Expert comment: The INF and the future of arms control
By John Mecklin, October 24, 2018
The United States' withdrawal today (August 2, 2019) from the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF) has elicited criticism from many quarters, including from the leader who signed the landmark agreement on behalf of the Soviet Union in 1987. “Do they really not understand in Washington what this could lead to?” former General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev told the Interfax news agency.
The INF required destruction of US and Soviet ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles with ranges of between 500 and 5,500 kilometers, and their launchers and associated support structures and equipment; it was long considered central to the East-West arms control regime. In 2018, I asked a variety of global security experts for their views on the proposed US pullout, and what might be done to deal with intermediate-range nuclear weapons, if or when the United States ultimately left the INF. Their views are, most unfortunately, at least as relevant now that the INF lies in the dustbin of history as they were then.
Share:
By Walter C. Clemens
Can Trump abrogate the INF Treaty without Congress?
By Alexandra Bell
We don’t have a missile gap in Asia. We have a diplomacy gap.
By Kingston Reif
Arms control on the brink
By Matt Korda, Hans M. Kristensen
Trump falls on sword for Putin’s treaty violation
By Steven E. Miller
Ideology over interest? Trump’s costly INF decision.
By Pavel Podvig
Who lost the INF Treaty?
By Mark Hibbs
The hope in Europe
By Zia Mian
The INF Treaty and the crises of arms control
By Sharon Squassoni
A mix of impatience and uncreativity
By Oliver Meier
Europeans to the rescue?
By Lawrence J. Korb
Why it could (but shouldn’t) be the end of the arms control era