New START

File:New START.ogv

The treaty limits the number of deployed strategic nuclear warheads for each party to 1,550, which is down nearly two-thirds from the original START treaty, as well as 10% lower than the deployed strategic warhead limit of the 2002 Moscow Treaty. The total number of deployed warheads could exceed the 1,550 limit by a few hundred because only one warhead is counted per bomber regardless of how many it actually carries.O'Hanlon, Michael E. [http://www.brookings.edu/opinions/2010/1118_new_start_ohanlon.aspx "New START Shouldn't Be Stopped"] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101201050747/http://www.brookings.edu/opinions/2010/1118_new_start_ohanlon.aspx |date=1 December 2010 }}, Brookings Institution, 18 November 2010 The treaty also limits the number of deployed and non-deployed intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) launchers, submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM) launchers, and heavy bombers equipped for nuclear armaments to 800. The number of deployed ICBMs, SLBMs, and heavy bombers equipped for nuclear armaments is limited to 700.Department of State – New START Treaty, [https://2009-2017.state.gov/documents/organization/140035.pdf TREATY BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION ON MEASURES FOR THE FURTHER REDUCTION AND LIMITATION OF STRATEGIC OFFENSIVE ARMS], Thur 8 April 2010 The treaty allows for satellite and remote monitoring, as well as 18 on-site inspections per year to verify limits.

The obligations must be met within seven years from the date the treaty enters into force. The treaty will last ten years, with an option to renew it for up to five years upon the agreement of both parties.White House, [https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/key-facts-about-new-start-treaty Key Facts about the New START Treaty] The treaty entered into force on 5 February 2011, when the United States and Russia exchanged instruments of ratification, following approval by the U.S. Senate and the Federal Assembly of Russia.Treaty text, Article XVI, section 1. The United States began implementing the reductions before the treaty was ratified.{{Cite web|url=https://fas.org/blog/ssp/2010/05/downloading.php|title=United States Moves Rapidly Toward New START Warhead Limit}}

Documents made available to the U.S. Senate described{{clarify|date=February 2011}} removal from service of at least 30 missile silos, 34 bombers, and 56 submarine launch tubes. Missiles which are removed would stay intact, and bombers could be converted to conventional use. Four of the twenty-four launchers on each of the fourteen ballistic missile nuclear submarines would be removed, and none retired.Peter Baker, [https://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/14/us/politics/14treaty.html "Obama Expands Modernization of Nuclear Arsenal"], The New York Times, 13 May 2010

The treaty places no limits on tactical systems,{{cite journal |last1=Rudesill |first1=Dakota S. |title=Regulating Tactical Nuclear Weapons |journal=Georgetown Law Journal |date=2013 |volume=102 |ssrn=2166184 }} such as the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II, which will most likely be replacing the F-15E and F-16 in the tactical nuclear delivery role.Grant, Rebecca. {{usurped|1=[https://web.archive.org/web/20100723175607/http://www.airforce-magazine.com/MagazineArchive/Pages/2010/July%202010/0710nato.aspx "Nukes for NATO"]}}. Air Force Magazine, July 2010

The treaty does not cover rail-mobile ICBM launchers because neither party possesses such systems. ICBMs on such launchers would be covered under the generic launcher limits, but the inspection details for such systems would have to be worked out between the parties if such systems were reintroduced in the future.[https://2009-2017.state.gov/t/avc/rls/145557.htm "Rail-Mobile Launchers of ICBMs and their Missiles"]. United States Department of State, 2 August 2010.

The New START treaty is the successor to the START I. The START II was signed but not ratified and the START III negotiating process was not successful.

The drafting of the treaty commenced in April 2009 immediately after the meeting between the presidents of the two countries involved, Barack Obama and Dmitry Medvedev, in London.{{cite web | date = 1 April 2009 | url = http://lenta.ru/news/2009/04/01/reset/ | title = Медведев и Обама решили продолжить сокращение вооружений | access-date =1 September 2009 | language = ru}} Preliminary talks had already been held in Rome on 27 April,{{cite web | date = 27 April 2009 | url = http://lenta.ru/news/2009/04/01/reset/ | title = Начались переговоры между США и Россией о сокращении ядерных вооружений | access-date =1 September 2009 | language = ru}} although it was initially planned to have them scheduled in the middle of May.{{cite web | date = 24 April 2009 | url = http://lenta.ru/news/2009/04/01/reset/ | title = Россия и США определили дату начала переговоров по СНВ | access-date =1 September 2009 | language = ru}}

Prolonged talks were conducted by U.S. and Russian delegations, led on the American side by U.S. State Department Assistant Secretary Rose Gottemoeller. The Russian delegation was headed by Anatoly Antonov, director of security and disarmament at the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs.[https://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/27/world/europe/27start.html?pagewanted=all "Twists and Turns on Way to Arms Pact With Russia"], Peter Baker, New York Times, 26 March 2010.

