#5596
#4
US seeks to downplay fears of instability from ABM
treaty withdrawal
AFP
December 13, 2001
Senior US officials moved frantically to downplay fears that President George W. Bush's decision to abandon the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty could cause global instability.
But with the White House, State Department and Pentagon all refusing to publicly confirm the move until Bush announces it, possibly as early as Thursday, the officials' messages appeared aimed at defending the decision to treaty partner Russia, wary allies in Europe and rising power China.
"We have reached the point where we have to do it," one senior US official said, noting tests for the national missile defense Bush wants to deploy will soon run afoul of the treaty which bars such systems.
"But we don't see it as creating a major crisis of any kind," the official said of Washington's impending notification to Moscow that it will unilaterally withdraw from the treaty six months after the announcement.
That official and others stressed negotiations with Moscow on strategic topics other than missile defense -- particularly reductions in offensive weapons -- would continue.
And they insisted repeatedly that Bush had done all he could in three summit meetings with Russian President Vladimir Putin to reach an agreement that would have stopped short of unilateral withdrawal.
"The president made a very strong attempt, but it wasn't possible so we find ourselves in the position that we tell the only country in the world that has a missile defense that we are going to withdraw," a senior State Department official said.
He referred to the fact that Russia took advantage of a provision in the 29-year-old treaty that allows a limited missile shield to be deployed over one city and other officials said US attempts at compromise followed a three-stage process.
The first, they said, was the idea that the treaty could be edited or amended to allow for missile shields that would meet Bush's aim to defend against so-called "rogue states."
After that initiative failed over US concerns, the idea of mutual withdrawal of the treaty was mooted.
Russia rejected that concept and then proposed a looser reading of the pact that would allow missile defense tests Washington had considered to be prohibited.
Ultimately, US officials believed that to be unfeasible and began to try to focus on ambitious cuts in offensive weaponry to assuage concerns that its withdrawal from ABM could spark a new arms race.
The officials pointed to the fact that Bush -- who has made no secret of his belief that the treaty is a Cold War relic -- and Putin -- who believes the pact is a cornerstone of strategic stability -- had agreed in principle to lower the number of nuclear warheads they keep by about two-thirds.
"Greater stability being achieved by these reductions in offensive weapons than instability caused by getting rid of this outmoded treaty," a second State Department official said.
Convincing the rest of the world of this, however, appeared Wednesday to be a difficult task.
Already, US allies in Europe have voiced concern and on Monday, after Secretary of State Colin Powell held meetings with officials in Berlin, German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder said he favored keeping the treaty in place "in one form or another."
Schroeder, presumably briefed by Powell on US plans to withdraw from the pact, said it was clear that there were differences on the matter that would result in "some upheaval."
Many in Washington believe that a nervous Europe will push very hard for the United States and Russia to negotiate some kind of broader strategic deal in the six months between Bush's announcement and the actual withdrawal.
"The Europeans will be disappointed and will be pressing the United States to try to negotiate a replacement agreement before the six months is up," said Lee Feinstein, a fellow at the Carnegie Institute for International Peace.
"Europe wants predictability and some kind of a framework in which US-Russia relations are managed."
US officials have made clear there is room for talk about the strategic relationship in general but Feinstein and others believe a harsh Russian reaction to the pullout announcement might not make that feasible, giving Europe even more to be concerned about.
"If Russian reaction is muted then they will be muted," Feinstein said. "If Russian reaction is negative, then they're going to push very hard for a replacement."
Back to the Top Next Article
December 13, 2001:
#5595 #5596
- Back to the Top -