ENVIRONMENTAL ASSISTANCE AS 

NATIONAL SECURITY POLICY: 

HELPING THE FORMER SOVIET UNION 

FIND SOLUTIONS TO ITS 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS 

Robert L. Dunaway

INSS Occasional Paper 4 

November 1995 

USAF Institute for National Security Studies 

US Air Force Academy, Colorado 
ii
iii

 The views expressed in this report are those of the author and do not 

necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the Air 

Force, the Department of Defense or the US Government. This report is 

approved for public release by SAF/PAS; distribution is unlimited. 

******** 

 This paper is the result of research conducted during academic year 

1993-94 under the auspices of a grant from INSS. The project is ongoing. 

******** 

 Comments pertaining to this report are invited and should be forwarded 

to: Director, Institute for National Security Studies, HQ USAFA/DFE, 2354 

Fairchild Drive, Suite 5D33, US Air Force Academy, Colorado Springs, CO 

80840, 719-472-2717. 
iv
v

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Forword................................................................................................. vii

Executive Summary............................................................................... ix 

Acknowledging the Former Soviet Union’s Problems........................... 1 

Defining the Problems............................................................................ 4 

 Economic Resources and Organizational Constraints .............11 

Committing US Support to Economic Development and 

Environmental Sustainability in the CIS............................................... 18 

One Solution: The Russian North-Geographic Information System 

Project (RN-GIS).................................................................................... 25 

Conclusion: Making and Implementing Policy...................................... 33 

Bibliography........................................................................................... 38 
vi
vii

FOREWORD 

 We are pleased to publish this fourth volume in the Occasional Paper

series of the US Air Force Institute for National Security Studies (INSS). This 

monograph represents the results of research conducted during the spring and 

summer of 1994 under the sponsorship of a grant from INSS. 

 INSS is co-sponsored by the National Security Negotiations Division, 

Plans and Operations Directorate, Headquarters US Air Force (USAF/XOXI) 

and the Dean of the Faculty, US Air Force Academy. The primary purpose of 

the Institute is to promote research conducted within the DOD community in the 

fields of arms control, proliferation, national security, regional studies, the 

revolution in military affairs, information warfare, and environmental security. 

INSS coordinates and focuses outside thinking in various disciplines and across 

services to develop new ideas for USAF policy making. The Institute develops 

topics, selects researchers from within the military academic community, and 

administers sponsored research. We also host conferences and workshops 

which facilitate the dissemination of information to a wide range of private and 

government organizations. INSS is in its fourth year of providing valuable, 

cost-effective research to meet the needs of the Air Staff and our other sponsors, 

which include Air Force Intelligence, the Defense Nuclear Agency, and the US 

Army Environmental Policy Institute. 

 This paper, by the new deputy director of INSS, reviews some of the 

serious environmental problems facing the Former Soviet Union and considers 

possible US responses to these issues. In particular, the author describes one 

possible program that would help Russia identify and catalog its environmental 

confusion: the Russian North-Geographic Information System (RN-GIS), a 

cooperative effort by the Russia Academy of Sciences and the US Air Force 

Academy. The RN-GIS envisions a pair of environmental data centers, one 
viii

each in Moscow and Colorado Springs, which would serve to provide modern 

Western expertise to Russian geographers and environmentalists, and offer these 

experts a venue for sharing their data with the world--including their neighbors 

in the Commonwealth of Independent States. Major Dunaway’s paper is an 

important piece of scholarship which reflects the new post-Cold War world and 

its realigned concerns. It also marks the first foray by INSS into the emerging 

arena of environmental security. 

 We appreciate your interest in INSS and its research products. We 

hope we are meeting a need for this type of analysis and reflection, and we look 

forward to publishing these papers on a regular basis. 

JEFFREY A. LARSEN, Lt Colonel, USAF 

Director, Institute for National Security Studies 
ix

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

 Since the fall of Communism in the former Soviet Union, US 

Presidents and policy makers have stressed the importance of helping Russia 

and the Newly Independent States develop democratic forms of government and 

forge strong economic and environmental ties with other nations throughout the 

world. This report focuses on the role the United States can and should play in 

helping the Commonwealth of Independent States to repair decades of damage 

caused by Cold War-driven industrial and nuclear development. 

 This report describes some of the region's most serious environmental 

problems and their potential to spread throughout the affected areas to 

neighboring--and even distant--countries. It provides an overview of the 

emerging environmental component of the US National Security Strategy first 

proposed by President George Bush, and explains how it has been applied to the 

CIS. Finally, it describes an ambitious proposal to implement geographic 

information system (GIS) technology as a means of helping the former Soviet 

Union identify and monitor existing and potential environmental hazards. 

 The author argues that the ability to locate, analyze, and track existing 

damage reliably, as a prelude to predicting potential threats, is a necessary first 

step in developing a viable strategy to protect environmental, economic, and 

social resources, both in the Former Soviet Union and world-wide. 
x
xi

INSS OCCASIONAL PAPERS

1. Explaining Weapons Proliferation: Going Beyond the 

Security Dilemma. Gregory J. Rattray, July 1994

2. The Ukrainian Military: Instrument for Defense or Domestic 

Challenge? Oleg Strekal, November 1994

3. North Korea’s Nuclear Program: The Clinton 

Administration’s Response. William E. Berry, Jr., March 1995
i

UNITED STATES AIR FORCE ACADEMY 

Lieutenant General Paul E. Stein 

Superintendent 

Brigadier General Ruben A. Cubero 

Dean of the Faculty 

HEADQUARTERS, US AIR FORCE 

PLANS AND OPERATIONS DIRECTORATE 

Major General Robert E. Linhard 

Director of Plans 

Colonel Richard B. Wallace 

Chief, National Security Negotiations Division 

USAF INSTITUTE FOR NATIONAL SECURITY STUDIES 

Lieutenant Colonel Jeffrey A. Larsen 

Director 

Lieutenant Colonel Kent Esbenshade 

Department of English, USAFA 

Series Editor 

2LT Grant Simmons 

Technical Support 

Ms Judy Thurlow 

Cover Design 

 
 1 

1

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSISTANCE AS NATIONAL SECURITY 

POLICY

"Don't Just Stand There . . . Do Something!" 

 -- Anonymous 

Acknowledging the Former Soviet Union’s Environmental Problems 

 The end of the Cold War caused the United States to redirect its 

existing defense and foreign policy strategies which had focused on the USSR 

as its--and its allies'--chief adversary. The fall of Communism spawned a new 

set of priorities, freeing decision-makers to devote expertise and resources to 

deal with another, more widespread threat: the contamination and depletion of 

the world's natural resources. This change in emphasis can be seen in 

agreements such as the Gore-Chernomyrdin Accords, the Arctic Monitoring 

and Assessment Program, and other demilitarization programs. Although 

many of these documents address environmental concerns there has been no 

concerted effort to establish programs to deal specifically with the serious 

environmental problems at hand. 

 Ironically, many environmental problems which the US and the 

former USSR are grappling with are by-products of their long-standing 

adversarial relationship. The resulting contamination of resources in both 

countries is part of a two-edged sword. Both countries succeeded in 

producing vast numbers of highly lethal weapons and weapons systems which, 

while effective, required hazardous fuels and chemicals for operations and 
 2 

2

maintenance and proved difficult to dispose of when their usefulness had 

ended. 

 Today, both US and former Soviet military bases face huge, 

expensive, and labor-intensive clean-up tasks, the products of decades of 

combat training and testing. The legacy of these operations includes leaking 

underground fuel storage tanks, the widespread use of ozone-depleting 

chemicals (such as the fire retardant halon), chemical spills, and toxic waste 

dumps. 

