…the coordinated duality of Soviet and Chinese policies offers a number of advantages for communist strategy. It enables the communist bloc to retain the initiative, to open up new possibilities for maneuver, and to induce erroneous responses from its opponents. Where there are conflicts in the outside world, it enables the two communist partners, by taking opposite sides, to strengthen communist influence simultaneously over both parties to the dispute.”Anatoly Golitsyn[i]
KGB Major Anatoliy Golitsyn, who defected from the Soviet Union in December 1961, successfully predicted the rise of Gorbachev and a false Soviet liberalization that would weaken the West’s strategic posture. He even predicted that the Communist Party would give up its monopoly of power in Russia. The Cold War, in effect, would be over. Only the whole thing, he said, would be a deception. It was designed so that the West would relax its guard. The Chinese and Russians – together with their communist allies around the world – would then be better positioned to infiltrate the West’s core institutions. Moscow and Beijing would also gain access to Western technology for military modernization. At the same time, the West would stop making nuclear weapons. And this is exactly what happened after 1991.
Look at the present situation in Moscow: The façade is over. Russia is no longer pretending to be a democracy. Putin is no longer pretending to be America’s friend. The mask has been ripped off. And despite predicting all this in advance, almost no one has credited Golitsyn. When the Soviet Union was crumbling, when Golitsyn’s predictions were coming true, the mainstream media was busy slandering him. The fact that Golitsyn’s name remains blackened, that his analysis is never used by mainstream politicians or pundits, shows that the communist deception succeeded – and still succeeds. This fact cannot be understated. Most conservatives believe, with Sean Hannity, that “Reagan won the Cold War.” No major media voices are heard saying, even now, that the communist bloc still exists, or that the communists fooled us in 1991. Everyone talks as if Russia and China were non-communist powers, motivated by nationalism instead of the murderous ideas of Marx, Engels, Lenin and Mao.
Because nobody heeded Golitsyn’s warnings, America and Europe allowed their nuclear arsenals to fall into disrepair. No new warheads have been produced in decades. There is no effective testing regime. The old experts have retired. Critical technical knowledge has been lost. The weapons we rely on for national survival are past their shelf-life. So the question of the hour is whether the West’s nuclear weapons work. Russia and China are watching carefully. In the coming months they will be testing us; and once they are confident that we have no effective nuclear deterrent, they will present their ultimatum. Or they will simply attack – as Russia has done to Ukraine – and wipe us out.
When a country gives up its nuclear arsenal, whether by neglect or treaty, consider what happens. Maria Drutska pointed out a few days ago, “Ukraine gave up 3,000 nuclear warheads because we were promised we would be protected. Now our soldiers are castrated, beheaded and burned alive. Their screams will haunt us for eternity. We watch our children kidnapped, we watch our houses bombed.”[ii]
Why was Ukraine invaded? Because Moscow was emboldened by having more nuclear weapons, and more modern nuclear weapons, than the United States. The Russian state wanted Ukraine reintegrated into a new Union. And why did they decide on this now? Because the West was weaker, vis-à-vis China and Russia, than it has ever been. Furthermore, Ukraine is an important food-producing country, and China needs that food production. Given the long-range communist strategy, there was no time to waste. In fact, there is testimony out of the Russian FSB that the Kremlin has been contemplating nuclear strikes against the West. They even tried to keep this from their own planners.
According to a Russian FSB analyst, writing anonymously about the war in Ukraine, “no one knew that there will be such a war – it was concealed from everyone.” The bosses in the Kremlin did not tell their own analysts that they were thinking of invading Ukraine or nuking the West. Instead, the Kremlin bosses invented a fake scenario. The anonymous FSB analyst wrote, “…you are being asked to analyze various outcomes and consequences of a meteorite attack – you research the mode of attack, and you are being told that it’s just a hypothetical and not to stress on the details, so you understand the report is only intended as a checkbox, and the conclusions of the analysis must be positive for Russia, otherwise you basically get interrogated for not doing good work. So, you must write that we have all necessary measures available to nullify the effects of a given type of attack.”[iii]
The word “meteor,” of course, is a metaphor for the word “nuclear.” The n-word is an obscenity which should never be spoken. So instead of “nuclear attack” you tell your analysts it is a “meteor.” Hopefully, they are smart enough to understand without grasping your intentions. If they try and say the wrong thing out loud, you correct them. You tell them to “shut up” and do the analysis. Mark the checkbox and give the green light to the Kremlin.
At least one FSB analyst tried to warn the Kremlin that Russia was too weak to economically survive a nuclear war. “And now what?” asked the Russian analyst. World War III is not doable. He wrote, “We cannot announce a general mobilization for two reasons: (1) Mobilization will implode the situation inside Russia: political, economic, and social. (2) Our logistics are already over-extended today. We cannot send a much larger contingent into Ukraine … because our roads simply cannot accommodate the resupply of such convoys, and everything will come to a halt. And we can’t pull it off from the management side because of the current chaos.”[iv]
Military operations require tremendous administrative integrity. You need honest leaders who tell the truth and you need subordinates who can speak truth to power. Effective military organizations require moral courage which is more important than battlefield courage. But there was never any moral courage in the Russian system, because everything in Russia has been based on lies. If you went along with the lies you were promoted. First was the lie that Russia was democratic. Second was the lie that Russia had a free economy. Third was the lie that Russia had joined civilization, that her leaders were “normal people.” (As the defector, Col. Stanislav Lunev, told me, “These are not normal people. These are crazy persons.”) When your entire political system is a lie, and lying has become second nature from top to bottom, you lose the ability to do things properly. “Yes, Comrade President, we are keeping your equipment in storage. No, Comrade President, we are not stripping it or selling it off. Yes, Comrade President, we are building new weapons. No, Comrade President, we are not embezzling the military budget.” (And under his breath: “Well, you embezzle everything so why can’t we?“)
Deception has been Russia’s great weapon. But deception is a two-edged sword. If you accomplish everything by trickery, what happens when your subjects turn the practice on you? To make lying and cheating an acceptable standard, modeled by your leaders, is to corrupt your own subordinates. Imagine, then, what happens when honesty is needed in a cooperative effort to encircle an enemy capital city during an invasion? The Air Force says it has neutralized Kiev’s air defenses when they have not. The paratroopers fly in and get shot down. Or the logistics department says there is enough food and fuel when there is not. The tank factories supposedly made new tanks, yet there are not enough new tanks to form a regiment. Lying and cheating, having become endemic to the system as such, destroys the efficacy of that system. And so, the Russian soldier invaded Ukraine on an empty stomach. “Go find food,” said the officers. As the promised sleeping bags and blankets never arrived, the generals said, “Go sleep on the cold ground.” When some soldiers, feeling misused, started defecting to the Ukrainians the Russian generals ordered atrocities against civilians. “We will put an end to defections. If they kill Ukrainian women and children, they cannot go over to the Ukrainians. They will be trapped and forced to fight.” Therefore, it follows, that a system predicated on deceiving the West ends by demoralizing itself. If a leader is not honest, why should his subordinates be honest? If the subordinates are not honest, why should the soldiers trust the orders he receives? As lies come down from the Kremlin, lies flow up the chain of command from the front.
Russian deception strategy is ingenious, of course. But it is also a disaster; and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is a disaster that continues to unfold – a gift that keeps on giving. As the FSB analyst noted, “even those loyal to us in Ukraine are publicly against us.” And it all went wrong because of lying, cheating, and coloring the truth. “Because,” said the FSB analyst, “all of this was planned at the top (in Russia), because we were told that such a scenario will not happen unless we were to be attacked first.” But Moscow was not attacked first. Naked Russian aggression, supported by outrageous lies, do not moralize the Russian solider; rather, it is Ukrainian morale that benefits from the rightness of their national cause. “The [Ukrainian] enemy is motivated,” said the Russian analyst. “Monstrously motivated. Knows how to fight, plenty of capable commanders. They have weapons and support. We will simply establish a precedent of human catastrophe in the world.”
Russia cannot not use its nuclear advantage in Ukraine because Putin said that Ukrainians were Russians. It is a statement he made at the outset of the war, that he cannot take back. If Ukrainians are Russians, the Russian president cannot use nuclear weapons against them. That does not work, politically. Furthermore, Russia is unprepared to deal with nuclear strikes launched from Europe or America. However, if the West’s nuclear weapons do not work, Putin may feel free to do as he pleases against NATO, thereby undercutting Ukraine’s position from behind. But how can Putin determine the efficacy of NATO’s nuclear deterrent?
“To offer further cynicism,” wrote the FSB analyst, “I don’t believe that Putin will press the red button to destroy the entire world. First, it’s not one person that decides, and someone will refuse. There are lots of people and there is no single ‘red’ button. Second, there are certain doubts that it actually functions properly. Experience shows that the more transparent the control procedures, the easier it is to identify problems. And where it’s murky as to who controls … there are always problems. I am not sure that the ‘red button’ system functions according to the declared data.”[v] And so, it seems, the Russian analyst wonders whether the Russian generals have cheated during their own missile tests. Do Russia’s nuclear weapons work? Little else in the Russian military seems to work as advertised.
