At the battle of Stirling Bridge, 11 September 1297, the movie Braveheart has William Wallace provoking the English to battle, saying "Here are Scotland's terms. Lower your flags, and march straight back to England, stopping at every home to beg forgiveness for 100 years of theft, rape, and murder. Do that and your men shall live. Do it not, and every one of you will die today. ... Before we let you leave, your commander must cross that field, present himself before this army, put his head between his legs, and kiss his own ass."
Putin's Nuclear Crisis - November 2024
“Russia has demonstrated its strength in front of the whole world,” Chinese journalists noted 01 November 2024. The Russian Federation held a training session of strategic deterrence forces, and it was held on a grand scale. Vladimir Putin personally supervised the exercises. On his command, ballistic missiles were launched, they were launched almost simultaneously from several locations - from land, air and sea. The Russian president accompanied this event with a statement according to which Russia does not intend to participate in the arms race, but will maintain strategic forces at the required level.
The authors of Baijiahao noted that the missiles were launched from different places - the Plesetsk Cosmodrome, the Barents Sea and the Sea of Okhotsk. At the same time, most of them (possibly all the missiles) were aimed at Kamchatka, where the Kura test site is located. In China, they noted that this is quite curious, because Kamchatka is a stone's throw from American Alaska. "This event was held at a special moment - before the elections in the USA <…> The fact that the missiles were launched from different places is very interesting. As well as the fact that they flew to Kamchatka, located near the territory of the USA," journalists from the PRC report.
According to Chinese journalists, Russia wanted to show its dissatisfaction with the behavior of the United States and make it clear that in the 21st century, the Americans will not be able to hide from their opponents overseas. This is especially true for Alaska, which is in the palm of Russia's hand. "This is undoubtedly a warning to the United States. They should behave more restrainedly, since any reckless action may result in retribution," the PRC stated.
Dmitry Medvedev, former Russian president and close ally of Russian President Vladimir Putin, warned that if the United States fuels the Ukraine conflict, it will face a World War III. Medvedev spoke during an interview with RT TV Channel news anchor Rory Suchet at the Gorki state residence outside Moscow, Russia. Medvedev, who serves as deputy chairman of Russia's security council, told Russian RT broadcaster on 02 November 2024 that if the next U.S. leader continues to fuel the Russia-Ukraine conflict, it will be a very bad choice as it will lead to a path to hell. Medvedev said that it will open up the path to a third world war, urging U.S. presidential candidates Donald Trump and Kamala Harris to realize it.
Russia had been signaling signs to the West that Moscow will respond with its nuclear weapons if the United States and its allies help Ukraine fire longer-range weapons deep into Russia. Medvedev warned the United States that it was wrong to believe that Russia will never "cross a certain line" when it comes to the deployment of nuclear arms.
The so-called rules-based order imposed by the US and its allies on the global scene is an unstable structure, which is about to fall apart, former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has said in an exclusive interview with RT. Creating crises such as the conflict between Russia and Ukraine in various places is how the US is trying to rule the world, Medvedev, who now serves as the deputy chairman of Russia’s Security Council, told the broadcaster.
“So, the more crises they create, the better, they think, the situation is for America... It makes money from weapons, supplies, and by allocating money to its defense industry,” he said. “The Americans are getting what they want at the price of more blood and casualties. This is why the Americans are engaging in feeding the war. But that system is coming to an end,” the former president warned. The authorities in Washington “feel the world is falling out from under their feet and they are resisting it in every way possible,” he said.
This is why the Americans see BRICS and other unions currently being created around the globe, in which the US has no say, as “hostile,” Medvedev explained. Washington and its allies accuse the members of those groups of “violating the rules-based order,” but, at same time, cannot explain what this order is,” he said. “I have carefully picked through the legal text and studied it: it is incomprehensible. It is not clear what the order is and who approved it. It is really just an idea of the US and its allies, while mostly in NATO, of how best to do business in the world,” the former president stressed.
According to Medvedev, the rules-based order is actually what the West believes “is right,” adding that “once you are out of this order, you’re a perpetrator.” The uni-polar world that the US is trying to preserve is “always prone to war and unfortunately results in conflicts,” he said. Meanwhile, the multi-polar system that Russia and other BRICS members are working to build “implies making a connection between different poles” and creating “a world in balance [that] is always relatively stable,” he explained.
