[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 86 (Wednesday, June 12, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6139-S6141]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                  CHINESE NUCLEAR MISSILES IN PAKISTAN

  Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, last year the Clinton administration 
asked Congress for the authority to allow United States military 
equipment to be delivered to Pakistan. Since 1990, such deliveries were 
not allowed because of a 1985 law known as the Pressler amendment, 
which prohibited any United States Assistance to Pakistan if the 
President failed to certify Pakistan was not in possession of a nuclear 
explosive device. My colleagues may recall that we debated this issue 
quite extensively. It was very controversial. In the end, despite 
strong opposition from this Senator and many of my colleagues, the 
Senate approved the so-called Brown amendment, which authorized the 
transfer of military equipment and repealed the Pressler amendment's 
prohibitions on nonmilitary aid to Pakistan. The Brown amendment became 
law earlier this year.
  To bolster the Clinton administration's request, Under Secretary of 
State Peter Tarnoff sent a letter to Members of Congress on August 3, 
1995, when the Senate first debated the Brown amendment. Secretary 
Tarnoff attempted to assure Senators that the administration's support 
of the Brown amendment would be conditional on ``no significant change 
on nuclear and missile non-proliferation issues of concern to the 
United States.''
  Mr. President, that was then.
  On February 22, 1996, Dr. John Deutch, the Director of Central 
Intelligence, testified before the Senate Select Committee on 
Intelligence. Director Deutch confirmed earlier reports that Pakistan 
had taken delivery of sensitive nuclear technology used to develop 
weapons-grade uranium. He also confirmed that Pakistan had received M-
11 ballistic missiles from China. My colleagues will recall that when 
we debated the Brown amendment, there was some dispute over whether 
Pakistan had in fact taken delivery of the M-11 missiles. Director

[[Page S6140]]

Deutch's testimony was the first time a Clinton administration official 
publicly confirmed the existence of the M-11s. In my view, this 
development should have halted the delivery of the military equipment 
to Pakistan. Unfortunately, the Clinton Administration did not consider 
the acquisition of this nuclear technology to be, in Secretary 
Tarnoff's words, a ``significant change on nuclear and missile non-
proliferation issues of concern to the United States.''
  Mr. President, this morning's Washington Times reveals that Pakistan 
has done more than just take possession of the M-11's. The Times 
reported that the M-11 missiles in Pakistan are operational and nuclear 
capable. If this account is accurate, and I have no reason to doubt it, 
Pakistan now has a complete, modern, nuclear weapons delivery system.
  Mr. President, first of all, in spite of a string of pious promises 
and written agreements to the United States, China has demonstrated a 
severe lack of international responsibility. By providing both nuclear 
technology and the means to deliver nuclear weapons, Chinese 
Government-owned companies have contributed to a vast escalation of 
tensions between Pakistan and India. Director Deutch has pointed to the 
Indian subcontinent as the most worrisome area in the world. He's 
right.
  The more immediate question, Mr. President, is what is the United 
States going to do? At the time the Senate approved the Brown 
amendment, we were of the belief that Pakistan did not possess both the 
technology to produce weapons-grade uranium, and an operational nuclear 
weapons delivery system. That was then. This is now. I do not believe 
the Senate would have approved the Brown amendment had we known then 
what we know now.

  The Washington Times also reported that State Department officials 
attempted to water down or alter the intelligence reports regarding the 
M-11's, and also tried to prevent these reports from moving through 
normal intelligence channels. Apparently this was done to prevent 
sanctions from being enforced. This is a very serious allegation. In 
effect, Federal officials are being accused of blocking the law from 
being enforced.
  Frankly, Mr. President, the Washington Times story is astounding. It 
is no secret that I am an outspoken critic of the Clinton 
administration's nuclear nonproliferation policy, or lack thereof. 
Before today, I never thought the administration's credibility 
regarding nonproliferation goals in South Asia could get worse. I was 
wrong.
  I have written to President Clinton, asking that he enforce the 
nonproliferation laws he has sworn to uphold. I also have asked the 
President to withhold delivery of any military equipment authorized by 
the Brown amendment. Clearly, the conditions the Clinton administration 
made to Pakistan for its support of the Brown amendment have been 
violated to a degree unimaginable. I also intend to contact the 
chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, Senator 
Specter, to request that the committee conduct a full investigation on 
the allegations raised involving the blocking or altering of 
intelligence reports by State Department officials. Finally, I intend 
to continue seeking the support of my colleagues to repeal the Brown 
amendment, and may offer an amendment to do just that in the near 
future. I think we have more than enough evidence to demonstrate why 
the Brown amendment should not have been passed. In my view, Congress 
was badly misled last year relative to Pakistan's nuclear arms 
development and delivery capability. My bill, which already has several 
cosponsors, would restore the supremacy of our nuclear nonproliferation 
laws.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that my letter of today to 
President Clinton and a Washington Times article by Bill Gertz be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                                  U.S. Senate,

