De Wikipedia, la enciclopedia libre
Saltar a navegación Saltar a búsqueda
Tratado sobre Fuerzas Armadas Convencionales en Europa
Firmado19 de noviembre de 1990 (1990-11-19)
LocalizaciónParís , Francia
Eficaz17 de julio de 1992
CondiciónRatificación por los países miembros de la OTAN y del Pacto de Varsovia
Expiración26 de abril de 2007 (2007-04-26)
Signatarios

El Tratado original sobre las Fuerzas Armadas Convencionales en Europa ( CFE ) se negoció y concluyó durante los últimos años de la Guerra Fría y estableció límites integrales sobre categorías clave de equipo militar convencional en Europa (desde el Atlántico hasta los Urales ) y ordenó la destrucción de exceso de armamento. El tratado propuso límites iguales para los dos "grupos de Estados partes", la Organización del Tratado del Atlántico Norte (OTAN) y el Pacto de Varsovia . En 2007, Rusia "suspendió" su participación en el tratado, y el 10 de marzo de 2015, citando la OTAN de factoEn caso de incumplimiento del Tratado, Rusia anunció formalmente que suspendería "por completo" su participación en él a partir del día siguiente. [1]

Historia [ editar ]

Antecedentes [ editar ]

En 1972, el presidente estadounidense Richard Nixon y el secretario general soviético Leonid Brezhnev llegaron a un acuerdo de compromiso para celebrar negociaciones políticas y militares por separado. [2] La Conferencia sobre Seguridad y Cooperación en Europa (CSCE) se ocuparía de cuestiones políticas, y Reducciones de Fuerzas Mutuas y Equilibradas (MBFR) con cuestiones militares. La CSCE dio como resultado en 1975 que 35 naciones firmaran el documento final: el Acta Final de Helsinki. Las negociaciones para MBFR fueron estancadas por la URSS en 1979 debido a la decisión de la OTAN de desplegar nuevas armas nucleares de alcance intermedio en Europa. En 1986, el secretario general soviético Mikhail Gorbachevpropuesto en el contexto de las negociaciones MBFR para reducir las fuerzas terrestres y aéreas, e incluir armas convencionales y nucleares desde el Atlántico hasta los Urales. Esta propuesta se formalizó más tarde ese año durante una reunión del Tratado de Varsovia. Consejo del Atlántico Norte de la OTANde ministros de Relaciones Exteriores emitió la Declaración de Bruselas sobre Control de Armas Convencionales, que pedía dos conjuntos distintos de negociaciones: uno para basarse en los resultados de las Medidas de Fomento de la Confianza y la Seguridad (MFCS) de la Conferencia de Estocolmo y el otro para establecer la estabilidad convencional en Europa a través de negociaciones sobre control de armas convencionales desde el Atlántico hasta los Urales (ATTU). En 1987, el Documento de Estocolmo entró en vigor y estableció por primera vez un derecho negociado para realizar inspecciones in situ de las fuerzas militares sobre el terreno.

Las conversaciones informales entre las 16 naciones de la OTAN y las 7 naciones del Tratado de Varsovia comenzaron en Viena el 17 de febrero de 1987 sobre un mandato para las negociaciones convencionales en Europa, que establecerían las directrices para la negociación del tratado. [2] Varios meses después, el 27 de junio, la OTAN presentó un proyecto de mandato durante la conferencia de 23 naciones en Viena. El mandato pedía la eliminación de las disparidades de fuerza, la capacidad de ataque sorpresa y operaciones ofensivas a gran escala, y el establecimiento de un sistema de verificación eficaz. Mientras tanto, en diciembre se firmó el Tratado INF entre los Estados Unidos y la Unión Soviética, permitiendo efectivamente inspecciones mutuas. Durante la Cumbre de Moscú de mayo a junio de 1988, el presidente de los Estados Unidos, Ronald Reagany el secretario general Gorbachov enfatizaron la importancia de la estabilidad y la seguridad en Europa, pidiendo específicamente el intercambio de datos, la verificación de estos datos y luego las reducciones. En diciembre, Gorbachov anunció en las Naciones Unidas la retirada unilateral de 50.000 soldados de Europa del Este y la desmovilización de 500.000 soldados soviéticos.

