DISCUSSIONS, ALL OF THE PRIORITY RECOMMENDATIONS WE HAVE HAD
           FROM EXPERTS IN THE FIELD WILL HELP US BEGIN THAT FRESH START.
           WE CANNOT AFFORD TO DO OTHERWISE. MR. PRESIDENT, I ASK
           UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO INCLUDE IN THE RECORD A CHART THAT
           OUTLINES AND PRIOR ADVERTISES THE VITAL NATIONAL SECURITY
           INTERESTS OF THE UNITED STATES AS RECOMMENDED BY THE MANY
           EXPERTS AND ORGANIZATIONS THAT I HAVE DISCUSSED EARLIER IN MY
           REMARKS. I WOULD ADD ONLY THAT THIS CHART WAS PREPARED BY MAJOR

           SCOTT KINSFODDER, AN OUTSTANDING PILOT IN THE UNITED STATES AIR
           FORCE AND CONGRESSIONAL FELLOW IN MY OFFICE.
           

           THE PRESIDING OFFICER: WITHOUT OBJECTION, IT WILL BE ENTERED
           INTO THE RECORD.
           

           MR. ROBERTS: I YIELD THE FLOOR. MR. CLELAND: MR. PRESIDENT?
           
           

           THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE SENATOR FROM GEORGIA.
           

           MR. CLELAND: I CANNOT ACTION PRESS STRONGLY ENOUGH WHAT AN
           HONOR IT IS TO BE HERE ON THE FLOOR OF THE UNITED STATES SENATE
           AND LISTEN TO MY DISTINGUISHED COLLEAGUE TALK ABOUT THE NEED
           FOR A MEANINGFUL DIALOGUE ON A SUBJECT THAT OFTEN GETS PUT DOWN
           AT THE BOTTOM OF THE LIST WHEN IT COMES TO PUBLIC ISSUES. I AM
           REMINDED OF THE LINE FROM ONE OF WELLINGTON'S TROOPS AFTER THE
           BATTLE AT WATERLOO -- AFTER THE BATTLE WAS WON. "IN TIME OF

           WAR, AND NOT BEFORE, GOD AND THE SOLDIER MEN A DOOR. BUT IN
           TIME OF PEACE, WITH ALL THINGS RIGHTED, GOD IS FORGOTTEN AND
           THE SOLDIER SLIGHTED." UNFORTUNATELY, MR. PRESIDENT, I THINK
           THAT MY DEAR COLLEAGUE, SENATOR PAT ROBERTS AND I, HAVE SENSED
           THAT THE VITAL INTERESTS OF THE UNITED STATES, THE INTERESTS
           THAT CAUSE US TO GO TO WAR, THE INTERESTS THAT COMPEL US TO

           FIGHT FOR OUR VITAL NATIONAL INTERESTS, THESE BASIC FUNDAMENTAL
           PRINCIPLES HAVE BEEN LOST IN THE SHUFFLE. THAT SOMEHOW HAVE
           BEEN SLIGHTED. THAT SOMEHOW THE ISSUE OF FOREIGN POLICY AND
           DEFENSE FOR THAT MATTER HAS BEEN SHOVED TO THE BACKGROUND, AND
           THAT WE HAVE LOST SIGHT OF THE BASICS OF WHO WE ARE AND WHAT WE
           ARE ABOUT HERE AS WE GO INTO THE 21ST CENTURY, WHICH IS WHY WE
           HAVE TRIED, THROUGH THIS DIALOGUE, TO CALL ATTENTION TO THIS

           ISSUE. WE HAVE SOME WONDERFUL COLLEAGUES JOINING US IN OUR
           DIALOGUE. MY FELLOW VIETNAM VELT RAN, SENATOR KERREY, AND
           HAGEL, AS WELL AS SENATOR HUTCHINSON AND SENATOR KYL. I WOULD
           SAY THAT FOR AWHILE, A FEW WEEKS, I WONDERED WHETHER I WAS A
           LITTLE BIT OUT-OF-TOUCH AND WONDERING WHETHER OR NOT THIS
           DIALOGUE ON MESH FOREIGN POLICY AND GLOBAL REACH -- ON AMERICAN

