New US / Russian nuclear arms deal

In 1997 Bill Clinton met Boris Yeltsin in Helsinki and the two leaders agreed that they should reduce their nuclear weapons arsenals to between 2,000 and 2,500 each. However the agreement was not supported in Congress and was not implemented. The latest Treaty between Bush and Putin revives these proposals with slightly lower targets of between 1,700 and 2,200 to be acheived by 2012. This to be welcomed as a step in the right direction, but there are significant weaknesses.

Last year it was clear that while both leaders were aiming towards this objective there were significant differences between them. The US wanted an informal agreement and to keep its weapons in reserve. Russia wanted the extra warheads to be destroyed and a binding treaty to be signed. In the end there is a Treaty, but it allows both sides to keep their old weapons in bunkers, rather than destroying them. Lowering the number of weapons deployed on alert is a positive step. But retaining the old warheads leaves an easy route for either side to rapidly increase their arsenals in the future. It also means that there will be thousands of old nuclear weapons lying around the former Soviet Union.

The new Treaty has to be seen in the context of the Nuclear Policy Review recently conducted in the USA. The contents of the review were leaked to the media in March. It calls for an arsenal which is smaller and more useable. While reducing the number of operational weapons, the Pentagon also plans to build new lower yield nuclear bombs. There may be less restraint is using such a weapon and so the nuclear threshold is more likely to be crossed. The US also plans to build bunker busting bombs. If these were ever used they would be detonated on or below the surface causing huge amounts of radioactive fallout.

The review also details circumstances in which nuclear arms might be used. These include against targets which cannot be destroyed by conventional weapons, eg bunkers, and in the event of "unforeseen circumstances". Particular scenarios which have been considered involve Iraq, Iran, Syria, Libya, and North Korea as well as China and Russia.

see also: British CND response