Talks were held on:

• First round: 19–20 May 2009, Moscow{{cite web | date = 19 May 2009 | url = http://evrazia.org/news/7106 | title = В Москве начались переговоры по СНВ | access-date =1 September 2009 | language = ru}}
• Second round: 1–3 June 2009, Geneva, Switzerland{{cite web | date = 24 July 2009 | url = http://www.rian.ru/defense_safety/20090724/178534144.html | title = США и РФ достигли прогресса в ходе переговоров по СНВ в Женеве | access-date =3 September 2009 | language = ru}}
• Third round: 22–24 June 2009, Geneva
• Fourth round: 22–24 July 2009, Geneva
• Fifth round: 31 August – 2 September 2009, Geneva{{cite web | date = 5 September 2009 | url = http://rian.ru/politics/20090905/183779271.html | title = РФ и США приступили к отработке конкретных статей договора по СНВ | access-date =19 September 2009 | language = ru}}
• Sixth round: 21–28 September 2009, Geneva{{cite web | date = 24 March 2009 | url = http://rian.ru/announce/20090917/185424192.html | title = Календарь событий 19 сентября – 20 октября | access-date =21 September 2009 | language = ru}}{{cite web | date = 21 September 2009 | url = http://rian.ru/defense_safety/20090921/185791054.html | title = Очередной раунд переговоров России и США по СНВ пройдет в Женеве | access-date =1 September 2009 | language = ru}}
• Seventh round: 19–30 October 2009, Geneva{{cite web|date=8 November 2009 |url=http://k2kapital.com/news/fin/753392.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170829184249/http://k2kapital.com/news/fin/753392.html |archive-date=29 August 2017 |title=На выработку нового договора по СНВ у США и России остался месяц |access-date=8 November 2009 |language=ru}}
• Eighth round: 9 November 2009, Geneva{{cite web | date = 8 November 2009 | url = http://russian.people.com.cn/31519/6806688.html | title = МИД РФ о новом раунде российско-американских переговоров по СНВ | access-date = 8 November 2009 | language = ru | archive-date = 27 September 2011 | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20110927225024/http://russian.people.com.cn/31519/6806688.html | url-status = dead }}

On the morning of 6 July 2009, the agreement on the text of the "Joint Understanding on Further Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms" was announced,{{cite web | date = 6 July 2009 | url = http://lenta.ru/news/2009/07/06/snv/ | title = Россия и США согласовали текст договора по СНВ | access-date =1 September 2009 | language = ru}}{{cite web | date = 6 July 2009 | url = http://www.rian.ru/politics/20090706/176476664.html | title = Медведев и Обама подписали рамочный документ по СНВ | access-date =1 September 2009 | language = ru}} which Medvedev and Obama signed during the US presidential visit to Moscow which began on the same day. The document listed the intention of both parties to reduce the number of nuclear warheads to 1,500–1,675 units, as well as their delivery weapons to 500–1,100 units.{{cite web | date = 6 July 2009 | url = http://lenta.ru/news/2009/07/06/agree/ | title = Медведев и Обама договорились сократить стратегическое вооружение | access-date =1 September 2009 | language = ru}}

Presidents Obama and Medvedev announced on 26 March 2010 that they had reached an agreement, and they signed the treaty on 8 April 2010 in Prague.

On 13 May, the agreement was submitted by Obama for ratification in the U.S. Senate. Ratification required 67 votes in favor (out of 100 Senators). On Tuesday, 16 September 2010, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee voted 14–4 in favor of ratifying New START. The measure had support from three Senate Republicans: Richard Lugar of Indiana, Bob Corker of Tennessee, and Johnny Isakson of Georgia.[http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/09/16/senate.start.treaty/ "Key Senate committee passes nuclear arms treaty"], CNN, 16 September 2010. Senator John Kerry[http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1210/45870.html John Kerry more optimistic now about START], by Scott Wong & Shira Toeplitz, Politico, 2 December 2010. and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton expressed optimism that a deal on ratification was near.[http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/254471/clinton-deal-new-start-imminent-daniel-foster Clinton: Deal on New START Imminent], by Daniel Foster, National Review Online, 3 December 2010.

Republicans in the Senate generally deferred to Jon Kyl (R-AZ), a leading conservative on defense issues, who sought a strong commitment to modernize U.S. nuclear forces and questioned whether there was time for ratification during the lame-duck session, calling for an opening of the negotiation record before a vote was held.{{cite news|title=The New Start Treaty: Time for a Careful Look|author=Jon Kyl|newspaper=The Wall Street Journal|date=8 July 2010|url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748704293604575343360850107760}} Senator Ben Nelson (D-NE) joined Kyl in expressing skepticism over the timing of ratification;{{cite news |title=Nelson: 'I Think We Can Hold Off on START'|author=Robert Costa|newspaper=National Review|url=http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/254280/nelson-i-think-we-can-hold-start-robert-costa}} Senator Kit Bond (R-MO) expressed opposition.{{cite news|title=GOP senator cites new intel, won't back New START|author=Eli Lake|url=http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/nov/22/gop-senator-cites-new-intel-wont-back-new-start/|newspaper=The Washington Times}}

Obama made New START ratification a priority during the 2010 post-election lame duck session of Congress, and Senators John Kerry (D-MA) and Richard Lugar (R-IN), the Democratic Chairman and senior Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, were leading supporters of the treaty.{{cite news|title=How New-START will improve our nation's security|author=John Kerry|newspaper=The Washington Post|date=7 July 2010|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/06/AR2010070603942.html}}{{Citation|last=Zimmerman|first=Eric|title=Lugar takes shot at Romney over START|newspaper=The Hill|date=8 July 2010| url =https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/165766-lugar-takes-shot-at-romney-over-start/ |access-date=10 July 2010}}[http://www.armscontrolwonk.com/2791/lugar-on-new-start-and-tacnukes Lugar on New START and TacNukes], Arms Control Wonk, 8 July 2010.

