START stops
February 21, 2023 6:21 AM Subscribe
Putin has learned that the massive Russian military that allowed him to sign SORT and approve of New START isn't going to cow his neighbors or the US anymore. I'm only surprised that he waited through most of the winter to do it.
posted by Etrigan at 6:52 AM on February 21, 2023 [1 favorite]
posted by Etrigan at 6:52 AM on February 21, 2023 [1 favorite]
M.A.D.? HAH, two can play at that game!
posted by chavenet at 7:10 AM on February 21, 2023 [13 favorites]
posted by chavenet at 7:10 AM on February 21, 2023 [13 favorites]
It's not clear to me what this actually means long-term...is "suspending" participation basically just a PR move that will end once the war does, or does he really mean to engage in an excruciatingly expensive new arms race?
posted by mittens at 7:15 AM on February 21, 2023
posted by mittens at 7:15 AM on February 21, 2023
Just a note that this is very recent news (Putin’s speech was less than 12 hours ago afaict), and it’s not at all clear what this means in practice yet.
It could mean anything from Russia not participating in joint inspections and information sharing (which it looks like they were not really doing anyway…). To adopting more aggressive stances on weapons production, or testing. Or other things! Arms control treaties tend to be big and complex.
I’m trying to hold off panicking until nuclear and arms control experts in the US have had their coffee, and had a chance to think and comment on this. (I personally follow Jeffrey Lewis for this, but there are plenty of others in the space.)
posted by learning from frequent failure at 7:24 AM on February 21, 2023 [7 favorites]
It could mean anything from Russia not participating in joint inspections and information sharing (which it looks like they were not really doing anyway…). To adopting more aggressive stances on weapons production, or testing. Or other things! Arms control treaties tend to be big and complex.
I’m trying to hold off panicking until nuclear and arms control experts in the US have had their coffee, and had a chance to think and comment on this. (I personally follow Jeffrey Lewis for this, but there are plenty of others in the space.)
posted by learning from frequent failure at 7:24 AM on February 21, 2023 [7 favorites]
This is Putin's ongoing campaign to punish the US for its support of Ukraine. Whether or not it will actually result in anything happening, it's best not to assume that "of course he wouldn't".
posted by tommasz at 7:33 AM on February 21, 2023
posted by tommasz at 7:33 AM on February 21, 2023
China must see where the puck is going because they've been expanding their nuclear arsenal.
Not that we have helped that much -- since a handful of senators in deep red states prevent us from touching a single land-based ICBM. And the Heritage Foundation is thrilled!
posted by credulous at 7:42 AM on February 21, 2023 [3 favorites]
Not that we have helped that much -- since a handful of senators in deep red states prevent us from touching a single land-based ICBM. And the Heritage Foundation is thrilled!
posted by credulous at 7:42 AM on February 21, 2023 [3 favorites]
I DID NOT LIVE THROUGH THE 1980S FOR THIS.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 7:43 AM on February 21, 2023 [74 favorites]
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 7:43 AM on February 21, 2023 [74 favorites]
It’s posturing. Russia can’t afford the nuclear arsenal it does have, let alone build more.
posted by Galvanic at 7:53 AM on February 21, 2023 [7 favorites]
posted by Galvanic at 7:53 AM on February 21, 2023 [7 favorites]
Ah yes, nothing I love more than getting back those recurring nuclear winter nightmares of my childhood.
posted by Kitteh at 7:56 AM on February 21, 2023 [7 favorites]
posted by Kitteh at 7:56 AM on February 21, 2023 [7 favorites]
I believe without solid evidence that a lot of Russian nukes won't work. As I understand it, the radiation eats the electronics.
This doesn't mean I think it's a good idea to bet cities on Russian nukes faiilng to explode, but is the idea that many, maybe most of them won't work reasonable?
posted by Nancy Lebovitz at 8:42 AM on February 21, 2023 [5 favorites]
This doesn't mean I think it's a good idea to bet cities on Russian nukes faiilng to explode, but is the idea that many, maybe most of them won't work reasonable?
posted by Nancy Lebovitz at 8:42 AM on February 21, 2023 [5 favorites]
What about the US arsenal? Is that in better shape?
posted by chavenet at 8:47 AM on February 21, 2023
posted by chavenet at 8:47 AM on February 21, 2023
I think a major overhaul/upgrade of the US nuclear arsenal was begun under Obama, with a hefty price tag and a several-year action time planned.
posted by hippybear at 8:51 AM on February 21, 2023
posted by hippybear at 8:51 AM on February 21, 2023
It's hard to tell whether the US arsenal is in better shape, but the US military is generally more conscientious.
posted by Nancy Lebovitz at 8:57 AM on February 21, 2023 [1 favorite]
posted by Nancy Lebovitz at 8:57 AM on February 21, 2023 [1 favorite]
is the idea that many, maybe most of them won't work reasonable?
