rV VIETNAM: WHEN WILL WE GET A FULL ACCOUNTING? Y 4. IN 8/16; V 67/4 Uietnan: When Hill Ue 6et a Full Ac... n^ HEAEING BEFORE THE '^^Sv COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED FOURTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION JULY 12, 1995 Printed for the use of the Committee on International Relations ^'i-f lIiMli(4LIij '•- '>v.i "^ otms VIETNAM: WHEN WILL WE GET A FULL ACCOUNTING? HEARING BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED FOURTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION JULY 12, 1995 Printed for the use of the Committee on International Relations U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 21-370 WASHINGTON : 1995 ForsalebytheU.S.GovernmentPrintingOffice SuperintendentofDocuments,CongressionalSalesOffice,Washington,DC 20402 ISBN 0-16-052169-6 COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS BENJAMIN A. OILMAN, New York, Chairman WILLIAM F. GOODLING, Pennsylvania LEE H. HAMILTON, Indiana JAMES A. LEACH, Iowa SAM GEJDENSON, Connecticut TOBY ROTH, Wisconsin TOM LANTOS, California HENRY J. HYDE, IlUnois ROBERT G. TORRICELLI, New Jersey DOUO BEREUTER, Nebraska HOWARD L. BERMAN, CaUfornia CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey GARY L. ACKERMAN, New York DAN BURTON, Indiana HARRY JOHNSTON, Florida JAN MEYERS, Kansas ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York ELTON GALLEGLY, CaUfornia ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA, American ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida Samoa CASS BALLENGER, North Carolina MATTHEW G. MARTINEZ, CaUfornia DANA ROHRABACHER, CaUfornia DONALD M. PAYNE, New Jersey DONALD A. MANZULLO, Illinois ROBERT E. ANDREWS, New Jersey EDWARD R. ROYCE, California ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey PETER T. KING, New York SHERROD BROWN, Ohio JAY KIM, CaUfornia CYNTHIA A. McKINNEY, Georgia SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas ALCEE L. HASTINGS, Florida DAVID FUNDERBURK, North CaroUna ALBERT RUSSELL WYNN, Maryland STEVEN J. CHABOT, Ohio MICHAEL R. McNULTY, New York MARSHALL "MARK" SANFORD, South JAMES P. MORAN, Virginia CaroUna VICTOR O. FRAZER, Virgin Islands (Ind.) MATT SALMON, Arizona AMO HOUGHTON, New York Richard J. Garon, ChiefofStaff Michael H. Van Dusen, Democratic ChiefofStaff John P. Mackey, Investigative Counsel Parker Brent, StaffAssociate (II) CONTENTS Page Ambassador Winston Lord, Assistant Secretary ofState for Asian and Pacific Affairs, Department ofState 33 The Honorable James Wold, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense (POW/ MIAAffairs), Department ofDefense 37 Mr. Richard Childress, president, Asian Investment Strategies 86 Mrs. Ann Mills Griffiths, executive director. National League of POW/MIA Families 89 Mr. Carl Ford, Jr., president, Ford &Associates 88 Mr. John Sommer, executive director, American Legion 91 Mr. Paul Spera, seniorvicecommanderin chief. Veterans ofForeignWars 93 Mr. Bill BeU, president. National Veterans Research Center 94 APPENDIX Prepared statements: The HonorableJay Kim 121 The Honorable DavidFunderburk 124 The Honorable Sam Johnson 128 The Honorable Pete Peterson 131 The HonorableJim Kolbe 133 The Honorable Randy "Duke" Cunningham 135 The HonorableWayne Gilchrest 137 The Honorable RobertDoman 140 AmbassadorWinston Lord 144 The HonorableJames Wold 151 Mr. Richard Childress 161 Mr. Carl Ford 175 Mrs. AnnMills Griffiths 184 Mr. John Sommer 195 Mr. Paul Spera 209 Mr. Bill Bell 212 Additional information providedby the DepartmentofState 219 Additional information providedbythe Department ofDefense 238 Additional information provided byMrs. Ann Mills Griffiths 403 Additional information provided by Mr. Bill Bell 512 Letter submitted byJames Brazee, Jr., president, VietnamVeterans ofAmer- ica, Inc 543 (III) VIETNAM: WHEN WILL WE GET A FULL ACCOUNTING? WEDNESDAY, JULY 12, 1995 House of Representatives, Committee on International Relations, Washington, DC. The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:07 a.m., in room 2172, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Benjamin A. Oilman (chairman ofthe committee) presiding. Chaiiman Oilman. Our hearing will come to order. I ask our members to please take their seats, and would the audience please be seated? Two years ago in the summer of 1993, President Clinton said that the improving relations between our country and Vietnam de- pended on progress in a number of key areas. They included wider access to archival materials, intensified efforts to repatriate re- mains and a resolution ofoutstanding discrepancy cases. In a letter addressed to me on June 2, 1993, the President stated that normalization would depend on, "progress toward achieving the fullest possible accounting of Americans missing in Vietnam." Since then, the President has taken a number of steps to encour- age Vietnam's cooperation, including ending U.S. opposition to per- mitting access to Vietnam to new loans from the International Monetary Fund, ending the U.S. trade embargo and establishing a liaison office in Hanoi. Yesterday, the President