U.S. to stop complying with nuclear pact with Russia after talks flop

[highplainsdem]

Source: Reuters

The United States will stop complying with a landmark nuclear pact with Russia as soon as this weekend after last-ditch talks with Moscow to save it fell flat, a senior U.S. arms control official said on Thursday.

Washington has long accused Russia of flouting the 1987 Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF), alleging that a new Russian missile, the Novator 9M729, called the SSC-8 by NATO, violates the pact, which bans either side from stationing short- and intermediate-range, land-based missiles in Europe.

-snip-

U.S. Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security Andrea Thompson on Thursday held last-ditch talks with Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov in Beijing ahead of the expiration of a U.S. 60-day deadline for Moscow to come back into compliance with the treaty.

-snip-

In an interview, Thompson said she expected Washington to now stop complying with the treaty as soon as this weekend, a move she said would allow the U.S. military to immediately begin developing its own longer-range missiles if it chose to do so, raising the prospect they could be deployed in Europe.

-snip-

Read more: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-nuclear-russia/u-s-to-stop-complying-with-nuclear-pact-with-russia-after-talks-flop-idUSKCN1PP0FN

[NurseJackie]

1. So, the US cannot be trusted to abide by treaties and pacts? We're no better than a banana republic?

Got it.

I weep for our nation. I feel so ashamed to be an American.

I wish I was younger with my career ahead of me instead of in my rearview mirror. I'd leave and become one of the Queen's subjects.

This isn't just a passing blip like GWB. Trump's actions have diminished and destroyed so much about or once-great nation. These things will not return in my lifetime, nor my children's lifetimes.

For those who voted for him and are suffering... I have zero sympathy.

[Oneironaut]

9. I have to side with the US on this one.

Putin thinks he can skirt around the nuclear treaties while the US is subject to them. I’m not so sure it’s Trump, but rather an increasingly aggressive Russia.

[EX500rider]

10. "So, the US cannot be trusted to abide by treaties and pacts?"

You have that backwards, Russia refused to be in compliance so why would the US stay in the treaty?
What would be the point in staying in a treaty the otherside breaks? (European's in agreement the Russia has cheated)

Also Russian military journals have had some disturbing articles, hypothetical plans to use tactical nukes on NATO forces during a war with the theory that that we can not reply in kind as we would have no tactical nukes and would not want to go to strategic nukes (ie, fire ICMB's at Russia) and would therefore have to withdraw/surrender.

[NurseJackie]

11. Thank you.

[MyOwnPeace]

2. So, all of this winning............

and making our world so much safer.

WHEN will we finally see an end to this madness?

[TomCADem]

3. The Hill - Bernie Sanders calls for new NATO that includes Russia

While I think Trump is using Russia's violation of a nuclear treaty as a pretext for actually letting Russia walking away from the treaty, isn't Bernie proposing that Russia be invited to be a part of NATO?

https://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/260804-sanders-calls-for-new-nato-that-includes-russia

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) called for a new accord between America, its closest allies and Russia as well as Arab nations as a major plank on how to destroy the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS).

“We must create an organization like NATO to confront the security threats of the 21st century — an organization that emphasizes cooperation and collaboration to defeat the rise of violent extremism and importantly to address the root causes underlying these brutal acts,” the Democratic presidential candidate said Thursday during a speech at Georgetown University in Washington, D.C.

“We must work with our NATO partners, and expand our coalition to include Russia and members of the Arab League.”

NATO, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, started at the doorstep of the Cold War and eventually became a major alliance against the then-Soviet Union. So accepting Russia into NATO, or creating a new defense group all together, would rearrange one of the world’s most powerful bonds by uniting the former rival countries around ISIS as the modern enemy.

[karynnj]

8. NO! It sounds more like the ISIS coalition which deconflicted with Russia, Syria and Iran

The goal then - and it sounds like Sanders' goal as well - would be the allow all governments to fight non state terrorists and terrorists like ISIS when they do control land. In 2014, the anti ISIS coalition did start with the NATO partners, quickly added the Arab league partners and other countries supporting the goal.

After Iraq made changes needed to itself counter the expansion of ISIS, the coalition with the local people fighting on the ground and the powerful coalition providing air power, training and planning started to reclaim land from ISIS and then immediately worked to demine the land and restore local governance - something intended to prevent the areas from immediately collapsing and ISIS returning.

Because Russia and Iran had strong real reasons to themselves want to fight ISIS because it was a threat to them too, the coalition established means to deconflict with them and even Syria - so we would not inadvertently attack each other. In the Obama years, the reason for just not including countries like this to the coalition is that it would give them a lot of our military information in the region. There was at least one cease fire proposal where if all the actions to increase trust - including no violations to the ceasefire for several months, they would work together. That NEVER happened.

I don't think what Sanders says is a replacement to NATO, which is a mutual defense pact.

[TomCADem]

12. Are You Sure? Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump Express Similar Views On NATO

If you look on feelthebern.org (quoted below), Bernie still offers a very harsh view of NATO describing it as a waste of money. The similarity in Bernie and Trump's views on NATO has been pretty consistent over the past few years in terms of minimizing its importance as a strategic alliance against Russian aggression and expansion. So, I don't think Bernie's statements in the Hill article could be dismissed as a mere aberration or flub.

https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/la-na-live-updates-democr-1460688145-htmlstory.html

When it comes to NATO, Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump offer similar assessments

Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump are both outsiders of sorts in this campaign, and though they rarely agree on issues, there appears to be common ground over NATO.

Sanders dismissed NATO decades ago as a "waste" of money for the U.S., which funds a disproportionate share of the alliance among its 28 member nations.

"The countries of Europe should pick up more of the burden for their defense," Sanders said when asked during Thursday's debate about his past statements.

* * *
Sanders' views on NATO are somewhat similar to those recently voiced by Trump, who says NATO is unfair economically to the U.S. "NATO is obsolete," Trump said last month on ABC's "This Week." "And there's nothing wrong with saying it's obsolete. But it is obsolete."

http://feelthebern.org/bernie-sanders-on-nato/

Bernie opposes the expansion of NATO because it could lead to further aggression from Russia, which is territorially sensitive about the military alliance’s expansion eastward. Bernie also believes the U.S. foots too much of NATO’s bill.

Who are the current members of NATO?
NATO member countries include the U.S., Canada, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Spain, Portugal, Iceland, Italy, Denmark, Norway, Poland, Turkey, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Latvia, Bulgaria, Lithuania, Croatia, Belgium, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Albania, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Hungary, and Greece.

Which countries are interested in joining?
Bosnia, Georgia, Montenegro, Macedonia, and Ukraine have all indicated an interest in joining NATO. Ukraine’s potential membership has become a hot-button issue in the past year as its conflict with Russia has raged on.

What is Bernie’s opinion on NATO expansion?
He’s against it, claiming it is a waste of taxpayer dollars and not geo-politically sound. In 1997, as a congressman, Bernie said:

“After four decades of the cold war and trillions of United States taxpayer dollars allocated to compete in the arms race, many of our constituents understand that it is not the time to continue wasting tens of billions of dollars helping to defend Europe, let alone assuming more than our share of any costs associated with expanding NATO eastward.”

Why would Bernie want to prevent countries from joining?
Bernie sees the eastward expansion of NATO as an unnecessary provocation of Russia — and, as stated in the quote above, he’s not interested in revisiting the Cold War era when Russia and the U.S. were constantly pitted against each other.

Even “pro-western” politicians in Russia have been hesitant to support NATO’s expansion to include Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia, the Baltic states that were part of the former Soviet Union. Russian President Vladimir Putin’s personal envoy even suggested that Finland’s membership in NATO would start “World War III,” while Putin himself referred to Ukraine’s potential membership as a “direct threat” to Russian national security.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

4. This is Trump-Putin summit bait.

They need an excuse to get together again. And this would be it.

[Honeycombe8]

5. Will Trump stop this?

He could fire Thompson and others. We'll see what Putin tries to get Trump to do.

[TomCADem]

6. Why? This Is a Pretext for Russia to Leave

If Russia scrapped the pact, then Russia would be the bad actor. Instead, the US is the bad guy and now Russia is free to target Europe.

[Bayard]

7. Great, another arms race

Way to go!

What possible reason could Russia have for this missile?

[EX500rider]

13. "What possible reason could Russia have for this missile?"

As I stated earlier, Russian military journals have had some disturbing articles, hypothetical plans to use tactical nukes on NATO forces during a war with the theory that that we can not reply in kind as we would have no tactical nukes and would not want to go to strategic nukes (ie, fire ICMB's at Russia) and would therefore have to withdraw/surrender.

[Bayard]

15. That's my point

Why does anyone need to produce more nuclear weapons unless they have mass destruction in mind? There are already enough to kill every person in the world many times over.

[EX500rider]

16. What do you suggest?

I don't think the US is enlarging its stockpile so much as modernizing it with more recent designs/builds.



The US would be foolish to disarm nuclear-wise as long as the Russians, the Chinese, the Pakistanis, the N Koreans and maybe the Iranians have their own nukes.

[Blue_Tires]

14. Greenwald and Snowden were unavailable for comment