Obama’s Nuclear Policy Legacy on the Line

October 22, 2014 | Edited by Jacob Marx and Will Saetren

Safer world, more savings - “If President Obama wants to use his last two years to further his agenda, [there's] something he could do that would both advance the cause of global security and save the country money,” writes Joe Cirincione in the Los Angeles Times. “Suspend plans to develop a new arsenal of American nuclear weapons.”

--“Unless something is done soon, we will lay out as much as a trillion dollars over the next few decades to replace our obsolete Cold War nuclear arsenal. We will buy thousands of new hydrogen bombs and mount them on hundreds of new missiles and planes...Proponents claim the spending is necessary to assure the nation's security. But history shows that buildups like this trigger new arms races, inspiring other nations to match or exceed our capabilities.”

--“Instead of blindly moving ahead with building submarines and other expensive nuclear paraphernalia, let's determine our actual needs. Let's fully examine whether modifying existing submarine designs might suffice. And while we're at it, let's talk about a range of other expensive nuclear weaponry on the drawing boards.” To quote Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.),“It is time to think creatively about how to maintain a much smaller nuclear deterrent at an affordable cost.” As the author asks, “Who could disagree with that?” Read the full op-ed here. http://goo.gl/CR7VJW

By the numbers - Want a breakdown of how the U.S. is about to spend $1 trillion on new nuclear weapons? Michael Corones of Reuters has the numbers in a new infographic here. http://goo.gl/wuZGeK

$41 billion wasted and counting - Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) goes after missile defense in a new report on the 100 most wasteful government programs. “Despite obvious flaws, the Missile Defense Agency and Congress are moving forward with a $1 billion decision based on a 30% success rate in tests that fail to replicate in a real world scenario...By the time it is completed, the Defense Department will have spent more than $41 billion on a missile defense system.” Read the full report here, with missile defense on page 42. http://goo.gl/HlgULW

About Congress’ role - David Sanger's story in The New York Times about the Obama administration using executive authority to make an Iran deal has Congress up in arms. But as Paul Pillar writes in The National Interest, “we all know what's going on and what's at stake here. The more of a role Congress does play in the immediate aftermath of signing a deal, the greater the chance that elements opposed to anyone reaching any agreement with Iran on anything will be able to torpedo the deal.”

--“There is good reason that the Constitution placed the power to declare war with the people's representatives in Congress. It is a major and potentially highly costly departure. Expending blood and treasure in warfare is one of the riskiest and most consequential things the nation can do. As has been demonstrated painfully and recently, going to war has a way of dragging the nation into even costlier and longer-lasting commitments. An agreement of the sort being negotiated with Iran is none of those things.”

--“The agreement would impose no new costs on the nation...It does not create, as warfare does, any new exceptions to normal peacetime relations with other states…[It does not] impose any new legal obligations on U.S. persons...It does not mark a departure in national goals and objectives, because it is an almost unanimously shared objective that Iran not acquire a nuclear weapon. The issue instead is what is the best way of executing policy to achieve that objective; that is part of what the executive branch is supposed to do.” Read the full column here. http://goo.gl/558jrf

Tenuous, but legal - “There are many different statutory sanctions against Iran, and Congress’s most recent word – from 2012– tightens and narrows the President’s authority to waive the sanctions,” writes Jack Goldsmith for Lawfare. “Without getting into the details, it nonetheless appears that the President can waive most if not all sanctions against Iran for the remaining two years of his term if he is willing to make the requisite findings. If he does so, what are the implications for any nuclear deal with Iran? Answer: The deal will be tenuous.” Read the full blog here. http://goo.gl/13J6Vc

Tweet - @Cirincione: "Caving to Iran" is the new neocon meme for any #IranDeal short of Rome's victory over Carthage.

Deep engagement - “U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said on a visit to Berlin on Wednesday that the Obama administration planned to fully consult Congress about ongoing negotiations with Iran over its nuclear program,” reports Reuters. “‘I personally believe, as does the president, that Congress has an extremely important role to play in this and Congress will play a role in this,’ Kerry said in response to a question about whether U.S. lawmakers might be shut out of the decision-making process.” Read the full story here.http://goo.gl/uBtbjk

Response from the Hill - A few Democrats are mildly displeased about the recent New York Times story on using presidential authorities over sanctions to secure a deal with Iran. "As negotiations continue on a deal to prevent a nuclear Iran, Congress cannot be circumvented," said New York Rep. Steve Israel in a statement.

--”Congressional action at the outset of an agreement is premature," said Kelsey Davenport of the Arms Control Association. "In a final deal, when Iran's commitment to a peaceful and verifiably limited nuclear program is well established, Congress will need to weigh in and lift sanctions. In the initial phases of an agreement, using presidential waivers to grant relief to Iran maintains the leverage created by sanctions and provides incentive to Iran to follow through on its obligations." John Hudson at Foreign Policy has the story. http://goo.gl/nwnV9K

American released - North Korea unexpectedly released Jeffrey Fowle today, an American who was being held on charges that he had distributed religious propaganda, reports AFP. The release “may be aimed at prising open the door to direct talks with Washington, but the road to a genuine dialogue remains long and strewn with obstacles, analysts said Wednesday.”

