BFIA Foreign Affairs Friday: Nuclear Non-Proliferation

“…one
thing that came out of our work on the treaty was that when it comes to
foreign relations, the majority of Iowans seem disengaged in anything
except what is directly related to their economic interests“

By ratifying the New START Treaty on Wednesday, the United States Senate took a key step to check nuclear proliferation in the world. Failure to ratify would have encouraged North Korea and Iran to continue their nuclear programs, even though they do not seem to take direction from the US regarding things nuclear. More significantly, other countries seeking to assert their sovereignty, like Burma and Indonesia, may have been encouraged to continue development of their nuclear programs without New START. As the vote on New START approached, it grew into a gigantic, multifaceted behemoth that blocked light on other important priorities regarding nuclear non-proliferation.

On Wednesday, Iowa Senator Chuck Grassley's comment on his vote on the New START Treaty included the statement, “the prospects of a nuclear war are far greater today with Iran and North Korea, so that’s where U.S. national security concerns and work should be primarily focused.” This comment suggests that the administration's focus on re-setting the United States relationship with Russia is misguided and implicit is the notion that as a nation, we struggle to work on more than one foreign policy priority at a time.

That may be true of the United States Senate, where every bill becomes an omnibus packed with multiple priorities and is laden with earmarks. However; as the world's dominant super power, the United States can and must manage multiple national security priorities, Russia, Iran and North Korea representing a subset in the domain of nuclear non-proliferation.

Our most urgent priority regarding nuclear non-proliferation should be preventing terrorists from obtaining nuclear technology and/or nuclear weapons. In the rhetoric of Washington, rogue states like North Korea are equated with terrorism, but they are two different issues requiring different approaches regarding nuclear non-proliferation. Few besides the President and his cabinet and staff seem willing to get into the weeds of these diverse issues. Our corporate media and members of the U.S. Senate reduce the discussion to a lowest common denominator, with sound bites like Senator Grassley's.

During the eight months since Presidents Obama and Medvedev signed the New START Treaty in Prague, Iowa activists have been engaged in a treaty ratification advocacy effort. Most Iowans have not paid attention. Had activists been able to effectively increase public awareness of the importance of the treaty, Senator Grassley would likely have listened to his constituents and changed his approach to the treaty, and maybe his vote.

We should be happy that the New START Treaty was ratified for a number of reasons. Perhaps foremost is that by going through the ratification process, the United States Senate engaged in debate regarding nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation in a thoughtful and detailed manner. This sets the stage for further negotiation with foreign states regarding non-proliferation and disarmament, including reductions in tactical nuclear weapons between the Russian Federation and the United States. It also set the stage for the other treaty in the Senate, the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, if and when it is considered again for ratification.

~Paul Deaton is a
native Iowan living in rural Johnson County and weekend editor of
Blog for Iowa. E-mail
Paul Deaton