Friday, April 26, 2019

I Always Fought In My Life For Everything Good Against Everything Bad.

Exactly like Donald Trump who, yet again, proposed to get rid off nuclear weapons. 
Donald Trump has called on the US, Russia, and China to reduce their nuclear arsenals amid reports that his administration is planning to propose a landmark arms control deal with Beijing and Moscow. In an interview with Fox News host Sean Hannity, the US president said that he welcomed Russia’s efforts to help denuclearize the Korean Peninsula – but that more must be done. “We want to get rid of the nuclear weapons, we all have to get rid [of them]. Russia has to get rid of them, and China has to get rid of them,” Trump stated.
I agree--great idea. While at it we might as well negotiate the treaty on limitation of food allergies, teenage boys masturbation and conclude comprehensive international agreement on preservation of unicorns. Why not? But here is this teeny weeny problem, which RT and, actually, Russian Foreign Ministry (I omit here the Russian MoD which is only now recovering from hours of Homeric laughter upon hearing Trump's proposal), define clearly:
Trump may also struggle to convince the international community that Washington will honor any new arms control agreements. His decision to unilaterally pull out of the 2015 nuclear deal with Iran angered many US allies, and sparked accusations from Tehran that the US is incapable of keeping its word.
Ahh, yes, this credibility issue. Grandiose statements are easy, keeping the word--is a completely different game, it is hard, much harder than PR tricks. Trump's Administration has a rather underwhelming record in this field of international relations, you know, like sticking to treaties. When even Professors of uber-liberal pro-Western madras such as Higher School of Economics in Moscow calls these Trump's appeals a complete BS (in Russian), one can assume with a very high degree of probability that US level of trust in Russia is not just zero, it is in negative territory. As per China, her nuclear arsenal, even if one considers deliberate deflation by China, is still dwarfed by those of Russia and US. So, nominally, China can not be a party to any reduction efforts, before Russia and US cut their arsenals dramatically to get within Chinese levels. 

So, after Trump's grandiose and totally, as usual, hollow statement, I have only one suggestion to him--to start with unilateral reduction of the numbers of war-mongering lunatics in his Administration before we all get to the point that reduction of nuclear arsenals may, indeed, happen by means of their actual use against actual targets. In general, however, the United States is not a treaty-worthy party, whose signature on any international treaty is useless and guarantees exactly zero. So, what's the point then? PR, nothing more. Meanwhile bi-polar John Huntsman, who just couple days ago was waxing  militaristic with "200, 000 tons of diplomacy",  suddenly recalled that on the 25th of April 1945 Allied and Soviet troops linked at Elbe and that dialog between Washington and Moscow is necessary (in Russian). I wonder what will he say tomorrow? This routine by now is so tiresome and so beaten to death as Trump's TV Show that no one takes United States seriously anymore. Maybe we should just wait for the lineup for the next season, whenever this season arrives.  

UPDATE: LOL!! Not that this treaty is so important or infringes on gun owners rights within the (nation)states--Second Amendment is a very good amendment. But still, the trend and MO of throwing treaties out of the window is obvious. 
US President Donald Trump has announced his administration will stop ratification of the UN Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) and withdraw from it, calling it “badly misguided” and a threat to American freedoms.The UN will soon receive “formal notice that America is rejecting this treaty,” Trump said on Friday, speaking at the National Rifle Association (NRA) convention in Indianapolis, Indiana.“I will sign right now, in front of a lot of witnesses, a message asking the Senate to discontinue the treaty ratification process, and to return the now-rejected treaty to me, to the Oval Office, where I will dispose of it.”
How about not signing such treaties in the first place? 

No comments:

Post a Comment