Britannica
Sources used in this answer
- Strategic Arms Limitation Talks
- mutual assured destruction
- 20th-century international relations - Arms-limitation negotiations
- arms control - The Cold War : Soviet and U.S.-led arms-control agreements
- nuclear strategy - Mutual assured destruction
- rocket and missile system - Ballistic missile defense
- strategic weapons system
Why did the Strategic Arms Limitation Talks focus on limiting strategic nuclear weapons?
Created from Britannica articles
using AI.
AI can make mistakes, so verify using Britannica articles.
nuclear strategy
The explosion from the first thermonuclear weapon (hydrogen bomb), code-named Mike, which was detonated at Enewetak atoll in the Marshall Islands, November 1, 1952. The photograph was taken at an altitude of 3,600 metres (12,000 feet) 80 km (50 miles) from the detonation site.
The Strategic Arms Limitation Talks (SALT) focused on limiting strategic nuclear weapons to stabilize the regime of mutual assured destruction and restrain the escalating nuclear arms race between the United States and the Soviet Union.123
By the late 1960s, both superpowers had developed massive arsenals of intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) and other strategic delivery systems capable of total mutual annihilation. The primary objectives of these negotiations included:134
- Maintaining Deterrence: By limiting antiballistic missile (ABM) systems, the ABM Treaty ensured that both sides remained vulnerable to a retaliatory strike, thereby reinforcing the deterrent effect of their respective strategic forces.135
- Managing Technological Shifts: The emergence of multiple independently targetable reentry vehicles (MIRVs) threatened to destabilize the strategic balance by allowing a single missile to carry multiple warheads, potentially enabling a first-strike capability.25
- Establishing Parity: The talks sought to confirm a broad equality in destructive power, addressing the asymmetry between the two nations' arsenals—such as the Soviet focus on large warheads versus the U.S. emphasis on missile accuracy.15
Ultimately, these agreements aimed to prevent a surprise attack and provide a framework for détente, though they often struggled to keep pace with rapid technological advancements.235