The latest news shows that the United States is discussing signing an agreement with China to notify each other of missile launches, which means that the United States plans to start arms control negotiations with China next year and hopes to make this request in the negotiations. Previously, China and the United States held a rare arms control and non-proliferation consultation before the China-US summit this year. The White House stressed that in the current complex international situation, the establishment of a launch notification mechanism is particularly important. To this end, the United States drew on the agreement signed by China and Russia on mutual notification of ballistic missile and space launch vehicles, which was signed by China and Russia in 2009 and expired in 2020, after which it was extended by the two sides for a decade. The United States believes that this method of building mutual trust also applies to the U.S.-China relationship. Similar to the current U.S.-China discussion, recall that during the Cold War in 1988, the United States signed a similar agreement with the Soviet Union, stipulating that when launching ICBMs and SLBMs, the other side must be notified in advance to make it clear that the subsequent missile launch is not a nuclear strike.
Even in the current situation when US-Russian relations have deteriorated due to the Russia-Ukraine conflict, Russia still abides by the agreement and notifies the United States in advance when conducting missile launch tests. This kind of agreement is like an agreement between two neighbors to tell each other in advance when they fire guns in their yards, so as to avoid misunderstandings and unnecessary actions. The agreement was signed during the Cold War when the United States and the Soviet Union were mired in nuclear war, and the agreement was signed to prevent each other from destroying each other or even destroying the world. However, the fundamental reason for the United States to push for the signing of this agreement was to limit the development of Soviet nuclear **, and although the Soviet Union refused at one time, it was eventually convinced. The historic signing of the Intermediate-Range Missile Treaty between Usain Bolt and Reagan gave the United States more opportunities for Soviet military intelligence on the number, performance, and deployment of missiles. But in recent years, the United States has acted as an opportunity to restrain and constrain China, even though it ostensibly promotes the goal of avoiding misunderstandings. It is worth noting that it has been the United States, not other countries, that has recently provoked the dispute, which raises questions about the integrity of the United States, and even if an agreement is signed, it is difficult to guarantee that it will not be breached. The following will be discussed from four aspects.
First of all, Biden vowed not to support it during the Sino-US summit, but in less than two days, the United States reversed this promise and said that it would continue to provide ** support to Taiwan, a disappointing move. Fortunately, we have left room for negotiation and have so far not responded positively to the repeated requests of the United States to resume military dialogue. Just the other day, White House spokesman Kirby once again publicly urged the top military leaders of the two countries to resume communication in order to resolve differences. Against this backdrop, the United States must set a back path for itself, so as not to provoke China and not end up. Secondly, the United States itself, as a nuclear power, has a large number of nuclear **. However, the United States has withdrawn from the Intermediate-Range Missile Treaty and the Iran Nuclear Deal at the first sign of disagreement, refused to renew the New START Treaty with Russia, and formed the "Aukus" alliance to share nuclear technology. These practices have undoubtedly contributed to global nuclear proliferation, undermined the foundations of the global arms control system, and exacerbated China's distrust of the United States. Recently, the United States carried out a launch of a medium-range land-based missile and has consistently emphasized the "Chinese nuclear threat."
They claim to have observed through satellites that China has made tremendous progress in building missile silos, and speculate that the country's nuclear warheads have reached more than 500, a number that they say will double by 2030. It is said that this move is aimed at discrediting China's nuclear strategy, pressuring China to join nuclear arms control negotiations, and paving the way for an increase in the defense budget. In addition, the United States recently announced that it will deploy land-based medium-range missiles in the Asia-Pacific region next year, the first such deployment since the end of the Cold War. Phillips, a spokesman for the US Army in the Pacific, bluntly said that this is to strengthen the deterrence capability against China. In the face of obvious provocations by the United States, should we agree to inform each other of missile launches with the United States, and will this fall into the trap of the United States?We know that we have credibility in what we say and do, and that U.S. promises are not always reliable. In fact, even if the United States does not make a request, China's attitude and position on the issue of arms control are very firm, and we are willing to contribute to global arms control.
In contrast, the United States, fearing that China might adopt a preemptive strategy, has tried to restrain China through an agreement that "restricts China and protects itself from influence." The United States should reflect on its position and that unilateral pressure will not bring peace. We hope that the United States will realize this.