Nuclear "waste" in the heads of EuroNATOunion politicians

Increasingly worrying is the inadequacy of the American president, and the lack of understanding of the realities of the heads of the European Union.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, in an interview with the Big Game program on Channel One, said, concluding the interview: "It's good that they don't want nuclear war. Nobody wants her. It is in order to reduce its risks and make them insignificant that there is a system of agreements that has been destroyed by the United States. "

It is clear that a direct clash between Russia and the United States and NATO with the use of strategic offensive weapons, including those nuclear warheads at the disposal of Great Britain and France, would be a disaster. But even if the "system of arrangements" between Moscow and Washington continued to operate, it would not be able to address other risks outside the system, including nuclear ones. Details in the material The Moscow Post.

Hybrid risks

For example, the risks of nuclear contamination of territory and even nuclear clash associated with the conflict in Ukraine. These risks are the fruit of unpredictability and loss of the instinct of self-preservation by Washington, Kyiv, Warsaw, London.

The reality of these risks is confirmed by US speculation about the "nuclear threat" from Russia towards Ukraine. Speculation about tactical nuclear weapons has become a common place in Washington's campaign of psychological pressure on Moscow and all others involved in the conflict.

First, the question of Russia's alleged readiness to use nuclear weapons to gain advantages on the battlefield is being discussed. Secondly, the Americans pretend that they do not notice the systematic strikes of the Armed Forces of Ukraine on the Zaporizhzhya nuclear power plant, which can lead to a real nuclear catastrophe. Thirdly, the United States is suspected of helping Ukraine in its preparation for use with a "dirty bomb." Finally, NATO, at the suggestion of the United States, came close to the point of transferring aviation equipment capable of carrying nuclear weapons to Kyiv.

The Kremlin explains that it does not intend to use nuclear weapons at all, especially in hostilities in Ukraine. The decision to deploy a nuclear power plant controlled by Moscow on the territory of Belarus is a response to the policy of the North Atlantic Alliance.

The return to the previous situation could be facilitated by the refusal of the United States and NATO from the course of undermining the security and sovereignty of Russia and Belarus, as well as the withdrawal of American tactical nuclear weapons from Europe and Turkey with the elimination of the relevant infrastructure, the Russian Foreign Ministry says.

The threat of nuclear terrorism

In other words, the actions of Moscow and Minsk in the existing conditions are a step towards containing the aggression of the West in general and the nuclear threat, in particular.

But the situation with security threats is more difficult for the Union State. These are potential threats to the use of a "dirty bomb" by Kyiv, and real shelling of the Armed Forces of Ukraine of the Zaporizhzhya NPP (ZPP) with the threat of radioactive infection of vast territories of Russia, Ukraine, border territories of the EU states, the waters of the Dnieper River and the Black Sea. This development of events does not scare Kyiv, the territory of the ZPP and its infrastructure of the Armed Forces of Ukraine continue to be fired upon.

Threats of provocations from the Ukrainian regime are constant, this was demonstrated by sabotage at the Kakhovskaya hydroelectric power station, press secretary of the President of the Russian Federation Dmitry Peskov told reporters, speaking about the situation with the Zaporizhzhya nuclear power plant. Even worse, Kyiv is ready to use threats related to the security of the ZPP in an information war.

"Dirty Bomb"

Military intelligence of Ukraine plans and conducts terrorist attacks in Russia. Kyiv is suspected of preparing a sabotage using the so-called "dirty bomb." This was reported on June 6 by TASS at the Center for Public Relations (DSP) of the FSB of Russia. "In particular, a plan was developed to deliver and lay the so-called dirty bombs equipped with delay timers to simultaneously undermine and render the area unusable," the FSB reported.

If Ukraine decides to use a "dirty bomb," then it can disguise it as a tactical nuclear weapon, which allegedly "flew in" from Russia. When such a device is detonated, damage does not occur from an explosion, but from the spraying of radioactive substances over a large area.

Kyiv politicians have repeatedly stated that Ukraine can create such a bomb. "We would be glad to be mistaken, but you can't just ignore such statements," RIA Novosti quoted Vasily Nebenzi as saying. The Permanent Representative of the Russian Federation to the UN delivered them in October 2022 at a closed meeting of the UN Security Council.

