President Obama believes he has developed a closer relationship
with Russian President Dmitri Medvedev than was enjoyed by his
predecessor, George W. Bush. I am doubtful about that, but even
if it is so, of what consequence is it? Although the Russian
constitution makes the president of the republic the number one
figure at the apex of Russia’s governing elite, the reality is
that the Russian constitution is what Vladimir Putin says it is.
Putin is only No. 2 on paper. He is the premier. But the reality
is that Putin dominates Russia today. Just as he dominated Russia
when he served – briefly — under the drunken President Boris
Yeltsin as his Premier.
So it should give us some concern when President Obama goes
out of his way to tout a new strategic arms reduction treaty
(START) signed with the ever compliant Medvedev. In fact, the
pact as initialed recently in Prague is called the Obama-Medvedev
treaty.
U.S. Senators should stop START. As a treaty, it requires a
vote of two-thirds of the U.S. Senate. Republicans and
defense-minded Democrats — are there any left? — must hold up
ratification until many, many questions are answered.
John Bolton calls the START agreement “a treaty for Utopia”
in carefully detailed analysis in National Review. Our
former ambassador to the UN lays out many specific and pressing
concerns and raises questions that deserve to be answered before
any senator gives this document his okay.
I would like to address the overall atmospherics of the
treaty. Ronald Reagan made sure we did not sign any arms
agreements with the Soviets until he had re-built our
hollowed-out military — a military demoralized and de-mobilized
under the studied neglect of the Carter administration. Jimmy
Carter publicly said we had to “get over our inordinate fear of
Communism.” The Kremlin bosses took him at his word and ran
rampant through Southeast Asia, Southern Africa and Central
America.
“Let us never negotiate out of fear,” President Kennedy had
said, “but let us never fear to negotiate.” Reagan never feared
to negotiate — provided America’s military was second to
none.
This treaty will disarm the U.S. without making similar
demands on Russia. Russia will retain its current substantial
advantage over this country in the numbers of tactical nuclear
weapons. If both sides reduce their strategic nuclear
stockpiles, then tactical nukes become all the more
important.
The U.S. has global commitments. Russia has none (although
it’s perilously playing games with Cuba, Venezuela, and even
Iran).
Do we want Japan, Germany, or even Australia to feel
compelled to go nuclear? This could be the unintended result if
the U.S. disarms too quickly. START disarms the U.S. too
quickly.
Why should Obama choose this moment to ink a new
arms reduction agreement with the Russians? He seems to have
forgotten the classic formulation: There is not mistrust in the
world because there are arms; there are arms in the world because
there is mistrust.
Liberals have always believed that it is the weapons
themselves which constitute the greatest danger to world peace.
If that were true, then we should have shuddered at the approach
of the HMS Trafalgar, a nuclear submarine capable of
launching nuclear-tipped Tomahawk missiles against the U.S. We
didn’t tremble. That’s because Trafalgar was a British
submarine, belonging to our tried and true allies.
Put very simply, the Russians have done nothing recently to
merit our trust. Signing an arms reduction agreement with them
now makes no sense. They may not want war, but they want the
fruits of war. We should remember what Churchill said in
1946.
I do not believe that Soviet Russia desires war. What they
desire is the fruits of war and the indefinite expansion of
their power…. Our difficulties and dangers will not be removed
by closing our eyes to them. They will not be removed by mere
waiting to see what happens; nor will they be removed by a
policy of appeasement…. From what I have seen of our Russian
friends and Allies during the war, I am convinced that there is
nothing for which they have less respect than for weakness,
especially military weakness.
Unless and until the U.S. is securely in the lead — with a
due regard to our alliances and obligations — we should
not be ratifying any arms reduction agreements with the
Russians. Now is not the time to START. It’s the time to
STOP.
