Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
323151632
label
Address to Nation 9/27/91 [OA 6037]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
323151632
contentType
document
title
Address to Nation 9/27/91 [OA 6037]
citationUrl
identifierLocal
13582-011
collections
Records of the White House Office of Speechwriting (George H. W. Bush Administration)
Speech Draft Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
323151632
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
1ce296516d399e11
ocrText
Originally Processed With FOIA(s):
FOIA Number:
S
S
FOIA
MARKER
This is not a textual record. This is used as an
administrative marker by the George Bush Presidential
Library Staff.
Record Group/Collection:
George H.W. Bush Presidential Records
Collection/Office of Origin:
Speechwriting, White House Office of
Series:
Speech File Draft Files
Subseries:
Chron File, 1989-1993
OA/ID Number:
13582
Folder ID Number:
13582-011
Folder Title:
Address to Nation 9/27/91 [OA 6037]
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
G
26
17
3
4
STATEMENT BY THE PRESS SECRETARY
September 27, 1991
President Bush will address the American people at 8:00 p.m.
tonight from the Oval Office on America's national defense
strategy. This major policy address will discuss the status of
America's forces in the wake of changes in the Soviet Union. It
will mark an historical turning point in our national defense
posture, pointing out a new path for peace.
The President will announce a number of decisions related to
our nuclear weapons program, and he will discuss with the
American people our total readiness to provide for the security
of the United States in a new world order.
This address will last approximately 20 minutes and will be
offered to all television networks.
# # #
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release
September 27, 1991
ADDRESS BY THE PRESIDENT TO THE NATION
The Oval Office
8:02 P.M. EDT
Good evening. Tonight I'd like to speak with you about
our future, and the future of the generations to come.
The world has changed at a fantastic pace, with each day
writing a fresh page of history before yesterday's ink has even
dried. And most recently, we've seen the peoples of the Soviet Union
turn to democracy and freedom and discard a system of government
based on oppression and fear.
Like the East Europeans before them, they face the
daunting challenge of building fresh political structures, based on
human rights, democratic principles, and market economies. Their
task is far from easy, and far from over. They will need our help.
And they will get it.
But these dramatic changes challenge our nation as well.
Our country has always stood for freedom and democracy. And when the
newly elected leaders of Eastern Europe grappled with forming their
new governments, they looked to the United States. They looked to
American democratic principles in building their own free societies.
Even the leaders of the USSR republics are reading The Federalist
Papers, written by America's founders, to find new ideas and
inspiration.
Today, America must lead again, as it always has, as
only it can. And we will. We must also provide the inspiration for
lasting peace. And we will do that, too. We can now take steps in
response to these dramatic developments, steps that can help the
Soviet peoples in their quest for peace and prosperity. More
importantly, we can now take steps to make the world a less dangerous
place than ever before in the nuclear age.
A year ago, I described a new strategy for American
defenses, reflecting the world's changing security environment. That
strategy shifted our focus away from the fear that preoccupied us for
40 years, the prospect of a global confrontation. Instead, it
concentrated more on regional conflicts, such as the one we just
faced in the Persian Gulf.
I spelled out a strategic concept, guided by the need to
maintain the forces required to exercise forward presence in key
areas, to respond effectively in crises, to maintain a credible
nuclear deterrent, and to retain the national capacity to rebuild our
forces, should that be needed.
We are now moving to reshape -the U.S. military to
reflect that concept. The new base force will be smaller by half a
million than today's military -- with fewer Army divisions, Air Force
wings, Navy ships, and strategic nuclear forces. This new force will
MORE
- 2 -
be versatile, able to respond around the world to challenges -- old
and new.
As I just mentioned, the changes that allowed us to
adjust our security strategy a year ago have greatly accelerated.
The prospect of a Soviet invasion into Western Europe, launched with
little or no warning, is no longer a realistic threat. The Warsaw
Pact has crumbled. In the Soviet Union, the advocates of democracy
triumphed over a coup that would have restored the old system of
repression. The reformers are now starting to fashion their own
futures, moving even faster toward democracy's horizon.
New leaders in the Kremlin and the republics are now
questioning the need for their huge nuclear arsenal. The Soviet
nuclear stockpile now seems less an instrument of national security,
and more of a burden. As a result, we now have an unparalleled
opportunity to change the nuclear posture of both the United States
and the Soviet Union.
If we and the Soviet leaders take the right steps --
some on our own, some on their own, some together -- we can
dramatically shrink the arsenal of the world's nuclear weapons. We
can more effectively discourage the spread of nuclear weapons. We
can rely more on defensive measures in our strategic relationship.
We can enhance stability, and actually reduce the risk of nuclear
war. Now is the time to seize this opportunity.
After careful study and consultations with my senior
advisors, and after considering valuable counsel from Prime Minister
Major, President Mitterand, Chancellor Kohl and other allied leaders,
I am announcing today a series of sweeping initiatives affecting
every aspect of our nuclear forces on land, on ships, and on
aircraft. I met again today with our Joint Chiefs of Staff, and I
can tell you they wholeheartedly endorse each of these steps.
