Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov rejected the US request to extend the New Start nuclear arms control treaty.
The US and Russia have signed an agreement called New Start on the control of nuclear weapons, but Russia is refusing to extend the agreement based on reservations.
According to the report, the United States wants to extend the New Start agreement in any case so that the Trump government can get a large number of public support in the upcoming elections, but the Moscow government rejected the American request to extend the agreement.
Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said that the extension of the agreement is unacceptable, there are restrictions on the US stock of nuclear weapons and we do not accept their position.
In recent days, US negotiator Michelle Billings Lee claimed that Russia is ready to extend the agreement and we want the Moscow government to be ready to limit its nuclear weapons.
In response to this statement, the Russian Deputy Foreign Minister severely criticized the Trump administration and said that we reject agreements and compromises related to the American elections.
It should be noted that in 2010, the New Start agreement was signed between the US and Russia under which both countries agreed to reduce the number of their strategic nuclear weapons from 1550 to a maximum of 700.
#request #extend #Start #treaty #nuclear #arms #control #rejected
What are the potential consequences of Russia’s rejection to extend the New START Treaty on global nuclear stability?
**Interview with Expert on Nuclear Arms Control**
**Interviewer**: Thank you for joining us today. We’re discussing a significant development regarding the New START Treaty. Recently, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov rejected the U.S. request to extend this nuclear arms control agreement. What are the implications of this decision?
**Expert**: The rejection of the extension by Russia signifies a considerable setback in nuclear arms control efforts between the U.S. and Russia. The New START Treaty, originally signed in 2010, was a cornerstone of post-Cold War nuclear stability, capping each side’s deployed strategic warheads at 1,550. The refusal to extend this treaty raises concerns about the potential for a new arms race.
**Interviewer**: The U.S. seems to be pushing for an extension, particularly as the Trump administration seeks public support ahead of elections. How might domestic politics in the U.S. be influencing nuclear policy?
**Expert**: Domestic politics undoubtedly play a role. The current administration might argue that extending the treaty demonstrates a commitment to nuclear stability, which can be politically favorable. However, Russia’s criticisms suggest they perceive this as an attempt to gain leverage on the domestic front rather than a genuine effort for mutual nuclear disarmament.
**Interviewer**: Ryabkov pointed out that the agreement’s extension is unacceptable due to restrictions on U.S. nuclear stocks. What does this indicate about the state of negotiations?
**Expert**: It indicates a fundamental distrust and a significant gap in perspectives. Ryabkov’s statement reflects Russia’s belief that U.S. nuclear policies are overly restrictive and that extending the treaty would not address their security concerns. This divergence suggests that negotiations would require not just technical adjustments but a reevaluation of strategic priorities on both sides.
**Interviewer**: There have been conflicting reports, with U.S. negotiators claiming Russia is open to extending the treaty. How can such discrepancies arise in international negotiations?
**Expert**: Discrepancies like these can arise from various factors, including diplomatic posturing, internal political climates, or even differing interpretations of past discussions. Each side may have a stake in presenting a particular narrative that supports its diplomatic agenda. In this case, while the U.S. seeks to frame the dialogue as open to extension, Russia’s hardline stance reflects their strategic interests.
**Interviewer**: As a final question, what do you think the next steps should be for both nations regarding nuclear arms control?
**Expert**: Both nations need to return to the negotiating table with a willingness to engage in constructive dialogue. Establishing confidence-building measures could reopen avenues for discussions. Additionally, it may be beneficial to include broader security concerns and frameworks that go beyond just nuclear arsenals. The world is watching, and the need for a stable nuclear environment is more critical than ever.
**Interviewer**: Thank you for your insights. Readers, what do you think about Russia’s rejection of the U.S. request to extend the New START Treaty? Do you believe nuclear arms control is still a priority for global security, or is it overshadowed by political maneuvering? Share your thoughts below and let’s discuss!
