Russia finally agreed to restrict its nuclear warheads for a year as the offer for the New START (Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty) treaty, which expires in February 2021.

“Russia proposes to extend the New START Treaty by one year and is ready, together with the United States, to make a political commitment to ‘freeze’ the number of nuclear warheads held by the parties for this period,” the statement said. 

The Kremlin is committed to strictly implementing such a proposal as long as there will be no extra demands from Washington, as Russia’s Foreign Ministry added.

The White House welcomed Russia’s last-minute offer and said it is ready to agree with Moscow.

“The United States is prepared to meet immediately to finalize a verifiable agreement. We expect Russia to empower its diplomats to do the same,” US State Department Spokesperson Morgan Ortagus stated on Tuesday.

How Many Warheads do the US and Russia Have Currently?

According to data from the SIPRI (Stockholm International Peace Research Institute) yearbook 2019, the US has 6,185 warheads, while Russia has 6,500. All warheads include the deployed and other warheads-refers to the stored and reserved ones awaiting dismantlement.

The New START: What You Need to Know

The New START is a treaty that restricts the numbers of deployed warheads up to 1,550 and 700 dispatched missiles and bombers, all below the Cold War limit.

Then-US President Barack Obama and then-Russian President Dmitry Medvedev signed the pact in 2010. In comparison, the first treaty was inked in July 1991, five months before the breakup of the Soviet Union.

The pact also covers an aggregate limit of 800 deployed and non-deployed ICBM launchers, SLBM launchers, and heavy bombers for nuclear arsenals, NTI reported.

The New START is the only nuclear-related treaty left between the U.S. and Russia after the termination of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF), signed in 1987 and eliminate both countries’ ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, and missile launchers within range of 500-1,000 kilometers.

The US halted the treaty in early 2019, citing that Russia had violated the deal and the pullout aimed at China’s military build-up in the Pacific. Russia followed suit then, and Washington formally quit the agreement on August 2, 2019.

What’s Behind the Extension?

The world greeted Russia’s last-minute decision to freeze its warheads after a tough negotiation with relief.

“Why did Russia agree? In my opinion, the process cannot be separated from the U.S. effort to include China in the treaty. However, China refused to join in (as it has a smaller number of warheads than Russia and the U.S.). China’s exclusion is a part of the negotiation, too (as Russia supports China),” Yusran, international relations expert at Indonesia’s Budi Luhur University, told InsideOver. 

A closer relationship between the US under President Donald Trump and Russia is one reason why both countries have agreed on each other’s proposals.

“Russia allegedly played a role in helping Trump to win the election four years ago. In my opinion, the New START extension can be part of the effort to boost Trump’s electability ahead of the election in November,” Yusran added.

Former White House

Officials and Arms Control Experts Cast Doubt on Agreement’s Verification

Arms control experts and former White House officials questioned the agreement’s inspection protocol as it takes time to negotiate the detail on how the inspection and verification are implemented.

“It would be very, very difficult to verify such an agreement without an intrusive inspection protocol, and … there are a lot of serious questions whether you could negotiate such a protocol in two weeks,” Frank Rose, a Brookings Institution analyst and former Obama administration official, told Reuters.

One of the major achievements from the New START is the treaty simplifies the verification without sacrificing any vital information, equipped with the most progressive verification system for counting warheads.

The new START introduces verification of actual and updated numbers for the first time, Union of Concerned Scientists explained.

The most important thing is what will happen after one year.

L'articolo Why Did Russia Agree to Freeze its Number of Nuclear Warheads? proviene da InsideOver.

U.S. President Donald Trump and Russian leader Vladimir Putin are expected to meet soon to discuss the possible extension of New START (Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty), which will expire in 2021. The treaty is the definitive agreement on nuclear arms control following the collapse of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF).

What Is The New START Treaty?

The New START is a nuclear arms control treaty between the U.S. and Russia. It is officially named Measures for the Further Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms. Washington and Moscow signed the agreement on April 8, 2010, in Prague, Czech Republic. The treaty took into effect on February 5, 2011 after its ratification.

The New START is the replacement of the Moscow Treaty, which expired in December 2012 and the follow-up of the START I, which ended in December 2009. The New START restricts each signatory to possess 700 deployed Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM), deployed heavy bombers, and deployed Submarine Launched Ballistic Missile (SLBM). Also, the pact limits the ownership of deployed long-range nuclear warheads up to 1,550 and deployed and non-deployed launchers and delivery vehicles to 800, as Armscontrol reported.

The treaty does not cover the restriction of non-deployed, stockpiled nuclear warheads, current missile development programs, or conventional weapons (not based on missiles, warheads stipulated in the agreement).

As the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) has ended following the U.S.’ accusation that Russia had breached the Cold War-era deal, the New START is the only hope to limit Washington’s and Moscow’s arsenals. In addition, the New START can be extended by up to five years if the U.S. and Russia agree to do so.

 NSA O’Brien: “We’ll Start Negotiations Soon”

“We are going to confront the Russians where we need to, but at the same time I think we’ll negotiate, we’ll start negotiations soon on arms control, on the nuclear issue which is, you know, important to the safety of the world, not just the U.S. and Russia,” U.S. National Security Adviser Robert O’Brien stated in a recent speech at the at the Meridian International Center in Washington.

In December of 2019 Putin expressed the Kremlin’s readiness to prolong the New START without any additional conditions, adding that Russia was not interested in deploying missiles or being involved in arms races.

“Russia is ready to immediately, as soon as possible, by the end of this year – without any preconditions – extend the START Treaty so that there would be no further double or triple interpretation of our position,” Putin said, while briefing officials in a meeting.

Trump suggested that the new arms control treaty should include China, given the mainland’s rapid development of its arsenal, whereas Russia prefers to involve the U.K. and France in a trilateral arms negotiation.

China Is Not Interested In Joining A Trilateral Arms Treaty

The U.S. has repeatedly urged China to join trilateral nuclear arms talks with Moscow, claiming that Beijing’s confidentiality of the numbers of nuclear weapons’ stockpile poses a severe threat to strategic stability.

China has rejected the idea, arguing that its nuclear arsenals are still at “the lowest level” compared to those of the U.S. and Russia. The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) revealed that Russia had the highest numbers of nuclear weapons (6.500 units) in 2018, followed by the U.S. ( 6.185), France (300), and China (290).

“China opposes any country talking out of turn about China on the issue of arms control, and will not take part in any trilateral negotiations on a nuclear disarmament agreement,” said Chinese Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Geng Shuang in response to Trump’s statement as Reuters reported.

An unnamed senior American official, meanwhile, has claimed that the U.S. is only using China as an excuse to terminate new START and a tool to win the military competition with the mainland, raising questions whether the U.S. is genuinely worried about China’s nuclear development or just posturing.

What About Other Countries Being Included In The New START?

While the U.S. focuses on persuading China to join the New START despite Beijing’s firm stance on the nuclear policy, Russia has historically endorsed the involvement of France and the U.K. in arms control talks. Vladimir Ermakov, director of the Russian Foreign Ministry Department of Nonproliferation and Arms Control, stressed that the reduction of strategic arms should involve France and the U.K.

The new START extension is necessary for both Russia and the U.S.’ national security, not only because of arms control but also because of the need to reduce geopolitical tensions. The Kremlin and The White House need to meet and make a new agreement that benefits both and guarantees both sides’ compliance in order to create a more secure world.

L'articolo Will the New START Include Other Nations Besides The U.S. And Russia? proviene da InsideOver.

French President Emmanuel Macron recenly urged his European partners to discuss the role of strategic nuclear deterrence for defending the continent.

Macron’s Priority: Boost European Partners’ Defense Spending

A prerequisite for Macron remains getting other European countries to increase their defense budgets. As Macron said in a keynote speech on his country’s defense strategy and nuclear weapons doctrine in Paris, France also offers partners more involvement with France’s nuclear deterrence. European partner countries could also take part in French military exercises on nuclear deterrence. Now that the UK left the European Union, France remains the only EU country with its own nuclear weapons arsenal.

Given the current political developments in the United States, Macron considers it imperative that Europe becomes less reliant of Washington and more self-dependent. At the same time, Macron emphasized that this would not put any future cooperation with the US in question. In fact, Macron stated that France was convinced that Europe’s long-term security remains based on a strong alliance with the United States. Nonetheless, however, Macron is convinced that a greater ability for Europeans to act independently is a necessity for the future.

Macron: European States Need To Work Together To Counter Threats

To facilitate the latter, Europe will have to increase its defense spending in the future. States should no longer get involved in complicated debates about funding their military budgets but act decisively instead. Continuously dodging the question and conducting defense procrastination—in view of the current political situation—is incomprehensible to Macron. After all, Europe and France had “a historical role” to play and would have to react to the threats of today and tomorrow. Moreover, Europeans needed to work together to determine what their security interests are and to decide what is necessary to defend the continent.

At the core of Macron’s message was an invitation to the European allies to participate in a “strategic dialogue” and exchange on the role of French nuclear deterrence. Participation in exercises by the French armed forces is also on the table. However, Macron’s offer does not mean that France is inclined to give up control of its nuclear weapons or share responsibility for them. In fact, Paris will remain outside NATO’s Nuclear Planning Group in the future. In fact, France only returned to the integrated command structure of the military alliance in 2009 after a long absence but has yet to participate in the Nuclear Planning Group to date. Macron thus emphasized that his country was committed to its own arsenal of nuclear weapons and it was so not only for its own good but also for the good of the entire continent. According to Macron, nuclear weapons are strengthening Europe’s security solely by their existence and thus have a genuine importance for all the countries of Europe.

