Russia and the United States discussed the implementation of the INF Treaty

34
Representatives of the Russian Federation, the USA, Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine held in Geneva the 30-th meeting of the Special Control Commission (SCC), created at one time to facilitate the implementation of the Russian-American treaty on the elimination of medium and short-range missiles, reports TASS State Department message.

Russia and the United States discussed the implementation of the INF Treaty




"The delegations of the United States, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Russia and Ukraine met to discuss issues related to the fulfillment of their obligations under the treaty," the report said.

According to the representative of the department, it was “the American side that initiated the convocation of the commission’s meeting”. “The CCM's work is conducted in a confidential manner, so we will refuse to provide additional details.”, - he added.

As the American media previously wrote, “the meeting should be the first in 16 years, it will give an opportunity to Russian and US officials to discuss the“ specifics ”of their mutual claims relating to the INF.

In September, the deputy director of the Foreign Ministry department, Vladimir Leontyev, said: “The question, as far as we understand, is that we have some complaints in terms of the tests we’re supposedly done. At the same time, the American side does not go to any specification of its claims. ”

Russia has its own questions for the Americans: “Firstly, this is a large-scale development and use of target missiles that are completely identical to medium-range and short-range ballistic missiles. That is, the scale of activity in this area is such that, in our opinion, it is a question of developing and testing production technologies and the combat use of these missiles.


“The second problem that we put before the Americans is also not new, they know it well, probably for more than 15 years. These are American drums. Drones, which fall under the definition of "intermediate-range cruise missiles" under the treaty. Here, too, we do not see any oncoming movement from the American side,” Leontiev said.

“Finally, the last problem that arose in connection with the deployment in Europe of elements of a global (system) missile defense system is the use of Mk-41 launchers, which are practically similar, according to the US Missile Defense Agency, which is used in the US Navy to launch cruise missiles Tomahawk, ”he added.
34 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. nnm
    +11
    17 November 2016 08: 50
    It is necessary to leave this Agreement .....
    1. +4
      17 November 2016 08: 58
      Quote: nnm
      It is necessary to leave this Agreement .....

      We always have time to leave, and at least we’ll talk to their insolent eyes ... lol
      1. +3
        17 November 2016 09: 06
        We need to develop medium- and small-scale missiles, not of ground-based deployment, but at least of water, but also provide ground-based universal launchers in order to place the INFs on them at the right time, and if the mess starts, who will figure out where and by which missile we launched hit, no one will be on the opposite side.
        1. +3
          17 November 2016 10: 17
          The missiles X 555 and X 101 together with 3M - 14 missiles can be placed on river barges - throughout the country and thereby circumvent the INF Treaty.
      2. 0
        17 November 2016 10: 29
        Why look into these shameless eyes? And so we look at the hell of a lot of years. Isn't it time to expand on them with something sharp, such as a refusal of an agreement, how they refused the missile defense.
    2. +8
      17 November 2016 09: 04
      Representatives of the Russian Federation, the USA, Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine held in Geneva the 30th meeting of the Special Control Commission (CCM), which was created at one time to facilitate the implementation of the Russian-American agreement on the elimination of medium and shorter range missiles,

      Well, we met, we talked, well, went to a buffet table, and of course we parted. request So about nothing. request
      1. +1
        17 November 2016 12: 06
        Quote: vovanpain
        Well, we met, we talked, well, went to a buffet table, and of course we parted. request So about nothing. request

        Our side should not go further than this. Let them have fun.
    3. +2
      17 November 2016 09: 10
      Quote: nnm
      It is necessary to leave this Agreement .....

      And get something like pershing in Europe.
      1. nnm
        +1
        17 November 2016 09: 17
        And so, like, Mk-41 have not yet received !?
        1. +3
          17 November 2016 09: 44
          Quote: nnm
          And so, like, Mk-41 have not yet received !?

          Well, we’ll also get perching. You can’t cut off your shoulder, you need to calculate everything to the smallest detail.
      2. 0
        17 November 2016 10: 33
        Do you all think that the Shtatovs are fulfilling any agreements? Yes, you are my friend, some optimist. It seems that youth is boiling in you.
        1. +1
          17 November 2016 10: 43
          Quote: Tambov Wolf
          Seen youth boils in you

          - it's still better than when "seething" ... senile insanity tongue
          1. +2
            17 November 2016 10: 54
            Quote: Cat Man Null
            Quote: Tambov Wolf
            Seen youth boils in you

            - it's still better than when "seething" ... senile insanity tongue

            And you vainly maliciously .. Russia so far lives on what our old people created! And the current generation, some show off so far ... hi
  2. +4
    17 November 2016 08: 50
    We talked and parted ... But Ukraine is doing something there?
    1. +11
      17 November 2016 08: 51
      Like what? They tested "a new and terrible weapon" yesterday ....
      1. +9
        17 November 2016 09: 07
        But what is Ukraine doing there?

        USA dance group. Yes
        1. +1
          17 November 2016 09: 29
          No - bad vocal, but of course with the USA soloist.
  3. +2
    17 November 2016 08: 59
    What negotiations can there be after such a large-scale deployment of missile defense in Europe? !!! On the contrary, it is necessary to increase the number of Iskanders, Navy ships capable of placing Caliber, placing Bastions or Iskanders in Cuba supposedly to protect the coastline. After that, hint at all that You can also establish nuclear warheads. And after all this, start negotiations!
  4. The comment was deleted.
  5. +1
    17 November 2016 09: 02
    Quote: nnm
    It is necessary to leave this Agreement .....

    The question is different. Why are we still not out of it? request
  6. Mwg
    0
    17 November 2016 09: 06
    You need to meet and listen to their suggestions. But from the context of their proposals to draw conclusions about their intentions and goals is easier than just guided by their own assumptions and observations. Well, one must also push one's own interests in the manner provided for by international law. At least, then they will not say that Russia refuses to discuss existing problems.
    1. nnm
      +1
      17 November 2016 09: 09
      that's what they say. anyway. The United States has already made an informational throw about new sanctions if we leave the INF Treaty. no matter what Russia will actually say and do, they will blame us all the same ..
      1. Mwg
        +1
        17 November 2016 09: 15
        Well they say - they will say so. They have spoken more than once and this will not surprise anyone. But the parties present, and the press, will have and state their own vision of the negotiations. Now you can’t even close yourself up with Jesuit proposals. Openness (to a certain extent, of course) is the path that Russia has chosen in this period of time and it is necessary to maintain a vector of relations. We must live on. Earth - it is small and fragile ....
  7. +5
    17 November 2016 09: 16
    of course you can talk, but develop your own RIAC and nod with an unblinking glance, as "partners" do
    1. 0
      17 November 2016 12: 16
      Quote: dik-nsk
      to talk of course you can, but develop your INF and nod with unblinking eyes, as do "partners"

      Here I really like it +++++++
  8. 0
    17 November 2016 09: 16
    [quote] [/ quote] "The delegations of the United States, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Russia and Ukraine met to discuss issues related to the fulfillment of their obligations under the treaty," the statement said. And Ukraine is in the role of the barking dog of the United States. Russia one must keep an eye on this issue. The US said and forgot and will do their own thing. But we also should not relax.
  9. +1
    17 November 2016 09: 28
    It is always useful to kick the insolent Americans once again, and to spread the news of their dishonesty and deceit to the whole "baptized world".
    And start to develop targets "very similar to the INF"
  10. 0
    17 November 2016 09: 32
    “The work of the CCM is carried out in a confidential mannerSo we will refuse to provide additional details»

