Partnership for Global Security: Leading the World to a Safer Future
Home Projects Publications Issues Official Documents About RANSAC Nuclear News 4/15/13
Location: Home / Projects & Publications / News
Sitemap Contact
Search
Google www PGS
 
Nuclear News - 12/18/00
RANSAC Nuclear News, December 18, 2000
Compiled by Christopher Ficek


 
A. Arms Control - General
    1. Russia, U.S., Cut Risk of Inadvertent Nuclear Strike,Reuters (12/17/00)
    2. US-Russian Accord To Prevent Mistaken Firing Of Missiles,Agence France Presse (12/16/00)
B.  Russian Nuclear Forces
    1. New Topol-M Unit To Be Deployed By Year's End, RFE/RL(12/18/00)
    2. Russian TV Army Programme Questions Strategic Forces Cuts[Commentary], BBC Monitoring (12/17/00)
C. Brain Drain
    1. Russia: Brain Drain In Defence Sector Seen As "Security Threat" BBC Monitoring (11/29/00)
D. Russian - Indian Nuclear Cooperation
    1. 'India, Russia Nuclear Cooperation Will Continue' VladimirRadyuhin, The Hindu (12/16/00)
E. U.S. - Russian Relations
    1. 2 GOP Stars Poised To Guide US Abroad, John Donnelly,Boston Globe (12/16/00)
    2. Bush Could Forge New Direction In U.S.-Russia Ties, CarolGiacomo, Reuters (12/15/00)



A. Arms Control - General

1.
Russia, U.S., Cut Risk of Inadvertent Nuclear Strike
        Reuters
        December 17, 2000
        (for personal use only)

BRUSSELS, Dec 17, 2000 -- (Reuters) Russia and the United States onSaturday made the nightmare of inadvertent nuclear strike a little lesslikely -- a scenario which came terrifyingly close in 1995 when Moscowmistook a research rocket for a missile.

U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, with five weeks left inoffice, agreed with Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov to share dataon more missile tests and other rocket launches like the one that had formerRussian President Boris Yeltsin weighing his retaliatory options.

The pre- and post-launch notification system envisages a data centeropening in Moscow and builds on agreements to share early warning informationsigned in 1998 and June 1999.

Albright and Ivanov, at a ceremony in a Brussels hotel a day after theyattended a meeting of NATO foreign ministers and Russia, also pledged toinclude more countries in the hope of creating what Ivanov called a "globalsystem of control".

"Under our agreement, both the United States and Russia will invitethe participation of other countries in the missile and space launch notificationsystem," Albright said.

"This reflects the fact that proliferation is a threat to every nation,and that contributing to stability is every nation's responsibility," sheadded.

The two countries agreed back in 1991 under START I, the first in aseries of Strategic Arms Reduction Treaties slashing nuclear arsenals,to tell each other about launches of intercontinental and submarine-launchedballistic missiles.

Saturday's memorandum of understanding expanded on this to include shorter-rangeballistic missiles, sounding and research rockets and most space launchvehicles.

It also allows for each side to notify the other on a voluntary basisof objects leaving orbit or experiments that early warning systems mightmistake for missiles.

Norway said it had notified embassies beforehand when it launched itsBlack Brant XII research rocket in January 1995.

But the message had clearly not reached Yeltsin, who said afterwardshe had used his "black suitcase" hotline link to his generals for the firsttime to discuss a possible retaliatory strike.

The near-catastrophic, 24-minute flight of the 15-meter (50 foot) longresearch rocket, part of a Norwegian-American project to study the NorthernLights, highlighted the dangers of nuclear arsenals which the former ColdWar enemies are committed to reduce in the new era.

CLINTON ADMINISTRATION DISAPPOINTED ON NMD

Before President-elect George W. Bush takes office, President Bill Clinton'sadministration had hoped to get further with Russia on arms control issuesby winning Moscow's agreement to amend a Soviet-era treaty so Washingtoncould start building a missile defense shield.

Critics see the National Missile Defense (NMD), which would use rocketsto shoot down rockets in an action so delicate it has been compared tohitting a bullet with a bullet, as threatening the stability of internationalarms control.

Clinton deferred a decision on the system after tests failed. Bush hasput less stress on getting Russian consent for the system, which he hassaid he will build, and is expected to take a tougher line on arms controlissues with Moscow.