And now we have an explanation for why America still exists after three decades of outrageous subversion and treason at the highest levels. If Russia has deceived and infiltrated the West, the native dishonesty and corruption of Russia’s own leaders has rotted them as well. All the while they were plotting our destruction, they were becoming hollow themselves. Things have not gone well in the Russian heartland, and now that heartland is being put to the test. Russia appears unable to defeat Ukraine. The traitors in America and Europe, however corrupt they might be, however effective the blackmail, are not going to commit suicide by acquiescing to Russia’s demands and threats. “Oh yes, you paid us well and we understand your threats. But no amount of money will convince us to kill ourselves. Go ahead, do your worst. If you expose us, you expose yourselves.”
Russia and China’s Way Forward
It is important to understand that the worm’s-eye-view of the demoralized FSB analyst misses the big picture. The demoralized Russian does not see the lamentable situation of the West, with its suicidal and increasingly insane policies. He does not reckon with the French President kowtowing to Beijing, or with Biden blocking American nuclear rearmament. He does not see how Critical Race Theory is taught to U.S. military personnel, or how Chinese agents have penetrated the Centers for Disease Control, or how subservient the West’s media has become to false narratives. Instead of counting the West’s deficits, he is counting Russia’s. To understand the situation correctly, he should have analyzed the pathologies of East and West; for the real question is whether one side or the other collapses first.
The leaders of Russia and China have always had a plan. The way forward, said Marx, is through a “crisis of capitalism” in which the economic system of the West finally collapses. “The communist bloc will not repeat its error in failing to exploit a slump as it did in 1929-32,” noted Golitsyn. “Information from communist sources that the bloc is short of grain and oil should be treated with particular reserve, since it could be intended to conceal preparation for the final phase of the policy and to induce the West to underestimate the potency of the bloc’s economic weapons.”[vi]
According to Soviet strategists, the key natural resources are oil and grain (or anything that amounts to the same thing, like natural gas and fertilizer). If the East can cut the West from its energy supplies, the West will suffer a severe economic contraction, vindicating communist theory. If a food crisis develops and people in the West face starvation, communist theory will again be vindicated. Battlefield defeats in Ukraine are insignificant if the West suffers a severe and prolonged loss of grain or oil (or natural gas). In light of this, consider how the oil-rich Saudi kingdom has been pulled into the orbit of China and Russia. Last month, the Saudis joined Russia and China’s Shanghai Cooperation Organization.[vii] It is perfectly clear that oil will be used, in the coming months, as a weapon against America’s allies in Europe and Asia. Combine this with attacks against the West’s energy sector by way of anthropogenic global warming theory and you have a communist recipe for victory.
Consider all the little victories communism has won along the way: The Keystone XL pipeline project was scrapped after President Biden blocked the necessary federal permits. American oil refineries are now sitting idle. In Europe, imports of Russian natural gas have been reduced by two-thirds. At the same time, OPEC has agreed to cut oil production as much as 3.66 million barrels per day.[viii] Economies staggered by the pandemic are continuing to struggle. Worse yet, the pandemic has seriously damaged the West’s banking system as commercial real estate holdings have fallen in value. Perhaps, indeed, an economic crisis will bring Europe to its knees and politically destabilize the famously stable United States. Here, the fifth column activities of Russian and Chinese operatives have made a significant contribution.
According to Gen. Jan Sejna, who served as Chief of Staff to the Czech Defense Ministry in the 1960s, “the main target of the Strategic Plan is the United States….” Although this Strategic Plan was developed in 1957-58 by a special committee under Leonid Brezhnev, Moscow’s Warsaw Pact allies were only brought into the plan during an October 1966 meeting held in Moscow. According to Gen. Sejna, the plan called for “the withdrawal of the U.S.A. from Europe and Asia; the removal of Latin America from the United States’ sphere of influence and its incorporation into the Socialist bloc; and the destruction of the United States influence in the developing world; the reduction of American military power to a state of strategic inferiority; the advent to power in Washington of a transitional liberal and progressive government; and the collapse of the American economy.” When Moscow’s Central Committee Secretary, Konstantin Katushev, visited Prague to give the Czechs a strategic update in September 1967, he encountered skepticism from the Czech communists. Katushev explained that America was a volatile society. He said, “It can move to either extreme … as we’ve seen in the McCarthy period and the Vietnam War. If we can impose on the U.S.A. the external restraints proposed in our Plan, and seriously disrupt the American economy, the working and lower middle classes will suffer the consequences and they will turn on the society that has failed them. They will be ready for revolution.” [ix]
Knowing that the United States “can move to either extreme,” the communist movement has taken great pains to place agents on the right as well as the left. As time goes on, the narratives of the right as well as the left, have become contaminated with variations on old communist themes. Many supposed conservatives are now pro-Russian in their thinking. They want America to withdrawal from Europe and Asia, and they do not care if Latin America joins the Socialist bloc. All these themes, which we see around us, support the strategic goals of Moscow and Beijing’s long-range strategy.
