iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

New US-Russia Nuclear Pact: Obama, Medvedev Sign Off On 'Landmark' Arms Accord

Medvedev

TOM RAUM and ROBERT BURNS   03/27/10 12:57 AM ET   AP

WASHINGTON — The U.S. and Russia sealed the first major nuclear weapons treaty in nearly two decades Friday, agreeing to slash the former Cold War rivals' warhead arsenals by nearly one-third and talking hopefully of eventually ridding a fearful world of nuclear arms altogether.

President Barack Obama said the pact was part of an effort to "reset" relations with Russia that have been badly frayed. And at home the agreement gave him the biggest foreign policy achievement of his presidency, just days after he signed the landmark health care overhaul that has been his domestic priority.

Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev will sign the agreement April 8 in Prague, where Obama gave a major speech on doing away with nuclear arms one year ago. The city is the capital of the Czech Republic, a former Soviet satellite and now a NATO member.

If ratified by the Senate and by Russia's legislature, the reductions still would leave both countries, by far the world's largest nuclear powers, with immense arsenals – and the ability to easily annihilate each other. Together, the United States and Russia possess about 95 percent of the world's nuclear weapons, according to the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation.

Still, Obama called the pact a step toward "the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons." He said nuclear weapons "represent both the darkest days of the Cold War, and the most troubling threats of our time."

Agreed Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, "Both parties see the ultimate goal in building a nuclear-free world."

No one sees that any time soon. But U.S. leaders noted that the agreement came shortly before Obama was to host an international conference on nuclear proliferation in Washington.

U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon called the treaty an "important milestone" and said he believed it would "add a significant impetus" to a U.N. conference in May to review the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.

"We have turned words into action," Obama said at the White House after completing the agreement in a morning phone call with Medvedev. The White House said it was their 14th meeting or phone call on the issue.

The United States hopes the 10-year agreement will lead to better cooperation on other issues, such as a unified U.S.-Russian stance against the development of nuclear weapons by Iran.

Ratification in the Senate will require 67 votes, two-thirds of the senators, meaning Obama will need support from Republicans, something he's found hard to come by on other issues.

Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana, a leading Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, welcomed Friday's announcement. Lugar, who is influential among fellow GOP senators as an arms control expert, said he looked forward to receiving the treaty so that the committee could hold hearings and "work quickly to achieve ratification."

Under the agreement, which would replace and expand on a landmark 1991 Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty that expired in December, the two former Cold War foes would cut their arsenals of nuclear warheads to 1,550 – from the 2,200 previously permitted – over seven years. It would also trim the number of allowable missiles and bombers capable of carrying the warheads to targets.

"With this agreement, the United States and Russia – the two largest nuclear powers in the world – also send a clear signal that we intend to lead," Obama said.

In Moscow, the Kremlin hailed the agreement. Medvedev's spokeswoman, Natalya Timakova, said, "This treaty reflects the balance of interests of both nations."

There are still disagreements.

According to U.S. officials, the accord won't restrict moving ahead on deployment of an American missile defense system – long a touchy subject between the two nations. And Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov suggested Russia reserves the right to walk away from the treaty if it sees it can no longer protect its security because of a U.S. missile-defense buildup.

"The existence of strategic defensive systems capable of neutralizing strategic offensive weapons will be taken into account," Lavrov told reporters.

Sealing the deal gave Obama a badly needed foreign policy victory. His advisers hoped it would help lend momentum to his overall agenda by demonstrating strength on both the international and domestic fronts. It came soon after Congress approved his top domestic priority, the health care overhaul.

Yet, given the highly charged partisan atmosphere in Washington, Republican support for the treaty is not a foregone conclusion. Obama will need at least eight Republican votes in the Senate.

And despite supportive statements by more moderate Republicans such as Lugar, some conservative GOP senators have voiced concerns that too many concessions to Moscow could limit the flexibility of future presidents.

Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and Arizona Sen. Jon Kyl have voiced concerns about the treaty's impact on missile defenses and have proposed linking ratification with modernization of the U.S. nuclear arsenal.

McConnell said Friday that GOP senators will attempt to determine whether the treaty's provisions would be verifiable and would maintain America's full ability to defend itself.

