From the House Reports Online via GPO Access
[wais.access.gpo.gov]
104th Congress Rept. 104-18
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
1st Session Part 1
_______________________________________________________________________
NATIONAL SECURITY REVITALIZATION ACT
_______
February 6, 1995.--Ordered to be printed
_______________________________________________________________________
Mr. Spence, from the Committee on National Security, submitted the
following
R E P O R T
together with
ADDITIONAL AND DISSENTING VIEWS
[To accompany H.R. 7]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on National Security, to whom was referred
titles I, II, III, and V and section 401 of the bill (H.R. 7)
to revitalize the national security of the United States,
having considered the same, report favorably thereon with an
amendment and recommend that the bill as amended do pass.
The amendment is as follows:
Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert the
following:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.
(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``National Security
Revitalization Act''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act is as
follows:
Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
TITLE I--FINDINGS, POLICY, AND PURPOSES
Sec. 101. Findings.
Sec. 102. Policy.
Sec. 103. Purposes.
TITLE II--MISSILE DEFENSE
Sec. 201. Policy.
Sec. 202. Actions of the Secretary of Defense.
Sec. 203. Report to Congress.
TITLE III--ADVISORY COMMISSION ON REVITALIZATION OF NATIONAL SECURITY
Sec. 301. Establishment.
Sec. 302. Composition.
Sec. 303. Duties.
Sec. 304. Reports.
Sec. 305. Powers.
Sec. 306. Commission procedures.
Sec. 307. Personnel matters.
Sec. 308. Termination of the commission.
Sec. 309. Funding.
TITLE IV--COMMAND OF UNITED STATES FORCES
Sec. 401. Limitation on expenditure of Department of Defense funds for
United States forces placed under United Nations command or control.
Sec. 402. Limitation on placement of United States Armed Forces under
foreign control for a United Nations peacekeeping activity.
TITLE V--UNITED NATIONS
Sec. 501. Credit against assessment for United States expenditures in
support of United Nations peacekeeping operations.
Sec. 502. Codification of required notice to Congress of proposed
United Nations peacekeeping activities.
Sec. 503. Notice to Congress regarding United States contributions for
United Nations peacekeeping activities.
Sec. 504. Revised notice to Congress regarding United States assistance
for United Nations peacekeeping activities.
Sec. 505. United States contributions to United Nations peacekeeping
activities.
Sec. 506. Reimbursement to the United States for in-kind contributions
to United Nations peacekeeping activities.
Sec. 507. Prohibition on use of funds to pay United States assessed or
voluntary contribution for United Nations peacekeeping activities
unless Department of Defense reimbursed by United Nations for certain
goods and services.
Sec. 508. Limitation on use of Department of Defense funds for United
States share of costs of United Nations peacekeeping activities.
Sec. 509. Codification of limitation on amount of United States
assessed contributions for United Nations peacekeeping operations.
Sec. 510. Buy American requirement.
Sec. 511. United Nations peacekeeping budgetary and management reform.
Sec. 512. Conditions on provision of intelligence to the United
Nations.
TITLE VI--REVITALIZATION AND EXPANSION OF THE NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY
ORGANIZATION
Sec. 601. Short title.
Sec. 602. Findings.
Sec. 603. United States policy.
Sec. 604. Revisions to program to facilitate transition to NATO
membership.
TITLE VII--BUDGET FIREWALLS
Sec. 701. Restoration of budget firewalls for defense spending.
TITLE I--FINDINGS, POLICY, AND PURPOSES
SEC. 101. FINDINGS.
The Congress finds the following:
(1) Dramatic changes in the geo-political and military
landscape during the last decade have had significant impacts
on United States security.
(2) Those changes include the breakup of the Warsaw Pact
alliance, the disintegration of the Soviet Union, and an
increase in regional instability and conflict.
(3) While the magnitude and implications of these and other
changes continues to evolve, the world remains an unstable and
dangerous place. This uncertainty mandates the need for an on-
going process to establish an appropriate national security
strategy and the forces needed to implement that strategy.
(4) The centerpiece of the defense strategy of the
Administration, the review of the Department of Defense
conducted by the Secretary of Defense in 1993 known as the
``Bottom Up Review'', determined that United States forces must
be--
(A) prepared to fight and win two nearly simultaneous
Major Regional Conflicts;
(B) able to sustain robust overseas presence in
peacetime;
(C) prepared for a variety of regional contingencies;
and
(D) able to deter and prevent attacks with weapons of
mass destruction against United States territory and
forces and the territory and forces of our allies.
(5) The Bottom Up Review also recommended significant
reductions in military forces, including reduction in the
number of Navy ships by one-third, the number of Air Force
wings by almost one-half, and the level of funding for missile
defenses by over 50 percent.
(6) The General Accounting Office and the Congressional
Budget Office have estimated that the mismatch between even the
restrictive Bottom Up Review force and the Administration
defense budget may be up to anywhere from $65,000,000,000 to
$150,000,000,000.
(7) Since January 1993, presidential budgets and budget plans
have set forth a reduction in defense spending of
$156,000,000,000 through fiscal year 1999.
(8) The fiscal year 1995 budget is the 10th consecutive year
of reductions in real defense spending and, with the exception
of fiscal year 1948, represents the lowest percentage of gross
domestic product for any defense budget since World War II.
(9) During fiscal year 1995, the number of active duty,
reserve component, and civilian personnel of the Department of
Defense will be reduced by 182,000, a rate of over 15,000 per
month or over 500 per day. The Bureau of Labor Statistics
estimates that 1,200,000 defense-related private sector jobs
will be lost by 1997.
(10) Despite severe reductions and shortfalls in defense
funding and force structure, since 1993 United States military
forces have been deployed more often and committed to more
peacetime missions per year than ever before. Most of these
missions involve United Nations peacekeeping and humanitarian
efforts. At the end of fiscal year 1994, over 70,000 United
States personnel were serving in such regions as Iraq, Bosnia,
Macedonia, the Adriatic Sea, Rwanda, and the Caribbean Sea for
missions involving Haiti and Cuba.
(11) Despite the dramatic increase in the pace of operations
and the diversion of training and exercise funds to cover the
costs of unbudgeted contingency operations, the Armed Forces of
the United States remain the most capable, motivated, and
effective military force in the world. The ability to
successfully deploy and maintain support for the range of on-
going contingency operations demonstrates the continued quality
and professionalism of our troops.
(12) However, persistent indictations of declining readiness
demonstrate that military units are entering the early stage of
a long-term systemic readiness problem. This downward readiness
trend risks a return to the ``hollow forces'' of the 1970s.
(13) At the end of fiscal year 1994, one-third of the units
in the Army contingency force and all of the forward-deployed
and follow-on Army divisions were reporting a reduced state of
military readiness. During fiscal year 1994, training readiness
declined for the Navy's Atlantic and Pacific fleets. Training
funding shortfalls also resulted in a grounding of Navy and
Marine Corps aircraft squadrons and cancellation and
curtailment of Army training exercises. Marine and naval
personnel are not maintaining the standard 12- to 18-month
respite between six-month deployments away from home.
(14) The significant increase in deployments in support of
peacekeeping, humanitarian, and contingency operations has
placed great personnel tempo stress on many critical
operational units.
(15) A real commitment to equitable compensation and
protection of quality-of-life programs for servicemembers and
their families is an esssential component to ensuring high
personnel morale and sustaining force readiness. However, as of
January 1, 1995, military pay is approximately 12.8 percent
below comparable civilian levels. As a result, it is estimated
that close to 17,000 junior enlisted personnel have to rely on
food stamps and the Department of Defense will soon begin
providing supplementary food benefits to an estimated 11,000
military personnel and dependents living overseas.
(16) Critical long-term modernization programs continue to be
delayed or cancelled as resources are diverted to cover short-
term personnel and readiness shortfalls resulting from an
underfunded defense budget and an overextended force,
threatening the technological superiority of future United
States forces.
(17) The fiscal year 1995 defense budget failed to meet the
current force structure goal of 184 modern long-range bombers,
as established in the Bottom-Up Review. Unless this long-range
bomber capability shortfall is addressed promptly, the Nation's
ability to project force will be undermined and the existing
bomber industrial base may be placed at risk.
(18) The Administration has initially agreed to or proposed
treaty limitations, or has unilaterally adopted positions, that
prohibit the United States from testing or deploying effective
missile defense systems.
(19) United Nations assessments to the United States for
peacekeeping missions totaled over $1,000,000,000 in 1994. The
United States is assessed 31.7 percent of annual United Nations
costs for peacekeeping and other United Nations missions. The
next highest contributor, Japan, only pays 12.5 percent of such
costs. The Department of Defense also incurs hundreds of
millions of dollars in costs every year for United States
military participation in United Nations peacekeeping or
humanitarian missions, most of which are not reimbursed by the
United Nations. For fiscal year 1994, these Department of
Defense costs totaled over $1,721,000,000.
SEC. 102. POLICY.
The Congress is committed to providing adequate resources to protect
the national security interests of the United States, including the
resources necessary--
(1) to provide for sufficient forces to meet the national
security strategy of being able to fight and win two nearly
simultaneously major regional conflicts;
(2) to provide pay and benefits necessary for members of the
Armed Forces (including members of the National Guard and
Reserve as well as active duty members) to begin closing the
gap between rates of civilian pay and rates of military pay;
(3) to maintain a high quality-of-life for military personnel
and their dependents;
(4) to maintain a high level of military readiness and take
all necessary steps to avoid a return to the ``hollow forces''
of the 1970s;
(5) to fully provide for the necessary modernization of
United States military forces in order to ensure their
technological superiority over any adversary; and
(6) to develop and deploy at the earliest practical date
highly effective national and theater missile defense systems.
SEC. 103. PURPOSES.
The purposes of this Act are--
(1) to establish an advisory commission to assess United
States military needs and address the problems posed by the
continuing downward spiral of defense spending;
(2) to commit the United States to accelerate the development
and deployment of theater and national ballistic missile
defense capabilities;
(3) to restrict deployment of United States forces to
missions that are in the national security interest of the
United States;
(4) to maintain adequate command and control by United States
personnel of United States forces participating in United
Nations peacekeeping operations;
(5) to reduce the cost to the United States of United Nations
peacekeeping activities and to press for reforms in the United
Nations management practices; and
(6) to reemphasize the commitment of the United States to a
strong and viable North Atlantic Treaty Organization.
TITLE II--MISSILE DEFENSE
SEC. 201. POLICY.
It shall be the policy of the United States to--
(1) deploy at the earliest practical date an antiballistic
missile system that is capable of providing a highly effective
defense of the United States against ballistic missile attacks;
and
(2) provide at the earliest practical date highly effective
theater missile defenses (TMDs) to forward-deployed and
expeditionary elements of the Armed Forces of the United States
and to friendly forces and allies of the United States.
SEC. 202. ACTIONS OF THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE.
(a) ABM Systems.--The Secretary of Defense shall develop for
deployment at the earliest practical date a cost-effective,
operationally effective antiballistic missile system designed to
protect the United States against ballistic missile attacks.
(b) Advanced Theater Missile Defenses.--The Secretary of Defense
shall develop for deployment at the earliest practical date advanced
theater missile defense systems.
SEC. 203. REPORT TO CONGRESS.
(a) Requirement.--Not later than 60 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the
congressional defense committees a plan for the deployment of an
antiballistic missile system pursuant to section 202(a) and for the
deployment of theater missile defense systems pursuant to section
202(b).
(b) Congressional Defense Committees.--For purposes of this section,
the term ``congressional defense committees'' means--
(1) the Committee on National Security and the Committee on
Appropriations of the House of Representatives; and
(2) the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on
Appropriations of the Senate.
TITLE III--ADVISORY COMMISSION ON REVITALIZATION OF NATIONAL SECURITY
SEC. 301. ESTABLISHMENT.
There is hereby established an advisory commission to be known as the
``Revitalization of National Security Commission'' (hereinafter in this
title referred to as the ``Commission'').
SEC. 302. COMPOSITION.
(a) Appointment.--The Commission shall be composed of 12 members,
appointed as follows:
(1) Four members shall be appointed by the President.
(2) Four members shall be appointed by the Speaker of the
House of Representatives, one of whom shall be appointed upon
the recommendation of the minority leader of the House of
Representatives.
(3) Four members shall be appointed by the president pro
tempore of the Senate, three of whom shall be appointed upon
the recommendation of the majority leader of the Senate and one
of whom shall be appointed upon the recommendation of the
minority leader of the Senate.
(b) Qualifications.--The members of the Commission shall be appointed
from among persons having knowledge and experience in defense and
foreign policy.
(c) Term of Members; Vacancies.--Members of the Commission shall be
appointed for the life of the Commission. A vacancy on the Commission
shall not affect its powers, but shall be filled in the same manner as
the original appointment was made.
(d) Commencement.--The members of the Commission shall be appointed
not later than 21 days after the date of the enactment of this Act. The
Commission shall convene its first meeting to carry out its duties
under this section 14 days after seven members of the Commission have
been appointed.
(e) Chairman.--The chairman of the Commission shall be designated
jointly by the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the majority
leader of the Senate (after consultation with the minority leader of
the House of Representatives and the minority leader of the Senate)
from among members of the Commission appointed under subsection (a)(2)
or (a)(3).
SEC. 303. DUTIES.
(a) Comprehensive Review.--The Commission shall conduct a
comprehensive review of the long-term national security needs of the
United States. The review shall include the following:
(1) An assessment of the need for a new national security
strategy and, if it is determined that such a new strategy is
needed, identification of such a strategy.
(2) An assessment of the need for a new national military
strategy and, if it is determined that such a new strategy is
needed, identification of such a strategy.
(3) An assessment of the military force structure necessary
to support the new strategies identified under paragraphs (1)
and (2).
(4) An assessment of force modernization requirements
necessary to support the new strategies identified under
paragraphs (1) and (2).
(5) An assessment of military infrastructure requirements
necessary to support the new strategies identified under
paragraphs (1) and (2).
(6) An assessment of the funding needs of the Department of
Defense necessary to support the long-term national security
requirements of the United States.
(7) An assessment of the adequacy of the force structure
recommended in the 1993 Bottom-Up Review in executing the
national military strategy.
(8) An assessment of the adequacy of the current future-years
defense plan in fully funding the Bottom-Up Review force
structure while maintaining adequate force modernization and
military readiness objectives.
(9) An assessment of the level of defense funds expended on
non-defense programs.
(10) An assessment of the costs to the United States of
expanding the membership of the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization.
(11) An assessment of the elements of military pay and
allowances constituting the regular military compensation of
members of the Armed Forces and the development of
recommendations for changes in those elements in order to end
the dependence of some members of the Armed Forces and their
families on Federal and local assistance programs.
(12) An assessment of the need to revise the command and
control structure of the Army Reserve.
(b) Matters To Be Considered.--In carrying out the review, the
Commission shall develop specific recommendations to accomplish each of
the following:
(1) Provide members of the Armed Forces with annual pay
raises and other compensation at levels sufficient to begin
closing the gap with comparable civilian pay levels.
(2) Fully fund cost-effective missile defense systems that
are deployable at the earliest practical date following
enactment of this Act.
(3) Maintain adequate funding for military readiness accounts
without sacrificing modernization programs.
(4) Define policies for committing troops to peacekeeping,
peacemaking, peace-enforcing, or humanitarian missions.
(5) Maintain a strong role for Guard and Reserve forces.
(6) Provide a new funding system to avoid diversions from
military readiness accounts to pay for peacekeeping and
humanitarian deployments such as Haiti and Rwanda.
(7) Support measures to enhance security in the Asia-Pacific
region, including security for the ASEAN Regional Forum member
nations.
(8) Reduce the level of defense expenditures for non-defense
programs.
SEC. 304. REPORTS.
(a) Final Report.--The Commission shall submit to the President and
the designated congressional committees a report on the assessments and
recommendations referred to in section 303 not later than January 1,
1996. The report shall be submitted in unclassified and classified
versions.
(b) Interim Report.--The Commission shall submit to the President and
the designated congressional committees an interim report describing
the Commission's progress in fulfilling its duties under section 303.
The interim report shall include any preliminary recommendations the
Commission may have reached and shall be submitted not later than
October 1, 1995.
(c) Designated Congressional Committees.--For purposes of this
section, the term ``designated congressional committees'' means--
(1) the Committee on National Security, the Committee on
International Relations, and the Committee on Appropriations of
the House of Representatives; and
(2) the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on Foreign
Relations, and the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate.
(d) Limitation Pending Submission of Interim Report.--The Secretary
of the Army may not, during the period beginning on the date of the
enactment of this Act and ending on the date on which the interim
report under subsection (b) is submitted, take any action to implement
the plan to reorganize the Army Reserve's continental United States
headquarters structures that was announced by the Secretary on January
4, 1995.
SEC. 305. POWERS.
(a) Hearings.--The Commission may, for the purpose of carrying out
this section, conduct such hearings, sit and act at such times, take
such testimony, and receive such evidence, as the Commission considers
appropriate.
(b) Assistance From Other Agencies.--The Commission may secure
directly from any department or agency of the Federal Government such
information, relevant to its duties under this title, as may be
necessary to carry out such duties. Upon request of the chairman of the
Commission, the head of the department or agency shall, to the extent
permitted by law, furnish such information to the Commission.
(c) Mail.--The Commission may use the United States mails in the same
manner and under the same conditions as the departments and agencies of
the Federal Government.
(d) Assistance From Secretary of Defense.--The Secretary of Defense
shall provide to the Commission such reasonable administrative and
support services as the Commission may request.
SEC. 306. COMMISSION PROCEDURES.
(a) Meetings.--The Commission shall meet on a regular basis (as
determined by the chairman) and at the call of the chairman or a
majority of its members.
(b) Quorum.--A majority of the members of the Commission shall
constitute a quorum for the transaction of business.
SEC. 307. PERSONNEL MATTERS.
(a) Compensation.--Each member of the Commission shall serve without
compensation, but shall be allowed travel expenses including per diem
in lieu of subsistence, as authorized by section 5703 of title 5,
United States Code, when engaged in the performance of Commission
duties.
(b) Staff.--The Commission shall appoint a staff director, who shall
be paid at a rate not to exceed the maximum rate of basic pay under
section 5376 of title 5, United States Code, and such professional and
clerical personnel as may be reasonable and necessary to enable the
Commission to carry out its duties under this title without regard to
the provisions of title 5, United States Code, governing appointments
in the competitive service, and without regard to the provisions of
chapter 51 and subchapter III of chapter 53 of such title, or any other
provision of law, relating to the number, classification, and General
Schedule rates. No employee appointed under this subsection (other than
the staff director) may be compensated at a rate to exceed the maximum
rate applicable to level 15 of the General Schedule.
(c) Detailed Personnel.--Upon request of the chairman of the
Commission, the head of any department or agency of the Federal
Government is authorized to detail, without reimbursement, any
personnel of such department or agency to the Commission to assist the
Commission in carrying out its duties under this section. The detail of
any such personnel may not result in the interruption or loss of civil
service status or privilege of such personnel.
SEC. 308. TERMINATION OF THE COMMISSION.
The Commission shall terminate upon submission of the final report
required by section 303.
SEC. 309. FUNDING.
Of the funds available to the Department of Defense, $1,500,000 shall
be made available to the Commission to carry out the provisions of this
title.
TITLE IV--COMMAND OF UNITED STATES FORCES
SEC. 401. LIMITATION ON EXPENDITURE OF DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE FUNDS FOR
UNITED STATES FORCES PLACED UNDER UNITED NATIONS
COMMAND OR CONTROL.
(a) In General.--(1) Chapter 20 of title 10, United States Code, is
amended by inserting after section 404 the following new section:
``Sec. 405. Placement of United States forces under United Nations
command or control: limitation
``(a) Limitation.--(1) Except as provided in subsections (b) and (c),
funds appropriated or otherwise made available for the Department of
Defense may not be obligated or expended for activities of any element
of the armed forces that after the date of the enactment of this
section is placed under United Nations command or control.
``(2) In this section, the term `under United Nations command or
control' means under the command or operational control of an
individual acting on behalf of the United Nations for the purpose of
international peacekeeping, peacemaking, peace-enforcing, or similar
activity that is authorized by the Security Council under chapter VI or
VII of the Charter of the United Nations if the senior military
commander of the United Nations force or operation--
``(A) is a foreign national or is a citizen of the United
States who is not a United States military officer serving on
active duty; or
``(B) is a United States military officer serving on active
duty in a case in which--
``(i) elements of the armed forces of the United
States assigned or detailed to that force or operation
are under the command or operational control of a
foreign national; and
``(ii) that senior military commander does not have
the authority to dismiss any subordinate officer in the
chain of command (regardless of nationality) who is
exercising command or operational control over United
States forces, to establish rules of engagement for
United States forces involved, and to establish
criteria governing the operational employment of United
States forces involved.
``(b) Exception for Presidential Certification.--(1) Subsection (a)
shall not apply in the case of a proposed placement of any element of
the armed forces under United Nations command or control if the
President, not less than 15 days before the date on which such United
Nations command or control is to become effective (or as provided in
paragraph (2)), meets the requirements of subsection (d).
``(2) If the President certifies to Congress that an emergency exists
that precludes the President from meeting the requirements of
subsection (d) 15 days before placing any element of the armed forces
under United Nations command or control, the President may place such
forces under such command or control and meet the requirements of
subsection (d) in a timely manner, but in no event later than 48 hours
after such command or control becomes effective.
``(c) Exception for Authorization by Law.--Subsection (a) shall not
apply in the case of a proposed placement of any element of the armed
forces under United Nations command or control if the Congress
specifically authorizes by law that particular placement of United
States forces under United Nations command or control.
``(d) Presidential Certifications.--The requirements referred to in
subsection (b)(1) are that the President submit to Congress the
following:
``(1) Certification by the President that--
``(A) such a United Nations command or control
arrangement is necessary to protect national security
interests of the United States;
``(B) the commander of any unit of the armed forces
proposed for placement under United Nations command or
control will at all times retain the right--
``(i) to report independently to superior
United States military authorities; and
``(ii) to decline to comply with orders
judged by the commander to be illegal,
militarily imprudent, or beyond the mandate of
the mission to which the United States agreed
with the United Nations, until such time as
that commander receives direction from superior
United States military authorities with respect
to the orders that the commander has declined
to comply with;
``(C) any element of the armed forces proposed for
placement under United Nations command or control will
at all times remain under United States administrative
command for such purposes as discipline and evaluation;
and
``(D) the United States will retain the authority to
withdraw any element of the armed forces from the
proposed operation at any time and to take any action
it considers necessary to protect those forces if they
are engaged.
``(2) A report setting forth the following:
``(A) A description of the national security
interests that require the placement of United States
forces under United Nations command or control.
``(B) The mission of the United States forces
involved.
``(C) The expected size and composition of the United
States forces involved.
``(D) The incremental cost to the United States of
participation in the United Nations operation by the
United States forces which are proposed to be placed
under United Nations command or control.
``(E) The precise command and control relationship
between the United States forces involved and the
United Nations command structure.
``(F) The precise command and control relationship
between the United States forces involved and the
commander of the United States unified command for the
region in which those United States forces are to
operate.
``(G) The extent to which the United States forces
involved will rely on non-United States forces for
security and self-defense and an assessment on the
ability of those non-United States forces to provide
adequate security to the United States forces involved.
``(H) The timetable for complete withdrawal of the
United States forces involved.
``(e) Classification of Report.--A report under subsection (c) shall
be submitted in unclassified form and, if necessary, in classified
form.
``(f) Exception for Small Forces.--This section does not apply in a
case in which fewer than 50 members of the armed forces are
participating in a particular United Nations operation or activity.
``(g) Interpretation.--Nothing in this section may be construed--
``(1) as authority for the President to use any element of
the armed forces in any operation; or
``(2) as authority for the President to place any element of
the armed forces under the command or operational control of a
foreign national.''.
(2) The table of sections at the beginning of subchapter I of such
chapter is amended by adding at the end the following new item:
``405. Placement of United States forces under United Nations command
or control: limitation.''.
(b) Report Relating to Constitutionality.--No certification may be
submitted by the President under section 405(d)(1) of title 10, United
States Code, as added by subsection (a), until the President has
submitted to the Congress (after the date of the enactment of this Act)
a memorandum of legal points and authorities explaining why the
placement of elements of United States Armed Forces under the command
or operational control of a foreign national acting on behalf of the
United Nations does not violate the Constitution.
(c) Exception for Ongoing Operations in Macedonia and Croatia.--
Section 405 of title 10, United States Code, as added by subsection
(a), does not apply in the case of activities of the Armed Forces in
Macedonia authorized pursuant to United Nations Security Council
Resolution 795, adopted December 11, 1992, and subsequent
reauthorization Resolutions, and in the case of activities of the Armed
Forces in Croatia authorized pursuant to United Nations Security
Council Resolution 743, adopted February 21, 1992, and subsequent
reauthorization Resolutions, as part of the United Nations force
designated as the United Nations Protection Force (UNPROFOR).
SEC. 402. LIMITATION ON PLACEMENT OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES UNDER
FOREIGN CONTROL FOR A UNITED NATIONS PEACEKEEPING
ACTIVITY.
(a) In General.--Section 6 of the United Nations Participation Act of
1945 (22 U.S.C. 287d) is amended to read as follows:
``Sec. 6. (a) Agreements With Security Council.--(1) Any special
agreement described in paragraph (2) that is concluded by the President
with the Security Council shall not be effective unless approved by the
Congress by law.
``(2) An agreement referred to in paragraph (1) is an agreement
providing for the numbers and types of United States Armed Forces,
their degree of readiness and general locations, or the nature of
facilities and assistance, including rights of passage, to be made
available to the Security Council for the purpose of maintaining
international peace and security in accordance with Article 43 of the
Charter of the United Nations.
``(b) Limitation.--(1) Except as provided in subsections (c) and (d),
the President may not place any element of the Armed Forces under the
command or operational control of a foreign national acting on behalf
of the United Nations for the purpose of international peacekeeping,
peacemaking, peace-enforcing, or similar activity that is authorized by
the Secretary Council under chapter VI or VII of the Charter of the
United Nations.
``(2) For purposes of this section, elements of the Armed Forces
shall be considered to be placed under the command or operational
control of a foreign national acting on behalf of the United Nations
only in a case in which the senior military commander of the United
Nations force or operation is a foreign national.
``(c) Exception for Presidential Certification.--(1) Subsection (b)
shall not apply in the case of a proposed placement of any element of
the Armed Forces under such command or operational control if the
President, not less than 15 days before the date on which such command
or operational control is to become effective (or as provided in
paragraph (2)), meets the requirements of subsection (e).
``(2) If the President certifies to Congress that an emergency exists
that precludes the President from meeting the requirements of
subsection (e) 15 days before placing any element of the Armed Forces
under such command or operational control, the President may place such
forces under such command or operational control and meet the
requirements of subsection (e) in a timely manner, but in no event
later than 48 hours after such command or operational control becomes
effective.
``(d) Exception for Authorization by Law.--Subsection (b) shall not
apply in the case of a proposed placement of any element of the Armed
Forces under such command or operational control if the Congress
specifically authorizes by law that particular placement of United
States forces under such command or operational control.
``(e) Presidential Certifications.--The requirements referred to in
subsection (c)(1) are that the President submit to Congress the
following:
``(1) Certification by the President that--
``(A) such a command or operational control
arrangement is necessary to protect national security
interests of the United States;
``(B) the commander of any unit of the Armed Forces
proposed for placement under the command or operational
control of a foreign national acting directly on behalf
of the United Nations will at all times retain the
right--
``(i) to report independently to superior
United States military authorities; and
``(ii) to decline to comply with orders
judged by the commander to be illegal,
militarily imprudent, or beyond the mandate of
the mission to which the United States agreed
with the United Nations, until such time as
that commander receives direction from superior
United States military authorities with respect
to the orders that the commander has declined
to comply with;
``(C) any element of the Armed Forces proposed for
placement under the command or operational control of a
foreign national acting directly on behalf of the
United Nations will at all times remain under United
States administrative command for such purposes as
discipline and evaluation; and
``(D) the United States will retain the authority to
withdraw any element of the Armed Forces from the
proposed operation at any time and to take any action
it considers necessary to protect those forces if they
are engaged.
``(2) A report setting forth the following:
``(A) A description of the national security
interests that require the placement of United States
forces under the command or operational control of a
foreign national acting directly on behalf of the
United Nations.
``(B) The mission of the United States forces
involved.
``(C) The expected size and composition of the United
States forces involved.
``(D) The incremental cost to the United States of
participation in the United Nations operation by the
United States forces which are proposed to be placed
under the command or operational control of a foreign
national.
``(E) The precise command and control relationship
between the United States forces involved and the
United Nations command structure.
``(F) The precise command and control relationship
between the United States forces involved and the
commander of the United States unified command for the
region in which those United States forces are to
operate.
``(G) The extent to which the United States forces
involved will rely on non-United States forces for
security and self-defense and an assessment on the
ability of those non-United States forces to provide
adequate security to the United States forces involved.
``(H) The timetable for complete withdrawal of the
United States forces involved.
``(f) Classification of Report.--A report under subsection (e) shall
be submitted in unclassified form and, if necessary, in classified
form.
``(g) Exception for Small Forces.--This section does not apply in a
case in which fewer than 50 members of the Armed Forces are
participating in a particular United Nations operation or activity.
``(h) Interpretation.--Except as authorized in section 7 of this Act,
nothing contained in this Act shall be construed as an authorization to
the President by the Congress to make available to the Security Council
United States Armed Forces, facilities, or assistance.''.
(b) Report Relating to Constitutionality.--No certification may be
submitted by the President under section 6(e)(1) of the United Nations
Participation Act of 1945, as amended by subsection (a), until the
President has submitted to the Congress (after the date of the
enactment of this Act) a memorandum of legal points and authorities
explaining why the placement of elements of United States Armed Forces
under the command or operational control of a foreign national acting
on behalf of the United Nations does not violate the Constitution.
(c) Exception for Ongoing Operation in Macedonia.--Section 6 of the
United Nations Participation Act of 1945, as amended by subsection (a),
does not apply in the case of activities of the Armed Forces in
Macedonia pursuant to United Nations Security Council Resolutions 795,
adopted December 11, 1992, and 842, adopted June 18, 1993, as part of
the United Nations force designated as the United Nations Protection
Force (UNPROFOR).
TITLE V--UNITED NATIONS
SEC. 501. CREDIT AGAINST ASSESSMENT FOR UNITED STATES EXPENDITURES IN
SUPPORT OF UNITED NATIONS PEACEKEEPING OPERATIONS.
(a) In General.--The United Nations Participation Act of 1945 (22
U.S.C. 287 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following new
section:
``Sec. 10. (a) Credit Against Assessment for Expenditures in Support
of Peacekeeping Operations.--
``(1) Limitation.--Funds may be obligated for payment to the
United Nations of the United States assessed share of
peacekeeping operations for a fiscal year only to the extent
that--
``(A) the amount of such assessed share exceeds--
``(B) the amount equal to--
``(i) the total amount identified in the
report submitted pursuant to paragraph (2) for
the preceding fiscal year, reduced by
``(ii) the amount of any reimbursement or
credit to the United States by the United
Nations for the costs of United States support
for, or participation in, United Nations
peacekeeping activities for that preceding
fiscal year.
``(2) Annual report.--The President shall, at the time of
submission of the budget to the Congress for any fiscal year,
submit to the designated congressional committees a report on
the total amount of funds appropriated for national defense
purposes for any fiscal year that were expended during the
preceding fiscal year to support or participate in, directly or
indirectly, United Nations peacekeeping activities. Such report
shall include a separate listing by United Nations peacekeeping
operation of the amount of funds expended to support or
participate in each such operation.
