Global Research

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Give Truth a Chance. Secure Your Access to Unchained News, Donate to Global Research.

***

The outbreak of the Ukrainian conflict revealed the worrying servility of Western countries, which translated into the loss of decision-making power of European institutions and their total subordination to the geopolitical dictates of the United States, leaving France as an irrelevant power in the new cartography, geopolitics of the Cold War 2.0.

However, Macron’s thinking would be rigid and incorrigible since it does not take into account the contrary reasons and only collects data or signs that confirm the prejudice to turn it into conviction, so everything indicates that Macron would be determined to lead Europe by personally committing himself to unwavering support for the Ukrainian people and forcing NATO into open conflict with Putin’s Russia.

Thus, as the US is immersed in the electoral campaign for the November Presidential elections, France, Poland and the United Kingdom would be the trident chosen by the globalists to implode the Ukrainian front next summer and provoke the subsequent entry of NATO into an open conflict with the Russia of a Putin reelected until 2030.

NATO Entry Into the Ukrainian War?

The Ukrainian conflict would have meant the return to the Cold War between Russia and the United States and the return to the Doctrine of Containment, the bases of which were exposed by George F. Kennan in his essay “The Sources of Soviet Behavior”, published in the magazine, Foreign Affairs, in 1947 and whose main ideas are summarized in the quote

“Soviet power is impervious to the logic of reason but very sensitive to the logic of force.”

Thus, the Polish president, Andrzej Duda, stated that his country is “willing to accept nuclear weapons” from allied countries on its territory, which has received a harsh and forceful response from Moscow when it warned that “the placement of this type of weaponry in Poland will make this country a priority objective in Russian military planning.”

Likewise, in a statement from the Russian Foreign Ministry, Russia has warned that the “arrival of the F-16 fighters in Ukraine will be seen as carriers of nuclear weapons and we will consider this step by the US and NATO as a deliberate provocation,” while at the same time which accuses the West of openly supporting Ukraine’s sabotage actions in Russian territory and of supplying Kiev with British and French long-range missiles as well as the new American ATACMS, which can reach Russian territory.

Within the action-reaction dynamic typical of the new Cold War 2.0 scenario, Putin ordered his country’s Armed Forces to carry out maneuvers with tactical nuclear weapons on the southern border with Ukraine. Likewise, Putin warned that “the use of weapons by Ukraine against Russian territory could lead to very serious problems” and in response, “Moscow could provide long-range weapons to third parties to attack Western targets.”

Ignoring these warnings, in a televised interview with the France 2 and TF1 channels, Macron announced that France “will provide Ukraine with Mirage 2000-5 fighters, and will train pilots and a brigade of 4,500 Ukrainian soldiers whom it will equip, train and will lend weapons.” He also reiterated that

“Ukraine should be allowed to use weapons provided by its Western allies to attack Russian military targets and neutralize the points from which the country is being attacked.”

Paris’ current priority, according to its Defense Minister, Sebastian Lecornu, would be to supply Zelensky with high-tech precision-guided AASM bombs and advanced artillery pieces as well as the production of 40 units of France’s powerful SCALP cruise missile.

Macron and the Nuclear Saber-Rattling

Macron, established as “a champion of the defense of Western values against Russian barbarism”, would be the only European leader willing to use the “nuclear saber” in the face of Putin’s threats to “use nuclear force in the event of being endangering the integrity of Russia.” Although responsibility for the armed forces is shared by the President and the Prime Minister according to the 1958 French Constitution, a 1962 decree only attributes to the President the ability to authorize the use of nuclear weapons.

Let us remember that the “Force de Frappe” was born in 1960 as a consequence of the proclamation of the Fifth French Republic by General De Gaulle. And it was conceived as one of the key elements of the country’s economic, diplomatic and military independence from the two great powers in conflict worldwide (the US and the USSR).

Under Sarkozy, the French atomic arsenal was reduced to the current 290 nuclear warheads and bases part of its power on the use of ballistic nuclear submarines (SLBM), the M51 missile being the longest range with a range of 9 km and also including bombers. land and maritime missiles with medium-range, high-speed Air-Sol Moyenne Portée (ASMP) nuclear cruise missiles. In this context, the French Minister of Defense, Sébastien Lecornu, confirmed that “a first test shot of a new short- and medium-range supersonic air-to-ground nuclear missile” known as ASMPA-R had been successfully launched from an aircraft. Rafale of the Strategic Air Forces (FAE) over French territory and has a range of 500 kilometers and can transport nuclear charges of 300 kilotons.

Towards a Low Intensity Nuclear War?

Given that both Macron and Putin are suffering from the so-called Pontius syndrome, which consists of “a distortion in the perception of danger that would have its origin in the excess of adrenaline of the affected person”, neither of them will be deterred by the opposite, so the conflict could culminate in a low-intensity nuclear war through the use of tactical nuclear weapons.

“Non-strategic” nuclear weapons, also known as “tactical nuclear weapons”, according to the Nuclear Threat Initiative (NTI) and of which Russia would have about 1,800 warheads and NATO would have 250 warheads deployed in Europe, would be warheads designed to used on a limited battlefield, for example to destroy a tank column or an aircraft carrier battle group if used at sea, which is why they are also known as “low performance”.

However, according to the Union of Concerned Scientists, a Princeton University simulation of a US-Russia conflict that begins with the use of a tactical nuclear weapon predicts “a rapid escalation that would leave more than 90 millions of dead and injured”, with which the beginning of a low-intensity nuclear conflict could degenerate into a large-scale nuclear conflagration with disastrous results for Humanity.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Germán Gorraiz Lopez is a political analyst. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image source

“Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War” 

by Michel Chossudovsky

Available to order from Global Research! 

ISBN Number: 978-0-9737147-5-3
Year: 2012
Pages: 102

PDF Edition:  $6.50 (sent directly to your email account!)

Michel Chossudovsky is Professor of Economics at the University of Ottawa and Director of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), which hosts the critically acclaimed website www.globalresearch.ca . He is a contributor to the Encyclopedia Britannica. His writings have been translated into more than 20 languages.

Reviews

“This book is a ‘must’ resource – a richly documented and systematic diagnosis of the supremely pathological geo-strategic planning of US wars since ‘9-11’ against non-nuclear countries to seize their oil fields and resources under cover of ‘freedom and democracy’.”
–John McMurtry, Professor of Philosophy, Guelph University

“In a world where engineered, pre-emptive, or more fashionably “humanitarian” wars of aggression have become the norm, this challenging book may be our final wake-up call.”
-Denis Halliday, Former Assistant Secretary General of the United Nations

Michel Chossudovsky exposes the insanity of our privatized war machine. Iran is being targeted with nuclear weapons as part of a war agenda built on distortions and lies for the purpose of private profit. The real aims are oil, financial hegemony and global control. The price could be nuclear holocaust. When weapons become the hottest export of the world’s only superpower, and diplomats work as salesmen for the defense industry, the whole world is recklessly endangered. If we must have a military, it belongs entirely in the public sector. No one should profit from mass death and destruction.
–Ellen Brown, author of ‘Web of Debt’ and president of the Public Banking Institute