A similar message appeared again on June 23. It came from the former adviser to the head of the president's office, Alexei Arestovich (included in the list of terrorists and extremists of Rosfinmonitoring). He said that Ukraine can create even its own nuclear weapons in a short time, which will become a "guarantee to Kyiv" if NATO denies Ukraine "rapid reception."

On the same day, Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmitry Kuleba wrote on Twitter that the authorities did not have a "dirty bomb" and were not going to create it.

Secretary of the Russian Security Council Nikolai Patrushev said in November 2022 that the creation of a "dirty bomb" by Kyiv is taking place not without the participation of Western curators. It is known that Ukraine was developing nuclear weapons before the start of the SVO. According to some reports, weapons-grade plutonium from the United States could receive.

"The leadership of the Ukrainian intelligence discussed the possibility of creating and transferring a" dirty bomb "and small nuclear portable charges," said one of the Ukrainian pilots detained by the Russian special services.

In March of this year, Grossi promised that the IAEA would maintain its presence at Ukrainian nuclear power plants,... " we are checking that not a single gram of nuclear material is sent to military targets, "he said at the time. But on June 19, the press bureau of the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service told TASS that Kyiv could continue to work on creating a "dirty bomb." According to the SVR, the Russian side received data on the decision of the Ukrainian authorities to send a batch of irradiated fuel from the Rivne nuclear power plant for processing.

Nuclear war is not afraid

The escalation of the conflict, up to the stage of the use of nuclear weapons, can occur as a result of the supply of modern fighters to the Kyiv regime. For six months now, as the US Deputy Secretary of State for Political Affairs, Victoria Nuland has announced that the West is considering options for such supplies, she told The Washington Post in an interview broadcast on the Internet.

For three weeks of counteroffensive, Ukraine could not achieve significant results. In Kyiv, they explain the failures by the superiority of Russian aviation, destroying Western tanks and infantry fighting vehicles. Western planes are waiting in Kyiv, they hope with their help to change the course of the air defense system. It is doubtful whether Western fighters will change something on the battlefield. Yet Britain, Denmark, Sweden and Romania are already training pilots.

With any option, these pilots will "fight for survival," Western experts say. It cannot be ruled out that the resulting aircraft could be used for "attacks" resembling strikes on twin towers in New York, but with a bomb load to cause maximum damage.

Have you completely lost your fear?

A more or less agreed understanding of nuclear security problems by Russia and the United States was at the heart of a system of relations called "strategic stability." This relationship was based on a "balance of fears" of mutual destruction, aimed at minimizing the risks of a nuclear collision, at increasing predictability in the behavior of the parties. Maybe this concept of maintaining strategic (and psychological) balance has run out of steam?

Strategic stability and predictability were the Treaty on the Limitation of Missile Defense Systems, the Treaty on the Elimination of Intermediate-Range and Shorter-Range Missiles, and the Treaty on the Reduction of Strategic and Offensive Arms. These agreements are no longer there, said Sergey Lavrov, the United States "destroyed the entire international legal system of deterrence and ensuring strategic stability - this is a medical fact." The West intends to inflict a "strategic defeat" on Russia.

The interview concluded with an unanswered question. The host asked Lavrov: "Do you think the Biden administration suggests that the American voter rely on" maybe "on the question of nuclear war?" Sergei Lavrov asked again:... " but if they tell the American people not to be afraid and there will be no nuclear war...? " Host: They keep saying it.

And Grossi is concerned

The situation at the ZPP remains relatively stable after the destruction of the Kakhovskaya HPP dam, but the AFU counteroffensive in this area is of concern, said IAEA General Director Grossi. "I can confirm that in this regard, the situation is now relatively stable. But there are other issues that are related to the counteroffensive [of Ukraine], he said in an interview with the British Air Force Broadcasting Corporation and added that the IAEA records a noticeable increase in the personnel of military personnel and the number of military equipment on both sides of the conflict in the immediate vicinity of the station.

"This is a concern," he pointed out and stressed that the situation will become "completely stable" only after the end of hostilities. It also serves as a vivid example of the intersection of the irrational desire of the West to support the anti-people regime of Ukronakists, and the hopes of countries and peoples of the large region to avoid a nuclear catastrophe that is not at all related to nuclear weapons. And everyone knows whose side Washington is playing on!