the strategic arms limitation talks:

3 min read 14-03-2025

The Strategic Arms Limitation Talks (SALT) were a series of bilateral conferences and agreements between the United States and the Soviet Union during the Cold War. These talks, spanning from 1969 to 1979, aimed to limit the growth of nuclear arsenals and reduce the risk of nuclear war. Understanding SALT's context, agreements, and legacy is crucial for appreciating the complexities of Cold War diplomacy and nuclear arms control.

The Cold War Context: An Arms Race Spiraling Out of Control

The Cold War's defining characteristic was the intense rivalry between the US and the USSR, fueled by ideological differences and geopolitical competition. This rivalry manifested in a dangerous arms race, particularly in the realm of nuclear weapons. Both superpowers possessed thousands of nuclear warheads, capable of devastating each other and the world multiple times over. The escalating nuclear stockpiles created a climate of fear and uncertainty, increasing the risk of accidental or intentional nuclear war.

The Need for Arms Control: A Shared, Though Cautious, Goal

Despite their ideological differences and geopolitical tensions, both the US and the USSR recognized the inherent dangers of unchecked nuclear proliferation. The possibility of mutual assured destruction (MAD) – a scenario where a nuclear war would annihilate both sides – became a sobering reality. This shared understanding, however grim, laid the groundwork for the SALT talks.

SALT I: A First Step Towards Limitation

SALT I, encompassing the 1972 agreements signed in Moscow, represented a crucial first step in controlling the nuclear arms race. Two major agreements emerged from SALT I:

The Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty: This treaty limited the deployment of ABM systems to two sites per country. The intention was to deter a first-strike capability, as a nation wouldn't be able to defend itself against a large-scale nuclear attack.
The Interim Agreement on Offensive Strategic Arms: This agreement froze the number of intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) and submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs) at existing levels for a five-year period. While it didn't reduce the number of weapons, it prevented further expansion.

SALT I was a landmark achievement, signaling a willingness by both superpowers to engage in serious arms control negotiations. However, it was only an interim measure.

SALT II: A More Ambitious, Yet Ultimately Unratified, Agreement

SALT II, negotiated between 1972 and 1979, aimed to achieve more substantial reductions in strategic offensive arms. The treaty, signed in Vienna in 1979, proposed limits on the number of ICBMs, SLBMs, and heavy bombers equipped with long-range cruise missiles. It also included provisions for verification and data exchange to ensure compliance.

However, SALT II faced significant challenges. The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979 severely damaged US-Soviet relations. President Carter withdrew the treaty from the Senate for ratification, effectively killing it.

The Legacy of SALT: A Mixed Bag

While SALT II ultimately failed to enter into force, SALT I had a significant impact. The ABM Treaty, in particular, contributed to a degree of strategic stability by limiting the development of missile defense systems. Moreover, the SALT talks established a framework for future arms control negotiations, including the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaties (START).

Long-Term Effects: A Foundation for Future Negotiations

The SALT process demonstrated the feasibility of arms control agreements between superpowers. It established mechanisms for verification and dialogue, paving the way for subsequent arms reduction treaties that were more successful in dismantling nuclear arsenals. Despite its limitations, SALT stands as a testament to the importance of diplomatic efforts to manage the risks posed by nuclear weapons.

It's important to note that the SALT talks were not without their critics. Some argued that the agreements did not go far enough in reducing nuclear arsenals, while others expressed concerns about verification and enforcement. The legacy of SALT is complex and multifaceted. It reflects the inherent difficulties of arms control negotiations between rival superpowers but also highlights the potential for achieving some level of cooperation, even in the midst of profound ideological and geopolitical conflict.