[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 127 (Tuesday, September 13, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: September 13, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
                   NEW RUSSIAN-CIS MILITARY ALLIANCE?

  Mr. DeCONCINI. Mr. President, recently, reports have come to my 
attention that Russia and other former Soviet Republics might be moving 
toward the creation of a new military alliance. Apparently, a draft 
agreement for such a military alliance is to be submitted in early 1995 
to the leaders of the CIS that would call for, among other things, the 
eventual creation of joint armed forces, collective peacekeeping, and a 
joint air defense system--forces that would, no doubt, be largely 
dominated by Russia. According to a recent New York Times Op-ed written 
by freedom House president Adrian Karatnycky, Konstantin Zatulin, 
chairman of the Russian Parliament's Committee for Commonwealth 
Affairs, has hinted that Russia may not pressure Ukraine to give up its 
nuclear weapons should Ukraine and Russia become ``strategic 
partners.''
  Mr. President, such developments must be monitored closely, given 
their implications for U.S. strategic and other interests. 
The prospects of such a union could derail efforts to integrate these 
New Independent States into Europe, including NATO, following decades 
of Russian domination. This is particularly troubling considering the 
possible rise of anti-Western, anti-democratic forces in any post-
Yeltsin Russia.

  United States policy with respect to the non-Russian New Independent 
States within the last 6 months has appeared to evolve. We have 
increasingly recognized their importance and, especially in the case of 
critically important Ukraine, stressed its independence and territorial 
integrity. Therefore, I find puzzling and disconcerting recent reports 
that the United States is prepared to accept an expanded Russian sphere 
of influence. If true, Mr. President, this cannot help but send the 
wrong signal to those in Russia who still have not abandoned the goal 
of re-creation of the empire, Equally important, it sends the wrong 
message--one bound to undermine the recent progress that has been 
made--to those New Independent States less than eager to once again 
come under Russia's wing.
  Mr. President, while pressing ahead on developing a constructive 
relationship with Russia, and encouraging positive changes there, we 
must not waver in our commitment to the independence of the other 
former Soviet republics. Support for their independence includes well-
thought-out policy statements that must not be perceived as even a 
tacit green light to Russian neo-imperialism. We must also extend 
concrete, effective, and timely assistance in many areas, such as de-
nuclearization, energy, privitization, the environment, and last, but 
by no means least, democratic institution building.
  Both words and deeds are important in making clear to the world the 
United States commitment to the independence of the former Soviet 
Republics.

                          ____________________