By Muhammad Usama Khalid
The missile race across tactical, operational, and strategic defensive levels emerged as a defining feature of the Cold War era. Despite the establishment of numerous arms control treaties, this phenomenon has not only persisted but has also intensified in today’s complex security environment.
While arms race is not a new phenomenon for the international community, its most severe consequences were starkly evident during the Cold War, particularly in the 1960s and early 1970s, when the United States and the Soviet Union engaged in a massive strategic arms buildup, amassing thousands of warheads and delivery systems.
Although various treaties and agreements were introduced to mitigate these dangers, many have since become outdated and ineffective in the face of rapidly evolving geopolitical dynamics. This essay critically examines how the aggressive missile development postures adopted by certain states threaten to undermine the global arms control regime. In order to mitigate this threat, some policy recommendations are also suggested in the later part of this essay.
US – Russia Case
On Thursday 21st of November, Russia in response to the Ukrainian strikes on Russian territory using the US and British missiles, launched a new intermediate-range missile in a strike on Ukraine. Russian President Vladimir Putin has claimed that such missiles cannot be intercepted by the American air defence system deployed in the region. However, earlier this month on November 5, 2024, the United States launched a test of Minutemen III.
A joint team of Air Force Global Strike Command (AFGSC) airmen and Navy aircrew launched an unarmed Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) equipped with multiple targetable reentry vehicles (MIRVs) from aboard the Airborne Launch Control System (ALCS) from Vandenberg Space Force Base, California. According to the official statement the test was testament to the effective readiness of the US robust strategic force command.
The implications of these particular testing might not be as overtly visible as it would be perceived, but the timing of the tests is quite threatening for the global arms control regime in the wake of weakening of the existing regimes.
The strategic signaling in the midst of the ongoing Russia-Ukraine War may be interpreted differently than during the peace time. Similarly, the launch of intermediate-range nuclear capable missiles during the ongoing military engagement would be quite hazardous as it could initiate a nuclear war in no time with a mere miscalculated decision.
Though, Russian President Vladimir Putin has stated that Russia has no desire to engage in an arms race, but he has also issued a warning to the United States and its NATO allies, emphasizing that if any state—whether possessing nuclear weapons or not—threatens Russia’s sovereignty and receives support from a Nuclear Weapon State (NWS), Russia will not hesitate to employ nuclear weapons in response under such conditions. Such statements reveal the unambiguity in policy related issues during hostile circumstances. Therefore, strategic restraint is the fundamental element which needs to be exercised by the rational actors such as states’ politico-military leadership.
India – Pakistan Case
Similarly, for some time missiles developments and testing have also been taking place in South Asia. Last week, India reportedly conducted a test of nuclear capable submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM) K-4 from the recently commissioned nuclear-powered submarine INS Arighaat. The K-4 missile has a range of 3500 km.
Likewise, few months ago, in September 2024, Defence Research & Development Organisation (DRDO) and the Indian Navy conducted the flight test of the Vertical Launch Short Range Surface-to-Air Missile (VL-SRSAM) from the Integrated Test Range (ITR) in Chandipur, off the coast of Odisha. Additionally, the news is circulating that the Indian Navy will be expected to conduct another test, this time of Anti-Ship Ballistic Missile (ASBM) in the coming days. However, such Indian aggressive developments coerced Pakistan to go for an active arms tussle with India in response.
Therefore, on November 04, 2024, Pakistan Navy carried out a successful flight test of the indigenously developed SMASH – a Ship-Launched Ballistic Missile (SLBM). This ballistic missile has a stated range of 350 KM with the capability of engaging land and sea targets with high precision. It is equipped with a state-of-the-art navigation system and maneuverability features. On the other hand, neighboring India has been the provocateur of instigating strategic arms buildup in South Asia.
These developments are quite threatening for the region’s strategic stability regime in the presence of an overt conventional asymmetry between India and Pakistan – both of whom had been engaged in military duels in the past several times. In a hostile region such as South Asia, the existence of two nuclear rivals makes it the most vulnerable for accidental nuclear escalation. The absence of mutual dialogues in the current scenario further complicates the scenario for the establishment of a sustainable nuclear restraint regime. The previously agreed Confidence Building Measures (CBMs) on the pre-notification of missile flight testing has proved to be inconsequential when the debate comes towards arms control.
Iran – North Korea Case
The other two states, Iran and North Korea, though situated geographically in two completely different regions, still their offensively defensive actions have critically been observed by the world leaders and institutions, simultaneously.
