The post US administration requests $2.2 bln for the enriched uranium production appeared first on New Defence Order. Strategy.
]]>The White House has sent a request to the US Congress to allocate $ 6 billion to ensure "Protect American Security and Bolster Energy Independence," $2.2 billion of this amount is planned to be spent to "improve long-term, domestic enrichment capabilities for low-enriched uranium and high-assay low-enriched uranium."
The press release says that the allocation of designated funds for the development of the energy industry will allow the United States and allies to avoid dependence on Russian energy supplies. According to the document, $300 million will be spent on the development of the oil reserve of the Ministry of Energy in case of a scenario in which there will be supply disruptions around the world. $278 million is planned to be allocated to strengthen the position and increase the competitiveness of the United States in the isotope market, and $200 million will be allocated to strengthen the security of energy facilities.
Production of enriched uranium is highlighted in the document - the administration has requested $ 2.2 billion for the development of the industry. These funds should be used to "improve long-term, domestic enrichment capabilities for low-enriched uranium and high-assay low-enriched uranium," in order to ensure the operation of small modular nuclear reactors being developed in the country. In the message, uranium enrichment is called a national security priority, since "dependence on Russian sources of uranium creates risk to the U.S. economy and the civil nuclear industry".
"Without action, Russia will continue its hold on the global uranium market to the detriment of U.S. allies and partners. To be successful, this initiative would also require a long-term ban on enriched uranium product imports from the Russian Federation into the United States," - the message says.
After the start of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, the United States imposed large-scale sanctions and restrictions aimed at most sectors of the Russian economy, but this did not affect the export of uranium from Russia. In the first half of 2023, the United States purchased 416 tons of uranium from Russia worth $696.5 million, which was a record since 2002. During the year, the cost of supplies increased 2.5 times, and the Russian share in American imports reached 32%. The US also increased purchases from the UK – the volume of deliveries increased by 28% and amounted to $383.1 million in monetary terms. The largest increase in uranium supplies to the United States occurred in France, which transported $ 319 million worth of uranium to the American market, last year the amount of supplies was $ 1.9 million. The top five suppliers also included Germany ($277 million) and Canada ($247.5 million).
Source - The White House
The post US administration requests $2.2 bln for the enriched uranium production appeared first on New Defence Order. Strategy.
]]>The post DPRK to Accelerate its Nuclear Forces Development appeared first on New Defence Order. Strategy.
]]>The Supreme People's Assembly of the DPRK has adopted a law on amendments to the country's constitution, which enshrine the status of nuclear forces and provide for their accelerated development in order to guarantee the "right of the country to exist", as well as to ensure the deterrence and the protection of peace and stability in the region and in the world. The amendments are being adopted against the background of changes in the security situation.
The agency cited the content of the amendments, which note that the North Korea "as a responsible nuclear state" is rapidly developing nuclear weapons to ensure the country's right to exist – nuclear weapons are assigned a key role "in protecting the sovereignty, territorial integrity of the state, the rights and interests of the people", as well as in "protecting the socialist system and the conquests of the revolution." It is noted that the law on amendments to the Constitution was adopted "with full support and approval." North Korean leader Kim Jong-un called the amendments a "historic event", "a powerful political weapon" and "the most just and timely measure that meets the requirements of modernity."
The adoption of the law was preceded by a speech by Kim Jong-un, who at the 9th session of the Supreme People's Assembly of the DPRK stated that "the most important task" for the DPRK is "the rapid strengthening of the nuclear armed forces in qualitative and quantitative terms." Kim Jong-un called for the implementation of work on increasing the production of nuclear weapons "exponentially," and also set the task of developing new "shock nuclear weapons and putting them on combat duty of different types of troops."
