In 2009, President Obama, to the surprise of much of the world, won the Nobel Peace Prize. He had hardly done anything to deserve it, but now he has the chance to prove that the much-coveted award is deserved.
However, to little surprise, this chance is being held up by the Senate Republicans. The new Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, negotiated between the U.S. and Russia and signed by Presidents Obama and Dmitry Medvedev in April, is before the Senate for ratification in this lame duck session of Congress. It is imperative that this treaty be passed.
This treaty calls for a reduction in each country’s nuclear arsenal and allows a more transparent relationship when monitoring each other’s nuclear arsenal.
The treaty states that the two countries are “working therefore to forge a new strategic relationship based on mutual trust, openness, predictability, and cooperation” and “expressing strong support for on-going global efforts in
non-proliferation.”
The treaty provides a cap of 700 on intercontinental ballistic missiles, submarine launched ballistic missiles and heavy bombers. The treaty also puts a limit of possessing 1,550 warheads for each of these weapons, and a restriction of 800 on the launchers of these weapons.
According to The Washington Post, the actual reduction of the United States’ arsenal would be only 100 or 200 weapons.
This treaty signals that the U.S. and Russia are willing to make amends after a falling out over the Russia-Georgia War. The treaty also helps present a unified front against Iran and its nuclear program.
As if repairing relations with Russia, reducing the levels of our nuclear arsenal and stopping Iran were not enough, Russia also has a stake in Afghanistan and might decrease its presence in that war.
According to the Los Angeles Times, Russia has allowed the U.S. to use its territory in Afghanistan to ship NATO and U.S. supplies into the country. If the U.S. does not follow through on its half of the START agreement, why should Russia allow us to use its territory in Afghanistan? Foreign policy is a little give and a little take. Apparently Senate Republicans are only interested in taking.
Early last week, Arizona’s junior Republican Sen. Jon Kyl, decided to lead the charge against progress and moved to block a vote on the ratification of this important treaty.
The Obama administration moved to make accommodations to win his vote, including spending $85 billion to modernize this nation’s nuclear weapons program, according to The New York Times.
Despite this concession, Kyl, the GOP’s go-to person on this issue, has decided to act in favor of political preservation.
His leadership, or lack thereof, has been nothing short of sickening. It is appalling to live in a state where the Senate Minority Whip represents us and uses his leadership position to demonize the president rather than work with him to make our country more secure.
Kyl may have won my vote in 2006, but his decision to put politics before our national security is despicable. As the second highest-ranking Republican in the Senate, Kyl has a great amount of power to shape debate and a great amount of influence among members of his fellow senators. When I vote in 2012 for the Arizona Senate seat, my vote will certainly be one of no confidence for Mr. Kyl.
Andrew can be reached at andrew.hedlund@asu.edu
