Connect with us

RussiaFeed

News

Politics

PUTIN: 9/11 was not inside job

Published

on

40 Views

Oliver Stone and Vladimir Putin discussed the September 11th attacks during a series of interviews which recently aired in the US.

While most people in the US no longer believe the official story of how the towers collapsed on 9/11, man more have posited theories on how and why officials from within the US deep state helped to orchestrate the attacks.

Vladimir Putin responded to the theories in the following way, in the midst of a wider discussion on the NSA whistle-blower Edward Snowden,

“I don’t believe that (the US side planned to stick US whistle-blower Edward Snowden in Russia to call him a traitor). Nor do I believe that the American intelligence services were the ones to organise the terrorist attacks in New York”.

So there you have it…unless Putin was simply being diplomatic?

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Advertisement
36 Comments

36
Leave a Reply

avatar
13 Comment threads
23 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
19 Comment authors
667..neighbor of the beastTim Webbregvernon .DarkEyesIsabella Jones Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Zchnetterhorn
Guest
Zchnetterhorn

Doesn’t exclude i side job

Zchnetterhorn
Guest
Zchnetterhorn

Doesn’t exclude insider job

Isabella Jones
Guest
Isabella Jones

He doesn’t exclude the idea of an inside job. He just says he doesn’t believe it was the Intelligence services who organised it. The statement leaves the field wide open.

regvernon .
Guest
regvernon .

An FBI field officer drew attention to the group taking flying lessons. His report was not acted on. This suggests that at the highest levels of the FBI there may have been both knowledge of the plans and complicity.

Isabella Jones
Guest
Isabella Jones

Indeed. True. But they could have been acting under orders. What V. Putin said was that he didn’t believe they organised it. I have no doubt that certain elements in the Corridors of Power in US probably acting in collusion with Saudi Arabia, were involved in making it happen. Ultimately many people were dragged in down the line I imagine. Certainly there have been huge amounts of input from flight specialists regarding the impossibility of flying in a tight curve so low, of many many issues, which are enough to convince that the whole thing was some sort of set… Read more »

Tim Webb
Guest
Tim Webb

Cui Bono?
Israel.

regvernon .
Guest
regvernon .

You don’t know that. You are speculating, probably because of the ‘dancing Israelis.’ Judging by the Stock Market trades in advance of the event, a lot of people knew something was going to happen so Cui Bono applies more widely than might be thought. One thing is certain for sure, Israel does not have the ability to deploy the kind of directed weapons technology that turned the Twin Towers to microscopic dust in mid air so whatever the involvement of Israelis (as opposed to Israel) I prefer to think that if any such were involved it was on the role… Read more »

Tim Webb
Guest
Tim Webb

There was a great deal more jewish involvement than merely a few “dancing Israelis”.
Perhaps you should investigate the situation a little more thoroughly than you have done.

regvernon .
Guest
regvernon .

Oh yes? And where, pray, should I look? And Jewish involvement means what in your book?

Tim Webb
Guest
Tim Webb

Jewish involvement, in my and anybody else’s book, means that jews organized, committed, filmed, and benefited from, the events of that day.
There are many places where you could begin your investigation into the truth; but how about researching the jewish “art students” who described on jew TV how they had been in the US to observe and record the events as they unfolded.

Anne Felippe
Guest
Anne Felippe

Dont forget israel’s complicity

Bessarabyn
Guest
Bessarabyn

yes ; his term was “to organise ” . Read. It was organised by foreign agencies , Mossad … and U$ agencies told to turn blind eyes at certain defined (organised) times and locations .

Natylie Baldwin
Guest

I vote for being diplomatic. It makes one wonder why he would even mention it at all since that wasn’t the question. It wouldn’t be in Putin’s interest to be the one to say that it was. 19 hijackers didn’t defy physics and make the buildings come down at free fall speed in their own footprints by driving airplanes into them. Those guys didn’t wire the buildings for demolition. Nor did they have anything to do with NORAD standing down when not 1, not 2, not 3, but 4 or 5 planes go off course over major American cities, including… Read more »

Isabella Jones
Guest
Isabella Jones

And I agree – the official story is clearly utter balderdash. I just emphasis that V.V. said he did not “believe” [i.e. he isn’t claiming he has any evidence of any sort] that the intelligence agencies “organised” the atrocity. This leaves the entire field of [a] who did and [b] at what point they were involved, wide open, is all I am saying. Agree also – it’s not clear exactly why he mentioned it, however, bringing subjects into an answer that seems tangential is something Putin does a lot. Whether he is thinking aloud, rambling in one direction while thinking… Read more »

Natylie Baldwin
Guest

Good to hear from you, Isabella. I thought I heard a while back that you were actually living in Russia. Hope all is well. I just was there for 2 weeks (Moscow and St Petersburg). Would love to go back again and just stay in St. Petersburg for about 10 days. Love that city – so beautiful.