Depends - do you know if there's a place in the US where people would be comfortable gambling that they won't get blown up by the one-functioning-nuke-out-of-99?
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 9:02 AM on February 21, 2023 [6 favorites]
Depends - do you know if there's a place in the US where people would be comfortable gambling that they won't get blown up by the one-functioning-nuke-out-of-99?
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 9:02 AM on February 21, 2023 [6 favorites]
Russia can’t afford the nuclear arsenal it does have, let alone build more.
It's not at all clear that Russia is a functioning nuclear power at all right now. Nuclear weapons need consistent training and ongoing maintenance, both of which are very, very expensive. I don't think it's a stretch at all to say that a military that can't keep up enough operational discipline to keep truck tires from rotting out has no shot, none whatsoever, of maintaining the readiness of a nuclear arsenal.
posted by mhoye at 9:03 AM on February 21, 2023 [8 favorites]
It's not at all clear that Russia is a functioning nuclear power at all right now. Nuclear weapons need consistent training and ongoing maintenance, both of which are very, very expensive. I don't think it's a stretch at all to say that a military that can't keep up enough operational discipline to keep truck tires from rotting out has no shot, none whatsoever, of maintaining the readiness of a nuclear arsenal.
posted by mhoye at 9:03 AM on February 21, 2023 [8 favorites]
I don't think it's a stretch at all to say that a military that can't keep up enough operational discipline to keep truck tires from rotting out has no shot, none whatsoever, of maintaining the readiness of a nuclear arsenal.
Unless the reason that they didn't keep the truck tires from rotting out is because they were funneling their entire defense budget into maintaining their nuclear arsenal just in case.
(Fair warning to all that this has awakened Lurking Gen-X Cold War PTSD, so some of us may not be as able to see reason as one might usually hope.)
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 9:08 AM on February 21, 2023 [13 favorites]
Unless the reason that they didn't keep the truck tires from rotting out is because they were funneling their entire defense budget into maintaining their nuclear arsenal just in case.
(Fair warning to all that this has awakened Lurking Gen-X Cold War PTSD, so some of us may not be as able to see reason as one might usually hope.)
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 9:08 AM on February 21, 2023 [13 favorites]
What about the US arsenal? Is that in better shape?
Hard to say from the outside, but we certainly still spend money on it! The 2023 budget request for the National Nuclear Security Administration is about $21B, of which ~$16B is "weapons activities".
posted by learning from frequent failure at 9:17 AM on February 21, 2023 [1 favorite]
Hard to say from the outside, but we certainly still spend money on it! The 2023 budget request for the National Nuclear Security Administration is about $21B, of which ~$16B is "weapons activities".
posted by learning from frequent failure at 9:17 AM on February 21, 2023 [1 favorite]
Unless the reason that they didn't keep the truck tires from rotting out is because they were funneling their entire defense budget into maintaining their nuclear arsenal just in case.
Those are definitely not even remotely equivalent costs, in either sheer monetary terms or in the level of staffing and expertise required, though.
posted by We put our faith in Blast Hardcheese at 9:17 AM on February 21, 2023
Those are definitely not even remotely equivalent costs, in either sheer monetary terms or in the level of staffing and expertise required, though.
posted by We put our faith in Blast Hardcheese at 9:17 AM on February 21, 2023
Here's the National Nuclear Security Administrations page on the nuclear stockpile which talks about maintenance and upgrades and things they think about doing those things.
posted by hippybear at 9:18 AM on February 21, 2023
posted by hippybear at 9:18 AM on February 21, 2023
this has awakened Lurking Gen-X Cold War PTSD
I entirely sympathize with this, and have oddly comforted myself by remembering that each side still had over a THOUSAND of these weapons and so we're no more doomed today than we were yesterday. The US has been champing at the bit to make more (or at least refresh the ones we have), as evidenced by pushing forward with plutonium pit production which is just depressing.
posted by mittens at 9:19 AM on February 21, 2023 [2 favorites]
I entirely sympathize with this, and have oddly comforted myself by remembering that each side still had over a THOUSAND of these weapons and so we're no more doomed today than we were yesterday. The US has been champing at the bit to make more (or at least refresh the ones we have), as evidenced by pushing forward with plutonium pit production which is just depressing.
posted by mittens at 9:19 AM on February 21, 2023 [2 favorites]
have oddly comforted myself by remembering that each side still had over a THOUSAND of these weapons and so we're no more doomed today than we were yesterday.
