He pledged to secure all nuclear materials within four years. He wanted “a new treaty that verifiably ends the production of fissile materials intended for use in state nuclear weapons.” Not even close. Obama hoped that by now he would have secured Senate approval of the nuclear test ban treaty, which he promised to “immediately and aggressively pursue.” Didn’t happen. Impressive, but these accomplishments fall short of the policy transformation Obama sought. The New York Times called it “potentially one of the most consequential accords in recent diplomatic history.” Nuclear experts overwhelmingly agree the agreement stops the weapons threat from Iran and makes the world safer. If it works, “it will be the major foreign policy achievement not only of this presidency but of this generation,” said Rachel Maddow. He offered Iran a choice at Prague between “increased isolation, international pressure and a potential nuclear arms race in the region” or “engagement.based on mutual interests and mutual respect.” The resulting dialogue produced a diplomatic triumph that prevented a war with Iran many thought inevitable. Obama’s most important achievement was the seven-nation accord that rolled back Iran’s nuclear program and put it under lock and camera. Many other nations increased the security around their supplies and joined conventions against nuclear terrorism. Since the summits began, 12 countries eliminated weapons-usable nuclear material, including 200 kilograms of highly enriched uranium from Ukraine - enough for four bombs - just months before that nation convulsed in conflict. “His well-conceived, confidently executed three-part movement in statecraft this month should banish the notion that Obama’s ambitious nuclear goals spring from naiveté or inexperience.” foreign policy, “ wrote Washington Post columnist Jim Hoagland. “President Obama has turned the once utopian-sounding idea of global nuclear disarmament into a useful tool for U.S. He impressed global audiences and domestic skeptics. Obama successfully linked idealistic goals to practical, near-term security objectives. Eighty-eight percent of all the living former secretaries of state supported the project, as did 70 percent of all former national security advisors and 62 percent of all former secretaries of defense.īy April 2010, Obama had hit a nuclear trifecta: a new Nuclear Posture Review promised to reduce the role and number of US nuclear weapons a treaty with Russia kept critical verification measures intact and trimmed both nations’ long-range nuclear arsenals and the first Nuclear Security Summit, the largest convening ever of heads of state focused on nuclear policy. McCain and Obama were backed by scores of former military and national security leaders, including 17 former cabinet members, as well as former generals, senior officials, nuclear scholars, and Democrat and Republican politicians. John McCain, R-Ariz., the GOP nominee, “and the time has come to take further measures to reduce dramatically the number of nuclear weapons in the world's arsenals.” “The Cold War ended almost 20 years ago,” said Sen. There was little debate on this score in the 2008 campaign. Every move away from the immorality of nuclear use makes us more human. Every reduction in the global stockpile of 15,000 nuclear weapons makes us safer. Obama achieved only a fraction of what he had hoped. Seven years ago this April, in his first foreign policy speech as president, Obama pledged “to seek the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons.” He detailed an ambitious program in his Prague address, including an initiative to unite world leaders to secure all nuclear bomb material from terrorists. Barnum said, “Always leave them wanting more.” If the fourth and final Nuclear Security Summit this week is President Barack Obama’s closing nuclear act, he will certainly be following Barnum’s dictum.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |