Senator Obama has a great deal to say about the issue of nuclear weapons and proliferation in his platform and various speeches; his predominant stance on nuclear weapons and disarmament comes across as a commitment to eliminate the global threat of nuclear weapons and support for the nonproliferation regime, yet his voting record remains mixed. Below is a summary of the main issues, along with how Senator Obama voted on crucial issues, and other initiatives he supports.

Nonproliferation and Disarmament

In his platform, Obama states that he will work to secure existing stockpiles of nuclear material, negotiate a global ban on production of new material, stop the development of new nuclear weapons in the U.S., work with Russia to take U.S. and Russian weapons off hair trigger alert, and seek extensive reductions in U.S. and Russian stockpiles. In a statement made January 17, 2008, Obama says, “I welcome the renewed call by Sam Nunn, George Shultz, Henry Kissinger, and William Perry to urge the United States to support a world free of nuclear weapons. These four Americans have shown leadership on this issue for many months, and I have embraced this goal throughout my campaign. As I said in a speech on October 2: ‘Here’s what I’ll say as President: America seeks a world in which there are no nuclear weapons.’ Obama has also stated that U.S. ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) will be a priority. However, Obama makes it clear that the U.S. will always maintain a strong deterrent as long as nuclear weapons exist. Obama also states that he will take steps to strengthen the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT), but in terms of stronger sanctions for states that break the rules, rather than focusing on the disarmament of nuclear weapons states.

Towards this goal, Obama’s Senate record reflects a commitment to the reduction of nuclear weapons. Obama has worked with Senator Lugar since 2005 on an initiative to increase funding for nonproliferation programs. Obama also sponsored the Nuclear Weapons Threat Reduction Act of 2007, which provides for the U.S. to take a leading role in decreasing global nuclear arsenals and stop the spread of nuclear weapons, as well as supporting a Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty. Senator Obama’s voting record also indicates support for nonproliferation and disarmament legislation. Obama voted in favor of an amendment to a bill stating that the U.S. will continue its commitment to the NPT. He also voted in favor of repealing laws that restrict the U.S. from assisting Russia and former Soviet Union states from destroying nuclear, chemical, and other weapons, as well as voting in favor of increasing funding for the Cooperative Threat Reduction program by $50 million (program to secure and dismantle weapons of mass destruction in former Soviet states).

U.S.-India Nuclear Deal

The U.S.-India Nuclear Deal is considered detrimental to the nonproliferation regime and international security by most nonproliferation and disarmament groups. Exemptions made by the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) do not require India’s military nuclear facilities to be inspected, only its civilian nuclear facilities (which are determined by India). India is not required to sign the NPT or CTBT.

Senator Obama supports the U.S.-India Nuclear Deal. In a statement released on September 9, Obama states “I welcome news that the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) has now consensus…that would permit its members to engage in nuclear cooperation with India. It is a positive development.” In his statement, Obama urges the administration to submit the agreement to Congress quickly; presumably, Obama would vote in favor of a cooperative deal. Obama voted in favor of the Hyde Act in 2006. This act exempts India from Section 129 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, which prohibits the export of nuclear materials and technology to states that have not signed the NPT. However, Senator Obama also voted in favor of an amendment to the Hyde Act that states that a precondition to U.S.-India nuclear cooperation is that the U.S. will not assist or encourage India to make or acquire nuclear weapons.

National Missile Defense Systems (NMD)

Certain missile defense systems, such as conventional short range tactical Patriot missiles, provide useful battlefield defense and don’t “play” in the proliferation argument. Many have argued that an effective National Missile Defense system (current testing shows the missile defense system to be ineffective and unrealistic), designed to shoot down long range intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM’s), which are often equipped with nuclear warheads, may have a deterrent effect. However, NMD also has the potential to be harmful to the nonproliferation regime because it is seen as an offensive threat to other countries. NMD may also encourage other countries to proliferate in order to strengthen their defense capabilities. The logic behind this is that if the U.S. perfects a missile defense system, the U.S. will not need to fear retaliation for any nuclear attacks, thus removing a stabilizing check on the use of nuclear weapons.