[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 26 (Thursday, February 9, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Page S2425]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


                           ANGUISH IN RWANDA

 Mr. SIMON. Mr. President, recently, the Washington Post had an 
interesting editorial titled, ``Anguish in Rwanda.''
  It speaks of the need for the United Nations to have a few troops, to 
give some stability to a nation that is teetering on the edge of 
instability. Perhaps even that is a too favorable description of the 
situation.
  I introduced legislation in the last session, which I will be 
reintroducing this session, to authorize the United States to have up 
to 3,000 troops that would be available to the United Nations for their 
efforts, subject to the approval of the President of the United States. 
We should call on other nations to do the same.
  The great threat to U.S. security and the security of other nations 
today is instability. By having a small force, a group of volunteers 
from within our Armed Forces available, we could do much to provide 
stability in places like Rwanda.
  I ask that the Post editorial be printed in the Record.
  The editorial follows:
               [From the Washington Post, Jan. 25, 1995]

                           Anguish in Rwanda

       To protect a million-plus Rwandan refugees in Zaire, the 
     United Nations appealed to 60 nations for peace-keepers. All 
     60 said no. The secretary general then asked for a few dozen 
     U.N. officers to support soldiers from Zaire. Again the 
     answer was no. Falling back, U.N. Secretary General Boutros 
     Boutros-Ghali now simply asks the Security Council to make 
     available some Zairian troops assisted by civilian refugee 
     officials. The prospects are uncertain.
       In the camps there is no uncertainty, only desperation. The 
     Hutus who perpetrated genocide in Rwanda last spring lost to 
     the Tutsi-minority rebels and then carried many of their 
     people, with their supporting community structures, into 
     exile in Zaire. The international relief agencies found these 
     structures essential to funnel in quick aid. But that gave 
     new power and coin to the old Hutu hierarchy, including war 
     criminals, who steal the aid and keep refugees from going 
     home. A moral dilemma has split the agencies: Stay and 
     sustain a regime of killers, or leave and let suffering 
     refugees suffer more. This is the context in which the United 
     Nations seeks to build an alternative security structure.
       Last year's television pictures of the genocide publicized 
     the need for emergency supplies, and many responded. But the 
     humanitarian needs of the camps merge into an obscure zone of 
     political struggle, and many lose interest. Dozens of 
     countries were ready to send material aid. None is ready to 
     expose its soldiers to risk for the Hutus. Nor is the problem 
     confined to Rwanda. Its descent to a hollowed-out chaos where 
     it can no longer order its own affairs is typical of the 
     ethnic and national disputes that now disfigure world 
     politics. Expect more in humanitarian crises, the CIA warned 
     last month, and less in international relief.
       So many things remain to be done. Right at the top ought to 
     be the establishment of a standby humanitarian food-and-
     police service, run out of the Security Council, where the 
     United States has a veto, so that when the next quaking call 
     comes, the secretary general does not have to run around 
     begging 60 distracted countries to help in vain.
     

                          ____________________