“The Israelis and the Americans point to the fact that the Iranians have made a very public commitment to the Non-Proliferation Treaty – not to acquire nuclear weapons – whereas Israel is legally able to develop its arsenal.”….. “But the legal defense and the defense that Israel developed its weapons a while ago is hardly a defense in terms of justice”
Analysis
US Senate Foreign Relations Committee votes to send New START to the full Senate
The U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee agreed by a 14-4 vote to send the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) to the full Senate for advice and consent to ratification.
The treaty requires support from two-thirds of the full Senate. It is uncertain whether this process will be completed by the end of the year. If the treaty is approved by both Russia and the United States, it will limit their arsenals to 1,550 deployed strategic nuclear warheads on each side.
For more information on the New START agreement and the U.S. Senate, see:
Latest on the Trident replacement delay
Suggestions surfaced publicly today that the UK Ministry of Defence is considering a delay to the main gate for Trident replacement – the point at which a decision is taken to start actual construction of the submarines – until 2015/16, after the next election.
BASIC understands that these discussions have been ongoing throughout August, and that the decision has been made on the basis of accountability and the political context.
The thinking goes something like this.
US Senate Foreign Relations Committee sends nuclear weapons treaty to full Senate
The US Senate Foreign Relations Committee today voted to refer the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) to the full Senate. If the treaty successfully goes through the ratification processes in the United States and Russia, the treaty will cap deployed strategic nuclear warheads at 1,550 in both countries and establish a set of mutual inspections that have not had a formal framework since the first START treaty lapsed last December.
Dropping nuclear submarine policy has benefits
Paul Ingram wrote the lead letter in the Financial Times, arguing that “there are in fact substantial financial benefits” to ending the requirement that the United Kingdom maintain a nuclear submarine at sea at all times. “Not only would the current running costs be reduced, but so too would the total substantial capital costs…”
Read the full letter on the website of the Financial Times:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/afb28048-c056-11df-8a81-00144feab49a.html
Countdown to Zero
The new film, Countdown to Zero, highlights the global nuclear threat and spells out, in chilling terms, the danger facing everyone if nuclear weapons end up in the hands of terrorists.
View the Countdown to Zero trailer.
Update on New START in The Cable
Senator John Kerry, Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, has distributed a “discussion draft” of the New START Treaty Resolution of Advice and Consent to Ratification. An article in The Cable reviews reaction to the draft and related political developments in Washington.
To read the article, visit:
Scott Brown and the bombs in the basement
“Unfortunately, the nuclear capability of Israel goes unmentioned in his article, highlighting the Arab contention that the West is guilty of double standards by shielding Israel but punishing Iran.”
Excerpt from article by BASIC Program Director Anne Penketh, written for The Hill’s Congress Blog.
Read the full article: