Un B-52 con contrassegni che identificano un velivolo per i test è stato avvistato due volte mentre trasportava un “misterioso carico” su un pilone subalare. Secondo gli analisti, che avevano già notato la presenza di un carico mai notato prima lo scorso 5 novembre, potrebbe trattarsi di un missile da crociera nucleare stealth di nuova generazione, l’Agm-181 LRSO, dove l’acronimo sta per Long Range Stand Off: un’arma a lungo raggio che appartiene a quella categoria di sistemi che possono essere lanciati da una distanza sufficiente a consentire all’attaccante di eludere l’effetto dell’arma o del fuoco difensivo dall’area bersaglio in una qualsiasi operazione offensiva contro obiettivi di terra e sulla superficie del mare. In questo caso, parleremmo di un missile che può essere armato con una testata nucleare. Il fatto che abbia fatto la sua comparsa proprio dopo il test di due sistemi d’arma nucleari progettati dai russi – il missile a propulsione nucleare russo Burevestnik e il siluro nucleare Poseidon – potrebbe spingerci a credere che sia una “risposta” ai test russi in una rinnovata dinamica di corsa agli armamenti in una Guerra Fredda mai finita.

Le immagini scattate dal fotografo aeronautico Ryan Watamura che sono state condivise dalla testata specializzata The Avionist, “aggiungono un altro tassello al puzzle dei test di integrazione in corso del B-52 con il missile Agm-181 Long Range Stand Off” e mostrano, appunto, un bombardiere strategico B-52H dell’Us Air Force che vola a bassa quota con un pilone alare che trasporta la nuova arma strategica di Washington.

Il secondo “avvistamento” sulla base Edwards del B-52 identificato attraverso le particolari “pinne esterne” utilizzate per distinguere i bombardieri equipaggiati per missioni nucleari dalle varianti convenzionali in rispetto del nuovo trattato Start, armato con il nuovo missile strategico, suggerisce quindi un progresso reale verso lo schieramento dell’arma che andrebbe a sostituire il vecchio missile da crociera aviolanciato Agm-86B Launched Cruise Missile (ALCM)., offrendo quella che si ritiene essere una capacità di volo standoff maggiormente furtiva per garantire una maggiore capacità di sopravvivenza per la flotta di bombardieri strategici statunitensi del tipo B-52. Questo longevo vettore è al centro di un ampio programma di modernizzazione che include anche nuovi radar, motori e aggiornamenti delle comunicazioni, e continua a vederlo schierato come proiettore della potenza degli Stati Uniti accanto al B-2 Spirit, il bombardiere strategico con capacità stealth che è entrato in azione nell’operazione Midnight Hammer lanciata contro il programma nucleare dell’Iran, e accanto ai B-1 Lancer, bombardieri strategici supersonici sviluppati per compiere missioni di penetrazione a bassa quota e velocità transoniche nel corso della Guerra Fredda.

Secondo il sito The War Zone, che ha citato un rapporto di acquisizione del Pentagono, i vecchi missili da crociera aviolanciati Agm-86B dovrebbero essere ritirati entro il 2030 per essere sostituiti da circa 1.020 nuovi missili Agm-181. Anche secondo altri analisti il “fatto che l’arma sia stata utilizzata a bassa quota in condizioni di cielo sereno potrebbe indicare che l’Aeronautica Militare statunitense volesse che fosse visibile“, ragione per cui possiamo seriamente ipotizzare che sia una risposta discreta ai “messaggi strategici” lanciati dal Cremlino.

Il missile da crociera LRSO, precedentemente testato in gran segreto, sarà integrato sia sul B-52 Stratofortress, sia sul nuovo bombardiere stealth di ultima generazione B-21 Raider – che potrà essere equipaggiato con altre due armi nucleari, le bombe B61-12 e B61-13 – il successore del B-2 Spirit, per entrare a far parte della triade nucleare e della capacità di deterrenza gestita dal Pentagono come mezzo per raggiungere e distruggere “obiettivi strategici“, garantendo agli Stati Uniti una capacità di attacco globale e mantenendo la deterrenza strategica della Forza Aerea.

