19Glenn Diesen
Be sure to share these materials with friends, kin, and workmates.
Glenn Diesen
CHATS W.
Scott Ritter • Chas Freeman
Scott Ritter: Europe Attacked Russia - Retaliation Is Now Unavoidable
May 19, 2026
Scott Ritter is a former Major, Intelligence Officer, US Marine, and UN Weapons Inspector. Ritter discusses how Europe has now crossed the line, making a Russian retaliation inevitable. Follow Prof. Glenn Diesen: Substack: https://glenndiesen.substack.com/
[00:01] Introduction and Context of Escalating Attacks on Russia
Scott Ritter, a former UN weapons inspector and US Marine intelligence officer, opens the discussion emphasizing the intensification of attacks on Russia, notably massive drone strikes on Moscow and incursions near St. Petersburg that forced flight suspensions at Pulkovo airport. Ritter asserts that Western involvement is critical to these attacks—Western-developed technology, intelligence, and manufacturing outside Ukraine enable these strikes. Thus, these are not isolated Ukrainian actions but reflect collective Western escalation against Russia, effectively constituting NATO nations engaging in combat operations against Russia. [01:52] Crossing of Strategic Red Lines and Western War Preparations
Ritter points out that major Western powers such as Germany, France, and the UK openly prepare for armed conflict with Russia, targeting strategic goals for long-range strikes within Russian territory by 2029 or 2030. Public statements by Germany’s Defense Minister Pistorius declare Russia an enemy, emphasizing preparation for war. Ritter, adopting a military strategist’s perspective, notes Russia has largely restrained from escalating despite provocations, but the West’s persistent crossing of red lines undermines this restraint, suggesting the threshold where inaction becomes more dangerous than retaliation has been crossed or soon will be. [03:30] Use of Baltic States as Attack Corridors and Russian Response Expectations
Drone attacks utilizing Baltic airspace (Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania) are confirmed by Russian intelligence allegations and reflect a clear strategic escalation, with risks that Russia will no longer tolerate basing Ukrainian strikes from NATO member states. Ritter believes Latvia, in particular, may be “marked for death” as a likely target for Russian retaliation given emerging intelligence and political assessments. These developments signal a shift from managed escalation toward inevitable military responses against NATO-associated territories. [05:19] Russian Escalation Management and Western Strategic Goals
Ritter lauds Putin’s previously effective management of the escalation ladder—Russian restraint has avoided an all-out conflict despite Western efforts aimed at Russia’s “strategic defeat” since the beginning of the war. Western crossing of red lines is described as a deliberate provocation to elicit a Russian overreaction and galvanize Western public support for Ukraine. Despite misinformation on social media and pro-Ukrainian narratives, official US reports confirm Russia maintains operational and strategic dominance on the battlefield, pursuing a war of attrition aimed at wearing down the West and Ukraine. [07:56] Introduction to Sergey Karaganov and the ‘Karaganov Doctrine’
Ritter introduces Sergey Karaganov, a respected Russian political-military analyst and Kremlin advisor, who advocates the preemptive use of nuclear weapons if Western powers use conventional means via a non-nuclear state (Ukraine) to strike Russia’s strategic depth. This doctrine, formally adopted in Russia’s 2025 nuclear posture review, essentially states that conventional attacks facilitated by nuclear powers can be deemed nuclear attacks, justifying nuclear retaliation. Western powers appear to be flagrantly crossing these red lines under the belief that Russia is bluffing, while Ukraine intensifies attacks to provoke NATO engagement. [10:33] Significance of the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum and Anticipated Russian Retaliation
Ritter highlights the impending 2024 St. Petersburg International Economic Forum, one of the world’s largest economic gatherings, noting that Russia will not tolerate further Ukrainian drone threats during this event. The West’s escalation is seen as a dangerous miscalculation, and Ritter anticipates a strong Russian military response targeting Baltic states, production facilities in Europe, possibly even NATO command centers such as Ramstein Air Base, viewing it as necessary to decisively “nip threats in the bud.” He urges that Kyiv itself might face severe retaliation to demonstrate the stakes of continued conflict. [14:13] Assessment of Damage to Russian Energy Infrastructure
Despite Western media claims of significant success, Ritter recounts an interview with a Russian State Duma committee member, emphasizing that damage from drone attacks on Russian energy infrastructure has been minimal and readily mitigated up to November 2023. However, Ritter estimates that current damage has escalated to affect 10-20% of Russian export production capacity beyond prior levels, causing long-term repair needs, threatening to deplete Russia’s strategic reserves, and necessitating immediate Russian action to prevent debilitating effects. [18:56] May 9 Victory Day as Indicator of Russian Resolve
Ritter describes the May 9th Victory Day celebrations as marked by “deathly seriousness,” intense anti-Western rhetoric, and unprecedented alignment in Russian elite discourse—from Ambassador speeches invoking unconditional surrender from Ukraine and comparing it to Nazi Germany, to Dmitry Medvedev’s stark article in RT branding Germany as a “permanent enemy.” This atmosphere signals that Russia perceives itself at a critical juncture requiring possible decisive military steps before the St. Petersburg Forum. [21:11] Anticipated High-Level Talks Between Putin and Xi Jinping
