Statement from the Vice President on the New START Treaty

In his statement Vice President Joe Biden said that  “If we do not ratify the New START Treaty, it would be an extreme detriment to our National Security. The two nations who account for 90% of the World’s Nuclear Arsenal would not be able to monitor each other. We, as a Nation, would be at extreme risk. After the Consultation from Senator Kyl, the Senator, who said we should not vote on this until next year, the government has requested an additional $4.1 Billion for the modernization of the United States Nuclear Arsenal.”

This piece is the opinion of the authors and is not a reflection of  MDAA’s view on the New START treaty.

When Is the Far Right Going to Start Listening to the Military?

Jon Cirincione, President of Ploughshares Fund, recently penned an op-ed for the Huffington Post in which he questioned the far rights willingness to listen to military leadership. He claimed that the United States Military is very supportive of the New START Treaty.  He also stated that the treaty would reduce the number of Nuclear Weapons that the United States and Russia have pointed at each other. Cirncione is concerned that the right wing politicians in the Senate, the party that has control over this Treaty do not feel the same. He also highlights that the majority of the leaders that disagree with the Obama Administration use this Treaty as a weapon in order to spear the current Administration.

This piece is the opinion of the authors and does not reflect MDAA’s view on the New START treaty.

Protective Agreement to Limit Missile Defense and Space Systems Should Delay New START

 

It appears that the Obama Administration is challenging the U.S. Senate regarding the ratification of the new strategic arms control treaty with Russia called New START and its potential negative consequences for U.S. missile defense options—so much so that a group of Senators have felt compelled to send an October 18 letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton asking for further details. From the outset, the Administration has asserted that New START will not limit the missile defense options of the U.S., including the option to deploy components of a missile defense system in space. The Senate has made it clear that it does not want the agreement with Russia to limit U.S. missile defense options.

According to a recent report in Bloomberg, however, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov is claiming that the U.S. and Russia are on the verge of concluding a side agreement that an earlier report in The Washington Times indicates will limit U.S. missile defense options. If so, the Obama Administration’s insistence that the side bargain constitutes a “missile defense cooperation agreement” is cynical at best. Further, it is possible that this side agreement could limit U.S. space capabilities, which has additional negative implications for missile defense.

New START and Missile Defense

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee will hold two hearings this week regarding the treaty between the U.S. and Russia.  The Senate will have a chance to publicly inquire about effects of the new treaty on the U.S. missile defense program.  On June15, the committee will hear testimony from two key U.S. negotiators for the New START, Rose Gottemoeller, the Assistant Secretary of State for Verification and Compliance, and Edward L. Warner III, the Pentagon’s representative for the negotiations.  The Committee must question the witnesses about certain preamble language in the treaty, and what effect it will have on future U.S. missile defense capabilities. The specific language in the treaty reads:

“Recognizing the existence of the interrelationship between strategic offensive arms and strategic defensive arms, that this interrelationship will become more important as strategic nuclear arms are reduced, and that current strategic defensive arms do not undermine the viability and effectiveness of the strategic offensive arms of the Parties.”

New START—No Killer Flaws Emerge

Critics of the New START Treaty signed by President Obama and Medvedev two months ago, have raised no substantive objection that could prevent that treaty’s from being ratified. The New START will bring U.S. and Russian strategic forces to their lowest levels in 40 years. This post from the Brookings  Institute is the opinion of the author and theirs alone.

In the two months since the New START Treaty (Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty) was signed by Presidents Obama and Medvedev, critics have raised a number of questions about its terms and impact. So far, however, they have raised no substantive objection that could sink the treaty’s ratification prospects.

New START will reduce U.S. and Russian strategic warheads to a level of 1550—a cut of about 30 percent from what the sides were previously allowed. The treaty also sets limits on intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs) and nuclear-capable bombers. These limits will bring U.S. and Russian strategic nuclear forces to their lowest levels in 40 years.

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee opened Senate review of the treaty on May 18. In the weeks since the treaty text was released in April, we have already seen the principal questions of treaty critics. What are the objections? What are the responses?

Did the Russians Win on Missile Defense in the New START Treaty?

Baker Spring and Owen Graham from the Heritage Foundation analyze linkage between strategic offensive arms and ballistic missile defense in the New START Treaty based on Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearings that started this week. They note Russian consistent insistence on the linkage between ballistic missile defense and strategic offensive arms and so far unpersuasive arguments that the new treaty does not restrain ballistic missile defense from the Administration officials.

The Senate Committee on Foreign Relations met on May 18 to hold a hearing with Secretaries Clinton and Gates and Admiral Mullen on the new U.S.-Russia Strategic Arms Reduction (New START) Treaty. The three officials gave testimony and urged ratification saying the treaty will enhance U.S. security and aid nuclear non-proliferation efforts. In a near-herculean effort, the witnesses, over and over, sought to persuade lawmakers that divergent views with Russia on the key issues of missile defense should not be an obstacle to ratification, reiterating that nothing in New START will prevent the U.S. from deploying missile defenses.

A Missile Defense Goal That Never Was

Senator DeMint attacks the New START Treaty on the grounds that it prohibits efficient and global ballistic missile defense. Senator Kerry responded by saying that the United States should not deploy ballistic missile defense to the point where it would render ballistic missile obsolete.

WASHINGTON — The sharpest exchange at this week’s Senate hearing on President Obama’s new arms control treaty with Russia came when Senator Jim DeMint went on the attack.

START places no limit on US missile defense: Clinton, Gates

Secretary of State and Secretary of Defense both assure Senate Foreign Relations Committee that linkage between offensive strategic weapons and missile defense will not limit current ballistic missile defense of the United States. However, so far they did not adequately address the question of future ballistic missile defense system and entirely different interpretations by Russian Federation.

WASHINGTON — The new START arms control treaty imposes no limits on US missile defense weapons despite concerns voiced by Russia, President Barack Obama’s deputies told lawmakers on Tuesday.