Print Print this article Email Email this article Link Trackback

Jon Kyl vs. Jon Kyl on New START

Kingston | Nov 24, 2009 | there are 0 comments 0
I (now) love verification!

I (now) love verification!

A few weeks ago I noted that it was ironic that Senator Jon Kyl has been accusing the Obama administration of being weak on verification in its pursuit of a New START agreement considering his past lackadaisical approach to this topic.  Apparently the Senator's inconsistency knows no bounds.

In a November 21 speech on the Senate floor, Sen. Kyl warned of the consequences of allowing START I to expire on December 5.  “The U.S. will lose a significant source of information that has allowed it to have confidence in its ability to understand Russian strategic nuclear forces,” he proclaimed.

Arms control advocates have been raising concerns about the impending disappearance of START I’s verification, monitoring, and inspection provisions for years.  The same cannot be said of Sen. Kyl, whose sudden admiration for START I’s verification scheme contrasts sharply with his position on the Bush administration’s 2002 Strategic Offensive Reductions Treaty (SORT), which contained no such verification procedures.  In praising SORT on the Senate floor in April 2003, Sen. Kyl stated:

This treaty is a masterstroke. It represents, and, I am sure, will be sent as ushering in a wholly new approach to arms control for a wholly new era. The simplicity of this treaty is a marvel. It is extremely brief, indeed just three pages long. It is shorn of the tortured benchmarks, sublimits, arcane definitions and monitoring provisions that weighed down past arms control treaties.
In addition, Sen. Kyl was one of 50 mostly Republican Senators to vote against an amendment proposed by Sen. Kerry to add verification requirements to SORT.

So he was against verification before he was for it?

What’s the cause of his new-found verification religion?  Has it something to do with a Democrat being in the White House?

Kyl’s November 21 floor speech also tries to blame the Obama administration for Russia’s plans to deploy the road-mobile RS-24 missile, a new, multiple-warhead version of the single warhead SS-27.  

Yet the Bush administration did not make an issue out of Russia’s development of the RS-24.  This was in keeping with the conclusions of the 2001 Nuclear Posture Review, which declared that it was no longer appropriate to size and configure U.S. nuclear forces in relation to the Russian arsenal.  

As Amb. Linton Brooks, a former Republican official and negotiator of the START I agreement, noted at an October 26 event on START at the United States Institute of Peace: “The fact that the Secretary of Defense in the last administration said both publically and privately that we didn’t care [about the RS-24] may have suggested to them [the Russians] that it was ok….We had a long time…to call them on that and we as a government chose not to.”

Sen. Kyl claims that the Obama administration has given next to no consideration of how to bridge the gap between the expiration of START I and entry into force of New START.  This is simply not true.  As numerous Obama administration officials have noted, the two sides have been negotiating a bridging agreement in parallel to the new Treaty to cover the gap.  The Administration has not, however, divulged the details of a bridge agreement that is still being negotiated.

Sen. Kyl ends his speech by noting that “the U.S. would have been very well served with a simple 5 year extension of the 1991 Agreement, as the treaty allowed.”  Earlier versions of Senator Kyl would likely have opposed this position, as he apparently had no qualms with the Bush administration’s decision not to seek an extension of START I in 2007 and 2008.  

In any event, the time for talk of a simple five year extension has long since past, thanks in large part to the Bush administration’s unwillingness to consider it.  

tags Nukes on a Blog, Jon Kyl, New Start, verification (all tags)


Display:

You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account by clicking right here. It's quick and free.

About This Blog

Search This Blog

Center Analysis

Obama: Additional Sanctions on North Korea
...

Jimmy Carter to the Rescue... Again
Former President Jimmy Carter is in North Korea to secure the release of an American missionary sentenced to eight years of hard labor for illegal entry. The trip comes amid a North Korean nuclear impasse and heightened tensions on the Korean peninsula. W...

Is a “Region by Region” Approach Really Effective in Preventing the Spread of Sensitive Nuclear Tec
Following an August 3 report in the Wall Street Journal, the arms control blogosphere has been buzzing about a nearly finalized nuclear cooperation agreement between the United States and Vietnam. According to the Journal, and now other outlets includin...

Current Status of Iran's Nuclear and Ballistic Missile Programs
There is no hard consensus as to exactly how close Iran is to acquiring a nuclear weapon, fitting a nuclear warhead on a ballistic missile, and/or developing a ballistic missile capable of reaching most of Europe and the United States. In this updated fac...

Another Squeeze
The U.S. will soon announce a fresh list of sanctions against North Korea to dry up the regime’s illegal cash sources that fund its nuclear weapons programs. Pyongyang is expected to unleash more provocations, even a third nuclear test, in retaliation as ...