On the recordMay 24, 2010
The bottom line is, there were concessions by the United States. The Russian conventions are essentially strictly based on their financial situation, not by any New START warhead ceilings. So what I think we should ask is why did we agree to it and what did we get in return. Additionally, what will the U.S. nuclear force structure look like after eliminating these 180 U.S. strategic delivery systems? I have already talked about it, but I wish to explain why this is an important requirement for Senators to consider before we vote on the treaty. The administration has provided some initial information as a basis for future planning. It could retain up to 420 ICBMs, up to 60 strategic bombers, and deploy no more than 240 SLBMs at any time. We will require further details about where these reductions will be made and how this force structure fares against our most likely prediction about how the Russians will design their nuclear forces. An issue of concern is that while the United States intends to deploy only single-warhead ICBMs under the administration's new NPR, the treaty appears to be driving the Russians to deploy multiple-warhead missiles for their ICBM force.
