    [Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: William J. Clinton (1997, Book II)]
    [September 17, 1997]
    [Pages 1183-1186]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office www.gpo.gov]

    [[Page 1183]]

    Remarks on International Efforts To Eliminate Landmines and an Exchange
    With Reporters
    September 17, 1997

        The President. Thank you very much. I want to talk now about what
    the United States has done and what we will continue to do to lead the
    world toward the elimination of antipersonnel landmines.
        Every year, landmines kill or maim more than 25,000 people:
    children, women, farmers peacefully going about their business. That is
    why, since I called for the global elimination of landmines in 1994, the
    United States has been at the forefront of the effort to ban them, not
    just in words but in actual, concrete deeds.
        Eighteen months ago, I ordered a ban on the most dangerous types of
    landmines, those that remain active and dangerous long after soldiers
    have left the scene. These are the mines that are causing all the damage
    around the world today. These hidden killers prey on innocent civilians.
    They are responsible for the horrific mutilation of children from Angola
    to Cambodia to Bosnia.
        In the months since I ordered that ban, the United States has
    destroyed 1\1/2\ million of these landmines. By 1999 we will have
    destroyed all the rest in our stockpiles, another 1\1/2\ million, with
    the exception of our mines at the demilitarized zone in Korea, the cold
    war's last frontier.
        The United States has also led the world in the effort to remove
    existing landmines, again not with talk but with action that has saved
    lives. Since 1993 we have devoted $153 million to this cause. Our
    experts have helped to remove mines from the ground in 15 nations. They
    have trained and equipped roughly one-quarter of all the people who work
    at this effort around the world.
        These efforts are paying off. In the areas of Cambodia where we've
    been active, the death rates for landmines has dropped by one-half. In
    Namibia, the casualty rate has fallen 90 percent.
        These efforts do not come without real cost and sacrifice. The C-141
    plane that went down in that terrible collision off the coast of Africa
    on Monday, in which nine Air Force crew members were lost, had just
    carried a unit of special forces demining experts to Namibia.
        Last month I instructed a U.S. team to join negotiations then
    underway in Oslo to ban all antipersonnel landmines. Our negotiators
    worked tirelessly to reach an agreement we could sign. Unfortunately, as
    it is now drafted, I cannot in good conscience add America's name to
    that treaty. So let me explain why.
        Our Nation has unique responsibilities for preserving security and
    defending peace and freedom around the globe. Millions of people from
    Bosnia to Haiti, Korea to the Persian Gulf, are safer as a result. And
    so is every American. The men and women who carry out that
    responsibility wear our uniform with pride and, as we learned in the
    last few days, at no small risk to themselves. They wear it secure in
    the knowledge, however, that we will always, always do everything we can
    to protect our own.
        As Commander in Chief, I will not send our soldiers to defend the
    freedom of our people and the freedom of others without doing everything
    we can to make them as secure as possible. For that reason, the United
    States insisted that two provisions be included in the treaty negotiated
    at Oslo. First, we needed an adequate transition period to phase out the
    antipersonnel mines we now use to protect our troops, giving us time to
    devise alternative technologies. Second, we needed to preserve the
    antitank mines we rely upon to slow down an enemy's armor offensive in a
    battle situation.
        These two requests are not abstract considerations. They reflect the
    very dangerous reality we face on the ground as a result of our global
    responsibilities. Take the Korean Peninsula. There, our 37,000 troops
    and their South Korean allies face an army of one million North Koreans
    only 27 miles away from Seoul, Korea. They serve there, our troops do,
    in the name and under the direct mandate of the international community.
    In the event of an attack, the North's overwhelming numerical advantage
    can only be countered if we can slow down its advance, call in
    reinforcements, and organize our defense. Our antipersonnel mines there
    are a key part of our defense line in Korea. They are deployed along a
    DMZ where there are no villages and no civilians. Therefore, they, too,

    [[Page 1184]]

