[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 127 (Wednesday, September 26, 2001)]
[Senate]
[Pages S9862-S9864]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION
Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, let me begin by thanking my colleague
for those eloquent and passionate and insightful remarks, and for his
extraordinary leadership, not only in this time but as he shows
throughout all of our work in Congress. I thank him for his guidance on
this issue which is so important. I look forward to joining him on this
issue when we reconvene next week.
Mr. President, as the Senator from Connecticut so eloquently spoke
about for the last half hour or so--about the importance of alliances
at this time, the importance of international alliances, the
extraordinary opportunity that has been given to us out of this tragedy
to build a new framework of mutual trust and mutual cooperation for the
benefit of all citizens of this world who love freedom, who hope for a
better life, who want only for themselves, their children, and their
grandchildren to live free of oppression, free from fear, free from
hunger, free from want, it is really an extraordinary time.
I want to acknowledge the leadership that I have seen in this body in
a way that I never thought I would. I am certain that most people in my
State and in many States don't completely really understand yet the
extraordinary length to which the Members of this body, both Democrats
and Republicans, have worked to overcome some very difficult issues in
trying to work so closely with the President, and have done this in a
remarkable way under his tremendous leadership, as the Senator from
Connecticut also pointed out.
I think we have made great progress in the last 2 weeks, since
September 11. We are on the right track and at the right pace. We just
have to steady our course and continue to support our President and
debate where we need to and not give up our right to judgment, and do
it in a way that will strengthen our country and will honor the spirit
that Americans everywhere are showing us around the world and move
forward to win this war.
I want to spend a few minutes before we close today speaking about an
important part of this effort, an important part of the Defense
authorization bill, which we have been engaged in debating now under
the great leadership of Senator Levin from Michigan and the Senator
from Virginia, Senator Warner.
In my mind, the cold war finally ended at 8:45 a.m. eastern time on
Tuesday, September 11. Literally, up until that moment, this Congress
had engaged in something akin to shadowboxing.
We swung our arms about in search of enemies, and in search of a
unifying purpose to our national security. Yet in life, it is often
tragedy and crisis that lifts the fog from our eyes. Suddenly, we see
the world with crystal-like clarity. We understand better that which is
trivial and that which is absolutely essential. We look back on our
priorities before this crisis, and I think many of us have been shaking
our heads wondering: What could we possibly have been thinking?
One truth that should now be evident to America's collective world
view is that we need a strong and practical relationship with Russia.
There is a bond between the United States and Russia that defies
coincidence. Of course, we share the common experience of the cold war.
It was not a pleasant experience, it was not a good experience, but it
was an experience that we shared. Now it appears we will share the
experience of fighting in Afghanistan.
Russia itself has been attacked by terrorists, supported by elements
of the Arab Afghan army, the very force that we trained during the cold
war and now has unleashed its terror upon us.
In short, our countries have a history of lashing out at each other.
Yet when we do, we inevitably hurt ourselves. It is an instinct we
learned during the cold war, but we must unlearn that instinct to
succeed in this silent war. Hopefully, on September 11, we closed for
good that chapter in our relationship.
There are many things that make me proud about this Defense
authorization bill that we have been debating and will hopefully
conclude that debate when we reconvene next week, but one of the things
that makes me proudest about this year's Defense authorization bill is
that even before the events of the 11th, we understood the importance
of our relationship with Russia. Senators Nunn and Lugar deserve the
thanks of the whole of the American public for their extraordinary
foresight. They realized that at the end of the cold war, in the
tremendous vacuum that was created, we needed to be aggressive in
forming a new relationship with Russia. It would not be a relationship
based on fear, deception, and suspicion. Rather, it would be a
relationship grounded in our common history, our common roles as great
powers, and our mutual interest in establishing a world where our
citizens could flourish.
The only way forward to this goal is up the trail blazed by Senators
Nunn and Lugar. The Cooperative Threat Reduction Program sponsored by
the Department of Defense has been under assault in this Congress since
I joined the Armed Services Committee. It was derided as welfare to ex-
Communists. We slashed and hamstrung the programs, claiming to react to
mismanagement.
With the hard work of my friend and now partner, Mr. Roberts, the
Senator from Kansas, we reversed that trend this year. The subcommittee
mark for the Emerging Threats included full funding for the Cooperative
Threat Reduction Program at $403 million. Of these funds, $50 million
is dedicated to chemical demilitarization of the Soviet Union.
The facts before us should be crystal clear to everyone. There should
be no more urgent priority for this country than to secure and destroy
the chemical, biological, and nuclear stockpiles of the former Soviet
Union.
