U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

67–625 CC WASHINGTON : 2000

INTERNATIONAL EFFORTS TO END

DISCRIMINATION AGAINST WOMEN

HEARING

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON

INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED SIXTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

MAY 3, 2000

Serial No. 106–158

Printed for the use of the Committee on International Relations

(

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.house.gov/international—relations

(II)

COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

BENJAMIN A. GILMAN, New York, Chairman

WILLIAM F. GOODLING, Pennsylvania

JAMES A. LEACH, Iowa

HENRY J. HYDE, Illinois

DOUG BEREUTER, Nebraska

CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey

DAN BURTON, Indiana

ELTON GALLEGLY, California

ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida

CASS BALLENGER, North Carolina

DANA ROHRABACHER, California

DONALD A. MANZULLO, Illinois

EDWARD R. ROYCE, California

PETER T. KING, New York

STEVE CHABOT, Ohio

MARSHALL ‘‘MARK’’ SANFORD, South

Carolina

MATT SALMON, Arizona

AMO HOUGHTON, New York

TOM CAMPBELL, California

JOHN M. MCHUGH, New York

KEVIN BRADY, Texas

RICHARD BURR, North Carolina

PAUL E. GILLMOR, Ohio

GEORGE RADANOVICH, California

JOHN COOKSEY, Louisiana

THOMAS G. TANCREDO, Colorado

SAM GEJDENSON, Connecticut

TOM LANTOS, California

HOWARD L. BERMAN, California

GARY L. ACKERMAN, New York

ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA, American

Samoa

MATTHEW G. MARTINEZ, California

DONALD M. PAYNE, New Jersey

ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey

SHERROD BROWN, Ohio

CYNTHIA A. MCKINNEY, Georgia

ALCEE L. HASTINGS, Florida

PAT DANNER, Missouri

EARL F. HILLIARD, Alabama

BRAD SHERMAN, California

ROBERT WEXLER, Florida

STEVEN R. ROTHMAN, New Jersey

JIM DAVIS, Florida

EARL POMEROY, North Dakota

WILLIAM D. DELAHUNT, Massachusetts

GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York

BARBARA LEE, California

JOSEPH CROWLEY, New York

JOSEPH M. HOEFFEL, Pennsylvania

RICHARD J. GARON, Chief of Staff

KATHLEEN BERTELSEN MOAZED, Democratic Chief of Staff

STEPHEN G. RADEMAKER, Chief Counsel

NICOLLE A. SESTRIC, Staff Associate

(III)

C O N T E N T S

WITNESSES

Page

The Honorable Lynn Woolsey, a Representative in Congress from the State

of California .......................................................................................................... 6

The Honorable Carolyn B. Maloney, a Representative in Congress from the

State of New York .................................................................................................... 6, 8

The Honorable Constance A. Morella a Representative in Congress from

the State of Maryland .......................................................................................... 10

The Honorable Theresa Loar, Director, President’s Interagency Council on

Women and Senior Coordinator for International Women’s Issues, U.S.

Department of State ............................................................................................ 20

APPENDIX

Prepared statements:

The Honorable Benjamin A. Gilman, a Representative in Congress from the

State of New York and Chairman, Committee on International Relations .... 34

The Honorable Lynn Woolsey ................................................................................. 35

The Honorable Carolyn B. Maloney ....................................................................... 37

The Honorable Constance A. Morella .................................................................... 41

The Honorable Theresa Loar .................................................................................. 44

Additional material submitted for the record:

Response by the Department of State to the additional question submitted

for the record by Representative Dana Rohrabacher ........................................ 56

Language on equality of women and men adopted by the Organization for

Security and Cooperation in Europe, Charter for European Security,

Istanbul, November 1999, submitted by Representative Christopher H.

Smith ..................................................................................................................... 58

Excerpts from Reports of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination

Against Women, submitted by Representative Christopher H. Smith ............ 59

(1)

INTERNATIONAL EFFORTS TO END

DISCRIMINATION AGAINST WOMEN

WEDNESDAY, MAY 3, 2000

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS,

Washington, DC.

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:02 a.m. in room

2172, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Benjamin A. Gilman,

(Chairman of the Committee) presiding.

Chairman GILMAN. The Committee on International Relations

meets today to receive testimony on international efforts to end discrimination against women.

This Committee has repeatedly affirmed its support for the

rights of women. Most recently, on November 9 of last year we approved H.R. 3244, the Trafficking Victims Protection Act, which is

intended to increase the protections under U.S. and foreign law for

victims of sexual trafficking and slave-like working conditions,

most of whom are women.

This legislation, which moved forward in our Committee under

the leadership of Mr. Smith and Mr. Gejdenson, as well as other

Members of this Committee, should soon be on the House Floor,

and we hope it will make a significant contribution to our international efforts to increase the protections available to women.

Regrettably, for reasons that I have never found persuasive, the

Administration opposes the Trafficking Victims Protection Act.

The Administration has, however, been active in other areas in

seeking to combat discrimination against women. One of those

areas is the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, the so-called CEDAW treaty. President Carter signed that Convention in 1980, but it has never been

ratified by the U.S. Senate.

The Convention is strongly supported by the Clinton Administration. Supporters of the Convention today blame the Senate Majority for the fact that the Convention has not been ratified. However,

I submit that had President Clinton pressed this matter more vigorously during the first 2 years of his Administration, when Senator Pell chaired the Foreign Relations Committee, he might have

obtained Senate ratification of the Convention in 1993 or 1994, and

we would not be here talking about it today.

The objectives of the Convention are laudable. Critics of the Convention have complained that it is overly broad, and I hope that

our witnesses will be able to dispel those concerns. We look forward

to hearing today’s testimony about the steps the Administration is

2

taking in this and other areas to end discrimination against

women.

I now recognize the Ranking Minority Member, the gentleman

from Connecticut, Mr. Gejdenson, for any opening remarks.

Mr. GEJDENSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I join with you in

supporting this legislation and this hearing. Representative Woolsey has done outstanding work on it. We are very happy to see

Congresswoman Maloney, also an active supporter, here today.

We think that with 160 some other countries already on board,

it is outrageous that the U.S. Senate has prevented the United

States from becoming a signatory to this legislation, and I think

that without any question we should move this very rapidly from

our Committee.

We see today a world where women are still finding discrimination not just in education, in health care, in the area of work, but

even their survival in many societies is endangered by custom and

activities which threaten the survival of women, abuse them physically, and sell them into slavery, and so it is outrageous that we

in this country have not joined this international effort.

I commend again Ms. Woolsey and her colleagues for their tremendous effort in this area.

Chairman GILMAN. Thank you, Mr. Gejdenson.

Mr. Smith.

Mr. SMITH. Thank you very much. Mr. Chairman, there is no

question that women in many countries face discrimination in

areas such as employment, education, housing and access to financial resources. I am entirely sympathetic to this issue, and I welcome the opportunity to examine how the United States and this

Congress can support substantive efforts to end such discrimination and can encourage full and equal respect for human rights of

all people, women and children.

Through law and practice, Mr. Chairman, the United States has

been a leader in advancing equality of opportunity for women and

men. The United States has ratified human rights instruments, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,

which mandate non-discriminatory respect for fundamental human

rights.

I stand second to no one in my determination that human rights

of all people should be respected. The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, though, is

not about ending discrimination against women in the United

States because in this country women do possess tools necessary to

seek redress if they face discrimination.

CEDAW ratification is about furthering an agenda which seeks

to insure abortion on demand and which refuses to recognize any

legitimate distinctions between men and women. If there is any

question on this, one need only look at the U.N. website, which

proudly proclaims that CEDAW is the only human rights treaty

which affirms the reproductive rights of women and targets culture

and tradition as influential forces shaping gender roles and family

relations.

As a party to CEDAW, the United States would subject itself to

the jurisdiction of a U.N. committee that was established to enforce

compliance with CEDAW. Only a few examples of this committee’s

3

opinions are needed to demonstrate the agenda advanced by

CEDAW.

First, the CEDAW committee has interpreted the treaty’s language on eliminating discrimination against women and access to

health care to mean that it is discriminatory for the government

to refuse to legally provide for the performance of certain reproductive health care services for women. This is a step toward the

globalization of legalized abortion that I and many other of my colleagues can never support because, frankly, we believe that abortion is violence against children.

If one just looks at the methods that are employed by the abortionist, dismemberment of an unborn child, chemical poisoning,

these types of acts are violence against children. Many countries

have come under the scrutiny of CEDAW, and they have been encouraged, admonished and even not compelled, but close to it, to

change their laws that protect the rights of unborn children.

Second, the treaty obligates state parties to modify the social and

cultural patterns of conduct of men and women in order to eliminate stereotyped roles for women and men. As American citizens,

we should be appalled by the notion that our government would assert the authority to modify the roles that a husband and wife have

undertaken in their family because a government expert believes

those roles are based on social or cultural stereotypes.

Earlier this year, for example, the CEDAW committee demonstrated its view of such stereotyped roles when it expressed concern that Belorussia had introduced symbols such as a Mothers

Day and Mothers Award. In the CEDAW committee’s opinion,

these symbols encourage women’s traditional roles and, therefore,

should be eliminated. Do our constituents, Mr. Chairman, really

want a group of international bureaucrats telling them that the

day set aside to honor our mothers must be abolished? I think not.

The United States does not have to ratify CEDAW in order to be

a leader in human rights. Signing a treaty does not make a country

a leader in human rights. China and Burma, to name just a few

examples, have both ratified CEDAW, but no one would seriously

suggest that those countries have a better record than the United

States for respecting the human rights of women.

Rather than argue over legal instruments as controversial and

fundamentally flawed as CEDAW, this Committee and this Congress should be discussing ways for the United States and other

countries to implement the human rights commitments that already have been made. The United States is a leader in human

rights because its actions demonstrate a belief that human rights

must be respected equally for men and women.

The United States has set an example for the international community by establishing effective mechanisms for women and men

to seek redress when recognition of their rights is denied on the

basis of sex. In the United States, if an individual suffers discrimination despite legal restrictions against it, he or she can seek legal

recourse on the basis of anti-discrimination legislation.

This past year, Mr. Chairman, the U.S. delegation to the OSCE,

and the Helsinki Commission which I chair, in the House, Senate

and the Executive Branch, successfully advanced language in the

Charter for European Security, and I strongly supported it, that

4

commits OSCE participating States to ‘‘make equality between men

and women an integral part of our policies’’ and that commits participating states to specifically ‘‘undertake measures to eliminate

all forms of discrimination against women.’’

What is needed now is implementation of such commitments. For

example, the constitutions of most, if not all, of the OSCE countries, like scores of other countries in other regions, state that men

and women have equal rights under the law, but despite this statement of principle women in most of these countries lack any effective legal redress if they face discrimination in employment, education, housing or access to credit.

Using the OSCE framework and its own example, the United

States can encourage other participating States to fulfill their

OSCE commitments by adopting comprehensive anti-discrimination

legislation that enables women to assert their rights.

The Congress can also take the lead in the international community, and I offered the resolution last year in St. Petersburg at the

OSCE Parliamentary Assembly which seeks to crack down on this

offensive, horrific abuse of women, especially in trafficking. Many

trafficking victims are women who face unemployment in their native countries because of sex discrimination, but have no effective

means of challenging that discrimination.

Earlier in this Congress, Congressman Sam Gejdenson and I introduced a bill, H.R. 3244, which hopefully will be up on the Floor

shortly, that would severely punish persons in the United States

convicted of trafficking in human beings and provide incentives for

foreign countries to initiate efforts to combat this outrageous abuse

of women.

Mr. Chairman, I would ask that some other documentation be included in the record, including the OSCE text that was adopted in

Istanbul in November 1999 with regards to equality of rights.

I yield back the balance of my time, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. GEJDENSON. Mr. Chairman.

Chairman GILMAN. Thank you, Mr. Smith.

Mr. Gejdenson.

Mr. GEJDENSON. Mr. Chairman, frankly I am a little concerned

about the issues raised by Mr. Smith. I know he does it earnestly,

but I think that this is good legislation.

Even though there are clearly countries that sign onto this Convention who may not be carrying it out, it is not the converse that

without America’s approval that somehow the situation is better.

I know I am in support of this.

Mr. Chairman, I was wondering. Are you planning to support

this legislation, Mr. Chairman?

Chairman GILMAN. I am strongly in support of the objectives of

the CEDAW convention. I am looking forward to today’s hearing

because I want to hear the Administration’s responses to some of

the objections that have been raised by critics of the Convention.

Any other Members seeking recognition? Ms. Lee.

Ms. LEE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Let me just thank you for

holding this hearing.

The issue of discrimination against women in the United States

and around the world is one that must be addressed, and I appreciate the Committee holding the hearing so we can hear from our

5

colleagues on this, and thank you, Congresswomen Woolsey and

Maloney, for being here and for taking the lead on our behalf.

Unfortunately, discrimination against women is still widespread

both in the United States and around the world. Here in our country, for example, the tools may be available to women, but often

times they are not available due to either their race or economic

status. The issue of race discrimination, domestic violence, economic opportunity, access to health care are still basic human

issues that for some women present a struggle in their lives here

in America and abroad.

Certainly we have made significant strides, but there is much

that needs to be done. CEDAW is a single, comprehensive treaty

to protect women’s rights and was drafted and pursued by advocates with United States participation. The year 2000 marks 20

years since CEDAW was opened for ratification, so we must move

this forward. It is a moral imperative. Congress must not turn a

blind eye to the need to make women’s rights around the world a

priority.

Thank you very much for the hearing again, Mr. Chairman. I

look forward to the testimony.

Chairman GILMAN. Thank you, Ms. Lee.

Any other Members——

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Chairman.

Chairman GILMAN. Mr. Hastings. Judge Hastings.

Mr. HASTINGS. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and thank

you for holding this hearing. I would like to compliment our colleagues, Ms. Maloney and Ms. Woolsey, for their leadership not

only as it pertains to CEDAW, but on women’s issues and issues

with reference to people who are discriminated against in general.

Mr. Chairman, I think it sends a very poor signal to countries

around the world that the United States has not ratified the

CEDAW treaty. I take this opportunity to point out that this is not

the only treaty that does not allow for difficulties to be addressed.

We have also not ratified the convention on the child, which was

passed by the United Nations in 1989 and we became signatories

to in 1995.

Yesterday, Mr. Chairman, I filed some legislation hoping to remedy that particular problem and asking that the Senate expedite its

business, as well as the Administration, with reference to the ratification of the CEDAW treaty and the convention on the child.

In my view, we are lagging behind the rest of the world. On the

convention of the child, only the United States and Somalia have

not ratified that treaty. I find that abhorrent, and I equally find

it abhorrent that we have not moved the pace with reference to the

treaty that we are here about today.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this hearing.

Chairman GILMAN. Thank you, Judge Hastings.

Any other Members seeking recognition?

If not, we will now proceed with our panelists. Our first panel

this morning consists of three of our distinguished colleagues, Congresswoman Woolsey, Congresswoman Morella and Congresswoman Maloney. Congresswoman Morella has not yet arrived.

Congresswoman Maloney of New York is co-chairman of the Congressional Caucus on Women’s Issues, and I will ask CongressVerDate 11-MAY-2000 13:12 Dec 01, 2000 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 67625.TXT HINTREL1 PsN: HINTREL1
6

woman Maloney to submit her full statement for the record or summarize, whichever she sees appropriate.

Congresswoman Maloney.

STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE CAROLYN MALONEY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW

YORK

Ms. MALONEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman GILMAN. Would you hold on just a moment? Ms.

Maloney’s mike is not working. Would you test it again, please?

Just test it if you would.

Ms. MALONEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman GILMAN. It is still not working. Hold on just a moment.

Ms. MALONEY. OK. All right. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your

supportive——

Chairman GILMAN. Thank you.

Ms. MALONEY [continuing]. Statements and Mr. Gejdenson and

really many, Mr. Hastings, Ms. Lee, all of your statements and for

supporting many of the initiatives of the women’s caucus. This is

among our must pass bills that have come forward in the women’s

caucus in a bipartisan way with Congresswoman Kelly.

This particular bill was offered by my distinguished colleague,

Ms. Woolsey, and I will defer to her for the opening statement and

follow her comments.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Thank you. Thank you very much, Madam Chairman.

Chairman GILMAN. Ms. Woolsey of California has been very active on women’s rights and is the Minority Deputy Whip on the

Floor, and she has also served on the Children’s Task Force.

Please proceed.

STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE LYNN WOOLSEY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

Ms. WOOLSEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member

Mr. Gejdenson and all the wonderful Members that are here and

interested in this issue this morning. I thank you for holding this

hearing and allowing for the opportunity to testify.

Mr. Chairman, since being elected in 1992, I have urged the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to ratify the convention on elimination of all forms of discrimination against women known as

CEDAW. Knowing also, Mr. Chairman, your strong stand on women’s international rights, I am hoping that following this hearing,

this Committee will be able to mark up House Resolution 107,

which urges the Senate to ratify CEDAW.

CEDAW, a United Nations treaty, is considered the women’s

international bill of rights because it establishes basic human

rights for women around the globe. These are rights not fully addressed in any other treaty. The United Nations recognized and actually condemned the devastating consequences of gender discrimination when it adopted CEDAW in 1979.

Chairman GILMAN. If I might interrupt, Ms. Woolsey? I am being

called to the Floor. We have four Committee resolutions on the

7

Floor, and I am going to ask Mr. Campbell, the gentleman from

California, to preside.

Ms. WOOLSEY. I will miss your presence, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman GILMAN. We will be back.

Mr. CAMPBELL [presiding]. Congresswoman Woolsey, please go

right ahead.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Thank you. It is nice to see you, Mr. Campbell.

As I was saying,——

Mr. CAMPBELL. It is mutual Congresswoman.

Ms. WOOLSEY [continuing]. CEDAW, a United Nations treaty, is

considered the women’s international bill of rights because it establishes basic human rights to women around the globe. These are

rights that are not fully addressed in any other treaty.

The United Nations recognized and condemned the devastating

consequences of gender discrimination when it adopted CEDAW in

1979. On July 1980, President Carter signed CEDAW and submitted it to the Senate for ratification. I am sad and disappointed

to report that this year marks the 20th year that CEDAW has been

available for United States ratification, but the Senate has yet to

ratify.

In 1994, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee held a hearing

on CEDAW, reported in favor of its ratification with four reservations, reservations that respond to Congressman Chris Smith’s concerns earlier this morning. There were four understandings and

two declarations.

These provisions address the overriding concerns that CEDAW

critics maintain. Most of these concerns claim that CEDAW would

override the United States Constitution, open the door to frivolous

litigation, force social engineering and promote abortion. I am confident after reading what came out in the declarations in 1994 that

these concerns were addressed, and hopefully the Senate Foreign

Relations Committee will ratify CEDAW.

