"Grounded in an understanding of the more plausible pathways to conflict, NATO should adopt a comprehensive strategy aimed at minimizing the chances of a direct clash while maintaining effective deterrence, countering Russian threats ..." 7/x

"below that threshold, and ultimately stabilizing the security environment on the continent." This will doubtless be a significant challenge. An accurate appreciation of the most plausible pathways to conflict is where the process of addressing it needs to start. END

People who negotiated SALT II on Sov side talked about it as a near-perfect treaty (not that I agree). Data exchange - 2nd time in SU history it provided data about its military; 1st time was in July 1939 to British and French. So, yes, big thing.

Former Russian ambassador to Washington Antonov linked resumption of arms control to sanctions. Also: Biden administration wanted arms control only because they wanted to look into the depths of our arsenal using verification. kommersant.ru/doc/7432532?fr…

My short piece in EU Non-Proliferation and Disarmament newsletter on chances of an INF 2.0. Short answer - slim. Both US and Russia prepare deployments in 2026; many countries (China!) have INF-range missiles. Not impossible, but commitment and political will are lacking. iai.it/sites/default/…

Hard to figure why some think Trump wants division of spheres of influence with Putin. He recognizes only one sphere of influence - that of the US. Bringing Russia into it is hardly appeasement. Chances of success is a different matter, so far it's about intentions.