In early August, Russia informed the United States through diplomatic channels of its decision to temporarily withdraw from the facility verification mechanism of the new START treaty and withdraw the Russian facilities from the verification activities stipulated in the treaty.
Since the facility verification mechanism is an important part of the implementation of the new strategic arms reduction treaty, which is the only bilateral arms control treaty between Russia and the United States, and also the only remaining pillar of the current international arms control system, the Russian decision will inevitably have a major impact.
Then, what considerations did the Russian side make this decision?
What are the intentions behind the US actions?
What impact will the interaction between Russia and the United States have on the future of the new START treaty?
Cui Rongwei Institute of international studies, Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences
Editor | Pu Haiyan lookout think tank
This article is an original article of Wangwang think tank. If you need to reprint it, please indicate the source of the article and the author’s information in front of the article. Otherwise, legal responsibility will be strictly investigated
one
Behind the Russian side’s decision, there is not only obstruction from the other side
Looking at the statement of the Russian side, it made the decision to temporarily withdraw because of a series of negative treatment and even deliberate obstruction from the United States.
Among them, there are concerns about epidemic prevention and control, such as whether the United States can ensure the health and safety of Russian personnel conducting inspections in its territory. For example, Russian inspectors are unable to enter the United States. It is also difficult for Russian personnel to travel to the United States due to the tightening of visa system by third countries – in the view of Russia, this is also an indirect consequence of restrictive measures taken by the United States against Russia.
Generally speaking, Russia believes that the implementation of the new START treaty is restricted by the interference of the COVID-19 and the unilateral anti Russian measures of the United States. Faced with the request of the United States to restart verification activities as soon as possible, the Russian side believes that this does not conform to the principle of reciprocity and equality in bilateral relations, and therefore decides to withdraw temporarily.
These public arguments are reasonable, but I am afraid they are not the main reason. In terms of the actual situation, the author believes that the key to understanding Russia’s behavior is to give full play to the leverage of the new START treaty to express interest demands and obtain favorable political results.
First, Russia regards nuclear arms control negotiations as an important means to obtain national security assurances.
As early as before the outbreak of the geopolitical conflict on February 7, senior Russian officials claimed that “the urgent security assurance talks have priority over the strategic arms control talks” and “whether to resume (Strategic Arms Control) talks depends to a large extent on whether the security assurance issue raised by Moscow can be resolved.” It can be seen that in the Russian political agenda, obtaining international legal guarantees from the United States and NATO has a priority.
On June 24, 2020, a military parade was held in Moscow, Russia. Picture people’s vision
The so-called international legal guarantee for Russia’s security is actually a package of proposals, which not only includes NATO’s commitment to stop eastward expansion and Ukraine’s non membership in NATO, but also includes not establishing military bases in Central Asia and stopping the deployment of missiles in Russia’s neighboring countries. At the same time, Russia also adheres to the indivisibility of security, opposes the United States and NATO treating the package of proposals put forward by Russia separately, and seeks legal guarantees for the above package of proposals.
This kind of legal guarantee, in the words of Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Ryabkov, “we need an iron, waterproof, bulletproof and legally binding guarantee. It is not a verbal guarantee made in terms of ‘should’ and ‘must’; it is not a protection. All the contents should be written in ‘never become a member of NATO’. This matter has a bearing on Russia’s national security.”
After being strongly rejected by the United States, Medvedev, vice chairman of the Russian Federal Security Council and signatory of the new strategic arms reduction treaty, announced on February 26 that Russia may completely change its relations with countries imposing sanctions on Russia. “In principle, (Russia) can give up everything including the new strategic arms reduction treaty signed by me and (former US president) Obama and renewed by (Russian President) Putin and the current US president.”
It can be seen that the issue of strategic arms control is considered in the context of national security, and whether the Treaty can be smoothly promoted is linked to whether it can promote Russia’s national security.
Second, we should use the temporary withdrawal of the facility verification mechanism as a starting point to exert pressure on the United States and try our best to prevent the further deterioration of bilateral relations.
As of April 2022, the United States and NATO countries have imposed more than 8000 sanctions on Russia. It can be said that its sanctions are all-round, with all kinds of contents and means. The implementation of the new START treaty is inevitably affected. On April 30, the Russian side announced that the strategic stability dialogue between the two countries was officially “frozen”. This is not only the result of the failure of the Russian US talks on security assurances, but also Russia’s response to the sanctions imposed by western countries.
What is even more outrageous is that the US Congress is brewing a legislative initiative that will declare Russia a “state supporting terrorism”. According to the Washington Post, this is the “treatment” that only a few countries, including Iran, North Korea, Cuba and Syria, have been able to get since 1979. In the face of the “bottomless line” destruction of bilateral relations by the United States, the Russian side warned the United States not to embark on the road of no return leading to the severance of diplomatic relations between the two countries. It can be said that the continuous deepening of the sanctions and anti sanctions struggle between the United States and Russia has plunged Russian US relations into a situation of “no worst, only worse”.
As the only two nuclear superpowers in the world, the issue of strategic arms control is an area that the United States cannot and cannot avoid. Moreover, Russia also has sufficient bargaining chips on this issue. Starting from this topic will effectively force the United States to face up to the problems existing in bilateral relations and make meaningful responses.
In other words, there is an understandable common language between Russia and the United States in the game of problems existing in the implementation of the new START treaty. Even if the US side interprets
Send out weak positive signals, and Russia can also use them to promote positive interaction with the United States. This can be seen from the second half of the Russian statement.
