Military Review

Exit DRCMD: the funeral of a new world order

32
Donald Trump's statement about the need for the United States to withdraw from the Treaty on Intermediate-Range and Shorter-Range Missiles (INF) on the eve of the visit of his assistant John Bolton to Moscow is likely to be a “homework” for him. The fact that Washington has not yet engaged in the official procedure for withdrawing from the United States Children's Day (and is spelled out in the contract) suggests that this may be a traditional attempt at blackmail for the current leadership of the United States, or, as the White House itself calls it, “preparation for dialogue.




There is no guile here: for present-day American diplomacy, it is common practice to begin negotiations with threats and “raids” in the hope of making the partner in the “dialogue” more accommodating.

However, it seems that this reception from Washington again did not work. In any case, after Bolton arrived in Moscow, representatives of the highest authorities of the country declared that if the United States did decide to withdraw from the treaty, the retaliatory steps of Russia would immediately follow.

In particular, the press secretary of the Russian president, Dmitry Peskov, said that scrapping the provisions of the Treaty on the Elimination of Medium and Short Range Missiles would force Russia to take measures to ensure its security.

“If you carefully re-read various speeches and interviews of the president, he has repeatedly said that breaking the provisions of the INF Treaty forces Russia to take measures to ensure its own security, because what is the breakdown of the INF Treaty? This means that the United States is not only veiled, but also directly starting to develop these systems in the future, and if this system is developed, then action is needed from other countries - in this case Russia, to restore balance in this area, ”said Peskov.

And the head of the Duma defense committee, Vladimir Shamanov, noted that Russia has sufficient scientific and technical reserve to respond to any enemy action.



At the same time, the Secretary of the Security Council of Russia, Nikolai Patrushev, at a meeting in Moscow with Bolton, stated the importance of preserving the INF Treaty, the termination of which would be a “serious blow to the entire international legal arms control system”, and readiness “to work together to eliminate mutual claims in connection with the implementation of this contract. "

However, there is no doubt that the counter-claims of Russia, which Patrushev mentioned, will not be considered by the Americans. In the event that Trump’s intentions to withdraw from the treaty are serious, there can be no compromise: under a far-fetched pretext, the obligations will simply be rejected in the same way as was the case with the nuclear deal with Iran.

However, it cannot be ruled out that Trump’s speech is connected with the elections to the US Congress and his desire to show the Americans, including his opponents from the camp of the Democrats, that he can be extremely tough in relation to Moscow, and talks about his dependence on Putin have no reason. Actually, the experience of his presidency shows that he managed to achieve a rating upgrade thanks to an aggressive foreign policy, which is perceived by many Americans as a manifestation of America’s “greatness” that Trump promised to “return”.

And if this is only a pre-election demonstration, it cannot be excluded that the United States may not withdraw from the treaty. Especially if Russia manages to get some bonuses. For example, to assist the United States in the matter of extending the INF range to China, which, as we know, does not participate in it.

However, for Washington, who declared the People's Republic of China "enemy number one," it would be very desirable if Beijing, most of whose missiles fall under the treaty’s limitations, signed it. After all, it is not by chance that China also mentioned in his statement about the withdrawal of Trump.

Recall that the American leader, stating his intention to withdraw from the treaty, added that the US will develop these medium and shorter-range missiles, "only if Russia does not come to us, and China does not come to us, and they all come to us, and they they will say: "Let us be wiser and let none of us develop these weapons."



A little later, Trump on Fox News TV announced: "China is not included in this agreement, but they should be included in it." That is, the message of the American leader to Moscow should be understood as follows: if you want to keep the treaty, make sure that China also signs it. And if the Kremlin accepts US proposals and takes pressure on the PRC, trust between our countries will be undermined, and the emerging Russian-Chinese alliance will not take place. And there is no guarantee that then Washington will not unite with Beijing against us.



