The head of the United Nations on Monday warned that efforts to stem the spread of nuclear arms are likely to be hampered by recent events in Ukraine.
In 1994, Kiev agreed to repatriate a large arsenal of Soviet nuclear weapons back to Russia in exchange for promises from London, Washington and Moscow — outlined in the Budapest Memorandum — that they would respect Ukraine’s territorial integrity. Leaders in Kiev and the West say Russia’s annexation of Ukraine’s Crimea Peninsula earlier this month violates that pledge.
Speaking in The Hague, Netherlands, U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon told leaders from 53 countries participating in the 2014 Nuclear Security Summit that “the credibility of the assurances given to Ukraine in the Budapest Memorandum of 1994 has been seriously undermined by recent events.”
“The implications are profound, both for regional security and the integrity of the nuclear nonproliferation regime,” the U.N. leader said.
Ban did not single out any one side for blame in the unfolding events in Ukraine, but said “security assurances provided to non-nuclear weapon states by nuclear-weapon states” must be followed.
North Korea already has pointed specifically to the experiences of Iraq under Saddam Hussein — as well as Libya under Muammar Qadhafi — as justification for its own ongoing nuclear-weapons development. Years after the two dictators gave up their respective weapons of mass destruction programs under international pressure, they were attacked by U.S.-led forces and saw their regimes toppled. The unfolding crisis in Ukraine could further deepen the Kim Jong Un regime’s belief that it needs a nuclear deterrent to protect itself from a feared invasion by the United States and South Korea.
Ban urged signatories of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty to use the 2015 treaty review conference to take up the issue of providing “unequivocal and legally binding” promises to nations without atomic arsenals that they would not be attacked by nuclear weapon possessor countries.
“Together, we must ensure that nuclear weapons are seen by states as a liability, not an asset,” the former South Korean foreign minister said.
What We're Following See More »
Paul Ryan told CNN today he's "not ready" to back Donald Trump at this time. "I'm not there right now," he said. Ryan said Trump needs to unify "all wings of the Republican Party and the conservative movement" and then run a campaign that will allow Americans to "have something that they're proud to support and proud to be a part of. And we've got a ways to go from here to there."
In The New Yorker, Jeffrey Toobin gives Preet Bharara, the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, the longread treatment. The scourge of corrupt New York pols, bad actors on Wall Street, and New York gang members, Bharara learned at the foot of Chuck Schumer, the famously limelight-hogging senator whom he served as a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee staff. No surprise then, that after President Obama appointed him, Bharara "brought a media-friendly approach to what has historically been a closed and guarded institution. In professional background, Bharara resembles his predecessors; in style, he’s very different. His personality reflects his dual life in New York’s political and legal firmament. A longtime prosecutor, he sometimes acts like a budding pol; his rhetoric leans more toward the wisecrack than toward the jeremiad. He expresses himself in the orderly paragraphs of a former high-school debater, but with deft comic timing and a gift for shtick."
President Obama has announced another round of commutations of prison sentences. Most of the 58 individuals named are incarcerated for possessions with intent to distribute controlled substances. The prisoners will be released between later this year and 2018.
The Daily Beast has unearthed a piece that Donald Trump wrote for Gear magazine in 2000, which anticipates his 2016 sales pitch quite well. "Perhaps it's time for a dealmaker who can get the leaders of Congress to the table, forge consensus, and strike compromise," he writes. Oddly, he opens by defending his reputation as a womanizer: "The hypocrites argue that a man who loves and appreciates beautiful women (and does so legally and openly) shouldn't become a national leader? Is there something wrong with appreciating beautiful women? Don't we want people in public office who show signs of life?"