With Putin arriving in Beijing shortly after the Trump visit, Ritter expects an important strategic discussion with Xi Jinping, comparing it to the February 4th, 2022 meeting preluding the special military operation. China’s stance on Taiwan parallels Russia’s concerns about Ukraine, making the dialogue crucial. Ritter dismisses Western intelligence speculation about Chinese criticisms and anticipates China will be briefed on Russia’s planned posture adjustment, potentially laying groundwork for diplomatic intervention or coordination. [24:24] Latvian Defense Minister Resignation and Baltic States as Escalation Zones
Ritter discusses the resignation of Latvia’s Defense Minister following drone attacks within Latvian territory, viewed as an embarrassing breach of covert operational security. He notes the repeated use of the Baltic corridor by Ukrainian drones, confirmed by extensive tracking and Russian claims, although the exact control methods (including Russian electronic warfare against drones) remain partly uncertain. Ritter also highlights the political vulnerability of Baltic states and the unrealistic expectation that NATO would intervene militarily to defend them if Russia escalates. [28:57] Kaliningrad as a Potential Flashpoint and NATO’s Limitations
Ritter warns that Kaliningrad—hosting approximately one million Russians as well as nuclear weapons—is a highly sensitive and dangerous flashpoint. NATO rhetoric about “taking Kaliningrad” is described as reckless and likely to provoke a devastating Russian response, potentially including the rapid re-annexation of Baltic states. He states that NATO lacks the political will and military capability to defend the Baltic nations in such a scenario, calling current Baltic state leadership rhetorically fatal and warning that such provocation could hasten a collapse of NATO credibility and possibly the alliance itself. [32:51] The Fallacy of Russia’s Deterrence and the Risk of Nuclear Escalation
Ritter elaborates on the Karaganov Doctrine and its implications, warning of a new nuclear deterrence paradigm where Russia’s demonstration of readiness to use nuclear weapons obliges the US and others to reconsider their posture. He indicates that any nuclear exchange risks inevitable general nuclear war and the destruction of humanity—what Ritter terms the “Karaganov fallacy”: the mistaken belief that limited use of tactical nuclear weapons can be controlled or contained. He stresses the grave danger in the delusion of “escalation control” currently believed by Western policymakers. [39:39] Expected Russian Retaliation Strategy
Ritter forecasts a decisive initial Russian retaliation against key targets including Kyiv and at least one Baltic state, likely leading to the destruction or elimination of the latter as a signal to the West. He expects escalation management, with Germany and UK facilities targeted only in subsequent waves if required. The initial attacks are projected to be significant to convey a “marker” or warning, potentially involving concentrated “resnick” attacks designed to inflict massive urban devastation. This underscores an increasing Russian willingness to escalate in a manner the West must seriously consider. [43:09] Diplomatic Prospects and China’s Potential Role
Ritter is skeptical about the EU’s short-term capacity for serious diplomacy because military planning for war is ongoing in parallel to diplomatic talks. He sees China as a critical potential diplomatic intermediary that could connect Russia, the US (via Trump), and Europe to press for de-escalation. However, without effective direct communication and credible threats (e.g., the US warning Europe to cease escalation or be abandoned), the path toward war remains open. Ritter remarks on the fragmented, weakened US political leadership and doubts Trump’s ability to exert the necessary influence. [45:22] Generational Gap in Military Leadership and Cold War Experience
Ritter laments that the generation with direct Cold War experience and familiarity with large-scale, nuclear-capable ground warfare has largely retired, leaving a gap in military understanding among current leadership. This contributes to mismanagement of the current crisis and raises fears of repeating catastrophic mistakes akin to those that led to World War I, underscoring the need for urgent sober reflection and rational policies. [46:22] European Political Leadership and Radical Elements
The interview concludes with Ritter criticizing the European political leadership, especially in the Baltic states, highlighting figures like Estonia’s Kaja Kallas as responsible for hardline policies that refuse diplomacy and pursue escalation. He expresses pessimism about Europe’s readiness to demand common sense or reverse course and conveys his nervousness about the approaching crisis point. [47:23] Summary and Final Appeal
Ritter closes by deploring Western media narratives celebrating attacks on Russia—calling it tribal, irrational logic that fails to grasp the existential scale of the conflict with a nuclear superpower. He emphasizes the catastrophic risk of continuing down this path and urges all to pray for peace but also actively engage in informed discourse and advocacy. He compliments the interviewer for promoting high-quality intellectual discussion that can potentially influence policy circles and concludes with a sober warning about the dangers of misunderstanding escalation dynamics.
