Albright Addresses The Future Of NATO

By Miles Wolf Tamboli-Talk Radio News Service

Former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee Thursday on the future of NATO and how the coalition could evolve to meet twenty-first century threats.

Albright, who chaired a panel to determine NATO's Strategic Concept, called for a "comprehensive approach" - an idea to create a civilian arm of NATO forces, in part as a response to the alliance's experience over the past decade in nation-building in Afghanistan. Albright also emphasized that the framers of the new Strategic Concept did not want Afghanistan to be, "the be-all and end-all of NATO." She stated that there must be lessons learned from the mission, but that NATO's strategic outlook, "has to go beyond just Afghanistan."

As the Senate continues to weigh the ratification of the START Treaty, an arms reduction agreement between Russia and the U.S., Albright proclaimed that as long as nuclear arms exist "in the system," NATO will continue relying on a nuclear component. The former Secretary of State also portrayed energy security as a primary NATO concern in the future.

Bipartisan Letter Sent To Obama Urges Strong Sanctions Against Iran

By Laurel Brishel Prichard University of New Mexico/ Talk Radio News Service

Bipartisan support was shown Wednesday in a letter sent to President Barack Obama urging him to put “crippling” sanctions on Iran to stop the prevent the country from developing nuclear weapons.

“Without a doubt, Iran’s nuclear weapons program poses a severe threat to America’s national interest,” said Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. (D-IL.) in a press appearance with Republican colleagues.

The sanctions would place strict regulations on Iran which would stop the country from acquiring nuclear materials as well as keep the nation from becoming “a more dangerous, destabilizing and destructive force in the world,” according to Jackson.

While the United Nations is currently focusing on applying sanctions against the country, Rep. Illeana Ros-Lethinen (R-Fl.) hopes the leter prompts faster action.

“We are repeating the failures of the past and continuing to let Iran run out the clock. We can’t wait for consensus on watered-down resolutions at the United Nations Security Council,” said Ros-Lethinen.

The letter was signed by 361 House members.

PRESIDENT TO SPEAK ON IRAN AT 3:05 EASTERN

We’re about to get President Obama’s reaction to today’s talks in Geneva between Iran and the so-called P5+1; the president will speak in the Diplomatic Reception room at 3:05 Eastern.

As for the talks themselves, there has been no indication that Iran is willing to back down on its nuclear program. But Tehran has agreed to allow international nuclear inspectors into its uranium-enrichment facility near Qum – no word on when - it also claims that last week’s disclosure of the facility means that Iran has now disclosed all of its nuclear facilities to the West.

At the talks, which included the highest-level bilateral discussions between the U.S. and Iran in years, Tehran also agreed to an additional meeting later this month.

Asked whether the additional talks are merely an attempt by Tehran to stall the West, presidential press secretary Robert Gibbs said: “The Iranians need to understand that we mean business.” If talks do not yield fruitful results soon – and by soon, the White House means Dec. 31 – then tougher sanctions will be on the table, Gibbs said.



What kind of sanctions is Obama considering? The President is said to be weighing the cutoff of gasoline supplies to Iran, the thought being that this would further weaken the wobbly Iranian economy. Why does Iran – the world’s 4th biggest oil producer - have to import gasoline in the first place? Because existing sanctions have choked its refineries of spare parts needed to process enough crude to meet its needs – it is estimated that Tehran imports about 25% of its gas.
These sanctions have, in fact, appeared to have an impact. The CIA has reported that fuel shortages forced the regime to ration fuel in July 2007 and impose a stiff fuel tax in October of last year. Both moves, intelligence analysts say, “were met with stiff resistance and violent protests.”

-- TRNS Staff

Key U.S.-Russia Non-Proliferation Treaty May Expire Without Renewal, Say Foreign Affairs Experts

By Celia Canon- Talk Radio News Service

Charles D. Ferguson and Stephen Sestanovich, Senior Fellows at the Council on Foreign Relations, explained that the 1991 START non-proliferation treaty may not be renewed following the U.S.-Russia Summit this July.

“There can’t be an agreement unless there’s also a formal renunciation by the U.S of the missile defense plan. That’s rather unlikely to happen, and if the Russian stick to that line, the chances of arms control are [slim],” said Sestanovich.

START (Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty) was ratified in 1991 by Russia and the U.S in an effort to achieve a dramatic reduction in strategic forces such as warheads and inter-continental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) in the post-Cold War era.

According to the U.S. based Arms Control Association, “Russia claimed 4,237 total deployed strategic warheads under the terms of the 1991 START nuclear reductions agreement” while the U.S has 3,696 deployed strategic warheads.

“What has really agitated the Russians... is the American plan to deploy some rather basic elements of the missile defense system in Eastern Europe,” Sestanovich explained, referencing the Bush administration’s decision to install missiles at a base in Poland and to build a radar station in the Czech Republic. Both deals intended to protect Europe from “rogue states” such as Iran.

Ferguson added, “The [Obama] administration has a review of its missile defense policy on the way, and that makes it a little more difficult for them to reach any specific understandings with the Russian about this issue. They can’t offer certain kinds of assurances.”

President Barack Obama has recently agreed to halt military developments in Eastern Europe if Russia agrees to participate actively against Iran.

Ferguson countered Moscow’s accusations that a U.S presence in neighboring states is a serious military threat, saying “What we are looking at is a much smaller, much more modest missile defense system... There’s really no technical reasons for the Russians to be worried at this stage about missile defense as it is currently proposed.”

GOP Wants U.S. to Be a Leader in the “Nuclear Renaissance”

Members of the Senate Republican Conference have adopted the challenge of creating 100 new nuclear plants in the United States in the next 20 years. The main objective of the proposal is to produce more American energy while using less.

“If climate change is the inconvenient problem of the day, then nuclear power is the inconvenient answer,” said U.S. Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), Senate Republican Conference Chairman.

Alexander said it is “hard to imagine” why the most urgent solution would not be how to produce more nuclear energy in the next 20 years. He said without nuclear power, the U.S. would not have a chance of a clean air economy.

David Blee, executive director of the U.S. Transport Council, discussed the building process of the 100 new nuclear plants. There is currently only one nuclear energy plant under construction in the United States, TVA’s Watts Bar unit 2.

Blee said that nuclear energy is the “most potent clean energy baseload power option, the most powerful stimulator of jobs per megawatt and enjoys record performance reliability, safety, economics and strong public support.”

However, nuclear energy was removed from the stimulus package and there is not a nuclear title in the House Energy and Commerce Committee’s recently passed clean energy bill.

“To me this is almost a P.R. situation. I don’t think Americans are aware of the potential associated with nuclear power.” said Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.).