Obama’s Nuclear Disarmament Plan Backfired

[Editor’s Note: Today’s blog is longer than usual, but it may be the most important piece I have ever posted. I’m reprinting an article that every American should read. Please pass it along!]

Since the movie “2016: Obama’s America” was released last fall, I have repeatedly urged clients and readers to see this documentary film It’s still not too late to see this very alarming movie on DVD. It is not a “hit piece” on President Obama as many have assumed, but it does suggest that the president intends to significantly reshape America over the next four years.

One of the main tenets of the movie is Obama’s quest to greatly reduce America’s nuclear arsenal. In 2010, Obama signed the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty which required the US and Russia to reduce their deployed nuclear warheads from around 2,200 each to 1,550.

It is widely expected that Obama will soon announce yet another nuclear weapons reduction that would take our nukes down to only 1,000 warheads, this according to published reports. Sources say the president was prepared to make such an announcement in his February 12 State of the Union address, but it was delayed after North Korea conducted its third nuclear test earlier that day.

While this unilateral announcement could occur any day now, it is expected to meet stiff resistance in Congress. Let’s hope so! If Obama gets his way, Russia will be the supreme nuclear power in the world.

The following article appeared in The Wall Street Journal last Sunday, and it is nothing less than chilling. Obama’s plan to disarm the United States by reducing or eliminating our nuclear arsenal – in an effort to encourage other nations to do the same – has backfired. As you will read below, the world is moving ever closer to a dangerous new era of nuclear proliferation.

Read this and pass it along. And be sure to rent 2016: Obama’s America. As the movie’s subtitle says, “Love Him, Hate Him – You Don’t Know Him.” Liberal or conservative, you need to see this documentary.

QUOTE:

The Coming Nuclear Breakout

As the U.S. deterrent fades, atomic weapons are poised to proliferate.

President Obama came to office in 2009 promising to negotiate with America’s enemies and create a world without nuclear weapons. Four years later, North Korea is threatening America with nuclear attack, Iran is closer to its own atomic arsenal, and the world is edging ever closer to a dangerous new era of nuclear proliferation. The promises and the reality are connected.

north-korean-missile

The latest talks between the West and Iran failed this weekend, with no immediate plans for another round. The negotiations by now follow a pattern in which the U.S. makes concessions that Iran rejects, followed by more concessions that Iran also rejects, and so on as Tehran plays for time.

North Korea, meanwhile, has moved medium-range missiles to its east coast in preparation for what is expected to be another launch as early as this week. This follows its third nuclear test and an explicit government authorization to strike U.S. targets with nuclear weapons. South Korea and Japan are in the direct line of fire.

The U.S. responded at first with a modest show of deterrent force (B-2 bombers, Aegis cruisers), but lately it has downplayed the threat and even cancelled a U.S. missile test lest it discomfit the North’s young dictator Kim Jong Eun. U.S. policy now seems to be to beg China one more time to do something about its client state. This is worth trying given that China has a new senior leadership, but the public nature of U.S. pleading (see the weekend’s newspapers) also projects weakness.

This anti-proliferation failure, in turn, has friends and allies increasingly wondering if they need their own nuclear deterrent. Chung Mong-joon, a prominent member of South Korea’s ruling party, has called for the U.S. to return tactical nuclear weapons to the peninsula. George H.W. Bush withdrew them from South Korea in 1991 in a gesture to stop North Korea from going nuclear.

“Some say that the U.S. nuclear umbrella is a torn umbrella. If so, we need to repair it,” Mr. Chung said in February, adding that if the U.S. refuses South Korea should develop its own nuclear weapons. A recent poll found that 66% of South Koreans support a home-grown deterrent.

The South Korean government says it has no such plans, but it’s no coincidence that it is now pressing the U.S. for permission to produce its own nuclear fuel. While the supposed rationale is civilian use, the ability to enrich uranium and reprocess spent fuel is also a step toward making a bomb if South Korea ever chooses to.

That kind of talk is watched closely in Japan, which has refrained from getting its own bomb under the U.S. umbrella and the legacy of World War II. Few politicians are making the case for a Japanese bomb other than the nationalist Shintaro Ishihara, but that will change if the North keeps expanding its arsenal or the South goes nuclear. Japan already has a reprocessing facility that will soon be producing tons of weapons-usable plutonium.

Likewise in the Middle East, Iran’s march to the bomb has other countries preparing the ground for their own nuclear breakout. Saudi Arabia has announced plans to build 16 reactors—precisely the number that nuclear inspectors say it would need for both civilian and military use. The world’s largest oil exporter does not need nuclear power for electricity.

Neither does the United Arab Emirates, which is nonetheless building a nuclear power plant only a few hundred miles from Iran. The UAE has promised not to enrich uranium or reprocess spent fuel, and in return the U.S. is providing technical advice on the plant. But few expect that promise to stand if Iran gets the bomb.

Elsewhere in the region, Syria tried to import a nuclear-energy capacity until Israel blew it up in 2007 (despite the disapproval of then Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice). Turkey and Egypt are also likely to seek their own nuclear deterrent if Iran isn’t stopped.

All of this is occurring even as Mr. Obama has pursued the most aggressive nuclear arms control agenda since the 1970s—or more likely because of it. In April 2009, the President famously declared that reducing U.S. nuclear stockpiles “will then give us a greater moral authority to say to Iran, don’t develop a nuclear weapon; to say to North Korea, don’t proliferate nuclear weapons.”

Mr. Obama has since cut the U.S. arsenal in the Start treaty with Russia and he’s negotiating more reductions that he may not submit for Senate ratification. None of this “moral authority” has had the least deterrent effect on Iran or North Korea.

The truth is the opposite. The world can see the U.S. has acquiesced in North Korea’s weapons program and lacks the will to stop Iran. It can see the U.S. is shrinking its own nuclear capacity through arms control, even as rogue threats grow. And it can see the U.S. is ambivalent about its allies getting nuclear weapons even as it does little to shore up the U.S. umbrella or allied defenses.

Above all, the world can hear Mr. Obama declare for domestic American audiences that “the tide of war is receding” despite the growing evidence to the contrary. On present trend, the President who promised to rid the world of nuclear weapons is setting the stage for their greatest proliferation since the dawn of the atomic age.

END QUOTE

Have a great weekend everyone!





Posted 04-23-2013 10:36 AM by Gary D. Halbert