Trump or Tillerson’s Nuclear Diplomacy?
Former ExxonMobil executive Rex Tillerson, recently approved to be the United States Secretary of State, remains a controversial choice because of previous positions on Russia and climate change.
But interestingly, Secretary Tillerson’s positions on crucial nuclear weapons issues as expressed at his confirmation hearing and responses to written questions may infer some hope of a moderating influence on President Trump’s erratic approach.
Mr. Tillerson’s views appeared to be frequently at variance with views expressed by candidate Donald Trump.
Shortly before Christmas, the then-President-elect Trump tweeted: “The United States must greatly strengthen and expand its nuclear capability until such time as the world comes to its senses regarding nukes.”
The next day, Morning Joe reported Mr. Trump saying: “Let it be an arms race. We will outmatch them at every pass and outlast them all.”
In mid-January, President-elect Trump sent different signals in a Times of London interview: “I think nuclear weapons should be way down and reduced very substantially,” perhaps as part of a deal with Russia to ease American sanctions.
For his part, Secretary Tillerson was consistently positive about nuclear arms control agreements. When New Hampshire Senator Jeanne Shaheen asked State’s new leader whether he supports continued adherence to the nuclear reductions treaty with Russia known as New START, he said yes — and that is an area where the U.S. must stay engaged with Russia.
Senator Shaheen also coaxed a response supporting continued engagement with Russia on further nuclear negotiations. She asked whether he supported the positions of five previous presidents of both parties to negotiate arms control treaties with Russia. Mr. Tillerson provided a crystal clear answer, “Yes, I do.”
In addition, the nation’s top diplomat agreed with Massachusetts Senator Edward Markey that he would pursue efforts to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and materials to other countries. “We just simply cannot back away from our commitment to see a reduction in the number of these weapons on the planet.”
Moreover, the Secretary of State split from President Trump in some key areas. During the campaign, Mr. Trump suggested that he would be comfortable with South Korea and Japan pursuing nuclear weapons. Pressed by Senator Markey, Secretary Tillerson said point blank, “I do not agree.”
During the campaign, Mr. Trump harshly criticized the Iran nuclear agreement that has verifiably pushed Iran’s nuclear program back into the shadows. Secretary Tillerson avoided such incendiary language, instead promising “a full review of that agreement.”
Secretary Tillerson also backed the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. In a written response, he replied, “So long as the reliability of our nuclear deterrent can be guaranteed through other means, I think the moratorium has served us well.”
On the difficult challenge of dealing with North Korea’s Kim Jong-un, the President appeared to throw down the gauntlet after a pledge by the North Korean leader to test a long-range missile that in theory could reach the United States. Mr. Trump tweeted, “It won’t happen!”
Mr. Tillerson took a different track, not that different from that of the Obama and Bush administrations — tighter enforcement of sanctions and press China to rein in North Korea.
Based on Secretary Tillerson’s comments, there is reason to be hopeful that continued advocacy by an engaged public and energized non-proliferation community might find a receptive audience within the higher echelons of the Trump administration. The questions remain: will Secretary Tillerson retain his views so far expressed and will he influence his otherwise erratic colleagues?
