Go to ...

The Newspapers

Gathering and spreading news from various Russian Newspapers

The Newspapers on Google+The Newspapers on LinkedInRSS Feed

Friday, February 16, 2018

Experts have estimated trump’s words about lifting sanctions in exchange for nuclear deal


In the Kremlin cautiously took Donald trump to exchange sanctions relief for nuclear arms reduction. Yet since the 1970s years, every US administration begins to build the relationship with Moscow with the wishes of nuclear disarmament. However, in the statement trump that proposal raises serious questions. Experts expect that the US President-elect may nominate and other conditions for bargaining with Moscow.

Russia has no plans to reduce nuclear weapons in exchange for the lifting of sanctions Washington against Moscow, said press Secretary of Russian President Dmitry Peskov. He commented on the proposal of the elected U.S. President Donald trump, made in an interview to The Times of London. Trump said the United States may lift sanctions against Russia in exchange for a bilateral agreement on the reduction of nuclear weapons.

“Since the 1970s, with the arrival of every us administration raised the issue of nuclear control and disarmament”

“People need to agree and do what they need to do, to act according to justice,” – said the President-elect of the United States. He recalled that, on the one hand, States are for substantial nuclear arms reductions, and Russia is “seriously affected” by the sanctions. “…Let’s see, won’t we have to conclude with Russia a good deal,” said trump.

Dmitry Peskov, commenting on the words of the elected President of the United States, noted: the Kremlin will be to evaluate the statements and initiatives of trump after his inauguration (scheduled, recall, January 20). Press Secretary of the Russian President recalled the words of Vladimir Putin that the sanctions relief – the issue is not a Russian agenda.

Note that trump said in an interview with the Times that he intends to raise the question about significant reductions in negotiations with Russia on nuclear disarmament. However, earlier he said that the United States should significantly expand and strengthen its nuclear capacity.

Last week, the candidate on a post of the head of the Pentagon James Mattis has blamed Russia of alarming statements concerning the use of nuclear weapons.

We will remind that since 2011, the signed by Putin and Obama’s Agreement on the reduction of strategic offensive arms (start-III). The agreement, concluded for a period of 10 years, provides for the reduction of deployed strategic delivery vehicles on each side to 700 and up to 1,550 nuclear warheads on them.

Later, Obama took the initiative to reduce arsenals of the two countries by a third. Russia rejected the offer, citing the extension ABOUT the United States and other outstanding bilateral issues. Later the US proposed to extend the start-III for five years, but the Russian foreign Ministry said that a formal proposal had been brought before it.

Informal bargaining

The Chairman of the Federation Council Committee on international Affairs Konstantin Kosachev, commenting on the words of trump, remarked that he considers necessary to give the status of official proposal to the elected President of the USA of a possible “exchange of nuclear disarmament to the lifting of sanctions”.

In any event, “reducing the number of nuclear weapons to a level where American military power in other spheres will make our main weapon is ineffective, of course, impossible. And because all this should be considered in conjunction with other factors, including the nuclear capabilities of other countries and the development of other types of weapons,” said the Senator Kosachev.

As for the sanctions, as you know, the outgoing President Barack Obama has extended for another year the effect of his decree of 6 March 2014, which provides for the imposition of sanctions against Russia over the situation in Crimea and Ukraine.

Trump, commenting on sanctions Obama’s decision, said he intends to keep these restrictive measures, “at least for some time.” While the President-elect added that he considers useful for the establishment of relations with Moscow. “If we get along and Russia is helping us, then why to maintain the sanctions, if you can do great things together,” said trump. Political scientist Sergei Mikheyev in an interview with the newspaper VIEW earlier suggested that a full lifting of sanctions by the US will never be. It is not excluded that the sanctions imposed by Obama, trump will remain as a trump card for bargaining with Russia.

“6 thousand units of recoverable nuclear capabilities”

Military expert, doctor of military Sciences Konstantin Sivkov believes that to reduce the nuclear potential, Russia should not in any case. “And so he is now critically low. Further reduction can lead to the loss of state sovereignty”, – the expert said in comments the newspaper VIEW.

Sivkov reminded that none of the States in the nuclear club – neither NATO, nor China – does not intend to reduce its nuclear capabilities.

“As for the United States, they besides being deployed I have 6 thousand units of recoverable nuclear capabilities. In addition, the U.S. deploys a missile defense system, and NATO in terms of General purpose forces have superiority on Russian Armed forces,” – said the military expert. In these conditions, according to Sivkova, to reduce the already relatively low nuclear potential of Russia is unacceptable.

“A strange proposal, which may be supplemented”

The scientist-americanist Victor Olevich, commenting on the OPINION “nuclear proposal” trump said that the President-elect is not the first American leader who raises this question. “Ronald Reagan was talking about reducing nuclear weapons and made it the theme for the Soviet-American talks in the early 1980-ies. Most recently, eight years ago, when Barack Obama was elected to his first term, was signed the Treaty of Moscow on reducing nuclear weapons,” the expert reminded.

According to Olevia, although there is much to discuss, but the words of trump, tying the easing of the sanctions regime to reduce nuclear weapons are odd. “This statement requires further explanation from the United States. The imposition of sanctions did not become attached to the issue of nuclear weapons. Trump and colleagues will have to explain in detail what they mean,” explained americanist.

Moreover, the expert believes that Moscow, even in exchange for the lifting of sanctions is not going to go for a reduction of nuclear weapons, which would threaten the national sovereignty of Russia and its ability to protect. “This is Washington can’t count, even if in exchange they promise to completely do away with the regime of political and economic sanctions”, – said Olevich.

However, in his opinion, given the changing rhetoric trump and during the election campaign and after the election, we can expect a variety of twists on this front. “We should not give so much importance to this statement. Much can still change,” added the analyst.

How to grow world military rashoditsya Olevich believes that in the future, in addition to the reduction of nuclear capacity to the conditions for lifting of sanctions “can be added to the requirements for demotion of Russia’s relations with its strategic partners – Beijing, Tehran, Havana, Caracas, etc.”. On that Russia, in its opinion, also will not go.

“The bilateral agreement have been exhausted”

The head of the Council on foreign and defense policy analyst Fyodor Lukyanov also believes that the statement trump made “while in very General terms”.

“Trump in this matter understand the position, he talked about the need for capacity to improve, modernise. The feeling that a clear position on what to do with nuclear weapons, it has no”, – the expert said in comments the newspaper VIEW. This position is, of course, will come after trump takes office, listen to numerous experts, advisors, “but I would seriously this is not treated,” said the source.

“Yes, indeed, trump is much more ready to take on any agreements on serious issues than his predecessors, at least, to try, but starting with a nuclear sphere – every time the same thing,” reminded the analyst.

He explained that, when a new American administration since the 1970-ies on the agenda in relations with Russia goes nuclear control, disarmament, limit nuclear weapons. “Today, especially in those formulations which trump has reproduced that a lot of weapons, it is necessary to reduce – this is not the theme”, – the expert believes. He stressed that “the model of bilateral agreements to limit and then reduce nuclear weapons has exhausted itself and belongs to another era”.

Start-4 is not yet visible

“The need for cooperation in maintaining strategic stability is inevitable, because Russia and the United States, which they have neither had a relationship, are holders of the world’s largest arsenals of nuclear weapons capable of destroying the whole world. This theme will not disappear from the agenda. But, on the other hand, is not very clear which way to go, a real understanding of what to do with Russia, neither he (trump), nor his team yet,” said the analyst.

Lukyanov doubts that the parties will decide to return to the model of parallel cuts about the arms. Even after signing the latest start Treaty (on the reduction and limitation of strategic offensive arms) with Obama already said that in the reductions we are no longer interested, he recalled. So if to discuss further reductions, not on a bilateral level and, more widely, with the inclusion of China and so on, said the source. The probability of such developments is small, but possible, added the analyst.

“Either this is all a different system, when everyone comes from their own needs. No bilateral agreements, Russia and the United States do not link with each other, as it always was, each based on their needs, so to speak, the principle of reasonable sufficiency” – said Lukyanov.

Thus, the first version of the agreements, even though it is unlikely, but may still be part of “some greater agreement, such as was the batch transaction restart”. “Or the second model does not provide for negotiation, each party operates based on its own understanding of its necessity,” – concluded the expert.

source

Related posts:
Lawyer Clinton called Hillary a terrorist: intimidated by all lovers of ex-President
Biden called Poroshenko to prevent the escalation of the conflict with Russia
Putin takes a naval parade in St. Petersburg
Walker announced the UN resolution for peacekeepers in the Donbas to the end of the year

Recommended

More Stories From Politics