|
|||||
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
 |
 |
    |
|
|
|||
 |
|
||
|
|||
|
|
|
|
||||||||
|
U.S.-Russia: Joint Missile Defense Program Unlikely, Russian Official Says By Kerry Boyd Some U.S. officials have mentioned the possibility of cooperation, but so far no actual joint plans or programs have been created, Arbatov said at a press conference. Negotiations will probably not go far beyond the discussion stage, he said. The legislator identified three obstacles to missile defense cooperation. A joint system, he said, would be antithetical to mutual deterrence, it would require a much closer relationship between the two countries and it would require U.S. defense contractors to share business with their Russian counterparts. Theoretically, Russia and the United States might engage in strategic missile defense if their relationship would change significantly and move beyond “the principles of mutual deterrence,” Arbatov said. Such a change, however, would require restructuring both countries’ nuclear forces more extensively than the recent Strategic Offensive Reductions Treaty, which the two countries signed in Moscow in May (see GSN, May 24). “We cannot retain relations of mutual deterrence when … both of us try to maintain the deterrence potential through the possibility of a retaliatory strike and at the same time jointly create missile defense, at least a strategic one,” Arbatov said. The United States continues to gear its strategic policy toward Russia, said Col. Gen. Leonid Ivashov, vice president of the Geopolitical Problems Academy, who also spoke at the press conference. “The technological parameters of the U.S. ABM defense system are, above all, anti-Russian and anti-Chinese,” he said. The distance that remains in the relationship between Russia and the United States is another barrier, Arbatov said. “Joint missile defense presupposes a close military-political alliance, closer than the alliance between the U.S. and its NATO allies,” he said. The United States, which is hesitant to share military secrets even with its close NATO allies, would be very unlikely to share such information with Russia, he said. Russia, too, is unlikely to share technology with the United States, Ivashov said. There might be minor exchanges of defense-related technology and products between the two countries, but Russia will not be ready to reveal defense secrets to other countries, he said. Finally, the U.S. defense industry is unlikely to be willing to share major missile defense contracts with Russian companies. “They want these contracts all for themselves,” Arbatov said. The companies might share some minor technology and activities, such as conducting joint tests, “but they will do so more as political advertising,” he said. As an alternative to joint missile defense, Arbatov advocated setting limits on future missile defense programs “to protect ourselves from third countries and threshold countries while not undermining mutual strategic deterrence,” he said. Arbatov criticized the Russian military and President Vladimir Putin for surrendering too many “bargaining chips in the form of our own offensive and defense arms programs,” adding that Russia’s position has become so weak that the United States is no longer interested in holding serious strategic arms negotiations. The war on terrorism, the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, relations with NATO and the new reductions treaty “reflect the positions of the U.S. and its allies by 90 percent and Russia’s position by 10 percent,” Arbatov said. Ivashov also expressed concern. The Moscow treaty “essentially lays down the transition today from parity in strategic offensive weapons to a unilateral superiority of the United States,” he said (RIA Novosti news agency/Federal News Service Transcript, June 28). For further information, see: U.S. Fact Sheet on Withdrawal from ABM Treaty U.S. State Department Fact Sheet on Arms Reduction Treaty
| ||||||||||
Back to top
