Table Of Content

S. Hrg. 104-301 PEACE OPERATIONS Y 4, AR 5/3: S. HRG. 104-301 Peace DperationSi S.Hrg. 101-30L 1... BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON AIRLAND FORCES OF THE COMMITTEE ON AKMED SERVICES UNITED STATES SENATE ONE HUNDRED FOURTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION MAY 3, 1995 Printed for the use of the Committee on Armed Services U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 9S-352CC WASHINGTON : 1996 ForsalebytheU.S.GovernmentPrintingOffice SuperintendentofDocuments,CongressionalSalesOffice,Washington,DC 20402 ISBN 0-16-052209-9 nr> oco 1-1 nc _ 1 /*^1^ t \ \ S. Hrg. 104-301 PEACE OPERATIONS Y 4. AR 5/3: S, HRG, 104-301 Peace Qperations, S.Hrg. 104-301> 1... BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON AIRLAND FORCES OF THE COMMITTEE ON AKMED SERVICES UNITED STATES SENATE ONE HUNDRED FOURTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION MAY 3, 1995 Printed for the use of the Committee on Armed Services U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 93-352CC WASHINGTON : 1996 ForsalebytheU.S.GovernmentPrintingOffice SuperintendentofDocuments,CongressionalSalesOffice,Washington,DC 20402 ISBN 0-16-052209-9 oo oco r\ ^ QC COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES STROM THURMOND, South Carolina, Chairman JOHN W. WARNER, Virginia SAM NUNN, Georgia WILLIAM S. COHEN, Maine J. JAMES EXON, Nebraska JOHN MCCAIN, Arizona CARL LEVIN, Michigan TRENT LOTT, Mississippi EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts DAN COATS, Indiana JEFF BINGAMAN, New Mexico BOB SMITH, New Hampshire JOHN GLENN, Ohio DIRK KEMPTHORNE, Idaho ROBERT C. BYRD, West Virginia KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas CHARLES S. ROBB, Virginia JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut RICK SANTORUM, Pennsylvania RICHARD H. BRYAN, Nevada Richard L. Reynard, Staff"Director ARNOLD L. PUNARO, StaffDirectorfor the Minority Subcommittee on AirLand Forces JOHN W. WARNER, Virginia, Chairman WILLIAM S. COHEN, Maine CARL LEVIN, Michigan DAN COATS, Indiana J. JAMES EXON, Nebraska DIRK KEMPTHORNE, Idaho JOHN GLENN, Ohio KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas ROBERT C. BYRD, West Virginia JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut RICK SANTORUM, Pennsylvania RICHARD H. BRYAN, Nevada (II) CONTENTS CHRONOLOGICAL LIST OF WITNESSES May 3, 1995 Page Warner, Hon. Edward L., Ill, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Strategy andRequirements 4 Claric, Lt. Gen. Wesley K., U.S. Army, Director for Strategic Plans and Policy(J-5), Office oftheJoint Chiefs ofStaff 17 Kirkpatrick, Ambassador Jeane, Senior Fellow, American Enterprise Insti- tute 28 Dean, AmbassadorJonathan, Adviser on International Security Issues, Union ofConcernedScientists 33 Bolton, Hon.John R., President, National PolicyForum 41 Hoar, Gen.Joseph P., Retired, U.S. Marine Corps 57 (III) — PEACE OPERATIONS WEDNESDAY, MAY 3, 1995 U.S. Senate, Subcommittee on AirLand Forces, Committee on Armed Services, Washington, DC. The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:35 p.m., in room SR-222, Russell Senate Office Building, Senator John Warner (chairman ofthe subcommittee) presiding. Committee members present: Senators Warner, Levin, and Nunn. Committee staff members present: Richard L. Reynard, staff director; Donald A. Deline, general counsel; and Christine'K. Cimko, press secretary. Professional staff members present: Romie L. Brownlee, Jona- than L. Etherton, John H. Miller, and Thomas G. Moore. Minority staffmembers present: Arnold L. Punaro, minority staff director; Richard C. DeBobes, counsel; and John W. Douglass, professional staffmember. Staff assistants present: Pamela L. Farrell, Shelley G. Lauffer, and Jason Rossbach. Committee members' assistants present: Grayson F. Winterling and Judith A. Ansley, assistants to Senator Warner; Pamela G.D. Sellars and Richard F. Schwab, assistants to Senator Coats; Patri- cia L. Stolnacker, assistant to Senator Santorum; Andrew W. John- son, assistant to Senator Exon; David A. Lewis, assistant to Sen- ator Levin; Patricia J. Buckhelt, assistant to Senator Glenn; and John F. Lilley, assistant to Senator Lieberman. OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR JOHN WARNER, CHAIRMAN Senator Warner. The subcommittee will now come to order. First, the ranking member and I regret last week's cancellation of the scheduled he—aring, but those of us who were able to attend and I did attend the funeral ofSenator Stennis were privileged to do so on behalf of our country and on behalfof the Congress ofthe United States. He was, without question, a figure that will be long revered and respected by this institution, and, indeed, the country. It brought back for me the best of memories. If I could just charac- terize