Lo sviluppo di tecnologie militari d’avanguardia e il loro schieramento deciderà le sorti delle guerre future. Conoscerle, analizzarle, e cercare di spiegare la loro importanza e il ruolo che svolgono nei conflitti è parte del nostro sforzo quotidiano. Se vuoi approfondire queste tematiche ed essere sempre aggiornato sugli sviluppi nell’ambito della Difesa, segui InsideOver, e sostieni il nostro lavoro, abbonati oggi!

L'articolo Quale “sconosciuta” e nuova arma hanno testato gli americani? Potrebbe essere una risposta a Mosca… proviene da InsideOver.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has informed his annual news conference that Russia is developing new “hypersonic weapons” in response to a new arms race, which he claims was triggered by the US.

The Russian leader urged Washington to agree to a one-year extension of the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START), which maintains a nuclear balance between the two countries. The treaty expires in February.

Putin wanted more cooperation from Washington and added that he reckons US president-elect Joe Biden was more open to talking about negotiations on the issue, as opposed to current President Donald Trump.

Also known as New START, the current treaty replaced the Treaty of Moscow that was set to expire in December 2012. It calls for halving the number of strategic nuclear missile launchers.

START Negotiations Have Been Difficult

In October, the US and Russia came close to concluding negotiations over a short-term extension of New START. Putin put forward an offer to extend the treaty, but Trump’s national security advisor Robert O’Brien rejected the proposal, calling it insufficient.

In response, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov issued a statement clarifying Moscow’s offer by saying that the Russian President envisioned a one-year extension as well as a freezing of nuclear warheads by each side.

During a meeting of NATO defense ministers in Brussels later on in October, the US ambassador to NATO, Kay Bailey Hutchinson said that an agreement was close at hand.

However, Lavrov produced another statement clarifying that the Russian Government was – and still is – awaiting an official response from the Trump administration.

Another Nuclear Arms Race is the Last Thing the World Needs Right Now

This will be one of the most pressing issues that Biden will have to deal with when he comes to office in January. Without NEW Start, both Russia and the US would be free to deploy unlimited numbers of strategic warheads and the missiles, submarines and bombers to deliver them.

As Bloomberg argued, letting the treaty lapse could open the doors to a new arms race between Moscow and Washington. As a result, there would be less transparency about each side’s intentions and that would have a destabilizing effect on global stability. It might even encourage China to expand its own nuclear arsenal. New weapons and new means to spy on rivals’ stockpiles would drain money from the conventional weapons the US needs to maintain its deterrence.

New START’s demise would also end on-site inspections that the world’s two largest nuclear powers conduct of each other’s armed forces. That would remove a critical source of intelligence used to detect cheating and to give insight into each other’s arsenals.

Is Biden Strong Enough to Stop Putin from Gaining the Upper Hand?

Biden supports an extension but he has failed to specify for how long. Meanwhile, Putin favors an unconditional five-year extension. As Reuters reported, this is because the Russian leader has learned from the Cold War that Ronald Reagan succeeded in bankrupting the Soviet Union by forcing a nuclear arms race, which he wants to avoid.

The argument is that by cutting the treaty’s length, it would tie the negotiations to all aspects of military power. Also, if New START is extended to February 2026, that would put its expiration beyond the incoming US President’s four-year term, potentially reducing his leverage to secure a follow-on pact. Biden must do everything he can to prevent Putin from gaining the upper hand in nuclear talks, which is why slashing New START’s duration seems like the most sensible option.

At some stage, China will also need to be brought into an agreement as they possess a growing stockpile of nuclear warheads.

As Trump’s four-year term comes to an end, it appears unlikely he will renew START before his term in office expires. It is a shame he will leave the White House without making progress on this issue, but there is no doubt that Putin is keen to hear how Biden intends to conclude the New START negotiations.

L'articolo Should the US and Russia Extend the START Treaty? proviene da InsideOver.

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.

