Quick Take: Can the US and Russia Denuclearize?

Another off the top, Quick Take from The Countermeasure. This time our pervading thoughts are looking at denuclearization and the basic reasons why it isn’t as easy for the US to make a good deal as we would like. Let’s go!

Putin Wants to Look Friendly

Recently, Radio Free Europe reported that Vladimir Putin has proposed to extend the START Treaty, without preconditions, for at least one more year.

This is important, but why? What is the START Treaty? These questions will be answered in this piece.

START Treaty

The START Treaty (actually the New START Treaty) is an expansion of the START I, a denuclearization treaty signed by the USSR and the United States.

New START was signed by Russia and the US in April 2010 and was intended to make up for failures of agreeing on START II and START III. New START is intended to limit the amount of nuclear missile launchers, but not the nuclear stockpiles of each nation.

New START is expiring in December though, and Putin wants to extend the treaty by at least a year so that negotiations can continue for a new agreement and thereby avoid losing the progress that has been made.

The Importance

This is a pretty important issue, because the amassed nuclear arsenals pose a existential risk to humanity. With New START ending, the US has also called for China to enter into the next agreement, whatever it may be.

China, who has been hesitant to join negotiations with the US and Russia, isn’t along in its skepticism however.

The US has pulled out of agreements with Russia before — on the pretext that Russia violates agreements. Not only has the US felt that similar treaties work in Russia’s favor, but Russia enthusiastically violates them. It should say a lot when Russia proposes a treaty extension, but then rejects the extension when Washington asks for Russia to halt nuclear missile production, as they have in early October 2020.

This brings up the issue of trust. There really isn’t any.

Both Russia and China are considered revisionist powers. They reject the American Liberal Economic Order that has dominated world affairs and and the global economy for decades. Instead, they wish to establish their own orders, play by their own rules, and pursue foreign policy goals without relent.

If we keep this in mind, as many US policy makers have, it can be reasonably assumed that Russia, and China if they join such agreements, will not honor a deal. Deals such as the New START, as the US view has stated, overwhelmingly favor Russia in that they do two things:

Restrict US nuclear armament and leave Russia in the wind.

The US sort of ties their hands, so to speak, in entering agreements such as START especially given the relative certainty that Russia will violate the treaty. What is more, the treaties do not necessarily stop the production or innovation of warheads anyways.

These treaties appear to be mere formalities that allow each state to imprint a relative gauge of progress on the other nation’s developments.

Should We Extend START

Despite the obvious reasons not to, yes we should extend START. If START does anything, it also keeps the door open for genuine denuclearization when the necessity for it arises.

It should be noted though that the US needs to do something to get Russia to display a sincere interest in denuclearization. Asking them to halt their production of warheads was exactly the kind of display we needed, but we didn’t get it. Something similar must be tried, else we repeat a scenario that encourages Russian violations.

It will be perpetually impossible to get Russia and China to honor such agreements in full given their revisionist strategy and lack of regard for the “rules” of foreign affairs, but START at least displays a constant and attentive interest in ridding of nuclear weapons. Russia and China are just as skeptical of us as we are of them, so by being engaged in denuclearization over a consistent time, it shows a greater reason that we can be trusted to honor our agreements.