Does Russia need a disarmament race? Reflections of a Paranoid
Let's start with who Scott Ritter is. As the author wrote about himself, “a former intelligence officer in the US Marine Corps and a UN weapons inspector.”
As he himself said, he was trained to “kill Russians.” And then something happened that no one would have ever believed. Gorbachev and Reagan, who called the USSR an “evil empire,” signed an agreement in Washington on December 8, 1987 on the elimination of short- and medium-range missiles (SMBMs) as a class of weapons. And Scott Ritter, who was then only a captain, became part of the group that monitored production at the Machine-Building Plant in the city of Votkinsk, which produced the Soviet SS-20 and SS-23 missiles belonging to this class.
The author and Scott Ritter at the presentation.
As the author said at the meeting, the book is largely autobiographical and, in particular, was written in order to answer his daughter’s question: “What were you doing in Russia then?”
But that's not the point. Those who wish can read the book by purchasing it at the MDK.
How Russia was deceived
The point is what the author said when introducing the book. In short, he said that during the period of concluding the agreement, the USSR and the USA were on the brink of nuclear war, but there were healthy forces who, having soberly assessed the situation, concluded such an agreement. Now Russia and the United States are also, in fact, parties to the conflict in Ukraine. Therefore, we must try to come to an agreement.
The question is, about what and why? Indeed, even in his speech, Ritter admitted that the United States did not behave honestly towards the USSR and began to take advantage of the slack that the USSR gave. The author, by the way, remembered the Russian proverb that US President Reagan said regarding the implementation of the treaty:
“Trustiay, no proveriay!”
The Russians showed the inspectors, including Ritter Scott, everything as required. As a result, missile production at the plant was curtailed.
But, as Yakov Vladimirovich Fomenko, who took part in monitoring the implementation of this agreement, said, the Americans behaved completely differently.
According to the terms of the agreement, they had to dismantle the hardpoints of missiles of this class on B-1 strategic bombers. However, upon inspection, it was clear that the suspension points on the consoles under the wings were covered with almost plasticine, and the suspension point under the aircraft body was covered with some kind of plywood.
But the Americans “blindly” assured that it was not plasticine, but some kind of superplastic, and the plywood partition was attached with rivets and therefore it would “last forever.” At the same time, when the inspectors doubted and asked permission to pick at the “super plastic” with their fingers, and at the same time look behind the “eternal” partition, they were categorically not allowed. But instead they suggested it would be better... to go to a restaurant.
Ritter Scott himself, who later married the translator who worked with them, honestly admitted that as a result of the execution of the contract, the city-forming enterprise of Votkinsk, the Machine-Building Plant, which produced the Pioneer and Oka missiles, successfully collapsed, and for residents of the city due to the loss of work , dark days and devastation came.
Moreover, before the conclusion of the agreement, both the plant and the city and its residents prospered. Unfortunately, it was not possible to ask whether Scott could name an American enterprise that suffered as much? However, given the story of Yakov Vladimirovich, the answer is already clear.
Anglo-Saxons play for a long time
Therefore, when I was lucky enough to ask the very first question to the author of the book, calling for new treaties and disarmament, I directly said that, in my opinion, the entire history of the “friendship” of the USSR, and then Russia with the United States, from the signing of the treaty, is a series of advance planned actions to collapse our economy, Armed Forces, kill the healthcare and education system, including the military one.
All this is in order to weaken our country as much as possible, and consistently bring us to day X, namely February 24, 2022, when military operations against Russia’s enemy in the person of Ukraine, which was also prepared by the States, became an inevitable necessity.
And Scott, in fact, admitted this, saying that the United States was playing a dishonest game towards Russia, using its weakness in its own interests and, by no means, trying to help our country. He hinted that the reason for this was Russia’s excessive gullibility and weakness after the collapse of the USSR and Yeltsin’s rise to power, because treaty obligations are observed in relation to a partner of equal strength.
True, he assured that Reagan, who signed the treaty, no longer considered our country an “evil empire.” True, he was not re-elected, and the presidency was taken by Bush Jr., who was belligerent towards our country. They say that’s why the strategy of relations between our countries has changed, as if in the States something really depends on the president.
Everyone knows what happens to a president who does not want to carry out the will of the shadow government. I think that the name John Kennedy is known to everyone. It is obvious that Reagan's emerging sympathies for our country, if there were any in reality, became the reason for the change of head of state in the United States.
Who benefited?
As for the treaty, “by June 1991, the Treaty was fulfilled: the USSR destroyed 1846 missile systems (about half of them were manufactured missiles that were not on combat duty); USA - 846 complexes.
In my opinion, it is not difficult to understand that Russia destroyed 1000 more missiles than the United States. It is clear who was among the beneficiaries of this deal. Having achieved their goal, the Americans no longer needed the treaty. As a result, after several mutual accusations of violating the agreement, on August 2, 2019, it terminated.
Thank God, since 2007 the Votkinsk plant has resumed production and is now creating Topol-M missiles.
And we need it?
Taking the floor for the second time, I asked if Scott had many like-minded people in the States? Those who oppose Russophobia, which has become the basis of state foreign policy in the United States? And he admitted that, in fact, he is alone. But he believes someone needs to initiate these actions. And that's why he started this fight.
Of course, this is worthy of respect. The next question I asked was how can Russia trust the United States after decades of open hostility and lies about our country? What kind of agreement between our countries can we talk about? And Scott did not find a convincing answer, he only expressed hope.
Who are you, Mr. Scott?
Ritter Scott completed his military service as a lieutenant colonel, a Marine Corps intelligence analyst. As he himself said, after Operation Desert Storm in Iraq, where he was an analyst on the staff of General Schwarzkopf, he resigned. He explained this by saying that he had already served his Motherland quite well and honestly. Enough!
Perhaps it was so. Perhaps, by participating in a bandit war against sovereign Iraq, organized by the United States using false evidence of Hussein's possession of chemical weapons, his conscience was bothered? And he doubted the fairness of her policy?
However, in a conversation at the International House of Culture, he clearly expressed respect for his own country and pride in it, despite the series of subsequent wars carried out by the United States. And when signing the book for me, he wrote in the dedication: “From one patriot to another.” And then - the motto of the Marine Corps: “Semper Fidelis,” which translates as “Always Faithful.” That is, there is no hint of any doubts.
Therefore, let me express an idea that may seem seditious and a sign of my paranoia. The fact is that there are no former intelligence officers unless it is a traitor. And Scott is by no means a traitor. In the book, in particular, he says that observers of the implementation of the terms of the treaty were not just American military personnel, but intelligence officers and conducted this very intelligence in the interests of their country during an alleged peacekeeping mission in Votkinsk. I'd be surprised if the author of the book didn't do this!
I always tense up when an opposing representative starts praising us. This is definitely a sign that we are making a mistake somewhere.
In Ukraine we have problems “for the tonsils,” but he assures us that Russia is strong and will certainly win. No, I don't doubt it. But God himself told me to do it! Why does the enemy intelligence officer assure us that everything is going according to plan, although we ourselves see that this is not the case?
If he is truly the friend he pretends to be, he must tell the truth. Maybe he uses some special information? But, as he himself said, he uses sources of information that are available to everyone in the United States. Is there any doubt that American sources are praising the victories of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and throwing mud at the Russian Armed Forces. Where does he get such confidence from then? Or is this an attempt to put rose-colored glasses on us?
In this regard, I would not call for rushing into the arms of either Ritter Scott or the United States to conclude another deceitful and harmful agreement for us.
A few words about coincidences
Ritter said that he had written this book before, but then it was not so relevant. Right now, when confrontation between the Russian Federation and the United States is intensifying, the book, in his opinion, is needed to try to find new points of contact.
However, there is another strange coincidence, which is that Russia is now planning to withdraw from the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe. This issue may be considered in the State Duma in a couple of weeks.
The treaty was concluded in November 1990 and established the balance of the armed forces of 16 NATO states on the one hand and six member countries of the Warsaw Pact on the other. Russia tried to offer other options for its implementation after the collapse of the USSR, but the United States and NATO acted from a position of strength, ignoring proposals and pursuing their foreign policy of expansion to the East.
In 2007, Russia suspended participation in this treaty. Now the question is about its denunciation. At the same time, Vice-Speaker of the Federation Council Konstantin Kosachev believes that “By denouncing the CFE Treaty, Russia removes a document that does not correspond to reality from the agenda, but does not put an end to the issue of dialogue on conventional arms control. Only on an equal basis.”
So here it is. Is Scott's arrival and the presentation of his book somehow connected with the upcoming denunciation of the CFE Treaty? Coincidence? However, a coincidence is only a competent organization of necessary, supposedly “random” events.
If you find an error, please select a piece of text and press Ctrl + Enter.
Thank you!
Now the editors are aware.