Permanent Representation of the Russian Federation spoke about the difficulties in reducing nuclear weapons

Russia can not move towards reducing nuclear weapons exclusively on a bilateral basis with the United States, disregarding the potential of other states, transfers RIA News a comment published on the website of the Russian Permanent Mission to the UN.

Russia cannot move further along the path of reducing nuclear weapons exclusively on a bilateral basis with the United States (not to mention that the line of the Donald Trump administration on issues such as the future of the Treaty on measures to further reduce and limit on the elimination of medium and shorter range missiles). In fact, we have already reached the line beyond which the corresponding hypothetical negotiations should be multilateral. Not taking into account the potentials of all other nuclear-weapon States in the process of such discussions no longer works,

the commentary says.

The Permanent Mission also stressed the need to be extremely responsible and cautious in evaluating the overall prospects for nuclear disarmament.

We give and will continue to give priority to all factors affecting the situation in this area. Among them are the creation of a US global missile defense, the prospect of weapons in space, the non-ratification of the CTBT (Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty) by the United States and several other states, Washington’s plans to build a global lightning strike potential, remaining imbalances in conventional weapons,

The report says.

The agency recalls that 7 July, following several weeks of negotiations in the UN, a convention on the complete prohibition of nuclear weapons was adopted. The nuclear powers did not participate in drafting the treaty, including the permanent members of the UN Security Council - Russia, the United Kingdom, China and the United States.

The Convention will enter into force 90 days after it is ratified by at least 50 countries. On September 20, the number of signatories was 51.

Comments

[Logall]

The United States reduces nuclear weapons as well as chem. weapons!
USA - fucking cowgirl with wolves ...
And more precisely - the "jackal" among the wolves ...

[DEPARTMENT]

Following several weeks of negotiations, the UN adopted a convention on a complete ban on nuclear weapons

We were already disarmed in the 90s! Let the USA show an example to all countries (we also destroyed our chemical weapons, unlike the United States ..)))
And the conclusion is .. Tricky, arrogant moneylenders!

[pjastolov]

And the conclusion is .. Tricky, arrogant moneylenders!

Vital you're wrong

The United States does not plan to accede to the Convention on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, the text of which was agreed on July 7 by the participants of the UN conference. This was stated by the official representative of the US State Department, Heather Neuerth, reports a REGNUM correspondent.
“The United States did not participate in these negotiations and will not support this agreement,” the press service of the US Foreign Ministry quoted Neuert as saying.
The State Department spokeswoman noted that Washington "over the years and under various administrations has clearly expressed its willingness to work with all states to improve international security and reduce the risk of nuclear war."
“However, the proposed treaty ignores current security challenges that make nuclear deterrence necessary,” said Neuert.
She emphasized that "not a single nuclear-weapon state has participated in these negotiations, and not a single US ally that relies on expanded nuclear deterrence has supported the final text."

signed it

it was ratified by representatives of 51 states, including Algeria, Austria, Brazil, Vatican, Costa Rica, Indonesia, Cuba, Libya, Liechtenstein, Mexico, New Zealand, Palestine, South Africa, Thailand, Venezuela and others ...
Source: https://rueconomics.ru/276424-konvenciyu-o-polnom
-zaprete-yadernogo-oruzhiya-podpisala-51-strana # f
rom_copy

- Papuans, yes neutrals

[dorz]

Americans will never reduce nuclear weapons because they border Canada and the evil Mexicans.

[stolz]

And why reduce it, it is necessary to increase it, on the contrary, do we have something else to counter the predatory aspirations of our "partners" in NATO?

[zhekazs]

Quote: Stolz

And why reduce it, it is necessary to increase it, on the contrary, do we have something else to counter the predatory aspirations of our "partners" in NATO?

It may not be worth it to build up, but constantly improve technologically, update, this must be done. As is generally happening now. And if we were to set the apple on hyper, then we’ll look at the squeals of mattresses with their much-praised missile defense.

[siberalt]

Yeah. Let them first make Eunu shrink! And we'll see what happens.

[zhekazs]

Quote: siberalt

Yeah. Let them first make Eunu shrink! And we'll see what happens.

Eunu, let China and I force-coerce-caress-persuade, and let the mattresses force Israel to acknowledge and destroy it. We can destroy with us, for denyuzhku. On which we build ourselves something worthwhile))

[79807420129]

Quote: Logall

The United States reduces nuclear weapons as well as chem. weapons!

