[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 49 (Wednesday, April 17, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3420-S3421]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
PROGRESS TOWARD A BAN ON ANTIPERSONNEL LANDMINES
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I want to bring Senators up to date on the
progress of the past 2 months since the Leahy amendment for a
moratorium on the use of antipersonnel landmines was signed into law.
That amendment received bipartisan support from about two-thirds of
the Senate. It was supported by the House-Senate conference committee,
and it was signed by the President on February 12. I want to thank all
those Senators who voted for it. I would also like to thank those
Senators who have come up to me since the vote who did not vote for it
and said now they wished they had because of the havoc that the mines
have wreaked in Bosnia.
In fact, in Bosnia just since December, 38 NATO soldiers have been
injured, 7 have been killed by landmines, including 3 Americans. There
are 3 million landmines left in Bosnia. To put that in perspective,
there are 3 million landmines in a country about the size of Tennessee.
They will kill and maim civilians for decades after our troops leave.
Children going to school, farmers working in their fields, and people
going to market will be dying long after most of us have left the U.S.
Senate.
Over the past several years, I have sponsored legislation against
antipersonnel landmines. The purpose of my legislation has been to
exert United States leadership so that pressure would build on other
countries to follow our example. During a lot of that time this was
seen as some kind of a crusade of civilians against the military. It
was never the case. It was never intended by me to be the case. In
fact, one of the greatest encouragements I had in my efforts to ban
landmines was the support I received from combat veterans around this
country.
Those who say we need antipersonnel landmines should read the April 3
full-page open letter to President Clinton that appeared in the New
York Times. In this full-page letter to the President, 15 of the
country's most distinguished retired military officers called for a ban
on the production, the sale, the transfer, and the use of antipersonnel
landmines. They say such a ban would be both ``humane and militarily
responsible.''
Look at some of the people who signed this. These are not just wild-
eyed theorists. They include Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf; former Chairman
of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. David Jones; the former Supreme
Allied Commander, Gen. John Galvin; former Commander in Chief of the
U.S. Southern Command, Gen. Frederick Woerner; former Commmanding
General, U.S. Readiness Command, Gen. Volney Warner. Mr. President,
these are generals who know what has happened.
I ask unanimous consent that a copy of the generals' letter be
printed in the Record following my remarks.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
(See exhibit 1.)
Mr. LEAHY. There is no doubt that antipersonnel landmines have some
use. Any weapon does. But to those who would argue that whatever use
they have outweighs the devastation they inflict on whole societies, I
would answer that the commanders of our forces in South Korea, Vietnam,
NATO, and Desert Storm say otherwise.
They say we can get rid of these landmines. These generals have used
antipersonnel landmines and have seen what they do. They say these
indiscriminate weapons made their jobs more dangerous, not safer. They
remember their troops being blown up by their own minefields.
Today, it is landmines that our troops fear the most in Bosnia. No
army is going to challenge our men and women in Bosnia, but there are
hidden killers everywhere. A $2 antipersonnel mine will blow the leg
off the best-trained, the best-equipped, the best-motivated American
soldier.
In the 2 months since February, Canada, the Netherlands, Australia
and, yesterday, Germany, have announced they will unilaterally,
effective immediately, ban their use of antipersonnel landmines. These
countries have gone way out ahead of the United States in showing
leadership to ban landmines. Several, like Germany, said they will
destroy their stockpile of these weapons. They are taking this action,
which far surpasses what the United States has done, to lead the rest
of the world.
Mr. President, next Monday, the United States will join over 50
countries in Geneva in the final session of negotiations on a treaty to
limit the use of antipersonnel landmines. We already know that any
agreement is going to fall far short of what is needed to solve this
problem. Countries have insisted on exceptions and loopholes that are
just going to assure that landmines will continue to maim and kill
innocent civilians for decades to come.
In the weeks of negotiations there have not been more than 2 minutes
of discussion on the banning of these weapons--the simplest and easiest
thing to do, and what all of these distinguished retired American
generals asked us to do. The only way we are going to get rid of
antipersonnel landmines is by leadership that energizes the rest of the
world.
A year and a half ago in a historic speech at the United Nations,
President Clinton declared the goal of ridding the world of
antipersonnel landmines.
There is no reason why today, with the world's attention focused on
Bosnia, where we are spending tens of millions of dollars just to try
to find the mines, we cannot join with our NATO partners, who have gone
way out ahead of the United States, and renounce these insidious
weapons. Let the United States--the most powerful nation on Earth--
instead of being a follower in this, become the leader. A law we voted
for in the Senate, now on the books, says we will halt our use of these
landmines in 3 years. It should happen immediately, and it should be
permanent, as Germany, Canada, and the others have done. Our senior
retired combat officers support it. Hundreds of humanitarian
organizations support it. They have seen the limbs torn off children at
the knee.
If I have anything to do with it--and I intend to--this country is
going to end this century having banned these terrible weapons once and
for all. I hope the President and his administration will do what the
United States Senate has already done--shown leadership in this. I hope
that the rest of the Congress will do that, and then I hope that the
United States will come back into a leadership role in banning
landmines. It is what our NATO allies want, it is what our retired
generals want, and it is what our men and women in the Armed Forces
want.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that an article in the April 8
edition of Newsweek magazine, by David Hackworth, America's most
decorated soldier, entitled, ``One Weapon We Don't Need,'' be printed
in the Record.
There being no objection, the article was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
[From Newsweek, Apr. 8, 1996]
One Weapon We Don't Need
(By David H. Hackworth)
Last February, Sgt. 1/C Donald A. Dugan was killed
instantly on a snowy patch of ground in Bosnia. An
antipersonnel mine exploded while the veteran U.S. Army
reconnaissance sergeant was attempting to disarm it. The
explosion drove a piece of the steel disarming tool into his
forehead. On a dozen different killing fields around the
world in the past 50 years. I've seen thousands of soldiers
and civilians blasted apart by land mines. In northern Italy,
where I served as a 15-year-old soldier boy at the end of
World War II, I saw an army captain's legs ripped off by a
land mine. In Bosnia last January, I came within minutes of
becoming a casualty myself from a land-mine explosion. But
I've never seen a battle in which land mines made a
difference to the outcome. They are ugly and ineffective
weapons, and they ought to be outlawed.
Land mines are indiscriminate killers. They kill not only
during the conflict, but decades after the last shot was
fired. The technology has improved; a modern mine can be
programmed to blow itself up after a few weeks or months,
reducing the postwar threat to civilians. But anti-personnel
mines are still not ``smart.'' They can't tell a good guy
from a bad guy, a soldier from a civilian, an adult from a
child. And some fail to blow themselves up. When millions of
mines are
[[Page S3421]]
scattered across a battlefield by air and artillery, even a
tiny ``dud rate'' will leave a substantial number lying in
wait for innocent victims.
Of all the instruments of terror used on the battlefield,
mines are the most inhumane. The wartime casualties are young
men whose lives are either snuffed out or ruined forever by
crippling injuries. Even soldiers who escape from a minefield
unscathed are haunted by the experience. Many cases of
posttraumatic stress disorder, a serious psychological
malady, were caused by the preying fear of mines and booby
traps. Years later, a walk across an open field bring back
the old dread: What's under those leaves? Do I dare put my
foot on that freshly turned earth? Walk through a minefield,
and you'll never be young again.
During the Korean War, tens of thousands of soldiers on
both sides were felled by land mines. Many of them were
killed by their own mines, recklessly thrown down in haste,
their location unrecorded. In 1952, as a 21-year-old
lieutenant, I was ordered to clear a path through an unmapped
minefield--one of our own. I argued with my colonel about the
advisability of doing such work on frozen, snow-covered
ground. Lieutenants seldom win disputes with colonels, so the
mine-clearing detail proceeded as ordered until a fine black
sergeant named Simmons tripped the wire on a ``Bouncing
Betty'' mine. It popped up from the ground and blew off the
top of his head, covering me with his blood and brains.
Moments later, another noncom went nuts and stomped out
into the minefield, screaming: ``I'll find the f------
mines, I'll find the f------ mines!'' He was tackled,
restrained and led away.
In Vietnam, the U.S. Armed Forces also used land mines
irresponsibly, dropping millions of them at random by air.
The enemy quickly learned how to disarm these weapons and
recycle them for use against us. The infantry battalion I
commanded in the Ninth Division took more than 1,800
casualties in a year and a half, most of them caused by
recycled U.S. ordnance. Mines cannot secure a flank or defend
a position by themselves. For a minefield to be even
marginally effective, it must be protected by friendly
troops, to knock off the bad guys who want to clear a path or
use the mines against you.
Mines never stopped any unit of mine from taking its
objective--or the enemy from getting inside my wire. Anyone
who has ever been in battle, especially in Korea or Vietnam,
has seen enemy sappers crawl through mines and barbed wire
and get into their positions. I once faced a Chinese ``human
wave'' attack in Korea. My company was dug in on high ground,
with plenty of weapons, ammo and artillery support. Out in
front of our position we laid a carpet of mines and flares.
The enemy attacked in regimental strength, outnumbering us 9
to 1. They walked through our minefield--and our gunfire--
without missing a beat. They cut my company in half and
within an hour were two miles to the south, in our rear. The
only way out was to move north, so we trudged through our own
somewhat depleted minefield to escape, losing two men in the
process.
Most serving generals especially the desk jockeys, are in
favor of mines. The real war-fighters usually want to get rid
of them. Whatever defensive punch is lost would be more than
offset by the new firearms and missiles that give today's
infantry platoon more killing power than a Korea-vintage
battalion. ``Mines are not mission-essential,'' says one
general, ``but they are budget-essential.'' In 1996, the U.S.
Army budgeted $89 million for land-mine warfare. Now the army
is fighting to protect every nickel.
Still, some retired generals want to ban mines, and I agree
with them. Governments can declare land mines illegal, just
as chemical weapons were prohibited. Sure, thugs like Saddam
Hussein or Ratko Mladic will continue to use them. But users
(along with manufacturers and dealers) can be hunted down and
punished by an international court. If that happens just a
few times, anti-personnel mines will go the way of mustard
gas. I'll drink to that, and so will most veterans of foreign
wars.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, let me say one last time that we can ban
landmines. We can ban landmines certainly within this century. We can
ban them if the most powerful nation on Earth, the United States, takes
the leadership role that it must in this. If we do what so many other
countries have already done, and if we, instead of following them, step
out ahead of them, we can ban these landmines once and for all. If we
do, our men and women, when sent into harm's way, will be safer. Our
humanitarian workers will be safer, and millions of children and
innocent civilians around the world will become safer.
I yield the floor.
Exhibit 1
[From the New York Times, Apr. 3, 1996]
An Open Letter to President Clinton
Dear Mr. President: We understand that you have announced a
United States goal of the eventual elimination of
antipersonnel landmines. We take this to mean that you
support a permanent and total international ban on the
production, stockpiling, sale and use of this weapon.
We view such a ban as not only humane, but also militarily
responsible.
The rationale for opposing antipersonnel landmines is that
they are in a category similar to poison gas; they are hard
to control and often have unintended harmful consequences
(sometimes even for those who employ them). In addition, they
are insidious in that their indiscriminate effects persist
long after hostilities have ceased, continuing to cause
casualties among innocent people, especially farmers and
children.
We understand that: there are 100 million landmines
deployed in the world. Their presence makes normal life
impossible in scores of nations. It will take decades of
slow, dangerous and painstaking work to remove these mines.
The cost in dollars and human lives will be immense. Seventy
people will be killed or maimed today, 500 this week, more
than 2,000 this month, and more than 26,000 this year,
because of landmines.
Given the wide range of weaponry available to military
forces today, antipersonnel landmines are not essential.
Thus, banning them would not undermine the military
effectiveness or safety of our forces, nor those of other
nations.
The proposed ban on antipersonnel landmines does not affect
antitank mines, nor does it ban such normally command-
detonated weapons as Claymore ``mines,'' leaving unimpaired
the use of those undeniably militarily useful weapons.
Nor is the ban on antipersonnel landmines a slippery slope
that would open the way to efforts to ban additional
categories of weapons, since these mines are unique in their
indiscriminate, harmful residual potential.
We agree with and endorse these views, and conclude that
you as Commander-in-Chief could responsibly take the lead in
efforts to achieve a total and permanent international ban on
the production, stockpiling, sale and use of antipersonnel
landmines. We strongly urge that you do so.
General David Jones (USAF; ret.), former Chairman, Joint
Chiefs of Staff;
General John R. Galvin (US Army, ret.), former Supreme
Allied Commander, Europe;
General H. Norman Schwarzkopf (US Army, ret.), Commander,
Operation Desert Storm;
General William G.T. Tuttle, Jr. (US Army, ret.), former
Commander, US Army Materiel Command;
General Volney F. Warner (US Army, ret.), former
Commanding General, US Readiness Command;
General Frederick F. Woerner, Jr. (US Army, ret.), former
Commander-in-Chief, US Southern Command;
Lieutenant General James Abrahamson (USAF, ret.), former
Director, Strategic Defense Initiative Office;
Lieutenant General Henry E. Emerson (US Army, ret.),
former Commander, XVIII Airborne Corps;
Lieutenant General Robert G. Gard, Jr. (US Army, ret.),
former President, National Defense University,
President, Monterey Institute of International Studies;
Lieutenant General James F. Hollingsworth (US Army,
ret.), former I Corps (ROK/US Group);
Lieutenant General Harold G. Moore, Jr. (US Army, ret.),
former Commanding General, 7th Infantry Division;
Lieutenant General Dave R. Palmer (US Army, ret.), former
Commandant, US Military Academy, West Point;
Lieutenant General DeWitt C. Smith, Jr. (US Army, ret.),
former Commandant, US Army War College;
Vice Admiral Jack Shanahan (USN, ret.), former Commander,
US Second Fleet;
Brigadier General Douglas Kinnard (US Army, ret.), former
Chief of Military History, US Army.
____________________