Western leaders do not fully appreciate Russia’s readiness to deploy nuclear weapons to protect itself, Dmitry Medvedev told RT. Washington and its allies mistakenly believe that Russia will never cross the line of using nuclear weapons, former President Dmitry Medvedev stated in an exclusive interview with RT on Saturday. Medvedev, who currently serves as deputy chairman of the Russian Security Council, suggested that current Western leaders are not as forward-thinking as their predecessors and fail to take into account Russia’s willingness to defend its existence using all means at its disposal.
”They have made a miscalculation, since they are not of the brightest kind… For some reason they think that Russians will never cross a certain line. They are wrong. If it comes down to the existence of our state, as the president of our country has repeatedly said… we will simply have no choice,” Medvedev said. He stressed that any person who serves as president of a nuclear-armed state takes on the obligation to defend their country “to the last man,” and suggested that current Western leaders such as French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Olaf Scholz “lack the acumen and subtlety of mind” of their predecessors. The political class is degenerating, technocrats are coming in and they cannot understand how politics function. This is a disaster,” Medvedev stated.
German expert Serhii Sumlenny noted 02 November 2024 "Red lines are drawn by the West, but as they’re crossed, nothing is done. The same happened with Biden’s warning of “severe consequences” if Russia used chemical weapons in Ukraine, yet we have over 400 documented cases of Russia using chemical agents like chlorine in Ukraine, with no response. This echoes Obama’s red line in Syria—it’s not about one administration being bad or good, but rather a Western reluctance to get involved in war. But it’s Russia, the adversary, that ultimately decides if we’re involved—not our actions or inactions."
According to Foreign Affairs on 05 November 2024, Ukraine's long-range UAVs and missiles can strike many of Russia's nuclear storage facilities , destabilizing one-third of Russia's nuclear arsenal . According to the paper, about 30% of Russia's estimated 5,580 nuclear warheads are stored within reach of Ukraine's long-range weapons. The paper noted that Ukrainian UAVs can already reach Moscow, so at least 14 Russian nuclear storage facilities are also within range. Among these: At least two are located within 160 km of the Ukrainian border; Five military airfields are located within 320 km of the Ukrainian border, Foreign Affairs noted, Russia's unwillingness to properly secure its nuclear arsenal in western Ukraine poses "serious risks." Journalists speculate that Russia may refuse to move its nuclear weapons further from the border for several reasons . One reason is Putin's reluctance to show weakness , and another is that the Russian leadership does not fully appreciate the dangers of storing nuclear warheads in such close proximity . Nuclear missiles are transported by rail , making them particularly vulnerable when they are transported for maintenance.
Russian President Vladimir Putin spoke 07 November 2024 at the annual plenary session of the Valdai Club. The main delegations to the forum came from Asia, Europe and LatiAmerica. Among the invitees are political scientists, economists, international security experts and representatives of the Russian leadership. His speech, including answers to questions, lasted more than four hours.
"There can be no talk of any hegemony in the new international environment. And when, say, Washington and other Western capitals comprehend and recognize this irrefutable, incontrovertible fact, the process of building a world system that meets the challenges of the future will finally enter the phase of genuine creation."
"We see a conflict between the overwhelming majority of the planet's population, which wants to live and develop in an interconnected world of enormous opportunities, and a global minority that is concerned with only one thing, as I have already said - maintaining its dominance. And for the sake of this, it is ready to destroy the achievements that have become the result of long-term development in the direction of a universal world system."
"Therefore, today this issue is not simple, it is even more complicated than it was 20 or 30 years ago. But we understand our responsibility as a country, which in terms of its capabilities, the number of carriers and warheads and the quality of modern weapons, and they are being improved in our country, is now approaching the point of putting into service our latest developments, which I spoke about five years ago, we are now gradually completing the tests - we understand all this, and in general we are ready for this dialogue. It is necessary for the other side to approach this honestly, taking into account all aspects of our relationship." Putin said.
