[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 46 (Friday, March 29, 1996)]
[House]
[Pages H3219-H3222]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
COMMEMORATING THE ACCESSION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TO THE
PROTOCOLS OF THE SOUTH PACIFIC NUCLEAR FREE ZONE TREATY
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the
gentleman from American Samoa [Mr. Faleomavaega] is recognized for 60
minutes.
Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I have just returned to Washington
form the South Pacific, where I was privileged to be part of the U.S.
delegation to the signing ceremonies for the Treaty of Rarotonga. I
want to take this opportunity to inform our colleagues in Congress and
the people of our great Nation of the historic event that took place
this past Monday, March 25, 1996, in Suva, Fiji.
Mr. Speaker, on Monday, the Government of the United States of
America signed the protocols of the South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone
[SPNFZ] Treaty, also known as the Rarotonga Treaty, formally evidencing
America's unequivocal support for the nuclear free zone in the South
Pacific.
Mr. Speaker, this action by our Government constitutes a great and
momentous development in the history of relations between the United
States and the nations of the Pacific region. At the Suva ceremonies,
the Governments of France and Great Britain joined us in signing the
protocols of the SPNFZ Treaty.
{time} 1545
With this development, Mr. Speaker, all of the world's nuclear powers
are now signatories to the South Pacific Nuclear Treaty.
I want to express my deepest heartfelt appreciation to the House
Committee on International Relations chairman, the gentleman from New
York [Mr. Gilman] and the committee's ranking Democrat, the gentleman
from Indiana [Mr. Hamilton], for authorizing me to represent the
Committee on International Relations and the U.S. Congress in this
historic milestone achievement for the people of the Pacific. Coming
from the Pacific, Mr. Speaker, I was deeply honored to have been
extended this great privilege.
Mr. Speaker, for decades, the island nations have strived for U.S.
accession to the SONFZ protocols, which symbolizes America's support of
and respect for the South Pacific people's dream of a homeland free of
nuclear weapons. To have played a small role in Washington over the
past 8 years in bringing about the realization of these aspirations for
the people of the Pacific has been a long and hard struggle, but
indeed, a very worthy one.
At this time of celebration in the Pacific, I want to recognize and
thank those who have contributed greatly over the years in a bipartisan
spirit to this week's historic event. In particular, the following
individuals must be recognized for their leadership, the former
chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Asian-Pacific
Affairs, the gentleman from New York and former Congressman, the
Honorable Stephen Solarz; former Congressman and revered champion of
Pacific interests, the gentleman from California and my very good
friend, the Honorable Robert Lagomarsino; and the greatly respected
member of the Committee on International Relations, the gentleman from
Iowa, currently chairman of the Committee on Banking and Financial
Services, the Honorable Jim Leach.
I also want to express appreciation to my colleagues and Members of
this great institution--Congressmen Ben Gilman, Lee Hamilton, Chris
Smith, Howard Berman, Congresswoman Connie Morella, Congressmen Gary
Ackerman, Ron Dellums, Doug Bereuter, Tom Lantos, Pete Stark, Matthew
Martinez, Bob Underwood, and the distinguished delegation from the
State of Hawaii, Senators Daniel Inouye and Daniel Akaka, Congresswoman
Patsy Mink, and my good friend, Congressman Neil Abercrombie--for
supporting my efforts over the years for U.S. accession to the SPNFZ
Treaty.
Mr. Speaker, I also want to recognize the tremendous leadership role
that the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency [ACDA] has played in
urging, since the Reagan administration, for U.S. support of the SPNFZ
Treaty. ACDA has long been a crucial and vital part of several
administrations' efforts to stop nuclear proliferation around the
globe. While ACDA's mission is growing with greater importance--Start
II implementation, chemical weapons convention ratification, and
completion of the comprehensive test ban treaty negotiations and
implementation--I find it an unfathomable tragedy that ACDA's funding
is being butchered. Stopping proliferation of weapons of mass
destruction must clearly be a top priority of our Government, and steps
must be taken to ensure that ACDA will be given the resources necessary
to accomplish this most urgent of missions.
