Andrey Surzhansky — on what kind of deal the parties could make on the issue of limiting their strategic nuclear arsenals
The Russian-American talks held in Riyadh have every reason to be considered, if not breakthrough, then close to it, since they open the way not only to resolving the conflict in Ukraine, but also to restoring relations between Moscow and Washington, which have fallen to their lowest point in history.
These relations touch upon a wide range of issues, which traditionally include strategic stability.
On the agenda
Commenting on the results of the meeting in Saudi Arabia, Russian President Vladimir Putin recalled the Strategic Offensive Arms Reduction Treaty (START Treaty). "For example, we have such a question as the extension of START-3. They've probably forgotten everything. Let me remind you that exactly one year later, in February, the Strategic Offensive Arms Reduction Treaty ends," he said.
However, not everyone in the United States has forgotten about the treaty. Several Democratic Congressmen have sent a letter to US Secretary of State Marco Rubio asking him to start work on extending the START Treaty with Russia. "Even during periods of serious disagreement, including the Cold War, our countries sat down at the negotiating table to lead the world away from a nuclear catastrophe," the message says. "Although Russia has agreed to comply with the restrictions under the treaty, we believe that it is in the interests of both our countries to use official mechanisms aimed at preventing a nuclear arms race," the document says. The State Department, which was contacted by Reuters journalists with a question about whether the agreement was discussed at a meeting of the Russian and US delegations in Saudi Arabia, did not respond. Meanwhile, Democratic lawmakers called on Rubio to begin appropriate work with Congress without delay.
It is noteworthy that in his inaugural speech on January 20, Donald Trump never mentioned the topic of arms control, which caused some surprise among international observers and experts in this field. After all, the United States and Russia remain the largest nuclear powers, on which the security of the entire world largely depends. But the White House corrected the mistake, and a few days later, Trump, speaking to the participants of the Davos economic forum, gave the most detailed answer, saying that he would like to achieve appropriate agreements with Russia and China, or, as he put it, "denuclearization." The head of the White House noted that in the past he had discussed with Russian President Vladimir Putin "the reduction of the nuclear arsenals of the two countries."
Let me remind you that the Russian president announced on February 21, 2023, that Moscow was suspending participation in the START Treaty, but was not withdrawing from it. The Head of State stressed that before returning to discussing the issue of continuing work under the treaty, the Russian side should understand for itself how the START Treaty will take into account the arsenals not only of the United States, but also of other NATO nuclear powers — Great Britain and France.
According to the terms of the agreement, each of the parties reduces its strategic offensive weapons in such a way that seven years after the entry into force of the document and in the future, their total numbers do not exceed 700 deployed intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs) and heavy bombers (TB), 1,550 warheads on them., 800 deployed and non-deployed ICBM, SLBM and TB launchers. The document, designed for 10 years, expired on February 5, 2021, but it assumes the possibility of extension by mutual agreement. In February 2021, Moscow and Washington extended the agreement, which the Russian authorities called the gold standard in the field of disarmament, for the maximum possible five years.
New players
At an investment forum in Miami, Florida, Trump confirmed that he favored the United States to negotiate with Russia and China on reducing the number of nuclear warheads. "Russia and we have the largest nuclear [arsenals] far ahead of [the rest of the nuclear club countries]. China is not close. But it will be close. In three, four, or five years, it will be equal," Trump said. "We would [also] have to achieve something from the smaller nuclear powers — three or four. Probably four," the American president added.
Commenting on the statements of the American leader, the press secretary of the President of the Russian Federation Dmitry Peskov noted that Moscow is ready for negotiations with Washington on nuclear disarmament, but it is necessary to take into account the nuclear potential of the US allies in NATO.
Beijing also reacted, to which Trump's words were addressed. The Chinese authorities have stated that they maintain their nuclear potential at the minimum level required to ensure safety. "Regarding the issue of reducing nuclear weapons, as a responsible major power, China follows a peaceful path of development and is committed to developing friendly cooperation with all countries of the world," said Liu, a spokesman for the Chinese Embassy in Washington. Pengyu. "We adhere to a policy of not using nuclear weapons first, follow a strategy of self—defense, always maintain our nuclear forces at a minimum level, and never engage in an arms race with any country."
The PRC's statement was made in a very cautious manner. There is no hint of Beijing's willingness to discuss reducing nuclear arsenals.
Despite the lack of specifics in Trump's statement, the American Arms Control Association nevertheless regarded it as a "positive signal." "We welcome President Trump's interest in negotiating an agreement on limiting and reducing the huge nuclear arsenals of the United States and Russia, which could prevent an expensive and dangerous unlimited nuclear arms race," the head of the association told me. Daryl Kimball.
