William Helms: “Mr. President, there is a lot of misunderstanding about this treaty. It has been advertised implicitly--not explicitly…”

“Mr. President, there is a lot of misunderstanding about this treaty. It has been advertised implicitly--not explicitly, of course--as a cure-all; as an end to the perils of chemical warfare. And a lot of people think it will all be over, and we will not have any more danger. The truth of the matter is that they will not do a thing in the world to help the situation because the Chemical Weapons treaty--Convention, as it has been called--is not a comprehensive ban. This treaty contributes to the national security of the United States and the American people, and that is what I am primarily interested in. This treaty, it seems to me, must at a minimum affect those countries possessing chemical weapons which pose a threat to the United States. Accordingly, the United States should not become a party to this treaty--many Senators feel--until those countries are also participants. And no effort has been made to encourage them to come in. We are standing alone, and they are going to go about their little deviltry unmolested. Rogue states--like Iran, Iraq, Libya, Syria, and North Korea--clearly represent a threat to United States security and the security of key United States allies. And not one of these countries has ratified the CWC, and not one of them is likely to ratify.”