|
|||||
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
 |
 |
    |
|
|
|||
 |
|
||
|
|||
|
|
|
|
||||||||
|
United States: Democrats Fear New Effort to Repeal Mininukes Production Ban By David Ruppe “I can absolutely confirm that Republicans in the House-Senate conference on the defense authorization act are trying to back away from … the 10-year-old Spratt-Furse ban,” said a House Armed Services Committee member’s aide, who asked not to be identified. That ban prevents the Bush administration from conducting major research and development into small nuclear weapons, and the House and Senate have each approved partial repeals of the ban in their respective versions of the defense authorization bill. Differences between the two versions are scheduled to be resolved in a House-Senate conference this month (see GSN, June 24). House Democrats plan to offer a “motion to instruct,” the staffer said, describing a maneuver where any minority House member can require the entire House to vote to advise its conferees to insist on certain legislative language in the conference. Such motions do not bind the conferees to accept the recommendation, but it would force Republicans to indicate whether they intend to stand by the language the House already approved. In May, the House approved its version of the 2004 defense authorization bill and partially repealed restrictions on research — but not on development or production — of low-yield nuclear weapons. “We’re trying to force a vote on whether or not they actually support the language they’ve already voted on,” the aide said. Total Repeal Allegedly Sought in Conference The Precision Low-Yield Weapons Development Law, passed as part of the 1994 defense authorization bill, allows early research and development of low-yield nuclear weapons — those with yields equivalent to less than 5 kilotons of TNT — but prohibits research and development that could lead to the production of such weapons. The White House and some senior House Armed Services Committee Republicans, including Chairman Duncan Hunter (R-Ind.), are seeking a full repeal of the ban. The Bush administration advocates development of new low-yield nuclear weapons for potential use against deeply buried targets and suspected chemical and biological weapons stocks. “Maintaining the prohibition on development will hinder the ability of our scientists and engineers to explore technical options to deter national security threats of the 21st century,” the White House said in a May statement. Critics charge developing such weapons could undermine international nonproliferation efforts and foster insecurity about U.S. intentions, which could drive certain countries to accelerate efforts to obtain nuclear weapons. A full repeal of the law, Representative John Spratt (D-S.C.) said in May, would be “backsliding on a decade of progress on nuclear weapons [arms control], especially our move away from tactical, or ‘battlefield’ nukes, a move begun by [former] President [George H.W.] Bush … in 1991.” “They are preparing the way for testing and new weapons,” said John Isaacs, president of the Council for a Livable World arms control organization. In May, the Republican-led House Armed Services Committee voted for a partial repeal. It adopted compromise language that would allow full research but not full development or production, and that language was later approved by the full House as part of the 2004 defense authorization bill. The Senate also approved a partial repeal that would allow research and development, but would require the administration to seek further congressional authorization before “testing, acquisition or deployment.” Now Democrats believe House Republican leaders aim to write in a total repeal during a conference of members from both chambers to resolve differences in their respective versions of the bill. “It’s clear in conference that you’ve got House Republicans trying to back away from it [the compromise language],” according to the aide. The staffer said that during recent informal House-Senate negotiations, Strategic Forces Subcommittee Chairman Terry Everett (R-Ala.) indicated House Republican intentions to work for a total repeal. “When the first meeting of the panel dealing with these issues met, the chairman of the House subcommittee opened the meeting by basically saying ‘let’s go with what you guys did on mini-nukes, except drop all those caveats,’ which means, let’s just repeal the damn thing,” said the staffer. Staff members for Everett and Hunter did not respond to requests for comment. Insufficient Outrage A significant question looms as to whether the Senate Republican conferees would be willing to join House Republicans in fully repealing the ban over opposition from Senate Democrats, congressional aides said. The Senate Armed Services Committee in May had voted for a full repeal (see GSN, May 9), but when faced with a Democratic challenge on the Senate floor that looked likely to succeed, Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John Warner (R-Va.) introduced a compromise amendment for a partial appeal that was approved. Democrats say if Warner and Hunter, the senior Republican conferees, now decide to push through a total repeal, the only recourse Democrats would have is to try to muster sufficient Democratic and Republican opposition to the entire defense bill over the issue. Such a move would probably fail, however. “There’s not remotely that level of outrage. There’s an awful a lot of Democrats who are concerned about it, but it’s not even unanimous within the Democratic caucus,” the staffer said. The only real leverage the Democrats may have is that Republicans might prefer to achieve bipartisan support for the defense bill, and if Republicans in the conference trampled Democrats on many other issues, it could produce a large Democratic vote against the conference report. Republican leaders will “try to measure their ability to railroad things through with this desire to keep enough Democrats around,” the staffer said.
| ||||||||||
Back to top
