Sen. Shaheen Speaks Out for National Security and New START

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

Stories we're following today, Friday, December 10, 2010:

Shaheen to DeMint: Now is the Time to Vote on New START -  Senator Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) [link]

• We should not play partisan politics when it comes to nuclear weapons. In a speech this morning at the Heritage Foundation, my colleague, Senator Jim DeMint claimed that the New START Treaty weakens our national security. Nearly the entire foreign policy and national security establishment – Democrats and Republicans alike – completely disagrees with him.
• Senator DeMint is arguing that this treaty somehow weakens our national security and limits our strategic options. His argument has little basis in reality. Senator DeMint is opposed by every living former Secretary of State, five former Secretaries of Defense, nine former National Security Advisors, seven former commanders of our strategic nuclear weapons, and former President George H. W. Bush. All of these national security heavyweights argue the exact opposite of Senator DeMint, and they all agree that the New START Treaty strengthens our national security.
• The New START Treaty has the unanimous backing of America’s military leadership and America’s NATO allies, and according to the most recent CBS News poll, the treaty now has the support of 82 percent of Americans.
• Now is the time to vote on the New START Treaty. No one is rushing this treaty. Since the treaty was signed in April, the Senate has had 245 days to thoroughly review and consider this agreement. After 20 Senate hearings, more than 31 witnesses, more than 900 questions and answers, and 8 months of consideration – including a significant delay during the August recess for additional time for consideration in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee – the consensus is clear: New START is in our national security interests, and the Senate should not wait any longer to ratify this treaty.

MJ Note: The above statement was released in response to comments on December 9 at the Heritage Foundation by Senator Jim DeMint (R-SC), who opposes the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty.

Letter to Senators Reid, Durbin and Schumer Calling for Immediate Approval of New START [link]

• Failure to act on the New START treaty this year would undermine the country’s national security interests, as both our military leadership and numerous former Republican officials have noted.
• Failure to bring New START to the floor will also squander the significant momentum that has built up in support of the treaty. There is now widespread bipartisan support for New START in the Senate, making it imperative that a floor vote happen before the Senate goes out of session.
• Any issue that is left uncompleted during the next month will drag long into 2011; a new Senate takes months to get organized. The new make up of the Senate also promises to complicate ratification, potentially requiring new, more costly negotiations.
• The treaty is supported unanimously by the nation’s military and intelligence leadership and most prominent former senior national security officials from Republican as well as Democratic administrations. They support it because it will make the U.S. safer.
• We urge you to take up and approve New START now, if need be by extending the Senate in session beyond December 17.

Note: The above letter was signed by 33 leaders of key organizations working to sustain the momentum for approval of New START.  These organizations, representing millions of Americans, demonstrate the large, diverse, bipartisan coalition of national security, religious, scientific, and environmental organizations that support prompt ratification of New START.

What I Found in North Korea - Siegfried Hecker in Foreign Affairs [link]

• On November 12, during my most recent visit to the Yongbyon nuclear complex, North Korean scientists showed me and my colleagues, John W. Lewis and Robert Carlin, a small, recently completed, industrial-scale uranium-enrichment facility and an experimental light-water reactor (LWR) under construction.
• Although I and other nonproliferation experts had long believed that North Korea possessed a parallel uranium-enrichment program -- and there was ample evidence for such a belief -- I was amazed by its scale and sophistication. Instead of finding a few dozen first-generation centrifuges, we saw rows of advanced centrifuges, apparently fully operational. Our hosts told us that construction of the centrifuge facility began in April 2009 and was completed a few days before our arrival. That is not credible, however, given the requirements for specialty materials and components, as well as the difficulty of making the centrifuge cascades work smoothly.
• It will be more important than ever to limit Pyongyang's nuclear progress and calm tensions on the Korean peninsula. This is particularly true in light of the clash in the Yellow Sea between the two Koreas late last month.
• How North Korea managed to obtain all these materials is a troubling question for the global nonproliferation regime. Indeed, there is no evidence that North Korea can produce high-strength aluminum or steel alloys on its own, or that ring magnets, bearings, and vacuum valves were manufactured indigenously.
• Washington cannot rule out North Korean cooperation with Iran, since the two have collaborated closely on missile technologies before. North Korea's centrifuge facilities appear to be more sophisticated than what Iran has shown to international inspectors, but it is well known that Tehran is developing next-generation centrifuges. Moreover, North Korea has much greater experience in uranium processing and reactor technologies than Iran, raising concerns that such expertise could flow from Pyongyang to Tehran.
• It is time for the United States to conduct a thorough review of its policies on Northeast Asia, including but not limited to the nuclear issue. The fundamental and enduring goal must be the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula. However, since that will take time, the U.S. government must quickly press for what I call "the three no's" -- no more bombs, no better bombs, and no exports -- in return for one yes: Washington's willingness to seriously address North Korea's fundamental insecurity along the lines of the joint communiqué.

