Russian Lower House Approves New START Treaty

Today's top nuclear policy stories, with excerpts in bullet form.

Stories we're following today: Tuesday January 25, 2011.

Russian Parliament Ratifies Arms Pact with US - The Associated Press [link]

• Russia's lower house of parliament on Tuesday ratified a landmark nuclear arms pact with the United States that was earlier been approved by the U.S. Senate.
• The State Duma voted 350-96 with one abstention to pass a ratification bill of the New START treaty. The treaty will now go to the upper house for final approval.
• The treaty's passage has never been in doubt in the Kremlin-controlled parliament, but Russian lawmakers wanted to counter a U.S. Senate resolution that accompanied its December's ratification with a similar motion.
• While the Senate resolution said the treaty shouldn't restrict U.S. plans to develop a missile defense system, the Duma ratification bill stated that the treaty can only be fulfilled if emerging missile defenses don't erode the Russian nuclear deterrent.
• The Russian draft bill also mimicked the Senate resolution that mentioned increased funding for the U.S. nuclear arsenal by emphasizing the need to modernize Russia's nuclear forces.
• Neither the Senate, nor the Duma resolution would affect the text of the treaty, which is a centerpiece of President Barack Obama's efforts to "reset" ties with Russia.
• NOTE: For an overview of the Russian ratification process, click here. 

No Panic at Lack of Progress in Iran Nuclear Talks - Mike Shuster for NPR [link]

• Two days of talks with Iran — held by the United States, Europe, Russia and China — over its controversial nuclear activities ended Saturday with no progress. This time, Iran set preconditions the other side was unwilling to meet.
• Before, it seemed that Iran was making progress in expanding its uranium enrichment program nearly every day — but not so recently. And it seemed the only choices for action to pressure Iran on its nuclear program were diplomacy or war.
• Now, says David Albright, director of the Institute for Science and International Security, a whole range of actions has emerged between the two extremes, most of them apparently successful covert operations.
• So the U.S. and Europe may be content to wait and see what Iran might do, despite a lack of progress in the current talks. That's the view of Leonard Spector of the Martin Center for Non-Proliferation Studies.
• "I'm not too concerned, because I think the whole dynamics of these talks have shifted over the last year, year and a half, from the point where we originally were the ones that were very anxious to see progress. And now I have a feeling the Iranians may eventually be the ones who are looking for a way out, because the circumstances have changed a bit," he says.
• One analyst called the Obama administration's current strategy engage-sanction-sabotage. Right now, sabotage may be the most potent weapon available.
• NOTE: Albright and Spector are Ploughshares grantees.  The unnamed "analyst" is Joe Cirincione. 

After a Failure in Istanbul, a Better Route Than Talks With Iran - The Washington Post [link]

• The Obama administration recently has been boasting of the success of its campaign to impose sanctions on Iran, which is said to have had a significant impact on the country's economy.
• If the regime is indeed feeling threatened by the sanctions, there was little sign of it from its chief negotiator in Istanbul, Saeed Jalili, who struck rhetorical poses aimed at domestic and regional audiences. Mr. Jalili insisted that there could be no substantive discussions unless the United States and its allies met several preconditions, including the lifting of U.N. sanctions.
• The failed meeting might make it easier for the Obama administration to win support for still more sanctions, though it would probably face an uphill battle in obtaining another Security Council resolution.
• Because it has banked on this approach, the administration has consistently played down U.S. support for the opposition Green movement, which has been dormant in recent months. Yet Mr. Jalili's behavior in Istanbul suggests that the regime remains more concerned about appearing weak to its domestic opposition than about the consequences of defying the Security Council.
• By doing more to support the Iranian opposition, the United States could press the regime where it actually feels threatened. It could also send an important message to Iranians: that the international coalition seeks not to punish them but to weaken the government they despise.
  

Geithner: Levey’s Departure Won't Affect Policy - Josh Rogin in “The Cable” a Foreign Policy Blog [link]

• The Obama administration's top official for financial sanctions Stuart Levey will step down and be replaced by his deputy David Cohen at the Treasury Department.
• The resignation comes just as the latest round of talks between the P5+1 countries and Iran regarding its nuclear program seem to have sputtered and even Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has indicated more sanctions could be in the offing.
• "It will have no effect on policy, or on our ability to execute the President's policy," said Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner. "David came to Treasury with well established outside expertise and has worked at Stuart's side for the last two years."
• White House counterterrorism advisor John Brennan said in a statement that Levey's work had directly degraded the capabilities of those who seek to do the U.S. harm.
• "There's no perfect time for these things. But this is as good a time as any," said Geithner.

New Poll: Americans Would Cut Military Spending Over Entitlements - Laicie Olsen on “Nukes of Hazard” Blog [link]

• A new New York Times/CBS News poll, based on telephone interviews conducted Jan. 15-19 with over a thousand US adults, contains some interesting statistics on the priorities of the American public.
• It is clear from the numbers that the deficit is a major concern, and Americans would, not surprisingly, prefer the deficit be addressed through spending cuts, rather than higher taxes. When asked what they would cut, however, that preference seems to disappear.
• Nearly two-thirds of Americans chose higher payroll taxes for Medicare and Social Security over reduced benefits in either program. And when asked to choose among cuts to Medicare, Social Security or military spending – all programs that have grown exponentially over the past decade – 55 percent said cut the Pentagon.

A View From The Dark Side

Lip Service for Military Service - Frank Gaffney in The Washington Times [link]

• In 1892, Rudyard Kipling wrote a poem about the paradigmatic British soldier, Tommy Atkins, and his paradigmatic treatment at the hands of an indolent democratic society that takes him for granted - until he is needed.
• Unfortunately, for the first time in a generation, Americans are behaving as though they can safely disdain Tommy‘s U.S. counterparts - “the troops” - even as the guns are shooting.
• Some leading Republicans who should know better are signaling that they are going to join forces with the Obama administration and make significant cuts in defense spending.
• Now, no one is in favor of wasteful expenditures, in the Pentagon or elsewhere. But let’s face it: There is no line item in the Defense Department’s budget called “waste, fraud and abuse.” As a result, cuts that would eliminate unjustifiable spending by the military have to be wrung out from each and every item that actually is in the defense budget.
• But most of those caviling for the budget to be balanced on the backs of our troops are not interested in such a tedious and time-consuming exercise. A much more convenient way to arrive at significant savings at the Pentagon‘s expense is to dramatically slow down, reduce or kill outright planned purchases of major weapon systems. Right on cue, several Washington think tanks - including the left-wing Brookings Institution and Stimson Center and the ostensibly centrist Bipartisan Policy Center - have recommended doing just that in recent days.
• Say what you want, the people who will most immediately reap the whirlwind sown by such actions will be our troops. They may prove, as a result, unable safely and surely to meet the threats that will be given short shrift tonight by politicians consumed with domestic considerations. They will be placed in greater jeopardy as a result, but ultimately so will be the nation they have volunteered to protect with their lives.