Secretary Clinton Delivers Remarks on New START Treaty Ratification

Posted by DipNote Bloggers
August 11, 2010
Secretary Clinton Delivers Remarks on New START Treaty Ratification

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton delivered remarks on the ratification of the new START treaty at the U.S. Department of State in Washington, D.C., on August 11, 2010. The Secretary was joined by Assistant Secretary of State for Verification,
Compliance, and Implementation Rose Gottemoeller and Assistant Secretary of State for the Bureau of Legislative Affairs Richard Verma.

Secretary Clinton said, "In the weeks and months since the treaty was submitted to the Senate, it has earned bipartisan support from senators on both sides of the aisle as well as statesmen in and out of government from both parties. They understand that once the new START treaty is ratified and enters into force, it will advance our national security and provide stability and predictability between the world's two leading nuclear powers."

The Secretary continued, "This treaty will verifiably limit the strategic nuclear forces of Russia and the United States and will establish equal limits on both countries' strategic warheads, delivery vehicles, and launchers.""This treaty will provide for inspections that the United States would not otherwise be able to hold. For 15 years, START provided us access to monitor and inspect Russia's nuclear arsenal. START, as you know, expired last December. It, therefore, has been more than eight months since we have had inspectors on the ground in Russia. This is a critical point. Opposing ratification means opposing the inspections that provide us a vital window into Russia's arsenal. This treaty in no way does or will constrain our ability to modernize our nuclear enterprise or develop and deploy the most effective missile defenses for the sake of our security and for our allies, friends, and partners."

In closing, Secretary Clinton said, "There is an urgency to ratify this treaty because we currently lack verification measures with Russia which only hurts our national security interests. Our ability to know and understand changes in Russia's nuclear arsenal will erode without the treaty. As time passes, uncertainty will increase. With uncertainty comes unpredictability, which, when you're dealing with nuclear weapons, is absolutely a problem that must be addressed. Ratifying the new START treaty will prevent that outcome."

Read the Secretary's full remarks here.

Comments

Comments

K V.
|
India
August 12, 2010

K.S.V. in India writes:

The new START treaty is viewed by non-partisan observers outside America as the outcome of most sincere efforts taken by the US President, Barack Obama towards ensuring global peace, which is only possible by complete nuclear disarmament. Reducing the nuclear arms to zero level may be a distant dream now; but even a thousand miles journey begins with a small step. It may have to be a small step but I wish it be a firm and timely step.

donald m.
|
Virginia, USA
August 13, 2010

Donald M. in Virginia writes:

August 13, 2010

So Iran purchases the Air Defense Missiles from a third party country, yet the Missiles were manufactured in Russia... I guess sanctions really worked?... The Treaty with Russia has paid off for the Russians, while they plan on providing the fuel for the Nuclear Reactors. The reset switch must be switching pretty good, when they profit from selling arms and laughing at the United States. Most likely because the have empathy and smiling at President Barack Obama. They know he doesn't have the foreign policy skills and took advantage of the situation. Being naive to Russia only proves how unsecure our future holds for the United States, and it certainly will be no excuses or blaming because he lead the way to the treaty.

Apparently, its reseted when they want to sell weapons and arms to countries that have sanctions. Wait...he found a loophole in the system to sell missiles to Iran?

Hook, line and sinker... smamboozled by the bear....(chuckle chuckle) then to find out the BP OIL CEO is heading to Russia?

I think most people with intelligence has figured out by now that the BP OIL RIG might not have been an accident. So do the math and figure it out...

I agree with Jospeh A.M. in Oregon, we provide good feedback on here, and you guys get paid the big bucks... so I guess i'm in the same situation that why should we be giving free advise when you pay people hundreds of thousands of dollars for advise and apparently its NOT working. Think I'm going to spend my time working on other projects since this one is NOT beneficial to my family.

Peace out and Good Luck!!! whats that phrase, see y'all in the funny pages? (Chuckle chuckle)

Eric
|
New Mexico, USA
August 13, 2010

Eric in New Mexico writes:

Hi Donald,

Don't give up in disgust bro, I don't know where you heard that but it may not be accurate, as this shows who's really backing Iran in air defense capability.

