Putin ally issues nuclear warning to UK and Germany

A stark warning from one of Russia’s most prominent strategic thinkers has reignited fears of nuclear escalation in Europe. Sergey Karaganov, a former adviser to President Vladimir Putin and a longtime fixture in Russia’s foreign policy establishment, has openly suggested that Moscow would resort to nuclear weapons, namely against Germany and the United Kingdom (UK), if it ever came close to defeat in its war against Ukraine.

Delivered during an interview with United States (US) commentator Tucker Carlson, the remarks go beyond routine rhetoric, offering a blunt articulation of how parts of Russia’s elite define “defeat” and deterrence. While such statements do not represent official policy, they shed light on the increasingly dangerous logic shaping the conflict.

Who is Sergey Karaganov and do why his words matter?

Karaganov is not a mere marginal figure. As head of Russia’s Council for Foreign and Defense Policy and a former adviser to both presidents Boris Yeltsin and Vladimir Putin, he has long been influential in elite debates on security doctrine. Over the years, he has gained notoriety for advocating a lower threshold for nuclear use, arguing that the West underestimates Russia’s willingness to escalate.

Nuclear rhetoric as strategic messaging

Russia’s leadership has repeatedly used nuclear threats since the start of the Ukraine war, but Karaganov’s comments stand out for their explicitness. In the recent interview, Karaganov dismissed the idea of a Russian defeat as a “fantastical illusion,” claiming European leaders lack the intellectual capacity to grasp the risks they are taking by supporting Ukraine. His assertion that Europe would be “finished physically” if Russia faced imminent defeat reflects a worldview in which nuclear weapons are not merely deterrents of last resort, but tools to enforce geopolitical red lines.

He framed nuclear use not as an abstract possibility, but as an inevitable response to defeat. This aligns with the adjustments to Russia’s nuclear doctrine, which have broadened the scenarios under which nuclear weapons could be employed, including responses to large-scale conventional attacks that threaten sovereignty rather than the state’s very existence.

Particularly, Karaganov suggested that the UK and Germany would be his primary choices as potential targets, stating that Berlin should come first given that it represents “the source of the worst in European history.”

The intent behind such rhetoric is widely seen as coercive. By raising the specter of nuclear catastrophe, Moscow seeks to deter deeper Western involvement, particularly the supply of advanced long-range weapons to Ukraine. The message is designed to instill fear, fracture European unity and convince policymakers that continued support for Kyiv carries unacceptable risks.

Europe, NATO and the escalation dynamic

Karaganov’s warning comes at a moment of heightened tension between Russia and NATO. European countries continue to provide military, financial and political backing to Ukraine, while Russia portrays this support as a proxy war against itself. At the same time, disputes involving the Arctic and Greenland have added strain to transatlantic relations, reinforcing Moscow’s narrative of a divided and weakened West.

European leaders and NATO officials have consistently described Russian nuclear threats as irresponsible and dangerous. They stress that any use of nuclear weapons would trigger severe consequences and fundamentally alter the global security order. Still, analysts warn that repeated threats, even if intended as bluff, increase the risk of miscalculation; particularly as diplomatic channels erode and military activity intensifies.

In conclusion, Karaganov’s comments underscore a troubling reality: within influential circles in Moscow, nuclear escalation is openly discussed as a viable option rather than an unthinkable catastrophe. Whether or not the Kremlin shares his most extreme views, such statements normalize the idea of nuclear use and lower psychological barriers to escalation. For Europe, the challenge is twofold: maintaining support for Ukraine while managing escalation risks in a conflict where deterrence is being aggressively tested.