Mr. President, I rise today in support of the amendment offered by Senators Kennedy and Feinstein to prohibit the use of funds for the support of new nuclear weapons development.
Passage of this amendment would ensure that the United States will not develop new nuclear weapons while at the same time asking other nations to give up their own weapons development programs.
Unfortunately, today we live in a world where governments and terrorists are seeking to create and acquire weapons of mass destruction. I am deeply concerned that we are not doing enough to stop the potential flow of weapons and weapon materials to terrorist organizations. Rather then devoting scarce resources to researching new nuclear weapons we should be securing nuclear material already in existence.
The Administration's plans to develop new weapons and modify old types of weapons will compromise U.S. security by undermining efforts to make worldwide cooperation on nonproliferation of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction (WMD) more effective.
The first Bush administration prohibited work on nuclear weapons then under development and halted nuclear testing except for safety and reliability, effectively bringing work on new weapons types to a close.
In contrast, I believe this Administration's nuclear initiatives are creating a new kind of arms race by expanding our weapon development programs.
The United States pledged in the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty "to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament." This is still a worthy objective.
However, instead of strengthening nonproliferation efforts, the Administration has requested $27.6 million for the Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator (RNEP) for FY 05. The request would continue a study to modify an existing weapon to penetrate completely into the ground before detonating, increasing its ability to destroy buried targets.
The RNEP is a bad idea for a number of reasons. First, it is a common misconception that a weapon detonated a few meters underground creates less fallout. In fact, a weapon detonated at a shallow depth would actually create more fallout than if it were detonated on the surface.
Nuclear testing done in the 1960's demonstrated that weapons detonated deep underground can produce large amounts of fallout. In order to prevent this during underground testing done at the Nevada Test Site, detonations were required to be at least 600 feet underground, with no vertical shaft open to the atmosphere. This scenario cannot happen in a battlefield situation.
We do not have the ability to drive a weapon down to the depths that would be required to prevent huge quantities of fallout from occurring, and even if we did, the hole created by the weapon would allow the fallout to escape to the atmosphere. Even a low-yield RNEP would kill large numbers of people from both the blast and from the inevitable fallout that would follow.
The RNEP study was initially projected to cost $45 million – $15 million a year for FY 2003-2005. It is now projected to cost $71 million, which is too much money to research a weapon that in many ways duplicates what conventional weapons can do already.
Additionally, the budget request includes figures through FY 2009 that total $484.7 million and includes placeholders for both the development-engineering and production-engineering phases. This may indicate that the RNEP study is more than just a study and is in fact being undertaken with the foregone conclusion that the weapon will go into development. This amendment would effectively stop funding for this weapon.
The Administration argues that these weapons programs are needed to increase deterrence from a new kind of threat. I do not believe these weapons will deter other nations or terrorists. If other nations see the U.S. developing new nuclear weapons, they are likely to think that they need new weapons for their security as well.
We already know that terrorists are trying to acquire nuclear weapons. Director of Central Intelligence, George Tenet, warned the Armed Services Committee once again in March of al-Qa`ida's interest in chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear (CBRN) weapons.
Director Tenet said, "Acquiring these remains a 'religious obligation' in Bin Ladin's eyes, and al-Qa`ida and more than two dozen other terrorist groups are pursuing CBRN materials. Over the last year, we've also seen an increase in the threat of more sophisticated CBRN. For this reason, we take very seriously the threat of a CBRN attack." We cannot afford this risk.
I urge my colleagues to support the Kennedy-Feinstein amendment to stop funding new nuclear weapons development programs.
