Western propagandists, as always, lie. And lie, as always, recklessly and on all counts.
First, they, adherents of Western ideology and Western mentality, do not advocate universal disarmament, but disarmament of those whom they want to enslave, destroy, or, at best, on whose territory they want to ensure the most favorable economic regime for themselves and loved ones. Naturally, a strong military state, while still unfriendly toward the Western globalist system, is a headache for an extensively organized Western and pro-Western economy. Such an unfriendly, that is, "undemocratic" and "bloody", state will be an obstacle to the unbridled interference of the largest corporations, banks and commodity companies in the economy of this very "bloody" state. And obstacles, as any liberal perfectionist knows, are to be eliminated, preferably radical and immediate.
Secondly, the West will never accept anyone but itself into its community. This directly follows from the chauvinistic western socio-political doctrine, which is divided into currents, subgroups, sub-blocks, and so on, but in its essence it is one and unchanging and defends Western exclusiveness. In the West, the center is always in the West, and the periphery is in the rest of the “uncivilized” world. Therefore, the maximum that a country that has disarmed by the will of the West can claim is to become a western vassal with minimal autonomy in internal affairs. Not our case, the West traditionally expects from us either slavery or our physical elimination.
In order not to be unfounded, I will try to acquaint the reader with the background of today's controlled humanism purely in fact, without affecting the chauvinistic anti-Russian Western teachings, of which many dozens have accumulated over the past three hundred years.
There was such a financier in the US - Bernard Baruch. The financier is extremely influential, bringing to power the three presidents of the United States and subsequently controlling, through his numerous organizations, about a third of all silver deposits in the world, as well as a significant amount of gold, copper and oil deposits. Of course, activities of such magnitude would have been unthinkable in the absence of a solid ideological and political foundation, and it would be a shame if the building created by overwork and adventurous talent was completely inappropriate with such a disposition by the doctrine of sovereignty. And Baruch as a genius, of course, the manager was not only perfectly aware of this, but also competently built his own behavioral line and, consequently, the behavioral line of the modes and systems under his control.
In 1945, the United States tested the atomic bomb in Japan. The total number of dead - about 240 thousand people, in one fell swoop. Americans realized that in their hands is not only the most terrible weapon, but also an extremely effective tool for the implementation of their decisions and the implementation of their political and economic will. But they also realized that the atomic bomb was about to be in service with their main (and, perhaps, at that time the only) enemy in the geopolitical game - the USSR. What to do in order to preserve the status of monopolists in the military and political terms? Obviously, to launch the doctrine of controlled humanism.
Already in 1946, Baruch proposes to the UN Atomic Energy Commission a program in accordance with which the creation of the Atomic Energy Agency was planned, the function of which was to control all research in the field of atomic energy. The agency should have complete information about these studies. And even more: Baruch proposes to transfer to the United States all the technological information about research in the field of nuclear energy. In other words, the United States, according to Baruch’s plan, should have gained power over the entire then emerging world system of weapons of mass destruction, thereby having the opportunity by force to impose any decision on anyone.
Baruch’s plan was not to be realized. Despite the fact that the UN Atomic Energy Commission approved the draft by a majority of votes, the USSR, which had veto power, did not give it a go. The world was saved from Armageddon, but the sharp contradictions outlined already then did not disappear anywhere today.
Now a little about disarmament at a practical international level.
According to the START-I treaty, Russia and the United States should mutually reduce their nuclear arsenal, while following this reduction, Russia's nuclear arsenal became about one and a half times smaller than the US nuclear arsenal. Disarmament under the START-I project, although it was implemented, but in an obviously unidirectional and uneven format.
The START-II Treaty banned ballistic missiles with multiple warheads. According to the official version, the ban was due to the fact that the radius of action of ballistic missiles with separable warheads significantly increases the risk of escalation of international conflicts. However, the Russian side was forced to refuse to ratify this treaty - due to the fact that the United States had abandoned the ABM Treaty. As we see, the USA again tried to eat the fish and not wet the legs; and limit ballistic missiles, and build their own system to combat them. It is obvious that the United States again tried to form a system in which the enemy is in a position that is obviously losing to him.
Finally, the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty was not signed and ratified by the very knowledgeable US “humanism”, and it is for this reason that the Treaty has not yet entered into force (and, judging by recent events, is unlikely to enter). A "bloody" and "dictatorial" Russia signed it.
In principle, there is nothing wrong with disarmament. Moreover, it is necessary in conditions of colossal overpopulation of the globe and in conditions of political, economic, racial-ethnic and interfaith tension. Apparently, it is precisely disarmament that can now be used to minimize conflicts. But disarmament is good only when it is happening at a massive rate and at the same pace in all states. But this is not even close, and it is the Western world that will never allow it, which needs to be disarmed “into one gate” until the end.
It should be understood that what is happening now is only a consequence of what has been repeatedly voiced and carried out by the western side, starting with the 40 of the last century and up to our days. Baruch is dead, but his work lives!