MR. HUMPHREY

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP65B00383R000100200026-2
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 4
• Document Creation Date: December 20, 2016
• Document Release Date: March 1, 2004
• Sequence Number: 26
• Publication Date: August 19, 1963
• Content Type: OPEN

'Approveci For Release'2006/11/1 : A DP6 P. 03e3RO6010OZ00026-2
14469
-proposed limited- test ban treaty and yet provides for absolutely none. 9Q-day basis; or, if we presume that there
As it, stands, of course, the, treaty con- In that way it is symbolic of the entire .has been a violation, we can withdraw
rains no provision for inspection, We treaty. It seems only half thought, immediately.
-are told that it does not need.such,a pro- through in its implications. I urge that I am sure the Senator knows that it is
vision,' that we can check on the per- the Senate try to supply some of the the intention of this Government, from
?fprmance of the signatory nations by the thinking ,so obviously lacking, lest the all the reports that have been given to
use of our detection devices, That is mistakes of a few 7Clegotiators become the us in the hearings, to maintain at peak
.not true, There is one entire area of the peril of an entire nation, of an entire .performance our laboratories and scien-
treaty proposal which cannot be checked way of life. tint teams in the field of nuclear science
by black boxes, or satellites, or Ionization I have spoken of one part of the treaty and in the field of nuclear weaponry.
couuters,,or apy technical means., which demands actual, physical. inspec- We intend to maintain testing equipment
That area is section 2 of article I. Let tion and . which .will make. the treaty for atmospheric, underwear and outer
me read it: meaningless without it. I do not want, space tests at a ready alert, and to engage
.Each of the parties to this treaty under- to gloss over, by that single point, the in an extensive series of underground
takes flirthermore,.to refrain, from, causing, general impact that this treaty has upon tests, which are costly and time con-
encouraging, or in any way participating in the principle of inspection to which we suming-an area. of testing the Soviet
the carrying out of any nuclear weapon test have hewed until this very proposal. Union has not perfected but one in which
`explosion, or any, other nuclear explosion, We have, through countless negotia-
anywhere which 'would take place in, any of tions with the Soviet, placed the heaviest we have expert knowledge.
the environments described, or have the ef- Finally, I point out to the Senator from
?fect referred to in iaragraph l of this article. . emphasis upon the need for international Arizona that when raising these doubts-
,uispection of arms agreements. That which surely is a legitimate activity on
The.wording seems clear to me. ,Ana- principle now is dropped in the proposed the part of any interested citizens or Sen-
tiurl that signs this treaty will not- cause test ban treaty. ator-it is also important to cite what we
a. nuclear explosion, or test, anywhere in , . How, having finally renounced our de- do to overcome the doubts. For example,
Any,of the banned environments.,. A na- mands for inspection, could we expect we have the most extensive system of in-
'tion ,that signs this treaty ,would pledge to press those demands in future arms spection and detection of nuclear cx-
not to, encourage any such test. A na- control agreements with which we may plosions of any nation on the face of the
`tion that signs this treaty, would not be faced? ?earth. We have acoustical, electronic,
participate in any such test. Our position in the United Nations also and seismic detection and identification
Let us mow get down to cases. That has reflected part of this problem.' We systems. Those systems are tied in with
`Clause says that we will not cause, en- have long been firmly opposed to declar- those of other countries.
courage, or participate in regard to any atory treaties, those treaties which sim- The particular treaty under discussion
tests that, for instance, the French ply declare a goal but provide no realistic would not cover underground tests for
might carry out. That clause says that machinery for inspection, maintenance, the purpose of inspection. Our inter-
'the. Soviets will not cause, encourage, or or effectiveness. The, proposed partial national inspection system was primarily
:participate in regard to any tests that nuclear test ban treaty is surely just such directed toward the underground tests.
ed, China ,night carry out, to cite just a declaratory treaty. Does it establish In this environment we needed on-site
one"of the nations that could be,involved a broader. precedent than even the arms inspections within the Soviet Union to be
on their side. control precedent?, Will it, . indeed, able to ascertain whether there had been
'Hpw in,the,world-can any such clause establish an entire new avenue of Amer-. a violation by underground testing. The
be meaningful if there J.
