(Photo Credit: Kazakh Ministry of Foreign Affairs)
The deputy foreign minister says he sees no desire on the U.S. side to engage in discussions to renew or extend the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty.
Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov told Financial Times the “complete malfunction” of the U.S. system of government has meant that key treaties are likely to lapse and leave the world’s nuclear powers “without constraint in the event of a conflict.” Continue reading
Abstract
The 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty between the U.S. and the Soviet Union was one of the most significant arms-reduction accomplishments of the Cold War. The INF Treaty led to the elimination of ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles with ranges from 300 miles to 3,400 miles, their launchers, and associated support structures and support equipment. In 2014, the U.S. State Department officially accused Russia of violating the treaty. The allegation sparked renewed interest in the utility of the agreement for the United States, and in the implications of Russia’s violations for U.S. allies in Europe. Russia’s aggressive and illegal behavior and the inability of the United States to bring Russia back into compliance with the INF Treaty indicate that the treaty has outlived its utility and is no longer in the U.S. interest.
The 1987 Treaty between the United States of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics on the Elimination of their Intermediate-Range and Shorter-Range Missiles—known as the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty—was one of the most significant arms-reduction accomplishments of the Cold War era. The INF Treaty led to the elimination of ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles with ranges from 500 kilometers to 5,500 kilometers (about 300 miles to 3,400 miles), their launchers, and associated support structures and support equipment.[1] In July 2014, the U.S. State Department officially accused Russia of violating the treaty.[2] The allegation sparked renewed interest in the utility of the agreement for the United States, and in the implications of Russia’s violations for U.S. allies in Europe. Russia’s aggressive and illegal behavior and the inability of the United States to bring Russia back into compliance with the INF Treaty indicate that the treaty has outlived its utility and is no longer in the U.S. interest. Continue reading
Complaints nuke deal must demand Tehran change conduct ignore long history of arms control accords with Cold War enemy
WASHINGTON (AP) — Critics of the Iran nuclear deal claim it is flawed, among many reasons, because it does not demand that Tehran also change its behavior at home and abroad. That complaint ignores the United States’ long history of striking arms control agreements with the Soviet Union, a far more dangerous enemy.
…
Dating as far back as the Limited Test Ban Treaty in 1963 — less than a year after the Cuban missile crisis — US administrations engaged the Soviet Union in agreements to limit nuclear threats while not linking deals to abhorrent Soviet human rights abuses and the active arming and funding of leftist, anti-American revolutionary movements around the world. Continue reading
A 2009 article with relevancy for today:
What was the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the 20th century?
…
The catalog of contenders runs long—but the answer is clear to Vladimir Putin. Russia’s strongman believes the “greatest geopolitical catastrophe” of the 20th century was the 1991 collapse of the Soviet Union.
The significance of that telling revelation is hard to overstate. That statement, made in his state of the union address in April 2005, provides an invaluable glimpse into the mind of the man who runs Russia. It lies at the core of current international relations, and it gives much-needed clarity and simplicity to the sometimes confusing and contradictory movements of Russia—the nation Winston Churchill identified as a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma.
Putin’s statement furnishes a key to understanding Russia!
GENEVA, January 13 (Sputnik) — Russia could revise its commitment to the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) in response to ‘unfriendly’ US actions, the head of the Department for Non-Proliferation and Arms Control of the Russian Foreign Ministry said Tuesday.
“We have not taken any concrete steps in this direction, but I am not ruling out the possibility that Washington could force us to do so, to adjust our policy in this area,” Mikhail Ulyanov told RIA Novosti. Continue reading
Are you sure you know who’s playing for what side?
As mentioned just two days ago, the ‘token’ pledge to modernize the U.S. nuclear arsenal is just that: A token pledge for public consumption. They’re telling you what you want to hear. The fifth column is alive and well within the highest of all offices in the United States government. America very soon going to be a land of unwalled villages bound to be hit by the sword, as warned by watchmen foretold of. Escape Babylon before it’s too late.
