Yabloko party leaders on the real threat of nuclear war and the only way to prevent it

Press Release, 23.11.2024

Photo by Global Look Press/MOD Russia

In recent days, the escalation of the military conflict between Russia and Ukraine has reached a new level. The United States and European countries have allowed Ukraine to use long-range precision weapons deep into Russia’s territory. The first strikes on the territories of the Kursk region and the Bryansk region were recorded on 19 November and 21 November. In response to this, Putin approved changes to Russia’s nuclear doctrine, after which the territory of Ukraine was hit by the latest medium-range missile Oreshnik, capable of carrying a nuclear charge. The Kremlin called the launch a demonstration of a possible response to the West. Putin said during his special address that strikes on targets in the countries supplying weapons to Ukraine are possible.

The leaders of the Yabloko party note that the threat of a nuclear war is stronger than ever since the start of hostilities between Russia and Ukraine, and that the only way to stop the escalation is to immediately conclude a ceasefire agreement.

Lev Shlosberg, Deputy Chairman of Yabloko:

Escalation cannot be endless. Each side has a set of initially known actions at hand, which is gradually being used up. The escalation can result either in a retreat from the abyss or a pull of the emergency stop valves. The events have been developing according to the second option so far. There is little time left before the end, because both sides are close to exhausting their escalation ammunition. Two or three more steps – and the parties will unseal nuclear weapons. Perhaps not in the form of a military strike at first, but in the form of a test, but the barrier for a nuclear attack will be overcome. From here on out there will be only one option left – a global war.

We are at the final stage of escalation, which began with a misunderstanding of the risks and consequences of the collapse of the USSR. The windows of opportunity for harmonising the world order and creating a new global system of world security were missed first in the late 1980s, then in the early 1990s, and after that in the early 2000s. The entire history of the first quarter of the 21st century, except for its very beginning, is a history of the accumulation of negative political energy, which both Russia and the United States understood as a sign of strength: the more we can destroy, the more damage we can inflict on the enemy, the stronger we are.

Ukraine has become a territory of discord not only because of Crimea, the Black Sea Fleet and the conditions of gas transit. Ukraine has turned out to be the quintessence of the political problems of the former USSR: historical roots, intersection of cultures, Soviet inertia, post-Soviet syndrome, the choice of a military bloc (that is, a side in a probable future war) or a non-aligned status, directions of economic integration, the crisis of elites, the risks of nationalism, and migration problems.

After the start of the escalation (it can be counted from the election of Viktor Yushchenko in Ukraine in 2004), the fight for Ukraine took on an existential nature for both the United States and Western countries, as well as for Russia. The fight is for a new global world order, not for Ukraine as such. That is why the stakes are higher than peace.

Participants in the escalation expect that their next move will exhaust the enemy’s capabilities and force them to stop. However, each time it turns out that there is no bottom for escalation. Escalation releases the energy of destruction.

The 2024 escalation began with the entry of the Ukrainian Armed Forces into the internationally recognised territory of Russia on 6 August. Russia announced a revision of its nuclear doctrine, adding obligations regarding Belarus. The United States, Germany and France allowed Ukraine to use long-range high-precision weapons against targets on Russian territory. Ukraine used these weapons against targets in the Kursk and Bryansk regions on 19 November and 21 November. On 19 November, Putin approved a new nuclear doctrine. On 21 November, Russia used the latest medium-range missile Oreshnik at a target in Ukraine. Putin said that strikes on targets in those countries that allow their weapons to be used against targets in Russia are possible, and that strikes will be announced in advance.

Not just a hot, but a burning ball is now on the side of the US and NATO. What is left in their arsenal? Deployment of nuclear weapons in non-nuclear countries of Europe? Sending NATO military units directly to Ukraine? Closing the skies over Ukraine (which is equivalent to NATO directly entering the military hostilities)?

There are only a few steps left before nuclear weapons tests, the rupture of the treaty banning nuclear weapons tests in the atmosphere, outer space and under water, the final collapse of the international nuclear safety system and the use of tactical nuclear weapons.

