Blog

What’s the rush? asks Henry Sokolski, executive director of the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center and a member of the congressionally mandated Commission on the Prevention of Weapons of Mass Destruction, Proliferation, and Terrorism.

The U.S. has several nuclear arms containment options, so why rush to renew the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) and allow Russia to dictate our missile defense policy?

Last month, the U.S. and Russia agreed to honor the spirit of the expired START, as they continue to negotiate a replacement Under the treaty, signed by Russia and the U.S. in 1991, both countries agreed to reduce nuclear warheads to roughly 6,000 and delivery vehicles to 1,600. Eleven years later, the Moscow Treaty, a follow-up to START, required warhead reductions to between 1,700 and 2,200.

Russia blamed our plans to continue developing a comprehensive missile defense system for the renewal delay. Sokolski, writing at National Review Online:

“The odds of START’s being ratified before November’s elections are hardly on the rise. The next round of negotiations begins today in Geneva…As it is, 41 Senators (all 40 Republicans plus one independent, Sen. Joe Lieberman) have warned President Obama that they are in no mood to approve START unless the White House supports a ‘significant’ nuclear-weapons-modernization program. The Defense Department’s Nuclear Posture Review, which details U.S. nuclear-weapons requirements for Congress every five years, was due in December. The administration is divided and has asked for two extensions; the review is now due in March and may be delayed again. Complicating matters even further, Russian prime minister Vladimir Putin is pushing to link missile defenses with offensive missiles in START, a potential killer provision for most pro-missile-defense Republicans.”

Senior officials in the administration are keen to “show progress” with Russia, in light of the mid-term elections. They may resubmit a Bush-era nuclear cooperation agreement between the U.S. and the former Soviet Union, whose approval would “pretty much be a slam dunk.” But bringing this agreement before Congress has drawbacks, the most important of which, is that it is sure to force a debate over Russia’s cooperation with Iran in the nuclear weapons and rocket fields. This is unlikely to make passage of START easier in the Senate.

If Obama stops pushing START, and the U.S. diversifies “arms-control portfolio to address nuclear threats outside” Russia , whose deployed nuclear capabilities have diminished in the last 25 years, we might make some headway, without letting Russia call the shots.

Will Obama be proactive and take the initiative in containing Russia , or will appeasement policies prevail?

The U.S. and Russia recently agreed to honor the spirit of the expired Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START), while they continue to negotiate a replacement treaty. Under the treaty, signed by Russia and the U.S. in 1991, both countries agreed to reduce nuclear warheads to roughly 6,000 and delivery vehicles to 1,600. Eleven years later, the Moscow Treaty, a follow-up to START, required warhead reductions to between 1,700 and 2,200.

Vladimir Putin, Russia’s prime minister, said the two countries are still trying to replace START and blames America’s plans to continue developing a comprehensive missile defense system for the delay. (Source)

“If we don’t develop a missile defense system, a danger arises for us that with an umbrella protecting our partners from offensive weapons, they will feel completely safe,” he said. “The balance will be disrupted and then they will do whatever they want, and aggressiveness will immediately arise both in real politics and economics.”

Putin adds that to counter our missile shield Russia would make new offensive weapons. As a result, he is demanding that the U.S. provide Russia detailed data on its missile defense plans and capabilities. Logic dictates that Putin wants Russia to receive this information in order to permit it to modernize its offensive nuclear force in ways to defeat the missile defense system.

Will Barack Obama allow Russia to make START’s replacement contingent on whether the U.S. changes its missile defense policy? Obama already dropped plans to deploy missile defense shields in Poland and the Czech Republic, although he claimed Iran’s missile capabilities were the reason, not Russia’s negative reaction. President Obama’s explanation is not convincing and suggests that he is bowing to Prime Minister Putin’s demands that the U.S. terminate its missile defense program in order to get the START follow-on treaty.

NATO may collaborate with Russia on missile defense, a year after criticizing the former Soviet Union’s invasion of Georgia. Dmitry Rogozin, Russia’s NATO envoy, said he hopes the renewed ties will pave the way for a new Euro-Atlantic security treaty in the joint NATO-Russia Council. (Source)

Statement from NATO foreign ministers: “We continue to support increased cooperation between NATO and Russia on missile defense, including maximum transparency and reciprocal confidence-building measures. We reaffirm the alliance’s readiness to explore the potential for linking the United States, NATO and Russian missile defense systems at an appropriate time.” (Source)

In related news, the U.S. and Russia have agreed to extend the deadline to renew the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START), which was set to expire December 5. (Source)

Under the treaty, signed by Russia and the U.S. in 1991, both countries agreed to reduce nuclear warheads to 6,000 and delivery vehicles to 1,600. Eleven years later, the Moscow Treaty, a follow-up to START, required warhead reductions to between 1,700 and 2,200.

Last month, Russia’s Dmitry Medvedev said he believed his country and the U.S. would reach an agreement by the deadline.

Russia and the U.S. have yet to reach an agreement to replace the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START – also called START-1), set to expire on December 5.

Under the treaty, signed by Russia and the U.S. in 1991, both countries agreed to reduce nuclear warheads to 6,000 and delivery vehicles to 1,600. Eleven years later, the Moscow Treaty, a follow-up to START, required warhead reductions to between 1,700 and 2,200.

At issue are factors like mobile missile systems, delivery vehicle cuts, and how to inspect and verify warhead destruction.

Dmitry Medvedev said he believes the two will reach an agreement by the deadline, and added that his country “agreed to give additional impetus to those (new START) negotiations, find solutions on remaining issues. In some instances, those are technical issues, some are political issues. We will task our aides to continue working on those matters. I hope that…we will be able to finalize the text of a document by (the end of) December. The world is watching. It is all the more important now.”

The president’s National Security Advisor said both sides probably will negotiate a temporary treaty that would keep START in place until they can come to terms on a new treaty.

From the Heritage Foundation’s blog The Foundry:

“The Russians are demanding the removal of US monitors from a ballistic missile plant in Votkinsk, Russia. This is where the Topol M intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) are produced. Under START, Topol is supposed to be a single warhead ICBM, while the U.S. suspects that the Russians are putting multiple warheads (MIRVs) on it in violation of the Treaty. Speaking in the Kremlin, Gen. Makarov remarked, ‘we don’t have such observer missions in the U.S., so it’s natural that we tell them that this mission needs to be removed. On December 5 it will depart.’

“US negotiators are rushing against this tough deadline, leading many experts to believe that the U.S. may grant more unilateral concessions, such as the recent cancellation of the Bush-era Europe-based missile defense.”

(Sources: RIA Novosti and FOX News)

 
The web is buzzing about two nuclear-powered Russian submarines spotted off the East Coast, a scene right out of the Cold War. U.S. Northern Command spokesman Michael Kucharek said the U.S. is monitoring the submarines. Russia did not alert the U.S. in advance of these patrols. (Source)

As President Barack Obama tries to “reset” relations between the U.S. and the former Soviet Union, Russia seems to be operating under a different agenda. Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev met last month to begin talks to replace the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, signed in 1991. A new agreement calls for nuclear warhead reductions to between 1,500 and 1,675. As Russia’s arsenal is aging, that country will get the better deal from any reduction agreement. Additionally, Medvedev does not want missile defense shields in Poland and the Czech Republic, and Obama likely will renege on those agreements.

While the U.S. is ready, willing, and able to make compromises that jeopardize our national security, especially missile defense, Russia clearly is testing the waters, so to speak, with its nuclear-powered subs. This incident isn’t the first act of seeming aggression, as the AP notes. In 2008, Russian bombers flew 2,000 feet above an American aircraft carrier.

(Photo source: AFP)

 
Last week, the Senate passed a resolution supporting our agreements with Poland and the Czech Republic to build missile defense shields in those countries. Although the Senate voted to cut funding for certain defense programs, lawmakers seem to be on board with protecting Central Europe, despite President Barack Obama’s obvious hedging.

Earlier this month, Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev agreed to set goals to reduce nuclear warheads as part of a plan to replace the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START). In a surprising revelation, the AP reports that the Senate would block spending for a new treaty that limits our missile defense capabilities. By a voice vote, the Senate approved a non-binding resolution that any agreement between the U.S. and Russia will not put limitations our “ballistic missile defense, space capabilities or advanced conventional weapons.”

Russia claims missile defense shields in Central Europe threaten its national security, while we maintain that those bases would protect the region from Iran. Our president clearly doesn’t support the bases, but the Senate does. Obama and Medvedev have agreed to meet sometime in September to resume START negotiations. How much room does Obama have to strike a deal?

Ariel Cohen of the Heritage Foundation said, “There are chances of ratification, provided the administration does not capitulate” on bases on Central Europe.

 
Writing in National Review Online, columnist Charles Krauthammer has a theory about what has strained relations between the U.S. and the former Soviet Union: “Vladimir Putin’s unapologetic and relentless drive to restore Moscow’s hegemony over the sovereign states that used to be Soviet satrapies.”