The leader of the DPRK explained the need to build up nuclear forces by the increasingly complicated security situation. He noted that the United States "has stepped up the creation of a trilateral military alliance with Japan and the Republic of Korea," which leads to the creation of an analogue of the NATO alliance in the Asia-Pacific region (APR). According to the North Korean leader, "this is not a rhetorical threat and an imaginary reality," but a "real maximum threat." Kim Jong-un also said that the United States is resuming large-scale joint nuclear military exercises, as well as "placing nuclear strategic weapons on the Korean peninsula at the level of permanent deployment." According to him, such actions by the United States pose "a serious threat to the existence of sovereign states," and also bring the threat of nuclear war against the DPRK to an "unprecedented and maximum" level.
Source: Central Telegraph Agency of Korea
The post DPRK to Accelerate its Nuclear Forces Development appeared first on New Defence Order. Strategy.
]]>The post Germany to expand the geography of arms supplies appeared first on New Defence Order. Strategy.
]]>German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius announced the country's intentions to support allies in the Indo-Pacific region and increase the presence and supply of weapons to the countries of the region. At the same time, the head of the German defense ministry assured that Germany is not seeking to establish itself as a military power there.
According to The New York Times, Pistorius said that Western countries, including Germany, should pay more attention to cooperation and interaction with non-Western partners. In his opinion, such cooperation can strengthen European positions in other regions, in particular in the Indo-Pacific, and balance the growing power of China.
Although Germany considers China as a partner, they have fundamental contradictions. Pistodius noted that Germany must help in the South China Sea to ensure that the rules-based international order and international law continue to be observed, and that freedom of navigation and freedom of trade routes continue to apply in the future. which is at odds with the position of Beijing, which claims to establish control over these waters.
Cooperation with India in countering China is noted as key direction for Germany, and the military-technical cooperation plays an important role in this process. The New York Times reports that during a recent visit to New Delhi, Pistorius discussed with Prime Minister Modi easing the process for weapons purchases. However, according to the statement made by Pistorius, Germany will not be limited to India, the minister believes that the country should increase the supply of weapons to the world market and adopt appropriate changes in legislation. Pistorius added that "it does not mean that we want to flood the world with German weapons. It still has to be done with a sense of proportion".
Germany has already begun to take some steps within the framework of the designated course – according to media reports, since January of this year, Germany has approved arms exports abroad in the amount of € 4.62 billion, which is 12% more than the amount for the same period last year. The geography of arms exports is mainly European states. However, South Korea and India also entered the top ten importers, which allows to conclude that the geography of German arms supplies is expanding.
Source: The New York Times
The post Germany to expand the geography of arms supplies appeared first on New Defence Order. Strategy.
]]>The post SIPRI: World’s military expenditure reaches a new record appeared first on New Defence Order. Strategy.
]]>Analysts from SIPRI presented a report, saying that the world’s military expenditure in 2022 increased by 3.7% and reached $2240 billion, which is a historical record. These figures turned out to be a result of the largest and the most intensive increase in military spending in Europe in the last 30 years. However, the leaders in expenditure are still the USA, China and Russia.
Experts from the institute say 2022 became the eighth consecutive year of military spending growth. The sharpest rise in spending was observed in Europe (+13%) due to Russian and Ukrainian spending. However, their conflict strongly affected other European countries and led to significant growth in their spending. Thus, Military expenditure by states in Central and Western Europe totalled $345 billion in 2022. In real terms, spending by these states for the first time surpassed that in 1989, as the cold war was ending, and was 30% higher than in 2013. This is not the end – apart from the states who had already increased their spending, there are others, who announced plans to raise spending levels over periods of up to a decade.
‘The continuous rise in global military expenditure in recent years is a sign that we are living in an increasingly insecure world…. States are bolstering military strength in response to a deteriorating security environment, which they do not foresee improving in the near future.’
Dr Nan Tian, Senior Researcher with SIPRI’s Military Expenditure and Arms Production Programme
So, the tendency is going to stay – military spending in Europe is going to grow further. Some of the sharpest increases among European states were seen in Finland (+36%), Lithuania (+27%), Sweden (+12%) and Poland (+11%). However, the largest increase was seen in Ukraine – its military spending reached $44 billion in 2022. At 640%, this was the highest single-year increase in a country’s military expenditure ever recorded in SIPRI data. Now, the military burden for Ukraine is 34% of GDP, instead of 3.2% a year earlier.
