Russian lawmakers have outlined their requirements to a new Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty. Members of the Russian parliamentary delegation spoke in Washington at a joint session of the Russian parliament's International Relations Committee and the Committee of Foreign Affairs of the US House of Representatives.
The Chairman of the Russian International Relations Committee, Konstantin Kosachev, said the Russian MPs made crystal clear the points they would never compromise on in discussing the future treaty. Russia requires the treaty to be balanced, respect Moscow's interests and stipulate a clear link between strategic offensive weapons and missile defense. Otherwise, Russian MPs will not ratify the new treaty.
These requirements do make sense. As Moscow and Washington talk of yet more significant reductions in strategic offensive weapons, the deployment of US missile defense system may shift the balance of strength and threaten Russia's security. What causes concern, in the first place, is the Pentagon's intention to deploy missile defense elements in Poland, Rumania and other European countries. Konstantin Kosachev says the plans are clearly at odds with the current stage in Russian-US relations.
"Last year marked a reset in Russia's relations with the United States, he says, and this reset precludes any unilateral steps to guarantee national security without consulting a partner. The two sides arranged to consider the seriousness of threats a missile defense system would pose to the US and Russia alike. It's only after this joint evaluation of threats that the two countries could consider further steps, unilateral or bilateral. As it happens, the US is acting both ways, maintaining a political dialogue with Russia, on the one hand, and discussing security issues with Eastern Europe, on the other".
After meeting with Russian MPs in Washington the US officials acknowledged that the Russian requirements sound logical. Hopefully, this acknowledgement will materialize in the text of the new START Treaty, currently under scrutiny in Geneva.
Please rate: