The United States on Tuesday accused Russia of violating the New START framework, which currently remains as the last nuclear arms-control dreadfort at averting any future nuclear confrontations. This article explains the current accusation, gives a brief on the treaty framework and it’s compliance mechanism, and attempts to find larger insights through a look at the bigger picture and a possible future without the treaty.
Table of Contents
What is the New START Treaty?
The New START refers to the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty that was signed between the USA & Russia in 2010. It officially came into force in 2011, replacing the 1991 START I Treaty, and superseding other similar arms control frameworks.
The New START is the current bilateral setup of reducing nuclear arsenals, between the two ex-rivals of the Cold War era. Predecessors of the New START treaty played a vital role in facilitating the end of the Cold War, and in reducing the fear of nuclear war between the two at that time.
While the Cold War is long over, the two countries still account for about 90% of the world’s nuclear warheads.
Essentially, the treaty puts a ceiling limit or a ‘cap’ on the long-range nuclear warheads and systems each country can possess. The current restriction is at 1550 deployed long-range nuclear warheads, and 700 deployed long-range nuclear delivery vehicles. The New START puts caps on long-range nuclear weapons deployed through air, sea and land.
The Long-range nuclear systems includes land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), Submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs) & Heavy bombers that can carry nuclear weapons – these systems can carry out nuclear strikes over long distances, including in each other’s borders – thus requiring the treaty restriction.
The New START is a nuclear arms reduction treaty, not a nuclear disarmament or a non-nuclear treaty. The Treaty does not attempt to limit or put significant restrictions on stockpiled nuclear reserves, conventional weapons, or nuclear R&D and weapons testing.
In 2021, when the treaty was set to initially expire – it was extended till 2026 for a period of 5 years. Currently, the treaty stands as the last major pillar of post-Cold War nuclear arms control between the two countries.
How does the Treaty ensure compliance?
The compliance mechanism is handed over to each party in this treaty. The United States and Russia can carry out up to eighteen short-notice, on-site inspections of each other’s nuclear bases and support facilities annually.
The purpose of such inspections is to ensure that the number of warheads, weapons delivery systems and similar other nuclear units that the nations had reported of carrying, is indeed accurate. The short-notice aspect of it ensures that the findings cannot be altered.
The Inspection team gives a notice of a planned visit as early as 32 hours before, and the country is expected to comply. Only after arrival does the inspection team choose a certain site or facility to visit, which cannot be altered by the host country.
Till this date, close to 350 inspections have been carried out. The inspection mechanism of the treaty however has always created deadlocks between US & Russia, and the current accusation levied at Russia is also surrounding the same issue.
What is the USA accusing Russia of?
The United States on Tuesday accused Russia of violating the New START Treaty, stating that Moscow was refusing to allow inspection activities on its territory. The U.S. State Department, in a report to Congress, stated that Russia has refused on-site inspections, and paid little attention to multiple requests made by the USA to meet and discuss compliance concerns.
In August of last year, Russia started causing compliance issues by suspending cooperation with inspections under the treaty. Russia blamed the non-compliance on travel restrictions imposed by the US and its allies after Russian forces invaded Ukraine, and stated that it was still committed to complying with the treaty provisions.
By mid of last year, Russia was able to assure the USA that it has a “clear path” for returning to compliance by allowing inspection activities, and talks between Moscow and Washington on resuming inspections and due compliance of New START were set to take place in November last year – but Russia postponed that as well.
Currently, neither side has been able to reach any firm stance on a fixed date to return back to a period of complete compliance, and Russia has not shown any initiative.
This has led to the USA raising the accusation against Russia. The State Department’s finding that Moscow is in “noncompliance” with the accord marks the first time that the USA has accused Russia of violating the treaty, ever since it came into force. A State Department spokesperson said the following to Reuters in an email correspondence,
“Russia’s refusal to facilitate inspection activities prevents the United States from exercising important rights under the treaty and threatens the viability of U.S.- Russian nuclear arms control.”
What is the Bigger Picture?
Russian non-compliance comes in the light of the ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict. As the Wall Street Journal reports, tensions over Russia’s invasion of Ukraine are endangering cooperation on nuclear-arms control.
While Washington has been eager to preserve the treaty, relations with Moscow are the worst in decades, due to the situation in Ukraine. Strained ties are complicating attempts by President Joe Biden’s administration to retain the treaty, and bring it back to a state of complete compliance.
As per a statement from the Russian ambassador to the US, Russia saw it as inappropriate to invite the U.S. military to its strategic facilities at the moment, stating that it could create a conflict of interest. He stated, “arms control cannot be isolated from geopolitical realities.”
Experts opine that Russia might be willing to let the New START arrangement wither away, till it finally expires in 2026. On Monday, Russia told the United States that the treaty could expire in 2026 without a replacement.
Russia’s non-compliance is in stark discontent over Western support to Ukraine, which Moscow considers an attempt by Washington to inflict a “strategic defeat” on it. Till date, the US has supplied more than $27 billion in security assistance to Ukraine since the conflict began.
When the Deputy Foreign Minister of Russia, Sergei Ryabkov was asked, whether he can imagine a non-nuclear arms control arrangement between the USA & Russia post-expiry of the New START, he replied saying that “it is quite a possible scenario.”
Russia & USA were also a part of a similar arms-control treaty, known as the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty, which put a cap on short to intermediate range land based nuclear weapon caches. Russia began violating the INF in 2014, and eventually the treaty was terminated in 2019.
Till date, both sides were in full reported compliance of the New START, but with the recent accusation of violation, the cracks are beginning to show.
Russian non-compliance will only add on to the multiple ‘short-comings’ the Treaty is often criticized for, including keeping China out of the arrangement, lack of limitations on short-range nuclear systems and non-inclusion of Russia’s new nuclear weapons.
U.S officials are already forecasting a grim future for future arms control efforts between the two countries, arising out of Russia’s current non-compliance of new START. Democratic Senators Bob Menendez, Jack Reed and Mark Warner, each chairing the Senate Foreign Relations, Armed Services & Intelligence Committees, said in a statement,
“But to be very clear, compliance with New START treaty obligations will be critical to Senate consideration of any future strategic arms control treaty with Moscow”
Will The New-START be terminated?
Eventually, the question of whether to continue the treaty, or to terminate it would arise. The U.S. needs to be aware of the consequences of letting the Treaty come to an end.
First, there would be more nuclear weapons, as without any limits – both sides will be able to build and deploy more long-range nuclear weapons, triggering another dangerous arms race. Given Russia has recently modernized its nuclear arsenal, and the US is still undergoing it – the timing can also turn out to be bad.
Second, there would arise an information gap – as the treaty was equal parts about maintaining transparency, as it was about limiting armaments. Without information sharing and inspections, U.S. intelligence would have to use alternative sources of intel-gathering to get an idea of Russia’s nuclear weapons, and that would still be prone to miscalculations.
Third, there would be an economic toll. The U.S. is already projected to spend nearly $ 1.2 trillion over the next thirty years, and that is with the expectation that New START stays in force. If the treaty comes to an end, both sides will fire up the war machine, creating greater costs – in an upcoming recessionary economy.
Finally, the US & Russia will cease to have any future arms control agreements. Current Russian non-compliance has already risked the prospect and scope of future arms control frameworks between the two countries, and thus if New START expires without a replacement, the US & Russia will be left with no starting point of future cooperation, and no shared vision for arms control.
In light of the above insights, officials on both sides needs to ensure that the New START cannot be brought to a full STOP.
Also Read : Discussion with “Western Puppet masters “make no sense for Russia
