355
HR 3230 EAS
(b) CONTENT OF REPORT.—The joint report shall con-
tain a determination regarding whether there is a signifi-
cant likelihood that the funding of the operation of the Na-
tional Drug Intelligence Center, a domestic law enforcement
program, through an appropriation under the control of the
Director of Central Intelligence will result in a violation
of the National Security Act of 1947 or Executive Order
12333.
Subtitle D—Matters Relating to
Foreign Countries
SEC. 1041. AGREEMENTS FOR EXCHANGE OF DEFENSE PER-
SONNEL BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND
FOREIGN COUNTRIES.
(a) EXCHANGE AUTHORITY.—Subchapter II of chapter
138 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding
at the end the following new section:
‘‘§ 2350l. Exchange of defense personnel between the
United States and foreign countries
‘‘(a) INTERNATIONAL EXCHANGE AGREEMENTS AU-
THORIZED.—The Secretary of Defense is authorized to enter
into agreements with the governments of allies of the United
States and other friendly foreign countries for the exchange
of military and civilian personnel of the Department of De-
fense and military and civilian personnel of the defense
ministries of such foreign governments.
356
HR 3230 EAS
‘‘(b) ASSIGNMENT OF PERSONNEL.—(1) Pursuant to
an agreement entered into under subsection (a), personnel
of the defense ministry of a foreign government may be as-
signed to positions in the Department of Defense, and per-
sonnel of the Department of Defense may be assigned to po-
sitions in the defense ministry of that foreign government.
Positions to which exchanged personnel are assigned may
include positions of instructors.
‘‘(2) An agreement for the exchange of personnel en-
gaged in research and development activities may provide
for assignment of Department of Defense personnel to posi-
tions in private industry that support the defense ministry
of the host foreign government.
‘‘(3) A specific position and the individual to be as-
signed to that position shall be acceptable to both govern-
ments.
‘‘(c) RECIPROCITY OF PERSONNEL QUALIFICATIONS
REQUIRED.—Each government shall be required under an
agreement authorized by subsection (a) to provide personnel
having qualifications, training, and skills that are essen-
tially equal to those of the personnel provided by the other
government.
‘‘(d) PAYMENT OF PERSONNEL COSTS.—(1) Each gov-
ernment shall pay the salary, per diem, cost of living, trav-
el, cost of language or other training, and other costs for
357
HR 3230 EAS
its own personnel in accordance with the laws and regula-
tions of such government that pertain to such matters.
‘‘(2) The requirement in paragraph (1) does not apply
to the following costs:
‘‘(A) Cost of temporary duty directed by the host
government.
‘‘(B) Costs of training programs conducted to fa-
miliarize, orient, or certify exchanged personnel re-
garding unique aspects of the exchanged personnel’s
assignments.
‘‘(C) Costs incident to the use of host government
facilities in the performance of assigned duties.
‘‘(e) PROHIBITED CONDITIONS.—No personnel ex-
changed pursuant to an agreement under this section may
take or be required to take an oath of allegiance to the host
country or to hold an official capacity in the government
of such country.
‘‘(f) RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER AUTHORITY.—Nothing
in this section limits any authority of the secretaries of the
military departments to enter into an agreement with the
government of a foreign country to provide for exchange of
members of the armed forces and military personnel of the
foreign country except that subsections (c) and (d) shall
apply in the exercise of that authority. The Secretary of
358
HR 3230 EAS
Defense may prescribe regulations for the application of
such subsections in the exercise of such authority.’’.
(b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections at
the beginning of subchapter II of such chapter is amended
by adding at the end the following new item:
‘‘2350l. Exchange of defense personnel between the United States and foreign coun-
tries.’’.
SEC. 1042. AUTHORITY FOR RECIPROCAL EXCHANGE OF
PERSONNEL BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES
AND 
FOREIGN 
COUNTRIES 
FOR 
FLIGHT
TRAINING.
