There was a time when it was taboo to talk about “nuclear war”. Even during the Cuban Missile Crisis, Khrushchev and Kennedy refused to discuss the possibility. But, in the XXIe century, international affairs seem to be characterized in some respects by an erasure of political norms. Today, any despot with the bomb and an atrabilairy temper can wave a nuclear Armageddon in the hope of covering up the odious enterprise – of whatever nature – in which he has embarked. .
How did we get there ? The answer is, once again, Vladimir Putin.
With him, the taboo was shattered. Henceforth, Russian television periodically evokes this perspective. Talk show host and Kremlin thurist Dmitri Kiselev talks happily about blowing up the UK. A Russian nuclear missile could “to flow [la Grande-Bretagne] once for all” or make one “radioactive desert”he thus warned this summer, with the weighting of which he is customary.
Of course, Kiselev has no control over the Kremlin’s nuclear policy – he’s a TV star. But as the de facto mouthpiece of the Kremlin, he would never have made such incendiary remarks without an official green light. There is another truth behind it. Russian military strategy in Ukraine is not a straight line. It evolved continuously with Moscow’s repeated defeats and was therefore struck not by method or foresight, but by emotion: in short, anger and an insatiable thirst for revenge.
Ukraine’s leaders are now considering nuclear war, or, perhaps a more realistic scenario, the use of a tactical nuclear bomb – loosely defined as an atomic weapon of limited power intended for use on the front lines near friendly forces – as a real risk. When I went there, at the beginning of the year, it was a fear that came back very
The rest is reserved for subscribers…
- Access all subscribed content
- Support independent writing
- Receive the Mail Alarm Clock every morning
Source of the article
UnHerd (London)Founded by conservative journalist Tim Montgomerie in 2017, UnHerd relies on a double play on words. The website is aimed at people who “refuse to follow the herd” (herdin English), and want “learn about ideas and people” unheard-of (unpublished). Described as “non-partisan”, the online media publishes articles by journalists, intellectuals, activists and political figures of all persuasions. UnHerd rejects the “news site” label and says to focus on “the important events, without the distractions”. Favoring the major philosophical questions arising from current events, UnHerd works on five major topics: capitalism, technology, peripheries, religion and single thought.
Read more
Nos services