For Immediate Release
April 08, 2010
Remarks by President Obama and President Medvedev of Russia at New START Treaty Signing Ceremony and Press Conference
Prague Castle
Prague, Czech Republic
12:37 P.M. CEST
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Good afternoon, everyone. I am honored to be back
here in the Czech Republic with President Medvedev and our Czech hosts
to mark this historic completion of the New START treaty.
Let me begin by saying how happy I am to be back in the beautiful city
of Prague. The Czech Republic, of course, is a close friend and ally of
the United States, and I have great admiration and affection for the
Czech people. Their bonds with the American people are deep and
enduring, and Czechs have made great contributions to the United States
over many decades -- including in my hometown of Chicago. I want to
thank the President and all those involved in helping to host this
extraordinary event.
I want to thank my friend and partner, Dmitry Medvedev. Without his
personal efforts and strong leadership, we would not be here today.
We’ve met and spoken by phone many times throughout the negotiations of
this treaty, and as a consequence we’ve developed a very effective
working relationship built on candor, cooperation, and mutual respect.
One year ago this week, I came here to Prague and gave a speech
outlining America’s comprehensive commitment to stopping the spread of
nuclear weapons and seeking the ultimate goal of a world without them. I
said then -- and I will repeat now -- that this is a long-term goal,
one that may not even be achieved in my lifetime. But I believed then
-- as I do now -- that the pursuit of that goal will move us further
beyond the Cold War, strengthen the global non-proliferation regime, and
make the United States, and the world, safer and more secure. One of
the steps that I called for last year was the realization of this
treaty, so it’s very gratifying to be back in Prague today.
I also came to office committed to “resetting” relations between the
United States and Russia, and I know that President Medvedev shared that
commitment. As he said at our first meeting in London, our
relationship had started to drift, making it difficult to cooperate on
issues of common interest to our people. And when the United States and
Russia are not able to work together on big issues, it’s not good for
either of our nations, nor is it good for the world.
Together, we’ve stopped that drift, and proven the benefits of
cooperation. Today is an important milestone for nuclear security and
non-proliferation, and for U.S.-Russia relations. It fulfills our
common objective to negotiate a new Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty. It
includes significant reductions in the nuclear weapons that we will
deploy. It cuts our delivery vehicles by roughly half. It includes a
comprehensive verification regime, which allows us to further build
trust. It enables both sides the flexibility to protect our security,
as well as America’s unwavering commitment to the security of our
European allies. And I look forward to working with the United States
Senate to achieve ratification for this important treaty later this
year.
Finally, this day demonstrates the determination of the United States
and Russia -- the two nations that hold over 90 percent of the world’s
nuclear weapons -- to pursue responsible global leadership. Together,
we are keeping our commitments under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation
Treaty, which must be the foundation for global non-proliferation.
While the New START treaty is an important first step forward, it is
just one step on a longer journey. As I said last year in Prague, this
treaty will set the stage for further cuts. And going forward, we hope
to pursue discussions with Russia on reducing both our strategic and
tactical weapons, including non-deployed weapons.
President Medvedev and I have also agreed to expand our discussions on
missile defense. This will include regular exchanges of information
about our threat assessments, as well as the completion of a joint
assessment of emerging ballistic missiles. And as these assessments are
completed, I look forward to launching a serious dialogue about
Russian-American cooperation on missile defense.
But nuclear weapons are not simply an issue for the United States and
Russia -- they threaten the common security of all nations. A nuclear
weapon in the hands of a terrorist is a danger to people everywhere --
from Moscow to New York; from the cities of Europe to South Asia. So
next week, 47 nations will come together in Washington to discuss
concrete steps that can be taken to secure all vulnerable nuclear
materials around the world in four years.
