Congress Calls for Comprehensive Review of Landmine Policy

Floor Speech

* Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, today 68 members of the United States Senate sent a bipartisan letter to President Obama calling for a comprehensive review of the U.S. policy on anti-personnel landmines, urging the Administration to identify any obstacles to joining the Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and Their Destruction. I am proud to say that 57 Members of the U.S. House of Representatives also sent a bipartisan letter to the President in support of their Senate colleagues.

* Mr. Speaker, the United States has not exported anti-personnel mines since 1992; it has not produced anti-personnel landmines since 1997; and it has not used anti-personnel landmines since 1991. During the past decade, the United States has become the world's largest contributor to humanitarian demining and rehabilitation programs for landmine survivors. I firmly believe that it's time for the United States to formally join the 158 nations of the world who are parties to Convention banning anti-personnel landmines so that we can receive the credit for which our nation is long overdue and restore our leadership in shaping the Convention in the future.

* I know that there are military questions that require review so that all sectors of our government are united in joining the Convention. I believe there are answers to these questions, answers that our NATO allies and other nations have confronted and overcome over the past decade as they complied with Convention's requirements. There is a wealth of experience and knowledge among our NATO allies, all of whom are parties to this Treaty, on adopting new military strategies and tactics, working with non-Treaty States, and identifying alternative weaponry as we abandon, once and for all, this indiscriminate, rogue weapon. I encourage our military leaders to reach out to our NATO partners and consult with their military counterparts on how they adapted and complied with the Landmine Ban Treaty.

* Mr. Speaker, I have seen first-hand the results of anti-personnel landmines on civilians and soldiers in El Salvador and Colombia. I have talked with survivors from around the globe, including men and women who proudly wear the U.S. military uniform. I have met with landmine survivors, including children, who were only working their fields or walking to school when they stepped on a landmine. They are not victims, Mr. Speaker--they are survivors and leaders in a global movement to ban this weapon from all current and future arsenals. They are clear-eyed, sophisticated individuals who are determined that no one--in uniform or civilian--shall ever be harmed again by these weapons.

* I believe, Mr. Speaker, that it is in our best national and security interests to join the Convention. Clearly, the bipartisan letter by our Senate colleagues and the supporting House letter show that the time has come for the United States to once again take up its leadership on this international issue. I ask unanimous consent to enter the House and Senate letters and related materials into the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD.

U.S. Senate,

Washington, DC, May 18, 2010.

Hon. BARACK OBAMA,

The White House,

Washington, DC.

DEAR MR. PRESIDENT: We are writing to convey our strong support for the Administration's decision to conduct a comprehensive review of United States policy on landmines. The Second Review Conference of the Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on Their Destruction, held last December in Cartagena, Colombia, makes this review particularly timely. It is also consistent with your commitment to reaffirm U.S. leadership in solving global problems and with your remarks in Oslo when you accepted the Nobel Peace Prize: "I am convinced that adhering to standards, international standards, strengthens those who do, and isolates and weakens those who don't.''

These indiscriminate weapons are triggered by the victim, and even those that are designed to self-destruct after a period of time (so-called "smart'' mines) pose a risk of being triggered by U.S. forces or civilians, such as a farmer working in the fields or a young child. It is our understanding that the United States has not exported anti-personnel mines since 1992, has not produced anti-personnel mines since 1997, and has not used anti-personnel mines since 1991. We are also proud that the United States is the world's largest contributor to humanitarian demining and rehabilitation programs for landmine survivors.

In the ten years since the Convention came into force, 158 nations have signed including the United Kingdom and other ISAF partners, as well as Iraq and Afghanistan which, like Colombia, are parties to the Convention and have suffered thousands of mine casualties. The Convention has led to a dramatic decline in the use, production, and export of anti-personnel mines.

We note that our NATO allies have addressed their force protection needs in accordance with their obligations under the Convention. We are also mindful that anti-personnel mines pose grave dangers to civilians, and that avoiding civilian casualties and the anger and resentment that result has become a key priority in building public support for our mission in Afghanistan. Finally, we are aware that antipersonnel mines in the Korean DMZ are South Korean mines, and that the U.S. has alternative munitions that are not victim-activated.

We believe the Administration's review should include consultations with the Departments of Defense and State as well as retired senior U.S. military officers and diplomats, allies such as Canada and the United Kingdom that played a key role in the negotiations on the Convention, Members of Congress, the International Committee of the Red Cross, and other experts on landmines, humanitarian law and arms control.

We are confident that through a thorough, deliberative review the Administration can identify any obstacles to joining the Convention and develop a plan to overcome them as soon as possible.
--

Congress of the United States,

Washington, DC, May 18, 2010.

Hon. BARACK OBAMA,

President of the United States, The White House, Washington, DC.

