... Trump administration is extremely suspicious of any agreement that in one way or another restricts the United States in the field of security, and even more toward those agreements that were signed before Donald Trump came to power. This is not only the INF Treaty, but also the New START Treaty, which raises big questions and doubts about how good the treaty is and whether it should be renewed at all. This reflects the philosophy of the administration, its emphasis on complete independence on strategic issues and its unwillingness ...
... would be wrong, in my opinion. We need to stop these conversations,” the expert said.
Pavel Zolotarev, Head of Research at RAS Institute for the U.S. and Canadian Studies, retired Major General, RIAC expert, noted that the U.S. withdrawal from the INF Treaty threatens New START — an agreement between the Russian Federation and the United States of America on Measures for the Further Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms. “Almost 99.9% that it will not be renewed. There is no reason to talk about ...
... Treaty.
In early 2019, the U.S. media ran a Russian
letter
to the United States Senate Committee on Foreign Relations. The document explained Russia’s position with regard to the allegations of the United States that Moscow had failed to observe the INF Treaty [
5
]. Without going into much detail as to the essence of the mutual accusations, it should be noted that Washington’s failure to embrace a constructive approach presents the key threat to prolonging New START beyond 2021. Most importantly, Russia is presumably prepared to agree to a system of so-called “cabinet-level written political commitments”. Those are possible with regard to the cap on the total number of ballistic missile launch tubes ...
... unilaterally withdraw from the ABM Treaty. 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. However, they came as a result of ... ... took to strengthening its own security by reducing that of its international partners.
Andrey Kortunov:
The World After the INF Treaty: How to Get Out of the Dead Zone
And what did this do to Russia–U.S. relations?
It could never have ended well. ...
... shorten the pause as much as possible and make the resumption of the talks as simple as possible. There are at least four ways of doing this.
Alexander Yermakov:
Brave New World Without INF Treaty
First, even the absence of formal obligations under the INF Treaty or the New START Treaty cannot stop the sides from honoring them de facto. The analysis of the Russian and American nuclear modernization plans shows that the sides do not intend to move beyond the existing agreements. An informal arrangement or at least a silent ...
... taken today. It is with that in mind that we call on you to urgently implement the following recommendations:
1) Preserve the INF Treaty.
Rather than abandoning the agreement, the United States and Russia should urgently seek to resolve compliance issues ... ... diplomatic efforts to begin a global conversation on the risks posed by intermediate-range ballistic missiles.
2) Extend the New START
Treaty until 2026. Set to expire in February 2021, the New START Treaty provides common-sense limits and verification ...
... rescued, but only if Russia and the United States demonstrate political goodwill. The two countries need to be able to both demonstrate and explain the specifics of their own weapons systems and accept the opponent’s explanations.
The prospects of the New START being prolonged are moot, and the balance may shift either way. In fact, if the INF Treaty is cancelled altogether, there may be fewer obstacles than if both Russia and the United States allegedly violate it. On the other hand, yet another destroyed treaty would evidently result in a reduction in mutual interest and trust in arms ...
It is still possible that both sides may uncover some new options for arms control, with the aim of upgrading and updating the principles of New START and the INF Treaty
The articles below were informed by a roundtable discussion in London in October 2018 between the Russian International Affairs Council (RIAC) and RUSI to discuss the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty. While the discussion revealed ...
... that leaders today recognize their responsibility to work together to prevent nuclear catastrophe and provide a foundation for other practical steps to reduce the risk of nuclear use—including resolving the current problems with INF and extending the New START Treaty through 2026.
There remains the challenge of rebuilding trust between the United States, NATO and Russia so that it will again be possible to address major security challenges in the Euro-Atlantic region. This was done throughout the ...
... this pivotal accord but also the future of nuclear arms control, with potentially grave consequences for European security.
The INF treaty may indeed have been violated. And it may be anachronistic. But it is symbolic of great power cooperation on nuclear ... ... the INF crisis would be highly damaging.
Even more troubling would be the likely consequences of the Treaty’s demise.
The New START Agreement, which limits US and Russian strategic nuclear warheads and delivery vehicles, expires in 2021 and the INF ...
