SOLVENCY: USA AND RUSSIA CUTS WILL CAUSE OTHERS TO FOLLOW
AS USA AND RUSSIA CUT NUCLEAR FORCES OTHER NATIONS WILL BE DRAWN INTO THE PROCESS
Statement on Nuclear Weapons by International Generals and Admirals (Signed by 60 retired generals and admirals from 17 countries) December 5, 1996http://www.nuclearfiles.org/docs/1996/961205-admirals.html //VT2002acsln
The United States and Russia should -- without any reduction in their military security -- carry forward the reduction process already launched by START - they should cut down to 1000 to 1500 warheads each and possibly lower. The other three nuclear states and the three threshold states should be drawn into the reduction process as still deeper reductions are negotiated down to the level of hundreds. There is nothing incompatible between defense by individual countries of their territorial integrity and progress toward nuclear abolition.
THE USA SHOULD BEGIN NEGOTIATING A NUCLEAR ABOLITION AGREEMENT WITH RUSSIA AND OTHERS
David Krieger, President of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation. May 25, 2000 It's Time to End the Nuclear Weapons Threathttp://www.peacenet.org/disarm/ //VT2002acsln
Fourth, we should be engaging in good faith negotiations with Russia and the other nuclear weapons states to achieve a treaty to eliminate nuclear weapons. Thats what we promised in the 1970 Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, and recently reaffirmed at the 2000 Review Conference for this Treaty. If we want the non-nuclear weapons states to keep their part of the non-proliferation bargain and not develop nuclear weapons, wed better keep our part of the bargain.
NUCLEAR REDUCTIONS COULD PERSUADE OTHER NATIONS TO FOLLOW THE USA
Stephen S. Rosenfeld, March 6, 2000, The Washington Post SECTION: OP-ED; Pg. A19 HEADLINE: Clinton's Nuclear Dilemma // acs-ln
Abolition is a nonstarter. But it would be a stunning initiative for the United States to put itself on a gradual downward slope toward a so-called minimum deterrent. Reduction by unilateral example on the model successfully pursued by George Bush would leave us with a force of our own design and would produce a more powerful impact on others weighing reductions than any conceivable negotiating strategy.