Mapping a National Security Failure: Ratification of the New START Treaty

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tennessee):

I have reviewed the plan that calls for spending $85 billion over the next ten years on nuclear modernization. I have visited our outdated nuclear weapons facilities. I am convinced that the plan’s implementation will make giant steps toward modernization of those facilities so that we—and our allies and adversaries—can be assured that the weapons will work if needed. The president’s statement that he will ask for these funds and the support of senior members of the Senate Appropriations Committee means that the plan is more likely to become a reality. This will make sure the United States is not left with a collection of wet matches…

“Alexander said that under the terms of the Treaty, the United States:

— will have up to 1,550 deployed strategic nuclear weapons, “each one up to 30 times more powerful than the one used at Hiroshima to end World War II”; and

–will gain valuable data, including through inspection operations “that should provide a treasure trove of intelligence about Russian activities that we would not have without the treaty—and that we have not had since the START treaty expired on December 9, 2009.

Over the weekend the president sent a letter to the Senate reaffirming ‘the continued development and deployment of U.S. missile defense systems …’ There is nothing within the Treaty itself that would hamper the development or deployment of our missile defense. Our military and intelligence leaders all have said that…[163]

Sen. Scott Brown (R-Mass):

Over the course of many months, I have had the opportunity to meet with active and former military, missile defense and non-proliferation experts to discuss the New START Treaty. Ensuring adequate funding for nuclear modernization and protecting our missile defense capabilities have always been my greatest concerns. In the course of the debate, these concerns have been addressed by the White House and the Pentagon. This treaty is critical to our national security. While I am supporting the New START Treaty, there is more work to be done with regard to tactical nuclear weapons in Russia and nuclear proliferation in Iran and North Korea.[164]

Sen. Thad Cochran (R-Mississippi):

After listening carefully to national security experts and debate on the Senate floor, I have been convinced that failure to ratify this treaty would diminish cooperation between our two countries on several fronts, including nuclear proliferation, and would limit our understanding of Russian capabilities. Also, failure to ratify this treaty would cause further delays in getting our inspectors back to Russia after a one year absence.”

I am cognizant of the fact that the New START has received unanimous endorsement by our country’s diplomatic and military leadership, and it would be an extraordinary position for the Senate not to support their views on how best to advance our national security interests…[165]

Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine):

…In her letter, Senator Collins also expressed her support for the Administration’s recent commitment to increase investment for nuclear modernization efforts.

In announcing her support for ratification, Senator Collins said, ‘The New START represents a continued effort to achieve mutual and verifiable reductions in nuclear weapons. As the Ranking Member of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, I support the President’s commitment to reduce not only the number of strategic nuclear weapons through the New START treaty, but also to reduce, in the future, those weapons that are most vulnerable to theft and misuse—and those are tactical nuclear weapons.’[166]

Ben Lerner

Please Share: