James F. Collins
{
"authors": [
"James F. Collins"
],
"type": "legacyinthemedia",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center"
],
"collections": [
"U.S. Nuclear Policy"
],
"englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "russia",
"programs": [
"Russia and Eurasia",
"Nuclear Policy"
],
"projects": [
"U.S.-Russia Bilateral Presidential Commission"
],
"regions": [
"North America",
"United States",
"Caucasus",
"Russia"
],
"topics": [
"Nuclear Policy",
"Nuclear Energy"
]
}Source: Getty
Will Russia Nuclear Treaty Improve U.S. Security?
The most significant aspect of the new START treaty is its preservation of a legally binding framework for the U.S.-Russian strategic relationship.
Source: PBS NewsHour

The most significant aspect of this treaty is its preservation of a legally binding framework for the U.S.-Russian strategic relationship. The treaty's reduction of deployed warhead and delivery vehicle numbers is modest compared with its START I predecessor in 1991, and it does not take the levels much below the SORT agreement signed by President Bush and President Putin in 2002.
But the new START does accomplish a reduction that will be monitored, inspected, and verified. The treaty will thus help preserve the ability of the United States and Russia to know what the other is doing with its strategic weapons, promote transparency, and build confidence that the strategic relationship will proceed in predictable and mutually understood ways. This is clearly in the interest of the United States.
On another level, this agreement will strengthen the case America and Russia can take to the nonproliferation table. Most observers agree that we are at a critical moment in the history of the nonproliferation treaty's existence and that its effectiveness can be eroded without a successful review conference in May.
The new START will strengthen the position of Washington and Moscow in the debate over the future of disarmament and nonproliferation. It demonstrates their commitment to reducing nuclear weapons and will strengthen President Obama's ability to promote his vision of a world without nuclear weapons.
The United States' knowledge of Russia's nuclear arsenal will be the best assurance Americans can have that our own defenses and nuclear posture are adequate to deter any threat. Moreover, in improving the prospects for progress at the upcoming NPT review conference, the treaty will support American efforts to enhance our own security by inhibiting the further spread of nuclear weapons. These objectives improve U.S. national security and the safety of the American people.
About the Author
Nonresident Senior Fellow, Russia and Eurasia Program; Diplomat in Residence
Ambassador Collins was the U.S. ambassador to the Russian Federation from 1997 to 2001 and is an expert on the former Soviet Union, its successor states, and the Middle East.
- Daunting Challenges and Glimmers of Hope in UkraineArticle
- The Game Changer: Cooperative Missile DefenseCommentary
Dmitri Trenin, James F. Collins
Recent Work
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- Pushing Beirut into an Armed Conflict With Hezbollah Is InsaneCommentary
The party’s domestic and regional roles have changed, so Lebanon should devise a disarmament strategy that encompasses this.
Michael Young
- Continental Asia and the Rise of Portfolio PoliticsArticle
“Central Asia” as an analytical category is itself part of the problem. The term is a Soviet administrative inheritance, drawn along lines that served the convenience of Moscow. The Central Asian states the Soviets named no longer see themselves through this category alone and are not aligning across political blocs but are instead building external partnerships sector by sector, assigning different partners to different functions.
Jennifer B. Murtazashvili
- In Russia, Private Companies Have Been Left to Pick Up the Tab for Ukrainian Drone AttacksCommentary
The cost of air defense has become an unregistered tax on revenue for businesses. While military rents are consolidated in the federal budget, the costs of defense are being spread across the balance sheets of companies and regional governments.
Alexandra Prokopenko
- California’s Global Trade Cities: Driving Local and National OutcomesPaper
Cities across the United States facilitate investment in American communities. Yet, because global attention remains focused on U.S. trade policy, their distinctive and bold local approaches to international trade and investment promotion are often underappreciated.
Wyatt Frank, Marissa Jordan
- The Unresolved Challenges in U.S.–India Semiconductor CooperationCommentary
The U.S.–India semiconductor cooperation story is well-stocked with top-level strategic intent. What remains unresolved, however, are some underlying challenges that will determine whether the cooperation actually functions. Three such friction points stand out.
Shruti Mittal