In the US continues scandal around the memoirs of the former assistant to the President for homeland security John Bolton. The white house failed through the courts to ban the book, which contains many unpleasant – especially on the backdrop of the campaign for trump’s episodes. A senior White house official told a lot of behind-the-scenes details of making foreign policy decisions. In particular, Bolton describes his role in the destruction of the Treaty with Russia on arms control.
the book of Bolton coincided with the holding at the beginning of this week in Vienna consultations between the US and Russia for disarmament. And that we have today – and without much hope of success – to save the crumbling architecture of international security, a considerable “achievement” of John Bolton.
“From the time of my stay in the administration of George W. Bush I wanted to free the United States from the Treaty – recognizes Bolton in his memoirs, “the Room where it happened: a Memoir of the White house.” I knew what to do, helped Bush get America out of the dangerous legacy of the ABM Treaty of 1972, which did not allow US to create an effective national missile defense.”
“And as one of the few tangible results of the meeting in Helsinki was to be the enhanced cooperation between the Council for national security of the United States and Russia, tools were at hand – says Bolton about the events of 2018. I suggested Nikolai Patrushev (Secretary of security Council of Russia – MK) meet in Geneva, and he agreed on 23 August.”
Next Bolton accuses Russia that it “years violated the INF Treaty, while America kept him and watched his performance.”
“with the exception of rockets and launchers with ranges of 500 to 5,500 kilometers (310 to 3420 miles), the agreement of the Reagan-Gorbachev between the United States and the Soviet Union was to prevent a nuclear war in Europe – like John Bolton. – However, over time the fundamental purpose of the INF Treaty has been undermined by constant Russian violations of the changing global strategic realities and technological progress”.
“Even before trump took office, says us politician – Russia began the actual deployment of the missiles violate the INF Treaty bans in the Kaliningrad exclave on the Baltic sea, laying the basis for a significant threat to the European members of NATO. Moreover, and more importantly, in the long run, the Treaty did not connect any other country (except, theoretically, other successor States of the USSR).
China, for example, had the largest share of their large, growing and already deployed missilex capacity in the zone of action of the INF Treaty, endangering the lives of US allies like Japan and South Korea, and India and subtle irony, Russia itself. Iranian ballistic medium-range missiles threaten Europe and was ready to expand, as well as North Korea, Pakistan, India and other potential nuclear powers”.
“Finally – concludes Bolton. the INF Treaty was technologically obsolete. Barring the launch of land-based missiles within its prohibited zones, it does not prohibit the launch of missiles, sea-and air-launched from the nearby waters or airspace, which may affect the same purpose as the land-based missiles”.
“the point is, says the author of a controversial memoir, that the INF Treaty bound only the two countries, and one of them cheated. Only one country in the world was actually deprived of the opportunity to develop medium-range missiles: the United States. Today it did not make sense, even if it was made in the mid 1980-ies. Times change, as the liberals like to say”.
“We Patrushev met at the U.S. Mission to the UN in Geneva, says Bolton. – The staff of the NSC pre-consulted extensively in the US government agenda, and Pompeo, and I several times discussed the issues of arms control; he agreed with my approach to Patrushev. In a typical cold war-style Patrushev and I started with the arms control and non-proliferation, especially in Iran and North Korea. Russians follow Putin’s approach at our Moscow meeting, focusing on “strategic stability”, their main phrase for the attack on our withdrawal from the ABM Treaty”.
“I again explained, – says the diarist, that we withdrew from the ABM Treaty to, at least initially, to eliminate the threat to us from the new States possessing nuclear weapons, and the risk of accidental launches from Russia and China… Russia violated the INF Treaty for more than ten years, which is frequently mentioned by the Obama administration, but to no avail…”.
“I also said that it is unlikely that we could agree on five-year extension of Obama’s new start Treaty, which prayed Moscow and most American liberals. There were many reasons to resist the extension spur of the moment, including the need first to draw China into negotiations on strategic arms that I saw, caught the Russians by surprise. We also have to cover tactical nuclear weapons (which was not in the framework of the new start Treaty) and new technologies, actively used by Russia and China (for example, a hypersonic glide), which were only in the early stages of development, when in 2010 it adopted a new start Treaty”.
I went Bolton and Trump say: he was never sure that the President understood that the INF Treaty does not regulate nuclear weapons as such, but only the means of delivery. According to the diarist, he offered the President a variant of the mutual withdrawal of the U.S. and Russia from the Treaty, but trump said, “I don’t want to do. I just want to go out.”
ahead of the visit of Bolton in Moscow in October 2018 trump suddenly announced to the press about the intention to withdraw from DRMS that is not included in the plans of the presidential assistant on national security, set up to act decisively without fanfare.
“When I landed in Moscow, Ambassador Jon huntsman met me and said that the Russian campaign, playing on the fears of the Europeans that we leave them defenseless. This line swept Europe and during the withdrawal from the ABM Treaty. Then it wasn’t true, wasn’t true and now.”
At the Moscow talks with his Russian counterpart Bolton outlined the reasons why Washington believes that Russia is violating the agreement, and why the actions of China, Iran and other countries made it impossible for the universalization of the Treaty.
that same night overseas visitor met with the President of Russia: “it is Obvious that Putin was determined to declare that he was dissatisfied with the U.S. withdrawal from the INF Treaty. He noted that the eagle on the coat of arms of the United States clenches one claw an olive branch (although he didn’t notice that in the other Talon the eagle clasps arrows), and asked if the eagle ate all the olives. I said I did not bring a new olives. Such is the Soviet banter”.
Talking about the conversation about arms control, Bolton writes: “Putin reminded that we were both lawyers, said, “We could continue to do so until dawn” and then we exchanged jokes about lawyers. As for the New start Treaty, we have reviewed our respective positions, and I again stressed the advantages of returning to the agreement of the Moscow Treaty.
Why go through the agony of re-signing the New start Treaty, adding, for example, reductions or limitations on tactical nuclear weapons, which was of great importance for US, given the large number of such weapons, which was in Russia? Answering the questions of Putin, I said that we have no intention to withdraw from the New start Treaty, but we also were absolutely sure that it is not permissible to simply extended for five years, as requested by Russia (along with almost all Democrats of the Senate)”.
In 2019, the U.S. and Russia suspended observance of its obligations under the INF Treaty, and on August 2 of last year the Contract was finally terminated.
as for the start-3, it expires in February 2021 and the prospects of its renewal seem pessimistic.