           FOREIGN POLICY AND GLOBAL REACH, WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS
           OUT-OF-TOUCH WITH WHAT WAS REALLY GOING ON IN THE WORLD. AND I
           WENT BACK HOME THE LAST FEW DAYS AND IN MY OWN HOMETOWN PAPER
           THERE IN ATLANTA, I CAME ACROSS AN ARTICLE. "NEW YORK TIMES"
           PIECE. "ANTI-AMERICANISM GROWING ACROSS EUROPE." HELLO, GOOD
           MORNING. I REALIZED THAT WHAT I WAS SEEING IN A DAILY NEWSPAPER

           WAS WHAT I WAS ATTEMPTING TO ENGAGE HERE IN TERMS OF A
           PERSPECTIVE ON OUR GLOBAL REACH. A SENSE THAT WE WERE
           OVERCOMMITTED IN THE WORLD, AND YET UNDERFUNDED. A SENSE OF
           MISMATCH BETWEEN OUR ENDS AND OUR MEANS TO ACHIEVE THOSE ENDS.
           AND I REALIZE THAT WE REALLY WERE ON TARGET. IN MY STATE WE SAY
           THAT EVEN A BLIND HOG CAN ROOT UP AN ACRE EVERY NOW AND THEN. I
           THINK MY DISTINGUISHED COLLEAGUE FROM KANSAS, WE HAVE ROOTED UP

           AN ACRE. WE ARE ON TO SOMETHING HERE. AND THAT'S ONE REASON WHY
           I AM STRENGTHENED IN PURSUING THIS DIALOGUE AND I AM DELIGHTED
           THAT WE WILL HAVE ADDITIONAL SENATORS ENTERING INTO THIS
           DIALOGUE. BECAUSE UNLESS WE OURSELVES BEGIN TO DEFINE WHO WE
           ARE AS A NATION, WHAT WE WANT OUT OF OUR ROLE AS A NATION AND
           WHERE WE WANT TO GO, AND HOW WE EXERCISE OUR POWER, UNLESS WE
           DECIDE IT, IT WILL HAPPEN BY HAPPENSTANCE. WE WILL MOVE FROM

           CRISIS TO CRISIS. WE WILL NOT HAVE A PLAN, AND WE WILL END UP
           IN PLACES IN THE WORLD WHERE WE KNOW NOT OF WHERE WE SPEAK. I
           WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT ONE OF THE QUOTES THAT I HAVE COME
           ACROSS AND ONE OF THE LINES THAT CONTINUE TO REINFORCE MY VIEW
           OF MY OWN CONCERN AND MY OWN CAUTION ABOUT AMERICA'S EXPANDED

           ROLE IN THE WORLD IS A QUOTE FROM OUR FIRST DIALOGUE HERE BACK
           IN FEBRUARY, WHERE OWNER HARRIS, EDITOR OF THE NATIONAL
           INTEREST, SUMMED UP HIS VIEWS ON THE APPROPRIATE APPROACH FOR
           THE UNITED STATES IN TODAY'S WORLD WITH THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS.
           HE SAID, "I ADVOCATE RESTRAINT, BECAUSE EVERY DOMINANT POWER IN
           THE LAST FOUR CENTURIES THAT HAS NOT PRACTICED IT, THAT HAS
           BEEN EXCESSIVELY INTRUSIVE AND DEMANDING, HAS ULTIMATELY BEEN

           CONFRONTED BY A HOSTILE COALITION OF OTHER POWERS. AMERICANS
           MAY BELIEVE THAT THEIR COUNTRY BEING EXCEPTIONAL NEED HAVE TO
           NO WORRIES IN THIS RESPECT. I DO NOT AGREE," MR. HARRIS SAYS.
           "IT IS NOT WHAT AMERICANS THINK OF THE UNITED STATES, BUT WHAT
           OTHERS THINK THAT WILL DECIDE THE MATTER." END OF QUOTE.
           ANTI-AMERICANISM GROWING ACROSS EUROPE. THE DISTINGUISHED
           SENATOR FROM KANSAS ARTICULATED IN A SHOCKING WAY JUST SOME

