Answer to a Question
Question:
It is well known that Russia's aerial intervention in Syria was with the approval of America in a dirty deal, according to which Russia serves America's interests in Syria in exchange for the US turning a blind eye to Russia's occupation of Crimea, as well as what is happening in eastern Ukraine... This could have been understood as a policy of accord between Russia and America. However, recent events, such as the exclusion of Russia from the Nuclear Summit managed by Obama, as well as the military confrontations between Azerbaijan (supported by America) and Armenia (supported by Russia), make this accord appear unstable... The question is: what is the explanation for this?
Another question: How did these nuclear summits originate? What is the purpose of these summits? Will they truly lead to nuclear disarmament? May Allah reward you with goodness.
Answer:
First: The Unstable US-Russian Accord:
1- Putin, having been a director of the KGB in the former Soviet Union, yearns for a prominent international role similar to what the Soviet Union had with America. For this reason, he agreed to carry out the aggressive, criminal role in Syria for the benefit of America by stabilizing Bashar's rule until America finds a replacement, especially after he was on the verge of falling and America feared that sincere Islamic forces would fill the vacuum after him... Putin thought that by serving America in Syria, it would calm the problems on Russia's southern borders in Ukraine and its surroundings. But this is one matter, and that is another! Russia’s slide into a war against Muslims will, with Allah’s help, make it taste woes upon woes, making the problems of Ukraine and its annexes a mere drop in the ocean of Muslims' anger against it; and tomorrow is near for the one who awaits it. This is from one perspective...
From another perspective, Putin thought that America would reward him by elevating Russia's international role and highlighting it in international affairs! This is political stupidity because states based on the Capitalist principle have no values except utility and the exploitation of others. Therefore, the stronger Capitalist states exert every effort to dominate the weaker Capitalist states... America, Europe, and Russia all follow the Capitalist principle. This is not like the previous situation when the West followed the Capitalist principle and the Soviet Union followed the Socialist-Communist principle; each of the two principles had its own conflicting values, so they could compete for dominance and influence, and parity was expected... As for the major powers that adopt Capitalism, dominance remains for the strongest state, and its agreement with other states of the same principle is to serve it, not to be an equal to it. Therefore, America does not accept Europe being an equal to it, nor Russia being an equal to it, unless these states reach a level of strength where they can contest its influence to become its equal. This is because the Capitalist principle is based on utility, and the lion's share goes to the strongest.
2- Thus, Putin’s belief that serving America's interest in Syria would lead to America calming Russia's regional and international problems is a mistaken belief. This became clearly evident in the two matters mentioned in the question: the Nuclear Summit and the war between Azerbaijan and Armenia:
a- As for the Nuclear Summit, America handled the preparation for the summit, including the programs and agenda, while ignoring Russia, which is the second-largest nuclear power in the world... The summit lasted from March 31, 2016, to April 1, 2016, during which the United States tried to prove that it is the major and supreme power, the historical leader that leads all countries of the world, doing as it pleases anywhere and at any time. It paid no attention to Russia and did not involve it in the preparation for the summit despite it being the second-largest nuclear state: ("The Kremlin emphasized that the preparation for this summit lacked cooperation with Russia. Furthermore, studying issues related to nuclear security requires joint efforts and taking into account the interests and positions of other parties. This is what Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said. He explicitly clarified that Moscow faced a lack of cooperation in studying the issues and topics on the agenda during the preparation for the summit... accompanied by a provocative media campaign by the United States"). (Russia Today, 2016/03/31).
Washington's behavior during the call for the summit and its convening was characterized by what can be described as disregard to the point of insulting Russia. This prompted Putin not to attend. Although the reason was America’s neglect of Russia in the preparations and conference procedures, the American response to Putin’s absence was colder and more dismissive than it was during the Cold War. The Deputy National Security Advisor for the White House, Ben Rhodes, said: "We believe that Russia's decision not to participate at a high level in the Nuclear Security Summit in Washington this week is an opportunity missed, above all for Russia. All they are doing is isolating themselves in not participating as they have in the past." (Al-Badeel website, 2016/03/31). Furthermore, Obama downgraded Russia's value by placing it in the same category as North Korea, saying at the end of the Nuclear Summit: "There is still much work to be done to reduce the nuclear arsenals of Russia and North Korea," adding, "Our work is not yet finished, as there are many nuclear materials that need to be secured globally." (Al Jazeera Net, 2016/04/02). Thus, the extent of American disregard for Russia regarding the Nuclear Summit is clear!
