{
  "id": "RL30034",
  "type": "CRS Report",
  "typeId": "REPORTS",
  "number": "RL30034",
  "active": false,
  "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
  "versions": [
    {
      "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
      "id": 103289,
      "date": "1999-01-26",
      "retrieved": "2016-05-24T20:47:20.804941",
      "title": "Joint Combined Exchange Training (JCET) and Human Rights: Background and Issues for Congress",
      "summary": "Recent press articles describe U.S. special operations forces (SOF) training under the Joint\nCombined\nExchange Training (JCET) program in countries where human rights abuses have allegedly or actually\ntaken place. Joint Combined Exchange Training is carried out under provisions in 10 USC  2011. \nThe law allows the regional commanders and the commander of the U.S. Special Operations\nCommand to pay for deploying and training U.S. SOF teams as long as the primary purpose of the\nactivity is to train the U.S. special operations forces. One of the primary unconventional warfare /\nforeign internal defense missions of U.S. SOF is to train other militaries. SOF uses JCET\ndeployments to practice training foreign militaries. 10 USC  2011 requires the Secretary of Defense\n(SecDef) to submit an annual report to Congress covering various JCET details.\n  \n  The press and Members of Congress have expressed concern because of the apparent\ncontradiction between declared U.S. policy not to train foreign military forces implicated in human\nrights violations -- supported by actions of Congress to curtail military aid to such countries -- and\nthe continued use of JCET deployments to those countries to train U.S. SOF. Under JCET, SOF\nteams have trained foreign units that subsequently were accused of being involved in human rights\nabuses. Three countries of particular concern are Indonesia, Colombia, and Rwanda. As long as the\nSOF received the primary benefit, the training was legal. Unlike other forms of foreign aid, military\nassistance, and military training, the funding for JCET comes from the Defense Department budget\nbecause JCET is a DOD training activity.\n  In addition, press reports and Members have complained about the perceived lack of civilian\noversight in planning, approving, and monitoring these training operations. The Department of State,\nDepartment of Defense, U.S. ambassadors, Congress, and host nation governments are involved in\nJCET oversight. Whether existing (pre-FY99) mechanisms provided adequate oversight is in\nquestion.\n  Congress has taken steps to enact legislation to bring JCET more into alignment with policies\nand establish more stringent oversight. The Leahy Amendment to the Department of Defense\nFY1999 Appropriations Act ( P.L. 105-262 ) prohibits the U.S. military from training with human\nrights abusers (unless waived by the Secretary of Defense). Two other bills in the 105th Congress,\nthe Security Assistance Act of 1998 ( S. 2463 ) and the International Military Training\nand Accountability Act ( H.R. 3802 ), would have banned all forms of U.S. military\ntraining to countries ineligible for the international military education and training (IMET) program. \nOne other bill, the International Military Training Transparency and Accountability Act\n( H.R. 4874 ), would specifically ban JCETs for countries under IMET restrictions.\n  Several alternative courses of action and additional issues remain. Balancing national security\nissues and human rights policies may require difficult choices and uncertain trade-offs.",
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORTS",
      "active": false,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "encoding": null,
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/RL30034",
          "sha1": "7baa1efe188979cd5bd57071147243738b2d884f",
          "filename": "files/19990126_RL30034_7baa1efe188979cd5bd57071147243738b2d884f.pdf",
          "images": null
        },
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "filename": "files/19990126_RL30034_7baa1efe188979cd5bd57071147243738b2d884f.html"
        }
      ],
      "topics": []
    }
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Appropriations",
    "Foreign Affairs",
    "Intelligence and National Security",
    "National Defense"
  ]
}