[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 34 (Wednesday, March 23, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: March 23, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
                  CHANGING POLICY ON NONPROLIFERATION

  Mr. GLENN. I thank the Senator for his courtesy. I appreciate the 
opportunity to add a couple of remarks to those made by Senator 
Pressler a few moments ago. I had not been aware that he was going to 
make remarks about the changing administration policy in this area. I 
want to back up his views on this. We worked together a long, long time 
on nonproliferation matters, and we have over 148 nations now signed up 
around the world on the nonproliferation regime. It has not been 
perfect, but it has been very good through the years. It has had a 
positive impact.
  The Pressler amendment is applied to one nation, Pakistan--who 
through the years was developing nuclear weapons, and we knew that. But 
every year because of the situation in Afghanistan, the President 
needed a special, country-specific waiver of the Glenn-Symington 
amendment so we could ship material through Pakistan over to 
Afghanistan. Despite waiver after waiver in the 1980s, Pakistan 
continued and even accelerated its pursuit of the bomb. Facing these 
facts, the Pressler amendment became law in 1985 without any loopholes 
or waivers.
  It is just hard to see how we can change this now. In effect, what 
the administration apparently wants to do is say: OK, they lied to us 
all this time and went ahead and developed nuclear weapons anyway. They 
did not deal fairly with us, but we will forget that. That is behind us 
now, and we will now say they have the bomb now, so we now want to ship 
airplanes and some other combat equipment to them. So we will just say 
we forget all of that, and as long as they do not add to the bombs they 
already have, we will forget all that.
  What kind of a message, I ask you, does that send to the other 
nations that we are trying to tell ``do not develop weapons and we will 
cooperate with you,'' when if they do develop weapons, they have the 
precedent of Pakistan, to say it will not make any difference anyway. I 
think that is absolutely the wrong signal to send.
  So I thank my distinguished colleague, Senator Pressler--I personally 
would prefer to see his amendment expanded to some other nations that 
have egregiously violated what we think is the norm in 
nonproliferation. All these years, what we have said is if nations sign 
up under NPT, we will cooperate, and at the same time we will be able 
to get control of our nuclear weapons stockpiles vis-a-vis the Soviet 
Union, we will negotiate them down, and maybe we will have a less 
dangerous world so we will have at the same time prevented the spread 
of nuclear weapons to other nations.
  Here is a nation that has literally lied to us. What they have done 
flies in the face of their own commitments. I was there years ago and 
had the head of State tell me they did not have any interest in nuclear 
weapons. The foreign minister and defense minister told me the same 
thing, when we knew exactly what they were doing.
  I admire Senator Pressler for what he is doing in this area. If there 
is a change contemplated, we should do everything we can to prevent it 
and support the nonproliferation regime around the world. I think it 
has done a lot of good. That does not mean taking all of the 
restrictions off of Pakistan, as far as I am concerned. I appreciate 
the distinguished floor manager letting me add words in support of 
Senator Pressler on this. He has done yeoman's work in this area. I 
hope we stick to his policy.

                          ____________________