that day in the light of the John Stennis that I had known and admired so much, he was a man who was very strong-willed, very knowledgeable, very decisive, but very simple in his tastes. The funeral took place in an open field, in a simple family grave- yard, with a very short service by an Episcopal minister, and com- (1) ments by his son. Twenty-some Senators attended, a number of Members ofthe House ofRepresentatives, and it was done, I think, exactly the way he would have wanted it. I am deeply grateful for all the things he did for me when I first joined this committee, and, indeed, before that when I was Sec- retary of the Navy, and came over and testified for him many times. So he holds forth an example for all of us to try and emu- late. Along with my good friend here, we both respect those early days when we joined here many years ago with him. Today, we have this very important hearing. It is following yes- terdays hearing, where we had the new Chief of the Staff of the U.S. Army, General Reimer, and the new Commandant of the Ma- rine Corps, General Krulak. During the course of our hearings, we talked about peacekeeping missions and how they are becoming a larger and larger role for the U.S. military, and, indeed, for other militaries. Therefore, we have to begin to have a better understanding of what is involved, the training required, and the foundation has to be laid for the President of the United States and other officials of authority to provide a measure of understanding for the American public, before those troops are sent on such missions. I mean in my earlier life, there was great clarity, certainly, no doubt in World War II, in what we were doing. Less so in Korea, and then, of course, in Vietnam, the answers nave to be defined. But certainly in World War II, there was the total commitment of this Nat—ion. In subsequent operations, I am not—so sure that Presidents this one, and, indeed, the predecessors have made the strong case to the extent the public needs to be educated. How well I remember the Gulf operation. We had in place a half million U.S. troops, together with a coalition offorces, yet the Sen- ate felt it necessary, and, indeed, it was, to debate for some 3 days the issue of whether or not the Congress of the United States should go on record as authorizing the President to utilize force in the prosecution of the missions of the allied forces in the Gulf. It was in the very hour ofvote at which that was decided. Subsequent operations, particularly that in Somalia, we saw the American public turn very clearly against it once there were cas- ualties involved. That was followed by a Congress that became quite hostile, and challenged in many respects the right ofthe President of the Unit- ed States, in his constitutional role, to make the determination as to when the troops should be withdrawn. Again, that was a heated battle here in the Senate, and a very narrow margin of votes. So our challenge is great in trying to get a much clearer understanding ofthese types ofoperations. The record in the United Nations over the years has been quite p;ood in terms ofth—e more conventional pe—acekeeping operation, but if that transitions and it can in a flash from just peacekeeping to peacemaking, requiring the use of force, then we have to pull back to educate the public in order to carry forward and finish that mission. We have two distinguished panels today. Secretary Warner, we thank you for breaking off a vacation to come back. General Clark, we welcome you again. I am sure by now you have become an ex- pert. General Zinni, you have a very fine record of having per- formed a mission here, the extraction of the last U.N. forces from Somalia, So your firsthand views ofthat operation will be very ben- eficial. Then we will have a second panel, and I will announce that then. I defer now to my distinguished colleague, the ranking minority member. Senator Levin. Senator Levin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding these hearings, and for the care, and the thoughtfulness, and the thor- oughness with which you proceeded to an issue as complicated and as important, and really new, still, as this one is. The multinational peace enforcement area is one that is being created kind ofin front ofour eyes. I believe we must proceed, or else we will be leaving ourselves two options which sometimes are unacceptable, which is to act unilaterally, or to do nothing. Or we can create a third option, which is to act in a multinational way, which may be the best way of ap- proaching it. But we cannot just proceed down this third option road without the greatest of care, the greatest of understanding, and the greatest ofpreparation. I want to thank you for your exploration of this issue at this hearing, and, again, the approach that