Text Only | Disarmament Diplomacy | Disarmament Documentation | ACRONYM Reports

Disarmament Documentation

Powell-Ivanov Meeting, Moscow, December 10

Press Conference

'Remarks by Secretary of State Colin L. Powell and Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov following their meeting, The Kremlin, December 10, 2001', US State Department transcript.

Minister Ivanov: [V]ery substantial and intensive talks between the President of Russia, Mr. Putin, and Secretary Powell took place. During these talks, key problems of US-Russian relations and acute topics of mutual relations were discussed. ... Great attention was paid to the issue of strategic stability. Russia proceeds from this option that without losing time, it is necessary to formalize now the results that were achieved during the recent Russian-US summit in America. First of all, it is related to the expressed intentions to make cuts in nuclear offensive weapons and the relevant legal formalization of this arrangement, given adequate control and transparency. And we believe it would be politically right to set for ourselves the task to formalize this arrangement by the forthcoming visit by the President of the United States to Russia, which is scheduled for the middle of next year. We have also started the issues related to the ABM Treaty of 1972. The positions of the sides remain unchanged.

Secretary Powell: As the Minister noted, we had a good discussion on the strategic framework we are working on. We are close to getting the strategic offensive numbers in line with each other. Both of our presidents have charged us to finish this work as soon as possible, and to find ways to formalize this agreement at lower levels of strategic offensive numbers and to try to get the work concluded in time for the two presidents when they meet in Moscow in the middle of next year and to do it in a way that preserves the verification and transparency procedures that exist in current agreements. As the Minister said, we still have disagreements with regard to missile defense and the ABM treaty and we will continue working on the whole strategic framework both offensive and defense in the months ahead as instructed by our presidents.

Question: Mr. Secretary, I believe there was some expectation that you would get the Russian offensive [reduction] numbers when you came here today. Did you get them? And if you didn't, could you describe why you didn't? I wonder if we could ask both of you gentlemen, if this agreement, when it does come, will be in the form of a treaty and whether it should be, given that it has to outlive both the terms of Mr. Putin and President Bush. And finally, to Mr. Ivanov, I wonder if you could explain to us what it is the Russian side wants on the defensive missile question? Do you want to have a discussion about each level of American tests so you can evaluate its impact on the treaty or what's the hang up, because our side won't tell us? (Laughter).

Secretary Powell: On your first question, both of us recognize the need for a codification of the new levels we are going to and we will be discussing the form that that might take. It might be in the form of a treaty, or some other way of codifying it. With respect to what that agreed new lower level will be, we are very close. It's a matter of me reporting back to President Bush with what I heard today before being able to say anything more and make it public.

Minister Ivanov: I would like to join what the Secretary said. I thought that the main thing was to set approximately the radical cuts in the strategic offensive arms that we've arranged for. The levels that are determined by the sides allow us to start some practical work already. The main thing is that there is an understanding expressed by both sides that these reductions need to be embodied in some form of treaty formalization. During the negotiations we will decide what form it will take. As regards the third question, the Russian side has never put any prerequisites or preconditions as regards the ABM treaty. We proceeded from the assumption that this treaty is a useful one and that this needs to be preserved. This is our position.

Question: What are the intentions of the US Administration regarding the ABM Treaty of 1972? ... If the US unilaterally withdraws, what would the Russian reaction be?

Secretary Powell: The United States has held the position for some years that we want to pursue the development of a limited missile defense system, a missile defense system that would be directed against irresponsible states that are developing missiles that can deliver weapons of mass destruction. We are not developing a system that would in any way undermines the deterrence capability of offensive nuclear forces. The problem is that as we move forward with the development of such a system, the ABM Treaty constrains our testing and development and our deployment of such systems. So in due course, as we have said for a long period of time, we have to find a way to get out of the constraints of the ABM Treaty.

Minister Ivanov: In our forecasts, we're not excluding the possibility that the US may be withdrawing from the ABM Treaty. First of all, this was mentioned in statements, including official ones by US officials, top officials. Secondly, the treaty itself, in Article XV, provides for such an opportunity. Therefore in our programs for ensuring national security we are forecasting such an option, too. At the same time, we are proceeding from the fact that this treaty is the key element of the entire treaty system of providing or ensuring strategic stability in the world. And therefore our task will be parallel to ensuring our own national security to promote the strengthening of the control, over the cuts in weapons, as well as the non-proliferation regime.

Question: [D]oes the US Administration plan to expand their anti-terrorist operation to cover other countries of the region, Iraq in particular...

Secretary Powell: [T]he United States and its partners are embarked on a campaign against terrorism throughout the entire world. The first phase of that campaign was directed against Usama bin Laden, al-Qaida, and the Taliban. As we get into other phases of the operation, we need to look at those terrorist organizations that exist and those regimes that support them, or those regimes that are developing weapons of mass destruction that could be used by terrorists or threaten other nations. President Bush has not yet made any decision, nor has he received any recommendations from his national security team as to targets we should go after, to what targets we should direct our attention in the next phase of the campaign.