Mr. Speaker, although we were not able to stop France from resuming
their recent nuclear bomb detonations in the South Pacific, we should
welcome the fact that Paris' irresponsible actions ignited worldwide
protests and served as a catalyst for France to join the SPNFZ Treaty
protocols.
Mr. Speaker, although we were not able to stop France from resuming
their recent nuclear bomb detonations in the South Pacific, we should
welcome the fact that Paris' irresponsible actions ignited worldwide
protests and served as a catalyst for France to join the SPNFZ Treaty
protocols in an attempt to defuse international condemnation.
Mr. Speaker, the international community's strong and visceral
opposition to French nuclear testing sent a strong message that we have
entered into a new post-cold-war era where nuclear testing and nuclear
weapons development are increasingly viewed around the world as an
unnecessary evil for preserving peace, stability, and freedom. Perhaps
this is a lesson we can all take to heart on the eve of the 21st
century.
Mr. Speaker, it is about time that the three remaining nuclear powers
have finally joined Russia and China, who ironically supported SPNFZ
years ago, by acceding to the SPNFZ Treaty. The fact that all of the
world's declared nuclear powers are now signatories to the treaty,
establishing the South Pacific's vast nuclear-free zone, cannot but be
perceived positively in Geneva, Switzerland, where the United Nations-
sponsored Conference on Disarmament is under way. Joining the SPNFZ
Treaty is proof of the nuclear powers' good faith commitment to
progress on nuclear disarmament, that should bolster efforts to
negotiate a genuine ``zero-yield'' Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty before
the end of this year.
Mr. Speaker, a couple of observations, as I have followed the
question of nuclear testing for the past 8 years and diligently pursued
this issue with my colleagues while serving as a member of the House
Committee on International Relations. We proved in World
[[Page H3220]]
War II the devastating effect of nuclear weapons and their impact on
human beings. The bomb the United States dropped on Hiroshima some 50
years ago killed and vaporized over 150,000 men, women, and children,
and points to the stark reality of the devastation that nuclear weapons
can wreak upon mankind.
Mr. Speaker, I am not one to quibble with the fact that we were at
the height of a world war or that the axis powers were on the verge of
oppressing all of the free people of the world and that our country was
in the midst of this great war for democracy and freedom, but what
basic lessons have we learned, Mr. Speaker, in perfecting how to
destroy multitudes of fellow human beings by the creation of this great
weapon, the atomic bomb? I wonder when we detonated what was known then
in 1954 as the ``Bravo Shot,'' where the United States was the first
nation to explode a thermonuclear device, which was then known as the
hydrogen bomb, what was gained for mankind while the people of the
Marshall Islands suffered from these hydro tests in their homeland?
I also wonder, Mr. Speaker, at this point in time in our history
whether nuclear weapons really provide security for the American people
as well as the other nations of the world. I am concerned, Mr. Speaker,
about the fact that we have perfected the use of nuclear weapons and
their destructive powers, just as we have made, I am sure, earnest
efforts to harness peaceful uses of nuclear energy to improve living
conditions for mankind.
At the same time, Mr. Speaker, we are now capable of exploding a
thermonuclear device 1,000 times more powerful than the atom bomb that
we dropped on Hiroshima. What does that mean, Mr. Speaker? It means
that we have perfected a device to hand down to generations to come so
that we can kill other human beings by the destructive nature of the
atom and hydrogen bomb.
I am concerned, Mr. Speaker, about the fact that the Western nuclear
powers condemn China now for continuing its efforts to perfect its
nuclear devices, while the United States, for example, allocates a
tremendous amount of our military budget to maintain our distinct and
unchallenged nuclear technology supremacy. I find this hypocritical,
Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, while we harnessed nuclear energy for the benefit of our
citizens to provide electricity for our homes, our Government also has
to deal with the reality that it is going to take approximately $350
billion of the American taxpayers' money to clean up and store the
spent nuclear waste that is in our own country. This is just in our own
country. It does not even address the issue of other nations currently
using nuclear energy for electrical production.
So we seem to be at a crossroad now, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, where is it going to end, or when is it ever going to
end? We need to bring the nuclear nightmare to an end and regain some
sense of morality among nations of the world, so that peace can be
attained in a constructive fashion. We cannot continue with this idea
that we are going to win and they are going to lose if we press that
nuclear button first.
Mr. Speaker, I submit whoever presses that nuclear button, it is
going to be a lose/lose situation for all of the nations of the world.
I sincerely hope that perhaps having nuclear-free-zones, like the South
Pacific nuclear-free-zone, throughout the world will be a positive step
for peace and stability in the world. We should all take a minute and
say to ourselves, let us hold back, let us have a sense of better
control of what we are doing, especially since we have already proven
the destructive nature of nuclear weapons. We do not need to prove this
again, as we did in World War II among the people that lived in
Nagaskai and Hiroshima.
I pray, Mr. Speaker, that my colleagues will help in our efforts to
see that perhaps the five nuclear nations and the other undetected
nations who have the capability for nuclear destruction, will provide a
very strong and binding commitment that we will not spread this evil
cold danger to other nations of the world.
Mr. Speaker, I include the following material for the Record:
House of Representatives,
Committee on Foreign Affairs,
Washington, DC, May 27, 1993.
Hon. Warren M. Christopher,
Secretary of State, Department of State,
Washington, DC
Dear Mr. Secretary: We write to recommend an early review
of U.S. policy toward signature of the Protocols of the South
Pacific Nuclear Free Zone (SPNFZ) Treaty.
Such a review would appear to be appropriate not only in
the context of non-proliferation policy but also because of
the relevance of SPNFZ to U.S. relations with the South
Pacific. SPNFZ is a significant non-proliferation measure and
any support the U.S. can lend to it would strengthen the
cause of non-proliferation in the region. It would also
contribute to support for the extension of the Non-
Proliferation Treaty in 1995. Given the importance of SPNFZ
to South Pacific Forum members, U.S. accession to the
Protocols would enhance U.S. influence and credibility in the
South Pacific.
As we understand them, the provisions of the SPNFZ Treaty
and its three Protocols do not appear to be inconsistent with
U.S. national interests. The Treaty specifically respects
states' rights under international law to freedom of the seas
and leaves it up to individual signatories to decide whether
to allow foreign ships and aircraft to visit or transit their
territory.
We note that, at the hearing of the Foreign Affairs
Committee on 18 May, you said the U.S. was not at odds with
the basic thrust of SPNFZ. You did, however, express concern
about the Treaty's possible impact on the U.S.'s operational
flexibility and freedom in the South Pacific.
We would be interested in understanding the nature of the
Administration's concerns about operational flexibility for
U.S. forces in the South Pacific, and are interested in
working with you in support of a policy regarding the SPNFZ
Protocols that protects and promotes U.S. interests in the
South Pacific and enhances U.S. non-proliferation objectives.
We are writing a similar letter to the Secretary of
Defense.
With best regards,
Sincerely yours,
Benjamin A. Gilman.
Jim Leach.
Lee H. Hamilton.
Gary L. Ackerman.
Eni F.H. Faleomavaega.
____
House of Representatives,
Washington, DC, April 24, 1995.
Ambassador Ralph Earle II,
Head of Delegation, U.S. Delegation to the Nuclear Non-
Proliferation Treaty Extension Conference,
New York City, NY.
Dear Ambassador Earle: It is my understanding that, in
conjunction with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty
Extension Conference proceedings being held in New York,
there shall be convened a working group focussing on nuclear-
weapon-free zones.
As a member of the House International Relations Committee,
I am writing to urge that the U.S. delegation take an active
role in those discussions and strongly support the use of
nuclear-weapon-free zones as a non-proliferation tool.
Treaty-based nuclear-weapon-free zones with adequate
verification safeguards have already proven effective in
preventing spread of nuclear weapons and serve to assist
efforts ``rolling back'' existing proliferation.
