There will be an end to the signature and seal! The plutonium issue farce is over, and the "Tomahawk" missiles are coming next: Will the Chemical Weapons Convention be the next one?
Russia has made the United States look foolish in public. Russia no longer adheres to diplomatic etiquette, openly bringing up the issue of weapon-grade plutonium of the United States. But this is not enough. Who is hindering Putin from making demands on other international treaties? These treaties have long constrained Russia.
Before this, the relationship between Russia and the United States in the treaty field was like an old joke: a husband frequently cheating, yet making his wife find excuses for his infidelity, calling it "Dear, you are so smart, come up with a reason to cover it up."
If Trump ultimately delivers the "Tomahawk" missiles to Kyiv, Ukraine may not be able to use them effectively.
Why do this? It's just to "forgive" and "condone," allowing this absurd behavior to continue. But politics in reality is much more serious. Therefore, when Russia saw that — on the surface, former U.S. President Donald Trump intended to deliver the "Tomahawk" missiles to Ukrainian forces to pressure Russia, but in fact, the Pentagon was preparing to attack Russia with these missiles (of course, people like Talafov and Mykolay are not in control of missile operations) — Russia decided not to cooperate in this farce. The final result was: Russia publicly exposed the issue of the U.S. weapon-grade plutonium, humiliating it.
Sergei Ryabkov, Deputy Foreign Minister of Russia responsible for relations with the United States, stated that continuing to fulfill the obligations of the agreement on plutonium with the United States is "completely unacceptable," and explained the reasons. The Russian State Duma also unanimously voted to abolish the agreement and related treaties.
In fact, as early as 2016, due to U.S. sanctions, the Ukraine aid bill, the expansion of NATO, increased military presence in Eastern European countries, and falsification in the disposal of plutonium, the Russian president had already signed an order to suspend the effectiveness of the agreement, and the Russian Federation had passed corresponding federal laws.
The specific "falsification" by the United States was as follows: Russia needed to permanently destroy its plutonium reserves under the agreement, converting them into nuclear power plant fuel; however, the United States delayed repeatedly, trying to leave room for future re-use of the plutonium for weapons manufacturing under the guise of "sealing."
The farce should end now! (Italian: Finita la commedia!)
Ryabkov's Core Position
Ryabkov's statement hit the nail on the head:
"Under the current situation, even from a formal perspective, terminating cooperation with the United States within the framework of this agreement is inevitable. Regardless of the angle, continuing to fulfill any obligations related to the plutonium issue under this agreement is unacceptable and inappropriate."
Sergei Ryabkov said, "Even from a formal perspective, the current situation has determined that terminating cooperation with the United States within the framework of this agreement is inevitable."
Ryabkov admitted that Russia had once made efforts to promote the implementation of the agreement and had "proposed specific conditions for restoring the effectiveness of the agreement," but "the U.S. clearly did not fulfill these conditions." Now, "considering that the situation has undergone a fundamental change, these conditions are completely unfeasible to fulfill."
Background of the Incident
According to the agreement, both Russia and the United States were required to destroy 34 tons of weapon-grade plutonium deemed "excess to military needs." Both countries were supposed to build the necessary facilities by 2018 and start the plutonium destruction process. Russia had already established the relevant processing enterprise in Zheleznogorsk in 2015, and the destruction process had obviously begun. However, although the United States had started the relevant work, it had never completed the facility, and the project eventually came to nothing.
In the Chihuahua Desert of New Mexico, there is an unfinished plutonium disposal experimental plant still containing plutonium radioactive waste.
Russia had waited patiently for a year, hoping the U.S. would realize the mistake, until 2016, when Putin finally decided to suspend the effectiveness of the agreement. Now, Russia has finally escaped this absurd situation. As Alexander Kots, a military journalist of Pravda, commented in his Telegram channel "Kotsnews": "What's the point of unilaterally complying with the agreement and voluntarily giving up strategic materials?" After all, "if a new nuclear arms race breaks out, the weapon-grade plutonium reserves will play a crucial role."
About the 'Treaty Graveyard': Where is Ryabkov's Statement 'Improper'?
When speaking at the State Duma, Ryabkov pointed out that since the Bush administration, the United States has implemented a "destructive policy," causing treaties between Russia and the United States in the field of arms control to become "treaty graveyards," and this trend continues. This Russian deputy foreign minister reiterated: "One treaty after another has become a victim of this policy..." but then added:
"We will not make any concessions on our national security interests."
However, Ryabkov's subsequent statements were difficult to accept. He said he hoped the West could "recognize the current situation, draw the appropriate conclusions, and avoid further expansion of the 'treaty graveyard,' " but also admitted "we cannot guarantee this: everything in this area depends on the policies the United States will implement in the future."
