By Celia Canon- Talk Radio News Service

As the U.S-Russia summit from July 6th-8th nears, former Secretary of Defense William Cohen, who spoke at the Center for American Progress Thursday, delivered an optimistic message on the chances of cooperation between the two nations based on goals that both share.

“The distrust is long, it’s deep, but in my opinion it’s not irresponsible… [President Obama] has to decide what the nature of our relationship is going to be with Russia. He has to identify 5 or 6 areas of potential cooperation,” said Cohen.

Russian political experts and Washington think-tanks alike believe the upcoming summit could produce a renewal in Russo-American ties.

Cohen and Dr. Samuel Charap, a Fellow at the Center for American Progress, identified six points of common interest between the U.S. and Russia: Arms control and non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, stability and security for the former Soviet region, the fight against violent extremism, the introduction of Russia to Western organizations such as the WTO, energy conservation, and the health and wellness of the two populations.

On the scheduled expiration of START, ratified by Russia and the United States in 1991 to achieve a dramatic reduction in strategic forces, Cohen said “If President Obama and his counterparts are dedicated to doing that [complete the renewal of START by the end of the year], it’s achievable.”

Cohen reiterated the importance of Russia’s role in foreign affairs, indicating that “the non proliferation of weapons of mass destruction: we both have interests in that; curbing Iranian and North Korean nuclear ambitions. Frankly I don’t really think we will be able to solve Iran’s ambitions for nuclear weapons capability without the help of Russia. Russia will have far more leverage than we will. The question is are they going to be wiling to exercise that leverage in their dealings with Iran. They have serious commercial interests in Iran…”

Charap agreed with Cohen that the U.S. should include Russia in international organizations.

“The administration’s policies should be guided by the long term goal of integrating Russia into western and other international institutions. integration in these structures, rather than isolation from them is in the U.S national interest because they require greater accountability,” said Charap.

In addition to national security issues, Cohen also discussed economic benefits of renewed ties between the two nations.

“[Russians] need to have Western investment and it has not exactly been a hospitable environment for Western investment. There are serious questions remaining concerning the rule of law… and safe investment,” said Cohen, adding that “The U.S should encourage the development of a democratic Russia that observes the universal values of human rights, political pluralism and the rule of law” in order to encourage foreign direct investment.

President Barack Obama will follow-up the 4th of July holiday with an over-seas trip to Russia, Italy, and Ghana.

Obama will arrive at the Russian capitol on July 6th and meet with current and former Russian leaders including a breakfast with Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, current President Dimtry Medvedev, and the former Soviet Union President Mikhail Gorbachev.

The Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START), which is set to expire in December, is expected to a primary focus between the two countries’ leaders.

The U.S. President will also deliver a major speech on U.S.-Russia relations at the New Economic School in Moscow.

The next day Obama will travel to L’aquila, Italy for a series of meetings in preparation for the upcoming G8 Summit. The President is also expected to visit Vatican City, where he will attend a meeting with Pope Benedict XVI.

Before returning to Washington, the Obama will make a final stop in Ghana, where the President will deliver a speech highlighting the country’s improvement in over-all governance.

Fritz Ermath, Former National Intelligence Council Chairman, says U.S. policy making toward Russia should be informed by the deepest possible understanding of Russia. He says the U.S. devoted extensive research to that understanding during the Cold War, and the current policy-makers need to study Russia more today. (0:45)

 

 Standard Podcast [0:45m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

Baker Spring, Research Fellow of National Security Policy at the Heritage Foundation, described the Obama administration’s failure to conduct the fundamental reviews necessary for a well grounded arms control policy as a “rush to failure”. Spring went on to add that arms control was at the heart of the U.S.-Soviet relationship and is now a central theme of the U.S.-Russia relationship. (1:04)

 

 Standard Podcast [1:04m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

Yevgeny Volk, Coordinator at the Heritage Foundation’s Moscow office, joins a discussion, via satellite, on the upcoming U.S.-Russia Summit. He says Russia must look at arms control as a two-way street, not only preventing present threats but also forthcoming threats. He also adds that they must realize that the threats are not coming from the United States. (0:40)

 

 Standard Podcast [0:40m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

By Celia Canon- Talk Radio News Service

Charles D. Ferguson and Stephen Sestanovich, Senior Fellows at the Council on Foreign Relations, explained that the 1991 START non-proliferation treaty may not be renewed following the U.S.-Russia Summit this July.

