Thus, the fate of the INF Treaty is of surpassing importance in Europe, Russia and the United States. The stakes for the parties to the treaty are obvious. Europe too would be affected as dissolution of the treaty could lead to a new arms race with intermediate-range missiles targeting the entire continent. Below, three authors representing each of these perspectives consider the likely future of the treaty, how it might be saved and what its demise might mean. 

Following the news that the Trump administration plans to abandon the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty, signed in 1987 by Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev, ten Belfer Center nuclear and U.S.-Russia relations experts offered their thoughts on the significance and consequences of this action.
 

Belfer Center experts comment on the Trump-Putin summit in Helsinki.

Whether or not the United Nations Security Council takes such action is irrelevant, because Beijing controls the trade flows to North Korea and will now likely ramp them up again.

Belfer Center experts offer insight and analysis of the Trump-Kim summit through statements and interviews.

• U.S. and Russian experts ponder denuclearization of Korean Peninsula.
• Graham Allison on changing the odds of nuclear terrorism.
• William Tobey on insights on UNSCR 1540.
• Siegfried Hecker calls for revival of U.S.-Russian nuclear cooperation.

President Trump’s unilateral withdrawal from the Iranian nuclear deal has driven yet another wedge between Washington and its closest European allies – a longstanding goal of Iranian policy and a major gift to Russia.

Calling it a “great embarrassment” that fails to “halt Iran’s nuclear ambitions,” President Trump today announced his intention to pull out of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action and re-impose sanctions on Iran. The independent nuclear, national security, and regional experts of Harvard Kennedy School’s Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs have been assessing the terms of the JCPOA for years. In the wake of Trump’s decision, many of them weighed in with thoughts on the significance of Washington’s policy change – and what comes next.

The decision to leave the JCPOA is a blunder. The deal has significant flaws, notably a relatively brief duration and a failure to compel Iran to make a complete and correct declaration of all relevant nuclear activities—the bedrock of any effective verification system. Withdrawing from the agreement, however, only compounds those problems, shortening the duration and abandoning mechanisms to investigate and respond to compliance issues.