The Center for Defense Information
Center for Defense Information
1779 Massachusetts Ave., NW * Washington, DC 20036
(202)332-0600 * Fax (202)462-4559 * www.cdi.org
| August 10, 2000 |
| August 10, 2000 |
Exporting American "Diplomacy"
Rachel Stohl, Senior Analyst, rstohl@cdi.org
The Clinton Administration announced this week that the United States plans to send American soldiers to train peacekeeping forces in West Africa. Hundreds of American soldiers will join the 40 others already in Nigeria later this month "to train and equip West African battalions that will then be dispatched to Sierra Leone to bolster beleaguered government troops and United Nations peacekeepers." The troops will be Special Forces out of Fort Bragg, North Carolina.
According to reports, "Americans will train and equip five Nigerian battalions of 800 soldiers each, one battalion from Ghana and one from a French-speaking West African country, possibly Mali or Senegal." Under Secretary of State Thomas Pickering said, "Our goal is to return the freely elected government to full control of the territory of Sierra Leone and to get the guerillas demobilized."
Sierra Leone could definitely use the presence of skilled peacekeepers. The country has been mired in a decade long civil war that remains brutal and devastating. Last year, the United States helped broker the Lome Peace Accords, which allowed the rebel force, the Revolutionary United Front (RUF), to enter into the Sierra Leonean government. The Accords also provided for amnesty for the RUF's leader, Foday Sankoh and his troops, which had participated in gross human rights abuses during the conflict, including chopping the limbs off innocent civilians. Many in the international community were displeased with the Accord's contents and were unsatisfied with the resulting government initiatives. When Nigerian peacekeepers withdrew from Sierra Leone in May, RUF troops took 500 remaining UN peacekeepers hostage and asserted control over regions of the country, in particular those in which lucrative diamond mines are located.
The U.S. decision to provide military training to those now tasked with restoring peace in Sierra Leone was made in the wake of continued criticism by Congress, human rights and other non-governmental organizations, and a reported "behind closed doors" discussion with the British government, who has maintained that they are being "left alone in Sierra Leone." In addition, the United States had recently refused a UN request to help the peacekeeping force planned for Sierra Leone and, according to news reports, "tried to charge expensive rates for the use of Pentagon aircraft to ferry soldiers of other nations to Sierra Leone," angering many countries in the process. The decision also comes as President Clinton plans his trip to Nigeria later this month. According to a New York Times report, "Administration officials said that Mr. Clinton needed something substantial to announce once he got there and the president was keen to bolster the new civilian leader of Nigeria Olusegun Obasanjo, as well as try and turn the tide in Sierra Leone."
Beyond West Africa, U.S. Special Forces are also providing training in Colombia. Last week 83 Special Forces trainers arrived in Colombia to begin training Colombia's second anti-narcotics military battalion. The training is part of the $1.3 billion aid package recently approved by Congress to help Colombia support new democracy and anti-drug programs. The aid package also includes military hardware including Blackhawk helicopters.
The training of both Nigerians and Colombians has raised concerns among many in the human rights community. According to a U.S. Law, known as the Leahy Law, the United States must "make every reasonable effort" to ensure that troops receiving U.S. military aid and training are not guilty of human rights abuses. Critics of both the West African and Colombian programs believe that the troops may not have been vetted completely.
These two training missions are not unique. For the most part, the United States exports its brand of diplomacy, rather than participating in multilateral and international initiatives. The U.S. spends tens of millions dollars every year training foreign militaries, including programs within and outside the United States Further, the United States remains the world's number one arms exporter, often arming both sides of a tense situation (such as Greece and Turkey, Israel and Egypt) to maintain a balanced level of technology and power.
