by Faiz Shakir, Amanda Terkel, Matt Corley, Benjamin Armbruster, Ryan Powers, Ian Millhiser and Nate Carlile
To receive The Progress Report in your email inbox everyday, click here.
During his campaign for the White House, President Obama pledged to work with Russia to reduce U.S. and Russian nuclear weapons stockpiles. "I will negotiate with Russia to take our ICBMs off hair-trigger alert and to achieve deep cuts in our nuclear arsenals," he said. Indeed, the Obama administration went to work right away, with Obama, Vice President Biden, and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton stressing their desire to "reset" the U.S. posture toward Russia after tumultuous relations in the final years of President Bush's term in office. Illustrating the new post-Bush era U.S.-Russia relationship, Obama and Russian President Dmitri Medvedev agreed in April on a framework for sharp cuts in the U.S. and Russian strategic nuclear arsenals. And yesterday in Moscow, both leaders reached a preliminary agreement to replace the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) -- which expires on Dec. 5 -- that would reduce each country's deployed nuclear weapons by nearly one-third. "This is an urgent issue, and one in which the United States and Russia have to take leadership," Obama said yesterday at a news conference with Medvedev. "It is very difficult for us to exert that leadership unless we are showing ourselves willing to deal with our own nuclear stockpiles in a more rational way."
THE AGREEMENT: Combined, the U.S. and Russia possess more than 90 percent of the world's nuclear weapons. But under yesterday's agreement, the START successor treaty would "reduce the ceiling on strategic warheads to somewhere between 1,500 and 1,675 warheads within seven years, down from the current ceiling of 2,200 warheads by 2012." The accord also places limits on delivery systems, such as land and submarine-based missiles and bombers, to "somewhere from 500 to 1,100, down from the 1,600 currently allowed." More importantly, the new framework maintains the critical verification mechanisms contained within START I. "They've hit the sweet spot in finding numbers that will be a significant reduction and likely to get the necessary support in their respective parliaments," said non-proliferation expert and Ploughshares Fund President Joseph Cirincione. Obama and Medvedev also signed agreements allowing "the transit of U.S. military personnel and weapons through Russia to Afghanistan" and restoring military-to-military ties that were suspended after Russia's invasion of neighboring Georgia last year. Missile defense remains a sticking point, but progress was made yesterday. While Russia objects to U.S. plans to place anti-missile batteries and radar stations in Poland and the Czech Republic, Medvedev said he "believed that Russia had made progress on the issue, saying the United States had acknowledged that negotiations on arms control would be connected to the missile defense program. did not acknowledge any change in the American position," but he did offer language on the issue that the Russian leadership found agreeable. "I believe that over time we will end up seeing that the U.S.-Russian positions on these issues can be reconciled and that in fact we have a mutual interest in protecting both our populations," Obama said of missile defense. Indeed, both leaders issued an unexpected joint statement in response "the challenge of ballistic missile proliferation," pledging that the U.S. and Russia will "analyze the ballistic missile challenges," "cooperate on monitoring the development of missile programs around the world," and establish "the Joint Data Exchange Center, which is to become the basis for a multilateral missile-launch notification regime."
TOWARD A NUCLEAR-FREE WORLD: During his college days at Columbia University, Obama wrote in a campus magazine about his vision of a "nuclear free world." And nearly 26 years later, he outlined that vision during a speech in Prague in April: "I state clearly and with conviction America's commitment to seek the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons. This goal will not be reached quickly -- perhaps not in my lifetime. It will take patience and persistence. But now we, too, must ignore the voices who tell us that the world cannot change." Indeed, in addition to agreeing on sharp reductions in weapons and delivery systems, Obama and Medvedev also pledged to work more closely on securing loose fissile materials and to cooperate further in addressing the proliferation threat from states like North Korea and Iran. "It's our common, joint responsibility, and we should do our utmost to prevent any negative trends there, and we are ready to do that," said Medvedev, who also offered support for Obama's vow to "secure vulnerable nuclear materials around the world within four years and [to] hold a nonproliferation summit meeting in Washington next year." The Center for American Progress has outlined a progressive strategy to guide U.S. policy toward Russia in addressing these and other issues, and offered a number of recommendations to broaden the traditional bilateral agenda from its current focus on security matters.
RIGHT-WING OPPOSITION: Earlier this month, Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ) tried to stymie Obama's plan to agree to nuclear cuts with Medvedev by placing a hold on then-Rep. Ellen Tauscher's (D-CA) nomination to a top State Department post. According to reports, Kyl wanted the Obama administration to conduct a nuclear review before any new agreement with Russia, perhaps thinking he could have a better opportunity to limit U.S. nuclear reductions on the domestic front. He used Tauscher's nomination as blackmail. But while the Senate ultimately confirmed Tauscher after Kyl eventually lifted the hold, the Arizona Republican took to the op-ed pages of the Wall Street Journal last week with Iraq war architect Richard Perle to attack Obama's stand on nuclear weapons. They called Obama's vision "dangerous" and "wishful thinking." "There is a fashionable notion that if only we and the Russians reduced our nuclear forces, other nations would reduce their existing arsenals or abandon plans to acquire nuclear weapons altogether," they wrote, adding, "If we were to approach zero nuclear weapons today, others would almost certainly try even harder to catapult to superpower status by acquiring a bomb or two." However, in an interview on Saturday Obama countered, "It's naïve for us to think...that we can grow our nuclear stockpiles, the Russians continue to grow their nuclear stockpiles, and our allies grow their nuclear stockpiles, and that in that environment we're going to be able to pressure countries like Iran and North Korea not to pursue nuclear weapons themselves."