The world has approached a dangerous line where talk of nuclear catastrophe no longer seems like an abstract scenario from the last century. Renowned Italian theoretical physicist Carlo Rovelli in his book “85 Seconds to Midnight” warns: the current level of nuclear threat may be the highest in human history.
Rovelli is known not only for his work in the field of loop quantum gravity but also for his ability to speak about science in simple terms. This time, his topic goes far beyond physics. He talks about politics, fear, distrust between states, and how quickly the world can lose control over the logic of deterrence.
According to The Guardian, Rovelli’s key point is that modern leaders lack the caution and strategic foresight demonstrated by politicians during the Cold War. Back then, the world was also on the brink, but there was an understanding between superpowers: a nuclear war cannot have a winner.
Today, according to the scientist, this understanding has weakened.
Why Rovelli criticizes the new arms race
Carlo Rovelli opposes the buildup of arms in Europe and believes that the main risk arises not only from the strength of armies but from mutual fear. When states stop trusting each other, every new armament is explained as defense, but to the other side, it looks like preparation for an attack.
The physicist is particularly critical of talks about a possible large-scale invasion of Russia deep into Europe. In his opinion, such fears are exaggerated. Rovelli reminds that Russia could not quickly achieve its goals even in Ukraine, and NATO’s combined military expenditures significantly exceed Russia’s.
At the same time, his position does not negate the fact of Russian aggression against Ukraine. The point is different: the scientist tries to show that panic and the logic of constant strengthening can lead to an even more dangerous spiral.
The danger is not only in war but in nuclear arsenals
The main source of concern is the huge stockpiles of nuclear weapons. Russia has thousands of nuclear warheads, and the US also maintains a large arsenal and the right to retaliate. Of the three largest nuclear powers, only China officially adheres to the principle of no first use of nuclear weapons.
Rovelli believes that the situation became especially unstable after Western weapons began to be used on targets in Russia. He is concerned about the very possibility that Moscow might interpret strikes with British missiles as direct strikes by the UK.
In the old logic of nuclear deterrence, there was an unspoken rule: if a state possesses nuclear weapons, its territory is not bombed directly. Now, according to Rovelli, this boundary is blurring.
For Israel, such a conversation is not something distant. Regional security, the Iranian nuclear program, wars in the Middle East, strikes on infrastructure, and the constant threat of escalation make the topic of nuclear deterrence part of the real political agenda. That is why НАновости — Новости Израиля | Nikk.Agency considers such warnings not as an abstract European discussion but as a signal for the Israeli audience: global instability quickly reflects on the Middle East.
What Europe, the Middle East, and the logic of fear have in common
Rovelli writes that militarization is often fueled not by strength but by a sense of vulnerability. When society is convinced that “if we don’t destroy them, they will destroy us,” the space for diplomacy narrows sharply.
He draws historical parallels with the aggression of the Third Reich and modern conflicts in the Middle East, emphasizing: violence often amplifies fear, and fear then justifies new violence. In such logic, each side considers itself defensive, even when it takes steps that bring catastrophe closer.
For the Israeli reader, this is a particularly recognizable formula. Israel lives in an environment where security is not a theory but a daily necessity. But that is why it is important to distinguish real defense, political hysteria, and decisions that can make the region and the world less safe.
“85 Seconds to Midnight”: why it sounds like a warning
The title of Rovelli’s book is related to the decision of the “Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists”: in 2026, the Doomsday Clock was set at 85 seconds to midnight. This is the most alarming indicator in history.
The physicist places responsibility not on one country but on the entire circle of modern leaders — from the leadership of the US and NATO to Russia, Iran, and Israel. In his opinion, the world lacks politicians who are ready to think not only in terms of national strengthening but also in terms of the survival of humanity.
Rovelli reminds that it was scientists who once created nuclear weapons. But he also emphasizes: the voice of the scientific community helped Cold War politicians find a way out of dangerous confrontation. One such example was the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, associated with the era of Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev.
New threat: nuclear weapons in space
Amid these warnings, the topic of possible deployment of nuclear weapons in orbit sounds separately. The commander of the Bundeswehr Space Command, Major General Michael Traut, stated that Russia might be developing technologies to deploy nuclear weapons in space.
According to Politico, a nuclear explosion in orbit would not look like a familiar strike on a city or military base but could disable a significant portion of satellites in low Earth orbit. The consequences of such a scenario would be global: communication, navigation, military coordination, financial systems, and civilian infrastructure depend on satellites much more than it seems to the average person.
A separate risk is the Kessler effect. This is a chain reaction of space debris formation, where collisions of debris create new debris, and some orbital zones may become unusable for decades.
That is why Germany is already strengthening space defense, developing jamming systems, laser technologies, and its own protected satellite communication network for the Bundeswehr.
Rovelli’s final question sounds not like a scientific formula but as a political challenge: which leader today is ready to say that instead of endlessly strengthening their country, they want to make humanity safer?
For a world where Ukraine continues to live under strikes, Israel faces threats on multiple fronts, and Iran remains part of the nuclear agenda, this question can no longer be considered philosophical. It has become practical.