Section 544 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22
U.S.C. 2347c) is amended—
(1) by inserting ‘‘, and for attendance of foreign
military personnel at flight training schools or pro-
grams (including test pilot schools) in the United
States,’’ after ‘‘(other than service academies)’’; and
(2) by striking out ‘‘and comparable institu-
tions’’ and inserting in lieu thereof ‘‘ or flight train-
ing schools or programs, as the case may be, and com-
parable institutions, schools, or programs’’.
SEC. 1043. EXTENSION OF COUNTERPROLIFERATION AU-
THORITIES.
Section 1505 of the Weapons of Mass Destruction Con-
trol Act of 1992 (title XV of Public Law 104–484; 22 U.S.C.
5859a) is amended—
359
HR 3230 EAS
(1) in subsection (d)(3)—
(A) by striking out ‘‘fiscal year 1995, or’’
and inserting in lieu thereof ‘‘fiscal year 1995,’’;
and
(B) by inserting before the period at the end
the following: ‘‘, $15,000,000 for fiscal year 1997,
or $15,000,000 for fiscal year 1998’’; and
(2) in subsection (f), by striking out ‘‘fiscal year
1996’’ and inserting in lieu thereof ‘‘fiscal year
1998’’.
SEC. 1044. PROHIBITION ON COLLECTION AND RELEASE OF
DETAILED SATELLITE IMAGERY RELATING TO
ISRAEL AND OTHER COUNTRIES AND AREAS.
(a) COLLECTION
AND DISSEMINATION.—No depart-
ment or agency of the Federal Government may license the
collection or dissemination by any non-Federal entity of
satellite imagery with respect to Israel, or to any other
country or geographic area designated by the President for
this purpose, unless such imagery is no more detailed or
precise than satellite imagery of the country or geographic
area concerned that is routinely available from commercial
sources.
(b) DECLASSIFICATION
AND RELEASE.—No depart-
ment or agency of the Federal Government may declassify
or otherwise release satellite imagery with respect to Israel,
360
HR 3230 EAS
or to any other country or geographic area designated by
the President for this purpose, unless such imagery is no
more detailed or precise than satellite imagery of the coun-
try or geographic area concerned that is routinely available
from commercial sources.
SEC. 1045. DEFENSE BURDENSHARING.
(a) FINDINGS.—Congress makes the following findings:
(1) The United States continues to spend billions
of dollars to promote regional security and to make
preparations for regional contingencies.
(2) United States defense expenditures promote
United States national security interests; however,
they also significantly contribute to the defense of our
allies.
(3) In 1993, the gross domestic product of the
United States equaled $6,300,000,000,000, while the
gross domestic product of other NATO member coun-
tries totaled $7,200,000,000,000.
(4) Over the course of 1993, the United States
spent 4.7 percent of its gross domestic product on de-
fense, while other NATO members collectively spent
2.5 percent of their gross domestic product on defense.
(5) In addition to military spending, foreign as-
sistance plays a vital role in the establishment and
maintenance of stability in other nations and in im-
361
HR 3230 EAS
plementing the United States national security strat-
egy.
(6) This assistance has often prevented the out-
break of conflicts which otherwise would have required
costly military interventions by the United States
and our allies.
(7) From 1990–1993, the United States spent
$59,000,000,000 in foreign assistance, a sum which
represents an amount greater than any other nation
in the world.
(8) In 1995, the United States spent over
$10,000,000,000 to promote European security, while
European 
NATO 
nations 
only 
contributed
$2,000,000,000 toward this effort.
(9) With a smaller gross domestic product and a
larger defense budget than its European NATO allies,
the United States shoulders an unfair share of the
burden of the common defense.
(10) Japan now pays over 75 percent of the non-
personnel costs incurred by United States military
forces permanently assigned there, while our Euro-
pean allies pay for less than 25 percent of these same
costs. Japan signed a new Special Measures Agree-
ment this year which will increase Japan’s contribu-
tion toward the cost of stationing United States
362
HR 3230 EAS
troops in Japan by approximately $30,000,000 a
year over the next five years.
(11) These increased contributions help to rectify
the imbalance in the burden shouldered by the United
States for the common defense.
(12) The relative share of the burden of the com-
mon defense still falls too heavily on the United
States, and our allies should dedicate more of their
own resources to defending themselves.
(b) 
EFFORTS
TO
INCREASE
ALLIED
BURDENSHARING.—The President shall seek to have each
nation that has cooperative military relations with the
United States (including security agreements, basing ar-
rangements, or mutual participation in multinational
military organizations or operations) take one or more of
the following actions:
(1) Increase its financial contributions to the
payment of the nonpersonnel costs incurred by the
United States Government for stationing United
States military personnel in that nation, with a goal
of achieving the following percentages of such costs:
(A) By September 30, 1997, 37.5 percent.
(B) By September 30, 1998, 50 percent.
(C) By September 30, 1999, 62.5 percent.
(D) By September 30, 2000, 75 percent.
363
HR 3230 EAS
An increase in financial contributions by any nation
under this paragraph may include the elimination of
taxes, fees, or other charges levied on United States
military personnel, equipment, or facilities stationed
in that nation.
(2) Increase its annual budgetary outlays for na-
tional defense as a percentage of its gross domestic
product by 10 percent or at least to a level commensu-
rate to that of the United States by September 30,
1997.
(3) Increase its annual budgetary outlays for for-
eign assistance (to promote democratization, economic
stabilization, transparency arrangements, defense eco-
nomic conversion, respect for the rule of law, and
internationally recognized human rights) by 10 per-
cent or at least to a level commensurate to that of the
United States by September 30, 1997.
(4) Increase the amount of military assets (in-
cluding personnel, equipment, logistics, support and
other resources) that it contributes, or would be pre-
pared to contribute, to multinational military activi-
ties worldwide.
(c) AUTHORITIES TO ENCOURAGE ACTIONS BY UNITED
STATES ALLIES.—In seeking the actions described in sub-
section (b) with respect to any nation, or in response to
364
HR 3230 EAS
a failure by any nation to undertake one or more of such
actions, the President may take any of the following meas-
ures:
(1) Reduce the end strength level of members of
the Armed Forces assigned to permanent duty ashore
in that nation.
(2) Impose on that nation taxes, fees, or other
charges similar to those that such nation imposes on
United States forces stationed in that nation.
(3) Reduce (through rescission, impoundment, or
other appropriate procedures as authorized by law)
the amount the United States contributes to the
NATO Civil Budget, Military Budget, or Security In-
vestment Program.
(4) Suspend, modify, or terminate any bilateral
security agreement the United States has with that
nation.
(5) Reduce (through rescission, impoundment or
other appropriate procedures as authorized by law)
any United States bilateral assistance appropriated
for that nation.
(6) Take any other action the President deter-
mines to be appropriate as authorized by law.
365
HR 3230 EAS
(d) REPORT ON PROGRESS IN INCREASING ALLIED
BURDENSHARING.—Not later than March 1, 1997, the Sec-
retary of Defense shall submit to Congress a report on—
(1) steps taken by other nations to complete the
actions described in subsection (b);
(2) all measures taken by the President, includ-
ing those authorized in subsection (c), to achieve the
actions described in subsection (b); and
(3) the budgetary savings to the United States
that are expected to accrue as a result of the steps de-
scribed under paragraph (1).
(e) REPORT ON NATIONAL SECURITY BASES FOR FOR-
WARD
DEPLOYMENT
AND
BURDENSHARING
RELATION-
SHIPS.—(1) In order to ensure the best allocation of budg-
etary resources, the President shall undertake a review of
the status of elements of the United States Armed Forces
that are permanently stationed outside the United States.
The review shall include an assessment of the following:
(A) The alliance requirements that are to be
found in agreements between the United States and
other countries.