Russia and the US rejected offers from one another that would have extended the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START). On Friday, Russian President Vladimir Putin turned down an offer from the Trump administration to extend the agreement for one year, conditioned upon more limits on Russia’s tactical nuclear warheads, which are not currently restricted by the treaty.

Expanding the Scope of the Treaty

Instead, the Kremlin offered to extend New START for another year without any modifications. This proposal was not the first time Moscow has made it an easy deal for the Americans — it previously offered to extend the deal for another five years. Either way, minimal work would have been required to usher the extensions through both governments if the Trump administration had desired to do so. In fact, as it stands now, an extension of the deal wouldn’t even require approval from the US Senate.

However, the American delegation wants more, as is often the case when negotiating foreign policy with Trump’s White House. To earn President Donald Trump’s signature, a New START extension must cap all types of nuclear warheads, the Associated Press reported. The immediate need for that kind of limitation is unclear because Russia hasn’t been building up its stockpile to the extent that a new cap would be needed.

“I see no real significance to it. I can’t see any rationale for it,” said William J. Perry, former defense secretary for President Bill Clinton. From Perry’s perspective, the administration’s demand that more limitations be imposed on a potential extension is a “domestic political gambit” during the crucial last weeks of the 2020 US presidential election. 

The US Defense Intelligence Agency disagreed, however, and anticipates a massive surge in nuclear warhead production by Moscow over the next decade. These weapons are not prohibited by the New START treaty, suggesting that a new provision in an extension of the deal would be a solution to limiting them.

Moscow Balks First Calling US Deal ‘Nonsense’

The Kremlin called the America proposal  “nonsense,” however, and insisted the agreement be extended as it stands now, the New York Times reported. Russia has invested heavily in building out a new range of weaponry under Putin’s direction. 

“All those years, the New START has worked, playing its fundamental role of limiting and containing an arms race,” Putin said. In making his counteroffer in which he was adamant that the terms remain the same, Putin lamented that it would be “extremely sad if the treaty ceased to exist.” 

Blame Goes Both Ways

Even so, it would not be unusual and could even be considered normal for the Trump administration. It already withdrew from three major treaties, two of which Russia was a party to — the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty and the Open Skies Treaty. At this point, Trump seems more focused on ending pacts rather than forming them. 

“President Putin’s response today to extend New START without freezing nuclear warheads is a non-starter,” said US National Security Adviser Robert O’Brien. “The United States is serious about arms control that will keep the entire world safe. We hope that Russia will reevaluate its position before a costly arms race ensues.”

Marshall Billingslea, the US arms control envoy, went further and blamed the Moscow delegation for reneging on a verbal agreement to the Trump administration’s proposal, a claim the Kremlin denied. O’Brien was also under the impression that Russia found the terms of the new agreement amicable during a meeting in Geneva on Oct. 2. Whether there was a translation error or Moscow changed its mind, it is clear now that it was never willing to give in to Washington’s demands, nor will it any any point in the future.

The China Non-Factor

Another far-fetched dream of Washington is to bring China into the agreement. Beijing has already refused to even consider the notion so Russia is also to having any discussions of the sort. Still, that hasn’t stopped the Trump administration from pitching the idea again.

The nuclear arsenals of Russia and the US dwarf China’s stockpile and it has no incentive to become a party to the New START agreement. Is Beijing a growing nuclear threat? Almost certainly, but shoehorning It onto a treaty between Moscow and Washington isn’t the solution.

Biden Deja Vu

While the Trump administration is scrambling to secure an extension before the election, or before Trump leaves office if he loses, Putin is not pressured by looming deadlines. Truthfully, he would gain more by waiting for a possible Joe Biden presidency. Biden, Trump’s Democratic challenger, has made it a part of his foreign policy plan to sign a New START extension and negotiate further arms control agreements with Russia.

Meanwhile, until April, the current administration wasn’t even working to renew the deal. As such, its audacious demand that Putin get rid of weapons he has invested heavily in, tactical nuclear warheads in particular, will accomplish nothing. While Putin certainly wants an extension for the treaty, it doesn’t need it immediately like Trump.

A line of broken treaties and torn-up agreements will lie in the wake of the Trump presidency. If Nov. 3 doesn’t bode well for him, Biden will come in to pick up the pieces, and he has experience with it. In 2010, Biden helped write the original New START treaty. 

L'articolo Russia Won’t Agree to US Terms for New START Extension Potentially Leaving It for Biden to Fix proviene da InsideOver.

The United States and Russia remain in disagreement over the New START (Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty). The first lackluster offer by Russian President Vladimir Putin was promptly rejected by Washington. However, time remains of the essence.

The Treaty Expires Very Soon

The last remaining major nuclear disarmament treaty between Washington and Moscow expires in four months. The Trump administration rejected a Russian proposal for an extension nonetheless. Putin’s proposal to extend the New START Treaty without a freeze on the number of nuclear warheads was “unacceptable,” said National Security Advisor Robert O’Brien, on Friday, adding that “we hope that Russia will reassess its position before a costly arms race sets in.”

Putin had previously offered an unconditional extension of the New START agreement on nuclear disarmament by one year without preconditions. He is proposing to extend the existing agreement with the United States for at least one year to allow for comprehensive negotiations, Putin said on Friday, according to the Kremlin. The Russian leader further said the agreement had worked well so far at a meeting with the National Security Council on Friday, and added that it would be “extremely regrettable” if it were no longer effective.

Moscow Rejected Washington’s Treaty Conditions as ‘Unacceptable’

A few days ago, the US announced an agreement in principle with Russia on an extension. However, US negotiator Marshall Billingslea made a limitation or “freeze” of the Russian nuclear arsenal a condition. Moscow rejected this at the time as “unacceptable”.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov voiced skepticism about the possibility of reaching a deal on New START, noting that Russia cannot accept the conditions put forward by the US for its extension. Lavrov specified that Russia could not agree to the US proposal to limit nuclear weapons alongside nuclear warheads until Washington agrees to withdraw its tactical nuclear weapons from Europe.

However, Moscow announced that it would “freeze” the number of nuclear warheads for a year on Tuesday. If the agreement is initially extended by twelve months, Russia will make this political commitment, announced the Foreign Ministry in Moscow. Nevertheless, this is only possible if the United States does not make “additional demands.”

China Declined to Participate in Talks, Despite US Request

Washington and Moscow ended an initial round of negotiations on New START in Vienna in June without any concrete results. The Washington government insisted on China’s participation in the disarmament talks. However, China was not interested. Representatives from Beijing declined an invitation to Vienna. It was “not yet the right time” for China to talk on nuclear disarmament, Beijiing said in June.

Both sides still hence appear to remain far apart. While Washington seeks a cap on all US weapons in exchange for a New START extension, it remains an open question of what it is inclined to provide Moscow in return.

Will Washington Accept Putin’s Latest Offer?

However, with the political implications an agreement holds, one should not be surprised if the US accepted Putin’s latest offer, though slightly modified. Not only would it allow both sides to continue negotiations without the current degree of urgency, but it also could provide the president with a marketable – though geopolitically redundant – success so close to election day.

The New START Treaty was signed in 2010 and is the last significant agreement between the United States and Russia to control their nuclear weapons. Russia and the US together hold approximately 90 percent of the world’s nuclear arsenal.  Both countries undertook to reduce the number of their nuclear warheads to a maximum of 800 carrier systems and 1,550 ready-to-use nuclear warheads each: around 30 percent less than in the previous START agreement of 2002.

In 2019, Washington terminated the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty. In May of this year, the White House announced its withdrawal from the Open Skies Treaty with Russia, enabling both sides to fly in the other party’s airspace.

L'articolo Washington’s and Moscow’s Bargaining over New START proviene da InsideOver.

US President Donald Trump recently told his aides that he is willing to meet with his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin ahead of the presidential election which takes place this November.

A trusted source revealed that one of the main topics discussed in the upcoming event is the expansion of the nuclear arms control treaty or New START (Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty).

