(WASHINGTON, DC) An alliance of non-governmental nuclear arm control experts called today's ratification of the 1993 START II pact by Russia's lower house of parliament "a long-overdue, but very important step toward implementing reductions of Cold War-era nuclear bomb stockpiles." The START II pact was signed over seven years ago by Presidents Bush and Yeltsin. It will, if implemented, reduce each nation's deployed, long-range nuclear warheads to 3,000-3,500 from current levels of about 6,000 each.

"Russian action on START II puts to the test the United States ability to deliver on strategic nuclear arms control," said Jack Mendelson, Executive Director, Lawyers Alliance for World Security. "Several hurdles remain in the way of implementing START II, and future U.S. Presidential and Congressional action on national missile defense could jeopardize further progress on reducing nuclear weapons dangers," he added.

"We expect President Clinton and the Senate will work cooperatively to approve the 1997 agreements that will allow for implementation of these substantial nuclear arms reductions," said Mendelson. The U.S. Senate, which approved an earlier version of START II, must agree to a 1997 agreement to extend the deadline for START II and agreements related to the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty before START II can be implemented. Some Senators have said they will reject the 1997 agreements and that the U.S. should withdraw from the ABM Treaty itself in the hope of developing expensive — and as yet unproven and unworkable— sea- and space-based national missile defenses. The Clinton administration wants modifications to the 1972 ABM Treaty to allow for a "limited" missile defense -- a step now opposed by Russia, which could scuttle chances for further verifiable arms cuts.

Even after START II, both countries will retain thousands of nuclear weapons on hair-trigger alert, poised for mass attack, with decision-makers having just minutes to decide whether to launch thousands of nuclear- armed missiles. The U.S. and Russia will also still retain a large number of short-range, "tactical" nuclear bombs, not covered by START. Nations gathering next week in New York for a conference on the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty are expected to express concern about the nuclear weapons states' failure to fulfill their commitments to pursue nuclear disarmament.

"START II ratification is helpful, but the Cold War nuclear doomsday machine is still on-line," said Ira Schorr, Coordinator of Back from the Brink, which is pursuing a web-based citizens' signature campaign to ‘de-alert' nuclear arsenals. The address is

"Duma ratification of START II provides an historic opportunity for President Clinton to conclude a START III deal to secure deeper verifiable and irreversible reductions of each nations' nuclear bombs," said John Isaacs, President of Council for a Livable World. "The U.S. should lock in the lowest level of nuclear weapons that Russia will accept and verify," suggested Isaacs. "Sadly, when Russia says it is prepared to mutually and verifiably reduce to 1,000-1,500 long-range weapons, the Clinton-Gore Administration insists that we should not go below 2,500," he noted.

"It is dangerous to continue to believe that deterring Russia, which is poor and no longer a Cold War enemy, requires threatening to drop 2,500 nuclear bombs on Russian soil. Each of these 2,500 weapons can destroy an area much greater than Hiroshima or Nagasaki and kill hundreds of thousands of innocent people," said Martin Butcher, Director of Security Programs for Physicians for Social Responsibility.

The President and the Congress would have the backing of the public if they worked together to secure further verifiable nuclear reductions under START III. A national public opinion survey conducted last week shows that 67% of Americans believe that reduction or elimination of nuclear weapons should be the goal of U.S. nuclear policy. Four in ten Americans (40%) believe that the complete elimination of nuclear weapons should be the U.S. policy goal. Another 28% say that reduction of these weapons should be the goal. A total of 15% say the U.S. should maintain the current number of weapons, and 15% say the U.S. should design new and better nuclear weapons. The April 7-9 poll of 1000 adults nationwide was conducted by The Mellman Group for the Coalition to Reduce Nuclear Dangers.

Many Pentagon leaders also agree that more progress is needed. In an interview on 60 Minutes aired earlier this year, the former head of the U.S. Strategic Command, General Eugene Habiger said "... the fact that we have not been able to get down to lower and lower levels of nuclear weapons is troubling to me, and it should be troubling to you."

The Coalition to Reduce Nuclear Dangers is an alliance of 17 nuclear non-proliferation and arms control organizations committed to a practical, step-by-step program of action to reduce nuclear dangers. For more information on START and national missile defense, see the Coalition's Web Site http://www.crnd.org

Home Page