The Russian-American Treaty of fresh START expires on 5 February. After this date, Moscow and Washington will, for the first time in over half a century, be without any arms control agreements or negotiation processes. Dmitri Medvedev, Vice-President of the safety Council of Russia and organization leader 1 Russia, spoke to peculiar Correspondent "Commitant" Jelena Czernienko about the importance of the fresh START Treaty and the future of atomic deterrence. Medvedev signed the treaty during his presidency.
Q: What function did the fresh START Treaty play in Russian-American relations and in ensuring strategical stability? Did he fulfill your expectations at the time of signing?
Dmitri Medvedev: At any point in history, the fresh START Treaty mostly fulfilled its main functions. He played a very affirmative role. He maintained strategical stableness and reduced incentives for the arms race. It besides ensured the essential predictability in the field of strategical offensive weapons.
However, there were besides any negative aspects. The Russian side had a number of objections to the US side regarding the circumstantial provisions of the treaty. Joe Biden's administration has besides taken steps that we consider destructive. They were contrary to the fundamental principles and agreements contained in the preamble to the fresh START Treaty. Without their consent during the negotiations, the Treaty would simply not have been concluded. Ultimately, all of this led to Russia's suspension of participation in fresh START in 2023. The problem was not in the “quality” of the agreement itself, but in the irresponsible approach of the US to its implementation and to Russian-American relations as a whole.
However, the fresh START Treaty remains important, even though its implementation has been suspended. In designation of this fact, both parties announced their intention to proceed to respect the basic quantitative limits of the Treaty until its expiry in February 2026.
Last September, our country proposed moving even further. The president of Russia has presented a constructive initiative to voluntarily keep the parties' commitments to the fresh START limits for at least 1 year after the expiry of the Treaty. The head of our state stressed that this measurement could only be feasible if the United States acted in a akin way and did not take steps that would violate the current parity.
The implementation of Russia's initiative could contribute importantly to global safety and the improvement of strategical dialog with the United States. However, we have not yet received a substantive, authoritative consequence from Washington to our proposal.
Q: After the fresh START Treaty was signed, American officials (mainly from the Republican Party) repeatedly claimed that this agreement was detrimental to the United States. president Donald Trump late stated that the paper has “many weaknesses” and that “negotiators have done mediocre work.” What do you think?
Dmitri Medvedev: I think Trump meant American negotiators. He “loves” Barack Obama.
However, I want to emphasise the most crucial issue. Washington's decision to take steps that yet undermined the fresh START Treaty cannot be attributed to those who prepared and concluded it.
Both teams worked professionally during the negotiations. The deal was complex and multi-layered. Each point has been carefully checked. The final paper was the consequence of genuine, equal and mutually beneficial compromises. At the time, both parties felt that this was a classical situation in which everyone wins.
As a direct participant, I remember it well. As president of the country, for apparent reasons, I was profoundly active in the negotiation process. I had quite a few telephone conversations about this with the then president of the United States. I remember that during 1 of these talks I ironically referred to the celebrated saying: “If you want something to be done right, you must do it yourself.”
Of course, it was the teamwork that made it possible. The efforts of all participants were truly impressive, as was the consequence achieved.
Therefore, the negative mood, which later grew around the fresh START Treaty, was not related to the paper itself, but to the later behaviour of the American side and the events accompanying the Treaty.
If Washington yet re-evaluated the terms of the treaty and felt that he had someway "lost" under the fresh START, this shows a advanced level of professionalism of Russian negotiators who managed to defend our national interests. Therefore, the negative attitude, which later grew around fresh START, was not related to the paper itself, but to the later behaviour of the American side and the events accompanying the treaty.
Q: As you mentioned, the United States has not yet responded to the Russian president Vladimir Putin's proposal to keep the main quantitative limits of the fresh START for a year after it expired. Do you see the possible to resume cooperation with the United States in arms control?
Dmitri Medvedev: The possible of resuming fruitful cooperation with the United States in arms control depends on favourable conditions. First of all, Russian-American relations must be standardised to any extent. For Biden, relations deteriorated to an even worse level than during the Cuban crisis.
We see that the fresh U.S. administration is trying to reconsider the reckless and highly risky approach of the erstwhile U.S. administrations, which have sought the task of our country's "strategic failure". It's a step in the right direction, but advancement is slow. We are only at the beginning of the road, and the success is not yet guaranteed, especially since Donald Trump is inherently politically unstable.
Before we can build something new, we request to make certain that it does not collapse under the burden of long-term unresolved problems.
Washington must show its commitment to respect for our fundamental safety interests, both in words and in practice. We must besides guarantee that he is able to work with us on an equal footing to limit the possible conflict.
It is so premature to put forward optimistic predictions about the imminent resumption of a comprehensive and fruitful strategical dialog between Russia and the United States, which would cover arms control issues.