                                    Washington, DC, June 12, 1996.
     The President,
     The White House,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. President: A story in today's Washington Times 
     reported that the U.S. intelligence community has determined 
     that Pakistan obtained M-11 ballistic missiles from the 
     People's Republic of China (PRC) as part of an illegal 
     conspiracy to evade national international arms control 
     agreements. Even more disturbing, the Times reported that 
     these nuclear capable missiles have been deployed by 
     Pakistan.
       If these reports are true, I strongly urge you to enforce 
     the law and impose sanctions on both countries to the fullest 
     extent of the law. Further, I urge you to withhold from 
     delivering to Pakistan any U.S. equipment as provided in the 
     so-called Brown amendment to the Fiscal Year 1996 Foreign 
     Operations Appropriations Act.
       As you know, the United States has sought for a number of 
     years to put an end to illegal missile transfers originating 
     in the PRC. As you well know, sanctions were imposed on China 
     just three years ago for transferring M-11 components in 
     violation of the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR). 
     Those sanctions were lifted in 1994, after the PRC pledged 
     not to make future deliveries of missiles or related 
     components listed under the MTCR.
       Last year, the New York Times and Defense News reported 
     that Pakistan had received M-11 missiles from the PRC. This 
     was confirmed by Central Intelligence Agency Director John 
     Deutch in his testimony before the Senate Intelligence 
     Committee on February 22, 1996.
       These are troubling developments. We face a situation in 
     which the PRC has violated both a multinational missile 
     control agreement as well as a written non-proliferation 
     agreement with the United States. As a result of these 
     violations, Pakistan now has for the first time a strategic 
     nuclear delivery capability.
       Again, if the reports are true, I see no recourse but to 
     impose sanctions on both Pakistan and the PRC. Our own 
     credibility as a world leader in nuclear non-proliferation 
     requires no less.
       Our credibility also requires that we take additional 
     action: the withholding of any U.S. military equipment 
     authorized for delivery under the so-called Brown amendment. 
     Last August, when the Brown amendment was first considered in 
     the Senate, Under Secretary of State Peter Tarnoff stated 
     that your Administration's support for the Brown amendment 
     would be conditional on ``no significant change on nuclear 
     and missile non-proliferation issues of concern to the 
     United States.''
       At the time Secretary Tarnoff made this statement, Congress 
     and the Administration were of the belief that Pakistan did 
     not have both the nuclear technology capable of processing 
     enriched uranium, and an operational system of ballistic 
     missiles capable of delivering a nuclear payload. Clearly, 
     the conditions set by your Administration have been violated 
     by Pakistan to a degree unimaginable.
       Finally, I believe Congress was misled badly last year 
     relative to Pakistan's arms development and delivery 
     capability. Earlier this year, I wrote to you expressing my 
     concern that members of your Administration knew that 
     Pakistan was obtaining illicit nuclear technology from the 
     PRC while the Brown amendment was pending. I am equally 
     concerned with allegations raised in the Washington Times 
     article that members of your Administration may have 
     attempted to alter the content or the processing of 
     intelligence reports in order to avoid sanctions. This is a 
     very serious allegation, and I have requested that the Senate 
     Intelligence Committee conduct a thorough review of this 
     matter.
       Mr. President, you and I have not always agreed with the 
     best course of action on nuclear non-proliferation, 
     particularly in South Asia. I am sure you will agree with me 
     that if the Washington Times story is true, we have reached a 
     very dangerous stage in an already very unstable part of the 
     world. It has always been our policy to other nations that 
     nuclear proliferation should carry a heavy price. It is 
     imperative to the peace and security of all the peoples of 
     South Asia that this policy be enforced.
       For these reasons, I strongly urge you to enforce fully our 
     nation's non-proliferations laws, and honor the conditions 
     set forth last year by withholding any future implementation 
     of the Brown amendment.
       Thank you for your attention to this very critical 
     nonproliferation issue.
           Sincerely,
                                                   Larry Pressler,
     U.S. Senator.
                                                                    ____


               [From the Washington Times, June 12, 1996]

                   Pakistan Deploys Chinese Missiles

                            (By Bill Gertz)

       U.S. intelligence agencies have concluded that Pakistan has 
     deployed nuclear-capable Chinese M-11 missiles and that the 
     transfer was part of a conspiracy to skirt missile-control 
     agreements.
       The declaration, contained in interagency intelligence 
     reports produced last month, confirms for the first time that 
     Pakistan now has a strategic nuclear delivery capability. The 
     finding is expected to trigger U.S. economic sanctions 
     against both Pakistan and China based on a 1990 law.
       State Department officials, however, are trying to block 
     the intelligence judgment through bureaucratic maneuvering to 
     avoid imposing sanctions, according to intelligence sources 
     familiar with the effort.
       The intelligence sources disclosed to The Washington Times 
     that a report that Pakistan has operational Chinese M-11 
     missiles

