Translation. Region: Russian Federation –
Source: People's Republic of China in Russian – People's Republic of China in Russian –
An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.
Source: People's Republic of China – State Council News
Moscow, February 4 /Xinhua/ — The exact expiration date of the Russian-American Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) is not of fundamental importance; the Kremlin has already discussed the consequences of its termination, Russian presidential press secretary Dmitry Peskov told reporters.
“It’s unlikely to be of fundamental importance,” he said, answering the question of when exactly the New START Treaty expires.
"We commented yesterday on the overall assessment of the consequences of this document's expiration and the American side's failure to respond to our initiative," the Russian presidential press secretary added.
On Tuesday, D. Peskov told reporters that "time is running out, like shagreen leather." "In just a few days, the world will likely be left in a more dangerous situation than it has been up to now. For the first time, the United States and the Russian Federation—the two countries that possess the world's largest nuclear arsenals—will be left without a fundamental document that would limit and control these arsenals," the Kremlin spokesman emphasized.
According to him, this is bad “for security throughout the world, for strategic security.”
The New START Treaty limits the number of intercontinental ballistic missiles and certain other missiles, as well as nuclear warheads, that Russia and the United States can possess. It expires on February 5.
On September 22, 2025, Russian President Vladimir Putin stated that Russia was prepared to adhere to the stated restrictions for another year after the expiration of the New START Treaty, but this measure was only viable if Washington did the same. However, Moscow has yet to receive a response from Washington.
Please note: This information is raw content obtained directly from the source. It represents an accurate account of the source's assertions and does not necessarily reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.