McCain's Flawed Approach to Halting Nuclear Proliferation

Posted by Steve Benen, The Carpetbagger Report at 6:58 AM on May 28, 2008.

Way back last October, Barack Obama tackled the issue of nuclear proliferation, and explained why the U.S. should drastically reduce its stockpiles to lower the threat of nuclear terrorism. The Obama policy was largely in line with the bipartisan approach taken a few months earlier by George Shultz, secretary of state in the Reagan administration; Henry Kissinger, secretary of state in the Nixon and Ford administrations; William Perry, secretary of defense in the Clinton administration; and Sam Nunn, a former chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee.



And what of the GOP nominee? John McCain has been unusually reticent on the subject, but tackled the proliferation issue today in Denver.

John McCain is faulting both Republicans and Democrats on their efforts to control the proliferation of nuclear weapons.


The likely Republican presidential nominee favors an approach that doesn’t rely too heavily on either direct talks or military force to reduce the spread of nuclear weapons.


McCain spoke on the issue Tuesday at the University of Denver.


He said: “If you look back over the past two decades, I don’t think any of us, Republican or Democrat, can take much satisfaction in what we’ve accomplished to control nuclear proliferation.”

McCain’s triangulating notwithstanding, he’s largely right about the need for more progress, but the problem is with how he’d like to change the status quo. Or, in this case, how he wouldn’t.

For example, McCain said, “Many believe all we need to do to end the nuclear programs of hostile governments is have our president talk with leaders in Pyongyang and Tehran, as if we haven’t tried talking to these governments repeatedly over the past two decades.” This, of course, doesn’t make sense. The only progress we’ve made with North Korea came when we started talking to them, and the progress disappeared when we stopped. As for Iran, the U.S. cut off diplomatic ties to Iran 28 years ago. We’ve talked to Tehran “repeatedly”? Does McCain realize that Tehran is in Iran?



McCain went on to describe how he’d approach Russia: “[W]e should be prepared to enter into a new arms control agreement with Russia reflecting the nuclear reductions I will seek. Further, we should be able to agree with Russia on binding verification measures based on those currently in effect under the START Agreement, to enhance confidence and transparency.” It’s an odd proposition given that McCain wants to thumb his nose at Russia and kick the country out of the G8. How, exactly, does McCain suppose he’ll have diplomatic leverage on nuclear proliferation after antagonizing Russia with the least subtle slap in the face imaginable? Does McCain realize Russia wants to be in the G8?


Jon Wolfsthal, Fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, goes point by point, highlighting the overwhelming flaws in McCain’s speech, concluding:

McCain’s speech is a feeble attempt to try to tie all Republicans and Democrats into the failures of the Bush administration nuclear policies. Before 2000, the US was on the right track. The regime needed work, but was sound — more states had given up nuclear weapons and weapon programs in the 1980s and 90s than had begun them.


Now that track record lies in ashes — because of the Bush Administration approach, backed by a Republican Congress that killed the CTBT and sought to restrict funding for nuclear security efforts during 2000-2004. McCain is promising more of the same.

If I had a nickel for every policy in which McCain is “promising more of the same,” I could retire a wealthy man.

Tagged as: nuclear proliferation, mccain