If there were a mistake. the investigation establishes whether there was a mistake and as the Ambassador indicated the number of these Incidents that have been checked out and established as errors have been remarkably small.... (Kennedy. page 61) 5. In a letter submitted to the Kennedy subcommittee by the State Department on April 13. 1970. the following appears: "To what extent does the application of these concepts and tactics (U.S. operations. including bombing) contribute to the generation of refugees and the occurrence of civilian war casualties? "Studies of refugee attitudes undertaken by the RLG and USAID have shown that no single reason operated to cause a Lao. of whatever ethnic background. to leave his place of habitual residence and move elsewhere. and it has not proven possible to categorize refugees or casualties as having been created by any specific technique of battle." One of the most ironic exchanges of the May 1970 hearings was the concluding colloquy between Senator KENNEDY and Ambassador Sullivan: Senator KENNEDY. I wonder how the Ambassador has much time for anything else if he is giving all of this personal attention to the clearance of bombing targets and then reviewing the next day where they hit. looking at the aerial photographs. and getting prepared for the next days targets. It seems to me to be a fulltime job. Ambassador SULLIVAN. It took all my time. (Kennedy. Page 62.) In summary. the Senate subcommittee hearings of May 1970 clearly established a State/Defense position that villages were not permitted to be bombed. that only a few had been bombed by mistake. the Ambassador was always informed of the bombing of villages. he had to validate targets in advance and he would not validate villages as targets. the Ambassador had photographs taken after air strikes to make sure the villages had not been bombed. from refugee attitude surveys it had not been possible to categorize bombing as an identifiable reason to cause people to leave their homes and become refugees. When the Senate refugee subcommittee met again. on April 21 and April 22. 1971. nearly a year later. some additional information was provided by the Government witnesses. With reference to one small group of refugee settlements. Ambassador Sullivan testified: As I understand it . . . their villages were hit both by ground operation and then later on. when they were out of them. apparently their villages were damaged by bombing ... (Emphasis added.) (Kennedy. Part II. page 36.) Ambassador Sullivan cited one statement from the State Department testimony at the 1970 hearing: Most Lao civilians learn very quickly that bombing necessarily follows the North Vietnamese. and another. others fear the Lao and American bombing of the Communist zones. As evidence that the State Department had not denied that some refugees at least had left their homes because of the bombing. The Ambassador went on to state. however. thatOnly about 20.000 have come out of the area where bombing has taken place. (Kennedy. Part II. page 40) Ambassador Sullivan further conceded: The (bombing) attacks in Northern Laos we do not consider to have to do with the operations in South Viet Nam or Cambodia. The Ambassador further clarified that there is no such thing as an enemy village. or unfriendly village in Laos. all villages were apparently considered friendly. whether in Pathet Laooccupied territory or not. but specifically. the Ambassador confirmed that in Pathet Lao areas: If they are inhabiting a village. they are not a military target. (Kennedy. Part II. page 55) The Ambassador did state that in 1969 and 1970 there was quite a considerable increase in the targeting in Northern LaosKennedy. part II. page 60but he steadfastly maintained that only a minor portion of the refugees. 20.000 out of 700.000 had come from areas where bombing had taken place. If this testimony is correct. then of course. my own statements are incorrect. and the gentleman from Santa Clara County properly challenges them. We have seen in the past few weeks. however. with the publication of the Pentagon papers. that administration representations to the Congress are sometimes deserving of careful and independent scrutiny.
Keywords matched
refugee refugees