[[Page S6141]]

     was discussed last month by the Weapons and Space Systems 
     Intelligence Committee. The committee is an interagency panel 
     of intelligence experts who evaluate missile developments 
     worldwide. The report was based on sensitive CIA data.
       A separate ``statement of fact'' also was drafted last 
     month declaring that China and Pakistan took part in a 
     ``conspiracy to transfer M-11s,'' according to an 
     intelligence document obtained by The Times.
       U.S. officials said the statement is the first step in an 
     intelligence M-11 components were spotted in Pakistan three 
     years ago.
       China's delivery of the weapons violates the 31-nation 
     Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR), as well as a 1994 
     U.S.-China agreement not to deploy M-11s in Pakistan.
       CIA and State Department spokesmen would not comment on the 
     intelligence findings. A Chinese Embassy spokesman also 
     declined to comment.
       A Pakistani Embassy spokesman denied that any M-11s are 
     operational in his country or that any were bought from 
     China.
       The M-11 finding highlights China's active role in arms-
     proliferation activities and comes after the recent 
     administration decision not to impose economic sanctions on 
     China for selling nuclear-weapons technology to Pakistan.
       The administration announced last month it would not impose 
     sanctions because it claimed senior Chinese officials were 
     unaware of the sale last year of ring magnets--components 
     used to produce nuclear-weapons fuel--to Pakistan.
       William C. Triplett, a specialist on China, said the M-11 
     deployment, when coupled with the sale of nuclear-arms 
     technology, is a major boost in Pakistan's drive for a 
     strategic nuclear capability and will increase tensions in 
     the volatile region.
       ``This is a major change in the geostrategic balance 
     between Pakistan and India, and a devastating blow to Clinton 
     administration efforts to reduce tensions on the 
     subcontinent,'' said Mr. Triplett, a former counsel to the 
     Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
       Mr. Triplett, a former U.S. intelligence official, also 
     said he is not surprised by efforts of the State Department 
     Bureau of Intelligence and Research to block the M-11 
     deployment judgment. The bureau is notorious for politicizing 
     analyses and should be excluded from taking part in future 
     interagency estimates, he said.
       Limited sanctions were imposed on China in 1993 for selling 
     M-11 components to Pakistan.
       The sanctions, affecting an estimated $500 million in 
     American sales, were lifted in October 1994 after Chinese 
     Foreign Minister Qian Qichen and Secretary of State Warren 
     Christopher signed an agreement halting sales of the M-11 and 
     similar missiles.
       Under a 1990 U.S. law, Pakistan's possession of operational 
     M-11s requires the president to impose two years' sanctions 
     on both countries that limit U.S. sales of high-technology 
     products.
       The sanctions also would bar imports of any products made 
     by the government-owned China Precision Machinery Import-
     Export Corp., which makes M-11s, and Pakistan's Defense 
     Ministry. Both companies were sanctioned in the 1993 M-11 
     component transfer.
       Sanctions would have their greatest impact on sales of 
     high-technology goods to China. Those goods were a major 
     portion of the $12 billion in U.S. trade with China last 
     year.
       A State Department official said in 1994 when MTCR-related 
     sanctions were lifted that if complete missiles were deployed 
     in Pakistan ``we would have no choice but to impose MTCR 
     sanctions.''
       Mr. Deutch said in Senate testimony Feb. 22 that China has 
     continued to sell inappropriate weapons and military 
     technology in recent months, including ``nuclear technology 
     to Pakistan, M-11 missiles to Pakistan, cruise missiles to 
     Iran.''
       ``If this is true, there is no longer any excuse for not 
     imposing sanctions on both China and Pakistan,'' said Gary 
     Milhollin, director of the Wisconsin Project on Nuclear Arms 
     Control.
       China's disregard for the arms-control agreements despite 
     U.S. appeals has exposed the weakness of U.S. policy toward 
     Beijing, he said.
       The MTCR, which limits sales of missiles with ranges 
     greater than 186 miles or with warheads weighing more than 
     1,100 pounds, has no enforcement mechanism. But an amendment 
     to the 1990 Defense Authorization Act requires the government 
     to impose sanctions against foreign firms for MTCR 
     violations.
       U.S. officials have said the M-11 is a nuclear-capable 
     missile whose export is barred under the MTCR because its 
     warhead capacity exceeds MTCR limits.
       U.S. intelligence agencies reported last year that the M-11 
     deal moved ahead after Pakistan paid $15 million to China for 
     missiles, launchers and support equipment. The M-11s were 
     shipped to Pakistan in 1993, but their assembly was not 
     confirmed.
       Spy-satellite photographs taken in April 1995 showed 
     missile canisters at a facility in Sargodha, Pakistan. Two 
     teams of Chinese missile technicians were sent to Pakistan 
     later to provide training and to unpack and assemble the M-
     11s, intelligence sources said.

                          ____________________