New START Dead or Revivable Under a New US Regime?
New START is the last remaining Russia/US agreement to prevent unconstrained expansion of nukes that can kill us all if detonated in enough numbers.
Under Trump, it’s dead. Efforts by hardliners surrounding him to kill the deal succeeded by making unacceptable demands no responsible government would accept.
Is resuscitation possible if Biden/Harris succeed Trump in January?
Dems are notoriously more belligerent than Republicans.
Softening US relations with Russia, China, and other independent nations on the US target list for regime change is virtually off-the-table.
US relations with nations it doesn’t control are more likely to be hardened, not eased.
As long as nuclear weapons and long-range delivery systems exist in the hands of a nation seeking unchallenged global dominance — imperial USA — possible mass annihilation threatens everyone everywhere.
The US dismissed proposals by Russia to extend New START short-term ahead of November 3 elections.
Despite good faith efforts by Moscow to bridge differences, Pompeo and other Trump regime hardliners consistently rejected its proposals.
New START expires on February 5. Biden earlier said if he succeeds Trump in January, he’ll pursue extending the treaty without conditions.
Time and again, what US politicians say and do are worlds apart.
In relations between Washington and other nations, nothing is certain except militancy, belligerence, and rage to control planet earth, its resources and populations — wars by hot and/or other means its favored strategies.
In late October, Russia’s Foreign Ministry offered to extend New START for one year, adding:
The Kremlin would commit to “freeze for the above-mentioned period the number of nuclear warheads that each side possesses.”
The good faith offer would “be implemented only and exclusively on the premise that ‘freezing’ of warheads will not be accompanied by any additional demands on the part of the United States.”
“(T)ime gained (by extending the treaty for a year) “could be used to conduct comprehensive bilateral negotiations on the future nuclear and missile arms control that must address all factors affecting strategic stability.”
In mid-October, Vladimir Putin offered to extend New START “unconditionally for at least a year” in its present form.
Trump’s national security advisor Robert O’Brien called the offer a “non-starter.”
Following O’Brien’s rejection, Pompeo falsely claimed the landmark treaty “is not a good deal for the United States or our friends or allies.”
In late October, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister/chief New START negotiator with the US Sergey Ryabkov said the following:
“(T)he degree of our differences is rather significant. (He saw no) “reasons for strong optimism” that New START would be extended, warning:
Failure to reach agreement (because of unacceptable US demands) risks “destroy(ing)” it altogether.
While “Russia is open to continuing the dialogue,” chances for a breakthrough with Trump regime hardliners is virtually nil.
If New START expires and Biden/Harris succeed Trump on January 20, they’ll have barely more than two weeks to extend it.
On Thursday, Sergey Lavrov expressed little hope for extending the agreement, saying:
Russia’s “(c)onversations (with the US) are conducted in terms of the mentality of ‘who will win, who will lose’ ” by Trump regime negotiators.
“When talking about the START treaty, everyone can win if we extend it without any preconditions.”
An earlier unacceptable arrangement had US “inspectors…sitting at the gates of our military-industrial complex factories.”
This was during the Boris Yeltsin years “in the 1990s. (T)here will never be a return to this system,” Lavrov stressed, adding:
“Considering the hype that has developed in the United States as part of the ongoing vote counting, lawsuits, and other perturbations, it is probably not reasonable to expect any clear proposals from the Americans.”
“The ball is now in their court. If the answer is no – well, we will live without the agreement.”
Throughout his tenure, Trump proved he’s a deal-breaker, not maker. New START may be the next to go.
My two Wall Street books are timely reading:
“How Wall Street Fleeces America: Privatized Banking, Government Collusion, and Class War”
“Banker Occupation: Waging Financial War on Humanity”