[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 50 (Monday, May 2, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: May 2, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
                      AMBASSADOR FOR BURDENSHARING

  Mr. LAUTENBERG. Madam President, I am pleased that the conference 
agreement on the State Department authorization bill requires the State 
Department to have an Ambassador for Burdensharing who will be 
confirmed by the Senate and who will focus exclusively on 
burdensharing. I worked with Senator Byrd and others to ensure that 
this important position would not be eliminated as part of the State 
Department's reorganization effort.
  Several years ago, the Congress mandated that the administration 
create an Ambassador at Large for Burdensharing. The administration 
sought to eliminate that position and create instead a Special Envoy 
for burdensharing. The House version of this bill did in fact eliminate 
the Ambassador at Large for Burdensharing.
  When the Senate considered its version of the bill, Senator Byrd and 
I offered an amendment to restore the position. Our amendment was 
adopted by the full Senate.
  I am pleased that the conferees preserved an Ambassadorial-level 
position at the State Department who will focus exclusively on 
burdensharing. I look forward to Senate confirmation of this position 
and to seeing some progress on this issue.
  I understand the State Department's desire to simplify and control 
its own organizational structure. But, at the same time, I was 
concerned that eliminating the statutory requirement for a 
Burdensharing Ambassador would send exactly the wrong signal to the 
allies. I was concerned that at a time when the allies ought to be 
doing more to defend our collective security, eliminating the position 
would indicate that the United States is placing less of a priority on 
the issue of burdensharing. I was concerned that it would undermine our 
Government's efforts to ensure the allies will make good on commitments 
to provide compensation for the value of the investment America has 
made in the military infrastructure as we withdraw from Europe.
  Madam President, the Burdensharing Ambassador preserved by this bill 
will be responsible for ensuring that the allies pay us for the 
infrastructure we leave behind as we close military bases and withdraw 
our troops from Europe.
  With the demise of the Soviet Union and the reduced threat of an 
invasion of Western Europe, the Pentagon announced plans to close or 
reduce our presence at 867 military sites overseas. Most are in Europe, 
where America has already closed 434 military sites. These closures are 
part of an overall plan to reduce United States troop strength in 
Europe from 323,432 in 1987 to 100,000 by the end of 1996.
  When we close bases in Europe, we bring our troops home, but we leave 
buildings, roads, sewers, and other physical improvements behind. This 
valuable infrastructure, which cost us $6.5 billion to build, 
represents a significant American investment in the collective security 
of the West. Through a series of residual value agreements, some allies 
have acknowledged they will inherit all the structures we built. As a 
result, they agreed to repay us for what we leave behind.

  Despite those agreements, so far we have gotten a lot of talk and 
very little cash. We have recouped only $33.3 million, less than 1 
percent of our initial investment. Most of that money was recovered in 
1989.
  Our military drawdown has been rapid since 1990, but our European 
allies do not appear to be in a similar hurry to pay us what they 
agreed to pay. In Germany, we have already withdrawn from over 60 
percent of the military sites slated for closure. Yet the German 
Government has only budgeted $25 million this year to compensate us--
when our overall capital investment in German bases is almost $4 
billion. To be sure, the amount we can recover from Germany is subject 
to negotiations. The $4 billion capital investment may not reflect the 
current value of the facilities.
  The Burdensharing Ambassador will be intimately involved in these 
negotiations to get the allies to pay.
  Clearly, collecting this money from the allies will not be easy. 
Europe's economies have lagged behind ours. German citizens are no more 
eager to pay America for its military infrastructure than many 
Americans were to pay to maintain that infrastructure for the past 40 
years. But, a deal is a deal.
  The Ambassador for Burdensharing will also be tasked with the 
responsibility of securing increased commitments from the allies for 
the cost of maintaining our troops overseas. We spent $10 billion last 
year just to operate our forces and maintain military installations in 
foreign countries, mostly in Europe. That does not include the 
substantial cost of paying our soldiers and buying their weapons. In 
fact, in fiscal year 1993, according to Department of Defense figures, 
our NATO Allies paid less than 25 percent of the costs of maintaining 
troops in their countries while Japan paid more than 75 percent. If the 
European allies matched the Japanese contributions, the Congressional 
Budget Office estimates we could save the United States taxpayer $9.6 
billion over 5 years.
  The NATO Allies have not just failed to pay for the infrastructure we 
leave behind. They also refuse to pay for the infrastructure required 
to keep our forces at foreign bases today. And the cost of that 
infrastructure is rising. The administration wants Congress to provide 
more than $300 million to support new military infrastructure and 
projects in NATO countries next year.
  Even worse, the money we spend to defend Europe is cutting into our 
own military readiness to respond to conflicts, according to Gen. David 
Maddox, Commander in Chief, United States Army, Europe.
  With persistence, our Government should be able to recoup billions 
from our NATO Allies. After the Persian Gulf war, the international 
community pledged $54 billion to offset costs of U.S. military 
activities. With a nudge from the Congress, our Government pressed the 
Gulf allies until they provided every penny. We can and should do the 
same in this case.
  Madam President, the Ambassador for Burdensharing has a big job. I am 
pleased the conferees have agreed that our Government needs to task one 
individual to focus exclusively on this issue. Now that the conference 
report has been adopted, I trust that the State Department will act 
aggressively to support this position and the Ambassador's efforts to 
collect the money we are owed.

                          ____________________