    are not creating the problem we are trying to address in the world.
        We also need antitank mines there to deter or stop an armored
    assault against our troops, the kind of attack our adversaries would be
    most likely to launch. These antitank mines self-destruct or deactivate
    themselves when the battle is over, and therefore, they pose little risk
    to civilians. We will continue to seek to deter a war that would cost
    countless lives. But no one should expect our people to expose our Armed
    Forces to unacceptable risks.
        Now, we were not able to gain sufficient support for these two
    requests. The final treaty failed to include a transition period during
    which we could safely phase out our antipersonnel landmines, including
    in Korea. And the treaty would have banned the antitank mines our troops
    rely on from the outskirts of Seoul to the desert border of Iraq and
    Kuwait, and this in spite of the fact that other nations' antitank
    systems are explicitly permitted under the treaty.
        We went the extra mile and beyond to sign this treaty. And again, I
    want to thank Secretary Cohen and General Shalikashvili and especially
    I'd like to thank General Ralston for the enormous effort that was made
    and the changes in positions and the modifications in positions that the
    Joint Chiefs made, not once but 3 times, to try to move our country
    closer to other countries so that in good faith we could sign this
    treaty.
        But there is a line that I simply cannot cross, and that line is the
    safety and security of our men and women in uniform. America will
    continue to lead in ending the use of all antipersonnel mines. The offer
    we made at Oslo remains on the table. We stand ready to sign a treaty
    that meets our fundamental and unique security requirements. With an
    adequate transition period to a world free of antipersonnel landmines,
    this goal is within reach.
        As further evidence of our commitment, I am announcing today a
    series of steps America will take on its own to advance our efforts to
    rid the world of landmines. First, I'm directing the Department of
    Defense to develop alternatives to antipersonnel landmines so that by
    the year 2003 we can end even the use of self-destruct landmines, that
    is, those, again, that are not causing the problem today because they
    destroy themselves on their own after a short period of time. We want to
    end even the use of these landmines, everywhere but Korea.
        As for Korea, my directive calls for alternatives to be ready by
    2006, the time period for which we were negotiating in Oslo. By setting
    these deadlines, we will speed the development of new technologies that
    I asked the Pentagon to start working on last year. In short, this
    program will eliminate all antipersonnel landmines from America's
    arsenal.
        Second, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff David Jones has
    agreed to be a personal adviser to me and to Secretary Cohen to help us
    make sure the job gets done. Throughout his career he has demonstrated a
    concern for the safety of our troops second to none, and in recent years
    he's been a powerful, eloquent voice for banning landmines. There's no
    better man for the task, and I thank him for accepting it.
        Third, we will significantly increase our demining programs. No
    nation devotes more expertise or resources to the problem than we do
    today. Next year, we currently plan to provide $68 million for worldwide
    demining efforts, almost as much as the rest of the world combined. We
    will begin demining work in as many as eight new countries, including
    Chad, Zimbabwe, and Lebanon.
        But we can, and will, do more. I am proposing that we increase
    funding for demining by about 25 percent beginning next year. We must
    improve our research and development to find new ways to detect, remove,
    and dispose of these landmines. We must increase assistance to landmine
    victims to help them heal and take their place as productive members of
    their societies. And we must expand our training programs so that
    nations that are plagued by landmines can themselves do more to clear
    away these deadly devices. Every mine removed from the ground is another
    child potentially saved.
        Fourth, we will redouble our efforts to establish serious
    negotiations for a global antipersonnel landmine ban in the conference
    on disarmament in Geneva. We will begin by seeking an export ban next
    year and one that applies to the major landmine producers, the people
    who themselves cause these problems because they're making and selling
    these landmines--none of them were present in Oslo. In the end, we have
    to get them on board as well.
        I am determined to work closely with the Congress, with Senator
    Leahy, Senator Hagel,

    [[Page 1185]]

    and others to implement this package, because I think together we can
    take another step in the elimination of landmines that will be decisive.
        In that connection, let me say, I had a brief visit with Senator
    Leahy today, and I think that there's no way I can say enough about what
    he has done. He is a genuine worldwide leader in this effort. He has
    been recognized around the world. He has worked with us very closely,
    and I thank him. And I'm confident that we can do more by working
    together.
        I believe, and I think everyone in the United States and everyone
    leading the Pentagon believes, that every man, woman, and child in this
    world should be able to walk the Earth in safety, that we should do
    everything we can to guarantee this right, and we can do it while
    preserving our own ability to secure the safety of our troops as they
    protect freedom around the world. These steps will make a major dent. We
    are working hard, and we intend to keep going until the job is done.
        Thank you.

    North and South Korea

        Q. Does that mean the U.S. will not be represented at Ottawa? And
    how much threat is there of a famine-stricken North Korea being able to
    invade South Korea? I mean, aren't they starving to death?
        The President. Well, first of all, we've done everything we could to
    prevent them from starving to death, you know. I've strongly supported
    humanitarian food aid to the North Koreans. But frankly, it depends on
    how you read the risk. I mean, the tension between the two Koreas is
    still there. They have a million troops there. And my elemental
    experience in human psychology--and I think a lot of our experts in
    military strategies agree that sometimes people are most dangerous when
    they feel most threatened and most helpless, most frustrated.
        So I would just say to you, the fact that they have had some food
    problems does not in any way, in my mind, mitigate the risk. And anybody
    who's ever been to the DMZ and who has ever driven from Seoul to the DMZ
    and seen how short it is and has seen a million--you know, the numbers
    of troops there, and you see our people up there in those outposts and
    how few they are--and again I say, these mines are put along the DMZ in
    clearly marked areas to make sure that no children will walk across
    them. There is no place like it in the world.
        And let me also say, this is not a unilateral American presence
    there. We are there under an armistice agreement that proceeded from the
    authority of the United Nations to conduct the Korean war in the first
    place and then to have the armistice. We are there fulfilling the
    worldwide community's responsibility to preserve the peace and safety
    there.
        And it's very easy if you're not one of those Americans in uniform
    up there, saying, ``Oh, well, this will never happen. They'll never do
    it.'' But you could move a million people into Seoul pretty quickly. And
    no one I know believes that under present circumstances, with the
    hostilities that still exist between the two countries, that we could do
    anything to stop that if we didn't have the strong deterrent of the
    landmines that are in that very carefully marked field there.

    United States Action Against Landmines

        Q. Sir, does it pain you to be in the company of Russia and China,
    Iran, Iraq--other countries that won't be signing in Ottawa?
        The President. No, we're not in their company. It pains me that for
    whatever reason--and I understand--I have a lot of sympathy with a lot
    of these countries in Ottawa, that were in Oslo. I have a lot of
    sympathy with the countries that have themselves had a lot of people
    killed from landmines. But the argument that I have tried to make to
    them is that what we really have to do--we will never solve this problem
    until we get the producers, the people that are making these landmines,
    to stop making them, stop selling them, and stop using them. That's what
    we have to do. And I believe the United States is in a better position
    to work with the rest of the world to get that done than nearly any
    other country. But I don't feel that I'm in their company at all.
        We unilaterally stopped producing, stopped selling, stopped using
    these landmines. We have unilaterally destroyed a million and a half of
    them. I imagine that no country in Oslo can make that claim. We're going
    to destroy another million and a half by 1999. I doubt that any country
    in Oslo can make that claim.
        We have done everything we could. We have even said we are going to
    unilaterally give up our self-destruct landmines that do not--as far as
    I know, have not killed a single civilian or

    [[Page 1186]]

    maimed a single child anywhere in the world. And thousands of them have
    been tested. They all self-destructed when they were supposed to, except
    one that was an hour late.
        So we are not in their company. I wish we could sign the Oslo
    agreement. I understand the difficulties of the countries involved and
    the emotional feelings surrounding this issue, but we have to have some
    time to deal with our challenge in Korea. And our antitank mines, we
    believe, are more effective than other countries' are, and there is an
    explicit exception for antitank mines that is written in such a way that
    doesn't cover ours. And I could never agree not to have antitank
    weapons, given the kinds of combat that our people are likely to be in,
    in any kind of projected scenario, over the next 20 to 30 years. I
    couldn't do it. We have to have some resolution of that. It would just
    be--that would be completely irresponsible for me to let our people be
    in combat situations without an antitank device that I thought was the
    most effective available.

    Proposed Tobacco Legislation

        Q. Will you ask Congress to stay in session in order to pass tobacco
    legislation?
        The President. Well, let me just say, what I will ask Congress to do
    is to get into this now, bring all the parties together, have hearings
    as quickly as possible, and move as quickly as possible. I think the
    most important thing is that we make it clear that this process is not
    dead. It's taken new life. It's gone on to a new step. Congress has to
    resolve all these jurisdictional questions--how many committees in the
    House, how many committees in the Senate, who does what. But I'm going
    to work with them. I hope to give new life, a new impetus to this by the
    announcement I made today, and I think we did.

    Middle East Peace Process

        Q. Sir, you have the Secretary of State with you. What do you think
    are the next steps for the Middle East peace process, and what impact
    will that have on your remarks to the U.N. on Monday?
        The President. Well, first of all, I think she did a superb job in
    the Middle East with a very difficult circumstance. And I have nothing--
    I could sit here until midnight and not give a better synopsis than the
    one line she used in the Middle East where she said, ``The good news is
    we made some small steps, but we need to take big steps.'' And that is
    my--that Secretary Albright distilled in that one phrase where I think
    we are.
        But Mr. Berger and the Secretary and all of us, we're putting our
    heads together. We're going to do everything we can to keep pushing
    this. And I have seen some encouraging signs in the last couple of days
    that all the parties realize that they have special responsibilities to
    get this thing back on track. And we're going to look at our options and
    do everything we can.
        But I also say what I've said from the beginning: If you look at all
    the good things that happened early on in my administration in the
    Middle East, the United States facilitated them but did not create them.
    In the end, the peace is for the parties there to make, and they have to
    have the vision and the courage and the strength to do it. But we're
    going to do everything we can to try to create the conditions in which
    they can succeed and to try to protect them from the downsides if they
    do take risks for peace.
        Thank you.

    Note: The President spoke at 12:30 p.m. in the Roosevelt Room at the
    White House.