A meeting of the Russia-NATO Council, which was devoted to the issue of the Treaty on the Elimination of Intermediate-Range and Shorter-Range Missiles (INF), ended in Brussels on Friday, January 25. Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said he was not sure of the American side’s readiness to discuss the future fate of the treaty. So he commented on the reports that the dialogue on the INF Treaty with the US Assistant Secretary of State for Arms Control, Andrea Thompson, will continue during the meeting of the “nuclear five” in Beijing in late January.
“We will have contact, but whether Ms. Thompson is ready to discuss the INF Treaty during this contact, I have no answer to that effect.” Of course, we would be interested in continuing this dialogue, ”Ryabkov said.
The Russian diplomat noted that Moscow is ready to continue work on preserving the INF Treaty, even if Washington suspends its participation in it on February 2.
“We are continuing to work in the interests of preserving this document, nothing has changed. Despite the difficult conversation during this meeting, we expect that common sense will prevail, ”said Ryabkov.
Following the meeting, the Secretary General of the North Atlantic Alliance, Jens Stoltenberg, said that NATO does not observe "breakthroughs" in resolving the crisis associated with the release of the United States INF Treaty.
“All members of the Russia-NATO Council recognize that the INF Treaty is vital for North Atlantic security. But the contract is now under threat. Unfortunately, we did not see any signs of a breakthrough, ”Stoltenberg TASS quotes.
According to him, Russia and NATO during the meeting completely dispersed in their positions on the INF Treaty, as well as issues relating to the conflict in the east of Ukraine. At the same time, the Secretary General of the Alliance added that, “despite the difficult situation,” the parties were able to discuss all the primary issues. He also said that the situation around the INF Treaty will be discussed in mid-February in Brussels, where the meeting of defense ministers of the Alliance member countries will be held.
Stoltenberg said that NATO would seek to avoid an arms race in the event of a treaty breakdown, but refused to answer the question about the deployment of American medium-range and shorter-range missiles in Europe.
After the summit, Stoltenberg will make a two-day visit to the USA.
Chance of salvation
Commenting on the situation around the treaty, Stoltenberg said that there is a chance to keep the INFMT even if the United States begins to unilaterally exit.
“After February 2, there will still be an opportunity to keep the treaty, because the US on February 2 will only begin the process of withdrawing from it, but it will be completed in about 6 months,” the Alliance Secretary General said.
- Jens Stoltenberg
- © nato.int
The Treaty on the Elimination of Intermediate-Range and Shorter-Range Missiles (PRSMD) was concluded by the USSR and the USA in 1987. The countries agreed to completely destroy the missiles with a range of flight from 500 to 5,500 km and launchers. By 1991, the Soviet Union had utilized the Pioneer, Temp-S, Oka, R-12 and R-14 missiles. The Pentagon got rid of Pershing systems and ground versions of the Tomahawk cruise missile.
The United States claims that the range of the Russian cruise missile 9M729 in violation of the terms of the agreement exceeds 500 km, and the ballistic RS-26 Avangard does not reach 5.5 thousand km.
A few days before the meeting of the Russia-NATO Council, the Russian Defense Ministry held a briefing for foreign military attaches, demonstrating the 9M729 missile on it. Representatives of the Ministry noted that the maximum flight range of this rocket is 480 km - in full compliance with the terms of the INF Treaty. At the same time, the military attaches of the United States, Britain, France and Germany, as well as representatives of the EU and NATO missions, ignored the briefing of the Russian defense ministry. In the Kremlin, this position was described as “indicative.”
“Undoubtedly, this is more than indicative, because it just says that there is still no mood to discuss the problems of the INF Treaty,” said the press secretary of the Russian President Dmitry Peskov, commenting on the demarche of NATO military attaches.
He added that Moscow is not satisfied with the exchange of ultimatums and unsubstantiated accusations.
The situation with the briefing demonstrates the lack of independence of the European members of the alliance, as was the case with the work of the OPCW to investigate chemical attacks in Syria, said Sergei Sudakov, corresponding member of the Academy of Military Sciences, in a conversation with RT.
“Then, evidence was demonstrated of the falsification of the chemical attack, but the White House instructed European states to simply ignore the Russian position. They believe that if they close their eyes and see nothing, it means that this is not the case. The same behavior is observed in the system of international relations, and because of this, it is experiencing a terrible crisis. The United States is doing everything to destroy international law and an established system of relations between countries. This leads states to lose their sovereignty and identity. If the EU countries want to return it to themselves, they need to come to such demonstrations and not pretend that nothing is happening, ”the expert noted.
Imaginary and real threats
NATO and the US are playing the roles of a bad and good policeman on the issue of terminating the INF.
“Stoltenberg has repeatedly spoken about partnerships and that he does not see a threat in Russia. Then it is worth asking: what are the goals of the NATO bloc? The Warsaw bloc is no more. For example, terrorists are not hit with medium and shorter range missiles. It turns out that the United States successfully used the moment and created the image of an enemy from Russia to force Europe to invest more money in NATO, ”the expert believes.
However, a situation has now created where the United States constantly declares a Russian threat, but it never materializes for European allies, Sudakov notes.
- Trident II D5 rocket launch
- Reuters
- © US Navy
“Therefore, the question is brewing in Europe - if Russia is not an aggressive country, what threats should be considered real? What is the reason for being in the same NATO bloc along with the USA? Stoltenberg understands that he was not in a very good situation. He understands that the withdrawal of the United States from the INF Treaty will lead many European countries to abandon the deployment of new US military bases with missile systems aimed at Russia, ”explained Sudakov.
According to the expert, instead of developing and expressing his own position on the INF Treaty, the European countries-members of NATO simply took the side of the United States.
“Stoltenberg’s streamlined statements are due to the fact that it’s hard to admit that Europe has completely lost its sovereignty and independence. We see that the Russia-NATO summit was not effective because Europe did not have an independent agenda. If they read what is written to them in the White House, this will lead to the fact that behind imaginary threats they will overlook the real ones, ”noted Sudakov.
Trump Administration Maneuvers
The United States intends to withdraw from the INF Treaty, because it has ceased to arrange them, since it creates obstacles for the deployment of new American weapons in Europe, says Vladimir Vasilyev, Ph.D.
“For them, withdrawal from the treaty is a diplomatic procedure necessary to strengthen influence in Europe. In order to deploy new medium-range missiles in Europe, by analogy with the Pershing complex, Americans will have to convince the European allies of the need for such a step, ”said Vasilyev.
According to the expert, Russia can effectively oppose these plans of the United States, offering Europe a more constructive position. Recall that Russian President Vladimir Putin pointed out that the United States did not provide hard evidence that the Russian side violated the contract. Moscow has repeatedly opposed the destruction of the INF Treaty, indicating that dismantling the treaty would deal a severe blow to the international security system.
Washington has nothing to respond to the objections of Russia, because it is the United States who are the initiators of a unilateral and groundless exit from the INF Treaty, the expert stressed in a conversation with RT.
“Such a breach of agreement is the Trump administration style. His national security adviser, John Bolton, said that the US would withdraw from all the treaties and agreements of the Cold War era. Therefore, it is likely that, following the INF Treaty, Washington will also withdraw from START III, because these treaties are complementary, ”concluded Vladimir Vasiliev.