Russia publishes written reply to U.S. response to security guarantees

　　China News Agency, Moscow, February 17 (Zhang Mengtian Bing) The Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs delivered the Russian side's written reply document to the US side's response to the US's recommendations on security guarantees to the US Ambassador to Russia Sullivan on the 17th, and published the reply on its official website. text.

　　The Russian side pointed out that the US side has not made a constructive response to the main content of the draft security treaty drafted by the Russian side.

The main contents of the draft are: NATO will not further expand eastward, withdraw the "Bucharest Plan" that "Ukraine and Georgia will become NATO members", not establish military bases and conduct military activities on the territory of the Soviet Union and countries that are not members of NATO, and NATO in The military infrastructure in Europe is restored to the state it was in 1997 when Russia and NATO signed the basic relations document.

"These regulations are of vital importance to Russia."

　　The Russian side pointed out that the US side ignored the package nature of Russia's proposal, deliberately selected topics that were "convenient" to it, and "distorted" the theme to create an advantage for the US and its allies.

The move, along with corresponding remarks by U.S. officials, reinforces Russia's legitimate skepticism about whether Washington is truly committed to addressing European security concerns.

　　The Russian side said that the growing military activities of the United States and NATO near the Russian border are worrying, while Russia's "red lines", core security interests and sovereign rights are still being ignored.

If the United States is not prepared to provide long-term, legally binding security guarantees, Russia will be forced to respond, including military measures.

　　Regarding the Ukraine issue, the Russian side said that the "Russian invasion plan" exaggerated by the United States and its allies is conjecture. Russia has not and has no plans to "invade" Ukraine. The allegation that "Russia is responsible for the escalation of the situation" can only be regarded as Attempts to pressure and devalue Russian security proposals.

Russia has nothing to do with the internal conflict in Ukraine.

　　If Ukraine is accepted as a member of NATO, Ukraine may try to "recover" Crimea by force, thus involving the United States and NATO in a direct armed conflict with Russia, which will have serious consequences.

　　The issue in eastern Ukraine is an internal issue in Ukraine, which can only be resolved by implementing the Minsk Agreement.

The United States and NATO should stop supplying weapons to Ukraine, recall all Western advisers and instructors, refrain from conducting joint exercises with the Ukrainian army, and withdraw all foreign weapons from Ukrainian territory.

　　The Russian side believes that the deployment of Russian troops on its own territory will not and cannot affect the fundamental interests of the United States.

Russia has insisted on withdrawing all U.S. troops and weapons deployed in Central and Eastern Europe, Southeastern Europe and the Baltic states.

　　The Russian side said that the United States has not shown its sincerity in abiding by the principle of indivisibility of security.

The United States is reluctant to abandon destabilizing practices that create advantages for itself and its allies at the expense of Russia's security interests.

"Russia's 'red lines' and fundamental security interests are being ignored, and the inherent right to secure those interests is being denied. This is unacceptable."

　　The Russian side stated that the United States is willing to carry out substantive work on individual arms control and risk reduction measures, but has not responded constructively to Russia's main concerns.

Russia will only discuss arms control and other issues under a comprehensive and comprehensive framework for addressing security issues.

　　The Russian side pointed out that the United States did not respond to the content of "withdrawing nuclear weapons deployed abroad to its own country and giving up further deployment of nuclear weapons outside its own territory", but only mentioned the need to deal with the issue of non-strategic nuclear weapons in the strategic dialogue, without considering it. The particularity of its deployment and other factors that affect the security of all parties.

This topic cannot be discussed without addressing the issue of the deployment of non-strategic nuclear weapons in non-nuclear NATO states.

　　The Russian side stated that the issue of short- and medium-range missiles is one of the priority areas of the Russia-US strategic stability dialogue.

The Russian side believes that such weapons are a necessary part of the new "security equation" that Russia and the United States should jointly formulate.

　　The Russian side said that the United States believes that it is unrealistic and one-sided to reduce tensions in the military field by increasing military transparency and taking other measures, and its purpose is to "see" the activities of the Russian armed forces.

To discuss the possibility of updating the OSCE Vienna 2011 document, the necessary conditions must be created.

To this end, the United States and its allies should abandon the policy of containment against Russia and take practical measures to ease the military and political situation.

(Finish)