We are already in the Third World War.
According to Professor Sergey Karaganov, speaking to Professor Glenn Diesen on 10 May 2026, the Russian Government has said the Third World War began in Ukraine, spread to the Middle East, and now has moved on to South Asia.
Karaganov is the Head of the Council for Foreign and Defence Policy in Russia, one of the most important and influential scholars on Russian foreign policy. In the past, he was an advisor to Presidents Brezhnev, Gorbachev, and Yeltsin; he currently advises Putin. Given his pre-eminent position in the Russian hierarchy and his long experience in the Kremlin, his views on foreign policy should be taken seriously.
According to Karaganov, Russia sees the war as not about Iran’s nuclear weapons, but about the US seeking to restore its hegemony in the Middle East and North Africa by destabilising the entire region. While he believes that the war in Ukraine can be relatively easily resolved by moving rapidly up the escalation ladder, the more complex task he sees for Russia is to restore stability to the Middle East, and to prevent what he refers to as a horizontal escalation of the Third World War. But it is this so-called ‘easy part’ which should be of immediate concern to all those living on the European continent. He said that to resolve the Ukrainian War once and for all, we should start with a number of strategic conventional missile strikes in Europe (outside of Ukraine), and if the European elites do not then cease and desist, we should follow up with a number of nuclear strikes.
He said that after those first nuclear strikes, an ultimatum will be delivered, and if the European elites do not agree with it, “some of the countries of Europe must perish. That is my suggestion, though I pray God, and I’m a believer, that wouldn’t happen”. To achieve this result, the Russian nuclear doctrine should be modified to allow for “punishing European elites, including with special munitions which would do away with their bunkers”.
By implication, he is referring to special munitions which have deep ground penetrating capabilities, and a broadening of Russia’s current defensive nuclear doctrine towards a broader pre-emptive nuclear strike doctrine. He added that the first waves of nuclear strikes should target “European elites”, and that Russia’s disagreement is initially with these elites rather than the people of Europe. This approach is currently being debated within the Kremlin, and a decision will be made soon. If this decision is taken in favour of Karaganov’s plan, the strikes may come at any time.
Karaganov singles out Britain and Germany as the chief troublemakers and the main enemy in Europe. He accuses Britain of playing its time-honoured game of sparking off wars on continental Europe in order to weaken the other European powers: “That has been their bad habit for several centuries”. He says that when Germany calls for the strongest army in Europe, it will result in the “elimination of Germany totally. I mean, evaporation. And German burghers, who have common German friends, they should understand that”. The Russians have long memories, and aren’t anywhere near ready to forget the horrors of WWII.
Karaganov thinks that the end game in Europe is to destroy the current Ukrainian regime, but even more importantly, to break the will of the European elites who have started this aggression against Russia. The European elites should be punished for that or eliminated by their deep states. He said, “We will not invade Europe under no circumstances because there is nothing that we need there”.
In terms of Ukraine proper, he advocates a similar policy: first launch a series of massive infrastructure strikes targeting key government and logistical centres, and if Ukraine does not surrender, a number of nuclear strikes targeting the Zelenskyy regime will follow.
He refutes entirely the old premise that there could be no winner in a nuclear war; of course there will be. So, according to Russia, if it strikes Europe with limited tactical nuclear missiles, and Europe replies with its nuclear arsenal, Europe will be destroyed. Russia, with its vast territories, will survive. Karaganov hopes that it will not come to that on the basis that Europe will avoid an all-out nuclear exchange because it will become a continental nuclear desert. The feeling in Moscow is that various strategic strikes will bring Europe to its senses. He also mentions closing all European travel in and out of the Baltic Sea, just as Iran has selectively closed the Straits of Hormuz as a response to the European piracy of the Russian commercial fleet.
Karaganov has been advocating a restoration of Russia’s deterrence since 2023. This deterrence was perceived to have atrophied, while the West and NATO kept on attacking Russia without any kind of military reply. At that time, his opinion remained a minority one, while there was still a chance and a hope of a rapprochement with Europe. But now, the geopolitical landscape has changed with the advent of the war in the Gulf. It has been generally accepted in Russia, not only within political circles, but also among the political leadership and the wider population, that a grave military escalation must be made by Russia in order to wake Europe up to the dangerous game that the elites have been playing over recent years. He says that now his opinion on these matters is shared by the “overwhelming majority, both in the military, in the political circles, and in the society”. Confirmation that the Kremlin is preparing for nuclear attacks on Europe also come from Stanislav Krapivnik, who has good contacts within Russia’s military hierarchy. Further corroboration comes from Dr Gilbert Doctorow, a seasoned Kremlin watcher, who for months has been warning that there will soon be a major military escalation in Ukraine, with a strong chance of direct attacks on Europe.
