U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

66–730 CC WASHINGTON : 2000

H. RES. 431 AND H. RES. 429

HEARING

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON

INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED SIXTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

THURSDAY, MARCH 9, 2000

Serial No. 106–140

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

HILLEL WEINBERG, Senior Professional Staff Member and Counsel

MARILYN C. OWEN, Staff Associate
(III)

C O N T E N T S

Page

Markup of H. Res. 431, expressing support for humanitarian assistance to

the Republic of Mozambique ............................................................................... 1

Markup of H. Res. 429, expressing the sense of the House of Representatives

concerning the participation of the extremist FPO in the Government of

Austria .................................................................................................................. 5

APPENDIX

Prepared statements:

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

York and Chairman, Committee on International Relations concerning H.

Res 431 .................................................................................................................. 18

The Honorable Marcos G. Namashulua, Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary, of the Republic of Mozambique ........................................................ 19

The Honorable Edward R. Royce, a Representative in Congress from California and Chairman, Subcommittee on Africa ................................................. 20

The Honorable Earl F. Hilliard, a Representative in Congress from Alabama .. 21

The Honorable Benjamin A. Gilman, concerning H. Res. 429 ............................. 23

The Honorable Matt Salmon, a Representative in Congress from Arizona ........ 24

Bills and Amendments:

H. Res. 431 ............................................................................................................... 25

Amendment to H. Res. 431offered by Mr. Meeks, a Representative in Congress from New York ........................................................................................... 29

H. Res. 429 ............................................................................................................... 30

(1)

H. RES. 431 AND H. RES. 429

THURSDAY, MARCH 9, 2000

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS,

Washington, DC.

Chairman GILMAN [presiding]. We will now consider H. Res. 431,

relating to humanitarian emergency in Mozambique. The Chair

lays the resolution before the Committee. The clerk will report the

title of the resolution.

Ms. BLOOMER. H. Res. 431, a resolution expressing the support

for humanitarian assistance to the Republic of Mozambique.

Chairman GILMAN. This resolution was not referred to Subcommittee.

Without objection, the clerk will read the preamble and operative

language of the resolution, that order for amendment.

Ms. BLOOMER. Whereas on February 9, 2000 the Southern African nations of Botswana, Mozambique, South Africa, Zambia and

Zimbabwe——

Chairman GILMAN. Without objection the resolution is considered

as having been read. It is open to amendment at any point.

The bill was introduced this morning. It was not referred to Subcommittee. The Chair appreciates the willingness of the Subcommittee on Africa to waive its consideration of this matter.

The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from New York, Mr.

Meeks.

Mr. MEEKS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Today I urge the House International Relations Committee to

pass H. Res. 431, a resolution which expresses the support of humanitarian assistance to the Republic of Mozambique.

First, Mr. Chairman, I wish to commend the Chair of the Africa

Subcommittee, Mr. Royce, for agreeing to waive the Africa Subcommittee’s jurisdiction.

I also commend Mr. Campbell and his staff for assisting with the

drafting of this resolution.

I wish also to commend Mr. Payne and Mr. Gejdenson, and last

but certainly not least you, Mr. Chairman, for your cooperation and

the cooperation of your staff.

Mr. Chairman, for the past 2 weeks the world has watched with

great anguish as the people of the Republic of Mozambique cling

to whatever they can to escape raging flooding waters. The storms

that have ravaged Mozambique are the worst the Southern African

region has seen in more than 50 years. The nations of Botswana,

Zimbabwe, Zambia and South Africa have also experienced national emergencies from the rainy season of flooding. However, Mo-
2

zambique bore the brunt of the storm that is still threatened by

floodwaters from neighboring countries which are forced to open

their dams to ease the pressure on these structures.

In the southern third of Mozambique, virtually all the primary

roads, bridges, electric grid facilities, and clean water wells have

been destroyed. Many buildings and homes that were built along

the fertile flood plains of the Save and the Limpopo Rivers will

need to be relocated or rebuilt.

Mr. Chairman, I find it is ironic that a nation that has experienced much success over the past 8 years to reform its government

and economy, only to suffer the economic disaster that these floods

are causing.

