Subject: [big campaign] Experts React, Fact-Check McCain Speech on Nuclear Proliferation
From: Adam Blickstein <[email-masked]>
To: "[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 13:08:29 -0400
List-Id: <bigcampaign.googlegroups.com>

[http://ih.constantcontact.com/fs004/1101377320302/img/2.jpg?a=1102113193355]

For Immediate Release

Contact:
Adam Blickstein                                                                                                                          Moira Whelan
202-289-7113                                                                                                                             202-289-7211

 Experts React, Fact-Check McCain Speech on
Nuclear Proliferation
~ All agree that his unrealistic rhetoric and confrontational stances are unproductive to keeping America and the world safe and secure ~

Washington, D.C. - In reaction to John McCain's speech this morning on his views on nuclear proliferation and greater strategy for Asia, National Security Network compiled the following reactions from experts who agree that the speech and his overall outlook are misguided and return to the failed policies of the past:
"John McCain says we should not undermine our allies by talking to North Korea, but in fact our allies in East Asia want us to talk to and engage North Korea.  We lost their confidence under the Bush administration by holding to ideological positions that did not work instead of listening to our friends and working the problem to a realistic solution.  Returning to the isolationist days of the first Bush term will only weaken our alliance and give North Korea a justification to resume their nuclear efforts."
-Jon Wolfsthal, Fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies

"Senator McCain's speech conveniently glosses over the largest factor undermining American ability to stem the flow of nuclear weapons in Asia and around the world: our strategic preoccupation in Iraq. For a Senator campaigning on reasserting America's diplomatic leverage to decrease the proliferation of these deadly weapons, his "100 year" Iraq plan further hinders our power to do just that."
-Price Floyd, Director of External Relations, Center for a New American Security

"John McCain has made a major effort to reach for the votes of the of the arms control community with a broad speech on non-proliferation.  Unfortunately, cooperation with Russia, the basic premise of the speech, is undermined by his earlier promise to throw Russia out of the G-8 and his continued support for ballistic missile defense in eastern Europe.  An odd slip-up for a purported national security expert."
-Rand Beers, President of the National Security Network

Also, John Wolfsthal wrote the following longer reaction piece to McCain's speech:
McCain's Nonproliferation Policy-It's a Wolf in Sheep's Clothing

John McCain's speech on nuclear weapons seems to adopt the narrowest of lenses in dealing with nuclear weapons.  Moreover, his proposals - many of which might sound good - don't match up with other things he has said on nuclear weapons, on Russia, on Iran and suggests he doesn't really get the complexity of these issues.  Lastly, the tone may be better, but many of the proposals-not to mention his language choices-are right out of George W. Bush's play book.  This may be a wolf in sheep's clothing, but it is still a wolf.

1)      He wants to work with Russia on arms control and tactical nuclear weapons, but he also wants to kick Russia out of the G-8.  Not sure how you get them to play nice on nukes after you kick them in the teeth.  Also, Bush adopted a loose standard on counting nuclear weapons and verification.  Will McCain (who is now working with John Bolton - father of Bush arms control dogma) be any better?

2)      I applaud his desire to get tactical nuclear weapons out of Europe, but if we pull nuclear weapons out of Turkey as Iran advances its nuclear program, they are not going to have increased confidence in NATO and the US.  This speech, and the references to it, will send shock waves through Europe and and a McCain Administration would start in a hole.

3)      He does not walk away from the new "reliable replacement warhead" being pitched by the Bush administration.  Lots of wiggle room for him, left there on purpose, I would guess.

4)      Why is only the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) going to review nuclear policy?  Where are the experts on nonproliferation, diplomacy, history, etc?  This is the same line the Bush administration gave.  In May of 2000, standing in front of Secretary Kissinger and other republican heavy-weights, then-candidate Bush said he would reduce nuclear weapons to the lowest number consistent with U.S. security.  Sound familiar?  McCain's statement is almost an exact quote.  The JCS has set the current floor on reductions.  The President sets the war guidance for the level of nuclear weapons, and leaving it to the JCS is a recipe for the status quo.

5)      Did anyone else notice that McCain did not repudiate the policy of regime change? I know why Iran and North Korea want nuclear weapons.  Reducing ours will not get them to change their course.  Of course, singing "bomb bomb Iran" to the tune of "Barbara Ann" won't do it either.  Is McCain really suggesting cutting our nukes will lead others to reduce theirs?  It's the broader policy that needs changing, not just the number of nukes.

6)      Coming out of left field (or from pander-ville) is the remark about international nuclear storage.  It is possible that Russia might build a storage facility for countries in East Asia, but McCain seems to be suggesting some other country is going to accept our huge (the world's largest) stock of spent fuel and that this might be a way to avoid opening the spent fuel repository in Yucca Mountain, Nevada.  Talk about pandering.  Who does he think is going to take our nuclear waste?  Even if someone would take it off our hands, the stuff contains about 100,000 weapons worth of plutonium that must be dealt with.  Does McCain really want to export that to a country poor enough to want into the nuclear waste storage business?

