"Let there arise out of you a band of people inviting to all that is good enjoining what is right and forbidding what is wrong; they are the ones to attain felicity".
(surah Al-Imran,ayat-104)
Image Not found for user
User Name: abdulruff
Full Name: Dr.Abdul Ruff Colachal
User since: 15/Mar/2008
No Of voices: 1852
 Views: 1787   
 Replies: 0   
 Share with Friend  
 Post Comment  

Renewal of US-Russia Confrontation


                                       I- ONE




In 1990s leaders of USA and Russia made the world believe that Cold war ended and new phase of world peace and reconciliation have set in. However, it seems the Cold war has not ended at all but continued though with less intensity because of the unilateral, unipolar USA which wants to showcase its military superiority and threaten the world in one form or the other. The Kremlin cooperates with USA where it gains and confronts it when its global interests are blocked or threatened. But Moscow fully supports US imperialism in Afghanistan because that was the intention of Russia too but it does not support US imperialism in Iraq in full because its business interests are in peril there. Both cooperate on anti-Islamism and terror wars in Islamic generally.


Until now, it had seemed that Washington and Moscow were edging towards a successor to the 1991 Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (Start), despite failing to meet the original target of December 5. The Start treaty was signed shortly before the collapse of the Soviet Union 18 years ago. Russia and the US are negotiating in Geneva on the details of a new treaty and agreed to continue observing Start I until they reach a new agreement. Last week, the Russian foreign minister said a deal was very close. Under a joint understanding signed in July, deployed nuclear warheads should be cut to fewer than 1,700 on each side within seven years of a new treaty - a huge cut on Soviet-era levels.



Russia and the US are yet to find a successor to the Cold War-era Start I treaty, leaving both and others to do whatever they are pleased to do with their nukes programs. The 1991 Start I treaty led to deep cuts in nuclear arsenals by Washington and Moscow. Moscow wants a clause in the new treaty that would limit the scale of any US defense shield. Nonetheless, between them the two countries will retain enough firepower to destroy the world several times over. Moscow says that Russia’s nuclear arsenal is the only part of its military that remains world-class, and therefore it fears that it could be disadvantaged by cuts to nuclear capability.


Both countries now have agreed to extend the treaty while talks on a replacement treaty continue.The USA has rejected fresh concerns raised by Moscow about its planned missile defence system. Americans have agreed to continue to discuss the topic of missile defense with Russia in a separate venue.



                                       II- TWO




The US has shelved plans for missile defense stations in Central Europe in July, but intends to use a sea-based system. Obama’s reversal of plans to station the American missile defense shield close to Russia’s borders in Central Europe — and his vow to reset relations with Moscow — were warmly welcomed by Medvedev. The thaw was expected to pave the way for an agreement on a new nuclear arms reduction package. Earlier this month, President Dmitry Medvedev said Russia would continue to develop new warheads, delivery vehicles and launchers despite the disarmament talks, describing this as "routine practice".


It is clear from Putin's comments Russia still sees any missile shield as a threat - one it is now pledged to counter. The US statement said that Washington and Moscow’s joint position recognizing the inter-relationship between defensive and offensive weapons systems had not changed. "While the US has long agreed that there is a relationship between missile offence and defense, we believe the Start follow-on agreement is not the appropriate vehicle for addressing it. But western media say the hardening of Russia’s position must be frustrating for US terror President Barack Obama, now extremely busy with Afghan-Pak killings.




                                       III- THREE




Russian Premier Vladimir Putin who killed thousands and terrorized innocent Chechens to assume presidency earlier, said yesterday Russia needs more weapons to punch through America’s new missile defence shield. Putin said the US plans were holding up a new nuclear disarmament treaty. He said that "to preserve the balance, we must develop offensive weapons systems", but did not specify what kinds he had in mind. Putin said the US plans would allow them to do whatever they wanted and thus upset the balance. Putin, reasserting himself as the country’s real ruler, said that Moscow should press ahead with a new generation of weapons to stop the Americans doing “whatever they want”. Russian premier said during a visit to the naval port of Vladivostok on the Pacific coast that to preserve the balance Russia must develop offensive weapons systems, not missile defence systems as the United States is doing. His blunt remarks will complicate efforts to cut the nuclear arsenals of the former Cold War rivals. Putin said the problem is that “our American partners” are building an anti-missile shield and we are not building one.



Putin's comments could be a negotiating ploy, rather than a reversal of Russia’s commitment to a treaty. Moscow think what  Putin really wants is a commitment from Washington to only deploy a small-scale missile defense system, that would be effective against Iran and North Korea but would not neutralise Russia's nuclear missile force. Russia's government said until just a few days ago that these strategic arms reduction treaty talks were in their final stages, that they were perhaps just a couple of weeks away from signing a new document. And now suddenly Putin has come out with this statement, which really does put a spanner in the works. It shows just how nervous Russia is about the idea of a US missile defence shield, despite the fact Obama in September said they were going to scrap land-based missile defence in Europe.



The US plans to build another system while the Russians don't know exactly how that's going to affect them and how it may neutralise their nuclear deterrent. Putin is voicing a concern that is held by many experts in this country. Putin is  believed to be voicing the deeply held views of hardliners in the Russian military machine, but his forthright statement may also be linked to growing signs that he is preparing to announce his intention to seek a new presidential term in 2012.



International arms treaties are the remit of the president. Putin, in staking out his position, was wading into the domain of Medvedev, his chosen successor in the Kremlin after he stood down last year. It has always been widely believed that Premier Putin was allowing President Medvedev merely to keep his seat warm while he was taking a break, as laid down by the Constitution. His return to the presidential office would signal a harder line. He made it clear that Washington should share its missile defence plans — based on sea and land-based interceptors in Europe — with Moscow if it wanted to ease Russian concerns. Putin suggests that the American concessions are not enough: “If we are not developing an anti- missile shield then there is a danger that our partners, by creating such an umbrella, will feel completely secure and thus can allow themselves to do what they want, disrupting the balance, and aggressiveness will rise immediately.”



Putin’s intervention was seen by Western observers as an attempt to extract more American concessions on the defence shield while also allowing him to demonstrate that he remains the paramount voice in Russian politics. Undoubtedly, apart from Putin’s ambitions for a third presidential term, Moscow is also employing the “shield” only to gain entry into WTO.  Russia’s failed attempts to get membership of WTO could be worrying the Kremlin as it remains a focused failure of Moscow’s western foreign policy. Washington knows all weaknesses of the Kremlin- after all both are the rivals for too long. However, even their common anti-Islamic war techniques have not made the former ideological enemies the modern allies in reality and hence the continuing US-Russia confrontation on strategic shield as a show piece. 



Dr. Abdul Ruff Colachal

Specialist on State Terrorism

Independent Columnist in International Affairs, Research Scholar (JNU) & the only Indian to have gone through entire India, a fraud and terror nation in South Asia.


 No replies/comments found for this voice 
Please send your suggestion/submission to
Long Live Islam and Pakistan
Site is best viewed at 1280*800 resolution