So, at the Reykjavík Summit the world came the closest it's ever come to full nuclear disarmament. Both Reagan and Gorbachev genuinely wanted to reduce nuclear arms but Reagan simply refused to concede on the SDI program, he didn't see how SDI could be viewed as a threat and was adamant that it was a "shield" and even offered to share it with the USSR (while I personally bellvie his offer to share it was genuine, various geopolitical factors would have made this unlikely)
Lets say though that Reagan has a moment of doubt , does a turn on SDI and agrees to the Soviet proposal. What would both the immediate US political reaction (remember Reagan was being attacked from both the Left and Right) and what would be the long term effects of the Reykjavik Agreement? Could we see full disarmament by 2000?
Lets say though that Reagan has a moment of doubt , does a turn on SDI and agrees to the Soviet proposal. What would both the immediate US political reaction (remember Reagan was being attacked from both the Left and Right) and what would be the long term effects of the Reykjavik Agreement? Could we see full disarmament by 2000?
"The USSR and the United States undertake for ten years not to exercise their existing right of withdrawal from the ABM Treaty, which is of unlimited duration, and during that period strictly to observe all its provisions. The testing in space of all space components of missile defense is prohibited, except research and testing conducted in laboratories. Within the first five years of the ten-year period (and thus through 1991), the strategic offensive arms of the two sides shall be reduced by 50 percent. During the following five years of that period, the remaining 50 percent of the two sides strategic offensive arms shall be reduced. Thus by the end of 1996, the strategic offensive arms of the USSR and the United States will have been totally eliminated."