The Americans want to make the world community believe that the White House is inhabited by the "doves of peace", and a nuclear war in Europe, if any, is not going to be a tragedy at all. But the one to blame will be Russia.
A few months after Russia began its military operation in Ukraine, the United States allegedly received intelligence indicating that "Russian President Vladimir Putin was seriously considering using nuclear weapons to avoid major battlefield losses in Ukraine." Renowned American journalist Bob Woodward, who became famous owing to the Watergate scandal, dwells on that in his new book "War" released on October 15 this year by Simon & Schuster.
Passages from this work about Putin's "nuclear threat" have been quickly spread around the world by the Associated Press agency.
A notable thing is that a little earlier, in late September, venerable Washington Post observer David Ignatius spoke on the same topic, referring to "well-informed sources" as well. He also wrote that in October 2022, when Russia was experiencing difficulties in the battles outside Kharkov and Kherson, the probability of its resorting to tactical nuclear weapons was "50/50". Woodward uses nearly the same language.
Citing unnamed sources, he reports that American intelligence indicated "a 50 percent chance that Putin would use tactical nukes if Ukrainian forces surrounded 30,000 Russian troops in the southern city of Kherson."
Woodward writes that in late September 2022, US President's national security adviser Jake Sullivan was "horrified" to get acquainted with intelligence data obtained "from the best sources and methods." "This caused alarm across the Biden administration, moving the chance of Russia using nukes up from 5 percent <...> to 50 percent," the master of American journalism writes.
According to Woodward, President Joe Biden told Sullivan to "get on the line with the Russians. Tell them what we will do in response." Also, Biden allegedly addressed Putin with a message, warning of "catastrophic consequences" if Russia used nukes at the end of the day.
Interestingly, assistant White House press secretary Emily Simons refused to comment on the data from Woodward's book, saying that "there are plenty of books that are being written about this administration" and "we’re not going to comment on each anecdote that may come out of different reporting."
According to the same anonymous source, Woodward describes a "tense phone conversation" between Defense Minister Lloyd Austin and his Russian counterpart Sergei Shoigu on October 21, 2022.
"We know you are contemplating the use of tactical nuclear weapons in Ukraine. Any use of nuclear weapons on any scale against anybody would be seen by the United States and the world as a world-changing event. There is no scale of nuclear weapons that we could overlook or that the world could overlook," Austin allegedly told Shoigu.
"As Shoigu listened, Austin pressed on, noting that the U.S. had not given Ukraine certain weapons and had restricted the use of some of those it had provided. He warned that those constraints would be reconsidered. He also noted that China, India, Turkey and Israel would isolate Russia if it used nuclear weapons," Woodward goes on to claim.
"I don’t take kindly to being threatened," Shoigu replied, according to the author. And Austin replied: "Mr. Minister, I am the leader of the most powerful military in the history of the world. I don’t make threats."
The Russian Ministry of Defense did report an October 21, 2022 telephone conversation between Shoigu and Austin. "Topical issues of international security, including the situation in Ukraine, were discussed," the Ministry noted back then.
Data provided in Woodward's book is difficult to verify, although he has been a star of American journalism since the early 70s. They do trust him.
Now the reader has been undoubtedly captivated by the details the book’s author was provided with by some "anonymous source". Details such as "credible conversations inside the Kremlin", quotes from telephone conversations between Russia and the United States, and so on that make the reader believe this is exactly what happened. But how do you separate a lie from a truth or half-truth? The trick is that the lies are seasoned with the truth here, and the entire information mix seems very convincing therefore.
Some time ago, the American and the entire Western press wrote about the possibility of Russian nuclear strikes on Ukraine, as if urging and provoking the country to do so. It was all about the United States and its allies accustoming the public opinion to a feasible nuclear war in Europe with no tragic consequences. At the same time, the United States was and is defiantly keeping a distance from its European allies, as if implying the nuclear war will hit Europe alone, not America.
In this regard, Woodward's book may be a subtle provocation with the same objective. It was clear from the previous publications that Russia was planned to be pictured as the "culprit" of unleashing a nuclear war, regardless of the potential terms for its state sovereignty or security. All these facts constitute links in a chain aimed to demonize Russia and plunge Europe into a nuclear war that would undermine both Russia and Europe as the United Sates’ truest major economic competitor. At the same time, the US itself intends to stay on the sidelines.
However, Woodward or those who allegedly "leaked" information to him about Russia's "intention to use nuclear weapons" did not assume or know that Russia would change its relevant doctrine. Otherwise, the fact would have been reflected in the book as well. But there is not a single word to that effect.
And one more detail. If the White House knew from intelligence reports that "Russia is preparing a nuclear strike," then why did it have to wait more than a year for Woodworth's book to be published? After all, it was supposedly about an urgent problem. And then, in order to save the world, it would be necessary to leak information to the daily press or make an official statement. The way Russia does when it knows that the West is about to come up with some kind of provocation regarding nuclear or biological contamination.
This just suggests that the reference to "Kremlin intelligence" is a bluff they are trying to pass off as truth. And expectations are that everyone will believe the master of American journalism Bob Woodward, a two-time Pulitzer Prize winner, who has already made it into history by promoting the Watergate scandal half of a century ago.
In the midst of the 1972 election campaign, The Washington Post’s Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein conducted a sensational investigation into how Democratic presidential candidate George McGowan’s political opponents installed wiretaps at his Watergate Hotel headquarters. And information was leaked to them by FBI deputy chief (W. Mark Felt), known as "Deep Throat" in certain circles. Decades later, he became known to have offered a similar package to the New York Times, but they refused to mess with what hey deemed as a huge political manipulation.
Meanwhile, Woodward and Bernstein’s work brought glory to them as incorruptible journalists. Even now, Washington really needed to use Woodward's authority for its Russophobic purposes. And the master wanted to regain fame. Chances are high that someone has struck the right chord of Woodward's vanity and used him in an unwitting fashion.