In politics and strategy, it takes a lot of “juice” to successfully push a narrative. Therefore, it is no accident that these narratives are gaining ground among conservatives. People are so unoriginal and unthoughtful today, it is only natural that they succumb to enemy active measures. Many respectable Americans are ready to do Moscow’s bidding. And this situation will likely get worse before it gets better. Therefore, whenever you hear someone from the right mouthing themes consistent with Moscow’s past strategic goals, be on your guard.
What we see on many sides are the fruits of communism’s infiltration of American institutions from 1919 to the present. Add to this, the successful deception operations of 1989-91 when communism supposedly gave up the Cold War. As long as Moscow’s larger deception strategy succeeds, no one will see past the many small deceptions that are perpetrated day-to-day. They will see everything out of context, without understanding how each element fits together with other elements. And so, in America, Marxists have gotten themselves elected to office by wearing false democratic colors. Foreigners may still think of America as a right-wing country. But this is untrue. America took a left turn many years back, as political scientist Tim Groseclose has shown.[x]
In the 1990s, Golitsyn asked why the West ignored his warnings about the dangers of Soviet “Democratization” and the marginalizing of anticommunists. He wrote, “Lacking any means for distinguishing facts from fiction, they are incapable of producing valid and objective synthesis. The capacity to analyze Communist developments effectively, which existed up to the early 1960s, has been lost.”[xi] Golitsyn added:
Misunderstood and misinterpreted, the wealth of information available is of no greater value than the volumes of an old encyclopedia. The key to the correct interpretation of the facts, which brings them to life and makes them useful, is informed study of the Soviet long-range strategy which has been in operation since the late 1950s. This study reveals what Lenin called the ‘algebra’ of modern Soviet politics. Without the key, Western studies are confined to conventional, pedestrian arithmetic.[xii]
For more than three decades our leaders have misunderstood our strategic situation, mistaking their enemies for “partners.” Few see Russia’s aggression against Ukraine as part of a communist push for global dominance. They see the national aspirations of Russia and China as divergent. Nearly all our leaders have yet to learn that the communist bloc still exists. They have yet to reckon with the fact that Russia invaded Ukraine with the support of the other communist bloc countries. China, North Korea, Vietnam, and Cuba have refused to condemn Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. North Korea is sending military supplies, and Chinese components are showing up in captured Russian weapons.[xiii] The future is therefore predictable, from the standpoint of the larger communist strategy. The West will never succeed in countering the East unless they acknowledge that the communist bloc still exists, and a global communist movement still exists. As pressure is leveraged against Europe by the bloc’s agents and economic allies, enthusiasm for Ukraine’s defense will diminish. However long it takes, the Russians will politically and economically attack the sources of Ukrainian supply in Europe. Moscow will never relinquish the objective of conquering the whole of Ukraine as a step toward enslaving Europe.
Once Russia and China have secured certain strategic advantages, their “scissors strategy,” said Golitsyn, would “give way to the strategy of ‘one clenched fist.’” Golitsyn wrote, “The argument for accommodation with the overwhelming strength of communism would be virtually unanswerable. Pressures would build up for changes in the American political and economic system…. Traditional conservatives would be isolated and driven toward extremism. They might become the victims of a new McCarthyism of the left.”[xiv]
The only silver lining is that the left has been disoriented by Moscow’s deception strategy. They support Ukraine, against Russia’s wishes. How could this have happened? Russia did not think there would be a long war in Ukraine. The left in Europe and America would never have had time to register the humanitarian catastrophe if Russia had conquered Kiev in days. It was an invasion that was supposed to last three or four weeks at most. How quickly people would have then forgotten. Biden even said it was okay for Russia to invade Ukraine, if only it was a minor invasion (rather than a long war). But Russia got stuck. And now the Kremlin must backpedal. The left and right must be realigned in some way. Watch for a sudden turn of opinion. Watch how it all unfolds; for the Russians are on the communist side, yet they do not want to lose their friends on the European and American right. Consider, once again, the unusual statement of Venezuela’s communist dictator, Nicolas Maduro. Earlier this year Maduro proposed the creation of a new alliance bloc in Latin America under principles “that our elder brother President Xi Jinping talks about … [and] our elder brother, President Vladimir Putin, talks about….”[xv] There is no way Maduro’s elder brothers are not the leaders of a communist bloc which is now being extended to include most of South America.