``(3) Definitions.--For purposes of this subsection:
``(A) United nations peacekeeping activities.--The
term `United Nations peacekeeping activities' means any
international peacekeeping, peacemaking, peace-
enforcing, or similar activity that is authorized by
the United Nations Security Council under chapter VI or
VII of the Charter of the United Nations.
``(B) Designated congressional committees.--The term
`designated congressional committees' includes the
Committee on National Security of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Armed Services of
the Senate.''.
(b) Effective Date.--The limitation contained in section 10(a)(1) of
the United Nations Participation Act of 1945, as added by subsection
(a), shall apply only with respect to United Nations assessments for
peacekeeping operations after fiscal year 1995.
SEC. 502. CODIFICATION OF REQUIRED NOTICE TO CONGRESS OF PROPOSED
UNITED NATIONS PEACEKEEPING ACTIVITIES.
(a) Required Notice.--Section 4 of the United Nations Participation
Act of 1945 (22 U.S.C. 287b) is amended--
(1) by striking the second sentence of subsection (a);
(2) by redesignating subsection (e) as subsection (f); and
(3) by inserting after subsection (d) a new subsection (e)
consisting of the text of subsection (a) of section 407 of the
Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 1994 and 1995
(Public Law 103-236), revised--
(A) in paragraph (2)--
(i) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A),
by inserting ``in written form not later than
the 10th day of'' after ``shall be provided'';
(ii) in subparagraph (A)(iv), by inserting
``(including facilities, training,
transportation, communication, intelligence,
and logistical support)'' after ``covered by
the resolution''; and
(iii) in subparagraph (B), by adding at the
end the following new clause:
``(iv) A description of any other United
States assistance to or support for the
operation (including facilities, training,
transportation, communication, intelligence,
and logistical support), and an estimate of the
cost to the United States of such assistance or
support.'';
(B) by striking paragraph (3);
(C) by redesignating paragraph (4) as paragraph (3)
and in the last sentence of that paragraph by striking
``and (ii)'' and inserting ``through (iv)'';
(D) by inserting after paragraph (3) (as so
redesignated) the following new paragraph:
``(4) New united nations peacekeeping operation defined.--As
used in paragraphs (2) (B) and (3), the term `new United
Nations peacekeeping operation' includes any existing or
otherwise ongoing United Nations peacekeeping operation--
``(A) that is to be expanded by more than 25 percent
during the period covered by the Security Council
resolution, as measured by either the number of
personnel participating (or authorized to participate)
in the operation or the budget of the operation; or
``(B) that is to be authorized to operate in a
country in which it was not previously authorized to
operate.''; and
(E) in paragraph (5)--
(i) by striking ``(5) Notification'' and all
that follows through ``(B) The President'' and
inserting ``(5) Quarterly reports.--The
President''; and
(ii) by striking ``section 4(d)'' and all
that follows through ``of this section)'' and
inserting ``subsection (d)''.
(b) Conforming Repeal.--Subsection (a) of section 407 of the Foreign
Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 1994 and 1995 (Public Law
103-236), is repealed.
(c) Designated Congressional Committees.--Subsection (f) of section 4
of the United Nations Participation Act of 1945 (22 U.S.C. 287b(f)), as
redesignated by subsection (a), is amended to read as follows:
``(f) Designated Congressional Committees.--As used in this section,
the term ``designated congressional committees'' has the meaning given
such term in section 10(f).''.
SEC. 503. NOTICE TO CONGRESS REGARDING UNITED STATES CONTRIBUTIONS FOR
UNITED NATIONS PEACEKEEPING ACTIVITIES.
Section 10 of the United Nations Participation Act of 1945 is amended
by adding after subsection (a), as added by section 501, the following
new subsection:
``(b) Notice to Congress Regarding Contributions for Peacekeeping
Activities.--
``(1) Notice regarding united nations billing request.--Not
later than 15 days after the date on which the United States
receives from the United Nations a billing requesting a payment
by the United States of any contribution for United Nations
peacekeeping activities, the President shall so notify the
designated congressional committees.
``(2) Notice regarding proposed obligation of funds.--The
President shall notify the designated congressional committees
at least 15 days before the United States obligates funds for
any assessed or voluntary contribution for United Nations
peacekeeping activities, except that if the President
determines that an emergency exists which prevents compliance
with the requirement that such notification be provided 15 days
in advance and that such contribution is in the national
security interests of the United States, such notification
shall be provided in a timely manner but no later than 48 hours
after such obligation.''.
SEC. 504. REVISED NOTICE TO CONGRESS REGARDING UNITED STATES ASSISTANCE
FOR UNITED NATIONS PEACEKEEPING ACTIVITIES.
Section 7 of the United Nations Participation Act of 1945 (22 U.S.C.
287d-1) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a), by inserting ``other than subsection
(e)(1)'' after ``any other law''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(e)(1) Except as provided in paragraphs (2) and (3), at least 15
days before any agency or entity of the United States Government makes
available to the United Nations any assistance or facility to support
or facilitate United Nations peacekeeping activities, the President
shall so notify the designated congressional committees.
``(2) Paragraph (1) does not apply to--
``(A) assistance having a value of less than $1,000,000 in
the case of nonreimbursable assistance or less than $5,000,000
in the case of reimbursable assistance; or
``(B) assistance provided under the emergency drawdown
authority contained in sections 506(a)(1) and 552(c)(2) of the
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2318(a)(1),
2348a(c)(2)).
``(3) If the President determines that an emergency exists which
prevents compliance with the requirement in paragraph (1) that
notification be provided 15 days in advance and that the contribution
of any such assistance or facility is in the national security
interests of the United States, such notification shall be provided in
a timely manner but not later than 48 hours after such assistance or
facility is made available to the United Nations.
``(4) For purposes of this subsection, the term `assistance'--
``(A) means assistance of any kind, including logistical
support, supplies, goods, or services (including command,
control, communications or intelligence assistance and
training), and the grant of rights of passage; and
``(B) includes assistance provided through in-kind
contributions or through the provision of support, supplies,
goods, or services on any terms, including on a grant, lease,
loan, or reimbursable basis; but
``(C) does not include the payment of assessed or voluntary
contributions.''.
SEC. 505. UNITED STATES CONTRIBUTIONS TO UNITED NATIONS PEACEKEEPING
ACTIVITIES.
Section 4(d)(1) of the United Nations Participation Act of 1945 (22
U.S.C. 287b(d)(1)) is amended--
(1) by redesignating subparagraph (D) as subparagraph (E);
and
(2) by inserting after subparagraph (C) the following new
subparagraph:
``(D) A description of the anticipated budget for the
next fiscal year for United States participation in
United Nations peacekeeping activities, including a
statement of--
``(i) the aggregate amount of funds available
to the United Nations for that fiscal year,
including assessed and voluntary contributions,
which may be made available for United Nations
peacekeeping activities; and
``(ii) the aggregate amount of funds (from
all accounts) and the aggregate costs of in-
kind contributions that the United States
proposes to make available to the United
Nations for that fiscal year for United Nations
peacekeeping activities.''.
SEC. 506. REIMBURSEMENT TO THE UNITED STATES FOR IN-KIND CONTRIBUTIONS
TO UNITED NATIONS PEACEKEEPING ACTIVITIES.
(a) In General.--Section 7 of the United Nations Participation Act of
1945 (22 U.S.C. 287d-1), as amended by section 504, is further
amended--
(1) in subsection (b)--
(A) by inserting ``(1)'' after ``(b)'';
(B) by striking ``United States: Provided,'' through
``Provided further, That when'' and inserting ``United
States. When''; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
``(2) The Secretary of Defense may waive the requirement for
reimbursement under paragraph (1) if the Secretary, after consultation
with the Secretary of State and the Director of the Office of
Management and Budget, determines that an emergency exists which
justifies waiver of that requirement. Any such waiver shall be
submitted to the designated congressional committees, as defined in
section 10(a)(3)(B), at least 15 days before it takes effect, except
that if the President determines that an emergency exists which
prevents compliance with the requirement that the notification be
provided 15 days in advance and that the provision under subsection
(a)(1) or (a)(2) of personnel or assistance on a nonreimbursable basis
is in the national security interests of the United States, such
notification shall be provided in a timely manner but no later than 48
hours after such waiver takes effect.''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(f) The Secretary of State shall ensure that goods and services
provided on a reimbursable basis by the Department of Defense to the
United Nations for United Nations peacekeeping operations under this
section or any other provision of law are reimbursed at the appropriate
value, as determined by the Secretary of Defense.''.
(b) Initial Report.--
(1) In general.--Not later than one year after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Representative of the United
States to the United Nations shall submit to the designated
congressional committees a report on all actions taken by the
United States mission to the United Nations to achieve the
objective described in section 7(f) of the United Nations
Participation Act of 1945, as added by subsection (a)(2).
(2) Designated congressional committees defined.--As used in
this subsection, the term ``designated congressional
committees'' has the meaning given such term in section
10(a)(3)(B) of the United Nations Participation Act of 1945, as
added by section 501.
SEC. 507. PROHIBITION ON USE OF FUNDS TO PAY UNITED STATES ASSESSED OR
VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTION FOR UNITED NATIONS
PEACEKEEPING ACTIVITIES UNLESS DEPARTMENT OF
DEFENSE REIMBURSED BY UNITED NATIONS FOR CERTAIN
GOODS AND SERVICES.
(a) In General.--Section 10 of the United Nations Participation Act
of 1945 is amended by adding after subsection (b), as added by section
503, the following new subsection:
``(c) Prohibition on Use of Funds To Pay Assessed or Voluntary
Contributions for Peacekeeping Activities Unless Department of Defense
Reimbursed for Certain Goods and Services.--Appropriated funds may not
be used to pay any United States assessed or voluntary contribution
during any fiscal year for United Nations peacekeeping activities until
the Secretary of Defense certifies to the Congress that the United
Nations has reimbursed the Department of Defense directly for all goods
and services that were provided to the United Nations by the Department
of Defense on a reimbursable basis during the preceding fiscal year for
United Nations peacekeeping activities, including personnel and
assistance provided under section 7 (except to the extent that the
authority of subsection (b)(2) of such section to waive the
reimbursement requirement was exercised with respect to such personnel
or assistance).''.
(b) Effective Date.--The prohibition contained in section 10(c) of
the United Nations Participation Act of 1945, as added by subsection
(a), shall apply only with respect to fiscal years after fiscal year
1995.
SEC. 508. LIMITATION ON USE OF DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE FUNDS FOR UNITED
STATES SHARE OF COSTS OF UNITED NATIONS
PEACEKEEPING ACTIVITIES.
