Today, Rep. Mike Rogers (R-AL), Chairman of the House Armed Services Subcommittee on Strategic Forces, made the following remarks on the hearing titled "Russian Arms Control Cheating: Violation of the INF Treaty and the Administration’s Responses One Year Later:"
"I’d like to welcome everyone to this joint hearing of the House Armed Services Subcommittee on Strategic Forces and the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Terrorism, Trade and Nonproliferation on 'Russian Arms Control Cheating: Violation of the INF Treaty and the Administration’s Responses One Year Later'.
Testifying today are the following witnesses:
The Honorable Rose Gottemoeller
Under Secretary of State for International Security
Department of State
The Honorable Brian McKeon
Principal Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Policy
Department of Defense
This is an update to last year’s hearing with these witnesses and we are eager to learn what the Administration has been doing since we met in open and closed session on this topic last December.
The Congress, as I promised last year, has not been sitting idle.
The recently enacted FY16 NDAA included section 1243 which directs the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to begin the research and development of military response options to Russia’s violation.
INF is, of course, not the only treaty or agreement that Russia is violating. We learned from Ms. Gottemoeller during last year’s hearing that on 8 of 12 treaties and agreements, Russia is not in compliance or is outright violating its obligations.
INF has earned a lot of attention, but what of the Chemical Weapons Convention? The Biological Weapons Convention? The Open Skies Treaty?
Are we less concerned about Russian chemical or biological weapons that can be used against the United States than intermediate-range missiles that cannot? No, of course not.
And this hearing is also the first opportunity for many members to ask the Administration about the recent Russian disclosure of a nuclear-powered, nuclear warhead that occurred during a review of Russia’s nuclear forces that included its President, Vladimir Putin.
According to the Russian translations of what was disclosed, this weapon would provide Russia a new capability to damage 'the important components of the adversary's economy in a coastal area and inflicting unacceptable damage to a country's territory by creating areas of wide radioactive contamination that would be unsuitable for military, economic, or other activity for long periods of time.'
What does it say about a country that feels that nuclear weapons are such a significant tool of its military and diplomatic strategy that it discloses systems in this manner?
And what does this say about a country that would invest resources in such a weapon? This is just nuts.
Yet, the only time our President talks about nuclear weapons is when he wants to propose reducing them.
The world is paying attention. Where is our President?
So, we have a lot to talk about today. I’m looking forward to learning what the Administration has been up to since this time last year.
I’m looking forward to learning about the military assessment and review of military options that the former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, General Dempsey, produced, whether in the open hearing or the closed session.
With that, I would like to turn things over to Chairman Poe for any opening comments he might have."
