The fatal blow in the lingering demise of the missile defense scheme delivered by US President Barack Obama on Thursday may well have been struck in New York, in one of the aseptic negotiating rooms at the UN.
Discussions on a US-drafted resolution on nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation had been under way for weeks when, out of the blue, Russia came up with objections to a text that is supposed to be the centerpiece of an extraordinary nuclear summit at the UN this Thursday to be chaired by Obama.
He is pushing for a bold collective statement that will help set the world on a trajectory to a future without nuclear weapons. Most UN Security Council resolutions end up being watered down. But the potential failure of next week’s summit represents a threat to Obama’s global agenda, much of which is focused sharply on the threat of proliferation.
The UN stalemate was yet another reminder that the agenda, outlined by Obama in Prague in April, was doomed without a more cooperative relationship with Russia. And the most immediate, emotive barrier was the plan — now scrapped by Obama — to deploy elements of the missile defense shield in Poland and the Czech Republic.
To the Russians it was a symbol and the most irritating example of the US’ failure to take their concerns into account. Moscow did not believe assurances that the scheme was a shield against the potential threat of nuclear-tipped Iranian missiles. The Russians saw it as an attempt to sap their deterrent against a US first strike.
Obama’s bold and risky foreign policy ambitions could easily unravel even without missile defense. But clinging to the scheme — based on untested technology against a distant and uncertain threat — meant that Russia would block US influence at every turn.
A week after the Security Council meeting, the permanent five members, together with Germany, are due to sit down with an Iranian delegation for a critical meeting on Iran’s nuclear program. Tehran says it will turn up but not negotiate on that program, which it insists is peaceful and its sovereign right.
The US, Britain and France want to threaten oil and gas sanctions if Tehran does not suspend the enrichment of uranium, but those threats carry less weight without Russian support. Moscow’s acquiescence would also bring on board China, whose guiding principle is never to be isolated on the council.
If anything could knock the hardline clerical regime in Tehran off course, it is the prospect of a united Security Council brandishing meaningful sanctions.
Two months later, on Dec. 5, the 18-year-old Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) is due to expire. US and Russian negotiators are racing to strike an arms control deal that will take its place, cutting deployed strategic warheads on each side to a lower limit of 1,500 each.
The talks were supposed to exclude missile defense, but a diplomat monitoring the negotiations said the Russians kept bringing the issue up.
“It was a major impediment. Agreement was being hindered,” the diplomat said.
Fyodor Lukyanov, editor in chief of Russia in Global Affairs, believes the wheels will start turning more rapidly.
“We can expect the START talks to be completed by the December deadline and the bilateral atmosphere will surely improve,” he said.
A gap between the death of the old treaty and the birth of the new could be filled by some diplomatic improvisation. Far more important is what happens the day after the new agreement — “START plus”, as it is provisionally known — comes into force. Will it be seen as the end of a process or the start of a new round aimed at deeper cuts — and a new era in arms control?
Daryl Kimball, head of the Washington-based Arms Control Association, said on Thursday: “The deferral of the [missile defense] system and pursuit of other options will open the way for deeper US-Russian strategic arms reductions — below the 1,500 warheads — and perhaps increase Russia’s willingness to join the US in coming down harder on Iran.”
If the momentum can be maintained, Obama has a fighting chance of finding support in the US Senate to ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. China would then almost certainly follow suit, and the treaty would enter into force, prohibiting nuclear tests and providing a powerful legal barrier to proliferation.
In such circumstances, there is hope for the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), to be reviewed in May. The NPT, as Obama put it in his Prague speech, is a “bargain” between the nuclear weapons states and the non-weapons states.
“Countries with nuclear weapons will move towards disarmament, countries without nuclear weapons will not acquire them, and all countries can access peaceful nuclear energy,” he said.
For four decades, the NPT has slowed the spread of nuclear weapons. There are now nine states with nuclear weapons rather than the original five, but the world has not seen the disastrous cascade of proliferation once predicted.
But the bargain is now wearing thin.
A failure to maintain momentum behind disarmament, combined with continued Iranian progress on its nuclear program and an unsuccessful NPT conference next May, would create the conditions for conflict between Israel and Iran and the spread of nuclear weapons across the Middle East. It is a nightmare scenario and the inverse of the hopeful future Obama invoked in Prague.
A solid US-Russian relationship is the key. Much will depend on the response from Moscow. Dmitry Rogozin, the Russian ambassador to NATO, gave some room for hope, albeit in macabre terms.
“It’s like having a decomposing corpse in your flat — and then the mortician comes and takes it away,” Rogozin said. “This means we’re getting rid of one of those niggling problems which prevented us from doing the real work.”
With polls in as many as 76 countries, 2024 is the biggest election year in history. This year’s raft of elections has already produced a left-leaning government in Britain, political gridlock in France, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s return to office for a third term, and the elevation of the pro-sovereignty William Lai (賴清德) as Taiwan’s president, but with his Democratic Progressive Party losing its majority in the legislature. But no election will have a greater global impact than the one in the US. Whether American voters elect Kamala Harris or Donald Trump as the next president, and whether the Republicans
There is an old saying in Chinese that essentially means that when an academic tries to reason with a warrior, they might as well be talking to a wall. Times have changed, and military men are far more reasonable now than when this saying emerged. Retired army general Yu Pei-chen (于北辰) is a good example of this. Today, academics are now often the ones who cannot be reasoned with. Alice Ou (區桂芝), who teaches Chinese Literature at Taipei First Girls’ High School, and Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Legislator Weng Hsiao-ling (翁曉玲), who is also an associate professor at National Tsing Hua
Minnesota Governor and Democratic US vice presidential candidate Tim Walz has connections to China dating back decades that could help inform US Vice President and Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris’ approach to the world’s second-biggest economy, but might also spell trouble with leaders in Beijing and Republicans back home. The little-known Minnesota governor taught English in China’s southern Guangdong Province in 1989 and 1990, making him the first person on a presidential ticket to have that kind of experience living in the country since former US president George H.W. Bush, who served as US ambassador in Beijing in the 1970s. Walz
Last week, the South China Morning Post reported that Chinese academics and strategists have proposed the creation of a “shadow government” for Taiwan. The plan involves setting up a fully prepared administrative body, referred to as the “Central Taiwan Work Committee,” which would be ready to take over in Taiwan immediately upon unification — whether achieved through peaceful means or military action. The proposal emphasizes the committee’s role in swiftly assuming control of the island’s administration if unification were to occur. The proposed committee would handle tasks such as currency conversion and infrastructure integration between Taiwan and China, while also encouraging