One of key factors that affect international security and stability is the intention of the US and its allies to build a global anti-ballistic missile (ABM) defense and its regional segments without taking into account interests and concerns of other states. Its negative influence is enhanced with every new American ABM base, appearing in different regions of the world. In Europe, in Asia-Pacific region, in the Middle East and in the world in general the divisive lines are becoming deeper, mutual distrust grows. Washington's plans to increase numbers and improve technical characteristics of antimissiles capable of intercepting intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) and submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs) directly threaten to undermine strategic parity.

It was the US that started this negative process by withdrawing from ABM Treaty in 2002, which served as foundation for strategic stability for 30 years. 

The withdrawal from the Treaty was tied to the plans to deploy the so-called "third positioning area" of the US strategic ABM defense in Europe. Some of its elements were to be deployed in Poland and Czech Republic. Prospects of having them in the vicinity of Russian borders would have made us implement adequate reciprocal measures to neutralize threats to Russian nuclear deterrence forces which they would have created. We openly warned Americans and their allies who expressed their willingness to deploy American ABM bases in their territory about that.

We perceived President Obama's renouncement of the "third positioning area" as a step in the right direction and a timely signal, which helped to lower tensions and conclude a new strategic arms reduction treaty.  But new "phased adaptive approach" to ABM defense, declared by President Obama, in fact proved to be nothing but the continuation of the same course since their unilateral exit from ABM Treaty. With the "ripening" of anti-missile technologies and deployment of new anti-missile means in Romania, Poland and in European waters such activities become increasingly dangerous and directly concerning Russian interests.

Destabilizing effect of American ABM defense reaches other regions. Having started with Europe, the US is striving to involve more and more participants in building of global ABM defense's regional segments. In Asia-Pacific region, Japan and Australia have already been involved by Washington into its activity. Persian Gulf states are also being supplied with new anti-missile systems.

At the same time a force of GBI strategic anti-missiles in the continental US territory of is being enhanced. By the year 2017 it will reach the number of 44 interceptors.  Plans are being hatched to increase its power, including possible deployment in the east of the country. Information systems, including those of space placement, are being modernized; a broad programme of ABM defense firing means tests is being implemented. About 40 warships with hundreds of interceptors will form a sea-based force. All these impressive efforts clearly show that Washington's true objectives and those officially declared do differ.

As Russian Minister of Foreign Affairs stated in Munich, the problem of missile defense is vivid evidence of the powerful destructive influence of unilateral steps in the development of military capabilities contrary to lawful interests of other states. Our proposals on joint operation in the anti-missile field were rejected. In exchange we were advised to join the creation of global US missile defense, strictly according to Washington's templates, which, as we underlined and explained based on facts a number of times, carries real risks for Russian nuclear deterrence forces.

Any action undermining strategic stability will inevitably result in counter measures. Thus, long-term damage is inflicted upon the entire system of international treaties dealing with arms control, the feasibility of which directly depends on the missile defense factor.