US as “chief peacemaker”: Russia and China are invited to discuss the reduction of nuclear arsenals


The United States decided to appear in the guise of a "chief peacekeeper." This is the statement made by US Presidential Adviser on National Security Robert O'Brien.


According to an American official, the United States expects Russia to join the discussion on reducing the number of nuclear warheads.

From a statement by Mr. O'Brien:

We withdrew from the Treaty on the Elimination of Intermediate-Range and Shorter-Range Missiles, because it was ineffective. This could lead Russia and even China to the negotiating table on the issue of reducing the nuclear arsenal in the near future.

Advisor trump made this statement during a speech at the Atlantic Council.

O'Brien said that Russia itself is interested in reducing the strategic volume of offensive weapons.

O'Brien:

And if it is possible to come to an agreement on this issue (reduction of nuclear arsenals) with Russia, then it will be possible to put pressure on China. Then Beijing join our efforts.

The American official said these words a few days after the announcement in the USA about equipping submarines with missiles with low-power nuclear warheads. It's about warheads, whose power is up to half the power of a bomb dropped by the Americans at one time on Hiroshima.
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

55 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Uncle lee 12 February 2020 06: 21 New
    • 10
    • 0
    +10
    They’re hit ... They left the RMSD, they sculpt them as much as they want, and you guys, reduce the strategists!
    1. Kostyar 12 February 2020 06: 49 New
      • 5
      • 0
      +5
      The United States decided to appear in the guise of a "chief peacekeeper."

      Mutnorylye, again conceived the muck, "exceptional crusaders" .....
      1. Vladimir_2U 12 February 2020 07: 02 New
        • 5
        • 0
        +5
        Quote: Bone
        Muddy-nosed
        Not muddy snouts, but experts on Russia's interests! You have to understand!
        O'Brien said that Russia itself is interested in reducing the strategic volume of offensive weapons
        1. Tatyana 12 February 2020 09: 02 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          The United States decided to appear in the guise of a "chief peacekeeper."
          O'Brien said that Russia itself was interested in reducing the strategic volume of offensive weapons after the announcement in the USA of equipping submarines with missiles with low-power nuclear warheads, whose power is up to half the power of a bomb dropped by the Americans at one time on Hiroshima.

          Yeah! The devil is hiding in the "details"!
          1. Alex777 12 February 2020 12: 13 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            The Yankees have forgotten how to read.
            There was already a statement by the Foreign Ministry that we are not interested in a further reduction in the current conditions.
            What needs to be pulled towards disarmament of the British and French.
            And since they will not catch up, then there’s nothing to talk about. hi
            1. krot 12 February 2020 15: 16 New
              • 1
              • 1
              0
              We need to consider the US arsenal, coupled with the arsenal of all of NATO. So, propose a reduction of Britain and France ... Yes, and Israel, so nothing to worry about.
              And Pakistan is there too .. Who else can take the side of the United States, all to the heap!
              1. vadim dok 12 February 2020 18: 54 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                Mr. Lavrov proposed taking into account the arsenal of the United States, Britain and France jointly on the one hand, and on the other hand, Russia and its ally China, which is the enemy of the United States (it says the Russian Federation)! This is logical and correct! India, Pakistan and Israel can not be taken into account so far! If the arsenal of the Russian Federation, the USA and NATO are absolutely known, then how many warheads do China have?
      2. Chervonny 12 February 2020 07: 46 New
        • 6
        • 0
        +6
        Quote: Bone
        again conceived muck

        Of course. Reducing nuclear weapons is beneficial only to the United States. In my opinion, a reduction in nuclear weapons could bring a new world war, a new crusade from west to east.
      3. Misha Honest 12 February 2020 23: 35 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: Bone
        Mutnorylye, again conceived the muck, "exceptional crusaders" .....

        All of their politics, in fact, is focused on their own policy ... request And all external - destruction or slavery from the dollar ... Nothing new - Normal Only Military Super-duper power. Until they get into the bread, they shut up!
    2. Ross xnumx 12 February 2020 07: 42 New
      • 7
      • 0
      +7
      Quote: Uncle Lee
      They’re hit ... They left the RMSD, they sculpt them as much as they want, and you guys, reduce the strategists!

