American about can become kinder

The Russian press enthusiastically discusses the Berlin meeting of US Secretary of State John Kerry and the Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov. The meeting in the capital of Germany, which takes place on February 26, can launch the discharge and a decrease in the intensity of discussion regarding the deployment of the global NATO missile defense system.

According to Kommersant, Lavrov and Kerry should discuss the conditions for cooperation in the field of pro, which in the foreseeable future may end with the signing by the presidents of the two countries of official declarations on this issue. Barack Obama has the opportunity to conclude such an agreement without the participation of the Senate, who, most likely, would have opposed any concessions of Russia in the defense issue.

The so -called “ executive agreement ”, which the president has the right to conclude, according to American legislation, in the legal sense is not an analogue of an international treaty, but the head of state may conclude it without the approval of parliamentarians. At the same time, the executive agreement is not mandatory for the next US president, and he may simply not extend his action. Therefore, this decision, if it is made, is, rather, only a temporary respite in the long history of the anti -Board of two nuclear powers.

The tension regarding the formation of the American about began to grow in the 90s, when the US presidents consistently developed a new concept of strategic defense initiative. Until the beginning of the 2000s. The practical implementation of these plans was restrained by an unlimited agreement on limiting the missile defense systems, which was concluded between the United States and the USSR in 1972.

This agreement enshrined the refusal of the parties to develop and deploy systems about ground, sea, air and space basing, created to protect against ballistic missiles. In other words, the countries agreed that the holding factor of bilateral relations will be the prospect of mutual destruction in the event of a nuclear conflict.

However, in the late 90s. An official start was given to the National US Missile Defense System. In March 1999, the American Senate decided to make a system deploying about the priority of state policy. It is interesting that literally a month and a half before, US Secretary of State Madeleine Olbright visited Moscow and, in a conversation with Boris Yeltsin, confirmed the “adherence of the US agreement agreement, expressing their readiness to continue close contacts with Russia on this issue.”

Already in 2000, American experts began installation of the Globe -2 radar station (American name - Have Stare) in the Norwegian city of Vardo. According to the American side, the station was intended to monitor the space space, and not to control the launches of ballistic missiles, but the Russian Foreign Ministry did not accept this argument and announced a violation of the contract for restriction of missile defense systems.

The next year, George Bush announced that the missile defense system will ensure the safety of not only the territory of the United States, but also their allies. Then it was announced the possibility of placing system elements in other countries. Thus, the national about began to turn into global. At the end of 2001, George Bush notified Vladimir Putin about a one -way exit from the 1972 agreement, and the official termination of the document occurred in the summer of 2002.

After that, the number of countries, in one way or another involved in the development or placement of the missile defense system, began to grow rapidly. The anxiety of the Russian authorities increased, the reaction of which each time became more and more tough.

For example, in 2003, when the UK consent to the placement of American recruiters on the basis of the British Air Force File, the Russian Foreign Ministry, in its official note, expressed anxiety mainly about the “global stability”, the difficulty of “the process of weapons reduction”, as well as “the distraction of resources from opposing international terrorism.

And in 2004, after Denmark allowed the United States to modernize the American radar station in Tula, on the territory of Greenland, Russian diplomats published a statement that noted that in the American about “a certain potential was laid down that can cause damage to Russian security”, and Russia “reserves the right to take all measures necessary to maintain it at the proper level.”

The proposals of the Russian side for organizing joint projects in the field of PROs that would meet the interests of both parties, have not led to anything. The rhetoric reached maximum acuteness in 2007, at the peak of discussions about the placement of Poland elements in Poland, the Czech Republic and other countries of Eastern Europe. Speaking at the Munich conference on security issues, Vladimir Putin called a policy that violates the international military-strategic parity, a “ catalyst for arms race ”. He openly expressed doubts that the Pro system was directed against Iranian or Korean missiles, and also announced the unfriendly Policy of NATO in relation to Russia.

Representatives of the American side repeatedly emphasized that the missile defense system was not directed against Russia, but Moscow demanded the provision of any written guarantees and contractual obligations regarding the use of the NATO PRO. Such a document would give the country the opportunity to more reasonably dispute the approach of the elements of the system to its borders. If the NATO leadership accepts an official declaration that the about this is not directed against Russia, then the discrepancies between this statement and the real actions to deploy elements of the system will become “more noticeable” for the international community.

The hope for a quick solution to the issue did not justify even after the “reboot” of Russian-American relations, which Hillary Clinton and Sergey Lavrov announced in 2009. Judging by the latest statements, which at the beginning of February 2013 at the Munich Conference was voiced by the Foreign Minister of the Russian Federation, the question of the United States and Russia remains the question of the pro. Particular attention was paid to the same topic in the new “concept of foreign policy of the Russian Federation”.

It is obvious that in the current situation it is worth welcoming any progress in such an acute issue of interstate relations. However, even if Obama and Putin sign declarative agreements, and Russia will receive a document that will say that the system about “not directed against it”, this will not solve the main problem . Firstly, the next US president will be able to quickly and legally refuse to fulfill even these formal conditions. And secondly, no personal agreements of the existing leaders of the two countries will force the radars and anti-randomes that are under the control of NATO command.