Prospects for nuclear arms control over the next 18 months
Jun 06, 2011
Carnegie Council for Ethics in International Affairs Conference
Carnegie Council, U.S. Army War College
U.S. Global Engagement: Report of Two Years of Activities
The Pocantico Center
June 1-3, 2011
Thank you for inviting me to participate in the conference.
I am delighted only to have to comment on Stephen Blank’s paper rather than do any original thinking or writing myself.
And while he focused more on the broader U.S.-Russian reset question, I will focus more narrowly on nuclear weapons and treaty issues between the two questions.
When I first gave a talk for the Carnegie Council a year and a half ago, I was brimming with confidence about the ambitious Obama Administration agenda on nuclear issues, particularly after the President’s wide-ranging and terrific speech in Prague, the Czech Republic in April 2009.
While there has been important progress since that speech, that progress has not led to great momentum on other parts of that nuclear agenda, at least not in the immediate future.
But the immediate future is just that; I think we can look to make more progress beginning in 2013.
If the federal government shuts down . . .
Apr 08, 2011
(humor)
-->Cherry blossoms closed for the duration
-->Astronauts in space station required to stay in Russian-built Soyuz space capsule
-->Department of Energy permitted to service existing nuclear weapons but not build
new ones
-->Pacific Coast salmon barred from swimming upstream
-->Military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq continue; “humanitarian” operations in
Libya suspended
-->National Zoo’s orangutan can be fed but not treated for depression when audience
disappears
-->Hoover dam opened to prevent federal hindrance of free flow of water
-->No elevator operators in Congress; Members required to push their own buttons
(true)
-->Federal employees who leave the country by April 8 not permitted to return until
shutdown ends
Obama Administration request for missile defense in FY 2012
Feb 15, 2011
Missile Defense – The Administration is requesting $10.7 billion for missile defense in FY 2012, up roughly $450 million from the current $10.2 billion. This total does not include $995.2 million for the SBIRS-High satellite.
Ballistic Missile Defense -- Selected Functions
Ground-Based Midcourse Defense
$1,346.2 million -- FY’11 Total
$1,161.0 million -- FY’12 Request
AEGIS BMD
$1,561.4 million -- FY’11 Total
$1,525.7 million -- FY’12 Request
European Missile Defenses: Following in the Inept Shoes of National Missile Defense?
Feb 02, 2011
The knock on United States National Missile Defense based in Alaska and California is that it never has been proved to work in real-world situations. Billions of dollars have been spent on that system, now called “ground-based mid-course,” but there is no sure evidence that the defense would work should North Korea launch nuclear-tipped missiles against us.
Because of the powerful political backing for the program, missile defense has avoided the commonsense “Fly Before You Buy” mantra that prevents billions from being wasted on weapons that may eventually prove ineffective.
According to a recent report by the Government Accounting Office (GAO), the government auditing agency, the Obama Administration is risking repeating history with its proposed missile defense systems in Europe.
Center Chairman General Gard Publishes Op-ed on Military Support for Nuclear Agenda
May 20, 2010
Center Chairman General Gard has written an op-ed on the support of military leadership for the President’s nuclear weapons agenda published today by the McClatchy-Tribune news service. The article, GOP critics vs. the Pentagon, appeared in Lexington, Kentucky in the Lexington Herald-Leader
The Next Generation Speaks: Briefing on Critical U.S. Nuclear Weapons Policy Initiatives
Apr 14, 2010
Invitation: Nuclear Weapons Policy Conference Call for Youth/Student Leaders
4/20/10
Are you a member of your school’s debate team that has focused on U.S. nuclear weapons policy this year? Or a member of a campus-based group working on peace and security issues? Or simply a young person concerned about the future and wanting to be more involved?
You are cordially invited to participate in a national conference call,
- The Next Generation Speaks – A Briefing and Discussion on Critical U.S. Nuclear Weapons Policy Initiatives
To RSVP, please contact Sean Meyer at the Union of Concerned Scientists at smeyer@ucsusa.org or 617-301-8065. Please provide your full name, school and email address.
This call is hosted by the Union of Concerned Scientists and co-sponsored by the Center for Arms Control & Non-Proliferation; Women’s Action for New Directions and the Two Futures Project.
The purpose of the call is to engage and inform young people on a range of timely, critical nuclear weapons issues and related events, including the recently completed START nuclear reductions agreement with Russia, the May Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty Review Conference, the Administration’s Nuclear Posture Review and prospects for the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT).
President Obama’s Deputy National Security Advisor, Ben Rhodes will join the call to provide his perspective on the policy landscape for critical and current nuclear weapons issues. In addition, there will be brief presentations by other experts, including senior policy experts and national nuclear weapons advocacy organizers.
