THE FUTURE OF NUCLEAR DETERRENCE
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL SECURITY,
PROLIFERATION, AND FEDERAL SERVICES
of the
COMMITTEE ON
GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED FIFTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
FEBRUARY 12, 1997
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR COCHRAN
Senator Cochran. The Subcommittee will please come to
order. I'd like to welcome everyone to the first hearing of
this Governmental Affairs Subcommittee on International
Security, Proliferation, and Federal Services. The topic of
today's hearing is the future of nuclear deterrence.
This hearing is held in a security environment that is
radically different from the one faced by the United States a
few years ago. Perhaps James Woolsey, President Clinton's first
Director of Central Intelligence, best summed up this changed
environment when he said, ``We have slain a large dragon, but
we live now in a jungle filled with a bewildering variety of
poisonous snakes.''
Congress has an obligation to understand this new
environment and to examine critically the premises upon which
our national security has been based, including issues such as
the size and composition of our strategic offense force,
proliferation, arms control, and ballistic missile defense. We
must decide whether the concepts of the past continue to make
sense in this new security environment, require just some fine-
tuning, or have outlived their usefulness.
The subject of nuclear deterrence is ripe for review. Back
on the 4th of December, Generals Andrew Goodpaster and Lee
Butler issued a joint statement at the National Press Club that
was described in the press advisory as ``an unprecedented
statement for the elimination of nuclear weapons.'' This joint
statement, coming from two retired senior officers, one the
former Supreme Allied Commander in Europe, the other the former
Commander-in-Chief of Strategic Command, stirred up quite a
controversy. The controversy was enlarged the following day by
the release of the ``Statement on Nuclear Weapons by
International Generals and Admirals,'' which was endorsed by an
international group of 60 retired senior military officers.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The Joint Statement on Reduction of Nuclear Weapons by Generals
Goodpaster and Butler, and the Statement on Nuclear Weapons by
International Generals and Admirals appears in the Appendix on page 61.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Today's hearing will examine the underlying rationale for
their proposals regarding nuclear weapons and deterrence as
well as other alternatives.
The central question we will explore in this hearing is,
``Do nuclear weapons continue to have an important role in
America's national security strategy? '' We are fortunate to
have with us today three witnesses who are well qualified to
comment on this issue. We will begin with Under Secretary of
Defense for Policy Walt Slocombe, who will lay out the
administration's perspective on nuclear deterrence.
Secretary Slocombe will be followed by General Goodpaster,
whose public service spans seven decades and who is currently
the Co-Chair of The Atlantic Council of the United States, and
Richard Perle, now a Resident Fellow at the American Enterprise
Institute and formerly a senior defense official during the
administration of President Ronald Reagan. We are very grateful
for the attendance of the witnesses and for their good
assistance to our Subcommittee. Secretary Slocombe, we welcome
you to the Committee and we ask you to proceed. We have a copy
of your statement for which we thank you very much and for
which we are very grateful.
Let me first of all call on my distinguished colleague
Senator Levin from Michigan for any comments he might have.
Senator Levin.
|
NEWSLETTER
|
|
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list
|
|
|
