.... It is inevitable that the U.S. will press forward to modernize its nuclear triad. Russia to a large extent has already done so. It is a reverse situation in comparison... ... 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... ... risk inherent in the AUK–U.S. adventurism. The U.S. strategy of a new cold war with China envisages the creeping involvement of India in the anti-Beijing military alliance...
... sunk in that the withdrawal of the United States from the INF Treaty will leave the world in a state of heightened security threats. Having weathered U.S. military pressure and Washington’s attempts to contain its military power with the help of the INF Treaty, China has stepped up the development and deployment of medium-range missiles and is actively strengthening military exchanges and military-technical cooperation with Russia.
The withdrawal of the United States from the INF Treaty has also dealt a blow to the security interests of the European Union. Not only does the European Union need the United States and Russia to comply with the Treaty, but it also needs to reduce ...
... measures of trust and transparency have been developed and implemented yet.
In fact, retired Pentagon officials
have no qualms about saying
the missile defence system may be turned from a defensive weapon (against Iran) into an offensive one (against Russia).
Other Nuclear Powers and the Future of the INF Treaty
Other official nuclear powers could play a positive role in the current crisis. China is a very important component of the equation: on the one hand, it is has the largest number of missile systems, both nuclear and conventional, which may be covered by the INF Treaty definitions; the United States
estimates
that up to 95 per cent ...
... debris of the bilateral Soviet (Russian)-American system, new strategic arms control mechanisms are likely to emerge.
It is not clear what these mechanisms will look like, but some elements are now certainly relics of the past. First, the bilateral Russian-American format of the arms control regime is giving way to a multilateral focus. Among other issues, the U.S. is increasingly concerned with China’s expanding nuclear arsenal and Iran’s ballistic missile capabilities. In fact, when criticizing the INF Treaty, Trump administration officials have focused more on the fact that the treaty imposes no limitations on China’s nuclear forces.
Second, traditional, legally-binding agreements that are subject to ratification—which have long constituted ...
