Im currently a grade 12 student who started an Initiative to Inform Youth about Politics and World Issues.
I started this podcast in the summer of 2019 after seeing the lack of attention being given to the Canadain election of 2019. My older friends were not voting, and if they were voting, they voted without the proper knowledge. That led me to create this podcast where I try to inform the youth about world issues and politics, and hopefully encourage them to vote.
CHECK IT OUT HERE & TELL ME WHAT YOU THINK
By Jean Jacques
Is it okay to protest at a high level against the fact that a country, in order to protect its people, is strengthening the defense of its borders? I am talking about Japanese protests against Russia's strengthening of the defense of its Far East.
Tokyo constantly protests against any Russian activity on its own territory, and these protests have already become a habit. The stubbornness and new White Paper will not help the Japanese leadership to “return” the islands, because Moscow has repeatedly proved the groundlessness of these territorial claims and stated directly that they have no any plans to transfer the islands.
So what are our samurai friends waiting for? Maybe support of America in a military resolving of the issue?
American analysts are anxiously watching the strengthening of the forces of the Russian army, which has been happening in recent years. The Russian fleet got at its disposal the «Caliber» cruise missile, which confirmed its capabilities during real combat firing at terrorist targets in Syria. Also the new «Zircon» hypersonic anti-ship missile, which can be used from launchers for «Onyx and Caliber» complexes, is going to appear in the fleet service. The National Interest, also, noted the power of the Russian «Poseidon» project of an unmanned underwater vehicle with a nuclear power plant on board. All this, along with the expansion of the geopolitical influence of Moscow, forces the Pentagon and the White House administration to closely monitor changes in the military sphere of Russia. For more details: https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/russias-military-transforming-and-getting-stronger-right-our-eyes-67907
Currently, in America they are working on building of medium-range missiles, and they also recognize that anti-missile defense facilities deployed in Romania and Poland, after conversion, allow the launch of offensive missiles instead of defensive ones. Does the US really want the third world war to start?
In August 2019, the fate of the INF will be finally decided. On February 2, 2019, the American side announced the suspension of the implementation of the Treaty between the USSR and the USA. This situation is quite in the spirit of Washington: this is not the first, and perhaps not the last treaty, which the States neglect. In 2001, America unilaterally withdrew from the Treaty on the Limitation of Anti-Ballistic Missile Systems of 1972, which was considered an integral part of the entire system of control over strategic offensive arms. During Trump’s presidency, the States renegotiated a free trade zone agreement between the United States, Canada and Mexico, withdrew from the UN climate agreement and the Iran nuclear deal.
The INF was of great historical importance, it was the first Soviet-American treaty that not only limited weapons production, but also significantly reduced it. The USSR and the United States signed a treaty in 1987 with the aim of curbing the arms race that broke out in the second half of the 1970s. By agreement, the United States and the USSR have committed themselves not to produce, test or deploy ballistic and cruise ground-based missiles of medium (from 1,000 to 5,500 kilometers) and short (from 500 to 1,000 kilometers) range. Moreover, America and the USSR pledged to destroy all launchers and land-based missiles with a range of from 500 to 5,500 kilometers for three years.
The United States has been talking about withdrawing from the Treaty for the first time, declaring its bilateral effectiveness ineffective. “The motto of the INF policy should be as follows: expand it or destroy it,” said Bolton in the Wall Street Journal in collaboration with former Deputy Secretary of State Paula de Sutter. Russia has not adhered to the INF Treaty, and the provisions of the Treaty do not apply to China at all.
It was the behavior of the Russian side that, according to the States, was the reason for withdrawing from the treaty. The United States blamed Russia for the fact that, developed for the modernization of the operational-tactical missile complex Iskander-M, the new 9M729 missile violates the Treaty because it has a range of over 500 km. Moreover, Washington ignored the briefing given by the Russian Ministry of Defense, which demonstrated the tactical and technical characteristics of the new missile.
In turn, the Russian side has accumulated a lot of complaints about the US observance of its part of the Treaty. Moscow demanded the destruction of the MK-41 universal launchers deployed on land, designed to launch Tomahawk cruise missiles; target missiles with similar characteristics to medium-range and shorter-range ground-based ballistic missiles (for testing anti-ballistic missile defense systems); as well as the destruction of strike unmanned aerial vehicles, which, according to their characteristics, meet the definition of the term “cruise missile of a land-based. Russian requirements remained unanswered.
It is easy to predict what the next disregard of Washington may lead to. And the States themselves do not hide the fact that the goal of withdrawing from the treaty is to increase military pressure on the PRC and, most likely, short-range and medium-range US missiles will be placed primarily in Japan and the Republic of Korea. Furthermore, by abandoning the INF Treaty, the United States will be able to deploy ground-based missiles with a range of up to 5.5 thousand kilometers in close proximity to Russian borders, for example, in Poland and the Baltic countries. Obviously, the next step will be the US withdrawal from the “New Start”. Thus, the last treaty controlling the situation with nuclear weapons will disappear. This, in turn, will lead to an unrestricted nuclear arms race and heightening the risks of a nuclear war.
Tell a friend