Are We Facing a Nuclear War Crisis Similar to the Cuban Missile Crisis?

October 6, 2022

On October 22, 1962 President John Kennedy made a scary TV address which showed the world aerial photos of Soviet nuclear missile installations in Cuba. He explained that a naval blockade around Cuba would be enforced, and said ominously that the U.S. was prepared to use military force if necessary to neutralize this threat to national security. Following this news, we were all fearful that the world was on the brink of nuclear war.


At the time I was the young wire editor at the Guelph Mercury and watched the chugging Canadian Press machine spew out hourly news of the escalating and threatening situation developing between the Soviet Union and the United States. Nuclear armed B52’s were airborne and the Russian leader was Sabre rattling like his successor today.


But in contrast to today there was direct negotiation between Khrushchev and Kennedy.  Finally, on October 28 Krushchev capitulated. Work on the missile sites was stopped and the missiles would be returned to the Soviet Union. In return, Kennedy committed the United States would never invade Cuba.


So in a situation where Russian President Putin is watching predominantly US armed Ukrainian troops driving his forces out of larger and larger areas of territory he had coincidentally annexed as part of Russia, he is continually threatening to use tactical nuclear weapons. President Biden and the Pentagon warn of “catastrophic consequences” should the Russians make good their threat. The  various scenarios that are possible would all likely-involve major US military attacks on Russian positions in the Ukraine. This kind of escalation could lead to more nuclear deployment. 


Learned opinion on what will happen goes this way: Ukrainian forces just retook Lyman, a crucial rail and transport hub, and this could unhinge much of the Russian defense of northern Donbas. Thus Russia is backed into a tight corner. Having just upped the ante with staged referendums, proclaimed annexations, and televised fanfare in Moscow, Putin may just do something more drastic to demonstrate real strength by making good on his threat to use tactical nuclear weapons.

Or, facing further defeats, much has been written on Russia’s non military strategic powers which he may use: radical warfare including cyber, communications, undersea  cable sabotage, satellite, and pipeline sabotage, and other "unconventional" methods. Equally horrific for the west.


Are we already seeing early signs of escalation, just as in the cold war 60 years ago the photos of missiles in Cuba was the trigger for a huge crisis, photos were posted on the Telegraph World New recently showing  a train operated by the secretive Russian nuclear division and linked to the 12th main directorate of the Russian ministry of defense heading towards the front line in Ukraine. There will be more.


There would also appear to be no viable contact between NATO, the US administration and the leadership in Moscow. And no ongoing talks between Ukraine and Russia. No lines for negotiation, and no reason to believe Putin has any desire to engage. 


We would all do well to listen to Mykhailo Podolyak, Advisor to the Head of the President's Office in Ukraine, quoted from an interview with Wirtualna Polska: "A big agreement on war and peace is impossible as Russia is not interested in it. The Kremlin believes that Ukraine should be wiped off the face of the earth by military means. They also have intentions regarding Moldova, Georgia and Kazakhstan. They want to dictate the rules of the game to Europe. There is no peace in these plans." 


It is clear that even a truce allowing Russia to retain borders of previously occupied territory would be totally unacceptable to the Ukrainian leader. And Putin’s desire to keep the annexed territories is also non-negotiable.


Consider the very different situation which led to the de-escalation of the missile crisis 60 years ago. Kennedy and Khrushchev made real efforts throughout the crisis to clearly understand each others’ intentions, while all the world hung on the brink of possible nuclear war. No such desire exists today. Putin is a pariah and terrorist in the midst of western leaders. French President Macron alone has maintained direct contact with Putin but nothing has come of their conversations. 


Most observers agree that avoiding a serious nuclear escalation in the next months will depend on the ability of Putin to remain in power as his nation is being depopulated of draft age men and increasingly restless with his war, for which he is at last being openly criticized for. 


By Patrick Gossage

Note, this article ran in the Ottawa Life Magazine (OLM)