           HEADLINES FROM 40 OR 50 NEWSPAPERS, ANG AMONG OUR ALLIES AND
           OUR FRIENDS. QUESTIONING OUR ROLE, PARTICULARLY IN THE BALKANS,
           BUT QUESTIONING OUR EXERCISE OF POWER, AS IT WERE. THE FOREIGN
           PERSPECTIVE IS NOT ONE WE GENERALLY DEVOTE MUCH ATTENTION TO IN
           THE CONGRESS. CERTAINLY AFTER THE WAR IS OVER OVER. THE COLD
           WAR IS OVER. BUT, OUR ATTENTION TO FOREIGN AFFAIRS HAS BEEN
           SLIGHTED. WE DON'T REALLY DEVOTE MUCH A TEXT TO FOREIGN

           AFFAIRS, AND CONSIDERATION OF OUR FOREIGN POLICY OPTIONS,
           UNLESS WE ARE THREATENED. I AM DELIGHTED THAT SENATOR ROBERTS
           IS SITTING AS CHAIRMAN OF THE EMERGING THREATS SQUHEET IN THE
           ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE. HE HAS GOT HIS EYE ON THE BALL,
           CERTAINLY THE EMERGING BALL IN TERMS OF THREATS TO OUR COUNTRY.
           I THINK THE OVERALL THREAT IS THAT WE DON'T REALIZE THAT ONE
           COULD OCCUR NOW THAT THE COLD WAR IS OVER. I THINK ALSO ONE OF

           THE EMERGING THREATS IN MY POINT OF VIEW IS THAT WE WILL
           OVERCOMMIT, OVEREXPAND AND OVERREACT, AND INSTEAD WIND UP UP,
           INSTEAD OF JUST A SUPERPOWER WORKING WITH OTHERS AND SHARING
           POWER, WIND UP IMPOSING, BY DEFAULT, ALMOST, IN THE POWER OF
           VACUUMS AROUND THE WORLD, A PAX AMERICANA, THAT CANNOT BE
           SUSTAINED BY THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE IN THIS COUNTRY. AGAIN A
           MISMATCH BETWEEN MEANS AND ENDS. BUT IT IS IMPORTANT, AS MR.

           HARRIS SUGGESTS, TO FOCUS ON THIS ISSUE. I SPENT SOME TIME OVER
           RECENT MONTHS, LIKE THE DISTINGUISHED SENATOR FROM KANSAS, IN
           REVIEWING WHAT FOREIGN OPINION MAKERS AND LEADERS ARE SAYING
           ABOUT THE UNITED STATES. AND WHILE WE MAY THINK, AS I DO, THAT
           OUR COUNTRY HAS THOUGHT MADE A CLEAR CHOICE ABOUT OUR GLOBAL
           ROLE, THE VIEW FROM ABROAD IS VERY DIFFICULT REPRESENT. MANY
           PEOPLE THINK WE HAVE CHOSE AND THE PATH THAT WE ARE NOW 0 ON. A
           UKRANIAN COMMENTARY IN THE KIEV NEWSPAPER WROTE IN APRIL OF

           LAST YEAR, "CURRENTLY HE TWO OPINIONS ARE POSSIBLE IN THE
           WORLD. THE U.S. OPINION, AND THE WRONG OPINION." HE SAID, IT
           HAS ANNOUNCE, THE U.S., "ITS READINESS TO ACT AS IF THINKS
           BEST, DESPITE THE UNITED NATIONS, AND LET THOSE WHOSE INTERESTS
           ARE VIOLATED THINK ABOUT IT AND DRAW CONCLUSIONS. THIS IS THE
           CURRENT WORLD ORDER, OR WORLD DISORDER." THAT FROM KIEV. THE
           INFLUENCE TIMES OF INDIA, EDITORIALIZED IN JULY OF LAST YEAR.

           "NEW DELHI SHOULD NOTE LOSE SIGHT OF THE KIND OF GLOBAL ORDER
           THE U.S. IS FASHIONING. THAT FOE'S POLICIES AGAINST YUGOSLAVIA
           AND THAT STRATEGIC CONCEPT ARE BASED ON DEGRADATION OF
           INTERNATIONAL LAW AND A MORE MUSCULAR A PROVE TO INTERVENTION.
           SUCH A TREND IS CERTAINLY NOT IN INDIA'S INTERESTS." SO INDIA
           HAS CONCLUDED WHY DON'T WE GO IT ALONE. WHY DON'T WE DEVELOP
           OURSELVES AS A NUCLEAR POWER?
           THE PRESIDENT OF BRAZIL WAS QUOTED APRIL 22 OF LAST YEAR, IN AN

           INTERVIEW WITH A SAO PALAO NEWSPAPER WITH VIEWS TO THE UNITED
           STATES. "WHILE PRESIDENT CAR DOUGH ZOE WAS GENERALLY SIMILAR
           PAPA THEY PARTICULAR OF THE U.S. AND GOOD BILATERAL RELATION
           LINGS BETWEEN OUR TWO COUNTRIES THE PRESIDENT OF BRAZIL WAS
           NONETHELESS WON'T TO EXPRESS HIMSELF ABOUT SEFRMB MISS GIVES
           ABOUT OUR APPROACH TO INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS. HE SAID, "THE
           UNITED STATES CURRENTLY CONSTITUTES THE ONLY LARGE CENTER OF
           POLITICAL, ECONOMIC, TECHNOLOGY I CAN AND EVEN CULTURAL POWER.

           THIS COUNTRY HAS EVERYTHING TO EXERT ITS DOMAIN ON THE REST OF
           THE WORLD. BUT IT MUST SHARE IT," HE SAYS. "THERE MUST BE
           RULES. EVEN FOR THE STRONGER ONES, WHEN THE STRONGEST ONE MAKES
           DECISIONS WITHOUT LISTENING, EVERYTHING BECOMES -- BECOMES A
           BIT MORE DIFFICULT. IN THIS EUROPEAN WAR," HE SAID, "NATO MADE
           THE DECISION, BURR WHO LEGALIZED IT. THAT'S THE MAIN PROBLEM, I
           AM CONVINCED MORE THAN EVER WE NEED A NEW POLITICAL ORDER IN

           THE WORLD." I THINK I AM CORRECT THAT JACK KENNEDY ONCE
           INDICATED THAT WE WOULD SEEK A WORLD WHERE THE STRONG ARE JUST
           AND THE WEAK PRESERVED. I THINK WE, THE FACT THAT WE ARE STRONG
           ENOUGH, I THINK WE HAVE TO HAVE AN INORDINATE SENSE OF BEING
           JUST. BUT THESE ARE VOICES FROM COUNTRIES WHICH HAVE NOT
           TRADITIONALLY BEEN PARTICULARLY CLOSE TO THE UNITED STATES.
           LET'S LOOK THEN AT SOME OF OUR NATO ALLIES NATIONS WITH WHOM WE
           PRESUMABLY SHARE THE CLOSEST RELATIONSHIPS AND COMMON

           INTERESTS. FEBRUARY OF LAST YEAR, COMMENTARY IN THE BERLIN
           "THERE IS A GROWING NUMBER OF PEOPLE WITH MORE AND MORE
           PROMINENT PROTAG ANALYSTS AT ODD WITH AMERICANS SUPREMACY AND
           SEE THE WITH A POLICY OF INTEREST. WASHINGTON IS GIVING TO
           REASON TO DENY THESE JUSTIFICATIONS. AS UNILATERAL AS POSSIBLE,
           AND AS MULTILATERAL AS NECESSARY. THAT'S THE EXPLICIT MAXIM
           UNDER WHICH U.S. PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON HAS PURSUED HIS FOREIGN
           AND DEFENSE POLICIES IN THE LAST TWO YEARS YEARS." FROM ITALY

           AN ITALIAN GENERAL
           
           EXPRESSED THE FOLLOWING VIEWS: "THE CONDITION ALL THE NATO
           COUNTRIES AS A WHOLE FIND THEMSELVES IN IS CLOSER TO THE
           CONDITION OF VASSALAGE WITH RESPECT TO THE UNITED STATES. IT IS
           TO THE CONDITION OF ALLIANCE. NATO IS NOT ABLE TO INFLUENCE THE
           POLICY OF THE UNITED STATES BECAUSE ITS EXISTENCE IN EFFECT
           DEPENDS ON IT. NO MEMBER COUNTRIES ARE ABLE TO RESIST THE
           AMERICAN PRESSURES BECAUSE THEIR OWN RESOURCES ARE OFFICIALLY
           AT THE DISPOSAL OF EVERYBODY AND NOT JUST THE UNITED STATES --

