S3486 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE April 23, 1997 Mr. HELMS. Now, I am taking this have hostile intentions toward the and would cause me to reconsider my advantage as the chairman of the com- United States. This means that coun- current support for the treaty. mittee. I spoke for 26 minutes this tries which are suspected of having I urge my colleagues to vote against morning. The distinguished ranking chemical weapons programs and are any killer amendments that would member spoke for an hour. Just for the sponsors of terrorism—such as Libya, strike these conditions and, therefore, record, how long did the distinguished Syria, Iraq, and North Korea—must deprive the United States of assurances Senator from Indiana speak? I ask that participate in the CWC. Just this that the Chemical Weapons Convention of the Chair. morning, a newspaper article reported is effective, enforceable and verifiable. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. that a prominent North Korean defec- The American taxpayers, who will be LUGAR). The Senator from Indiana tor has warned that his former country funding U.S. participation in the CWC, spoke for 41 minutes. is fully prepared to launch a chemical deserve a treaty that unquestionably Mr. HELMS. I see. So the Senator weapons attack on its neighbors. North and unambiguously advances our na- from North Carolina feels that maybe Korea has not yet signed the CWC. tional security. they have had ample opportunity thus Fourth, we need to provide as much I yield the floor. far into the debate. protection as possible for U.S. Govern- f Now, I ask that the distinguished ment facilities and businesses when RECESS Senator from Minnesota be recognized faced with international inspections. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under for 7 minutes, after which time we will While the CWC does allow the United the previous order, the Senate will be stand in recess for the policy luncheon. States to refuse specific inspectors, it in recess until 2:15 p.m. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without should be a matter of policy that we Thereupon, the Senate, at 12:39 p.m., objection, the Senator from Minnesota will not accept inspectors from terror- recessed until 2:15 p.m.; whereupon, the is recognized. ist states like Iran. We are certainly Senate reassembled when called to Mr. GRAMS. Mr. President, I rise to justified in suspecting that these in- order by the Presiding Officer (Mr. express my support for the Chemical spectors would be intent on gaining ac- GREGG). Weapons Convention [CWC] with the cess to classified or confidential busi- f full complement of 33 conditions on ness information. U.S. participation, which are now being Fifth, I understand the administra- EXECUTIVE SESSION considered by the Senate. tion has offered assurances that the As a member of the Foreign Rela- United States will not seek to transfer CHEMICAL WEAPONS CONVENTION tions Committee, I have been review- chemical technology or information ing and studying this treaty for over a about chemical defenses to countries The Senate continued with the con- year now and have had some serious that might put it to harmful use. But sideration of the convention. reservations about the CWC through- because of the vagueness of the treaty The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- out that process. language, we need to go further to pre- ate will now proceed, under a previous order, to a voice vote on Senate Reso- Therefore, I believe the conditions in vent the proliferation of chemical Senate Executive Resolution 75 are es- lution 75. weapons. We need to close off the possi- The resolution (S. Res. 75) was re- sential to ensuring that the CWC has bility that other countries could use real benefits for American national se- jected. language in the treaty as cover for The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under a curity and will be truly verifiable and their desires to transfer chemical tech- previous order, the motion to recon- effective. Before we commit the Amer- nology to countries like Iran. As we sider is agreed to. ican taxpayers to paying more than have seen in Iraq and North Korea, nu- The resolution of ratification (S. Res. $100 million annually for U.S. partici- clear technology acquired supposedly 75) is back before the Senate. pation in the treaty, we owe them for peaceful purposes can advance Under the previous order, the ques- nothing less. weapon capabilities. tion now occurs on the first 28 condi- Let me outline the conditions I be- Sixth and finally, we need to be sure tions en bloc. lieve are the most important. that the CWC is effectively verifiable, The first 28 conditions en bloc were First, I am pleased the Clinton ad- meaning that the United States has a agreed to, as follows: ministration has finally reversed its high degree of confidence in its ability SEC. 2. CONDITIONS. long-standing position that the CWC to detect significant violations. I The Senate’s advice and consent to the would prevent U.S. soldiers from using strongly supported the START II Trea- ratification of the Chemical Weapons Con- tear gas to rescue downed pilots or to ty because it met this traditional vention is subject to the following condi- avoid deadly force when enemy troops tions, which shall be binding upon the Presi- standard. If we don’t think we can de- dent: are using civilians as human shields. tect cheating under the CWC, it seri- (1) EFFECT OF ARTICLE XXII.—Upon the de- Second, we must be sure that Russia ously calls into question the value of posit of the United States instrument of will both comply with the existing the treaty. ratification, the President shall certify to chemical weapons destruction agree- Recently, there have been reports the Congress that the United States has in- ments it has already signed, and that it that China is selling chemical weapons formed all other States Parties to the Con- will ratify the CWC. Russia has the components to Iran. Both countries vention that the Senate reserves the right, largest chemical weapons stockpile in pursuant to the Constitution of the United have signed the CWC and, therefore, States, to give its advice and consent to rati- the world and its compliance with ear- are supposedly committed to banning fication of the Convention subject to res- lier agreements will help the United such activity. ervations, notwithstanding Article XXII of States be more confident of its ability In conclusion, Mr. President, there the Convention. to monitor Russian compliance with are conditions in the current resolu- (2) FINANCIAL CONTRIBUTIONS.—Notwith- the CWC. tion of ratification for the CWC that standing any provision of the Convention, no This is especially important given re- address every single one of the con- funds may be drawn from the Treasury of the ports that Russia has already devel- cerns I have mentioned. United States for payments or assistance (in- oped new chemical weapons programs cluding the transfer of in-kind items) under I sincerely intend to support and vote paragraph 16 of Article IV, paragraph 19 of specifically designed to evade the trea- for the Chemical Weapons Convention Article V, paragraph 7 of Article VIII, para- ty. More than 15 months after the Unit- as long as the resolution of ratification graph 23 of Article IX, Article X, or any ed States ratified the START II Trea- is fortified with such strong conditions. other provision of the Convention, without ty, Russia has refused to follow suit. They will help ensure that this treaty statutory authorization and appropriation. What makes us think that if we join will have a real impact on the pro- (3) ESTABLISHMENT OF AN INTERNAL OVER- the CWC before Russia does, it will liferation of chemical weapons and pro- SIGHT OFFICE.— then follow our example? vide proven protection for U.S. forces. (A) CERTIFICATION.—Not later than 240 days after the deposit of the United States instru- Third, the CWC will not protect However, I understand that some of ment of ratification, the President shall cer- American soldiers from chemical at- my colleagues may try to strip out tify to the Congress that the current inter- tack unless it has a serious and imme- these important conditions on the nal audit office of the Preparatory Commis- diate impact on those countries that CWC. This would be very unfortunate sion has been expanded into an independent April 23, 1997 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S3487

internal oversight office whose functions vention, including the training of inspectors (B) PERIODIC AND SPECIAL REPORTS.— will be transferred to the Organization for and the provision of detection equipment and (i) IN GENERAL.—The President shall report the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons upon on-site analysis sampling and analysis tech- periodically, but not less frequently than the establishment of the Organization. The niques, or share the articles, items, or serv- semiannually, to the Select Committee on independent internal oversight office shall ices resulting from any research and develop- Intelligence of the Senate and the Perma- be obligated to protect confidential informa- ment undertaken previously, without first nent Select Committee on Intelligence of the tion pursuant to the obligations of the Con- having concluded and submitted to the Con- House of Representatives on the types and fidentiality Annex. The independent internal gress a cost-sharing arrangement with the volume of intelligence information provided oversight office shall— Organization. to the Organization or affiliated organiza- (i) make investigations and reports relat- (C) CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this para- tions and the purposes for which it was pro- ing to all programs of the Organization; graph may be construed as limiting or con- vided during the period covered by the re- (ii) undertake both management and finan- stricting in any way the ability of the Unit- port. cial audits, including— ed States to pursue unilaterally any project (ii) EXEMPTION.—For purposes of this sub- (I) an annual assessment verifying that undertaken solely to increase the capability paragraph, intelligence information provided classified and confidential information is of the United States means for monitoring to the Organization or affiliated organiza- stored and handled securely pursuant to the compliance with the Convention. tions does not cover information that is pro- general obligations set forth in Article VIII (5) INTELLIGENCE SHARING AND SAFE- vided only to, and only for the use of, appro- and in accordance with all provisions of the GUARDS.— priately cleared United States Government Annex on the Protection of Confidential In- (A) PROVISION OF INTELLIGENCE INFORMA- personnel serving with the Organization or formation; and TION TO THE ORGANIZATION.— an affiliated organization. (II) an annual assessment of laboratories (i) IN GENERAL.—No United States intel- (C) SPECIAL REPORTS.— established pursuant to paragraph 55 of Part ligence information may be provided to the (i) REPORT ON PROCEDURES.—Accompanying II of the Verification Annex to ensure that Organization or any organization affiliated the certification provided pursuant to sub- the Director General of the Technical Sec- with the Organization, or to any official or paragraph (A)(i), the President shall provide retariat is carrying out his functions pursu- employee thereof, unless the President cer- a detailed report to the Select Committee on ant to paragraph 56 of Part II of the Verifica- tifies to the appropriate committees of Con- Intelligence of the Senate and the Perma- tion Annex; gress that the Director of Central Intel- nent Select Committee on Intelligence of the (iii) undertake performance evaluations ligence, in consultation with the Secretary House of Representatives identifying the annually to ensure the Organization has of State and the Secretary of Defense, has procedures established for protecting intel- complied to the extent practicable with the established and implemented procedures, and ligence sources and methods when intel- recommendations of the independent inter- has worked with the Organization to ensure ligence information is provided pursuant to nal oversight office; implementation of procedures, for protecting this section. (iv) have access to all records relating to from unauthorized disclosure United States (ii) REPORTS ON UNAUTHORIZED DISCLO- the programs and operations of the Organiza- intelligence sources and methods connected SURES.—The President shall submit a report tion; to such information. These procedures shall to the Select Committee on Intelligence of (v) have direct and prompt access to any include the requirement of— the Senate and the Permanent Select Com- official of the Organization; and (I) the offer and provision of advice and as- mittee on Intelligence of the House of Rep- (vi) be required to protect the identity of, sistance to the Organization in establishing resentatives within 15 days after it has be- and prevent reprisals against, all complain- and maintaining the necessary measures to come known to the United States Govern- ants. ensure that inspectors and other staff mem- ment regarding any unauthorized disclosure (B) COMPLIANCE WITH RECOMMENDATIONS.— bers of the Technical Secretariat meet the of intelligence provided by the United States The Organization shall ensure, to the extent highest standards of efficiency, competence, to the Organization. practicable, compliance with recommenda- and integrity, pursuant to paragraph 1(b) of (D) DELEGATION OF DUTIES.—The President tions of the independent internal oversight the Confidentiality Annex, and in establish- may not delegate or assign the duties of the office, and shall ensure that annual and ing and maintaining a stringent regime gov- President under this section. other relevant reports by the independent in- erning the handling of confidential informa- (E) RELATIONSHIP TO EXISTING LAW.—Noth- ternal oversight office are made available to tion by the Technical Secretariat, pursuant ing in this paragraph may be construed to— all member states pursuant to the require- to paragraph 2 of the Confidentiality Annex; (i) impair or otherwise affect the authority ments established in the Confidentiality (II) a determination that any unauthorized of the Director of Central Intelligence to Annex. disclosure of United States intelligence in- protect intelligence sources and methods (C) WITHHOLDING A PORTION OF CONTRIBU- formation to be provided to the Organization from unauthorized disclosure pursuant to TIONS.—Until a certification is made under or any organization affiliated with the Orga- section 103(c)(5) of the National Security Act subparagraph (A), 50 percent of the amount nization, or any official or employee thereof, of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 403–3(c)(5)); or of United States contributions to the regular would result in no more than minimal dam- (ii) supersede or otherwise affect the provi- budget of the Organization assessed pursuant age to United States national security, in sions of title V of the National Security Act to paragraph 7 of Article VIII shall be with- light of the risks of the unauthorized disclo- of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 413 et seq.). held from disbursement, in addition to any sure of such information; (F) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: other amounts required to be withheld from (III) sanitization of intelligence informa- (i) APPROPRIATE COMMITTEES OF CON- disbursement by any other provision of law. tion that is to be provided to the Organiza- GRESS.—The term ‘‘appropriate committees (D) ASSESSMENT OF FIRST YEAR CONTRIBU- tion to remove all information that could be- of Congress’’ means the Committee on For- TIONS.—Notwithstanding the requirements of tray intelligence sources and methods; and eign Relations and the Select Committee on this paragraph, for the first year of the Orga- (IV) interagency United States intelligence Intelligence of the Senate and the Commit- nization’s operation, ending on April 29, 1998, community approval for any release of intel- tee on International Relations and the Per- the United States shall make its full con- ligence information to the Organization, no manent Select Committee on Intelligence of tribution to the regular budget of the Orga- matter how thoroughly it has been sanitized. the House of Representatives. nization assessed pursuant to paragraph 7 of (ii) WAIVER AUTHORITY.— (ii) ORGANIZATION.—The term ‘‘Organiza- Article VIII. (I) IN GENERAL.—The Director of Central tion’’ means the Organization for the Prohi- (E) DEFINITION.—For purposes of this para- Intelligence may waive the application of bition of Chemical Weapons established graph, the term ‘‘internal oversight office’’ clause (i) if the Director of Central Intel- under the Convention and includes any organ means the head of an independent office (or ligence certifies in writing to the appro- of that Organization and any board or work- other independent entity) established by the priate committees of Congress that provid- ing group, such as the Scientific Advisory Organization to conduct and supervise objec- ing such information to the Organization or Board, that may be established by it. tive audits, inspections, and investigations an organization affiliated with the Organiza- (iii) ORGANIZATION AFFILIATED WITH THE OR- relating to the programs and operations of tion, or to any official or employee thereof, GANIZATION.—The terms ‘‘organization affili- the Organization. is in the vital national security interests of ated with the Organization’’ and ‘‘affiliated (4) COST SHARING ARRANGEMENTS.— the United States and that all possible meas- organizations’’ include the Provisional Tech- (A) ANNUAL REPORTS.—Prior to the deposit ures to protect such information have been nical Secretariat under the Convention and of the United States instrument of ratifica- taken, except that such waiver must be made any laboratory certified by the Director- tion, and annually thereafter, the President for each instance such information is pro- General of the Technical Secretariat as des- shall submit a report to Congress identifying vided, or for each such document provided. ignated to perform analytical or other func- all cost-sharing arrangements with the Orga- In the event that multiple waivers are issued tions. nization. within a single week, a single certification (6) AMENDMENTS TO THE CONVENTION.— (B) COST-SHARING ARRANGEMENT RE- to the appropriate committees of Congress (A) VOTING REPRESENTATION OF THE UNITED QUIRED.—The United States shall not under- may be submitted, specifying each waiver is- STATES.—A United States representative will take any new research or development ex- sued during that week. be present at all Amendment Conferences penditures for the primary purpose of refin- (II) DELEGATION OF DUTIES.—The Director and will cast a vote, either affirmative or ing or improving the Organization’s regime of Central Intelligence may not delegate any negative, on all proposed amendments made for verification of compliance under the Con- duty of the Director under this paragraph. at such conferences. S3488 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE April 23, 1997

(B) SUBMISSION OF AMENDMENTS AS TREA- (D) PERIODIC CONSULTATION WITH CONGRES- (B) BRIEFINGS ON COMPLIANCE.—Given its TIES.—The President shall submit to the SIONAL COMMITTEES.—The President shall concern about the intelligence community’s Senate for its advice and consent to ratifica- consult periodically, but not less frequently low level of confidence in its ability to mon- tion under Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 of than twice a year, with the Committee on itor compliance with the Convention, the the Constitution of the United States any Foreign Relations of the Senate and the Senate expects the executive branch of the amendment to the Convention adopted by an Committee on International Relations of the Government to offer regular briefings, not Amendment Conference. House of Representatives, on Australia less than four times a year, to the Commit- (7) CONTINUING VITALITY OF THE AUSTRALIA Group export control and nonproliferation tee on Foreign Relations of the Senate and GROUP AND NATIONAL EXPORT CONTROLS.— measures. If any Australia Group member the Committee on International Relations of (A) DECLARATION.—The Senate declares adopts a position at variance with the cer- the House of Representatives on compliance that the collapse of the informal forum of tifications and understandings provided issues related to the Convention. Such brief- states known as the ‘‘Australia Group,’’ ei- under subparagraph (B), or should seek to ings shall include a description of all United ther through changes in membership or lack gain Australia Group acquiescence or ap- States efforts in bilateral and multilateral of compliance with common export controls, proval for an interpretation that various diplomatic channels and forums to resolve or the substantial weakening of common provisions of the Convention require it to re- compliance issues and shall include a com- Australia Group export controls and non- move chemical-weapons related export con- plete description of— proliferation measures in force on the date of trols against any State Party to the Conven- (i) any compliance issues the United States United States ratification of the Convention, tion, the President shall block any effort by plans to raise at meetings of the Organiza- would constitute a fundamental change in that Australia Group member to secure Aus- tion, in advance of such meetings; circumstances to United States ratification tralia Group approval of such a position or (ii) any compliance issues raised at meet- of the Convention. interpretation. ings of the Organization, within 30 days of (B) CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENT.—Prior to (E) DEFINITIONS.—In this paragraph: such meeting; the deposit of the United States instrument (i) AUSTRALIA GROUP.—The term ‘‘Aus- (iii) any determination by the President of ratification, the President shall certify to tralia Group’’ means the informal forum of that a State Party is in noncompliance with Congress that— states, chaired by Australia, whose goal is to or is otherwise acting in a manner inconsist- (i) nothing in the Convention obligates the discourage and impede chemical and biologi- ent with the object or purpose of the Conven- United States to accept any modification, cal weapons proliferation by harmonizing na- tion, within 30 days of such a determination. change in scope, or weakening of its national tional export controls chemical weapons pre- (C) ANNUAL REPORTS ON COMPLIANCE.—The export controls; cursor chemicals, biological weapons patho- President shall submit on January 1 of each (ii) the United States understands that the gens, and dual-use production equipment, year to the Committee on Foreign Relations maintenance of national restrictions on and through other measures. of the Senate and the Committee on Inter- trade in chemicals and chemical production (ii) HIGHEST DIPLOMATIC LEVELS.—The term national Relations of the House of Rep- technology is fully compatible with the pro- ‘‘highest diplomatic levels’’ means at the resentatives a full and complete classified visions of the Convention, including Article levels of senior officials with the power to and unclassified report setting forth— XI(2), and solely within the sovereign juris- authoritatively represent their governments, (i) a certification of those countries in- diction of the United States; and does not include diplomatic representa- cluded in the Intelligence Community’s Mon- (iii) the Convention preserves the right of tives of those governments to the United itoring Strategy, as set forth by the Director State Parties, unilaterally or collectively, to States. of Central Intelligence’s Arms Control Staff maintain or impose export controls on (8) NEGATIVE SECURITY ASSURANCES.— and the National Intelligence Council (or chemicals and related chemical production (A) REEVALUATION.—In forswearing under any successor document setting forth intel- technology for foreign policy or national se- the Convention the possession of a chemical ligence priorities in the field of the prolifera- curity reasons, notwithstanding Article weapons retaliatory capability, the Senate tion of weapons of mass destruction) that are XI(2); and understands that deterrence of attack by determined to be in compliance with the (iv) each Australia Group member, at the chemical weapons requires a reevaluation of Convention, on a country-by-country basis; highest diplomatic levels, has officially com- the negative security assurances extended to (ii) for those countries not certified pursu- municated to the United States Government non-nuclear-weapon states. ant to clause (i), an identification and as- its understanding and agreement that export (B) CLASSIFIED REPORT.—Accordingly, 180 sessment of all compliance issues arising control and nonproliferation measures which days after the deposit of the United States with regard to the adherence of the country the Australia Group has undertaken are instrument of ratification, the President to its obligation under the Convention; fully compatible with the provisions of the shall submit to the Congress a classified re- (iii) the steps the United States has taken, Convention, including Article XI(2), and its port setting forth the findings of a detailed either unilaterally or in conjunction with commitment to maintain in the future such review of United States policy on negative another State Party— export controls and nonproliferation meas- security assurances, including a determina- (I) to initiate challenge inspections of the ures against non-Australia Group members. tion of the appropriate responses to the use noncompliant party with the objective of (C) ANNUAL CERTIFICATION.— of chemical or biological weapons against demonstrating to the international commu- (i) EFFECTIVENESS OF AUSTRALIA GROUP.— the Armed Forces of the United States, Unit- nity the act of noncompliance; The President shall certify to Congress on an ed States citizens, allies, and third parties. (II) to call attention publicly to the activ- annual basis that— (9) PROTECTION OF ADVANCED BIO- ity in question; and (I) Australia Group members continue to TECHNOLOGY.—Prior to the deposit of the (III) to seek on an urgent basis a meeting maintain an equally effective or more com- United States instrument of ratification, and at the highest diplomatic level with the non- prehensive control over the export of toxic on January 1 of every year thereafter, the compliant party with the objective of bring- chemicals and their precursors, dual-use President shall certify to the Committee on ing the noncompliant party into compliance; processing equipment, human, animal and Foreign Relations and the Speaker of the (iv) a determination of the military signifi- plant pathogens and toxins with potential bi- House of Representatives that the legitimate cance and broader security risks arising ological weapons application, and dual-use commercial activities and interests of chem- from any compliance issue identified pursu- biological equipment, as that afforded by the ical, biotechnology, and pharmaceutical ant to clause (ii); and Australia Group as of the date of ratification firms in the United States are not being sig- (v) a detailed assessment of the responses of the Convention by the United States; and nificantly harmed by the limitations of the of the noncompliant party in question to ac- (II) the Australia Group remains a viable Convention on access to, and production of, tion undertaken by the United States de- mechanism for limiting the spread of chemi- those chemicals and toxins listed in Sched- scribed in clause (iii). cal and biological weapons-related materials ule 1 of the Annex on Chemicals. (D) COUNTRIES PREVIOUSLY INCLUDED IN and technology, and that the effectiveness of (10) MONITORING AND VERIFICATION OF COM- COMPLIANCE REPORTS.—For any country that the Australia Group has not been under- PLIANCE.— was previously included in a report submit- mined by changes in membership, lack of (A) DECLARATION.—The Senate declares ted under subparagraph (C), but which subse- compliance with common export controls that— quently is not included in the Intelligence and nonproliferation measures, or the weak- (i) the Convention is in the interests of the Community’s Monitoring Strategy (or suc- ening of common controls and nonprolifera- United States only if all State Parties are in cessor document), such country shall con- tion measures, in force as of the date of rati- strict compliance with the terms of the Con- tinue to be included in the report submitted fication of the Convention by the United vention as submitted to the Senate for its under subparagraph (C) unless the country States. advice and consent to ratification, such com- has been certified under subparagraph (C)(i) (ii) CONSULTATION WITH SENATE REQUIRED.— pliance being measured by performance and for each of the previous two years. In the event that the President is, at any not by efforts, intentions, or commitments (E) FORM OF CERTIFICATIONS.—For those time, unable to make the certifications de- to comply; and countries that have been publicly and offi- scribed in clause (i), the President shall con- (ii) the Senate expects all State Parties to cially identified by a representative of the sult with the Senate for the purposes of ob- be in strict compliance with their obliga- intelligence community as possessing or taining a resolution of continued adherence tions under the terms of the Convention, as seeking to develop chemical weapons, the to the Convention, notwithstanding the fun- submitted to the Senate for its advice and certification described in subparagraph (C)(i) damental change in circumstance. consent to ratification; shall be in unclassified form. April 23, 1997 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S3489

(F) ANNUAL REPORTS ON INTELLIGENCE.—On (iii) it is essential for the United States proposals for increased military assistance, January 1, 1998, and annually thereafter, the and key regional allies to preserve and fur- including through the Foreign Military Director of Central Intelligence shall submit ther develop robust chemical and biological Sales, Foreign Military Financing, and the to the Committees on Foreign Relations, defenses; International Military Education and Train- Armed Services, and the Select Committee (iv) the United States Armed Forces are in- ing programs pursuant to the Foreign Assist- on Intelligence of the Senate and to the adequately equipped, organized, trained and ance Act of 1961. Committees on International Relations, Na- exercised for chemical and biological defense (D) UNITED STATES ARMY CHEMICAL tional Security, and Permanent Select Com- against current and expected threats, and SCHOOL.—The Secretary of Defense shall take mittee of the House of Representatives, a that too much reliance is placed on non-ac- those actions necessary to ensure that the full and complete classified and unclassified tive duty forces, which receive less training United States Army Chemical School re- report regarding— and less modern equipment, for critical mains under the oversight of a general offi- (i) the status of chemical weapons develop- chemical and biological defense capabilities; cer of the United States Army. ment, production, stockpiling, and use, with- (v) the lack of readiness stems from a de- (E) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—Given its con- in the meanings of those terms under the emphasis of chemical and biological defenses cerns about the present state of chemical Convention, on a country-by-country basis; within the executive branch of Government and biological defense readiness and train- (ii) any information made available to the and the United States Armed Forces; ing, it is the sense of the Senate that— United States Government concerning the (vi) the armed forces of key regional allies (i) in the transfer, consolidation, and reor- development, production, acquisition, stock- and likely coalition partners, as well as ci- ganization of the United States Army Chem- vilians necessary to support United States ical School, the Army should not disrupt or piling, retention, use, or direct or indirect military operations, are inadequately pre- diminish the training and readiness of the transfer of novel agents, including any uni- pared and equipped to carry out essential United States Armed Forces to fight in a tary or binary chemical weapon comprised of missions in chemically and biologically con- chemical-biological warfare environment; chemical components not identified on the taminated environments; (ii) the Army should continue to operate schedules of the Annex on Chemicals, on a (vii) congressional direction contained in the Chemical Defense Training Facility at country-by-country basis; the Defense Against Weapons of Mass De- Fort McClellan until such time as the re- (iii) the extent of trade in chemicals poten- struction Act of 1996 (title XIV of Public Law placement training facility at Fort Leonard tially relevant to chemical weapons pro- 104–201) should lead to enhanced domestic Wood is functional. grams, including all Australia Group chemi- preparedness to protect against chemical and (F) ANNUAL REPORTS ON CHEMICAL AND BIO- cals and chemicals identified on the sched- biological weapons threats; and LOGICAL WEAPONS DEFENSE ACTIVITIES.—On ules of the Annex on Chemicals, on a coun- (viii) the United States Armed Forces January 1, 1998, and annually thereafter, the try-by-country basis; should place increased emphasis on potential President shall submit a report to the Com- (iv) the monitoring responsibilities, prac- threats to forces deployed abroad and, in mittees on Foreign Relations, Appropria- tices, and strategies of the intelligence com- particular, make countering chemical and tions, and Armed Services of the Senate and munity (as defined in section 3(4) of the Na- biological weapons use an organizing prin- the Committee on International Relations, tional Security Act of 1947) and a determina- ciple for United States defense strategy and National Security, and Appropriations of the tion of the level of confidence of the intel- development of force structure, doctrine, House of Representatives, and Speaker of the ligence community with respect to each spe- planning, training, and exercising policies of House on previous, current, and planned cific monitoring task undertaken, including the United States Armed Forces. chemical and biological weapons defense ac- an assessment by the intelligence commu- (B) ACTIONS TO STRENGTHEN DEFENSE CAPA- tivities. The report shall contain for the pre- nity of the national aggregate data provided BILITIES.—The Secretary of Defense shall vious fiscal year and for the next three fiscal by State Parties to the Organization, on a take those actions necessary to ensure that years— country-by-country basis; the United States Armed Forces are capable (i) proposed solutions to each of the defi- (v) an identification of how United States of carrying out required military missions in ciencies in chemical and biological warfare national intelligence means, including na- United States regional contingency plans, defenses identified in the March 1996 report tional technical means and human intel- despite the threat or use of chemical or bio- of the General Accounting Office entitled ligence, is being marshaled together with the logical weapons. In particular, the Secretary ‘‘Chemical and Biological Defense: Emphasis Convention’s verification provisions to mon- of Defense shall ensure that the United Remains Insufficient to Resolve Continuing itor compliance with the Convention; and States Armed Forces are effectively Problems’’, and steps being taken pursuant (vi) the identification of chemical weapons equipped, organized, trained, and exercised to subparagraph (B) to ensure that the Unit- development, production, stockpiling, or use, (including at the large unit and theater ed States Armed Forces are capable of con- within the meanings of those terms under level) to conduct operations in a chemically ducting required military operations to en- the Convention, by subnational groups, in- or biologically contaminated environment sure the success of United States regional cluding terrorist and paramilitary organiza- that are critical to the success of the United contingency plans despite the threat or use tions. States military plans in regional conflicts, of chemical or biological weapons; (G) REPORTS ON RESOURCES FOR MONITOR- including— (ii) identification of the priorities of the ING.—Each report required under subpara- (i) deployment, logistics, and reinforce- executive branch of Government in the de- graph (F) shall include a full and complete ment operations at key ports and airfields; velopment of both active and passive chemi- classified annex submitted solely to the Se- (ii) sustained combat aircraft sortie gen- cal and biological defenses; lect Committee on Intelligence of the Senate eration at critical regional airbases; and (iii) a detailed summary of all budget ac- and to the Permanent Select Committee of (iii) ground force maneuvers of large units tivities associated with the research, devel- the House of Representatives regarding— and divisions. opment, testing, and evaluation of chemical (i) a detailed and specific identification of (C) DISCUSSIONS WITH REGIONAL ALLIES AND and biological defense programs; all United States resources devoted to mon- LIKELY COALITION PARTNERS.— (iv) a detailed summary of expenditures on itoring the Convention, including informa- (i) IN GENERAL.—The Secretaries of Defense research, development, testing, and evalua- tion on all expenditures associated with the and State shall, as a priority matter, initiate tion, and procurement of chemical and bio- monitoring of the Convention; and discussions with key regional allies and like- logical defenses by fiscal years defense pro- (ii) an identification of the priorities of the ly regional coalition partners, including grams, department, and agency; executive branch of Government for the de- those countries where the United States cur- (v) a detailed assessment of current and velopment of new resources relating to de- rently deploys forces, where United States projected vaccine production capabilities tection and monitoring capabilities with re- forces would likely operate during regional and vaccine stocks, including progress in re- spect to chemical and biological weapons, in- conflicts, or which would provide civilians searching and developing a multivalent vac- cluding a description of the steps being necessary to support United States military cine; taken and resources being devoted to operations, to determine what steps are nec- (vi) a detailed assessment of procedures strengthening United States monitoring ca- essary to ensure that allied and coalition and capabilities necessary to protect and de- pabilities. forces and other critical civilians are ade- contaminate infrastructure to reinforce (11) ENHANCEMENTS TO ROBUST CHEMICAL quately equipped and prepared to operate in United States power-projection forces, in- AND BIOLOGICAL DEFENSES.— chemically and biologically contaminated cluding progress in developing a nonaqueous (A) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense environments. chemical decontamination capability; of the Senate that— (ii) REPORTING REQUIREMENT.—Not later (vii) a description of progress made in pro- (i) chemical and biological threats to de- than one year after deposit of the United curing light-weight personal protective gear ployed United States Armed Forces will con- States instrument of ratification, the Sec- and steps being taken to ensure that pro- tinue to grow in regions of concern around retaries of Defense and State shall submit a grammed procurement quantities are suffi- the world, and pose serious threats to United report to the Committees on Foreign Rela- cient to replace expiring battle-dress over- States power projection and forward deploy- tions and Armed Services of the Senate and garments and chemical protective overgar- ment strategies; to the Speaker of the House on the result of ments to maintain required wartime inven- (ii) chemical weapons or biological weap- these discussions, plans for future discus- tory levels; ons use is a potential element of future con- sions, measures agreed to improve the pre- (viii) a description of progress made in de- flicts in regions of concern; paredness of foreign forces and civilians, and veloping long-range standoff detection and S3490 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE April 23, 1997 identification capabilities and other battle- (v) if noncompliance has been determined, employment or official duties or by reason of field surveillance capabilities for biological seek on an urgent basis within the Security any examination or investigation of any re- and chemical weapons, including progress on Council of the United Nations a multilateral turn, report, or record made to or filed with developing a multi-chemical agent detector, imposition of sanctions against the non- the Organization, or any officer or employee unmanned aerial vehicles, and unmanned compliant party for the purposes of bringing thereof, and ground sensors; the noncompliant party into compliance; and (ii) such practice or disclosure has resulted (ix) a description of progress made in de- (vi) in the event that the noncompliance in financial losses or damages to a United veloping and deploying layered theater mis- continues for a period of longer than one States person, sile defenses for deployed United States year after the date of the determination the President shall, within 30 days after the Armed Forces which will provide greater ge- made pursuant to subparagraph (A), prompt- receipt of such information by the executive ographic coverage against current and ex- ly consult with the Senate for the purposes branch of Government, notify the Congress pected ballistic missile threats and will as- of obtaining a resolution of support of con- in writing of such determination. sist in mitigating chemical and biological tinued adherence to the Convention, not- (B) WAIVER OF IMMUNITY FROM JURISDIC- contamination through higher altitude withstanding the changed circumstances af- TION.— intercepts and boost-phase intercepts; fecting the object and purpose of the Conven- (i) CERTIFICATION.—Not later than 270 days (x) an assessment of— tion. after notification of Congress under subpara- (I) the training and readiness of the United (B) CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this section graph (A), the President shall certify to Con- States Armed Forces to operate in a chemi- may be construed to impair or otherwise af- gress that the immunity from jurisdiction of cally or biologically contaminated environ- fect the authority of the Director of Central such foreign person has been waived by the ment; and Intelligence to protect intelligence sources Director-General of the Technical Secretar- (II) actions taken to sustain training and and methods from unauthorized disclosure iat. readiness, including training and readiness pursuant to section 103(c)(5) of the National (ii) WITHHOLDING OF PORTION OF CONTRIBU- carried out at national combat training cen- Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 403–3(c)(5)). TIONS.—If the President is unable to make ters; (C) PRESIDENTIAL DETERMINATIONS.—If the the certification described under clause (i), (xi) a description of progress made in in- President determines that an action other- then 50 percent of the amount of each annual corporating chemical and biological consid- wise required under subparagraph (A) would United States contribution to the regular erations into service and joint exercises as impair or otherwise affect the authority of budget of the Organization that is assessed well as simulations, models, and war games the Director of Central Intelligence to pro- pursuant to paragraph 7 of Article VIII shall and the conclusions drawn from these efforts tect intelligence sources and methods from be withheld from disbursement, in addition about the United States capability to carry unauthorized disclosure, the President shall to any other amounts required to be with- out required missions, including missions report that determination, together with a held from disbursement by any other provi- with coalition partners, in military contin- detailed written explanation of the basis for sion of law, until— gencies; that determination, to the chairmen of the (I) the President makes such certification, (xii) a description of progress made in de- Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and or veloping and implementing service and joint the House Permanent Select Committee on (II) the President certifies to Congress that doctrine for combat and non-combat oper- Intelligence not later than 15 days after the situation has been resolved in a manner ations involving adversaries armed with making such determination. satisfactory to the United States person who chemical or biological weapons, including ef- (14) FINANCING RUSSIAN IMPLEMENTATION.— has suffered the damages due to the disclo- forts to update the range of service and joint The United States understands that, in order sure of United States confidential business doctrine to better address the wide range of to be assured of the Russian commitment to information. military activities, including deployment, a reduction in chemical weapons stockpiles, (C) BREACHES OF CONFIDENTIALITY.— reinforcement, and logistics operations in Russia must maintain a substantial stake in (i) CERTIFICATION.—In the case of any support of combat operations, and for the financing the implementation of both the breach of confidentiality involving both a conduct of such operations in concert with 1990 Bilateral Destruction Agreement and State Party and the Organization, including coalition forces; and the Convention. The United States shall not any officer or employee thereof, the Presi- (xiii) a description of progress made in re- accept any effort by Russia to make deposit dent shall, within 270 days after providing solving issues relating to the protection of of Russia’s instrument of ratification contin- written notification to Congress pursuant to United States population centers from chem- gent upon the United States providing finan- subparagraph (A), certify to Congress that ical and biological attack, including plans cial guarantees to pay for implementation of the Commission described under paragraph for inoculation of populations, consequence commitments by Russia under the 1990 Bilat- 23 of the Confidentiality Annex has been es- management, and a description of progress eral Destruction Agreement or the Conven- tablished to consider the breach. made in developing and deploying effective tion. (ii) WITHHOLDING OF PORTION OF CONTRIBU- cruise missile defenses and a national ballis- (15) ASSISTANCE UNDER ARTICLE X.— TIONS.—If the President is unable to make tic missile defense. (A) IN GENERAL.—Prior to the deposit of the certification described under clause (i), (12) PRIMACY OF THE UNITED STATES CON- the United States instrument of ratification, then 50 percent of the amount of each annual STITUTION.—Nothing in the Convention re- the President shall certify to the Congress United States contribution to the regular quires or authorizes legislation, or other ac- that the United States shall not provide as- budget of the Organization that is assessed tion, by the United States prohibited by the sistance under paragraph 7(a) of Article X. pursuant to paragraph 7 of Article VIII shall Constitution of the United States, as inter- (B) COUNTRIES INELIGIBLE FOR CERTAIN AS- be withheld from disbursement, in addition preted by the United States. SISTANCE UNDER THE FOREIGN ASSISTANCE to any other amounts required to be with- (13) NONCOMPLIANCE.— ACT.—Prior to the deposit of the United held from disbursement by any other provi- (A) IN GENERAL.—If the President deter- States instrument of ratification, the Presi- sion of law, until— mines that persuasive information exists dent shall certify to the Congress that for (I) the President makes such certification, that a State Party to the Convention is any State Party the government of which is or maintaining a chemical weapons production not eligible for assistance under chapter 2 of (II) the President certifies to Congress that or production mobilization capability, is de- part II (relating to military assistance) or the situation has been resolved in a manner veloping new chemical agents, or is in viola- chapter 4 of part II (relating to economic satisfactory to the United States person who tion of the Convention in any other manner support assistance) of the Foreign Assistance has suffered the damages due to the disclo- so as to threaten the national security inter- Act of 1961— sure of United States confidential business ests of the United States, then the President (i) no assistance under paragraph 7(b) of information. shall— Article X will be provided to the State (D) DEFINITIONS.—In this paragraph: (i) consult with the Senate, and promptly Party; and (i) UNITED STATES CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS submit to it, a report detailing the effect of (ii) no assistance under paragraph 7(c) of INFORMATION.—The term ‘‘United States con- such actions; Article X other than medical antidotes and fidential business information’’ means any (ii) seek on an urgent basis a challenge in- treatment will be provided to the State trade secrets or commercial or financial in- spection of the facilities of the relevant Party. formation that is privileged and confiden- party in accordance with the provisions of (16) PROTECTION OF CONFIDENTIAL INFORMA- tial, as described in section 552(b)(4) of title the Convention with the objective of dem- TION.— 5, United States Code, and that is obtained— onstrating to the international community (A) UNAUTHORIZED DISCLOSURE OF UNITED (I) from a United States person; and the act of noncompliance; STATES BUSINESS INFORMATION.—Whenever (II) through the United States National (iii) seek, or encourage, on an urgent basis the President determines that persuasive in- Authority or the conduct of an inspection on a meeting at the highest diplomatic level formation is available indicating that— United States territory under the Conven- with the relevant party with the objective of (i) an officer or employee of the Organiza- tion. bringing the noncompliant party into com- tion has willfully published, divulged, dis- (ii) UNITED STATES PERSON.—The term pliance; closed, or made known in any manner or to ‘‘United States person’’ means any natural (iv) implement prohibitions and sanctions any extent not authorized by the Convention person or any corporation, partnership, or against the relevant party as required by any United States confidential business in- other juridical entity organized under the law; formation coming to him in the course of his laws of the United States. April 23, 1997 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S3491

(iii) UNITED STATES.—The term ‘‘United (i) Article VIII(8) of the Convention allows (23) ADDITIONS TO THE ANNEX ON CHEMI- States’’ means the several States, the Dis- a State Party to vote in the Organization if CALS.— trict of Columbia, and the commonwealths, the State Party is in arrears in the payment (A) PRESIDENTIAL NOTIFICATION.—Not later territories, and possessions of the United of financial contributions and the Organiza- than 10 days after the Director-General of States. tion is satisfied that such nonpayment is due the Technical Secretariat communicates in- (17) CONSTITUTIONAL PREROGATIVES.— to conditions beyond the control of the State formation to all States Parties pursuant to (A) FINDINGS.—The Senate makes the fol- Party. Article XV(5)(a) of a proposal for the addi- lowing findings: (ii) Article I, Section 8 of the United States tion of a chemical or biological substance to (i) Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 of the Constitution vests in Congress the exclusive a schedule of the Annex on Chemicals, the United States Constitution states that the authority to ‘‘pay the Debts’’ of the United President shall notify the Committee on President ‘‘shall have Power, by and with States. Foreign Relations of the Senate of the pro- the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to (iii) Financial contributions to the Organi- posed addition. make Treaties, provided two-thirds of the zation may be appropriated only by Con- (B) PRESIDENTIAL REPORT.—Not later than Senators present concur’’. gress. 60 days after the Director-General of the (ii) At the turn of the century, Senator (B) SENSE OF SENATE.—It is therefore the Technical Secretariat communicates infor- Henry Cabot Lodge took the position that sense of the Senate that— mation of such a proposal pursuant to Arti- the giving of advice and consent to treaties (i) such contributions thus should be con- cle XV(5)(a) or not later than 30 days after a constitutes a stage in negotiation on the sidered, for purposes of Article VIII(8) of the positive recommendation by the Executive Council pursuant to Article XV(5)(c), which- treaties and that Senate amendments or res- Convention, beyond the control of the execu- ever is sooner, the President shall submit to ervations to a treaty are propositions ‘‘of- tive branch of the United States Govern- the Committee on Foreign Relations of the fered at a later stage of the negotiation by ment; and Senate a report, in classified and unclassi- the other part of the American treaty mak- (ii) the United States vote in the Organiza- fied form, detailing the likely impact of the ing power in the only manner in which they tion should not be denied in the event that proposed addition to the Annex on Chemi- could then be offered’’. Congress does not appropriate the full cals. Such report shall include— (iii) The executive branch of Government amount of funds assessed for the United (i) an assessment of the likely impact on has begun a practice of negotiating and sub- States financial contribution to the Organi- United States industry of the proposed addi- mitting to the Senate treaties which include zation. tion of the chemical or biological substance provisions that have the purported effect (21) ON-SITE INSPECTION AGENCY.—It is the to a schedule of the Annex on Chemicals; of— sense of the Senate that the On-Site Inspec- (ii) a description of the likely costs and (I) inhibiting the Senate from attaching tion Agency of the Department of Defense benefits, if any, to United States national se- reservations that the Senate considers nec- should have the authority to provide assist- curity of the proposed addition of such chem- essary in the national interest; or ance in advance of any inspection to any fa- ical or biological substance to a schedule of (II) preventing the Senate from exercising cility in the United States that is subject to the Annex on Chemicals; and its constitutional duty to give its advice and a routine inspection under the Convention, (iii) a detailed assessment of the effect of consent to treaty commitments before ratifi- or to any facility in the United States that the proposed addition on United States obli- cation of the treaties. is the object of a challenge inspection con- gations under the Verification Annex. (iv) During the 85th Congress, and again ducted pursuant to Article IX, if the consent (C) PRESIDENTIAL CONSULTATION.—The during the 102d Congress, the Committee on of the owner or operator of the facility has President shall, after the submission of the Foreign Relations of the Senate made its po- first been obtained. notification required under subparagraph (A) sition on this issue clear when stating that (22) LIMITATION ON THE SCALE OF ASSESS- and prior to any action on the proposal by ‘‘the President’s agreement to such a prohi- MENT.— the Executive Council under Article bition cannot constrain the Senate’s con- (A) LIMITATION ON ANNUAL ASSESSMENT.— XV(5)(c), consult promptly with the Senate stitutional right and obligation to give its Notwithstanding any provision of the Con- as to whether the United States should ob- advice and consent to a treaty subject to any vention, and subject to the requirements of ject to the proposed addition of a chemical reservation it might determine is required subparagraphs (B), (C), and (D) the United or biological substance pursuant to Article by the national interest’’. States shall pay as a total annual assess- XV(5)(c). (B) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense ment of the costs of the Organization pursu- (24) TREATY INTERPRETATION.—The Senate of the Senate that— ant to paragraph 7 of Article VIII not more affirms the applicability to all treaties of (i) the advice and consent given by the than $25,000,000. the Constitutionally based principles of trea- Senate in the past to ratification of treaties (B) RECALCULATION OF LIMITATION.—On ty interpretation set forth in Condition (1) of containing provisions which prohibit amend- January 1, 2000, and at each 3-year interval the resolution of ratification with respect to ments or reservations should not be con- thereafter, the amount specified in subpara- the INF Treaty. For purposes of this declara- strued as a precedent for such provisions in graph (A) is to be recalculated by the Admin- tion, the term ‘‘INF Treaty’’ refers to the future treaties; istrator of General Services, in consultation Treaty Between the United States of Amer- (ii) United States negotiators to a treaty with the Secretary of State, to reflect ica and the Union of Soviet Socialist Repub- should not agree to any provision that has changes in the consumer price index for the lics on the Elimination of Their Intermedi- the effect of inhibiting the Senate from at- immediately preceding 3-year period. ate-Range and Shorter Range Missiles, to- taching reservations or offering amendments (C) ADDITIONAL CONTRIBUTIONS REQUIRING gether with the related memorandum of un- to the treaty; and CONGRESSIONAL APPROVAL.— derstanding and protocols, approved by the (iii) the Senate should not consent in the (i) AUTHORITY.—Notwithstanding subpara- Senate on May 27, 1988. future to any article or other provision of graph (A), the President may furnish addi- (25) FURTHER ARMS REDUCTIONS OBLIGA- any treaty that would prohibit the Senate tional contributions which would otherwise TIONS.—The Senate declares its intention to from giving its advice and consent to ratifi- be prohibited under subparagraph (A) if— consider for approval international agree- cation of the treaty subject to amendment or (I) the President determines and certifies ments that would obligate the United States reservation. in writing to the Speaker of the House of to reduce or limit the Armed Forces or ar- (18) LABORATORY SAMPLE ANALYSIS.—Prior Representatives and the Committee on For- maments of the United States in a militarily to the deposit of the United States instru- eign Relations of the Senate that the failure significant manner only pursuant to the ment of ratification, the President shall cer- to provide such contributions would result in treaty power as set forth in Article II, sec- tify to the Senate that no sample collected the inability of the Organization to conduct tion 2, clause 2 of the Constitution. in the United States pursuant to the Conven- challenge inspections pursuant to Article IX (26) RIOT CONTROL AGENTS.— tion will be transferred for analysis to any or would otherwise jeopardize the national (A) PERMITTED USES.—Prior the the deposit laboratory outside the territory of the Unit- security interests of the United States; and of the United States instrument of ratifica- ed States. (II) Congress enacts a joint resolution ap- tion, the President shall certify to Congress (19) EFFECT ON TERRORISM.—The Senate proving the certification of the President. that the United States is not restricted by finds that— (ii) STATEMENT OF REASONS.—The President the Convention in its use of riot control (A) without regard to whether the Conven- shall transmit with such certification a de- agents, including the use against combatants tion enters into force, terrorists will likely tailed statement setting forth the specific who are parties to a conflict, in any of the view chemical weapons as a means to gain reasons therefor, and the specific uses to following cases: greater publicity and instill widespread fear; which the additional contributions provided (i) UNITED STATES NOT A PARTY.—The con- and to the Organization would be applied. duct of peacetime military operations within (B) the March 1995 Tokyo subway attack (D) ADDITIONAL CONTRIBUTIONS FOR VER- an area of ongoing armed conflict when the by the Aum Shinrikyo would not have been IFICATION.—Notwithstanding subparagraph United States is not a party to the conflict prevented by the Convention. (A), for a period of not more than ten years, (such as recent use of the United States (20) CONSTITUTIONAL SEPARATION OF POW- the President may furnish additional con- Armed Forces in Somalia, Bosnia, and Ru- ERS.— tributions to the Organization for the pur- anda). (A) FINDINGS.—The Senate makes the fol- poses of meeting the costs of verification (ii) CONSENSUAL PEACEKEEPING.—Consen- lowing findings: under Articles IV and V. sual peacekeeping operations when the use of S3492 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE April 23, 1997 force is authorized by the receiving state, in- with particularity the place to be searched abhor chemical weapons just as much cluding operations pursuant to Chapter VI of and the persons or things to be seized; and as proponents do. If this treaty per- the United Nations Charter. (ii) for any routine inspection of a declared forms as it is advertised to perform, I (iii) CHAPTER VII PEACEKEEPING.—Peace- facility under the Convention that is con- think everyone in this body would be keeping operations when force is authorized ducted on an involuntary basis on the terri- by the Securtity Council under Chapter VII tory of the United States, the United States supportive of it. Certainly those who of the United Nations Charter. National Authority first will obtain an ad- oppose the convention support elimi- (B) IMPLEMENTATION.—The President shall ministrative search warrant from a United nating our chemical weapons, which take no measure, and prescribe no rule or States magistrate judge. will happen with or without the Chemi- regulation, which would alter or eliminate (B) DEFINITION.—For purposes of this reso- cal Weapons Convention. Executive Order 11850 of April 8, 1975. lution, the term ‘‘National Authority’’ As has been noted by previous speak- (C) DEFINITION.—In this paragraph, the means the agency or office of the United ers, the United States is committed to term ‘‘riot control agent’’ has the meaning States Government designated by the United eliminating all of our chemical weap- given the term in Article II(7) of the Conven- States pursuant to Article VII(4) of the Con- ons, and I suspect that everyone in this vention. tion. Chamber supports that position. So op- (27) CHEMICAL WEAPONS DESTRUCTION.— The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Prior to the deposit of the United States in- Chair advises that under the previous position is not based on the notion that strument of ratification of the Convention, order the five remaining conditions are we would retain our chemical weapons. Mr. President, I also ask that the the President shall certify to the Congress now part of the resolution and are open RECORD reflect that the Senator from that all of the following conditions are satis- to motions to strike. Iowa, Senator GRASSLEY, was present fied: Mr. KYL addressed the Chair. (A) EXPLORATION OF ALTERNATIVE TECH- and voted ‘‘aye’’ on the last two votes. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who NOLOGIES.—The President has agreed to ex- Mr. President, let me move forward plore alternative technologies for the de- yields time? to this proposition. Last week the Sen- struction of the United States stockpile of Mr. HELMS. I yield to the Senator ate approved Senate Resolution 495, chemical weapons in order to ensure that the from Arizona. which demonstrates our commitment United States has the safest, most effective The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- and environmentally sound plans and pro- to do more. Whether one supports the ator from Arizona. Chemical Weapons Convention or not, grams for meeting its obligations under the Mr. KYL. Mr. President, I ask that Convention for the destruction of chemical this was an important bill to dem- the RECORD reflect my ‘‘aye’’ vote on weapons. onstrate our commitment, both here at the two resolutions just voted, and (B) CONVENTION EXTENDS DESTRUCTION home and abroad, to do more to try to DEADLINE.—The requirement in section 1412 that the RECORD also reflect that Sen- stop the spread of chemical weapons, of Public Law 99–145 (50 U.S.C. 1521) for com- ator SMITH of New Hampshire voted and not doing it alone, as my friend pletion of the destruction of the United ‘‘aye.’’ from Delaware has said, because Sen- States stockpile of chemical weapons by De- Mr. WARNER addressed the Chair. ate Resolution 495 contains several pro- cember 31, 2004, will be superseded upon the The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who date the Convention enters into force with visions that call for additional multi- yields time? lateral action on the part of the United respect to the United States by the deadline Mr. HELMS. I yield 10 seconds. required by the Convention of April 29, 2007. States. It requires the President, for Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I wish (C) AUTHORITY TO EMPLOY A DIFFERENT DE- example, to use his best efforts to keep STRUCTION TECHNOLOGY.—The requirement in the RECORD to reflect that the Senator the Australia Group intact and to work Article III(1)(a)(v) of the Convention for a from Virginia was on the floor present against any weakening of the Australia declaration by each State Party not later and voting ‘‘aye’’ on the resolution. Group restrictions on trade in chemi- than 30 days after the date the Convention Mr. KYL. Mr. President, may I fur- enters into force with respect to that Party, cals; to work with Russia to ensure ther ask that the RECORD reflect that that it conforms to its obligations on general plans of the State Party for de- the Senator from Florida, Senator struction of its chemical weapons does not under the bilateral destruction agree- MACK, was present and voting ‘‘aye’’; preclude in any way the United States from ment; for the President to impose sanc- deciding in the future to employ a tech- and that Senator KEMPTHORNE, Senator tions on countries that violate inter- nology for the destruction of chemical weap- ABRAHAM, Senator ROBERTS, and Sen- national law with respect to chemical ons different than that declared under that ator HUTCHINSON also voted ‘‘aye.’’ weapons. Article. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who So Senate Resolution 495 was not a (D) PROCEDURES FOR EXTENSION OF DEAD- yields time? go-it-alone resolution. Quite to the LINE .—The President will consult with Con- PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR gress on whether to submit a request to the contrary. Though it did close some Executive Council of the Organization for an Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, will the loopholes in American law, it also extension of the deadline for the destruction Senator yield 10 seconds for a unani- reached out in various specific ways to of chemical weapons under the Convention, mous-consent request regarding a staff enable us to deal with the problem of as provided under part IV(A) of the Annex on member? the spread of chemical weapons in Implementation and Verification to the Con- Mr. President, I ask unanimous con- more practical and specific ways than vention, if, as a result of the program of al- sent that Greg Suchan, a fellow on the the Chemical Weapons Convention it- ternative technologies for the destruction of staff of Senator MCCAIN, be granted the self does. chemical munitions carried out under sec- privilege of the floor during the discus- tion 8065 of the Department of Defense Ap- We have just had a vote on the reso- propriations Act, 1997 (as contained in Public sion of the Chemical Weapons Conven- lution of ratification as presented by Law 104–208), the President determines that tion. Senator HELMS, the resolution that is alternatives to the incineration of chemical The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without currently before us. Many of us voted weapons are available that are safer and objection, it is so ordered. for that resolution, to make the point more environmentally sound but whose use Mr. BIDEN. I thank the Chair. that we favor the Chemical Weapons would preclude the United States from meet- Mr. KYL addressed the Chair. Convention so long as it has certain ing the deadlines of the Convention. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- protections built into it. I think it (28) CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTION AGAINST ator from Arizona is recognized. should also be clear that the opposition UNREASONABLE SEARCH AND SEIZURE.— (A) IN GENERAL.—In order to protect Unit- Mr. KYL. Mr. President, we are now to the Chemical Weapons convention is ed States citizens against unreasonable going to commence additional debate not based on politics. searches and seizures, prior to the deposit of on the Chemical Weapons Convention. I As one of my colleagues said, there the United States instrument of ratification, would like to begin with some general will be criticism of President Clinton. I the President shall certify to Congress observations about treaties in general don’t think you will hear criticism of that— and about this treaty in particular. President Clinton. The opposition to (i) for any challenge inspection conducted Mr. President, I want to begin by this treaty is not based on politics. In- on the territory of the United States pursu- making what should be an obvious deed, it is not an easy treaty to oppose. ant to Article IX, where consent has been withheld, the United States National Au- point. But in view of some of the rhet- I think those who oppose it must be thority will first obtain a criminal search oric, I think it is important to reit- recognized as doing so because of a warrant based upon probable cause, sup- erate it; that is, that the opponents of firm principle and commitment rather ported by oath or affirmation, and describing the Chemical Weapons Convention than anything political. April 23, 1997 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S3493 Another general point I would like to Korea, or many of the other rogue Jeane Kirkpatrick and Richard Perle, make is this. The Senate has a con- states throughout the world. I think it Gen. P.X. Kelley, and Freddie Clay— stitutional obligation to independently is countries like Iran that want the when people like this say that they are scrutinize treaties. It has been said benefits of the CWC and the lifting of opposed to the treaty, it ought to be that treaties are forever. Most of the the trade restrictions that we cur- clear that there are reasonable argu- treaties that have been ratified by the rently have with Iran, secure in the ments on both sides and that neither U.S. Senate are still in force—treaties knowledge that it can avoid detection side should claim that all right and that are many, many, many years old, and/or any punishment that might fol- truth and justice are on their side. some undoubtedly far beyond this low that. Treaties generally do not Important columnists have also time. It is like amending the Constitu- modify the behavior of states. The law- weighed in to this and find themselves tion. It requires a two-thirds vote. It abiding will abide, and those that in- on both sides of the issue. requires a great deal of thought, there- tend to cheat will either cheat or not That is why I am troubled by the slo- fore, on the part of the Senate. join at all. gan of some people in the administra- Mr. President, we are not a rubber That is why these multilateral trea- tion—and, in particular, I will cite the stamp. No one should feel that they ties, unlike some of the bilateral trea- Secretary of State, who has said on na- have to support this treaty just be- ties that we entered into earlier, are tional television that one of the rea- cause it has been proposed. Treaties more difficult to make work. Fre- sons to vote for this treaty is that it are no substitute for sensible action. quently what they do is complicate di- has ‘‘Made in America’’ written all They are in many respects inherently plomacy and encourage dishonesty. We over it. Mr. President, that is not a limited in their value, especially when know that there are numerous exam- substitute for reasoned argument. It is the nations with whom they are en- ples of violations of existing treaties a slogan. It misrepresents the Reagan tered into are not committed to the and previous treaties. But it was un- administration’s position on the chem- principles of the treaty. There are ex- comfortable for us to bring those viola- ical weapons treaty, which, by the way, amples in past history that dem- tions to light because, frankly, we was very much different than the trea- onstrate this. thought that we had bigger fish to fry. ty that is before the Senate today. The Kellogg-Briand Pact of 1928, We had more important matters with I can point out the fact that there which outlawed war, was obviously those states than the violation of a have been other treaties proposed to something that everyone felt good particular treaty. As a result, paradox- the U.S. Senate that also had ‘‘Made in about supporting. But the actions ically it was more difficult to enforce America’’ written all over them—like didn’t follow the words, and we know these conditions once the treaty went the League of Nations, which this Sen- what happened. into effect than it was before, because ate in its judgment decided not to Also, this morning one of my col- once the treaty went into effect, in rubberstamp but to reject. leagues quoted Will Rogers, who said, order to upset the applecart, we have There were cries at the time similar ‘‘We have never lost a war or won a to find violations. We take it to the to the cries you hear today that it treaty.’’ While that has a certain ring body that is going to find a violation would isolate America; that it would of truth to it, I don’t think anyone and sanction, and we decide that would hurt our business; that we would be the would suggest that, therefore, all trea- be diplomatically difficult because we laughingstock of the world; that, after ties are bad. As a matter of fact, we want to accomplish some greater pur- all, President Wilson was the one who have supported very specific treaties pose with the state that is in violation. created this treaty and how could we that we think have done some good— So we just forget the whole thing. vote against it. Moreover, we would be arms control treaties like the INF What that does is literally put into law the pariah in the world if we voted Treaty, the START I Treaty, and the the violations that are occurring cur- against the League of Nations. But in START II Treaty. As a matter of fact, rently. So they can complicate diplo- 1919, this body exercised its judgment, I was asked to support the START II macy and encourage dishonesty. its constitutional prerogative and it Treaty on the grounds that Russia The bottom line about this general declined to allow the United States to would not ratify the START II Treaty discussion is this: Sometimes treaties participate. And I do not think today until the United States did. So we did. can be very useful and sometimes not. there are very many people who believe We support the START II Treaty. It We have an obligation to make that this country made a mistake by wait- was ratified here. And 2 years later, the distinction—not just to take the word ing and creating instead the United Na- Russians still have not ratified the that, if a treaty has been proposed, we tions. START II Treaty. So I agree with my have an obligation to support it. That We, I think, should be able to go for- colleagues who say that some treaties is not the job of the U.S. Senate. Trea- ward. I think it takes more courage can be useful. I also make the point ties are not an excuse to do that which sometimes to go forward with a posi- that one should not rely strictly on is difficult. It is like making a New tion that acknowledges a mistake than treaties. Year’s resolution rather than begin- it does to simply blindly go forward I also am troubled by the proposition ning to diet. Sometimes we have to and perhaps have in the back of your that we somehow feel that we could do have the courage to begin the diet mind the idea that you have made a internationally that which we could rather than just relying on a New mistake but it would not look good if never do domestically. I don’t think Year’s resolution. you backed out at this time. any of us would contend, for example, Mr. President, a second set of general That is another one of the arguments that we think we can solve the problem comments: being made by the opponents; we would of crime by going to the criminals in Reasonable people can differ over the be embarrassed internationally if we our neighborhoods and making a treaty Chemical Weapons Convention. We backed out of the treaty at this point with them to stop committing crime. have a series of former governmental or caused part of it to be renegotiated. Instead, we have police forces, we have officials on both sides of this issue. We I submit that knowing we have made a laws, we have specific punishments, we have former Secretaries of Defense, mistake at least with regard to articles have a court system, and we put people ambassadors, generals, columnists—all X and XI in this treaty, we should have in prison when they violate those laws. of whom have come out very publicly the courage to fix articles X and XI be- In other words, we take specific action against the treaty. There is undoubt- fore our resolution of ratification is de- to deal with the problem. We don’t rely edly an equal number who have come posited at The Hague. upon the written word of someone who out for the chemical weapons treaty. I Now another general comment, Mr. may be unreliable. Yet, in the inter- hope we can begin this debate with the President. No one has a monopoly on national forum that seems to be very proposition that reasonable people can morality. Ours is a disagreement about much in vogue. differ on this very important matter. means, not about ends. I want to make I don’t think there is any reason that Frankly, when former Secretaries of this point very clear because some peo- we can believe that a treaty with Iran, State—like Dick Cheney, Casper Wein- ple, perhaps a little overzealous to for example, is going to change its be- berger, Don Rumsfeld, James Schles- push this treaty, have inferred that havior, or Iraq, or Libya, or North inger; former Defense officials, such as those who vote against it somehow S3494 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE April 23, 1997 support the use of chemical weapons. I strictions in place now. That is the Now, another one of the selling watched my grandfather die, Mr. Presi- best way to prevent the spread of these points of this treaty, according to its dent, from emphysema acquired as a chemicals. Unfortunately, as an incen- proponents, is, well, it is better than result of his being gassed in World War tive to get countries to join the chemi- nothing. In other words, granted, it I in Europe. Therefore, I take a back cal weapons treaty, articles X and XI does not cover a lot of the countries we seat to no one in expressing my abhor- call into question the existence of wished it covered and it is not very rence for these despicable weapons and those conditions and in fact in our view verifiable and there are not any par- why I fully support the United States require that the states remove those ticular sanctions in the treaty, but at eliminating our chemical weapons and restrictions and trade with the coun- least it is better than nothing. leading the world in that regard. We tries that are parties to the treaty. Our response to that is essentially are the only country in the world with Second, the treaty is not verifiable. twofold. First of all, it is very costly chemical weapons that has declared we Now, proponents have said, well, noth- both in terms of money and potential will eliminate all of our stocks of those ing is 100-percent verifiable. That is a constitutional restrictions and, second, weapons. false standard, Mr. President. Nobody there are some other very significant So I hope no one tries to lecture me is claiming that it should be 100-per- reasons why it is not better than noth- about the evils of poison gas and how cent verifiable. The question is wheth- ing. the only way to deal with that is er it is effectively verifiable. And on In terms of cost, we know that the through this Chemical Weapons Con- that there is virtually unanimous cost to the Government is going to be vention. We have been the moral leader agreement that, no, it is not effectively $150 million to $200 million annually. of the world by imposing trade restric- verifiable. I read to you a recently un- Businesses are going to have to pay be- tions on countries like Iran, for exam- classified national intelligence esti- tween $200,000 and $500,000 for inspec- ple, restrictions that will probably mate conclusion published originally tions. Just to fill out the forms, and have to be lifted as a result of this in August of 1993 which stated: there are thousands of businesses in treaty because of articles X and XI. So The capability of the intelligence commu- this country that will have to fill out nity to monitor compliance with the CWC is the forms, it is going to be a $50,000 to I believe that insisting on renegoti- severely limited and likely to remain so for ation of articles X and XI would con- the rest of the decade. The key provision of $70,000 proposition, and, of course, un- firm our moral position. Our nego- the monitoring regime, challenge inspec- told amounts lost in confidential busi- tiators tried but failed to win key con- tions at undeclared sites, can be thwarted by ness information which can result as a cessions on those provisions. In the fu- a nation determined to preserve a small se- result of the industrial espionage that ture, they will be strengthened by the cret program using the delays and managed most people believe will result from knowledge that the Senate will not go access rules allowed by the convention. the inspections under this treaty. along with such halfway measures with And there are a variety of other Second, we mentioned the constitu- a defective treaty. statements I could read, including tional issues. There has been an at- So, Mr. President, my point here is statements of the former Director of tempt to fix about half of the constitu- this. It matters how we make a moral the CIA, all of which confirm the fact tional issues. One deals with the fourth statement, and simply ballyhooing a that this is not a verifiable treaty. amendment, and there has been an treaty that everyone knows is flawed Nor is the treaty enforceable. Even if amendment to say a search warrant you were to find a violation and you does not enhance our moral stature. would be required. The problem with Now to some specific comments. brought it to the bodies that are sup- that is that it would probably be found Those of us who have reservations posed to run this treaty, you would to be in violation of the treaty if a con- about the treaty have said that it fails have to have a three-quarter vote, and stitutional requirement were imposed there is no sanction in place. Once they in its key objectives, that if it met to prevent the treaty from operating as found a violation, they would go to the these objectives we would support it, it was written. country and say, would you please stop that our opposition is based on two So if we actually go ahead with a violating. If the country continued to simple points. It fails to meet the ob- protection from fourth amendment ignore them, although the likelihood is searches and seizures, we may very jectives and it does more harm than the country would say, well, sure, we well be found in violation of the treaty. good. would be happy to, and eventually hide In what way does it fail to meet its On the other hand, those responsible the material in such a way that you objectives. It was proposed as a global for making such a decision may decide could not find a violation in the future, and verifiable and enforceable treaty. but assuming the violation continued that we can have such a constitutional Unfortunately, it is none of those. and you continue to prove that, what is protection in which case I think we can First, it is not global. It does not cover the sanction? There is none. Where do count on all of the other nations that the key countries and the key chemi- you go? The United Nations, the Gen- want to avoid detection doing the same cals that are currently suspected of eral Assembly. thing and, of course, as a nation that being the problems. Nine of the 14 Mr. President, that is not a place lives under the rule of law we will countries suspected of possessing where at least the United States has abide by it in a proper way. And I think chemical weapons have not even signed been treated very kindly in the past. we can count on countries like Iran or this treaty. These countries include And if you have to go all the way to China or Cuba, for example, to use that Libya, Iraq, Syria, North Korea, Egypt, the Security Council, Russia, China, as an excuse not to allow the kind of Sudan, Serbia, South Korea, and Tai- other states have a veto. So it is un- inspections that would result in detec- wan. So many of the countries in the likely that significant punishment tion. world that possess the chemicals are would be meted out. As a matter of The other part of the Constitution, not signatories. They are not going to fact, the evidence of that probably the fifth amendment, presents a special bind themselves to it. And there is most clearly is the case of Iraq which problem that nobody has figured out nothing we can do in terms of verifica- admittedly—I should not say admit- how to fix. The fifth amendment pro- tion or inspection or anything else that tedly. They denied it, but after inspec- vides that if there is a taking by the is going to deal with it. The best way tion it was confirmed that chemical Government of property one is entitled to deal with those countries is to do weapons were used against both Iran to be paid. The problem is that when what we are currently doing, which is and against the Kurdish population of the U.S. Government imposes this re- to maintain and enforce the restric- Iraq itself and yet the United Nations, gime on American businesses and indi- tions of the Australia Group. the peace-loving nations of the world viduals, it has not yet made the com- Now, I spoke of that before. What is were incapable of mustering the cour- mitment to pay them. My own guess is it? It is a group of 29 countries, includ- age to even name Iraq in a meaningless that I would have a right to sue and ing the United States, that have agreed resolution about the use of these weap- the U.S. Government would have to among themselves not to trade these ons. So it does not seem likely to me pay but there is no provision for that. chemicals to countries that they think that the United Nations would muster You cannot sue under the Federal Tort might want to develop chemical weap- the courage to impose any kind of par- Claim Act, and so we would have to ons with them. And we have these re- ticular sanction. somehow construct an ability to sue April 23, 1997 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S3495 the U.S. Government and provide for discuss that in more detail later. They acquitted. And when they are acquitted the unlimited liability that would re- were put into the treaty at a time we have then diminished our oppor- sult from such an undertaking. So that when it seemed like a good idea. Now it tunity to negotiate with them, to tell has not been dealt with either. does not seem like such a good idea. them to stop selling chemicals, for ex- The bottom line is the constitutional The administration and everybody else ample, to Iran or other countries we do issues remain very much up in the air. acknowledges we have a problem here. not want to have them. In that respect, Now, those are some of the costs. I The problem is, everybody is embar- again, the treaty reduces our diplo- think, however, the biggest costs are rassed to go back and change it. The matic options. It puts us into a box. It the following two. The mere fact that administration says, ‘‘Well, we nego- makes it more difficult to deal with this treaty has been proposed has tiated the best deal we could.’’ We say, these kinds of violations and in that caused many to decide that we do not ‘‘Because it is flawed, let us go back respect again it is not better than have to worry as much about defending and take those two sections out.’’ But nothing, it is worse than doing noth- our troops. I know the President has the administration does not want to do ing. made a big matter out of saying that that. Not taking them out is going to What are some of the administra- this treaty would help to protect our result in a proliferation of chemical tion’s claims? First of all, they have troops. Well, I think he is very wrong weapons and technology, not a restric- made the astonishing claim that fail- and his own administration officials tion of it. Again, I will get into that in ure to ratify the treaty would mean verify this because for the last 2 years more detail later. that we are aligned with the pariah his representatives have come to the The point I want to make here is states of Iraq and Libya because Iraq Congress and based on the fact that the that as long as this treaty has articles and Libya are not going to sign or rat- United States signed this treaty and X and XI in it, it is going to be worse ify this treaty. I hope the Secretary of they presumed we would ratify it, this than nothing because it is going to re- State and the President of the United administration has called for reduc- sult in the proliferation of chemicals States could discriminate a little bet- tions in spending on defensive meas- rather than a restriction. I will just ter than that. I could make the same ures for our troops. quote one sentence that a letter that argument to them. If we sign the trea- How can a President who tries to sell former Defense Secretary, Dick Cheney ty, we are going to be in with a bunch the treaty on the basis that it will be wrote in this regard. He said, ‘‘In my of other pariah states. Do they think it good for our troops, that it will protect judgment, the treaty’s article X and XI is any better to be with Iran or Cuba? them, come before the Congress not amount to a formula for greatly accel- These are states that have signed the once but twice and call for a reduction erating the proliferation of chemical treaty and presumably will ratify it. in funding to provide defenses for our warfare capabilities around the globe.’’ Obviously, that is not an argument troops? Two years ago, $850 million. So, in this second significant respect, that gets you anywhere. But it is the Fortunately, we restored it. What was the treaty makes the situation worse kind of simplistic, superficial argu- the reason? The reason expressly was than it was before. ment that this administration is using because this treaty is going to enter Finally, as I made a point to mention to sell the treaty. It is an affront to into force and we will be a part of it, as before, it is going to significantly re- the intelligence of the Senate. As I if the treaty were going to make the duce our diplomatic options. Claiming said, I hope the President and Sec- threat go away. violations will take back seat to more retary of State can make better dis- And this year General Shalikashvili pressing diplomatic considerations. We tinctions than that. let us cut another $1.5 billion over 5 have seen this in a variety of situa- I also note it is a bit meaningless at years out of this part of the defense tions. When the Russians were in viola- this point to join the treaty, though 67 budget, this despite the fact that the tion of the ABM Treaty and had a other nations have joined it, because General Accounting Office in a very radar at a place called Krasnoyarsk, we they do not have chemical weapons. critical report following the Persian were in delicate negotiations with The countries that have chemical Gulf war, updated just last year, has them in a variety of other things and weapons have not joined it, and many found that our defenses are in a very therefore it was ‘‘see no evil,’’ basi- of them are not going to. About 99 per- serious state of disrepair; that we are cally. ‘‘We are really not all that sure cent of the world’s chemical weapons, not adequately prepared; that we have they violated the treaty,’’ when in fact according to open source material, are not provided our soldiers, our marines, our intelligence community knew full held by three countries, none of whom our fighting people who are going to be well they had. And after the Soviet have joined the treaty: The United confronting chemical or biological war- Union broke up, its leaders said, ‘‘Sure States, Russia, and China. We have a fare the kind of training, the kind of we were in violation.’’ The question is, bilateral destruction agreement with equipment, the kind of antidotes, the why didn’t we do anything about it? Russia, in which we are trying to get kind of protection they deserve. So you Well, because we did not want to upset them to destroy their chemical weap- have GAO in a very current finding the diplomatic applecart. ons—and they decided they are not that we are not doing enough for our Think about China with MFN. Are we going to follow through with that, ap- troops, the administration trying to going to upset the diplomatic apple- parently. So, what makes us think that cut the funding to do more, and the cart? You see, today we do not have to we are going to do any good by joining President saying that the chemical because there is no treaty. Once a trea- the treaty, when about 80 percent-plus weapons treaty will solve the problem. ty is in place we have an obligation. If of the chemicals in China and Russia That is what I had reference to when we know there are violations—perhaps, would be outside the purview of the I said that treaties can make you feel for example, with China—we would treaty? good, like you have solved a problem, have an obligation to send inspectors The next comment made is, ‘‘No trea- but when it comes to the lives of Amer- over there and ask them to see what ty is 100 percent verifiable.’’ I think I ican soldiers, we will not have done they could find. One of two things will dealt with that before. Nobody is enough to protect them. And that is happen. Either they are going to con- claiming it needs to be 100-percent ver- why we should not be lulled into a firm there are violations—unlikely, in ifiable, but when we say this treaty is sense of false security by signing a which case we are then going to have not adequately verifiable or effectively piece of paper that I do not think peo- to do something about it. More likely, verifiable, their comeback is, ‘‘Well, no ple would loan money on if they want- they will come back and say, ‘‘Well, we treaty is 100 percent.’’ That is not the ed to get it back, frankly. So, this trea- couldn’t prove it.’’ issue. The issue is whether it is effec- ty does damage. It is worse than noth- As a result, China or whoever is tively verifiable, and unfortunately no ing. doing the violating will have the Good one claims that this treaty is effec- What is another example? You have Housekeeping stamp of approval. We tively verifiable. heard me talk about articles X and XI. set up this regime. You try to find peo- No one, for example, has said that You are going to hear a lot about that, ple guilty. But the burden is so dif- they have high confidence that this because articles X and XI turn out not ficult you are not going to find people treaty will timely detect significant to be such a good idea. I am going to guilty. They are going to, in effect, be violations. As a matter of fact, one of S3496 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE April 23, 1997 the strong supporters of the treaty, a were not adopted by the United States. cannot share that information with friend and someone who has served this First, I would say that this is no reason anybody else. It is secret. So the Unit- country well, and we have a difference for the United States to enter into a ed States, not being a party to the in- of opinion about the treaty, Ron treaty, simply to enhance the financial spection, does not have the informa- Adelman, said in an op-ed piece he balance sheets of American companies. tion, and cannot have it, under the wrote on February 20, ‘‘Granted, the We are all for doing that, we are all for terms of the treaty. So there is only treaty is virtually unverifiable and helping American businesses do well, one way that we would gain more in- granted it doesn’t seem right for the but one does not enter into a treaty for formation under the terms of the trea- Senate to ratify an unverifiable trea- that purpose. I think there should be a ty and that is by cheating, by violating ty. . .’’ he went on to say: ‘‘however, I question about whether our chemical the treaty, by somehow trying to steal think we are still better off by going companies ought to be selling these the information, by somehow trying to ahead.’’ kinds of chemicals to countries like turn one of those inspectors to be an My point is that even treaty pro- Iran and Cuba and China in any event, agent for us in violation of the treaty ponents acknowledge it is not verifi- because that is the new market that terms. That is how we would get more able, so let us not get into a debate as will open up. These are countries that information—not legally, under the to whether it has to be 100-percent ver- have signed the treaty, not yet rati- treaty. ifiable or not. It is not effectively veri- fied. Presumably they will ratify it at What would we do if we found some- fiable. That is the point. some point so there will be an added body cheating? Let us assume that we I discussed a bit ago the argument market for us to sell our chemicals. find that Russia or China has chemical that the CWC will protect American The other added market is that if the weapons, is not destroying them—in troops and prevent a terrorist attack. Australia Group restrictions come off, other words, does possess in violation No one who has spoken to this from an then our companies would not be re- of this treaty. Would we insist on sanc- intelligence point of view can credibly stricted by the Australia Group limita- tions? How about today? Take the case make the claim that this treaty will, tions. In both cases they would be able of China. Would we insist on sanctions? in any way, shape or form, reduce the to sell more chemicals. I would argue We shake in our boots when the Presi- threat of terrorism. Let me repeat that that is not necessarily a good dent of Taiwan comes over, attends his that. Our intelligence community is thing, even though it might enhance 25th class reunion at Cornell, and the unwilling to say that this treaty would their balance sheets. Chinese Government threatens to lob stop terrorist attacks. And even one of And to the argument that somehow missiles into Los Angeles and steams the much vaunted agreements that was there will be a downside to them, that in the Straits of Taiwan and sends mis- entered into between our friends on the they will actually lose money, it is an siles over Taiwan. Are we going to im- other side of the aisle and Senator argument that does not persuade me. pose sanctions on China because of a HELMS recognizes the fact that the Because folks should know that the finding that they have maintained a CWC is not effective to deal with the only limitation that can be imposed on chemical weapons stock? Are we going problem of terrorism. Let me quote one companies in countries that do not to have to prove to this international of the recently unclassified assess- sign the treaty is with respect to so- body, this executive council, that they ments of our intelligence agency, the called schedule 1 and schedule 2 chemi- are in violation? And at what cost to Central Intelligence Agency: cals. These are the chemicals of chemi- our relations? In the case of Aum Shinrikyo [this is the cal warfare, of chemical weapons and The problem is, with the treaty you cult in Japan that gassed Japanese citizens] their precursors, by definition, made in can no longer ignore violations. You ei- the Chemical Weapons Convention would not noncommercial quantities. So the only have hindered the cult from procuring the ther object or it ends up in a white- needed chemical compounds needed in the limitation that could ever be imposed wash. Either way it creates significant production of sarin. Further, the Aum would upon American companies, if it ever problems. have escaped the requirement for an end-use were, would be on such a small amount There is a final argument that has certification because it purchased the chemi- of chemicals that, even by their own been made recently and it mystifies me cals within Japan. definition it would constitute only a because it doesn’t go anywhere but The point is, here, that chemicals are fraction of 1 percent of the chemicals they have been making it, so I will try so easily secreted, chemical weapons that are traded. We should pass the to respond. Proponents say we are get- are so easily made in small, confined treaty for that? I do not think so. ting rid of our weapons, and therefore spaces, that it is essentially impossible Another argument is that at least we the chemical weapon convention will to find all of them. And a terrorist will get more intelligence if we are a force others to do so, too. It is abso- group, in a room the size of a large party to the treaty. This is the argu- lutely true the United States is getting closet, in Japan, was able to make the ment that says granted it may not rid of our weapons. We are committed sarin gas that they used. This Chemi- solve all the problems but it is better to doing that. We do not need the cal Weapons Convention has no capa- to be inside than outside. I think this Chemical Weapons Convention to prove bility to deal with that. I will say it particular argument deserves a little to the world that we are the moral this way: It is a fraud on the American bit of attention. leader of the world. We have said we people to suggest that we have to adopt I serve on the Senate Intelligence are getting rid of ours. Nobody else this treaty in order to do away with Committee. I know how this works. I has, but we have. terrorist use of chemical weapons. It think I should explain a little bit about So you don’t need the Chemical will not be effective for that purpose. It it. The claim is not true. Our intel- Weapons Convention. I challenge my may have some other beneficial effects, ligence agencies, of course, always are friends who propose the treaty, in what but no one should contend that it is looking for new opportunities to get in- way will the chemical weapons treaty going to help with regard to terrorism. formation, but it is not correct to say make the other countries get rid of The same thing, as I said, is true that the chemical weapons treaty pro- theirs? That is the purpose, that is the with regard to the defense of our vides us that mechanism. The chemical goal, but there is no effective mecha- troops. If this administration were ac- weapons treaty says that if you want nism to make it happen, and there is tually pursuing a strong defensive ca- to inspect another country for a sus- no intelligence estimate or assessment pability for our troops, that would be pected violation, you bring the matter to that effect, Mr. President. one thing, but it is not. As a result, I to the council in charge of the treaty, We are going to have an opportunity think it is not an appropriate argu- and if it decides to go forward, it will tomorrow to go into classified session ment for this administration to base appoint three inspectors—but it cannot and hear just what our intelligence the ratification of the treaty on. be somebody from your country. So, it community has to say about the chem- Another argument of the administra- would be somebody from three other ical weapons programs of other nations tion is that this is important to pro- countries that go do the inspection. and about what we think they are tect the jobs in the chemical industry They come back and they deposit their going to be doing in the future, and I and that there would be some losses to findings with this body, this executive urge my colleagues to attend that ses- our chemical companies if the treaty council. And by the treaty terms they sion. April 23, 1997 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S3497 (Ms. COLLINS assumed the chair.) knowledge some of these constitutional areas in which the Bush and Reagan Mr. KYL. Finally, Madam President, protections. We could do without them, administrations had been very clear, there has been much made of the fact because they are in the Constitution and the Clinton administration that in the negotiations over this trea- anyway, but at least it was handy to changed policy, another example of a ty, numerous improvements were made get the administration to acknowledge situation where this is not the same and, therefore, we should remove our that they existed. treaty that the Bush and Reagan ad- objections and go along with the trea- Second, there are two conditions that ministrations had in mind. They al- ty. merely allow the Congress to enact ap- ways thought you could use tear gas in First of all, I want to set the stage. propriations or approve reprogram- certain situations; for example, to res- Last fall when the treaty came before ming. As every Senator knows, we have cue a downed pilot, to deal with a situ- the Senate, the statement was that we that right. We are the body, along with ation where you had civilians sur- couldn’t touch it, that we couldn’t ne- the House, that enacts appropriations rounding an American hostage, for ex- gotiate anything, we had to use the or approves reprogramming. So that ample. Rather than having to shoot resolution that came out of the com- was essentially meaningless, though those people, we say it makes sense to mittee and there were no changes that handy to have the administration ac- use tear gas to disperse the crowd and were possible; ‘‘You can’t change the knowledge. rescue the American. This administra- treaty; we’re not interested in nego- There are four conditions that call tion said, no, we don’t interpret the tiating any terms.’’ for reports. Whenever you see a call for treaty as allowing that. Even people It turned out there was not sufficient a report, Madam President, you know who support the treaty, like Gen. Brent support for the treaty and, therefore, that that means we tried to reach Scowcroft, said, that’s crazy, that has the administration had it pulled. Inter- agreement on something, we couldn’t, to be changed. It took a long time to estingly enough, last night I saw a so we said, ‘‘By golly, we’ll have a get the administration to finally agree news program, the Jim Lehrer News study on it, we’ll have a report.’’ And in concept to a change. I am still not Hour, in which it was misstated that that is what this calls for. There are persuaded the language does it, but Senator Dole, the previous majority seven conditions that call for Presi- let’s assume in good faith they have leader, asked the treaty to be with- dential certifications, all of which he really agreed to a change in this pol- drawn. He did not ask the treaty to be can make today. These were not con- icy. What that will mean is that, at least in that limited kind of situation, withdrawn. He was not even in the Sen- cessions by the administration. They we will be able to use tear gas. That is ate at the time. He wrote a letter in were able to agree to these because a positive development, but in light of opposition to the treaty, but he did not these are certifications they can cur- the final points that I want to make ask it be withdrawn. He just said he rently make. So one should not brag here, it is not reason to change from wouldn’t vote for it if it were still in about those. supporting a treaty that is not global, the Senate. It was withdrawn by the Four additional conditions are a re- not verifiable, not effective, does more administration, by the Clinton admin- statement of current U.S. policy. harm than good. That change is helpful istration, not by anyone here in the Again, we thought these were good to but not dispositive. Senate. have on paper in connection with the What are the five unresolved issues? Notwithstanding the fact that the treaty so there would be no mistake The way this treaty comes before the administration took the position that about what U.S. policy was. It isn’t Senate, it is the Helms resolution of nothing could change, once the treaty new, it isn’t new policy, it isn’t a com- ratification. In other words, it is a res- was found not to have adequate sup- promise, it isn’t a negotiated settle- olution wrapped around the treaty. It port, the administration began to ment; this is just a restatement in the has 28 agreed-upon items, and then, in change its tune, and little by little, resolution of ratification about exist- addition, there are 5 that are not they began to sit down and talk to ing U.S. policy. One of the conditions agreed upon. Those are the items that those who had objections. Over many doesn’t take effect until 1998. constitute the Helms resolution of rati- months, various concessions were made I conclude, then, with the two that fication. To approve the treaty, we will which marginally improved the situa- have some meaning. One deals with vote on the resolution of ratification. tion. Now, they are not concessions search and seizures under the fourth The proponents of the treaty have the with respect to the treaty itself be- amendment, and I discussed that brief- right under the rule here to seriatim cause it can’t be changed, but there are ly a moment ago. The other deals with move to strike each of these five re- some things which at least help to clar- the subject of riot control agents. We maining conditions. If they are all ify how the United States is going to do not know what the courts will do stricken, then we will end up voting for proceed, and had it not been for the with either of these two. the Helms resolution of ratification considerable efforts of the chairman of I spoke to the issue of the fourth sans these five protections. If four of the Foreign Relations Committee, amendment. The resolution includes a them are stricken, we will have one, these changes would not have been statement that we will require search and so forth. made. So while they were critical of warrants, either administrative war- What are these five unresolved is- the chairman for his opposition to the rants or criminal warrants in the ap- sues? These are the core of the dispute. treaty, it turns out that now they are propriate case. That may or may not This is really what it is all about. And bragging about the changes that he be effective under the treaty. It may be this is what I will spend the rest of my sought to have made, and I think that declared in violation of the treaty. If time on. is a very important point, Madam not, other countries are going to be The first issue says the country that President. Let me just repeat it. While able to do the same thing. While the has the most chemical weapons in the initially deriding the concerns of the United States will assiduously adhere world, Russia, is not a party to the chairman of the committee, they are to the law and to the Constitution, my treaty. It has not complied with var- now bragging about the changes that guess is if other States are able to do ious agreements that we have concern- he forced them to make, claiming that the same thing, we will suddenly find ing destruction of its chemical weapons this makes it a better treaty, now we interesting provisions in the Iranian stocks and its biological weapons, inci- should all support it. It does make it a Constitution or Chinese Constitution dentally, and it has not agreed to abide better treaty, but at the margins, not that are going to constitute loopholes by a memorandum of understanding at the core. big enough to drive a truck through. with this country under which it would What has been negotiated? First of The other matter is important, but list its stocks of chemicals. These were all, there are nine specific conditions in the overall scheme of things, I think key agreements that were part of the that merely restate existing constitu- perhaps more has been made of it than basis for the Reagan and Bush adminis- tional protections. Those could not was generally warranted, and it is still trations’ sponsorship of this treaty. have been taken away in any event, not certain that it is resolved, but at Russia had agreed to these things. One but it was helpful to get the adminis- least the allegation is that it is. This is called the bilateral destruction tration to acknowledge that they ex- has to do with riot control agents, tear agreement. The other is called the Wy- isted. They were even reluctant to ac- gas to most people. This was one of the oming memorandum of understanding. S3498 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE April 23, 1997 The Reagan and Bush administrations cause I know my colleague from Okla- that is what we have built into this believed that if the Russians complied homa, Senator INHOFE, wants to speak definition. with these provisions, that the chemi- at greater length about this. We know So what we have said, Madam Presi- cal weapons treaty might be a good that there are a variety of rogue states dent, is that we would join the treaty thing. But they are not complying with that have no intention of signing on to at such time as we had the certifi- them. Again, we will hear some details this treaty and others that may want cation from the President that the CIA in the session tomorrow. But the fact to sign on but know they can violate it certified that we could achieve this of the matter is, we ought to require with impunity. These chemical weap- level of verification. I do not think that Russia at least demonstrates some ons in these countries’ hands con- that is asking too much. good faith to proceed down the path to- stitute a real threat to American Finally, the final condition has to do ward declaring what they have and get- troops. We think that if one is going to with articles X and XI. This is what I ting rid of those things. If there is no make the claim that this Chemical had spoken to before. indication by the Russians that they Weapons Convention is going to reduce I would ask my distinguished chair- intend to do this, then it seems a little the chemical weapons stocks of these man if I could go on for just a few min- odd to be entering into a treaty where rogue nations that pose a threat to the utes here. 60 percent of the world’s chemical United States, the least that ought to Mr. HELMS. Go right ahead. weapons are not even being dealt with happen is that they submit themselves Mr. KYL. I will conclude on articles and we are basically conceding to the to the treaty. Can’t do any good if they X and XI because we are going to hear Russians that they don’t have to agree are not members. We need to certify a lot more about them. I think it is im- with these other agreements with us. that some of these nations are going to portant to read into the RECORD the What we are saying is, to try to apply be states parties before we subject our- provisions we are talking about and a little leverage to our friends in Rus- selves to it. discuss in a little bit of detail specifi- sia, look, we know it is expensive to The third condition is one that I cally what our concerns are. dismantle this, but that cannot be the can’t imagine anybody is going to ob- Here is what article X says. I might only problem you have when you will ject to, and that is that certain inspec- preface this comment, Madam Presi- not even declare all of the chemical tors would be barred from inspecting dent, with the statement that these weapons you have, when you won’t American sites. We have the right to were inducements put into the treaty even begin the process of dismantling do this under the treaty. The President originally to induce countries to join them, when you have signaled that you has the right to say, I don’t want any the treaty. They were put there based are no longer going to be complying inspectors from China, I don’t want upon inducements that were included with the bilateral destruction agree- any inspectors from Iran coming in in a previous treaty, the nuclear non- ment, you consider it now inoperative, here because we think they are going proliferation treaty, under the so- no longer useful. We want some signs to—and I use these as hypotheticals— called atoms for peace plan. from you that you are serious about the President says, we think they may Many people know or will remember dealing with chemical weapons before be bent on industrial espionage and that the atoms for peace plan was the we enter into the Chemical Weapons therefore we are going to ask that they idea that if countries would eschew the Convention. not be inspectors. The argument development of nuclear weapons, we And there is a final reason for this, against that is, well, tit for tat. They would provide them peaceful nuclear Madam President. One of the leaders of will say, fine, we don’t want any Amer- technology. And countries like Iraq, Russia has written to one of the top icans on the inspection team that and other countries that could be men- leaders of the United States and made comes into our country. We are willing tioned, took advantage of that pro- it clear that if Russia is to join the to say, fine. We think for certain coun- gram, and said, ‘‘Fine. We won’t de- Chemical Weapons Convention, it tries, like China and Iran, we should velop nuclear weapons. Now send us wants to do so at the same time the put right up front they are not going to the peaceful nuclear technology.’’ We United States does. As a result, it be inspectors of United States facili- eventually learned that what they did would be highly unfortunate if the ties. And that would be a third condi- with that peaceful technology was to United States went ahead and ratified tion to ratification. use it in their nuclear weapons pro- this treaty before the Russian Duma A fourth condition to—actually No. 5 gram. did. The Russian Duma is clearly not on the list has to do with the standard So after it was put in the treaty, and ready to do so. This first condition, for verification. This has to do with the we got these people signed up, we therefore, in the Helms resolution of question of whether or not we have an learned that several countries were ratification says, ‘‘Hold on, we will rat- adequate sense that we can actually using this provision of the treaty to ac- ify the Chemical Weapons Convention, find cheating under the treaty. And we tually enhance their nuclear weapons but we will not deposit our instrument are not asking for an impossible stand- capability. It worked to the detriment of ratification at The Hague until Rus- ard. We are not asking for 100-percent of the proliferation of nuclear weapons. sia has done the same, thus enabling us verification. Well, before that was ever learned to come in at the same time.’’ That is We are simply asking that the Presi- this chemical weapons treaty was ne- all that condition says. dent certify to the Congress before we gotiated. So at the time it seemed like It would require certification by the submit the articles of ratification that a good idea to put the same kind of President that Russia is making the CIA has certified to the President provision in the chemical weapons progress, that it intends to comply, it to a level of verification that will treaty. At the time it seemed like it is making progress toward complying. work. And what we have basically done would be a smart thing to provide an They don’t have to demonstrate that is take the definition of previous ad- inducement for countries to join the they have complied. We think that is a ministrations, the so-called Baker- treaty, saying: reasonable condition. I guess I will Nitze definition, along with a specific If you’ll join up, then we will not have any state it the other way around as to this aspect that General Shalikashvili iden- restrictions on trade in chemicals with you. first condition, should we be support- tified as a way of identifying our stand- You can buy all the chemicals you want. ing a treaty that we know is being ard here for verification under the And, in addition to that, you can ask us for, breached by the country that has the treaty. and we will provide to you, all of the defen- largest number of chemical weapons in It would be effectively verifiable. We sive gear, chemicals, antidotes, equipment, the world and is going to continue to could find violations with a high degree and so on, that will enable you to defend be breached by that country, or should of confidence in a timely fashion, with- against chemical weapons. we insist on a condition that they are in a year of their occurrence. And they That is a pretty good incentive for a making progress toward complying be- would be militarily significant. country to join up. Look at it from the fore we buy into it? Now, militarily significant was de- standpoint of a country that has in The second condition has to do with fined in a hearing before the U.S. Con- mind conducting chemical warfare ca- other states, the so-called rogue states. gress by General Shalikashvili as 1 ton pability. The first thing they want to I will spend only a moment on this be- of chemical weapons. And, therefore, do is be able to protect their own April 23, 1997 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S3499 troops from the use of the weapons. So none of the Australia Group countries to our argument, this makes the situa- they want our latest technology in de- will sell it these chemicals. tion worse, not better, and will actu- fensive gear, in defensive equipment, in What is going to happen? Well, today, ally proliferate these weapons, the antidotes and the like. So it is a pretty China may be selling chemicals to Iran same as Secretary Cheney just said in good incentive to sign up for the treaty or maybe another country is selling the quotation I just read, that articles because they have a right to ask us, chemicals to Iran not covered by the X and XI will result in the prolifera- and the treaty says we will undertake treaty. Once the treaty goes into ef- tion of chemical weapons because there to provide to them that material. fect, those countries could continue to cannot be any restrictions. Moreover they want to buy chemicals. sell chemicals to Iran. But what is The administration then began to Right now the Australia group I going to happen is that the other coun- take a different tack. First they said, talked about before has limitations on tries, countries that sign onto the con- well, we will decide not to lift our re- what chemicals can be sold. As a mat- vention are going to say, ‘‘Wait a strictions, so the United States will ter of fact, there are 54 specific chemi- minute. China, for example, is selling still not sell to countries that we think cals under the Australia group that chemicals to Iran. Our chemical com- might develop chemical weapons. And cannot be sold to the countries we be- panies want in on the action. It says we will get you a letter to that effect. lieve want to develop the chemical right here in the treaty we’re not sup- I have not seen anything in writing, weapons capability. These countries posed to maintain any restrictions. So but that is the administration’s latest then have an incentive for joining the we are out of here. We are going to statement. convention because under the conven- allow our countries to sell chemicals to We said, that does not do any good tion you cannot limit the trade in a country like Iran.’’ We will have a because it only takes one country to chemicals. very poor argument against that. break an embargo. Any one of the What does the treaty say? Article X: What has been the administration’s countries could do it. And the horse response to this? Belatedly the admin- would be out of the barn. So they said, Each State Party undertakes to facilitate, istration seems to find there is a little and shall have the right to participate in, well, we will try to get the other Aus- the fullest possible exchange of equipment, problem here. But originally it did not tralia Group states to agree to the material and scientific and technological in- think so. As a matter of fact—and I same thing. formation concerning means of protection think this is a critical point of this de- Bear in mind what they are saying. against chemical weapons. bate, Madam President,—right after First, they were all going to lift these It could not be more clear, Madam the chemical weapons treaty was restrictions to be in compliance with President. Article X says that the par- signed into force, the Australia Group the treaty. Now we are going to try to ties to the treaty have the right to par- members were all asked to begin the convince them they should keep them ticipate in and each party undertakes process of lifting their restrictions pur- in place in clear violation to the trea- to facilitate. In other words, we have suant to the Chemical Weapons Con- ty. This is the way to make a moral an obligation to facilitate their acqui- vention, the plain wording of articles X statement, Madam President, by vio- sition of this defensive equipment. and XI. lating the treaty right up front and an- Let me read to you, according to the Article XI carries this further and nouncing to the world we are violating administration—this is in testimony adds another element. And I read in the treaty, by keeping in place restric- before the Congress: part: tions that are required to be lifted Australia Group members in August 1992 The . . . States Parties . . . .shall . . . un- under articles X and XI? dertake to facilitate, and have the right to committed to review their export control measures with a view of removing them for It is not a very propitious way to participate in, the fullest . . . exchange of make a moral statement or to begin chemicals, equipment and scientific and CWC States Parties in full compliance with technical information relating to the devel- their own obligations under the convention. the operation of an international trea- opment and application of chemistry for pur- In other words, after the CWC was ty to announce in effect not only are poses not prohibited under this Convention signed, the Australia Group countries you going to violate it but you are . . . for peaceful purposes . . . began to review their export control going to try to get all your friends in In other words. The ‘‘atoms for measures which currently prohibit the Australia Group to violate it be- peace’’ equivalent in the Chemical them from selling chemicals to certain cause not to do so would be to lift the Weapons Convention. countries, so that they could bring restrictions we currently believe are So here is a big incentive for coun- themselves into compliance with their helpful in preventing the spread of tries who want to develop a defense obligations under articles X and XI of chemical weapons. against chemical weapons to join the the convention. Even if all these countries do decide Chemical Weapons Convention. And the Australia Group itself issued to ignore articles X and XI, countries The second part of article XI, section a formal statement—and I am quoting that are not States Parties can con- (c) says that: now— tinue to sell these chemicals. I said, it [The] States Parties. . . shall. . .[n]ot main- Undertaking to review, in light of the im- will not be long until everyone else will tain among themselves any restrictions, in- plementation of the Convention, the meas- want in the action. The same argument cluding those in any international agree- ures that they take to prevent the spread of that has been made by some of our ments . . . chemical substances and equipment for pur- chemical companies, in the event if shall. . . [n]ot maintain among themselves poses contrary to the objectives of the con- somebody is selling we should have the vention with the aim of removing such meas- any restrictions, including those in any right to sell too otherwise we are just international agreements, incompatible with ures for the benefit of States Parties to the Convention acting in full compliance with losing good business. the obligations undertaken under this Con- the obligations under the Convention. So I will conclude, Madam President, vention, which would restrict or impede by trying to make this rather simple, trade and the development and promotion of In other words, again, if you have [again] scientific and technological knowl- limitations on the sale of chemicals to but I think important point. To those edge in the field of chemistry for industrial, countries, you are going to have to lift who say, granted, it is not going to be agriculture, research, medical, pharma- them or you will be in violation of arti- a very effective treaty, but at least it ceutical or other peaceful purposes. cles X and XI of the convention. does no harm, I say, you are wrong. It shall . . . [n]ot maintain among them- What has the administration’s re- is going to do a lot of harm—to busi- selves any restrictions, [either unilateral or sponse to this been? ness, to the taxpayers, to our ability to international restrictions.] At first it was denial. Then, one com- conduct diplomacy and, importantly, So what this says is that States Par- ment made to me was, ‘‘Well, we tried to our ability to constrain the spread ties will have the right to say, once our best to negotiate our way out of of chemical weapons. they become parties, ‘‘You can’t have this, but the best we could do is get As Secretary Cheney said, unless ar- an embargo on selling chemicals to us. language like ‘undertake to facilitate’ ticles X and XI are removed from this You have to lift your restrictions.’’ rather than ‘obligated to.’ We just treaty, it is going to make matters For a country like Iran, for example, couldn’t negotiate anything better.’’ worse, not better. which has signed the treaty, this would So this was a bone to those countries, So the fourth condition that is a part be a pretty good deal because currently an incentive for them to come in. And of the Helms resolution of ratification S3500 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE April 23, 1997 says that we will ratify the treaty, but noticed that two or three people said, Trinidad Tobago. before we deposit the articles of ratifi- ‘‘Helms doesn’t do anything in the For- Ukraine. cation there has to be a certification eign Relations Committee except hold BILATERAL MUTUAL LEGAL ASSISTANCE by the President that those two sec- up treaties.’’ TREATIES tions have been removed from the trea- Well, let’s look at the record. In the Austria. ty. Yes, of course, that will require a past 2 years—that is to say the 104th Hungary. renegotiation. The States Parties will Congress—the Foreign Relations Com- Korea. Panama. have to agree to take those provisions mittee has considered 39 treaties, and The Philippines. out. That should not be a problem if the Senate approved 38 of them—the United Kingdom. one exception being this chemical the administration’s most current as- BILATERAL TAX TREATIES surances are to be believed. weapons treaty, which the administra- Canada. I suspect, however, there are specific tion pulled down just before it was to France. States Parties who do not agree with become the pending business in the Indonesia. those assurances who fully intend to Senate. Kazakstan. continue these sales. As a matter of I will read the list that I am going to Kazakstan Exchange of Notes. fact, if you will read the language of put into the RECORD: Consideration of Mexico. the Chinese ratification, it explicitly the CWC, in the context of the work of Netherlands-Antilles. preserves their understanding of arti- the committee in carrying out its re- Portugal. cles X and XI which is the obvious un- sponsibility to us and consent to ratifi- Sweden. Ukraine. derstanding of anyone reading them, cation as set forth in article II, section Ukraine Exchange of Notes. that it would be improper to have trade 2, of the Constitution. Treaties consid- restrictions or to deny the defensive ered during the 104th Congress included Mr. HELMS. In addition to my rec- equipment in the case of other States bilateral tax and investment treaties, ommendation to the distinguished Parties. important to protecting and furthering ranking member, I hope Senator So, Madam President, we are stuck U.S. business interests abroad; 14 trea- MCCAIN, although he does not share my with articles X and XI. And it is the be- ties strengthening U.S. law enforce- view on the treaty, will be recognized, lief of many of us that perhaps we ment through extradition of criminals because he is a patriot of the first could support this treaty if those arti- and access to criminal evidence in order, as far as I am concerned. If any- cles were removed. But until they are other countries. One notable example body ever paid his dues to this country, removed, it makes matters worse and of the impact of these treaties was the the Senator from Arizona did. Follow- therefore we cannot in good conscience ratification of the United States extra- ing him, I should like for Senator support the treaty in that form. dition treaty with Jordan, which en- HUTCHINSON to represent our side in the I thank the distinguished chairman abled the United States to take into pecking order. How much time will the of the committee for yielding me this custody a suspect in the World Trade Senator need? time. Center bombing. Extensive hearings Mr. HUTCHINSON. Ten minutes. Mr. HELMS addressed the Chair. were held by the committee to consider Mr. HELMS. The Senator can use a The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- the START II Treaty and the Conven- little longer if he wishes. Let me ask ator from North Carolina is recognized. tion on Chemical Weapons. The For- about the time consumed thus far, Mr. HELMS. Madam President, allow eign Relations Committee also consid- Madam President. me to thank the able Senator from Ari- ered, and the Senate ratified, three The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- zona. He is a walking encyclopedia on multilateral treaties dealing with land- ator from North Carolina has 3 hours 10 the details of this treaty, and he has mines and the rubber industry and minutes remaining. The Senator from been enormously helpful to me and to international fisheries laws. Delaware has 3 hours 21 minutes re- many other Senators in understanding I ask unanimous consent that this maining. Mr. HELMS. Three hours even for the implications of a great many provi- list be printed in the RECORD. sions of the treaty. I thank him now There being no objection, the list was me? publicly for all he has done to be help- ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as The PRESIDING OFFICER. And 10 ful. I am deeply grateful. follows: minutes. And 3 hours 21 minutes for the Senator from Delaware. Mr. KYL. Madam President, I return TREATIES RATIFIED BY THE SENATE DURING that thanks. I see the distinguished THE 104TH CONGRESS Mr. HELMS. We are running pretty near. The distinguished Senator from ranking member of the committee. I ARMS CONTROL TREATIES Delaware made his usual eloquent compliment both of them for their Convention on Conventional Weapons. work to achieve what I have described Start II. speech this morning. How long did I as ‘‘limited success’’ in the provisions [Convention on Chemical Weapons (ap- speak, by the way? agreed to, but nonetheless important. I proved by Committee/no vote by Senate)]. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- appreciate the negotiations that they COMMODITIES ator spoke for 4 minutes, plus 26 min- conducted and the spirit in which this 1995 International Natural Rubber Agree- utes earlier today. debate has been conducted as well. ment. Mr. HELMS. Four months? No, I un- Mr. HELMS. Madam President, I ask FISHERIES derstand. With the understanding that the Senator from Arkansas will follow unanimous consent that the RECORD re- U.N. Convention Relating to the Conserva- flect that had there been a recorded tion and Management of Highly Migratory the distinguished Senator from Ari- vote on the previous two voice votes, Fish Stocks. zona, I yield the floor to my distin- that Senators ASHCROFT and GRAMS BILATERAL EXTRADITION TREATIES guished friend from Delaware. would have voted ‘‘aye’’ on both votes. Belgium. Mr. BIDEN. That ‘‘four month’’ com- The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without Supplementary with Belgium. ment reminds me of a joke about the objection, it is so ordered. Bolivia. two guys who were cheering at the bar, Mr. HELMS. Madam President, I Hungary. clapping their hands. A guy walks into hope the distinguished ranking mem- Jordan. the bar and says, ‘‘What are they so ber will agree that the other Senator Malaysia. happy about?’’ Another guy says, ‘‘Oh, from Arizona should follow. I will leave The Philippines. they just put together a jigsaw puzzle, it for him to limit his time or not. Let Switzerland. and they did it in 3 hours.’’ The guy me do one or two other things and I BILATERAL INVESTMENT TREATIES walks up to them and says, ‘‘Congratu- will let the Senator take care of that. Albania. lations, but why is that so special?’’ I noticed that two or three times in the Belarus. They showed him the box, which said Estonia. past week—and I am used to the media Georgia. ‘‘2 to 4 years.’’ At any rate, it will take criticism; as a matter of fact, I enjoy Jamaica. a while for that to sink in. A little bit it. I have a lot of cartoons on my office Latvia. of levity in the chemical weapons trea- wall to prove that I do enjoy it. But I Mongolia. ty is worth the effort. April 23, 1997 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S3501 The junior Senator from Arizona The critics point out that a number CWC would require all other parties to de- complimented me on the limited suc- of countries, such as Iraq, Libya, Syria, stroy their stockpiles by April 2007. cess that we have achieved here. I and North Korea, will not ratify the ‘‘In addition, the Administration has agreed to a number of provisions dealing thank him for that. Now I am going to CWC and will therefore not be bound by with rogue states that remain outside the yield to a man of unlimited capacity to its limits. True. But will our efforts to treaty. (See attached letter from President prove to everyone that there is no keep weapons of mass destruction out Clinton to me dated April 22, 1997). I also un- limit to the success we are about to of their hands be enhanced if we don’t derstand there is a possibility of an addi- achieve in this treaty. ratify this treaty? No, they will not. In tional agreement with respect to sharing of I yield 15 minutes to the distin- fact, I am confident that these rogue information. If so, it would further strength- guished Senator from Arizona, my good states are desperately hoping the Sen- en the treaty. I understand that even with all the added safeguards, not every Senator, friend, JOHN MCCAIN. ate will reject ratification because, if for their own good reasons, will support rati- The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- we do, we will not only spare them the fication. ator from Arizona is recognized. mandatory trade sanctions that the ‘‘As a member of the Senate, I supported Mr. MCCAIN. Madam President, I CWC imposes on nonparties, we will the START I, START II, INF, and CFE trea- thank my distinguished colleague from also undermine a near global consensus ties because they met the crucial tests of ef- Delaware and the Senator from North that all chemical weapons, including fective verification, real reductions, and sta- Carolina. The distinguished Senator those of nonparties, should be banned. bility. If I were presently in the Senate, I from North Carolina deserves great would vote for ratification of the CWC be- Madam President, for 10 years I have cause of the many improvements agreed to. credit, in my view, because he, as had the privilege of working with the ‘‘Those who may still have concerns can chairman of the Foreign Relations former Senate majority leader, Bob look to Article XVI, which allows with- Committee, allowed this treaty to Dole. Probably the closest working re- drawal from the treaty on 90 days notice if it come to the floor. The distinguished lationship I had with him was on issues fails to serve America’s vital interests. chairman could have bottled up this of national security. In fact, I was priv- There is little doubt in my mind that if this convention increases proliferation of chemi- treaty under his authority as chairman ileged to serve as one of his advisers in of the committee. He deserves great cal weapons, it would lead to public outrage the last campaign in his efforts for the which would compel any President to act. praise. Presidency of the United States. The bottom line is that when it comes to I also point out that, as various Madam President, I know of no one America’s security, we must maintain a groups have gotten into this debate, more credible on these issues, and I strong national defense that is second to there have been a lot of allegations, a know of no one, going back to World none.’’ lot of impugning of character and pa- War II, who understands service and triotism and views about whether peo- THE WHITE HOUSE, sacrifice and our national security in- Washington, April 22, 1997. ple are tough enough or not tough terests more than Senator Bob Dole, a enough or what is too soft. This is a de- Hon. BOB DOLE, man whose friendship I cherish and Washington, DC. bate amongst honorable people who whose companionship I enjoy but, more DEAR BOB: I welcomed the opportunity to have honorable differences of opinion, important than that, a person whose discuss the Chemical Weapons Convention as I do with the junior Senator from views I hold in the highest esteem and (CWC) with you Saturday and appreciated Arizona, my dear friend and colleague, regard. There are many other experts your taking the time Monday to have Bob Bell brief you on the 28 agreed conditions to Senator KYL. I would like to see, espe- on national security issues in this cially in the columns of various peri- the Resolution of Ratification. town, but I know of no one who has had When you wrote Senator Lott last Septem- odicals interested in this view, the de- the experience and hands-on involve- ber, you expressed the hope that I would as- bate elevated a bit as to the virtues or ment with these issues, that is, the sist him in amending the Resolution of Rati- vices, as the observers of this treaty tough decisions, than Senator Dole. We fication in a manner that would address cer- might view them, as opposed to specu- all know that Senator Dole issued a tain concerns you raised and thereby lations about the motives of those who letter today that I think is of great im- ‘‘achieve a treaty which truly enhances American security.’’ I believe the 28 agreed either support or oppose this treaty. I portance. think the American people would be far conditions, which are the product of over 60 Madam President, I ask unanimous hours of negotiation between the Adminis- better off. consent that Senator Dole’s statement tration and the Senate over the last two and Madam President, the importance of and the letter from President Clinton a half months, meet both these tests. We this issue has been pointed out. We will to Senator Dole be printed in the have truly gone the extra mile in reaching have political and economic con- RECORD. out, as you recommended, to broaden the sequences for the United States for There being no objection, the mate- base of bipartisan support for this treaty. As many years to come. The most impor- I said in my public remarks Friday, ‘‘I con- rial was ordered to be printed in the sider that the things that we’ve agreed to in tant question is whether this agree- RECORD, as follows: ment is good for U.S. national security. good faith are really a tribute to the work that Senator Lott and Senator Helms and In my view, one central fact domi- STATEMENT OF BOB DOLE ON THE CHEMICAL WEAPONS CONVENTION Senator Biden and a number of others did to nates consideration of this issue. Re- really clarify what this Convention will WASHINGTON.—Bob Dole today issued the gardless of whether the United States mean; I think it’s a positive thing.’’ ratifies this treaty, the United States following statement regarding the Chemical Let me mention briefly how my Adminis- Weapons Convention: tration has addressed the specific concerns will, in the next decade or so, complete ‘‘Last September, the Senate Majority the destruction of its own aging chemi- you raised last fall: Leader, Trent Lott, asked me to express my Constitutionality. You said Constitutional cal weapons stockpile. Our reasons for opinion on the Chemical Weapons Conven- protections should be safeguarded against doing so have nothing to do with arms tion. In my response, I raised concerns about unwarranted searches. We have agreed to a control. The decision was made before the Chemical Weapons Convention and ex- condition (#29) guaranteeing that there will the CWC became a near-term possibil- pressed hope that the President and the Sen- be no involuntary inspection of a U.S. com- ity. I am not aware of any interest of ate would work together to ensure that the pany or facility without a search warrant. Congress or the U.S. military in get- treaty is effectively verifiable and genuinely Period. We have also agreed to a condition global. They have, and as a result, 28 condi- ting the United States back in the (#12) underscoring that nothing in the treaty tions to the Senate’s Resolution of Ratifica- ‘‘authorizes legislation, or other action, by chemical weapons business. So when tion have been agreed to. These 28 agreed the United States prohibited by the Con- we consider the wisdom of ratifying conditions address major concerns. stitution of the United States, as interpreted this treaty, we should bear in mind ‘‘I commend Senator Lott, Senator Helms, by the United States.’’ that this is, first and foremost, a trea- Senator Lugar, and many other former col- Real Reductions. You asked whether the ty about limiting other countries’ leagues, as well as President Clinton and ad- CWC will actually eliminate chemical weap- chemical weapons, not our own, be- ministration officials for their constructive ons. We have agreed to a condition (#13) cause we are doing away with ours. In efforts. Is it perfect—no—but I believe there specifying severe measures that the United are now adequate safeguards to protect practical terms, the alternative to rati- States will insist upon if a country is in non- American interests. We should keep in mind compliance of this fundamental obligation fication of the CWC is U.S. unilateral that the United States is already destroying under the treaty. disarmament in the field of chemical its chemical weapons in accordance with leg- Verification. You asked whether we will weapons. islation passed more than 10 years ago. The have high confidence that our intelligence S3502 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE April 23, 1997 community (IC) will detect violations. We expressed by Senator Dole at that proliferation is an evil that must be have agreed to a condition (#10) which would time—then candidate Dole. It is well countered. require the Administration to identify on a known that Senator Dole’s reserva- Moreover, beyond the text of the yearly basis priorities, specific steps and re- tions were legitimate and sincere. CWC itself, we have before us 28 agreed sources being undertaken to strengthen U.S. conditions in the resolution of ratifica- monitoring and detection capabilities. These There is also now no doubt—at least in annual reports would also include a deter- my mind, as well as in Senator Dole’s— tion. As a member of the group that mination of the IC’s level of confidence with that those reservations and concerns the majority leader put together to ad- respect to each monitoring task. We also have been satisfied by the 28 conditions dress issues regarding CWC ratifica- made clear during the negotiations on the that are included in this treaty, with tion, I am proud of the work done at conditions our willingness to certify that the only 5 remaining, which we will be vot- the member and staff level to achieve CWC is ‘‘effectively verifiable’’ and that the ing on tomorrow. agreement with the administration on IC has high confidence it could detect the Obviously, every U.S. Senator thinks a number of difficult issues. I am also kind of violation that matters most in terms for himself or herself; there is no doubt grateful for the work done by the of protecting our troops deployed in the field: any effort by an adversary to try to about that. But, in my mind, this is an chairman of the Foreign Relations train and equip his army for offensive chemi- important event that Senator Dole Committee and the ranking minority cal warfare operations. I regret that the should weigh in on this issue—not be- member, who together resolved many unanimous consent (U/C) agreement govern- cause there is any benefit to Senator additional problems. This work has ing the floor debate on the CWC will not Dole; clearly, there is a downside for greatly strengthened the resolution of allow this condition to be offered. his involvement, and he could have ratification on which we will soon vote. Universality. Finally, you asked whether kept silent. But, once again, Senator Agreed condition 7 of the resolution the treaty will be truly global. We have requires the President to certify not agreed to a condition (#11) which requires the Dole has chosen to speak out for what Secretary of Defense to ensure that U.S. he believes is important to U.S. vital only that the United States believes forces are effectively equipped, trained and national security interests. I applaud that the CWC does not require us to organized to fight and win against any rogue him and, again, hope that he will con- weaken our export controls, but also state that remains outside the treaty and tinue his involvement in the challenges that all members of the Australia employs CW in battle. To restrict CW op- that we face in the years ahead to our Group have communicated, at the tions for such states, we agreed to a condi- Nation’s security, as he has so success- highest diplomatic levels, their agree- # tion ( 7) requiring the President to certify fully done in the past. ment that multilateral and national that we will strengthen our national export The CWC critics also contend that export controls on sensitive chemical controls and that all 30 states participating in the Australia Group are committed to the treaty will weaken our non- technology are compatible with the maintaining this export control regime on proliferation policy because article XI treaty and will be maintained under dangerous chemicals. This certification will of the treaty says the parties will have the CWC. have to be made annually. Lastly, during the the right to participate in ‘‘the fullest Conversely, if the United States re- negotiations on the conditions we under- possible exchange’’ of chemical tech- jects ratification, I doubt that we will scored our willingness to commit to a mech- nology for purposes not prohibited be able to play our traditional leader- anism by which we would have to consult under the convention. As a result, we ship role in attempting to persuade each year with the Senate on whether to re- will have to eliminate our national other chemical suppliers to exercise re- main in the CWC if rogue states do not over straint. The world will blame the Unit- time succumb to pressure to join the treaty controls on chemical technologies and regime. As with the proposed verification disband the Australia Group, the mul- ed States for undermining a chemical condition, I regret the Senate will not have tilateral framework for restraining weapons ban that the vast majority of an opportunity to vote on this condition ei- transfers of sensitive chemical tech- other countries were willing to sign. If ther. nology. we reject ratification, where will we In closing, let me again thank you for your This interpretation of the treaty is get the moral and political authority interest in and support for achieving a trea- contradicted not only by the text of to persuade other Australia Group par- ty that enhances the security of our Armed the treaty—which subordinates article ticipants to block exports to countries Forces and all our citizens. Sincerely, XI to the basic undertakings in article of concern? BILL CLINTON. I for parties not to acquire chemical The same case can be made regarding article X of the treaty, which critics Mr. MCCAIN. Madam President, I weapons or to assist another state in claim will require us to share defensive will not read Senator Dole’s whole doing so—but also by our experience technologies with potential enemy statement, but I think it is important with other nonproliferation treaties states. Not only does this provision what he said. I will read parts of it: and the agreed ‘‘consensus’’ conditions apply only to CWC parties, so countries I commend Senator Lott, Senator Helms, included in the resolution of ratifica- Senator Lugar, and many other former col- tion before us. outside the treaty like Libya cannot leagues, as well as President Clinton and the First of all, article XI is essentially benefit, but condition 15 in the resolu- administration officials for their construc- similar to the language of article IV of tion of ratification obliges the United tive efforts. Is it perfect—no—but I believe the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty States to share only medical antidotes there are now adequate safeguards to protect in that it blesses technology exchanges and treatment to countries of concern American interests. among treaty parties, but the NPT has if they are attacked with chemical I repeat. not caused us to disband the Nuclear weapons. And our respected former col- * * * I believe there are now adequate safe- Suppliers Group, which was, in fact, league, Secretary of Defense Cohen, guards to protect American interests. We founded after the NPT went into force. has committed the United States to should keep in mind that the United States Nor has it obliged us to curtail our use every instrument of U.S. diplomacy is already destroying its chemical weapons national controls on the transfer of nu- and leverage to block transfers of in accordance with legislation passed more clear technology, even to other NPT chemical technology that would under- than 10 years ago. The CWC would require all parties; the United States enacted the other parties to destroy their stockpiles by mine our security, and he has made the April 2007. Nuclear Nonproliferation Act of 1978 10 obvious point that we will be better years after the NPT was signed. There He goes on to say: able to do this if we are inside the CWC will always be some countries that ob- regime rather than outside. As a Member of the Senate, I supported the START I, START II, INF, and CFE treaties ject to our technology controls, but It is true that the Chemical Weapons because they met the crucial tests of effec- these are decisions the United States Convention will be more difficult to tive verification, real reductions, and stabil- makes for itself. And successive admin- verify than nuclear arms control agree- ity. If I were presently in the Senate, I would istrations, Republican and Democratic, ments such as START and INF. But re- vote for ratification of the CWC because of have maintained and expanded our ex- gardless of whether the United States the many improvements agreed to. port controls on nuclear technology, ratifies the CWC, we will have to mon- Madam President, it is well known while the NPT has contributed to our itor closely the chemical weapons pro- that, last fall, one of the reasons the ability to obtain support from our al- grams of other states. The intelligence treaty was withdrawn by the adminis- lies in this effort by establishing an community has repeatedly told the tration was because of the reservations international consensus that nuclear Senate that the CWC’s verification April 23, 1997 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S3503 measures will be a useful tool in doing gulf war victors Colin Powell and Nor- Those words of Dick Cheney have this job. General Shalikashvili has told man Schwarzkopf, retired CNO Adm. echoed in my mind—‘‘worse than hav- the Armed Services Committee that ‘‘I Elmo Zumwalt, plus the Veterans of ing no treaty at all’’. believe that the system of declarations, Foreign Wars, the Vietnam Veterans of He said, if I might summarize, that of routine inspections, challenge in- America, and the Reserve Officers As- the manufacture of chemical weapons spections, all put together, give us a sociation. I am comfortable in their is too widespread, concealing it is too leg up to the ability to detect whether company, and that of every U.S. ally in easy, and enforcement is too uncertain (potential violators) are, in fact, em- Europe and Asia. That is why I intend for us to ratify this treaty. barked upon a program that would be to vote to ratify this treaty, and I urge Madam President, I ask unanimous in violation of the CWC. So I think our my colleagues to do the same. consent that this statement from Dick chances are improved when they are Madam President, I yield back my Cheney be printed in the RECORD. members of the CWC. Our chances de- time to the distinguished Senator from There being no objection, the mate- crease dramatically if they are not Delaware. rial was ordered to be printed in the members of the CWC.’’ The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- RECORD, as follows: ator from Arkansas is recognized for 10 While some want to reject the CWC The technology to manufacture chemical because of verification concerns, it minutes. weapons is simply too ubiquitous, covert seems to me that this would have the Mr. HUTCHINSON. Madam Presi- chemical warfare programs too easily con- practical effect of reducing the United dent, I rise today to voice my serious cealed, and the international community’s States’ ability to monitor the chemical reservations about the Chemical Weap- record of responding effectively to violations weapons programs of other countries. ons Convention treaty. The most im- of arms control treaties too unsatisfactory This is an example of the best being portant standards for an effective trea- to permit confidence that such a regime ty are: Verifiability, protection to the would actually reduce the chemical threat. the enemy of the good. Indeed, some aspects of the present conven- Discussions among Senators and be- signatories, constitutionality, and the applicability to nations of most con- tion, notably its obligation to share with po- tween the Senate and the administra- tential adversaries like Iran, chemical man- tion have produced other agreed condi- cern. I sincerely believe that the CWC ufacturing technology that can be used for tions to the resolution that have falls short in each of these basic re- military purposes and chemical defensive strengthened the case for ratification. quirements. equipment, threaten to make this accord Madam President, I also want to On April 8, 1997 three former Sec- worse than having no treaty at all.—Richard commend the work of the majority retaries of Defense appeared before the Cheney, Letter to Chairman Helms, April 7, 1997. leader, Senator LOTT, who has worked Senate Foreign Relations Committee long and hard to address the legitimate urging Senators to vote against the Mr. HUTCHINSON. Madam Presi- concerns many Republicans Senators ratification of the Chemical Weapons dent, Secretary Cheney’s statement had expressed about the Convention Convention. This fact alone should give sends a clear message to the American and to accommodate the administra- this body great pause in the consider- people that this treaty does not effec- tion’s correct assertion that the Senate ation of this treaty. tively deal with the threat of chemical I know that there are good, there are has a duty to vote, yea or nay, on the and biological weapons. As we begin loyal, and there are patriotic Ameri- treaty. Senator LOTT and his indefati- this debate on the CWC, the American cans on both sides of this issue of rati- gable foreign policy advisor, Randy people, with justification, will ask fying the Chemical Weapons Conven- Scheunemann, labored tirelessly to fa- their leaders how and where they stand tion. I have many constituents who cilitate negotiations between members on the issue of chemical weapons. have called me, and said, ‘‘Senator, and between the Senate and the admin- I stand here today wanting to tell the how do we know? We hear former Sec- istration. They ensured that these ne- American people that this Congress retaries of Defense saying it is a bad gotiations bore fruit and resulted in a will do everything in its power to rid treaty. We hear Colin Powell saying it resolution of ratification that resolved our world of chemical and biological is a good treaty. Today we hear former most, if not all, of the reservations ex- weapons, however, the CWC is not glob- Senator Dole saying we need to ratify pressed by some Senators. Both the al, is not verifiable, is not constitu- this. How do we know?’’ Senate and the administration are in tional, and quite frankly, it will not I believe that it is simply our respon- work. their debt. sibility as Senators, respecting the dif- It is also appropriate, Madam Presi- While the intent of the CWC is to cre- ferences that exist, to study this, to dent, to commend administration offi- ate a global chemical weapons ban, ac- evaluate it, and to make a reasoned cials for working with the Senate in a complishing that goal does seem un- judgment. I believe also when our na- genuinely nonpartisan way that was likely. Six countries with chemical tional security is at risk that we must notable for the respect paid to the weapons programs—including all of always opt on the side of caution in views of all Members, and the good those with aggressive programs—have consideration of a treaty such as we faith shown in trying to come to terms not yet signed the CWC. have before us. So how then can we call this a global with so many difficult issues. I have on Madam President, the opinions of treaty? many past occasions been critical of Secretaries Schlesinger, Rumsfeld, Neither Iraq, Libya, Syria, nor North administration policies and the lack of Weinberger, and Cheney regarding this Korea have signed or ratified the CWC. bipartisanship in promoting those poli- treaty should not be taken lightly. On cies. In this instance, administration China, Pakistan, and Iran have signed April 7, in a letter to Senator JESSE officials took great pains to secure the the CWC, but have not ratified it. Rus- HELMS, chairman of the Senate Foreign sia has signed the CWC, but has not Senate’s advice and consent in a man- Relations Committee, former Sec- ratified it. ner that was, as I said, genuinely re- retary of Defense Cheney wrote, and I These rogue nations of Iran, Libya, spectful of every Senator’s views. Thus, am quoting, Mr. President: I am happy to give praise where praise North Korea, and Syria represent a The technology to manufacture chemical clear threat to United States security is due. weapons is simply too ubiquitous, covert Madam President, I respect the con- chemical warfare programs too easily con- and the security of key United States cerns of those Senators who cannot cealed, and the international community’s allies. All of these countries have ac- vote in favor of ratifying the CWC. But record of responding effectively to violations tive, aggressive programs to develop in my opinion, we do not need killer of arms control treaties too unsatisfactory and produce chemical weapons. amendments to ensure that this trea- to permit confidence that such a regime Let’s be clear about one important ty—negotiated under President Reagan would actually reduce the chemical threat. thing. The administration has refused and signed by President Bush—is on Indeed, some aspects of the present conven- to ban inspectors from rogue nations balance a good deal for the United tion, notably its obligation to share with po- such as Iran and China. tential adversaries like Iran, chemical man- States. This view is shared by former ufacturing technology that can be used for That will be one of the reservations Presidents Ford and Bush, numerous military purposes and chemical defensive that we will have the opportunity to Nobel Prize winners in chemistry, the equipment, threaten to make this accord vote on. And it is one of those reserva- chemical industry trade associations, worse than having no treaty at all. tions that I find it incomprehensible S3504 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE April 23, 1997 that the administration has found un- I am very sensitive to the needs and mental concerns about the Pine Bluff acceptable—banning inspectors from wishes of the small business-man. And arsenal. So I believe that the recent de- rogue nations such as Iran and China. while large multinational chemical bate on Yucca Mountain further illus- In addition, there are intelligence re- corporations can bear the estimated as- trates how problematic the fulfillment ports that have recently indicated that tronomical costs regarding reporting of our treaty obligations would be. Russia has already begun to cheat, requirements of a CWC member nation, Madam President, I certainly want even before the CWC has gone into ef- these costs constitute a significant this body to provide a comprehensive fect. These facts alone give substance burden, in some cases an overwhelming domestic and international plan to re- to opposing the treaty. burden, to small businesses, not just in duce the threat of chemical and bio- Madam President, inherent in the Arkansas but all around America. logical weapons. As I have already CWC is a requirement that we share There are roughly 230 small businesses stated today, however, the CWC has our advanced chemical defensive gear which custom-synthesize made-to- too many loopholes that will perpet- with countries like Iran and China. It order products and compete with large uate chemical weapon activity rather is important to recognize that rogue chemical manufacturers. It is my un- than end it. It is a serious obligation nations, through reverse engineering, derstanding that they generally have that we have. I believe that this body can easily figure out how to infiltrate fewer than 100 employees and have an- will make the right decision. For me, our technologies. This would not only nual sales of less than $40 million each. the words of Dick Cheney keep echo- increase the chances of a chemical at- Few, if any, of them can afford to em- ing: ‘‘Worse than no treaty at all.’’ tack, but more importantly this would ploy legions of lawyers just to satisfy For this Senator, I will be voting endanger our troops around the world. the new reporting requirements of the ‘‘no’’ on I believe a flawed, unfixable Let us be crystal clear on the fact CWC. Let us be realistic. Can these treaty. I yield the floor. that once there is a free-for-all of U.S. burdensome reporting requirements The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who chemical and defensive technologies prevent the proliferation of chemical yields time? between the proposed signatories of weapons? Mr. BIDEN addressed the Chair. this treaty, it will quite frankly be im- In addition to the cost factor on our The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- possible to stop the transfer of this in- small businesses, the possibility of U.S. ator from Delaware is recognized. formation to the rogue nations, that do trade secrets being stolen during CWC Mr. BIDEN. I yield the distinguished not sign the CWC. inspections to me at least seems very Senator from New Jersey 7 minutes. I believe that the CWC will not in- The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- crease pressure on rogue regimes. The high. I have been advised that the U.S. intelligence community has said that ator from New Jersey is recognized. CWC will not result in an international Mr. TORRICELLI. I thank the Chair. norm against the use of chemical weap- the CWC inspections constitute a new tool to add to our intelligence collec- I thank the Senator from Delaware for ons. The Geneva Convention of 1925 al- yielding. ready established that norm. How tion tool kit. Putting one and one to- gether, inspections will also constitute Madam President, tomorrow the Sen- many times has this prohibition been ate will exercise its historic constitu- violated by Iraq, on the Kurds and even a tool in the kit of foreign govern- ments as well. I hope that the Amer- tional powers of treaty ratification. It in the case of our own troops? is a solemn power that we have exer- Madam President, it took 5 years be- ican people realize that U.S. expendi- cised for two centuries. That power has fore the Pentagon came forward with tures as a member nation of the CWC often defined the security of the Nation information pertaining to the exposure include a mandatory 25-percent assess- and sometimes been determinant of of our own troops to certain chemical ment for operating expenses of the Or- war and peace itself. The issue before and biological substances that could af- ganization for the Prohibition of Chem- the Senate now is the ban on chemical fect the health and well-being of our ical Weapons, the OPCW. weapons, probably the most important 700,000 U.S. service people in the gulf. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- The rogues have demonstrated that ator’s 10 minutes have expired. foreign policy question remaining be- they will plan for the use of, threaten Mr. HUTCHINSON. Madam Presi- fore the United States in this century. the use of, and indeed use chemical dent, I ask unanimous consent for an Perhaps because the consequences weapons despite international norms. additional 3 minutes. are so great the choice is also clear. We must, to the best of our ability, The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without This treaty demands ratification. The avoid the horrible events of the 1980’s, objection, it is so ordered. treaty itself is a culmination of a proc- when the international community Mr. HUTCHINSON. As a member na- ess that began over 12 years ago under witnessed the horrors of Iraq’s use of tion, we will pick up a 25-percent as- the leadership of Ronald Reagan. The chemical weapons against its own peo- sessment for the operating expenses of United States began a review and then ple. Since that time, sanctions against the organization. This is the new inter- determined that it would eliminate Iraq have been strong and effective. national organization created to ad- chemical weapons. We did so because of The CWC will not address any short- minister the CWC. It is my understand- the need to reduce the numbers of comings in these sanctions. ing that operating costs are likely to those weapons in the world and to re- Madam President, how can the CWC be a minimum of $100 million per year, strict the ability of those nations that be global if these so-called rogue na- $25 million of which will come from did not possess them to obtain them. tions have not signed the CWC? The U.S. taxpayers. Since Ronald Reagan’s judgment a bottom line seems to be that the CWC Finally, it is my understanding that decade ago, we have made extraor- is most applicable to the countries of the CWC requires the United States to dinary progress. In 1985, President least concern to the United States. It begin destruction of our chemical Reagan signed into law a judgment may help us with Great Britain, but stockpile no later than 2 years after that would eliminate American stock- provide no protection regarding North the treaty enters into force. I simply piles by the year 2004, having an impor- Korea or Iraq. believe that is unreasonable and unat- tant impact on the ratification of this It is my understanding, that under tainable. treaty because, whether it is ratified or article XII of the treaty, members The Department of Defense has pub- not, no matter what judgments are caught violating treaty provisions are licly stated that the U.S. destruction made by this institution, the United simply threatened with a restriction or of its chemical weapons stockpile will States is going to eliminate chemical suspension of convention privileges. At continue regardless of whether we are a weapons. Second, the United States worst, a report will be sent to the U.N. signatory to such treaty. We have one then followed our own judgment by General Assembly and the U.N. Secu- such arsenal in Pine Bluff, AR. I be- leading the international effort with rity Council. Mr. President, how does a lieve it is unrealistic to expect that the 160 other nations to enact a multilat- report protect the American people? $12.4 billion cost in destroying those eral ban. It is the result of that process Madam President, with no predeter- chemical weapons will be achievable that is now before the Senate. mined sanctions in place to deter po- particularly given the environmental The process, it is important to note, tential violators, the CWC seems inef- concerns that exist. And I am being did not culminate with the Reagan ad- fective and unenforceable. contacted daily by those with environ- ministration. In 1992, President George April 23, 1997 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S3505 Bush announced a strong American four-star generals and every former The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- support for the treaty and the United Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff— ator’s time has expired. Who yields States became an original signatory. A in the Carter, Clinton, and Ford admin- time? year later, under President Clinton, istrations. Mr. HELMS. Madam President, I the United States once again an- I ask my colleagues who oppose this yield 10 minutes to the distinguished nounced its support. Today, we have treaty, would all these members of the Senator from Idaho, [Mr. CRAIG]. come full circle. From Ronald Reagan’s general staff, would each of these men The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- first pronouncements, the treaty, now who have held the principal respon- ator from Idaho is recognized. endorsed by a Democratic President, sibility for guiding and leading our Mr. CRAIG. Madam President, thank seeks ratification under a majority Re- Armed Forces have endorsed this trea- you and let me thank my chairman, publican Congress. ty if there was any chance, if there was not only for yielding but for his leader- The Secretary of State said only a any judgment, that, indeed, our Armed ship on this most important issue that week ago: Forces would be less safe? now is being thoughtfully and respon- sibly debated here on the floor of the This treaty has ‘‘made in America’’ writ- The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- U.S. Senate. ten all over it. It was Ronald Reagan’s idea, ator’s 7 minutes have expired. George Bush negotiated it and signed it, and Madam President, the Chemical Bill Clinton has embraced it. Mr. TORRICELLI. Thank you, Weapons Convention has such far- In truth, however, Madam President, Madam President. I ask the Senator reaching domestic and national secu- the treaty is neither Democratic nor from Delaware to yield 3 additional rity implications that it deserves the Republican. It reflects the bipartisan minutes. most thorough and thoughtful exam- commitments of the United States to- Mr. BIDEN. Without objection. ination the Senate can give it. I have ward our security, our values, and a The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- given this matter a careful review and century of learning the lessons of col- ator may proceed. would like to reiterate some of the con- lective security because after 80 years Mr. TORRICELLI. Madam President, clusions I have reached. of living under the threats of chemical this is a moment of judgment that this If I thought supporting this treaty weapons, it is the judgment of this ad- Senate has faced before. History in- would make chemical weapons dis- ministration and those that preceded it structs us that we cannot afford to be appear, and give us all greater security that it is time to eliminate these weap- wrong. Over 75 years ago, this body from these heinous weapons, I would ons. chose the wrong route and the toll was not hesitate in giving my support. Un- The treaty does several direct and monumental. During consideration of fortunately, the facts do not dem- important things. It bans the develop- the treaty for the League of Nations, onstrate this; indeed, implementing ment, production, and stockpiling of the United States took the lead in this treaty may actually increase dan- chemical weapons. forming the principles of collective se- ger to U.S. citizens and troops. Second, it requires the destruction of curity. It was our leadership which The convention has been signed by all chemical weapons and their produc- brought the world to understand that 160 nations and ratified by only 74—less tion facilities. there was no separate peace, there was than 50 percent. Five countries who are Third, it provides the most extensive no individual security, and yet in that thought to have chemical weapons are verification process in the history of instance, as in this moment, the Unit- not even signatories of the convention: arms control. ed States, after providing the intellec- Egypt, Iraq, Libya, North Korea, and Finally, it grants member nations tual and the political leadership, was a Syria. Another six nations have signed, the effective tools for dealing with reluctant participant. The judgment but not ratified the convention: China, those who refuse to comply, tools that then, we were told, was that there were India, Iran, Pakistan, Israel, and Rus- will be denied the United States if we reservations because of individual pro- sia. In short, this convention is not fail to ratify the treaty. And yet many visions of the treaty. But, indeed, his- global in scale. of my colleagues have questioned the tory instructs us, and I believe would Even if it were true that this treaty need for the United States to become a guide us now, that those reservations had been signed and ratified by 160 na- member state. They note two principal tions, serious problems would remain. were not because of individual aspects objections. First, that the burden of re- Compliance with the Chemical Weap- of the treaty but because of a general porting requirements and verifications ons Convention cannot be assured be- ideologic opposition to arms control would be onerous on American indus- cause it is not effectively verifiable. and the general notion of collective se- try; and second, the impact on Amer- I think it is timely and appropriate curity. ican defense capabilities. to remember, as others have men- Allow me to deal with each. First, It is time for the United States, after tioned, the principles of Ronald the economic impact. In my State of all the painful lessons of previous gen- Reagan. Even though he started the New Jersey, the chemical industry rep- erations, to simply understand there is process that we are debating today, he resents fully one-third of the entire in- no unilateral security in a multilateral would have insisted in the end, while dustrial capability of the State; 150,000 world. From Pearl Harbor to the Per- we might trust our allies and our citizens of the State of New Jersey are sian Gulf, history demands us to recog- friends around the world, that in every employed in this vital manufacturing nize an essential truth: American secu- circumstance we must verify. industry of chemicals. Let us be clear. rity, because of a changing world and Unlike nuclear weapons which re- The entire industry, from small compa- developing technology, requires and de- quire a large, specialized industrial nies to among the largest industries in mands that we deal with other nations. base, chemical weapons can be manu- the State of New Jersey, not only sup- The choice before this Senate is factured almost anywhere. Further- ports this treaty but has joined in de- clear. From the doughboys who en- more, many lethal chemicals are com- manding its ratification. dured the horrors of mustard gas in the mon and have peaceful uses. Chemicals Second, on the question of American trenches of Europe, the Kurdish refu- help us to manufacture products such defense capabilities, it should be self- gees who suffered in Iraq, to the refu- as pesticides, pharmaceuticals, plas- evident that if the United States is gees of Cambodia who suffered yellow tics, and paints. With such a broad unilaterally forgoing these weapons rain, to our own veterans of the Per- spectrum of uses, it would be difficult and rogue nations continue to embrace sian Gulf, it is time to put an end to to discern the legitimate from the il- them, American military personnel chemical weapons. That power is in the licit. will be more vulnerable and, indeed, hands of the Senate. If we fail to do so, It is also very disturbing to me that endangered if the United States is not a host of rogue nations will take ad- ratification of this treaty would aban- a signatory, allowing us to help enforce vantage of the opportunity. don a fundamental arms control prin- the provisions of the treaty and deny Before this Senate on July 10, 1919, ciple insisted upon over the last 17 capability to rogue nations than if we Woodrow Wilson closed the debate say- years—that the United States must be are to remain on the outside. ing, ‘‘We are the only hope of mankind. able to effectively verify compliance That is why this treaty has been en- Dare we reject it and break the hearts with the terms of the treaty. Verifica- dorsed by General Powell, 17 other of the world.’’ tion has meant that U.S. intelligence is S3506 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE April 23, 1997 able to detect a breach in an arms con- prohibited chemicals in free and open children killed during the 1980’s by the trol agreement in time to respond ap- countries which will accurately declare Iraqi government. Illegal? Yes, but still propriately and assure preservation of the location of chemical facilities. in use, nonetheless. our national security interests. I be- However, this situation will be much I stand today with all Americans ex- lieve the Senate has an obligation to different for rogue states that are a pressing a grave concern over the in- uphold this sound standard. Let me party to the convention. As arms con- creasing proliferation of chemical and take this opportunity to express my trol verification experts correctly biological weapons. The real question support for Senator HELMS’ condition point out, ‘‘We’ve never found anything here seems to be whether ratification in this regard. I applaud his effort to that’s been successfully hidden.’’ Let of the Chemical Weapons Convention make real verification a condition of me repeat that: ‘‘We’ve never found will increase our own national secu- CWC implementing legislation, if the anything that’s been successfully hid- rity. Unfortunately, the answer is no. treaty is ratified. den.’’ Will the unintended consequence There is little value in implementing Even if verification of compliance of the CWC be that villainous states international laws which do little to were not a concern, this convention will be more secure, and peaceful decrease illegal research, development, would be difficult to enforce. In a states less? and proliferation of chemical weapons sound arms control treaty, the United Furthermore, have all questions worldwide. States must be able to punish other raised in regards to the convention’s I support the goal of making the countries caught in violation of the compatibility with our constitution world safe from the threat of chemical agreement. The Chemical Weapons been sufficiently addressed? The Con- weapons. I applaud the honorable Convention provides only vague, un- vention creates an international mon- statement the CWC makes against these heinous weapons. However, I be- specified sanctions to be imposed on a itoring regime called the Organization lieve the best way to protect ourselves country found in breach of the Conven- for the Prohibition of Chemical Weap- from this threat is by rejecting this tion. Ultimately, the Chemical Weap- ons, or OPCW. The OPCW will be grant- treaty. The convention does nothing to ons convention leaves the U.N. Secu- ed the most extensive monitoring better our security, but may even open rity Council to impose penalties severe power of any arms control treaty ever the door to increasing risks against our enough to change behavior of an out- because it extends coverage to govern- vital security interests and infringing law nation. Since any one of the five mental and civilian facilities. on the rights of innocent citizens. For members of the Security Council can The authority of this international these reason, I am compelled to vote veto any enforcement resolution lodged monitoring regime also raises concern against the ratification of the Chemi- against them or their friends, China about foreign nationals having such cal Weapons Convention. and Russia, for example, could simply broad authority to obtain access to The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. veto resolutions imposing sanctions if property held by private U.S. citizens. FAIRCLOTH). Who yields time? they disagreed with other Security The U.S. chemical industry is known Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, I yield Council members. In sum, it does not to be one of the top industries targeted myself 3 minutes and then I will yield appear that this agreement is verifi- for espionage by foreign companies and to the Senator from Ohio. able or enforceable. governments. There is legitimate The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Even if the enforcement mechanism worry that international inspections Chair recognizes the Senator from to punish violators of the treaty were could jeopardize confidential business Ohio. perfect, countries that represent the information, trade secrets, and other Mr. BIDEN. No, I yield myself 3 min- greatest threat to United States secu- proprietary data. Since the United utes and then I will yield to the Sen- rity such as Iran, Iraq, Libya, Syria, States will be expected to pay 25 per- ator from Ohio. and North Korea have not ratified the cent, or approximately $50 million, of The PRESIDING OFFICER. The treaty and would be under no obliga- the OPCW’s operating costs, American Chair recognizes the distinguished Sen- tion to comply with its terms and con- tax dollars could be subsidizing in- ator from Delaware. ditions. Furthermore, our intelligence creased risk for U.S. business interests. Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, I found it experts tell us that each one of these There is also an implementation cost fascinating, the statement of my friend countries has active and aggressive that will be borne by private industry. from Idaho. He made a very compelling programs to develop and produce chem- The cost for each inspection has been case, from his perspective, as why we ical weapons. estimated as high as $500,000 for large cannot verify the treaty and therefore Iran has a stockpile of blister, chok- chemical companies, and a range of why we should be against the treaty— ing, and blood agents possibly exceed- $10,000 to $20,000 for small companies. because we cannot verify it. We cannot ing 2,000 tons. Their program is the Costs could become even higher if a verify it because, he says, we cannot largest in the Third World. Syria, shutdown is required for an inspection inspect sufficiently well. And that is why he is against the treaty. Then he which has been increasing production to safeguard proprietary information says one of the other reasons he is of chemical weapons since the 1980’s, is or company security. home to several radical terrorist orga- Another issue which has not been against the treaty is because the ver- nizations, including Hamas, the Pal- thoroughly discussed is how the costs ification regime is so intrusive that it estinian Islamic Jihad, and the Popular incurred with the inspections are to be will allow the opposition—allow rogue states to get access to information in Front for the Liberation of Palestine. paid. Estimates of the number of com- the chemical industry. Many worry that Syria could easily panies to be inspected in America vary So, if we correct one problem, which supply these organizations with chemi- from 140 firms to over 10,000 firms. is to make it more verifiable, then he cal weapons. North Korea has a stock- And even though we would pay the would argue he is against the treaty pile of nerve gas, blood agents, and lion’s share of the international mon- because it is verifiable. If you do not mustard gas. Additionally, North itoring regime’s budget, the United make it more verifiable, he said, he is States would have no special status Korea has the ability to unleash large against the treaty because it is not over other signatory nations, no veto scale chemical attacks through mor- verifiable. tars, artillery, multiple rocket launch- power, and no assurance of being a Mr. CRAIG. Will the Senator yield? ers, and Scud missiles. Currently, member of the executive council. Mr. BIDEN. Not on my time. I will be Libya has one chemical weapons pro- In conclusion, making the production delighted to yield on the time of the duction facility in operation, and a and possession of chemical weapons il- Senator, since I have limited time, on larger plant under construction. Iraq legal according to international law Senator HELMS’ time. has not only a substantial capability, will not make them disappear. Use of Mr. CRAIG. I yield myself 1 minute but has demonstrated a willingness to such weapons has been prohibited since off the time of Senator HELMS. use these weapons against their own 1925 yet we have seen the results of Mr. BIDEN. I will be happy to yield people. their use. We all know about the tens when I finish. It has been observed that under the of thousands of deaths from poison gas He also said the intelligence commu- CWC, members to the convention in World War I, and no one could forget nity says, ‘‘They have never found any- would face no difficulty looking for the tragic photographs of the Iranian thing that is successfully hidden.’’ April 23, 1997 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S3507 I do not know how many of you are tinue to do it and we ought to make text in which he talked about it—was golfers. That is like saying you cannot sure that our troops in the field have appropriate and that any country’s sink a putt if it is short. Obviously, a adequate equipment to be able to pro- stock in excess of 1 ton would likely be putt will not go in if it does not get to tect themselves. for offensive military purposes. the hole. Obviously, you cannot un- We must lead by example, but let’s So what he is saying—the 1 ton that cover something that is successfully not walk into or create the illusionary keeps being used—he is saying if you hidden. track that I think the CWC simply of- detect that there is more than a ton of The last point I would make is the fers to the world, and most assuredly chemical weapons out there, they are chemical industry, the outfit that rep- to this country. probably doing it not for peaceful pur- resents the bulk of the chemical indus- The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who poses, they are probably doing it to try has strongly endorsed this treaty. I yields time? gain some military advantage. But it am just responding to the last point Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, I yield would take a lot more than 1 ton to that the chemical industry is the tar- myself as much time as I might take, have a major effect on a battle, a major get. The chemical industry, coinciden- and I am only going to take a few min- effect on our security. He said it would tally, is for this treaty. utes. take thousands of tons. But I would be happy, now, on Sen- Mr. President, the reason I mention Other people may think in this body ator HELMS’ time, to yield back to my the Chemical Manufacturers Associa- that 1 ton is militarily significant and friend from Idaho. tion is not that they should determine if you can’t effectively verify 1 ton Mr. HELMS. Yes, I yield 3 minutes to the foreign policy. My friend from then there is no verification in terms the Senator from Idaho. Idaho is saying that the target of this of our strategic interests. They may Mr. CRAIG. I thank the Senator for kind of espionage, or stealing secrets, think that, but that is not what the yielding. whatever, is going to be the chemical Joint Chiefs think. The 1-ton reference The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- industry. All I am pointing out is, just was for the purpose of determining ator from Idaho. as they should not determine the for- whether or not a country was trying to Mr. CRAIG. Thank you, Mr. Chair- eign policy, I respectfully suggest my do more than use those chemicals for man, for yielding me time. I think it is friend from Idaho does not know any- peaceful purposes. He says, if you have very important that what I said be thing about their secrets. The chemical more than 1 ton, it is a pretty good what I said. Let me reiterate that it industry knows about their secrets, sign that these are bad guys and they would be impossible to verify with and they believe that this treaty fully are trying to do something worse, but rogue nations. We know in this country protects them in maintaining their se- they are nowhere near being militarily we will verify. Our chemical companies crets. That is the point I was making. significant in terms of U.S. security. will be an open door. We have always You know that play and movie that I see my friend. played by the rules of the treaties we is out, ‘‘Don’t Cry for Me Argentina,’’ Mr. HELMS. I think it is fair to let have signed and we have never inten- well, don’t worry about the chemical Senator CRAIG have another whack at tionally or purposely violated them. companies, they think they can take it, and I do wish the former Democratic That is not the point I was trying to care of themselves in terms of their se- Secretary of Defense can be quoted on make, and I think the Senator knows crets. this subject as well. As a matter of that. One last point. The Senator raised, as fact, the news media ignored him en- But, what we do know is that for others have raised, the 1 ton of weap- tirely. countries who choose not to play by ons and 2 tons that could be amassed, I yield the Senator 2 more minutes. international rules—and there are a et cetera. I want to point out what Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, I thank good many out there—it would be dif- John Shalikashvili, Chairman of the my chairman for yielding, and I recog- ficult, if not impossible, for the inter- Joint Chiefs of Staff, said, and he is not nize and appreciate the patience of the national monitoring team to be able to quoted by the Senator from Idaho, but Senator from Ohio. I will be brief. verify compliance. I think that is the others. Everyone quotes John It is very important that it not be point. I have not even discussed, nor Shalikashvili as saying that 1 ton of suggested that all who are in favor did I bring up the point of concern, chemical weapons is militarily signifi- makes it so lopsided that there is no- that we would be releasing informa- cant and that we cannot effectively body in opposition. May I quote Donald tion. I am also concerned about espio- guarantee we could uncover 1 ton. Let Rumsfeld or James Schlesinger or, nage. And I did express that. So, it is me read what General Shalikashvili most important, Edward O’Malley, who important that that part of it be un- said: was the Assistant Director of the Fed- derstood. Our chemical companies, by A militarily significant quantity of chemi- eral Bureau of Investigation, chief of this treaty, would be an open door. cal weapons is situationally dependent. counterintelligence under Ronald Let me also say I do not believe there Thousands— Reagan. He speaks of many companies’ is a chemical company in this country Thousands— great concerns about both economic that is an expert in international af- of tons of chemical agent would be required and secret espionage and expresses his fairs. Nor do I want the executives of to significantly impact on a large scale en- opposition to it. these chemical companies negotiating gagement while a mere ton of agent could be Here are the names of 25 major CEO’s a treaty. Nor do I want them establish- effective as a weapon of terror. of chemical companies who stand ing the foreign policy of this country. I He went on to say: clearly in opposition to this treaty. Mr. believe that is the job of the Senator, In certain limited circumstances— President, I ask unanimous consent and it is mine, and the job of this body, I emphasize ‘‘in certain limited cir- that these ladies and gentlemen and and of the President of the United cumstances’’— their statements be printed in the States. even 1 ton of chemical agent may have a RECORD. I’m sorry, no matter what the chemi- military impact, for example, if chemical There being no objection, the mate- cal industry says, frankly, I don’t care. weapons are used as a weapon of terror rial was ordered to be printed in the What I do care about is the security of against an unprotected population in a re- RECORD, as follows: this country. What I do care about is gional conflict. AMERICA’S TOP FOREIGN POLICY, DEFENSE, our national sovereignty. And what I He went on to say further: AND ECONOMIC EXPERTS RAISE CONCERNS do care about is the issue of verifica- The United States should be resolute that OVER THE CWC’S IMPACT ON U.S. BUSINESS tion. I think this treaty simply does the 1-ton limit set by the convention will be Steve Forbes, President and CEO of Forbes not get us where we need to get for a our guide. Inc.: ‘‘....As I have strenuously argued on safer world. He did not mean, however, that 1 ton other occasions, maintaining America’s com- I must say, I am tremendously proud was an appropriate standard for what petitive edge requires a lessening of the tax and regulatory burdens on the American peo- and I have supported this country’s dis- constitutes effective verifiability. ple and on our Nation’s enterprises. Unfortu- arming itself of chemical and biologi- Rather, General Shali meant that the nately, the CWC will have precisely the op- cal weapons. I encourage us to do that. 1-ton limit in the CWC on agent stocks posite effect. It will burden up to 8,000 com- We have done it and we ought to con- for peaceful purposes—that is the con- panies across the United States. Remember, S3508 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE April 23, 1997 these are in the hands of an international Agency: ‘‘. . . the opportunity for unfettered mainder inside of the equipment that is used bureaucracy, not what we would like them access to virtually every industrial facility for sample analysis on-site. to be, with major new reporting regulatory in this country, not merely the pharma- They found out that, indeed, there is resi- and inspection requirements entailing large ceutical and chemical plants, would make due remaining. And if the equipment were and uncompensated compliance costs. These most foreign intelligence organizations very taken off-site, off of the Lawrence Livermore added costs constitute an unfunded Federal happy, even gleeful. It is likely to cause the Laboratory site, or off of the site of a bio- mandate. Like so many mandates, they are counterintelligence sections of the FBI and technology firm, for example, and further bound to retard our economic growth and the Defense Investigative Service major analysis were done on those residues, you make our companies less competitive. problems for the foreseeable future. The in- would be able to get classified and/or propri- ...in addition to the costs arising from spection procedures which apply to ALL in- etary information.’’ heavy duty reporting, the CWC subjects our dustries constitute unprecedented access to ‘‘. . . . My bottom line is that the use of chemical companies to snap inspections that our manufacturing base, not just to those treaty inspections for espionage is easy, ef- will allow other nations access to our latest thought likely to be engaged in proscribed fective, and all but impossible to detect . . . chemical equipment and information. No activities! My experience in protecting pat- Hypothetically, an inspector could either be longer will violators of intellectual property ents and intellectual property over the past an intelligence official assigned to be an in- rights in China, Iran, and elsewhere, have to ten years leads me to conclude that there is spector or could later sell information to a go to the trouble of pirating our secrets... the potential for the loss of untold billions of company or country abroad that reveals ei- Some might even regard such burdens as a dollars in trade secrets which can be used to ther classified or CBI, confidential business barrier to entry that can enhance their mar- gain competitive advantage, to shorten R&D information, that they might have gleaned ket share at the expense of their smaller cycles, and a steal US market share.’’ through the process of gathering samples competitors.’’ Edward J. O’Malley, former Assistant Di- and analyzing them.’’ Donald Rumsfeld, former Secretary of De- rector of Federal Bureau of Investigation, Ralph S. Cunninghan, President and CEO fense and President and former Chairman Chief of Counterintelligence: ‘‘The activities of Citgo Petroleum Corporation: ‘‘CITGO be- and CEO of G.D. Searle and Company: ‘‘...Big of the former Soviet Union and others are as lieves that the requisite inspections associ- companies seem to get along fine with big aggressive as ever, and remain a major ated with the Treaty will, no doubt, jeopard- government. They get along with American threat. What is new, however, is the in- ize confidential business information as well government, they get along with foreign gov- creased importance given by them to the col- as disrupt normal business operations. ernments, they get along with international lection of American corporate proprietary We realize that the petroleum industry is not the specific target of this treaty. Never- organizations, and they have the ability, information. theless, it will be affected because of the ex- with all their Washington representatives, to .. . One of the greatest concerns of compa- tensive list of chemicals covered by the trea- deal effectively with bureaucracies... Indeed, nies . . . is that the CWC will open them up ty.’’ that capability on the part of the big compa- to economic espionage. I think their con- cerns are well-justified. . . . The acquisition William Arbitman, Associate General nies actually serves as a sort of barrier to Counsel for the Dial Corp: ‘‘We are not pre- entry to small and medium-sized companies of American trade secrets has become a high stakes business involving billions and bil- pared to receive a foreign inspection team to that lack that capability. So I do not sug- our facilities, and we would be greatly con- gest... for one minute that large American lions of dollars, and I would be able to pay an agent handsomely to acquire such informa- cerned that such a visit might compromise companies are not going to be able to cope our confidential business information.’’ tion’’ with the regulations. They will do it a whale Kevin Kearns, President of the U.S. Busi- Deborah Wince-Smith, former Assistant of a lot better than small and medium sized ness and Industrial Council: ‘‘On behalf of Secretary of Commerce for Technology Pol- companies... the 1,000 member companies of the United icy (in September 9, 1996, letter signed joint- I don’t believe that the thousands—what- States Business Industrial Council (USBIC), ly by Secretaries Weinberger, Rumsfeld, and ever the number is—of companies across this I strongly urge you to oppose ratification of others): ‘‘What the CWC will do, however, is country know about this treaty in any de- the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC). tail, believe that the treaty would apply to quite troubling: It will create a massive new, . . . the CWC effectively authorizes indus- them, understand that they could be sub- UN-style international inspection bureauc- trial espionage. The CWC offers no protec- jected to inspections, appreciate the un- racy (which will help the total cost of this tions for company formulas and other trade funded mandates that would be imposed on treaty to U.S. taxpayers amount to as much secrets; they must be handed over if in- them in the event this were to pass.’’ as $200 million per year). It will jeopardize spected. Nothing would prevent other un- James Schlesinger, former Secretary of U.S. citizens constitutional rights by requir- scrupulous countries such as France and Defense and former Director of Central Intel- ing the government to permit searches with- China from placing intelligence officers on ligence: ‘‘The convention permits or encour- out either warrants or probable cause. It will the inspection team.’’ ages challenge inspections against any facil- impose a costly and complex regulatory bur- Larry Postelwait, President of the Crosby ity deemed capable of producing chemical den on U.S. industry. As many as 8,000 com- Group, Inc.: ‘‘I have several concerns regard- weapons—indeed, against any facility. This panies across the country may be subjected ing the access of our facilities to a foreign exposes American companies to a degree of to new reporting requirements entailing un- inspection team. The treaty, as written, industrial espionage never before encoun- compensated annual costs of between thou- gives them too much authority considering tered in this country. This implies the possi- sands to hundreds-of-thousands of dollars per they could interfere with our operations and bility of the capture of proprietary informa- year to comply. Most of these American affect production. It also makes us vulner- tion or national security information from companies have no idea they will be af- able to our global competitors since they American corporations by present or by pro- fected.’’ could benefit from interfering with our pro- spective commercial rivals. Bruce Merrifield, former Assistant Sec- duction and from gaining close insight into ...we are dealing with the possible indus- retary of Commerce for Technology: ‘‘I am our operations.’’ trial espionage in the United States, and quite concerned about the Chemical Weapons David M. Craig, Manager of Environmental that industrial espionage is going to be a Convention which, in its current form, would and Safety Compliance for the Detrex Cor- godsend—I repeat, a godsend—to foreign in- seriously diminish our U.S. competitive ad- poration: ‘‘Although reverse engineering of a telligence agencies and to the corporations vantage in the currently existing hyper-com- product (the process of determining the prod- which will feed on those foreign intelligence petitive global marketplace . . . industrial ucts’ composition or molecular structure) agencies.’’ espionage by countries that do not have an may be possible, many companies enjoy a Lieutenant General William Odom, former equivalent capability to make basic discov- competitive advantage in a market due to Director of the National Security Agency: eries, now accounts for the theft each year of the manufacturing process used. Process ‘‘Looking at the verification regime as a some $24 billion to perhaps over $100 billion ‘‘trade secrets’’ may include items as simple former official of the Intelligence Commu- of U.S. proprietary technology. The Chemi- as: the type of equipment used, manufactur- nity, I am disturbed by it, not just because it cal Weapons Convention would literally open ing parameters, or even who supplies a par- is impossible to verify, but also because it the floodgates of access to U.S. technology ticular raw material. Allowing inspectors can complicate U.S. security problems. by foreign nations. Virtually unannounced full access to a company’s manufacturing Take, for example, the U.N.-like organiza- inspections by scientific experts, taking site and records could have a large impact on tion to be set up to make inspections. All of samples and inspecting invoices can quickly a company’s ability to compete in domestic the appointed members may have no foreign uncover the proprietary nature of any indus- and international trade.’’ intelligence links initially. As they find that trial operation, bypassing millions of dollars Tracy Hesp, Assistant to the Director of they can tramp around in all kinds of U.S. of research and many years of development Regulatory Affairs for Farnam Industries: production facilities, however, foreign intel- time that a U.S. company has expended to ‘‘First, the short-notice challenge inspec- ligence services are likely to offer to supple- create its competitive advantage.’’ tions that can be initiated by foreign states ment their wages for a little ‘‘technology Kathleen Bailey, Senior Fellow, Lawrence would be a burden physically and financially. collection’’ activity on the side. And they Livermore Laboratories, former Assistant We have confidential information concerning will provide truly sophisticated covert tech- Director for the Arms Control and Disar- formulations and manufacturing procedures nical means to facilitate such endeavors.’’ mament Agency ‘‘Experts in my laboratory that we need to protect.’’ Lieutenant General James Williams, recently conducted experiments to deter- Lesa McDonald, Environmental/Safety former Director of the Defense Intelligence mine whether or not there would be a re- Manager for the Gemini Company: ‘‘. . . April 23, 1997 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S3509 hosting such an inspection would be a seri- erally large chemical manufacturers, and re- meet the market. The reporting alone would ous hindrance to our business. It would be portedly more than 60 percent of the facili- require additional personnel, much less the very difficult to safeguard confidential busi- ties likely affected by the CWC are not CMA cost of potential inspection, interpreting the ness information during such an inspection. members. regulations, etc. We currently have 10% of We have serious reservations about the Large companies possess far greater re- our work force assigned to nothing but regu- ability of more legislation and further regu- sources and have accrued significant experi- latory functions, mostly environmental. At lation of U.S. industry to solve the chemical ence in dealing with regulators of all kinds. some point these non-profit producing efforts weapons problem. Further, since the coun- In fact, new regulatory burdens can per- will outweigh the value of keeping the busi- tries of Libya, Iraq, Syria and North Korea versely give large firms a competitive edge ness operating. refuse to sign this treaty, how will further over smaller companies due to these re- * * * There are months where the cost of reporting requirements, and inspection of source and experience factors. As economist compliance with this treaty would com- businesses such as ours prohibit the develop- Thomas Hopkins has shown, the per-em- pletely eliminate the profit for the month. ment of chemical weapons?’’ ployee cost of federal regulation runs almost You can explain to our employees how this is John Hobbs, Safety Coordinator for Crafco, 50 percent higher for firms with fewer than more important to the nation than them get- Inc.: ‘‘The potential for abuse, specifically 500 employees versus companies with more ting a paycheck, or having health coverage, the theft of trade secrets both formulations than 500 employees.’’ or having a retirement plan, or having a and process oriented is significant. Unan- Marvin Gallisdorfer, President of Lomac, profit sharing check.’’ nounced inspections are also costly in terms Inc.: ‘‘It is not possible to estimate the John Hohnholt, Vice-President of Valero of production disruption. A second concern amount of time that it will take to fill out Refining Company: ‘‘Valero is an independ- would be that the apparent goals of this the various CWC forms, but I can assure you ent refinery with limited staff resources treaty are enforceable in the United States that the total time will far exceed the 2–10 which are already overwhelmed with regu- under already existing statutes. Industry hour estimate found in Section 1.A. [of the latory compliance record keeping and re- sponsored terrorism in the form of chemical Draft Department of Commerce Regula- porting. This additional burden on our staff weapons manufacture is controllable without tions.]. The instructions alone will require a appears excessive and probably unintended external intervention. Finally, without the substantial commitment of time. After the for our industry.’’ Odus Hennessee, President and COO for assent of the states sponsoring terrorism data is gathered, it must be checked thor- Cosmetic Specialty Labs: ‘‘The ultimate re- this treaty really amounts to the good guys oughly to assure accuracy, because an hon- sult is to simply add unnecessary costs to policing the good guys and picking up what- est mistake can (and most assuredly will in the production of our products making it dif- ever they can in the process.’’ some cases) lead to a $50,000 fine. Even if, ficult if not impossible to sell our products J. Doug Pruitt, President of the Sundt Cor- however, we estimate a 20-hour commitment in our own market, much less to compete in poration: ‘‘Based upon the depth of inspec- per form, where can we find the 20 hours? the international marketplace.’’ tion, e.g. interviews with corporate person- Our staff is already employed full-time fill- nel, employees, vendors, subcontractors; re- ing out a host of forms and applications for THE THEFT OF TRADE SECRETS view of drawings, purchase orders, sub- the Michigan Department of Environmental Don Fuqua, President of the Aerospace In- contracts; inspection and review of internal Quality, the U.S. EPA, and other govern- dustries Association: ‘‘We are very con- and external correspondence; we feel that it ment agencies. I have enclosed, for your in- cerned, however, that the application of the could be difficult to safeguard confidential formation, copies of the reports that we are Convention’s reporting and inspection re- business information during this inspection. required to file annually. As you can see, gime to AIA member companies could unnec- This has to do not only with our internal this is quite a bit of paperwork—and we are essarily jeopardize our nation’s ability to corporate information but we would be con- a relatively small (150–200 employees) com- protect its national security information and cerned about information that we have pany. proprietary technological data.’’ signed a confidentiality agreement with our * * * I truly believe that this CWC will Rear Admiral Jim Carey, Chairman of 21st partners and/or customers.’’ cost American jobs without any benefit. The Century Coatings: ‘‘This communication is United States can be trusted to refrain from to urge you in the strongest possible terms U.S. COMPANIES ARE EXTREMELY WORRIED making chemical weapons, but I cannot be- to oppose the Chemical Weapons Convention ABOUT THE CWC—A MASSIVE NEW PAPERWORK lieve that certain other countries will abide on the grounds that it will cost my company BURDEN by the treaty. Because of the adverse impact an outrageous amount of money and subject S. Reed Morian, CEO of Dixie Chemical on Michigan’s chemical industry (with little us to intrusive international inspections Company, Inc. (a CMA-member company): or no off-setting benefit) I urge you to vote that we can ill afford. We make paint under ‘‘We would incur a significant increase in against ratification of the treaty.’’ trade-secret technology that with one coat data reporting under the CWC. . . . I’m cer- Edward Noble, Senior Corporate Environ- can stop all rust and corrosion for 50 years. tain we could not comply with the CWC mental Specialist for ISK Biosciences Cor- We have spent the last 6 months researching under our current budget. The CWC would poration: ‘‘In general, we believe that ban- construction of a new plant in Texas. The probably require an increase in headcount at ning chemical weapons is a laudable goal. CWC will bring that effort to a screeching our plant. . . . It would be of little benefit Since those countries most likely to insti- halt and instead we will look offshore. The for the U.S. to rigorously participate in the gate the use of chemical weapons are not CWC will not stop the world chemical weap- CWC, if ALL the nations of the world don’t among the signatories of the CWC, it would ons threat; it will only put people like us out also participate. seem that this convention creates a lot of of business.’’ Thank you again for allowing us this op- paper and does very little to gain the goal of Eduardo Beruff, President of SICPA Indus- portunity to comment on a treaty ratifica- eliminating chemical weapons.’’ tries of America, Inc.: ‘‘For the reasons out- tion that could impact us so greatly.’’ Paul Eisman, Vice President of Ultraform- lined below, we at SICPA Industries of Amer- Robert Roten, the President and CEO of Diamond Shamrock: ‘‘* * * our costs have ica, Inc. (‘‘SICPA’’) respectfully urge you to Sterling Chemicals (a CMA-member com- increased by an estimated $1 million per year reject this treaty. pany): ‘‘We are very concerned about control over the last couple of years just to meet . . . SICPA Industries of America, Inc. is and cooperation of other countries (Mexico, new regulatory paperwork demands. We are the foremost manufacturer of security inks Colombia, North Korea, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, incurring these costs, but should assume used in printing U.S. currency, and is a lead- Libya, Croatia, etc.). Since they probably that our customers are paying for these in er in developing new security ink tech- will not cooperate, how does this treaty as- the long run * * *. We cannot comply with nologies to protect the nation’s valuable doc- sure a ‘‘worldwide ban?’’ . . . We are familiar the requirements of this treaty with our cur- uments and proprietary products. . . . The with the Chemical Weapons Convention and rent staff and resources. We estimate addi- proposed Chemical Weapons Convention we understand our responsibilities (and li- tional costs of $250,000 annually to comply.’’ would impose new financial burdens on abilities) should this treaty become U.S. Jim Moon, President of Moon Chemical SICPA and similar companies in order to at- law. . . . We cannot comply within our cur- Products, Inc.: ‘‘The reporting requirements tain and maintain compliance. More impor- rent annual budget and personnel con- in this treaty are a burden for any company tantly, it could jeopardize the security of straints. Our best estimates is that this trea- not involved in weapons * * * We are manu- SICPA’s invaluable trade secret informa- ty will cost Sterling a minimum of $100,000 facturers of industrial, institutional, and ag- tion.’’ per year and should an inspection occur at ricultural products. Several years ago we S. Reed Morian, CEO of Dixie Chemical least another $200,000–$300,000 will possibly had to hire an outside consultant to make Company, Inc. (a CMA-member company): be required.’’ sure we meet government regulations for our ‘‘While the intent of the CWC is of the high- Raymond Keating, Chief Economist for the business, our employees, and our customers. est merit, the regulations appear to be very Small Business Survival Committee: ‘‘Of Please do not add another burden to our in- onerous requiring increased reporting and course, smaller businesses will be hit hardest dustry.’’ record keeping, foreign inspection of our fa- by these increased regulatory costs. Interest- Nick Carter, President of South Hampton cilities, and a significant challenge to our ingly, the Chemical Manufacturers Associa- Refining Company: ‘‘No, we could not com- ability to maintain Confidential Business In- tion (CMA) supports ratification of the CWC ply with this treaty within our current an- formation (CBI) . . . We are not prepared to and told the Senate Foreign Relations Com- nual budget and personnel. The reason we have a foreign inspection team in our plant. mittee that the new regulations would not are in business as a small refiner is that we I doubt that CBI could be safeguarded during be a burden. But the CMA is a group of gen- change the operation quickly and often to such an inspection.’’ S3510 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE April 23, 1997 Ralph Johnson, Vice President of Environ- dinary access to files, data, equipment, etc. I yield back any time. mental Affairs of Dixie Chemical Company: A company might as well post its trade se- Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, I yield 30 ‘‘. . . If we use EPA inspections as an exam- crets on the Internet. seconds to myself. I ask unanimous The challenging country would send along ple, these foreign Chemical Weapon Conven- consent that a statement of the Chemi- tion inspections could cost up to maybe an observer, and even though he wouldn’t be $50,000 per site. . . . These inspections would permitted beyond a specified perimeter, cal Manufacturers Association be be very costly and burdensome. The biggest there’s a lot he would be able to learn from printed in the RECORD, as well as the problem with these inspections, however, is that distance. In a mock inspection that the list of those companies supporting this . . . our highly probable loss of confidential U.S. carried out using the CWC’s proposed treaty. business information. An inspector observing rules, the ‘‘observer’’ was able to steal pro- There being no objection, the mate- one of our reactors would know, for the prod- prietary information simply by gathering rial was ordered to be printed in the soil and water samples from his spot on the uct being observed, our operating pressures, RECORD, as follows: temperatures, catalysts, reaction time, in- edge of the inspection site. CHEMICAL MANUFACTURERS gredients, purification methods, pollution Worse, there are no guarantees that the in- ASSOCIATION, abatement methods. We would no longer spectors themselves won’t moonlight as Arlington, VA, April 18, 1997. have any confidential technology, methodol- spies. Senator Helms raised this issue during Hon. JOSEPH R. BIDEN, ogy, or know-how relative to this product. It Madeleine Albright’s confirmation hearing U.S. Senate, Washington, DC. would be gone forever.’’ in January. He pointed to evidence that Chi- nese applicants for OPCW inspector jobs had DEAR SENATOR BIDEN: On April 24, the Sen- Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, I also ask been ‘‘directed to volunteer’’ and that most ate will vote on whether to ratify the Chemi- unanimous consent that an editorial had ties to the People’s Liberation Army’s cal Weapons Convention (CWC). On behalf of from the Wall Street Journal that I chemical ‘‘defense’’ program. It’s not hard to nine organizations representing a broad spec- think speaks very openly to the con- imagine the damage an inspector-spy could trum of chemical producers, consumers, and cerns that many in the chemical indus- do. Reverse engineering is one threat, but professionals, I urge your strong support of try have as it relates to what they even something seemingly as simple as the this important treaty. type of equipment used in a manufacturing Opponents of the CWC contend that the would be required to do, which is open process could constitute a trade secret. treaty will have a catastrophic impact on their doors wide and embrace an inter- All this poses a danger to national secu- American business, including a burdensome national inspection team, be printed in rity. Kathleen Bailey of Lawrence Livermore regulatory system, intrusive on-site inspec- the RECORD. National Laboratory testified to that effect tions, and losses of proprietary information. There being no objection, the edi- before the Senate Foreign Relations Com- The facts, however, bear out our belief that torial was ordered to be printed in the mittee last year. She said ‘‘classified infor- the CWC is the right thing to do: mation can be obtained from sampling and RECORD, as follows: Less than 2,000 facilities nationwide will analysis during, and perhaps after, inspec- have any responsibilities under the CWC. Of [From the Wall Street Journal] tions under the Chemical Weapons Conven- these, ninety percent will have to do no more HERE COME THE SPIES tion. Furthermore, clandestine sampling than fill out a two-page report once a year. We’ve already made the case for why the would be virtually impossible to detect or to The chemical industry helped develop the Senate should reject the Chemical Weapons prevent.’’ In the defense area, stealth tech- procedures by which fewer than 200 facilities Convention. The last thing the world needs nology is particularly at risk; a challenge in- will be inspected. We then tested those provi- is another unverifiable arms control treaty. spection of a U.S. defense contractor could sions in a series of full-fledged trial inspec- The worst danger here is creating the illu- yield much on that score. tions at plant sites. We helped confirm that sion that we are ridding the world of the So far, the debate on the Chemical Weap- inspected companies have a role in determin- threat of chemical weapons. But there’s an- ons Convention hasn’t moved beyond Wash- ing how inspections will be conducted, and other danger: The treaty would be a bonanza ington to the boardroom. Only a few compa- the extent to which inspection teams access to countries that are in the business of spy- nies—Dial Soap and Citgo Petroleum among the facilities. ing on American business. them—have spoken out against the treaty. Industry representatives helped write the Worst hit would be the defense and aero- It’s perhaps understandable that most CEOs treaty provisions that safeguard confidential space industry—and hence national secu- would assume that a treaty on chemical business information. Chemical companies rity—but plenty of other industries would be weapons wouldn’t affect them. It does and worked closely with the Administration in subject to industrial espionage. There has they’d be wise to pay attention. drafting the CWC implementing legislation never been an arms control treaty whose CWC IS WATCHING that complements those safeguards. reach would extend so far into ordinary busi- From a May 14, 1996 list compiled by the The chemical industry has continued its ness, both through its reporting require- Arms Control and Disarmament Agency of efforts to further narrow the potential im- ments and its inspection regime. companies that would be subject to the pact of the Convention on commercial inter- The CWC covers not just companies that Chemical Weapons Convention: Archer Dan- ests. We successfully advocated a complete manufacture certain chemicals and discrete iels Midland Co., Armco Steel Co., Castrol, exemption for polymer and oligomer produc- organic chemicals, but also those that use Citgo Petroleum Corp., Colgate-Palmolive ers, which means that the plastics and tex- them to make something else—such as auto- Co., Dial Corp., General Motors Corp., Gil- tile industries are not subject to the Conven- mobiles, pharmaceuticals, electronics or lette Co., Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., Jim tion. We helped push an exemption for petro- even liquor. The Arms Control and Disar- Beam Brands Co., Kaiser Aluminum, Lever leum refineries and explosives manufactur- mament Agency has drawn up a list of more Brothers Co., Maxwell House Coffee Co., ers. We have worked to develop reasonable, than 1,000 American companies that would Nutrasweet Co., Pfizer, Quaker Oats Co., low concentration limits that are commer- be subject to the treaty’s terms. Others say Raytheon Co, Safeway Stores; Sherwin Wil- cially practicable, yet provide the level of at least 6,000 companies would be affected. liams Co., Simpson Timber Co., Winn-Dixie verification necessary to assure that the The Chemical Manufacturers Association Stores, and Xerox Corp. CWC is not being violated. has been vocal in pooh-poohing the treaty’s Source: Senate Foreign Relations Commit- On April 17, the Senate passed Senator reporting and inspection requirements, tee. Kyl’s legislation, S. 495. Although Senator which may in fact not be much for the Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, my point Kyl’s legislation would generally expand the CMA’s already highly regulated membership is simply this. There are reasonable legal basis for domestic action against chem- of fewer than 200 companies. But companies people on both sides of this issue who ical weapons proliferation, it is important that make such things as soap or tires or differ and are very loud about the con- that you know that S. 495 is not a substitute paint are going to find the paperwork alone cerns they have. The chemical industry for the Chemical Weapons Convention. an expensive new irritant. is not monolithic at all when it comes For example, S. 495 provides no mechanism Far more troublesome, however, is the to support for this. There are a sub- for multilateral agreement to prevent or treaty’s proposed inspection regime, to be prohibit the production, storage, develop- carried out by a new international bureauc- stantial number within it who are ex- ment or use of chemical weapons. It provides racy in the Hague called the Organization for tremely concerned that they may ex- no means for investigating potential diver- the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons. A bet- pose their companies to tremendous sions to illegal weapons uses. And it does not ter name might be the Organization for the economic risk and to the liability of remedy the trade impacts that will arise Promotion of Industrial Espionage. the loss of their secrets that relate to when the CWC’s trade ban goes into effect OPCW will conduct both routine inspec- the formulas for the production of three years from now. CMA estimates that tions and ‘‘challenge’’ inspections at the re- peaceful goods and services to our some $500 to $600 million in two way trade quest of member governments. Under the country. I think it is important that will be at risk if this ban goes into effect. terms of the treaty, it would be next to im- Moreover, S. 495 does nothing to prevent possible for the U.S. to halt a frivolous or that be said at this time and that the trade barriers being imposed by CWC Par- abusive inspection. A challenge inspection names and quotes of these ladies and ties, aimed at U.S. trade in chemicals. would take place with less than a day’s no- gentlemen become a part of the The chemical industry is America’s largest tice, and inspectors would have extraor- RECORD. exporter surpassing agriculture, aerospace, April 23, 1997 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S3511 computers, etc. It is the world leader in tech- President, Ashland Chemical Company; Mr. President, I rise to urge my col- nological development, research and innova- John R. Danzeisen, Chairman, ICI leagues to vote in favor of ratification tion. The industry works hard to maintain Americas Inc.; Earnest W. Deavenport, of the Chemical Weapons Convention that leadership. The industry has main- Jr., Chairman of the Board and CEO, with its 28 agreed conditions. tained a trade surplus for 68 consecutive Eastman Chemical Company. So far in this century, we have wit- years. You can be assured that the chemical R. Keith Elliott, Chairman, President & industry would not be silent if the CWC truly CEO, Hercules Incorporated; Darryl D. nessed the use of chemical weapons in jeopardized commercial interests. Fry, Chairman, President and CEO, Europe, in China and in the Middle For your further information, I have en- Cytec Industries Inc.; Michael C. East, and we have seen the absolutely closed a copy of an advertisement that ap- Harnetty, Division Vice President, 3M; revolting photographs of victims of peared in the April 14, 1997 issue of Roll Call. Richard A. Hazleton, Chairman & CEO, chemical weapons attacks at the Iraqi I have also enclosed a copy of a letter signed Dow Corning Corporation; Alan R. village of Halabja and the Tokyo sub- by members of CMA’s Board of Directors, re- Hirsig, President & CEO, ARCO Chemi- way. Some of us may have seen the fa- iterating their support for this important cal Company; Gerald L. Hoerig, Presi- mous photograph of the great violinist, agreement. dent, Syntex Chemicals, Inc.; Jack L. In short, Senator, we need your vote in Howe, Jr., President, Phillips Chemical Isaac Stern, performing in Israel while favor of the Chemical Weapons Convention. Company; Jon M. Huntsman, Jr., Vice wearing a gas mask during the Iraqi If you have any questions concerning the Chairman, Huntsman Corporation; occupation of Kuwait. Let there be no chemical industry’s support for the CWC, Donald M. James, President & CEO, doubt about it, these weapons do please call me or Claude Boudrias, Legisla- Vulcan Materials Company; Dale R. present a clear and present danger to tive Representative for Tax and Trade at Laurance, President and Sr. Operating our security and the security of our al- (703) 741–5915. Officer, Occidental Petroleum Corpora- Sincerely, lies around the world. They have not tion; Raymond W. LeBoeuf, President acquired the nickname, ‘‘poor man’s FREDERICK L. WEBBER, & CEO, PPG Industries, Inc.; James A. President and Chief Executive Officer. Mack, President & CEO, Cambrex Cor- nukes’’ for nothing. They are cheap to poration; Hans C. Noetzli, President & make, easy to conceal, and can have APRIL 15, 1997. CEO, Lonza, Inc.; Robert G. Potter, Ex- devastating effects. Hon. TRENT LOTT, ecutive Vice President, Monsanto Com- Since 1995, the Permanent Sub- Senate Majority Leader, U.S. Senate, pany; Arthur R. Sigel, President & committee on Investigations of the Washington, DC. CEO, Velsicol Chemical Corporation; Committee on Governmental Affairs DEAR SENATOR LOTT: We, the undersigned Enrique J. Sosa, Executive Vice Presi- members of the Chemical Manufacturers As- has held six hearings titled ‘‘Global dent-Chemicals Sector, Amoco Cor- Proliferation of Weapons of Mass De- sociation’s Board of Directors, are writing to poration; William Stavropoulos, Presi- ask you to support the Chemical Weapons dent & CEO, The Dow Chemical Cor- struction,’’ which documented in vivid Convention (CWC). poration; F. Quinn Stepan, Chairman & detail the gravity of the threat our We believe the Convention is a fair and ef- President, Stepan Company; S. Jay country faces from both chemical and fective international response to the inter- Stewart, Chairman & CEO, Morton biological weapons. The three commit- national threat of chemical weapons pro- International, Inc.; Robert O. Swanson, tee prints covering these hearings con- liferation. Ratifying the CWC is in the na- Executive Vice President, Mobil Cor- tain over 2,000 pages of relevant docu- tional interest. poration; Rudy van der Meer, Member, The CWC is a natural extension of existing mentation. While I was chairman of Board of Management, Akzo Nobel nv; U.S. policy. In 1985, Congress voted to end that committee, I chaired personally Jeroen van der Veer, President & CEO, production of chemical weapons by the mili- Shell Chemical Company; George A. four hearings on ‘‘Global Spread of tary and to begin destroying existing stock- Vincent, Chairman, President & CEO, Chemical and Biological Weapons.’’ In piles. The C.P. Hall Company; J. Virgil 1989, that produced another 746 pages of For years, the United States has imposed Waggoner, President & CEO, Sterling documentation on these threats and the world’s strongest controls on exports of Chemicals, Inc.; H. A. Wagner, Chair- weapons-making ingredients. Our nation is the various choices facing our country man & CEO, Air Products & Chemicals, the standard bearer in preventing the spread by way of responses. Inc.; Helge H. Wehmeier, President & of chemical weapons. Mr. President, today is not the day The CWC requires other nations to do what CEO, Bayer Corporation; Ronald H. for additional hand wringing over these the United States is already doing. That’s Yocum, President & CEO, Millennium nightmares. Today is the day finally to Petrochemical Company. why President Reagan proposed the treaty to do something truly constructive to al- the United Nations in 1984. It’s why Presi- Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, just as my leviate these threats and stop the hand dent Bush signed the treaty in Paris in 1993. friend from Idaho knows a lot about wringing. In this case, constructive And it’s why President Clinton is asking the mining and knows a lot about potatoes means multilateral, since we are deal- Senate to ratify it. and knows a lot about apples, because ing here with a truly global threat, not The chemical industry has thoroughly ex- they are big issues in his State, I as- one susceptible to solution by unilat- amined the CWC. We have tested the treaty’s sure you, being a Senator from Dela- record-keeping and inspection provisions. eral U.S. legislation. For example, bills ware, if there was any genuine opposi- And we have concluded that the benefits of like S. 495, which passed a badly di- the CWC far outweigh the costs. tion from the chemical industry for this treaty, since most of those compa- vided Senate last week after virtually Ratifying the CWC is the right thing to do. no serious debate and without a single We urge you to vote for the Convention. nies are incorporated in my State and Sincerely, it makes up 56 percent of my State’s hearing, would, if enacted, impose yet Frederick L. Webber, President & CEO, economy, I assure you, I would hear another death penalty, while opening Chemical Manufacturers Association; about it. up several new loopholes for continued J. Lawrence Wilson, Chairman & CEO, Now, there may be some companies U.S. possession of both chemical and Rohm and Haas Company, Chairman, that do not like it, but I want to tell biological weapons. Fortunately, we Board of Directors, Chemical Manufac- you, to use the expression, there may have an alternative approach to con- turers Association; John E. Akitt, Ex- sider. ecutive Vice President, Exxon Chemi- be reasons why for this in the minds of my colleagues, but none of the big Today, we can vote on a resolution cal Company; Phillip D. Ashkettle, providing our advice and consent to President and CEO, Reichhold Chemi- boys, none of the outfits that do this as cals, Inc.; Bernard Azoulay, President a big business, none of the outfits with ratify a treaty that does not just ad- and CEO, Elf Atochem North America; multibillion-dollar operations, none of dress the problem of halting the pro- William G. Bares, Chairman and CEO, them, that I am aware of, are opposed liferation of these weapons, but a trea- The Lubrizol Corporation; Jerald A. to this treaty. They strongly support ty that will also set the world on a Blumberg, Executive Vice President, it. course finally to eliminate such weap- DuPont, Chairman, DuPont Europe; I yield 7 minutes to my friend from ons everywhere. Though we will not ob- Michael R. Boyce, CEO & President, Ohio. viously achieve these goals overnight Harris Chemical Group; Vincent A. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The simply by ratifying the CWC, we will Calarco, Chairman, President & CEO, Crompton & Knowles Corporation; Wil- Chair recognizes the distinguished Sen- be taking a crucial step toward achiev- liam R. Cook, Chairman, President and ator from Ohio. ing that ultimate goal. CEO, BetzDearborn Inc.; Albert J. Mr. GLENN. I thank the Chair, and I My argument, simply put, is that we Costello, Chairman, President & CEO, ask the Chair to please notify me when just cannot solve the global problems W.R. Grace & Co.; David J. D’Antoni, I have used 6 minutes. of the CWC destruction, proliferation, S3512 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE April 23, 1997 terrorism and warfare by acting alone. tries. Second, it provides for a system such criticisms. I believe it is good to The international framework, machin- of on-site challenge inspections operat- hear the views of such critics, to listen ery, reporting procedures, and enforce- ing on the principle of managed access carefully to their interpretations of the ment and verification mechanisms of to ensure the protection of proprietary flaws of this treaty, to debate points on this treaty will complement and rein- information, constitutional rights, and which there is disagreement, and to force—not compete with, substitute for national security interests. These in- come to a decision on what is in the or compromise—our own national mili- spections will be conducted by the Or- long-term interest of our country. This tary, intelligence, and diplomatic ef- ganization for the Prohibition of Chem- is what the whole ratification process forts against the global CW threat. ical Weapons [OPCW]. This system of is all about. Though no treaty is per- The time has now come to put into verification has been worked out not fect and the CWC is no exception to place the international legal founda- just in consultation with industry, but this rule, by my reckoning the flaws in tion necessary to eliminate chemical with the strong and continuing support this treaty are not sufficient grounds weapons once and for all. I am proud to of industry. for the Senate not to proceed with rati- fication. be here on this historical occasion to NOTHING PERFECT speak on behalf of and to vote in favor I would now like to discuss briefly I believe that this system of verifica- some of the main criticisms of the of U.S. ratification of this treaty. tion—coupled with the increased trans- Mr. President, let me get into some treaty that I have encountered over parency of chemical transfers and ac- the many years this treaty has been highlights of the CWC. The CWC bans tivities at chemical facilities around the development, the production, awaiting a vote in the Senate. the world—will, when backed by robust No. 1. Lack of universality. It is true, stockpiling, use, and proliferation of national intelligence capabilities, build chemical weapons. It requires the de- not ever country is a party to this trea- a level of confidence in the world com- ty, nor is universal membership even a struction of existing weapons, chemical munity sufficient to ensure that the likelihood anytime soon. It may never agents, and CW production facilities. It treaty is being observed by its parties. be a universal agreement. There are breaks new ground with a system of EVEN IF IMPERFECT—BETTER THAN PRESENT several Arab countries, for example, verification that is the most extensive WITH NO RESTRICTIONS that will no doubt refuse to enter into in the history of weapons of mass de- This view is shared today by our binding CW disarmament agreements struction. until an agreement can also be reached On November 23, 1993—over 3 years military and intelligence officials. On concerning Israel’s nuclear capability. ago—President Clinton sent this treaty June 23, 1994, Gen. John Shalikashvili, Is this a sufficient cause to vote to the Senate for its advice and con- the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, summarized this judgment quite against the treaty? Absolutely not. sent to ratification. Though the Senate I know of no multilateral disar- has proceeded very, very slowly with clearly when he testified that—‘‘From a military perspective, the Chemical mament agreement that is truly uni- the consideration of this treaty, the versal, if that term is defined to mean rest of the world seems prepared to go Weapons Convention is clearly in our national interest.’’ On August 11, 1994, that all countries on Earth are parties. forward with or without us. Over 160 True, the more countries that join the countries have now signed the treaty he specifically testified that—‘‘Because of the regime of declarations, which better. But opting for isolation hardly and 74 have already ratified it. So with seems to me to be a rational way for a or without U.S. ratification, the treaty then can be verified through routine inspection and challenge inspection, I country to pursue the goal of uni- will enter into force on April 29 of this versality. I cannot imagine anything year. At that point, world commerce in believe that the CWC can be effectively verified.’’ The treaty has also been sup- that would set back the goal of uni- chemicals and chemical equipment will versality of this treaty more than a de- begin to take place within a multilat- ported by former generals Colin Powell and Norman Schwarzkopf, among cision by the Senate of the United erally coordinated system that imposes States not to vote for ratification of real costs on nonparties to this conven- many other top military and intel- ligence officials. It has the full support this treaty, or to approve it with killer tion. It is one reason why I support this amendments. I believe this treaty will treaty. of the Joint Chiefs. the verification system, in short, rep- stand the test of time and will ap- There is a widespread consensus proach universality of membership as among the military, the intelligence resents an appropriate balance between the need for intrusiveness and the need confidence grows in its credibility as a and the defense experts inside our Gov- force for international peace and secu- ernment that this treaty will serve our to protect commercial secrets and na- tional security information. As a rity. It will be a challenge for dip- national interest. This consensus is bi- lomats and national leaders of the 21st partisan. Indeed, the convention was whole, the treaty will serve U.S. na- tional interests in a number of ways. It century to induce the hold-out coun- negotiated during the Reagan adminis- tries into the CWC regime. tration, signed by President George will reduce the risk that chemical weapons will be used against our coun- As for the treaty hold-outs specifi- Bush and sent to the Congress by Presi- cally in the Middle East—including try. It will potentially reduce—but of dent Clinton. Iraq, Libya, and some other Arab course not eliminate entirely—the risk Except with respect to nonparties, states that critics cite as a reason why of terrorism involving chemical weap- this treaty is completely nondiscrim- the United States should not join this ons. It will enhance the transparency inatory: It obligates its parties not to treaty—let us remember that no coun- of activities at chemical facilities develop or to possess chemical weap- try has a bigger stake in putting a halt around the world and thereby build ons, period. It does not divide the world to chemical weapon proliferation in confidence in CW disarmament. It will up into one set of countries that may that turbulent region than does Israel. serve U.S. interests in combating the have these weapons and another set And I think it is instructive that Israel proliferation of chemical weapons. And that may not. It works from a different has considered and chosen to ignore premise, one more closely aligned with it will, after the 10-year process of de- this particular criticism—it has signed its cousin, the Biological Weapons Con- stroying existing CW stockpiles, re- the treaty. vention—by outlawing such weapons move many serious environmental haz- No. 2. Verification problems. Now no- among the parties to the treaty, it will ards that faced citizens who live near body questions that verifying a global significantly strengthen international plants that produced or stored chemi- ban on possessing or manufacturing diplomatic efforts to make the prohibi- cal weapon agents. chemical weapons will be a difficult tion truly global. COMMON CRITICISMS undertaking, maybe even an impossible To ensure compliance, the treaty It is not surprising that any great one, if the test of success is the ability provides a verification system that op- achievement in the realm of disar- to detect the secret manufacture of a erates on two dimensions. First, it pro- mament would encounter criticism. I small number of such weapons. Nobody vides for routine monitoring of poten- am not going to claim that each and doubts the widespread availability of tially sensitive activities at declared every one of these criticisms is totally the dual-use materials and know-how chemical weapons sites, storage areas, unfounded. I am also not going to ques- needed to make and to deliver chemi- and relevant civilian chemical indus- tion the motives of those who make cal weapons. Nobody doubts that such April 23, 1997 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S3513 weapons can be manufactured in very port on the CWC, the difficulties of U.S. facilities should that be necessary. small facilities, some even as small as monitoring this treaty underscore the This annual financial contribution ap- some hearing rooms here in the Senate, importance of maintaining a highly ca- proximates the cost of a couple of F–16 as our intelligence officials have open- pable U.S. intelligence community. If aircraft. ly testified. we work hard toward the goal of uni- The Chemical Manufacturers Asso- In light of these basic facts of life versal membership in the CWC and ciation [CMA] has estimated that the about chemical weapons, the Report of maintain or increase the capabilities of cost to industry of complying with this the Senate Select Committee on Intel- our intelligence community, then the treaty is about ‘‘. .. one-onehundredth ligence on the ‘‘U.S. Capability to Mon- lingering questions about compliance of one percent of the cost of environ- itor Compliance with the Chemical and verification would only fade ac- mental reporting in the United Weapons Convention’’ (Rpt. 103–390) cordingly. I would not be at all sur- States.’’ CMA estimates that indus- identified several potential difficulties prised if Russia were to ratify this try’s total CWC reporting costs for 1997 in verifying this treaty. The commit- treaty very soon. would come to less than $250,000 and tee’s report, however, reads not as an It is useful to recall that the Russian will decline in subsequent years. CMA indictment of the treaty, but as a con- scientist who blew the whistle in 1991 has also estimated, however, that the vincing reminder of the need for Amer- and 1992 on illicit Russian chemical cost to industry of America not ratify- ica to maintain and upgrade its intel- weapons activities is now a firm sup- ing this treaty would be ‘‘hundreds of ligence capabilities to grapple with porter of the CWC as a means to com- millions of dollars’’ and thousands of such problems. I am concerned that bat just such activities. On November jobs. some of my colleagues and outside 1, 1995, Dr. Vil Mirzayanov testified as As for the claim by some critics that commentators have looked at these follows before the Permanent Sub- the treaty will place a heavy regu- challenges and simply concluded that committee on Investigations about the latory burden on industry, CMA re- it is impossible to verify this, or indeed risk of theft of chemical agents in Rus- ports that in a recent field test it took any, CW disarmament treaty. sia: less than 2 hours for producers of the Though the treaty offers no absolute I am sure that the system of international broadcast category of materials—dis- guarantee against cheating at the level inspections provided for under the Chemical crete organic chemicals—to fill out the of relatively small-scale violations—it Weapons Convention will help address this appropriate reporting form. Some plant will leave us far more secure than we problem . . . These are very strong tools and managers have estimated that they would be without such a treaty. First, I hope that you will do your part to see that could complete this form in as little as the reporting and inspection provisions they are applied in Russia by pressing for the 15 minutes. In recent field tests involv- of the treaty will enhance the trans- Senate’s ratification of the Convention. ing materials that are more tightly parency of global flows of chemicals The fact that this statement came controlled, it took companies between and chemical production equipment—it from someone who is one of Russia’s 2–8 hours to complete the relevant pa- will also give us better information toughest critics on chemical weapons perwork. This does not seem to me to about how such chemicals are used issues will, I hope, inspire other treaty be an unduly burdensome procedure. after they leave international com- critics to reexamine their own views. We all know that the costs of de- merce. Second, the challenge inspec- No, this is not the time to badger the stroying CW agent material will of tion system will give the United States CWC’s verification system because it is course be considerable, particularly in a new means to check up on suspicious unable to guarantee perfect inter- countries like the United States and activities inside countries, including national compliance. I wish we had Russia which have tens of thousands of activities that may not even involve some domestic criminal laws that tons of this material. But U.S. law al- chemicals or chemical equipment that would guarantee perfect compliance. ready requires us to destroy these ma- entered international commerce. Today is a day to rejoice that the terials, whether or not we join the In short, we stand a much better CWC’s verification system will soon be CWC. chance of detecting, assessing, and mo- generating information that will be The costs of having to defend against bilizing collective international action useful to our national leaders in de- the use of such weapons—costs we have against potential CW-related activities tecting, characterizing, and defending to pay regardless of whether America by having a multilateral system of CW against chemical weapons threats. is a party to the CWC—will remain disarmament, than we would under the When I hear all these criticisms about considerable, though this expense will ‘‘go-it-alone’’ approach we would be the treaty’s verification system, I can decline as the world’s stockpiles of CW left with as a non-party to this treaty. only wonder—if these arguments are materials gradually diminish in ac- I think Maj. Gen. John Landry—tes- true, then why would Israel, which is cordance with the treaty. The treaty, tifying before the Armed Services Com- located in one of the most dangerous it should be noted, does not outlaw na- mittee as the National Intelligence Of- neighborhoods on Earth, and which has tional defenses against chemical weap- ficer for General Purpose Forces—accu- so much at stake, sign such a treaty? ons nor does it ban military retaliation rately summarized the view of the U.S. The answer is that the CWC serves Is- for CW users. intelligence community when he said rael’s national security interests for When it comes to measuring the true on August 11, 1994, that ‘‘we are better precisely the same reason it serves our costs of this treaty, there is an abso- off with the treaty than without it.’’ own national security interests. It de- lute way and a relative way to measure Former Defense Secretary Perry simi- serves the support of all nations, and these costs. The absolute approach larly observed on March 28, 1996, that the more support it has, the better the merely adds up the costs of implement- despite the inherent difficulties of de- verification system will become. Re- ing the treaty and considers such costs tecting illicit production of small maining outside the CWC is no way to in a vacuum. The relative approach quantities of chemical weapons, ‘‘we improve its verification system. compares these costs against various also recognize that that [detection ca- No. 3. Cost. Now with respect to cost, alternatives, such as costs we would pability] would be even more difficult nobody can possibly predict exactly have to pay in a world in which chemi- without a CWC.’’ what it will cost to implement this cal war remains a clear and present Let us keep in mind that when it treaty. The International Atomic En- danger, or a world with a CWC without comes to verifying international com- ergy Agency’s annual budget of about the United States as a party. pliance with arms control, disar- $200 million does not serve as a useful I think that any fair assessment mament, and nonproliferation treaties, indicator of the cost of implementing would need to compare the costs of im- America does not rely exclusively upon the CWC given the many different plementing the CWC against the costs the verification mechanisms in those functions of the respective treaty orga- of chemical war—preparing for one, treaties to judge compliance. Verifica- nizations, the IAEA and the OPCW. For fighting one, defending against one, de- tion is achieved by these mechanisms fiscal year 1998, the administration has terring one, and recuperating from one. operating alongside our own national requested $25 million for meeting our Now there is no way that the absolute intelligence capabilities. As I stated in CWC assessment and an additional $21 costs of implementing this treaty my additional views to the SSCI’s re- million for multilateral verification at would ever outweigh the devastating S3514 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE April 23, 1997 costs of coping in a world armed to the only lines of attack that critics have munity, so will the likelihood of strong teeth with chemical weapons. I just do taken against the treaty in recent international action against countries not accept the argument that the costs years. that would actually use such weapons. of implementing this treaty are greater First, would the CWC require a new Sanctions against all forms of pro- than the benefits to our national secu- strategic nuclear doctrine that actu- liferation could always be strength- rity from membership. ally encourages the use of tactical nu- ened, and I would certainly hope that No. 4. Sovereignty and secrecy. clear weapons, given the unavailability this would be a high priority national Under the Constitution, the CWC will of a CW alternative? Not very likely, security goal of this and future admin- be a supreme law of the land. Iron- given that our military has unparal- istrations. But the lack of mandatory ically, some of the same critics of the leled conventional military options sanctions in this treaty should not be CWC who argue that the treaty is not that are available to respond to and to confused with any lack of teeth—it will verifiable because it is not intrusive deter any CW attack. In this respect, fall to the national diplomats, the enough, also argue that the treaty is critics who urge the retention of a CW leaders, and ultimately the people of too intrusive insofar as it allegedly arsenal underestimate the power of our the states that are CWC parties to jeopardizes the U.S. constitutional conventional military capabilities and sharpen this treaty’s teeth. Though rights. These questions have already overestimate both the value and likeli- teething pains can be expected in the been examined closely by the Congress, hood of the use of tactical nuclear years ahead, sharper teeth will come. as well they should, and most Members weapons. Typically, such critics also Fourth, and most recently, critics would agree that these arguments have tend to ignore the impact of making have pointed to trade and cooperation been overdrawn. such nuclear threats upon our global provisions in the treaty as evidence of The main problem with this criticism nuclear nonproliferation policy. an alleged obligation to provide chemi- is that it ignores the many safeguards Second, it is true that the parties to cals and chemical equipment that will that exist in the treaty to protect sov- the CWC are nation states, not help treaty cheaters to make chemical ereign rights. First and most fun- nonstate entities such as terrorist weapons. Frankly, this argument is damentally, there is the right of with- groups that may seek to acquire such hogwash. The very first article of this drawal from the treaty on 90-days’ no- weapons. Though the treaty offers no treaty obligates its parties ‘‘* * * never tice. Second, the treaty’s inspection guarantee against CW terrorism, the under any circumstances * * * to as- system is far from a ‘‘no-notice’’ sys- treaty’s transparency provisions will sist, encourage or induce, in any way, tem—it prescribes a series of time- at least operate to make it more dif- anyone’’ to acquire chemical weapons. tables which allow a state party time ficult for terrorists to acquire equip- Given this obligation—and given the to prepare a site for inspection. The in- ment or materials for use in making treaty’s inspection system and na- spection itself is limited in time. such weapons and that in itself is a tional intelligence capabilities to back As the Department of State put it in positive feature of the treaty. In par- it up—the only appropriate response to its letter transmitting the treaty to ticular, it will make it much more dif- the accusation that the treaty will en- the President, ‘‘The inspected State ficult for terrorists to engage in large- courage peaceful trade and scientific Party has the final say in determining scale production of chemical weapons exchanges is, so what? the extent and nature of access within without detection. Since the CWC has The administration has been more the challenged site.’’ That is from the never been intended to serve as a sub- than reasonable in accommodating the letter of November 20, 1993. This gets at stitute for national efforts against sub- concerns of the critics. The fact that the whole notion of ‘‘managed access,’’ national terrorism, I find this whole agreement was reached on 28 condi- which lies at the heart of the CWC in- argument that the treaty is weak on tions hardly suggests a posture of spections system. Under this approach, terrorism to be a red herring. stonewalling by anybody. But I cannot the State Department letter continued, I find it quite interesting that support any of the five additional con- ‘‘the inspected State Party may give Japan—which was the victim of a re- ditions that have been offered concern- only individual inspectors access to cent chemical weapons attack by ter- ing Russian chemical weapons activi- certain parts of the inspection site, rorists—has already ratified the CWC. ties, requiring terrorist states to join may shroud sensitive pieces of equip- In fact, Japan’s Diet ratified the CWC the CWC before we do, asserting a uni- ment, such as computer or electronic within a month of the Sarin gas attack lateral U.S. right to bar certain inspec- systems, and it may restrict sampling in the Tokyo subway. Though the trea- tors from certain countries, requiring and sample analysis.’’ Indeed, it is ty may not have been able to guaran- the United States to seek the renegoti- highly improbable that the U.S. chemi- tee that this specific attack would not ation of key provisions of the treaty on cal industry would have been such occur, Japan’s leaders have obviously certain trade and CW defense issues, strong and chronic supporters of the concluded that their country would and adopting a verification standard CWC if this industry had concluded still be better off with this treaty than based on a concept of military signifi- that the treaty would harm the com- without it. So would our country. cance that is both inappropriate and petitiveness of U.S. industry or jeop- Third, critics have argued that the unworkable. To the limited extent that ardize company secrets. treaty lacks teeth. In fact, the CWC these final conditions touch upon le- Aside from industry, I can imagine does not repeal the fundamental prin- gitimate concerns, let us address these that the scientific community should ciple of national sovereignty that has concerns inside the tent of the CWC, be quite well informed about the mer- dominated world affairs for over 300 not by howling in the wilderness out- its of this treaty, especially its alleged years. The treaty does not intend for side that tent. intrusiveness. Mr. President, I ask the OPCW to perform as a police force CONCLUSION unanimous consent to have printed at in a world state. Though the treaty Mr. President, I would like to con- the end of my remarks a list of 151 provides procedures for mobilizing clude my remarks on a personal note. I members of the National Academy of international action against treaty have come a long way when it comes to Scientists who are chemists or bio- violators, sanctions must still be im- the issue of CW disarmament. On May chemists and who support this treaty, plemented by individual state parties 21, 1985, I joined with three of my Sen- and another list, compiled by the Fed- to the treaty. ate colleague to argue in an Op-Ed in eration of American Scientists, of 45 Nonparties to the treaty, however, the Washington Post in favor of mod- Nobel laureates who also endorse this will feel the teeth of this treaty. They ernizing America’s chemical weapons treaty. No doubt about it, American will have a harder time participating arsenal. At the time, there was scant support for this treaty is both broad in the world market for chemicals and prospect of a Chemical Weapons Con- and deep. chemical equipment. The few remain- vention. The Soviet Union was sitting The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without ing CW states will in time feel the in- on a huge CW arsenal and was threat- objection it is so ordered. evitable political pressures that come ening United States interests around (See exhibits 1 and 2.) with the possession of internationally the world. And our old so-called uni- Mr. GLENN. Mr. President, No. 5. outlawed weaponry. And as the taboo tary chemical weapons were at best a Other Criticisms. These are not the on possession settles in the world com- national embarrassment, at worst an April 23, 1997 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S3515 actual danger to American citizens and mittee on Foreign Relations, the Committee Martin Karplus. our own troops. I favored the safer bi- on Armed Services and the Select Commit- Joseph J. Katz. tee on Intelligence. The Secretaries of State Walter Kauzmann. nary weapons—safer for our own troops Sung-Hou Kim. if they ever had to use them. and Defense, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, the Director of Central Intelligence James L. Kinsey. William Klemperer. But times have changed. The Soviet and the representatives of the Chemical Union has ceased to exist and there is Judith P. Klinman. Manufacturers Association have all testified Irving M. Klotz. significant support inside the Russian strongly in favor of ratification. More than Edward D. Korn. Government to follow through with 65 countries, including all of our major al- Roger Kornberg. Russia’s obligations under the CWC, lies, have ratified. Daniel E. Koshland, Jr. support which America has every rea- If the Senate fails even to vote on the Henry Lardy. CWC, after three administrations have been Robert Lehman. son to encourage in any way it can. Nelson J. Leonard. Yes, there still are countries in the its leading architects and proponents, the United States will have surrendered by de- Robert L. Letsinger. Stephen J. Lippard. world today that have chemical weap- fault its essential leadership in combating ons. There still is a terrorist threat in- William N. Lipscomb.1 the proliferation of chemical weapons. F.W. McLafferty. volving such weapons. There is still a Respectfully, Jerrold Meinwald. CW proliferation threat. Russia, Julius Adler. Matthew Meselson. though it will hardly be alone in this Robert A. Alberty. Thomas J. Meyer. respect, will no doubt still seek to com- Sidney Altman.1 Josef Michl. pete with us in many arenas of world Fred C. Anson. William H. Miller. W. O. Baker. Kurt Mislow. affairs. And many of those old 1 John D. Baldeschwieler. Mario J. Molina. unitaries are still sitting around like Robert L. Baldwin. C. Bradley Moore. Manuel F. Morales. rusting relics of a by-gone age. Allen J. Bard. Yet the world today is closer than Howard A. Nash. Neil Bartlett. Daniel Nathans.1 ever to outlawing one of the most dan- Helmut Beinert. Elizabeth F. Neufeld. gerous weapons that mankind has Howard C. Berg. Marshall Nirenberg.1 every devised. As a U.S. Senator for R. Stephen Berry. Harry F. Noller. over 20 years now, I have at times en- Richard Bersohn. Leslie E. Orgel. Jerome A. Berson. Mary J. Osborn. countered some of my colleagues who Klaus Biemann. Norman R. Pace. were simply unprepared to reconsider Jacob Bigeleisen. Charles S. Parmenter. policy positions that they took in con- Virgil Boekelheide. Robert G. Parr. George W. Parshall. siderably different times and cir- Jan L. Breslow. Ralph G. Pearson. cumstances. I am determined not to Leo Brewer. Gregory A. Petsko. follow that practice. Herbert C. Brown.1 Kenneth S. Pitzer. Mr. GLENN. In partial answer to Giulio L. Cantoni. Charles M. Radding. John A. Carbon. Senator KYL’s comments on export Julius Rebek. Herbert E. Carter. Lester J. Reed. controls, I ask unanimous consent that Charles P. Casey. Howard Reiss. this release by the Australia Group, Thomas R. Cech.1 Stuart A. Rice. which deals with export controls, be David Chandler. Frederic M. Richards. printed at the end of my remarks. Carolyn Cohen. Irwin A. Rose. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without Mildred Cohn. F. Sherwood Rowland.1 Robert E. Connick. William J. Rutter. objection, it is so ordered. Lewis H. Sarett. John D. Corbett. (See exhibit 3.) Robert T. Sauer. Mr. GLENN. Mr. President, the only Stanley J. Cristol. Howard K. Schachman. other thing I would add is that I have James E. Dahlberg. Peter G. Schultz. Samuel Danishefsky. 1 examined this treaty and listened to Glenn T. Seaborg. Earl W. Davie. K. Barry Sharpless. arguments both pro and con. I am con- David R. Davies. Robert G. Shulman. vinced the time has finally arrived to Peter B. Dervan. Maxine F. Singer. move the campaign to eliminate chem- William Doering. Robert L. Sinsheimer. ical weapons into high gear. The CWC Paul Doty. Emil L. Smith. Harry G. Drickhamer. David B. Sprinson. certainly offers no panacea to all risks George R. Stark. concerning their proliferation or use of James L. Dye. Isidore S. Edelman. Donald F. Steiner. Joan A. Steitz. chemical weapons. It does, however, Mary P. Edmonds. represent a substantial step along the Thomas A. Steitz. David Eisenberg. Walter H. Stockmayer. way to alleviating these risks and, Mostafa A. El-Sayed. Gilbert Stork. therefore, deserves the full support of Ernest L. Eliel. Jack L. Strominger. the Senate and the people of the United David A. Evans. Julian M. Sturtevant. States. I urge all my colleagues to vote John D. Ferry Dean Stanley Tarbell. 1 1 for ratification. Edmond H. Fischer. Henry Taube. Marshall Fixman. H.E. Umbarger. I thank the Chair. Marye Anne Fox. Peter H. von Hippel. EXHIBIT 1 Josef Fried. Salih J. Wakil. FEBRUARY 24, 1997. Carl Frieden. Frederick T. Wall. Cheves Walling. Hon. TRENT LOTT, Gerhart Friedlander. Joseph S. Fruton. James C. Wang. 487 Russell Senate Office Building, Gregorio Weber. Washington, DC. Marshall Gates. Samuel I. Weissman. DEAR SENATOR LOTT: We, the undersigned E. Peter Geiduschek. Frank Westheimer. scientists, urge you to work as a matter of Martin Gellert. Ralph S. Wolfe. national urgency to bring the Chemical Walter Gilbert.1 (All signatories are members of the United Weapons Convention to a vote in the Senate Roy G. Gordon. States National Academy of Sciences in the before April 29 of this year. That is the date Robert H. Grubbs. field of Chemistry or biochemistry) when the Convention will automatically Lowell P. Hager. EXHIBIT 2 enter into force, with or without the United George S. Hammond. NOBEL LAUREATES URGES SENATORS TO States. Dudley Herschbach.1 RATIFY THE CHEMICAL WEAPONS CONVENTION Negotiated by the administrations of George P. Hess. Presidents Reagan and Bush, and signed by Robert L. Hill. MARCH 11, 1997. the United States under President Bush in Mahlon Hoagland. The Federation of American Scientists January 1993, the Convention was formally Bernard L. Horecker. (FAS) has sent a letter to US Senators urg- submitted to the Senate for its advice and Donald F. Hornig. ing the Senate to ratify the Chemical Weap- consent to ratification by President Clinton William P. Jencks. ons Convention without delay. Support for in November 1993. Since then it has been the Harold Johnston. subject of thirteen hearings before the Com- Isabella L. Karle. 1 Nobel Laureate. S3516 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE April 23, 1997 the letter’s goal of prompt ratification came ing in the establishment of operating proce- verifying compliance with BTWC obliga- from 45 Nobel prize winners who specifically dures. At the same time, as signatories we tions. confirmed their desire for CWC ratification. will be obligated to abide by the treaty’s pro- Experts from participating countries dis- The letter, signed by FAS Chairman, and hibitions. cussed national export licensing systems former Deputy National Security Adviser to Since the treaty was opened for signature aimed at preventing inadvertent assistance the President, Carl Kaysen, reminds Sen- in 1993, the United States and 166 other coun- to the production of CBW. They confirmed ators of the importance of U.S. ratification. tries have signed it. Further, 67 countries, that participants administered export con- The treaty requires ‘‘total elimination of including all the major NATO allies, have trols in a streamlined and effective manner chemical weapons stocks, prohibits chemical deposited their instruments of ratifications, which allows trade and the exchange of tech- weapons-related activities, bans assistance as have all other G–7 members. nology for peaceful purposes to flourish. for such activities, and bars trade with non- In order to draw the attention of the Sen- They agreed to continue working to focus parties in certain relevant chemicals.’’ ate to the importance of this issue, the Fed- these national measures efficiently and sole- In ratifying the treaty, the U.S. would join eration of American Scientists has secured ly on preventing any contribution to chemi- 70 countries—including all major NATO al- the specific endorsement of 45 Nobel Prize cal and biological weapons programs. Par- lies and all other G–7 members—who have al- winners to the ratification of the Chemical ticipants noted that the value of these meas- ready ratified it. Weapons Convention, and records their ures in inhibiting CBW proliferation bene- The Federation of American Scientists is a names below. fited not only the countries participating in national organization of scientists and engi- Yours sincerely, the Australia Group, but the whole inter- neers concerned with issues of science and CARL KAYSEN, national community. global security. Chairman, FAS. Participants also agreed to continue a wide I urge the U.S. Senate to ratify the Chemi- range of contacts, including a further pro- FEDERATION OF AMERICAN SCIENTISTS, cal Weapons Convention without delay. gram of briefings for countries not partici- Washington, DC, March 7, 1997. Signed by: Sidney Altman, Philip W. An- pating in the Paris consultations to further Hon. TRENT LOTT, derson, Kenneth J. Arrow, Julius Axelrod, awareness and understanding of national U.S. Senate, David Baltimore, Helmut Beinert, Konrad policies in this area. Participants endorsed Washington, DC. Bloch, Baruch S. Blumberg, Herbert C. in this context the importance of regional DEAR SENATOR LOTT: The Chemical Weap- Brown, Stanley Cohen, Leon N. Cooper, seminars as valuable means of widening con- ons Convention (CWC) will enter into force Johann Deisenhofer, Renato Dulbecco, Ger- tacts with other countries on these issues. In on April 29, 1997, following its ratification by trude B. Elion, and Val L. Fitch. particular, Romania’s plans to host a semi- the 65th signatory nation in November, 1996. Walter Gilbert, Dudley R. Herschbach, nar on CBW export controls for Central and It has not yet been ratified by the United David Hubel, Jerome Karle, Arthur Eastern European countries and the Com- States. Kornberg, Edwin G. Krebs, Joshua monwealth of Independent States in Bucha- This treaty bans an entire class of weapons Lederberg, Leon Lederman, Wassily W. rest on Oct. 21–22 and Japan’s plans to host of mass destruction. It is a nonproliferation Leontief, Edward B. Lewis, William N. a fourth Asian Export Control Seminar in treaty that requires total elimination of Lipscomb, Mario J. Molina, Joseph E. Mur- Tokyo in early 1997 were warmly welcomed chemical weapons stocks, prohibits chemical ray, Daniel Nathans, Arno A. Penzias, and by participants. Argentina will also host a weapons-related activities, bans assistance Norman F. Ramsey. regional seminar on non-proliferation mat- for such activities, and bars trade with non- Burton Richter, Richard J. Roberts, Mar- ters, in Buenos Aires, in the first week of De- parties in certain relevant chemicals. This tin Rodbell, F. Sherwood Rowland, Glenn T. cember 1996. France will organize a seminar treaty denies us no option we would other- Seaborg, Herbert A. Simon, Phillip A. Sharp, for French-speaking countries on the imple- wise wish to exercise, for the United States R.E. Smalley, Robert M. Solow, Jack mentation of the CWC. This will take place has already renounced chemical weapons and Steinberger, Henry Taube, James Tobin, shortly before entry into force of the Con- is in the process of destroying them. The Charles H. Townes, and Eric Weischaus. vention. CWC is a critical instrument for The meeting also discussed relevant as- EXHIBIT 3 universalizing this policy and preventing the pects of terrorist interest in CBW and agreed further spread of chemical weapons. AUSTRALIA GROUP MEETING that this serious issue requires continuing With no military interest in chemical Australia Group participants held informal attention. weapons, the United States can only gain by consultations in Paris between Oct. 14–17, to Participants agreed to hold further con- ratifying the treaty, regardless of its level of discuss the continuing problem of chemical sultations in October 1997. verification. US accession is necessary to and biological weapons (CBW) proliferation. give the CWC the force of an international Participants at these talks were Argentina, AUSTRALIA GROUP COUNTRIES WELCOME PRO- norm against the possession of chemical Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, the SPECTIVE ENTRY INTO FORCE OF THE CHEMI- weapons. That norm alone would be power- Czech Republic, Denmark, the European CAL WEAPONS CONVENTION ful, providing a basis for joint action to en- Commission, Finland, France, Germany, The countries participating in the Aus- force compliance. Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, tralia Group warmly welcomed the expected But, in addition, the CWC provides new Japan, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zea- entry into force of the Chemical Weapons tools for deterring and detecting chemical land, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Convention (CWC) during a meeting of the weapons proliferation. The value of its provi- Slovak Republic, Spain, Sweden, Switzer- Group in Paris in October 1996. They noted sions will grow with time, as the treaty’s in- land, United Kingdom and the United States, that the long awaited commencement of the centives work to increase the number of ad- with the Republic of Korea taking part for CWC regime, including the establishment of herents. The declaration and inspection re- the first time. the Organization for the Prohibition of quirements will improve our knowledge of Participants maintain a strong belief that Chemical Weapons, will be an historic water- possible proliferation activities, whether full adherence to the Chemical Weapons Con- shed in global efforts to abolish chemical conducted by nations or terrorists. Access to vention (CWC) and to the Biological and weapons for all time. They also noted that declared and undeclared sites will make Toxin Weapons Convention (BTWC) will be all states adhering to the CWC are obliged to clandestine operations more difficult, risky the best way to eliminate these types of par- ensure their national activities support the and expensive; participating states will have ticularly inhumane weapons from the goal of a world free of chemical weapons. the right to demand short-notice inspections world’s arsenals. In this context, the mainte- All of the participating countries reiter- of sites in other States Parties. The CWC’s nance of effective export controls will re- ated their previous statements underlining provisions constitute the most rigorous ver- main an essential practical means of fulfill- their intention to be among the original ification regime ever negotiated. At the ing obligations under the CWC and the States Parties to the CWC. They noted that same time, the treaty and the proposed US BTWC. 24 of the 30 countries participating in the implementing legislation explicitly protect All participants at the meeting welcomed Australia Group have already ratified the Constitutional rights and confidential and the expected entry into force of the CWC, Convention. Representatives also recalled proprietary information. noting that this long-awaited step will be an their previous expressions of support for the During negotiation of the treaty, senior of- important, historic moment in international CWC, and reaffirmed these commitments. ficials of the U.S. Chemical Manufacturers efforts to prohibit chemical weapons. Par- They restated their view that the effective Association participated at the side of U.S. ticipants agreed to issue a separate state- operation and implementation of the CWC Government negotiators, and the chemical ment on this matter, which is attached. offers the best means available to the inter- industry has consistently and publicly advo- Participants also welcomed the progress of national community to rid the world of these cated ratification of the CWC. Now, if the efforts to strengthen the BTWC in the nego- weapons for all time. They called on all sig- treaty comes into force without U.S. ratifi- tiations taking place in the Ad Hoc Group of natories to ratify the CWC as soon as pos- cation, its constraints on the chemical ex- BTWC States Parties in Geneva. All Aus- sible, and on the small number of countries ports of non-parties will penalize the U.S. tralia Group participating countries are also which have not signed the Treaty to join the chemical industry. Should the Senate not States Parties to this Treaty, and strongly regime and thereby contribute to inter- ratify the Convention, the U.S. Government support efforts to develop internationally- national efforts to ban these weapons. would also be excluded from a seat on the agreed procedures for strengthening inter- Representatives at the Australia Group CWC’s governing body, and from participat- national confidence in the treaty regime by meeting recalled that all of the participating April 23, 1997 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S3517 countries are taking steps at the national mires recognize that this treaty has a ter- Unverifiable, unenforceable accords do not level to ensure that relevant national regula- rible flaw: Its ‘‘Atoms for Peace’’ provision promote valuable ‘‘international norms’’ any tions promote the object and purpose of the which permits the sharing of nuclear weap- more than unverifiable, unenforceable do- CWC and are fully consistent with the Con- ons-relevant technology with countries that mestic statues like Prohibition lead to a vention’s provisions when the CWC enters promise not to apply it to that end. One sober and law-abiding society. The difference into force for each of these countries. They rogue nation after another has violated this is that the former threaten to make arms noted that the practical experience each promise, giving rise to a large and growing control a sham—an outcome that can trans- country had obtained in operating export li- number of undeclared or incipient nuclear late into incalculable harm to our Nation censing systems intended to prevent assist- weapon states. Unfortunately, a similar flaw and its people. ance to chemical weapons programs have has been built into the Chemical Weapons (Malcolm Wallop represented Wyoming in been especially valuable in each country’s Convention, virtually assuring that this new the United States Senate from 1976–1995 and preparations for implementation of key obli- ‘‘norm’’ will produce more proliferation of is currently chairman of the Frontiers of gations under the CWC. They noted in this chemical weaponry, not less. Freedom Institute, a non-partisan, public context, that these national systems are If anything, Mr. Adelman, as a spokes- policy organization located in Arlington, aimed solely at avoiding assistance for ac- person for proponents for the treaty; exag- VA.) tivities which are prohibited under the Con- gerates the value of unverifiable, unenforced Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, I yield 20 ‘‘international norms’’ which validates a vention, while ensuring they do not restrict minutes to the able Senator from New or impede trade and other exchanges facili- central concern expressed by the three Sec- tated by the CWC. retaries: Such ‘‘norms’’ frequently induce a Hampshire, a great patriot, BOB SMITH. Mr. SMITH of New Hampshire. Mr. HELMS addressed the Chair. false sense of security in law-abiding soci- The PRESIDING OFFICER. The eties. Thank you very much, I say to Senator This dangerous placebo effect of defective HELMS. Chair recognizes the Senator from arms control agreements is especially evi- North Carolina. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The dent with respect to another ‘‘international Chair recognizes the distinguished Sen- Mr. HELMS. I yield myself 1 minute. norm’’ lauded by Mr. Adelman, namely, the Mr. President, I have received a very Biological Weapons Convention. Adelman ator from New Hampshire. fine statement by a distinguished contends that this treaty—which he ac- Mr. SMITH of New Hampshire. former Member of this body, Malcolm knowledges lacks ‘‘even a pretense of verifi- Thank you, Mr. President. Wallop of Wyoming, a gentleman and ability’’—has, nonetheless, ‘‘served us fairly I thank the distinguished chairman Senator whom I admire very much. He well.’’ of the Foreign Relations Committee Regrettably, this Convention has not pre- is now chairman, by the way, of the for his tremendous leadership on this vented the spread of biological weapons and matter. He has been steadfast. I have Frontiers of Freedom. I ask unanimous related technology to virtually every dan- consent that his statement be printed gerous country on the planet. The ‘‘inter- been in a number—several hours and in the RECORD. national norm’’ created by the Biological days—of meetings with him as he has There being no objection, the mate- Weapons Convention has, however, encour- tried very hard to get this treaty into rial was ordered to be printed in the aged the United States government to re- a position where it could be acceptable RECORD, as follows: main woefully unprepared to deal with the to some of us—to all of us. But in this threat such weapons pose. case, Mr. President, I have to maintain BAD TREATIES DO MAKE SECURITY PROBLEMS This point is dramatically made in the WORSE my opposition to this convention. cover story of the March 14–20, 1997 edition of Contrary to the assertions of its pro- (By Malcolm Wallop) Washington City Paper. This article is enti- On Thursday, April 24th, the U.S. Senate tled ‘‘Margin of Terror—The Government has ponents, this treaty will not advance will debate and vote on ratification of the One Clear Strategy for Responding to a Ter- our national interests, and as a Mem- Chemical Weapons Convention. As is the rorist Attack on Washington: Pray.’’ ber of the U.S. Senate, I must put the case with many pieces of legislation like the It describes in detail how the United national and sovereignty interests Endangered Species Act and The Comprehen- States’ systematic failure to ready the re- above all others when it comes to votes sive Antiterrorism Act of 1995, the Chemical sources and emergency personnel—to say here on the Senate floor. This is a Weapons Convention sounds great. Who can nothing of the American people—to contend flawed accord that will undermine our be against the Convention except those who with the nightmare of weapons of mass de- like chemical weapons? Dig deep, however, struction in the subways or other public security and create a massive, un- and you will find how bankrupt and harmful spaces of cities like Washington could easily funded regulatory burden on U.S. com- the Chemical Weapons Convention can be, if translate into hundreds, if not many thou- panies. And the Senate should reject it. ratified. Ken Adelman, noted arms control sands, of casualties. Let me make clear, I do not object to expert an proponent of this Convention, ad- The U.S. military has proven no more im- the goal of eliminating chemical weap- mits forthrightly, in a Washington Post op- mune to the seductive effects of ineffectual ons, although those of us who have ed that ‘‘no accord banning all chemical ‘‘international norms’’ created by unverifi- taken a position in opposition to this able arms control treaties. Operation Desert weapons can be verifiable in any real sense. treaty will be accused of that, and have The convention’s verification provisions may Storm illuminated serious shortfalls in the help somewhat, but not all that much.’’ armed services’ capability to operate and been. In fact, as a member of the This reality virtually assures that the prevail in combat should chemical and/or bi- Armed Services Committee, I have con- treaty will be violated by many who sign up, ological weapons be used. These shortfalls sistently supported funding for our Na- as well as having no effect whatsoever on persist today to varying degrees thanks, in tion’s chemical demilitarization pro- several dangerous chemical weapon states— part, to illusion that ‘‘international norms’’ gram. Certainly, we all support the such as Iraq, Syria, North Korea and Libya— will make that sort of combat unlikely. goal of eliminating chemical weapons. that have said they will not become parties. Overstating the value of international ac- But this treaty will not accomplish With this devastating admission, virtually cords has one other deleterious effect: It the only argument left for the Chemical tends to make the United States and other that goal. Sometimes we forget that Weapons Convention is the proposition, as law-abiding states reluctant to respond to fact as we debate these issues that Adelman puts it, that ‘‘standards and values violators of such accords. As with President have a great-sounding name. It does violated are better than no standards or val- Clinton’s successive decisions to grant MFN not even come close. For the benefit of ues at all.’’ According to this logic, we will to China—despite its repeated violations of my colleagues, I want to highlight be better off being party to a treaty that undertakings concerning human rights and some of the most egregious problems cannot and will not reduce the chemical the curbing the spread of nuclear weapons with this treaty. weapons threat because of the civilizing ef- and missile technology, the argument is al- First of all, it is not a global treaty. fect such ‘‘international norms’’ create. ways made that larger national interests The implication is that the ‘‘international must be taken into account. When the Un- Its advocates would have you believe norm’’ will somehow enhance our security. tied States winds up ignoring violations in that it is. It is not global. In fact, In fact, quite the contrary is true—as former the interest of preserving an arms control re- many nations believed to have active Secretaries of Defense James Schlesinger, gime, however, the effect is not only to in- chemical weapons programs, such as Donald Rumsfeld and Caspar Weinberger ob- vite further violations but to undermine the Iraq, Libya, North Korea, and Syria, served in a Washington Post op-ed dated value of the ‘‘international norm’’ thus cre- have not even signed on to the treaty March 5th. ated. and they are not bound by any provi- That this can happen with even relatively Those who believe that arms control can practical ‘‘international norms’’ can be seen make a measurable contribution to U.S. se- sions. in one cited by Adelman, himself in a follow- curity and civilized intercourse between Additionally, other confirmed or sus- up to the March 5th op-ed—the Nuclear Non- states have a special responsibility to avoid pected chemical weapons nations, such Proliferation Treaty. Even its strongest ad- debasing the currency of international law. as India, Iran, Pakistan, and Russia, S3518 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE April 23, 1997 have signed the treaty but do not seem Iraq is the most heavily monitored Russia is developing new binary weap- very likely to ratify it or even comply and inspected country on Earth. We ons that are highly lethal, yet con- with it. have more access to Iraq than the tained none of the chemicals—none of For the life of me, I cannot under- chemical weapons treaty will ever pro- the chemicals—listed on the treaty’s stand how anyone could possibly stand vide for any country. If we cannot de- schedules. If this is true, Russia will be here on the floor of the U.S. Senate and termine after 5 years just how large capable of circumventing this treaty in say this is a global treaty if the most and sophisticated Iraq’s chemical a very significant and, frankly, desta- heinous anti-American regimes on the weapons program is, how on Earth are bilizing way. We will be considering face of the Earth are not even a party we going to be able to verify compli- this issue in more detail during the to it. They are going to be making ance for the dozens and dozens of coun- closed session, but I want to say here chemical weapons, and nobody can do tries supposedly bound by this treaty? and now that this is a very, very big anything about it. That is like saying The answer is simple. We cannot. We problem and it ought to be looked at we have a global treaty outlawing ter- are not going to be able to do it. very closely. rorism, but Iran, North Korea, Syria, We will move into classified session It gives me no pleasure to take the and Lebanon are not a part of it. Why later on, tomorrow, to more fully ex- floor of the Senate and raise these not have another treaty and outlaw amine the intelligence community’s troubling issues. I would like to be for terrorism? Well intended; great goal. assessment. I urge my colleagues to this treaty. I wish it banned all chemi- Why not just pass a treaty and we will come to that session and listen to the cal weapons. But the fact of the matter outlaw it? That will be the end of it. facts from our intelligence community. is, it does not, and I have a constitu- It is absurd, not to mention patently Noncompliance is not something to tional responsibility to look carefully false, to allege that this Chemical take lightly. Without adherence by all at these issues and act in a manner Weapons Convention is a global treaty. parties, no treaty is worth the paper it that I believe advances our national se- Iraq used chemical weapons on its own is written on—never has been, never curity. citizens in the last decade—on its own will be. But we cannot verify this trea- This treaty is deeply flawed—deeply people. How can we have a global trea- ty. We know for a fact that some of its flawed. No amount of public relations ty banning chemical weapons without signatories have routinely and repeat- spin, no amount of pressure from the Iraq? Could somebody please answer edly violated other treaties in the past. White House or from anybody else can that question for me? It is not global. So they have a track record. change that issue. Certainly it is not Russia has the world’s largest chemi- And we are not banning chemical weap- going to change this Senator’s mind. cal weapons arsenal. The former Soviet ons in Iraq. We are inspecting the devil I know that many of my colleagues Union routinely violated its arms con- out of Iraq and we still do not know think that since the cold war is over trol obligations whenever it was con- what they are doing and what they can arms control issues do not matter any- venient, whenever it was in their best and cannot do. more. I know many Members who interest. Russia remains in violation of Mr. President, not only is this treaty would just as soon focus on issues that the Biological and Toxic Weapons Con- not global, it is not verifiable accord- seem to be drawing more attention in vention and the CFE treaty. Thus, it is ing to the U.S. intelligence commu- the polls. But as the stewards of na- clear that the cold war pattern of non- nity, not according to Senator SMITH, tional security, we do not have that compliance did not end when the So- luxury. We cannot afford to sweep but the U.S. intelligence community. viet Union ended. these issues under the rug for the con- In testimony before the Foreign Re- Russia has also made clear that it lations Committee, former Director of has no intention of ratifying the chem- venience of political expediency. Mr. President, in addition to these Central Intelligence, James Woolsey ical weapons treaty or complying with important national security consider- stated: its provisions unless the United States ations, I want to highlight for my col- The chemical weapons problem is so dif- provides a massive aid package to pay leagues the enormous burden that this ficult from an intelligence perspective that I for destruction of its arsenal. Mr. cannot state that we have high confidence in treaty will place on U.S. businesses. President, where I come from in New our ability to detect noncompliance, espe- Under the treaty, there would be two cially on a small scale. Hampshire, this is called blackmail. That is what it is. And I object to it. basic types of inspections: routine and This is not exactly a ringing endorse- We are already committed to spending challenge. Routine inspections are to ment for this treaty, particularly when $12 billion to eliminate our own chemi- be directed at sites producing chemi- it is coming from a person who is rep- cal weapons arsenal. Are we supposed cals that present the greatest risk of resenting an administration that sup- to foot the bill for Russia’s as well diversion to weapons uses. A nation ports it and that is bringing it here to now? could be subject to up to 20 routine in- the Senate. Let us be honest, there is Let us not forget we are already giv- spections per year, and a specific site no way we are going to be able to ver- ing Russia billions of dollars in ransom up to two routine inspections. Chal- ify compliance, and everybody on this for the START I and START II trea- lenge inspections would occur by re- floor knows it. The proponents, as well ties, even though they have yet to rat- quest by a party to the treaty and can as the opponents, know that. ify START II. With the hard-line Com- take place with very little advance no- The United Nations Special Commis- munists and nationalists gaining 33 tice. There is no limit to the number of sion on Iraq was established following percent of Parliament seats in the re- challenge inspections that can take the gulf war to oversee the dismantling cent Russian elections, can anyone ac- place. of Iraq’s chemical, biological, and nu- tually believe that this situation is The United States also, Mr. Presi- clear weapons programs. There have likely to improve? I do not think so. dent, will be obligated to pay 25 per- been over 1,000 inspectors searching Russia is not implementing the 1990 cent of the operating expenses of this every nook and cranny in Iraq for the bilateral destruction agreement in organization. Does that sound famil- past 5 years, yet we continue to un- which it pledged to substantially re- iar? Think of the United Nations and cover new evidence and new revelations duce its chemical weapons arsenal. The other international organizations regarding Iraq’s programs to develop DIA stated Russia is moving so slowly where we wind up footing most of the weapons of mass destruction. that no meaningful reduction of its ar- bill. Membership on the Executive I say to my colleagues on the floor, senal is likely to occur in the next dec- Council is determined by a rotating re- now that you have seen all these in- ade. These are facts that the pro- gional formula, with the majority of spections, you all feel very com- ponents do not want you to hear, Mr. seats allocated to third world coun- fortable, I am sure. Now you have the President. The DIA has expressed skep- tries. The United States would not nec- full knowledge that Iraq does not have ticism regarding the veracity of Rus- essarily be represented on the council any chemical weapons or any biologi- sia’s data declarations. It appears high- at all times and there is no U.S. veto, cal weapons or any nuclear weapons. ly likely that Russia has grossly under- as there is in the U.N. Security Coun- Everybody feels real comfortable with reported its chemical weapons arsenal. cil. that. We have inspected them, so ev- Finally, it has been widely reported This represents a new open-ended en- erybody is certain. Right. in the international publications that titlement for another United Nations- April 23, 1997 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S3519 style bureaucracy. I cannot believe tions, here we go again. The problem ture of democracy. We discuss issues, that we are going to agree to pay 25 is, other nations who get to inspect our debate policy, find common ground, percent of the cost when we are having facilities have a lot more to gain than and compromise where we can. We so much difficulty injecting fiscal dis- we do by inspecting theirs. The limited compromised 28 times. cipline into the existing foreign aid bu- military-related intelligence that we It is important to understand, reaucracy which Senator HELMS has may gain is far outweighed by the in- though, that reasonable people can and been trying to change for years. Why dustrial and commercial intelligence do disagree on the merits of this trea- should we pay such a grossly dispropor- that other nations will derive from our ty. I want to make it very clear that I tionate percentage when Russia, who companies. That is why nations like have no problem with any of my col- has the world’s largest stockpile, pays Iran are signing on to this treaty, be- leagues in terms of how they arrived at 5.6 percent—while we pay the 25 per- cause they want that information. their votes. That is their vote, and I re- cent? They will have access to that informa- spect that, I recognize that. In fact, it It is estimated that somewhere be- tion, if not directly, certainly indi- is healthy. While I strongly oppose this tween 3,000 and 8,000 companies, per- rectly even if they are not one of the treaty, I don’t impugn anyone’s mo- haps more, will be affected by this inspectors. tives or character for taking an oppos- treaty—3,000 to 8,000 U.S. companies. Most chemical manufacturers have ing viewpoint. Having said that, it is The treaty creates a massive program not considered the effect of this treaty. regrettable that those of us deeply of reporting requirements for compa- Frankly, I am disappointed in some of troubled by the lack of participation in nies, companies that produce or use those manufacturers because they have this treaty by Iran, Syria, Libya, and regulated chemicals. not thought it through. But they will North Korea, and by the inherent I would ask my colleagues, do you be back, Mr. President. If we pass this, unverifiability of the treaty, by the really think the rogue nations, the they will be back and they will be back fact that nations such as Iran will gain North Koreas, the Libyas, the Irans, or with tears in their eyes because they access to sensitive data on our chemi- the Iraqs, and others, are going to be are going to be very, very sorry that cal defenses. Now, people have said subject to this? Do you really think they supported this treaty. that is not going to happen. Well, we they care that we are harassing our In fact, I know of one example where will see. If this treaty passes, we will own companies? They are probably get- an individual called my office purport- see, because they can be part of the in- ting a good laugh out of it, Mr. Presi- ing to represent the CMA in support of spection team and can have access to dent. the treaty. When questioned on the de- that information. The individual companies are re- tails of the treaty and the implications Anyway, we are accused of being quired to assume all costs associated for U.S. businesses, the individual be- somehow in favor of chemical weapons with this compliance, including filings, came frustrated, claimed ignorance, because we take this position. It seems escort and administration of routine and stated that the CMA told him to that when those of us who are conserv- inspections, challenge inspections, and make the calls. He admitted not know- atives want to stand by our principles, in some circumstances, American busi- ing much about the treaty and quickly we are ‘‘crazy people’’ or something. nesses may even be required to shut ended the call. That is pretty sad, Mr. But when you are liberal and you stand down production during the inspection President. by your principles, you are thoughtful period. Failure to comply with the reg- If that is the kind of expertise being and considerate and compassionate. ulations could result in a company brought to bear in this lobbying cam- Well, maybe I am missing something being fined up to $50,000 per incident— paign we are faced with, I think it somewhere. per incident. raises more serious questions as to the It is very easy for the media and the The Defense Department has esti- merit and true nature of this endorse- advocates of the treaty to demagog mated the cost imposed on a company ment by CMA. this issue. Some in the media have with a large facility could be as high as Additionally, while CMA’s support is demagoged it. Some in the media in $500,000 per inspection, while small an important factor to consider, it is my own State are demagoging me and businesses should expect inspections to important to recognize that CMA does the treaty. That is their prerogative. cost between $10,000 and $20,000, all on not even represent a majority of the But they are not here on the Senate U.S. businesses on something that does businesses affected by the treaty. Ac- floor—I am. Some in the media in my not ban chemical weapons in other cording to the Arms Control and Disar- State may not like that fact, but I am countries. mament Agency, 60 percent of the com- here as an elected representative for Each international inspection team panies affected by the treaty are not the State of New Hampshire. I am will be accompanied by representatives CMA members. sworn to uphold the Constitution and of the U.S. Government. According to In fact, most of these non-CMA com- to defend the national security inter- the administration, it is possible the panies are smaller businesses who are ests of the United States. Yes, if there representatives of the Environmental most likely to be harmed by the in- is a treaty violating those, I am going Protection Agency and OSHA could creased regulatory burden. They have to be opposed to it. also serve as escorts to come into your the most to lose. Yet, they are the ones While I wholeheartedly support the business and have a good look at what that are overlooked by the treaty’s objective of banning chemical weapons, we you are doing—maybe something proponents. this doesn’t ban chemical weapons. If very personal, very private, something Mr. President, since last fall, when somebody can stand up here and tell you would not want your competitors the Clinton administration abruptly me how we are going to get access to to have. But under the treaty, the EPA requested that the Senate defer consid- all of Iraq and be certain that we are can walk right in, have access to the eration of the treaty, I have worked not going to have chemical weapons whole facility, perhaps even take a few very closely with my colleagues in the there, and all of Libya and North samples, a few products. Who knows— Senate, including Senator KYL and Korea, and can prove that to me, I will take some records. Senator HELMS and others. I have at- support the treaty. That is why we It is clear, Mr. President, that this tended numerous meetings with the have this amendment, this provision on treaty and the accompanying imple- President’s National Security Adviser rogue nations. I don’t believe this re- menting legislation that the adminis- to explore possible conditions to pro- quires that the Senate rubber stamp tration has requested represents a mas- tect U.S. national security, and, to any treaty dealing with chemical weap- sive, unfunded mandate on U.S. busi- their credit, the administration and ons. We have some very respected peo- nesses. It is staggering. I cannot be- others did work hard to address many ple, including four former Secretaries lieve that this Senate is prepared to do of those concerns, and many have been of Defense—that was testified to here this injustice to businesses here in addressed. But there are still some that before—who oppose this treaty. America and, frankly, injustice to our- I just cannot, in good faith, allow to go In the medical world, the wrong med- selves as a nation. At a time when your unchallenged. icine can kill a patient even if it is pre- constituents are crying out for relief In the end, we are not able to agree scribed with the best of intentions. The from onerous and burdensome regula- on all of these issues. That is the na- same holds true with national security. S3520 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE April 23, 1997 I have no doubt that the advocates of factory chemical weapons treaty was do, or not do, in trying to find some CWC believe that it will cure the an objective that had to be achieved, process of protecting them against plague of chemical weapons. But that because we shared the feeling that the chemical and biological warfare. is the wrong medicine and it won’t world was becoming a very dangerous In its essence, I believe that the work. place to live in because of chemical and United States has a responsibility for I want to conclude my remarks by biological warfare developments. We world leadership. This leadership is summarizing some of the more impor- felt the United States needed to show more graphically demonstrated in this tant arguments against this treaty. leadership in reducing some of the dan- legislative body than anywhere I know, First, it is not global. gers whenever possible. because passage of the resolution of Second, it is not effectively verifi- This convention before the Senate ratification will show our leadership in able. could be improved. The START trea- the effort to contain chemical weapons, Third, there are no technical means ties could have been improved. How- just as Senate support for START I to detect undeclared stockpiles of ever, under those treaties, the United showed the United States’ commitment chemical agents or weapons. States and Russia will significantly re- to nuclear weapons reduction. Many of those who have signed the duce their numbers of nuclear war- I encourage the Senate to vote in treaty are either unlikely to ratify it heads and reduce the risk of nuclear favor of this resolution of ratification or to comply. Does anybody really be- war. The Conventional Armed Forces and support the Chemical Weapons lieve that Iran will be a responsible in Europe Treaty could have been im- Convention as it was presented to us. party to this treaty? When is the last proved. Yet, today we no longer have I ask unanimous consent that two ar- time we had access to all of the coun- Russian and NATO forces bristling ticles from today’s papers be printed in tryside in Iran and all of the industry with tanks, cannons, and fighter air- the RECORD. One article is by Samuel and buildings in Iran? Why should we craft facing each other across the bor- Berger, in the Washington Times, enti- believe that this treaty is going to der in numbers that reminded many of tled ‘‘The CWC Imperative’’; the other make us do that? Armageddon. is by Gen. Thomas McInerney and Article X of the treaty will require us The Chemical Weapons Convention Stanley Weiss, in the Hill newspaper. to share detailed information on our does move the world toward a goal of There being no objection, the articles own chemical weapons defenses with bringing order and accountability to were ordered to be printed in the all other signatories to the treaty, the production and transportation of RECORD, as follows: good and bad signatories to the treaty, weapons of mass destruction. This is a [From the Washington Times, April 23, 1997] friends and enemies. convention that has required the nego- THE CWC IMPERATIVE Thousands of U.S. businesses, many tiating concurrence of 74 countries. I (By Samuel R. Berger) of them vulnerable small businesses, will never forget sitting around those will be exposed to costly annual report- Tomorrow, the Senate will vote on the rooms in Geneva while we waited for Chemical Weapons Convention. After years ing requirements that they can’t af- the representatives of the various of international negotiation and domestic ford. Direct costs to U.S. industry are countries to state their positions. debate, the Senate faces a clear choice; we estimated to be over $200 million a To require this convention to be per- can continue to lead the widening inter- year. fect asks the impossible. To expect it national commitment to begin banishing It goes on and on and on, Mr. Presi- to be an effective tool in controlling poison gas from the earth and head the effort dent. It is just incredible. chemical weapons is reasonable. This to make it work. Or we can walk away from Challenge inspections, which basi- convention does provide an inspection a treaty we helped write, deny our soldiers cally you could not do under our Con- regime that will allow our inspectors and citizens its benefits, expose our compa- stitution, are unlimited in number and nies to its penalties, and put America on the to monitor potential chemical weapons same side as pariah nations like Libya and may violate the fourth amendment, production and transportation more ef- Iraq. which guarantees the rights of individ- fectively than without the convention. This treaty will take effect next week— uals and their property against unrea- And protections are built into the con- with or without us. That’s why the real test sonable search and seizure. vention so that U.S. companies produc- of the Chemical Weapons Convention is not Mr. President, it is clear that this ing chemicals are not going to have whether it’s perfect, but whether we will be treaty falls short of achieving its ob- their manufacturing processes com- better off inside or outside it. By that basic jectives and its goals. In fact, it doesn’t promised, and, obviously, we do not measure, this treaty is overwhelmingly in even come close. As we will see later in our national interest. amend the Constitution of the United First, this treaty will help protect our sol- the classified session, the stakes are States by approving this convention. diers by requiring other countries to do what high. We have little to gain and a great For me, this convention enhances the we decided to do years ago—get rid of chemi- deal to lose. security of our forces deployed abroad, cal weapons. The treaty will also make it I urge my colleagues to reject this as well as throughout our whole Na- harder for rogue states and terrorists to get treaty. I yield the floor. tion. The Joint Chiefs of Staff support or make chemical weapons. By eliminating PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR the Chemical Weapons Convention. existing stockpiles, it will remove the single Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I ask Generals Colin Powell and Norman largest source of weapons that they could steal or buy on the black market. By impos- unanimous consent that Jeff Severs be Schwarzkopf support the convention. ing new controls on the transfer of dan- given the privilege of the floor for this Former Secretary of State Jim Baker gerous chemicals, it will help put the raw in- day. and former National Security Adviser gredients for such weapons further out of The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without Brent Scowcroft support this conven- reach. objection, it is so ordered. tion. Former CIA Directors, Jim Wool- Finally, by giving us new tools for verifica- Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I yield 15 sey, Stansfield Turner, and John tion like short-notice, on-site inspections, minutes to the Senator from Alaska. Deutch, support this convention. I creating a global intelligence network, and Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I have could go on and on with the list, Mr. strengthening the authority of our own law been involved with the chemical weap- enforcement, this treaty will make it easier President. for us to prevent and punish those who seek ons debate and negotiations for a con- But, to me, it is not the former or to break its rules. vention like this since its beginning. present officials that should have an Two and half months ago, President Clin- During the Reagan administration, at impact on this Senate. It is the men ton and Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott the suggestion of Ambassador John and women in uniform. They are in established a process to work through the Tower, former Senator John Tower, I harm’s way. They know now that many concerns of some senators about the treaty. spent a month in Geneva during an Au- of their predecessors who served us in As a result of this effort, and negotiations gust recess auditing the beginnings of the Persian Gulf war, men and women led by Sen. Jessie Helms and Sen. Joe Biden, the negotiations that led up to this there in uniform, were exposed to some we have reached agreement on 28 conditions that will be included in the treaty’s resolu- Chemical Weapons Convention. John type of a chemical weapon in Iraq. It is tion of ratification. Among them are binding Tower even loaned me his home in Ge- for them that I speak, because I think, commitments to maintain strong defenses neva to live in during that period. He universally, they are now worried against chemical attack; allow the use of and I agreed that negotiating a satis- about what this Congress is going to riot control agents like tear gas in a wide April 23, 1997 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S3521 range of military and law enforcement situa- Convention (CWC). This model agreement, which will go into effect on April 29, with or tions; and require search warrants for any which bands the production and use of chem- without U.S. approval. As retired Gen. Nor- involuntary inspections of an American busi- ical weapons, is supported by an overwhelm- man Schwarzkopf stated in Senate testi- ness. These conditions resolve almost all the ing majority of Americans, including a mony, ‘‘We don’t need chemical weapons to issues that have been raised about this trea- ‘‘Who’s Who’’ of former officials and military fight our future wars. And frankly . . . by ty. leaders, and has been signed by most of the not ratifying that treaty, we align ourselves Almost, but not all. Opponents insist on a civilized world. with nations like Libya and North Korea, handful of additional conditions, each of On the other side is Sen. Jesse Helms (R– and I’d just as soon not be associated with which would make it impossible for us to N.C.). The Foreign Relations Committee those thugs.’’ participate in this treaty. One would have us chairman wants to reorganize the State De- If the price of getting two-thirds of the wait to join until Russia does—giving cover partment, and threatened to keep the CWC Senate to ratify the CWC is improving the to hard-liners in Russia who want to hold on bottled up in his committee until this was way the State Department works, that to their weapons. Another would have us agreed upon. sounds like a deal we can all live with. wait until rogue states like Iraq become Mr. President, Sen. Helms. It’s time to Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, it is members—delaying our chance to use the make a deal! treaty’s tools against these international Both of them and, more importantly, the not an easy position for me to be op- outlaws and giving them a veto over our na- American people would come out winners if posed to friends with whom I normally tional security. Another would impose an the Senate votes to ratify the CWC, and the stand shoulder to shoulder. But I be- unrealistically high standard of verifica- State Department streamlines its oper- lieve we must be motivated by what we tion—and risk our ability to protect our ations. Here are three ways to improve the believe is in the best interest of the troops by using the treaty’s already tough business of diplomacy: provisions to detect cheating that is mili- country as a whole. I believe if we took First, cut back on assistant secretaries. a poll of men and women in uniform tarily significant. The State Department currently houses 19 Two other killer conditions would require assistant secretaries focusing on certain re- today, they would say that the No. 1 us to re-open negotiations on the treaty. gions (East Asia) or functional areas (human threat they fear is chemical and bio- First, some critics mistakenly believe that rights). Compare this to the Department of logical warfare. I say that we must the treaty requires the United States to pro- lead the world in addressing the con- vide advanced chemical weapons defenses to Defense where nine assistant secretaries help rogue states. In fact, only countries that oversee a budget 10 times larger than the sequences of production and use of have joined the CWC, renounced chemical State Department’s program budget. The these weapons of mass destruction, just weapons and destroyed their stockpiles can system has evolved into an unwieldy bureau- as we led the world in dealing with the request assistance—and then, only if they cratic morass. The practical effect of 19 as- consequences of the proliferation of nu- are threatened with chemical weapons by a sistant secretaries is overlap and poor co- ordination. clear weapons. Voting for the Chemical non-party. President Clinton has committed Weapons Convention resolution of rati- to the Senate that if a country of concern Second, improve coordination and elimi- such as Cuba or Iran should meet the strict nate layers in foreign aid programs. Here fication will make the world a safer conditions for aid, the United States will re- again, a hodgepodge of well-intentioned pro- place. strict our assistance to emergency medical grams operates with little oversight and co- Thank you, Mr. President. supplies—and to use our influence as member ordination. The details should be left to Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I yield 10 of the CWC to prevent other states from careful negotiation between the State De- minutes to the Senator from Massa- transferring equipment that could harm our partment and Congress. But, the goal should chusetts. national security. be to reduce bureaucracies, establish clear The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- Second, some opponents misread treaty priorities, and put these aid programs more language to conclude that the CWC would closely in the service of our overall foreign ator from Massachusetts is recognized. somehow facilitate their spread. President policy goals. Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, it is in- Clinton has made it clear we reject this far- Finally, start running the State Depart- teresting. I have been here on the floor fetched interpretation. He has committed to ment in a more business-like manner. State listening to this debate for a period of maintain strict U.S. and multilateral export Department officials rightly tout their im- time, and it is almost as if the argu- controls on certain dangerous chemicals and portant role in supporting American busi- ments kind of pass each other in a obtained the same assurance from our allies. nesses overseas. But as part of this effort, strange way. I have, also, on the For- If the Senate approves any of these ‘‘killer they ought to get their own house in order. conditions,’’ it will mean foregoing this trea- The required management reforms are no eign Relations Committee, been at the ty’s clear costs. We will be denied use of the secret. The General Accounting Office hearings. We keep hearing the same treaty’s tools against rogue states and ter- (GAO), The National Performance Review, mantra repeated with respect to a rorists. We will lose the ability to enforce and other studies have all reached similar number of objections, notwithstanding the rules we helped make. We will subject conclusions. Closing unnecessary overseas the fact that either the language of the our chemical companies to trade restrictions posts, outsourcing administrative support treaty is going to be changed by virtue that could cost them hundreds of millions of functions, and rethinking overseas staff of agreements made between Senator dollars in sales. And we will send a clear sig- structure can save money and improve per- HELMS and Senator BIDEN and the ad- nal of retreat that will undermine our lead- formance. ership to stop the spread of weapons of mass Maintaining the status quo is impossible. ministration, or the treaty itself ad- destruction. The GAO estimates that simply maintaining dresses those specific arguments. One That must not be allowed to happen. While current functions and personnel will require of the most interesting repetitive argu- the Convention is not a panacea, it rep- a 22 percent increase in State Department ments is that this is somehow going to resents a real opportunity to strengthen the budgets by the year 2000—an unlikely pros- be dangerous for the chemical compa- global fight against the threat that no one pect in today’s budget environment. nation can meet on its own. That is why nies. We keep hearing people say that Despite the clear need for action, the State this is going to be terrible for Amer- president and legislators from both parties Department management continues to post- and our military leaders have made U.S. ap- pone the inevitable. A well-conceived strat- ican industry. But American industry proval of the Convention their common egy for reconstructing the department does has signed off on it. The Senator from cause. Negotiated under President Reagan not exist, and Helms is right to demand ac- Delaware represents many chemical and signed under President Bush, the treaty tion. companies. Fifty-six percent of the has broad, bipartisan support that includes In return, the Senate should ratify the economy in the State of Delaware is every chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Chemical Weapons Convention. Americans represented by chemical companies. He for the past 20 years and the overwhelming will be safer with the treaty than without it. majority of our veterans, chemical manufac- hasn’t heard from them in opposition. The CWC combines an arms-control agree- Nevertheless, we hear people repeat turers and arms control experts. As Sec- ment that bans an entire class of weapons of retary of State Madeleine Albright has said, mass destruction and a non-proliferation re- that. this treaty was ‘‘made in America.’’ It is gime that forbids trade to any nation in non- Now, obviously, this convention, de- right for America, and now, at last, it must compliance. spite its attributes, is not a panacea be ratified in America. It will help prevent terrorists and pariah for the threat of chemical weapons. states from getting their hands on materials [From the Hill, April 23, 1997] None of us who are proposing this con- to make chemical weapons, while ensuring CHEMICAL WEAPONS PACT: LET’S MAKE A vention, I think, are suggesting that that American manufacturers can continue this is the panacea. But what it does DEAL to successfully compete in the global trade (By Thomas G. McInerney and Stanley A. of legitimate chemical products. do, Mr. President, is it contributes, on Weiss) Ameria is unilaterally destroying its balance, more to the effort to have de- On one side is President Clinton. He wants chemical stockpile. The question now is terrence, to expose cheaters and to de- the Senate to ratify the Chemical Weapons whether it will become party to a convention tect chemical weapons production and S3522 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE April 23, 1997 proliferation of any kind of significant They resulted, however, in the 1925 Ge- ture chemical weapons in a factory military nature than not having it. neva Protocol that outlaws the use of purported to be involved in the com- Mr. President, although crude chemi- chemical weapons. Negotiations on a mercial production of legitimate prod- cal weapons have been around for cen- more far-reaching prohibition resumed ucts. The legitimate chemical industry turies, poison gas unfortunately came in 1968, focusing on a treaty that would around the world makes products that of age as a tool of warfare in World War prohibit the development, production, are important to modern life. Some of I. First chlorine, then phosgene, mus- and stockpiling of chemical weapons as the same chemicals and technologies tard gas, and lewisite were introduced well. In 1969, the United States re- that this industry employs to manufac- onto the battlefields of Europe, burn- nounced the first use of chemical weap- ture fertilizers, pharmaceuticals, pes- ing, blistering, and choking unpro- ons and initiated a moratorium on ticides, herbicides, and countless other tected soldiers and civilians alike. their production that lasted 18 years. products could also be used to make Both because with chemical weapons so Five years later, the Senate gave its chemical weapons. There are literally closely associated with World War I advice and consent to ratification of thousands of industrial facilities world- there is a perception they are an both the Geneva Protocol and the Bio- wide, and we know all too well from anachronistic threat and are therefore logical and Toxin Weapons Convention. the inspections in Iraq in the after- of less concern, and because we became International negotiation toward a math of the 1991 gulf war that a deter- accustomed during 40 years of the cold Chemical Weapons Convention, how- mined rogue proliferator can and will war to living with the threat of a glob- ever, made little progress until the use the industrial sector to mask ef- al nuclear Armageddon, some fail to United States again took the initia- forts to develop and produce weapons recognize the magnitude of the threat tive. of mass destruction. For these very now posed by chemical weapons. This In the 1980’s, Saddam Hussein’s use of reasons, the Reagan administration is a terribly serious mistake. chemical weapons against Iran and not only pushed for routine data dec- Modern chemical weapons—nerve against his own Kurdish people horri- larations and inspections of govern- agents like sarin, soman, tabun, and fied the international community. Iraq ment and industry facilities; it also in- VX—are so lethal that a dose as small clearly violated its obligations under sisted on these unprecedented chal- as 15 milligrams can kill a person. the Geneva Protocol, but the inter- lenge inspections. Equally as troubling, chemical weap- national community did nothing to After George Bush was elected Presi- ons are the most financially and tech- punish Saddam for his outlaw behavior. dent, the Bush administration took a nically attractive option for a coun- This failure to enforce the Geneva Pro- variety of steps to give impetus to the try—or a terrorist—that sets its sights tocol was a failure of international po- international negotiations. Perhaps on developing and producing a weapon litical will, not of the treaty itself. most importantly, in May of 1991, of mass destruction. The ingredients America’s leaders at that time, includ- President Bush, without waiting for or for chemical weapons are chemicals ing many of us in this Chamber, must depending on completion and ratifica- that are inexpensive and readily avail- bear part of the responsibility for not tion of the Chemical Weapons Conven- able in the marketplace, and the for- having insisted that Saddam pay a tion, unilaterally forswore any use of mulae to make nerve and blister agents price for his outrageous behavior. Just chemical weapons by the United are well known. It is no coincidence like a domestic law, an international States, even as in-kind retaliation on that chemical weapons are known as agreement, no matter how good, is of the battlefield. A year and a half later, the poor man’s atom bomb. The U.S. little use unless it is enforced. as one of the last acts of his Adminis- intelligence community estimates that Iraq’s flagrant violation of the Gene- tration, Bush sent Secretary of State more than 20 nations possess chemical va Protocol did, however, serve as a Lawrence Eagleburger to Paris in Jan- weapons or the capability to make catalyst for the negotiators’ attempt uary, 1993 to join more than 130 states them readily. Still other countries are to complete the Chemical Weapons in signing the Chemical Weapons Con- working to acquire a chemical arsenal. Convention. Working from a draft trea- vention. Pushing these negotiations Chemical weapons have proliferated far ty text first introduced by then-Vice through to a successful conclusion more widely than the two other types President George Bush in 1984, the 39 stands as one of the most important of weapons of mass destruction, nu- nations hammering out the treaty in foreign policy achievements of the clear and biological weapons. We ig- the Conference on Disarmament Bush administration. We owe the dedi- nore this threat at our peril. It is this reached agreements on intrusive and cated negotiators from the Reagan and threat that the Chemical Weapons Con- far-reaching verification provisions Bush administrations, most notably vention confronts. And the Senate that were included in the Bush draft Ambassador Stephen Ledogar and today and tomorrow has an historical text. For example, Vice President Bush Arms Control and Disarmament Agen- opportunity to address and reduce that proposed on behalf of President Reagan cy Director Ronald Lehman, a debt of threat—to our civilian citizens, to our ‘‘anytime, anywhere’’ on-site challenge gratitude for their far-sighted propos- armed forces, and to the entire world— inspections to deter and catch treaty als and their persistence at the nego- as we perform our constitutional re- violators. At the time the concept of tiating table. We owe Presidents sponsibility of advice and consent with challenge inspections was first ad- Reagan and Bush a debt as well—for respect to the convention. vanced, no nuclear arms treaty yet in- their leadership and consistent support Our Nation’s highest military and in- cluded even routine on-site inspections of this historic arms control initiative. telligence officials repeatedly have of declared nuclear facilities. The convention that President Bill stated that while the Chemical Weap- Vice President Bush asked for these Clinton presented to the Senate on No- ons Convention is no panacea for these tough verification measures for good vember 23, 1993, which is before us threats, America will be safer and we reason. It is much more difficult to today, is a feasible and pragmatic trea- will have greater ability to reduce monitor a chemical weapons treaty ty. Given the inherent difficulty of cur- chemical weapons proliferation, and to than a nuclear accord. The capabilities tailing the proliferation of chemical identify and remove chemical weapons of our national technical means—in- weapons, America’s negotiators did not threats, if the United States and a ma- cluding intelligence satellites—enable insist on obtaining a flawless pact—an jority of the world’s nations ratify this us to track the production and deploy- effort that would have been certain to treaty. The number of signatories is up ment of nuclear weapons in other coun- fail. Instead, the U.S. delegation to 161. Seventy-four nations, including tries with a considerable degree of con- worked closely with our allies in Eu- the majority of our allies in NATO and fidence. Chemical weapons production, rope, Japan, Australia, and Canada to the European Union, have already rati- however, cannot be monitored from create a realistic treaty with verifica- fied the convention. afar with anywhere near the same level tion provisions that offer a significant The public outcry over the use of of confidence. Aside from using large likelihood of identifying militarily-sig- chemical weapons in World War I com- government facilities to churn out nificant violations and that will force pelled diplomats to begin work to ban chemical weapons, a government could cheaters to incur higher costs and en- these weapons. These post-war efforts coopt a commercial chemical firm into dure greater inconvenience in order to fell short of a complete prohibition. making chemical weapons, or manufac- accumulate a covert chemical weapons April 23, 1997 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S3523 stockpile. It is important to note that country to protect our troops and the So here you have the general of our the convention’s negotiators and advo- long-term interests of our Nation? I be- Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Chairman, cates have never claimed that it pro- lieve this convention makes identifica- coming before us and saying, indeed, vides an ironclad assurance that the tion of cheaters more likely. It re- the problem of the rogue states is not world will become and remain free quires all noncheaters to dispose of all passing the convention. The problem is from all chemical weapons. That is an chemical weapons, something we can’t not having a convention because, if you impossible standard to meet, so it do today. And, of course, we have al- do not have a convention, you don’t should come as no surprise the conven- ready unilaterally decided that we are have the kind of legal structure and in- tion does not meet it. Instead, the con- going to get rid of all of our chemical spection and tracking and accountabil- vention makes identification of cheat- weapons. ity that help put pressure on those ers more likely; it requires all non- So here we are going down the road rogue states and limit the access of the cheaters to dispose of all chemical of getting rid of all of our chemical rogue states to the materials with weapons—which, of course, the United weapons, and here you have finally which they make chemical weapons. States already was unilaterally com- some form of legal structure that will The truth is that until the conven- mitted to doing by law; and it will hold other nations accountable. tion enters into force, the actions of make it more difficult and expensive Clearly the United States must never any nation, signatory or not, to manu- for cheaters to cheat. be complacent about the threat of ad- facture or to stockpile chemical weap- A very important ally in the negotia- versary nations or terrorists armed ons will be objectionable but it won’t tions leading to the Chemical Weapons with chemical weapons. be illegal. Mr. President, it won’t be il- Convention was the U.S. chemical in- I respectfully suggest that nothing in legal. And it is very hard for this Sen- dustry. It is counterintuitive to think this convention and none of those of us ator to understand how, against the that the chemical industry would par- who advocate this convention begs regimen that we have for inspection— ticipate in a negotiation that would ul- complacency. against the intrusiveness that we are The convention’s critics claim that timately bring additional regulation, acquiring that we don’t have today, the treaty will lull us into a false sense notably data declarations and inspec- and measured by the level of destruc- of security, resulting in a weakening of tions, upon itself. To its credit, that is tion of existing stockpiles that is re- our defenses. To the contrary, the con- exactly what the U.S. chemical indus- quired, the people who today are under vention stipulates that each of its try, and many of its counterparts in no obligation whatsoever to destroy member nations is allowed to maintain other nations, did. For well over a dec- those stockpiles—you could be better defensive programs to develop and test ade, the U.S. chemical industry pro- off without it against those who have antidotes, gas masks, and other protec- vided invaluable assistance to the U.S. tive gear and to train its troops in how it is really very, very difficult to un- delegation and all of the negotiators in to use them. derstand. Geneva, opening their facilities to test So it is really a question of us. I General Shalikashvili’s last point al- verification concepts and proposing mean that there is nothing in the trea- ludes to an argument often made by workable solutions for how the data ty that lulls us to sleep. The treaty the treaty’s opponents, who are quick declarations and inspections should op- specifically allows us to have defenses. to point out that not all of the coun- erate. With the help of the U.S. chemi- And if we are, indeed, concerned about tries believed to have chemical weap- cal industry, the CWC emerged with it, as we ought to be, we will have ons will join. Indeed, that is true. sufficient provisions and restrictions to those defenses, precisely as this admin- Libya, Syria, Iraq, and North Korea make trade in chemical weapons mate- istration is offering us with an addi- have not signed the convention, but rials more visible and more difficult. tional $225 million of expenditure this three-quarters of the nations on the in- The convention’s inspectors will watch year. telligence community’s list of probable closely over the global industry, guard- So how can you continually come to proliferators have signed. ing against the diversion of commer- the floor and say, ‘‘Oh, my God, this is The truth is that until the conven- cial chemicals for purposes of weapons going to lull us to sleep’’ when the ad- tion enters into force, the actions of proliferation. At the same time, the ministration is providing an additional any nation—signatory or not—to man- treaty contains numerous safeguards $225 million? ufacture or stockpile chemical weapons that enable the industry to protect its It is our responsibility as elected of- will be objectionable, but not illegal confidential business information to its ficials to ensure that we maintain a ro- under any international law or agree- satisfaction, despite claims to the con- bust U.S. chemical weapons defense ment. Some colleagues in this Chamber trary that are made by some treaty op- program. To do less would be an injus- suggest we defer United States ratifica- ponents. tice to our troops, a threat to our secu- tion until after Libya, Syria, Iraq, and I want to be clear that despite all of rity, and a failure on our part to exer- North Korea have joined. To them I its attributes, the treaty is not a pana- cise fully our rights under this treaty. would respond that failure to ratify cea for the threat of chemical weapons. One of the 28 conditions to the treaty gains us absolutely nothing with re- It can’t be. But the convention’s pri- negotiated by Senators HELMS and spect to those rogue states. We are in mary merit is that it will contribute to BIDEN, and agreed to by the adminis- no way aided in meeting our intel- deterrence, exposure, and detection of tration, condition 11, explicitly states ligence and military obligations re- chemical weapons proliferation of a this determination, and requires the garding those nations and their chemi- militarily significant nature. By re- Secretary of Defense to ensure that cal weapons activities by failing to rat- quiring the destruction of existing ar- U.S. forces are capable of carrying out ify the CWC; conversely, we are in no senals and making it much more dif- required military missions regardless way impeded, and in fact are assisted, ficult for future adversaries to acquire of any foreign threat or use of chemical in meeting those obligations by ratifi- or increase chemical weapons stocks, weapons. cation. Rather, I agree with the Chair- the CWC greatly reduces the prospect The Pentagon’s view of the conven- man of the Joint Chiefs of Staff on this that U.S. troops will encounter chemi- tion is unambiguous. In his testimony, matter: We increase our leverage cal weapons on the battlefield. Follow- Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff against these hold-out states by ratify- ing in our footsteps as we move to uni- Gen. John Shalikashvili stated: ing the Convention. We also make it laterally destroy our chemical weapons From a military perspective, the Chemical more difficult for those hold-outs to stockpile, the CWC will begin to level Weapons Convention is clearly in our na- obtain materials they can use in their the international playing field by re- tional interest. The convention’s advantages chemical weapons programs. quiring other countries to eliminate outweigh its shortcomings. The United Some opponents of the CWC, suggest States and all other CW-capable state parties that it is fatally flawed because adher- their chemical weapons as well. incur the same obligation to destroy their That is the balance. That is the judg- chemical weapons stockpiles . . . if we do ence to or violation of its requirements ment we are called on to make in the not join and walk away from the CWC an cannot be verified. Senate. awful lot of people will probably walk away We keep hearing this. It is interest- Is this, as the Senator from Alaska from it as well, and our influence on the ing. At the hearings I kept hearing two was just saying, in the interest of our rogue states will only decrease.’’ arguments coming out from the people S3524 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE April 23, 1997 who said you can’t verify it. They say weapons activity are true, I join treaty Group’s controls have not been weak- it is too intrusive, that we will give critics —and, I confidently expect—all ened. Further, the condition requires away all of the trade secrets of the Senators in abhoring this Russian ac- the President to block any attempt businesses, so we can’t allow obtrusive tivity. I take second place to no Sen- within the Australia Group to change verification. They object to it because ator in wanting to use all capability at the Group’s view of its obligations they think it is going to prevent busi- the disposal of the United States to ob- under the CWC. ness from conducting its business. And tain cessation of those activities, and Condition 16 requires the President they go to the other side of the coin, destruction of all Russian chemical to notify Congress if he ever deter- and say, ‘‘If we get more intrusive, we weapons. But treaty opponents seem to mines the Convention’s secretariat, the are going to be verifying sufficiently have stepped through the lookingglass Organization for the Prohibition of but then you lose on the other side.’’ in Alice in Wonderland. Simply insist- Chemical Weapons, has willfully di- You can’t have it both ways. Either it ing that Russia tell us the truth is no vulged confidential business informa- is a balanced effort at verification and way to get the bottom of this situa- tion that results in a financial loss or at the level of intrusiveness, which is tion. Refusing to ratify the CWC be- damage to U.S. company, and to with- why the chemical companies support cause we are piqued at their behavior is hold half the United States’ annual as- this treaty. a classic example of what the old cliche sessment toward the OPCW’s expenses Mr. President, the fact is that the refers to as ‘‘cutting off one’s nose to if such a breach occurs and the OPCW very people who have argued for that spite one’s face.’’ does not waive immunity for prosecu- intrusiveness—the Reagan administra- The United States greatly increases tion of any OPCW official involved in tion, and most of the principal critics its leverage by ratifying the CWC, the breach, or if the OPCW refuses to who are making that argument today which will put pressure on Russia to establish an investigatory commission —are the very people who insisted that follow suit. When Senate debate of the to investigate the breach. the challenge inspections would be es- CWC was scheduled in the fall of 1996, Condition 15 requires the United sential to the integrity of this conven- it became evident that Moscow was States not to contribute to the vol- tion. feeling the heat of a pending Senate untary fund the CWC establishes for Ironically, the handful of principal vote on the CWC. Suddenly, Russian of- providing chemical weapons defense as- critics making this argument served in ficials backpedaled from a 1990 bilat- sistance to other parties to the treaty, the Reagan administration and, fortu- and, with regard to the CWC require- eral destruction agreement, which had nately, insisted that challenge inspec- ment for all treaty parties to assist not yet entered into force, and stated tions would be essential to the CWC’s other party nations who have been at- the CWC’s activation should be delayed integrity. Virtually every inspection tacked with chemicals or are threat- until the bilateral agreement was un- provision that the Reagan administra- ened with such an attack, the same derway. This strategy belies Moscow’s tion proposed was included in the trea- condition limits U.S. assistance to eagerness to postpone U.S. ratification. ty text when the negotiations con- those nations determined to be adver- I, for one, am not buying it. The longer cluded in 1992. Their proposals having saries to medical antidotes and treat- we wait to ratify the CWC, the more been accepted, these critics now want ments. breathing room Moscow has. The time to raise the bar even higher. Perhaps the least credible argument The CWC’s verification provisions has long since passed to put some real raised by the CWC’s opponents is that will put inspectors on the ground with pressure on Russia. Senate ratification this treaty would place unreasonable sensitive equipment and the right to of the CWC will do just that. burdens on America’s chemical indus- Another of the treaty opponents’ review records, ask questions, go to try. It would seem that those making any part of a facility, and take and claims is that the treaty requires the this argument have not been listening analyze samples. These powerful in- United States to share chemical and to what the chemical industry itself spection tools are needed to get the job chemical weapons defense technologies has been saying for the last two dec- done, and it would be sheer folly for and capabilities with even those party ades. The chemical industry’s reasons the Senate to deprive the U.S. intel- States that are rogue nations or adver- for supporting the convention are not ligence community of the information saries of our Nation. Some claim that altogether altruistic, but they are im- that these inspections will provide. Ac- we would be forced to remove our cur- minently logical. First and foremost, cording to former Director of Central rent export controls applicable to the chemical industry seeks to disasso- Intelligence James Woolsey: chemicals with respect to all other par- ciate itself from the odious practice of What the Chemical Weapons Convention ties to the CWC. Articles X and XI of making chemical weapons. Equally im- provides the intelligence community is a the Convention are frequently ref- portant, the U.S. industry long ago de- new tool to add to our collection tool kit. It erenced in this context. What is going cided that the Chemical Weapons Con- is an instrument with broad applicability, on here, Mr. President, is very regret- vention would be good for business. which can help resolve a wide variety of table. The black and white language of The convention contains automatic problems. Moreover, it is a universal tool the convention itself contradicts that which can be used by diplomats and politi- economic sanctions that preclude trea- cians, as well as intelligence specialists, to view. And if the convention itself were ty members from trading in controlled further a common goal: elimination of the not sufficiently clear in enabling the chemicals with states that do not join. threat of chemical weapons. United States to refuse to provide any The U.S. chemical industry, which is Another argument used by critics of technology or other information or America’s largest exporter, views the the treaty is that Russia does not com- data that could be misused by rogue convention as a way to a more open ply with other arms control treaties nations or adversaries, several of the 28 marketplace. Industry representatives and that more of the same can be ex- conditions to which bipartisan agree- describe their obligations under the pected with the CWC. Reports from ment has been reached directly address treaty as manageable and acceptable; whistleblowers who worked in the So- these concerns and should lay them to to wit, the CWC will not impose inspec- viet chemical weapons production com- rest in all minds. tions, regulations, intrusions, or costs plex indicate that in the late 1980’s and Condition 7 requires the President to greater than those already required by on into the 1990’s, the Soviet Union was certify before the ratification docu- other Federal laws and standards. developing and testing a new genera- ments are deposited that the CWC will But it is very important to go beyond tion of nerve agents. More recent re- in no way weaken the Australia Group the fact that the chemical industry be- ports suggest chemical weapons re- of nations, of which the United States lieves the CWC will not impose signifi- search, if not limited production, con- is a participant, that has established a cantly difficult burdens on its compa- tinues. Russia has declared a stockpile cooperative export control regime, and nies—and look closely at the critical of 40,000 metric tons of chemical weap- that every single nation that partici- fact that U.S. failure to ratify will re- ons—the world’s largest—but reports pates in the Australia Group must con- sult in tremendous financial and mar- indicate that even these numbers may cur that there is no CWC requirement ket share losses—grave in the near be incorrectly low. that would weaken the Group’s export term and likely even worse in the Mr. President, to the extent these re- controls. Then, annually, certification longer term—for the U.S. chemical in- ports of continuing Russian chemical is required to the Congress that the dustry. In a letter dated August 29, April 23, 1997 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S3525 1996, the CEO’s of 53 of America’s most Also among the arguments against his capacity as a leader and statesman. prominent chemical companies bluntly the convention used by its critics is the Senator JOE BIDEN, the ranking Demo- stated: ‘‘Our industry’s status as the assertion that the CWC will cost the cratic member of the Foreign Rela- world’s preferred supplier of chemical American taxpayers too much money. tions Committee, has labored, also products may be jeopardized if the On the contrary, the U.S. share of the with the help of his staff, to bring this United States does not ratify the con- CWC’s monitoring and inspection re- treaty before the Senate. Senator CARL vention.’’ The American chemical in- gime, approximately $20 million annu- LEVIN, ranking Democrat on the Armed dustry would be marked as unreliable ally, is far less than the $75 million an- Services Committee, and Senate Demo- and unjustly associated with chemical nual cost to store America’s chemical cratic Leader TOM DASCHLE, each weapons proliferation. If the resolution weapons. This $20 million of support for knowledgeable and dedicated, have of ratification of the CWC were to be the international inspection agency is made considerable contributions to defeated, it would cost the U.S. chemi- minuscule in comparison to the this effort and to the debate. Majority cal industry significant portion of its amounts we spend for U.S. defenses. Leader TRENT LOTT’s leadership has $60 billion export business—many in This is a small price to pay to institute permitted negotiation of 28 conditions the industry have agreed on an esti- and maintain an international mecha- designed to reassure those who in good mate of $600 million a year—and result nism that will dramatically reduce the faith had questions and concerns about in the loss of thousands of good-paying chemical weapons threat that faces various aspects of the treaty. I com- American jobs. U.S. service men and women and estab- pliment and thank all of them. Under the terms of the CWC, some lish an international norm for national Mr. President the compelling logic of 2,000 U.S. industry facilities—not com- behavior which is so apparently in the this convention and the breadth and panies—will be affected by the treaty. interests of this Nation and, indeed, all depth of support for it should produce Of that group, some 1,800 will be asked the world’s people. And, lest the esti- an overwhelming vote to approve the to fill out brief data declaration forms mates of the costs of U.S. participation resolution of ratification. I have great and the remaining 200 are likely to un- prove to be low, included in the 28 hope that the Senate will demonstrate dergo inspections. Assertions that the agreed conditions is a condition that its ability by taking this important neighborhood ‘‘Mom and Pop’’ dry limits the U.S. annual contribution to step of ratifying this treaty. I urge my cleaners, cosmetics firms, and brew- no more than $25 million a year, to be colleagues to vote for the resolution. eries will be involved in this are wildly adjusted every third year based on PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR inaccurate. changes in the Consumer Price Index. Mr. President, I ask unanimous con- In addition, although the industry’s The United States led the inter- sent, under the new rules governing ac- representatives explained patiently to national community throughout the cess to the floor, that Scott Bunton of Senators that the CWC’s onsite ver- negotiation of the Chemical Weapons my staff, be permitted access to the ification and inspection procedures will Convention. Three administrations— Senate floor as long as the Chemical not violate a U.S. company’s constitu- two Republican and one Democratic— Weapons Convention is being debated. tional protection against undue search have labored to develop and place be- The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without or seizure, there is included in the 28 fore the Senate a carefully crafted in- objection, it is so ordered. agreed conditions condition 28 that re- strument that will increase the safety Mr. HELMS addressed the Chair. quires the United States to obtain a and security of U.S. citizens and armed The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- criminal search warrant in the case of forces and will do so at very reasonable ator from North Carolina. any challenge inspection of a U.S. fa- costs to taxpayers, companies that Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, I now in- cility to which the facility does not make and use legitimate chemicals, vite the distinguished Senator from give its consent, and to obtain an ad- and American consumers. Former Oklahoma [Mr. INHOFE] to take the ministrative search warrant from a Presidents Ford, Carter, and Bush have floor to make whatever comments he U.S. magistrate judge in the case of spoken out strongly in favor of ratifi- may require. any routine inspection of a U.S. facil- cation. Today 1996 Republican Presi- Mr. INHOFE. I thank the chairman. ity to which the facility does not give dential nominee and former Senate The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- its consent. Majority Leader Robert Dole an- ator from Oklahoma. The U.S. chemical industry led by nounced his support for the CWC cou- Mr. INHOFE. Thank you, Mr. Presi- the Chemical Manufacturers Associa- pled with the 28 conditions to which bi- dent. tion, the Synthetic Organic Chemical partisan agreement has been secured. First of all, let me say that there Manufacturers Association, and the Rarely does one see a situation in have been a lot of charges made back Pharmaceutical Research and Manu- which it is more important to apply and forth. And certainly I don’t ques- facturers of America have repeatedly the admonition that we would be wise tion the sincerity of any Senators who and unequivocally requested that the not to let the perfect become the have spoken on the floor, nor any posi- Senate approve the resolution of ratifi- enemy of the good. Perfect security tions they have taken, nor do I ques- cation and pass its associated imple- against chemical weapons is unattain- tion their motives. They clearly think menting legislation. Industry’s support able. I have great hopes that wise Sen- that they are right and that I am of this treaty should not be questioned, ators will not permit a group of Sen- wrong. I think I am right. And the it should be applauded. ators who will not be satisfied by the right position is not to ratify the It’s suprising to see nonindustry peo- greatest achievable increase in our se- Chemical Weapons Convention. ple shouting industry concern when the curity, and many of whom have a basic The distinguished Senator from Mas- industry itself was intimately involved objection to any international arms sachusetts talked about ‘‘lulling’’ peo- in developing the convention and the control treaty to scuttle a carefully en- ple into a false sense of security. There proposed implementation legislation gineered agreement that our military is a very interesting editorial in the and is urging the Senate to approve the leaders, our intelligence community Wall Street Journal on that subject— resolution of ratification. The CEO’s or senior executives, former Presidents of that people are going to believe that other senior executives of seven major both parties, President Clinton, and something is going to be done with chemical firms with significant oper- 1996 Presidential nominee Dole agree this, that it is going to eliminate or ations in my home State of Massachu- will make all Americans and, indeed, dramatically reduce chemical weapons. setts are among those who have repeat- the entire world safer and more secure We have testimony from very distin- edly urged the Senate to approve the from chemical weapons. guished, well-known, former Secretar- resolution of ratification. Frankly, in In closing, I want to commend those ies of Defense—four of them—who say my judgment, the statements of these who have labored diligently to bring that this, in fact, could increase the executives concerning the effects this the Senate to this point. Former Sen- proliferation of chemical weapons convention will have on their busi- ate Foreign Relations Committee around the world, and particularly in nesses are more credible than the con- Chairman RICHARD LUGAR, with the as- the area of rogue nations. tradictory statements of the opponents sistance of his able staff, has done yeo- Let me just address one other thing of the CWC. man service and again demonstrated because my beloved friend, Bob Dole, S3526 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE April 23, 1997 came out and changed the position to this treaty are going to ratify it; I have said on the Senate floor sev- that he had previously had. I certainly and, No. 2, the ones that ratify it will eral times in the past that I look back don’t question his sincerity. But in his do what they have said they will do. sometimes wistfully to the days of the letter he said that the conditions or I think it is kind of interesting when cold war, Mr. President, when they had the concerns that he had previously you look at Russia, for example. I am two superpowers, the U.S.S.R. and the had been met. not singling them out other than the United States of America. We had an I happened to stumble onto the letter fact that we have had more treaties intelligence system that was pretty that was dated September 11, 1996, from with Russia. We have the 1990 Biologi- well informed. We pretty much knew Bob Dole to TRENT LOTT. I will read cal Weapons Destruction Treaty; the what they had, and they pretty much the last of one paragraph. He says, ‘‘I ABM Treaty that goes all the way back knew what we had. Even though they have three concerns. First, effective to the 1970’s; we have the Strategic Ar- were a threat to this Nation, certainly verification. Do we have confidence maments Reduction Treaty, START I; they were a threat and a quantity that that our intelligence will detect viola- the Conventional Forces in Europe could be measured and we could antici- tions? Second, real reductions. In this Treaty, the CFE treaty; and the Inter- pate. Now we have countries like Iraq, case down to zero.’’ mediate Nuclear Forces Treaty. In and we have people, as I said before, He is putting an expectation of re- each one of these cases, the country in- who murder their own grandchildren ducing the use of chemical weapons volved—this country being Russia—has and we are talking about the Qadhafis, ‘‘down to zero.’’ not lived up to the provisions of the Hafez Assads and those individuals ‘‘Third, that it will truly be a global treaty. In other words, they ratify a who, I think, are a far greater threat in treaty.’’ treaty. They are a signatory. Then terms of what is available in tech- Mr. President, none of these three they ratify, go through that elaborate nology out there with weapons of mass have been met—not one of these three process, and then they turn around and destruction including what we are ad- conditions; certainly on verification. don’t live up to it. They have been dressing today, and that is chemical There is not one person who has found in noncompliance by our State weapons. So the threat is a very real stepped onto the floor of this Senate Department—this country—in each one threat that is out there. and said that this is a verifiable treaty. of these five. I understand from some of my close Nobody claims that it is. It is not veri- You have to ask the question: If Rus- friends, Republican friends, that there fiable. People who give us their word sia ratified five treaties and did not are some of these conditions that they that they are not going to do it. That comply with any of the five, why would could either take or leave and are not is fine. We can believe their word. Are we expect that they would ratify this as concerned about whether Russia we going to believe countries who have and not live up to it? One of the condi- ratifies the treaty in advance; they are not lived up to their other treaties? tions that we have is that the Russians not really concerned about whether Certainly not. will ratify the treaty prior to the time there are no inspectors from terrorist In the case of real reductions, ‘‘down that we would do it. People are saying countries. I can’t really understand to zero’’—getting one to say there are oh, no, Russia will ratify but only if we that, but they are concerned under- going to be any real reductions. Cer- do. I would like to remind my friends standably about article X. And while tainly not down to zero. Nobody has in this body that I was one of, I think, everyone has put their own interpreta- made that statement. three Senators who voted against the tion on article X, and instead of put- And will it be truly global? We have START II Treaty and they used the ting an interpretation on it let me just talked about the countries that are not same argument at that time. They said read. I hope that all of America could a part of this treaty. And there are you have to ratify this thing, you have hear the exact wording of this treaty countries that are not like we are. We to ratify it before Russia because Rus- that we are being asked to endorse and are talking about people who murder sia is not going to ratify it if we do not to ratify. Section 3 of article X says: their own grandchildren, we are talk- ratify it. This is 2 years later, and they Each State party undertakes to facilitate ing about Iraq, Syria, Libya, North still have not ratified it. So we are still and shall have the right to participate in the Korea. So obviously, it is not a global waiting. fullest possible exchange of equipment, ma- treaty in any sense of the term. So why will you expect if 2 years ago terial and scientific and technological infor- In verifiability, it is kind of interest- we passed the START II Treaty—and I mation concerning means of protection against chemical weapons. ing. After the Persian Gulf war we set think the Senator from North Carolina up a very meticulous system of ver- and I were two of the four votes that Wait a minute now. We are talking ification within the United Nations were against it—they said they were about they would be able to look at that gave the inspectors from the Unit- going to ratify after we did, and they what our defenses against chemical ed Nations far greater authority than didn’t do it—why would they nec- weapons are, not just what we have, the inspectors would have under this essarily do it? what our technology is, how they treaty. Yet we find out that in the This global thing is very significant might be able to copy our technology. midst of all of this that Iraq is making because here we talk about those who Moving on to section 5, it says: chemical weapons as we speak. If you have signed the treaty and those who The technical secretariat shall establish— Incidentally, Mr. President, does it bother can’t do it with the information that have ratified the treaty and, quite you, that technical secretariat? I always they have, and the ability that they frankly, I do not care if a lot of those wondered what happened to sovereignty in have from the United Nations, cer- who have to ratify this treaty ratify it. this country. We have a group sitting over tainly it is not something that can I am not at all concerned about Can- there someplace; we are not sure who they happen under this treaty. ada, Costa Rica, the Fiji Islands, Swit- are going to be, but they are called the tech- I have another concern. Mr. Presi- zerland, Togo, Singapore, Iceland. They nical secretariat— dent, it is not just those who have not are not threats to this country, but Not later than 180 days after entry into force of this convention and maintain for the signed or who have not ratified the there are threats out there. use of any requesting State party a data treaty. I look at some of the countries And a minute ago, someone, the dis- bank containing freely available information that have signed and they may or may tinguished Senator from Massachu- concerning various means of protection not ratify. The distinguished Senator setts, quoted James Woolsey, former against chemical weapons as well as such in- from Arizona, Senator KYL, earlier said CIA Director. It is also James Woolsey formation as may be provided by State par- that 99 percent of the known chemical who said we know there are somewhere ties. weapons are in three countries: United in excess of 25 nations that currently Now, I look at this as a sovereignty States, China, and Russia. And not one have weapons of mass destruction, ei- issue again, because I do not know who of those countries has ratified this ther biological, chemical, or nuclear these people are, but I do know this, treaty. I doubt very seriously that they and are working on the vehicle means that we have a lot of chemical compa- are going to ratify this treaty. to deliver those weapons. And so if nies in this country that have not been So we have all of these conditions these countries have them, these are talked about very much. You talk that we are talking about that assume not countries that we are friendly with about the CMA. That is, as I under- that, No. 1, those who are signatories or think like we do. stand it, 192 chemical companies. They April 23, 1997 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S3527 are the large ones, but there are some- So I would just say, Mr. President, Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I yield 7 where between, it is estimated, 3 and that there has been a lot of lobbying minutes to the Senator from Oregon. 8,000 companies that would be affected going on, and I know the President’s The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- by this treaty. Not all of them are been very busy. I do not know what ator from Oregon is recognized. chemical companies but about half of kind of deals have been made, but I do Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, the peo- them, so you may be looking at 192 know that this is not something that is ple of Oregon have firsthand knowledge large chemical companies and maybe in the best security interests of the of the dangers of chemical weapons. 4,000 small chemical companies and United States. I do sit on the Senate Stored at the chemical weapons depot maybe it would be to their advantage Armed Services Committee. I am the at Umatilla in the eastern part of my to have very stringent requirements chairman of the readiness subcommit- State are millions of pounds of chemi- like this that would be a lot easier for tee. We are very much concerned about cal weapons. Mustard gas and nerve gas large companies to stand behind than our State of readiness in terms of how sit in concrete bunkers, a constant re- small companies. to defend against chemical warfare. We minder of the need for action. Finally, Mr. President, I have so deal with this subject every day. I am We see and hear constant news re- much respect for the three former Sec- on the Intelligence Committee. We ports about the dangers facing children retaries of Defense who testified before talk about this. But none of us on in eastern Oregon every day those Senator HELMS’ committee, James those two committees know about this weapons sit in those stockpiles. There is no place in a civilized soci- Schlesinger, Don Rumsfeld, and Cap as people such as Dick Cheney. I agree Weinberger. In fact, I have talked to ety for terror weapons like these, and with them. We cannot afford to take a each one of them, along with Dick Che- it is not right to have stockpiles of chance on a flawed treaty that could ney, who would have been there to tes- these weapons that put our children at have the effect of increasing the pro- tify, but he was unable to make that risk. Passing the Chemical Weapons liferation of chemical weapons. schedule. But he has sent a letter that Convention is the most important vote I thank the Chair. has been quoted from several times. in this Congress for a safer future for Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, I yield These individuals all say essentially our children. This is a time in my view myself such time as I may require to the same thing. They say that we are for the United States to lead rather thank the Senator for his comment. He being asked to ratify a treaty that is than to retreat. When Presidents is right on target. not verifiable, that is not global, that Reagan and Bush negotiated this trea- I have been around this place quite a does not have any effect on those coun- ty, they fully understood that U.S. while, and I have seen Senators come tries that are considered to be our en- leadership was needed to complete it. and go but there is one situation that emies, our adversaries out there. And They knew that full U.S. participation is endemic to the trade. A lot of Sen- they are out there, Mr. President, and was essential for its work. ators can be frightened about threats also even those who say they will rat- Not only will failure to ratify this of 30-second television commercials 2 ify and comply have demonstrated over convention put us in the position of years hence or 4 years hence. But let and over again, such as Russia, that being followers on the world’s stage they have not complied with previous me tell you something, every kind of but the provisions built into this trea- treaties. television known to man has been used ty to isolate and in fact economically By the way, speaking of Russia, it against me about practically every punish those nations which refuse to was interesting; last week in Janes De- vote I have cast and I am still here. So ratify the treaty are going to apply to fense News, I read that the Russians I have a little policy. I started it the the United States if the Senate does had developed a type of chemical weap- first time I was sworn in. I stood over not ratify this treaty. on, and they have developed it out of there five times now taking an oath to In my State, we believe that we pros- precursors that are not under this trea- uphold the Constitution and to do my per from trade, cultural and other ex- ty. In other words, there are three pre- best to defend the best interests of this changes with the rest of the world and cursors that they are using that they country just as the Senator has and that there would be a threat if we can develop these weapons with. So just as the Senator has talked about. failed to ratify this treaty. they would not be covered by this. I Now, the media have with one or two If the Senate allows America to be- think maybe that is just a coincidence. rare exceptions totally ignored the ap- come an outlaw nation, the effects Maybe there are other countries out pearance of the three former Secretar- would be felt by every farmer, software there also that are saying all right, if ies of Defense who came before the For- engineer, timber worker and fisherman this Chemical Weapons Convention eign Relations Committee. And one of who sell the fruits of their labor over- goes in and we intend to comply with them read the letter that the Senator seas. the provisions of it, which they prob- has just alluded to written by Dick I would like to for just a brief few ably are not, what can we do to build Cheney. I wish all Americans could minutes review the arguments against chemical weapons without using those have heard these three gentlemen and this treaty. Some say that it rep- precursor chemicals? And they are al- read the letter by Cheney because they resents a loss of sovereignty, but there ready doing it. would understand that no matter about is no greater threat to our sovereignty I would like to share lastly some- the 30-second commercials, no matter than to run away from our role as a thing that all four of these former Sec- about the news media—I have had it all world leader. Some say that this treaty retaries of Defense have said. They thrown at me. You can come to my of- would open our essential industries to have said that there is a very good fice and look at the wall and see all the espionage, but there is no question chance being a party to this treaty and cartoons. Every cartoon that they run that the American chemical companies ratifying this treaty could increase the I put it up on the wall to remind me were consulted on this treaty. They proliferation of chemical weapons as that the media do not count if you worked closely on the key verification opposed to reducing them. I would read stand on principles and do what you issues and there is enormous support, one paragraph out of Dick Cheney’s think is right. enormous support among those in the letter, and I do not think anyone is Now, I have an idea satisfactory to chemical industry to approve this trea- more respected than Dick Cheney in myself that a lot of Senators wish they ty. these areas. could vote against this treaty but they Finally, there are those who say ver- Indeed, some aspects of the present con- are wondering about the next election. ification is unworkable because rogue vention, notably its obligation to share with I think they better stop and wonder nations will refuse to ratify it. But the potential adversaries like Iran chemical about the next generation. fact is that ratification of the treaty manufacturing technology that can be used I thank the Senator for the fine re- gives our country new access to infor- for military purposes and chemical defensive marks that he made. I admire the Sen- mation about the chemical weapons equipment, threaten to make this accord programs of other nations. If we are de- worse than having no treaty at all. In my ator very much. judgment, the treaty’s article X and XI Mr. INOUYE. I thank the Senator. nied access to this vital intelligence, amount to a formula for greatly accelerating Mr. HELMS. I yield the floor. then we will be forced to spend even the proliferation of chemical warfare capa- The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who more on our own intelligence to track bilities around the globe. yields time? the chemical weapons threat. S3528 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE April 23, 1997 The world is watching the Senate President Reagan, in 1985, proposed and This is the way General Shalikashvili now, watching the greatest nation on the Congress accepted his proposal that made that point. He said, ‘‘I fully sup- Earth and hoping that we will lead the we destroy our chemical weapons. port early ratification of the Chemical way to ridding our planet of these poi- What this convention will do will be to Weapons Convention and I reflect the sons. I urge my colleagues to join require other nations to do what we are views of the Joint Chiefs and the com- across party lines and approve this already doing, and that is going to re- batant commanders.’’ treaty, because when it is approved, duce the risk of chemical attacks The previous Chairman of the Joint our world will be a safer place. against our troops and our Nation. Chiefs, General Powell, spoke very I yield the floor. General Shalikashvili, the Chairman forcefully on this issue just last week. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who of our Joint Chiefs, has had a great He was addressing the Senate Veter- yields time? The Senator from New deal to say about this treaty. This is ans’ Affairs Committee on April 17 dur- Mexico is recognized. what he wrote on April 8. He said that: ing a hearing on gulf war illness, but MR. DOMENICI. I thank the Chair. The ratification of the Chemical Weapons he said this relative to the convention (The remarks of Mr. DOMENICI per- Convention by as many nations as possible is on chemical weapons: taining to the introduction of S. 633 are in the best interests of the Armed Forces of the United States. The combination [he I think one of the greatest things we can located in today’s RECORD under wrote] of the nonproliferation and disar- do over the next 2 weeks is to pass the Chem- ‘‘Statements on Introduced Bills and mament aspects of the convention greatly ical Weapons Convention treaty. This is a Joint Resolutions.’’) reduces the likelihood that U.S. forces may good treaty. It serves our national interest. PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR encounter chemical weapons in a regional That is why it was negotiated beginning in Mr. DOMENICI. I ask unanimous conflict. The protection of the young men Ronald Reagan’s term, and I helped partici- pate [The ‘‘I,’’ here, being Colin Powell]—I consent that Peter Lyons, a legislative and women in our forces, should they have to go in harm’s way in the future, is strength- helped participate in those negotiations as fellow working in my office, be granted ened, not diminished, by the Chemical Weap- National Security Adviser, and that is why the privilege of the floor for today and ons Convention. we signed it in the administration of Presi- the remainder of the debate on this Then he went on to say: dent Bush. And I participated in the develop- ment of the treaty during those days as issue. We do not need chemical weapons to pro- Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and I The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without vide an effective deterrent or to deliver an objection, it is so ordered. effective response. supported the treaty then and I support it now. Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I yield When the Chairman of the Joint myself 10 minutes. Chiefs of Staff, every member—every Then General Powell went on to say The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- single member of the Joint Chiefs, and the following: ator from Michigan. every combatant commander have There are some uncertainties associated Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I believe reached the same conclusion, that the with the treaty and there are some criti- it is crucial to American leadership ratification of this treaty is in our na- cisms of the treaty. I think those criticisms and to the security of our men and can be answered and dealt with. But we tional security interests and will re- should not overlook the simple fact that, women in the Armed Forces and, in- duce the likelihood of our men and deed, to all of us in America, that the with the treaty, the United States joins over women ever facing chemicals in com- 160 nations in saying to the world that chem- Senate provide its advice and consent bat, it seems to me we should listen. ical weapons will not be used, will not be to the ratification of the Chemical When they tell us that we are already made, will not be developed, will not be pro- Weapons Convention so that the United unilaterally destroying our stockpile of duced, and we will not share the technology States can join it as an original party. chemical weapons and that what we associated with chemical weapons with other The security of our men and women are doing by joining this convention is nations who are inclined to use them inside in the Armed Forces who someday may being in a position where we will be or outside the confines of this treaty. face the threat of chemicals, the secu- able to help reduce the risk that others Then he went on to say the following: rity of our people who constantly face will obtain chemical weapons, we Not to participate in this treaty, for us to the threat of terrorists and terrorist should listen. And when they tell us reject the treaty that we designed, we states that try to get their hands on that they know that this is not per- signed, for us to reject that treaty now be- chemical weapons, all demand that the cause there are rogue states outside that fectly verifiable but that this will re- treaty is the equivalent of saying we should Senate join as an original party to this duce the chances that chemical weap- convention and ratify this treaty. To not have joined NATO because Russia was ons will fall in hands of terrorist states not a part of NATO. It’s exactly because ratify it and to make it real, we have or terrorist organizations or individ- there are these rogue states that we should to do so without accepting any of the uals—when our top military leaders join with an alliance of over 160 nations to killer amendments that would render tell us that, we should listen. make a clear international statement that this ratification vote useless. They have acknowledged what every- these are rogue nations. I say this, and I reached this conclu- one has acknowledged. There is no way And he concludes: sion as a member of the Armed Serv- to perfectly verify a chemical weapons Not signing the treaty does not make them ices Committee who has listened to our convention. But what they have also no longer rogue nations. So I think this is a military leaders testify before us, who told us is that following their analysis fine treaty and it is one of the things the has read the testimony of these leaders of this treaty, that because of the in- Senate can do to start to get a better handle who have said that the ratification of tense inspection regime which is pro- on the use of these weapons of mass destruc- this convention is unequivocally in our vided for here, that we will be able to tion and especially chemical weapons. national security interest because it reduce the risk that any militarily sig- Mr. President, Secretary Cohen ad- will reduce the risk of our military nificant amount of chemicals will fall dressed the Chemical Weapons Conven- forces encountering chemical weapons into the hands of an opponent or a fu- tion at great length before the Armed on a future battlefield. ture opponent. It is not a matter of Services Committee. In 1985, President Reagan signed a perfection, they tell us. It is a matter I ask the Chair whether or not I have law which has resulted in our unilater- of improving our current position. used up the 10 minutes that I allotted ally destroying our stockpile of chemi- That sounds like a security bargain to myself? cal weapons. This process will be com- them and it ought to sound like a secu- The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- pleted in 2004. The destruction of our rity bargain to us. Our senior military ator from Michigan has 15 seconds re- chemical weapons will take place, leaders have a unique perspective on maining. whether or not the United States rati- what makes our military stronger or Mr. LEVIN. I thank my Chair. I will fies the convention. We are destroying more secure. And they have agreed. just yield myself 3 additional minutes. our chemical weapons. We are doing so They have agreed that this treaty is The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- because we decided they are no longer good for our security. All the Chiefs of ator has that right. militarily useful and they are too ex- Staff, as I have said, the Chairman of Mr. LEVIN. Now, Secretary Cohen, pensive to maintain and we have all the Joint Chiefs and the combatant our former colleague Bill Cohen, has the capability we need to deter attack commanders have urged that we ratify testified before the Armed Services and to respond to attack. So that this treaty. Committee on this subject. He has filed April 23, 1997 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S3529 some lengthy testimony supporting the Mr. President, I yield the floor, and if ian populations by bombs, rockets, Chemical Weapons Convention. To my good friend from Rhode Island is missiles, artillery, mines, grenades or summarize what he said, and here ready, I will be happy to yield him 7 spray. again I am quoting: minutes. If there is nobody on the Chemical weapons are terrifying be- The Chemical Weapons Convention is both other side, I yield 7 minutes to the Sen- cause they kill quickly, silently, and a disarmament and nonproliferation treaty. ator from Rhode Island. indiscriminately. Even more disturbing It is very much in our national security in- The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. is the fact that their production is terest because it establishes an international HAGEL). The Senator from Rhode Is- easy, cheap and simple to conceal. mandate for the destruction of chemical land. With a little know-how, a solvent used weapons stockpiles, because it prohibits the Mr. REED. Mr. President, I rise to in pen ink can be converted into mus- development, retention, storage, prepara- add my voice to the chorus of support tard gas and a chemical common in tions for use, and use of chemical weapons, because it increases the probability of de- for the ratification of the Chemical pesticides becomes an ingredient in a tecting militarily significant violations of Weapons Convention. As a former com- deadly nerve agent. It must be ac- the CWC. pany commander in the 82d Airborne knowledged that eliminating chemical And, here he said that: Division, I have a keen interest in an weapons is a herculean task. But the international diplomatic agreement Chemical Weapons Convention, which While no treaty is 100 percent verifiable, the Chemical Weapons Convention contains that will protect soldiers from one of we are finally considering today, ad- complementary and overlapping declaration the most terrible perils of war. As a dresses this challenge. This treaty is and inspection requirements which increase Senator, I believe that the United the most comprehensive arms control the probability of detecting militarily sig- States has a duty to assume a leader- agreement ever negotiated. It insti- nificant violations of the convention. While ship role in this ambitious, global ef- tutes an extensive and intrusive ver- detecting illicit production of small quan- fort to not only reduce, but eliminate, ification regime which will include tities of chemical weapons will be extremely an entire class of weapons of mass de- both government and civilian facili- difficult, it is easier to detect large-scale struction. ties. International teams of inspectors production, filling and stockpiling of chemi- cal weapons over time through declaration, U.S. ratification of the Chemical will conduct instrument-monitoring as routine inspections, factfinding, consulta- Weapons Convention is a paramount well as routine and random onsite in- tion and challenge inspection mechanisms. first step in removing the threat of spections of facilities known to work The verification regime should prove effec- chemical warfare on the battlefield. with chemical agents. Furthermore, it tive in providing information on significant Soldiers in World War I were the first allows challenge inspections, without chemical weapons programs that would not to know the terror of the release of poi- right of refusal, of sites suspected of otherwise be available. son gas. Over 1.3 million soldiers were producing or storing chemical weapons. In conclusion, there has been ref- injured or killed by chlorine and mus- The convention also requires export erence to a classified session tomorrow, tard gas during the Great War. This controls and reporting requirements on which will be held relative to advice enormous number of casualties led to chemicals that can be used as chemical from the intelligence community. the negotiation of the Geneva Protocol warfare agents and their precursors. In Relative to this point, I will only say in 1925 which banned the use of chemi- addition, the treaty establishes the Or- that the Acting Director of Central In- cal weapons in wartime. Eighty years ganization for the Prohibition of Chem- telligence, George Tenet, has said, later, however, young soldiers are still ical Weapons [OPCW], a permanent ‘‘The more tools we have at our dis- plagued by the dangers of chemical body which will oversee the conven- posal, the better off we feel we are in warfare. Many veterans of the Persian tion’s implementation and ensure com- our business.’’ And he said that as part Gulf war fight illness and lie awake at pliance. The enemy is elusive but 162 of an acknowledgment that we can night, worrying and wondering, ‘‘Was signatory countries decided this treaty never guarantee that a power that there something in the air?’’ was the best means of waging war signs up to this agreement will not But this is not a treaty which will against chemical weapons. cheat. ‘‘No regime is foolproof, particu- just protect soldiers in a time of armed In January 1993, President Bush larly with regard to these dual-use ca- conflict, it is a treaty which will pro- joined dozens of other nations in Paris pabilities. Nothing is going to guaran- tect innocent civilians from terrorist and agreed to meet the challenge of tee success but,’’ George Tenet con- attacks. The 1995 Sarin gas attack in a eliminating chemical weapons by sign- cluded, ‘‘the more tools we have at our crowded Tokyo subway that killed and ing the Chemical Weapons Convention. disposal, the better off we are in our injured dozens made this scenario a re- Now some members of this chamber, business.’’ ality for everyone. It is imperative members of President Bush’s own I also hope that our colleagues will that we do what is necessary to ensure party, are second-guessing that deci- come to that classified session tomor- that such an incident becomes a dis- sion. The problem is that if we drag our row. I am very confident that they will tant memory rather than a daily fear. feet any longer, the United States will conclude, as I have concluded after lis- The Chemical Weapons Convention be left behind. April 29, 1997 is not an tening to the intelligence community, bans the development, production, ac- artificial deadline imposed by a politi- that it is very much in our interest, quisition, stockpiling, transfer or use cal party. One of the provisions of the from an intelligence perspective, that of chemical weapons by signatories. It treaty is that it enters into force 180 we have these tools in our tool kit, and requires the destruction of all chemical days after the ratification by the 65th that these additional verification and weapon stockpiles and production fa- country, and in 6 days, on April 29, the inspection capabilities are very, very cilities. Parties to the convention must 74 nations who have ratified the treaty much in our Nation’s interest. begin to destroy weapons within 1 year will begin its implementation. If we do This treaty will enter into force on and complete the process within 10 not vote to ratify the Chemical Weap- April 29 whether or not we ratify, but years. If we ratify this treaty, we will ons Convention, we will not stop it. In our ratification will make a big dif- take an important step toward elimi- fact, we will not even become a passive ference in the effect the treaty has on nating the production, storage and use bystander. Instead, we will become the us and on our leadership in the world. of blister agents, like mustard gas, target of the trade restrictions that Is it perfect? No, nothing in life is. Is it which destroy exposed skin tissue; of make this treaty so powerful. an improvement to our present posi- choking agents that inflame the bron- Now, no one can say the Senate has tion in terms of inspection of other chial tubes and lungs and cause as- not had ample opportunity to consider countries? Surely it is, and we should phyxiation; of blood agents that block this agreement. Thirteen years and two listen to that top uniformed military the circulation of oxygen when inhaled; administrations ago, President Reagan official, General Shalikashvili, when he and of nerve agents that cause the proposed this treaty to the United Na- tells us our troops are safer, because if nervous system to overload, resulting tions. It was approved by the United we ratify this convention, it is less in respiratory failure and death. The Nations in 1992 and President Bush likely—not certain—but less likely goal of this treaty is to ensure that signed the convention weeks before he that they will ever face chemical weap- these deadly chemicals will never left office. Several months later, Presi- ons in combat. again be dispersed over troops or civil- dent Clinton presented the CWC to the S3530 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE April 23, 1997 Senate for consideration. The Commit- cripple the verification regime by de- the most effective weapons that the tees on Foreign Relations, Armed Serv- nying the international community the international community has. ices, Intelligence, and Judiciary held 17 benefits of our knowledge. In an era when balancing the budget hearings over three Congresses. The ad- In addition, the United States is the is of primary importance, it is not ministration has provided the Senate only nation with extensive experience sunrising that opponents cite the cost with over 1,500 pages of information. In in destroying chemical weapons. We of joining the treaty as a reason for not the past 2 months, the administration are also the only country investing ratifying it. I cannot dispute that there and a task force formed by the major- heavily in research and development to is a financial price for joining the con- ity leader have held almost 60 hours of find methods other than incineration vention. Most of the costs will be in- discussion. Twenty-eight additional to destroy these weapons. Without our curred for maintaining the activities of conditions, statements, understand- advice, participants in the convention the Organization for the Prohibition of ings, and declarations to the resolution risk inadvertent but dangerous acci- Chemical Weapons [OPCW]. These of ratification have been reached. The dents and may squander scarce finan- costs will be apportioned according to overwhelming evidence persuasively cial resources attempting to reinvent a system similar to the one used by argues that now is the time to ratify the wheel in learning how to destroy other international organizations. In this treaty. weapons. Furthermore, if the entire addition, each signatory which de- Ratifying the Chemical Weapons international community pools its re- stroys its stockpile must repay the Convention complements the existing sources, both intellectual and finan- OPCW for costs associated with ver- military strategy of the United States. cial, to discover safe, environmentally ification. In his budget, the President We are already committed to unilat- sound methods of destruction, the de- requested about 20 cents per American eral destruction of our chemical weap- velopment time would certainly be re- to pay for CWC costs, a small price for ons. In the early 1980’s, the Department duced. If we show reluctance to ratify the elimination of chemical weapons. of Defense declared about 90 percent of the treaty, we will undermine the con- Furthermore, members of this body our Nation’s chemical weapons obso- fidence and commitment of the entire can ensure that this cost does not esca- lete. In 1985, Congress directed destruc- international community. It is count- late in the future, because the condi- tion of these weapons. President ing on us to continue to lead the way. tions agreed to in the Senate Executive Reagan signed the law that would There are critics of this treaty, but Resolution allow Congress to control eliminate approximately 30,000 metric their criticism, I think, misses the future payments by granting it the au- tons of blister and nerve agents by the mark. This will not inhibit our busi- thority to authorize and appropriate year 2004. Even President Reagan, one ness, it will help our chemical business. any funds above this level. The cost of of the greatest advocates of a strong This treaty is not perfect, but it is a the CWC is reasonable, and certainly military, decided that chemical weap- better tool for controlling weapons less than the cost of ‘‘going it alone’’ ons were not needed to remain the than having no treaty whatsoever. We or entering a battlefield where chemi- most powerful fighting force in the are, I hope, committed to the path of cal weapons are being used. world. destruction of our own weapons and to Critics of the CWC claim that Amer- We have much to gain by ratifica- ensure that the rest of the world fol- ican private businesses will bear the tion. This treaty will force other na- lows this very prudent, indeed, noble brunt of the treaty provisions. How- tions to adopt the same standard as the course. ever, the U.S. chemical industry, the United States. The monitoring regime Vocal critics of the Chemical Weap- private business which will be most af- and trade restrictions imposed by the ons Convention claim that it is fatally fected by this treaty, heartily endorses convention will make the production flawed. They state that we should not its ratification. Contrary to what some and storage of chemical weapons by ratify this treaty because we will not have claimed, the burden on industry rogue states infinitely more difficult be able to verify that chemical weap- has not been discounted or ignored. and costly. The CWC improves our abil- ons are completely eliminated. Of The major trade associations which ity to keep our troops safe and makes course this treaty is not perfect. But represent the chemical industry, like the enemy more vulnerable by reducing we will have increased our capability the US Chemical Manufacturers Asso- its options of weaponry. to find and eliminate large scale pro- ciation, have actively worked with If we do not ratify the Chemical duction of chemical weapons which can those writing the treaty for the past 15 Weapons Convention, we will abdicate cause the most damage. The verifica- years. The chemical industry helped our leadership role in the world. As I tion regime will also enable us to dis- develop the confidentiality provisions, have said before, the United States ini- cover production and storage of small the data declarations and the inspec- tiated this treaty. It was American quantities of chemical weapons that we tion regime. Certain companies even leadership that led the negotiations have little or no chance of discovering participated in the National Trial In- through to completion. It would be ir- now. The CWC is not a panacea, but no spections to test the verification proce- responsible, both to Americans and the law or treaty is. It is a tool that can dures outlined in the Chemical Weap- world, to abandon the convention on help us solve a problem. Isn’t it better ons Convention. In addition, the condi- the eve of implementation. If we do not to use the tool to try and fix the prob- tions agreed to in the Senate Executive ratify this treaty tomorrow, the United lem rather than simply admit defeat? Resolution further protect businesses States will not be able to participate in Critics also contend that the treaty from unreasonable searches and sei- the executive council which will over- cannot be effective until all nations, zures and the dissemination of con- see the implementation of the treaty. particularly those who are known to fidential information. Less than 2,000 Furthermore, U.S. citizens will not be possess chemical weapons, ratify the facilities will be affected by the treaty, eligible to become international in- convention. It will be impossible to and the vast majority of these must do spectors and serve in other key posi- convince every rogue state to sign the no more than complete an annual two tions. The ratifying countries will be treaty. It is also safe to say that some page form. forced to carry on our idea without us, who sign the treaty will cheat. But the Opponents of the Convention claim and the United States will have no CWC is designed to isolate and cajole they are protecting American business choice but to stand aside and watch. those who do not join. The treaty uses interests. But American businesses Without our expertise and support, a most effective weapon against rogue seem to disagree. They fear, in fact, the entire convention may be jeopard- states—economics. Trade restrictions that the Senate will not ratify the ized. One of the key elements of the will be implemented against these na- treaty. Ironically, if we do not make treaty is intelligence gathering. The tions and they will soon be unable to the right decision tomorrow, our chem- United States has the most sophisti- acquire ‘‘dual use’’ chemicals which ical companies will become subject to cated intelligence network in the they need for the production of com- the same trade restrictions that will be world. If our country refuses to partici- mon items. As these nations begin to imposed on non-signatories such as pate, we deny our intelligence commu- feel the pressures from shortages, they Libya, Egypt, Iraq, North Korea, and nity the opportunity to tap into new may find it advantageous to sign the Syria. More than $600 million a year in sources of information and we may treaty. Trade restrictions are one of sales could be lost. Treaty critics are April 23, 1997 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S3531 protesting so loudly, they seem unable happened in the Tokyo subway with compliance costs—compliance costs, to hear the voices of the constituencies sarin gas. Let us not have it said on the cost of complying with this trea- they claim to protect. our tombstone that we knew but were ty—will place a massive new regu- We have overcome many hurdles to unwilling to take a first step. Let us, latory burden upon so many companies reach this point: Years of negotiations like the statesmen before us, take a who don’t even know it is going to hit among the nations of the world, first step to control weapons, to reduce them, along with an unprecedented on- months of negotiations among the weapons, to provide a more peaceful, a site inspections and data declarations leaders of this Nation. We are finally more dignified world. that may very well compromise trade debating this treaty on the floor of the Mr. President, I hope we will take secrets vital to the competitive edge of Senate today because we have agreed that first step and discharge our obli- many, many businesses. to an unprecedented 28 conditions—28 gation to the world and to the citizens So you see, we are dealing with a lot duties, declarations and understand- of this great country. of untrue, inaccurate statements. I am ings added to a treaty which was pro- On the eve of the vote to ratify another not saying everybody is deliberately posed, negotiated and agreed to by Re- historic agreement, one that seeks not just distorting the facts. In the media, they publican administrations. But, unfor- to limit weapons of mass destruction, but do not know what it is all about. I did tunately, five hurdles remain. Five eliminate them, the words of President Ken- see Helen Dewar the other day sitting nedy and Senator Dirksen still ring true. We conditions demanded by opponents of down and having lunch reading the have an obligation to take the first step. Let treaty. Bless her heart, she was trying. this treaty may prevent the United us do so. States from assuming its proper role of She looked up and said, ‘‘I’m trying to I yield back my time. understand this.’’ Well, Helen Dewar is leadership in an ambitious arms con- The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who a great reporter with a not so great trol treaty. These conditions unaccept- yields time? The Senator from North newspaper, but she was sitting there ably compromise the treaty and the Carolina. ability of the United States to partici- Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, I listened eating her lunch with the treaty before pate in its implementation. These con- in amazement to some of the state- her. I would like to take a poll of all the ditions are simply not fair play. Every ments being made today about a non- people who have commented on this member of this body has a right to op- existent treaty. The treaty before us I treaty and see how many of them have pose this treaty. They can voice their understand, but I do not understand even looked at it. That is the problem. opposition by voting against it and the descriptions that some are indicat- That is the problem. But at our hear- their opinion will be respected. But ing that they believe are accurate. ing the other day, a number of compa- Furthermore, I was astonished at the hobbling the ability of the United nies, including two members of the number of companies that will be re- States to ratify the Chemical Weapons Chemical Manufacturers Association, quired to provide annual business in- Convention strikes an unwarranted provided testimony relating to rising formation and undergo routine annual blow to international arms control and concerns about the chemical weapons inspections under this arms control our political process. I urge my col- treaty. leagues to vote against these five killer treaty, and that is what it is, an arms Now, then, here is a fact, indis- conditions. control treaty. putable: Companies will have to bear The Chemical Weapons Convention, Mr. President, 34 years ago, Presi- an entirely new reporting burden be- so-called, will affect companies en- dent John F. Kennedy undertook the yond anything required by, say, the gaged in coke, coal, steel production, challenge to convince the Senate and Environmental Protection Agency or mining, crop protection, fertilizers, the people of the United States of the Occupational Safety and Health paper production, wood preservation, America should ratify the Limited Test Administration or the International chlorine manufacturing, color pig- Ban Treaty. The same questions were Trade Commission or the Census Bu- raised about verification, about the re- ments, paint, ink, die stuff production, reau—and just name the various State liability of those who might sign the speciality coatings, powder and roof and local agencies that require reports. treaty or who might not sign the trea- coatings, plating and packaging, com- Nobody says that on Pennsylvania ty. In a nationwide television address, pressed gas, cosmetics, toiletries and Avenue about those reports, about the President Kennedy reminded us: fragrances, drug chemicals manufac- paperwork. Oh, no, we are not going to We have a great obligation . . . to use turing, pharmaceuticals, plastics, tex- mention that because they might ask whatever time remains to prevent the spread tiles, custom chemicals, food, wine, us too many questions. That is pre- of nuclear weapons, to persuade other coun- beer, processing and electronics, among cisely the problem. Everybody has been tries not to test, transfer, acquire, possess or others. dancing around the truth on this trea- produce such weapons. The list I just read, as long as it is, ty. As a consequence, too few Ameri- According to the ancient Chinese proverb, is not all of them. So anybody sitting ‘‘A journey of a thousand miles must begin cans understand the scope of it. in television land listening to this con- For those businesses that are cov- with a single step.’’ My fellow Americans, let versation in the Senate today, I sug- us take that first step. Let us, if we can, step ered, current reporting thresholds are back from the shadows of war and seek out gest, as the saying goes, wake up and much higher than those required under the way of peace. And if that journey is a smell the coffee and give some thought the CWC. Some regulations require thousand miles, or even more, let history about what is going to happen to the only prospective rather than retro- record that we, in this land, at this time, business community if, as and when active reporting. Moreover, several en- took the first step. this treaty is ratified. vironmental regulations—how do you Complementing the President’s It is not an ethereal thing that is like them apples?—will apply to the words, though, were the words of a very floating through the air, dropping lit- chemical producers but not to proc- wise, distinguished statesman of the tle rose petals, it is something that can essors or consumers. And reporting Chamber, Senator Everett Dirksen of bollix this country up. And yet what deadlines for the chemical weapons Illinois. In September of that year, you hear from so much of the media treaty are shorter and will require 1963, he came to this Chamber and and so much of the White House and more frequent updates than estimates began a speech, but threw the pages other proponents of this treaty is sim- currently required by the EPA. away and spoke spontaneously from his ply not so. So, if you would like to file reports heart and said: I note, however, that even this long with the EPA, you will file more re- list does not cover companies likely to A young President calls this treaty the ports with this chemical weapons trea- first step. I want to take a first step, Mr. be affected by the CWC, and I simply do ty. The regulations imposed by EPA President. One my age thinks about his des- not believe it advisable for the Senate and OSHA and all the others, in 1992 tiny a little. I should not like to have writ- to learn belatedly the far-reaching im- alone, 1 year, cost the chemical indus- ten on my tombstone, ‘‘He knew what hap- plications of this treaty for businesses try approximately $4 billion—$4 billion pened at Hiroshima, but he did not take a of all kinds across the United States of with a ‘‘B’’—$4.9 billion. first step . . .’’ America. As the April 15, 1997, hearing, Now, isn’t it a bit incredible that one We know what happened in World recently, before the Senate Committee major chemical manufacturer employs War I with poison gas. We know what on Foreign Relations demonstrated, 1,700 of its 50,000 personnel for the sole S3532 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE April 23, 1997 purpose of satisfying Federal and State newspapers and on television about op- Mr. BROWNBACK. Seven minutes, if requirements for environmental and posing a treaty that the newspapers I could. regulatory data? That is why, Mr. and the television programs say is a Mr. HELMS. Seven, eight minutes. I President, I am concerned that while wonderful treaty. But I stood there, as yield to the Senator for that purpose. large, international chemical indus- I said earlier this afternoon, five times, The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- tries such as those represented by the and I have taken the oath of office as ator is recognized. Chemical Manufacturers Association a Senator. A part of that oath, I say to Mr. BROWNBACK. I thank the Sen- may be able to afford the cost of the you, Mr. President, is to support the ator from North Carolina for yielding new regulations as a result of the rati- Constitution of the United States, de- to me for a few minutes to discuss this fication of this chemical weapons trea- fend it, and defend the American peo- critical issue in front of the U.S. Sen- ty, these same requirements will be ple. I have done my best to do that for ate, the Chemical Weapons Convention. proportionately far more burdensome every year that I have been here. I would like to state at the very out- for small businesses. That was the So as Don Rumsfeld, the former Sec- set of my statement that I would like point that Don Rumsfeld, former Sec- retary of Defense, emphasized in his to be on record that as to the earlier retary of Defense, made when he ap- testimony during his appearance, vote we had today of supporting the peared before the Foreign Relations which was unnoticed by the news CWC treaty that came to the floor ear- Committee. But that was kept a secret media, his appearance before the For- lier, that we had an oral vote on, that by the news media. They hardly eign Relations Committee, Don Rums- I support that treaty. I support it. And touched on anything that the four feld emphasized that the greatest I will go into the reasons why I sup- former Secretaries of Defense came and threat is not—is not—to the large, di- ported that and why I will have prob- testified to. Well, let me correct that. versified chemical manufacturers who lems ultimately voting for it if we do One of them, it was delayed at the last have the lobbyists lobbying for this not hold tightly to what hit the floor moment, sent a letter. treaty—you fall all over the lobbyists— earlier. Now then, there are roughly 230 small but it is going to be the threat to other Mr. President, I just want to talk businesses which custom synthesize companies that are trying to con- about this as a couple people would made-to-order products and compete centrate on a single market or a par- perhaps talk about it if they were sit- with the large chemical manufacturers. ticular technological nature. ting somewhere across this country, They generally have fewer than 100 em- A company whose profitability and somewhere in my State of Kansas, and ployees. They are small businesses, and economic survival derives from the how they look at the Chemical Weap- they have annual sales of less than $40 cost or quality advantage in one type ons Convention. million each. of process will be particularly vulner- I think they would sit down and ask Few, if any, of them can afford to themselves: If we enter into this Chem- employ the legions of lawyers just to able to industrial espionage. One other thing. For some companies ical Weapons Convention Treaty, will satisfy the new reporting requirements it be less likely for chemical weapons of this chemical weapons treaty. No- even visual inspection might reveal a unique process configuration of great to be used in the world or will it be body talks about that. Sandy Berger more likely for chemical weapons to be down at the White House has not even value to a would-be competitor. While big chemical businesses rou- used in the world? It seems to me that mentioned it. He is telling TRENT LOTT tinely undergo Federal inspections, the that is the real crucible that we have and all the rest what to do. Yet, Bob to decide this under: Is it more likely Dole writes letters, but they did not chemical weapons treaty will allow a whole cadre of international inspectors or less likely if we enter into this trea- talk about the details of the impact ty? and the burden to be piled on the small from countries routinely engaging in economic espionage to inspect hun- I take this treaty obligation very se- businesses of America. riously. I chair the Middle East Sub- It will not be reported in tomorrow’s dreds of facilities around the United committee for Foreign Affairs, the re- paper. You will not hear a thing about States on a recurring basis. gion of the world where perhaps you it unless you are looking at C–SPAN. Among the companies potentially have the most concentration and the That is one thing wrong with this hardest hit by treaty inspections will most potentially recent use of chemi- country today—no warning is given the be those companies that engage in cal weapons happening in a battle situ- American people about some of the ac- technologically intensive applications, ation. This is a very important issue in tions and some of the proposals that such as the biotechnology and pharma- that region of the world. It is a very come up in the Congress of the United ceutical sectors as well as the manu- States. facturers of commercial and military important issue in the United States as Mr. President, equally as important, aircraft, missiles, space-launch vehi- far as, are we going to be able to rid Senators should be careful to note that cles, and other equipment of a highly the world of these terrible, horrible the onsite inspection provisions of the sensitive nature. The economic integ- weapons of mass destruction? I take CWC increase the potential for com- rity of these companies is essential not that very seriously. So I have sat and I promising proprietary information only to the economic stability of the have visited with a number of people, which is offered as the very basis for a United States, don’t you see, but in experts on both sides. company’s competitive edge. Many many cases to our future national se- On Monday I did maybe an unusual companies will not survive if they had curity. thing for a Senator. I read the treaty. to do without their competitive edge. I, for one, was not surprised to have The parts of it I had not read, I have While it may be difficult to assess discovered that the Aerospace Indus- now read the treaty. I need to get on the potential dollar losses associated tries Association stated in a March 13, through the attachments, but I have with the inspections under the chemi- 1997, letter to the majority leader of gone through this. I have looked at the cal weapons treaty, it is clear, Mr. the U.S. Senate: arguments. I have looked particularly at the problems. I have looked at the President, it is absolutely clear, that We are very concerned, however, that the information gleaned from inspections application of the Convention’s reporting overall good aspects of it, and I want to and data declarations could be worth and inspection regime to AIA member com- say that I do strongly support the ob- literally millions and millions of dol- pany facilities could unnecessary jeopardize jectives of the Chemical Weapons Con- lars to foreign competitors. You better our nation’s ability to protect its national vention. We must oppose the use and believe that they will be digging for it security information and proprietary techno- existence of chemical weapons. There every time they get a chance. So that logical data. is just no doubt about it. They are an is what some of us have been talking At this point I am going to pause so abomination that needs to be removed about and some of us have been plead- that Senator BROWNBACK can be recog- from the face of the Earth. We all agree ing, let us get this thing straightened nized. on that. out before we make the mistake of We had several of those favoring the But it is actually for that reason, ratifying this treaty. treaty in a row, and I think it is fair however, that I have some great dif- Let me tell you something. I do not for Senator BROWNBACK to be recog- ficulties with one particular provi- enjoy having my shirttail on fire in the nized—for how long? sion—a number of them within the April 23, 1997 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S3533 treaty actually, but one in particular. ready pointing out the fact that actu- Long before the current debate on That is article X of this treaty. It is for ally that has already occurred under chemical weapons, in my college the- that reason, if that is left in this trea- some previous treaties—the Nuclear sis, which I wrote back at the Univer- ty, I do not think that I can support Non-Proliferation Treaty being one sity of Pennsylvania in 1951, on United the overall vote, if article X is left in. where the Russians now cite to us that States-Soviet relations, I was con- Let me say why. The Chemical Weap- treaty as a reason for them to sell nu- vinced by Prof. Hans Morganthau’s dic- ons Convention, if that is left in, I be- clear production capacity to the Ira- tum that ‘‘the objectives of foreign pol- lieve will have the exact opposite of nians, citing the very treaty we en- icy must be defined in terms of the na- the intended effect. And that is, as I tered into to stop this from taking tional interest and must be supported said at the outset, are we going to have place and that is used back against this with adequate power.’’ more chemical weapons used or less? If to try to expand. And now the Iranians As a U.S. Senator, I have long advo- article X is left in, I fear greatly we are having this capacity, we are trying to cated a strong national defense and going to have more use of chemical stop this nuclear generator from get- have worked to shape a comprehensive weapons taking place even though the ting fully online for the Iranians. And arms control agenda for the United purpose is exactly the opposite. the Russians cite a nonproliferation States as one arrow in our overall de- Let me say why. Article X requires treaty that they have to share this fense quiver. Ten years ago, in 1987, in Geneva, nations to share defensive technology technology with the Iranians. Switzerland, I was an observer to the regarding chemical weapons. It is That certainly is not the intent. I am U.S.-USSR nuclear disarmament talks. something that has been discussed at very fearful we will repeat the same That year I debated extensively with some length. The particular paragraph mistakes of history here. We have to many of my colleagues in the Chamber reads this way: stop the abomination of chemical the need for a broad interpretation of Each State Party undertakes to facilitate, weapons. We have to stop it in the United States. We have to stop it in the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, and shall have the right to participate in, ABM. Many of those whom I opposed at the fullest possible exchange of equipment, the world. We have to stop the abomi- that time I now side with on the cur- material and scientific and technological in- nation of these weapons of mass de- rent issue. I still believe that the ap- formation concerning means of protection struction, these terrible weapons of proach for a broad interpretation to against chemical weapons. mass destruction being used. The way give the United States additional In other words, we are going to be to do that is to have a CWC treaty that power, an approach advocated by Presi- sharing technology, particularly defen- actually does it and doesn’t spread dent Reagan, was necessary and still sive technology, which is very high their use. And striking article X is the remains necessary to provide security technology in many of these areas. I way to do that. With that, even though fear that that technology is going to for our Nation. the treaty has a number of other prob- From my experience on the Senate more easily get into the hands of rogue lems, it is supportable. Without that, I Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, nations, like Iran. I am very concerned actually fear the opposite will occur. I have observed that strength is the about their getting weapons of mass And with that I would like to yield best guarantor of peace and that pru- destruction. back the time. dent arms control can provide an im- We had a hearing last week in the The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who portant basis for such strength. From Middle East Subcommittee regarding yields time? my work as chairman of the Senate In- the threat and the expansion of Iran’s Mr. BIDEN addressed the Chair. telligence Committee, I have seen the capacity for mass destruction. The Chi- The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- ator from Delaware. wisdom of President Reagan’s view nese—and this is unclassified informa- that verification not trust is the realis- tion—have sold precursor chemical Mr. BIDEN. In 30 seconds, I will yield 12 minutes to my friend from Penn- tic basis for arms control. weapons to the Iranians. This has in Verification is an important issue in fact occurred. They do not use that sylvania. Mr. President, I am holding up in my this treaty. It is true that this treaty without defensive technology to sup- does not guarantee verification and no port their own troops, yet this treaty hand here a declaration form for those firms that face reporting requirements treaty has or can guarantee absolute will make the possibility of their get- certainty on verification. However, for production of discrete organic ting that defensive technology more ratifying this treaty gives us far great- chemicals, which applies to about 1,800 likely, if not even ordered within the er opportunity to verify through in- firms. It is three pages long. I will at a treaty. spections, data collection, and estab- later time read into the RECORD what You can say, wait a minute. That is lishing a norm for chemical arms re- it asks for to show you how non-oner- just your interpretation. Well, let us duction. look at what Secretary Cheney has ous it is. Mr. President, I adhere to my posi- On one of the pages of instructions, said on this, former Defense Secretary tion on the need to secure a strong de- on the bottom of the page, it says, Dick Cheney, an admirable man, who fense for America. It is my belief that served in the House of Representatives, You do not have to declare unscheduled the Chemical Weapons Convention will also in the administration under Presi- discrete organic chemical plant sites that produce explosives exclusively, produce hy- complement the existing components dent Bush. He says this about this trea- drocarbons exclusively, refine sulfur-con- of our foreign policy which includes ty: taining crude oil, produce oligomers and our arms control treaties. As we con- [the] obligation to share with potential ad- polymers, whether or not containing PSF, tinue to work to protect our troops versaries like Iran, chemical manufacturing and produce unscheduled discrete organic abroad and our citizens at home from technology that can be used for military pur- chemicals via a biological or bio-mediated the threat of weapons of mass destruc- poses and chemical defensive equipment, process. tion, arms control is an important in- threaten to make this accord worse than This eliminates thousands of firms, gredient of a sound foreign policy. having no treaty at all. hundreds of firms at least. And so this Critics of the Chemical Weapons Con- Then he is joined, of course, as you is not nearly as onerous as it was made vention say the treaty provides a false know, by former Defense Secretaries out to be in my humble opinion. sense of security. On the contrary, no Schlesinger, Weinberger, Rumsfeld, I now yield with the permission of Senator has ever suggested that a sin- and others. my colleagues 12 minutes to the distin- gle treaty standing alone would ade- Now you say, well, this is not going guished Senator from Pennsylvania, quately deter aggressor nations. The to happen. That is just not going to Mr SPECTER. Chemical Weapons Convention is not occur. We are not going to have people The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- perfect but we can build on it as a pa- selling them this sort of technology, ei- ator from Pennsylvania. rameter for dialog. Ratification cer- ther us or other nations. And maybe we Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I tainly does not mean that we are going will not do it. But will other nations thank my colleague from Delaware for to rest on our laurels. The United then step forward and sell this defen- yielding me this time. I have sought States did not stop moving forward sive technology? You say no, that will recognition to voice my support for the with strengthening our national de- not happen. There have been people al- pending treaty and to give my reasons. fense while we negotiated arms control S3534 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE April 23, 1997 agreements with the Russians such as As we debate the merits of the treaty tory states, we will be speaking from the ABM Treaty, SALT I, and SALT II. and consider the outstanding amend- the position not of unilateral American In this combined approach we were suc- ments, I remind my colleagues of the action, but with the support of most of cessful. The nuclear threat today is importance of bipartisanship in foreign the nations of the world.’’ dramatically lower than it was a dec- affairs. We have traditionally said that I suggest to my colleagues that it is ade or two decades ago, and arms con- politics stop at the water’s edge and bi- a matter of considerable importance in trol agreements are a critical part of partisanship in foreign affairs is of protecting American troops from the that strategy. critical continuing importance. It is ravages of chemical warfare, which the Similarly, we must not stop at mere the role of Senators to shape a climate gulf war troops may have been exposed ratification of the Chemical Weapons of bipartisan support for treaties of to. Convention in our quest to destroy ex- this magnitude. To work with the ad- Now, we must ask ourselves, if we isting and prevent the production of ministration and our colleagues to had this treaty in place beforehand, new chemical and biological weapons. craft an agreement that will serve the would we have at least averted or mini- One area of the treaty critics often needs of the United States in both the mized the effects of chemical agents on point to as being particularly det- long and short terms. Two of our note- our troops? We will never know the an- rimental to the United States is the worthy predecessors, giants in the Sen- swer to this question with certainty, search and seizure provisions of the ate, one Republican and one Democrat, but we owe it to our Nation to reach Chemical Weapons Convention which Senator Arthur Vandenberg and Sen- out for every possible means of reduc- they claim is unconstitutional. ator Scoop Jackson exemplify how bi- ing the threat of chemical and biologi- This is a subject that I have worked partisanship can work to the better- cal weapons. United States ratification on extensively since Mapp versus Ohio ment of our country. Their willingness of the Chemical Weapons Convention, came down in 1961 imposing the burden to look beyond the confines of partisan however, may certainly constrain the on States not to admit evidence seized politics provides the model for us today further development of chemical weap- as a result of an unconstitutional as Republicans to support the ratifica- ons by countries like Iraq. search and seizure. At a time when I tion of the Chemical Weapons Conven- Mr. President, it is obviously impos- was an assistant district attorney in tion. sible to craft a comprehensive treaty Philadelphia and later as district at- And I note, Mr. President, the state- that meets the satisfaction of all peo- torney of Philadelphia, I worked on ment today made by our former major- ple. I respect those who have spoken these issues very, very extensively. ity leader, Senator Robert Dole, in sup- against the treaty. I disagree with Under this treaty, an international in- port of the treaty. them, but I respect the sincerity of spection team would be allowed to There is another much more recent their views. Yet, with the appropriate search a U.S. facility to determine example of why ratification of the assurances given about some of the whether or not a chemical agent is treaty falls outside traditional par- finer points of the treaty on objections being diverted to use in noncompliance tisan politics and that is the potential with the treaty. Similarly, that obliga- use of chemical agents against U.S. which have been raised by opponents, tion, that inspection would be avail- troops. This is an issue about which I most of which have been satisfied, on able for other nations. am all too familiar. As former chair- issues such as constitutional rights, we After careful review of the provisions man of the Senate Intelligence Com- as a Nation, I submit, should take the of the treaty, I am personally confident mittee and as the current chairman of moral high ground. We should ratify that the language does not conflict the Veterans’ Affairs Committee, I the treaty, or we will be categorized with the fourth amendment of the U.S. have chaired several hearings on gulf with the likes of Iraq and Libya. I am Constitution but, rather, is in accord war syndrome. I have traveled exten- not advocating that we ratify the with that amendment. The language on sively throughout Pennsylvania and Chemical Weapons Convention instead search and seizure as negotiated by the have heard from gulf war veterans who of pursuing other forms of protection. administration and Members of the have been unable to explain the cause But it is one important point of protec- Senate states that in cases where the of their illnesses. And many gulf war tion. The Chemical Weapons Conven- search is challenged, the U.S. Govern- veterans across the Nation echo simi- tion is just one more tool for the Unit- ment will first obtain a criminal lar complaints. Believe me when I say ed States as we work toward a more search warrant based upon probable that their suffering is very real. vigilant defense for our Nation. We cause. So that in any situation of chal- Last year, this issue was addressed in have come a long way in making this lenge, the search will have to measure great detail at a joint hearing of the treaty work for the best interests of up to the tough criminal standard. In Senate Intelligence Committee and the the United States of America. cases of routine inspection, the U.S. Veterans’ Affairs Committee. This year I urge my colleagues in the Senate to Government will obtain an administra- a number of hearings have been held vote to ratify this convention. tive search warrant from a U.S. mag- both in Washington and across Penn- (The remarks of Mr. SPECTER per- istrate judge. sylvania. And more recently, a few taining to the introduction of the legis- Through the months preceding this days ago, on April 17, Gen. Colin Pow- lation are located in today’s RECORD debate, opponents have raised a num- ell testified before the Veterans’ Af- under ‘‘Statements on Introduced Bills ber of issues. These include suggestions fairs Committee on this important and Joint Resolutions.’’) that the treaty plays into the hands of matter. While we can still not verify Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, in the rogue nations like Libya and North the cause of these illnesses, there are spirit that these negotiations began Korea, that it facilitates the transfer indicators that American troops may with me and the chairman of the com- of military chemical technology to ag- have been exposed to chemical agents. mittee and Senator KYL, we have con- gressive countries and prohibits our During the course of the hearing with tinued that spirit. The next speaker we troops from the use of riot control General Powell, I asked him what ef- have is undeclared. So we have agreed agents. fect if any the Chemical Weapons Con- for a total of 7 minutes he will get. We There is now agreement on these is- vention would have had on Iraq if the ask unanimous consent that 31⁄2 min- sues among all the parties involved in United States had ratified the treaty utes be taken out of the time of the negotiating the set of conditions now before the gulf war and the treaty Senator from Delaware and 31⁄2 minutes contained in the proposed resolution of would have been in effect. out of the time of the Senator from ratification. The Chemical Weapons We will never know with certainty North Carolina. Convention will actually make it more the answer to that question. Iraq is a The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without difficult for rogue states to make rogue nation, and it is difficult to objection, it is so ordered. chemical weapons. The treaty has pro- imagine them as signatories. But Gen- Mr. BIDEN. Further, Mr. President, hibitions in place to prevent industrial eral Powell was quick to point out that before I yield the floor to my friend espionage. Concerning riot control the Chemical Weapons Convention from Washington State, we are trying agents, the treaty sets sound guide- works to strengthen America’s hand. to work out a unanimous-consent lines on what agents may be used and He noted, ‘‘In the future, when we agreement on the total 10 hours. I am when such agents may be used. deal with rogue states or with signa- not propounding such an agreement. April 23, 1997 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S3535 But we are hoping we can work out an Weapons Convention does not lead to a The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who agreement, whereby in the closed ses- false sense of security—a false sense yields time? sion tomorrow, the so-called secret ses- that is going to be there no matter Mr. LAUTENBERG addressed the sion that will take place tomorrow, what we do, but is at least limited by Chair. which will be a 2-hour session, that some specific promises on the part of The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- that time not be counted against the 10 the administration. ator from New Jersey. hours in the UC for debate on chemical Second, the clarification of the affect Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, I weapons. of the convention on the use of riot yield myself 7 minutes in accordance Again, I will leave it in the able control agents. with the understanding on the floor hands of my friend from Arizona to de- Third, and vitally important to us now. termine whether the Republican leader and to our constitutional rights, are The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- is amenable to that, but colleagues the fourth amendment protections ator is recognized for 7 minutes. who may be listening hopefully were against unreasonable searches and sei- Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, able to do that. The reason I stand up zures. while the Senate debates one of the to say that, if they are not, each of us That is not to say that the other 25 most important arms control treaties only have about 55 minutes left tomor- conditions aren’t important, Mr. Presi- in our history, various issues come into row in this process. So for the col- dent, but these 3, at least, have been play. It is obvious that the Chemical leagues who wish to speak, I want particularly significant, in my view, as Weapons Convention will ban an entire them to understand that I am not I have listened to both sides during the class of weapons of mass destruction. It going to have the time to give them if course of this debate. prohibits the full spectrum of activi- Nevertheless, I am not yet willing at in fact this doesn’t happen. This is by ties associated with the offensive use of this point to commit to voting in favor way of disclaimer this evening, so to- chemical weapons, including develop- of ratification because of my deep con- morrow morning my colleagues won’t ment, production, acquisition, stock- cerns with articles X and XI of the con- come in and say: Joe, you promised me piling, and assistance to anyone engag- vention, and the proposition that they time. ing in these activities. It requires that might well force the United States to I think we can work it out. the destruction of chemical weapons Mr. President, we now yield a total of share technologies and allow the world, begin within 1 year and it be completed by its sale of chemicals, to a far great- 7 minutes, 31⁄2 from each side, to the within 10 years. distinguished Senator from the State er extent, and those technologies and Mr. President, there is no doubt in of Washington. chemicals may be sold at least by re- my mind that the United States should The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- sponsible and free nations in the world join a treaty we helped to shape and ator from Washington is recognized. today under the aegis of the Australia which enhances our security. I am Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I thank Group. going to vote for it. Now, with the It would be ironic indeed if, in the my colleagues. I want to introduce my Chemical Weapons Convention and our guise of passing a treaty or a conven- remarks by expressing my view that leadership, other nations will follow tion to lessen the opportunity for the this has been a remarkably thoughtful the lead that we set years ago by giv- use of chemical weapons in the future and important debate in the finest tra- ing up chemical weapons. we actually enhanced it by assisting ditions of the Senate, not only here on Rogue nations and terrorist coun- those nations that are willing to sign the Senate floor but during the months tries will have a harder time acquiring the convention but which, like Iran, leading up to it. Perhaps one of the or making chemical weapons, and new have shown, without the slightest abil- reasons for that is that all Members tools will be available to prevent and ity to contradict the proposition, that are united in detesting the use of punish them if they try. That is a they do not regard any treaty, any con- chemical weapons, divided only by vention, as binding on them, and who noble goal. their views on how best to succeed in One of the arguments that we have are more likely than not to use the heard against ratifying the Chemical reaching that goal, and working to- convention to advance their own abil- ward reaching that goal with a high de- ity to violate it. Weapons Convention is that it will gree of good will and accommodation And so, Mr. President, as I make up force some industries —one in particu- to one another. So, essentially, from my own mind during the course of the lar—to bear an unusual burden. I want the beginning, the only real question next 24 hours, it is the impact of arti- to address this for a few minutes be- has been: Does this convention advance cles X and XI that cause me the great- cause I don’t believe it is true. To the or inhibit the cause of limiting or est degree of concern. I don’t believe contrary, the chemical industry will eliminating the use of chemical weap- that we can simply strike them from bear an undue burden if the United ons all around the world? the treaty. That vote tomorrow seems States fails to ratify the CWC. I want Mr. President, at the very beginning to me to be the equivalent of saying, to explain why. of the debate when the convention was no, of killing the convention in its en- If the Chemical Weapons Convention first submitted to the Foreign Rela- tirety. I do believe, however, that we goes into effect without the United tions Committee, I was inclined to fall should continue to work toward clari- States a party, strict trade restrictions on the side of that debate that said fication and understandings on the designed to pressure rogue states to that the convention probably was part of the administration, as I know join the convention would spell disas- worse than nothing because of the the majority leader is doing in this, as ter for the U.S. chemical industry. overwhelming false sense of security it he has in many of the other question- Reasonably enough, neither Presidents created, a sense of security that it able elements of this convention, so Reagan nor Bush ever foresaw that the could not match in its provisions on a that we can be assured that the United U.S. Senate might decide to place the wide range of activities attempted to States at least will not be required to United States outside of the treaty, be covered by it. do something that will undercut its along with countries like Iraq, Libya, But as we vote tomorrow, Mr. Presi- own security and that of its friends and and other rogue nations. dent, I don’t believe we are going to be neighbors by the convention, that it is But the fact is that treaty provisions voting on the original bare bones un- not required to do in the absence of prohibiting members from trading with derstanding of the convention. The ad- that convention. nonmembers in certain chemicals that ministration and the proponents on So if my concerns with respect to the have both commercial as well as mili- this floor have agreed to some 28 condi- actual impact in the real world of arti- tary uses would put at risk as much as tions, or explanations, or interpreta- cles X and XI are met, I will vote to $600 million a year in two-way trade by tions of the convention, each of which ratify the convention. If they are not, American chemical companies, and has contributed to a greater degree of it will remain, in my mind, a situation many jobs. comfort with the balance of the con- in which the convention increases our I will repeat that. Should the U.S. vention and its ratification. Three are danger rather than obviates them. Senate fail to ratify the treaty, as particularly important to me. One With that, Mr. President, I yield the much as $600 million a year in Amer- measure ensures that the Chemical floor. ican export and import sales would be S3536 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE April 23, 1997 placed at risk as a result of sanctions cent of the 2,000 American companies weapons and foreswore their use even against American companies. that will be covered by the treaty—the in retaliation upon the Chemical Weap- On April 15, Fred Webber, who is the treaty will require them to do little ons Treaty entering into force. president and CEO of the Chemical more than fill out a two-page form Many of those who have spoken out Manufacturers Association, testified in once a year. Only about 140 companies against this treaty imply that posses- support of this treaty. He said: are likely to be subject to routine in- sion of chemical weapons is the only The industry I represent is America’s larg- spections. deterrent against a chemical weapons est export industry, with over 1 million In addition to the protections nego- attack by an adversary. However, in American jobs * * * we know how this treaty tiated by industry and already in the the judgment of our political and mili- affects our commercial interests. * * * We treaty, the Senate will be adding five tary leaders, our Nation does not re- began with many of the same concerns about additional protections. quire chemical weapons to defend our the treaty that have been voiced here. We Under additional conditions that will worked hard to protect U.S. industrial inter- Nation. In fact, the United States has ests, especially proprietary information. be added by the Senate, if an employee already begun the process of destroying We helped develop the protocols guiding of the Organization for the Prohibition all our chemical weapons. Our Nation the treaty’s inspection and recordkeeping re- of Chemical Weapons willfully dis- reserves the right to retaliate against a quirements, and we put those protocols to closes U.S. confidential business infor- chemical weapons attack with over- live-fire tests over and over again. * * * In mation that causes financial harm to a whelming conventional force or any summary, we believe the treaty is not a U.S. business, the President is required other means at our disposal. The Unit- threat to U.S. business. to withhold half of the U.S. contribu- ed States can and will defend itself Not only does the CWC have the sup- tion to the organization until that em- against any foe armed with a weapon of port of the Chemical Manufacturers ployee’s immunity from prosecution is mass destruction. We do not need these Association, which represents 193 waived. This will serve as a deterrent ghastly weapons to ensure the safety of chemical manufacturing companies, to breaches of confidential informa- our military personnel and our Nation. accounting for more than 90 percent of tion. Mr. President, I also believe it is im- the Nation’s productive capacity for To reduce the risk of industrial espi- portant to note this treaty was nego- basic chemicals, it has the support of onage, samples collected during inspec- tiated and signed under two Republican the Chemical Industry Council of New tions in the United States cannot be Presidents and transmitted for ratifi- Jersey and the Synthetic Organic analyzed in a foreign laboratory. The cation under a Democratic President. Chemical Manufacturers Association, President would be required to certify The Chemical Weapons Convention is with over 260 member companies. annually that the CWC is not signifi- an example of how U.S. foreign policy It also has the support of the Phar- cantly harming the legitimate com- maceutical Research and Manufactur- can be bipartisan and how both parties mercial activities and interests of can act outside the shadow of political ers of America and its 100 plus member chemical, biotechnology, and pharma- companies, and the Biotechnology In- maneuvering when it is in the best in- ceutical firms. terests of our Nation. Presidents dustry Organization and its 650-plus The Senate would support the provi- Reagan, Bush, and Clinton realized the member companies and affiliated orga- sion of assistance to U.S. business by benefits we receive under a treaty ban- nizations. It has the support of the the On-Site Inspection Agency. And, ning the possession of chemical weap- Council for Chemical Research, the the Senate would be informed promptly ons could far outweigh any costs in- American Crop Protection Association, of the proposed addition of a chemical curred by our industries and Nation. the American Institute of Chemical to any of the CWC’s schedules and the Engineers, and the American Chemical anticipated effect of such a proposal on No treaty is perfect. As with other Society. U.S. industry. treaties, the Senate has included condi- Mr. President, the point I am trying Mr. President, this treaty enhances tions to the resolution of ratification to make is simple—the Senate cannot America’s security. It is the right which I believe strengthen this accord. refuse to ratify the CWC in the name of thing to do, and I urge my colleagues But opponents of the convention have industry. American industry supports to ratify it without delay. added five conditions meant not to im- this treaty. It does not believe it places I hope that my colleagues will stand prove but to kill the treaty. These five an unfair burden on companies in this up and say this is good for America, provisions must be struck from the country. that it is good for humanity, and that treaty if we are to receive the national In fact, U.S. companies view the con- they will ratify this treaty without security benefits the CWC offers our vention as an asset because it offers a delay. Nation. way to dissociate themselves from I thank the Chair. I yield the floor. The opposition to this treaty centers chemical weapons production and to be Mr. KERREY. Mr. President, I rise on three questionable and contradic- good corporate citizens by helping to today in support of the Chemical Weap- tory points. First, opponents state that eliminate these abhorrent weapons. ons Convention. While some of my col- since this treaty is not absolutely veri- American industry even participated leagues may have other means of meas- fiable, the U.S. Senate should not rat- in the treaty negotiations and helped uring this convention, I believe when ify it. Second, contradicting the first write the rules covering inspections we consider any arms control treaty, point, opponents state this treaty’s and confidential business information. the main concern must be how it will verification regime, while not strict Its top priority during the negotiations affect our national security. I support enough, nevertheless places too much conducted by the Reagan and Bush ad- this treaty because, on balance, our of a burden on our chemical industry. ministrations was ensuring that any Nation’s security will be vastly im- And, third, opponents state that since burdens on business would be reason- proved in a world where chemical rogue nations may either not join the able and that trade secrets would be weapons are outlawed than in a world Chemical Weapons Convention or will protected. To ensure that the protec- where the possession of these horrible not comply with the treaty once they tions against unreasonable searches weapons remains an acceptable prac- become signatories, this treaty does and seizures and industrial espionage tice. not further our national security inter- would be strong, the chemical industry I believe it is important for all in ests. I believe they are wrong on all tested the treaty during seven full- this Chamber and for the public at points. fledged trial inspections at chemical large to realize that today the United No treaty—be it an arms control facilities. It ensured that warrants States is committed to destroying all treaty, a trade treaty, or a humani- would be required when a company of our chemical weapons. Under a law tarian treaty—is completely verifiable. would not consent to a search and that passed by Congress and signed by If absolute verifiability is the marker, the treaty would protect sensitive President Reagan in 1985, we will de- no treaty could attain that ideal and equipment, information, or areas not stroy all of our chemical weapons our Nation would never experience the related to chemical weapons during a stockpile by the year 2004. Further, in varied benefits we now gain from trea- challenge inspection. For most compa- 1991 President Bush committed the ties such as the SALT Treaties, the nies in this country—more than 90 per- United States to banning chemical START Treaties, GATT, NAFTA, the April 23, 1997 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S3537 Convention on Fishing, or the Conven- their support for the Chemical Weap- against the possession of chemical tion on Literary and Artistic Copy- ons Convention. weapons will assist our own Nation’s rights. Absolute verification should not Opponents also argue that since continuing efforts against this abomi- be the measure of the CWC or any rogue nations can be expected not to nable class of weapons. other treaty. Instead of insisting on ab- join in the CWC or will not comply Taken together, the benefits we gain solute verification, our Nation has re- with its provisions the United States from ratifying the Chemical Weapons alized the strength of a treaty lies in should not endorse this treaty. This ar- Convention far outweigh the minimal the enforcement of the treaty and the gument overlooks the fact that even if costs of implementing this treaty. The measure to be taken if a party violates the Chemical Weapons Convention does strict verification regime, increased a treaty. America’s treaties work be- not enter into force these same rogue opportunities for our intelligence agen- cause our treaty partners know the full nations can develop and produce chem- cies, the prohibition of exports to non- power of the United States lies behind ical weapons. Without the CWC we will member nations, and the force of inter- the conventions and we do not hesitate still face this same threat. national law complementing the Unit- to protect our national interests by en- Yet, if we ratify the CWC and are vig- ed States’ individual efforts will help forcing their provisions. orous in its enforcement, the United protect our citizens and our national When considering ratification of an States will have a much improved abil- interests. arms control treaty, the question must ity to identify clandestine chemical We have already made the decision be whether on balance the verification weapons programs. The nature of that possession and use of chemical system is strong enough to signifi- chemical weapons make it possible to weapons is not in the security interests cantly increase our national security. produce them in facilities as small as a of our Nation. We have determined the It is a simple fact that the verification high school laboratory or even a ga- United States has the means and the measures included in this treaty are rage. Because these weapons of mass will to protect our forces and our Na- the most stringent and most intrusive destruction can be produced in small tion without this type of weapon. It is of any multilateral arms control agree- areas, the intelligence community time now to compel the other nations ment currently in place. While still not today faces extreme difficulties in lo- of the world to abide by these same powerful enough to allow searches of cating programs already underway in rules. every warehouse, laboratory, or garage rogue nations. However, as the Senate Mr. President, I have weighed the ef- in the world, the means to be employed Select Committee on Intelligence fects of the Chemical Weapons Conven- under the CWC are the most thorough noted in its September 1994 report on tion on our national security and I be- and most rational ever to be included this issue, under the Chemical Weapons lieve our Nation is safer with this trea- in a multilateral international agree- Convention, the United States Govern- ty than without it. It is my hope my ment. ment will gain important new access to colleagues will also realize that our na- The Reagan, Bush, and Clinton ad- useful information, relevant to poten- tional security interests lie in ratifica- ministrations all realized the nature of tial CWC threats to the United States, tion, not in maintaining the status quo chemical weapons and their production that would not otherwise be obtain- of a world where possession of chemical created the need for a stringent system able. As Acting Director of Central In- weapons remains acceptable under to verify compliance with the CWC pro- telligence George Tenet told the Intel- international law. I yield the floor. visions. And yet, some safeguards and ligence Committee on February 5 of Mr. JEFFORDS. Mr. President, this limitations on the verification system this year, the CWC will give our intel- is a day many of us have been waiting would have to be put in place in order ligence community more information for for a long time. After having been to protect companies engaged in legiti- and more tools to use in our efforts to thoroughly reviewed by the relevant mate chemicals from unwarranted combat those who would use these hor- Senate committees, both in the last hardships. Under President Bush’s di- rible weapons. Congress and this one, the Chemical rection, the proper balance was struck The Chemical Weapons Convention’s Weapons Convention has finally come between the strength and rigors of a regular inspection process and its abil- to the Senate floor for debate and a verification regime on one hand and ity to perform challenge inspections on vote. the intrusiveness of that same system short notice are very powerful means This is a complex and controversial on our industry and Nation on the of catching parties breaking the trea- treaty and I thank Senator HELMS, other. Under the Chemical Weapons ty. The convention also includes varied Senator BIDEN, and others for their Convention, measures are in place reporting requirements on the produc- hard work on the resolution of ratifica- which will severely increase the likeli- tion and use of toxic agents and precur- tion. The 28 conditions and provisions hood an illicit producer of chemical sor chemicals which may help the in- on which they have agreed go a long weapons will be caught while ensuring telligence agencies to locate clandes- way toward protecting American inter- that any company that produces or tine production of chemical weapons. If ests and making this an even better uses potentially dangerous chemicals the Chemical Weapons Convention is treaty. While I have reservations about will not be unnecessarily burdened. ratified and we use it to our advantage, the remaining five provisions, I am Mr. President, some opponents argue the intelligence community will have pleased that the Senate will have the that the treaty has it wrong both another important tool with which to opportunity to openly discuss and de- ways—they claim it is not intrusive fight the battle against these weapons. bate these before moving to a final enough to be completely verifiable and If we do not ratify the convention, we vote. I believe that when the facts also claim the costs incurred by indus- will forgo a better chance to win a bat- come to light, those who are undecided try are too great under the verification tle we must fight whether or not this will vote to ratify the treaty. regime. While the nature of all treaties treaty is in effect. I think I can safely say that no one makes them correct on the former The CWC will help protect our citi- in this body supports the production or point, since no treaty can reasonably zens by increasing the likelihood that a use of chemical weapons, even as a de- be considered absolutely verifiable, the potential cheater would be caught terrent. That is not what this debate is Chemical Manufacturers Association, under its inspection processes. But the about. What it is about is what we get which represents hundreds of chemical CWC helps our national security in for what we give up. In other words, is companies, and hundreds of individual other ways as well. Three years after the extra protection from chemical chemical companies on their own have entry into force, the Chemical Weapons weapons that this treaty affords us expressed their support for this treaty. Convention prohibits parties from ex- worth the financial cost and the regu- If the vast majority of companies porting high risk precursor and toxic latory burden required to implement that produce or use chemicals pro- chemicals to countries not belonging the treaty? nounce their support for this agree- to the CWC. This will further limit the Well, let’s take a look. First, what do ment, I do not believe we should claim ability of nonsignatory countries to ac- we get? the treaty is unduly burdensome on quire chemicals which could be turned Above all, we get enhanced national these companies. They know what is in into a lethal gas. Finally, the power of security. The treaty requires all sig- their own interest and they have stated international law created by the CWC natories to do away with chemical S3538 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE April 23, 1997 weapons and to refrain from any future violations, and stiffened international genuinely bipartisan. In that year, the production. We have already commit- resolve in addressing this global prob- final year of the Johnson administra- ted to destroy our own chemical weap- lem. tion, international negotiations began ons stocks, so why shouldn’t we grasp That’s a pretty valuable package. in Geneva to build on the 1925 Geneva an opportunity to require others to do What do we give up to get it? Well, we Protocol and try to reduce the produc- so as well? I