b- As for the war between Azerbaijan and Armenia... battles broke out almost suddenly along the ceasefire line between Armenia and Azerbaijan in the mountainous Karabakh region on the night of April 2, 2016... Political and military leaders in Baku, the capital of Azerbaijan, convened urgent meetings, and Armenia did the same, with its president, Sargsyan, stating: "These are the most serious armed battles since the ceasefire was established in 1994." (Al Jazeera Net, 2016/04/03). It can be concluded that Russian influence was very stable in Armenia, which hosts one of the largest Russian military bases, housing the 102nd division of the Russian army with approximately 5,000 Russian soldiers. Russia provides grants and loans to the resource-poor state of Armenia and provided it with military support during the conflict with Azerbaijan over the mountainous Karabakh region before and after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Russia was the mediator that imposed the 1994 ceasefire between the two parties, which was in favor of Armenia since it and its allies in the Karabakh region gained full control over the Azerbaijani territory, and 9% of other Azerbaijani lands to the west, south, and even east of the region were occupied. Therefore, Russia was interested in stopping this latest war... As for America's role in this war that broke out... it was from behind the curtain, or even without a curtain. The Al-Masry Al-Youm website published on 2016/03/31 that ("The President of Azerbaijan demanded on Wednesday, 2016/03/30, in Washington before US Secretary of State Kerry that Armenia 'immediately' withdraw its forces from Nagorno-Karabakh, the region over which the two countries are fighting a conflict that Washington has been trying to solve for years. Kerry received the Azerbaijani President on the sidelines of an international summit on nuclear security organized by President Barack Obama on Thursday and Friday. Aliyev told reporters in front of Kerry: 'We are grateful to the United States government for its efforts to find a way to resolve the long-standing conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan.' He added that 'the conflict must be resolved on the basis of a Security Council resolution calling for the immediate and unconditional withdrawal of Armenian forces from our lands.' As for Kerry, he called for a 'final solution to the frozen conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh, which must be a negotiated solution'").
If Azerbaijan, its oil, and the transport pipelines from it to the Black Sea and Turkey have attracted significant American interest since its independence in 1991 due to its importance in the Russo-American struggle, then the statements of the Azerbaijani President three days before the outbreak of fighting, from Washington and accompanied by Secretary of State Kerry, indicate beyond any doubt that America is the one igniting the war in Russia’s Caucasian backyard. This is a threat to Russian interests in Armenia and the Caucasus, as this region is extremely sensitive for Russia... Meaning, America, by detonating this war, is delivering pressing shocks to Russia's flank...
The conclusion is that it is political stupidity for Putin to think that through his dirty criminal deal with America in Syria, he will gain American favor by calming his regional and international problems. Rather, the limits of the deal will remain confined to Syria due to Russia's service to America's interests, and it will not necessarily extend beyond that to other international issues. This explains the tension in US-Russian relations at the Nuclear Summit and the war between Azerbaijan and Armenia, despite the calm relations in Syria.
Second: Nuclear Summits and Their Purpose:
1- During the Cold War, nuclear weapons played a fundamental role in the competition between great powers and in establishing state security. The security dilemma resulting from the imbalance in conventional weapons between states encouraged them to acquire more conventional and nuclear weapons in an attempt to restore parity. The United States was the first country to manufacture the nuclear bomb, which gave it a significant advantage over Russia. Russia was threatened by nuclear weapons until it possessed them, thereby succeeding in restoring military balance with America... Similarly, France and Britain, feeling threatened and fearful of the nuclear arsenal acquired by Russia, tried and sought to restore some parity with Russia. China, too, feeling weak before Russia, sought and managed to possess nuclear bombs, and this feeling of weakness also drove India to purchase nuclear bombs to counter Chinese aggression, followed by Pakistan in an attempt to achieve military superiority over India. As for the states that did not aspire to have nuclear activity, they allied themselves with either America or the Soviet Union to protect themselves from nuclear weapons. This protection was in the form of nuclear umbrellas; for example, America provided Europe and many countries in the Asia-Pacific region with a nuclear umbrella to protect them from the Soviet Union.
2- In the post-Cold War period, nuclear deterrence paved the way for a movement toward nuclear disarmament. Many felt that after the collapse of the Soviet Union, the international security environment had changed forever, and that the nuclear peace falsely imposed after Hiroshima and Nagasaki was no longer applicable. Globalization, climate change, the rise of non-state organizations and entities, and the emergence of ethnic tensions in the post-Soviet space all meant that if the nuclear weapons previously held by the Soviet Union were not properly disposed of, they could fall into the wrong hands and cause significant damage... Facing this situation, emerging states in possession of nuclear weapons, like Ukraine and Kazakhstan, quickly gave up their nuclear weapons in exchange for regional guarantees.
3- This new security environment pushed two basic concepts to the forefront: disarmament and nuclear non-proliferation. Since America was the only superpower in the world, people across the globe looked to America and hoped it would take the initiative in the field of nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation. However, both the Clinton and Bush administrations did very little in this regard. In January 2007, former American officials—Henry Kissinger, George Shultz, Bill Perry, and Sam Nunn (who were known as the "Gang of Four" for nuclear deterrence)—proposed that the United States dedicate itself to eliminating nuclear weapons... However, nuclear disarmament was not placed at the heart of the nuclear agenda until Obama took office... In 2009, Obama, speaking from Prague before a crowd of 20,000 people, said: ("The United States has a moral responsibility to act to rid the world of nuclear weapons. He said: 'The existence of thousands of nuclear weapons is a more dangerous legacy than the Cold War. Today, the Cold War has disappeared, but thousands of these weapons have not yet disappeared'"). (BBC website, 2009/04/05)... After that, four nuclear summits were held:
- First Nuclear Summit: April 12-13, 2010, in Washington...
