Alissa Tabirian
NS&D Monitor
12/4/2015
Lawmakers this week criticized the Obama administration for the years-long delay in reporting to Congress their concerns regarding a Russian violation of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty and for the United States’ lack of progress in restoring Russian compliance with the treaty. The treaty between the United States and the former Soviet Union required both sides to eliminate their arsenals of ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles with ranges of 500 to 5,500 kilometers. Now, both sides claim the other has violated the treaty, with Washington accusing Moscow of testing a ground-launched cruise missile that the Russian side argues is a sea-based missile outside the scope of the treaty.
Rep. Ted Poe (R-Tex.), speaking Tuesday at a joint hearing of the House Armed Services Strategic Forces Subcommittee and the House Foreign Affairs Terrorism, Trade, and Nonproliferation Subcommittee, said the administration “seems to have known about the violations back in 2008” but that it took officials three years to report its concerns to Congress. He added that overall, it “took six years for the State Department to officially find the Russians in violation; and this year, the State Department repeated its findings that the Russians are in violation of the treaty.”
Asked why the State Department didn’t acknowledge Russia’s violation until 2011 despite indications that it was testing a cruise missile in 2008, Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security Rose Gottemoeller said the department did not initially know it was a ground-launched system. Sea-launched and air-launched cruise missiles are allowed under the treaty, she noted, and although “it was mentioned the notion of this being a sea-launched cruise missile,” the U.S. has “shared more than enough information with Russian officials for them to look through their own records and identify the relevant program.”
Gottemoeller added that the State Department has briefed Congress on the issue approximately 60 times, but lawmakers argued this has not led to substantial progress in bringing Russia back into compliance with the treaty. “After seven years, there have been no consequences for the violation of the treaty,” Poe said. Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.) agreed, saying that “our response years and years in the making . . . without any repercussions to failure of compliance, is just going to lead Russia to believe that they can continue to be in noncompliance without any accountability.” Gottemoeller noted that the U.S. and its allies are considering economic sanctions as a means to respond to violations.
The recently signed fiscal 2016 National Defense Authorization Act calls on the secretary of defense to research and develop military responses to Russia’s violations. Brian McKeon, principal deputy undersecretary of defense for policy, said during the hearing that “this is not just an arms control issue” but rather a component of Russia’s “overall aggressive behavior.” He said the U.S. is “developing a comprehensive response” and “committing to investments now that we will make irrespective of Russia’s decisions to return to compliance with the INF Treaty.” The objective, he said, is to ensure Russia does not gain significant military advantage by violating the treaty.
