Carnegie Moscow Center
The current confidence-building and arms limitation measures are less effective for resolving the problems caused by the conventional prompt global strike systems being developed by the United States.
A preliminary date has been set for the Geneva II negotiations and the Syrian opposition is expected to sit down with representatives from Bashar al-Assad’s regime to discuss the prospect of a unity government. But note the word ”preliminary.”
The development of non-nuclear weapons that can strike distant targets in a short period of time has been a U.S. goal for over a decade now.
Putin aims for a world order in which the Security Council’s five permanent members, not the United States—alone or with its allies—decide on major issues pertaining to war and peace.
Connectivity in Asia and the Pacific, one of the main themes of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit, held on October 7 and 8 in Bali, is certainly growing.
There is still a window of opportunity for cooperation between the United States and Russia on conventional prompt global strike weapons.
Any Conventional Prompt Global Strike acquisition decision should be preceded by an in-depth and detailed debate about the costs, risks, and benefits of all potential CPGS alternatives. Their military utility is a natural starting point for such a debate.
Russia’s position on Syria is not primarily about Syria. It is about the world order: who has the right to decide on a military intervention?
The main reason that Russia’s anti-gay laws have stirred up such strong emotions is the lack of open social discussion about the issue.
The United Nations is a recognized platform for debate, but its performance depends on its key members actually working together.