,can di
lomac
wa
to i
d
no
p
y.
n-
y an
relationship to in- problem here Is one of differentiating be-
sprect it for possible violations? ternational , agreements of All sorts? tween earthquakes and underground nu-
,-And?h ,w in t4 ,e world can it be in- Surely we must not beg this question in clear explosions. This requires an ex-
spected or possible violation through studying the proposed treaty. tensive system of seismic stations sur-
existing technical means? The Answer The people of the United States have, rounding the Soviet Union and within
.seems clear. It punches ,a major hole in and their representatives have, surely the Soviet Union, and a freedom to move
.the validity of the treaty. arrived at consensus on the need to in- within the Soviet Union for on-site in-I 1r, Cannotthe_Soviets immediately claim speet, and carefully provide for inspec- spection.
,that we are violating thatclause by shag- tion of any treaty signed with the Soviet The limited nuclear test ban treaty
Ing nuclear, information with France? Union. Our experience in Cuba alone relies upon the national systems of sur-
Cannot we immediately ask what pro- shows how easily we may be burned. veillance; seismic, electronic and acousti-
tection there is in the treaty against So- Even with supposedly good air inspec- cal systems, plus the regular intelligence
tion, how long did It take before this Na-
viet,participation in tests inside the vast-, services of our Government and of
-,Hess of China? Talk of splits between tion was permitted to awaken to the friendly countries.
the Chinese and the . Soviets are between presence of Soviet missiles there? It Furthermore, the treaty will be signed
more Chinese n n in this respect than 'took almost too long. We risked our by many scores of nations, all of whom
talk of splits between ourselves and. the lives then. How much more would we be have a stake in seeing the treaty en-
:French. We still know whose friend is risking our lives now in signing a treaty forced and observed.
whose, and what the 'possibilities for vio- dealing with the mightiest weapons of
p all but with no inspection beyond sniffing I rise to protest the strawmen that
ration actually are. the air, feeling the ground, or scanning are set up day after day for someone to
secretary Rusk has commented on the skies? come in later and knock down and say,
:.this by saying that we will not cause, en- ? __ No, the question of inspection is not "I have proved my point."
:courage, or participate in regard to one that is apart from this treaty. In- The basic structure of this treaty was
French nuclear testing. He can be be- spection is deeply involved. It must be . submitted by the previous administra-
lieved, I am sure. Whether the Russians involved. I call on my colleagues to give tion; it has been recommended by Mem-
'will share,th t belie#, I cannot say. But this matter their most serious and urgent bers of Congress, by resolutions. The
Secretary Rusk, .in commenting on the consideration, treaty before us is the most simple and
.,other possibility-of the Soviet Working Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, will direct treaty we could sign in our na-
?the Res, Chinese-simply says that he the Senator yield? tional interest. The testimony reveals
doesqt beli_eve, they, will. _That is _. Mr. GOLDWATER. I am happy to that it is in our national interest. I do
scar y he sort of assurance on which yield. not feel that we ought to be frightening
.a treaty can be_based.. , Mr.,HUMl'HfiX_ Lam sure the Sen- the American people as to what is in
Inspection of the shipment of_ fission- ator knows that thetest ban treaty which this treaty or what it means to our
able material would be just one of the is now the subject of hearings provides security.
sorts 61 inspection that this particular a very effective means by which this The treaty provides every safeguard
Clause of the .treaty seems to .raise, country can protect its security interests, that could possibly be provided. The
; isle . ,qi teckuaicians and even of in- ' that is, by prompt withdrawal in case treaty provides more safeguards than
No."I 8-5
Approved For Release 2006/11/11 Cl -RDP65B00383R000100200026-2
CONGRESSIONAL.RECORp .. SENATE
 Approved For Release 2006/11/11 : CIA-RDP65B00383R000100200026-2
14470 CONGRESSIONAL RE CORD'-SENATE August 19
moratorium, which was approved by the Mr. GOLDWATER. For all tests. We agreements with East Germany, but it
previous administration, and which in- held, in ventures in the past in trying to does not recognize the East German se-
eluded underground tests. reach agreements, that we needed onsite gime. East Germany has signed certain.