    Probably an attempt on the American side once again to try to negotiate something.
  11. 0
    17 November 2016 09: 53
    “The CCM's work is conducted in a confidential manner, so we will refuse to provide additional details.”
    Ha! Also secretaries ... Right now, the svidomo maydauns will tell everyone everything. In its, so to speak, interpretation ...
  12. 0
    17 November 2016 10: 22
    SK opened a case of embezzlement of more than 50 million rubles in the East
  13. 0
    17 November 2016 13: 06
    Oh my God ... And the Ukrainian delegation is there ... They are probably bigger than the United States, they want Russia to fulfill the INF Treaty ...
    And what about Ukraine’s development of new rocket prodigies that fit the limitations of the INF Treaty? For some reason, they are not talking about them, but everything rests precisely on Russia ...
    It’s time, it’s high time to withdraw from this Treaty ... And the threats cited by the states to deploy new missile systems along our border in the event of our withdrawal from the Treaty are empty words ... Anyway, these missiles will still be at our borders ...
    It is necessary with the help of the media to inform the population of Europe that the US and NATO as a whole threaten Russia, and the population of Europe is the hostages ... First of all, it will "taste" all the delights of the armed conflict between the US and Europe ...
    The only thing I hope for is that before the inauguration of Trump, they would not do anything to him ... In this strange world, everything can be ...
  14. 0
    17 November 2016 13: 19
    Why do not take into account the RMD in NATO.
  15. +1
    17 November 2016 13: 39
    Quote: nnm
    It is necessary to leave this Agreement .....

    Advise the president. And then he is in the dark.

    Quote: Giant thought
    We need to develop medium- and small-scale missiles, not of ground-based deployment, but at least of water, but also provide ground-based universal launchers in order to place the INFs on them at the right time, and if the mess starts, who will figure out where and by which missile we launched hit, no one will be on the opposite side.

    Nobody prohibited short-range missiles. But ballistic "water" based certain ranges are prohibited by the strategic arms treaties.
    Quote: Vadim237
    The missiles X 555 and X 101 together with 3M - 14 missiles can be placed on river barges - throughout the country and thereby circumvent the INF Treaty.

    No, of course launching air missiles from barges is very enchanting. And where will the same 3M14 fly when starting at least from the Volga, let alone try to analyze the Siberian rivers?

    Quote: Tambov Wolf
    Why look into these shameless eyes? And so we look at the hell of a lot of years. Isn't it time to expand on them with something sharp, such as a refusal of an agreement, how they refused the missile defense.

    Before doing something, people usually analyze their actions. Well, we will "widen" them by leaving the INF Treaty. So what? Maximum in six months we will get a BR in the Baltics with a flight time of 3-4 minutes. Do you need to get it by "expanding"?

    Quote: nnm
    And so, like, Mk-41 have not yet received !?

    We got as many as 24 launchers. Only the placement of Tomahawks in them is still a hypothetical violation, such as the deployment of cruise and ballistic missiles on the Iskander with a range of 1000-2000-2500 km. Violation of not the "letter" of the treaty, i.e. clauses of the treaty, but a certain ephemeral "spirit" of the treaty

    Quote: Tambov Wolf
    Do you all think that the Shtatovs are fulfilling any agreements? Yes, you are my friend, some optimist. It seems that youth is boiling in you.

    And to cite an example of a violation, poorly cite? And then everyone is talking about a violation, but when asked to give an example, they are usually silent ...
  16. 0
    17 November 2016 15: 53
    “The delegations of the United States, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Russia and Ukraine met to discuss issues related to the fulfillment of their obligations under the treaty”

    Well, of course, but ... where are the Amer satellites here? And then they will again conclude an agreement with the USA, and their NATO allies will calmly develop their forces (with American help).
  17. 0
    17 November 2016 16: 43
    Quote: mamont5
    “The delegations of the United States, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Russia and Ukraine met to discuss issues related to the fulfillment of their obligations under the treaty”

    Well, of course, but ... where are the Amer satellites here? And then they will again conclude an agreement with the USA, and their NATO allies will calmly develop their forces (with American help).

    Those who could have long ago created. And others simply "did not shmogli and do not shmogut"

    Quote: shtanko.49
    Why do not take into account the RMD in NATO.

    Because when they concluded they did not take into account either NATO or the ATS. And now, NATO has corny no weapons that fall under this treaty. And those who have their own rocket industry do not need such missiles