7)      Either you are for the ban on nuclear testing or you are not.  The Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty is the most studied arms control agreement in history.  It has been verifiable since the 1960s.  McCain voted against it.  To play the "let's study it again" dance is too cute by half.  If the President does not support it, it is not going to happen.  Also, McCain seems to be suggesting we should re-open the agreement for new modifications.  That is the fastest way to kill it.  He also talks about limiting testing.  We want to ban testing.  We have more nuclear expertise than anyone - why we would want to make the world safe for others to test nuclear weapons is unclear.  Obama and Clinton have said they are for the CTBT and plan to fight for its ratification.  McCain has not.  The rest of the world - including the states we need on our side to deal with Iran and North Korea - are embarrassed that we have not ratified it.

 McCain's speech is a feeble attempt to try to tie all Republicans and Democrats into the failures of the Bush administration nuclear policies.  Before 2000, the US was on the right track.  The regime needed work, but was sound - more states had given up nuclear weapons and weapon programs in the 1980s and 90s than had begun them.  Now that track record lies in ashes - because of the Bush Administration approach, backed by a Republican Congress that killed the CTBT and sought to restrict funding for nuclear security efforts during 2000-2004. McCain is promising more of the same.

NSN's policy team produced the following posts below on DemocracyArsenal further scrutinizing the speech and McCain's Wall Street Journal Op-Ed<http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?t=lmpbrncab.0.0.olnitxbab.0&ts=S0341&p=http%3A%2F%2Fonline.wsj.com%2Farticle%2FSB121183670827020887.html%3Fmod%3Dgooglenews_wsj&id=preview>:

McCain's Disjointed Russia Policy<http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?t=lmpbrncab.0.0.olnitxbab.0&ts=S0341&p=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.democracyarsenal.org%2F2008%2F05%2Fmccains-disjoin.html&id=preview>
Posted by Ilan Goldenberg

OK, so John McCain is back to wishful thinking today laying out his bold new plan for stemming proliferation.  Obviously, reducing the stockpiles of nuclear weapons is critical to American and world security.  But his plan misses one slightly important detail.  The critical players in this field are obviously Russia and the United States - by far the two largest nuclear powers in the world.  McCain proposes a close working relationship with the Russians on these issues, and yet just two months ago in Los Angeles when he laid out his view of the world, he suggested tossing Russia out of the G8 - a needlessly provocative act that would essentially mark the start of a new Cold War in Europe.  On top of that he continues to support a regional missile defense system for Europe, which a crucial nuclear security concern for the Russians. Does he really think that he can alienate the Russians and at the same time get their cooperation on critical nuclear issues?  Is he that divorced from reality?  Or is he just ignoring what he said two months ago?  Either way, it doesn't make much sense.

Here is what he said<http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?t=lmpbrncab.0.0.olnitxbab.0&ts=S0341&p=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.johnmccain.com%2FInforming%2FNews%2FSpeeches%2F872473dd-9ccb-4ab4-9d0d-ec54f0e7a497.htm&id=preview> at the Los Angeles Council on World Affairs:
We should start by ensuring that the G-8, the group of eight highly industrialized states, becomes again a club of leading market democracies: it should include Brazil and India but exclude Russia.  Rather than tolerate Russia's nuclear blackmail or cyber attacks, Western nations should make clear that the solidarity of NATO, from the Baltic to the Black Sea, is indivisible and that the organization's doors remain open to all democracies committed to the defense of freedom.

And here is what he is saying today:
As our two countries possess the overwhelming majority of the world's nuclear weapons, we have a special responsibility to reduce their number. I believe we should reduce our nuclear forces to the lowest level we judge necessary, and we should be prepared to enter into a new arms control agreement with Russia reflecting the nuclear reductions I will seek. Further, we should be able to agree with Russia on binding verification measures based on those currently in effect under the START Agreement, to enhance confidence and transparency.

McCain's basic plan is to slap the Russians smack across the face and then ask them for a favor.  Somehow I don't think that will work.

May 27, 2008 at 09:34 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

McCain apparently does not understand US policy toward Iran <http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?t=lmpbrncab.0.0.olnitxbab.0&ts=S0341&p=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.democracyarsenal.org%2F2008%2F05%2Fmccain-apparent.html&id=preview>
Posted by Max Bergmann

In John McCain's speech today he says something very very puzzling:
Many believe all we need to do to end the nuclear programs of hostile governments is have our president talk with leaders in Pyongyang and Tehran, as if we haven't tried talking to these governments repeatedly over the past two decades.

So McCain thinks that the President of the United States has been negotiating with the Iranians for the past two decades? Huh? Does McCain not understand that the stated policy of the U.S. government since April 7, 1980 has been to NOT TALK TO THE IRANIANS. And that we have not negotiated with Iran over their nuclear weapons program.

