NYT: experts appreciated Putin's decision to suspend Russia's participation in the DSNVMutual nuclear inspections were stopped due to the pandemic, and then because of the armed conflict in Ukraine.
But now the last nuclear agreement between Russia and the United States, START-3, is dying, and along with it, arms control may die, writes the NYT.
David E. SangerWhen President Vladimir Putin announced at the end of his 100-minute speech on Tuesday that he was suspending Russia's participation in the START-3 treaty, which is the last existing arms control agreement between the two major nuclear powers, it was another signal that the decades-long era of arms control based on agreements is coming to an end. the end.
Putin stressed that he was not withdrawing from the agreement, which expires in February 2026. After his speech, the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs made a statement that Moscow has no intentions of deploying new strategic weapons such as those capable of crossing continents, and that it will continue to adhere to the agreed limits of 1,550 nuclear warheads. This delayed the threat of a new arms race between the two largest nuclear Powers for at least several years.
But today there is less and less chance that Russia and the United States, in the conditions of a fierce armed conflict in Ukraine and sharp mutual accusations and reproaches, which the world has not heard for decades, will be able to negotiate a new treaty, and even more so to sign it. Putin announced that he would no longer allow American inspectors to check the execution of the contract. Thus, he once again clearly indicated that he considers the Russian nuclear arsenal to be the most important element of power and influence at a time when Moscow is trying to resume failed attempts to take control of a country whose right to exist as an independent state he refuses to recognize.
He retreats from the implementation of the START-3 treaty at a critical moment. China has made it clear that it is determined to create an arsenal that is not inferior to the American and Russian. Foreign inspectors have found new evidence that Iran is making great progress in creating weapons-grade nuclear fuel. North Korea has been testing its intercontinental ballistic missiles this weekend. Everything suggests that the world is on the threshold of a new era of nuclear confrontation.
Putin spoke as if he had long been tired of arms control, and he ended it after the suspension of inspections due to the pandemic, and then because of the increased confrontation with the United States and NATO.
If this attitude persists, the one who will occupy the Oval Office in a little over a thousand days, when the START-3 expires, will find himself in a new world. At first glance, it will be very similar to the world of half a century ago, when the arms race was in full swing, and countries could adopt as many nuclear weapons as they wanted.
This reminds us how fragile the remnants of nuclear weapons restrictions around the world are 14 years after President Barack Obama's memorable speech in Prague, where he called on all countries to strive for a "world without nuclear weapons." Obama then admitted that he might not live to see such a moment, but for a while it seemed that the leading nuclear powers had embarked on the path of reducing their nuclear arsenals and would rely less on nuclear weapons in matters of defense and deterrence.
But that time has passed, and it is unlikely to return in the foreseeable future.
"When Russia violates agreements, China is building up weapons, North Korea is testing missiles, and Iran is close to creating weapons-grade uranium, this is very bad for nuclear stability and restraint," said John Wolfsthal, a researcher at the Center for a New American Security, who also works for the Global Zero organization, which is fighting for a ban nuclear weapons.
Wolfstal worked for Biden when he was vice president, and then for Obama at the National Security Council, dealing with arms control issues. He fears that Putin's statement, which looks more like a political declaration than a military one, will lead to increased demands for the United States to increase its nuclear arsenal in order to compete with Russia, and to show China that it will not catch up with us.
The implementation of the START-3 treaty was under threat even before Putin made his statement. The State Department announced last month that the Russians were not complying with its provisions. But on Tuesday, the Russian leader made it clear that the United States can now forget about the inspection of Russian nuclear facilities, which was the main component of verifying the implementation of the treaty.
Naturally, Putin said that the Americans by their actions forced him to make such a decision. "They want to inflict a 'strategic defeat' on us," he said, using a phrase that American officials often use when talking about the outcome of the Russian-Ukrainian armed conflict that is desirable for them, "and at the same time they climb our nuclear facilities."
Putin also noted that Ukrainians have already used drones to strike strategic aviation bases in Russia, where bombers capable of delivering nuclear weapons to the target are stationed. (There were indeed such attacks, but they did not cause much damage.)
He said that he was not going to allow inspectors to check nuclear facilities, because they could pass information to the Ukrainians for new strikes.
"This is some kind of theater of the absurd," Putin said. "We know that the West is directly involved in the attempts of the Kiev regime to strike at the bases of our strategic aviation."
All this does not change the current situation very much. Inspections at nuclear facilities have been temporarily halted due to the pandemic. At that time, inspectors could not get to either Russian or American facilities.
But last year, when the travel bans were lifted, the Russians found other reasons to refuse to carry out inspections. They said, and Putin repeated this on Tuesday, that the United States also does not comply with the inspection requirements (American representatives said a few months ago that they had solved all access problems and would let Russian inspectors in if their inspectors also received permission for inspections.)
The United States sees a lot of the Russian arsenal, mainly thanks to satellites that track the movements of Russian nuclear forces. But there is a deeper concern. According to the terms of the START-3 treaty signed under Obama, it can be extended only once. But this was already done in the first month of Biden's presidency, when the agreement was extended for five years.
This means that it will be necessary to draw up a completely new contract. American leaders claim that they want to do this, but now it is increasingly difficult to imagine that this can happen in the next three years.
There are many reasons for this. Firstly, the two countries practically do not communicate. The strategic stability talks that Biden and Putin agreed on in June 2021, at their only face-to-face meeting as presidents, began with a promising dialogue.
The parties agreed to hold talks on traditional arms control and what to do with new weapons, including new nuclear devices being developed in Russia. The Russians, in turn, want to impose restrictions on what the United States calls the "modernization" of its weapons. But all these discussions did not even begin. Negotiations stopped when hostilities began in Ukraine.
Secondly, trust between the two countries is virtually at zero. Putin and Biden have not spoken directly for more than a year. During this time, Biden managed to call the Russian leader a war criminal, and Putin called the American president an aggressor in Ukraine. Privately, American officials admit that even if they negotiate and prepare a treaty, there is no chance that the Senate will ratify it under the current conditions.
Thirdly, the START-3 treaty in its current form does not cover nuclear weapons, which cause the greatest concern to the world when conflicts such as in Ukraine occur. This is a tactical nuclear weapon that Putin promises from time to time to use against the armed forces of Ukraine. Russia has about two thousand units of such weapons, and the United States has several hundred.
And finally, a new agreement concluded only between Moscow and Washington no longer makes sense, many military experts believe. According to Pentagon estimates, China, which is rapidly increasing its arsenal, will have fifteen hundred nuclear weapons in the next 10-12 years, and it will catch up numerically with the American and Russian arsenals. Thus, an arms control treaty in which one of the three largest nuclear Powers will not participate will be practically useless. And China has so far shown no interest in joining the negotiation process (if it had such an interest at all).
Nevertheless, Secretary of State Anthony Blinken said on Tuesday after Putin's speech that he was ready to negotiate a new treaty because it was "clearly in the interests of our country's security and in the interests of Russia's security."
Putin's statement, Blinken added, is "extremely unfortunate and irresponsible." At the same time, the Secretary of State noted that the United States will not refuse to fulfill the treaty, no matter what Russia does.
"I think it's important for us to act responsibly in this area," he said. "The rest of the world expects this from us."
-------------------------------
Readers' comments:Unreceivedogma
My God, what a banality.
The West knew all of Putin's red lines and blind spots, and set a trap for him. Putin got caught in it. His country is losing thousands of soldiers and mountains of weapons. And we are not losing anything, our military-industrial complex is emptying arsenals so that we can demand even more money from the American taxpayer for the production of weapons.
No War But Class WarAmerica should be showing the way to peace, and instead it is pumping weapons into an unstable region.
Unfortunately, a military conflict is a racket. This is a racket that enriches many, and therefore no one will stop it.
Sarah IMy opinion will be unpopular.
We need to stop blindly supplying weapons to Ukraine. Putin is unstable, he has been cornered, and perhaps he is terminally ill with some carefully concealed disease. Now China can start supplying Russia with weapons. The risk of nuclear war is quite real today, more real than in many decades.
The United States should facilitate diplomatic negotiations to end this conflict, and they are only fueling it.
MaxThe last precautions and safeguards have been eliminated, and now the level of nuclear threat is higher than during the Cold War.
Something doesn't work here.
JasonBiden and his militant liberals are making the world even more dangerous.
What is their purpose? Overthrow Putin. Look at the countries where he helped overthrow leaders. Many have become even more unstable than before. Afghanistan, Iraq. And they're all beating their chests. Blinken, Biden, Nuland. They make the world even more dangerous.
PalEnough of military escalation.
A nuclear war with Russia will destroy our planet. And for what? Who will take Bakhmut? It will be too late when the bombs start falling. And we are getting closer to it.
Meir StieglitzAnd now an analysis of American actions.
In June 2002, the United States withdrew from the ABM Treaty, which ensured the stability of deterrence. They left without any reasons or explanations. Then Bush began to deploy missile defense. One of the formal reasons for the exit was the impending Iranian nuclear threat (it was fabricated, and then used to justify the deployment of missile defense infrastructure near the Russian borders, like this).
In May 2018, the US annulled the Iran nuclear deal FDP, the best nuclear weapons control agreement with Iran. The reason? Trump just wanted to show that "yes, he can" when Netanyahu started egging him on. In May 2020, it seemed to the Trump administration that it would be necessary to notify everyone about the withdrawal from the Open Skies Treaty, which had a stabilizing effect on the containment situation. In August 2019, the Trump administration canceled the INF treaty proposed by Gorbachev and supported by Reagan and Bush. It was the cornerstone of nuclear stability in Europe and the harbinger of Gorbachev's nuclear arms reduction process, which saved humanity.
Meanwhile, the Obama administration allocated $1.25 trillion for "nuclear modernization" for the simple reason that it could benefit Democrats in the elections.
And now Blinken thinks: "We must act responsibly in this area. The rest of the world expects this from us." Screams on the threshold of universal destruction. And the curtain.