(B) The national security interests that support
permanently stationing elements of the United States
Armed Forces outside the United States.
366
HR 3230 EAS
(C) The stationing costs associated with the for-
ward deployment of elements of the United States
Armed Forces.
(D) The alternatives available to forward deploy-
ment (such as material prepositioning, enhanced air-
lift and sealift, or joint training operations) to meet
such alliance requirements or national security inter-
ests, with such alternatives identified and described in
detail.
(E) The costs and force structure configurations
associated with such alternatives to forward deploy-
ment.
(F) The financial contributions that allies of the
United States make to common defense efforts (to pro-
mote democratization, economic stabilization, trans-
parency arrangements, defense economic conversion,
respect for the rule of law, and internationally recog-
nized human rights).
(G) The contributions that allies of the United
States make to meeting the stationing costs associated
with the forward deployment of elements of the Unit-
ed States Armed Forces.
(H) The annual expenditures of the United
States and its allies on national defense, and the rel-
367
HR 3230 EAS
ative percentages of each nation’s gross domestic prod-
uct constituted by those expenditures.
(2) The President shall submit to Congress a report
on the review under paragraph (1). The report shall be sub-
mitted not later than March 1, 1997, in classified and un-
classified form.
SEC. 1046. SENSE OF THE SENATE CONCERNING EXPORT
CONTROLS.
(a) FINDINGS.—The Senate makes the following find-
ings:
(1) Export controls are a part of a comprehen-
sive response to national security threats. United
States exports should be restricted where those threats
exist to national security, nonproliferation, and for-
eign policy interests of the United States.
(2) The export of certain commodities and tech-
nology may adversely affect the national security and
foreign policy of the United States by making a sig-
nificant contribution to the military potential of in-
dividual countries or by disseminating the capability
to design, develop, test, produce, stockpile, or use
weapons of mass destruction, missile delivery systems,
and other significant military capabilities. Therefore,
the administration of export controls should empha-
size the control of these exports.
368
HR 3230 EAS
(3) The acquisition of sensitive commodities and
technologies by those countries and end users whose
actions or policies run counter to United States na-
tional security or foreign policy interests may en-
hance the military capabilities of those countries, par-
ticularly their ability to design, develop, test, produce,
stockpile, use, and deliver nuclear, chemical, and bio-
logical weapons, missile delivery systems, and other
significant military capabilities. This enhancement
threatens the security of the United States and its al-
lies. The availability to countries and end users of
items that contribute to military capabilities or the
proliferation of weapons of mass destruction is a fun-
damental concern of the United States and should be
eliminated through deterrence, negotiations, and other
appropriate means whenever possible.
(4) The national security of the United States
depends not only on wise foreign policies and a
strong defense, but also a vibrant national economy.
To be truly effective, export controls should be applied
uniformly by all suppliers.
(5) On November 5, 1995, President William J.
Clinton extended Executive Order No. 12938 regard-
ing ‘‘Weapons of Mass Destruction’’, and ‘‘declared a
national emergency with respect to the unusual and
369
HR 3230 EAS
extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign
policy, and economy of the United States posed by the
proliferation of nuclear, biological, and chemical
weapons and the means of delivering such weapons’’.
(6) A successor regime to COCOM (the Coordi-
nating Commission on Multilateral Controls) has not
been established. Currently, each nation is determin-
ing independently which dual-use military items, if
any, will be controlled for export.
(7) The United States should play a leading role
in promoting transparency and responsibility with
regard to the transfers of sensitive dual-use goods and
technologies.
(b) SENSE OF SENATE.—It is the sense of the Senate
that—
(1) establishing an international export control
regime, empowered to control exports of dual-use tech-
nology, is critically important and should become a
top priority for the United States; and
(2) the United States should strongly encourage
its allies and friends to—
(A) adopt a commodity control list which
governs the same or similar items as are con-
trolled by the United States Commodity Control
list;
370
HR 3230 EAS
(B) strengthen enforcement activities; and
(C) explore the use of unilateral export con-
trols where the possibility exists that an export
could contribute to proliferation.
