• Recently US administration declared a suspension of U.S. obligations under the INF Treaty and formally announced its intention to withdraw from the treaty in six months. Shortly thereafter, Russia also announced that Russia will be officially suspending its treaty obligations as well. 

Intermediate range nuclear forces treaty :-

• After several years of negotiations, the United States and the Soviet Union agreed to sign the Intermediate Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty in 1987.
• Under the Treaty, the two parties agreed that a whole important class of nuclear weapons would be removed from Europe, and only tactical nuclear weapons (TNW) or short-range missiles – mostly deployed on the territory of Germany – would remain.
• The INF Treaty for years served to mitigate fears of both parties in relation to possibility of military escalation, operational miscalculation, and helping to shift the logic of MAD [mutually assured destruction] to the higher “more sensitive” political level.
• It barred both countries from deploying land-launched cruise missiles in the 500- to 5,500-km range. 

 Rationale behind USA’s decision to withdraw from the treaty:-

• Russia:-
  • What concerns Washington most is a Russian cruise missile designated SSC-8 associated with the Russian designation 9M729.
  • The SSC-8 has a range of 2,000 km, and is likely capable of being armed with conventional or nuclear warheads. Russia has also developed a shorter range version  ?   the 9M728 (SSC-7) cruise missile that is a part of the Russian Iskander-M tactical missile system.
  • In July 2014, the U.S. State Department found Russia to be in violation of the agreement by producing and testing an illegal ground-launched cruise missile.
• China:-
  • China is not bound by the INF Treaty and has deployed intermediate-range missiles in significant numbers .
  • For many years China not limited by the INF Treaty has made striking military progress and developed and deployed a numerous arsenal of high-end cruise missiles, both land attack and anti-ship (ASBM), capable to carry conventional or nuclear warheads. 
  • As analysts have noted intermediate-range systems make up approximately 95 percent of the People’s Liberation Army missile force.
• Observers have argued that the INF Treaty is anachronistically Eurocentric, failing to take into account the U.S.-Chinese military balance, which is becoming increasingly central to Washington’s strategic calculations. 

Implications:-

• US:-
  • Intermediate-range missile systems and cruise missiles would considerably enrich U.S. capabilities .
  • Returning to intermediate-range systems would equip American forces with the capability to strike targets that are highly difficult to penetrate for conventional weapons at present.
• China:-
  • Nevertheless, any additional U.S. conventional military superiority gives China considerable incentive to increase reliance on an escalatory and possibly deterrence strategy.
  • There will be vectoral enhancement of political relations with states all over the world, particularly those that are economically and politically affiliated to China, with possible shows of economic might and deeper engagement on the field of security.
• Europe:-
  • Washington and Moscow walking away from the INF Treaty will legitimate deployment of intermediate missiles in Europe – at the Russian and the European side.
  • Within the range of 500 – 2,000 km, Poland could stand for a missile launchpad and the first rank target, at the same time.
• Russia:-
  • Washington’s decision will ignite wide policy polemics in the Alliance, protracted debate on relations with Russia, the prospect of stronger nuclear deterrence, and if miscalculated, even war.
  • In harmony with the Limited Test Ban Treaty of the 1960s, SALT [Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty] and START [Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty], the INF has had a codifying effect on the two superpowers’ strategic relations. The INF Treaty bound Russia, but also offered a hedge against worst-case scenarios, like a redeployment of U.S. missiles in Europe. 
  • The number of operational 9M729 missiles has been quite limited, but released from its official obligations under the treaty, Moscow could deploy more units rapidly.
  • US’s move is also likely to undermine the 2010 New START treaty governing U.S. and Russian long-range nuclear systems. The INF Treaty’s demise will undercut New START by reopening questions on the relationship between intermediate and strategic systems that have been resolved for 30 years by the elimination of ground-based, intermediate-range missiles
• Washington’s leaving the ABM [Anti-Ballistic Missile] and INF Treaty creates a formal agreement to vertical proliferation of WMD and gives higher status to the concept of power in international politics. 
• Withdrawal is likely to be controversial with U.S. allies in NATO, further splitting the alliance at a difficult time for transatlantic relations. Many Western European NATO states favour retaining the INF, in conjunction with previous U.S. policy designed to push Moscow back into compliance. This raises concerns that divisions within NATO may worsen when the United States officially withdraws from the INF.