Playing Politics With Nukes
Despite numerous bipartisan endorsements, Senate Republicans have blocked ratification of a nuclear weapons treaty with Russia.
Once upon a time, nuclear security was important enough to convince everyone in Washington, D.C., to set aside partisan disputes. Not anymore.
Back in April, President Obama signed the New START treaty with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev to replace the expired START I treaty. It would reduce both nation’s nuclear stockpiles by about a third.
Outside Congress, the new treaty won swift bipartisan approval. The chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff think it must be ratified.
Five former defense secretaries, who served under both Democratic and Republican presidents, endorse it.
Six former secretaries of state believe it is in the nation’s best interest.
Three former national security advisers and seven former commanders of the U.S. Strategic Command also support the treaty.
Past nuclear arms treaties have made it through the U.S. Senate with overwhelming bipartisan support. The 1992 vote for START, for instance, was 93 to 6.
By all indications, though, this treaty will struggle to find the two-thirds majority needed for passage.
If Senate Republicans had substantive objections to the treaty, their widespread opposition might make sense. But the objections raised thus far are either incorrect or irrelevant.
Republicans complain that the treaty blocks missile defense systems. It does not. They complain that Obama should be focused on modernization of the U.S. nuclear arsenal. That’s irrelevant to the treaty — and ignores the fact that Obama is spending more than President Bush on maintaining the nuclear arsenal.
The treaty should have been ratified months ago. Thanks to Republican intransigence, the U.S. lost the ability guaranteed under the expired treaty to inspect Russia’s nuclear armament.
Evidence of Senate Republicans’ gross irresponsibility on this issue can be found in the reply from Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., when asked about the lack of inspections while he and his colleagues delayed ratification. Kyl said he assumed that inspections would continue as before.
He assumed incorrectly, and for the first time in 15 years, U.S. inspectors no longer have access to Russia’s long-range nuclear bases.
Thankfully, not all Senate Republicans are playing politics with nuclear weapons. Sen. Richard Lugar, RInd., has been a consistent supporter, and there is some reason to hope that the Senate will be able to find the 67 votes needed to ratify during the lame-duck session.
That it will be a tremendous struggle speaks poorly of the commitment of Republicans to national security.
Recent Comments
