On the recordMay 14, 2010
Mr. President, I rise today to address some very important concerns that arise in my mind in the evaluation of the new Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, START, that was submitted yesterday to the Senate for advice and consent to ratification. I do not believe that the Senate must ratify this treaty, as some of my colleagues suggest. But, rather, I begin with the proposition that a new treaty with Russia is not essential for our national security; may well be a distraction from addressing the real threats of nuclear proliferation by other nations and nuclear terrorism; and to the extent the President puts forth this treaty as a step toward his idea of a world without nuclear weapons, it is a naive and potentially risky strategic approach. Basically, the purpose of arms control is to reduce the risk of war by enhancing strategic stability and security and, if possible, lessen the costs of preparing for war. It is clear that the strategic balance between the United States and Russia is, for the most part, stable, while U.S. and Russian nuclear arsenals are already on a downward slope. Both sides had made a commitment, under the 2002 Moscow Treaty, to reduce deployed nuclear weapons to a range between 2,200 and 1,700 warheads, which was a significant reduction from the START I level of 6,000 warheads.…





