The following are editorial opinions from newspapers from around the world which may be of interest to Royal Gazette readers.

The Asahi Shimbun, Tokyo, –on nuclear disarmament

As US President Barack Obama seeks to embark upon a path toward a “world without nuclear weapons,” the US Senate is blocking the way toward his first nuclear disarmament treaty. This is the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty signed by the United States and Russia in April. The pact aims to reduce strategic nuclear warheads to no more than 1,550 each. Ratification requires Senate approval. As was clearly evident in the midterm elections earlier this month, US politics has become increasingly partisan. Some within the Republican Party are opposing the treaty just for the sake of bringing down Obama. For a legislative body that is supposed to make decisions from a broader perspective, the Senate has become quite a petty place.

As Indiana Sen. Dick Lugar, a Republican supporter of the treaty, says, this is a matter of American national security, as well as a matter of global security. We hope the Senate will display what is supposed to be its inherent wisdom. A treaty needs a two-thirds majority in the Senate to be ratified. This means the administration needs not only support from Democrats, but also Republicans. As a result of the midterm elections, Democrats will have fewer Senate seats in the new Congress session starting in January. Calling it a top diplomatic priority, Obama seeks to have the treaty ratified within this year, using the current Democratic majority.

If he fails, years could go by without any mutual verification of nuclear disarmament between the United States and Russia. There is a risk that the years spent since the days of the Cold War, dealing with each other on disarmament and building trust, may take a big step backward. ... This new nuclear arms reduction treaty is an important step toward creating a disarmament dialogue with other nuclear powers, not just the United States and Russia. ...

The Japan Times –on Iranian politics

While Iran’s leaders are generally wary of revolution having come to power on one President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is pushing his own economic revolution. He rightly notes that extraordinary sums spent on subsidies distort the economy and must end if it is to return to solid footing. The problem is that such reform risks a political backlash. The Tehran government spends tens of billions of dollars annually to keep food and fuel prices low. It can afford those exorbitant sums because of its vast oil wealth, but it weakens the economy. Inflation was officially tagged at 9 percent last month, but some economists think it could reach 50 percent this year. ... The government has announced that it will end the subsidies to ensure that “the country’s riches are correctly used.” ...

While the decision carries political risks the middle class will bear the brunt of the adjustment and this group is already smarting over the alleged theft of the presidential election last year the cash payments to the poor should consolidate support for the government among the lower classes. That will give Mr. Ahmadinejad and his supporters a boost when the country holds a presidential election in 2013. It is a gamble, but the president seems to enjoy the fight. The lessons of last year when the United States and several Western countries expressed to no avail their concern about alleged irregularities in the presidential election suggest that Iran remains the master of its fate. But there is another factor: the economic squeeze that is being applied to compel Tehran’s compliance with international nuclear obligations. Iran is being forced to recognize economic reality. Hopefully political realities will intrude as well.