Reykjavík Summit

• 1. Introduction

  ›

  The Reykjavík Summit, held on the 11th and the 12th of October 1986, came within a single word of ending the nuclear age. Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev sat across from each other in Höfði House in Reykjavík, Iceland, and for two days they came closer to eliminating all nuclear weapons than any leaders before or since. Then the talks collapsed. A photograph taken as the two men left the building tells the story without words: Reagan visibly angered, Gorbachev solemn. Yet what failed in October 1986 quietly seeded what would succeed in December 1987. How did a summit that produced no agreement end up reshaping the world anyway? And what was the single word that stopped it all?

• 2. A Meeting Arranged in Haste

  ›

  In mid-September 1986, Gorbachev wrote directly to Reagan proposing a meeting in Iceland the following month. The idea was not to settle everything there. It was to prepare the ground for a more substantive summit, which would eventually come as the Washington Summit in December 1987. Reagan agreed, and the arrangements were made in an unusually short period of time.

  The timing was complicated by a diplomatic crisis that had only just been resolved. Soviet physicist Gennadi Zakharov had been accused of espionage in the United States, and American journalist Nicholas Daniloff had been detained in the Soviet Union. Both were released without charge before the summit. The crisis had not prevented the meeting, but it had shadowed the weeks leading up to it.

• 3. What Each Side Wanted

  ›

  Reagan arrived in Reykjavík with an agenda that stretched beyond weapons. He sought to raise human rights, the emigration of Soviet Jews and dissidents, and the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. Gorbachev pushed to limit the talks solely to arms control. That tension between the two agendas would run through the entire meeting.

  On arms, the Soviet position had been forming since 1986. Gorbachev had proposed banning all ballistic missiles, but the sticking point was the Strategic Defense Initiative, known as SDI, which involved the militarization of outer space. Soviet suspicion of SDI had long strained relations between Washington and Moscow. At Reykjavík, it would become the fault line everything else ran along.

• 4. The Offers on the Table

  ›

  The Soviets came to Reykjavík with sweeping proposals. They agreed to the "double-zero" approach for eliminating intermediate-range nuclear forces from Europe, a concept Reagan himself had first put forward in November 1981. They proposed eliminating fifty percent of all strategic arms, including intercontinental ballistic missiles. They agreed not to count British or French weapons in the tally. All of this was offered in exchange for one American commitment: no strategic defenses for ten years, consistent with the terms of SALT I.

  The Americans countered by proposing to eliminate all ballistic missiles within ten years, while keeping the right to deploy strategic defenses against whatever threats remained after that period. Gorbachev went further still, suggesting that all nuclear weapons be eliminated within a decade. The two sides were, for a moment, negotiating the end of nuclear arsenals altogether.

• 5. The Word That Stopped Everything

  ›

  Gorbachev's sweeping offer came with a condition. Any SDI research, he insisted, had to be confined to laboratories for the ten-year period under discussion. His stated reason was a desire to strengthen the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, known as the ABM Treaty.

  Reagan refused. He argued that his proposed SDI research was permitted under any reasonable reading of the ABM Treaty. He also said he had made a personal pledge to Americans to investigate whether SDI was viable, and he could not walk away from that promise. He offered to share SDI technology once it was developed. Gorbachev said he doubted that promise would be kept, noting that the Americans would not even share oil-drilling technology.

  Reagan staffer Jack F. Matlock Jr. would later argue that Reagan's refusal rested on a misunderstanding. Matlock contended that the proposed restrictions would have had little practical effect on SDI research, which was still in its very early stages. But in the room, Reagan held firm. At the final moment, Reagan asked Gorbachev whether he would "turn down a historic opportunity because of a single word." Gorbachev said it was a matter of principle. The summit ended.

• 6. What the Collapse Left Behind

  ›

  The two leaders left Höfði House with no signed agreement. Yet both sides had revealed the full extent of what they were willing to give. That knowledge did not disappear when the talks ended.

  For the first time, human rights became a subject of productive discussion. Gorbachev also agreed in principle to on-site inspections, a demand the Americans had pressed for years without success. The Partial Test Ban Treaty of 1963 had not included it. The ABM and SALT I pacts of 1972 had not included it either. That agreement alone marked a genuine shift.

  Participants and observers later called Reykjavík an enormous breakthrough despite its apparent failure. The concessions both sides had put on the table became the foundation for what came next. The INF Treaty, eliminating an entire class of nuclear weapons, was signed at the Washington Summit on the 8th of December 1987. The path from Höfði House to that signing ceremony was shorter than either leader might have expected when they walked out.