Afrasianet - A Russian message, in the words of foreign intelligence, to decision-making circles in Britain, France and Washington: British-French behavior may push for the proliferation of nuclear weapons. What is happening?
Coinciding with the fourth anniversary of the Russia-Ukraine war, Russia's Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) published a report on a British/French plot to help Ukraine acquire a nuclear weapon, highlighting four main axes, including the real motives behind this plan, the details related to its implementation, the alleged justifications for its acquisition, and finally the warning about its danger.
Read the content of the report
First, the real motives: "Britain and France are aware that the current situation in Ukraine does not give them a chance of achieving the desired victory over Russia at the hands of Ukrainian forces, and they cannot admit defeat, so Ukraine's possession of a superweapon, such as a nuclear bomb, will enable it to obtain better conditions to end the fighting," the report said.
It has become clear that the position of the United States as a sponsor of the negotiations to end the conflict between Moscow and Kyiv is that Ukrainian forces must withdraw from the Donbas region completely in order to achieve peace, which Kiev absolutely rejects with the support and encouragement of London and Paris.
It is known that London is the mastermind of all the provocations carried out by Kyiv against Russia, while Paris is in charge of the process of throwing NATO's military capabilities on the ground in favor of Ukraine. In light of the desperation of the possibility of achieving tangible results on the ground and the pursuit of London and Paris believe that Kyiv's possession of a nuclear weapon would stop the fighting at least along the current front line or push Moscow to withdraw from the areas it controlled in the Donbas. In their view, this scheme is the only way to achieve victory over Russia.
Second, details of the plan: The report reveals an activity carried out by London and Paris to transfer the equipment and systems necessary to implement this plan. "This includes the secret transfer of European components, equipment and technologies in this field to Ukraine. The use of the small French TN75 warhead, used in the M51.1 submarine-launched ballistic missiles, is being considered as an option."
These details in the report show that the plan has been put in place, and that London and Paris are moving forward with it, which reflects their urgent need to resort to the option of extreme necessity or the option of desperation in order to end Trump's peace initiative in Ukraine, as London and Paris believe that Trump views the peace file in Ukraine as the only option before him to save him from a near-achieved defeat in the midterm congressional elections next fall.
Third, the alleged justifications for the plan: The report highlights a Western maneuver to justify Kyiv's possession of a nuclear weapon as an inevitable result of developments in the Ukrainian situation and with a purely Ukrainian decision that "the Westerners are concentrating their efforts on showing that Kyiv has obtained nuclear weapons as if it were the result of Ukrainian developments," with the aim of evading legal responsibilities related to the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons.
It is clear that London and Paris are aware that the expiration of the New START treaty on February 5 between Washington and Moscow, as well as Trump's announcement of his country's resumption of nuclear tests last November, have contributed to the formation of a suitable environment to cover up such a plan and attach it to an internal Ukrainian decision, especially since the Ukrainian leadership has previously expressed its desire in this direction on previous occasions, as happened at the Munich Security Conference 2022, when Ukrainian President Zelensky threatened review Ukraine's accession to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), especially since Ukraine has the equipment, technology and experts to achieve this since the Soviet era.
Fourth, the seriousness of the plan: "These very dangerous plans drawn up by London and Paris show their detachment from reality. They are vainly eager to evade responsibility. There are many wise men in the military, political and diplomatic circles of Britain and France who are aware of the danger that the reckless actions of their leaders pose to the whole world."
It can be concluded from the wording of the warning contained in the report that Moscow is directing the letter through its foreign intelligence to the highest decision-making circles in Britain and France, and even to the global decision-making circles, specifically in Washington, that this British-French behavior may constitute a catalyst for the proliferation of nuclear weapons, and London and Paris bear full responsibility for the consequences that this plan will cause if it is implemented, the most dangerous of which is the fall of the legal and deterrent rules that prevent many countries in the world from acquiring nuclear weapons. This necessarily means reaching a state of uncontrol over this technology and the manufacture of nuclear weapons.
Reactions to the report
Russian President Vladimir Putin's assertive, swift and inexplicable stance came hours after the release of the Foreign Intelligence Service's report, accusing Western powers of continuing to seek to defeat Russia's strategy, warned that their efforts could reach a "point of no return", at which point they would regret their actions, and issued a stern warning about the possibility of using nuclear weapons against his country, saying that adversaries "know how things can end if they resort to the use of a component."
Following Putin's stance, Russian Deputy Security Council Chairman Dmitry Medvedev said that the transfer of nuclear technologies to Kyiv is a "direct path towards a world war," and warned that his country could launch nuclear strikes on Britain and France if they supply Ukraine with nuclear weapons, and threatened to use nuclear weapons against targets in Ukraine.
As for the Ukrainian reaction, Kyiv strongly denied the Russian intelligence report and called the accusations "ridiculous," as did London in a similar situation and accused Moscow of trying to divert attention from the "atrocities" committed by its forces on the ground, while the French Foreign Ministry spokesman called the report "blatant misinformation."
Timing and background of the report
Trying to understand the timing of the release of Russian foreign intelligence also requires discussing the timing of the plan included in the report, if it is true, which means examining the possibility that there is a Russian interest in choosing this timing to announce this report. On the other hand, it is necessary to examine the timing of the British-French plan included in the report.
This can only be understood by tracking the intertwined files on nuclear security, as the Russian channel RT has previously leaked a report on Turkey, Russia's southern neighbor and member of the Tato alliance, seeking a nuclear weapon. At the same time, Polish President Nawrotsky expressed his belief that his country should consider developing its own nuclear capabilities, start working towards nuclear weapons in response to the escalating threat from Russia, or Poland should join a nuclear project or capability, according to Bloomberg reported. It has become clear that France is proposing the project of building a nuclear umbrella for Europe, extending to its east in particular, after the mistrust in the American ally, which pushes Europe to rely on itself and build its military and defense capability as a counterpart to the United States in NATO.
In parallel, the negotiations between the United States and Iran on the Iranian nuclear file reached a decisive point on the eve of the third round in Geneva, as well as with the end of the New START treaty and Washington's announcement before that of the resumption of nuclear tests, as well as the negotiations between Russia and Ukraine reaching a stage where the option of peace and its parameters have become clear in the event that Ukraine accepts the Trump plan.
According to this broad scene with all its ramifications and rationales, Russian interests can be gauged from the choice of this timing to publish the report by Moscow's desire to urge Washington to extend the New START treaty, and to pressure it to reverse the decision to resume nuclear tests by suggesting a shake-up of global security and the evasion of nuclear weapons, and the need to maintain a uniform standard in this regard with all countries aspiring to possess nuclear technology, as is the case with Iran, which is pressuring Washington militarily and politically in order to obtain guarantees from it that it will not acquire it nuclear weapons, which Moscow believes should be binding on its neighbors as well.
On the other hand, it is not inconceivable that Moscow wanted this report to threaten the use of nuclear weapons as a means of pressuring Europe, specifically Britain and France, in order to push it to stop obstructing the path of peace in Ukraine, given that the continuation of the war will extend to Europe sooner or later.
As for the British-French duo, in addition to what we mentioned earlier about their resort to this plan as a desperate option at this time, in light of their conviction that Trump will impose his peace plan on Zelensky and there is no time left to avoid Trump's pressure, it is not unlikely that they seek to provoke Russia to use nuclear weapons against Ukraine, and they have previously orchestrated many provocations against Russia's economic and military infrastructures, but to no avail.
That pushed Washington back into European security after Trump decided to retreat his country to its backyard from the Arctic to Latin America. Perhaps what Britain and France fear most is that peace in Ukraine will lead to a Russian-American strategic rapprochement under the guise of partnership in the field of energy and minerals from Ukraine at the expense of Europe.
In conclusion, in light of the unusual circumstances that the world is witnessing, the accelerated shift towards multipolarity, the changing priorities of the strategic security of many countries, and the resulting change in the map of global alliances, and the global retreat towards the concept of national security and the national state, it is obvious that the world will witness many dangerous and unpredictable adventures and their consequences. Perhaps this is what has made talk of a third world war widely circulated in the media and political circles.