Russian military spending grew by an estimated 9.2% in 2022, to around $86.4 billion. This was equivalent to 4.1% of Russia’s gross domestic product (GDP) in 2022, up from 3.7% of GDP in 2021. The authors state that figures released by Russia in late 2022 show that spending on national defence, the largest component of Russian military expenditure, was already 34% higher, in nominal terms, than in budgetary plans drawn up in 2021. Thus, they conclude that the conflict with Ukraine ‘has cost Russia far more than it anticipated’.
Anyway, the United States still remain the world’s biggest military spender. In 2022 the US military spending reached $877 billion, which was 39% of the global military spending and three times more than the amount spent by China, the world’s second-largest spender. The 0.7% real-term increase in US spending in 2022 would have been even greater had it not been for the highest levels of inflation. The US allocated $19.9 billion to financial military aid to Ukraine, $295 billion to military operations and maintenance, $264 billion to procurement and research and development, and $167 billion to military personnel.
The growth in military spending also occurred in Asia and Oceania. The combined military expenditure of countries in Asia and Oceania was $575 billion. This was 2.7% more than in 2021 and 45% more than in 2013, continuing an uninterrupted upward trend dating back to at least 1989.
China remained the world’s second-largest military spender, allocating an estimated $292 billion in 2022. This was 4.2% more than in 2021 and 63% more than in 2013. China’s military expenditure has increased for 28 consecutive years. Japan’s military spending increased by 5.9% between 2021 and 2022, reaching $46.0 billion, or 1.1% of GDP. This was the highest level of Japanese military spending since 1960. A new national security strategy published in 2022 sets out ambitious plans to increase Japan’s military capability over the coming decade in response to perceived growing threats from China, North Korea and Russia.
Source: SIPRI
The post SIPRI: World’s military expenditure reaches a new record appeared first on New Defence Order. Strategy.
]]>The post SIPRI Released its Trends in International Arms Transfer Report appeared first on New Defence Order. Strategy.
]]>SIPRI experts prepared a report about trends in international arms report. For a five-year period between 2018-2022 imports of major arms increased by 47% in Europe. At the same time global arms transfers reduced by 5.1%. The decreases in arms transfers occurred in Africa (-40%), in America (-21%), in Asia and Oceania (-7.5%) and in the Middle East (-8.8%). The world’s largest importers for the 2018-2022 period were India, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Australia and China. Top five world’s largest exporters were the USA, Russia, France, China and Germany.
SIPRI experts state an armed conflict in Ukraine did not affect the global trends for 2018-2022 period crucially. At the same time, they highlight that Ukraine became the world’s top three largest arms importer. The report also highlights a significant growth in European states’ import orders, which will affect the world’s big picture in the future. The authors say that the current happenings in Europe will show their results in the nearest future.
The institute’s experts defined 63 arms exporters in 2018-2022. Five world’s largest exporters – USA, Russia, France, China and Germany occupy 76% of the world’s total arms export. For the last five years American and French arms export grew by 14% and 44% respectively, while Russian, Chinese and German results decreased by 31%, 23% and 35% respectively.
There were 167 arms importers within the observed period. The leaders were India, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Australia and China, who received 36% of total global arms imports in the period. States in Asia and Oceania accounted for 41% of all arms imports in 2018–22, followed by the Middle East 31%, Europe 16%, the Americas 5.8% and Africa 5.0%.
The world’s import has changed in the least five years due to the aggravation of relations and geopolitical tensions in different regions. Thus, Asian import has increased mostly because of Japan (+171% comparing to the previous 5-year period) and South Korea (+61% in the period). The expert think that it occurred because of growing tension in the region caused by aggravation of relations between China and Taiwan, and another key factor was a growing number of missile tests conducted by the DPRK. In Europe such a key factor was an armed conflict in Ukraine, which led to 47% arms import growth, and, according to SIPRI experts this trend in going to remain the future.
