The Treaty on the Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces, better known as the INF Treaty, was considered a remarkable feat of arms control when it was signed on the 8th of December 1987 by President Ronald Reagan and Soviet General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev.
Aside from eliminating an entire class of nuclear weapons, the treaty created high standards for future verification procedures incorporated into arms control treaties. Even after more than three decades, the treaty’s history and role in the dismantling of nuclear arms reveal critical insights for disarmament initiatives in the future.
Historical Background and Genesis
The INF Treaty emerged from a significant geopolitical event known as the European Missile Crisis during the late 1970s and early 1980s. The Soviet Union’s RSD-10 Pioneer missile system deployment (referred to as SS-20 Saber) necessitated a shift in Europe’s strategic position.
The possession of intermediate range missiles capable of carrying nuclear warheads and targeting Western Europe heightened concerns within the NATO alliance. Its range of 4,700-5,000 kilometers made it a potent weapon able to circumvent extant arms control limits on intercontinental missiles while severely threatening European security.
The NATO response, often known as the Double Track Decision, consisted of two disparate approaches to the problem at hand. On one end, there was a willingness to negotiate with the Soviet Union to limit theater nuclear weapons, but there was also the willingness to position NATO missiles on European soil. This multifaceted approach was the turning point in the negotiation and signing of the INF Treaty.
Recommended Read: The Dead Hand: Reagan, Gorbachev and the Untold Story of the Cold War Arms Race — A Pulitzer Prize–winning narrative that illuminates the political and scientific struggles leading to disarmament trends like the INF Treaty.
Negotiation Process and Key Milestones
The negotiation process of the INF Treaty started during the Reagan presidency in 1981. The U.S. advanced the proposal of “Zero Option” which necessitated the removal of all Soviet SS-20 missiles in consideration of the U.S. stopping the deployment of Pershing II and GLCMs in Europe. This proposal was ‘radical’ and laden with political undertones; its objective was to constrain the Soviet Union and showcase NATO’s resolve to undertake arms control.
During the succeeding years, informal discussions and intense negotiations, which included the well-known “walk in the woods” with U.S. negotiator Paul Nitze and Soviet Yuli Kvitsinsky, provided occasional breakthroughs but also stagnation. However, the intense shift after Gorbachev took charge of the Soviet Union in 1985 and was more willing to entertain arms control discussions was remarkable. Reagan and Gorbachev’s acceptance to in principle eliminate INF missiles during the “Reykjavik Summit” in 1986 marked the start of progressive change.
After intensive negotiation and diplomacy, the treaty was fully finalized by 1987. The treaty further called the total elimination of all the intermediate range missiles, both nuclear and conventional, with ranges of 500 to 5,500 kilometers.
Provisions of the Treaty and Its Scope
The INF Treaty was the first of its kind and so much Europe and America had to offer. It compelled both the US and USSR (later Russia) to completely dismantle their intermediate-range missiles, alongside the necessary launchers and other supporting systems. The treaty incorporated both nuclear and conventional missiles, which is a first in the history of arms control treaties.
Core Disallowances:
The treaty explicitly prohibited all ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles of the range between 500 and 5,500 kilometers.
The air-delivered and sea-based missiles were not covered by the treaty, however ground-based systems were viewed as dangerously destabilizing because of the short time and warning period they provided to prospective targets.
Requirements for Elimination:
Both states were assigned to eliminate their inventories of missiles within a period of three years after the treaty was in force. The effort to eliminate arms led to the destruction of 2,692 missiles by the deadline set for implementation of the treaty in 1991.
The Revolution in Implementation and Verification
A remarkable advancement in the INF Treaty is its adoption of a National Technical Means (NTM) such as satellites, which were allows under the treaty to be used for monitoring compliance. The treaty also permitted the use of on-site inspections, which was a first in arms control history.
For the first time, both U.S. and Soviet inspectors were able to traverse each other’s missile facilities and observe the destruction of missiles. These inspections included:
Baseline inspections to determine the starting quantities.
Elimination inspections to confirm the destruction of missiles.
Declared facility short-notice inspections.
Ensuring accurate verification, along with ignoring potential violations, established a pivotal precedent for future arms control agreements.
Strategic Importance and Political Analysis
Perhaps the most significant achievement of the INF Treaty was the elimination of an entire class of nuclear weapons, which enhanced strategic stability, particularly in Europe. The removal of SS-20 and Pershing II missiles reduced the risk of nuclear confrontation in Europe.
However, the effect of the treaty was not purely military. It was part of a broader shift in U.S.-Soviet relations, and, therefore, a significant thaw of the Cold War. It demonstrated real intent of a shift towards nuclear disarmament.
Post Cold War Development and Issues
The dissolution of the Soviet Union gave rise to new issues concerning the INF Treaty. The successor states, especially Russia, came with the nuclear complicacies of the Soviet Union, making the treaty more complicated to enforce. The changing strategic landscape, with China ascending to the status of a nuclear power, also brought to light the issues with the INF treaty. It was a treaty that only gave limitations to the US and Russia, while China and many other states were free to create intermediate range missiles.
By 2007, the Putin administration was citing NATO’s missile defense systems in Europe, and China’s growing missile capabilities, as reasons for the INF treaty to be irrelevant.
Accusations of Violations and the Disintegration of the Treaty
In the years succeeding the treaty’s enforcement, the US accused Russia of reverse complying with the treaty through the development and testing of the 9M729 missile, which was allegedly made to be under the range limit of the treaty. Russia denied these accusations citing US missile defense systems as counter violations. These accusations from both sides not adhering to the treaty stipulations led to the treaty’s collapse in efficacy.
