Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives regarding the continued importance of the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty. (Introduced in the House)

HRES 313 IH

107th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. RES. 313

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives regarding the continued importance of the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

December 12, 2001

Ms. WOOLSEY (for herself, Ms. LEE, Mr. DEFAZIO, Mr. EVANS, Mr. MCDERMOTT, Mr. FATTAH, Mr. HINCHEY, Mr. FARR of California, Mr. DOGGETT, Mr. MCGOVERN, Ms. MCKINNEY, Mr. SABO, Ms. SCHAKOWSKY, Mr. NADLER, Mr. MARKEY, Mr. BARRETT of Wisconsin, Mr. HOLT, Ms. WATSON of California, Mr. OLVER, Mr. FRANK, Mr. LEWIS of Georgia, Ms. BALDWIN, Ms. RIVERS, Mr. PAYNE, Mr. BLUMENAUER, Mr. FILNER, Mr. TIERNEY, Ms. HOOLEY of Oregon, and Mr. RANGEL) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on International Relations

RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives regarding the continued importance of the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty.

Whereas nuclear weapons remain a threat to humankind;

Whereas the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty has been the cornerstone of international arms control efforts since its inception in 1972;

Whereas the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty has helped maintain trusting, lasting relationships with traditional allies of the United States and has been the foundation for positive relationships with Russia and other nuclear nations;

Whereas the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty remains an important means of limiting the threat of nuclear war and the proliferation of nuclear weapons;

Whereas the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty is an important symbol of the United States' commitment to global peace and cooperation in order to limit the proliferation of nuclear weapons and remains an important and viable method for safeguarding international peace;

Whereas the American people have made it overwhelmingly clear that they support a reasoned approach toward arms control policy--which the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty represents--and not a buildup of weapons system and programs;

Whereas the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty helps ensure that no nation questions the validity of the established and proven principles of deterrence, which remains an important and viable method for safeguarding international peace;

Whereas President Bush's November 2001 agreement with Russian President Vladimir Putin to reduce the number of nuclear weapons held by both countries is a welcome and useful step toward global peace and security;

Whereas the Bush Administration's has repeatedly expressed its intention to withdraw from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty in order to develop and build a national missile defense system;

Whereas no trial tests have shown that a national missile defense system could be a reliable defense system;

Whereas Philip E. Coyle, the former director of Operational Test and Evaluation within the Pentagon, stated in the June 2001 Defense Monitor: `The 1972 treaty is not holding back design and development of the technology needed for National Missile Defense (national missile defense), nor is the treaty slowing the testing of an national missile defense system. Development of national missile defense will take a decade or more for technical and budgetary reasons, but not due to impediments caused by the Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty.';

Whereas withdrawing from, or abrogating, the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty in order to continue development of a national missile defense system could weaken ties with traditional allies of the United States and alienate friendly, non-nuclear countries;

Whereas withdrawing from, or abrogating, the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty would destabilize the international relations and could spur nuclear nations to pursue a new arms race with the United States;

Whereas deployment of a national missile defense system presently outlawed by the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty would undermine deterrence, thereby increasing tension between nuclear powers and increasing worldwide instability;

Whereas a national missile defense system would also be perceived by other nations as a threat and could hinder attempts to further reduce nuclear arsenals;

Whereas increased tension between nuclear powers threatens the stability that makes economic and social cooperation between such powers possible;

Whereas the events of September 11, 2001--and the worldwide response to them--underscore the fact that international cooperation is extraordinarily important for protecting the security of United States citizens;

Whereas a national missile defense system would not have prevented the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001;

Whereas terrorist groups or rogue nations are far more likely to use simple means to threaten or harm the United States as opposed to the types of weapons a national missile defense system would defend against;

Whereas withdrawing from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and developing a national missile defense system would divert scarce taxpayer dollars and attention away from more pressing threats to our national security; and

Whereas these scarce resources could be earmarked for homeland security priorities, such as increased airline security, public health measures, and rebuilding those communities affected by the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001: Now therefore, be it

Resolved, that it is the sense of the House of Representatives that in the interests of United States citizens, and all of humankind, that the United States should--

(1) remain a signatory to the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty;

(2) not encourage Russia to withdraw from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty in order to validate United States efforts to build a national missile defense system;

(3) continue to work cooperatively with Russia and other nuclear powers to prevent nuclear proliferation, reduce the number of weapons in current arsenals, and facilitate nuclear disarmament .

Status as at 12/12/2001: Referred to the House Committee on International Relations.