Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation

Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation

  • Policy Issues
    • Fact Sheets
    • Countries
    • Nuclear Weapons
    • Non-Proliferation
    • Nuclear Security
    • Biological & Chemical Weapons
    • Defense Spending
    • Missile Defense
    • No First Use
  • Nukes of Hazard
    • Podcast
    • Blog
    • Videos
  • Join Us
  • Press
  • About
    • Staff
    • Boards & Experts
    • Jobs & Internships
    • Financials and Annual Reports
    • Contact Us
  • Donate
  • Search
You are here: Home / Front and Center / New START Preamble and Missile Defense, Again

December 17, 2010

New START Preamble and Missile Defense, Again

As Republicans continue to work themselves into a tizzy about the New START treaty’s preambular language on missile defense, there are a number of key points to keep in mind about why this should be a non-issue.  I realize that this is all about politics and not the substance at this point, but here goes:

  • Our military leadership, including MDA Director O’Reilly, does not believe that the preamble (and the Russian unilateral statement) meaningfully constrains U.S. missile defense plans.  The Lugar resolution of ratification reaffirms this.
  • The preamble is non-binding. It is not part of the text.
  • The recognition of a linkage between offensive and defensive forces is an objective reality that has been a staple of previous arms control agreements.
  • Removing the preamble would not change the fact that Russia could still withdraw from the treaty under Article XIV if it sees it fit to do so.
  • Amending the preamble would kill the treaty because it would force the U.S. and Russia to go back to the drawing board and renegotiate the treaty.
  • There is no evidence that previous Russian complaints about U.S. missile defenses have constrained U.S. missile defense spending or plans.  Congressional support for missile defense is too strong for Russian pressure to have any influence in any event.
  • For its part, the Obama administration has made it abundantly clear to the Russians that it is moving full stream ahead in its pursuit of the Phased Adaptive Approach for Europe and defenses to protect the U.S. homeland against an attack from Iran or North Korea.

Posted in: Front and Center, Nukes of Hazard blog

Tweets by Nukes of Hazard

Recent Posts

  • What’s in a Name? January 25, 2023
  • ‘ARMS CONTROL MATTERS’: STATEMENT ON SETTING THE DOOMSDAY CLOCK TO 90 SECONDS TIL MIDNIGHT January 24, 2023
  • Putin’s Military Strategy Ignores Key Principles of War: Ukraine Adviser January 13, 2023
  • Protecting Against Disaster – The Need for a Security Assurance at the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant January 6, 2023
  • 10 Thoughts for 2023 January 5, 2023
Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation

820 1st Street NE, Suite LL-180
Washington, D.C. 20002
Phone: 202.546.0795

Issues

  • Fact Sheets
  • Countries
  • Nuclear Weapons
  • Non-Proliferation
  • Nuclear Security
  • Defense Spending
  • Biological and Chemical Weapons
  • Missile Defense
  • No First Use

Countries

  • China
  • France
  • India and Pakistan
  • Iran
  • Israel
  • North Korea
  • Russia
  • United Kingdom

Explore

  • Nukes of Hazard blog
  • Nukes of Hazard podcast
  • Nukes of Hazard videos
  • Front and Center
  • Fact Sheets

About

  • About
  • Meet the Staff
  • Boards & Experts
  • Press
  • Jobs & Internships
  • Financials and Annual Reports
  • Contact Us
  • Council for a Livable World
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Instagram
  • Facebook

© 2023 Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation
Privacy Policy

Charity Navigator GuideStar Seal of Transparency