Edition

Why China is Worried About the End of the INF Treaty

IN THIS ISSUE: Why China is Worried About the End of the INF Treaty, How to Structure Sanctions Relief in Any Future DPRK Deal, Germany to Press China on Arms Control, Military Faces Greater Scrutiny, Tighter Funding as Democrats Take the House, In Bipartisan Pleas, Experts Urge Trump to Save Nuclear Treaty With Russia, After Iran Sanctions, U.S. Faces a Huge Task: Compliance

Published on November 8, 2018

Why China is Worried About the End of the INF Treaty

Tong Zhao | Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

The INF treaty is dead and American officials are arguing that it’s not just about Russia’s treaty violations but about responding to Chinese military build-up and influence. This decision reflects the impulsive decision-making of U.S. President Donald Trump and influence of U.S. National Security Advisor John Bolton, a noted opponent of arms control. But more importantly, it reflects a widespread and long-standing concern in Washington about how the treaty constrained U.S. capacity to counter China’s fast-growing regional missile forces in the Asia-Pacific. Now, for Chinese leaders the message from the White House is loud and clear: the United States is now fully committed to a strategic competition with China.

How to Structure Sanctions Relief in Any Future DPRK Deal

Richard Nephew | 38 North

North Korean leader Kim Jong Un will almost certainly seek sanctions relief in any future deal on denuclearization. It is important, therefore to consider how this relief should be structured to maximize US negotiating leverage and achieve a sustainable agreement.

Germany to Press China on Arms Control, Foreign Minister tells Newspaper

Reuters

German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas said he will press China to embrace arms controls during upcoming meetings in Beijing, citing the need to regulate robotic and space-based weapons that could soon shift from “science fiction” to reality. Maas told German newspaper Die Welt that Germany would continue to press both Washington and Moscow to adhere to the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty, and said it made sense to include China in future agreements. President Donald Trump on Oct. 20 announced plans to quit the INF Treaty, citing what he sees as Russian violations of the pact and concerns about China’s development of new weapons since it was not party to the treaty. 

Military Faces Greater Scrutiny, Tighter Funding as Democrats Take the House

Paul Sonne | Washington Post

The Democratic takeover of the House poses challenges to the Trump administration’s plans to create a Space Force, augment the American nuclear arsenal and draw on military funds to build parts of the border wall, as the Pentagon faces an era of greater scrutiny and tighter funding. Leading the charge for the Democrats on military issues is likely to be longtime Seattle-area congressman Adam Smith, who is poised to take over as chairman of the powerful House committee that oversees the U.S. armed forces and their funding.

In Bipartisan Pleas, Experts Urge Trump to Save Nuclear Treaty With Russia

Rick Gladstone | New York Times

Alarmed at what they see as disintegrating curbs on nuclear weapons, a bipartisan array of American nonproliferation experts has urged President Trump to salvage a Cold War-era treaty with Russia that he has vowed to scrap. In letters sent to the White House this week that were seen by The New York Times, the experts said the pact, the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, had reduced the risk of nuclear war. Despite the treaty’s flaws, they said, the United States should work to fix the accord, not walk away from it.

After Iran Sanctions, U.S. Faces a Huge Task: Compliance

Ian Talley | Wall Street Journal

Most Western companies and banks pulled out of Iran ahead of new Trump administration sanctions, fearing a loss of access to the U.S. economy. But the rest of the world may be more difficult for American officials to convince.

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.