PROFILE IN COURAGE: DOLE’S LEADERSHIP KEEPS SENATE ON TRACK TO DEFEND AMERICA, CONTRASTS SHARPLY WITH CLINTON

(Washington, D.C.): Yesterday, the U.S. Senate voted for
the third time in a week to reject the Clinton Administration’s
concerted efforts to leave the American people undefended against
ballistic missile attack. To a considerable degree, the 45-54
tally on an amendment offered by Sen. Byron Dorgan (D-ND) was a
tribute to the leadership on this issue of Majority Leader Bob
Dole. It mirrored the even more important role Sen. Dole and his
staff have been playing in preventing the Administration from
using behind-the-scenes negotiations to gut key elements of the
Senate Armed Services Committee’s plan for ending the United
States’ present, absolute vulnerability to missile strikes.

Sen. Dole’s Commitment to Defend America

On 3 August 1995, Sen. Dole expressed his personal commitment
to protecting America from the growing threat posed by ballistic
missiles. The following were among the highlights of a speech on
this subject delivered on the Senate floor:

“[The Missile Defense Act of 1995 contained in the
Armed Services Committee’s FY1996 Defense Authorization bill]
firmly establishes the critical imperative of defending
the United States of America from ballistic missiles.
Morally, rationally and constitutionally, this must be our
top priority.

“Why is this important now? Very simply because the
proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and the means to
deliver them is dramatically increasing….The Missile
Defense Act notes that weapons can be acquired by our
potential adversaries far more quickly than they can produce
them indigenously….We cannot wait around for years until
this threat is literally on our doorstep. We must prepare
now.

“…The bottom line is that the bill recognizes what
we all should be aware of — that Mutual Assured
Destruction, the doctrine underlying the ABM Treaty is not a
suitable basis for stability in a multipolar world, nor for
an improving relationship with Russia. Our goal should
be, as outlined in this legislation, to seek a cooperative —
and I stress cooperative — transition to a more suitable
regime to this post-Cold War era.

“…I would like to emphasize that the programs and
approach contained in the Missile Defense Act should be
viewed as an integral part of our counter-proliferation
strategy. If our adversaries know that their hard-gained
missiles will be of no use against America and its allies,
they may well be dissuaded from acquiring them in the first
place.

“…In considering the costs associated with missile
defense, we need to keep in mind how the threat to our
Nation’s security and to our interests has changed. For two
centuries, oceans protected us. Now technology gives even
relatively weak adversaries the hope of attacking or
blackmailing the United States. This bill takes concrete
steps to protect us and sends the clear message that we will
defend our homeland with our superior technology. Moreover,
America has and will continue to have vital interests around
the globe that must be protected, as well. Therefore…I
urge my colleagues to reject the measure offered by the
Senator from Michigan or any other measure which would
weaken or threaten the Missile Defense Act.”⁽¹⁾ (Emphasis added
throughout.)

Standing Firm

Such “other measures” have been the subject of
intensive closed-door discussions ever since the Levin Amendment
was defeated by a vote of 49-51 on 3 August. These negotiations
were precipitated by the threat of a Democratic filibuster of
S.1026 at the behest of the Clinton Administration. The
Administration is understandably panicked at the prospect of
taking into the ’96 election campaign a veto of a Defense
Authorization bill that the President could only justify on the
grounds of his opposition to protecting the American people
against missile attack.

Thanks to Senator Dole’s determination to reject efforts
to “weaken or threaten” the Missile Defense Act — and
that of two key Dole lieutenants, Mira Baratta and David Smith,
repeated White House-blessed “compromises” advanced by
Sens. Carl Levin (D-MI) and Sam Nunn (D-GA) have been repeatedly
rebuffed. Such “compromises” would, at best, have
provided political cover for opponents of missile defenses who
wished to avoid accountability for their indifference to the
public’s growing vulnerability. At worst, they would have
produced a lowest-common denominator that would indefinitely
postpone the steps necessary to begin defending America.
According to today’s Washington Times, the Dole-led
Republican refusal to capitulate will preclude completion of
Senate action on S.1026 before the August recess begins this
weekend.

The Bottom Line

The Center for Security Policy heartily commends Sen. Dole,
his staff and other key Republican legislators — notably, Sens.
Jon Kyl of Arizona, Bob Smith of New Hampshire, Jim Inhofe
of Oklahoma — as well as Armed Services Committee
Chairman Strom Thurmond (R-SC) and Majority Whip Trent
Lott (R-MS) for appreciating a fundamental reality: Time
is on the side of those who seek to defend America.

Opinion research conducted by the Coalition to Defend
America, in which the Center is a participating organization,
has clearly established that — as the public becomes acquainted
with the reality that it is unprotected against missile attack —
it is overwhelmingly disposed to seek urgent corrective action.
This research also suggests that, to the extent clear
responsibility for resisting such action can be assigned to those
like President Clinton and his Senate proxies (e.g., Senators
Dorgan and Levin), they will be held politically accountable
by an angry electorate.

By resisting the powerful temptation to compromise in order
to achieve early completion of Senate action on the Defense
Authorization bill, Sen. Dole and his like-minded colleagues have
afforded themselves — and all those committed to protecting both
the American people and their forces and allies overseas against
missile attack — with a singular opportunity to elevate this
issue and mobilize public support for defending America. The
weeks ahead should be used to make the most of that opportunity.

(1) Sen. Dole was referring to Democratic
Senator Carl Levin, author of an amendment that in several ways
would have gutted the Missile Defense Act by conforming it to
President Clinton’s priority of protecting the 1972
Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, rather than the American people.