[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 120 (Thursday, September 5, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S9958-S9959]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                    THE CHEMICAL WEAPONS CONVENTION

  Mr. PELL. Mr. President, under a previous unanimous consent 
agreement, the Senate is scheduled to consider and complete action 
before the end of next week on the Chemical Weapons Convention.
  The Convention bans the production, stockpiling, and use of chemical 
weapons. It includes detailed verification provisions. It was 
negotiated in the Reagan and Bush administrations and was based largely 
on a text personally presented to the Conference on Disarmament in 
Geneva by then Vice President Bush. The convention represents a 
significant advance beyond the only existing constraint on chemical 
weapons, the 1929 Geneva Protocol, which only bans the use of such 
weapons in war.
  Earlier today, several Members expressed concern with regard to the 
convention. I am sure that those concerns and any others that Members 
may have will be raised and addressed in detail next week during the 
total of 12 hours agreed upon for consideration of the treaty.
  I personally favor very much ratification of the treaty. I reached 
that judgment following extensive hearings I chaired in 1994 while 
chairman of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations. Additional 
hearings have been held this year under the chairmanship of the Senator 
from North Carolina [Mr. Helms], and, as a result, the Committee has 
been able to consider a broad range of issues and, in my view, resolve 
them quite satisfactorily.
  The Clinton administration strongly supports the treaty as settled 
upon during the Bush administration. In its efforts to inform the 
Senate, I am told that the administration has responded to over 300 
Senate questions on the treaty and has responded in detail to inquiries 
made by members of the Committee on Foreign Relations and others. The 
administration's responses include over 1,500 pages of information on 
the Chemical Weapons Convention--over 300 pages of testimony, over 500 
pages of answers to Senate letters and reports, over 400 pages of 
answers to Senate questions for the treaty record, and over 300 pages 
of additional documentation. During the August recess the White House 
held a series of briefings for Senate staffers.
  This coming Monday at 4 p.m. in S-407 senior administration officials 
will meet with all Senators in S-407 to discuss the treaty. This will 
allow all Members an opportunity to assess first-hand the arguments for 
the treaty and to raise any questions they have. I hope that any 
Senator with the slightest concern will avail him or herself of the 
chance to have concerns addressed directly.
  As we prepare for formal consideration I thought it would be helpful 
to my fellow Members to consider a letter I received this afternoon 
from the President's Assistant for National Security Affairs, Anthony 
Lake, addressing in detail some of the questions that have been raised 
regarding the treaty. The letter included an enclosure, a portion of 
which is classified, which is available in committee offices for 
interested Members. I ask unanimous consent that Mr. Lake's letter be 
printed in the Record following my remarks.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  (See exhibit 1.)
  Mr. PELL. Mr. President, there is no question that this convention 
enjoys the overwhelming support of the Nation's chemical industries. On 
August 29, I and other Senators received a letter strongly endorsing 
the convention and arguing for Senate consent to ratification. This 
letter was authored by senior officials of a number of significant 
corporations. I ask unanimous consent that the text of that letter also 
be printed in the Record following my remarks.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  (See exhibit 2.)
  Mr. PELL. Mr. President, I look forward to the debate on the 
convention when it comes before the Senate next week.

                               Exhibit 1


                                              The White House,

                                    Washington, September 5, 1996.
       Dear Senator Pell: As we continue to prepare for the 
     Senate's floor debate on the Chemical Weapons Convention 
     (CWC) two weeks from now, I want to share with you the basic 
     points we have made recently in responding to certain 
     concerns that have been raised by the Chairman of the Foreign 
     Relations Committee.
       Senator Helms has questioned whether Russia will ever 
     ratify the CWC. As you are aware, the Russian Government has 
     formally stated its commitment to become a party to the CWC, 
     as recently as July 22 of this year at the Plenary meeting of 
     the CWC Preparatory Commission (PrepCom) in The Hague. In 
     this same statement, the Russian Government announced that it 
     is seeking the speedy submission of the Convention to the 
     Russian parliament for ratification.
       In my view, the recent Russian statement in The Hague, 
     which mentioned the issue of entry into force, does not 
     reflect an intention to distance Russia from the CWC, but 
     rather a concern about being left behind. In these 
     circumstances, I believe that the best way to promote Russian 
     ratification is to proceed with our own ratification, as has 
     been done by all of our major NATO allies and many others, 
     and to bring the CWC into force as soon as possible while, at 
     the same time, trying to address Russian concerns in a manner 
     consistent with our own interests.
       We have forthrightly told the Russians that we believe that 
     prompt entry into force of the Convention is crucial to the 
     fight against the spread of weapons of mass destruction and 
     the fight against terrorism. Consequently, we have informed 
     them that we are moving forward with our own ratification and 
     have urged that they continue to proceed ahead with their 
     effort as well.
       The Russians have clearly stated that the central problem 
     they face regarding the CWC is financing the cost of their CW 
     destruction program. While requesting international 
     assistance, the Russians have also made it clear, most 
     recently in their Plenary Statement in The Hague, that the 
     program will be financed primarily by Russia itself. We and 
     other countries have indicated our willingness to address 
     this outstanding concern on an expedited basis, but we have 
     continued to underscore to the Russians that CW destruction 
     is primarily their responsibility and that any U.S. 
     assistance is contingent upon approval by the U.S. Congress.
       Senator Helms has also raised concerns with regard to the 
     1990 Bilateral Destruction Agreement (BDA). The Russian 
     Federation, as you know, has long expressed concerns about 
     certain aspects of this agreement and has not agreed to 
     detailed implementing procedures and updated provisions to 
     finalize the BDA. We continue to press the Russians at the 
     highest levels on the need to resolve the outstanding CW 
     issues, and they agreed to a meeting with ACDA Director 
     Holum, which was held on August 10. They also agreed to host 
     a visit to Volgograd later this fall to address specifically 
     the issue of conversion of production facilities. While the 
     Russians have stated that they believe that the bilateral 
     agreements between Russia and the United States have 
     fulfilled their useful role, they have also stated that they 
     will not renege on the agreements they have made.
       As for the Chairman's specific concerns about the possible 
     consequences of Russian withdrawal from the BDA, I would 
     point out that if the BDA is not in force when the CWC is 
     implemented, Russian chemical weapons elimination will still 
     be subject to systematic verification under the CWC, although 
     that would be performed by the Organization for the 
     Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), instead of the United 
     States. It is important to remember that, in contrast to the 
     CWC, the BDA does not require total destruction of CW stocks 
     nor does it provide a multilateral framework including 
     challenge inspections for addressing compliance concerns. As 
     you may recall, the President informed the Senate in 1993 in 
     transmittal of the CWC that, while the BDA was an important 
     agreement in its own right, it has become less relevant than 
     it was in 1990 because the CWC has been completed and that 
     final agreement on the BDA should not delay submission of the 
     CWC to the Senate.
       Some have the impression that Russia is ``withdrawing'' 
     from the 1989 Wyoming Memorandum of Understanding. This 
     agreement has been implemented in two phases. During the 
     first phase, the two sides exchanged general information on 
     their chemical weapons stockpiles and production and storage 
     facilities and carried out reciprocal visits to relevant 
     military and civilian facilities. During the second phase, 
     the two sides exchanged the detailed information on their 
     stockpiles and chemical weapons facilities and carried out a 
     number of inspections at declared chemical weapons 
     production, storage and development facilities, including 
     challenge inspections of such facilities.
       While Russia has met its obligations to participate in 
     implementation activities under the Memorandum of 
     Understanding, questions remain regarding certain aspects of 
     the Russian data. We are continuing to press the Russians at 
     the highest levels on the need to resolve these outstanding 
     CW issues.
       In any case, I have stressed to Senator Helms that the 
     Administration is prepared to actively pursue concerns 
     regarding the veracity of any State Party's reporting under

