Why in following news they use "she'd" and not "she will" to talking about the future ?
And crucially, it's not clear how far she'd actually go in criticising Vladimir Putin himself, a close family friend since her childhood.
In the context of this question:
'Would' is conditional, i.e. it refers to something that may or may not occur and/or if that thing does occur, the nature or extent of it cannot be known as a fact because it has not yet happened.
'Will' is imperative, i.e. it refers to something that has certain intention or for which the result can be predicted with certainty.
It depends on the context, would is used:
to talk about the past.
to talk about hypotheses – things that are imagined rather than true.
It means that: for some reasons they've imagined,
she misplaces her id card, she would found it.
I don't know how she'd react if I did that.
she'd actually go in criticising Vladimir
The " 'd " in question is referring to would. Though it does sound like past tense, English speakers use would to talk about things in an 'if' context
For example, if I wanted to prank someone, but wasn't sure what her reaction would be, I could say
" I don't know how she'd react if I did that."
Because I am talking about what would happen after I pranked her, we use the past tense
The answer above sums it up. I am no English professor, and, when I approach the language, I tend to listen to my intuition.
Afterall, it would sound awkward if I were to say instead of the following:
"I don't know how she'd react if I did that."
With: "I don't know how she will react if I did that"
To a native speaker, the latter sounds a bit strange and most would prefer the sentence before. However, if you do use "will" instead of "would," at least in this context, then your sentence would not be considered "grammatically incorrect."