On January 3, 1993, the Treaty on the Further Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms (START-II) was signed in Moscow between the Russian Federation and the United States, which, in fact, supplemented the START-I agreement concluded in the summer of 1991 and provided for more radical and rapid reductions in arsenals within the same time frame.

Its main provision was the obligation of the parties to reduce the number of nuclear warheads on deployed strategic launchers to the level of 3-3.5 thousand units.

In addition, the document provided for the elimination of all land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), which are equipped with more than one warhead.

However, START II never entered into force for a variety of reasons.

As Russian Ambassador to Washington Anatoly Antonov, who at the time of its publication (in 2012) held the post of Deputy Minister of Defense of the Russian Federation, wrote in his monograph, the treaty was seriously criticized by the expert community and part of the military-political elite of Russia, since it forced Moscow to “break the traditional structure of domestic strategic offensive weapons as a result of the elimination of multiply charged ICBMs.

“To a large extent, the ban on ICBMs with MIRVs (separable warheads with individual targeting units. -

RT

) in the START-II treaty was imposed by the American side ... Depriving the group of missiles with MIRVs that form the basis of Russian strategic offensive arms was fraught with a great risk of losing retaliatory strike potential in the event of a US decision to deploy a missile defense system, ”Antonov explained.

He also noted that the implementation of START II was associated with a number of economic, technical, organizational, environmental and other problems, the solution of which was "an exceptionally difficult state task."

As a result, a legislative impasse arose regarding the ratification of the treaty by the Russian parliament.

Under these conditions, the American side agreed to adjust the timing of the reduction of strategic offensive weapons, and in 1997 the New York Protocol to START II and the New York ABM agreements were signed, which, together with the START treaty, were considered as a single package of documents and were subject to simultaneous ratification for START II to enter into force.

In 2000, all these agreements were ratified by Russia, but the US Congress, which had previously ratified START II, ​​never began to consider the New York protocol and agreements on missile defense.

Later, on June 13, 2002, the United States completely withdrew from the Treaty on the Limitation of Anti-Ballistic Missile Systems, which was attributed by the federal law of the Russian Federation on the ratification of START II to an exceptional circumstance that gave Russia the right to withdraw from this agreement.

Moscow withdrew from START II the day after Washington withdrew from the ABM treaty.

As Antonov noted in his monograph, the non-entry into force of START II also affected the negotiations on a future agreement - START III.

“The fundamental decision to prepare such an agreement was fixed in Helsinki in 1997... However, since the start of the development of the START-III treaty was linked to the entry into force of the START-II treaty, official negotiations on the new treaty never began... Negotiations on START resumed only in 2001, when the United States was working towards withdrawing from the ABM treaty, ”he noted.

  • Flags of Russia and USA

  • Gettyimages.ru

  • © Daniel Carson

“Basic principles of START III are being eroded by Washington”

The Treaty on Measures for the Further Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms (START III) was signed by the presidents of Russia and the United States only in 2010 for a period of ten years.

The agreement obliged the parties to reduce their strategic offensive arms so that seven years after the entry into force of the document and in the future, their total number would not exceed 700 deployed ICBMs, submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs) ​​and heavy bombers (TB), 1550 warheads on them, as well as 800 deployed and non-deployed launchers of ICBMs and SLBMs and non-deployed TBs.

START III, which replaced START I, expired at the beginning of February 2021, but the parties extended the agreement for another five years - until February 5, 2026 in its original form, without any changes or additions.

However, after the start of the special military operation of the Russian Federation in Ukraine, the United States interrupted the dialogue on strategic stability: as explained in Washington, in connection with the situation around this conflict.

Nevertheless, on August 1, the head of the White House, Joe Biden, announced his readiness to promptly negotiate with Russia on a new arms control system that would replace START III.

In turn, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov, in an August interview with the Izvestia newspaper, called “far from obvious” the very possibility of resuming a dialogue on the strategic stability of Moscow and Washington “taking into account the recklessly aggressive policy” pursued by the United States towards Russia.

Also, Moscow considered it impossible for the Americans to conduct further inspections under START III, since the White House is trying to act on conditions “that do not take into account existing realities, create unilateral advantages for the United States and actually deprive the Russian Federation of the right to carry out inspections on American territory.”

In this regard, on August 8, the Foreign Ministry reported that Russia was temporarily withdrawing its facilities from inspection activities, especially since such a possibility was provided for by the START Treaty.

