New York Times on the Web Forums Science
Russian military leaders have expressed concern about US plans
for a national missile defense system. Will defense technology be
limited by possibilities for a strategic imbalance? Is this just SDI
all over again?
(7469 previous messages)
- 03:32pm Jul 26, 2001 EST (#7470
Negotiators Ready Arms Proposals for Bush and Putin by THE
ASSOCIATED PRESS http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/international/AP-Russia-US.html
" MOSCOW (AP) -- Setting a timetable for
strategic arms talks, President Bush's national security adviser
and her Russian counterpart on Thursday both said they wanted to
move from confrontation to cooperation -- then refused to budge
from their tough positions.
Comment: Interesting language usage -- an "inconsistency"
at an oversimple level is entirely consistent in its connection to
the real complicated case at hand.
" Washington will proceed with tests of a new
missile defense system, Condoleezza Rice said, while Russia's
Security Council head Vladimir Rushailo said Moscow will insist on
long and laborious negotiations to try to salvage the 1972
Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty that forbids such systems.
Comment: At the level of substance this makes perfect
sense - the decisions related to the issues are proportionate to the
consequences of the issues themselves.
" ``The new threats that we face ... won't wait
and we've agreed to work very hard over the next several months,''
Rice said to reporters after she and Rushailo met with President
" She added that Bush and Putin would have
proposals before them when they next meet, in Shanghai, China, in
" Rushailo, however, said the process would be
" '``This work calls for a long period of time
.... I'd like to remind you of the words of President Putin that
the national security of the Russian Federation should be
maintained,'' cautioned Rushailo.
Comment: The Russians are under time pressure from the Americans,
and pushing back. Proportionate responses, both ways.
" Russian officials say abandoning the ABM
treaty would destroy the foundations of global security, leading
to a new arms race. But Bush's administration contends the treaty
has outlived its usefulness, preventing the United States from
developing defenses against potential nuclear threats from such
nations as Iran and North Korea.
Comment: So a reasonable adjustment is being undertaken -- warily
- - with threats and incentives going both ways.
" ``The treaty itself is an impediment,'' Rice
" She said the U.S.-Russian discussions were no
longer about whether the United States would move forward with its
missile defense plans, but how. The U.S. Defense Department
announced earlier this month that it would start construction of a
testing site in April.
" ``Our testing program is designed to give us
the most effective system, not to stay within the frame of the ABM
treaty. That has not changed,'' she said.
" However, because Moscow is a signatory to the
ABM, ``we have to work out arrangements with the Russians if we
want to move beyond the ABM treaty,'' Rice said.
(One way to go beyond the old treaty is to modify it, with or
without a change in its name. )
" Earlier this week, Putin and Bush
unexpectedly announced that talks on missile defense would be
linked with talks on cutting strategic nuclear weapons. Deputy
Russian Foreign Minister Georgy Mamedov said that Putin had
repeated his proposal to cut nuclear warheads on both sides to
1,500, but Rice said no specific numbers had been discussed.
" Rice said she had also raised U.S. concern
about press freedom in Russia and Moscow's use of ``heavy-handed
tactics'' in Chechnya, which she said ``breeds extremism.'' "
- 03:35pm Jul 26, 2001 EST (#7471
I would hope that almarst would be pleased.
MD 5987 rshowalter
6/25/01 11:35am and especially MD2012 almarst-2001
4/5/01 2:44pm . . . issues that are "mutually
dependent" are being treated that way.
Given the complexities and tensions of the situation, it seems to
me that, as far as the current story goes into detail, the clear but
limited decisions made in the last few days are about as beautiful
and solid as they could be.
- 04:05pm Jul 26, 2001 EST (#7472
Some days, the TIMES produces wonderful, distinguished, powerful
work -- and gives it the space it needs. Here is an example today -
one that I hope is read widely, and for a long time.
SPECIAL REPORT Quest for Mideast Peace: How and Why It
Failed By DEBORAH SONTAG http://www.nytimes.com/2001/07/26/international/26MIDE.html?pagewanted=all
Too often, when accomodations require too much adjustment, in
circumstances too compromised and complicated, people fail to make
them. Even when there seems no acceptable choice, but to make the
accomodations, difficult as they are.
For all sorts of reasons, people have to learn to do better.
Sontag's piece is a step toward showing the world how to do so.
- 07:45pm Jul 26, 2001 EST (#7473
- landmine recovery.
UK Prosthetics are testing out a new
limb. An American is taking the route (now), from the lowest to
highest points in the USA, through Death Valley California, doing
the equivalent of five marathons, to test out the new design.
Heather Mills Foundation UK
New York Times on the Web Forums Science