For a deeper background on Chuck Hagel, including his anti-Israel stance, see HERE and HERE.
Hagel now ordering massive changes to management of arsenal
Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel has ordered what is being described in media reports as top-to-bottom changes in how the nation’s nuclear arsenal is managed.
Largely unreported in the coverage of the possible nuclear forces shakeup is that until his appointment as defense secretary, Hagel served on the board of a George Soros-funded group that advocates a nuclear-free world.
Ploughshares opposes America’s development of a missile-defense system and contributes funds to scores of anti-war groups highly critical of U.S. foreign policy and military expansion.
The fund identifies itself as a “publicly supported foundation that funds, organizes and innovates projects to realize a world free from the threat of nuclear weapons.”
WASHINGTON, October 20 (RIA Novosti) – The United States could securely reduce its nuclear arsenal below the new START agreement numbers through a unilateral action by President Barack Obama, without congressional authorization and without similar actions taken by Russia, Gaukhar Mukhatzhanova at the Center for Nonproliferation Studies said Monday.
“In terms of things the US administration could do without the Senate… President Obama could go back to the June [2013] statement about the possibility of further reductions,” said Mukhatzhanova at the annual meeting of the Arms Control Association (ACA) in Washington, DC. Continue reading
If you’ve ever watched a Yuri Bezmenov video, read New Lies for Old by Anatoliy Golitsyn, ever payed attention to JR Nyquist and his many writings over the years — or better yet — even bothered to open the Bible to Ezekiel 38 and 39, for example, you know where this is going. Truth is, Russia has always had more warheads than the U.S. but knew to hide them because they knew America would abide by its honor system and would eventually be lulled into a false sense of security thinking that a wall merely falling in Berlin meant the end of the Communist threat, then disarm thinking it was taking the ‘high road’. Truth is, they have more than they report and what’s mentioned in this article and have been preparing for a nuclear war for decades along with China.
America is in its final hour, beyond the point of no return and as it was in the times of Noah, doesn’t see the storm ahead.
It’s on borrowed time by the grace of God and the sword is indeed coming.
For the first time, Russia, which is in the midst of a major strategic nuclear modernization, has more deployed nuclear warheads than the United States, according to the latest numbers released by the State Department.
Russia now has 1,643 warheads deployed on intercontinental ballistic missiles, submarine-launched ballistic missiles and heavy bombers. The United States has 1,642, said the fact sheet released Wednesday.
Russia’s military carried out a flight test of a new multi-warhead intercontinental ballistic missile on Monday amid growing tensions with the United States over the crisis in Ukraine.
The SS-27 Mod 2 road-mobile ICBM was launched around 2:40 a.m. EST from Russia’s Plesetsk launch facility, located about 500 miles north of Moscow.
“The main purpose of the launch is to validate the reliability of a batch of this class of missiles made at the Votkinsk Plant,” Defense Ministry spokesman Igor Yegorov told state-run Interfax-AVN.
An unspecified number of simulated nuclear warheads landed at an impact range on the Kura test range on the Kamchatka Peninsula, in the Russian Far East, Yegorov said. The distance is around 3,500 miles.
The SS-27 Mod 2 is Russia’s newest ICBM and has been touted by Russian officials as designed specifically to defeat U.S. missile defenses. Continue reading
This is perfect timing, for Russia that is, since the USA is conveinently suiciding itself militarily by reducing its strategic nuclear deterrance — which also outdated and hasn’t seen anything new in weaponry since the early 90’s/late 80’s.
Russia ratcheted up international tensions over Ukraine by a big notch Saturday, March 8, the day after mobilizing air and coastal defenses for a large-scale month-long drill to prevent the disruption of the May 16 Crimean referendum. The defense ministry in Moscow announced: “Russia is considering halting foreign inspections of its strategic weapons arsenal, including nuclear-capable missiles, in response to “threats” from the United States and NATO over the Ukraine crisis.