Mozambique held its second multi-party elections in 1999 and it

has privatized over 800 former government-owned enterprises. For

the first time in a long time, or as long as anyone can remember,

Mozambique did not even request international food aid. Additionally, because Mozambique’s government’s track record and economic performance has been so strong, the nation qualified for the

World Bank and IMF highly-indebted poor-countries program.

With the floodwaters comes the threat of water-borne diseases

and other public health problems. There have already been outbreaks of dysentery reported in many towns and villages without

potable water.

Another problem comes from land mines. Mozambique has thousands of semi-buoyant plastic land mines that may have been uncovered by the rising waters. These new areas must be located and

demarcated to avoid the unnecessary damage that can happen to

the population of Mozambique.

Mr. Chairman, the pace of international mobilization to help the

Mozambiquans has sped up dramatically over the past 10 days.

The government of South Africa and the Clinton Administration

should be commended for their efforts to deploy military assets and

emergency assistance to this country.

In the midst of destruction and great human tragedy, who can

forget how we witnessed the miracle of life in Mozambique, as we

watched a mother clinging to life on a limb give life to a child?

Additionally, a vast quantity of the country’s crops were spared

from the floodwaters. If the international community can get seeds

and tools to the right areas, Mozambique’s 2000 harvest yield

should be available to help with the emergency food shortage.

We must prepare to do all we can to assist Mozambique get back

on track so that her hard-fought economic and political reforms are

not washed away with the floodwaters.

I urge you and my colleagues to support the people of Mozambique.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman GILMAN. Thank you, Mr. Meeks.

Any other Member seeking recognition?

Mr. Payne.

Mr. PAYNE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Let me commend Mr. Meeks for this resolution and you for allowing this to bypass the Subcommittee and Mr. Royce and Mr.

Gejdenson’s support also.
3

I would just like to commend the gentleman from New York and

say that I strongly support this resolution. As he’s indicated, Mozambique has been very hard-hit with this devastating flood. Mozambique being one of the poorest countries in Africa has, as it’s

been mentioned, shown great growth over the past seven or 8 years

since it has been moving toward market economy and privatization.

The fact is that Mozambique has had democratic elections, its

second elections. It is one of the few countries that took a guerrilla

movement, the Ranamo people, and made them into a political

party.

I think if we go back through history we know that Mozambique

probably would have been a supporter of the United States through

the last 50 years. But, as you know, being a Portuguese colony, the

NATO forces and U.S. supported the colonial powers who suppressed the independence movement of the African countries of

which Mozambique and Angola and Guinea Bissau and others were

a part. So there is a history that we should know of some of the

problems in this country, 20 years of war against the Portuguese

colonialists and then a civil war for another 15 or 20, has really

taken a toll, like I said indirectly.

I think that our hand is there because of the Cold War period,

and much of the battles were fought in Africa.

So I would certainly strongly support this resolution.

I would also like to say that I am disappointed that there was

a lack of response, a tardiness on the part of the Administration.

I do recall the earthquakes in Turkey where there was swift assistance from all over the world, and in particular the U.S. teams went

there to get people out. But here it took several weeks before we

could really get ourselves mobilized to respond to this tragedy.

I would certainly urge us to support this. Also I have a letter

from the Mozambiquan ambassador to the U.S. where he is asking

for food and medical supplies and it is in excess of $65 million.

I will ask that it be entered into the record. Also a statement

from Mr. Earl Hilliard I would like to have that also entered into

the record if there’s no opposition to it.

Chairman GILMAN. Without objection.

Mr. PAYNE. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman GILMAN. Thank you, Mr. Payne.

Mr. Lantos.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I just want to take a moment first

to commend my friends, Mr. Meeks and Mr. Payne. I, of course,

fully support this resolution. I think it is eminently appropriate

that we give every conceivable assistance to the long suffering people of Mozambique and I urge my colleagues to support the resolution.

Chairman GILMAN. Thank you, Mr. Lantos.

Mr. Rohrabacher.

Mr. ROHRABACHER. I join with my friend Mr. Lantos in commending Mr. Meeks and Mr. Payne, and support this resolution.