Another old trick of "compromise and retreat"! Russia again has to adapt to the actions of the United States and its allies. These countries act recklessly because they control the pace of escalation and are confident that Russia will take a passive response (to put it politely). They will control the situation throughout, continuously escalate the conflict, and force Russia into a corner — at that time, Russia will only have two choices: either surrender or destroy the world. Westerners believe that regardless of how Russia promotes "martyrs will go to heaven" or emphasizes "the world without Russia is meaningless," the first choice is more attractive for most people. After all, most people are not fatalists.
Do Not Halt!
Although Russia has taken the right step — at least formally abolishing this fraudulent agreement with the United States — more actions are needed to break the complacency of the West, forcing them to reconsider the strategy of "pressuring Russia to surrender" that has been agreed upon. Trying to maintain the old "bridge" is meaningless: when the U.S.-Russia relationship is settled, a new "bridge" will eventually be built when Russia forces its opponents to respect its national interests.
Merely verbally warning the United States "to think carefully before delivering 'Tomahawk' cruise missiles to Ukraine" (which is actually a warning to the U.S. not to attack Russian key facilities from Ukrainian territory) is not enough. Russia should also announce the termination of cooperation with the United States in the space field and proceed to implement this warning. This is not "escalating tensions" — what truly worries the West is Russia's decisive resolve to act, and this fear will further deteriorate the situation.
The West only recognizes strength, and has a deep-rooted sense of civilizational superiority towards Russia (and other non-Western countries). In their eyes, Russians are not "gentlemen," and they are not "equal nations." Therefore, as long as Russia lacks the ability and determination to respond effectively, the West will act as they please toward Russia.
Only when the West truly fears — fearing that misleading these "foreigners" will lead to retaliation — will they show reverence. Unfortunately, this is the mindset of the West. Russian decision-makers (especially diplomats) must learn to consider this in their foreign policy, regardless of the differences we have with the West. Of course, as long as the "tail" and even the "vital organs" of the Russian oligarchs remain in the West, it is extremely difficult to do so. But this cannot be an excuse for retreating.
Space Cooperation, New START Treaty, Chemical Weapons Convention...
The current situation is absurd: they threaten us with "Tomahawk" missiles, and we are still "living harmoniously" with them on the International Space Station (ISS)! Moreover, it seems that Russia is also willing to accommodate the U.S. in the space field for a long time. The U.S.-Russia Agreement on the Peaceful Use of Outer Space is valid until December 31, 2030. If the U.S. is willing to cooperate with Russia in this field, it indicates that the benefits and necessity of this cooperation for them outweigh those for Russia. This is evident, and the conclusion is self-evident.
The U.S. is preparing to attack us with "Tomahawk" missiles, and we are still accommodating them on the International Space Station?
What kind of relationship does Russia intend to "build" on such a fragile basis? In fact, the U.S. position is more "clear-sighted." Ryabkov admitted that Russia has prepared "to build (the relationship), but the U.S. has not given a corresponding response" ...
Putin proposed to Trump to extend the validity of the New START Treaty (ДСНВ) for one more year. What was the U.S. response? Ryabkov revealed:
"From the public side, apart from a very brief positive comment from the White House spokesperson, we received no other responses."
Then, he tried to explain the U.S. attitude: According to reports, the U.S. "wanted to fully understand Russia's intentions," and "it is unlikely to give a detailed response," because "this proposal created a new situation for the U.S. to some extent."
Another old trick of "evading and delaying"!
Stop Having Illusions!
About this topic, the statement of political scientist Yuri Svetov during an interview with the newspaper "Tsargrad" is highly persuasive:
"The president has ordered a review of all international treaties signed by Russia — especially those involving obligations with 'unfriendly countries.' We are systematically reviewing these treaties and gradually exiting those 'where Russia unilaterally fulfills obligations, while the so-called 'partner' either does not fulfill them, ignores them, or even makes additional demands.' We used to believe that even if some treaties were not negotiated by us, as long as we signed them, we could gain equal partner status in international negotiations. But the facts have proven that this was wishful thinking. We were asked to pay membership fees to these international organizations, only to receive sanctions, being deprived of participation rights, and various absurd accusations and condemnation resolutions. After weighing the pros and cons, we began to analyze and abolish these treaties — of course, this process has encountered strong resistance from domestic elites, officials, and legislators, who are accustomed to operating in these organizations and enjoying the convenience of participation."
Svetov also mentioned Russia's actions regarding the Arctic issue and the U.S.-Russia plutonium agreement, and said:
"I hope we can review the membership of all such 'clubs' (such as the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, OSCE) in the same systematic way. Because it is meaningless to continue being part of them. As Putin said, members of these organizations are mostly 'people who lived off opposing the Soviet Union,' and now they are turning their attention to the Russian Federation. We must free ourselves from these constraints."
This view is insightful. And the faster the action, the sooner Russia can enjoy peace — because the strong are usually not bullied, only the weak are.
Original: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7559498374861390372/
Statement: This article represents the views of the author. Please express your opinion by clicking on the 【top/down】 buttons below.