Exporting U.S. military know-how is not a replacement for peace-building and peacekeeping. The United States should also support and fund programs that assist with the demobilization of ex-combatants, their reintegration into society, and the destruction of their destabilizing weapons. At the same time, programs that rebuild the society's infrastructure, judicial and legal systems, as well as those that spur development and economic recovery cannot be overlooked. For instance, the United States should live up to its UN obligations and pay its share of peacekeeping and UN dues. Training soldiers to "enforce" the peace, without addressing the roots of the conflict and the unique needs of a particular country will not lead to success. The United States would do well to support indigenous programs, enlisting the help of the citizens on the ground, that facilitate a country's recovery and promote alternatives to violence and conflict. As long as the United States' contribution to peacekeeping and peace-building operations remains focused on providing weapons and training, sustained peace and real progress will remain elusive.
GAO: U.S. Forces Vulnerable to Terrorist Attacks
Christopher Hellman, Senior Analyst, chellman@cdi.org
A report released last month by the General Accounting Office (GAO) shows that despite improved security measures at U.S. overseas military bases in recent years, U.S. personnel remain vulnerable to terrorist attacks.
In the wake of the 1996 bombing at the Khobar Towers military complex in Saudi Arabia, and an earlier 1995 bombing in Riyadh, which together claimed 24 American lives, protecting U.S. personnel and dependents stationed overseas was made a high priority by the Defense Department. A 1997 GAO report found that the Pentagon lacked a comprehensive and consistent approach to antiterrorism.
The most recent study by the GAO, the results of which were released last month, found that "overall, military forces stationed overseas are better protected today than they were 3 years ago." Reasons for the improvements included the fact that the Defense Department had developed DoD-wide standards for new construction that include antiterrorism/force protection (AT/FP) measures, the creation of permanent AT/PF offices and staffs for geographic commands, and more frequent assessments of an installation's vulnerabilities to terrorist attacks based on a defined set of criteria.
Yet although the Defense Department continues to view antiterrorism programs as one of their highest priorities, these programs are routinely underfunded. The GAO study found that "some overseas service commands have repeatedly received less than 50 percent of the money the commands believe they require to correct or mitigate vulnerabilities [to terrorist attacks.]" The GAO report also stated that "funding for antiterrorism protection....will likely continue to be significantly less than what ...commanders have determined they require." According to GAO, the amount the services planned to spend on AT/FP in Fiscal Year 2001 was $133 million less than the amount requested by the various commands, meeting only 51% of the commands' requirements.
The report also pointed out that while DoD is required to provide to Congress information on AT/FP funding as part of its budget, it is not required to provide information on program requirements that are unfunded, and therefore "Congress does not have an accurate picture of the extent of the risk that U.S. forces face from terrorism."
Despite recent improvements, the GAO study found that a number of problems, both physical and procedural, remain. Physical problems included poor controls over access to installations -- some facilities had no gates or other ways of blocking unauthorized vehicles from entering -- and poorly maintained perimeter fences. One base visited by the GAO had gaps cut in the fencing to create shortcuts, while others had "host nation housing" leaning against the perimeter walls, which in some cases had holes cut through them for drainage pipes. Other physical problems included a lack of warning systems and shortage of security forces.
Procedural shortfalls included poor AT/FP planning -- a number of installations had not yet completed their installation plans nearly three years after the Defense Department issued the requirement. Some of the installations that had developed plans failed to exercise them as required by DoD.
For more information, see "Combating Terrorism: Action Taken but Considerable Risks Remain for Forces Overseas," GAO report NSIAD-00-181, July 19, 2000.
U.S. Nuclear Sites May be Toxic Forever -- According to a report by the National Academy of Scientists, many of the sites where the United States built its nuclear weapons will never be clean enough to allow public access to the land, and the plan for guarding sites which are permanently contaminated is inadequate. "Complete elimination of unacceptable risks to humans and the environment will not be achieved, now or in the foreseeable future," said the report. Hazardous wastes at some sites will cause risks "for tens or even hundreds of thousands of years."
U.S. Army Divisions Ready -- General Henry H. Shelton, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, responding to questions at a public forum last week, stated that all ten of the Army's active divisions were fully combat ready. The question came after a statement last week by Governor George W. Bush at the Republican National Convention. Gov. Bush said, as part of his speech accepting the GOP's nomination, that "If called on by the commander-in-chief today, two entire divisions of the Army would have to report, 'Not ready for duty, sir.'"
Landmines to be Removed in DMZ -- Landmines in South Korea's Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) will be removed to facilitate the reconnecting of a railroad between Seoul in South Korea and Shinuiju in North Korea. The mine removal is scheduled to begin in mid-September. South Korea plans to ask U.S. troops stationed in Korea to assist with the mine removal. There are an estimated one million mines in the DMZ, 100,000 of which are in the area needed for the railroad. The majority of the mines are U.S. M-14 anti-personnel mines and M-15 anti-tank mines. It is unclear how many mines will need to be removed in the North to make way for the railroad.
Opposition Divided Going in to Yugoslav Elections -- Opposition parties bidding to topple the regime of Slobodan Milosevic failed to field a single candidate for the September 24 elections. The largest opposition party, the Serbian Renewal Movement, broke with the rest of opposition and nominated its own candidate. The ruling party in Montenegro, junior partner in the Yugoslav federation, announced it will not participate in the elections. The boycott came in response to constitutional changes that weakened Montenegro's influence in the country's parliament. Polls show an opposition candidate would prevail over Milosevic if the elections were fair and if opposition was united.
Quotation of the Week -- "...We believe that the United States has the military force needed to protect the national interest and to sustain the U.S. position as the world's superpower. We also believe that this force superiority can be sustained at current budget levels (but to do so will take careful management by the Defense Department and uncommon discipline by Congress)." -- Former Secretary of Defense William J. Perry and former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General John M. Shalikashvili, USA (Ret.), "The U.S. Military: Still the Best by Far," The Washington Post, August 10, 2000.
This week on America's Defense Monitor: "Lessons of Kosovo: The Limits
of Air Power"
The United States and its NATO allies were determined to stop Serbian aggression against ethnic Albanians in the province of Kosovo, but decided to do so by relying exclusively on air power. Did NATO's bombs and missiles stop ethnic cleansing? How effective were NATO warplanes in attacking Serb forces? An eye-opening look at the air war in Kosovo.
Airs in Washington, DC on Sunday, August 13 at 10:30 a.m. on Channel 32.
Airs in NYC on Friday, August 18 on Channel 25 at 7:30 p.m., and on
Saturday, August 19 at 7:00 a.m. on Channel 13.
Visit our web site for transcripts, CDI resources, RealVideo, and related links.
Regular Price: $39 each
INTERNET PRICE: $29
Order at 800-CDI-3334, or on the web.
Coming Soon! CDI's Issue Brief "National Missile Defense: What Does It
All Mean?"
As the debate in the United States on the planned deployment of the national missile defense (NMD) system heats up, the Center for Defense Information (CDI) is releasing a timely Issue Brief, "National Missile Defense: What Does It All Mean?" on this important national security issue.
The Issue Brief is designed to offer unbiased, in-depth, and up-to-date information on all aspects of the NMD debate to citizens, educators and decision-makers nationwide. Missile defense has gained additional prominence as one of the most divisive and defining issues in this year's presidential campaign. The 40-48 page document scheduled for release in August 2000, will include the following:
In addition to the print version, CDI is preparing a web site with further information on the National Missile Defense program. Each section in the print version will be updated on the web, on an as-needed basis, to keep the document current.
Readers of the Issue Brief will further benefit from access to the latest CDI documentary on missile defense, "Star Wars: New Hope or Phantom Menace?" This thirty-minute film contains interviews and testimonies by the nation's foremost experts on missile defense. A transcript of the film is available on the Web. The Issue Brief will be available August 31, 2000.
TO ORDER...
Please send a check for $5 to the Center for Defense Information, 1779 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Suite 615, Washington, DC 20036. Please write "Issue Brief" on the check. For more information, please e-mail Tomas Valasek.