{"id":520432,"date":"2010-04-08T07:31:48","date_gmt":"2010-04-08T11:31:48","guid":{"rendered":"tag:www.armscontrolwonk.com,2010-04-08:57f256023a9af1385990be02cc9db91e\/8d209cf267f7e0bf0bb9906d44fdf897"},"modified":"2010-04-08T07:31:48","modified_gmt":"2010-04-08T11:31:48","slug":"treaty-signings-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/520432","title":{"rendered":"Treaty Signings    [2]"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>To oversell or underplay &#8212; that is the question: Whether \u2018tis nobler in the mind to suffer slings and arrows by acknowledging modest gains, or to claim immodest accomplishments in search of 67 votes in the Senate.  <\/p>\n<p>Since treaty foes will never be shy about predicting dreadful consequences, the case can be made to fight threat inflation by projecting outsized gains.  The Nixon administration barreled down this slippery slope after signing the <span class=\"caps\">SALT<\/span> I accords.  Immediately after returning from the hoopla of the Moscow summit, President Nixon addressed a joint session of Congress where he encouraged prompt action on the accords to \u201cforestall a major spiraling of the arms race.\u201d National security adviser Henry Kissinger characterized the accords as being \u201cwithout precedent in the nuclear age; indeed in all relevant modern history.\u201d  During the hearings on <span class=\"caps\">SALT<\/span>, Secretary of Defense Melvin Laird who, like Nixon and Kissinger, surely knew better, testified that the Interim Agreement \u201cstops the momentum of the Soviet Union in the strategic offensive weapon area.\u201d Nixon\u2019s International Economic Report sent to the Congress in 1973 characterized the administration\u2019s dealings with the Kremlin as \u201ca giant step toward a lasting peace.\u201d   <\/p>\n<p>By claiming immodest gains and misrepresenting accomplishments, the Nixon administration handed cudgels to critics of arms control when a very different story unfolded in the next few years. The task of capping the arsenals that were free to grow under the Interim Agreement fell to the Ford and Carter administrations. It took five long years for <span class=\"caps\">SALT<\/span> II to establish ceilings from which strategic arms reductions could subsequently occur.  But Senate support waned during the drawn-out, dispiriting process of negotiating the treaty. The best that could be said of <span class=\"caps\">SALT<\/span> II \u2013 aptly characterized by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, General David Jones, as \u201ca modest but useful step\u201d \u2013 was insufficient balm at a time of deteriorating U.S. national confidence and growing Soviet adventurism.  <\/p>\n<p>The George W. Bush administration certainly did not feel compelled to make immodest claims on behalf of the 2002 Moscow Treaty.  Russia was no longer a strategic competitor and key members of Team Bush were no fans of treaties.  <span class=\"caps\">SORT<\/span> barely qualified as such; its constraints were as flimsy as tissue paper.  The Moscow Treaty had no verification measures integral to its reductions, which would come into effect for one second of one minute of the very day that the Treaty\u2019s obligations would lapse.  Nonetheless, Senate Democrats, then thankful for small favors, voted en masse to consent to ratify the Treaty, as did Senate Republicans previously counted as irreconcilable treaty foes.<\/p>\n<p>The final Senate tally on <span class=\"caps\">SORT<\/span> was 95-0.  The New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, like <span class=\"caps\">SORT<\/span>, offers the benefits of flexibility.  But unlike <span class=\"caps\">SORT<\/span>, its reductions can be monitored by intrusive, cooperative measures as well as by <span class=\"caps\">NTM<\/span>.  These verification provisions are essential for states that don\u2019t entirely trust each other.  They are also a necessary foundation for more encompassing and deeper reductions, for which stronger monitoring arrangements will be needed. <\/p>\n<p>Despite claims to the contrary, New <span class=\"caps\">START<\/span> does not inhibit the growth of U.S. conventional power projection capabilities that, unlike nuclear weapons, are militarily useful on battlefields. Nor will New <span class=\"caps\">START<\/span> impede ballistic missile defense programs that, with or without the Treaty&#8217;s entry into force, will continue to be constrained by balky Democrats in Congress as well as by limitations imposed by technology, cost, and cost-effectiveness.  <\/p>\n<p>New <span class=\"caps\">START<\/span> does not lend itself to extravagant claims, but it is an essential step on a long journey to reduce wretched excess and nuclear dangers. New <span class=\"caps\">START<\/span> reconfirms the stubborn, post-Cold War fact that nuclear weapons have declining utility for major powers. Constituencies in both countries chafe against this trend line, and they will do their best to block entry into force.  But dispassionate observers will understand that overheated arguments against the Treaty are baseless.  The Senate vote on New <span class=\"caps\">START<\/span> will therefore be yet another indicator of how well \u2013 or how poorly \u2013 the most powerful nation in the world projects itself internationally.         <\/p>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"http:\/\/feeds.feedburner.com\/~r\/acw\/~4\/W3mJ2nYVCuA\" height=\"1\" width=\"1\"\/><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>To oversell or underplay &#8212; that is the question: Whether \u2018tis nobler in the mind to suffer slings and arrows by acknowledging modest gains, or to claim immodest accomplishments in search of 67 votes in the Senate. Since treaty foes will never be shy about predicting dreadful consequences, the case can be made to fight [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":5629,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[7],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-520432","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-news"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/520432","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/5629"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=520432"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/520432\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=520432"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=520432"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=520432"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}