US-Russia arms control talks started in Vienna on Monday as the fate of the last nuclear arms control treaty between the two powers hangs in the balance. Russia has offered to extend the New START treaty, which is set to expire in February 2021, but the Trump administration has not agreed to the extension, calling for China to get involved in a new deal.
The US formally invited China to attend the talks, but Beijing has been clear in saying they have no interest in trilateral arms control agreements since China’s nuclear arsenal is much smaller than the US and Russia’s. President Trump’s lead envoy for the talks continues to focus the conversation on China.
US Envoy for Arms Control Marshall Billingslea shared a picture from Vienna on Twitter of empty chairs with Chinese flags around them and said China was a “no-show.” Arms control advocates fear the Trump administration’s insistence on including China in the deal is only to use Beijing’s unwillingness to participate as an excuse to let the New START expire.
In another Tweet, Billingslea said the talks with his Russian counterpart went well. “First round of Vienna talks very positive. Detailed discussions on full-range of nuclear topics. Technical working groups launched. Agreement in principle on second round,” Billingslea said.
Ahead of the talks, Russia’s lead envoy told NBC News that he believes the US does not want to extend the New START. The Russian envoy also said Moscow would be willing to put some of its new nuclear systems the US is concerned with under the “umbrella” of the New START if Washington reciprocates.
The New START limits the number of nuclear warheads its signatories can have deployed and includes a verification regime that allows up to 18 inspections per year. If the treaty lapses, it would follow a pattern of the Trump administration pulling out of arms control agreements citing Russian violations, with little attempt at actual negotiations.
typical childish neocon nutter manipulation attempt. these dimwits do not consider that France and GB who are part of NATO which just adds to the so called allied nuke counts as well as israel combined have more nukes than rus sia and china combined with NK. china has close to what france has, asside from being non agreement capable, why wud china evan consider this non sense or anyone else think that the us has any credibility left, integrity, what little there ever was, left decades ago .
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/e0eff7dfecea24219d52a2cea4e2878e4b7a5aa5b2c9bebaf7b37dede6af8e98.jpg
Chinese answer to US pathetic tweet by Marshall Billingslea
1. US has kept quitting treaties, so it has left with no credibility. Go back to JCPOA and Paris accord before you make such argument.
2. China has 300 nukes in contrast to 6,000 by US and Russia. So unless you agree to come down to 300 or even 500, you’re not making sense.
US uses arms control summit with Russia for China-bashing, derails talks needed to prevent new arms race.
By Scott Ritter
A former US Marine Corps intelligence officer. He served in the Soviet Union as an inspector implementing the INF Treaty, in General Schwarzkopf’s staff during the Gulf War, and from 1991-1998 as a UN weapons inspector
https://www.rt.com/op-ed/492640-us-start-treaty-russia-china-talks/
The collapse of New START might be dire. But the collapse of the Non-Proliferation Treaty, which will logically follow, will be far worse. Nuclear powers, large and small, signatories or not, will be in a hurry to build up their stockpiles. The greatest danger is thinking this will end peacefully like the Cold War.
https://www.ghostsofhistory.wordpress.com/
China should still have shown up to make that case, that their arsenal is small and will remain so, and also that there are unbound nuclear powers.
Only 100 Hiroshima sized bombs end the world; any nation approaching that number should be on some sort of regulatory standard.
An accidental launch by any one of the smaller nuclear-armed nations could set off a world-ending exchange.
Why should the Chinese have shown up to a meeting regarding a treaty they’ve never been party to and are not interested in being party to?
Fair point, but sometimes in geopolitical diplomacy it helps to be constructively proactive.
Right now, the natural economic giants of the world are set against China. China has potential kinetic problems with India (with prompting of India from the U.S. and U.K.) as well as the U.S. now.
China’s extension of its security laws into Hong Kong will set them into escalating conflict with the U.K. and France/EU as well, although those arsenals are U.S.-controlled.
Curbing nukes should be on the Chinese agenda.
I hope the USA is insisting that Israel take part in the talks too.
http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/63527
Russia President Vladimir Putin’s essay on WW II and current peace efforts.