Based on the data on orders and final negotiations of orders, the authors make several conclusions about the future of major arms import and export in the coming years. The authors suppose the USA is going to keep its leadership, while Russia is likely to lose its position due to the shortage of orders and negotiations. Along with that the experts say that the ongoing armed conflict makes Russian defence industry to change its focus from export towards its own needs. Moreover, sanctions and restrictions will remain a significant obstacle for the growth of Russian military export. According to the authors, China also expects a continuation of the decline, and France and South Korea can improve their positions.
At the same time experts notice that at the moment it is almost impossible to make an accurate forecast related to the trends of arms transfer. However, they conclude that the situation on the international arena will significantly affect the market structure and its players in the future.
Source: SIPRI
The post SIPRI Released its Trends in International Arms Transfer Report appeared first on New Defence Order. Strategy.
]]>The post Russia’s Suspension of Participation in START: The World Reacts appeared first on New Defence Order. Strategy.
]]>The announcement of New START treaty suspension by the Russian President was vividly discussed. This political decision combined with Vladimir Putin’s order to ensure preparedness of the state for nuclear testing raised some fears of the end of nuclear arms control and of the destruction of an already faltering global security architecture.
Vladimir Putin announced that Russia has suspended its participation in the New START Treaty, at the same time he has stressed that the country does not withdraw from the treaty completely. According to him the inability to conduct mutual inspections due to aggravation of Russian-US relations became a cornerstone.
Shortly after the President’s speech was followed by the statements made by the Ministry of Defence and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. They were of moderate character and both institutions stated that despite the decision to suspend the treaty Russia “will adhere to a responsible approach and continue to strictly comply with the quantitative restrictions on strategic offensive weapons provided for by it within the life cycle of the Treaty”. It was also said that Russia and the US will continue to exchange notifications on the IBM and SLBM launches.
The decision made by the President of Russia consequently caused the US reaction. President Biden called it “a big mistake”, but also said that he does not perceive this decision as a signal that Russia has an intention to use nuclear weapons. The US President was later joined by the Secretary of State Antony Blinken, calling the decision to suspend the treaty “deeply unfortunate and irresponsible”. However, the US openly announce their readiness to get back to negotiations on further reduction and limitation of strategic offensive arms.
The US were not the only, who expressed their opinion on the matter. The UN Secretary General António Guterres, was one of the first to comment Putin’s decision. He called both Russia and the United States to resume full implementation of the New START Treaty “without delay." NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg also said he "regrets Russia's decision to suspend its participation in START" and "calls on Russia to reconsider and honor its commitments."
According to High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Josep Borrell such measure “undermines the European security architecture and substantially set back arms control efforts, which is not in the interest of any of the States parties to New START, neither of any other country.” The Brussels characterized the New Start Treaty as “a crucial contribution to international and European security,” and called Russia to fulfil its obligations in accordance with the treaty, letting the inspectors visit Russia.
The need for Moscow to return to participation in the Treaty was also discussed in Paris, French Foreign Minister Catherine Colonna called on Russia to "show responsibility and cancel its statement (on the suspension of the treaty) as soon as possible." Also France is worried by the potential consequences of such decision, saying the it can lead to violation of the nuclear non-proliferation regime, which should be avoided by all means.
“We consider it important to preserve the existing tools for deterring strategic arms and non-proliferation of nuclear weapons, in particular the Treaty on the Reduction of Strategic Offensive Arms, which remains the cornerstone,” said the French Foreign Minister.
Boris Pistorius, German Minister of Defence called Putin's speech to the Federal Assembly "one of the usual methods" and said that Germany would continue to adhere to the set political course "without reacting to provocations or threats."