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, standing with Defense Secretary Robert Gates alongside Obama, said, "National security has always produced large bipartisan majorities, and I see no reason why this should be any different. I believe that a vast majority of the Senate, at the end of the day, will see that this is in America's interest."

Clinton also jestingly offered the Russian government help in getting the treaty through the Duma. "President Obama has said he will send Rahm Emanuel to Moscow" if necessary, she joked, referring to Obama's blunt-speaking chief of staff. "We all endorsed that offer."

Because the earlier START treaty expired in December, Russia and the United States will not have an agreement for inspecting each other's arsenals until a replacement treaty comes into effect.

Clinton emphasized the verification mechanism in the treaty – a key demand of the U.S. that was resisted by Russia and was one of the sticking points that delayed completion of the deal. It will "reduce the chance for misunderstandings and miscalculations," she told reporters.

She noted that the U.S. and Russia still possess the lion's share of the world's nuclear weapons. "We do not need such large arsenals to protect our nation," she said.

Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said U.S. commanders around the world "stand solidly behind the treaty."

Gates cautioned that the treaty – and an accompanying review of nuclear posture – will require more spending to modernize America's nuclear arsenal. At the same time, the defense secretary called it an "important milestone" in consigning Cold War nightmares to the past.

Gates recalled serving as an Air Force officer in the 1960s at Whiteman Air Force Base, Mo., then home to 150 Minuteman nuclear missiles. The new treaty, he said, "is testimony to just how much the world has changed."

The agreement was hailed internationally.

In Brussels, European Union Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso said the EU strongly supports nonproliferation efforts and "there could not be a more positive signal to our efforts than the news today."

___

Associated Press writers Mark S. Smith, Desmond Butler and Jennifer Loven in Washington and Douglas Birch in Moscow contributed to this report.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST WORLD

WASHINGTON — The U.S. and Russia sealed the first major nuclear weapons treaty in nearly two decades Friday, agreeing to slash the former Cold War rivals' warhead arsenals by nearly one-third an...
WASHINGTON — The U.S. and Russia sealed the first major nuclear weapons treaty in nearly two decades Friday, agreeing to slash the former Cold War rivals' warhead arsenals by nearly one-third an...
Filed by Nicholas Sabloff  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 766
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (16 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
norman60
06:37 AM on 04/08/2010
president barack obama, ......a great leader. ..
pushing towards a more peaceful word....
doing what he promised he will do....
.and finally earning the nobel peace prize.
Ivar
Ivar
11:45 PM on 03/28/2010
So why not ask Russia to assist us in Afganistan?
12:13 AM on 03/29/2010
Because even the US is unclear on exactly what the goals are.

Russia will ask "Assist with what?" The US would then look at them with a "deer in the headlights" look and say, "Well, you know...ahhhhhhh.....well, like, freedom or something."
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
terry63
treasure hunter.
01:40 AM on 03/29/2010
Russian land mines have killed thousands of Afghan children, Yeah, you see when the Soviets left , they didnt take their land mines with them, the U.N. has been digging those baby's up for years now, also, they are quilty of many war crimes there.They poisioned the water wells on their way out, that killed thousands of men women and children. The socialists, are not exactly the Afghans favorite people. Although to their credit they do commit alot people and aircraft to Afghanistan for humanitarian releif.
photo
mcmutter
A Groover has to expect a few setbacks .....
11:01 PM on 03/28/2010
U.S. Nuclear Forces 2009

Complete breakdown of all weapons and delivery systems .... (pdf)

http://www.ploughshares.org/sites/default/files/resources/200903_norris,kristensen_nuclearnotebook2009.pdf
photo
Marlyn
If I'm wrong, let me know.
08:14 PM on 03/28/2010
"modernization of the U.S. nuclear arsenal" ???

The Republicans are INSANE!

You can't use nukes ... unless you want to kill everything.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
terry63
treasure hunter.
01:42 AM on 03/29/2010
Peace ,and good relations through supperior fire power,
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
terry63
treasure hunter.
02:03 AM on 03/29/2010
I mean, superior,my bad.
08:08 PM on 03/28/2010
The trollies are putting down this achievement but I would expect nothing else from them. They hate this man and he can do no good.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
terry63
treasure hunter.
02:06 AM on 03/29/2010
I wouldnt call myself a troll, But I do tend to lean to the right, and I think its a good thing. Its a cintinuation, of an ongoing policy between two nations. But Putin is the man to talk to.This guy is a puppet on a string.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
terry63
treasure hunter.
02:06 AM on 03/29/2010
Continuation, I mean, darn thumbs!
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Tom Joad
"While there is a lower class, I am in it "
02:20 PM on 03/28/2010
It's about time.

http://www.brookings.edu/projects/archive/nucweapons/50.aspx

http://www.brookings.edu/projects/archive/nucweapons/figure1.aspx
(figure above presents est. minimum costs of U.S. nuclear programs 1940-1996 in 1996 dollars; $5.8T)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
terry63
treasure hunter.
12:46 AM on 03/28/2010
All of this is good and fine with me, But I wouldnt have made the trip to talk to this man, He's just Putin's lap dog. It reminds me of the story of Washington. When Cornwallace surenderd to George Washington he sent a lower Officer to surrender his sword, He stated he wasnt feeling well. Washington declined Taking the sword, instead he motioned that officer to give that sword to a lower officer.
photo
Marlyn
If I'm wrong, let me know.
08:16 PM on 03/28/2010
"He's just Putin's lap dog." ???

How do you know?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
terry63
treasure hunter.
01:47 AM on 03/29/2010
I read the papers.But dont take my word for it do a little investigation for youre self, Remember when the soviets invaded Georgia? this guy had no power, Putin just brushed him aside. That and a few other instances. But as I say Dont trust me or anybody else for things you can investigate yourself.
photo
AnotherAngle
Joe Biden -- the gift that keeps on giving
10:53 PM on 03/27/2010
We've had arms treaties with Russia before .. and probably always will. Even your buddy Dubya signed one in 2002. I don't think either country will EVER commit to a total disarmament which would be the only real news. Don't kid yourselves. Both countries will retain enough weaponry to get the job done, if needed.

To my knowledge, Russia hasn't been a real threat to us since the late 80's / early 90's. They've been a little ticked off at us, but then who hasn't? This is a good tickler and a nice banner for Obama, but that's about the extent of it.
photo
Marlyn
If I'm wrong, let me know.
08:17 PM on 03/28/2010
"enough weaponry to get the job done" ???

That job being what? To destroy civilization?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
terry63
treasure hunter.
01:51 AM on 03/29/2010
Yes, that would be it. Its not really Russia I fear, now we have , India, Pakistan, soon to be if not already Iran, and Israel, I can promise you in no uncertain terms, If Israel is attacked by Iran, They will use nukes first and ask questions later. Thats a big if, If Israel doesnt attack Iran first. Iran has made no bones about what thry intend to do with their bomb.
10:06 PM on 03/27/2010
Proof positive of our POTUS ability to multi-task!
07:13 PM on 03/27/2010
From a military point of view, these cuts are not significant; both sides will retain more than enough weapons to wage a nuclear war of total annihilation.

However, this does help improve relations with Russia, and reduces maintenance and replacement costs for both sides. So, from a fiscal and diplomatic point of view, this treaty is unequivocally a good thing.
photo
Marlyn
If I'm wrong, let me know.
08:21 PM on 03/28/2010
"this treaty is unequivocally a good thing"

I agree. So, do you think 8 Republicans will support it?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
terry63
treasure hunter.
02:00 AM on 03/29/2010
Yes I think so, This is a Bipartisan bill that will go through, we have been making these deals for years, as you know.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
JohnnyPDX
09:50 PM on 03/28/2010
Governing and policy building come in stages, perhaps baby steps, but it does come and I feel safer that this reduction is a possibility.. Remember some republicans have to climb on board this. Right now it does not look too good. No gaurantee all demos will go for the new treaty
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
rgateman
05:24 PM on 03/27/2010
uh, what happened to the tens of thousands of nukes both sides constructed over the last 50 some years? They have a halflife of what, 10,000 years? Do you just like take the wheels off them and put them up on cinderblocks like a old Camaro? What 'missle defense system' are these folks refering to since ours has never actually worked at actually shooting down anything much less a incoming missle. I thought that all the practicing we did in school in the 1950's and 60's to 'duck and cover' gave us ample protection from nukular blasts. I thought we needed to both be able to destroy the world for our own good and mutual protection. None of this adds up even a little bit. Never did really.
photo
Marlyn
If I'm wrong, let me know.
08:28 PM on 03/28/2010
"What 'missle defense system' are these folks refering to" ???

