A joint statement on exchanging information could arguably serve as a precursor for a more earnest and verifiable treaty, with the ultimate prospect of resuming U.S.–Russia TMD cooperation
In the wake of the U.S. withdrawal from the ABM Treaty in 2002, missile defence has come to be a contributing factor to military and political tensions in U.S.–Russia relations. Russian officials have repeatedly referred to missile defence, claiming it could be a threat to the country’s potential ...
... deal with a range of challenges.
Ballistic missile defenses, offering a promise of intercepting a certain proportion of incoming missiles, by definition, undermine deterrence. For three decades, ballistic missile defenses (BMD) were constrained by the ABM Treaty, which Moscow considered to be a cornerstone of strategic stability. After the U.S. withdrawal from the treaty in 2002, Russia embarked on a program designed to nullify any advantages the United States would get through implementing its missile ...
... impossible without imposing any restrictions on China. At the next stage, China must be involved in such a treaty.
Would it be correct to say that, as a matter of principle, we are on the threshold of destroying the treaty system? Can the expired agreements (ABM Treaty, the CFE Treaty, the INF Treaty) be followed by the endangered START and TOS and then by the CTBT, Non-Proliferation Treaty and other fundamental agreements?
That is absolutely correct. If the central link falls apart… there are already attempts ...
... of the United States’ withdrawal from the treaty will not be immediate, but will reveal themselves within a few years. Until that time, the United States will actually comply with the terms of the treaty, as was the case when it withdrew from the ABM Treaty in 2002. The Americans quit, but they did not create an efficient missile defence system: they actually continued to implement it. And in order to create a fundamentally new system of medium-range missiles, it will take at least 5-to-10 years,...
... arms control developed as a sum-total of supplementary elements rather than an eclectic set of separate unrelated bilateral or multilateral agreements.
The first serious blow was dealt to this system when the United States withdrew from the Soviet-US ABM Treaty in 2002. However, the system withstood the first blow largely owing to the then general positive dynamics of Russia-US political cooperation. Meanwhile, judging by everything, the collapse of the INF Treaty 17 years later may prove fatal to ...
... two sides to coordinate their positions and gain an understanding of each other’s capabilities, but it also gave them the opportunity to come to concrete agreements on the most complex and sensitive issues. The 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty (ABM Treaty ) and the 1974 Protocol to the ABM Treaty, the Strategic Arms Limitation Talks (SALT I and II in 1972 and 1979, respectively) and the 1968 Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. These and other treaties and conventions would not ...
... many politicians and experts voiced their concerns about the consequences of withdrawing from the Treaty. Everything was in vain: Washington ignored the opinion of Russia, the global community and the domestic opposition and resolutely demolished the ABM Treaty.
Andrey Kortunov:
U.S. Withdrawal From the INF Treaty and the End of the Bilateral Era
Today, many years later, we can confidently state that the withdrawal from the Treaty failed to strengthen the security of the United States and did not ...
Despite the belligerent nuclear statements by Russia and the U.S., the configuration of a possible future for the international arms control regimes can be seen beyond the veil of rhetoric.
Despite the belligerent nuclear statements by Russia and the U.S. in the first quarter of 2018, the configuration of a possible future for the international arms control regimes can be seen beyond the veil of rhetoric.
Therapeutic address
We can assume that the demonstration of nuclear delivery systems that...
... would have allowed the parties to preserve the Treaty.
The UN General Assembly supported the Treaty, adopting the appropriate resolution by an overwhelming majority vote in late 1999. Many countries, including allies of the United States, viewed the ABM Treaty as the cornerstone of international security.
Unfortunately, all our attempts to salvage it were in vain, despite the fact that Russia was among the first countries to offer support to the United States after the attacks of September 11, 2001,...
... periodically bring the world to the brink of a nuclear Armageddon, whereas with arms control processes and regimes in place, this can be avoided.
In the years that followed, three fundamental treaties were signed: the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty (ABM Treaty) in 1972 and the Strategic Arms Limitation Talks treaties (SALT I and SALT II) in 1972 and 1979. A number of other agreements were also signed: the cornerstone 1968 Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT); the 1972 Convention ...
