What happened during the Cuban missile crisis – and why is it being compared to Russia’s war in Ukraine?

Published

3 years ago

October 8, 2022

admin

US President Joe Biden has been overheard saying that Vladimir Putin’s war in Ukraine carries the greatest risk of nuclear weapons being used since the Cuban missile crisis in 1962.

Speaking at a Democratic Party fundraiser in New York on Thursday, Mr Biden said: “For the first time since the Cuban missile crisis, we have a direct threat of the use of nuclear weapons if, in fact, things continue down the path they are going.

Effigy of Putin burned outside Moscow; follow Ukraine updates live

“We have not faced the prospect of Armageddon since Kennedy and the Cuban missile crisis.”

Mr Putin himself has also threatened the use of Russia’s vast nuclear arsenal.

Last month he said: “I want to remind you that our country also has various means of destruction… and when the territorial integrity of our country is threatened, to protect Russia and our people, we will certainly use all the means at our disposal.”

Why is Biden talking about nuclear Armageddon?

In the face of unexpected, successful counter-offensives by the Ukrainians in recent weeks, some Western intelligence officials and defence analysts believe the Kremlin could resort to drastic measures to save face.

According to Russia’s nuclear doctrine, it could launch a first-strike nuclear attack if the country’s existence was deemed to be at risk.

Given Mr Putin’s claims about why he started the war, any involvement of NATO troops in the Ukraine conflict could put this plan into action.

And after Moscow staged ‘referenda’ on annexing four areas of Eastern Ukraine, its leader could also use a Ukrainian attack on any of those territories to justify a nuclear strike.

If that did happen, NATO would have to respond, but currently officials have suggested they would only use conventional weapons in retaliation.

Several analysts believe that although Mr Putin says he is “not bluffing” any nuclear activity by Russia would be just as damaging for him – as it would for the West – and is therefore unlikely.

What was the Cuban missile crisis?

The Cuban missile crisis is considered the closest the world has ever come to nuclear annihilation.

The 13-day showdown in 1962 came during the Cold War and after the US discovered the Soviet Union had secretly deployed nuclear weapons to Cuba.

Responding to the presence of American ballistic missiles in Italy and Turkey, as well as the failed Bay of Pigs Invasion of Cuba in 1961, Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev agreed to place missiles on the island – just a few hundred miles from the US coastline.

In response, then-US president John F Kennedy ordered a naval quarantine of the island to prevent further missiles from being delivered.

After several days of tension, Mr Kennedy and Mr Khrushchev reached an agreement for the Soviet Union to dismantle their weapons in Cuba in exchange for Mr Kennedy promising the US would not invade the island.

The US also secretly agreed to dismantle all of its medium-range ballistic missiles in Turkey.

It saw the warring geopolitical powers establish the Moscow-Washington hotline to facilitate quick and direct communication between them in the event of tensions escalating again.

Although the two leaders came to an agreement not to deploy the weapons, bitter tensions between the US and Soviet Union until the end of the Cold War in 1991 left the rest of the world fearing a nuclear attack for decades after.

‘Protect and survive’ adverts warned Britons of nuclear attacks

Those who lived through the 1970s and 1980s in Britain will remember the government’s ‘Protect and Survive’ campaign.

Designed to prepare people for a nuclear attack and supposedly give them the best chance of surviving, it came in the form of pamphlets, TV and radio adverts.

One example recorded for use on BBC Radio 4 said: “This is the Wartime Broadcasting Service. This country has been attacked with nuclear weapons.

“Communications have been severely disrupted, and the number of casualties and the extent of the damage are not yet known.

“We shall bring you further information as soon as possible. Meanwhile, stay tuned to this wavelength, stay calm and stay in your own house.”

Drills were also carried out in schools, workplaces and public buildings.

Air sirens used in the Second World War were repurposed and would be used to deliver attack warnings and ‘fallout warnings’ in the event of a nuclear incident.

The word ‘fallout’ refers to harmful radioactive material released by nuclear explosions.

Adverts advised people to move to the safest area of the house – known as the ‘fallout’ room – the furthest away from exterior wars and preferably on the ground floor or in the basement.

Families were instructed to close their windows and doors, draw their curtains, and even build an ‘inner refuge’ within the fallout room.

Fashioned by propping a door or wooden plank against the wall, people were advised to cover it with sand-filled bags or suitcases.

Families also had instructions to ration food, water and other essentials in the event of a nuclear strike, as they would be advised to stay in their fallout room for at least two days afterwards.

Their fatalistic tone had a lasting psychological and cultural impact on the population, in a similar way to the 1980s ‘Don’t Die of Ignorance’ HIV/AIDS awareness campaign.

World

What’s it like with the National Guard on the streets of DC?

Published

12 hours ago

August 22, 2025

admin

What's it like with the National Guard on the streets of DC?

👉 Follow Trump100 on your podcast app 👈

What’s it like on the streets of DC right now, as thousands of federal police patrol the streets?

Who is Steve Witkoff, the US envoy regularly meeting Vladimir Putin and Benjamin Netanyahu to broker peace in Ukraine and Gaza?

And why is Californian Governor Gavin Newsom now tweeting like Donald Trump?

Martha Kelner and Mark Stone answer your questions.

If you’ve also got a question you’d like the Trump100 team to answer, you can email it to trump100@sky.uk.

