Smells Like Teen Fear-It

Posted: December 2, 2010 in Uncategorized

Desperate acts for desperate men; desperate arguments for desperate minds.

Among the more juvenile and anxious (teen fear-it, get it?) pro-New START arguments seen to date is this cheesy piece from the Stimson Center. It argues that unless the Senate ratifies New START (queue the Jaws music), satellites will be put at risk.

Many of New START’s harshest critics argue that the Treaty’s monitoring provisions are deficient. Shelving the Treaty will not improve verification. On the contrary, doing so will deal another blow to binding legal obligations protective of monitoring satellites.

The author appears to presume that any form of on-site verification, no matter how flawed or weak, is better than nothing and attempts to create a false dilemma: New START or nothing.

Additionally, maybe the author would like to explain the following parts of the earlier paragraph:

  1. Another blow? What were the previous blows?
  2. Another blow to binding legal obligations? What binding legal obligations have been beat on? The Outer Space Treaty seems to…well, not really under attack.
  3. Another blow to binding legal obligations protective of monitoring satellites? Hmm. Is there some sort of monitoring satellite discrimination going on that makes them more vulnerable than communications or GPS satellites? Are monitoring satellites somehow especially vulnerable to a no-treaty outer space beat down?

Spacecraft have and will have a free right of passage in space. Willful actions that interfere with the ability of U.S. satellites will be dealt with through any and all forms of national power as appropriate no matter how silly the argument…like this:

Shelving treaties undermines norms protective of America’s eyes and ears in space. NTM will be placed at further risk by pursuing the space warfare capabilities that some treaty opponents seek. Instructing the Obama administration to go back to the drawing board to improve verification would result in years of logrolling. In the meantime, there will be no inspections and no reaffirmation of the norm against harmful interference with NTM. Without treaties in force that allow on-site inspections and affirm norms protective of monitoring satellites, complaints about the need for better verification ring hollow.

Please. Shelving treaties undermines norms protective of America’s eyes and ears in space? How so? When START expired were America’s eyes and ears in space put at risk? How about Koyoto, the global warming treaty which wasn’t even submitted to the Senate. Did it put any satellites at risk? Didn’t think so. And the U.S. withdrawal from the ABM treaty? No satellite deaths (or even injuries) noted.

Actually, I’ll go further and offer this: complaints about complaints about the need for better verification ring hollow. So there.

Feel free to come back when you have a real argument. In the meantime, your cheese stands alone.

New START, Stimson Center, Weak Cheese

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s