Definition Of Arms Control Agreement

December 6, 2020 at 9:12 pm

To understand the current history or practice of arms control, it must be recognized that arms control agreements often serve several conflicting objectives. To avoid war, arms limitation can contribute to disarmament, stability or advantage, rooted in a plausible explanation of the causes of war and of which everyone can credibly claim the mantle of “arms control”. Without consensus on the most effective approach to preventing wars, it has been difficult to implement an arms control policy. In practice, policy makers have juggled the different time horizons of competing arms control constituencies to reach compromises capable of simultaneously advancing the three objectives of arms control, at least for a time. Recognition of the multiple objectives of arms control has a decisive impact on scientists and policy makers. Faced with the difficulties associated with the development of a unified theory of arms control, scholars would do well to learn the lessons of the practical world of state art, where theoretical rigour is often less important than political necessity. This is particularly the case when arms control agreements must be put in place for competing purposes in order to form the parallel coalitions necessary to prevail in complex two-tiered negotiations. In these circumstances, one of the most important resources available to a so-called arms controller is time. Competing interests with different time horizons can be brought together to form trade-offs on arms control, in which each party gets what it wants, but at different points. In addition, initial trade-offs on the importance of arms control can be reinterpreted and revised over time, as arms control regimes take on new meanings and contexts. The realization that arms control agreements can be used for many purposes and that these objectives can change over time can help to better understand why certain agreements exist, why some of them are coming to an end, and why those that end up when they do. The most durable arms-limitation agreements are likely to be those that can continue to embody multiple agendas while adapting to new contexts.

It is unlikely that a Derait agreement will continue when it no longer appears to be used for a sufficient range of purposes and that heads of state and government will be disillusioned by the usefulness of arms control to achieve its objectives. Today, the CIA is the largest producer of national security information for senior U.S. officials. The Director of the CIA (DCIA) is the national head of HUMINT and, on behalf of the DNI, serves as the national authority for the coordination, conflict and evaluation of HUMINT covert operations throughout the IC, in accordance with existing laws, executive orders and inter-institutional agreements. The implementation of arms control agreements has proved difficult over time. Most agreements are based on participants` constant desire to meet the conditions to remain effective.