Us media reported that Donald trump has criticized the Agreement on the reduction of strategic offensive arms (start-3), a prisoner five years ago, Vladimir Putin and Barack Obama. It is alleged that trump believes the Treaty “concluded in favour of Russia”. How likely is it that the new US leader is interested in the revision of the nuclear deal with Moscow? Will USA at the conclusion of the start-4?
Two high-ranking American officials almost simultaneously said, in the first telephone conversation with Vladimir Putin, the President of the United States Donald trump criticized the Treaty on the reduction of strategic offensive arms (start), calling it bad for the United States. “Trump then told Putin that the agreement was one of several bad business deals by the Obama administration,” said the Reuters source. He also claims that trump said: start-3 “was concluded in favor of Russia”.
“Russia and the United States understand that the further reduction of nuclear potential will lead to the fact that they will begin to approach the level of other nuclear powers”
The start-3 Treaty (in English sources listed by the acronym New START, which also can be translated as “a new beginning”) was signed by Vladimir Putin and Barack Obama in April 2010 in Prague and entered into force on 5 February 2011. Under this agreement, the parties must make reductions of deployed strategic delivery vehicles (Intercontinental ballistic missiles and heavy bombers) for each side to 700 and up to 1 550 thousand nuclear warheads on them. “The new start Treaty gives both countries the term until February 2018 to reduce their deployed strategic nuclear warheads to no more than 1,550, the lowest level in the last decade”, – says the publication Reuters.
We will add that the Obama administration has launched an initiative to reduce arsenals of the two countries, but Russia rejected the offer, citing the extension ABOUT the United States and other outstanding bilateral issues.
“Russia outwitted US”?
Reuters notes that the White house did not disclose the details of the conversation between the two presidents. Thus the Agency draws attention to the recognition of the press Secretary of the new U.S. administration Shawn Spencer – he said that trump “is familiar with the content of the contract start-3,” but during the conversation, Putin asked for clarification to his assistants.
“During the debate ahead of the presidential elections in 2016, trump said that Russia has “outsmarted” the United States Treaty,” reminds Agency. Reuters points out: the current President claimed that the start-3 “allows Russia to produce nuclear warheads, while the USA couldn’t do.”
This will add that in January, before trump as President, the media reported that he is preparing Russia for a new deal on nuclear disarmament. The newspaper VIEW detailed analysis of those statements.
We can assume that the nuclear issue will be considered at the (yet hypothetical) meeting of the presidents Putin and trump. Preparations for such a meeting soon to discuss the Minister of foreign Affairs of Russia Sergey Lavrov and the new head of the state Department’s Rex Tillerson.
It is also likely that the stumbling block will be the question of us missile defense. Moscow and Washington have a mutual interest to discuss the topic of missile defense, but the basis for reaching an agreement in this area yet, said Friday the Russian Ambassador in Washington Sergey Kislyak. “We have no illusions about missile defense. We see that whatever was observed explanations … in fact, is building a global system that including the surrounds of the Russian Federation”, – said the Russian Ambassador to the United States.
In addition, Moscow and Washington have not yet developed a mutual understanding on Iran. Trump is configured and is extremely tough against Tehran, called Iran “a terrorist state number one”, expanded sanctions against the country. As you know, during the election campaign, trump has repeatedly promised to revise the “nuclear deal” with Iran, concluded in 2015 with the participation of the Obama administration. The Iranians do not remain in debt on Friday at a rally in Tehran marking the anniversary of the Islamic revolution, burned an effigy of trump.
Quantitative and qualitative parameters of the limitation of strategic offensive arms Russia and the United States in contracts SNV-1 and SNV-3Как recently said the newspaper VIEW, Moscow, in turn, makes it clear that it will continue to be friends with Iran and will not exchange the lifting of sanctions on nuclear reduction.
As for the Russian-American Treaty on strategic offensive arms, as was pointed out in December last year, the New York Times, it is not clear whether trump intends to withdraw from agreements on reducing nuclear weapons. But if statements by the new American leader about the need to expand nuclear capacity of the United States will go into practice, they will have serious consequences, pointed the edition.
“Liberal” start-3 are completely satisfied with US
Military expert, chief editor of the magazine “Arsenal Fatherland” Victor murakhovski in conversation with the newspaper LOOK skeptical about reports of trump’s intention to revise the start-3.
According to the interlocutor, it is unlikely trump could have something to guard in this agreement. “The contract is very liberal for both sides. It only limits the number of carriers and the number of nuclear warheads,” – said the expert, adding that unlike previous treaties, there is no separation, where the media and so on. “The control mechanism is also quite liberal, the parties just exchange information, verification lies with the parties themselves, – said murakhovski. And it has nothing to do with the anti-ballistic missile Treaty, which also fully satisfied with the US”.
Prospects of negotiations on the conditional start-4, the expert evaluates “extremely negative”. “Russia and the United States understand that the further reduction of nuclear potential will lead to the fact that they will begin to approach the level of other nuclear powers who do not participate in any agreements on limiting strategic nuclear weapons,” – said the source.
Meanwhile it is no secret that China, for example, “is actively developing its own nuclear weapons, including Intercontinental”, said the source. In fact, China has made a new generation, and now puts into service ICBM’s, and they are respectively equipped with nuclear warheads, the expert said.
“That the contract will be irrelevant, said before the trump”
The political scientist, the head of the Council on foreign and defense policy Fyodor Lukyanov in conversation with the newspaper VIEW noted that the start-3 might seem to Trump unfavorable. “Trump has several times touched on the theme of nuclear weapons, including publicly,” the expert reminded. From what an American President says, yet implies that he does not understand it, how it works, what’s the point of all these negotiations and the role of diplomatic hand in strategic stability, said Lukyanov.
The expert believes that trump was referring to, say, the United States cut more than I would like. “So it turned out that the Americans in this contract reduce more than Russia, just because we have the total number (warheads) was somewhat less,” – said the analyst.
In any case, even if trump really criticized start-3, “none of this implies,” says Lukyanov. He recalled that the contract has long been signed and executed, Russia he’s not going to come out. However, “this is probably the last contract of its kind in the field of bilateral treaties on the limitation and reduction of nuclear weapons,” said the analyst. “The fact that this model is over and will be irrelevant in the future, said immediately, well before the trump, the expert said. – If we would be talking about nuclear disarmament, the control, this obviously need to not do in a bilateral format, and to connect other countries.”
Thus the question remains, how will be in the future policy in regard to nuclear arsenals in the issue of strategic stability, as previously trump advocated the strengthening of nuclear capabilities. “The position of the parties is not clearly formulated,” the expert reminded.