... 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 ... ... United States’ withdrawal from the treaty are already obvious and will continue to manifest themselves. In the field of nuclear arms control, the US decision could create a ‘domino effect’: if it abandons the INF Treaty, it puts the New START treaty’s extension into question. Mutual accusations about the failure to abide by this treaty — at least in terms ...
... Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, another step towards the destruction of the international arms control regime established over 30 years ago. At the same time, military technology... ... 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... ... Yes, the Strategic Offensive Reductions Treaty was signed in Moscow in 2002, and the New START was signed in 2010. And both these documents are, without a doubt, very important...
... 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 ... ... are in high-risk regions where military tensions are already elevated.
Dmitry Stefanovich:
Post-Helsinki Opportunities for New START and the INF Treaty?
I would venture to suggest that, following the withdrawal from the INF Treaty, the U.S. Administration ...
