Select period
04.09.2018

“At the time of confrontation between the United States and Russia, two summits – one in Geneva in 1985, and the other one in Reykjavik in 1986 – helped to change the atmosphere. Neither resulted in specific agreements, but they turned the developments for the better. Although President Trump is facing strong domestic pressure against any meetings with President Putin, this channel of communication should be maintained,” – Amb. Yuri Nazarkin, Professor of the Geneva School of Diplomacy and International Relations, Member of Centre russe d’etudes politiques.

15.07.2018

“А third party, be it a country or a non-state actor, can attack critical infrastructure of the US or Russia, making it look as if the aggressor was the other one, thus provoking war between them. In cyber space this is possible. Both the Russian and the US cyber doctrines allow them to react to major cyberattacks with all military means. Therefore, an effective direct communication and de-escalation channels between the two countries are a priority,” – Dr. Elena Chernenko, PIR Center Executive Board Member and Deputy Head of the Kommersant Newspaper Foreign Policy Department.

12.07.2018

“The Advisory Board on Disarmament Matters, through its mandate to recommend studies, could be more closely integrated into deliberative processes and negotiations,” — Agenda for Disarmament of Secretary-General “Securing Our Common Future”.


07.06.2018

“The contemporary Russian and American leaders should reconfirm unequivocally and without any reservations the conviction of their predecessors of the 1970s and 1980s that nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought,” Dr. Alexei Arbatov, Head of the Center for International Security, Institute of World Economy and International Relations (IMEMO).

16.05.2018

“Although there is a number of efforts to bridge Russia and the United States as key players in the NPT review process, unfortunately, today we are witnessing the opposite situation when the dialogue is falling apart. Even at this PrepCom we could witness both the dialogue and the traditionally established rules of behavior falling apart, which is very dangerous. We decided that we needed a special meeting involving next generation of nuclear nonproliferation specialists from both countries, which we called a Track 2.5 meeting. I am particularly grateful to the Gorchakov Fund for its support in bringing three young Russian specialists to the PrepCom and the seminar. The fact that the Russian official fund is interested in this channel of public diplomacy is notable,” – Dr. Vladimir Orlov, PIR Center Founder & Special Advisor.


23.04.2018

“Prof. Naumkin is not only an academic and a key Russian expert on the Middle East, but he has also a deep practical insight into Russian interests in the region. This particular experience makes his presentation at once unique and very valuable. We highly appreciate the idea to make the Swiss Embassy the venue for this special meeting of the Trialogue Club International.”, - Col. Bruno Russi, Swiss Defense Attaché and Dean of the Defense Attachés Corps in Moscow.

20.04.2018

“The window of opportunity regarding US-Russian dialogue is closing very quickly. I do not accept the argument that that the transition period in Washington is taking longer than usual, and the real game will start soon. Nor do I think that just separating the nuclear nonproliferation agenda issues from the broader context of security agenda could help. This will just mislead all of us,” – Dr. Vladimir A. Orlov, Founder and Special Advisor, PIR Center.

03.04.2018

“We really have quite serious problems in arms control. Nothing similar happened before. The trend we seemed to notice in the 1990s has become history. In Russia, we had illusions that we could have normal partnership dialogue with Western countries. On our part, we have done practically everything possible for this dialogue,” - Vladimir Yermakov, Director of the Department for Nonproliferation and Arms Control of the Russian MFA. 

02.03.2018

"The United States and Russia have managed to cooperate on nonproliferation even amid grave political crises since such cooperation always was and remains indispensable to the preservation and success of the nonproliferation regime. Whenever the two countries, divided by broader political disagreements, failed to compartmentalize their relations and keep nonproliferation dialogue intact, they would also fail to achieve common nonproliferation-related goals, something they cannot allow to happen today,” Mr. Adlan Margoev, PIR Center’s “Russia and Nuclear Nonproliferation” Program Director.

08.02.2018

Today they DPRK has a nuclear arsenal. In my judgment, they are not going to give up their nuclear arsenal. Diplomacy is no longer able to solve that problem and that’s the problem we have to deal with today. Therefore, U.S, Russia, China, Japan and South Korea have to being able to contain and deter the arsenal they have. It is not primarily a diplomatic issue, but a military issue. Secondly, we need diplomacy to try to lower that danger”,  Former Secretary of Defense (1994 – 1997) William Perry.

loading