Be that as it may, the mention of China on the issue of US withdrawal from the Treaty on Medium and Shorter-Range Missiles was very disturbing to China, and the Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Hua Chunying was quick to note that "a reference to China in this matter is completely erroneous." He also warned the United States against the step announced by Trump.

“A unilateral withdrawal from the agreement will have a multilateral negative effect,” the spokeswoman said. She hoped that the parties to the treaty would “value the result” achieved by great difficulty and solve issues related to the INF Treaty through dialogue and negotiation. “We hope that the parties will think twice about the issue of withdrawing from the treaty before acting,” Hua Chuying stressed, making it clear by the context of her speech that the PRC perceives this issue detachedly and does not try it on.

But besides China, what is happening can seriously change the agenda of world politics.

Thus, the chairman of the Italian think tank Vision & Global, Tiberio Graziani, called Trump's initiative consonant with the US policy to upset the global balance.

“Trump’s recent statement of intent to withdraw from the agreement with Russia is fully in line with the American strategy for breaking the international equilibrium. It is worth noting that this balance is already unstable, since we are in the middle of a geopolitical transition to a new order, which is absolutely multipolar, but not yet established, ”the RIA expert cites the words“News».



In this regard, a very energetic reaction to Trump’s statement about the withdrawal of one of its authors and signatories, Mikhail Gorbachev, is of some interest.

In an interview with Interfax, he noted that this decision of Trump "will undermine all the efforts that were made by the leaders of the USSR and the United States themselves to achieve nuclear disarmament."

“To break old agreements on disarmament,” Gorbachev believes, “is by no means impossible. Is it really difficult to understand that the rejection of these agreements, as they say, is not of a great mind. ”



You can, of course, assume that Mikhail Sergeyevich is sad to see how the American head buries his child. However, we note that, for example, on the expansion of NATO, which was also a violation of the promise once given to him, he reacted much more calmly. What is the matter?

But the fact is that, as Graziani absolutely correctly noted, Trump's step, or rather, its consequences, many of which today are not possible to calculate, drive another nail into the coffin of that global project, of which Gorbachev was an active participant. This is a monopolar, Western-centric device for the life of the planet, known as the “new world order”, which Trump is the grave digger of today.



And by the way, it was this circumstance that aroused the European elites much more than the hypothetical threat to the security of their countries, which the United States abandoned by the INF. So, in particular, it is obvious to them that, contrary to Washington’s plans, “hitting” Moscow and Beijing will not destroy, but only strengthen their alliance, strengthening the center of power alternative to the West.

The global power vertical, built with the participation of Gorbachev, in which they were embedded and within which they functioned, is crumbling. This alarm is shared by some representatives of the US political elite. So, US Senator Robert Menendez said that withdrawing from the Treaty on the Elimination of Medium and Short Range Missiles would further isolate the United States on the world stage and “give up a political victory” to Russia.

“Exit from this treaty without a comprehensive strategy that would eliminate its basic strategic consequences, and without consulting with Congress or our allies, threatens the long-term interests of the national security of the United States,” said the senator, urging US lawmakers to limit the efforts of the administration of President Donald Trump to eradicate agreements on disarmament.

But Trump doesn’t seem to be unstoppable: on October 22, he announced his intention to build up the nuclear arsenal of the United States (probably not giving a damn about all the treaties) “until the rest come to their senses.” In order not to leave room for doubt, Trump stressed that this comment is addressed to Russia and China.

Although the American leader assures that his goal is new, more fair (from his point of view) agreements, his attitude to previous commitments and aspirations to constantly and unilaterally change the adopted rules makes it clear that there is no need to talk about any agreements. . He demands unconditional surrender and absolute submission. At the same time, the USA is becoming less and less able to achieve “obedience”.
Author:
32 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. 210ox
    210ox 23 October 2018 12: 11
    +3
    It’s time to bury the marked one (and not in Russia, it won’t accept the land of this kind), but he also advises ..
    1. Nasrat
      Nasrat 23 October 2018 12: 13
      +2
      Quote: 210ox
      It’s time to bury the marked one (and not in Russia, it won’t accept the land of this kind), but he also advises ..

      I remind you - The article is not about him ..
      1. 210ox
        210ox 23 October 2018 12: 16
        +1
        And about whom? About the INF Treaty ... Who signed it do you remember? Who stood at the "foundations of a new world order"? One of them is Gorbachev. Now it's time to ... If you don't bury it, then forget it. what he did.
        1. Fedor egoist
          Fedor egoist 23 October 2018 13: 09
          0
          When I heard Gorbachev’s opinion, I was finally convinced of my opinion that this agreement is in its current state for us rather harmful than useful.
          1. Apart from Russia, in fact, no one observes it. States that no longer have enough marine components for the so-called. "containment", they are building positioned missile defense areas with universal launchers. A kind of land destroyers. About attack drones, which in fact are KRMD / KRMD, generally keep quiet. The Chinese, who were not part of the treaty (and are not even going to enter there), have a range of short / medium-range missiles, incl. and with nuclear warheads on board.
          2. In the event of the termination of the treaty, the Russian Federation receives an excellent instrument of influence on the Europeans. Political, above all ... but in the event of a military conflict, extremely fast and effective. In principle, the fact that the Russian Federation even has several hundred cruise / ballistic missiles with special charges, and more importantly, the readiness to use them in a large-scale conventional conflict ("escalation for de-escalation") will cool many hotheads in Europe. And the Chinese will become "calmer" - they are friends with us only as long as we are ready to "warmly welcome" them on occasion))
          3. With the termination of the INF Treaty, the appearance of short / medium-range nuclear missiles by the Russian Federation does not at all mean the appearance of similar US "products" in the countries of Eastern Europe. They do not have tactical nuclear warheads as a class (except for those on the B61), and there are no launch vehicle systems ready for deployment on combat duty either. And if it takes a year or two to start production of missiles (provided that there are already non-serial samples that have passed tests), then the manufacture of new nuclear warheads in the next decade is impossible for the United States (as surprising as it sounds). Maximum - they will try to "saw through" nuclear warheads from the return potential (those for ICBMs and SLBMs). What will happen as a result and whether it will work out at all is a big question.
          So in fact, Trump, wanting China to join the existing treaty (why China itself is not asked), himself removes unnecessary Gorbachev's "agreements" that seriously limit our defense capability.
          Although the presence of the Russian Federation ready-made infantry and infantry fighting systems, and nuclear warheads to them, is an open secret. So not only Americans are cunning))
          1. Lieutenant Teterin
            Lieutenant Teterin 23 October 2018 13: 44
            0
            I basically suspected from the very beginning that all this fuss about the INF Treaty was started in order to force China to join it, because then the Chinese anti-ship BRs would also be banned. Apparently, the calculation here is that Russia, not wanting to terminate the treaty, will put pressure on China in this matter. Somewhat naive, but not without logic, assumptions.
            1. svd-xnumx
              svd-xnumx 23 October 2018 18: 53
              0
              If it has already come to the announcement of candidates for the reduction of missile weapons, then Putin needs to supplement the list with the allies of the United States and put Israel first. But I think there are enough Jews for their lobby led by Trump to screech like a slaughtered pig. China also has a "partner" carrying a threat, India, and those of Pakistan.
    2. Pasha
      Pasha 23 October 2018 12: 49
      -1
      Gorbachev is not the topic.
      The wisdom of the leader, to work ahead of schedule and will be strengthened by the support of all countries to prevent the second Cold War, with the prohibition of weapons of mass destruction, you see the United States will be at the fringes of international politics.
      The absence of a center of power, with the emergence of a center of Justice and Honesty led by Russia.
    3. NEXUS
      NEXUS 23 October 2018 13: 55
      0
      Quote: 210ox
      It’s time to bury the marked one (and not in Russia, it won’t accept the land of this kind), but he also advises ..

