With these words the specialist of department "F" finished his speech, listening to whom outsiders would understand why this department in "Zero" is called "the department of fantasists".

– You have something, am I reading that right? – Rutra asked the person in charge of world demography.

– May I?

– We must! – Ruthra motivated her. – Don't forget that all traditional methods have been tried.

– Can I start? – She asked.

– We are listening to you," Ruthra replied.

– I have an article.

– Familiarize us with her," Ruthra asked.

– Reporting," she said in an accent of uncertain origin.

It was clear that she had come to Zero from the security services, the SVR or some similar foreign service. Rutra did not yet have access to the initial employee profiles.

– My article touches on such a topic as World War III. It is an event that many believe cannot happen because of its fundamental insanity. But I think it is quite realistic.

What do we put into the meaning of the expression World War III? World War III is first of all a global military conflict. In case of massive use of nuclear weapons in the Third World War, most of humanity may be destroyed. According to experts of the UN Commission, the total stockpile of nuclear weapons is about 10 gigatons in TNT equivalent. According to the estimates of the international journal of the Swedish Academy of Sciences, dropping 5000 nuclear shells with a total capacity of two gigatons on the main cities of the northern hemisphere could lead to the simultaneous death of 750 million people from only one of the striking factors – the shock wave. Thus, according to scientists' estimates, the nuclear arsenal of mankind is sufficient for its complete extermination. Literature and cinematography often play up the possibility of the defense system going out of control of the country's political leadership or an irresponsible leader coming to power, which leads to mutual destruction of opponents, despite the practical senselessness of such a strategic decision. The consequences of nuclear war could theoretically lead to catastrophic changes in the climate and environmental conditions of the planet. This view has largely defined nuclear weapons as weapons of strategic deterrence of opponents from the outbreak of nuclear conflict. At the beginning of the 21st century, the main points of tension are on the borders between Pakistan and India, and Israel and Palestine. On the side of the latter is Iran. The Indo-Pakistani conflict has escalated in the early 21st century because both states have received nuclear weapons from their patrons and are actively building up their military power. Today, military supplies to Pakistan are provided by the United States, and arms supplies to India are provided by Russia, but at the same time Pakistan is showing increased interest in possible military-technical cooperation with Russia, and the United States is making attempts to oust Russia from the Indian arms market. The situation around the Arab-Israeli conflict is similar: the United States is an ally of Israel, while Arab states traditionally buy weapons from Russia. If the Arab-Israeli conflict develops to the level of war, a direct or indirect confrontation between the nuclear powers – the United States and Russia – may arise. We don't even have to make up scary stories, I think it is enough to emphasize the statements of well-known politicians on this problem. For example, the former U.S. presidential candidate, "the situation in Crimea is part of the whole scenario, that is, the scenario of the Third World War." Or the first president, "Putin could be the initiator of World War III." And one of the party leaders in Russia, who likes to shake the air, said that Russia is being prepared for a big war, as the decision to start World War III has already been made.

The very article I am proposing can be discussed on some popular forum or on an analysis program on television.

She was silent. Ruthra realized that the speech was over.

– Do you have everything? – He asked.

– Yeah, I guess so.

– Who else would like to speak? Any suggestions? – Ruthra asked the audience.

No one answered.

– Most importantly, don't forget that people do what they think and fear what they think. I think it has become clear to you that the media work is the first part of the project. There will be other parts going on in parallel. Depending on what results the first part brings, the other parts will be adjusted. If there are no further proposals, this meeting is adjourned," Rutra announced.

In the months following the Zero meeting, the airwaves were bombarded with programs on similar topics. It became fashionable to understand such issues. Speeches of experts from Russia, the United States and Israel occupied a special place, as they were broadcasted directly. Talk shows, news and speeches of different levels of specialists became the main topic of the media. Central channels tried not to stoop to the level of "occult sciences" and "great predictions", which were fantasized on the airwaves and pages of various fashionable "heralds of truth".

The propaganda and censorship department at Zero monitored all possible media. Computer programs, according to a special algorithm that could be changed depending on the requirements, marked with special markers and gave to the operators for analysis exactly those copies that were of interest to the "customer". Rutra was periodically provided with the materials, in the assessment of which the analysts' opinions differed. In contrast to all official services that monitored the content of the airwaves and the flow of information, Zero's function was to monitor these services, the quality of their work, and to shape public opinion with their help.

A number of programs were prepared. Some of them had to be watched and listened to for further recommendations. The first was a program on one of the popular channels to which a world renowned scientist had been invited. On this one, Rutra gave them a "pass".

The host began the program, and Rutra put aside his current affairs to listen more closely. The host welcomed the audience and the guest.

– Good afternoon, Alexei Norayrovich. Good afternoon, dear viewers. For those who think that global catastrophe is a fantasy of paranoiacs, I suggest that you read the lecture "Global Climate: Yesterday, Today, Tomorrow", and then read the course "Historical Geology". This I mean that even without the fruits of mankind's activity, I mean negative for mankind and for the planet as a whole, there are enough options and threats to the extinction of civilization. When the atomic bomb was created in the USA, people still knew little about nuclear energy. There were different assumptions – for example, that a nuclear explosion would provoke a split and destruction of the Earth with a 30% probability. And that didn't stop the politicians. The temptation to own a new superweapon was too great. So they can't stop themselves. But if the majority of humanity speaks out against this thing, they will be stopped by a higher power. Therefore, I repeat: if you value your life and the lives of your children, contact presidents and other authorities who can and must cancel the possible upcoming suicide of our civilization.

And our guest is Alexei Sisakyan, Russian scientist in the field of elementary particle physics, theoretical and mathematical physics, academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences in the Department of Physical Sciences, Doctor of Physical and Mathematical Sciences, Director of the Joint Institute for Nuclear Research.