Concern about the decision to suspend participation in START was also expressed by the Minister of Foreign Affairs and Defense of Ireland, Micheál Martin. He noted that "The verifiable reduction of strategic nuclear arsenals in accordance with START contributes to security in Europe and the world, as well as to the implementation of the sixth article of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)." According to Martin, the decision of the President of Russia was the result of a general crisis in the nuclear non-proliferation regime.
“The deadlock that has prevailed in this Conference over 26 years is neither acceptable nor sustainable. The increasingly procedural nature of the Conference’s work does not reflect the urgent need to address the deteriorating international security environment through multilateral disarmament and arms control. Put simply, we must do better,” – said Martin.
Wang Wenbin, the official representative of China also commented the Russian decision. During the briefing he said that China “hopes that both of the parties [Russia and the US] will be able to solve their disagreement by means of a constructive dialogue and consultations to ensure implementation of the treaty without any obstacles.”
The New START treaty was signed in 2010 by Russian and the US presidents for a ten-year period and had a provision allowing to renew it on the same conditions for another five years. The treaty entered into force in 2011. In 2021 Vladimir Putin approved an agreement on the renewal of the treaty until February 5, 2026. According to the treaty the parties can possess no more than 1550 ready-to-use nuclear warheads, no more than 700 deployed ICBMs, BLPRs and strategic missile-carrying bombers, no more than 800 deployed and non-deployed launchers of ICBMs, SLBMs and heavy bombers.
Sources: The Diplomatic Service of the EU, CBS News, DW, DFA of Ireland
The post Russia’s Suspension of Participation in START: The World Reacts appeared first on New Defence Order. Strategy.
]]>The post IAEA Sends Observers to Ukrainian Nuclear Facilities appeared first on New Defence Order. Strategy.
]]>Rafael Grossi, Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) announced an intention of the Agency to maintain a permanent presence of nuclear safety experts at all nuclear facilities in Ukraine. It is expected that missions consisting of two IAEA experts will operate at South Ukraine and Rivne Nuclear Power Plants (NPPs) as well as on the Chernobyl site. In total it is planned to send from eleven to twelve experts to the country’s NPPs.
According to Grossi, the experts will “monitor the situation at the plants, assess their equipment and other needs, provide technical support and advice, and report their findings to IAEA headquarters”. The Director General explains the need for an extended presence of the agency in Ukraine by the necessity to prevent nuclear accidents in the country.
Currently the Agency’s experts in groups up to four members permanently operate at the territory of Zaporizhzhya NPP (ZNPP), which is under Russian control (On October 5, 2022 Vladimir Putin, the president of the Russian Federation signed a document on the transfer of the ZNPP to Russian jurisdiction). IAEA Support and Assistance Mission to Zaporizhzhya (ISAMZ) was established on 1 September last year. In January the fifth group of the agency’s experts arrived at the station.
Another mission of the IAEA is staring its operation at the South Ukraine NPP. On his social media Grossi has shared a video with the IAEA flag raising ceremony at the NPP. “We are here to stay to help ensure nuclear safety and security during ongoing conflict. Soon IAEA will be permanently present at all Ukrainian nuclear power plants”, - said the Director General.
IAEA has already presented its project of a Nuclear Safety Zone around ZNPP. The key condition was to cease fire around the plant. The role of IAEA in the process of the safety zone maintenance was to control the implementation of the ceasefire. The agency would also perform a function of an intermediary within Russian and Ukrainian disputes. However Russian and Ukraine have shared their positions and unfortunately there was no common ground. Demilitarization of the NPP, supposing complete withdrawal of troops from the territory of the plant, became as cornerstone. Along with Russian authorities ruled out the possibility of the station coming under the control of the IAEA, explaining that the agency does not have such powers.
The post IAEA Sends Observers to Ukrainian Nuclear Facilities appeared first on New Defence Order. Strategy.
]]>The post Stability is Cracking: Interim Results of the NPT Review Conference appeared first on New Defence Order. Strategy.
