[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 117 (Friday, August 2, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Page S9648-S9649]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
WAR CRIMES ACT OF 1996
Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate
now proceed to the consideration of H.R. 3680 which was received from
the House.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:
A bill (H.R. 3680) to amend title 18, United States Code,
to carry out the international obligations of the United
States under the Geneva Conventions to provide criminal
penalties for certain war crimes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection to the immediate
consideration of the bill?
There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.
Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, this particular act is known as the War
Crimes Act of 1996. This was called to my attention by a very
articulate young Congressman from North Carolina, Walter Jones, Jr.,
whose father we served with for many, many years over in the House of
Representatives.
He was very observant in discovering something, that after 40 years,
after the ratification of the Geneva Conventions, that it was not self-
enacting, and we actually have never passed the necessary legislation
to accept jurisdiction within our Federal courts to prosecute war
crimes that we were aware of.
So this legislation will correct that after this long period of time.
It is kind of inconceivable to me that we would send out to battle and
to various parts of the world our young troops, trying to equip them
properly--I would say properly, that if we ever get our authorization
passed--and have these people ready to do the work that they are
trained to do, and yet if a crime is perpetrated against them, and that
criminal happens to be in the United States, we cannot even prosecute
them in our Federal courts. That is all going to come to a stop.
I think also this bill might even address another problem that is
taking place right now in this country. As you know, I am from
Oklahoma. And one of the worst terrorist acts took place just a little
over a year ago in Oklahoma City with the bombing of the Murrah Federal
Office Building. And with all of the terrorist acts recently, this
could act as a deterrent, this War Crimes Act of 1996, for people who
may be considering perpetrating some terrorist act that could be
defined as a war crime.
So I believe this is something that should have been done some 40
years ago, but was not. So we will correct that tonight. This has been
cleared by both sides.
Mr HELMS. Mr. President, this bill will help to close a major gap in
our Federal criminal law by permitting American servicemen and
nationals, who are victims of war crimes, to see the criminal brought
to justice in the United States.
Before addressing the need for this legislation, let me thank and
commend the distinguished Walter Jones, who so ably represents the
third district of North Carolina, for his commitment and hard work
toward the passage of this bill. I'd also like to thank my
distinguished colleague, Senator James Inhofe, for his support of this
important bill.
Many have not realized that the U.S. cannot prosecute, in Federal
court, the perpetrators of some war crimes against American servicemen
and nationals. Currently, if the United States were to find a war
criminal within our borders--for example, one who had murdered an
American POW--the only options would be to deport or extradite the
criminal or to try him or her before an international war crimes
tribunal or military commission. Alone, these options are not enough to
insure that justice is done.
While the Geneva Convention of 1949 grants the U.S. authority to
criminally prosecute these acts, the Congress has never enacted
implementing legislation. The War Crimes Act of 1996 corrects this
oversight by giving Federal district courts jurisdiction to try
individuals charged with committing a grave breach of the Geneva
Conventions, whenever the victim or perpetrator is a U.S. serviceman or
national.
The bill would also allow an American, who is charged with a war
crime, to be tried in an American court and to receive all of the
procedural protections afforded by our American justice system.
Mr. President, at a time when American servicemen and women serve our
Nation in conflicts around the world, it is important that we give them
every protection possible. I urge my colleagues to support this
bipartisan bill and reaffirm our commitment to our country's
servicemembers.
I ask unanimous consent that an article from the New York Times be
printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the article was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
[From the New York Times, June 25, 1996]
Ms. Maloney and Mr. Waldheim
(By A.M. Rosenthal)
For a full half-century, with determination and skill, and
with the help of the law, U.S. intelligence agencies have
kept secret the record of how they used Nazis for so many
years after World War II, what the agencies got from these
services--and what they gave as payback.
Despite the secrecy blockade, we do know how one
cooperative former Wehrmacht officer and war crimes suspect
was treated. We know the U.S. got him the Secretary
Generalship of the U.N. as reward and base.
For more than two years, Congress has had legislation
before it to allow the public access to information about
U.S.-Nazi intelligence relations--a bill introduced by
Representative Carolyn B. Maloney, a Manhattan Democrat, and
now winding through the legislative process.
If Congress passes her War Crimes Disclosure Act, H.R.
1281, questions critical to history and the conduct of
foreign affairs can be answered and the power of government
to withhold them reduced. The case of Kurt Waldheim is the
most interesting example--the most interesting we know of at
the moment.
Did the U.S. know when it backed him for Secretary General
that he had been put on the A list of war-crime suspects,
adopted in London in 1948, for his work as a Wehrmacht
intelligence officer in the Balkans, when tens of thousands
of Yugoslavs, Greeks, Italians, Jew and non-Jew, were being
deported to death?
If not, isn't that real strange, since the U.S.
representative on the War Crimes Commission voted to list
him? A report was sent to the State Department. Didn't State
give the C.I.A. a copy--a peek?
And when he was running for Secretary General why did State
Department biographies omit any reference to his military
service--just as he forgot to mention it in his
autobiographies?
If all that information was lost by teams of stupid clerks,
once the Waldheim name came up for the job why did not the
U.S. do the obvious thing--check with Nazi and war-crime
records in London and Berlin to see if his name by any chance
was among those dearly wanted?
Didn't the British know? They voted for the listing too.
And the Russians--Yugoslavia moved to list him when it was a
Soviet satellite. Belgrade never told Moscow?
How did Mr. Waldheim repay the U.S. for its enduring
fondness to him? Twice it pushed him successfully for the
job. The third time it was among few countries that backed
him again but lost. Nobody can say the U.S. was not loyal to
the end.
Did he also serve the Russians and British? One at a time?
Or was he a big-power groupie, serving all?
One thing is not secret any longer, thanks to Prof. Robert
Herzstein of the University of South Carolina history
department. He has managed through years of perseverance to
pry some information loose. He found that while Mr. Waldheim
worked for the Austrian bureaucracy, the U.S. Embassy in
Vienna year after year sent in blurby reports about his
assistance to American foreign policy--friendly, outstanding,
cooperative, receptive to American thinking. All the while,
this cuddly fellow was on the A list, which was in the locked
files or absent with official leave.
On May 24, 1994, I reported on Professor Herzstein's
findings and the need for opening files of war-crime
suspects. Representative Maloney quickly set to work on her
bill to open those files to Freedom of Information requests--
providing safeguards for personal privacy, ongoing
investigations and national security if ever pertinent.
Her first bill expired in the legislative machinery and in
1995 she tried again. She got her hearing recently thanks to
the chairman of her subcommittee of the Government Reform
Committee--Stephen Horn, the California Republican.
If the leaders of Congress will it, the Maloney bill can be
passed this year. I nominate my New York Senators to
introduce it in the Senate. It will be a squeeze to get it
passed before the end of the year, so kindly ask your
representatives and senators to start squeezing.
If not, the laborious legislative procedure will have to be
repeated next session. Questions about the Waldheim
connection will go unanswered, and also about other cases
that may be in the files or strangely misplaced, which will
also be of interest.
Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be
[[Page S9649]]
deemed read a third time, and passed, and the motion to reconsider be
laid upon the table, and that any statements relating to the bill
appear at the appropriate place in the Record.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? Without objection, it is
so ordered.
The bill (H.R. 3680) was deemed read the third time and passed.
Mr. INHOFE. Thank you, Mr. President.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?
Mr. HATFIELD addressed the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oregon.
____________________