The meeting is expected to be held next month in New York.

Brief Overview of the New START Treaty

On July 31, 1991, the US and Russia (formerly known as the Soviet Union) signed an agreement that reduced nuclear arsenal possession that can harm human civilization. In the same year, the Soviet Union split and left only four independent states with nuclear weapons; Belarus, Ukraine, Russia, and Kazakhstan.

In 1993, then-US President George H.W Bush and then-Russian leader Boris Yeltsin signed the START-II, which slashed 3,000-3,500 warheads. After the treaty’s ratification by the U.S. Congress in 1996, then-President Bill Clinton and Yeltsin extended the treaty deadline until 2007, and start negotiation on the START-III for further reduction.

The New START is the only arms control treaty left after the collapse of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF). The US dumped the INF after accusing Russia of violating it.

Based on the New START—signed in 2010—the US and Russia agreed to halve the numbers of strategic nuclear missiles and limit the quantities of strategic nuclear warheads deployed to 1,550. The deal expires in February 2021.

Will Trump Target China?

The meeting between Trump and Putin seems to target China, given Trump wants to include Beijing in the extended New START.

China currently has world’s second highest defense spending according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI). The country spent $ 261 billion last year. The increase in China’s military expenditure represents around 5.1 percent growth, SIPRI estimated.

SIPRI recorded that Russia is the country with the highest numbers of nuclear warheads with 6,735—1,570 on standby position. The US came second with around 5,800 nuclear warheads with 1,750 on standby position.

China has 320, up 30 from 290 in 2019, followed by India with 150 (up from 130-140) and Pakistan (160), and Israel (90). However, Washington believes that Beijing possesses more warheads that the official record shows.

“Trump also has several considerations and calculations based on the intelligence analysis on China’s nuclear warhead. Even though the U.K. and France have warheads more than China, Trump believes the intelligence data revealed China possesses warheads more than the official figures. Therefore, Trump wants to involve China in the treaty,” Indonesian international affairs expert Yusran told Insideover.

China is planning to deploy its DF-41 intercontinental ballistic missile, which will carry three to six multiple reentry vehicles, as the Hill reported.

 Lt. Gen. Robert Ashley, director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, said China would likely double its nuclear stockpile over the next decade. China is planning to produce 100 DF-41missiles, each equipped with six warheads.

China is Willing to Join the New START — With One Big Condition

 A senior Chinese diplomat expressed Beijing’s willingness to participate in a trilateral arms control treaty with Washington and Moscow.

However, China will join the treaty if the US is ready to reduce its nuclear weapons to China’s level, which seems unlikely for Washington.

“I can assure you, if the US says that they are ready to come down to the Chinese level, China would be happy to participate the next day. But actually, we know that’s not going to happen,” Fu Cong, head of the arms control department of Chinese foreign ministry, told journalists in July.

Will Russia Invite China to the New START?

Trump may hope that Russia will bring China to the negotiating table. Unfortunately, it is unlikely to happen as Russia and China share something in common; to contain Washington’s influence.

Despite competing to be one of the global superpowers, China and Russia will support each other from Washington’s hostility. Last June, Russia stated that it would not push China to join the trilateral arms control treaty as the numbers of China’s warheads are relatively small compared to those of the US, Russia, France, and the UK

Moscow will prioritize France and the U.K. as both are members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and possess nuclear arsenals too.

“As an essential element of our position on the future of nuclear arms control, we insist that the United States’ closest NATO allies possessing nuclear weapons should join these hypothetical talks. They are France and the United Kingdom,” Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov told TASS News Agency.

L'articolo What to Expect in the Upcoming Trump-Putin Meeting Next Month 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.

Sergey Lavrov, Russian foreign minister, was in Washington last week for meetings with US President Donald Trump and Mike Pompeo, his secretary of state. Lavrov’s visit at The White House came as the House of Representatives concluded its impeachment hearings primarily centered on evidence the American leader attempted to extort a political favor from Ukraine by holding up foreign aid. Considering the 2016 allegations of collusion, the pending impeachment vote, and the upcoming elections, Lavrov’s visit to the US raised eyebrows. The two nations understandably have other issues to discuss outside of US domestic politics, but if there was any concern of a Kremlin official meeting Trump, it was amplified when both sides recalled the subjects of their discussion.

