“‘Only A Madman Sitting In The White House Who Hates His Own Country’ Would Risk Condemning ‘Philadelphia, Boston, Or Los Angeles’ To ‘Nuclear Fire.’” — Sergey Karaganov, honorary chairman of the Presidium of Russia’s Council on Foreign and Defense Policy.

---

On September 26, 2023, renowned Russian academic Sergey Karaganov, who is honorary chairman of the Presidium of Russia’s Council on Foreign and Defense Policy, published an article titled “How to Prevent a Third World War” on the “Russia in Global Affairs” website.

The article follows an analysis that Karaganov published in mid-June, in the Russian media outlet Profil magazine, in which he stressed that more than 75 years of relative peace have made Western people forget the horrors of war and stop fearing nuclear weapons. Consequently, their instinct for self-preservation has weakened. “Therefore, it is necessary to arouse the instinct of self-preservation that the West has lost and convince it that its attempts to wear Russia out by arming Ukrainians are counterproductive for the West itself. “We will have to make nuclear deterrence a convincing argument again by lowering the threshold for the use of nuclear weapons set unacceptably high, and by rapidly but prudently moving up the deterrence-escalation ladder,” Karaganov said.

Concluding that Russia may take the “difficult but necessary decision,” to use nuclear weapons, Karaganov added: “For a quarter of a century, we did not listen to those who warned that NATO expansion would lead to war and tried to delay and ‘negotiate.’ As a result, we have got a severe armed conflict. The price of indecision now will be higher by an order of magnitude. But what if they do not back down? What if they have lost the instinct of self-preservation completely? In this case we will have to hit a bunch of targets in a number of countries in order to bring those who have lost their mind to reason. Morally, this is a terrible choice as we will use God’s weapon, thus dooming ourselves to grave spiritual losses. But if we do not do this, not only can Russia die, but most likely all of human civilization will cease to exist.”

In the following article, Karaganov stated: “If strikes – any strikes – are carried out on our territory or the territory of the Republic of Belarus, Americans and their allies should be aware of the fact that, of course, limited retaliatory strikes will follow on the territory of the United States and those countries that dare to attack. But, as I have made it clear many times, including in the previous article, only a madman sitting in the White House who hates his own country, along with a military willing to carry out such an order (which means they also hate their homeland), would risk condemning hypothetical Philadelphia, Boston, or Los Angeles to nuclear fire to confirm the bluff of ‘security guarantees’ for hypothetical Poznan, Klaipeda, Frankfurt, or Bucharest. I hope there are still no madmen in Paris and London. But what do their experts mean by threatening a massive strike on Russian armed forces? However, considering the trajectory of the evolution of Western elites, we may eventually see such madmen at the helm. This trajectory needs to be arrested soon before it is too late, and humanity plunges into a Third World War.”

---

Following is Karaganov’s article:

“In mid-June, I published an article titled ‘Nuclear weapons use can save humanity from global catastrophe’ in Profil magazine. It was posted in Russian and in English almost simultaneously on the Russia in Global Affairs journal’s website. It was widely reprinted around the world, sparking a tsunami of responses, objections, and debates, tens of thousands of reactions. There was also no shortage of words of support, either.

“I took the criticism coming from some of my compatriots calmly and with a healthy dose of humor. With joy and interest, I welcomed the feedback from my opponents. As a patriot of Russia and a responsible citizen of humanity, as well as an international scholar, I experienced a sense of satisfaction from the awareness that I was successfully performing my moral and professional duty.

“However, the work is just beginning.

“The Active Nuclear Deterrence/Intimidation/Sobering That I Propose Is Aimed Precisely At Preventing A Global Thermonuclear Conflict, And Preferably Any Use Of Nuclear Weapons”

“One of the intermediate goals of this article – which is to revive the discussion of the role of nuclear deterrence in preventing a major thermonuclear war, and a major war in general – has been partially achieved. The professional strategic community and the thinking public in general have started to move away from the lethargic slumber of ‘strategic parasitism.’

“This lethargy was induced by three-quarters of a century without a major war, which has led – primarily in the West, but even here in Russia – to a habit of peace, an assurance that everything will remain as is, and a dulled sense of self-preservation among a significant portion of the world’s elites. Actively opposing the threat of a major war, which almost inevitably would escalate into a nuclear Armageddon, has started to feel awkward and outdated.

“Later on, I will discuss another reason for the urgent need to step up nuclear deterrence which is the unfolding of a new phase of the arms race, which is potentially much more costly and dangerous than the one we saw during the years of the previous Cold War.

“I stand by every word written in the June article. I will reinforce certain arguments and introduce new ones that I did not raise last time in favor of a policy of intensifying nuclear deterrence/intimidation, and sobering up the adversary. But first, I will address the criticism.

“Responding to everyone, especially certain Russian voices, would be out of place. They do not warrant attention, particularly the outcry that I and those who agree with me were calling for the use of nuclear weapons. The active nuclear deterrence/intimidation/sobering that I propose is aimed precisely at preventing a global thermonuclear conflict, and preferably any use of nuclear weapons.

“In my heart, I partly understand the criticism coming from the people who say it cannot be, for it is too terrible to contemplate. But my mind rejects it. Pacifists, including nuclear pacifists, are able to live comfortably, sit and chat in cafes only because warriors fight for them and die. Just like our soldiers and officers are doing now in the fields of Ukraine.

“I am well aware of the theory that nuclear weapons, if used, would inevitably lead to global escalation and the demise of human civilization. Such a possibility does exist, and it should by no means be underestimated. However, without strengthening nuclear deterrence and restoring the fear of nuclear war, including a credible threat of limited use of nuclear weapons, a global war, given the trajectory of global developments, is practically inevitable.

“Yet the automatic escalation from limited nuclear weapon use to a global thermonuclear conflict is a myth. It certainly contradicts the actual plans for using nuclear weapons, as well as official doctrines. In the past, this myth was quite useful.

“Like other experts, I consciously participated in its creation during the Cold War. Inflating these ideas was intended to prevent any major war between nuclear states, although it would seem to contradict the logic of actual doctrines for the use of nuclear weapons. But this crucial function of nuclear deterrence – preventing any major war especially against major nuclear power – did not work. The West has effectively unleashed one.

“By Downplaying The Nuclear Threat, The American Deep State Is Giving Itself Carte Blanche To Conduct An Aggressive And Plainly Reckless Foreign Policy”

“The reaction of officials and semi-officials and experts in the United States was almost appalling. They continued to grossly downplay the likelihood of Russia using nuclear weapons. They keep saying, ‘No, they won’t use them.’ ‘Their (our – S.K.) doctrine (sic) does not provide for the use of nuclear weapons except in response to an attack against the territory of the Russian Federation or its allies or when the very existence of the state is under threat.’ And such a situation doesn’t seem to exist. Our frivolous, if, alas, not irresponsible, nuclear doctrine which was written in a different era in line with prevailing strategic theories (usually coming from the West), and apparently driven by a lingering desire from the past to please others, is being used as a pretext to wage an endless war against Russia to the last Ukrainian.

“Statements by the President, indicating the possibility of using nuclear weapons, are either silenced or ridiculed, and presented as hollow. It is absolutely clear that efforts are underway to politically and psychologically denuclearize Russia and to virtually deprive it of its nuclear weapons, since they failed to do so physically. Westerners are trying to make their latent economic advantage pay political dividends, to wear Russia out, and to provoke an internal split. I don’t pretend to be on the same level as the President, but even my modest article has been labelled as propaganda. It is not. It is an invitation to reflection.

“The downplaying of the threat of nuclear war to justify reckless policies and impose defeat on Russia has reached absurd proportions. US Secretary of State Antony Blinken ranks fourth in the presidential line of succession in case of the president’s death or incapacity to perform his duties. He had the following to say on 30July: ‘The potential threat of nuclear war is no more dangerous than the existential problem of climate change and there is no hierarchy in this regard.’ I was stunned. But it doesn’t end there. Speaking in Vietnam on September 10, President Biden said, ‘The only existential threat humanity faces even more frightening than a – than a nuclear war is global warming going above 1.5 degrees in the next 20 – 10 years…There’s no way back from that.’

“As a fellow citizen of the Earth, I am also concerned about climate change. Humanity will have to painfully adapt to it. But when this change is considered worse than a nuclear catastrophe which will destroy hundreds of millions of lives and undermine our species’ habitat, you understand that we are dealing with a dangerous… I will refrain from using the most fitting term. After all, we are talking about the leaders of a major nuclear power. The fear of nuclear weapons, or of nuclear war in general, must be restored without any further delay.

“Such statements strongly reinforce my arguments about the rapidly deteriorating Western elites’ need for a rude awakening. ‘Nuclear parasitism’ and the declining sense of self-preservation can be clearly seen in what the Westerners are doing and saying with regard to the Zaporozhye Nuclear Power Plant. The Kiev junta is bombing it, and we are repelling the attacks, but we see no protests, to say nothing of mass protests. They hope that if any of these attacks succeeds, small leaks and some casualties will ensue, but they will be able to blame Russia again; the world won’t collapse, and they will be able to go on with their insane policies. They no longer fear radiation, even though it was the most feared consequence of nuclear weapons in the public consciousness.

“A poll conducted by the supposedly reputable Pew Research Center in March showed that the Americans considered cyberattacks, fake news, China and Russia in general, global economic issues, infectious diseases, climate change, and only then nuclear war to be top threats.

“By downplaying the nuclear threat, the American deep state is giving itself carte blanche to conduct an aggressive and plainly reckless foreign policy.”

Read The Full Report

RELATED ARTICLE: Ukraine making few gains while suffering big losses

EDITORS NOTE: This MEMRI column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.