[00:01] Introduction and Context of Escalating Attacks on Russia
Scott Ritter, a former UN weapons inspector and US Marine intelligence officer, opens the discussion emphasizing the intensification of attacks on Russia, notably massive drone strikes on Moscow and incursions near St. Petersburg that forced flight suspensions at Pulkovo airport. Ritter asserts that Western involvement is critical to these attacks—Western-developed technology, intelligence, and manufacturing outside Ukraine enable these strikes. Thus, these are not isolated Ukrainian actions but reflect collective Western escalation against Russia, effectively constituting NATO nations engaging in combat operations against Russia. [01:52] Crossing of Strategic Red Lines and Western War Preparations
Ritter points out that major Western powers such as Germany, France, and the UK openly prepare for armed conflict with Russia, targeting strategic goals for long-range strikes within Russian territory by 2029 or 2030. Public statements by Germany’s Defense Minister Pistorius declare Russia an enemy, emphasizing preparation for war. Ritter, adopting a military strategist’s perspective, notes Russia has largely restrained from escalating despite provocations, but the West’s persistent crossing of red lines undermines this restraint, suggesting the threshold where inaction becomes more dangerous than retaliation has been crossed or soon will be. [03:30] Use of Baltic States as Attack Corridors and Russian Response Expectations
Drone attacks utilizing Baltic airspace (Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania) are confirmed by Russian intelligence allegations and reflect a clear strategic escalation, with risks that Russia will no longer tolerate basing Ukrainian strikes from NATO member states. Ritter believes Latvia, in particular, may be “marked for death” as a likely target for Russian retaliation given emerging intelligence and political assessments. These developments signal a shift from managed escalation toward inevitable military responses against NATO-associated territories. [05:19] Russian Escalation Management and Western Strategic Goals
Ritter lauds Putin’s previously effective management of the escalation ladder—Russian restraint has avoided an all-out conflict despite Western efforts aimed at Russia’s “strategic defeat” since the beginning of the war. Western crossing of red lines is described as a deliberate provocation to elicit a Russian overreaction and galvanize Western public support for Ukraine. Despite misinformation on social media and pro-Ukrainian narratives, official US reports confirm Russia maintains operational and strategic dominance on the battlefield, pursuing a war of attrition aimed at wearing down the West and Ukraine. [07:56] Introduction to Sergey Karaganov and the ‘Karaganov Doctrine’
Ritter introduces Sergey Karaganov, a respected Russian political-military analyst and Kremlin advisor, who advocates the preemptive use of nuclear weapons if Western powers use conventional means via a non-nuclear state (Ukraine) to strike Russia’s strategic depth. This doctrine, formally adopted in Russia’s 2025 nuclear posture review, essentially states that conventional attacks facilitated by nuclear powers can be deemed nuclear attacks, justifying nuclear retaliation. Western powers appear to be flagrantly crossing these red lines under the belief that Russia is bluffing, while Ukraine intensifies attacks to provoke NATO engagement. [10:33] Significance of the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum and Anticipated Russian Retaliation
Ritter highlights the impending 2024 St. Petersburg International Economic Forum, one of the world’s largest economic gatherings, noting that Russia will not tolerate further Ukrainian drone threats during this event. The West’s escalation is seen as a dangerous miscalculation, and Ritter anticipates a strong Russian military response targeting Baltic states, production facilities in Europe, possibly even NATO command centers such as Ramstein Air Base, viewing it as necessary to decisively “nip threats in the bud.” He urges that Kyiv itself might face severe retaliation to demonstrate the stakes of continued conflict. [14:13] Assessment of Damage to Russian Energy Infrastructure