Isabella Jones
Guest
Isabella Jones

Hi Natylie – thanks for your good wishes. Yes, I am currently living in Russia but in Vladivostok. Whilst it has it’s points of interest, my overriding desire is to make it to Moscow and St. Petersberg. However, much depends on how events unfold, because – as you would well know – for we visitors, everything depends on the elusive Visa !! I’d love to be able to stay and live and work there for at least a year, if not longer however, … could be difficult. It’s interesting getting the “other take” from the things you read both in… Read more »

Natylie Baldwin
Guest

That sounds great. As I recall, Vladivistok is the 3rd largest city after Moscow and St. Pete. Good to hear what it’s like from your stay there. From what I’ve heard from people who have experience with it, it’s very difficult for most westerners to get a visa for more than 3 months at a time and most expatriates have to travel to Finland for a few days and come back in. You can stay for 3 months and then have to leave and come back. It sounds like a pain but a fair number of people do it. Good… Read more »

Isabella Jones
Guest
Isabella Jones

Well, there are visa’s for longer than 3 months – not tourist ones’ though. You can get a work visa for a year if you can get a contract plus letter of invitation. a student visa ditto but that’s about all. I’m investigating soon the 3 yr “Temporary” visa, but what it’s restrictions are I dont know. They all have restrictions, in that the Work Visa requires you to apply for the first time to a Russian Embassy in your “home” country which makes a few issues, and on it goes. You can renew it by crossing the border every… Read more »

DarkEyes
Guest
DarkEyes

And, Isabella, is the knowledge of the language of the land a condition for a work-visa for let’s say one year?

Isabella Jones
Guest
Isabella Jones

No DarkEyes, it isn’t. You need knowledge of the language for Government jobs, but not for an ordinary Work Visa, no. Just the letter of invitation and your work contract. I am planning to make a visit to the Dept. Immigration early next month, to dig deeper into the 3 yr Temp. Res. Visa, and will happily let anyone who wants know what I discover.

DarkEyes
Guest
DarkEyes

Thank you, Isabella. Yes, please.

Aleksandar Tomić
Guest
Aleksandar Tomić

The statue itself is the proof it was an inside job. Jet fuel, melting, steel beams… 😉

Le Ruscino
Guest
Le Ruscino

Putin is smart as he has to say this because he knows the Yanks are on a terrible hook until the crash & burn of their economy.

The Global War of Terror has failed to save the American economy just as the intended war with Russia & the current attempt to start a war with China.

No War = Curtains for the US – unless Trump can get Americans back to work ?

Penrose
Guest
Penrose

Who wants to tell all of those grieving American parents that their children were killed or maimed in the Middle East for an ignoble purpose.

Le Ruscino
Guest
Le Ruscino

There’s 200 Million dead in the last century for exactly the same purpose if truth be told – that a lot of grieving parents of which very few were American.

Henrik
Guest
Henrik

That’s if you don’t count the ones who have lost their lives in both world wars and other conflicts,to save the world

DarkEyes
Guest
DarkEyes

To save the world? Of what?

Penrose
Guest
Penrose

A program for America:
1) Cut the military budget by 80% and bring the troops home.
2) Put the above cuts into rebuilding infrastructure.
3) Build a nationwide modern train system.
4) Get rid of the Federal Reserve debt money system and assign interest free money creation to the government.

Phillip Kokesh
Guest
Phillip Kokesh

no, he was being most precise in his wording; the folks controlling the intelligence services are the culprits… 😉

Dennis Morrisseau
Guest

OK, Who then?…….There was huge Israeli involvement we know.

Dennis Morrisseau
US Army Officer [Vietnam era] ANTI-WAR
–BACK ON THE TRUMP TRAIN–
Lieutenant Morrisseau’s Rebellion
FIRECONGRESS.org
Second Vermont Republic
POB 177, W. Pawlet, VT USA 05775
dmorso1@netzero.net
802 645 9727

Doug Brown
Guest
Doug Brown

Whatever. Those buildings came down in their own footprint and only controlled demolition is capable of achieving such precision. No one was charged for this crime. The people responsible are still free.
It’s a smelly rotting affair and make no mistake.

ignasi
Guest
ignasi

He says were not of intelligence
Because it is the government that moves all the threads of the damn lie

CumExApostolatus
Guest
CumExApostolatus

Mr. Putin is wily coyote.

