Chronology

France joins the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty as the fifth nuclear weapons state.
03.08.1992

International Security Index iSi

PIR PRESS LOGO

PIR PRESS NEWS

13.07.2020

“In June, the US National Security Council was due to consider a draft decision on the revision of some elements of the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR). In particular, Washington wants to remove heavy attack and reconnaissance drones from the MTCR control list, which will allow American companies to supply them to “unstable” countries as well. The military-industrial complex is lobbying removal of some restrictions from the USA the most actively, and although no final decision on this issue has been reported, the consequences of such a step can be significant: the entire regime of international export control may be jeopardized” - this is the leitmotiv of the 524th issue of Yaderny Kontrol.

10.07.2020

The article analyzes NATO nuclear sharing arrangements and examines the history of the concept of nuclear sharing, based on archival documents, and its practical implementation at the present stage. The authors pay special attention to the positions of the countries in whose territory American tactical nuclear weapons are stored, as well as to the speeches of countries against nuclear sharing at the PrepComs of the Review Conference. In conclusion, recommendations for Russia in working on this issue are voiced.

09.07.2020

“Training in the morning frees rest of the day - this is our general rule,” – Irina Mironova, senior specialist at Gazprom, senior lecturer of international programs at European University at St. Petersburg, and Dmitry Kovchegin, independent consultant.

Missile Defense Issue

It is difficult to see how Washington, Moscow or NATO would benefit from missile defense remaining a problem issue. Among other things, that could pose an obstacle to further U.S.-Russian nuclear arms reductions below New START levels. It could interfere with other types of cooperation. Agreement on a NATO-Russia cooperative missile defense arrangement, on the other hand, could remove this problem.

Real partnership on missile defense would provide a better missile defense of Europe, including European Russia. It would make NATO and Russia allies in protecting Europe, which could prove a ”gamechanger” in altering lingering Cold War attitudes in both Russia and NATO member-states.

Experts from the Pentagon and Russian Defense Ministry reportedly held productive exchanges in early 2011 regarding what a cooperative missile defense arrangement would entail. They discussed transparency, joint exercises and two jointly manned missile defense centers: a data fusion center, and a planning and operations center.

Progress slowed in spring 2011, when Russia took the position that it required a “legal guarantee” that U.S. missile defenses would not be directed against Russian strategic forces. The Russian concern has an understandable basis in principle: if U.S. missile defenses continue to grow in numbers and quality, at some future point they could undermine the balance in strategic offensive forces between Russia and the United States.

While studying the missile defense issue, PIR Center experts provide a set of recommendations which should lead to establishing the real (not declarative) partnership between Russia and its partners on the missile defense issue.

Publiscation:

1. Steven Pifer. NATO-Russia Missile Defense: Compromise Is Possible. Russia Confidential, №12, 2012

2. Evgeny Buzhinsky. The Results of NATO’s Unremarkable Summit in Chicago. Russia Confidential, №6, 2012

2. Recommendations of the Sustainable Partnership with Russia Group

loading