Sen. Richard Lugar responds
Thu Oct 12, 8:36 PM ET
Hundreds of comments and questions were posted for Sen. Richard Lugar (news, bio, voting record) by Yahoo! readers. Thanks to all for contributing your thoughts and to Sen. Lugar for taking time to respond.
North Korea's nuclear test was on many readers' minds. They also wanted to know about U.S. relations with Europe over Iraq as well as agriculture and alternative forms of energy.
Sen. Richard Lugar
The interview took place in Sen. Lugar's office on Capitol Hill. Talk to Power host Judy Woodruff presented Yahoo! users' questions to the senator.
Below is a question-by-question breakout of the interview, with links to individual responses from Sen. Lugar, followed by a transcript of the interview.
Thanks again to all the participants.
North Korea: Miltary action, sanctions and nuclear proliferation
A reader asked about what the U.S. should do next, following the recent nuclear test:
"Now that North Korea is alleged to have done a nuclear test, effectively putting them in an elite club of nations that possess such weapons, do you think that it's time to play hardball with North Korea?"
See Sen. Lugar's response here or read the transcript below.
Another reader wondered how sanctions against countries like North Korea or Cuba make for good policy:
"Can you give me some examples of when, where, and how such sanctions have produced positive results, rather than simply impoverishing these countries' citizens, making them weak and incapable of effecting change in their own countries, and breeding resentment toward the U.S.? Are there other means of bringing about positive change in foreign countries, even those who are hostile toward the US, without the use of sanctions, embargos, or military action?"
And, finally, a reader raised the broader issue of weapons proliferation in the wake of the nuclear test:
"My question is, if we cannot stop North Korea from developing nuclear weapons, how do we prevent them from selling or giving that technology to either a rogue country (namely Iran or some other terrorist oganization such as al Qaida or Hezbollah)?"
Nuclear weapons
A number of readers raised questions about limiting the global nuclear arsenal. One wrote: "The numbers I have seen were at its current funding rate of $1B it would take until 2020 to secure all the loose nukes in the former Russian-states. What is being done [to] accelerate this effort to ensure they can't be acquired by terrorists? If you could do one thing to strengthen this program what would it be?"
U.S. relations with Europe
"My question and or observation concerns the standing of the USA in Europe. At least among the general populace the US seems to have lost much credibility because of the Iraq war. And the EU with about 460 million people and the world's largest economy does play an important even if not often recognized role in the world. Is there any way you see to restore America's standing?"
Farm subsidies
Finally, we paired two different reader posts regarding farm policy and asked Sen. Lugar to comment.
The first post: "Farm subsidies pay billions of dollars a year for not growing corn. Why not have the Federal Government pay out the same amount of money for these subsidies but grow corn and turning the expenditure into a national [ethanol] product and not a subsidy?"
The second: "Senator Lugar, enormous subsidies for American corn are distorting trade worldwide, while midwest ecosystems are dying from soil erosion and pollution from corn farming. Why not re-direct those subsidies to help farmers transition to restoring the land to be attractive for tourists, hunters, fishermen?"The complete transcript of Sen. Lugar's interview is below.
* * * *
MS. WOODRUFF: Senator, first of all, thank you very much for participating in this, in this interview.
We have a number of questions from visitors to the Yahoo! site, Senator, you wouldn't be surprised to know, about Korea, and I'm going to read one of them.
Military action in North Korea
News that North Korea had conducted a nuclear test brought this - here is what we thought was a typical question on how to deal with it - quote, "Do you think, Senator, that it is time to play hardball with North Korea? It just seems to me that talking to them may become far much harder if it is indeed true the North Koreans detonated a nuclear bomb."
SENATOR LUGAR: My view is still the diplomatic track is the way to go, and I'm - and I think that's been confirmed by the fact that the North Korean test, both the missile test in July as well as this reported nuclear test of the weekend, have brought together Japan and China in an unprecedented meeting after 5 years at the highest levels, as well as South Korean interest in dealing with Japan. Now, I mention that because this has nothing to do necessarily with the North Korean dilemma, but the fact is the six powers around the table have had very different sorts of agendas.
What we're looking at now is a situation in which the Japanese new prime minister, Mr. Abe, having had some diplomatic success with China and South Korea, might frighten his two new partners because Japan is determined to have pretty stern measures, namely, ready to cut off trade with North Korea.