CEDAW is ratified by 165 countries, all of our allies. I am disappointed that the Senate’s inaction puts the United States in the

company of North Korea, Sudan, Somalia and Iran. I am certain,

and I know you will agree, that the United States does not belong

in this company, particularly when it comes to women’s rights.

The United States played a major role in drafting CEDAW, and

now we should live up to our commitment, and we must ratify it.

Furthermore, without ratification the United States will not be a

member at the international committee when the treaty monitors

implementation of its provisions. We will be absent. The seat that

should be filled by the United States will be vacant.

While some critics feel the committee oversteps or makes radical

recommendations, in fact it has no enforcement measures, but instead it creates a working framework for countries to utilize in

their quest to promote women’s rights. It is an advisory committee.

It is an overview committee, but it can do no more than make recommendations.

Making the United States a player on this committee would lend

support to the treaty’s effectiveness, and it will give the United

States credibility when advocating on women’s issues here at home

and around the globe.

8

Mr. Chairman, I would like to share two examples of how

CEDAW has been effective. First, when Brazil redrafted its constitution it used CEDAW as the framework for articulating human

rights for women. The Brazilian constitution now contains provisions on gender equality, gender based violence, state interest in

the prevention of domestic violence, the equality of rights within

marriage, family planning and employment that parallels

CEDAW’s provisions.

On the continent of Africa, CEDAW has provided a vehicle for

women. Zambia ratified CEDAW in 1995 and in 1991 extended its

bill of rights to cover sex discrimination. Without that, many of the

rights we have here in our country would not be available to the

women in Africa.

More important, there is a groundswell of support for ratification

right here at home. Ten states, 14 counties and 26 cities have

passed resolutions advocating U.S. ratification of CEDAW. Last

year, the Church Women United and the United Methodist Women

and other supporters of CEDAW delivered more than 10,000 handwritten—every letter was individually written, and we delivered

them to the Senators urging ratification. Each letter was to an individual Senator.

I can assure those of you who are here today that not only are

people from other countries looking for leadership from the United

States, but so are our constituents. The people’s House must go on

record and urge the Senate to ratify CEDAW. Today’s hearing is

a great first step in this process.

I look forward to continuing to work with the Committee and to

place the United States in a strong standing for women’s rights

globally.

I yield back my time. Thank you.

[The prepared statement of Representative Woolsey appears in

the appendix.]

Mr. CAMPBELL. Thank you, Congresswoman Woolsey, for your

fine statement.

Congresswoman Maloney, you had yielded to Congresswoman

Woolsey. Did you wish to conclude?

Ms. MALONEY. Yes, I would, and I would like my comments to

be placed in the record as read.

Mr. CAMPBELL. Without objection.

STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE CAROLYN MALONEY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW

YORK

Ms. MALONEY. I would like to underscore that this is a national

disgrace, an international disgrace. As my colleague pointed out,

165 nations, countries, have ratified CEDAW. Our country stands

alone with Sudan and North Korea and a few others.

One point that I would like to point out in response to my dear

friend and colleague, Mr. Smith’s, earlier statements. There is

nothing in CEDAW that states that on abortion. It has nothing to

do with it. In fact, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee passed

the Helms understanding stating that nothing in CEDAW creates

a right to abortion and should not be promoted as a method of family planning, so I would like to offer that if he has an objection to

9

any language in the treaty, we would entertain deleting it or talking to him about it because what he said is in it is not there.

The convention continues to languish in the Senate, locked up in

the committee, even though CEDAW contains no provisions in conflict with American laws, no action has been taken on CEDAW,

and it is really absolutely fundamental.

One aspect that is very important is that very shortly we will be

going to the 5-year review of the international U.N. conference on

women, and in the next 33 days will we or will we not endorse

human rights of women across the world? That is what we are here

to ask today. As many of my colleagues have said, the Ranking

Member, others have said that we absolutely should do this. This

is an absolute embarrassment. The Administration considers this a

major priority.

Family planning. If the gentleman is opposed to abortion, one

way to prevent abortion is through family planning. As Mr. Campbell knows, he worked very hard last year on various family planning refunding actually for the first—our country created the U.N.

population program, yet it was defunded, and Mr. Campbell led the

refunding effort, and we thank you for that.

You know that our population is more than 6,000,000,000 now,

and by 2050 the United Nations projects that this figure could double to 12,000,000,000. Most of this growth will occur in developing

countries, the countries where the desire for family planning service is far greater than the supply.

Already, more than 150,000,000 women and families want access

to family planning services, but do not have the resources available

to them. There are 2,000,000,000 young people quickly approaching

their reproductive years, and will they have access to family planning, resources they need? This will have a direct impact on the

economic stability of their countries, on the environment and really

the entire world. Voluntary family planning would help all of these

women, and CEDAW, although it has nothing to do with abortion,

it does promote family planning.

I must say that one thing that is tremendously problematic is

that many nations’ governments do not include women in their definition of human. Consequently, women are denied very basic

rights. I truly believe that empowering women globally reduces the

negative impact of HIV and AIDS, which Ms. Lee has worked so

hard on, along with Chairman Leach, the negative impact of fast

growing population on our rural environment and economy and improves the education and employment of over half of our world’s

community.

The Women’s Caucus has also supported two other resolutions,

which I hope this Committee will take up. One is H.R. 187, which

urges the United Nations to reject the Taliban as a legitimate government in Afghanistan, to deny the Taliban a seat in the General

Assembly as long as they continue to practice horrific violations of

women’s rights.

We have had hearings in the Women’s Caucus. They must wear

a berka. They are killed if they go to school. They are killed if they

show an ankle or a hand. It is just horrific what is happening

there.

10

We have also worked on H.R. 1849 to require the Attorney General to publish regulations relating to gender related persecution,

including female genital mutilation, for use in determining an

alien’s eligibility for asylum. This legislation helps women who are

not fortunate enough to be born in the United States or other industrialized countries and who have no means to protect themselves. Although we grant asylum on many bases, we do not for

gender related violence, and certainly female genital mutilation is

a horrible, life threatening practice that needs to be terminated.

In any event, if you read all of CEDAW it merely says let’s empower women with education, with health care, with information,

with knowledge. Let’s empower them to be productive members of

their communities and their villages and their societies. We should

be part of the global effort to help women.

Many countries look to the United States for leadership. It is an

absolute total embarrassment. We should not have a government

by one person, in this case Mr. Helms, who has held up this very

important treaty. Again, 165 nations cannot be wrong. We should

join 165 nations in time for the United Nations General Assembly

where they review Beijing plus five.

My distinguished colleague, Connie Morella, has joined us.

Thank you very much, and I yield back the balance and would like

my rather lengthy statement to be placed in the record, which is

a lot more than what I said.

[The prepared statement of Representative Maloney appears in

the appendix.]

Mr. CAMPBELL. Congresswoman Maloney, your words will be included in the record barring no objection.

Ms. MALONEY. Thank you.

Mr. CAMPBELL. Hearing no objection, so ordered.

We are joined now by Congresswoman Morella, the third member

of our panel of Members. Congresswoman Morella has long been

active in international and human rights issues. She was the first

women to chair the Arms Control and Foreign Policy Caucus. She

represented the United States at the U.N. Conference on Population and Development in Cairo. She co-chaired the congressional

delegation to the United Nations Fourth World Conference on

Women in Beijing.

She is the Subcommittee Chair of the Science Committee’s Technology Subcommittee and vice-chair of the Committee on District

of Columbia of the Government Reform and Oversight Committee

and a friend and a champion of women’s rights and human rights

in every other respect.

It is a pleasure to welcome you, Congresswoman Morella.

STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE CONSTANCE A. MORELLA, A

REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF

MARYLAND

Ms. MORELLA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Members of the

Committee. I am sorry I was not here to hear the statements of my

distinguished colleagues. I know in part what they have said and

certainly associate myself with their comments.

I thank you very much for the opportunity to testify before the

Committee today, and I am especially pleased to be here with my

11

colleagues to talk about actions that we can take on foreign policy

to reverse discrimination against women around the world, and the

affirmative steps that we can take to help the world’s women and

their daughters to overcome the effects of discrimination.

The Committee and Congress have enacted a number of initiatives in the last decade or two in recognition of the problems that

women and girls face. They include authorization and funding for

programs dealing with micro credit, family planning, rape victims,

domestic abuse, and treatment of torture survivors, just to name a

few. I am also pleased by the recent attention which has been

given to the problem of sex trafficking, and I am sure that the

Committee will continue to investigate the problem and the best

way we can work to bring about its demise.

Mr. Chairman, the importance of women’s roles and development

and potentially differential impact of USAID policies and programs

on women and men, because of gender roles and activities, has

been recognized for more than 30 years. Particularly in the last

decade, there has been a realization of the centrality of the status

of women in developing and implementing sustainable development

policies and programs.

This week, the HIV and AIDS pandemic was declared a national

security threat. In Africa, whole regions are being ravaged. Families lose some of what economic power they had when a parent dies

and the rest when a second parent, having been infected by the

first, dies. Children drop out of school to replace their parents’ income, or to care for them while they are ill, and then are orphaned.

Extrapolate this scenario to account for tens of millions of people

populating some two dozen countries over the next 10 or 20 years.

Inadequate social safety nets are overwhelming governments that

are unable to cope. People become politically alienated. Economies

contract. Nations destabilize.

HIV and AIDS is not an African problem alone. Disease spreads.

It is everyone’s problem. Infection rates are rising at alarming

rates in Asia, the Caribbean and Latin America. In addition to a

number of praiseworthy proposals which had been made to address

the African crisis, one of the best tools we have to fight the spread

of HIV and AIDS is to assure that women and men have access to

quality reproductive health information and facilities.

