[Page: S365]
Inhofe先生。Mr. President, I listened with interest when the Senator from Utah was talking about some of the drug problems that are facing this Nation and that concern all of us deeply. He made a comment that we are all pleased that Barry McCaffrey, if he is confirmed, will be taking over as drug czar to actually do something about it. It is long overdue.
I sat in the other Chamber and listened to the President during his State of the Union Message 2 days ago. He expressed this great concern about the drug problem in America. Yet he has done nothing for the first 3 years about the drug problem.
我想我们确实有一个毒品沙皇，但是本来应该参加该计划来解决美国毒品问题的人员人数减少了75％，从100人减少到25人。在药物问题上花费的钱数量实际上减少了一半。
I hope that Gen. Barry McCaffrey will be confirmed and will come out with a very aggressive drug program. I only regret that we lost 3 years in the battle against drugs in America. Everything that the Senator from Utah said made a lot of sense to me.
[页：S366]
总统先生，我还担心没人谈论的另外两件事。一个是美国总统发表的声明，不是一次，而是两次在他的国际电联讯息期间。
他说：“美国人不再需要自己努力。”美国人不再需要自己努力。我必须思考 - 也许我对此做出了错误的解释 - 但不是让美国伟大的原因，什么使我们与其他国家区分开来？如果您说美国人不再需要自己抵御，那么这会使您得出无可争议的结论，即政府应该照顾我们。我认为，以潜意识的方式，这也许就是总统所说的。
If I were to single out the thing that bothered me the most about the message--not just the inconsistencies and the talk about the role of Government and the one-liners about large Government coming to an end and all of that--it was the statement that he made that almost went unnoticed regarding a new national policy that our military is no longer to be used to defend America, but for peacemaking.
I have watched this progress, first when we made the commitment into Somalia--and that was not President Clinton, that was actually President Bush that made that decision after he had lost the election and before President Clinton was sworn into office--when our troops were supposed to be there for 45 days. It was not until 18 of our Rangers were killed almost a year later that President Clinton agreed to bring the troops home. Well, that was a concern to me. Haiti was a concern, and Rwanda was, and now, of course, Bosnia is. We had our debate on Bosnia, and now we are going to support our troops all we can. I kept thinking that all these humanitarian gestures were kind of incidental things, or accidents that, well, if there is something that the President seems to think is very significant in a part of the world, we need to get involved because there are human rights violations and murders going on and things that we all find deplorable.
But in his State of the Union Message, he made it national policy for the first time, that our role is now peacemaking throughout the world. This is not some idle remark--it is the President of the United States who is making this statement, in a State of the Union Message which all of the world was watching. If I were sitting out there listening in any number of countries that are having problems right now, I would say, `Good, we do not have to worry because the good old United States is going to come in and solve our problems.'
Now, with a starved military budget--which in purchasing dollars is less than it was in 1980 when we could not even afford spare parts--we are diluting our force by sending troops around the world on peacekeeping missions.
现在，我们有一项否决的国防部授权法案。总统在否决消息中说，他正在否决它，因为我们在那里有钱来完成我们的国家导弹防御系统，我认为这是今天完成的85％ - 如果捍卫美国有什么问题。
我们不断回去谈论1972年的ABM条约。正如您将记得的那样，总统先生是在我们的政策是相互保证的破坏之一的时候建立的。理由是，我们有两个超级大国，苏联和美国，如果我们俩都同意不捍卫自己，那么当导弹驶向我们的国家时，没有能力击倒导弹，这两个国家都不会攻击其他。好吧，那是政策。坦白说，当时我不同意，但这至少是有道理的，因为有两个超级大国。
现在我们有一个完全不同的环境。关于此事的有趣之处在于，《 ABM条约》的建筑师亨利·基辛格（Henry Kissinger）不久前告诉我，今天不再有应用。今天，我们从世界各地的地方泛滥，它在一个地方并不孤立。引用基辛格博士的话，“从我们的脆弱性中脱颖而出是坚定的。”那就是我们今天所处的情况，这使我感到非常困扰智力委员会和参议院武装服务委员会。但是，您不必去我们这些可能被指控过于关注美国对美国的导弹袭击的人。您可以去前中央情报局局长詹姆斯·伍尔西（James Woolsey），他不是由共和党总统任命的，而是由克林顿总统任命的。吉姆·伍尔西（Jim Woolsey）说，有20至25个国家正在开发或开发出大规模杀伤性武器，即化学，生物或核能，并正在努力运送这些弹头。
这就是我关心的原因，因为我们现在知道威胁比冷战期间更大。在国际电联的信息中，总统说 - 他受到了激动的鼓掌 - “这是第一次，俄罗斯导弹并没有指向美国的孩子。”但是我可以这样说：至少当俄罗斯导弹指着美国的孩子时，我们知道他们在哪里。现在，可能是伊朗，伊拉克，叙利亚，朝鲜或中国的任何地方。我们不知道它们在哪里。但是我们知道，有两个国家正在开发向美国传递导弹的技术和能力。
Mr. President, the ABM Treaty stated that it is all right to have a theater missile defense system in place. It is all right if you are in the Sea of Japan and you see two missiles coming out of North Korea, one going toward Japan, which you can shoot down; but if one is going to the United States, you cannot shoot it down because that would violate the ABM Treaty of 1972. I also have contended that the ABM Treaty was between two parties, one party of which no longer exists today.