Negociaciones CFE [ editar ]

En enero de 1989, los miembros de la OTAN y del Tratado de Varsovia redactaron el Mandato de Negociación sobre Fuerzas Armadas Convencionales en Europa. El mandato estableció objetivos para el Tratado FACE y estableció principios de negociación, y las negociaciones formales comenzaron el 9 de marzo de 1989 en Viena. Cuando el presidente de Estados Unidos, George HW Bush, y el presidente de Francia, François Mitterrand, se reunieron en mayo, Bush anunció la aceptación de las reducciones de aviones y helicópteros de combate. También propuso un límite máximo de 275.000 personas estacionadas en Europa por Estados Unidos y la Unión Soviética. La propuesta de Bush fue adoptada formalmente durante la cumbre de la OTAN de Bruselas de 1989 y posteriormente presentada en Viena. En noviembre, el muro de Berlíncayó y en los meses siguientes estallaron revoluciones en Hungría, Checoslovaquia, Rumania y Bulgaria. Bush y Gorbachov acordaron acelerar el control de armas y las negociaciones económicas. Bush propuso reducciones aún más pronunciadas, y la Unión Soviética negoció y concluyó acuerdos de retiro de tropas con los estados del Tratado de Varsovia.

Además, en ese momento, la reunificación alemana estaba en marcha, lo que conduciría al Tratado sobre la solución definitiva con respecto a Alemania . El tratado se vinculó con el tratado CFE especificando que ciertos límites militares impuestos a Alemania entrarían en vigor una vez concluido el Tratado CFE. [3]

El texto del tratado fue aprobado por los 22 estados negociadores el 15 de noviembre de 1990 en Viena . [4]

Estado [ editar ]

Firmado [ editar ]

Todos los miembros de los dos bloques (la OTAN en azul, el Tratado de Varsovia en rojo) firmaron el tratado CFE en 1990.

El Tratado fue firmado en París el 19 de noviembre de 1990 por 22 países. [5] Estos se dividieron en dos grupos:

  • los entonces 16 miembros de la OTAN: Estados Unidos , Canadá , Dinamarca , Francia , Alemania , Grecia , Islandia , Italia , Luxemburgo , Países Bajos , Noruega , Portugal , España , Turquía , Reino Unido y Bélgica .
  • los entonces seis estados del Tratado de Varsovia: Bulgaria , Checoslovaquia , Hungría , Polonia , Rumania y la Unión Soviética

Ratificación [ editar ]

Los miembros del tratado CFE de 1992 difieren de los signatarios de 1990 debido al colapso de la Unión Soviética y la división de Checoslovaquia.

En 1991, la URSS y el Tratado de Varsovia se disolvieron y Checoslovaquia estaba a punto de dividirse en Chequia y Eslovaquia , lo que explica por qué el tratado fue ratificado por 30 en lugar de 22 estados: [6]

  • Los entonces 16 miembros de la OTAN
  • Las ocho ex repúblicas de la URSS que tienen territorio al oeste de los Urales y los otros seis ex miembros del Tratado de Varsovia. Estas ex repúblicas de la URSS incluyen a Armenia , Azerbaiyán , Bielorrusia , Georgia , Kazajstán , Moldavia , Rusia y Ucrania . Los seis miembros del Tratado de Varsovia incluyen: Bulgaria , Chequia y Eslovaquia, Hungría , Polonia , Rumania . Los ex miembros del Tratado de Varsovia no pertenecientes a la URSS (pero Albania) y los tres estados bálticos se convirtieron en miembros de la OTAN en 1999 o 2004. En 1994, varias ex repúblicas de la URSS formaron elOrganización del Tratado de Seguridad Colectiva (OTSC). A partir de 2019, los siguientes países son miembros de la OTSC : Armenia, Bielorrusia, Kazajstán, Kirguistán, Tayikistán y Rusia.