The treaty requires careful considera- inspections. protocols and agreements relating to
tion. The hearings have been produc- Mr. HUMPHREY. 'The Senator is prisoners of war to which we are signa-?
tive. Nothing has been said in the hear- talking about onsite inspections for the tories. That does not mean that the
ings to date which was not known before comprehensive, overall' nuclear test ban East German regime has been recog-,
or which would in any way frighten the proposals, which included underground nized.
American people into a position of doubt tests. I am not going to let the Senator First the Senator from Arizona an-
as to the reliability of the instrument we from Arizona befog or' becloud the rec- pounced that he was opposed to the
have signed. ord or to obscure the central issue. The treaty-
Mr. GOLDWATER. Mr. President, tests being banned under the treaty are Mr. GOLDWATER. The Senator is
will the Senator yield? the very areas which the previous ad- mistaken.
Mr.,HUMPHREY. I yield. ministration recommeijtded for the kind Mr. HUMPHREY. At one time.
Mr. GOLDWATER. I have been lis- of treaty we now have. and the previous Mr. GOLDWATER. I said I was op--
tening very carefully. I have been try- comprehensive test b proposals were posed to the draft that Dean Rusk
ing to ascertain the point the Senator is not approved. It was n the area of on- showed us 2 or 3 days before.
trying to make. site inspection and international control Mr. HUMPHREY. It was the same
I agree with what the Senator has where we had differenpes. The Senator treaty.
said, but I think the point he is trying from Minnesota represents that this Mr. GOLDWATER. No; it was not.
to get across is that Senators have no treaty is subject to inspection--our in- Mr. HUMPHREY. I respectfully dif?-
right to stand up and ask questions about spection-and we can: withdraw at any fer.
the treaty. time that we find it is In our national in- Mr. GOLDWATER. I respectfully
Mr. HUMPHREY. Not at all. terest to do so. differ. I heard it. I was present.
Mr. GOLDWATER. If the Senator Mr. GOLDWATER.! If the Senator Mr. HUMPHREY. I am, happy to
will read my remarks carefully, he will will take the trouble in the morning to learn that the Senator is not opposed to
find there is an area of doubt, but not read the remarks I have made, he will the treaty. This is encouraging to me,
in the same area. The Senator from see that I am outlining'[ an area in which because I felt that eventually he would
Minnesota has raised some very intelli- I feel that a different type of inspection not be opposed to it. He is sensible, wise,
gent questions. I know about seismic is needed. I may be mistaken, but the and intelligent.
detection. I know we cannot distin- Senator is not talking o the point, so we Mr. GOLDWATER. Flattery will get
guish between earthquakes and nuclear are not solving it. The point I make is the Senator everything.
explosions. I am not arguing that that after reading the draft of the treaty Mr. HUMPHREY. I amp happy to
point at all. I am arguing whether there I have a question in my mind as to know that the Senator will, be on the
is some doubt as to whether we would whether or not we need a better inspec- side of those supporting the treaty.
have to give up our help with the French, tion system in that area. I admit that West Germany did not have any di-
or what the Soviet attitude is toward the situation may never develop, but the culty with it, because it signed. the
Red China, or any other country. Once fact that it could develop worries me. I treaty. West Germany is not as worried
Cuba is recognized as a signatory of this know we can withdraw. That is the about its relationships with East Ger-
treaty, there is nothing to prevent any most palatable part of the treaty. I many as we are. The Associated Press
other country from giving her atomic in- would not want to join in one that was indicated a few moments ago that the
formation. irrevocable. Republic of West Germany signed the
Mr. HUMPHREY. Oh, yes; there is. I further suggest that, in the 'whole , treaty.
Mr. GOLDWATER: This is what oc- area of underground testing, we can test Mr. GOLDWATER. Mr. President,
curs to me at the time. This is the point as much as they and they can test as will. the Senator yield?
I am trying to make. The Senator from much as we can. In this we are not stop- Mr. HUMPHREY. I yield.
Minnesota is making a long recital of ping a proliferation of weapons. I think Mr. GOLDWATER, If the Senator is
things he knows I know, and he knows I we are adding to the proliferation of interested in my becoming enlightened in
agree with him. I am merely trying to weapons. But this is neither for nor this field, if he will allow me to ask
raise questions which are in my mind, against the treaty. I have merely raised questions, I may be contented, and be
and I intend to continue raising them. -a question, as have other Members of the may find me going arm in arm with
Senate. I asked Dean Rusk for a com-
Mr. HUMPHREY. The Senator is him-
entitled to do so. plete briefing-I have not received it yet, Mr. HUMPHREY. 'Wonderful.
but I know I will-a? to why, by East
Mr. GOLDWATER. I am glad to hear Germany's signing the treaty, we would Mr. GOLDWATER. But not having
r
that. not be in effect recognizing her. I take all the intelligence that the Senator
Mr. HUMPHREY. He would be remiss his word for it. I believe him. But I from Minnesota has--
in his duty if he did not. want to have some legal proof before I Mr. HUMPHREY,? That is going too
All I am saying is that the Senator has say "Yes." I am merely raising ques- far.
indicated certain things. He has indi tions. I merely wanted to clarify the Mr. GOLDWATER. He is going to
cated that the treaty would not be sub- issue and debate it. I hope the Senator hinder me and place hurdles in my road.
ject to inspection-which is not true. from Minnesota does pot suggest that a I merely want to be as well informed an
It is subject to inspection-it is subject Senator ought not to, have the right or this subject as those who have already
to our national inspection system. duty to stand up and, raise a question, made up their minds. :I hope the Sen-
The Senator has questioned whether When I have other questions I intend to ator will not undertake: to restrain me
or not the treaty would be abided by. I raise them. from asking questions in the future that .
think the point he is trying to make to M:r. HUMPHREY. '- The practice of I regard as important questions to me. I
the American people is a disservice, continually raising questions is a good hope the Senator will not deny me that
namely that the treaty is an open invi- way to indicate a deep interest in the right.
tation to avoidance or evasion. The subject; and the Senator from Arizona Mr. iTMP'RFV_ I will .join the Sen-
Senator says the treaty is not subject to . has a deep interest in it. But these a r in a exercise of interrogation. I
inspection. I say it is subject to our in- questions have already' been raised.. The read with considerable interest the Sen-
spection. The Senator's questions tend point with respect to recognition of East ator's speech during the past weekend.
to obscure rather than illuminate the Germany has been answered. A pam-. I listened to his remarks today. Both
Senate's consideration of this treaty. phlet has been published by the Foreign speeches indicate to me that a number
Mr. GOLDWATER. It is not subject to Relations Committee on the legal ques- of questions are being asked.
the type of inspection that we have been tiori involved. Furthermore, the State The public :record, as well as the ex-
insisting on year after year. Department has a memorandum on this ecutive record, has answered these
Mr. HUMPHREY. For underground particular legal issue, I point out that questions. But the constant repetition
tests? the West German Republic has many of them does not reassure the people of
Approved For Release 2006/11/11 : CIA-RDP65B00383R000100200026-2
 4pproved' For' Release 2006/11/1 4 C 383RC b01002b00'-2'
96 CONGRESSIONAL kE C6Rb - -SENATE
ment at
would the' entire
_h he
the -United States What is ;needed is from iMi that to belthre my speec tor
e case. I am not his leisure. r If he does so, he tw ll see that
have been asked are being answered re-
sponsively and effectively. The testi-
'mony of Secretary Rusk, the testimony
of General Taylor, and the testimony of
Mr McCbne as we. as a testimony o
Other witnesses who have appeared be-
fore the committee, has been candid,
to.the point, and responsive to the ques-
tions which have been asked by thought-
ful Senators, including the distinguished
Senator from Arizona. But let us now
acknowledge that these questions have
been answered.