M Green
Guest
M Green

I just finished watching all four hours of the Putin Interviews and I do not believe that Putin makes this statement about 9/11. I vividly recall him stating that it was not the plan of the US intelligence services to strand Snowden in Russia. Putin then quipped, “They’re not that clever,” but did not follow it up with any comment on 9/11, let alone the one given here. I have written a good deal about 9/11 and if Putin had said this I would not have missed it. If I am mistaken, perhaps the author or one of the commentators… Read more »

667..neighbor of the beast
Guest
667..neighbor of the beast

Response to Bin Laden assassination:

Russia is ready to help step up efforts to combat terror, saying only joint efforts can produce results.
“Russia was among the first countries to face the dangers inherent in global terrorism, and unfortunately knows what al Qaeda is …not from hearsay,” the Kremlin said. “Retribution will inevitably reach all terrorists.”

667..neighbor of the beast
Guest
667..neighbor of the beast

Latest

High-ranking Ukrainian official reports on US interference in Ukraine

It is not usually the case that an American media outlet tells the truth about Ukraine, but it appears to have happened here.

Seraphim Hanisch

Published

on

The Hill committed what may well have been a random act of journalism when it reported that Ukrainian Prosecutor General, Yuriy Lutsenko, told Hill.tv’s reporter John Solomon that the American ambassador to that country, Marie Yovanovitch, gave him a “do not prosecute” list at their first meeting.

Normally, all things Russia are covered by the American press as “bad”, and all things Ukraine are covered by the same as “good.” Yet this report reveals quite a bit about the nature of the deeply embedded US interests that are involved in Ukraine, and which also attempt to control and manipulate policy in the former Soviet republic.

The Hill’s piece continues (with our added emphases):

“Unfortunately, from the first meeting with the U.S. ambassador in Kiev, [Yovanovitch] gave me a list of people whom we should not prosecute,” Lutsenko, who took his post in 2016, told Hill.TV last week.

“My response of that is it is inadmissible. Nobody in this country, neither our president nor our parliament nor our ambassador, will stop me from prosecuting whether there is a crime,” he continued.

Indeed, the Prosecutor General appears to be a man of some principles. When this report was brought to the attention of the US State Department, the response was predictable:

The State Department called Lutsenko’s claim of receiving a do not prosecute list, “an outright fabrication.” 

“We have seen reports of the allegations,” a department spokesperson told Hill.TV. “The United States is not currently providing any assistance to the Prosecutor General’s Office (PGO), but did previously attempt to support fundamental justice sector reform, including in the PGO, in the aftermath of the 2014 Revolution of Dignity. When the political will for genuine reform by successive Prosecutors General proved lacking, we exercised our fiduciary responsibility to the American taxpayer and redirected assistance to more productive projects.”

This is an amazing statement in itself. “Our fiduciary responsibility to the American taxpayer”? Are Americans even aware that their country is spending their tax dollars in an effort to manipulate a foreign government in what can probably well be called a low-grade proxy war with the Russian Federation? Again, this appears to be a slip, as most American media do a fair job of maintaining the narrative that Ukraine is completely independent and that its actions regarding the United States and Russia are taken in complete freedom.

Hill.TV has reached out to the U.S. Embassy in Ukraine for comment.

Lutsenko also said that he has not received funds amounting to nearly $4 million that the U.S. Embassy in Ukraine was supposed to allocate to his office, saying that “the situation was actually rather strange” and pointing to the fact that the funds were designated, but “never received.”

“At that time we had a case for the embezzlement of the U.S. government technical assistance worth 4 million U.S. dollars, and in that regard, we had this dialogue,” he said. “At that time, [Yovanovitch] thought that our interviews of Ukrainian citizens, of Ukrainian civil servants, who were frequent visitors of the U.S. Embassy put a shadow on that anti-corruption policy.”

“Actually, we got the letter from the U.S. Embassy, from the ambassador, that the money that we are speaking about [was] under full control of the U.S. Embassy, and that the U.S. Embassy did not require our legal assessment of these facts,” he said. “The situation was actually rather strange because the funds we are talking about were designated for the prosecutor general’s office also and we told [them] we have never seen those, and the U.S. Embassy replied there was no problem.”

