Ofbegan cooperative storage soviet nuclear and chemical weapons. Lugarnn and richard marked the anniversary in the Kennedy Cochran room. Nationalsted by the security archive, the carnegie endowment, and other initiatives. Ladies and gentlemen, distinguished guests, a few words of welcome. I am the director of the National Security archive and i am honored to be an organizer of today. This is the day that president bush signed the nunnlugar legislation into law. Document fetishists, we scoured the library for this exist. And none there was not a signing ceremony. It gives you a sense of a mixed opinion with the Congressional Initiative in foreign policy. One of the most prescient pieces of legislation ever. The declassified documents and the danger of that time. It is the first ever to classified list with the soviet and they rounded up weapons and cleaned up the legacies of the cold war arms race. Tasks and is a heroic carried out by many. Many of those heroes are here with us. Not the least is Richard Lugar and sam nunn. There is a real hero of the all who is inare the hospital this month. Colleagues andnd many heroes. Cornyn, theo john majority leader of the senate, us. Secured this room for he was a champion of the freedom of information act and i want to thank him for this. I want to thank our project director and all of those who made the work to bring this history to the present and we really appreciate the nuclear it is anitiative and fantastic organization. I thank this center, which continues the tremendous leadership and most of all, i need to thank the Carnegie Corporation of new york. Carnegie and their Visionary Research onted preventing nuclear war and methods of cooperative security and it was present at the first meeting when the legislation took shape and carnegie is with and supporting this effort to understand what we did right and wrong and bring that history to now to build the mutual security and it is an ther for me to introduce award. Thank you very much. I have the easiest job. How about that . Am not going to introduce the others. But i want to tell you that this organization and the Nuclear Threat initiative archives are grants of the Carnegie Corporation and the most doortant is that successors not normally give credit to predecessors. Hamburg, this would not have happened. Thank you, david. Last, but not least, Andrew Carnegie was against war and he thought that war was not necessary and there is plenty of competition available for everyone. Thatbeled or a polite disgraces the earth and his ambition was to eradicate war and force all conflicts into arbitration. He created the carnegie and it is my delight and pleasure to introduce a distinguished social scientist who has done so much on Nuclear Nonproliferation. So, thank you. I have learned that it is the parent of a fool to try to follow. Acknowledgeedge i would just say that i remember when the legislation was passed. I was working with senator biden and i was thinking about coming over. , i wass nunn and lugar thinking about the exemplars you of integrity and commitment to ascertain facts deepseatednding changes in a cooperative way. Your leadership was exemplary and i think we all hope that Something Like this could be rich and old, as we are worried this may not be the case. I am so thankful for all of this happening. The Carnegie Corporation and thehed on her founding offer was made to dick other one . Ho was the i forget now. Today, two other important individuals, but i want to tell you that we were given four minutes and we are saving a minute for the panel. I will introduce steve, who is here from the carnegie i would like to give a hand to steve, who is doing real work here. That, thank you very much. I believe you have a citation turn thend we will Panel Discussion and david will take control of the proceedings. Thank you. You and your team have done a tremendous job of looking at this. I think we will be surprised with a lot of what is there and in a legalne it all way without any leaking and that is significant and it is wonderful to be able to say thank you to so many in this audience. , the whole team has done a tremendous job and you have the analytical studies done that enable me to convince the senate to pass this in december of 1991 and, when i first came up with this idea of doing something, i was in budapest and a friend left when gorbachev was taken captive. He went straight back to the soviet bacto the soviet union and called me after and told me to come and i spent that wasng days and when it became apparent to me that we had to take action. Role to played a huge and wethis award on me now have two today and i think it is a tremendous thing to do. I have often said that the wife,de is that, like his i had to give up my last name in many parts of the world. Downside ofonly being a partner with dick lugar. This andat to present it is appropriate that he receive this. He has had his surgery and could not be here, but the general has role in constructive u. S. And russian relations and will be accepting the award. He was named in the general staff from 19921997 and was acting responsible for munitions and security. Orderedis yeltsin military forces into the parliamentary building, russia and former soviet republics were in a violent state of of people and the general conducted aggressive testing throughout russia to ensure that aggression would be countered by exhaustive safeguards and preparation. The absolute accountability for the testing the testing and the protection dismantlement with repatriation of Nuclear Warheads for the duration