[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 57 (Tuesday, March 28, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4693-S4696]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


            STOP HIDDEN KILLERS: THE GLOBAL LANDMINE CRISIS

  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, over the years, I have spoken often about 
the problem of landmines. I have done so on this floor and as a member 
of the U.S. delegation to the United Nations, where I addressed the 
Disarmament Committee of the United Nations. I have been urging the 
U.S. Government and the United Nations to do whatever they can to stop 
the proliferation and use of antipersonnel landmines.
  Sometimes when we think of landmines, we think of these huge floating 
mines in a shipping lane, but in fact, what we usually mean is a weapon 
about the size of a can of shoe polish. Antipersonnel landmines are 
tiny, and in some of them the only metal part is about the size of a 
thumb tack, so it is virtually impossible to detect. They cost about $2 
or $3, and can be concealed beneath the surface of the ground. They are 
strewn by the thousands and they explode when somebody steps on them, 
no matter whether that person is a civilian or combatant. They kill an 
estimated 70 people each day. In the 2 hours since the Senate opened 
session this morning, at least eight people have been killed or maimed 
in the world from landmines. We are talking about 70 people each day, 
26,000 people each year. There are an estimated 85 to 110 million 
landmines in 60 to 65 countries waiting to explode.
  To give you some idea of this, parts of the Netherlands, and Denmark, 
are still too dangerous to go into, because of landmines left from 
World War II. But the vast majority of these hidden killers have been 
spread in just the past few years. In fact, even though the Russians 
followed our lead and declared that it would stop exporting 
antipersonnel landmines, that policy apparently does not apply to 
Chechnya. The Russians have been spreading landmines in Chechnya and 
doing it in such a way that nobody is ever going to know where they 
are--they are being dropped by the thousands out of airplanes--and 
there will be people, years from now, still dying and being maimed from 
them.
  This January, at a press conference attended by representatives of 
some 40 countries, Secretary of State Christopher announced the release 
of the State Department's report ``Hidden Killers: The Global Landmine 
Crisis.'' 
[[Page S4694]]  It tells the gruesome story of the carnage caused by 
landmines.
  Last year alone, on top of that 100 million or so unexploded 
landmines, we now have another several million that were laid, mostly 
in the former Yugoslavia. Estimates of the cost to locate and remove 
them are in the tens of billions of dollars. That does not even count 
the millions of mines that will be laid in the future.
  Three years ago, almost nobody was paying attention to what has aptly 
been called a ``weapon of mass destruction in slow motion.'' Far more 
civilians have died and been injured by landmines than by nuclear 
weapons.
  They are a weapon of mass destruction, they just claim their victims 
slowly. Then the Senate passed, by 100-0, an amendment I sponsored to 
halt U.S. exports of antipersonnel landmines. That is the only time I 
know of when the U.S. Senate acted with unanimity on an issue of this 
kind.
  The purpose of that amendment was to focus attention of the landmine 
crisis and to urge other countries to join us in trying to solve it. 
Because the Senate acted with such unanimity--Republicans and 
Democrats, across the political spectrum-- and spurred on by the 
President of the United States, Secretary of State Christopher, and 
U.N. Ambassador Madeleine Albright, 18 other countries have declared 
export moratoria. Last September, at the United Nations, President 
Clinton announced a U.S. goal of the eventual elimination of 
antipersonnel landmines. On December 15, 1994, the U.N. General 
Assembly adopted a U.S. resolution calling on all countries to stop 
exports, and for further efforts toward the goal of the eventual 
elimination of antipersonnel landmines.
  This is the first time, Mr. President, in recent history, since the 
banning of chemical weapons, that the world community has singled out a 
type of weapon for total elimination. It reflects a growing consensus 
that these weapons are unacceptable because they are indiscriminate, 
and because they are used routinely to terrorize civilian populations.