“The portion of the funds, namely 4.4 million U.S. dollars were designated and were foreseen for the recipient Prosecutor General’s office. But we have never received it,” he said.

Yovanovitch previously served as the U.S. ambassador to Armenia under former presidents Obama and George W. Bush, as well as ambassador to Kyrgyzstan under Bush. She also served as ambassador to Ukraine under Obama.

Former Rep. Pete Sessions (R-Texas), who was at the time House Rules Committee chairman, voiced concerns about Yovanovitch in a letter to the State Department last year in which he said he had proof the ambassador had spoken of her “disdain” for the Trump administration.

This last sentence may be a way to try to narrow the scope of American interference in Ukraine down to the shenanigans of just a single person with a personal agenda. However, many who have followed the story of Ukraine and its surge in anti-Russian rhetoric, neo-Naziism, ultra-nationalism, and the most recent events surrounding the creation of a pseudo-Orthodox “church” full of Ukrainian nationalists and atheists as a vehicle to import “Western values” into a still extremely traditional and Christian land, know that there are fingerprints of the United States “deep state” embeds all over this situation.

It is somewhat surprising that so much that reveals the problem showed up in just one report. It will be interesting to see if this gets any follow-up in the US press.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

President Putin signs law blocking fake news, but the West makes more

Western media slams President Putin and his fake news law, accusing him of censorship, but an actual look at the law reveals some wisdom.

Seraphim Hanisch

Published

on

The TASS Russian News Agency reported on March 18th that Russian President Vladimir Putin signed off on a new law intended to block distorted or untrue information being reported as news. Promptly after he did so, Western news organizations began their attempt to “spin” this event as some sort of proof of “state censorship” in the oppressive sense of the old Soviet Union. In other words, a law designed to prevent fake news was used to create more fake news.

One of the lead publications is a news site that is itself ostensibly a “fake news” site. The Moscow Times tries to portray itself as a Russian publication that is conducted from within Russian borders. However, this site and paper is really a Western publication, run by a Dutch foundation located in the Netherlands. As such, the paper and the website associated have a distinctly pro-West slant in their reporting. Even Wikipedia noted this with this comment from their entry about the publication:

In the aftermath of the Ukrainian crisis, The Moscow Times was criticized by a number of journalists including Izvestia columnist Israel Shamir, who in December 2014 called it a “militant anti-Putin paper, a digest of the Western press with extreme bias in covering events in Russia”.[3] In October 2014 The Moscow Times made the decision to suspend online comments after an increase in offensive comments. The paper said it disabled comments for two reasons—it was an inconvenience for its readers as well as being a legal liability, because under Russian law websites are liable for all content, including user-generated content like comments.[14]

This bias is still notably present in what is left of the publication, which is now an online-only news source. This is some of what The Moscow Times had to say about the new fake news legislation:

The bills amending existing information laws overwhelmingly passed both chambers of Russian parliament in less than two months. Observers and some lawmakers have criticized the legislation for its vague language and potential to stifle free speech.

The legislation will establish punishments for spreading information that “exhibits blatant disrespect for the society, government, official government symbols, constitution or governmental bodies of Russia.”

Insulting state symbols and the authorities, including Putin, will carry a fine of up to 300,000 rubles and 15 days in jail for repeat offenses.

As is the case with other Russian laws, the fines are calculated based on whether the offender is a citizen, an official or a legal entity.

More than 100 journalists and public figures, including human rights activist Zoya Svetova and popular writer Lyudmila Ulitskaya, signed a petition opposing the laws, which they labeled “direct censorship.”

This piece does give a bit of explanation from Dmitry Peskov, showing that European countries also have strict laws governing fake news distribution. However, the Times made the point of pointing out the idea of “insulting governmental bodies of Russia… including Putin” to bolster their claim that this law amounts to real censorship of the press. It developed its point of view based on a very short article from Reuters which says even less about the legislation and how it works.

However, TASS goes into rather exhaustive detail about this law, and it also gives rather precise wording on the reason for the law’s passage, as well as how it is to be enforced. We include most of this text here, with emphases added:

Russian President Vladimir Putin has signed a law on blocking untrue and distorting information (fake news). The document was posted on the government’s legal information web portal.

The document supplements the list of information, the access to which may be restricted on the demand by Russia’s Prosecutor General or his deputies. In particular, it imposes a ban on “untrue publicly significant information disseminated in the media and in the Internet under the guise of true reports, which creates a threat to the life and (or) the health of citizens, property, a threat of the mass violation of public order and (or) public security, or the threat of impeding or halting the functioning of vital infrastructural facilities, transport or social infrastructure, credit institutions, energy, industrial or communications facilities.”

Pursuant to the document, in case of finding such materials in Internet resources registered in accordance with the Russian law on the mass media as an online media resource, Russia’s Prosecutor General or his deputies will request the media watchdog Roskomnadzor to restrict access to the corresponding websites.

Based on this request, Roskomnadzor will immediately notify the editorial board of the online media resource, which is in violation of the legislation, about the need to remove untrue information and the media resource will be required to delete such materials immediately. If the editorial board fails to take the necessary measures, Roskomnadzor will send communications operators “a demand to take measures to restrict access to the online resource.”

In case of deleting such untrue information, the website owner will notify Roskomnadzor thereof, following which the media watchdog will “hold a check into the authenticity of this notice” and immediately inform the communications operator about the resumption of the access to the information resource.
The conditions for the law are very specific, as are the penalties for breaking it. TASS continued:

Liability for breaching the law

Simultaneously, the Federation Council approved the associated law with amendments to Russia’s Code of Administrative Offences, which stipulates liability in the form of penalties of up to 1.5 million rubles (around $23,000) for the spread of untrue and distorting information.

The Code’s new article, “The Abuse of the Freedom of Mass Information,” stipulates liability for disseminating “deliberately untrue publicly significant information” in the media or in the Internet. The penalty will range from 30,000 rubles ($450) to 100,000 rubles ($1,520) for citizens, from 60,000 rubles ($915) to 200,000 rubles ($3,040) for officials and from 200,000 rubles to 500,000 rubles ($7,620) for corporate entities with the possible confiscation of the subject of the administrative offence.

Another element of offence imposes tighter liability for the cases when the publication of false publicly significant information has resulted in the deaths of people, has caused damage to the health or property, prompted the mass violation of public order and security or has caused disruption to the functioning of transport or social infrastructure facilities, communications, energy and industrial facilities and banks. In such instances, the fines will range from 300,000 rubles to 400,000 rubles ($6,090) for citizens, from 600,000 rubles to 900,000 rubles ($13,720) for officials, and from 1 million rubles to 1.5 million rubles for corporate entities.

While this legislation can be spun (and is) in the West as anti-free speech, one may also consider the damage that has taken place in the American government through a relentless attack of fake news from most US news outlets against President Trump. One of the most notable effects of this barrage has been to further degrade and destroy the US’ relationship with the Russian Federation, because even the Helsinki Summit was attacked so badly that the two leaders have not been able to get a second summit together.

While it is certainly a valued right of the American press to be unfettered by Congress, and while it is also certainly vital to criticize improper practices by government officials, the American news agencies have gone far past that, to deliberately dishonest attacks, based in innuendo and everything possible that was formerly only the province of gossip tabloid publications. The effort has been to defame the President, not to give proper or due criticism to his policies, nor credit. It can be properly stated that the American press has abused its freedom of late.

This level of abuse drew a very unusual comment from the US president, who wondered on Twitter about the possibility of creating a state-run media center in the US to counter fake news:

Politically correct for US audiences? No. But an astute point?

Definitely.

Freedom in anything also presumes that those with that freedom respect it, and further, that they respect and apply the principle that slandering people and institutions for one’s own personal, business or political gain is wrong. Implied in the US Constitution’s protection of the press is the notion that the press itself, as the rest of the country, is accountable to a much Higher Authority than the State. But when that Authority is rejected, as so much present evidence suggests, then freedom becomes the freedom to misbehave and to agitate. It appears largely within this context that the Russian law exists, based on the text given.

Further, by hitting dishonest media outlets in their pocketbook, rather than prison sentences, the law appears to be very smart in its message: “Do not lie. If you do, you will suffer where it counts most.”

Considering that news media’s purpose is to make money, this may actually be a very smart piece of legislation.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

US continues to try to corner Russia with silence on Nukes

Moscow continues to be patient in what appears to be an ever more lopsided, intentional stonewalling situation provoked by the Americans.

Seraphim Hanisch

Published

on

TASS reported on March 17th that despite Russian readiness to discuss the present problem of strategic weapons deployments and disarmament with its counterparts in the United States, the Americans have not offered Russia any proposals to conduct such talks.

