"It is possible for a party to abandon the treaty [unilaterally] if it provides convincing evidence that it is necessary to do so," said Army General Yury Baluyevsky. "We have such evidence at present."

The INF treaty eliminated nuclear and conventional ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles with ranges of 500 to 5,500 kilometers (300 to 3,400 miles). By the treaty's deadline of June 1, 1991, a total of 2,692 such weapons had been destroyed, 846 by the U.S. and 1,846 by the Soviet Union.

"Unfortunately, by adhering to the INF treaty, Russia lost many unique missile systems," the general said, adding that many countries are currently developing and modernizing medium-range missiles.

Demand for the INF treaty arose in the 1970s when the Soviet Union began to deploy what the West called SS-20 missiles.

These were two-stage, medium-range missiles, many of them mobile and hard for the United States to track or destroy. Since most SS-20s targeted Europe, they allegedly threatened America's NATO partners.

The U.S. administration under Ronald Reagan proposed the so-called "zero option," stipulating that if the Soviet Union scrapped all its ground-launched medium-range ballistic and cruise missiles, the United States would do the same and abandon its plans to deploy anti-missile defenses in Europe.

Seeking better relations with the West, ex-Soviet leader Gorbachev agreed to remove more than three times as many warheads and destroy more than twice as many missiles as Washington by 1991.

Baluyevsky's remarks could be interpreted as a strong warning to the U.S. regarding its plans to deploy elements of its anti-missile defense system in Poland and the Czech Republic, and as a follow up to recent statements made by Russian President Vladimir Putin and Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov.

Putin said on February 10 that deployment of a U.S. missile defense system in Central Europe could trigger a new arms race.

The Russian leader told the 43rd Munich Conference on Security Policy that the reasons the U.S. cited in favor of deploying a missile defense system in Europe are not convincing enough, as launching North Korean ballistic missiles against the U.S. across Western Europe would be impossible, given the required trajectories.

"This clearly contradicts the principles of ballistics. Or, as we say in Russia, it's like trying to reach your left ear with your right hand," he said.

Moscow strongly opposes the deployment of a missile shield in its former backyard in Central Europe, describing the plans as a threat to Russian national security.

Speaking at an annual televised news conference February 1, President Putin pledged to amend the country's military strategy in view of the new developments.

"We must think - we are thinking - of ways to ensure our national security. All our responses will be asymmetrical but highly effective," he said.

The Russian military chief said Thursday that Russia's participation in the INF treaty will depend on future U.S. moves on missile defenses.

"What they [the Americans] are doing at present, building a third missile defense ring in Europe, is impossible to justify," Baluyevsky said.

Washington has also recently moved its largest sea-based missile defense radar in the Pacific from Hawaii to the Aleutian Islands, not far from Russia's Kamchatka Peninsula.

earlier related report
Russian army chief threatens withdrawal from missile treaty
Moscow (AFP) Feb 15 - Russia could withdraw from a Cold War-era treaty limiting short and medium-range missiles if the United States places a missile defence system in the Czech Republic and Poland, the head of the armed forces said on Thursday. General Yury Baluyevsky told Russian news agencies that Moscow or Washington were entitled to withdraw from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, commonly known as INF, if there was "convincing proof" of the need to do so.

With several countries currently developing medium-range missiles, "such proof exists," he told Interfax.

He said Russia's decision could hinge on US plans to build a missile defence shield in central Europe -- plans that Moscow strongly opposes.

"We will see how our American partners act in future. What they're doing today, creating an... anti-missile defence region in Europe, is inexplicable," said Baluyevsky.

At an international security conference on Sunday, Russian Defence Minister Sergei Ivanov called the INF treaty, signed by the Soviet Union and the United States in 1987, a "relic" of the Cold War, saying that other countries were developing such weapons while Washington and Moscow's hands were tied.

In Washington, State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said the US had received no formal notice from Moscow about withdrawing from the INF but was "still looking into the specific provisions" of the treaty concerning an eventual pullout.

"I just would make the basic point that our effort to deploy an antimissile system around the world ... is in no way directed at Russia's strategic forces," McCormack said.

"They are instead designed to help protect the United States, its friends and allies from the possible launch of missiles from rogue states such as Iran," he said.

McCormack reiterated that Washington had asked Russia to cooperate with it on the missile defense issues and that the offer still stands.

"I know the Russians have had a reaction to this, I can't tell you exactly why, but it's not for lack of explanations and assurances and a number of levels that this is not directed at them," he said.

Moscow has said it does not accept Washington's assurances that its plans for the defence shield are not aimed against Russia but against "rogue states" such as Iran and North Korea.

President Vladimir Putin has promised a "highly effective" response if the United States deploys the defence shield.

Neither the Czech Republic nor Poland have yet approved the US plans, but officials from both countries have spoken in favour.

Czech President Vaclav Klaus said on Wednesday that the shield would protect "the free world."

Poland's Prime Minister Jaroslaw Kaczynski said Thursday he was in favour, under certain conditions, of Poland housing missiles for a defence shield.

Email This Article

Related Links
Learn about nuclear weapons doctrine and defense at SpaceWar.com
Learn about missile defense at SpaceWar.com