The Architecture of Unilateralism: Dismantling Arms Control
1. THE CLAIM: An Unfortunate Expiration The Deutsche Welle article, like many others, reports on the expiration of the New START treaty, highlighting the absence of limits on US and Russian nuclear arsenals and the UN's warning of heightened nuclear risk. The implication is often that this is a recent, concerning development, perhaps due to current geopolitical tensions. 2. THE EVIDENCE: A Pattern
of Disengagement The public record demonstrates a consistent pattern of the US systematically disassembling the arms control architecture built over decades. This trend did not begin with the current Russia-Ukraine conflict. Key milestones include: Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty (2002): The George W. Bush administration unilaterally withdrew from the ABM Treaty, signed in 1972, which was a
cornerstone of strategic stability by limiting missile defense systems. The stated rationale was to develop missile defenses against 'rogue states', but the effect was to destabilize the strategic balance with Russia. Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty (2019): The Trump administration withdrew from the INF Treaty, signed by Reagan and Gorbachev in 1987, which banned land-based missiles
with ranges between 500 and 5,500 kilometers. This withdrawal was explicitly based on accusations of Russian non-compliance, but also opened the door for the US to develop similar systems, notably in the Pacific theater. Open Skies Treaty (2020): Also under the Trump administration, the US withdrew from the Open Skies Treaty, which allowed unarmed aerial surveillance flights over member states to