SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
The Obama administration is considering a major reduction in nuclear
weapons to as little as 1,000 warheads each for Russia and the U.S.,
according to a recent article in The Times of London.
Surprisingly, this story has received almost no attention in the U.S.
media, although it may represent the most important progress in
non-proliferation in many years.
The Obama team will reconsider
the Bush administration's plan for a missile defense deployment in
Eastern Europe -- a deployment the Russians have strongly opposed,
according to the article. Obama pledged during his campaign to open
talks with Moscow on the Start treaty, which expires at the end of the
year. That agreement calls for both countries to reduce their
stockpiles from about 10,000 to about 5,000.
But going to 1,000 would mark a major additional reduction. According to David Krieger, head of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation, "This news is not just noteworthy, it could be a game-changer."
The Times quoted an unnamed administration official as saying: "Nobody would be surprised if the number reduced to the 1,000 mark for the post-Start treaty."
"Imagine
what a message these talks would send to other nuclear countries,"
Krieger said in an email to supporters. "Suddenly, U.S. leadership
would be unequivocal, and there would be pressure on all nuclear
nations to join in the process."
The world's nuclear stockpile
stands at about 25,000 nuclear weapons, the vast majority of which are
held by Russia and the United States.
This news falls in line with President Obama's promise during the campaign to seek a nuclear-free world:
"I
will set a goal of a world without nuclear weapons. To seek that goal,
I will not develop new nuclear weapons; I will seek a global ban on the
production of fissile material; and I will negotiate with Russia to
take our ICBMs off hair-trigger alert, and to achieve deep cuts in our
nuclear arsenals."
There's at least some support for a nuclear-free future from the other side of the aisle. George Shultz, secretary of state in the Reagan administration, told me in a YES!
interview that he believes the world can be safe from the global hazard
of nuclear warfare, terrorism, or accident only by eliminating nuclear
weapons.
Political revenge. Mass deportations. Project 2025. Unfathomable corruption. Attacks on Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. Pardons for insurrectionists. An all-out assault on democracy. Republicans in Congress are scrambling to give Trump broad new powers to strip the tax-exempt status of any nonprofit he doesn’t like by declaring it a “terrorist-supporting organization.” Trump has already begun filing lawsuits against news outlets that criticize him. At Common Dreams, we won’t back down, but we must get ready for whatever Trump and his thugs throw at us. Our Year-End campaign is our most important fundraiser of the year. As a people-powered nonprofit news outlet, we cover issues the corporate media never will, but we can only continue with our readers’ support. By donating today, please help us fight the dangers of a second Trump presidency. |
The Obama administration is considering a major reduction in nuclear
weapons to as little as 1,000 warheads each for Russia and the U.S.,
according to a recent article in The Times of London.
Surprisingly, this story has received almost no attention in the U.S.
media, although it may represent the most important progress in
non-proliferation in many years.
The Obama team will reconsider
the Bush administration's plan for a missile defense deployment in
Eastern Europe -- a deployment the Russians have strongly opposed,
according to the article. Obama pledged during his campaign to open
talks with Moscow on the Start treaty, which expires at the end of the
year. That agreement calls for both countries to reduce their
stockpiles from about 10,000 to about 5,000.
But going to 1,000 would mark a major additional reduction. According to David Krieger, head of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation, "This news is not just noteworthy, it could be a game-changer."
The Times quoted an unnamed administration official as saying: "Nobody would be surprised if the number reduced to the 1,000 mark for the post-Start treaty."
"Imagine
what a message these talks would send to other nuclear countries,"
Krieger said in an email to supporters. "Suddenly, U.S. leadership
would be unequivocal, and there would be pressure on all nuclear
nations to join in the process."
The world's nuclear stockpile
stands at about 25,000 nuclear weapons, the vast majority of which are
held by Russia and the United States.
This news falls in line with President Obama's promise during the campaign to seek a nuclear-free world:
"I
will set a goal of a world without nuclear weapons. To seek that goal,
I will not develop new nuclear weapons; I will seek a global ban on the
production of fissile material; and I will negotiate with Russia to
take our ICBMs off hair-trigger alert, and to achieve deep cuts in our
nuclear arsenals."
There's at least some support for a nuclear-free future from the other side of the aisle. George Shultz, secretary of state in the Reagan administration, told me in a YES!
interview that he believes the world can be safe from the global hazard
of nuclear warfare, terrorism, or accident only by eliminating nuclear
weapons.
The Obama administration is considering a major reduction in nuclear
weapons to as little as 1,000 warheads each for Russia and the U.S.,
according to a recent article in The Times of London.
Surprisingly, this story has received almost no attention in the U.S.
media, although it may represent the most important progress in
non-proliferation in many years.
The Obama team will reconsider
the Bush administration's plan for a missile defense deployment in
Eastern Europe -- a deployment the Russians have strongly opposed,
according to the article. Obama pledged during his campaign to open
talks with Moscow on the Start treaty, which expires at the end of the
year. That agreement calls for both countries to reduce their
stockpiles from about 10,000 to about 5,000.
But going to 1,000 would mark a major additional reduction. According to David Krieger, head of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation, "This news is not just noteworthy, it could be a game-changer."
The Times quoted an unnamed administration official as saying: "Nobody would be surprised if the number reduced to the 1,000 mark for the post-Start treaty."
"Imagine
what a message these talks would send to other nuclear countries,"
Krieger said in an email to supporters. "Suddenly, U.S. leadership
would be unequivocal, and there would be pressure on all nuclear
nations to join in the process."
The world's nuclear stockpile
stands at about 25,000 nuclear weapons, the vast majority of which are
held by Russia and the United States.
This news falls in line with President Obama's promise during the campaign to seek a nuclear-free world:
"I
will set a goal of a world without nuclear weapons. To seek that goal,
I will not develop new nuclear weapons; I will seek a global ban on the
production of fissile material; and I will negotiate with Russia to
take our ICBMs off hair-trigger alert, and to achieve deep cuts in our
nuclear arsenals."
There's at least some support for a nuclear-free future from the other side of the aisle. George Shultz, secretary of state in the Reagan administration, told me in a YES!
interview that he believes the world can be safe from the global hazard
of nuclear warfare, terrorism, or accident only by eliminating nuclear
weapons.