Krauthammer says the forthcoming treaty between the two is useless as far as our country is concerned, and may be damaging.

“Useless because the level of offensive nuclear weaponry, the subject of the U.S.-Russia ‘Joint Understanding,’ is an irrelevance,” Krauthammer writes. “We could today terminate all such negotiations, invite the Russians to build as many warheads as they want, and profitably watch them spend themselves into penury, as did their Soviet predecessors, stockpiling weapons that do nothing more than, as Churchill put it, make the rubble bounce.”

Keith B. Payne, a member of the Perry-Schlesinger Commission, made a similar observation last week. Russia’s deployed intercontinental ballistic missiles, submarine-launched missiles, and strategic bombers are old. In negotiating to reduce these weapons, Russia has given up nothing.

Russia has convinced our president that renewing the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty and reducing our weapons will deter other nations from stockpiling. “That a man of Obama’s intelligence can believe such nonsense is beyond comprehension.”

Krauthammer notes that Obama is keen on diplomatic success, which helped Russia link offensive nuclear weapons with defense ones. As we are more capable of dealing with intercontinental ballistic missile attacks than Russia, Russia’s interested in stopping our development in its tracks. Previous presidents have refused to give up our country’s advantage in this area. Obama not only wants to comply with Russia for the sake of diplomacy, he seems to be capitulating on all fronts, including funding missile defense and moving forward with shields in Central Europe.

“Obama doesn’t even seem to understand the ramifications of this concession. Poland and the Czech Republic thought they were regaining their independence when they joined NATO under the protection of the United States. They now see that the shield negotiated with us and subsequently ratified by all of NATO is in limbo.”

Read the full article here.

 
President Barack Obama met with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev today and signed an agreement to reduce two nuclear stockpiles to as few as 1,500 warheads each. Obama said the two countries “reset” relations, and Medvedev called it a “reasonable compromise.” (Source)

Under the previous Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, signed in 1991, Russia and the U.S. agreed to reduce nuclear warheads to 6,000 and delivery vehicles to 1,600. The Moscow Treaty required warhead reductions to between 1,700 and 2,200. According to the new declaration, the U.S. and Russia “will reduce…strategic offensive weapons in such a way that within seven years the maximum numbers of carriers would lie in the range of 500-1,100 and for the warheads within the range of 1,500-1,675.” (Source)

Discussions are still ongoing. Will Obama renege on our agreements to build missile defense shields in Poland and the Czech Republic?

 
As Russian President Dmitry Medvedev and President Barack Obama prepared to discuss replacing the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START), which expires on December 5, 2009, Medvedev said the U.S. must compromise on our plans to build missile defense shields in Poland and the Czech Republic. Medvedev said, “We consider these issues are interconnected.”
(Source)

It’s safe to say any compromise would involve cancelling the shields altogether. Russia still claims the bases in Central Europe would pose a threat to its national security.

Under START, signed in 1991, Russia and the U.S. agreed to reduce nuclear warheads to 6,000 and delivery vehicles to 1,600. Eleven years later, the Moscow Treaty, a follow-up to START, required warhead reductions to between 1,700 and 2,200.

If Medvedev is looking for a compromise, he couldn’t have picked a better time. No doubt Obama is receptive to negotiating with Russia on this issue, even if it means going back on our good faith agreements with Poland and the Czech Republic. It’s no secret our president has been lukewarm about those missile defense shields, which would protect the region from possible Iranian missile attacks.

 
The U.S. and Russia will meet in Geneva in November to discuss the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, which expires next year. The two countries will continue to discuss whether to renew their arms-reducing agreement. Sergei Lavrov, Russian Foreign Minister, implied that discussions were of a high priority in light of U.S. plans to install missile defense bases in Poland and the Czech Republic. (KyivPost)

Speaking of missile defense bases, Russia “expects” to be allowed access to parts of those bases. “A non-permanent presence, meaning limited visits, changes nothing except to reinforce our suspicions,” Prime Minister Lavrov said. “We welcome the idea of a permanent Russian presence and a permanent check, both physical and technical, and this would assuage our fears.” (AFP)

According to a Russian state arms exporter, Russia is not discussing with the Ukraine plans to buy an unfinished missile cruiser for the Russian Navy. In 2005, Defense Minister Yuriy Yekhanurov mentioned Russia as a potential buyer of a missile cruiser. But the exporter’s first deputy general director said the company “has no instructions to buy the cruiser [from Ukraine], although I cannot deny that we were interested in this ship.” Another case of he said/he said? (RIA Novosti)