September 21, 1982 EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS 24519 EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS TO KEEP THE PEACE ... ARMS many nuclear weapons will we have left and ically ignored by the USSR and her satel­ CONTROL AND THE NUCLEAR deliverable after a Soviet first strike? lites. FREEZE The simplicity of the "overkill" argument, But there are those who insist that any is both attractive and misleading. Our nu­ Soviet cheating would be detected because, clear arsenal exists to deter potentia? ag­ by its terms, the freeze must be verifiable. HON. HENRY J. HYDE gressors and thus preserve both peace and Of course our reconnaissance satellites and OF ILLINOIS freedom. Deterrence is not based simply on other signals intelligence can do a great IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES numbers or claiins of sufficiency. Deter­ deal. But "on-site" verification is the only rence depends on the capability of prevail­ way production and testing can be moni­ Tuesday, September 21, 1982 ing in conflict at any level while preserving tored. This fact was conceded by the House • Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, an issue the flexibility to escalate the conflict to an­ sponsors of the Kennedy Freeze Resolution receiving a lot of media attention is other level and prevail there too. Only by when, during floor debate they accepted, convincing a potential enemy that, by start­ without argument, an amendment by Con­ the so-called nuclear freeze. I have ing a war, they have nothing to gain and a gressman Norman Lent <R., N.Y.> requiring written an article on this subject lot to lose, can we hope to deter aggression. "on site inspection." <This Resolution is which I would like to share with my So here we face a basic disagreement with named after the Massachusetts Senator colleagues. the "freeze now" advocates: One strategy is who is its chief advocate and, having aban­ The article follows: based on strength and deterrence, and the doned National Health Insurance as his ve­ To KEEP THE PEACE •• • ARMS CONTROL AND other on good will and faith. History contin­ hicle to the White House, has chosen the THE NUCLEAR FREEzE ues to repeat itself-to trust the Soviets is Nuclear Freeze as his new crusade). No one in their right mind wants nuclear dangerous and even deadly folly. Santayana Of this, two things must be said. No war. Most people understand the horror has said that those who fail to read history matter what Soviet Propaganda asserts, on­ such a war would unleash, and so it is not are condemned to re-live it. The history of site inspection would mean a fundamental surprising that the proposal for a mutual, Soviet aggression is there for all but the change in Soviet society-from a closed to verifiable freeze on the production, testing willfully blind to read. an open society and I just don't believe they and deployment of such weapons by the So­ No competent military analyst disputes are ready to do that. Secondly, even if viets and ourselves is receiving so much at­ the fact that by every measure-number of granted, how do you inspect every nook and tention. warheads, accuracy, total delivery vehicles cranny of such an enormous <8.649,538 sq. The majority <but certainly not am of its and megatonnage-the ratio of Soviet to miles> country? The production and testing proponents are well intentioned pr. trio tic United States capabilities has dramatically of these weapons can be done underground citizens, but some of their tactics blur the shifted. Remember, deterrence has worked in remote areas that will escape detection. real issues in a frenzy of emotionalism. for <37> years, especially while the U.S. Our defense industries have many legal They seek to give the impression that they maintained strategic superiority. It is not at safety factors imposed on them and their are the only protectors of peace and those all clear that our deterrent capability would workers. There is no Occupational Safety who oppose their views are recklessly will­ remain credible under a freeze which pro­ and Health Agency in Russia. They will ing to risk war. vides Soviet parity or, as the Administration work underground. The secret production It is unwise to judge the merits of such a believes, Soviet superiority. and stockpiling of these weapons would pre­ proposal on the basis of its proponents' A "freeze now" would prevent the long dictably occur, and meanwhile our hopes good intentions. We must do much more­ overdue modernization of our aging nuclear would get the better of us <as they always we must ask whether such a freeze is attain­ weapons, deferred under the sedative of de­ do> and we would be complying with our able and if so, what it would accomplish. tente. Our B-52 bombers are now so ancient part of the bargain-easily enforced