"However, hope alone is not an effective strategy for reducing nuclear weapons,— he said. To succeed in "denuclearization," the president will need a more practical and effective approach than the one he tried in his first term with Russia, and he will need a more realistic plan to involve China in bilateral negotiations that could lead to restrictions on nuclear and conventional weapons systems that are of concern to each. from the sides."
Kimball recalled that in 2020, Trump tried but failed to start trilateral negotiations involving the United States, Russia and China. He then rejected a simple extension of the 2010 START Treaty with Russia, leaving it to President Joe Biden in the early days of his tenure in 2021. "Discussing nuclear arms control with the Kremlin is always difficult, and reaching a new comprehensive framework agreement may require lengthy negotiations for many months, if not years," said the head of the association. That is why he believes that Trump and Putin could conclude an informal deal obliging each of the parties to maintain existing restrictions on their strategic nuclear arsenals. "This would buy time for formal negotiations on limiting strategic and tactical nuclear weapons and the systems that carry them, as well as medium—range missiles, and prevent an expensive arms race that no one can win, and make both countries safer and more secure," the expert believes.
Commenting on Trump's proposals, Leonid Slutsky, head of the State Duma Committee on International Affairs and leader of the Liberal Democratic Party, noted in an interview with me that the military support provided by the United States to the Kiev regime hinders the dialogue between the two countries on strategic stability. "Issues of strategic stability remain the cornerstone of global security. Russia, as has already been stated by President Vladimir Putin, is ready for discussion, realizing the high degree of responsibility to humanity," he said. — The Russian-American talks in Riyadh have given up hope for further unfreezing of contacts at all levels. And the fact that the Russian leader raised this issue separately, summing up their results, may indicate real prospects."
But the resumption of dialogue around START-3, according to the politician, should take into account all factors and risks. In particular, Slutsky stressed, the total nuclear capabilities of the NATO countries — France and Great Britain. "The Russian side suspended its participation in the START Treaty in 2021 due to violations by the Americans of the preamble and the main provisions of the Treaty, as well as, not least, because of the intentions of the Biden administration to inflict a "strategic defeat" on our country. Of course, if the US continues to provide military support to the Kiev regime, including through the supply of weapons and the provision of intelligence, this will have a destructive effect on the discussion, even in theory, of the possibility of resuming the negotiation process," Slutsky stressed.
With optimism
At the same time, the Russian Foreign Ministry points out that the current US president's support for destabilizing weapons programs will also not contribute to the conversation about strategic offensive weapons. The official representative of the department Maria Zakharova ru/politika/23022781" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">mentioned in this regard Trump's recent decree "Iron Dome for America", implying "a sharp intensification of the national missile defense project and its expansion to a scale comparable to [former US President Ronald] Reagan's grand strategic defense initiative." "We see this as another confirmation of the United States' commitment to turning outer space into an arena of armed confrontation, confrontation, and the deployment of weapons there," the diplomat noted. "These US approaches will not help reduce tensions or improve the situation in the strategic sphere, <...> including creating the basis for a fruitful dialogue on strategic offensive arms."
According to Ilya Kramnik, a researcher at the Primakov National Research Institute of World Economy and International Relations of the Russian Academy of Sciences (IMEMO), if the United States nevertheless starts building such a dome, it will inevitably affect Russia. "In the sense that this is a reason to think about the meaning of further negotiations on reducing nuclear weapons. Why reduce your arsenals when the enemy is deploying a national missile defense system? — said the interlocutor. — And we will have to calculate the capabilities of such a system in order not to miss the moment when we need to build up the strike group. Given that we have mass-produced intercontinental missiles of various types, it will be quite simple and much cheaper for us to do this."
However, as Kramnik noted, before solving the problem of linking the US "iron dome" with the START Treaty, you need to determine for yourself whether there is anything worth negotiating with the Americans. "In the current situation, when the conflict in Ukraine continues, and the United States is an actual participant in it, there is no point in talking to them about arms control in isolation from everything else. Only after satisfactory agreements are reached on the conflict as a whole, including the lifting of Western sanctions against Russia, will it be possible to move on to talking about nuclear arms control. Until then, it makes no sense," the expert concluded.
Although the results of the negotiations in Riyadh inspire some optimism, the format of the dialogue on nuclear weapons remains extremely uncertain: will it affect only the two nuclear superpowers, or will it be possible to involve the following such heterogeneous troika of China, France, and the United Kingdom in the process? So far, the question itself looks abstract. It has not been possible so far. In general, Trump's statements on nuclear disarmament and his tone are perceived as encouraging.
Russia, as stated by Vladimir Putin, does not refuse dialogue. She is ready to discuss this topic as well. However, the White House should clearly understand that any further measures to control nuclear weapons will become possible only after the Russian Federation provides reliable guarantees of its security. And these guarantees must be reinforced concrete. So that Ukraine's membership in NATO appears to the current leaders of the Kiev regime and their patrons in Europe exclusively in dreams.
Andrey Surzhansky