(a) In General.--(1) Chapter 20 of title 10, United States Code, is
amended by inserting after section 405, as added by section 401 of this
Act, the following new section:
``Sec. 406. Use of Department of Defense funds for United States share
of costs of United Nations peacekeeping activities:
limitation
``(a) Prohibition on Use of Funds for Payment of Assessments and
Voluntary Contributions.--(1) Funds available to the Department of
Defense may not be used to make a financial contribution (directly or
through another department or agency of the United States) to the
United Nations--
``(A) for the costs of a United Nations peacekeeping
activity; or
``(B) for any United States arrearage to the United Nations.
``(2) The prohibition in paragraph (1)(A) applies to voluntary
contributions, as well as to contributions pursuant to assessment by
the United Nations for the United States share of the costs of a
peacekeeping activity.
``(b) Limitation on Use of Funds for Participation in United Nations
Peacekeeping Activities.--Funds available to the Department of Defense
may be used for payment of the incremental costs associated with the
participation of elements of the armed forces in a United Nations
peacekeeping activity only to the extent that Congress has by law
specifically authorized the use of those funds for that purpose.
``(c) Covered Peacekeeping Activities.--In this section, the term
`United Nations peacekeeping activity' means a peacekeeping activity
carried out pursuant to a resolution of the United Nations Security
Council for which costs are met (in whole or in part) through
assessments by the United Nations to its member nations.''.
(2) The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter is amended
by adding at the end the following new item:
``406. Use of Department of Defense funds for United States share of
costs of United Nations peacekeeping activities: limitation.''.
(b) Effective Date.--Section 406 of title 10, United States Code, as
added by subsection (a), shall take effect on October 1, 1995.
SEC. 509. CODIFICATION OF LIMITATION ON AMOUNT OF UNITED STATES
ASSESSED CONTRIBUTIONS FOR UNITED NATIONS
PEACEKEEPING OPERATIONS.
(a) In General.--Section 10 of the United Nations Participation Act
of 1945 is amended by adding after subsection (c), as added by section
507, the following new subsection:
``(d) Limitation on Assessed Contribution With Respect to a
Peacekeeping Operation.--Funds authorized to be appropriated for
`Contributions for International Peacekeeping Activities' for any
fiscal year shall not be available for the payment of the United States
assessed contribution for a United Nations peacekeeping operation in an
amount which is greater than 25 percent of the total amount of all
assessed contributions for that operation.''.
(b) Effective Date.--The limitation contained in section 10(d) of the
United Nations Participation Act of 1945, as added by subsection (a),
shall apply only with respect to funds authorized to be appropriated
for ``Contributions for International Peacekeeping Activities'' for
fiscal years after fiscal year 1995.
(c) Conforming Amendment.--Section 404(b) of the Foreign Relations
Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 1994 and 1995 (Public Law 103-236) is
amended by striking paragraph (2).
SEC. 510. BUY AMERICAN REQUIREMENT.
Section 10 of the United Nations Participation Act of 1945 is amended
by adding after subsection (d), as added by section 509, the following
new subsections:
``(e) Buy American Requirement.--No funds may be obligated or
expended to pay any United States assessed or voluntary contribution
for United Nations peacekeeping activities unless the Secretary of
State determines and certifies to the designated congressional
committees that United States manufacturers and suppliers are being
given opportunities to provide equipment, services, and material for
such activities equal to those being given to foreign manufacturers and
suppliers.
``(f) Designated Congressional Committees Defined.--As used in this
section, the term `designated congressional committees' means--
``(1) the Committee on International Relations and the
Committee on Appropriations of the House of Representatives;
and
``(2) the Committee on Foreign Relations and the Committee on
Appropriations of the Senate.''.
SEC. 511. UNITED NATIONS BUDGETARY AND MANAGEMENT REFORM.
(a) In General.--The United Nations Participation Act of 1945 (22
U.S.C. 287 et seq.) is further amended by adding at the end the
following new section:
``Sec. 11. (a) Withholding of Contributions.--
``(1) Assessed contributions for regular united nations
budget.--At the beginning of each fiscal year, 20 percent of
the amount of funds made available for that fiscal year for
United States assessed contributions for the regular United
Nations budget shall be withheld from obligation and
expenditure unless a certification for that fiscal year has
been made under subsection (b).
``(2) Assessed contributions for united nations
peacekeeping.--At the beginning of each fiscal year, 50 percent
of the amount of funds made available for that fiscal year for
United States assessed contributions for United Nations
peacekeeping activities shall be withheld from obligation and
expenditure unless a certification for that fiscal year has
been made under subsection (b).
``(3) Voluntary contributions for united nations
peacekeeping.--The United States may not during any fiscal year
pay any voluntary contribution to the United Nations for
international peacekeeping activities unless a certification
for that fiscal year has been made under subsection (b).
``(b) Certification.--The certification referred to in subsection (a)
for any fiscal year is a certification by the President to the
Congress, submitted on or after the beginning of that fiscal year, of
each of the following:
``(1) The United Nations has an independent office of
Inspector General to conduct and supervise objective audits,
inspections, and investigations relating to programs and
operations of the United Nations.
``(2) The United Nations has an Inspector General who was
appointed by the Secretary General with the approval of the
General Assembly and whose appointment was made principally on
the basis of the appointee's integrity and demonstrated ability
in accounting, auditing, financial analysis, law, management
analysis, public administration, or investigation.
``(3) The Inspector General is authorized to--
``(A) make investigations and reports relating to the
administration of the programs and operations of the
United Nations;
``(B) have access to all records, documents, and
other available materials relating to those programs
and operations;
``(C) have direct and prompt access to any official
of the United Nations; and
``(D) have access to all records and officials of the
specialized agencies of the United Nations.
``(4) The United Nations has fully implemented, and made
available to all member states, procedures that effectively
protect the identity of, and prevent reprisals against, any
staff member of the United Nations making a complaint or
disclosing information to, or cooperating in any investigation
or inspection by, the United Nations Inspector General.
``(5) The United Nations has fully implemented procedures
that ensure compliance with recommendations of the United
Nations Inspector General.
``(6) The United Nations has required the United Nations
Inspector General to issue an annual report and has ensured
that the annual report and all other reports of the Inspector
General are made available to the General Assembly without
modification.
``(7) The United Nations has provided, and is committed to
providing, sufficient budgetary resources to ensure the
effective operation of the United Nations Inspector General.''.
(b) Effective Date.--Section 11 of the United Nations Participation
Act of 1945, as added by subsection (a), shall apply only with respect
to fiscal years after fiscal year 1995.
SEC. 512. CONDITIONS ON PROVISION OF INTELLIGENCE TO THE UNITED
NATIONS.
(a) In General.--The United Nations Participation Act of 1945 (22
U.S.C. 287 et seq.) is further amended by adding at the end the
following new section:
``Sec. 12. (a) Conditions on Provision of Intelligence to the United
Nations.--
``(1) Requirement for agreement.--The United States may
provide intelligence to the United Nations only pursuant to a
written agreement between the President and the Secretary
General of the United Nations.
``(2) Content of agreement.--Any such agreement shall
specify--
``(A) the types of intelligence to be provided to the
United Nations;
``(B) the circumstances under which intelligence may
be provided to the United Nations; and
``(C) the procedures to be observed by the United
Nations--
``(i) concerning persons who shall have
access to the intelligence provided; and
``(ii) to protect the intelligence against
disclosure not authorized by the agreement.
``(3) Duration of agreement.--Any such agreement shall be
effective for a period not to exceed one year from the date on
which the agreement enters into force.
``(b) Advance Notification to Congress.--An agreement described in
subsection (a) shall be effective only if the President has transmitted
the agreement to the Committee on International Relations and the
Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the House of
Representatives and to the Committee on Foreign Relations and the
Select Committee on Intelligence of the Senate not less than 30 days in
advance of the entry into force of the agreement.
``(c) Delegation of Authority.--The President may delegate the
authority and assign the duties of the President under this section
only to the Secretary of Defense or the Director of Central
Intelligence.
``(d) Exceptions.--Subsection (a) shall not apply to the provision of
intelligence--
``(1) that is provided only to, and for the use of, United
States Government personnel serving with the United Nations; or
``(2) that is essential for the protection of nationals of
the United States, including members of the United States Armed
Forces and civilian personnel of the United States Government.
``(e) Relationship to Existing Law.--Nothing in this section shall be
construed to--
``(1) impair or otherwise affect the authority of the
Director of Central Intelligence to protect intelligence
sources and methods from unauthorized disclosure pursuant to
section 103(c)(5) of the National Security Act of 1947 (50
U.S.C. 403-3(c)(5)); or
``(2) supersede or otherwise affect the provisions of--
``(A) title V of the National Security Act of 1947
(50 U.S.C. 413-415); or
``(B) section 112b of title 1, United States Code.''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall take
effect 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.
TITLE VI--REVITALIZATION AND EXPANSION OF THE NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY
ORGANIZATION
SEC. 601. SHORT TITLE.
This title may be cited as the ``NATO Revitalization and Expansion
Act of 1995''.
SEC. 602. FINDINGS.
The Congress makes the following findings:
(1) Since 1948, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)
has helped to guarantee the security, freedom, and prosperity
of the United States and its partners in the alliance.
(2) NATO has expanded its membership on three different
occasions since its founding in 1949.
(3) The steadfast and sustained commitment of the member
countries of NATO to mutual defense against the threat of
communist domination played a significant role in precipitating
the collapse of the Iron Curtain and the demise of the Soviet
Union.
(4) In the place of that threat, new security threats are
emerging to the shared interests of the member countries of
NATO.
(5) Although these new threats are more geographically and
functionally diverse and less predictable, they still imperil
shared interests of the United States and its NATO allies.
(6) Western interests must be protected on a cooperative
basis without an undue burden falling upon the United States.
(7) NATO is the only multilateral organization that is
capable of conducting effective military operations to protect
Western interests.
(8) The valuable experience gained from ongoing military
cooperation within NATO was critical to the success of joint
military operations in the 1991 liberation of Kuwait.
(9) NATO is an important diplomatic forum for discussion of
issues of concern to its member states and for the peaceful
resolution of disputes.
(10) Admission of Central and East European countries that
have recently been freed from Communist domination to NATO
could contribute to international peace and enhance the
security of those countries.
(11) A number of countries, including the Visegrad countries
(the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, and Slovakia), the Baltic
states (Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania), and Ukraine, have
expressed interest in NATO membership.
(12) In recognition of this interest, the Partnership for
Peace proposal offers limited military cooperation to many
European countries not currently members of NATO, but fails to
establish benchmarks or guidelines for eventual NATO
membership.
(13) In particular, Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic, and
Slovakia have made significant progress toward establishing
democratic institutions, free market economies, civilian
control of their armed forces, police, and intelligence
services, and the rule of law since the fall of their previous
Communist governments.
