Channeling Joseph McCarthy
Posted by Kelsey Hartigan
Today kicks off another intensive week of hearings before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on the New START accord. Rose Gottemoeller, chief negotiator of the treaty, and Ed Warner, DoD’s representative for the negotiating team will appear before the committee today at 2:30pm EST. This will be the second time this duo testifies to the SFRC—the first meeting was a closed session.
I’m expecting one of two outcomes.
Conservatives’ long-standing obsession with missile defense has triggered the recent accusations. The New START agreement, like START 1 and nearly every arms control agreement since the Kennedy administration, contains language that allows either side to withdraw from the treaty if they believe their national interests have been threatened—a provision which, by the way, allowed the Bush administration to withdraw from the 1972 ABM treaty in 2002. This reality hasn’t stopped the critics who are hell-bent on finding some sort of ground on which to base their opposition. Neither has Dick Lugar’s explanation that the non-binding perambulatory statements are essentially “editorial opinions.” Instead, critics are launching attacks based on deeply rooted, outdated suspicions. Joseph McCarthy would have been proud. In a SFRC hearing last week, Senator Kaufman asked the former National Security Advisors for George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush, General Brent Scowcroft and Stephen Hadley, if they believed a super-secret deal had been made:
I’m expecting one of two outcomes.
Neither of these options are particularly appealing, but given the state of the current debate and the fact that critics have absolutely no support, these are the two most likely outcomes. Critics are desperately seeking something to latch onto—they need a scapegoat so that their political ploys aren’t so transparent. Their latest attempt? Murmurs of secret, back room deals with the Russians. Cue the creepy music.1. Other than Dick Lugar, most GOP senators won’t bother to show up.
2. The hearing turns into a political circus, with critics interrogating the negotiators about “secret deals” with the Soviets…errr, Russians.
Conservatives’ long-standing obsession with missile defense has triggered the recent accusations. The New START agreement, like START 1 and nearly every arms control agreement since the Kennedy administration, contains language that allows either side to withdraw from the treaty if they believe their national interests have been threatened—a provision which, by the way, allowed the Bush administration to withdraw from the 1972 ABM treaty in 2002. This reality hasn’t stopped the critics who are hell-bent on finding some sort of ground on which to base their opposition. Neither has Dick Lugar’s explanation that the non-binding perambulatory statements are essentially “editorial opinions.” Instead, critics are launching attacks based on deeply rooted, outdated suspicions. Joseph McCarthy would have been proud. In a SFRC hearing last week, Senator Kaufman asked the former National Security Advisors for George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush, General Brent Scowcroft and Stephen Hadley, if they believed a super-secret deal had been made:
Senator Kaufman: Do you think there's some kind of secret deal, I mean, that's going on, which is what's also implied by many of the critics?
General Scowcroft: No, I would say that on both sides this is an issue of domestic politics. And the treaty is amply clear. It does not restrict us. Would the Russians like it to restrict us? Yes, of course. But there isn't -- I don't think there's substance to this -- to this argument.
Mr. Hadley: I don't think there's secret understanding.
Every single national security expert who has appeared before the SFRC has supported ratification of New START. The National Security Advisors of both Bush presidents explain that any suspicions over a “secret deal” are simply a result of “domestic politics.” Maybe the critics won’t show up after all.
I am glad to have this stuff.I would say that Joe McCarthy was unquestionably the most controversial man I ever served with in the Senate.
Posted by: m3 zero | June 16, 2010 at 03:37 AM