|
Comment on this article |
Email this Article
|
|
News :: Elections & Legislation : Government Secrecy : International Relations : Nukes : Regime |
|
Arms Control Activists Hail Bush Setback |
Current rating: 0 |
by Michael Kilian
(No verified email address) |
23 Nov 2004
|
|
"What worries me about the nuclear penetrator," maverick Republican, Rep. David Hobson of Ohio, chairman of the House Appropriations energy subcommittee, said when he told one symposium where the administration proposal was being debated, "is that some idiot might try to use it." |
The defeat over the weekend of President Bush's attempts to fund research and possibly development of a new family of nuclear weapons was hailed Monday by arms control advocates as their biggest success in more than a decade.
They were reacting to the approval by the Senate and House of a spending bill that eliminates funding for the nuclear "bunker buster" as well as other "advanced concept" tactical nuclear weapons.
"This is the biggest victory that arms control advocates in Congress have had since 1992, when we were able to place limits on nuclear testing," said Rep. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), one of the leading opponents of the Bush administration's nuclear arms program. "If we are to convince other countries to forgo nuclear weapons, we cannot be preparing to build an entire new generation of nuclear weapons here in the U.S."
The administration had argued that it was important at least to study such weapons at a time of great threat against the United States. But congressional sources said Republicans joined with Democrats in opposing the program because of the example it would set while the U.S. is trying to compel North Korea and Iran to abandon their nuclear arms efforts.
In addition, lawmakers were concerned by the budgetary pressure of the costly Iraq war and the spiraling deficit.
The Bush administration, which is likely to continue making the program a priority in the president's second term, had sought $27.6 million to continue work on the bunker buster or Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator, a nuclear weapon that would be aimed at an enemy's underground sanctuary. The goal would be to deny enemies havens for weapons of mass destruction or to hide from U.S. forces.
Rationale for bomb
"We want, in some hypothetical future confrontation with a hypothetical generic dictator, to make it absolutely clear that he doesn't have an invulnerable sanctuary," Linton Brooks, administrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration, said recently.
An agency spokesman acknowledged the congressional action was a setback, but attributed the defeat to legislative procedure.
"We are of course very disappointed that there was not funding for all the administration requests for the NNSA," agency spokesman Bryan Wilkes said. "We think that if the issue had come to a specific floor vote on it we would have prevailed. Instead, it was caught up in the appropriations process."
He said he did not know if the nuclear weapons programs would be included in Bush's fiscal year 2006 budget requests.
The White House had outlined plans to spend more than $500 million on the penetrator project over the next several years, which some analysts said was enough to move the weapon into production.
Bush also had asked for $9 million for further research into the possible development of "advanced concept" low-yield tactical nuclear weapons that could be used on a battlefield.
In addition to eliminating the funding requests, Congress slashed to $7 million from $29.8 million a White House request to build new nuclear warhead facilities, or "pits," and cut $30 million that the administration had planned to use to speed resumption of nuclear testing, if that proved necessary.
Though Brooks argued it was not the intention of the White House to start "some bad new nuclear arms race," critics argued these actions would have precisely that effect.
Russian's observation
Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov had said that pursuit of these programs would be "a case of letting the genie out of the bottle."
According to the Washington-based Center for Defense Information, Russia still has about 3,400 tactical nuclear weapons left from the Soviet era that the U.S. would like eliminated.
A major stumbling block to the administration's plans was a maverick Republican, Rep. David Hobson of Ohio, chairman of the House Appropriations energy subcommittee, who feared the funding would lead to a new arms race.
Unlike other military programs, nuclear weapons are overseen by the Energy Department, which is monitored by Congress' energy committees.
"What worries me about the nuclear penetrator," Hobson told one symposium when the administration proposal was being debated, "is that some idiot might try to use it."
Though Bush can seek money for nuclear weapons research in his budget next year, opponents hope Congress' action will make clear that lawmakers are reluctant to go along.
In addition to the financial and diplomatic arguments, critics questioned the new weapons' likely efficiency. The penetrator would not reach deep enough to knock out bunkers far underground, they argued, and it would release deadly radioactive clouds no matter where it was detonated.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) called the decision "a consequential victory for those of us who believe the United States sends a wrong signal to the rest of the world by reopening the nuclear door and beginning testing and development of a new generation of nuclear weapons."
Copyright © 2004 Chicago Tribune
http://www.chicagotribune.com |
Copyright by the author. All rights reserved. |
