48 



for cooperation among the eight Arctic nations; fourth, involving 

 the indigenous peoples of the Arctic on decisions that affect them; 

 fifth, enhancing scientific monitoring and research on local, re- 

 gional, and global environmental issues; and finally, meeting post- 

 cold- war national security and defense needs. 



Mr. Chairman, it is within this framework that U.S. agencies 

 now work on Arctic issues. This Arctic policy review, which was the 

 first in over a decade, reflects the needs and realities of the post- 

 cold-war era. Vigilance in the Arctic in defense of our national se- 

 curity will be no less, but we recognize that other objectives must 

 be pursued, as well. 



When there was last a hearing on this subject in September 

 1993, we had all just become aware of the Yablokov Report, which 

 detailed Soviet dumping illegally of high- and low-level radioactive 

 waste in the Arctic. We were intent at that time on achieving glob- 

 al international agreement on a prohibition on dumping in the 

 ocean of high- and low-level nuclear waste. Fortunately, we 

 achieved that in the fall of 1993 in the London Convention, which 

 is the appropriate international forum. Unfortunately, Russia, as 

 the only country, stood upon its treaty rights and opted out of this 

 decision in respect of low-level liquid radioactive waste. 



There are several ways one can look at this turn of events. It is, 

 perhaps, honest recognition that Russia does not and has not the 

 facilities to process and store such waste on land at the present 

 time. On the other hand, it appears to reflect an unwillingness to 

 give high priority to waste management within the Russian mili- 

 tary system. After all, at least with respect to low-level waste stor- 

 age and processing, the cost is relatively modest, certainly so when 

 compared to the cost of a nuclear submarine or to the operation of 

 a nuclear submarine. 



To try to assist the Russian Gk)vemment and assure against Rus- 

 sian dumping, we have acted on two fronts. First, at the September 

 1994 summit here in Washington, we secured a joint statement be- 

 tween Presidents Clinton and Yeltsin to solidify political commit- 

 ment by Russia at its highest level not to dump radioactive waste 

 in the ocean. 



Second, together with Norway and Russia, we are working on the 

 Murmansk project, which will provide the necessary facilities in 

 the northern region. Dr. Hecht, I am sure, will go into this project 

 in more detail. Likewise, we encouraged Japan in similar efforts in 

 the Vladivostok region. 



The third area where there has been progress is in international 

 cooperation on Arctic matters. Bilaterally, in December 1994, with- 

 in the Gore-Chernomyrdin context, we reached agreement on an 

 Arctic contamination agreement that is particularly noteworthy in 

 its provisions providing for access to important research sites. This 

 agreement is not limited to radioactive waste investigation, as we 

 assume that other contaminants may be of even greater concern, 

 particularly in the near term. 



Here I have to pause and speak to the point raised by Dr. 

 Yablokov and the reflection that the State Department somehow 

 did something with respect to an agreement that Russia proposed. 

 I think it is fair to say that we did receive — we, the United States 

 Government — received a proposal within the Gore-Chernomyrdin 



