“New Nuclear Disarmament Proposals: Implications for NATO and the Transatlantic Relations ”

Ivo H. Daalder
U.S. Ambassador to NATO
Slovak Atlantic Commission International Security Conference 
Bratislava
 
October 22, 2009
 

Deterrence/Defense in the 21^st Century: A Shared Responsibility

Thank you for your kind introduction… I am delighted to be here and for the opportunity to make a few brief remarks about one of the most critical security issues of our time: deterrence and defense in the 21^st century.

One key to this, concerns the subject of this panel: nuclear weapons and arms control; but another is one we often ignore: active defense, especially against ballistic missile attack—the quintessential Article 5 threat of our time.

These are subjects that I not only deal with on a daily basis in my current position, but have for decades as an academic and think tanker in the U.S. and Europe. Indeed, my first two books were on the question of missile defense—and my doctoral dissertation was on the subject of nuclear weapons and NATO.

So I speak today not only as the U.S. Ambassador to NATO, but also as someone with a long, deep interest in the subject.  And I am personally well aware of how important an issue this is to you here in Bratislava.

The nuclear threat is one that we all face together.  The world has changed since I wrote my dissertation.   And as we move further into the 21^st century and the threats multiply, it’s important that we find solutions together. 

It’s fair to say we could call the period we are currently living in “Looking Towards Global Zero”. We know we’ve left behind the arms race of the Cold War, and our aspirations of living in a world without nuclear weapons are clear. But the threat of proliferation by rogue states is growing alarmingly in scope and complexity, and the urgency to forestall it is high. And now we also face the danger of nuclear terrorism.  Therefore the consequences of not acting are simply unacceptable.

President Obama and his Administration are determined to act – by making clear that we need to make the goal of a world without nuclear weapons our collective goal – and to take concrete steps toward its achievement.  Of course, the President was clear that this goal might not happen in his lifetime, and that it would carry broad implications and responsibilities for the world’s nuclear powers and other states. In his words, “We cannot tolerate a world in which nuclear weapons spread to more nations and in which the terror of a nuclear holocaust endangers more people.”

And that is why President Obama is determined to take on this challenge--today, and every day that follows—until our goal of a world without nuclear weapons—a world of Global Zero—has been achieved.

The Obama Administration has not just spoken in the past ten months, it has acted.

• It is strengthening the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

• It is in the midst of pursuing a new START agreement with Russia.

• It is engaging both Iran and North Korea to halt and reverse their nuclear programs.

• It is moving forward with ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.

• It will complete a Nuclear Posture Review early next year that opens the door to still deeper cuts, and reduces the role of nuclear weapons.

• And it will start negotiating in January on a treaty to end the production of fissile material for weapons purposes.

A reinvigorated commitment to arms control and nonproliferation—as evidenced by the remarkable United Nations Security Council Summit last month chaired by President Obama and the passage of the historic Resolution 1887—is one key aspect of the Obama Administration’s effort to build a safer world. President Obama’s announcement of a new approach to missile defense is another.

One of the most important and dangerous new challenges facing NATO comes from the proliferation of ballistic missiles that can carry chemical, biological and nuclear warheads. This is not a theoretical threat—it is real and getting bigger every day. And it will affect all of us in NATO—whether in Europe, given the threat of Iran, or in North American, given what’s happening in North Korea.

Some of the initial reactions in the press to President Obama’s announcement on missile defense last month focused on what was being scrapped—the old plan—but not on what the President proposed to put in its place: a missile defense system that, in his words, is: “stronger, smarter, swifter”.  

The new program will be stronger. It will protect the U.S. and our NATO Allies against 21^st-century threats.

Let’s be very clear: the President’s decision—and the new program—have nothing to do with Russia. It is neither directed at Russia nor was the decision based on a desire to curry favor with Russia. Its sole purpose was to deal with a serious danger to ourselves, our forces in Europe, and above all, to our allies in the North Atlantic Alliance.

Indeed, those who drafted the North Atlantic Treaty 60 years ago could not have imagined that the “armed attack” they wrote about in Article 5 would come from rockets that could travel intercontinental distances—but that is the threat we now face.

And the new system proposed by President Obama offers an effective defense against this threat by relying on proven technologies like Aegis radars on ships and Standard Missiles that can shoot down ballistic missiles before they reach their target. 

With the President’s decision, we have a flexible system that can be based in many different places. And it can be part of a NATO system if the Alliance decides that territorial missile defense is now the kind of Article 5 contingency that this Alliance needs to take on.

The system we propose is also smarter than the previous system of ten ground-based interceptors in Poland and a large radar in the Czech Republic. The old plan was calibrated to the threat from Iran’s long-range missiles, but in fact, the more immediate danger is from Iran’s short and medium-range missiles.

We now know that Iran already has hundreds of ballistic missiles that can threaten its neighbors, and it is actively developing and testing ballistic missiles that can strike farther into Europe.

We also know that Iran is -- at a minimum -- keeping open the option of developing nuclear weapons, as well as longer-range delivery systems.

Given the new realities on the ground, the original plan, first put forward in 2006, is simply no longer the smartest option. Its ten interceptors could easily be exhausted by a larger attack; and that system offered no defense of parts of NATO territory in southeastern Europe.

Confronting the increased danger from Iran demands a new, better option for the defense of all of NATO territory.  And it demands a swifter response. Because the new system relies on existing technologies, the first defenses can be deployed as early as 2011, some five years ahead of the old plan.

By 2018, all of NATO territory – in Europe and North America – will be protected against ballistic missiles of all ranges.

As I mentioned, we will start out with ship-based Aegis interceptors--they are smart, adjustable elements with the potential for upgrades and links to other systems.  The idea is to deploy these new defenses over four phases as the network expands to include land- and air-based sensors and more capable interceptors in response to an evolving threat. 

Agile, tested, flexible: this is a “drive before you buy” plan using proven technology. The new network will be able to integrate with existing systems and will adapt to new threats as they emerge. If NATO agrees, these new defenses can be fully integrated into NATO’s command and control backbone and fully achieve the mission of territorial defense against ballistic missile attack. 

The merit of this plan is that all 28 Alliance members—not just some—will have the opportunity to plug into the system…to be part of a program that defends every member’s territory, which is what NATO’s core commitment of Article 5 is all about.

The path forward—on missile defense, on arms control, nonproliferation, and disarmament—is clear.

As Secretary Clinton said yesterday in her address on nonproliferation at the U.S. Institute for Peace, we stand at a new crossroads as we look to a world without nuclear weapons. At this key moment in history, we must meet this challenge by acting boldly, wisely, and in concert with other nations.

Thank you.