[ad_1]
"Russia has violated this deal and they have been violating it for many years," Trump told reporters before boarding Air Force One to leave Nevada after a campaign rally. "We are the ones who remained in agreement and we respected the agreement.Russia unfortunately did not respect the agreement."
Some analysts believe, however, that the dislike of Trump administrations for international agreements and the views of National Security Advisor John Bolton are one of the drivers of the decision.
The signing of the treaty in 1987 was seen as a turning point at the end of the cold war, helping to eliminate thousands of land-based missiles with ranges of about 300 to 3,400 miles.
Here is an overview of the various factors involved as well as the potential consequences.
Russia
The United States has long accused Russia of violating the agreement through the deployment of a treaty violating cruise missiles. US and NATO officials have long criticized Russia for its actions.
The withdrawal of the treaty will allow the United States to develop a similar missile and many analysts fear that a withdrawal of the United States will trigger an arms race. But some argue that a withdrawal of the United States will actually help Russia because they could blame the United States for the disappearance of the treaty.
"The United States will have the responsibility to kill the treaty," Pifer wrote, adding that "American evidence of the Russian violation is highly classified, so that public debate will result in an exchange of accusations, counter-accusations and denials ".
Russia's development of its cruise missile is also relatively much more advanced, which means that Moscow could start deploying it much more widely if the treaty were to be terminated.
"Moscow will be free to deploy the 9M729 cruise missile, as well as an intermediate-range ballistic missile if it wishes, without any constraints," Pifer added, noting that "the United States does currently have no missile that they could deploy quickly to match the Russians. "
While the US Department of Defense has launched a treaty-based research and development program for a mid-range missile, its commissioning would take some time.
Former State Department spokesman Rear Admiral John Kirby, CNN's military and diplomatic analyst, also agreed that the decision was bringing benefits to Moscow.
"This confers a victory on Putin and allows him to accelerate the development of this ability," said Kirby, adding that he "will now be able to violate it more flagrantly."
China
The Chinese army has undertaken a spectacular modernization effort since 1987, investing billions of dollars in the acquisition of new weapons.
One area in which China has invested heavily is missile development. Senior US military officials said that if China were party to the INF treaty, about 95 percent of its nearly 2,000 ballistic and cruise missiles would be in violation.
Critics of the treaty, including Republican Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas, have relied on China as a reason why the United States should consider abandoning it.
"The Chinese are stocking missiles because they are not at all bound by this, and I have been asking the United States for a long time to see if this treaty is still serving our national interests," Cotton said in a statement.
Kirby said that if China's missile arsenal was a "legitimate concern," he said the United States could help counter it by relying on its advantages in terms of cruise missiles based at sea, not governed by the INF Treaty.
Is Bolton behind that?
Although Bolton stated that his editorials did not necessarily reflect the policy he would pursue, he has since criticized the fact that, since his arrival at the administration, he has criticized what he considers to be a breach of the law. sovereignty of the United States.
"I think that Bolton is very late on this decision, that goes very well with his dislike of multilateral agreements and agreements, especially those which, in his opinion, restrict the freedom of action of the United States", Kirby said.
"He is starting to find his place on the National Security Council and to put his mark on it," he said.
Kirby added that it was worth noting that neither the state department nor the Pentagon had issued a statement on the withdrawal of the US from the treaty as a result of the announcement made Saturday by Trump.
Bolton is expected to discuss the treaty with the Russian authorities during his trip to Moscow next week.
Congress reaction
Senator Cotton expressed his support, but other members of Congress expressed their opposition.
"There is no doubt that Russia is responsible for the deterioration of the INF Treaty, but the withdrawal of this treaty without a comprehensive strategy to address its underlying strategic implications and without consulting Congress or our allies threatens long-term interests. term of US national security "Senator Robert Menendez, the most Democratic in the Committee on Foreign Relations, said in a statement.
Republican Senator Bob Corker told CNN's Jake Tapper on "The State of the Union" that he thought the Trump announcement could be an effort to put Russia back into the current situation, much like the way the administration has threatened to leave the NAFTA before renegotiating a new trade agreement expected to sign later this year.
"Maybe it's just a decision to look at, if we do not do it – if you do not get right, we'll get out of it," said Corker, chair of the Senate Committee on Seniors. foreign Affairs. "I hope this is the case, and I hope we can find a way to stay under the treaty."
European allies
While NATO has criticized Russia's "plausible" treaty violations, "it also described the INF agreement as" crucial "for transatlantic security.
German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas criticized Trump's decision, calling it "regrettable", adding that "this poses tough questions for us and for Europe".
Many European leaders recall the "Euro-missile crisis" of the 1980s, when Soviet SS-20 missile deployments in the Warsaw Pact countries provoked political divergence in Europe over the question of whether they would be safe. it was necessary to support the American deployment of Pershing missiles.
If the US develops and seeks to deploy an intermediate-range land-based missile to counter Russia's deployment, it would need the support of its European allies, which is not necessarily guaranteed.
Iran and North Korea
Kirby said the decision to leave the treaty "would likely diminish our credibility at the negotiating table" with regard to efforts to reduce missile stocks in North Korea and Iran.
