The I.N.F. Treaty, Explained

At 58 at least I didn't have to spend the middle years of my life worrying about the imminent threat of nuclear war.

It is time to either withdraw or update the INF to include China. Russia's annual GDP is about $1.6 trillion dollars (i.e., less than the annual revenue of Apple and Google combined). They claim to spend approx. $60 billion on their defense budget ( the US spends $600 to $700 billion annually on defense with a $17 trillion dollar economy). I lived in Russia from 2010 to 2017 and can tell you first hand their economy is less efficient than any Western country (e.g., $60 billion spent in Germany or the US would go a lot further than in Russia). I would not worry about an arms race with Russia. They already are running at full tilt. We are in a sort of arms race with China. China is already spending close to $300 billion on defense & due to its command & control economy (70% owned by the Gov't) would have a difficult time efficiently spending more on defense. However, the Chinese economy has some serious financial issues it needs to resolve before it could become an hegemonic power, which is its real aim.

It has long been a Putin goal to eliminate the INF, as well as other nuclear treaties. Trump is, we all know a loose cannon, given to impetuous, sudden, unpredictable and ill thought out action; we all know this and accept it as part of the strange time we are cursed to inhabit. But is it not strange that so often, as here, his actions fall into accord with Putin's wishes? He weakens NATO, undermines European unity, encourages enraged American discourse, subverts institutions of national and international order. The platform cited in the indictment for Russian meddling in this year's election is exactly the same as the topics in Trumps rallies. Just sayin'

I remember the anxiety, horrors, and nightmares as an adolescent who came of age during the height of the cold war. Many reading this will also remember. But you know what I also recall? The signing of the INF, I was 15 years old. I remember watching the President on TV with the clunky bar charts showing how many nuclear warheads would be destroyed and “Trust but verify”. I remember feeling hopeful and optimistic about nuclear war not happening. When the Berlin wall fell and the Soviet Union collapsed a few years later, Jesus Jones released the perfect song for the zeitgeist - “Right Here Right Now”. So here we are right here right now living the self inflicted anti-zeitgeist of the late 80’s early 90’s perpetuated by the Trump administration’s red herring claims about the dangers of China not being part of the INF. Really? China has 260 warheads. Guess how many warheads a single Ohio class submarine could deliver - more than 260 - and there are 14 of these subs. That rationale isn’t left field, its left universe. Is there any rational reason to pull out of the INF right now? No. Anything that could lead to more nuclear weapons deployed that can deliver payload in a matter of minutes is insane. Living in a Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) world with INF, START and SALT has been disturbingly comfortable and stable. We can do even better. Watching this unchecked administration with a father’s eyes and cold war memories is painful. Voting gave me hope. Please vote.

What are the odds that the little behind doors tete-a-tete between Trump and Putin in Helsinki was to come up with this strategy: create a visible "nuclear threat" to distract from their election meddling and other crimes in which Trump is implicated, and to make Trump look like he's being tough against Russia, so that they can all become rich off of another arms race?

Whatever the deficiencies of the INF, it's absence would make the concerns raised by those like Bolton and some commenters here worse. Withdrawing from the INF and building new IRBMs and other weapons like GLCM to hold Russian leadership under the 10 minute threat window again is just dumb. Now they're even talking about god being on their side, etc. Do you really want to rush people like that to a decision on nuclear war? There is no circumstance under which that has a happy outcome or gains any real advantage for the US. Period. Russian cheating? Yes, it may be happening. But the treaty still induces restraint. Without the INF, it would be anything goes. Maybe that's what Trump wants, but it's just plain dumb when it comes to nuclear weapons and makes us more insecure, not less. China? Bolton would have acted in the interest of our nation if he'd used the opportunity to pressure the Chinese by suggesting an opening of negotiations for a global INF. Any nation holding nuclear weapons is worrisome, but those most worrisome are those who still aspire to join this small "club." It's Kim's intermediate range missiles that are causing the worry now. Nuclear rivals India and Pakistan need only intermediate range missiles to wipe each other out. Israel's missiles are similarly located as are those of its regional rival, Iran, should it's weapons program ever restart. Yes and let's not forget all those sea- and air-launched cruise missiles. Can them, too.

This issue is still a muddle to me. Intermediate range missiles in Russia can strike Europe and Western missiles in Europe can strike Russian. With the treaty, I thought that we pulled our missiles out of Europe, in part because they were very unpopular with the locals. For this reason, it is unlikely that the US or NATO could deploy such missiles now. So what do we gain by pulling out of the treaty? As for China, it is unlikely that any Asian countries would permit us to install such missiles on their territory and to do so would certainly throw a wrench in any denuclearization goals with North Korea. Is this simply another attempt by Trump before the elections to show how tough he is?

Mr. Putin said: “... we, as victims of aggression, will go straight to heaven as martyrs while they will just croak.” And there we have it, 21st century statesmanship. No more flowery language of diplomacy, just tell it like it is.

This is yet another case of the President, without warning, making a pre-emptive decision in secret that affects the security of the U.S. and especially Europe, and the whole world generally. His total ignorance of the nuclear triad during the 2016 election was evidence of that. Sen. Marco Rubio had to explain it. Congress needs to demand an explanation and a coherent strategy, other than we'll outspend everyone on nuclear weapons. Sure with what, the trillion dollar debt outsourced to the Chinese? This man makes me very afraid, and we should be afraid. Vote

If the Russians are cheating then there's no point in the US unilaterally complying with the treaty.

As the civil servant who set up the process and laid out options for our allies to consider, back in 1977, which led to Pershing IIs and GLCMs deployed in Europe and thence to the INF Treaty, Andrew Kramer has gotten some things quite wrong. First, SS-20s were not deployed in Europe but in the USSR, all across the country, replacing the aging SS-4s and 5s -- a "tous azimuths" strategy that the U.S. had long ago detected. The only extra range coverage the Soviets got over NATO was Portugal and a lot of Atlantic water. Second, the option the allies selected, and to which we agreed, was "into the USSR, but short of Moscow." Both the GLCMs and Pershing IIs had ranges 500km short of Moscow -- but, remember, they were not to be used, but to act as a deterrent, which obviously worked. Both the U.S. and the new Russia each saved a couple of thousands of so-called "tactical" (I never use the word) weapons not subject to New START and INF. As a former high-level Russian general told me, those warheads are all in central storage, not deployed to their forces. Of course, bombs could be deployed to aircraft, but there are no warheads deployed to ground forces. Of course, both Russia and the U.S. have all those ICBMs, SLBMs, and bombers that could dump any nuke anywhere they wanted -- but those are limited to the parity set in New START (which the warm-monger Bolton also wants to end). -- But, to conclude, Kramer's assertion that SS-20s were deployed to Europe shows ignorance.

Therein lies proof that the human animal is very ignorant and actually wants to destroy itself - the primary justification for belief in some after life.

It appears that we have learned NOTHING from our past! And these "leaders" were alive in the 1960s, and sure to have experienced nuclear war insecurities. Or did they live in their own reality even then?!

The INF Treaty resulted in cooling relations between the United States and the Soviet Union, and contributing to the end of the Cold War. It should not be scrapped and if anything, strengthened to end nuclear proliferation and militarism.