Sec. 242. Sense of Congress on negotiations affecting the missile defenses of the United States
336 words·~2 min read·
/bill/113/hr/1960/eh/section-242·A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.
Congress finds the following: On April 15, 2013, the National Security Advisor to the President, Tom Donilon, conveyed a personal letter from President Obama to the President of the Russian Federation, Vladimir Putin. Press reports indicate that in this letter the President proposed, developing a legally-binding agreement on transparency, which would include exchange of information to confirm that our programs do not pose a threat to each other’s deterrence forces, through a so-called executive agreement, for which [the President] does not need to seek the consent of Congress. .
The Deputy Foreign Minister of Russia, Sergei Ryabkov, stated in response to the letter that, the proposals of the U.S. side on the issue are quite concrete and are related in a certain way to the discussions our countries had at various levels in the past years. And it cannot be said from this point of view that the offers are decorative and not serious. No, I want to emphasize that we are committing to the seriousness of these proposals but we note their insufficiency. . Press reports indicate that the Secretary of the Russian Security Council, Nikolai Patrushev, conveyed a response to the letter from President Putin.
President Obama’s proposed deal with Russian President Putin has been kept secret from Congress and the American people. The Administration has systematically denied Congress information about past offers of United States missile defense concessions to Russia, including written requests from Members of the House of Representatives. It is the sense of Congress that— the President should promptly convey to Congress the details of any proposed deals with the Russian Federation concerning the missile defenses or nuclear arms of the United States; and the missile defenses of the United States are central to the defense of the homeland from ballistic missile threats, particularly if nuclear deterrence fails, thus such defenses are not something that the President should continue to trade away for the prospects of nuclear arms reductions with Russia, the People’s Republic of China, or any other foreign country.