[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 134 (Thursday, August 10, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S12207-S12208]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


              FRENCH NUCLEAR TESTING IN THE SOUTH PACIFIC

  Mr. THOMAS. Mr. President, as the chairman of the Senate Subcommittee 
on East Asian and Pacific Affairs, I come to the floor today to respond 
briefly to French President Jacques Chirac's decision to conduct a 
series of underground nuclear test explosions in the South Pacific 
between September of this year and May 1996.
  I strongly believe that President Chirac's decision to conduct these 
tests will be damaging to international efforts to curb the 
proliferation of nuclear weapons. The Soviet Union began a test 
moratorium in October 1990; France initiated its own in April 1992, 
although it had not exploded a device since 1991, and the United States 
and Great Britain have similarly observed a moratorium since 1992. 
Continuing the trend toward minimizing the nuclear threat, in May of 
this year the world's five declared nuclear powers extended 
indefinitely the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty [NPT].
  On June 13 of this year, however, President Chirac--citing the need 
to check the reliability and safety of France's existing nuclear 
arsenal--announced that country would conduct eight nuclear tests at 
its site at Mururoa Atoll in the South Pacific. That decision is 
unfortunate for three principal reasons. First, it is likely that a 
resumption of testing by France will result in the disintegration of 
the current testing moratorium and a renewal of underground testing by 
other states. Moratoria are like truces--they are only good as long as 
all the parties to them observe their provisions. Second, it calls into 
serious question France's commitment to the NPT extension. In May, the 
world's five nuclear powers--the United States, France, Russia, China, 
and Britain--persuaded the rest of the world to extend indefinitely the 
Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. To win that consensus, the five 
countries promised to sign a comprehensive test ban treaty by the end 
of next year. The resumption of French nuclear testing though, only 4 
months after France signed this agreement, I believe calls into 
question France's commitment to the CTBT and consequently undermines 
these international efforts to curb the proliferation of nuclear 
weapons. Japan's Prime Minister, Murayama Tomiichi, has accused France 
of betraying nonnuclear countries, while Minister of Science and 
Technology Tanaka has stated that ``Nations that possess nuclear 
weapons must show their wisdom and set an example to countries that do 
not have nuclear weapons.''
  Third, Mr. President, the French decision to test is vehemently 
opposed by most, if not all, of the countries along the Pacific rim, 
most of which have publicly condemned the decision. I have been visited 
by the Ambassadors of Australia, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, 
Micronesia, among others, all of whom have conveyed their Governments' 
opposition to nuclear testing in their ``backyards.'' Australia's Prime 
Minister recently summed up his country's position in an article in the 
German daily Die Welt:

       Australia and its citizens, and the peoples and governments 
     of many other countries, are outraged about the French 
     Government's announcement that it intends to resume nuclear 
     testing in Mururoa. I believe the French people will 
     understand such feelings very well.
       The mood in the South Pacific countries is general: If 
     France has to test these weapons, it should do so on its 
     internal territory. Whatever the French Government intends to 
     achieve with these actions, they are seen by the overwhelming 
     majority of the people in this region as a big nation's 
     attack on the rights of smaller ones. The decision to resume 
     the tests is inevitably regarded as a return to old colonial 
     attitudes. This is all the more tragic since most recently 
     France's relations with the countries in the region have 
     become much more positive and fruitful.
       Neither Australia nor the other countries in the region 
     want France to withdraw from the Pacific. On the contrary, we 
     want to cooperate closely and well with it. However, it is 
     one of the lamentable consequences of this decision that many 
     people in the region now doubt the legitimacy of France's 
     role.

                           *   *   *   *   *

       Australia's concern is increased further by the additional 
     responsibility that arises this year from our role as 
     chairman of the 15 members in the South Pacific Forum. In 
     this function we speak on behalf of all countries in the 
     region; many of them are small and economically vulnerable 
     and all of them have a deep material and spiritual 
     relationship with the Pacific Ocean.
       I am convinced that I speak for the members of the Forum 
     when I continue to urge France to rescind its decision and 
     when I stress that in this case it would gain considerable 
     prestige not only in the South Pacific countries but among 
     all the peoples in the world.
       The French Government has mentioned the safety of the 
     environment with regard to the tests in Mururoa. However, we 
     are most deeply concerned about the possibility of accidents. 
     And no one can foresee the long-term dangers that arise from 
     a potential destruction of the sensitive atoll structures 
     during the tests.
       Australia's reaction is neither precipitate nor a mere 
     reflex. Australia can point to a long history of responsible 
     diplomatic efforts with regard to nuclear issues. Together 
     with the other South Pacific countries, in the 1970's 
     Australia opposed France's atmospheric tests and, upon our 
     initiative, the South Pacific nuclear-free zone was 
     established in 1985.
       Australia has also been active regarding nuclear issues in 
     the United Nations and in 

