The idea that installing U.S. missiles in Germany would scare Russia into submission is flawed. The notion underestimates the scale of nuclear warfare, where Russia, with its superior arsenal, could obliterate Europe before any retaliation. Additionally, the U.S. would prioritize its survival over defending Europe in a nuclear conflict, rendering the threat ineffective and dangerous.
* * *
Starting in 2026, the United States will place its most sophisticated missiles in Germany to threaten Russia. According to NATO and its propagandists, this is a smart move. They believe that Russia will be so frightened that its generals will submit to all Western decisions, including Ukraine’s entry into NATO. This theory, which I call the “absolute madness theory” for convenience, suggests that every time Russia needs to make a decision, Putin will gather his generals and say, “Yes, okay, but let’s be careful because Germany has American missiles aimed at us.” Unfortunately, this theory is completely wrong. Given the enormity of the dangers, I will try to speak as simply and clearly as possible. There are two problems.
The first problem concerns nuclear war. Many applaud the absolute madness theory because they imagine nuclear war between Europe and Russia as an orderly exchange – “one at a time” – meaning that Russia launches a nuclear warhead against Germany, then Germany launches a nuclear warhead against Russia, then Russia launches another nuclear warhead against Germany, and so on. This erroneous way of imagining nuclear war between Russia and Europe explains why NATO propagandists always say: “If Putin tries to hit a European country with nuclear warheads, Russia will be incinerated.” Let’s reason. The only European Union country with nuclear warheads is France, which only has 290. Russia has 6,000. A nuclear war between Russia and Europe would happen like this: Russia conducts a single nuclear attack on all European NATO countries that possess nuclear warheads without giving them the chance to retaliate.
The second problem concerns the reaction of the United States. NATO propagandists say: “Yes, it’s true, the European Union only has 290 nuclear warheads and Russia has 6,000. But the United States would strike Russia with their nuclear warheads, balancing the disparity.” Too bad the United States would never use nuclear warheads against Russia to defend a European country. If Italy were hit by Russia’s nuclear warheads, the United States would not respond by hitting Russian territory with its own nuclear warheads since, in the event of a nuclear war, the main objective of the United States would not be the protection of Italy but its own survival. Nuclear war would indeed change the entire scale of the White House’s strategic priorities. In our time, which is a time without nuclear war, the control of American bases in Italy is an absolute priority for the United States. However, if a nuclear war with Russia broke out, the control of those bases would lose importance. The United States would have the supreme goal of its own survival. American generals would reason: “Let Italy go to ruin. We Americans must only think about not being hit by Russia’s atomic bombs.” I hope I have explained why it is pure madness to think of scaring Russia by installing long-range American missiles capable of carrying nuclear warheads in Germany. If Russia feels that its existence is threatened by Europe, it will hit Europe with such a large number of nuclear warheads that it will prevent them from reacting. On the other hand, Europe would never strike Russia first with nuclear warheads given the immense disparity between the arsenals. Therefore, the first move would always be Russia’s. And Russia has 6,000 nuclear warheads. Its first move would certainly be decisive.
Il Fatto Quotidiano, July 18, 2024
