|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
| NEWSMAKER: WILLIAM COHEN | |
 October 5, 1999 
|
||
|
|
|
|
JIM LEHRER: And now a Newsmaker interview with the Secretary of Defense, William Cohen. Mr. Secretary, welcome. WILLIAM COHEN: Good evening. JIM LEHRER: On the test ban treaty a vote is now scheduled for next week, and the Senate, the votes aren't there, are they, it takes 67, you don't have them, is that right? |
|||||||||||||||||||
| A ban on nuclear testing | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
JIM LEHRER: Opponents to the treaty -- most of them are Republicans in the Senate -- argue that this would inhibit the development of our own nuclear capabilities, is that correct? WILLIAM COHEN: Well, we've already stopped developing nuclear weapons.
We've said we have enough, we've done enough tests now, we have enough
JIM LEHRER: So we don't need to test anymore? WILLIAM COHEN: We don't to test anymore at this point. What we hope to do is to prevent others from testing. We are engaged in what we call -- we aren't testing -- we're not testing with nuclear explosions. JIM LEHRER: Right. WILLIAM COHEN: And that's the difference. We're doing scientific tests, computer simulations, deconstruction of our current weapons to make sure that they're safe and reliable, so we're testing but we are no longer testing any nuclear way. |
 |
|||||||||||||||||||
| Will other countries comply with the ban? | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
WILLIAM COHEN: Well, I think this is a serious matter that should be approached seriously. There are legitimate questions that they are raising and should raise that I will be testifying tomorrow, as it currently stands, with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs to raise the kind of issues that they're concerned about. Number one: How can we satisfy ourselves that this is a reliable stockpile that we have? We have scientists and a lab -- heads of our nuclear weapons labs; the head of our strategic command, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs and others, who are satisfied that the system, our nuclear systems are safe, reliable, and effective, and so we can continue to test them in a non-nuclear fashion that will satisfy us year by year. Now, in addition, I think the questions are, well, how can we be sure about -- JIM LEHRER: The other guy. WILLIAM COHEN: -- verification for the other guy? JIM LEHRER: Right. WILLIAM COHEN: And there -- JIM LEHRER: Particularly China and Russia.
JIM LEHRER: Senator Helms, among others, have said that the CIA has said that they cannot verify testing in particularly high-level tests or any kind of tests in Russia and in China. I don't mean any kind of tests but effectively. WILLIAM COHEN: I think what the agency has said is that ... JIM LEHRER: I screwed that up, I think. WILLIAM COHEN: Low-level tests. JIM LEHRER: Low-level tests. WILLIAM COHEN: Low level tests. But then the question is what would that do? Low-level tests might be conducted by Russia or China in circumventing this but it would not be so sufficient to give them a technical advantage in terms of developing a new type of warhead that would undercut our strategic deterrence. So that's the real test. Could they, in fact, cheat at the margins or conduct some tests that could go undetected? The answer is yes. But would that be militarily significant in terms of undercutting our strategic capability? Our judgment is no. |
 |
|||||||||||||||||||
| Republican opposition to the ban? | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
WILLIAM COHEN: I think it's important that both sides approach this with as much seriousness as possible. The signal that is sent by how this is handled has consequences well beyond this administration and into the next administrations. If we were to take this up in a rushed fashion with a quick vote, without an exploration of all the information that needs to be looked at, then I think if it's defeated, it will send a very bad signal. Number one, we apparently intend to continue our non-testing policy and, number two, we'll have very little leverage over the countries who are saying, well, you rejected the treaty and therefore we can test. So I think we give it the worst of all worlds. I hope that we can approach this thing in a very thoughtful fashion. JIM LEHRER: So if it looks like you haven't got the votes from the administration's point of view, let's don't have the vote. Is that what you're saying?
JIM LEHRER: Mr. Secretary, as a Republican, how did this become a partisan issue? Most of the opponents, it's not just the Republican Senators, some of the leading candidates for the Republican nomination in 2000 are also opposed to ratification, George W. Bush, Elizabeth Dole, among others. |
 |
|||||||||||||||||||
| A historical context | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
WILLIAM COHEN: What's interesting is President Eisenhower almost 40 years ago, I think the interview was on February 11, 1960, in which he said perhaps the greatest regret of his administration was the fact that he could not get a test ban treaty. And he said something to the effect that the biggest disappointment that he could have, that any administration of any party at any time in any decade, was not to get a test ban.
JIM LEHRER: Speaking of the next administration, defense policy generally has become an issue already in this campaign. Many Republicans, including Mr. Bush, has said repeatedly that one of his priorities if he is elected President is to rebuild the nation's defenses, which have been diminished under the Clinton administration and essentially under your watch. How do you respond to that? WILLIAM COHEN: Well, I would point to a press availability that took place today where the President signed the defense authorization bill with Democrats and Republicans cooperating to rebuild our defense capability. We're seeing now a substantial commitment now, one of the highest pay raises certainly since 1981 which was signed into law today by the President. So we've had a bipartisan commitment to paying our troops more, to
increase the retirement benefits, to have what we call pay-table reform
to give incentive to those mid-career officers.We're in the process
of rebuilding the JIM LEHRER: Are you going to be comfortable in these next several months in the Republicans continue to criticize the administration in which you serve for its defense policies? |
||||||||||||||||||||
| Defending the DOD performance | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
WILLIAM COHEN: Well, I really... it's been a great experience to me, not to get involved in partisan politics. The reason the President appointed me and asked me to serve in this capacity was to take away the party politics as far as national security is concerned. I intend to do exactly what I've been doing. I'm going to go to Capitol Hill, I'm going to present the administration's budget, I'm going to support them, I'm going to explain why I think it's in the national security interest to support the mission that I'm advocating and I believe I can continue to build strong bipartisan support as I did during the last two and a half years as was evidenced by the signing of this bill just this afternoon.
WILLIAM COHEN: No, I simply will continue to do my job and let the politics take care of itself. I continue to meet with Republicans and Democrats and anyone who certainly wants to call can do that but I'm doing my job and I think that it's starting to show how we're, in fact, having a revolution in business affairs and military affairs. I could take the time to point out how successful we were in Kosovo, how successful we are across the globe and how admired and envied we are. And I think that all that goes to the men and women who are serving us in uniform, and we should be very, very proud of them. JIM LEHRER: So you're not defensive at all about what's been accomplished while you've been Secretary of Defense? WILLIAM COHEN: Not at all. I'm proud of what we've do and I'm proud of the direction we're going and I'm proud of the support the President is giving. |
||||||||||||||||||||
| The East Timor situation | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
JIM LEHRER: Finally, East Timor. You just came back from Indonesia. And the word was you talked turkey to the Indonesians. What did you tell them?
JIM LEHRER: What kind of reaction did you get? WILLIAM COHEN: It's a good reaction. I met with General Wiranto, I met with President Habibie, I met with Mrs. Megawati, and others, and the message was the same. What takes place in East Timor, how that is resolved is going to have a major impact upon Indonesia itself. If Indonesia is not seen as cooperating and helping to resolve that issue peacefully, then there will be consequences that will flow in terms of investors holding back and putting their capital as a risk in such a country and I'm sure there will be some diplomatic isolation as well. So they have a real -- JIM LEHRER: You told them that? WILLIAM COHEN: Absolutely. JIM LEHRER: And you said - this is what we think you should do and there is no or else kind of element to it? WILLIAM COHEN: I think it's a statement of reality. It was not a threat.
It's simply an indication of what the real world is like if they stay
instability take place, if they see JIM LEHRER: Mr. Secretary, thank you very much. WILLIAM COHEN: My pleasure. |
||||||||||||||||||||
 |
        |
|
| Support the kind of journalism done by the NewsHour...Become a member of your local PBS station. | ||
| ||
| PBS Online Privacy Policy Copyright ©1996- MacNeil/Lehrer Productions. All Rights Reserved. | ||
| ||
WILLIAM
COHEN: At this point, no. I think it's going to be a very uphill struggle,
but there are serious consequences involved in the event that this treaty
has been voted upon and rejected. We are trying to stop the spread of
nuclear weapons, and I think it depends upon what kind of a world we
want to see in the future, one with more nuclear weapons, or fewer,
and I would judge that most want fewer. We want fewer in a way that
we can be satisfied that our nuclear stockpile is secure, safe, and
reliable at the same time that we have some effective means of verifying
what other people are doing, other countries. Now, we stopped testing
back in 1992. We'd like other countries to stop testing as well. And
the judgment of the scientific community is that that's the most effective
means of preventing countries from building more sophisticated types
of nuclear weapons is through the testing mechanism, so if we can get
them to stop testing, this would be a very effective thing for us.
weapons.
