The American missile test reopens the issue of armaments

The American missile test has put an end to the interruption of evidence of US ballistic carriers that has lasted for thirty years and represents the logical consequence of the interruption of the treaty in force since 1987 between USA and Russia. With the signing of that treaty the end of the cold war and the logic of the two blocs coincide, so its overcoming can only mean that we officially enter a new phase of world instability. In reality this situation is already a fact: both for the Russian protagonist of Putin, and for the appearance of a new actor, China, on the military scene. This does not mean the passage from a situation of opposition of two subjects to a tripolar situation: certainly China, Russia and the USA are the major superpowers, but in this scenario it is necessary to keep in mind also India, the states that can or want to have a nuclear arsenal and also of the European Union, which, albeit slowly, has planned the constitution of its own armed force. The scenario, therefore, becomes multipolar, also because of Trump's intentions, not always respected by the American government itself, of not wanting to play the part of world gendarme anymore. In addition to this general framework it is necessary to consider the particular case of Russia, committed to developing missile technology capable of reaching 5,000 kilometers away and above all a carrier that could reach the western coast of the USA, besides Chinese military development, with Beijing has always refused to adhere to arms treaties, has justified the launch of the test missile for the American military. Certainly not good news, the resumption of American missile launches means that Washington wants to demonstrate the real intention of putting itself on the same level as the other super powers, thus reopening to rearmament, whose conseguneze are, first of all, of a diplomatic nature. In fact, the reactions of Moscow and Beijing have not been slow in coming, accusing the United States of preparing the test for some time; these accusations are unproven and contain a certain amount of hypocrisy, if we consider that they are made by nations that have long been testing new missile systems. From the military point of view, precisely for this reason, it is impossible not to justify the United States for having interrupted the period in which they did not carry out missile tests: the need to have countermeasures against the adversaries is a fact. It is also necessary to consider the aspect of wanting to give a signal to China and Russia, in order not to pass as a sign of weakness to have respected the treaties and not to have carried out missile tests for thirty years. For Trump it was the way and the moment to show the world that even the US can have missile weapons also intended as deterrents to other powers. A possible reading also includes the desire, through the test, to bring Beijing to a new negotiation to avoid the proliferation of armaments. There are forecasts that say that the Chinese arsenal can, in the near future, exceed the American one. From these data the recipient of the missile test message appears to be more Beijing, than Moscow, also due to China's growing desire to extend its influence in the South China Sea, whose maritime routes and the protection of the countries bordering on this sea , appears to be a primary objective of American foreign policy since the time of the Obama presidency. As already mentioned, both Russia and China reacted negatively to this test, which marks the resumption of armaments and brings the world back thirty years: this awareness must be of the whole world, because it means possible negative effects on relationships between states and economic uncertainty, therefore a further factor of aggravation for the world situation, increasingly subject to solicitations of a different nature, which endanger stability and global peace.