On 22 December 2010, the U.S. Senate gave its advice and consent to ratification of the treaty by a vote of 71 to 26 on the resolution of ratification.{{cite web|author=Mark Memmott|url=https://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2010/12/22/132262684/senate-ratifies-start|title=Senate Ratifies START|publisher=npr.org|date=22 December 2010|access-date=22 December 2010}} Thirteen Republican senators, all 56 Democratic senators, and both Independent senators voted for the treaty.[https://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/23/world/europe/23treaty.html?_r=1&hp Senate Passes Arms Control Treaty With Russia, 71-26] New York Times Obama signed documents completing the U.S. ratification process on 2 February 2011.{{cite news|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-russia-start-idUSTRE71177U20110202|work=Reuters|first=Patricia|last=Zengerle|title=Obama signs New START treaty documents|date=2 February 2011}}

On 28 May 2010, the document was introduced by Medvedev for consideration in the State Duma. On 6 July, the State Duma held parliamentary hearings on the treaty, which representatives from the Foreign Ministry and General Staff attended. On 8 July, the Duma Defense Committee and the International Affairs Committee recommended that the State Duma ratify the treaty.{{citation needed|date=October 2021}}

On 29 October, the chairman of the Duma International Affairs Committee, Konstantin Kosachev, called for the return of the document to committee hearings, noting that the agreement does not restrict the activities of the United States on missile defense, as well as the fact that ballistic missiles with non-nuclear warheads are not covered under the agreement. At the same time, Federation Council Chairman Sergei Mironov proposed to not rush to amend or vote on the treaty and to monitor the discussions in the U.S. Senate.{{citation needed|date=October 2021}}

Following ratification by the U.S. Senate, the formal first reading of the treaty was held on 24 December, and the State Duma voted its approval. The State Duma approved a second reading of the treaty on 14 January 2011.{{cite web|url=http://www.rferl.org/content/duma_new_start_sent_to_third_reading/2276545.html |title=Duma Sends 'New Start' To Third Reading |publisher=Rferl.org |date=2011-01-14 |access-date=2011-09-11}} 349 deputies out of 450 voted in favor of ratification.{{citation needed|date=October 2021}}

The third and final reading by the State Duma took place on 25 January 2011; the ratification resolution was approved by a vote of 350 deputies in favor, 96 against, and one abstention.{{Citation needed|date=December 2020}} It was then approved unanimously by the Federation Council on the next day.{{cite web|title=Russian Ratification of Start Follow-on Treaty |publisher=Nukes of Hazzard |url=http://nukesofhazardblog.com/story/2010/5/28/133330/351 |access-date=22 December 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110106225949/http://nukesofhazardblog.com/story/2010/5/28/133330/351 |archive-date=6 January 2011 }}

On 28 January 2011, Medvedev signed the ratification resolution passed by the Federal Assembly, completing the Russian ratification process. The treaty went into force when Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton exchanged the instruments of ratification at the Security Conference in Munich, Germany, on 5 February 2011.

The New START Treaty requires several specific actions within periods after entry into force (EIF) (5 February 2011){{Cite web|url=https://2009-2017.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2011/02/156037.htm|title=Technical Difficulties|website=2009-2017.state.gov}}

• No later than (NLT) 5 days after EIF

:Exchange Inspection Airplane Information:

:Lists of the types of airplanes intended to transport inspectors to points of entry will be exchanged.

• NLT 25 days after EIF

:Exchange Lists of Inspectors and Aircrew Members:

:Lists of initial inspectors and aircrew will be exchanged.

• NLT 45 days after EIF

:Exchange databases:

:Databases will provide information on the numbers, locations, and technical characteristics of weapon systems and facilities that are covered under the Treaty.

• NLT 60 days after EIF

:Exhibition: Strategic Offensive Arms:

:If a type, variant, or version of a strategic offensive arm (SOA) that was not exhibited in connection with the START Treaty is declared, then the SOA's features and technical characteristics must be demonstrated and confirmed.

• 60 days after EIF

:Right to Conduct Inspections Begins:

:Parties may begin inspections, 18 on-site inspections per year are provided in the Treaty. Each Party is allowed ten Type One Inspections and eight Type Two Inspections.

::#Type One Inspections focus on deployed and non-deployed SOAs sites. Activities include confirming accuracy of data on SOAs, the number of warheads located on designated deployed ICBMs and SLBMs, and the number of nuclear armaments to be on designated deployed heavy bombers.

::#Type Two Inspections focus on sites with non-deployed SOAs. They can involve confirmation of the conversion/elimination of SOAs, and confirming the elimination of facilities.

• NLT 120 days after EIF

:Exhibition: Heavy Bombers at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base:

:The United States will conduct a one-time exhibition of each type of environmentally-sealed deployed heavy bombers which are located at the storage facility at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base in Arizona.

• NLT 180 days after EIF

:Initial Demonstration of Telemetry Playback Equipment:

:Parties will conduct an initial demonstration of recording media and playback equipment for telemetric information, information that originates on a missile during its initial motion and flight.

• NLT 225 days after EIF

:Exchange Updated Databases:

:Parties will exchange updated databases and every six months thereafter for the duration of the Treaty.