El tratado entró en vigor el 17 de julio de 1992. [7]

Enmienda [ editar ]

El 31 de mayo de 1996, el tratado fue enmendado por el llamado acuerdo de flanco, que relajó las restricciones para Rusia y Ucrania en la región del flanco definida en el artículo V, subpárrafo 1 (A) del tratado. [8]

Suspensión por Rusia [ editar ]

Rusia notificó a otros signatarios de su intención de suspender la CFE el 14 de julio de 2007.

En marzo de 2015, la Federación de Rusia anunció que había tomado la decisión de detener por completo su participación en el Tratado. [ cita requerida ]

Contenido [ editar ]

Techos de tropas [ editar ]

El Tratado FACE estableció techos iguales para cada bloque (la OTAN y la Organización del Tratado de Varsovia), desde el Atlántico hasta los Urales, en armamentos clave esenciales para llevar a cabo ataques sorpresa e iniciar operaciones ofensivas a gran escala. Colectivamente, los participantes en el tratado acordaron que ninguna de las partes podría tener más de: [7]

  • 20.000 tanques;
  • 20.000 piezas de artillería;
  • 30.000 vehículos blindados de combate (ACV);
  • 6.800 aviones de combate; y
  • 2.000 helicópteros de ataque.

Para limitar aún más la preparación de las fuerzas armadas, el tratado estableció límites máximos iguales para el equipo que podría desplegarse con unidades activas. Otro equipo de tierra tuvo que ser colocado en sitios designados de almacenamiento permanente. Los límites de equipamiento que cada bando podía tener en unidades activas eran: [7]

  • 16.500 tanques;
  • 17.000 piezas de artillería; y
  • 27.300 vehículos blindados de combate (ACV);

El tratado limitó aún más la proporción de armamentos que podría poseer cualquier país de Europa a aproximadamente un tercio del total de todos los países de Europa: la regla de la "suficiencia".

Todas las fuerzas navales basadas en el mar fueron excluidas de la responsabilidad del Tratado FACE. [9]

Arreglos regionales [ editar ]

Además de los límites en el número de armamentos en cada categoría en cada lado, el tratado incluía límites regionales destinados a evitar concentraciones de fuerzas desestabilizadoras en el equipo terrestre. [9]

Destrucción [ editar ]

Para cumplir con los límites máximos de tropas requeridos, el equipo tenía que ser destruido o, de ser posible, convertido para fines no militares. [7]

Verificación [ editar ]

El tratado incluía disposiciones sin precedentes para el intercambio de información detallada, las inspecciones in situ, las inspecciones por denuncia y el seguimiento in situ de la destrucción. [7] Las partes del tratado recibieron un derecho ilimitado a monitorear el proceso de destrucción. La vigilancia por satélite se utilizó para verificar la ubicación y el progreso de la destrucción de grandes equipos militares como vehículos y tanques. [10]

Grupo Consultivo Conjunto [ editar ]

Finalmente, el Tratado estableció en Viena un organismo integrado por todos los miembros del Tratado, que se denominó Grupo Consultivo Conjunto (JCG), [6] y que se ocupaba de cuestiones relacionadas con el cumplimiento de las disposiciones del Tratado. El grupo tenía como objetivo: [11]

  • Resolve ambiguities and differences in interpretation
  • Consider measures that enhance the Treaty's viability and effectiveness
  • Resolve technical questions
  • Look into disputes that may arise from the Treaty's implementation

Implementation[edit]

After the treaty entered into force, a 4-month baseline inspection period began. Twenty-five percent of the destruction had to be completed by the end of 1 year, 60% by the end of 2 years, and all destruction required by the treaty completed by the end of 3 years.

The principal accomplishment was the large-scale reduction or destruction of conventional military equipment in the Atlantic Ocean to the Ural Mountains (ATTU) region during the first 5 years the Treaty was in effect.[5] By the end of the Treaty's reduction period in 1995, when equipment limits took effect, the 30 States Parties completed and verified by inspection the destruction or conversion of over 52,000 battle tanks, armored combat vehicles, artillery pieces, combat aircraft and attack helicopters. In addition, they have conducted/accepted over 4,000 intrusive on-site inspections of military units/installations, and of specified areas.

