Two decades after the U.S. and Russia signed the only treaty in history that eliminated an entire class of weapons, the treaty has become a danger to Russian and American security interests, according to Brigadier General (ret.) Kevin Ryan. It must now either be expanded or eliminated, he says.

"What all of this debate about withdrawal missed, however, is that the driver is not conditions in Iraq or politics in the United States but the hard realities of Army and Marine Corps readiness. As the troops' extended 15-month tours of duty end, the Army and Marine Corps simply don't have more troops to replace them. The withdrawal will be, in effect, the flip side of the surge."

With Gen. David H. Petraeus scheduled to appear before Congress next week, Belfer Center experts and researchers offer their insights and analysis — as well as items that Congress should not overlook.

This week, a second round of surge units were announced for Iraq as the number of troops in that country builds to its highest level ever. Gen. David Petraeus has told President Bush that he needs until September to see if conditions on the ground warrant continuing the surge.

WHEN IS a surge not a surge? The American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank in Washington, issued a report yesterday calling for a "sustained surge of US troops to secure and protect critical areas of Baghdad." The report, presented by professor Frederick Kagan and retired Army vice chief of staff Jack Keane, purports to give ground commanders a new strategy for deploying 30,000 more troops and winning the war in Iraq.