• NLT 1 year after EIF

:Exhibition: B-1B Heavy Bomber:

:The United States will conduct a one-time exhibition of a B-1B heavy bomber equipped with non-nuclear armaments to demonstrate it no longer can employ nuclear armaments.

• NLT 3 years after EIF

:Exhibition: Previously Converted Missile Launchers:

:The United States will conduct a one-time exhibition of its four SSGNs, which are equipped with cruise missile launchers and were converted from nuclear ballistic submarines, to confirm that SSGNs cannot launch SLBMs. The United States will also hold an exhibition of the five converted ICBM launcher silos at Vandenberg Air Force Base in California, now used as missile defense interceptor launchers. This will confirm that the converted launchers are no longer able to launch ICBMs and determine the features to distinguish converted silo launchers from unconverted ones.

• NLT 7 years after EIF

:Meet Central Treaty Limits:

:Parties are required to meet the limits laid out in the Treaty for deployed strategic warheads, and deployed and non-deployed strategic delivery vehicles and launchers.

• 10 years after EIF

:Treaty Expires:

:Unless Parties agree with an extension for up to five years.

File:White House meeting about New START Treaty.jpgA debate about whether to ratify the treaty took place in the United States during the run-up to the 2010 midterm elections and in the lame-duck congressional session afterward. While a public opinion poll showed broad support for ratification,[https://web.archive.org/web/20101119051202/http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/11/16/cnn-poll-three-quarters-say-ratify-start-treaty/ CNN Poll: Three-quarters say ratify START treaty], by CNN Political Unit, 16 November 2010. another showed general skepticism over nuclear arms reductions.[http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/august_2010/77_think_u_s_nuclear_weapons_arsenal_is_important_to_national_security 77% Think U.S. Nuclear Weapons Arsenal is Important to National Security], Rasmussen Reports, 12 August 2010{{unfit|1=[https://web.archive.org/web/20100820071133/http://blog.heritage.org/?p=41372 "New Poll Shows More Trouble for New START"]}}, by Conn Carroll, The Foundry, The Heritage Foundation, 18 August 2010{{Unreliable source?|date=March 2011}}

The Arms Control Association led efforts to rally political support, arguing that the treaty is needed to restore on-site verification and lend predictability to the U.S.–Russian strategic relationship.[http://www.armscontrol.org/subject/125/date New START], Arms Control Association. Other organizations supporting the treaty included the Federation of American Scientists,[https://fas.org/blog/ssp/2010/11/responding-to-senator-bond-on-new-start.php "Responding to Senator Bond on New START."] Federation of American Scientists, 23 November 2010 and disarmament expert Peter Wilk of Physicians for Social Responsibility called the New START treaty "essential" to ensuring a safer world and stronger diplomatic ties with Russia.{{cite news |title=Don't play politics with new START treaty |first=Peter |last=Wilk |date=19 November 2010 |work=CNN |url=https://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/11/19/wilk.new.start.treaty/ |department=Opinion |access-date=22 February 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160913135008/http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/11/19/wilk.new.start.treaty/ |archive-date=13 September 2016 |url-status=live}}

Republican supporters included former President George H. W. Bush[https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/08/AR2010120807094.html], by Mary Beth Sheridan, The Washington Post, 9 December 2010. and all six former Republican Secretaries of State, who wrote supportive op-eds in The Washington Post[https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/01/AR2010120104598.html The Republican case for ratifying New START], by Henry A. Kissinger, George P. Shultz, James A. Baker III, Lawrence S. Eagleburger and Colin L. Powell, The Washington Post, 2 December 2010. and The Wall Street Journal.[https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748703814404576002094121743636 New Start: Ratify, With Caveats], by Condoleezza Rice, The Wall Street Journal, 7 December 2010. Conservative columnist Robert Kagan who supported the treaty, says its goals are modest compared to previous START treaties and that the treaty should not fail because of partisan disagreements. Kagan said the Republican insistence on upgrading the U.S. nuclear arsenal was reasonable but would not be affected by the current language of the treaty.{{cite news|title=New START: Too modest to merit partisan bickering|author=Robert Kagan|date=30 July 2010|newspaper=The Washington Post|url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/29/AR2010072904902.html|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101113225032/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/29/AR2010072904902.html|url-status=live|archive-date=13 November 2010}}

Heritage Action, an advocacy group affiliated with The Heritage Foundation, took the lead in opposing New START, lobbying the Senate along with running a petition drive and airing political advertisements before November's midterm elections. The effort drew the support of likely presidential candidate Mitt Romney and has been credited by former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle as changing some Republican votes.{{cite web |title=US-Russia nuke treaty facing hurdles in US Senate| author=Desmond Butler |date=23 July 2010 |work=The New York Times |url=http://politics.usnews.com/news/articles/2010/07/23/us-russia-nuke-treaty-facing-hurdles-in-us-senate.html}} According to Edwin Feulner, then president of The Heritage Foundation, the language of the New START treaty would "definitely" reduce America's nuclear weapon capacity but "wouldn't necessarily" reduce Russia's, and Russia would maintain a 10–1 advantage in tactical nuclear weapons, which are not counted in the treaty.{{cite web |title=Stop the New START |author=Ed Feulner |work=The Washington Times |date=9 June 2010 |url=http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/jun/9/stop-the-new-start/ }}

