Skip to comments.U.S. Says Russia Tested Missile, Despite Treaty
Posted on 01/30/2014 8:36:45 AM PST by Seizethecarp
The United States informed its NATO allies this month that Russia had tested a new ground-launched cruise missile, raising concerns about Moscows compliance with a landmark arms control accord.
With President Obama pledging to seek deeper cuts in nuclear arms, the State Department has been trying to find a way to resolve the compliance issue, preserve the treaty and keep the door open to future arms control accords.
Other officials, who asked not to be identified because they were discussing internal deliberations, said there was no question the missile tests ran counter to the treaty and the administration had already shown considerable patience with the Russians. And some members of Congress, who have been briefed on the tests on a classified basis for well over a year, have been pressing the White House for a firmer response.
The treaty banning the testing, production and possession of medium-range missiles has long been regarded as a major step toward curbing the American and Russian arms race.
But after President Vladimir V. Putin rose to power and the Russian military began to re-evaluate its strategy, the Kremlin developed second thoughts about the accord. During the administration of President George W. Bush, Sergei B. Ivanov, the Russian defense minister, proposed that the two sides drop the treaty.
Though the Cold War was over, he argued that Russia still faced threats from nations on its periphery, including China and potentially Pakistan. But the Bush administration was reluctant to terminate a treaty that NATO nations regarded as a cornerstone of arms control and whose abrogation would have enabled the Russians to increase missile forces directed at the United States allies in Asia.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Don’t think they signed the last treaty. Missile testing?? We test them. Why can’t they?
I guess Putin has more flexibility, too.
Draw a red line?
Barry will send them a letter....
They're saying this goes back to 2008??
Sounds like Snowden sent Obama a memo.
Barry puts the US at risk to fulfill the “trust but don’t verify” disarmament dreams of his commie youth that followed the Soviet propaganda push in the US at the time.
Here is the NY Times’ assessment of Barry’s article in 1983:
“Despite Barack Obama’s sympathetic portrayal, his article seemed to question the popular goal of freezing nuclear arms at current levels — rather than cutting arsenals, the topic of his seminar paper. Mr. Obama wondered if the freeze movement “stems from young people’s penchant for the latest ‘happenings’” and called its focus narrow.”
If you’re a foreign leader, its pretty obvious that U.S. influence and power are rapidly diminishing. Why should the Russians bother to comply with anything when there are no consequences for doing whatever you want? The rest of the world is reaching the same conclusions.
“What is Obama to do about it?”
He is entirely way too IMPOTENT to do anything about it.
Patience describes a situation where you actually care. Obama hasn't shown patience, he's shown apathy.
Sometimes I wonder if we should really trust the Russians...
What is Bam Bam going to do? Not unilaterally disarm as fast as he would if the Russians played nice?
The Russians know he won’t build up anything in response. They know Obama believes weakness is a virtue. And the Russians also know the congress fears being called racist more than they care about our nuclear deterrent and our national security.
I think the only incentive for the Russians to APPEAR to play nice is that it may provide them the opportunity in the future to get rid of “Glavni Vrag” once and for all when we have disarmed to that point...
not *just* a letter... a strongly-worded letter. Possibly in ALL CAPS. He has a pen and a phone, you know.
"But Putin promised me...."
“We test them. Why cant they?”
IIRC, this is about intermediate range ground-based missiles that threaten our European NATO allies. The US gave up testing and deploying such weapons in exchange for the USSR doing the same.
Back in the hapless Carter Admin the Rooskies were intimidating our NATO allies with the SS-20 intermediate range nuke missile. If the USSR got off a first strike and NATO weapons weren’t available to retaliate in-theater, the war would be over before the US could retaliate with more remote weapons. NATO allies weren’t confident that a weak US president like Carter (or currently Barry) would initiate mutual assured destruction if Europe was already fried and the Russians were stoking that fear.
At first Carter countered with the neutron bomb, but after key NATO leaders stuck their necks out and backed it, Carter backed out leaving they with the political damage coming and going and leaving NATO exposed.
When Reagan got in he countered the SS-20s with the Pershing, IIRC. (don’t quote me) as well as air-launched assets. Then when Reagan backed Gorbachev into a corner will our military build-up combined with collapsing the world oil price killing Soviet hard currency, the 1987 treaty was signed signally that the USSR was backing down from intimidating NATO unilaterally.
The Chinese and the Russians are getting whilst the getting is good.
Who can blame them - who wouldn’t?
Backdoor Bath House is a pushover on the international stage.
He won’t contest the Chinese or Russians, but he’ll contest conservatives at every turn. Conservatives are the enemy in his foreshortened cranium.
They don’t need missiles they have Obama&Co on our land.
Another possibility for this week’s NSS (no s***sherlock) award.
Uh-oh,,, I smell another pink line about to be drawn by Dear Leader.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.