[[Page S 12208]]
     other international forums. Often, we acted in close cooperation with 
     France, in particular since President Mitterrand's highly 
     welcome decision to declare a nuclear test moratorium in 
     1992. These efforts were combined on 11 May with the decision 
     by the international community to extend the Nuclear 
     Nonproliferation Treaty [NPT] for an unlimited period--an 
     important element for the safety of our two countries.
       Neither Australia nor any other country has the right to 
     define France's security; however, given the circumstances, 
     the French will certainly permit me to explain why, in our 
     view, France's action is not good for France or for the 
     world.
       We believe that these tests endanger our efforts to 
     preserve the effectiveness of the NPT and to achieve 
     universal membership. For the unlimited extension of this 
     treaty it was decisive that a ``declaration of principles and 
     goals on nonproliferation and disarmament'' was 
     simultaneously negotiated and adopted by all states involved, 
     including the nuclear states.
       This declaration announced the speedy conclusion by 1996 at 
     the latest--of a comprehensive nuclear test ban treaty. And 
     until such a treaty comes into effect the nuclear states have 
     committed themselves to ``extreme restraint.''
       However, ``extreme restraint'' regarding nuclear tests 
     hardly applies to a program of eight tests. France's decision 
     will certainly make many non-nuclear states wonder about the 
     honesty of all nuclear states.
       This will harm the treaty's credibility, which must be 
     preserved if some states, which have not yet signed it, are 
     to be persuaded to do so.
       The decision will also increase the problems in the 
     negotiations on a comprehensive nuclear test ban treaty. 
     Despite President Chirac's gratifying statement that France 
     will sign such a treaty, there is the serious danger that the 
     very difficult treaty negotiations that we are facing in 
     Geneva will become even more difficult.
       In particular France's position as a responsible and 
     leading power in the world means that any new French test 
     will play into the hands of potential arms dealers and that 
     any test will make many of those countries hesitate whose 
     support we need to conclude a comprehensive treaty.
       We know the arguments for France's nuclear capacity and the 
     strategic dimensions of a nuclear power very well. We argue 
     not merely on the basis of emotions when we say that the 
     biggest responsibility for us all is the one to keep alive 
     the hope for a nuclear-free world, which was born when the 
     Cold War ended. The burden of this responsibility rests most 
     heavily on the nuclear states, particularly after the 
     unlimited extension of the NPT.
       And in view of the nuclear experiences in Europe, the 
     biggest challenge for leadership certainly is right in front 
     of Europe's own door. The damaged Chernobyl reactor may have 
     been encased in a sarcophagus, but there are still another 20 
     reactors with similar design flaws on the territory of the 
     former Soviet Union. Dozens of nuclear powered submarines of 
     the former Soviet fleet are now idle. Nuclear material and 
     nuclear expert knowledge are leaking from the former Soviet 
     Union into illegal markets.
       These dangers, as well as the stocks of dismantled nuclear 
     weapons and contaminated areas, are not precisely banished by 
     the development of further nuclear weapons capacities. But 
     France's top international skills in nuclear science and 
     technology could help. How much more respect would France 
     gain and how much more useful would it be if the country were 
     not to concentrate its skills and energy on countering a 
     purely hypothetical threat but on meeting a real threat!
       I do not doubt that the Australians want to make it known 
     in France that their attitude is in no way determined by 
     hostility toward the French people or the French nation. Our 
     opposition specifically refers to the French Government's 
     decision to resume the nuclear tests in the Pacific.
       In the past Australia's attitude was sometimes understood 
     as an expression of some kind of Anglo-Saxon hostility toward 
     France. However, Australia is certainly not an Anglo-Saxon 
     enclave in the Asia-Pacific region. As the many French who 
     live in Australia can confirm, Australia is a rich 
     multicultural society, in which half of the immigrants come 
     from Asian countries. It is clear that many of these French 
     inhabitants of Australia think that the French Government 
     should rescind its decision.
       If they live on Australia's east coast, they know that 
     there is an enormous difference between studying a map of the 
     Pacific in Europe and actually living on the shores of the 
     ocean in Sydney or Brisbane or Auckland. The map shows these 
     places to be far away from Mururoa. However, if one lives in 
     these places, one knows that the South Pacific--no matter how 
     gigantic it is constitutes a single environment and links 
     everyone who participates in it.
       The community spirit that the Pacific Ocean gives us is 
     similar to the one given to France by the idea of ``Europe.'' 
     It is the fundamental reason for our opposition to France's 
     decision to resume the tests and for the fact that Australia 
     and its partners in the South Pacific Forum will not stop 
     emphatically presenting our views to the French Government 
     and conveying to the French people, if we can, the depth of 
     our feelings.

  Mr. President, it is my understanding that Senator Akaka intends to 
introduce an amendment to the Department of Defense authorization bill 
this week expressing the sense of the Senate that France must abide by 
the current international moratorium on nuclear test explosions, and 
refrain from proceeding with its announced intention of conducting a 
series of nuclear tests in advance of a comprehensive test ban treaty. 
I support that amendment, and hope that the French will reconsider 
their position on conducting these tests and that the CTBT will be 
signed by the end of next year.


                          ____________________