A senior State Department official said Saturday's deal showed the natureof U.S.-Russian relations under the outgoing administration. "It's alwaysbeen about identifying and solving problems and they did a little of thattoday," he said.
return to menu


2.
US-Russian Accord To Prevent Mistaken Firing Of Missiles
        Agence France Presse
        December 16, 2000
        (for personal use only)

BRUSSELS, Dec 16 (AFP) - The United States and Russia on Saturday signeda new agreement aimed at preventing inadvertent retaliation in responseto a false warning of missile attack.

"The result will be deeper confidence and greater strategic stabilitybetween our two nations which translates into a safer and more secure world,"US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright said after signing a memorandumof understanding with Russian Foreign Minister Ivan Ivanov.

The accord, which expands an earlier agreement, aims to reduce nucleardanger by establishing a pre-and post-launch notification system for launchesof ballistic missiles and space launch vehicles.

It also provides for voluntary notification of satellites forced outof orbit, and certain space experiments that could adversely affect theoperation of early warning radars.

Ivanov, who earlier met NATO foreign ministers here, stressed the memorandumaimed at strengthening strategic stability, and expressed the hope thatit would eventually lead to a global system of control of ballistic missiles.

Albright said the US and Russia would invite other nations to join inthe new missile and space launch notification system.

"This reflects the fact that proliferation is a threat to every nationand that contributing to stability is every nation's responsibility," sheadded.

The memorandum complements an agreement on sharing early warning informationsigned last June by President Bill Clinton and Russia's President VladimirPutin.

The new system will be located at a Joint Data Exchange Center in Moscowagreed under the Clinton-Putin accord.

It will greatly expand the numbers and types of launches subject tonotification to include shorter-range ballistic missiles, sounding andresearch rockets and most space launch vehicles.

US officials said the exchange of data from the new system would strengthenstrategic stability by promoting increased mutual confidence and assuranceof the peaceful intentions of both sides when ballistic missiles or spacelaunch vehicles were launched.

It would further reduce the risk of a missile launch resulting froma false warning of ballistic missile attack.

President Clinton and former President Boris Yeltsin gave the go-aheadfor such early information in 1998 when they signed a joint statement onexchange of information on missile launches and early warning to reducethe possibility of inadvertent retaliatory launches due to false warningof a ballistic missile attack.
return to menu


B. Russian Nuclear Forces

1.
New Topol-M Unit To Be Deployed By Year's End
        RFE/RL
        December 18, 2000
        (for personal use only)

Strategic Rocket Forces commander General Vladimir Yakovlev has announcedthat on 25-26 December, another regiment will be equipped with Topol-Mmissiles, Interfax reported on 15 December. This will bring the numberof regiments with such missiles to three. Currently, a total of 20 Topol-Mmissiles, which can be fired from a mobile launcher and are therefore hardto detect, have been deployed equally (10 each) between the two existingregiments.
return to menu


2.
Russian TV Army Programme Questions Strategic Forces Cuts [Commentary]
        BBC Monitoring
        December 17, 2000
        (for personal use only)

Text of commentary broadcast in Russian Public TV's "Army Magazine"programme on 17 December

Ill-conceived army reforms could lead to nuclear catastrophe, Russianexperts believe. Today the five nuclear states are armed with more than11,000 nuclear warheads, with which all of mankind can be destroyed 50times over. Another five countries are on the verge of developing theirown nuclear weapons.

In line with international accords, Russia has no more than 3,500 warheads,of which 448 are in the hands of the navy and another 500 at the disposalof the air force. The greatest number are concentrated in the StrategicMissile Troops, which are today the basis of the Russian Federation's strategicnuclear forces. To a large extent thanks to these troops, our country haslived without wars for 50 years. These troops have 60 per cent of the deliveryvehicles and warheads, and their job is to perform at least half the tasksof the strategic nuclear forces in a counterstrike [otvetnyy udar] andat least 90 per cent in a surprise counterstrike [otvetno-vstrechnyy udar].

At the same time, under high command plans, the Strategic Missile Troopsare to be transformed from a separate armed service to an ordinary combatarm by 2005. The share of the Missile Troops in the forthcoming armed forcescuts is to be about 80,000 personnel. In parallel, work is under way onthe technology of maintaining alert duty with reduced forces and decisionsare being drafted for withdrawing nuclear units from subordination to commandersof missile divisions.

