U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

20–747PDF 2016

VARIOUS MEASURES

MARKUP

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

ON

H. Res. 634, H. Res. 660, H. Res. 728, H. Res. 729, 

H. Res. 750, H. Res. 780, H. Res. 808, H. Res. 810, 

H. Res. 821, H.R. 4481, H.R. 5537, H.R. 5732, 

and H.R. 5094

JULY 14, 2016

Serial No. 114–207

Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs

(

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.foreignaffairs.house.gov/ or

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/

(II)

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

EDWARD R. ROYCE, California, Chairman 

CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey 

ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida 

DANA ROHRABACHER, California 

STEVE CHABOT, Ohio 

JOE WILSON, South Carolina 

MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas 

TED POE, Texas 

MATT SALMON, Arizona 

DARRELL E. ISSA, California 

TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania 

JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina 

MO BROOKS, Alabama 

PAUL COOK, California 

RANDY K. WEBER SR., Texas 

SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania 

RON DESANTIS, Florida 

MARK MEADOWS, North Carolina 

TED S. YOHO, Florida 

CURT CLAWSON, Florida 

SCOTT DESJARLAIS, Tennessee 

REID J. RIBBLE, Wisconsin 

DAVID A. TROTT, Michigan 

LEE M. ZELDIN, New York 

DANIEL DONOVAN, New York 

ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York 

BRAD SHERMAN, California 

GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York 

ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey 

GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia 

THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida 

BRIAN HIGGINS, New York 

KAREN BASS, California 

WILLIAM KEATING, Massachusetts 

DAVID CICILLINE, Rhode Island 

ALAN GRAYSON, Florida 

AMI BERA, California 

ALAN S. LOWENTHAL, California 

GRACE MENG, New York 

LOIS FRANKEL, Florida 

TULSI GABBARD, Hawaii 

JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas 

ROBIN L. KELLY, Illinois 

BRENDAN F. BOYLE, Pennsylvania

AMY PORTER, Chief of Staff THOMAS SHEEHY, Staff Director

JASON STEINBAUM, Democratic Staff Director 

(III)

C O N T E N T S 

Page

MARKUP ON 

H. Res. 634, Recognizing the importance of the United States-Republic of 

Korea-Japan trilateral relationship to counter North Korean threats and 

nuclear proliferation, and to ensure regional security and human rights ...... 2

Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to H. Res. 634 offered by the 

Honorable Matt Salmon, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of Arizona .......................................................................................................... 6

H. Res. 660, Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives to support 

the territorial integrity of Georgia ...................................................................... 10

H. Res. 728, Supporting human rights, democracy, and the rule of law in 

Cambodia .............................................................................................................. 17

Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to H. Res. 728 offered by the 

Honorable Alan S. Lowenthal, a Representative in Congress from the 

State of California ............................................................................................ 22

H. Res. 729, Expressing support for the expeditious consideration and finalization of a new, robust, and long-term Memorandum of Understanding 

on military assistance to Israel between the United States Government 

and the Government of Israel ............................................................................. 28

H. Res. 750, Urging the European Union to designate Hizballah in its entirety 

as a terrorist organization and increase pressure on it and its members ....... 32

H. Res. 780, Urging respect for the constitution of the Democratic Republic 

of the Congo in the democratic transition of power in 2016 ............................. 37

Amendment to H. Res. 780 offered by the Honorable Edward R. Royce, 

a Representative in Congress from the State of California, and chairman, 

Committee on Foreign Affairs ......................................................................... 44

Amendment to H. Res. 780 offered by the Honorable Christopher H. Smith, 

a Representative in Congress from the State of New Jersey ........................ 46

H. Res. 808, Calling on the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran 

to release Iranian-Americans Siamak Namazi and his father, Baquer 

Namazi .................................................................................................................. 47

H. Res. 810, Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives regarding 

the life and work of Elie Wiesel in promoting human rights, peace, and 

Holocaust remembrance ...................................................................................... 50

Amendment to H. Res. 810 offered by the Honorable Edward R. Royce ......... 54

H. Res. 821, Urging the Government of Gabon to respect democratic principles during the August 2016 presidential elections ....................................... 55

Amendment to H. Res. 821 offered by the Honorable Gregory W. Meeks, 

a Representative in Congress from the State of New York .......................... 59

H.R. 4481, To amend the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 to provide assistance 

for developing countries to promote quality basic education and to establish 

the goal of all children in school and learning as an objective of the 

United States foreign assistance policy, and for other purposes ..................... 60

Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to H.R. 4481 offered by the 

Honorable Edward R. Royce ............................................................................ 88

H.R. 5537, To promote internet access in developing countries and update 

foreign policy toward the internet, and for other purposes .............................. 110

Amendment to H.R. 5537 offered by the Honorable Edward R. Royce ........... 126

H.R. 5732, To halt the wholesale slaughter of the Syrian people, encourage 

a negotiated political settlement, and hold Syrian human rights abusers 

accountable for their crimes ................................................................................ 127

Amendment to H.R. 5732 offered by the Honorable Mark Meadows, a 

Representative in Congress from the State of North Carolina ..................... 166

Page

IV

Amendment #53 to H.R. 5732 offered by the Honorable Ileana RosLehtinen, a Representative in Congress from the State of Florida .............. 170

Amendment #54 to H.R. 5732 offered by the Honorable Ileana RosLehtinen ............................................................................................................ 171

Amendment to H.R. 5732 offered by the Honorable Ted S. Yoho, a Representative in Congress from the State of Florida ......................................... 174

H.R. 5094, To contain, reverse, and deter Russian aggression in Ukraine, 

to assist Ukraine’s democratic transition, and for other purposes .................. 191

Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to H.R. 5094 offered by the 

Honorable Eliot L. Engel, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of New York ...................................................................................................... 215

Amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to H.R. 

5094 offered by the Honorable Gerald E. Connolly, a Representative 

in Congress from the Commonwealth of Virginia .......................................... 245

APPENDIX 

Markup notice .......................................................................................................... 252

Markup minutes ...................................................................................................... 253

Markup summary .................................................................................................... 255

The Honorable Christopher H. Smith, a Representative in Congress from 

the State of New Jersey: Prepared statement ................................................... 257

The Honorable David Cicilline, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of Rhode Island: Prepared statement ................................................................. 258

The Honorable Michael T. McCaul, a Representative in Congress from the 

State of Texas: Prepared statement ................................................................... 260

The Honorable David A. Trott, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of Michigan: Prepared statement ........................................................................ 261

(1)

VARIOUS MEASURES 

THURSDAY, JULY 14, 2016

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS,

Washington, DC. 

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:04 a.m., in room 

2172, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Edward Royce (chairman of the committee) presiding. 

Chairman ROYCE. This committee will come to order. 

Pursuant to notice, we meet today to mark up 13 bipartisan 

measures. And without objection, all members may have 5 days to 

submit statements or extraneous materials on today’s business. 

As members were notified yesterday, we intend to consider 12 of 

today’s 13 bipartisan measures en bloc, and then we will consider 

the Ukraine bill. 

And so without objection, the following items previously provided 

to members and in your packets will be considered en bloc and are 

considered as read. 

House Resolution 634, the Salmon amendment 146 in the nature 

of a substitute to House Resolution 634; House Resolution 660; 

House Resolution 728, with the Lowenthal amendment 78 in the 

nature of a substitute; House Resolution 729; House Resolution 

750; House Resolution 780, with Royce amendment 131 and Smith 

amendment to House Resolution 780; House Resolution 808; House 

Resolution 810, with Royce amendment 139; House Resolution 821, 

with the Meeks amendment to House Resolution 821; H.R. 4481, 

with the Royce amendment 130 in the nature of a substitute; H.R. 

5537, with a Royce amendment to that H.R. 5537; H.R. 5732, with 

Meadows amendment 286, Ros-Lehtinen amendment 53, RosLehtinen amendment 54, and the Yoho amendment 104. 

[The information referred to follows:]

