Article
If Washington cannot adapt to the ongoing transformations of a multipolar world, its superiority will become a liability.
Amr Hamzawy
{
"authors": [
"Vladimir Dvorkin"
],
"type": "commentary",
"centerAffiliationAll": "",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "",
"programs": [],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"North America",
"United States",
"Russia"
],
"topics": [
"Security",
"Military",
"Foreign Policy",
"Nuclear Policy",
"Arms Control"
]
}
Source: Getty
Commentary
About the Complaints Made Regarding Russia’s Alleged Violations of Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty
The recent reports in the U.S. media suggest that Russia has violated the INF Treaty seem to echo, at a new stage, previous claims made almost six months ago. At that time, questions arose in connection with the Rubezh missile flight tests and assumptions were made that the Rubezh missiles are actually intermediate-range missiles.
By Vladimir Dvorkin
Published on Nov 29, 2013
The recent reports in the U.S. media suggest that Russia has violated the INF Treaty seem to echo, at a new stage, previous claims made almost six months ago. At that time, questions arose in connection with the Rubezh missile flight tests and assumptions were made that the Rubezh missiles are actually intermediate-range missiles. The allegations were triggered by a multiple-warhead missile launch from the Kapustin Yar missile base to the Balkhash area at an INF-range distance.
However, a single-warhead missile of this type was launched from Plesetsk to Kura, which is a strategic distance. According to the conclusions in the U.S. Air Force Intelligence Report, as explained by Hans M. Kristensen of the Federation of American Scientists, the missile was tested at intercontinental range. This rebuts the claims that Russia is violating the INF Treaty.
In the same manner, similar allegations can be leveled against any intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) the range of which virtually completely overlaps that of the intermediate-range missiles; in fact, ICBM tests to INF range and minimal range have always been conducted.
Vladimir Dvorkin, Major General (Ret.)., is a chief researcher at the Center for International Security at the Russian Academy of Sciences' Institute of World Economy and International Relations.
About the Author
Vladimir Dvorkin
Major General Dvorkin (retired) is a chief researcher at the Center for International Security at the Institute of World Economy and International Relations.
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
- The Iran War Shows the Limits of U.S. Power
- Where is the Groundwork for Lebanon’s Negotiations With Israel?Commentary
A prerequisite of serious talks is that the country’s leadership consolidates majority national support for such a process.
Michael Young
- The EU Equivocating on Turkey Is Bad GeopoliticsCommentary
Following Ursula von der Leyen’s gaffe equating Turkey to Russia and China, relations with Ankara risk deteriorating even further. Without better, more consistent diplomatic messaging, how can the EU pretend to be a geopolitical power?
Sinan Ülgen
- Trump’s National Security Decisionmaking Is BrokenCommentary
Here’s why—and what the next president needs to do to fix the process.
Daniel C. Kurtzer, Aaron David Miller
- What Does Nuclear Proliferation in East Asia Mean for Russia?Commentary
Troubled by the growing salience of nuclear debates in East Asia, Moscow has responded in its usual way: with condemnation and threats. But by exacerbating insecurity, Russia is forcing South Korea and Japan to consider radical security options.
James D.J. Brown
