2012-06-22 God bless Senator Romeo Dallaire – his speech against Bill S-10, cluster bombs

June 22, 2012

Check against delivery

Soon after the bombing in Afghanistan began in 2001, the Pentagon announced its intention to change the colour of the humanitarian daily rations being airdropped throughout the country. These are the small, yellow, packages of prepared meals that contain enough calories to feed a person for one day.

The practice of distributing humanitarian rations dates back to conflicts in Bosnia, Rwanda, Cambodia, Sierra Leone and Somalia. They were designed to reduce mortality rates during emergencies or humanitarian crises — and perhaps even win a few hearts and minds in the process.

But by the time the Pentagon changed the packaging, some 2.5 million humanitarian rations had already been dropped. And all throughout, US Forces had dropped more than a thousand BLU-92 cluster bombs throughout Afghanistan, containing some 250,000 sub-munitions. Regrettably, the thousands of bomblets that failed to explode on impact were the same size and colour — as the humanitarian rations which blanketed the landscape…

You cannot imagine how many children had their limbs blown off due to this careless oversight.

Honourable Colleagues, in a way it is understandable why countries like Russia, China and the US are reluctant to remove cluster munitions from their arsenals. Developed in the lead-up to the Vietnam War, cluster bombs are highly effective “area” weapons, designed to lay out barriers, block forces, and push troops into killing zones.

They can be used to rapidly take out airfields, swaths of tanks, or large troop formations — the kinds of formations we expected to face in the Cold War.

Almost immediately following their development, cluster bombs became the weapon of choice for area denial.

Instead of asking the ethical, legal and moral questions of how the weapon would affect civilians, the only question asked was “how many of these things can we make?”

And so they built them by the hundreds of thousands. Today we’re at the point where some 86 countries stockpile the weapon. And while Canada has never used them, 18 other nations have.

For example, some 500,000 cluster bombs comprising 285 million submunitions — were dropped over the fields, cities and peoples of Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia, between 1964 until 1975. In the 80s and 90s, they were used extensively in places like Lebanon—by Israeli forces, & in Iraq & Kosovo by US forces.

In all of these conflicts, cluster munitions have been shown to be highly effective in killing human beings. But behind this is an even more devastating truth: the real cost, the human cost, the civilian cost.

By their very nature, cluster bombs are imprecise weapons. Launched from the air, artillery or rocket launchers, each one opens mid-air to release dozens or hundreds of bomblets. Strikes cover areas the size of football fields, and have no ability to distinguish between enemy combatants and children.

Children like 6-year-old Umarbek, a young boy from Tajikistan whose home was struck by these weapons in 1991. Just imagine his horror as shrapnel sliced through his right eye — and ripped through his small torso and face. It tore through his sister’s abdomen and took his brother’s life.

Just like landmines, cluster munitions kill, maim and injure innocent civilians long after conflicts come to an end. This happens because many fail to explode on impact, littering whole communities with unexploded ordinance. Failure rates have been calculated from anywhere between 7 to 40 per cent depending on the ground and vegetation. But even at 1 per cent, you are still in the thousands. As a result, farmers cannot farm. Refugees cannot return. And those who do, risk life and limb.

That is why, in 2008, Canada joined what is now 111 countries in deciding to comprehensively ban the use of these weapons by signing the Convention on Cluster Munitions. After 4 years of waiting, we now have Bill S-10, our ratification legislation.

This Bill has the potential to be a strong legislative tool to end the use of the weapon. Section 6, the heart of the bill, lays out clear and unambiguous prohibitions against cluster munition use. It bans the use, development, acquisition, possession, movement, import, or export of cluster munitions.

Furthermore—and this is key—section 6(f) states that we may not aid, abet or counsel another person to use cluster munitions, or perform any of the prohibited acts above…

And yet, this bill is flawed—deeply so. Its promise is undermined by its exceptions, exceptions so broad you can drive a tank through it. they water down and weaken the treaty—perhaps even critically.

Despite our best intentions, there are provisions in this Bill that would allow members of the Canadian Forces to expressly request the use of cluster munitions while in combined operations, such as NATO missions, as indicated in sections 11 (1)(a) and (b).

Moreover, Section 11(1)(c) grants our armed forces permissionto use, acquire or possess cluster munitions while on secondment. This is not a meaningful prohibition. This is a half-measure, and one not worthy of a country that has, for so long, led the world in disarmament.

The policy enshrined in this Bill completely contradicts our stance on antipersonnel landmines. It contradicts the spirit of the Convention we have signed; it contradicts established Canadian policy—and the values that have inspired it.

In a memo dated 11 August 1998, the Chief of the Defence Staff clearly prohibited Canadian commanders of combined forces from authorizing the use of anti-personnel mines. Likewise, personnel being commanded by foreign nationals are prohibited from using—or even planning to use—landmines, and contingents may not use, request, or encourage the use of mines by others.

So that is the precedent. And its origins are in this very city—where in 1997, Canada joined forces with civil society in a campaign to ban landmines. And it worked. We no longer needed landmines to achieve their tactical or strategic objectives or defences. The same can be said today of cluster munitions.

And yet, Bill S-10 contains an exception, in Section 11(3)(a), that would allow Canadian Forces to aid and abet the use of cluster munitions while in combined operations.

It does not make sense to comprehensively ban an immoral, indiscriminate weapon, and then turn around and say, it’s still okay to use them in combined operations. Almost all operations are combined operations, and so we are effectively paving the way for their continued use.

Honourable Senators, as we move toward committee stages, we have a great deal of work ahead of us.

First, we must study Bill S-10 in detail and seek expert advice of not only the military but also civil society, which is fast becoming the voice of humanity, certainly on issues of disarmament.

Second, we must address the ethical, legal and moral issues introduced by Section 11. Surely some exceptions will be necessary — but like the Ottawa Mine Ban Treaty — they must be narrow in scope. The question we have to ask ourselves is which exceptions are absolutely essential? This should become central to the committee’s work.

Third, we should consider drafting prohibitions against financial investment in these weapons, as New Zealand and other allies have done.

Fourth, we should enshrine the positive obligations laid out in Article 21 — so as to make it clear to allies where we stand.

Finally, we should ensure this legislation applies to all Canadians overseas — not only armed forces — so Canadians will not be in a position to sell, transport or otherwise aid in the use of these weapons.

Honourable Colleagues, should we fail to pass strong, comprehensive ratification legislation, we will create a precedent that will ultimately undermine the convention, potentially leading to the continued proliferation of these weapons, and the destruction of innocent civilians.

In her speech, Senator Fortin-Duplessis vividly described the disproportionate effects that cluster munitions have on civilians. She has told us they cause widespread damage and indiscriminate harm, particularly when used near populated areas. She has told us that they injure, mutiliate or too often kill innocent people —and that 98 per cent of recorded casualties have been civilians.

When we took the collective decision to ban cluster munitions in 2008, we did so because we believed the harm caused by cluster munitions far outweighs any military advantage they offer. Colleagues, I would submit to you that this equation does not change in combined operations.

Honourable Senators, we must reject the temptation to water down a comprehensive ban on cluster munitions. We must craft our laws to be in accord with our principles. We must rise above narrow self-interest, and put the good of humanity above the good of our own tribe.

For the sake of civilians everywhere, and for our women and men in uniform, we can do no less.

And yes, we can do this without putting our men and women in combat at any higher level of risk. I stake my personal military reputation on this fact.

The world expects Canada to lead. And in that duty, we must not let them down.

Merci.