Mr. GOLDWATER. Mr. President,
will the Senator yield?
Mr. HUMPHREY. I yield.
Mr. GOLDWATER. I do not believe
I have missed one session of the commit-'
tee hearings on this treaty. I have
heard Dean Rusk, and I have heard
General Taylor. The fact that there is
still some question in my mind indicates
that there are areas in the treaty to be
questioned. I do not believe a treaty
should be brought before the Senate and
voted on-merely because it seems to be
the politically proper or appropriate
thing 'to, do or `because the President
wants it or does not want it. I believe
these issues should be considered care-
Yam not a member of the For-
h
u
y.-L arms raoc.
eign Relations Committee. My knowl- ? China were to explode a nuclear device.
ed
field is entirely military and This is not merely a declaratory state- All these questions have been referred
in thi
r
s
Edge
technical. I must proceed with some ment. to in testimony, and they have been caution in a field in which the Senator I thank the Senator for his indulgence. cussed in s at length. Alley h the a en dis
r
from-Minnesota-is so brilliant; namely, I will examine the Senator's speech in from Minnesota is saying is that a ato-
of the of tha. doubts,
foreign policy and international prob- more detail. The Senator says, "Having from Minnesota
,lems. I hope the Senator will therefore finally renounced our demands for in- the ation up the stra recital of and the doubts,
help me in my Ignorance. I Shall be spection, could we expect to press those thei et knocking down a tanra c-
grateful'if he will extend my knowledge demands in future arms control agree- men by the cke who initially sets them
n this Held. ments with which we may be faced?" I , does not contribute to to what I believe
"Mr. HUMPHREY. The Senator's ex- say that that kind of question is mis- u upbethouc tri t what e the a of
presslon of humility does him well. His leading. treby.
knowledge in this field is far beyond his Mr. GOLDWATER. Is it a fair ques- Mr. G07,DWATER. Mr. President,
present testimony, and I am more than tion? he Senator yield?
happy to be his witness. Mr. HUMPHREY. It is not a fair will ll the HUMPHREY. yield.
Mr. UMPHREY. Perhaps I am in
The RECORD will indicate that the Sen- question. Mr. $
or from Arizona attempted to tell the Mr. GOLDWATER. It is not? error. but when I GOLDWATER. ng
ts,
American people that we were trying to Mr. HUMPHREY. No. It is not fair with tbu when am Union, Perhaps dam, the din dealing
:establish a new pattern and a new policy because we have not renounced our de- I believe I have some ground for nesng
by signing an agreement without a pro- mands for inspection. Our demands for a bit ditrustv and I shall continue to
vision for inspection; and that ap- inspection were in connection with a be.
parently we were growing a little weak comprehensive nuclear test treaty. The Mr. HUMPHREY. Every man is dis-
Soviet terms of our relationships with the Senator from Minnesota has said on the Mrtrustful. It is "old hat" to say that we
Soviet Union because the treaty on these floor dozens of times that he has been ought stf 1. be is ol distrustful of the Chat we
subjects is wide open to violation. All in favor of this proposal, and encour-
Mr. GOLDWATER. Is it wrong to
that the Senator from Minnesota says ages it. Furthermore, I have not heard nists.
is that such statements plant doubts his entire speech. I have heard only a say it?
Lich should be resolved by testimony, part of it. However, in his speech the HUMPHREY. Indeed not; let the
and which have been resolved by testi- Senator asks: "And how in the world SenaMr. tor say it repeatedly. However, it
mony can any such clause be meaningful if the Senator's argument.
The inspection that is provided is ade- there is no way to inspect it for possi- does No not treaty with fortify the Senat Union will be
quate for the type of treaty we are dis- ble violations?" ` North the with the a is iettn on unless
cussing`. On-site, international control Mr. GOLDWATER. Is that a fair worth some mutual advantages.
Inspection was required in connection question? ore, as Admiral Radford once
with a comprehensive treaty that in- Mr. HUMPHREY. Yes; but the an- Furthermore, develop our system ionce
eluded" underground tests. I am sure swer is as obvious as the presence of the said, inspection as s alternative to
that my remarks at this point will prove Senator from Arizona. trust."
to be very pertinent to this RECORD. I Mr. GOLDWATER. Why? Mr. President, we have poured mil-
-
tagy"have more to say later. Mr. HUMPHREY. There are means lions of doids nto the system of interGOLDWATER. I should like to of inspection; and the Senator knows it. national inspection.
op tfie "Record straight. ?I believe that He ought to be telling the American peo-
'I commented upon the fact that his- pie that there is a means of inspection; We have farflung inspection facilities, aVe not
of th
e
the and
system
inspect
the
n in
ful Of rma.Ing ah8 claratoryetype of treaty. UnitedStates, wh chi is managed by the awe evof erytMember. I believe theisAmebody can pe0-
That is what I mentioned as being a U.S. Air Force, of which the Senator is pie ought to be told that the treaty is not a
statement that
the Sena- it invol es a system of inspect on.u They
z;tepre adiredtion that eif have not the Senator a Mrenowned and r. GOLDWATER. respeced member.
'befOre. I 'believe
-Approved For Release 2006011111 CIA-RDP65B0038 ROQQ QO,200026-2
site inspection system. In other words,
as it is, if they are going to cheat, they
will cheat, and we shall have a hard time
catching them.
Mr. HUMPHREY. I 'do not consider
the treaty a declaratory statement. It
is a first step in the attempt to bring
nuclear weaponry under control. It is a
primary, preliminary step. However, I
believe it is a very important step in our
effort to prevent further proliferation of
these weapons. It is not the answer to
all problems. It does not represent a
major step toward disarmament. It does
not reduce our military power. There
are many things that it does not do.
As the President says in his message
to the Senate :
This treaty is the first concrete result of
18 years of effort by the United States to im-
se limits on tne nuclear urnis race.
tion that we discussed previously. i aui
talking about the question that arose as
a result of the signing of the treaty with
other countries; namely, that it might
allow other countries to develop a nu-
clear power which they now have no op-
portunity to devel9p. I wish the Senator
would read the entire statement, and not
take portions of it out of context. I be-
lieve I have raised a fair, legitimate ques-
tion. If the Senator can answer it, I
shall be grateful to him.
Mr. HUMPHREY. I shall try to do so.
With respect to inspection, we have not
renounced our requirement for inspec-
tion in a comprehensive treaty. I be-
lieve that the Senator's speech presents
a constant attitude of doubt and sus-
picion. I do not believe it makes a con-
structive contribution to a thoughtful
discussion of the all-important treaty
that is before us.
There is a doubt on some points.
There is some doubt as to what will be
Then he goes on to say: +.1,a veartion of the Soviet Union if we
This treaty is the whole agreement. U.S. were to give nuclear weaponry and nu -
negotiators in ow were instructed not to clear information to France.
make this agreement conditioned upon any The Senator from Oregon [Mr.
other understanding; and they made none.
