Unoformed Code of Military Justice SUBCHAPTER X. PUNITIVE ARTICLES Sec. Art. 888. ART. 88. CONTEMPT TOWARD OFFICIALS Any commissioned officer who uses contemptuous words against the President, the Vice President, Congress, the Secretary of Defense…

JOB OPENING – Council for a Livable World and the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation Outreach Coordinator

Council for a Livable World and the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation are seeking to hire an Outreach Coordinator, with a specific focus on organizing outreach trips across the United States and engaging online audiences and social networks.

Our “in person” outreach mission primarily revolves around the Center’s already active Outreach Program, which sends retired senior military officers and national security experts throughout the United States to engage local community leaders by speaking at events hosted by non-profit organizations, veterans groups, academic institutions, and giving media interviews to local media outlets. The goal of the program is to enhance opportunities for informed public debate on US security policy and empower citizens to engage in discussion and raise important national security issues with policy makers at every level. The Outreach Coordinator will be responsible for helping to organize these trips, including identifying and reaching out to local partner groups and institutions, setting up events, communicating with local media, and collaborating with partner organizations. The Outreach Coordinator will also travel on several of these trips.

Our “online” outreach mission is to take advantage of developments in online communications to reach out to our online supporters and to identify and cultivate new supporters. The Outreach Coordinator will collaborate with staff to enhance and coordinate blogging and online social networking operations already in motion, as well as be responsible for developing new initiatives and assisting in the maintenance of our websites.

The Outreach Coordinator will likely engage in the following activities:
–Research and identify local groups and institutions to host speaking events for retired senior military officers
–Act as liaison for Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation with local partner organizations to organize local speaking events
–Writing and promoting E-Appeals for online actions (letters, petitions, contributions etc)
–Maintaining our organizations’ presence on social networking sites such as Twitter, Facebook, Flickr, and YouTube.
–Posting informative articles and managing information on our websites
–Moderating discussion space on our websites
–Using social networking software to create and help organize local chapters
–Organizing local events like town hall meetings, district visits, and meetings with our staff and board
–Creating and organizing online events (online chats with staff, board members, political candidates, and other people of interest)
–Generating multimedia content for our websites (podcasts, videos)
–Tracking and responding to new communications trends and technologies

Preference will be given to candidates who have a strong interest in and experience in the following two subject areas:
–Grassroots organizing.
–Blogging, social networking, or so-called Web 2.0 communications

Candidates are expected to have the skills and experience to coordinate and set up speaking events for senior experts and support senior experts on travel as well as website maintenance and web standards.

Candidates should be outgoing, self-motivated, able to work in a fast-paced environment and be able to multi-task assignments. A B.A. or B.S. and excellent writing skills are required.

The Outreach Coordinator will work in close conjunction with the Chief Operating Officer, Executive Director, Director of Nuclear Non-Proliferation, and IT Director.

Salary depends on experience. A full benefits package is included.

Application Procedure

Email cover letter, resume, writing sample and two references by June 28 to jobs@armscontrolcenter.org.

Council for a Livable World and Center for Arms Control & Non-Proliferation are equal opportunity employers.

On June 17, the Senate Armed Services Committee held its first hearing on the New START Treaty, with witnesses Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, Energy Secretary Steven Chu, and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Michael Mullen. They all testified in favor of ratification. As in earlier hearings on New START held by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, criticism of the treaty focused primarily on the treaty’s provisions with regard to missile defense, verification, and nuclear weapons complex modernization. Ranking members Carl Levin and John McCain framed the debate for the hearing in their contradictory opening remarks:

LEVIN: There have been statements made suggesting that the treaty imposes constraints on our missile defense plans and programs. That is simply incorrect…This treaty limits strategic offensive nuclear arms, not missile defenses.

…

MCCAIN: Secretary Gates, you have been quite clear, and I quote, “that the treaty will not constrain the United States from deploying the most effective missile defenses possible, nor impose additional costs or barriers on those defenses. While such assurances are welcome, they don’t change the fact that the treaty text, not just the preamble, but Article 5 of the treaty itself, includes a clear, legally binding limitation on our missile defense options.”