We have not invested sufficient resources in these programs in

the last several years. Regardless of the restrictions which may or

may not be attached, we need to reverse the trend. Meeting the

President’s requested funding level for family planning programs

for the coming year would be a good start.

I was honored to be part of a special order on global HIV and

AIDS last evening that was led by Ms. Lee, a Member of this Committee, and I very much valued the fact that we had an opportunity to promote awareness with the public.

Disease spreads. Congressman Brown and I have introduced legislation to address one of the fastest growing killers, tuberculosis.

TB kills 2,000,000 people every year. That is a person every 15 seconds. Globally, TB is the biggest killer of young women. The World

Health Organization estimates that one-third of the world’s people

are infected with the bacteria that causes tuberculosis, and there

12

are 8,000,000 new cases every year. It is spreading because of inadequate treatment, and it knows no national borders.

In my own district, so-called affluent Montgomery County, Maryland, earlier this year a woman had to be forcibly removed from

her apartment by government health personnel because she refused to be treated.

There is a highly effective, inexpensive treatment for tuberculosis

known as directly observed treatment short course called DOTS,

the acronym. Under DOTS, health workers directly monitor patients with tuberculosis for the purpose of insuring that they take

their full course of medicine, and yet fewer than one in five of those

who are ill with tuberculosis are receiving DOTS treatment, and,

according to World Bank estimates, DOTS treatment is one of the

most cost effective health interventions available. $20 to $100 will

save a life, and it can produce cure rates as high as 95 percent

even in the poorest countries.

Mr. Chairman, it is a universal truth that education is key to

economic well being, but in too many countries access to education

is limited. Girls particularly are disadvantaged. UNICEF reports

that 150,000,000 children do not attend school, and two-thirds of

them are girls. Those girls who do attend drop out in higher numbers than boys. So investing in girls’ education is one of the most

effective means of promoting economic growth and poverty reductions. We know from studies that additional education corresponds

with reduced family size, reduced rates of infant and maternal

mortality, healthier and better nourished families. These trends

are continued in following generations.

Our assistance programs should be designed to insure equity in

education to meet the needs of girls. Governments should promote

policies to encourage them to enroll and stay in school and to recruit more female teachers. Parents and community members must

be mobilized to support and promote girls’ education and participate in decisionmaking and oversight regarding schools in their

communities.

I know I am preaching to the choir here as I go on with education and tuberculosis and HIV and AIDS, but you are awfully

nice to listen.

Mr. CAMPBELL. It is our privilege, Congresswoman Morella.

Please continue.

Ms. MORELLA. Although great attention has been given to the

role of women in sustainable development programs, gender analysis of the impact of our programs continues to lag.

USAID’s progress in integrating gender analysis through its assistance programs has been hindered by a lack of structures and

mechanisms to insure accountability. AID is addressing this with

its adoption of its gender action plan meant to built agency wide

commitment, capacity and incentives for integrating gender analysis into its policies, programs and projects.

Later this month, the AID Advisory Committee on Voluntary

Foreign Assistance will file its report assessing the implementation

of the plan. I think it should include reporting on integration of

gender analysis and the impact of USAID policies, programs and

projects in its annual presentation to Congress, and I think AID

missions should be held to account for their efforts to integrate

13

gender analysis into programs and explain their inability to do so

if they cannot.

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, the subjects

which I have briefly mentioned—education, health, gender based

analysis of the effects of the assistance programs—are going to be

addressed in comprehensive legislation that I am planning to introduce, and I hope all of you will become cosponsors of it.

In collaboration with Congressman Porter, Congresswoman

Lowey, and Congresswoman Kilpatrick, we have been working with

a consortium of non-governmental organizations led by Women’s

EDGE to develop the Global Actions and Investments for New Success for Women and Girls Act.

The GAINS Act, will address U.S. policy, education, health,

micro credit, refugees, trafficking, as well as other subjects. I look

forward to working with this Committee on that legislation. I hope

you will give it serious consideration.

I had a comment in here for Mr. Gilman, but since he is not here

he can read my testimony and know that I said good things about

him and that this might well be the last hearing that I would appear before that he would be chairing.

In closing, I wanted to thank you for calling the hearing and allowing me to testify before this very distinguished Committee. I

thank you very much.

[The prepared statement of Representative Morella appears in

the appendix.]

Mr. CAMPBELL. Thank you, Congresswoman. Without objection,

your full statement, including the laudatory comments of Chairman Gilman, will be included in the record.

It is traditional not to put any Members to questions unless they

would wish it. I will just use this one moment to say thanks to

Congresswoman Maloney for your kind words about me, but, as I

recall, it was you and me together, and it could not have been possible without both of us working for funding international family

planning. The importance of that is that you and I share awareness

of equality, and I commend you every bit as much.

What I would like to do, since I was not able to make an opening

statement, is just to state the following, and then if you have a

comment or disagreement that is fine. It will only take a minute,

after which I would yield to my colleagues.

As to self-executing provisions of the treaty, as I understand it

there are none. So, Mr. Smith or other Members of our Committee

who might be worried about an intrusion on sovereign United

States rights should be reassured that the treaty itself does not include self-executing provisions. Rather, it is a call to arms, if you

will, or a call to action, but the action has to be done by American

constitutional processes.

Second, there is some value, nevertheless. I do not want to say

that this is toothless. There is some tremendous value, particularly

under the alien tort statute, a subject I used to teach, but let me

just take it for a second and say this.

An alien can sue in the United States courts for tort committed

in violation of the law of nations. Victims of gender mutilation can,

in my view, take advantage of this, but a court might say that the

United States recognition of this abuse as an international human

14

rights violation is in doubt since the United States had not ratified

CEDAW. The ratification of CEDAW, in other words, provides a

very strong premise that American courts will use to allow a suit

under the alien tort statute for violations of women’s rights.

Those two observations I wanted to put on the record, and perhaps Ms. Loar will be able to speak to them in her testimony.

I would yield to any of the panelists if you would wish to comment on that.

If not, I will go to the next speaker, who is Mr. Hastings. Mr.

Hastings, do you have any questions for our colleagues?

Mr. HASTINGS. I do, Mr. Chairman, and thank you. I also would

like to add a comment.

When Ms. Morella, my good friend and a good friend to all of us,

joined the panel, at some point during the course of your testimony,

Ms. Morella, you commented to the fact that you were preaching

to the choir. It is a very small choir here, and I think that is one

of the problems.

Very occasionally, those of us, particularly men who are avantgarde about women’s issues, do not have the ear of some of our colleagues that we work with on a day to day basis, and I do not say

that disparagingly, but with an abundance of understanding that

we need to develop strategies to be sure to include significant numbers of persons who can be influential in the objectives that we are

trying to achieve.

Toward that end, the legislation that you and your colleagues

have been working on, I beg of you at the earliest time you accept

cosponsors that you include me, and then at least I know I will be

on record early on as matters go.

Additionally, I would like to say that I think all of us here who

are concerned know that a part of the problem is the now chair of

the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. I do not know Senator

Helms. I have never met him, and I only know his reputation

through what I hear as I travel about the world.

I do not know that he knows, and I believe he does need to know,

that there are those who feel that he has pretty much individually

hijacked foreign relations in the United States of America. Toward

that end, when Senator Bob Graham and myself introduced legislation dealing with the convention on the child and the fact that it

had not been ratified—I will use media speak—a high ranking Senate source said to me that no treaties were going to be ratified because Senator Helms did not choose to do so.

We love our government, and we have great reason to have better understanding from the Senator. If there is to be a strategy developed, it should be to pressure him to understand that when 163

countries have ratified a treaty like CEDAW or we find ourselves

in a position where countries are moving forward on matters as it

pertains to discrimination against women, and yet we are the alleged champions and have not done the simple act of ratifying a

treaty with the clarifications. I might add I do not hear, and I

guess my question to you all is I do not hear any objection now.

I heard from both Ms. Woolsey’s and Ms. Morella’s testimony

that the clarifications or the reservations that were offered by Senator Helms would go right along with any new visit that the Senate Foreign Relations Committee might have and that you all at

15

this point are not raising objections to some of the reservations. Am

I correct about that?

Ms. WOOLSEY. You are absolutely correct, and the language in

1994 from the Senate Foreign Relations Committee acted on the

matter. There were reservations that would state clearly that

CEDAW does not create a right to abortions and that abortions

should not be promoted as a method of family planning.

Mr. HASTINGS. Right.

Ms. WOOLSEY. It was clear in the language.

Mr. HASTINGS. Well, I for the life of me then do not understand

what other reservations exist, and if they are out there they ought

to be known.

Let me ask you, and this will be my final question, Mr. Chairman, since many of the countries that have ratified CEDAW continue to have very poor records in terms of discrimination against

women.

I heard lengthy testimony about Iran and some of their actions.

I know that in Iraq and Burma, just as two examples, that women

are discriminated against, as well as many countries in Africa.

What can the United States do, or do we have any leverage at this

point, to make CEDAW a more effective tool for achieving concrete

results in ending discrimination against women around the world?

Ms. WOOLSEY. Well, sir, we can do nothing if we do not ratify it

in our own country. That makes us voiceless. If we have a seat at

the table, then we can advise. We can recommend. We can weigh

in with our statements, but when we have not ratified the treaty

then we are really voiceless in this regard.

Mr. HASTINGS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Ms. MORELLA. May I make a comment, too?

Mr. HASTINGS. Yes, please. Thanks, Connie.

Ms. MORELLA. I was at the U.N. Conference on Environment in

Rio, Population and Development in Cairo, and Women in Beijing.

All of them dealt with empowering women because this would empower societies, whether it was through education, removing violence from one’s life, health access, which deals with microenterprise, which deals with enhancing our environment. It all ties in.

I do not know why we have had such reticence about signing on

to these U.N. conventions when we are leaders with regard to these

conferences. I would submit that we should continue, as Representative Woolsey has, to try to get ratification of it, but at the same

time we have to look at these other programs that are doing that

very thing, eliminating discrimination against women.

Ms. MALONEY. To respond to the gentleman’s question of how we

can put more teeth, obviously passing CEDAW is an important

symbolic statement. As was pointed out, Helms’ understanding

which stated that nothing in CEDAW creates a right to abortion

was literally passed out of the Senate, and still the Senate did not

ratify it.

Likewise with my colleague, Ms. Morella, we were delegates to

the world conference in Beijing, China, 5 years ago where the report from the United States delegation called for the ratification of

CEDAW, and in just 33 days we will be meeting in New York for

the 5-year review of Beijing. You will have at least 180 countries

there. It will be very embarrassing if the report from the United

16

States states that we still have not met up to the commitment that

we made in Beijing, China, as a delegation to ratify CEDAW.

The funding for USAID and UNFPA helps countries around the

world combat AIDS, female genital mutilation, education and

health empowerment, and one of the bills that we have put forward

is called Back to the Future. Mr. Campbell has helped me with

that, as well as Ms. Lee and Ms. Morella and Ms. Woolsey, and it

calls for funding at 1995 levels; not 1999 levels, but what we funded UNFPA and USAID back in 1995, to go out and empower

women and educate communities about the importance of educating women.

When you educate women, you educate the village, the family

and the stability of the country, the knowledge not only on family

planning, but AIDS prevention, health care education, so funding

these two very vital programs that the United States literally created and led for many years, if we can continue to go back to the

future with 1995 levels of funding for USAID and UNFPA.

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Chairman, if you would just indulge me just

one moment?

Mr. CAMPBELL. Of course. The gentleman has additional time.

Mr. HASTINGS. Chris Smith, one of our colleagues from New Jersey that has been very active on a number of subjects pertaining

to women, one being the trafficking of women. When Congressman

Smith and I and others were in attendance at the Organization for

Security and Cooperation in Europe last year, he introduced a resolution on behalf of the United States delegation, of which I was a

participant and signatory to. We met not resistance, but guffaws

almost from our colleagues in the United Kingdom and Canada

asking us where were we on the ratification of this treaty, and so

it hampers our interfacing with other organizations, that organization being one, that is a 54 member country organization, all of

whom have ratified CEDAW.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. CAMPBELL. Thank you, Congressman Hastings.

The Congressman’s comment reminds me to be sure that I am

a cosponsor of your resolutions. Would you kindly see that my

name is included if it has not been already?

Ms. WOOLSEY. Thank you. I believe you are. Certainly Mr.

Hastings is. We would love to put you on it.

Mr. CAMPBELL. Very well.

Mr. Chabot is next—we alternate between parties—if you would

like. Otherwise we will proceed.

Thank you. We will proceed then. I apologize to Mr. Delahunt.

I understand the rule is in terms of the order you show up rather

than seniority, so I apologize. I yield now to Mr. Delahunt.

Mr. DELAHUNT. No need to apologize, Mr. Chairman. In fact, Mr.

Hastings absolutely I think echoed my own concerns.

I will be very brief other than simply to say to my colleagues a

job well done. Thank you for your perseverance, your persistence.

I agree. It is an embarrassment. It is indeed unfortunate.

I welcome the observation by the learned constitutional scholar,

our pro tem chairman, Mr. Campbell, relative to the self-executing

provisions because after listening to Mr. Smith I was concerned

17

about Mothers Day, but it would appear that Mothers Day would

survive ratification of CEDAW.

I really think that you all got to the quick because I suspect that

the real concern is the abortion issue, and you have been very clear

and unequivocal that the reservation by Senator Helms would be

retained, and I do not see any rational basis for why we have not

ratified it.

With that, I will yield back.

Mr. CAMPBELL. Congresswoman Lee of Oakland.

Ms. LEE. Thank you very much. Let me just find out from you,

Congresswoman Woolsey. In terms of women’s international organizations and the human rights organizations, what has been the

general feedback from these groups with regard to the lack of

United States ratification of the treaty?

Ms. WOOLSEY. Over 100 women’s and church groups support

ratification of CEDAW. They know it is the right thing for the

United States to have a seat at the table. Congresswoman, as I told

you, the Church Women United and the United Methodist Women

brought 10,000 handwritten letters to me, and we made sure they

got to individual Senators, saying thank you to the Senators who

had signed on to ratify CEDAW and encouraging those who were

holding back. That is 10,000 handwritten. They could get more.

Ms. LEE. Short of changing chairs with the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which we know is not going to happen, what do

we do next? I mean, I think this is a major step in the right direction, but how do we move forward?

Ms. WOOLSEY. Well, the next step, of course, will be to have this

Committee mark up House Resolution 107, get it to the House

Floor, and then the House can vote on it. We have 112 bipartisan

cosponsors now that we have Mr. Campbell on our legislation. We

will pass it out of the House which urges the Senate to ratify

CEDAW. It has to be ratified in the Senate and the Senate must

take action.

You know, it is all right that Senator Helms disagrees with

CEDAW. It is all right that Congressman Smith has disagreements, but, you know, this is a democracy, and Senator Helms

must know that he has to let the other 99 Senators weigh in and

vote on whether or not they support it.

This is not a country with a one person democracy. We have to

insist that he see it that way. He can vote any way he wants, but

he has no right not to let the rest of the Senate weigh in.

If we would start here, that would help. We will let the rest——

Ms. MALONEY. Passing it out of the House would be a huge statement.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Right.

Ms. MALONEY. A huge statement.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Yes. If we pass it out of the House, it will be a

national statement that will have to be heard.

Thank you for asking.

Ms. LEE. Thank you. Let me just comment with regard to the

work that all of you have done in terms of raising this to the

public’s attention. I found after last year’s series of activities, many

women in this country were shocked to find that we had not ratified it. For some reason, the word had not gone out, but I think

18

now we have a prime opportunity thanks to all of you and what

we are doing to engage women. The 10,000 signatures, as well as

what has been going on throughout the country now, I think gives

us a real unique opportunity to move this forward.

Just on behalf of my constituents I want to say thank you very

much for everything.

Ms. WOOLSEY. And thank you for your support.

Mr. CAMPBELL. Thank you, Congresswoman Lee.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Thank you.

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. Pomeroy.

Mr. POMEROY. I want to thank the panel. This is really an issue

that I think deserves the light of day to be cast clearly and squarely upon it. We are in an untenable position—not moving this forward.

Senator Helms, in blocking Committee action on this treaty, is

not reflecting his own party. He is not reflecting the U.S. Senate

and certainly not reflecting the American people, so I really commend you for your participation in this hearing today.

I hope I am on the resolution. Like our Chairman, if I am not,

please put me on. I would want to be.

I would like to ask your thoughts on the relationship of this treaty to the education of girls in Third World countries. I have become

convinced that that issue, education of girls in Third World countries, is the single most important thing that we can do as part of

our foreign policy to address systemic difficulties resulting in

health epidemics, resulting in war, resulting in dysfunctional

economies.

It really is at the heart of so very much that is wrong that we

try to bandaid our way over with these kind of ad hoc, knee jerk

responses, but we are not getting at the crux of it, which is the

education of girls. What is the relationship between this treaty and

that issue, any of you?

Ms. WOOLSEY. Well, Mr. Pomeroy, education is one of the major

tenets of CEDAW. Equal education, educating girls and young

women.

Mr. POMEROY. Right.

Ms. WOOLSEY Education, equality in work, but it starts with education, and that is one of the major tenets of CEDAW.

Ms. MORELLA. In my statement, which did not truly address

CEDAW, but addressed discrimination against women, a major

part of it is education. Two-thirds of those people in developing

countries that are not educated are women, are females, and when

you can see how they are heads of households, how important that

is, and mention was made that in those countries when you educate a woman you educate a family. That is important in terms of

their understanding of reproductive health, of micro enterprise endeavors. I will have legislation on it, but indeed it links up.

I also think this is very important what Congresswoman Woolsey

has been tenacious about and the family planning that Congresswoman Maloney has been a leader on, but I think it is important

that we match our rhetoric with the actions, and that is putting

the money significantly into AID, directing it toward education and

showing by example that we are more than words. I believe that

very strongly.

19

Ms. MALONEY. Advancing the status of women is not only the

right thing to do, but it is the single, most effective thing we can

do to address the multiple foreign policy goals at one time.

I appreciate your comments, Mr. Pomeroy.

Mr. POMEROY. I want to emphasize this is not just matters of

principle discussed at women’s conferences—international women’s

conferences. These are fundamentals of economics agreed to by

male economists in boring finance seminars. I mean, it is just absolutely true. It is common sense. It needs to be moved forward. I

really do commend you for your work.

There are women’s issues that do not involve abortion, and I

think that sometimes we get so incredibly sensitive to the abortion

dimension of things that we impose it on all things about women.

Of course, there is no joinder, and we do a terrible disservice to

public policy when we cannot look at issues rationally that are

squarely before us, so you leadership on this is so very important.

Thank you.

Mr. CAMPBELL. Thank you, Mr. Pomeroy.

We are at the end of the Members’ panel. If you wish to say

something else, the Chair certainly is willing to.

Not hearing anything further, thank you, Congresswoman Woolsey, Congresswoman Maloney, Congresswoman Morella.

