| John Tessitore, Susan Woolfson - 1997 - 360 pages
...appear to make them second-class citizens within NATO. The latter oppose it because they claim to have "no intention, no plan, and no reason to deploy nuclear...territory of new members nor any need to change any aspect of NATO's nuclear posture or nuclear policy — and ... do not foresee any future need to do... | |
| United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Foreign Relations - 1997 - 184 pages
...concept, although at the December North Atlantic Council meeting, Alliance Ministers affirmed that NATO had "no intention, no plan, and no reason to...nuclear weapons on the territory of new members." Furthermore, all new members will join the Alliance's collective defense arrangements which remain... | |
| Richard Lugar - 1997 - 54 pages
...enlargement win not require a change in NATO's nuclear posture, "and therefore, NATO countries have no intention, no plan, and no reason to deploy nuclear weapons on the territory of new members . . . and we do not foresee any future need to do so." The Task Force also supports NATO's statement... | |
| United States. Congress. Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe - 1997 - 228 pages
...1997, NATO summit in Madrid to discuss the beginning of accession negotiations. It also noted NATO has "no intention, no plan, and no reason to deploy nuclear weapons on the territory of new members...." A key factor in the length of the negotiations with prospective new members could be the readiness... | |
| United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Armed Services - 1997 - 116 pages
...Ministers were merely reaffirming that decision in December 1996 with their statement that NATO has "no intention, no plan, and no reason" to deploy nuclear weapons on the territory of new NATO members. In considering the issue, the HLG and Ministers took into account the changes in the... | |
| Joseph R. Biden - 1997 - 68 pages
...deployments, as articulated by the North Atlantic Council on December 10, 1996, that NATO members have "no intention, no plan and no reason" to deploy nuclear weapons on the territory of states that are not now members of the alliance, nor do they foresee any future need to do so. President... | |
| Frank H. Columbus - 1998 - 304 pages
...deployment forces. Senator Biden further noted that the Alliance publicly stated in December 1996 that it had "no intention, no plan, and no reason to deploy nuclear weapons on the territory of new members" and in March 1997 it stated that there was no need to deploy combat troops in the new member countries.... | |
| United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Foreign Relations - 1998 - 576 pages
...in new NATO member states. The Founding Act says that NATO member states "reiterate that they have no intention, no plan and no reason to deploy nuclear weapons on the territory of new members.. .and do not foresee any future need to do so." The document adds that NATO "has no intention, no plan... | |
| United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Appropriations - 1998 - 184 pages
...NATO or not. There is no requirement to change NATO's current nuclear posture. NATO countries have no intention, no plan, and no reason to deploy nuclear weapons on the territory of new member states, nor any need to change any aspect of NATO's nuclear posture or nuclear policy — nor... | |
| |