In 2024, North Korea was actively involved in the development and testing of a series of ballistic missiles including short-range as well as strategically long-range ICBMs in the East Asian Sea. Such tests are a provocateur for neighboring states such as South Korea and Japan. While, on the other side, Iran was in the global headlines due to the prevailing precarious security situation in the Middle East.
On November 9, 2024, video circulated on some of the social media accounts likely affiliated with the people associated with the Iranian journalists claimed that Iran had covertly conducted the test of ICBM amid the crisis in the region where US involvement is also imminent and dangerously threatening for regional stability because US has been actively supporting anti-Iran actors for the last forty odds years.
Though the Iranian government had neither confirmed the news nor denied it. However, if such development took place, then it would be quite destabilizing for the region mired in sectarianist tussles for some time with the global attention is much focused on the Israel-Iran retaliatory crisis for provoking each other with strategic weapons firing in the past few months during the ongoing Israel-Hamas war in Gaza.
Recommendations
Addressing the missile arms race in these regions necessitates a comprehensive approach that combines diplomatic, economic, and security measures. The following outlines practical solutions tailored to each pair of countries involved:
India-Pakistan
– India and Pakistan encounter significant obstacles in implementing conventional arms control for various reasons. India is hesitant to agree to measures that would undermine its strategic position due to its military strength and territorial disputes with China. Moreover, entrenched hostility stemming from historical conflicts and security concerns hinders collaboration on arms control initiatives between the two nations. Moreover, demonstrating compliance with any such agreement would be challenging due to the intricacies of modern military capabilities and the potential for clandestine operations. Implementing comprehensive Confidence-Building Measures (CBMs) is essential to address these challenges. Prospective future arms control agreements may be facilitated by confidence-building measures (CBMs) that mitigate misconceptions and enhance trust through improved transparency and communication between the two nations.
– Enhancing bilateral relations and guaranteeing regional security depend on discussions between the political and military authorities of both nations concerning a pragmatic arms control agreement, especially pertaining to missile systems. In this setting, Confidence-Building Measures (CBMs) serve as a crucial institutionalized tool. An operational organization may be established to provide coordinated and consistent communication with the relevant officials of both countries.
– Notwithstanding enduring security and geopolitical challenges, the significance of international organizations in mediating between India and Pakistan is undeniable. These groups can be highly beneficial in adversarial circumstances where neither party is inclined to communicate.
US-Russia
– Subsequent to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Russia showed increased opposition to international arms control agreements. With the change in US leadership, there is hope that peace will supersede international order. Renewing, renegotiating, and expanding the New START agreement to encompass advanced missile technologies and verification protocols may mitigate the escalating arms race between these two long standing Cold War adversaries.
– Establishing bilateral talks in contemporary society is challenging. Consequently, Multilateral Dialogues are essential to involve other significant nuclear-armed states, including the United Kingdom, France, and China, in discussions aimed at establishing a more comprehensive arms control framework.
Iran-North Korea
– Sanctions have proven ineffective in deterring Iran and North Korea from advancing their missile programs, which they assert are responses to security threats. A more efficacious strategy would involve offering economic and political incentives, such as sanctions alleviation, market access, or security assurances, in return for verifiable actions to limit their missile development.
– Regional security frameworks focused on the Middle East and East Asia are essential for addressing missile proliferation. These strategies, which foster dialogue, collaboration, and reciprocal comprehension, might mitigate conflict risks, enhance stability, and tackle the fundamental causes of missile arms races.
Conclusion
Consequently, the difficulties posed by the advancing missile arms race require urgent and collaborative international efforts. The enhancement and evaluation of essential delivery vehicles is warranted to evaluate technical progress; nonetheless, it often produces inflammatory signals that may intensify security apprehensions and heighten tensions.
To counter these dangers, the international community must adopt a comprehensive strategy aligned with the existing situation, ensuring that missile developments and testing are not regarded as hostile actions. A properly constructed treaty, such as the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT), could be essential for diminishing the spread and testing of offensive missile systems. Inaction at this juncture may have repercussions that are more destabilizing than those experienced during the Cold War arms competition.
The contemporary multipolar international system, characterized by complex economic and political interrelations, poses a challenge and necessitates vigilance about missile proliferation, unlike the previous bipolar world order. Resolving this issue is essential to sustain stability in an increasingly interconnected world and to uphold global security.
Author: Muhammad Usama Khalid – Research Officer at Balochistan Think Tank Network (BTTN), BUITEMS, Quetta.
(The views expressed in this article belong only to the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of World Geostrategic Insights).