December, 2000- Response from President William Clinton
"Thank you very much for your letter. It's important for me to know the views of individuals throughout our nation, and I'm glad you took the time to write.
My administration remains committed to promoting fiscal responsibility while addressing the needs of our people. We are working hard to widen the circle of opportunity in America and to prepare our nation for the challenges of the new millennium. I appreciate having your input on the important issues we face and I encourage you to remain involved. Together, we can make a difference."
Editor's Note: I understand that the President was very busy and I did not expect his personal response. But, sometimes, a form letter is worse than no letter at all. This is one of those times.
August, 2000- Response from George Bush Jr. Presidential Campaign
"....... America should rethink the requirements for nuclear deterrence in a new security environment. The premises of Cold War nuclear targeting should no longer dictate the size of our arsenal. As president, I will ask the Secretary of Defense to conduct an assessment of our nuclear force posture and determine how to best meet our security needs. While the exact number of weapons can come only from such an assessment, I will pursue the lowest possible number consistent with our nuclear security. It should be possible to reduce the number of American nuclear weapons significantly further than what has already been agreed to under START II, without compromising our security in any way. We should not keep weapons that our military planners do not need. These unneeded weapons are the expensive relics of dead conflicts. And they do nothing to make us more secure.
In addition, the United States should remove as many weapons as possible from high alert, hair trigger status - another unnecessary vestige of Cold War confrontation. Preparation for quick launch - within minutes after warning of an attack - was the rule during the era of superpower rivalry. But today, for two nations at peace, keeping so many weapons on high alert may create unacceptable risks of accidental or unauthorized launch. So, as president, I will ask for an assessment of what we can safely do to lower the alert status of our forces.
These changes to our forces should not require years and years of detailed arms control negotiations. There is a precedent that proves the power of leadership. In 1991, the United States invited the Soviet Union to join it in removing tactical nuclear weapons from the arsenal. Huge reductions were achieved in a matter of months, making the world much safer, more quickly...... "
Editor's Note: Tactical nuclear weapons were, indeed, removed from the European theater; greatly reducing tensions. Governor Bush certainly has his heart in the right place. But, I fear the "assessment" for further reductions would be made by the same people who have, so far, ignored the opportunity for a vast and comprehensive elimination of nuclear arms, here and around the world.
May 2002 Update:
A new agreement between Vladimir Putin and George Bush Jr. will cut each nation's existing store of between 5,000 and 6,000 warheads by about 65 percent, taking both sides down to the neighborhood of "only" 1,700 to 2,200 warheads each.
One major issue in the negotiations is whether the warheads would be destroyed or dismantled and put into storage. Russia wants them destroyed and the United States wants to put a number of warheads in storage to be available in an emergency.
Since the USA is unwilling to destroy the warheads and continues to develop the "Star Wars" defense initiative, many Russians are angry that Putin plans to honor the agreement. One Russian leader, Alexei Mitrofanov, said "We are doing a favor to the United States. They form a shield and we break our sword."
This new development also appears to go against several of President Bush's campaign statements (see above).
January 2002 Update: In November 2001, President Bush met with Russian President Vladimir Putin, at the Bush Texas ranch. They tried to reach a new agreement over the increased reduction of nuclear weapons. No no agreement was concluded.
In December 2001, President Bush announced that existing nuclear treaties would be ignored by the United States, in the future. In favor of the development of the U.S. Nuclear Defense Initiative ("Star Wars").
Therefore, all of his campaign statements, above, are no longer valid.
August, 2000- Response from Hillary Clinton Senatorial Campaign
Editor's Note: The Nunn-Lugar Program is similar to our own concept for nuclear disarmament, but less comprehensive. With Nunn-Lugar, there is no clear strategy for a reciprocal reduction of the United States' arsenal. For more information on Nunn-Lugar, see the information on the bottom of our homepage.
"Hillary believes the United States must assume a leading role in promoting arms control and preventing the spread of nuclear weapons. She has said that she will vote to ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty in the Senate, and she will work with our allies to block the proliferation of missiles and other weapons of mass destruction. She believes we should continue the Nunn-Lugar Program to reduce the nuclear stockpile in the former Soviet Union."
October, 1992- Response from U. S. Department of Energy
".... Your letter to President Bush dated October 7, 1992, has been referred to the Office of Arms Control and Nonproliferation of the Department of Energy for a response.
...... I believe the that the Bush Administration’s accomplishments have been truly historic. After the successful conclusion of the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) negotiations in July 1991, sequential unilateral steps were taken by each superpower. President Bush introduced the process ....... to eliminate all of the remaining U. S. inventory of ground-launched theater nuclear weapons. In response, President Gorbachev announced on October 5th, 1991, his intention to deactivate all Soviet tactical nuclear weapons and remove them to Russia for destruction......
In his 1992 State of the Union address, President Bush then proposed a negotiation to eliminate all multiple-warhead inter-continental ballistic missiles and further to cut the two strategic arsenals to about 50 percent of START treaty levels. Yeltsin, in turn, suggested even greater strategic reductions.
Then, at the 1992 Washington Summit, Presidents Bush and Yeltsin agreed to limit their nuclear arsenals to a range of 3,000 to 3,500 nuclear weapons by the year 2003 and to eliminate all multiple-warhead intercontinental ballistic missiles. With this series of actions, the two Presidents agreed to the most far reaching reductions in nuclear weaponry since the dawn of the atomic age.......
Furthermore, as part of his Nuclear Initiative of September 27, 1991, President Bush set in motion discussions with Russia on the safe, secure transport, storage, and dismantlement of former Soviet nuclear weapons, a top priority of the Bush Administration. A very large share of the $400 million allocated by Congress in the 1991 Soviet Nuclear Threat Reduction Act will be used for these purposes. The United States is assisting Russia with protective materials for transport of nuclear weapons, accident response equipment and training, and safe storage containers for fissile materials resulting from dismantlement.
We appreciate your interest in these important issues
Signed, Victor E. Alessi
Director
Office of Arms Control and Nonproliferation
Office of the Secretary"
Editor's Note: Again, wonderful intentions from 1992. Recently, August 29, 2000, a national news report covered the financial crisis in the Russian military. Soldiers were washing car windows on street corners and raising pigs to survive. The report closed by reminding us, ".... however, the Russians continue to maintain an arsenal of 10,000 nuclear weapons".
Anyone who follows "60 Minutes" knows how well the Russians have stored and dismantled their atomic bombs. It is unclear how many dozens of portable "suitcase" nuclear devices are missing from storage. It is said that many Russian nuclear scientists have provided their services to terrorist nations and organizations, in order to make a living.
My friends, I honor President George Bush I., for his good intentions. But, it was simply not enough. How many more decades will it be, before these dinosaurs of the cold war are eliminated. And what will go wrong, between now and then?
| Person: | Date originally contacted |
|---|---|
| Secretary to Mr. Ross Perot | April 1992 |
| Vice President Al Gore | August 2000 |
| U. S. Senator Voinovich | August 2000 |
| U. S. Representative Boehner | August 2000 |
| U. S. Senator Moynihan | December 2000 |