Arms control experts critical of the treaty included Robert Joseph, former undersecretary of state for arms control and international security, and Eric Edelman, undersecretary of defense for policy, who have written that the treaty weakens U.S. defenses.{{cite news |title=New START: Weakening Our Security |author=Robert Joseph and Eric Edelman |newspaper=National Review |date=10 May 2010 |url=http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/print/229704 }} Former CIA Director James Woolsey also said that "concessions to Russian demands make it difficult to support Senate approval of the new treaty".{{cite news |title=Old Problems with New START |author=R. James Woolsey |newspaper=The Wall Street Journal |date=15 November 2010 |url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748703514904575602992172574172}}

Senators Jon Kyl and Mitch McConnell complained about a lack of funding for the Next-Generation Bomber during the treaty debate, even though this treaty would not constrain this platform.Kyl, Jon. [https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748704293604575343360850107760 "The New Start Treaty: Time for a Careful Look."] Wall Street Journal, 8 July 2010.Trinko, Katrina. [http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/255680/mcconnell-new-start-flawed-mishandled-treaty-katrina-trinko "McConnell on new START: 'A Flawed, Mishandled Treaty'."] National Review, 20 December 2010.

During the Senatorial debate over the US ratification of the New START Treaty with Russia, Senator James Inhofe (R-OK) stated, "Russia cheats in every arms control treaty we have with them", which caused an uproar in Russian media.{{cite web|url=http://republican.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=FloorUpdates.Browse&Date=20-Dec-10 |title=Republican.Senate.Gov |publisher=Republican.Senate.Gov |date=2011-07-17 |access-date=2011-09-11}} Additionally, there were concerns about the possibility of restrictions being imposed on the deployment of missile defense systems by the U.S.{{Cite web|url=https://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101222/ap_on_go_co/us_us_russia_nuclear_117/|title=US poised to approve nuclear arms pact with Russia}}{{Cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/22/world/europe/22start.html|title=Arms Treaty With Russia Headed for Ratification|first=Peter|last=Baker|work=The New York Times |date=21 December 2010|via=NYTimes.com}}

The Pentagon's "Report on the Strategic Nuclear Forces of the Russian Federation Pursuant to Section 1240 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012" found that even if Russia did cheat and achieved a total surprise attack with a breakout force, it would have "little to no effect" on U.S. nuclear retaliatory capabilities.{{cite web|last=Kristensen|first=Hans|title=DOD: Strategic Stability Not Threatened Even by Greater Russian Nuclear Forces|url=https://fas.org/blog/ssp/2012/10/strategicstability.php|publisher=Federation of American Scientists|access-date=12 October 2012}}

During the negotiations for New START, verification was one of the core tenets deliberated between the United States and the Russian Federation. When New START entered into force, both participating states could begin performing inspections on each other.{{Cite web|url=https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/NewSTART|title=New START at a Glance {{!}} Arms Control Association|last=Rief|first=Kingston|website=www.armscontrol.org|access-date=2020-04-01}} Each state is granted 18 on-site inspections per year, which fall into two categories: Type 1 and Type 2 inspections.{{Cite web|url=https://www.state.gov/new-start/|title=New START Treaty|website=United States Department of State|language=en-US|access-date=2020-04-01}} Type 1 inspections are specific to military bases that house only deployed ICBMs, SLBMs, and bombers. Type 2 inspections include facilities that have non-deployed systems as well. The treaty allows only ten Type 1 and eight Type 2 inspections annually. States can also announce the arrival of an inspection team with as little notice as 32 hours.{{Cite journal|last=Woolf|first=Amy|title=The New START Treaty: Central Limits and Key Provisions|url=https://fas.org/sgp/crs/nuke/R41219.pdf|journal=Congressional Research Service|publication-date=2 April 2020}} Since 2011, both states have made gradual progress in their reductions. By February 2018, both parties had reached their reduction goals well within the treaty limits.{{Cite web|url=https://fas.org/blogs/security/2018/02/newstart-ineffect/|title=After Seven Years of Implementation, New START Treaty Enters into Effect|last=Kristensen|first=Hans M.|year=2018|website=Federation of American Scientists|language=en-US|access-date=2020-04-01}}

Current information on the aggregate numbers and the locations of nuclear weapons has been made public under the treaty, and on 13 May 2011, three former U.S. officials and two non-proliferation experts signed an open letter to both sides asking that the information be released to promote transparency, reduce mistrust, and support the nuclear arms control process in other states.{{Cite web|url=https://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2011/05/startetter.php|title=Letter Urges Release of New START Data}} These are the most recent values reported from inspection activities.

The data that follows was made public under the prior START treaty.

On 9 February 2017, in US President Donald Trump's first telephone call to him, Russian president Vladimir Putin inquired about extending New START, which Trump dismissed as too favorable for Russia and "one of several bad deals negotiated by the Obama administration".{{citation|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-putin-idUSKBN15O2A5|title=Exclusive: In call with Putin, Trump denounced Obama-era nuclear arms treaty|publisher=Reuters|author1=Jonathan Landay |author2=David Rohde |location=Washington|date=9 February 2017|access-date=9 February 2017}}

