International Observation: Who did the United States hurt after retiring and retiring?

　　China News Service, Beijing, November 24th, title: International Observation: Who did the United States hurt after retiring from the group?

　　Reporter Zhang Shuo

　　Six months after the "announcement" was issued, the US government finally announced on the 22nd that it would formally withdraw from the "Open Sky Treaty" with immediate effect.

In this regard, experts in Beijing said in an interview that the United States’ insistence on “withdrawing from the group” is breaking the balance of the global arms control system, and accelerating the process of unilateralism highlights its shaking up the international system and threatening world security.

In addition, this "withdrawal" coincides with the transition of the two administrations of the United States, and it also left doubts about whether the United States intends to return to the treaty in the future.

　　Regarded as an important measure to enhance mutual trust between the United States, Europe and Russia after the end of the Cold War, the Open Skies Treaty has played a major role in reducing the risk of conflict between all parties since its entry into force in 2002.

According to the treaty, each member state can go to the other's home to "take a look" and conduct short-term unarmed observation and reconnaissance flights to collect data on the armed forces and their activities.

According to media statistics, as of 2019, treaty member states have carried out more than 1,500 reconnaissance flights.

Before the United States withdrew, 34 countries including Russia and NATO countries signed the treaty.

　　Originally, the member states greeted each other and went to each other's home to "catch a door", which provided a way for each other to collect and share information, and also added a channel for military transparency to both sides.

But in May of this year, the United States declared that Russia had systematically violated this agreement and restricted the United States from flying in some sensitive areas. Therefore, in accordance with regulations, the United States notified all parties to "leave the group" six months in advance.

U.S. National Security Affairs Assistant O'Brien put it more bluntly. In doing so, the U.S. is "just withdrawing from an outdated treaty that benefits the adversary and undermines its own security."

　　The United States is determined to unilaterally break the contract, why?

　　"For the United States, the treaty is'outdated'." Su Xiaohui, deputy director of the American Institute of the China Institute of International Studies, said in an interview with a reporter from Chinanews.com that from a technical point of view, the US military capabilities and reconnaissance methods are already very advanced. , It is no longer necessary to collect image intelligence by means of traditional reconnaissance aircraft, and the models to perform the tasks are old, and the maintenance and replacement costs are high.

"Therefore,'constraint' is just a'trouble' that the United States wants to get rid of as soon as possible."

In addition, Su Xiaohui pointed out that the United States believes that the arms control mechanism restricts the United States far more severely than other countries, which is even less cost-effective for the United States, making the United States "self-binding."

　　On the same day that the United States announced its "retirement", the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs strongly condemned its decision, claiming that it undermined the modern arms control system and aroused concerns about the global arms race.

Jiang Yi, a researcher at the Russian Foreign Affairs Office of the Russian-Eurasian Institute of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, believes that "this US move is another blow to global arms control efforts."

"The U.S. government is accelerating the process of unilateralism, shaking the international system and threatening world security." Jiang Yi believes that the significance of the treaty is an important measure for trust-building among member states. The U.S. attempts to reshuffle international relations. Attitudes will have a more negative impact on global politics and diplomacy.

　　In this regard, Su Xiaohui also holds the same view.

She said that the purely superstition of the United States in seeking national interests through military means and hegemonism has actually aggravated global instability.

"Strengthening the international arms control treaty system is something that all countries must abide by. The US's stubborn attitude is breaking the balance of the global arms control system, which is very dangerous."

　　Although the U.S. willfully "withdraws from the group," European allies such as Germany, Britain, and France have repeatedly expressed hope that the U.S. can stay.

Some analysts believe that it remains to be seen whether the treaty can continue to take effect after the United States withdraws, and it will depend on Russia's actions.

　　"Russia is doing very'beautiful' this time." Su Xiaohui said in commenting on Russia's response that Russia not only did not choose to withdraw from the group, but also "kicked" the problem back to the United States.

"For the reason given by the United States for withdrawal from the group that'Moscow has violated the treaty more than once', Russia has made it clear that it does not recognize and emphasizes that it will continue to perform the treaty agreement with the signatory countries." Su Xiaohui believes that "the United States insists on withdrawing, showing its commitment to European allies Concerns do not care. This will be another blow to US-Europe relations. Russia has created a wedge between the US and Europe."

　　Nowadays, it is a fact that the United States has "retired". However, in the transitional period of the two-term government, is it possible to return in the future?

Su Xiaohui also gave her own judgment, “does not rule out future US policy adjustments and return to the treaty. However, she also pointed out that once the new government comes to power, it may devote more energy to prioritize domestic issues such as epidemic prevention and control. As for the future considerations, it is not yet known."

　　In addition, in the face of multiple "withdrawal" actions by the US government in the field of arms control, Jiang Yi predicts that it will leave more challenges for the next US government in handling international issues.

(Finish)