Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT)

Senate rejection of Test Ban: US Statements & Comment

Pro-Test Ban

President Bill Clinton

14 October: "In recent days, members of the Congressional majority have displayed a reckless partisanship that threatens America's economic well-being and, now, our national security. ... Even more troubling are the signs of a new isolationism among some of the opponents of the treaty. You see it in the refusal to pay our UN dues, you see it in the woefully inadequate budget for foreign affairs... You see it in the refusal to adopt our proposals to do our part to stem the tide of global warming. ... I think if we ever have a President and a Senate not for this test ban treaty then all bets are off, you'll see a lot of testing and they'll bail out on the NPT..."

Source: Clinton blasts Republicans for new isolationism, Reuters, 14 October.

14 October: "Let me say to India and Pakistan - do not take yesterday's vote as a sign that America doesn't care whether you resume testing and build up your nuclear arsenals. We do care, you should nit do it, it's not necessary, it will hurt your economy and endanger your people..."

Source: Clinton warns India, Pakistan against nuclear tests, Reuters, 14 October.

13 October: "I am very disappointed that the United States Senate voted not to ratify the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. This agreement is critical to protecting the American people from the dangers of nuclear war. It is, therefore, well worth fighting for. And I assure you, the fight is far from over.

I want to say to our citizens, and to people all around the world, that the United States will stay true to our tradition of global leadership against the spread of weapons of mass destruction. The Senate has taken us on a detour. But America eventually always returns to the main road, and we will do so again. When all is said and done, the United States will ratify the test ban treaty.

Opponents of the treaty have offered no alternative, no other means of keeping countries around the world from developing nuclear arsenals and threatening our security. So we have to press on and do the right thing for our children's future. We will press on to strengthen the worldwide consensus in favor of the treaty.

The United States will continue, under my presidency, the policy we have observed since 1992 of not conducting nuclear tests. Russia, China, Britain and France have joined us in this moratorium. Britain and France have done the sensible thing and ratified this treaty. I hope not only they, but also Russia, China, will all, along with other countries, continue to refrain from nuclear testing. I also encourage strongly countries that have not yet signed or ratified this treaty to do so. And I will continue to press the case that this treaty is in the interest of the American people.

The test ban treaty will restrict the development of nuclear weapons worldwide at a time when America has an overwhelming military and technological advantage. It will give us the tools to strengthen our security, including the global network of sensors to detect nuclear tests, the opportunity to demand on-site inspections, and the means to mobilize the world against potential violators. All these things, the Republican majority in the Senate would gladly give away.

The senators who voted against the treaty did more than disregard these benefits. They turned aside the best advice - let me say this again - they turned aside the best advice of our top military leaders, including the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and four of his predecessors. They ignored the conclusion of 32 Nobel Prize winners in physics, and many other leading scientists, including the heads of our nuclear laboratories, that we can maintain a strong nuclear force without testing. They clearly disregarded the views of the American people who have consistently and strongly supported this treaty ever since it was first pursued by Presidents Eisenhower and Kennedy. The American people do not want to see unnecessary nuclear tests here or anywhere around the world.

I know that some Senate Republicans favored this treaty. I know others had honest questions, but simply didn't have enough time for thorough answers. I know that many would have supported this treaty had they been free to vote their conscience, and if they had been able to do what we always do with such treaties, which is to add certain safeguards, certain understandings that protect America's interest and make clear the meaning of the words. Unfortunately, the Senate majority made sure that no such safeguards could be appended. Many who had questions about the treaty worked hard to postpone the vote because they knew a defeat would be damaging to America's interest and to our role in leading the world away from nonproliferation. But for others, we all know that foreign policy, national security policy has become just like every domestic issue - politics, pure and simple.

For two years, the opponents of this treaty in the Senate refused to hold a single hearing. Then they offered a take-or-leave-it deal: to decide this crucial security issue in a week, with just three days of hearings and 24 hours of debate. They rejected my request to delay the vote and permit a serious process so that all the questions could be evaluated. Even worse, many Republican senators apparently committed to oppose this treaty before there was an agreement to bring it up, before they ever heard a single witness or understood the issues. Never before has a serious treaty involving nuclear weapons been handled in such a reckless and ultimately partisan way.

The Senate has a solemn responsibility under our Constitution to advise and consent in matters involving treaties. The Senate has simply not fulfilled that responsibility here. This issue should be beyond politics, because the stakes are so high. We have a fundamental responsibility to do everything we can to limit the spread of nuclear weapons and the chance of nuclear war. We must decide whether we're going to meet it.

Will we ratify an agreement that can keep Russia and China from testing and developing new, more sophisticated advanced weapons? An agreement that could help constrain nuclear weapons programs in India, Pakistan, and elsewhere, at a time of tremendous volatility, especially on the Indian sub-continent? For now, the Senate has said 'no'. But I am sending a different message. We want to limit the nuclear threat. We want to bring the test ban treaty into force.

I am profoundly grateful to the Senate proponents of this treaty, including the brave Republicans who stood with us, for their determination and their leadership. I am grateful to all those advocates for arms control and national security, and all the religious leaders who have joined us in this struggle. The test ban treaty is strongly in America's interest. It is still on the Senate calendar. It will not go away. It must not go away. I believe that if we have a fair and thorough hearing process, the overwhelming majority of the American people will still agree with us that this treaty is in our interest. I believe in the wisdom of the American people, and I am confident that in the end, it will prevail."

Source: Statement by the President, The White House, Office of the Press Secretary, 13 October.

Letter to Senate Majority Leader (Trent Lott) and Minority Leader (Thomas Daschle), 12 October: "Tomorrow, the Senate is scheduled to vote on the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. I firmly believe the Treaty is in the national interest. However, I recognise that there are a number of Senators who have honest disagreements. I believe that proceeding to a vote under these circumstances would severely harm the national security of the United States, damage our relationship with our allies, and undermine our historic leadership over forty years, through Administrations Republican and Democratic, in reducing the nuclear threat. Accordingly, I request that you postpone consideration of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty on the Senate floor."

Source: White House text, 12 October.

8 October: "They want me to give them a letter [saying I will not resubmit the Treaty] to cover the political decision that they have made that does severe damage to the interest of the United States and the interest of non-proliferation in the world? I don't think so. They have to take responsibility for whether they want to reverse 50 years of American leadership in non-proliferation... This whole thing is about politics... It's about [the Republicans saying] 'burn us in 1999, because we're against a treaty that 80% of the American people support, but please don't burn us again in 2000.'"

Source: Clinton asks Senate for CTBT delay, Lott declines, Reuters, 8 October.

7 October: "Do you really want to leave our children a world in which every nation has a green light to test, develop and deploy nuclear weapons, or a world in which we have done everything we possibly can to minimise the risks nuclear weapons pose to our children?"

Source: Clinton, Albright keep up push for test ban treaty, Reuters, 7 October.

13 October: "The responsibility for this abdication of American leadership rests of the increasingly political motives of Senate Republicans. They started a fire of political partisanship they could not put out - ultimately leaving the fate of a crucial international treaty in the hands of those who would play politics with nuclear weapons. ... [The CTBT] is an indispensable tool in our fight to stop the spread of nuclear weapons around the world. I support the Treaty wholeheartedly, and I will continue to work to see it ratified."

Source: Statement of Vice President Al Gore on Senate rejection of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, The White House, Office of the Vice President, 13 October.

18 October, speaking on CNN Television: "I've gotten calls all week,,,[from] my fellow foreign ministers, trying to figure out what has happened here. It's very serious. It has hurt us internationally. What we've lost for the time being is the real international leadership in terms of trying to make others live up to the CTBT. But I want to assure all your viewers, around the world, that the United States is going to live up to the conditions of the treaty."

Source: Albright - US will honor nuke treaty, Reuters, 18 October.

7 October: "It would be a national security tragedy if the world's greatest deliberative body killed a treaty that our nation has sought for 40 years by failing properly to deliberate on and appreciate its merits."

Source: Clinton, Albright keep up push for test ban treaty, Reuters, 7 October.

7 October: "We don't need explosive testing. Only would-be proliferators, rogue States and terrorists do. And there is no good reason to let them have it. ... People around the world do not want to live in a world in which nuclear testing is business as usual. They do not care for the threat of radiation in their air and water or in their children's bones. They do want to make it easy or acceptable for nuclear weapons to spread further."

Source: Senate shouldn't delay passing nuclear test-ban treaty, article by Secretary Albright, The Chicago Herald, 7 October.

10 October: "I think for the Senate to take it up and just have a couple of days of hearing and vote is not a responsible course of action. My own judgment is that we will be seen as being frivolous and cavalier by many other nations around the world."

Source: Delay of test ban treaty vote sought, Association Press, 11 October.

6 October: "I think that if we reject it, that certainly will be seized upon by those who are watching and waiting. ... India has indicated it would like to sign the treaty... I believe that, should the United States go forward and ratify this, it would certainly put pressure on both the Indians and the Pakistanis to not only sign it but ratify it."

Source: Defense Secretary Cohen urges Congress to send signal on non-proliferation, United States Information Service, 6 October.

