Military

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for inviting me to testify before this distinguished Committee on this vitally important subject.

I accepted your invitation, Mr. Chairman, because I believe it is essential that this nation's defenses be adequate to cope with the growing dangers we face from hostile powers possessing weapons of mass destruction and effective means of delivery. 

Mr. Chairman, I encountered this subject and became concerned about this issue, as a consequence of having served on President Reagan's A Blue Ribbon Presidential Task Force on Nuclear Products in 1985; on the APresident's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board (PFIAB) from 1985 to 1990; on the Defense Policy Review Board from 1985 to 1992.  I chaired the A Fail Safe and Risk Reduction Committee (generally referred to by its acronym as the FARR Committee) charged with reviewing the United States Nuclear Command and Control system. 

September 11^th dramatized the dangers we face.  These experiences made a strong impression on me concerning the dangers of proliferating nuclear and missile technology.  As everyone who is interested in these matters now knows, the number of countries capable of producing and delivering nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction, has increased and is increasing as we speak, and includes several of the world's most aggressive, repressive, destructive countries B North Korea, Iran, Iraq B as well as a Russia less stable than we would prefer and a China less benign.

We know, moreover, that other regimes with little regard for the rule of law or human rights work hard to acquire weapons of mass destruction.

An effective deterrent has never been as important to the security of Americans as it is today with rogue states developing the capacity to attack our cities and our population.  Americans and their allies are more vulnerable than we have ever been.

Mr. Chairman, as we experienced on September 11^th, the threat to Americans, its cities, and populations, is here and now.  It has expanded dramatically, not only because of systematic Chinese theft of America 's most important military secrets and because of the inadequate U.S. policies governing the safekeeping and transfer of technology, but also because several countries who are signatories of the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty have violated their commitments under the Treaty.  Specifically, they have violated commitments.

Terrorism began a rapid growth in the 1970s. The early success of the PLO was important. The PLO introduced airline hijacking as an international weapon. Though seemingly independent the terrorist groups throughout Europe, Japan, North and South American, and the Middle East also seemed to be linked to one another:  The Arab PLO, Iranian Mujahadeen, the Armenian ASALA, the German Bader Meinhof gang, Italian Red Brigades, the July 17th Group.  They were built around Marxism and radical Islam. The targets of terrorism have been numerous – United Kingdom , Germany , France , Italy , Israel , Japan , Spain , Portugal , and the United States .

The next contact of the Reagan Administration with terrorism came with the hijacking of the Achille Lauro, which was, I am sure everyone remembers, a pleasure ship, a cruise ship that was hijacked off the coasts of Egypt on its way to Israel , transporting Americans.  It was hijacked and the Americans on board were treated in a brutal fashion, and one of them, Leon Klinghofer, an American, was murdered.  He and his wheelchair were pushed overboard off the coast of Egypt .

That act of terrorism was carried out by a PLO group, headed by one Abu Abass, who was a member of the PLO Executive Committee and a close aide to PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat.  They had smuggled some quite heavy weapons on board the Achille Lauro at the same time they boarded.

The first response of the Reagan Administration to the experience on the Achille Lauro and the Libyan bombings of American property and Americans made clear that President Reagan did not intend to accept attacks on Americans passively.

We all know that the increased capacities, which have developed, not just nuclear, of course, but electrical and biological powers of all kinds, which the committee is fully aware of, have increased our potential powers as a military establishment, and our vulnerability.  The centralization of our population renders us particularly vulnerable to some new developments in, for example, miniaturization and liquification and terrorism.

We are all, I think, aware of the increasing capacity at least of very small numbers of people to do very large amounts of damage.  That capacity is illustrated in our tragedy in our embassies a few months ago where many people were killed -- Americans and host country personnel B by the work of what will probably turn out to be at most a few dozen people.  That capacity of miniaturization and of weapons and liquefaction and centralization and interdependence is familiar, and it is growing continually, and it makes all types of domestic security more difficult than it previously has been.

Larger numbers of people cross our borders on a larger number of days.  Most of those people are unknown to us and how to control our borders is unknown to us today, too, in some sense.

Our intelligence needs have increased geometrically alongside our growing vulnerabilities.  I have been for a number of years B since my time in the Reagan Administration B quite deeply concerned by our vulnerability, however, to weapons.

Our open borders and habits of free movement and casual border security enhance our vulnerability.  The World Trade Center bombing and subsequent detective work demonstrated how possible it is for Americans at home to be targeted by foreign terrorists.  (The Oklahoma city bombing illustrates American vulnerability from domestic terror.)  Threats against Americans make the same point.

We can also watch the work of Hamas spreading terror in Israel , of Hizbollah attacks on civilians in Lebanon .  In the years since the Iranian revolution, we have grown familiar with the mix of fanaticism, intolerance, and violence that accompany the Islamic politics and Islamic rule in most of the states that sponsor terrorism: Iran , Sudan , and non-state alliances that seek power in Egypt , Algeria , Lebanon , Lybia and Afghanistan .