Monday, December 27, 2010

New START Treaty - #2508 - Vice Admiral - Obama was Outmaneuvered by Russians on START - United States Naval Institute

President Barack Obama was outmaneuvered by the Russians and should have abandoned the New START negotiations instead of seeking a political victory, says former nuclear plans monitor Vice Admiral Jerry Miller, USN (Ret). “The Obama administration is continuing a dated policy in which we cannot even unilaterally reduce our own inventory of weapons and delivery systems without being on parity with the Russians,” Miller told the U.S. Naval Institute in Annapolis, Md. “We could give up plenty of deployed delivery systems and not adversely affect our national security one bit, but New START prohibits such action - so we are now stuck with some outmoded and useless elements in our nuke force.” After meeting resistance from several Republicans, the U.S. Senate ratified the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) with Russia by a vote of 71-26 on Wednesday. “The Soviets/Russians were done in by Reagan and our missile defense program because they cannot afford to build such a system,” said Miller. “They instead try to counter our program with rhetoric at the bargaining table. And they won by outmaneuvering Obama. START plays right into their hands.”  Read more.......  Article contributed by Steve Peters.


Russian Media: The Missile Defense Provision in the New START Treaty is legally binding - Hot Air -   Remember, the argument from START supporters since the beginning is that the treaty won’t compromise U.S. missile defense because the stuff about “defensive arms” is in the preamble, which isn’t legally binding. Here’s the key provision from page two:  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 arms of the parties.  Russia’s been hinting since at least April that it’ll pull out of the treaty if the U.S. proceeds with missile defense, with the preamble the likely pretext for blaming the U.S. if/when that happens, but things went quiet lately on that front as the Senate got to work on ratification. But here’s a fun tidbit from Itar-TASS just last week flagged by Bill Gertz of the Washington Times. If you’re thinking that Russia’s given up on using the preamble to try to block America’s missile shield, think again:  One of the key arguments made by American proponents of New START is that the language in the treaty’s preamble linking strategic offensive and defensive weapons is nonbinding.  Sen. John Kerry, a Massachusetts Democrat who has been leading the fight for ratification, said during floor debate that the treaty’s preamble is “a component of the treaty that has no legal, binding impact whatsoever.”  Moscow apparently has a different view of the preamble.  ITAR-Tass, the main Russian government information agency, reported last week: “The treaty will have a legally binding provision on the link between strategic offensive and defensive weapons and will affirm the increasing importance of this link amid the reduction of strategic offensive weapons.”  Read more........

No comments:

Post a Comment