The announcement of the US departure from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty raised concerns about whether a New START extension was possible.{{Cite web|last1=Gramer|first1=Robbie|last2=Seligman|first2=Lara|title=The INF Treaty Is Dead. Is New START Next?|url=https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/02/01/the-inf-treaty-is-dead-is-new-start-next-russia-arms/|access-date=2020-10-17|website=Foreign Policy|date=February 2019 |language=en-US}} On 12 June, Andrea Thompson, U.S. undersecretary of state for arms control and international security, and Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov met for the first time since 2017.{{Cite web|last1=Kimball|first1=Daryl|last2=Taheran|first2=Shervin|title=Bolton Declares New START Extension 'Unlikely' {{!}} Arms Control Association|url=https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2019-07/news/bolton-declares-new-start-extension-unlikely|access-date=2020-10-17|website=www.armscontrol.org}} These discussions included the importance of negotiating a multilateral treaty, which would include China, France, and the United Kingdom. Many members of Congress wrote a letter urging the Trump administration to extend New START, citing its importance to nuclear security and its robust verification regime.{{Cite web|last1=Kimball|first1=Daryl|last2=Reif|first2=Kingston|last3=Taheran|first3=Taheran|date=2019-06-19|title=U.S.-Russian Nuclear Arms Control Watch, June 20, 2019 {{!}} Arms Control Association|url=https://www.armscontrol.org/blog/2019-06-20/us-russian-nuclear-arms-control-watch|access-date=2020-10-17|website=www.armscontrol.org}} Delegations from both the US and Russia met in Geneva in July 2019 to begin discussions on arms control, including how to include China in a future three-way nuclear arms control treaty.{{Cite web|last=Abbasova|first=Vusala|date=2019-07-20|title=Russian & American Officials Meet To Avoid New Nuclear Arms Race|url=https://caspiannews.com/news-detail/russian-american-officials-meet-to-avoid-new-nuclear-arms-race-2019-7-19-22/|access-date=2020-10-17|website=caspiannews.com|language=en}} On 1 November 2019, Vladimir Leontyev, a Russian foreign ministry official, was quoted as saying he did not believe there was enough time left for Moscow and Washington to draft a replacement to the New START treaty before it expired in 2021.{{citation |url=https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-russia-usa-missiles/russia-says-not-enough-time-left-to-draft-new-start-arms-control-treaty-ifax-idUKKBN1XB3NQ?il=0 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200423180137/https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-russia-usa-missiles/russia-says-not-enough-time-left-to-draft-new-start-arms-control-treaty-ifax-idUKKBN1XB3NQ?il=0 |url-status=dead |archive-date=23 April 2020 |title=Russia says not enough time left to draft new START arms control treaty - Ifax |publisher=Reuters |author=Tom Balmforth |location=Moscow |date=1 November 2019 |access-date=1 November 2019}} In December 2019, Putin publicly offered the US an immediate extension to the treaty without any modifications and gave US inspectors a chance to inspect a new hypersonic glide vehicle, Avangard, which would fall under the New START limits.{{Cite web|last=Isachenkov|first=Vladimir|date=2019-12-05|title=Putin offers US an immediate extension to key nuclear pact|url=https://apnews.com/article/7b031de50f534ba181446080117f728f|access-date=2020-10-17|website=AP NEWS}}

In February 2020, the Trump administration announced plans to pursue nuclear arms control negotiations with Russia, which had not occurred since Secretary of State Pompeo's testimony that conversations on renewing New START were beginning.{{Cite web|last=Gaouette|first=Nicole|date=2020-02-05|title=US to start negotiating with Russia on nuclear arms control soon|url=https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/05/politics/us-russia-nuclear-arms-control/index.html|access-date=2020-10-17|website=CNN}}

In light of the COVID-19 pandemic, inspections of missile sites of both the US and Russia, typically conducted to ensure compliance with the treaty, were suspended.{{Cite web |last=Hansler |first=Kylie Atwood,Jennifer |date=2022-11-28 |title=Russia postpones nuclear arms control talks with US, State Department says {{!}} CNN Politics |url=https://www.cnn.com/2022/11/28/politics/us-russia-arms-control-talks/index.html |access-date=2023-03-01 |website=CNN |language=en}}

In July 2020, US and Russian officials met in Vienna for arms control talks. The US invited China to join, but the latter country made it clear that it would not participate.{{Cite web|last=Ward|first=Alex|date=2020-08-03|title="The end of arms control as we know it"|url=https://www.vox.com/world/21131449/trump-putin-nuclear-usa-russia-arms-control-new-start|access-date=2020-10-17|website=Vox|language=en}} Discussions continued between the US and Russia, with the US proposing a binding statement for Russia to sign. This would include an outline for a new treaty, which would cover all Russian nuclear weapons and expand the current monitoring and verification regime implemented by New START, with the goal of bringing China into a future treaty.{{Cite web|last=Kimball|first=Daryl|date=October 2020|title=Trump's Disingenuous Disarmament Diplomacy {{!}} Arms Control Association|url=https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2020-10/focus/trumps-disingenuous-disarmament-diplomacy|access-date=2020-10-19|website=Arms Control Association}}

