The fallout from Washington’s policy of seeking Russia’s strategic defeat has seen Moscow radically alter its arms control position. That raises important questions about the winner of the next U.S. presidential election.
Having used arms control to gain unilateral advantage over Russia, the cost to the U.S. and NATO in getting Moscow back to the negotiating table will be high.
Putin’s announcement of a suspension of the last extant U.S.-Russia arms-control pact this week was a carefully attenuated move. It was also a big deal, but not in the way Western officials encourage us to think it is.
As Russia suspends New START, the sooner the Ukraine war ends, the sooner the U.S. and Russia can work to preserve arms control to avert the ultimate disaster.
Disarmament in the time of Perestroika spotlights the pivotal contributions of U.S.-Soviet inspectors in helping to complete the 1988 INF treaty, which took effect after a period of bilateral tensions that could be considered more severe than those of today.
To most, the idea of fighting a nuclear war seems absurd — the assumption being that a nuclear balance provides stability, writes Paul Rogers. But this has never been the case.
Congress must step in and slam the door shut on the idea of resuming nuclear testing, especially if its purpose is to threaten other countries, writes Daryl G. Kimball.
The West is out of practice when it comes to serious strategic appraisal of the U.S.-Russian arms race, writes Michael Brenner.
Donald Trump is not the first U.S. president to want to militarize life beyond Earth. But that is a bankrupt approach, believes Jonathan Marshall.
Trump’s new National Security Adviser John Bolton has been instrumental in launching wars and scrapping arms control treaties – just the man for the job as the U.S. embarks on a new arms race with Russia, Ray McGovern sardonically observes.
