424 



nuclear dumping in the Arctic. It's been confirmed to us that the 

 Secretary General of the International Maritime Organization is 

 currently requesting information from the Russian Federation as to 

 the nature and extent of that dumping. I should give credit to my 

 colleagues from Greenpeace for origin^ly bringing this issue to the 

 attention of the IMO last year. We strongly believe that the U.S. 

 government should be supporting this effort and that there should 

 be a fiill and timely response from the Russian government. At the 

 same time the U.S. government should be evaluating the applica- 

 tion of all relevant international agreements that might address 

 this issue and publicly report their conclusions on an urgent basis. 



The second point, there's a fair amount of discussion about the 

 Russian Aid Bill. An effective assistance to Russia is vitally impor- 

 tant and hopefully a good bill can be passed before this Congress 

 adjourns this fall. It's important to keep the Russian scientists who 

 have been involved in putting baseline information together in the 

 process of supporting this environmental effort. I'd note that the 

 Russian Aid Bill not only contains some very important provisions 

 on the Arctic to this end, but also some critical provisions on im- 

 proving energy efficiency in Russia and on broader environmental 

 protection. In this regard, I would note that at the July Group of 

 Seven Economic Summit in Munich, the Group of Seven leaders 

 committed, as part of their assistance to Russia in the nuclear 

 area, to promote and assist efforts to improve energy efficiency and 

 alternative energy as an alternative to some of their nuclear reac- 

 tors. This is critical. Improvements in energy efficiency is not only 

 the most effective means to shut down Chernobyl type reactors but 

 also to address a host of environmental problems including pollu- 

 tion in the Arctic. A Russian aid bill promoting conservation and 

 efficiency would help give some meaning to that if passed. It's vital 

 that assistance be provided to Russia if we are going to actually 

 protect the Arctic environment. 



The other point I'd like to note, that it's important to the U.S. 

 not only to take a lead in the assessment process but also in the 

 mitigation and prevention side of protection of the Arctic. The Arc- 

 tic has not been adequately protected by the existing international 

 environmental legal regime. The Arctic Environmental Protection 

 Strategy adopted in 1991 could make a contribution to this end if 

 effectively implemented. This will take a much higher level of pol- 

 icy and attention to it by the Federal government, including 

 the State Depsirtment, as Assistant Secretary Bohlen has men- 

 tioned and Stephanie noted, but also by agencies such as EPA and 

 NCAA, who need substantially new resources in order to effectively 

 implement the Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Program. More- 

 over in this process there needs to be a much greater effort to try 

 and ensure that the existing international environmental agree- 

 ments, such as those are we might address Arctic haze: 

 the convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution are 

 fully brought to bear. 



Fourthly, I'd also like to welcome the statement at the recently 

 concluded Arctic Conference by Assistant Secretary Bohlen of his 

 intention to create a State Department advisory committee on the 

 Arctic. I believe this could be a very important vehicle in getting 

 nongovernmental input of all types into Arctic environmental pro- 