  Imagine if the area from the Capitol Building to the Washington 
Monument were seeded with antipersonnel landmines, each one buried in 
the ground and waiting to explode. Who is going to go there? What if 
all of New England, or all of California, were strewn with mines? That 
is the reality for dozens of countries where millions of people go 
about their daily lives in fear of losing a leg or an arm, or their 
children's lives, from landmines.
  I remember being in Uganda several years ago. From legislation of 
mine, we started a program to make artificial arms and legs for people 
who have lost limbs from landmines. My wife, who is a registered nurse, 
was with me and she saw a young boy, 10 or 12 years old, hopelessly 
crippled from polio. She could not believe that there was someone who 
was crippled from polio, when there are such low-cost vaccines.
  It turned out that UNICEF had sent polio vaccine to Uganda, but that 
little boy had not got the vaccine. The medical personnel could not go 
to his part of Uganda, to his village, because of the landmines strewn 
around there. So in a country where to survive it is necessary to be 
able bodied, this little boy is hopelessly crippled.
  Here is a photograph of a young boy in Mozambique, Mr. President. 
Look at him from the waist down. There is nothing there. Those are two 
wooden legs. Artificial legs in a very poor country, a growing boy who 
will outgrow them and probably did outgrow them months after this 
picture was taken.
  Look at this Kurdish boy. Can anyone, as human beings, as parents, 
look at this and not be horrified? I think of my children, when they 
were this age. One badly damaged leg. An arm missing at the shoulder. 
The other leg torn off at the knee. And these children are considered 
the lucky ones because they were close enough to medical care to get 
help. They did not die, as many do, just from the loss of blood.
  These are not combatants, but these are typical of what I have seen 
every place I have gone in the world where they have landmines. I am 
told that you cannot walk down the street of Phnom-Penh without seeing 
people an arm or leg gone. They say that in Cambodia they are clearing 
the landmines an arm and a leg at a time.
  Not only do these weapons endanger civilians most of all--and that is 
why they are terrorist weapons--but they kill and maim American 
soldiers, whether in combat or peacekeeping missions. They threaten our 
Peace Corps volunteers and other Americans who are involved in 
humanitarian work.
  Ken Rutherford of Colorado testified here last year. He told about 
being in Somalia driving in his jeep, while he was working for the 
International Rescue Committee. He heard the blast and the bang, and 
the next thing he knew he was sitting in shock, holding his foot in his 
hand trying to reattach it to his shattered leg. Of course, that could 
never be. Ken has courageously gone through painful surgery after 
surgery, to be able to walk again.
  Hidden killers is an indictment of a weapon that even Civil War 
General Sherman, who is not remembered as a great humanitarian, called 
a violation of civilized warfare over a century ago. A violation of 
civilized warfare. That is when a tiny number of them were used. Now 
there are millions.
  During the month of January, officials of governments, including the 
United States, met in Geneva to discuss proposals for strengthening the 
Conventional Weapons Convention, the one existing international 
agreement covering the use of landmines. Signed in 1980, the Senate 
finally ratified it last Friday.
  I want to praise the distinguished majority leader, Senator Dole, the 
distinguished Democratic leader, Senator Daschle, and others, Senator 
Helms, Senator Pell, and Senator Lugar, for bringing the convention 
before the Senate for ratification.
  The fact that the talks are going on in preparation for a U.N. 
conference next September to strengthen the 1980 convention is 
important by itself. The convention is universally regarded as woefully 
inadequate, and John Molander, the Swedish chairman of the talks, 
deserves credit for his efforts.
  But these negotiations have shown how reluctant governments are to 
turn rhetoric into reality. I mentioned that Russia had said it had 
stopped exports of landmines. I praise President Yeltsin for that. I 
had talked to him about it personally, as I did Foreign Minister 
Kozyrev. Russia is obviously a country that has one of the largest 
stockpiles of landmines and they have the ability to manufacture them.
  But now we see that they have no reluctance to sow them from 
airplanes over Chechnya. What army is being deterred by that? What 
army? It is the armies of old women and old men going out to find 
firewood to make a fire so they do not die from the cold. What army? It 
is an army of little children trying to go to school. Those are the 
armies that are terrified and maimed and killed by the indiscriminate 
use of landmines.
