Obama Took Up Arms
At his first press conference in the White House, U.S. President Barack Obama emphasized the great significance of achieving a U.S.-Russia agreement on arms control. In his opinion, this will help promote the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. According to experts, the efforts to use the topic of nuclear disarmament by Moscow and Washington as a means to solving the Iran problem are narrowing the agenda in U.S.-Russia relations.
The U.S. president’s press conference was mainly devoted to his efforts of pushing the anti-crisis stimulus package through Congress, and partially to the U.S.’ new course with Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan. However, the journalists also questioned the new president about his view on the dangers of the weapons of mass destruction spreading in the Middle East. Obama not only noted the reality of such a threat, but also admitted that over the last few years the progress in non-proliferation treaties has been notably weakened. According to him, now is the time to “start stitching back together the nonproliferation treaties.”
“One of my goals is to prevent nuclear proliferation. I think that it's important for the United States, in concert with Russia, to lead the way on this, and I've mentioned this in conversations with the Russian president, Mr. Medvedev,” stated Obama. In the president’s words, the conversation related to restarting the talks about reducing the nuclear arsenals of both countries in an effective way.
As previously announced, Moscow and Washington recently confirmed their willingness to start negotiations on the preparation of the new U.S.-Russian treaty, which will become a continuation of the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) that will expire at the beginning of December.
Obama linked the topics of negotiations with Moscow and non-proliferation with the situation in the Middle East and the possibility of the existence of nuclear weapons there. “If we see a nuclear arms race in a region as volatile as the Middle East, everybody will be in danger,” stated the president. He also said that he has not yet reached decisions regarding Iraq and Afghanistan. Obama also stated the U.S. is currently seeking “areas where we can have constructive dialogue” with Iran.
A significant part of the president’s address was dedicated to his efforts of pushing the approval of his economic stimulus package in the Senate, where the overwhelming majority of Republicans spoke against it. At the end of the last week, the White House was able to win over three Republican Senators in favor of the bill. As a result, the document was put up for vote. Obama’s statements during the press conference indicated that the president is wary of the problems that might arise during voting in the Senate. “Delay in approving the bill may turn the crisis into catastrophe,” stated Obama.
At the same time, Obama sharply criticized the Republican Party’s stance against the government’s interference in the economy. Obama believes that in the event of the crisis private sector does not have sufficient mechanisms to affect the economy. In this situation, only government is capable of doing it.
How meaningful was Washington’s appeal to Moscow to jointly “lead the way” in reducing nuclear arsenals? According to Deputy Director of Institute for International Security Alexey Bogaturov, the American side is putting an emphasis on the dangers of Iran’s development of a nuclear weapon in its argument for control over arms proliferation. At the same time, it seems that the U.S. ignores the fact that a nuclear weapon already exists in the region (Israel owns them). It is possible that this is what was meant by a journalist who asked Obama a question about the existence of nuclear weapons in the Middle East.
According to the expert, the deficiency of such an argument lies in the fact that it allows Americans to justify the necessity of building the third anti-missile defense site in Europe. In an interview with “NG” Bogaturov noted that this argument does not seem to break away with the U.S.’ prior position. At the same time, the American anti-missile defense shield in Europe is a secondary problem for Russia. In addition, the efforts to limit its economic and trade ties with Iran, referencing Iran’s nuclear weapons development, are unacceptable to Russia.
Bogaturov notes that Obama’s statements indicate that it is currently a crucial time for negotiations on arms control, but they also show the convergence of Russian and American approaches to nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation. The expert stressed that the efforts to use the topic of nuclear disarmament by Moscow and Washington as a means to solving the Iran problem are narrowing the agenda in the U.S.-Russia relations.
The U.S. president’s press conference was mainly devoted to his efforts of pushing the anti-crisis stimulus package through Congress, and partially to the U.S.’ new course with Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan. However, the journalists also questioned the new president about his view on the dangers of the weapons of mass destruction spreading in the Middle East. Obama not only noted the reality of such a threat, but also admitted that over the last few years the progress in non-proliferation treaties has been notably weakened. According to him, now is the time to “start stitching back together the nonproliferation treaties.”