Finally, as a meagre sliver of an olive branch, Kraganov says that Russia doesn’t want and doesn’t need an inch of Europe, and the further Russia gets from Europe, the better for Russia.
For decades, including throughout the Cold War, mutual animosity and distrust have dominated European-Russian relations, but the use of nuclear weapons was always precluded because of the mutual destructive potential of the US and Russia, with Europe sheltering underneath the American nuclear umbrella. Today, however, that situation no longer prevails. Europe has succeeded in alienating its protector as outlined in this UK Column article, with the US withdrawing its troops and resources from Europe, starting with a 5,000 troop withdrawal from Germany. The US National Security Strategy document published at the end of 2025 stated that Europe must learn to defend itself. But just as Europe has succeeded in alienating its protector, it has declared war on its hugely powerful Eastern neighbour. Russia is well aware of this situation, and is also fully aware that the US will not sacrifice its own cities to protect any in Europe. So, just as Europe is uniquely weakened, it has also become uniquely bellicose under its current lamentable crop of leaders.
Given the imminent threat of nuclear strikes in Europe and the absence of the American nuclear umbrella, is there anything that Europe can do to defend itself against multiple nuclear missile strikes from Russia? In short, there is no defence whatsoever. For a technical explanation of Russia’s latest generation of nuclear payload capable missiles capable of hitting the main European capitals from Russia, please watch Ted Postol’s interview and presentation. Postol is one of America’s leading nuclear weapons specialists. There is no defence anywhere in the world currently capable of intercepting this missile; it is simply far too fast, leaving European cities and strategic centres totally vulnerable to a Russian nuclear attack. Russia currently possesses over 4,500 nuclear warheads. Recent Russian studies revealed that just 43 of these would be capable of destroying all the major cities in the US. Russia’s tactical nuclear warheads, the smallest in its arsenal, and presumably those planned for taking out European leaders, vary in range from 10 to 100 kilotons, with the smaller ones ranging from 10 to 30 kilotons, roughly twice as powerful as the devastating Hiroshima bomb, which caused such horrifying destruction.
The potency and immediacy of the Russian threat is further enhanced by the successful testing of Russia’s new RS-28 Sarmat missile on 12 May 2026. This missile has been in development for the last 15 years and is due to enter active service at the end of this year. “This is the most powerful missile in the world”, President Putin said of the Sarmat missile on Tuesday, adding that the combined power of its individually targeted warheads is more than four times that of its Western counterparts, and that it is capable of penetrating all present and in development missile defence systems. This missile is 35m long, weighs 208 tonnes, and can carry a 10 tonne payload. The claimed maximum range is 35,000km, thanks to its suborbital capability, whereas Western analysts claim that it can only achieve half that distance.
But that quibbling is largely academic for Europe. The distance from Moscow to London is less than 3,000km and from Krasnoyarsk, where its first silos will be located in central Russia, to London, a distance of 7,000km. Russia has developed some amazingly fast missiles, including the Avangard, which can achieve Mach 27, (over 30,000 km/hour). Such a missile could reach London from Moscow in as little as six minutes. The ability to deliver simultaneous multiple nuclear warheads, as the RS-28 Sarmat can do, if clustered correctly makes for far greater destruction on the ground than the equivalent explosive power of a single warhead, as Ted Postol has explained.
In short, such strikes on European elites would likely kill hundreds of thousands of innocents as well. They also have in their arsenal megaton bombs, roughly 60 times more powerful than the Hiroshima bomb. For anyone who is interested in the sickening realities of being involved in a nuclear war, Annie Jacobsen’s book, Nuclear War: A Scenario, is a good place to obtain a grounding.
While the Kremlin debates whether to, and how much of, Europe to annihilate this year, Britons are more concerned about Net Zero, the cost of filling up a tank of petrol, what personal pronoun to use, and whether Starmer will be replaced.
So, if Russia does decide to destroy London, Paris, Brussels, and Ramstein, then there is nothing to stop it. We have been warned.