14 October: "For the Stockpile Stewardship Program to be successful the Administration and the Congress must work together to demonstrate its commitment to the US nuclear deterrent by providing for sustained and stable funding for the program over the years to come. This will be true whether or not a Test Ban Treaty is ratified since the US will inevitably continue to rely on the new paradigm for maintaining its weapons in the post-Cold War era where we are not building new weapons systems, and where we are dependent on a new set of facilities and scientific resources to meet this critical challenge. The importance of a credible nuclear deterrent to our national security was reaffirmed during last week's Senate debate. We at the Department of Energy will continue our work to fulfill this important national security mission."

Source: Statement by Secretary Richardson on Stockpile Stewardship, Department of Energy Press Release R-99-279, 14 October.

7 October: "The scientific achievements of our national laboratories in Stockpile Stewardship, built on more than 50 years of experience, has given us the confidence to forego nuclear tests. ... The Test Ban Treaty is fundamental to the national security interest of the United States. It will rein in nuclear weapons development by States that want the bomb, and dampen the development of more advanced weapons by current members of the nuclear club. The American people want peace of mind. This treaty can give it to them."

Source: Text - Richardson testimony on Stockpile Stewardship Program, United states Information Service, 7 October.

Joint Statement by Three Nuclear Weapons Laboratory Directors, 8 October: "We, the three nuclear weapons laboratory directors, have been consistent in our view that the stockpile remains safe and reliable today. For the last three years, we have advised the Secretaries of Energy and Defense through the formal certification process that the stockpile remains safe and reliable and that there is no need to return to nuclear testing at this time. We have just forwarded our fourth set of certification letters...confirming our judgment that once again the stockpile is safe and reliable without nuclear testing.

While there can be no guarantee that the stockpile will remain safe and reliable indefinitely without nuclear testing, we have stated that we are confident that a fully supported and sustained stockpile stewardship program will enable us to continue to maintain America's nuclear deterrent without nuclear testing. If that turns out not to be the case, Safeguard F - which is a condition for entry into the Test Ban Treaty by the US - provides for the President, in consultation with the Congress, to withdraw from the Treaty under the standard 'supreme national interest' clause in order to conduct whatever testing might be required."

Source: Joint statement by three nuclear weapons laboratory directors (C. Paul Robinson, Sandia National Laboratories; John C. Browne, Los Alamos National Laboratory; C. Bruce Tarter, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory), Energy Department Press Release R-99-276, 8 October.

Source: Delay of test ban treaty vote sought, Associated Press, 11 October.

Source: Senators' views clash on approving test ban treaty, United States Information Service, 7 October.

Source: First Lady criticizes GOP on treaty, Associated Press, 15 October.

Source: US arms control lobby sees hope for CTBT vote, Reuters, 1 October.

Source: GOP blasted for test ban vote, Associated Press, 14 October.

Source: Defeat of test ban treaty a blow to US prestige, Reuters, 14 October.

Source: Senators' views clash on approving test ban treaty, United States Information Service, 7 October.

Source: Clinton, Senate take treaty dispute to the brink, Reuters, 12 October.

Source: Defense Secretary Cohen urges Congress to send signal on non-proliferation, United States Information Service, 6 October.

Senator Lieberman, 14 October: "We have come together today to say to anyone who will listen - to the American people and hopefully to people around the world - that although there are not now sufficient votes in the Senate to ratify this test ban treaty, that does not mean that the cause of nuclear non-proliferation died on the Senate floor yesterday... [I] think it's important to leave the door open to a return to the Treaty by the United States Senate, a Treaty that can be passed. In working toward that end together, we will reach out to our colleagues and to the Administration to see what changes might be made to achieve enough support to enable us to ratify... [i]t's not likely to be accomplished quickly. We don't have a deadline or even a timeline in mind now. But we do want to signal to nations around the world...that neither the American people nor the United States Senate are walking away from our responsibility to lead the effort to reduce the risks to the people of the world, including the American people, from the spread of nuclear weapons."

Source: Republican Senators want US to remain leader on arms control efforts, Congressional Report, 15 October.