[[Page S9959]]

     the CWC, since the provision of accurate declaration 
     information is a fundamental obligation essential to the 
     effective implementation of the Convention. The 
     Administration also continues to believe that prompt entry 
     into force of the CWC will provide the necessary tools to 
     deal effectively with these issues, including a basis for 
     punitive measures or sanctions in response to noncompliance.
       Finally, we have carefully considered the Chairman's 
     request for declassification of any documents and cables 
     pertaining to bilateral discussions with Russia. As you know, 
     it is our standard practice to make relevant classified 
     information available to the Senate through classified 
     briefings and reports. The Administration has provided the 
     Senate with numerous briefings and reports of this sort since 
     November 23, 1993, when the President submitted the CWC with 
     a request for its prompt consideration. I informed Senator 
     Helms that I regretted that we cannot declassify the 
     requested documents, because they have been properly 
     classified pursuant to E.O. 12958 and because disclosure of 
     the information they contain could seriously undermine 
     ongoing diplomatic activities. The Administration is eager, 
     however, to assist the Senate in developing a complete record 
     for its consideration prior to floor action on the Chemical 
     Weapons Convention, as stated in the June 28, 1996 unanimous 
     consent agreement pertaining to the Convention. Therefore, I 
     made clear to the Chairman that we are prepared to make 
     appropriate officials available to Senators and cleared staff 
     to brief on those documents under appropriate classification 
     at the earliest date.
       We look forward to Senate advice and consent to the CWC by 
     September 14. Enclosed please find the detailed answers we 
     provided the Chairman in response to the questions he had 
     recently raised.
           Sincerely,

                                                 Anthony Lake,

                                        Assistant to the President
                                    for National Security Affairs.