      Near the EBN, and after all, level it with excavators with the ground, and fill it with a meter layer of concrete.
      It is necessary to resume work on the Barguzin Railways and on the ICBM Frontier. And while we are chewing snot and playing in partnership, axes will already be standing at our borders, shooting through our entire European part (the most densely populated) for departure.
  2. Serge Gorely
    Serge Gorely 23 October 2018 12: 16
    +6
    The INF Treaty is one of Gorby's many acts of betrayal. First, it did not apply to France and Britain. Second, it affected ONLY the land part, where we had an advantage, and did NOT touch the naval part, where the United States had a huge advantage. Initially, it was necessary to link all the components of the INF Treaty taking into account the NATO countries.
    1. Dude
      Dude 23 October 2018 12: 57
      -1
      Initially, it was necessary to link all the components of the INF Treaty, taking into account the NATO countries.

      Gorby and Raisa Maksimovna (it will not be remembered for the night) then, come on, their palms were sweating, from the anticipation of "dividends" from the wholesale sale of the Country, what are the accounting and linking ...
    2. Kent0001
      Kent0001 23 October 2018 16: 01
      +2
      In fact, Moscow was primarily threatened by Pershing from land bases ...... this is so for information.
  3. kapitan92
    kapitan92 23 October 2018 12: 20
    -1
    Reading about these "political combinations," I immediately recall the words V, S, Vysotsky.
    I watched everything so that there was no mistake. I remembered all the cooks in anguish. Oh, change the pawns to glasses - Vividly, it would become clearer on the board! .........
    I don’t moo, I do not calve, everything is like cotton wool. You have to beat something - it's time! What to beat? Rook - scary, Right in the jaw - a bit early, Inconvenient - the first game ...........
    Only in vain does he joke with our brother, I have a measure, even two: If he kills me with obscenities, I will take him through the thigh with a grab, Or I will move the horse through the head! ...........
    I measured his figure with his eye, And when he declared a check to me - I bared my biceps inadvertently, I even took off my jacket for fidelity. And instantly in the hall it became quieter, He noticed that I was getting up ... Apparently, he was not up to the chips - And the much-praised notorious Fisher Immediately agreed to a draw.
  4. Dude
    Dude 23 October 2018 12: 21
    +3
    Yeah, the impression is that the USA is a cart rushing without brakes downhill: it will ruin both those who turn up under the wheels, and those at the foot of the mountain, and those who are in the cart itself ... Moreover, the cart also dynamite stuffed ..
  5. Machito
    Machito 23 October 2018 12: 32
    +1
    Cold War 2.0 is in full swing, and the US withdrawal from the INF Treaty is only a matter of time. Moreover, the de facto treaty is no longer valid, since the United States has deployed air defense systems in Romania, which make it possible to use launch containers on land to launch "sea" cruise missiles. At the same time, Russian "river-sea" missile ships, in turn, are a substitute for "land" medium-range missiles. In addition to the Russian Federation and the United States, there are a number of states that produce medium and short-range missiles with various equipment and are not bound by any restrictive agreements.
  6. dgonni
    dgonni 23 October 2018 12: 33
    -7
    At one time, the union developed the Pioneer RSD, as a result it got the Pershing accommodation (very quickly) in Europe with higher performance characteristics + to this tomahawk. As a result, the flight time to Moscow was reduced to 15 minutes. Andropov himself admitted that they were stuck in this matter. The Iskanders also laughed at first, now no longer funny. For if the mattresses will accommodate RSD in Poland and Romania, then the flight time will be within 5-7 minutes. Do not even have time to get a bottle after the alert and get on the track to the other world. Excellent mnogohodovochka turned out.
    1. Lieutenant Teterin
      Lieutenant Teterin 23 October 2018 13: 46
      +1
      Quote: dgonni
      Do not even have time to get a bottle after the alert and get on the track to the other world.

