USA: Petty Motives Can Stop START
The new START agreement cannot be compared with the mass scrapping of nuclear weapons of former times. Nevertheless, a 30 percent reduction in the number of warheads to 1,550 by the USA and Russia is not to be scoffed at. Besides, mutual inspections will be resumed.
If this now materializes, political polarization in Washington and the Republicans’ indomitable desire to sabotage Barack Obama threaten to bring the whole process to a standstill.
The START agreement was signed by Obama and Russia’s president, Dmitry Medvedev, in April. The agreement must be ratified in the Senate in order for it to come into force, and thus requires a two-thirds majority vote. This may be difficult to cobble together after the Democrats’ recent setback in the congressional elections. The Republicans have pushed through funding bills for the modernization of the remaining nuclear arsenal, but draw out the process anyway.
Obama has, with certain concessions, attempted to thaw relations with Russia, which froze under his predecessor, George W. Bush. Russia has expressed its gratitude by letting American military transports through to Afghanistan and supporting extended sanctions against Iran in the U.N. Security Council.
The price for blocking the START agreement could result in the collapse of collaboration in the Iranian nuclear issue and the worsening of relations between NATO and Russia once again. It is not likely to bolster the already-beset progressive powers in Russia; rather, it will strengthen anti-Western nationalists. Nobody ought to rejoice in a situation in which the world cannot depend upon the American president’s word.
That the agreement in itself could stand in the way of the old Republican dream of an impenetrable missile defense shield is not true. This is substantiated by the military leaders who support START. Furthermore, Republican foreign policy experts, like Robert Kagan, warn their party of the consequences of dissent. Kagan believes that Obama will escape censure if the Russians start to misbehave; instead, the blame will fall on the Republicans.
Surely, it is small-minded to begrudge Obama a success, even with a nuclear weapons agreement that few Americans care about. If START is representative of how Republicans will act in the run-up to the next presidential election, there is good reason to fear that nothing will be achieved in Washington. Inability to act would be devastating, not in the least for America’s faltering economy.
If this now materializes, political polarization in Washington and the Republicans’ indomitable desire to sabotage Barack Obama threaten to bring the whole process to a standstill.
The START agreement was signed by Obama and Russia’s president, Dmitry Medvedev, in April. The agreement must be ratified in the Senate in order for it to come into force, and thus requires a two-thirds majority vote. This may be difficult to cobble together after the Democrats’ recent setback in the congressional elections. The Republicans have pushed through funding bills for the modernization of the remaining nuclear arsenal, but draw out the process anyway.
Obama has, with certain concessions, attempted to thaw relations with Russia, which froze under his predecessor, George W. Bush. Russia has expressed its gratitude by letting American military transports through to Afghanistan and supporting extended sanctions against Iran in the U.N. Security Council.
The price for blocking the START agreement could result in the collapse of collaboration in the Iranian nuclear issue and the worsening of relations between NATO and Russia once again. It is not likely to bolster the already-beset progressive powers in Russia; rather, it will strengthen anti-Western nationalists. Nobody ought to rejoice in a situation in which the world cannot depend upon the American president’s word.
That the agreement in itself could stand in the way of the old Republican dream of an impenetrable missile defense shield is not true. This is substantiated by the military leaders who support START. Furthermore, Republican foreign policy experts, like Robert Kagan, warn their party of the consequences of dissent. Kagan believes that Obama will escape censure if the Russians start to misbehave; instead, the blame will fall on the Republicans.
Surely, it is small-minded to begrudge Obama a success, even with a nuclear weapons agreement that few Americans care about. If START is representative of how Republicans will act in the run-up to the next presidential election, there is good reason to fear that nothing will be achieved in Washington. Inability to act would be devastating, not in the least for America’s faltering economy.
Yes, I understand that the world views American sovereignty as “petty”, but we don’t. This is exactly the type of anti-American treaty that so many foreigners voted for when they made illegal campaign donations to Obama. Research it, anyone, anywhere could donate to his campaign, and as much as they wanted as long as it was in increments of $200 or less.
Our Senate had better stand strong and oppose this legislation or they will be toast in 2012.
Best regards,
Gail S
http://www.backyardfence.wordpress.com