Is Russia ready to use nuclear weapons? I think it is. Are the US and NATO nuclear countries ready to use nuclear weapons? I think they are. The psychological barrier has been overcome on both sides. The level of idiosyncrasy has reached a critical point. In fact, the parties are going into a frontal attack.

If in the coming days, a week at most, a political agreement on a complete ceasefire without preliminary conditions under the guarantees of mediators and on the transition to negotiations is not reached, then the Third World War will become inevitable.

Grigory Yavlinsky, Chairman of the Federal Political Committee of Yabloko:

As soon as a ceasefire is discussed at the decision-making level, a new round of hostilities immediately follows – ships are blown up, cities are shelled, and territories are seized. This is exactly what is happening now. After the victory of Donald Trump, who promised to end all wars, and against the backdrop of rumours about his telephone conversation with Vladimir Putin, and after a confirmed conversation between the German Chancellor and the Russian President – now everyone is only discussing the US permission for long-range strikes on Russia and a response in the form of approving a new nuclear doctrine of the Russian Federation.

The strikes on Russian territory authorised by Joe Biden will not change the situation on the front and will not save lives.

On the contrary, given the extremely tense situation, such steps lead to a very dangerous escalation. The already tragic confrontation is becoming even more dangerous and difficult to predict. Only the immediate signing of a ceasefire agreement can slow down the movement towards disaster.

Nikolai Rybakov, Yabloko Chairman:

Vladimir Putin urgently made changes (http://publication.pravo.gov.ru/document/0001202411190001?index=6) to the nuclear doctrine a day after the publication in The New York Times (https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/17/us/politics/biden-ukraine-russia-atacms-missiles.html) that US President Joe Biden had given permission to fire Western ATACMS missiles at Russian territory. While we are watching yet another absolutely cynical geopolitical chess game with the subtext of “let’s see who wins”, but those who have never made any decisions about escalation, who would like to live, love, and raise children, will die.

Today, none of us knows for sure the number of people killed – neither in Ukraine nor in Russia. In this matter, we can only rely on UN reports, rare reports of regional media on killed fellow countrymen, and the rapidly expanding cemeteries with tricolour Russian flags fluttering in the wind, which I personally have seen many times when visiting Russia’s regions.

It is possible to agree on stopping killing people. The most important thing in this matter is that if there are not enough resources, intelligence, connections, diplomatic skills and political experience to return peace – then it is important to simply not put obstacles to the ceasefire agreement, not to call for continued escalation, not to multiply human casualties, all this without even risking one’s life.

In the meantime, with any illusory hope for peace, there are those who are again asking for blood, bread and circuses. Alas, just like the invasion of the Ukrainian Armed Forces into the Kursk region, as well as the information that US President Joe Biden has allowed Ukraine to fire missiles deep into Russia, and the amendments to the nuclear doctrine introduced by Vladimir Putin, are distancing us all from peace.

This is nothing more than a proposal to turn 1,000 days of bloodshed into 2,000 days, turn dozens of destroyed citied into hundreds of destroyed cities, and turn thousands of killed and injured into a million killed and injured.

All this will continue, but someday it will still end in peace and a ceasefire. So why digging new graves every day in order to come to this decision anyway?

Boris Vishnevsky, Deputy Chairman of Yabloko:

The Doomsday Clock is an international project that symbolically shows how close the world is to a nuclear catastrophe.

This closeness is shown by the time left until midnight.

At the beginning of 2023, experts (including 18 Nobel Prize winners) moved the hands of the clock to the maximum, for the entire duration of the project, closeness to midnight: only 90 seconds remained until it.

Now these hands (although there is no official decision of the experts yet) have obviously moved forward.

Permission for Ukraine to use long-range missiles on Russian territory – changes in the Russian nuclear doctrine – the use of these missiles in the Bryansk and Kursk regions – a ballistic missile strike on the Dnieper.

What is next? A new escalation based on the principle of “who will be the first to flinch”? Up to the use of nuclear weapons – with an inevitable global catastrophe?

It is necessary to conclude a ceasefire agreement as soon as possible. Without preconditions. And begin negotiations. Otherwise, the hands of the Doomsday Clock will move inexorably towards midnight.

And the next day may never come.