#2
US Department of State
09 July 2002
Powell Says U.S. Plans to Cut Total Strategic Warheads to 4,600
(Testifies on Bush-Putin Moscow Treaty before Senate panel) (860)
By Ralph Dannheisser
Washington File Congressional Correspondent

Washington -- The Bush Administration plans to gradually cut the number of strategic nuclear warheads -- both those deployed and in storage -- to about 4,600, Secretary of State Colin Powell revealed July 9.

Powell made the disclosure in the course of a hearing by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which is considering the Treaty on Strategic Offensive Reductions, agreed to between President Bush and Russian President Vladimir Putin in May and submitted to the Senate for its advice and consent on June 20.

That treaty contemplates a reduction in deployed U.S. and Russian warheads from about 6,000 to between 1,700 and 2,200 over the course of the next decade. But it does not require actual destruction of any warheads, permitting storage of dismantled weapons.

Powell's comments came against the background of questions by some committee members as to how meaningful the treaty would be under those circumstances, and without verification provisions that go beyond those in existing pacts.

His comments telegraphed testimony expected to be delivered by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, who is scheduled to appear before the committee on July 17. Powell stressed that it would be up to Rumsfeld to state the official administration position on the issue, but said, "The total number that I believe you will hear from Secretary Rumsfeld, both deployed and in reserve, is somewhere around 4,600" warheads.

Powell's testimony in support of the treaty was warmly received by key committee members, with both Chairman Joseph Biden (Democrat, Delaware) and Senator Richard Lugar (Republican, Indiana) saying that they hope for, and expect, Senate approval by the end of the current congressional session late this year.

Biden deemed the pact "a very important step forward in U.S.-Russian relations and toward a more secure world."

"I think this is a good treaty," he told Powell -- though he said it remains to be seen in practice just how good. It "may turn out to be a great treaty," or it could be "of marginal value," he said.

And Lugar said the agreement to cut the number of operationally-deployed strategic nuclear warheads to between 1,700 and 2,200 by December 31, 2012 is "a tremendous accomplishment that deserves the full support of the Senate and the Russian Duma." He added, "I believe this treaty marks an important step toward a safer world."

Lugar did express concern, however, that nuclear warheads taken from dismantled Russian delivery systems not fall into the wrong hands. Furthermore, he said, "Without U.S. assistance Russia cannot meet the timetable of its obligations under this treaty... Without Nunn-Lugar (the Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction Program) it is unlikely the benefits of this treaty will be realized."

Powell, in his opening statement to the committee, said the treaty "marks a new era in the relationship between the United States and Russia, easing "the transition from strategic rivalry to a genuine strategic partnership based on the principles of mutual security, trust, openness, cooperation and predictability."

He said the omission of a strict timetable and verification provisions was intentional, and designed to give the parties "flexibility in how each implements its obligations."

Overall, he said, the treaty advances the president's goal of achieving a credible deterrent "with the lowest possible number of nuclear weapons consistent with our national security requirements. It reduces by two-thirds the number of strategic nuclear warheads available for ready use while preserving America's ability to respond promptly to changing future situations."

Perhaps the most serious reservations about the treaty were voiced by Senator Russell Feingold (Democrat, Wisconsin). He termed it "a step in the right direction," but expressed concern that "it does not address the vital issues of compliance and verification, that it does not include a timetable for those reductions, and that it does not require that any nuclear warheads actually be destroyed."

"Only by dismantling and destroying those devastating weapons can we truly achieve the goal of meaningful nuclear arms reduction," Feingold said.

Further, Feingold said, he is troubled by treaty language that permits either party to withdraw, upon only three months' written notice and without the need to cite any extraordinary justifying circumstances.

And harking back to the president's controversial decision to withdraw the United States from the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, Feingold insisted that the Senate has a constitutional role to play in terminating treaties, which must be respected in any future case. "I look forward to exploring ways to protect the Senate's prerogatives ... as the committee continues its consideration of this treaty," he said.

When Feingold directly asked Powell whether he believes that the president could withdraw from the new treaty without the need for Senate approval, Powell replied, "Yes, sir." This prompted Feingold to respond that the administration was entering on "a dangerous road" which could ultimately lead to conflict with the Senate.

BACK TO THE TOP    #214 CONTENTS    NEXT SECTION