The World & I Online Magazine, ONline Archive and Educational Resource  
World & I School | World & I Homeschool | World & I College | World & I Library
Username:   Password:      Subscribe Now   Register   About Us | Contact Us | FAQs      
The World & I Archive Peoples of the World Book Reviews Worldwide Folktales Fathers of Faith
Search  
Sort by: Results Listed:
Date Range:    Advanced Search

The World & I Magazine
 
Current Issue
The Arts
Life
Natural Science
Culture
Book World
Modern Thought
  Resources
American Waves
Book Reviews
Fathers of Faith
Footsteps of Lincoln
Millennial Moments
Peoples of the World
Profiles in Character
Traveling the Globe
Writers and Writing

European Security After the INF Treaty


Article # : 13677 

Section : CURRENT ISSUES
Issue Date : 8 / 1988  4,581 Words
Author : Jed C. Snyder
Jed C. Snyder is a senior research fellow at the Washington office of the National Strategy Information Center, where he is directing a project on "New Approaches to Transatlantic Security." He served in the State Department during the first Reagan administration, and from 1984 to 1987 was deputy director of national security studies at the Hudson Institute.

       When Secretary of State George Shultz traveled to Brussels to report to the allies on the results of the Moscow summit, he found that while his audience supported the warming trend in U.S.-Soviet relations, their enthusiasm was tempered by an audible sigh of relief that President Reagan did not walk away with another arms control treaty; that the "spirit of Reykjavik" was not replicated in Moscow. The allies were ironically grateful that human rights rather than arms control dominated the president's summit agenda.
       
        Allied ambivalence about the "new détente" illustrates the schizophrenic approach that America's security partners in Europe feel that they must take toward their own security. This schizophrenia has been fueled by the now-ratified agreement to remove all intermediate-range nuclear forces (INF) from Europe. Although this condition has characterized Europe's approach to its defense since the NATO treaty was signed nearly four decades ago, the INF agreement has exposed this infirmity to close scrutiny and will likely force a public and painful assessment of NATO's weaknesses at a time when the alliance is least likely to respond favorably.
       
        That such an examination is due cannot be contested. The INF treaty, however, moves the alliance in exactly the wrong direction: away from a reasoned approach to bolstering the European-based component of the nuclear deterrent, while enhancing the conventional force posture, and toward a progressive denuclearization of the continent that will simultaneously remove any incentive to repair the eroding ground and air capabilities of the allies. In sum, this author does not share the widely held view that the "zero-zero" solution of "removing an entire class of nuclear weapons" will ... (1996 of 29301 Characters)
Read Full Article

Copyright © 2004 The World & I Online. All rights reserved. Terms of Use | Privacy Policy