By Kira Webster
The Trump administration made the decision to leave the INF Treaty earlier this year citing Russia violating the treaty by deploying 4 battalions of the Novator 9M729 missile with a range of 500-5500 km. Foreign Minister of Latvia Edgars Rinkevics stated that Latvia knew Russia had been violating the treaty long before Washington withdrew. Latvia and the U.S. also knew that Moscow had already targeted the Baltic States with four missiles also banned under the treaty, as they were deployed in Kalingrad and European Russia. Since then, Russia delivered 24 supersonic anti-cruise ship missiles to their navy. These confirmed violations show that Russia has a strategy of working to deploy these missiles and this strategy has remained a priority for the Russian military. However, the arms control community unanimously agreed that the Trump administration leaving the INF Treaty was not the right decision for peace and security. This choice not only makes the New Start Treaty more vulnerable but also leaves Russia to manufacture any sort of weapons without any sort of inspection or accountability.
Currently, Russia has signaled a willingness to extend the New START Treaty. However, Russian Ambassador Anatoly Antonov stated that Russia’s new weapons circumvent the treaty’s guidelines and won’t be discussed in any future negotiations. With this vital loophole in the treaty, President Trump has ordered his administration to prepare a new arms control initiative involving both Russia and China. Critics have said that this could potentially be a plan created by National Security Advisor John Bolton to sabotage China’s compliance since Bolton is a public opponent of nuclear arms control.
Involving China in future arms control negotiations would be a wise decision. They have insisted on being recognized as a global great power and China’s intimidating nuclear threshold means we can’t afford to ignore them. In the past, China hasn’t been included on Russo-American arms control agreements, but under the Nuclear Proliferation Treaty China is estimated to have about 280 nuclear warheads – a number that has increased over recent years. Russian analysts like Alexei Arbatov have estimated that China may actually have several thousand nuclear weapons which would be a threat to Russia and surrounding Asian countries as well. China has stated that its nuclear policy has been to keep deterrent capabilities for national security. Also, it was the first nation to declare a “No First Use” Policy. Despite their alleged support for nuclear non-proliferation, and peace overall, in the past it has continued not to submit to negotiations and has also continued to support proliferation to Pakistan and North Korea.
In March of 2018, Beijing announced that they would be selling sophisticated optical tracking systems for nuclear missiles with multiple warheads. While China’s conventional arms trade value is still much lower than the U.S., it’s still worth noting that its arms sales have surged from $650 million in 2008 to $1.13 billion in 2017, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. Around 74 percent of these exports went to Asia (mainly Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Myanmar) while an additional 21 percent went to Africa. China has also been Pakistan’s largest arms supplier, due mainly in part to a growing cooperation between Beijing and Islamabad on counter-terrorism initiatives.
With the confirmation of Russia’s missiles, as well as the need to include China, a new treaty with more specifications and accountability is extremely urgent. China has been continuously working to secure cyberspace – particularly through their military with drones and cyberattack software development. Their strides in developing semiconductors, artificial intelligence, and quantum computing has led to heavy influence over foreign industries. China has moved to sign guidelines to companies agreeing that they will only buy from Chinese manufacturers. Efforts to solidify the New START Treaty and include as many nations holding nuclear arsenals must be taken as swiftly as possible. It’s daunting to think about what the future may hold should Russia and China decide to hold their own negotiations without involving the rest of the world.
Kira Webster is an intern at the Peace Economy Project
