“The Doomsday Clock is operated by the Board of Directors of the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists at the University of Chicago to assess the worldwide danger of nuclear threats.  Just this week, the Board decided to move the Doomsday Clock forward to reflect the growing threat the world faces from terrorists who seek to acquire nuclear weapons.  In the same week, the fictional television show 24 depicts terrorists detonating a nuclear bomb in Los Angeles.

 

Since the invention of the atomic bomb, we have had warnings and speculation about the danger of nuclear annihilation.  We have also invested U.S. military and diplomatic personnel in the effort to stop nuclear weapons from being acquired by nations and terrorist organizations which could bring truth to the prediction of the Doomsday Clock.  Today, one fact remains clear: If the U.S. wants to slow the proliferation of nuclear weapons, we must stand firm with a group of nations similarly dedicated to preventing the spread of weapons of mass destruction.

 

The Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI) is a cooperative effort between America and other nations to monitor, detect and intercept transactions of ingredients for nuclear weaponry as well as the international finances meant to support these activities.

 

We can not count on the access of inspectors, diplomats or the media to nations trying to gain these weapons.  North Korea and Iran are early examples of regimes which are pursuing a nuclear agenda behind closed doors.

 

A bill which just passed in the U.S. House of Representatives would undo three years of work to build a coalition of our allies to actively oppose the proliferation of nuclear weapons.  Instead of recognizing the importance of our common interest with nations who genuinely wish to stop the spread of nuclear weapons technologies, this legislation would give authority over the PSI to the United Nations.

 

The thick irony here is that the United Nations has a record of indulgence and inaction when it comes to human rights abuses and acting against rogue nations who violate international law.  A stronger UN would be more aggressive in acting against Iran and North Korea.  A stronger UN would have aggressively investigated claims of nuclear technologies in Iraq before U.S. military action began.  And a weak UN is making intervention in Sudan’s civil war nearly impossible for the international community.

 

One reason for this last difficulty with the UN is the fact that Sudan, Syria and other bad actors occupy seats on the UN Commission on Human Rights, from which the U.S. was recently relieved of its duties.

 

Simply put, the United Nations is a terrible choice to lead the Proliferation Security Initiative. 

 

America must not concede this aspect of our national security to any international organization, especially one with as poor a track record as the United Nations.  Though I voted against this idea, it still will proceed to the U.S. Senate for further debate.  I will continue to fight to keep control over the Proliferation Security Initiative in the hands of America and her allies.  The work of this group is too important to entrust with the United Nations.

 

We must not send the signal that Congress would rather leave responsibility for our safety from nuclear proliferation in the hands of an uncontrollable international body than do this life-and-death work ourselves.”