This treaty advances, though it does not MORSE] has asked for specific informa-
assure, world peace; and it will inhibit, tion on that point from the State De-
though it does not prohibit, the nuclear partment, and he will get it. There is
ubt as to what we could expect if
.d
o
 Approved,For Release 2006/11/11 : CIA-RDP65B00383R000100200026-2
should be told that we are paying for it, No; we are trusting durselves, and are
and that we will rely upon our inspection trusting the finest inspection appara-
system to make sure that the treaty is tus that any country has ever known.
observed and that there is no violation Mr. GOLDWATER. We are getting
of it. If there is a violation, we will be into a discussion without the Senator's
ready to take whatever action is appro- reading my question. He is not giving
priate under the existing circumstances. attention to it.
Mr. GOLDWATER. Mr. President, Mr. HUMPHREY. Would the Senator
will the Senator yield? like to tell me what the question is? I
Mr. HUMPHREY. I yield. have re-read his statement the second
Mr. GOLDWATER. Once again, the time.
Senator gets away from the point. I Mr. GOLDWATER. No; the Senator
admit all the things the Senator is talk- has not.
ink' about. - Mr. HUMPHREY. I would be most
Mr. HUMPHREY. The Senator is so happy to have the Senator state the
helpful about admitting all these won- question.
derful things. Mr. GOLDWATER. I hope the Sen- -
Mr. GOLDWATER. If the Senator ator will read the question and give
will allow me to direct his attention to me an intelligent answer, because I think
the basic question that arises by the lan- I asked a legitimate question. It has
guage of the treaty, I have no doubt nothing to do with our inspection system.
about our inspection. I think I know as Mr. HUMPHREY. What Is the Sen-
much about it a
d
es
s
o
h
t
e senator from ator talkin
ab
t i
i
g
ou
n h
s speech? Would
Minnesota. he mind delineating his remarks? -
Mr. HUMPHREY. Perhaps more. Mr. GOLDWATER. It pertains to sec-
Mr. GOLDWATER. I have great tion 2 of article 1. That language
faith in it. I am aware of its weaknesses, reads:
but we are not discussing them today. I Each of the parties to this treaty under-
am discussing a question I have in my takes furthermore to refrain from causing,
mind, that I stated on the floor of the encouraging, or in any, way participating
Senate, but which, except for the last in, the carrying out of any nuclear weapon
part, the Senator from Minnesota did test explosion, or any other nuclear explo-
not hear. The Senator from Minnesota Sion, anywhere which would take place any the have
took exception to It. When he studies the itect referred t to, in environments o, in described, or hhi
paragraph 1 of this
the question I propounded, if he can en- article.
lighten me on the subject, I shall be very
happy to be enlightened. He will not Mr. HUMPHREY. Yes.
find the question on the last page. Mr. GOLDWATER. This wording, as
Mr. HUMPHREY. Despite all the I said, seems clear:
genteel protestations, when I read again A nation that signs Ws treaty will not
what the Senator from Arizona said, it cause a nuclear explosion, or test, anywhere
is quite obvious what the impact or im_ In any of the banned environments.
port of the question- is. We know that Mr. HUMPHREY. Yes.
suspicion exists apart from the treaty. Mr. GOLDWATER. Then:
I callupon all Senators to give this sub- A nation that signs this treaty would
ject their serious attention. The Sen- pledge not to encourage any such test.
ator from Minnesota will give it serious
consideration. Inspection is involved. testified to HUMPHRthe Yes; that has been
The Senator from Arizona asks: in all the hearings.
How much more would we be risking our A Mn nation . GOLDat signs tgns t And:
lives now in signing a treaty dealing with pte that ee treaty would not
the mightiest weapons of all but with no participate in any such test
inspection beyond sniffing the air, feeling Mr. HUMPHREY. The Senator from
the ground, or scanning the skies Arizona is making a good case for the
Sniffing the air under the inspection treaty. What is the question?
system we have is a little more than Mr. GOLDWATER. We will get to it.
talking about hay fever. It is a mighty That clause provides that we will not
process. It involves planes and man- cause, encourage, or participate in re-
power. It involves the highest, most gard to any test the French may make.
intricate techniques of air inspection and Mr. HUMPHREY. Yes. The Senator
filtration for atomic debris. It means from Oregon [Mr. Moi4szl placed that
scanning the skies with radar and elec- question before the State Department.
tronic devices. That is no little picture The question will be answered. A vig-
of looking up at the milky way or the orous answer will be made available to
moon. it is a mighty, technical, and the American people.
effective process. Mr.. GOLDWATER. The Senator
Mr. GOLDWATER. Mr. President, agrees with me, then, that there is a
ield?
y
Will the Senator
August 19
encourage, or participate in regard to
any test Red China may carry out.