As you know, the U.S. has supported establishment of
nuclear-weapon-free zones around the world, including those
in Antarctica, the seabed and outer space. We are also a
signatory to the Treaty of Tlatelolco, which prohibits
nuclear weapons in Latin America. The White House has
recently lauded the Latin America Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone as
a critical building block of peace and stability throughout
the Western Hemisphere which reinforces the worldwide non-
proliferation regime.
I have long urged that our government should also join the
South Pacific Nuclear-Free Zone created by our allies through
the Treaty of Rarotonga. The protocols to the Rarotonga
Treaty are substantially identical to our commitments under
the Latin America Treaty. In the post-Cold War era, the
Soviet nuclear threat in the Pacific no longer exists,
overcoming past justification for not joining the Treaty of
Rarotonga.
At a time when it is crucial that the U.S. utilize all
resources to forge a majority for indefinite extension of the
NPT, joining the South Pacific Nuclear-Free Zone Treaty would
materially enhance U.S. credibility, gain international
goodwill and act as visible proof of America's commitment to
nuclear arms controls.
Ambassador Earle, I wish you the very best in your
discussions regarding nuclear-weapon-free zones and the
benefits of their formation around the world, in particular
in the Middle East, Southeast Asia, Africa, and the South
Asia Subcontinent. I further commend you and the delegation
for your efforts leading to permanent establishment of the
NPT, a mission of utmost urgency and importance to our nation
and the world.
With best personal regards,
Sincerely,
Eni F.H. Faleomavaega,
Member of Congress.
____
[[Page H3221]]
House of Representatives,
Washington, DC, September 20, 1995.
Hon. William J. Clinton,
President of the United States,
The White House,
Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. President: We write to recommend that the long-
pending review of U.S. policy toward the South Pacific
Nuclear Free Zone (SPNFZ) Treaty be brought to a close, and
would strongly urge that our nation sign the Protocols to the
SPNFZ Treaty.
The review was appropriate due to our non-proliferation
policy and the relevance of SPNFZ to U.S. relations with the
South Pacific. We feel SPNFZ is a significant non-
proliferation measure and any support the U.S. can lend to it
would strengthen the cause of non-proliferation in the
region.
The provisions of the SPNFZ Treaty and its three Protocols
are not inconsistent with U.S. national interests or present
security practices. The Treaty specifically respects states'
rights under international law to freedom of the seas and
leaves it up to individual signatories to decide whether to
allow foreign ships and aircraft to visit or transit their
territory.
While the U.S. has yet to act on the SPNFZ Protocols,
ironically, both China and Russia are signatories. The U.S.
is, however, a signatory to the Protocols of the Latin
America Nuclear Free Zone Treaty, substantively the same as
SPNFZ, which your administration has lauded as a critical
building block for peace and stability in our backyard, the
Western Hemisphere.
Given the importance of SPNFZ to South Pacific Forum
nations, U.S. accession to the Protocols would enhance U.S.
influence and credibility in the Pacific. Moreover, U.S.
accession to SPNFZ would bolster progress on global non-
proliferation measures, including the indefinite extension of
the Non-Proliferation Treaty and negotiation of a zero-yield
Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. In light of France's decision
to support a zero-yield CTBT, the time is particularly right
for the U.S. to accede to SPNFZ.
We thank you for your consideration of this request and
urge timely action.
Sincerely,
Eni F.H. Faleomavaega.
Lee H. Hamilton.
James A. Leach.
Christopher H. Smith.
Robert A. Underwood.
Members of Congress.
____
The White House,
Washington, November 7, 1995.
Hon. Eni F.H. Faleomavaega,
House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Dear Eni: Thank you for your letter regarding the South
Pacific Nuclear Free Zone (SPNFZ) Treaty.
On October 20, 1995, the United States, France and the
United Kingdom jointly announced our intention to sign the
relevant protocols of the SPNFZ Treaty in the first half of
1996. This announcement reflects a number of positive
developments that have occurred recently, such as the
extension of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty indefinitely
and without condition and progress on a Comprehensive Test
Ban Treaty.
I appreciate your efforts in support of SPNFZ and look
forward to working with Congress to achieve ratification of
the SPNFZ protocols.
Sincerely,
Bill.
____
U.S. Arms Control and
Disarmament Agency,
Washington, DC, December 8, 1995.
Hon. Eni F.H. Faleomavaega,
Committee on International Relations,
U.S. House of Representatives.
Dear Congressman Faleomavaega: I wanted to convey my
admiration for and congratulations upon your tireless efforts
to achieve formal U.S. adherence to the Protocols of the
Treaty of Rarotonga. As you know, the U.S. was able to
declare its intention on October 20, 1995 along with the
United Kingdom and France, to sign the Protocols in the first
half of 1996.
The United States has always respected the goals and the
spirit of Rarotonga. As we stated in 1987, our activities in
the region were not inconsistent with the Treaty. That is,
however, a long way from assuming the legal obligations of
the Protocols and thereby conferring the full legal and
political support of the United States. Now, the U.S., U.K.
and France will sign the Protocols together, and at a stroke
bring all five nuclear weapon states in accord with the
solemn commitments and obligations undertaken by the states
of the region.
I am extremely gratified that the United States of America
can formally adhere to this important regional
denuclearization treaty, and am pleased that my Agency was
able to play a crucial role in this decision. Your efforts
have contributed greatly to this momentous decision, and I
again offer my congratulations.
Sincerely,
John D. Holum.
____
The White House,
Washington, March 24, 1996.
Hon. Eni F.H. Faleomavaega,
House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Dear Eni: Last fall I promised to keep you informed of
developments regarding the South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone
(SPNFZ) Treaty. I am pleased to advise you that on March 25
the United States will join France and the United Kingdom in
signing the relevant protocols to this Treaty at a tripartite
ceremony in Fiji.
Last year's NPT Review and Extension Conference agreed that
internationally recognized nuclear free zones, based on
arrangements fully arrived at among the states of the region
concerned, enhance international peace and security. The
Conference also agreed that the cooperation of all the
nuclear weapon states and their respect and support for the
relevant protocols are necessary for the maximum
effectiveness of such zones.
Our decision to sign the SPNFZ protocols demonstrates our
clear support for a nuclear weapons-free zone in the South
Pacific, our commitment to nuclear nonproliferation and our
determination to achieve a Comprehensive Test Ban treaty
mandating a permanent end to nuclear testing throughout the
world.
I appreciate your strong support for the important step we
will be taking on March 25.
Sincerely,
Bill.
____
House of Representatives, Committee on International
Relations,
Washington, DC, March 28, 1996.
Hon. Eni F.H. Faleomavaega,
Washington, DC.
Dear Eni: I am writing to congratulate you for the superb
work you have done over the years on behalf of the South
Pacific Nuclear Free Zone Treaty--work whose culmination we
witnessed earlier this week when the United States joined
France and Great Britain in signing the three SPNFZ
protocols.
It was only fitting that you should have been in Suva to
participate in this ceremony.
You have been an eloquent and impassioned voice on this
issue, and all of us are very much in your debt.
So please accept my hearty congratulations for a splendid
job and a successful conclusion to your labors.
I look forward to your leadership on many other issues in
the days ahead.
With best regards,
Sincerely,
Lee H. Hamilton,
Ranking Democratic Member.