 In his Annual Report to the President and the Congress, January 

1994, then Secretary of Defense Les Aspin stated, 

New environmental, health and safety threats to US security 

have emerged over the past two decades. They threaten US 

national security and quality of life. They also threaten the 

Department's military mission. DoD is spending large sums 

of money to clean up contaminated sites, to dispose of the 

wastes generated, and to solve other environmental 

problems. . . . In 1984, Congress created the Defense 

Environmental Restoration Account (DERA) to fund 

cleanup of contaminated sites. . . . In 1994, DoD will devote 

$2 billion of DERA funds to cleanup activities and, for the 

first time, will spend more money on cleanup than on studies 

and investigations. (US Department of Defense 82-84) 

In his report, Secretary Aspin also announced DoD's decision to create a new 

Office of the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Environmental Security 

(DUSD(ES)) "to meet these environmental threats and better fulfill [DoD's] 

responsibilities." (US Department of Defense 82) 

 The former Soviet Union faces equally serious environmental 

challenges, spawned by seven decades of heavy military and industrial buildup. In its wake lies a legacy of aging, deteriorating infrastructure that 

continues to pose threats to the environment and, potentially, to the region's 

economic progress. However, even as the various governments of the Newly 
 3 

3

Independent States struggle to develop and institute democratic forms of 

government, they are expected to match the economic stability and 

productivity of the West without the knowledge or support to do so. 

Accustomed to relying on substantial support and guidance from Moscow, 

they must now fall back almost entirely on their own diminished resources and 

experience. Since the 1980s, political leaders and citizens throughout the 

Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) have expressed growing concern 

over the severe environmental problems that threaten their quality of life and 

their health and economic future. However, these governments lack the 

funding, equipment, and technical expertise to fully address--or even assess--

environmental hazards. Although the international community has 

acknowledged the importance of helping the CIS to become economically 

strong and politically stable, many potential funding organizations and 

governments are willing to make only limited commitments until the CIS 

countries demonstrate reliable stability and growth. Thus, CIS leaders feel 

compelled to allocate resources toward instituting democratic reforms and 

maintaining or increasing industrial production. Only by doing so can they 

hope to attract international funding, support, and investment, and become 

self-sufficient and competitive in the world marketplace. 

 It seems clear that the CIS must receive substantial financial and 

technical support if it is to arrive at effective, widespread solutions to its 

environmental problems in the foreseeable future. For years, the US 

Department of Defense, various scientific organizations, and several 

Presidential administrations have called on the international community to 

offer such assistance. All have stressed the dangers environmental damage 

pose toward the Former Soviet Union's economic and, therefore, its political 

stability and of the potential for the effects of such hazards to spread beyond 

the region's immediate borders. Experts throughout our government have 

argued that by offering the CIS substantial assistance in solving their 
 4 

4

environmental problems, DoD and other federal agencies are fulfilling part of 

their stated commitment to strengthen US national security. If properly 

applied, US financial and technical support can help prevent the spread of 

environmental contamination from other countries to our own, encourage 

international industry and growth, and, by bolstering other countries' 

economic and political prospects, contribute to international stability and 

security. 

Defining the Problems 

 Seventy years of Communist rule and the accompanying military 

build-up in the former Soviet Union have left a widespread, toxic stain across 

the landscape that will take many decades to erase. In his 1993 study 

Troubled Lands: The Legacy of Soviet Environmental Destruction, author D.J. 

Peterson writes, 

Over the decades, the Soviet government consistently 

diverted a massive share of available resources to build up 

the nation's large military-industrial complex as it waged a 

cold war with the United States and its allies. . . . Western 

estimates of the share of the Soviet economy accounted for 

by the defense sector in the 1980s range from about 15-25 

percent and even higher; Aleksi Yablokov [Russian State 

Counselor for Ecology and Public Health] asserted that the 

real figure is on the order of 50 percent. (The rate in the 

United States during the same period was about 5 percent). 

(Peterson 14) 

Author Richard Sakwa offered additional insight in his 1993 book on Russian 

politics: 

The Soviet defense industries had absorbed about a fifth of 

national income every year since the Second World War. 

By the last year of perestroika in 1991, nothing much was 
 5 

5

left of the old Soviet centrally planned economy, but what 

did remain was overwhelming state ownership and a bloated 

defense sector. (Sakwa 225) 

Peterson cites the Soviet military's inability or unwillingness to monitor the 

extent of environmental damage its weapons proliferation programs caused: 

As in the West, defense-related activities proved to be some 

of the most environmentally damaging--from groundwater 

contamination by industrial solvents used in the aerospace 

industry to radioactive and toxic contamination from unsafe 

storage and disposal of chemical, biological, and nuclear 

weapons. Playing on the Soviet regime's obsession with 

national security and secrecy, the military-industrial 

complex ignored the most important environmental concerns 

and resisted interference by pro-environmental interests. . . 

Speaking about Murmansk, a principal Navy port reported 

to be experiencing severe problems managing and disposing 

of radioactive and toxic waste, the head of the Soviet 

environmental agency [Goskompriorda] commented [in a 

1990 issue of Sovetskaya Kul'tura]: “We simply do not 

know what's going on there.” (Peterson 14) 

Other sources paint an equally grim picture: 

Among the significant sources of maritime pollution are the 

ships and support services of the USSR Navy. Over many 

years in the areas of the Bay of Sevastopol where the Black 

Sea Fleet is moored and fueled, the level of pollution from 

oil and petroleum products has been high, sometimes up to 

100 times the PDK [predel’no dopustimaya kontsentratsiya, 

or maximum permissible concentration]. Work on 

preventing oil leaks . . . is being carried out very slowly. 

There is no effective system in place to catch the overflows 

from heavy rains that carry higher loads of oil products into 

the bay. Still, the Defense Ministry plans to finish work on 

water catchment installations only in 1992. (Feschbach 126) 
 6 

6

The Soviet military's environmental legacy includes, in addition to hazardous 

wastes, the existence and problems associated with the disposal of nuclear and 

other weapons. In an August 1994 report on the current location and control 

of nuclear weapons in the CIS, analysts from the Foreign Affairs and National 

Defense Division of the Congressional Research Service reported that the 

former Soviet Union is believed to possess more than 27,000 nuclear 

weapons, and perhaps as many as 45,000 warheads, including 18,000 in 

storage. In addition to the problems associated with storing and eventually 

dismantling many of these weapons, international sources have raised 

concerns about the status of weapons still stored in the newly independent 

states of Belarus, Kazakhstan and, most notably, Ukraine: 

Some Russians have argued that the missiles in Ukraine 

have not received proper periodic maintenance and are, as a 

result, beginning to become unsafe. Some have argued that 

the warheads are also leaking radiation as a result of 

improper care. Russian officials contend that the absence of 

proper maintenance is caused by the fact that Ukraine has 

taken responsibility for day-to-day operations at the bases 

but that it lacks the technical ability to maintain the missiles. 

Ukraine, in contrast, insists that Russia had agreed to 

maintain the missiles and warheads as a part of the joint 

operational command of strategic systems, but that it has 

failed to provide needed spare parts and technical expertise. 

. . . Several observers have also raised concerns about the 

sale of Soviet nuclear materials or nuclear knowledge to 

nations that are trying to acquire their own nuclear weapons. 

