These days, the Republicans could accuse Barack Obama of many things: government debt growing out of control; scrambled health care reform; planned tax reform that seems very Austrian, punishing performance; or pure populism when it comes to manager bonuses.
In terms of nuclear disarmament, however, Barack Obama has done everything right so far. The reduction of the weapons arsenal, agreed upon with Russia, is as important as the new nuclear doctrine in which the U.S. promises not to use its nuclear weapons, even if it is attacked. The nuclear summit this week with heads of state like the Kazakh Nazarbayev (who abandoned nuclear weapons voluntarily), is also an important step toward global disarmament.
Most politicians and commentators get that. Conservative criticism against Obama’s nuclear policies was barely audible. Only Sarah Palin, an intellectually exceptional person, is thinking entirely differently on this matter: The new nuclear doctrine is a sign of weakness and one should not talk to people like Nazarbayev because he tramples human rights.
With this reaction, Sarah Palin shows once more that she is an utterly inappropriate person to choose for political office. Every child understands how important nuclear disarmament is. Everybody can imagine what could happen if nuclear weapons were to fall into the wrong hands. In order to prevent this, the U.S. must reduce its arsenal and win over controversial heads of state before members of terror organizations do so themselves.