  It is a blight, Mr. President, it is a blight. It is a moral blight. 
It is an evil blight. They should be treated the same way as we treat 
poison gas and chemical warfare. They do not distinguish between 
civilians and combatants. And yet we there are some who would have us 
give a Good Housekeeping seal of approval to a certain types of 
landmines.
  Balderdash. What difference does it make? A landmine is a landmine. 
Cheap, deadly, long-life mines can blow the leg off the best trained, 
best equipped America soldier. If we treat some antipersonnel mines as 
acceptable, we run the risk of making the goal of eliminating them more 
elusive. Thousands of innocent people will continue to die. Every 15 
minutes of every day of every year someone--usually an innocent 
civilian, often a child, or civilian--loses a leg or an arm.
  Large areas of countries like Bosnia, Angola, and Cambodia have been 
contaminated with mines. The people cannot return to their fields to 
grow food, collect water, or firewood without risking their lives. 
Their children are being blown to pieces when they play outside or walk 
to school.
  Refugees cannot go home. The Pakistani Ambassador to the United 
Nations tells me that over 1 million Afghan refugees are stranded in 
his country. Why? They cannot go home to Afghanistan; it is littered 
with landmines. And so they are in an area where they are devastating 
the forest, causing all kinds of problems and they 
[[Page S4695]]  are an enormous drain on Pakistan because they cannot 
go back to Afghanistan.
  It is a global catastrophe. People everywhere are calling for an end 
to this madness. Three weeks ago the Belgium Parliament voted a 5-year 
total ban on antipersonnel mines. Mexico, Sweden, Ireland, Estonia, 
Colombia, and Cambodia have already announced a total ban.
  Only a year or two ago that seemed inconceivable. The United States 
has led the way, and we should continue to lead. We are the only 
superpower, and we can afford to set an example. We do not need these 
weapons for our security. What army is going to march against the 
United States? We have the most secure borders in the world.
  Mr. President, we are blessed as no democracy in history has been 
blessed, not only with the resources of our own land and the resource 
of our own people, but with the security we have as a nation. But let 
us think what happens when we set foot outside of our country, when we 
send humanitarian missions, or send the men and women from our military 
to help in peacekeeping. We find this terrorist weapon used against us. 
And we are only the tip of the iceberg, because it is a terrorist 
weapon used most often against those who are most defenseless.
  We should treat antipersonnel landmines with the same stigma as 
poison gas and other indiscriminate, inhumane weapons. Only when the 
price of using them is to be branded a war criminal and am 
international pariah will this mayhem stop. There are always going to 
be Saddam Husseins, who would commit any outrage against their own 
people. But they will become more and more the exception.
  Last week we did take the next step. We ratified the Conventional 
Weapons Convention, including the landmine protocol. The United States 
can now participate fully in the conference to amend the convention 
this September. I intend to go to that conference. I think it is an 
important opportunity to try to give the convention the teeth it 
currently lacks. Between now and then I will be speaking with the 
President of the United States, the Secretary of State, and others, 
about ways to strengthen it.
  Mr. President, there are some weapons that are so inhumane that they 
do not belong on this Earth. They do not fit in our natural law right 
of self-preservation and defense. Even within that natural law, and 
even with our right of self-defense, we do not have the right to use 
any kind of weapon under any circumstances. Antipersonnel landmines are 
so inhumane that they fall into that category. They have ruined far too 
many innocent lives already.
  Anyone who doubts that need only look at these photographs. See what 
happens. I started speaking 15 minutes ago. During that time this has 
happened to at least one person on this Earth since I started speaking, 
possibly another child like these. When the Senate recesses this noon--
and we all in the security of our caucuses and the security of this 
beautiful building, the symbol of democracy, eat our lunches--a half-
dozen more people will be killed and maimed somewhere in the world. And 
for what? Do these children threaten anybody? These children had a life 
hard enough already. Now they have one leg or one arm, or, as in this 
case, no legs. Can you imagine what their lives are like?
