It is a sign of how wacko things have gotten that the truly most important event of the past week has simply been buried in the news by all the huffing and puffing over Trump’s shutdown ending and these revelations about VA Governor Northam. This would be decision by the US on Feb. 1 to withdraw from the Intermediate Nuclear Force (INF) treaty with Russia, followed by Russia’s doing so as well shortly thereafter. This is both historic and very serious, far more so than Trump’s wall or Northam’s photographs.
The treaty was signed in 1987 between then US President Reagan and then Soviet President Gorbachev, culminating several years of negotiations. It led to the destruction of around 3600 short and intermediate range nuclear missiles, including most importantly all of those in Europe that threatened the potential outbreak of a war on that continent between NATO and the USSR. It was one of the most important moments on the way to bringing about the end of the Cold War, and indeed it is unfortunately accurate to describe the ending of this treaty as the end of that end.
I have seen a number of people speculating that this action somehow shows Trump “standing up” to V.V. Putin, being a tough guy and all that. But the nearly immediate acceptance with virtually no complaint by Putin of this move suggests otherwise. US and also western European officials have argued that Russia has been in effective violation of the INF since 2014 when it developed a new cruise missile, 97M925, that can be easily modified to make it fly in the forbidden distance ranges. Russian leaders have argued that they were not in violation given that this missile also had as its main range adjusted and therefore are not in violation and none violating the limits had been deployed. Putting such missiles with the violating ranges in deployment would directly threaten western Europe. As it is, Putin is in a position now to rapidly deploy them in a way to threaten western Europe while the US has nothing to put in place to reply to this. So, Putin gets to gain a major military edge and threaten the western Europeans while getting to blame Trump for having ended the treaty by withdrawing and allowing him to do this. The Europeans in question had opposed Trump ending the treaty, with indeed this probably being one of those things Merkel was trying to maintain influence with Trump over by not complaining too loudly about the US pressuring German companies to stop dealing with Iran.
Another factor in this matter emphasized by US leaders is that China was never a part of the agreement, and I gather has been developing such intermediate range missiles. But those were unlikely to be deployed in Europe, where the removal of such missiles 32 years ago was a triumphant movement towards the reduction of mutual tensions and towards peace.
All the way around, there is nothing good at all about this development, and it most definitely doesn’t show Trump doing something that is against the interests or desires of V.V. Putin. The outcome may well be a new arms race, which will please the military-industrial complexes in both the US and Russia, and maybe China as well. No, this is not a good development at all
Barkley Rosser
Barkley:
Virginia “Attorney General Mark Herring issuing a statement admitting he wore brown makeup and a wig in 1980 to look like a rapper during a party as a 19-year-old student at the University of Virginia.
Herring — who has been among those calling on Northam to resign — said that he was ‘deeply, deeply sorry for the pain that I cause with this revelation and that the days ahead will make it clear whether I can or should continue to serve as attorney general.'” https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/crisis-escalates-in-virginia-top-3-democrats-under-fire/ar-BBTfsD6?ocid=spartanntp
Democrats are great at eating their own.
Sure, it’s all Putin’s fault, the dying empire that bombs, drones, invades, assassinates, deposes and wreaks mayhem in countries all over the globe. Sounds like something the thoroughly discredited “intelligence” community would say.
I am a retired cold warrior.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=La4Dcd1aUcE
Had real meaning in the day.
I knew a couple of pilots who imagined they were a “Capt. Kirk”.
I wonder if Germans want to be a big piece of Armageddon?
There’s plenty of money for 21st century INF systems!
Lost in this conversation is that this is a big win for Putin in that it drives more division in NATO.
I think concerns about a new arms race might be correct, but I seriously doubt any such US arms will be deployed in European countries, as those countries will not allow that to happen.
“Several months ago, arms-control expert Joseph Cirincione made this very point when the idea of abandoning the INF agreement was first floated.
Maybe that is why no one wants them. No government in Europe or Asia is calling for these weapons or offering to host them. In the 1980s, deployments of nuclear weapons into Europe brought millions of Europeans into the streets in sustained protests. This time, the decision to pull down yet another security pillar in the trans-Atlantic alliance will deepen an already growing divide. “Of course, it will widen the rift between Europe and America,” former British diplomat and director of the European Leadership Network Adam Thomson told me this week, “European governments will look even more intensely at how they can provide for their own security.” It will not be as insulting to European leaders as Trump’s violation of the Iran anti-nuclear deal, he said. Europeans saw that agreement as the crowning achievement of European Union security diplomacy. But it will burn.”
https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/a26112390/nuclear-arms-control-treaty-russia-trump-administration/
EM:
Perhaps Poland and Hungary. Otherwise, I agree with you. Europe does not want INFs. Europeans have protested on these weapons before.
Run,
Maybe Poland. But Hungary’s Orban is now Putin’s biggest pal in the EU. He would be more likely to host Putin’s intermediate range missiles against western Europe to make their leaders shut up about his increasing authoritarianism.
Gotcha
Trump’s comment about missile defense “improvements” in the SOTU; following the attention the war media gave to the missile defense agency (MDA) report recently released imply some mixing of theory around missile defense with offensive weapons. A concept that is misguided if not frightening!
In Europe MDA is deploying two aegis ashore weapon systems, one operating in Rumania and one to be built (2020) in Poland the sensors are SPY-1 for foreign sales (not the latest greatest as upgraded SPY 1 on US Navy ships to be replaced by SPY-6 on new Arleigh Burke destroyers). The interceptors are SM-2 vertical launch again not the greatest as US Navy going SM 3 and later SM 6.
With Patriot for close in and EU systems not sure I would call ABM in Europe not worthy of defeating much more complex threats than Saddam SCUDs.
No rapid pentagon move to design new Intermediate Range Ballistic Missiles.
https://thehill.com/policy/defense/428845-pentagon-official-no-plans-to-develop-new-missile-system-amid-end-of-russian?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ebb%2007.01.19&utm_term=Editorial%20-%20Early%20Bird%20Brief
Pershing II was dismantled in 1989, no similar missile is readily available and given the botch job on MX I doubt one will be forth coming in the mid range future.
However, late versions of Tomahawk could be adapted to ground launchers and motivators already carrying US Army Tactical Ballistic systems. That was the deployments in England and Belgium that caught the most protests prior to INF treaty.
The main claim of Russian violation is a cruise missile that could be modified like the US could modify Tomahawk…….
INF is Asia……… need to think about that!
First of all, INF was tremendously beneficial for the USA, as the USSR has to destroy more missiles then the USA: 654 SS-20 missiles were build by the USSR. These and the 499 associated mobile launchers were destroyed by May 1991.
Gorbachov was a very weak negotiator (and an extremely mediocre politician) who tried too much to please the USA. There were even some speculations in Russia now that he was a British agent (http://aanirfan.blogspot.com/2015/10/gorbachev-is-british-agent.html 😉
Now the problem for the USA is that other countries who did not sign this treaty are developing such systems. First of all China. So this is probably the main consideration as for the USA.
But the devil is always in detail: the USA re-opens its forces in Europe and Japan to direct attack by this type of ground-based missiles from Russian territory. Which now will be more sophisticated and difficult to intercept then famous SS-20 (Saber or Invisible) with its unprecedented for its time accuracy of 450 meters.
So the shadow of SS-20 is again all over Western Europe. From military point of view the chances of surviving WWIII of any European country with the USA bases in case WWIII starts dropped significantly
On Russia part, the fact that the USA unilaterally withdraw from the treaty that cost Russia so much is like a slap in the face. That why Russia already demanded from the USA the destruction of all attack drones and all Tomahawks-compatible silos, which means all negotiations ended.
Russian MIC is less well fed then the USA MIC and as such is definitely more happy that the USA MIC. They also probably has some nasty asymmetrical surprise already on the drawing boards to compensate for the humiliation.
Most probably this response will became a huge headache for future US presidents. As if Putin will be replaced by a hard-core nationalist of Trump-style and temperament that will increase dangers of WWIII.
So, in a way, history repeats and Trump now is taking measures that are clearly in Russia favor (as one would expect from the “Russia stooge”) : Kaliningrad to Berlin distance is 328 miles. Distance from Kamchatka to Okinawa is 630 miles. The INF Treaty prohibits ranges 310–620 mi and 620–3,420 miles and did not cover air- or sea-launched missiles which are the USA forte. And mobile ground-based intermediate missiles are Russian forte: they already have the technology and variety of mobile launchers including railcar based. .
So all huge advantages negotiated by Reagan team went into dumpster.
While China is clearly a concern, the main beneficiaries of the INF treaty were neither US nor USSR/Russia. It was European nations, especially the western ones on the continent. So iit should be no surprise that they opposed ending the treaty, even as Russia was violating it, and Trump withdrew from it unilaterally with Russia immediately following.
Putin is not already a “hard core nationalist”? Compared to Putin, Trump looks very much like a soft core one. Has he pulled anything remotely as hard core nationslist as annexing Crimea?