Pact Lifts Limits on Civilian Nuclear Projects With Russia - Peter Baker for The New York Times [link]

• While President Obama presses the Senate to embrace a new arms control treaty with Russia, another nuclear pact with Moscow cleared its final hurdle on Thursday after more than four years with virtually no notice but potentially significant impact.
• An agreement opening the door to greater civilian nuclear cooperation between the two countries cleared its final hurdle in Congress and will now take force in what Mr. Obama hopes will be another step toward strengthening the Russian-American rapprochement that has been one of his signature foreign policy goals.
• The civilian nuclear agreement lifts longstanding limitations to allow extensive commercial nuclear trade, technology transfers and joint research between Russia and the United States. It does not permit the transfer of restricted data, but it eliminates a significant barrier to Russia’s importing, storing and possibly reprocessing spent nuclear fuel from American-supplied reactors around the world.
• “The agreement represents a major step forward in U.S.-Russian civil nuclear cooperation,” Daniel Poneman, the deputy energy secretary, said by telephone from Moscow. “It enhances cooperation on nonproliferation” and “creates new commercial opportunities for Russian and American industry.”
• The agreement and the New Start treaty are at the heart of Mr. Obama’s effort to rebuild the relationship with Moscow after it deteriorated to a post-cold-war low following the Georgia war. In response to Mr. Obama’s outreach, Russia has supported tougher sanctions on Iran and canceled its sale of S-300 antiaircraft missiles to Iran; allowed American troops and weapons to fly through Russian territory to Afghanistan; and agreed to further study cooperation on missile defense.

Administration and GOP Preparing to Fight Over 'Treaty Killer' Amendments for New START - Josh Rogin for "The Cable" [link]

• Now that the Senate has declined to repeal the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy, the path could be clear for a full-on debate over the New START treaty with Russia, right? Not so fast. A huge fight is brewing on Capitol Hill over the dozens of amendments GOP senators are preparing to bring up during the debate, several of which the administration could consider "treaty killers."
• Senate Foreign Relations Committee (SFRC) Chairman John Kerry (D-MA) and the administration have been telling GOP senators that some of their amendments cannot be brought up on the Senate floor because, if adopted, they would force the treaty to go back to the Russians for another round of negotiations. Multiple GOP Senate aides told The Cable that the treaty supporters were calling these amendments "treaty killers."
• The amendments being circulated now cover the whole litany of concerns that GOP senators have raised about New START treaty for months, including missile defense, nuclear modernization, Iran policy, tactical nuclear weapons, and verification of the treaty's provisions.
• The one amendment that could really rile up the Russians and force further protracted negotiations on the treaty is one being circulated that would strip the treaty's preamble of language that acknowledges a relationship between offensive and defensive capabilities. The administration has said repeatedly this language doesn't constrain U.S. missile defense plans but many Republicans want to see it gone nonetheless.
• Meanwhile, the administration and Kerry continue to work behind the scenes with top GOP senators, including Kyl and John McCain (R-AZ). Nobody knows whether they will reach a deal in time, but the longer the negotiations drag on and the longer the tax issue remains unresolved, the dimmer the chances of ratifying New START this year.