]]>The Tenth NPT Review Conference is still ongoing, and this year the conference is taking place in very specific circumstances and in the context unprecedented tension between the nuclear weapons states since the end of the Cold War. Thus the statements made by the parties during the conference to some extent clarify the shape of current global security architecture.
There were moderate positive expectations about the conference in terms of the dialogue dedicated to the issues of nuclear arms control and disarmament. At the very beginning of the event, US president Joe Biden announced the US preparedness for further cooperation in the field of nuclear arms control.
Today, my Administration is ready to expeditiously negotiate a new arms control framework to replace New START when it expires in 2026. But negotiation requires a willing partner operating in good faith.
At the same time, the US president called China to join the negotiations process and stated that "Russia's brutal and unprovoked aggression in Ukraine has shattered peace in Europe and constitutes an attack on fundamental tenets of international order. In this context, Russia should demonstrate that it is ready to resume work on nuclear arms control with the United States". The latter statements probably changed the tone of the message, and the situation ended up with mutual criticism.
The reaction from Russian and Chinese counterparts followed the next day. The key argument was that the declaration of readiness is not the same as readiness itself, and there is no reason to suppose that the US position is solid. Deputy Director of the Russian Foreign Ministry’s Department for Non-Proliferation and Arms Control Igor Vishnevetsky noticed that "the positive achievements (of Strategic Dialogue between Russia and the US) were devalued by the U.S. policy of ignoring Russia's "red lines" in the field of security. Washington used our rebuff to this destructive approach as a pretext to "freeze" the strategic dialogue."
The speech probably became one of the triggers for the Russian exemption of the inspection activities within the New START framework. However, there is still no official American reaction to the statement. The UN urged the US and Russia to resolve all the New START issues and let allow inspectors to get back to their invaluable work of verifying this important treaty.
"As the only remaining bilateral nuclear arms control agreement between the United States and Russian Federation, New START is an essential element of international peace and security, and the nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation regime," said Spokesperson for the UN Secretary-General Stephane Dujarric.
The Chinese representative of the Foreign Ministry Hua Chunying stated that China is "ready for close contacts with all interested parties on issues in the field of strategic security," however, provided that the United States, which has the largest nuclear arsenal in the world, "will be the first to comply with agreements on the limitation of strategic arms".
The participants also discussed the relevant issues of strategic stability, including the deployment of global ABM systems and short- and medium-range ballistic missiles in the Asia-Pacific Region and Europe. This position was shared by Russia and China.
The problem of disarmament is also an object of discussion. Traditionally the P5 countries, mostly the US and Russia, were accused of a lack of activities devoted to nuclear disarmament. But they responded that their nuclear arsenals were reduced by 90% and 85% respectively, compared to 1967.
During the work of the First Main Committee, Russia and the United States also expressed support for further nuclear disarmament. American Special Representative Adam Sheinman noted the obvious achievements of the United States on the path of disarmament, such as a consistent reduction in the number of nuclear warheads or support for movements like Creating an Environment for Nuclear Disarmament or the Stockholm Initiative. On August 5, the head of the National Nuclear Safety Administration at the US Department of Energy, Jill Hruby, speaking at an event within the framework of the NPT, also stated that the United States is not expanding its nuclear arsenal during modernization.
Thus, it can be concluded that the rows between the great powers, primarily the United States, China, and the Russian Federation, on disarmament and arms control issues, have a serious impact on the work of the X Review Conference. The statements of the parties are filled with a series of mutual accusations of the degradation of existing regimes and agreements, as well as the build-up of their nuclear capabilities, which, of course, does not contribute to a fruitful and constructive dialogue within the framework of the NPT.
Source: UN
The post Stability is Cracking: Interim Results of the NPT Review Conference appeared first on New Defence Order. Strategy.
]]>The post The Sanction Future of Russia appeared first on New Defence Order. Strategy.