There will be plenty of time for discussion and Q&A, and a portion of time devoted to discussing how youth can get involved both nationally, on-campus and in their communities.
RSVP – smeyer@ucsusa.org or 617-301-8065. Please provide your full name, school and email address.
You will receive a confirmation email with the call-in information. We look forward to your participation.
Those Were the Weeks that Were: Nuclear Spring
Apr 14, 2010
A poster from Kazakhstan promotes a nuclear weapons free world during the security summit in Washington, DC.
Stepping back from the past few frantic days on nuclear weapons issues, it is useful to realize how much has been accomplished. The last two weeks have arguably been the two most eventful weeks on reducing the dangers posed by nuclear weapons since the advent of the nuclear age.
• On March 29, President Obama, together with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Mike Mullen, announced that the U.S. and Russia had reached agreement on the “New START” nuclear reductions treaty.
• On April 6, the United States released the results of a year-long review of nuclear weapons, called the Nuclear Posture Review.
• On April 8, Presidents Barack Obama and Dimitry Medvedev signed New START in Prague, Czech Republic.
• On April 12-13, the President convened leaders of 47 countries to agree on steps needed to secure and safeguard vulnerable nuclear materials and to cope with the worldwide terrorist threat.
Critics will point to shortcomings in the treaty, the nuclear review and the Washington summit. The millennium has not come and nuclear weapons will not disappear the day after tomorrow. Iran and North Korea continue to break the rules. There remain about 23,000 nuclear weapons across the globe, most much larger than those used against Japan in 1945.
But there has been significant forward movement that had been lacking over the past two decades.
Unfinished Symphony/treaty
Mar 28, 2010
Last evening, I attended the National Symphony Orchester at the Kennedy Center at which they played Schubert’s Unfinished Symphony No. 8.
Fitting, because the U.S.-Russian nuclear reductions treaty called New START announced by President Obama and cabinet officials on March 26 is not quite finished either.
The 20-page treaty has been completed as is the associated protocol. The many detailed pages of annexes laying out verification procedures and the complete explanation of the treaty – called article-by-article analysis – are not quite done.
But Presidents Obama and Medvedev will head to Prague on April 8 to sign the agreement – or should I say the Finale: Allegro moderato.
The treaty is important movement to reducing the limits on strategic nuclear weapons by about 30%. It is a step towards the President’s non-proliferation goals and begins a reset in U.S. and Russian relations that deteriorated during the George W. Bush Administration.
The treaty enhances U.S. security by verifiably reducing U.S. and Russian nuclear stockpiles and ensuring a stable and predictable U.S.-Russian nuclear relationship.
BREAKING NEWS: New START Agreement Complete
Mar 26, 2010
The Obama Administration announced today that negotiations for the text of the most significant nuclear reductions treaty between the United States and Russia in decades are complete. President Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev will sign the agreement on April 8 in Prague, Czech Republic.
The announcement was made at a White House press conference earlier today.
Council for a Livable World welcomes the announcement that the “New START” (Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty) is complete. Reducing the number of nuclear weapons in the two countries that currently possess more than 95% of those remaining in the world is a key step forward in advancing the bipartisan nuclear security agenda that President Obama outlined in Prague in April 2009.
Troubles in U.S.-Russian land
Mar 10, 2010
Good New York Times article today about the difficulties in the “reset” in U.S.-Russian relations.
People may have thought it just like getting back on a bicycle, but it isn’t.
There are too many grievances over the last 20 years – or is it 80 years – between the U.S. and Russia to make buddy-buddy easily again.
Most experts thought that the New START nuclear reductions treaty negotiations would go rapidly and smoothly.
Unfortunately, not so.
The most important deadline was the December 5, 2009 expiration of the START I agreement, and the two countries breezed past that three-month-old deadline.
The U.S. nurses grievances over Russian trade with Iran and Moscow’s harsh response in last year’s Russia vs. Georgia conflict. And their crackdown on dissidents.
The Russians nurse grievances about how we treated the former Soviet Union when it was down (before petro-dollars shot up) and our persistence in placing missile defense in former Soviet dependencies. And our tendency to tell them how to run their country.
Both countries could probably extend their list of grievances as long as their arms (either connected to their bodies or their weapons).
We have heard predictions that the New START agreement is 95% done and will be concluded in a matter of weeks.
But we have heard those predictions before.
The new treaty will be worth the wait and will be positive for American national security and yes, even for improved U.S.-Russian relations, but it has been a wait.
The Times article suggests: “The American officials said the answer might be persistence and patience,” and they are correct.
Persistence. Patience. Say in over and over again.
