INF Treaty Talks Fail: What Happened and What’s Next
Foreign policy in the age of Trump
By Neha Mehta
The Progressive Teen Staff Writer
ON JANUARY 31st, 2019, THE UNITED STATES AND RUSSIA MET IN BEIJING for a summit — the last hope to save the INF Treaty established in 1987 by Former U.S. President Ronald Reagan and Former Soviet General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev. The INF Treaty, or the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, is an arms treaty between the U.S. and Russia, prohibiting an entire class of nuclear weapons. The intermediate range the treaty refers to is 500 to 5,500 kilometers, roughly 300 to 3,400 miles. At the time of its enactment, it was the first arms treaty that required a physical reduction in nuclear weapons, rather than just limiting further proliferation. By 1991, the U.S. and U.S.S.R. had destroyed over 2,000 intermediate-range missiles. Seen as a symbolic denouement to the Cold War, the INF Treaty could not be more profound in its significance.
Since 2014, the United States has claimed that Russia has been in violation of the treaty on multiple occasions. It is unclear whether or not this is true, but Russia has also accused the United States of non-compliance. In October of 2018, NATO rebuked Russia for a supposed violation of the INF Treaty, causing John Bolton, President Trump’s 3rd National Security Advisor, to advise Trump to push for withdrawal. Bolton states that the treaty is out of date and does not account for threats from China, a rapidly growing nuclear power. While this is true, many believe that the treaty is still necessary to both symbolically and physically maintain the end of the Cold War and the arms race that went along with it. Russia’s response to the U.S. and NATO’s allegations was to accuse the United States of a violation through its missile defense systems in Europe. This led up to a summit, set in Beijing, between the United States and Russia.
However, in Beijing, issues were not resolved. Andrea Thompson, U.S. Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security Affairs, and Sergei Ryabkov, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister were the primary negotiators at this summit, and it is evident that their talks did not lead to a resolution. The fate of the INF Treaty seems bleak given the failure of the summit, and Ryabkov is quoted by Reuters saying, “Unfortunately, there is no progress…as far as we understand, the next step is coming, the next phase begins, namely the phase of the United States stopping its obligations under the INF, which will evidently happen this coming weekend.” President Trump fulfilled his promise to withdraw from the treaty, saying, “We will move forward with developing our own military response options.” The Trump Administration has stated that the United States will halt compliance effective immediately and will serve formal notice within six months. Leaving the world with a little bit of hope, Andrea Thompson added that “diplomacy is never done.”
Advocates for peace and people all over the world are anxiously watching for what comes next. Not only did the INF Treaty lead to an overall decrease in nuclear missiles, but it also symbolized the culmination of the Cold War. Many are anticipating a return to Cold War-era policy and the spark of a new arms race that will only end in mutually assured destruction. Through the illegal annexation of Crimea and offensive military strategy in Eastern Ukraine, Russia has shown its aggressive tendencies, and in this new era, deterrence could not be more important.
NATO, The North Atlantic Treaty Organization, was formed to unite in the face of Russian aggression. Although the withdrawal from the INF Treaty most affects NATO countries, the organization voiced full support and political backing for the U.S. Given the circumstances, European countries, especially those who were a part of the Soviet Union, are the most vulnerable because of the failure of the treaty talks. This vulnerability gives NATO the opportunity to show its unity and strength through the power of deterrence, and voice responses to Russia’s violations. In a region where stability is exceedingly necessary, deterrence must be restored. Although one possibility is a rapid and dangerous escalation and arms race that will lead to destruction, another is that the looming threat of another Cold War will spark the U.S. and NATO to rejoin talks with Russia, averting a crisis at least temporarily.