of the service life cannot be overstated and his comprehensive expertise were instrumental in transferring Nuclear Warheads to russia and from the ukraine. The general provided compelling support for the this armament mission. As a leading authority on Nuclear Security, his contribution to this cause is immeasurable, even continuing today. Is an advisor to the center and energy and security studies. He has authored several publications on Nuclear Nonproliferation and he added to his acclaim and his accomplishments have been acknowledged with governmental honors, including the order of the red star and for service to the fatherland. We give tribute to this distinguished leader and the theing force behind international Nuclear Nonproliferation efforts and we , service,expertise wisdom, conscience, and integrity. Indebted toally perform with grace under fire. This an honor to present general to the colonel general. [applause] accidents happen, which is why we must be careful with the nuclear arsenal. [speaking russian] the implementations of joint tasks in the sphere of Nuclear Security and protection in russia and helps to develop context between representatives of the Nuclear Industry in both of the countries. This is the anniversary of the last Nuclear Warheads being withdrawn from the ukraine and belarus. This clears the way for these states in which Nuclear Weapons on thethdrawn earlier nonproliferation of Nuclear Weapons. Means of securing weapons and materials provided with this program played a role in solving this cast this task. In terms of importance to security, the collective work in in themework, especially early years, is comparable to the military and economic cooperation. Me express my gratitude and appreciation. See this as a tribute to all who contributed in the destruction of Nuclear Warheads, ballistic missiles, nuclear submarines, and chemical weapons. Carried theseave tasks out on their own, like the iniet union tested a bomb 1949, just after world war ii, but it would have taken more time and increased the dangers of environmental catastrophe and would have demanded colossal expenses. Thanks to the efforts of both a new there was revive the to relations between the countries. Creationy would be the of a joint commission to prevent accidents. I hope these opportunities will be implemented. Russia and the United States have never been at war with one another. [speaking russian] it is now my privilege to give an award to a brave man. It has been said that we all think the Carnegie Corporation and iese wonderful ideas appreciate my partner, who is conducting hearings and looking for partners who may be helpful. I appreciate that even the five years before that, with Ronald Reagan asking members of the senate to go to geneva. There were eight republicans and eight democrat. That he needed a two thirds majority to pass a treaty and it turned out that 1986 was not a good time for a treaty. That it has been on this day of december 12 of 1991 that there may not have been enormous enthusiasm in the white house in saming this legislation and and i found out that there were some who felt that we had overstepped our balance and that the president of the United States was the person who deals and situations of this sort , to have two senators putting together a coalition and passing legislation of this variety, it seemed a little upsetting and it you see david hamburg here and asked carter was on this and it was in april of the next year and we all got religion together. We saw the problems that were unionby the former soviet with the bill going into Nuclear Powers and it didnt occur right away. Some had pointed out that the first 800 million or so that was appropriated by the congress is that dealt with this resulted in limited expenditures and this was not easy to get underway and it is why it is so important that we recognize those who help to get this underway and the nittygritty of the problems ,ere with our trips to russia the ukraine, belarus, and cosmic stan. So, it is a real privilege to be here with all of you and so many role ined an important russia and the United States and all that followed. Specifically, it is my privilege say that William Perry and his extraordinary career began when he joined the army corps of engineer at the age of 18 and he moved on to the occupation in japan with efforts that earned him the rank of second lieutenant. After his time in the army, the secretary became one of the original Silicon Valley pioneers and he trained as a mathematician with specialization in digital and and, inssance systems hisequent years, he applied expertise to business and entrepreneurial initiatives. As the undersecretary of defense , secretary perry brought the areaary into the stealth and he was equipped with smart weapons and American Forces were prepared to stand tall in the face of adversaries. Secretary perry became the 19th secretary of defense and the first enlisted man to serve in that role. He had time in the highest ranks of the pentagon and was instrumental in the dismantlement of the Nuclear Warheads in the United States and russia. Throughout his career, he has devoted himself to protecting the interests of the nation. His book chronicles his endeavors with equal measures alarm. Velopments and he shares wisdom and come of the next generation of nonproliferation advocates, his commitment remains steadfast and unstoppable. The secretary has had countless rewards and declarations from heads of state around the world. Ironically, that makes him a consummate peacekeeper with Visionary Leadership that has and it