Will Senate Allow Implementation of CTB Without Ratification?

(Washington, D.C.): During consideration of the FY 1999, Foreign Operations Appropriations bill today, Senators Joseph Biden (D-DE) and Arlen Specter (R-PA) intend to offer an amendment which would begin implementation of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTB) prior to its approval by two-thirds of the Senate. Quite apart from the fact that this initiative deserves to be defeated on its merits, Senators should disavow any such affront to their institution’s constitutional prerogatives and responsibilities.

The Biden-Specter amendment would fence nearly $29 million in funds appropriated by the Foreign Ops. bill for the purpose of defraying "expenses related to the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty Preparatory Commission" — yet another international bureaucracy created by a multilateral treaty for the purpose of promulgating monitoring arrangements and other implementing procedures.

This amendment would have the effect of furthering an increasingly common Clinton Administration gambit: to implement its agenda through executive orders and by expending funds and otherwise adjusting federal programs to make them conform to unratified treaty requirements.

Congress should make unmistakably clear its determination to prevent such erosions of its authority. To its great credit, the House of Representatives did just that last July when it voted to reject the Administration’s bid to begin covert implementation of the Kyoto Protocol — an accord the President has refused to date to submit to the Senate. This welcome action occurred when an amendment to the House of Representatives’ Housing and Urban Development/Veterans’ Affairs appropriations bill offered by Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) was defeated by a sizeable bipartisan majority. A similar effort should be made by the Congress with respect to the Administration’s bid to impose new constraints on missile defense programs, without forwarding its new Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaties for the Senate’s advice and consent.⁽¹⁾

These implementation-without-ratification gambits are being employed for one simple reason: Neither the Comprehensive Test Ban, the Kyoto Protocol nor the new ABM treaties is likely to pass muster in the Senate. In the case of the CTB, the reason is fairly self-evident. As the Center for Security Policy noted on 19 May 1998⁽²⁾:

"…The inescapable truth, borne out by the recent Indian and Pakistani nuclear tests is that the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty will not prevent nations determined to have nuclear weapons from achieving their goal. It cannot even be relied upon to prevent them from conducting covert nuclear tests.

 

"The only thing this treaty will surely do is deny the United States the one tried-and-true technique available to us to assure the safety, reliability and effectiveness of the American nuclear deterrent. By permanently precluding the sort of periodic, safe, underground testing used to find and fix defects in the Nation’s thermonuclear arsenal — and to minimize the susceptibility of that arsenal to accidents or functional obsolescence — the CTB would be worse than useless. It would actually be detrimental to U.S. security."

 

The Bottom Line

It is hard to imagine that the Senate would wish to be a party to the hoax that the Clinton non-proliferation policy in general, and its Comprehensive Test Ban in particular, constitute effective measures for dealing with the burgeoning nuclear threat. It is harder still to believe the Senate would want to waste $29 million on implementation arrangements for a treaty in which the United States may well not participate. But most especially, it strains credulity that Senators would want to authorize such an expenditure before they have given advice and consent to this accord.

For these reasons, among others, the Senate and the Nation will be well served if a majority of Senators vote to reject the Biden-Specter Amendment. Failing that, a vote by at least 34 Senators will be an early indication that the treaty is unlikely to pass muster when it finally is acted upon. It would, moreover, encourage conferees on the Foreign Operations bill to avoid the wasteful expenditure of $29 million for the CTB Prep Com. In this regard, the words of Majority Leader Trent Lott on 29 May 1998 bear repeating:

"American policy should shift from a misguided focus on an unverifiable and ineffective [CTB] treaty that precludes maintaining the safety and reliability of the U.S. nuclear deterrent to a sustained effort to build international support for de-escalating the nuclear arms race in Asia. This should include multilateral sanctions and a complete reappraisal of U.S. export control, counter-proliferation and arms control policies."

 

– 30 –

1. See Center Decision Briefs entitled Chairman Helms Sets the Right Priorities on Pending Treaties: ABM Amendments, Kyoto Accord to Precede the Test Ban (No. 98-P 13, 22 January 1998), Senate Should Vote to Defend America ‘As Soon As Technologically Possible’ (No. 98-D 79, 6 May 1998) and No Implementation of Treaties Without Ratification, Period(No. 98-R 131, 14 July 1998).

2. See Center Decision Brief entitled India’s Nuclear Tests Show Folly of Clinton’s C.T.B. (No. 98-D 86, 19 May 1998).