Tag Archives: Treaty

WHO Pushes to Seal Global Pandemic Treaty

tedros-treaty-talks-640x480

Important Takeaways:

  • The World Health Organization’s (W.H.O.) drive to seal a global pandemic treaty will conclude Friday after weeks of closed-door talks in Geneva, Switzerland.
  • Critics have already accused the organization of bureaucratic overreach in pushing to seize control of how the world responds to any future pandemic along the lines of the coronavirus outbreak.
  • The main disputes revolve around issues of access and equity: access to pathogens detected within countries, and access to pandemic-fighting products such as vaccines derived from that knowledge.
  • Other tricky topics are sustainable financing, pathogen surveillance, supply chains, and the equitable distribution of not only tests, treatments and jabs, but also the means to produce them.

Read the original article by clicking here.

U.S. pulls out of Soviet-era nuclear missile pact with Russia

FILE PHOTO: A component of SSC-8/9M729 cruise missile system is on display during a news briefing, organized by Russian defence and foreign ministries, at Patriot Expocentre near Moscow, Russia January 23, 2019. REUTERS/Maxim Shemetov

By Steve Holland and Andrew Osborn

WASHINGTON/MOSCOW (Reuters) – The United States formally withdrew from a landmark nuclear missile pact with Russia on Friday after determining that Moscow was in violation of the treaty, something the Kremlin has repeatedly denied.

Washington signaled it would pull out of the arms control treaty six months ago unless Moscow stuck to the accord. Russia called the move a ploy to exit a pact the United States wanted to leave anyway in order to develop new missiles.

The 1987 Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF) was negotiated by then-U.S. President Ronald Reagan and Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev.

FILE PHOTO: U.S. President Ronald Reagan (R) and Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev sign the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty in the White House December 8 1987. REUTERS//File Photo

FILE PHOTO: U.S. President Ronald Reagan (R) and Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev sign the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty in the White House December 8 1987. REUTERS//File Photo

It banned land-based missiles with a range of between 310 and 3,400 miles (500-5,500 km), thus reducing both countries’ ability to launch a nuclear strike at short notice.

“The United States will not remain party to a treaty that is deliberately violated by Russia,” Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said in a statement about the U.S. withdrawal.

“Russia’s non-compliance under the treaty jeopardizes U.S. supreme interests as Russia’s development and fielding of a treaty-violating missile system represents a direct threat to the United States and our allies and partners,” Pompeo said.

Senior administration officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said Russia had deployed “multiple battalions” of a cruise missile throughout Russia in violation of the pact, including in western Russia, “with the ability to strike critical European targets.”

Russia denies the allegation, saying the missile’s range puts it outside the treaty. It has rejected a U.S. demand to destroy the new missile, the Novator 9M729, known as the SSC-8 by the NATO Western military alliance.

Moscow has told Washington its decision to quit the pact undermines global security and removes a key pillar of international arms control.

RUSSIAN RESPONSE

Russia said on Friday it had asked the United States for a moratorium on the deployment of land-based short and intermediate-range nuclear missiles.

“A serious mistake has been made in Washington,” Russia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said in a statement.

“We have already introduced a unilateral moratorium and won’t deploy land-based short or medium-range missiles, if we get them, in regions where such U.S. missiles are not deployed,” it said.

President Vladimir Putin says Russia does not want an arms race and he has promised he will not deploy Russian missiles unless the United States does so first.

However, should Washington take such a step, he says he would be forced to deploy Russian hypersonic nuclear missiles on ships or submarines near U.S. territorial waters.

NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg dismissed Russia’s moratorium request on Friday, saying it was “not a credible offer” as he said Moscow had already deployed illegal missiles.

“There are no new U.S. missiles, no new NATO missiles in Europe, but there are more and more new Russian missiles,” he said.

The dispute is aggravating the worst U.S.-Russia friction since the Cold War ended in 1991. Some experts believe the treaty’s collapse could undermine other arms control agreements and speed an erosion of the global system designed to block the spread of nuclear arms.

‘WE DON’T WANT A NEW ARMS RACE’

NATO said it had agreed a defensive package of measures to deter Russia. That response would be measured and would only involve conventional weapons, it said.

NATO’s Stoltenberg said there would be “no rash moves” by the alliance which he said “would not mirror what Russia does.”

“We don’t want a new arms race,” Stoltenberg said.

NATO members Britain and Poland blamed Moscow for the INF treaty’s demise.

“Their contempt for the rules-based international system threatens European security,” British Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab said on Twitter.

European officials have voiced concern that if the treaty collapses, Europe could again become an arena for a nuclear-armed, intermediate-range missile buildup by the United States and Russia.

