Strategic Arms Limitation Negotiations (SALT) - a series of bilateral agreements between the USSR and the USA on the issue of security from nuclear weapons. There were several rounds of negotiations. As a result, the SALT-1 and SALT-2 treaties were signed. The first - in 1972, the second - in 1979.
Prerequisites and the concept of "sufficiency" in the USSR
If we talk about the prerequisites and reasons why the first signing of the SALT-1 treaty took place, then it is necessary to mention the concept of "sufficiency" in nuclear weapons. This term was ambiguously perceived in the West, but this fact did not at all affect the behavior of the Soviet side. Our official nuclear concept was announced at the 26th CPSU Congress. Its essence is that the USSR and the USA have a balance that objectively serves to preserve peace, and there are a sufficient number of nuclear warheads in service, which are distributed evenly between the Strategic Missile Forces,Navy and Air Force. We do not need any superiority in quantitative terms over the Americans. In fact, the leadership of the USSR announced that there would be no more arms race. N. Khrushchev once told D. Kennedy that for our country it does not matter how many times the United States can destroy it - eight or nine. It is enough for us to know that the USSR can destroy the USA at least once. In fact, this is the whole essence of the “concept of sufficiency”, which was already formalized at the party congress.
US position
The United States had a different attitude: they were reluctant to sign the SALT-1 treaty. The reason lies in the internal political struggle: in the United States, two parties compete in elections. One must always criticize the other. In the 1960s, the Democratic Party was in solidarity with the Soviet side and made sure that the new term Republican Nixon began his rule with the issue of arms control. For the new president, this was a serious puzzle, since he criticized the possible nuclear parity of the USSR and the USA throughout the entire election campaign. He kept saying that it is necessary to achieve total superiority in armaments over our country. The defeated Democrats took advantage of this by putting a "pig" under the chair of the new president.
Nixon got into a stalemate: on the one hand, he criticized the idea of parity between the USSR and the USA, he was a supporter of nuclear quantitative superiority. On the other hand, the build-up of the arms race in a unilateralorder - with the official announcement of the USSR about limiting the number of its nuclear weapons - undermined the image of the States as a "force of good", which is fighting the "Evil Empire". It turns out that the parties are changing roles in the eyes of the entire Western capitalist world. In this regard, Nixon had to make concessions and agree to the signing of the SALT-1 treaty.
U. S. concept under Nixon
Declare that the US and the USSR are signing new treaties, and parity is being established, of course, the President of the Republican Party could not. That is why the "strategy of sufficiency" was chosen in the United States. Those. for voters, it was something between the concept of total superiority and the concept of nuclear parity. In fact, this point of view is not at all populist: the US did have a larger stockpile of nuclear weapons than the USSR.
Deputy Secretary of Defense D. Packard's remark is indicative: “Sufficiency only means that this word is convenient to use in speeches. Other than that, it doesn't mean anything." Most likely, President Nixon regarded the "concept of sufficiency" as a kind of compromise between his election program and the policies of the Democrats who preceded him.
Principles for the development of US strategic forces
So, the Nixon administration announced the "concept of sufficiency". The following principles were officially proposed:
- Maintaining enough strategic weapons to retaliate even after a "sudden nuclear attack".
- Removing any incentive for a "surprise attack".
- Depriving a prospective adversary of the ability to inflict more damage on the US than the United States can in retaliation.
- Protecting the US from nuclear strikes.
As is always the case in American diplomacy, this project can be "tailored", both for the "concept of sufficiency" and for the doctrine of "total superiority", since it does not provide for clear plans and specific figures. Many military experts said that any side can take this concept as they please, and will be right. However, a direct renunciation of total superiority is already a certain progress in US policy, without which the signing of the SALT-1 treaty becomes absolutely impossible.
Missile defense issue
The whole essence of American policy was revealed in the discussion of anti-missile systems. The fact is that the USSR went ahead in anti-missile defense technologies. We learned 23 years earlier than the Americans to shoot down nuclear missiles with non-nuclear missiles due to the kinetic energy from an explosion of TNT equivalent. In fact, we had a safe shield that made it possible not to detonate nuclear warheads on our territory. The Americans, on the other hand, could shoot down nuclear missiles only with other nuclear missiles with less power. In any case, it was impossible to avoid a nuclear explosion in the United States. Therefore, the Americans insisted on refusing to create a missile defense system when discussing SALT-1 and SALT-2.
The United States explained the refusal to develop missile defense by the fact that allegedlythere is no point in limiting the offensive arms race if the defensive arms race is not prohibited. According to the Americans, the continued development of missile defense by the Soviet side would destabilize the established delicate balance between the two superpowers. On this issue, the United States seems to have forgotten its superiority in offensive weapons and Nixon's campaign promises.
