On and off today I watched the Senate debate on the New START Treaty, and I have to admit that I found the whole spectacle deeply depressing. I wasn’t encouraged through monitoring Twitter, my email lists, and the blogosphere, and thereby coming to the realization that somehow progressives have become almost completely disengaged from the issues of nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation, and are far more invested in other issues that are important but, let me say, of less monumental importance. I don’t want to engage in a war of “my issue is more important than your issue,” because the Senate is debating a range of important issues that include progressive taxation, the budget, gay rights, immigrant rights, nuclear issues, and bilateral relations with Russia. I will just say that I am not happy that there is almost no evident interest or angst from the progressive community about the outcome of the START ratification effort. When I was coming of political age, the left was deeply invested in nuclear issues and in many ways we had an ally in Ronald Reagan, although it certainly didn’t seem that way for the majority of his presidency.
I blame Bush and the influence of the neo-conservatives for discrediting the idea that America has a legitimate and morally justifiable role in pushing and enforcing non-proliferation issues. It seems like the left just thinks we’ve lost the moral authority to lead and that all effort to safeguard the world against the spread and use of nuclear weapons is just some cloak for illegitimate imperial ambitions that are incapable of masking our hypocrisy.
In any case, you may disagree, but you can’t possibly countenance the behavior described by Senator Bob Corker of Tennessee.
“I felt like momentum was growing for START,” Corker said, adding that since Reid announced he was holding votes on DADT and DREAM, it has had a “chilling effect.”
“I’m watching support for the treaty erode, because of highly partisan political issues being brought up solely because activist groups in the Democratic Party want this done,” he continued.
Corker said he wasn’t issuing a personal threat, and was merely commenting on the reaction of his Senate GOP colleagues. When I pressed Senator Corker on whether Republican Senators would really base their decision on START on whether Reid held a vote on DADT, Corker didn’t answer directly.
“That being thrown into the middle of this debate is causing many Republicans to want to see START pushed back and candidly is causing them to oppose it,” Corker said. “This is hardening them against passage of this treaty at this time.”
If any senator is willing to vote against a treaty with Russia that is of vital importance to both our national security and our credibility as a leader against the proliferation of nuclear weapons because they don’t like having to vote on other issues, then that senator doesn’t deserve the tiniest bit of respect and the people should rise up and insist that they serve our country no longer. I’m serious. You can oppose the New START Treaty on substance, but not on procedural grounds and not for narrow political purposes. Anyone who doesn’t understand that should be drummed out of office.
I really cannot endure this kind of governance. It’s going to drive me mad.
