DEFENSE NEWS March 30-April 5, 1998

Nuclear Policy Battle Looms as NATO Expansion Nears

By LISA BURGESS
Defense News Staff Writer

WASHINGTON — One of the first.battles an expanded NATO may have to face is outside criticism, as well as internal debate, over the alliance's nuclear weapon policy.

Even as squabbling between the Republican-led Congress and Democratic President Bill Clinton's White House delays the U.S. Senate's vote on NATO expansion, nonnuclear countries are preparing a challenge to NATO's posture that continues to allow a nuclear first strike by allied forces.

A coalition of 113 countries will request that NATO adjust its nuclear doctrine to better reflect the goals of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) during an NPT Council meeting in Geneva April 27-May 8.

The countries will raise a fundamental question facing a newly enlarged NATO as it heads into the 21st century: the role of nuclear weapons in European security.

The 113 members of the so-called nonaligned movement, none of which have nuclear weapons, have asked conference leaders at the meeting to discuss assurances for parties to the NPT that they will not be targeted by nuclear weapons, and that nuclear-haves will begin disarmament in earnest.

As the only nation to renounce its nuclear arsenal, South Africa has volunteered to represent the nonaligned states' position.

The coalition is concerned that a policy is emerging within NATO in opposition to changes in the alliance's nuclear doctrine, scheduled for revision in 1999.

The current NATO doctrine, which includes placing U.S. nuclear weapons in European countries, runs counter to commitments made by NPT signees, coalition leaders have said.

All NATO members have signed the NPT. So have the Czech Republic, IIungary and Poland, expected to join the alliance in 1999.

As evidence of their fears, nonaligned movement officials have pointed to a Feb. 10 speech at the National Defense University here by Joris Michael Vos, the Netherlands' ambassador to the United States. Vos called for a conservative approach to adapting NATO's strategic concept.

Although Vos said he believed changes are necessary to the concept, he added that NATO's "commitment to collective defense and the trans-Atlantic link, and adherence to the nuclear [policy] paragraphs, should be maintained.

"These represent the heart of the organization," Vos said, "and changing them would alter NATO's essence and purpose irrevocably."

"If NATO ... continues to publicly declare nuclear weapons as part of its strategy ... the fear is that some states that do not currently have nuclear [weapons] may become frustrated and decide to acquire them for protection"

Stephen Young
British American Security Information Council

Vos' statements characterized what Stephen Young, a senior analyst at the British American Security Information Council here, said March 25 was a fundamental disconnect between NATO's charter and the NPT.

"The purpose of the NPT is to reduce nuclear weapons," Young said. To correlate its aims with those of the treaty, NATO must pledge to adhere to the NPT.

In a Jan. 20 statement to the Conference on Disarmament, J.S. Selebi, South Africa's representative to the conference, said, ''South Africa sees security assurances as an implicit part of the NPT bargain which was struck with non-nuclear weapon states when they foreswore the nuclear weapon option — i.e., the right of states which have given up nuclear weapons not to have nuclear weapons used or threatened to be used [against them]."

Young added, "If NATO won't give [nuclear weapons] up, and in fact continues to publicly declare nuclear weapons as part of its strategy for the future of the alliance, the fear is that some states that do not currently have nuclear [weapons] may become frustrated and decide to acquire them for protection."

Meanwhile, the Senate vote on NATO enlargement, scheduled for last week, has been delayed until after the congressional spring break, which begins April 3. Congress is back in session on April 20.

Senators balked on voting on NATO enlargement after a floor debate on the issue was unexpectedly scheduled for March 17, a Senate aide told Defense News March 23.

Other aides said the White House had wanted to press the NATO vote through Congress before Clinton left for his two-week trip to Africa March 22.

But the pressure backfired, even among Clinton's supporters in the Senate.

"A significant number of Republican senators were already complaining that the [White House] was railroading NATO expansion through Congress without enough time to debate," the aide said.

"Even the pro-NATO people were livid" when the floor debate unexpectedly turned up on the schedule, the aide said. Senators and their staffs were forced to scramble, turning their attention away from an upcoming education bill to the NATO issue.

The hastily called debate "gave some credibility to [the anti-NATO group's] accusations" of White House pressure, the aide said.

The Republican-controlled Senate delayed the vote because "they wanted to send a message to the [White House]: Don't push us around," another Republican Senate aide said March 26.

Despite the setback, analysts and politicians do not expect the Senate's stance on NATO to change. Senators are expected to overwhelmingly approve the expansion plans.

Defense News Online

Read more about NATO's nuclear doctrine on NATO's home page in the Web Watch section of Defense News online at http://www.defense-news.com.