MISSILE DEFENSE, ARTICLE V, AND THE RUSSIAN UNILATERAL STATEMENT

In their prepared statements, both Clinton and Gates reaffirmed the treaty’s lack of legal restrictions on American missile defense. Clinton in particular devoted a significant period of time to discussing Article V of the treaty, which forbids both parties from converting existing ICBM or SLBM launchers into interceptor launchers for missile defense purposes. Explaining that the U.S. never had any plans to convert additional existing launchers for missile defense purposes, Clinton emphasized the irrelevance of Article V to American missile defense efforts:

CLINTON:  I mean, we could have had a long list — you know, we’re not going to launch from any moving vehicle, like a car or a truck or a cow. I mean we could have said a lot of things that we’re not going to do. But the fact is, we weren’t going to do them, and we weren’t going to do this either.

Sen. McCain seized on the issue of the Russian unilateral statement in the Q&A. He noted that in the statement, the Russian government mentioned that it would consider exercising its right to withdraw from the treaty should the U.S. develop its missile defense capabilities “in such a way that threatens the potential of the strategic nuclear forces of the Russian Federation.” Both Clinton and Gates, however, were quick to dismiss the importance of the statement, with Clinton arguing it was as legally binding as a press release and Gates noting, “the Russians can say what they want. If it’s not in the treaty it’s not binding on the United States.” Gates also reiterated that the United States had no plans to develop missile defense on a scale that would threaten the Russian deterrent.

Later in the Q&A, Republican Senator Saxby Chambliss emphasized the importance of missile defense, arguing that “the issue of missile defense may be more important than any agreement that the U.S. and Russia enter into regarding nuclear weapons. And that’s because we’re much less likely… to face a nuclear conflict with the Russians than we are to be attacked or threatened by a rogue nation or a terrorist group that possesses nuclear weapons.”

RUMORED SECRET AGREEMENTS

When asked by Senator Levin if there existed any secret, side or informal agreements between the United States and Russia that might limit American missile defense, Clinton replied: “No.” A later question on the same subject by Maine senator Susan Collins elicited a longer response from the witnesses. Collins asked Clinton about the veracity of a news report that asserted the Obama administration was working to ink an as-of-yet incomplete deal with the Russian federation that limited U.S. missile defenses. Clinton and Gates both rejected the report’s claims, but suggested that the United States was seeking to cooperate with the Russians on a joint missile defense system, which could also include Europe. Towards the end of the hearing, Clinton revisited the issue of secret agreements, in what appeared as an attempt to preempt any future speculation:

CLINTON: …Number one, there is no secret deal. Number two, there is no plan to limit U.S. missile defenses either in this treaty or in any other way. And number three, on that score, the story is dead wrong. I want to be very clear about that because I don’t want anyone using what is yet again another inaccurate story to argue against this treaty. And as Secretary Gates and I have both said, we will continue to explore missile defense cooperation with Russia, but the talks are not secret and there’s nothing on the table or even in the wildest contemplation that would involve any limits on our missile defense. Instead, we’re seeking to see whether they can be expanded with additional capabilities for our system.

NEW START IN AN INTERNATIONAL CONTEXT

Unlike this week’s Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearings on New START, which tended to discuss the treaty in a bilateral U.S.-Russian context, today’s hearing discussed the impact of New START on wider nonproliferation efforts. Both Secretaries Chu and Clinton emphasized that ratification would demonstrate the United States’ willingness to uphold its disarmament commitments under the NPT, thus illustrating American support for the global nonproliferation regime. Senator Hagan further reiterated the important nonproliferation benefits of New START in the Q&A:

HAGAN: …if the two nations that possess the most nuclear weapons — us and Russia — agree on verification and compliance of nuclear weapons and are committed to nonproliferation, it is possible to achieve consensus with other countries. It is important to encourage non-nuclear states to sign and abide by the Non-Proliferation Treaty. Ratifying this treaty will demonstrate our commitment to nonproliferation, sending a message and isolating Iran.

Secretary Gates also clearly shot down proposals from Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) and other Senators for building a national wide defense against Russia and all countries:

“Our missile defenses do not have the capability to defend against the Russian Federation’s large, advanced arsenal. Consequentially, U.S. missile defenses do not and will not affect Russia’s strategic deterrent. To build such a capability, a missile shield of the kind envisioned in the 1980s, is technologically unfeasible, cost prohibitive and destabilizing. Therefore, we have no plans to do so.”

Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I-CT) gave his official blessing to the treaty:

“My own feeling is that if this New START treaty is ratified, it will be a small step forward for mankind, but a long way, I’m sure you’d agree, from the dream that people harbor of having a nuclear-free world.”

After setting the stage at the UN last week, the US and EU have followed through on their pledge to implement strong unilateral sanctions on Iran.  While decades of US sanctions have eliminated Iran’s reliance on the US market and rendered US sanctions essentially worthless, the implementation of stronger European sanctions is a significant step.

According to an official statement, the European measures include sanctions on “key sectors of the gas and oil industry with prohibition of new investment, technical assistance and transfers of technologies” and related equipment and services.  In addition, Iran’s shipping and air cargo companies will be blacklisted and banned from operating in EU territory, and new visa bans and asset freezes will be imposed on Iran’s Revolutionary Guard.  Officials say the new sanctions could come into force within weeks.

Prior to this move, the EU has not placed significant trade restrictions on Iran beyond existing UN sanctions.  As a result, the EU is one of Iran’s largest trading partners, along with China, and provides for more than 20 percent of Iran’s trade.  H/T to Max Bergmann here, who makes some great points on the Obama Administration’s containment strategy over at the Wonk Room. Bergmann points out that…

While the effort at the UN has been the most visible aspect of the Administration’s Iran policy, it has taken other steps to contain and isolate Iran. Militarily, the administration has reoriented US missile defense plans in Europe so that they are more focused and effective in countering the Iranian missile threat. Through General Petraeus the Administration has sped up missile defenses in the Persian Gulf. They have also reassured Iran’s Arab neighbors of US commitment to their security in an effort to stave off potential cascade of nuclear proliferation throughout the region. Ideologically, through its broader outreach to the Muslim world and by developing a direct dialogue with the Iranian people the Administration has helped undercut Iran’s ideological appeal in the region.

Internationally, the administration has been able to increase Iran’s isolation and box it into a corner…

In a statement released today, Russia’s Foreign Ministry has stated that the US and EU moves demonstrate Western neglect of Russia’s opinion, and that unilateral sanctions will erode international efforts.

“We are extremely disappointed that neither the United States nor the European Union is heeding our calls to refrain from such steps,” Russian news agencies quoted Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov as saying.

While many critics speculated that Russia and China would attempt to water down UN sanctions to the point of insignificance, it seems that the US has come away with both a strong UN Resolution and unilateral sanctions that fill in the gaps.

This is not to say that sanctions will end Iran’s nuclear program (in all likelihood they will not) but at this point, the US has managed to gain a slight upper hand that most, including Iran, probably didn’t see coming.

The Massachusetts special election and unexpected primary upsets serve as harsh reminders of the challenges facing Senate candidates endorsed by Council for a Livable World.  If Massachusetts, long considered the bluest of blue states, can elect a Republican to the Senate in these tough economic times, California could follow suit.

In California, the Tea Party Express has identified Senator Boxer as one of their top targets in the 2010 elections.  Money is flowing into the Golden State from across the country to fund baseless, vicious attacks that distort her record.

Donate now to help Barbara Boxer fight back and win the Senate in 2010!

Ex-Hewlett Packard CEO Carly Fiorina (R) is challenging Sen. Barbara Boxer (D), and easily won the June 8 primary with 56% of the vote against Assemblyman Chuck Devore (R) and former U.S. Rep. Tom Campbell (R), the 2000 nominee for Senate. Fiorina’s personal wealth, from the $42 million severance package she received after being booted from Hewlett Packard, eases her ability to fund her own campaign and neutralizes the fundraising advantage an incumbent like Boxer would normally enjoy.

A recent poll conducted by Greenberg Quinlan Rosner shows incumbent Barbara Boxer ahead by a none-to-comfortable margin, with 44% to Fiorina’s 38%.

Contribute now to help Barbara Boxer defeat Carly Fiorina in 2010!

Senator Barbara Boxer has been a strong supporter of nuclear arms control treaties. She voted for the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty in 1999. In the most recent Council for a Livable World voting records, she received a 90%, a 91% and a 100%, only missing perfect score because of two absences. Senator Boxer has consistently opposed national missile defense deployment and new nuclear weapons, and was one of the few Senators to vote against the U.S.-India nuclear deal.

Boxer is a capable and strong Senator that we don’t want to lose. Click here to give her the support she needs!