Lines of tanks were seen Saturday heading from Russian bases towards Crimea.
A high-ranking defense ministry official in Moscow, who was not named, released this statement to all Russian news agencies: “The unfounded threats towards Russia from the United States and NATO over its policy on Ukraine are seen by us as an unfriendly gesture that allows the declaration of force majeure circumstances.” Continue reading
It should be known that Russia also plays the game of pretending to reduce their nuclear stockpiles, often claiming their latest missiles are classified as anything but long-range. The only country playing honest is the United States, which has a false sense of security and has developed the illusion that total disarmament would be a demonstration of moral strength.
SINGAPORE – How many nuclear weapons and delivery systems does a country need as an effective deterrent against the threats of attack? Finding an acceptable balance is critically important in Asia, where four of the world’s nine nuclear-armed states are located.
The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) reported in June that all four Asian nations with nuclear weapons — China, India, Pakistan and North Korea — appeared to be expanding their arsenals while the United States, Russia, France, Britain and Israel were either reducing them or holding the number static. Continue reading
The systematic disarming of America’s aging nuclear arsenal and strategic rearming and modernization of Russia’s nuclear deterrent continues:
Russia and the United States have tentatively agreed to a weapons inspection program that would allow Russians to visit nuclear sites in America to count missiles and warheads.
The plan, which Fox News has learned was agreed to in principle during negotiations, would constitute the most intrusive weapons inspection program the U.S. has ever accepted.
Full article: Tentative Inspection Program Would Allow Russia to Visit U.S. Nuclear Sites (Fox News)
Get this: The General commanding Russia Strategic Rocket Forces, Lieutenant General Sergei Karakayev, said in December that the new Russian Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (ICBMs) are needed — because the existing ones are vulnerable to US missile defenses.
This is apparently the result of all that nice goodwill generated by the Obama administration’s “reset” of relations with Vladimir Putin’s Russia and the ratification of the New Start Arms Control Treaty. It should come as no surprise: nuclear weapons, along with oil and gas exports, are just about the only thing that still qualifies Russia as a “Great Power.”
If Russia’s leaders still resent their loss of superpower status and feel they have a strategic need to challenge the US wherever possible, then spending the money to build a new type of nuclear missile aimed at the US makes sense.
…
Ever since Ronald Reagan gave his famous “Star Wars” speech in March1983, which lead to the rebirth of American missile defense efforts, opponents of the idea that it is not only possible but desirable to build defensive systems that can shoot down incoming nuclear missiles and their warheads have claimed that the technology cannot be developed. Yet now, a senior Russian officer has publicly admitted that America has built a system that can shoot down the solid propellent missiles that Reagan and his team thought were the most dangerous ones in the Soviet inventory. This is a major development: it proves that Ronald Reagan was right not to overestimate Soviet technological capacities.
Of course, as the US GMD system has fewer than 30 operational interceptors, the ability of Russia’s missile force with its hundreds of ICBMs and SLBMs to overwhelm the US defense system is obvious. However, if the US were to chose to build a much larger number of interceptors, and to build up a “multilayered” national missile defense system, as has been promised by Republican Presidential candidate Mitt Romney, Russia would no longer have an unquestioned ability to hit a wide array of US targets with nuclear warheads. The reliability of Russia’s missile strike force would be compromised.
If this is the motivation for Russia’s announced decision to build a new type of nuclear missile, then Russia’s commitment to “reset” its relationship with the US is based on a wildly false premise. After all, if the US does not threaten Russia’s territorial integrity, why should Russia worry about America’s ability to defend itself ? Or do Russia’s leaders still believe that a balance of terror, based on the old doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD), is necessary?
Full article: Russia Wants to Build New Missiles to Hit the U.S. (Stonegate Institute)
Global Geopolitics 