Let's make a deal

Posted By Stephen M. Walt Thursday, March 18, 2010 - 12:38 PM Share

I see that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is in Moscow to clinch a new arms control agreement with Russia. I hope she succeeds, although the details of the treaty are probably less significant than people think. Both sides will be left with plenty of nuclear warheads, so the core strategic situation between the two countries won’t be affected very much. An agreement might help both sides save some money and will make each look like it at least trying to fulfill its long-standing obligations in the Non-Proliferation Treaty. (Non-nuclear signatories agreed not to get nukes, but Article VI commits signatories -- including the United States and USSR -- to make good faith efforts at nuclear disarmament).

What I’ll be watching is whether Hillary can close the deal. In general, you shouldn’t send the secretary of state or the president to a big-time negotiation unless you’re pretty confident that the deal is ready and all that’s left are some minor details that will be easy to work out. You might also send the secretary if you needed someone with real status to make a final push, but you’ve got to be ready to walk away if the other side won’t play ball.  Otherwise, your top people look ineffective, or even worse, they look desperate for a deal.  

What worries me is the Obama team’s track record on this front. It was a mistake to send Obama off to shill for Chicago’s bid to host the Olympic games, for example, partly because he’s got better things to do, but mostly because the gambit failed and made him look ineffectual. Ditto his attendance at the Copenhagen summit on climate change. Attending the summit was a nice way to signal his commitment to the issue, but it was obvious beforehand that no deal was going to be reached and his time could have been better spent elsewhere. 

So I’m hoping that Secretary Clinton’s subordinates have done their homework, and that the trip to Moscow won't increase her carbon footprint to no good purpose.

YURI KADOBNOV/AFP/Getty Images)

EXPLORE:DIPLOMACY, HILLARY, INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS, NUKES, OBAMA ADMINISTRATION, RUSSIA, STATE DEPARTMENT, U.S. FOREIGN POLICY
 

DEPETRIS@WORDPRESS.COM

5:02 PM ET

March 18, 2010

Not a Big Deal

The nuclear deal that the U.S. and Russia are working on isn't really that significant. Sure, its the first major arms control treaty in the last two decades, but the obligations put forth in the proposal aren't quite modest. All it basically says is that the Washington and Moscow need to reduce their stockpiles by a quarter from previous levels, and prove that they are actually doing it. I mean c'mon, it's not like the treaty-in-progress is spelling out a "zero-nukes" policy. Each side will still have well over 1,000 nuclear weapons each.

But I guess it's a start.

http://www.depetris.wordpress.com

 

DEPETRIS@WORDPRESS.COM

2:56 AM ET

March 19, 2010

Sorry, Correction

The nuclear deal that the U.S. and Russia are working on isn't really that significant. Sure, its the first major arms control treaty in the last two decades, but the obligations put forth in the proposal are quite modest. All it basically says is that Washington and Moscow need to reduce their stockpiles by a quarter from previous levels, and prove that they are actually doing it. I mean c'mon, it's not like the treaty-in-progress is spelling out a "zero-nukes" policy. Each side will still have well over 1,000 nuclear weapons each.

But I guess it's a start.

http://www.depetris.wordpress.com

 

BLUE13326

1:07 PM ET

March 19, 2010

LOL! The first thing the

LOL! The first thing the Russians do is humiliate her by announcing the start date of the Iranian nuclear reactor.

I'm sure all those who were so offended by Israel's 'humiliation' of the Obama admin will be just as outraged...

 

KENNETH SORENSEN

3:10 PM ET

March 19, 2010

A-L-L--- I-S--- W-O-N-D-E-R-F-U-L

Russians show real pragmatism

They help the Iranians, which is great and should be applauded by all freedom loving peoples. Unfortunately we have some New Yorkers -- exemplified by Allan Green and Blue -- who apparently doesn't love freedom. Or perhaps they love freedom for themselves, but not for Iranians.

All freedom loving peoples should welcome all cooperation efforts with the proud and sovereign country of Iran. And what Americans think of Iran is largely void, due to this country's interfering in the past and messing about with internal Iranian affairs.

You in America have one individual -- Stuart Levey -- who for a number of years has been conducting his own financial war against the proud and sovereign country of Iran. This war and economic boycot is based on assumptions and has as such no foundation in international law. He is a relict of the Bush administartion and a sad testimony of the influence of The Israel Lobby.

What you as Americans could do is to condemn this individual, expose all his undoings and demand that he step down as gets procecuted as a representative of a foreign government (Israel) - whcih is an illegal pursuit for any person who at the same time serves in an administrative position in the government of The United States of America,

 

KENNETH SORENSEN

3:17 PM ET

March 19, 2010

Click Stuart Levey's name above

Unfortunately the new software here at the FP doesn't allow for any specific mark out (like bold and/or colured fonts for example) when hyperlinks are posted, but just go ahead and click on his name in the aboce post, in order to read what material I have collected about this individual. Very few people has hurt American interests -- and caused so much misery to specific countries and its peoples-- as he. And he call himself American -- an insulf to al honest Americans indeed.

 

Stephen M. Walt is the Robert and Renée Belfer professor of international relations at Harvard University.

Read More