A landmark summit

The new US-Russian arms agreement to cut their strategic nuclear arsenal from the earlier agreed figures of around 6,000 warheads each to a ...

The new US-Russian arms agreement to cut their strategic nuclear arsenal from the earlier agreed figures of around 6,000 warheads each to a figure of 1700-2200 deployed warheads on either side by 2012 is a welcome step. The fact that this has come about in the shape of a bilateral agreement in spite of a vast range of differences between the two countries on strategic issues is all the more creditable. However, the current agreement marks a major departure from the previous such treaties. Unlike the earlier ones, the warheads to be reduced under the current agreement would not be destroyed but held in reserve as spares and for 8220;quality control8221; reasons. This only reaffirms the strategy embedded in the new Nuclear Posture Review of the United States which emphasises the salience of nuclear weapons in the future, rather than any move towards elimination of nuclear weapons.

Unlike the treaties of the Cold War, this agreement does not rely on its implementation on inspection and verification systems. Nor does it seek any mutually agreed composition and structure of the strategic offensive forces of either side. This demonstrates a new level of trust and willingness to move towards co-operative security. The two leaders sealed this process by agreements promising co-operation in energy development, economic co-operation and Middle East policy. They also signed an agreement for a 8220;new strategic relationship8221; which would lead to better co-operation on counter-terrorism. But the most significant promise of that strategic relationship is to find ways to co-operate on the development of missile defences.

Differences, however, came to the surface on the Russian policy of supplying a nuclear power reactor to Iran although it would be placed under IAEA inspections. President Putin publicly rejected the US position on the grounds that the US itself was committed to build a similar nuclear power reactor in North Korea. The joint statement to co-operate on energy development would be premised on the challenges of energy security in future. Greater reliance on nuclear energy would be necessary if the world has to find a comprehensive solution to the energy shortages in the coming years which reduces dependence on non-renewable eco-unfriendly sources. The US itself has revised its thinking and would now extend its nuclear power infrastructure well into the future. A broader global policy which encourages broader co-operation in building nuclear power reactors would be needed for sustainable development, especially in energy deficient countries.