Tearing up N-arms treaty with Russia would be catastrophic

President Trump has made a habit of repudiating international agreements negotiated by Barack Obama, his Democratic predecessor. Now he seems to be on the verge of withdrawing the United States from a landmark arms control agreement signed more than 30 years ago by a Republican president, Ronald Reagan.Trump’s stated reason for abrogating the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty – that Russia is violating its terms – seems superficially plausible. But withdrawal would still be a catastrophic mistake.The treaty, concluded between the US and the former Soviet Union, ended an arms race in Europe that began in the late 1970s when Moscow deployed a new generation of intermediate-range missiles capable of delivering multiple nuclear warheads, and Nato responded with a plan to deploy US ground-launched cruise missiles and intermediate-range ballistic missiles. Eventually the two superpowers agreed to a treaty banning all land-based missiles with ranges of 500 to 5,500 km.The INF treaty was part of a larger disarmament dialogue between the US and the Soviet Union (and later the Russian Federation) that also included talks to limit long-range nuclear weapons. Current strategic stockpiles and delivery systems are limited by the 2010 New START treaty, which expires in February 2021 unless the two nations agree to extend it for up to five years.Trump has been telegraphing in recent days that the US would be abandoning the INF treaty. On Saturday he said: “Russia has violated the agreement. They have been violating it for many years. And we’re not going to let them violate a nuclear agreement and go out and do weapons and we’re not allowed to.”The president apparently was referring to allegations that the Russians have developed a land-based cruise missile that exceeds the range specified in the treaty, an allegation the Russians deny. The Obama administration also alleged that Russia breached the treaty’s terms, and in 2016 convened a meeting of the Special Verification Commission, a body established by the treaty to address compliance concerns. But rather than withdraw from the treaty, the Obama administration adopted a policy of trying to press Russia back into compliance.Arms-control experts point out that abrogating the treaty over one alleged violation by Russia would free Moscow to disregard all constraints imposed by the agreement. And that wouldn’t be the only adverse consequence.US renunciation of the INF treaty also would undermine prospects for extending the New START treaty. In addition to complaining about Russian violations, Trump has pointed out that China is not bound by the INF treaty. “If Russia’s doing it and if China’s doing it, and we’re adhering to the agreement, that’s unacceptable,” he said. Some arms-control experts have spoken about “globalising” the INF treaty to add China and other Asian nations. But the idea that the US needs to be freed from the treaty’s restrictions to deter China isn’t serious given this country’s other military assets not constrained by the agreement.On too many occasions this administration has acted impulsively on the world stage and scrambled to contain the damage later. Trashing the INF treaty would be another such blunder. The president should pull back from the precipice. – Tribune News Service