Policy Alert #182 | February 12, 2019
The failed negotiations over the 1987 Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF Treaty) between the United States and Russia spiked concerns in rising powers about their own security as well as global stability. The long-standing Treaty effectively dissolved as US President Donald Trump announced that his country would “suspend its obligations under the INF Treaty effective February 2, 2019” and gave Russia 180 days to remedy alleged violations on its side. Russian President Vladimir Putin responded in kind, however; Putin emphasized that his country’s actions would only be to “mirror” actions taken by Washington first (official statement in Russian here). Although the treaty was a bilateral agreement, President Trump’s demands to include China as a member state and growing uncertainty in the Indo-Pacific from other sources of tension have led to domestic discussions of how each country is measuring up to its neighbors. In this Policy Alert, we catch up on the Rising Powers’ weigh-ins.
CHINA
In response to the US’s announcement that it was suspending its observation of the INF Treaty, Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Geng Shuang responded to inquiries that “China finds this move regrettable. […] China is opposed to the US withdrawal and urges the US and Russia to properly resolve differences through constructive dialogue.”
- The state-funded China Daily criticized plans for US deployments of a new radar system in Japan that will strengthen its ability to intercept intercontinental ballistic missiles. The Daily noted that the system was specifically oriented against attacks from China, Russia, and North Korea, the latter of which seeming particularly “out of place” given ongoing negotiations for North Korea’s denuclearization. “History proves that seeking unilateral and absolute security at the cost of the security of other countries will only trigger an arms race, which in return will cause more instability and make the world a more dangerous rather than a safer place,” the Daily warned.
- In the wake of the dissolution of the INF Treaty, the nationalist Global Times urged China to resist US efforts to rope China into a multilateral nuclear arms deal: “Without the restraints of the treaty, the US may intensify its deployment of offensive missiles and anti-missile systems around China, further increasing China’s strategic security challenges. Beijing will never accept the treaty becoming a multilateral agreement. It must reject any request from the US on the issue. Instead of relying too much on land-based missiles for national security, China must diversify its strategic nuclear deterrence.”
- Yang Yucai, professor at the National Defense University of the People’s Liberation Army, took aim at rumors that the “Five Eyes” intelligence alliance composing of Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the UK, and the US, is courting Germany and Japan as potential new members. In an op-ed for the Global Times, Yucai urged the government to invest more in efforts to mitigate the threat: “If Japan gets into the Five Eyes fold, they will together build a system of intelligence exchange mechanism against China. […] China should improve its information security mechanism, develop intelligence and research work, and try its best to defuse the threat that the Five Eyes alliance will pose to China.”
- Zhou Yongsheng, deputy director of the Japanese Studies Center at China Foreign Affairs University, penned in an op-ed for the Global Times that assessed Japan’s recent efforts to finalize Acquisition and Cross-Servicing Agreements (ACSAs) with Canada and France, in addition to prior ACSAs with Australia, India, the United Kingdom, and the US: “Japan’s ambition is to become a global political power. But political and diplomatic means alone cannot support Japan’s global ambitions. A military presence at the global level is needed if Japan is to expand its political clout. […The ACSAs are] part of an overall plan to influence economics, politics, military and culture, which is a long-term strategic mindset of the Japanese government.”
- Ruan Zongze, executive vice president and senior research fellow at the China Institute of International Studies, was more confident in China’s ability to rise peacefully by pursuing a path of cooperation: “[While] some major countries are exhausting all their resources to build up their military, China keeps development as the central task. [While] some countries are building a wall at border, China is constructing bridges. As China grows stronger, the world will also become more peaceful and prosperous.”
JAPAN
Following a report by Reuters in October 2018 that Japan and Germany were being courted as a potential new members to the “Five Eyes” intelligence sharing group between Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the UK, and the US, the Japanese government appears to have made significant efforts to cement an official invitation. The Nikkei Asian Review reports that since the New Year, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe paid a visit to British Prime Minister Theresa May last month, discussed the ongoing tensions between China and Canada over the arrest of Huawei executive Meng Wanzhou with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, and hosted German Chancellor Angela Merkel during an official visit to Tokyo. The bungling of the INF Treaty negotiations between the US and Russia has put Japan between a rock and a hard place, however: following Japan’s tepid endorsement of the US withdrawal, Russia warned Japan’s ongoing efforts to improve bilateral ties were under threat.
- The centrist Japan Times offered a mixed response to ongoing negotiations between the US and South Korea to renew their Special Measures Agreement (SMA), the contract of cost-sharing for maintaining the US military presence. While solidifying the US presence on the peninsula is a comfort to Japan, US demands for South Korea to increase its share to $1.6 billion from $800 million per year and the reduction of the SMA’s period of effectiveness from five years to one year are ominous signs for the renegotiation of Japan’s SMA in 2021: “Tokyo should not hesitate to remind Washington that the U.S. military presence here is not just for Japan’s benefit, and matters greatly to U.S. power and influence in the region. This is, after all, an alliance, and like the one with South Korea, both partners gain significantly from their partnership.” In another editorial, Times also criticized the US and Russia for the current disagreement over the INF Treaty, and highlighted the potential consequences for Japan.
- On the issue of the INF Treaty, the conservative Yomiuri Shimbun called for Prime Minister Abe to help mediate resolution: “It is important for the United States and Russia to steadfastly maintain the existing framework, and also for China to be brought into the arms reduction efforts. The U.S. administration must deepen its cooperation with its allies and work out its strategies toward Russia and China. […] Prime Minister Shinzo Abe must beef up his approaches to both the United States and Russia.” Regarding Chancellor Merkel’s visit, the Yomiuri expressed relief that Germany was shifting away from its “excessively China-leaning stance” in the region and looking to bolster ties with Japan in the wake of strained relations with the US: “Japan and Germany must demonstrate leadership and promote the framework for international cooperation.”
- Business-focused Nikkei Asian Review featured an op-ed by Hudson Institute senior fellow Arthur Herman that advocated for Japan to become the “Sixth Eye” in the multimember intelligence sharing group between Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the UK, and the US. In addition to increasing “interoperability” with the armed forces of the member countries, Herman claimed the move could be a political windfall for Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe: “[A] formal membership would cap his efforts to build the “special relationship” with the U.S. similar to the one the oldest Five Eye member, the U.K., already enjoys. It would also earn him the laurels as Japan’s most significant prime minister in the postwar era.”
INDIA
India’s sense of security was rattled by a series of high-profile crashes in the Indian Air Force. Although several occurred throughout 2018, having two crashes on January 28 and February 1 of this year left the public in doubt of the Air Force’s capabilities. In addition to wariness of the INF Treaty’s impact on the region, another source of concern for the India is the report that the US is pursuing negotiations with the Taliban as part of its withdrawal from nearby Afghanistan.
- The liberal Indian Express expressed concern with the US’s involvement with the Taliban, but admitted that while India is currently pursuing its interests in dialogue with China, Iran, and Afghani leadership, “[t]he day may not be far when India has to consider what has seemed unthinkable as yet — reaching out to the Taliban, at least sections of it that are independent minded.”
- The pro-government Daily Pioneer condemned the “unacceptable and needless loss of human life” from the Indian Air Force crash in Bengaluru, and called for the main political parties to carefully weigh the issue of national security in the context of the upcoming elections: “With elections nearing and the need to fund social sector schemes to alleviate poverty gaining momentum despite two well-armed neighbours and constant threats, India finds itself in a bind that few other nations do when it comes to security in the region. India has to be prepared for the eventuality of a two-front war and that needs investment in new military equipment and better management of existing resources. While affording equipment is a challenge, we cannot afford to lose lives needlessly. The next Government and the Opposition have to keep this in mind.”
- The center-right Times of India cited the aging air force fleet and problems with the scale and quality of domestic production of aircraft and replacement parts: “This ‘jugaad’ approach simply cannot continue. It undermines our defence preparedness and puts our servicemen at risk. We need to ramp up indigenous production and create an American-style military-industrial complex. This requires greater participation of the private sector.”
- In response to the INF Treaty debacle, left-leaning The Hindu criticized the US for opening the gates for a potential arms race for little gains: “[I]n pulling out of the INF, Washington is effectively throwing away leverage it may have had with Russia on an issue of global concern.”
- S.D. Pradhan, former chairman of India’s Joint Intelligence Committee and former deputy national security adviser, weighed the consequences of the INF Treaty’s dissolution for the Indo-Pacific region with a wary eye toward China: “Pragmatism demands greater push to achieve objectives of the free, open and inclusive Indo –Pacific Vision before the new tensions exacerbate the situation in India’s neighbourhood.”
RUSSIA
Following the aforementioned exchange between the United States and Russia regarding the INF Treaty, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov asserted that the US was guilty of violations of the accord: “According to our information, the United States started violating that undated treaty in 1999 when it began trials of combat unmanned flying vehicles with specifications similar to those of ground-launched cruise missiles banned by the Treaty. Later it started using target missiles, ballistic target missiles, for testing its missile defense system, whereas starting 2014 it began deploying in Europe launching pads for its positioning areas of missile defense – MK 41 launching pads, which may absolutely be used without any changes and to launch Tomahawk medium-range cruise missiles.” Further, Minister Lavrov explained that Russia tried “to do everything to save the INF Treaty, considering its importance for preserving strategic stability in Europe and globally.”
- In its coverage of the INF Treaty dissolution, state-owned Sputnik News featured interviews with honorary Vice President of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND) Bruce Kent, nonprofit Beyond Nuclear’s “Radioactive Waste Watchdog” Kevin Kamps, senior research associate at the Delhi-based Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses Rajiv Nayan, and foreign affairs analyst Rakesh Krishnan Simha. The interviews all emphasized the destabilizing effects the end of the INF Treaty will bring.
RPI acknowledges support from the MacArthur Foundation and the Carnegie Corporation of New York for its activities.
