NATIONAL SECURITY POLICY AND RATIFICATION OF THE COMPREHENSIVE TEST BAN TREATY
Winston P. Nagan & Erin K. Slemmens*
“And so, to all the other peoples and governments who are watching today, . . . know that America is a friend of each nation and every man, woman[,] and child who seeks a future of peace and dignity. And we are ready to lead once more.”
“With both sides of this divided world in possession of unbelievably destructive weapons, mankind approaches a state where mutual annihilation becomes a possibility. No other fact of today’s world equals this in importance. . . .”
If the complete eradication of nuclear weapons seems a remote possibility, it is nonetheless important for wise policy makers to consider such a goal in terms of the rational control and regulation of nuclear arsenals by law. America’s national discourse on foreign policy and security makes only fleeting references to managing nuclear dangers through international law. The tactical emphasis on a few rogue states appears to obscure the strategic interest in a broader, more comprehensive, and more effective approach to the problems of nuclear testing and proliferation.
The Bush Administration made clear its position on a universal testing prohibition in 2001, when President Bush announced that he would not submit the treaty to the Senate for advice and consent, declaring the document “fatally flawed.” In 2002, a Department of Defense official stated, “We are continuing the current administration policy, as I said, which is we continue to oppose ratification of the CTBT; we continue to adhere to a test moratorium.” In 2007, the Administration reaffirmed this stance. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice stated in a letter to a senator that, “the Administration does not support the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and does not intend to seek Senate advice and consent to its ratification. There has been no change in the Administration’s policy on this matter.” READ FULL PAPER
Print