New START to be Voted Out of Committee Today

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

Stories we're following today: Thursday, September 16, 2010.

New START for National Security – Undersecretary Ellen Tauscher & Principal Deputy Undersecretary James Miller for Politico [link]

• For the past 15 years, our principal arms control agreement with Russia, START, has been based on President Ronald Reagan’s guiding principle, “Trust, but verify.” But START, which allowed us to monitor and inspect Russia’s strategic nuclear arsenal, expired last December. Now, we have only trust — and that’s not enough in an uncertain world.
• Without New START, our knowledge of Russia’s nuclear forces is likely to erode and the risks of misunderstandings and miscalculations will grow. Worst-case assumptions are then likely to fuel military planning in both countries, increasing costs and decreasing trust.
• If the Senate approves the treaty — a two-thirds vote is required — we will be able to regain and improve upon our ability to verify what Russia is doing with its nuclear arsenal.
• This new treaty could provide a vital window into Russia’s strategic nuclear arsenal and help track it. The new inspection regime draws on our experience over the past 15 years with the original START.

Ratify New START: Senseless Opposition and Delay to New START Carries Real Risks – Max Bergmann of the Center for American Progress [link]

• After more than 20 Senate hearings and endless discussion and debate over the specifics of New START, no concerns are legitimate enough to justify a vote in opposition to the treaty.
• Every day that goes by without a new treaty, the United States loses valuable intelligence on Russia’s nuclear forces due to the lack of any verification and monitoring measures. This harms U.S. security and creates an incredibly uncertain and dangerous nuclear environment.
• Some Republican senators, keen to avoid anything that could be seen as a victory for President Barack Obama, have sought to stall the treaty or tied its ratification to issues with no direct relevance.
• The Senate Foreign Relations committee will almost certainly approve the treaty. But the stance of some Senate Republicans makes the treaty’s future less certain in the full Senate where it will need 67 votes for ratification.
• Arms-control treaties in the past have been ratified by the Senate with near unanimous bipartisan support.
• It’s time for the Senate to ratify New START and end the nuclear uncertainty created by the gap in verification. Our national security is at stake.

Don't Allow Politics to Stop New START - Lt. Gen. John Castellaw in the Memphis Commercial Appeal [link]

• New START can stabilize America's strategic nuclear forces, provide vital intelligence and verification, and bring about a modest but needed reduction in nuclear weapons. It must be ratified.
• By reducing U.S. and Russian arsenals and reinstating and strengthening the verification procedures that allow U.S. inspectors to keep tabs on Russian nuclear weapons, the treaty increases U.S. national security.
• The treaty has the unanimous support of our nation's military leadership, including Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
• This is a vital issue where we can't allow politics to overshadow statesmanship. I urge Corker, who serves on the Foreign Relations Committee, and Sen. Lamar Alexander not to be swayed by those who would attempt to put politics before national security. I ask them to heed the advice of our nation's military leadership and the collective wisdom of security experts from Republican and Democratic administrations and vote to ratify.

A Security Test for the GOP – Joe Cirincione in The Huffington Post [link]

• America's military is solidly behind the new security treaty that cuts Russia's nuclear weapons. Is the Republican Party? The test comes Thursday when Senators have to choose: Back the military or play politics?
• The New Start treaty has the unanimous support of America’s military leadership…For nearly 40 years, treaties to limit or reduce nuclear weapons have been approved by the US Senate by strong bipartisan majorities. This treaty deserves a similar reception and result.
• Some in the Republican leadership, however, appear reluctant to give President Obama a "victory" before the November elections. They have drawn out the approval process. Senators, for example, submitted over 900 questions for the record compared to fewer than 150 for the previous START treaty. Each has to be painstakingly answered and approved by administration officials. There have been over 20 hearings on this treaty compared to 3 for the original START treaty.
• It is time to choose, Senators. For inspecting Russian weapons, or against? For reducing the only weapons that can destroy America, or against? For supporting the entire military leadership of the United States, or against?
• It is time to put country first.

North Korea Wants to Make a Deal – Jimmy Carter in the New York Times [link]

• In July, North Korean officials invited me to come to Pyongyang to meet with Kim Jong-il…They wanted me to come in the hope that I might help resurrect the agreements on denuclearization and peace that were the last official acts of Kim Il-sung before his death in 1994.
• I met with Kim Yong-nam, president of the presidium of the North’s Parliament, and Kim Kye-gwan, the vice foreign minister and chief negotiator for North Korea in the six-party nuclear talks. Both of them had participated in my previous negotiations with Kim Il-sung.
• They expressed concern about several recent American actions, including unwarranted sanctions, ostentatious inclusion of North Korea among nations subject to nuclear attack and provocative military maneuvers with South Korea.
• Still, they said, they were ready to demonstrate their desire for peace and denuclearization. They referred to the six-party talks as being “sentenced to death but not yet executed.” The following week I traveled to Beijing, where Chinese leaders informed me that Mr. Kim had delivered the same points to them while I was in Pyongyang.
• A settlement on the Korean Peninsula is crucial to peace and stability in Asia, and it is long overdue. These positive messages from North Korea should be pursued aggressively and without delay, with each step in the process carefully and thoroughly confirmed.

US: Time May Come for Special Nuke Probe of Syria – George Jahn for the Associated Press 

• A U.S. envoy [in Vienna] on Thursday suggested time was running out for Syria to cooperate with a U.N. atomic agency probe of alleged secret nuclear activities before the agency invokes its seldom-used authority to call for a special inspection — a possible prelude to U.N. Security Council involvement.
• Israeli warplanes bombed what the U.S. says was a nearly finished nuclear reactor three years ago, launching an agency investigation. After an initial visit to the site, agency inspectors have not been allowed to return — or visit other suspect sites — and the agency's chief, Yukiya Amano, says Syria's lack of cooperation could mean that information sought by the agency could be lost with the passage of time.
• Glyn Davies, the chief U.S. delegate to the agency, told the meeting that, unless Syria ends its stonewalling, the IAEA must increasingly "consider all available measures and authorities to pursue the verification assurances the international community seeks" — diplomatic language for a special inspection.
• Refusal by Syria to allow a special inspection would allow the board to refer the issue to the U.N. Security Council, which then could issue a reprimand, pass a resolution demanding compliance and ultimately pass the kind of sanctions Iran is now under for refusing to heed demands to curb nuclear activities that could be used both to generate energy or make weapons.

View From the Dark Side

Advice and Consent? The Senate Should START with Advice – Baker Spring of The Heritage Foundation [link]

• Last week Senator John Kerry (D–MA), Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, released the long-awaited “Chairman’s draft” of the New START Treaty Resolution of Advice and Consent to Ratification.
• The discussion draft demonstrates that even the strongest proponents of the treaty in the Senate acknowledge the numerous problems pointed out by The Heritage Foundation over the last several months.
• Unfortunately, substantial portions of the draft resolution are only non-binding declarations. In addition, a review of the declarations reveals the impact of many of the issues that The Heritage Foundation has repeatedly raised…
• The treaty’s most serious impact is the limitations it imposes on the U.S. ballistic missile defense systems.
• The draft resolution of ratification does very little to address the fact that the verification regime is not even a pale reflection of that of the original START treaty.
• Congress is required by the Constitution to “provide for the common defense,” and the Senate must provide due diligence in its consideration of the treaty. The American people are depending on their elected leaders in the Senate to take necessary actions to ensure the U.S. is defended against attack.