--"‘Usually we see a clear lead-up to this sort of thing, but not in this case,’ said Paul Carroll, a North Korea expert and programme director at the Ploughshares Fund in San Francisco. ‘It could mean the North Korean leadership is interested in exploring what might be possible in terms of picking up a conversation with the US again.’”

--"It's a positive sign, especially if it's followed by the release of the others, but in the end it only removes an irritant. Resuming a dialogue is still many, many steps away,” said John Delury. “Together with ally South Korea, the United States has maintained that high-level talks can only take place after the North shows a genuine commitment to abandoning its nuclear weapons programme,” a step which has yet to be taken. Read the full story here. http://goo.gl/FtmxKL

Banning testing - “Tensions with Russia, an ongoing arms race in Asia, threats of terrorism and other fears should not stop the U.S. from pursuing the ratification of an international treaty to end all nuclear testing,” Rose Gottemoeller said on Monday. Read the full story here. http://goo.gl/ryOpSh

Quick Hits:

--“A Response to Critics of U.S.-Russian Nuclear Security Cooperation,” by Nickolas Roth of the Harvard Kennedy School. http://goo.gl/Li6gAH

--Sixty-Ninth UNGA First Committee Thematic Discussion on Nuclear Weapons, Remarks of Ambassador Robert A. Wood, Alternate Representative, Delegation of the United States of America. http://goo.gl/LeJvdW

--“Is Iran About to Blow It?” by John Allen Gay for The National Interest. http://goo.gl/qFSlUa

Events:

--"The Building Blocks Approach for a World without Nuclear Weapons," featuring Hiro Yamamoto, Japanese ambassador to the Conference on Disarmament; Theo Peters, Dutch Foreign Ministry; John Burroughs, Lawyers Committee on Nuclear Policy; and Alyn Ware, Parliamentarians for Non-Proliferation and Disarmament. Sponsored by Japan, Netherlands and the Global Security Institute. Oct. 22 1:15-2:30 p.m. United Nations, Conference Room 6. RSVP by email. http://bit.ly/1yUXL3S

--"Iran And The Arab World After The Nuclear Deadline: Possible Scenarios,” featuring Mehrzad Boroujerdi, Syracuse University, Abbas Kadhim, SAIS, and Geneive Abdo, Stimson Center. Oct. 23, 9:30-11:00am., The Stimson Center, 1111 19th Street, NW, 12th Floor, Washington DC, 20036. http://bit.ly/1oeinAG

--"After the Scottish Referendum: What are the Future Transatlantic Security Implications?," featuring Des Browne, former U.K. Defense Secretary, and Franklin Miller, Scowcroft Group. Oct. 23, 10:00-11:30 a.m., Center for Strategic and International Studies, 1616 Rhode Island Ave. NW, Washington. Register online. http://bit.ly/1Cxle8Q

--"Current and Future Challenges for Nuclear Security, Nonproliferation and Verification," featuring Rose Gottemoeller, Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security. Oct. 23, 12:45-1:45 p.m., MIT 24-213, MIT, Cambridge, MA. Details here. http://bit.ly/124iwwv

--"Future Prospects for U.S.-Russian Arms Control," featuring Rose Gottemoeller, Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security. Oct. 23, 2:00-3:30 p.m., 54-100, Green Building, MIT, Cambridge, MA. Details here. http://bit.ly/1whXnJe

--“EU-Coordinated P5+1 Nuclear Negotiations with Iran,” featuring Wendy Sherman, Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs, Sponsored by Syracuse University and the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs. Oct. 23, 5:00 p.m., at Center for Strategic and International Studies, 1616 Rhode Island Ave. NW, Washington. RSVP online.http://bit.ly/1r8qMkL

--“Debate: Should the United States Cut its Nuclear Arsenal?” Featuring Adam Mount, Council on Foreign Relations; Tom Collina, Ploughshares Fund; Matthew Kroenig, Georgetown University; and Thomas Moore, Wilson Center. Oct. 23, 6:00-8:00 p.m., George Washington University, Room B17, 1957 E St. NW, Washington. RSVP online. http://bit.ly/1w0dQSi

--"Spiral of Resistance: The Effect of Coercive Diplomacy on Iran’s Nuclear Program," featuring Ebrahim Mohseni, University of Tehran. 10:30 a.m.-noon, Oct. 28, Harvard University, Belfer Center Library, Littauer 369, Cambridge, MA. RSVP to Hanieh Mohammadi by email. http://goo.gl/s1iRtb

--"Preventing Nuclear Terrorism Globally: Results and Remaining Challenges," featuring Deepti Choubey. Oct. 29, 9:00-11:00 a.m. at the Foreign Policy Institute,1717 Massachusetts Ave. NW, Room 500, Washington. Register online. http://bit.ly/1yaVfn3