2


20747a-1.eps
3


20747a-2.eps
4


20747a-3.eps
5


20747a-4.eps
6


20747p-1.eps
7


20747p-2.eps
8


20747p-3.eps
9


20747p-4.eps
10


20747b-1.eps
11


20747b-2.eps
12


20747b-3.eps
13


20747b-4.eps
14


20747b-5.eps
15


20747b-6.eps
16


20747b-7.eps
17


20747c-1.eps
18


20747c-2.eps
19


20747c-3.eps
20


20747c-4.eps
21


20747c-5.eps
22


20747q-1.eps
23


20747q-2.eps
24


20747q-3.eps
25


20747q-4.eps
26


20747q-5.eps
27


20747q-6.eps
28


20747d-1.eps
29


20747d-2.eps
30


20747d-3.eps
31


20747d-4.eps
32


20747e-1.eps
33


20747e-2.eps
34


20747e-3.eps
35


20747e-4.eps
36


20747e-5.eps
37


20747f-1.eps
38


20747f-2.eps
39


20747f-3.eps
40


20747f-4.eps
41


20747f-5.eps
42


20747f-6.eps
43


20747f-7.eps
44


20747r-1.eps
45


20747r-2.eps
46


20747t.eps
47


20747g-1.eps
48


20747g-2.eps
49


20747g-3.eps
50


20747h-1.eps
51


20747h-2.eps
52


20747h-3.eps
53


20747h-4.eps
54


20747u.eps
55


20747i-1.eps
56


20747i-2.eps
57


20747i-3.eps
58


20747i-4.eps
59


20747v.eps
60


20747j-1.eps
61


20747j-2.eps
62


20747j-3.eps
63


20747j-4.eps
64


20747j-5.eps
65


20747j-6.eps
66


20747j-7.eps
67


20747j-8.eps
68


20747j-9.eps
69


20747j-10.eps
70


20747j-11.eps
71


20747j-12.eps
72


20747j-13.eps
73


20747j-14.eps
74


20747j-15.eps
75


20747j-16.eps
76


20747j-17.eps
77


20747j-18.eps
78


20747j-19.eps
79


20747j-20.eps
80


20747j-21.eps
81


20747j-22.eps
82


20747j-23.eps
83


20747j-24.eps
84


20747j-25.eps
85


20747j-26.eps
86


20747j-27.eps
87


20747j-28.eps
88


20747w-1.eps
89


20747w-2.eps
90


20747w-3.eps
91


20747w-4.eps
92


20747w-5.eps
93


20747w-6.eps
94


20747w-7.eps
95


20747w-8.eps
96


20747w-9.eps
97


20747w-10.eps
98


20747w-11.eps
99


20747w-12.eps
100


20747w-13.eps
101


20747w-14.eps
102


20747w-15.eps
103


20747w-16.eps
104


20747w-17.eps
105


20747w-18.eps
106


20747w-19.eps
107


20747w-20.eps
108


20747w-21.eps
109


20747w-22.eps
110


20747k-1.eps
111


20747k-2.eps
112


20747k-3.eps
113


20747k-4.eps
114


20747k-5.eps
115


20747k-6.eps
116


20747k-7.eps
117


20747k-8.eps
118


20747k-9.eps
119


20747k-10.eps
120


20747k-11.eps
121


20747k-12.eps
122


20747k-13.eps
123


20747k-14.eps
124


20747k-15.eps
125


20747k-16.eps
126


20747x.eps
127


20747l-1.eps
128


20747l-2.eps
129


20747l-3.eps
130


20747l-4.eps
131


20747l-5.eps
132


20747l-6.eps
133


20747l-7.eps
134


20747l-8.eps
135


20747l-9.eps
136


20747l-10.eps
137


20747l-11.eps
138


20747l-12.eps
139


20747l-13.eps
140


20747l-14.eps
141


20747l-15.eps
142


20747l-16.eps
143


20747l-17.eps
144


20747l-18.eps
145


20747l-19.eps
146


20747l-20.eps
147


20747l-21.eps
148


20747l-22.eps
149


20747l-23.eps
150


20747l-24.eps
151


20747l-25.eps
152


20747l-26.eps
153


20747l-27.eps
154


20747l-28.eps
155


20747l-29.eps
156


20747l-30.eps
157


20747l-31.eps
158


20747l-32.eps
159


20747l-33.eps
160


20747l-34.eps
161


20747l-35.eps
162


20747l-36.eps
163


20747l-37.eps
164


20747l-38.eps
165


20747l-39.eps
166


20747y-1.eps
167


20747y-2.eps
168


20747y-3.eps
169


20747y-4.eps
170


20747z.eps
171


20747aa-1.eps
172


20747aa-2.eps
173


20747aa-3.eps
174


20747ab.eps
175

Chairman ROYCE. Now, the ranking member is on his way. And 

here he is. 

As a token of my appreciation for the extensive bipartisan work 

that went into today’s business, I am going to limit to two sentences per measure my comments. 

So first, I want to thank Mr. Salmon for his leadership on House 

Resolution 634. This expresses support for increased trilateral cooperation with our Japanese and Korean allies, and this support is 

critical, given North Korea’s continued belligerence. 

I also want to thank Judge Poe and Mr. Connolly for House Resolution 660, which urges the United States to deepen cooperation 

with Georgia, especially through strengthening the country’s selfdefense capabilities. 

Next year, the current memorandum of understanding regarding 

U.S. military assistance to Israel will expire, so I want to thank 

Chairman Emeritus Ros-Lehtinen and Mr. Deutch for introducing 

House Resolution 729, which urges the administration to work expeditiously to finalize a new robust agreement with our key security partner. 

Few threats to Israel are as great as that posed by the Iranian 

proxy Hezbollah. So I want to recognize the good work of Mr. 

Deutch on House Resolution 750, which urges the European Union 

to designate Hezbollah as a terrorist organization. 

I also want to thank Mr. Smith and Ms. Bass for introducing 

House Resolution 780, urging respect for free and fair elections in 

the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Elections that have been delayed by President Kabila, as he seeks to avoid a clear constitutional requirement that he step down from power. 

House Resolution 821 urges Gabon to hold free and fair elections 

this August. Gabon is not on a good track. Election observers, including the National Democratic Institute, report the possibility of 

violence during the election period. If past elections are an example, voter lists and vote counting will surely be manipulated. The 

Gabonese people deserve better. Unfortunately, with no Presidential term limits in place, this could be the low standard. 

We also consider House Resolution 808, which calls on Iran to 

immediately release Iranian Americans Siamak Namazi and his father, Baquer Namazi, who are being held hostage by that regime 

in Evin prison. The regime in Tehran has not changed its ways, 

and it continues to threaten the United States, threaten our allies, 

and threaten our citizens. 

Our last resolution recognizes the great life and work of the recently deceased activist and historian, Elie Wiesel. It urges the continuation of his tremendous efforts to never forget and to ensure 

the tragedies of the Holocaust are never repeated. 

We also consider H.R. 4481, the Education for All Act, which increases direction and accountability for U.S. efforts to improve access to basic education in developing countries, particularly for 

girls and children affected by conflict and crisis. And I want to 

thank Ranking Member Engel and Mr. Smith for their good inputs 

into this measure and have welcomed, in particular, the bill’s emphasis on girls’ access to education and the importance of parental 

involvement in their children’s schooling. 

176

Next, we turn to the Digital Global Access Policy Act, which will 

make it U.S. policy to alert the private sector to infrastructure 

projects in developing countries so that companies have the option 

of installing Internet access prior to a project’s completion. This 

build-once policy is common sense, and it will help more people in 

developing countries get Internet access. 

And lastly, the ongoing atrocities in Syria continue to shock the 

world, so I am proud to be an original cosponsor of the Caesar Syrian Civilian Protection Act of 2016, which should make it harder 

for the Assad regime to acquire the tools to keep bombing and to 

keep gassing and to keep killing Syrians. 

And I thank our ranking member, Mr. Engel, who has long been 

at the forefront of Syria policy. And I now recognize the ranking 

member for his remarks. 

Mr. ENGEL. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for 

your kind words, and thank you for calling this markup. We are 

going into our summer recess with a bang, taking up 13 measures 

this morning, and I want to thank our members on both sides of 

the aisle for all their hard work. 

I am going to focus first on a bill that the chairman just mentioned that I introduced, and it is one of the measures we are considering en bloc. Earlier this week, Chairman Royce and I introduced the Caesar Syrian Civilian Protection Act. 

One of the most remarkable moments for me as ranking member 

took place 2 years ago when the man known as Caesar visited this 

committee. Our colleagues will remember that day very vividly. He 

was a photographer who worked for the Assad Government in 

Syria who defected to the opposition. He brought with him horrific 

photographic evidence of violence and torture and killing that the 

regime had inflicted upon its own people. 

The need for American leadership to end this crisis has never 

been greater, and my bill would provide the administration with 

even more tools to help end the bloodshed and usher in a political 

transition. This bill would impose new sanctions on any parties 

that continue to do business with the Assad regime, but leaves 

flexibility for the administration so that if negotiations go forward, 

sanctions could be waived on a case-by-case basis to keep things 

moving along. 

The bill also addresses war crimes and crimes against humanity 

that have been so obvious in this conflict by facilitating evidence 

collection and requiring a report to name and shame those responsible for human rights violations against the Syrian people. 

Lastly, this bill strengthens oversight of our cross-border assistance going into Syria and requires a report on the potential effectiveness, risks, and requirements of a no-fly zone over or safe zone 

in Syria. I am grateful to the chairman for joining me to introduce 

this bill, and I ask that all members support it. 

We have 11 other measures we are taking up en bloc, and I am 

glad to support all of them. Mr. Salmon’s resolution, underscoring 

the importance of the U.S.-South Korea-Japan trilateral relationship, enhances regional security and holds North Korea accountable on its atrocious human rights record. Mr. Poe’s resolution expresses support for Georgia’s territorial integrity and condemns 

Putin’s aggression and supports the people of Georgia. Mr. 

177

Lowenthal’s resolution supports democracy, human rights, and the 

rule of law in Cambodia, and urges Cambodia’s Government, headed by the same Prime Minister since 1985, to respect the democratic aspirations of its people. Ms. Ros-Lehtinen’s measure calling 

for a new long-term memorandum of understanding between the 

United States and Israel demonstrates our steadfastness in our 

support of Israel’s ability to defend itself. Mr. Deutch’s resolution 

appropriately calls on the European Union to designate Hezbollah 

in its entirety as a terrorist organization. Mr. Smith’s resolution 

urges respect for the Constitution of the Democratic Republic of the 

Congo in this year’s transfer of power. And Chairman Royce and 

I were in the Democratic Republic of the Congo together just a few 

months ago. 

The chairman’s measure calling on Iran’s leaders to release Iranian Americans Siamak Namazi and his father, Baquer Namazi. It 

is outrageous that Iran continues to detain Americans on trumped 

up charges, and we need to keep holding Iran’s feet to the fire on 

these issues. 

Another resolution from Mr. Smith urges Gabon’s Government to 

respect and uphold democratic principles in the upcoming Presidential elections. The Education for All Act, sponsored by my 

neighbor from New York, Nita Lowey, helps ensure that expanding 

access to basic education remains a foreign policy priority in developing countries. A resolution from another New York colleague, Mr. 

Israel, honors the life and work of Elie Wiesel, a constant example 

of the sort of encourage needed to stand up against hatred and evil. 

And lastly, the chairman’s Digital GAP Act, which I am happy 

to cosponsor, promotes our interest in seeing more people around 

the world get online. And I thank the chairman for his work on 

this measure. 

These are all good pieces of legislation I am glad to support. 

Again, I thank everyone for their hard work. I wish everyone a 

good summer break. 

I ask unanimous consent to enter into the record a statement of 

support for H.R. 4481, the Education for All Act, from my good 

friend and ranking member of the Appropriations Committee and 

author of the bill, Mrs. Lowey. 

And I yield back, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman ROYCE. Mr. Rohrabacher of California. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. And 

let me note that I certainly support almost all of the bills that are 

being presented en bloc to us, but I have an absolute deep opposition to the bill that is aimed at Georgia and the situation in Georgia. 

Again, we have heard over and over again misinformation based 

on an irrational hostility toward Russia. We see this over and over 

again. We are leading the world not to a new cold war but the possibility of a real war with Russia; Russia who pulled back their 

military forces from a large chunk of Europe peacefully; Russia 

that has, yes, made some mistakes and actually done some things 

that are worthy of condemning. 

But if we take a look at what happened in Georgia and what the 

situation is, Georgia had a truce with warring factions in that part 

of the world. And what happened is that Georgia withdrew from 

178

the Soviet Union after the fall of Communism, which it had every 

right to do. 

There are two provinces of Georgia that had been given to Georgia by Joseph Stalin, two provinces that did not want to be part 

of Georgia, traditionally, historically, were not comfortable with 

having the Georgians over them: Ossetia and Abkhazia. Those two 

provinces immediately after the withdrawal from Russia began—

there was an insurgency movement for independence for those two 

provinces, very similar to what we saw in Kosovo and Serbia. We 

sided with the Kosovars, by the way, because they had a right of 

self-determination. 

While the fighting that went on was so bloody that there was a 

truce that was reached with negotiations, Russia involved themselves in that truce by agreeing to have observers to that agreement. That truce lasted for years, until the United States decided 

that we were going to work with Georgia to bring Georgia into 

NATO. NATO, an armed alliance aimed specifically at Russia. 

And so we decided to bring Georgia into NATO, and Russia counteracted by offering the people in Ossetia and Abkhazia Russian 

citizenship if they wanted it, which was then countered by Georgia 

in an invasion of those two provinces. We keep talking about an 

aggression by Russia against Georgia. The truce that lasted—the 

truce that was there, the peace that was there was violated by 

Georgia, and what we call the invasion of Georgia was a retaliation. The very next day, they did not let the Georgians get away—

into Georgia. 

And by the way, when the Georgians broke that truce and invaded Abkhazia and Ossetia with their army, they killed unarmed 

Russian observers of that truce agreement. Now, I don’t know what 

we would do if there are American observers of a peace truce and 

they ended up being murdered by some people coming in, unarmed, 

I might add, coming in to make sure that their country took over 

two provinces like, I might say, just exactly like Mr. Eliot and I 

were very, very active making sure that the Serbians didn’t get to 

kill everybody who got in their way, wouldn’t be part of the greater 

Serbia after the breakup of Yugoslavia. 

And the fact is that Georgia today—we keep talking about the 

Russian aggression on Georgia. The Russian troops that we are 

talking about only went into those two provinces. They are now, 

yes, in those two provinces. And what we should do is make an 

agreement for any withdrawal of those troops by letting Ossetia 

and Abkhazia have a vote on where they want to be. Let them have 

a vote that is taken by the OSCE and down there could verify that 

vote. Let them make that determination. 

What we are doing is a hostile anti-Russian act in the name of 

trying to in some way make up for some act of aggression that did 

not take place with Russia. Russia retaliated against someone who 

had already broken a truce and broken the peace. And by the way, 

I have said that a dozen times here. It is always ignored. 

Condoleezza Rice was right at that table when I said exactly the 

same thing, and instead of denying it, she went around it. 

Now, I think that if we want to have peace in the world, we have 

to have a good working relationship with Russia. And instead, in 

an irrational hostility toward Russia, based on the fact that Stalin 

179

not only did this thing with Ossetia and Abkhazia, giving it to 

Georgia, but he murdered millions of people, Ukrainians. Stalin, 

and during the Soviet time, murdered millions of people in these 

subjugated areas, whether the Balkans or whether it is up in Latvia, Estonia, and Lithuania, and now those people have a historic 

grudge. We cannot let ourselves be pushed into a war with Russia 

because there is a historic grudge that is going on among those 

people. 

And if we are going to have peace in the world, we have to be 

sure of what we are doing and be honest about it, and we haven’t 

been with Russia dealing with Georgia and dealing with the Baltic 

States, which I have not seen any military aggression going on in 

the Baltic States. Yet, we have B-52 bombers—B-52 bombers—

which are nuclear weapons delivery systems flying straight toward 

Russia and turning around as they get over the Baltic States. This 

is insane. 

What we would do if Russian bombers were headed straight into 

us—I mean, we are not talking about cruising along a coastline or 

cruising along boundary lines, we are talking about a war-type maneuver. And we are doing that in Georgia. We are doing that in the 

Baltics. It is ridiculous. And I would oppose this particular part of 

these bills today, but I support the rest of them. 

Chairman ROYCE. So now we go to Mr. Gerry Connolly of Virginia. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. I thank the chair, and I thank the ranking member for bringing before the committee H. Res. 660, expressing support for the territorial integrity of Georgia. I also want to welcome 

the Ambassador of Georgia to this markup, who has joined us 

today. 

I introduced this resolution with my friend and colleague and cochair of the congressional caucus in Georgia, Judge Ted Poe, who 

unfortunately is not with us today. 

This resolution serves as a clear and unequivocal statement in 

support of the sovereign territory of Georgia and reiterates the 

longstanding United States policy to not recognize territorial 

changes effected by force as dictated by the Stimson Doctrine, established in 1932—not a new idea, not an anti-Putin idea—1932, 

by then-Secretary of State Henry Stimson. 

In Georgia and elsewhere in the region, revisionist talk notwithstanding, Russia has committed gross violations of these principles 

by fomenting unrest and aiding separatist movements in the countries along its periphery. Foundational, multilateral agreements 

reached for the purpose of maintaining a peaceful and stable international order, such as the Helsinki Final Act of 1975 and the 

charter of the United Nations itself, have been willfully disregarded by Russia at Vladimir Putin’s behest. 

This resolution condemns strongly the forceable and illegal occupation of Abkhazia and South Ossetia regions in Georgia, and calls 

on Russia to withdraw its troops from those territories of another 

sovereign country. Phony elections with troops of a foreign power 

all over territory should be rejected. Those aren’t Democratic instruments. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Would the gentleman yield for a question at 

that point that you just made? 

180

Mr. CONNOLLY. I would. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Would you say elections that—would you 

agree that the solution to this would be elections in those provinces 

under the supervision of the OSCE, let those people decide? 

Mr. CONNOLLY. I would argue that with Russian troops in those 

territories, no such election could ever be valid. And the first order 

of business, like in the Ukraine and the Crimea—which we are 

going to address separately—they must withdraw. You cannot have 

any confidence in an election when Russian troops are all over your 

territory. An election at the point of the gun? What democrat, with 

a small D, in America could ever consent to that? None of us can. 

None of us should. 

This committee has an opportunity right now with this resolution 

and with the Ukrainian resolution to follow to make a clarion 

statement that can be heard in Moscow. We will be unwavering in 

insisting on the territorial sovereignty of sovereign states, whether 

Putin likes it or not, whether there was Soviet history or not. We 

are where we are today, and we don’t solve problems in Europe at 

the point of a gun. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Would the gentleman yield for another question? 

Mr. CONNOLLY. I would happily yield to my friend. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Do you recognize or do you not recognize that 

the military action—that the initiator of the violence that you are 

condemning was the Georgian army that broke a long-lasting truce 

in that area and thus resulted in the occupation forces that you 

were talking about? 

Mr. CONNOLLY. I would say, reclaiming my time to my friend, believe it or not, there are international mechanisms for dispute resolution. They do not include the invasion and occupation for 8 long 

years of another country’s sovereign territory. That is not how we 

solve disputes. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. The question that I had to you was do you 

recognize——

Mr. CONNOLLY. I yield again my time to my friend. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER [continuing]. That was the actual Georgians 

and not the Russians that initiated that violence? 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Again, that is my friend’s view of history, and I 

respect my friend, but there is another point of view about that history. And those disputes can be resolved in a peaceful manner, but 

they cannot be resolved so long as there are Russian troops occupying territory of another country. 

Certainly, my friend would agree that this territory is Georgian. 

That is not in dispute. And certainly, my friend would also agree, 

there are Russian troops in Georgian territory. Now, whether my 

friend wants to aid and abet Putin in his hegemony and occupying 

and annexing, as he did illegally in the Crimea, this territory of 

Georgia is a different matter. 

But I am urging my colleagues to reject my friend’s argument 

and to wholeheartedly endorse this resolution so the statement 

from this committee representing the foreign affairs function of the 

United States Congress is as crystal clear as can be so there is no 

ambiguity. 

With that, I yield back. 

181

Chairman ROYCE. And we go now to Mr. Chabot of Ohio. 

Mr. CHABOT. I thank the gentleman. 

I would like to commend you, Mr. Chairman and the ranking 

member, for bringing these bills before the committee today. These 

are all important measures, and it is encouraging to see the hard 

work of our colleagues that are being considered today. 

And again, the nature of this committee, for the most part, on 

a bipartisan manner, oftentimes the disagreements aren’t necessarily between Republicans and Democrats; they are oftentimes 

between Republicans and Democrats and one or a few members of 

this committee sometimes. But—and I don’t say that in a critical 

way. 

I rise in support of H. Res. 728, a bill that reaffirms the U.S. 

commitment to promoting democracy, human rights, and the rule 

of law in Cambodia. I am an original cosponsor of the bill, and I 

also serve as cochair of the Congressional Cambodia Caucus, along 

with my colleague, Mr. Lowenthal, and I commend him for offering 

this bill that I am talking about. 

In recent months, we have held a number of briefings and meetings with the State Department officials, with Cambodian Americans, as well as NGOs engaged in democracy building and rural 

law issues in Cambodia. And I have to say, I am very concerned 

about the situation there. Prime Minister Hun Sen continues to use 

bully tactics to sway the elections in his favor, and he has obviously been in control, in power in Cambodia for a long time. I believe he is the longest, at least, strong man serving in all of Asia. 

Opposition leader Sam Rainsy, who I have met with many times 

over the years, both in Cambodia and here, and who Mr. 

Lowenthal and I met with just last month, has real doubts about 

his ability even to return to Cambodia for fear of being in prison 

there on trumped-up charges, or worse. And now the deputy opposition leader Kem Sokha has seen charges brought against him. 

And there is reason to believe that there will be an intensifying 

crackdown on opposition prior to the election, which puts the election itself and its credibility in doubt, unfortunately, because Cambodia has the potential of being a truly great country and a very 

important part of the world. The people still should be living under 

much better circumstances than they are. It is obviously much better than it was when the Khmer Rouge was in power, when the 

killing fields occurred, and a quarter of the population was wiped 

out on the basis of, for example, whether you wore glasses or 

whether you had an education or a whole range of other issues. 

So it is not nearly as bad as it was back then clearly, but it 

should be so much better. And, unfortunately, because of the leadership of Hun Sen, the democracy that ought to be taking place in 

that country right now is being to a considerable degree thwarted. 

And if this behavior by Hun Sen and his supporters is allowed to 

continue and a suppression of the opposition and coercion of the opposition, in many cases, this could deal a serious blow to the democratic process just before the upcoming 2018 election. 

So I believe that this legislation will send a strong signal that 

the United States is paying close attention to the situation in Cambodia. 

182

I want to, again, thank Mr. Lowenthal for his leadership on this 

bill and on all issues in Cambodia, and I appreciate his cooperation 

in working on this issue, again, in a bipartisan way. So thank you 

very much. 

And I urge my colleagues to support it and the other legislation 

that we have discussed this morning and will discuss, and I yield 

back my time. 

Chairman ROYCE. Ted Deutch of Florida. 

Mr. DEUTCH. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. Thanks to you and Ranking Member Engel for, again, working in the spirit of bipartisanship that has marked the leadership of this committee. 