And the spread of nuclear weapons to more states is also an
unacceptable risk to global security -- raising the specter of arms
races from the Middle East to East Asia. Earlier this week, the United
States formally changed our policy to make it clear that those
[non]-nuclear weapons states that are in compliance with the Nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty and their non-proliferation obligations will
not be threatened by America’s nuclear arsenal. This demonstrates, once
more, America’s commitment to the NPT as a cornerstone of our security
strategy. Those nations that follow the rules will find greater
security and opportunity. Those nations that refuse to meet their
obligations will be isolated, and denied the opportunity that comes with
international recognition.
That includes accountability for those that break the rules --
otherwise the NPT is just words on a page. That’s why the United States
and Russia are part of a coalition of nations insisting that the
Islamic Republic of Iran face consequences, because they have
continually failed to meet their obligations. We are working together
at the United Nations Security Council to pass strong sanctions on
Iran. And we will not tolerate actions that flout the NPT, risk an arms
race in a vital region, and threaten the credibility of the
international community and our collective security.
While these issues are a top priority, they are only one part of the
U.S.-Russia relationship. Today, I again expressed my deepest
condolences for the terrible loss of Russian life in recent terrorist
attacks, and we will remain steadfast partners in combating violent
extremism. We also discussed the potential to expand our cooperation on
behalf of economic growth, trade and investment, as well as
technological innovation, and I look forward to discussing these issues
further when President Medvedev visits the United States later this
year, because there is much we can do on behalf of our security and
prosperity if we continue to work together.
When one surveys the many challenges that we face around the world,
it’s easy to grow complacent, or to abandon the notion that progress can
be shared. But I want to repeat what I said last year in Prague: When
nations and peoples allow themselves to be defined by their
differences, the gulf between them widens. When we fail to pursue
peace, then it stays forever beyond our grasp.
This majestic city of Prague is in many ways a monument to human
progress. And this ceremony is a testament to the truth that old
adversaries can forge new partnerships. I could not help but be struck
the other day by the words of Arkady Brish, who helped build the Soviet
Union’s first atom bomb. At the age of 92, having lived to see the
horrors of a World War and the divisions of a Cold War, he said, “We
hope humanity will reach the moment when there is no need for nuclear
weapons, when there is peace and calm in the world.”
It’s easy to dismiss those voices. But doing so risks repeating the
horrors of the past, while ignoring the history of human progress. The
pursuit of peace and calm and cooperation among nations is the work of
both leaders and peoples in the 21st century. For we must be as
persistent and passionate in our pursuit of progress as any who would
stand in our way.
Once again, President Medvedev, thank you for your extraordinary leadership. (Applause.)
PRESIDENT MEDVEDEV: (As translated.) A truly historic event took
place: A new Russia-U.S. treaty has been signed for the further
reduction and limitation of strategic offensive arms. This treaty has a
10-year duration. It will supersede the START treaty, which has
expired, as well as another existing treaty, Russia-U.S. treaty on the
reduction of strategic offensive capabilities.
And first of all, I'd like to thank my colleague, President of the
United States of America, for the successful cooperation in this very
complex matter, and for the reasonable compromises that have been
achieved, thanks to the work of our two teams -- we have already thanked
them, but let me do it once again in the presence of the media and the
public. We thank them for their excellent work.
And I would also like to thank the leadership of the Czech Republic,
Mr. President, for the invitation to hold this signing ceremony here in
this beautiful city, in this beautiful springtime, thereby creating a
good atmosphere for the future. And I believe that this signature will
open a new page for cooperation between our two countries -- among our
countries -- and will create safer conditions for life here and
throughout the world.
One word -- we aimed at the quality of the treaty. And indeed, the
negotiating process has not been simple, but again, our negotiation
teams have been working in a highly professional, constructive way that
has been lots of work and very often they worked 24 hours a day. And
that enabled us to do something that just a couple of months looked like
mission impossible; within a short span of time we prepared a
full-fledged treaty and signed it.
As a result, we obtained a document that in full measure maintains
the balance of interest of Russia and the United States of America.
What matters most is that this is a win-win situation. No one stands to
lose from this agreement. I believe that this is a typical feature of
our cooperation -- both parties have won. And taking into account this
victory of ours, the entire world community has won.
