The United States suspended its compliance with the INF Treaty on February 2, 2019, after an announcement made the day before by US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. In a statement, Trump said there was a six-month timetable for full withdrawal and termination of the FSL Treaty if the Russian Federation did not agree again within that time frame.   On the same day, Putin announced that Russia had also suspended the FSL Treaty as a “reaction to the mirror” of Trump`s decision to suspend the treaty with effect that day.  The next day, Russia began work on new medium-range hypersonic (ballistic) missiles, as well as 3M-54 Kalibr ground systems (both armed with nuclear weapons), in response to the US announcement of the launch of research and development of weapons prohibited by the treaty.  The two-track decision concerned two political “tracks”. Initially, of the 7,400 nuclear warheads, 1,000 would be removed from Europe and the United States would conduct bilateral negotiations with the Soviet Union to limit the theater`s nuclear forces. If these negotiations fail, NATO would modernize its own LRTNF or medium-range nuclear (SNSF) forces by replacing the US Perhing 1a missiles with 108 Pershing II launchers in West Germany and deploying 464 BGM-109G Ground Launched Cruise Missiles (GLCM) in Belgium, Italy, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom from December 1983.     On November 18, 1981, just before the start of formal talks, Reagan made the zero option or the “zero zero” proposal.  It requested that the US deployment of the GLCM and Pershing II systems be limited by the Soviet elimination of its SS-4, SS-5 and SS-20 missiles. There seemed to be little chance that the zero option would be accepted, but the move was well received by European public opinion. In February 1982, U.S. negotiators presented a draft treaty that included the zero option and a comprehensive ban on medium- and short-range missiles, while ensuring compliance with a rigorous, though unspecified, verification program.  In 2011, Dan Blumenthal of the American Enterprise Institute wrote that the real Russian problem with the FN Treaty is that China is not bound to it and continues to develop its own medium-range forces.
 R&D agreements take the form of a Cooperation Research and Development Agreement (CRADA) (15 U.S.C§ 3710a), a Partnership Intermediary Agreement (PIA) (15 U.S.C§ 3715) or a Technology Investment Agreement (TIA) (32 C.F.R Part 37). These procurement methods are fluid and the timing of the acquisition process may vary depending on the specific purpose of the project. During these two years, there has been little consensus between the two sides. An attempt by the United States to separate the issue of nuclear aircraft from the issue of medium-range missiles has successfully drawn attention to the latter point, but little clear progress has been made in this area. . . .