Russia May Agree To Strategic Nuke Cuts

In Advance Of Arms Talks, Medvedev Seeks Reassurances About U.S. Missile Defense Plans

(AP)  Russia is ready for deep cuts of strategic nuclear weapons in a new deal with the United States if the U.S. eases Moscow's concerns about plans for a missile defense system, President Dmitry Medvedev said Saturday.

Medvedev lifted hopes for progress when President Barack Obama visits Moscow July 6-9 for talks focusing on replacing the 1991 Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, which expires in December.

Launching the talks was part of Mr. Obama's efforts to improve ties with Russia, which plunged to a post-Cold War low under the previous U.S. administration.

U.S. and Russian arms negotiators have met several times in the last two months to prepare for the Moscow summit, with much of the discussion revolving around the missile defense system the U.S. had planned to install in Poland and the Czech Republic.

Medvedev, speaking to reporters after meeting Dutch leaders, stopped short of demanding the system be scrapped, but indicated it remains a strong irritant.

"We cannot agree with U.S. plans to create a global missile defense system," he said in a statement released by the Kremlin. "I would like to emphasize that the proposed cuts are only possible if the U.S. relieves Russian concerns. In any case, the link between strategic offensive and defensive weapons must be clearly fixed in the treaty."

Medvedev, however, stopped short of saying the U.S. must dump missile defense plans, and the wording of his statement indicated that Russia was ready for a compromise. He didn't say what specific steps Russia expects the U.S. to take to assuage Moscow's concerns.

Moscow wants "verifiable and real reductions" of weapons," he said. "We are ready to cut our strategic delivery vehicles by several times in comparison with START I," he added, referring to the 1991 treaty. He said the number of warheads should be slashed below the figure agreed seven years ago when the U.S. and Russia decided to cut the maximum number to 1,700 to 2,200 by 2012.

An agreement with the Obama administration should be "specific, concrete and binding," and be enshrined in a single document, he added.

Medvedev said Moscow expects relations with the U.S. to improve under Obama. "I hope that a new, more favorable and trusting form will be given to these relations under the new administration," he said.

An arms control deal would be the centerpiece of a new beginning in U.S.-Russian relations, which Medvedev acknowledged had eroded in recent years.

It also might smooth the way for Moscow and Washington to work together to curb the nuclear ambitions of Iran and North Korea.

On the other hand, failure to negotiate a replacement for START, which ends Dec. 5, would leave the two countries unable to inspect and verify each other's stockpile of nuclear warheads.

President Obama's engagement with the Russians marks a sharp reversal from policies of the Bush administration, which was disinclined to take up deep arms control negotiations and had angered Moscow with its intention to install the missile defense system in eastern Europe.

President Obama has delayed those plans while assuring Moscow the system was aimed against a potential threat from Iran, not Russia.

Earlier this month, U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates indicated Moscow's opposition to the defense shield may have softened as it became more concerned about the development of Iranian nuclear capabilities. Gates said the Russians were persuaded that Iran's nuclear program was more advanced than previously thought in the Kremlin.

[PVperson2]

"I would like to see the Nkorea launch missile to the Hawaii next week..."

Spoken like a real neo-con, un-American and wishing harm to the US while wrapping yourself in the flag, BooYA, "I love the US, I'd love to see it destroyed" is that your spiel moron?

[cbsblogger]

Israel needs to reduce its illegal stockpile of 200 nukes before we have a nuclear free Middle East. That's the bottom line to it all. We can't expect others not to develop nukes when a proven trigger happy Israel has 200+ of their own.

[Sloughfoot]

Good number, what part of your body did you pull that figure from?

[Illuminated1]

The way I see it

Russia has devestated its own country in the blind race to create weapons of mass destruction and still has to pay the price for it.
Many of the readers here don't understand that whole cities were created to build such weapons in the U.S.S.R.
In America, environmental damage has occurred, mostly in national labs, but at least started cleanup, and don't have entire cities to have to rebuild.
These weapons should all be destroyed everywhere they exist. We must rise above the point where men can destroy the planet.
It has only been 50-60 years since we have had the ability to destroy the world, at first slowly, now within an hour.
Russia can be a good strong ally working for the good of us all now.
They are still economically damaged, but can pull out of it. I feel we are so close to a true one planet society, yet kept by those in power from reaching such goals because of power itself.
As for a defense shield, it is necessary for our defense, and for Europe if they want it, not for Russia to decide.
Keep in mind Russia is an oil exporter and has made use of its leverage in the former soviet block nations to the point of extortion.

[Sloughfoot]

Luminate-Lights on but nobodies home. We have more Nuclear Hazz Mat sites in the U.S. then you can imagine. You should research this topic. We don't owe Europe a defensive shield. In fact we owe them nothing, for 60+ years we have been their protector. For what? Why? I'd much rather stand heel to heel with Ivan in some dark ally then most any European. It is for Russia to decide what missles we place in her back yard. We wouldn't tolerate missiles in Cuba and I hope we don't have a show down with missiles and Chavez. Castro was a Communist Revolutionist who believed in his cause and his people and reason. Chavez is a mad man and has no reason.

Sorry but this world is far from being the utopia you would like it to be. Einstien let the genie out of the bottle. America got there first, Thank God. Now we have to keep the lid on it with the threat of ultimate destruction, hoping that mad men like Kim, Chavez or ranting Iranian don't go balistic. Sorry but as long as Man roams this planet there will be a utopia in the afterlife only.

[mnbrant]

If you want missile defense systems just base some in russia with joint Nato Russia control. End of controversy. Oh and get rid of the nukes too.

[vietnamwar]

Dumacrat just cut the missile defense systems, I would like to see the Nkorea launch missile to the Hawaii next week...

[mnbrant]

wow lots of jingoistic talk here. Maybe they are bored CIA?

[skunk_monkey]

The reason why Russia is against the missile defence system is because it could be used against Russian missiles, thus ending Russia?s nuclear deterrent..

There is not a need for one in Europe, America is trying to provoke Russia

[edward1975-2009]

I'm surprised they have any left, after the fall of the Soviet Union, many rogue generals were selling off everything they could get there hands on.

[babooph]

Smart Russians ,why pay a wad for a bunch of trash you will not use-the US taxpayer will have to be the fool who suffers through this mess.

[u-r-right]

Hmm...what exactly is wrong with having a missle defense system? If somebody fires a missle, wouldn't you want to be able to disable it before it does major damage?

Maybe Russia can/will sell their nukes to NK or Iran?