      So “one” is the same “smart”. It was they who built military bases around Russia and near China and hope to "get" us the RMND, and we do not have bases at such a distance from the USA ... And from the strategic novelties the hypersonic "Vanguards" leave no chance to survive, even if everyone knows Patriots. "
      They will take away their bases along the Russian borders - you can talk about something.
      yes
      1. bessmertniy 12 February 2020 09: 08 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Let them set an example and reduce their nuclear weapons. Then it will be possible to talk about reducing nuclear weapons and other nuclear powers. negative
        1. Nyrobsky 12 February 2020 09: 20 New
          • 6
          • 0
          +6
          Quote: bessmertniy
          Let them set an example and reduce their nuclear weapons. Then it will be possible to talk about reducing nuclear weapons and other nuclear powers. negative
          They are a priori non-negotiable. At that time when we actually cut our nuclear arsenals, they simply unassembled our own. With this fact, it is necessary to beat them with a cunning, mattress physiognomy.
    3. Starover_Z 12 February 2020 11: 22 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: Uncle Lee
      They’re hit ... They left the RMSD, they sculpt them as much as they want, and you guys, reduce the strategists!

      US as “chief peacemaker”: Russia and China are invited to discuss the reduction of nuclear arsenals

      You can get together and discuss with China - REDUCING US NUCLEAR ARSENALS!
      That's it, the only way and no other way!
      1. Alex777 12 February 2020 12: 16 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        By the way. What Trump surprised was the resumption of the destruction of American chemical weapons.
        Obama kept crying that there was no money. They say there’s nothing to build a plant on and let it lie.
        But Trump found it.
  2. Victor_B 12 February 2020 06: 25 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    Russia and China are invited to discuss the reduction of nuclear arsenals

    Well, for what are they all trying to do this?
    Does anyone believe that for the sake of caring for peace and tranquility?
    Brad!
    Just for the sake of strategic advantage.
    Yeah, Russia and China shrink, and Naglia, France, Israel and further on the list?
  3. Rurikovich 12 February 2020 06: 26 New
    • 14
    • 0
    +14
    USA - UNCONTINUOUS CREATION! Checked by time. Therefore, in my deepest opinion, cheaters should be sent away and follow their interests. yes Or put forward your conditions, beneficial to us what repeat
    And as soon as you go about the Anglo-Saxons, you always find yourself in such a pope winked
    1. Reptiloid 12 February 2020 07: 39 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      Quote: Rurikovich
      ...... cheaters should be sent away and follow their interests. yes Or put forward your conditions, beneficial to us what repeat
      And as soon as you go about the Anglo-Saxons, you always find yourself in such a pope winked
      cannot forget their faithful servants ----- tagged and drunk .----- am am
  4. maidan.izrailovich 12 February 2020 06: 26 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    As a condition for the start of such negotiations, this is the US rejection of aggressive foreign policy and the elimination of all American military bases outside the United States. Otherwise, there is little point in such negotiations.
    1. ltc35 12 February 2020 07: 28 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      The liquidation of US military bases will make it (America) automatically a third world country.
    2. Chervonny 12 February 2020 07: 49 New
      • 5
      • 0
      +5
      Quote: maidan.izrailovich
      As a condition for the start of such negotiations, this is the US rejection of an aggressive foreign policy

      The United States will never do this. Rather, they will declare that their foreign policy is the most "peace-loving" and, in general, they carry with their policy "freedom and democracy to the peoples of the world." The United States are still liars and deceivers.
    3. Winnie76 12 February 2020 11: 33 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: maidan.izrailovich
      As a condition for the start of such negotiations, this is the US rejection of aggressive foreign policy and the elimination of all American military bases outside the United States.

      For starters, the exclusion from NATO of the ATS countries and the Baltic states. All the same, they are of no use, but we are pleased
  5. Sailor 12 February 2020 06: 38 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    He forgot to mention England and France.
    1. Lipchanin 12 February 2020 07: 19 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: Sailor
      He forgot to mention England and France.

      What for. They do not count. They seem to have none at all. So, the smallest thing may be lying around somewhere.
      But Russia and China have a lot of them and we need to shake them.
      And to detail and say that this is not a small thing
  6. Simara 12 February 2020 06: 39 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    The USA is not negotiable.
    1. Reptiloid 12 February 2020 07: 43 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Quote: Simara
      The USA is not negotiable.

      Just recall the destruction of Syrian weapons at a Nevada training ground. Either destroyed, or not ??????
  7. rotmistr60 12 February 2020 06: 41 New
    • 6
    • 0
    +6
    They revealed the "terrible secret" of their withdrawal from the treaty - it turns out to push Russia and China to a new treaty.
    US decided to appear in the image of "chief peacekeeper"
    Even if a wolf tries to pull a sheep’s skin on itself, anger-filled eyes and huge fangs cannot be hidden.
    1. Uncle lee 12 February 2020 06: 59 New
      • 5
      • 0
      +5

      And nothing has changed!
      1. rotmistr60 12 February 2020 07: 02 New
        • 4
        • 0
        +4
        I agree. I once wrote that the cartoons of KuKryNiks of the 60-70s are still relevant today
      2. Chervonny 12 February 2020 07: 51 New
        • 5
        • 0
        +5
        Quote: Uncle Lee
        And nothing has changed!

        And it will not change until the whole world rallies against the United States and puts them in their place.
  8. Air force 12 February 2020 06: 44 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    The Americans have a scam mentality, dialogue with them can only be done with an advantage over them, otherwise there will be an American monologue. As for me, on the part of Russia it makes sense to start a dialogue with them on a reduction only after they have rolled out all missile defense bases at the borders of Russia. Well, so that they would take such steps, Russia needs to qualitatively increase new weapons systems, Zircon, Vanguard, Poseidon and Daggers on the MIG31 and on the TU160, only after that the Americans will be able to negotiate. And now it’s just a “chatter” from the United States, in which only “elven suckers” will believe.
  9. Tank jacket 12 February 2020 07: 02 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    But what about the doctrines of Americans about an instant disarming strike? Limited use of nuclear strike? Preventive nuclear strike?
    1. novel66 12 February 2020 07: 24 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Did anyone notice ?? oh, obscuration!
      1. Tank jacket 12 February 2020 15: 16 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        hi Novel, truly impudence, the second happiness.
    2. Chervonny 12 February 2020 07: 53 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      Quote: Tank jacket
      But what about the doctrines of Americans about an instant disarming strike? Limited use of nuclear strike? Preventive nuclear strike?

      For this, the United States needs a new treaty to reduce nuclear weapons.
  10. Vadmir 12 February 2020 07: 09 New
    • 6
    • 0
    +6
    Nuclear weapons, the only guarantor of our independence and peace. Given the significant superiority of NATO in conventional weapons, only nuclear weapons prevent them from destroying our country, dividing it, tearing it into control zones.
    Only nuclear weapons stop China.
    A reduction of nuclear weapons without a missile defense treaty is a game of giveaway in favor of the United States.
    Already, stockpiles of nuclear weapons do not guarantee mutual destruction, but do guarantee unacceptable damage.
    A further reduction will increase the risk of war, strengthen the advantages of NATO and China over Russia.
    Now, negotiating a reduction in nuclear weapons is tantamount to betrayal.
    1. Lipchanin 12 February 2020 07: 23 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: Vadmir
      Only nuclear weapons stop China.

      They thrust themselves at Eun, he threatened with a finger, reminded that he also had nuclear weapons, turned around right away, pretended to just pass by and evaporate
  11. Avior 12 February 2020 07: 17 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    The Americans are also trying to include tactical nuclear weapons in the new START treaty, according to which Russia has a significant advantage, and to connect China to the treaty.
    1. KCA
      KCA 12 February 2020 08: 20 New
      • 0
      • 1
      -1
      Tactical charges have never been taken into account and controlled by anyone, but in Russia, according to various estimates, there are no 12-16 tactical charges, there are no INF Treaty, now these charges can turn all of Europe into glass, so mattresses are fussing
      1. Avior 12 February 2020 08: 30 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        I totally agree.
        That is why the Americans are trying to include them in the new START Treaty, the past is about to expire.
  12. Thrifty 12 February 2020 07: 29 New
    • 1
    • 2
    -1
    Raving, at least! What is good for them is not necessary for others and for nothing, all the more so the Chinese will be easier to see on the Sun than at the negotiating table to reduce their nuclear arsenal.
  13. Dmitry Potapov 12 February 2020 07: 30 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    US grave with the inscription on the tombstone "Peacekeeper", the best result of peacekeeping!
  14. rocket757 12 February 2020 07: 43 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    The United States decided to appear in the guise of a "chief peacekeeper."