Aside from that, Russia is pursuing an initiative to reduce the numberof nuclear warheads to 1,500 - an almost twofold cut. At the same time,there is an intensive build-up under way on the territories of the NATObloc countries of high-precision weapon systems, while the USA is seriouslyconsidering abandoning the ABM treaty.

Why are we again in such a hurry to disarm unilaterally? We have alreadydestroyed a superpower with our own hands, we have disbanded military-politicalalliances, given up the world's most powerful army, destroyed our bestmissiles and unilaterally pulled out our troops from Europe. Why is no-onein the world in a hurry to follow our example? And what will the West dowhen we disarm for good?
return to menu


C. Brain Drain

1.
Russia: Brain Drain In Defence Sector Seen As "Security Threat"
        BBC Monitoring
        November 29, 2000
        (for personal use only)

Text of report in English by Russian newspaper `Segodnya' on 29 November

Finally, the authorities have noticed that Russian science is dying.At a meeting yesterday, the government discussed urgent measures for itsresuscitation. Tasking themselves with attracting young scientists to researchand development at large, the ministers paid special attention to the sheershortage of cadre in the defence industry.

The "young brains" deficit in defence is so tangible that it has beenrecognized as a "security threat" for Russia. Even though the situationwith "peaceful" science is catastrophic. The share of scientists aged 40or less accounts for 20 per cent and by 2002 their number might drop twice,so that the average age of our researchers will exceed 50.

Worldwide experience shows that serious achievements are obtained byscientists aged 27-40. But talented Russian college and university graduatescannot be attracted by the poor compensation and ancient equipment of researchand development institutes. And they go to post-graduate education notfor the sake of science, but to postpone their conscription duty and toget a degree in science that would facilitate their future employment incommerce or their professional immigration.

Over a 10-year period our science has lost over 400,000 scientists,with defence expertise enjoying special demand abroad. According to theMinister of Education, Vladimir Filippov, "the USA has set a target toattract specialists in the field of science and defence industry, whichincludes a special quota for Russian experts. If we do not undertake urgentsteps, we will be working for another country's defence".

The government decided to stop youths from going to the Pentagon. Thereare budget plans for a 4-fold increase of student grants at defence sector-relateduniversity departments, as well as to raise lecturers' salaries at thesedepartments by 30-40 per cent. It was also decided to create a state trainingplan for engineering and scientific cadres for the defence sector.

In order to retain young people in the Russian science, the governmentis willing to allocate R820m from the 2001 federal budget for pay increases,R800m for facilities development, 12.5m to meet housing needs and anotherR80m for some "retention efforts". Where this money will come from is yetto be clarified.

According to the Ministry of Finance, it does not have to be additionallyraised, it can be "redistributed" from other budget sections.
return to menu


D. Russian - Indian Nuclear Cooperation

1.
'India, Russia Nuclear Cooperation Will Continue'
        Vladimir Radyuhin
        The Hindu
        December 16, 2000
        (for personal use only)

MOSCOW, DEC. 16. Russia will continue nuclear cooperation with Indiaeven if it meant reviewing its commitments under international exportscontrols.

The Russian Minister for Atomic Energy, Mr. Yevgeny Adamov, expressedconfidence that Russia will supply more nuclear reactors to India in additionto two units for the Koodankulam power plant agreed earlier. ``I am convincedthere will be more contracts,'' Mr. Adamov told presspersons in Moscow.

As a member of the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG), Russia is under restrictionsto supply nuclear technology to countries such as India which had refusedto place all its nuclear programmes under full-scope safeguards of theInternational Atomic Energy Agency. Despite the U.S. pressure, Russia wentahead with the Koodankulam deal, arguing it had been negotiated beforethe full-scope rule was clamped down in 1992.

Replying to a question from The Hindu on how Russia's intention to supplymore nuclear reactors to India could be reconciled with the NSG restrictions,Mr. Adamov hinted that Moscow could withdraw from the NSG. If current restrictionson cooperation in peaceful use of nuclear energy were not modified, theremay be changes in the lists of participants in various control regimes,the Minister said.

Mr. Adamov cited the example of China, which had not adhered to theNSG inspite of being a member of the Zangger Committee of nuclear exporters.This enabled her to build a 300- MW nuclear plant in Pakistan recently,since the Zangger Committee rules did not require full-scope safeguards.Russia is a member of both the NSG and the Zangger Committee. However,Mr. Adamov was confident that Russia could persuade the NSG to ease exportrestrictions.