____
H. Con. Res. 111
Whereas the nations of the South Pacific, which share with
the United States a strong interest in nuclear non-
proliferation, have negotiated and signed the Treaty of
Rarotonga, establishing a South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone;
Whereas the Treaty of Rarotonga came into force on December
11, 1986, and has been ratified by 11 nations;
Whereas the Treaty of Rarotonga prohibits the testing,
manufacture, acquisition, and stationing of nuclear weapons
in the territory of parties to the treaty and the dumping of
radioactive wastes at sea;
Whereas the 3 protocols to that treaty, which are open for
ratification by nuclear-weapon states, require that those
nuclear weapon states that ratify those protocols abide by
the treaty's provisions in their territories in the region,
not contribute to violations of the treaty or threaten to use
nuclear weapons against its parties, and refrain from testing
nuclear devices in the zone;
Whereas the Treaty of Rarotonga does not prejudice or in
any way affect the rights of all nations to freedom of the
seas under international law and leaves to each party policy
decisions on visits or passage through its territory by
foreign ships and aircraft;
Whereas the establishment of verified nuclear-weapon-free
zones can reinforce the international norm of nuclear
nonproliferation and build consensus for long-term extension
of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) when reviewed
for extension by its members in 1995;
Whereas the United States leadership to extend the Nuclear
Nonproliferation Treaty would be further enhanced if United
States signature and ratification of the protocols were part
of an overall nonproliferation policy that included
negotiations on a comprehensive nuclear test ban;
Whereas Article VII of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty
affirms ``the right of any group of States to conclude
regional treaties in order to assure the total absence of
nuclear weapons in their respective territories,'' and state
parties to the Treaty of Rarotonga have implemented a
safeguards agreement for the region with the International
Atomic Energy Agency;
Whereas it has been the policy of the United States to
favor the establishment of effective nuclear-weapon-free
zones in regions of nonproliferation concern and where such
zones would enhance international stability and security;
Whereas the United States has set forth 7 criteria whereby
the effectiveness of proposed nuclear-weapon-free zones will
be judged, as follows: (1) the initiative is from the nations
in the region, (2) all nations whose participation is deemed
important participate, (3) adequate verification of
compliance is provided, (4) it does not disturb existing
security arrangements to the detriment of regional and
international security, (5) all parties are barred from
developing or possessing any nuclear device for any
[[Page H3222]]
purpose, (6) it imposes no restrictions on international
legal maritime and serial navigation rights and freedoms, and
(7) it does not affect the international legal rights of
parties to grant or deny others transit privileges, including
port calls and overflights;
Whereas the United States has signed and ratified the
protocols to the Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear
Weapons in Latin America (the Treaty of Tlatelolco),
establishing a nuclear-weapon-free zone in Latin America,
whereby the United States committed itself not to test,
manufacture, acquire, or store nuclear weapons in its
territories in the region (namely Puerto Rico and the United
States Virgin Islands), not to contribute to any violation of
the treaty, and not to threaten to use nuclear weapons
against the parties;
Whereas the United States is also a party to the Antarctic
Treaty, the Seabed Arms Control Treaty, the Treaty on
Principles Governing the Activities of States in the
Exploration and Use of Outer Space, Including the Moon and
Other Celestial Bodies, which preclude nuclear weapons from
these regions;
Whereas support for these nuclear-weapon-free zones does
not prejudge United States policy with respect to other
proposed nuclear-weapon-free zones, each of which must be
judged on its individual merits in accordance with United
States national interests;
Whereas in order to maintain the security of United States
military forces and their ability to contribute to nuclear
deterrence, the United States must preserve the principle of
neither confirming nor denying whether particular United
States naval vessels or other military forces possess nuclear
weapons;
Whereas the protocols to the Treaty of Rarotonga do not
conflict with the United States policy of neither confirming
nor denying the presence of nuclear weapons on United States
vessels or aircraft and do not prohibit any current or
anticipated activities in United States territories in the
South Pacific or elsewhere in the region; and
Whereas past administrations have stated that while the
United States could not, under circumstances prior to the
cessation of the Cold War, sign the protocols to the Treaty
of Rarotonga, United States practices and activities in the
South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone region, then and now, are
consistent with the treaty and its protocols: Now, therefore,
be it
Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate
concurring), That (a) it is the sense of the Congress that--
(1) the Treaty of Rarotonga is consistent with United
States security commitments in the South Pacific since it
does not prohibit port calls by naval vessels which are
nuclear powered or may be carrying nuclear weapons and does
not create other impediments to United States military
operations in support of the Security Treaty between
Australia, New Zealand and the United States (ANZUS Treaty);
(2) the Treaty of Rarotonga satisfies the 7 criteria, set
forth in the preamble of this resolution, which have been
established by the United States Government for judging the
effectiveness of proposed nuclear-weapon-free zones;
(3) signature and ratification of the protocols to that
treaty would be in the national interest of the United States
by contributing to a comprehensive United States
nonproliferation policy that would enhance prospects for
extending the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty in 1995,
particularly if such a policy were to include negotiations on
a comprehensive nuclear test ban agreement; and
(4) signature and ratification of the protocols would not
prejudge United States policy with respect to proposals for
nuclear-weapon-free zones in other regions, such as those in
which the presence of an effective nuclear deterrent has
contributed to United States national security by enhancing
stability.
