scholarly journals Problems and Dilemmas of the Next Start Treaty

2021 ◽  
Vol 65 (6) ◽  
pp. 5-20
Author(s):  
A. Arbatov
Keyword(s):  
Arms Control ◽  
The United States ◽  
World Politics ◽  
Nuclear War ◽  
Strategic Stability ◽  
Highly Active ◽  
Political Relations ◽  
Relationship Of ◽  
The Military ◽  
Two Sides

Received 28.02.2021. In the end of January 2021, the New START Treaty was extended by five years by the United States and Russia. Thus, the two nuclear superpowers have time to work on the follow-on treaty not in a strategic vacuum, but relying on the valid treaty and its system of transparency and predictability. The promoters of abolishing negotiations on arms limitation and their substitution by amorphous multilateral discussions of “a general philosophy of strategic stability”, who have been highly active during recent years, have temporarily shied away, but probably not for long. The predictable difficulties of the forthcoming negotiations would be interpreted as the evidence of their impending doom, and this may turn into a self-fulfilling prophesy and once again deadlock the dialogue. During the previous decades, the development of the military technologies and new strategic concepts have changed strategic relationship of the parties. This was happening against the background of deteriorating political relations, a long pause of arms control negotiations and abrogation of a number of crucial disarmament treaties. Now the two sides have to catch up. Already it is possible to foresee the main differences of their positions. Washington is emphasizing deep reduction of the nuclear arms of the two superpowers – both strategic and tactical. Moscow has advanced a concept of “security equation”, which implies limitation of offensive and defensive arms – both nuclear and nonnuclear. There will be a great demand for strong political will and wisdom of the leaders of the two nations and of hard work and professionalism of civilian and military experts – in order to restore arms control, which has historically proved its effectiveness as a barrier in preventing nuclear war and as a stabilizer of turbulent world politics.

scholarly journals Eroding Arms Control Regime and US-Russia Relations

2021 ◽  
pp. 0
Author(s):  
Natalia Shapiro
Keyword(s):  
Arms Control ◽  
The United States ◽  
Strategic Competition ◽  
Strategic Stability ◽  
Technological Advances ◽  
Military Conflicts ◽  
Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty ◽  
Transformative Impact ◽  
The Military ◽  
Control Regime

Two weeks after Joseph Biden took office as President, the U.S. and Russia extended the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty for five years. This landmark arms control treaty limits the number of strategic offensive weapons each country can have. A ‘window of opportunity’ for a new stage of strategic stability discussions on arms control has opened. Strategic competition between the world’s most powerful countries, escalating global and regional threats, accelerating technological advances in the military sphere, which hold the potential to have a transformative impact on arms forces and military conflicts, have given added urgency to the bilateral dialogue on arms control between the two nuclear superpowers. Political barriers to a new agreement are significant. The perilous state of U.S.-Russia relations, lack of trust and mutual suspicion make it more difficult for the two powers to have sustainable negotiations toward a new treaty. However, if political will is in place coupled with a realistic approach and the United States’ readiness to address Russia’s concerns, a follow-on agreement could be reached.

scholarly journals Strategic stability at 30+ years: stasis, evolution, or degradation?

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 123-138
Author(s):  
D. V. Stefanovich
Keyword(s):  
Large Scale ◽  
International Security ◽  
Arms Control ◽  
Armed Forces ◽  
Academic Community ◽  
Great Powers ◽  
Control Measures ◽  
Nuclear War ◽  
Strategic Stability ◽  
Political Relations

“Strategic stability” as a characteristic of military and political relations with a low possibility of large-scale armed confl ict between great powers remains one of the basic notions of international security, especially in its nuclear missile dimension. At the same time, this notion also sets forth tangible state of strategic forces of two (or potentially more) nations and the framework of risk reduction and arms control measures preventing a nuclear war. The purpose of this study is to identify the main trends in this area and how strategic stability can be maintained and enhanced. To this end, I review the main offi cial doctrinal documents and statements in this area, international arms control treaties, trends in the development of the armed forces, and academic and expert publications. It is concluded that strategic stability can be preserved under increasing infl uence of a growing number of new factors, both political (including degradation of arms control regimes) and technological. Among the latter are modernization and development of means for delivery of nuclear warheads, growth of long-range precision-guided non-nuclear weapons potential, increase of antagonism in new environments. The experts point out the need for active work of the academic community and diplomats to fi nd new solutions ensuring maintenance of strategic stability in the future. Negative scenarios are outlined in the absence of such solutions.

scholarly journals Why Arms Control?

Daedalus ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 149 (2) ◽  
pp. 101-115
Author(s):  
Jon Brook Wolfsthal
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Cold War ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Arms Control ◽  
Good Deal ◽  
The United States ◽  
Nuclear War ◽  
Nuclear Age ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
The Cold War

America survived the nuclear age through a complex combination of diplomatic and military decisions, and a good deal of luck. One of the tools that proved its value in both reducing the risks of nuclear use and setting rules for the ongoing nuclear competition were negotiated, legally binding, and verified arms control agreements. Such pacts between the United States and the Soviet Union arguably prevented the nuclear arms racing from getting worse and helped both sides climb off the Cold War nuclear precipice. Several important agreements remain in place between the United States and Russia, to the benefit of both states. Arms control is under threat, however, from domestic forces in the United States and from Russian actions that range from treaty violations to the broader weaponization of risk. But arms control can and should play a useful role in reducing the risk of nuclear war and forging a new agreement between Moscow and Washington on the new rules of the nuclear road.

scholarly journals CONTROVERSIAL ISSUES REGARDING THE EXTENSION OF THE “NEW START” TREATY: CAN THE USA AND RUSSIA PRESERVE EXISTING STRATEGIC ARMS CONTROL?

2021 ◽  
Vol 70 (4/2020) ◽  
pp. 123-149
Author(s):  
Marina Kostic
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Arms Control ◽  
World Order ◽  
The United States ◽  
Controversial Issues ◽  
Strategic Stability ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Key Issues ◽  
Security Challenge ◽  
The Cold War

Treaty between the United States of America and the Russian Federation on measures for further reduction and limitation of strategic offensive arms (“New START”) is the last pillar of the arms control regime on which the end of the Cold War and the new world order rested. Its expiration on 5 February 2021 is a top security challenge and indicates a possible new strategic arms race. However, can the United States and Russia still preserve the existing strategic arms control by extending the Treaty for another five years? What are the prospects, the opportunities and obstacles for this extension? What are the most pressing issues USA and Russia face with in order to preserve strategic arms control and are they willing to do so? In order to answer to these research questions author analyses several key issues that are of paramount importance for extension of the New START: nuclear modernization processes, invention of new weapons and emergence of new warfare domains; transparency and verification and broader confidence building measures; missile defence and prompt global strike; tactical nuclear weapons in Europe and Asia; general US-Russia relations which include question of democratic capacity; and broader influence of this Treaty on nuclear non-proliferation regime. By using content and discourse analysis author concludes that, although it is obvious that the extension of the New START would be primarily in favour of Russia and that the USA has not much to gain, the character of strategic stability in the Third Nuclear Age gives reasons to believe that the New START will be extended for another five years.

5. Soviet–American Relations: Avoiding Hot War and the Search for Stability

2020 ◽  
pp. 145-158
Author(s):  
John W. Young ◽  
John Kent
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Cold War ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Arms Control ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
German Question ◽  
The Cold War ◽  
Relationship Of ◽  
The Relationship

This chapter examines US–Soviet relations during the Cold War as well as the question of the genuineness of efforts by the United States and the Soviet Union to achieve disarmament and resolve troublesome disputes. It begins with a discussion of the German question, noting that Germany’s future position was vital to the future of Europe and a particular concern of the Soviets. It then considers the progress of arms control and peace efforts by the United States and the Soviet Union, before concluding with an analysis of the relationship of arms control to the use of armaments in hot war and to some aspects of fighting the Cold War.

scholarly journals What History Can Teach

Daedalus ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 149 (2) ◽  
pp. 116-132
Author(s):  
James Cameron
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
International System ◽  
Arms Control ◽  
The United States ◽  
First Century ◽  
Comprehensive Strategy ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Strategic Stability ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
The Cold War

Most analyses of arms control during the Cold War focus on its role in maintaining strategic stability between the United States and the Soviet Union. However, history shows that the superpowers' search for strategic stability is insufficient to explain the roots and course of negotiations. This essay argues that arms control was used as one tool in a broader strategy of war prevention, designed to contain a series of challenges to U.S. and Soviet dominance of the international system that both sides worried could upset bipolarity and increase the chances of conflict between them. At the same time, U.S. policy-makers balanced this joint superpower interest with Washington's extended deterrent commitment to its allies, which ultimately upheld the integrity of the system as a whole. The essay concludes that today's leaders should integrate arms control into a more comprehensive strategy of political accommodation fit for twenty-first-century conditions.

scholarly journals Nuclear Deterrence: A Guarantee for or Threat to Strategic Stability?

2020 ◽  
pp. 65-86
Author(s):  
Alexey Arbatov
Keyword(s):  
International Security ◽  
The United States ◽  
Great Powers ◽  
Arms Race ◽  
Nuclear Deterrence ◽  
Nuclear War ◽  
The Public ◽  
Cyber Threats ◽  
Strategic Stability ◽  
Public Consciousness

AbstractIn recent literature, much attention has been paid to factors that affect nuclear deterrence and stability from the outside: new missile defence systems, non-nuclear (conventional) high-precision long-range weapons, the influence of third and threshold nuclear states, space weapons, and—more recently—cyber threats. These new factors have pushed the core of nuclear deterrence—strategic relations between Russia and the United States—to the background in the public consciousness. Yet dangerous changes are taking place. This chapter examines the real and imaginary causes of the current situation and suggests potential ways to reduce tensions that could benefit international security. It concludes that nuclear deterrence can serve as a pillar of international security with one crucial reservation: namely, that it can only work in conjunction with negotiations and agreements on the limitation, reduction, and non-proliferation of nuclear weapons. Without such checks, nuclear deterrence goes berserk. It endlessly fuels the arms race, brings the great powers to the brink of nuclear war in any serious crisis, and sometimes the very dynamics of nuclear deterrence can instigate a confrontation.