I will begin with the category in which we will make the
most fundamental change in nuclear forces in over 40 years -- non-
strategic or theater weapons.
Last year, I cancelled U.S. plans to modernize our
ground-launched theater nuclear weapons. Later, our NATO allies
joined us in announcing that the Alliance would propose the mutual
elimination of all nuclear artillery shells from Europe, as soon as
short-range nuclear force negotiations began with the Soviets. But
starting these talks now would only perpetuate these systems, while
we engage in lengthy negotiations. Last months' events not only
permit, but indeed demand swifter, bolder, action.
I am therefore directing that the United States
eliminate its entire worldwide inventory of ground-launched short-
range, that is, theater nuclear weapons. We will bring home and
destroy all of our nuclear artillery shells and short-range ballistic
missile warheads. We will, of course, ensure that we preserve an
effective air-delivered nuclear capability in Europe. That is
essential to NATO's security.
In turn, I have asked the Soviets to go down this road
with us -- to destroy their entire inventory of, ground-launched
theater nuclear weapons: not only their nuclear artillery, and
nuclear warheads for short-range ballistic missiles, but also the
theater systems the U.S. no longer has -- systems like nuclear
warheads for air-defense missiles, and nuclear land mines.
Recognizing further the major changes in the
international military landscape, the United States will withdraw all
tactical nuclear weapons from its surface ships and attack
submarines, as well as those nuclear weapons associated with our
land-based naval aircraft. This means removing all nuclear Tomahawk
cruise missiles from U.S. ships and submarines, as well as nuclear
MORE
- 3 -
bombs aboard aircraft carriers. The bottom line is that under normal
circumstances, our ships will not carry tactical nuclear weapons.
Many of these land and sea-based warheads will be
dismantled and destroyed. Those remaining will be secured in central
areas where they would be available if necessary in a future crisis.
Again, there is every reason for the Soviet Union to
match our actions -- by removing all tactical nuclear weapons from
its ships and attack submarines; by withdrawing nuclear weapons for
land-based naval aircraft; and by destroying many of them and
consolidating what remains at central locations. I urge them to do
SO.
No category of nuclear weapons has received more
attention than those in our strategic arsenals. The Strategic Arms
Reduction Treaty, START, which President Gorbachev and I signed last
July was the culmination of almost a decade's work. It calls for
substantial stabilizing reductions and effective verification.
Prompt ratification by both parties is essential.
But I also believe the time is right to use START as a
springboard to achieve additional stabilizing changes.
First, to further reduce tensions, I am directing that
all United States strategic bombers immediately stand down from their
alert posture. As a comparable gesture, I call upon the Soviet Union
to confine its mobile missiles to their garrisons, where they will be
safer and more secure.
Second, the United States will immediately stand down
from alert all intercontinental ballistic missiles scheduled for
deactivation under START. Rather than waiting for the treaty's
reduction plan to run its full seven year course, we will accelerate
elimination of these systems, once START is ratified. I call upon
the Soviet Union to do the same.
Third, I am terminating the development of the mobile
Peacekeeper ICBM as well as the mobile portions of the small ICBM
program. The small single-warhead ICBM will be our only remaining
ICBM modernization program. And I call upon the Soviets to terminate
any and all programs for future ICBMs with more than one warhead, and
to limit ICBM modernization to one type of single warhead missile --
just as we have done.
Fourth, I am cancelling the current program to build a
replacement for the nuclear short-range attack missile for our
strategic bombers.
Fifth, as a result of the strategic nuclear weapons
adjustments that I've just outlined, the United States will
streamline its command and control procedures, allowing us to more
effectively manage our strategic nuclear forces.
As the system works now, the Navy commands the submarine
part of our strategic deterrent, while the Air Force commands the
bomber and land-based elements. But as we reduce our strategic
forces, the operational command structure must be as direct as
possible. And I have therefore approved the récommendation of
Secretary Cheney and the Joint Chiefs to consolidate operational
command of these forces into a U.S. Strategic Command, under one
commander, with participation from both services.
Since the 1970s, the most vulnerable and unstable part
of the U.S. and Soviet nuclear forces has been intercontinental
missiles with more than one warhead. Both sides have these ICBMs in
fixed silos in the ground where they are more vulnerable than
missiles on submarines.
MORE
- 4 -
I propose that the U.S. and the Soviet Union seek early
agreement to eliminate from their inventories all ICBMs with multiple
warheads. After developing a timetable acceptable to both sides, we
could rapidly move to modify or eliminate these systems under
procedures already established in the START agreement. In short,
such an action would take away the single most unstable part of our
nuclear arsenals.
But there is more to do. The United States and the
Soviet Union are not the only nations with ballistic missiles. Some
15 nations have them now, and in less than a decade, that number
could grow to 20.