DEAR MR. PRESIDENT: We write to add our voices to our bipartisan Senate colleagues and convey our strong support for the Administration's decision to conduct a comprehensive review of United States policy on landmines. The Second Review Conference of the Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on Their Destruction, held recently in Cartagena, Colombia, makes this review particularly timely. It is also consistent with your commitment to reaffirm U.S. leadership in solving global problems and with your remarks in Oslo when you accepted the Nobel peace Prize: "I am convinced that adhering to standards, international standards, strengthens those who do, and isolates and weakens those who don't.''

These indiscriminate weapons are triggered by the victim, and even those that are designed to self-destruct after a period of time (so-called "smart'' mines), pose a risk of being triggered by U.S. forces or civilians, such as a farmer working in the fields or a young child. It is our understanding that the United States has not exported anti-personnel mines since 1992, has not produced anti-personnel mines since 1997, and has not used anti-personnel mines since 1991. We are also proud that the United States is the world's largest contributor to humanitarian demining and rehabilitation programs for landmine survivors.

In the ten years since the Convention came into force, 158 nations have signed, including the United Kingdom and other ISAF partners, as well as Iraq and Afghanistan which, like Colombia, are parties to the Convention and have suffered thousands of mine casualties. The Convention has led to a dramatic decline in the use, production, and export of anti-personnel mines.

We note that our NATO allies have addressed their force protection needs in accordance with their obligations under the Convention. We are also mindful that anti-personnel mines pose grave dangers to civilians, and that avoiding civilian casualties and the anger and resentment that result has become a key priority in building public support for our mission in Afghanistan. Finally, we are aware that anti-personnel mines in the Korean DMZ are South Korean mines, and that the U.S. has alternative munitions that are not victim-activated.

We believe the Administration's review should include consultations with the Departments of Defense and State as well as retired senior U.S. military officers and diplomats, allies such as Canada and the United Kingdom that played a key role in the negotiations on the Convention, Members of Congress, the International Committee of the Red Cross, and other experts on landmines, humanitarian law and arms control. We are confident that through a thorough, deliberative process the Administration can identify any obstacles to joining the Convention and develop a plan to overcome them as soon as possible.

We look forward to hearing from you on plans for the review.

--

[From the United States Campaign to Ban Landmines, May 18, 2010]

SENATORS AND REPRESENTATIVES SUPPORT BAN ON LANDMINES: LETTERS SENT TO PRESIDENT OBAMA

Washington, DC.--A letter signed by 68 senators, asking the administration to join the 1997 Landmine Ban Treaty, was delivered to President Obama on Tuesday. The signers include 10 Republicans and two Independents and constitute more than the two-thirds of the Senate needed to ratify a treaty.

Sen. Patrick Leahy (VT-D) and Sen. George Voinovich (OH-R) circulated the Senate letter, and a similar letter in support of the Senate initiative, circulated by Rep. James McGovern (MA-D) and Rep. Darrell Issa (CA-R) in the House of Representatives, was also delivered to President Obama. The existence of the letters was made public on May 8, but the final versions, with all signatures, was delivered Tuesday.

In describing the use of antipersonnel landmines, Sen. Patrick Leahy said, "The idea that a modern military like ours would be using indiscriminate, victim-activated weapons today is hard to reconcile with our current military objectives, particularly when you consider that the two countries (Iraq and Afghanistan) where our troops are fighting are parties to the treaty and the members of the coalition that we are leading in Afghanistan are also parties to the treaty.''

The Administration launched a review of U.S. landmine policy late last year, and in the letters the legislators say that they are "confident that through a thorough, deliberative review the Administration can identify any obstacles to joining the Convention and develop a plan to overcome them as soon as possible.''

Rep. James McGovern, who circulated the letter in the House, said, "A thorough review will show that the U.S. can play an even greater role in the world on landmines by formally joining the ban. The Senate letter demonstrates the support is there.''

The Congressional letters follow a letter sent to President Obama on March 22 by leaders from 65 national nongovernmental organizations that also urge the U.S. to relinquish antipersonnel landmines and join the 1997 Mine Ban Treaty without delay.

"The strong support these letters have received shows that Congress is firmly behind accession to the Mine Ban Treaty,'' said Zach Hudson, the coordinator of the U.S. Campaign to Ban Landmines (USCBL). "The U.S. has not used these barbaric weapons in 19 years. With these letters, Congress adds its voice to that of the American people in calling on our government to join our NATO allies--and all of the 158 nations that have joined this treaty--and eliminate the use of landmines once and for all.''