"At the same time, there are nuclear arsenals in other NATO countries, except the US, in Great Britain and France, and they are growing. They are not only growing, they are changing qualitatively. Just recently, very recently, I was told: NATO is not a military-political union, it is first and foremost a political union, and only then a military one. No, we see that this is not so at all, in fact, the United States, deliberately or undeliberately, I think deliberately, returned the military component of NATO to the forefront, all together they declared that they are going to inflict a strategic defeat on us. How can we not take into account the nuclear arsenals of Great Britain and France?" Putin answered a question about the New START and its possible extension: "We have never refused to have a dialogue on strategic stability. Everyone knows that the US and its satellites aim to inflict a strategic defeat on Russia. What is that? If not to destroy the country, then to reduce the country to an insignificant role. Why do we need nuclear weapons then? And at the same time they want to have a dialogue on strategic stability. They seem like grown-ups."
Putin pointed out the need to approach this issue honestly, with open cards, “without any double, triple, or quintuple standards.” "It can't be that they are planning to inflict a strategic defeat on us here, and they are telling their citizens: 'Guys, everything is calm, everything is fine. Business as usual. Don't be afraid, don't worry about anything.'"
If the Russian Federation did not possess nuclear weapons, NATO would have deployed forces onto Ukrainian territory to help repel Russian terrorists. Ukraine holds strategic importance for the Alliance, citing NATO Military Committee Chairman Admiral Rob Bauer at the Prague Defense Summit, which took place from November 8 to 10. "I am absolutely certain that if the Russians did not have nuclear weapons, we would have been in Ukraine a long time ago to kick them out. We certainly would have done that," Bauer said, adding that "the Taliban do not have nuclear weapons, the Russians do" and this is what differentiates the wars in Ukraine and Afghanistan.
"Afterward, everybody will say the red line wasn't the red line. So why didn't we give those weapons earlier? But if you are looking at the problem in the future, when the question arises and you don’t necessarily understand the consequences, then it's much more difficult," he explained. He also pointed out that Ukraine cannot be compared to Afghanistan, as it holds strategic importance for NATO. For this reason, the United States must not allow dictator Vladimir Putin to emerge victorious from the war.
On 09 November 2024 Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Ryabkov mentioned revising the document that stipulates the conditions for the use of nuclear weapons in an interview with . It is believed that the intention is to use "nuclear threats" to check the new Trump administration over the invasion of Ukraine . In the document "Fundamentals of the National Policy of Nuclear Deterrence" signed by President Putin in 2020, Russia stipulated the conditions for the use of nuclear weapons, stating that Russia can retaliate with nuclear weapons even against attacks by conventional weapons if the existence of the country is threatened. However, President Putin mentioned revising the document in September 2024, stating his view that Russia can retaliate with nuclear weapons against attacks by non-nuclear countries supported by nuclear weapon states. Deputy Foreign Minister Ryabkov argued that US and European support for Ukraine over the invasion "seems to intensify tensions endlessly," and said, "The time is approaching when the possibility of resorting to the nuclear option will be reflected in the document ," with a serious crisis in mind in relations with the US and Europe and in the situation in Ukraine.
Russia’s new nuclear doctrine will likely force the US and other Western nations to reconsider their military support for Ukraine, defense and political experts have said after Vladimir Putin officially signed the new rules on 19 November 2024. The new doctrine states that Moscow will have the right to consider the nuclear option if Russia or Belarus come under attack by conventional arms and if such aggression creates a “critical threat” to their sovereignty or territorial integrity. Additionally, any act of aggression by a non-nuclear state with the participation of a nuclear state against Russia will now be regarded as a joint attack and could also trigger the new doctrine.
Following the publication of the revised rules, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov explained that the new doctrine effectively gives Russia the right to consider a nuclear response to the use of Western-supplied non-nuclear missiles by Kiev against Russian territories. According to author and war correspondent Thomas Roeper, outgoing President Joe Biden is making it difficult for President-elect Donald Trump to find a peaceful solution to the Ukraine conflict. “This decision... [allowing Ukraine to shoot] at Russia with long-distance rockets, and the possible answer of Russia, will make it more complicated for Trump to get out of this conflict,” he told RT.
Former Russian president Dmitry Medvedev, who is now the deputy chairman of the National Security Council, said the new rules have the potential to trigger a third world war if Kiev decides to use NATO weapons to attack Russia. “In this case, the right arises to launch a retaliatory strike with weapons of mass destruction against Kiev and the main NATO facilities, wherever they are. And this is already WWIII,” he wrote on his Telegram channel, warning that Ukraine and its allies should be prepared for such retaliatory measures.
Andrey Klimov, who serves as the deputy chairman of parliamentary international affairs committee, said the provisions of the revised doctrine would likely be “carefully studied in the near future in unfriendly states,” and expressed hope that they will draw the appropriate conclusions and realize that “one should not play with fire.” The deputy head of the State Duma Defense Committee, Yuri Shvytkin, has also claimed that France and the UK should now realize that any attack on Russia using their weapons would immediately draw a retaliation from Moscow. “I think that an unambiguous, clear signal has been given to Western countries about the inadmissibility of supplying these types of weapons to the Ukrainian Armed Forces militants,” Shvytkin said.
Meanwhile, the head of the Federation Council Committee on Defense and Security, Vladimir Bulavin, told TASS that Moscow continues to see nuclear weapons exclusively as an instrument of deterrence and considers their use only as a last resort. He explained that the new rules were aimed at “ensuring strategic stability and predictability,” and do not imply “an automatic change in the nature of the actions being taken.”
The latest changes to Russia’s nuclear doctrine were likely made for two main reasons, Mikael Valtersson, former Swedish military officer and ex-chief of staff with the Sweden Democrats, tells Sputnik. “One is to make it even clearer that even attacks from Ukraine with conventional weapons with the active support of Western powers will be seen as a combined attack on Russia,” he says. “This will give Russia the opportunity to claim Casus belli [an event that either provokes or is used to justify a war], and legitimate defensive military action according to international law and the UN Charter.” This move, Valtersson argues, is essentially an attempt by Russia to “strengthen deterrence towards the West and reduce the risk of Western escalation in Ukraine.”
“The second and very interesting aspect is the inclusion of allies in the nuclear deterrence,” he continues. “This must be seen in the light of the recent ratification of the new defense cooperation agreement with the DPRK (North Korea) that includes a paragraph akin to the NATO article 5. This stipulates mutual military aid to defend each other in case of aggression from other countries.”
"With the changes of Russian nuclear strategy, Russia says that aggression towards it's allies will be seen as aggression towards Russia and might include a nuclear response," Valtersson notes. The Russian nuclear doctrine now reflects the fact that Russia has formal allies again.” As Russia’s actions resulted in NATO ceasing to be the only military bloc in the post-Cold War world whose members “have been included in a common nuclear umbrella,” Valtersson suggests that this development has both pros and cons for Moscow.
“This makes Russia a more attractive ally, but also puts Russia into a more precarious situation, since it now has stronger obligations to live up to. A failure to live up to these obligations would result in a huge loss of confidence in Russian willingness to support allies, and the Kremlin of course knows this,” he elaborates. “That means that this decision to change the nuclear doctrine must be seen as a real willingness of Russia to extend its nuclear deterrence to other allies.”
Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic warned that his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin is serious when he speaks about using nuclear weapons if Moscow’s stated red lines continue to be crossed. He added that only “crazy people” or those unfamiliar with Putin would dismiss his warnings. “If you think you can attack everything on Russian territory with Western logistics and weapons without getting a response, and that Putin won’t use whatever weapons he deems necessary, then you either don’t know him or you’re abnormal,” Vucic told reporters on 18 Novemve 2024, according to the Serbian news outlet Novosti.
Vucic cautioned that the planet is on the brink of catastrophe, as no one seems willing to negotiate a truce in the Ukraine conflict. “The world is approaching disaster. No one listens. No one talks about peace,” he said. “Today, it’s an intercontinental missile [sic]; tomorrow, it’s something else.” The Serbian president, whose country was the subject of an extensive NATO bombing campaign in 1999, referred to Russia’s updated nuclear doctrine, which was approved by Putin on November 19. The document allows Moscow to treat an attack by a non-nuclear state, backed by a nuclear power, as equivalent to direct nuclear aggression.
Vucic noted that Putin views nuclear weapons as a last resort, but stressed that if Russia’s security is under direct threat, the president will act. “If Moscow’s security or its forces are at risk, and if there’s no other way out, he will use nuclear weapons,” he said, adding that Serbia would avoid entanglement in such a conflict but warned that “the targets will be around us.” Moscow has consistently accused Western nations of escalating the Ukraine conflict by supplying Kiev with long-range missiles. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov recently called such actions a “new escalation” aimed at prolonging the war and using Ukraine as a proxy in a broader conflict with Russia.
