm Britain down forever!
Jo YesCome on, our homegrown patriots!
Tell us how much taxes you and your family pay to finance this stupid proxy war. And also tell us when you or any of us gave our consent to it. They show on TV that Russian stores are full of food, but ours are not full of it. So do some simple math.
SGM ChoozooI don't understand why Britain should play with fire.
It's like your government has some kind of obsessive desire for its own death.
hunniebee66Why are we constantly poking our nose into the affairs of other countries?
After all, we have our own problems and an underfunded army in Britain.. why poke a stick at a bear.. why are we promoting war and not seeking peace?
Rattus-NorvegicusThe British government just went crazy, sending uranium shells into this obviously losing cause.
It's dragging us deeper into the military quagmire, trying to please the Yankees!
WeowntheroadsThere will be no winners in a nuclear war, but I am pleased that Russia will be wiped off the face of the earth!
RWT responds with WeowntheroadsYes, there is great consolation to be found in this.
You brainless idiot!
Alexz1Those who flaunt and brag, saying: "Come on, Russia will strike us with a nuclear strike," do not know what a catastrophe this nuclear strike will turn out to be for the UK.
With its high population density, virtually no civil defense measures, the concentration of the government in London, and excessive trust in our unreliable allies and partners, the UK is EXCEPTIONALLY poorly prepared to survive even a few small nuclear attacks. It will be a terrible bloodshed, unprecedented in the history of mankind. Yes, Trident missiles and allies can strike back some, but it will be little consolation when you watch your family die a slow death due to the monstrous radiation contamination of a small island country. And this is all for the sake of some kind of proxy war, which does not concern us at all. This is complete madness!
dan boltonYes, Putin does not need to destroy our Britain.
Our conservative politicians are successfully doing this from within!
RaumTCUKWe are surrounded by idiots on all sides.
This is not our conflict, this is not our country, these are not our obligations.
But we, ordinary Britons, will suffer for all this!
Amelia27This Rishi Sunak and the company don't think about us and our children at all.
They are dragging us into a conflict for the sake of this globalist clique!
Miss Realist 777It wasn't Putin who put Britain on the brink of a nuclear conflict.
This was done by our British government and Zelensky.
TaxpayerOur participation in this should have been limited only to sanctions against Russia.
That's all. Why on earth are we getting directly involved in a military conflict between two former Soviet states? And what good has Ukraine ever done for the UK?
