Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Senior Foreign Policy Figures Endorse Obama Vision for Nuclear-Free World

By Michael A. Fletcher
President Obama held an Oval Office meeting today with four of the nation's foreign policy wise men, who endorsed his administration's vision for a world free of nuclear weapons.
Obama, who laid his vision out in a speech in Prague early last month, embraced the endorsement after meeting with former secretaries of state Henry Kissinger and George P. Shultz, former Defense Secretary William Perry and former Sen. Sam Nunn (D-Ga.).

"I don't think anybody would accuse these four gentlemen of being dreamers," Obama told reporters after the meeting with the bipartisan group. "They're hard-headed, tough defenders of American interests and American security. But what they have come together to help galvanize is a recognition that we do not want a world of continued nuclear proliferation, and that in order for us to meet the security challenges of the future, America has to take leadership in this area."

Obama said the need to limit the spread of nuclear weapons is underscored by the growing global threat: nuclear programs in North Korea and Iran, substantial stockpiles in India and Pakistan and efforts by al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups to acquire nuclear materials.

Obama said his administration wants to revitalize the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, work to reduce current stockpiles and to do more to "lock down" loose nuclear weapons.
"All four of us support enthusiastically what the president is doing," Shultz said after Obama spoke.

By Web Politics Editor  |  May 19, 2009; 4:50 PM ET
Categories:  National Security  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Steele Predicts a GOP Comeback
Next: GOP Compares Pelosi to Bond Villain


Nuclear weapons ! The US is the only country to use them and set the standard for other countries, to what they need to defend themselves. It kept Russia and United States from destroying each other. The path has been set and how long it will take for a nuclear confrontation to happen again is yet to be determined. As long as war persist in this world, its likely hood will be assured. The real problem is the human being.

Posted by: jk330 | May 21, 2009 12:19 PM | Report abuse

Why can't we all just get along? Don't upset Israel. They could take over this nation if they wanted. They have weapons that make ours look like they were made by grade-schoolers.

Posted by: bob461 | May 20, 2009 3:46 PM | Report abuse

Obama is going to pressure everyone to cut nukes. The probability of a nuclear terrorist attack is a sum of multiple probabilities that increases (not decreases) with time until the probability becomes a certainty at some point in the future. The only way to change this probability function is to remove the one element terrorists will not have -- the ability to MAKE weapons grade nuclear material.

Nukes are just a means of deterrence throughout the world, not weapons of aggression. Thus, their destruction depends on one factor only -- lessening the concerns of nations that they may need them for protection. Israel has feared its neighbors. Pakistan and India have feared each other. The US feared Russia. I think England and France just built them so they would be nuclear powers. China built them out of concern over Russia and the US. If we can lessen the tensions, improve the peace we can start to dispose of these weapons and lower the probability of the material getting in the hands of terrorists.

Posted by: PJW5552 | May 20, 2009 12:35 PM | Report abuse

Besides being a Marxist in this heart, an arch-leftist in the open, Obama knows nothing about foreign policy. When it come to motives of other countries, he is a babe in the woods. Appeasement, defeatism, and pacifism, throughout the course of history has led to only one thing. This thing is a combination of slavery, defeat, and ruin. Has any one person in this guy's administration ever read something other than revisionist history?

Posted by: walterndebby | May 20, 2009 11:05 AM | Report abuse

Good luck with that. Try prying the nukes from India and Pakistan. We have made great progress with Iran and North Korea. Get back to me when China has signed on. Just another distraction from the spending and looting going on behind close doors at the Federal Reserve and Treasury. Next up unloading the toxic waste, er I mean assets onto the taxpayer.

Posted by: Bubbette1 | May 19, 2009 11:51 PM | Report abuse

Obama's aim to prevent or reduce nuclear weapons in certain countries is suspect since he does not include Israel, which has nuclear weapons and a history of committing atrocities and war crimes on its arab neighbors. Countries without nuclear weapons should get nuclear weapons to protect their sovereignty and defend against countries with nuclear weapons. Otherwise, these countries are at the mercy of countries with nuclear weapons. Iraq, Lebanon, and Gaza are good examples of how countries without nuclear weapons fall victim to countries with nuclear weapons.

Nuclear weapons should be the right of all countries, or the right of none.

Posted by: marge9 | May 19, 2009 9:29 PM | Report abuse

When did reducing our weapons ever encourage other countries to do the same? I don't think Obama is the first president to have this wonderful vision of a neclear-free world. I think they have all had it. But the past presidents, with the exception of Carter, had the wisdom and experience to know that it is unrealistic. THIS is where experience comes in handy.

Posted by: phanka2005 | May 19, 2009 5:14 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company