The Nuclear Challenge for Obama

One of the most ominous issues which President-elect Barack Obama will face in his first months in office is the matter of the growing array of nuclear weapons around the globe. Today there are 27,000 nuclear weapons of various kinds in the world today – of which 26,000 belong to the US and Russia. How does this country work toward reducing the numbers of these dangerous devices to lower the possibility of nuclear mishaps and ward off the chances of accidental missile launches and prevent bombs like these from falling into the hands of terrorists?

In its eight years in office, the Bush Administration neglected doing anything serious about these matters. It is true that President Bush early in his tenure moved to sign a treaty with Russia, the so-called “Moscow Treaty”, where both capitals agreed to cut back on their nuclear armaments, but the accord was basically a non-binding one depending on voluntary compliance – and thus the adjustments in the arsenals were somewhat illusory. Since then, it has not pursued a follow-on to the Start I Treaty with the Russians. Equally as important, the administration never seriously strengthened, much less fought to expand funding for, the Nunn-Lugar act designed to round up “loose nukes.”

Meantime, the obligations which the US took on under the forty-year old Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) were also never fulfilled or seriously addressed during Bush’s term in office. Nuclear states, according to the agreement, are allowed to retain their weapons but are under a “good faith” legal obligation to gradually cut back on their own nuclear capacity. But the Bush government not only has balked at serious disarmament but has instead, as made clear in its 2001 Nuclear Posture Review statement, focused on expanding our nuclear arsenals by modernizing US nuclear weapons, manufacturing bunker-busters, creating mini-nukes for the battlefield and building missile shields -- all contrary to the spirit of the deal.

Similarly President Bush, during his tenure, steered clear of any push to ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty(CTBT) – this, despite the fact that high-level Republicans like two former Secretaries of State, George Shultz and Henry Kissinger, publicly supported the accord and said it could be verified (there are almost 337 measuring facilities around the globe). Indeed most of the countries of the world today have on their own, in effect, adopted an informal moratorium on testing. But the US never took the lead in endorsing this agreement, thereby hampering the efforts to bring a total end to testing.

President-elect Obama is going to have to do the following things to reclaim leadership on the nuclear agenda: (1) refocus American diplomatic priorities on nuclear issues through a redrafting of the Congressionally-mandated 2009-2010 Nuclear Posture Review statement; (2) begin disarmament talks with the Russians in time for the 2010 NPT UN five year review meeting; (3) ratify the CTBT, with Republican help; (4) strengthen the Nunn-Lugar legislation; (5) end efforts to develop new nuclear weapons; (6) begin negotiations to extend the Start I Treaty, which limits delivery vehicles and warheads in the US and Russia, for an additional five years.

And he should also consider doing the following over the longer term to strengthen protocols over nuclear weaponry: Restructure the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) – The IAEA needs satellite image technology, more inspectors, more financing, stronger legal authority to prevent illegal trade in nuclear materials, and other necessary upgrades. Right now US intelligence agencies do most of the investigations that uncover violations of the NPT. This is not sufficient. The IAEA must play the central role in tracking down offenders and correcting or punishing bad behavior. The IAEA should also consider becoming the guarantor for supply of fissile material for civilian uses. In addition, the new administration should look toward negotiating two additional weapons treaties: A Treaty To Ban The Production of Fissile Materials for Nuclear Weapons – with strong verification provisions; and A Treaty To Ban The Weaponization of Space.

Comments

[Lisa P]

After the winning of President Barack Obama, we are all waiting for his actions and plans for our country. Obama wants to know all about you if you plan to work in his Cabinet or staff. Makes sense, doesn’t it? If a person is going to hold a high-responsibility position in America’s federal government, it is in the best interests of the nation and its people that the employee meets the qualifications and not be a security risk. However, it seems to me that there are limits to what is reasonable. With as much information as Obama asks for in his seven-page, 63-question application, you’d think the administration would have enough to perform credit repair for everyone who applies. CNN leaked a copy of the questionnaire, which requires applicants not only to talk in detail about nearly everything they’ve done over the past 10 years or more, but also to do the same for their spouse. Here are a few of my favorite questions. I hope applicants do indeed get free credit repair as part of the deal… (1) Writings: Please list and, if readily available, provide a copy of each book, article, column or publication (including but not limited to any posts or comments on blogs or other Web sites) you have authored, individually or with others. Please list all aliases or “handles” you have used to communicate over the Internet. (2) Electronic communications: If you have ever sent an electronic communication, including but not limited to an E-mail, text message or instant message, that could suggest a conflict of interest or be a possible source of embarrassment to you, your family, or the President-Elect if it were made public, please describe. (3) Please provide the URL address of any Web sites that feature you in either a personal or professional capacity (e.g., Facebook, MySpace, etc.) This only scratches the surface of how deep the application goes. If you’re going to serve under the “change” president and you don’t have all your ducks in a row, you’ll have to change that right away!

[Renata Thiebaut]

I wonder how Mr. Obama will deal with Iran and Syria.