Author: Talitha Dowds, Center for Strategic and International Studies

The panel on New START II was moderated by Paul Hughes, United States Institute of Peace and consisted of three panelists including Leonid Ryabikhin, Committee of Scientists for Global Security and Arms Control, Elbridge Colby, Center for Naval Analyses and Feroz Khan, Naval Postgraduate School. Each panelist addressed various issues relating to the perspectives of the US, Russia and Pakistan.

Prior to the panelists’ discussions, Mr Hughes gave a brief overview of arms control in today’s world and it’s current role.

Leonid Ryabikhin highlighted that from a Russian viewpoint the New START Treaty was a great change not only in relation to arms control as a process within Russia but also in terms of the states strategic relationship with the US. He also discussed how the renewed effort in arms control by both the US and Russia posed problems for various government departments due to the lack of and lost experience of specialists who could, for example, understand the full scope of the problem and the complexities of such an agreement. Ryabikhin said that the Russian position and approach was quite soft which in his opinion greatly contributed to the agreement of New START. Going forward, he believed that it was important to take multilateral steps to include such states as France, the UK, China, Pakistan and India in future agreement processes.

Elbridge Colby focused on the US perspective and how the New START Treaty fits into the broader US picture. He gave a brief overview of US nuclear weapons policy to date and discussed that the US’s approach to such a treaty was, in his opinion, not a break in the traditional American approach as some may argue but rather a resuscitation and reinvigoration of a traditional view. He also discussed the modifications which the new treaty presented and how it helped “reset” relations between Washington and Moscow. Something, which he believes, may have been helpful in encouraging Russian assistance regarding Iran. Overall the existence of the treaty has proven consequential for US nuclear weapons policy and the states, which rely on such policy, to its commitment to the Triad of delivery systems and the long-term health of US nuclear deterrent and extended deterrence. Lastly, Colby looked at the implications such a treaty poses for the future.

The last panelist, Feroz Khan, discussed the perspective of the third world namely of India and Pakistan and the challenges they face regarding strategic stability, survivability and vulnerably. Khan highlighted concepts related to extended deterrence and the viewpoint of both India and Pakistan that every nuclear weapon is for strategic purposes. He also discussed in detail the important relationship between conventional and nuclear weapons and how the imbalances between the two pose problems for the future of arms control and the pursuit of global zero.

At the conclusion Hughes posed a follow up question as to the implications of further reductions by Russia and the US and if it would encourage a break out. All panelists acknowledged that going forward steps will need to be taken to reduce numbers multilaterally.

* The views expressed herein do not necessarily reflect the views of the Asan Institute for Policy Studies.
* The views expressed here are panel overviews of the Asan Plenum. They do not necessarily reflect the views of the author or the institutions they are affiliated with.