May 27, 2008 at 09:51 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

McCain More Extreme Than Bush on North Korea <http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?t=lmpbrncab.0.0.olnitxbab.0&ts=S0341&p=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.democracyarsenal.org%2F2008%2F05%2Fmccain-more-ext.html&id=preview>
Posted by Ilan Goldenberg

So on top of North Korea McCain decides that on North Korea it's actually better to be more extreme than George Bush.  From 2000-2006 the Administration pursued a failed policy that got us no closer to eliminating the nuclear threat and actually ended with the detonation of a North Korean nuclear bomb.  Now McCain says he wants to return to that policy:
American leadership is also needed on North Korea. We must use the leverage available from the U.N. Security Council resolution passed after Pyongyang's 2006 nuclear test to ensure the full and complete declaration, disablement and irreversible dismantlement of its nuclear facilities, in a verifiable manner, which we agreed to with the other members of the six-party talks.

Seems innocent enough, except it didn't work for six years and has now been dismissed by all but the hardest line Bush Administration officials.  Glen Kessler has more<http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?t=lmpbrncab.0.0.olnitxbab.0&ts=S0341&p=http%3A%2F%2Fblog.washingtonpost.com%2Fthe-trail%2F2008%2F05%2F26%2Fmccain_breaks_with_bush_over_n.html&id=preview>.

May 27, 2008 at 09:31 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

What is John McCain talking about? <http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?t=lmpbrncab.0.0.olnitxbab.0&ts=S0341&p=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.democracyarsenal.org%2F2008%2F05%2Fwhat-is-john-mc.html&id=preview>
Posted by Max Bergmann
I mean really - what is he talking about?

In the Wall Street Journal today, McCain and Lieberman write?
Top leaders in Asia have warned that a precipitous American retreat from Iraq would empower al Qaeda in its global terror campaign and badly undermine America's position in Asia. We should listen to them.

Which top leaders?  Who are they talking about? Do McCain and Lieberman realize that John Howard is no longer Prime Minister of Australia?

May 27, 2008 at 09:21 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

The National Security Network (NSN)<http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?t=i6gps5bab.0.0.olnitxbab.0&ts=S0242&p=http%3A%2F%2Fcapweb.democracyinaction.org%2Fdia%2Ftrack.jsp%3Fkey%3D-1%26url_num%3D5%26url%3Dhttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.nsnetwork.org%2F&id=preview&id=preview> mission is to revitalize America's national security policy, and bring cohesion and strategic focus to the progressive national security community. NSN works with a broad network of experts to identify, develop and communicate progressive national security policy solutions.

[http://img.constantcontact.com/letters/images/safe_unsubscribe_logo.gif]<http://visitor.constantcontact.com/d.jsp?p=un&v=001KZi1d-co_IjEH0Qv-PO0_AXya1t7LIG4g0Av4QgTTHE2EcrPX1yjkJXTIcw8MBjXVSM0CWBE7XlnVUCamxuERJm5jI3VBrF9sTp4vWnv6LCI9FQsKljTT1-coV91VmWM&id=preview.1101377320302&id=preview>
This email was sent to [email-masked], by [email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>
Update Profile/Email Address<http://visitor.constantcontact.com/d.jsp?p=oo&v=001KZi1d-co_IjEH0Qv-PO0_AXya1t7LIG4g0Av4QgTTHE2EcrPX1yjkJXTIcw8MBjXVSM0CWBE7XlnVUCamxuERJm5jI3VBrF9sTp4vWnv6LCI9FQsKljTT1-coV91VmWM&id=preview.1101377320302&id=preview> | Instant removal with SafeUnsubscribe<http://visitor.constantcontact.com/d.jsp?p=un&v=001KZi1d-co_IjEH0Qv-PO0_AXya1t7LIG4g0Av4QgTTHE2EcrPX1yjkJXTIcw8MBjXVSM0CWBE7XlnVUCamxuERJm5jI3VBrF9sTp4vWnv6LCI9FQsKljTT1-coV91VmWM&id=preview.1101377320302&id=preview>(tm) | Privacy Policy<http://ui.constantcontact.com/roving/CCPrivacyPolicy.jsp?id=preview&id=preview>.

Email Marketing<http://www.constantcontact.com/index.jsp?cc=press01&id=preview> by
[http://img.constantcontact.com/letters/images/cc-logo-color-sm.gif]<http://www.constantcontact.com/index.jsp?cc=press01&id=preview>

National Security Network | 1225 Eye St. | Ste. 307 | Washington | DC | 20005

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "big campaign" group.

To post to this group, send to [email-masked]

To unsubscribe, send email to [email-masked]

E-mail [email-masked] with questions or concerns
 
This is a list of individuals. It is not affiliated with any group or organization.
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---