" . . .
U.S. officials who spoke with The Wall Street Journal on the condition of anonymity said Marshall Billingslea, Trump’s senior envoy on arms control, is seeking new talks on a new nuclear treaty with Russian deputy foreign minister Sergei Ryabkov. The agenda for their meeting is still in the works, but the meeting is likely to take place in Vienna.
“We have agreed that as soon as possible, taking into account the Covid virus, we will get together to begin negotiations,”
Marshall Billingslea, who was appointed last month as the president’s special envoy for arms control, said Thursday that he had his first secure phone call with his counterpart in Moscow, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov. Billingslea said they agreed to meet, talk about their objectives and find a way to begin negotiations.
"Suffice to say, this won't be easy. It is new," Billingslea said, adding that the U.S. fully expects Russia to help bring China to the table.
Russian officials and many arms control experts agree that China, as a rising power, should be part of a nuclear arms accord, but they are eyeing the calendar.
"It's really hard to see how, in the midst of a pandemic that would make actual in-person negotiations quite difficult, you're going to get something done and ratified and in force before the New START treaty expires on Feb. 5, 2021," said Alexandra Bell at the Center for Arms Control and Non-proliferation.
Marshall Billingslea, who was appointed last month as the president’s special envoy for arms control, said Thursday that he had his first secure phone call with his counterpart in Moscow, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov. Billingslea said they agreed to meet, talk about their objectives and find a way to begin negotiations.
"Suffice to say, this won't be easy. It is new," Billingslea said, adding that the U.S. fully expects Russia to help bring China to the table.
Russian officials and many arms control experts agree that China, as a rising power, should be part of a nuclear arms accord, but they are eyeing the calendar.
"It's really hard to see how, in the midst of a pandemic that would make actual in-person negotiations quite difficult, you're going to get something done and ratified and in force before the New START treaty expires on Feb. 5, 2021," said Alexandra Bell at the Center for Arms Control and Non-proliferation.
@GL2814,
I wonder why China would want to get involved, too. Would they agree to have their current status frozen, at far lower than the US or Russia? Would Russia & the US want to allow China to acquire their status?
However, those questions are pertinent to a question of if the negotiations will be successful, not if they will open.
I started using that to make probabilities. When I got to game theory, I drove TSM nuts. An angry young man that isn't as good as he thinks he is. Didn't blow up like Sabisky though.
“This is the fast lane, folks...and some of us like it here.”
@GL2814, I wonder why China would want to get involved?
Simplistically Trumps wants China to be included.
Russia wants to start talks and the US stated China must be included.
China does not have to do anything at this time for resolution,
Only that the US and Russia start talks.
Thus Russia bending to get started [May 21, 2020] about China has started the 2 Two, the USA and Russia talking about the New Start. Which started a few days ago official envoy are talking and planing in person when COVID-19 allows such events to take place.
Nevertheless Talks have begun. In May 2020
It's not for Trump to decide. De Mesquita did some work for the CIA using a game theory model to lay on top of what was in the book:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ts5MKtXNpMQ
The GJP2 May 25 scores are not up yet. The natives are getting restless and the lab rats are dying. The folly of man in a pandemic?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8GtTyC53kjU
One contrarian view is that if China becomes engaged, then they have arrived and cemented their place back among the great (military) powers. Many studies (too lazy to find a link) suggest that on the basis of some version of "deterrence" one really only needs a relatively small number of deployable weapons. From memory (not reliable), China passed that threshold some time ago. And engaging offers opportunities even if there is a deal. Site visits or similar might be a bridge too far though. FWIW
I thought China achieved strategic deterrence many moons ago. They also don't have to maintain a fleet of unterwasser boats. China has a win win if the US and Russia expend their treasury against each other. Trump needs something to campaign on and whatever the next administration is should be able to complete a deal or have an extension.
https://americanmilitarynews.com/2020/05/report-trump-wants-new-age-nuke-agreement-with-russia-china/
" . . .
U.S. officials who spoke with The Wall Street Journal on the condition of anonymity said Marshall Billingslea, Trump’s senior envoy on arms control, is seeking new talks on a new nuclear treaty with Russian deputy foreign minister Sergei Ryabkov. The agenda for their meeting is still in the works, but the meeting is likely to take place in Vienna.
“We have agreed that as soon as possible, taking into account the Covid virus, we will get together to begin negotiations,”
Marshall Billingslea, who was appointed last month as the president’s special envoy for arms control, said Thursday that he had his first secure phone call with his counterpart in Moscow, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov. Billingslea said they agreed to meet, talk about their objectives and find a way to begin negotiations.
"Suffice to say, this won't be easy. It is new," Billingslea said, adding that the U.S. fully expects Russia to help bring China to the table.
