Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    New START Treaty

    Share
    avatar
    max steel
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2981
    Points : 3013
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Re: New START Treaty

    Post  max steel on Mon Apr 06, 2015 9:48 pm

    US having more deployed ICBMS SLBMS . Hmm unshaven


    Well I read a month back where Russia's deployed warheads ( 1643 ) overtook murica's deployed warheads ( 1642) for first time in a decade . But again russia's has reduced its warheads count . dunno
    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 16036
    Points : 16669
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: New START Treaty

    Post  GarryB on Wed Apr 08, 2015 9:49 am

    As old ICBMs and SLBMs are retired the missiles that replace them often don't have the same number of warheads so the overall number reduces...


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 10043
    Points : 10531
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: New START Treaty

    Post  George1 on Fri Apr 17, 2015 2:44 pm

    US Says Cooperation With Russia on New START Treaty "Silver Lining"

    According to the latest data exchange with Russia, the two sides have made a significant progress over the restrictions presumed by the treaty by February 2018, Assistant Secretary of State Frank Rose said.

    The US is satisfied with the cooperation of Russia on the implementation of the 2010 New START treaty, Assistant Secretary of State Frank Rose said.

    The two sides continue to honestly implement the terms of the treaty despite tensions over the Ukrainian crisis and some other international issues, Rose said Thursday at a press-conference on the nuclear disarmament and international security in Colorado Springs.

    The State Department official said the latest events in Ukraine "dramatically complicated" the work to minimize the global nuclear threat, but cooperation with Moscow on the New START treaty remains "a silver lining."

    "At such a hard time it is highly important to maintain transparency in the displacement and deployment of strategic nuclear weapons," he added.

    "According to the latest data exchange with Russia, the two sides have made a significant progress over the restrictions presumed by the treaty by February 2018," Rose said.

    He pointed out that by that time Russian and the US will each have 1,550 deployed nuclear warheads, the smallest number since the beginning of the nuclear arms development.

    The New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START), which lays out the further reduction of deployed strategic nuclear weapons was signed on April 8, 2010, in Prague. It came into force on February 5, 2011. It replaced the old treaty which expired in December 2009. The New START treaty limits the number of the deployed nuclear warheads to 1,550, and the number of intercontinental ballistic missiles, submarine ballistic missile and heavy bombers to 700. The document is expected to last at least for 10 years with the possibility to be prolonged for five years by mutual agreement of the two sides.

    Read more: http://sputniknews.com/politics/20150417/1021006521.html#ixzz3XZOGOFUU

    TheRealist
    Corporal
    Corporal

    Posts : 78
    Points : 112
    Join date : 2012-08-20

    Re: New START Treaty

    Post  TheRealist on Sun Apr 19, 2015 7:01 am

    A very interesting provision on the START 1 treaty which restricted the movements of land-based mobile ICBM's are limited and apparently the Americans wanted to keep this on the New START Treaty.

    USNI

    Where mobile missiles are concerned, a rigorous, verifiable inspection regime is a must. It has been said that a long-term collection effort to create a sound intelligence base and target familiarity is essential for missile monitoring in peace or targeting during war1 – hard experience learned by the US following SCUD-hunting in Desert Storm. An example of that kind of rigor is found in the Mobile ICBM provision (Article VI) of START I:

    1. Deployed road-mobile launchers of ICBMs and their associated missiles shall be based only in restricted areas. A restricted area shall not exceed five square kilometers in size and shall not overlap another restricted area. No more than ten deployed road-mobile launchers of ICBMs and their associated missiles may be based or located in a restricted area. A restricted area shall not contain deployed ICBMs for road-mobile launchers of ICBMs of more than one type of ICBM.

    2. Each Party shall limit the number of fixed structures for road-mobile launchers of ICBMs within each restricted area so that these structures shall not be capable of containing more road-mobile launchers of ICBMs than the number of road-mobile launchers of ICBMs specified for that restricted area.