In mid-October, Putin proposed to "extend the current agreement without any pre-conditions at least for one year",{{Cite web|last=AFP|date=2020-10-16|title=Putin Proposes One-Year Extension of New START Treaty|url=https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2020/10/16/putin-proposes-one-year-extension-of-new-start-treaty-a71780|access-date=2020-11-16|website=The Moscow Times|language=en}} but Trump rejected this. Subsequently, Russian officials agreed to a US proposal to freeze nuclear warhead production for a year and to extend the treaty by a year. US Department of State spokesperson Morgan Ortagus stated that "We appreciate the Russian Federation's willingness to make progress on the issue of nuclear arms control" and that the US was "prepared to meet immediately to finalize a verifiable agreement".{{Cite web|last1=Lee|first1=Matthew|last2=Isachenkov|first2=Vladimir|date=2020-10-20|title=US, Russia appear set to extend last remaining nuclear pact|url=https://apnews.com/article/moscow-dmitry-medvedev-russia-barack-obama-1bf8b86b8b5838de0a21f2e2d404c73e|access-date=2020-11-16|website=AP News}}

On the day of Joe Biden's inauguration, Russia urged the new U.S. administration to take a "more constructive" approach in talks over the extension of the New START, with the Russian foreign ministry accusing the Trump administration of "deliberately and intentionally" dismantling international arms control agreements and referring to its "counterproductive and openly aggressive" approach in talks.{{Cite web|date=2021-01-20|title=Russia Urges Biden to Be 'More Constructive' Over Arms Treaty |url=https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2021/01/20/russia-urges-biden-to-be-more-constructive-over-arms-treaty-a72675 |access-date=2021-01-31|website=The Moscow Times|language=en}} The Biden administration said that it would seek a five-year extension of the treaty, which was then set to expire in February 2021.{{Cite news|last=Hudson|first=John|date=2021-01-21|title=Biden administration to seek five-year extension on key nuclear arms treaty in first foray with Russia|language=en-US|newspaper=The Washington Post|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/biden-russia-nuclear-treaty-extension/2021/01/21/4667a11e-5b40-11eb-aaad-93988621dd28_story.html|access-date=2021-01-21|issn=0190-8286}} On 26 January, Biden and Putin agreed in a phone call that they would extend the treaty by five years.{{Cite web|date=2021-01-27|title=Renewed US-Russia nuke pact won't fix emerging arms threats|url=https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-politics-nuclear-weapons-north-korea-vladimir-putin-41891565c23d7ff99f5c575080c7ed6a|access-date=2021-01-31|website=Associated Press|language=en}}

Russian spokesman Dmitry Peskov replied that his country "stands for extending the treaty" and is waiting to see the details of the US proposal.{{cite news |title=Russia welcomes US proposal to extend nuclear treaty|url=https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-international-news-vladimir-putin-dmitry-medvedev-russia-6730cb38e8253a02d83c562841e7ed00|access-date=23 January 2021|work=AP NEWS|date=22 January 2021}} On 27 January, the Russian State Duma voted to ratify the extension.{{cite news|title=Russia ratify extension of the New START nuclear arms control treaty|url=https://news.trust.org/item/20210127091821-25q4z|access-date=27 January 2021|agency=Reuters|date=27 January 2021}} On 3 February, five days after Putin signed this legislation, Secretary of State Antony Blinken announced that the U.S. had formally agreed to extend the treaty for five years, until 2026.[https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/us-russia-new-start-nuclear-treaty/2021/02/03/4293d0fa-6638-11eb-bf81-c618c88ed605_story.html United States extends nuclear treaty with Russia for five years], Washington Post, 3 February 2021.

In November 2022, The Russian Foreign Ministry postponed a meeting with the U.S. meant to discuss resuming New START inspections.{{Cite news |date=2022-11-28 |title=Russia postpones Cairo talks with U.S. under New START nuclear treaty |language=en |work=Reuters |url=https://www.reuters.com/world/russia-unilaterally-postpones-nuclear-arms-meeting-with-us-kommersant-2022-11-28/ |access-date=2023-03-01}}{{Cite news |date=November 30, 2022 |title=RUSSIA POSTPONES TALKS ON NEW START PACT, IMPERILING MAJOR NUCLEAR ACCORD |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/11/30/russia-us-start-nuclear-treaty/ |newspaper=Washington Post}} The US State Department responded that they were "ready to reschedule at the earliest possible date as resuming inspections is a priority for sustaining the treaty as an instrument of stability." The Russian Foreign Ministry did not give a reason for the delay, although the relations between the United States and Russia became critically strained after Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.

File:Putin 21 Feb 2023 Speech.png announcing the plans to suspend Russia's participation in the New START treaty during his February 2023 speech]]

On 21 February 2023, during the Presidential Address to the Federal Assembly, Vladimir Putin announced the suspension of Russia's participation in the New START treaty, saying that Russia would not allow the US and NATO to inspect its nuclear facilities. He claimed the United States was continuing to develop new nuclear weapons, and warned that any nuclear weapons tests conducted by the Americans would be countered by Russia developing and testing its own.{{Cite news |date=2023-02-21 |title=Putin Says Russia to Suspend New START Nuke Pact Participation |language=en |work=Bloomberg.com |url=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-02-21/putin-says-russia-to-suspend-new-start-nuke-pact-participation |access-date=2023-02-21}} Putin also complained that French and British nuclear weapons are not covered by the treaty. Sergei Markov, director of the Russian Institute for Political Studies, said, "If Washington does not listen to Moscow now, this is Putin's warning that he may withdraw [altogether] from the treaty. In a few years, there could be a colossal change that would catastrophically reduce U.S. nuclear security."

