Generals Mundy, Kroesen and Davis testify on landmines

Generals Carl Mundy (USMC, Ret.), Frederick Kroesen (USA,
Ret.) and Raymond Davis
(USMC, Ret.)

Before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee
3 February 1998

General Mundy:

“…Current use of anti-personnel landmines by U.S. forces is not, in my judgment, contributing
to
the genuine humanitarian tragedy arising from the use of enormous quantities of long-duration
APLs by others around the world. Let me repeat that: Our military today is not part of
the
APL problem.

“The use of such APLs by our forces, however, permits American troops to protect
vulnerable
positions from being overrun by numerically superior enemies. The force-multiplier effect
achieved by APLs is significant….

“Mr. Chairman, it is deeply troubling that the United States is being urged to take a step that
would deny us valuable military capabilities — capabilities, I reiterate, that will save the lives of
our troops and contribute materially to their success on the battlefield — when the benefits from
doing so would be, to put it charitably, so intangible….This is especially true since there is no way
to verify a ban on production and stockpiling of something as easily and inexpensively
manufactured as landmines….

“You and your Committee are to be commended for addressing the anti-personnel landmine
issue
as an urgent agenda item. As you do so, however, I urge you to reflect upon the implications that
extend far beyond the immediate issue.

“Consider, for example, the precedent that has been set by the landmine ban. As The
Nation
magazine editorialized this week:

“‘Abolition of nuclear weapons is not a pipe dream. The progress of the anti-landmine

campaign…suggest[s] the possibility of citizen activism with a global reach: one in

which grassroots activists and non-governmental groups, linked by the Internet into an

informal communication and action network, join governments on the losing end of the

weaponry game to bring worldwide pressure through the UN and other arenas.’

“I very much hope that this committee’s scrutiny of the international landmine
convention
will lead it actively to oppose the ‘worldwide pressure’ to have the United States join such a
flawed accord — or legislative efforts to accomplish the same purpose on a unilateral basis. In so
doing, you will be rendering a real service to the men and women in uniform who rely
upon
the responsible use of landmines to protect themselves and achieve the missions. You will
also be sending an indispensable signal that future efforts to disarm the United States
through unverifiable, ineffective agreements aimed at stigmatizing weapon systems will
also be rejected.”

General Kroesen:

“…I believe it very important to note that when mines are used properly they are not a major
casualty threat. They deny avenues of approach, they limit use of terrain and they cause
time-consuming delays in operations, but they cause mass casualties only when commanders
stupidly or
wantonly ignore their presence.

“I cannot today visualize a battlefield in which they will not be a factor again, and I
believe
that any deployment of an American force into a combat zone or a crisis action arena
without a supply of anti-personnel mines that can be used to help guarantee their security
would be highly irresponsible. There is no substitute system today and no guarantee that
there will be one in the near future.”

General Davis:

“In my judgment, anti-personnel landmines as used by American forces — which is to
say, in
a responsible way, employing technologies and tactics that minimize the danger of
casualties to innocent civilians and friendly fire losses to our own personnel — are not only
entirely legitimate and valuable weapons. They are weapons that are absolutely
essential to
the way we fight and our ability to do so successfully.

“Mr. Chairman, we are in danger of barking up the wrong tree with these landmine bans —
either
the multilateral version or that contained in legislation intended to impose an APL ban on our
forces unilaterally. Countries that will use anti-personnel landmines irresponsibly fall into two
categories: Either they are not going to sign on to such arrangements or they have done so with
no intention of adhering to them.

“The bans simply serve to divert the attention and resources required actually to reduce the
humanitarian problem ….

“…[Our military leaders must] giv[e] the President and the Congress their best professional
advice, even if it conflicts with policies preferred by the executive or legislative branches. In my
estimation, in this case, the Joint Chiefs of Staff gave their civilian superiors exactly the right
advice and it produced exactly the right outcome. They deserve our heartfelt thanks for their
courage and vision.

“I very much hope, Mr. Chairman, that the JCS will also be heard from on two other
issues
that concern me greatly as a career military man — the idea of denying our armed forces
the ability to exercise control of outer space in future conflicts and the proposal to ‘de-alert’
or otherwise ‘denuclearize’ our deterrent forces. These should properly be the subject of
separate hearings by this and other relevant committees of the Congress.”

— End of Excerpts —