[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 86 (Friday, June 26, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7251-S7252]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
TRIBUTE TO LISA KAUFMAN, SOUTH DAKOTA WINNER OF THE NATIONAL PEACE
ESSAY CONTEST
Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I rise to salute Lisa Kaufman of Freeman,
South Dakota--an outstanding young woman who has been honored as South
Dakota's first place winner in the eleventh annual National Peace Essay
Contest sponsored by the United States Institute of Peace. More than
5,000 students in the 50 states participated in this year's contest.
Students wrote about the way in which war crimes and human rights
violations are accounted for in various international conflicts.
Ms. Kaufman was chosen to represent South Dakota in a special program
for state-level winners here in Washington this past week, where she
participated in a three-day simulation of high-level discussions with
the goal of finding the best way to address war crimes and human rights
violations to ensure a stable peace in Cambodia. She has received a
college scholarship to reward her achievement.
I also commend Ms. Vernetta Waltner, the faculty coordinator for the
contest at the Freeman Academy, for her involvement and for encouraging
participation in this type of program.
I am pleased that Ms. Kaufman and our next generation of leaders are
helping build peace to promote freedom and justice among nations and
peoples. Their commitment and dedication is a lesson to us all. The
title of Ms. Kaufman's essay is ``Justice Leads to Peace.'' She richly
deserves public recognition for her accomplishment, and I am proud to
ask unanimous consent that her winning essay be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the essay was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
Justice Leads to Peace
(By Lisa Kaufman)
It is impossible to deny the fact that there are many
cruelties associated with war. In the news, we see and hear
about the devastation that war causes in a country. Damage
occurs to the land. Buildings and even whole cities may be
destroyed by bombs. The real problem with war, though, is
that it causes damage beyond just the destruction of various
structures within a country. War affects
[[Page S7252]]
people. Individuals who live through times of war endure much
pain. An ugly reality is that many violent crimes are
committed against people during times of war.
So how does a society deal with those who committed
atrocious human rights violations during a war? I feel that
the only way to restore a stable peace is to face the
challenge of punishing those guilty of war crimes. A society
can't move on without dealing with the realities of its past,
no matter how painful they may be. Several countries
throughout the world are now facing the obstacle of dealing
with war criminals as they move down the road to peace.
One country that is dealing with this issue is South
Africa. Conflict over the practice of apartheid, or racial
segregation, escalated into a serious situation during the
last half of the 20th Century. The conflict is deeply seeded
in South Africa's history. The British gained control of
South Africa in 1814 and white control of the country
immediately provoked uprising by the native blacks who sought
independence. In 1910, Britain did grant South Africa
independence, but the situation didn't change much as white
English-speaking people maintained control of the government.
The government established apartheid as an official policy
in 1948, and various acts were passed with the purpose of
completely separating South Africa's blacks from the white
minority. Inevitably, protests arose and they became more
serious throughout the 1950's. Nelson Mandela led the African
National Congress (ANC), a political organization that
actively worked for black control. Boycotts, strikes, and
rallies were used to draw attention to their plea for the end
of apartheid. Tensions rose even higher when the ANC was
banned by the government and Nelson Mandela was jailed.
The black movement began to escalate again during the
1970's and 1980's. Renewed demonstrations and riots plagued
the country and a state of emergency was declared in 1986.
Change finally began when a new president, Frederick de
Klerk, took office in 1989. Nelson Mandela was released from
jail and apartheid was gradually dismantled. Real progress
came with elections held in 1994 in which blacks took control
of the government with Nelson Mandela as the new president.
The new government faced many challenges, one of which was
dealing with those guilty of human rights violations that
occurred during the era of apartheid. The Truth and
Reconciliation Commission was created in June 1995 to give
victims a chance to voice the abuses that occurred. It also
served to uncover evidence about the perpetrators of those
crimes. Political amnesty was guaranteed for those who came
forward voluntarily to confess. In other words, those who
admitted to committing political crimes were pardoned, but
those who remained silent could be prosecuted.
I feel that the creation of this commission was beneficial
in several ways, but was too lenient in its dealings with war
criminals. The acceptance of the commission was evident when
over 10,000 victims came forward to share their personal
horror stories. This reveals that there was a need among the
people to talk about what happened. The way in which the
commission dealt with war criminals represented a compromise,
though Truth is essential, but at what cost?