U.S. officials said the United States was months away from the first flight tests of an American intermediate-range missile that would serve as a counter to the Russians. Any deployment would be years away, they said.

“We are just at the stage of looking at how we might further the development of conventional options,” one official said.

The U.S. military plans to test a ground-launched cruise missile in the coming weeks and an intermediate-range ballistic missile in November, both of which would have been banned under the treaty.

But U.S. officials told Reuters that funding would run out for the tests without approval from Congress, where top Democrats have balked at Trump’s treaty pullout.

Trump has said he would like to see a “next-generation” arms control deal with Russia and China to cover all types of nuclear weapons, something Beijing has so far rejected.

(Reporting by Roberta Rampton and Steve Holland in WASHINGTON, Andrew Osborn in MOSCOW and Robin Emmott in BRUSSELS; Additional reporting by Idrees Ali and Phil Stewart; Editing by Jon Boyle, Peter Graff and Edmund Blair)

Putin says Russia will retaliate if U.S. quits nuclear missile treaty: agencies

Russia's President Vladimir Putin chairs a meeting with top officials of the Russian Defence Ministry in Sochi, Russia November 19, 2018. Picture taken November 19, 2018. Sputnik/Alexei Nikolsky/Kremlin via REUTERS

MOSCOW (Reuters) – Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Monday the Kremlin would retaliate if the United States withdrew from the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces treaty, Russian news agencies reported.

Putin discussed possible Russian retaliation with top Russian Defence Ministry officials and added that the Kremlin was ready to discuss the INF treaty with Washington.

The Cold War-era treaty, which rid Europe of land-based nuclear missiles, has come into question against a backdrop of renewed tensions between the West and Russia, most notably over Moscow’s 2014 annexation of Crimea and role in eastern Ukraine.

U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration has accused Russia of non-compliance with the 31-year-old missile accord and warned it will pull out of the deal as a result. The Kremlin denies violating the pact.

NATO and Russian envoy addressed the dispute during rare talks on Oct. 31, with NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg urging Moscow to make quick changes to comply in full with the treaty. He said Russia’s development of the land-based, intermediate-range SSC-8 cruise missile posed “a serious risk to strategic stability”.

European leaders worry any collapse of the INF treaty could lead to a new, destabilizing arms race.

(Reporting by Maxim Rodionov; Editing by Mark Heinrich)

Russia to retaliate against U.S. in military observation flights row: agencies

Finnish President Sauli Niinisto (not in picture) meets Deputy Foreign Minister of the Russian Federation Sergei Ryabkov at the President's Official Residence Mantyniemi, Helsinki, Finland September 12, 2017. Lehtikuva/Martti Kainulainen/via REUTERS

MOSCOW (Reuters) – Russia will retaliate against the United States in a row over a treaty that allows both states to conduct military observation flights over each other’s territory, Russia’s deputy foreign minister said, Russian news agencies reported on Wednesday.

In the latest sign of escalating tensions between the two countries, the United States has accused Russia of flouting the so-called Open Skies Treaty, an agreement designed to build confidence between the two countries’ militaries, and said it plans to take measures against Moscow.

The Wall Street Journal newspaper reported on Tuesday that would include restricting Russian military flights over American territory in response to what it said was Moscow preventing U.S. observation flights over its heavily militarized Baltic exclave of Kaliningrad.

Russian news agencies cited Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov on Wednesday as saying that Moscow was itself unhappy about Washington’s compliance with the same treaty and would take its own measures against the United States in response to any new U.S. restrictions.

“I have no doubt there will be a (Russian) response,” agencies cited Ryabkov as telling reporters.

“But before announcing something on this, we have to analyze the situation with our military and look at how we’ll respond to the Americans.”

Ryabkov was quoted as describing Washington’s approach to the disagreement as one-sided and as saying Russia would not yield to U.S. pressure for it to make concessions.

U.S. Marine General Joseph Dunford, chairman of the military’s Joint Chiefs of Staff, told a Senate Armed Services Committee on Tuesday that Washington believed it would be best if the Open Skies Treaty with Russia continued, but that it should not be in place if Moscow was flouting it.

(Reporting by Maria Kiselyova/Andrew Osborn; Editing by Christian Lowe)

U.S., South Korea agree to revise missile treaty in face of North Korean threats

The intercontinental ballistic missile Hwasong-14, in this photo released July 4, 2017.

SEOUL (Reuters) – U.S. President Donald Trump agreed with South Korean President Moon Jae-in to revise a joint treaty capping the development of the South’s ballistic missiles, Moon’s office said on Saturday, amid a standoff over North Korea’s missile and nuclear tests.

Trump also gave “conceptual” approval to the purchase by the South of billions of dollars of U.S. military hardware, the White House said.

The South wants to raise the missile cap to boost its defenses against the reclusive North, which is pursuing missile and nuclear weapons programs in defiance of international warnings and UN sanctions.

“The two leaders agreed to the principle of revising the missile guideline to a level desired by South Korea, sharing the view that it was necessary to strengthen South Korea’s defense capabilities in response to North Korea’s provocations and threats,” South Korea’s presidential Blue House said.

Impoverished North Korea and the rich, democratic South are technically still at war because their 1950-53 conflict ended in a truce, not a peace treaty. The North regularly threatens to destroy the South and its main ally, the United States.

North Korea sharply raised regional tension this week with the launch of its Hwasong-12 intermediate-range ballistic missile that flew over Japan and landed in the Pacific.

That followed the test launch of two long-range ballistic missiles in July in a sharply lofted trajectory that demonstrated a potential range of 10,000 km (6,000 miles) or more that would put many parts of the U.S. mainland within striking distance.

North Korea has been working to develop a nuclear-tipped missile capable of hitting the United States and has recently threatened to land missiles near the U.S. Pacific territory of Guam.

South Korea’s development of its ballistic missiles is limited to range of 800 km (500 miles) and payload weight of 500 kg (1,100 pounds) under a bilateral treaty revised in 2012.

South Korea has said it wants to revise the agreement to increase the cap on the payload.

The two countries agreed to the cap as part of a commitment to a voluntary international arms-control pact known as the Missile Technology Control Regime, aimed at limiting the proliferation missiles and nuclear weapons.

The two leaders pledged to continue to apply strong diplomatic and economic pressure on North Korea and to make all necessary preparations to defend against the growing threat by the North, the White House said.

The White House did not mention the voluntary bilateral agreement but said the two leaders agreed to strengthen their defense cooperation and South Korea’s defense capabilities.

Trump “provided his conceptual approval of planned purchases by South Korea of billions of dollars in American military equipment”, the White House said.

Trump, who has warned that the U.S. military is “locked and loaded” in case of further North Korean provocation, reacted angrily to the latest missile test, declaring on Twitter that “talking is not the answer” to resolving the crisis.

North Korea defends its weapons programs as necessary to counter perceived U.S. aggression, such as recent air maneuvers with South Korean and Japanese jets.

(Reporting by Jack Kim in Seoul and Eric Beech in Washington; Editing by Nick Macfie)

Iranian Nuclear Deal Reached

President Obama announced his long-sought deal with Iran regarding their nuclear program and was immediately met with praise from his supporters and criticism from others.

“Today, because America negotiated from a position of strength and principle, we have stopped the spread of nuclear weapons in this region,” President Obama said. “Because of this deal, the international community will be able to verify that the Islamic Republic of Iran will not develop a nuclear weapon.”

The deal includes reducing Iran’s centrifuges by 67%.  Enrichment at particular facilities is banned and it limits uranium research and development to one facility.  One U.S. estimate says that Iran goes from being able to assemble a bomb in 2-3 months to at least one year.

Opponents to the deal quickly noted that after the 10 years stated in the deal, Iran could then quickly race to a nuclear weapon.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said the deal was a “bad mistake of historic proportions.”

“Iran is going to receive a sure path to nuclear weapons. Many of the restrictions that were supposed to prevent it from getting there will be lifted,” Netanyahu said. “Iran will get a jackpot, a cash bonanza of hundreds of billions of dollars, which will enable it to continue to pursue its aggression and terror in the region and in the world.”

“One cannot prevent an agreement when the negotiators are willing to make more and more concessions to those who, even during the talks, keep chanting: ‘Death to America,”‘ Netanyahu added. “We knew very well that the desire to sign an agreement was stronger than anything, and therefore we did not commit to preventing an agreement. We did commit to preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, and this commitment still stands.”

The deal has to pass Congress where the deal could face a rocky path based on a statement today from House Speaker John Boehner.

“You know, at the outset of the Iran negotiations, the Obama administration said that a good deal would affirm that Iran does not have the right to enrich.  They also said that keeping sanctions in place until Iran met concrete, verifiable standards.  And, they believed that they had to stop Iran’s drive for a nuclear bomb,” Boehner said.

“Listen, the president has abandoned all of those goals, and that’s why the deal that we have out there, in my view, from what I know of it thus far, is unacceptable.  It’s going to hand a dangerous regime billions of dollars in sanctions relief while paving the way for a nuclear Iran.”