This agreement enhances strategic stability and, at the same time,
enables us to rise to a higher level for cooperation between Russia and
the United States. And although the contents of the treaty are already
known, let me point out once again what we have achieved, because this
is very important thing: 1,550 developed weapons, which is about
one-third below the current level; 700 deployed ICBMs --
intercontinental ballistic missile -- and anti-ballistic missiles and
heavy bombers, and this represents more than twofold reduction below the
current levels; and 800 deployed and non-deployed launchers for such
missiles -- deployed and non-deployed heavy bombers, which again
represents a twofold reduction below the level that existed prior to the
signature on this treaty.
And at the same time, each party can use its own discretion to defend
the makeup and structure of its strategic offensive potential.
The treaty also includes provisions concerning data exchange. We are
quite experienced now in this matter with my colleague and we are great
experts on this matter -- perhaps the greatest experts in the world.
And the treaty also includes provisions concerning conversion and
elimination, inspection provisions and verification provisions as well
as confidence-building measures.
The verification mechanism has been significantly simplified and much
less costly, as compared with the previous START treaty. At the same
time, it ensures the proper verification, irreversibility and
transparency of the entire process of reducing strategic offensive arms.
We believe -- and this is our hope and position -- we believe that
the treaty can be viable and can operate only provided there is no
qualitative or quantitative (inaudible) in place in the capabilities,
something that could, in the final analysis, jeopardize the strategic
offensive weapons on the Russian side. This is the gist of the
statement made by the Russian Federation in connection with the
signature on this treaty.
The main task of the full signature period we regard as achieving the
ratification of the treaty, as mentioned by my colleague, Mr. President
of the United States, and it is also important to synchronize the
ratification process. Our American partners, as I understand, intend to
proceed quickly to present this document to the Senate for
ratification. We also will be working with our Federal Assembly to
maintain the necessary dynamics of the ratification process.
By and large, we are satisfied with what we've done. The result we
have obtained is good. But today, of course, we have discussed not only
the fact of signing this treaty; we have also discussed a whole range
of important key issues of concern to all the countries. Of course, we
would not omit the Iranian nuclear problem. Regrettably, Iran is not
responding to the many constructive proposals that have been made and we
cannot turn a blind eye to this. Therefore I do not rule out the
possibility of the Security Council of the United Nations will have to
review this issue once again.
Our position is well known. Let me briefly outline it now. Of
course, sanctions by themselves seldom obtain specific results, although
it’s difficult to do without them in certain situations. But in any
case, those sanctions should be smart and aimed not only at
non-proliferation but also to resolve other issues -- rather than to
produce (inaudible) for the Iranian people.
(Audio is lost)
I am convinced that all that has been done so far is just the
beginning of a long way, long way ahead. I wouldn’t like to see the
Russian Federation and the United States be narrowed down to just
limiting strategic offensive arms.
To be sure, we shoulder specific responsibility, a special responsibility, in that respect, and we --
(Audio is lost)
And let me once again thank President Barack Obama for the cooperation in this area. Thank you.
(Audio is lost)
PRESIDENT OBAMA: We recognize, however, that Russia has a
significant interest in this issue, and what we’ve committed to doing is
to engaging in a significant discussion not only bilaterally but also
having discussions with our European allies and others about a framework
in which we can potentially cooperate on issues of missile defense in a
way that preserves U.S. national security interests, preserves Russia’s
national security interests, and allows us to guard against a rogue
missile from any source.
So I’m actually optimistic that having completed this treaty,
which signals our strong commitment to a reduction in overall nuclear
weapons, and that I believe is going to strengthen the Nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty regime, that sends a signal around the world
that the United States and Russia are prepared to once again take
leadership in moving in the direction of reducing reliance on nuclear
weapons and preventing the spread of nuclear weapons, as well as nuclear
materials, that we will have built the kind of trust not only between
Presidents but also between governments and between peoples that allows
us to move forward in a constructive way.
