63 



the world, and we have the wisdom borne of 25 years of experience 

 in integrating environmental protection into military activities. 



Before I describe how the Department of Defense has applied 

 these capabilities in the Arctic region, let me address the criteria 

 for DOD involvement here. In the Arctic, as elsewhere, the Depart- 

 ment must continuously scrutinize its activities to ensure that we 

 achieve maximum return on our investment for the national secu- 

 rity dollar. 



The criteria for judgment in the Arctic are, first, to minimize po- 

 litical tensions generated by real or perceived pollution. Radio- 

 active waste has attracted the most attention in this regard. 



Second, to minimize the real threat to human health and the 

 natural environment in the Arctic by military activities. 



Third, to realize the best return for our investment of time and 

 resources. 



Fourth, to address environmental problems according to a risk- 

 based analysis, as Congressman Kennedy has alluded to. 



The source of much of the environmental security concerning the 

 Arctic today stems from the Russian military, and that brings me 

 to the fifth criteria, which is to measurably improve Russian mili- 

 tary environmental management of nuclear and hazardous waste. 



The good news is that the Department's and others' research to 

 date indicates that there is not a significant immediate threat to 

 human health and to the food chain in the Arctic, but good news 

 should not lull us into complacency. The Arctic remains vulnerable 

 to a host of commonplace toxins, such as heavy metals and persist- 

 ent organic pollutants. We have a responsibility to do all we can 

 to help ensure that an environmental disaster never occurs, be- 

 cause once it does, it could take decades or centuries to reverse. 



Let me now briefly address how we have set DOD's capabilities 

 to work with others in the Arctic. First, the Gore-Chernomyrdin 

 Commission, which under the leadership of the Vice President, Vice 

 President Gore, provides an enduring forum for bilateral coopera- 

 tion. Because the Vice President and Prime Minister Chernomyrdin 

 meet several times a year, there is plentiful opportunity for ex- 

 change. The Department of Defense is a full participant in a num- 

 ber of the committees, not only the National Security Committee 

 but the Environment Committee, as well, and I have personally 

 had the opportunity to present the Department of Defense environ- 

 mental program to Russian defense and environmental officials at 

 a Moscow meeting of the GCC. 



Second, in June 1995, the Secretary of Defense, Dr. Perry, and 

 his Russian counterpart. Minister Grachev, did sign a memoran- 

 dum of understanding, as you referred to, Mr. Chairman, to facili- 

 tate military environmental cooperation. Under this agreement, we 

 can share information and experiences in a wide variety of sub- 

 jects, ranging from risk analysis as an environmental prioritization 

 tool to environmentally sound weapons demilitarization to person- 

 nel education and training. We would like to commence developing 

 project proposals under this agreement as early as possible. 



Next, the Secretary of Defense, Dr. Perry, established the Arctic 

 Military Environmental Cooperation Program, which we refer to as 

 AMEC, at the request of the Norwegian Minister of Defense, 

 Kosmo, in June 1994. This is a trilateral military-to-military dialog 



