So this morning, I went down to the Kommersant TG channel. Think of it as the main economics paper in the Federation. They are the equivalent of Barrons, so this was curious. And it is oh so Russian. So here is the post, which refers to the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty. It’s a mouthful, but essentially, it prevented the deployment of exactly the systems listed in this piece by Kommersant.
The United States has again deployed a ground-based launcher for medium- and shorter-range missiles on an island in the Baltic Sea. As in September last year, the US Navy deployed the Mk70 containerized missile system during exercises in Bornholm, Denmark. Until 2019, such systems were prohibited under the Russian-American Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF Treaty).
Earlier this week, the Russian Foreign Ministry warned that since the United States has “openly and clearly taken the path of deploying similar missile systems in various regions of the world,” Russia will “intensify development and begin production” of similar systems. However, the Russian authorities have not yet made a decision on their placement anywhere.
As usual, they don’t tell the whole story. Russia has been pulling back from several treaties over the last ten years, truly starting with the Trump presidency. For all who say Trump was better for deterrence, here we are. So what is the rest of the story?
This is just part of it; the link will have the rest of the timeline regarding this specific treaty. Let’s say it’s been a strategic goal of the Russian Federation to withdraw from these treaties but do it in such a way they can blame others:
However, President Trump announced Oct. 20 that he would “terminate” the INF Treaty in response to the long-running dispute over Russian noncompliance with the agreement, as well as citing concerns about China’s unconstrained arsenal of INF Treaty-range missiles. Trump’s announcement seemed to take NATO allies by surprise, with many expressing concern about the president’s plan.
After repeatedly denying the existence of the 9M729 cruise missile, Russia has since acknowledged the missile but denies that the missile has been tested or is able to fly at an INF Treaty-range.
On Nov. 30, U.S. Director of National Intelligence Daniel Coats provided further details on the Russian treaty violation. Coats revealed that the United States believes Russia cheated by conducting legally allowable tests of the 9M729, such as testing the missile at over 500 km from a fixed launcher (allowed if the missile is to be deployed by air or sea), as well as testing the same missile from a mobile launcher at a range under 500 km. Coats noted that “by putting the two types of tests together,” Russia was able to develop an intermediate-range missile that could be launched from a “ground-mobile platform” in violation of the treaty.
On Dec. 4, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced that the United States found Russia in “material breach” of the treaty and would suspend its treaty obligations in 60 days if Russia did not return to compliance in that time. Though NATO allies in a Dec. 4 statement expressed for the first time the conclusion that Russia had violated the INF Treaty, the statement notably did not comment on Pompeo’s ultimatum.
Russian President Vladimir Putin responded Dec. 5 by noting that Russia would respond “accordingly” to U.S. withdrawal from the treaty, and the chief of staff of the Russian military General Valery Gerasimov noted that U.S. missile sites on allied territory could become “targets of subsequent military exchanges.” On Dec. 14, Reuters reported that Russian foreign ministry official Vladimir Yermakov was cited by RIA news agency as saying that Russia was ready to discuss mutual inspections with the United States in order to salvage the treaty. The United States and Russia met three more times after this, first in January in Geneva, on the sidelines of a P5 meeting in Beijing, and again in Geneva in July — all times to no new result.
There are, of course, a slew of other treaties that Russia is withdrawing or has withdrawn. But as Kommersant put it, we are to blame because we are making them do it.
This is not a new pattern. Russia does this all the time. It’s part of DARVO, and they are now the victims of the evil Americans, even if things are a tad more complex.
Keep reading with a 7-day free trial
Subscribe to Rumination's to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.