Election Disadvantage


CTBT Good - Multilateralism



Download 1.8 Mb.
Page26/61
Date19.10.2016
Size1.8 Mb.
#3943
1   ...   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   ...   61

CTBT Good - Multilateralism

CTBT has enough support to be ratified but Obama’s political capital will be key. Ratification is critical to restore the signal of multilateralism and solve global proliferation


Joseph 2009 (Jofi Joseph, senior Democratic foreign policy staffer in the Senate, April 2009, Renew the Drive for CTBT Ratification, Washington Quarterly, p. 80)

The 1999 vote fell short of an absolute majority, much less the two-thirds majority required for treaty ratification under the U.S. Constitution. This failure undercut traditional U.S. leadership on nuclear nonproliferation issues, and offered an easy justification for China to continue to refuse to ratify the CTBT, as well as for India and Pakistan to avoid signing the treaty altogether. An announcement in Obama’s first year in office that he will call on the Senate to initiate the consideration of the CTBT by holding the appropriate hearings over the next year, with the goal of scheduling a ratification vote prior to the end of his first term in 2012, will send an unmistakable signal that the United States is once again committed to multilateral, rules-based cooperation with the international community to advance mutual interests. It will reenergize a flagging nonproliferation regime and offer the United States important leverage on key challenges like Iran and North Korea. With a healthy majority of Democratic senators in place, and close relationships with key moderate Republicans, Obama is within reach of the 67 votes necessary to secure ratification, and accomplish a significant foreign policy and national security goal. Why Push for CTBT Ratification Now? The Obama administration cannot take the decision to press the Senate for CTBT ratification before 2012 lightly. It will require a significant investment of political capital by the president and his senior national security team during his first term in office to closely coordinate with the Senate leadership and chairmen of the Foreign Relations, Armed Services, and Intelligence Committees. The risks of failure are considerable: a second rejection by the Senate would likely doom the nuclear test ban treaty to oblivion and risk encouraging other states to end their informal moratoria on nuclear testing. So why should Obama forge ahead with a determined campaign for CTBT ratification?

Only multilateral cooperation prevents great power wars that make extinction inevitable.


Dyer, 12/30/2004 (Gwynne – former senior lecturer in war studies at the Royal Military Academy Sandhurt, The End of War, The Toronto Star, p. lexis)

The "firebreak" against nuclear weapons use that we began building after Hiroshima and Nagasaki has held for well over half a century now. But the proliferation of nuclear weapons to new powers is a major challenge to the stability of the system. So are the coming crises, mostly environmental in origin, which will hit some countries much harder than others, and may drive some to desperation. Add in the huge impending shifts in the great-power system as China and India grow to rival the United States in GDP over the next 30 or 40 years and it will be hard to keep things from spinning out of control. With good luck and good management, we may be able to ride out the next half-century without the first-magnitude catastrophe of a global nuclear war, but the potential certainly exists for a major die-back of human population. We cannot command the good luck, but good management is something we can choose to provide. It depends, above all, on preserving and extending the multilateral system that we have been building since the end of World War II. The rising powers must be absorbed into a system that emphasizes co-operation and makes room for them, rather than one that deals in confrontation and raw military power. If they are obliged to play the traditional great-power game of winners and losers, then history will repeat itself and everybody loses.

CTBT Good – Proliferation

Ratifying the CTBT restores U.S. non-proliferation leadership and builds coalitions against prolif


Medalia 2008 (Jonathan Medalia, specialist of National Defense for the Congressional Research Service, 3/12/2008, Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: Issues and Arguments, p. 53-54)

Gen. John Shalikashvili, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, argued that the CTBT and nuclear nonproliferation were closely linked: Non-ratification [of the CTBT] has also complicated U.S. efforts to strengthen the International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards that non-nuclear weapon state parties to the NPT must have on their civilian nuclear programs. Many countries are reluctant to accept new obligations while the United States is unwilling to approve the Test Ban Treaty.... Once we ratify the Test Ban Treaty, which the rest of the world views as vital for non-proliferation, we will be better able to enlist cooperation on export controls, economic sanctions, and other coordinated responses to specific problems.192 Former Secretary of State George Shultz, former Secretary of Defense William Perry, former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, and former Senator Sam Nunn argued the need to link the goal of disarmament and specific steps to achieve it: Reassertion of the vision of a world free of nuclear weapons and practical measures toward achieving that goal would be, and would be perceived as, a bold initiative consistent with America’s moral heritage.... Without the bold vision, the actions will not be perceived as fair or urgent. Without the actions, the vision will not be perceived as realistic or possible. One of the eight steps they recommend is “Initiating a bipartisan process with the Senate, including understandings to increase confidence and provide for periodic review, to achieve ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, taking advantage of recent technical advances, and working to secure ratification by other key states.”193 By the same token, some CTBT supporters contend that U.S. failure to observe the disarmament end of the bargain will inevitably undermine the willingness of other nations to cooperate on nonproliferation. Margaret Beckett, former U.K. Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, said, our efforts on non-proliferation will be dangerously undermined if others believe, however unfairly, that the terms of the grand bargain have changed, that the nuclear weapon states have abandoned any commitment to disarmament. The point of doing more on disarmament, then, is not to convince the Iranians or the North Koreans. I don’t believe for a second that further reductions in our nuclear weapons would have a material effect on their nuclear ambitions. Rather the point of doing more is this: because the moderate majority of states, our natural and vital allies on non-proliferation, want us to do more. And if we do not, we risk helping Iran and North Korea in their efforts to muddy the water, to turn the blame for their own nuclear intransigence back onto us. They can undermine our arguments for strong international action in support of the NPT by painting us as doing too little too late to fulfill our own obligations.194

Obama has broad support for the CTBT which will restore U.S. credibility on proliferation


Joseph 2009 (Jofi Joseph, senior Democratic foreign policy staffer in the Senate, April 2009, Renew the Drive for CTBT Ratification, Washington Quarterly, p. 89)

Obama won the presidency in part on his pledge to bring a new tone to U.S. relations with the world through enhanced multilateral cooperation and a pragmatic approach to international institutions and treaties. Substantively, Obama has identified the specter of nuclear terrorism as the gravest challenge to our national security and linked that threat to the breakdown of the nuclear nonproliferation regime. Accordingly, he concluded that only a renewed effort, led by the United States, toward a world of zero nuclear weapons can make real headway in reducing the threat of proliferation and nuclear terrorism. Senate ratification of the CTBT and its resulting entry into force would set a new tone for U.S. diplomacy while revitalizing the nuclear nonproliferation regime. It would restore U.S. credibility on this issue after years of moving in the opposite direction. Obama enjoys a broad mandate and the strong support of almost 60 Senate Democrats. Now is the time for a renewed push for CTBT ratification that can serve as a landmark national security accomplishment for the United States and for international peace and stability.


CTBT Good – Proliferation

Ratifying the CTBT restores confidence in the NPT


Kimball 2008 (Daryl G. Kimball, executive director of the Arms Control Association, 8/22/2008, The Enduring Value of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and Prospects for Its Entry Into Force, p. http://www.armscontrol.org/node/3300)

Today, the 1996 Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) remains a vital disarmament and nonproliferation instrument. By prohibiting all nuclear test explosions it impedes the ability of states possessing nuclear weapons to field new and more deadly types of warheads, while also helping to prevent the emergence of new nuclear-armed states. Moving forward quickly on the CTBT is also an essential step towards restoring confidence in the beleaguered Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) regime. The nuclear-weapon states’ commitment to achieve the CTBT was a crucial part of the bargain that won the indefinite extension of the NPT in 1995 and the 2000 NPT Review Conference document.





Download 1.8 Mb.

Share with your friends:
1   ...   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   ...   61



The database is protected by copyright ©ininet.org 2024
send message
    Main page
Guide
Instructions
Report
Request
Review