The Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty, signed in 1972 as part of SALT I, was a landmark in arms control history. Its significance lay in its recognition of the destabilising effect of ABM systems on the strategic balance. By limiting each superpower to two ABM sites (later reduced to one), the treaty acknowledged that defence against nuclear missiles could spur an arms race, as each side would try to overcome the other's defences. The ABM Treaty was central in maintaining the concept of Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD), which was a key element of strategic stability during the Cold War. This treaty remained in force for three decades until the US withdrew in 2002, a move that sparked new debates about missile defence and strategic stability.

The Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty had significant implications for both NATO and Warsaw Pact countries. For NATO members, particularly those in Western Europe, the treaty was a relief as it eliminated an entire class of nuclear weapons – intermediate-range missiles – that were primarily deployed in Europe. This reduction in land-based missiles was seen as a de-escalation of the direct nuclear threat to European nations. Conversely, for Warsaw Pact countries, the INF Treaty signified a shift in the Soviet Union's approach to security and its willingness to reduce its military presence in Eastern Europe. This change was a precursor to the broader political transformations that led to the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact and the Soviet Union itself.

Technological advancements significantly influenced the arms control agreements during the Cold War. Innovations in missile technology, such as the development of Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (ICBMs) and Submarine-Launched Ballistic Missiles (SLBMs), altered the strategic balance and necessitated new terms in arms control treaties. For instance, the advent of Multiple Independently Targetable Reentry Vehicles (MIRVs) complicated the verification processes and effectiveness of the SALT agreements. Similarly, advances in reconnaissance and verification technology, such as satellite surveillance, enhanced the ability to monitor compliance with treaty terms, making arms control agreements more viable and enforceable. This constant evolution in military technology required arms control treaties to be adaptable and regularly updated to address new challenges.

The arms control efforts during the Cold War had lasting impacts on US-Soviet (later Russian) relations beyond the Cold War era. These efforts established a framework for dialogue and negotiation that continued into the post-Cold War period, facilitating further arms reduction agreements like the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) and New START. They also set a precedent for cooperation on nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament issues globally. The trust and verification mechanisms developed through these treaties helped to foster a more cooperative and less confrontational relationship between the two former adversaries. However, the legacy of these efforts has been tested in recent years, with new security challenges and disagreements leading to the erosion of some of these arms control frameworks.

The Cuban Missile Crisis was a critical catalyst for subsequent arms control treaties. This high-stakes confrontation brought the world perilously close to nuclear war, highlighting the urgent need for effective mechanisms to prevent such escalations. In response, the Partial Test Ban Treaty (1963) was signed, banning nuclear tests in the atmosphere, space, and underwater, thus reducing the nuclear fallout and easing global fears. The crisis also led to the establishment of the hotline between Washington and Moscow, improving communication and reducing the chances of accidental war. This greater awareness of the nuclear threat paved the way for more comprehensive treaties, such as the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) in 1968, which sought to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and promote peaceful uses of nuclear energy.