The U.S. Congress will meet to discuss the American-Russian START treaty in September. By and large, the document is the talk of the day within the American political establishment. Ex- governor of Massachusetts Mitt Romney, candidate for U.S. president in 2008, came up with scathing criticism of the treaty a while ago. Spokesmen for the Democratic Party both on the Hill and within the American establishment challenged validity of his arguments and assertions.
John Kerry, Senate’s Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman, accused Romney of the lack of knowledge of what he had been talking about. He said that Romney had misinterpreted facts and blithely ignored expert opinions. Romney condemned the document for restrictions on development of the American ballistic missile system needed for defense from rogue regimes (Iran and North Korea). In fact, it was his key objection to the treaty and one which Kerry flatly rebutted. According to Kerry, there was nothing in the document to bind America’s hands or prevent it from doing what it thought necessary. «Obama’s Administration enjoys complete freedom in the matter of the ABM plans proclaimed last year,» said Kerry.
Romney announced as well that the START treaty allegedly enabled Russia to exceed the strategic nuclear warhead quotas. Kerry advised his opponent to take a look at the text of the document. In fact, he announced that the new treaty favored the United States.
Strobe Talbott and Steve Pifer both of the Brookings Institution rebutted Romney’s assertions as «groundless and misleading». These two intellectuals used to be senior officials of the executive branch of the government only recently. The former was with the U.S. State Department and the latter, America’s ambassador to Ukraine.
Talbott and Pifer made an emphasis on Article 5 of the START treaty that outlawed installation of interceptors of the future defense systems into old silos or on nuclear submarines. «That’s what the American military itself does not want,» said experts. Speaking before the U.S. Senate, Missile Defense Agency Director Patrick O’Reilly said that should the ballistic missile defense system require additional interceptors, it would be simpler and actually cheaper to build new silos than convert old ones for the purpose.
Neither did unbiased experts take to Romney’s assertions concerning missile trains which he had said the treaty never addressed. According to Pifer and Talbott, these systems had been withdrawn from Russian nuclear arsenals years ago and the factory making them was in Ukraine now. Experts dismissed Romney’s claims concerning «Russia’s growing interest in revival of missile trains» as groundless.
«The START treaty is no mistake,» said experts. Sources within Kerry’s office said that their patron remained hopeful and expected ratification of the document soon.