This is peculiarly crucial given that strategical problems are increasing as a consequence of the destabilising actions of the United States. Consider, for example, the highly provocative rocket defence task “Golden Dome for America”. This task fundamentally contradicts the claim of an inextricable offensive and defensive strategical weaponry; the rule enshrined in the preamble to the fresh START Treaty.
It should besides be mentioned the statements of American leaders suggesting the anticipation of reopening full-scale atomic trials. This would considerably complicate any possible strategical dialog between Russia and the US.
There are many another negative examples.
However, the American side clearly lacks affirmative signals. Importantly, there was no affirmative consequence to our initiative after START. In short, it would be better not to have a START-4 treaty than 1 that simply masks common distrust and provokes an arms race in another countries.
Q: How do you imagine the future of arms control after February 5? Do you foresee the anticipation of multilateral agreements? Or will there not be a government at all and the planet face a fresh arms race between atomic powers?
Dmitri Medvedev: First of all, we must wait until 5 February to see whether the United States will respond importantly to the Russian initiative. Theoretically, looking at the calendar, there is inactive a tiny chance of making affirmative decisions.
However, if we do not hear anything circumstantial from Washington, we will follow the steps actually taken by the United States. We carefully monitor these steps and we will proceed this.
Russia is prepared for any eventuality.
Any fresh threat to our safety will be considered rapidly and decisively. There should be no uncertainty about it. This is peculiarly crucial given that alongside conventional strategical offensive weapons new, highly powerful weapons emerge. All countries are active in this, including of course us. Examples do not request to be looked far; for example, take the Buriewiestnik, Oresznik and Poseidon systems.
As regards possible multilateral agreements, there is presently no queue of countries willing to discuss a fresh restrictive government outside Russia and the United States. Therefore, discussions on this subject are pointless. I'd go further, and I'd say I'm certain the atomic club will expand.
Q: How do you view developments in atomic deterrence, given the deficiency of prospects for a fast resumption of a comprehensive strategical dialog between Russia and the United States and the deficiency of a queue of countries willing to discuss a fresh restrictive government in a broader format?
Dmitri Medvedev: Russia and the United States proceed to have crucial influence in this area as they are countries with the top atomic potential. There is no point in denying that the atomic club is much wider today. There are countries with atomic weapons under the atomic Non-Proliferation Agreement, as well as unofficial members who either consider themselves atomic powers or not. But everyone knows they are.
The situation is not without dark clouds. It gets worse due to the fact that the global instability and the deepening contradictions in the planet order prompt any countries to consider the most effective way of defending themselves. any may conclude that acquiring atomic weapons is the optimal way. Therefore, despite all the discontent with this issue, I believe that the atomic club will proceed to expand.
Many countries have method capabilities to make military atomic programmes, and any are already conducting investigation in this area. Humanity may not want this, but let us be honest: no another method has been found to warrant the sovereignty and endurance of the state.
Without atomic weapons, it is rather possible that our country would cease to exist. Whether it was the russian Union or Russia today.
In general, I am alternatively pessimistic about the future of the atomic non-proliferation system.
Q: Do you have any thought which fresh countries could join the atomic club?
Dmitri Medvedev: Let me just say that according to open sources and intelligence, many countries are conducting investigation in this area. However, the boundary between peaceful and military atomic energy is very fluid. Nevertheless, the emergence of fresh members of the atomic club is rather likely.
Q: Will it stabilise or destabilize the situation?
Dmitri Medvedev: That's a tough question. On the 1 hand, the more countries have atomic potential, the little unchangeable the situation becomes. Finally, individual may choose to usage atomic weapons in local conflict.
On the another hand, this will force States to consider the consequences of provoking certain conflicts.
Since you asked this: [West] Europe, and under Biden's regulation Americans, constantly force us to make hard decisions. And these provocations continue. Remember the attack on the president of Russia's residence at the end of the year utilizing a large number of unmanned aircraft? This could be the basis for a retaliatory attack with peculiar weapons.
Such games are highly dangerous.
It is impossible to find clearly how atomic weapons affect human life. On the 1 hand, it creates large tension, on the another hand, calms dangerous minds.
Q: What measures, apart from the arms control system, which is becoming obsolete, could, in your opinion, reduce the hazard of atomic war?
Dmitri Medvedev: We have always taken a comprehensive approach. Its basis is simply a set of fundamental principles which the atomic powers must abide by: equal and indivisible security, respect for each other's vital interests and resolution of contradictions that could lead to military confrontation. Weapons control plays a secondary role. It is simply a tool that helps in the applicable implementation of agreements through limits and inspections. But there is no panacea.
If we are not heard, we will act proportionately to reconstruct the parity. Or we can make something fundamentally new, something that will sober those who have dangerous intentions.
Therefore, the successful work of the Russian defence and industrial complex acts as a sedative for Russia's enemies.
This article was originally published in "Comprehensant", and translated and edited by the RT team.
Written by Jelena Czernienko, a peculiar correspondent for the Moscow paper "Kommersant".
Translated by Google Translator
source:https://www.rt.com/russia/631526-nuclear-renaissance-start-dmitry-medvedev/
