“We never liked the French,” the opening line of a Telegram post by Dmitry Medvedev, Russia’s former president and prime minister and now Security Council deputy chairman – a great start to 2024.
Apart from his public disdain for the West, Medvedev is also known for his hawkish comments that went as far as suggesting to nuke the West and Ukraine on multiple occasions, earning him the moniker as “herald of the apocalypse.”
JOIN US ON TELEGRAM
Follow our coverage of the war on the @Kyivpost_official.
In fact, Medvedev pressed the nuclear threat button a total of 12 times on Telegram alone in 2024 along with several comments at official meetings and other public pronouncements – no one has pressed the actual button against either Ukraine or the West thus far.
This is not a right to self-defense, but a direct and obvious basis for our use of nuclear weapons against such a state.
Post 1 – “Some dumb warriors from Banderastan”
On Jan. 11, Medvedev said Ukrainian attacks on Russian missile sites using Western weapons would warrant a nuclear response from Moscow.
“Here, some dumb warriors from Banderastan have gone so far as to say that the best method of fighting Russia is to destroy our launchers all over Russia with long-range missiles transferred by the West,” the statement began.
Medvedev often used the term “Banderastan” when mentioning Ukraine, a catchphrase that references Stepan Bandera, a controversial Ukrainian nationalist prominent during WWII by which the Kremlin, close to a century later, tries to justify its full-scale invasion for the “denazification” of Ukraine.
What if Russia Wins?
“What does this mean? Only one thing – they risk running into the action of paragraph 19 of the Fundamentals of the State Policy of Russia in the Sphere of Nuclear Deterrence: ‘d) aggression against the Russian Federation with the use of conventional weapons, when the very existence of the state is threatened.’
“This is not a right to self-defense, but a direct and obvious basis for our use of nuclear weapons against such a state,” Medvedev added.
“Banderastan” and its “fellow travelers” will continue to appear in Medvedev’s public rants.
And this is the notorious Apocalypse. The end of everything.
Post 2 – “Ballistic and cruise missiles with special warheads”
On Feb. 7, Medvedev said the Kremlin would be forced to use “ballistic and cruise missiles with special warheads” on NATO if a war ever breaks out between the two due to the “incomparability of our military potentials.”
Medvedev’s Telegram announcement referenced the West’s comments that a potential war with Russia is on the horizon. He started by criticizing NATO’s threats as distractions to their citizens before seemingly acknowledging the bloc’s military superiority, which would again, warrant the Kremlin’s nuclear response.
“Therefore, given the incomparability of our military potentials, we will simply have no choice. The answer will be asymmetrical. Ballistic and cruise missiles with special warheads will be used to protect the territorial integrity of our country.
“This is based on our doctrinal military documents and is well known to everyone. And this is the notorious Apocalypse. The end of everything,” the announcement reads.
To a global war with Western countries using the entire strategic arsenal of our state. In Kiev [sic], Berlin, London, Washington.
Post 3 – “All other beautiful historical places that have long been included in the flight targets of our nuclear triad.”
On Feb. 18, Medvedev threatened to nuke the West if Russia was defeated and was forced to give up the Ukrainian territories it annexed.
“For attempts to return Russia to the borders of 1991 will lead to only one thing. To a global war with Western countries using the entire strategic arsenal of our state. In Kiev [sic], Berlin, London, Washington.
“In all other beautiful historical places that have long been included in the flight targets of our nuclear triad,” the statement reads. The “nuclear triad” refers to intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs) and strategic bombers with nuclear weapons.
And, alas, not on the territory of the former Ukraine.
Post 4 – Against potential Western troop deployments to Ukraine
On May 6, Medvedev said Western troop deployments in Ukraine could warrant Moscow’s “non-strategic nuclear” response about reports that there were ongoing discussions on the possibility of such action in February, reports that Paris had sent troops to Ukraine was debunked by AP News.
“The chorus of irresponsible scoundrels from among the Western political elite calling for sending their troops to a non-existent country is growing,” according to Medvedev’s May 6 statement. The term “non-existent country” is another of Medved’s slogans when he refers to Ukraine.
“Sending their troops to the territory of the former Ukraine will entail their countries’ direct entry into the war, to which we will have to respond. And, alas, not on the territory of the former Ukraine.
“[...] And that is why today the General Staff has begun preparations for exercises, including events for practical training in the preparation and use of non-strategic nuclear weapons,” the statement added.
After all, Storm Shadow/SCALP-EG is not controlled by idiots in embroidered shirts, but by the British and the French.
Post 5 – In response to British Storm Shadow missiles arriving in Kyiv
Four days later, on May 10, Medvedev said Moscow could respond “not only with conventional explosives, but also with special ammunition” against the UK relating to Kyiv’s use of British Storm Shadow missiles and the associated comments by then British Foreign Minister David Cameron.
“After all, Storm Shadow/SCALP-EG is not controlled by idiots in embroidered shirts, but by the British and the French. Under certain circumstances, the answer for this will fly not only to Kiev [sic]. And not only with conventional explosives, but also with special ammunition,” his statement read.
Post 6 – We have big bombs
On May 17, Medvedev warned the West that Moscow’s nuclear arsenal “includes nuclear charges that significantly exceed the power of Little Boy and Fat Man,” referring to the atomic bombs the US dropped on Japan in WWII.
Medvedev talked about the buffer zone proposed by Russian President Vladimir Putin at the time and suggested that it should be expanded to the entirety of Ukraine to ensure that it “will not be able to strike targets on Russian territory” using Western long-range weapons.