Ms. MORELLA. Mr. Chairman, you are a champ.

Mr. CAMPBELL. Congresswoman Morella, you have what it takes.

That is a bit of an inside joke as to what you say to a Member

of Congress when you forget their first name. You say hi, champ,

and then the other person says you have what it takes. I now have

explained the inside joke.

Thank you very much. Now it is my distinct privilege to introduce Theresa Loar, our next and principal witness. Ms. Theresa

Loar was appointed by President Clinton as senior coordinator for

international women’s issues at the Department of State. She was

given that appointment 4 years ago in 1996.

She also serves as director of the President’s Interagency Council

on Women. She previously served as a State Department official in

Mexico, Korea and various bureaus of the Department of State.

Ms. Loar, your testimony will be submitted in the record in full.

I appreciate the fact that you took the time and trouble to prepare

12 pages, but, given that, try instead of—well, you know what I

mean. If you could summarize it?

On a personal note, I would like to say something interesting

that maybe you did not know. In 1981, Ronald Reagan, President

Reagan, established an interagency task force on women chaired by

Elizabeth Dole, I think you have that in your line of succession. I

was the only male member of that task force.

Ms. Loar, you are welcome.

20

STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE THERESA LOAR, DIRECTOR,

THE PRESIDENT’S INTERAGENCY COUNCIL ON WOMEN AND

SENIOR COORDINATOR FOR INTERNATIONAL WOMEN’S

ISSUES, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE

Ms. LOAR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It sounds like you got all

the training you need for this hearing.

I want to thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to testify

before your Committee on international women’s issues. I would

like to commend the Chairman and this Committee for focusing on

women, one of the most powerful and as yet under utilized forces

for change and progress around the world.

I will make an abbreviated statement and request that my full

testimony be submitted into the record.

As I begin my testimony, I would like to say what an honor it

is to follow such strong congressional champions for women, Congresswomen Maloney, Woolsey and Morella. They really have made

a mark not just here in the United States, but around the world.

As I testify today on support for women, I am fortunate to have

with me visiting from New Jersey my No. 1 supporter, a woman

who raised five daughters, one of the great women of the world, my

mother, Ann Loar. I am very glad to have my mother here with me

today.

Mr. CAMPBELL. Ms. Loar, you are most welcome. If you would

stand up? I think the Committee Members would like to recognize

you.

[Applause.]

Ms. LOAR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Secretary Albright has mandated that the advancement of women’s human rights and the advancement of women be put into the

mainstream of U.S. foreign policy, and under extraordinary leadership we have made great strides in carrying out this mandate.

The work we are doing to support women flows out of the U.N.

Conference on Women held in Beijing, China, that so many of the

Members of Congress who spoke earlier referred to. This gathering

of delegates from 189 countries and 50,000 NGO’s was a hallmark

event that had profound effects on how governments, including our

own, look at issues affecting women and their families.

Those of us working to coordinate the U.S. Government engagement in this conference could not have foreseen the impact this

event would have. Our U.S. delegation included three distinguished

Members of Congress who were here at the hearing today, Representatives Maloney, Morella and Smith.

Our First Lady, Hilary Rodham Clinton, who led the U.S. delegation in Beijing, sent out a clarion call to the international community to recognize that human rights are women’s rights and women’s rights are human rights.

My testimony today will report on a powerful partnership working to improve the lives of women and girls. This partnership includes our government, NGO’s here and around the world, other

governments, international organizations and Members of this Congress.

The focus is on fighting trafficking and supporting women democracy builders. I will also reiterate our support for the women’s

human rights treaty, the United Nations convention on the elimiVerDate 11-MAY-2000 13:12 Dec 01, 2000 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 67625.TXT HINTREL1 PsN: HINTREL1
21

nation of all forms of discrimination against women. I will also look

ahead to Women 2000, the fifth year review of the Beijing women’s

conference.

My position as senior coordinator for international women’s

issues at the State Department was created through the efforts of

Congress in 1994. President Clinton appointed me to this position

in 1996, and since that time we have made great progress in institutionalizing issues affecting the lives of women and the development, formulation and implementation of U.S. foreign policy.

I have two key areas of focus, expanding women’s political participation and eliminating violence against women. In my position

as director of the President’s Interagency Council on Women, I am

proud to represent that the council has served as a model for other

governments committed to progress for women. Representatives of

the governments of India, South Korea and New Zealand have

come to hear how a government task force like the council can be

a catalyst for policy formation to support women’s advancement.

Another key element in my work is the strong partnership with

a broad representation of the NGO community. This is something

that the State Department is starting to do more and more, but it

is not something traditionally the State Department has done over

the years.

My office holds the largest ongoing public briefings with the

NGO community held at the Department of State. For the past 3

years, we have held open and transparent public quarterly briefings attended by some 300 to 400 individuals. This strong collaboration with NGO strengthens and informs my work. This inside/

outside strategy has been an effective way to develop policy.

One of the key issues in the area of violence against women that

has emerged both domestically and internationally in the last few

years is the trafficking and the women and children. Among the

most horrific abuses that women face around the world is the buying and selling of humans for elicit purposes.

Trafficking is one of the fastest growing criminal enterprises

today behind drug trafficking and arms trafficking. Although it is

sometimes characterized as a women’s issue, it involves not only

women, but also children and men. It is first and foremost a

human rights issue, but is also a socio-economic issue, a public

health issue and one organized criminal activity.

I have met with trafficking victims and organizations working in

the field to help these women and their families, and I have heard

firsthand of the devastation suffered by young women, sometimes

merely only girls, who are deprived of their childhood when traffickers sold them into slavery. These encounters have deepened my

commitment to marshal the full breadth of government resources

available to confront and stop trafficking, which now affects over

1,000,000 women and children each year.

One of the key issues behind trafficking is the low economic status of women and the low status of girls around the world. Congressman Pomeroy talked about his commitment to girls’ education. I would echo that and talk about the importance of educating girls and valuing girls so that they are not pulled out of

school and their childhoods are not cut short.

22

The President, the Secretary of State and the Attorney General

have all shown tremendous commitment to this serious human

rights issue. First Lady Hilary Rodham Clinton has worked tirelessly to bring this issue out of the shadow and onto the world

stage. As a result of this leadership, the full machinery of the Department of State and several other government agencies is working on this issue. We have several multi-lateral initiatives underway with the United Nations, the European Union and OSCE.

Some of the anti-trafficking efforts of OSCE have benefited from

the strong support of Congressman Smith.

Most recently, the United States and the Philippine government

co-hosted a meeting in the Philippines called the Asian regional

initiative to combat the trafficking of women and children. This involved over 20 Asian and Pacific nations who are working together

for the first time. Our embassies in the field are already reporting

new levels of cooperation among the governments of Thailand and

Cambodia, for example.

Congress is essential to our efforts on trafficking. Passage of an

effective bill that provides severe punishment for traffickers and

protection for victims from medical treatment to shelters to the opportunity to become legal residents is crucial. However, this bill

must not, as some have proposed, inflict mandatory economic sanctions on countries that may seem to be doing too little to combat

trafficking. This could require the United States to impose sanctions on as many as two-thirds of the world’s governments. Moreover, such a heavy handed response would cripple NGO’s work in

this area.

Internationally, we need to achieve consensus and rapid ratification by states working on the U.N. trafficking protocol being negotiated in Vienna. We look forward to continue working with Congress.

My other key area of focus is promoting women’s political participation so that as the time that we live in now offers us great opportunities for democracy to take hold. Our key program for that effort

is the Vital Voices Women in Democracy initiative. This is an ongoing global initiative that implements Secretary Albright’s mandate

to promote the advancement of women as a U.S. foreign policy objective. It has benefited from the strong support of the First Lady.

At some conferences we have announced U.S. Government commitments. For example, in Vienna we announced $3 million to fight

trafficking and violence. We have now surpassed $10 million in

funding for that issue in that region. Vital Voices raises the voices

of emerging women leaders from around the world who are forging

the way to democracy.

Moving ahead to Women 2000, Beijing plus five—in September,

1995, the United States joined 188 other governments at the

United Nations. The United Nations joins 180 other governments

in Beijing for the significant turning point on how the world looked

at the issues affecting women and their families. The document

that came out of that U.N. conference was a very strong policy

statement.

In June, 2000, looking ahead, the United States will join most of

the other nations of the world at a special session of the United

23

Nations General Assembly in New York. The purpose is to appraise

and assess the progress it made in advancing the status of women.

To hold the U.S. Government accountable for Beijing followup,

the President’s council has put together a resource document, a reference tool called The 2000 Edition of America’s Commitment. This

is a 5-year review of U.S. Government programs. This document

highlights U.S. efforts measured against the Beijing document, The

Platform for Action. I have brought along copies of the book today

for Members of the Committee, and we are mailing that out to

NGO’s and sharing it with other governments around the world.

The Beijing conference has unleashed changes for the better for

women everywhere. In the past 5 years, I have had an opportunity

to meet with women from every continent who recounted with

pride how they are achieving progress in their country, spurred on

by the U.N. women’s conference.

There are now more laws on the books against domestic violence,

new violence protection programs in place and legal aid centers

from Sri Lanka to Bulgaria. Women have greater access to micro

credit. In Rwanda, the government is revising discriminatory laws

in the area of inheritance rights, which is so important to the survivors of the Rwanda genocide. A new constitution in Venezuela allows women for the first time to transfer citizenship to their foreign born spouses.

Mr. Chairman, I turn now to the women’s international bill of

rights, as Congresswoman Woolsey calls it, the convention to end

all forms of discrimination against women. The Administration

feels strongly that CEDAW must be ratified. Its ratification is an

administration priority. The President, the First Lady and the Secretary of State have repeatedly called for its ratification.

We have worked closely with NGO’s in their quest for ratification

of this treaty. I would like to note the tireless efforts of Kit Cosby,

Pat Rengel and their working group on the ratification of CEDAW,

as well as Billy Heller of California and the National Committee

for Ratification of CEDAW. I understand that Kit and Pat are here

today, and we thank them for their guidance and support.

These groups should be commended for their efforts. American

citizens have been working for the past 20 years on this issue. At

least 10 states have endorsed ratification of CEDAW in their own

state legislatures.

I would also like to thank the 33 cosponsors who reintroduced

Senate Resolution 279 in support of CEDAW and, of course, the

Members of the House, some of whom have come forward today,

who have been supportive of Congresswoman Woolsey’s legislative

efforts on behalf of CEDAW.

Some say that only radical feminists support CEDAW. This is

not true. Support comes from organizations and citizens across the

broad spectrum of our society. The Gray Panthers, AARP, the National Coalition of American Nuns, the National Council of Negro

Women, the American Bar Association all have endorsed CEDAW.

The list goes on and on.

CEDAW removes obstacles to women’s full enjoyment of their

rights. It does not create an international right to abortion. Rather,

it seeks to insure equal access for men and women to health care

services. It does not encroach on the principle of federalism or vioVerDate 11-MAY-2000 13:12 Dec 01, 2000 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 67625.TXT HINTREL1 PsN: HINTREL1
24

late U.S. sovereignty. Rather, it reinforces U.S. commitment to

equality and human rights.

The United States is one of the world’s leading advocates for

human rights and fundamental freedoms. Ratification would

strengthen our global efforts to advance the status of women.

I would like to talk briefly about the importance family planning

plays in the lives of women around the world. One hundred and

fifty million women in the developing world want to space or limit

their child bearing, but have no access to family planning. Family

planning saves lives, protects women’s health, promotes healthy

families and prevents abortion. Real world evidence in places like

Russia and eastern Europe shows that family planning can do just

that.

As we look ahead to the fifth year review of Beijing, one of the

most extraordinary changes we have seen around the world is the

willingness of governments to step forward and to stand up for

women’s human rights. I started my position as senior coordinator

for international women’s issues just a few days after the Taliban

moved into Kabul and Afghanistan and shocked the world with

their regressive restrictions on women.

Sadly, these restrictions remain today, but the promotion of

human rights, particularly the human rights of women and girls,

is among our highest priorities in Afghanistan. The international

community must remain steadfast and united in its resolve to seek

wider rights and opportunities for Afghan women and girls. The

United States will not move away from this agenda.

The Clinton Administration has an unprecedented record in

achieving progress for women, but there is still work to be done.

There is a momentum now from villages to towns and countries

around the world. The commitment women and men everywhere

have shown to improve the lives of women, girls and their families

will continue into the twenty-first century.

We thank the Members of Congress who work with us on this

agenda for lasting change and progress. Thank you.

[The prepared statement of Ms. Loar appears in the appendix.]

Mr. ROHRABACHER [presiding]. Thank you very much. I am Congressman Dana Rohrabacher. We have had a change at the helm

here.

Ms. Loar, I will just take advantage of the fact that I am now

the Chair to ask a few questions of my own. I could not help but

notice that you were, of course, strongly advocating the CEDAW.

Is that how it is pronounced?

Ms. LOAR. Yes.

Mr. ROHRABACHER. The CEDAW conference or proposal, and

then you were focusing on Congress’ inaction. To what then do you

ascribe the failure of the Clinton Administration to obtain the ratification of CEDAW in the 2 years, 1993 and 1994, when President

Clinton was President, but the Democratic party had control of

both houses of Congress?

Ms. LOAR. Mr. Chairman, I would say that the consensus in support for women’s human rights has been one that has been growing

and one that has increased, and I think our——

Mr. ROHRABACHER. The President did not have a commitment at

the beginning of his Administration?

25

Ms. LOAR. Oh, I think he had. I think he came into office with

that commitment. I think we have seen that commitment growing

and evidenced in many strong ways, and that is why we are continuing to fight for passage of CEDAW.

Mr. ROHRABACHER. I do not think that quite answered my question. Why did he not do it in the first 2 years——

Ms. LOAR. Well, actually the President did.

Mr. ROHRABACHER [continuing]. When he had all the power to do

it?

Ms. LOAR. President Clinton did send the treaty. President

Carter some 20 years ago signed the treaty and did send it to the

Senate for ratification.

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Yes.

Ms. LOAR. We made very clear our efforts to endorse the purpose

of CEDAW. We did send it up to the Senate for ratification. We

worked very hard to work out the reservations so that those areas

where there were some perhaps misrepresentations or misunderstandings were clarified. We have been very clear in pushing this.

Mr. ROHRABACHER. So this was in that 2-year period, 1993 and

1994, that the Administration did that?

Ms. LOAR. These efforts have been going on for some time. It was

sent to the Senate in 1994.

Mr. ROHRABACHER. It was sent to the Senate in 1994. When in

1994 was it sent?

Ms. LOAR. I do not know the exact date. I would probably say in

the summer, perhaps June or July.

Mr. ROHRABACHER. So in the final months of those first 2 years

when you had control of both houses it was sent to the Senate. Was

there any agreement made by the Democratically controlled Senate

to bring this to a vote?

Ms. LOAR. I can say that there was broad support for CEDAW

when it was first brought to the Senate. We know that there is

very broad support now, and we know that the basic elements of

CEDAW and what it represents, that agenda——

Mr. ROHRABACHER. I am not asking about right now. I am asking

about when the Democrats controlled both houses of Congress and

the presidency why did they did not act.

Ms. LOAR. I cannot speak to that. I can speak to right now the

need for CEDAW and the——

Mr. ROHRABACHER. OK.

Ms. LOAR [continuing]. Interest on behalf of women around the

world for it.

Mr. ROHRABACHER. All I would suggest is when you say that this

Administration has such a pristine record on women’s rights that

we take into consideration when it could have done anything on

this issue that it wanted and controlled both houses of Congress

and the Executive Branch, it did nothing.

You mentioned your own situation and your own recognition of

the rights of women in Afghanistan. How long have you been in

your job at the State Department?

Ms. LOAR. Since September 1996.

Mr. ROHRABACHER. OK. You have undoubtedly heard my demands over and over again for the records dealing with this Administration’s policies toward Afghanistan. Have you personally

26

tried to see that I and this Committee received a copy of the documents we requested in order to determine what the policy of this

Administration toward the Taliban is?

Ms. LOAR. Mr. Chairman, I know well of your interest and support for the people of Afghanistan. I am not familiar with your request for documents. I have not——

Mr. ROHRABACHER. You are not?

Ms. LOAR. I am not aware of that, but I do know well of your

interest and support.

Mr. ROHRABACHER. You are not familiar with that?

Ms. LOAR. I am not personally. I have not heard anything about

that.

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Just so you will know, and I want to state

for the record, having been in Afghanistan a number of times—I

am probably the Congress’ foremost expert on Afghanistan—I have

charged this Administration has a covert policy of supporting the

Taliban, and the Taliban would not be in power if it was not for

this Administration wanting it and cutting deals with the Saudis

and the Pakistanis to see that the Taliban were there.

I have demanded, and received support from the Chairman of

this Committee, a request for the documents that would prove or

disprove that charge. For over 2 years, this Administration has

done everything they could to block me from the documents and

block this Committee from legitimate oversight.

I will tell you right now, for someone who supposedly is concerned about women’s rights, for you not to have waded in behind

the scenes, calls into question your commitment whether it is a political commitment to this Administration or a commitment to the

rights of women that you are talking about today.

The most gross violator of women’s rights in the world today is

the Taliban government in Afghanistan, and this Administration’s

policies in regard to the Taliban have been disgraceful and deceitful to the American people. This Committee has oversight responsibility to find out what this Administration’s policies have been, and

this Administration has stonewalled us and blocked our ability to

find out what policies we have had toward Afghanistan.

To make it very clear for you, we expect people like yourselves,

who are behind the scenes and in the Administration who supposedly support women’s rights, to be pressuring the Administration to do what their public positions indicate they should be doing.

Again, I would hope that in the next few months this Administration will finally provide the documents for the time period that

I requested to find out what the policy of this Administration was

toward the creation and support of the Taliban’s control of Afghanistan.

I would say that issue overrides many of the things that you

have been talking about today, and I would hope that when you go

back to the State Department that you personally activate yourself

to see that those documents are available and that if you find that

this Administration has been supporting the Taliban that you join

with us, whatever party, to try to change that policy. It is a disgrace.

I will be very happy to hear whatever you want to retort to that,

and then we will let one of our colleagues speak.

27

Ms. LOAR. Let me say that I will carry back your request of the

State Department. I will carry that back with me as I return to the

State Department this afternoon.

I would just say that the Secretary of State has been very direct

and clear in her criticism of the Taliban for its treatment of women

and girls. It is gratifying to know you share that concern. I know

you have a deep, long-term interest in Afghanistan. Our record is

very strong and very clear, and we are going to continue to have

that record.

Mr. ROHRABACHER. The record of this Administration is not very

strong and clear. It is deceitful, and it is false. I do not care if Madeleine Albright talks about human rights and goes over to China

or we have an Administration that is kissing the boots of these

gangsters. All the talk about human rights does not mean a darn

thing if the Administration does not put any force behind it in

China.

I will tell you, her words in Afghanistan do not mean anything

to these fascist thugs who run Afghanistan and treat women the

way they do when we have an administration that has cut a back

room deal with Pakistan and Saudi Arabia to support them and

keep them in power.

This Administration disarmed the opposition to the Taliban. Bill

Richardson and Rick Interfurth went to CABO and then went to

the Northern Alliance at a pivotal moment and disarmed the opposition to the Taliban.

We also have an opposition right now under Commander

Musuad. People like yourself who supposedly believe in human

rights for women and make that your priority should be doing everything you can to see that this Administration not disarms the

opposition to the Taliban, but supports Musuad and supports those

people in Afghanistan who do not believe in this type of oppression,

not only of women, but of everyone else.

I will say right now I was in Afghanistan during the war. This

oppression of women, which they say is just cultural, is not something that the people of Afghanistan fought for when they were trying to kick the Russians out. They may be developing Muslims, but

they are not fanatics. This reflects the Pakistani and the Saudi

brand of Islam, if you will.

With that, I am sorry, but I do feel strongly about this obviously.

It is not just for women’s rights, but for everybody’s rights.

Ms. LOAR. Mr. Chairman, I would agree that the restrictions and

the human rights abuses against women in Afghanistan are not

culturally based, and I would agree that our government’s—perhaps we do not agree about this, but my belief is that our government has been very strong in standing up to women of Afghanistan.

We will continue to do that. I will take back your concerns to the

State Department. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Thank you.

Ms. Woolsey or Ms. Lee? Which one comes first?

Ms. LEE. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Let me go back to the treaty. I would like to find out just in

terms of your work—and thank you for everything you have done

and for being here today——

28

Ms. LOAR. Thank you.

Ms. LEE. What does the United States face when we try to talk

to other nations about discrimination against women? Does our

failure to ratify CEDAW undercut our efforts actually to be a leader in international women’s issues?

Ms. LOAR. Well, Congresswoman Lee, it is actually quite an embarrassment to go to U.N. conferences where the United States has

a strong human rights record, and there will be discussions about

institutional mechanisms, treaties, powerful documents that can be

used to help women, and it is repeated again and again, whether

it is at U.N. meetings or at OSCE meetings like Congressman

Hastings referred to where there was a big effort to fight trafficking or whether it is in meetings supporting women’s role in democracy. I have been in meetings in Latin America where there is

a real focus on trying to fight violence against women in the home.

Again and again we are reminded that we as a government have

not ratified this treaty, so it is an embarrassment. It is a setback.

Ratification of the treaty would help move us forward in the work

we are trying to do for women’s human rights.

Ms. LEE. Which countries do we align ourselves with at this

point?

Ms. LOAR. Well, it is not a very enviable coalition of countries

that have not ratified CEDAW. It includes Iraq. It includes Somalia. It includes some other countries who are not known for their

strong brand of democracy.

All of Latin America, every single nation of Latin America, has

ratified CEDAW, and many of them are using it to help improve

the lives of women and girls. We are in a very unattractive grouping of countries and one that does not put us in a strong stead as

a strong leader for democracy around the world in not ratifying

CEDAW.

Ms. LEE. As I mentioned earlier, of course, we are still faced here

in this country with massive discrimination against women. Ratifying CEDAW, how would that help us in terms of using the treaty

as a tool to help women here in America deal with discrimination?

Ms. LOAR. Well, our laws currently already exceed a lot of the

standards in CEDAW, so we do not expect it to have a dramatic

effect on the U.S. laws related to women’s status.

More than anything, we see it as a very powerful tool that will

help us in our work internationally and as part of the international

community supporting women’s advancement.

Ms. LEE. Let me just make a comment, Mr. Chairman, because

I think one of the reasons that we need to move forward and quickly ratify CEDAW is to send a message, though, to our courts here

in this country and to all of those with jurisdiction over implementing anti-discrimination policies which we have in place here.

Often times I believe they are just there either for women who

have the money and the means to mount lawsuits or they are there

because we passed the law, but I believe in passing this treaty we

would have at least the moral obligation to move forward with our

anti-discrimination laws against women in this country, so I see

this as a very necessary tool for me as an African-American women

in America who needs these kinds of mechanisms on record and

internationally also.

29

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Ms. Woolsey.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, you

will not be surprised that Afghanistan has not ratified CEDAW.

Mr. ROHRABACHER. No pressure from the Administration obviously.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Well, I have to tell you, speaking of the Administration, and this will lead me into my question with Ms. Loar.

I was elected in 1992 when Bill Clinton was elected, and one of

the first items that was a part of my agenda was the ratification

of CEDAW. During that time Bill Clinton and the State Department started working with the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Because we know that our President likes to reach out across

party lines, he worked with the State Department and with Senator Helms to iron out concerns. That took up all of the rest of the

time that it would have taken to bring it to the Senate Floor and

get it passed. Then we lost the Majority, and then it was straight

downhill.

Now, I do not think this should be a partisan issue. I mean, this

is a women’s human rights issue. What I would like from you, Ms.

Loar, because you are part of the State Department, what does the

State Department need from us? You have done your part. The

Secretary of State has written to the Senate. The President has

asked the Senate to ratify. What do we have to do?

Ms. LOAR. We understand that there are discussions about the

possibility of hearings to get the issue fully explored and to be able

to have a strong basis for ratification. We know that the resolution

that you have sponsored in gaining support even today here as we

speak, we think resolutions of that nature are very helpful to give

a sense to the Senate in their role in ratifying the treaty that there

is a groundswell of support. We would like to see more of that.

We know from the groups that have worked so tirelessly here in

the United States, here in Washington and all across the United

States that there is a lot of support at the grassroots for ratification of this treaty, and we think that will be reflected ultimately

in passage of the treaty.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Well, I thank you, and you can count on us to

work with you.

Ms. LOAR. And we thank you for your leadership on that.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Thank you very much.

Mr. Chairman, when I came in here I had 111 cosponsors on H.

Res. 107, and I am leaving with 113; 114 if you will sign on it.

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Congratulations. I will take a look.

There is a question that they want me to ask for the record, and

if you could perhaps answer in writing if you would like? I will just

read this to you for the record, and then you could reply for the

record as well.

In the case of another international human rights convention,

the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the

United Nations body, with responsibility for overseeing the implementation of that covenant, has ruled that as a matter of international law, the U.S. reservations to the covenant have no legal

effect. This means that when the covenant was ratified there were

30

reservations that were put into it as part of the legislation of ratification by the Congress, but now we have that body saying those

reservations do not have any effect, no legal effect or no legal voice.

Here is the question. Does the United States accept the validity

of this ruling by that panel, and what assurances can you give the

Committee, which oversees the implementation of this convention,

that the elimination of discrimination against women, and that if

there are reservations during this whole process, in the ratification

process, that there will not be a similar ruling that the reservations of this convention have no legal force or effect?

First of all, you can answer that in writing, or if you would like

to answer it now that is fine.

Ms. LOAR. Mr. Chairman, with your agreement I would like to

answer that in writing. I will take that question back with me.

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Yes. This is vitally important because it goes

to the heart of the power of Congress to——

Ms. LOAR. Right.

Mr. ROHRABACHER [continuing]. Pass to what degree and if we

take everything or leave everything because if all our reservations

are declared null and void by the United Nations that means that

it is take it or leave it time for Congress from now on if the policy

of the Administration is to accept that as the policy.

Thank you very much for being a witness, and also thank you

for—I mean, I came in and came on very strong, and I believe what

I believe in. I would hope that you did take my admonition about

someone who is serious about women’s rights.

Frankly, I am shocked that you had not heard of my demand and

these charges that I have been making for 2 years. This has been

a struggle on my part to try to get the documentation to prove

something that indicates that this Administration is involved in a

heinous crime against women. As I say, I am just surprised that

you not only have not acted upon it, but have not heard about it.

I would hope that people in the Administration, like yourself,

who are committed to human rights and are committed especially

to women’s rights will pay attention to this battle and struggle that

I have been waging for 2 years.

I can think of no greater threat to the rights of women in the

world today than the acceptance of the Taliban form of Islam in

other countries that have Islamic populations. If other countries

which have Islamic populations start taking the lead from the

Taliban, hundreds of millions of women will lose their rights and

will find a dramatic decrease in their rights and find themselves

in subjugation of the worst possible kind. The only thing that we

can do is try to forcefully oppose this type of government that they

have in the Taliban in Afghanistan.

Let me note that we had an alternative. The King of Afghanistan, who has been in exile since the Russians took over, his wife

was the one who first helped liberate the women of Afghanistan 50

years ago. He is a very pro western and moderate alternative for

the people of Afghanistan who would love to have had the alternative.

But, this Administration went in the other direction and instead

undermined any efforts to bring the King back and undermined the

efforts of the Northern Alliance, which are composed of people who

31

are even more consistent with how you would like to see women

treated in the Islamic countries, yet this Administration continually undermined the efforts of these groups to change the government of Afghanistan. It is an important issue, and it is important

not just for women, but for everyone who believes in a broad sense

of human rights that cover both genders and not just women’s

rights.

I hope that you will take a look into it, and I hope that behind

the scenes you will tell them that, No. 1, you expect the documents

that we have requested be made available, and if those documents

indicate that this Administration had a covert policy of supporting

this horrendous, fascistic regime, the Taliban regime, that you will

publicly or privately try to do what you can to change that policy.

With that, I want to thank you for again being here today and

putting up with my confrontation, and I declare this hearing adjourned.

Ms. LOAR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

[Whereupon, at 11:41 a.m. the Committee was adjourned.]

(33)

A P P E N D I X

MAY 3, 2000

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63