SEC. 1047. REPORT ON NATO ENLARGEMENT.
(a) REPORT.—Not later than December 1, 1996, the
President shall transmit a report on NATO enlargement to
the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on
Foreign Relations of the Senate and the Committee on Na-
tional Security and the Committee on International Rela-
tions of the House of Representatives. The report shall con-
tain a comprehensive discussion of the following:
(1) Geopolitical and financial costs and benefits,
including financial savings, associated with—
(A) enlargement of NATO;
(B) further delays in the process of NATO
enlargement; and
(C) a failure to enlarge NATO.
(2) Additional NATO and United States mili-
tary expenditures requested by prospective NATO
members to facilitate their admission into NATO.
(3) Modifications necessary in NATO’s military
strategy and force structure required by the inclusion
of new members and steps necessary to integrate new
members, including the role of nuclear and conven-
371
HR 3230 EAS
tional capabilities, reinforcement, force deployments,
prepositioning of equipment, mobility, and head-
quarter locations.
(4) The relationship between NATO enlargement
and transatlantic stability and security.
(5) The state of military preparedness and inter-
operability of Central and Eastern European nations
as it relates to the responsibilities of NATO member-
ship and additional security costs or benefits that
may accrue to the United States from NATO enlarge-
ment.
(6) The state of democracy and free market de-
velopment as it affects the preparedness of Central
and Eastern European nations for the responsibilities
of NATO membership, including civilian control of
the military, the rule of law, human rights, and par-
liamentary oversight.
(7) The state of relations between prospective
NATO members and their neighbors, steps taken by
prospective members to reduce tensions, and mecha-
nisms for the peaceful resolution of border disputes.
(8) The commitment of prospective NATO mem-
bers to the principles of the North Atlantic Treaty
and the security of the North Atlantic area.
372
HR 3230 EAS
(9) The effect of NATO enlargement on the polit-
ical, economic, and security conditions of European
Partnership for Peace nations not among the first
new NATO members.
(10) The relationship between NATO enlarge-
ment and EU enlargement and the costs and benefits
of both.
(11) The relationship between NATO enlarge-
ment and treaties relevant to United States and Eu-
ropean security, such as the Conventional Armed
Forces in Europe Treaty.
(12) The anticipated impact both of NATO en-
largement and further delays of NATO enlargement
on Russian foreign and defense policies and the costs
and benefits of a security relationship between NATO
and Russia.
(b) INDEPENDENT ASSESSMENT.—Not later than 15
days after enactment of this Act, the Majority Leader of
the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives
shall appoint a chairman and two other Members and the
Minority Leaders of the Senate and House of Representa-
tives shall appoint two Members to serve on a bipartisan
review group of nongovernmental experts to conduct an
independent assessment of NATO enlargement, including a
comprehensive review of the issues in subsection (a) (1)
392
HR 3230 EAS
pay, and incentive pay that the member is authorized
to receive under title 37, United States Code, or any
other law providing pay for service in the uniformed
services.
‘‘(D) The term ‘Secretary concerned’ means—
‘‘(i) the Secretary of Defense, with respect to
the Army, the Navy, the Air Force, the Marine
Corps, and the Coast Guard (when it is operat-
ing as a service in the Navy);
‘‘(ii) the Secretary of Transportation, with
respect to the Coast Guard when it is not operat-
ing as a service in the Navy;
‘‘(iii) the Secretary of Health and Human
Services, with respect to the Commissioned Corps
of the Public Health Service; and
‘‘(iv) the Secretary of Commerce, with re-
spect to the Commissioned Corps of the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.’’.
(b) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.—Section 1 of Public
Law 87–693 (42 U.S.C. 2651) is amended—
(1) in the first sentence of subsection (a)—
(A) by inserting ‘‘(independent of the rights
of the injured or diseased person)’’ after ‘‘a right
to recover’’; and