announced normalization of diplomatic relations with Vietnam, stating that his policy ofproviding such in- centives in response to, and I quote, "their cooperation" on the criti- cal issues Ijust mentioned has worked. The question before us is has it, and that is the objective of this hearing to examine the record. On the question of wider access to archival materials, how successful have our efforts been to obtain relevant POW records held by numerous agencies in the Com- munist controlled Vietnamese Government? Whereas it is true that thousands of documents have been turned over to our people, only a fraction of them have been found to be relevant records that we need. On the question of intensified effi)rts to repatriate remains since the President lifted the trade embargo, remains of only 8 Ameri- cans ofover 2,200 missing ha—ve been accounted for according to the National League of Families eight sets of remains since February 1994. The remains ofat least 94 POW's and MIA's have never been re- turned. We know those men were taken by the Vietnamese through (1) photographs, through documents, through their own appearances on Vietnamese radio or television or identification by fellow pris- oners. The Vietnamese know we know of those prisoners. We want to know why they continue to withhold information with regard to those prisoners. The remains of many more POWs that we know that were pre- served by the Vietnamese, possibly as many as 400, have not been turned over to date. We had testimony with regard to a Chinese mortician hired by the Vietnamese to preserve those remains through a polygraph screening and found to be a credible testimony before our committee. In short, it is apparent that the administration's policy of incen- tives has not been working. Vietnam has not provided information and remains that they should be able to locate and to provide. While Hanoi is supporting field activities, something for which they are well paid, incidentally, at the rate of $3,000 an hour for helicopter, they are not providing the accounting that they prom- ised. Many ofour families and veterans contend that normalization amounts to a betrayal of those Americans whose loved ones have not yet been accounted for. It will mean the end of any leverage or influence in obtaining as complete an accounting as possible of our missing is a further con- tention ofthose involved. Millions ofAmericans are concerned. The President's sanctions amount to rewarding a former battlefield ad- versary, even though it has reneged on promises ofcooperation. At best, the President's announcement yesterday, many ofus be- lieve, was premature and could lead to legislation barring the use of Federal funds to establish or maintain diplomatic relations or to advance our economic relations with Vietnam. My colleagues and I are exploring a number ofavenues with regard to that issue. The President also spoke ofnormalization ofdiplomatic relations, but we must ask whether normal relations can truly be built on a foundation of questions and doubt that continue to linger in this issue. Before turning to our witnesses, I would like to ask any of my colleagues ifthey have a briefopening statement. Mr. Kim. Mr. Chairman. Chairman Oilman. Mr. Kim has a short request. Mr. Kim. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for yielding. I would like to apologize that I have to go to the Transportation Committee for two markups today. I have to be out there to vote. I would like to state publicly that I have strong reservations about Mr. Clinton's decision to normalize relations with Vietnam. I do not think enough has been done on this POW/MIA accounting to justify this normalization. It is important. I am going to watch it carefully. I am going to read the hearing transcript today. It is a very important issue to me. I would like to ask unanimous consent that my statement appear in today's record. Chairman GiLMAN. Without objection. Mr. Kim. Thank you very much again, Mr. Chairman. I apolo- gize. [The statement ofMr. Kim appears in the appendix.] Chairman GiLMAN. Mr. Roth. Mr. Roth. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First of all, let me com- mend you for holding these hearings. Mr. Chairman, I heard you on public radio this morning. You were very persuasive. Chairman Oilman. Thank you. Mr. Roth. I do not know just what the correct position is, to be quite frank with you, but we have with us a distinguished panel this morning. I am going to listen very closely to them. I think that it could be argued that the President's action yester- day was somewhat inevitable. One by one, other governments, even our allies in the Vietnam war, have accepted the situation, and the United States is left almost alone. Our leverage was diminished. The issue now is what does our Government do to use normaliza- tion as leverage? I think it is very important that we convey a mes- sage, not only for the people who served in Vietnam, but also for the people who are going to serve in the future, that when their country sends them overseas, they are not going to be forgotten. I