During the visit of the Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Karen Donfried to the Russian capital, the American side was presented with the draft Treaty between Moscow and Washington on security guarantees based on the principles of indivisible and equal security
According to one of them, in Art. 1 Russia proposes the United States not to take action or take measures affecting the security of the other side; not to implement security measures individually or within the framework of a military coalition (primarily, NATO is assumed), which would undermine the fundamental security interests of the other side.
Fundamentally important for the Russian Federation is Art. 4 of the Treaty, in which the United States is invited to take on the following obligations: to exclude further NATO expansion in an eastern direction; refuse to admit states that were previously part of the USSR into the alliance; not to create military bases on the territory of the post-Soviet space (the Baltic countries are not included in it); not to use the infrastructure of the countries located there for the conduct of any military activity and not to develop bilateral military cooperation with them.
In addition, according to Art. 5 of the Treaty, it is proposed to refrain from deploying its armed forces and weapons in areas where this would be perceived by the other side as a threat to its national security, with the exception of such deployment within its own national territories. Avoid the flights of heavy (strategic) bombers and the presence of surface warships in areas from where they can hit targets on the territory of the other side. Improve mechanisms for preventing dangerous military activities on the high seas and in airspace. And also not to deploy ground-based intermediate and shorter-range missiles (Article 6) and nuclear weapons (Article 7) outside the national territory.
Of course, these are somewhat overestimated expectations, which the Joe Biden administration, primarily due to internal political reasons, cannot go for. Moreover, the ratification of such an agreement by the US Congress is ruled out, where two-thirds of the votes of Democrats and Republicans in favor – even on the eve of the midterm elections in November 2022 – clearly will not be typed.
First, the Americans continue to stake on a disarming strike with nuclear and high-precision weapons against potential adversaries (Russia, China). That is why, in December 2001, during the Bush Jr. administration, they withdrew from the Treaty on the Limitation of Anti-Ballistic Missile Systems (ABM). Then it was assumed that the retaliatory strike of the Russian nuclear missile forces would be parried by a national missile defense system, including forward-based from bases in Romania and Poland. And despite the low efficiency of the ground-based missile defense system and the too high cost of a similar space system, the US ruling elite is not going to abandon this course even in the medium term.
Second, the withdrawal of American troops from Afghanistan negatively affected the image of the US Democratic Administration. Formally, President Joe Biden restored transatlantic unity, but this did not eliminate Washington’s problems in relations not only with Berlin, but also with Paris. Turkey’s activities are causing a serious split within NATO. In such conditions, the Biden administration fundamentally cannot assume obligations to refuse to admit Georgia and Ukraine to NATO, and even more so to terminate military cooperation with them, including within the framework of joint military exercises. We are particularly worried about such exercises above the brigade level in areas adjacent to Russia and its allies.
Third, the growing confrontation with China is pushing the United States to deploy medium-range missiles in Japan and, possibly, even on the territory of the Republic of Korea. Therefore, the provision of Art. 7 of the Treaty will prevent nuclear deterrence not only of the Russian Federation, but also of the PRC.
Fourthly, NATO includes such states as Poland, Romania and the Baltic states, which are interested in aggravating relations with the Russian Federation.
In order to exert pressure on the United States and its allies, the text of the security guarantee treaty must be discussed at the expert level and in the media. This policy is being actively pursued by the Russian Foreign Ministry. In particular, Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said that Moscow has already formed a team to negotiate with the United States on this treaty. In his opinion, the Russian side “even tomorrow” is ready to hold discussions with its American counterparts, for example, in Geneva. And Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Grushko warned NATO that Moscow would switch to a counter-threat regime if the alliance rejected Russian security proposals.
This position of the Russian Foreign Ministry on ensuring the national security of our country is fully justified. But it should be borne in mind that at present, our security guarantees for the United States are not needed. Americans still consider their state to be the only superpower that has the right to dictate its will to everyone else.
And this situation is likely to continue until 2030, when global changes in the financial market will be possible. Consequently, Russia is starting a difficult and lengthy dialogue with the United States, from which one should not expect concrete results in the near future.
Vladimir Evseev, Izvestia newspaper