NATO mostly fulfilled its obligations by destroying its oldest equipment. Also, NATO members with newer equipment, such as the United States, agreed to transfer some of this equipment to allies with older equipment.[7]

Compliance[edit]

NATO[edit]

The United States plans to create bases in Romania and Bulgaria constituted, according to Russia, a breach of the treaty.[12] NATO officials disputed this and stated that the US bases were not intended as permanent and thus could not be seen as a breach. However, it was then reported that the agreements signed with both Romania and Bulgaria in 2006 specifically allowed for permanent bases under direct US control and The Washington Times also had obtained the confirmation of a senior United States official that the facilities were intended to be permanent.[13]

Former Soviet republics[edit]

A June 1998 Clinton administration report stated that Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, Armenia and Azerbaijan were not in compliance with the CFE treaty.[14] Violations ranged from holdings of treaty-limited equipment (TLE) in excess of CFE ceilings to denial of full access during treaty inspections. The report concluded that the compliance issues were not "militarily significant" and Russia and Ukraine, the former USSR republics with the largest holdings among the Eastern bloc, remained within their treaty limits.

In the run-up to the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe's (OSCE) November 1999 Istanbul summit, NATO members perceived three treaty compliance problems.[15] First of all, the continuing existence of Russian equipment holdings in the "flank" region (i.e. Russia's North Caucasus Military District) were in excess of agreed treaty limits. Secondly, the Russian military presence in Georgia was beyond the level authorised by the Georgian authorities. Thirdly, the Russian military presence in Moldova lacked the explicit consent of the Moldovan authorities. During the summit, 30 OSCE members signed the adapted CFE treaty and Russia assumed an obligation to withdraw from the Republic of Moldova, reduce her equipment levels in Georgia and agree with the Georgian authorities on the modalities and duration of the Russian forces stationed on the territory of Georgia, and reduce their forces in the flanks to the agreed levels of the Adapted CFE Treaty.[15] These agreements became known as the "Istanbul Commitments" and were contained in 14 Annexes to the CFE Final Act and within the 1999 Istanbul Summit Declaration. NATO members however refused to ratify the treaty as long as Russia refused, as they saw it, to completely withdraw its troops from Moldovan and Georgian soil.[16] While Russia partially withdrew troops and equipment from Georgia and Moldova, it did not do so completely as requested by NATO.

Transcaucasia[edit]

According to 2019 report Azerbaijan continues to significantly violate the treaty. In its data as of January 1, 2018, Azerbaijan declared equipment totals that exceeded its overall limits by over 900 pieces of Treaty-Limited Equipment:[17]

  • over 300 battle tanks in excess of Azerbaijan's limit of 220 battle tanks, surpassing 236% of the limit,
  • over 160 armored combat vehicles (ACV) in excess of Azerbaijan's limit of 220 ACVs, surpassing 172% of the limit,
  • over 670 artillery pieces in excess of Azerbaijan's limit of 285 artillery pieces surpassing 335% of the limit
  • over 5 attack helicopters in excess of Azerbaijan's limit of 50 attack helicopters surpassing 110% of the limit.[17]

In May 2019 Armenia dismantled and decommissioned 21 armored combat vehicles in accordance with the requirements of treaty.[18]

Follow-up agreements[edit]

Concluding Act of the Negotiation on Personnel Strength of Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (CFE-1A)[edit]

CFE-1A negotiations began shortly after the original CFE Treaty was signed in 1990.[7] CFE-1A was unlike the original CFE treaty not a legally binding treaty, but a political commitment that simultaneously came into force with the CFE treaty and served as a follow-up agreement.[9] The commitment was that all signatories of the CFE Treaty would undertake steps to improve further confidence and security in the ATTU region. CFE-1A committed the 30 members of the treaty to establish manpower limits and, if deemed necessary, to reduce the existing manpower levels within the CFE area of application to reach these limits. The United States was limited under this commitment to have no more than 250,000 troops in the area of application. As an additional source of security assurance, the CFE -1A agreement required the parties to provide advanced notification of any increases made to the force levels. The compliance with the CFE-1A agreement by a member was evaluated during on-site inspections conducted under the CFE Treaty.