The Russian military has launched a state-of-the-art intermediate-range ballistic missile against a Ukrainian target, President Vladimir Putin said in a public address on 21 November 2024. As part of what the president called a “combat test,” the hypersonic missile, dubbed ‘Oreshnik’ (‘Hazel’), successfully struck a military industrial facility in the Ukrainian city of Dnepropetrovsk (known as Dnipro in Ukraine), Putin added. The strike was a response to Ukrainian attacks on military facilities located on internationally recognized Russian territory, the president stated. Kiev’s forces launched the strikes using US-made ATACMS and HIMARS systems as well as British-made Storm Shadow missiles, he said.
The president also vowed to publicly announce any future strikes against the Ukrainian targets involving the ‘Oreshnik’ system “for humanitarian reasons” to let civilians leave a potentially dangerous zone. The announcements would not affect the effectiveness of the strikes, he added. A ballistic missile travelling at between 2.5 and 3 kilometers per second, or 10 times faster than the speed of sound, cannot be countered with any existing air defense systems, Putin said.
On November 21, Moscow said a new U.S. missile defence base in the Polish town of Redzikowo near the Baltic coast, which was opened on November 13 as part of a broader NATO missile shield, will lead to an increase in the overall level of nuclear danger. "This is another frankly provocative step in a series of deeply destabilising actions by the Americans and their allies in the North Atlantic alliance in the strategic sphere," Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said. "This leads to undermining strategic stability, increasing strategic risks and, as a result, to an increase in the overall level of nuclear danger," Zakharova said.
Poland rejected the claim, saying there were no nuclear missiles at the base. "It is a base that serves the purpose of defense, not attack," Foreign Ministry spokesman Pawel Wronski said on November 21.
On 21 November 2024 Russia launched a single RS-26 Rubezh road mobile missile against the Yuzhmash missile production factory in Dnepropetrovsk. Pepe Escobar wrote "Oreshnik in fact is a tacit demo that Russia does not need nuclear power to solve anything in the Ukrainian theater of war. So let’s assume that escalation has been controlled – for now. Yet we still have nearly two months of a completely deranged US administration in power. NATO’s congenital dementia suggests escalation will continue. The difference though is stratospheric: now they don’t know if Oreshnik handing them a business card comes with a nuclear bomb on or not."
The US has become a fascist state under the administration of President Joe Biden, former Fox News host Tucker Carlson has claimed during an interview with American journalist Glenn Greenwald which was published on his YouTube channel on 20 November 2024. Carlson stated that Washington’s decision to allow Ukraine to use US-supplied ATACMS missiles to strike targets deep inside Russia is “the most evil thing I’ve ever seen in my lifetime” and accused the outgoing government, which he described as a “lame duck administration” of trying to “leave the next administration with a world war.” “In fact, it is our government that is the fascist state, not Russia,” Carlson said. The journalist argued that Biden’s reported decision to lift restrictions for Ukraine, “a proxy state of the US,” to strike Russian territory using Western long-range missiles could provoke a nuclear war.
Russian propagandists created counterfeit cover of renowned British magazine to disseminate nuclear threats aimed at Western audiences The counterfeit cover, circulated by Kremlin-controlled media outlets, Russian bots on X, and some Azerbaijani and Arab media platforms, features Russian dictator Vladimir Putin and U.S. President-elect Donald Trump against a backdrop of missiles and an explosion-filled sky. It includes the sensational caption "Apocalypse." According to these propagandists, the issue's supposed theme is that Western approval for Ukraine's long-range strikes deep into Russian territory marks "the beginning of World War III."
On Dignity and Freedom Day, November 21, Russia struck the Ukrainian city of Dnipro with an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM). This is the world's first use in combat of this type of weapon, designed to carry a nuclear charge, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky noted in a video address. According to information released by the Ukrainian Air Force, the ICBM was launched from the Astrakhan region of the Russian Federation. In addition, Russian forces launched aeroballistic missiles and several cruise missiles. Some of the missiles were destroyed, the Ukrainian Air Force reported on its Telegram channel.
Russian military activity had increased in recent days following reports of Ukraine using Western long-range ATACMS and Storm Shadow missiles to strike the Bryansk and Kursk regions of the Russian Federation.
Vladimir Putin responded to these reports by changing the Russian nuclear doctrine, expanding the conditions for Moscow to use nuclear weapons. Let us note once again that intercontinental ballistic missiles can carry nuclear warheads.