On 21 February, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken said that the Russian president's decision "is both really unfortunate and very irresponsible," while Jens Stoltenberg, the Secretary General of NATO said, "I strongly encourage Russia to reconsider its decision and to respect existing agreements."{{cite news |first1=Ann M. |last1=Simmons

|first2=Sabrina |last2=Siddiqui |first3=Austin |last3=Ramzy |url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/putin-suspends-new-start-nuclear-arms-treaty-with-u-s-6498b44?mod=mhp |title=Putin Suspends Nuclear-Arms Treaty Between Russia, U.S. |publisher=The Wall Street Journal |date=21 February 2023}}

On 22 February, a senior defence official from Russia announced that Russia would stick to agreed limits on nuclear missiles and keep informing the United States about changes in its deployments.{{cite news |first1=Mark |last1=Trevelyan |first2=Jake |last2=Cordell |title=Russia says it will play by nuclear treaty rules despite suspending deal with U.S. |url=https://www.reuters.com/world/russia-dumas-speaker-says-us-destroyed-international-stability-2023-02-22/ |work=Reuters |publisher=Thomson Reuters Corporation |date=23 February 2023}}

On 29 March, Sergey Ryabkov announced the discontinuation of the notification process: "There will be no notifications at all... All notifications, all kinds of notifications, all activities under the treaty will be suspended and will not be conducted regardless of what position the U.S. may take."{{cite news |last1=Isachenkov |first1=Vladimir |title=Russia stops giving advance notice about missile tests info to U.S. |url=https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/russia-stops-giving-advance-notice-about-missile-tests-info-to-u-s |agency=Associated Press |publisher=NewsHour Productions LLC |date=29 March 2023}} The same day the Russian Ministry of Defence reported that it "has begun exercises with its Yars intercontinental ballistic missile system and several thousand troops".{{cite news |first1=Lidia |last1=Kelly |first2=Muralikumar |last2=Anantharaman |first3=Robert |last3=Birsel |title=Russia starts exercises with Yars intercontinental ballistic missiles |url=https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russia-starts-exercises-with-yars-intercontinental-ballistic-missiles-2023-03-29/ |work=Reuters |publisher=Thomson Reuters Corporation |date=29 March 2023}}{{cite news |title=Russia starts Yars intercontinental ballistic missile drills |url=https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/3/29/russia-starts-yars-intercontinental-ballistic-missiles-drills |publisher=Al Jazeera Media Network |date=29 March 2023}}

On 30 March, Sergey Ryabkov announced that "Moscow would continue to notify the United States of any intercontinental or submarine ballistic missile launches despite suspending the last remaining nuclear arms control treaty between the two countries" based on the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty from 1988: "Ryabkov said Russia, despite the suspension, had pledged to stick to the warhead limits and would also continue to implement a 1988 agreement on the exchange of missile launch notifications".{{cite news |first1=Mark |last1=Trevelyan |title=Russia to keep notifying US of ballistic missile launches |url=https://www.reuters.com/world/russia-keep-notifying-us-ballistic-missile-launches-2023-03-30/ |work=Reuters |publisher=Thomson Reuters Corporation |date=30 March 2023}}

On 2 June, the United States revoked visas of Russian nuclear inspectors, describing this step as a "lawful countermeasure" to Russia's "ongoing violations" of the treaty.{{cite news|url=https://apnews.com/article/us-russia-new-start-nuclear-16285354fcdc4f6a8ef18367620707e3|title=US retaliates for Russia's suspension of New START treaty by revoking visas of nuclear inspectors|work=AP NEWS|date=2 June 2023}}

• 2010 NPT Review Conference
• Strategic Arms Limitation Talks (SALT I and II)
• Treaty of Moscow (2002)

{{Notelist}}

{{Reflist}}

{{Commons category|New START treaty (2010)}}

• [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O_xfulydNJg Facing the risk of nuclear war in the 21st Century] Video by Carl Robichaud, Centre for Effective Altruism, 21 March 2020.
• [https://2009-2017.state.gov/t/avc/trty/126118.htm New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START)] from the United States Department of State
• [https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2010/04/08/new-start-treaty-and-protocol The New START Treaty and Protocol] from Whitehouse.gov
• [https://fas.org/sgp/crs/nuke/R41219.pdf The New START Treaty: Central Limits and Key Provisions] Congressional Research Service
• [http://www.democracynow.org/2010/12/21/as_dems_work_to_ratify_start Jonathan Schell Says U.S.-Russia "Nuclear Standoff" Defies "Rational Explanation"] – video report by Democracy Now!
• [http://www.nbr.org/research/activity.aspx?id=213 New START, One Year Later], Interview with Christopher A. Ford, Hudson Institute

{{Nuclear weapons limitation treaty}}

{{Russia–United States relations}}

{{Dmitry Medvedev}}

{{Barack Obama}}

Category:2010 in Russia

Category:2010 in international relations

Category:2010 in the Czech Republic

Category:2010 in the United States

Category:2010s in Prague

Category:April 2010 in Europe

Category:April 2010 in Russia

Category:April 2010 in the United States

Category:Arms control treaties

Category:Articles containing video clips

Category:Bilateral treaties of Russia

Category:Bilateral treaties of the United States

Category:Dmitry Medvedev

Category:Events affected by the Russian invasion of Ukraine

Category:Nuclear technology treaties

Category:Nuclear weapons governance

Category:Presidency of Barack Obama

Category:Russia–United States relations

Category:Treaties concluded in 2010

Category:Treaties entered into force in 2011

Category:Vladimir Putin