[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.''

                          ____________________