With Russia’s Suspension of New START, the Future of Arms Control is Bleak

by | Feb 23, 2023

With Russia’s Suspension of New START, the Future of Arms Control is Bleak

by | Feb 23, 2023

p020211ck 0016 0

President Barack Obama signs the New START Treaty in the Oval Office, Feb. 2, 2011. Participants include, from left: Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen; Energy Secretary Steven Chu; Defense Secretary Robert Gates; Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton; Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass.; Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Ind.; Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif.; Sen. Thad Cochran, R-Miss.; Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H.; and Vice President Joe Biden. (Official White House Photo by Chuck Kennedy) This photograph is provided by THE WHITE HOUSE as a courtesy and may be printed by the subject(s) in the photograph for personal use only. The photograph may not be manipulated in any way and may not otherwise be reproduced, disseminated or broadcast, without the written permission of the White House Photo Office. This photograph may not be used in any commercial or political materials, advertisements, emails, products, promotions that in any way suggests approval or endorsement of the President, the First Family, or the White House.

Nuclear arms control has had a very rough few years. The latest piece of bad news comes from Russia. Earlier this week, Vladimir Putin announced that Russia is “suspending its membership” in New START, a treaty that limits the number of deployed nuclear warheads and launchers for Russia and the United States. While New START is not completely dead yet, Putin’s announcement is the latest in a series of unfortunate events for the arms control regime.

What is New START?

Arms control negotiations and treaties have helped restrain nuclear competition between the United States and Russia, the world’s two largest nuclear‐​armed powers, since the late 1960s. While every agreement is unique, two common themes of U.S.-Russia arms control treaties are mutual limits on the number of nuclear weapons and restrictions or outright bans on specific weapon systems.

Under New START, which entered into force in February 2011, Russia and the United States are limited to 700 deployed launchers (nuclear‐​capable bombers, ballistic missile submarines, and intercontinental‐​range ballistic missiles) and 1,550 deployed nuclear warheads. It took seven years for the United States and Russia to adjust their nuclear forces to meet these limits, and since 2018 both states have been in compliance.

While warhead and launcher limits are New START’s headline feature, the treaty also contains multiple verification mechanisms such as inspections of nuclear weapon facilities and regular data exchanges. These verification mechanisms ensure treaty compliance and make it generally easier for the United States to gather information on Russia’s nuclear forces and vice versa.

What Does Suspension Mean?

While Putin’s suspension of New START is not a good outcome it is also not the worst outcome.

After Putin’s speech announcing the suspension, Russia’s foreign ministry released a statement clarifying that Russia would not deploy nuclear weapons or launchers above New START’s limits. However, since Russia is suspending its participation in New START’s verification mechanisms, it will be harder for the United States to confirm that Russia is in fact following through on its promise to not exceed the treaty’s limits.

It is also important to note that there have not been any onsite inspections of nuclear weapon facilities since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, so that specific New START verification measure was dormant for a couple years. However, the United States and Russia kept exchanging data about nuclear forces despite the pandemic.

Russia’s foreign ministry statement left the door open for a return to full compliance with New START, but it said this will only occur if the United States takes steps toward “general de‐​escalation,” namely halting support for Ukraine. An unlikely outcome given Biden’s recent visit to Kyiv and promises of continued U.S. military and financial aid.

What Happens Next?

New START is the last remaining U.S.-Russia nuclear arms control treaty. The Trump administration withdrew from the Intermediate‐​Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty in 2019 citing Russian violations, and left the multilateral but Russia‐​focused Open Skies Treaty the following year. George W. Bush withdrew from the Anti‐​Ballistic Missile Treaty in 2002. The United States and Russia are parties to multilateral arms control agreements like the Nonproliferation Treaty and the Partial Test Ban Treaty, but New START is the last bilateral treaty standing.

Russia’s suspension comes at a worrying time for international nuclear stability. China is rapidly increasing the size of its nuclear arsenal, North Korea is moving toward deploying low‐​yield nuclear weapons, and Iran is getting very close to obtaining weapons‐​grade uranium. Within the United States, there is growing pressure from defense hawks to discard arms control and expand the U.S. nuclear arsenal. New START suspension will fuel this argument.

Arms control treaties have been an important tool for maintaining nuclear stability, especially between the United States and Soviet Union during the Cold War and Russia afterward. Russia’s suspension of New START does not kill the treaty, nor does it mean a massive Russian nuclear buildup will happen soon. But this lack of a short‐​term crisis belies a long‐​term hollowing out of arms control.

A steady drumbeat of dead U.S.-Russia nuclear treaties coupled with growing arsenals and animosity among great powers is a recipe for fewer controls and less stability. Nuclear competition is back in a way not seen since the Cold War. Arms control treaties could play a role in restricting the worse aspects of that competition, but right now the future of arms control looks bleak.

This article was originally featured at the Cato Institute and is republished with permission.

Eric Gomez

Eric Gomez

Eric Gomez is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute. His research focuses on the U.S. military budget and force posture, as well as arms control and nuclear stability issues in East Asia.

View all posts

Our Books

libertarian inst books

Related Articles

Related

TGIF: What Free Market in Health Care?

TGIF: What Free Market in Health Care?

Contrary to a popular article of faith, America has no free market in health care—far from it. Consider this: the largest lobby in Washington, D.C., is—wait for it—the health care and health insurance industries. Last year, they spent 5.8 times the amount the...

read more
A Critique of Practical Hasbara

A Critique of Practical Hasbara

Immanuel Kant published The Critique of Pure Reason in 1781. It was the same year the Rebel Alliance triumphed at Yorktown, Virginia. The victory at Yorktown made possible the decline of the British “liberal” empire and the eventual rise of Washinton DCs “non-empire”...

read more
The Switzerland Summit: Peace Through Delusion

The Switzerland Summit: Peace Through Delusion

Ukraine has been at war for over ten years, and even the political establishment wipeout in the European elections has not managed to shock the Western ruling class back into coherence. Nothing could provide a clearer example of their clownish nature than the recent...

read more
Smashing the UK’s Statist Mindset

Smashing the UK’s Statist Mindset

Mainstream British political thought processes contain an epidemic of dreadful reasoning. Witness the average political interaction between “popular” British parliamentarians and voters, think through the reasoning of the topics discussed, and you will know exactly...

read more
Will Trump Learn from Bump Stock Battering?

Will Trump Learn from Bump Stock Battering?

The Supreme Court last Friday struck down one of the most controversial gun control edicts in recent years. The ruling on bump stocks is being widely hailed as a victory for an expansive reading of the Second Amendment. But it is also a stark rebuke to Donald Trump’s...

read more

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This