I am proud to support this good slate of bills today, and I would 

like to thank Ranking Member Engel for his continued leadership 

on Syria with the Caesar Syrian Civilian Protection Act. I am also 

proud to cosponsor Congressman Poe and Congressman Connolly’s 

resolution supporting Georgia’s territorial integrity. 

And I would make a point of offering our thoughts and our prayers to Judge Poe as he goes home to get well. 

I also want to thank Chairman Royce and Mr. Connolly for introducing H. Res. 808, calling on the Government of Iran to release 

American citizens Siamak and Baquer Namazi. We cannot and we 

must not be silent as Iran continues to unlawfully detain American 

citizens, and we won’t stop until the Namazis are released. And we 

also will not stop—will not stop—until Bob Levinson returns home 

to his family. He has now been separated from them for 91⁄2 years. 

Mr. Chairman, I would like to just briefly talk about three of the 

measures before us that I am proud to have introduced. First, I 

would like to thank my friend and Chairman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen 

for working with me to introduce H.R. 729, which urges the expeditious conclusion of a new memorandum of understanding between 

the United States and Israel. I thank the many members of this 

committee who are also cosponsors. This resolution now has over 

270 cosponsors, which underscores the deep bipartisan support for 

the U.S.-Israel relationship in this Congress. 

I traveled to Israel last week to assess the current security situation, and it is clear that Israel continues to face unprecedented 

threats from Hamas rockets in the south to Hezbollah’s more than 

100,000 rocket arsenal to ISIS affiliates, both on the Syrian border 

and on the Sinai. And it is because of the strong support from the 

United States that Israel is able to defend itself against these 

threats, many of which threaten our own strategic interests in the 

region. 

But the conclusion of this MOU is about more than just shared 

security threats. A new 10-year MOU will serve as the backbone 

of this relationship, and it sends a message to the entire world that 

the United States and Israel stand together. The administration 

has made clear that it wants to conclude the MOU as quickly as 

possible, that it is prepared to offer Israel the largest aid package 

to date. And I heard many encouraging things from those in Israel 

last week about the desire to reach an agreement. 

By passing this resolution today, Congress will go on record with 

the overwhelming bipartisan support for the U.S.-Israel relationship, and I urge my colleagues to support it. 

183

Second, I urge the committee to support H. Res. 750, which calls 

on the European Union to designate the whole of Hezbollah as a 

terrorist organization. I thank my colleagues, Representatives Bilirakis, Israel, Kelly, Lieu, Jeffries, Zeldin, and Davis, for joining me 

in introducing this resolution. 

In 2012, Congress passed a resolution that I authored with Congressman Kelly calling on the EU to designate Hezbollah. In 2013, 

the EU designated the military wing of Hezbollah. Mr. Chairman, 

we all know there is no distinction between the military and political wings of a terrorist organization. There is only one Hezbollah; 

it is a terrorist organization. This country makes no distinction. 

Canada makes no distinction. The Gulf Cooperation Council and 

the Arab League make no distinction. 

Hezbollah is responsible for terrorist attacks in Europe, Latin 

America, and in Asia. It has well over 100,000 rockets pointed at 

Israel. Its fighters are on the ground in Syria doing Iran’s dirty 

work helping the Assad regime slaughter tens of thousands of innocent Syrians. 

This organization uses the international financial system to fund 

its worldwide criminal enterprises, which in turn fund its terror activities. And I applaud our allies in Europe for the work they have 

done to crack down on Hezbollah’s criminal activities. That is why 

they should take the next logical step of designating the entirety 

of Hezbollah as a terrorist organization. This designation will allow 

the EU to work even more closely with American authorities to 

prevent Hezbollah from using the international banking system to 

fund its global terror. I urge my colleagues to support this good and 

timely bill. 

And finally, I would like to thank the committee for moving 

swiftly to bring up H. Res. 810, recognizing the life and the incredible contributions of Elie Wiesel. It is difficult to truly capture the 

immense positive impact that Elie Wiesel had on our world. 

After surviving one of humanity’s darkest moments, he worked 

to keep alive the memories and the stories of the millions of lives 

that were lost. He committed himself to fighting for the voiceless. 

He refused to stay silent as atrocities transpired against others. He 

was a source of inspiration for millions of people throughout the 

world, and he will forever live in history as one of the greatest and 

most influential and the bravest figures of his time. 

By passing this resolution today, particularly today, after the 

challenging month that our own Nation has had, we honor Elie 

Wiesel. And we recommit ourselves to overcoming even the most 

insurmountable of obstacles. We inspire ourselves to greater tolerance and to upholding the principle of never again. 

I appreciate it very much, Mr. Chairman. And I yield back. 

Chairman ROYCE. Thank you, Mr. Deutch. 

We go now to Ileana Ros-Lehtinen. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Thank you so much, Chairman Royce and 

Ranking Member Engel, for bringing before the committee my resolution, H. Res. 729, which is simple bipartisan common sense, and, 

as my colleague, Congressman Deutch, pointed out, has the support 

of over 270 cosponsors, including almost every single member of 

our committee. It calls upon the administration to conclude a new 

robust and long-term MOU on military assistance to Israel. 

184

I also wanted to express my support for H.R. 5732, the Caesar 

Syrian Civil Protection Act. In 2012, we passed in this committee 

a bill I authored, the Iran Threat Reduction and Syria Human 

Rights Act, which later became law, and part of our bill before us 

builds upon those sanctions. And I have offered two amendments 

that I think add to what we are trying to accomplish. 

And later today, Mr. Chairman, as you know, I will convene a 

hearing in our subcommittee on a GAO report that Ted Deutch, 

Ron DeSantis, Gerry Connolly, and I requested on undelivered humanitarian assistance into Syria. And I would also like to commend my friend, Mark Meadows, for offering his important amendment to name and shame the human rights violators in Syria. And 

I yield back. 

Chairman ROYCE. Mr. Lowenthal, were you seeking time? Yes, 

Alan. 

Mr. LOWENTHAL. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you 

for working with me. 

And thank you, Ranking Member Engel, for bringing up House 

Resolution 728 supporting human rights, democracy, and the rule 

of law in Cambodia. 

You know, Mr. Chair, you have been a leader on human rights 

and the rule of law in Cambodia for years, and I was so pleased 

to work with you to bring this resolution forward. 

I also want to thank Congressman Chabot. You have worked 

with me as the cochair on the Cambodia Caucus. We have brought 

together a bipartisan approach to democracy and the rule of law in 

Cambodia, and I just want to thank you as we bring this resolution 

forward. 

And I also want to thank Chairman Matt Salmon, who has been 

the Republican lead on this resolution. He brought it up in the Asia 

Subcommittee markup last week, where it was passed, and I want 

to thank him for working with us and his leadership on this issue. 

It is very much appreciated. 

Cambodia holds great promise for being one of the few open, free, 

and democratic societies in a region where democracy has been on 

the defensive. However, in recent years, the Cambodian Government, presided by the Prime Minister Hun Sen for the past 31 

years, has severely cracked down on the political opposition and all 

forms of dissent. 

This resolution outlines numerous instances of political violence 

since the 2013 national elections, which prolonged Hun Sen’s grip 

on power and were marred by allegations of voting irregularities. 

The Cambodian Government has undertaken a comprehensive 

campaign to undermine the political opposition. 

Last year, the Cambodian Government revived a 7-year-old defamation charge against opposition leader Sam Rainsy, expelling him 

from the Parliament and forcing him into self-imposed exile. Since 

then, the government has sought to arrest Kem Sokha, the deputy 

opposition leader who remains under effective house arrest. 

And just this last weekend, prominent political activist and outspoken critic of the government, Kem Ley, was brutally gunned 

down in the streets of Phnom Penh. The true motive of his killing 

is not yet known, but the current unrest in Cambodia and the long 

185

history of political assassinations have led many to suspect the government’s involvement in his murder. 

Just yesterday, I spoke with Mr. Kem Sokha, the deputy opposition leader. He told me now that he not only fears arrest by the 

government but that now he truly fears for his life. The deteriorating political situation in Cambodia demands action from the 

United States. That is why it is so important that we pass this resolution and show that Congress stands with the people of Cambodia and reaffirms our commitment to democracy, to human 

rights, and the rule of law in Cambodia. 

By passing House Resolution 728 today, we will send an important signal to the Cambodian Government that political violence of 

any kind will not be tolerated and that the Cambodian people must 

be able to enjoy freedom of speech and freedom to choose their own 

leaders. 

Again, I urge my colleagues to support the resolution and thank 

Chairman——

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Would the gentleman yield? 

Mr. LOWENTHAL. Yes. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Would the gentleman yield? 

Mr. LOWENTHAL. Yes, I will. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Let me just commend Congressman 

Lowenthal for his unstopping energy that he puts into this effort 

to bring peace and democracy to Cambodia. 

Over the years, I have tried to be supportive of his efforts. And 

I have been to Cambodia a number of times. It is time for Hun Sen 

to go. There was an argument that Hun Sen helped get rid of Pol 

Pot, who was a monster who murdered millions of his own people. 

Whatever happened in the past does not justify Hun Sen’s continuing iron-fisted grip. And this is crony capitalism or crony communism, however you describe it in Cambodia. And we are going 

to have—they deserve our support for creating a more democratic 

society there. 

And thank you, Mr. Lowenthal, for all you are doing in this regard. 

Mr. LOWENTHAL. Thank you. 

Chairman ROYCE. I will just make the observation that we are 

going to have business on the floor at 10:05, so if any of the members here could submit their statements for the record, that would 

be very helpful. 

We are going to go to Mr. Weber of Texas. 

Mr. WEBER. I thank the gentleman, thank the chairman. 

And I am going to speak on 660. I want to thank my good friend, 

Congressman Poe from Texas, for his excellent work on the resolution. Seems there has been some discussion about it. I will put my 

good friend, Mr. Connolly from Virginia, down as a ‘‘lean yes’’ and 

our good friend from California as an ‘‘undecided.’’

I do want to commend the work that Congressman Poe and Mr. 

Connolly have done on this bill. I want to commend the work of the 

chairman and my colleagues on the full slate of legislation being 

marked up today. 

From the prompting of the EU to designate Hezbollah a terrorist 

organization, to the honoring of a true statesman, as many have already alluded to, Mr. Elie Wiesel, to the call for the release of yet 

186

more Iranian Americans illegally jailed, we have a block of legislation that is both timely and significant in its reach. And I appreciate the bipartisan work done on this committee. 

