Democrat less wrong than usual about nuclear proliferation
Rep. Jane Harman no longer believes the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty protects us from rogue states with nuclear weapons:
Iran is not the only problem. Other countries may travel down the same path, waving the banner of peaceful nuclear energy. Some – including North Korea – already have, and the international system is ill-prepared to prevent wannabes.
Today’s legal regime is no match for the wide dissemination of nuclear technology. Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) standards are obsolete, and the growth in the sheer number of nuclear facilities world-wide has made it difficult for the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to achieve its mission.
Well, admitting we have a problem is good. What does Rep. Harman want to do about the NPT’s shortcomings?
A more promising approach might be to create an international consortium of fuel centers that provide enrichment and reprocessing of nuclear fuel, and end-to-end oversight of nuclear resources. Driven by market demand, private companies could operate facilities with IAEA oversight, and participating states would agree not to engage in independent enriching and reprocessing. Material would be purchased from the international market, thereby creating supply assurance for nations who fear being denied fuel.
This concept is a private-sector version of the International Nuclear Fuel Authority envisioned by Sens. Richard Lugar and Evan Bayh, and could borrow from the low-enriched uranium “emergency” stockpile concept proposed by the Nuclear Threat Initiative.
Okay…so we, um, let the UN make all the world’s enriched uranium and ration it. How long until the U.N. manages to turn “Atoms for Peace” into “Oil For Food II”?
More importantly, I don’t hear anything in there that would actually discourage a country like Iran or North Korea from enriching uranium, other than making them pinky swear to the IAEA that they won’t do it–and both countries have already broken their word on the subject.
See, the NPT is fine if you are worried about non-rogue states acquiring nukes. If Finland decided it probably needs a nuclear arsenal, it might be stopped by the fact that it had signed the NPT and it had made a commitment to the international community not to acquire nuclear weapons even though it wanted them. A nice non-rogue country like Finland cares about these things, you see.
But if the NPT didn’t stop Finalnd, well, it’s still just Finland. I’d rather they didn’t have H-bombs riding on their ICBM’s, but even if they do, if there’s (God forbid) a bright flash where Times Square used to be, the first place I look for the culprit is not going to be Finland.
Meanwhile, where I will look is toward the rogue states that either never joined the NPT regime, left it (like the DPRK did ), or are cheating on it like a Kennedy on a blind wife (Iran). They don’t care about international law except insofar as it legitimizes and protects their regimes. Iran’s signature on the NPT does not reassure me. And of course subnational groups–e.g., Al Qaeda, the Russian Mob, aren’t bound by the NPT at all.
Rep. Harman’s right that the NPT doesn’t protect us well. But her alternative plan just sounds like the Democrat version of what I’ve called a faith-based non-proliferation policy, because it trusts the North Koreans (and the Saudis) to do what’s in our interests instead of in theirs, presumably out of the goodness of their hearts.
__________________
{post by See-Dubya}
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Homeland Security, United Nations
Big Government
» BREAKING: San Diego ACORN Document Dump Scandal
Big Government
» Why Isn’t Anyone Really Investigating ACORN?Big Government
» ACORN Scandal, Part 2: The Evidentiary PhaseMudville Gazette
» War costs money (2)Green Room
» Going Un-Framed?Mudville Gazette
» Surrender, he whisperedPundit & Pundette
» The rebirth of Rom Houben
Typical left philosophy…if it “feels good”, it must be right. Besides, if we tell nations we trust them, all will okay, along with “conversation” and a “hug”.
talk, talk, talk, talk, boom!, opps.
Give the United Nations oversight on a program is akin to trusting the public school system to teach values to children.
Are you sure Harman isn’t really Dumpster Muffin? Seems to be a striking resemblance there.
As always a Dem lib is spouting a bunch of half-baked gobbledy-gook about something they haven’t thought fully through because they really know nothing about the problem … typical cursory level of thinking … it sounds great in the sound bites … it feels good to say things that seem profound … and that’s as deep as the thinking goes … never a second spent to consider all of the ramifications of the their statements …
As usual … nothing to see here folks … just another looney liberal trying to give the impression she is on top of the situation and has a solution …
Boortz was quoting yesterday that if you talk energy with a Democrat, their brains fall out…
heeheeheeheeheehee
Nucs are bad however you spin it. Even if you don’t know what you’re talking about. It’s just wrong to mess with mother nature…as in splitting atoms.
We all know that Saddam had no nuclear interests or capabilities, so we should be comforted by that as the prime example of how a new treaty would work. These Democrat idiots ought to read the “Mouse that Roared”.
The only rational policy is a strong missle defense and an assurance that any state found to have used nuclear weapons against us will be wiped off the face of the earth. Unilateral Assurred Destruction Of course we could not credibly employ UAD without worring about all the innocents that would be destroyed.
Beyond Intelligence: Covert Preemption
The only real dirty-hands but sure solution to this outside the political minefield of military action is to have a covert ultra-aggressive threat preemption department designed to ferret out and sabotage (and yes, maybe assassinate) and otherwise frustrate the very personnel and means of creating these awful weapons. People who dislike the military or hate seeing women and children bombed should support such an initiative. This technology is just too widespread and loose to trust your family’s welfare on diplomatic reins and good-feelings. There must be a way to directly cripple a potential aggressor with us in their targets. They need only incinerate your loved ones once and no amount of “We should’ve done that!” or “But we meant good!” or “I’m sorry” can resurrect them. It’s not a gentleman’s world anymore I’m afraid.
James Greenidge
Queens NY
DL, Excellent post.
Oh and See-dubya, you didn’t do so bad there yourself.
The default position for Democrat pols like Harman when a problem rears its ugly head is either ‘nationalize it’ or ‘let the UN control it’….the good thing about that is it relieves them from having to do any actual thinking about real problems.
Oil for food II, I love it — But I think the more sinister thing is the “ration” part. Controlling electricity is controlling people in the modern world.
You noticed that Democrats are control freaks, haven’t you.
It sounds to me like Jane Harmon is living in liberal lalaland when it comes to her world view of international organizations. Why the heck to this clueless “feeling” idiots not understand the UN and any other international organization you can think of is a failure. Anyone remember or worse yet know about the League of Nations (not they teach that in public school anymore). I have to agree with you see-dubya what would prevent a repeat of the Food for Oil II with a much scary exchange of fissile materials to some very scary people.
James Greendige we used to have an agency like that once called the CIA until Jimmah Carter neutered it with the stroke of a pen using an Executive Order that not one sitting President has had the gumballs (to quote our lovely hostess) to nullify.
And there they go again. Libs STILL think the U.N. has relevance. The track record of this Dictator Club is beyond checkered. I say no way do we give these hacks any say over energy of any sort. Oil For Food is the glaring example. Wake up Harman, ya ditz !
The Useless Nitwits couldn’t keep Iran, Iraq, North Korea, Pakistan, India, and who-knows-who-else from working on or developing nukes.
And yet liberals STILL want to trust them to control nuclear material!?!?
Let the UN control ENRICHED URANIUM??? you have got to be KIDDING, right??? I would not let the UN control the LUNCH ROOM at the US HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. And you know the FIASCO that is…Personal opinion, get the USA out of the UN, and the UN out of the USA…
You would think that Democraps would be happier people when they stare at the world through rose-colored glasses.
The United Nations does not have Americas best interest at heart. I think that is true of most of the rest of the world also. What I don’t understand is why our government officials think that matters.
America feeds and protects the worlds poorest nations so explain to me why they don’t kiss our feet instead of trying to blow our feet off.
Do they actually believe the goodies will continue to flow if this nation falls?
Harmon is not a typical democrat on national security issues. It’s not that unusual for her to make sense. Come’on ppl, give credit where credit is doe!
I don’t know what all the hubbub is about. After all, Bill Clinton had Jimmy Carter negotiate with North Korea, and North Korea agreed not to make nuclear weapons in exchange for food and money.
All we have to do is sit down with Iran, no preconditions, and discuss our rational with them. I know in their hearts they want to be reasonable, just like North Korea did. We haven’t had a war with North Korea in 50 years! It can be the same with Iran! Change we can believe in!
Guys….why did the crickets get so loud all of a sudden? Guys….
/sarc off
#20……….snort
And what about the NON-PARTICIPATING states? I think those and the non-complying states may be a concern Congresswoman.
What a putzette.
WTF??..It’s not bad enough to be dependent on foreign countries for our oil produced energy….Now you want us to be dependent on the foreign run U.N. for nuclear energy also??? Why don’t we just open our borders and let them have the entire country….uh…wait a minute…uh…nevermind…
mind boggling… kumbaya policies…today’s California nut-nuggets…little rich girl Harman playing politics…
no more words for such silly naive crapola…
cheating on it like a Kennedy on a blind wife
i just caught that… HA HA HA HA HA …
ROTFLMAO!
Hey, I give her credit for recognizing this problem and not putting her faith in paper treaties.
It’s just that the solution she came up with doesn’t solve the problem.
site problem
This is not appearing on the front page.
Where do these people come from? What life experiences have they had that lead them to think that handing over their security is a good idea?
For the most part, liberals HATE their OWN military. Where do these bizarre impulses come from that lead them to believe that their own military is bad, but trusting a conglomerate that includes every rogue state is “good.”