The Senate Foreign Relations Committee is set to approve Sen. Richard Lugar's resolution of ratification for the New START nuclear reductions treaty with Russia this morning, but not before Sen. James Risch tried to stop the vote from happening due to what he called an alarming intelligence issue was brought to senators this week.

Risch tried to stop the hearing at the outset, saying that he had been approached by the "intelligence community" with shocking information that if true would fundamentally impact the treaty and should prevent the committee from proceeding in any way. He did not specify what the information was but implored chairman John Kerry (D-MA), to postpone the vote.

Kerry acknowledged that the intelligence community had come to committee with a last minute issue and he said he made efforts to make sure all committee members' offices were aware of the secret issue. But he declined to postpone the vote and said the issue would be vetted thoroughly before the full Senate votes.

"It is inappropriate for us to have any discussion in open session in any substance of the information," Kerry said. But he made clear he viewed the issue seriously and  even spoke personally with Vice President Joseph Biden about the issue.

"The conclusion of the intelligence community is that it in no way alters their judgment, already submitted to this committee, about the substance of the treaty... We would not have proceeded today if this information had any effect on this vote or the substance of this treaty," Kerry said. "Before we go to the floor, this issue will further be vetted by the intelligence community and everybody else."

Several Hill sources declined to comment due to the fact that the information was classified.

Sen. Bob Corker (R-TN), who is now supporting the treaty, said he attended a briefing yesterday about the issue and said it would not affect his support.

Overall, Kerry endorsed the resolution of ratification put forth by Lugar, which the committee voted to replace a previously circulated version by Kerry.

"I have been particularly pleased to work with Senator Lugar to develop a resolution that we can all support," Kerry said in his opening statement for today's committee business meeting in the Dirksen Office Building, where the vote on the treaty will take place in about an hour. "This is a draft that reflects all of our views and I look forward to the committee adopting it."

He also implored senators to put aside politics and ratify the treaty soon as a matter of national security.

"The stakes are significant," Kerry said. "By ratifying this treaty, we will limit Russia's nuclear arsenal. We will regain the ability to inspect their nuclear forces. And we will redouble international support for our nonproliferation efforts.""

Kerry touted the dozens of hearings held on the issue, the testimony of current and former officials in both parties, and the hundreds of answers to questions submitted by Congress. He said the administration had provided a summary of the negotiating record, although not the full record, as some GOP senators demanded.

Kerry has been quarterbacking the ratification process since April, but recently Lugar has become the center of gravity in the START ratification process because his version of the resolution for ratification is the one that the administration, Kerry's staff, and several GOP senate offices have been working on. He raised it at the meeting as a "substitute amendment" to an earlier version floated by Kerry.

Lugar said his amendment brought in the concerns of senators and should alleviate any concerns about the treaty have a constraining impact on the plans to deploy ballistic missile defense program, a key concern of lots of GOP senators, including Senate Armed Services Committee ranking Republican John McCain (R-AZ).

"My substitute amendment covers at length concerns raised about missile defense... the treaty places no limitation on the deployment of missile defense... and the 2010 unilateral statement by the Russian federation about missile defense does not impose any legal obligation on the United States."

The full Senate won't debate the treaty until after the November elections, Kerry has said.

 

AMERICAN SON

10:34 AM ET

September 17, 2010

New Start is the wrong treaty at the wrong time.

Studies have shown that people who hold a viewpoint, particulary when wrong, adhere to their beliefs even when shown facts that they are wrong. In fact, they adhere to their false assumptions and conclusions even harder, fighting reality. So for me to believe John Kerry or anyone else who has bought into the false arguments of the New Start crowd are going to change their minds flies in the face of research and truth. Barabar Tuchman said it all in "The March of Folly," which should be required reading for all in government, when she asked why leaders so often throughout history chose options that were so obvious not in the best interests of their constituents, even when there were people on the sidelines yelling to get out of the street, that a bus was coming. History is relete with sad stories of error when common sense should have prevailed. Is this the case now with America and this foolish treaty?

Why can't we see that at lower levels of nuclear arms we shall reach a point of no return, we will have breached a threshold below which we shall be more vulnerable, not less, to a nuclear exchange. Nuclear deterrence works. If it works, don't fix it. Nuclear deterrance works for the people of America and for the people of Russia.

If we were awake we would realize that in addition to having to win hearts and minds in Afghanistan, we must do so in the United States. Just look at the news in any outlet. We have murder and mayhem going on in many communities. But there are those who would have you believe that the human condition is okay internationally and that there is nothing to worry about. Bulldung. Hearts and minds -- through education should be our modus operandi worldwide -- including in Russia, including China. But many believe they have changed -- to a degree. To that degree some are willing to risk our collective and indiviudal futures on a treaty that has not been thought-out. It leaves us in the future vulnerable. It is not they who have changed. It is us. Many of us have become intellectually disarmed. They have shaped us, we who are so proud of our alleged ability to shape others. Hillary Clinton may talk about "smart" power, but you must have smart ideas to have smart power. And right now America is not acting very smart, particularly with this treaty.

New Start is wrong and not in the best interests of America. This is the most important decision the United States shall make this year. It surpasses economic and all other issues. It propels us into the future in a perilous way. It has not been well thought-out. It is predicated on the hopes of a young naive man who now occupies the White House. It is dangerous for America. The mere fact that it is not the primary story of the day, but occupies mere mention in the media, that it has not been investigated by the media, the public, or the Senate with dissenters given their due shows the confusion in the minds of so many people. New Start should be stopped. This perfect storm toward disaster is dangerous, and not many see the Hurricane coming, let alone are prepared for it or its aftermath.

Hope is fine. But we know what hope and irrational exuberance has gotten us in other areas. National security demands -- demands -- we rely on cold hard facts. No to New Start. Yes to a safe America with a continued reliance on a robust nuclear deterrence. Do you have a fallout shelter? Are you adequately stocked if the unthinkable happens? Should we gamble our children's and grandchildren's future on hope, or should we use common sense -- like the Boyscouts -- and be prepared? Or is even this too much thinking to ask in this present climate.

Anyone who contends that New Start is good for America is not thinking. And they are probably not going to start doing so as the arguments in the Senate begin on this most important matter.

 

John Hudson reports on national security and foreign policy from the Pentagon to Foggy Bottom, the White House to Embassy Row, for The Cable.

Enter your email address to get The Cable delivered to your inbox each night:

Delivered by FeedBurner