Despite Western media claims of significant success, Ritter recounts an interview with a Russian State Duma committee member, emphasizing that damage from drone attacks on Russian energy infrastructure has been minimal and readily mitigated up to November 2023. However, Ritter estimates that current damage has escalated to affect 10-20% of Russian export production capacity beyond prior levels, causing long-term repair needs, threatening to deplete Russia’s strategic reserves, and necessitating immediate Russian action to prevent debilitating effects. [18:56] May 9 Victory Day as Indicator of Russian Resolve
Ritter describes the May 9th Victory Day celebrations as marked by “deathly seriousness,” intense anti-Western rhetoric, and unprecedented alignment in Russian elite discourse—from Ambassador speeches invoking unconditional surrender from Ukraine and comparing it to Nazi Germany, to Dmitry Medvedev’s stark article in RT branding Germany as a “permanent enemy.” This atmosphere signals that Russia perceives itself at a critical juncture requiring possible decisive military steps before the St. Petersburg Forum. [21:11] Anticipated High-Level Talks Between Putin and Xi Jinping
With Putin arriving in Beijing shortly after the Trump visit, Ritter expects an important strategic discussion with Xi Jinping, comparing it to the February 4th, 2022 meeting preluding the special military operation. China’s stance on Taiwan parallels Russia’s concerns about Ukraine, making the dialogue crucial. Ritter dismisses Western intelligence speculation about Chinese criticisms and anticipates China will be briefed on Russia’s planned posture adjustment, potentially laying groundwork for diplomatic intervention or coordination. [24:24] Latvian Defense Minister Resignation and Baltic States as Escalation Zones
Ritter discusses the resignation of Latvia’s Defense Minister following drone attacks within Latvian territory, viewed as an embarrassing breach of covert operational security. He notes the repeated use of the Baltic corridor by Ukrainian drones, confirmed by extensive tracking and Russian claims, although the exact control methods (including Russian electronic warfare against drones) remain partly uncertain. Ritter also highlights the political vulnerability of Baltic states and the unrealistic expectation that NATO would intervene militarily to defend them if Russia escalates. [28:57] Kaliningrad as a Potential Flashpoint and NATO’s Limitations
Ritter warns that Kaliningrad—hosting approximately one million Russians as well as nuclear weapons—is a highly sensitive and dangerous flashpoint. NATO rhetoric about “taking Kaliningrad” is described as reckless and likely to provoke a devastating Russian response, potentially including the rapid re-annexation of Baltic states. He states that NATO lacks the political will and military capability to defend the Baltic nations in such a scenario, calling current Baltic state leadership rhetorically fatal and warning that such provocation could hasten a collapse of NATO credibility and possibly the alliance itself. [32:51] The Fallacy of Russia’s Deterrence and the Risk of Nuclear Escalation
Ritter elaborates on the Karaganov Doctrine and its implications, warning of a new nuclear deterrence paradigm where Russia’s demonstration of readiness to use nuclear weapons obliges the US and others to reconsider their posture. He indicates that any nuclear exchange risks inevitable general nuclear war and the destruction of humanity—what Ritter terms the “Karaganov fallacy”: the mistaken belief that limited use of tactical nuclear weapons can be controlled or contained. He stresses the grave danger in the delusion of “escalation control” currently believed by Western policymakers. [39:39] Expected Russian Retaliation Strategy
Ritter forecasts a decisive initial Russian retaliation against key targets including Kyiv and at least one Baltic state, likely leading to the destruction or elimination of the latter as a signal to the West. He expects escalation management, with Germany and UK facilities targeted only in subsequent waves if required. The initial attacks are projected to be significant to convey a “marker” or warning, potentially involving concentrated “resnick” attacks designed to inflict massive urban devastation. This underscores an increasing Russian willingness to escalate in a manner the West must seriously consider. [43:09] Diplomatic Prospects and China’s Potential Role
Ritter is skeptical about the EU’s short-term capacity for serious diplomacy because military planning for war is ongoing in parallel to diplomatic talks. He sees China as a critical potential diplomatic intermediary that could connect Russia, the US (via Trump), and Europe to press for de-escalation. However, without effective direct communication and credible threats (e.g., the US warning Europe to cease escalation or be abandoned), the path toward war remains open. Ritter remarks on the fragmented, weakened US political leadership and doubts Trump’s ability to exert the necessary influence. [45:22] Generational Gap in Military Leadership and Cold War Experience
