British Defense Minister Gavin Williamson said while he wanted the Cold War-era Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty to stay in place, Trump had made the right call.
“Our close and long-term ally of course is the United States and we will be absolutely resolute with the United States in hammering home a clear message that Russia needs to respect the treaty obligation that it signed,” he told the Financial Times on Sunday.
Trump announced Saturday that he was pulling out of the deal because it kept Washington from developing new nuclear weapons while Moscow was free to “do weapons (while) we're not allowed to.”
“We’ll have to develop those weapons,” he then vowed.
The INF, which was signed in 1986 between then US president Ronald Reagan and Soviet Union President Mikhail Gorbachev, banned deploying nuclear-capable missiles with ranges of 500 and 5,500 kilometers (310 to 3,420 miles).
The US claims that Russia’s newly-deployed Novator 9M729 cruise missiles fall in the banned category and pose a direct threat to members of the NATO military alliance. Russia finished testing the missile in 2014.
US Ambassador to NATO Kay Bailey Hutchison stirred tension earlier this month by warning that Washington would “take out” the missiles if necessary.
Russian President Vladimir Putin hit back by threatening to use nuclear weapons if it was attacked in any way.
Williamson said London stands “absolutely resolute” with Washington because Russia had made a “mockery” of the INF. He also called on the Kremlin to “get its house in order” and observe the deal.
“We of course want to see this treaty continue to stand but it does require two parties to be committed to it and at the moment you have one party that is ignoring it,” Williamson said.
“It is Russia that is in breach and it is Russia that needs to get its house in order,” he added.
Gorbachev warned Sunday that the move was a “mistake” that demonstrated Trump's "lack of wisdom."
Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said later in the day that Trump’s withdrawal was "very dangerous" and could lead to a "military-technical" retaliation.