There must be penalties for these crimes that were
committed and I think that the offer of political amnesty was
too generous. Citizens should be able to see punishment
handed out to the guilty so that they can feel safe again. It
would be beneficial to reward those who come forward
voluntarily with a lesser sentence, but they still deserve to
face punishment for their actions. Justice must not be
compromised in this way. War criminals must be held
accountable.
Another recent conflict that has been plagued by
discoveries of genocide and vast human rights violations is
the civil war in Bosnia. The region has had a troubled past.
After World War II, Yugoslavia was united as a confederation
of six republics held together by the ruling Communist Party.
This federation was unstable, though, because of deeply
seeded ethnic divisions.
In 1990, the Communists lost control and Yugoslavia began
to crumble. In June, 1991, two of the republics, Slovenia and
Croatia, declared their independence. The other republics
followed, with Bosnia and Herzegovina declaring their
independence in March 1992. Civil war then broke out in
Bosnia between the three ethnic groups living in the area:
the Croats, Serbs and Bosnian Muslims. The Muslim-dominated
government forces fought to maintain a multiethnic state
while the Bosnian Serbs and Croats called for separate ethnic
states.
A peace treaty was signed in December 1995 in which Bosnia
was split into two sub-states, a Muslim-Croat federation and
a Serb republic. The agreement called for the exchange of
territory and this led to much violence. International
peacekeeping forces and humanitarian organizations were
present throughout the war and remain in the area yet today
to stabilize the conflict.
Both during and after the war, reports were confirmed of
torture and cruelty committed by all three ethnic groups. The
Bosnian Serbs were specifically singled out, though, for
their policy of ``ethnic cleansing'' in which over 700,000
Muslims were forced from their homes in Serb-controlled areas
of Bosnia. The Serbs were also responsible for putting people
in concentration camps and killing and raping many women.
Mass graves hold evidence to the large number of deaths that
occurred.
These human rights abuses were acknowledged with the
formation of The United Nations International Criminal
Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. This tribunal was set up
at The Hague in 1994 with the purpose of judging serious
violations of international humanitarian law. The tribunal
issued indictments of various criminal suspects and then
those in the international community were responsible to
arrest them and turn them over to the tribunal to face
punishment.
The problem with this arrangement was that many indicted
war criminals were not actively sought by international
peacekeepers. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)
was very active both during and after the war in Bosnia by
stationing peacekeeping soldiers throughout the area. These
NATO troops have not chosen to search out the war criminals,
though. At one point 75 people had been indicted by the
tribunal, while only nine had been arrested.
In July 1997, NATO started to actively track down indicted
war criminals. More arrests were made, but NATO has not yet
moved to arrest the higher-level criminals that have been
indicted, such as Radovan Karadzic, a Serb leader who is
accused of genocide, or the intent to destroy a whole ethnic
group.
I believe that it is time for international peacekeepers to
actively move in on arresting the high-profile suspects. It
is easier to leave these suspects alone, but by delaying
action, peace and reconciliation is being delayed. I agree
with the tribunal's goal of bringing war criminals to face
judgment, but the way that this effort is being carried out
is short of effective.
These issues dealing with the prosecution of war criminals
must be dealt with carefully. There are many variables to
consider. Even though public trials may be painful for
survivors, I feel that it is necessary to deal with the
perpetrators in public. Silence is not a solution. It is
better to deal with those suspected of human rights
violations than to pretend the damage never occurred. Only
when these problems are dealt with can lasting peace have a
chance.
Truth must be exposed. Elie Wiesel, a Holocaust survivor
and Nobel Peace Prize winner, recently said, '`There is no
compensation for what happened. But at least a certain
balance can be established that opposing fear there is hope,
hope that when we remember the fear . . . our memory becomes
a shield for the future.'' By exposing what really happened
we can guard ourselves against it ever happening again.
Both South Africa and Bosnia face challenges in their
future. As they work to bring war criminals to justice,
painful memories resurface. They are taking steps in the
right direction, though, as they confront the atrocities that
took place during times of war and conflict. War criminals
must be tried and held responsible for their actions. There
are no valid excuses for killing. People should never have to
suffer based on their ethnic origin or simply the color of
their skin. When these offenses occur, the guilty must be
punished so that peace and justice can thrive in the future.
____________________