is a real privilege to present this award for promoting Nuclear Security to William Perry. Congratulations. Thank you. Amant to say how pleased i to have so many longtime friends here today. These are all great americans. Acknowledge the extraordinary actions we have program and i see two of them here today. Gloria and susan. Teamw that the lead of the is on a victory tour around the as theending his tour secretary of defense. Few briefmake a bowling about age from problem between the United States and russia today. The cold war ended and we had a where it wast possible to conceive the United States and russia became allies and some of us believe it would be possible and worked to make it happen. Direction. In that i remember the first time i voted i invited a Russian Defense minister and he was really welcome. And ited him to a dinner was a warm gathering. Anything seemed possible. On, he confronted the ioblem of implementation and out that it i found is easier to advise then we could not have done it without close cooperation from russia and the ukraine. I still remember the last meeting with the last warhead that had been dismantled and the , thenian defense minister Russian Defense minister, and the American Defense minister posed a picture with a handshake in that is where we were 1996. Negotiating the Peace Enforcement operation in sent troops america and russia wanted to send a brigade of troops in. It was unlike what we had in negotiations,er we ended up with a russian with and under the direction of a Major General , after themnd working together, they presented the russian general a medal for having the most effective brigade in bosnia. There was a shining moment when this seems to be working. This is not a time for a litany of what caused us to go down so discouraging lay, but the conclusion i have come to is and it can and has happened , if we cannot find a way to have key issues with a strong desire to prevent nuclear peripheral and nuclear proliferation. Countries working together would be an effective probability of catastrophes happening. Say it is impossible to Work Together because of issues that separate us and i want to refer to the fact that i have had training in mathematics and, there is a technique known as the separation of variables. Diplomats have to find a way to separate problems we can agree on from problems we cannot agree on and it is important that we Work Together. Separation of variables will diplomacy and of mathematics. Thank you. All right. Thank you. A panelwill try to have discussion to revisit some of these issues and lift our spirits a little bit, but i would like to begin with a reminder that, in 1991 and 1992, the senators took a gamble with there were skeptics who said it would be best to let sorrowiet union drown in and officials said that the union should be left to freefall. Senators nunn and lugar did not agree and helped them cope with the inheritance from hell. This was the most successful Congressional Initiative since the Marshall Plan and i would like to ask for this panel to inclusion of the political mood and the American People not interested in another andram helping an adversary they had a cold war sensibility about security and did not understand that what happens over there could affect us. . Ow did you make it work how do we get it to work again . With, answer is, to begin we did not make it work. Withtnership was formed we authorization bill and andalready past those bills went to the soviet union, which was collapsing. Authorization and conference report. We thought we could persuade our urgent. Es that this was thehey said, they were in framework that this was the . Nemy and why should we help we had to pull off the opposition bill and take it back and go withrence the authorization bill. We passed the amendment and it was cut and we were grateful to get that and it was an authorization, not a mandate. And itimportant factors was anna cole analytical. A roundtable in my office where we met over and over again and we persuaded people and went from september 2 december to persuade a vast majority of the senate. Happened. He way it we turned around the sentiment in 2. 5 months in the era where people let facts lead to conclusions. That does not always exists today. That is the history of its and we worked really hard on this at to the people in it is easier to pass legislation then implement. There are those in this room and other places who made this work. People andnumber of i would like to see tom blanton do an honor roll of people who felt that this was implemented. That is the way this came about. I remember passing this they went andd travel to each of these countries and talked to the leaders there about what was coming and what to expect. It was the implementation and the legislation. Dones not easy and it was on a bipartisan basis. Share with us you joining sam and what made this so urgent. I was a student of this his worknd i observed and admired it. Genevabeen together in and i got to know him well, at that time. The russian to consulate. There was quite a number. Broad and we of went to one in russia and became addressing i stress the importance of what occurred than being political. There were a great number of that is ridiculous to even be considered and this is a strongly felt sentiment by many constituents. The sentiment did not go away. Had anunnlugar past, we appropriation bill to face every year to come up with the 500 million or thereabouts that would be required. Had 50t two years, we million spent on implementation and, for all this the warheads to be taken