Sen. Cruz to President Obama: Release the Russian Missile Risk Assessment

Cruz.Senate.gov ^ | August 24, 2015

[Isara]

Cruz sends letter to the President requesting embargoed report on Russian treaty violations

WASHINGTON, D.C. - U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) on Friday sent a letter to President Obama calling for the release of the Department of Defense's (DoD) risk assessment of Russia's violations of the Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF). The letter explains that the White House has blocked the release of the Pentagon report and is preventing Congress from investigating Russia's noncompliance.

"Although the State Department formally declared Russia to be in violation of the INF Treaty in 2014, additional reports indicate that the United States has harbored doubts of Russian compliance since 2008 stemming primarily from the R-500 ground-launched cruise missile. But these concerns were not shared with the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations in September 2010 before the committee voted on the New START Treaty," Sen. Cruz wrote. "Only in late 2011, long after Congress voted in favor of the New START Treaty, did your Administration conclude that the R-500 was an official compliance concern."

"The Senate's advice and consent power is a pivotal element of a constitutional and prudent foreign policy, but it cannot be exercised if your administration does not act in good faith...This risk assessment report is necessary to determine a strategic response to Russia's treaty violations, and I request that you lift your embargo on this report immediately."

Sen. Cruz's letter can be read in its entirety below and viewed here.

August 21, 2015

President Barack Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW
Washington, D.C. 20500

Dear President Obama:

I write regarding a recent report that suggests the White House is blocking the Department of Defense from releasing its risk assessment of Russia's violations of the Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty.

If accurate, this report suggests your administration is withholding information from Congress pertinent to executing its constitutional and statutory role in foreign affairs. In May, I noted the delay of the State Department's Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2014 and the Pentagon's deferral of its Annual Report on Military Power of Iran report - both of which coincided with the negotiation of the Iran nuclear deal. Such information is critical for elected representatives in Congress to fulfill our oath of office to protect the American people from all foreign enemies, and this risk assessment report is no exception.

Although the State Department formally declared Russia to be in violation of the INF Treaty in 2014, additional reports indicate that the United States has harbored doubts of Russian compliance since 2008 stemming primarily from the R-500 ground-launched cruise missile. But these concerns were not shared with the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations in September 2010 before the committee voted on the New START Treaty. Only in late 2011, long after Congress voted in favor of the New START Treaty, did your Administration conclude that the R-500 was an official compliance concern. Congress was justly disturbed by this revelation; when then-acting undersecretary of state for arms control and international security Rose Gottemoeller and assistant secretary of defense for global strategic affairs Madelyn Creedon stated definitively in a closed-door hearing that Russia had violated the INF Treaty, then-senator John Kerry replied tersely: "We're not going to pass another treaty in the U.S. Senate if our colleagues are sitting up here knowing somebody is cheating."

Shortly before the announcement of Brian McKeon's nomination for principal deputy undersecretary of defense for policy in January 2014, the New York Times released a story detailing long-held concerns regarding Russian compliance with the INF. Two of my colleagues sent a letter to Mr. McKeon asking for specific answers as to the exact timing of when the intelligence community briefed senators on such concerns and whether he believed the Senate was properly notified. Instead of a straightforward response, DoD delivered a classified letter to my colleagues at 8:00 p.m. EST the night before Mr. McKeon's confirmation hearing, giving senators little to no time to review these serious questions.

The Senate's advice and consent power is a pivotal element of a constitutional and prudent foreign policy, but it cannot be exercised if your administration does not act in good faith. Grave concerns of Russian compliance exist beyond the R-500 cruise missile, as Russia has potentially mislabeled intermediate missiles as intercontinental ballistic missiles and fielded air defense systems that possess ground-to-ground ballistic capability. If true, these would not only constitute clear violations of the INF Treaty, but present a material threat to the United States and our allies. This risk assessment report is necessary to determine a strategic response to Russia's treaty violations, and I request that you lift your embargo on this report immediately. I look forward to your reply on this matter no later than September 1, 2015.

Sincerely,

Ted Cruz

###

[Isara]

FYI

[ETL]

Mar 2012...

"Obama was talking with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev when neither of them realized that their conversation was being picked up by microphones. Here is what they said:

Obama: “On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this, this can be solved, but it’s important for him to give me space.”

Medvedev: “Yeah, I understand. I understand your message about space. Space for you ...”

Obama: “This is my last election. After my election, I have more flexibility.”

Medvedev: “I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir.”

“This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility.” That statement tells us much about the president’s mindset.

The specific mention of missile defense is worrisome enough. Mr. Obama has retreated from the missile defense plan that was negotiated with European allies during the George W. Bush administration. Apparently, he is signaling Moscow that he intends to retreat further. The clear implication from the president’s comments is that he cannot tell the American people before the election what he plans to do after the election.

In addition, there is the phrase “on all these issues,” implying more is at stake than just missile defense.”

Article: Obama plans double cross on missile defense
When it comes to keeping America safe, we shouldn’t be too flexible:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/mar/29/obama-plans-double-cross-on-missile-defense/print/
__________________________________________________________

From Investor’s Business Daily, 2012:

Obama To Betray Missile Defense Secrets To Moscow
Investor's Business Daily ^ | January 9, 2012 | IBD staff

Appeasement: From ObamaCare to recess appointments, honoring the Constitution has not been an administration hallmark. But when it comes to betraying secrets to mollify the Russians, it becomes a document the president hides behind.

