Beyond climate change, foreign policy.

[Mass]

First, the START treaty, which will be in committee soon (later today)http://foreign.senate.gov/hearings/hearing/20100429/ and that some GOP oppose (party of NO).

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2010/04/29/kerry_expects_battle_for_votes_on_arms_treaty/

Kerry girds for fight to ratify arms pact
Hearings begin today on treaty with Russia

WASHINGTON — Senator John F. Kerry, who today will lead the effort to ratify a new arms control pact with Russia, said he expects a tough fight for passage because partisanship has seeped into what has historically been bipartisan cooperation on nuclear weapons pacts.

Kerry’s comments, his first on the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty debate, came in an interview as the Massachusetts Democrat prepared to be the Obama administration’s point man; as chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, he has the job of sending the treaty to the full Senate and securing the two-thirds vote needed to approve it.

...
The Foreign Relations Committee will kick off the debate today in the first of a series of hearings on the treaty — known as New START — which was signed by President Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev earlier this month. Testifying before the panel will be two former secretaries of defense, James R. Schlesinger, a Republican, and William J. Perry, a Democrat.

The treaty would require the United States and Russia to reduce their deployed nuclear arms to 1,550 each, about 30 percent below currently agreed upon levels.

However, the agreement is seen as only a first step. Obama says he will pursue further weapons cuts and other treaties to ban nuclear testing and the production of nuclear material — all part of a long-term vision to convince other nations to forswear atomic arms.
...

Let's hope that they can find the 8 GOP they need (they already have Lugar, so they need 7 more. Is it still doable in such a climate).

And Iran, for which saber rattling continue. Sadly, it is unlikely that cool heads will prevail there.

http://www.thenation.com/blogs/dreyfuss/556223/crippling_crushing_and_suffocating_iran

Crippling, Crushing, and Suffocating Iran

On Wednesday afternoon, members of the House and Senate gathered for a conference committee meeting to discuss the bills passed by each house to impose sanctions on Iran. As I sat down at my desk to write this, I pulled out my Roget's Thesaurus to see how many synonyms for "crippling," 'crushing," "overwhelming," "suffocating," and so on there are. There are a lot. And many of them, including those just mentioned, were used by members of Congress competing to see strongly each one could condemn Iran.
It wasn't pretty. Apoplexy was the order of the day.
Representative Ileana Ros-Lehtinen of Florida got the ball rolling, by demanding "crippling, mandatory sanctions" on Iran. Which caused everyone who followed to try to outbid her
...
Noting that most of the speakers were either rabid, right-wing Republicans or militantly pro-AIPAC Democrats, I went over to Representative Barney Frank as the left the room. Is there any way to stop this runaway train? I asked. "No," he said. And he's glad. Frank argues that the bill, which as written will compel the president to impose sanctions on friend and foe alike who sell gasoline and petroleum products to Iran, will strengthen the president's hand. (The White House and the State Department, incidentally, oppose the bill, and they're demanding that the conferees weaken it to give President Obama some flexibility in implementing its draconian provisions. So, it would seem, the president doesn't want the help that Congressman Frank is happily offering.) I pointed out to Frank that the president doesn't want the bill's help, but Frank said, simply, "It helps him."
...
There's a chance, a small one, that Senator John Kerry, along with Senator Chris Dodd (the Senate sponsor of the bill) will accede to administration wishes and water down the bill so that it doesn't tie the president's hands. To the consternation of the mad dog-like members of the conference committee, Senator Dodd said, "We will accommodate the administration's concerns," though he didn't specify exactly how. And Kerry, sounding glum and resigned – and completely avoiding words such as crushing, crippling, and suffocating! – said simply that the threat of congressional action has "helped to focus the world's attention" on the Iran problem, but he added: "This conference report is gonna pass." He pointed out that international diplomacy by the Obama administration, and the talks at the UN Security Council about sanctions, are proceeding, and that it all may take time.
And Representative Howard Berman, the bill's sponsor in the House, suggested that there is a "certain logic" to the administration's request that the legislation carve out waivers or exemptions for "cooperating countries" – which, as some members pointed out, could mean anyone and everyone.
But when it comes to weakening the bill, the rest of the members weren't having any of it.

All that while Conrad wants to cut State Department budget (sorry of the source, but I had read that for several days now, and cannot find the sources)

I understand the need to reduce the deficit, but Conrad is on a roll to become a good Republican, wanting to cut Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, ... I worry sometimes that liberal blogs are mostly bent on flashy things, rather than looking at things that will have a deep impact for our future.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/apr/29/cuts-state-department-budget-ignite-interparty-row/

Cuts to State Department budget ignite interparty row
Kerry, administration, ex-officials vs. Conrad

A dispute over the State Department budget has pitted the chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, Sen. Kent Conrad of North Dakota, against a fellow Democrat and head of the Foreign Relations Committee, Sen. John F. Kerry of Massachusetts, and the Obama administration.

Mr. Conrad led an effort to slash President Obama's $58 billion international affairs request for 2011 by $4 billion, a cut his committee approved last week. Despite protests from Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and all her living predecessors, the senator stood his ground on Wednesday.
...

While the reduced plan "will cover the increased funding requested by for our efforts in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan, as well as our efforts for the Middle East peace process, the president's other new international initiatives will have to compete for funding within the rest of the international budget," he said.
...
As a counterpoint to Mr. Conrad's actions, Mr. Kerry on Tuesday engineered the first bipartisan approval of a White House budget request by the Foreign Relations Committee in five years.

"This is the first time since 2005 that we have passed a State Department authorization bill," he said. "It provides our diplomats and development experts the tools and guidance needed to advance our interests and national security priorities both now and in the future."

[Inuca]

1. Kerry

"sounding glum and resigned – and completely avoiding words such as crushing, crippling, and suffocating!" - that tells 90% of the story.

[beachmom]

2. Thanks for the roundup, Mass.

Over and over again, we see Kerry as a good guy among a lot of bad actors in Congress.

A lot of Democrats, especially in the Congress, are just a little less worse than a Republican. Just a LITTLE.