Mr. Chairman, in 2008, Russia signed a cease-fire agreement 

with Georgia committing to, among other things, the withdrawal of 

their military troops to prewar position. Eight years later, they 

have instead created an entire military base and continued to expand their territory within the sovereign nation of Georgia. In fact, 

reports suggest that Russian military and special forces invaded a 

village within the District of Guria where they created roads 

through the gardens of 48 local residents, divided the village cemetery in two, and destroyed the stadium along with thousands of 

apple trees. Additionally, Russian soldiers have kidnapped a number of Georgian citizens near the administrative border line separating South Ossetia and the rest of Georgia, and the detentions 

are on the rise. 

Russia is refusing to honor their agreement. Instead, they are 

signaling their desire to reclaim Georgia by the blatant attempt to 

co-op the upcoming October elections, as Mr. Connolly alluded to 

at the point of a gun perhaps, also via propaganda and the influence of Russian oligarch and billionaire Bidzina Ivanishvili. Worth 

at least $5 billion, Mr. Ivanishvili was recently exposed by the Panama Papers for his offshore financial deals, his illicit arms trades, 

and his continued efforts to control the Georgian Government behind the scenes. 

There is no question that Moscow is mounting an attack via Mr. 

Ivanishvili to acquire full control over Georgia once again. New 

pro-Russian political parties, blocks, and coalitions are being created almost daily thanks to the funding by Mr. Ivanishvili and 

Russian intelligence services. Pro-Russian propaganda has taken 

control of the television space in Georgia with the only pro-Western 

TV station, Rustavi 2, now facing the threat of a shutdown, all of 

these efforts personally organized and funded by Mr. Ivanishvili. 

Mr. Chairman, as evidenced by other resolutions on today’s agenda, including those related to the countries of Cambodia, the Democratic Republic of Congo, and Gabon, this committee takes free 

elections very seriously, despite the recent revelation that our own 

Department of State used hundreds of thousands of dollars in taxpayers’ funds to support election campaign efforts in opposition to 

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the leader of one of 

our strongest allies in the world. That thwarts the very essence of 

a governing democracy. It goes against the very founding of our 

principles. 

Mr. Chairman, we must take a stand for the national sovereignty 

of our allies. We must push Russia to stand by their words and remove their troops from Georgia. We must provide a better example 

to those around the world by demanding free and fair elections. 

And in standing by those principles, in word indeed, I wholeheartedly support Congressman Poe’s legislation. I thank my friend 

from Virginia for his part in it, and I also support the full slate of 

legislation today. I urge passage. 

And with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back. 

Chairman ROYCE. I thank the gentleman. 

187

I would remind our members we still have the Ukraine bill that 

we need to debate, and so if we could be succinct in our comments. 

Mr. Cicilline is next from Rhode Island. 

Mr. CICILLINE. With that request, Mr. Chairman, I will submit 

my comments for the record and just say thank you to you and to 

Ranking Member Engel for, again, conducting this markup in a bipartisan way. I think we should all be very proud of the resolutions 

that are before the committee today, which I think reflect our commitment to important allies around the world and our commitment 

to human rights, democracy, and rule of law, and international stability and peace. 

And with that, I will submit this, and thank you and yield back. 

Chairman ROYCE. Thank you, Mr. Cicilline. I deeply appreciate 

you submitting that for the record. 

We now go to Mr. Smith of New Jersey. 

Mr. SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I will submit most 

of my comments for the record. 

Just very briefly to speak on the Democratic Republic of the 

Congo, which I think members realize faces a perilous course as 

elections scheduled for November look increasingly unlikely. The 

mandate for President Joseph Kabila and his country’s national 

legislature will expire in late December and unless there is some 

way to either speed up the process for an acceptable election or find 

a way to create an acceptable transition in government to manage 

the election process, many of us, the State Department included, 

fear that that country could descend into chaos. 

I have met with Kabila’s Special Envoy recently who tried to explain why, in the 5 years since the last election, the government 

couldn’t make the necessary preparations to hold this election on 

time. His reasons did not justify the delays that have put his country on the brink of a constitutional crisis. That is why we have introduced H. Res. 780, to press the Kabila government to avoid a 

situation in which he remains in power indefinitely, contrary to the 

intent of his country’s Constitution and the will of the people. 

I also would point out that backing the resolution is a group of 

the Congolese diaspora, including an opposition party member, religious leaders, and civic society groups. Because H. Res. 780, this 

coalition is calling for a process by which Kabila would appoint a 

Prime Minister under his country’s emergency provisions to take 

over temporarily to hold the elections that will be considered acceptable to the Congolese people. 

Let me also point out the resolution on Gabon. H. Res. 821 calls 

for an orderly peaceful, free, and fair Presidential election in that 

country. The 2009 elections were plagued with election irregularities and provoked destruction demonstrations, and a repeat of 

such a significantly flawed process could endanger the stability of 

that country. Our championing of a successful election for free, fair, 

and violence-free election puts governments on notice that we mean 

what we say about democracy, we will be watching and watching 

carefully. 

And finally, on H. Res. 660, about 10 days ago, I was in Tbilisi, 

Georgia. Eight years ago, I was there about 10 days after the invasion by the Russian troops, and I can tell you the scars are real. 

One hundred ninety-two thousand people were displaced at the 

188

time. Several hundred were killed. I remember I had some of my 

own constituents trapped in South Ossetia. We got them out, 

thankfully, after weeks of negotiations and many other children, 

American children, who were in Abkhazia as well. But this is a festering sore, and the Russians took South Ossetia and Abkhazia by 

force. They violated the Helsinki Final Act and follow-on agreements about territorial integrity. 

And I was at a checkpoint just 10 days ago, on the Georgia-South 

Ossetia border, and it was like the old Soviet Union. The Russian 

troops came to the checkpoint. They had made people wait upwards 

of 12 hours to cross over with food stuffs to get to people on the 

other side, and out came a Russian guard with a camera filming 

me and a few other Members who were standing there. It was the 

old Soviet reprise that we saw for so many years. The tensions are 

thick. It is important that we send this message. 

So thank you, Ted Poe and Mr. Connolly, for the resolution. 

Those two areas, South Ossetia and Abkhazia, were taken by force. 

Yes, there was perhaps a provocation of sorts, but nothing that 

caused the counteraction by the Russians in invasion and, again, 

it caused large losses of life and displacement of so many people. 

I thank the chairman. I yield back. 

Chairman ROYCE. Mr. Alan Grayson. 

Mr. GRAYSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

When I look at these resolutions regarding Abkhazia, South 

Ossetia, the bill regarding the Ukraine and the Crimea, what is 

missing to me is a sense of respect for the wishes of the people involved. Too often we find ourselves viewing those people as pawns, 

as puppets, and we view this as some kind of colossal battle between one government and another without any regard for what 

the people involved actually want. 

As I indicated the last time we had a bill involving the Ukraine, 

the people of the Crimea voted overwhelmingly time and time 

again for pro-Russian parties. When they were part of the Ukraine, 

that is what they did. That reflected their will. There is no indication at this point, whether or not Russian troops are there, that 

most people in the Crimea would want to rejoin the Ukraine. Quite 

the contrary, the indication is that they would not, that they were 

not comfortable being part of that country when they were part of 

it, and they are not comfortable now with the idea or notion that 

they would be forced to rejoin the Ukraine. 

With regard to Abkhazia, with regard to South Ossetia, both of 

these areas held elections within the past 2 years. There is no evidence that has been provided that these elections were somehow 

twisted or perverted by the presence of foreign troops. In fact, from 

the looks of things, they had multicandidate elections. The elections looked to be fair. They certainly were vigorously contested. 

And they reached results that seemed to reflect the local priorities. 

The turnout was actually very high in both cases. 

So one has to wonder exactly what we think we are accomplishing by choosing sides against the will of the people in places 

like Abkhazia, in places like South Ossetia, in places like Crimea 

and so on. 

One of the great battles of the later part of the 20th century was 

the battle for decolonization. One of the great battles that I see for 

189

the early part of this century is the battle against internal colonization, taking large groups of people, that sometimes number in the 

millions, and keeping them trapped within a country they don’t feel 

a part of against their will. It is no longer true of the Soviet Union. 

It still is true of Iran. Frankly, if South Ossetia and Abkhazia were 

returned to Georgia, it would be true of those places as well. 

We show all too much regard for the concept of territorial integrity without any regard for the concept of self-determination and 

the concept that people have the right to be part of a country that 

they want to be part of. It is that simple. And too often we find 

large groups of people who feel trapped in the wrong country. 

I agree that these matters should always be resolved without 

force. I think it is regrettable whenever any shot is fired over an 

issue of self-determination. But what we need, I think, more than 

anything else right now in these situations, whether it is Abkhazia, 

South Ossetia, Crimea, or anywhere else, we need some kind of 

peaceful resolution that reflects the popular will. And that is something that was never provided to the people of Crimea, never provided to people of Abkhazia, and South Ossetia, by the governments that purported to be governments covering those areas, 

whether we are talking about Georgia, Ukraine, or otherwise. 

We need to have some kind of consensus that it is all right, it 

is okay for a territory that is part of a government to separate and 

to do so through peaceful means, as we saw an attempt to do in 

Scotland recently and as we will see time and time again in Western democracies and other democracies all around the world. Yes, 

these things should be done through democratic means, but there 

must be a mechanism to do them. 

I yield back. 

Chairman ROYCE. We are going to go to Mr. Meadows for 1 

minute and then 1 minute to Mr. Sherman, but then we are going 

to have to go to the vote. 

Mr. Meadows. 

Mr. MEADOWS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

My amendment basically works in very close harmony with the 

gentlewoman from Florida, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen’s, fine work on the 

Syrian issue and to make actually the human rights abusers directly accountable for their crime. And so it puts in reporting language of 120 days for the President to submit a report on the 47 

individuals that actually are either responsible or complicit in the 

human rights violation in Syria. So I would like to thank her, the 

Syrian Emergency Task Force, and certainly the author of the underlying bill for their work and leadership. 

And with that, I will yield back, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman ROYCE. Thank you, Mr. Meadows. 

We will now go to Mr. Sherman of California. 

Mr. SHERMAN. I will associate myself with Mr. Lowenthal’s comments on Cambodia. And while I will vote for the Georgia resolution, we should recognize that we often support not territorial integrity but self-determination, and we are often somewhat inconsistent on this. We supported the breakup of the Soviet Union, 

Yugoslavia, and the division of the Republic of Serbia. We oppose 

the division of Croatia, Georgia, and the Ukraine. 