you bring to it, which is typ- ical of you, which is to be thorough and objective about an issue. We are all in your debt for that. I want to join the chairman, also, in his words about John Sten- nis. I also was privileged to attend that funeral, which inconven- ienced some witnesses, but which was very important to us person- ally, and as an institution, because John Stennis was a major part of this institution. He had a big impact on my life when I first got here, as the kind of Senator which I think should be emulated, one who is inherently decent, fair, and democratic, with a small "D." He always made time to hear other points ofview, and was always determined that every point of view would be heard, and tried never to cut off any point of view. He was just a very kind and a very wonderful man. So he was an important part of my life, as he was of the chairman's, and it was important that we went to that funeral. The one thing that the chairman mentioned was the funeral service at the field, instead of in a church or in a funeral home. I was also struck by John Stennis's home; although, we did not have a chance, or at least I did not, to actually go into it. I was struck by the simplicity of his home, right there on the main road, going through that small town, just right there on the side of the road, a very unpretentious home in a small town. The whole event was very moving, indeed. So I just want to join the chairman in, again, thanking our witnesses for their understanding, and apologize for the inconven- iences that they may have endured as a result of our doing some- thing which was important to us. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Senator Warner. Thank you. Senator Levin. Indeed, we have been together these 17 years. It has been a team. We sort ofjust quietly shift positions from chairman to rank- — ing member. I think the position may remain a little longer this time. [Laughter.] Senator Levin. Sometimes not so quietly. Senator Warner. But we have been a team, and I have the greatest respect for all the participation you do. I know there is no one that studies an issue with greater depth and intensity than Senator Levin. It has been a marvelous experience for us to learn. Senator Nunn was there at that funeral. Senator Lott was also there. I mention that only for the leadership. Senator Thurmond had planned to attend, but a case ofthe very severe flu that he had contractedjust prevented his attendance. Thank you, I say to our panel ofwitnesses, and those assembled. If you will now proceed. Secretary Warner, we will put your entire statement and that of the other members of the panel into the record. Knowing how well you have prepared that, and your depth of knowledge, you can articulate it extemporaneously, I am quite sure. STATEMENT OF HON. EDWARD L. WARNER, III, ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR STRATEGY AND REQUIRE- MENTS Mr. Warner. Thank you very much, Senator Warner, Senator Levin. It is always a privilege to appear before you two gentlemen and your colleagues to discuss various issues of defense policy. The issue we have today is one of the most controversial we face these days: the issues of peacekeeping. But —we very much look forward General Clark, General Zinni, and I to a dialogue with you on these matters. As the Senator said, I have a more complete statement for the record. Let me make some opening comments then turn it over to General Clark, and then we will be available for your discussion. General Zinni does not have an opening statement, but he would be more than happy to assist us by providing firsthand perspective on the conduct ofpeace operations in this difficult era. Let me say at the outset that peace operations, of course, are no substitute for the ability of U.S. military forces acting unilaterally, or more frequently, in concert with others, to directly defend Amer- ican interests throughout the world. The United States still faces a multitude of threats in the post- Cold War era, for which we must retain the classic military options to manage crises, to deter conflict, or to defeat adversaries, should that be necessary. Peace operations, of course, are not a substitute for our alliances either. The United States continues to maintain and strengthen alliances around the world, such as our NATO alliance, and they remain the bedrock of our national security thinking and planning in this post-Cold War era. Having said that, I, nevertheless, agree with many of the opening remarks made by the chairman: peace operations do provide a veiy important instrument for the international community to deal with and reduce instabilities in this turbulent world. As it has in the past, our Nation will continue to participate in multilateral peace operations, when they serve the Nation's inter-