]]>Most of the sanctions imposed on Russia will not be lifted even in case of a ceasefire in Ukraine and reaching any agreement. The point of no return to "pre-February normality" was achieved, so there is a need to focus on creating a new future, where sanctions will be a constant variable.
Any conflict sooner or later ends in peace and some people hope for a return of "normality". Such logic seems to be simple: at some point the parties will cease fire and sit down at the negotiating table. Following this logic, the end of hostilities would lead to a gradual reduction of sanctions pressure, and Russian business would be able to return to working with Western partners. According to Ivan Timofeev, Program Director of the Valdai International Discussion Club, the future doesn't seem to be so bright.
There are several reasons why the sanctions will not be lifted.
Reason one
The complexity of the conflict between Ukraine and Russia, it might become a long-term conflict. There may be pauses in active hostilities. The parties may conclude temporary truces. However, such truces are unlikely to remove the political contradictions that gave rise to the conflict. Currently, there are no parameters of a political compromise that would suit all parties. Even if an agreement between Moscow and Kiev is reached, its sustainability and feasibility are not guaranteed. Relations between Russia and Ukraine risk becoming one of the long-term conflicts similar to the relations between India and Pakistan, North and South Korea. The complexity and long-term nature of the conflict are guaranteed by Western sanctions for the long period of time.
Reason two
The stable character of relations between Russia and the West. Ukrainian conflict is just a part of Euroatlantic security architecture. There is an unstable system of asymmetric bipolarity in Europe, where Russian and NATO security is unlikely to be indivisible. Russia is not able to crush the West, without receiving an unacceptable damage, the same it true for the West.
For Russia, the strategy of asymmetric balancing of Western superiority remains optimal. It is possible that a radical revision of Ukrainian territory, i.e. alienation of its Eastern and Southern parts, will become a part of such course. But this measure will not lead to solution of the sanctions problem.
Reason three
Institutional features of the sanctions policy. Experience shows that sanctions are relatively easy to impose, but very difficult to lift. Thus, a whole "web of laws" has been formed in the United States regarding Iran, which significantly limits the administration's ability to waive sanctions. Even if sanctions are not enshrined in law, their cancellation or mitigation still requires political capital, which not every politician is willing to spend. In the US, such steps will cause criticism or even opposition in Congress, and in the EU – disagreements of member states.
Of course, certain restrictions are lifted in case if it suits the national interests of the initiators of sanctions. The example of sanction pressure on Belarus is a good example, but anyway legal mechanisms of sanctions remain and can be used any time.
Reason four
Rapid reversibility of sanctions. Their cancellation is often accompanied by political demands, the implementation of which is a complex process. For example, the Iranian nuclear deal required several years of complex negotiations and significant technological solutions. At the same time a repeated imposition of sanctions is much faster process. There is an asymmetry in the performance of obligations. The fulfillment of the initiators' demands requires significant changes, whereas the return of sanctions requires only a political decision.
Rapid cancellation of sanctions also causes the distrust of target countries. It is easier for them to continue living under sanctions than to make heavy concessions with the risk of getting new sanctions. Historical experience shows that the initiators of sanctions tend to play the game of "finishing off" the opponent. After the concessions, new, more radical political demands and threats of new sanctions appear.
Reason five
The ability to adapt. Without any doubt, Russia will suffer enormous damage from the imposed restrictive measures. However, the possibilities of its adaptation to the sanctions regime remain high.
Firstly, Russia has chance to partially compensate falling supplies from abroad by its own industry, although this will require political will and concentration of resources.
Secondly, there is an access to non-werstern markets as well as to the alternative sources of goods, services and tachnologies. The key condition to solve this task is creation of reliable financial transactions channels indepent from US dollar, euro and Western financial institures. This task is possible to be solved technically and politically, but it will require time and political will.
These reasons make the prospect of lifting or significantly reducing the sanctions pressure on Russia extremely unlikely. The United States, the EU and other initiators have already imposed the most severe restrictions on Moscow. But the limit of sanctions is not over yet. However, this is not the end of Russian economy, it has just created the new conditions, where Russia has to adapt and operate ti dubf bew opportunities to develop and grow.