Agreement on Adaptation of the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (CFE-II)[edit]

Main article: Adapted Conventional Armed Forces in Europe Treaty

The Agreement on Adaptation of the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (also known as the adapted CFE treaty) was a revision of the original treaty and was signed during the November 1999 Istanbul summit and took into account the different geopolitical situation of the post-Cold War era by setting national instead of bloc-based limits on conventional armed forces. NATO members refused however to ratify the treaty so long as Russia refused to completely withdraw its troops from Moldovan and Georgian soil. While Russia partially withdrew troops and equipment from Georgia and Moldova, it did not do so completely as demanded by NATO. The linkage between the ratification of the adapted treaty and the complete withdrawal had no legal basis, but was rather a political decision made by NATO members.

Suspension and complete withdrawal by Russia[edit]

After Russia was not willing to support the US missile defense plans in Europe, Russian President Vladimir Putin called for "moratorium" on the treaty in his April 26, 2007 address. Then he raised most of his points for rewriting the treaty during the Extraordinary Conference of States Parties to the Treaty on Conventional Forces in Europe, held in Vienna on June 11–15 at Russia's initiative.[19] As his requests were not met during this conference, Putin issued a decree intended to suspend the observance of its treaty obligations on July 14, 2007, effective 150 days later, stating that it was the result of "extraordinary circumstances (...) which affect the security of the Russian Federation and require immediate measures," and notified NATO and its members.[20][21] The suspension applies to the original CFE treaty, as well as to the follow-up agreements.[19]

Motives[edit]

An explanatory document from Russia's presidential administration mentioned several reasons for its original suspension of compliance in 2007.[19] First of all, Russia considered the linkage between the adapted treaty ratification and the withdrawal of troops from Georgia and Moldova as "illegitimate" and "invented". Russia also considered the troop-withdrawal issue a bilateral Russia–Georgia and Russia–Moldova issue, not a NATO–Russia issue. Secondly, the three Baltic states, which border Russia unlike the rest of NATO (excluding Poland and Norway), were not covered under the original CFE treaty as they were still part of the Soviet Union when the treaty was signed.[19] Also, the Baltic states like all NATO members did not ratify the adapted CFE treaty. Russia's wish for a speedy ratification and accession of the Baltic states to a ratified treaty, hoping to restrict emergency deployments of NATO forces there, was not fulfilled.[citation needed]

Thirdly, Russia emphasized that NATO's 1999 and 2004 enlargements increased the alliance's equipment above the treaty limits.[19] Consequently, Russia demanded a "compensatory lowering" of overall NATO numerical ceilings on such equipment. Fourthly, Russia mentioned that the then planned basing of U.S. military units in Romania and Bulgaria "negatively affects" those countries' compliance with the CFE Treaty's force ceilings.[19] Fifthly, the document demanded a "removal" of the flank (i.e., North Caucasian) ceilings on Russian forces by a "political decision" between NATO and Russia, ostensibly to "compensate" Russia for the alliance's enlargement.[19] Sixthly, Russia wanted to re-negotiate and "modernize" the 1999-adapted CFE treaty as soon as it was brought into force.[19] Russia's position was that it would proceed unilaterally to suspend the treaty's validity unless NATO countries brought the updated version into force by July 1, 2008, or at least complied with its terms on a temporary basis, pending a re-negotiation of the treaty.