--

[From the Washington Post, May 8, 2010]

SENATE PUSHES OBAMA ADMINISTRATION TO SIGN TREATY BANNING LAND MINES
(By Craig Whitlock and Glenn Kessler)

More than two-thirds of the Senate is urging the Obama administration to consider signing an international treaty that bans land mines, reviving a dormant campaign from the 1990s that left the United States divided from its closest allies.

Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.) said in an interview Friday that 68 senators had signed a letter to President Obama to support a "comprehensive review'' of U.S. policy on land mines. The letter is an indication that there are enough votes in the Senate to ratify the treaty--at least 67 would be required--if Obama signs the measure, which has languished in Washington for a decade.

"We want to show we have enough people to ratify a treaty,'' Leahy said. "I think there's an excellent opportunity that we'll finally do it.''

The pressure from Congress leaves the White House in an awkward position as it tries to navigate between Obama's desire to work closely with allies on security issues such as nuclear disarmament, while at the same time listening to advisers at the Pentagon, many of whom are leery of such campaigns.

The mine ban treaty was the result of a grass-roots movement championed by celebrities, including Princess Diana, and ordinary citizens such as Jody Williams, a Vermont native who won the 1997 Nobel Peace Prize for her role as founding coordinator of the International Campaign to Ban Land Mines. About 5,000 people a year--the majority of them civilians--are killed or maimed by mines scattered across 70 countries.

Neither President Bill Clinton nor President George W. Bush signed the treaty, which was negotiated in 1997 and took effect in 1999. Their rejections left the United States at odds with more than 150 countries that embraced the accord, including every member of NATO.

The treaty prohibits the manufacture, trade and stockpiling of land mines. The United States has not used antipersonnel mines since the Persian Gulf War in 1991 and stopped producing them in 1997, but the military keeps about 10 million of them in reserve.

In November, State Department spokesman Ian Kelly announced that the Obama administration had decided against signing the treaty, saying, "We would not be able to meet our national defense needs nor our security commitments to our friends and allies.'' But after Leahy and human-rights groups condemned the decision, the State Department said it would revisit the issue and conduct a broader policy review.

White House and State Department spokesmen emphasized Friday that the administration is in the midst of a comprehensive review, cutting across all affected agencies, that will not be completed for some months. But two senior U.S. officials speaking on the condition of anonymity indicated that the administration is actively looking for ways to come into compliance with the treaty without endangering national security needs.

"We are asking that if you come into compliance, what would be the costs and the benefits--and if there are costs, how can they be addressed in other ways,'' one senior official said.

The official described the administration's review as "a herculean effort'' intended to "cut through reflexive reactions'' to the issue of eliminating land mines from the Pentagon's arsenal.

Officials also said they welcomed the indication of bipartisan support represented by the Leahy letter.

Another senior U.S. official, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations, said the administration is looking at what new technologies could be used to bring the United States into compliance with the treaty while also allowing it to respond to threats such as North Korea. Some military officials want to maintain the U.S. stockpile in case it is needed to slow an invasion of South Korea by the North. About 30,000 U.S. forces are stationed in the South.

The Pentagon declined to say whether it would support the treaty, citing the Obama administration's review. "It would be premature at this time to provide any statement until the review is complete,'' said Geoff Morrell, the Pentagon press secretary.

Leahy, who has fought for a land-mine ban for many years, said there was bipartisan support in Congress for ratifying the treaty. Ten Republicans have signed the letter to Obama, which Leahy said will be delivered to the White House next week. The lead Republican co-sponsor is Sen. George V. Voinovich (Ohio), Leahy aides said.

In November, Leahy criticized the Obama administration's initial decision to reject the treaty as ``a default of U.S. leadership.'' Since then, he said, White House and State Department officials have left him with the impression that they are seriously considering adopting the treaty, especially if he can help deliver the votes in a Senate that is usually sharply divided along partisan lines.

"It's been a much more positive response than I've seen in a long, long time,'' Leahy said of his talks with administration officials.

Leahy noted that Obama has pushed for a global reduction in nuclear arms; ignoring land mines, he added, could undercut U.S. diplomacy on that front. "If we want to keep the high moral ground, then we have to do it,'' he said.

Although Clinton did not sign the international mine ban, he ordered the Pentagon in 1998 to develop alternatives to antipersonnel mines, with the goal of giving them up completely by 2006.

In 2004, in response to objections from the Pentagon, Bush adopted a different policy that permits the U.S. military to use sophisticated mines that are designed to self-destruct within a fixed number of days. The idea was to reduce civilian casualties from unexploded mines left on the battlefield.

At the same time, Bush set a deadline of 2010 for the U.S. military to end the use of antipersonnel or anti-vehicle mines that lack timers. Obama administration officials have said that they are on track to meet that deadline this year.

Neither China nor Russia has ratified the international mine ban treaty. Human rights groups say there is little pressure for them to do so as long as the United States doesn't sign.

Source