Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation
November 2010
Recent Remarks from Military and Intelligence Leaders, Statements from NATO Allies, and Newspaper Editorials In States With GOP Senators Demonstrate Wide-Ranging Support for New START
U.S. Military and Intelligence Leaders
• Secretary of Defense Robert Gates
“Despite what anybody says, I, as secretary of Defense, and the entire uniformed leadership of the American military believe that this treaty is in our national security interest.”
November 21, 2010
• Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen
“I think this is, more than anything else, it’s a national security issue. I was involved extensively the negotiations with my counterpart in Russia. We have, for decades, have had treaties with them to be able to verify aspects of the nuclear weapons capabilities that we both have. And from a national security perspective, this is absolutely critical.”
November 21, 2010
• Director of National Intelligence James Clapper
“I think the earlier, the sooner, the better. You know, my thing is, from an intelligence perspective only, are we better off with it or without it? We’re better off with it.”
November 16, 2010
• Retired Lt. Gen. Dirk Jameson, former deputy commander of U.S. nuclear forces
“[It’s] quite puzzling to me why all of this support [for New START] . . . is ignored. I don’t know what that says about the trust that people have and the confidence they have in our military.”
November 19, 2010
• Former Director of Operations for the Defense Intelligence Agency Donald Kerrick
“Now, after nearly a year in the dark, the Senate has the opportunity to turn the lights back on by ratifying the New START Treaty. The treaty must be promptly ratified for a very straightforward reason — it makes America safe. As a former director for operations for the Defense Intelligence Agency, I can say definitively that this treaty makes an enormous difference to our nation’s security.”
November 21, 2010
NATO Allies
• NATO General Secretary Anders Fogh Rasmussen
“The New START treaty will contribute to an improvement of security in Europe and the whole Euro-Atlantic area, and I would strongly regret if ratification is delayed . . . A delay in the ratification of the treaty would be damaging to security in Europe, so I strongly encourage all parties involved to do their utmost to ensure an early ratification.”
November 19, 2010
• Foreign Minister Audronius Azubalis of Lithuania
“And also I just would like to add that we see this treaty as an entrance to START negotiations — thank you — as also we see this treaty as a prologue, as an entrance to start talks about sub-strategical weaponry, which is much more even dangerous, and it’s quite difficult to detect. And we are, who are living in the East Europe, especially, know this. That’s what we are for START treaty.”
November 20, 2010
• Foreign Minister Girts Valdis Kristovskis of Latvia
“And I want to underline that Euro-Atlantic cooperation is very important for security of my state. And of course, START II [sic] treaty ratification in Congress we support very strongly, and also this policy of President Obama and his administration is very important for security of our region.”
November 20, 2010
• Foreign Minister Nickolay Mladenov of Bulgaria
“START is not just key to the security of Europe but it is key to making sure that today what we managed to achieve in the new Strategic Concept, and that is a NATO that reaches out in partnership with — to other countries, can actually be implemented. So all I can say is, don’t stop START before it’s started.”
November 20, 2010
• Foreign Minister Janos Martonyi of Hungary
“My country has a very special historic experience with Russia. We also have a special geographic location. And with all that historic and geographic background, we wholeheartedly advocate the ratification of START. It’s a general interest of my region, of Europe, and indeed, most importantly, of the transatlantic alliance. It’s also a global interest, and I would very much encourage, for this reason, not to kill START before it starts, as it has been just said. And this is a process which is a promise at the same time and a commitment for the whole world.”
November 20, 2010
• Foreign Minister Lene Espersen of Denmark
“I can tell you, besides being Minister for Foreign Affairs, I’m also the chairman of the Conservative Party in Denmark, which is the sister party of the Republican Party. So nobody will ever accuse me of being soft on security. And this is the reason why I said, well, maybe it could be fruitful for us as a broad member of NATO — the North, the East, the Central — to say why it’s important for us that the START treaty is ratified and that as soon as possible.”
November 20, 2010
• Foreign Minister Jonas Stoere of Norway
“I’d just like to say briefly, I second my Danish colleague. Norway neighbors Russia. We live a few kilometers from one of the largest nuclear arsenals there is. And as my colleague from Lithuania said, this is an entry point to a process which can keep bringing these levels down. And if those levels go down, we can do a lot of other things, which will enhance security. So missing this opportunity, I think for all us Europeans, is really something of great concern.”
November 20, 2010
Newspaper Editorials
• The Louisville Courier-Journal (Kentucky)
“The determination of the national Republican Party to oppose anything that could be construed as a victory for President Obama has moved from being irresponsible to downright dangerous… If efforts to ratify the treaty fail, the Obama administration would be severely undercut just as it is making progress in enlisting Russia and other countries to intensify the pressure on Iran to abandon its nuclear weapons ambitions. If there is any area in which policy should be decided on a strictly bipartisan basis, surely it would be nuclear weapons.”
November 21, 2010
• Knoxville News Sentinel (Tennessee)
“Ratification is in the best interests of the country and is important for the future of the Y-12 National Security Complex in Oak Ridge. Unfortunately, Tennessee’s senators, Republicans Lamar Alexander and Bob Corker, appear willing to go along with Kyl… Corker and Alexander should help secure ratification by joining in the call for a vote on this important for national security treaty.”
November 21, 2010
• Atlanta Journal Constitution (Georgia)
“Senate Republicans refuse to step up to approve the arms control pact, which requires a two-thirds majority. None of their professed “reasons” make sense… There is no excuse for this, no rationalization that explains it in any way other than a crass political ploy on an issue of unchallenged national security importance.”
November 22, 2010
• Toledo Blade (Ohio)
“This situation wreaks of “all politics, all the time” rather than acting in the best interests of the United States. Both the New START treaty and good working relations with Russia fall firmly into the latter category.”
November 22, 2010
• Nashua Telegraph (New Hampshire)
“With so many overpowering arguments supporting the agreement, it doesn’t take a cynic to conclude Kyl’s opposition is motivated by more than concerns over the treaty itself. Giddy over their mid-term election triumphs that will bolster their ranks by six seats, Senate Republicans are drooling over the opportunity to embarrass and undermine President Obama, regardless of what is best for the country.”
November 21, 2010
• St. Louis Post-Dispatch (Missouri)
“On the U.S. side, treaties need the advice and consent of the Senate, which means ratification by two-thirds vote. This ought to be a no-brainer; the treaty has been endorsed by Defense Secretary Robert Gates, the Joint Chiefs of Staff and six former secretaries of State… Failure to ratify START II would leave the United States in a far weaker diplomatic position. Friends and enemies alike would see a nation less concerned about peace than politics. They would not be wrong.”
November 19, 2010
• Bangor Daily News (Maine)
“The treaty, which needs 67 votes for ratification by the Senate, has gotten tangled up in partisan politics, posturing and pork-barrel negotiations. There is also a group of senators who are opposing the bill in an attempt to get more money for nuclear weapons labs in their states.”
November 15, 2010
• Maine’s Sun Journal
“Now is the time for Maine’s senators to take the leadership role for New START ratification as asked for by diverse Maine constituents, editorial writers in major Maine newspapers, and the Maine Medical Association.”
November 21, 2010
• The Times of Trenton (New Jersey)
“Failure to ratify this treaty could undermine that stance to the detriment of the United States and the world. In making his case, President Obama last week assembled former secretaries of state of both parties, including Henry Kissinger from the Nixon era, military leaders, diplomats and policy analysts who all agree that this treaty is both sound and necessary. So, again, what possible reason could Sen. Kyl have for orchestrating this delay?”
November 21, 2010
• Salt Lake Tribune (Utah)
“Sen. Jon Kyl’s objections notwithstanding, the U.S. Senate should bring the new Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty between the United States and Russia to a vote in the lame duck session. To delay that vote until after the new Congress convenes next year would only postpone, and perhaps jeopardize, ratification of a good treaty.”
November 24, 2010
• Deseret News (Utah)
“This is one vote that shouldn’t hinge on false political perceptions. The one sure tip-off that ratification is important is that leaders of the U.S. military support it and believe it enhances national security. Ratification should be high on the to-do list of the outgoing Senate.”
November 16, 2010
• Chattanooga Times Free Press (Tennessee)
“There was no acceptable reason for Arizona Sen. John Kyl, the Senate’s chief Republican negotiator on the proposed treaty, to announce last Wednesday that he would oppose and help block a vote on the pending treaty. Indeed, his statement that time in the lame-duck session is too short to resolve what he claimed were remaining “complex issues” concerning the treaty seems a blatant contrivance — an artifice to mask an obvious effort to damage President Obama politically by undercutting his ability to improve security and foreign relations in key areas abroad.”
November 21, 2010
• Des Moines Register (Iowa)
“A delay serves no purpose other than for Republicans to show they can make the president wait. But not moving forward could weaken U.S. relations with the Russian Federation, where the more liberal Medvedev faces an internal power struggle of his own with hard-line Prime Minister Vladimir Putin. That could damage cooperation on containing Iran’s nuclear ambitions.”
November 16, 2010
• Houston Chronicle (Texas)
“We join many others in calling on Sen. Kyl to withdraw his objections and allow a Senate vote on the new START treaty without delay.”
November 27, 2010
• Chicago Tribune (Illinois)
“Some Republicans accuse the administration of trying to rush ratification. But the Senate has already put off the vote and held some 20 hearings on the issues. There is nothing new to be learned by waiting. This treaty clearly would enhance the national security of the United States. Any time the Senate has a chance to do that, it should not delay.”
November 29, 2010