On that exact point, there was a beautifully written op-ed piece by
former Senator Sam Nunn of Georgia. I ask unanimous consent to print
the op-ed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
[From the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Sept. 16, 2001]
Living in a New Era of Insecurity
(By Sam Nunn)
The bitter events of last week will never pass from the
American memory. But whether they are remembered as an
isolated, unrepeated horror or the first nightmare in a new
era of insecurity may well depend on what we do now.
The terrorists who planned and carried out the attacks of
Sept. 11 showed there is no limit to the number of innocent
lives they are willing to take. Their capacity for killing
was restricted only by the power of their weapons.
[[Page S9863]]
As we strengthen airport and airplane security, we must
automatically assume that the next attack against America
will be like the one we just experienced.
Though we may not yet know with certainty which group
sponsored these attacks we do know that Osama bin Laden
declared in 1998 that acquiring weapons of mass destruction
is ``a religious duty.'' This statement should not be taken
lightly. We have had a look at the face of terrorist warfare
in the 21st century, and it gives us little hope that if
these groups gained control of nuclear, biological and
chemical weapons they would hesitate to use them.
As America prepares a response, we must build a new
framework for national security that protects us from the
full range of new dangers we face.
Ten years ago a communist empire broke apart. Its legacy:
30,000 nuclear warheads; more than 1,000 tons of highly
enriched uranium; 150 tons of plutonium; 40,000 tons of
chemical weapons; 4,500 tons of anthrax and tens of thousands
of scientists who know how to make weapons and missiles but
don't know how to feed their families. Russia's dysfunctional
economy and eroded security systems have undercut controls on
these weapons, materials and know-how and increased the risk
that they may flow to hostile forces.
Our nation understands from heart-shattering experience
that America is targeted for terrorist attack. But we do not
fully grasp how Russia's loose controls over weapons,
materials and know-how dramatically increase our
vulnerability to an attack with nuclear, biological and
chemical weapons. In 1998, an employee at Russia's premier
nuclear weapons laboratory was arrested for trying to sell
documents on weapons design to agents of Iraq and
Afghanistan. Just this year, former Bin Laden associate
admitted to a federal grand jury his role in a plot to
purchase uranium.
Threats of terrorism and threats of weapons of mass
destruction are not separate but interrelated and
reinforcing. The world's security now depends in great part
on who is faster and smarter--those trying to get weapons,
materials and know-how, or those trying to stop them.
To reduce these threats to our own security, we have--for
the past 10 years--helped the Russians secure weapons and
weapons materials to prevent theft, convert nuclear weapons
facilities to civilian purposes and employ their weapons
scientists in peaceful pursuits. But we need to do much more.
Russia itself has experienced terrible terrorist attacks in
recent years, and its outpouring of support in the past few
days indicates there may be a real opportunity for enhanced
U.S.-Russia cooperation.
Early this year, a distinguished bipartisan task force
declared loose weapons, materials and know-how in Russia
``the most urgent unmet national security threat to the
United States,'' and called for a fourfold funding increase
to reduce these threats. We need to reflect this sound advice
in our budget priorities. Keeping weapons of mass destruction
out of terrorists' hands is either a priority or an
afterthought. If it is an afterthought, after what?
The tragic events of this week have given us a rare
opportunity to lead a world coalition against terrorism.
NATO, for the first time in 52 years, has formally declared
that the alliance has been attacked, and 19 democracies are
now committed to join America in hitting back. We also have
other partners in Europe Asia, the Middle East, Latin
America, and Africa.
To carry out the Bush Administration's declaration of war
against terrorism, we must:
Prevent terrorist groups from getting nuclear, biological
or chemical weapons, weapons materials and know-how.
Eliminate terrorist cells wherever they are, including in
the United States.
Enlist the support of our coalition partners to destroy the
infrastructure and cut off the funding of terrorist groups
wherever they are.
Make no distinction between the terrorists who committed
these acts and those who knowingly harbor them, as President
Bush has said.
Take every feasible and reasonable step in our military
planning to avoid inflicting large numbers of civilian
casualties that will only sow the seeds of the next
generation of fanatical, suicidal terrorists.
Make it clear by our words and actions that our war is
against terrorist, not a war against Islam at home or abroad.
Continue to address the underlying conflicts and condition
around the world that breed fanatical hatred and terrorism--
probably our most difficult challenge.
Promote and enhance the diplomacy, intelligence gathering
and cooperation that are our first line of defense.
In implementing this strategy, we must make sure that we
don't undercut the international cooperation we need to
protect ourselves against a wide range of dangers.
The United States cannot identify and eliminate terrorist
groups, destroy their funding and support, apply pressure to
rogue regimes, secure dangerous materials, limit the spread
of weapons of mass destruction and gather intelligence
without the support and active cooperation of allies and
former adversaries. While we must be prepared to act alone if
necessary, if we are going to go after terrorists before they
come to our shores, we must have partners abroad.
