[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 53 (Thursday, May 5, 1994)]
[House]
[Page H]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: May 5, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
          REVITALIZING THE NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Hyde] is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, in the last five years momentous events have 
recast the landscape of Europe, and indeed the world. The ``Iron 
Curtain''--so long a symbol of the bankruptcy of communist ideology--
has been pulverized and sold off in small chunks, a triumph of free 
enterprise over totalitarianism. The Soviet Union has collapsed under 
its own weight without a shot being fired and from its destruction a 
dozen independent states have emerged. The Warsaw Pact--once a mighty 
and feared military alliance spreading from the Arctic Ocean to the 
Mediterranean Sea--is no more.
  These historic events were in no small part due to the enduring 
strength of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and the sustained 
commitment of its member countries. Founded in 1949, the NATO alliance 
served as the West's primary defensive bulwark against Moscow's amply 
demonstrated aggressive posture. However, in the wake of the Cold War, 
NATO's mission lacks the clarity it once had. Some argue that there is 
no further need to maintain the alliance, that it has outlived its 
purpose. Furthermore, the role of the United States in NATO has been 
called into question. Even during the height of East-West tension there 
were calls in Congress to reduce or eliminate the presence of U.S. 
military forces in Europe. Even as our forces in Europe decline from a 
high of 434,000 in the early 1960's to a projected level of 100,000 by 
next year, those calls continue to be heard.
  Unfortunately, the world has not suddenly evolved into a utopian 
paradise with chamber music playing softly in the background. In place 
of the dangers posed by communist domination, new threats have emerged 
to the shared interests of the United States and other NATO countries. 
These threats are of lower intensity, more widespread, and less 
predictable. But, they can be ignored only at great peril. 
Proliferation of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons of mass 
destruction and the means to deliver them are of serious concern and 
may soon require bold actions on our part. Furthermore, several 
undemocratic and hostile regimes including North Korea, Iran, Iraq, and 
Libya pose serious threats to the West and to the global economy on 
which a stable energy supply and the free flow of commerce are 
dependent. Some feel that we can turn to the United Nations to deal 
with these threats. But, the limits of U.N. capability have only too 
vividly been revealed over the past year.
  The NATO alliance, on the other hand, has a proven track record of 
effective political cooperation and military interoperability that can 
help protect our mutual interests without an undue burden falling on 
the United States. This was demonstrated by the success with which NATO 
member countries coalesced in joint military operations to liberate 
Kuwait in 1991. While many other nations participated in allied 
operations in the Persian Gulf war, NATO members formed the core 
military components that ensured victory.
  NATO has been a dynamic and evolving organization expanding on three 
different occasions in its forty-five year history. Since the collapse 
of communism, several countries in Central and East Europe have 
expressed interest in NATO membership. These include the Visegrad 
countries of Poland, Hungary, Slovakia, and the Czech Republic and the 
Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania. While immediate 
admission for these and other countries may not be feasible or 
desirable, the alliance should establish guidelines for eventual 
admission. As many European countries reach out to the West seeking to 
share our values and participate in our mutual defense, we should not 
simply turn a blind eye for fear of sending the wrong message to 
Moscow. A new NATO that includes former Warsaw Pact members would be no 
more a threat to Russia than the old NATO--which was, and which will 
remain, a defensive alliance. We should establish tough, but 
appropriate standards for interested countries to meet in order to be 
invited to join the alliance. We should be firm, but we should also be 
willing to work with prospective members to assist them in reaching 
those standards.
  There has been little discussion in the Congress and the Executive 
Branch on these crucial issues, and I believe their consideration is 
long overdue. I am today introducing the ``NATO Revitalization Act'' 
expressing United States policy with respect to the North Atlantic 
Treaty Organization. My bill states that it should be the policy of the 
United States to continue our commitment to and active leadership role 
in NATO and to join with our NATO allies to redefine the role of the 
alliance in the post-Cold War world. It further states that it should 
be U.S. policy to urge NATO to support the eventual expansion of 
alliance membership to other European countries that meet appropriate 
standards including shared values and interests, democratic 
governments, free market economies, civilian control of the military, 
and a willingness to contribute to the security of the North Atlantic 
area. It urges NATO to establish benchmarks and a timetable for 
eventual membership for selected countries in transition. Lastly, it 
urges NATO to affirm that the organization's military planning should 
include contingencies beyond the NATO area when the shared interests of 
the United States and other member countries require such action to 
defend vital interests.
  This legislation is not carved in granite or printed with indelible 
ink. It is not binding on the President or his Administration. It is 
intended to be a point of departure, not necessarily the destination, 
itself. Nonetheless, I think it represents a solid basis for NATO's 
future in the post-Cold War world. This bill is not intended to a 
critique of the Clinton Administration or the recently announced 
``Partnership for Peace'' program. Instead, it offers a road map that 
extends beyond the limited scope of that initiative without prejudicing 
its merits. It is intended to stimulate both policymakers and the 
American people to engage in a thorough exploration and a vigorous 
debate of these important issues involving the security of the United 
States and our allies. The bill follows:

                                H.R. --

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``NATO Revitalization Act''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       The Congress finds that--
       (1) for over 40 years, the North Atlantic Treaty 
     Organization has helped guarantee the security, freedom, and 
     prosperity of the United States and our partners in the 
     alliance;
       (2) the North Atlantic Treaty Organization has expanded its 
     membership on 3 different occasions since its founding in 
     1949;
       (3) the steadfast and sustained commitment of the member 
     countries of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization to mutual 
     defense against the threat of communist domination played a 
     significant role in precipitating the collapse of the Iron 
     Curtain and the demise of the Soviet Union;
       (4) in the place of that threat, new security threats are 
     emerging to the shared interests of the member countries of 
     the North Atlantic Treaty Organization;
       (5) although these new threats are more geographically and 
     functionally diverse and less predictable, they still imperil 
     shared interests of the United States and our North Atlantic 
     Treaty Organization allies;
       (6) Western interests must be protected on a cooperative 
     basis without an undue burden falling upon the United States;
       (7) the North Atlantic Treaty Organization is the only 
     multilateral organization that is capable of conducting 
     effective military operations to protect Western interests;
       (8) the valuable experience gained from ongoing military 
     cooperation within the North Atlantic Treaty Organization 
     critical to the success of joint military operations in the 
     1991 liberation of Kuwait;
       (9) the North Atlantic Treaty Organization is an important 
     diplomatic forum for discussion of issues of concern to its 
     member states and for the peaceful resolution of disputes;
       (10) admission of Central and East European countries that 
     have recently been freed from Communist domination to the 
     North Atlantic Treaty Organization could contribute to 
     international peace and enhance the security of those 
     countries;
       (11) a number of countries including the Visegrad countries 
     (the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, and Slovakia) and the 
     Baltic states (Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania), have 
     expressed interest in North Atlantic Treaty Organization 
     membership; and
       (12) in recognition of this interest, the ``Partnership of 
     Peace'' proposal offers limited military cooperation to many 
     European countries not currently members of the North 
     Atlantic Treaty Organization, without establishing benchmarks 
     or guidelines for eventual North Atlantic Treaty Organization 
     membership.

     SEC. 3. UNITED STATES POLICY.

       It should be the policy of the United States--
       (1) to continue our commitment to and active leadership 
     role in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization;
       (2) to join with our North Atlantic Treaty Organization 
     allies to redefine the role of the alliance in the post-Civil 
     War world, taking into account--
       (A) the fundamentally changed security environment of 
     Central and Eastern Europe,
       (B) the need to assure all countries of the defensive 
     nature of the alliance and the desire of its members to work 
     cooperatively with all former adversaries,
       (C) the emerging security threats posed by the 
     proliferation of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons of 
     mass destruction and the means to deliver them,
       (D) the continuing challenges to the interests of all North 
     Atlantic Treaty Organization member countries posed by 
     unstable and undemocratic regimes harboring hostile 
     intentions, and
       (E) the dependence of the global economy on a stable energy 
     supply and the free flow of commerce;
       (3) to urge the North Atlantic Treaty Organization to 
     support the eventual expansion of alliance membership to 
     European countries that meet appropriate standards, 
     including--
       (A) shared values and interests,
       (B) democratic governments,
       (C) free market economies,
       (D) civilian control of the military,
       (E) adherence to the values, principles, and political 
     commitments embodied in the Helsinki Final Act of the 
     Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, and
       (F) commitment to further the principles of the North 
     Atlantic Treaty Organization and to contribute to the 
     security of the North Atlantic area;
       (4) to urge the North Atlantic Treaty Organization--
       (A) to extend membership to countries that meet the 
     standards set forth by the North Atlantic Treaty 
     Organization, and
       (B) to establish benchmarks and a timetable for eventual 
     membership for selected countries in transition; and
       (5) to affirm the North Atlantic Treaty Organization 
     military planning should include joint military operations 
     beyond the geographic bounds of the alliance under Article 4 
     of the North Atlantic Treaty when the shared interests of the 
     United States and other member countries require such action 
     to defend vital interests.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Georgia [Mr. Gingrich] is recognized for 5 minutes.

  [Mr. GINGRICH addressed the House. His remarks will appear hereafter 
in the Extensions of Remarks.]

                          ____________________