In February 1993, Russia reported that uranium had been 

stolen from Russian facilities three times in the past two 

years, and there have been many reports of nuclear materials 

appearing on the black market in Eastern Europe. At the 

same time though, reports indicate that officials in eastern 

and western Europe have worked together to investigate and 

interrupt suspected cases involving the smuggling of nuclear 

materials. (Woolf and Galdi 4 12) 
 7 

7

 Civilian industrialization has also caused environmental 

contamination in the former Soviet Union, as it has in the US. Perhaps the 

most familiar incident in recent history is Ukraine's Chernobyl nuclear 

accident which, eight years later, continues to cause serious ecological and 

health problems in Ukraine, Belarus, and Russia. Scientists from the 

University of Oregon who visited the site in 1994 reported, 

At the destroyed reactor, our instruments registered several 

hundred times the normal background radiation. The gray 

walls of the sarcophagus [housing the reactor], more than 

ten stories high and fifty-nine feet thick in places, had been 

patched so often they resembled the tarred, caulked hull of a 

derelict ship. . . . More than 11,000 square feet of leaks have 

formed, and a French construction firm that was recently 

contracted to erect another tomb around the first one warned 

it could never be completely sealed. Nor could radioactive 

runoff from Chernobyl's cooling ponds, impounded by dikes 

hastily constructed at enormous cost along the Pripyat, be 

kept from seeping into the watershed. Once there, the runoff 

flows directly to the Dnieper River, Ukraine's Mississippi, 

the source of drinking and irrigation water for 38 million 

people. (Weisman 46) 

Other horror stories abound, ranging from reports of massive soil erosion 

throughout much of Russia, harvested crops and other foods registering high 

levels of heavy metal contamination, and high levels of water and air 

pollution. According to a January 1994 article in Sotsis, reprinted in Russia & 

CIS Today, "In Russia, approximately 50 million people live in cities where 

the concentration of hazardous substances in the air is 20 times the permissible 

levels, and 60 million live in cities where the concentration of hazardous 

substances in the air is five times the permissible concentration. Only 15 

percent reside in areas where the air meets health standards." (CIS 

Environmental Watch 2) 
 8 

8

 The Russian Academy of Sciences has compiled troubling sets of 

statistics on the Circumpolar North, the area around the Arctic Circle 

encompassing zones of permafrost and tundra, including Russia and more than 

two-thirds of the CIS and part of Canada: 

The Circumpolar North has, comparatively, the most 

autonomous circulation of water and air masses. It contains 

about half of the total world's population, 80% of industrial 

and 70% of intellectual potential of our planet. More than 

80% of world energy consumption is concentrated here. On 

the other hand, 55% of warming gases are emitted by the 

countries of the Circumpolar North. Thus, total volume of 

pollutant released into the atmosphere in 1990-91 was 47.5 

million tons, from 380,547 former Soviet northern sources 

of pollution. 70% of pollutants are accumulating in the 

Arctic basin. Total discharge of waste into rivers and seas 

of the former Soviet Arctic has exceeded 2 billion cubic 

meters annually. (Personal Interview with Dr. Ludmila 

Ilyina, Senior Research Geographer, Institute of Systems 

Studies, Russian Academy of Sciences) 

Further, the effects of military, industrial, and nuclear pollution are not 

confined to the borders of individual countries, or even continents: 

Western Europe, which received fallout from Chornobyl 

[sic], has urged Russia, Ukraine, and Lithuania to impose 

stringent safety measures of shut down unsafe reactors. 

Scandinavian nations protest smelter exhaust from Russia's 

Kola Peninsula. Industrial toxics waft across the Arctic to 

Alaska and Canada, while effluents from Siberian rivers foul 

Arctic fishing grounds. Even more worrisome to these 

neighbors, and also to Japan, are revelations of wholesale 

nuclear dumping at sea. (Edwards 77) 

D.J. Peterson makes a similar point by outlining the potential international 

benefits to be gained by providing the CIS with technical and financial 

assistance to correct its far-reaching environmental problems: 
 9 

9

Russia has already taken significant steps to reduce domestic 

sulfur emissions; paying the country to reduce emissions at 

its metallurgical plants on the Kola Peninsula presents the 

least-cost means of controlling air pollution in Finland. 

Helping St. Petersburg and the Baltic states treat their 

sewage helps Sweden clean up its beaches at home. 

Western aid to seal methane leaks in gas pipelines and coal 

mines could reduce the potential for global warming with 

less expense and disruption than curtailing carbon emissions 

elsewhere in the world. (Peterson 254) 

 

The author adds that the CIS has acknowledged the existence and known 

effects of extreme environmental insult throughout the region. Perhaps as a 

result, during Mikhail Gorbachev's administration funding for environmental 

issues increased substantially. "Total spending by the Soviet government on 

nature protection and the ‘rational use of natural resources’ in 1990 amounted 

to about 13 billion rubles, a 30 percent increase over levels in 1985," Peterson 

writes. (168) 

 Peterson cites numerous attempts on the part of state governments, 

federal agencies and private groups to identify and address environmental 

problems. These programs range from local pollution control efforts in Russia 

and Ukraine, fines levied on polluters in Belarus, and the election to the USSR 

Congress of People's Deputies in 1989 of such environmental activists as 

Aleksei Yablokov and writers Sergei Zalygin and Valentin Rasputin. The 

Baltic States also elected pro-environment politicians during this period. 

(Peterson 159-188) 

 During a February 1992 meeting of CIS members (with the notable 

exception of Ukraine), those present signed an agreement "On Cooperation in 

the Area of Ecology and Environmental Protection": 

In the agreement, the participant states recognized that 

'borders between governments do not coincide with natural-
 10 

10

ecological and basin boundaries,' adding that economic 

activity in one state 'must not cause damage to the 

environment, the public's quality of life, or economic 

activity of other states.' To this end, the parties resolved, 

among other points, to coordinate and cooperate on the 

drafting and enforcement of environmental legislation and 

regulations, monitoring and assessing environmental 

quality....preserving wilderness areas and biodiversity, and 

pursuing joint environmental research. (Peterson 186-87) 

Economic Resources and Organizational Constraints 

 Russia and the other Newly Independent States are actively seeking 

economic assistance to develop the technology, infrastructure, and methods 

needed to address their environmental problems. However, such attempts 

have long been frustrated by a variety of governmental and bureaucratic 

obstacles that hinder the cooperative agreements between government 

ministries. Internal rivalries and poor communication networks also prevent 

establishing links between separate groups of people who might otherwise 

combine their resources and expertise to devise widespread, systematic 

solutions. Referring to the Communist party's strenuous attempts since the 

1950s to institute laws and regulations to restrict pollution, D. J. Peterson 

writes: 

Responsibility for carrying out the government's modest 

environmental initiatives was divided among several 

ministries and state committees that often had priorities 

other than protecting the environment. One department was 

made responsible for collecting data, another for conducting 

the analyses, and a third for enforcement. Up to twenty-six 

separate state committees and ministries participated in the 

design and implementation of environmental regulations. In 

the case of Lake Baikal, over forty-five institutes affiliated 

with different departments and ministries conducted 
 11 

11

research on the ecology of the region. This arrangement 

frequently led to bureaucratic prerogatives, pitting one 

agency against another. And in a society obsessed with 

secrecy, the sharing of information was anathema. (Peterson 

17) 

 The author also points out that chronically underfunded efforts to 

establish and enforce environmental laws coupled with the USSR's overriding 

concern for ever-escalating military and industrial development, greatly 

reduced the impact of proposed reform efforts over the following decades. 

Others have cited obvious conflicts of interest among those who were 

expected to spearhead environmental reform efforts: "Decisions about the 

financing of Soviet science and technology involved many of the same highlevel party and governmental organs involved in the policy-making and 

planning processes" (Zickel 632). Needless to say, a government committed 

to producing military machinery in mass proportions was unlikely to cut 

production in that area to increase funding for environmental remediation. 

 Today of course, the CIS is in the throes of a vast military and 

nuclear draw-down that has allowed government officials and the man on the 

street to focus attention on environmental issues. However, given the still 

unsettled state of affairs caused by the Former Soviet Union's often unruly 

transition to a new system of government, economic system, and social 

conditions, few observers underestimate the challenge implementing a 

systematic program to address environmental concerns within the CIS. This is 

especially true in countries whose populations are struggling to forge new 

democratic governments, and to survive under desperately poor economic 

conditions. Millions of people are forced to rely on an aging and poorly 

maintained industrial infrastructure which no longer provides enough goods 

and services. Meanwhile, they are hurtling toward adopting a strange new 
 12 

12

capitalist system that offers no substitutes for their previous governments' 

politically restrictive but economically protective safety nets. 

 Desperate conditions lead to desperate measures. Before the fall of 

Communism, a growing environmental movement in many CIS countries 

(primarily since the mid-1980s) led to the establishment of large political 

groups such as the Moscow Green Party, an organization that staged 

demonstrations and other forms of protest. These civil actions led to 

hazardous chemical plant closures and increased public concern about 

environmental hazards. Despite such developments, coupled with wellpublicized accounts of the damage caused by nuclear accidents and poor 

maintenance procedures, the Russian and Ukrainian governments recently 

declared their intention to continue operating existing nuclear plants and build 

new ones as a key source of essential energy. These announcements coincide 

with reports from official monitoring groups such as the Russian Federal 

Inspectorate on Nuclear and Radiation Oversight, which reported 20,000 

safety violations at Russian nuclear installations in 1993. Such dire 

concessions on the part of struggling countries may be inevitable. Many 

Soviet-era factories, however poorly run or maintained, are unique in their 

areas and therefore deemed essential. Specialization in the former Soviet 

Union was exploited to the point that each factory became invaluable in the 

grand scheme of production: "Unlike Western economies, the ex-Soviet 

region's economy lacks surplus production capacity in most sectors and, 

therefore, is unable to compensate for plant shutdowns by shifting production 

to less controversial facilities" (Peterson 240). 

 When discussing economic resources, I must mention the vast 

mineral and energy reserves known to exist but not yet tapped throughout 

much of the former Soviet Union. Many unmined pockets of oil, natural gas, 

and minerals such as gold, aluminum, uranium, and platinum group metals 

have been identified in remote areas that warrant specific geological and 
 13 

13

environmental examination. Scientists and businessmen, both in the CIS and 

abroad, seek more information about their specific location and size, 

recognizing them as an important source of revenue. As the authors of a 1991 

Congressional Research Service report on "Soviet Energy" explained, 

Declining rates of Soviet oil and gas output and exports are 

a serious brake on domestic growth and foreign commerce, 

in the Soviet Union, East and Central Europe. Notably, 

reduced exports will shrink this major potential hard 

currency earner and severely limit imports of food and 

machinery. Rapidly deteriorating performance stands in 

sharp contrast to the rich Soviet energy reserves which could 

serve as an engine for growth. . . .Western assistance could 

include investments in all aspects of the energy chain: 

exploration, field management, transportation, refining and 

foreign marketing. . . . Without this beneficial foreign 

involvement, one may expect no new development of major 

proven oil and gas projects, and little technology transfer to 

close the wide gap between Soviet and Western norms in the 

energy chain (e.g. poor exploration, field management, 

transmission efficiency, refining, byproduct production, 

marketing, environmental safeguards). (Hardt and Kaiser 1-

3) 

 

A 1993 report on CIS world mineral markets stresses as well the importance 

of lending assistance to promote identifying and processing these resources: 

The development of CIS natural resources, particularly its 

minerals, could be a major vehicle for its economic growth. 

Between 1990-1992 the former Soviet Republics exported 

larger quantities of raw materials and metals because of the 

collapse of their internal military materials markets and the 

need for hard currency. Exports of precious metals such as 

gold and platinum group metals were also increased. Over 

the past couple of years, the US has increased its imports of 

CIS materials, including uranium, aluminum and platinum 

group metals. (Humphries 1) 
 14 

14

 As part of its commitment to assist democratic and economic reforms 

in the former Soviet Union, the Gore-Chernomyrdin Commission negotiated a 

series of agreements in 1993-94 to provide technical assistance and more than 

$400 million of assistance for energy resource development, trade, and 

environmental remediation in the CIS. Much of this support will also be used 

for defense conversion projects and cooperative space exploration ventures. 

 Environmentalists fear, however, that headlong efforts to exploit the 

region's natural resources, many of which are found amidst pristine or fragile 

ecosystems, may cause irreparable environmental damage. In 1993 members 

of the Russian Academy of Sciences proposed a series of thematic maps for 

the Circumpolar North region encompassing most of Russia: 

Seventy three percent of Russia's economic potential is 

located in the Arctic basin. This region contains about 90% 

of Russian natural gas fields, two thirds of oil and coal, 95% 

of timber, gold and diamonds, over half of metal ores and 

non-metal chemical materials. 

The impact of contemporary resource-utilization on natural 

environments is, indeed, extremely powerful. Take for 

example the history of 30 years of intensive oil and gas 

exploration in Western Siberia. During this period over 110 

million tons of oil leaked out into peat moss, lakes and 

marshes. A continuous film of oil has covered the estuary of 

Ob' river. Eighteen billion cubic meters of casing-lead gases 

are burned annually in this area. At the same time, Russian 

Ministries concerns are extended to the industrial expansion 

in the Arctic: more than 30 oil and gas fields are presumed 

to occur on the Yamal peninsula on the shelves of the 

Barents and Kara seas, often under contract to Canadian oil 

and gas companies. . . . Arctic ice masses are melting, 

releasing pollutants which have accumulated during 50 

years of economic development and testing of nuclear arms. 

In this situation, sustainable development of the 

Circumpolar Northern countries is impossible. 
 15 

15

This grim picture of environmental degradation and 

economic destabilization underlines the urgency of 

international cooperation on economic-ecological research 

endeavors and scholars of similar interests. International 

exchange of experiences, mutual assistance and support are 

the order of the day. This is especially important for Russia, 

Canada and the USA, countries which are most interested in 

sustainable development and nature conservation in the 

Circumpolar North. (Russian Academy of Sciences, Institute 

of Systems Studies 1-3) 

 Current and past scientific studies conducted by experts in the CIS 

and abroad provide sufficient evidence of severe contamination in the 

resource-rich but environmentally vulnerable Circumpolar North Region. 

International observers should remember, however, that the ramifications of 

existing and future contamination have the potential to extend far beyond the 

area's borders. Sweden and Norway have reported contamination from 

Ukraine's Chernobyl nuclear accident, and, according to Russian nuclear 

scientist Valery Bulatov, during above-ground nuclear tests conducted in the 

1940s, Russian scientists tracked the course of radiation clouds as they swept 

from Siberia into Alaska. The very real threat of transnational migration of 

numerous contaminants from this heavily polluted region is indeed a cause for 

international concern. (Bulatov 65) 

Committing US Support to Economic Development and Environmental 

Stability in the Commonwealth of Independent States 

 Since the late 1980s, US leaders have acknowledged that the former 

Soviet Union's efforts to institute permanent democratic reforms will succeed 

only if they are based on a foundation of economic, social, and political 

strength. As one of the first steps in helping the Commonwealth of 

Independent States to achieve such stability, President George Bush and 

President Boris Yeltsin on 17 June 1992 issued a "Joint Statement on Science 
 16 

16

and Technology Cooperation," one of many US-Russian Summit documents 

on economics, trade, and scientific issues. Through this statement, the two 

leaders reaffirmed their countries' long-term commitment to scientific 

cooperation and agreed to support "efforts underway in both countries to 

convert defense-related industries to civilian purposes.” The two leaders 

reported that "both sides expressed satisfaction in the progress made in 

establishing the International Science and Technology Center in Moscow with 

its important task of redirecting the talents of weapons scientists to peaceful 

purposes." In February 1992, Secretary of State James Baker pledged $25 

million for the center, which is committed to preventing nuclear and chemical 

weapons proliferation and to finding or developing peaceful employment 

opportunities for Russian military scientists. 