``We should be able to bring our partners in the NSG to an understandingthat the enforcement of rules which contradict Articles 3 and 4 (of thenon-proliferation treaty) amounts to slapping sanctions against India andharming Russian commercial interests, the Russian Minister said.

Article 3 of the NPT said international safeguards must not hamper internationalcooperation in the field of peaceful nuclear activities, while Article4 urged all NPT signatories to contribute to further development of theapplications of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes with due considerationfor the needs of developing areas of the world.

Mr. Adamov denounced as `unconstructive' the Western nuclear technologyboycott of India to force it to give up its nuclear option and sign thenon-proliferation accords. Such attempts amounted to sanctions, he said.``We are against a policy of sanctions and did not impose them even whenIndia conducted its nuclear tests.''

Mr. Adamov's statement raised the veil of secrecy over the Indo- Russiannuclear cooperation agreement signed during the Russian President, Mr.Vladimir Putin's visit to Delhi in October, but whose contents had notbeen made public. ``We will do our best to participate in India's ambitiousprogramme to generate 20,000 MW of nuclear power by 2020, he said.

The Minister said the Russian side was completing a detailed reporton the Koodankulam project and hoped that a commercial contract for thesupply of two reactors would be signed next year.
return to menu


E. U.S. - Russian Relations

1.
2 GOP Stars Poised To Guide US Abroad
        John Donnelly
        Boston Globe
        December 16, 2000
        (for personal use only)

WSHINGTON - He's a national hero and has held top jobs at the Pentagonand National Security Council. She's a virtual unknown, her only governmentexperience as an NSC officer who specialized on an empire that no longerexists.

Retired General Colin L. Powell and Condoleezza Rice - in line to bethe secretary of state and national security adviser, respectively, inthe Bush administration - are about to walk onto the world stage on vastlydifferent footing.

Powell, whose appointment to the Bush Cabinet is to be announced today,has an aura of prestige, even a flash of celebrity. Rice has pizazz, smarts- plus the president-elect's ear.

Their individual influence with President-elect George W. Bush won'tbe known until the crises begin. But with the all-but-announced Powell-Riceduo, an unprecedented elevation of African-Americans to two of the topthree national security positions in US government, even Democrats whofind much to fault on their policy stands give both high marks for theirunderstanding about how the world works.

And, they say, with Bush's foreign policy experience as governor ofTexas limited to Mexico and a few countries in Latin America, the new presidentwill depend on the two to have a major imprint on everything from formulatingmore skeptical relations with China and Russia to restarting serious discussionswith allies and Congress over national missile defense.

In previous comments, both have espoused caution when it comes to committingUS troops overseas, but they embrace broader free-trade deals. Many observersbelieve that as one of their first steps the two would attempt to reducethe US troop presence in Bosnia, a goal Defense Secretary William S. Cohenhas quietly pushed.

But how will they work together?

''They have known one another for years, they have a relationship thatgoes back, and it is a strong relationship, a healthy relationship, anopen relationship,'' said F. William Smullen, Powell's chief of staff.''They talk frequently and have on a daily basis for the last several weeks,and they are going to continue that dialogue at the national level. Itwill have one goal: to serve the president, and in this town that's notalways a common denominator.''

Powell, 63, a former national security adviser and chairman of the JointChiefs of Staff who worked closely with then-Defense Secretary Dick Cheneyin the first Bush administration, has statesman-like credentials.

''This is a man who is better prepared to be secretary of state thanany other person in post-Cold War history,'' said Ivo H. Daalder, an analystat the centrist think tank Brookings Institution who served on the NSCfrom 1995 to 1996 and who backed the candidacy of Vice President Al Gore.''Powell was military adviser to the president in the last major militaryengagement. He's had to deal with ethnic conflicts. We haven't had a secretaryof state who arrives on the seventh floor of the State Department withthe kind of aura that General Powell has.''

Powell's leadership style, according to three people who have workedwith him, is that he gives directions to deputies but doesn't meddle inhow they carry out their jobs.

''He empowered you with authority to go off and do things, but he wasn'tin your face all the time,'' Vice Admiral Gregory G. Johnson, commanderof the Sixth Fleet, said from Malta.