Patrick Gossage Insider Political Views

By Patrick Gossage July 7, 2025
When I was at university in the sixties, it was easy to love being Canadian. Patriotism was easy in the era of Pearson, peacekeeping and his Nobel Prize. He introduced defining landmark social programs like the Canada Pension Plan and universal health care. He also was crucial in launching the new Canadian flag, promoting bilingualism, and fostering a more inclusive immigration policy. His government got into the business of Canadian cultural promotion with the establishment of Telefilm Canada in 1967 to fund Canadian filmmakers. (The crown corporation, the National Film Board, was established in 1939.) The Pearson era went out with a proud Canadian bang at Expo67. Canada was prosperous, our identities, either largely British and French, were secure. The writer and philosopher George Grant, put it this way: “English speaking Canadians have been called a dull and costive lot. In these dynamic days, such qualities are particularly unattractive to the chic. Yet our stodginess has made us a society of greater simplicity, formality, and perhaps even innocence than the people to the south.” This is the society in which most anglo seniors today grew up. Not chic, looking with some envy at the glamour of Hollywood and Broadway, but modest and content. But the seeds of change were there. In Toronto. Italian and Portuguese laborers were being brought in to build subways and suburbs. Canada was about to add to the core French and English culture, and value assumptions far more diverse, and multicultural influences. Multiculturalism became official government policy in 1988. In his speech to the House of Commons, Trudeau stated that no singular culture could define Canada, and that the government accepted “the contention of other cultural communities that they, too, are essential elements in Canada.” A policy of multiculturalism was implemented to promote and respect cultural diversity, and to in fact fund ethnic efforts to preserve and develop their cultures within Canadian society, the opposite of the US “melting pot” objective. Section 27 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms officially recognizes multiculturalism as a Canadian value. In a 1971 speech in Winnipeg to a Ukrainian audience, Trudeau said: “What could be more absurd than the concept of an “all Canadian boy or girl! “ Trudeau greatly enlarged the makeup of the body of immigrants by expanding the ‘family class’. In 1978 immigration act changes allowed new Canadians to sponsor their parents of any age. Those from less-developed nations found this particularly appealing. Trudeau senior’s major accomplishment which ensured the protection of all minority rights was the repatriation of our constitution woth the Charter of Rights and Freedoms Now In Canada, approximately 23.0% of the population are first-generation immigrants, meaning they were born outside of Canada. This figure represents the highest proportion of immigrants in Canada in 150 years and is the highest among G7 countries. Over half of our population are either of English or French heritage. The torch of openness to refugees and immigrants and “diversity is our strength” has been taken up by Justin Trudeau in a big way. He told the New York Times Magazine in October 2014 that Canada could be the “first post national state”. He added: “There is no core identity, no mainstream in Canada.” Many would argue that, yes, there is a core set of Canadian values. Often not recognized, they are regularly reflected in government policies. They set us apart from the United States, form part of our identity, and enrich our life experiences. Pearson and the Trudeaus have been instrumental in implementing Liberal values, ensuring equality of opportunity across the country and that no minority is trampled on. Foremost is universal publicly funded health care, whatever its problems. His son will be remembered for the Canadian Child benefit which today grants parents up to over $6,000 per child, which greatly reduced child poverty and $10 a day daycare. Justin Trudeau also launched publicly funded denticare and started a pharmacare program. Recipients of these programs obviously see them as essential parts of being Canadian. The generally shared values of Canadians include the importance of collective wellbeing, co-operation and social equality and a belief that active governments can improve our lives. Justin Trudeau’s self-declared “feminism” and his making cabinet one half women showed a dedication to equal rights for women which he tirelessly promoted. He was forever promoting the value of “diversity is our strength”. We genuinely welcome immigrants and show a high degree of tolerance for differences. Perhaps the best indication of this is the late seventies welcoming of over 60,000 Vietnamese boat people. As well, after 2015, over 44,000 government and privately sponsored Syrian refugees were settled and helped to establish themselves in Canada. Prime Minister Trudeau personally welcomed the first arrival in Toronto. While seemingly uncontrolled immigration of foreign students and refugees has become more controversial recently, it is accepted that we need immigrants, and the flow is now more rationally controlled. His father also ruled over a Canada that was very pro-Canadian and even anti American – not hard when the United States was immersed in the nightmare of Vietnam. He was well aware of the dangers signaled by George Grant in Lament for a Nation, which predicted the virtual integration of the Canadian and US economies. He established the Foreign Investment Review Agency to break the wholesale takeover of Canadian businesses by US firms. He established Petro Canada to get a window into the largely foreign owned oil and gas sector. And his government was very active in supporting and encouraging Canadian culture. The CRTC mandated Canadian content on our airwaves, spawning a healthy music industry. His son substantially increased funding for the public broadcaster CBC. Then in 1988 came a major shift in our identity and sovereignty. Prime Minister Mulroney wanted a free trade deal with the US and John Turner, the defeated Liberal leader, finally found his voice: “I will not let Brian Mulroney sell out our sovereignty. I will not let this great nation surrender its birthright. I will not let Brian Mulroney destroy a 120-year-old dream called Canada, and neither will Canadians”. But Turner lost, and a new deal sealed the situation we are in today with over 70% of our exports going stateside and Trump determined to wage economic warfare with a country he feels does not have a right to exist and should be the 51 st state: “Economically we have such power over Canada.” In fact, we have inadvertently given him “all the cards” as Trump likes to say. Turner might well say from the grave, “I told you so!” Sovereignty means more than building our own economy more independent of the United States. It means rebuilding the pride we have as Canadians and actually knowing and cherishing its values so different from those south of us. And this seems to be happening ironically, thanks to Trump’s trumpeting us as a 51 st state. Flags are everywhere and as we celebrate our 158 th birthday there is a new patriotism bursting out across the nation. The national anthem is being enthusiastically sung by audiences at all sorts of gatherings and performances. And worry as we may about the diverse cultures and beliefs of the hundreds and thousands of immigrant adults from every corner of the Globe, we know their children going to public schools will become knowledgeable, committed Canadians. There is a Canadian soul which will not be destroyed.
Doug Ford in a suit and tie is talking into a microphone
By Patrick Gossage June 11, 2025
Who is the is the real Doug Ford? Is it the smiling man walking beside Premier of Alberta Danielle Smith into the meeting of the Premiers with the PM intoning “love is in the air”(!) or the inept initiator of the Green Belt scandal which sold protected land to his developer friends – for which he apologized while reversing the order?
More Posts