“There can’t be an agreement unless there’s also a formal renunciation by the U.S of the missile defense plan. That’s rather unlikely to happen, and if the Russian stick to that line, the chances of arms control are [slim],” said Sestanovich.

START (Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty) was ratified in 1991 by Russia and the U.S in an effort to achieve a dramatic reduction in strategic forces such as warheads and inter-continental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) in the post-Cold War era.

According to the U.S. based Arms Control Association, “Russia claimed 4,237 total deployed strategic warheads under the terms of the 1991 START nuclear reductions agreement” while the U.S has 3,696 deployed strategic warheads.

“What has really agitated the Russians… is the American plan to deploy some rather basic elements of the missile defense system in Eastern Europe,” Sestanovich explained, referencing the Bush administration’s decision to install missiles at a base in Poland and to build a radar station in the Czech Republic. Both deals intended to protect Europe from “rogue states” such as Iran.

Ferguson added, “The [Obama] administration has a review of its missile defense policy on the way, and that makes it a little more difficult for them to reach any specific understandings with the Russian about this issue. They can’t offer certain kinds of assurances.”

President Barack Obama has recently agreed to halt military developments in Eastern Europe if Russia agrees to participate actively against Iran.

Ferguson countered Moscow’s accusations that a U.S presence in neighboring states is a serious military threat, saying “What we are looking at is a much smaller, much more modest missile defense system… There’s really no technical reasons for the Russians to be worried at this stage about missile defense as it is currently proposed.”

By Celia Canon-Talk Radio News Service

Boris Nemstov, Russia’s former Deputy Prime Minister, believes that the global financial crisis is forcing changes in Russia’s balance of power. Consequently, Nemstov urged President Barack Obama during a discussion at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace Center on Thursday to focus more attention on Russian President Dmitry Medvedev in order to achieve a stronger democracy.

“[For a ] transformation from an authoritarian to a democratic regime, the best way is to give a chance to Medvedev to be a real president,” since, as Nestov explained, Medvedev is in charge of foreign affairs while former President and current Prime Minister Vladimir Putin takes care of domestic concerns.

Nemstov stressed that “Putinism is disastrous for Russia…Obama plays by Putin’s rules which [are] crazy, its unconstitutional.”

Discord between the two countries has presented a challenge to the U.S. in the past few of years following Russia’s desire to expand in the Arctic, however the U.S has recently extended a hand to Russia in order to enforce sanctions against North Korea for their missile tests.

By Michael Combier-Talk Radio News Service

In the midst of a global crisis, two wars and nuclear threats, it is crucial that the United States reinforce its relationships with its European allies, especially Russia said Philip H. Gordon, assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs. Gordon’s remarks came during testimony he issues in front of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.

Gordon argued that the United States should put its past difficulties with Russia “behind us to the extent possible.” However, in a reference to last July’s conflict between Georgia and Russia, Gordon said that the U.S. “will not abandon our principles or ignore concerns about democracy and human rights…We don’t recognize any privilege sphere of influence for Russia in Europe [and] we will also continue to support the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Russia’s neighbors.”

“The U.S. and Russia can still work together where our interests coincide while seeking to narrow our differences in an open and mutually respectful way.”

Said Gordon, “the greatest success we have in preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles, the less there is a need for a missile defense system in Europe. If that threat goes away, the need for the system also goes away,” adding that a nuclear North Korea and nuclear Iran also pose great threats to Russia’s security as well.

Four members of the French Parliament were present in the audience during the hearing.

