Physical Address
304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124
MOSCOW, October 1. /TASS/. Moscow will not sign a new arms control deal with the US; Kiev is not taking China’s new “Friends of Peace” initiative seriously; and a closer look at Mark Rutte, NATO’s new Secretary General, and what his tenure could mean for Russia. These stories topped Tuesday’s newspaper headlines across Russia.
Russia will not sign another New START Treaty, a high-ranking source told Izvestia. According to the source, Moscow resuming its participation in the treaty “would only serve to feed the US’ ego.” At the same time, Moscow’s position is dictated by Washington’s destructive actions – threats with strategic weapons and providing military support to Ukraine, the newspaper writes. Earlier, Washington called on Moscow to return to the agreement while on September 25, Vladimir Putin announced a host of changes to Russia’s nuclear doctrine.
“We have suspended our participation in the New START Treaty because of Washington’s actions. And we will not sign any new agreement, as doing so would only inflate the ego of the US,” the source stressed.
The source cited the aggressive actions of the United States towards Russia as the main reason for this rejection. “They threaten us with strategic weapons, provide weapons to Ukraine, so what kind of treaty can we even talk about?” the source added.
The US believes that in the near future it may find itself in a situation of confrontation with at least two countries that have powerful nuclear arsenals (Russia and China), as well as with North Korea, which is building up its nuclear potential, research fellow at the Center for International Security at IMEMO RAS Dmitry Stefanovich told Izvestia. “In the absence of restrictions and transparency regarding the Russian arsenal, the United States must prepare for the worst-case scenario and pre-emptively build up its own nuclear arsenal,” the expert believes.
According to Igor Nikulin, a military expert and former member of the UN Disarmament Commission, the US only agrees to arms limitation treaties in one case – when they see that they are being outpaced in some way. Meanwhile, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov recently emphasized that Russia will not increase its arsenal of offensive weapons, at least not while the New START Treaty remains in effect.
“If they feel they have the upper hand, they will never agree to any treaty. For example, when the Chemical Weapons Convention was signed, they did not want to include binary munitions under any circumstances. They only agreed when they learned from defector Vil Mirzayanov that Russia allegedly had such a program,” Nikulin told Izvestia.
Amid Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrey Sibiga’s trip to Budapest to discuss the prospects of Kiev’s peace formula, a competing peace initiative from China and Brazil has emerged, on the basis of which it was decided to launch the negotiating platform “Friends of Peace.” Kiev, however, considers it to be something more like “Friends of Capitulation,” Nezavisimaya Gazeta writes, while the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry expressed dissatisfaction that Switzerland had come on board the Brazilian-Chinese plan.
At the end of last week, on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly in New York, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi, in a meeting with Special Representative of the Brazilian President Celso Amorim, announced the creation of a platform of the countries of the global South called “Friends of Peace,” meant to bring a peaceful settlement of the Ukrainian crisis based on the provisions of the China-Brazil peace initiative presented this spring.
“By calling the leading countries of the world majority ‘friends of capitulation’, Ukraine, as usual, is being combative from the start. At the same time, it is obvious that Kiev cannot avoid competing peace initiatives. And it certainly cannot expect the Ukrainian formula to be the only one. Some states continue to promote it, while others do not support it. Therefore, it is doubtful that Kiev will be able to convince Budapest to change its position on this issue,” leading researcher at the Institute of International Studies at MGIMO Nikolay Silaev told the newspaper.
Meanwhile, China, India, and other countries from the global South are evidently concerned about the Ukraine crisis, which is disrupting global trade and harming their economic interests, Nezavisimaya Gazeta writes. Besides, taking part in the settlement of a large-scale military conflict gives them an opportunity to strengthen their own international status, the analyst added.
“In turn, Moscow, judging by the recent statements of its representatives, is amenable to the initiative. However, any decision on participating in an alternative summit will be made only after its specific parameters are clarified. Chances are that in the end the Russian side will agree to participate and the Ukrainian side will not,” Silaev added.
Meanwhile, Kiev continues to talk in parallel about President Vladimir Zelensky’s “victory plan,” which includes obtaining permission to use long-range strikes with Western weapons against Russia. Press secretary of the Ukrainian president Sergey Nikiforov said the other day that while there is no clear authorization yet, “there is tremendous pressure on Ukraine’s partners.”
After Mark Rutte was elected NATO Secretary General in late June, succeeding long-time stalwart Jens Stoltenberg, the media has sliced and diced his diplomatic and political abilities. Outlets like Politico, Reuters, Le Monde, CNN, have outlined several challenges that the new Secretary General will have to face. These include support for Ukraine, strengthening NATO’s eastern flank, increasing defense spending by member countries and preparing for a potential second term for Donald Trump as US President. On all these issues, Rutte’s positions are practically no different from those that Stoltenberg adhered to – a staunch Euro-Atlanticist, he advocates for continued support for Kiev, Vedomosti writes.
Rutte supports increasing defense spending. In January 2024, in an interview for Bloomberg Surveillance, he called Trump’s demand to spend more on military needs correct. At the same time, it is unclear to what extent his approach to this issue will coincide with the opinion of other countries. According to Politico, in June 2024, Rutte and the heads of other NATO member states butted heads after he came out against creating a pan-European fund to finance defense projects.
The NATO Secretary General, however, is not an independent actor and Rutte should not be expected to usher in any sweeping changes with regard to how the alliance operates, leading expert at the HSE Center for Comprehensive European Studies Yulia Semke told Vedomosti. In fact, his main function is to broker compromises between the 32 member countries and promote their cohesion.
Given the limited powers of the NATO Secretary General, one should not expect support for Ukraine to dwindle either, the expert added. Brussels has already taken a clear anti-Russian stance, which is enshrined, specifically, in the strategic concept of the alliance for 2022. But unlike Stoltenberg, who at the end of his career leaned into a “hawkish” image, Rutte may explore different approaches, potentially “testing the waters,” for alternative strategies, she added
Rutte is a Euro-Atlantic politician to his core, with more political weight than Stoltenberg, senior researcher at the Institute of International Studies at the Moscow State Institute of International Relations of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia Egor Sergeev said. According to him, Rutte cannot be called a rabid opponent of Russia – rather, his past statements have been much more measured with regard to Russia.
In the Ukrainian direction, NATO’s policy is also unlikely to change, Sergeev added. But Russia still remains a strategic priority and the number one threat for NATO. Therefore, the Ukraine conflict will continue to stay in the spotlight going forward, the expert believes.
The running mates of Democrat Kamala Harris and Republican Donald Trump, Tim Walz and JD Vance, will take to the stage on CBS on October 1 to clash in the only debate scheduled for the US vice presidential candidates. As a rule, the war of words between the “second-in-command” is only a political spectacle and does not have much impact on the course of the race. However, the current debate may be an exception, Kommersant writes. The race between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris is so close that even the slightest boost received by either of them as a result of the debates between the vice presidential candidates may be extremely important.
The debate between Walz and Vance has attracted increased attention for various reasons. First, with a little over a month to go before the election, there is still no clear favorite in the race. According to RealClearPolitics, Kamala Harris is beating Donald Trump by two points in the most recent nationwide polls, while in seven swing states the politicians continue to leapfrog each other.
Secondly, Walz and Vance are from the Midwest, home to two swing states where the outcome of the election could be especially tight. Third, many are hyped about the October 1 debates because of the oratory skills of Walz and Vance, which are perhaps even better than those of their bosses.
According to analysts, to some extent the Republican has a tougher road to climb. The fact is that by the end of September, Vance had accumulated a fairly large anti-rating: according to polling aggregator FiveThirtyEight, as of September 27, only 34.7% of Americans had a positive approval rating for Donald Trump’s running mate, while 45.7% disapproved. Walz, on the contrary, can boast a positive balance on this indicator: the Democrat enjoys the approval of 40.1% of Americans, while 36.4% have a negative attitude towards him.
In this regard, political strategists note that Kamala Harris’ running mate simply needs to avoid messing up during the debates, while Vance has to try to change voters’ opinions of him and improve his own rating, the newspaper writes.
The Russian government submitted a draft budget for the next three years to the State Duma. The government plans to increase budget expenditures next year to 41.47 trillion rubles ($446.45 bln) from 39.4 trillion rubles ($424.14 bln) in 2024, according to the explanatory note to the country’s main financial plan. Along with defense, the country is committed to fulfilling its social obligations to citizens, Vedomosti writes.
The ten largest expenditure items of the draft federal budget for 2025 include national defense – 13.5 trillion rubles ($145.33 bln), social policy – 6.5 trillion rubles ($69.9 bln), national economy – 4.35 trillion rubles ($46.83 bln), national security and law enforcement – 3.5 trillion rubles ($37.67 bln), public debt servicing – 3.2 trillion rubles ($34.45 bln), general government expenditures – 2.5 trillion rubles ($26.91 bln), housing and utilities – 1.8 trillion rubles ($19.37 bln), healthcare – 1.86 trillion rubles ($20.02 bln), education – 1.58 trillion rubles ($17 bln), and environmental protection – 914 bln rubles ($9.84 bln).
At the same time, the Finance Ministry raised its forecast for the federal budget deficit this year to 3.3 trillion rubles ($35.52 bln) or 1.7% of GDP, according to the explanatory note. Federal budget revenues will grow by 11.6% to 40.29 trillion rubles ($433.67 bln) next year, with some additional resources provided by systemic tax changes that will come into force next year, the Finance Ministry noted.
This is a fairly complex budget, Director of the Center for Regional Policy at the Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA) Vladimir Klimanov noted. First, it is necessary to ensure an unconditional solution to social issues, the country’s defense capabilities, as well as achieving technological leadership, and technological sovereignty, he noted. “Of course, we would like more funds to be directed specifically at these goals. But the budget is formed based on available revenues,” the expert added.
Defense, national security, and social spending are the highest priority items in the 2025-2027 budget, Director of the Institute of Economic Forecasting at the Russian Academy of Sciences Alexander Shirov told Vedomosti. “Understanding how the logic of budget formation works, we can see that no serious reduction in social support is envisaged,” he noted.
The increase in expenses for servicing the national debt is dictated by the increase in the key rate and the need to provide for the so-called “protected” items – defense, national security, and social policy, Shirov added. The government believes that new tax rates and changes in the general economic situation, which ensured the growth of Russians’ salaries, will be enough to increase revenues, the expert believes.
TASS is not responsible for the material quoted in these press reviews
English