[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 156 (2010), Part 13]
[Senate]
[Pages 18604-18606]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                              START TREATY

  Mr. DORGAN. Madam President, I rise to speak about the START treaty. 
This issue, while on the front pages in the last few days, is not 
front-page news generally, but it is so unbelievably important.
  First, I compliment Senator Kerry, chairman of the committee. I 
compliment Senator Lugar and others who have worked on this. I was part 
of the national security working group. We had many briefings during 
the negotiations with the Russians. I chair the appropriations 
subcommittee that funds our nuclear weapons, and I have stood next to 
nuclear weapons, know a lot about them, know about the horror of these 
weapons, as do almost all Americans. Let me describe how many nuclear 
warheads we have in the world.
  This data is the Union of Concerned Scientists' that made an estimate 
in 2010. They said Russia has about 15,000 nuclear weapons; the United 
States about 9,400; China, 240; France, 300; Britain, 200. We can see 
Israel at 80. These are the expected number of nuclear weapons on the 
planet. That is somewhere around 25 to 28,000 nuclear weapons on this 
planet, the loss of one of which or the explosion of one of which in a 
major city by a terrorist

[[Page 18605]]

group will change life on this planet forever.
  The question is, What are we doing now to stop the spread of nuclear 
weapons, prevent terrorists and rogue nations from acquiring nuclear 
weapons, and then reducing the number of nuclear weapons? What are we 
doing?
  I have told the story of the CIA agent called Dragonfire who, 1 month 
to the day, October 11, 2001, reported to his superiors there was 
evidence that a Russian 10 kiloton nuclear weapon had been stolen and 
smuggled into New York City by a terrorist group. That was exactly 1 
month after 9/11 when Dragonfire provided that piece of information to 
the intelligence community. For a month or 2 months, there was an 
apoplectic seizure in the intelligence community, with the 
administration trying to figure out how to deal with this. No one from 
New York was informed, not even the mayor. It was later discovered this 
was not a credible piece of intelligence, and everyone breathed easier. 
But as they did the postmortem, they understood, it would have been 
possible, perhaps, to have believed a terrorist group could have stolen 
a low-yield Russian nuclear weapon. It would have been possible for 
them to have stolen it and to have smuggled it into a major city, New 
York or Washington, and it would have been possible for a terrorist 
group to have detonated it. That is one nuclear weapon. There are 
25,000 on this planet.
  This morning on the way to work I heard a description on the radio of 
the nuclear weapons possessed by Pakistan. The question by some people 
who know a lot about this is whether there is an impossibility of 
someone from al-Qaida or the Taliban infiltrating the structure by 
which there is security for the nuclear weapons in Pakistan. That is an 
open question.
  Earlier this year I was in Moscow, about an hour and a half outside 
Moscow, at a training facility we have helped fund in Russia to train 
for the security of Russian nuclear weapons. It is in all our 
interests--it is in the interest of the future of mankind--to 
understand the urgency to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and to 
stop rogue nations and terrorists from acquiring nuclear weapons and, 
finally, at least to begin substantially reducing the number of nuclear 
weapons. That is what brings us to the issue of the START treaty.
  I don't denigrate anyone or suggest that anyone who raises questions 
about this is uninformed. That is not the case. All of us want what is 
best for this country and for the world. We want to have arms reduction 
treaties and weapons reductions in a way that is verifiable and will 
strengthen the world's security. There have been a lot of questions 
asked. A lot of them have been answered. It is my hope that all of us 
who have been interested in this--and that is both Republicans and 
Democrats--will find ways to come together and pass this START treaty.
  If I might, I will describe the unbelievable success we know occurs 
from this kind of activity. We don't have to test this. We know it 
works. Through the Nunn-Lugar program, which has been around for some 
while, we actually fund the activities to destroy weapons that 
previously were aimed at the United States. Albania is now chemical 
weapons free; the Ukraine, Kazakhstan, and Belarus have no nuclear 
weapons any longer; 7,500 warheads have been deactivated; 32 ballistic 
missile submarines; 1,400 long-range nuclear missiles; 155 bombers.
  I know it is repetitive, but I wish to again say that I have in my 
desk a piece of wing from a Soviet Backfire bomber. We didn't shoot 
this down. I ask unanimous consent to show it.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  Mr. DORGAN. As a result of Nunn-Lugar, we sawed the wings off. How is 
it that I stand on the floor with a piece of a wing from a bomber that 
used to carry nuclear weapons threatening to destroy this country? I do 
that because we know these work.
  Ukraine is now nuclear free. This is a hinge from a silo that 
contained a nuclear-tipped missile aimed at the United States. This 
piece, from a silo containing an intercontinental ballistic missile 
aimed at America, is from a missile that no longer exists. The nuclear 
weapon is gone; the missile is gone. There are now sunflower seeds 
planted where there was previously a missile. I tell that to say: We 
understand what works. Arms negotiations, arms treaties with which we 
have tried to reduce delivery vehicles and nuclear weapons work.
  I have just described the Nunn-Lugar program. Let me show a couple 
photographs of it. This is a Typhoon-class ballistic missile submarine 
that carried nuclear weapons. I have the copper wiring from this 
submarine in my desk, reminding all of us, again, that this works. We 
didn't have to destroy this submarine with a weapon under the sea in 
hostile action. We negotiated a treaty. It was taken apart.
  This shows an SS-18 missile silo in Ukraine. We can see they planted 
dynamite and blew up the silo. Because we agreed with the Russians that 
we were going to reduce nuclear weapons, reduce delivery vehicles, that 
silo is now gone and sunflower seeds are planted where a missile 
previously had been.
  Here is a photograph of a Blackjack bomber that the old Soviet Union 
and Russia had. We destroyed it, sawed off the wings. We know these 
kinds of treaties work.
  The treaty negotiated is supported by so many people. ADM Mike 
Mullen, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, says:

       I, the Vice Chairman and the Joint Chiefs, as well as our 
     combatant commanders, stand solidly behind this new treaty. 
     This treaty represents our country's best interests, in my 
     judgment.

  There are many things to say in support of concluding an arms control 
agreement with the Russians. There are many questions that have been 
raised about the treaty and have been answered. When I described 
earlier the large number of people who say it is in this country's 
interest to support this treaty, I did not put up several of these, but 
let me say, Dr. Kissinger, said:

       I recommend ratification of the treaty. It should be noted 
     I come from the hawkish side of this debate so I'm not 
     advocating these measures in the abstract. I try to build 
     them into my perception of the national interest.

  This morning George Shultz, James Baker, Lawrence Eagleburger, Colin 
Powell, and Dr. Kissinger wrote an op-ed piece in the Post making the 
case.
  Those who have raised questions about this are as concerned about our 
national security as anybody else. They believe, as I do, in the same 
goals. Let's keep nuclear weapons out of the hands of terrorist 
organizations and rogue nations. Let's stop the spread of nuclear 
weapons and, ultimately, let's try to reduce the number of weapons on 
this planet. I think everybody here who is involved are people of good 
will. My fervent hope is that in the coming couple weeks, as we 
conclude this session of the Congress, we will find a way to have on 
the floor this treaty which is so widely supported and be able to say, 
all of us of every persuasion, we did something that will have a 
lasting impact on the future of this country, the security of this 
country, and the security of the world. We did something that reduces 
nuclear weapons, the number of nuclear weapons among the two nations 
that have, by far, the most nuclear weapons. We did something that 
substantially reduces the number of delivery vehicles for nuclear 
weapons. This will provide for a much greater measure of security for 
us and the rest of the world.
  Those who have spoken on this issue, giving different views, offering 
different views, I have great respect for them. Many of them and I were 
part of the national security working group. Along the line when the 
treaty was being negotiated, we had meetings in an area that is for 
top-secret presentations. All along the way we understood what was 
happening and how it was happening. I think this is a treaty that is 
mutually beneficial and represents not only the best interests of both 
countries that are parties to the treaty but especially the best 
interests of the world.
  I started by saying the loss of one nuclear weapon exploded in one 
city on the planet would change everything

[[Page 18606]]

about our lives. We have about 25,000 nuclear weapons on the planet. 
The security of those weapons, the ability to keep them out of the 
wrong hands, the ability to keep others from acquiring weapons, the 
ability to reduce weapons, all of that urgent and important. It doesn't 
always rise to the top in the debate in the Senate, but now we have 
that discussion around this treaty which is only a first step. I hope, 
by the end of this month, perhaps all of us could celebrate having a 
significant achievement for the security of the country and for the 
world.
  I yield the floor.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Missouri.
  Mr. BOND. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to speak up to 15 
minutes.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.

                          ____________________