I’ve repeatedly said that we will not do anything that endangers
or limits my ability as Commander-in-Chief to protect the American
people. And we think that missile defense can be an important component
of that. But we also want to make clear that the approach that we’ve
taken in no way is intended to change the strategic balance between the
United States and Russia. And I’m actually confident that, moving
forward, as we have these discussions, it will be part of a broader set
of discussions about, for example, how we can take tactical nuclear
weapons out of theater, the possibilities of us making more significant
cuts not only in deployed but also non-deployed missiles. There are a
whole range of issues that I think that we can make significant progress
on. I'm confident that this is an important first step in that
direction.
PRESIDENT MEDVEDEV: (In Russian, then translation begins) -- on
that basis we will implement the newly signed treaty. It matters to us
what will happen to missile defense. It is related to the
configuration of our potential and our capacities, and we will watch how
these processes develop. And the preamble has a language that, to a
certain extent, replicates a legal principle of the unchangeability of
circumstances that were basis for the treaty. But this is a flexible
process, and we are interested in close cooperation over it with our
American partners.
We have appreciated the steps by the current U.S. administration
in terms of the decisions in the area of anti-missile defense of the
present administration, and this has led to progress. It doesn’t mean
that we’ll have no digressions in understanding, but it means that we’ll
have will and wish to address these issues.
We offered to the United States that we help them establish a global
anti-missile defense system, and we should think about this, given the
vulnerability of our world, the terrorist challenges and the possibility
of using nuclear arms by terrorists existing in this world.
And I am an optimist, as well as my American colleague, and I believe that we will be able to reach compromise on these issues.
Q (As translated.) I have two questions. To each of the
Presidents, one. The first is to Mr. Obama. Moscow and Washington, not
for the first time, agree on a reduction of strategic offensive arms,
but as you have mentioned, Russia and the United States are not the only
countries having nuclear weapons. So how specifically can the
documents achieved -- well, similar to today’s document on limitation on
nuclear arms -- how soon we will see others sign this document? And
will you move along this track together with Russia?
And to the President of the Russian Federation, you have mentioned
the fact that sometimes there’s an impression that Moscow and Washington
are unable to agree on anything else but a mutual reduction of arms.
So will we see any things that will counter such a statement? And what
will the agreement be?
PRESIDENT OBAMA: First of all, as I mentioned in my opening
remarks, the United States and Russia account for 90 percent of the
world’s nuclear weapons. And given this legacy of the Cold War, it is
critical for us to show significant leadership. That, I think, is what
we’ve begun to do with this follow-on START treaty.
Other countries are going to have to be making a series of
decisions about how they approach the issue of their nuclear weapons
stockpiles. And as I’ve repeatedly said, and I'm sure Dmitry feels the
same way with respect to his country, we are going to preserve our
nuclear deterrent so long as other countries have nuclear weapons, and
we are going to make sure that that stockpile is safe and secure and
effective.
But I do believe that as we look out into the 21st century, that
more and more countries will come to recognize that the most important
factors in providing security and peace to their citizens will depend on
their economic growth, will depend on the capacity of the international
community to resolve conflicts; it will depend on having a strong
conventional military that can protect our nations’ borders; and that
nuclear weapons increasingly in an interdependent world will make less
and less sense as the cornerstone of security policy.
But that’s going to take some time, and I think each country is
going to have to make its own determinations. The key is for the United
States and Russia to show leadership on this front because we are so
far ahead of every nation with respect to possession of nuclear weapons.
The primary concerns that we identified in a recent Nuclear
Posture Review, essentially a declaratory statement of U.S. policy with
respect to nuclear weapons, said that our biggest concerns right now are
actually the issues of nuclear terrorism and nuclear proliferation --
more countries obtaining nuclear weapons; those weapons being less
controllable, less secure; nuclear materials floating around the globe.
And that’s going to be a major topic of the discussion that we have in
Washington on Monday.
The United States and Russia have a history already, a decade-long
history, of locking down loose nuclear materials. I believe that our
ability to move forward already on sanctions with respect to North
Korea, the intense discussions that we’re having with respect to Iran,
will increasingly send a signal to countries that are not abiding by
their Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty obligations, that they will be
isolated. All those things will go toward sending a general message
that we need to move in a new direction. And I think leadership on that
front is important.
