Obama Scores High on Nuclear Disarmament Agenda

Posted 05 21 2009 8:29AM

WASHINGTON, Apr 24 (OneWorld.net) - U.S. President Barack Obama has "actedquickly and boldly on a nuclear disarmament agenda" during his firstthree months in office, says the president of a nuclear non-proliferation advocacygroup.

• The Obama administration has "set forth a vision of a world without nuclear weapons, begun negotiations with Russia on a new treaty to replace the START I [nuclear non-proliferation] agreement that expires in December 2009, and provided the first indications that the U.S. will seek to involve all nuclear weapons states in negotiations to create a world without nuclear weapons," writes David Krieger, head of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation (NAPF). Krieger's analysis compares Obama's policy decisions to date with NAPF's 100-Day Nuclear Disarmament Agenda, which the group put forward after the elections last year, and also urges Obama to act on several points of the agenda which he has yet to address. (See the full statement below.)

• Between them, nuclear weapons states control some 27,000 warheads worldwide. However, Obama and Russian President Dmitri Medvedev pledged earlier this month to negotiate a new treaty to diminish the stockpiles of the world's two largest nuclear arsenals. Under the current 1991 Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START), both countries have reduced their nuclear stockpiles by roughly 50 percent -- from approximately 10,000 to 5,000 warheads each. The new deal, expected this summer, could bring the count down even further, to as few as 1,000 weapons each. "This is still far too many, but it would demonstrate that the two sides are taking seriously their obligations for nuclear disarmament," writes David Krieger.

A 100-DAY NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT AGENDA: PRESIDENT OBAMA SCORES HIGH

From: Nuclear Age Peace Foundation  

April 16, 2009 

By David Krieger

At the end of 2008, following President Obama’s election but priorto his inauguration, the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation put forward “A Nuclear Disarmament Agenda for President Obama,”focusing on his first 100 days in office (100-Day Agenda).  During hiscampaign for the presidency, candidate Obama had spoken about a nuclearweapons-free world being in the interests of America and the world. The Foundation put forward the 100-Day Agenda to encourage PresidentObama to keep the issue of nuclear disarmament high on his agenda.  TheFoundation urged the president to act boldly and take a number of stepsduring his first hundred days in office.  The steps that were proposedwere divided into three categories: public commitment, bilateralengagement, and global action. 

President Obama has, in fact, acted quickly and boldly on a nucleardisarmament agenda.  He assumed office on January 20, 2009 and almostimmediately posted on the www.whitehouse.govwebsite a series of steps that he and Vice President Biden intended totake on nuclear policy issues.  These fell into three areas: secureloose nuclear materials from terrorists, strengthen the NuclearNon-Proliferation Treaty, and move toward a nuclear free world.  In thelatter area, it stated, “Obama and Biden will set a goal of a worldwithout nuclear weapons, and pursue it.”

President Obama met for the first time with Russian PresidentDimitriy Medvedev in London on April 1, 2009.  Following their meeting,the two presidents issued a Joint Statement in which they reaffirmed“that the era when our countries viewed each other as enemies is longover….”  They pledged their resolve “to work together to strengthenstrategic stability, international security, and jointly meetcontemporary global challenges, while also addressing disagreementsopenly and honestly in a spirit of mutual respect and acknowledgementof each other’s perspective.” 

They discussed “nuclear arms control and reduction” and made anumber of specific pledges, including  “working together to fulfill ourobligations under Article VI of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation ofNuclear Weapons (NPT) and demonstrate leadership in reducing the numberof nuclear weapons in the world.”  Article VI of the NPT contains thetreaty’s nuclear disarmament obligation.  The two presidents alsocommitted their countries “to achieving a nuclear free world,” whilerecognizing that this would be a “long-term goal.”

A few days later, on April 5, 2009, President Obama spoke in Prague,devoting his speech almost entirely to “the future of nuclear weaponsin the 21st century.”  President Obama called this an issue that is“fundamental to the security of our nations and to the peace of theworld.”  In his speech, he struck a moral tone, unusual for a USpresident when discussing US responsibilities.  “[A]s the only nuclearpower to have used a nuclear weapon,” he said, “the United States has amoral responsibility to act.”  He recognized that the US cannot succeedin achieving nuclear disarmament alone, but that it can lead.  Thespeech was historic in accepting moral responsibility for nucleardisarmament and setting forth a commitment for US leadership to achievea world without nuclear weapons.  President Obama took a far differentapproach to nuclear disarmament than had been seen from the two mostrecent past presidents, Clinton and Bush, who had preceded him inoffice.

Below in bold are the major points made in the Foundation’s 100-DayAgenda on Nuclear Disarmament.  Following each point there is anindication of what President Obama has said regarding it.  As can beseen, most of the 100-Day Agenda has been fulfilled, although there aresome points that he has not spoken to or that raise some concerns. These include his indication that the timeframe for achieving a worldwithout nuclear weapons may be a long one, perhaps not in his ownlifetime; his emphasis on nuclear deterrence in the interim, althoughwithout indicating who is being deterred; and his general support fornuclear power, which is likely to draw societal subsidies away fromtruly sustainable forms of energy and make a world without nuclearweapons far more difficult to achieve. 

Three specific issues called for in the 100-Day Agenda thatPresident Obama failed to address were a policy of No First Use ofnuclear weapons; specific numbers related to the next round ofbilateral reductions with the Russians; and a timeframe for conveningthe other nuclear weapons states to negotiate further reductions.  Itis not necessary that any of these be achieved within President Obama’sfirst hundred days in office, but they would be valuable and, in thecase of numbers related to the next round of reductions, will beessential to address as the US and Russia proceed with their bilateralnegotiations.

On balance, President Obama’s oft-stated commitment to a worldwithout nuclear weapons appears genuine and he is off to a strong startin his first 100 days in office.  Perhaps most important, he haschanged the tone of US nuclear policy, so that the US has become aleader for nuclear disarmament rather than the principal obstacle toits achievement, as it was under the Bush administration.

Public Commitment

Make a major foreign policy address, affirming US commitmentto initiate a global effort to achieve a world with zero nuclearweapons.  (Speech in Prague on April 5, 2009: “[T]he UnitedStates has a moral responsibility to act.  We cannot succeed in thisendeavor alone, but we can lead it, we can start it.  So today, I stateclearly and with conviction America’s commitment to seek the peace andsecurity of a world without nuclear weapons.”  WhiteHouse.gov website:“Obama and Biden will set a goal of a world without nuclear weapons,and pursue it.”)

Deemphasize reliance on nuclear weapons in US military policy. (Speech in Prague: “To put an end to Cold War thinking, we will reducethe role of nuclear weapons in our national security strategy, and urgeothers to do the same.”)

Commit to not developing new nuclear weapons.  (WhiteHouse.gov website: “[Obama and Biden] will stop the development of new nuclear weapons….”) 

Seek Senate ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. (Speech in Prague: “To achieve a global ban on nuclear testing, myadministration will immediately and aggressively pursue U.S.ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.”)

Launch a major global initiative to assure control of all nuclear weapons and the material to construct them. (Speech in Prague: “So today I am announcing a new international effortto secure all vulnerable nuclear material around the world within fouryears.  We will set new standards, expand our cooperation with Russia,pursue new partnerships to lock down these sensitive materials.”)

Points of concern

Timeframe: The president offered no timeframe for achieving“a world without nuclear weapons.”  Rather, he stated in Prague, “I’mnot naïve.  The goal will not be reached quickly – perhaps not in mylifetime.  It will take patience and persistence.”  Shifting directionagain, he said, “But now we, too, must ignore the voices who tell usthat the world cannot change.  We have to insist, ‘Yes, we can.’”

Deterrence: Following his commitment to reduce the role ofnuclear weapons in national security strategy, he stated in Prague,“Make no mistake: As long as these weapons exist, the United Stateswill maintain a safe, secure and effective arsenal to deter anyadversary, and guarantee that defense to our allies….”  He leaves itunclear, however, which potential adversaries require being deterred. He also makes a common error in equating deterrence with defense.

No First Use: The president talked about reducing the roleof nuclear weapons in national security strategy, but made nocommitment to a policy of No First Use.  Such a policy would mark amajor change of course in US nuclear policy, and would be the surestway to deemphasize reliance on nuclear weapons.  If all countriescommitted to No First Use, and backed this up with appropriate nuclearpolicies, the possibility of any use would be dramatically reduced.

US nuclear weapons in Europe: President Obama emphasizedUS commitment to NATO, while making no reference to removing the USnuclear weapons currently stored in five NATO countries.

Missile defenses: President Obama framed missile defensesin Europe as being set up against a potential attack from Iran,although these defenses are still perceived by the Russians to threatenthem with a US first-strike potential.  The president said in Prague,“As long as the threat from Iran persists, we will go forward with amissile defense system that is cost-effective and proven.”  Of course,“cost effective and proven” may be a very large, if not impossible,hurdle for the missile defense program to achieve.

Bilateral Engagement

Open negotiations with Russia on a range of nuclear policy issues….” (Speechin Prague: “To reduce our warheads and stockpiles, we will negotiate anew Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty with the Russians this year. President Medvedev and I began this process in London, and will seek anew agreement by the end of this year that is legally binding andsufficiently bold.  And this will set the stage for further cuts….”)

Negotiate to take both sides’ ballistic missiles off high alert status. (WhiteHouse.gov website: “[Obama and Biden will] work with Russia totake U.S. and Russian ballistic missiles off hair trigger alert….”)

Negotiate extending the verification provisions of the 1991 Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START I). (Joint Statement by President Medvedev and President Obama, April 1,2009: “We agreed to pursue new and verifiable reductions in ourstrategic offensive arsenals in a step-by-step process, beginning byreplacing the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty with a new,legally-binding treaty.”)

Agree to the verifiable reduction to under 1,000 nuclear weapons each (deployed and reserve) by the end of 2010. (“WhiteHouse.gov website: “[Obama and Biden will] seek dramaticreductions in U.S. and Russian stockpiles of nuclear weapons andmaterial….”  Joint Statement by President Medvedev and President Obama:“We committed our two countries to achieving a nuclear free world,while recognizing that this long-term goal will require a new emphasison arms control and conflict resolution measures, and their fullimplementation by all concerned nations.”)

Points of concern

Reductions: The president referred to reducing the size ofnuclear arsenals when he stated in Prague, “But we will begin the workof reducing our arsenal.”  He gave no specifics, however, on what levelof reductions could be expected.  Currently both countries areobligated under the SORT agreement to lower their nuclear arsenals tobetween 1,700 and 2,200 deployed strategic weapons by the year 2012. Whatever next step is agreed upon by the two leaders should be bold andsubstantially lower than the existing agreement and should include allnuclear weapons, not only those that are deployed and strategic.

Global Action

Organize to convene a meeting of all nuclear weapons statesprior to the 2010 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty Review Conference tonegotiate a new treaty for the phased, verifiable, irreversible andtransparent elimination of nuclear weapons.   (Speech inPrague:  After calling for further cuts in US and Russian arsenals,President Obama stated, “…and we will seek to include all nuclearweapons states in this endeavor.”)

Additional promises for global action (not in the NAPF 100-Day Agenda)

Strengthen the Non-Proliferation Treaty.  (Speechin Prague: “Together we will strengthen the Non-Proliferation Treaty asa basis for cooperation….  We need more resources and authority tostrengthen international inspections.  We need real and immediateconsequences for countries caught breaking the rules or trying to leavethe treaty without cause.  And we should build a new framework forcivil nuclear cooperation, including an international fuel bank, sothat countries can access peaceful power without increasing the risksof proliferation.”  WhiteHouse.gov website: “Obama and Biden will crackdown on nuclear proliferation by strengthening the NuclearNon-Proliferation Treaty so that countries like North Korea and Iranthat break the rules will automatically face strong internationalsanctions.”)

Convene a global meeting of states to cooperate in preventing nuclear terrorism. 

 (Speechin Prague: “[W]e must ensure that terrorists never acquire nuclearweapons….  We should start by having a Global Summit for NuclearSecurity that the United States will host within the next year.”)

Ban the production of weapons-grade fissile materials. (Speech in Prague: “And to cut off the building blocks needed for abomb, the United States will seek a new treaty that verifiably ends theproduction of fissile materials intended for use in state nuclearweapons.”  WhiteHouse.gov website: “Obama and Biden will negotiate averifiable global ban on the production of new nuclear weaponsmaterial.”)

Create a global ban on intermediate-range missiles.  (WhiteHouse.govwebsite: “[Obama and Biden will] set a goal to expand the U.S.-Russianban on intermediate-range missiles so that the agreement is global.”)

Points of concern

Timeframe: President Obama gave no indication of when hewould move to convene all nuclear weapons states in negotiations fornuclear disarmament.

Nuclear energy: President Obama supported the right ofcountries, including Iran, to the peaceful uses of nuclear energy “withrigorous inspections.”  It remains questionable, however, whether evenwith rigorous inspections it will be possible to create an impermeablewall between nuclear energy and weapons.

Ban on missiles: While calling for a ban onintermediate-range missiles, President Obama fails to mentionlong-range missiles, the kind of missiles more likely to be used bymany of the existing nuclear weapons states.

In his first 100 days, President Obama has set forth a vision of aworld without nuclear weapons, begun negotiations with Russia on a newtreaty to replace the START I agreement that expires in December 2009,and provided the first indications that the US will seek to involve allnuclear weapons states in negotiations to create a world withoutnuclear weapons.  Committing to the goal of a nuclear weapons-freeworld is the first step toward achieving the goal.  President Obama hasdone this.  The next steps are developing a full plan to achieve thegoal and implementing that plan.  Developing and implementing such aplan will no doubt be extremely difficult, but it is not impossible andthis work must begin. 

David Krieger is President of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation and a Councilor of the World Future Council.

Discuss this article on OneWorld.net

OneWorld.net: Latest News, Groups Working on Nuclear Arms Worldwide