    3. Each restricted area shall be located within a deployment area. A deployment area shall not exceed 125,000 square kilometers in size and shall not overlap another deployment area. A deployment area shall contain no more than one ICBM base for road-mobile launchers of ICBMs.

    4. Deployed rail-mobile launchers of ICBMs and their associated missiles shall be based only in rail garrisons. Each Party shall have no more than seven rail garrisons. No point on a portion of track located inside a rail garrison shall be more than 20 kilometers from any entrance/exit for that rail garrison. This distance shall be measured along the tracks. A rail garrison shall not overlap another rail garrison. (more)
    avatar
    Big_Gazza
    Senior Lieutenant
    Senior Lieutenant

    Posts : 664
    Points : 686
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Re: New START Treaty

    Post  Big_Gazza on Sun Apr 19, 2015 12:58 pm

    GarryB wrote:Hahaha... clearly they have found one button to press to upset the Americans...

    Amusing that the US thinks it can impose sanctions on Russia and force its cronies to do the same because it claims Russia is interfering in the Ukraine... it would be easier to name the countries the US isn't directly interfering in than the ones it was...

    I am SO in agreement... Its simply appalling how arrogant these USGov talking heads can be... The hypocrisy is simply unbelievable.

    Do they actually know how absurd their statements are, or are they simply too myopic and mind-wiped to realise?
    avatar
    Big_Gazza
    Senior Lieutenant
    Senior Lieutenant

    Posts : 664
    Points : 686
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Re: New START Treaty

    Post  Big_Gazza on Sun Apr 19, 2015 1:02 pm

    TheRealist wrote:A very interesting provision on the START 1 treaty which restricted the movements of land-based mobile ICBM's are limited and apparently the Americans wanted to keep this on the New START Treaty.

    That's hardly a surprise given the US doesn't have any such systems, and has no plans for them in any case.

    Bad Vlad gives his answer using an outstretched index finger....
    avatar
    max steel
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2981
    Points : 3013
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Re: New START Treaty

    Post  max steel on Sat Apr 02, 2016 3:01 pm

    New START March 2016 aggregate numbers

    Russia declared 1735 deployed warheads, 521 deployed launchers, and 856 total launchers. In September 2015 the numbers were 1648, 526, and 877 respectively.

    The increase of 87 deployed warheads is most likely due to the deployment of Bulava missiles on the Vladimir Monomakh submarine that was completed in April 2015. Some older missiles were apparently withdrawn from service.

    The U.S. numbers in March 2016 were 1481 warheads, 741 deployed and 878 total launchers (1538, 762, and 898 in September 2015).
    avatar
    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 10043
    Points : 10531
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: New START Treaty

    Post  George1 on Wed Jul 13, 2016 5:02 am

    Even If Russia Agrees to Extend START Treaty, It Will Be on Moscow’s Terms

    In the follow up to recent US media reports that the US President “plans to offer Russia to extend the START treaty after 2021”, Russian military experts responded that Moscow will agree to the extension only after the US meets a number of its requirements.

    The administration of US President Barack Obama is considering offering Russia the opportunity to extend the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, also known as New START, after its expiration in 2021, US media reported on Monday.

    Russian military experts have provided their comments on the released statement.

    Moscow will agree to the extension only after Washington meets a number of its requirements, including cancelation of the deployment of its anti-missile defense system on Russia’s borders and the withdrawal of tactical nuclear weapons from Europe, Igor Korotchenko, editor-in-chief of the magazine Russian National Defense and member of the Russian Defense Ministry's Public Council told RIA Novosti.

    “Moscow will continue negotiations on the further reduction of nuclear arsenals, but only on three conditions,” added the defense analyst.

    First, he said, is the full withdrawal of American tactical nuclear weapons from Europe to US territory. Second – there should be a summarized set-off of nuclear potentials for the US, UK and France on the one hand, and for Russia – on the other.

    And the third – the Americans should sign a legally binding agreement on restrictions on the deployment of their anti-missile defense systems, which could otherwise offset the world’s strategic balance, the military analyst added.

    Korotchenko also noted that in the event of a refusal to fulfill any of the above conditions, any negotiations on the possible reduction of Russia’s nuclear potential are out of the question.

    Additionally, he added, one should take into consideration that in recent decades, the significance of the nuclear potential of the US has steadily fallen due to the non-nuclear high precision weapon systems it has started developing. The high precision of such weapon systems ensures an effect similar to the one produced by nuclear weapons, he explained.

    “In this segment the US has considerable preponderance over Russia. Moreover, it has set up its Global Strike Command, an infrastructure filled up with these high precision weapon systems which are capable of making a strike to any part of the world within 30-40 minutes after such a decision is made by the US president,” said the defense analyst.

    However for Russia, he explained, nuclear weapons remain a “cornerstone” of its national security and the maintenance of the strategic parity in the world. Therefore, he added, Russia will consider any further reduction of its nuclear potential in the context of its own national interests and not on “mythical universal human values.”

    “With regards to the extension of the START-III treaty, Moscow will consider it after complex analysis of all the decisions made at the recent NATO Summit in Warsaw and their possible impact on Russia’s military security,” stated the expert.

    In a separate analysis on the issue, the Russian online newspaper Gazeta.ru noted that Kremlin’s reaction to the US media reports was rather restrained.

    Commenting on the article in The Washington Post, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said that the Russian leadership “knows nothing” about the intention of the US president to extend the existing treaty.

    The outlet therefore suggested that Russia might get back to the issue after the US presidential elections, as such negotiations are “too important for the Kremlin to start with the president who is already getting ready to step down.”

    http://sputniknews.com/world/20160712/1042830722/us-russia-nuclear-weapons.html


    _________________
    "There's no smoke without fire.", Georgy Zhukov

    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 16036
    Points : 16669
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    New START treaty

    Post  GarryB on Sat Aug 06, 2016 12:07 pm

    Mark Schneider, a former Pentagon nuclear forces policymaker, said the increase by Russia in deployed warheads is greater than analysts expected and signals Moscow is set to violate New START in the coming months.

    Moscow cannot violate New START in the next couple of months.

    New START sets limits on warheads and launch platforms for the specific date of Feb 2018... the years before and after are not regulated so having the correct amount on that month means full treaty compliance.

    “I believe the odds are that Russia will terminate the treaty in 2017,” Schneider said. “That would pocket all the U.S. reductions, give them more weapons, and it might be seen by [Russian leader Vladimir] Putin as revenge for the Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty [withdrawal].”

    Even if Mr Schneider believes is correct that would still not violate the terms of the agreement. Just like the US withdrew from the ABM treaty Russia has every right to do the same from New START.


    Additionally, Russia will be emboldened to pull out of the New START treaty by the failure of the United States to address Russia’s violation of the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces Treaty, Schneider said. The treaty bans the construction of intermediate-range ballistic and cruise missiles. Russia breached the accord with a new SS-N-8 cruise missile, U.S. officials have said.

    The INF treaty bans the development of ballistic or cruise missiles whose range exceeds 500km or is less than 5,500km. The US deployment of Standard missiles in their new ABM systems in former eastern european countries already violates the INF treaty...

    “Whether or not the Russians pull the plug on New START, the number of Russian warheads will be much larger than 1,550,” Schneider said, noting state-run Russian press reports put Moscow’s long-term warhead level at 2,100, while a U.S. think tank estimates the Russians will deploy around 2,500 warheads by 2025.

    Russia has no reason to withdraw from the New START treaty... it can withdraw and put in storage all but 1,500 warheads for the period of February 2018 and then after that period bring the weapons and platforms out of storage and back into service.

    “Russia’s apparently low nuclear threshold raises the stakes in any conflict, and compels adversaries to confront the possibility they could become involved, so too would Russian nuclear weapons,” the report said.

    What a bunch of fucking hypocrites... they were talking about nuclear armed bunker buster bombs that would be used in conventional wars and they dare talk about Moscow lowering the nuclear threshold?

    “This has been prominently displayed throughout hostilities in Ukraine, as Russian nuclear exercises, official statements and bomber patrols are intended to intimidate western states.”

    And Nato tanks moving east are peaceful measures to improve peace and stability in the region...

    The report concludes: “Whether it be covering hybrid [warfare] operations, intimidating European states or potentially employing nuclear strikes to defeat a conventionally superior adversary, nuclear weapons and threat of their use are likely to remain, if not grow, in importance for Russia.”

    Western duplicity and fraudulent portrayal of Russia as the Aggressor means Russia cannot rely on the world of the west... it needs the assurance of being able to wipe you fuckers out if it needs to.



    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    kvs
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2915
    Points : 3040
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Canuckistan

    Re: New START Treaty

    Post  kvs on Sat Aug 06, 2016 9:43 pm

    Russia's response to these obvious NATO provocations and hate propaganda needs to be harsh. This would include
    deploying the full spectrum of nuclear missiles and ABM systems without any constraints "in the name of peace".
    NATO does not want peace, so it should not get any.

    If you listen to all the propaganda and yammering by NATO leaders, you would conclude that Russia is some chicken
    shit 3rd world country that is afraid of using its nuclear weapons and does not have the ability to stave off NATO's attacks.
    This is exactly the hubris of Napoleon and Hitler. It's now a mathematical law that the west is diseased with militarist
    arrogance.

    Putin has been sending all sorts of signals recently to warn NATO that it is on an idiotic path. Putin is making the mistake
    that NATO has the mental capacity to listen. To NATO deciders Russia's calls for reason are like the squeaking of some
    mouse before it is crushed in the boot heel. Russia ain't no mouse and can crush NATO. Trying to back Russia into a
    corner is a suicide-by-war move for NATO.
    avatar
    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 10043
    Points : 10531
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: New START Treaty

    Post  George1 on Thu Oct 20, 2016 12:18 am

    US, Russia Hold Bilateral Consultative Commission on New START Treaty

    Read more: https://sputniknews.com/politics/201610191046477018-usa-russia-stert-treaty/


    _________________
    "There's no smoke without fire.", Georgy Zhukov

    avatar
    kvs
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2915
    Points : 3040
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Canuckistan

    Re: New START Treaty

    Post  kvs on Thu Oct 20, 2016 1:35 am

    George1 wrote:US, Russia Hold Bilateral Consultative Commission on New START Treaty

    Read more: https://sputniknews.com/politics/201610191046477018-usa-russia-stert-treaty/

    WTF. Does Russia need to bend over and take it from Uncle Scumbag for some reason? How about sending this imperialist goon
    a message and threatening to scrap any existing arms control agreement. Perhaps then the goon will begin to think that his
    ABM does not make in invulnerable.
    avatar
    OminousSpudd
    Major
    Major

    Posts : 870
    Points : 887
    Join date : 2015-01-03
    Age : 21
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: New START Treaty

    Post  OminousSpudd on Thu Oct 20, 2016 5:18 am

    kvs wrote:
    George1 wrote:US, Russia Hold Bilateral Consultative Commission on New START Treaty

    Read more: https://sputniknews.com/politics/201610191046477018-usa-russia-stert-treaty/

    WTF.  Does Russia need to bend over and take it from Uncle Scumbag for some reason?   How about sending this imperialist goon
    a message and threatening to scrap any existing arms control agreement.   Perhaps then the goon will begin to think that his
    ABM does not make in invulnerable.
    Hopefully it doesn't mean anything from the Russian side other than to play the US along (they have a habit of playing the burgers). What it does show however is that Skunkle Scam is willing to now negotiate on a new START, this suggests they feel they are on the back foot in terms of Russian capabilities.

    Sponsored content

    Re: New START Treaty

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Fri Jun 23, 2017 3:36 am