It was bad enough that the 2012 defense authorization bill signed by President Obama set America on a downward spiral of military mediocrity.

He also issued a signing statement, something he once opposed, saying that language in the bill aimed at protecting top-secret technical data on the U.S. Standard Missile-3 — linchpin of our missile defense — might impinge on his constitutional foreign-policy authority.

Section 1227 of the defense law prohibits spending any funds that would be used to give Russian officials access to sensitive missile-defense technology as part of a cooperation agreement without first sending Congress a report identifying the specific secrets, how they'd be used and steps to protect the data from compromise.

The president is required to certify that any technology shared will not be passed on to third parties such as China, North Korea or Iran, that the Russians will not use transferred secrets to develop countermeasures and that the Russians are reciprocating in sharing missile-defense technology. ..."

“In his signing statement, Obama said he would treat these legal restrictions as “non-binding” and that “my administration will also interpret and implement section 1244 (sic) in a manner that does not interfere with the president’s constitutional authority to conduct foreign affairs and avoids the undue disclosure of sensitive diplomatic communications.”

Betraying our secrets is easy for a president who betrayed allies Poland and the Czech Republic to placate Moscow.

Poland was to host ground-based interceptors such as those we’ve deployed in California and Alaska, with missile-tracking radar deployed in the Czech Republic.
mp3Subscribe to the IBD Editorials Podcast

Obama pulled the plug when Moscow objected. Never mind, he said, we have a better approach: a four-phase plan that calls for using three versions of the Navy’s Standard SM-3 interceptor missile that forms the backbone of its Aegis missile-defense system.

The fourth phase consists of a missile still on the drawing board scheduled for deployment by 2020, a version of the SM-3 called the Block IIB. It would intercept hostile missiles in the “early intercept” phase before an enemy missile could release its warheads and decoys. The Russians want the SM-3’s secrets, and Obama appears to be willing to turn them over.

The president wants to save the New Start Treaty, which the Russians have threatened to abandon if we try to fully implement President Reagan’s dream of defeating a nuclear missile attack.

Russia has unilaterally asserted that any qualitative or quantitative improvement in U.S. missile defenses would be grounds for withdrawal from the treaty.

Read More At Investor’s Business Daily:
http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/010912-597158-obama-gives-russia-missile-defense-secrets.htm#ixzz3jXmMbVwY
__________________________________________________________

January 2015...

Officials: Iran nuclear deal fuels Middle East arms race, boosts Russia’s influence
FoxNews ^ | July 14, 2015 | Catherine Herridge
__________________________________________________________

Aug 2015...

[Lil Flower]

*The Senate’s advice and consent power is a pivotal element of a constitutional and prudent foreign policy, but it cannot be exercised if your administration does not act in good faith.*

Um.....what

If the Senates’ advice and consent power is Constitutional why do they have to wait on a rogue president to “act in good faith?”

OMG I’m so sick of all this political, decorum bs.

[SaveFerris]

bkmk

[ETL]

From the campaign trail, 2008...

Obama Pledges Cuts in Missile Defense, Space, and Nuclear Weapons Programs

February 29, 2008 :: News
MissileThreat.com

A video has surfaced of Presidential candidate Senator Barack Obama talking on his plans for strategic issues such as nuclear weapons and missile defense.

The full text from the video, as released, reads as follows:

Thanks so much for the Caucus4Priorities, for the great work you've been doing. As president, I will end misguided defense policies and stand with Caucus4Priorities in fighting special interests in Washington.

First, I'll stop spending $9 billion a month in Iraq. I'm the only major candidate who opposed this war from the beginning. And as president I will end it.[i.e. not win it]

Second, I will cut tens of billions of dollars in wasteful spending.

I will cut investments in unproven missile defense systems.

I will not weaponize space.

I will slow our development of future combat systems.

And I will institute an independent "Defense Priorities Board" to ensure that the Quadrennial Defense Review is not used to justify unnecessary spending.

Third, I will set a goal of a world without nuclear weapons. To seek that goal, I will not develop new nuclear weapons; I will seek a global ban on the production of fissile material; and I will negotiate with Russia to take our ICBMs off hair-trigger alert, and to achieve deep cuts in our nuclear arsenals.

You know where I stand. I've fought for open, ethical and accountable government my entire public life. I don't switch positions or make promises that can't be kept. I don't posture on defense policy and I don't take money from federal lobbyists for powerful defense contractors. As president, my sole priority for defense spending will be protecting the American people. Thanks so much.

Article: Obama Pledges Cuts in Missile Defense, Space, and Nuclear Weapons Programs:

http://web.archive.org/web/20090412030633/http://missilethreat.com/archives/id.7086/detail.asp

"MissileThreat.com is a project of The Claremont Institute devoted to understanding and promoting the requirements for the strategic defense of the United States."

Obama Pledges Cuts in Missile Defense, Space, and Nuclear Weapons Programs