 Congress also weighed in by passing the FREEDOM Support Act of 

1992 which states that "the dimension of the problems now faced in the 

independent states of the former Soviet Union makes it imperative for donor 

countries and institutions to provide the expertise and support necessary to 

ensure continued progress on economic and political reforms.” In addition to 

economic and humanitarian efforts, the legislators called for initiatives 

ensuring "improvement in the collection and analysis of statistical 

information" and "promotion of cooperative research efforts to validate and 

improve environmental monitoring of protracted radiation exposure." In April 

1992, the former Soviet Union met requirements for support under the Soviet 

Nuclear Threat Reduction Act (also known as the "Nunn-Lugar Act") which 

authorizes funding for Russia's and other CIS countries' efforts to dismantle 

and destroy nuclear and chemical weapons and convert defense industries to 

civilian use. In 1992, the US government pledged $100 million in aid 

designed to develop and support research projects to keep Russian scientists 

working in Russia. This figure represents only a small portion of the $800 
 17 

17

million funding package Congress approved that year to help Russia, Ukraine, 

Belarus, and Kazakhstan to dismantle their nuclear weapons programs. 

 The proposed "Circumpolar North Information System" data 

collection and mapping project between the US Air Force Academy and the 

Russian Academy of Sciences also meets key objectives spelled out in the 

Former Soviet Union Demilitarization Act of 1992. The legislation reads, 

"The Congress finds that it is in the national security interest of the United 

States to . . . support the demilitarization of the massive defense-related 

industry and equipment of the independent states of the former Soviet Union 

and conversion of such industry and equipment to civilian purposes and uses; 

and to expand military-to-military contacts between the United States and the 

independent states of the former Soviet Union." 

 In the 1993 National Security Strategy of the United States, President 

Bush drew an analogy between current national policy and that of the 1930s 

when "the United States took the lead in laying the foundation for a global 

economic system based on multilateral cooperation, liberalized trade, 

international institutions for financial cooperation and development assistance 

and other mechanisms." He added, "These institutions are proving their worth 

today in responding to the new challenges of aiding the former Communist 

countries." 

 During 1993, the US provided Russia with $355 million in technical 

assistance. In September 1993, Congress approved a $2.45-billion assistance 

package for the Newly Independent States which included a $1.8 billion 

bilateral package first announced during the G-7 economic summit held in 

Tokyo in July 1993. Several months earlier the Clinton Administration stated 

its commitment to seek $1.3 billion in bilateral assistance to Russia and the 

Newly Independent States. Both funding packages emphasized the areas of 

energy, environment, housing, technical, and humanitarian assistance. Also in 

September, the US Agency for International Development signed an 
 18 

18

agreement to launch the Russian-American Enterprise Fund for which $300 

million in foreign assistance appropriations had been earmarked. Among the 

many proposed initiatives slated for support under the fund were defense 

conversion initiatives and a project to design a geological database. (US 

Department of State, June 1994 366-371) 

 In his January 1994 Annual Report to the President and the 

Congress, Secretary of Defense Les Aspin acknowledged the defense 

establishment's increasing awareness of "the importance of environmental 

security to national defense" demonstrated by the creation of a new Office of 

the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Environmental Security. Secretary 

Aspin cited several "critical elements" in DoD's new environmental strategy, 

including the importance of establishing firm international cooperative 

agreements. "By facilitating bilateral agreements with advanced nations, the 

Department can speed the development and transfer of innovative 

technologies for defense-related environmental problems," he pointed out. He 

also stressed the importance of providing "international environmental 

assistance" to countries of the former Soviet Union, concluding, "Educating 

Eastern European military personnel on environmental issues holds the 

potential to stop the rampant spread of contaminants, improve the health of 

soldiers and surrounding populations, speed conversion of military facilities to 

economically viable use, and ease historical distrust between populations and 

militaries in this part of the world." (US Department of Defense 88-89) 

 During their summit meeting in Vancouver, Canada, 3-4 April 1993, 

President Bill Clinton and Russian President Boris Yeltsin agreed to develop a 

program to sponsor energy, space, and science and technology projects that 

would benefit both countries. This agreement led to a new cooperative 

venture, the US-Russian Joint Commission on Economic and Technological 

Cooperation (the venture, also known as the Gore-Chernomyrdin 

Commission, was established through agreements signed by Vice President Al 
 19 

19

Gore and Prime Minister Viktor Chernomyrdin in September 1993). In June 

1994 the commission issued a memorandum calling for cooperative efforts to 

promote development of offshore mineral resource development and "the 

sharing of scientific and technical information . . . on geology, resource 

assessment, environmental protection, economic and socioeconomic analysis, 

and risk protection." (US Department of Interior 2) The commission has 

initiated a broad range of agreements aimed at increasing bilateral trade 

between the two countries and developing a variety of environmental, 

scientific, energy policy, and defense programs. 

 In his March 2, 1994 statement to the Senate Appropriations 

Committee, Secretary of State Warren Christopher cited the Administration's 

proposed FY 95 International Affairs budget request for $900 million to 

support reform in the former Soviet Union: "Our dollars provide capital to 

Russian entrepreneurs and loan guarantees to American exporters and 

investors: our dollars extend technical expertise to democratic reformers, from 

local councils to government ministries. . . . In short, we are supporting those 

who are building a market economy in Russia and those who have a stake in 

sustaining stable democratic institutions." (US Department of State, 14 March 

1994 141) 

 President Clinton stressed the importance of such initiatives in his 

1994 National Security Strategy: 

The core of our strategy is to help democracy and markets 

expand and survive in other places where we have the 

strongest security concerns and where we can make the 

greatest difference. This is not a democratic crusade; it is a 

pragmatic commitment to see freedom take hold where that 

will help us most. Thus, we must target our efforts to assist 

states that affect our strategic interests, such as those with 

large economies, critical location, nuclear weapons, or the 

potential to generate refugee flows into our own nation or 

into key friends' and allies'. . . . Russia is a key state in this 
 20 

20

regard. If we can support and help consolidate democratic 

and market reforms in Russia (and the other newly 

independent states), we can help turn a former threat into a 

region of valued diplomatic and economic partners. In 

addition, our efforts in Russia, Ukraine and other states raise 

the likelihood of continued reductions in nuclear arms and 

compliance with international nonproliferation accords. 

(Clinton 19) 

 Shortly after being nominated to serve as Deputy Secretary of State, 

Strobe Talbot, then serving as the US Ambassador to Russia, testified before 

the House Foreign Affairs Committee in January 1994: 

As President Clinton stressed in his [January 1994] Moscow 

speech, Americans want Russia to succeed in its 

transformation, not just for its sake or for Europe's sake, but 

for our own. A stable, democratic, market-oriented Russia, 

a Russia secure in its own borders and respectful of the 

borders of others, a Russia integrated rather than contained, 

will mean fewer US tax dollars spent on defense; a reduced 

threat from weapons of mass destruction; new markets for 

US products; and a powerful, reliable partner for diplomacy 

as well as commerce in the 21st century. (US Department of 

State, 31 January 1994 37) 

 The President also stressed the importance of initiating and 

supporting international efforts to help CIS countries overcome their 

potentially devastating environmental problems: "The United States has 

focused technical assistance and encouraged non-governmental environmental 

groups to provide expertise to the republics of the former Soviet Union and 

East European nations that have suffered the most acute environmental crises." 

(US Department of State, 6 June 1994 37) 

 As early as February 1993, President Clinton demonstrated his 

awareness of the strategic importance of helping the former Soviet Union 
 21 

21

identify and address the environmental effects of past nuclear and industrial 

proliferation by introducing the Environmental Technology Initiative. This 

initiative encourages the export of American environmental technologies; in 

addition to a variety of remediation programs and techniques, the initiative 

specifically cites the importance of introducing systems to manage 

environmental data collected from the field. Other proposed assistance 

programs include a $1.6 billion initiative announced during President Clinton's 

4 April 1993 Vancouver summit meeting with President Yeltsin to cover 

previously proposed or existing projects aimed at helping Russia improve its 

energy, environmental, housing, and business sectors; an additional $1.3 

billion in bilateral programs promised by the US; and the FREEDOM Support 

Act for which the Administration sought $704 million in FY 94 for additional 

support in these key areas. On 24 August, 1994, the President signed into law 

the FY 1995 Foreign Operations Export Financing and Related Programs 

Appropriations Act (PL 103-306) which allocates $850 million in a broad 

range of bilateral assistance to the former Soviet Union. 

One Solution: The Russian North-Geographic Information Systems 

Project (RN-GIS)

 The former Soviet Union's numerous environmental problems have 

been thoroughly documented, but to date there is no unified, nation-wide 

program to address them. Although various studies and remediation projects 

are underway, all are limited in scope, and no one has attempted to ensure 

compatibility between various systems and techniques. Therefore, various 

research and scientific teams from the CIS and other countries conducting 

such projects have no way to share the information they gather with others, or 

to apply their findings to portions of the CIS outside the particular area under 

study. 
 22 

22

 It is important to note that support for developing effective national 

environmental projects in the CIS, especially those that have been endorsed by 

its leaders and scientists, can reinforce strong environmental policies 

championed by key decision-makers. Such joint cooperative efforts have the 

potential to strengthen relations between the cooperating countries and 

contribute and promote environmental security regionally and internationally. 

Such joint efforts are also the first step in helping CIS scientists and 

researchers acquire and apply the expertise their western counterparts bring to 

these projects. The host country participants would not be passive aid 

recipients but project partners with the goal of becoming self-sufficient. They 

would continue the work independently while sharing its results with the rest 

of the scientific community, long after infusions of international aid have 

ceased. 

 The next step for policy makers in the former USSR and this country 

is to determine how the US can best help the CIS to assess and address these 

problems. What type of assistance and support can this country offer that will 

lead to the development of long-term solutions to environmental problems in 

the CIS? Such assistance should not take the form of hand-outs or short-term 

projects of limited scope but a long-term strategy and program that scientists, 

scholars, and policy makers can adopt and expand, using national resources 

and expertise. 

 One possible solution is creating a geographic information system 

(GIS) that will help the former Soviet Union gather, analyze, and display vital 

statistical information on the types of existing hazards. A reliable, nationwide data collection and analysis system would allow experts to track the 

location, severity, and impacts of existing hazards and predict their long-term 

impacts, both within and ultimately beyond the region's borders. This 

information could also help scientists to develop various measures to reduce or 

eliminate these hazards and their effects. An effective GIS could help 
 23 

23

scientists monitor the migration of contaminants through groundwater, predict 

the effects of airborne pollutants within and beyond national boundaries, and 

help users conduct advanced computer modeling to determine the 

effectiveness of proposed or existing remediation efforts. Such a system 

would also allow researchers to track the effects of population growth and 

migration and the current and projected status of rivers, forests, and other 

natural resources. 

 To meet the ever-growing demand for such tools, cartographers and 

hardware/software developers have worked together to develop geographic 

information systems. An article on GIS published in the November 1992 

Journal of Forestry offers an excellent example of how graphical GISs are 

produced and their potential applications: 

A GIS can be defined as a system for entering, storing, 

manipulating, analyzing, and displaying geographic or 

spatial data. These data are represented by points, lines, and 

polygons, along with their associated attributes. . . . For 

example, the points may represent hazardous waste site 

locations; the attributes associated with each site may be the 

specific chemical dumped at the site, the owner and the date 

the site was last used. Lines may represent roads, streams, 

or other linear features, while polygons may represent areal 

features such as vegetation types of land use. 

Recent technological developments and refinements in GIS 

computer hardware, software, and data acquisition 

techniques have revolutionized land management and land 

planning. The GIS link between locations and attributes 

makes it possible for decision-makers to simulate the effects 

of management and policy alternatives. GIS is a potentially 

powerful tool because knowledgeable users can quickly 

search, display, analyze, and model spatial information. In 

addition, maps and other data can be updated more quickly 

and accurately with GIS than by conventional methods. 

(Congalton and Green 13-14) 

 
 24 

24

 Since the end of the Cold War, separate groups of researchers 

throughout the CIS have been collecting statistical data about the region's 

environmental characteristics and conditions manually or by using software 

they have created themselves. The Russian Academy of Sciences, Institute of 

System Studies, has documented the existence of as many as 30 different, 

incompatible systems currently used to collect and manipulate such data. The 

lack of a centralized system for this work has resulted in the proliferation of 

small, individual pockets of information and processes, none of which can 

share data with other systems. Since neither the data nor the computer 

technology used to compile and manipulate it matches western GIS standards, 

sources outside the CIS cannot use or supplement them. 

 Well established mapping procedures are lacking as well. Many 

existing maps of the former Soviet Union were constructed in accordance with 

internally-developed standards that do not correspond to any followed by 

other countries. The lack of adequate hardware, software, and up-to-date 

methodologies has hampered many cartographers' efforts to capture current 

and changing conditions in the former Soviet Union. 

 Although a variety of federal, private, and commercial organizations 

have launched mapping projects in Russia (the US Geological Survey, the 

University of Oregon, and Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI) 

are three examples), all of these efforts are limited, local in scope, and to a 

large extent, mutually exclusive. None of the software programs currently 

employed are designed to share information with other existing systems, and 

the proposed projects are not intended to collect information about large areas 

of Russia and other CIS countries. 

 In March 1993, I traveled to Canada to meet with Dr. Ludmila Ilyina, 

a senior research geographer at the Institute of System Studies, Russian 

Academy of Sciences. Working with a US software developer, Dr. Ilyina and 

her colleagues have produced the first-ever computerized Russian Atlas which 
 25 

25

contains data on the Russian economy, transportation, population, natural 

resources, and other vital statistics. The Russian Academy of Sciences intends 

to expand this resource and develop additional means to store such 

information and display it graphically in a series of thematic and reference 

maps that can be used by scientists, researchers, and policy makers throughout 

the former Soviet Union. 

 In July 1994, I traveled to Russia with an Air Force Academy team to 

discuss the feasibility of helping the Russian Academy of Sciences to develop 

a GIS system designed to organize the data and standardize its storage and 

presentation. The Institute for National Security Studies and the US Army 

Environmental Policy Institute funded this mission. 

 Most of the software and data collection and analysis we saw during 

the trip was conducted manually or produced using software written by the 

users themselves. None of the data appeared in a format that other agencies 

could use cooperatively. The Russian computer experts we met were highly 

skilled and innovative; when they had difficulty using the limited types of offthe-shelf software available to them, many developers simply devised unique 

products, writing their own code on the spot as needed. However, their access 

to--and experience with--current technology is limited. They are clearly aware 

of their current inability to match Western software and hardware 

requirements and of the need to modernize in order to compete with 

developers and products in the international community. 

 Recent work performed by Dr. Valery Bulatov is a case in point. At 

the request of the Russian government, Dr. Bulatov, an eminent nuclear 

scientist, has produced many maps showing his efforts to locate all of the 

major contamination sites, both military and civilian, in the Former Soviet 

Union. Although some of the contamination data from particular sites such as 

Chernobyl had been published elsewhere, we had no prior access to much of 

the information he provided. Much of the information would be very useful to 
 26 

26

scientists and policy-makers who wish to identify and remediate many of the 

region's environmental problems. However, at the time of our visit, no copies 

existed of one of Dr. Bulatov’s maps which featured hand-drawn symbols and 

a typewritten legend carefully glued to the page. During his visit with us, Dr. 

Bulatov admitted that due to the inaccuracy of official Soviet maps, he was 

forced to rely on US Defense Mapping Agency maps to navigate the area he 

visited. 

 During our visit, we met with scientists, representatives from 

numerous government ministries, states committees, and Russian ministries, 

all of whom expressed an interest in working with the US Air Force Academy 

to establish a national GIS data center in Moscow. This center would be a 

central data collection point and a clearinghouse of key statistical information 

presented in a variety of formats. This information would give scientists, 

researchers, and key decision-makers across Russia, and potentially beyond, 

access to vital socio-economic, demographic, and environmental data in a 

standardized and highly accessible format. Our proposal also calls for 

establishing a duplicate data center at the US Air Force Academy (USAFA) in 

Colorado Springs. The USAFA-based center would provide continuous 

technical support to the Moscow-based center and serve as a distribution point 

for data Moscow agrees to release for international study and use. 