Trump announced the US was withdrawing from the INF Treaty in 2018, citing the breach of Russian terms and the need to revise China’s missile capabilities. Following several months of strained diplomatic relations, the US officially withdrew from the treaty in August 2019.
Current Developments and Future Implications
As of 2025, Russia has officially scrapped its moratorium on the deployment of intermediate-range missiles, entering another dimension concerning global security in the region. The development indicates the growing competition between US and Russia on the declining post-cold war era arms control systems.
The INF treaty’s suspention has posed rising concerns of strategic competition, particularly in the Europe and Asia Pacific. The US plans to place intermediate range missiles to NATO allied strategically positioned countries, which Russia may see as a threat and respond in a manner that could lead to conflict and instability in Europe as the Russia-Ukraine war intensifies.
Lessons and Legacy
The frailty of global power dynamics and geopolitical shifts serve as the frontline reasoning to the collapse of INF Treaty, and therefore, the value it serves as a cautionary tale of flexility of arms control agreements. Nevertheless, the treaty’s verification framework remains a notable legacy that will guide arms control treaties of the future. It also speaks to the need and challenges of a multipolar world.
The INF Treaty exemplified one of the hopeful milestones of Cold War disarmament; however, its inability to evolve has resulted in a world that is more dangerous and unpredictable. Its story is particularly useful for those who intend to shape future nuclear arms control deals.
Concluding Remarks
The Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF Treaty) remains one of the most remarkable attempts of arms control in history as it eliminated an entire class of nuclear weapons and established a model to be followed for future treaties. Its groundbreaking verification system, disarmament success, and nuclear arms control foresight were remarkable; however, the 2019 collapse of the INF Treaty, along with other disarmament frameworks, has created a world with new nuclear dangers. Shifting forward, international diplomacy needs to reconsider the lessons of the INF Treaty to navigate the realities of evolving security challenges.
For a deeper look at how Cold War power dynamics shaped global security, I recommend The Dead Hand again — it contextualizes the INF collapse within the broader narrative of disarmament failure and nuclear brinkmanship.
FAQ
What is the INF Treaty and why is it significant?
The INF Treaty, signed in 1987 between the U.S. and the Soviet Union, aimed to eliminate an entire class of nuclear weapons—intermediate-range missiles. Its significance lies in reducing the threat of nuclear war in Europe and setting a precedent for arms control treaties with rigorous verification mechanisms.How did the INF Treaty contribute to Cold War arms control?
The INF Treaty played a pivotal role in Cold War arms control by eliminating nuclear weapons that could target Europe, reducing the risk of nuclear confrontation. It was a symbol of thawing relations between the U.S. and the Soviet Union, marking a shift towards nuclear disarmament during the Cold War era.What were the key provisions of the INF Treaty?
The INF Treaty prohibited all ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles with ranges between 500 and 5,500 kilometers. It required both the U.S. and Soviet Union to eliminate their intermediate-range missiles, as well as the launchers and associated systems, within three years.Why did the U.S. and Soviet Union agree to eliminate intermediate-range missiles?
Both the U.S. and Soviet Union agreed to eliminate intermediate-range missiles to reduce the threat of nuclear war in Europe, where the missiles could be deployed within minutes, offering little time for response. The treaty reflected a broader commitment to nuclear disarmament and improving U.S.-Soviet relations.How did the INF Treaty change arms control verification procedures?
The INF Treaty introduced groundbreaking verification measures, such as National Technical Means (NTM) like satellites and on-site inspections. These allowed both U.S. and Soviet inspectors to monitor missile destruction, ensuring compliance and setting a precedent for future arms control agreements.What was the “Zero Option” proposed during the INF Treaty negotiations?
The “Zero Option” proposed by the U.S. in the early 1980s called for the complete removal of Soviet SS-20 missiles, with the U.S. agreeing to halt the deployment of Pershing II and GLCMs in Europe. It was a bold diplomatic move designed to push the Soviet Union toward agreeing to arms control.How did the INF Treaty impact U.S.-Soviet relations during the Cold War?
The INF Treaty helped thaw U.S.-Soviet relations by demonstrating a willingness on both sides to reduce nuclear arsenals. It marked a shift from confrontation to cooperation and played a key role in easing tensions during the Cold War.What were the major violations that led to the collapse of the INF Treaty?
The treaty collapsed after the U.S. accused Russia of developing and testing the 9M729 missile, which allegedly violated the treaty’s range limits. Russia denied these accusations, pointing to U.S. missile defense systems in Europe as counter-violations, leading to a breakdown in trust and compliance.Why did the U.S. withdraw from the INF Treaty in 2019?
The U.S. withdrew from the INF Treaty in 2019 due to violations by Russia and concerns over China’s growing missile capabilities. The U.S. cited Russia’s failure to comply with the treaty as a primary reason and emphasized the need to address new threats from other nations.What are the implications of Russia scrapping its moratorium on intermediate-range missiles?
The end of Russia’s moratorium on intermediate-range missiles in 2025 increases the risk of a new arms race. It could lead to more missiles being deployed in Europe and Asia, exacerbating global tensions and potentially sparking military confrontations between major powers.How does the suspension of the INF Treaty affect global security?
The suspension of the INF Treaty heightens global security concerns by removing important arms control measures that limited the deployment of intermediate-range missiles. The potential for increased missile proliferation in Europe and Asia raises the specter of a new arms race and military instability.What lessons can be learned from the collapse of the INF Treaty?
The collapse of the INF Treaty highlights the importance of adapting arms control agreements to evolving geopolitical realities. It also demonstrates the need for robust verification mechanisms and underscores the risks of failing to evolve treaties to address new threats from rising powers like China.
Disclosure: This post contains affiliate links. If you make a purchase through them, I may earn a small commission at no extra cost to you.