How was the nuclear agreement with Russia from which the United States withdrew

Treaty on Intermediate Nuclear Forces (INF, for its acronym in English) It was the first disarmament agreement signed by both countries during the Cold War. It aimed to eliminate all short and medium range nuclear and conventional missiles.

INF sought to ban medium-range nuclear weapons, those whose action is between 500 and 5,500 km and who shoot on the ground (GLBM or GLCM, depending on whether it is a ballistic missile or a missile cruising)in the arsenals of the Soviet Union (maintained later by Russia) and the United States.

His negotiation began in the late 1970s, when the USSR deployed its SS-20 missiles in Europe, a new and improved model for medium-range ballistic missiles (IRBM).

The deployment triggered a diplomatic crisis and promptly triggered a limited arms race. prepare NATO to modernize its own MIRBM in the region with the arrival of Pershing II missiles.

After years of negotiations and in the context of improving relations between the two superpowers during the last part of the cold war and shortly before the fall of the USSR, Washington and Moscow reached an agreement for the destruction of nearly 2,700 warheads and missiles among so-called tactical nuclear weapons.

Both countries have maintained their strategic arsenal of intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM), with distances greater than 5,500 kilometers, which means that Russia and the United States are able to attack with these weapons, but the FNI has helped to defuse the tensions of an immediate conflict in Europe

John Bolton, National Security Advisor to Donald Trump and other "hawks" in government, maintain that Russia has violated the agreement with the development of a new cruise missile, the 9M729, far exceeding the 500 km distance according to expert estimates, as reported by the specialized site Global security.

It was not the first time Washington had named Moscow for violating the agreement that had just been withdrawn. In 2014, President Barack Obama's government accused Russia of testing a new mid-level ballistic missile, in violation of the FNI.

The government of Vladimir Putin has always denied these accusations, but at least since 2014, the United States urges Russia to abandon these developments and to adapt to the INF.

In addition, Bolton felt that the lack of such weapons in the arsenals of the United States is a disadvantage in the face of growing clashes with China, this is not part of the INF and has GLCM and GLBM without limitations.

Steven Pifer, an arms control expert at the Brookings Institution, said in a recent article that if the violations committed by Russia were a valid justification for the United States to drop the treaty, that would be a mistake.

In principle, because Washington can now be blamed for unilaterally violating a valuable instrument of nuclear non-proliferation, but also because the break eliminates Moscow does not need to deny accusations or limit developments. That is to say, it is hopefully the two countries will resume the development and deployment of these weapons.

Pifer also warned that the decision would have effects with the European allies and within NATO, with which Washington already has a tense relationship.

And this is due, in part, to the missiles that affected the INF they must necessarily be deployed relatively close to their targets. Photographed from Russia or the United States, they do not have the opportunity to reach one or the other country.

For this reason, the arms race would also raise the need to find allied countries willing to host them and close to Russia, such as Poland, Japan and South Korea.

A potentially dangerous situation more typical of the cold war, and this refers to the 1963 missile crisis, born from the deployment of intermediate-range missiles from the United States to Turkey and from the Soviet Union to Cuba.