News

USIS Washington 
File

20 July 1999

Transcript: Clinton on the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty July 20

(Urges Senate move toward ratifying nuclear test ban pact) (1510)

Washington - President Clinton has urged the Senate Foreign Relations
Committee to hold hearings this fall on the Comprehensive Test Ban
Treaty (CTBT) so that "each side can make its case for and against the
treaty, and allow the Senate to decide this matter on its merits."

The people of the United States "consistently have supported it for
more than 40 years now," he told reporters July 20 in the Rose Garden.
"We have a chance right now to end nuclear testing forever. It would
be a tragedy for our security and our children's future to let this
opportunity slip away."

Clinton noted that the treaty, which now has 152 signatories, cannot
go into effect for any country unless the Senate ratifies it.

On another matter, Clinton said he has had a conversation with China's
President Jiang Zemin "in which I restated our strong support of the
One China policy and our strong support for the cross-strait
dialogue." However, Clinton added, he also told Jiang "we would take
very seriously any abridgement of the peaceful dialogue."

Following is the White House transcript:

(begin transcript)

THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the Press Secretary

July 20, 1999

STATEMENT BY THE PRESIDENT ON THE COMPREHENSIVE TEST BAN TREATY

Rose Garden

11:43 A.M. EDT

THE PRESIDENT: I have just had the privilege of meeting with the three
Apollo 11 astronauts, who, 30 years ago, carried out the first landing
on the moon: Neil Armstrong, Buzz Aldrin, and Michael Collins. They
and everyone at NASA over the years have made an extraordinary
contribution to our nation and to humanity. I am very grateful to
them.

President Kennedy, who set a goal of putting a man on the moon by the
late 1960s, was committed to using technology to unlock the mysteries
of the heaven. But President Kennedy was also concerned that
technology, if misused, literally could destroy life on Earth. So
another goal he vigorously pursued was one first proposed by President
Eisenhower, a treaty to ban for all time testing of the most
destructive weapons ever devised -- nuclear weapons.

As a first step, President Kennedy negotiated a limited test ban
treaty to ban nuclear tests except those conducted underground. But
for far too long nations failed to heed the call to ban all nuclear
tests. More countries sought to acquire nuclear weapons and to develop
ever more destructive weapons. This threatened America's security and
that of our friends and allies. It made the world a more dangerous
place.

Since I have been President, I have made ending nuclear tests one of
my top goals. And in 1996, we concluded a Comprehensive Test Ban
Treaty -- 152 countries have now signed it, and 41, including many of
our allies, have now ratified it. Today on Capitol Hill, a bipartisan
group of senators is speaking out on the importance of the treaty.
They include Senators Jeffords, Specter, Daschle, Biden, Bingaman,
Dorgan, Bob Kerrey, Levin, and Murray. I am grateful for their
leadership and their support of this critical agreement.

And today I want to express again my strong determination to obtain
ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. America already has
stopped nuclear testing. We have, today, a robust nuclear force and
nuclear experts affirm that we can maintain a safe and reliable
deterrent without nuclear tests.

The question now is whether we will adopt or whether we will lose a
verifiable treaty that will bar other nations from testing nuclear
weapons. The Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty will strengthen our
national security by constraining the development of more advanced and
more destructive nuclear weapons, and by limited the possibilities for
more countries to acquire nuclear weapons. It will also enhance our
ability to detect suspicious activities by other nations.

With or without a test ban treaty, we must monitor such activities.
The treaty gives us new means to pursue this important mission -- a
global network of sensors and the right to request short notice,
on-sight inspections in other countries. Four former Chairmen of the
Joint Chiefs of Staff -- David Jones, William Crowe, Colin Powell and
John Shalikashvili -- plus the current Chairman, Hugh Shelton, all
agree the treaty is in our national interests. Other national leaders,
such as former Senators John Glenn and Nancy Kassebaum Baker, agree.

Unfortunately, the Test Ban Treaty is now imperiled by the refusal of
some senators even to consider it. If our Senate fails to act, the
treaty cannot enter into force for any country. Think of that. We're
not testing now. One hundred and fifty-two countries have signed, 41
have ratified, but if our Senate fails to act, this treaty and all the
protections and increased safety it offers the American people cannot
enter into force for any country. That would make it harder to prevent
further nuclear arms competition, and as we have seen, for example, in
the nuclear tests in India and Pakistan.

Do we want these countries and other regional rivals to join a test
ban treaty, or do we want them to stop nuclear testing? Do we want to
scrap a treaty that could constrain them? The major nuclear powers,
Britain and France, Russia and China, have signed the treaty. Do we
want to walk away from a treaty under which those countries and scores
of others have agreed not to conduct nuclear tests? I believe it is
strongly in our interest to ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.

The American people consistently have supported it for more than 40
years now. At a minimum, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee should
hold hearings this fall. Hearings would allow each side to make its
case for and against the treaty, and allow the Senate to decide this
matter on the merits. We have a chance right now to end nuclear
testing forever. It would be a tragedy for our security and for our
children's future to let this opportunity slip away.

I thank those senators from both parties who today are announcing
their clear intention not to do that. Thank you.

Q: Mr. President, did Jiang Zemin tell you that he would use force to
counter Taiwan's independence? And would you use force in Taiwan's
defense?

THE PRESIDENT: First let me tell you I'm going to have a press
conference tomorrow and I will answer a lot of questions. The answer
to that question is, we had a conversation in which I restated our
strong support of the one China policy and our strong support for the
cross-strait dialogue, and I made it clear our policy had not changed,
including our view under the Taiwan Relations Act that it would be --
we would take very seriously any abridgement of the peaceful dialogue.

China knows very well what our policy is, and we know quite well what
their policy is. I believe that the action of the United States in
affirming our support of the one China policy and encouraging Taiwan
to support that and the framework within which dialogue has occurred
will be helpful in easing some of the tensions. And that was the
context in which our conversation occurred.

So I thought it was a very positive conversation, far more positive
than negative. And that is the light in which I meant it to unfold,
and I think that is the shape it is taking. So --

Q:  The Chinese seemed to make it clear that he would use force --

Q: On the treaty, Senator Helms says that he would be happy to hold
hearings if you would send up the ABM Treaty and the Kyoto Treaty.
Will you?

THE PRESIDENT: Look, the ABM Treaty -- we have to conclude START II
first. That's in our national interest. The Kyoto Treaty -- all the
people who say they're not for the Kyoto Treaty insist that we involve
the developing nations in it. I agree with them -- even the people who
are against the Kyoto Treaty under any circumstances say, well, if
you're going to have it you've got to have the developing nations in
there. So it's inconsistent for me to send it up when we're out there
working ourselves to death to try to get the developing nations to
participate.

Now, this is a relatively new issue, the Kyoto Treaty. And the other
issue is not ripe yet -- clearly, not ripe yet. So to take a matter
that has been a matter of national debate for 40 years now, and it is
finally a reality -- a treaty that has been ratified by 40 other
countries, the prospect of dramatically increasing the safety of the
American people in the future -- and hold it hostage to two matters
that are literally not ripe for presentation to the Senate yet would
be a grave error, I think. And I hope that we can find a way around
that.

Thank you.

THE PRESS:  Thank you.

(end transcript)