“Star Wars, Eh?”: Canadian Aerospace Policy and the Militarization of Outer Space

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raymond K. MacKinnon,
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
Public Perception ◽  
Outer Space ◽  
The United States ◽  
Nuclear War ◽  
Star Wars ◽  
Defence Budget ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Defence Research ◽  
The Military

Canadians rightly pride themselves on their technological achievements in outer space. Heralded as a pioneer with several “firsts” in space exploration, public perception is that Canada explores the “final frontier” in the name of peace. This is the myth perpetuated by scientists and politicians alike, distorting clear evidence to the contrary. This study aims to rectify this fallacy by demonstrating that Canadian space initiatives were a product of Cold War relations, a need for domestic and international security against the threat of nuclear war. Contextualized within the paradigm of a bipolar world, an ostensibly civilian space program only thinly veiled military objectives. Consulting military, political and scientific sources from the end of the Second World War to contemporary conflicts, what emerges is a complex relationship between civilian and military initiatives. Balancing demands from the United States for hemispheric security against the increasing threat of the Soviet Union whilst maintaining sovereignty over Canadian territory presented immense challenges to government leaders. Coupled with a shrinking defence budget, space research fulfilled specific niche roles in Canadian‐American relations. Deconstructing the objectives of prominent satellite programs, Canada‐U.S. (CANUS) agreements, and concomitant government sponsored defence research into theoretical space programs reveals policy marked by the vestiges of war. Peaceful orientations toward outer space perpetuated in historical literature sets a dangerous precedent. Future conflicts will not always pit technologically advanced societies against underdeveloped armies, and ignoring the military advantages of outer space could prove a fatal mistake in confrontations that will assuredly come.Defence in

scholarly journals Offensive Weapons and the Future of Arms Control

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 79-102
Author(s):  
Nancy Jane Teeple
Keyword(s):  
Arms Control ◽  
The United States ◽  
Cruise Missile ◽  
Strategic Competition ◽  
Strategic Stability ◽  
The Us ◽  
Nuclear Security ◽  
The Future ◽  
Nuclear Systems ◽  
Cruise Missiles

With a focus on the strategic competition between the United States and Russia, this paper explores the prospects for the future of arms control under an intensifying nuclear security dilemma. The end of stability-enhancing agreements such as the INF Treaty and Open Skies has accelerated the arms race. What is the future of New START and are we likely to see any extension beyond 2021? The relationship between arms control and strategic stability is part of this evaluation, particularly with respect to how states view the concept framed within their national security interests. The provocative role that offensive – deterrence by denial – capabilities play in contributing to strategic instability is central to this study. This work looks particularly at new systems designed for asymmetric advantage, including those that can defeat strategic defences, such as longer-range cruise missiles and hypersonic vehicles. Under conditions of modernizations and upgrades to nuclear arsenals, including the entanglement of conventional and nuclear systems that can threaten a first strike, this work considers how a dialogue on limiting dangerous systems could be initiated between the US and Russia. Could New START be revised – or a new treaty established – to limit advances in cruise missile technology, hypersonics, missile defences, and tactical nuclear weapons?

scholarly journals POLITICAL RELATIONS BETWEEN THE SOVIET UNION AND AFGHANISTAN SOVIET OCCUPATION OF AFGHANISTAN 1979-1989 AD AS A MODEL

2021 ◽  
Vol 03 (07) ◽  
pp. 215-225
Author(s):  
Alghalia Salim AL-MUGHAIRI
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
World War Ii ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
United States Of America ◽  
The United States ◽  
Historical Method ◽  
Soviet Occupation ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Political Relations ◽  
The Military

The research deals with the study of the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan during the period from 1979 to 1989 as an example of the political relations between the Soviet Union and Afghanistan, where the world witnessed the outbreak of the Cold War between the two poles: the Soviet Union and the United States of America after the end of World War II in 1945 AD, and both of these two great powers were keen to highlight Its dominance in various aspects, especially the military, and this war received strong and strict international reactions, and the United States of America was one of the most prominent countries that condemned this war and demanded the withdrawal of the Soviet Union. The research aims to shed light on the roots of the interest of Russia and then the Soviet Union in Afghanistan and focus on the reasons that prompted the Soviet Union to launch war on Afghanistan and follow the events of the war and its escalation between 1979 and 1989 and focus on some international attitudes towards the war, especially the United States of America, and also clarify the reasons for the withdrawal of forces The Soviet Union of Afghanistan and its consequences. The research adopts the descriptive historical method, which was employed in deriving historical facts and talking about all aspects covered by the study, and the analytical method that was used in analyzing the information of documents and texts, and comparing them to reach information related to the subject of the study.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document