Sanya, Hello. I look in the mail repent. And for Mirikans, we have roughly equal nuclear potentials, I write from memory, please forgive me if something is wrong. About 1600 warheads on each side, they are ahead of us in carriers, we are tactical nuclear weapons in tactical nuclear weapons, but it’s correctly noticed that the arsenal is not taken into account NATO, where England and France, is +400 warheads and delivery vehicles.

[Logall]

Hi!
But the main thing is not the number of warheads, but their delivery vehicles!
Here it is impossible to make concessions, in no case ...
Accepted, answered.

[weksha50]

Quote: 79807420129

correctly noted, not taken into account the arsenal of NATO where England and France, this is +400 warheads and delivery vehicles.

Um ... If we seriously talk and take into account, then we can not forget about the long-term friendly China, at least ...

[79807420129]

Quote: weksha50

about bye friendly China, at least ...

This is plus another 200-300 warheads and carriers.

[Starover_Z]

Quote: 79807420129

Quote: weksha50

about bye friendly China, at least ...

This is plus another 200-300 warheads and carriers.

China is not friendly. China is still neutral to us, while it has less modern and better weapons for the ground forces!

[210ox]

What is the reduction of nuclear weapons? We are still alive because of this.

[pjastolov]

On July 7, following several weeks of negotiations at the UN, a convention on the complete ban on nuclear weapons was adopted. Nuclear powers did not participate in the development of the treaty, including the permanent members of the UN Security Council - Russia, Great Britain, China and the USA.

what's this? got married without me? I wonder who these signatories are? probably the Papuans? how can you forbid what you don’t have and will not appear soon

[weksha50]

Quote: pjastolov

what's this? got married without me? I wonder who these signatories are? probably the Papuans? how can you forbid what you don’t have and will not appear soon

Nobody "married" anyone ... Signed by such "Papuans" as Liechtenstein (demanding the abolition of the veto power of Russia in the UN Security Council), Costa Rica, Zimbabwe ... Non-nuclear countries ...
And NUCLEAR - put on these signatories ... Just did not notice, passing ...

[pjastolov]

Already found who signed what mattresses said about this,

[newcomer]

not bad, however. we destroyed our chemical weapons, the Yankees pull up to 23g. you never know what they have in mind before the 23rd. here and with yao moment. we must cut, the Yankees pretend to cut. and NATO jackals: Britons, paddles? other nuclear club recruits? very interesting.

[Alexander 3]

A global missile defense is like a global nuclear weapons, which many states already have, including North Korea.

[Bronevick]

In my opinion, now is the time to build up nuclear potential.

[rotmistr60]

They did not participate in the development of the treaty, including the permanent members of the UN Security Council - Russia, Great Britain, China and the USA.

Therefore, they will not sign any convention. Therefore, countries without nuclear weapons should not be in the clouds and hope that the nuclear powers begin to disarm. Not for this was created nuclear weapons, so that someone does not know who banned him.

[Dezinto]

Trump is certainly a setup in terms of unpredictability, and in general the absence of a coherent policy. Figs know what to expect from him. Hence, such advances in fundamental treaties with the United States.

[Makarov]

there are definitely two things you can expect from him: work to get the US out of the crisis and the “republican” model of behavior in foreign policy .. as for me that's all you need to know about this person as the US president ... he reminds Reagan, only much worse versed in politics and better in economics ...

[weksha50]

"Russia cannot move towards reducing nuclear weapons exclusively on a bilateral basis with the United States, not taking into account the potential of other states"...

Lord, I finally waited for a real understanding and assessment of the situation, - thank God - openly said this not only to the avid "partner" - the United States, but to the whole world ...
PS True, it is disappointing that Russia destroyed its chemical weapons, but the USA has not yet begun ... and the US bio-bio-laboratories in Georgia and / or Ukraine are very "embarrassing" to me ...

[Old26]

The title of the article is frankly IDIOTIC. What we did not know all these last 30-40 years, that this is the problem7, Reductions are in the direction of Russia-USA. Everything else before our treaties with the Americans is simple Violet.

[Georges Pompidou]

Based on the current situation, the nuclear arsenal needs to be increased and not reduced.