Last point I'll make, I will just anticipate or coach the
question about other areas of cooperation. Our respective foreign
ministers -- Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Foreign Minister
Lavrov -- have been heading a bilateral commission that has been working
intensively on a whole range of issue. And President Medvedev and
myself identified a series of key areas on the economic front, in trade
relations, the potential for joint cooperation on various industries,
how we can work on innovation and sparking economic growth. We've
already worked together closely in the G20; I think we can build on that
bilaterally.
There are issues of counterterrorism that are absolutely
critical to both of us, and I just want to repeat how horrified all of
America was at the recent attacks in Moscow. We recognize that that's a
problem that can happen anywhere at any time, and it’s important for
Russia and the United States to work closely on those issues.
And then there are people-to-people contacts and figuring out
how we can make sure that there’s more interaction and exchange between
our two countries on a whole range of issues within civil society.
So I'm very optimistic that we're going to continue to make
progress on all of these fronts. But I think we should take pride in
this particular accomplishment because it speaks not only to the
security of our two nations but also the security of the world as a
whole.
PRESIDENT MEDVEDEV: It’s always good to answer second. First
of all, you know what your partner has said, and secondly, you can
comment on what has been said by your interlocutor. As a matter of
fact, I will say a couple of words on the first part of the question
that was meant for my colleague.
Yes, we have 90 percent of all the stockpiles which is the
heritage of the Cold War legacy and we'll do all that we have agreed
upon. Keep in mind special mission of Russia and the U.S. on this
issue, and we do care about what is going on with nuclear arms in other
countries of the world, and we can't imagine a situation when the
Russian Federation and the United States take efforts to disarm and the
world would move towards a principled different direction away -- in
charge of our peoples and the situation in the world.
So all the issues related to the implementation of the treaty
and non-proliferation and the threat of nuclear terrorism should be
analyzed by us in a complex way, an integrated way. And I'd like this
signing not to be regarded by other countries as their -- well, stepping
aside from the issue. On the contrary. They should be involved to
the full and take an active participation in it. They should be aware
what is going on.
So we welcome the initiative that has been proposed by the
President of the United States to convene a relevant conference in
Washington, and I will take part in it, which is good platform to
discuss non-proliferation issues.
In this world we have a lot that brings us together, we and the
United States as well. And today we have had a very good talk that has
started not with the discussion of the documents to be signed -- they
were coordinated -- and not with discussing Iran, North Korea, Middle
East, and other pressing issues of foreign affairs, but we started with
economic issues.
I have said that there is a gap in our economic cooperation. I
have looked at the figures, how the cumulative investments of the United
States in Russia is quite small -- nearly $7 billion, and the figure
has decreased a bit thanks to the world crisis. In terms of Russian
investment into the U.S., well, it’s nearly the same, which testifies to
areas of interests. It’s not with all countries that we have such
volume of investment, but if we compare the figures with the figures of
foreign investors’ presence in the American economy -- I mean other
countries, including states that can be compared with Russia in terms of
volume of economy, so it’s the difference of 20 or 30 times. So we
have a field to work upon.
To say nothing about the projects we talked about today --
modernization, high-tech, economy, establishment, and in the Russian
Federation we are open for cooperation and would like to use American
experience to employ -- these also include issues of energy, cooperation
in transport, and I have suggested some time ago returning to the issue
of creating a big cargo plane as such a unique experience -- only two
countries have, the U.S. and Russia. The issues of nuclear cooperation
are important.
So there can be a lot of economic projects. It’s not the business of
Presidents to deal with each of them, but some key issues are to be
controlled by us, as the relations in business, relations between those
who would like to develop active ties -- depend on business ties -- and
humanitarian contacts, people-to-people contacts are important. And
it’s significant that we do our best so that our citizens respect each
other, understand each other better, so that they are guided by the best
practices of American-Russian culture, and not perceive each other
through the lens of information that sometimes is provided by mass
media.
So we should more attentively, more thoughtfully -- well, have a more
thoughtful attitude towards each other. And I count on this.
Q Thank you, President Medvedev and President Obama. For
President Obama first, could you elaborate on how the yearlong
negotiations over the New START treaty have advanced U.S. cooperation
with Russia on Iran, and give us a sense of when you will pursue, move
forward in the United Nations and next week with sanctions discussions,
and what those sanctions might look like?
And for President Medvedev, could you address whether Russia could
accept sanctions against Iran specifically dealing with its energy
industry and energy sector? Thank you.
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Discussions about sanctions on Iran have been
moving forward over the last several weeks. In fact, they’ve been
moving forward over the last several months. We’re going to start
seeing some ramped-up negotiations taking place in New York in the
coming weeks. And my expectation is that we are going to be able to
secure strong, tough sanctions on Iran this spring.
Now, I think there are two ways in which these START
negotiations have advanced or at least influenced Russia-U.S.
discussions around Iran. The first is obviously that President Medvedev
and I have been able to build up a level of trust and our teams have
been able to work together in such a way that we can be frank, we can be
clear, and that helped to facilitate, then, our ability, for example,
to work together jointly to present to Iran reasonable options that
would allow it to clearly distance itself from nuclear weapons and
pursue a path of peaceful nuclear energy.
That wasn’t just an approach that was taken by the United States
and Russia, but it was an approach taken by the P5-plus-1 as well as
the International Atomic Energy Agency, the IAEA.
So what we’ve seen from the start is that a host of countries,
but -- led by countries like the United States and Russia, have said to
Iran, we are willing to work through diplomatic channels to resolve this
issue. And unfortunately, Iran has consistently rebuffed our
approach. And I think that Russia has been a very strong partner in
saying that it has no interest in bringing down Iranian society or the
Iranian government, but it does have an interest, as we all do, in
making sure that each country is following its international
obligations.
The second way in which I think the START treaty has influenced
our discussions about Iran is it’s sent a strong signal that the United
States and Iran -- or the United States and Russia are following our own
obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, and that our
interest in Iran or North Korea or any other country following the NPT
is not based on singling out any one country, but rather sends a strong
signal that all of us have an obligation, each country has an obligation
to follow the rules of the road internationally to ensure a more secure
future for our children and our grandchildren.
And so I think the fact that we are signing this treaty, the
fact that we are willing, as the two leading nuclear powers, to
continually work on reducing our own arsenals, I think should indicate
the fact that we are willing to be bound by our obligations, and we’re
not asking any other countries to do anything different, but simply to
follow the rules of the road that have been set forth and have helped to
maintain at least a lack of the use of nuclear weapons over the last
several decades, despite, obviously, the Cold War.
And the concern that I have in particular, a concern that I
think is the most profound security threat to the United States, is that
with further proliferation of nuclear weapons, with states obtaining
nuclear weapons and potentially using them to blackmail other countries
or potentially not securing them effectively or passing them on to
terrorist organizations, that we could find ourselves in a world in
which not only state actors but also potentially non-state actors are in
possession of nuclear weapons, and even if they don’t use them, would
then be in a position to terrorize the world community.
That’s why this issue is so important, and that’s why we are going to
be pushing very hard to make sure that both smart and strong sanctions
end up being in place soon to send a signal to Iran and other countries
that this is an issue that the international community takes seriously.
PRESIDENT MEDVEDEV: Let’s ask ourselves a question: What do we need
sanctions for? Do we need them to enjoy the very fact of reprising --
imposing reprisals against another state, or is the objective another
one? I am confident that all those present here will say that sanctions
-- we need sanctions in order to prompt one or another individual or
state to behave properly, behave within the framework of international
law, while complying with the obligations assumed.
Therefore, when we are speaking about sanctions, I cannot disagree
with what has yet been said. And this has been the position of the
Russian Federation from the very outset. If we are to speak about
sanctions, although they are not always successful, those sanctions
should be smart sanctions that are capable of producing proper behavior
on the part of relevant sides.