Mr. HUMPHREY. Yes.
Mr. GOLDWATER. This is where the
present inspection system, in my opin-
ion, is not meaningful, and where I have
a question. How in the world can any
such clause be meaningful ii' there is no
way to inspect for possible violations?
There must be a way to inspect for
possible violations. We can inspect on
the basis of our ability. I think we can
say, without violating secrets, that we
can inspect the mainland, heartland, of
Russia. I do not think we are set up
to inspect any disturbances that might
be seismic in nature in China.
Mr. HUMPHREY. We can do so
every bit as well as we can :in Russia.
Mr. GOLDWATER, We cannot dis-
cuss that subject on the floor of the
Senate.
Mr. HUMPHREY. The Senator from
Arizona and I know that. I do not say
we can inspect all seismic events in Rus-
sia; but we can do it as well there its we
can in China.
Mr. GOLDWATER. We cannot tall:
about that on the floor of the Senate.
That is the question I would like to have
answered.
Mr. HUMPHREY. What is the other
question? The question is one of in-
spection. The Senator from Arizona not
only raises the point of inspection in
that situation, but the entire force of
his speech was upon the subject of in-
spection, planting doubts in the Ameri-
can mind as to whether the treaty
provides for inspection.
I say unqualifiedly that the treaty
provides for inspection-our inspection.
Who else said so? Secretary Rusk Mr.
McCone, and General Taylor. 'f'' i~ep'
W re witnesses before the committee.
Secretary McNamara also testified,
Everyone knows that the treaty Pro-
vides for inspection. Whether the in-,
spection is as good as it ought to be is
a question that can be argued. I am of
the opinion that our inspection system
can be improved. But let the record be
perfectly clear that we do nort trust the
Soviets, and they do not trust us
.
W
e
have our inspection system. That is the
alternative to trust. To me, the treaty is
an enforcible document to protect our
national security. We will rely on our
national inspection system. The taxpay-
ers of the United States have put hun-
dreds of millions-of dollars into this
system and have reached a number of
agreements with the friendly powers of
the world, with 'whom there is a tie-in
of their inspection systems with our own.
Many scores of countries will sign the
treaty, all of them interested in seeing
that the treaty is abided by.
He said the issue was inspection, That
issue i
l
says that the Senator fjrom+Ariz nazis
Arizona has very weak: underpinnings.
s we
l met in the treaty. It is
our i
s
e
about a week late in catching up with
It is primarily an expression of doubt
n
p
ction system. We are the judge
of wheth
the Senator from Oregon,
,
to which he knows the answer. That is
er the treaty is being fulfilled.
If ev
Mr. GOLDWATER. It takes about
the kind of protest the Senator from
er there was a treaty that protected
the nati
that much time to catch up with the
Arizona makes. I can question whether
onal sovereignty of the United
States
Senator from Oregon.
today is Monday and tomorrow will be
of America, this is it. If there
were an international in
Mr. HUMPHREY. The Senator from
Tuesday. I can raise a question. But
th
spection system
I can imagine the Senator saying, "Are
we going to trust th
Oregon is a fast man.
Mr. GOLDWATER, The same clause
ere are ahe answers have the made.
Th
and
he been made.
ose foreigners?"
provides that the Soviets will not cause,
e
answer the n
the record. r It was answered by the Seen-
14472 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE
? Approved For Release 2006/11/11 : CIA-RDP65B00383R000100200026-2