For Congress, Back to Cold War

WASHINGTON -- Welcome back to the Cold War.


That's the danger that lurks in the new Republican majority's national security agenda, according to a bipartisan array of foreign policy experts.


Evidence for their concern came with the remarks of Steven Berry, a senior Republican staff member on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, during a European speaking tour sponsored by the United States Information Agency on the eve of the congressional elections.


According to several people on the tour, Berry, a former State Department official who is to become a top adviser when Republican Senator Jesse Helms takes over leadership of the committee in January, told audiences in Germany that the United States must "encircle" Russia with friends of the U.S. and military strength to make certain it remains on a democratic course.


Berry did not respond to requests for comment. But one Democratic congressional staffer who accompanied him confirmed he had repeatedly called for such "encirclement." Another staff member added, "His overall tone is that Russia is still dangerous."


A Democratic member of the tour, Jeremy Rosner, a former National Security Council staff member under Clinton and now with the Carnegie Institute for International Peace, said, "There is something to be said for the view that the U.S. should support democracies around Russia as a way of keeping Russia democratic. But the problem with the Republican view, as presented by Berry, is one of tone. I tsays, 'We won the Cold War. Let's act like it.'"


Republicans too draw back from such language. "A poor and unnecessary choice of words," said Fred Ikle, a former Pentagon and State Department official and an adviser to the Republican National Committee. "We've won the Cold War, but there's no reason to lose what we've won."


Noting that Moscow so far has reacted to the U.S. election outcome with caution, and understanding that the bark may be worse than the bite, Ikle said, "I hope we can be sensible. If there is carelessness and lack of thought, there could be unwanted consequences."


Careless or not, Berry's words echoed the hardline views of Helms, who has opposed virtually every arms treaty with Moscow and remains hostile to the administration's support of Russia.


Beyond the difficulty the administration is likely to have with Helms and other conservatives, the ambitious National Security Act of 1995, which Republicans have promised to introduce as part of their "Contract with America," calls for military and diplomatic policies that are reminiscent of the Cold War and that many fear could provoke a new confrontation between East and West. Indeed, the language of the bill draws a line between helping Russia and the need to "protect Western interests."


"We are headed into a period in which congressional leaders will be more confrontational -- with Russia, with the United Nations, with many aspects of foreign policy," Rosner said.


The 26-page Republican proposal was crafted by a committee directed by Representative Robert Livingston, a Louisiana conservative who has helped bring billions of dollars in Navy contracts to his constituents and is scheduled to become chairman of the House Appropriations Committee.


Among other objectives, the bill proposes to "reverse the downward spiral of defense spending; rapidly provide the American people, the United States' armed forces and U.S. allies with a capable defense against missile attacks; restrict deployment of U.S. troops to missions that are in the national interest," and virtually prohibit U.S. forces from serving under UN commanders from foreign countries.


In addition, the bill calls for full funding of "missile defense systems that are deployable within seven to nine years." The systems would include both the Strategic Defense Initiative, commonly called "Star Wars," and a new $15 billion "Theater Missile Defense" to protect U.S. forces against short-range missiles, presumably from outlaw regimes.


Such systems, some experts contend, would violate and thus kill the 1972 U.S.-Soviet treaty prohibiting the development of antiballistic-missile systems and would provoke a strong and adverse reaction from Moscow.


Experts predict that Helms and the conservative Republicans who will run the Senate and House Armed Services Committees -- Senator Strom Thurmond and Representative Floyd Spence -- will seek sharp increases in Pentagon funds while pulling back on aid to Russia, including help for its efforts to destroy its nuclear arsenal.


The Republican bill couples its call for a military buildup and two missile defense systems with a requirement that the president seek expansion of NATO to Russia's borders within four years, while shutting Moscow out. The Clinton administration favors expansion at a slower pace, perhaps to include Russia.