In early December, State Department spokesman Ned Price, during a briefing, reiterated the US readiness to resume negotiations with Russia on strategic stability.

“We indeed remain ready to meet with Russia within the START Implementation Body to discuss any U.S. and Russian concerns regarding START implementation, conduct inspections, and ensure the viability of the treaty,” Price said.

However, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov stressed in an interview with TASS on December 27 that Moscow does not yet intend to come up with new initiatives on the subject of START.

“At this stage, we are not going to come up with any initiatives.

This, for example, refers to the discussion of a possible new agreement or agreements in the field of strategic offensive weapons, as well as on mutual security guarantees, ”Lavrov said, stressing that the United States itself refused such negotiations under the pretext of the Ukrainian crisis.

According to him, Russia remains committed to START III, "the basic principles of which are being eroded by Washington."

Negotiation prospects 

As Konstantin Blokhin, a researcher at the Center for Security Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences, noted in a RT commentary, the American authorities are behaving duplicitously, on the one hand, offering to resume dialogue on strategic stability and START III, and on the other, openly declaring their desire to harm Russia as much as possible.

“Washington does not hide that it wants to defeat the Russian Federation in Ukraine through the supply of Western weapons.

The United States accuses Russia of all mortal sins, and then offers to resume negotiations on strat stability.

It looks at least strange.

In such aggressive conditions created by the United States, cooperation in this area is impossible.

The resumption of negotiations is seen as real only with mutual trust, respect and transparency, which Washington absolutely does not demonstrate in relation to Russia, ”the expert said.

  • US Trident II intercontinental ballistic missile launch

  • globallookpress.com

  • © MC2 Thomas Gooley / Keystone Press Agency

At the same time, it is not worth completely excluding the continuation of the dialogue between Russia and the United States on strategic stability, Blokhin believes.

“This can happen as part of the discussion of a new agreement, which is not excluded that will follow after START III.

But there are many pitfalls here.

In particular, the United States has repeatedly stated that it wants to involve China in this dialogue.

But we know the position of China, which does not want to participate in the new treaty, since there is a clear disproportion of forces - the United States and Russia account for more than 90% of the entire nuclear potential in the world, ”the analyst stated.

In addition, according to him, the development of a dialogue between Moscow and Washington on arms control may be hindered by a change of power in the United States if a representative of the Republican Party takes the presidency in 2024.

“Republicans view the START III treaty primarily as a tool to contain the United States.

It was the representative of this political force, George W. Bush, who pulled the US out of the ABM treaty.

Republican Donald Trump did not want to extend START III.

If a Republican is again in the post of the 47th President of the United States, the Treaty on Measures for the Further Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms will most likely be put an end to, ”the expert believes.

Another problem that could hinder the dialogue between Moscow and Washington in the field of arms control, Blokhin calls the US desire to include in the new agreement after START III Russia's promising hypersonic weapons, which the United States does not possess.

“Obviously, due to the new agreement that the parties will have to conclude after START III, Washington will try to limit the technological development of Russia and prevent its breakthroughs in hypersound.

But the Russian Federation will never sign an agreement that is unprofitable for it or infringes on its capabilities, ”the analyst said.

As Sergey Ermakov, a leading RISS expert, recalled in turn, START III is the only treaty between Russia and the United States that is currently in effect within the framework of ensuring strategic stability.

“The term of the contract expires at the beginning of 2026, and its parameters do not provide for further extension.

It could only be extended once, which the parties did back in 2021, ”the expert said in a conversation with RT.

According to Yermakov, according to Moscow's position, the new security system should be created primarily on the basis of the "principles of equality."

“Against the backdrop of the Ukrainian crisis, the United States is waging a rather incorrect information-psychological war in the field of strategic weapons, hiding behind the desire to supposedly increase the level of transparency in this area.

And at the same time, no serious discussions of the problems that worry Russia are going on.

This applies primarily to medium-range and shorter-range missiles in Europe, as well as joint NATO nuclear missions near the borders of the Russian Federation, ”the analyst believes.

The expert stressed that all these issues need to be discussed in a confidential format, which is impossible at this stage.

At the same time, if START III expires, and the United States and Russia fail to create a new treaty to replace it, the international security system will be under attack.

“This is a very serious danger – the world will live without rules.

Against this background, the likelihood of the threat of a nuclear conflict increases, since there is no trust between states and nothing is holding them back.

In addition, all opportunities for a new arms race will be open, and strategic stability will be seriously undermined, ”concluded Yermakov.