Russia: what the withdrawal of Donald Trump from the INF treaty meant for Vladimir Putin

John Bolton is a man of traditions, traditions of which he seems proud. He came to Moscow on several occasions, for example in 2001, when the US National Security Advisor began his press conference following a meeting with President Vladimir Putin. At that time, as Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security, he had conveyed the message of the Bush administration to the withdrawal of the ABM Treaty on the limitation of ballistic missile defense. .

Bolton therefore has experience in terminating arms control contracts. Seventeen years later, this is the INF contract (Intermediate range NOTNUCLEAR faOrce). Shortly before the US Security Advisor goes to Moscow, US President Donald Trump announced his intention to end the ban on the possession and development of weapons land-based nuclear weapons, enshrined in the FNI agreement.

In 1987, Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev called Trump's announcement "wrong" and his counterpart Ronald Reaganden signed a contract. This prohibits the construction and possession of ballistic missiles and land-based cruise missiles with a range of 500 to 5,500 kilometers. Both states destroyed more than 2,500 medium-range missiles in 1991.

In the Russian capital, Bolton was greeted fairly friendly despite the announcement of Trump. In any case, the images of state television appear to have been influenced by meetings with Nikolai Patrushev, President of the Russian Security Council, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu and finally President Putin. Even a meeting of the head of state with Trump, on November 11, on the sidelines of the end of the First World War, 100 years ago in Paris, gave his agreement.

Perhaps it is because the American guest and his Russian hosts speak the same language. Bolton calls the INF treaty "a bilateral treaty of the cold war" in a world that has become "multipolar". The agreement has nothing to do with "the new strategic reality". It's a deficit that countries like North Korea or China are not bound by the terms of the contract. One-third to one-half of the people's missiles fell under the INF treaty, Bolton said.

Russian officials continue to use the word "multipolar" to describe the vision of a world order in which there are many centers of cooperating power instead of a hegemonic power, the United States.

The United States is putting pressure

In Moscow, US representative Bolton sets the tone on Tuesday. He is considered a tough guy who does not give much importance to the disarmament treaties, especially the INF agreement, which he strongly criticized in 2011. He told the Kommersant newspaper: "Only two countries in the world are bound by the treaty, and one of them rapes him ".

Russia had violated the contract by testing a new cruise missile from 2008. The danger does not come from the exit of the United States, but from the fact that Russia has banned missiles and that they are in Europe said the trustworthy Trumps. It does not become more concrete.

Since 2012, the United States has suspected Russia of developing and building new medium-range missiles. For example, the 9M729 cruise missile (NATO SS-C-8 designation) is expected to have a range of 2600 kilometers. In 2014, Washington officially accused Russia of breaking the treaty, which Moscow denies. At the same time, other NATO countries share the view that Russia has equipped two battalions of medium-range weapons, which denies it.

Bolton also indicates how little room is left to negotiate. It states rather that it is not a Trump threat, but a "decision of the President" that has not yet been formally taken.

Russia has refused to violate the treaty for years, said Bolton. Moscow, in turn, accuses the Americans of developing heavy battle threats and placing missile defense launchers in Romania and Poland, which could be used not only for defensive but also offensive purposes for Tomahawk missile firing. – from Moscow's point of view, a breach of the INF Treaty,

Mutual accusations can hardly be reconsidered. In 2001, mutual inspections of the arsenal were completed. Since then, the INF contract is actually already "dead", writes badyst Vladimir Frolov. For the military industry and the Russian security forces, the agreement has always symbolized the defeat of the Cold War.

In 2007, at the G8 summit, Putin had made it clear that it was unacceptable for his country to disintegrate as the West modernized. In March, Putin reportedly introduced new nuclear weapons. These are inaccessible for US missile defense, he announced with applause.

The benefits of Putin

If the United States really ended the treaty, Moscow would no longer be bound by its restrictions and could therefore openly deploy its medium-range missiles – without even being politically responsible: it would be Trump.

Its withdrawal from the FNI treaty would underpin the picture Russia likes to draw from the United States in circles close to the Kremlin: Washington is presented as an unreliable partner, only Moscow having pursued its interests and having done shortly after the war cold. Close security agreements. "The United States is leading the world closer to a nuclear war," warns the Kremlin's mbad newspaper "Komsomolskja Pravda".

The fact that there is no uniform attitude in NATO vis-à-vis Trump's exit plan – while it is strongly criticized in Germany and in France, he was greeted by the British Minister of Defense – is pursued in Moscow with a certain benevolence.

The risks of Putin

But the end of INF would also entail considerable risks for Russia. Russia would react "quickly like a mirror" to find a balance, announced Putin in 2017 at the forum Waldai organized by the Kremlin. An arms race would begin. In addition, the "New Start" agreement expires in 2021, limiting strategic nuclear weapons, transportation systems and nuclear warheads.

Alexey Arbatov, head of the International Security Center of the Institute of World Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences, warns of the long-term consequences for Russia. The geopolitical situation has changed considerably over the last 30 years. American rockets could be stationed not only in Romania and Poland, but also in the Baltic States close to the Russian border.

The question is also to what extent Russia, which for example has the economic power of Italy, is really able to cope with an expensive arms race. After all, Moscow should not only run this with the United States, but also with China. A neighbor who is already instilling in Moscow the respect of his economic and military power.