Obama, Medvedev Commit to Reduce Nuclear Arms, Reset Relationship

AMERICAN FORCES PRESS SERVICE ^ | April 1, 2009 | Fred W. Baker III

[Cindy]

Note: The following text is a quote:

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=53735

Obama, Medvedev Commit to Reduce Nuclear Arms, Reset Relationship

By Fred W. Baker III American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, April 1, 2009 – The leaders of the world’s two largest nuclear superpowers today agreed to start new talks aimed at reducing nuclear arms stockpiles, and to use the platform to “reset” relationships between the United States and Russia.

“What I believe we've begun today is a very constructive dialogue that will allow us to work on issues of mutual interest,” President Barack Obama said following his first meeting with Russian President Dmitriy Medvedev, held on the sidelines of the Group of 20 economic summit in London today.

Both presidents acknowledged a “drift” in relations between the United States and Russia, but said common interests should give them cause to work together.

In a joint statement released after the meeting, both leaders agreed “that the era when our countries viewed each other as enemies is long over,” and pledged a “substantive agenda for Russia and the United States to be developed over the coming months and years.”

“We … are ready to move beyond Cold War mentalities and chart a fresh start in relations between our two countries,” the statement reads.

In a separate news conference before the meeting, Obama said both countries have an interest in reducing nuclear stockpiles, reducing the threat of terrorism, and stabilizing the world economy. And, he said, nuclear arms talks are an ideal first front to begin moving the two countries toward common grounds.

“The presence of these deadly weapons, their proliferation, the possibility of them finding their way into the hands of terrorists, continues to be the gravest threat to humanity,” Obama said.

In the joint statement, Obama and Medvedev agreed to strengthen their obligations under Article VI of the treaty on nonproliferation of nuclear weapons and to replace the strategic arms reduction treaty. Talks on the new treaty are to begin immediately, and the two leaders called for a report on results by July.

“We committed our two countries to achieving a nuclear free world,” the statement reads.

Still, the two acknowledged that differences remain over missile defense assets in Europe.

The United States wants to base missile defense interceptors in Poland and associated radar in the Czech Republic. U.S. officials want to extend the zone of coverage in Europe for the potential long-range missile threat from Iran or others in the region.

Russian officials, however, have downplayed the threat from Iran and have been outspoken opponents of the plan. Both Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates and former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice met with former Russian president Vladimir Putin and Medvedev in the past two years in Moscow for talks on the plan.

In the statement, though, the two leaders agreed to forge ahead on the missile defense discussions, and Medvedev later said he looks forward to meeting with Obama in Moscow in July.

“We discussed new possibilities for mutual international cooperation in the field of missile defense,” the statement reads. “The relationship between offensive and defensive arms will be discussed by the two governments.”

The statement also put Obama and Medvedev on the same side of the fight against al-Qaida and other insurgent groups operating in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and it expressed joint concern over a possible upcoming North Korean ballistic missile launch. The statement said the launch “would be damaging to peace and stability in the region.”

[Cindy]

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/09/04/01/Reset-with-Russia/

#

Note: The following text is a quote:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Background-Readout-By-Senior-Administration-Officials-On-President-Obamas-Meeting-With-Russian-President-Medvedev/

THE BRIEFING ROOM

THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the Press Secretary
(London, United Kingdom)

_______________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release April 1, 2009

BACKGROUND READOUT
BY SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIALS
ON PRESIDENT OBAMA’S MEETING WITH
RUSSIAN PRESIDENT MEDVEDEV

Filing Center
Thistle Marble Arch Hotel
London, United Kingdom
2:31 P.M. (Local)

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Thank you, all. We just came from the meeting with our two Presidents. You saw, I think, already what they said publicly. Let me report that in the meeting, which I think went 70 minutes altogether, most of which was with our delegations but some of which was in a private meeting between the two of them — we released the two documents which you already have.

On the START agreement, I would just remind you that for a long time we’ve been out of the business of doing verifiable treaties. You have to go back to really the start, the beginning, of when we signed START, which is almost 20 years now out of date, where you could find similar aspiration to do a treaty like this.

What we’ve released today, of course, is not the — what the treaty will be, but the instructions for how we’re going to get this treaty done. And both Presidents emphasized that they would like to see a new treaty to replace START by the end of the year.

The second agreement, which was also released today — both of these, by the way, I’ll talk a little bit more about that, if you’re interested, are the result of a lot of negotiations, some very intense negotiations, over the last 60 days or so.

The second agreement outlines the broad parameters of U.S.-Russia relations. It is much more far-reaching than just arms control. I think it’s important to understand that, and that is a notable achievement compared to where we were just a couple months ago.

I want to remind you also where we were six months ago when we talked about the relations being at a lowest point since Cold War times. This document shows that we’re in a different place. And you’ll see there are lots of areas of agreement, and I would say, importantly, lots of agreement about definitions of common threats and common interests.

Also in that document and most certainly in the discussion today were exchanges, and in the document but verbal exchanges today about disagreements. And let’s be very clear about that. In the meeting today, particularly when talking about Georgia, when talking about Abkhazia and South Ossetia, when talking about spheres of influence, when talking about missile defense, we were talking about disagreements, not agreements. And it was done in a very frank way. I think both Presidents appreciated that it was done in a frank way. It was not done in a defensive manner.

And even the discussion of human rights, as I’m sure many of you have read, Lev Ponomarev was badly beaten in Moscow yesterday. He is a leading human rights activist in — first in the Soviet Union with Andrei Sakharov and all through — that came up in a very productive, positive exchange about what had happened to him, and a concern expressed on both sides.

So on the whole, I think it was a very — this was not a meet-and-greet. This was not a “let’s get to know each other.” It was not all about personal stuff, although there was some personal stuff, too, we can talk about, if you want. This was setting a very ambitious agenda for U.S.-Russia relations. And now our two governments have to get together and start to do the work that has been broadly outlined in these two documents.

Do you want to add —

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Thanks a lot. I would just — you know, several of you have been covering the President now for some time, and I think you’ve heard him say over the course of many months that as it relates to Russia, he intends to have a relationship that identifies areas of common interests and seeks to work very aggressively on those, but then is also very candid and very frank in areas of disagreement. And I think the meeting today was the embodiment of that fundamental tenet that the President has as it relates to our relationship with Russia.

My colleague enumerated what we think is a very significant breakthrough — namely, instructions to negotiators to begin the firming up of a verifiable, legally binding follow-on to the START agreement, which obviously will allow us to maintain very important verification measures after the end of this year, provided that we meet the goal laid out by the Presidents.

But the issues, as my colleague suggested by talking about the second statement that was released today, did not stop there. I would just say that the President was very forward-leaning as it relates to his fundamental interests and his fundamental belief that the biggest threat the country faces, our country faces, is a nuclear weapon in the hands of a terrorist. So he leaned very far forward on nonproliferation goals.

He also made very clear that we continue to remain committed to the goal of locking down all loose fissile material within the next four years. That’s something that we’ll want to work very closely with our Russian colleagues on.

But he was also very candid in the areas where we disagree. And I think the President said that in order for us to have — referring to himself and President Medvedev — in order for us to have a very strong and solid relationship, we need to be honest and truthful with one another. And in that spirit the President raised a number of disagreements that my colleague just laid out.

So it’s our view that we’ve taken this opportunity for this first major bilateral meeting today to continue the pace that we set over the course of the 60 days — 60-plus days that the President has been in office. As my colleague suggested, that this announcement today and even the cordial and congenial relationship that the President had today with President Medvedev is not by any means — neither of these things are an end of themselves. They’re in fact means to a greater set of ends, including fundamentally securing our countries from the threat of nuclear weapons.

So with that, we’ll throw it open to your questions.

Michael.

Q You guys talk about the frank and honest discussion. Can you talk about places where you hoped you to get something, but didn’t; or pushed the Russian President, and he resisted — things that didn’t — that the President was not able to go as far as he would have liked?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Let me say two things about that. My colleague just mentioned that — and I’ll want — let’s go back before the election, and remember where we were, right?

And both Presidents today in their remarks and in previous conversations and in previous correspondence, have met — really emphasized how badly the U.S. relationship had “drifted.” That was the phrase that both President Obama used and President Medvedev used. And in fact — I don’t know if there’s any Russian speakers here. I think even — there’s a new verb, “drift.” “Drifting,” the way he used it, was a strange verb to me. I speak Russian pretty well, and he wanted to emphasize that word “drift,” echoing President Obama. Not unlike other exchanges that they’ve had, they’re trying to find common language. And parenthetically —

Q What’s the word itself? Sorry.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Dreyfovat. Do you speak Russian?

Q Yes.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Is that a word in Russian? Dreyfovat?

Q Yes, I —

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Kind of? (Laughter.)

Q Like, you know, when a huge iceberg is moving —

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Okay. Drifting, okay. It’s the first time I’ve ever heard it as a verb. You know, it sounds like — never mind, let’s not talk Russian translation. (Laughter.)

So that’s where they started. Now, with the exchange of letters, which I think was very important — in Medvedev’s letter to our President, it was clear that he had a big plan in mind in terms of resetting relations, as he himself has said and President Obama now has said many times. President Obama’s response was not a tit-for-tat; it was more his vision of the relationship. And you saw in his BBC interview just a few days ago, Medvedev said it was a profound statement, that letter. And that created, I think, the beginning of some momentum to something bigger.

Not long ago, just a few weeks ago, the agenda was very narrow. And not long ago, by the way, we did not even have an agreement about the negotiating rules on START. And I think — our President most certainly said to us we don’t want to have just a get-together meeting here in London; we want to get work done and affirm that the work has been done with this meeting, and that’s what we accomplished. And I get the sense that Medvedev has seized the moment, too.

And the joint statement on U.S.-Russia relations, more broadly, is a much bigger, more comprehensive, and I would say — you know, this is not flowery language; this is actual statements about real things: Afghanistan, North Korea, Iran. And on those things, I see progress in terms of statements of common interests, common threats, things that we can do together.

Q Okay, but — I’m sorry, if I could just follow up. You told us all the things that you think went well. Can you talk a little bit more about the things that didn’t go so well, or where the two of them either clashed a little bit, or where our President sought some change in position or change in view, or —

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Yes.

Q — where it didn’t happen?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: So on missile defense, we have different definitions of when and where it should happen, and that remains. And that’s still — the President, as I’m sure you all know, has made very clear how we talk about European missile defense as being directly related to the threat from Iran. If the threat from Iran is eliminated, the necessity — it’s in the language, I don’t need to go through it — but the necessity of that site subsides.

I think we’ve made progress in coming to closer understanding about that with our Russian friends. But we — we are not on the same page on that. And they expressed their differences of opinion about that.

On Georgia, the President said categorically we’re not going to recognize South Ossetia and Abkhazia as independent states. We had a disagreement about that conflict. And he said very categorically, too, we don’t recognize spheres of influence as a useful concept in the — I think he said in the 21st century. I also saw closer agreement on that than before, but not — we’re not there on the same page on those two issues.

Q Can I follow up on missile defense? Whatever happened to that proposal then-President Putin made to George Bush about — like some facility in Azerbaijan? Is that still alive?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Yes, it is alive. In the joint statement there’s a phrase in there saying we’re going to look at ways to explore cooperative missile defense. And today in the meeting it was discussed, and the Russians have put forward some ideas about how to do that.

Q Did you guys outline any specific plans for how you’re going to get some of this accomplished? I can see what you’re doing with START, and you have the deadline ahead of this year. But on missile defense, on NATO enlargement, on Iran, on those sort of contentious issues, is there an action plan? Is there a way forward, or is it just you guys putting out this statement they were going to work on it?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: We actually — it was not discussed today. I want to make that clear. But in parallel with these negotiations about the START agreement and the joint statement, there’s another document which outlines very specific action — action plan, to use your word, that’s a good word, where — you know, this will not be a public document, so don’t expect it from us. This is a way to keep our bureaucracies honest. And President Obama said very clearly and I think very correctly that in the past you had some lofty agreements and ideals, and the execution was lacking. And Medvedev agreed. And he said, I’m not going to let that happen in my presidency.

So I think it would be too early to get into details about how we’re going to do that, but the fact that we have established an agenda, we have now established the next time they’re going to meet in July in Moscow — there’s nothing like summits to make action happen, as it was with this summit, by the way. Without this meeting on the books, I don’t think we would have gotten the two joint statements that we got.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: I think — I mean, I think we may have buried the lead here a little bit in the sense that one of the real conclusions that the President drew in the course of the last couple of weeks and then in the meeting today was that — it’s his belief that there’s been enough forward progress on our shared interests that he makes sense — he believes it makes an awful lot of sense for him to travel to Moscow in July.

And I think we will see the use of that deadline, in effect, to good use as it relates to the — firming up the START negotiations, as it relates to moving forward on our plan to lock down all loose fissile material in the next four years.

And I guess I’d only say that it’s our hope that the administration can in fairly short order be fully staffed up on these issues. So we’ll obviously want to see the Senate finalize its consideration of several of our folks here so that we can get to work on this stuff.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: And I want to echo what my colleague said. I mean, you know, a lot of you maybe forgot the Cold War. I haven’t — at least I studied it well, but, you know, to get these kinds of agreements done with the Russians is not going to be an easy task. I mean, we’ve got a lot of work to do before the end of the year. And so today was an important milestone, but both Presidents let it be known we’ve got a lot of work to do to get to the second part.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Let me — I just want to add one more thing here, I’m sorry. I think it’s important to see the START — the forward lean on START and the forward lean on nonproliferation in a bigger context. Obviously another issue that was discussed today, and will be discussed throughout these meetings throughout the weeks, is Iran and its illicit nuclear program; is our continued concern about proliferation — missile technology.

And so I think it’s important for everyone to see that this President is very committed to making clear that we’re going to do our part as it relates to nuclear technology, as it relates to proliferation, as it relates to locking down loose material. And so we want to send a very clear message that — and I think we did today in this statement — that this is a very important national security priority not just for us and not just for Russia, but in many other regions.

Q On some specifics on Iran, was there any discussion and any kind of commitments from Iran on — I mean, from Russia on halting construction of the Bushehr nuclear facility, or on the sale of S-300 missiles to Iran, or even on new sanctions if these if the diplomacy doesn’t work?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: You know, I think — the short answer is there was not specific commitments in this meeting on that. We do have the next meeting of the P5-plus-1 coming up, and we are going to continue to aggressively use the fora that are available to us to press all these issues. Obviously Russia is a very pivotal member of the P5-plus-one and we’ll cooperate very closely with them and the other members on many of the issues you pointed out.

Q And when was that next meeting?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: April 8th, I think.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: I would just add to that, if I may, that it didn’t come up today, but having been involved in these negotiations all the way through, everything you talked about has been mentioned. And I would just note the Russians do have a contract on the S-300s and they have not fulfilled it, and that’s important — they have done that deliberately.

Q One of the reasons a lot of people think U.S.-Russia relations sort of didn’t go so well in the administration was the areas of disagreement eventually overwhelmed the areas of agreement. Do you think you’ve made sufficient progress today so that if there’s another outside event, some kind of geographical issue, the sphere of influence, or whatever, that the initiatives you have will be able to be sustained?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: I don’t want to predict the future about sustaining moment, and I want to be very clear to establish an ambitious agenda does not mean we’re going to fulfill it, and we have no illusions about that. We are not being naïve about this. We — the relationship with Russia is a complicated, big, difficult one.

But I would just — I would really implore you to read the joint statement. And what you see there is a lot of common definitions about a lot of common threats and opportunities — so Afghanistan, Iran, North Korea, al Qaeda, nonproliferation issues that my colleague has mentioned. You know, we’re talking about a lot of big things that matter to the United States of America. I want to make that clear. This agenda starts, first and foremost, with our national interest. And what is striking to me, both in the document and in the discussion that they had today, is there is quite a bit of overlap.

Now, when there’s disagreement — President Obama said very clearly today, we’re going to disagree, we’re going to honestly disagree, but we’re not going to — we’re not going to have — we’re going to try to avoid problems that come as a result of misunderstandings. And both Presidents affirmed that, and that’s — that speaks to the larger agenda and the larger approach that President Obama has to foreign policy issues more generally. And I think that was well-received on the Russian side today.

Q In mid-March, the Russian President gave a speech that some interpreted as a signal that he was moving closer toward a post-Cold War footing. He talked about a large-scale rearmament. He talked about things that have transpired in the last couple of weeks that have dramatically accelerated the pace of negotiation and agreement. Put that speech from March 17th in context of where we are now, and how much do you think what was feared in that speech has been averted or watered down or is —

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Do you mean the NATO speech, the —

Q — the Medvedev speech about large-scale rearmament in 2011 —

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Yes.

Q Some people look at that speech as sort of putting another marker —

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Yes, I understand.

Q — dramatically with what you’re talking about today.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Yes. I read that speech very differently, just so you know. I mean, so there’s that — that marker was down. But the real message there was to the militaries — we’re firing a bunch of generals that don’t do anything and we’re restructuring our military.

So the message in Russia was very different than the message in the West; that this was a — and so he says those tough things, but then it disguises some very difficult things for him to do vis-à-vis the military. But that’s in terms of Russia.

You know, I see Medvedev, President Medvedev himself, as somebody that sees an opportunity to work with a new President, President Obama, not burdened by, you know, either the last eight years or the Cold War, for that matter. And he’s trying to — I think he sees an opportunity to rebuild this relationship on a different platform.

You know, whether — I want to keep emphasizing — whether we succeed or not, we’re not — let’s not — I want to emphasize — we know the probabilities, right? But the ambition I think and the aspiration is there on both sides. And what’s the alternative? You’ve got to — I think you’ve got to try to build a constructive relationship with all the caveats that my colleague and I keep emphasizing about when we disagree, we disagree. But that, to me, is a vision for the relationship that I think is shared by these two Presidents.

And remember, Medvedev, yes, he was picked by Putin and all that stuff, but he wants to establish his own agenda, particularly on foreign policy. And he said that very explicitly in the interviews leading up to this meeting — “I’m in charge of foreign policy.” Whether — that’s his aspiration to be the guy driving that. And so to be hooked up with a new President from the United States, also not burdened with things that happened in the past, that’s an opportunity I think he’s trying to seize.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Why don’t we go in the back here a little bit.

Q You were talking about the common threat — common agreements and threats coming from Afghanistan. In that respect, did you discuss the question of the — (inaudible) — base? Did the Russians have anything to say about that? And the other question is about — Khodorkovsky’s new trial opening yesterday — was it discussed —

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Manas was discussed in a very frank way about — we have common threats and we should cooperate, and it was an interesting conversation. It was not the old talking points. Mikhail Khodorkovsky’s specific case did not come up, but discussions about rule of law, reform — Medvedev himself emphasizing his legal background — that all did come up in a rather interesting way.

Q Can I ask what your sense is of where Vladimir Putin is in all of this and what his view will be of it, and whether he’s a kind of ghost at the theater?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Well, he’s not here because he’s Prime Minister, as you know. I don’t have a view on Putin — ask the Russian analysts that. I would say this, though — Medvedev is here with the blessing and coordination with his government and Russia. This is not some — that system just doesn’t work that way. And in the negotiations about these documents, just as it — you know, the interagency process, which I’m — how it works in our government, the Russians also have a very elaborate interagency process. And so Mr. Putin is well aware of everything that’s been said and is — well, I’ll just leave it at that. I don’t know if he — what documents he physically read, but I’m quite sure that he’s well abreast and on the same page in terms of what we agreed to in the two statements today.

Q I can’t believe the Russians were willing to host a peace conference about the Middle East. Did you raise that possibility of any Russian role regarding the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, or the Israeli-Syrian peace process, considering they have a very good relationship with both Syria and Khaled Mashaal, the leader of Hamas?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: That issue did come up in passing —

Q What issue?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Middle East peace process.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Middle East peace process. And so I think that the two Presidents agreed to have their teams take a further look at what exactly our Russian friends have in mind.

Q In terms of the next meeting in July, their predecessors met something like 30 times, and a lot of those were sort of referred to as kind of drive-by summits. Did they talk about how they’re going to have a different type of summitry? And also, you mentioned at the beginning a little bit of personal banter between them. Can you tell us anything about that?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: I’ll let my colleague do the banter. (Laughter.)

Yes, it’s an important point about the way the previous administrations dealt with this. I think this meeting in and of itself shows you that we’re not — we don’t do drive-by summits. We have meetings of substance and it’s not — quite frankly, neither President, most certainly not our President, has the time to have 30 meetings with all the other things going on, including the whole reason we’re here in London.

So I presume and expect — and for me it’s a great burden, but when we go to Moscow it’s going to be a real, substantive meeting and it won’t be 45 minutes; it will be the serious things principally that my colleague already talked about in terms of START and nonproliferation, but, again, the full spectrum of everything that we’re going to talk about — including, I would say, trying to remember that the societal part, the business links, the civil society links that are talked about in the joint statement, I suspect Moscow will give us an opportunity to develop some of that when we have our President in Russia.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: I’d just that and I think that those of you who have followed the President more closely are fully aware of what he has said in the past, which is that he wishes he had the luxury of choosing to spend a lot of time on any one particular issue. But the fact remains that we have 12 million people looking for jobs in the United States, we have a lot of people whose health care is at risk. He is investing in this relationship because it’s a very fundamental interest at play. And the next summit will be driven by our interest in advancing those -– our fundamental interest in advancing those interests as it relates to proliferation and START.

As it relates to banter, I would just say that I think as many of us do when we see each other, the Presidents asked each other about their families. They underscored their appreciation of the candid exchange of letters, the very productive phone calls that they’ve had until this date. I think it was noted that they share an interest in law, training in law, and that undergirded a much longer conversation about the importance of the rule of law to not only political development, but also economic development.

And so I also think that there was — I think this was implicit in their discussion about their families that they’re relatively young men, as my colleague suggested, and coming to this meeting with perhaps a fresher set of eyes on our shared challenges.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: I want to add one footnote that I think is very important on this. We start to build this relationship from the premise that we are focused on our national interests. And our objectives are to pursue those interests. The relationship between Medvedev and Obama or me and some low-level — you know, my counterpart, that is a means to that end.

Sometimes in the past I think we’ve gotten that backwards, where forging a close, personal bond becomes the objective — and that gets you in a lot of mess, and we’re not going to do that.

Q On North Korea, was President Obama and Medvedev — missile launch by North Korea in violation of the U.N. Security Council?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: I think President Obama has been very clear on this issue as it relates to his belief, our government’s belief that such a launch would be a violation of U.N. Security Council Resolution 1718. The issue was not discussed in the context of U.N. Security Council resolutions today, but there was an exchange about North Korea, about suggestions from Pyongyang that they’re preparing such a launch and a shared sense that such a move is of considerable concern.

Q Did he tell what you said to President Hu of China?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: We’ll get you that — that’s your next background briefing.

Q When you say that the path to the new treaty won’t be easy, won’t be an easy task, what do you mean technically and diplomatically? What — why it wouldn’t be easy to do that if you have one year — and why, if you have any guarantees at all that the Russians are going to do their part, why is he accepting such an invitation in July, which is just six months from now?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: So, on the first part, just to underscore the points that my colleague made — we want a legal, binding treaty. We want a lot of the — not all, but many of the verification procedures that are in START, and there are some technical issues, that some of them are outdates, some need to be updated — we have to work out the verification package.

We’re going to talk about delivery vehicles and warheads. So that’s different than before, and therefore that complicates the negotiations. And I would remind you, I think the Moscow Treaty was two or three pages — I don’t remember –- it was a very short, little document and it didn’t have any of the verification, and it didn’t — if you put the warheads in storage, it didn’t count against the number.

The START treaty I don’t have in front of me, but it was several hundred pages long. And we’re going to a bigger, more verifiable — a serious arms control agreement, not the kind of arms control-light of that other treaty — and on this we have agreement.

But to get all the t’s and i’s dotted to do that, that’s a pretty big task — especially when we’re not used to doing it, by the way. We’ve lost a lot of expertise in our country. You know, thank goodness we’re going to have Rose Gottemoeller as our chief negotiator; that’s very good news. But we’ve gotten a little bit out of the habit of doing this kind of stuff.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: I would just say that I think there’s been some suggestions that perhaps we’ve settled on a number that we’ll get to in this, and I think that’s premature. I think that there is a lot of deliberation on our end on what we need in terms of protecting our interests and then what is the goal that we want to work to throughout these negotiations.

So I think that there does remain a lot of work to be done. But let’s remember that we have an expiration date at the end of this year. We’re working hard to press toward that because we think it’s vitally important that, in particular, those verification procedures remain in place. And that’s what the Presidents charged their governments to do today.

Thanks, everybody.

END
3:03 P.M. (Local)

[bushfamfan]

Leave it to the Demonrat party to sell this country out every chance it gets. The Soviets know they are dealing with a weakling and their greatest ambitions are about to come to fruition with the fool known the world over. The world will miss the Bush cowboy very shortly.

[LibertyRocks]

I just heard this on the news... Obama and Medvedev have started over, a "new day". Doesn't surprise me a bit. Of course Obama and the Neo-Soviets are friendly... They are BOTH COMMUNISTS!!! (Not to mention Russia's coziness with Obama's Muslim friends and all...).

This should be a signal to the liberal jews in this country who still support Israel -- Obama is NOT YOUR ALLY! He supports Russia who is HELPING IRAN develop the nuclear weapons they will try to use to destroy Israel! I hope you realize what you've wrought upon the Holy Land by your support of this Marxist/Muslim Pres_ent.

Cindy, I don't know if you saw this yet or not, but the combination of the two articles is rather telling, IMHO...

FR Thread: "Kremlin guru predicts Vladimir Putin will rule new Soviet empire"

It's no secret that Putin wants to reinstate the Soviet Union (Georgia was the first attempt). Now with the U.S. out of the way since Obama is an ally (or just plain stupid, in their opinion), they can go ahead with their previous plans.

Mother Russia and the dream of a Worldwide Communist government never went away. All the players are the same, only the names have changed...

[Cindy]

START:

http://search.state.gov/search?access=p&entqr=3&getfields=*&entsp=0&output=xml_no_dtd&ie=utf8&lr=lang_en&client=stategov_frontend&q=START&ud=1&search-button=Search&site=stategov%7Coig%7Cfpc%7Cbmena%7Cusawc%7Cmepi%7Ctravel%7Cstategov_exchanges%7Ccareers%7Cfoia%7Caiep%7Cpepfar%7Ccspo&oe=UTF-8&proxystylesheet=stategov_frontend&search-button.x=0&&search-button.y=0&sort=date%3AD%3AS%3Ad1

[mojitojoe]

Birds of a feather,flock together.

[Cindy]

Note: The following text is a quote:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Remarks-By-President-Obama-And-Russian-President-Medvedev-After-Meeting/

THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the Press Secretary
___________________________________________________________________________________
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE April 1, 2009

REMARKS BY PRESIDENT OBAMA
AND RUSSIAN PRESIDENT MEDVEDEV
AFTER MEETING

Winfield House
London, United Kingdom
1:01 P.M. (Local)

PRESIDENT OBAMA: Let me just make a brief comment. I am very grateful to President Medvedev for taking the time to visit with me today. I’m particularly gratified because prior to the meeting our respective teams had worked together and had developed a series of approaches to areas of common interest that I think present great promise.