Let us revisit what General Laura Richardson said on the subject:
“The largest military buildup in history,” says Gen. Richardson, is happening “in China.” This buildup needs to be explained, especially in terms of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Here is evidence of Golitsyn’s “once clenched fist.” China is forming that fist even as Russia has thrown a punch. All these moves are related; and Gen. Richardson is drawing our attention to Russian and Chinese moves in our own hemisphere; that is, the takeover of countries in South and Central America by Marxists who receive support directly from Beijing and Moscow (i.e., see Daniel Ortega in Nicaragua, Maduro in Venezuela, the Cuban communist regime, and the rise of China’s friends in Chile, Peru, Colombia, and Argentina.)
As the communist bloc defector literature indicates, everything here has been choreographed in advance. The invasion of Ukraine is, in essence, a precursor attack. Moscow needs Ukraine securely under control before the Kremlin is free to support China’s moves in the Pacific and the Western Hemisphere. China needs Russia’s naval and nuclear missile support. Therefore, China must wait until Russia has won the Ukraine War. According to this interpretation of events, China was mobilizing for war against America last year in anticipation of a Russian victory in Ukraine; but this victory was not achieved. So, China is waiting to begin its “special military operation,” – and waiting, and still waiting.
In May 2020, when the COVID pandemic was locking down the United States and most of Europe, Asian intelligence sources were warning Washington that China and Russia were planning a “thunderous” war against the United States.[xvi] In mid-2021, someone high up in Russian intelligence, frightened by the Kremlin’s “crazy” plans for war, passed information to U.S. officials about the coming invasion of Ukraine. On its side, the Ukrainian government was warned about the coming invasion by the Americans. When told, Zelenskyy the actor appropriately hid his foreknowledge of Russian plans with a pretended skepticism toward the Americans. President Zelenskyy and his staff did not want to reveal – to America or anyone else – that Ukrainian politicians had been approached by the Russians to assist in a Russian takeover of Ukraine. The plan was to kill thirty top Ukrainian officials, including Zelenskyy, and install a puppet government in Kiev. Many of these politicians were considered friendly to Russia; but on being asked to betray their country, reported the recruitment attempts to Ukrainian security officials. The Ukrainian government was, therefore, well-informed on Russian intentions. Yet this knowledge had to be kept secret, as the Ukrainian military was engaged in sensitive defensive preparations which included dispersing military supply depots and air defense sites that would be targeted in the first hours of an attack from Russia. The Ukrainian government did not want to panic the Ukrainian people, especially since nobody knew if Ukraine could withstand a full Russian attack. At the same time, the Ukrainian intelligence officers were keeping tabs on more than 800 prominent citizens in league with Russian intelligence. Many of these Ukrainians would be arrested before or immediately after the Russian invasion of February 2022.
Related to this, it is well-known that President Xi has been telling the Chinese military to “get ready for war.” Chinese military newspapers published articles about the coming war as early as April 2020. These articles were not mere rhetoric. If we credit Golitsyn, he warned about a shift in Russian and Chinese strategy following the success of Russian and Chinese deception operations: especially the false Sino-split deception and the false Russian liberalization. The joining of Russia and China into an offensive military combination was always in the cards.
If this overview of the situation is correct, all those analysts who think China is “taking advantage of Russia,” or that China wants to take over Siberia when Russia collapses, are misreading events. The objectives of Moscow and Beijing are not limited to acquiring territory in Ukraine or taking the island of Taiwan. In this regard their alliance is not temporary. It is not the result of opportunism. The alliance between the two countries is not even new. It is a longstanding collaboration to bring about America’s destruction.
In this context, it is childish to expect that America can woo Russia away from China. Steve Bannon has expressed this idea, but he has neglected to read the warnings of Golitsyn. He has failed to see that a long-range communist bloc strategy exists. Sadly, the opinion leaders of the right are misguided in their analysis of current events. While it is true that the left has been full of useful idiots and fellow-travelers in decades past, today’s right presents another flavor of wrong. For all those misguided conservatives who think Putin is “benign” and Ukraine is evil, let me read a line from Russian SVR defector Sergei Tretyakov’s testimony, given in 2007: “I want to warn Americans. As a people, you are very naïve about Russia and its intentions. You believe because the Soviet Union no longer exists, Russia is now your friend. It isn’t, and I can show you how the SVR [KGB] is trying to destroy the U.S. even today and even more than the KGB did during the Cold War.”[xvii]
Putin was leading Russia in 2007. If Tretyakov says Putin was plotting our destruction then, what are we supposed to think now? Looking at the invasion of Ukraine, some U.S. officials are saying that “Putin has changed.” No, he has not changed. He has merely torn off his mask. As if to dismiss the importance of Putin’s deceptive self-presentation, some conservatives are repeating the line that Putin is playing the role of Mussolini to China’s Hitler. But all these analogies misunderstand the fundamentals. Russia and Red China have been aligned for thirty years if not seventy-four years. Long before Putin took power, the alliance between Russia and China was in place. According to Col. Stanislav Lunev, a Mandarin-speaking defector from Russian military intelligence, Russia and China signed secret intelligence and military agreements at the end of the Cold War. These agreements covered intelligence cooperation and a future invasion of North America. Lunev told me, in 1999, “Russia will provide the missile power and China will provide the manpower.” But nobody in the American security establishment believed Lunev’s intelligence. The campaigns of our elected leaders depend on contributions from big business, and big business wanted to trade with China while developing Russia’s energy resources.
