Conference Report On H.R. 5682, Henry J. Hyde United States-India Peaceful Atomic Energy Cooperation Act of 2006

CONFERENCE REPORT ON H.R. 5682, HENRY J. HYDE UNITED STATES-INDIA PEACEFUL ATOMIC ENERGY COOPERATION ACT OF 2006 -- (House of Representatives - December 08, 2006)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may consume.

First, let me begin by complimenting the gentleman from Illinois, Mr. Hyde. Like Mr. Hyde, I was born a Democrat and baptized a Catholic just 7 days later. So I know how big a decision it must have been to have abandoned that Democratic birthright. But he has been a historic figure in this institution. I want to associate myself with everything that the gentleman from California said about you.

But I do believe that this bill is a historic mistake. The world is looking at this institution this evening. It is wondering what in the world the United States is thinking in giving an exemption to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Act to a country which is a nonsignatory to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.

What is the signal that that will send to Pakistan? What is the signal that that will send to Iran, to Syria, to Egypt, to Venezuela, to North Korea? What is the signal that we are sending with regard to the entire nuclear nonproliferation regime which has served this world well since the 1960s?

I think that the message they are receiving is that there is going to be a double standard, and a double standard which, unfortunately, from my perspective, is going to lead to a rapid escalation of the development of nuclear weapons programs in country after country around the world.

Right now, India has a nuclear weapons program that experts estimate produces approximately 7 per year. Because the nuclear fuel, which this bill will make possible, frees up the domestic uranium supply in India, experts estimate that it will increase to 40 to 50 the number of nuclear weapons which India can produce per year, because we, the United States, in passing this legislation, will ensure the supply of their civilian nuclear energy needs.

Why should we care about that? Well, the reason that we should care about that is that Pakistan is now developing and building their own nuclear material production facility, which experts indicate will increase from two to three nuclear bombs per year to 40 to 50 nuclear bombs per year. That is what a nuclear arms race looks like. That is what the nuclear arms race between the United States and Soviet Union looked like in the 1950s, in the 1960s and in the 1970s, and what we are doing out here is pouring fuel onto this fire, rather than calling an international conference to bring together these parties and others in order to put in place a real nuclear weapons control regime. Instead we are turning a blind eye to the reality of what is going on in the South Asian continent.

So, ladies and gentlemen, this is a historic moment, a moment that we will look back on, not perhaps tomorrow, or next week, but 5 years from now, 10 years from now. People will point back to this night, this last night of the Republican control of Congress, this last night when the Republican-controlled House and Senate can produce for President Bush this anti-nuclear weapons control policy that he has been engaging in for the last 6 years and say this was the moment that crossed the line where ever country said to themselves, why should we, as signatories of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, abide by those rules when the United States selectively gives exemptions to countries that are not signatories to the nuclear nonproliferation policy.

You cannot preach temperance from a bar stool. The hypocrisy coefficient is at historic heights when the United States believes that the rest of the world will listen to us as we preach that they should not be interested in nuclear weapons, even as they are helping to facilitate the Indians in developing an ever greater capacity to produce nuclear weapons inspect that country.

Why should we care? We should care because A. Q. Khan, the nuclear Johnny Appleseed, the nuclear Pied Piper, who spread nuclear weapons from North Korea through the Middle East, is still living in Pakistan, living in a palace, still not in prison. His associates, his men, still walking the streets of Pakistan. Al Qaeda is headquartered in Pakistan, still unapprehended.

What is the message that we are sending? We are sending a message that the nuclear arms sellers are back on the road, selling to anyone who will purchase. That is the message that we are sending.

So tonight is a historic vote. It is a vote that will be looked back at as one of the most important that we have ever cast here in Congress. Sadly, it is not going to receive even a fraction of the attention which it deserves.

But I tell you this, ladies and gentlemen, when and if this nuclear war breaks out, we will look back. At least we should be able to say we tried, we really tried to put an end to the nuclear arms race on the South Asian continent. This is what this debate tonight is all about.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

This is an historically bad deal. President Bush has done a far better job in negotiating with the Congress to gain acceptance for this deal than he did with the Indians and getting them to accept the essentials of a real nuclear nonproliferation agreement.

In this agreement, as we send nuclear materials to India and free up so that the Russians and others can do so as well, here is what is not inspected: Six of India's plutonium-producing reactors will not be inspected. Their heavy-water production facets, not inspected. Plutonium separation facilities, not inspected. Uranium mines, not inspected. Uranium enrichment facilities, not inspected. In other words, their nuclear weapons program, not inspected.

This is the deal which we are cutting. This is the deal which the Congress is being asked tonight to bless. Do you know who would accept a deal like that? A.Q. Kahn would accept a deal like that for Pakistan. In fact, President Musharraf of Pakistan said to President Bush on his visit to Pakistan right after his visit to India, he said to President Bush, ``I too would like that deal that you are offering to India.'' President Bush said, ``We cannot give you that deal.''

What are we going to say when China offers that deal to Pakistan? Because they will, ladies and gentlemen. What will we say when all of those plutonium-producing reactors are not inspected? What will we say in 2 years when the Russians offer that same deal to the Iranians? What will we say to the Russians, to the Iranians?

If we don't set the standard for nuclear nonproliferation here in the United States in our negotiations with our allies, do not expect there to be higher standards in the negotiations between the Chinese and their allies or the Russians and their allies. Wherever we set the standard, that is going to be the global standard. And when we turn to these other countries and we tell them, no, your standards are not high enough, they are going to call us hypocrites.

Ladies and gentlemen, it is an historic night, it is an historic vote. People will look back at this as the moment when the nuclear nonproliferation regime of the world was destroyed. Vote ``no''. Vote ``no'' for history. Vote ``no'' for your conscience. When you look back, this will be one of those moments when you are glad that you voted ``no.''

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

http://thomas.loc.gov/