Most likely, but not mentioned in Russia's explanatory document, the above-mentioned "extraordinary circumstances" referred to the US plans for a missile defense complex in Poland, with a radar component in the Czech Republic.[22][23] Another likely reason is that NATO members refused to ratify the Adapted CFE Treaty due to the continuing presence of several hundred Russian troops in Moldova—something they considered as a violation of the obligations Russia assumed during the 1999 Istanbul summit.[24] However, there was no legal connection between the Adapted CFE treaty and the Russian withdrawal from Georgia and Moldova. The linkage between these two security issues was a decision made by NATO member states to protest against the Second Chechen War and was used as a reason not to ratify the treaty.[25] Russia never accepted this decision—a decision also made six months after the Istanbul summit.[25] Russia also considered the original CFE treaty to be outdated and strategically flawed as it did not take into account the dissolutions of the Warsaw Treaty or the Soviet Union.[26][27]

In Russia, even Vladimir Ryzhkov, an opposition leader and an independent member of the Duma, agreed that Russia had been forced to respond. However, he also speculated that Putin's suspension by decree was "primarily an election-year message to the country: "Your leader won't budge, no matter who formally becomes next President"."[21]

Reactions[edit]

NATO immediately expressed regret over Russia's decision to suspend the treaty, describing it as "a step in the wrong direction", but hoped to engage Moscow in what was described as constructive talks on this issue.[28] The United States along with European states such as Germany, Poland and Romania also expressed their disappointment.[29] Collective Security Treaty Organisation (CSTO) General Secretary Nikolai Bordyuzha and former Soviet president Mikhail Gorbachev expressed support for Putin's decree.[30] On 25 November 2011, the UK stopped sharing military data with Russia.[31]

The Russian Foreign Ministry also said that the consequences of the suspension would be the halting of inspections and verifications of its military sites by NATO countries and that it would no longer have the obligation to limit the number of its conventional weapons.[21] In practice, Russia had already halted such verification visits in June 2007 after an extraordinary CFE treaty conference held in Vienna turned a deaf ear to Russia's complaints.[32] Consequently, military delegations from Bulgaria and Hungary had been denied entry to Russian military units.

Yuri Zarakhovich speculated in Time that the above-mentioned "immediate measures" would be a build-up of its forces in areas bordering NATO eastern members, in particular Poland and the Baltic states.[21] Time further speculated at the time that other measures could include troop buildups along southern borders in the Caucasus, new pressures on Ukraine to maintain the Russian Black Sea Fleet in the Crimea beyond the (then planned) 2017 withdrawal deadline, and a refusal to leave Moldova.

In March 2015, the Russian Federation announced that it had taken the decision to completely halt its participation in the Treaty.[citation needed]

See also[edit]

  • Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances
  • Helsinki Accords

References[edit]

