Easing Nuclear Jitters

The Bush administration has rejected one international agreement after another, from a curb on global warming to the creation of an international criminal court that would investigate war crimes. So the president’s announcement that he wants to “liquidate the legacy of the Cold War” by signing a treaty May 24 with Russian President Vladimir V. Putin to slash bloated nuclear arsenals comes as a refreshing change.

The proposed treaty would make the world a bit safer, not just by taking some nukes out of commission--the United States and Russia have more than 90% of the world’s nuclear weapons--but by tightening the relationship between two former enemies.

The agreement contains massive cuts in long-range warheads, from the 6,000 permitted under the 1991 START treaty to between 1,700 and 2,200. Russia can’t afford to maintain a big Cold War-style missile force, and the Bush administration’s insistence on putting warheads in storage rather than destroying them, as the Russians wanted, held up a deal.

A compromise on how many warheads are to be dismantled was apparently reached, though the percentages have not been revealed yet. Bush did agree to a formal treaty, rather than the informal agreement he had been pushing for.

In the works since fall, the agreement is supposed to form the centerpiece of Bush’s visit to Russia late next week. The Senate will doubtless ratify the treaty but will have a chance to call for greater cuts--which should alarm no one, since the U.S. could easily go below 1,000 warheads and retain an overwhelming deterrent force.

However Bush and Putin resolve their now relatively small differences, the forthcoming treaty is evidence of a new relationship based on trust and common national interests. Already a NATO-Russia council is being created that will give Moscow a greater role in counter-terrorism and military actions. The result could be anything from a joint training center to an anti-terrorism center.

The sooner Russia is included in NATO decisions, the more willing it will be to work with the U.S. and its allies. In improving ties, Bush is following in the footsteps of President Clinton, who was ferociously attacked by the Republican right on the ground that he was appeasing Russia. But the United States and Russia have far more to gain by cooperating than returning to Cold War-era confrontation. The benefits of working with Russia show that an American go-it-alone foreign policy is dangerously counterproductive.