The recent conflict in the Persian Gulf demonstrates in
no uncertain terms that the time has come for strong action on this
growing threat to world peace.
Accordingly, I am calling on the Soviet leadership to
join us in taking immediate concrete steps to permit the limited
deployment of non-nuclear defenses to protect against limited
ballistic missile strikes -- whatever their source -- without
undermining the credibility of existing deterrent forces. And we
will intensify our effort to curb nuclear and missile proliferation.
These two efforts will be mutually reinforcing. To foster
cooperation, the United States soon will propose additional
initiatives in the area of ballistic missile early warning.
Finally, let me discuss yet another opportunity for
cooperation that can make our world safer.
During last month's attempted coup in Moscow, many
Americans asked me if I thought Soviet nuclear weapons were under
adequate control. I do not believe that America was at increased
risk of nuclear attack during those tense days. But I do believe
more can be done to ensure the safe handling and dismantling of
Soviet nuclear weapons. Therefore, I propose that we begin
discussions with the Soviet Union to explore cooperation in three
areas: First, we should explore joint technical cooperation on the
safe and environmentally responsible storage, transportation,
dismantling, and destruction of nuclear warheads. Second, we should
discuss existing arrangements for the physical security and safety of
nuclear weapons and how these might be enhanced. And third, we
should discuss nuclear command and control arrangements, and how
these might be improved to provide more protection against the
unauthorized or accidental use of nuclear weapons.
My friend, French President Mitterrand, offered a
similar idea a short while ago. After further consultations with the
Alliance, and when the leadership in the USSR is ready, we will begin
this effort.
The initiatives that I'm announcing build on the new
defense strategy that I set out a year ago -- one that shifted our
focus away from the prospect of global confrontation. We're
consulting with our Allies on the implementation of many of these
steps which fit well with the new post Cold-War strategy and force
posture that we've developed in NATO.
As we implement these initiatives we will closely watch
how the new Soviet leadership responds. We expect our bold
initiatives to meet with equally bold steps on the Soviet side. If
this happens, further cooperation is inevitable. If it does not,
then an historic opportunity will have been lost. Regardless, let no
one doubt we will still retain the necessary strength to protect our
security and that of our allies, and to respond as necessary.
In addition, regional instabilities, the spread of
weapons of mass destruction, and as we saw during the conflict in the
Gulf, territorial ambitions of power-hungry tyrants, still require us
- 5 -
to maintain a strong military to protect our national interests and
to honor commitments to our allies.
Therefore, we must implement a coherent plan for a
significantly smaller but fully capable military, one that enhances
stability but is still sufficient to convince any potential adversary
that the cost of aggression would exceed any possible gain.
We can safely afford to take the steps I've announced
today, steps that are designed to reduce the dangers of
miscalculation in a crisis. But to do so, we must also pursue
vigorously those elements of our strategic modernization program that
serve the same purpose. We must fully fund the B-2 and SDI program.
We can make radical changes in the nuclear postures of both sides to
make them smaller, safer and more stable. But the United States must
maintain modern nuclear forces including the strategic triad and thus
ensure the credibility of our deterrent.
Some will say that these initiatives call for a budget
windfall for domestic programs. But the peace dividend I seek is not
measured in dollars but in greater security. In the near term, some
of these steps may even cost money. Given the ambitious plan I have
already proposed to reduce U.S. defense spending by 25 percent, we
cannot afford to make any unwise or unwarranted cuts in the defense
budget that I have submitted to Congress. I am counting on
congressional support to ensure we have the funds necessary to
restructure our forces prudently and implement the decisions I have
outlined tonight.
Twenty years ago when I had the opportunity to serve
this country as Ambassador to the United Nations, I once talked about
the vision that was in the minds of the U.N.'s founders -- how they
dreamed of a new age when the great powers of the world would
cooperate in peace as they had as allies in war.
Today I consulted with President Gorbachev. And while
he hasn't had time to absorb the details, I believe the Soviet
response will clearly be positive. I also spoke with President
Yeltsin and he had a similar reaction -- positive, hopeful.
Now, the Soviet people and their leaders can shed the
heavy burden of a dangerous and costly nuclear arsenal which has
threatened world peace for the past five decades. They can join us
in these dramatic moves toward a new world of peace and security.
Tonight, as I see the drama of democracy unfolding
around the globe, perhaps -- perhaps we are closer to that new world
than ever before. The future is ours to influence, to shape, to
mold. While we must not gamble that future, neither can we forfeit
the historic opportunity now before us.
It has been said, "Destiny is not a matter of chance, it
is a matter of choice; it is not a thing to be waited for, it's a
thing to be achieved." The United States has always stood where duty
required us to stand. Now let them say, that we led where destiny
required us to lead -- to a more peaceful, hopeful future. We cannot
give a more precious gift to the children of the world.
Thank you, good night, and God bless the United States
of America.
END
8:24 P.M. EDT