As I’ve said in the past, I think that over the last several years the relationship between our two countries has been allowed to drift. And what I believe we’ve begun today is a very constructive dialogue that will allow us to work on issues of mutual interest, like the reduction of nuclear weapons and the strengthening of our nonproliferation treaties; our mutual interest in dealing with terrorism and extremism that threatens both countries; our mutual interest in economic stability and restoring growth around the world; our mutual interest in promoting peace and stability in areas like the Middle East.

So I am very encouraged by the leadership of the President. I’m very grateful that he has taken the time to visit. I am especially excited about the fact that the President extended an invitation for me to visit Moscow to build on some of the areas that we discussed on today. And I have agreed to visit Moscow in July, which we both agreed was a better time than January to visit.

And my hope is that given the constructive conversations that we’ve had today, the joint statements that we will be issuing both on reductions of nuclear arsenals, as well as a range of other areas of interest, that what we’re seeing today is the beginning of new progress in the U.S.-Russian relations. And I think that President Medvedev’s leadership is — has been critical in allowing that progress to take place.

So thank you very much.

PRESIDENT MEDVEDEV: (As translated.) I would like to sincerely thank President Obama for this opportunity to meet him and to meet this time in person. And, indeed, we had an opportunity to compare our views on the current relations and current situation in the world. And we had an opportunity to agree upon certain common values that we need to foster in our relations, and provide for further areas for cooperation in progression of our relations.

I can only agree that the relations between our countries have been adrift over the past years. As President Obama has said, they were drifting, and drifting in some wrong directions. They were degrading, to some extent.

That is why we believe that since such a situation was not to the benefit of the United States or Russia Federation, to say nothing about the global situation, we believe that the time has come to reset our relations, as it was said, and to open a new page in progression in the development of our common situation.

Indeed, it was said that we are prepared to cooperate further in such areas as the nonproliferation of WMDs limitation of strategic weapons, countering terrorism, and improving economic and financial situation and the overall economic situation in the world.

It is important to note that there are many points on which we can work. And indeed there are far more points in which we can — where we can come closer, where we can work, rather than those points on which we have differences. Thus, by bringing our positions closer we can attain significant progress and, much more importantly, further our achievements.

I share the view of President Obama who said that our teams have worked really well in preparation of this meeting, and the declarations, the two declarations, which we are adopting are just another proof of that. And those are a declaration on the strategic weapons, and the declaration on the general framework of relations between Russia and the United States, which set good grounds for our further interaction.

We will be very glad to host President Obama, to greet him in Moscow in July. Indeed, July is the warmest time in Russia and in Moscow, and I believe that will be exactly the feature of the talks and relations we are going to enjoy during that period in Moscow. And of course we have set out certain objectives and certain goals and tasks we need to work through in order to get better prepared for this meeting. And indeed I am convinced that is a good opportunity for this interaction.

Well, indeed, so we are convinced that we’ll continue successfully our contacts, in particular today, where we were not only discussing international issues or bilateral items of interaction; we were also discussing education, which probably not everybody — where we have come to an understanding that we’re reading the same textbooks while in these subjects. And this will set us further for interaction.

After this meeting, I am far more optimistic about the successful development of our relations, and would like to thank President Obama for this opportunity.

END
1:14 P.M. (Local)

[ETL]

"the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the [20th] century" -Russian leader Vladimir Putin on the collapse of the Soviet Union...
"World democratic opinion has yet to realize the alarming implications of President Vladimir Putin's State of the Union speech on April 25, 2005, in which he said that the collapse of the Soviet Union represented the 'greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century.'
http://www.hooverdigest.org/053/beichman.html

_____________________________________________________________

From National Public Radio (NPR):
August 29, 2006
"Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez has been visiting countries such as China, Iran and Russia as part of an effort to build a 'strategic alliance' of interests not beholden to the United States. He considers the United States his arch enemy.":
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5729764
_____________________________________________________________

From the Russian News and Information Agency:
July 27, 2006
"'I am determined to expand relations with Russia,' Chavez, known as an outspoken critic of what he calls the United States' unilateralism, told the Russian leader, adding that his determination stemmed from their shared vision of the global order.":
http://en.rian.ru/russia/20060727/51913498.html
_____________________________________________________________

Venezuela Set to Develop Nuclear Power With Russia
September 29, 2008
CARACAS, Venezuela — President Hugo Chavez said Sunday that Russia will help Venezuela develop nuclear energy — a move likely to raise U.S. concerns over increasingly close cooperation between Caracas and Moscow.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,429441,00.html
_____________________________________________________________

Venezuela's Chavez welcomes Russian warships
Nov 25, 2008
LA GUAIRA, Venezuela – Russian warships arrived off Venezuela's coast Tuesday in a show of strength aimed at the United States as Moscow seeks to expand its influence in Latin America. The deployment is the first of its kind in the Caribbean since the Cold War and was timed to coincide with President Dmitry Medvedev's visit to Caracas — the first ever by a Russian president.
http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=%22Venezuela%27s+Chavez+welcomes+Russian+warships%22&ei=UTF-8&fr=moz2

More Yahoo search results for Russia and Venezuela connections:
http://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=A0geu_X30pZJCJEAfCtXNyoA?p=Russia+Venezuela+bombers+tanks+arms&y=Search&fr=404_news
_____________________________________________________________

From CBS-News:
July 29, 2006
"Chavez pledged that his country would 'stay by Iran at any time and under any condition,' state television reported. Ahmadinejad said he saw in Chavez a kindred spirit." "'We do not have any limitation in cooperation,' Ahmadinejad was quoted as saying. 'Iran and Venezuela are next to each other and supporters of each other. Chavez is a source of a progressive and revolutionary current in South America and his stance in restricting imperialism is tangible.'":
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/07/29/world/main1847331.shtml
_____________________________________________________________

Russian nuclear bombers in Cuba?
July 23, 2008

The media has been abuzz today at the prospect of Russian nuclear bombers being stationed in Cuba if the US goes ahead with plans for missile defense bases in Eastern Europe.

The story has riled the US enough that a US general has been wheeled out to tell the world’s press that any Russian attempt to build another nuclear base in Cuba would cross US “red line”.

The story broke earlier this week, when Russian newspaper Izvestia quoted an un-named source from within the Russian military. He told the Russian daily:

“While they are deploying the missile shield in Poland and the Czech Republic, our strategic bombers will already be landing in Cuba.”

The quote hasn’t been independently confirmed, but the Russian Defense Ministry added fuel to the fire when they refused to comment on the story.

