"Of that group, Iran's missiles would certainly have Russia's cities in range," says Mark Fitzpatrick, senior fellow for non-proliferation at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London. "The Iranians are developing a long-range missile - with Russian technology."
By Catherine Belton and Neil Buckley
In 1987, Mikhail Gorbachev, the Soviet leader, and Ronald Reagan, the US president, signed the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces treaty, scrapping 2,692 medium-range nuclear missiles, including the fearsome US Pershings, and the Soviet SS-20s. It was one of the most dramatic gestures towards ending the cold war.
Yesterday a top Russian general threatened to withdraw unilaterally from the treaty, and linked the move directly to the US plans to establish parts of its proposed missile defence system in Poland and the Czech Republic.
At the weekend Vladimir Putin, the Russian president, attacked US rearmament and Nato expansion to his borders. It all sounds ominously like a revival of cold war attitudes.
There is little doubt that the Russians are mightily upset by the US missile defence plans. American envoys have been shuttling in and out of Moscow, seeking to assure them that the plans are not aimed at Russia itself but rather at any new sources of proliferation. Not only that, but the system remains profoundly unproven. But Mr Putin and his military commanders have decided they are not prepared to believe the arguments.
"What they are doing at the moment - creating a positioning region for anti-missile defence in Europe - is totally inexplicable," said Gen Yury Baluyevsky, chief of the general staff.
But Russia's response seems equally inexplicable. It may be an effort to galvanise public opposition in Poland and the Czech Republic - and much of western Europe - to oppose the US plans.
It does not sound serious or likely that Moscow would want to go back to spending billions on nuclear missiles against a non-existent threat.
In Munich last Saturday, Mr Putin used different arguments against the INF treaty. He said that while Russia and the US had agreed not to produce any medium-range nuclear missiles, many other countries were working on them, or had them already.
He mentioned North and South Korea, India, Iran, Pakistan and Israel. "In these conditions, we must think about ensuring our own security."
It is true that Russia is a lot closer to most of those countries than the US. But on the list only North Korea and Iran - if it does get nuclear weapons - would really be in range.
"Of that group, Iran's missiles would certainly have Russia's cities in range," says Mark Fitzpatrick, senior fellow for non-proliferation at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London. "The Iranians are developing a long-range missile - with Russian technology."
That may be one reason why Mr Putin is rather more upset about Iranian nuclear intentions than he has admitted in public. But it still does not explain the sudden threat to walk away from the INF treaty.
Judging by his words in Munich, Mr Putin is genuinely concerned at the absence of the old disarmament framework that was set up during the cold war. There is no common view on how to repair and extend the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty in the light of Israel, India, Pakistan, North Korea and maybe Iran soon acquiring weapons outside it.
"The Russians seem to be worried that arms control has got stuck," a senior Nato analyst suggests. "They want to go back to the old arms control framework. But the Bush administration does not seem to be bothered. It has got other priorities."
That is one theory. Another is even more ambitious: that Mr Putin actually wants to buy into the US missile defence system. Mr Reagan once offered such a prospect to Mr Gorbachev, who was too proud to accept. But the sight of China launching a satellite-killing missile has shaken Moscow as much as Washington. Behind the tough words, the Russian president may be really seeking to do a deal.