Ritter laments that the generation with direct Cold War experience and familiarity with large-scale, nuclear-capable ground warfare has largely retired, leaving a gap in military understanding among current leadership. This contributes to mismanagement of the current crisis and raises fears of repeating catastrophic mistakes akin to those that led to World War I, underscoring the need for urgent sober reflection and rational policies. [46:22] European Political Leadership and Radical Elements
The interview concludes with Ritter criticizing the European political leadership, especially in the Baltic states, highlighting figures like Estonia’s Kaja Kallas as responsible for hardline policies that refuse diplomacy and pursue escalation. He expresses pessimism about Europe’s readiness to demand common sense or reverse course and conveys his nervousness about the approaching crisis point. [47:23] Summary and Final Appeal
Ritter closes by deploring Western media narratives celebrating attacks on Russia—calling it tribal, irrational logic that fails to grasp the existential scale of the conflict with a nuclear superpower. He emphasizes the catastrophic risk of continuing down this path and urges all to pray for peace but also actively engage in informed discourse and advocacy. He compliments the interviewer for promoting high-quality intellectual discussion that can potentially influence policy circles and concludes with a sober warning about the dangers of misunderstanding escalation dynamics.
Final Key Takeaways
- The Ukraine conflict has escalated into a wider proxy war involving the West and NATO directly against Russia, crossing several strategic red lines recognized by Russia.
- Russia formally adopted a nuclear doctrine to justify nuclear use if attacked via conventional means by NATO powers through Ukraine, raising the stakes to unprecedented levels.
- Current drone attacks using Baltic corridors indicate growing Western willingness to escalate despite risks of direct conflict with NATO countries, compelling Russia toward decisive retaliation.
- Russian military dominance on the battlefield persists despite Western narratives, but economic and infrastructure damage from drone strikes is intensifying, pressing rapid Russian response.
- Baltic states are highly vulnerable and potentially in the crosshairs, while NATO’s political will and military capacity to defend them is questioned, potentially leading to a collapse of the alliance’s credibility.
- The risk of nuclear escalation is real and poorly understood by Western policymakers, with the possibility of uncontrollable general nuclear war once nuclear weapons are used tactically.
- China’s strategic partnership and upcoming discussions with Russia may offer a narrow diplomatic window, but immediate prospects for de-escalation remain bleak amidst ongoing military preparations.
- Generational gaps in military understanding and leadership further complicate the crisis, with fears that reckless escalation could lead to global catastrophe.
Summary Conclusion
The video transcript presents a deeply sobering analysis of the current Ukraine-Russia conflict, highlighting the profound risks woven into Western escalation policies and Russian strategic responses. Scott Ritter’s expert insights underscore the dangerous trajectory toward direct conflict involving NATO, significant military retaliation from Russia, and the looming threat of nuclear war. He calls for urgent global attention to prevent miscalculations leading to catastrophic escalation, stressing that peace requires not only prayer but active, informed engagement to influence policymaking and avert disaster.
Chas Freeman: Crisis in Israel & Iranian Nuclear Weapons
May 25, 2026
Ambassador Chas Freeman discusses Trump being stuck in Iran, Israel's reputation collapsing, the possibility of Iran developing a nuclear weapon, and the rapid changes in the international system. Ambassador Freeman was a former Assistant Secretary of Defense, earning the highest public service awards of the Department of Defense for his roles in designing a NATO-centred post-Cold War European security system and in reestablishing defence and military relations with China. He served as U. S. Ambassador to Saudi Arabia during operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm.
