&host=rt.com&uri=/usa/news/new-start-step-forward/&via=(none)&ua=CCBot/1.0 (+http://www.commoncrawl.org/bot.html))
New START – one more step forward
Published: 14 March, 2010, 09:21
Edited: 14 March, 2010, 21:49
TAGS: Arms, Military, Nuclear, Medvedev, Russia, Obama, Politics, USA
Russia and the US could be close to signing a new agreement on arms reduction - expected to slash their nuclear arsenals by about a quarter, according to Russia’s president.
The two countries’ leaders, Dmitry Medvedev and Barack Obama, discussed the final details of the pact in a telephone conversation on Saturday.
The Kremlin says the presidents reached a strong level of consensus and are ready to talk about a specific date for signing the new treaty.
"They had a good conversation and they looked upon progress and consensus concerning new START Treaty reached in Geneva,” stated press-secretary of the US National Security Council, Michael Hammer.
The previous Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty – known as START – was signed in 1991 and expired in December last year.
Under the original pact, the countries massively reduced their nuclear arsenals from the late Cold War levels.
The ongoing negotiations were officially launched last April, but reportedly stalled over the controversial American plans for a missile shield in Europe.
13.03.2010, 09:55
4 comments
Illegal US immigrant detention practices questioned. Part 2RT is investigating allegations that US immigration officials are using harsh detention methods against those suspected of violating visa rules. |
15.03.2010, 11:50
6 comments
Ads-oriented media breeds biased journalism – authorModern America’s media is a cartel system that is owned and dominated by a handful of huge corporations saddled with heavy debts, said author Mark Crispin Miller, who shared his views on American media and propaganda. |
I don't know what is going to be in the detail of this agreement. However, if it turns out that it limits offensive weapons, without a tie to defensive weapons. Then I don't welcome it at all. If you don't want war, then the way to prevent it, is to actually negotiate to reduce nuclear weapons, but preserve the deterrence. That means the whole focus of the agreement should be to preserve deterrence, not just to make lower numbers. If you just reduce and then the deterrent is eroded, then you will actually face an increased risk of the use of nuclear weapons. I would be happier with 2000 unused nuclear weapons than 1000 used weapons. The devil is in the detail on this one. We will in practice never give up our deterrence, so there will be a reaction if this agreement is wrong, and the US tries to takes advantage. Therefore in real terms this agreement is either making a more or less stable arrangement and hence a more or less likely lasting peace. Russia is a nuclear superpower and will always be, misguided adventurous attempts to try to change the balance won't work and in the end could lead to a catastrophic outcome for all the world.