Editor's note: in an op-ed piece published in The New York Times on 16 October, Lieberman and Senator Chuck Hagel (Republican - Nebraska), penned the following appeal for calm and consultation - "In this town, conventional wisdom is usually far more deadly than conventional weapons. And so it was this week with the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. After the Senate's disappointing defeat of the treaty, the Beltway coroners wasted little time issuing their post-mortems...and quickly cementing the prevailing notion that the test ban had been banished, permanently. We beg to differ. In fact we do differ. We voted in opposite ways on the treaty and would do so again tomorrow. But we nevertheless agree that...it is still possible to salvage a viable, verifiable test ban. ... We could spend a lot of time assessing blame for this disappointing outcome, and there is plenty of it to go around. But it is more constructive to focus on tomorrow and what it will take to build a lasting consensus. ... Can we pick up the pieces and start anew without partisan rancour? We believe we can, and we are encouraged by comments we have heard from many of our colleagues in both parties who do not want this vote to be the prologue for proliferation. ... [W]e intend to spend the next several months reaching out to our colleagues on the Armed Services and Foreign Relations Committees, throughout the Senate, and in the Clinton Administration, in hopes of determining what steps can be taken to secure a strong bipartisan vote in the Senate for nuclear non-proliferation."

Source: Senators Byrd and Specter urge Senate to postpone CTBT vote, Congressional Report, 7 October.

Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (Republican - Missouri)

6 October: "I think it is unwise for the Administration to have pushed for this treaty as they have when the timing is not right and when it's very dangerous for the future of our children and our grandchildren... They, in effect, have forced this vote. Now, they're going to have to make a decision to go forward... And if the vote occurs, I hope and I believe the treaty will be defeated."

Source: Clinton to press reluctant Senate on nuclear pact, Reuters, 6 October.

5 October: "Foreign Governments will decide whether to develop nuclear weapons based on a calculus of national interests, not on whether the CTBT has been ratified by the US Senate."

Source: Senate opens nuke test ban hearings, Associated Press, 5 October.

30 September: "We are asking that we go to a reasonable time for debate and a vote on this [treaty]... I think this treaty is bad for the country and dangerous. But if there is demand that we go forward with it, as I have been hearing for two years, we are ready to go."

Source: Republicans offer to move on nuclear treaty, Reuters, 30 September.

2 October: "I am confident that the Senate will vote to reject this dangerous arms control pact. The effect of this treaty would be to forever forbid the United States from testing its nuclear arsenal, while allowing the rogue nations of the world to proceed with their nuclear plans."

Source: Nuclear test ban vote set for Oct., Associated Press, 2 October.

1 October: "The American people will be left with no defensive or offensive deterrent. That is exactly what the crowd that conceived this dangerous treaty wants. Well, I have news for them - it's not going to happen on my watch. ... [When it comes to a vote,] the same people clamouring for action go running to the hills... If it were not so pitiful, this behaviour would be amusing."

Sources: Democrats back test van vote delays, Associated Press, 1 October; White House sees chance to push test treaty, Reuters, 1 October.

12 October: "On both sides of the aisle there are Senators of like mind who believe that in the interests of our national security now is not the time to vote on this treaty. What possible rush to judgment compels us to vote today or tomorrow?"

Source: Senate resumes debate on nuclear test ban treaty, Reuters, 12 October.

5 October: "If there were some feeling of weakness about [the US] stockpile, it could induce a leader of another nation or some rogue element or some terrorist to challenge the United States... There can be no doubt about the credibility of that stockpile.."

Source: Senate opens nuke test ban hearings, Associated Press, 5 October.

Editor's note: Senator Warner has proposed that President Clinton establish a bipartisan Committee, to be chaired by former Secretary of Defense James Schlesinger, to explore ways of meeting Senators' concerns about the Treaty.

Mindy Tucker, Campaign Manager for George W. Bush, Governor of Texas and Favourite for the Republican Presidential Nomination, 6 October: "The Governor supports the current moratorium on nuclear testing but not the treaty. He is concerned the treaty is not verifiable, will not stop countries which pose real threats lime North Korea and Iran, and will restrict the United States' ability to test the safety of our own weapons in the future."

Source: Senate Leader predicts defeat for nuclear treaty, Reuters, 6 October.

Source: Dole criticizes Clinton nuke policy, Associated Press, 4 October.

Elizabeth Dole, 14 September: "With Russia in turmoil, with North Korea and other threats, other rogue nations moving forward, I think the US will need - for the foreseeable future - a credible deterrent. A credible deterrent means you have to have confidence in that deterrent - and that means testing."

Source: Dole opposes test ban treaty, Associated Press, 14 September.

Source: Dole opposes test ban treaty, Associated Press, 14 September.

Source: Albright - US will honour nuke treaty, Associated Press, 18 October.

Source: Albright - US will honour nuke treaty, Associated Press, 18 October.

Source: Republican Senators want US to remain leader on arms control efforts, Congressional Report, 15 October.

Source: Text - Senator Lugar's statement announcing his opposition to CTBT, United States Information Service, 12 October.

Back to the Top of the Page

© 2003 The Acronym Institute.