The Soviet side was categorically against this approach, rightly stating that the development of defense is moral, and the development of attack is immoral. In addition, the Americans were offered to resolve the issue of reducing offensive weapons, also rightly stating that the United States had an advantage in them.
The deployment of American missile defense systems is a threat to upcoming agreements
In 1967, the US Administration unilaterally deploys its anti-missile defense system. They explained this by the fact that the system was not directed against the USSR, but was intended to neutralize the threat of the PRC. The latter even had by that time only nominal nuclear weapons, which could not threaten the United States in any way. Surprisingly, history repeats itself with the US missile defense in Eastern Europe, which is allegedly directed against Iran, although it does not threaten either the US or the countries of Eastern Europe. Military experts noted then, as they note now, that the goal of the Americans is our country.
By 1972, the US government and the Department of Defense could no longer justify themselves to the anti-militarist forces in the Western world. US nuclear stockpileincreased, weapons improved, but no prerequisites for this were observed. Our country, in spite of the Americans, pursued a friendly policy, agreeing to any agreements - shortly before that, an agreement was signed to limit the development of the missile defense system.
Nixon's visit to the USSR and the signing of treaties
In May 1972 Nixon's historic visit to Moscow took place. A preliminary treaty on the limitation of strategic arms was signed on May 29, 1972. It was called "The basis of interaction between the USSR and the USA." Both sides recognized that the peaceful coexistence of the two great powers was the only acceptable basis for mutual relations. Also, both countries took responsibility for preventing local conflicts, took on the responsibility to show restraint and resolve differences by peaceful means.
Another treaty was also signed in May - the Treaty on the Limitation of Anti-Missile Defense Systems. The parties had to choose certain areas on their territory where missile defense facilities would be located. The USSR protected Moscow from nuclear attacks. United States - several sites with nuclear weapons.
Signing of the SALT-1 agreement: date, main provisions
SALT-1 is a set of agreements between America and the USSR from 1969 to 1972. It all started in Helsinki. And many believed that he would remain in the project. However, the signing of the Soviet-American SALT-1 treaty by Nixon in Moscow in 1972 took place. The nuclear weapons of the USSR and the USA from now on are strictlyfixed. An increase in the number of warheads was prohibited. A moratorium was also introduced on the testing of nuclear weapons in the USSR, but this did not mean that our country was ready to abandon the continuation of work on the development of nuclear weapons.
At this time, the Soviet Union deployed up to 200 new missiles. The US had 1,054 ICBMs, 656 submarine-launched missiles. The nuclear weapons of the USSR and the United States have remained unchanged since that time. However, the Americans adopted a new type of missile - MIRV (missiles with separable parts). Their peculiarity is that nominally it is one missile, but it hits several strategic targets.
OSV-2
OSV-1 and SALT-2 is a single system of contracts. The second was a logical continuation of the first. The only difference was that SALT-2 was a single agreement signed on June 18, 1979 in Vienna at a meeting between L. Brezhnev and D. Carter.
Basics
OSV-2 limited the number of strategic carriers to 2400 pieces. Both sides also agreed to reduce this volume. Only 1320 units could be equipped with warheads with a given target. This number included all types of nuclear weapons. In addition to this, the restrictions affected the number of warheads that could be deployed on strategic carriers: ships, aircraft, submarines.
OSV-2 also prohibited the commissioning of new missile silos and limited modernization. Each side, for example, coulddeploy no more than one new ICBM that could be armed with 10 warheads.
SALT-2 was not ratified by the US as the Soviet Union moved its troops into Afghanistan. However, the unofficial agreement was respected by both parties.
START-1 and START-2
The history of restrictive treaties for SALT-2 has not ended. On July 31, 1991, the Treaty on the Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms of the Soviet Union and the United States (the START-1 Treaty) was signed in Moscow. This is one of the last treaties of the USSR, signed by M. Gorbachev. Its term was 15 years. The goal of the treaty is to reduce armaments to 30 percent of all available nuclear weapons forces. An exception was only made for naval cruise missiles with a range of over 600 km. This is not surprising: the United States had a huge number of such missiles, while our country did not have them at all.
After the collapse of the USSR, it was necessary to re-sign the agreement with Russia again, as there was a risk that our country would not comply with the conditions of START-1. In January 1993, a new treaty was signed - START-2 by B. Yeltsin and George W. Bush. In 2002, our country withdrew from the treaty in response to the fact that the United States withdrew from the ABM treaty. In 2009, D. Medvedev and B. Obama were negotiating a new START treaty in Geneva, but the Republican American Congress blocked all initiatives of Democrat B. Obama on this issue. The official wording of congressmen - "The United States fears" fraud "from Russia on the executioncontract.”
START-3
In 2010, the presidents of Russia and the United States signed a new treaty. Each side on it can have no more than 1,550 nuclear warheads. The number of strategic carriers should not exceed 800 units. This treaty was ratified by both sides.