The prospect of Russian nuclear forces being stationed in Cuba - which is, after all, only 90 miles from the US coast - would bring back some rather unpleasant memories for the US of the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962, where the Soviet Union under Nikita Kruschev launched an audacious and foolhardy bid to station nuclear missiles on the Caribbean island.

http://www.siberianlight.net/2008/07/23/russian-nuclear-bombers-cuba/

[ETL]

From the Sino-Russian Joint Statement of April 23, 1997:
"The two sides [China and Russia] shall, in the spirit of partnership, strive to promote the multipolarization of the world and the establishment of a new international order."
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/HI29Ag01.html
_____________________________________________________________

[2009] Russia, China plan new joint military exercises

By MARTIN SIEFF, UPI Senior News Analyst
Published: March 26, 2009

WASHINGTON, March 26 (UPI) -- The continuing tensions over Russia's refusal to sell its state-of-the-art land warfare advanced weapons systems to China hasn't interrupted the rhythm of major joint military exercises between the two major land powers on the Eurasian landmass. The latest in the regular, biennial series of exercises between the two nations has been confirmed for this summer.

The next in the now well-established series of exercises called Peace Mission 2009 will be carried out in northeastern China, the Russian Defense Ministry announced March 18, according to a report carried by the RIA Novosti news agency.

The first bilateral Peace Mission maneuvers -- described at the time as counter-terrorism exercises -- were held in Russia and the eastern Chinese province of Shandong in August 2005. As we reported at that time, they were a lot bigger than mere counter-terrorism exercises. Warships, squadrons of combat aircraft and more than 10,000 troops were involved carrying out landings against hypothetically hostile shores. The maneuvers also involved large-scale paratroops drops. The scale and nature of those exercises suggested a trial run for a possible Chinese invasion of Taiwan with Russian support. ..."

http://www.upi.com/Security_Industry/2009/03/26/Russia_China_plan_new_joint_military_exercises/UPI-25021238094858/
_____________________________________________________________

Russia, China flex muscles in joint war games
August 17, 2007

CHEBARKUL, Russia (Reuters) - Russia and China staged their biggest joint exercises on Friday but denied this show of military prowess could lead to the formation of a counterweight to NATO.

"Today's exercises are another step towards strengthening the relations between our countries, a step towards strengthening international peace and security, and first and foremost, the security of our peoples," Putin said.

Fighter jets swooped overhead, commandos jumped from helicopters on to rooftops and the boom of artillery shells shook the firing range in Russia's Ural mountains as two of the largest armies in the world were put through their paces.

The exercises take place against a backdrop of mounting rivalry between the West, and Russia and China for influence over Central Asia, a strategic region that has huge oil, gas and mineral resources.

Russia's growing assertiveness is also causing jitters in the West. Putin announced at the firing range that Russia was resuming Soviet-era sorties by its strategic bomber aircraft near NATO airspace.
http://in.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idINIndia-29030120070817?pageNumber=1&virtualBrandChannel=0
_____________________________________________________________

War Games: Russia, China Grow Alliance
September 23, 2005

In foreign policy it’s critical to “know thine enemy.” So American policymakers should be aware that Russia and China are inching closer to identifying a common enemy — the United States.

The two would-be superpowers held unprecedented joint military exercises Aug. 18-25. Soothingly named “Peace Mission 2005,” the drills took place on the Shandong peninsula on the Yellow Sea, and included nearly 10,000 troops. Russian long-range bombers, the army, navy, air force, marine, airborne and logistics units from both countries were also involved.

Moscow and Beijing claim the maneuvers were aimed at combating terrorism, extremism and separatism (the last a veiled reference to Taiwan), but it’s clear they were an attempt to counter-balance American military might.

Joint war games are a logical outcome of the Sino-Russian Friendship and Cooperation Treaty signed in 2001, and reflect the shared worldview and growing economic ties between the two Eastern Hemisphere giants. As the Pravda.ru Web site announced, “the reconciliation between China and Russia has been driven in part by mutual unease at U.S. power and a fear of Islamic extremism in Central Asia.”
http://www.heritage.org/Press/Commentary/ed092605a.cfm

[Ole Okie]

Oh Lord, I hope Zerobama knows something about chess.

I suspect, though, that the Russian president and Vlad the Impaler both bared their teeth and told each other, “Fresh Meat!”

I’ll not forget Krushchev meeting J.F. Kennedy in Vienna and concluding that he was weak. The Cuban missile crisis was the outgrowth of Nikita’s estimation of John Fitzgerald Kennedy (America’s new royalty at that time).

Reportedly, Jackie charmed the old Bolshevek. A fat lot of good that did us.

[Cindy]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2220279/posts

“Kremlin Should Seize This Obama Moment”
Moscow Times ^ | 30 March 2009 | Vladimir Frolov
Posted on April 1, 2009 4:48:18 PM PDT by nickcarraway

SNIPPET: “Vladimir Frolov is president of LEFF Group, a government-relations and PR company.”

[JoanneSD]

I wonder if they used the big red “reset button” Hillary gave the Soviets.... that should of taken care of everything..once they got it translated

[dr_who]

Medvedev knows a fool when he sees one.

[Cindy]

QUOTE:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2235860/posts

Russia’s Lavrov and Clinton to meet for START talks in May
RIA Novosti ^ | 23/ 04/ 2009
Posted on April 23, 2009 1:41:52 AM PDT by pobeda1945

MOSCOW, April 23 (RIA Novosti) - Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov will meet with U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in Washington on May 7 to discuss the START agreement, which expires at the end of this year.

The director of the North American Department at the Foreign Ministry, Igor Neverov, told RIA Novosti on Thursday that the first round of Russian-American expert-level consultations on preparing the new Strategic Arms Reductions Treaty (START) agreement would take place in Rome this week.

“There will be a meeting of experts in April, and the experts will continue to work until the minister (Lavrov) goes to Washington on May 7,” Neverov said.

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said on Monday the new Russian-U.S. arms reduction deal to replace the START-1 treaty that expires in December should also cover delivery systems.

“In our view, the agreement to replace the START treaty should also limit the means of delivery of nuclear warheads, and not just the number of warheads. I mean by this intercontinental ballistic missiles, submarine ballistic missiles and heavy bombers carrying nuclear loads,” Dmitry Medvedev said during an official visit to Helsinki.

The START-1 treaty, signed in 1991, obliges Washington and Moscow to cut nuclear warheads to 6,000 and their delivery vehicles to 1,600 each. The treaty expires on December 5 this year.

In 2002, an additional agreement on strategic offensive reductions was concluded in Moscow. The agreement, known as the Moscow Treaty, envisioned cuts to 1,700-2,200 warheads by December 2012. However, that treaty is largely considered by analysts to be less effective than the START treaty.

Medvedev also said that during his recent London meeting with U.S. President Barack Obama it had been agreed that negotiators would immediately start talks on a new strategic arms reduction treaty.

