Floyd Spence: “I too am concerned about the costs of NATO expansion and have serious doubts about the estimates advanced by the Clinton…”

“I too am concerned about the costs of NATO expansion and have serious doubts about the estimates advanced by the Clinton administration. While I have some doubts about the practicality of this amendment as written, I look forward to working with all Members who have concerns about the numerous implications of NATO expansion. As my colleagues may be aware, Mr. Dellums and I wrote a letter to the President, as yet unanswered, and published a jointly authored editorial highlighting these concerns. Both the letter and editorial take cost as an important factor in NATO expansion, but secondary to questions of national security and military strategy. I believe as many others do that NATO is perhaps the most successful alliance in history, and I am concerned that the administration's focus on the process of NATO expansion diverts attention from understanding the purpose of an expanded alliance. Personally, I am a strong supporter of NATO, and inclined to support its expansion, for moral, military, and strategic reasons. However, too many fundamental questions remain unanswered about the implications for United States national security strategy, force structure, defense budgets and relations with Russia, and other states. For example: In addition to military criteria such as equipment interoperability, the administration has stressed other factors such as 'adherence to market democracy' as necessary for admission to NATO.”