“This measure of the Russian side is temporary. The Russian side is committed to abiding by the relevant provisions of the new START treaty and regards the treaty as’ the most important tool for maintaining international security and stability ‘. After solving the problems involved in resuming the verification activities stipulated in the new START treaty, the Russian side will immediately cancel this measure and restart the full implementation of the relevant verification activities.”. The strategic flexibility demonstrated by the Russian side leapt onto the paper.
two
Why is the United States so displeased?
The western countries led by the United States have spared no effort to impose sanctions on Russia, and even spared no effort to damage the new strategic arms reduction treaty, which is the only pillar of the international arms control system.
In the face of Russia’s announcement to temporarily withdraw from the facility verification mechanism, the United States quickly responded by requesting that the verification mechanism be restarted. However, so far, the US side has not introduced specific improvement measures. There is an obvious “temperature difference” between the promotion of facility verification and the introduction of improvement measures. This disconnect between words and deeds not only proves that the United States intends to continue to exert pressure on Russia, but also relates to the failure of the treaty to realize two expectations that the United States has always had:
First, the attempt to include many new Russian weapons in the new START treaty has not met expectations.
During Putin’s term of office, Russia has made amazing progress in missile strike force: it has a new type of “salmat” intercontinental missile, a “pioneer” hypersonic warhead, a “dagger” hypersonic air to ground missile, a “zircon” hypersonic missile, and has developed a “Haiyan” nuclear powered cruise missile and a “Poseidon” nuclear powered unmanned submarine.
As early as the trump era, the United States intended to discuss with Russia and try to include many new Russian weapons, including the “salmat” intercontinental ballistic missile, the kh-101 air-based nuclear powered cruise missile, the “status-6” Underwater Unmanned Aerial Vehicle and the “pioneer” long-range hypersonic missile, in the arms reduction agenda.
In addition to taking the initiative to include “pioneer” hypersonic missiles in the coverage of the new START treaty in December 2020, Russia has made no further concessions on other new weapons issues.
This year, Russia has continuously demonstrated the devastating strike power of the “salmat” missile and the great deterrent power of the kh-101 air launched missile on the battlefield, which has become a lingering shadow for the United States. Therefore, in the face of the temporary withdrawal statement issued by the Russian side, the United States only asked for the resumption of verification, obviously assuming a posture of indifference.
Second, it failed to promote Russia to press China together with the United States.
One of the common positions of the Biden administration and the former trump administration on the issue of nuclear weapons control is to press China to join, but under the circumstances of the resolute struggle of the Chinese government and Russia’s insistence that the United Kingdom and France should also be included in the new mechanism, it has no choice but to abandon this position. This means that until at least February 5, 2026 (the expiration date of the new START treaty), the United States will no longer be able to make an issue of negotiations.
In essence, this means the bankruptcy of the US plot, which is undoubtedly a kind of torture for the United States, which is accustomed to long arm jurisdiction and likes to interfere in other countries’ internal affairs.
three
The only pillar of international arms control has a worrying future
The United Nations and the United States have responded to the temporary withdrawal statement issued by the Russian side. The United Nations spokesman urged the United States and Russia to continue to fulfill their commitments and promote arms reduction in order to maintain international peace and stability. As one of the countries concerned, the United States only responded by asking the Russian side to restart the verification, without further follow-up measures.
It can be said that the new START treaty is in a short period of paralysis, and the only pillar of the international arms control system is showing a shaky posture. Against the backdrop of the ongoing local war, the sluggish global economic recovery, and the Federal Reserve’s monetary tightening policy, which exacerbates the bankruptcy risk of many small and medium-sized countries, this is not a positive signal in any case.
How will Russia’s temporary withdrawal decision come to an end?
Russia’s actions on the issue of the “open skies treaty” can provide a reference. It is precisely because of the intentional disregard or resistance of western countries to the reasonable concerns of Russia that Russia officially withdrew from the open sky Treaty on December 18, 2021. Judging from Russia’s recent record of “decoupling” from various international organizations or mechanisms, it is not inconceivable that Russia will formally withdraw from the “new START treaty” according to its temperament.
How will the United States further respond to this?
First, the sanctions and anti sanctions surrounding the conflict between Russia and Ukraine have become more and more intense, and the Russian US relations have reached the point of almost tearing the skin, which is only one step away from the severance of diplomatic relations. There is irreconcilable hostility between the elites of both sides and between the societies of both sides, which determines that the United States is unlikely to make too many compromises and concessions, and it is reasonable for it to show lethargy.
Second, from the perspective of the focus of attention of the United States, after realizing its shortcomings, the United States has taken countermeasures in two aspects:
First, accelerate the modernization of nuclear weapons, focusing on the development of nuclear weapon delivery vehicles, which is mainly manifested in the development and application of hypersonic weapons. The United States is catching up in the hypersonic weapons field. The sea based, air-based or land-based versions of hypersonic weapons launched by American companies such as Raytheon and Lockheed Martin are in full swing.
The second is to ignore the Treaty on the non proliferation of nuclear weapons and deliberately spread nuclear technology to serve its own private interests. The main performance is the signing of the agreement on sharing nuclear propulsion information with Britain and Australia. Therefore, even if the crisis of Russia’s temporary withdrawal can be quickly resolved, with the continuous efforts of the United States in the field of hypersonic weapons and the deliberate proliferation of nuclear technology, the reduction of strategic weapons between the United States and Russia is bound to be full of various struggles and discord.
On June 12, 2022, researchers at the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute believed that “soon, we will reach a turning point, and the number of nuclear weapons in the world will begin to grow for the first time since the end of the cold war.” “The risk of escalation of the nuclear race is at the highest point in the post Cold War period.”. Faced with this enlightening remark, what do you think of the key parties to the new START treaty?
The parties concerned should put aside their prejudices, earnestly assume their own responsibilities, and act for a better future for their own country, the world and all mankind.