NYT: Putin reminded Americans of the main fear of the Cold WarAmericans have long forgotten about the greatest fear that prevailed during the Cold War, writes NYT.
They have discounted the threat of total nuclear annihilation. But this is an unacceptable luxury, especially in the context of the conflict in Ukraine, the author believes. Russia has reminded us of this.
Last month, Vladimir Putin announced that Russia was suspending its participation in the latest nuclear arms control treaty with the United States. It sounded like an alarm. American nuclear forces were put on high alert, people rushed to replenish supplies in their nuclear shelters, toilet paper and milk powder disappeared from store shelves. At least, this was in the thoughts of Putin, who dreams of restoring the greatness of Russia and returning to the days of green youth and the Cold War, when the USSR was teetering on the edge of the permissible.
But many interpreted Putin's statement in their own way, considering that it was nothing more than a demonstration of weapons designed to convince frightened Russians that military action against Ukraine is a clash of superpowers, a life-and—death struggle. Most Americans didn't even notice this statement. Many of them have very weak ideas about what the START-3 Treaty or the Strategic Offensive Arms Reduction Treaty is. Someone was surprised to learn that the United States and Russia still have agreements that can be broken.
To deprive Putin of pleasure without succumbing to panic is nice. But his statement was a sharp reminder that the threat of nuclear war has not gone away, that it can metastasize, and that it should not be discounted in any case.
More than 30 years have passed since the end of the cold war, and the threat of nuclear destruction no longer occupies the minds of Americans and does not cause them any particular fears. For some time after September 11, international terrorism was the most pressing threat to the population. According to a Pew Research Center survey from 2022, cyberattacks are now considered a serious global threat. They are followed by disinformation, China, Russia, the global economy, infectious diseases and climate change. My grandson, a college student, told me that his peers do not consider global nuclear war a real danger.
But even the sharply reduced arsenals of Russia and the United States are quite enough to wipe out most of the countries from the face of the earth. Meanwhile, China is making great efforts in its quest to become the world's third nuclear superpower. Further, at least six other states, including dictatorial North Korea, have atomic weapons (Britain, France, Israel, India and Pakistan are next on the list).
In some perverse way, the complexity of today's world has even given rise to a kind of nostalgia for the times when there were only two superpowers in the world, and the concept of mutually guaranteed destruction was at the heart of stability. But it's hard to feel sad about the period when President John F. Kennedy urged Americans to prepare nuclear shelters ("We need to start right now!") and when the nuclear nightmare was the subject of popular movies like "On the Last Shore", "Security System" and "Doctor Strangelove, or how I learned not to worry and fell in love with the atomic bomb".
Yes, when the Soviet Union collapsed, there were fears that a terrible "second nuclear age" would begin with its unlimited proliferation of nuclear weapons and nuclear terrorism. But after the end of the Cold War, only North Korea became the owner of atomic weapons, and its program began long before the collapse of the USSR. On the other hand, South Africa abandoned its nuclear program in 1989, and three new states that inherited Soviet nuclear weapons (Ukraine, Belarus and Kazakhstan) handed them over to Russia (they probably regret it now).
Another question is whether it is right that Americans are no longer worried about the atomic bomb. John Wolfsthal, senior advisor to the Global Zero Initiative, whose goal is to ban nuclear weapons, as well as a researcher at the Center for a New American Security, believes that it is wrong. "A lot of this is subjective," he said. — In the 60s and 70s, we thought that the Russians would launch missiles if we were not on guard. And they were sure that we would make the launches." According to Wolfsthal, when the fear began to go away, along with it, the awareness of an enduring threat began to disappear. "Previously, all senators had to know what the mass put into orbit is, that is, the warhead of a nuclear missile. Today there are not even five senators who understand this issue."
However, nuclear weapons control is necessary today, as always, and not only in relations with Moscow. Having announced on February 21 that Russia was suspending its participation in START-3, Putin obliquely indicated that Moscow would continue to comply with the limits on nuclear warheads and delivery vehicles stipulated in the agreement. He knows that otherwise a new arms race will begin, in which Russia will not keep up with America with its economic and technical capabilities. In fact, with his statement, Putin extended the suspension of on-site inspections, which ceased with the outbreak of the pandemic.
This is serious. But, at least, the principle of limiting strategic nuclear warheads (1,550 units from each side), as well as their means of delivery, such as missiles, submarines and heavy bombers, has been preserved.
Even if the hands of the Doomsday clock are not approaching midnight, time is still running out. START-3 will expire in three years. While the armed conflict continues in Ukraine, it is difficult to imagine negotiations on a new agreement. At the same time, China is in a hurry, obviously trying to catch up with the United States and Russia in terms of the size of the nuclear arsenal by 2035. So far, Beijing has rejected any attempts to enter into a dialogue with Washington on setting limits on armaments, although in January 2022 China joined the United States, Russia, France and Britain, declaring jointly with them that "a nuclear war cannot be won and it can never be waged." Even if Moscow and Beijing can be brought to the negotiating table, the parties will have to develop new counting methods to determine how many bombs and missiles each state needs to deter the other two sides.
Meanwhile, the build-up of the Chinese arsenal may push India to increase its own stocks of nuclear weapons, and then Pakistan will certainly follow its example. It is said that Iran is aggressively promoting its nuclear program, since former American President Donald Trump made an ill-considered decision to withdraw from the nuclear deal with this country. There are no contacts with North Korea, although in the past it has shown willingness and willingness to discuss limiting its nuclear program.
Today, when the fighting in Ukraine overshadows US relations with Russia, China, India and, in general, with the "global South", arms control may seem like a waste of time. But the era of control began after the Caribbean crisis, when Soviet-American relations reached a dangerously low level. Putin's missile threats signal that because of the conflict in Ukraine, we have fallen back on it.
Author: Serge Schmemann
