[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 51 (Thursday, April 30, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Page S3813]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                            Impact on Russia

  But what about the impact on Russia?
  Mr. President, how we enlarge NATO is critically important, along 
with whether we enlarge NATO, since we do not want to isolate Russia 
and contribute thereby to the very instability that NATO enlargement is 
aimed at deterring.
  At the Armed Services Committee's first hearing on NATO enlargement 
on April 23, 1997, more than a year ago, at which Secretary of State 
Madeleine Albright and Secretary of Defense William Cohen testified, I 
stated, with specific reference to Russia, that I believe that we must 
do everything we reasonably can to enlarge NATO in a way that 
contributes to greater, rather than less, stability in Europe.
  The Administration has worked hard and worked successfully to do just 
that. On May 27, 1997, subsequent to NATO's decision to expand, Russian 
President Boris Yeltsin, President Clinton and leaders of the other 
NATO countries signed the ``Founding Act on Mutual Relations, 
Cooperation and Security between NATO and the Russian Federation.'' The 
second paragraph of the Founding Act succinctly states the relationship 
between NATO and Russia and the goal of the Act. It reads as follows:

       NATO and Russia do not consider each other as adversaries. 
     They share the goal of overcoming the vestiges of earlier 
     confrontation and competition and of strengthening mutual 
     trust and cooperation. The present Act reaffirms their 
     determination to give concrete substance to our shared 
     commitment to a stable, peaceful and undivided Europe, whole 
     and free, to the benefit of all its peoples. By making this 
     commitment at the highest political level, we mark the 
     beginning of a fundamentally new relationship between NATO 
     and Russia. They intend to develop, on the basis of common 
     interest, reciprocity and transparency a strong, stable and 
     enduring partnership.

  As part of the Founding Act, the NATO member nations reiterated that 
``they have no intention, no plan and no reason to deploy nuclear 
weapons on the territory of new members.'' NATO also reiterated that 
``in the current and foreseeable security environment, the Alliance 
will carry out its collective defense and other missions by ensuring 
the necessary interoperability, integration, and capability for 
reinforcement rather than by additional permanent stationing of 
substantial combat forces.''
  The Founding Act sets up a NATO-Russia Permanent Joint Council to 
``provide a mechanism for consultations, coordination, and to the 
maximum extent possible, where appropriate, for joint decisions and 
joint action with respect to security issues of common concern.''
  It is surely noteworthy that the NATO-Russia Founding Act and the 
Permanent Joint Council it created were adopted after NATO's decision 
to enlarge. The Act represents both NATO's acknowledgment of Russia's 
important position and Russia's acceptance of NATO's enlargement.
  Mr. President, subsequent to NATO's decision to invite Poland, 
Hungary and the Czech Republic to join the Alliance, Marshal Igor 
Sergeyev, the Minister of Defense of the Russian Federation, wrote an 
article entitled ``We are not adversaries, we are partners,'' for the 
Spring 1998 edition of the NATO Review. It is significant that he even 
wrote an article for the NATO publication. Even more importantly, in 
that article, Marshal Sergeyev wrote the following:

       It is my profound conviction that, in spite of the problems 
     that exist, the NATO-Russia Founding Act provides extensive 
     opportunities for creating an atmosphere of trust. This can 
     facilitate settling existing differences in our relations as 
     well as establishing efficient and productive machinery for 
     cooperation between the military establishments of Russia and 
     NATO member states. Only in this way can we complete the 
     common task of creating a community of free and democratic 
     states from Vancouver to Vladivostok.

  Again, the signal from Russian Defense Minister Sergeyev is 
acceptance and cooperation with NATO, not hostility and withdrawal.
  Mr. President, President Clinton and the other NATO leaders are to be 
commended for the manner in which they have sought to carry out NATO 
enlargement in a way that minimizes any possible negative reaction in 
Russia.
  Some of the strongest evidence of the success of their efforts is 
that Russia ratified the Chemical Weapons Convention in November 1997, 
four months after NATO invited Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic 
to join the Alliance. Some of the most recent evidence of the success 
of their efforts is that just two weeks ago Russian President Boris 
Yeltsin resubmitted the START II Treaty to the Russian parliament for 
ratification. In other words, on the eve of Senate action on the 
Resolution of ratification of NATO enlargement, President Yeltsin took 
a critical step towards continuing the mutual reduction of nuclear arms 
by the United States and Russia.

  The clear message was--``we know NATO is about to enlarge and we are 
prepared to ratify START II anyway.'' The message wasn't--``we will 
withhold acting on START II until we see what you do about NATO 
enlargement,'' or that--``we won't proceed to ratify START II in this 
environment.''
  Beyond the clear evidence of the acceptance of NATO enlargement by 
the Russian leadership, there is some evidence of support among the 
Russian people. A Gallup poll conducted in Moscow and released in March 
revealed that 57 percent of Muscovites supported the Czech Republic's 
bid to join NATO, 54 percent supported Hungary's admission, and 53 
percent said Poland should be allowed to join NATO. More than a quarter 
of those polled had no views on the subject.
  Finally, I would note that United States and Russian troops are 
serving side-by-side in Bosnia, are conducting joint patrols, and, 
based upon my personal conversations and observations, have developed 
an appreciation for each other's soldierly skills and a comraderie that 
benefits both our nations. On March 18, Russian Foreign Minister 
Primakov stated that if the U.N. Security Council passes the 
appropriate resolution, ``Russia will be ready to take part in this 
operation.'' There hasn't been even the slightest hint by any official 
in the Russian government or parliament that ratification of NATO 
enlargement by the United States Senate or the parliaments of our NATO 
allies would threaten the continued participation of Russian troops in 
the NATO-led peace operation in Bosnia.

  Mr. President, we should care about our relationship with Russia and 
we do. Other countries also have a great interest in their relationship 
with Russia. That why it is so important to note that thus far all the 
Parliaments of our NATO European allies that have taken up the issue 
have overwhelming ratified NATO enlargement. The three countries--
Denmark, Norway, and Germany--are much closer geographically to Russia 
than we are. As a result, they are more likely to feel the impact of a 
reversal of democratization in Russia, and they are very likely to pay 
great attention to Russian sensitivities. Based upon the voting margins 
in those countries--the Danish Parliament voted 97 to 17; the German 
Bundestag voted 553 to 37 and the vote in the Bundesrat was unanimous; 
and Norway's Storting voted 151 to 9--it appears that the parliaments 
in those countries are satisfied that NATO enlargement will not play 
into the hands of anti-Western forces in Russia or otherwise negatively 
impact relations with Russia.