Word: arsenals
(lookup in dictionary)
(lookup stats)
Dates: all
Sort By: most recent first
(reverse)
European ambivalence makes it excruciatingly difficult to define "progress" toward arms control, while the nearly desperate eagerness with which progress is pursued makes its attainment less likely. The Soviets have refused even to discuss any proposal balancing U.S. intermediate-range missiles in Europe against the Soviet arsenal at a lower level. They insist on total withdrawal of American missiles while retaining a large number of their own. The goal of leaving Europe vulnerable to Soviet nuclear blackmail is obvious. Yet significant segments of European opinion persist in blaming the U.S. for the deadlock. In Europe and in the U.S., this...
...START, the obstacles are more of the Administration's making. From the beginning of the talks in 1982, the U.S. has demanded massive and unrealistic reductions in the Soviet Union's arsenal of land-based nuclear weapons. Last fall some of Secretary of State George Shultz's aides designed a new initiative that might be more acceptable to the Soviets. To minimize the appearance that the Administration was changing course, State Department officials explained that their so-called framework approach was nothing more than an elaboration of the Administration's existing START proposal...
...should dampen the historic emphasis on developing ever more survivable nuclear forces. Though each of the superpowers has in absolute numbers weapons sufficient to destroy the other several times over strategists usually focus instead on the projected post strike balance. How much will be left in each side's arsenal after it has been attacked? Would that stockpile be sufficient to coerce of deter the other side's behavior? Emphasis on post strike balance implies for instance that the U.S. can secure deterrence only by maintaining an arsenal so large that even after a Soviet first strike enough U.S. forces...
...Five-Year Plan, due to begin in 1986. There are already signs that the Soviet military-industrial complex may be feeling the squeeze. Among the 25 principal classes of armament, production has declined in 13 between 1977 and 1981. That drop may indicate that the Kremlin has built its arsenal up to strength. But it could also reflect the stagnation in the civilian economy, as producers fail to supply quality steel and as bottlenecks in rail transport hold up vital raw materials needed by defense contracts...
...contrast to the four branches of the U.S. military (Navy, Army, Air Force, Marines), the Soviets have five. The strategic rocket forces are the most prestigious, and form the core of the nuclear weapons arsenal. Next is the oldest and largest of the services, the land forces. Instead of a single air force, the Soviets have two: the elite air defense forces, which protect Soviet airspace (and shot down the Korean airliner in September), and the air forces, which are responsible for offensive missions. Despite its impressive growth, the Soviet navy ranks last in the rigid Soviet military hierarchy...