[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 110 (Friday, July 30, 1999)]
[Senate]
[Page S9939]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                  THE U.S. ARMY SCHOOL OF THE AMERICAS

  Mr. CLELAND. Mr. President, I rise today to express my continued 
support for the U.S. Army School of the Americas (SOA), located at Fort 
Benning, Georgia. Legislation has been introduced by my colleagues both 
in the House and the Senate which would close the School of the 
Americas, and last evening the House adopted an amendment to do so. Mr. 
President, I rise to support the School of the Americas and the vital 
mission it performs in encouraging diplomacy and democracy within the 
militaries located in the Americas.
  The School of the Americas has been a key instrument of U.S. foreign 
policy in Latin and Southern America for over fifty years and is the 
single most important instrument of our National Security Strategy of 
engagement in the Southern Hemisphere.
  The legislation opposing the School has been accompanied by a 
mountain of communications alleging that this School, operated by the 
U.S. Army and funded by taxpayers' dollars, is the cause of horrendous 
human rights abuses in Central and South America. In twelve separate 
investigations since 1989, the Department of Defense, the Army, the GAO 
and others have found nothing to suggest that the School either taught 
or inspired Latin Americans to commit such crimes. Yet, sponsors of 
these measures reproduce the critics' list of atrocities allegedly 
committed by a small number of graduates in order to transfer 
responsibility for these crimes to the backs of the School and the Army 
rather than to the individuals themselves.
  The School is, and always has been, a U.S. Army training and 
education institution teaching the same tactics, techniques, and 
procedures taught at other U.S. Army schools and imparting the very 
same values that the Army teaches its own soldiers. These U.S. military 
personnel receive the same training as all graduates of our military 
schools. To suggest that terrorist activities are taught to students 
would suggest that we in fact teach terrorist activities to all of our 
own military personnel. This is assuredly not the case.
  The School is commanded by a U.S. Army colonel whose chain of command 
includes the Commanding General of the U.S. Army Infantry Center and 
the Commanding General of the U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command. 
The School also receives oversight and direction from the Commander-in-
Chief of U.S. Southern Command. The School's staff and faculty includes 
over 170 U.S. Army officers, noncommissioned officers, enlisted 
soldiers, and Department of the Army civilians. The School counts among 
its graduates over 1,500 U.S. military personnel including five general 
officers currently serving on active duty in our military.
  I agree completely with critics of the School that ``Human rights is 
not a partisan issue,'' and I further agree that, in the past there 
were indeed some shortcomings in the School's fulfillment of its 
mission to transmit all of the values we hold dear in our country. In 
that regard, today, the U.S. Army School of the Americas has the U.S. 
Army's premier human rights training program. The program has been 
expanded in recent years in consultation with the International 
Committee of the Red Cross and Mr. Steve Schneebaum, a noted human 
rights attorney and a member of the School's Board of Visitors. Every 
student and instructor at the School receives mandatory human rights 
instruction and the International Committee of the Red Cross teaches 
human rights each year during the School's Command and General Staff 
and Peace Operations courses. Last year, over 900 Latin American 
soldiers, civilians, and police received human rights instruction at 
the U.S. Army School of the Americas.

  Latin America is currently undergoing an unparalleled transformation 
to democratic governance, civilian control of the military, and 
economic reform along free market principles. Almost every nation in 
Latin America has a democratically elected government. During this 
transition, the region's militaries have accepted structural cuts, 
reduced budgets, and curtailed influence in society. In many cases, 
their acceptance of this new reality has been encouraged and enhanced 
by the strategy of engagement of which the U.S. Army School of the 
Americas is an integral part. However, many Latin American democracies 
are fragile. True change does not occur in days, months, or even years. 
We must continue to engage Latin American governments, including their 
militaries. Marginalizing or ignoring the militaries of the region will 
not help in consolidating hard-won democracy but, instead, will have 
the opposite effect. Our efforts to engage the militaries of the region 
are more important and more relevant than ever. The U.S. Army School of 
the Americas is unique in this regard because it trains and educates 
large numbers of Latin American students who cannot be accommodated in 
other U.S. military service schools due to limited student spaces and 
the inability of other U.S. military schools to teach in Spanish.
  Over the years, changes have been made to enhance the School's focus 
on human rights and diplomacy. Recently introduced courses such as 
Democratic Sustainment, Humanitarian Demining, International 
Peacekeeping Operations, Counternarcotics Operations, and Human Rights 
Train-the-Trainer, directly support shared security interests in the 
region, and are not offered elsewhere. Other proposed changes include 
placing the School under the jurisdiction of U.S. Southern Command and 
expanding the Board of Visitors to include congressional membership--
both proposals which I strongly support.
  By focusing on the negative, critics ignore the many recent positive 
contributions that U.S. Army School of the Americas graduates have 
made. In 1995, this nation helped broker a cease fire between Peru and 
Ecuador when a historical border dispute threatened to ignite into war. 
The key members of the delegations that put together that accord were 
U.S. Army School of the Americas graduates, from Peru, from Ecuador, 
and from the guarantor nations of the United States and Chile. In fact, 
the Commander of the U.S. contingent to the multinational peacekeeping 
force, who received special recognition from the State Department for 
``extraordinary contributions to U.S. diplomacy,'' was a 1986 graduate 
of the School's Command and General Staff course, and serves as the 
current Commandant of the School. More recently, in 1997, the President 
of Ecuador was removed from office, creating a constitutional crisis. 
Some of the people of Ecuador called for the military to take power, 
but their military refused. Many of the officers in the high command 
were U.S. Army School of the Americas graduates. Finally, less than 
four months ago, the President of Paraguay was impeached for 
misconduct. Once again, a constitutional crisis ensued. Once again, the 
military refused to take power. Once again many of the officers in that 
military were U.S. Army School of the Americas graduates, including one 
general officer who played a key role in the refusal.
  I ask each of you to take a careful look at the U.S. Army School of 
the Americas as it exists today. Look to the future. As stated by the 
School's critics, ``The contentious politics of U.S. foreign policy in 
Central America in the 1980s are over.'' I strongly urge you to 
continue your support of the Army School of the Americas and the U.S. 
Army.

                          ____________________