Currently the USA has missiles in Poland and Czech Republic pointed at Russia, or is it Iran?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
JohnnyPDX
09:52 PM on 03/28/2010
Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't believe they are yet in Poland or the Czech Republic and the likelihood is dim.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ErnestoBuda
03:28 PM on 03/27/2010
The agreement is not that significant. Moscow was simply eager to dump some of its oldest leaking bombs/warheads but couldn't do that without U.S. reciprocating. Barack Husein Obama has obliged. As usual.

That's all.

Besides, nukes are an old technology.

That's why Sov..er...new democratic Russia works on biological weapons.

[While of course denying officially that such a program exists. :)]
07:10 PM on 03/27/2010
Well, technically biological weapons are an older technology than nukes... Infected blankets, anyone?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Andman0121
02:50 PM on 03/28/2010
LOL oh and you know first hand they are constructing these biological weapons on mass huh? Forgetting that WE are prolly doing the same thing? Oh you conservatives tend to overlook that. Moving on.

And whats up with the Husein nonsense? Are you fake conservatives still pushing that middle name thing like its supposed to bring about some sort of shock factor? Well it doesnt work. Its tired. Its boring. You dont like him. We get it.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
davidwayneosedach
11:59 AM on 03/27/2010
How many time's have we been through this before? And the Russians 'accidentally forget' to comply.
03:00 PM on 03/27/2010
Did they?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
RudyEbert
05:57 PM on 03/27/2010
Can you cite specifics on this? For my money, both sides have managed these various treaties pretty responsibly. What hadn't been addressed previously, and is now covered in this pact, is the issue of ensuring that no nuclear material gets loose and into the hands of the bad guys. That's the biggest threat to us, not Russia's own arsenal.
11:44 AM on 03/27/2010
The Dems must lay low (not really a problem for them) in order to set the trap for this enemy of American freedom.

And by that I mean the Republican Party.

They will read the treaty and immediately claim BO is giving away the store to his socialist friends and that, just like closing Gitmo and bringing KSM to US shores, BO is putting the country in danger.

After all the GOP cannot, under any circumstances, allow a black president, or even a Democratic one, to claim the chest thumping Nixon-Reagan mantle of dealing tough with the Ruskies.

Then the Dems must spring full force and proclaim to the American people that the GOP wants MORE nuclear weapons pointed at your kids while they try to repeal your new benefit of putting them on your HC plan even with pre existing conditions. Then ask "why do Republicans hate kids"?
photo
Marlyn
If I'm wrong, let me know.
08:53 PM on 03/28/2010
"the chest thumping Nixon-Reagan mantle of dealing tough with the Ruskies" ???

But Reagan was the one who made peace with the Russians, ending the Cold War.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
terry63
treasure hunter.
01:56 AM on 03/29/2010
Yes, you are exactly right.
06:24 PM on 03/29/2010
Marlyn.

Mikhail Gorbachov, a man whose political consciousness was formed in the turbulent 1960s (he was young enough to be Reagan's son) was the man who made peace with the US and who ended the Cold War. Reagan was an accident of history who just happened to be in the right place at the right time and who had the opportunity to deal with a totally different type of Soviet leader, unlike his (Reagan's) predecessors who had to deal with Stalinist hardliners.

It was Reagan who wanted to arm Europe zip code to zip code with nukes and build his star wars missle defense (an idea he got from a Hollywood screenwriter.)
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
MaybeMilo
"You can't fight in here. This is the War room!"
10:54 AM on 03/27/2010
How will the GOP spin this? "Obama's capitulating to the Ruskies."

Don't forget - Old Man McGrumpy's still fighting the war in Vietnam.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
JohnnyPDX
09:56 PM on 03/28/2010
McGrumpy as you call him is history, relegated to the status of sage on the mountain