Committee for the Rescue and
Development of Vieques
Box 1424
Vieques, Puerto Rico 00765
Phone: (787) 741-8651
e-mail: bieke@coqui.net

Good morning, Mr. Chairman and Members of the Senate Armed Services Committee. My name is Flavio Cumpiano. I am a Puerto Rican attorney in Washington, DC and I appear before you today in my capacity as Representative of the Committee for the Rescue and Development of Vieques.

The Committee for the Rescue and Development of Vieques. The Committee for the Rescue and Development of Vieques ("Comité Pro Rescate y Desarrollo de Vieques" in Spanish) is a non-partisan grass-roots organization dedicated to the permanent cease and desist of the bombing by the U.S. military in Vieques, to putting an end to the military presence in Vieques, and dedicated to the decontamination and sustainable development of the island. Although the members of our organization have been working towards achieving these goals for many years, we were formally organized and registered as a non-profit with the Puerto Rico Department of State in 1993. The Committee for the Rescue and Development of Vieques was founded by community and civic leaders in Vieques of all political ideologies.

The Committee for the Rescue and Development of Vieques, along with other groups and individuals, has established a Multidisciplinary Technical Team for the Development of a Free Vieques. We have begun to articulate, with the assistance of experts from Puerto Rican, U.S. and international organizations and universities, a vision for the future social and economic development of a Vieques freed from the Navy. In general, we recommend the creation of a land trust to keep and maintain the lands rescued from the Navy in the hands of the community of Vieques. We also recommend the establishment of a continuing education and training program in order to adequately empower the community of Vieques to manage its own resources, including but not limited to, its hotels, restaurants, agricultural projects, small factories, and scientific and environmental projects. The goal is to ensure the sustainable development of Vieques by Viequenses, for the benefit of Viequenses and those who visit our beautiful island. But of course, as the last sixty (60) years have shown, none of this can happen with the US Navy occupying most of our land and bombing and abusing our natural resources. And so let's focus on the first order of business: Getting the US Navy out of Vieques.

The US Navy must leave Vieques. Almost 20 years ago, a Congressional Panel of the House Armed Services Committee conducted extensive hearings and reviewed the status of Navy training activities on Vieques. The Congressional Panel concluded, among other findings, that:

(1) The Navy should find an alternative site;

(2) Insensitivity has been the hallmark of the Navy's approach towards Vieques, resulting in legal action and protests;

(3) There is a concern "that a business as usual policy will be counterproductive. The United States and Puerto Rico have a unique relationship that requires trust, communication and cooperation. Vieques, however, is a political issue that for some, if not many, symbolizes third world concerns with their relationship with the industrialized nations of the world." The Panel "cannot emphasize too strongly the need for the Navy and the Defense Department to proceed now, without delay, to locate alternatives to Vieques and, in the interim, study and develop methods of alleviating as many of the more immediate concerns as possible. Otherwise, the Navy may further undermine its credibility and encourage exploitation of the controversy."

Almost 20 years have passed since the Congressional Panel's study, hearings and report. The Panel's findings have turned out to be tragically prophetic. Let's briefly examine the principal findings.

(1) The Navy should find an alternative site.

The people of Vieques have had to continue carrying too heavy a burden for too long due to the Navy's presence and activities. Their concerns at the insensitivity of the Navy found an understanding forum in the Congressional Panel in 1980. The Panel understood the importance of national security, but at the same time cared and was deeply concerned about the well-being of the people of Vieques. Sadly, to the detriment of thousands of Viequenses, the past two decades have proven to be not only a continuation of the deplorable situation described by the Congressional Panel, but indeed a deterioration of that situation.

The Navy was told to find an alternative site. It didn't and it hasn't. Twenty years after the Congressional Panel's report, when a Navy bomb killed a civilian and injured four others in Vieques and the decades-long resentment of Viequenses was heeded by many, the Navy went ahead and conducted its own study concluding that there is no acceptable alternative site to Vieques. But of course, it should be evident to all that the Navy tried to justify its continued presence in Vieques and thus found fault with all the sites it considered. The main point should not be whether or not Vieques is the most convenient site for the Navy. The main point is that Vieques is an inhabited island of close to 10,000 US citizens and there should be no bombing in such an island. Common sense and the most basic principles of justice dictate it. The people of Vieques have suffered enough and are clamoring for the Navy to leave. The Congressional Panel recognized this twenty years ago, and circumstances since have only made it more imperative that the Navy should leave Vieques.