by our If such a truly mutual verifiable freeze that if one was an automobile appearing in free press-while the Soviets would continue could be implemented, neither side could a show, it would qualify for an antique li­ their relentless military build-up. produce, test or deploy any additional nucle­ cense plate. The present trend towards re­ A question of surpassing importance re­ ar weapons. What would this mean for us? placing large, inaccurate warheads with ceives little or no attention from "freeze We would be forbidden to produce the MX smaller, more accurate warheads, would be now" proponents: How, we must ask, does missile <which is our, as yet undeveloped, stopped. This means, of course, that in any such a freeze position lead to U.S.-U.S.S.R. answer to the Soviet's present capacity to nuclear exchange under present conditions, negotiations that can result in actual reduc­ knock out all our land based Intercontinen­ far more widespread collateral damage tion of nuclear weapons and delivery sys­ tal Ballistic Missiles), no more Trident sub­ would result. teins? The answer is, unfortunately, it marines <designed to upgrade our soon to be Some will argue that all this is worth the doesn't. retired Polaris submarines), no B-1 or risk if the freeze really works. This is a big The Soviets never, never negotiate any­ Stealth bombers <leaving us with the an­ and dangerous "if". What sound reasons thing unless they get some decided advan­ cient 1962 vintage B-52s as our sole long exist to believe that a mutual, verifiable tage out of it. We Americans make the fun­ range bombers>. no cruise missiles and no freeze could be achieved? To argue that the damental mistake of assuming the Russians nuclear-armed anti-ballistic missiles. Soviets would honor this treaty is to ignore look at the world through much the same Would this reduce the risk or the severity history, and to overlook a long and tragic eyes as we do. Former Ambassador to the of nuclear war? Not necessarily, but it would list of Soviet treaty violations. For example: Soviet Union Foy D. Kohler, who has vast confirm and ratify the drastic change in the Conducting underground nuclear tests experience with the Russians has written a strategic balance between us and the Soviets larger than permitted by the 1974 Thresh­ monograph entitled SALT II: How Not To that has occurred over the past ten years. old Test Ban Treaty; Negotiate With The Russians <Advanced Military analysts can debate whether that Numerous violations of the SALT I treaty, International Studies Institute-Univ. of balance has shifted in favor of the Soviets including replacement of the SS-11 ICBM Miami) which ought to be read carefully by or not, and this argument gets very compli­ with the heavy SS-19, camouflage of subma­ every "freeze now" advocate. He writes: cated. But as the U.S. News and World rine missile construction, and encryption of "The norms of diplomatic intercourse Report of April 19th reported, " ... while missile test telemetry; seldom hold good. And whatever the nature the U.S. leads in numbers of warheads, Rus­ Similar violations of SALT II, including of the matter being negotiated, the Rus­ sia's arsenal contains more launchers that the stockpiling of 88-16 missiles and exten­ sians invariably approach the issues in can throw vastly more explosive power." sive encryption of missile telemetry signals; terms of an adversary relationship with the This leads us to one of the most frequent­ and, most blatant of all, aim not of a mutually acceptable agreement ly used arguments by those who favor a Violation of the 1925 Geneva Protocol on based on compromise and two-way conces­ freeze now <prior to any negotiated reduc­ chemical weapons and the 1972 Biological sions, but of gaining unilateral advantage." tions>-namely that both sides have enough Weapons Convention by use of "yellow He also states: nuclear weapons to exterminate the other, rain" in Afghanistan and Laos; and "It is also not that the Soviets have at­ so why build more? This statement misses The Treaty of Helsinki which pledged free tempted to hide or disguise their attitudes. the point: The question should be, how emigration has been repeatedly and trag- Actually, they have set them forth with e This "bullet" symbol identifies statements or insertions which are not spoken by the Member on the floor. 24520 EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS September 21, 1982 startling frankness and completeness. The others who know exactly what they are avowed mission not only of "burying us". as problem is that we are unwilling to accept doing. No protest was raised when Soviet Khrushchev promised, but of imposing its as reality what we see and have every SS-20 missiles and Backfire bombers were system of organized barbarism on all the reason to accept at face value.