Two Tales

Whereas Pompeo and The White House insisted Trump personally “warned against any Russian attempts to interfere” in the 2020 presidential election, Lavrov denied elections were discussed at all.

“I will leave to the White House to give the details of what is said. I never talk about what the President says in those private settings, but I can tell you that Foreign Minister Lavrov’s statement is not accurately a reflection of my recollection of that meeting,” Pompeo countered. “[T]here is no mistake that President Trump made clear in the meeting that he had with Foreign Minister Lavrov and the rest of the Russian team that was there that President Trump personally, and America, finds their meddling in our elections unacceptable in the very same way that I had said it earlier to Foreign Minister Lavrov.”

Lavrov not only denied the conversation took place, but also took umbrage with the notion that The Kremlin even interfered in the election. In denying this basic premise, he argued there are no facts to support the argument Russia meddled in the election, which was well-documented in Mueller’s 500-page report. Furthermore, Lavrov stated that because of the undue focus on the “alleged” interference, other work between Russia and the US has been inhibited. These topics include nuclear arms control and weapons shipments to Libya.

Unrestricted

In February, the Trump administration announced the US would withdraw from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty with Russia. The agreement was a landmark deal when it was signed at the end of 1987 as it heralded the beginning of the end of the Cold War. The INF forbid both nations from possessing land-based missiles and launchers with ranges of 500 to 5,500 kilometres. Consequently, the two states drastically reduced their stockpiles.

Former US President Barack Obama negotiated the New START treaty, a followup to the 1991 START I agreement. Like the INF, New START placed limits on the nuclear programs, capping the number of deployed strategic nuclear warheads at 1,550. It also placed limits on missile launcher systems and heavy bombers.

Trump has signaled his intention not to renew the New START treaty, which expires in 2021. Complicating matters further, the treaty expires on Feb. 5, 2021, leaving no time for Trump’s successor to broker an extension or work a new deal, if Trump is defeated in the election. Since the American president has chosen not to renew the treaty or work toward a new one, it seems the US and Russia will be without an agreement for the first time in over three decades.

Although Russia is willing to extend it, Trump is refusing because he wants to see China added to the deal. China’s nuclear arsenal is comparatively small, but experts estimated it will double its stockpile over the next 10 years. China is not a member to any nuclear treaty and, as Lavrov declared, Beijing is uninterested.

Hinging a critical nuclear deal such as New START on a condition beyond Moscow’s control is unreasonable. Nuclear arms cannot be left to irrational demands especially when the other party is powerless to fulfill them.

Libya Embargo

On Libya, Pompeo called for a peaceful solution in coordination with The Kremlin to limit the weapon flow. Libya has been in a state of civil war since April when General Khalifa Haftar, a Gaddafi holdover, began a campaign to take control of the government. Washington has evidence Haftar’s Libyan National Army is supplied by Egypt, the United Arab Emirates, and Russia.

“We want to work with the Russians to get to the negotiating table, have a series of conversations that ultimately lead to a disposition that creates what the UN has been trying to do,” Pompeo said. “Foreign Minister Lavrov told me directly yesterday he is prepared to be part of that, to continue it. I reminded him that there is a weapons embargo that is still in place in Libya, and that no nation ought to be providing incremental materiel inside of Libya.”

The US and Russia often find themselves on different sides when it comes to the Middle East and North Africa, particularly under Trump as the US has attempted to extricate itself from the regions. The US still looks to put its weight behind international affairs, however, and Trump has publicly called on Haftar to end his campaign. As in Yemen, when outside powers invest resources for war, conflict becomes difficult to stop. In the case of Russia, there are few options that will not risk an international incident except harsh words during an Oval Office visit.

L'articolo Lavrov Visits Trump and Pompeo but Contradicts Their Story proviene da InsideOver.