Considering that Russia is performing very well in its “race of logistics” with NATO, the US would certainly respond to the nuking of its NATO allies, and diplomatic options for relieving the US’ proxy war pressure haven’t yet been exhausted, there’s no reason for Russia to risk World War III by nuking Europe.
"...options for relieving the US’ proxy war pressure haven’t yet been exhausted..."
That's why this is being addressed now — before it's too late.
"...a deeply respected intellectual..."
A Russian John Bolton, in other words, bearing in mind being Russian imbues him with a perspective very different from one which Mr Bolton may enjoy (or indulge); he's respected to a similar degree, wouldn't it be fair to say?
"...instead of letting it possibly turn into yet another so-called ‘forever war’."
Sounds like the finest intention in the world to me; so, considering it is well worthy of any discomfort doing so may cause.
"According to him, his country must absolutely achieve its special operation’s security-related goals..."
Well, there's absolutely no doubt about the veracity of that statement!
"... which can only be accomplished by stopping the never-ending influx of Western arms into Ukraine."
And he's pretty close to the mark — spot on — with this one, as well. Two out of two ain't bad — a damn good start.
"...the only way to do this, Karaganov believes."
I don't think he does believe that. I think he's being deliberately disingenuous ('disingenuous' being deliberate by definition).
"...not only may Russia perish, but most likely the whole of human civilization will end.”"
Three out of three... Certainly is on the right track.
"...has therefore convinced himself..."
There are those who can see things most others struggle with. Stoltenberg isn't one of them.
"...it’s of existential importance for humanity..."
Four out of four; you can't get much better than that!
"...it’s not necessary to risk..."
No, I'm sure he knows that. That's the disingenuous aspect of this work: I don't believe he genuinely thinks, nor has he convinced himself, that taking out half a dozen big EU cities is the way to go in the first instance. But everyone should have that in mind as a possibility.
"...there’s no reason to expect his country to lose its competitive edge anytime soon."
Not soon, but it will eventually. This is the nature of the beast: its economy thrives on war. Russia's doesn't. Yes, we've got the momentum at the moment because we're doing what's right and no-one can get away with being wilfully ignorant enough to ignore that. In a couple of years, however, when the deranged and rabid NATO war-dog mentality begins to catch up... That would be when it would start to become increasingly difficult for Russia to maintain momentum. The momentum is with us NOW. THIS is the time to act.
"And finally, the last argument is..."
...very weak. Not only is India neither experienced nor strong enough to assume the role it might be cast into in a fantasy world, but: 1) it's neither genuinely interested nor invested in taking on that role; 2) it's political system doesn't ensure long-term stability; so a colour revolution, or simply voters' fancy, could destabilise any position of authority it might manage to assume in such a fantasy role; 3) any compromise the US might pretend to make under such circumstances would only be made in the knowledge that, being premised on India's stability, it may soon be unmade.
"...the US would certainly respond to the nuking of its NATO allies..."
True, but I don't think the US (NATO) would be nuked in the first instance. I think what's happening here is an interesting result of accusatory inversion. The Russians are assuming the justification the Americans used to atomise Japanese cities in '45: reducing loss of life. The difference is the truth: the Americans were lying — they did it to stop the Soviet Union participating in Japan's reconstruction. The Russians aren't lying: they need to do it to save — their soldiers', among many others' — lives. The really funny part is the twist that makes it all so poignant (for the Americans): had they (the Americans) not declared their intention to defeat and divide Russia by using little manageable 'small nukes' in their recent 'defence' re-formulation (I've forgotten what it was called and when they came up with it; wan't it some sort of 'initiative' in 2018?) it would never have occurred to the Russians that what they need to do now might work. Accusatory inversion being what it is, they're going to use small nukes to secure the Ukraine and begin negotiations for its future, once they're firmly established in Lvov, and throughout the rest of the 'country'. The Americans are right: it's the only way (for the Russians, ironically) to go. And, when they do, everyone will be bloody grateful that's what they've done, because otherwise they might have had to vaporise half a dozen important EU cities, which would have run the risk of far more damaging results, apart from having vaporised millions of EU citizens. That's what this article in RT is telling us (although I can't see it because we're not allowed to view RT in the UK): be bloody grateful the Russians are sensible enough to make timely use of nukes in the Ukraine.
This being the case, for the first time in my life, I see hope for bringing an end to the scourge of nuclear fear, as it has plagued humanity since the Americans used it to build their post-war world in 1945.
"...as a last resort out of self-defense to ensure its survival..."
Yeah... Best not to wait that long. Куй пока горячо!
"...Karaganov’s latest article could still serve a positive purpose..."
Ah-ha, you see: you DO get it.
"The best-case scenario is that perceptions [...] might also gradually change..."
No, fuck 'em! They had their chance. They blew it.
"They’d likely wait until the end of the year..."
Patience is a virtue, but virtuosity has its limits.
"...Russian policymakers shouldn’t think that nuking Europe will relieve the US’ proxy war pressure..."
I don't believe they do. I think they're miles ahead of us, thanks to the Americans lack of vision.
"Hopefully Russian policymakers pay no heed to Karaganov’s..."
Oh, I'm sure they do; at least, I HOPE they do. But not as you perceive it.
The very first low yield bomb deployed even against a largely unmanned military target, like an EMP directed against an enemy’s Command-and-Control communications system, will trigger an irreversible nuclear escalation. This will lead to the deaths of innocent billions while the worst actors in history sit it all out safely in their deep underground bunkers.
No, there is no safety, not even in the Pentagon's bunkers. They know that. That's why they won't object to the Russians using small nukes to fix the problem there's already now no other way to address.
"...the US would certainly respond..."
Depends on circumstances.
"...options for relieving the US’ proxy war pressure haven’t yet been exhausted..."
That's why this is being addressed now — before it's too late.
"...a deeply respected intellectual..."
A Russian John Bolton, in other words, bearing in mind being Russian imbues him with a perspective very different from one which Mr Bolton may enjoy (or indulge); he's respected to a similar degree, wouldn't it be fair to say?
"...instead of letting it possibly turn into yet another so-called ‘forever war’."
Sounds like the finest intention in the world to me; so, considering it is well worthy of any discomfort doing so may cause.
"According to him, his country must absolutely achieve its special operation’s security-related goals..."
Well, there's absolutely no doubt about the veracity of that statement!
"... which can only be accomplished by stopping the never-ending influx of Western arms into Ukraine."
And he's pretty close to the mark — spot on — with this one, as well. Two out of two ain't bad — a damn good start.
"...the only way to do this, Karaganov believes."
I don't think he does believe that. I think he's being deliberately disingenuous ('disingenuous' being deliberate by definition).
"...not only may Russia perish, but most likely the whole of human civilization will end.”"
Three out of three... Certainly is on the right track.
"...has therefore convinced himself..."
There are those who can see things most others struggle with. Stoltenberg isn't one of them.
"...it’s of existential importance for humanity..."
Four out of four; you can't get much better than that!
"...it’s not necessary to risk..."
No, I'm sure he knows that. That's the disingenuous aspect of this work: I don't believe he genuinely thinks, nor has he convinced himself, that taking out half a dozen big EU cities is the way to go in the first instance. But everyone should have that in mind as a possibility.
"...there’s no reason to expect his country to lose its competitive edge anytime soon."
Not soon, but it will eventually. This is the nature of the beast: its economy thrives on war. Russia's doesn't. Yes, we've got the momentum at the moment because we're doing what's right and no-one can get away with being wilfully ignorant enough to ignore that. In a couple of years, however, when the deranged and rabid NATO war-dog mentality begins to catch up... That would be when it would start to become increasingly difficult for Russia to maintain momentum. The momentum is with us NOW. THIS is the time to act.
"And finally, the last argument is..."
...very weak. Not only is India neither experienced nor strong enough to assume the role it might be cast into in a fantasy world, but: 1) it's neither genuinely interested nor invested in taking on that role; 2) it's political system doesn't ensure long-term stability; so a colour revolution, or simply voters' fancy, could destabilise any position of authority it might manage to assume in such a fantasy role; 3) any compromise the US might pretend to make under such circumstances would only be made in the knowledge that, being premised on India's stability, it may soon be unmade.
"...the US would certainly respond to the nuking of its NATO allies..."
True, but I don't think the US (NATO) would be nuked in the first instance. I think what's happening here is an interesting result of accusatory inversion. The Russians are assuming the justification the Americans used to atomise Japanese cities in '45: reducing loss of life. The difference is the truth: the Americans were lying — they did it to stop the Soviet Union participating in Japan's reconstruction. The Russians aren't lying: they need to do it to save — their soldiers', among many others' — lives. The really funny part is the twist that makes it all so poignant (for the Americans): had they (the Americans) not declared their intention to defeat and divide Russia by using little manageable 'small nukes' in their recent 'defence' re-formulation (I've forgotten what it was called and when they came up with it; wan't it some sort of 'initiative' in 2018?) it would never have occurred to the Russians that what they need to do now might work. Accusatory inversion being what it is, they're going to use small nukes to secure the Ukraine and begin negotiations for its future, once they're firmly established in Lvov, and throughout the rest of the 'country'. The Americans are right: it's the only way (for the Russians, ironically) to go. And, when they do, everyone will be bloody grateful that's what they've done, because otherwise they might have had to vaporise half a dozen important EU cities, which would have run the risk of far more damaging results, apart from having vaporised millions of EU citizens. That's what this article in RT is telling us (although I can't see it because we're not allowed to view RT in the UK): be bloody grateful the Russians are sensible enough to make timely use of nukes in the Ukraine.
This being the case, for the first time in my life, I see hope for bringing an end to the scourge of nuclear fear, as it has plagued humanity since the Americans used it to build their post-war world in 1945.
"...as a last resort out of self-defense to ensure its survival..."
Yeah... Best not to wait that long. Куй пока горячо!
"...Karaganov’s latest article could still serve a positive purpose..."
Ah-ha, you see: you DO get it.
"The best-case scenario is that perceptions [...] might also gradually change..."
No, fuck 'em! They had their chance. They blew it.
"They’d likely wait until the end of the year..."
Patience is a virtue, but virtuosity has its limits.
"...Russian policymakers shouldn’t think that nuking Europe will relieve the US’ proxy war pressure..."
I don't believe they do. I think they're miles ahead of us, thanks to the Americans lack of vision.
"Hopefully Russian policymakers pay no heed to Karaganov’s..."
Oh, I'm sure they do; at least, I HOPE they do. But not as you perceive it.
The very first low yield bomb deployed even against a largely unmanned military target, like an EMP directed against an enemy’s Command-and-Control communications system, will trigger an irreversible nuclear escalation. This will lead to the deaths of innocent billions while the worst actors in history sit it all out safely in their deep underground bunkers.
"...will trigger an irreversible nuclear escalation."
No, it won't.
"...safely in their deep underground bunkers."
No, there is no safety, not even in the Pentagon's bunkers. They know that. That's why they won't object to the Russians using small nukes to fix the problem there's already now no other way to address.