Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Susan Wright on the Right

Home
Politics and Religion
Taking Washington’s Cue, Russia Abandons Nuclear Arms Pact

Taking Washington’s Cue, Russia Abandons Nuclear Arms Pact

Last updated on: February 2, 2019 at 1:41 pm by Susan Wright

Taking Washington’s Cue, Russia Abandons Nuclear Arms Pact 2019-02-02T13:41:18-05:00 Susan Wright

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Those who either adore President Trump, with no reservations, or those who wish to walk the fence, for appearances sake, while inwardly succumbing to the poisonous pull of partisan Trumpism will call this “winning.”

Those situational “conservatives” happily dance on the grave of Ronald Reagan, because it is the price of admission to the Trump World funhouse.

After all, going along is so much easier than taking a stand on principle – a dirty word to those who have not the stomach for such things.

On Friday, the Trump administration set about to dismantle the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty.

This treaty was signed by then-President Ronald Reagan and the U.S.S.R’s General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev on December 8, 1987. It served as an agreement to eliminate all land-based ballistic and cruise missiles, along with their launchers with ranges of 310 to 620 miles (short-to-medium range), and those with a range of 620-3,420 miles (intermediate range).

It was a successful move to cap off the Cold War, with 2,692 missiles eliminated by May 1991. That was followed up with ten years of on-site verification inspections, by both sides.

Of that 2,692 eliminated missiles, 846 belonged to the United States, and 1,846 belonged to the Soviet Union.

To be clear, Russia has had its problems with the INF treaty. In February of 2007, Russian President Vladimir Putin began making noise in regards to the treaty, suggesting that the original framework of that treaty was no longer agreeable to Russian interests.

One of the problems – and it is a valid one – was that the nation of China was not included in the treaty, and they continue to build up their stock of intermediate range weaponry. The U.S. has the same concerns, actually.

Of course, at the time of the original treaty signing, China had little to do with the Cold War conflict. To meet those concerns, perhaps renegotiations and bringing China to the table would not be out of the question.

Unfortunately, at this critical juncture, we no longer have a Reagan in Washington. We’re stuck with Donald Trump.

So, when Secretary of State Mike Pompeo made his announcement regarding the pull-out of the U.S. from the agreement on Friday, what do you think the next likely reaction would be?

On Saturday, Putin announced that Russia would abandon the agreement, as well.

And they’re not just abandoning the agreement, but kicking up production on those formerly banned intermediate missiles.

After the U.S. gave notice of its intention to withdraw from the treaty in six months, Putin said Russia would do the same. He ordered the development of new land-based intermediate-range weapons, but emphasized that Russia won’t deploy them in the European part of the country or elsewhere unless the U.S. does so.

“We will respond quid pro quo,” Putin said. “Our American partners have announced they were suspending their participation in the treaty, and we will do the same. They have announced they will conduct research and development, and we will act accordingly.”

Our European allies are not sweating this morning because they’re afraid of the United States moving aggressively across the region.

Say, remember at the 2016 RNC convention, when Trump’s team of jackboots, including men like Paul Manafort and Reince Priebus shut down the anti-Trump delegates, orchestrated the language of the Republican platform to take a softer approach to Russia’s moves in Crimea and Ukraine?

Pepperidge Farm remembers.

Just thought I’d toss that in there, because I’m sensing a theme.

At issue with this latest bit of theater, according to the U.S., is the claims that Russia has been developing and deploying a cruise missile that violates provisions of the pact that ban the production, testing and deployment of land-based cruise and ballistic missiles with a range of 310 to 3,410 miles.

Pompeo put a six month deadline on the announcement, giving Russia that time to destroy those missiles and return to compliance. NATO actually agrees and are urging Russia to make good on the agreement.

They’re not having it.

But Russia has categorically rejected the U.S. claims of violation, charging that the missile, which is part of the Iskander-M missile system, has a maximum range of 480 kilometers (298 miles). Russian officials claimed the U.S. assertions about the alleged breach of the pact by Moscow were intended to shift the blame for the pact’s demise to Russia.

The Russian Defense Ministry on Saturday released a satellite image of what it described as new production facilities at the U.S. missile maker Raytheon’s plant in Tucson, Arizona, noting that their expansion began in 2017 as the Congress authorized spending for the development of intermediate-range missiles.

“The character and the timing of the works provide an irrefutable proof that the U.S. administration had decided to pull out of the INF treaty years before making unfounded claims of Russian violations,” it said.

That tends to always be Russia’s way: deflect, shift blame, then do what they want, until it becomes untenable to do so.

So on Saturday, Putin announced it to the world, giving his military the go ahead to restart production of those banned missiles. It doesn’t appear he’s waiting for that six months.

Let’s not kid ourselves. This was another gift to Putin from Trump. This yanks the rug out from under everything President Reagan sought to build. Many are saying this could be the start of another arms race, with each side rushing to outgun the other, and there’s no accountability.

Get your bomb shelters stocked.

I’m going to just go ahead and point out a few things that may have slipped past yesterday’s announcement.

I’ve written previously about Trump’s announcement of what he called an “immediate” exit from Syria, leaving a power vacuum for Russia to fill.

That announcement came on December 19, approximately 3 weeks after Trump’s private huddle with Vladimir Putin at the G20 summit in Argentina.

So get this: Trump first announced his intention of leaving the INF treaty on December 20, 2018.

He was on a roll.

Both of those moves only serve to benefit Putin’s ambitions.

Of course, it could all be a coincidence, and the timing could just be unfortunate.

What we don’t do is act as if Trump is being “tough” on Putin with this move. That’s simply not the case, because it gives Putin exactly what he wants: an excuse.

Previous Post

January 31, 2019

Who Did Trump Jr. Talk to Before the 2016 Trump Tower Meeting?

Next Post

February 4, 2019 After Trump Demeans Intelligence Community, Some Speak Out

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Uncategorized

Select a Month December 2021 November 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz