In the context of the 80th anniversary of the Victory in the Second World War and of the founding of the United Nations, the People’s Republic of China and the Russian Federation (hereinafter referred to as the two Sides) emphasize the utmost importance of maintaining and strengthening global strategic stability. Taking into account of the serious challenges facing the international community in the sphere of international and regional security, adhering to the strong consensus reached by the Heads of the two States, and acting in the spirit of previous joint documents on this subject and the principled approaches set out therein, the two Sides state the following.
The two Sides are convinced that the destinies of the peoples of all countries are interrelated; States and their associations should not seek to ensure their own security at the expense and to the detriment of the security of other States. The two Sides call upon all States to adhere to the principle of equal and indivisible security on global and regional levels, make maximum efforts to eliminate conflicts in relations between States, build comprehensive, integrated and sustainable security throughout the world on a collective basis.
The two Sides emphasize the importance of maintaining constructive relations between major powers, including in addressing global strategic issues. Nuclear-weapon States, which bear special responsibility for international security and global strategic stability, should reject Cold War mentality and zero-sum games, resolve contradictions via dialogue on an equal footing and mutually respectful consultations, build confidence to avoid dangerous miscalculations and refrain from actions that generate strategic risks.
The two Sides state with regret that not all of the five nuclear-weapon States follow such approaches in practice. The two Sides note with concern that against the backdrop of aggravation in the relations between nuclear-weapon States, which in some cases has escalated to the threat of a direct military clash, a critical mass of problems and challenges has accumulated in the strategic sphere, and the risk of nuclear conflict has increased.
One of the most pressing strategic risks to be urgently addressed remains the highly destabilizing expansion of existing and newly formed military alliances and coalitions that is being carried out by some nuclear-weapon States close to the frontiers of other nuclear-weapon States in an attempt to establish or expand permanent footholds in such areas, which are particularly sensitive to them, for the purposes of projecting military power, exerting forceful pressure and committing other hostile activities that threaten the core security interests of those States.
It is also of serious concern that such activities are accompanied by the forward deployment of military infrastructure and advanced offensive, defensive and versatile weapon systems that can be employed to accomplish strategic missions -- in particular, to perform decapitating and disarming strikes, while providing enhanced capabilities for missile interception.
In this context, of particular concern are the plans and practical steps by individual nuclear-weapon States to deploy outside their national territories ground-launched intermediate-range and shorter-range missiles with short flight time to a wide range of targets in the territories of other nuclear-weapon States. At the same time, accelerated development, procurement and emplacement of long-range missile systems of this and other similar classes are carried out within the relevant military alliances and coalitions not only by nuclear-weapon States, but also by their non-nuclear allies in the framework of concepts involving the acquisition of counterforce systems for “deep precision strikes”, “kill chains”, “counterstrike capabilities”, and etc. The two Sides strongly condemn such provocative activities that undermine regional stability and global security.
Deeply destabilizing in nature is also the recently announced “Golden (Iron) Dome for America”, a large-scale program designed to establish unconstrained, global, deeply layered and multi-domain missile defense system to protect against any missile threats, including all types of missiles from “peer and near-peer adversaries”. First of all, this means a complete and ultimate rejection to recognize the existence of the inseparable interrelationship between strategic offensive arms and strategic defensive arms, which is one of the central and fundamental principles of maintaining global strategic stability. The project also provides additional impetus to the further development of kinetic and non-kinetic means providing for the left-of-launch defeat of missile weapons and the infrastructure that supports their employment.
The situation is further aggravated by the fact that the “Golden (Iron) Dome for America” program also directly envisages significant strengthening of the arsenal of means to conduct combat operations in space, including the development and orbital deployment of interception systems, turning outer space into an environment for placing weapons and an arena for armed confrontation.
The two Sides oppose the attempts of individual countries to use outer space for armed confrontation and will counter security policies and activities aimed at achieving military superiority, as well as at officially defining and using outer space as a “warfighting domain” . The two Sides confirm the need to start negotiations on a legally binding instrument based on the Chinese-Russian draft of the Treaty on the Prevention of the Placement of Weapons in Outer Space and of the Threat or Use of Force Against Outer Space Objects as soon as possible, that would provide fundamental and reliable guarantees for preventing an arms race in outer space, weaponization of outer space and the threat or use of force against outer space objects or with their help. In order to safeguard world peace, ensure equal and indivisible security for all, and improve the predictability and sustainability of the exploration and peaceful use of outer space by all States, the two Sides agree to promote on a global scale the international initiative/political commitment not to be the first to deploy weapons in outer space.
The two Sides condemn the use of commercial space systems to interfere in the internal affairs of sovereign States and armed conflicts involving third countries.
Among the provocative actions undertaken by some nuclear-weapon States and posing a threat to the security of other nuclear-weapon States the one that stands out is the further development of schemes and means of so-called “nuclear sharing” and “extended nuclear deterrence” within the framework of relevant military alliances and coalitions, which provide for the employment of forward-deployed and (or) other nuclear weapons in the course of joint “integrated” operations with formally non-nuclear allies, involving the use of bases in their territories, dual-capable platforms transferred to them and (or) their own conventional forces and means, including increasingly advanced missile and anti-missile weapons. This has high potential to provoke a regional and global arms race and further escalate tensions.
The two Sides particularly note that the above mentioned offensive capabilities are openly designated by their possessors or, according to their features, can be employed for the purposes of delivering by means of high-precision conventional weapons or a combination of nuclear and non-nuclear weapon systems a supposedly “preventive” or “preemptive” strike, but in fact a first strike, in calculation to repel a radically weakened retaliatory strike with air and missile defense assets, thus making use of strategic advantage in offense and defense. At the same time, the integration of counterforce and missile defense components of this adventurous strategy is explicitly envisaged at the doctrinal level and implies, in particular, ensuring multi-factor support for “missile defense and defeat”.
The comprehensive implementation by individual nuclear-weapon States, with the support of their allies, of the specified conceptual and military-technical approaches, obviously aimed at weakening the reliability and effectiveness of the strategic deterrence capabilities of other nuclear-weapon States, indicates aspiration to ensure an overwhelming military superiority, “strategic invulnerability” and ultimately “absolute strategic security”. This fundamentally contradicts the logic underlying the maintenance of strategic balance and runs counter to the principle of equal and indivisible security. As a consequence, there is a combined threat of directly undermining global strategic stability, spurring an arms race and increasing conflict potential both among nuclear-weapon States and in the international arena as a whole. Moreover, such a course of action calls into question the effectiveness of efforts to maintain predictability in the nuclear and missile sphere, as well as creates hardly surmountable obstacles to the constructive consideration of nuclear arms control and nuclear disarmament initiatives.
The two Sides consistently oppose such a policy in the strategic sphere that is destructive for international security. The two Sides reaffirm their commitment to “The Joint Statement of the Leaders of the Five Nuclear-Weapons States on Preventing Nuclear War and Avoiding Arms Race” of January 3, 2022 and to the principle enshrined therein that a nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought. The two Sides call on all participating States of the above-mentioned Statement to fully adhere to its provisions in practice. This implies an unwavering focus on avoiding any military confrontation between nuclear-weapon States and seeking politico-diploma