Ticking ‘Doomsday Clock’: How Russia's suspension of New START Treaty can be a threat to world's nuclear security

Few would have noticed a rather more than alarming event recently. The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, a body founded in 1945 by Albert Einstein, and examines global nuclear and conflict issues, announced that for the first time ever, the ‘Doomsday Clock’ stood at 90 seconds to midnight. The ‘Clock’ has been a reliable indicator for decades of the world’s vulnerability to global catastrophe due to nuclear weapons and other dangers. As President Putin announces his decision to withdraw from one of the most important arms control treaties, that clock probably moved in another second. This is not a question of theories by academics or inane and complex treaties. This is deadly serious. And it has serious implications for us and the region. Putin makes a speech  In a speech ahead of the one year ‘anniversary’ of the Ukraine war, the Russian President Vladimir Putin announced that he was submitting a bill to Parliament to ‘suspend’ – not withdraw – from an arms treaty that limits the already humongous numbers of nuclear weapons the two powers have.  That is the New START (Strategic Arms Reduction) Treaty, that ostensibly limits the two to deploying no more than 1,550 strategic nuclear warheads and a maximum of 700 long-range missiles and bombers. Notably, that’s only ‘deploy’ which is taken to mean a warhead on a missile for immediate use, rather than those in storage. Take those in storage and the total for each comes to 6,257 warheads with Russia and 5,550 warheads with the US. That’s 90 per cent of the world’s arsenal, and neither are satisfied with this yet.   Each of them are trying to sharpen their missile capabilities in a race that is as mad as it is expensive. In an attempt to reach some form of stability, the treaty also calls for  up to 18 inspections of strategic nuclear weapons sites every year to ensure the other has not breached the treaty’s limits. This, to be clear, is the last remaining important nuclear treaty that claims to hold the world back from nuclear annihilation. That it hasn’t done so, is apparent in Ukraine, where every day the danger of war gets closer. In other words, these two are holding the rest of the world hostage. Arms control going downhill  Arms control efforts had been rewarding in earlier years, with a series of treaties at least making an effort to put some controls on a reckless arms race. This included not just earlier iterations of the START but also a ban on Anti Ballistic Missile defences (ABM, 1972) and the Intermediate Range Treaty (INF). This was in fact, the only actual arms limitation treaty, since it banned an entire class of weapons, that is, all nuclear- and conventionally-armed ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles with ranges of 500-5,500 km. Three months after 9/11, President George W. Bush announced withdrawal from the ABM treaty on the grounds that it needed protection itself against “terrorists” and “rogue states”. That was the strangest of reasons, since it gave North Korea a clout that the US had never accorded to the Soviet Union itself.   Besides, the Treaty did allow deployments of about 100 interceptors, more than enough for North Korea, assuming that missile defence worked at all, which was doubtful.  What it did extremely effectively was to alarm Russia and China, and lead each to look for counters to a possible missile defence. That included a Russian intercontinental hypersonic glider, a nuclear-powered cruise missile, as well as its own ABM system. China went in for multiple warheads on its missiles and tests of an orbital weapon capable of delivering a hypersonic glide bomb. The end result. No one has a perfect ballistic missile defence and they all have more nuclear weapons programs.   President Trump went one worse. He withdrew from the INF Treaty citing Russian violations, though the US itself was in violation with Europe based missiles. Then he went on to give notice to withdraw from the Open Skies Treaty as well, which is a basic confidence building treaty to allow each the right to conduct short notice flights over the others territory. President Biden seemed inclined to let the Treaty continue, but with no US reaction, Russia has formally withdrawn from it. The covers are off – its US vs Russia In short, if START lapses, there is now not a single confidence building measure between the two for the first time in nearly half a century. And this is between powers  who are in effect and on the ground – at war with each other. That is evident not just from reports of American casualties on the ground, but also the fact that Europe and NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organisation) have been training and advising Ukraine since its independence. The New York Times    reported more than 150 military advisors from the US and others from various NATO countries, including the UK . A previous aide to the Ukrainian Parliament describes the extensive nature of this assistance, and observes that since then these numbers have   increased with even Canada sending special forces. Then there is the heavy military aid coming in from all of Europe including East Europe. In simple words, the covers are off. If war breaks out, it will be between the heavily nuclear powers of US, NATO and Russia.  This state of affairs is dangerous particularly for a world already battling climate change, severe inflation and a threatened global recession. It also means that those countries like China and India, who have stubbornly kept to a ‘minimum’ in nuclear numbers, will probably be forced to review their policies.   China seems to have done so already, with 120 new silos across Gansu province, though these could also be alternate locations for existing missiles. If China increases its arsenal, Delhi may be forced along the same path.  Neither can afford it, and neither should. It’s perhaps time for the world to take note and bring an end to a war that has brought a once prosperous Ukraine to its knees, and hit the global economy hard.   There is a view that Putin has made their threat precisely as a negotiation tactic. If it is, then that’s all to the good. But as elections loom, Biden is unlikely to agree to allowing any concessions to Russia. But he also has to acknowledge that    bipartisan support for Ukraine in the US is slowing, and surveys show increasing pessimism at home as inflation bites. More people are blaming vested interests for a war that seems to benefit only the rich. As Beijing’s top diplomat Wang Yi visits Moscow and claims a ‘rock solid’ relationship, and India chairs the G-20, all concerned need to work towards ending a dangerous slide. Europe and allies have threatened the world enough and caused untold damage for a third time. It’s time to call a halt. The author is a Distinguished Fellow at the Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies, New Delhi. She tweets @kartha_tara. The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not represent the stand of this publication. Read all the  Latest News ,  Trending News ,  Cricket News ,  Bollywood News , India News  and  Entertainment News  here. Follow us on  Facebook,  Twitter and  Instagram.