In a much-anticipated speech yesterday at the Brandenburg Gate in Berlin, President Obama said the United States could reduce the size of its strategic deployed nuclear arsenal by more than 500 warheads and pledged to pursue such cuts in arms control negotiations with Russia. In a wide-ranging speech that touched on climate change and poverty, Obama’s most noteworthy proposal came in the arms control sphere, where he continued to push his vision for a world free of nuclear weapons that he crystallized during a speech in Prague in 2009. “Peace with justice means pursuing the security of a world without nuclear weapons, no matter how distant that dream may be,” Obama said before laying the groundwork for another round of reductions to the size of the nation’s nuclear arsenal. “After a comprehensive review, I’ve determined that we can ensure the security of America and our allies and maintain a strong and credible strategic deterrent while reducing our deployed strategic nuclear weapons by up to one-third,” Obama said. “And I intend to seek negotiated cuts with Russia to move beyond Cold War nuclear postures.” He also said the U.S. would work with its NATO allies to “seek bold reductions in U.S. and Russian tactical weapons in Europe.”
The President’s vision is spelled out in classified nuclear weapons employment guidance recently signed by Obama that was the product of the 18-month Nuclear Posture Review implementation study, which according to a White House fact sheet “directs DOD to align U.S. defense guidance and military plans with the policies of the NPR, including that the United States will only consider the use of nuclear weapons in extreme circumstances to defend the vital interests of the United States or its allies and partners.” The guidance also “narrows U.S. nuclear strategy to focus on only those objectives and missions that are necessary for deterrence in the 21st century. In so doing, the guidance takes further steps toward reducing the role of nuclear weapons in our security strategy.” Obama also addressed several other pillars of his nuclear security agenda, noting that the Administration would continue to try to build support for the Comprehensive Test-Ban Treaty and a Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty. He also said that the U.S. would host a second Nuclear Security Summit in 2016 (the fourth overall). “These are steps we can take to create a world of peace with justice,” he said.
Any nuclear reductions, whether through a treaty or through a presidential agreement with Russia, are sure to draw stiff opposition from Republicans, which responded to yesterday’s announcement with a significant amount of skepticism. Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.) called the pursuit of additional reductions “misguided and dangerous” while Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.), the ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, suggested now is not the time to reduce the size of the nation’s nuclear arsenal, suggesting the reductions represent “the triumph of hope over experience” and that the Administration hasn’t fulfilled its nuclear modernization commitments that were part of the New START Treaty. Twenty-four Republican senators also suggested in a letter to Secretary of State John Kerry yesterday that any reductions should come through a treaty. “It is our view that any further reductions in the U.S. nuclear arsenal should only be conducted through a treaty subject to the advice and consent of the Senate,” the senators wrote. “This view is consistent with past practice and has broad bipartisan support, as you know from your service in the Senate.” In contrast to Republicans, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), the chairwoman of the Senate Energy and Water Appropriations Subcommittee, said she supported the reduction plan. “It is my strong belief that the world will be better off without an unnecessarily high number of these powerful weapons,” she said. “The Cold War is long gone and the United States and Russia must do more to adjust their deterrents to practicable standards.”
Jobs