Macron: France Still Prefers Global Disarmament

At the same time, Macron also stated that France was continuing to advocate for global disarmament and called on Europeans to advance an “international arms control agenda.” However, Macron emphasized that given a possible nuclear arms race, the EU countries should not become a spectator on the global stage during a time when the US has already exited the INF Treaty it had signed with Russia during the Cold War.

In Berlin a few days ago, a CDU spokesman proposed that Germany—which has pledged to take on a more prominent role other than diplomacy on the world stage until 2030—could indeed participate in France’s nuclear deterrence with its own capabilities and means. However—and contrary to Paris’ intention—the CDU also suggested that in return France should put its nuclear weapons under the joint command of the EU or NATO.

The comments were met with immediate criticism by the opposition. Particularly Greens and The Left have continued their demands for the denuclearization of Europe and stated that no European country should participate in Macron’s plan. Germany’s participation can be considered a sine qua non in this matter, as without Berlin’s participation—which appears highly unlikely under the current German domestic political climate—smaller EU states will be reluctant to accept France’s offer.

L'articolo Macron Calls For Cooperation On European Nuclear Deterrence proviene da InsideOver.

North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un has announced: “offensive measures” which he says are necessary to ensure his country’s security and sovereignty. The deadline he has set for the US to respond expired on Dec. 31. Meanwhile, the Trump administration is staying patient.

Kim Jong-un: It’s Time For ‘Military Countermeasures’ Against The USA

In the ongoing nuclear dispute with the United States, North Korea’s dictator Kim announced Dec. 30 that it will be necessary to take “military countermeasures” for the country’s security and sovereignty. His statements were made at a meeting with senior members of the North Korean Communist Party in Pyongyang on Monday, according to state media. Kim reportedly spoke for seven hours at the meeting, which was held to discuss an unspecified “important document.”

Also, at the party meeting, Kim reportedly said that the time had come for a “decisive turn” in economic development. North Korea’s economy is being crushed, not least because of international sanctions. The central committee proclaimed a change of political course last year, agreeing that the country must concentrate more on the economy in the future.

Traditional North Korea New Year Speech Jan. 1

Kim seeks to deliver his traditional New Year speech on Wednesday, which is considered a highlight of the year in North Korean politics. Two years ago, Kim threatened the world with nuclear weapons, but at the same time communicated his willingness to talk with South Korea. Six months later, Kim met with President Trump at their first summit.

Most recently, Kim gave the United States until the end of the year to resolve the dispute over the nuclear armament of North Korea by mutual agreement. Negotiations have not progressed since Kim’s failed meeting with Trump in Vietnam in February. If no agreement is facilitated, Kim said he will take an unspecified “new path.”

What To Expect In Kim’s New Year’s Speech

Observers are eagerly anticipating Kim’s speech, as it will likely provide the world with clarity as to what precisely the “new way” eludes to. However, it can be expected that it may include the announcement of testing a long-range missile with nuclear warheads. Moreover, South Korea anticipates that North Korea may lift its moratorium on testing nuclear bombs and long-range missiles.

Any of these occurrences would be a major issue for the US, not merely due to security concerns, but as a testimony for what former National Security Advisor Bolton in his recent interview called “no visible process” despite continuous contrary claims from Trump. Since 2011, Kim has launched more than 100 missiles and conducted four nuclear weapons tests, which is more than his predecessors Kim Jong-il, and Kim Il-sung launched over nearly three decades.

The Trump Administration’s Position

Despite the potential implications, the Trump administration has pledged not to be pressured by Pyongyang. US National Security Advisor Robert O’Brien said he did not want to speculate on possible missile tests; however, he did say the US was willing and able to counteract any measures taken by the regime in North Korea.

Trump himself has warned North Korea not to break its commitment to nuclear disarmament. With a view to Kim, Trump wrote on Twitter: “Kim Jong Un is too smart and has far too much to lose, everything actually, if he acts in a hostile way. He signed a strong Denuclearization Agreement with me in Singapore.”

Where The UN Fits Into The North Korea Picture

Meanwhile, the UN Security Council is scheduled for an informal meeting on Monday to consider a Russian and Chinese proposal to ease sanctions against North Korea. It will not be more than a diplomatic gesture, due to the virtual certainty of a US veto. The sanctions imposed on North Korea in 2016 and 2017 aim to make it financially harder for Pyongyang to conduct its nuclear and missile programs.

Whatever Kim may or may not reveal on Wednesday, the US has minimal options at this stage other than buy time and contain the threat North Korea poses through continuous appeasement. North Korea, at the same time, will lose the leverage it holds over the situation in precisely eleven months and the presidential election, especially if Trump wins.

L'articolo North Korea Threatens Offensive Measures Against The United States proviene da InsideOver.