[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 99 (Tuesday, July 26, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: July 26, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
               ELIMINATE NUCLEAR ARSENAL? NOT A BAD IDEA

 Mr. SIMON. Mr. President, I was startled to read an interview 
the other day in the Chicago Tribune with Gen. Charles Horner, 
commander of both the U.S. Space Command and NORAD, the North American 
Aerospace Defense Command. General Horner, a veteran and leader of the 
gulf war campaign, said that nuclear weapons are ``obsolete,'' and that 
he wants ``to get rid of them all.''
  You don't hear these kinds of remarks every day from the Pentagon, 
nor from a lot of other people involved in military affairs or foreign 
policy. And I am aware that General Horner's responsibilities include 
ballistic missile defense--what we used to call SDI, or star wars--
whose program managers have long argued that missile defenses work much 
better in a world of very few nuclear weapons. But the instability 
caused along the way by erecting such defenses has always been the 
sticking point for those of us opposed to missile defense.
  But I take General Horner's words seriously, and I urge my colleagues 
to do likewise. Nuclear weapons, he points out, are simply unusable in 
any meaningful military sense, and no President would order their use 
against cities in any event. And General Horner also talks about the 
``high moral ground,'' which too often goes unconsidered.
  I commend General Horner for his uncommon frankness and candor, and I 
commend his words to my colleagues in the Senate. I ask that the 
article from the July 16 Chicago Tribune be printed in the Record in 
full.
  The article follows:

               [From the Chicago Tribune, July 16, 1994]

      Eliminate Entire Nuclear Arsenal, Senior Air Force General 
                                 Urges

       Washington.--The United States should eliminate all its 
     nuclear weapons, a top Air Force general said Friday in a 
     sharp break from Pentagon orthodoxy.
       Gen. Charles Horner, head of the U.S. Space Command, said 
     the nation would secure ``the high moral ground'' worldwide 
     while losing little militarily by eliminating its nuclear 
     arsenal.
       ``The nuclear weapon is obsolete,'' Horner said at a 
     breakfast meeting with defense reporters. ``I want to get rid 
     of them all.''
       Horner made clear he was ``talking long-term'' and said 
     nuclear disarmament should only take place if other nuclear 
     powers, especially Russia, go along.
       Still, the comments from one of the military's most senior 
     officers run counter to the Clinton administration view that 
     the nuclear weapons arsenal can be reduced, but not 
     eliminated entirely.
       Horner, as head of one of the military's nine ``unified 
     commands,'' reports directly to the secretary of defense.
       His command covers military satellite operations and 
     ballistic missile defense efforts, among other things.
       In addition to heading the U.S. Space Command, Horner also 
     leads the North American Aerospace Defense Command, which is 
     responsible for defending the United States and Canada from a 
     nuclear attack.
       Horner first raised the idea of eliminating the nuclear 
     arsenal last year, but only as something the Pentagon should 
     consider in ``what if'' studies.
       His comments Friday marked a rare instance of an active-
     duty officer criticizing one of the fundamental pillars of 
     U.S. defense throughout the Cold War.
       ``I want to go to zero and I'll tell you why: If we and the 
     Russians can go to zero nuclear weapons, then think what that 
     does for us in our efforts to counter the new war,'' Horner 
     said.
       The new military threat, unlike the superpower tensions of 
     the past, comes from smaller, less stable countries that 
     obtain weapons of mass destruction, Horner said.
       ``Think of the high moral ground we secure by having 
     none,'' said Horner, who plans to retire soon.
       ``It's kind of hard for us to say to North Korea, `You are 
     terrible people, you're developing a nuclear weapon,''' when 
     the United States has thousands of them.
       The Clinton administration, in a review of its nuclear 
     posture, is not endorsing total nuclear disarmament.
       But with the annual cost of maintaining the U.S. nuclear 
     arsenal estimated at about $20 billion, administration 
     officials are looking at ways to reduce the stockpile 
     sharply.
       Current arms reduction treaties would bring the U.S. and 
     Russian nuclear arsenals down to about 3,500 weapons apiece 
     from an estimated 45,000 currently on hand.
       Horner is far from a pacifist. He led coalition air forces 
     during the Persian Gulf war, and he worries that the nation's 
     conventional forces are being cut too deeply. His concern 
     over nuclear weapons is a practical one.
       ``I just don't think nuclear weapons are usable,'' Horner 
     said.
       ``I'm not saying that we militarily disarm, I'm saying that 
     I have a nuclear weapon, and you're North Korea and you have 
     a nuclear weapon. You can use yours. I can't use mine. What 
     am I going to use it on? What are nuclear weapons good for? 
     Busting cities. What president of the United States is going 
     to take out Pyongyang?''

                          ____________________