- Second Nuclear Summit: March 26-27, 2012, in Seoul, South Korea...
- Third Nuclear Summit: March 24-25, 2014, in The Hague, Netherlands...
- Fourth Nuclear Summit: March 31 - April 1, 2016, in Washington...
4- America's policy in what it calls nuclear disarmament is not intended, according to its plan, for the actual disarmament of nuclear weapons from all countries. Rather, it intends to disarm other countries while the nuclear weapons remain only with it. If it cannot achieve that, the most it can do according to its plans is to reduce the nuclear weapon stockpiles of nuclear states by a certain percentage, which it controls. Because its nuclear stockpile is the highest, by setting a percentage applied to nuclear states, it will reduce the stockpiles of other countries so that what they have becomes ineffective compared to America’s stockpile. Therefore, the final communiqués of the four nuclear summits are vague statements containing no text indicating the actual removal of nuclear weapons from the world. This is clearly shown in the final communiqués; if we take the final communiqué of the fourth summit, which is the most prominent of those summits, we find it does not go beyond general, non-binding, and futile texts regarding nuclear disarmament. The final communiqué stated:
("The countries participating in the fourth 'Nuclear Security' summit in Washington affirmed their commitment to nuclear disarmament, non-proliferation, and the peaceful use of nuclear energy... The summit warned in its final statement that 'the threat of nuclear and radiological terrorism remains one of the greatest challenges facing international security and that the threat is constantly evolving'... World leaders reaffirmed their commitment to preventing nuclear weapons from falling into the hands of extremists, but they warned that the threat is 'constantly evolving'... The leaders said in a joint statement at the Nuclear Security Summit hosted by Washington: 'There is still more work to be done to prevent non-state actors from obtaining nuclear and other radioactive materials that could be used for malicious purposes'... The leaders added in their statement: 'We reaffirm our commitment to our common goals of nuclear disarmament, nuclear non-proliferation, and the peaceful use of nuclear energy'... They continued: 'We commit to strengthening a peaceful and stable international environment by reducing the risk of nuclear terrorism and enhancing nuclear security'... The fourth Nuclear Security Summit was launched in Washington last Thursday to discuss ways to enhance security measures for nuclear materials and prevent them from falling into the hands of terrorists, with the participation of leaders from more than 50 countries and organizations"). (Al-Youm website, "SPA-Washington", 2016/04/02) End.
By contemplating this statement, one sees no practical text for global disarmament. They did not even mention anything about the Zionist entity's possession of an arsenal of nuclear weapons in a region free of nuclear weapons, despite having long said that achieving true nuclear security begins with serious work to establish zones free of weapons of mass destruction! Thus, the purpose of these summits is not the actual disarmament of nuclear weapons from the world, but rather American nuclear control over the affairs of states... This is confirmed by Obama in his statements about the conference, saying that America wants to regulate and control nuclear weapons: ("US President Barack Obama: 'There is still a significant amount of nuclear and radioactive material around the world that needs to be secured. The global stockpile of plutonium is growing, nuclear arsenals are expanding in some countries, and there may be small tactical nuclear weapons vulnerable to theft.' Obama explained that his country will do its part to protect nuclear materials until other countries improve security measures and transparency"). (euronews website, 2016/04/02). Obama also said: ("US President Barack Obama said in a press conference after the end of the summit on Saturday that there is a significant amount of nuclear material around the world that must be secured as global plutonium stockpiles grow... Obama considered that there is still a lot of work required to reduce the nuclear arsenal of Russia and North Korea, saying that South America has become free of nuclear materials, and that 14 countries—including Taiwan, Libya, and Vietnam—have gotten rid of enriched uranium and plutonium"). (Al Jazeera, 2016/04/02).
Thus, America wants these summits to take over the regulation of nuclear weapons so that it becomes the controller of them. Even the conferences it holds are placed under its disposal; it invites whom it wills and prevents whom it wills, and provokes or insults whom it wills, considering itself the master of the world. This is only because it finds no state of significance to stand in its face!
This will remain the condition of America with the states submissive to it until the dawn of the Khilafah rises. Then, the power of Islam will come to them from where they did not expect, and those who committed crimes will be turned back on their heels, achieving no good.
سَيُصِيبُ الَّذِينَ أَجْرَمُوا صَغَارٌ عِنْدَ اللَّهِ وَعَذَابٌ شَدِيدٌ بِمَا كَانُوا يَمْكُرُونَ
"There will afflict those who committed crimes debasement before Allah and severe punishment for what they used to conspire." (Surah Al-An'am [6]: 124)
2nd of Rajab 1437 AH Corresponding to April 9, 2016 CE