The U.S. announcement on January 31st of its intent to withdraw from the 1987 Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces (INF) missile treaty was a gift to Vladimir Putin. Despite public comments from U.S. arms control pundits suggesting that Russia’s violations of the treaty pose major war-fighting risks to the U.S. and NATO, the danger from Russia’s moves is far more political than military; and it’s centered on U.S.-alliance relations. 

  • Though strained now, U.S.-NATO ties reached the breaking point in the 80's when the U.S. countered Russian missile deployments then by stationing its own land-based missiles in Europe. Memories from that time are still fresh for those of us who lived there; European publics were outraged over the US missiles. Putin remembers this clearly as well: he worked there, after all, in Dresden, as a KGB intelligence agent. 
  • Putin’s calculus is apparent: what better way to continue his strategy of disruption and test NATO resolve - especially U.S. ties to the alliance - than to turn over the INF missile “log” (i.e., deploy new missile systems) and see what bugs and creatures crawl out from underneath? 

Last week’s Wall Street Journal provided an answer. Less than two weeks after the U.S. announced its intent to withdraw, the European center-left, led by Germany's Social Democrats, is once again (as in the 80's) questioning the entire nuclear relationship with the U.S. What a gift to Moscow! 

  • Make no mistake: Russia was in clear violation of the INF missile deal through its testing and deployment of land-based missiles exceeding the lower 500 km limit of the treaty. But the way ahead for the U.S. was to work closely with Chancellor Angela Merkel, President Emmanuel Macron, the EU and NATO, to highlight Russia's lies, embarrass Russian leaders, and salvage the deal. We missed the opportunity; and Moscow is not about to pass up the gift.
  • Russia is also eager to turn the clock back on another issue that deeply upsets the Kremlin: Ukraine’s turn to the west. Little noticed in the U.S. but on the front burner for Putin are the March 31st national elections in Ukraine. Cyber activity targeting Ukraine’s candidates and the electoral system has ramped as the elections loom – to no one’s surprise. Besides yet more “disruption," Moscow is intent on seeing sitting Ukraine President Petro Poroshenko ousted, with a pliable politician taking his place. U.S. and European support for Kiev through the electoral process will be critical if Ukraine’s slow move away from Moscow and institutionalized kleptocracy is to be sustained.

To reiterate: the INF missile deal was far more important politically then military. Unfortunately, by going it alone, we are now "Back to the future" - a period of intra-alliance NATO squabbling that Putin relishes. Angela Merkel doesn’t need this – nor does her party; they are the political actors best positioned to maintain alliance solidarity, and the ones now most threatened by yet another European missile donnybrook.