  I am going to speak again as I have, many, many times before, Mr. 
President, about this subject. I will continue to speak about it. I 
applaud and compliment those of my colleagues, Republicans and 
Democrats alike, who have joined me in this crusade.
  We should tell the world that we will treat the use of antipersonnel 
landmines the same way that we treat poison gas and other 
indiscriminate, inhumane weapons, and ban them altogether.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Thompson). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I understand the pending business is the 
amendment offered by the Senator from Iowa, is that correct?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is correct; the Harkin amendment numbered 
411.
  Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, on Saturday, March 25, an Iraqi court 
sentenced two Americans, David Daliberti of Jacksonville, FL, and 
William Barloon of Iowa, to 8 years in prison. Their crime was an 
innocent and inadvertent crossing into Iraq from Kuwait.
  These two men, both of whom were employed by United States 
contractors working in Kuwait, have been converted from free citizens 
working in an important area of national responsibility for Kuwait on 
behalf of United States contractors to prisoners in an Iraqi cell.
  David Daliberti and his partner have done nothing to deserve this 
sentence. As the observers at the trial last Saturday stated, these men 
are innocent of the charges levied against them. The crossing was an 
honest mistake. This mistake has been admitted, but it is not a 
criminal offense.
  The Iraqis must understand several things. First, that we will not 
allow them to utilize this inadvertent crossing of the border for 
political purposes. They must understand that their outrageous action 
toward these two men is the equal of the outrageous action that they 
have taken when they refuse to abide by the international standards 
that would be necessary for a lifting of the economic embargo against 
their country; that their use of these two men for political purposes 
will in no way lead to a lifting of the embargo or a modification of 
the U.N. resolutions regarding sanctions.
  Mr. President, President Clinton should be commended for the action 
that he has taken in this regard. He has been steadfast, he has been 
personally involved and committed to see that the United States takes 
all efforts within its power and by organizing international forces in 
order to accomplish the objective of the release of these two men.
  I would also like to thank the representatives of the Polish 
Government who represent United States interests in Baghdad. They have, 
as they have done in previous cases, performed a great service for this 
country. They have represented our interests well in the past, and I am 
confident that they will do so on behalf of these two Americans.
  I have written to the United Nations and received assurance from Mr. 
Boutros Boutros-Ghali that the United Nations will do everything within 
its power to ensure the release of these individuals.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to print in the Record a 
letter dated March 24, from the Secretary General, relative to the 
commitment of the United Nations, at the conclusion of my remarks.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  (See exhibit 1.)
  Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, there have been a variety of voices raised 
on this matter. The most compelling have been those of the voices of 
the families directly involved. The family of Mr. David Daliberti live 
in Jacksonville, FL. I have had the opportunity to talk with his 
mother, father, and last Friday with his wife, Kathy. They are, 
obviously, extremely distressed and anxious about the future of their 
son and husband.
  We must convey to them that it is the commitment of the United States 
of America to do everything within its power to gain the safe and 
expeditious release of their loved ones. The same commitment will be 
made to the Barloon family who, I am certain, is experiencing the same 
level of anxiety.
  The Iraqis must understand that we will hold them fully responsible 
for the treatment that they are according these two innocent men; that 
they will be held accountable in the court of international opinion and 
law for any adverse actions taken against these two Americans.
  There have been a variety of proposals made, Mr. President, as to 
what we should do, ranging from diplomatic to economic to military. I 
personally believe that we should not take any option off the table. We 
should not give to Saddam Hussein the confidence that would come by his 
knowing what we will not do.
   [[Page S4696]] However, affirmatively, I believe that we should 
place our confidence and place our faith in the individual who has the 
constitutional responsibility to lead United States efforts in a matter 
of this type, and that is the President of the United States.