SEC. 603. UNITED STATES POLICY.
It should be the policy of the United States--
(1) to continue the Nation's commitment to an active
leadership role in NATO;
(2) to join with the Nation's NATO allies to redefine the
role of the alliance in the post-Cold War world, taking into
account--
(A) the fundamentally changed security environment of
Central and Eastern Europe;
(B) the need to assure all countries of the defensive
nature of the alliance and the desire of its members to
work cooperatively with all former adversaries;
(C) the emerging security threats posed by the
proliferation of nuclear, chemical, and biological
weapons of mass destruction and the means to deliver
them;
(D) the continuing challenges to the interests of all
NATO member countries posed by unstable and
undemocratic regimes harboring hostile intentions; and
(E) the dependence of the global economy on a stable
energy supply and the free flow of commerce;
(3) to affirm that NATO military planning should include
joint military operations beyond the geographic bounds of the
alliance under Article 4 of the North Atlantic Treaty when the
shared interests of the United States and other member
countries require such action to defend vital interests;
(4) that Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic, and Slovakia
should be in a position to further the principles of the North
Atlantic Treaty and to contribute to the security of the North
Atlantic area not later than January 10, 1999 (5 years from the
date of the establishment of the Partnership for Peace), and,
in accordance with Article 10 of such Treaty, should be invited
to become full NATO members not later than that date, provided
these countries--
(A) meet appropriate standards, including--
(i) shared values and interests;
(ii) democratic governments;
(iii) free market economies;
(iv) civilian control of the military, of the
police, and of intelligence services;
(v) adherence to the values, principles, and
political commitments embodied in the Helsinki
Final Act of the Conference on Security and
Cooperation in Europe;
(vi) commitment to further the principles of
NATO and to contribute to the security of the
North Atlantic area;
(vii) commitment to accept the obligations,
responsibilities, and costs of NATO membership;
and
(viii) commitment to implement infrastructure
development activities that will facilitate
participation in and support for NATO military
activities; and
(B) remain committed to protecting the rights of all
their citizens and respecting the territorial integrity
of their neighbors;
(5) that the United States, other NATO member nations, and
NATO itself should furnish appropriate assistance to facilitate
the transition of Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic, and
Slovakia to full NATO membership not later than January 10,
1999; and
(6) that other European countries emerging from communist
domination, in particular the Baltic states (Estonia, Latvia,
and Lithuania) and Ukraine, may be in a position at a future
date to further the principles of the North Atlantic Treaty and
to contribute to the security of the North Atlantic area, and
at the appropriate time they should receive assistance to
facilitate their transition to full NATO membership and should
be invited to become full NATO members.
SEC. 604. REVISIONS TO PROGRAM TO FACILITATE TRANSITION TO NATO
MEMBERSHIP.
(a) Establishment of Program.--Subsection (a) of section 203 of the
NATO Participation Act of 1994 (title II of Public Law 103-447; 22
U.S.C. 1928 note) is amended to read as follows:
``(a) Establishment of Program.--The President shall establish a
program to assist in the transition to full NATO membership of Poland,
Hungary, the Czech Republic, and Slovakia and any other European
country emerging from communist domination that is designated by the
President under subsection (d)(2).''.
(b) Eligible Countries.--
(1) Designated countries.--Subsection (d) of such section is
amended to read as follows:
``(d) Designation of Eligible Countries.--
``(1) Specified countries.--The following countries are
hereby designated for purposes of this title: Poland, Hungary,
the Czech Republic, and Slovakia.
``(2) Authority for president to designate other european
countries emerging from communist domination.--The President
may designate other European countries emerging from communist
domination (as defined in section 206) to receive assistance
under the program established under subsection (a). The
President may make such a designation in the case of any such
country only if the President determines, and reports to the
designated congressional committees, that such country--
``(A) has made significant progress toward
establishing--
``(i) shared values and interests;
``(ii) democratic governments;
``(iii) free market economies;
``(iv) civilian control of the military, of
the police, and of intelligence services;
``(v) adherence to the values, principles,
and political commitments embodied in the
Helsinki Final Act of the Conference on
Security and Cooperation in Europe; and
``(vi) commitment to further the principles
of NATO and to contribute to the security of
the North Atlantic area;
``(vii) commitment to accept the obligations,
responsibilities, and costs of NATO membership;
and
``(viii) commitment to implement
infrastructure development activities that will
facilitate participation in and support for
NATO military activities; and
``(B) is likely, within five years of such
determination, to be in a position to further the
principles of the North Atlantic Treaty and to
contribute to the security of the North Atlantic
area.''.
(2) Conforming amendments.--
(A) Subsections (b) and (c) of such section are
amended by striking ``countries described in such
subsection'' and inserting ``countries designated under
subsection (d)''.
(B) Subsection (e) of such section is amended--
(i) by striking ``subsection (d)'' and
inserting ``subsection (d)(2)''; and
(ii) by inserting ``(22 U.S.C. 2394)'' before
the period at the end.
(C) Section 204(c) of such Act is amended by striking
``any other'' and inserting ``any country designated
under section 203(d)(2)''.
(c) Types of Assistance.--
(1) Economic support assistance.--Subsection (c) of section
203 of such Act is amended--
(A) by redesignating paragraphs (3) and (4) as
paragraphs (4) and (5), respectively; and
(B) by inserting after paragraph (2) the following
new paragraph (3):
``(3) Assistance under chapter 4 of part II of the Foreign
Assistance Act of 1961 (relating to the Economic Support
Fund).''.
(2) Additional assistance.--
(A) In general.--Subsection (f) of such section is
amended to read as follows:
``(f) Additional Assistance.--In carrying out the program established
under subsection (a), the President may, in addition to the security
assistance authorized to be provided under subsection (c), provide
assistance to countries designated under subsection (d) from funds
appropriated under the `Nonproliferation and Disarmament Fund'
account.''.
(B) Effective date.--The amendment made by
subparagraph (A) does not apply with respect to funds
appropriated before the date of the enactment of this
Act.
(d) Disqualification From Assistance for Support of Terrorism.--
Section 203 of such Act is further amended by adding at the end the
following new subsection:
``(g) Prohibition on Providing Assistance to Foreign Governments That
Export Lethal Military Equipment to Countries Supporting International
Terrorism.--Assistance may only be provided through the program
established under subsection (a) subject to the same terms and
conditions that apply under section 563 of the Foreign Operations,
Export Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 1995 (Public
Law 103-306), with respect to the making available to foreign
governments of funds appropriated or otherwise made available under
that Act.''.
(e) Annual Report.--Section 205 of the NATO Participation Act of 1994
(title II of Public Law 103-447; 22 U.S.C. 1928 note) is amended--
(1) by inserting ``annual'' in the section heading before the
first word;
(2) by inserting ``annual'' after ``include in the'' in the
matter preceding paragraph (1);
(3) by redesignating paragraphs (1) and (2) as paragraphs (2)
and (3), respectively;
(4) by inserting before paragraph (2), as so redesignated,
the following new paragraph (1):
``(1) An assessment of the progress made by Poland, Hungary,
the Czech Republic, and Slovakia and by any country designated
by the President under section 203(d)(2) toward meeting the
standards for NATO membership set forth in Article 10 of the
North Atlantic Treaty, including--
``(A) an assessment of the progress of each such
country toward establishing--
``(i) shared values and interests;
``(ii) democratic governments;
``(iii) free market economies;
``(iv) civilian control of the military, of
the police, and of intelligence services;
``(v) adherence to the values, principles,
and political commitments embodied in the
Helsinki Final Act of the Conference on
Security and Cooperation in Europe;
``(vi) commitment to further the principles
of NATO and to contribute to the security of
the North Atlantic area;
``(vii) commitment to accept the obligations,
responsibilities, and costs of NATO membership;
and
``(viii) commitment to implement
infrastructure development activities that will
facilitate participation in and support for
NATO military activities; and
``(B) the commitment of each such country to
protecting the rights of all its citizens and
respecting the territorial integrity of its
neighbors.''; and
(5) in paragraphs (2) and (3), as so redesignated, by
striking ``and other'' and all that follows through the period
at the end and inserting ``and any country designated by the
President pursuant to section 203(d)(2).''.
(f) Definitions.--The NATO Participation Act of 1994 (title II of
Public Law 103-447; 22 U.S.C. 1928 note) is amended by adding at the
end the following new section:
``SEC. 206. DEFINITIONS.
``For purposes of this title:
``(1) NATO.--The term `NATO' means the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization.
``(2) Other european countries emerging from communist
domination.--The term `other European countries emerging from
communist domination' means--
``(A) any member of the Partnership for Peace that is
located--
``(i) in the territory of the former Union of
Soviet Socialist Republics; or
``(ii) in the territory of the former
Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia; or
``(B) Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Bulgaria,
or Albania.
``(3) Designated congressional committees.--The term
`designated congressional committees' means--
``(A) the Committee on International Relations, the
Committee on National Security, and the Committee on
Appropriations of the House of Representatives; and
``(B) the Committee on Foreign Relations, the
Committee on Armed Services, and the Committee on
Appropriations of the Senate.''.
TITLE VII--BUDGET FIREWALLS
SEC. 701. RESTORATION OF BUDGET FIREWALLS FOR DEFENSE SPENDING.
It is the sense of the Congress that so-called ``budget firewalls''
between defense and domestic discretionary spending should be
established for each of fiscal years 1996, 1997, and 1998.
Purpose and Background
Six years into the post-Cold War era, United States
national security policy suffers from a lack of definition and
credibility due to the significant mismatches between our
defense strategy, military force structure and projected
defense budgets. The 1993 Department of Defense ``Bottom Up
Review,'' intended to serve as the national security blueprint
for the Clinton Administration, has been widely criticized as
fundamentally flawed due to its unsuccessful attempt to
reconcile a two major regional conflict defense strategy and an
inadequate defense budget plan--a plan that actually pre-dated
the analysis underlying the Bottom Up Review strategy.
The consequent effect has been a defense program stretched
beyond prudence. The Bottom Up Review recommendations are
leading to dramatic reductions in U.S. military forces,
including a reduction in the number of Navy ships by one-third,
the number of Air Force wings by almost one-half, and the level
of funding for missile defenses by over fifty percent.
Further, the defense budget proposed for fiscal year 1996
represents the eleventh consecutive year of real decline in
defense spending and, with the exception of fiscal year 1948,
will mark the lowest percentage of gross domestic product of
any defense budget since World War II.
The combination of these significant reductions in military
forces and defense budgets are being exacerbated by the
increased pace of operations resulting from the growing number
of peacekeeping and humanitarian operations. These so-called
contingency operations have led to personnel tempo problems and
the diversion of already scarce training and exercise funds in
order to maintain forward deployed forces. Not surprisingly,
many military units are entering the early stages of a long-
term systemic readiness crisis.
H.R. 7, the National Security Revitalization Act, is
designed to serve as a critical step toward constructively
addressing these and many other fundamental challenges
afflicting U.S. national security policy. While H.R. 7 is not
the vehicle for comprehensive legislative action on these
issues, it serves as the policy framework to guide the 104th
Congress as it moves through the traditional budget,
authorization and appropriation process.
Legislative History/Committee Consideration
H.R. 7 was introduced on January 4, 1995 by Representatives
Floyd Spence, Benjamin Gilman, Ed Bryant and James A. Hayes. In
a split referral, Titles I, II, III, V, and section 401 were
referred to the Committee on National Security. Other sections
and titles were referred to the Committee on International
Relations, the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, and
the Committee on the Budget.
The Committee on National Security held three hearings on
H.R. 7 on January 19, 25, and 27. The first hearing addressed
the issue of the adequacy of the Administration's defense
funding plan. The second hearing addressed that portion of the
bill pertaining to missile defense. At the third hearing the
committee received testimony from Defense Secretary William
Perry and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff John
Shalikashvili on the position of the Department of Defense with
respect to this legislation.
The bill was marked up on January 31, 1995 and, a quorum
being present, reported favorably by a roll call vote of 41 to
13. The individual roll call results are placed at the end of
this report.
Section-By-Section Analysis
The committee considered only those provisions of H.R. 7
referred to it pursuant to the referral message. Therefore, the
section-by-section analysis only discusses those provisions
considered to fall under the committee's jurisdiction.
TITLE I--FINDINGS, POLICY AND PURPOSES
Section 101--Findings
This provision would establish several findings providing
the context and rationale for the National Security
Revitalization Act.
Section 102--Policy
This provision would establish the policy objectives behind
the National Security Revitalization Act.
Section 103--Purposes
This provision would summarize the purposes of the National
Security Revitalization Act.
TITLE II--MISSILE DEFENSE
The proliferation of ballistic missiles and weapons of mass
destruction poses a significant threat to U.S. military forces
and U.S. global interests. The committee is concerned, however,
that current Department of Defense policies and programs are
not aggressive enough in responding to this threat.
For example, the current Administration's budget for
theater missile defense (TMD) is approximately 30 percent less
than spending levels recommended by the previous
Administration. As a result, several of the most promising TMD
concepts, such as the Navy's ``Upper Tier'' program and the
Army's Theater High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system, have
been delayed.
The committee is also concerned about the Administration's
proposal to turn the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty
into a new, multilateral ``ABM/TMD Treaty'' in its arms control
talks with Russia and others. Current U.S. proposals will
impose specific design limitations on U.S. systems that will
unnecessarily tie the hands of U.S. engineers and lead to a
significantly compromised U.S. TMD capability.
The Administration's program for national missile defense--
a defense of the American homeland--is even more worrisome.
There is currently no commitment to deploy a national missile
defense. In fact, the Department of Defense presently plans to
spend over eighty percent less for national missile defense
programs than the spending levels recommended by the previous
Administration--approximately $500 million per year over the
next five years. This is less money than President Carter spent
on national missile defense two decades ago.
The Administration's decision to abandon plans to deploy a
national missile defense is particularly disturbing in light of
the range of potential missile threats to the United States.
Both Russia and China today maintain and are aggressively
modernizing nuclear forces capable of destroying American
cities. Moreover, various ``rogue regimes'' are seeking a
capability to attack the United States using ballistic
missiles.
According to senior U.S. intelligence officials, it may not
take long for an outlaw regime to acquire such a capability.
For instance, the Defense Intelligence Agency Director,
Lieutenant General James Clapper, on January 10, 1995,
testified that North Korean missiles now under development
probably have sufficient range to reach targets in Alaska. On
January 18, 1995, the Acting Director of the Central
Intelligence Agency, Admiral William Studeman, testified that
``The proliferation . . . relates to the nonproprietary nature
of technology. This means that what will be proliferated will
be new and more diverse forms of lethality, increasing threat
reach--that is, longer ranges, including ultimately ranges from
problem states that can reach the United States toward the end
of this decade and the beginning of [the next] century. * * *''
In response to these concerns, the committee recommends a
provision (Title II) to strengthen the U.S. response to the
missile proliferation threat. Title II commits the United
States to the development and deployment of effective and
affordable national and theater missile defenses.
Section 201--Policy
This provision would establish that U.S. policy shall be to
deploy a highly effective national missile defense (NMD)
system, and to provide highly effective theater missile defense
(TMD) systems to U.S. military forces and to friendly military
forces and U.S. allies.
Section 202--Actions of the Secretary of Defense
This provision would require certain actions of the
Secretary of Defense in carrying out the policy stated in
Section 201. Subsection 202(a) would direct the Secretary to
develop for deployment a NMD system designed to protect the
United States against ballistic missile attacks. Subsection
202(b) would direct the Secretary to develop for deployment
advanced TMD systems. The Secretary would be further directed
to develop for deployment the NMD system and the advanced TMD
systems ``at the earliest practical date.'' In addition to
addressing the ballistic missile threat, the committee
recognizes that this mandate will be carried taking into
account a variety of other competing factors.
Section 203--Report to Congress
This provision would direct the Secretary of Defense within
sixty days of enactment of this act to submit a plan for the
deployment of a NMD system pursuant to section 202(a) and TMD
systems pursuant to section 202(b). Along with the plan, the
committee directs the Secretary to submit a report detailing a
range of NMD system options, including architectures that
contain only ground-based elements, architectures that contain only space-based elements, and mixed architectures that contain
ground and space-based elements. Likewise, the report should
include some system options and architectures that are
constrained to the current terms of the Anti-Ballistic Missile
(ABM) Treaty and some that assume changes to the Treaty. The
report should describe the cost, performance, and technical
risk associated with each architecture option. Finally, the
report should specify the Secretary's recommended architecture,
and the reasons for his selection. Such a comprehensive report
will assist the committee in carrying out its responsibility to
carefully review the Department's fiscal year 1996 budget
request for missile defense.
TITLE III--ADVISORY COMMISSION ON REVITALIZATION OF NATIONAL SECURITY
Section 301--Establishment
This provision would establish an advisory commission to be
known as the ``Revitalization of National Security Commission''
to assist the executive and legislative branch in identifying
and assessing national security strategy and policy options.
Section 302--Composition
This provision would specify that the Commission shall be
comprised of twelve members--four appointed by the President,
four appointed by the Speaker of the House (one upon the
recommendation of the House Minority Leader), and four
appointed by the President Pro Tempore of the Senate (three
upon the recommendation of the Senate Majority Leader and one
upon the recommendation of the Senate Minority Leader). The
Chairman would be appointed jointly by the Speaker of the House
and the Senate Majority Leader after consultations with the
minority leaders of each chamber.
Section 303--Duties
This provision would charge the Commission with conducting
a comprehensive review of the long-term national security needs
of the United States to include a number of specified
assessments of critical national security issues. The
Commission would also be required to develop specific
recommendations to accomplish a number of policy goals.
One area requiring an assessment by the Commission involves
the need to revise the command and control structure of the
Army Reserve. In carrying out this assessment, the Commission
should consider the following: 1) the process and the explicit
criteria by which the Army evaluated, ranked and made formal
recommendations regarding the twenty Army Reserve Commands, 2)
whether Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) district
boundaries are the best possible geographic boundaries for use
by the Army Reserve, and 3) whether and in what manner the
restructuring plan influences Army Reserve readiness?
Section 304--Reports
This provision would require the Commission to provide the
President and the Congress a final report on the required
assessments and recommendations by January 1, 1996. In
addition, an interim report would be required by October 1,
1995.
Section 304 would also prohibit the Secretary of the Army
from taking any action to implement the reorganization of the
Army Reserve headquarters structure in the continental United
States as announced by the Secretary on January 4, 1995, until
the Commission submits the interim report as required by this
section. The committee does not intend for this moratorium to
be construed that the committee seeks to interrupt the planned
restructuring of the Army National Guard and U.S. Army Reserve,
commonly known as ``the Offsite Agreement,'' announced by the
Secretary of Defense on December 10, 1993. The committee views
the December, 1993 Offsite Agreement plan and the January, 1995
ARCOM reorganization plan as separate actions the
implementation of which are not linked.
Sections 305-309
These provisions would vest the Commission with appropriate
powers and authorities to carry out its duties
TITLE IV--COMMAND OF UNITED STATES FORCES
Presidential Decision Directive 25 (PDD-25) signed by
President Clinton in May of 1994 contains a number of policy
initiatives intended to promote peacekeeping as an important
instrument of this Administration's national security policy.
While the Administration continues to deny the committee access
to this critical policy document, summary documents and
extensive public and private briefings reveal that the
Administration has adopted a policy of allowing the placement
of U.S. armed forces under the operational control of foreign
commanders when engaged in peacekeeping operations.
The Administration continues to stress that the President
will retain ``command'' of U.S. forces at all times. However,
the usage of the term ``command'' in this context refers to the
administrative control of military forces which has never been
an issue of debate or contention. On the other hand, the
practice of ceding ``operational control'' of U.S. military
forces to non-U.S. commanders remains a highly controversial
and troubling policy. While certain U.S. military units have
operated under the operational control of other nations, these
instances have been rare and usually as part of larger
coalition military operations where the U.S. retains overall
operational command of the theater of operation. Further, these
instances occurred during traditional military operations that
allowed a high degree of planning and coordination to minimize
the inherent complications resulting from mixed command chains.
By contrast, the concept of ceding operational control of
U.S. forces to a United Nations peacekeeping command is a
relatively recent practice that has thus far yielded decidedly
mixed results. As demonstrated during the UNOSOM II operation
in Somalia, peacekeeping operations place a high premium on the
ability to rapidly employ effective military force in response
to unplanned circumstances. The tactical demands of such
operations tend to stress and exacerbate the limitations of
mixed-nationality operations resulting from the usually
significant cultural, language, doctrine, and training
differences among the participating national contingents. While
only U.S. logistics forces were placed under United Nations
operational control during UNOSOM II, the unanimous view of
U.S. commanders interviewed by the committee during its review
of the Somalia operation was that United Nations mixed-
nationality command chains are inappropriate for demanding
United Nations operations.
Section 401--Limitation on expenditure of Department of Defense funds
for United States forces placed under United Nations command or
control
The committee recommends a provision (section 401) that
would regulate the circumstances under which the President
could commit U.S. forces under United Nations command or
control. This provision would require that before U.S. forces
may be deployed under the command or operational control of the
United Nations, the President must first certify to the
Congress that 1) such a command arrangement is necessary to
protect U.S. national security interests, 2) the commander of
the U.S. force involved will retain the right to report
independently to U.S. military authorities and to decline to
comply with orders judged to be illegal, militarily imprudent
or beyond the mandate of the U.S. mission, 3) the U.S. force
involved will remain under U.S. administrative command, and 4)
the U.S. will retain the authority to withdraw the U.S. force
involved and take action it considers necessary to protect this
force if it is engaged.
