Washington Post reporter Walter Pincus, in his August 10 article “New START: A Similar Arms Reduction Pact but a Different Republican Reaction,” argues that Republican Senators are applying different standards for reviewing the 2002 Moscow Treaty between the U.S. and Russia for reducing strategic nuclear warheads and today’s New START, which seeks to limit offensive and defensive strategic weapons. The problem with the Pincus argument, as its title makes clear, is that it fails to account for the dramatic differences between the two treaties. Accordingly, it is essential to describe …
The Washington Post has arrived at the conclusion, in a July 26 editorial, that the New START arms control agreement with Russia should be ratified this year. Arriving at this conclusion, however, has resulted from the Post misunderstanding important details about the treaty and failing to recognize that the Obama Administration’s general approach to arms control is seriously flawed. Starting with the specifics, the Post asserts that New START will reduce the number of deployed strategic nuclear warheads from the levels required under the current Moscow Treaty with Russia by …
Supporters of the New START treaty want you to believe that 1.) All who oppose it are nuke-loving troglodytes; and 2.) Its an “all or nothing” deal, the only way to a world without nuclear weapons. They’re wrong on both counts. Critics of New START do not oppose all arms-control pacts. But they worry that this treaty can lead to more instability in the world, not less. They think there is a better way to achieve arms control. And they are disappointed that the Obama administration negotiated a treaty pegged …
One of the common “sky is falling” claims of Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START) supporters like Hillary Clinton and John Isaacs of the Council of a Livable World is that unless this treaty with Russia is ratified, we’ll have nothing binding to make us continue reducing our nuclear weapons arsenal. Those claims are just plain false, and the Obama Administration should acknowledge that fact –now. Today, the levels of strategic nuclear weapons in the U.S. and Russia are governed by the Bush-era Moscow Treaty or as its technically known, …
In her testimony today before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee urging the Senate to consent to the ratification of the April 8th Treaty between the Russian Federation and the United States of America on Measures for the Further Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms (New START), Secretary of State Hillary Clinton stated the following: Now, some may argue that we don’t need the new START treaty. But the choice before us is between this treaty and no treaty governing our nuclear security relationship with Russia, between this treaty and …
FOX News reports: Russia and the United States have tentatively agreed to a weapons inspection program that would allow Russians to visit nuclear sites in America to count missiles and warheads. The plan, which Fox News has learned was agreed to in principle during negotiations, would constitute the most intrusive weapons inspection program the U.S. has ever accepted. Initial thoughts: The description reported in the press of what has been agreed to is way too vague to know whether there would be a significant security risk. What we know for …