We must develop a comprehensive defense against the full
range of threats, based on relative risk and supported by
strong alliances so that the pain of today will not be known
by the children of tomorrow.
Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I want to quote a few sentences from
this beautifully written piece. He says:
The terrorists who planned and carried out the attacks of
Sept. 11 showed there is no limit to the number of innocent
lives they are willing to take. Their capacity for killing
was restricted only by the power of their weapons.
Though we may not yet know with certainty which group
sponsored these attacks, we do know that Osama bin Laden
declared in 1998 that acquiring weapons of mass destruction
is ``a religious duty.'' This statement should not be taken
lightly. We have had a look at the face of terrorist warfare
in the 21st century, and it gives us little hope that if
these groups gained control of nuclear, biological and
chemical weapons they would not hesitate to use them.
As America prepares a response, we must build a new
framework for national security that protects us from the
full range of the new dangers we face.
Mr. President, we cannot, we should not try, it would be foolhardy to
begin to try to build this framework without a strong partnership with
Russia.
We know of nearly 400 incidents to purchase or smuggle this material
since the end of the cold war. We can safely assume that for every
purchase or smuggling operation we stopped--and we stopped many--others
succeeded. Yet the technology and framework for locking down these
stockpiles is within our grasp.
Today we fund the Cooperative Threat Reduction Program at $403
million a year. We spent 100 times that amount of money in 1 day to
respond to the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.
Let me repeat that. Today we fund this Cooperative Threat Reduction
Program at $403 million a year. We spent 100 times that amount in 1 day
to deal with the crisis that hit us at the World Trade Center and the
Pentagon 2 weeks ago.
Keep in mind that this is the immediate cost only to the
stabilization, rescue, and cleanup of these sites. We will be spending
billions more.
Now imagine the cleanup costs that result from an attack by a weapon
of mass destruction. As horrific and as heartwrenching and as merciless
as were the attacks and the casualties from those attacks on September
11, a weapon of mass destruction promises to be a whole scale of
magnitude worse. The devastation could be beyond our imagination.
Yet there have been many reports on this subject. The Baker-Cutler
report notes that we need to spend, in their estimation, nearly $30
billion to address just the nuclear side of this equation over the next
8 to 10 years. At our current rate of $3 billion a year, that would
require a tenfold increase.
Furthermore, it is my opinion that we cannot wait 8 to 10 years, and
we must address all weapons of mass destruction in a more direct,
focused, urgent, and intelligent way.
All of this is a long way of saying that Russia's stockpiles of
weapons of mass destruction constitute a vital national security
interest second to none. No resource should be spared, no bureaucratic
hurdle left standing, no diplomatic initiative left unexplored to
eliminate the risk these weapons represent.
The preamble of our Constitution makes it incumbent on this Congress
to ``provide for the common defence . . . and secure the Blessings of
Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.'' If we take the lessons
learned from September 11 and destroy these weapons, we will have done
ourselves and our posterity a great service.
As we embark on this extended and silent war against terrorism, I
believe that nonproliferation represents one of the true front lines.
If we lose the momentum necessary to destroy these stockpiles now, the
outcome of this war must be in doubt.
I know the American people understand the heavy costs we will have to
bear. This is surely one of those costs, but I am confident, because I
have seen on the faces of Americans everywhere--people in my home
State, children who have stopped to talk with me, friends who have
called, strangers who have walked in my office and left notes and
missives, telephone calls I have received--that the American people are
ready, they are united, they are willing, strong enough, and without
fear to accomplish this goal.
[[Page S9864]]
I believe there are a variety of answers to that question when people
ask: When will we know this war has been won? I will say this: One of
the best indications of whether or not we are winning this war is our
success in cooperative threat reduction. The struggle is on, but this
is an objective that freedom-loving people must take and hold.
I have every confidence the Members of this body, both Democrats and
Republicans, regardless of their views, will understand, and with new
insight will appreciate, because of the tragedy that is before us, the
urgency of this subject. I am looking forward to doing my part, with
other committees that obviously have influence in this area, to work
across party lines, to work with House leaders, to work with men and
women who have served before in this body, who have quite an expertise
in this area, as well as our private sector, think-tanks, our
universities, to put all of our best thoughts and efforts in action and
to be focused as a laser so we can provide for the common defense of
this Nation, the common defense of civilizations and freedom-loving
people around the world, and that Americans will do what Americans do
best, which is to put our best foot forward with clarity, with
commitment, with purpose, with the practical way that Americans move
forward to take on this task and to do it well. I am confident that as
we do, we will be successful in this endeavor.
____________________