You can also watch all episodes on our YouTube channel.

World

It’s been a confusing week – and Trump’s been made to look weak

Published

12 hours ago

August 22, 2025

admin

It’s been a confusing week.

The Monday gathering of European leaders and Ukraine’s president with Donald Trump at the White House was highly significant.

Ukraine latest: Trump changes tack

The leaders went home buoyed by the knowledge that they’d finally convinced the American president not to abandon Europe. He had committed to provide American “security guarantees” to Ukraine.

The details were sketchy, and sketched out only a little more through the week (we got some noise about American air cover), but regardless, the presidential commitment represented a clear shift from months of isolationist rhetoric on Ukraine – “it’s Europe’s problem” and all the rest of it.

Yet it was always the case that, beyond that clear achievement for the Europeans, Russia would have a problem with it.

Trump’s envoy’s language last weekend – claiming that Putin had agreed to Europe providing “Article 5-like” guarantees for Ukraine, essentially providing it with a NATO-like collective security blanket – was baffling.

Russia gives two fingers to the president

And throughout this week, Russia’s foreign minister Sergei Lavrov has repeatedly and predictably undermined the whole thing, pointing out that Russia would never accept any peace plan that involved any European or NATO troops in Ukraine.

“The presence of foreign troops in Ukraine is completely unacceptable for Russia,” he said yesterday, echoing similar statements stretching back years.

Remember that NATO’s “eastern encroachment” was the justification for Russia’s “special military operation” – the invasion of Ukraine – in the first place. All this makes Trump look rather weak.

It’s two fingers to the president, though interestingly, the Russian language has been carefully calibrated not to poke Trump but to mock European leaders instead. That’s telling.

The bilateral meeting (between Putin and Zelenskyy) hailed by Trump on Monday as agreed and close – “within two weeks” – looks decidedly doubtful.

Maybe that’s why he went along with Putin’s suggestion that there be a bilateral, not including Trump, first.

It’s easier for the American president to blame someone else if it’s not his meeting, and it doesn’t happen.

NATO defence chiefs met on Wednesday to discuss the details of how the security guarantees – the ones Russia won’t accept – will work.

European sources at the meeting have told me it was all a great success. And to the comments by Lavrov, a source said: “It’s not up to Lavrov to decide on security guarantees. Not up to the one doing the threatening to decide how to deter that threat!”

The argument goes that it’s not realistic for Russia to say from which countries Ukraine can and cannot host troops.

Would Trump threaten force?

The problem is that if Europe and the White House want Russia to sign up to some sort of peace deal, then it would require agreement from all sides on the security arrangements.

The other way to get Russia to heel would be with an overwhelming threat of force. Something from Trump, like: “Vladimir – look what I did to Iran…”. But, of course, Iran isn’t a nuclear power.

Something else bothers me about all this. The core concept of a “security guarantee” is an ironclad obligation to defend Ukraine into the future.

Future guarantees would require treaties, not just a loose promise. I don’t see Trump’s America truly signing up to anything that obliges them to do anything.

A layered security guarantee which builds over time is an option, but from a Kremlin perspective, would probably only end up being a repeat of history and allow them another “justification” to push back.

Image and reality don’t seem to match

Among Trump’s stream of social media posts this week was an image of him waving his finger at Putin in Alaska. It was one of the few non-effusive images from the summit.

He posted it next to an image of former president Richard Nixon confronting Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev – an image that came to reflect American dominance over the Soviet Union.

That may be the image Trump wants to portray. But the events of the past week suggest image and reality just don’t match.

The past 24 hours in Ukraine have been among the most violent to date.

World

At least 17 dead in Colombia after car bombing and helicopter attack

Published

12 hours ago

August 22, 2025

admin

At least 17 dead in Colombia after car bombing and helicopter attack

At least 17 people were killed after a car bombing and an attack on a police helicopter in Colombia, officials have said.

Authorities in the southwest city of Cali said a vehicle loaded with explosives detonated near a military aviation school, killing five people and injuring more than 30.

Authorities said at least 12 died in the attack on a helicopter transporting personnel to an area in Antioquia in northern Colombia, where they were to destroy coca leaf crops – the raw material used in the production of cocaine.

Antioquia governor Andres Julian said a drone attacked the helicopter as it flew over coca leaf crops.

Colombian President Gustavo Petro attributed both incidents to dissidents of the defunct Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC).

He said the aircraft was targeted in retaliation for a cocaine seizure that allegedly belonged to the Gulf Clan.

Who are FARC, and are they still active?

The Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, a Marxist guerrilla organisation, was the largest of the country’s rebel groups, and grew out of peasant self-defence forces.

It was formed in 1964 as the military wing of the Colombian Communist Party, carrying out a series of attacks against political and economic targets.

In 2016, after more than 50 years of civil war, FARC rebels and the Colombian government signed a peace deal.

It officially ceased to be an armed group the following year – but some small dissident groups rejected the agreement and refused to disarm.

According to a report by Colombia’s Truth Commission in 2022, fighting between government forces, FARC, and the militant group National Liberation Army had killed around 450,000 people between 1985 and 2018.

Both FARC dissidents and members of the Gulf Clan operate in Antioquia.

It comes as a report from the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime found that coca leaf cultivation is on the rise in Colombia.

The area under cultivation reached a record 253,000 hectares in 2023, according to the UN’s latest available report.