|
#6 - JRL 2006-258 - JRL Home
RIA Novosti
November 14, 2006
Russian nuclear strategy: in search of amendments
MOSCOW. (Sergei Kortunov for RIA Novosti) - Since the U.S. State Department,
three months after 9/11, said America was going to quit the 1972 Anti-Ballistic
Missile Treaty - which it did half a year later - Moscow's response has been
conspicuous by its nearly total absence.
At that point, no one among Russia's political elite offered a viable
perspective of a future international nuclear arms control regime, heavily
undermined by the U.S. unilateralism. Then, on May 26, 2002, the Russian and
U.S. presidents signed the Strategic Offensive Reductions Treaty, a move that
sent a very clear signal - at least, to security experts' community - that
bilateral and probably multilateral nuclear arms control, in its previous shape,
was history. From that point on, a new national nuclear strategy has been a most
urgent imperative.
Similarly to what we witnessed four years ago, we can see now that the Bush
Administration is apparently not going to have its hands tied by any arms
limitation or reduction treaties whatsoever. The U.S. military policies are
being significantly reshaped - not so much by the war on terror but for other,
deeper reasons.
The Treaty on Further Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms,
like the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, has not been ratified. Now both
look completely forgotten. The Pentagon gets nearly $100 billion more a year
than before. A recently adopted U.S. nuclear doctrine includes the upgrade of
strategic offensive arms, the development of small nuclear munitions to be used
together with smart weapons, and a premise that Washington might resort to
nuclear weapons against a non-nuclear state.
Many Russian experts believe the recent changes to the U.S. military policy
do not mean that Russia's national security is going to be under threat, at
least for 10 to 15 years to come, when the full deployment of the national
missile defense system is expected. However, the abandonment of the ABM Treaty,
in combination with other changes, puts the international arms control regime
under question and probably sets the stage for a new international arms race.
The U.S. is making strategic moves that - naturally - call for strategic
nuclear responses. In fact, the new U.S. strategy says that unprecedented
terrorist attacks and a new prioritization of threats may well lower the
go-nuclear threshold, which means that a nuclear capability, once used, can
easily spiral out of control. The continuing proliferation of the weapons of
mass destruction, as well as of means of delivery, and growing regional
instability add little comfort.
Amid utterly unpredictable political momentum, the U.S. has chosen to further
upgrade its nuclear force, to retain the means to quickly build up its nuclear
capability in time of need, and to effectively put off the table any binding and
verifiable agreements with Russia on the inconvertible reduction of strategic
offensive arms. On the other side of the equation, recent tests and general U.S.
technological potential suggest that a workable and consistently upgradable
missile defense system could be deployed already in the medium term.
All this demonstrates that the only option for Russia is to retain a great
nuclear power status for at least 15 to 20 years to come - which means to
rethink its nuclear plans. What we have right now was drawn up on the assumption
that both START II and ABM would be in place, and that the naval and air legs,
like in the U.S. nuclear triad, will grow, while the ground component will be
largely reduced.
The new strategic reality suggests that we should instead maintain our ground
nuclear force as long as possible, while shaping the naval and air legs so that
they could fulfill both nuclear and conventional tasks. Old plans, drawn up in
response to radically different challenges, are no more viable - economically as
well as militarily.
In his State of the Nation Address earlier this year, the President radiated
confidence on a new nuclear reality. Let's hope it is really there.
Sergei Kortunov is chairman of the Foreign Policy Planning Committee.
|