This Committee knows full well that U.S. 'national security' means protecting the US and safeguarding the lives of its citizens. Yet it also knows, or should realize, that it would be a travesty and a cruel contradiction to allow the Navy to continue to disregard the lives and well-being of close to 10,000 US citizens in Vieques in the interest of 'national security'."

(2) Insensitivity has been the hallmark of the Navy's approach towards Vieques, resulting in legal action and protests.

Twenty years ago, the Congressional Panel found what has been evident for decades to the people of Vieques and to many others: That insensitivity has been the hallmark of the Navy's approach towards Vieques. Insensitivity means not contributing to the well-being, safety, employment and economy of the people whose land you occupy, whose best natural resources you use and abuse, whose territory you bomb and authorize other countries to bomb, whose agreements and memorandums of understandings you disregard, and whose concerns and demands are cursorily dismissed and labelled as "un-American". What is truly un-American, or more precisely inhuman, is dropping chemical weapons such as napalm and depleted uranium in a populated island like Vieques.

When the Congressional Panel concluded that insensitivity has been the hallmark of the Navy's approach towards Vieques, could it have foreseen that that insensitivity and callous disregard for the well-being of the people of Vieques would only increase and be exacerbated? Vice Admiral William Fallon and Lt. General Peter Pace were in charge of conducting the Navy's own study on Vieques a few months ago. When recently confronted by the Rush Panel on Vieques about the concerns and demands of the people of Vieques, Vice Admiral Fallon replied: "I deal with facts, not with sentiments." Res ipsa loquitur.

(3) There is a concern "that a business as usual policy will be counterproductive. The United States and Puerto Rico have a unique relationship that requires trust, communication and cooperation. Vieques, however, is a political issue that for some, if not many, symbolizes third world concerns with their relationship with the industrialized nations of the world." The Panel "cannot emphasize too strongly the need for the Navy and the Defense Department to proceed now, without delay, to locate alternatives to Vieques and, in the interim, study and develop methods of alleviating as many of the more immediate concerns as possible. Otherwise, the Navy may further undermine its credibility and encourage exploitation of the controversy."

As recommended by the Congressional Panel, did the Navy proceed without delay to locate alternatives to Vieques? No. Did the Defense Department proceed without delay to locate alternatives to Vieques? No. What incentive do they have to be objective, to be creative, to be accommodating in finding an alternative site if, in the interim, the Navy is allowed to continue occupying and bombing Vieques? None. The "business as usual" policy only affects the people of Vieques. It would be a cruel hoax if the people of Vieques are once again penalized for the failure of the Navy or the Department of Defense or the Rush Panel to seriously find an alternative site.

Bear in mind the directive of the Commander-in-Chief, President William J. Clinton, when on June 9, 1999 he ordered Defense Secretary William Cohen to "establish a panel to review the need for operations at Vieques and to explore alternative sites or methods that would meet the Department's needs." (emphasis added). If the Rush Panel did not fully comply with its mandate, the people of Vieques should be the last to pay for or be penalized for that failure to comply with the mandate of the President and Commander-in-Chief. In effect, Congressional panels such as the Dellums Panel in 1980, and Executive panels such as the Rush Panel in 1999, can issue all the findings and reports they want, but if the Navy is allowed to resume bombing Vieques, history has proven that there will be no incentive to seriously find an alternative site and the practical consequence will be that the Navy will remain in Vieques indefinitely. That would be a travesty.

Finally, this Committee, indeed Congress as a whole, as well as the President and Commander-in-Chief, the Department of Defense, and the Navy, should heed the insightful words of Congressman Bob Carr, a member of the Congressional Panel which reviewed the status of Navy training activities on Vieques. Congressman Carr wrote in the Congressional Panel's final report that:

"Naval training facilities of all types are badly needed. Vieques-type facilities are essential. While some locations have advantages over others, I strongly believe that it is indefensible to state that Vieques is a one-of-a-kind indispensable training facility and that the search for alternatives is unnecessary and wasteful. Relative to the readiness of our naval forces I also think that it is diplomatically and militarily dangerous for congressional committee members to state that naval training of this type and sufficiency is dependent on one geographical location. Our Navy should not be either so dependent or unimaginative."

The U.S. Navy should not be either so dependent or unimaginative. And if I may add to the compelling words of Congressman Carr: The people of Vieques should not continue to be penalized for the Navy's dependence or lack of imagination.

We demand peace. Thank you.

The Committee for the Rescue and Development of Vieques, PO Box 1424, Vieques, Puerto Rico 00765, e-mail: bieke@coqui.net