Discover and read the best of Twitter Threads about #INFTreaty
Most recents (7)
Honored to be cited by @iandenisjohnson @NewYorker:
newyorker.com/news/persons-o…
"Andrew Erickson, a professor @NavalWarCollege & a visiting professor at @Harvard, said he’s seen no evidence that #China..."
For further background, see: sites.harvard.edu/coexistence/
thewirechina.com/2022/12/04/fix…
newyorker.com/news/persons-o…
"Andrew Erickson, a professor @NavalWarCollege & a visiting professor at @Harvard, said he’s seen no evidence that #China..."
For further background, see: sites.harvard.edu/coexistence/
thewirechina.com/2022/12/04/fix…
...wants to reciprocate, citing #China’s refusal to discuss meaningful arms control. “I don’t see a basis for deep coöperation” with #Xi’s China, Erickson said. “I’m sad to say that.”
newyorker.com/news/persons-o…
KEY: In what areas is the #PRC under Xi willing to accommodate the US?
newyorker.com/news/persons-o…
KEY: In what areas is the #PRC under Xi willing to accommodate the US?
2019 is the 50th edition of the #SIPRIYearbook. Join SIPRI as we celebrate the occasion with a 50-day countdown and share the history of the Yearbook over the past 50 years. Watch the introductory video with SIPRI Director @dansmith2020:
The first #SIPRIYearbook was published in 1969 with the aim ‘to produce a factual and balanced account of a controversial subject—the arms race and attempts to stop it’. The rise in world military spending and disarmament efforts, including the #NPT, take central focus. 
'In whatever way the nuclear situation is examined, the inescapable feature is what enormous quantities of weapons have been amassed' – Movement towards a first-strike capability by the #US and #USSR, the #SALT talks and European security were a focus of the 1970 #SIPRIYearbook.
“...The United States remains committed to effective arms control that advances U.S., allied, and partner security; is verifiable and enforceable; and includes partners that comply responsibly with their obligations...”- @SecPompeo #INFTreaty
“... The United States has gone to tremendous lengths to preserve the #INFTreaty, engaging with Russian officials more than 30 times in nearly six years to discuss #Russia’s violation, including at the highest levels of government...”
“... Despite our efforts, Russia continues to deny that its noncompliant missile system – the SSC-8 or 9M729 – violates the Treaty...”
And here's one *more* thought on #INFTreaty. Even if the Russians built 1000 theater nukes tomorrow, I wouldn't advocate countering them. This isn't 1965, and we're not trying to stop them from going to the Rhine or the Channel. They're screwing *themselves* going that road. /1
People can't internalize that *NATO* is now the conventionally superior power. Yes, the Russians can grab some dirt and sit on it - until we make them go home. At that point, nuclear escalation is on *them*. The *last* thing you want is to invite a tactical or theater duel. /2
NATO had a "first use" policy because *we* were the inferior power before the 90s. If the Russians tomorrow said "Don't push us out of Estonia or we'll nuke Tallinn or Warsaw," who really thinks that "we can nuke a base near Smolensk" isn't going to turn into WWIII? /3
While Russia needs to be held accountable, withdrawal from the #INFTreaty will have significant consequences for international security and geopolitics.
The full implications of taking this step at this time ought to be fully considered, including with Congress, beforehand.
The full implications of taking this step at this time ought to be fully considered, including with Congress, beforehand.
The #INF Treaty covers ground-launched, intermediate-range missiles.
With its large territory in the middle of Eurasian landmass, such missiles let #Russia range targets throughout #Europe, #MiddleEast and #Asia.
For example, here's the coverage of SS-20s Moscow deployed in 1986:
With its large territory in the middle of Eurasian landmass, such missiles let #Russia range targets throughout #Europe, #MiddleEast and #Asia.
For example, here's the coverage of SS-20s Moscow deployed in 1986:
Thus, the INF Treaty deprives Russia of a significant military capability, for which its size and location are strategic advantages.
Tune in #live at 8:15 a.m. ET to hear #GenDunford's remarks at the @HFXforum on the U.S. military's role in addressing international security challenges alongside our allies and partners: facebook.com/Halifaxtheforum
#GenDunford on the National Defense Strategy: Today our #military can defend the homeland and meet our alliance commitments. The NDS articulates what is necessary to maintain our competitive advantage into the future in terms of resourcing and technology investment. #HISF2018
#GenDunford: I'm never complacent about the pace of technological change. It's incumbent upon us to invest in capability development. It's a combination of ideas and technology to remain competitive against #China and #Russia. #HISF2018
How's the Kremlin reacting to Trump's foolish withdrawal from the #INFTreaty? Three of Russia's sharpest strategic minds--Andrei Kortunov, @DmitriTrenin & Alexei Arbatov weigh in carnegie.ru/commentary/775…, carnegie.ru/commentary/775…, carnegie.ru/commentary/775…
Kortunov: "[R]emoving the centrality of strategic arms control not only deprives the U.S.-Russia relationship of its special status in global politics, but also drastically reduces both countries’ importance to one another." 2/
Kortunov: "If the U.S. and Russia are no longer willing to give up 1 or 2 types of delivery vehicles, what can they rightfully ask of other members of the int'l community? It is quite possible that the next nuclear nonproliferation Review Conference will also be the last one." 3/
