In an effort to reduce nuclear proliferation and strengthen diplomatic ties, U.S. President Barack Obama and Russian President Dmitri Medvedev announced a framework Monday that would reduce both countries’ nuclear stockpiles.

Although both administrations have said that this meeting was an important first step, there has been much controversy in the media over the possible pitfalls and even the purpose of the talks.  

From Al Jazeera English’s perspective, there are issues the countries must acknowledge if the talks are to truly be successful.  

“After years of fraught diplomacy under the Bush-Putin era real obstacles still threaten to jeopardize hopes of a fresh start.  Among them Russia’s opposition to American missile defense plans in Europe and objections to growing U.S. influence in post-Soviet space.”  

The missile defense system has been the source of much tension between the two nations.  And from the perspective of UK’s ITN, the countries are at crossroads.  

“The rest of the U.S. leader’s first visit to Russia might not go as smoothly. Obama has already said he won’t accept any attempt by Moscow to link arms talks to U.S. proposals to locate a missile defense shield in Europe.  Moscow sees the systems in Poland and the Chec Republic as a threat to its security and is insisting the two issues are intertwined.”  

But there are those who say whether the two come to an agreement on this topic is unimportant.  A blogger form the Telegraph has this pessimistic perspective on the summit.    

“The whole agreement makes no sense, and is little more than a vanity exercise for Barack Obama who has ludicrously pledged to carve out a nuclear-free world.”

Democracy Now speaks with a nuclear expert, who highlights the hypocritical nature of the talks.

“The reason Obama has announced the goal of the abolition of nuclear weapons is to try and leverage over proliferation because the great problem with the overall architecture of the Nuclear dilemma now is the double standard in which the nine countries including of course the United State and Russia which have 95% of the arsenals are really basically saying they can have their weapons forever and everyone else should do without them.”

Even with all the controversy, France 24 points out that some missions were accomplished…

“Although Obama admitted the talks were frank and that they didn’t agree on every issue, nevertheless, it seems that relations between Washington and the Kremlin have now been significantly reset.”

So are America and Russia making big strides towards diplomacy or merely sidesteping some major issues in favor of showmanship?