Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty: Update
I just spoke with Daryl G. Kimball of the Arms Control Association whose remarks to The Economist were at the center of a weekend fracas between myself, Tom Maguire, and Mark Kleiman (see my original posts, Tom's reply, my correction and these two Kleiman posts). According to Kimball, and contrary to Tom's textual exegesis (which, I must say, is a pretty convincing exegesis), the Economist didn't get the story wrong. He has he thought my original post was over-interpreting the Economist article and that Tom's counter-response was underinterpreting the Pakistan and Israel angles.
Kimball seemed to resent being drawn into a blogospheric back-and-forth and suggested that folks who want to know the "official" ACA take should just read Wade Boese's article on the subject in Arms Control Today which suggests (though rather obliquely), that Pakistani (and Israeli) objections were one of several factors in play. ACA thinks (and I agree) that the administration is on the wrong side here. So there you have it.
September 7, 2004 | Permalink
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty: Update:
» Correction on the FMCT and Pakistan from Mark A. R. Kleiman
I asked a few days ago whether the Bush Administration was deliberately helping Pakistan nuke up. The answer to that question is "No." Sorry. [Read More]
Tracked on Sep 7, 2004 3:47:56 PM
» A Matter of Interpretation from Political Animal
A MATTER OF INTERPRETATION....This is ridiculous. This week's issue of the Economist quotes Daryl Kimball of the Arms Control Association about the reasons that the Bush administration has suddenly decided to oppose the verification provisions of the F... [Read More]
Tracked on Sep 7, 2004 6:22:15 PM