“One of my goals is to prevent nuclear proliferation. I think that it's important for the United States, in concert with Russia, to lead the way on this, and I've mentioned this in conversations with the Russian president, Mr. Medvedev,” stated Obama. In the president’s words, the conversation related to restarting the talks about reducing the nuclear arsenals of both countries in an effective way.
As previously announced, Moscow and Washington recently confirmed their willingness to start negotiations on the preparation of the new U.S.-Russian treaty, which will become a continuation of the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) that will expire at the beginning of December.
Obama linked the topics of negotiations with Moscow and non-proliferation with the situation in the Middle East and the possibility of the existence of nuclear weapons there. “If we see a nuclear arms race in a region as volatile as the Middle East, everybody will be in danger,” stated the president. He also said that he has not yet reached decisions regarding Iraq and Afghanistan. Obama also stated the U.S. is currently seeking “areas where we can have constructive dialogue” with Iran.
A significant part of the president’s address was dedicated to his efforts of pushing the approval of his economic stimulus package in the Senate, where the overwhelming majority of Republicans spoke against it. At the end of the last week, the White House was able to win over three Republican Senators in favor of the bill. As a result, the document was put up for vote. Obama’s statements during the press conference indicated that the president is wary of the problems that might arise during voting in the Senate. “Delay in approving the bill may turn the crisis into catastrophe,” stated Obama.
At the same time, Obama sharply criticized the Republican Party’s stance against the government’s interference in the economy. Obama believes that in the event of the crisis private sector does not have sufficient mechanisms to affect the economy. In this situation, only government is capable of doing it.
How meaningful was Washington’s appeal to Moscow to jointly “lead the way” in reducing nuclear arsenals? According to Deputy Director of Institute for International Security Alexey Bogaturov, the American side is putting an emphasis on the dangers of Iran’s development of a nuclear weapon in its argument for control over arms proliferation. At the same time, it seems that the U.S. ignores the fact that a nuclear weapon already exists in the region (Israel owns them). It is possible that this is what was meant by a journalist who asked Obama a question about the existence of nuclear weapons in the Middle East.
According to the expert, the deficiency of such an argument lies in the fact that it allows Americans to justify the necessity of building the third anti-missile defense site in Europe. In an interview with “NG” Bogaturov noted that this argument does not seem to break away with the U.S.’ prior position. At the same time, the American anti-missile defense shield in Europe is a secondary problem for Russia. In addition, the efforts to limit its economic and trade ties with Iran, referencing Iran’s nuclear weapons development, are unacceptable to Russia.
Bogaturov notes that Obama’s statements indicate that it is currently a crucial time for negotiations on arms control, but they also show the convergence of Russian and American approaches to nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation. The expert stressed that the efforts to use the topic of nuclear disarmament by Moscow and Washington as a means to solving the Iran problem are narrowing the agenda in the U.S.-Russia relations.
america has to keep its massive war machine needed in the americans eyes.
look close since 1945 this war machine has managed to keep americans in fear of being invaded or bombed by other countries.
they have done a brillant job of doing just that.
most americans want a larger military not a smaller one.
it is bankrupting the country and no one dares talks about it.
we have southern states that raise their kids to fight in these wars for profits and call their kids heros for doing so.
in their mind it is to keep america free. again brillant actually pure genius job from the mass media much now controlled by the corp war machine.
complete economic decline is the only thing that will put a stop to this mega war machine and that is many years off.
first america will become a massive debtor nation to keep this mega war machine intact.
right now we can borrow massive amounts of money from china and pay them back with a devalued dollar. as long as that works the war machine stays intact.
ironic that a coummuist country is keeping a capitalist country”s war machine intact.
and the best part americans still brag about how much better capitalism is than any other economic system in the world while they borrow massive amounts of money from a communist country.
that is the power of a nationalistic paradigm.