![]() The 1994 Nuclear Posture Review was led by Ash Carter, the present defense secretary, who back then was a lowly assistant secretary with more hair and less experience. All three studies have been led by the Defense Department, with varying levels of involvement from the departments of State and Energy. A Nuclear Posture Review is really just a study, one that informs the big choices a president makes about what guidance to issue to the military about using nuclear weapons, as well as the size of the force to execute that guidance. Alongside that process, the Clinton administration also conducted a Nuclear Posture Review. defense requirements to guide the post-Cold War downsizing of the military. Clinton had campaigned on the idea of spending the “ peace dividend” on domestic programs, so one of the first things Secretary of Defense Les Aspin did was undertake a “ bottom-up review” of U.S. ![]() The first Nuclear Posture Review occurred at the beginning of Bill Clinton’s administration. A lot of people have gotten the idea that the Nuclear Posture Review, like the Quadrennial Defense Review, is something that new presidents are obligated to undertake. The United States has conducted three reviews - one each at the beginning of the Bill Clinton, George W. To understand why, it is helpful to briefly review the history of Nuclear Posture Reviews. Why would Democrats do this to themselves? That would both make it harder for President Barack Obama to act on urgent nuclear weapons issues as his term ends and tie Clinton’s hands on the issue through much of her first term. In other words, presidents might not do all the dumb stuff in party platforms, but they try to do more than you might think.Īnd that’s bad news, because on the little issue of nuclear weapons, the Democratic Party’s 2016 platform commits a President Hillary Clinton to the terrible idea of conducting another Nuclear Posture Review. But politicians also tend to act consistently with platforms, and, not surprisingly, platforms can help anticipate changes in a party’s attitudes. ![]() A president isn’t bound by a party platform, and it can be a cheap way to appease elements of the base. Insiders will tell you party platforms don’t matter much, and they are generally correct. And then there’s the crafting of the party platform. So far, we’ve seen a Game of Thrones-like ending for Debbie Wasserman Schultz as the Democratic National Committee’s chair and efforts to make future presidential primaries more Bernie Sanders-friendly. But party conventions are also about the sausage-making of party politics. That plan includes an immediate ceasefire and an eventual democratic transition.This week’s Democratic National Convention will hit its high point with Hillary Clinton accepting the party’s nomination to be president. She said these attacks have continued despite Assad's acceptance of UN mediator Kofi Annan's plan to end the crisis. She also said the US would co-operate with the region's Sunni governments to counter Iranian threats against shipping in the Gulf and Tehran's support for "the Assad regime's murderous campaign".īefore heading to Turkey for a 60-nation "Friends of the Syrian People" meeting on Sunday, Clinton condemned the Assad government for shelling civilian neighbourhoods and targeting mosques and churches. With tensions rising in the region, she said American and Gulf militaries should cooperate to improve maritime security as well. It is incumbent upon Iran to demonstrate by its actions that it is a willing partner and to participate in these negotiations with an effort to obtain concrete results."Ĭlinton's remarks followed President Barack Obama's announcement on Friday that the US was moving ahead with penalties aimed at depriving Iran of oil revenue, while also working with Saudi Arabia and other Persian Gulf states to safeguard global petroleum supplies.Ĭlinton also urged Gulf governments to develop a co-ordinated defence strategy against Iranian missiles. "We enter into these talks with a sober perspective about Iran's intentions. ![]() We are determined to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. "Our policy is one of prevention, not containment. "We're going in with one intention: to resolve the international community's concerns about Iran's nuclear program," Clinton said after attending a security conference in Saudi Arabia. Tehran contends the programme is solely for peaceful energy and research purposes. She also expressed doubt over whether Iran had any intention of negotiating a solution that satisfies the US, Israel and other countries that believe Tehran is trying to develop nuclear weapons.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |