Foreign Policy

The military agrees — we need START now

After more than 20 hearings and testimony from military and diplomatic officials that has seen more than 900 questions asked and answered, a strong bipartisan consensus has emerged on a simple point about the New START treaty: it makes America more safe.
I served in the nuclear arena of our national defense during and following the Cold War; I was the Deputy Commander in Chief and Chief of Staff of U.S. Strategic Command before retiring from the U.S. Air Force.  Prior to this I commanded the 14,500 men and women of the U.S. 20th Air Force, and was responsible for all U.S. Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles, seven major subordinate units, operational training, testing, security and readiness. I know about our nuclear security. It is out of this concern for the safety and security of the country that the Senate should promptly ratify New START.


New START in time for Christmas?

As the Senate begins to wrap up the business of the 111th Congress, an urgent national security priority remains in limbo – despite the wishes of our military leadership, the intelligence community and retired high level security officials from both parties.

The New START nuclear reductions treaty, signed by the U.S. and Russia in April, would verifiably limit the still enormous Russian nuclear arsenal and restore an essential window into its size and make-up that we haven’t had since START I expired one year ago this Sunday. In addition, the treaty will allow the U.S. to maintain a robust and flexible nuclear deterrent and places no meaningful limits on missile defense programs.


Showdown in the Senate

When the President, the Secretary of Defense and the Joint Chiefs of Staff are united, they usually get what they want.  And they really want the New START treaty. 


Nuclear pact would make America safer (Sen. Bob Casey)

Next Sunday will mark a full year since the original START expired, removing our ability to monitor the Russian nuclear forces. At last week’s NATO Summit, the 27 member countries expressed their desire to see New START ratified by the U.S. Senate, adding their voices to a broad coalition of U.S. national security experts and former senior Republican officials who favor this important pact. Our military officers do not take these pronouncements lightly, and their unambiguous support should serve as a wake-up call — without New START, our national security is at risk.


Stopping START (Sen. John Barrasso)

On Oct. 26, 2010, one-ninth of the United State’s land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM) went offline at F. E. Warren Air Force base in Wyoming.

By ratifying the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START), the Senate risks taking America’s nuclear deterrent offline. 


Let’s get back to work with Russia: We need New START treaty in force

By midnight on Dec. 4, 2009, the last U.S. inspector had to be out of the Russian Federation — at that moment, the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) was going out of force. Nearly a year has passed since that day, and in all that time, we have had no data exchanges on Russia’s strategic forces and no opportunity to inspect Russian strategic nuclear bases. Our inspectors are poised to resume their important work, but they can only do so after New START — now awaiting a Senate vote to approve ratification — enters into force.


OSCE Summit an opportunity for Clinton, Kazakhstan on human rights (Sen. Benjamin L. Cardin)

In a year that commemorates the 35th anniversary of the Helsinki Accords – the Cold War agreement that forever tied human rights to a holistic view of global security – it is time we do more than merely recommit to our shared values at this week’s 56-nation summit of the Organization of Security and Cooperation in Europe.


New START: It's not about Reagan

For the past week, an irrelevant and false talking point has pervaded any discussion of President Obama’s New START treaty.  Brett Budowsky (“Reagan yes, START yes,” Nov. 22) and other treaty proponents are now invoking President Reagan, suggesting he would support the treaty.  Honest observers should not be tricked by this new argument – it is both irrelevant and wrong.


North Korean uranium enrichment no surprise (Rep. Pete Hoekstra)

It’s not a surprise that North Korea was able to build a secret uranium enrichment plant considering they were able to help Syria construct a secret nuclear facility that went undetected for years. An unclassified report on North Korean nuclear proliferation issued by the House Intelligence committee in 2006 when I was chairman noted North Korea’s repeated covert enrichment efforts in spite of treaties dating back to the 1990s.


Palestine at the UN: An alternative strategy

As Israeli-Palestinian negotiations lurch from crisis to crisis, Palestinian Authority (PA) leaders have been suggesting they may go to the United Nations to seek resolutions confirming the illegality of Israel’s settlements in the occupied territories and recognizing a reality of Palestinian statehood.