FLASH
Shkruar nga Slavoj Žižek
They will use all methods at their disposal in this conflict, including nuclear weapons, to achieve their goals.
Nuclear war is the "inevitable" end of the Russian occupation of Ukraine. This is what the retired major general and simultaneously the author of the "Russian war bible", Alexander Vladimirov, said during an interview with journalist Vladislav Shurygin and which was reported by the British tabloid The Daily Mail.
" For the transition to the use of weapons of mass destruction, only one thing is needed - a political decision by the Supreme Commander-in-Chief, Vladimir Putin. The goals of Russia and the goals of the West are their historical survival and eternity," he declared .
According to him, this means that they will use all the methods at their disposal in this conflict, including nuclear weapons, to achieve their goals.
"I am sure that nuclear weapons will be used in this war - inevitably, and from this, neither we nor the enemy have anywhere to go ," he added.
But is Vladimirov asking a highly influential person in Russia to somehow exalt a (self-destructive, murderous) passion by couching it in vague terms like "historical eternity."
His pronouncement should not be dismissed as a mere lie, or a strategic threat. Even if implied as such, Vladimirov's prophecy has its own internal logic. He abandons the idea of Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD), which ensured that we avoided nuclear catastrophe throughout the Cold War, instead portraying the destruction of both sides as inevitable because "neither we nor the enemy we have nowhere to go."
It is not about determining who is to blame, because this is about destiny, about a life and death struggle.
Then there is the claim that "Russia's goals and the West's goals are their historical survival and perpetuity." What does the strange phrase "historical eternity" mean here? This implies that, as Vladimirov sees it, both countries face drastic existential choices: as if Ukraine and Russia were fighting for their survival, and therefore had no other way out than nuclear war.
What can we do?
First, we need to examine it closely so that we can identify signs that may point in a different direction from the oversimplified result that Vladimirov presented.
The only approach that combines principles and pragmatism is to consider Russia's nuclear threat but ignore it at the level of diplomacy and military strategy. The worst option would be to give in to Russia's attempts to intimidate, to argue that we should try to avoid provoking Russia.
We simply need to continue to support Ukraine, while at the same time making it clear that no one is trying to annex any part of Russian territory. Russia must be forced into a position where it is clear that if it uses nuclear weapons, it has chosen to do so of its own free will, not in response to a threat to its territorial integrity./ Adapted Pamphlet from WorldCrunch "
Lini një Përgjigje