Why nuclear-arms treaty is not a deadly mistake

Jacob Heilbrunn

is a senior editor

at the National Interest

Here we go again.

President Obama signed a nuclear-arms-control agreement - the New START - with Russian counterpart Dmitry Medvedev in April in Prague to much fanfare. Senate hearings on the treaty are taking place.

But in a reprise of Cold War debates, hard-liners are seeking to block ratification of the treaty in the Senate, where it needs a two-thirds majority, by depicting the deal as a dangerous sellout to Moscow. The treaty deserves careful scrutiny, but it is in danger of becoming the victim of a hazing campaign.

The Heritage Foundation announces on its website that it "has been leading the charge against New START treaty, as we do with all threats to American sovereignty and independence. And our message is getting through to our target audience in Congress."

Indeed, it is. Senate Minority Whip Jon Kyl (R., Ariz.) is citing the foundation's studies. Other Republican senators expressing doubts include Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, James M. Inhofe of Oklahoma, and Jim DeMint of South Carolina. The most inflammatory attack, however, has come from former presidential candidate Mitt Romney. In an op-ed in the Washington Post, he contended that the treaty represented Obama's "worst foreign-policy mistake yet."

It's not a mistake. The treaty would not eviscerate American national security. It would enhance it, which is why it enjoys the bipartisan support of the Foreign Relations Committee leaders, Sens. John F. Kerry of Massachusetts and Richard G. Lugar of Indiana. It's also why GOP foreign-policy eminences such as Henry Kissinger and George P. Shultz endorse the treaty.

By capping each side's deployed warheads at 1,550, the New START would cut Russia's and America's arsenals about 30 percent. It would also restore verification procedures that lapsed with the expiration of START I. Each Russian missile would be given a unique serial number, and on-site inspections would take place. Tracking nuclear weapons and materials safeguards U.S. security. And the more concerned conservatives are about Russian intentions, the more they should welcome the verification procedures contained in the New START treaty.

But its opponents are not about to let facts stand in their way. They never have. As J. Peter Scoblic shows in his valuable book U.S. Versus Them, the right has a long, misguided history of fulminating against nuclear arms control.