‘Using nuclear war to save the world is like using a guillotine for a headache’

Report + Debate> A former Putin and Yeltsin aide’s call to use nuclear weapons to deter NATO has led to fierce debate…

from thefreeonline on 18th June 2023 by Home Russia (banned in West)

See hundreds of English language comments at original below

Professor Sergey Karaganov’s “Tough-but-necessary decision” article – which claims that by using its nuclear weapons, Russia could save humanity from a global catastrophe – has provoked plenty of reaction domestically.

see Karaganov’s call for Atomic Strike HERE

Some saw it only as the private opinion of a political scientist. Others pointed out that Karaganov is no stranger to high office: he is aligned with the Security Council of the Russian Federation, among other bodies.

Professor Alexey Makarkin, Vice-President of the Center for Political Technologies:

Karaganov’s article about a nuclear strike is completely unsurprising. Last September he did not rule out “the need to use nuclear weapons” and predicted that the US would not sacrifice Boston for Poznan. The signals were clear. There were just two differences.

First, a nuclear strike has been transformed from a possibility into a concrete short-term goal, if the West doesn’t back off – which is what has raised the profile of the news piece. And, secondly, it concludes that the advent of nuclear weapons is the result of a direct intervention of the Almighty, who has decided through fear to keep the world from new wars.

It seems that even the American apologists for the Cold War never thought of such a theological argument.

The text by Karaganov illustrates the desperation to which deadlocked realpolitik can lead us. Three decades ago, a considerable number of Russian Westernizers dreamed of a kind of new Entente ruling the world – with Moscow’s participation, of course. Russia’s modernization at the time was accompanied by an archaic desire to restore “the Russia we lost” – not the real Russian empire, but an imagined and reconstructed version, including elements of the old Soviet superpower.

But there was a consensus among such Westernizers and anti-Western figures that there would be no recognition of an independent role for the “small countries,” which were perceived only as a playground for the great game of the few great powers.

When the Entente failed, a new Yalta was conceived, not to negotiate with our partners but to impose the rules of the game on our opponents. And now Karaganov’s text testifies to its author’s despair at the fact that the Entente has been rejected and the Yalta scheme has not only failed but cannot be achieved by conventional means.

*Sergey Poletaev**, co-founder and editor of the Vatfor project:*

Professor Karaganov suggests that we should stop hesitating and finally strike. Start with Poland and then see how it goes. And after that [the West] will leave us alone and we will live happily ever after.

If they do, that’ll be great. And if not? Then our actions will very quickly lead to the very destruction of humanity that the professor is trying to avoid. That is the first thing.

Second: Our main achievement since the beginning of the military operation in Ukraine is that most of the world has recognized that we are acting within our our rights: Whether openly, like China, or silently or because they, by and large, do not care [about a conflict in Europe].

This is what gives us a chance not just to live but to even develop and prosper in the face of the new normal.

There is no need to put this achievement in danger by starting a nuclear war, especially as we are doing quite well in a conventional conflict so far. The atomic option should still be retained in case of a NATO conventional attack on the Kaliningrad region, Belarus and so on, and we should not hesitate to use them there.

That said, a public nuclear test would be useful. On Novaya Zemlya [an island in the Arctic], with broadcasts and streaming in 5D. The other nuclear powers would probably follow suit, and the rest of the world would be wondering who’s who in this conflict and where it might all lead.

Philosopher Alexander Dugin:

I think this is an extreme proposal. We are far from having exhausted all the possibilities of victory without nuclear weapons, but I certainly understand, as our president has said, that there will be no peace at all without Russia. That has to be taken seriously. But with our current resources, it is irresponsible to talk in advance about a nuclear apocalypse.

‘Peace is unlikely in the near future’: Here’s what Russian experts think about Ukraine’s much-hyped counteroffensive

People like Karaganov [are curious]: one day they are glorifying Western civilization, in his case for decades, but the next they become extreme Russian patriots. They go full-on in both personas, and they don’t show consistency. We have not exhausted all the possibilities of talking about nuclear weapons, but we must not forget what use would mean. Everyone should understand that it would be the last resort.

Elena Panina, former State Duma deputy and director of the Institute of International Political and Economic Strategies:

Sergey Karaganov’s article suggesting Russia should preemptively use nuclear weapons is intended to finally draw “red lines” so that the West gets scared and retreats. However, it looks like an extremely strange gambit, even beyond the provocative overtones. Nuclear war as a remedy for a global catastrophe is as helpful as a guillotine for a headache.

Trident rally is Britain’s biggest anti-nuclear march in a generation

It is nuclear war that we are talking about, though in Karaganov’s article the term is replaced by the more streamlined formula “use of nuclear weapons.” Is there a line before which “use of nuclear weapons” is not nuclear war, and after which it is?

Is it not clear that the first use of nuclear weapons will immediately trigger a retaliation of much greater force?

Nuclear weapons are the last resort on the chessboard. When all other means have been exhausted, all resources expended, and defeat is inevitable. And even then, nuclear weapons can no longer be used to checkmate the enemy, but instead to overturn the tables and blow up the room. They do not let the enemy win by destroying it along with planet Earth.

Ukraine’s propaganda machine is vital for Zelensky: Here is how it works

The West has been blackmailing Russia by developing plans for a nuclear strike to which we would not be able to respond. And this absolutely is blackmail. As long as our chances are equal, no one will use nuclear weapons against us. We are guided by the same logic. That is why nuclear weapons are a deterrent. They have a purpose by the mere fact of their existence, not by their use.

Police officers and criminals both know the rule: don’t show your gun unless you intend to use it. Don’t scare your opponent with it, because they might hit you or shoot you first.

That’s why immature minds are not advised to carry guns – they don’t control the guns, the guns control them. It is a good thing that Mr Karaganov, who advises the use of nuclear weapons to scare the West, is not allowed to use them. And those who are allowed to have iron self-control and will not listen to such advice.

One gets the impression that Karaganov believes that the West can be stopped by a local and demonstrative “use of nuclear weapons”. But there is no comprehension of the consequences. And it’s not just the military but also the geopolitical component that is at stake. All those who are neutral or sympathetic to Russia today will turn their backs. The West is very much in favor of such Russian behavior. So why does the author suggest doing what is in the West’s interest?

Russia is responding to a war unleashed against it with conventional weapons, and it must win it with these very means. Our capacity is by no means exhausted, and it has not even really been used. The number of Russian troops on the lines of contact has not been increased dramatically, which should be necessary and possible, in my view, and not only through conscription.

The fifth column in and around power has not been cleared. Can these things be compensated-for by using nuclear weapons to deter the West? Doesn’t this look like a bluff combined with madness?

A petri dish for fascism: How Ukraine has become a magnet for Western neo-Nazis

Believing that it had won the Cold War, the West systematically worked to destroy Russia, and this has nothing directly to do with the US conflict with China, which just happens to coincide in the sense of time.

Would the US have started a war with Russia on Ukrainian territory if it had kept China as a vassal? It would have. The roots of the war lie in 1991, in the collapse of the USSR and the submission of the Russian elite to Western concepts.

The US and NATO are pumping equipment and ammunition into Europe. They are increasing their involvement in Ukraine. They desperately need a move by Russia to isolate it on the world stage.

And then, like an egg delivered on Easter Sunday, comes Sergey Karaganov’s article. Coincidence or part of a pattern?

Political scientist Ilya Grashchenkov, President of the Center for Regional Policy Development:

Karaganov’s article is interesting because it shines a light on the impasse in which we find ourselves. Without reflecting on why this has happened, he suggests a simple solution: “It is necessary to scare the West into retreating and getting out of the way. To do this, we must strike. Somewhere. It’s not yet clear where.”

“It is a morally frightening choice – we use God’s weapon and condemn ourselves to a severe spiritual dilemma. But if we do not, not only will Russia perish, but all human civilization will probably come to an end,” is the conclusion Karaganov draws for some reason.

And what would our reaction be if (God forbid!) Pakistan attacked India or vice versa? We’d be horrified. Shocked that the nuclear taboo has been breached. Then we’d help the victims and change our own doctrine accordingly.

In fact, Karaganov’s article is similar to the line of thought of [ex-Preident Dmitry] Medvedev’s, but more serious. It is also in the schoolboy logic of “hitting first” and thereby beating the opponent in a berserk frenzy. Which is kind of frightening.

On the other hand, if you talk about something for a very long time, you begin to perceive the idea not as insane but as quite acceptable. Thus extending the boundaries of what is possible, first in your own mind and then in reality. So, what goes on in the heads of those who write about “God’s weapon” (though personally I am not sure that God has any weapon at all and apparently they have their own Savior), is difficult to analyze and predict.

Great Chinese prose compares such thoughts to “the dream of a severed head,” whose thoughts brew in a highly autonomous manner and are almost not subject to external comprehension. I would suggest that someone is trying to plant their fear in the West, fear as a new doctrine. We are the fearful!

To simplify the content of the article, it says that a “small scale” nuclear war is not that scary. And since we have nothing else, it means we have no choice – we must strike at Western Europe and then “in a few years take a stand behind China’s back, just as it is now behind ours, supporting it in its tussle with the US.

For some reason, Karaganov seems to think that such an outcome is an outright blessing and a sign of prosperity, though one might perceive that such a position of battering ram and satellite of China looks rather humiliating.

ANALYSIS

Discussion..Comments

Show hundreds more comments at original

‘Using nuclear war to save the world is like using a guillotine for a headache’: Russian experts respond to call for atomic strike

314

Mercury

Only Nazis want nuclear war…

15 m

−

Tor Gjesdal

It is Not a Support for Nuclear War this is about. But a Limited Strike for example on NATO Headquarter in Brussels to Show that Russia Has to be Taken Seriously about Their Need for Security Guarantees by the Insane Western Bankster Idiots in Governments. Besides NATO is a Threat to the whole World now. Seaking to be Global NATO Waring organization. Flattening NATO Headquarter is Not a Russian Attack on Any Member Country. But this can be seen as an Attack on the Criminal Ziobankster Regimes👹 in Washington and London City.🧐🤔

39 m

−

Valkiri

The underlying message is for the West that Putin is a moderate so they should forget their plot for a regime change in Russia because they would only get a hardcore nuclear warmonger instead, not a sissy globalist.

1 hr

−

Rocky Fjord

US is not opposed to use of nuclear weapons, nor biological we know from COVID, not opposed to mass destruction as in Iraq, or terrorism as Nordstream. What US opposes is any reckoning for their intrangencies.

1 hr

−

Rocky Fjord

‘Fighting for peace (from Vietnam era) is like having sex for virginity.’ But these metaphoric analogies are abstract consistencies, not existential realities, and not to be relied upon, or so I think.

1 hr

−

Juan M0re

Rocky Fjord, It was in an old movie that IMHO actually spoke about the reasons why the US got involved in Vietnam in the first place. The reason was that it showed the old USSR and the PRC that they US wasn’t afraid to expend many lives and vast amounts of treasure in a futile and useless war. This was to show them that American could go to war. BUT that and subsequent US wars have shown that the US can not go to war against a peer level adversary and even has a struggle against a poorly armed one.

1 hr

1 reply

The_D3vils_Advocate

It could all go away if the West would only stop supplying Ukraine with better weaponry. These storm shadows should be the last time that the west should be allowed to get away with escalating the conflict. Russia could start stationing it’s nuclear weapons in Allied countries else where. Or talk about it

1 hr

−

Simplybe

Always been the problem since the nuclear genie was let out of the bottle. It will take only one person with enough influence or money to start a nuclear holocaust. I think what the man was originally saying was because people alive today have no idea the destruction a nuclear war would cause a single limited military use of nukes would wake people up to what would happen in an all out nuclear war. Considering politicians are the ones that will start a war and everyone knows that politicians aren’t that bright any use of nukes is really a bad idea.

1 hr

−

Juan M0re

Simplybe, I think that the USA will be the one to use nukes again. If traditional hostile countries like India and Pakistan didn’t use tactical nukes against each other it bodes well for the other nuclear countries. Except for the US and possibly the UK whom I believe would use tactical nukes. It was part of NATO doctrine to use nukes against the old USSR greater number of tanks.

