Nobel Committee Notwithstanding, An Effective, Global Ban On Anti-personnel Landmines Remains An Infeasible Unreality
(Washington, D.C.): The Norwegian
Nobel Committee justified its decision to
award the 1997 Nobel Peace Prize to the
International Campaign to Ban Landmines
(ICBL) and its coordinator, Jody
Williams, on two, untenable grounds:
First, it declared that the ICBL was
responsible for starting a process that,
“in the space of a few years,
changed a ban on anti-personnel mines
from a vision to a feasible reality.”
And second, the Committee hopes that,
“as a model for similar
processes in the future, [this ban]
could prove of decisive importance to the
international effort for disarmament and
peace.”
As the Center has repeatedly noted in
recent months,(1)
an international ban on items as easily
produced and transported and as widely
deployed around the world as
anti-personnel landmines (APLs) is doomed
to be unverifiable, unenforceable
and ineffective. These tests
have traditionally been applied to arms
control initiatives and should not now be
discarded in favor of utopian delusions
that “stigmatizing” weapons
will make them go away — at least
from the arsenals of America’s present or
potential adversaries.
The Best Professional
Military Advice
Those, like the International Campaign
to Ban Landmines, who demand that the
President ignore the counsel of his
military advisors, are evidently
untroubled by this prospect. That counsel
is compelling, however, if one is
responsible for the lives of American
service personnel. For example, as was
stated in an extraordinary
“64-star” letter signed in July
1997 by every member of the Joint Chiefs
of Staff and every regional
Commander-in-Chief (CINCs)(2),
ill-conceived bans on
anti-personnel landmines would
“unnecessarily endanger U.S.
military forces and significantly
restrict the ability to conduct combat
operations successfully.”
The letter goes on to say:
“Until the United States has
a capable replacement for
self-destructing APL, maximum
flexibility and warfighting
capability for American combat
commanders must be preserved. The
lives of our sons and daughters
should be given the highest
priority when deciding whether or
not to ban unilaterally the use
of self-destructing APLs.”
(Emphasis added.)
The strong cautionary note sounded by
these active duty military leaders was
subsequently echoed by 24 of their most
distinguished former colleagues — highly
decorated four-star generals(3)
with first-hand experience in command of
ground combat operations and an intimate
familiarity with the contribution APLs
make to such operations. In an open
letter to the President dated 21 July
1997, these generals wrote:
“In our
experience…responsible
[American] use of APLs is not
only consistent with the Nation’s
humanitarian responsibilities; it
is indispensable to the safety of
our troops in many combat and
peacekeeping situations….Mr.
President, we have fought our
Nation’s wars and our battlefield
experience causes us to urge you
to resist all efforts to impose a
moratorium on the future use of
self-destructing anti-personnel
landmines by combat forces of the
United States.”(4)
Doing The Right Thing By
Heeding Sound Advice
To his credit, President Clinton last month
decided — after taking aboard the
informed and authoritative advice of such
military leaders, both past and present
— to forgo U.S. involvement in a ban
that was clearly incompatible with the
national security. In explaining his
decision on 17 September, President
Clinton rightly said: “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….There is a line
that I simply cannot cross, and that line
is the safety and security of our men and
women in uniform.”
In the wake of the Nobel Committee’s
action today, twelve among the Nation’s
most respected four-star ground combat
commanders released another letter to the
President, commending him for his
previous decision and encouraging him to
resist the sort of pressure to reverse
course that was predictable even before
the Peace Prize was awarded. This letter
(see the
attached) was signed by: a former
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (Gen.
John W. Vessey); two former
Commandants of the Marine Corps (Gen.
Carl E. Mundy and Gen. Louis H. Wilson);
a former Chief of Staff of the Army (Gen.
Gordon R. Sullivan); two
recipients of the Congressional Medal of
Honor, (Gen. Wilson and Gen. Gen.
Raymond G. Davis, former
Assistant Marine Corps Commandant); two
service vice chiefs of staff (the
Marine’s General Davis and
General Walter E. Boomer); and
six generals who retired from posts as
the Commanders-in-Chief of major regional
or Army commands (Generals
Michael S. Davison, David M. Maddox,
Glenn K. Otis, Crosbie E. Saint, Donn A.
Starry and Louis C. Wagner, Jr.)
and concluded:
“We commend you and the
leaders of today’s American
military for concluding that the
treaty signed in Oslo did not
meet this basic test. You
will have our support in holding
the line against renewed efforts
by proponents of the present
treaty and other, similarly
defective initiatives that would
impinge upon the survivability
and mission effectiveness of our
men and women in uniform —
either through unilateral or
multilateral action.”
With these words, notice has been
served that what is at stake is not just
preventing a dangerous anti-personnel
landmine ban from being foisted on the
U.S. military. Perhaps even more
important is rejecting the creation of
precisely the sort of precedent the Nobel
Committee had in mind by awarding its
Peace Prize to “a model for similar
processes in the future.”(5)
– 30 –
1. For example,
see the following Center products: The
Battle Is Joined: Defense Department,
Congressional Opposition Mounts To
Fatuous Landmine Ban (
July 1997); New Chairman of
the Joint Chiefs of Staff Draws Line in
the Sand: No Exceptions, No Military
‘Chop’ on Landmine Ban (
September 1997); and Too
Clever By Half: Bob Bell’s Sophistry Must
Not Be Allowed To Jeopardize U.S.
Military’s Ability To Use Landmines
(No. 97-D 142,
24 September 1997).
2. See the Center’s
Decision Brief entitled Celestial
Navigation: Pentagon’s Extraordinary
’64-Star’ Letter Shows Why the U.S.
Cannot Agree to Ban All Landmines
(No. 97-D 97,
14 July 1997).
3. The signatories
on this letter include: a former Chairman
of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (Gen.
John W. Vessey), a former
Supreme Allied Commander, Europe — and
Secretary of State (Gen.
Alexander M. Haig, Jr.); six
former Commandants of the Marine Corps (Gens.
Leonard F. Chapman, Jr., Louis H. Wilson,
Robert H. Barrow, P.X. Kelley, Alfred M.
Gray and Carl E. Mundy),
two former Chiefs of Staff of the Army (Gen.
William C. Westmoreland and Gordon
R. Sullivan); two recipients of
the Congressional Medal of Honor, (Gen.
Wilson and Gen. Raymond
G. Davis, former Assistant
Marine Corps Commandant); four service
vice chiefs of staff (the Army’s Gen.
Robert W. RisCassi and the
Marines’ Generals Davis, Walter
E. Boomer and Joseph J.
Went); and ten generals who
retired from posts as the
Commanders-in-Chief of major regional or
Army commands (Generals George B.
Crist, Michael S. Davison, John W. Foss,
Frederick J. Kroesen, Gary E. Luck, David
M. Maddox, Glenn K. Otis, Crosbie E.
Saint, Donn A. Starry and Louis
C. Wagner, Jr.
4. See the
Center’s Press Release entitled
Many of the Nation’s Most
Respected Military Leaders Join Forces to
Oppose Bans on Use of Self-Destructing
Landmines (
July 1997).
5. Other
initiatives include the abolition of
anti-tank mines, depleted uranium rounds,
small caliber ammunition, fuel-air
explosives, directed energy weapons,
naval mines, non-lethal weapons and,
ultimately, nuclear weapons.
- LIVE NOW – Weaponization of US Government Symposium - April 9, 2024
- CSP author of “Big Intel” is American Thought Leaders guest on Epoch TV - February 23, 2024
- Four weeks after release, Big Intel remains a #1 Amazon bestseller - February 13, 2024