Barkley,
You should probably read more Professor Stephen F. Cohen on Russia, not NYT or WaPo.
Of course, as you do not know the language, it is difficult for you to access the situation on the ground. And in this sense reading Stephen F. Cohen might be very helpful as he operates with Russian language sources, nor NYT or WaPo propaganda. Also traveling to Moscow on vacations might help to access the situation in a more rational style 😉
> Putin is not already a “hardcore nationalist”? Compared to Putin, Trump looks very much like a softcore one.
FYI Putin a “soft neoliberal,” and as such he can’t be the hardcore nationalist. For those, you need to look at Ukraine’s political scene. At best he can be “cultural nationalist,” but I doubt even that. He is a Philo-German politician, I think.
I think the main countervailing force that prevents Russians from jailing Yeltsin close circle of neoliberal reformers (like Chubais, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatoly_Chubais, aka the most hated man in Russia) is Putin.
The only guy who IMHO might qualify as a hardcore nationalist I think is Zhirinovsky ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladimir_Zhirinovsky ). But I do not know much about Russia anyway, so there might be more. In any case, it looks like nationalism is on the upswing in Russia like in most European countries. Especially after Euromaidan, when pro-Western neoliberals in Russia were decimated and lost all political influence.
Putin also keeps Medvedev as the Prime minister and recently appointed Kudrin to an important office. Both are neoliberals, proponents of “free markets” and privatization. Both might well be jailed without Putin.
Trump also is a neoliberal politician (his tax cuts were clearly a neoliberal act), but his main and defining features are incompetence and impulsivity.
He betrayed all his key promises to the electorate and thus can be called Republican Obama.
To qualify for a far-right politician, you need to adhere to key points of NSADAP program of 1920:
… … …
7. We demand that the state is charged first with providing the opportunity for a livelihood and way of life for the citizens. If it is impossible to sustain the total population of the State, then the members of foreign nations (non-citizens) are to be expelled from the Reich.
8. Any further immigration of non-citizens is to be prevented. We demand that all non-Germans, who have immigrated to Germany since 2 August 1914, be forced immediately to leave the Reich.
9.All citizens must have equal rights and obligations.
10.The first obligation of every citizen must be to work both spiritually and physically. The activity of individuals is not to counteract the interests of the universality, but must have its result within the framework of the whole for the benefit of all. Consequently, we demand:
11.Abolition of unearned (work and labor) incomes. Breaking of debt (interest)-slavery.
12.In consideration of the monstrous sacrifice in property and blood that each war demands of the people, personal enrichment through a war must be designated as a crime against the people. Therefore, we demand the total confiscation of all war profits.
13.We demand the nationalization of all (previous) associated industries (trusts).
14.We demand a division of profits of all heavy industries.
15.We demand an expansion on a large scale of old age welfare.
16.We demand the creation of a healthy middle class and its conservation, immediate communalization of the great warehouses and their being leased at low cost to small firms, the utmost consideration of all small firms in contracts with the State, county or municipality.
17.We demand a land reform suitable to our needs, provision of a law for the free expropriation of land for the purposes of public utility, abolition of taxes on land and prevention of all speculation in land.
18.We demand struggle without consideration against those whose activity is injurious to the general interest. Common national criminals, usurers, profiteers and so forth are to be punished with death, without consideration of confession or race.
… … …
21.The State is to care for the elevating national health by protecting the mother and child, by outlawing child-labor, by the encouragement of physical fitness, by means of the legal establishment of a gymnastic and sport obligation, by the utmost support of all organizations concerned with the physical instruction of the young.
22. We demand abolition of the mercenary troops and formation of a national army.
Likbez,
Try not to talk.
Likbez,
Thank you for your ideas.
I knew USAF several persons who served in Strategic Command missiles, one managed servicing ground launched cruise missiles (INF weapons).
My recall of my thinking at the time “there were too many nuclear weapons targeting Central Europe and West Soviet Union”.
I thought Nena in the ’99 Luftbalon’ song made a good point, if a bit 1950’s nuclear disaster fiction.
1987 INF treaty rolled back a side show of Mutual Assured Destruction.
I did not view NATO as a good assignment in my career.
Likbez,
Sorry, but my Russian sources are better than Stephen Cohen’s. Really. He makes a lot of good points, but hhe is way off base on a lot of important matters. Puting him forward as the Great Authority is not credible.
Yes, Zhirinovsky is more nationalistic than Putin, and Putin keeps some neoliberals around, but he is a hardcore nationalist. This is pretty much what iis the case for leaders who go around annexing territory of their neighbors.