He then further suggested the zone be extended to parts of Poland, a NATO member state, and cautioned the West to “calculate the range” of weapons being given to Kyiv.
And for those enemy countries whose lands are further than the tactical nuclear weapons coverage area, there is finally a strategic potential.
Post 7 – The “strategic potential” for nuclear strikes on European countries
In a lengthy Telegram post on May 31, Medvedev hinted at European capitals being a perfect target for strategic nuclear strikes due to their “very high population density.”
“After all, as the President of Russia rightly noted, European countries have a very high population density. And for those enemy countries whose lands are further than the tactical nuclear weapons coverage area, there is finally a strategic potential,” he said, adding that the message is “not intimidation or nuclear bluff.”
He also accused the West of approving Kyiv’s strikes inside Russia using Western long-range weaponry - a decision that was not be granted until November.
Holy s**t! It’s impossible, but it happened.
Post 8 – “Any patience comes to an end”
On Sept. 14, Medvedev said Moscow’s lack of nuclear response after Kyiv’s Kursk incursion was a sign of the Kremlin’s patience before adding that “any patience comes to an end.”
He suggested the West should not ignore the Kremlin’s warning and that an actual nuke could take them by surprise.
“And in the end, those moderate Western analysts who warned all will be right: ‘Yes, the Russians will most likely not respond in this way… although there is still a possibility. In addition, the response could also be using new means of delivery in non-nuclear equipment.’
“And then that’s it. A giant gray melted spot on the site of the mother city of Russia. Holy s**t! It’s impossible, but it happened…” his “prediction” read – the “mother city of Russia” was Medvedev’s sarcastic reference to Kyiv, as Ukrainians call it the founding site for Kyivan Rus, the ancestral kingdom of modern-day Ukraine, Belarus and Russia.
Everyone understands which countries we are talking about.
Post 9 – Russia’s updated nuclear doctrine
Medvedev once again warned Kyiv and the West that Moscow could respond with nuclear weapons now that Putin had modified the country’s criteria for a nuclear strike.
Under the new rules, Russia would also consider any attack by a non-nuclear country supported by a nuclear power as a joint attack by both.
“Aggression against Russia by a state that does not possess nuclear weapons, but with the support or participation of a country with nuclear weapons, will be considered a joint attack. Everyone understands which countries we are talking about,” Medvedev hinted at Ukraine in his Sept. 25 statement.
And it will be hard for him to deny the pleasure of looking at the lights in Kiev [sic].
Post 10 – Nukes in Belarus
In response to a statement by Ukrainian lawmaker Oleh Dunda of a need to expand the war to include Russian ally Belarus, Medvedev said that would give Minsk every right to use the Russian tactical nuclear weapons deployed there.
He then joked that Belarusian President Aleksandr Lukashenko could then look at the explosions in Ukraine close up.
“Some stinking Kiev [sic] Dunda has suggested moving the war to Belarus. Well then Alexander Grigoryevich [Lukashenko] will have every reason to ask Russia to use the [tactical nuclear weapons] deployed in Belarus.
“And it will be hard for him to deny the pleasure of looking at the lights in Kiev [sic],” Medvedev said in his Oct. 6 statement. The use Lukashenko’s patronymic is a sign of respect in Russian culture.
The right arises to launch a retaliatory strike with weapons of mass destruction against Kiev [sic] and the main NATO facilities, wherever they are.
Post 11 – “This is already WWIII”
Medvedev brought up Russia’s updated nuclear doctrine again following the US granting limited approval for Kyiv to strike Russian territories with its long-range weapons and the official approval of the Kremlin’s new nuclear doctrine.
In the Nov. 19 statement, Medvedev said the move “can now be qualified as an attack by the bloc’s countries on Russia,” suggesting this warranted Russia’s nuclear response.
“One thing is important – what the Head of the Russian State said on Sept. 12. And as a result, a new version of the Fundamentals of State Policy in the Field of Nuclear Deterrence was approved today.
“The use of alliance missiles in this way can now be qualified as an attack by the bloc’s countries on Russia. In this case, the right arises to launch a retaliatory strike with weapons of mass destruction against Kiev [sic] and the main NATO facilities, wherever they are. And this is already WWIII,” it read.
Four days later, Russia launched its experimental “Oreshnik” intermediate-range ballistic missile (IRBM) on Ukraine’s Dnipro – the first use in combat of such a weapon in history but excluded nuclear warheads.
The very idea is so absurd that it raises suspicions about the presence of paranoid psychosis in Joe the Walking Dead and all those who discuss the advisability of such a step.
Post 12 – On alleged US nuke transfers to Kyiv
Medvedev, referring to reports at the time, called proposals that the US could transfer nuclear weapons to Ukraine “nonsense” that would, again, warrant Moscow’s nuclear response.
“The very idea is so absurd that it raises suspicions about the presence of paranoid psychosis in Joe The Walking Dead and all those who discuss the advisability of such a step,” read his Nov. 26 statement.
“The very threat of transferring nuclear weapons to the Kiev [sic] regime can be seen as preparation for a nuclear conflict with Russia,” he added.
Medvedev was not fully wrong, though – Kyiv Post debunked reports at the time as an extrapolation of a comment by unnamed US officials that was wrongly interpreted as the Biden administration’s official position.
You can also highlight the text and press Ctrl + Enter