ask myself if I had had a son during the Vietnam war would I want him to serve in Vietnam. I think that all fathers and all mothers today are going to have to ask themselves that question. It is really a wrenching situation. The administration has an obligation to show that their approach is going to work. We simply cannot give up on the missing. We can- not give up for the sake of those who are still missing. We cannot give up for the family members. We cannot give up for those who served in Vietnam. Some people who did not serve might not fully understand the depth of feeling among the American people. The President's an- nouncement yesterday cannot be the end of a process. Until we know the truth and until we have the fullest possible accounting of our remaining MIA's, we must remain committed to this cause. Every American who serves has to understand that none will be left behind. As a signal to the men and women who in the future will serve their country, we must tell them they will never be for- gotten or never be neglected. We still have some 2,204 U.S. servicemen missing in action from the Vietnam war, and we cannot forget that fact. It is up to us to keep the vigil. The tragedy of modern war is that we will probably never know what happened to every last MIA, but we cannot give up. The President's announcement yesterday highlighted some key questions, and I think that we have to look for those answers. No. 1, is there more the Vietnamese Government should be doing? For instance, are there key documents or facilities to which the United States does not have adequate access? Second, if we are not getting full cooperation, how can we get that now? What sticks and carrots remain, and what should we do? Third, does the administration really have a plan for ensuring full cooperation and the best possible accounting? Have they antici- pated the next steps? I look forward to working with the chairman and to getting the answers to these questions. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Oilman. Thank you, Mr. Roth. Mr. Funderburk. Mr. FUNDERBURK. Mr. Chairman, I wanted to give part of my statement and enter the rest into the record. Chairman Oilman. Without objection. Mr. FUNDERBURK. Thank you. I may be the only member of this committee to have served as an ambassador to a Communist country. I have seen firsthand the barbarity and duplicity of Communists in what Winston Churchill called the dark and lamentable catalog ofhuman crime. There is nothing on record to compare to the 80 years ofdestruc- tion and human misery communism brought to Europe, Latin America, Africa, and Asia. Hundreds ofmillions died. Religious and political freedom was obliterated. To fight communism, America spent thousands of lives and tril- lions of dollars. In light of that bloody history, it is all the more tragic that the Clinton administration has decided to ignore a clear campaign promise and recognize and—assist one ofthe last but most brutal Communist dictatorships left ^Vietnam. The Vietnamese Communists deserve only our contempt. They crushed our allies in South Vietnam, killing millions. They over- threw the governments of Cambodia and Laos. They forced the en- tire ethnic Chinese population of their country into the sea, prompting Beijing to invade. They opened up re-education camps and suppressed all dissent and religious expression. As we speak, Buddhist monks are threatening to take to the streets to emulate themselves. Vietnam has entered into formal defense arrangements with Cuba and Iraq and has recently invited Saddam Hussein for a state visit, thereby thumbing its nose at the world community. Hanoi brutally murdered hundreds of America's POW's before the Paris peace accords were signed and have lied about it ever since, yet the Clinton administration claims we must rethink our relationship with Vietnam and reward it with the benefits ofAmer- ican recognition and aid because progress has been made on the POW/MIA issue. That progress is so illusory that it is scarcely worth the mention. There has been no progress in accounting for over 300 Americans last known to be alive. In testimony last month, retired military POW/MIA investigators told the House that Hanoi still holds back remains. The Pentagon's own joint task force full accounting has repeatedly been denied access to areas where sightings have been alleged. Some in the administration and Congress are now advocating that we open up relations with Vietnam and open up security ties in order to counterbalance resurgent Chinese militarism. That is also a prescription for disaster. I have seen what happened when we toyed with a Communist dictator who promised us he would side with us against a more powerful adversary. We placated Ceausescu, and we turned a blind eye to one ofthe most savage regimes in the history ofEastern Eu- rope. Placating Communist Romania was shameful, but it pales in comparison to the policy we are about to set for Vietnam. The only way for reform, Mr. Chairman, and the only way to stand up for our ideals is to say respect for human rights and