The end of the INF

By | February 8, 2019

The INF and the future of arms control

Last week, the US withdrew from the 1987 Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces Treaty, with Russia following suit days later. The US decision has elicited criticism from many; in the 2019 Doomsday Clock Statement, the Bulletin Science and Security Board recognized the importance and impact of the INF, writing “Its potential death foreshadows a new competition to deploy weapons long banned.”

Here’s what you need to know:

Welcome to the New Age of Nuclear Instability

Bulletin president & CEO Rachel Bronson
New York Times Op-Ed

Expert comment: The INF and the future of arms control

Can Trump abrogate the INF treaty without Congress?
Walter C. Clemens

We don’t have a missile gap in Asia. We have a diplomacy gap.
Alexandra Bell

The hope in Europe
Mark Hibbs

Why it could (but shouldn’t) be the end of the arms control era
Lawrence J. Korb

Trump falls on sword for Putin’s treaty violation
Matt Korda, Hans M. Kristensen

Europeans to the rescue?
Oliver Meier

The INF Treaty and the crises of arms control
Zia Mian

Ideology over interest? Trump’s costly INF decision.
Steven E. Miller

Who lost the INF Treaty?
Pavel Podvig

Arms control on the brink
Kingston Reif

A mix of impatience and uncreativity
Sharon Squassoni

Bulletin Subscription Magazine

Special Issue: Nuclear Modernization

Completely free-access through February

Together, we make the world safer.

The Bulletin elevates expert voices above the noise. But as an independent nonprofit organization, our operations depend on the support of readers like you. Help us continue to deliver quality journalism that holds leaders accountable. Your support of our work at any level is important. In return, we promise our coverage will be understandable, influential, vigilant, solution-oriented, and fair-minded. Together we can make a difference.

Get alerts about this thread
Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments