Unsuccessful diplomatic negotiations led Russia and the United States to battle on with their strategic arms. The two countries held talks in the "two-plus-two" format in Moscow on October 12, 2007, to discuss issues such as the missile defense system in Eastern Europe, the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe, and bilateral relations. The U.S. side claimed to be considerate about Russia's concerns, but refused to give up its deployment plan. The United States suggested that the bases in Poland and the Czech Republic not be activated immediately after their establishment, while Russia proposed to deploy its officers at the U.S. missile bases. The United States later agreed to allow Russia to do so only with the consent of the host countries' governments. Russia rejected U.S. claims that the regional missile defense system was targeted at the threat from Iran. Meanwhile, a Russian proposal to jointly use a Russian-operated radar station in Azerbaijan received a chilly response from the United States. Russia and the United States again failed to reach an agreement on missile defense in "two-plus-two" talks held on March 18, 2008, though they did sign a "joint strategic framework" document that included strategic arms reduction.

While the talks remained inconclusive, Russia took a hard line toward the United States—threatening to quit the bilateral 1987 Intermediate Nuclear Force Treaty, withdrawing from the 1990 Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe, repeatedly showing off with its latest Topol-M missile system, resuming patrol of its strategic bombers and initiating military exercises with Latin American countries. Russia also updated its nuclear arsenal, planned to deploy advanced missile systems in Belarus and Kaliningrad, and set up new military bases with strategic missile systems in the Far East. Kyrgyzstan received financial aid from Russia in exchange for closing the U.S. military base at Manas. Russia has voiced strong opposition to NATO plans to grant membership to former Soviet republics Ukraine and Georgia, and pressured Ukraine with higher energy prices. Finally, Russia invaded neighboring Georgia in August 2008, backing independence for the breakaway provinces of South Ossetia and Abkhazia.

On January 19, 2008, Russian General of the Army Yuri Baluyevsky warned that Russia was ready to use force, preemptively and with nuclear weapons, to defend itself and its allies against security threats. Russia also has the military technology to intercept any missiles launched from Polish soil. All of these factors suggest a new round of Russia-U.S. military confrontation, but Russia and the United States are unlikely to engage in direct warfare. The only way to resolve differences between the two sides is through diplomatic negotiation.

Common interests

Both sides feel the burden of overloaded historical elements in their bilateral ties. But each of them has criticized the other party for maintaining a Cold War mentality while looking forward to the reconciliation of their relations. Meanwhile, reduction of offensive nuclear weapons is an urgent and inevitable task for both sides, as reaching agreement is in both their interests.

Such an agreement is what the United States needs. The United States started to combine its active anti-proliferation policy together with arms control policy in the 1990s. It promoted the indefinite extension of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). The United States also impelled all countries to sign the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty under the UN multilateral nuclear disarmament framework. There has been no need to maintain its massive nuclear arsenal, which was based on the U.S.-Soviet Union nuclear confrontation, since the Soviet Union's disintegration in 1991. Strategic nuclear arms reduction based on strategic balance will not threaten the nuclear strategic advantage of the United States. Further reductions in strategic nuclear weapons between Russia and the United States will not only help the latter maintain its position as a nuclear giant, but also stop a new round of nuclear armament competition, while restraining other countries' nuclear development. The nuclear proliferation situation since 1991 has been even tougher than in the Cold War period, which is affecting and challenging U.S. strategic interests. Thus, preventing nuclear proliferation is an important goal of U.S. arms control and security policy. The challenge that the United States faces on the issue has forced it to switch its focus to preventing the worldwide proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and related technologies.