News Item;

(excerpts)

August 12, 2009: While Iran has been unable to get modern Russian S300 surface-to-air missiles (yet), they have gone ahead and built a nationwide air defense network using Chinese HQ2 missiles. These were first purchased in the 1980s, but since then, Iran progressed to the point where they are now building HQ2 missiles and radar stations under license. It's believed that China has quietly allowed Iran to build the latest versions of the HQ2 as well. These are not quite as effective as the S300, but are pretty formidable.

...

American electronic countermeasures can probably defeat all models of the HQ-2. Newer models of the HQ-2 have a range of 40 kilometers, and will hit the target 70 percent of the time (if there are no countermeasures.) The HQ-2 radars have a hard time dealing with stealthy aircraft, and the radar is needed to guide the missile to its target (via radio signals from the ground to the missile).

Source; strategypage.com

---

Now about that bill we'll send to China....

(winky wink)

I'll just let the thought dangle...

"Hey Mr. Hu, do you want to divest now or pay later?"

Eric
|
New Mexico, USA
August 13, 2010

Eric in New Mexico writes:

BBC News Item;

Russia says it will undertake a key step next week towards starting up a reactor at Iran's first nuclear power station.

Russia's state atomic corporation, which is building the plant, said engineers will begin loading the Bushehr reactor with fuel.

...

"The fuel will be charged in the reactor on 21 August. From this moment, Bushehr will be considered a nuclear installation," spokesman Sergei Novikov said.

---

I've always felt that this blog, Dipnote...(short for "diplomatic note" should have this "special channel" for the citizen to post a note to world leaders and news makers directly.

See, it will take many minds to stop this car in time.

So let's give it a whirl and see what comes of it...

To; Sergei Novakov
CC Sergei Lavrov, FM

Re; Bushehr

Gentleman, what we have here is a failure to communicate.

Apparently you think it's ok to give a non-peaceful regime the means to atomic power production.

When "Atoms for Peace" was concieved, we didn't have what folks call "sponsors of terror" back in those days.

Now get a grip and figure it out, a state sponsor of terror has voided all soverign right to the peaceful use of atomic energy.

If the international community is not ready to ascribe to this as policy under the rule of law, you will never create a safer world to live in.

I say this to you as I would say this to my own government, so please don't take this Dipnote too personally.

Thanks for your consideration on this.

EJ

--end dipnote--

donald m.
|
Virginia, USA
August 13, 2010

Donald M. in Virginia writes:

@Eric in New Mexico

I'm still here... I did notice the big fire in Russia... the fact is you don't need missiles to take out missiles like Bush hinted with the air to air strike. Most likely one of the best ways to defeat this missile will be on the ground before you go in with bombers. Actually, if you take away his "eyes in radar" he wouldn't be able to fire it...and if he did fire it, most likely wouldn't keep the track, another words a good old fashioned sand storm would do the trick... kick up some of that Iranian sand where they keep these Missile launchers...I used to work at an Air Defense Facility in Saudi Arabia, Prince Sultan years ago...

The "Sand will be the key element of deception" or just sandbag the Missile Launchers, eventually they would be so deep in sand they can't fire.

I guess, I was a little dis-appointed when I heard about the Joint Fighting Command in Norfolk, Va being closed down, people losing jobs in Virginia...

China and Russia might have teamed up, both have committments with Iran. Both countries are making money on arms deals. Makes for some interesting challenges ahead...

The 2012 year might come sooner then anyone imagined.

Now would be an excellent time to show a little force, other than the leader being in the box, time to turn up the HEAT!!!

The days of talk for the Leader of Iran have run dry... He had the Opportunity to come to the table... now should be the time to act...before its too late...

