U.S. allies in Europe concerned about a possible failure of New START

A stern President Barack Obama says it is a 'national security imperative' for the Senate to ratify a pending nuclear arms treaty with Russia before ending its work this year.
By Mary Beth Sheridan
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, November 21, 2010; 8:45 PM

President Obama's trip to Europe this past weekend has revealed a growing alarm among U.S. allies over the possible failure of a U.S.-Russia nuclear arms treaty, with many warning that it would hurt the West's efforts to deal with Iran and with Russian weapons near Eastern Europe.

Obama comes home from the NATO summit facing one of the most significant showdowns of his presidency: trying to win ratification of the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) before the Senate adjourns in December.

Jon Kyl (Ariz), the second-ranking Republican senator, said last week he did not think there was time to bring it up during the current lame-duck session.

But Obama has forced the issue, reflecting Democrats' belief that if the treaty is pushed into next year, it could become a political issue for an emboldened Republican Party. The pact currently needs nine Republican votes to pass the full Senate but will need 14 next year.

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton emphasized Sunday that political leaders appealed for passage of the treaty during the NATO summit, including German Chancellor Angela Merkel, NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen and leaders from Eastern and Central Europe.

"Now, why are they saying that? Not because they have a dog in the hunt between Republicans and Democrats in our country. It's because they know that this would be an important treaty for the continuing cooperation between Russia and the United States," she said on "Fox News Sunday."

Kyl, a frequent guest on Sunday talk shows, did not appear. He has said little publicly about the treaty in recent days, but he has continued to hold private talks with Democratic senators.

Not ratifying the treaty could be a deep blow to the U.S. "re-set" with Russia, according to U.S. and foreign officials. The warming relations with Russia have fed closer cooperation on Afghanistan and Iran, with Moscow supporting tougher U.N. sanctions on the latter and canceling the sale of S-300 anti-aircraft missiles to Tehran.

There is another reason that Europeans are worried: Without New START, it will be difficult to carry through on Obama's plans to hold follow-up talks on reducing the thousands of smaller Russian nuclear weapons within range of Eastern and Central Europe. Like its predecessor, signed in 1991, New START deals only with long-range weapons aimed at the United States.

"We see this treaty as a prologue, as an entrance to start talks about sub-strategical weaponry, which is much more even dangerous" than the bigger weapons, said Foreign Minister Audronius Azubalis of Lithuania at a news conference at which six foreign ministers appealed for approval of New START. "We who are living in Eastern Europe especially, know this."

The New START treaty would reduce by up to 30 percent the deployed, long-range warheads of both nuclear giants. It would also restart a system in which inspectors from each country monitor the other's stockpiles, to ensure there is no secret buildup.

For the first time in 15 years, the two nuclear giants are not directly checking on one other's arsenals because of the expiration of the first START treaty a year ago. That worries U.S. military officials; few foresee an immediate threat from Russia, but it remains the only country with sufficient nuclear firepower to destroy the United States.

CONTINUED     1        >

© 2010 The Washington Post Company