What is the INF treaty and why has Donald Trump pulled out?
US leaving ‘watershed’ nuclear missile treaty

The US has formally withdrawn from a nuclear treaty with Russia, prompting fears of a new arms race.
President Donald Trump warned six months ago that the US would be pulling out of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF), which was agreed between the two nations in 1987, the BBC reports.
The US is blaming Moscow for the collapse of the Cold War-era pact, claiming it has breached the agreed terms.
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
“Russia is solely responsible for the treaty's demise,” Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said today.
“With the full support of our Nato allies, the United States has determined Russia to be in material breach of the treaty, and has subsequently suspended our obligations under the treaty.”
What is the INF Treaty?
The INF is a bilateral treaty between the US and the then Soviet Union. It was signed by President Ronald Reagan and General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev on 8 December 1987 and ratified by both countries the following year.
The treaty required the destruction of the two states’ ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles with ranges of between 500km (310 miles) and 5,500km (3,420 miles), along with the launchers and associated support structures and equipment, within three years of the agreement coming into force, says US public policy think-tank the Lexington Institute.
In effect, the pact protected Europe from the nuclear threat posed by Russia and the US, by banning missiles that would be able to strike European nations easily from within Russian territory and prohibiting the US from stationing missiles in Europe in order to target Russia.
The US Department of State has described the treaty as bringing about “a qualitative and quantitative change in the European security situation”.
The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute reports that within three years of the ratification of the treaty, more than 2,600 missiles had been destroyed.
The Washington Post has described the signing of the pact as a “watershed moment in Cold War arms control”.
The treaty was due to expire in February 2021.
Why has the US pulled out?
In February, both the US and Nato accused Russia of violating the pact by deploying a new type of cruise missile.
Washington said it had evidence that Russia had deployed a number of 9M729 missiles, a claim that was then put to and backed by the members of the international alliance. However, Moscow has denied it.
Trump set a deadline of 2 August for the US to withdraw if Russia didn’t come into compliance.
Russian President Vladimir Putin suspended his country's own obligations to the treaty just hours later.
However, as the BBC explains, the treaty’s woes predate Trump’s rise to power. In 2007, Putin declared the treaty no longer served Russia's interests.
That withdrawal came five years after then president George W. Bush pulled the US out of the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, which banned weapons designed to counter ballistic nuclear missiles.
In 2014, Barack Obama also accused Moscow of breaching the INF treaty, after it reportedly tested a ground-launched cruise missile.
What does the withdrawal mean?
UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres says that “an invaluable brake on nuclear war” has been lost.
“This will likely heighten, not reduce, the threat posed by ballistic missiles,” adds Guterres, who is calling for all parties to “seek agreement on a new common path for international arms control”.
Sky News says Trump’s withdrawal means that “there will be no legally binding restrictions on the two biggest collections of nuclear weaponry in the world for the first time in nearly half a century”.
And the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists goes a step further, warning that “we are at the cusp of a new arms race in Europe and Asia”.
Sign up for Today's Best Articles in your inbox
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
-
Bomee Ki's Kugelhopf madeleines recipe
The Week Recommends Fluffy, sweet sponge cakes with a zesty, rum twist
-
Hôtel du Couvent: a tranquil hideaway in the French Riviera
The Week Recommends Find pared-back luxury in the heart of Nice within the walls of a beautifully restored former nunnery
-
Introducing our new app
The Week has launched a newly redesigned mobile app to deliver a smarter, faster and more personal experience
-
Angela Rayner: Labour's next leader?
Today's Big Question A leaked memo has sparked speculation that the deputy PM is positioning herself as the left-of-centre alternative to Keir Starmer
-
Donald Trump's foreign policy flip in the Middle East
Talking Point Surprise lifting of sanctions on Syria shows Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Qatar are now effectively 'dictating US foreign policy'
-
Elon Musk says he's 'done enough' political spending. What does that really mean?
TODAY'S BIG QUESTION The world's richest man predicted he'd do 'a lot less' electoral financing moving forward. Has Washington seen the last of the tech titan?
-
'Organ donation is kindness'
Instant Opinion Opinion, comment and editorials of the day
-
GOP megabill would limit judicial oversight of Trump
speed read The domestic policy bill Republicans pushed through the House would protect the Trump administration from the consequences of violating court orders
-
Home energy: Bills are up, efficiency is out
Feature The Energy Star program saves Americans billions of dollars, but the Trump administration plans to 'eliminate' it.
-
Trump lectures South Africa president on 'white genocide'
speed read Trump has cut off aid to South Africa over his demonstrably false genocide claims
-
'These businesses have appealed to generations'
Instant Opinion Opinion, comment and editorials of the day