|
|
|
Jewish World Review Nov. 23, 2010 / 16 Kislev, 5771 Stopping START By Jack Kelly
http://www.JewishWorldReview.com |
After his humiliating Asian trip -- where foreign leaders at the G20 summit in Seoul treated him as if he had a social disease -- President Barack Obama is desperate for something that could be spun as a foreign policy "triumph."
That's why he's pressing so hard to have the Senate ratify in the lame duck session the nuclear arms reduction treaty (New START ) he negotiated with Russia last Spring.
This is a bad idea, for three reasons:
The first, on which I'll elaborate below, is that it is not in the security interests of the United States.
The second is the treaty is complicated, and deserves serious consideration. With all the other things that must be done before the end of the year, there simply isn't enough time before the 111th Congress (thankfully) expires.
The third is there is something illegitimate about having so many senators who were defeated in November make this decision.
This last is the chief reason for Mr. Obama's urgency. Republicans gained six seats Nov. 2. They'll have 47 in January. That'll make it that much harder for Mr. Obama to win the two-thirds majority required for ratification.
In the real world, there's no such urgency. The old START treaty expired at the end of last year. Few people noticed or cared.
"Progressives" like Mr. Obama have difficulty recognizing the world has changed since the 1970s. In the bad old days of the Soviet Union, arms control treaties were a big deal.
But no serious person believes the Russia of today will go to war with the United States. Indeed, with its plunging population and a gross domestic product that is less than that of Belgium, there is doubt Russia in anything like its present form will exist a decade from now.
So even though I think New START is, on balance, harmful, I don't think it's a big deal.
If the U.S. and Russia do cut their nuclear arsenals by another 20 percent, the chief beneficiary would be China, which (unlike Russia, which can't afford it) is in the midst of a massive buildup in strategic weaponry.
There are other reasons. Language in the preamble to the treaty could cripple our ballistic missile defense program. Poorly drafted provisions could cripple our ability to use dual purpose systems such as the B-2 bomber for conventional military missions.
Finally, the verification procedures are poor. "The New START is not even a pale reflection of the verification regime of the original START treaty," said experts assembled by the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank.
The Soviets cheated on the earlier arms limitation agreements. It'll be easier for the Russians to cheat on this one.
And there is nothing in the treaty that is of any benefit to the United States. President Obama speaks of his dream of a nuclear free world. A nuclear free United States would be a nightmare for us in a world in which China and Pakistan have the bomb, and North Korea, Iran and Venezuela(!) aggressively are pursuing it. It's time for Mr. Obama to wake up from his dream and smell the coffee.
Despite this, there is an argument for ratifying New START.
That argument rests in recognition of the fact that President Obama is a greater threat to missile defense and strategic modernization than is the language of the new treaty, and in his desperation to have a foreign policy success.
Republican senators could trade their votes for the treaty for a firm commitment by the president to modernize our nuclear arsenal, and to continue funding ballistic missile defense.
Nuclear weapons deteriorate over time, and must be replaced. We would be safer with a smaller, better arsenal than a larger, aged one.
A small additional reason for ratification is that Russia would use rejection of New START as an excuse for continued belligerence on matters of greater import, such as Russia's continuing occupation of a substantial portion of Georgia, and Russia's continued support for Iran's nuclear program. And the Obama administration (with some justification) would blame Republicans for that continuing belligerence.
So it may serve the national interest (and that of Republicans) to ratify the new START treaty, despite its flaws. But that is a decision for the new Senate to make.
Every weekday JewishWorldReview.com publishes what many in the media and Washington consider "must-reading". Sign up for the daily JWR update. It's free. Just click here.
Comment by clicking here.
JWR contributor Jack Kelly, a former Marine and Green Beret, was a deputy assistant secretary of the Air Force in the Reagan administration.
© 2009, Jack Kelly |
Columnists
Toons
Lifestyles | |||||||||||
>