  On Friday, I met with the President at the White House, and I was 
impressed with the degree to which he was personally knowledgeable of 
the minute details of this issue; that he had been in personal contact 
with key figures who have the capability of bringing maximum pressure 
upon the Iraqis, and his commitment to see that these two men are 
released as expeditiously and in the best possible circumstances.
  So, Mr. President, I support the resolution that is before us today. 
I think it is important that the United States Senate send a strong 
signal to Baghdad as to our outrage at their action and that their 
action will not secure any steps which will be beneficial to the 
country of Iraq.
  The irony is that the control of the future of Iraq and its people, 
the ability to lift the economic sanctions and to begin a process of 
restoring Iraq to a membership in an international community of law-
abiding nations lies totally within the Government of Iraq itself and 
particularly its leader, Saddam Hussein.
  For months, that regime has rejected its opportunity and 
responsibility to take those actions. Now they are potentially 
attempting to use these two innocent Americans as a lever to achieve 
that result.
  They shall not succeed. The United States, with our international 
allies and with the coalition that is being organized by President 
Clinton, will bring both maximum force, maximum diplomatic, economic 
and, if necessary, other initiatives in order to achieve the release of 
these men, while at the same time standing firm behind the sanctions 
which Iraq imposed upon itself by its lawless activities.
  So, Mr. President, I urge my colleagues to adopt this resolution and 
send the signals that have the best opportunity to achieve the release 
of these two men to the regime in Baghdad and to reinforce the 
leadership which is being provided by our President in Washington.
  Thank you, Mr. President.
                               Exhibit 1

                                                   March 24, 1995.
     Senator Bob Graham,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Graham: Thank you for your letter of 23 March 
     1995 expressing your grave concern for the two United States 
     citizens who have been detained by the Government of Iraq 
     since 13 March after accidentally crossing the border between 
     Kuwait and Iraq. Please be assured that I share your concern.
       Since the incident occurred, General Krishna Thapa, the 
     Force Commander of the United Nations Iraq-Kuwait Observation 
     Mission (UNIKOM), which is situated along the international 
     border between the two countries, has been repeatedly in 
     contact with Iraqi authorities to ascertain the whereabouts 
     of the two individuals, obtain assurances of their well-
     being, and urge the Government to release them immediately.
       Mr. Kofi Annan, Under-Secretary-General for Peace-keeping, 
     has also been in touch with the Permanent Representative of 
     Iraq to the United Nations to protest the incident and to 
     urge the Government of Iraq to take immediate steps to obtain 
     release of the detainees. Mr. Annan is also keeping the 
     Permanent Representative of the United States informed of any 
     developments in this regard as they occur.
       You may be assured that the United Nations will continue to 
     do everything we can to bring about the rapid release of the 
     detainees. Please convey to their families my deep concern, 
     together with my personal wishes that their families will 
     soon be reunited.
       Please accept, Sir, the assurances of my highest 
     consideration.
                                            Boutros Boutros-Ghali.

  Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, I commend the Senator from Iowa, Senator 
Harkin, for his leadership on this issue. The virtual kidnaping of two 
innocent American businessmen by Iraq is a very serious matter.
  Obviously, I will vote for this amendment because it strongly 
condemns the Government of Iraq for its unjustified action. I also 
think it empowers the President as he strives to assure the prompt 
release and safe exit of our two citizens from Iraq.
  At the same time, though, I want to explain for the Record that in 
voting for a resolution which urges the President to ``take all 
appropriate action'' in this matter, I do not believe that Congress is 
authorizing any broad use of military action. While the President may 
initiate an emergency operation to rescue American citizens, any 
military action beyond that into Iraq would have to be specifically 
authorized by Congress.
  I make this point, Mr. President, because I have seen in the past how 
sometimes we quickly and quite appropriately pass some foreign policy 
resolutions to express a sense of the Senate, only to have them 
reinterpreted as a broad authority for some unforeseen or even 
uncontemplated military action later. I hardly expect that to be the 
case with this amendment, but I wanted to set the record straight from 
the outset.
  Mrs. HUTCHISON addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas.

                          ____________________