1 hr

1 reply

JohnS

A country could use nuclear weapons without it being in the war. Wake up the world. A country could even just offer to give nuclear technology capability to enemies of enemies; cause a media stir, and scare them to their senses. My fellow Americans are clueless, thanks to our one-sided media.

1 hr

−

Oneworld

The only reason to strike first is the enemy you face . America not Europe is the root cause of the problem. They can’t be trusted on any level , they are capable of anything. They have proven this time and time again. Striking america fist on legitimate military targets only at home would be scary yes but necessary. America will not stop and will not go away . Ever .

2 hr

−

fluttershield mlp

Oneworld, Talmudic cultists are running our USA foreign intervention policy.

1 hr

1 reply

Aderyn

With how the world would look if the US globalists would achieve total hegemony, I’d rather have a nuclear war.

2 hr

−

Tranceislife

What kraganov actually said is that the only way to stop the west permanently is to show the US which is the main instigator that any more provocation will result in a direct strike on American territory and not just in Europe – He says that once the current artificially high threshold is lowered for usage, then it should be communicated to the US that there will be repurcussions for their demented acts – That he believes will make the hegemon quit Europe and withdraw back to his backyard leaving Europe free to pursue an independent policy and not as a vassal – He’s not advocating using nuclear weapons as a demonstration as all this critics seems to be crying about

2 hr

−

TheBlackLodge

That Alexander Dugin feels that way with what he’s lost says a lot. 🇷🇺

2 hr

−

David Bailey

Elena Panina is exactly right! Besides, if you listen to videos by Col Macgregor and others, it is clear that Russia is rapidly winning this conflict with its conventional weapons.

2 hr

−

Carlos Conde

Nato sending uranium ammunitions its fine thank you very much. Russia use nuclear: NO! Crazy!

2 hr

−

Philip Lock

When the US nuke Japan, it is not Tokyo which is like cutting off a head. It was cutting a leg and hand and it stop the war. Ukraine leader is similar to Japan leaders in 1945, fight to the death of the whole country.

3 hr

−

Jed Slater

“Nuclear war as a remedy for a global catastrophe is as helpful as a guillotine for a headache.” great expression, it’s a keeper.

3 hr

−

Simon Gunson

Nobody is necessarily calling for a strategic strike, however it is USA which is timid. Time for Russia to start pushing back on NATO encroachment in Ukraine. Biden will back away the moment he can’t read Russia’s intentions.

3 hr

−

David Bailey

Simon Gunson, Biden is, as they say, out to lunch. Nobody can predict how he will react.

2 hr

1 more reply

Progress

Karaganov has effectively revealed practical and realistic steps to overcome a fixed idea in the minds of many cultivated by Western propogandists. The Cultists of the West paint a picture of how to weaken and ultimately defeat a nuclear power through a thousand cuts – they say so frequently. Karaganov shows the steps needed to dissolve this fixed idea – this mirage. It would be wise to list these steps and begin to employ them. There is no risk along most of the path – quite the contrary – only a change in position will give pause to the Sociopaths who are presently far too confident in their own personal safety and their absolute control of the “Western Information space”.
One side at least MUST step closer to the Mirage – and all will see it fade. Every step outlined by Karaganov will force a change in the Hegemon’s path. The sooner those steps are started – the sooner a true picture of a free world will emerge.

3 hr

−

Simon Gunson

Progress, True, I agree Russia’s hesitance sends the wrong signal, Being a punching bag for NATO is death by a thousand cuts. It is time for Ukraine to fall.

3 hr

2 more replies

EPM

With the guillotine, you are sure the person has no headache anymore! :))

3 hr

−

Sujan

LAst few days i was thinging only one way now i am clear i was wrong we must do whatever we can to save planet from nuclear disaster..

3 hr

−

GuitarP2022

If Nuclear weapons are used by one side….the other side will instantly retaliate with them in return. Only a complete fool would call for using nuclear weapons unless you’re suicidal.

3 hr

−

MTakim

Most stupid analysis. Not for a headache, it’s for a cancer . And like cancer you have to remove tissue . One strike in London rest will beg russia for negotiations , no one wants to be next London , their population will demand it . They don’t give a damn about London . It’s called survival instinct . Highest instinct man kind have

4 hr

−

GuitarP2022

MTakim, NATO would respond with a counter Nuclear strike instantly.

