Let's get real Anatoly #Antonov@RusEmbUSA It is @KremlinRussia_E who has issued threats of nuclear weapons use and started a war that raises the risk of nuclear annihilation. Russia cannot have it both ways and claim to be a "responsible" nuclear actor when it is clearly not. 1/
@RusEmbUSA@KremlinRussia_E It is #Putin who has issued nuclear threats to shield Russia's aggression against a nonnuclear, democratic, independent state, raised the alert levels of Russian forces, overseen an ICBM flight tests, and authorized Russian state TV to air simulations of attacks on Europe. 2/
@RusEmbUSA@KremlinRussia_E Fortunately, and so far, Biden and NATO have not matched Russia's nuclear taunts and have taken the threats seriously and have made it clear they do not want U.S. and NATO forces involved in the conflict in Ukraine, but will act to help Ukraine defend its people and territory. 3/
@RusEmbUSA@KremlinRussia_E Nevertheless, as result of Putin's premeditated attack on Ukraine. the world faces a heightened risk of nuclear war. If Russian and NATO/U.S. start fighting in Europe, the risk of nuclear escalation is real and would start w/the use of short-range, tactical nuclear weapons. 4/
@RusEmbUSA@KremlinRussia_E Once and if nuclear weapons are used in a conflict between nuclear-armed adversaries, the level of destruction would not only become massive, but there is no guarantee the nuclear war could be "limited." The fog of war is thick; the fog of nuclear war would be thicker.
@RusEmbUSA@KremlinRussia_E This "PLAN A" simulation depicts what might happen if Russia or US used nukes in a war in Europe. An initial volley of “tactical” detonations, could escalate and lead to a massive exchange of long-range n-weapons. > 91m would likely die within hours:
@RusEmbUSA@KremlinRussia_E In the current, heightened state of nuclear danger, it is even more important that Russian, NATO, and U.S. leaders take steps to avoid nuclear escalation. A cease fire, a Russian withdrawal from Ukraine, and an end the war would be ideal. Until then other steps are critical. 7/
@RusEmbUSA@KremlinRussia_E So Amb. Antonov, it is not enough for the leaders of nuclear-armed states to declare that “a nuclear war cannot be won and must not be fought.” Much more is necessary to prevent nuclear catastrophe and eliminate the threats posed by nuclear weapons and nuclear war. 8/8
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Surprise! Misinfo from @SenTedCruz on benefits of restoring 2015 #IranDeal Yes, the admin. has an assessment, which finds there ARE significant benefits, namely increasing time it would take Iran to produce an SQ of fissile material from 2 wks today to approx. 9 mnths. 1/
@SenTedCruz In addition, restoring compliance with JCPOA would ensure enhanced IAEA inspections, which are essential to provide early warning in the event Iran tries to evade the JCPOA restrictions or violate its safeguards obligations. 2/
@SenTedCruz Trump's decision to exit JCPOA in 2018 not only failed to produce the promised results; it opened the way for Iran to take steps breach the JCPOA’s nuclear limits and accelerate its capacity to produce bomb-grade nuclear material. Pursuing the same failed strategy is lunacy. 3/
Nuclear arms control is a serious business that requires serious ideas and serious diplomacy. Unfortunately @USArmsControl continues to demonstrate that @realDonaldTrump is unserious and lacks a real arms control strategy. Some comments 1/
@USArmsControl@realDonaldTrump First, it should be noted that China’s position has not changed even if Team Trump wants to say it is shifting regarding talks on things nuclear. What @FuCong17 said on July 7
@USArmsControl@realDonaldTrump@FuCong17 Unfortunately, U.S. officials and Chinese officials are talking past one another. Rather than use existing P5 format for engage in necessary discussions on strategic stability and nuclear arms control, U.S. officials continue to insist on separate trilateral talks w/Russia. 3/
What to make of Trump's support for Putin's proposal for summit of the leaders of Perm 5 members of the UNSC on n-arms control and security issues? What does this mean for #NewSTART, #NPT, and further action on disarmament? Some background & analysis. 1/
A P5 leaders summit on nuclear weapons is a potentially important development. There hasn't been such a mtg since Sept. 2009 when Obama convened UNSC for Resolution 1887. See armscontrol.org/pressroom/2009… This time around real progress is going to be difficult. Some background ... 2/
its important to note that the P5 heads of state summit idea is not a Trump initiative; the WH is responding to an invitation from President Putin sent to the leaders of the P5 members of the UNSC in late-January. Putin spoke about his concept in a speech a few days earlier. 3/