I guess, I can also be added to the funny pages...hehehehe

Eric
|
New Mexico, USA
August 13, 2010

Eric in New Mexico writes:

@Donald,

First things first , if sending a bill is the only way to convince China we're serious about them not coddling and arming rouge terrorist regimes, the cost/benefit analysis alone should provide incentive for them to remove "lil Kim.

Rather than "forcing them" it is more like "reasoning" with them in the long-term context.

Saying to them "Here, this is what it has cost us so far to maintain the peace on the Korean peninsula for tha last 50 years, oh, and here's what it's cost S Korea and Japan as well and since the situation has developed to this point, we believe at any point in time up till now China could have removed the threat altogether had you seen the wisdom of doing so. Now we're asking you to before we seek to collect on this ammount, and if "Lil Kim starts a war before you remove him, we'll be forced to send you a follow-up bill to this." (and give a rough estimatated breakdown they can look forward to)

Then you talk about the reaction of the American public to our troops being killed by Chinese made weapons... supporting terrorists, and nuclear idiots that are trying their best to start wars with us...etc etc...they'll get the picture.

Vs. Ending the threats posed by Iran and N. Korea as our partner and trading together happily ever after.

A unified Korea would only help the region's overall economic growth, and that is in China's interest.

This can't happen with a build-up of Chinese arms across the straits, nor disputes over territorial waters.

So if we're going to draw new borders one way or another ( if war happens ) so might as well draw them so folks can live with the arrangement without further hassle.

If China truly wants peace and stability , it will take a hit in divesting from Iran, and removing the NK regime from power, but it gains it's long term goals in the process.

"no pain, no gain"

It's not a welcome choice, but an essential choice they must make.

We have to show them what it means to be a responsible member of the international community, and what happens when they fail to be.

I'm sure folks have talked with them, but did the get it? It doesn't seems so, and it's time for a different approach.

As I said, "I don't do wait and see very well", especially with ethical infants thretening nuclear war whenever they feel like it.

donald m.
|
Virginia, USA
August 14, 2010

Donald M. in Virginia writes:

@Eric in New Mexico

I agree, if the evidence proves China is behind selling Iran Missiles, or weapons to the Taliban then they should receive a "Whoppper of a Bill" especially since our forces have been in Korea for the past 50 years. Subsequently, knowing that Sanctions have been placed on Iran. I had a hunch that China may have been selling the Taliban weapons. China is a very close ally of North Korea, and even sending them a bill won't change that fact. Allies are like brothers, you would stand by your brother in time of trouble, China wants to be the big brother of North Korea, Just like Saudi Arabia had been the big money sugar daddy of the Middle East giving big money to Egypt and Pakistan.

Did people forget or have short memories when the toys from china were painted with lead paint? They shipped God knows how many toys to the United States and other countries with lead painted toys. While the current administration praises China because they borrowed so Many Billions of dollars, placing our Nation in a vunerable security situation. It was China vessels "Crewmembers" that were Mocking our Sailors at sea. This embarassment should not have been placed on our people, especially when they are trained to combat in time of war. What should of happened is Car Manufactures, Mortgage Companies and banks if they foreclose, they sell off the business and someone else picks up the pieces. Once the situation happened with our Sailors, the President of the United States, President Barack Obama, should have given the money back to China. How in the world can President Barack Obama claim China was our best ally when they have never stepped into Battle with our forces. United Kingdom and France have, China did not.

I can't help but think our forces in Afghanistan are in a unique situation. Pakistan can lure Taliban members into its country being a Muslim State. I would say if the Prime Minister of the President of Pakistan has his secuirty Staff on the ball, we wouldn't see our troops under fire in Afghanistan.

However, that will not change the current situation with Iran. Pragmatic to say the least with 4 US Americans in custody. I would think the leader of Iran would try the same nonsense Saddam Hussain forces used in Iraq, which would be to use them as "Human Shields." The State Department should be prepared for all kinds of situations in this country.

I also understand that the Joint Chief of Staff has a plan to deal with Iran. I believe the Admiral when he says, "We have a plan." It should make the leader of Iran think twice about stocking up missiles. Since he continues to be defiant, its only a matter of time before he feels the wrath the United States can deliver on a country that refuses to even communicate when so many offers were given to resolve the standoff.

