John Bolton didn’t totally say that New START is a threat to your precious fluids, but he was happy to weave the treaty into a generally frothy speech at Heritage about the long-term threat that the Obama administration’s multilateralism poses to American sovereignty. Just out from the Washington Independent:

Advances in arms control would have “a cumulative impact on our sovereignty,” Bolton argued. While he declined to address the merits of the treaty — whose text has not yet been released — Bolton said it reflected Obama’s “almost religious view in the obligations and implications of treaties.” He scoffed at the president’s statement that the U.S.-Russian reduction in their countries’ nuclear stockpiles, which represent over 90 percent of the world’s nuclear weapons, would strengthen global arms control efforts, and suggested that it would spur rogue-state nuclear proliferation.

“I think the people in places like Teheran and Pyongyang say, ‘Fantastic — the United States is coming down, let’s ramp up our production efforts to get to the [nuclear] capability even more quickly,’” Bolton said. “The rhetoric of the arms control advocates often is very divorced from important and legitimate American security concerns.”

It is what it is and it won’t ever change. I suppose it’s immaterial to observe that Bolton didn’t address the value that disarmament or strengthening the NPT has on non-rogue potential proliferators. Perhaps I’m looking at this the wrong way and the fact that Bolton didn’t say New START itself is a threat to American sovereignty is an indicator that the treaty might be in stronger political shape for ratification than I’m considering.

Spencer Ackerman

Spencer Ackerman