Johnson was Powell's executive assistant for 21 months beginning in1991. ''If you did wrong, he wasn't afraid to tell you. He was very quickto clear the air.''

Johnson and several others described Powell as politically astute. ''He'sthe most sophisticated pragmatist I know,'' Johnson said. ''He knows theart of the possible in Washington. He knows that D.C. is populated withvery large egos, and you're not going to get it done with in-your-facetactics.''

Inside previous administrations, tensions almost always arose amongthe secretary of state, the national security adviser, and the defensesecretary over who has final word with the president. Often one person,such as Secretary of State Henry A. Kissinger in the Nixon administrationor to a lesser degree national security adviser Samuel R. ''Sandy'' Bergerin the last years of the Clinton administration, emerges as dominant. Sometimesthere are battles that become public, such as those during the early Reaganyears between Secretary of State George P. Shultz and Defense SecretaryCaspar W. Weinberger.

Rarely is there peace.

But those who know Powell and Rice believe they may work in concert.One of their reasons was that Powell, more than a decade ago, was ableto help broker good relations in his job as national security adviser inthe last year of the Reagan administration. Shultz was secretary of stateand Frank C. Carlucci was defense secretary.

''Colin, George, and I met every morning at 8,'' Carlucci rememberedin an interview this week. ''It was just to go over the day's work, andit had an extraordinary effect on the Reagan administration's last yearin the foreign policy area, which had been very difficult before. Georgeand I might have a difference of opinion, and Colin would turn to one ofus and say, `Come on, Frank, that's BS.' He had a way of saying to oneor the other of us that you ought to back down, and frequently we did.''

Carlucci also knows Rice; they served together on the board of Rand,a Santa Monica, Calif., think tank. ''It was a very intimidating board,but she was not intimidated. She was not bashful at all. She's got a gooddegree of self-confidence,'' he said.

The former defense secretary doesn't believe Powell and Rice would clash.''Sometimes there's a healthy tension between State and NSC. The waterwill find its own level,'' he said. ''But it's very hard not to get alongwith Colin.''

Rice, 45, fluent in Russian, a student of Soviet military history, wasa specialist on the Soviet Union at the NSC during the collapse of theempire and the fall of the Berlin Wall. After leaving the NSC, she spenta short time at the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard Universityand then became provost at Stanford University in 1993.

It was at the NSC that she developed close ties to then-President Bush.''She was front and center then with all that was happening, and made abig impression,'' said Michael McFaul, a Russia specialist who was at Stanfordduring Rice's tenure as provost. He now is an analyst at the Carnegie Endowmentfor International Peace in Washington.

''She'll be a strong personality,'' said McFaul, who supported Gorein the election. ''Throughout her life and career, people have continuallyunderestimated her because she is a young black woman in a field dominatedby old white men. People assume before they know her she is some kind oftoken, and she is not.''

Graham Allison, director of the Belfer Center for Science and InternationalAffairs at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard, who has known Ricefor years, also sees racial stereotyping as one of the reasons she is oftenunderestimated.

''It partly, undoubtedly, has to do with being a black woman, but nobodywho has worked with her very long has underestimated her,'' Allison said,pointing particularly to her job as provost at Stanford, where she pilotedthe university through a difficult financial period.

Allison also believed that Rice's experience compares favorably to thatof many national security advisers, including those now seen as giants.

''Compare her with Henry Kissinger,'' Allison said. ''Well, Kissingerwas a professor at Harvard before he was national security adviser, andshe was a professor at Stanford. Kissinger was a part of the foreign policyestablishment, and she is a part of the foreign policy establishment. AndKissinger never had the administrative capabilities that she has.''

Still, Powell and Rice would enter their positions with what McFaulcalled an ''asymmetry of experience.''

''My personal assessment,'' he said, ''is I don't think it is goingto matter. Powell has the presence, but Condi's big trump card over anybodyis her personal relationship with the president.''
return to menu


2.
Bush Could Forge New Direction In U.S.-Russia Ties
        Carol Giacomo
        Reuters
        December 15, 2000
        (for personal use only)
 
WASHINGTON, Dec 15 (Reuters) - Relations between the United Statesand Russia, which experts say are now at a critical juncture, could undergofundamental change as President-elect George W. Bush takes power in Washington.

Over the past year, he and his advisers outlined views that criticsfear would turn Russia back into an enemy. But Republicans have insistedthe Bush positions are more realistic and would better protect U.S. interests.