190

In each case, we have taken the anti-Russian position. We should 

at least try to be as calm as possible with Russia, to recognize that 

we are not always consistent and absolute in our position, and that 

we should avoid pushing things to the very edge where we put 

military forces right up against a border when that is unnecessary. 

And I look forward to working with the members of this committee, 

even Mr. Rohrabacher, for a calmer relationship with Russia. 

I yield back. 

Chairman ROYCE. I thank the gentleman. 

Hearing no further requests for recognition, the question occurs 

on items considered en bloc. 

All those in favor, say aye. 

All those opposed, no. 

In the opinion of the Chair, the ayes have it, and the measures 

considered en bloc are agreed to. 

And without objection, the measures considered en bloc are ordered favorably reported as amended. Staff is directed to make any 

technical and conforming changes, and the Chair is authorized to 

seek House consideration under suspension of the rules. 

The Chair now calls up for consideration H.R. 5094, the Stability 

and Democracy for Ukraine Act. Without objection, Engel amendment 284 in the nature of a substitute will be considered base text, 

is considered read, and is open for amendment at any point. 

[The information referred to follows:]

191


20747o-1.eps
192


20747o-2.eps
193


20747o-3.eps
194


20747o-4.eps
195


20747o-5.eps
196


20747o-6.eps
197


20747o-7.eps
198


20747o-8.eps
199


20747o-9.eps
200


20747o-10.eps
201


20747o-11.eps
202


20747o-12.eps
203


20747o-13.eps
204


20747o-14.eps
205


20747o-15.eps
206


20747o-16.eps
207


20747o-17.eps
208


20747o-18.eps
209


20747o-19.eps
210


20747o-20.eps
211


20747o-21.eps
212


20747o-22.eps
213


20747o-23.eps
214


20747o-24.eps
215


20747ac-1.eps
216


20747ac-2.eps
217


20747ac-3.eps
218


20747ac-4.eps
219


20747ac-5.eps
220


20747ac-6.eps
221


20747ac-7.eps
222


20747ac-8.eps
223


20747ac-9.eps
224


20747ac-10.eps
225


20747ac-11.eps
226


20747ac-12.eps
227


20747ac-13.eps
228


20747ac-14.eps
229


20747ac-15.eps
230


20747ac-16.eps
231


20747ac-17.eps
232


20747ac-18.eps
233


20747ac-19.eps
234


20747ac-20.eps
235


20747ac-21.eps
236


20747ac-22.eps
237


20747ac-23.eps
238

Chairman ROYCE. And I want to thank the ranking member for 

authoring this important measure which tightens sanctions on 

Moscow, especially related to the forcible annexation of Crimea and 

includes measures to counter sanctions evasion. 

I now recognize the ranking member for his remarks on the bill. 

Mr. ENGEL. Thank you, again, Mr. Chairman. 

I am grateful that we are taking up the STAND for Ukraine Act, 

which I introduced in April with Mr. Kinzinger, a former member 

of this committee. The legislation underscores America’s support 

for Ukraine’s right to defend itself. Parts of Ukraine, as we know, 

are illegally occupied, so our aim with this bill is rooted in America’s nonrecognition policy during the 50-year Soviet occupation of 

Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania. 

This bill links any sanctions relief to Russia fulfilling its obligations under the Minsk Agreement as well as making Crimea-related sanctions permanent so long as the Russian occupation there 

continues. It also tightens sanctions enforcement with a new antievasion framework and requires regular reports on banks illegally 

controlling Ukrainian assets, particularly Russian banks in Crimea. 

Additionally, this bill tries to drive new private sector investments in Ukraine, clamps down on Russia buying defense equipment or services from our NATO allies, targets human rights 

abuses in Russian-occupied areas, and calls for a strategy to push 

back against Russian propaganda. 

I want to thank Mr. Connolly of Virginia for offering an amendment, making clear that Crimea-related sanctions should not be 

dropped until Ukrainian sovereignty of Crimea has been restored. 

Let me also thank the gentleman for his tireless work on this issue. 

Thank you, Mr. Connolly. He has been laser-focused on it since the 

first day of this crisis and this measure makes this bill stronger. 

We need to send a message to the people of Ukraine that we 

stand with them and to Putin that his aggression and bullying 

won’t go unanswered. I ask that all members support this bill, and 

I yield back. 

Chairman ROYCE. On the amendment referenced by Mr. Engel 

that has not yet been offered but will be, and before I yield the 

chair or turn over the chair to Mr. Smith, I did want to speak to 

this issue. And I think it is an issue we should all think on before 

we adopt this amendment, and I will tell you why. 

First, I want to thank the gentleman from Virginia for offering 

the amendment, although I have to oppose it, because I admire his 

long-established commitment to Ukraine and especially to Crimea. 

However, as we are all aware, the provision in the ranking member’s bill that that amendment would strike allows the President 

of the United States to lift the existing sanctions related to Crimea 

if there is a resolution of the region’s status that—and here is the 

key concept in the underlying bill—that a democratically-elected 

Government of Ukraine judges to be satisfactory and that has been 

reached through an internationally supervised process. In other 

words, the people of Ukraine would make that decision. 

My concern is that to strike that language to prevent a situation 

from arising in which the Ukrainian Government concludes an 

agreement that it believes is good for the nation, but the U.S. nevVerDate 0ct 09 2002 16:24 Sep 21, 2016 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00242 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\_FULL\071416M\20747 SHIRL
239

ertheless says, that is not good enough for us, we would have in 

effect be claiming to be more Ukrainian than the Ukrainians. This 

amendment would potentially bind the U.S. to a position that the 

Ukrainian Government itself might have left behind. 

As the gentleman is aware, the central goal of U.S. policy toward 

Ukraine is to allow a sovereign and democratic Ukraine to choose 

its own destiny, just like the United States. So I believe that 

should continue to be our goal. I think the underlying bill states 

it very effectively. So we should be prepared to support Ukrainian’s 

decisions of what is best for Ukrainians. 

Therefore, I must oppose the amendment. I just don’t see the 

sense of offering it in these circumstances, given how strong the 

underlying bill already is. But with that——

Mr. CONNOLLY. Would the chairman yield? 

Chairman ROYCE. You will have your own time. I have to go to 

the floor right now——

Mr. CONNOLLY. The chairman has preemptively attacked an 

amendment. 

Chairman ROYCE. And if you withdraw the amendment, I will 

withdraw my preemptive attack. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. But I kind of wanted to give my colleagues an 

opportunity for the counterargument. 

Chairman ROYCE. I would love to have that argument, but I cannot have it today, I can’t have it at this moment. But I will yield 

you 5 minutes. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. I will move up. I have an amendment at the 

desk. I am sorry. Are you recognizing me to speak? 

Chairman ROYCE. I am recognizing you to speak. I was recognizing you to speak on the underlying measure. But inasmuch as 

I discussed your amendment, feel free to segue into that amendment. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Thank you so much. 

First of all, I want to thank Mr. Engel for bringing this resolution up, and I want to thank the chairman for bringing the resolution up. 

The chairman has given a point of view. And I listened carefully 

to my friend Mr. Weber about Georgia and the Ukraine. I have consistently insisted, since the illegal invasion and annexation of the 

Crimea, that we must be clear as a bell, no ambiguity, no other 

conditionality. 

My friend Mr. Chabot and I introduced a bill this committee supported, the Crimea Annexation Non-Recognition Act. This isn’t a 

Democratic or Republican issue. 

Here is my concern, and I hope it is yours. That language looks 

innocent. My amendment would delete that language and leave it 

with silence about what the Ukrainian Government decides to do. 

If the Ukrainian Government decides tomorrow, ‘‘You know what, 

we don’t need the Crimea, we are going to give it up,’’ obviously, 

a President is going to come to Congress saying, ‘‘Well, that is their 

decision,’’ and we would have to consider it. But why offer it on a 

plate by the U.S. Congress? 

I have worked with my friend Mike Turner, Republican from 

Ohio. He heads up the NATO Parliamentary Assembly. I head up 

the U.S. delegation. We have worked together to make sure there 

240

is no dilution of language on this subject in NATO, and there have 

been attempts. 

This is, without intention, I fear, to be construed as, ‘‘Well, if you 

don’t get out of Crimea, how about you negotiate something, and 

we will call it a day?’’ We don’t want to do that. 

Now, contrary to what my friends have heard from Mr. Grayson, 

there is terrible human rights abuse going on by the Russians in 

Crimea today against Tartars, against political dissenters, against 

anybody with a different political point of view. As Mr. Weber indicated, they dominate media, and the propaganda and the harassment are quite considerable. And life for the indigenous Crimean 

population is very difficult. People who have family members there 

report that. 

I am delighted to have the support of the author of this resolution, Mr. Engel, for this amendment. And I know a number of my 

colleagues also heard from the Ukrainian Congress in support of 

this amendment as well. 

This isn’t a Democrat or Republican issue. This isn’t something 

designed in any way to embarrass the leadership of this committee. 

This is a sincerely felt policy position so that we speak with one 

voice and as clearly as we can, just as we just did in Georgia, on 

the Ukraine. 

I was in the Ukraine recently. They need our support. They need 

to know in Kiev that we are unwavering so that they do what they 

have to do. If they ever change their minds, they are always free 

to come back. We don’t need a provision to invite it. What we need 

is a clear, unequivocal statement that the settlement about the Crimea is a Ukrainian issue, not an issue for Russia and the rest of 

the world. 

With that, I yield back. 

Mr. SMITH [presiding]. The Chair recognizes Mr. Rohrabacher. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Well, let me just ask my colleague from Virginia, Mr. Connolly, do you sense that we actually agree on selfdetermination, or do we not? Meaning, if, indeed, there were no 

Russian troops involved and no military action taking place, that 

the people, as we heard from Mr. Grayson, the people do have a 

fundamental right, even if they are a part of another country, they 

are on a periphery of a country and want to be independent or part 

of another nation, that they have a right by majority to do so. Is 

that correct? And it is the occupation, it is the introduction of Russian troops at Abkhazia. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Yeah, that is like, other than the unpleasantness, 

how did you like the play at Ford’s Theatre? 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. I yield time to respond. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. I thank my friend. 

No, we don’t agree, because you are assuming, even if Russian 

troops got out—a big if—which Mr. Grayson apologizes for that, he 

dismisses that, I don’t know how any reasonable person can say 

there can be a free and fair election with Russian troops over all 

the territory. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. We did. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. But with respect to your question. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Yes. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. It is for Ukraine to make that decision. 

241

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Yes. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Otherwise, I would say to my friend, then you 

would have to say those parts of Spain that have an inclination to 

secede, we ought to have an international election and let them do 

it, irrespective of the wishes of the Spanish Government in Madrid. 

