By John Q. Hosedrinker 
The 9M729 ground-launched cruise missile, a weapon whose development prompted the U.S. to withdraw from the INF Treaty, has been fired at Ukraine on multiple occasions, according to Ukrainian officials. This missile, which has a reported range of up to 1,200 kilometers, was banned under the 1987 treaty. The use of this missile in Ukraine has been interpreted as confirmation of previous concerns about Russia’s compliance and the need for the U.S. to leave the treaty. The recent strikes on Ukraine have further opened the door for new defense developments in the U.S.
Read the original article here
New missile that pushed Trump to leave nuclear treaty fired by Russia at Ukraine, Reuters reports, is a story that involves a complex interplay of international agreements, military technology, and geopolitical maneuvering. It all centers around a particular missile, the 9M729, also known as the Iskander K, a ground-launched cruise missile that, according to reports, Russia has deployed in its war against Ukraine. This missile, and the circumstances surrounding its development and use, are at the heart of why the United States withdrew from a significant arms control treaty, the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF Treaty), during the Trump administration.
The specs of the 9M729 are said to be similar to the U.S.-made Tomahawk cruise missile, sharing characteristics like range capabilities, which likely influenced the decision to leave the treaty. The INF Treaty, signed in 1987 by the United States and the Soviet Union (and subsequently Russia), aimed to eliminate ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles with ranges between 500 and 5,500 kilometers. The core purpose of the treaty was to reduce the risk of nuclear war by eliminating these types of weapons, particularly those that could be deployed quickly and potentially used for a first strike. These were considered to be particularly dangerous weapons due to their potential to launch without warning and thus increase the likelihood of a rapid escalation during a conflict.
The US, having withdrawn from the INF treaty, has since been developing ground-based launch systems for its own Tomahawk cruise missiles, which were initially designed for sea-based launches. This move reflects a response to the perceived threat posed by Russia’s violation of the treaty. The US decision to develop new missile systems after its exit is a direct consequence of the perceived actions of Russia. The development of ground-launched Tomahawk systems is, in essence, a direct response to the developments surrounding the 9M729.
The central issue, as it pertains to the INF Treaty, is the ground-based nature of these missiles. Submarines, for example, are inherently more difficult to detect and track, which affects how they contribute to the strategic balance of nuclear powers. Ground-based launchers, on the other hand, are easier to target, potentially leading to a “use them or lose them” scenario. This leads to the increased likelihood of pre-emptive actions as both sides are tempted to launch before they can be targeted. The INF treaty was meant to deter exactly this type of escalation.
Russia’s actions, specifically the development and deployment of the 9M729, are viewed by many as a violation of the treaty. This is the main driving factor in the US withdrawal. It seems that the US then chose to develop and test their own equivalent missile platform, one that could be potentially deployed to Ukraine.
There are many considerations surrounding the practical differences between the 9M729 and the Tomahawk cruise missiles. While both are cruise missiles, their effectiveness can depend on several factors, including the accuracy of the weapon, the warhead used, and the specific targets they are employed against. The accuracy of these weapons, and therefore the potential for collateral damage, is a significant concern. Precision and target selection are, ultimately, human driven. The era in which they are used, or where they are used, is less relevant than what is being targeted.
It’s important to understand the broader context of the INF Treaty. The treaty was a product of the Cold War and the arms race between the US and the Soviet Union. The goal was to give more time for diplomacy to succeed. The end goal of these treaties is to make sure any nuclear war has an increased probability of being prevented.
One significant factor that has been added to the discussion is China. China was not party to the INF Treaty. As China develops its own advanced missile technology, the value of the INF Treaty for the US and Russia was lessened. This is likely another key driver in the decisions that led to the treaty’s end.
Given the current geopolitical landscape and the ongoing conflict in Ukraine, the firing of the 9M729 missile and the re-evaluation of the American reaction is an ongoing story.