Yeah, but we also had a standing agreement that each side would let the other one come in and have a peek once in a while to get a general sense of "how many of these things have ya got and what condition are they in", and now we don't.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 9:21 AM on February 21, 2023 [1 favorite]
Yeah, but we also had a standing agreement that each side would let the other one come in and have a peek once in a while to get a general sense of "how many of these things have ya got and what condition are they in", and now we don't.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 9:21 AM on February 21, 2023 [1 favorite]
Russia hasn’t been complying with inspection requirements for quite a while.
But generally, it was never the treaties that kept everyone safe, it was the mutual part of mutual assured destruction. Putin could have 10 times as many nukes as the US does and we’d still have enough to incinerate all of Russia. Deterrence is scary but it works.
posted by Galvanic at 9:34 AM on February 21, 2023 [1 favorite]
But generally, it was never the treaties that kept everyone safe, it was the mutual part of mutual assured destruction. Putin could have 10 times as many nukes as the US does and we’d still have enough to incinerate all of Russia. Deterrence is scary but it works.
posted by Galvanic at 9:34 AM on February 21, 2023 [1 favorite]
Until it doesn't.
posted by Reverend John at 9:43 AM on February 21, 2023 [5 favorites]
posted by Reverend John at 9:43 AM on February 21, 2023 [5 favorites]
According to CNN, "However, the New START treaty is still in force after a previous agreement between Moscow and Washington extended it through February 4, 2026." It also notes that "inspections have been halted since 2020 due to the Covid-19 pandemic" and "According to US officials, Russia has continually refused to allow inspections of its nuclear facilities."
But my main takeaway from that is that in terms of the treaty itself, the existing treaty is still in place until early 2026.
It's hard to say whether Putin will still be in power in, say, another 12 months, so it's really hard to predict what will happen.
posted by kristi at 9:51 AM on February 21, 2023 [1 favorite]
But my main takeaway from that is that in terms of the treaty itself, the existing treaty is still in place until early 2026.
It's hard to say whether Putin will still be in power in, say, another 12 months, so it's really hard to predict what will happen.
posted by kristi at 9:51 AM on February 21, 2023 [1 favorite]
I can see a scenario where Russia's refusal to allow inspections aids in the grift that might keep the maintenance from happening. If nobody from outside is looking at the weapons, we don't need to look at them ourselves, do we?
posted by hippybear at 9:52 AM on February 21, 2023 [2 favorites]
posted by hippybear at 9:52 AM on February 21, 2023 [2 favorites]
It's hard to say whether Putin will still be in power in, say, another 12 months, so it's really hard to predict what will happen.
He's dying, and Ukraine will outlive him. The question is when, and what happens inside Russia next.
posted by mhoye at 9:54 AM on February 21, 2023 [2 favorites]
He's dying, and Ukraine will outlive him. The question is when, and what happens inside Russia next.
posted by mhoye at 9:54 AM on February 21, 2023 [2 favorites]
I think a good explanation for all of this is that Russia has simply sold some of these weapons to either China or India.
posted by zenon at 10:28 AM on February 21, 2023 [2 favorites]
posted by zenon at 10:28 AM on February 21, 2023 [2 favorites]
He's dying…
Isn’t that just conjecture, though? Has there been any actual proof and/or verification of this?
posted by Thorzdad at 10:52 AM on February 21, 2023 [1 favorite]
Isn’t that just conjecture, though? Has there been any actual proof and/or verification of this?
posted by Thorzdad at 10:52 AM on February 21, 2023 [1 favorite]
RIP Strategic Arms Control, 1972 - 2023.
posted by Aardvark Cheeselog at 1:38 PM on February 21, 2023 [2 favorites]
posted by Aardvark Cheeselog at 1:38 PM on February 21, 2023 [2 favorites]
As to Putin's health, I think it's safe to say nobody outside a small handful of folks close to him know for sure. I suspect not very many people in power in Russia, are looking to become more friendly with the US, so I'm doubtful that a regime change would result in a more positive relationship. However, they may back away from their tawdry little war with Ukraine, at least until they can become militarily sound.
posted by evilDoug at 2:06 PM on February 21, 2023
posted by evilDoug at 2:06 PM on February 21, 2023
As to Putin's health
Deep fakes can stretch him out post-death for a year at least, before it becomes obvious.
posted by CynicalKnight at 2:48 PM on February 21, 2023 [2 favorites]
Deep fakes can stretch him out post-death for a year at least, before it becomes obvious.
posted by CynicalKnight at 2:48 PM on February 21, 2023 [2 favorites]
SATRACK is one system that is used to confirm the readiness and health of America's strategic deterrent.
posted by newdaddy at 3:01 PM on February 21, 2023
posted by newdaddy at 3:01 PM on February 21, 2023
I think a good explanation for all of this is that Russia has simply sold some of these weapons to either China or India.