(b) Noting that the executive branch has indicated that
United States practices and activities in the region are
consistent with the Treaty of Rarotonga and its protocols, it
is therefore the sense of the Congress that the United States
should sign and ratify the protocols to that treaty.
____
[From the Christian Science Monitor, Jan. 11, 1994]
Ensuring Stability in the Pacific
(By Eni F.H. Faleomavaega)
In the afterglow of the recently concluded Asia-Pacific
Economic Cooperation meetings and the North American Free
Trade Agreement, a new era of increased trade and economic
growth is dawning. But the vision of Pacific prosperity is
impossible to realize unless a foundation of peace and
stability can be ensured. For half a century, the United
States has provided this crucial element of security in the
Asia-Pacific region, directly aiding the dynamic growth of
Asia's economies. The US should build on this legacy by
supporting the security arrangements necessary for economic
prosperity.
Nuclear proliferation is a major threat to Pacific and US
security, as exemplified by the crisis over North Korea. The
Clinton administration has urged the indefinite renewal of
the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treat and negotiation of a
Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. To bolster US nonproliferation
policy, the president also should build support for nuclear-
weapon-free zones and join the existing nuclear-free zone in
the South Pacific.
Eleven Pacific island nations are members of the Rarotonga
Treaty, establishing the South Pacific Nuclear-Free Zone
(SPNFZ), which bans the testing, stationing, or use of
nuclear weapons in the zone. The treaty, a symbol for the
peoples of the South Pacific, expresses their trepidation
over nuclear weapons and the possibility of a nuclear
holocaust in the region. With France and the US having
detonated more than 100 nuclear bombs in the South Pacific,
the nations there have gained a firsthand appreciation of the
hazards of nuclear weapons.
Since the treaty took effect, the island nations have
eagerly sought US support for a nuclear-weapon-free South
Pacific. By refusing to sign the treaty, the US is
increasingly perceived as indifferent to the aspirations and
concerns of its South Pacific allies--many of whom fought at
our side during World War I, World War II, the Korean War,
and the Vietnam War, and supported America in the cold war.
Ironically, Russia and China have signed the treaty.
The treaty would advance US nonproliferation objectives
without undermining US security policy in the South Pacific,
as past administrations have conceded when testifying before
Congress. It was carefully drafted to accommodate US
interests, including our policy to neither confirm nor deny
the presence of nuclear weapons on US warships or aircraft;
and it protects free transit through the zone by US vessels
and planes carrying nuclear weapons.
The US already supports nuclear-weapon-free zones around
the world, and has signed treaties prohibiting nuclear
weapons in Latin America, the Antarctic, the ocean floor, and
outer space. Furthermore, the US supports creating nuclear-
weapon-free zones in South Asia, the Middle East, and Africa.
With the end of the cold war, justification for much of
America's reluctance to join the SPNFZ has evaporated. The
Soviet nuclear threat in the Pacific no longer exists.
Instead, the US and Russia are committed to keep reductions
in their nuclear arsenals, the US has removed tactical
nuclear weapons from its surface fleet, and all nuclear-
weapon states except China are observing a nuclear-testing
moratorium.
If the US is serious about promoting nonproliferation and
free trade, then it should make use of nuclear-weapon-free
zones that enhance the security that makes economic
prosperity possible. Signing the Rarotonga Treaty would be an
important step toward realizing the promise of a secure and
prosperous ``New Pacific Community.''
____________________