Senate Defeat of Test Ban Treaty

Re “Senate Rebuffs Clinton, Rejects Treaty to Ban Nuclear Testing,” Oct. 14: I wish to point out that the Republican refusal to ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty is not a defeat for President Clinton. It is another defeat for the Republican side, who have again demonstrated their inability to rise above their stubborn partisan mode for the good of their country and, in this case, the safety of our one planet Earth. Their ignorance and shortsightedness provide us with a very difficult challenge if we want to save our future for ourselves and our children.

RITA SOKOLOW

Los Angeles

*

The Republicans are playing a very cynical game. Reject the test ban treaty that Clinton and Al Gore would get credit for. Pray that George W. Bush wins the election. Accept a virtually identical plan in two years that they can get credit for. Maybe assuming this is their motivation seems unfair, but the only other possibility is that they are actually in favor of a nuclear holocaust.

TOM TRAUB

Pasadena

*

The Republican position on the test ban treaty is like saying crime happens so why have laws against it.

PAUL DERGARABEDIAN SR.

Mission Viejo

*

The Clinton administration has systematically dismantled the nation’s strategic deterrence while extended deployments and falling morale lead the military to the breaking point. The Chinese campaign-funding scandals, loss of critical intelligence to both Chinese and Russian espionage, Clinton’s steadfast refusal to prepare (let alone deploy) a missile defense and the CTBT are all linked and amount to unilateral U.S. disarmament.

The CTBT defeat is the first step toward turning the situation around. Does anyone believe China, Russia, North Korea, India, Pakistan, Iran or Iraq would ever sign or honor this treaty even after a U.S. signature?

KEN ARTINGSTALL

Glendale

*

Our government threatens every Third World country on the planet when they dare test a nuclear weapon. But when given the chance to end nuclear weapons testing (which is unnecessary for us because of our advanced computer models of weapons), an opportunity to stop the proliferation of nuclear weapons, we turn down the offer. I now understand the term “Ugly American.” I am embarrassed to be an American today.

RAHM TAMIR

Venice

*

Re “A More Dangerous Place,” editorial, Oct. 14: Your naivete truly knows no bounds. How can a staff of (seemingly) intelligent individuals truly believe that passing a nuclear test ban (on underground testing--above-ground testing has been banned for years) makes our world less dangerous? According to your rantings, by handcuffing ourselves and making sure we get some “important signatures” from all our friendly global neighbors like China, everything will be rainbows and sunshine. So here we are, watching the Republicans vote this down to “embarrass President Clinton” (geez, you guys sure are gullible). Please wake up and realize that signatures and laws do not stop evil from occurring; it’s action and defense that, as of late, have only been heralded by conservatives in Congress.

T.J. CHRISTIE

Los Angeles

*

April 12, 1861: Fort Sumter fired on by Confederate forces led by Southern conservatives. Result: Civil War.

Nov. 19, 1919: U.S. rejects the Treaty of Versailles, led by Senate Republican conservatives. Result: isolationism contributing to advent of World War II.

Oct. 13, 1999: U.S. Senate rejects nuclear arms control treaty, led by Republican Southern conservatives. Result: isolationism contributing to international chaos.

Are we stupid, or what?

CARL STEINER

Mission Viejo

*

Reflecting on Jim Mann’s column, “America: Global Arms Superstore” (Oct. 13), juxtaposed with the Senate’s rejection of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, brings me to the realization that the U.S. Congress fails to grasp the changes that have occurred in this post-Cold War era of globalization. The majority of the Senate appears to believe that we need to be able to test nuclear weapons for purposes of national security, while condemning India and Pakistan for conducting tests. How those senators conclude that we can apply more pressure on the other nuclear powers by not becoming a signatory in the test ban process totally escapes me.

The moral failure on the CTBT is bad enough; to combine that failure with the fact that we are undeniably the largest arms supplier in the world raises major questions regarding the indirect role of the U.S. in the multitude of armed conflicts occurring throughout the world. It is time for Congress to show the moral resolve to move beyond the Cold War and embrace the opportunity to create a world where countries are recognized for investing in education, health care and infrastructure, rather than the size of their purchase contracts for fighters, bombers and helicopters.

JOHN M. FORREST

Pasadena