As for the idea of invading North America, nearly all our “experts” have scoffed. Chinese troops will never reach North America, they say. Nobody would be crazy enough to launch a thermonuclear war. But Gen. Richardson is telling us, in so many words, that Russia and China are already here. They are invading our hemisphere. In February 1999, when confronted with a room full of skeptical American experts, Lunev said, “During my years with the Soviet and Russian Army we trained for one mission, and one mission only: Future nuclear world war against America.”[xviii]
Anticipating this exact end-game scenario, KGB defector Golitsyn wrote a memo to the CIA in 1973. After the U.S. defense establishment has been sufficiently weakened, noted Golitsyn, Russia and China might launch an all-out attack:
… The Soviet and Chinese rocket strike units and strategic bombers will make a surprise raid on Pearl Harbor lines on the main government and military headquarters of the leading Western countries and on their missile sites. The main idea will be to knock out the primary Western sources of retaliation and to paralyze, at least for a short period, their physical ability to take a decision on retaliation.[xix]
According to Golitsyn, the Soviets would use their hotline to Washington D.C. to sow confusion and doubt on the American side. “Such an attack will probably be accompanied by an intensification in the activity of the Communist countries’ intelligence agents designed to increase panic and to operate blackouts and paralyze normal life in the capitals of the Western countries.” This is speculative, admitted Golitsyn, yet nuclear war “has been the subject of study by the KGB, and should in any case be prepared for.”[xx]
After debunking right-wing fears of a nuclear threat from Russia during the Cold War, Kremlin officials and Russian TV pundits are talking seriously about nuclear attacks on the West. Rather than saying that Russia is a threat to no one, they are openly boasting about Russia’s nuclear capabilities. That is, they are threatening to use nuclear weapons against NATO countries – to drown the British with a nuclear “tsunami bomb”; to nuke Poland or even NATO headquarters in Brussels. In effect, Putin’s forward deployment of nuclear weapons to Belarus constitutes a nonverbal nuclear threat. This has been underscored by Yuri Felshtinsky, who claims that Putin is planning to have “Ukrainian partisans” capture the Russian weapons in Belarus and fire them into Poland. Putin will absolutely deny that he fired the weapons, explained Felshtinsky. “Putin does not care about the Belarussian people,” said Felshtinsky. “[Belarussian President] Lukashenko has no voice or power at all….” Felshtinsky is puzzled by the silence of Belarussian society regarding Russia’s transfer of nuclear weapons to their country. “On the state channels of Belarussian TV, they discuss with smiles how they will destroy Poland and Lithuania with nuclear strikes. That’s fine, but no one is asking the question … ‘Aren’t they going to retaliate?’ And no one is worried, somehow….”[xxi]
According to the late Peter Vincent Pry, there are questions about the status of NATO’s nuclear weapons. Do these weapons work? The Kremlin would like to know. The last U.S. nuclear test was Operation Julin, conducted on 23 September 1992. The last nuclear test conducted by the United Kingdom was on 26 November 1991.[xxii] The last French nuclear test was conducted on 27 January 1996.[xxiii] Although Russia supposedly has not tested a nuclear weapon since 1991, there have been a series of atypical “earthquakes” in Russia, which some experts believe were underground nuclear tests. As reported by the Arms Control Association in 1997, “A small earthquake beneath the Arctic Ocean off the coast of Novaya Zemlya has led to reports that Russia conducted a clandestine nuclear explosion at its former test site on the island.”[xxiv] Since Russian specialists are known to be working at the North Korean nuclear test site, Russian nuclear weapons may have been tested in North Korea, without anyone being the wiser. In fact, an official of the International Atomic Energy Agency privately told me that, in his opinion, North Korea has never “made” a nuclear weapon of its own; rather, Russia has given North Korea nuclear weapons. The weapon tests in North Korea, therefore, might be Russian nuclear tests. Meanwhile, the Chinese have been expanding their nuclear test site with new tunnels.[xxv]
What if Putin is moving nuclear weapons into Belarus for a “live fire test”? Drop a nuclear weapon on Poland and see what the West does. Can the West successfully explode a nuclear device in response? If the West responds conventionally, repeat the process until the West proves that it has a nuclear capability. If the West can only respond, one-to-one, with conventional weapons, Russia and China might conclude that the West’s nuclear arsenals are no longer in working order.
We need to assume that Russia and China are attempting to acquire strategic nuclear supremacy over the West. In fact, the Chinese have attempted to trick us into believing they have no such intention. The Chinese military text, Unrestricted Warfare, is full of clever disinformation where it claims that nuclear weapons are obsolete and unusable. The underlying suggestion is given out that China has no intention of building a large nuclear arsenal.[xxvi] With STRATCOM’s recent announcement that China has more ICBM launchers than the United States, we now know that Unrestricted Warfare’s text was misleading.[xxvii] In response to a letter from STRATCOM’s Gen. Anthony J. Cotton, four members of Congress wrote, “It is not an understatement to say that the Chinese nuclear modernization program is advancing faster than most believed possible. We have no time to waste in adjusting our nuclear force posture to deter both Russia and China. This will have to mean higher numbers and new capabilities.”[xxviii]
The Biden Administration and the Democrats in Congress can be counted on to block any attempt to build new and reliable nuclear warheads. Russia and China’s useful fools in the Federation of American Scientists have issued a statement denying that China poses a threat. Supposedly, this is all about defense contractors making money. We are told, in terms of nuclear weaponry, that numbers do not matter. According to the FAS,
Even if the hawks in Congress have their way, the United States does not seem to be in a position to compete in a nuclear arms race with both Russia and China. The modernization program is already overwhelmed with little room for expansion, and the warhead production capacity will not be able to produce large numbers of additional nuclear weapons for the foreseeable future. It would be more constructive for the United States to focus on engaging with Russia and China on nuclear risk reduction and arms control than engaging in a build-up of its nuclear forces.[xxix]
Therefore, we should just give up on the idea of building a credible nuclear deterrent. Let’s just rely on Russian and Chinese promises – like the Ukrainians did when they gave up their nuclear weapons in 1994.
If the Federation of American Scientists believes nuclear weapons are useless, maybe they should pay closer attention to what the Russians have been saying in recent months. In January, former Russian president Dmitri Medvedev suggested that nuclear weapons could be used by Russia because Russia’s survival was at stake in the Ukraine War. He said, “The defeat of a nuclear power in a conventional war may trigger a nuclear war.”[xxx] It is almost as if Russia wants a nuclear war, and a ready-made excuse for pushing the red button is at hand. And yes, what Medvedev offers is nothing less than an excuse – and a feeble one at that. If Russian troops are forced out of Ukraine, in what sense is Russia’s survival at stake? Here we have a situation in which Russia has lost no territory, in which Russia’s sovereignty is not even being threatened, and no Russian cities have been damaged by bombardment. Yet, if Moscow is blocked from flattening and conquering Ukraine, then a defeat is somehow registered which threatens Russia’s survival and justifies a nuclear attack on NATO. In fact, Ukrainian troops have not crossed Russia’s border, and the Ukrainian government’s stated goal is merely the return of Ukrainian territory. How does the West’s support for this defensive Ukrainian policy justify nuclear strikes on NATO? Neither Ukraine nor NATO have advocated an invasion of Russia. How, then, is Russia’s survival in any sense “at stake”?
When combined with Russia’s long record of cheating on arms control treaties, this kind of rhetoric is more than sinister. The truth is, Russia suspects the West’s nuclear deterrent has deteriorated. Although Russia’s Army is stuck in Ukraine, the nuclear option may provide them with a path to ultimate victory. According to the Czech communist defector, Jan Sejna, the bloc’s long-range plan had a nuclear weapons component which “revolved around how to design arms control agreements so that the United States and other NATO nations would ultimately be compelled to eliminate their own strategic weapons, while [Moscow and its allies] … would be able to retain enough of their strategic forces to tilt the global balance of power in their favor.”[xxxi] Sejna added that, “To cheat and deceive the enemy is the duty of all party and government organizations and individuals.”[xxxii] Russian cheating, in fact, is always carefully planned in advance. Sejna noted,
The instructions [of the Administrative Department] explained that cheating, deceiving, disinforming, and misleading the enemy were very important functions of both party and government organizations because they helped to protect socialism, blinded the enemy to the nature of the main strategic goals, and specifically covered the methods used to achieve the main strategic goals … [which aimed at] the final victory of communism.”[xxxiii]
The fact that Venezuela’s communist dictator, Nicolas Maduro, refers to Russia and China’s leaders as “elder brothers,” openly signals the continued existence of a communist bloc under Russian and Chinese leadership. What else could Maduro’s speech signify? The communists have deceived us. They have cheated on all their agreements. Control of the world requires strategic nuclear supremacy. This explains the rapid buildup of nuclear and conventional weapons in China.
