Read Part 1 and Part 2 of this series here.

The Failure Of Arms Control In A Shifting Global Order

Rising tensions between major global powers have intensified following recent conflicts and advancements in nuclear and missile technologies. The collapse of various treaties has contributed to this growing strain, as the U.S. deploys weapons that would have previously been restricted. 

While the U.S. withdrew from the (INF) Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, Russia suspended its participation but continued to follow its guidelines, arguing that missiles stationed in Poland and Romania violated the agreement. Russia has also stated that it will allow New START (Measures for the Further Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms) to expire in 2026, refusing to renegotiate as long as the U.S. continues supplying weapons to Ukraine.

 In 2023, the U.S. accused Russia of blocking treaty inspections, despite having confirmed Russia’s compliance the previous year. President Putin sounded the alarm last year about the deployment of Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) missiles in Denmark and the Philippines during training exercises. 

After Ukraine’s July ATACMS attack on civilians in Crimea, Russia announced its plans to restart production of INF weapons, previously banned under the INF Treaty, which the U.S. left in 2019. NATO's provision of nuclear-capable aircraft to Ukraine further complicates any future arms control discussions.

Consequences of NATO-Russia War in Ukraine

The controversy surrounding the use of long-range missiles in Ukraine has continued to grow. President Putin warned that if NATO allows Ukraine to target Russia with these missiles, it would essentially mean war between Russia and NATO. 

While some Western countries have allowed Ukraine to strike "legitimate" sites within Russia, even as civilians are targeted and killed. The U.S. has restricted the use of its weapons to defending against cross-border attacks rather than allowing deep strikes into Russian territory. However, as the U.S. considers lifting these restrictions and permitting Ukrainian strikes on Russian soil, tensions between Moscow and the West are escalating.

The U.S. has justified this provocation by pointing to reports that Iran is allegedly supplying missiles to Russia and is close to approving the shipment of JASSM missiles to Ukraine. In response, Moscow warned it would supply similar weapons to the West’s adversaries if these strikes are authorized. 

According to The Wall Street Journal, U.S.-made F-16 fighter jets, equipped with advanced missiles, were delivered to Ukraine in July. Although Moscow claims the F-16s won’t change the war’s outcome, it views their arrival as a step toward NATO’s direct involvement and a potential nuclear threat.

The Outlook for Arms Control

As restrictions on long range NATO weapons deployed in Ukraine are lifted, Russia's previously declared red lines are increasingly seen as ineffective deterrents, emboldening NATO to act more aggressively. 

Making matters worse, the U.S. has approved a new nuclear strategy to address a potential joint nuclear attack from Russia, China, and DPRK. Senator Roger Wicker has even called for the redeployment of tactical nuclear weapons to South Korea to counter such threats. The U.S. now threatens to initiate an arms race by expanding its nuclear arsenal, should China and Russia refuse to "negotiate." In fact, missiles U.S missiles deployed in the Philippines and Japan continue to irritate Russia and China. 

However, these threats are unlikely to sway Russia, which rightly views U.S. negotiations as coming in bad faith. Former Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev has slammed the cynical U.S. arms control proposals while the U.S. continues to supply weapons to Ukraine, likening the situation to Nazi Germany negotiating arms with the USSR while still at war. An example of such bad faith negotiations is how the West misled Russia by leveraging the Minsk Agreements under the guise of pursuing peace, while in reality, the accords were used to buy time to rearm Ukraine.

Russia warned that negotiations would not proceed unless the U.S. halts its support for Ukraine and rejects Ukraine’s NATO membership. Similarly, President Putin condemned U.S. hypocrisy on this issue in his recent address to the Federal Assembly.  

U.S. Nuclear Plans and the Risk of War

As the U.S. mulls lifting restrictions on Ukrainian strikes inside Russia using U.S. weapons, Russia has warned of the threat of nuclear escalation. Russia announced that it would resume nuclear testing for the first time in over three decades, should President Putin give the order. This comes as Putin expands the Russian military to 1.5 million members and considers restricting uranium exports—a critical resource for U.S. nuclear programs. 

Meanwhile, the U.S. is adjusting its nuclear policy, with plans to develop a new nuclear gravity bomb and extend the life of its nuclear-capable submarines, further escalating tensions in Ukraine despite Russia’s warnings. 

A New Arms Race

The breakdown of arms control treaties has serious consequences, especially in today's heated geopolitical climate. The war in Ukraine has further strained international relations, exposing the fragility of these agreements. As global powers like the U.S., China, Russia, Iran, and the DPRK work to counter Western Imperialism amidst failed diplomacy, the danger of a new arms race looms large. 

The U.S. has warned both Russia and China that it will engage in such a race if they refuse to negotiate. Adding to the problem, the New START treaty is set to expire in 2026, with little hope for renewal given the deteriorating U.S.-Russian relations. Russia has made it clear it is ready to match U.S. missile development, with plans to expand its already substantial nuclear arsenal. Putin announced in 2021 that Russia would upgrade its Soviet-era nuclear weapons.

Ongoing conflicts in Ukraine and rising tensions in the Middle East underscore the dangers of abandoning arms control. As nations ramp up their military capabilities in response to perceived threats, the risk of miscalculation or unintended confrontations grows. The failure of arms control agreements has created a risky and unstable environment, increasing the likelihood of nuclear escalation while endangering international peace and security.

As global military dynamics shift, the return of INF weapons and the related geopolitical fallout underscores the renewed arms race. Both long-standing adversaries and emerging regional rivals, such as Yemen and the DPRK, are strengthening their arsenals with help from Iran and Russia, while China tries to mediate tensions in the Middle East.

Russia’s recent revisions to its nuclear doctrine reflect new crystal-clear warnings to the U.S. and NATO over its escalations, which complicate existing arms control agreements. These revisions expand the scenarios that would justify a nuclear response, now encompassing potential airstrikes or missile attacks on Russia, aggression against Russia by a third country supported by a nuclear power, as well as threats directed at Belarus.

Such developments indicate the delicate balance needed to restart diplomacy amid nuclear proliferation and a new arms race as the world grapples with global instability, emphasizing the need for arms control and renewed diplomacy for the sake of international security.