  1. ^ А.Ю.Мазура (10 March 2015). "Заявление руководителя Делегации Российской Федерации на переговорах в Вене по вопросам военной безопасности и контроля над вооружениями". RF Foreign Ministry website.
  2. ^ a b FEDERATION OF AMERICAN SCIENTISTS, "Chronology: CFE Treaty Negotiations and Implementation, 1972-1996", n.d.
  3. ^ http://usa.usembassy.de/etexts/2plusfour8994e.htm
  4. ^ Sharp, Jane (2010-04-05). Striving for Military Stability in Europe. Routledge. p. 2. ISBN 978-1-134-32581-8.
  5. ^ a b US DEPARTMENT OF STATE, "Fact Sheet: Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (CFE) Treaty" , June 18, 2002
  6. ^ a b FEDERATION OF AMERICAN SCIENTISTS, "Treaty on Conventional Forces in Europe (CFE)", n.d.
  7. ^ a b c d e f g US DEPARTMENT OF STATE, "CFE treaty and CFE-1A agreement - Conventional Armed Forces in Europe", July 13, 1992
  8. ^ "Final Document of the First Conference to Review the Operation of the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe and the Concluding Act of the Negotiation on Personnel Strength" (PDF). Retrieved 2009-03-06.
  9. ^ a b c NAVY TREATY IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM, "Conventional Armed Forces in Europe Treaty" Archived 2007-08-03 at the Wayback Machine, n.d.
  10. ^ Mitslal Kifleyesus-Matschie (2006), The role of Verification in International Relations: 1945-1993, p. 112
  11. ^ OSCE, "Joint Consultative Group", n.d.
  12. ^ J. COOPER, "Washington calls 5,500 U.S. troops "hardly any" but 1,200 Russians in PMR must go" Archived 2007-09-27 at the Wayback Machine in The Tiraspol Times, June 13, 2007
  13. ^ http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2006/apr/24/20060424-121528-1841r/?page=all
  14. ^ W. BOESE, "CFE Compliance Report Issued; Treaty Adaptation Talks Continue" in Arms Control Today, June/July 1998
  15. ^ a b NATO, "Questions and Answers on CFE", n.d., p. 2
  16. ^ Most of the Russian troops present were actually in the process of withdrawing from Georgia (see Russian Group of Forces of the Transcaucasus) at the time, though the then current agreements would have left Russian troops in Gudauta in Abkhazia (See: "Archived copy". Archived from the original on 2007-09-30. Retrieved 2007-07-23.CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)), and with peacekeeping forces in South Ossetia (See: [1]) and the Abkhaz/Georgian boundary line (See: IISS Military Balance 2007)
  17. ^ a b "Compliance With the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (Condition (5) (C) Report) - 2019". United States Department of State. Retrieved 2019-05-21.
  18. ^ "Armenia dismantles 21 armored combat vehicles". ARKA News Agency. Retrieved 2019-05-16.
  19. ^ a b c d e f g h V. SOCOR, "Kremlin Would Re-write Or Kill CFE Treaty" Archived 2007-09-30 at the Wayback Machine by The Jamestown Foundation, July 18, 2007
  20. ^ BBC NEWS, "Russia suspends arms control pact", July 14, 2007
  21. ^ a b c d Y. ZARAKHOVICH, "Why Putin Pulled Out of a Key Treaty" in Time, July 14, 2007
  22. ^ A. KRAMER, "Russia Steps Back From Key Arms Treaty" in The New York Times, July 14, 2007
  23. ^ These US plans would not have been possible without the 2002 unilateral withdrawal from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty by the US as this treaty prevented the establishment of new anti-missile defenses sites. See: BBC NEWS, "Q&A: US missile defence", July 3, 2007. As Russia saw it, the CFE treaty could thus become (after the ABM treaty) the second major Cold War treaty that was suspended.
  24. ^ Kramer, Andrew (July 14, 2007). "Russia Steps Back From Key Arms Treaty". New York Times. Retrieved 2007-07-14. The Treaty terms specified that any party withdrawing from the agreement would have to provide 150 days notice before withdrawal, but it had no provisions for the suspension of obligations.
  25. ^ a b N. VON OTFRIED, "Das Wort zur Ta" in Der Spiegel, July 15, 2007 (in German)
  26. ^ I. MARSCHALL, "Russia changes game by leaving CFE treaty" Archived 2007-09-27 at the Wayback Machine in The Kuwait Times, July 15, 2007
  27. ^ X, "CFE Treaty – Time to end the hypocrisy" in Pravda, July 15, 2007
  28. ^ S. LEBIC, "Suspension of CFE Treaty is a 'step in the wrong direction,' NATO says" Archived 2007-10-01 at the Wayback Machine in The Independent, July 16, 2007
  29. ^ AFP, "US, NATO 'disappointed' at Russian pullout of arms treaty", July 15, 2007
  30. ^ UNI, "Gorbachev backs Putin for suspending CFE Treaty" Archived 2007-09-30 at the Wayback Machine, July 15, 2007
  31. ^ "UK halts military data sharing with Russia." RIA Novosti, 25 November 2011.
  32. ^ R. WEITZ, "Extraordinary Conference Fails to Achieve Agreement on CFE Treaty Dispute" in World Politics Review, June 19, 2007

External links[edit]

  • The Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (CFE) Treaty at a Glance — Arms Control Association
  • Text of the treaty — United States Department of State
  • Official signatures and ratifications[permanent dead link].
  • History of NATO – the Atlantic Alliance - UK Government site
  • Russia intends to leave CFE 26 April 2007
  • Statement by Russia's Ministry of Foreign Affairs Regarding Suspension by RF of CFE Treaty
  • 'Kremlin tears up arms pact with NATO', the Observer
  • The Cornerstone Crumbles, the eXile
  • Key Facts About the CFE Treaty and Agreement on Adaptation - U.S. Mission to the OSCE