Monitoring the readiness of Russia's nuclear forces is a priority for U.S. intelligence, says Matthew Bunn, a nuclear weapons analyst and former scientific adviser in the Bill Clinton administration. "As far as we know, they are on alert. It would be foolish for the United States not to believe that Russia could use nuclear weapons if it wanted to use them," Bunn said.
The last time, according to Bunn, US intelligence seriously considered the danger of Russia using nuclear weapons to strike Ukraine was in late 2022 after the successful counteroffensive of the Ukrainian Armed Forces in the Kharkiv and Kherson regions. “There is a view that if Ukraine successfully reaches the point where there is a serious threat to Crimea – perhaps there is a 50/50 chance of this – then under those circumstances Russia will choose to use nuclear weapons,” the expert said.
John Erath, senior policy director at the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation in Washington, said Russia is unlikely to use nuclear weapons. He said many “red lines” for their use have been crossed in the past two years. "Over the last two years, we have seen threats, direct and indirect, of nuclear use. This included sending tanks, Bradley fighting vehicles, additional Patriot systems, F-16 fighters to Ukraine. This time, on paper, there has been a change in nuclear policy. This is an additional step, something that has not happened before, but it is consistent with previous Russian responses to such steps," Erath said.
The analyst points out that Russia is using all available weapons in the war against Ukraine without any red lines or conditions. Therefore, the reason why it has not used nuclear weapons yet is not related to moral limitations. "They actually have no moral restraints on using nuclear weapons in Ukraine. And despite this, they have not yet decided to use these weapons. This means that these weapons will not benefit them," says Erat.
Over the past two years, Russia has repeatedly threatened to use nuclear weapons. The purpose of these threats is to intimidate the West and Ukraine, experts emphasize. “Russia’s policy is to consistently try to force countries to stop supporting Ukraine, to prove that Ukraine cannot win the war and that Russia should be allowed to dictate the terms of the ceasefire,” the expert explains.
John Hardy , a security expert at the Washington-based Foundation for Defense of Democracies, is convinced that the West must continue to support Ukraine by all means necessary. “I think we should support Ukraine in striking other targets in Russia, including by providing more missiles. There are a number of ways we can do that, such as providing JASSM missiles or increasing the export of ATACMS missiles to Ukraine,” Hardy says.
At the same time, according to Matthew Bunn, the risk of a nuclear war is the highest since the Cuban missile crisis of 1962, when the USSR deployed nuclear missiles in Cuba. Bunn emphasizes that diplomacy is essential in this case. "There is little being done at the moment to reduce these dangers other than containment, containment, containment. Containment alone without diplomacy is dangerous...", the analyst states.
John Erath recalls that at one time the USA and the USSR managed to reduce the number of nuclear missiles by 80%. "During the Cold War, the governments of the United States and the Soviet Union claimed that approximately 70,000 to 80,000 nuclear weapons were needed to prevent World War III. Over time, we realized that this figure was too high, and there was a reduction. There are now about 15,000 such weapons left in the world," the expert notes.
He emphasizes that there is no point in talking about further cuts at the moment, given the tense international situation. Moreover, there is a threat of a new build-up of nuclear forces due to the fact that the Treaty between the US and the Russian Federation on Measures for the Further Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms (START-3) expires in 2026. This is the last active treaty on the reduction of nuclear weapons.
Dmitry Medvedev stated 26 November 2024 "American politicians and journalists are seriously discussing the consequences of transferring nuclear weapons to Kiev. It seems that my sad joke about the crazy senile Biden, who decided to leave this life gracefully, taking a significant part of humanity with him, is turning into a frightening reality. Transfer nuclear weapons to a country that is at war with the largest nuclear power? The very idea is so absurd that it raises suspicions about the presence of paranoid psychosis in Joe The Walking Dead and all those who discuss the advisability of such a step.
"And yet, we have to comment on the nonsense:
"1) the very threat of transferring nuclear weapons to the Kiev regime can be considered as preparation for a nuclear conflict with Russia;
"2) the actual transfer of such weapons can be equated to an accomplished act of attack on our country in the sense of paragraph 19 of the Fundamentals of State Policy in the Field of Nuclear Deterrence.
