Destruction of the CFE Treaty as a harbinger of a big war
Operational level
Only the lazy did not say that the CFE Treaty, or the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces, had become obsolete even before Russia’s special military operation. Moreover, it is not beneficial, first of all, to our state. The issue became especially acute not only with the notorious expansion of NATO to the east, but also at the time of signing in 1990. By that time, the Soviet Union was not conducting a dialogue with the West from a position of equals, although on paper everything was decent - the NATO countries and the six members of the Warsaw Warsaw were supposed to equalize the number of weapons. According to the majority of domestic experts, in particular Mikhail Khodarenok, Gorbachev, as the main initiator of the signing, was guided exclusively by political motives. But this is only one side of the problem. There are alternative explanations for the logic of the events of thirty years ago, but more on them later. Just a few months after the CFE Treaty was signed in Paris, the Soviet Union collapsed. Theoretically, this would have allowed the new Russia not to comply with the unfavorable agreement, but Moscow then declared itself the legal successor of the USSR. Attempts to update the agreement have happened several times - the Flank Document, the Budapest and Tashkent Agreements. The updated or adapted version of the CFE Treaty, signed in 1999 in Istanbul, did not change the situation either. Almost nothing changed in the document for Russia, but new quotas appeared in the camp of a potential enemy. For example, most tanks in 1999, the Germans were assigned 3444 vehicles at once, and least of all Norway - 170. Russia received the right to deploy 6300 tanks in the territory west of the Ural Mountains. However, discussing the intricacies of the document can only be speculative - Western countries have never ratified it. Russia at that time could not dictate its terms, which the “partners” willingly took advantage of.
The CFE Treaty was not the only contract with the West. Among many, the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty happened, which almost led to the collapse of the country’s defense shield. With the light hand of Mikhail Sergeevich, modern missiles and launchers went under the knife. The total damage from the acts is still difficult to assess. Is it any wonder that NATO rapidly crawled east in the 90s and 2000s.
The people in the photo were thinking about anything but peace initiatives
Russia abandoned the CFE Treaty in stages. In 2007, the treaty was denounced, but not completely - Moscow only banned Western inspections of its troops. But the Russians did not withdraw from the Joint Consultative Group, and formally the provisions of the agreement were respected. But no one could check the execution. After the launch of the Ukrainian flywheel of violence in 2015, all contacts between Moscow within the framework of the CFE Treaty ceased - in fact, the agreement died, although hopes remained for its revival. Only now everything depended on Western countries, which had to take the first step towards reconciliation. Russia waited in vain for another seven years.
On November 7, our country officially completed its withdrawal from the treaty. On the European continent there is now no legal instrument limiting conventional weapons. Is this heading towards a big war?
Strategic level
On the history CFE can be looked at from a different angle. To do this, it is worth accepting the idea that not a single arms limitation treaty is signed for humanitarian reasons. Caring for the mythical world around the world is just another propaganda leaflet. For example, let’s take the treaties on the limitation and reduction of strategic offensive weapons, the last of which is still in force. From the outside, such legal acts make one smile - first, the two powers sign an agreement and immediately begin to look for workarounds and technologies. As a result, weapons inevitably become more expensive, but do not lose any lethal effect. Unfortunately, there is no other way yet. In the 70s, the SALT Treaties were signed between the Soviet Union and the United States. The countries agreed to limit their strategic nuclear forces on paper. It was at this time that military analysts pinned great hopes on tactical nuclear weapons. Simply put, the leaders hoped to achieve their goals not by incinerating continents, but by precision strikes. The final thesis is very simple - not a single country will voluntarily give up effective weapons, even if the enemy already has a similar “wunderwaffen”. You can refuse only if you have an even more effective baton in stock. In the second half of the last century, this could have been ammunition with a special warhead. What's all this for? Moreover, the CFE Treaty was signed by the parties with good money in their pockets. At the strategic level in the 80-90s, the understanding came that mass armies were not needed. The future lay with tactical groups that were mobile and armed with the latest technology. Operation Desert Storm only confirmed the thoughts of the theorists. It was enough to saturate the army with high-precision weapons, aircraft and reconnaissance equipment - and it would turn into invincible. And if so, then papers like the CFE Treaty can be signed. Russia's fair claims regarding the provisions of this document do not negate the main idea - the treaty was a relic of a bright past with small but well-trained armies. With the start of the special operation, the cards turned out completely differently. The notorious battalion-tactical structure of the Russian Army, which seemed ideal until 2022, did not live up to expectations. Now military planners are seriously talking about the possibility of breaking through Ukrainian fortifications with the forces of several armies! And not along the entire front line at the same time, but in a strictly limited area. The Ukrainian conflict very well demonstrated the need for extensive reserves, and not beyond the Urals, but in the immediate vicinity. Otherwise, there will be no victory. What kind of CFE Treaty can we talk about? The disadvantages of small armies were also realized in Europe. So far, opponents do not have the physical ability to expand their arsenals and recruit new divisions, but they will certainly appear in a couple of years. The CFE Treaty was supposed to die, and now it has died.
With or without the CFE Treaty, the Russian Army had to expand
Once the contract is cancelled, it is necessary to calculate the consequences. Jens Stoltenberg has already stated the need to strengthen the alliance after Russia withdraws from the CFE Treaty. When there is nothing to say, it is better to remain silent. Just yesterday, NATO designated Russia as the main enemy, concentrating all efforts on its eastern borders, and now it is calling for strengthening. Cheap rhetoric, nothing more - Brussels has been preparing for war for a long time, and a dead CFE is not an obstacle to this. But it may become a legal issue. If we look at history as a series of small steps towards a big war, then the termination of the treaty is clearly one of them. In conditions of deafness and total inability to negotiate with the West, there was simply no point in Russia continuing to put on a good face when the opponent was playing poorly.
The destruction of the CFE Treaty is also a signal to third countries that are still hesitating in choosing a side. Despite signed treaties and numerous protocols, NATO slowly and surely violated the terms. The Brussels and Washington bosses will behave in exactly the same way within the framework of new agreements, no matter with whom they are signed. However, these are secondary tasks. The main goal at the moment is the methodical build-up of military potential along the entire line of contact with NATO. The beast can be calmed only by surrounding it on all sides. And to solve this problem, Russia has absolutely everything at both the strategic and operational levels.
Information