因此，我将支持国防部授权法案，尽管我认为将国家导弹防御语言从该法案中删除是一个错误的决定。
Before somebody comes running in the Chamber and starts talking about star wars and all of these mythical things and making people believe there is not a threat out there, let me just suggest, Mr. President, that I am not talking, even right now, about space-launched missiles to intercept missiles. We are talking now about surface-launched missiles, the technology of which we already have.
在波斯湾战争期间观看CNN的任何人都看着导弹击倒导弹。那不是超自然的；这不是巴克·罗杰斯（Buck Rogers）或星球大战（Star Wars）的东西。这是一项今天起作用的技术。我们在宙斯盾系统上投资了400亿美元，大约有22艘具有推出能力的船只。我们试图在5年的时间内花更多的时间，大约50亿美元，以达到上层。这意味着，如果从朝鲜发射了一枚导弹，花了大约30分钟才能过来，我们将能够对此做些事情并将其击倒，然后才能进入美国。在这与已经在这里的THAAD导弹技术之间，我们可以升级已经投资数十亿美元并为美国捍卫美国的东西。
I do not understand why this aversion toward defending America keeps coming out of the White House. We know the technology that is here, and we know what the North Koreans are doing. We know the type of missile North Korea is developing is going to be capable of reaching Alaska and Hawaii by the year 2000 and the continental United States by 2002.
I saw something only yesterday that I would like to share.
我要求一致同意，昨天的《纽约时报》中的整篇文章题为“中国威胁台湾，它确保在Record.
There being no objection, the article was ordered to be printed in theRecord,as follows:
[Page: S367]
Beijing, January23: The Chinese leadership has sent unusually explicit warnings to the Clinton Administration that China has completed plans for a limited attack on Taiwan that could be mounted in the weeks after Taiwan's President, Lee Tenghui, wins the first democratic balloting for the presidency in March.
The purpose of this saber-rattling is apparently to prod the United States to rein in Taiwan and President Lee, whose push for greater international recognition for the island of 21 million people, has been condemned here as a drive for independence.
While no one familiar with the threats thinks China is on the verge of risking a catastrophic war against Taiwan, some China experts fear that the Taiwan issue has become such a test of national pride for Chinese leaders that the danger of war should be taken seriously.
一位美国高级官员说，政府没有“没有独立的确认甚至可靠的证据”，即中国人正在考虑袭击，几乎不屑一顾。
官员说：“他们可以发射导弹，但台湾有自己的牙齿。”“中国是否想冒险和国际影响？”
The most pointed of the Chinese warnings was conveyed recently through a former Assistant Secretary of Defense, Chas. W. Freeman Jr., who traveled to China this winter or discussions with senior Chinese officials. On Jan. 4, after returning to Washington, Mr. Freeman informed President Clinton's national security adviser, Anthony Lake, that the People's Liberation Army had prepared plans for a missile attack against Taiwan consisting of one conventional missile strike a day for 30 days.
该警告遵循了斯坦福大学政治学家约翰·刘易斯（John W. Lewis）的类似声明，他经常在这里与中国高级军事人物见面。
These warnings do not mean that an attack on Taiwan is certain or imminent. Instead, a number of China specialists say that China, through `credible preparations' for an attack, hopes to intimidate the Taiwanese and to influence American policy toward Taiwan. The goal, these experts say, is to force Taiwan to abandon the campaign initiated by President Lee, including his effort to have Taiwan seated at the United Nations, and to end high-profile visits by President Lee to the United States and to other countries.
If the threats fail to rein in Mr. Lee, however, a number of experts now express the view that China could resort to force, despite the enormous consequences for its economy and for political stability in Asia.
自去年夏天以来,当白宫允许先生. Lee to visit the United States, the Chinese leadership has escalated its attacks on the Taiwan leader, accusing him of seeking to `split the motherland' and undermine the `one China' policy that had been the bedrock of relations between Beijing and its estranged province since 1949.
中国外交部发言人要求对中国军方为台湾采取军事行动的计划发表评论，他说他正在等待上级的回应。ReportsReports上个月，一位高级部官员私下表示，中国明显的军事行动准备工作旨在摆脱不必要的冲突。
官员说：``我们一直在努力竭尽所能，以避免我们最终面临的情况，只有军事选择。''他说，如果中国没有成功改变台湾的路线，那么我担心会有一场战争。”
Mr. Freeman described the most recent warning during a meeting Mr. Lake had called with nongovernmental China specialists.
参与者说，弗里曼先生的演讲正在逮捕，正如他描述的是一位中国军事规划的中国官员所说的那样。他说，对台湾进行导弹袭击的准备工作，以及执行该导弹的选择，已经完成，并等待了政治局在北京的最终决定。
One of the most dramatic moments came when Mr. Freeman quoted a Chinese official as asserting that China could act militarily against Taiwan without fear of intervention by the United States because American leaders `care more about Los Angeles than they do about Taiwan,' a statement that Mr. Freeman characterized as an indirect threat by China to use nuclear weapons against the United States.
An account of the White House meeting was provided by some of the participants. Mr. Freeman, reached by telephone, confirmed the gist of his remarks, reiterating that he believes that while `Beijing clearly prefers negotiation to combat,' there is a new sense of urgency in Beijing to end Taiwan's quest for `independent international status.'
Mr. Freeman said that President Lee's behavior `in the weeks following his re-election will determine' whether Beijing's Communist Party leaders feel they must act `by direct military means' to change his behavior.
近几个月来，弗里曼先生说，他已向美国政府官员发出了许多警告。“我援引了中国人的话说，中国会牺牲“数百万人”和“整个城市”，以确保中国的统一，并认为美国不会做出可比的牺牲。”
他还断言：“北京的一些人可能准备对美国进行核勒索，以确保美国人不会阻碍人民解放军的努力。
Some specialists at the meeting wondered if Mr. Freeman's presentation was too alarmist and suggested that parliamentary elections on Taiwan in December had resulted in losses for the ruling Nationalist Party and that President Lee appeared to be moderating his behavior to avoid a crisis.
一位专家说：“我目前还不是警报者。”他不会对白宫会议的实质发表评论。“我认为证据不在那个方向发展。”
Other participants in the White House meeting, who said they would not violate the confidentiality pledge of the private session, separately expressed their concern that a potential military crisis is building in the Taiwan Strait.
密歇根大学的中国学者肯尼斯·利伯特萨尔（Kenneth Lieberthal）说：“我认为有证据表明，如果中国人认为台湾在政治上有效地搬出了中国的轨道，那么中国人至少可以选择向台湾施加军事压力。”以及政府的非正式顾问。
Mr. Lieberthal, who also has traveled to China in recent months, said Beijing has redeployed forces from other parts of the country to the coastal areas facing Taiwan and set up new command structures `for various kinds of military action against Taiwan.'
他说：“他们以他们知道台湾可以监视的方式完成了所有这些事情，”他说：“以便在使用武力方面可信。”
`I believe there has been no decision to use military force,' he continued, `and they recognize that it would be a policy failure for them to have to resort to force; but they have set up the option, they have communicated that in the most credible fashion and, I believe, the danger is that they would exercise it in certain circumstances.'
几位专家认为，他们担心国会在李总统的预期选举之后的行动可能是导致军事对抗的关键因素。他们说，如果李总统认为他在美国国会拥有强大的支持基础，并推动了提高台湾地位的运动，那么军事危机的风险就会更大。主要关心的是，国会将寻求邀请台湾领导人回到美国，以此作为美国支持的姿态。一位中国军事领导人在11月警告说，这样的步骤可能会带来“爆炸性”的结果。
最近几个月,美国的语句是否United States forces would come to the defense of Taiwan if it came under attack have been deliberately vague so as to deter Beijing through a posture of what the Pentagon calls `strategic ambiguity.'