That would be a very, very tough blow for North Korea because they are gaining currency, hard currency, through that trade, and the North Koreans have said that would be an act of war. They've warned the United States, if we were to augment our very modest sanctions, and they have included disrupting counterfeit money trading in Asian banks or various other sources of illicit gain, the North Koreans have said that would really end talks and so forth.
I'm not certain what the viewer's question about hardball meant. Sometimes people are back into talking, are we really interested in regime changes, that whole purpose of this really to change the whole government? And if so, we don't have many other folks on board, at least around the table.
The Chinese and the South Koreans, in particular, abhor the regime in North Korea, but it is a North Korean regime. They want all the North Koreans to stay inside the boundary lines of North Korea, not to have spillover, and, therefore, they've been prepared really - they get a great deal of food aid, energy aid, and in the case of the South Koreans, even an industrial park that has brought some hard currency to North Korea.
So, there are lots of possibilities for influencing North Korea through sanctions, and the North Koreans have threatened to retaliate if we do, but the most promising aspects of all of this are probably still to find the avenue to visit with the North Korean leadership, to find out what their price is for re-entry into the world, into some sort of normal commerce and political dialogue in return for terminating their nuclear programs, and then finding some means of verifying they've done so.
Sanctions against North Korea
MS. WOODRUFF: Senator, this brings me to another question that some of the visitors brought up, and one in particular is questioning the value of tightening sanctions. They are asking, "Can you give me some examples of when, where, and how such sanctions have produced positive results, rather than simply impoverishing these countries' citizens, making them weak and incapable of effecting change in their countries, and breeding resentment toward the U.S.? And they go on to say trade and good will with China has been helpful to China.
SENATOR LUGAR: The normal law with regard to sanctions is that if the country is large in terms of population and resources and area, sanctions don't work. They sometimes bring a feel-good situation for the country that's issuing them, that we've done something. They serve as a substitute for not going to war and having military conflict; however, there are instances in which a very small entity politically has been influenced, and sometimes even a fairly large country.
I would argue that the very limited sanctions that the Congress of the United States enacted in 1986 with regard to South Africa resulted ultimately in freedom for Nelson Mandela about 3 years later and substantial changes in that country. They were targeted sanctions at the leadership, and that's very important, so that ordinary people are not hurt in the process, if the leadership doesn't care for the ordinary people. But there have been cases in which specific sanctions that went to the leadership, and if the entity was fairly small, have worked.
Nuclear proliferation
MS. WOODRUFF: And in connection still with North Korea, this visitor writes, "My question is, if we can't stop North Korea from developing nuclear weapons, how do we prevent them from selling or giving that technology to either a rogue country (like Iran) orIran some terrorist organization (like al Qaeda or Hezbollah)?"
SENATOR LUGAR: Well, now we're talking about potential sanctions that might or might not work to bring North Korea into proper negotiations, but are very important in terms of weapons of mass destruction non-proliferation in the world. Specifically, the North Koreans have, in the past, we believe, been engaged in exports of materials or techniques or equipment to places such as Libya and Iran as customers. They've had commerce with Pakistan both ways, with the Ayub Kahn nuclear projects. Now, it is possible, most observers believe, for the nations that are now dealing with North Korea to cut off those shipments or at least to make it very, very difficult for North Korea to make those kinds of exports or imports. And I think most countries believe that is important to do. North Korea may or may not continue to develop nuclear weapons or even to scrape the plutonium off of the rods at the Yongbyon facility, but they have a deep need for money, and these materials are interesting to people who are willing to pay for them. And the need to stop this in terms of simply world peace and security is imperative.
Problem of loose nukes
MS. WOODRUFF: Well, in connection with that, but not North Korea now, this person is asking about the former Soviet states, quote, "The numbers I have seen were that at current rates, it could take until 2020 to secure all the loose nukes in the former Russian states." I believe they mean former Soviet. "What's being done to accelerate this effort to ensure they can't be acquired by terrorists? If you could do one thing to strengthen this program, what would it be?
SENATOR LUGAR: Well, the estimates the viewer cites have come because there are certain figures available as to how many loose nukes or, to state it another way, how many laboratories or educational facilities or other places at one time or another had some fissile material under Atoms for Peace or various other gestures that the nuclear powers took to give people who didn't nuclear power some opportunities. Now the problem is rounding it all up before spent fuel or other difficulties are created.
Presently, my own view is that the Cooperative Threat Reduction Program, the so-called Nunn-Lugar program, is operating at a good level, but clearly more could be done. I'm an advocate of that each year in the budgetary process, and I'm not alone in that respect.
The fact is that, with the Russians, our cooperation in some months and some years is better than in others. We have encouraged them to be much more vigilant, and they understand that and probably are on the same page, even if bureaucracy inhibits our being able to deal with all of their projects. I mentioned specifically we've had great difficulty in the past when biological projects came into the fore. The Russians have always been in denial there were any biological weapons programs. This is not the same as nuclear, but we all know that biological warfare, chemical warfare can have many, many horrible and deadly results. And so, the need to keep all of this within bounds is very important.
But what we've discovered in recent years, and I came across this because Albanian officials indicated to us that there was nerve gas in canisters above Tirana, their capital. I'm glad they notified us. We went in military planes, our military people secured it, that is, they put fences around it. And I saw, just in August of this year, the apparatus that will neutralize all of this nerve gas, 16 metric tons of it. From time to time, these discoveries are very unnerving. You ask, where did it come from and why is it there?
So, in addition to those things we think we know need to be cleaned up, we are surprised, if sometimes happily, that nations are forthcoming. They want to work with us and be a part of that apparatus. We must do more, more rapidly, and clearly this is a mission for those of us, such as myself and others, who are interested in it.
U.S./Europe relations
Senator, a number of questions about Iraq, and instead of asking you about a specific policy course in Iraq, I want to ask you a question that was posed by someone who, whose path crossed yours over 20 years ago, and this person writes, "Senator Lugar, back in ‘83 I was asked without notice to do a live on-air translation of a speech that you gave at Hambach Castle in Germany, and as a fellow Denisonian I have followed your most impressive career. My question and/or observation concerns the standing of the USA in Europe. At least among the general populace the U.S. seems to have lost much credibility because of the Iraq war. And the EU, with about 460 million people and the world's largest economy, does play an important, even if not often recognized, role in the world. Is there any way you see to restore America's standing?"
SENATOR LUGAR: Well, I thank my friend for doing the Lord's work with the Hambach Castle speech. That was an attempt on the part of our country then to get Germany to take on Pershing missiles. That was a key element in terms of the Cold War ending at that particular point. But I would just say presently our need for solidarity with Europe is just as he has suggested.
There is going to be a summit of the NATO nations in Riga in November. This offers really a very good attempt to try to think through with European friends, our NATO allies, where NATO is headed, how we're doing together in Afghanistan, the first out-of-area mission, how really the security of Europe and the United States is tied together in places now outside the continent, quite apart from the need really for greater understanding through the World Trade Organization talks or even bilateral talks with the European Union on reduction of agricultural barriers, specifically subsidies that both of us have, Europe and the United States, that inhibit our growth and our understanding with regard to many other facets of trade. I'm not one who believes we're going to be able to turn around the Pew polls that ask, do you approve of Americans or disapprove? Or even, break that down, do you like the people as opposed to the leadership? And so forth. A lot of those results are unfortunately adverse, and they've been flowing that way in Europe for a while. And in part it's because the feelings on the part of the Europeans that, rather than NATO going into Iraq, we were unilateral and saying we're headed there whether we have you not. We've gotten better at that, the Europeans would think, with the Afghanistan planning, but by this time, Europeans have been reducing their defense budgets year by year. They have many fewer expeditionary forces that is forced to go outside of Europe anywhere, and so we lecture each other about that.
I mentioned the Riga conference. It offers one of these new opportunities to come together and to think about the future in an alliance that has worked extraordinarily well to bring peace in Europe and the United States and the trans-Atlantic partnership.
Farm subsidies
MS. WOODRUFF: I'm going to bring you back home, Senator, with a couple of questions about agriculture and energy. Two different suggestions offered by two different readers. Here's the first one: "Farm subsidies" - of course, you're from the state of Indiana -
SENATOR LUGAR: Yes, and I am a farmer, Senator Grassley being the other one in the Senate, I believe.
MS. WOODRUFF: "