INF Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty

Russia offering the United States and NATO an alternative to a new Cuban Missile Crisis-style scenario, and was prepared to continue constructive dialogue with Washington on Ukraine, Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said 10 Decembe 2021. "We are offering an alternative [to a repeat of a Cuban Missile Crisis-style event] – the non-deployment of these kinds of weapons near our borders, the withdrawal of forces and assets which destabilise the situation, a rejection of provocative measures, including various drills. But we need guarantees, and the guarantees must be legal," Ryabkov told Sputnik during a press briefing in Moscow. "It's necessary to avoid a new missile crisis in Europe before it's too late, before the appearance of medium- and short-range missiles in these territories. This is unacceptable and is a direct route to escalating the confrontation," the diplomat warned. Ryabkov said he couldn't understand the actions of the US and its European allies in this area, stressing that their behaviour has done nothing to strengthen their own security. "It's ridiculous to suggest that their missiles are aimed at countering a limited rocket threat from the opposite direction," he said.

Ryabkov said this dialogue will include a proposal on the reciprocal verifiable moratorium on the development of new ground-to-ground missile systems banned under the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, which the US denounced in 2019. Lavrov said “The initiative not to deploy shock weapons near the borders of Russia – this is a useful thing, but apart from the main requirement of non-expansion of NATO to the East, it is unlikely to be of significant importance.”

Progress was made on Russian President Vladimir Putin’s initiative to freeze the deployment in Europe of short- and intermediate-range missiles banned by the now-defunct Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty. President Putin first put forward this plan in September 2019, soon after the treaty was terminated, and, a year later, presented a new version of this proposal to the West. Neither draft sparked any interest in the US or among its allies.

Deputy Secretary of State Wendy R. Sherman led the U.S. delegation’s participation in an extraordinary session of the U.S.-Russia bilateral Strategic Stability Dialogue (SSD) 10 January 2022. "The preliminary ideas the United States raised today include missile placement. We also made clear that the United States is open to discussing the future of certain missile systems in Europe – along the lines of the now defunct INF Treaty between the U.S. and Russia.... The Russians addressed the concerns that we had that led to the ultimate demise of the INF treaty. This was not a negotiation, so we were putting ideas on the table today. And we have a long way to go, but of course, there are ongoing concerns about intermediate-range missiles. That’s the whole reason there was an INF treaty in the first place. That concern remains, and if there is a way for us to address it going forward, including our concerns that led to the demise of the treaty, that is something worth considering and seeing whether, in fact, reciprocal actions can be taken that increase our security."

Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, interviewed on Channel One’s “The Great Game” political talk show, Moscow, January 13, 2022, stated "As one of the proposals made to us verbally for now as an example of areas where we could hold further talks, the Americans and representatives of NATO countries mentioned reducing risks, discussion of confidence building measures, including in outer space and cyberspace, as well as arms control, including an agreement on limiting intermediate- and shorter-range missiles. This is a revealing moment. Over two years ago, after the Americans destroyed the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty, we sent an initiative of President of Russia Vladimir Putin practically to all OSCE countries. He invited them to join a unilateral moratorium that we imposed on the deployment of land-based intermediate- and shorter-range missiles. It was conditioned on the non-deployment of the same missiles of US make. We suggested a joint moratorium. As soon as we announced it, the Americans and Europeans, the NATO members called us sneaky. They said we had already deployed Iskander missiles in the Kaliningrad Region and now want to deprive them of such an opportunity.

"Now this is one of the specific results that we asked them to put in writing. They said themselves that they are ready to discuss a new regime on intermediate- and shorter-range missiles. There are nuances: they are ready to renounce nuclear missiles of this range and will think what to do about their non-nuclear versions. However, there is no difference – both a nuclear and non-nuclear missile will be detected and perceived as a direct threat to the Russian Federation. It is necessary to talk about this. They pulled out one element of our proposals – the initiative not to deploy offensive weapons near the Russian borders. This is a useful suggestion but it will hardly be important in isolation from our main demand of NATO’s eastward non-expansion."

Donald Trump said on 20 October 2018 he would denounce the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty because Russia has violated the agreement, but provided no details on the violations. The 1987 pact, which helped protect the security of the US and its allies in Europe and the Far East, prohibited the United States and Russia from possessing, producing or test-flying a ground-launched cruise missile with a range of 300 to 3,400 miles (482km to 5,471km). "Russia has violated the agreement. They have been violating it for many years," Trump said after a rally in Elko, Nevada. "And we're not going to let them violate a nuclear agreement and go out and do weapons and we're not allowed to."

"We'll have to develop those weapons, unless Russia comes to us and China comes to us and they all come to us and say let's really get smart and let's none of us develop those weapons, but if Russia's doing it and if China's doing it, and we're adhering to the agreement, that's unacceptable," he said.

The US Constitution provides that the president "shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two-thirds of the Senators present concur" (Article II, section 2). Stricly speaking, the Senate does not ratify treaties—the Senate approves or rejects a resolution of ratification. If the resolution passes, then ratification takes place when the instruments of ratification are formally exchanged between the United States and the foreign power(s).

Denunciation and withdrawal are used interchangeably to refer to a unilateral act by which a state that is a party to a treaty ends its adherence to that treaty. Under Article XIV of the INF Treaty " Each Party shall, in exercising its national sovereignty, have the right to withdraw from this Treaty if it decides that extraordinary events related to the subject matter of this Treaty have jeopardized its supreme interests. It shall give notice of its decision to withdraw to the other Party six months prior to withdrawal from this Treaty. Such notice shall include a statement of the extraordinary events the notifying Party regards as having jeopardized its supreme interests."

The US Constitution is silent about how treaties might be terminated. Precedent strongly suggests that denunciation is at the discretion of the President alone, without Congressional involvement.

President George W. Bush's unilateral denunciation of the 1972 ABM Treaty prompted a lawsuit, Kucinich v. Bush, in which members of the House of Representatives challenged the constitutionality of the denunciation on grounds that the president may not terminate a treaty without congressional approval. The Federal District Court declined to rule on the merits of the case, which was dismissed the case as a nonjusticiable political question.

Germany voiced concern over the consequences Trump's decision to pull out of the INF Treaty will have on security in Europe. German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas said that the US decision is "regrettable" and that it "raises difficult questions for us and Europe." He added that the over 30-year-old treaty is "an important pillar of our European security architecture." In a separate statement, the German government also emphasized that despite repeatedly urging Moscow to clear up allegations that it has violated the treaty, Russia had not yet done so.

The state RIA Novosti news agency quoted an unidentified "diplomatic source" in Brussels as saying Trump's statement has "an election context." The source was quoted as saying "Just days before the elections to Congress, he wants to show his electorate that he can make decisions that will upset the president of Russia". The pro-Kremlin tabloid website Argumenty Nedeli quoted an unidentified "high-ranking Russian diplomatic-military source" as saying that Trump's statement was a ploy to get the upper hand in talks with Russia on nuclear issues. "The business president is simply raising the stakes before negotiations like he always does," the source said. "Now a banal exchange of concessions both by us and by the Americans will begin."

Thomas Graham, former specialist on Russia for the National Security Council under President George W. Bush, told the daily Kommersant that the withdrawal indications could just mean that Bolton, who has long opposed any arms-control treaties with Russia, has caught the president's ear. "Only time will tell if this decision is final," he said. "In the administration there are high-ranking figures who support the treaty and who would like to continue working with Russia to regulate contentious issues."

The Intermediate Nuclear Force (INF) Treaty was signed by President Reagan and General Secretary Gorbachev on December 8, 1987. The INF Treaty eliminated 867 American an 1836 Soviet missiles from NATO and Warsaw Pact arsenals by the end of 1991 with intrusive verification measures to be employed over the following decade. The treaty was hailed as the most important arms control agreement in the cold war era, representing tne first negotiated reversal of the Soviet buildup of nuclear weapons.

The Treaty Between the United States of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics on the Elimination of Their Intermediate-Range and Shorter-Range Missiles, also known as the INF Treaty, required the destruction of U.S. and Soviet ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles (“GLBMs” and “GLCMs”) with a range capability between 500 and 5,500 kilometers, and their associated launchers, support structures, and equipment, within three years after the Treaty entered into force in 1987. At the time it was signed, the Treaty’s verification regime was the most detailed and stringent in the history of nuclear arms control.

The INF Treaty was designed to eliminate all INF Treaty-prohibited systems in a short time span, and to ensure compliance with the total ban on the possession, production, and flight-testing of such systems. GLBMs and GLCMs were acknowledged to be destabilizing to Cold War European and Asian stability, and had the potential to precipitate and/or escalate a nuclear war between the East and West. The INF Treaty is of unlimited duration.

The United States eliminated its last GLCM and GLBM covered under the INF Treaty in late April and early May 1991. The Soviet Union eliminated its last declared SS-20 GLBM in May 1991. A total of 2,692 missiles were eliminated.