一些国会议员断言，1979年的《台湾关系法》包括一项隐含的承诺，以捍卫台湾，但政府官员说，最终，决定取决于中国侵略的时机，借口和性质。
Inhofe先生。总统先生在本文中，题为“随着中国威胁台湾的威胁，它确保美国聆听”，《泰晤士报》记者报告了最近传递给国家安全顾问安东尼湖的一些不祥信息，北京正在采取的措施，以促进军事措施。ReportsReports针对台湾的行动以及旨在阻止美国来台北的援助的陈述。
According to Charles Freeman, former United States Ambassador to China and now an Assistant Secretary of Defense, a Chinese official told him of the advanced state of military planning and that preparations for missile attack on Taiwan and the target selection to carry it out have been completed and await a final decision by the Politburo in Beijing. Freeman reported to Mr. Lake that a Chinese official had asserted that the Chinese could act militarily against Taiwan without fear of intervention by the United States because American leaders `care more about Los Angeles than they do about Taiwan,' a statement Mr. Freeman characterized as an indirect threat by China to use nuclear weapons against the United States.
我不认为任何人谁是看要什么g on in the world today can miss the threats that come both subliminally and directly from various countries. If those people watched Saddam Hussein during the Persian Gulf war, they know that he would not have hesitated to use this capability on the United States if he had had it. But today we have more than two dozen countries that are developing such a capability.
If I could single out this one thing that I heard from the President's State of the Union Message 2 days ago, this is the most disturbing thing that came out of his message. We can concentrate on the inconsistencies or the statements he made about wanting to have welfare reform, when in fact he vetoed the very bill he says he now wants; and when Americans stood up and applauded when he said he was going to downsize Government, when he, in fact, is increasing the size of Government every day in assigning new tasks and putting more jobs into job programs and into retirement programs and into environmental programs--he mentioned 14 different areas of Government he wanted to increase--in every area except for defense, he wants to increase government.
他说：“等一下，“现在我很自豪地告诉你，与上任时，我们的政府雇员要少200,000。”让我告诉你员工来自哪里。他们来自国防部。他们来自我们的防御系统。如果您排除国防系统，我们的政府无论您谈论预算还是谈论员工人数都大大发展。总统这么说是非常具有欺骗性的。
再说一遍，所有这一切都像想到美国人一样令人反感的是，必须考虑的是我们军方与捍卫美国的作用相反的新角色。
I wish that more people in this Senate Chamber had been able to be with me on the days following April 19 in Oklahoma City, in my beautiful State of Oklahoma, where the most devastating terrorist attack, domestic attack, in the history of the world took place. When you saw, as we saw in the Chamber the other day, Richard Dean, who went in there after he himself had gotten out of the building and dragged out three or four other people. The stories of the heroes of that disaster were just incredible. Jennifer Rodgers, the police officer acknowledged during the State of the Union Message--and I appreciate the President doing that--sure, ask Jennifer Rodgers or Richard Dean about the devastation of that bomb in Oklahoma City. That bomb was measured as equal to 1 ton of TNT. The smallest warhead we know of today, nuclear warhead, is equal to 1,000 tons of TNT.
Now, that has to tell you, if you are concerned as we were about what happened in one building and all the tragedy surrounding that, that if you multiply that by 1,000--and I do not care if it is a city in Oklahoma or New York or Washington or anywhere else in the world--that is a pretty huge threat that is out there. It is a very real threat. As yesterday's paper indicates, it is even a greater threat and a more documented threat than it was before. Yet the President has shown no regard for the defense of this country against this threat.
Mr. President, we will have a chance to address this. Yes, we do want to pass the Defense authorization bill even though missile defense has been taken out of it. But we will return to the battle over missile defense, and to this new humanitarian role that our military has, in future debates.
I guess I will conclude with another concern that is not as life-threatening. Of course, we are concerned about the lives that would be lost if we failed to defend ourselves, but in these various humanitarian peacemaking missions that is the new rule of our military, somebody has to ask the question: Who is going to pay for this? We have a President who has taken virtually all of the money out of the military budget that would go into equipment to defend America, and yet we are going to have to come around and pay for all this stuff that is going on in Bosnia and elsewhere.
I picked up something the other day in last week's Defense News that I guess has the solution. Pentagon officials said on January 3 that the budget cuts could come from areas where Congress has increased funding, such as missile defense, to pay the bill for these missions. This is from Pentagon officials. `Congress increased Clinton's overall budget request by $7 billion in 1996. It is intuitive that any money above the President's request would be reprogrammed to pay for Bosnia,' one senior Pentagon official said on January 2.
它告诉我们两件事。首先,$ 1.5 billion that the President says it will cost for the humanitarian exercise in Bosnia is grossly understated. It could be up to $7 billion. The studies I have seen show it around $5 billion. I guess we not only are redirecting our military to a new role and that new role is peacemaking, but we are also going to pay for it with the dollars we would otherwise use to defend America. This is wrong.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr.Thompson）。来自阿肯色州的参议员。
[Page: S368]