Since the first V2 rockets rained down on London during World War II, countries have sought, in fits and spurts, a defense against missile attacks. The U.S.-Soviet nuclear and missile arms race increased the threat. Over the years, various schemes for national missile defense were developed and discarded as unworkable against thousands of sophisticated long-range missiles. The Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), often called “Star Wars,” was a prominent example of such a defense scheme. Proposed by President Ronald Reagan in 1983, SDI aimed to develop space-based systems capable of intercepting and neutralizing incoming ballistic missiles. The rationale behind these defense initiatives was to protect the U.S. from a potential nuclear attack and provide a shield against the Soviet Union’s expanding missile capabilities. While causing significant debate, these warfare defense innovations also contributed to efforts to reduce nuclear arms through negotiations and treaties.
In 1983, President Reagan revived missile defense research efforts to render nuclear weapons “impotent and obsolete.” His Strategic Defense Initiative restored research on various missile interceptor technologies. At the October 1986 Reykjavik summit with Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, Reagan suggested that both countries abandon “mutually assured destruction” by eliminating all offensive ballistic missiles within ten years while researching and jointly developing strategic missile defenses. Along with the debates about the nuclear defense system, the development of atomic power faced challenges. The Chornobyl nuclear disaster in 1986 raised concerns about safety and environmental risks associated with nuclear energy. This event led to increased scrutiny, stricter regulations, and a more cautious approach to nuclear power development. However, research and development continued, improving reactor designs and safety measures. Despite the failures caused by Chornobyl, states continued to expand their nuclear energy capacity.
Although Gorbachev rejected Reagan’s proposal, the meeting set the stage for the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty. It scrapped all their ground-launched missiles with ranges between 500 and 5,500 kilometers and eased Cold War tensions. Reagan also began talks toward the 1991 Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START), the first treaty to reduce strategic nuclear weapons verifiably. Under START, U.S. and Russian deployed strategic arsenals shrank from over 10,000 warheads each to less than 2,500 each.
Because potential foes can counter missile defense by building enough offensive ballistic missiles to overwhelm the system, the Reagan administration also established the Missile Technology Control Regime in 1987 to help curb the spread of technologies related to missiles capable of carrying nuclear, chemical, and biological warheads. MTCR membership has grown and has contributed to constraining or ending missile programs in several countries.
With the collapse of the Soviet Union and the easing of the superpower nuclear rivalry, the focus of U.S. missile defense efforts shifted to responding to more limited attacks and the threat of shorter-range missiles from states such as North Korea and Iran. Despite initially signing the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), North Korea raised concerns by pursuing a clandestine nuclear weapons program. The U.S. negotiations with North Korea led to the 1994 Agreed Framework, which aimed to withdraw North Korea’s nuclear activities in exchange for economic aid and normalized relations. Meanwhile, tensions between the U.S. and Iran escalated as suspicions grew about Iran’s nuclear ambitions. Increased international scrutiny and negotiations led to the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which sought to limit Iran’s nuclear program in exchange for sanctions relief. Today, 31 states possess ballistic missiles, but only 10 have produced or flight-tested missiles with ranges exceeding 1,000 kilometers. For now, China and Russia are the only states with a proven capability to launch ballistic missiles from their territories that can strike the United States.
Over the years, various U.S. missile defense systems have been fielded, such as the Patriot and Theater High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) systems, primarily to counter short and medium-range missile threats. After many years of research, in 2004, the George W. Bush administration deployed 30 ground-based strategic missile interceptors in Alaska and California. Although President Reagan was unable to conclude a deal to cooperate on missile defense with the Soviet Union, President George W. Bush renewed efforts in this area with Russia in part to assure Russia that U.S. missile defenses are not intended to undermine Russian security. In 2004, the Bush administration began seeking a Defense Technical Cooperation Agreement (DTCA) with Russia to address various cooperative research and development activities, including missile defense.
In 2009, the Obama administration modified the Bush administration’s plan for deploying strategic interceptors in Europe in favor of the European Phased Adaptive Approach. The Phased Approach involves the deployment of hundreds of more effective Standard Missile-3 (SM-3) interceptors on Aegis ships in the Mediterranean Sea and on land in Romania and Poland, with a radar in southeastern Europe to counter Iranian short- and medium-range missiles, and if necessary, against long-range missiles after 2018.
During the Trump administration, U.S.-Russia nuclear relations were marked by cooperation and tensions. The New START Treaty, signed in 2010, was prologued in 2021, ensuring limits on deployed strategic nuclear weapons. However, Russia violated the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty, and allegations of election interference strained relations. The Biden administration continued the extension of New START but faced challenges, including cyberattacks and disruptions over arms control. The broader relationship between the two countries influenced nuclear diplomacy, with both sides expressing concerns over strategic stability and modernization efforts, making nuclear relations a crucial yet complex aspect of U.S.-Russia diplomacy in recent years.