Table Of ContentS. 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 di-
rector; 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, pro-
fessional 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 uni-
laterally, 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 wit-
nesses 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 al-
liances around the world, such as our NATO alliance, and they re-
main 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 open-
ing 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-
