Skybolt and New START

That Good Old 'Pattern of Cooperation'," Contentions, February 8, 2011. "Over the last few days, the conservative media and blogosphere in the U.S. and Britain have been roiled by WikiLeaks documents suggesting that, in order to secure Russia’s agreement to the New START Treaty, the U.S. agreed to disclose information about the Trident missiles it transfers to Britain. Media Matters predictably claims that there is nothing untoward involved, it’s all an invention of the “right-wing media.” And P.J. Crowley argued that New START simply “carried forward and updated this notification procedure” from the 1991 START Treaty. Yet a careful reading of the 1991 and 2011 treaties reveals significant differences between the U.S.’s obligations vis-à-vis Britain and Russia in these treaties."

Another New START Problem

New START and the Special Relationship: A Case to Answer, Heritage Foundation Foundry, February 8, 2011. "Last Friday, British newspapers reported that the U.S. had agreed to supply Russia with sensitive information on Britain’s nuclear deterrent in order to win Russian agreement to the New START Treaty. Over the weekend, State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley described this claim as “bunk” and asserted that New START simply “carried forward and updated this notification procedure to the new treaty” from the 1991 START Treaty. The Wikileaks document on which the original story was based, and the treaties of 1991 and 2011, tell a different story."

My Take on Wikileaks

Forget About Leaks, The Real Problem is Slipshod Diplomacy, Yorkshire Post, December 8, 2010. "If you work in the government, and you disagree with a policy, you have only two honorable choices: follow the policy and keep your mouth shut, or resign and speak out. Over the past decade, U.S. officials – and in particular the State Department and the intelligence services – have cultivated a third way, an ethic of irresponsible leaking."