           AND NOT JUST THE UNITED STATES. WHAT EVIDENCE DO OUR FRIENDS
           CITE FOR SUCH CONCERNS?
           THE LEFT OF CENTER DUTCH DAILY WROTE LAST OCTOBER. "THE U.S.
           SENATE'S REEBBS.OF THE COMPREHENSIVE TEST BAN TREATY DOES NOT
           REPRESENT JUST A HEAVY DEFEAT FOR PRESIDENT CLINTON. FAR MORE
           IMPORTANT ARE THE CONSEQUENCES FOR WORLD ORDER. OF TREATIES
           DESIGNED TO STOP THE PROLIFERATION OF WEAPONS OF MASS
           DESTRUCTION, AND HENCE BOOST WORLD SECURITY. UNFORTUNATELY,
           ACCORD, THE DECISION FITS IN WITH A GROWING TENDENCY ON THE

           PART OF U.S. FOREIGN POLICY TO PLACE GREATER EMPHASIS ON THE
           UNITED STATES OWN ROOM FOR MANEUVER AND LESSON INTERNATIONAL
           COOPERATION AND TRADITIONAL IDEALISM. "I IN A SIMILAR VEIN THE
           UNITED STATES -- THE "LONDON TIMES" CARRIED A COMMENTARY LAST
           NOVEMBER. "THE REAL FEAR IS OF AN AMERICAN RETREAT. NOT TO
           ISOLATIONISM, BUT TO UNION LATT RA LIFM. EXACERBATED, AT
           PRESENT, BY THE POST-IMPEACHMENT WEAKNESS OF THE PRESIDENT AND

           HIS STAND OFF WITH THE SENATE REPUBLICANS. THE STALLING OF FREE
           TRADE INITIATIVES AND REFUSAL TO PAY ARREARS TO THE UNITED
           NATIONS. THE U.S. IS SEEN AS WAYWARD AND INWARD-LOOKING." NOW,
           MR. PRESIDENT, WHILE THERE ARE SOME EXCEPTIONS A LARGE MAJORITY
           OF THE RELEVANT ARTICLES AND STATEMENTS I LOOKED AT EXPRESSED
           THE VIEW THE UNITED STATES HAS INDEED MADE THE CONSCIOUS
           DECISION TO USE OUR CURRENT POSITION OF PREDOMINANCE TO PURSUE
           UNION LATT RALLIES THE FOREIGN AND NATIONAL SECURITY POLICY.
           WHEN I FIRST CAME TO WASHINGTON SOME 30-SOME ODD YEARS AS A R.

           AGO AS A YOUNG INTERN, I FOUND OUT THAT THERE COULDN'T BE A
           CONSPIRACY HERE. WE ARE NOT THAT WELL ORGANIZED. THERE CAN'T BE
           A UNION LATT RALLIES IT CONSPIRACY IN THE WORLD BY THE UNITED
           STATES WE ARE NOT THAT WELL ORGANIZED. WHAT HAS EVOLVED IS A
           SENSE IN WHICH WE MOVE FROM CRISIS TO CRISIS AND LOOKED AT
           POWER VACUUMS AND SAYS WELL WE NEED TO BE THERE. I LIKE THE
           NOTION THAT GENERAL SHELTON HAS ABOUT THE USE OF AMERICAN
           MILITARY MORE. HE SAYS WE HAVE GOT A GREAT HAMMER, BUT NOT

           EVERY PROBLEM IN THE WORLD IS A NAIL. I DO LIKE PRESIDENT
           KENNEDY'S INSIGHT, TOO, THAT THERE IS NOT NECESSARILY AN
           AMERICAN
{END: 2000/04/12 TIME: 10-30 , Wed.  106TH SENATE, SECOND SESSION}