think this is a compelling must pay our share of the costs for ad- tion of chemical weapons. In the 1970’s, argument. So do a few other people ministering the treaty and carrying President Gerald Ford had the vision who know something about national out required inspections. We must also to take that initiative a major step for- security matters: General Powell, Gen- underwrite costs associated with pre- ward during intense international ne- eral Schwarzkopf, and every living paring U.S. military facilities for in- gotiations. former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of spection. I understand that the Con- President Ronald Reagan advanced it Staff. Believe me, if this treaty weak- gressional Budget Office has estimated to the next stage with his efforts on ened the United States in some way that implementation of the CWC would arms control in the 1980’s. And Presi- these distinguished Americans would cost the U.S. taxpayer about $33 mil- dent Bush deserves high praise for em- not support it. lion a year. That’s about one-twentieth bracing the ideal of eliminating chemi- With a reduction in the number of of the amount that we spend every cal weapons, for making it a serious chemical weapons we also get in- year on chemical and biological weap- worldwide effort, and at long last creased protection for U.S. troops. We ons defenses. I think that’s a reason- bringing it to the stage where it was have a responsibility to our brave men able investment to reduce the core ready to be signed. In one of his last and women in uniform to do all we can threat against which these defenses are acts in office, George Bush signed the to protect them as they put their lives needed. treaty, on January 13, 1993. on the line for our freedoms. We spare The treaty does impose additional re- President Clinton formally submit- no expense to provide them with the porting and inspection requirements on ted the Chemical Weapons Convention best chemical weapons defenses pos- American businesses in the chemical to the Senate for its advice and con- sible. By the same token, we should do field. This is regrettable but necessary sent later that year. Now, it’s our turn. all we can to reduce the actual threat if we wish to have a serious verifica- Today and tomorrow, in a series of tion regime. It’s worth noting, though, of a chemical weapons attack on them. votes, the Senate can and should join that the U.S. chemical industry was Recognizing this, a number of the in this historic endeavor to rid the closely involved in the negotiation of country’s most prominent veterans’ world of chemical weapons. We can be- the treaty and strongly supports it. I groups and military associations have stow a precious gift on generations to am sympathetic to the concerns ex- spoken out in favor of the CWC, includ- come by freeing the world of an entire pressed by smaller businesses affected ing the VFW and the Reserve Officer class of weapons of mass destruction. by the treaty but believe that some Association. They recognize the extra The chemical weapons treaty bans treaty opponents have vastly exagger- protection this treaty provides our the development, production, stock- ated the additional regulatory burden troops in the field. piling, and use of toxic chemicals as involved. As I understand it, the vast The CWC also improves our ability to weapons. Previous agreements have majority of these businesses will need detect chemical weapons production by merely limited weapons of mass de- do no more than submit a short, basic others. This treaty boasts the most in- struction. But the Chemical Weapons informational form annually. And only trusive verification regime of any arms Convention sets out to eliminate them a handful are likely to be inspected in control agreement ever. Will it enable from the face of the earth. any given year. This is a small price to us to sniff out every violation, every The United States has already taken pay for the many benefits of the trea- criminal effort to produce these hor- many steps unilaterally to implement ty. rible weapons? Of course not. But it Finally, I would like to address the a ban of our own. As long ago as 1968, will give us a powerful new tool to argument that the United States this country ordered a moratorium on check up on those who seek to employ should withhold ratification until Rus- chemical weapons production. chemical weapons, something that is sia and all the so-called rogue states When President Bush signed the trea- important to the intelligence commu- sign and ratify the treaty. The issue is ty on behalf of the United States, he nity. Opponents point out that U.S. in- not whether we should press these also ordered the unilateral destruction telligence agencies cannot absolutely countries to join the treaty—of course, of the U.S. stockpile of these weapons. guarantee they will be able to detect we should—but how to most effectively Regardless of the treaty, the United treaty cheaters. This is true. But it is achieve this goal. Does anyone really States is destroying its chemical weap- also true that the treaty will signifi- think that withholding U.S. ratifica- on stockpile. cantly improve our ability to uncover tion will convince these countries to Today and tomorrow culminate violations. Let’s not make the perfect sign up? Standing on the sidelines with many years of work and compromise. an enemy of the good. arms folded will only give encourage- The Senate has held 17 hearings on the Finally, the CWC also stiffens inter- ment to those who want to ignore this convention. Every issue has been ex- national resolve to deal with the chem- treaty and continue making chemical haustively analyzed. The result is the ical weapons threat. Every signatory weapons. The United States is a world shootout that the leadership has ar- will be required to enact legislation leader and should act like one. We ranged for the next 24 hours. cracking down on terrorists and crimi- should not allow thugs like Qaddafi Bipartisan negotiations have nals who use or threaten to use poison and Saddam Hussein to dictate our ap- achieved agreement on 28 amendments gas, as well as the unsavory business- proach to national security matters. to the treaty, none of which go to the men who traffic in these dangerous Mr. President, this treaty is good for heart of the treaty and many of which chemicals. Last week the Senate America and good for the world. It’s help to clarify it. passed a bill which would tighten U.S. not perfect. What international treaty But five major issues have not yet laws in this area. Isn’t it in our inter- is? But it serves our interests and im- been settled. The five amendments, on est, in this ever-shrinking world, to proves our security. For these reasons, which we will vote tomorrow, seek to make sure that others also toughen I will vote to ratify and encourage my settle differences of opinion the wrong their laws against chemical weapons colleagues to do the same. way. They are killer amendments. I production? Moreover, a broadly ac- Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, the 29- hope the Senate will vote ‘‘no’’ on each cepted international regime outlawing year-old pursuit for a chemical weap- of them. If any one of them passes, it this class of weapons altogether will ons treaty has finally reached its mo- will doom our participation in the trea- put us on a much stronger footing to ment of truth in the United States ty, and relegate us to the company of respond to serious violations, including Senate. Few votes cast in this Congress outlaw regimes like North Korea and by force if necessary. or any Congress are likely to be more Libya, who also reject the treaty. So with the CWC we get enhanced na- important. Two of the killer amendments condi- tional security, better protection for The effort to achieve this treaty was tion our participation on whether U.S. troops, improved ability to detect launched in 1968, and its history is other nations—Russia, Iran, Iraq, April 23, 1997 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S3539 Syria, and China—have already become treaty. I also want to commend the easily approved by the Senate. Unfor- participants. Essentially, they would majority leader for working diligently tunately, opponents of the convention hand over U.S. security decisions to with both sides to bring this treaty to have distorted the facts surrounding those nations. the Senate floor for consideration. No this treaty, and it is possible that the A third killer amendment arbitrarily matter where one stands on this issue, United States will fail to ratify the excludes all representatives from cer- we all agree that it is proper for this treaty that it initiated. tain other countries from participating debate to take place while our Nation I strongly believe that the Chemical in verification inspections. This can still become a full participant in Weapons Convention is an effective amendment ignores the ability that the convention. tool for combating chemical warfare, the treaty already gives us to reject I think that it is only appropriate and I hope that my fellow Senators will any inspectors we believe are not trust- that we are having this debate 1 week look beyond the rhetoric of the trea- worthy. after we commemorated the second an- ty’s detractors and look at the positive A fourth killer amendment omits and niversary of the bombing of the Murrah things that this measure would accom- alters other key parts of the treaty Federal building in Oklahoma City. plish. that deal with the export of certain That singular event made us all aware The Chemical Weapons Convention materials. Its proponents fear that that we are vulnerable to terrorism on bans the development or transfer of rogue nations may gain valuable tech- our own soil. We also remember when chemical weapons by member nations. nology from us. Nothing in the conven- terrorists launched a chemical attack It also requires participating states to tion requires the United States to in Tokyo’s subways, taking 12 lives and destroy their chemical weapon stock- weaken its export controls. Experts in injuring thousands more. We must take piles and chemical weapons production the chemical industry, trade organiza- action to protect Americans from a facilities under the observation of tions, and Government officials have similar terrorist outrage, and therefore international inspectors. worked to ensure that nothing in the it is incumbent upon this body to ap- treaty threatens our technology and prove the Chemical Weapons Conven- The convention would also establish industrial power. tion. the most extensive verification regime The fifth killer amendment places an The Chemical Weapons Convention is of any arms control treaty, that would unrealistically high standard of ver- also relevant today in light of recent require inspections of not only govern- ification on the treaty. It requires the findings that thousands of our troops mental facilities but also civilian fa- treaty verification procedures to ac- may have been exposed to chemical cilities. This system of monitoring will complish the impossible, by being able weapons during the Persian Gulf war. provide us with a mechanism for know- to detect small, not militarily signifi- Veterans groups across the country ing who produces what chemicals cant, amounts of dangerous chemical have called on the Senate to approve throughout the world, and where these materials. the CWC, and I believe that it is inex- chemicals are being sent. No international agreement can ef- cusable for us to forgo this opportunity The convention also prohibits signa- fectively police small amounts of raw to take a stand against chemical war- tory nations from exporting chemicals materials that might possibly be used fare. If we fail to do so, we will be un- most frequently used in chemical in chemical weapon production. Every necessarily placing those who volun- weapons to non-member countries. The effort is being made and will be made teer their services in our military at import of some chemicals from non- to make the detection procedures as ef- risk. member nations would also be prohib- fective as possible. It is hypocritical It is impossible to overstate the im- ited. These measures should isolate for opponents to attempt to scuttle portance of the votes that will be cast nonmember nations and provide them this treaty because they feel it does in this Chamber tomorrow. We have an with incentive to ratify the conven- not go far enough. opportunity to consider a proposal that tion. The overwhelming majority of past would eliminate an entire class of In order to oversee the convention’s and present foreign policy officials, weapons of mass destruction, and we implementation, the CWC establishes military leaders, large and small busi- may never have this opportunity again. the Organization for the Prohibition of nesses, Fortune 500 companies, Nobel Our decisions will have a tremendous Chemical Weapons, or the OPCW. This laureates, veterans organizations, reli- impact on the safety of the American organization will monitor the chemical gious groups, environmentalists, and people and our Nation’s role as an production throughout the world and public interest groups are united in international leader. will enforce compliance with the con- their strong support of the convention. We are all familiar with the horrify- vention. It is a practical international agree- ing effects associated with chemical ment with practical benefits for the weapons. We remember the use of mus- On April 29, the Chemical Weapons United States, and the United States tard gas in World War I and the use of Convention will go into effect with or should be a part of it. chemical weapons during the Iran-Iraq without the United States’ ratifica- Nevertheless, the treaty is being op- war. It was the inhumane nature of tion. The Senate must provide its ad- posed by an entrenched band of foreign chemical warfare that prompted Presi- vice and consent on the treaty and policy ideologues and isolationists who dent Reagan to initiate the negotia- send a resolution of ratification to the think the United Nations is the enemy tions for an international treaty to President before next Tuesday, so that and who say the arms race should be eliminate the use of chemical weapons. he may formally ratify the treaty. escalated, not restricted. History President Bush was also committed to Many hours of intense negotiations proved their ilk wrong once before, phasing out chemical weapons, and the have yielded the resolution of ratifica- when they sank the League of Nations United States joined 160 other nations tion to the Chemical Weapons Conven- in the 1920’s. And it will prove them in signing the Chemical Weapons Con- tion that we are now considering on wrong, again, with far more drastic vention during the final days of his ad- the Senate floor. This resolution con- consequences than World War II, if ministration. tains 33 conditions which cover nearly they prevail today. President Clinton has been a strong every objection raised by opponents of We cannot let that happen. The Sen- supporter of the convention, and he has ratification. I am pleased that nego- ate should reject the five killer amend- made ratification of this treaty his top tiators have reached an agreement on ments, and give this treaty the two- foreign policy priority. 28 of those 33 conditions. However, the thirds vote it needs and deserves. For nearly a decade, the United Senate will have a separate vote on Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I rise States led efforts to develop the Chem- each of the five remaining conditions today to express my strong support for ical Weapons Convention, and the re- tomorrow. I would like to stress that U.S. ratification of the Chemical Weap- sult was an effective agreement to approval of any of these conditions ons Convention. eliminate chemical weapons that was would be tantamount to prohibiting First, I wish to thank Senators BIDEN unprecedented in its scope. Considering U.S. participation in the Chemical and LUGAR for their untiring efforts in its history of bipartisan support, one Weapons Convention and could fatally seeking ratification of this historic would have expected this treaty to be damage the effectiveness of this treaty. S3540 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE April 23, 1997 I would like to quickly address these this treaty. The question ought to be: change of equipment, material, and sci- five conditions that threaten ratifica- Are verification measures under this entific and technological information tion of this treaty. Two of these condi- treaty better or worse than those we concerning means of protection against tions tie our ratification to the actions have now? chemical weapons.’’ The inclusion of of other nations. One demands that The answer to that question must be the word ‘‘right’’ underscores that each Russia ratify the treaty first, and the ‘‘yes.’’ This treaty includes tougher signatory state has a right, not an obli- other precludes ratification until the verification measures than any exist- gation, to exchange materials and in- world’s rogue nations like Libya and ing arms control agreement to the ex- formation. Iraq ratify the treaty. tent that it allows for frequent inspec- In fact, President Clinton confirmed The logic behind these two amend- tions of both governmental and com- this interpretation when he recently ments is that the convention is mean- mercial chemical manufacturing plants stated: ‘‘We have made it clear that, as ingless if it does not include all nations throughout the world. And while chem- regards to other countries, we will not with the capability to develop and use ical weapons are generally more dif- do anything to give them our tech- chemical weapons. This logic is seri- ficult to detect than conventional nology * * * and that our response will ously flawed. weapons, the U.S. intelligence commu- be * * * limited to helping them deal The CWC would impose trade restric- nity has confidence that it will be able with the health effects of an attack. tions on nonmember nations that will to detect a large scale effort to develop We will help people in medical ways curb their ability to obtain the mate- chemical weapons. and with other things having to do rials used in making chemical agents. The remaining condition of the rati- with the health consequences.’’ In addition, by establishing an inter- fication resolution is perhaps the most The national security concerns raised national legal standard opposing the contentious, and it would certainly kill by Senator HELMS were shared by the manufacture and use of chemical weap- all hopes of ratifying the Chemical representatives of the Reagan and Bush ons, the United States will be able to Weapons Convention if it were to pass administrations who negotiated this isolate these pariah states making it as an amendment tomorrow. treaty. That is why treaty negotiators more difficult for these nations to ac- In today’s Washington Post, my col- took great lengths to ensure that the quire chemical weapons. league from North Carolina, Senator treaty’s language would be carefully Also, since when does the United HELMS writes: ‘‘* * * the one issue that crafted to protect America’s interests. States allow other nations to dictate has raised the greatest concern among In responding to the criticisms of arti- American policy? It is ridiculous to Senators—the issue on which the rati- cle 10 of the convention, I’ll simply use suggest that we should compromise our fication vote will almost certainly the words of former Secretary of State position as a world leader by following hinge—is the Clinton Administration’s James Baker: ‘‘The suggestion that the lead of fringe countries. refusal to modify the treaty’s Articles Presidents Bush and Reagan would ne- President Reagan did not wait for 10 and 11.’’ His next sentence is par- gotiate a treaty detrimental to the na- other nations when he declared that ticularly important, ‘‘These controver- tion’s national security is outrageous.’’ this Nation would unilaterally destroy sial provisions require the transfer of I hope that my colleagues will not its chemical weapons stockpile. He did dangerous chemical agents, defensive take the criticisms of this critically not wait for other nations when he ini- gear and know-how to any nation that important treaty at face value and will tiated negotiations to ban chemical joins the CWC.’’ With all due respect to closely examine the actual text. weapons from the Earth. We did not my colleague from North Carolina, the The final condition which opponents follow others in making those critical simple fact of the matter is that this of the treaty seek to raise relates to decisions. We led and others fell in be- statement is not true. Article 10 does cooperation in the field of chemical ac- hind us. This Nation set the example. not require the United States or any tivities for businesses. Critics argue And now it is time for us once again to other signatory to share advanced that the CWC might force industry to lead and set the example. chemical weapons defense technologies share manufacturing and trade secrets In fact, perhaps the greatest way to and equipment with other countries or with other nations. These criticisms ensure that Russia and other countries to assist them in the development of are completely unfounded. Fred with offensive chemical weapons pro- such capabilities. Webber, president and CEO of the grams will not endorse this treaty, I hope that all of my colleagues, who Chemical Manufacturers Association, would be for the United States to re- are considering opposing the CWC for criticized these allegations stating ject this treaty. Seventy-three other this reason, will simply refer to the ac- that, ‘‘the Chemical Weapons Conven- nations, including all of our major al- tual text of the convention to under- tion does not obligate us to turn over lies, and two-thirds of all countries stand the true implications of the trea- trade secrets, and it most certainly with chemical weapon capabilities, ty. does not require the U.S. to abolish its have already endorsed this treaty. I Paragraph 7 of article 10 states: system of export controls on dual-use hope that we will align ourselves with ‘‘Each State Party undertakes to pro- chemistry. The CWC raises the export those who have ratified the convention vide assistance through the Organiza- control bar for other nations to the and not with those outlaw nations. tion and to this end to elect to take high standard already set by the Unit- Another condition that will be con- one or more of the following meas- ed States. That’s why this treaty is in sidered as an amendment would bar in- ures.’’ One of the choices is, ‘‘to de- the national interest.’’ In fact, it is dividual inspectors because they come clare, not later than 180 days after the ironic that critics of the treaty argue from a country that supported terror- Convention enters into force for it, the that they support the interests of ism or violated U.S. nonproliferation kind of assistance it might provide in America’s chemical and pharma- law. If a particular inspector has a past response to an appeal by the Organiza- ceutical companies. Yet, if we fail to history of spying or assisting terror- tion.’’ In no way does this language re- ratify this treaty, these very same ists, we must prevent him or her from quire any country to share advanced companies will be subject to trade re- inspecting our facilities. But if we bar chemical defense technology and equip- strictions that were devised by the certain inspectors based solely on their ment. In fact, 1 of the 28 conditions United States. nationality, other countries will cer- agreed to in the resolution of ratifica- Members of this body must examine tainly bar U.S. inspectors. In addition, tion will ensure that no assistance the elements that set this agreement these will likely be the countries that other than medical antidotes and apart from others. The Chemical Weap- we would most like to monitor. treatments is provided by the United ons Convention was signed by nearly Another condition that would surely States under article 10. every nation in the world; it penalizes kill the ratification agreement de- Opponents of the convention have nations that refuse to sign on; it pro- mands a level of verification that sim- also raised concerns regarding para- vides for routine and challenge inspec- ply cannot be guaranteed. Like every graph 3 of article 10. It reads as follows: tions; and it creates an international other arms control agreement, this one ‘‘Each State Party undertakes to fa- norm that would prohibit the very ex- is not 100 percent verifiable. Certainly, cilitate, and shall have the right to istence of chemical weapons. We must that is not a reason to avoid ratifying participate in, the fullest possible ex- recognize that there has never been an April 23, 1997 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S3541 arms control treaty that better ac- President then must formally ratify— tion. I would like to summarize and counted for the skeptic’s concerns than an indication to our treaty partners comment upon those agreed conditions, this one. that the United States is consenting to so that my colleagues may understand Today we live in a world of nations be legally bound to its terms—by sign- what we have achieved. that increasingly act together. In this ing an ‘‘instrument of ratification.’’ For I think that we have achieved time of economic unions, coalition The President then directs the Sec- quite a lot. I also think that Members forces, and multinational businesses, retary of State to deposit that instru- should study the many agreed condi- we can ill-afford to disengage from the ment at a central location designated tions that the Senator from North international community. If we do not by the convention; then, once the con- Carolina was able to propound. Frank- ratify this treaty or if we accept condi- vention enters into force, the United ly, virtually all of the concerns that tions that prevent our ratification, we States is bound under international have been raised regarding the CWC will careen off the course that we set law to abide by its terms. have been addressed in these agreed for ourselves and the other peace-lov- The Senate’s role in providing con- conditions, in a manner that should ing nations of the world. sent to a treaty is not that of a rubber substantially ease those concerns. Worse, we will force the nations who stamp. The Senate may attach amend- So I would like to summarize, Mr. have ratified the treaty to decide be- ments or reservations to the treaty— President, what the Senator from tween ridding the world of chemical essentially changing the terms of the North Carolina and I, along with other weapons on the one hand and maintain- original bargain between the United Members and the executive branch, have been able to achieve. ing good trade relations with the rich- States and its treaty partners, or it est nation in the world on the other. If may adopt conditions, which are, in ef- PROVIDING PROTECTION FOR INDUSTRY we force our allies to make decisions fect, a binding contract between the The CWC contains a number of built- like that, they’ll be justified in looking Senate and the President which will in protections for U.S. businesses, elsewhere for leadership. govern how the treaty will be imple- largely because industry helped write many of the convention’s provisions. A I strongly believe that ratification of mented or interpreted under U.S. law number of conditions have been added, the Chemical Weapons Convention is in and practice. the best interests of the United States, In the case of the Chemical Weapons however, to provide even greater pro- and I urge my colleagues to support Convention, no amendments to the tection for business. Condition 16 provides that if an em- this historic treaty. convention’s text have been, or will be, ployee of the organization for the pro- Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, as we offered; the Senate has already moved hibition of chemical weapons, or close the first day of debate on the beyond the stage in its consideration of OPCW, willfully discloses U.S. con- Chemical Weapons Convention, I want- treaties in which such amendments fidential business information that ed to insert into the RECORD an expla- would be in order. Neither have any causes financial harm to a U.S. busi- nation of the 28 conditions to the reso- reservations been put forth—although ness, the President must inform Con- lution of ratification that we adopted article XXII of the convention purports gress. If the director-general does not this afternoon, so we can create a legis- to prevent a party from doing so. The waive the employee’s diplomatic im- lative history. Senate has gone on record several munity from prosecution, which may Mr. President, the Chemical Weapons times, and does so again in condition be done pursuant to paragraph 20 of the Convention is a fine arms control 17, that the President’s agreement to CWC’s confidentiality annex, within 9 agreement. It can stand on its own. such a prohibition cannot constrain months of the President’s reporting the But the U.S. Senate has a constitu- the Senate’s constitutional right and matter to Congress, the President is re- tional duty to consider carefully all obligation to give its advice and con- quired to withhold half of the U.S. con- the implications of treaties submitted sent to a treaty subject to any reserva- tribution to the OPCW until that em- for its advice and consent to ratifica- tion it might determine is required by ployee’s immunity from prosecution is tion. Such careful consideration often the national interest. waived. This will serve as a strong de- enables us to spot aspects of an agree- Instead, we have a set of 28 condi- terrent to breaches of confidential in- ment that merit clarification, or im- tions which were agreed to by those in- formation. You might call it a ‘‘don’t plementation matters on which we volved in the negotiations to date, and mess with our trade secrets’’ condition. would be well advised to require par- which the Senate approved by voice Condition 18 is a further protection ticular executive branch policies. vote earlier this afternoon. These con- for proprietary information. This con- The Chemical Weapons Convention is ditions, as stated before, are binding dition prohibits any samples collected no exception to this rule. Over the upon the President. during inspections in the United States years since its signing over 4 years ago, Several conditions will be debated to- from being analyzed in a foreign lab- near the end of the Bush administra- morrow which are tantamount to kill- oratory. This will greatly reduce the tion, we have identified several areas ing the treaty. For example, any condi- risk of industrial espionage. I frankly in which clarifying the convention’s in- tion which requires a renegotiation of have concerns about this condition. I tent or establishing requirements re- the treaty—as condition 32 does—is a hope it does not lead to every country garding executive branch implementa- killer, plain and simple, because there keeping all its samples in-country, so tion would be useful. is no way that this treaty can be re- that all of Iran’s samples are analyzed In addition, there were several areas negotiated. Additionally, any condition in Iran and all of Russia’s samples are in which some of my colleagues wanted which requires the President to make analyzed in Russia. But there is no assurances that went beyond those impossible certifications before depos- question that this is a major conces- that the executive branch or I could iting the instrument of ratification sion to some of my colleagues’ con- give them, even though we thought will prevent the United States from cerns regarding the need to protect that such reassurances ought to suf- formally entering the convention. confidential business information. fice. In many such cases, the easiest As I described earlier, there have Condition 9 requires the President to way of providing the needed assurances been several stages of negotiation to certify, both now and annually, that was to codify them in a condition to work out agreed conditions to the reso- the CWC’s limits on the production and the resolution of ratification. lution and to narrow our areas of dis- use of the most toxic chemical weapons The convention enters into force on agreement. The Senator from North and their precursors are not signifi- April 29, with or without the United Carolina and I engaged in many hours cantly harming the legitimate com- States. To be an original state party, of negotiation as part of this process. mercial activities and interests of therefore, the President must deposit The end result of our negotiations, of chemical, biotechnology, and pharma- the instrument of ratification by mid- the negotiations between the White ceutical firms. The administration is night on April 28. As a technical mat- House and the task force established by fully prepared to make that certifi- ter, the Senate’s vote is not the final the majority leader, and of discussions cation. word, because the Senate does not directly between the White House and The Reagan, Bush, and Clinton ad- ‘‘ratify’’ a treaty; it provides advice the majority leader is a set of 28 agreed ministrations have all taken extraor- and consent to it. Once that occurs, the conditions to the resolution of ratifica- dinary measures to limit the impact of S3542 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE April 23, 1997 the CWC upon U.S. businesses. For ex- Union, and they have not been included OPCW meetings and the results of ample, the Bush administration made in the regular OPCW budget. those meetings. sure that challenge inspections would Condition 2 provides that any U.S. The careful reader of condition 10 be subject to ‘‘managed access,’’ in contributions to the OPCW will be sub- may note some hyperbole in it. Thus, which a firm will be able to limit the ject to congressional authorization and the first subparagraph states that ‘‘the access of inspectors to the minimum appropriation. This means that not one convention is in the interests of the necessary to disprove any allegations dollar can be transferred to the organi- United States only if all parties * * * of CWC violations by that firm. And zation by the U.S. Government without are in strict compliance * * *, such the Clinton administration worked congressional approval. compliance being measured by per- with other countries in the CWC Pre- Pursuant to condition 3, the OPCW formance and not by efforts * * *’’ paratory Commission to make sure must create an independent inspector In truth, of course, there may be that most of the businesses covered by general within its first 9 months of op- major violations or minor shortfalls. If the convention will only have to fill eration. Otherwise, half of the regular a party is delayed in its sincere efforts out a short form to comply with the re- U.S. contribution to the OPCW budget to clean up the vestiges of a long-inac- quirement for data declarations. will be withheld. An inspector general tive chemical weapons program, that Condition 21 puts the Senate on will ensure rigorous oversight of OPCW will hardly constitute a threat to U.S. record supporting the provision of as- activities and expenditures. national interests. But the drafters of sistance to U.S. businesses by the On- While it is in the U.S. interest for the this condition are on to something; Site Inspection Agency—or OSIA—an CWC to have a strong verification re- even minor violations by a few parties arm of the Department of Defense. gime, we should not have to foot the could erode the commitment of other OSIA has years of experience in helping bill for all of the research and develop- parties to strict compliance with the protect sensitive information during ment that goes to improving verifica- convention. inspections of Government-run facili- tion. That is why condition 4 was in- The important thing is that the ad- ties and defense contractors. This cluded, to require that any research ministration is not afraid to keep Con- Agency lacks authority to aid other and development by the United States gress in the loop on CWC compliance U.S. businesses, however. Following that is designed primarily to improve issues. Condition 10 requires briefings through on this provision with author- the verification provisions of the at least four times a year for the Con- izing legislation—which I would hope CWC—including the training of OPCW gress on U.S. actions taken to address we could do in the CWC implementing inspectors—must be pursuant to an compliance issues. This regular flow of legislation—would ensure that Amer- agreed cost-sharing arrangement that information will allow the Congress to ican businesses have the full benefit of spreads the costs of such R&D equi- keep abreast of chemical weapons pro- OSIA’s expertise available to them. tably between the United States and grams and to judge for itself whether Under condition 23, the Senate will the organization. the United States is doing enough to be informed promptly of the proposed A cost-sharing arrangement will also detect and respond to noncompliance. addition of a chemical to any of the be required in order to share items or It may be in our interest at times to CWC’s schedules of chemicals. A report services that were developed through share intelligence with the OPCW, es- from the President will indicate the U.S. research and development. It will pecially so as to maximize the effec- anticipated effect of such proposal on still be possible, however, for U.S. tiveness of the CWC’s on-site inspec- U.S. industry. If a proposed addition agencies to pursue R&D programs so as tion regime. All agree that we should should appear to promise too great a to improve U.S. monitoring of chemi- take steps to protect U.S. sources and burden on U.S. industry for too little cal weapons, and cost-sharing arrange- methods when sharing intelligence in- gain in protection against chemical ments need not be in place unless and formation. weapons, Congress will then have time until the United States wants to share Thanks to the work of the senior to convince the executive branch to the results with the OPCW. Senator from Alabama, which I am force that proposed addition into a We would also not want to be stuck happy to commend, condition 5 has CWC process that requires two-thirds with the bill for Russian destruction of been added to do just that. It requires vote of the states parties to adopt the their vast chemical weapons stockpile. the intelligence community, at the change. So there is agreement on condition 14, interagency level, to fully sanitize and HOLDING DOWN U.S. COSTS under which the United States shall to approve all intelligence information Allegations have been made that the not accept any Russian effort to condi- before it is released to the OPCW. CWC will create a massive U.S.-style tion its ratification of CWC upon Unit- The Director of Central Intelligence bureaucracy that will cost U.S. tax- ed States guarantees to pay for Rus- can waive this requirement for particu- payers hundreds of millions of dollars. sian implementation of chemical weap- lar documents on a case-by-case basis, Several conditions have been agreed ons destruction under the CWC or the but that must be promptly reported to upon to keep U.S. costs to a minimum 1990 bilateral destruction agreement. the Foreign Relations and Intelligence and ensure a well-managed organiza- ENSURING IMPROVED MONITORING, Committees of the Congress. The Di- tion. VERIFICATION AND ENFORCEMENT rector must also report on the proce- Under condition 22, regular U.S. con- Some opponents of CWC have alleged dures set up to protect classified infor- tributions to the Organization for the that the convention will lead to a mation and on any unauthorized dis- Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, or ‘‘dumbing down’’ of U.S. intelligence closures of information provided to the OPCW, have been capped at $25 million and that the United States will shy OPCW. annually. Any increase to this cap away from taking tough actions when The Senator from Alabama’s condi- must cross two high hurdles. First, the faced with instances of noncompliance. tion makes a real contribution to the President must make a ‘‘national secu- Three conditions address these con- verification of compliance with the rity interest’’ waiver. Second, the Con- cerns head-on. CWC. The ability of the United States gress must enact a joint resolution ap- We all know that monitoring and to share information with the OPCW is proving the President’s waiver. verification of some aspects of CWC vital to catching would-be violators of Fortunately, condition 22 allows a compliance will be difficult. This fact the convention. I hope that this condi- periodic inflation adjustment to the of life has prompted understandable tion will not only ease the Senator’s regular U.S. contribution. In addition, concern on the part of some Members, concerns over the protection of intel- the United States will be permitted to and the administration has accepted a ligence sources and methods, but also contribute funds to help the OPCW condition— No. 10—that requires both reassure him that the overall conven- handle the costs of monitoring U.S. de- periodic reports and prompt notice re- tion is in the national interest. struction of chemical weapons. Those garding world chemical weapons pro- All of us want the executive branch are costs that we originally intended to grams and the status of CWC compli- to act effectively in the event that a fund for implementation of the 1990 bi- ance. The executive branch would also State party should violate the CWC in lateral destruction agreement between offer briefings on current compliance any manner that threatened U.S. na- the United States and the Soviet issues, including issues to be raised in tional security interests. Condition 13 April 23, 1997 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S3543 will require the executive branch to re- automatically remove the need to de- that the concessions he obtained from port to and consult with the Senate re- fend against chemical weapons, but the administration on this major issue garding such violations and to make ef- rather because CWC is a vital step to- would reassure him that the CWC’s im- fective use of CWC provisions for chal- ward reducing and combating that portant contributions to the national lenge inspections, high-level diplomacy threat. security will be achieved without any and U.N. sanctions. The executive While the opponents’ argument ig- violation of people’s constitutional branch also agrees that any sanctions nores the fact that the Pentagon has rights or any undue costs or harm to required by U.S. law should be imple- requested $225 million in additional U.S. persons. mented in such a case. funds for chemical weapons defenses Condition 12 makes clear that noth- Pursuant to subparagraph (A)(vi), if over the next 5 years, a condition has ing in the CWC requires or authorizes the noncompliance should persist for a nonetheless been added to address their anything that is prohibited by the U.S. year, the executive branch will be concerns. Pursuant to condition 11, the Constitution, as interpreted by the bound to consult with the Senate for Secretary of Defense shall ensure that United States. No administration the purposes of obtaining a resolution U.S. forces are capable of carrying out would agree to a treaty that violated of support of continued adherence to required military missions in U.S. re- the constitution, no treaty ever takes the convention. This seems unduly gional contingency plans, regardless of precedence over the constitution, and rigid; a country may well need more any threat or use of chemical weapons. only the United States interprets our than a year to come into compliance if In particular, U.S. forces must be prop- Constitution. The administration is it must destroy chemical weapons erly trained, equipped, and organized quite willing, therefore, to accept a stocks or facilities. Frankly, I do not to operate in chemically and bio- condition stating these facts. know what is to be gained by requiring logically contaminated environments. RIOT CONTROL AGENTS the executive branch to consult each This means not only improving the de- Concerns were raised that the admin- time on a possible resolution of support fensive capabilities of U.S. forces, but istration planned to amend Executive for continued adherence to the CWC. also initiating discussions on chemical Order 11850 of 1975 to prohibit the use of But condition 13 does not require that weapons defense with likely coalition tear gas in times of war to rescue such a nonbinding resolution be intro- partners and countries whose civilian downed pilots and to fend off attacks duced or voted upon in every case, so personnel would support U.S. forces in by combatants using civilians as there is little potential for harm in a conflict. human shields. Condition 26 has been this. The administration has also agreed added to lay this concern to rest. Some other aspects of condition 13 to assure that the U.S. Army Chemical Pursuant to condition 26, the Presi- merit additional explanation. For ex- School remains under the supervision dent is prohibited from taking any ac- ample, several of the mandated execu- of an Army general. Finally, the Presi- tion to alter or eliminate Executive tive branch responses to CWC viola- dent is required to submit exhaustive Order 11850 of 1975. In other words, all tions must be undertaken on an urgent annual reports to Congress on the uses of tear gas by U.S. Armed Forces basis. This does not mean that they State of Chemical and Biological de- that are permitted today—including must all proceed concurrently. Thus, in fense efforts. rescuing of downed pilots and against some cases high-level diplomacy will CONSTITUTIONAL CONCERNS combatants when they use civilians to suffice and there will be no need to Some opponents of the CWC have al- shield attacks—will continue to be per- seek a challenge inspection or U.N. leged that it will violate the U.S. Con- mitted after the CWC enters into force. sanctions. stitution by permitting international In addition, condition 26 makes clear In some cases, it might be necessary inspectors to conduct warrantless that nearly all uses of riot control to prepare the groundwork carefully searches of U.S. facilities. Actually, a agents in peacekeeping operations will for a challenge inspection or a diplo- number of legal scholars have noted be permitted. The sole exception to matic approach. The Senator from the specific constitutional protections that permission would be in the most North Carolina and I are agreed that written into the convention. To ease unlikely case that the U.S. role in a the executive branch could proceed any members’ lingering concerns, how- peacekeeping operation reached such a with such preparations on an urgent ever, two important agreed conditions military scope and duration that the basis, even though they may take have been added. laws of war would pertain to it. many months to come to fruition. Condition 28 makes it crystal clear TRANSFER OF CHEMICAL WEAPONS DEFENSES Finally, the requirement in subpara- that no warrantless searches will be Some opponents of CWC have as- graph (A)(ii) that the executive branch permitted when access to inspectors is serted that article X of the convention seek a challenge inspection should not denied. All challenge inspections will would require the United States to pro- be read as requiring that the United require a criminal warrant based upon vide financial assistance and equip- States must always be the party that probable cause when consent to that ment to countries such as Iran and initiates such a request. There might inspection is withheld. An administra- Cuba in order to improve their chemi- well be other States parties with an tive warrant will be required for rou- cal weapons defense capabilities. This equal or greater interest in a given tine inspections of declared U.S. facili- is an understandable misconception of country’s apparent violation of the ties when consent has been withheld. paragraph 7 of article X, which states CWC, and it might be more fruitful in Both of these warrants must be issued that ‘‘each state party undertakes to some cases for the executive branch to by a Federal judge—either a U.S. Dis- provide [such] assistance through the work with those other States parties to trict Court judge or a U.S. magistrate organization.’’ Paragraph 1 of article X secure the common objective of a chal- judge. defines ‘‘assistance’’ to include ‘‘detec- lenge inspection. Condition 28 was reached through the tion equipment and alarm systems, MAINTAINING ROBUST CHEMICAL DEFENSES combined efforts of the majority lead- protective equipment; decontamina- Some have asserted that if the Unit- er, Senator HELMS, the administration tion equipment and decontaminants; ed States joins the CWC, we will be and myself. It represents a significant medical antidotes and treatments; and lulled into a false sense of security and concession by the administration, as advice on any of these protective meas- drop our guard against the continuing the Constitution does not require ad- ures.’’ threat of chemical weapons. This con- ministrative warrants in cases of high- The rest of paragraph 7 of article X cern is frankly a bit mystifying. Aside ly-regulated industries. Condition 28 makes clear, however, that each state from the risk that any arms control reflects the executive branch’s con- party is not required to provide all treaty might be violated by a State fidence that any challenge inspection such assistance. A state party may party to it, U.S. military leaders are mounted in the United States will, in- contribute to a voluntary fund for as- quite aware that such potential mili- deed, be based on sufficient evidence to sistance, or agree to provide assistance tary adversaries as Iraq, Libya, and justify a criminal search warrant. through the OPCW on demand, or sim- North Korea are not planning to sign I want to compliment the majority ply declare what assistance it might the convention. The Joint Chiefs of leader, in particular, for his efforts on provide in response to an appeal by the Staff support CWC not because it will condition 28. I would certainly hope OPCW. So CWC does not compel the S3544 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE April 23, 1997 United States to give any country, let bind the executive branch to vote on Condition 8 deals with the matter of alone an enemy like Cuba, anything every proposed CWC amendment and to so-called negative security assurances. more than medical assistance or ad- submit any amendment to the Senate Despite the fact that the United States vice. for its advice and consent. decided long ago to destroy its chemi- The Senator from North Carolina has As explained in the discussion of con- cal weapons stockpile, some are con- proposed in condition 15 that the Sen- dition 1, the CWC includes a provision cerned that one impact of the CWC will ate bind the executive branch not to barring states parties from attaching be to undermine the ability of the provide anything more than medical reservations to their ratification of the United States to adequately retaliate antidotes and treatment to a rogue convention. A sense-of-the-Senate con- against a state that used chemical state pursuant to article X of the con- dition warns U.S. negotiators that they weapons against us, if that state has vention. While there is no real need to should not include such provisions in received U.S. assurances to non-nu- so bind the executive branch, this pro- any future treaty. clear weapons states that the United posal is certainly consistent with cur- The Biden condition on treaty inter- States will not be the first to use nu- rent administration policy. As such, it pretation, which has been attached to clear weapons against them—Such as- may usefully allay the suspicions that all arms control treaties since the INF surances are known as negative secu- article X has aroused in some quarters, treaty was approved in 1988, is re- rity assurances—This condition re- and is therefore worth supporting. affirmed in condition 24. It states the quires the administration to submit a MAINTAINING STRINGENT EXPORT CONTROLS constitutionally-based principle that classified report on the impact of this Some opponents of the CWC see arti- the shared understanding that exists new reality upon U.S. retaliatory op- cle XI of the convention as requiring between the executive branch and the tions in such a case and upon the whole the Australia group—an informal alli- Senate about the terms of the treaty at policy of negative security assurances. ance of potential supplier states—to the time the Senate gives advice and U.S. CHEMICAL WEAPONS DESTRUCTION relax its export controls, which are a consent to ratification can be altered Condition 27 is the result of negotia- bulwark of nonproliferation. I have only subject to the Senate’s advice and tions between the administration and never shared that concern, because the consent to a subsequent treaty or pro- the senior Senator from Kentucky. It Australia Group has steadfastedly told tocol, or the enactment of a statute. is an important effort to ensure citi- the world that it viewed its export con- Another condition is included which zens concerned about the environment trol regime to be fully consistent with has been attached to major arms con- that the United States will do all it the CWC. Nevertheless, condition 7 has trol treaties in recent years, setting can to select the safest methods for the been added to reassure those who forth the Senate position that any destruction of our own stockpile of worry that the Australia Group would international agreement that would chemical weapons. be hobbled by the CWC. obligate the united States to limit its Condition 27 assures that the United Pursuant to condition 7, the Presi- forces in a militarily significant way States will be able, under CWC, to give dent must certify that he has obtained will be considered by the Senate only full consideration to alternatives to in- authoritative assurances from all other pursuant to article II, section 2, clause cineration as the means to destroy U.S. Australia Group members that they 2 of the Constitution. This is condition chemical weapons pursuant to the con- agree with the United States view that 25. vention. Since alternative means may the CWC will not weaken any Australia Condition 20 also purports to pre- be feasible only if we take the full time Group controls—and these assurances serve the rights of the Senate, by as- allowed by the CWC, which is more have, in fact, been received. In addi- serting the sense of the Senate that the than the time allotted under current tion, the President is required to do United States should not be denied its U.S. law, this condition states that the what it takes to prevent any back- vote in OPCW organs if Congress fails CWC time allotment may supersede sliding in the years to come. If the to appropriate the full amount of funds that in section 1412 of Public law 99– Australia Group is weakened, the assessed to the United States. 145. President will be required to consult It should be noted that although Mr. President, this has been a with the Senate for the purposes of ob- paragraph 8 of article VIII of the con- lengthy explanation of what we are ac- taining a resolution of continued ad- vention allows the Conference of States cepting in the 28 agreed conditions to herence to the CWC. Parties to permit a state party to re- the resolution of ratification. It is PROTECTING THE SENATE’S PREROGATIVES tain its vote if the conference is satis- lengthy for a good reason: because the Senators on both sides of the aisle fied that the state’s arrears are due to senior Senator from North Carolina wish to preserve the Senate’s constitu- conditions beyond the control of the and I have truly reached many ele- tional role in treaty-making. Several state party, this is clearly a decision ments of agreement, and because sev- conditions address this issue. left to the states parties acting in that eral of those agreements are truly sig- Condition 1 asserts that the Senate conference. nificant. In addition, given the absence reserves the right to add reservations I sincerely doubt that any inter- of a report from the Foreign Relations to the resolution of ratification, de- national body will see the actions of Committee, this statement is intended spite the ban—in article XXII of the Congress as conditions beyond the con- to create some legislative history for convention—on reservations to the trol of the United States, although the 28 conditions on which the Senator convention. This condition asserts the sometimes the American people may from North Carolina and I have agreed. Senate’s right under the U.S. Constitu- sympathize with that concept. Condi- It is my sincere belief, Mr. President, tion, but does not exercise it. It re- tion 20 merely states the nonbinding that the adoption of these 28 agreed quires the administration to inform all sense of the Senate, however, so it does conditions, will answer many of the other states parties that the Senate re- no harm. most vexing concerns that have been serves the right to give its advice and FOREIGN POLICY CONSIDERATIONS raised by Members who find it difficult consent to ratification of the conven- Some people are concerned that the to decide how to vote on advice and tion subject to reservations. Although CWC has been oversold as a defense consent to ratification. I hope that my the Senate has not exercised this right against the use of chemical weapons by colleagues will study carefully how at this time, it could do so in ratifying terrorist groups. The Senator from much we have achieved. future amendments to the convention; North Carolina proposes, therefore, I trust they will understand that the this condition puts all parties on no- condition 19, by which the Senate will remaining issues are ones on which we tice. find that the CWC would not have cannot accept the proposed conditions If the United States decided not to stopped the Aum Shinrikyo Group in without killing U.S. ratification of the cast its vote—one way or another—on a Japan and that future terrorist groups convention or seriously impeding its proposed CWC amendment at an will likely seek chemical weapons. implementation. And finally, I urge my amendment conference under the con- Both of these statements are probably colleagues, in light of what we have ac- vention, it would be possible for such quite accurate, and no harm is done by complished thus far, to take the cul- an amendment to be passed without a attaching them to the resolution of minating step and support final pas- vote in the Senate. So condition 6 will ratification. sage of this historic resolution. April 23, 1997 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S3545 Mr. KYL. Mr. President, to explain to 100th day of this Congress. Since we we can provide working families with the colleagues what is going to happen began this session, 14 million children tax breaks for education and ensure next, we are going to conclude debate attended classes in schools that are that parents can afford to take their this evening on the Chemical Weapons falling apart, 180,000 babies were born children to the doctor. We can ensure Convention and then reinitiate it to- without health care coverage and 51 that in future years when Kym’s chil- morrow. million workers labored without a pen- dren retire they will have financial se- We will begin tomorrow with the sion plan. Unfortunately, this Congress curity. All of this is in our power, but closed session which will be a 2-hour has accomplished nothing to meet to meet our goal we must work to- closed session in the Old Senate Cham- these dire needs. It is now time to gether. I hope my colleagues will join ber, and thereafter resume debate, in- make good on our pledges of coopera- me in this task. cluding the motions to strike. tion. Just as South Dakotans have f f joined together for the good of our State, we in Congress must join to- COMMENDING VOLUNTEERS ON UNANIMOUS-CONSENT AGREEMENT gether for the good of our country and THE FLOOD RELIEF EFFORT Mr. KYL. Mr. President, I have a deliver much-needed relief to Ameri- Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I want to unanimous-consent request that has ca’s working families. highlight the commendable effort dis- been cleared on both sides. I ask unani- On the first day of the 105th Con- played by the legion of West Virginia mous consent that 1 hour of the 2 hours gress, I introduced bills to enact the volunteers who have done so much to devoted to the closed session not be Families First Agenda to raise the in- help their neighbors and communities counted against the 10-hour debate comes of working families, extend af- affected by last month’s flooding in time as provided in the consent agree- fordable health coverage to children, sixteen West Virginia counties. Their ment. expand the retirement benefits of selfless dedication to neighbors in need The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without workers, and make it easier for stu- is in the finest West Virginia tradition objection, it is so ordered. dents of all ages to receive a quality of community spirit and support. education. Now it is time to roll up our f The efforts of volunteers from the sleeves and get to work. I urge my col- Fire and Rescue Departments through- MORNING BUSINESS leagues to join with me to support out the affected area are especially America’s families. Every day we wait Mr. KYL. Mr. President, I ask unani- noteworthy. These heroic workers res- is another day they struggle to make mous consent that there now be a pe- cued numerous families and individuals ends meet. riod for the transaction of morning trapped by the raging flood waters that Mr. President, I would like to bring swept through my beloved state. You business with Senators permitted to to the attention of my colleagues a speak for up to 5 minutes each. may recall some of the harrowing very important letter I received from events displayed on television news, The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without Kym Pacheco, a resident of Sioux objection, it is so ordered. particularly from those hardest hit Falls, SD. It is a heartbreaking letter, counties of Kanawha, Cabell, and Wirt. f and it tells the story of working fami- Also working during the storms and in lies better than any words of mine. De- PUTTING FAMILIES FIRST: 100 their destructive aftermath, utility spite a 105-hour work week as a truck DAYS PAST DUE AND COUNTING employees labored long hours in driv- driver, Kym’s husband earns just ing rain and deep mud to restore elec- Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, over enough for the family to get by. Each tricity, gas, water, and sewer service to the past months South Dakota has suf- month they struggle to pay their rent the affected communities. fered some of the worst disasters in re- and the grocery, gas, and phone bills. Mr. President, churches have always cent memory. The drifts of snow that ‘‘Mind you,’’ she writes, ‘‘none of this sustained the people of West Virginia, have paralyzed our State and killed includes car repairs, school supplies, and never more so than when disaster over 100,000 cattle are at last melting, clothes, medications, or car insurance. strikes. Aside from providing physical but their runoff has swelled our lakes There are no luxuries—week-end vaca- sustenance to the affected residents, and rivers to overflowing and forced tions, a nice car, trips to McDonald’s. the community churches that dot our thousands to evacuate in the face of What we wouldn’t do to be able to take hills and hollows have also provided devastating floodwaters. Only the hard our son to the Black Hills for a week! flood victims with moral and spiritual work of South Dakotans, building .. . But we cannot put any money into comfort to ease the pain of all that has dikes and filling sandbags to save the the savings. We literally live paycheck been lost. Particularly hard hit in this homes of their friends and neighbors, to paycheck!’’ flood, the people of Clendenin have re- has prevented the serious disaster we Mr. President, no one in our Nation ceived extensive and much-needed sup- are facing from having more cata- who works 105 hours a week should live port from churches, neighbors, and strophic consequences. one paycheck away from an empty other charitable organizations. After I am also proud to say that during stomach or a missed rent payment. all of the floods of last year, it is up- these disasters, our bipartisan elected Families like Kym’s work hard but lifting to see that such strong commu- leadership has set politics aside and cannot get ahead, and they fear for the nity spirit yet endures among the worked together for the good of our future of their children. They have Mountaineers of West Virginia. This State. Our Democratic President, our faith that life can be better, but they year, as in previous years, volunteers, Republican Governor, our entire con- are depending upon us to give them the churches, and organizations like the gressional delegation, and every local help they need. We cannot let them Red Cross have risen above the flood leader have made overcoming the dis- down. As Kym continues, ‘‘There are so waters of disaster to provide comfort aster our first priority. As Governor many problems in the U.S., but I hon- and hope to their neighbors. I am re- Bill Janklow of South Dakota stated, estly believe that when our govern- minded of the words of poet, essayist, ‘‘There is no way that Republican or ment starts passing laws that actually and critic Matthew Arnold: Democrat politics should come into give families affordable, decent cov- play when we are dealing with the Then, in such hour of need erage health insurance, decent wages, Of your fainting, dispirited race, things that are vital to all the people tax breaks for poor and middle class Ye, like angels, appear, of this State.’’ Together, we believe working families, our country will be- Radiant with ardour divine! that meeting the needs of our families come better. It would be a start! Our Beacons of hope, ye appear! and our communities should always children deserve an opportunity to live Langour is not in your heart, come first. better than we did!’’ Weakness is not in your word, This philosophy has served South Da- Mr. President, her children do de- Weariness not on your brow. kota well during its time of need, and serve that opportunity, and we can Surely, the concerned faces and help- I am convinced that what has worked give it to them. Let us accept Kym’s ing hands of volunteers and church in South Dakota can work here in challenge. If we put the interests of workers seemed divinely inspired to Washington. Recently, we passed the working families before party politics, the flood victims who benefited from