down, the Safety Measures and so forth ithere are new ideas and came aboard and has not been there since the beginning. Vote on what had to be that with. The politics of nunnlugar were it ismportant and important that we have opportunities to visit russia and ukraine. In addition to countries that themffective, we have seen they say theyand will not even get a pass for it. Became almost a matter of and we continue to face some of that. As we reach out today in our understanding with the United States relations, we will have thisnd members who share heresiasm and the vision and elsewhere. We have one final story, which bill from 1991 and the unit soviet union came apart. Bush lost the election to bill clinton. We went over to russia after that and we saw the russian leadership and the leadership said, in no uncertain terms, they were prepared to give up Nuclear Weapons and i am not trying to repeat the translation of the profanity that came. Sam and i went and saw the president and there was an andrtunity to review this we went to a dinner when we got here and there were a few people the united here and states is prepared to spend to get rid of Nuclear Weapons. There is the legislature and the ukraine with the thirdlargest Nuclear Power the world and there are the dangers of having is outside and this to the hallway with a press that and it was said senator lugar had just main exciting proposal for the ine, offering us i hope i do not betray sam. Thataid something to effect. I think it is going to work out bush was somewhat andonsolate over his loss ande was a letter written others may know this better because this is a huge job that i remember years and the fact that we were privileged in russia and ukraine. We believe we can persuade and i hopeashington this situation will repeat itself now. Thank you. Shows what wee seen. Ll you need to partners on two sides and, for the signing moment, they worked together. It was known for many years and he was kind to review one of my books in russia recently. I want to hear your perspective if on the origins of denlinger andwhat it nunnlugar. Hat it looked like in moscow thank you. I will share my ideas. , i believe, it is very important to stress the and they circumstances were taken by senators nunn and soviet nuclear and the soviet union broke apart and fell apart. Nuclear weapons were in russia, and the proliferation stoppedweapon could be because of the assistance provided by the United States and the program, the nunnlugar program. Numbert russia, but to a of other newly formed postsoviet states. This is a Historic Mission of the nunnlugar program. The United States and russia, the effectiveness of which was prestigious awards given to the general and mr. Perry. Stress that the decadeswent on for two the extension expired on the on june 14,rogram 2014. Russia and the United States signed an agreement on the and environmental theram and the protocol of government on this framework. Hadnew american documents more topics and it allows the joint air force and the reduction of nuclear materials. It addresses the related environmental problems. Also encouraging was the nuclear and not everything could be far transformed to life. The problem is the rapid deterioration of russian relations because of the ukraine and the sanctions. Crisisory teaches, a is a hoper countries for a successful experience that will be used in full to renew the cooperation between russia and the United States. Threats for other weapons of mass destruction and wille that these times arrive soon and that is all i have to say. Thank you for your time. In 1994, sitting around this table, we had Charlie Curtis in the audience and we were getting more opposition on why we continue to fund this and we got together and said that it was worth the effort to pass a subsequent piece of legislation and pete was an important part of that. It explained an address to the terrorism andlear we had the nunnlugar bill that getthe first act that would local and state officials in on terrorism. Lot reinforces an awful reinforced an awful lot of reinforcement and there were two items published on the program and they encouraged a program with the help of his russian colleagues. That is another important part. Us understandhelp what works and i detected some ghts about was an agreement that this we the top priority to get them out there. We didnt know what was going to happen in the ukraine and russia. Big shock i had was redirecting. Unpleasant. But, thereafter, we got the full funding from the senate and that made that easier. Expecting opposition or lukewarm support in the ukraine and that did not happen. Not only did we get support, we got enthusiastic support from almost everybody we worked with ,ver there in the ministrys military, right down to the field. Everybody seemed to understand what we were doing and that was one of the biggest surprises on the day when we got that. Or it. When we got that support. Whatever problems there were, they were taken care of and we would get to the appropriation but the number one big surprise was the absolutely enthusiastic support of all the people that worked for us on the program, all the people we had to work with in russia, the people in ukraine. The cosmicderstood significance of what we were doing and they all got behind it magnificently. A big question that has occurred throughout this project is what reusable history is there in alaska 25 years is there in the last 25 years. If you had to write a handbook for the policymakers who will face the next nuclear crisis, what is the lesson you would put on the front page of that handbook from 25 Years Experience with nunnlugar . Im not going to say what country or what time this crisis will be in, but suppose it happen soon and people want to know, what did we learn . What would you tell them . Sam, you want to go first . Mr. Nunn we learned a lot over the course of the cold war about where the red line should be drawn, and exercising forces and discussing nuclear equations in terms of threatening nuclear. That is extremely dangerous because the people on the warning systems, the people in the silos, they look at the atmosphere when they are trying to judge whether something is an accident, a mistake, or really an attack. Another thing we have learned but have not cured is the danger of hairtrigger alerts and having so many weapons on alert that can be fired very rapidly. But the most that i have taken away and the thing most applicable to today, to what we are facing in terms of disagreements with russians over the syrian, the middle east, as well as the ukraine, is that we are not having anywhere near the kind of military discussions we had back during even the cold war. We have got to renew military to military discussions. People say, how can you do that when you are disagreeing over ukraine . How can you not do it when you are flying ships and planes near each other, when you have the possibility of an accident every day, when you have the possibility of escalation, and Nuclear Rhetoric is being thrown around . It is extremely dangerous. I would say resume military to military communications. The secretary of defense should be authorized by the president to talk to his counterpart. Chairman of the joint chiefs should be talking to his counterpart. The head of nato forces should be talking to his counterpart. We have got to resume military to military communication. Or wise to cut off communication because of disagreements. That is the time you need to communicate. We have a russiau. S. Natorussian council. Bill perry started it, both in response to georgia and in response to ukraine. Nato took the position and russia did also that we wont communicate. Why do you have it if you are not going to communicate in a crisis . The other thing i would say, while we are really trying now to figure out or at least we should be trying to figure ,ut where to draw the red lines we are accusing the russians of interfering with u. S. Elections, etc. , etc. It is apparent that u. S. And russia and other powers in the world have not developed understandings and red lines in the cyber area. We have got to do that. We have got to talk to do that. I think it would be the supreme irony if while we have not developed redlines in the cyber area, which can interact with Nuclear Warning systems and so forth while we are not developing redlines in the cyber area, we seem to be forgetting the redlines we have learned in the nuclear area. Um dumb is that . It is not in the interest of u. S. , russian, or world security. Those are a few observations that i think we need to make progress on. Victor, would you respond . What do you think about sams suggestions . Gen. Esin [translated] i will tell you my opinion about todays situation between russia and the United States. Is main danger as i see it that we are starting to lose mutual trust between the military. There was a period of cooperation under the nunnlugar program, and it was a successful program. And it was based on mutual trust. This gave us an opportunity to remove many obstacles standing in the way of this program. Today, this mutual trust is being gradually lost. As sam nunn has just said, when there is no cooperation, there is no trust. Indeed, we have a lot of disagreements. However, these disagreements may be resolved only on the basis of cooperation. Support sam nunn in that we should restart close cooperation between the military. In this case, we will be able to find means and ways of overcoming whatever problems that keep arising in military incidents. Convinced that if military cooperation was in forest lets take if military ced ation was enfor lets take the example of syria we would have found a chance to use our mutual efforts to reduce the threat that comes from the socalled islamic state. We would have found opportunities to agree on cooperation aimed at meeting the interests of both the Syrian Opposition and the current government of syria. Example of the nunnlugar program tells us that , we canhave cooperation solve such an important issue as Nuclear Security in this period of the early 1990s. I believe the time will come when we realize that such cooperation must be resumed. Thank you. [applause] mr. Hoffman dick, do you have thoughts about lessons for the next generation . Mr. Lugar i recall in 2012 that viktor said the nunnlugar program was coming to an end and russia. I went to see the foreign office. There was talk about several ways we could extend it. That was not the case with military, and as a matter of part e feeling on the although i did not see president clinton at the time president is thate time they were tired of seeing americans prowling around russia. Furthermore, they had gotten oil money at this time. They did not need the 400 million a year or whatever it was that we were sending. As a result, i tried another tack. I had a press conference, well attended by the Russian Press and likewise by the New York Times and reuters and so forth. I said, we have had cooperation together when it really counted. We have both got a problem with the chemical weapons of syria. I suggest that we come together and go after those and get rid of them. This was something we could be helpful to the safety of russians and the safety of the world. I heard not much more about it for quite a while, because as you recall, there did come a day when president Vladimir Putin indicated they would have a program about syrian chemical weapons. Kenny myers was very instrumental in trying to think through methods of how you extract chemical weapons from all sorts of places in syria, get them out to ships so they can be destroyed and so forth. At that point, a whole group of russians from the Russian Press corps in washington came to my office at lugar center. They started out by saying, are you pleased your idea was taken . I said, it was president Vladimir Putins idea. He is the one who made the possibility. The fact is, there are ways in which we can bring about and sometimes not through regular direct negotiations, since these are difficult for the time being but indirectly. Russia and the United States both need to, with regard to all of the bits and pieces of nuclear, chemical, or biological erials left on this earth with the Nuclear Threat initiative under sams leadership, they really went after this and published a remarkable publication that goes country by country as to who has what at this point. It illustrates how many countries have either shipped back their stuff to russia or to the United States. And we have destroyed it in both cases. The world is a lot safer because of this. We could do a lot more of it. Whether we have conferences about this specifically, there are ways, clearly, in terms of public communication, in which we can hope to get the job done. I complement president obama on having these summits you cheer in washington in which people washingtonh year in in which people have talked about ridding the world of materials of last instruction. Unfortunately, the last couple were not attended by the russians, but they could come back. I hope there would be more conferences of this variety. We have not just the problem any longer of Nuclear Weapons that might be shot by rockets across continental and so forth. We are in a situation with terrorists, who could go into particular areas, scoop up the material that is required, and create havoc in any city or situation all over the world. But onea big problem that is not without some solutions and potential for cooperation. Mr. Hoffman thank you. Secretary kerry, you want to add ,omething . Secretary perry you want to add something . Mr. Perry i want to comment about a question im asked all the time. Questions im asked by my students. Neededht, so you Strategic Deterrence during the cold war. How did that add up to 70,000 Nuclear Weapons . What deterrence argument led you to 70,000 . They did cap it, so lets say 30,000 roughly. I tried to answer the question. Maybe we think to have deterrence, we need to be able to destroy 100 targets. To be safe, lets double that, make it 200 or 250. Then you assume that maybe some of our missiles wont work, so we better double that. Now we get up to 500, 1000. Then you say, but we are going to be responding to a surprise attack. That surprise attack is going to androy 90 of our silos most of our airbases, and the bombers left going to be shot down by the soviet air defense. Somehow, the soviets are going to have a magical solution which is going to attack our submarines at sea. Never quite explain what that is. So they are going to be gone, too. Pretty soon, you have got the numbers. You better multiply it by 10. After all of this elaborate calculation without substance, you have got 10,000. How do you get to 30,000 . All i can say from that point is after a while, you watch with the soviets are doing, they watch what you are doing, and it becomes we want as many as they have, plus a little more. And that gets you into what is called a feedback loop that gets uncontrolled. If i put my hand on my hearing aid, i get a whistling noise, which maybe you can hear. That is an uncontrolled feedback loop, which theoretically can be infinitely many. We never got to infinitely, but we did get to 70,000, which is a lot. To answer the question for the future, can we learn something from that passed . From that past . In a logic i cannot possibly explain to my students getting to 70,000, can we learn something from that . If we modernize our Nuclear Weapons, build new ones in United States and russia, if we feel we have to do that, at least can we find a way of doing that in a restrained, logical way so we dont find ourselves once again going to this surrealistic number of 70,000 Nuclear Weapons, each of which has destructive power about 10 times to hundred times the hiroshima bomb. [applause] mr. Hoffman i think we will close this panel. With the optimistic thought that that feedback loop at least was broken and we are now down to many tens of thousands fewer, but we have not completely gone to zero. Only have 15,000 now. Are going tonow we move to a panel to discuss implementation, but i would like to thank all the panels for what they have done for joining us in the celebration of this important moment. [applause] [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2017] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org] you are watching American History tv, all weekend, every weekend on cspan3. Like us on facebook at cspan history. Cspan is visiting harrisburg, pennsylvania. Right now, we are on the pedestrian bridge that connects midtown to city island. Up next, we will visit with john harris to learn about pennsylvanias two politicians from two different centuries. Standing in the john harris