By Celia Canon- Talk Radio News Service

Americans should be more concerned by the proliferation of nuclear weapons from North Korea to other states or non-state actors, rather than focus on a direct N.Korean nuclear attack on the Western World.

Such was the conclusion of former Secretary of Defense William Perry when addressing the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) on U.S nuclear weapons policy today.

“When we are concerned about proliferation, for example from N.Korea to Iran, we are concerned with the possibility that nuclear terrorists might be a bomb… The greater danger is that the bomb or the fissile material leak from one of these countries.” said Perry.

On Monday, N.Korea announced that it had successfully detonated and underground nuclear bomb, and on Tuesday, it launched two short-range ballistic missiles. As a result, the Obama administration may be facing an unexpected turn in the nuclear debate.

The topic is gaining momentum as talks between the U.S and Russia on the renewal of the 1991 Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (Start) are feared to be unsuccessful.

That N.Korea has nuclear capabilities and is testing missiles has fanned the flames on the necessity to reconsider the reduction in the Department of Defense FY2010 budget.

Perry was joined by Brent Scowcroft, former assistant to the President for National Security Affairs who explained that “a great danger in nuclear terrorism lies with the civilian nuclear power and the loose fissile material that comes with that.”

Scowcroft appealed to the security dilemma to provide a link between N.Korea or Iran acquiring a nuclear power and nuclear terrorism.

“If we don’t put a cap on proliferation now, we could easily face 30 or 40 countries with that capability, That is not a better world,” said Scowcroft, adding that “If [Iran and N.Korea] are free to enrich uranium to weapons grade, then you have others who want to do it just for protection or whatever and then you have a tremendous danger of terrorists getting hold of fissile material and then its relatively easy.”

The U.S government had already started to deal with this problem under the Bush junior administration, as Perry explains: “For one thing I support the initiative of the previous administration called the Proliferation Security initiative (PSI) and the recent moves to strengthen this initiative.”

Former President George.W. Bush said that PSI’s aim is “to keep the world’s most destructive weapons away from our shores and out of the hands of our common enemies.”

The initiative is limited to controlling alien ships in one’s waters to search for weapons. Airways are however not part of the PSI.

By Celia Canon- Talk Radio News Service.

Analysts for the Brookings Institution gathered to assess the North Korean threat on America and its allies in reaction to N.Korea’s recent underground nuclear bomb detonation and the launch of two short-range missiles.

The think tank was pressed into discussing the matter following North-Korea’s acceleration in its military activity.

Pyongyang had already caught the international community’s attention in October 2007 by unsuccessfully testing a nuclear weapon.

However the threat posed by the North Asian state has reached new heights after N.Korea announced that it had conducted underground nuclear tests on Monday, followed by two short-range missiles (a ground-to-ship missile and a ground-to-air missile) launched from an east-coast base on Tuesday.

Michael O’Hanlon, a Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institution warned that although “Their options are limited,” threats must be taken seriously, they must be mitigated.

Richard Bush, a Senior Fellow and Director for the Center for Northeast Asian Policy Studies, confirmed that “They have a problem though, and that is that deterrence is not yet credible; their missiles don’t fly far enough and accurately enough, the weapons design is not yet perfect and so they need to test, that’s the only way they can demonstrate to others that they have the capability to inflict harm on the United States and on Japan.”

If the production of the missiles is one leap closer to achieving significant nuclear capabilities, O’Hanlon explained that “The real issue is the size of the weapon and how deliverable it would be by the North Koreans, if they were to choose to deliver it some day.”

Additionally, “[The missile] has to survive the stresses of missile flight, which are no trivial,” said O’Hanlon.

However, according to the analysts, this does not mean that a threat is nonexistent but rather that the U.S should not be concerned by missiles coming from North Korea directly.

O’Hanlon said “I would say the most worrisome question is the sale of nuclear material because if they attack South Korea, their regime will end.”

O’Hanlon concluded that “The only thing they can plausibly get way with is the sale.”