These people are suffering and the bottom line is that we represent a country that’s supposed to have the highest ideals and

lead the way when people are suffering like this, and I am very
4

pleased with the leadership you’ve provided and am happy to support you.

Chairman GILMAN. Thank you, Mr. Rohrabacher.

Ms. Lee.

Ms. LEE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank you and Mr.

Meeks for bringing up this resolution and would also like to commend Mr. Meeks with regard to the details of the resolution.

The fact that we were late in stepping up to the plate, I think,

should prompt us to move very quickly to look at the ideas and

suggestions from the Ambassador and other relief agencies so that

we can really redouble our efforts. I am pleased that the resolution

also calls for us to take the international lead because we should.

We’ve neglected Africa for so long, and here we have an opportunity to be international leaders in responding to such a devastating disaster.

So thank you very much for giving us the opportunity to vote on

this and to work with you on it.

Chairman GILMAN. Thank you, Ms. Lee.

Are any other Members seeking recognition?

I am pleased to announce my support for this resolution.

I want to thank the gentleman from New York, Mr. Meeks, for

his leadership in this measure, and also Chairman Royce and

Ranking Member Mr. Payne of the African Subcommittee for introducing it.

It is important for our Congress to recognize the devastating

floods in Mozambique and the extraordinary trials the people of

that nation are undergoing.

When we saw television shots of them clinging to rooftops in

order to escape the rising flood tide, and then to have a limited

number of helicopters there to rescue the people, I think focused

our attention on the need to have international assistance.

I am pleased that we finally did react, even belatedly, and got

some choppers in there and provided humanitarian supplies. Our

military is in and out of there now to help the people of Mozambique. South Africa, the United Kingdom, France, and Denmark

also responded even though it was a bit late, but it helped considerably and we are going to try to arouse the interest of other nations to provide assistance.

I am particularly impressed with and thankful for the rapid and

effective assistance from the neighboring country of the government of South Africa.

I hope that our foreign disaster specialists at USAID are going

to explore ways to further support regional disaster response capabilities in Africa in the days ahead.

Is there any other Member seeking recognition?

I would also like to note that I’ve just been handed a note that

senior Administration officials will brief interested Members on the

situation in Mozambique this afternoon at 3 p.m. in room 2255.

That’s this afternoon at 3 p.m. in room 2255.

Is there anyone else seeking recognition? If not, the gentleman

from California, Mr. Rohrabacher, is recognized to make a motion.

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Chairman be

requested to seek consideration of the pending resolution on the

suspension calendar.
5

Chairman GILMAN. The question is now on the motion by the

gentleman from California, Mr. Rohrabacher. All those in favor of

the motion, say aye.

[Chorus of ayes.]

Chairman GILMAN. Those opposed, say no.

[No response.]

Chairman GILMAN. The ayes have it. The motion is agreed to.

Further proceedings on this measure will be postponed.

We will now proceed to H. Con. Res 315—I am sorry H. Res. 429.

Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Chairman?

Chairman GILMAN. Yes, Mr. Meeks.

Mr. MEEKS. Before we go on I have some technical amendments

that I had at the desk.

Chairman GILMAN. I am sorry, we will vitiate the prior action of

the Committee. Mr. Meeks is recognized without objection to offer

a technical amendment.

Mr. MEEKS. I believe the technical amendments have already

been distributed to the Members and I ask unanimous consent of

these amendments be considered en bloc.

Chairman GILMAN. Without objection, the amendments are being

considered en bloc.

All in favor of the technical amendments signify in the usual

manner.

[Chorus of ayes.]

Chairman GILMAN. Opposed?

[No response.]

Chairman GILMAN. The technical amendments are agreed upon.

Mr. MEEKS. Thank you Mr. Chairman.

Chairman GILMAN. We will now return to the motion by Mr.

Rohrabacher to seek consideration of the measure on the suspension calendar.

All in favor signify in the usual manner.

[Chorus of ayes.]

Chairman GILMAN. Opposed?

[No response.]

Chairman GILMAN. So be it. Mr. Rohrabacher’s motion is agreed

to.

We will now consider H. Res. 429 relating to the new Austrian

government. The Chair lays the resolution before the Committee.

