Arms Control with China?

The Washington Times (Washington, DC), November 12, 2006 | Go to article overview

Arms Control with China?


Byline: Daniel Gallington, SPECIAL TO THE WASHINGTON TIMES

Former Secretary of State James Baker has long believed we should talk directly to our enemies as well as our friends. Before that, President Richard Nixon thought it made sense to be talking directly to the Soviet Union about limiting the most dangerous kinds of weapons and this resulted in the laborious negotiation of intricate nuclear arms control agreements and their implementing protocols. Even President Reagan became something of an arms-control believer during his second term with the conclusion of the INF Treaty with the Soviet Union in 1987.

Proposed here is that arms control negotiations with China could now be a sound idea for us and we should be exploring the proposition as a part of a comprehensive new policy.

This would be a very controversial step, especially for critics of arms control: They maintain that arms control especially with the former Soviet Union was never a good idea for us, whether in concept, practice or otherwise.

The primary reason was that the Soviets always cheated in fact, they developed cheating scenarios as part of their arms control strategies and new weapons development. While we knew this, we seemed oblivious to it, and often agreed to goofy verification regimes rigged to facilitate wide-scale Soviet cheating.

In fact, when I "did" arms control in the 1980s, the more candid Soviet arms controllers told me they assumed we cheated as well: They refused to believe we wouldn't cheat on a matter so fundamentally important to our national security.

We didn't, of course, and Congress would never have funded such projects even if we had wanted to try them. But again, most Soviets thought our Congress did whatever the Pentagon wanted and that all our national security news reporting was under control of the government, as was theirs.

Cheating is the most serious problem with any kind of arms control, most recently demonstrated with the multilateral Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty or "NPT." Rather than to limit the spread of nuclear weapons technology, this treaty has served primarily as diplomatic cover for clandestine nuclear weapons programs in several countries. North Korea and Iran are perhaps the best current examples.

We should, therefore, begin with the proposition that if we decided to negotiate arms control agreements with China we should assume the same degree and intensity of deception we got from the Soviets. China, like the Soviets, won't want us knowing much about their military capabilities especially their strengths or weaknesses.

But, does this mean that arms control with China is a fundamentally bad idea for us? …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • A full archive of books and articles related to this one
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Arms Control with China?
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Help
Full screen

matching results for page

    Questia reader help

    How to highlight and cite specific passages

    1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
    2. Click or tap the last word you want to select, and you’ll see everything in between get selected.
    3. You’ll then get a menu of options like creating a highlight or a citation from that passage of text.

    OK, got it!

    Cited passage

    Style
    Citations are available only to our active members.
    Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

    1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

    Cited passage

    Thanks for trying Questia!

    Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

    Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

    For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

    Already a member? Log in now.