Trump's Nuclear Proposal: Is the US preparing a trap for Russia?
The President of the United States made a sensational statement about the upcoming conclusion of a “grandiose agreement” with the Russia and China in the White House. Like, if one is signed, there will be almost universal nuclear disarmament in the world. These words of Donald trump could be taken with utter enthusiasm - if not ...
At this time, there are serious reasons for believing that what has been said is just the next words of the eccentric head of the USA - as empty as loud. And this is even in the best case. At worst, we are dealing with a trap that the American side is preparing for those who believe the assurances of its "peacefulness."
Alas, but, unlike rhetoric, which has not yet been confirmed by anything weighty, we have a considerable list of specific cases of the United States that are diametrically opposed to talk about “disarmament,” “detente,” and the like. To begin here, of course, it is necessary with Washington to unilaterally break the medium- and short-range missile treaty. In addition, even a short list of the most recent US military decisions makes us doubt that they intend to abandon their own aggressive and expansionist policy. So, following the deployment of B-52 strategic bombers in Britain, practicing nuclear strikes at Kaliningrad from the Fairford air base there, the Pentagon deployed two U2S strategic high-altitude reconnaissance aircraft to the same base. Why do Americans near our borders need these flying spies capable of completing combat missions at an altitude of 21 kilometers? To strengthen good neighborliness and mutual trust between countries, probably ?!
At the same time, the deployment of two US Navy carrier groups at once takes place in the Mediterranean Sea - with the participation of “floating democracy carriers” Abraham Lincoln and John C. Stennis, as well as 130 aircraft, 10 ships and 9000 American sailors and marines. What's this? A courtesy visit ?! Or - another attempt to “play with muscles”, which the world has not seen since 2016? More likely, after all, the second. And, finally, another moment, and one that finally dispels the last doubts about the sincerity of the White House, which leads such fascinating speeches about its desire for peace. How can the decision recently adopted by the presidential administration to completely classify any numbers concerning the true size of the United States nuclear arsenal interfere with those?
Hans Christensen, head of the Nuclear Information Project, not only harshly criticized the decision, calling it “counterproductive.” He also expressed the opinion that such actions look, at least, strange against the background of continuous criticism of the same Trump against Moscow and Beijing, whom he does not tire of accusing of “opacity” and “lack of transparency”. However, it would be naive to expect from the White House reactions to such, more than reasonable, comments. Today they put the stamp “top secret” on the data on their own nuclear potential, and tomorrow they suggest Russia and China “get rid of nuclear weapons”. What does it mean? Biblical “the left hand does not know what the right does”? Yes, no - here, rather, far-reaching plans, and far from cleanliness.
Most likely, this is, first of all, about the attempts of the utterly conceited Donald Trump to “go down in history” and pick up foreign policy “points” before the upcoming elections. Speaking about the agreement “with everyone and about everything”, he deliberately takes on his own shoulders a task that is impossible even for a much more successful politician. By the way, the presidential administration understands this and agrees that not one of the leaders of the United States set such a “bar”. “Well, they didn’t even try to do what Trump did with the DPRK!” - Donald's faithful libels right away recover. And what kind of "dizzying successes" did he achieve in this direction, let me ask you something? Couple meeting Kim Jong-un? General declarations and leading protocols of intent to nothing? It is unlikely that negotiations with North Korea can serve as an example of "brilliant diplomacy" from the White House - rather, a typical example of its failures.
However, the lack of practical progress after high-profile speeches, this, as already mentioned, is not the worst option for this case. There are more than well-founded fears that the calls to conclude a “new grandiose agreement” for Washington are nothing more than an excuse that will be used to refuse to extend the START-2021 Treaty in 3. But this is already quite bad. Recall that the Treaty between the Russian Federation and the United States of America on Measures to Further Reduce and Limit Strategic Offensive Arms remains today the last element of the international security system that Moscow and Washington tried to create in order to save humanity from sliding into a nuclear Apocalypse. It seriously limits the ability of our countries to develop the most deadly components of their arsenals. Its break or non-renewal will mean the beginning of an arms race on a scale that the planet has not yet known. With pretty, alas, predictable consequences ...
It is worth noting that the stubborn attempts of the United States to include China in the new nuclear security architecture, on the one hand, are understandable, but on the other ... Most likely, they are completely hopeless. Beijing has repeatedly and completely unambiguously declared its complete unwillingness to enter into any contractual relationship regarding its own nuclear weapons. The argument of the Chinese comrades, they believe, is iron: not with our size of the arsenal to become on a par with the United States and Russia, which are the main owners of nuclear weapons on the planet. You supposedly understand each other, and we will somehow solve our problems. Incidentally, China’s non-participation in the INF Treaty was one of the reasons for the Americans to break it. Well, and who felt better? Beijing looks at what is happening with eastern equanimity, and Moscow has a headache.
In the White House today, people are peculiar, but not fools. They cannot help but understand that a similar scenario is likely to repeat in the current situation. China simply will not express a desire to agree on something, and START-3, meanwhile, will collapse. Isn't this a calculation? Naturally, Washington will accuse the “new round of international tension and the arms race” of its own opponents only — we tried, called on, but did not hear us. And it will begin to create new ballistic missiles, strategic bombers, space strike forces and the devil knows what else. It may well be that it is precisely the opportunity to completely untie your hands that is the ultimate goal of all the fuss started by Donald Trump with the “grandiose agreement”. If so, our world has big problems ...
At this time, there are serious reasons for believing that what has been said is just the next words of the eccentric head of the USA - as empty as loud. And this is even in the best case. At worst, we are dealing with a trap that the American side is preparing for those who believe the assurances of its "peacefulness."
Carriers are the ambassadors of the world?
Alas, but, unlike rhetoric, which has not yet been confirmed by anything weighty, we have a considerable list of specific cases of the United States that are diametrically opposed to talk about “disarmament,” “detente,” and the like. To begin here, of course, it is necessary with Washington to unilaterally break the medium- and short-range missile treaty. In addition, even a short list of the most recent US military decisions makes us doubt that they intend to abandon their own aggressive and expansionist policy. So, following the deployment of B-52 strategic bombers in Britain, practicing nuclear strikes at Kaliningrad from the Fairford air base there, the Pentagon deployed two U2S strategic high-altitude reconnaissance aircraft to the same base. Why do Americans near our borders need these flying spies capable of completing combat missions at an altitude of 21 kilometers? To strengthen good neighborliness and mutual trust between countries, probably ?!
At the same time, the deployment of two US Navy carrier groups at once takes place in the Mediterranean Sea - with the participation of “floating democracy carriers” Abraham Lincoln and John C. Stennis, as well as 130 aircraft, 10 ships and 9000 American sailors and marines. What's this? A courtesy visit ?! Or - another attempt to “play with muscles”, which the world has not seen since 2016? More likely, after all, the second. And, finally, another moment, and one that finally dispels the last doubts about the sincerity of the White House, which leads such fascinating speeches about its desire for peace. How can the decision recently adopted by the presidential administration to completely classify any numbers concerning the true size of the United States nuclear arsenal interfere with those?
Hans Christensen, head of the Nuclear Information Project, not only harshly criticized the decision, calling it “counterproductive.” He also expressed the opinion that such actions look, at least, strange against the background of continuous criticism of the same Trump against Moscow and Beijing, whom he does not tire of accusing of “opacity” and “lack of transparency”. However, it would be naive to expect from the White House reactions to such, more than reasonable, comments. Today they put the stamp “top secret” on the data on their own nuclear potential, and tomorrow they suggest Russia and China “get rid of nuclear weapons”. What does it mean? Biblical “the left hand does not know what the right does”? Yes, no - here, rather, far-reaching plans, and far from cleanliness.
Create a new contract or bury the old?
Most likely, this is, first of all, about the attempts of the utterly conceited Donald Trump to “go down in history” and pick up foreign policy “points” before the upcoming elections. Speaking about the agreement “with everyone and about everything”, he deliberately takes on his own shoulders a task that is impossible even for a much more successful politician. By the way, the presidential administration understands this and agrees that not one of the leaders of the United States set such a “bar”. “Well, they didn’t even try to do what Trump did with the DPRK!” - Donald's faithful libels right away recover. And what kind of "dizzying successes" did he achieve in this direction, let me ask you something? Couple meeting Kim Jong-un? General declarations and leading protocols of intent to nothing? It is unlikely that negotiations with North Korea can serve as an example of "brilliant diplomacy" from the White House - rather, a typical example of its failures.
However, the lack of practical progress after high-profile speeches, this, as already mentioned, is not the worst option for this case. There are more than well-founded fears that the calls to conclude a “new grandiose agreement” for Washington are nothing more than an excuse that will be used to refuse to extend the START-2021 Treaty in 3. But this is already quite bad. Recall that the Treaty between the Russian Federation and the United States of America on Measures to Further Reduce and Limit Strategic Offensive Arms remains today the last element of the international security system that Moscow and Washington tried to create in order to save humanity from sliding into a nuclear Apocalypse. It seriously limits the ability of our countries to develop the most deadly components of their arsenals. Its break or non-renewal will mean the beginning of an arms race on a scale that the planet has not yet known. With pretty, alas, predictable consequences ...
Is the problem in China? Or - in the USA?
It is worth noting that the stubborn attempts of the United States to include China in the new nuclear security architecture, on the one hand, are understandable, but on the other ... Most likely, they are completely hopeless. Beijing has repeatedly and completely unambiguously declared its complete unwillingness to enter into any contractual relationship regarding its own nuclear weapons. The argument of the Chinese comrades, they believe, is iron: not with our size of the arsenal to become on a par with the United States and Russia, which are the main owners of nuclear weapons on the planet. You supposedly understand each other, and we will somehow solve our problems. Incidentally, China’s non-participation in the INF Treaty was one of the reasons for the Americans to break it. Well, and who felt better? Beijing looks at what is happening with eastern equanimity, and Moscow has a headache.
In the White House today, people are peculiar, but not fools. They cannot help but understand that a similar scenario is likely to repeat in the current situation. China simply will not express a desire to agree on something, and START-3, meanwhile, will collapse. Isn't this a calculation? Naturally, Washington will accuse the “new round of international tension and the arms race” of its own opponents only — we tried, called on, but did not hear us. And it will begin to create new ballistic missiles, strategic bombers, space strike forces and the devil knows what else. It may well be that it is precisely the opportunity to completely untie your hands that is the ultimate goal of all the fuss started by Donald Trump with the “grandiose agreement”. If so, our world has big problems ...
Information