Or Iran.
posted by susiswimmer at 5:07 PM on February 21, 2023
Or Iran.
posted by susiswimmer at 5:07 PM on February 21, 2023
Or Iran.
Much more likely. China and India have their own.
posted by porpoise at 5:25 PM on February 21, 2023
Much more likely. China and India have their own.
posted by porpoise at 5:25 PM on February 21, 2023
Anyone remember the NIF fusion result from December 2022? "It’s not really about generating electricity" but actually about nuclear weapons testing, materials validation, weapon research, etc.
I'd kinda suspect NIF's fusion result makes some leaders of other nuclear powers nervous, ala "If America want controlled fusion for nuclear weapons testing, then how do we know if our two-stage weapons still work?" It becomes interesting if NIF's fusion result helps push China or Russia back into nuclear weapons testing.
Aside: Russia's nuclear energy exports continue to expand, even as its overall economy bears the brunt of Western sanctions..
posted by jeffburdges at 5:32 PM on February 21, 2023
I'd kinda suspect NIF's fusion result makes some leaders of other nuclear powers nervous, ala "If America want controlled fusion for nuclear weapons testing, then how do we know if our two-stage weapons still work?" It becomes interesting if NIF's fusion result helps push China or Russia back into nuclear weapons testing.
Aside: Russia's nuclear energy exports continue to expand, even as its overall economy bears the brunt of Western sanctions..
posted by jeffburdges at 5:32 PM on February 21, 2023
The "Russia's nukes don't work" meme is worrying. It falls explicitly in the realm of deterrence failure, which is the part of MAD doctrine where it all goes to hell.
If brinksmanship results in Russia having to prove that their nukes work, that's a very serious escalation. Even a failed demonstration could be dangerous if they panic and overcorrect.
posted by swr at 6:43 PM on February 21, 2023 [8 favorites]
If brinksmanship results in Russia having to prove that their nukes work, that's a very serious escalation. Even a failed demonstration could be dangerous if they panic and overcorrect.
posted by swr at 6:43 PM on February 21, 2023 [8 favorites]
China must see where the puck is going because they've been expanding their nuclear arsenal.
Yeah, but China has for a long time had a very small arsenal. Ballpark 50 land based icbms, and only recently deterrent patrols from relatively noisy ssbns.
Having such a small force, a minimal credible deterrent, always struck me as pretty smart, but it wouldn't surprise me if they were worried about better detection and targeting making their forces more at-risk to first strike. Or if they just wanted a more robust second-strike capacity so they wouldn't be as tightly wedded to a use-it-or-lose-it response to anything that looked like a US/NATO/Russian launch.
posted by GCU Sweet and Full of Grace at 6:48 PM on February 21, 2023 [3 favorites]
Yeah, but China has for a long time had a very small arsenal. Ballpark 50 land based icbms, and only recently deterrent patrols from relatively noisy ssbns.
Having such a small force, a minimal credible deterrent, always struck me as pretty smart, but it wouldn't surprise me if they were worried about better detection and targeting making their forces more at-risk to first strike. Or if they just wanted a more robust second-strike capacity so they wouldn't be as tightly wedded to a use-it-or-lose-it response to anything that looked like a US/NATO/Russian launch.
posted by GCU Sweet and Full of Grace at 6:48 PM on February 21, 2023 [3 favorites]
It’s posturing. Russia can’t afford the nuclear arsenal it does have, let alone build more
Something like this has happened a couple of times. Something go poorly and gets a lot of eyes and Putin comes like, "Don't forget we have nukes! We'll use 'em, I swear! So everyone back off!"
Then nothing happens.
Whether he's bluffing or not it has to be treated seriously but I do hope there ends up being some "This is not a thing you bluff about!" comeuppance to come out of this but it's not up to me but I'll hang onto that hope.
posted by VTX at 7:45 PM on February 21, 2023
Something like this has happened a couple of times. Something go poorly and gets a lot of eyes and Putin comes like, "Don't forget we have nukes! We'll use 'em, I swear! So everyone back off!"
Then nothing happens.
