RSS
Using PayPal
ON DAY ONE: "Multi-Nationalize the Fuel Cycle" and "Open Travel to Cuba"
Share / Recommend - Comment - Print - Thursday, Mar 13 2008, 2:28PM
One of the very coolest and most informative blogs I check in on a daily basis is ArmsControlWonk.com published by my New America Foundation colleague Jeffrey Lewis.
Both of us were asked by the Better World Campaign to offer comments for its "On Day One" initiative. He talked nukes, and I talked Cuba. . .though I'd also like to talk about Israel/Palestine, Syria, China, Iran, climate change, oil/energy, and nukes. I may fool them and wear different hats and perhaps a moustache to make myself appear differently.
But listen to Jeffrey Lewis share in one minute what I think is a vital approach to a key national security challenge.
I share my "On Day One" thoughts here and believe strongly that it is in American interests that the U.S. open up exchange and travel with Cuba:
-- Steve Clemons
« Previous Article - The Washington Note and The Havana Note Soon to Have More Cuban Readers» Next Article - Brussels Forum Impresses
Reader Comments (3) - post a comment
Steve, I appreciate your friend Jeffery taking the time out to comment on what he feels needs to be done one Day One. I feel that his logic is a little flawed, though, because he sees it all from the all American point of view. All his suggestions apply to “other“ countries. THEY need to be more transparent, THEY need to internationalize their fuel cycle, THEY need to be restricted to avoid proliferation. But if the US and other nuclear armed nations don’t abide by these rules how do we expect “other” countries to not label us hypocrites? Here’s a suggestion that will go over really good with Uncle Sam: let an Iranian team inspect the US nuclear facilities for compliance to the NNPT…
Also, for instance, Iran has already made clear that nobody can force them to become dependent on second or third parties for their nuclear fuel cycle. Those countries would basically own Iran, and other countries, pushed into agreements like this. Why should anyone on earth agree with that?
Why not a more traditional day-one act? Rescind the Mexico City
protocol.
OPEC and American oil oppose Iranian nuclear ability because they want the oil market spiked.
It isn't about security to them, never was.
MAD is reason enough to consider deterrence deployments.
If Iran's ability to power itself remains on horseback, the world oil market narrows and inflates prices.
Leave a comment: