... arms control the transparency and predictability of strategic balance is undermined.
Incidentally, the situation would have been far more dangerous today if it were not for the achievements of arms control. It should be remembered that pursuant to the INF Treaty (1987), START I (1991), and parallel unilateral initiatives of the USSR/Russia and the U.S. (1991–1992) thousands of strategic nuclear warheads, intermediate-range missiles and tactical nuclear arms were removed from Ukraine [
55
] [Arkin, Fieldhouse 1985: 252–263]. Otherwise, the current crisis would have been developing ...
With the INF Treaty collapsed and Russian proposals to prevent another missile confrontation in Europe possibly rejected, the logical thing to do would be to deploy the revised “Pioneer” missile in response to the new “Pershings” and “Gryphons”
Who is to blame? A seemingly ...
... should such systems be deployed in the proximity of Russia. The same relates to the new INF systems, which are being quickly developed by the U.S. In Germany there is already a revived NATO military infrastructure, closed in the aftermath of the 1987 INF treaty, and designed for operating INF systems. In the eyes of Moscow there is a high probability of a new Euromissile crisis exploding in two to three years if Russia’s proposals for a moratorium are not responded to in a rational way. Nuclear posturing on all sides, including NATO nuclear sharing, may change for worse more quickly than that if recent Russia’s proposals on security guarantees, handed over ...
... confine themselves to the question of medium-range missiles, then it is their business with the Chinese. What we need to do regarding such missiles is promote the moratorium that Putin recently proposed: missiles that were banned under the denounced 1987 INF Treaty should not be deployed in the European part of Russia and in the rest of Europe. For verification Putin suggested introducing on-site inspections. This, of course, is very different from the INF Treaty. Nonetheless, it is a basis for an agreement. As for the Asian dimension, the Americans are free ...
... opposed viewpoints. Of course, there is no reason to put all our faith in the memoirs authored by former US national security adviser John Bolton who claims that, in a conversation with him, Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu allegedly admitted that the INF Treaty had “lost its practicality.” Russia’s position on the treaty is well known and is devoid of ambiguity. Nevertheless, one gets the impression that Moscow was not fighting to preserve the INF Treaty as consistently, resourcefully or energetically as it fought to preserve the ABM ...
This article is part of the Russia-EU: Promoting Informed Dialogue project supported by the European Union in Russia.
The 50-year-old arms control regime that helped keep the Cold War cold is beyond repair. It's time to begin discussing ways of moving toward a new global strategic ...
... Under the agreement, the United States and Russia agreed to reduce the number of nuclear warheads and ballistic missiles deployed during the Cold War. However, Donald Trump called New START a “
bad deal
” following the United States’ exit from the INF Treaty. If Russia and the United States fail to come to an agreement on the extension of New START or cannot hammer out a new one, then, given the collapse of both the INF and ABM treaties, the arms control system developed by the sides over the course of decades ...
The current trends in Russia–EU relations carry a number of risks that should be mentioned when predicting possible scenarios for the further deterioration of these relations.
The current trends in Russia–EU relations carry a number of risks that should be mentioned when predicting possible scenarios for the further deterioration of these relations. The general deterioration of European security due to the expiration of the INF Treaty, the degradation of confidence-building measures, and the start of an arms race, including hi-tech weapons (understanding that the military-political situation in Europe cannot change drastically in 2020, and military spending in European countries ...
... be to try to reach out, formally or informally, to Russia to clarify the technical parameters of the proposed moratorium
The Russian moratorium proposal
On 2
nd
February 2019, when the United States announced that it intended to withdraw from the INF Treaty on 2
nd
August, Russian President Vladimir Putin held a
meeting
with ministers Shoigu and Lavrov to discuss the possible weapons that might be developed in response, and
framed a ‘formula’
for the moratorium on their deployment:
“…Russia will not deploy intermediate-range ...
... And even if the Kremlin wanted to play that role, who would it support? President Trump? The same guy who has levied more sanctions against Russia (often unwarranted). The same guy who has lobbied against the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, pulled out of the INF Treaty, permitted airstrikes that killed Russian nationals in Syria, provided lethal military aid to Ukraine, and sought regime change in countries like Venezuela — places where Russian energy companies have billion-dollar contracts? Or what about Joe Biden and the rest of the Democratic frontrunners?...
