Land mines, again

The Clinton administration has already drawn worldwide criticism for its refusal to join an international treaty banning land mines. Now, at the urging of the Pentagon, it seems ready to undo even the modest steps it has taken to reduce American reliance on this crude weapon. The administration is trying to repeal a one-year moratorium on the use of land mines, due to go into effect next February, that Congress and President Bill Clinton himself endorsed two years ago.

The moratorium, which is likely to be only symbolic, is nevertheless worthwhile. It was passed as a way to encourage the Pentagon to develop alternatives to land mines, especially in destroying enemy tanks. The Pentagon contends that it needs to continue using "mixed" mines -- antitank mines that are salted with antipersonnel mines to keep enemy soldiers from taking them apart quickly. But so far the Pentagon has made little effort to find alternatives to mixed mines.

The moratorium might be worth sacrificing if in exchange the Pentagon would lift some of its objections to an international treaty to ban land mines. Without a deal for real progress, however, the moratorium should stay. Many military officials acknowledge that antipersonnel mines are far more of a threat that protection for American soldiers.

American-made mines were the leading cause of American casualties in Vietnam. The military's fears do not justify the survival of a weapon that continues to kill civilians for decades after a war ends. Mr. Clinton should simply decide to stop giving the Pentagon a veto over a land mine treaty that is clearly in America's -- and American soldiers' -- best interests.

-- The New York Times