The Euromissiles and the INF treaty

(To Tiziano Ciocchetti)
02/12/18

During the mid-twentieth century 60, with the establishment of a strategic nuclear parity between the two Superpowers, the concept of Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD) was affirmed.

With this doctrine, NATO's defense strategy - which was based on an almost immediate use of the entire tactical nuclear arsenal, in the event of an invasion of Central Europe by the Warsaw Pact forces - begins to lose its validity. In fact, it appeared unlikely that Washington would have authorized NATO to use nuclear weapons, with the serious risk of a Soviet retaliation, against the American territory.

At this point, the Europeans only had to formulate the so-called Flexible answer (doctrine still in force), which postulates that in the event of a massive conventional attack by the Warsaw Pact, the Alliance would also defend itself with conventional weapons.

However, if the attack were to be so powerful as to endanger the survival of the NATO countries, at this point the US would authorize the use of tactical nuclear weapons, ie the release nuclear (nuclear release). A strategy formulated to send a clear message to the Kremlin: a possible attack on Europe, if successful, would have led to nuclear escalation between the two Superpowers.

La Flexible answer led to the progressive withdrawal, from the territories of the European countries of NATO, of almost all tactical nuclear weapons, leaving only some B-61 devices (photos) to use both the USAF and other NATO aeronautics (Italy, West Germany, Belgium) , Turkey, Holland), always with the system of the double key.

To circumvent this doctrine, the Warsaw Pact strategists decided that they themselves would be the first to cross the nuclear threshold, with the launch of at least 200 nuclear warheads against strategic objectives in Western Europe, and only after continuing the attack by conventional means. .

However, the adoption of such a strategy would not have completely canceled a possible American nuclear response.

The turning point occurred in the 1977, when the USSR began to deploy the new intermediate-range ballistic missiles (SSI-20 SABER Intermediate-Range Ballistic Missile, IRBM), according to the NATO name. Mounted on a mobile launcher, the missile could be armed with three nuclear warheads from 150 kilotons and had a maximum range of 5.000 km, therefore sufficient to hit any city in Western Europe, but just below the minimum value foreseen by the SALT II treaty. the limitation of strategic armaments then in place (5.500 km), therefore did not violate the nuclear balance established between the two Superpowers.

The purpose of Moscow immediately became clear: to separate the strategic interests of the USA from those of Western Europe. In fact, the USSR could hold European governments under threat to persuade them to never use their nuclear deterrent, not even in case of invasion, and then the European NATO countries would accept a Soviet occupation of Germany and north-eastern Italy, not to risk the destruction of Paris or London. At this point, American nuclear retaliation would have been unlikely, and even if the threat of Moscow had not been taken seriously and NATO's use of nuclear weapons had been followed by a launch of SS-20 (photo) on Rome or Bonn, the United States would hardly have retaliated.

In this scenario, the Flexible answer he lost all his weight in the balance of power. It is good to remember that at that time the USA was governed by the Carter Administration, certainly not passed to history for international decision-making. However, Germany of Chancellor Schmidt and Italy of Governments Cossiga and Craxi embarked on an intense diplomatic campaign aimed at convincing the other NATO countries of the convergence of strategic interests between the USA and Western Europe, or that a possible occupation from Soviet part, even if only part of the NATO countries, would inevitably lead to nuclear confrontation with the United States.

In a rare moment of convergence, Europe, led by Italy and Germany, succeeded in obtaining from Washington the deployment of new tactical nuclear weapons, de facto binding the will of the US to put into play their own survival in order to protect the territory of Western Europe.

The 2 December 1979, the ministers of Defense and Foreign Affairs of the NATO countries, in Brussels, formulated the so-called Double Decision: start negotiations with Moscow for a limitation of the respective theater nuclear arsenals and plan the deployment, within 1986, of 108 ballistic missiles MGM-31B PERSHING II in Germany and 464 cruise missiles BGM-109G GRYPHON GLCM, mounted on mobile launchers deployed in Belgium, Italy, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. Obviously the management and, if the use of these weapons would have been the preserve of the USA.

The USSR sought to block the initiative by mobilizing its traditional fifth columns, from traditional communist parties in the pay of Moscow to one-way pacifist associations. The great ideological battle for the Euromissiles saw the greatest pacifist demonstrations ever celebrated in Europe. In the end, however, the governments of Bonn and Rome - the two key governments - held out and in November the 1983 came to the deployment of the first Euromissiles.

Soon, however, we came to consider these theater weapons as risk multipliers for a nuclear escalation. Thus, thanks to the appointment of Gorbachev's CPSU as General Secretary, after long and complex negotiations, the decision was made to completely eliminate this category of arms.

8 December 1987 in Washington, US President Reagan and Secretary of the CPS Gorbachev signed the INF (Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces), which no longer simply stipulated a numerical limitation of nuclear arsenals but rather the elimination total of a category of weapons, in this case the destruction of all ground-based missiles with a range between 500 and 5.500 km as well as the related launch equipment, including cruise missiles and ballistic missiles, whether they were armed with warheads nuclear both with conventional ones.

Furthermore, it should be added that the INF treaty concerns only the USSR and the USA, in fact the Europeans did not have and had no say in the matter. Last October 20 President Trump announced the decision to exit the Treaty as Moscow would have violated it by introducing a new launching missile from the ground into service. It is also plausible that the decision of the American administration is aimed at undertaking a more effective policy - coming out of the INF it would have the hands free - of containment of the Chinese missile capabilities, in continuous expansion. In fact, thanks to the entry into service of a new generation of Medium-Range Ballistic Missile (MRBM) and IRBM (Intermedie-Range Ballistic Missile), Beijing is able to hit almost all the American bases in the Western Pacific.

(photo: National Nuclear Security Administration / US DoD / web)