Russian officials and many arms control experts agree that China, as a rising power, should be part of a nuclear arms accord, but they are eyeing the calendar.
"It's really hard to see how, in the midst of a pandemic that would make actual in-person negotiations quite difficult, you're going to get something done and ratified and in force before the New START treaty expires on Feb. 5, 2021," said Alexandra Bell at the Center for Arms Control and Non-proliferation.
Riechmann, D. (2020). Time running out on the last US-Russia nuclear arms treaty. The Associated Press. Nuclear Arsenal. May 25, 2020. Retrieved from
https://www.defensenews.com/smr/nuclear-arsenal/2020/05/24/time-running-out-on-the-last-us-russia-nuclear-arms-treaty/
\\
Marshall Billingslea, who was appointed last month as the president’s special envoy for arms control, said Thursday that he had his first secure phone call with his counterpart in Moscow, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov. Billingslea said they agreed to meet, talk about their objectives and find a way to begin negotiations.
"Suffice to say, this won't be easy. It is new," Billingslea said, adding that the U.S. fully expects Russia to help bring China to the table.
Russian officials and many arms control experts agree that China, as a rising power, should be part of a nuclear arms accord, but they are eyeing the calendar.
"It's really hard to see how, in the midst of a pandemic that would make actual in-person negotiations quite difficult, you're going to get something done and ratified and in force before the New START treaty expires on Feb. 5, 2021," said Alexandra Bell at the Center for Arms Control and Non-proliferation.
Riechmann, D. (2020). Time running out on the last US-Russia nuclear arms treaty. The Associated Press. Nuclear Arsenal. May 25, 2020. Retrieved from
https://www.defensenews.com/smr/nuclear-arsenal/2020/05/24/time-running-out-on-the-last-us-russia-nuclear-arms-treaty/
Why would China want to get involved in this silly Cold War game?
@GL2814,
I wonder why China would want to get involved, too. Would they agree to have their current status frozen, at far lower than the US or Russia? Would Russia & the US want to allow China to acquire their status?
However, those questions are pertinent to a question of if the negotiations will be successful, not if they will open.
Your casting this as election politics removes many obstacles to a successful resolution. I went thru the KNOWS training about 45 times in my rookie year and didn't get anything out of it. This explained it better: https://www.amazon.com/Dictators-Handbook-Behavior-Almost-Politics/dp/1610391845
I started using that to make probabilities. When I got to game theory, I drove TSM nuts. An angry young man that isn't as good as he thinks he is. Didn't blow up like Sabisky though.
“This is the fast lane, folks...and some of us like it here.”
@GL2814, I wonder why China would want to get involved?
Simplistically Trumps wants China to be included.
Russia wants to start talks and the US stated China must be included.
China does not have to do anything at this time for resolution,
Only that the US and Russia start talks.
Thus Russia bending to get started [May 21, 2020] about China has started the 2 Two, the USA and Russia talking about the New Start. Which started a few days ago official envoy are talking and planing in person when COVID-19 allows such events to take place.
Nevertheless Talks have begun. In May 2020
It's not for Trump to decide. De Mesquita did some work for the CIA using a game theory model to lay on top of what was in the book:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ts5MKtXNpMQ
China has no self interest in my book. Game theory can be useful in solving a number of problems:
1. Buying a car: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=coWgbmlvRTU
2. Poker: https://www.amazon.com/Harrington-Expert-Strategy-Limit-Tournaments-ebook/dp/B002XQ2C6O/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=harrington+on+holdem&qid=1590534936&sr=8-1
I just wanted to tell the machines what to go find and then apply a set of analytical tools as necessary. Did you know you can use geometry to solve probability problems? https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/can-you-solve-the-impossible-puzzle/
The GJP2 May 25 scores are not up yet. The natives are getting restless and the lab rats are dying. The folly of man in a pandemic?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8GtTyC53kjU
One contrarian view is that if China becomes engaged, then they have arrived and cemented their place back among the great (military) powers. Many studies (too lazy to find a link) suggest that on the basis of some version of "deterrence" one really only needs a relatively small number of deployable weapons. From memory (not reliable), China passed that threshold some time ago. And engaging offers opportunities even if there is a deal. Site visits or similar might be a bridge too far though. FWIW
I thought China achieved strategic deterrence many moons ago. They also don't have to maintain a fleet of unterwasser boats. China has a win win if the US and Russia expend their treasury against each other. Trump needs something to campaign on and whatever the next administration is should be able to complete a deal or have an extension.
Woah, I'm mightily surprised to see a 100% here.
@LokiOdinevich,
Thanks for challenging me! I think my hope/optimism biased me to put too much stock in Billingslea.