Discussions about the possibility of deploying nuclear weapons in Ukraine are irresponsible, and this is said by those who have a poor understanding of reality, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on 26 November 2024. Earlier, The New York Times reported that some US and European officials are allegedly proposing to return nuclear weapons to Ukraine. "You know, even the most provocative line aimed at escalating tensions has such an extreme extremist wing. This point of view probably belongs to this extreme extremist wing. This is absolutely irresponsible reasoning of people who probably have a poor understanding, a poor idea of reality, and who do not feel a shred of responsibility when making such statements. But we see that all these statements are anonymous," Peskov told reporters.
The idea of providing Ukraine with nuclear weapons comes from the “extremist flank” of Kiev’s Western backers, who have lost touch with reality, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said 26 November 2024. The New York Times had reported that EU and American officials have suggested that outgoing US President Joe Biden could give Ukraine nuclear arms as a “security guarantee.” “That would be an instant and enormous deterrent,” the paper claimed, in an article bylined by four of its reporters, but citing anonymous sources, in which it acknowledged that such a move would be “complicated and have serious implications.”
Commenting on the report, Peskov said: “You know, even the most provocative line aimed at escalating tensions has a fringe extremist flank. This idea probably comes from this fringe extremist flank.” The Russian presidential spokesman described the suggestion of transferring nuclear weapons to Ukraine as “absolutely irresponsible deliberations by people, who probably have a poor understanding… of reality, and who do not feel a shred of responsibility” for the consequences of their proposals. Peskov also noted that “all of these statements are anonymous.”
US lawmaker Marjorie Taylor Greene has also slammed the idea of providing Kiev with nuclear weapons, arguing that it would be “insane and completely unconstitutional, possibly an act of treason.” In a post on X, the representative for Georgia wondered whether the Biden administration is “trying to start a nuclear war and use it as the reason to stop the transfer of power to [President-elect Donald] Trump.”
On 27 November 2024, Fyodor Lukyanov, the editor-in-chief of Russia in Global Affairs, chairman of the Presidium of the Council on Foreign and Defense Policy, and research director of the Valdai International Discussion Club, wrote "The ongoing standoff over Ukraine is increasingly becoming a direct confrontation between Russia and NATO, raising serious concerns about the risk of nuclear escalation. In this new phase, both Moscow and the bloc’s leading members have nuclear capabilities, and how these powers communicate with each other has become crucial. The question is whether sufficient signals are being sent, red lines are being properly marked, and deterrence is being maintained....
"Deterrence relies on the credibility of threats. The opposing side must believe that they will be carried out if necessary. Yet, with this approach now in the public eye, decision-makers face additional challenges. Public opinion shapes policy in ways that can limit room for maneuver. Consequently, the risk is that leaders may feel forced to act on their threats, not necessarily because they want to, but to prove that they are credible.... The breakdown of private diplomacy and the rise of public threats have made the nuclear balance more precarious than ever. If the current trajectory continues, the risk of escalation will only grow, and the stability that once existed during the Cold War may seem like a distant memory."
On 29 November 2024, the Chinese Defense Ministry issued a statement confirming that, according to the annual cooperation plan between the two military forces, China and Russia’s air forces had organized the 9th joint air strategic patrol over relevant airspace in the Sea of Japan on that day. In June 2023, the joint air strategic patrol between China and Russia was divided into two phases for the first time, demonstrating their capability to execute strategic patrol missions tailored to operational needs.
Chinese military expert Zhang Junshe told the Global Times that the Sea of Japan, East China Sea, and the West Pacific airspace are considered the 'doorsteps' of China and Russia, and it is entirely reasonable for the two air forces to conduct joint strategic patrols in these regions. In the straits and waters where Chinese and Russian warplanes conducted patrols, such as the Miyako Strait, Tsushima Strait, and the West Pacific, all nations have the right to freedom of navigation and overflight, he said.
For joint air strategic patrols conducted by the air forces of China and Russia in the Sea of Japan and other waters, some foreign media outlets said the patrols may be aimed at countering the US’ plans to deploy intermediate-range missiles in Japan. For the first time during the latest patrol, China's air force used the H-6N strategic bomber. Zhang said that this deployment was based entirely on operational and training requirements. The H-6N is emblematic of the strategic transformation of the People’s Liberation Army Air Force and is capable of long-range operations. The joint flight of Chinese and Russian fighter jets over relevant straits and their advance into the Western Pacific for air strategic patrols has demonstrated and bolstered the two nations' capability for joint operations at sea.
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
