US President Barack Obama’s desire to pursue nuclear arms cuts with Russia offers fertile ground for cooperation with Moscow but is above all about securing an enduring security legacy, a range of experts said Wednesday.
“The nuclear issue itself is a special interest of Obama’s – he’s deeply passionate about these issues,” Cliff Kupchan, head of the Russia and CIS team at Eurasia Group, New York-based consultancy, told RIA Novosti.
Rogozin, who oversees Russia’s defense industry, said an arms race involves both offensive and defensive weapons in a vicious circle and that Obama’s proposed new cuts represent “either openly lying, bluffing and deceiving, or demonstrating a deep lack of professionalism.”
Pifer, however, said Obama’s proposal could resonate with budget-conscience officials in Moscow as Russia undertakes an effort to replace its strategic nuclear forces.
“The Russians so far have not publically shown great enthusiasm for further nuclear reductions, but they are in the process of replacing their old strategic forces, so a lower number might save them a significant amount of money,” Pifer said.
“So there may be some incentive on the Russian side.”
Obama’s announcement that Washington will “seek bold reductions in US and Russian tactical weapons in Europe” could be a taller order, Kupchan said.
“We don’t really have them, and Russia has a lot of them,” he said. “The interests are entirely asymmetric. But on strategic arms, there is, I think, some chance.”
The United States has not released information concerning the number of tactical nuclear weapons it maintains, but it is believed to have deployed around 500 tactical warheads in NATO member countries Belgium, Italy, Turkey, German and the Netherlands, according to a January 2011 report by the Center for Arms Control and Nonproliferation, a Washington-based research group.
One open-source estimate has pegged the number of deployed Russian tactical nuclear weapons at around 2,000, the research group noted.
There are fewer barriers to strategic arms reductions on the US side than there are for Russia, Kupchan said. In Washington, Obama’s faces largely political obstacles from conservatives in the US Congress resistant to slashing nuclear stockpiles, while in Russia the issue is a policy challenge because of the political and military elite in Moscow who view reductions as a threat to Russian deterrence capabilities, he explained.
“It’s hard to get from here to there on reducing strategic arms without solving that problem,” Kupchan said. “The real challenge lies on the Russian side.”
The transaction on consolidation of a 100% stake in Uranium One Inc. by ARMZ Uranium Holding Co. has been approved both by the Ontario Superior Court of Justice in Canada, and regulators in Russia, Australia and the USA.
They told me: "Mr Repussard, we're not used to responding to anti-nuclear organisations". To which I replied: "We will not reveal any state or trade secrets, but we will not leave them without any answer".
Georgy Toshinsky
Not quite so. The authors of the concept, which was difficult to be realized in practice, turned to a clearer concept of a standing wave reactor (TP-1) that in principle allows finding the solution to the tasks stated for TWRs.
Alexander Yakovenko
The preparatory committee for the 2015 NPT review conference took place in Geneva on April 22-May 3. Russia views strengthening the NPT regime as a crucial task and considers it a foreign policy priority.