Irrespective of the ratios of reducing the nuclear arsenals of the United States and Russia, which will drop to one-third of their level under the previous agreement of 2002 and three-quarters of what they were at the time of the collapse of the Soviet Union, the most important thing about the new START treaty between the two countries is the positive climate that prevails between the two global powers. The remaining warheads possessed by Washington and Moscow do not rule out the possibility of a nuclear confrontation in the future; as they are still able to destroy both countries. However, the treaty sends a message, namely that the Obama administration intends to take the right course of action in dealing with the nuclear issue, and this involves a desire to rid the world of this destructive arsenal. In order to do this, nuclear states must be watched and constraints imposed on them, in order to prevent them from using these weapons. The signatures witnessed by Prague on Thursday, on the treaty to reduce American and Russian nuclear arsenals, comes exactly a year after Obama's famous address in the same city. Then, he declared his dream of ridding the world of nuclear weapons, not just during one or two presidential terms, but also during his lifetime. The difficulty of achieving this has been demonstrated over the past year. The world has seen an improvement in the climate of relations between Washington and Moscow, thanks in particular to Obama's rhetoric of cooperation with Russia, and his initiative to drop the missile shield plan of his predecessor, George Bush, from America's defense strategy. However, this year has not seen an improvement in Washington's relations with other “nuclear” areas of concern and tension, especially in Iran and North Korea. They continue to remain distant from this positive climate; in fact, this climate, in their view, is coming at their expense, and in order to confront their aspirations. This explains the importance of what Obama has declared as a new nuclear policy, the day before the signing of the START treaty in Prague by Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev. This policy is based on a commitment to not use American nuclear weapons against any state that does not have them, or against any nuclear state that adheres to the Non-Proliferation Treaty. In other words, we can say that Washington's “nuclear relaxation” policy does not extend to the current, likely confrontation with Tehran, which is worrying the entire Middle East. Neither does it extend to the other possible confrontation, on the Korean Peninsula, which also worries North Korea's neighbors. Just as China plays the swing role in the former confrontation, in terms of participating in sanctions or pleasing the Iranian regime at the expense of international consensus, it plays the same role in the Korean case, where it is the only state able to open a line of communication and discussion with Kim Jong-Il. The direct benefits of the new START treaty might include its convincing the Kremlin leadership that the Obama administration shares its concerns about regions of nuclear tension in the world, which remain out of control. Iran is the leader on this front, as it occupied a significant part of the discussions between the American and Russian presidents. Obama announced that he agreed with the Russians that Iran bears the consequences of its stance on its nuclear program, while Medvedev expressed readiness to participate in sanctions in Iran if it does not dispel the doubts about this program. Another benefit of START is that it sends a message to “nuclear states,” namely that understanding and dialogue among these states will guarantee “coexistence” with nuclear weapons. The Obama administration is also sending a message that is no less important: adhering to nuclear non-proliferation, or playing the geopolitical game as it should be played, heads off the possibility of America confronting any state that adheres to these bases, even if it labels itself a country of “opposition”, one that is inimical to US interests. It is a message that should be picked up by the rulers in Tehran, since they are characterized as something else by the Obama administration, which goes beyond amateur or immature, as the “mature” Ahmadinejad understood it!