Looking at American communists, like Angela Davis and Gus Hall, it is inconceivable that they gave up their beliefs in 1991. So why would we accept the claim that the communist rulers of Russia gave up their beliefs? The communists in Angola and Namibia and North Korea and Cuba did not “give up” their belief system. But somehow, the communists in the Soviet Union were more enlightened. Was this story ever believable? It was believable only to those wanted to believe. Such a belief was soothing and flattering. We could claim victory over the Soviet Union. We could stop worrying about nuclear war. We could watch democracy take root in Eastern Europe. But then, the hard left was gaining a foothold in Washington, D.C.
Ask yourself, honestly: How many of our Democratic politicians are Marxists? Communism is a crazy belief system that has killed tens of millions of innocent people during the last hundred years. Yet communist thinking underlies America’s public school curriculum. Communist thinking underlies the woke dogmas fashionable at our universities. Communist thinking underlies the policies of leaders who have resisted replacing old and unreliable nuclear warheads with new ones. The pattern has been, and remains, one of unilateral and spontaneous disarmament by neglect. And it has been enabled by massive infiltration and subversion of our political system – at all levels – by communists. Nothing here has happened by accident. The communists have worked hard and diligently for decades. But nobody is supposed to acknowledge this reality. We are all playing a game called “let’s pretend.”
Golitsyn warned that Moscow’s deception strategy would create conditions for the political isolation of anticommunists and conservatives. He said they “would be isolated and driven toward extremism. They might become the victims of a new McCarthyism of the left.”[xxxiv] In the crucial phase of long-range communist bloc strategy, the rise of former Russian security chiefs to the highest office (e.g., Andropov and Putin), would become necessary “in order to secure the important shift in the realization of the strategy.”[xxxv] The entire state apparatus would be shifted from one policy to its opposite in short order – rapidly, and without bureaucratic resistance. The initial part of the strategy, for Moscow, would begin with an offensive consisting “of a calculated shift from the old, discredited Soviet practice to a new, ‘liberalized’ model, with a social democratic façade, to realize the communist planners’ strategy for establishing a United Europe. At the beginning they introduced a variation of the 1968 Czechoslovakian ‘democratization.’ At a later phase they will shift to a variation of the Czechoslovakian [communist] takeover of 1948.”[xxxvi]
Everything did not go as planned in Moscow’s strategy. But now we see that the Kremlin is still determined to dominate Europe. We can see that Moscow is brandishing its nuclear weapons. We can see that Beijing and Moscow are coming together as allies. What is more dangerous, of course, is that Western political analysts have misunderstood Russian and Chinese politics. They accepted the Sino-Soviet split as real. They accepted the collapse of communism in Russia as real. As a result, we are walking blindly into the communist endgame. And there is almost no one in authority who understands the kind of alliance Russia and China have built – in Asia, in Africa, and in Latin America. Right now, the only people openly fighting Russia are the Ukrainians.
Notes and Links
[i] Anatoliy Golitsyn, New Lies for Old (New York: Dodd, Mead & Company, 1984), p. 281.
[vi] Golitsyn, New Lies for Old, p. 342.
[ix] Jan Sejna, We Will Bury You (London: Sidgwick & Jackson, 1982), pp. 153-154.
[xi] Anatoliy Golitsyn, The Perestroika Deception (London & New York: Edward Harle, 1995, p. 128.
[xi] Ibid, pp. 172-3.
[xiv] Ibid, p. 346.
[xvi] I cannot reveal my sources on this, as they provided the information on condition of anonymity.
[xvii] Pete Earley, Comrade J: The Untold Secrets of Russia’s Master Spy in America After the End of the Cold War (New York: G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 2007), p. 8.
[xviii] The meeting at which Lunev made this statement, a retired U.S. admiral and general were in attendance.
[xix] Anatoliy Golitsyn, The Perestroika Deception (London & New York: Edward Harle, 1995, p. 171.
[xx] Ibid, pp. 172-3.
[xxxi] Joseph D. Douglass, Jr., Why the Soviets Violate Arms Control Treaties (New York: Pergamon-Brassey’s International Defense Publisher’s, Inc., 1988), p. 129.
[xxxii] Ibid, p. 131.
[xxxiii] Ibid, p. 133.
[xxxiv] Anatoliy Golitsyn, New Lies for Old, p. 346.
[xxxv] Ibid, pp. 347-48.
[xxxvi] Ibid, p 349.
Quarterly Subscription (to support the site)