The Kremlin has not yet received any particular proposals on the talks over issues of strategic stability and disarmament from Washington, Russian Presidential Spokesman Dmitry Peskov told TASS on Sunday when commenting on the statement made by US National Security Adviser John Bolton who did not rule out that such talks could be held with Russia and China.

“No intelligible proposals has been received [from the US] so far,” Peskov said.

Earlier Bolton said in an interview with radio host John Catsimatidis aired on Sunday that he considers it reasonable to include China in the negotiation on those issues with Russia as well.

“China is building up its nuclear capacity now. It’s one of the reasons why we’re looking at strengthening our national missile defense system here in the United States. And it’s one reason why, if we’re going to have another arms control negotiation, for example, with the Russians, it may make sense to include China in that discussion as well,” he said.

Mr. Bolton’s sense about this particular aspect of any arms discussions is correct, as China was not formerly a player in geopolitical affairs the way it is now. The now all-but-scrapped Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, or INF, was a treaty concluded by the US and the USSR leaders Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev, back in 1987. However, for in succeeding decades, most notably since the fall of the Soviet Union, the US has been gradually building up weaponry in what appears to be an attempt to create a ring around the Russian Federation, a situation which is understandably increasingly untenable to the Russian government.

Both sides have accused one another of violating this treaty, and the mutual violations and recriminations on top of a host of other (largely fabricated) allegations against the Russian government’s activities led US President Donald Trump to announce his nation’s withdrawal from the treaty, formally suspending it on 1 February. Russian President Vladimir Putin followed suit by suspending it the very next day.

The INF eliminated all of both nations’ land based ballistic and cruise missiles that had a range between 500 and 1000 kilometers (310-620 miles) and also those that had ranges between 1000 and 5500 km (620-3420 miles) and their launchers.

This meant that basically all the missiles on both sides were withdrawn from Europe’s eastern regions – in fact, much, if not most, of Europe was missile-free as the result of this treaty. That is no longer the case today, and both nations’ accusations have provoked re-development of much more advanced systems than ever before, especially true considering the Russian progress into hypersonic and nuclear powered weapons that offer unlimited range.

This situation generates great concern in Europe, such that the UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres called on both Moscow and Washington to salvage the INF and extend the Treaty on Measures for the Further Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms, or the New START as it is known.

“I call on the parties to the INF Treaty to use the time remaining to engage in sincere dialogue on the various issues that have been raised. It is very important that this treaty is preserved,” Guterres said at a session of the Conference on Disarmament in Geneva on Monday.

He stressed that the demise of that accord would make the world more insecure and unstable, which “will be keenly felt in Europe.” “We simply cannot afford to return to the unrestrained nuclear competition of the darkest days of the Cold War,” he said.

Guterres also urged the US and Russia to extend the START Treaty, which expires in 2021, and explore the possibility of further reducing their nuclear arsenals. “I also call on the United States and the Russian Federation to extend the so-called New START Treaty before it expires in 2021,” he said.

The UN chief recalled that the treaty “is the only international legal instrument limiting the size of the world’s two largest nuclear arsenals” and that its inspection provisions “represent important confidence-building measures that benefit the entire world.”

Guterres recalled that the bilateral arms control process between Russia and the US “has been one of the hallmarks of international security for fifty years.”

“Thanks to their efforts, global stockpiles of nuclear weapons are now less than one-sixth of what they were in 1985,” the UN secretary-general pointed out.

The Treaty between the United States of America and the Russian Federation on Measures for the Further Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms (the New START Treaty) entered into force on February 5, 2011. The document stipulates that seven years after its entry into effect each party should have no more than a total of 700 deployed intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM), submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBM) and strategic bombers, as well as no more than 1,550 warheads on deployed ICBMs, deployed SLBMs and strategic bombers, and a total of 800 deployed and non-deployed ICBM launchers, SLBM launchers and strategic bombers. The new START Treaty obliges the parties to exchange information on the number of warheads and carriers twice a year.

The new START Treaty will remain in force during 10 years until 2021, unless superseded by a subsequent agreement. It may be extended for a period of no more than five years (that is, until 2026) upon the parties’ mutual consent. Moscow has repeatedly called on Washington not to delay the issue of extending the Treaty.

 

 

 

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

JOIN OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL

Your donations make all the difference. Together we can expose fake news lies and deliver truth.

Amount to donate in USD$:

5 100

Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Advertisement

Advertisement

Quick Donate

The Duran
EURO
DONATE
Donate a quick 10 spot!
Advertisement
Advertisement

Advertisement

The Duran Newsletter

Trending