On June 13 the United States officially withdrew from the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile, ABM, Treaty, closing a chapter in U.S.-Soviet relations, and beginning another with Russia. The lapsing of the ABM Treaty, combined with the Senate's defeat of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty in 1999 and the signing of a new type of nuclear reduction treaty with Russia in May, represent a fundamental shift in the way the United States approaches strategic security. We have moved away from reliance on traditional arms control treaties toward a reliance on our own capabilities--namely missile defenses and a credible nuclear deterrent. Proponents of the ABM Treaty were convinced that it was the 'cornerstone of strategic stability,' and that U.S. withdrawal would damage the improving U.S.-Russia relationship, spark a new arms race, and even lead, as one of my colleagues remarked, to 'Cold War II.' Those predictions were wrong.
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the U.S. withdrawal from the ABM Treaty and its implications for national security.
Share
More from Jon Kyl
The threat briefings that we received leave no question that both China and Russia, but particularly China see space as a war fighting domain.
It's enough that it's opportunistic. In other words, we're in a conflict with one, and the other sees that this is an opportunity.
The first thing we've got to do is have a conventional capability which is so dominant that no party would ever consider a nuclear attack against the United States.
I know that the Democratic leader is scheduled to speak next, but if there is a minute that I could take in between, I just wanted to comment on my colleague who spoke yesterday, Senator Collins. I had wanted to come to the floor to speak…





