American University Professor criticized the US approach to Start-3

“The world will lose the last support of the arms control regime.”

In February 2021, the Russian-American strategic offensive arms Treaty Start-3, signed in Prague in 2011 by the presidents of Russia and the United States, will expire. The agreement could have been extended for five years, but Washington still defiantly rejects this possibility. This position is criticized not only in Russia but in the United States itself. So, honorary Professor of the faculty of political science at Columbia University, doctor of science Robert Legvold (USA), believes that start-3 should be preserved.

The expert expressed his position in an interview published on the YouTube channel of the international Luxembourg forum on preventing a nuclear disaster.

According to the American political scientist, Start-3 should be extended.

“This is extremely important,” the expert believes. “After all, if we lose this last pillar of the arms control regime… it will destroy not only the system of control over nuclear weapons between the US and Russia but also the very prospect of such control between the other new nuclear powers.”

The Professor recalled that the creation of a mechanism for controlling nuclear weapons “took fifty years, and the process was exhausting and sometimes painful from a political point of view.”

The breakdown of the control mechanism as a result of the collapse of Start-3 will lead to the fact that all the parameters of the US and Russian nuclear missile arsenals will “get out of control.”

This, the expert believes, “will create a volatile and potentially dangerous international environment.”

“Strategic stability will be threatened, the risk of nuclear war between some countries will increase at a certain level, and we will live in a different world,” Robert Legvold concluded.

In his opinion, the world is already becoming more fragile: “The risk of nuclear war is growing today, and the chances of a nuclear catastrophe, that is, a nuclear war, are now higher or as high as at any time of acute tension during the cold war, in particular during the Caribbean crisis.”