      This can be done just in 5-7 minutes. And you can have time to pray for the last time on Earth. But there is no longer a proportionate response, and this is the biggest threat to the BRDS.
    2. a.sirin
      a.sirin 23 October 2018 15: 01
      +1
      Nobody wants to think about it. Not in VO nor in the Kremlin
    3. g1washntwn
      g1washntwn 24 October 2018 07: 51
      0
      The development of Pioneer and Pershing began at the same time - in 1973. Prior to the deployment of the RSD-10, R-12s (from 1960) and R-14s (in series since 1961) were already on combat duty. The Pioneer simply replaced these RSDs 3 years faster, so it’s at least incorrect to say that Pershing appeared in response to the Pioneers at least.
    4. Soho
      Soho 24 October 2018 10: 47
      0
      At one time, the union developed the Pioneer RSD, as a result it got the Pershing accommodation (very quickly) in Europe with higher performance characteristics + to this tomahawk. As a result, the flight time to Moscow was reduced to 15 minutes. Andropov himself admitted that they were stuck in this matter. The Iskanders also laughed at first, now no longer funny. For if the mattresses will accommodate RSD in Poland and Romania, then the flight time will be within 5-7 minutes. Do not even have time to get a bottle after the alert and get on the track to the other world. Excellent mnogohodovochka turned out.

      it’s very interesting to know where the porridge is in your head? you still tell that the expansion of NATO to the East is part of a defensive doctrine against an aggressive Kremlin.
  7. rocket757
    rocket757 23 October 2018 12: 35
    0
    The contract is not perfect, it is more harmful to us, but after the striped pof-pokh-bury it, too. With whom and how to finally agree.
    It’s sad ... but for the geyropa what urges will appear after that, for the old, for the young geyropeytsy, there’s nothing to say, it’s still more difficult there, with brain activity!
    1. NEXUS
      NEXUS 23 October 2018 14: 02
      -1
      Quote: rocket757
      The contract is not perfect, it is more harmful to us, but after the striped pof-pokh-bury it, too. With whom and how to finally agree.

      Do you all hope to come to an agreement? Mattresses understand only the right of the strong and in no other way, as well as Europe.
      They deployed their missiles in Turkey, received our missiles in Cuba, and as a result, when it came to that he would fly to all 100, they began to negotiate, removed all their rubbish from Turkey ... and now it will not work, because we are weak in their eyes and weak. Even though the Soviet Union gave us nuclear weapons, and we didn’t miss it .. in 90.
      The nomenclature of the Iskander arsenal must be updated by increasing the missile range, the Dagger must be refined and unfreezed on the Barguzin BJRD and the Rubezh ICBM project, including the modification on a wheeled platform. And this should be done now, and not wait for the Balts with the Ukrainians to "ask" the United States to bungle up bases on their territory with radars and axes.
      1. rocket757
        rocket757 23 October 2018 14: 10
        0
        Why so? I personally have to striped, their top, attitude be-ee and fi!
        It’s just that there should be at least something in the world, at least somewhere, at least with someone, to talk and agree! Yes, only from the position of POWER and over this we will have to work hard!
        Striped now, with their henchmen, they can arrange for the whole world to fly to tartaras .... they will not remain intact either, so it’s preferable that they were, if not reliable, then at least the stable side of all the agreements.
        It’s just such a situation ... and I really want to live, but not at any cost! So sho important, Schaub everyone knew, bang, so all together!
  8. arhPavel
    arhPavel 23 October 2018 12: 51
    +2
    Europe does not see the need for American weapons, and the USA creates this need.
    1. Fanning the hysteria about the Russian threat.
    2. Leaving treaties that do not pose a direct threat to the United States
    3. Prepare a base for replacing anti-missiles with such normal missiles.

    In general, they are preparing a war in Europe, until the last European :) as it should be in corporate business, you need to cover your *** if possible someone else's.
  9. Sonet
    Sonet 23 October 2018 12: 57
    0
    Unfortunately, the era of small warriors for the United States is over. Ahead, the war with Iran, China, Russia is necessary to emphasize, but so far they do not dare to open the Pandora's box. And so I want ...
    1. Fedor egoist
      Fedor egoist 23 October 2018 13: 16
      0
      Quote: Sonet
      Ahead is the war with Iran, China, Russia, the necessary to emphasize.

      Emphasize Iran)
      Quote: Sonet
      And so you want ...

      If only to them. Or you. I personally do not want to open any drawers. There is something to lose, as well as many others.
  10. akudr48
    akudr48 23 October 2018 14: 04
    +1
    Contract or non contract

    1. The INF Treaty was a compromise between approximately equal rivals - the USA and the USSR, while the USSR was inferior and reduced more than America. I remember how on TV at that time we drew arrows and indicated the flight time, fueling the situation, and then Gorbach succumbed and after signing became like a savior of the country (so that to destroy the country after a couple of years, not without the help of partners)

    2. By the power of the military and any other Russia, now-this is not the USSR then, America and we now even have to invent something, such as interference in the American elections, so that inside they believe that Russia is an enemy, in which our government helps it, different with creaks and an invitation to the atomic paradise, not realizing that it’s better than the existing government that has surpassed $ 1,5 million to America to America, for them it still will not be

    3. An acceptable compromise could be based on the territorial principle of restrictions (Europe - Russia to the Urals), and then let the USA and China limit themselves without us, but the hegemon will not do this precisely because of our weakness, the desire to impressively crush Russia in the person of it ( or them?) elite and unpreparedness, even fear of seriously dealing with China

    4. Contracts in this matter are better than their absence, but contracts are not at all costs. We will see what will happen soon. They can immediately lie down according to the Gorbachev principle, it is possible. They can play another landmark battle with the Main Enemy, which will eclipse all the experiences of the electorate on pension reform. We are waiting for the propaganda of an.d.nonov on TV, they will then explain how everything was done correctly, and who did it to make the rating well ...
  11. soul
    soul 24 October 2018 00: 13
    0
    In response to their new conditions, the United States needs to be required to include the UK INF Treaty. True, the British now seem to have no BRSD, but who knows what will happen tomorrow?
  12. iouris
    iouris 24 October 2018 00: 41
    0
    They disarmed themselves. "World order" was only in Mikhalserkheich's house, because he is the best German of all times and peoples. Will someone ask him for Akhromeev?
  13. steelmaker
    steelmaker 24 October 2018 09: 02
    0
    Correctly in the comments they write that this agreement has long been violated by the United States. And you don't need to hold on to it, you need to think about your safety. "If they shoot at you with a steel bullet, do not bear it, but fight back with a combat grenade."
    1. iouris
      iouris 24 October 2018 14: 50
      0
      Quote: steel maker
      This agreement has long been violated by the United States.

      Only a very weak side is required to comply with contracts.
  14. nikvic46
    nikvic46 24 October 2018 17: 08
    0
    The author is absolutely right about the alliance between Russia and China. Only together can our countries successfully resist US pressure.
    1. iouris
      iouris 26 October 2018 01: 17
      0
      Quote: nikvic46
      The author is absolutely right about the union of Russia and China

      The union of the communist PRC and the anti-communist RF is impossible by definition. A short-term use of the Russian Federation against the United States by China is possible under certain conditions. China will not be able to crush the Anglo-Saxons, it depends on them. And if it works out, then it is also impossible for them without raw materials. The Russian Federation has only one project that justifies its existence, the project is called a "raw material superpower", in other words, "a raw materials supercolony." In short, Postsssr is the first in line. Apparently, it will be destroyed by the technological revolution. But not necessarily, the vast majority of the unneeded population is concentrated in just a few cities, which are highly vulnerable. The destruction of infrastructure in a very cold country is not at all the same as its destruction or absence in Africa.