The INF (Intermediate-Range and Shorter-Range Missile)
treaty, signed in 1987 by Reagan and Gorbachev, banned the design, production,
testing and deployment of ground-based (but not ship-based or air-launched) cruise
and ballistic missiles with ranges between 500 and 5000 km. We have adhered to
that treaty up until now. The Russians, on the other hand, developed the 9M729
(SSC-8) cruise missile, with a range estimated up to 3400 miles, and have thus
far deployed at least two battalions of this missile, with four launchers and
an unknown number of missiles each.
We have complained to the Russians about this violation for
several years now, but the Obama administration, typically, didn’t push the
issue very hard and so Putin just ignored them. Trump gave the Russians 60 days
to come into compliance, but they refused, claiming that the range was only 300
km, below the 500 km limit of the treaty, though they offered no proof of that
claim, and only allowed external inspection for a few hours of a static mock-up
of the missile by some journalists. We apparently know differently, probably
because we have tracked test flights. But even without that, the missile
appears to be an extended range variant of the 9M728 (SSC-7), which already has
a range of 500 km.
It is not clear why the Russians have decided to abandon the
treaty. There doesn’t appear to be any current tactical need for such a missile
against the West, considering what they already have fielded. Perhaps its
development was a result of internal politics – some group that pressed for it
and that Putin needs as supporters. Perhaps it was just exuberance among some
in the military. Perhaps the growing threat from China drove the perceived need
for such a missile. Perhaps it was just Putin pushing to see how far he could
go against Obama’s weak response. Perhaps Putin’s need to show the Russian
public how strong Russia is was more important than adhering to the treaty. Who
knows?
In any case, the treaty was for practical purposes already
dead, since the Russians weren’t observing it. There is of course the
predictable outcry in the US by those who think anything Trump does must be
stupid (even if Obama tried the same thing). But in fact, withdrawing from the
treaty is just an acknowledgement that it was no longer in force anyway. I am
hard-pressed to see what benefit America would get from pretending otherwise
and staying in the treaty when Russia is already violating it. Indeed, not
reacting to Russian’s violation of the treaty might well encourage them to feel
they could violate other treaties, like the START (Strategic Arms Reduction)
treaty, with impunity.
In an amusing sidelight, China opposes the US withdrawal
from the INF treaty. Of course, China itself never joined the INF treaty, and
has developed and a deployed a number of missiles that would be in violation of
the treaty, including the DF-26 “Guam Killer” ballistic missile they have been
bragging about recently. Still, they oppose our leaving the treaty! Talk
about chutzpah!
Posts
