US & South Asia - Articles

The New START: A step forward?

8 April 2010 marked an important day in the nuclear chronology of the United States of America and Russia as Presidents Barack Obama and Dmitry Medvedev signed the most important post-Cold War arms reduction treaty in Prague. The New START (Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty) has fulfilled the objectives of disarmament by paring the American and Russian nuclear weapons. The next step is to have this treaty ratified by the US Senate and Russian Duma. The major concern for the Republicans is US missile defences which are considered to be undermined by the New START. Will the Republican concern prove an obstacle to the ratification of the treaty? Its other implication will be on the status of nuclear weapons deployed in NATO countries. What will be NATO’s final decision on tactical nuclear weapons (TNWs) stationed in Netherlands, Turkey, Germany, Belgium and Italy? Apart from these issues, there was a strategic necessity for the United States and Russia to enter START; the disintegration of the Soviet Union raised concerns in the minds of the two leaderships. Russia remained anxious to retain its super-power status by maintaining nuclear parity with United States whereas the United States was concerned about the safety and security of the Russian nuclear arsenal, preventing nuclear proliferation and the possibility of an accidental nuclear war. 

The New START is a confidence building measure between the two countries. It will restore strategic stability and predictability, and bolster the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT); in the NPT Review Conference (NPT RevCon). New START restricts each side to 700 deployed strategic nuclear delivery vehicles and 1550 deployed strategic nuclear warheads, which is significant as compared to the 2200 permitted under the Strategic Offensive Reduction Treaty (SORT). Further, New START provides for a comprehensive verification mechanism which is less intrusive than that envisaged by START I. According to Konstantin Kosachev, chair of the Duma Foreign Relations Committee, the earlier agreements were based on the Russian proverb “Trust but Verify.” The New START relies on the opposite maxim – “Verify but Trust.” The New Start is a reset strategy; which has been the goal being pursued by the US President Barack Obama.

The Republicans are concerned about several references to missile defence in the preamble of the treaty, some of which could limit US actions during hostilities. Any linkages to missile defence in the Treaty is seen as being contrary to the US national security objectives and its ability to protect the homeland, its troops and military bases overseas and its allies from the ballistic missiles as directed by President Obama’ Ballistic Missile Defence Review (BMDR). They are concerned about the number of ballistic missiles currently in existence outside the control of US allies, Russia and China; according to BMDR there are 5900 ballistic missiles. According to the US lawmakers, the Treaty does not inhibit US missile defences and does not undermine national security. It will help to build trust between the two nuclear giants and prevent misunderstanding and miscalculations. The US Senate needs 67 out of 100 votes to ratify the treaty. The treaty has gathered support from nuclear stalwarts and the former Republican Secretaries of State, Henry Kissinger and George Schultz; so, there is hope of gaining support to get it ratified. Similarly, there may be obstacles in the Russian Duma. The retired generals have an “institutional memory” of the Cold War and may argue against the New START.

The New START does not address the issue of an estimated 200 US tactical nuclear weapons (TNWs) in Europe. New START must bring TNWs in Europe to the top of the agenda. Removing US TNWs from Europe would display imaginativeness by the United States to reach its objectives but also provide an impetus to nuclear disarmament and re-energize the nonproliferation agenda. Keeping in view the opposition of the Republicans, the removal of tactical nuclear weapons from Europe might block the ratification of the Treaty but is necessary to ensure the Russian support. According to Obama’s Nuclear Posture Review the fate of TNWs in Europe lies in the hands of the NATO members states. A parallel arrangement between NATO and Russia on nuclear arms reduction can be enforced under the aegis of the NATO-Russia Council (NRC).

Apart from addressing the issue of TNWs in NATO countries, there are some other issues to be addressed. New START includes special but complicated accounting rules, especially determining the number of warheads, which includes heavy bombers. The new Treaty does not require the elimination of warheads as delivery vehicles are being reduced. The warheads retrieved from delivery vehicles that are retired can be kept in storage. These issues can be further discussed as the Treaty is yet to be officially made public. After the ratification, the New START will breathe life into the vision of a nuclear weapons free world but all depends on the attitude of entities opposing the Treaty. They must understand that the threats are nuclear proliferation and terrorism, which do not require the US and Russia to deploy large numbers of nuclear weapons.