Arms Control
The American quest for stability and the
willingness of the Soviets to bargain have led to
arms control negotiations. That is not a new
effort. A history of arms control agreements
exists between the two superpowers stretching
back to 1959.
The first round of Strategic Arms Limitation
Talks (SALT), concluded in 1972, produced the
Antiballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty that severely
restricts the deployment of ABM systems by either
country. The SALT I also produced the Interim
Agreement on Strategic Offensive Arms that
placed limits on the number of strategic nuclear
weapons. That agreement was to remain in effect
for 5 years, but both countries pledged to abide
by its provisions until further negotiations were
c o n c l u d e d .
In 1974 both countries agreed to maintain an
equal number of strategic delivery vehicles.
Additionally, they agreed to sublimit the number
of delivery vehicles they could equip with
multiple independently targetable reentry vehicle
(MIRV) warheads. Those agreements formed the
basis for the SALT II agreement in 1979. SALT II
continued the agreement of equal limits but
lowered the level of limitation on strategic
weapons delivery systems. That new agreement
forced the Soviet Union to dismantle several
hundred missile launchers. In addition, the
SALT II agreement placed sublimits on MIR V
ballistic missiles in general and on MIR V
intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) in
particular. A provision, which accompanies
the basic treaty, imposes restraints on the
development of new and more sophisticated
weapons.
The United States sees arms control as an
important complement to the strategy of
deterrence. We are seeking to reach an agreement
with the Soviet Union on a Strategic Arms
Reduction Treaty (START). Our objective is to
enhance strategic stability through equal and
verifiable limitations on both sides. Despite some
key differences on issues, we are confident an
agreement can be reached.
In negotiations the United States will continue
to try to limit American-Soviet competition in
strategic nuclear forces. The United States will
continue to pursue the basic objectives of strategic
deterrence, adequate stability, and equivalence.
That process began with the SALT I agreement
and has progressed through the SALT II and
START.
Present Posture
The Soviet navy could pose the greatest
potential threat to the U.S. Navy. Realistically,
however, small Third World navies now pose
more of an actual threat to U.S. naval forces.
Since the U.S. Navy is primarily prepared to
engage the Soviet navy, we will compare U.S. and
Soviet maritime missions.
The Soviet navy’s primary mission is to be
prepared to conduct strategic nuclear strikes from
SSBNs operating in protected waters close to the
Soviet Union. The key to carrying out that
mission is strategic defense of seaward approaches
to the Soviet Union. The Soviet navy, air
force, and army will try to control the Soviet
Union’s peripheral seas and key land masses.
The Soviets’ aim in controlling these areas
is to deny Western access to areas needed to
threaten Soviet SSBNs. The Soviets usually
create sea denial zones up to 2,000 kilometers
from the Soviet mainland. The primary targets
in the sea denial zones are sea-launched cruise-
missile-equipped submarines, surface ships, and
aircraft carriers.
Disruption of U.S. supply lines to Europe and
Asia is another Soviet objective. The Soviets will
attempt to interdict sea lines of communications
(SLOC) and establish sea denial zones. During
conflict the Soviets are expected to attack critical
SLOCs that link the United States and its allies.
The Soviet submarine force plays a primary role
in the disruption of SLOCs.
The U.S. national security strategy is based
on deterrence, forward defense, and collective
security. Forward-deployed U.S. and allied
combat ready naval forces can provide a visible
deterrent to any country bordered by an ocean
or a sea. These forces operate globally in support
of bilateral and multilateral commitments and
project military power in support of national
policy and interest. U.S. naval forces have four
primary peacetime objectives:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Defending the continental United States
(CONUS) from attack
Assuring freedom of the seas and pro-
tecting important SLOCs from adversaries
Providing regional stability by supporting
friends and deterring aggression
Functioning as a visible power projection
force capable of responding to crises and
low-intensity conflicts on short notice
anywhere in the world
1-11
