Russia has good reason to be concerned. The US has repeatedly rebuffed offers of cooperation based on shared management of the ABM bases. Why? And really, what threat are Iranian missiles to europe. ABM bases would be far more effective as part of a first strike nuclear strategy against russia. To all appearances, the cold war never ended in washington. But now they’re really playing with fire.
(Reuters) – A top Russian diplomat said on Wednesday that talks with the United States on missile defense had hit a “dead end,” and Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov responded coolly to a gesture designed to allay the Kremlin’s concerns about U.S. plans.
The below article explains how ABM bases would be an essential part of a first strike strategy. The stakes couldn’t be higher.
For almost half a century, the world’s most powerful nuclear states have been locked in a military stalemate known as mutual assured destruction (MAD). By the early 1960s, the nuclear arsenals of the United States and the Soviet Union had grown so large and sophisticated that neither country could entirely destroy the other’s retaliatory force by launching first, even with a surprise attack. Starting a nuclear war was therefore tantamount to committing suicide. … [but] the age of MAD is nearing an end. Today, for the first time in almost 50 years, the United States stands on the verge of attaining nuclear primacy. It will probably soon be possible for the United States to destroy the long-range nuclear arsenals of Russia or China with a first strike. This dramatic shift in the nuclear balance of power stems from a series of improvements in the United States’ nuclear systems, the precipitous decline of Russia’s arsenal, and the glacial pace of modernization of China’s nuclear forces. Unless Washington’s policies change or Moscow and Beijing take steps to increase the size and readiness of their forces, Russia and China — and the rest of the world — will live in the shadow of U.S. nuclear primacy for many years to come.