We're trying to actually reduce -- here we are engaged in START talks
with the Russians -- START II -- START III -- to see if we can't reduce
the number of nuclear weapons, but we have enough to satisfy our nuclear
deterrent. We have a very effective nuclear deterrent, and, frankly,
we don't plan on developing more nuclear weapons at this point. We're
in the process of reducing them. 
JIM
LEHRER: Well, then what do your former Republican colleagues in the
Senate know or believe that you don't know or believe? Why are they
saying just the opposite of what you're saying?
WILLIAM
COHEN: Let me be very clear. We can't have a foolproof system. There
is no system we could devise that can prevent cheating at all levels.
There can be cheating at lower levels, sub-critical levels, but there
must be a sustained series of tests with yields that we think are detectable
at higher levels that would take place that could undercut our strategic
capability. So I think these are legitimate issues they're raising.
I think we have legitimate and responsible answers to them. 
JIM
LEHRER: Late this afternoon, Mr. Secretary, there were reports on the
wires that there was talk by Senator Lott, the Senate Majority Leader,
and others about pulling this vote, in other words, delaying this vote
and maybe even waiting until after the election to try again. What do
you think of that idea?
WILLIAM
COHEN: I think that it's important for both sides to look at the consequences
of this. I think the issues have to be resolved, I think we have to
have hearings to make sure the members understand the full implications,
why we think we can satisfy the concerns of those who are critics of
the test ban treaty. But I hope we approach it in a very thoughtful
fashion. 
So
that started with a Republican, it was continued by John Kennedy, and
we've had each President at least commit to the prospect of getting
a comprehensive test ban treaty. The issues come back to two critical
ones: Number one, are we've satisfied that our systems are reliable
and, number two, can we effectively verify whether others are complying?
These are substantive issues that have to be addressed. It shouldn't
be a partisan issue. The next administration, be it Democrat or Republican,
is going to have to make a determination as to whether or not we want
to do what we can to stop the proliferation of nuclear weapons. That's
one of the greatest threats I think that we face. 
military
- putting the focus on the people. Secondly, we are in fact increasing
our future modernization capability. We're going up now to that goal
that has been set so many times -- to the $60 billion mark by 2001.
So we are in fact modernizing, we are taking care of our people. We
are seeing some returns now in terms of what we've try to accomplish
by retention rates going up in the army, and we expect that to be replicated
in other services. So I think what we're doing on a bipartisan basis
is going to, in fact, modernize our force, keep us well ahead of any
contemporary or future challenger. 
JIM
LEHRER: Have you made any effort to speak to some of the Republican
leaders - the Republican critics of what you've been doing and explain
this to them? 
WILLIAM
COHEN: Well, basically that they should be participants in this process
of the peacekeeping mission in East Timor, that they had an obligation
to help resettle the refugees and displaced persons from West Timor
into East Timor. They had an absolute obligation to provide for their
safe return; they had an obligation to demilitarize the militias in
West Timor; and that they had an obligation consistent with the views
of the Indonesian people to subordinate the military to civilian control.
I tried to make it as direct and also as diplomatic as possible, but
I wanted that message to get through and hopefully it has. 
the
military aiding and abetting a militia who are killing innocent people,
that will have an impact on the international community, and that will
be one that would not be supported. So I believe that Indonesia is on
the path towards full democracy. The people want, the leadership is
saying they're supporting it. So what I am indicating, they need to
make sure that the military which will continue to play a very important
role in Indonesian society nonetheless is subject to civilian control.
That's something every democracy must insist upon.