[Cindy]

Note: The following text is a quote:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Joint-Statement-by-President-Barack-Obama-of-the-United-States-of-America-and-President-Dmitry-Medvedev-of-the-Russian-Federation-on-Nuclear-Cooperation/

THE BRIEFING ROOM

THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the Press Secretary
_________________________________________________________________
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE July 6, 2009

Joint Statement by President Barack Obama of the United States of America and President Dmitry Medvedev of the Russian Federation on Nuclear Cooperation

The United States of America and the Russian Federation confirm their commitment to strengthening their cooperation to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons and stop acts of nuclear terrorism. We bear special responsibility for security of nuclear weapons. While we reconfirm that security at nuclear facilities in the United States and Russia meets current requirements, we stress that nuclear security requirements need continuous upgrading. We will continue cooperating on effective export controls that make it possible to prevent nuclear materials, equipment and technologies from falling into the hands of actors unauthorized by the state as well as prevent their use in any manner contrary to obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

Building upon previous joint efforts, experience and achievements, and in order to fulfill our agreements reached in London on April 1, 2009, we declare an intent to broaden and deepen long-term cooperation to further increase the level of security of nuclear facilities around the world, including through minimization of the use of highly-enriched uranium in civilian applications and through consolidation and conversion of nuclear materials. We also reaffirm our commitment to dispose of existing stockpiles of weapon-grade materials that are surplus to defense needs consistent with our obligations under Article VI of the NPT.

Both sides remain committed to executing the Agreement between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Russian Federation Concerning the Management and Disposition of Plutonium Designated as No Longer Required for Defense Purposes and Related Cooperation to dispose of 34 metric tons each of weapons-grade plutonium in the United States and Russia. The parties recognize that successful implementation of their respective programs will be subject to future appropriation of funds.

Both sides commit themselves to the nuclear security initiatives begun in 2005, to include the repatriation of spent highly-enriched uranium (HEU) fuel. To expand on this work, we will jointly and together with other nations work to return research reactor HEU fuel under the agreed-upon schedule, as a practical implementation of nuclear nonproliferation objectives. We will continue working with other nations to secure and to eliminate excess stocks of proliferation-sensitive nuclear materials worldwide.

We will continue cooperating on development of new types of low-enriched uranium (LEU) fuel for possible conversion of research reactor cores in third countries and on conducting feasibility studies to explore possibilities for conversion of such individual reactors in the United States and Russia. We note the importance of HEU minimization in civilian applications and support such efforts to the maximum extent possible, where feasible.

To continue to improve the level of nuclear security and to combat existing and emerging threats, our experts will continue working to further improve physical protection systems at nuclear facilities and ensure that these improvements will be sustained in the long term. We will continuously improve physical protection, accounting and control of nuclear materials and radioactive substances and qualifications of professional staff.

Building on our excellent bilateral cooperation in nuclear security, and the expertise of both countries in this area, we will work together to strengthen the ability of other nations to carry out their weapons of mass destruction nonproliferation obligations under UNSCR 1540.

We express our mutual desire to expand capabilities to combat illicit trafficking of nuclear materials and radioactive substances at the borders of our countries.

Recognizing the important role of safeguards in promoting confidence in the peaceful use of nuclear energy and in addressing proliferation threats, we will work together to expand opportunities for bilateral and multilateral cooperation to strengthen the overall effectiveness and efficiency of the international safeguards system.

We share a common vision of the growth of clean, safe, secure and affordable nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. Our nations have a great deal to offer together with other states to the international community in this area, focusing additional efforts on:

- Development of prospective and innovative nuclear energy systems;
- Research into methods and mechanisms for the provision of reliable nuclear fuel cycle services;
- Research into international approaches for the establishment of nuclear fuel cycle services to secure the nuclear weapons nonproliferation regime;
- Improvement of the international safeguards system;

As stated in London on April 1, 2009, the United States and Russia will work to bring into force the bilateral Agreement for Cooperation in the Field of Nuclear Energy, which will provide the basis for these and other types of cooperation.

We welcome the expansion and strengthening of the Global Initiative to Combat Nuclear Terrorism, which held the fifth meeting of partner nations in The Hague on June 16-17, 2009, and we are fully determined to continue joint work to expand national and collective efforts to combat the threat of nuclear terrorism. To this end, we will jointly initiate practical steps, to include conducting world-wide regional nuclear security best-practices workshops to facilitate greater international cooperation in implementing this initiative.

##

[Cindy]

Note: The following text is a quote:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/FACT-SHEET-The-Joint-Understanding-for-the-START-Follow-on-Treaty/

THE BRIEFING ROOM

THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the Press Secretary
_____________________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release July 6, 2009

FACT SHEET

The Joint Understanding for the START Follow-on Treaty

On April 1, Presidents Obama and Medvedev agreed in London that America and Russian negotiators would begin work on a new, comprehensive, legally binding agreement on reducing and limiting strategic offensive arms to replace the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START), which expires on December 5, 2009.

On July 6, Presidents Medvedev and Obama signed a Joint Understanding to guide the remainder of the negotiations. The Joint Understanding commits the United States and Russia to reduce their strategic warheads to a range of 1500-1675, and their strategic delivery vehicles to a range of 500-1100. Under the expiring START and the Moscow treaties the maximum allowable levels of warheads is 2200 and the maximum allowable level of launch vehicles is 1600.

These numbers reflect a new level of reductions of strategic offensive arms and delivery vehicles that will be lower than those in any existing arms control agreements. The new treaty will include effective verification measures drawn from the experience of the Parties in implementing START. The new agreement will enhance the security of both the U.S. and Russia, as well as provide predictability and stability in strategic offensive forces. A follow-on agreement to START directly supports the goals outlined by the President during his speech in Prague and will demonstrate Russian and American leadership in strengthening the Non-Proliferation Treaty.

The U.S. and Russian negotiating teams met in April, May, June, and July, and will continue their work toward finalizing an agreement for signature and ratification at the earliest possible date.

##

[Cindy]

Note: The following text is a quote:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Joint-Statement-by-Dmitry-A-Medvedev-President-of-the-Russian-Federation-and-Barack-Obama-President-of-the-United-States-of-America-on-Missile-Defense-Issues/

THE BRIEFING ROOM

THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the Press Secretary
______________________________________________________________________
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE July 6, 2009

Joint Statement by Dmitry A. Medvedev, President of the Russian Federation, and Barack Obama, President of the United States of America, on Missile Defense Issues

In accordance with the understanding reached at the meeting in London on April 1, 2009, Russia and the United States plan to continue the discussion concerning the establishment of cooperation in responding to the challenge of ballistic missile proliferation. Our countries are intensifying their search for optimum ways of strengthening strategic relations on the basis of mutual respect and interests.

We have instructed our experts to work together to analyze the ballistic missile challenges of the 21st century and to prepare appropriate recommendations, giving priority to the use of political and diplomatic methods. At the same time they plan to conduct a joint review of the entire spectrumof means at our disposal that allow us to cooperate on monitoring the development of missile programs around the world. Our experts are intensifying dialogue on establishing the Joint Data Exchange Center, which is to become the basis for a multilateral missile-launch notification regime.

