[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 150 (2004), Part 10]
[House]
[Pages 13213-13214]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




            SMART SECURITY AND INDIA-PAKISTAN NUCLEAR ISSUES

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, the border between India and Pakistan has 
commonly been called the world's most dangerous nuclear flashpoint. 
India is thought to have at least 50, maybe as many as 120, nuclear 
warheads; and Pakistan is thought to have 30 to 70 warheads, but the 
two countries took a step towards nonproliferation on Sunday when they 
signed their first confidence-building agreement on nuclear weapons 
since 1999.
  As part of the agreement, both countries will keep open a permanent 
telephone hotline to warn the other in advance of tests of nuclear-
capable missiles. The confidence-building measures also included an 
agreement to continue the moratorium on testing nuclear warheads and a 
promise to continue nuclear talks.
  While largely symbolic, this agreement is significant because it 
represents the desire of both India and Pakistan, two countries 
consistently at odds with each other, to avoid a devastating nuclear 
exchange that could kill hundreds of thousands of people.
  The United States could take some valuable lessons, Mr. Speaker, from 
this India-Pakistan agreement. At the same time these two countries are 
seeking to reduce the threat of nuclear weapons, the United States is 
funding millions of dollars in research on new nuclear weapons.

[[Page 13214]]

  Specifically, in this year's budget request, President Bush asked for 
over $100 million for research and testing of new nuclear weapons, 
including the robust nuclear Earth penetrator and so-called yield 
nuclear weapon. Fortunately, these funds were initially rejected by the 
Committee on Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy and Water 
Development.
  When it comes to nuclear weapons, President Bush just does not seem 
to get it. While countries like India and Pakistan have taken the first 
step to making the world safer, our President seems to think the only 
good defense is a good offense.
  But how strong does our offense need to be? We already possess 9,000 
strategic nuclear warheads. How many of these weapons of last resort do 
we need before we feel secure? How much money do we need to spend on 
new nuclear weapons while neglecting important domestic programs before 
we decide that we have finally spent enough?
  Mr. Speaker, there has to be a better way, a more sensible way, a way 
more rooted in the best American values, and there is.
  I have introduced H. Con. Res. 392 to create a SMART security 
platform for the 21st century. SMART stands for Sensible Multilateral 
American Response to Terrorism. We need to stop the spread of weapons 
of mass destruction, and keeping the American people safe must be our 
highest priority. On that point, the President and I agree; but we must 
avoid equating our security with aggression and military force.
  The United States possesses the world's largest nuclear stockpile, 
but nuclear weapons are not the answer to our problems because 
conflicts between nations require a more delicate touch.
  Instead, SMART security calls for aggressive diplomacy, a commitment 
to nuclear nonproliferation, strong regional security arrangements, and 
vigorous inspection regimes.
  The United States must set an example, Mr. Speaker, an example for 
the rest of the world by renouncing the first use of nuclear weapons 
and the development of new nuclear weapons.
  We must maintain our commitment to existing international treaties 
like the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty, the Comprehensive Test Ban 
Treaty, the Biological Weapons Convention, and the Chemical Weapons 
Convention.
  We must support and adequately fund programs like the Cooperative 
Threat Reduction Program, which works with the Russian Federation and 
the states of the former Soviet Union to dismantle nuclear warheads, 
reduce nuclear stockpiles and secure nuclear weapons in Russia; and we 
must replicate this successful program in other troubled countries like 
North Korea and Iran, because not every country will proactively choose 
to give up its nuclear program. In the long run, negotiating with other 
countries will keep us much safer than scaring them into submission.

                              {time}  2000

  The Bush doctrine of arrogant nuclear proliferation has been tried 
and it has failed. It is time for a new national security strategy.
  SMART security defends America by relying on the very best of 
America, not relying on her nuclear capabilities, but our commitment to 
peace and freedom and our capacity for multilateral leadership. SMART 
security is tough, SMART security is pragmatic and patriotic. SMART 
security is smart and it will keep America safe.

                          ____________________