 The proposed "Agreement for Future Cooperation" between the 

Institute of Systems Analysis, Russian Academy of Sciences, and the US Air 

Force Academy calls for "the creation of a compatible information system for 

the reinforcement of scientific cooperation and mutual exchange of spatial 

information in the Circumpolar North Region." During our visit, we also met 

with General Colonel Petr Deinekin, Commander-in-Chief of the Russian Air 

Force. General Deinekin suggested that Russia and the US could use a 

centralized data center to implement two major projects. The first concerns 

analyzing, planning, and implementing air and sea corridors between Russia 
 27 

27

and North America with a project called Arctic Bridge. The second project 

calls for using GIS to analyze the environmental status of military airbases 

slated for conversion to civilian use. Gen Deinekin expressed his enthusiastic 

support for the project, as did Victor P. Kuramin, Russian Minister of National 

and Regional Affairs, who assured us that Prime Minister Viktor 

Chernomyrdin has been kept apprised of and has also showed interest in this 

initiative. We have also received strong encouragement for the proposal from 

Secretary of State Warren Christopher. 

 The Air Force Academy hopes to eventually implement an initial 

program featuring sample GIS work stations at USAFA and the Russian 

Academy of Sciences. We are seeking funding support from various federal 

agencies for this initial phase of the project, which will help us to test the 

feasibility of launching a comprehensive and self-sustaining GIS-based 

National Data Center in Moscow within three to five years. By the end of the 

start-up phase the center, which will belong to the Russian government, will 

be fully staffed by Russian participants. The USAFA-based center will be 

maintained and administered by the Air Force Academy. Both centers will 

need long-term support to carry out this joint information-sharing and 

technology-enhancing initiative which will bring intellectual, commercial, and 

environmental benefits to the former Soviet Union, the United States, and 

other countries that may be affected by Russia's changing environmental and 

socio-economic conditions. 

Conclusion: Making and Implementing Policy 

 It behooves policy-makers who are concerned with issues of national 

and international security to understand the scope of the Former Soviet 

Union's environmental problems. These resource-depleting and, in many 

cases, life-threatening hazards harm the populations' health and have the 
 28 

28

potential to hinder the Newly Independent States' economic, social, and 

political progress, thereby hindering their continuing struggle to institute 

democratic reforms. Failure to address these issues endangers human and 

natural resources throughout the affected region and, potentially, the world. 

The consequence may be widespread social, economic, and political 

destabilization within the former Soviet Union and beyond. 

 Despite their awareness of and genuine concern over these hazards, 

key decision-makers and experts in the CIS are hampered in their attempts to 

address environmental problems by three things: a lack of financial resources, 

little or no access to tools and methodologies to identify and assess specific 

problems accurately, and inadequate organizational structures and 

communication links which prevent separate groups of scientists and other 

experts from communicating and jointly devising a comprehensive 

environmental recovery strategy. The Commonwealth of Independent States 

must overcome these obstacles if it hopes to solve environmental problems 

which, if allowed to grow unchecked, may threaten these states' natural 

resources, the health of their citizens, and their economic and perhaps longterm political health as well. 

 These states are dealing simultaneously with numerous challenges, all 

of them unfamiliar and daunting. They must learn to adopt new economic 

structures and methodologies that call for privatization and increased 

production in order to become globally competitive. For the first time, these 

citizens must also deal squarely with a failing industrial infrastructure without 

previously existing support or control from Moscow. They must also explore 

and adopt new and unfamiliar democratic forms of government, seeking 

leadership from a field of inexperienced candidates who are called upon 

within a few months or years to reverse the wasteful damage caused by 70 

years of Communist control. 
 29 

29

 As these newly independent states struggle to establish separate 

identities and allegiances, they are also faced with numerous volatile 

challenges ranging from a resurgence of potentially violent nationalism to the 

need to deal with widespread environmental waste and its dangerous effects 

on its population and industries. 

 Russia, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, and Belarus must also cope with the 

existence of nuclear weapons within their borders. Citizens in each country 

are torn between fear of the international security threat this firepower may 

pose and these weapons' potential use as a bargaining chip to prevent future 

aggression from Russia. Ironically, these weapons are now a potential threat 

to the very oppressor who distributed them so widely to guard against a 

Western foe who has since become an ally. 

 All successful attempts to solve current problems and prevent new 

ones begin with the ability to identify and monitor accurately the factors and 

effects of past damage. Decision-makers must also predict and plan for future 

changes, be they intentional or inevitable. The proposed Russia NorthGeographical Information System project, initiated by Russian and US 

partners through the National Data Centers, represents an important first step 

in this direction. By establishing a national information collection, processing, 

and distribution center, the participants will link expertise and information that 

can help Russia and the Newly Independent States comprehend existing 

problems, develop long-term solutions, and prevent future damage. This 

information will also help the CIS to understand economic, social, and 

demographic conditions within and beyond their borders. Introducing new 

technology will help these countries share information and build cooperative 

business opportunities with each other and with Western governments and 

entrepreneurs. The United States and other countries will gain an increased 

understanding of a formerly almost impenetrable region of the world and will, 

by helping the CIS to become more economically and politically stable, 
 30 

30

increase its own national security and forge new bonds that may help to 

bolster international peace and cooperation throughout the world. 

 Most importantly, the joint Russian North-GIS project will become a 

self-sustaining project, fully staffed by Russian participants who will produce 

valuable research and information to be shared with the international scientific 

community and marketed to other requesters for use in commercial projects. 

The duplicate center based at the US Air Force Academy will help to transmit 

information provided by the Moscow center to researchers in this country and 

use the data for faculty and student-conducted research. 

 Both the Russian Academy of Sciences and the US Air Force 

Academy realize that no amount of international support alone will solve the 

former Soviet Union's environmental problems. Both parties agree that such 

joint projects and other forms of international assistance should be offered not 

as solutions, but as tools that the key leadership can use to develop and apply 

existing expertise, acquire and share information with other members of the 

international community, and contribute to environmental stability and 

cooperation nationally and abroad. These goals are summed up in the 

"Agreement for Future Cooperation" between the Russian Academy of 

Sciences and the US Air Force Academy which calls for the joint development 

of a geographical information system. This will enable Russia to collect vast 

amounts of scientific data on the Circumpolar North and to store and present it 

according to widely-accepted Western standards. The agreement paves the 

way for international transmission of valuable statistical information, currently 

inaccessible or yet to be collected, about a little-known part of the world. This 

system may also serve as the model for developing an internationally united 

geographical information system whose products (statistical data, reports and 

maps) could be used to collect and disseminate environmental information 

worldwide. 
 31 

31

 Knowledge is power. The ability to collect, organize, interpret, and 

exchange valuable information may give a consortium of scientists and policymakers the power to enhance international stability and security by increasing 

communication and encouraging joint solutions to many problems the world 

shares. The Russia North-GIS project may be an important first step in the 

United States' commitment to help Russia develop solutions to its 

environmental problems and to forge similar cooperative efforts with other 

countries as well. 

# # # 

In a free world, if it is to remain free, we must maintain, with our lives if need 

be, but surely by our lives, the opportunity for a man to learn anything. 

 -- Robert Oppenheimer 
 32 

32
 33 

33

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Baradat, Leon, P. Soviet Political Society. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice 

Hall, 1986. 

Batalden, Stephen K. and L. Sandra. The Newly Independent States of 

Eurasia: A Handbook of the Former Soviet Republic. Phoenix, AZ, The 

Oryx Press, 1993. 

Bremer, Ian and Ray Taras, eds. Nations and Politics in the Soviet Successor 

States. Cambridge University Press, 1993. 

Bulatov, V.I. 200 Nuclear Test Sites of the USSR. Novosibirsk, Russia, 

ZERIS, 1993. 

CIS Environmental Watch, Spring 1994, Number 6. 

"Cleaning Up the Black Sea." The UNESCO Courier December 1993. 

Clinton, William J. A National Security Strategy of Engagement and 

Enlargement. Washington DC: GPO, July 1994 

"Concern Over Nuclear Device at Semipatalinsk Site." Foreign Broadcast 

Information Service Daily Report 5 November 1993: 68. 

Congalton, Russell G. and Kass Green. "The ABCs of GIS: An Introduction to 

Geographic Information Systems." Journal of Forestry, vol. 90, number 

11 November 1992. 

Coplin, W. and M. O'Leary, eds. Political Risk Yearbook: Europe Outside the 

European Community, Vol. VII. Political Risk Services 1993. 

DeBardelben, Joan, ed. To Breathe Free: Eastern Europe's Environmental 

Crisis. Washington, DC: Woodrow Wilson Center Press 1991. 

Department of Foreign Languages, US Air Force Academy. Russian 221, 

Culture Handbook, 1993. 

Diller, Daniel C., ed. Russia and the Independent States. Washington, DC: 

Congressional Quarterly, Inc. 1993. 
 34 

34

Dyer, Jim. "Feature: Russia - The Making of a Waste Colony." Greenpeace 

<jim@remarque.berkeley edu>. 2 April 1994. 

Europe World Yearbook, Vol II. London: Europea Publications Ltd. 1993. 

"Exclusive: State Reports on the Condition of the Populations Health Will Be 

Made Public Today." Current Digest of the Post Soviet Press 4 August 

1993: 17-19. 

"Fact Sheets from the Russia-US Summit." Weekly Compilation of 

Presidential Documents 12 April 1993. 

Feschbach, Murray and Alfred Friendly, Jr. Ecocide in the USSR: Health and 

Nature Under Siege. NY: Basic Books 1992. 

Fierman, Wm, ed. Soviet Central Asia: The Failed Transformation. Bolder, 

CO: Westview Press 1991. 

Geographic Synopsis for the Former Soviet Union. Multimedia World Atlas, 

Version 4 1993. 

Hardt, John, P. Soviet Energy: An Engine or a Brake on Commercial 

Relations in the 1990s? CRS Report for Congress, 91-211 RCO, 

Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress, Washington, DC 

May 18, 1993. 

Harrylyshun, Oleh and John Williamson. From Soviet Disunion to Eastern 

Economic Community? Washington DC: Institute for International 

Economics 1991. 

Humphries Marc. The CIS Role in World Mineral Markets. CRS Report for 

Congress, 93-512 ENR, Congressional Research Service, Library of 

Congress, Washington, DC, May 18, 1993. 

Jancar, Barbara. Environmental Management in the Soviet Union and 

Yugoslavia: Ecocide in the USSR. Durham: Duke University Press 1987. 

Kotlyakov, V.M. "The Aral Sea Basin, A Critical Environmental Zone." 

Environment. Jan/Feb. 1991: 4-9. 
 35 

35

Kotov, Vladimir and Elena Nikitina. "Russia in Transition: Obstacles to 

Environmental Protection." Environment December 1993: 10-20. 

Montgomery, Carla W. Environmental Geology, 3/E. Jeffrey L. Hahn, ed., 

Dubuque, Iowa, Wm C. Brown Publishing 1992. 

"More Environmental Disasters Predicted for Russia." Current Digest of the 

Post-Soviet Press 4 August 1993: 17-19. 

Palmisan, J. and B. Haddad. "The USSR's Experience with Economic 

Incentive Approaches to Pollution Control." Comparative Economic 

Studies Summer 1992: 50-62. 

Peterson, D.J. Troubled Lands: The Legacy of Soviet Environmental 

Destruction. A RAND Research Study, Westview Press: Boulder 1993. 

Preliminary project proposal submitted by the Institute of System Studies, 

Russian Academy of Sciences for RN-GIS project to assess Former 

Soviet Union's environmental problems July 1994. 

Pryde, Phillip R. Environmental Management in the Soviet Union. NY: 

Cambridge University Press 1991. 

Renner, Michael G. "War on Nature." World Watch June 1991: 18-25. 

Reuter. "Japan Calls on Russia to Stop Nuclear Dumping." 

clarinews@clarinet.com. 5 April 1994. 

Reuter. "Russian Nuclear Workers Warn of 'Second Chernobyl'." 

clarinews@clarinet.com. 8 April 1994. 

Reuter/Alistair Doyle. "Norway to Lead Russian Nuclear Waste Cleanup." 

clarinews@clarinet.com. 13 March 1994. 

Ridgeway, James. "Environmental Devastation in the Soviet Union." 

Multinational Monitor September 1990: 8-12. 

"Russia Faces Nuke Power Crisis," Clarinews@clarinet.com. Associated 

Press 8 April 1994. 

Sakwa, Richard. Russian Politics and Society. Routledge: NY and London 

1993. 
 36 

36

Scanlan, Kathleen. "Kyrgystan Offers a Wealth of Untapped Mineral 

Reserves," Business America 6 September 1993: 5. 

"Semipalatinsk Accident Makes Future Uncertain," Foreign Broadcast 

Information Service Daily Reports 26 November 1993: 50. 

Stewart, Massey John, ed. The Soviet Environment: Problems, Policies and 

Politics. NY: Cambridge University Press 1992. 

Tsvang Roma. "CIS Armed Forces and Radioactive Pollution." 

Environmental Policy Review Spring 1993: 22-40. 

Twining, David T. Guide to the Republics of the Former Soviet Union. 

Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group, Inc. 1993. 

US Committee on Foreign Affairs. US Policy Toward Central Asia, 102nd 

Congress, 2nd session, Washington, DC: GPO 28 April 1992. 

US Department of Defense. Annual Report to the President and the Congress. 

Washington, DC: GPO January 1994. 

US Department of Interior. Memorandum of Understanding Between the 

Minerals Management Service of the Department of Interior of the United 

States of America and the Committee of the Russian Federation on 

Geology and Use of Underground Resources. Washington DC, 23 June 

1994. 

US Department of State. Dispatch, Vol 5, number 5, 31 January 1994 

US Department of State. Dispatch, Vol 5, number 11, 14 March 1994. 

US Department of State. Dispatch, Vol 5, number 23, 6 June 1994 

US Senate Committee on Foreign Relations. US Plans and Programs 

Regarding Dismantlement of Nuclear Weapons in the Former Soviet 

Union. 102nd Congress, 2nd Session, Washington, DC: GPO, 27 July 

1992. 

US Stake in a Democratic Russia. 103rd Congress, 1st Session, Washington, 

DC: GPO, 24 March 1992. 
 37 

37

Vekslar, Leonid, "The West Will Pay for Modernization of the CIS Nuclear 

Power Generating Industry." Moscow News 3 March 1993. 

Weisman, Alan. "Journey Through a Doomed Land: Exploring Chernobyl's 

Still-Deadly Ruins." Harper's Magazine August 1994. 

Edwards, Mike. "Lethal Legacy." National Geographic August 1994. 

"Who Will Develop Russia's Resources?" Current Digest of the Post-Soviet 

Press. 30 September 1993: 9-10. 

Woolf, Amy F. and Theodor W. Galdi. Nuclear Weapons in the Former 

Soviet Union: Location, Command and Control. CRS Issue Brief, 

IB91144, Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress, 

Washington, DC August 8, 1994. 

Yablokov, A. "Notes on the Environmental Situation in Russia," 

Environmental Policy Review. Autumn 1992: 1-20. 

Zickel, R, ed. The Soviet Union: A Country Study, 2/E. Federal Research 

Division, Library of Congress, Washington, DC 

 GPO, 1991. 
 1 

1