The Russian Federation and the United States of America reaffirm their willingness to engage in equitable and mutually beneficial cooperation with all interested countries that share their assessments of the danger of global proliferation of ballistic missiles. We call upon all countries having a missile potential to refrain from steps that could lead to missile proliferation and undermine regional and global stability.

##

[Cindy]

Note: The following text is a quote:

http://www.defenselink.mil//news/newsarticle.aspx?id=55028

American Forces Press Service

Obama, Medvedev Agree to Reduce Nuclear Stockpiles

By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, July 6, 2009 – President Barack Obama and Russian President Dmitri Medvedev agreed in Moscow today to reduce U.S. and Russian nuclear weapons stockpiles by up to a third.

Medvedev said during a news conference with Obama at the Kremlin that the two leaders have forged an understanding on a pact to follow up the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, known as START.

“We agreed on the levels of carriers and warheads, meaning that this is a very concrete subject,” the Russian president said. “In the mutual understanding, as we have just signed with the president of the United States, it is said that our two countries can have from 500 to 1,100 carriers of strategic arms, and from 1,500 to 1,675 warheads.”

The leaders agreed that offensive and defensive systems should be considered together. The two also adopted a joint statement on anti-ballistic missile programs.

Obama said the meetings helped to correct the “sense of drift” in the relationship between the two nations. Russia damaged the relationship with its August incursion into the former Soviet republic of Georgia.

Still, the two nations must talk and must work together, the leaders said. “We’ve taken important steps forward to increase nuclear security and to stop the spread of nuclear weapons,” Obama said at the news conference.

“We have signed a joint understanding for a follow-on treaty to the START agreement that will reduce our nuclear warheads and delivery systems by up to a third from our current treaty limitations,” Obama said. “This legally binding treaty will be completed this year.”

The leaders also agreed on a joint statement on nuclear security cooperation that calls on the two nations to cooperate in securing vulnerable nuclear materials.

“As we keep our commitments, so we must ensure that other nations keep theirs,” the U.S. president said. “To that end, we had constructive discussions about North Korea and Iran.”

Obama praised Russia for its help in passing a U.N. Security Council resolution that calls for strong steps to block North Korea’s nuclear and ballistic missile programs, and noted that Iran also continues to develop nuclear capabilities and the means to deliver them.

“This is not just a problem for the United States,” Obama said. “It raises the prospect of a nuclear arms race in the Middle East, which would endanger global security, while Iran’s ballistic missile program could also pose a threat to the broader region.”

Obama said he is pleased with the U.S.-Russian statement on cooperation on missile defense, and the agreement to conduct a joint threat assessment of the ballistic missile challenges of the 21st century that will include Iran and North Korea.

Related Articles:
U.S., Russia Resume Military Relations
Russia Allows Transit for Afghanistan-bound U.S. Troops

[Cindy]

Note: The following text is a quote:

http://www.defenselink.mil//news/newsarticle.aspx?id=55038

News
American Forces Press Service

Obama Proposes New Security Relationship with Russia

By John J. Kruzel
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, July 7, 2009 – President Barack Obama today called on current generations free from Cold War antipathy to chart a new course of U.S.-Russian relations that focuses on areas of mutual interests.

Addressing an audience at the New Economic School in Moscow, Obama spoke about reducing nuclear arsenals, negotiating a missile defense program in Europe, and security topics such as Afghanistan and NATO.

“Together, we can build a world where people are protected, prosperity is enlarged, and our power truly serves progress,” he said. “And it is all in your hands.”

On nuclear weapon reduction, Obama noted that he and Russian President Dmitri Medvedev agreed yesterday to reduce U.S. and Russian nuclear weapons stockpiles by up to a third. In a meeting at the Kremlin, the leaders signed a pact to follow up the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, known as START.

“America has an interest in reversing the spread of nuclear weapons and preventing their use. That is why America is committed to stopping nuclear proliferation, and ultimately seeking a world without nuclear weapons,” Obama said. “And while I know this goal won’t be met soon, pursuing it provides the legal and moral foundation to prevent the proliferation and eventual use of nuclear weapons.”

As the United States and Russia stick to their own commitments, Obama said, they must also hold other nations accountable for meeting their obligations. He warned that Iranian or North Korean nuclear capabilities could spark an arms race in East Asia or the Middle East.

“I’m pleased that President Medvedev and I agreed upon a joint threat assessment of the ballistic missile challenges of the 21st century, including from Iran and North Korea,” he said.

But Obama said nuclear nonproliferation is a concern for the international community writ large – an issue that’s not solved by singling out individual nations.

“If we fail to stand together, then the [Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty] and the [United Nations] Security Council will lose credibility, and international law will give way to the law of the jungle,” he said.

Acknowledging that U.S. plans to configure a missile defense in Europe has been met with opposition in Russia, the president reiterated that the system is designed to defend against an Iranian attack, not to weaken Moscow. He also proposed working with Moscow on creating acceptable missile defense architecture.

“I want us to work together on a missile defense architecture that makes us all safer,” he said. “But if the threat from Iran’s nuclear and ballistic missile programs is eliminated, the driving force for missile defense in Europe will be eliminated. That is in our mutual interest.”

Speaking about Afghanistan, Obama highlighted another pact signed yesterday – one that permits the United States to transit troops and weapons across Russian territory en route to Afghanistan. The agreement allows for 4,500 flights per year through Russian airspace, and saves the U.S. government $133 million annually in transportation costs while boosting logistical efficiency.

He underscored America’s goal in the region: to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat al-Qaida and its allies in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

“I’m pleased that Russia has agreed to allow the United States to supply our coalition forces through your territory,” Obama said. “Neither America nor Russia has an interest in an Afghanistan or Pakistan governed by the Taliban.

“It is time to work together on behalf of a different future – a future in which we leave behind the great game of the past and the conflict of the present; a future in which all of us contribute to the security of Central Asia,” he said, alluding to the 19th and early 20th century geopolitical competition for Central Asian dominance known as the “Great Game.”

Addressing a controversial topic, Obama said state sovereignty must be a cornerstone of international order – a reference to the five-day conflict last August during which Russia invaded an enclave within the borders of the former Soviet satellite of Georgia. The government in Tbilisi is seeking membership to NATO, which would guarantee protection under Article 5 of the Washington Treaty, which created the alliance. The article states that an attack against one NATO member is an attack against all.

But Obama underscored that NATO, a political and military alliance that came to rise during the Cold War, now seeks collaboration with Russia, not confrontation.

“For any country to become a member of NATO, a majority of its people must choose to, they must undertake reforms, and they must be able to contribute to the alliance’s mission,” he said. “And let me be clear: NATO seeks collaboration with Russia, not confrontation.”

Related Articles:
Russia Allows Transit for Afghanistan-bound U.S. Troops
Obama, Medvedev Agree to Reduce Nuclear Stockpiles