While this provision seeks to ensure that any deployment of
U.S. forces under United Nations command or control is made
with a clear and unambiguous understanding of the right of the
United States to withdraw those forces at any time and to take
any action considered necessary to protect such forces, the
committee recognizes that any such decision to withdraw
deployed U.S. forces should be made with due regard and
consideration for the safety of U.S. and other national
contingents deployed in any such given operation.
The provision would further require the President to submit
a report along with the aforementioned certification providing:
(1) a description of the national security interests that
require such a command arrangement, (2) the mission of the U.S.
forces involved, (3) the expected size and composition of the
U.S. forces involved, (4) the incremental cost to the U.S. of
participation in the operation, (5) the precise command and
control relationship between the U.S. forces and the United
Nations command structure, (6) the precise command and control
relationship between the U.S. forces involved and the U.S.
unified commander for the region in which the forces will be
operating, (7) the extent to which the U.S. forces involved
will be relying on non-U.S. forces for self protection, and (8)
the timetable for the complete withdrawal of the U.S. forces
involved.
TITLE V--UNITED NATIONS
Section 506--Reimbursement to the United States for in-kind
contributions to United Nations peacekeeping activities
This provision would require the Secretary of State to
ensure that goods and services provided by the Department of
State to the United Nations on a reimbursable basis shall be
reimbursed at the appropriate value, as determined by the
Secretary of Defense.
Section 507--Prohibition on use of funds to pay United States assessed
or voluntary contribution for United Nations peacekeeping
activities unless Department of Defense reimbursed by United
Nations for certain goods and services
This provision would prohibit the payment of assessed and
voluntary contributions to the United Nations until the
Secretary of Defense certifies to the Congress that the United
Nations has reimbursed the Department of Defense for goods and
services provided on a reimbursable basis.
Section 508--Limitation on use of Department of Defense funds for
United States share of costs of United Nations peacekeeping
activities
Presidential Decision Directive 25 (PDD-25) proposes to
change the manner in which the United States Government
finances its annual assessed contribution to the United Nations
for peacekeeping by having the Department of Defense pay for
the U.S. costs of all Chapter VII operations and those Chapter
VI operations involving U.S. troops. This so called ``shared
responsibility'' arrangement was specifically rejected by the
House Committee on Armed Services in the 103rd Congress during
its consideration of the Fiscal Year 1995 National Defense
Authorization Act. While the provision prohibiting the ``shared
responsibility'' arrangement passed the House and was
eventually dropped during conference negotiations with the
Senate, the issue remains a serious concern for the committee.
Therefore, the committee recommends a provision (section
508) that would specifically prohibit the expenditure of funds
made available to the Department of Defense for voluntary or
assessed financial contributions to the United Nations for the
United States share of peacekeeping costs. The committee
continues to strongly oppose the ``shared responsibility''
concept as it represents one more attempt to divert dwindling
defense resources toward a non-defense purpose.
The provision would also impose a limitation on the use of
Department of Defense funds for participation in United Nations
peacekeeping activities unless Congress has by law specifically
authorized the use of those funds for that purpose. This
limitation would cover only those United Nations peacekeeping
activities that are financed through member assessments such as
the UNPROFOR operation in the former Yugoslavia, the UNOSOM II
operation in Somalia and the UNMIH operation in Haiti.
Section 512--Conditions on provision of intelligence to the United
States
This provision would require that the provision of
intelligence by the United States to the United Nations be
carried out pursuant to an agreement between the President and
the United Nations Secretary General. The agreement would be
required to detail the types of intelligence to be provided and
United Nations procedures and precautions to protect provided
U.S. intelligence information against unauthorized disclosure.
Committee Cost Estimate
The committee generally concurs with the cost estimate
contained in the report of the Congressional Budget Office.
congressional budget office cost estimate
In compliance with clause 2(l)(3)(C) of rule XI of the
Rules of the House of Representatives, the cost estimate
prepared by the Congressional Budget Office and submitted
pursuant to section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974
is as follows:
U.S. Congress,
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, February 3, 1995.
Hon. Floyd D. Spence,
Chairman, Committee on National Security,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
reviewed the amendments to H.R. 7, National Security
Revitalization Act, as ordered reported by the House Committee
on National Security on January 31, 1995. Neither the
Committee's amendments nor the bill as introduced would have
pay-as-you-go implications. They would not explicitly authorize
appropriations nor would they have an impact on the budgets of
state and local governments.
A few provisions of H.R. 7 could imply changes in the
authorization of discretionary appropriations--particularly,
Title II (Missile Defense), Title V (United Nations), Title VI
(expansion of NATO). The attachment discusses these
implications of H.R. 7 as introduced. The costs discussed in
the attachment would come to bear only if subsequent
legislation explicitly authorizes appropriations.
If you would like further details on this estimate, we will
be pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contacts are Kent
Christensen, Raymond Hall, and Michael Miller.
Sincerely,
Robert D. Reischauer, Director.
budgetary implications of h.r. 7, national security revitalization act
This document considers the budgetary implications of H.R.
7 as introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives on January
4, 1995. It serves as a basis for understanding the budgetary
impacts of any Committee or floor amendments.
Strictly speaking, H.R. 7 has no direct budgetary impact.
It has no pay-as-you-go implications nor does it explicitly
authorize appropriations. Nevertheless, some provisions of H.R.
7 could imply changes in the authorization of discretionary
appropriations--particularly, Title II (Missile Defense), Title
V (United Nations), and Title VI (Revitalization and Expansion
of NATO). These implications would come to bear only if
subsequent legislation explicitly authorizes appropriations.
Title II--Missile Defense. H.R. 7 calls on the Secretary of
Defense to develop national and theater missile defenses, but
it is silent on how much funding would be available for this
purpose. The cost of such a system could total $29 billion to
$30 billion over the next five years, or about $10 billion to
$11 billion more than is currently programmed for missile
defense.
In 1992, the Department of Defense planned to deploy a
national missile defense (NMD) system at an initial site by
2004 and at multiple sites soon thereafter. This plan called
for deploying both ground-based systems and space-based sensors
commonly referred to as Brilliant Eyes. These two components of
the 1992 plan are the basis for our current estimate for the
costs of a NMD system. The current estimate does not, however,
embrace the component of the 1992 plan calling for space-based
interceptors (commonly known as Brilliant Pebbles.) An
enhancement to NMD, Brilliant Pebbles raises more concerns
about violating the Antiballistic Missile (ABM) Defense Treaty
than do other elements of NMD.
Deploying a ground-based system of radars, interceptors,
and command and control at an initial site by 2006 would cost
about $10 billion. This sum would also support eventual
deployment at multiple sites. Finally, the additional funding
would support research and development into technologies that
would enable the system to counter emerging threats.
For about $1 billion more this system could be expanded to
accelerate the deployment of space-based sensors. With this
additional funding, some sensors could be deployed by 2002 to
provide cuing and initial targeting data. This sensor
capability is supposed to permit the ground-based interceptors
at the initial site to protect the entire continental United
States against limited missile attacks from the north.
As for theater missile defense, this estimate assumes that
the current plan for theater missile defense is consistent with
the aims of H.R. 7. That plan would deploy ground-based radars
and missiles with forward-deployed elements of the Army and
Marine Corps by the end of the century. Eventually more capable
systems such as the Navy's sea-based vertical launch systems,
the Air Force's boost-phase interceptors, or the Army's mobile
air and missile defenses would be deployed.
Under these assumptions H.R. 7 would add $10 billion to $11
billion to missile defense costs and bring the total budget for
these capabilities to $29 billion or $30 billion. But the
ultimate costs are quite uncertain. These estimates assume that
the 1992 plan is technically feasible, that the financial plan
matched the real components of the system, and that the plan
could be resumed after a two-year hiatus with costs rising only
for inflation.
Title III--Revitalization of National Security Commission.
The bill would establish a commission to conduct a
comprehensive review of defense strategy, force structure,
modernization, readiness, infrastructure, and funding. Of the
funds otherwise available to DoD, $1.5 million would be
available to carry out the provisions of the title.
Title IV--Command of United States Forces. H.R. 7 would
amend title 10 of the U.S. Code and the United Nations
Participation Act to prohibit a foreign national from
commanding U.S. forces unless the President makes certain
certifications. Neither change would have a significant
budgetary impact.
Title IV would also require the Congress to approve in law
any agreement between the President and the U.N. Security
Council for the use of U.S. forces in maintaining international
peace and security. CBO cannot predict the extent of U.S.
involvement in peacekeeping activities. Nevertheless, if
Congress denied U.S. participation in some peacekeeping
activities the budgetary savings would likely be no more than a
few hundred million dollars per year based on recent
experience. For example, if the United States had not used its
forces in Bosnia it would not have incurred expenses of about
$300 million a year in 1994 and 1995. Similarly for U.S.
expenses in Somalia, the average savings would have been about
$700 million a year in 1993 and 1994. Aside from deployments to
Southwest Asia, the deployments to Bosnia and Somalia have been
the most costly contingencies of recent years.
Title V--United Nations. Title V addresses U.S. financial
responsibilities to the U.N. in support of international
peacekeeping. Enactment of Title V could:
lower payments of assessed and voluntary
contributions that help fund U.N. peacekeeping
activities;
lower payments of assessed contributions that help
fund the U.N. operating budget; and
limit DoD's involvement in U.N.-sponsored
peacekeeping activities.
Certain sections of Title V would have overlapping effects.
For example, sections 501 and 507 could reduce assessed
payments to the United Nations for peacekeeping--currently
about $1.0 billion a year--for fiscal years after 1995.
Similarly sections 507 and 511 could reduce the assessments and
voluntary contributions totalling about $0.1 billion a year.
Thus, the potential budgetary effects of these sections are not
additive.
Section 501 would probably lower or eliminate the payment
of assessed peacekeeping contributions, which will total about
$1.0 billion in 1995 if the President's supplemental request is
fully funded by the Congress. Under section 501, payments would
be lowered by the total cost of using U.S. forces in
peackefeeping activities that are authorized by the U.N. unless
the U.N. has reimbursed DoD for those costs.
DoD currently is incurring incremental peacekeeping costs
from U.N. authorized operations in Haiti, the former
Yugoslavia, and elsewhere that will total about $2 billion in
1995. Total costs could be much higher. If DoD continues its
current level of peacekeeping activity, section 501 would
eliminate the payment of U.S. contributions because DoD's tota