During the period of tension on the world stage between different countries and / or ideological camps, many people are concerned about one question: what will happen if the war does start? It is now 2018 and the whole world, in particular Russia, is now going through such a period once again. At such moments, military parity between countries and blocs becomes the only deterrent that prevents the start of a real war, and the phrase “if you want peace, prepare for war” takes on special relevance and meaning.
What is it - theory
Military-strategic parity (MSP) is an approximate equality between countries and / or groups of countries in the qualitative and quantitative availability of nuclear missile and other weapons, in their ability to develop and produce new types of strategic offensive and defensiveweapons, which provides an equivalent possibility of delivering a retaliatory (reciprocal) strike with infliction of damage unacceptable for the aggressor side.
To comply with the GSP, it is necessary to take into account not only strategic weapons, but also production capacities in order to prevent an arms race.
What is it in practice
In practice, military-strategic parity is the basis of international security, which was established after the end of the Cold War with the adoption of the Soviet-American agreement on the limitation of anti-ballistic missile systems (ABM) in 1972.
The GSP is based on the principle of equal opportunities, rights and the same ratio of parties in the military-political sphere. First of all, today we are talking about nuclear missile weapons. And this principle is basic in negotiations on the reduction and limitation of weapons, as well as the prevention of the creation of new types (again, primarily nuclear weapons).
This is not about absolute mirror equality, but about the possibility of causing irreparable and unacceptable damage to the aggressor country, up to its complete destruction. However, we are not talking about constantly building up our military power, thereby upsetting the balance of power, but about equality in military-strategic potentials, since this parity can also be violated by an intense arms race of one of the opposing sides. Military-strategic parity is precisely the balance that can be disturbed at any moment by creatingweapons of mass destruction that other countries do not have or against which they have no protection.
As mentioned above, the GSP relies mainly on weapons of mass destruction and primarily on nuclear-missile parity. At the same time, the Strategic Missile Forces (RVSN) are the base, the material basis of the VSP and balance the combination of the quantity and quality of weapons of each side. This leads both to a balance of combat capabilities, and to the possibility of guaranteed use of weapons to solve the military-strategic tasks of the state under the most pessimistic scenarios for it.
Military-strategic parity of the USSR and the USA
About two decades after the end of World War II, the USSR was strategically behind the United States of America in terms of nuclear weapons. By the 1970s, it was reduced, and a relative balance in military potential was achieved. This period is known in history as the Cold War. On the verge of armed confrontation, the peace-loving and good-neighborly policy of the USSR and other countries of the socialist camp played a very important role in preventing the outbreak of a hot war, as well as the fact that the leaders of the capitalist world showed common sense and did not continue to escalate the situation, which threatened to get out of control.
It was the significant successes of the Soviet Union in the design and production of strategic weapons that helped the USSR achieve military-strategic parity with the United States. This led both parties to the negotiation process, as theyrealized that no country in the future will be able to achieve any significant superiority without inflicting serious damage on itself and its allies in the form of a retaliatory military strike.
The available forces of the USSR by 1970 consisted of 1600 launchers of ICBMs, 316 launchers of SLBMs for 20 RPK CHs and about 200 strategic bombers. The United States outnumbered the Soviet Union, but military experts from both countries agreed that there was no significant asymmetry in terms of quality.
One of the tasks that military-strategic parity solves is an obstacle for countries and groups of countries to solve their geopolitical issues with the help of nuclear missile weapons. At that time, parity was called the balance of fear. At its core, it remains so now, and it seems that fear of the unknown stops some countries from rash actions.
Documents
The guarantors of parity were documents that were subject to lengthy and very complex negotiations:
- SALT-1 - 1972 Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty;
- SALT II – 1979 Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty;
- ABM – 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty – limiting the deployment of anti-missile defense systems – was in effect until 2002, when the Americans unilaterally withdrew from the treaty;
- Additional Protocol to the ABM Treaty on the reduction of deployment areas.
By 1980, the military-strategic parity of the USSR to the United States was 2.5 thousandcarriers, 7 thousand nuclear charges, while the US has 2.3 thousand carriers and 10 thousand charges.
All treaties were restrictive in terms of the number of nuclear weapons and consolidated the principle of security in the field of offensive weapons.
Conclusion
This solution to an acute issue led to a warming of relations between countries: many treaties and agreements were concluded in the areas of trade, shipping, agriculture, transport and many others.
Undoubtedly, the signing of treaties and agreements on arms limitation has become a positive development for the whole world. But the deterioration of relations between the US and Iran, the Afghan issue, the policy of the United States in different parts of the world (in Africa and the Middle East), the Ukrainian, Crimean and Syrian issues de alt a very serious blow to the process of further peaceful existence and put the world on the brink of another cold war..
And today such a precarious balance is maintained with the help of a relative equality of forces with a possible global conflict. Therefore, military-strategic parity is a very serious deterrent for those countries that believe that they alone dictate their interests to the whole world and try to subordinate everyone to their will.
