tv Inside Story 2019 Ep 215 Al Jazeera August 4, 2019 10:32am-11:01am +03
pro-democracy activists have woken the deal saying it's the 1st step with more to follow russian police arrested more than $800.00 opposition protesters they were rallying in the capital moscow after the government disqualified a number of candidates from standing in city elections next month last saturday more than 1300 people were arrested at a similar rally but most were released. the u.s. defense secretary says he's in favor of putting intermediate range missiles in asia markets but comments come 2 days after washington withdrew from an arms control treaty it had signed with a former soviet union in 1970 s. process he'd like to see warheads in place in the coming months but it will likely take longer well those were the headlines the news continues on al-jazeera after inside story structure that's watching. the saudi u.a.e. war on yemen has led to thousands of. libyans hungry what role has the u.s.
played in the world's worst humanitarian crisis is the entity that has the right to begin and end wars robert malley a top advisor on the middle east to president obama talks to al jazeera. is it the end of u.s. and russian arms control pulled out of their cold war era nuclear treaty blaming moscow for failing to comply and raising fears of a new nuclear arms race so what chance of a new agreement maybe even with some new players this is inside story. hello everyone i'm kemal santa maria welcome to inside story for 32 years it was the treaty that kept a lid on the nuclear ambitions of what were then the world's 2 superpowers and now
overnight it's gone the united states has pulled out of its landmark arms control deal with russia the intermediate range nuclear forces treaty increasing fears that there might be some sort of new arms race between the 2 nuclear powers now the u.s. says russia didn't stick to its side of the bargain and instead built missiles banned under the agreement moscow denies that and says washington made a serious mistake pulling out of the deal just for a bit of background the treaty known as the i.m.f. was signed between the u.s. and what was then the soviet union in 1978 banned all short and medium range missiles both nuclear and nonnuclear with the exception of weapons launched from the sea within 4 years and a $2700.00 missiles were destroyed in both countries were allowed to inspect each other's installations but washington's withdrawal means there is now only one. arms control agreement left between the u.s. and russia that is the new start treaty which limits long range nuclear weapons in
both countries and is considered the most important agreement reached during the cold war but the u.s. national security advisor john bolton already says new start won't be extended beyond its deadline of february 2021 so we're going to discuss in a moment what will happen next with our panel but 1st this report from our white house correspondent kimberly octaves. it's a treaty u.s. president donald trump has repeatedly accused russia of violating right guys not adhere to the agreement they should have been done years ago the intermediate range nuclear forces treaty was signed in 1087 by then u.s. president ronald reagan and soviet leader mikhail gorbachev for 31 years it's ban both sides from deploying medium range land based missiles halting the arms race between the 2 superpowers but washington and moscow clashed for years over russia's development and deployment of
a cruise missile system the united states and its allies say was prohibited under the cold war pact in february us secretary of state mike pump a 0 announced that of russia did not begin to comply with the agreement the us would withdraw on august 2nd russia has jeopardized the united states' security interest and we can no longer be restricted by the treaty while russia shamelessly violates them announcement prompted russian president vladimir putin in the united states against deploying new missiles in europe well showcasing next generation russian weaponry it's i'd like to tell you about the hypersonic missile which can travel at about 9 times the speed of sound has a range of more than 1000 kilometers for months nato leaders urged russia to comply with the deal to prevent its collapse the u.s. concerns on nato concerns about a new russian missile had been raised with russia over several years but last
minute pleas to keep that deal intact failed in july putin signed a law suspending russia's participation in the agreement now hopes are diminishing for preserving the last remaining arms pact between the united states and russia the new start treaty signed in 2010 and set to expire in 2021 trumps national security adviser john bolton has called. the treaty flawed i fear that without now and with the attitude of mr ball with the lack of interest and focus of president we end up without a new start treaty as well we go into a nuclear arms race like we saw in the 1960 s. only more expensive and more dangerous the pentagon has announced it will begin flight tests of new intermediate range ballistic missiles and cruise missiles by the end of this year and it's requested funding to develop new missile systems that
previously would have been prohibited under the eye enough treaty kimberly helped get al-jazeera the white house. all right so here's our panel of experts for today we're starting in vienna with tartikoff who is then expert on nuclear disarmament also the former head of verification and security policy at the i.a.e.a. the international atomic energy agency in moscow. professor of international relations at the high school of economics in moscow you also wrote the book the decay of western civilization and resurgence of russia and finally in washington d.c. david thoreau she is a professor and senior military fellow at the national defense university so former nato operations director the joint chiefs of staff gentlemen welcome to all of you all supreme the qualified to talk about this topic i wonder if i could start with a general question and i'll get a short answer from each of you. this is really to clear things up about the
violation of the treaty was it violated because you've got both sides saying no we didn't do it it was them so tada grow 1st of all in your view was the treaty violated was it warranted that the u.s. would pull out of it well it's not entirely clear because the u.s. director of national intelligence said that the russians have this missile the 9 m. $7.00 to $9.00 from a fixed launcher in the. in the excess of 500 kilometers an hour long tour with the range less than 500 kilometers and taken together the u.s. deemed to be a violation the russians on the other hand say that the 9 m. $7.00 to $9.00 cruise missile has a range of only 480 kilometers so that neither side has really followed up on this to have a technical solution that made a political points. and then also do you agree that there's some gray area going on here. well there's definitely some gray areas which is why it's a bit uncertain if russia has been in violation but the russian position is it's
a few mention is the other side the united states that has been in violation because russia very much links diana cittie with. a listing missile treated a.b.m. treaty which united states they withdrew from in 2002 because now. with the nato building up is a just missile defense system effectively the missiles are can be deployed now in poland and romania has the potential to it take an offensive posture and be used in a strike against russia so these deployments towards remain on poland are seen to be in direct violation of the i n f treaty and russia therefore sees itself as simply responding by developing its own capabilities in response ok and to have a direction washington any further clarity from you or do you agree with our other 2 guests well no i don't well look if you're arguing over
a projected 20 kilometer range on a missile that's that's a pretty bad indication of good faith and equating the missile defense system with an office of system is is really apples and oranges so what we're dealing here with is pettifogger. the russians have been unhappy with the treaty you know putin in 2007 said he was unhappy with the treaty because it didn't address chinese things and there's there's been a lot of bad faith here but i think the administration's been pretty deliberate and counter what you said at the start that this was overnight i mean the administration gave 6 months notice that a change had to happen so this is this is been a deliberative thing and it's not the united states charging into it alone and some of it also i'll stay with you david does some of it also come down to the sort of quote unquote trump doctrine of withdrawal you know withdrawing from pacts and basically saying well america should be able to do what it wants to do i mean that's the that's sort of the vibe you get from from john boehner. and as well well you know you can dislike john bolton you can dislike john trump and still they can
be right from time to time. i think if anything the the visceral dislike that most overseas have for trump and bolton and even mike pompei o smears what is actually a pretty clear cut issue that the administration was raising in the united states was raisins even under barack obama it's just that they're at a point now where they've said this is just unsustainable because of the fielding of the 9 m. 7 tonight so glenn in moscow you know david's rights and some good points there not least of all the fact that and as i said it did happen overnight in the fact that the trade he was gone but this has been flagged up for a while they were i would presume opportunities to try to salvage it and it didn't happen why couldn't it be salvaged well i i think that the whole idea of blaming russia for it it's a bit dishonest costs even the american side to a certain extent been very specific it's all that they're worried about china. and out there you know i'm inclined to be
a bit empathetic towards the american position because this is arms trade belonging to a different time again from 1907 it's a treaty between the united states and the soviet union at a time when there was a bipolar distribution of power and very different technologies now this treaty does not constrain china and given the changes we have now in the international system that creates a lot of problems so from the american perspective you have china russia reduced in power and they no longer want to feel obliged to live up to former arms control treaties with the russians meanwhile china's rising and america still really have the ability to respond because they're constrained with this treaty with russia have with the russians so i think that this blaming the russians is. dishonest because again this idea that the missile defense component have no offensive posture. there's been plenty of studies of this in the most best studies
probably from a professor pascola at mit who was very much recognised a leading economic in this area so they all recognise the same thing that this missile defense component are in violation of that and have treaties which dots warrant a russian response but if if it's really just about the chinese issue then it probably had a different response from the americans because the russians have some similar concerns but what you'll see now is effectively this will push the russians militarily closer and closer with china they need the chinese to defend their pacific fleet the americans are developing this new missile capabilities. seeing as you have mentioned the chinese and in fact i think all 3 of you have mentioned the chinese let's have a quick listen to this this is a spokesperson from the chinese ministry for foreign affairs to hunt him a fan who deeply regrets and firmly opposes the u.s. decision to neglect the opposition from the international community and withdraw
from the i.n.f. treaty their withdrawal is another negative move by the us to pursue unilateralism and this we guard up its international commitments aiming to shake off the bindings by itself and seek unilateral military as strategic advantages if the us receives the development and deployment of intermediate range nuclear forces it will seriously affect global strategic balance and stability topographic vienna let me come to you can you maybe explain to viewers who are so up on the nuclear world why china would be reacting like that and also just build on the idea that you know china could even be. considered a part of this in the future. well i think the chinese card is a little bit of a red herring because even in nike 7 the chinese did have some shorter and intermediate range systems that did not concern the 2 countries at that time so the u.s. and russia do not need to match china weapon for a weapon they can deter china out given their strategic capabilities but at the
moment china does not really have any incentive to join this and the new agreement because if they were to join a new strategic agreement they would need to build up and nobody wants the chinese to build up any further weapons than they already have and they have no incentive to put their medium range missiles on the table i also wanted to complete the discussion there on the russian side show that negation is that the mark 41 you just launch your with just land based in romania and in poland can be used to launch tomahawk run launch cruise missiles and that is an issue of concern for the russians as well as the target missile for the antiballistic missile testing system which is clearly hera and the russians also complain that heavy combat drones like the predator also violate the i.m.f. treaty and also wanted to pick up on another point that under the trumpet ministration the u.s. is slowly winding back the clock on nuclear arms control they have come up now with
a new initiative called creating the environment for nuclear disarmament in actuality one could call it creating the environment for a new nuclear disarmament because under the nuclear posture review the u.s. is moving to a low yield nuclear weapons and in the end nuclear geygan state game out in june the us is openly calling for the use of low yield and small nuclear weapons to restore strategic stability in a conflict and for its part the russians have this concept of escalate to deescalate so if they were to have a conflict with nato they would use nuclear weapons early as well to prevent a larger war so on both sides there is a. movement to it's a nuclear war fighting doctrine and also i think you're russian colleague mentioned in the development of hypersonic weapons which again is even more of the stabilizing because they would be traveling at somewhere around 5 kilometers per 2nd and therefore not be defended against against any missile system and
this the stabilize the stabilizes the offense defense balance between the russians and the americans ok so you've let us not asleep in the next part of the conversation which was going to be about what happens next in the idea and it's this it's a very sort of catchy phrase which gets used but this idea of a quote unquote new nuclear. race let's go to david to russia in washington about that let's not say that there's you know hundreds of thousands of new nukes just around the corner bought doesn't the end of this treaty sort of give a bit of a green light to increase things well i don't think so i mean look the united states in nato is behind the game on this i mean even at the height of the cold war we're only talking about a couple 100 launchers pershing and ground launch cruise missiles that were deployed during the cold war and it's important note that they were only employed in europe not in asia against the chinese threat so this is very much a european issue even though both sides were unhappy with the fact that it left
chinese china on constraint the 2nd thing is the american. presence in this and the nato presence in this is going to be a measured one we haven't been building new weapons missiles of the sort we've been building other things that might be characterized as to wreak notes you know predator and stuff like that those are really. it's very on their canonical for us to try to convert you know an aegis missile launch colonel offensive system is just not cost practical be easier for us to try to revive like the old persian line so i think what we'd see is just enough to deter another step forward. because where is it in. yeah it is expensive because quickly i want to read you this it's from i can what you'll know is the international campaign to abolish nuclear weapons reading on their website today they believe the us the us is projected to spend $1.00 trillion dollars in the coming 30 years to maintain and modernize its existing arsenal that's a lot of money. well i dispute the number i dispute the premise
and i dispute the source but when we look at modernizing our arsenal what's important to know is that generally that includes the entire domestic nuclear industry and usually what we're doing is repurpose existing warheads rather than building new ones in many instances the american warheads being used are ones that were originally built in the 1960 s. and been updated so i'm not quite sure how expensive that would be and what extent it would and i'm also i'm sure that that i can report which i haven't seen includes also the strategic nuclear deterrence which is you know submarines land base the big things that we're not really discussing here so i think that's a little bit of a that's a big bit of red herring it's actually more of a red whale ok let's see what plame thinks about this in moscow as i can and the groups of it's they are they overstating the facts here i mean is that i mean again from that same i can report i think quite a new nuclear arms race is right around the corner what do you reckon. you know and
i think definitely that relations will get much more and it does probably puts. everything in place for another. however again the technology changed as well it's not just the nuclear weapons which is why it's difficult now to have an arms treaty because there's also a new precedent went buttons which are. and furthermore like russia qantas not the soviet union anymore a country really follow an arms race all the way with the united states but instead you have other options using different technologies so you mentioned a hypersonic missile so this would be it's the stabilizing but it's a way. balancing out america's effort to try to establish this nuclear military money you also have this new new technologies coming forward so underwater nuclear submarine drones and you know in different efforts in order to balance off this new
drive towards. yes maintaining this american the military hedge of money but again i think russia will it has no interest in starting to so i think you will see more tit for tat so if you put some weapons out there russians will respond now it's assumed that the americans will 1st will prioritize arming or placing a lot of these weapons in asia to counter china and yes i mentioned this creates a lot of problems for the pacific fleet of russia so it will need to upgrade a lot of its capabilities to defend its its 2nd strike capability is primarily but also it's a huge incentive to cooperate more with china because this american the economic coercion against russia and china in the last few years some pushed it's to countries together economically and now that this conflict is becoming more militarized i think you will see russia and china cooperating more and more militarily to counter this american effort to. build up its.
military forces especially in the pacific toward a graph in vienna let me bring you back in because i think you know your well placed to to maybe answer my next question and i think you've got something else you want to say but i did want to ask just about europe itself because we're talking all about russia and the united states he is stuck in the middle of all this so stand simply is europe and those european countries right to be as concerned as they seem to be so this trillion dollar martin isolationist not you this actually came up with that little mite ministration soon after it made its famous speech in prague in 2009 wanting for a nuclear weapons free world because the u.s. says it needs to reinvest in its ballistic missile submarines in its land based i.c.b.m. senates bombers the russians already are building a new generation of ballistic missile submarines they're also investing in new that base connla stick missiles and also investing in their air force so this
modernization is going. and on both sites that we really should this certainly single out the us here with forgot to europe they are in a very tight bind already they are in disarray over brecht's it they are in disarray of what the preservation of the iran deal the joint comprehensive that action and then loaded on top of that is this controversy now with the i.n.f. treaty and its future it would be very controversial in europe where the us to decide to bring back nuclear armed cruise missiles or medium range missiles in europe and it will split the divide europe between the old members of the european union and the new members so the new members like the czech republic poland and romania are closer to the u.s. in one thing greater military investments to counter what they perceive as the russian threat whereas the order members that just germany the netherlands and some others favor more of an arms control approach so mention this new initiative of the
us or creating the environment for nuclear disarmament they had a meeting in washington on the 2nd and 3rd of july with 42 priests came and a number of european countries were present there as well and they're all trying to see if they can want to rape the 2 sites but at the moment it seems very difficult and acting it's not president crap that's the problem he has given interviews where he has expressed skepticism about nuclear weapons it's more his national security adviser and to a certain extent to state secretary there are behind this new assertiveness and muscularity you know u.s. defense and foreign policy gentlemen we just starting to run down the clock now one final thought i'm just thinking you know we are in august 29000 at the moment and as i mentioned before faber 2021 is when the other will the last remaining treaty new start expires and john bolton's already said we're not renewing that either.
david in washington if i start with you. do we need to keep that in the back of our minds a fact that that very last piece of the puzzle could get for in fact probably will fall in a couple of years well you know i'm not sure i mean the fact that you've had to withdraw from the i.m.f. which is always been a european centric thing as a matter fact the impetus for it was helmut schmidt when he was a chancellor that may be seen as enough to address this issue and people might have a wait and see and the other thing is you know there's an election between now and then by february of 2021 john bolton could be a private citizen his opinion could be worth about as much as mine so you know i wouldn't i wouldn't pin too much on that it's worth it's worth watching but it's not worth watching like say a predator drone watches an area of interest ok quick final thought from you this is a crime going to be where it plays out. well i think is going to very hard to replace it with something else simply given the new distribution of power as china will not want to commit to anything you have
a different technology which makes it difficult as if to take into account conventional weapons as well. and lastly i think there's just a lack of empathy on all sides study this very little recognition for the security concerns of the adversary that's both the case in moscow and in washington and this is the russian hysteria that has lost over the west over the last few years it's definitely there's no mood there really to appreciate their mutual concerns so i'm very pessimistic on this issue when days and in moscow thank you very much also david to russia in washington d.c. and tonic roth joining us from vienna and of course thank you as well for watching plenty more for you online this show and all the previous ones or at al-jazeera dot com on demand inside story in the show section we're also facebook dot com forward slash a.j. inside story we're on twitter at a.j. inside story and i'm at a j. e. if you want to get in touch with me from the whole inside story team thanks for
joining us to see you can say. i. adored by millions for challenging social issues head on what women don't say is mexico's longest running so. as the program celebrates its anniversary the producers revisit one of their most powerful storylines. and discover how the show has affected the women who inspired it in the 1st place. now i have a voice soapbox mexico on al-jazeera.
after school armenia part of the rebel education series. on al-jazeera. multiple fatalities are reported in a shooting attack in the us state of ohio just hours after a mass shooting in texas. and the police in texas are investigating whether that shooting that killed 20 people paso was a hate crime. hello i'm don jordan this is odd as they are live from doha also coming up protests as up back on the streets of hong kong a day after police fired tear gas to disperse them. thousands more indian troops