A year ago, when Russia invaded Ukraine, no one would have imagined that the top leaders of the East and West would mention the possibility of a third world war using nuclear weapons.
That is, mutually assured destruction, with the return of people who could survive the ice age and the eternal nights.
However, the probabilities of this conflict escalating into a confrontation between the superpowers have been analyzed in recent months, according to different international sources, in the high political and military circles of the United States (USA), Russia, China, the Organization of the North Atlantic Treaty and the European Community.
In addition, it has been verbalized by presidents Joe Biden, Vladimir Putin and his trusted advisers.
To the point that Switzerland, faced with the risk of atomic weapons being used or a nuclear incident being caused in Ukraine, set up a crisis unit to coordinate quick and effective access for its inhabitants to shelters and bunkers.
While Antonio Guterres, Secretary General of the United Nations, warned that humanity is going through a time of nuclear danger that has not been seen since the second half of the last century.
Indeed, if we observe the evolution of this tremendous nonsense, it is worth noting that after the US atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which accelerated the end of the Second World War in August 1945, almost eight decades have passed in that nuclear weapons became a key element of military strategy.
First in the US, then in the former Soviet Union (USSR) which multiplied its atomic arsenal during the 1960s.
Later, and to a lesser degree, in China, England, France, India, Pakistan, Israel and North Korea.
At first, the types, transportation and power of bombs and air, sea and land thermonuclear devices were perfected.
Later, the launch bases and the development of intercontinental missiles, which today have an effective range of more than 10,000 km, were expanded.
In an arms race in which the US and the USSR came to concentrate 90% of the thousands of warheads that were ready to be fired.
In the early years, especially in the period from the '50s to the '70s, the idea prevailed that these weapons should be used to pulverize the enemy's cities, infrastructure and industrial facilities in a few hours.
Even if the victor, so to speak, faltered in radiant fields of smoke and ash.
In the next stage, and due to a certain parity of fire between the US and the USSR (which became Russia after its collapse in the early 1990s), the war strategies of these nations, instead of anticipating attacks direct, prioritized nuclear deterrence.
Understood as the accumulation of an atomic arsenal powerful enough to discourage another power, for fear of reprisals, from using nuclear weapons against its territories or that of its allies.
In this change gravitated the calculations that were made of the infinite number of victims and damage that could be caused by the atomic explosions and radioactive fallout, the massive fires and the climatic impact that would follow.
Whose effects would quickly reach Latin America despite the fact that it is a zone free of nuclear weapons under the Treaty of Tlatelolco of 1969.
This situation was taken into account by the political power of these powers after the incidents that occurred in Cuba in October 1962 and in Soviet territory on September 26, 1983. And they explain the intentions of some of their presidents to limit the intensity of any confrontation since then.
An issue that allowed the signing of numerous agreements that were partially fulfilled by the US and Russia to control and reduce, but not eliminate, atomic weapons.
The last one that remains in force, the New Start that has just been suspended by Putin, had been extended until 2026.
In any case, in the event that these countries rule out using these weapons in retaliation or preventively, knowing that they will also be destroyed, there are three other factors that can unleash a catastrophe in an instant: miscalculations, loss of control and technology failures.
For example, on the cold midnight of September 26, 1983, in the midst of a world tension that many look upon with nostalgia, a technological failure in the missile detection early warning system set off the alarm in the Serpukhov-15 bunker, a few kilometers from Moscow.
According to protocol, there were only a few minutes to respond.
And the nuclear holocaust could be avoided thanks to the mettle of its commander whose actions, circumstances and outcome play an important role in the plot of my novel "The Redemption of Comrade Petrov" just published by Edhasa.
However, at this complex time it is not possible to know if there will be others like Petrov willing to risk their lives to save the world from a massacre on a tremendous scale, never seen before.
Nor if there is another John willing to write the Apocalypse in Patmos or in some point of the deep Aegean where he is about to be exiled.
It is to be expected, to actively fight, so that none of this is needed again.
Eduardo Sguiglia is an economist and writer.