                               Exhibit 2

                                                  August 29, 1996.
     Hon. Claiborne Pell,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Pell: The undersigned senior executives of 
     chemical companies urge your vote in support of the Chemical 
     Weapons Convention (CWC), and quick Senate action on 
     legislation to implement this important treaty.
       The chemical industry has long supported the CWC. Our 
     industry participated in negotiating the agreement, and in 
     U.S. and international implementation efforts. The treaty 
     contains substantial protections for confidential business 
     information (CBI). We know, because industry helped to draft 
     the CBI provisions. Chemical companies also help test the 
     draft CWC reporting system, and we tested the on-site 
     inspection procedures that will help verify compliance with 
     the treaty. In short, our industry has thoroughly examined 
     and tested this Convention. We have concluded that the 
     benefits of the CWC far outweigh the costs.
       Indeed, the real price to pay would come from not ratifying 
     the CWC. The treaty calls for strict restrictions on trade 
     with nations which are not party to the Convention. The 
     chemical industry is America's largest export industry, 
     posting $60 billion in export sales last year. But our 
     industry's status as the world's preferred supplier of 
     chemical products may be jeopardized if the U.S. does not 
     ratify the Convention. If the Senate does not vote in favor 
     of the CWC, we stand to lose hundreds of millions of dollars 
     in overseas sales, putting at risk thousands of good-paying 
     American jobs.
       The U.S. chemical industry has spent more than 15 years 
     working on this agreement, and we long ago decided that 
     ratifying the CWC is the right thing to do.
       We urge you to vote in support of the Chemical Weapons 
     Convention.
           Sincerely,
         J. Lawrence Wilson, Chairman & CEO, Rohm and Has Company, 
           Chairman, Board of Directors, Chemical Manufacturers 
           Association; Alan R. Hirsig, President & CEO, ARCO 
           Chemical Company, Chairman, Executive Committee, 
           Chemical Manufacturers Association; H.A. Wagner, 
           Chairman, President & CEO, Air Products & Chemicals, 
           Inc.; D.J. D'Antoni, President, Ashland Chemical 
           Company; Helge H. Wehmeier, President & CEO, Bayer 
           Corporation; John D. Ong, Chairman & CEO, The 
           BFGoodrich Company; Robert R. Mesel, President, BP 
           Chemicals, Inc.; Charles M. Donohue, Vice President, 
           Akzo Nobel Chemicals, Inc.; J. Dieter Stein, Chairman & 
           CEO, BASF Corporation; W.R. Cook, Chairman, President & 
           CEO, Betz Dearborn, Inc.; Joseph M. Saggese, President 
           & CEO, Borden Chemicals & Plastics, LP; Dr. Aziz I. 
           Asphahani, President & CEO, Carus Chemical Company; 
           Vincent A. Calarco, Chairman, President & CEO, 
           Cromption & Knowles Corporation; Richard A. Hazleton, 
           Chairman & CEO, Dow Corning Corporation; Howard J. 
           Rudge, Senior Vice President & General Counsel, E.I. 
           duPont de Nemours & Company; Richard G. Fanelli, 
           President & CEO, Enthone-OMI Inc.; J.E. Akitt, 
           Executive Vice President, Exxon Chemical Company; 
           William S. Stavropoulos, President & CEO, The Dow 
           Chemical Company; Earnest W. Deavenport, Jr., Chairman 
           of the Board & CEO, Eastman Chemical Company; Bernard 
           Azoulay, President & CEO, Elf Atochem North America; 
           Bruce C. Gottwald, CEO, Ethyl Corporation; Ron W. 
           Haddock, President & CEO, FINA, Inc.; Robert N. Burt, 
           Chairman & CEO, FMC Corporation; Otto Furuta, V.P. 
           Global Logistics & Materials Management, Great Lakes 
           Chemical Corporation; R. Keith Elliott, President & 
           CEO, Hercules, Inc.; Hans C. Noetzli, President & CEO, 
           Lonza, Inc.; Robert G. Potter, Executive Vice 
           President, Monsanto Company; Dr. William L. Orton, 
           Senior Vice President, Chemical Operations, Givaudan-
           Roure Corporation; Michael R. Boyce, President & COO, 
           Harris Chemical Group; Thomas F. Kennedy, President & 
           CEO, Hoechst Celanese Corporation; Mack G. Nichols, 
           President & COO, Mallinckrodt Group, Inc.; S. Jay 
           Steward, Chairman & CEO, Morton International, Inc.
         E.J. Mooney, Chairman & CEO, Nalco Chemical Company; 
           Jeffrey M. Lipton, President, NOVA Corporation; Donald 
           W. Griffin, Chairman, President & CEO, Olin 
           Corporation; Peter R. Heinze, Senior Vice President, 
           Chemicals, PPG Industries, Inc.; Phillip D. Ashkettle, 
           President & CEO, Reichhold Chemicals, Inc.; Ronald L. 
           Spraetz, V.P., External Affairs & Quality, National 
           Starch & Chemical Company; J. Roger Hirl, President & 
           CEO, Occidental Chemical Corporation; David Wolf, 
           President, Perstorp Polyols, Inc.; Ronald H. Yocum, 
           Chairman, President & CEO, Quantum Chemical Company; 
           Thomas E. Reilly, Jr., Chairman, Reilly Industries, 
           Inc.; Peter J. Neff, President & CEO, Rhone-Poulenc, 
           Inc.; Nicholas P. Trainer, President, Sartomer Company; 
           J. Virgil Waggoner, President & CEO, Sterling 
           Chemicals, Inc.; W.H. Joyce, Chairman, President & CEO, 
           Union Carbide Corporation; Arthur R. Sigel, President & 
           CEO, Velsicol Chemical Corporation; Roger K. Price, 
           Senior V.P., Mining & Manufacturing, R.T. Vanderbilt 
           Company, Inc; F. Quinn Stepan, Chairman & President, 
           Stepan Company; William H. Barlow, Vice President, 
           Business Development, Texas Brine Corporation; Robert 
           J. Mayaika, President, CEO & Chairman, Uniroyal 
           Chemical Company, Inc.; John Wilkinson, Director of 
           Government Affairs, Vulcan Chemicals; Albert J. 
           Costello, Chairman, President & CEO, W.R. Grace & 
           Company.

                          ____________________