Many details of Bush's policy are left unclear.

But during the election campaign, Bush himself raised expectations forsignificant changes in U.S.-Russian ties, calling for nothing less thana "new strategic relationship to protect the peace of the world."

This is likely to be underpinned by Bush's stated conviction that "Russiais a great power and must always be treated as such."

But the president-elect's approach is also expected to reflect a tougherline toward Moscow on missile defenses, aid, corruption, arms control andChechnya, as well as a greater proclivity to take on Russia when it actsagainst perceived U.S. interests.

CLINTON FAULTED

Bush advisers had accused the Clinton administration for having too"romantic" a view of Russia after communism fell and the country movedtoward democracy and capitalism.

"People know that policy toward Russia has failed," Bush foreign policyadviser Condoleezza Rice told reporters last September.

Bush may have a freer hand in dealing sternly with Moscow now that theRussian president is Vladimir Putin, who has made strides in reformingthe economy but has set back the cause of democracy by weakening all majorsources of power independent of the executive branch.

On missile defenses, Bush has publicly promised to "develop and deploy"national and theater systems, despite strong opposition from Russia, aswell as China and NATO allies.

The Washington Post reported on Dec. 10 that Bush told the Russian foreignminister directly last April that the U.S. commitment to build a missiledefense system was "a political fact of life that Russia and other nationshad to absorb."

The issue is certain to be a continuing flashpoint between Washingtonand Moscow, in addition to other capitals.

Russia fears that a national missile defense system that seeks to protectU.S. territory, would seriously undermine or erode its nuclear arsenal,which has been the basis of deterrence for the past 50 years.

But the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, in a recent reporton the need to "renew" U.S.-Russia ties, said any system that the UnitedStates would be able to deploy in the next 10-15 years would not threatenRussia in that way.

MISSILE DEFENSE KEY ISSUE

The report argued that before moving ahead with missile defense, theBush administration should make a fresh assessment of the threat from missilescapable of hitting the United States and redouble efforts to stem proliferation.

And unless the missile proliferation threat significantly worsens (withanother North Korean test, for instance) then the United States shouldnot unilaterally defect from the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty, whichlimits missiles defenses, the Carnegie experts said.

The Bush team has also signaled that the new president would end U.S.support for billions of dollars in aid to Russia from the InternationalMonetary Fund.

Bush "does think further IMF funding doesn't make sense at this point,"Rice, who is expected to be Bush's National Security Adviser, said in aninterview during the campaign.

She has complained about Russia's lack of a rule of law, a senselesstax policy and rampant corruption and blamed the Clinton administrationfor missing an opportunity to really transform the Russian economy.

The Bush team has also declared its intention to withhold internationalfinancial assistance to Russia because of the Russian government's attacksagainst civilians in the breakaway province of Chechnya.

"Even as we support Russian reform, we cannot excuse Russian brutality,"Bush said in his major foreign policy speech in November 1999.

UNILATERAL ARMS CUTS

Bush has expressed skepticism about the process of negotiated arms dealsthat has been a staple feature of the U.S.-Soviet and then U.S.-Russiarelationship.

But he has endorsed further reductions in nuclear weapons and has hintedhe might take unilateral action, which could dramatically change the internationalsecurity environment.

The United States and Russia are already committed under the START IItreaty to slash their nuclear arsenals from more than 6,000 deployed weaponsto 3,000-3,500 weapons by 2007.

The Carnegie report argued that Washington should unilaterally reduceits level to 1,000 to 1,5000 weapons.

Putin has suggested that Russia, which is finding it increasingly difficultto maintain its nuclear arsenal because of economic problems, would takesimilar action.

Bush, concerned that vast amounts of Russian nuclear material cannotbe accounted for, has declared his intention to press for an accurate inventoryof this material and to seek expanded funding from Congress to dismantleas many of Russia's weapons as quickly as possible.

Tensions in the U.S.-Russia relationship could flare over plans to expandNATO further, Moscow's transfer of conventional arms and nuclear expertiseto Iran and Putin's effort this week to breathe new life into ties withCuba.

But Moscow defused another problem this week by pardoning and freeingAmerican Edmund Pope, who was convicted of espionage after spending eightmonths in jail. He denied the charges.
return to menu


 

Section Menu:
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999


© 2007 Partnership for Global Security. All rights reserved. Privacy Statement.