Video: US-Russia Relations and the Expiry of Nuclear Treaties. Global Security in Jeopardy

Putin Warns: "We are Running Out of Time". Unreported by Mainstream Media

Nuclear treaties (mainly between the USA and Russia) have formed the cornerstone of world peace, stability and safety for decades. They have been an essential mechanism in the international security architecture. Nuclear treaties gave assurance to the world that the human race would cease to be drawn into a never-ending and extremely dangerous arms race – a nuclear arms race at that. However, recent developments threaten this stability. For years, the US has been steadily provoking many nations, especially Russia, with a variety of tactics, including false flag operations, sanctions, coups and importantly by pulling out of key nuclear treaties. Now, there is only one nuclear treaty left (the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, or START, known in Russian as START III) that the US has not withdrawn from … and this is set to expire in 2021, with no signs of US interest in renewing it.

US History of Withdrawal from Nuclear Treaties

In 2002, the US withdrew from the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty of 1972. On February 2nd, 2018, in the document Nuclear Posture Review (NPR), the Trump Administration revealed that the US was changing its nuclear policy. It was specifically retaining the right of nuclear first use (NFU)(meaning pre-emptive strikes) as well as embracing the development of low-yield nuclear warhead for submarine-launched ballistic missiles. Later in 2018, Trump announced the US intention to withdraw in 6 months from the Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty of 1987, which he made official in a written statement on February 1st, 2019. Some reports state that National Security Advisor and notorious warhawk John Bolton was the force behind the INF withdrawal – the same Zionist neocon warmonger itching for war with Iran, Venezuela, North Korea and any other nation not already under the heel of the US-led NWO.

A study of the NPR by Seyom Brown explains:

“Blurring the distinction between non-nuclear and nuclear war, the 2018 NPR reverses the commitment in the Obama administration’s 2010 NPR to reduce the role of nuclear weapons in US grand strategy … [the] NPR fails to show why modernized nuclear capabilities are better able to deter and defend against potential enemy aggression than technologically advanced non-nuclear capabilities. Its presumption of controllable nuclear exchanges will reduce the calculations of risk and increase the likelihood of conflicts escalating to nuclear war.”

How the US Tricked Russia into Dissolving the Soviet Union

In the above linked White House statement, the US tries to claim Russia is the one violating the INF, when actually it is the US itself. This kind of mendacity is typical of US behavior. History repeats itself. It is reminiscent of how then President George H. W. Bush lied to then Soviet Chairman Gorbachev, promising him that NATO would not extend “one inch eastwards” and goading him into dissolving the Soviet Union. That turned out to be a giant whopper, as NATO has constantly expanded eastwards, gobbling up Baltic, Slavic and former Soviet states. For a deeper background to all this, read How America Double-Crossed Russia and Shamed the West by Eric Zuesse:

“The conditionality of the Soviet Union’s agreement to allow East Germany to be taken by West Germany and for the Cold War to end, was that NATO would not expand “one inch to the east.” This was the agreement that was approved by the Russian President of the Soviet Union, Mikhail Gorbachev … He trusted American President George Herbert Walker Bush, whose friend and Secretary of State James Baker made this promise to Gorbachev … Russia kept its part of the bargain. It ended the Berlin Wall, allowed East Germany to join with West Germany; ended the Warsaw Pact; and ended communism. Russia ended its entire Cold War against the U.S., not just the ideology but the Soviet Union and its alliances. But, in contravention of the promise that had been made to Gorbachev, the U.S. and its allies did not end their war against a now free and democratic Russia. Instead, over the years, the NATO alliance absorbed, one by one, the former member-nations of the Warsaw Pact — and yet refused to allow membership to Russia.”

Who’s Violating the INF?

Russian President Vladimir Putin recently warned journalists of the US-withdrawal trend that has been happening – and the dire and urgent situation humanity subsequently now faces, given that there are less and less treaties to prevent another nuclear arms race. Putin said:

“When in reality, it was the first step taken to the dismantling of the entire ‘carcass’ of the system of international security … It was a very serious step to have been taken … Now, the US is wanting to withdraw from the Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty [1987], also in a unilateral manner. At least in the first instance, they were honest about it. They just withdrew, in a one-sided manner. This time, recognising full well that someone will have to be held responsible, they’re attempting to blame Russia [for alleged violations of the INF Treaty] … why don’t you … go and open the INF Treaty text? Go and read it.

It says in clear text you cannot install land-based missile launchers for missiles of short and medium range. It says so in plain sight. But no – they have placed missile launchers in Romania, and soon in Poland. It’s a direct violation. Go and look at the definition of short and medium range missiles – and then compare them to the capabilities of [missile carrying] drones. It’s the same thing.”

– Vladimir Putin, President of the Russian Federation

Putin goes on to say that Russia is looking to extend the New START / START III Treaty (which ends on February 5th, 2021) but they don’t ‘have’ to. The US has neither initiated renewal talks, nor shown any interest in conducting them:

“Our defense capability is such that it will absolutely guarantee the safety of Russia [against nuclear attack] for quite some time in the future. I have to be direct and say that we have overtaken our opponents in the creation of [defensive] hypersonic weapons. If no one is interested in extending the START-3, ok then we won’t. We have said 100 times already that we are ready to begin the work. No one is talking to us. There are no formal talks being had … And in 2021 – everything will end. Let me focus your attention – there will not be a single instrument that can regulate a [nuclear] arms race. No tool to curtail the imposition of weapons in outer space.”

Putin went on to dramatically spell out the implications:

“It means that we will have [the] constant presence of nuclear weapons above our heads. It will always be up there, constantly. Is this not where we are headed, and very quickly at that? Is anyone going to think or talk about this at all? Does anyone care? No – it’s just radio silence. What about the creation of low-power nuclear weapons? Or regulating strategic missiles without a nuclear warhead [which can be quickly refitted with nuclear ones] … Do you seriousness of the issue and how dangerous it can be?”

Indeed. The situation is very dangerous. If nuclear proliferation continues, combined with the new technological military advances of drones and space-based weapons, it is conceivable that we will have the metaphorical Sword of Damocles hanging over our heads at every living moment, only one millions of times more destructive.

Putin went on to make an appeal to have an open, transparent, professional dialogue with all people of the world, especially including all nuclear countries, declared or not. This is an obvious allusion to the rogue nation of Israel, which harbors some 100-400 nuclear weapons, but adheres to a policy of nuclear ambiguity and refuses to state the obvious about its nukes. He ended with a note of optimism, that both Trump and US Secretary of State Pompeo have expressed concern about US defense war spending, and so perhaps the US and Russia could work together.

Nuclear Treaties: Going Forwards … Or Backwards?

All this very much reminds me of the situation in 1962-63, when JFK and Khrushchev were at the helm of their respective nations. After the tense Cuban Missile Crisis nearly ended in nuclear catastrophe, JFK came to the realization that we must choose cooperation and peace, and stop stockpiling and engaging in an arms race out of fear. He spoke about this in an inspirational speech in July 1963. Sadly, with all the Russophobia, we seem to have broken trust and gone back to the fear-filled days at the height of the Cold War. That is only good for the Military Industrial Complex, the warmongers and the NWO manipulators … and horrible for everyone else.

It’s the media – whether mainstream, alternative or independent – focused on this highly important issue. The future of humanity is at stake.


Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

This article was originally published on The Freedom Articles.

Makia Freeman is the editor of alternative media / independent news site The Freedom Articles and senior researcher at, writing on many aspects of truth and freedom, from exposing aspects of the worldwide conspiracy to suggesting solutions for how humanity can create a new system of peace and abundance. Makia is on Steemit and FB.


Comment on Global Research Articles on our Facebook page

Become a Member of Global Research

Articles by: Makia Freeman

Disclaimer: The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article. The Centre of Research on Globalization grants permission to cross-post Global Research articles on community internet sites as long the source and copyright are acknowledged together with a hyperlink to the original Global Research article. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: [email protected] contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from the copyright owner.

For media inquiries: [email protected]