    Run away all who can where !!! The main "peacekeeper" is walking, swimming, flying .... how can he still ????
    Anyway, crawl away, stay intact!
  15. Fantazer911 12 February 2020 07: 47 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    A tricky US policy will lead to the fact that having a weak arsenal of nuclear weapons in NATO after cutting the world’s delivery man, there will be no answers and they can really become dominants, and then we will become slaves, so quietly and peacefully they can twist us into a ram’s horn, sorry no the ability of these cunning twists to show a five-finger composition.
  16. Lamata 12 February 2020 08: 20 New
    • 0
    • 2
    -2
    A counter proposal from the Russian Federation, to lift sanctions, recognize Crimea for the Russian Federation, stop supporting Ukraine and other Russian enemies.
  17. steelmaker 12 February 2020 08: 36 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    The US does not believe that Russia can use nuclear weapons for its children and business. And since they do not believe, then they should not be afraid. Even in Syria, where there is a war, our military did not dare to avenge the death of their comrades. Iran didn’t get cold. But China always responds to any disrespect for itself and its citizens! Therefore, the United States insists on joining the treaty of China. And our government is immediately ready to extend, as if France and England would not be friends with us and would not use their weapons against us. I can’t look at Putin and Lavrov already. Therefore, the TV almost does not turn on.
  18. Cowbra 12 February 2020 09: 11 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    How many warheads have the US reduced PHYSICALLY during the duration of all nuclear weapons reduction treaties? Not "removed and put into storage" and "irreversibly processed"? ZERO! They don’t even have such technologies! What is the agreement with these balabolami? Moreover, they never comply with agreements
  19. Graz 12 February 2020 09: 14 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    we shouldn’t cut anything anymore
  20. shinobi 12 February 2020 09: 18 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Then they say we offered, and again Russia and China are bad guys. Interesting, but they themselves believe that?
  21. Ros 56 12 February 2020 09: 30 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Striped offer
    US as “chief peacemaker”: Russia and China are invited to discuss the reduction of nuclear arsenals
    ....
    .... and reaction to it

  22. Alexander X 12 February 2020 09: 59 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Well, why not discuss it? In some resort, under a glass of daiquiri with a sympathetic translator at your side. They drank, ate, discussed, decided to send Americans a forest ...
  23. Rusticolus 12 February 2020 10: 01 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    We withdrew from the Treaty on the Elimination of Intermediate-Range and Shorter-Range Missiles, because it was ineffective. This could lead Russia and even China to the negotiating table on the issue of reducing the nuclear arsenal in the near future.
    Right uncle said. Russia and China need to sit at the negotiating table and agree to put pressure on the United States so that they reduce their nuclear arsenal. Because the strategic offensive arms in its current form is not effective.
  24. Kerensky 12 February 2020 10: 11 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    They just need to negotiate with China. By and large, no matter what, even a pact on socks and tights. Any agreement, and even more so in the military sphere, but on nuclear weapons, is a lot of points in the political piggy bank. The press will inflate the huge success of diplomacy ....
    But China does not want to be an extras at this performance. So you need to send Russia to ask for participation ...
    Draw China into various "formats", committees, commissions to resolve penguin requirements ... The main thing is to start the process.
  25. Operator 12 February 2020 11: 15 New
    • 0
    • 2
    -2
    In vain O'Brien mixes strategic offensive arms and INFs - the first we will multilaterally reduce (by increasing the unit capacity to 100 Mtn), the second we will unilaterally increase (by reducing the unit capacity to 250 Ktn).
  26. Old26 12 February 2020 12: 54 New
    • 0
    • 2
    -2
    Quote: Cowbra
    How many warheads have the US reduced PHYSICALLY during the duration of all nuclear weapons reduction treaties? Not "removed and put into storage" and "irreversibly processed"? ZERO! They don’t even have such technologies! What is the agreement with these balabolami? Moreover, they never comply with agreements

    From 1994 to 2009, they dismantled 8748 ammunition. At the current level of funding for the industry, they are able to dismantle an average of up to 300 ammunition per year, plus the same amount of ammunition they have under the LEP program. On the network you can, if you wish, find reduction tables and tables for dismantling US ammunition. Both in Russian and in English.
    Parsing technology - there is, as well as storage technology. so people don’t have to hang noodles on their ears that they don’t have technologies. And give their own opinion for the real situation. The worst thing is to look at the world through pink glasses and believe in what you see. All of these media reductions are monitored by our inspectors. As for the analysis of ammunition. This is with us it becomes a top-secret document. Our “partners” have annual reports from the Department of Energy where all these figures are published

    Quote: Red
    Of course. Reducing nuclear weapons is beneficial only to the United States. In my opinion, a reduction in nuclear weapons could bring a new world war, a new crusade from west to east.

    Reducing nuclear weapons benefits everyone. Only you need to do this without fanaticism and not reduce it below the permissible level. But in itself there is nothing wrong with the reduction. What is bad, that about 2000 ammunition is aimed at us in total instead of about 33000
  27. lvov_aleksey 13 February 2020 21: 56 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    I won’t take it now, I’ll just say, the stripes could write anything off, don’t forget NATO!
    you can blah blah, and rockets sit in Europe
    ps where will they write? !!!