And what sort of sanctions should we need? Today we have had a very
open-minded, frank, and straightforward manner discussed what can be
done and what cannot be done. And let me put it straightforward: I
have outlined our limits for such sanctions, our understanding of these
sanctions, and I said that in making decisions like that, I, as friend
of the Russian Federation, will proceed from two premises. First, we
need to prompt Iran to behave properly; and secondly, least but not
least, aim to maintain the national interests of our countries.
So smart sanctions should be able to motivate certain parties to
behave properly, and I'm confident that our teams that will be engaged
in consultations will continue discussing this issue.
Q (As translated.) Now, everyone is concerned whether the treaty
will be ratified by the parliaments. You have mentioned that you will
be working with the parliamentarians to achieve such certification. Let
me ask you what difficulty you see along this road, and what do you --
how do you assess the chances for success? The question is addressed to
both Presidents.
PRESIDENT MEDVEDEV: Well, by all appearances, Barack believes that
we might have more problems with ratification. Perhaps that’s true, but
let me say what I think about this question.
Of course, such agreements of major importance, international
agreements, under our constitution and under our legislation, are
subject to ratification by our parliaments. And of course, for our
part, we intend to proceed promptly and to do all the necessary
procedures to ensure that our parliament, our State Duma, starts
reviewing this treaty, discussing this treaty.
I will proceed from the following: I believe that we have to ensure
the synchronization of this ratification process so that neither party
feels in one way or another compromised. Earlier we had periods when
one state ratified while another party said, sorry, the situation has
changed; therefore we cannot do it.
So this is something we’re to avoid. That’s why I say we have to
proceed simultaneously in the conditions of an open-minded and
straightforward discussion with subsequent certification by our
parliaments. That’s what we need. And we will not be found amiss in
that regard.
PRESIDENT OBAMA: The United States Senate has the obligation of
reviewing any treaty and, ultimately, ratifying it. Fortunately there
is a strong history of bipartisanship when it comes to the evaluation of
international treaties, particularly arms control treaties.
And so I have already engaged in consultation with the chairmen of
the relevant committees in the United States Senate. We are going to
broaden that consultation now that this treaty has been signed. My
understanding is, is that both in Russia and the United States, it’s
going to be posed on the Internet, appropriate to a 21st century
treaty. And so people not only within government but also the general
public will be able to review, in an open and transparent fashion, what
it is that we’ve agreed to.
I think what they will discover is that this is a well-crafted treaty
that meets the interests of both countries; that meets the interests of
the world in the United States and Russia reducing its nuclear arsenals
and setting the stage for potentially further reductions in the future.
And so I'm actually quite confident that Democrats and Republicans in
the United States Senate, having reviewed this, will see that the
United States has preserved its core national security interests, that
it is maintaining a safe and secure and effective nuclear deterrent, but
that we are beginning to once again move forward, leaving the Cold War
behind, to address new challenges in new ways. And I think the START
treaty represents an important first step in that direction, and I feel
confident that we are going to be able to get it ratified.
All right? Thank you very much, everybody.
PRESIDENT MEDVEDEV: Thank you, sir. Next time. (Applause.)
END 1:29 P.M. CEST
President
Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev signed the new Strategic
Arms Reduction Treaty (START) on April 8, described by the British Times as “the first concrete foreign policy achievement by Mr. Obama since he took office.”
President
Obama promised on Monday to pursue yet another controversial agreement
with Russian officials to further slash both governments’ nuclear
arsenals, saying the United States already controls more than enough
atomic weapons. Speaking ahead of a global “security” summit in Seoul,
South Korea, Obama also blasted the regimes ruling North Korea and Iran.
U.S. law requires the Secretary of State to provide Congress, by April
30 of each year, a full and complete report on terrorism with regard to
those countries and groups meeting criteria set forth in the
legislation. This annual report is entitled Country Reports on Terrorism. Beginning with the report for 2004, it replaced the previously published Patterns of Global Terrorism.
