Are the Neocons Setting Up the World for Nuclear War?/ By Dr. Paul Craig Roberts

By Dr. Paul Craig Roberts Global Research, May 04, 2022

PCR Institute for Political Economy

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

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

Visit and follow us on InstagramTwitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.


Oliver Stone on Facebook writes that rabid anti-Russian propaganda has set the stage for a false flag low-yield nuclear explosion in Ukraine that the world has been trained to interpret as Russia’s doing. The success of Washington’s perception war and saturation of the CNN/Fox airwaves with condemnation of Russia could lead to hopes that a false flag nuclear event would bring down Putin’s government.  A new Yeltsin installed would return Russia to Washington’s control and leave China, alone, as the next target.  Such an event is not a fantasy.  It is an expression of Stone’s understanding of the neoconservatives commitment to Washington’s hegemony.  Biden officials have made it clear that they are at war with Russia, using Ukraine as a proxy, with the goal of exhausting Russia into weakness and disposing of Putin.  

A false flag event is not the only avenue to nuclear war.  The expansion of NATO to Finland and Sweden is another.  Washington is not only pressuring the governments to apply for NATO membership but also is bribing Swedish and Finnish government officials to do so.  

Think about this expansion of NATO for a minute.  One reason for Russia’s intervention in Ukraine is the stark refusal of Washington and NATO to take Russia’s security concerns seriously.  Ukraine’s membership in NATO is totally unacceptable to Russia, so why was it pushed?  With Western intervention in Ukraine threatening to spin the conflict out of control, why pour gasoline on the fire by bringing Sweden and Finland into NATO?  Currently Scandinavia and the Baltics are nuclear free.  Finland’s entry into NATO would bring more NATO to Russia’s border, a development that the Kremlin has declared as unacceptable. By piling on more provocations, Washington and NATO are intentionally widening a conflict that was deliberately provoked.

Clearly, it is irresponsible for Finland and Sweden to further destabilize the situation by joining NATO.  Dmitry Medvedev has made it clear that NATO membership would mean the end of the nuclear-free Baltic.  More NATO on Russia’s border creates an imbalance that Russia would have to correct with deployment of hypersonic nuclear missiles.  How can it be possible for the governments of Finland and Sweden to regard NATO membership as an increase in security when the result is to have their countries targeted with nuclear weapons? Finland and Sweden are in no danger of being attacked by Russia unless they join NATO.  No one in their right mind would see NATO membership for Finland and Sweden as anything but a reckless act of destabilization.  Like Switzerland, Finland and Sweden have benefitted from their neutrality.  It is nonsensical for them to turn themselves into nuclear targets.

Everyone needs to understand that the neoconservatives’ ideology of hegemony is an expansionist ideology. It is the American Empire that is expanding toward Russia, not Russia expanding into the West.  It is truly amazing how opposite from the truth the anti-Russian propaganda is.  Sooner or later the Kremlin will comprehend that Russia’s enemies are the American neoconservatives and that the pressure point on the neoconservatives is Israel.

As my audience knows, I have been concerned for years that Russia’s low-key response to provocations brings about more and more dangerous provocations that eventually will bring Armageddon upon us.  I saw recently that the Chinese government thinks similarly when a Chinese spokesman said that China can accept no provocation from Washington as the result would be more and worse provocations.

The Kremlin’s policy of relying on reason, negotiations, and good will has not been reciprocated by the West.  The Kremlin’s limited military operation in Ukraine was not of sufficient ferocity to convince the West to abandon its policy of provocation.  It seems Washington will continue its provocations until the fatal line is crossed.

READ MORE: Ukraine: The US and NATO Created this Mess/ By Hamilton Coalition to Stop the War – Mark Taliano


Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Dr. Paul Craig Roberts writes on his blog site, PCR Institute for Political Economy. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from The Unz Review

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 . He is a contributor to the Encyclopedia Britannica. His writings have been translated into more than 20 languages.


“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  

The original source of this article is PCR Institute for Political Economy

Copyright © Dr. Paul Craig RobertsPCR Institute for Political Economy, 2022