Aug 25, 2022
0 0

Kyiv inspired: London threatened Russia with an atomic bomb

Pictured: British Foreign Secretary Liz Truss

Pictured: British Foreign Secretary Liz Truss (Photo: AP/TASS)

UK Foreign Secretary Liz Trussinvolved in a fierce struggle for the premiership of the country, said that if necessary, she would be ready to press the button to launch nuclear missiles. In her opinion, this is an important duty of the prime minister. She’s ready to do it, Truss said during a speech in Birmingham when asked how she “would feel about it.”

In Britain, the fifth round of voting by members of parliament from the Conservative Party has passed to elect a leader who will automatically become prime minister. Two candidates reached the final of the election race, including Liz Truss.

Deputy Director of the Taurida Information and Analytical Center RISS Sergey Ermakov recalls that the defense strategy of this country very clearly states that the UK is a NATO country, and its nuclear forces are one of the elements of the “nuclear deterrence” of the alliance:

– This is now fixed in their foundations “Strategic Concept”. It is clear that it is Russia that has been declared the main adversary for NATO, and hence the UK. There is no need to guess that nuclear weapons are really directed against our country, and if they are used, then against us. So far, not even against China – in the future, maybe, but so far the goals have been defined.

We are seeing how Britain is increasingly betting on the so-called “nuclear deterrence”. This includes raising the ceiling on permissible nuclear warheads, and strategic policy support, expressed in the concept of “global Britain”. We see that in fact all this talk about the “nuclear button”, “nuclear deterrence” is just a return to the strategy of something in between “flexible response” and “massive retaliation”.

And American allies in Europe have so far declared that they are ready to use nuclear weapons if necessary. That’s how their “nuclear deterrence” works – it’s a matter of trust. The number of weapons themselves is not so important for the British, because it is clear: they do not want to use them. These are simply displays of determination, given that Britain, by and large, still relies on the US nuclear umbrella.

If we are talking about the nuclear potential of Britain, then it should be noted that they do not have a full cycle of creating nuclear weapons, the Britons are largely dependent on the United States.

“SP”: – But maybe then little depends on Liz Truss and the NATO command itself will give all the necessary orders – in which case?

— No, NATO is acting here as an organization that does not itself decide on the use of nuclear weapons. It is just the strategy within NATO that works when the nuclear forces of Britain, France and the United States are ready to support their allies. They call it the “nuclear shield of the planet.”

France’s position has its own nuances. And the current position of the UK is that London supports the United States and NATO in their confrontational course, which is being developed at the moment. Therefore, there are assurances of loyalty to their allies.

Britain is now playing an increasing role within NATO. Leaving the European Union, this country wanted to improve its status. In fact, it is she who, among the rest of the allies, plays the role of America’s main stronghold within the framework of their special relationship.

It is Britain that is currently ready to provide guarantees to Finland and Sweden “if suddenly”, as they believe, they are “attacked by the Russian Armed Forces.” Militant statements are just designed to show that Britain has what is called “the hand will not waver.” Otherwise, there will be no confidence in the policy of the aforementioned “containment”.

As for nuclear weapons in general, no one really knows what their limited use will lead to.

“SP: – That is, will a chain reaction begin, will answers follow?

The question is natural: will a minor nuclear charge, used once, provoke a serious nuclear conflict?

The nuclear potential of Britain is much inferior to Russia’s, and here, of course, no threats can follow us. The main thing here is to convince everyone of their determination and once again demonstrate to the United States the desire to follow in their wake.

Well, plus a personal one – Liz Truss is aiming for a serious post and once again says that she is an “iron lady” and, in which case, she can make a serious decision.

“SP”: – On their part, everything is exaggeratedly serious. But with ours – everything is turned into a joke. Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova wrote on her Telegram channel that the statement by Foreign Secretary and candidate for British Prime Minister Liz Truss could be a perfect start for a new comedy series about super spy Austin Powers. Shouldn’t the response of our Foreign and Defense Ministries be more serious?

– I think on our part they understand that all these statements are more “for internal use.” Yes, we can perceive everything with a bit of irony, but in principle we take this seriously.

In the strategy of containment, the main thing is endurance. The main thing is not to go to extremes and respond adequately. At the level of the Foreign Ministry, Maria Zakharova demonstrates irony, and those who need it draw their own conclusions and then calculate what strategy needs to be built …

Liz Truss’s rival for the post of prime minister is an ethnic Hindu, the former head of the Treasury Rishi Sunak – another “man of mystery of international proportions”, if you recall the above-named comedy about spies. But now a woman can play him, notes a witty Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman. Although not a fact.

In the last round, the British will have to choose the winner from these two. Only members of the Tory Conservative Party, of which today there are about two hundred thousand, will be chosen, and voting will take place by mail.

And all because Boris Johnson “resigned” from the post of Prime Minister and head of the Conservative Party of Great Britain. The Conservatives had to elect a new leader after the scandal over the appointment of the former British Deputy Foreign Secretary for European and US Affairs Christopher Pinchera to a new position. He turned out to be one of the harassers, and Johnson knew about this harassment. He apologized, but about sixty members of the government and party functionaries resigned in protest.

Already the current Minister of Defense of Britain scared Russia with an atomic bomb. The Free Press wrote what will remain of London, Manchester, Liverpool when our nuclear “response” arrives there? Nothing will be left.

Political scientist, professor, dean of the Faculty of Social Sciences of the Financial University Alexander Shatilov suggests that Liz Truss may have had certain critical days:

“Still, she has entered an age when ill-conceived statements happen. But fortunately, both Britain and the US have a system for making decisions about the use of nuclear weapons. It is very complicated, but it is guaranteed from the emotions of politicians. Even if Liz Truss wants to use nuclear weapons, she will not be allowed to do so until the will of the top curators.

In the West, there is a complex system of power hierarchy. There are both formal and informal leaders of the supranational level. Fortunately, politicians like Boris Johnson or Liz Truss are not in charge of making decisions.

Another thing is that now Liz Truss is being presented as such an agitator, who is called upon to “press” Russia with serious statements on the principle of “threat over execution.” Plus, it is designed to inspire a somewhat despondent Ukrainian elite, counting on much moreaboutmore support from the West.

Such statements are intended to support optimism in Ukrainian society, especially among the elite, who are saddened by not seeing a favorable end to hostilities. Therefore, such statements will be distributed more and more often. The West, of course, will, as they say, “give us a pig” one after another. But in order for the West to directly enter into hostilities, not to mention the use of nuclear weapons, it seems to me that things will not come to that in the near future …

In general, nine countries are members of the nuclear club. The United States with Russia, as well as Great Britain, France, Israel, on the one hand, and on the other, China, North Korea. Somewhere in between is India. All over thirteen thousand warheads. But Russia and the US control roughly 90% of the military arsenal, with 11,000 warheads between them.

Britain has possessed nuclear weapons since 1952 and theoretically could compete with France, which has had an atomic bomb since 1960 – their nuclear forces are approximately equal. And the British Queen has 188,000 soldiers under arms. Their number is comparable to the limited contingent, the personnel involved in the special operation to denazify and demilitarize Ukraine.

Article Categories:

Leave a Reply