3 hr

4 more replies

w rsg23

Disagree. Nato used to worry about escalation. Now they don’t care at all. Russia should make a stone cold commitment that if Poland sends fighter jets into Ukraine, Warsaw will turn into Hiroshima.

4 hr

−

ScioDeNescio

Dear moderators, please stop censoring posts ‘you’ feel inappropriate about! I follow the guidelines to the ‘T’, and such things are frustrating towards your own community! Create a reply with an appropriate response and argument why that action was taken! Cause I can post it sometimes amongst a reply, but not as it’s own, but why? And why can’t I correct certain comments for grammar or spelling mistakes as well? Why is this comment section not improved accordingly? Failure of management or coders to make it happen! But you could always hire me! 250k a year, I’ll work for you, solely and with upmost loyalty as long it helps to create an equal plane and comment platform for all! RT is even not able to post a list of words not allowed to be shared or posted, but stating a case without should be allowed!

4 hr

−

cassies707

Don’t agree, guillotine will definitely cured NATO’S headache.

4 hr

−

Unholy76

Nuclear war will kill the planet…

4 hr

−

Know All

Yes, Zelensky deserves guillotine.

4 hr

−

Unholy76

Know All, Not only the guillotine…

4 hr

1 reply

Know All

Nope. The problem is not headache. It is cancerous cell, or frost-bitten hand called Ukraine. We need the nuclear option of radiation therapy or amputation. The rest of the body will survive.

4 hr

−

Hto137

US would not risk Boston for Poznan – (Argument) It’s a wrong argument. US does not have a license to use nuclear weapons as they wish in the current environment. So they push Russia to use one in Ukraine, so that they can take it as an international license to use their nuclear weapons. If Russia strikes Ukraine, there won’t be a counter strike but they may use that opportunity to carpet nuclear bomb North Korea, Iran etc. Why Russians not taking out Zelensky ? It’s NOT because US/NATO will strike on Moscow but they may take out Assad, Iran regime etc. Russia not willing to sacrifice it’s friends for taking out an adversory. Anglo saxons desperately pushing for a scenario they can justify themselves by saying , ‘Look we didn’t do it first’. Regime knows this but Russian people also need to know this.

4 hr

−

alci

Biden needs one for his headaches.

If you send him one, please join a user’s manual, with pictures if possible.

5 hr

−

alci

Good!

Biden is having headaches at the moment…

5 hr

−

Unholy76

alci, Perhaps an Aluminium baseball Bat slammed to his head could help???.

4 hr

2 more replies

Tomiko Tomochan

well mr.expert, that’s the same case as plandemic……vaxing healthy ppl with poison for prevention not to have headache

5 hr

−

Eric Summer

I honestly thought that nuclear mutually assured destruction would end all wars involving the nuclear powers. The scientists in the end would have won over brute force.
Instead we make agreements not to use these weapons only to continue the type of warfare we seem to love – with ambushes, encirclement, bold attacks, same as in ancient times.

5 hr

−

fidel

No need nukes. Moscow can borrow perhaps a CL bomb or two to use against the countries it considers as belligerent – Poland for one, for sending its troops to fight Russians; City of London for the DEPLETED UNRANIUM – as good as a Dirty – read radioactive – Bomb; Washington for the destruction of the Khakova Dam, direct involvement of its generals, technicians, and mercenaries, provision of HMARS, artilleries, destruction of Nordstream pipeline, attacks in Crimea and Moscow, etc.; Berlin for the Leopard tanks and other equipment and betrayal in the Minsk Peace Accord negotiations. France too. Romania and Moldava for stationing Amerikan troops on their soil for invasion of Ukraine. Lithuania, Estonia, Latvia …

5 hr

−

VargusMcFargus

Mr Karaganov needs to understand that suicide is NOT the answer

6 hr

Show hundreds more comments at original

Author: thefreeonline

The Free is a book and a blog. Download free E/book ...”the most detailed fictional treatment of the movement from a world recognizably like our own to an anarchist society that I have read... View all posts by thefreeonline