Whether he's bluffing or not it has to be treated seriously but I do hope there ends up being some "This is not a thing you bluff about!" comeuppance to come out of this but it's not up to me but I'll hang onto that hope.
posted by VTX at 7:45 PM on February 21, 2023
The danger lies in the townsfolk not listening when the boy cries wolf yet again.
posted by hippybear at 8:17 PM on February 21, 2023 [2 favorites]
posted by hippybear at 8:17 PM on February 21, 2023 [2 favorites]
CNN is reporting that a scheduled Russian ICBM test just failed.
posted by Harald74 at 11:58 PM on February 21, 2023 [1 favorite]
posted by Harald74 at 11:58 PM on February 21, 2023 [1 favorite]
The 2008 Serdyukov reform in the Russian military gave us the Russian military they went to war with in 2022. It was much reduced in size, with the army organized along brigades in place of divisions, the enormous reserve cadre formations cut, the air force organised into smaller units etc. Defence Minister Anatoly Serdyukov took a long hard look at the means available to him, and decided that some hard prioritisation was needed. About the only part of the military which retained their funding was the Strategic Missile Troops, to keep the strategic deterrent in place.
Some of the reforms were reversed later, and especially now there are changes being implemented, but the gist of it is that even though the regular armed forces has shrunk and there have only been very spotty modernisation efforts, there was money allocated for the nukes. So old shitty Chinese tyres on the ground in Ukraine does not automatically equal that the ICBMS are rotting in their silos.
That being said, I would be surprised if more than a tiny fraction of the weapons would actually work on The Day. However, even a single warhead detonating over a populated target would be an immense tragedy, so I'm not very keen to find out.
posted by Harald74 at 12:11 AM on February 22, 2023 [3 favorites]
Some of the reforms were reversed later, and especially now there are changes being implemented, but the gist of it is that even though the regular armed forces has shrunk and there have only been very spotty modernisation efforts, there was money allocated for the nukes. So old shitty Chinese tyres on the ground in Ukraine does not automatically equal that the ICBMS are rotting in their silos.
That being said, I would be surprised if more than a tiny fraction of the weapons would actually work on The Day. However, even a single warhead detonating over a populated target would be an immense tragedy, so I'm not very keen to find out.
posted by Harald74 at 12:11 AM on February 22, 2023 [3 favorites]
CNN is reporting that a scheduled Russian ICBM test just failed.
Satan II. Liquid fueled in the silo. N2O4 + UDMH. So retro. So nostalgic. Welcome to the 1950's, campers.
posted by mikelieman at 2:28 AM on February 22, 2023
Satan II. Liquid fueled in the silo. N2O4 + UDMH. So retro. So nostalgic. Welcome to the 1950's, campers.
posted by mikelieman at 2:28 AM on February 22, 2023
> Arms control treaties tend to be big and complex.
> China must see where the puck is going because they've been expanding their nuclear arsenal.
Analysis: Putin's nuclear treaty move raises stakes over China's growing arsenal - "China's nuclear arsenal sits at the core of those concerns as it grows in size and sophistication - an expansion that the Pentagon recently noted is now gathering pace."
-Western official: Putin's future in power has become less certain
-Russia tells Macron: Don't forget Napoleon when you talk of regime change
-Soros says Russian defeat in Ukraine would trigger dissolution of 'Russian empire'
-Russian defence chief keeps job despite Ukraine routs thanks to Putin[1,2,3,4,5,6,7]
posted by kliuless at 5:55 AM on February 22, 2023 [3 favorites]
> China must see where the puck is going because they've been expanding their nuclear arsenal.
Analysis: Putin's nuclear treaty move raises stakes over China's growing arsenal - "China's nuclear arsenal sits at the core of those concerns as it grows in size and sophistication - an expansion that the Pentagon recently noted is now gathering pace."
The Pentagon's annual China report released last November noted that Beijing appeared to accelerate its expansion in 2021 and now has more than 400 warheads stockpiled.> The question is when, and what happens inside Russia next.
By 2035 - when the ruling Communist Party's leadership wants its military to be fully modernised - it will likely field 1,500 nuclear warheads and an advanced array of missiles, the Pentagon says.
-Western official: Putin's future in power has become less certain
-Russia tells Macron: Don't forget Napoleon when you talk of regime change
-Soros says Russian defeat in Ukraine would trigger dissolution of 'Russian empire'
-Russian defence chief keeps job despite Ukraine routs thanks to Putin[1,2,3,4,5,6,7]
posted by kliuless at 5:55 AM on February 22, 2023 [3 favorites]
« Older Why do pop songs have so many credited writers... | 🚨 Hot off the presses. Next Civ game in... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
And topical, as today's news item that Russia formally pulling out of New START is certainly worthy of thoughtful discussion on it's own.
posted by sammyo at 6:24 AM on February 21, 2023