That is interference in another sovereign state’s affairs. It is up to 

the Ukraine, I would say to my friend from California, to decide on 

the disposition of its own territory, not up to us and not up to Russia. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Yeah. Then you would suggest that we 

should be part of the British Empire. Is that correct? After all, we 

did forcefully declare our independence, and I guess you do, then, 

renounce when in the course of human events that it comes time 

to separate the bonds between, that doesn’t—go right ahead. I 

yield. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. All right. No, the proper analogy actually is the 

American Civil War, Mr. Rohrabacher. It was not up to the United 

Kingdom and France to recognize Confederate independence. It 

was up to the United States of America to decide on that, and we 

did. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Reclaiming my time. Let me just note that 

had the South, during the Civil War, permitted women and permitted slaves and not had slavery, and it was not a slave situation, 

where if they had been permitted to vote, I doubt if they would 

have voted for secession, but had they done so and the South didn’t 

have slavery, well, then, that would have been fine for them to secede, if we do believe in the Declaration of Independence. 

Did you oppose our efforts in Kosovo, Mr. Connolly? 

Mr. CONNOLLY. I opposed secession, certainly, in the United 

States history. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. You are being consistent. 

Let me note, I don’t believe there is that big a difference between 

most of the members here and some of these issues that we are 

raising, because whether or not what the Russian action was at 

this point, at this point, whether or not somebody else committed, 

initiated a violence that ended up with the current situation, I 

think that what unites Americans is that we do believe that people 

have a right, through the ballot box, to determine their destiny. 

And you would suggest that they have to be part of a bigger entity, 

and that bigger entity has to agree to it. I think that is where we 

disagree. 

But I think the right of people to determine through the ballot 

box rather than bullet box is the way we should be supporting and 

ending some of these conflicts. And I certainly agree with that in 

the Ukraine, and I certainly agree with that in Georgia, and all of 

these different things that we are talking about. 

So I do not interpret my own position as being pro-Russian in 

some of these things. I really believe that local people have a right. 

I supported Kosovars. I supported the Scots. Even if they didn’t get 

their vote, I would have appreciated it. And the Catalonians, if 

they want to be free from the rest of Spain. People have a right 

to their self-determination. I think that is what our Declaration of 

Independence was all about. And just a thought. I thought I would 

throw that in the air. 

242

Thank you very much, Mr. Connolly, for that exchange. 

Mr. SMITH. Mr. Sherman. 

Mr. SHERMAN. I think both gentlemen are right. We have been 

on the side of self-determination. We have been on the side of territorial integrity. We were born in a war of secession. We were baptized in a great civil war against secession. We tore asunder the 

British Empire in 1776 and prevented our Nation from being torn 

asunder fourscore and 7 years later. 

I don’t agree with Mr. Rohrabacher that just any group for any 

reason can say, ‘‘Give us a vote and we get our independence.’’ That 

is only true if David Cameron is your Prime Minister. 

The fact is, the San Fernando Valley would make an excellent 

country. I know it would have outstanding leadership. And, yet, we 

weren’t even given a free vote to secede from the City of Los Angeles, let alone from the United States. 

The fact is, these questions are answered in our Declaration of 

Independence, which says you shouldn’t create your own country 

just because, well, that is how you feel that day or you think you 

would do a little better, only when you can lay out to the world 

truly extraordinary oppression from the State that is governing you 

and truly extraordinary reasons for your independence. 

But getting back to the bill, I think this is a very strong proUkrainian bill. I do not think that we need an additional amendment to be more pro-Ukraine. I think the gentleman from Virginia 

is right, though, in saying that this is a decision to be made in Kiev 

by Ukrainians. And if Ukraine, as the bill states, if Ukraine negotiates a settlement with Russia for whatever level of autonomy or 

whatever relationship Crimea will have to Russia or the Ukraine, 

that that is something that we ought to be prepared to accept. 

Now, the gentleman from Virginia points out that we shouldn’t 

invite that, but the fact is, we should invite the Ukraine to do 

whatever it considers best for the people of the Ukraine and the 

Crimea. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Would my friend yield? 

Mr. SHERMAN. And to tie the President’s hands and say that we 

have to continue these sanctions, even if a democratically-elected 

Ukrainian Government in Kiev is asking us to remove the sanctions, I think makes the bill more unwieldy, more permanent, more 

locked in, more written in stone than it needs to be. 

I will make one point, then I will yield to the gentleman from 

Virginia, and that is he is correct in pointing out that human 

rights in the Crimea are not being respected. However, there were 

times in Ukrainian history where they did not have a democratic 

government, where there were levels of oppression for all of the 

people of Ukraine, including those of the Crimea, and particular 

concerns of the Russian-speaking majority in the Crimea. So I don’t 

think we can say that Kiev always provides the highest level of 

human rights while Moscow always imposes oppression. 

But the Crimea was made part of the Ukraine, and we should 

be following the Ukraine in whether to remove sanctions. 

I yield to the gentleman from Virginia. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. I thank my friend. I find it interesting that we 

are concerned about ‘‘tying the hands of the President.’’ There are 

243

so many other examples where we have no compunction about 

doing that, including my friend from California. 

Mr. SHERMAN. You are absolutely correct. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. But I will simply point out, there is nothing in 

my amendment, which has yet to be introduced, that ties anybody’s 

hands. It simply removes this provision and is silent about it. It is 

a false argument to say we tie the President’s hands. We most certainly do not. I am not adding language. We are subtracting language to be clear. 

Secondly, the language here——

Mr. SHERMAN. Reclaiming my time. Reclaiming my time. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Thanks for the courtesy. 

Mr. SHERMAN. Every time a member of this committee tries to 

strike language that provides for a Presidential waiver, the response is that we are tying the President’s hands. So the fact that 

you are striking language does not mean that you are not making 

the bill more binding, shifting, and depriving the President of an 

ability to act quickly. Sometimes we should and sometimes we 

should not provide such waivers. 

And I will yield to you whatever remaining time I have. My time 

has expired. 

Mr. SMITH. The time of the gentleman has expired. 

The Chair recognizes Chairman Chabot. 

Mr. CHABOT. Mr. Chairman, if I could ask your advice at this 

point in time. Mr. Connolly has not yet actually introduced the 

amendment. So for other members who may want to speak, and I 

do want to speak on this, I would be happy to wait until the 

amendment is introduced, or otherwise, we can all take two bites 

of the apple. 

Mr. SMITH. Once the amendment has been introduced, obviously, 

we could have a debate on that. 

Mr. CHABOT. Can I ask, are there any other members that wish 

to speak prior to the amendment being offered? Because I will wait. 

Mr. SMITH. On the underlying bill, or whatever you want to 

speak on. 

Mr. CHABOT. This was sort of like a parliamentary inquiry. So 

you have answered my parliamentary inquiry. Thank you. 

Mr. SMITH. Mr. Lowenthal. 

Mr. LOWENTHAL. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would like to claim 

time, and I would like to yield it to my colleague from Virginia. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. I thank the gentleman from California. 

I will point out to my colleagues, unlike what Mr. Sherman characterized, let’s read the language here. This language doesn’t say, 

‘‘Well, only if Ukraine initiates something and chooses a process, 

well, then, of course, we would respect it.’’ It actually says the status of the Crimea has been resolved through an internationally supervised process to the satisfaction of the Ukrainian Government. 

That can be construed as an imposed settlement. So somebody else 

decides, whether Ukraine likes it or not, that this is good for them, 

this is the best we can get, and they have to accept it. 

The other point I would make, which really troubles me about 

Mr. Sherman’s argument, I was just in the Ukraine. They have a 

democratic government. They had a revolution to get it. They overVerDate 0ct 09 2002 16:24 Sep 21, 2016 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00247 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\_FULL\071416M\20747 SHIRL
244

threw the previous government because it was corrupt, it was a 

kleptocracy. They are struggling. They need our support. 

I went with my friend Peter Roskam, a Republican, the head of 

the House Democracy Project, to go to the Ukraine to show support 

for what they are trying to do. This would dishearten them, I can 

assure you. This is not a signal of support. This is a retreat. It may 

not be intended as such, but it will be construed as such. We can 

be silent by eliminating this and not make the point. 

I am glad to have Republican support for the amendment yet to 

be introduced. I am disheartened that one of my fellow Democrats 

feels otherwise. But I really do believe that the purpose here is to 

speak with one clear voice: You must withdraw from your illegal 

annexation and occupation of the Crimea. 

And if the President ever wants, whatever President, to come to 

Congress with a different idea, there is nothing in here that precludes that, and there is nothing in here to preclude our consideration of it. We are silent about it. That is all I am doing, so that 

we were speaking clearly on this policy. 

If Mr. Sherman wants me to yield, I do—with Mr. Lowenthal’s 

permission. 

Mr. SHERMAN. Just one point. Yes, the Ukrainian Government is 

democratic today. I was just making the point that sovereignty 

does not depend upon democracy. That is to say, Crimea was part 

of the Ukraine when they had a bad government. Crimea was part 

of the Ukraine when the Ukraine was part of the Soviet Union. 

Crimea is part of the Ukraine today. And I yield back to the gentleman. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. I thank my friend. And I yield back to Mr. 

Lowenthal. 

Mr. SMITH. Do you yield back? 

Mr. LOWENTHAL. And I yield back. 

Mr. SMITH. Okay. 

Any other members like to be heard on the underlying bill? 

Having heard no further request to speak on the bill, are there 

any amendments to the bill? 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the 

desk. 

Mr. SMITH. The clerk will report the bill. 

Ms. MARTER. Amendment to the amendment in the nature of a 

substitute to H.R. 5094 offered by Mr. Connolly of Virginia. Page 

5, line 15, strike ‘‘that’’ and all that follows through ‘‘Ukraine’s’’ on 

line 16 and insert ‘‘that Ukraine’s.’’ Page 5, line 17, strike ‘‘; or’’ 

and insert a period. Page 5, strike lines 18 through 21. 

[The information referred to follows:]

245

Mr. SMITH. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia for 

5 minutes to speak on his amendment. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. I thank my friend. 

I think I have made it as clear as a bell what we are trying to 

do here. It is simple, it is uncomplicated, and it is designed to show 

solidarity with our democratic friends struggling in the Ukraine. 

The Ukraine is losing soldiers every single day. So far, 6,000 casualties—6,000 casualties—to Russian aggression. We must do everything in our power to reverse what they are doing and to make 

it clear that is not how disputes are settled in modern day Europe. 

And with that, I yield to my good friend, Mr. Chabot from Ohio. 

Mr. CHABOT. I thank the gentleman for yielding. 

It is rare that I disagree with my chairman on this committee. 

I have been working with Mr. Connolly on issues related to Crimea 

for some time now. I thank him for his leadership on this. 

Our position with respect to Russia invading Ukraine and Crimea should be crystal clear, the world’s position should be crystal 

clear, and that is that the Russians should get the hell out of Crimea, as simple as that. I think this language just muddies up our 

position and the waters, and it ought to be as clear as that, Russian has to get out. 

To allow additional pressure, basically, to be put on the Ukrainian Government, which I think this ultimately would do—Russia is 

a bully, we know that. They have threatened to cut off energy. 

They have invaded not just Crimea, but the eastern border of 


20747ad.eps
246

Ukraine, and they are continuing in that. It is an off-and-on, literally, military battle going on. The Ukrainians, unfortunately, are 

outgunned by the Russians over and over again. And I think we 

have been remiss, this administration’s policies have been remiss 

in providing additional necessary arms to allow the Ukrainians to 

defend themselves. 

But we ought to be, as I say, crystal clear on this, and we ought 

not allow that aggressive behavior by the Russians to be rewarded. 

To accept Russian aggression in Crimea and with respect to 

Ukraine is just going to invite additional Russian aggression, 

whether it is in Lithuania, whether it is in Latvia, whether it is 

in Estonia, whether it is in Poland. 

I think this language sends the wrong message altogether, and 

it does invite some international supervised process, whatever that 

means, to come in and just muddy the whole situation up, and it 

ultimately gives the Ukrainians a decision, which is kind of a takeit-or-leave-it thing. We ought not to go down that road. That is the 

wrong way to go. We ought to stay with our position, which is, Russia, get out of Crimea. 

And I thank the gentleman for his leadership on this issue. And 

I yield back to Mr. Connolly. 

Mr. SMITH. You still have some time remaining. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. I would be glad to yield to anyone or yield back, 

Mr. Chairman. I know we are pressed for time. 

Mr. SMITH. The gentleman yields back. 

I recognize myself in favor of the amendment. 

Let me just say to my colleagues, I remember standing with Ronald Reagan in my first term, 35 years ago, when he proclaimed 

Captive Nations Week and continued a tradition that began in the 

late 1940s, that was through Democrat and Republican administrations, of not recognizing Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia, because 

they were captive nations. 

Our maps did not recognize that they had been annexed, conquered by the Soviet Union. And we stood firm. Half a century 

later, those countries are free and prospering and great friends and 

allies in the European Union, as well as with the United States 

and NATO. 

Let me just say that I think this language, well-meaning as it 

is, to me looks like an engraved invitation to do something other 

than recognize Ukraine’s sovereignty over the Crimea. You know, 

when we say, ‘‘to the satisfaction of a democratically-elected government of Ukraine,’’ Ukraine is under tremendous pressure, both 

financially and militarily, with such occupiers and such acts aggression happening every single day, now outside of Crimea, in 

other parts of Ukraine. And they would be at a very disadvantaged 

position to resist international pressure to accept a solution that is 

not truly in their best interest. 

So I support the Connolly amendment, and I do yield back my 

time. 

I would like to go to the Democrat side next. I can’t see it. 

Mr. Boyle, sorry. 

Mr. BOYLE. I know I am way down here. But thank you, Mr. 

Chairman. 

247

I just want to speak briefly to strongly support the Connolly 

amendment. You know, since the end of World War II, the first 

time we have seen the boundaries actually jeopardized in Europe, 

one nation-state invading another, was Putin’s invasion of Crimea. 

We need to be doing far more to support Ukraine. We cannot 

support some process by which essentially it would be agreed that 

Russian aggression is being rewarded. That would be a mistake for 

Ukraine, it would be a mistake for the Baltics, and it would be a 

mistake for the rest of Europe. 

Putin’s actions in Crimea and actions that continue today in the 

eastern part of Ukraine, where people are suffering, where relatives of constituents of mine in Philadelphia and suburban Philadelphia continue to suffer, to recognize and actually award that 

sort of aggression would be a mistake with terrible consequences. 

And if we learned nothing from history, that is something that we 

should have learned and relearned by now. 

So I strongly support the Connolly amendment, and I will take 

this opportunity, again, to urge our own administration to be doing 

more to assist Ukraine in their time of need. 

I yield back. 

Mr. SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Boyle. 

I would like to yield 5 minutes to Mr. Rohrabacher, the gentleman from California. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Thank you very much. And I also appreciate 

the fact that the chair recognized captive nations speeches by the 

President, because I am the one who wrote them. It seems that we 

are having time for a little philosophical part of the discussion. Let 

me share this, especially with Mr. Connolly. 

When I was working on this captive nation speech for President 

Reagan, I remember what almost scuttled the first captive nation 

speech that I worked on, and that was I wanted to be fair about 

it, and I wanted to declare that the Russian people themselves 

were the first captive nation, that they themselves had been oppressed by communism, and it was communism that was the 

enemy, not Russian people. 

And you know that the Baltic groups, especially, but the other 

people who were now in those occupied countries at the time were 

so adamant that we not include anything about the damn Russians. They hated the Russians. They did not differentiate between 

the Soviet Union and the Russian people. And they almost, with 

their hatred toward the Russian people, almost scuttled the President of the United States’ solid statement on how we were opposed 

to the Russians occupying all of these countries in Eastern Europe. 

That is the same mentality that is going on today. There is such 

a hatred. It is based on basically an historic hatred for the fact that 

Stalin and Russian people under Communist control murdered millions of people throughout Europe and these countries. They can’t 

get rid of that hatred and that resentment toward that country 

which they see has caused that, when it was really communism, it 

was the evil of communism. 

It is like right now, we shouldn’t hate the people of Iran. You 

and I, Mr. Connolly, agree totally on Iranian policy. We don’t hate 

the people of Iran. We don’t like the mullahs and that vicious dictatorship of the mullahs that is pro-terrorist. 

248

Well, I believe that a lot of what we are talking about dealing 

with whether it is Ukrainian policy or whether it is—wherever that 

is, it is all based on a hatred of Russia and an unwillingness, thus, 

to see that Saakashvili was the one who caused the crisis in Georgia. He is the one who broke a long-term truce, sent troops in, and 

murdered, I might add, truce observers that were unarmed, Russian truce observers. 

So we don’t want to recognize that as a factor. For the Russians, 

that was a major factor. There would not have been any Russian 

troops going into that area, had Saakashvili not done that. 

And I will tell you, when it comes to Georgia, that is one thing. 

We have Ukraine. And, Mr. Connolly, I respect you, you are my 

friend, but I also respect your opinions. But the fact is, you just 

mentioned, yeah, we overthrew that former government that was 

a kleptocracy. That was a conspiracy from our EU members and in 

collusion with the United States to overthrow an elected government. 

Chris Smith will tell you, he was there observing the election of 

Yanukovych. Yanukovych was a legally-elected President who was 

overthrown, and if they would have waited until the next election, 

there would have been none of this problem. The Russians would 

not have gone in if he would have lost the election. But instead, 

we overthrew, we participated in collusion with the overthrow of an 

elected government that then threatened the status quo to the detriment of Russia. 

We have to expect Russia to watch out for its own interests. 

What would we do if that same thing happened in Mexico? We 

would be involved. 

Well, I suggest that we need to make sure that we try to, number one, live at peace with Russia, recognizing that it is no longer 

the Soviet Union, but it is a country that is large and has its interests, the same way we do and other countries that are allied with 

us do. And we cannot just have a double standard, saying we can 

overthrow that government in Ukraine and the Russians have to 

accept it. 

And we have, in terms of self-determination, I really appreciate 

Mr. Sherman’s remarks about the Declaration of Independence. I 

will think about what he just said. But we may have a difference 

in philosophy, not with Brad, but here in this committee, as to 

whether or not the right of self-determination is something that 

should be a consideration of U.S. policy. 

So with that said——

Mr. SHERMAN. If the gentleman will yield? I fully agree with——

Mr. SMITH. The gentleman is out of time. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. My time is up. Thank you very much. I appreciate it. 

Mr. SMITH. The Chair recognizes Mr. Sherman. 

Mr. SHERMAN. I would just say that I may not accept Mr. 

Rohrabacher’s views anywhere else in the world, but an independent San Fernando Valley is something I am looking forward 

to. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. I supported that. 

Mr. SMITH. Do you yield back? 

249

Do any other members seek recognition on the Connolly amendment? 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Chairman, might I just note for the record, 

because he is necessarily on the floor, the author of the resolution 

has endorsed this amendment, for the record. 

Mr. RIBBLE. Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. SMITH. The Chair recognizes Mr. Ribble. 

Mr. RIBBLE. Mr. Chairman, thank you for a moment to speak on 

this issue, and I will be brief. 

There are about 55 miles at the narrowest point that separates 

the United States in the State of Alaska from the Russian border. 

Under this self-determination argument that has been made here, 

if a certain percentage of Alaskans decided they want to be part 

of Russia, would we ever, under any circumstances—ever, under 

any circumstances—accept a Russian invasion of Alaska? We would 

not. 

I support this amendment, and I encourage its adoption. 

I yield back. 

Mr. SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Ribble. 

Hearing no further requests for time, the question occurs on the 

amendment offered by Mr. Connolly. 

All those in favor, say aye. 

Opposed, no. 

In the opinion of the Chair, the ayes have it, and the amendment 

is agreed to. 

Hearing no further requests for amendments, the Chair now 

moves that the committee agree to H.R. 5094, as amended. 

All those in favor, say aye. 

All those opposed say, no. 

In the opinion of the Chair, the ayes have it, and H.R. 5094, as 

amended, is agreed to. 

Without objection, the amended bill is ordered favorably reported 

as a single amendment in the nature of a substitute. Staff is directed to make any technical and conforming changes, and the 

chairman is authorized to seek House consideration under suspension of the rules. 

That concludes our business for today. I want to thank members 

on both sides of the aisle for their input. 

The committee is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 10:37 a.m., the committee was adjourned.] 

(251)

A P P E N D I X 

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

252

f


20747n.eps
253


20747m-1.eps
254

f


20747m-2.eps
255


20747s-1.eps
256

f


20747s-2.eps
257

STATEMENT SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD BY THE HONORABLE CHRISTOPHER H. 

SMITH, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY

f


20747ae.eps
258


20747af-1.eps
259

f


20747af-2.eps
260

f


20747ag.eps
261

Æ


20747ah.eps