When Forty-four visited Prague in April of last year he pledged to end "Cold War thinking" and "reduce the role of nuclear weapons in our national security strategy". But as we are finding out, the President is much better delivering inspiring rhetoric than decisive action. His vice president, Joe Biden, announced in January that the administration will budget
$5bn in new spending to modernize the United State's nuclear arsenal. VP Biden wrote in a
Wall Street Journal editorial that the spending was necessary to maintain nuclear deterrence while seeking new strategic arms agreements with the Russians. Biden said that the new expenditures were not contradictory to his President's pledge to end the Cold War. But
supporters of disarmament consider statements such as Biden's to be more "doublethink" than sincere effort to reduce the threat to humanity of nuclear annihilation. The United States is still actively pursuing missile defense at home and abroad despite Russia's position that strategic missile defense is destabilizing. Disagreements over the issue delayed the signing of START II agreement.
{2.4.10} The two presidents agreed in a
memorandum of joint understanding that strategic missile defense was linked to strategic offensive missiles, and they would include a provision in the new treaty recognizing "the interrelationship". Nevertheless the Americans have insisted on unlinking missile defense from offensive missile limitation in the START II negotiations. Prime Minister Putin and Russian chief of general staff Nikolai Makarov both view the US effort to cover southern Europe with a missile shield
a threat to the Russian Federation. While the US backed down from a Regime plan to put interceptors in Poland
{Cold War Returns; 8.27.07}, it has
reached agreement with Romania to base shorter range Standard 3 interceptor missiles intended to counter a medium range missile launch from Iran. The defense system is intended to become operational in five years. Romanian legislators will have to approve any final agreement to base the missiles on its territory.
Disarmament advocates in the United States are calling for a "transformational rather than incremental changes" in our nuclear weapon policies. In a l
etter to Forty-four they urged changes in four key areas as part of the upcoming Nuclear Posture Review. The signatories urge a declaration against first use and narrowing the use of nuclear weapons to deterring nuclear attacks only; deep reductions in nuclear stockpiles to the level of hundreds rather than thousands of warheads; reducing the risks of nuclear war by ending a rapid launch posture; and clearly committing to not developing new warhead designs or modifying existing designs for new purposes. The US nuclear arsenal is not decaying away as reflexive hawks would have you believe. A 2002 National Academy of Science panel concluded the current stockpile management program provides the technical capability to maintain a safe and effective nuclear arsenal. A major effort to refurbish warheads and modernize weapons has been underway for some time even though weapons experts consider this effort technically unnecessary. With Biden's published remarks the current administration has reassured their supporting elites that it is still committed to nuclear hegemony. By continuing to research and develop new warhead designs it undermines efforts to finally stop nuclear proliferation. If Forty-four wishes to back his disarmament rhetoric with action, he should take the first step by working with the Senate to reconsider and approve the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.