I'm actually more concerned about the woman they plan on stoning to death. This is so lame. One day God will Judge the Leader of Iran, and I seriously doubt his closet is clean.

Eric
|
New Mexico, USA
August 14, 2010

Eric in New Mexico writes:

I'm not judging China's intent Donald, just the result of its actions, and I don't know what's worse if they have the same effect, blind stupidity or greed and malice?

Que no?

donald m.
|
Virginia, USA
August 15, 2010

Donald M. in Virginia writes:

@Eric in New Mexico

Isn't that about the same principal when it comes to the New Mosque they plan on building in New York, 100 Million dollars. Greed instead of thinking about the 911 victims or the Fire Fighters who perished in the building. People agree they can build a mosque in the United States but being close to where a Memorial of over 3,000 people perished by Islamic Terrorists shows how they won the city of New York. I guess it's only a matter of time before they start having prayer calls around the clock in New York City from the tower of the Mosques like its done in the Arab world.

China should be held responsible and account for its action if they are behind selling weapons to the Taliban or Iran. Greed should not be a pass for political gains.

donald m.
|
Virginia, USA
August 15, 2010

Donald M. in Virginia writes:

The CIA has its motto inscribed in stone just inside the front door : “And ye shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free.”

Eric
|
New Mexico, USA
August 15, 2010

Eric in New Mexico writes:

I think the President said all I would have ever had to say on that subject anyway Donald.

Now if terrorists were trying to build a memorial to bin Laden on the WTC site, I'd be the first to blow it up.

But no one's doing that and folks that think Muslims are , by building a mosque, need to get a real good grip on themselves.

Since you asked...(chuckle).

Eric
|
New Mexico, USA
August 16, 2010

Eric in New Mexico writes:

Dipnote Bloggers, PJ Crowley, and "powers that be" in gov. ...(you know who you are)

We need a "New Start" with China as well, and I was just reading, along with this item included here from BBC NEWS how Pres. Lee of Korea is looking to institute a 1.2-3 trillon dollar "tax" that would pay for reunification costs after all was sais and done...(presented as a reasonable proposition to the North Korean gov. in his speech along with his people.)

It's not clear who he'd be asking to pay for that tax, but we all know where he can send the bill I suppose...

11 day excercises have begun, and I think China will turn blue holding its collective breath, unless they exhale and blow 'lil Kim away to prevent further stupidity from being uttered or initiated by that terrorist regime.

(forget re-designating NK a "sponsor of terror", 'lil Kim has graduated to terrorist status.)

I wonder what PJ Crowley would say for this Dept. regarding that last thought, officially.

Since he hasn't blogged here in awile, I figured a "citizen's public invitation" to is certainly appropriate under these circumstance.

6 party talks are "dead in the water", so we'all would love to know what "next steps" look like.

Because we have a pretty good idea what things will look like when all hell breaks loose, and if folks don't have some reasonable "next steps" in mind, State's leaving way to much to random acts of idiocy to dictate the terms of US policy.

May I suggest a joint State dept/DOD briefing with the heads of agencies on this subject?

Include the President, if the secretaries get too hard a question that's beyond their job description to answer.

Point being in being absolutely crystal clear with the American public, and all the other audiences out there listening.

It's time.

Source; BBC

"The military counteraction of the DPRK [Democratic People's Republic of Korea] will be the severest punishment no one has ever met in the world," a spokesman for the General Staff of the Korean People's Army said in a statement carried by North Korea's official news agency.

North Korea's statement Sunday took direct aim at U.S. President Barack Obama.

"The Obama Administration would be well advised to cool its head heated with the moves to isolate and stifle the DPRK," the spokesman for the General Staff of the Korean People's Army said, "and deeply ponder over what the DPRK meant when it clarified its resolute determination and solemn declaration to defend the country and the nation."

---

Thanks, Hope they consider the resoning behind my simple request.

EJ

.

Latest Stories

Pages