|
International Reactions to US
Decision to Unilaterally Withdraw from the ABM Treaty
Reactions from:
Allies
and International Organizations
United
Kingdom
Russian Federation and Belarus
China
Allies and
International Organizations
Kofi
Annan, United Nations Secretary-General
The Secretary-General has noted with regret
the decision of the United States of America to withdraw unilaterally from
the 1972 Treaty on the Limitation of
Anti-Ballistic Missile Systems. The ABM Treaty has served for many years
as a cornerstone for maintaining global peace
and security and strategic stability.
He is
concerned that the annulation of this treaty may provoke an arms race,
especially in the missile area, and further undermine
disarmament and non-proliferation regimes. He calls upon all states to
explore new binding and irreversible initiatives
to avert such unwelcome effects. (14 December 2001, UN Web Site,
Statement of the Secretary-General)
Lord
Robertson, Secretary General of NATO
Today, President Bush announced
that the United States of America is withdrawing from the 1972 Anti
Ballistic Missile Treaty between the United States and the then Soviet
Union. In line with its commitment to maintain close consultations with
Allies, the United States briefed the North Atlantic Council this
afternoon. The United States explained that today’s decision is in the
context of the development of appropriate means to counter new security
challenges and terrorist threats such as weapons of mass destruction and
their means of delivery.
NATO welcomes the pledge of the United States of America to develop a new
framework of cooperation with Russia to enhance stability and re-inforce
cooperation on security issues, including dramatic reductions in strategic
nuclear weapons. We look forward to continuing our close consultations on
these issues. (13 December 2001, NATO Web Site, Press Release)
Andreas
Michaelis, German Federal Foreign Office Spokesman
"The German
Government...sees in the US decision an opportunity to reduce the
strategic nuclear threat, even if it would have welcomed a new
treaty-based arrangement to replace the ABM Treaty. All efforts should be
made to strengthen the international disarmament and arms control
regime." (13 December 2001, Federal
Foreign Office Website, Statement )
Anna Lindh, Swedish Foreign
Minister
"Sweden has pointed out repeatedly that a
unilateral decision to go ahead with missile defense
plans may potentially lead to a new arms race and have adverse effects for
disarmament and non-proliferation. Sweden has welcomed
the consultations between the Bush
administration and other countries, and had hoped that a constructive
solution would be found to the issues of disarmament and
non-proliferation. In this context, the consultations with Russia and
China have been particularly important. I call
upon the USA to continue consultations so as to achieve a joint solution
instead, a
solution that makes a positive contribution to disarmament and
non-proliferation" (13 December 2001, Swedish Ministry of Foreign
Affairs Website, Press Release)
French
Foreign Ministry
A foreign ministry
spokesman said France feared a legal void if the ABM treaty were not
replaced. “We are attached to the existence of a binding legal
structure, a key element for international security.” (13 December 2001,
Reuters, “Putin says US wrong over ABM, Europe Split”) Meanwhile
a foreign ministry statement called the ABM treaty “an essential
component of strategic stability in recent years.” (13
December 2001,
AFP,
“US withdrawal from ABM
Treaty gets mixed reaction”)
United Kingdom
Official Spokesman of UK
Prime Minister Tony Blair
“The ABM treaty is bilateral between the United
States and Russia. Therefore its future is [an issue] for those two
countries….What is important is the maintenance of strategic stability
rather than.... the particular framework to achieve it…. We
share United States concerns about the threats stemming from missiles and
weapons of mass destruction. We agree there is now a need for a
comprehensive strategy, including defensive systems, to counter such
threats.”(14
December 2001, The Guardian, “Europe Resigned While Britain
Clicks its Heels”)
Menzies Campbell, Liberal
Democrat Foreign Affairs Spokesman
A unilateral withdrawal would send “a
seismic shock through the structure of collective agreements and treaties
which have underpinned arms control for the past 30 years… It
is no longer possible for the government to hide behind its disingenuous
'wait till we are asked' policy in relation to Menwith Hill and
Fylingdales.” (14
December 2001, The Guardian, “Europe Resigned While Britain
Clicks its Heels”)
Russian Federation and Belarus
Vladimir
Putin, President of the Russian Federation
"We
did believe that this treaty was one of the fundamental pillars of the
overall security and stability system in the
world as established in recent decades. More than
30 other international agreements were based on that foundation - agreements
in areas of arms control and arms reduction. That is why we insisted
it should be maintained.
In
principle, we were prepared for certain modifications of the treaty. We
asked to be
given specific parameters that stood in the way of US desires to develop
defensive systems and implement programs. We were fully
prepared to discuss those parameters. But
nothing specific was given to us, no specific parameters to be negotiated.
We heard only insistent requests for bilateral
withdrawal from the treaty. To this day I fail
to understand this insistence, given our position, which was fairly
flexible.
I am very
much concerned in the face of the most negative development or
implication of this step,
that is, the extension of the arms race to outer space. If the leading
nuclear powers embark on this road, we will not be in a position to say
"no" to any other country." (15 December
2001, Financial Times, "Transcript: Interview with Vladimir
Putin")
Vladimir
Lukin, Deputy Speaker of the Duma:
The decision is “worse than a crime. It's a mistake in substance and
timing.” (14 December 2001, The Guardian, “Russia Puts a Brave
Face on the Inevitable”)
General
Anatoly Kvashnin, Chief of the Russian General Staff
“It will untie the hands of a number of countries, and may trigger a new
phase of the arms race.” (14 December 2001, The Guardian,
“Russia Puts a Brave Face on the Inevitable”)
Alexei
Arbatov, Member of the Duma
“To put
it figuratively, after the tragedy of September 11, Russia extended its
hand full-length to meet the United States in the spirit of cooperation
and even mutual alliance. And yesterday and today, the United States has
spat into that extended hand." (14
December 2001, New York Times, “Facing Pact's End, Putin Decides
To Grimace And Bear It”)
Vladimir
Putin, President of the Russian Federation
"The
leadership of the United States has spoken about it repeatedly and this
step has not come as a surprise to us. But we believe this decision to be
mistaken....our country elected not to accept the insistent proposals on
the part of the US to jointly withdraw from the ABM Treaty and did
everything it could to preserve the Treaty. I still think that this is a
correct and valid position. Russia was guided above all by the aim of
preserving and strengthening the international legal foundation in the
field of disarmament and non-proliferation of mass destruction
weapons" (13 December 2001, Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Website, Statement)
Pavel
Latushko, Press-secretary of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the
Republic of
Belarus:
"We have a critical approach to the USA decision of withdrawal
from the ABM Treaty, which played an important
role in securing reduction of international tension and curtailment of the
arms race. The USA withdrawal from the Treaty can destroy balance of
stability in the world and international security.
The problem
of withdrawal from the Treaty - this is a matter of confidence in nuclear
states, and to a certain extent this confidence could be blown up. At
present nuclear powers - UN Security Council members - to a considerable
degree appear as the guarantees of security in the world. We hope that
steady strategic cooperation and partnership between Russia and the USA
will make it possible to continue dialogue in order to elaborate the
concept of a new system of international security. (14 December 2001, Website
of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Belarus,
Statement)
China
Chinese Foreign Ministry
Statement
Chinese officials "stressed the importance of
safeguarding international military control and
the disarmament system and the stability of global strategy
in the current circumstances... We hope that the United States will
earnestly take into account the opinion
of the majority of the world's nations" (17 December 2001, Reuters,
“China Urges Stability as U.S. Missile Pact Talks End”)
Zhang
Qiyue, Spokeswoman for the Chinese Foreign Ministry
"It is of crucial importance to maintain the international
disarmament and arms control efforts….China opposes the missile defense
system. We are worried about the negative impact of the US move and hope
that the US will listen to the opinions of other countries, exercising
prudence on the question of missile defense….We maintain that the
various sides should hold strategic dialogue to seek ways to maintain the
global strategic balance without harming the international disarmament and
arms control efforts.” (14
December 2001, New York Times, “China Voices Muted Distress At
U.S. Blow To ABM Pact”)
Back to NMD Home Page
Back to Nuclear and WMD
|
