(November 14, 2009) Moscow–The preparation of a new agreement between Russia and the United States in the field of strategic offensive arms has entered the concluding stage. The eighth and, Moscow hopes, last round of Russian-American consultations on this problem opened yesterday in Geneva. Less than a month remains to secure a new strategic offensive arms accord to replace the 1991 START I Treaty that expires 5 December. Russian experts questioned by Vremya Novostey believe that the negotiators have every chance of meeting the deadline because it has been possible to eliminate the key differ-ences.

Russia has been proposing that the document enshrine the interconnection between strategic offensive and defen-sive arms, such as a missile defense system. Moscow has justified its position with reference to Washington’s plans to station elements of its missile defense in Poland and the Czech Republic, to which it is categorically hostile. The Sep-tember decision by US President Barack Obama to abandon these plans has smoothed over the differences. Russian presidential aide Sergey Prikhodko remarks that the general atmosphere at the talks has become “more favorable.” The Americans’ intention to develop a missile defense system is a continuing cause of concern for Moscow, however. The other day Russian Foreign Ministry head Sergey Lavrov expressed the “firm conviction” that the link between strategic offensive and defensive arms will be reflected in the START Treaty now in preparation.

Another problem has concerned American delivery platforms in a non-nuclear configuration. It is Moscow’s belief that these arms relate to the strategic category — that is, they must be liable for reduction. Washington has long taken exception to this. The logjam was broken by the visit to Moscow in October by the US President’s national security ad-viser, James Jones. Major-General Pavel Zolotarev, deputy director of the Russian Academy of Sciences’ USA and Canada Institute, suggested in a conversation with Vremya Novostey that Jones had brought with him to Moscow a “key compromise”: “The Americans have agreed to regard the majority of their non-nuclear-configured delivery plat-forms as strategic. And in exchange we have decided not to count in the strategic category their four submarines con-verted to accommodate sea-launched cruise missiles.” Our interlocutor is now confident that “if differences do still re-main, they are not of a fundamental nature.”

“Moscow and Washington are just a two-minute walk away from a new agreement,” Academician Roald Sagdeev of the Russian Academy of Sciences, now resident in the United states, voices his agreement. In an interview with Vremya Novostey he recalled that even if the heads of state sign a new treaty by the deadline, time will nevertheless be required for the document’s ratification by the respective legislatures before it comes into force. In the United States this process may drag on through the middle of 2010. “However, I’m not anticipating any serious battles in Congress,” Sagdeev remarked.

A couple of days ago, US Senator Richard Lugar introduced for congressional scrutiny a bill extending until 5 June 2010 the START I compliance verification regime. His aim — “to preclude the cessation of reciprocal inspections before a new agreement comes into force.” Gen. Zolotarev believes, however, that the verification issue “is not so acute.” Many of the monitoring measures enshrined in START I “were good for their time,” but now “they have become politi-cally and economically obsolete.”

“Reciprocal inspections of nuclear facilities cost money, a lot of money. Furthermore, they render pointless the ex-change of telemetry data already put in place by the parties (a reference to the exchange of data on missile launches, flights, and certain other specifications — Editor),” Mr. Zolotarev explained. At the same time, in his opinion, “we nonetheless should not exclude the possibility that the Lugar option is a useful one: Obama has plenty of opponents in Congress who are capable of delaying ratification of a new agreement.”

The START I Treaty signed in 1991 obligated Moscow and Washington to cut their strategic nuclear forces from 10,000 to 6,000 warheads on each side, and their delivery platforms — to 1,600 apiece. In 1993 the parties signed START II, which stipulated a significant reduction in numbers of ICBMs and nuclear warheads. But Russia withdrew from the treaty in 2002 in response to US repudiation of the 1972 ABM Treaty.

Back in 2005 Russia proposed to the United States the conclusion of a new strategic offensive arms agreement. At their summit meeting in Moscow in July 2009 Presidents Dmitriy Medvedev and Barack Obama signed a document of intent to almost halve the number of nuclear weapons — to 1,500-1,675 units, and their delivery platforms — to 500-1,100. These parameters are to form the basis of the new document.

BBC Monitoring Former Soviet Union – Political
Supplied by BBC Worldwide Monitoring
Text of report by Boris Yunanov of the Russian newspaper Vremya Novostey, “Eighth and Decisive. Moscow and Washington Have Entered Disarmament Home Straight”.