Source: Valdai discussion club
The post The Sanction Future of Russia appeared first on New Defence Order. Strategy.
]]>The post Temporary Measures: Russia’s MFA on the START Inspections appeared first on New Defence Order. Strategy.
]]>Russia decided to temporarily exempt the inspection activities from the facilities subject to inspection under the Treaty on Measures for the Further Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms (New START). The Russia's Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued the message at the website on 8 August. The Ministry infromed the US through diplomatic channels.
The exemption includes the appropriate facilities at which exhibitions may be conducted under the Treaty.
The MFA refers to the item 5 of Section 1 of Part Five of the Protocol to the Treaty, which allows such steps. This is how it is formulated in the document: "In exceptional cases, and for purposes not inconsistent with the Treaty, the inspected Party may temporarily exempt from inspection activities appropriate facilities subject to Type One or Type Two inspections and appropriate facilities at which exhibitions are to be conducted. Notification thereof shall be provided through diplomatic channels along with an explanation of the reason for such exemption from inspection activities".
The decision on exemption is referred as a compulsory, but temporary measure, which Russia had to use "due to Washington’s stubborn striving to achieve, without prior arrangement, the resetting of inspection activities on conditions that do not take into account existing realities and are creating unilateral advantages for the United States, and are de facto depriving the Russian Federation of the right to conduct inspections on American territory". The declared goal is "to bring an end to this unacceptable situation and ensure the functioning of all mechanisms in the Treaty in strict conformity with the principles of parity and equality of the parties"
Dmitry Stefanovich, a Research Fellow of Center for International Security, IMEMO RAS, highlights and welcomes the transparency of the Russian party and the fact of the publicly made announcement , because "the broad public is not always informed about such decisions". He writes that the main reason for the decision might be an American attempt to restore the inspections which had been paused since 2020.
According to the Russia's MFA announcement, the principles of the Treaty are not being observed, as they were implied. Sanctions imposed on Russia since the beginning of the special military operation are considered as one of the reasons for the current state of affairs. Thus normal airflights between Russia and the US have been suspended while the air space over US ally and partner countries is closed to Russian aircraft carrying Russian groups of inspectors to ports of entry on American territory. Additional difficulties - are thougher visa requirements in transit countries along potential routes. The MFA clarifies that "there are no similar restrictions for US inspectors coming to Russia". Until the aforementioned problems are solved it is "premature to resume inspection activities under the Treaty, as the United States insists". The MFA considers attempts to artificially expedite the resumption of inspection activities under the Treaty as counterproductive measures.
Stefanovich assumes that Russia would rather formalize the inspection activities resumption, taking all the new circumstances into consideration, "for example by making respective decisions at the Bilateral Consultative Commission meeting, which are also paused".
"It is hard to suppose what is going to happen, - Stefanovich comments, - On the one hand, we have been working without these inspections since spring 2020, although our partners would like to see Avangard (once more) and Sarmat missiles. There is also something worth seeing for the Russian party as well. It is necessary for the final resolution of contradictions on Trident launchers deduced from the count, and so on. The notifications work properly, there are no restrictions for national technical means and the parties were re;atively satisfied with that. The main problem is that sooner or later we might want to see the new American "toys", like Raider bomber, Columbia SSBN, Sentinel ICBM. The only thing we can do now - is to hope that everyone will keep their sanity".
The MFA stresses that "successful resolution of these problems would make it possible to return to the full application of the verification mechanisms under the Treaty".
"Russia is fully committed to the observance of the provisions of the Treaty, something we consider to be a very important instrument in maintaining international security and stability. We highly value its unique role in ensuring the necessary transparency and predictability in relations between Russia and the United States in the critical area of nuclear missiles," -Russian ministry states.
The post Temporary Measures: Russia’s MFA on the START Inspections appeared first on New Defence Order. Strategy.
]]>