President Vladimir Putin’s threat to use nuclear weapons in Ukraine if Russia’s “territorial integrity” is threatened has sparked a deep debate in the West about how the West will respond. writes Al Jazeera.

In a televised address on Wednesday, the Russian leader said he was not bluffing about using nuclear weapons if Russian territories were threatened, announcing a partial military mobilization that would send about 300,000 troops to the front.

Several experts and officials spoke to AFP about possible scenarios that could arise if Russia were to launch a nuclear strike.

What would a Russian nuclear strike look like?

Analysts say Moscow may deploy one or more “tactical” nuclear bombs on the battlefield. It is a weapon with an explosive yield of between 0.3 and 100 kilotons, compared to the 1.2 megatons of the largest US strategic warhead or the 58-megaton bomb tested by Russia in 1961.

Tactical bombs are designed to have limited effects on the battlefield compared to strategic nuclear weapons, which are designed to fight and win all-out wars.

But the terms “small” and “limited” are relative: the atomic bomb dropped by the USA on Hiroshima in 1945 had a devastating effect of only 15 kilotons.

Analysts also suggest that Russia’s goal would be to scare Ukraine into capitulating or submitting to Russian-imposed negotiating terms.

Mark Kanchian, a military expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in Washington, said he does not believe Russia will use nuclear weapons.

Instead, Moscow could send a strong signal and avoid significant casualties by detonating a nuclear bomb over water or over Ukraine to create an electromagnetic pulse that would destroy electronic equipment.

Or Putin could attack a Ukrainian military base or urban center, causing mass casualties and possibly killing the country’s political leadership.

“Such scenarios would likely be designed to split the NATO alliance and the global consensus against Putin,” John Wolfstal, a former White House nuclear policy expert, wrote on Substack on Friday.

“It’s unclear whether he will succeed, and that could just as easily be seen as desperation as it is determination,” he said.

How should the West respond?

The West remains ambivalent about how it would respond to a tactical nuclear strike, and the choices are difficult.

The US and NATO do not want to appear weak in the face of an implicit nuclear threat. But they would also like to avoid the possibility of the war in Ukraine escalating into a much wider and more destructive nuclear conflict.

Experts say the West will have no choice but to respond to a Russian nuclear attack, and that the response would have to come from NATO as a group, not the US.

The US has deployed about 100 units of its own tactical nuclear weapons in NATO countries and can respond to Russian forces.

A threat to respond would demonstrate determination and remind Moscow of the dangers of its actions, according to Matthew Kroenig of the Atlantic Council.

However, he said, “it could also provoke Russian nuclear retaliation, raising the risk of a larger nuclear exchange and humanitarian catastrophe.”

Another risk is that some NATO members will reject a nuclear response, serving Putin’s goals of weakening the alliance. In addition, “Russia’s use of nuclear weapons could persuade countries that have been reluctant so far — such as India and perhaps even China — to participate in increased sanctions,” Krenig said.