On December 8, 1987, the world witnessed an extraordinary moment of hope. U.S. President Ronald Reagan and Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev sat together at a table in Washington, D.C., and signed the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty. As I look back on that moment, I can’t help but marvel at what it represented: the idea that even the bitterest of rivals could come together to make the world a safer place.
This wasn’t just another diplomatic handshake or hollow promise. It was a bold commitment to peace, a decision to step back from the brink of destruction at a time when the Cold War had left much of the world paralyzed by fear. Today, as we face new conflicts and escalating global tensions, I find myself wishing we could rediscover the courage and vision that leaders like Reagan and Gorbachev showed that day.
The World in 1987: A Fragile Balance
I don’t think we fully appreciate how close we came to disaster in the 1980s. The United States and the Soviet Union were locked in an arms race that seemed to have no end. Each side had stockpiled enough nuclear weapons to annihilate the planet, but it was the intermediate-range missiles that terrified people the most. These were the weapons that could strike targets in minutes, leaving no time for warnings or evacuations.
I remember how Europe became the battleground for this silent but deadly standoff. Soviet SS-20 missiles were pointed west, while American Pershing II missiles were stationed in NATO countries, pointed east. If you lived in cities like Berlin, London, or Warsaw back then, you understood what it meant to live under the constant shadow of annihilation.
But even in that climate of fear, there were glimmers of hope. Mikhail Gorbachev emerged as a leader who seemed different—someone willing to challenge the rigid orthodoxy of the Soviet system. Meanwhile, Ronald Reagan, who had once labeled the USSR an “evil empire,” began to see the value of diplomacy.
A Risk Worth Taking
When Reagan and Gorbachev met in Reykjavik, Iceland, in 1986, many of us watched with skepticism. Could these two men, representing rival superpowers, really find common ground? The Reykjavik summit ended without an agreement, but it opened the door to something greater.
A year later, the INF Treaty was signed. It wasn’t just a piece of paper—it was a game-changer. Both nations agreed to eliminate an entire class of nuclear weapons, destroying nearly 2,700 missiles by 1991. Just as important, the treaty included rigorous verification measures, including on-site inspections, to ensure compliance.
Think about that for a moment. Two nations that had spent decades distrusting each other managed to agree not only to disarm but to allow inspectors into each other’s territories. That kind of trust didn’t come easily, and it shouldn’t be underestimated.
What the INF Treaty Meant to Us
I was young then, but I still remember the sense of relief that came with the INF Treaty. It felt like the world had stepped back from the edge of a cliff. For a moment, it was possible to believe that peace wasn’t just a dream—it was something leaders could actually achieve if they tried hard enough.
The treaty didn’t end the Cold War, but it set the stage for its conclusion. It showed that even the most entrenched rivalries could be softened by dialogue and compromise. For me, it remains one of the most inspiring examples of what diplomacy can accomplish.
Why This Matters Now
Fast forward to today, and the world feels eerily familiar. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has brought war back to Europe, and the United States is deeply involved as Ukraine’s primary supplier of weapons. Many argue that this involvement is necessary—after all, Russia’s aggression must be confronted. But it’s also a reminder of how fragile peace can be and how quickly it can unravel.
It’s hard to ignore the parallels between now and then. Just as in the 1980s, we’re seeing the erosion of arms control agreements. In 2019, the United States withdrew from the INF Treaty, citing allegations that Russia had violated its terms. Whether or not those allegations were accurate, the result is the same: we’ve lost one of the most significant safeguards against nuclear escalation.
And let’s be honest—today’s global leadership doesn’t inspire the same confidence as Reagan and Gorbachev did. President Biden’s foreign policy has been criticized by many as reactive rather than strategic, and I can’t help but wonder whether a different approach might have prevented some of the crises we’re now facing.
A Call for Bold Leadership
I know some people are pinning their hopes on a new administration, possibly under Donald Trump, to restore a sense of balance and focus. Whether or not you believe he’s the right person for the job, it’s clear that we need leaders who are willing to take risks for peace. Reagan and Gorbachev weren’t perfect, but they understood what was at stake.
We need that kind of vision now. The war in Ukraine must be resolved, but it shouldn’t escalate into something even more catastrophic. And beyond Ukraine, we need to rebuild the kinds of agreements that keep the world safe—agreements like the INF Treaty.
Lessons We Can’t Afford to Forget
The INF Treaty wasn’t just a diplomatic win; it was a reminder of what’s possible when leaders rise above their own interests and focus on the greater good. It showed that peace isn’t just the absence of war—it’s a choice, one that requires courage, compromise, and trust.
As we remember December 8, 1987, let’s also reflect on what it means for us today. The stakes are just as high now as they were then, if not higher. We can’t afford to give up on the idea of peace—not when the alternative is so unthinkable.
Thirty-six years ago, Reagan and Gorbachev proved that diplomacy could work. It’s time for us to demand that same courage from today’s leaders. Peace is never easy, but it’s always worth fighting for.
