MOSCOW: Russia has ruled out nuclear negotiations with the US on the backdrop of Washington’s position on the future expansion of NATO, Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova said on Wednesday.

“We see no point in dialogue with Washington without respect for Russia’s fundamental interests. First of all, this is the problem of NATO’s expansion into the post-soviet space, which poses threats to common security,” Zakharova said.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov on Tuesday ruled out discussions between Moscow and Washington to sign a new treaty to replace an existing one that caps strategic nuclear arms in each country. This pact is scheduled to expire in 2026 and needs to be broadened and expanded to include other countries.

Historical Background

The current tension has its roots dating back to the end of the Cold War. NATO, created to serve as a counterbalance against Soviet influence, continued its steady expansion eastward since the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991.

While the US and the West portray NATO’s expansion as a step that will protect European states from the probable aggression of Russia, Moscow views it as a provocation. Every new state admitted into NATO brings the alliance one step closer to Russia’s borders, thereby presenting it with the increased sensibility of being encircled and faced with an existential threat.

Russia’s View

In fact, Russia has crossed the line, even if only in thought, from NATO’s steady expansion into Eastern Europe and, more recently, discussions over the possible inclusion of Ukraine and Georgia. From the Russian point of view, the space between the Atlantic Alliance and Russian borders has long been shrinking to make strategic vulnerabilities appear. In its eyes, such expansion is an issue not of foreign policy or security but one of national survival.

In denying negotiations with the U.S. over nuclear arms, Russia is, at least in part, saying that there is no incentive on its part to negotiate arms control if and when NATO continues to expand. Being the cornerstone of the bilateral relationship during the Cold War, the nuclear issue becomes a hostage to broader geopolitical dynamics.

On the other hand, the United States and its NATO partners view the expansion of this alliance as organic to democratic states that are now desirous of collective defence. At the same time, the Soviet Union no longer exists. To them, states that may fear the possibility of being threatened by Russia can be allowed to join NATO if such is to be their lot. This especially applies to states like Poland, and the Baltic states, among others, that were once a Soviet state and view NATO membership as equivalent to sovereignty and security.

But the U.S. has argued that it is aiming at its missile defence systems and all other NATO movements not at Russia but at the threat from rogue states or non-state actors. This explanation did not placate Russia, and it still remains wary of U.S. intentions towards it.

Effect on Global Security

This is coupled with a unilateral refusal by Russia to enter into any nuclear arms talks, sending a message: not one more inch of what it perceives as Western encroachment on its sphere of influence. The danger is that if open channels of communication or meaningful arms control arrangements are not in place, a potential nuclear arms race or even accident-al escalation pulls in the same direction.

The past two decades have seen the slow unravelling of the arms-control treaties between Russia and the U.S., particularly the breakdown of the INF Treaty in 2019. An impasse in negotiations may also have catastrophic implications since each country will likely escalate its nuclear stockpiles. In light of international relations, other nuclear-capable countries will likely be drawn into the conflict, further destabilising the security environment of the world.

Changing Geopolitics

The rejection of nuclear talks by Russia fits into the bigger scheme of its positioning vis-à-vis the West. Moscow has been actively involved in attempts to bring about more inclusive relations with China, Iran, and other world players outside the Western orbit, and this is being done to bring the situation closer to a multipolar world where the dominance of the Western models is steadily being rejected. This is accordingly synonymous with its general foreign policy aimed at weakening U.S. influence and tilting the global balance of power in favour of Russia.

Thus, the nuclear arms talks are incidental and background noise to the Russian ones. Suppose Moscow believes that NATO expansion fundamentally threatens its security. In that case, it probably will take steps to respond to this threat rather than playing along with arms control, which it has consistently communicated to us is rapidly becoming moot.

Conclusion

Russia’s reluctance to join the US in nuclear matters portends a treacherous turn in the security landscape of the world. The increasingly deep fault line between Russia and the West, driven in large measure by NATO expansion, threatens to unravel decades of arms control progress and ratchet up the potential for miscalculation. While the West presents NATO enlargement as a step toward collective security, it has instead instilled profound insecurities in Moscow that lock the parties into an impasse from which no clear way out presents itself. In a world in which there is no dialogue, there may be another nuclear arms competition that might be even more complicated and dangerous compared to the old Cold War era.