The Clerk will report the title of the resolution.

Ms. BLOOMER. H. Res. 429, a resolution expressing the sense of

the House of Representatives concerning the participation of the

extremist FPO and the government of Austria.

Chairman GILMAN. Without objection the preamble and operative

language of the resolution will be read in that order for amendment. The Clerk will read.

Ms. BLOOMER. Whereas the extremist, racist and xenophobic

FPO has entered into a coalition agreement and is participating in

the new government of Austria. Whereas the long time——

Chairman GILMAN. The resolution is considered as read, without

objection.

The resolution is in the original jurisdiction of the Full Committee and I now recognize the gentleman from California, the
6

original sponsor of the measure, Mr. Lantos, to introduce the resolution to the Committee.

Mr. LANTOS. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Let me first express my appreciation to you for not only being an

original cosponsor of my resolution but of having significantly improved the nature of the resolution.

I want to thank also my friend, Mr. Crowley, who has played

such a pivotal role in bringing this resolution before our Committee

and I hope in a day or so before the House.

We are dealing with one of the most remarkable political developments of Europe since the end of the Second World War.

The European Union, a group of democratic, friendly, free and

open societies has seen fit to express in the strongest possible

terms its disapproval of a neo-Nazi, racist, xenophobic political

party being part of the new coalition government of Austria.

I thought long and hard, Mr. Chairman, of how I could relate the

leader of this party to the American political scene, and it is not

easy. But the closest I can come to is David Duke. Because Joerg

Haider is a very successful David Duke. While David Duke is

viewed as a fringe character on the American political scene with

his sickeningly racist and xenophobic and extremist views, Haider

was able to obtain 27 percent of the vote in free and open and

democratic elections in Austria; and the more recent public opinion

polls show that were the elections to be held today he would be

likely to receive a higher percentage of the vote.

Haider is typical of the new generation of political leadership of

the far-right. When David Duke talks about—no longer, he no

longer talks about the white citizens council—he talks about European Americans, the European Americans who have been so put

upon by recent trends in this country which have moved our country toward some degree of recognition of racial justice.

Haider is a charismatic, articulate, sophisticated European political leader. His party is included in the Governing Coalition, and

our resolution merely expresses our concern that Austria now has

a government in which one of the two major political parties is an

extremist, racist, neo-fascist group.

Now Haider, shortly after this government was founded, removed

himself from the political leadership of this party, which is one of

his most recent clever moves because he will want to disassociate

himself from the very harsh economic measures the new Austrian

government will have to institute.

As a matter of fact, Haider’s own political leadership indicates

that he plans to run for Chancellor of Austria as soon as those elections will be open, and they may be open very soon because this

coalition may collapse.

I cannot emphasize the importance of the Congress of the United

States going on record expressing its concerns with respect to this

development. There is an enormous difference between Germany

and Austria in facing their Nazi past. The Germans faced up to

their Nazi past forthrightly, courageously, and have undertaken a

program in Germany’s public schools of teaching the history of the

Hitler period and recognizing the tremendous degree of responsibility that the new democratic German governments face in living

down that past.
7

None of that happened in Austria. Austria was extremely successful in portraying herself as Hitler’s first victim when in fact

Austria was Hitler’s first ally.

I remember as a boy in Budapest seeing newsreels of Hitler’s

troops marching into Austria triumphantly and being greeted by

hundreds of thousands of joyful Austrians throwing countless bouquets of flowers at the feet of the Germany Nazi troops, who came

in as friends and allies and were greeted with delight.

It will be necessary for Austria in the coming years to come faceto-face with its Nazi past. My resolution commends the 14 nations

of the European Union and some nations that are not part of the

European Union, like Norway and Canada, for recognizing the horrendous danger this philosophy of neo-Nazism, xenophobism, racism represents for Europe.

David Duke is not successful in this country because we have a

history of 220 years of trying to build slowly a democratic society.

As a matter of fact, one way of looking at American history is to

say that we have been engaged for 220 years in closing the hypocrisy gap. When we initially declared all men are created equal,

some of the people who said that had slaves and it took us a civil

war to get beyond that.

When we said all men are created equal, we never even looked

at women. They were not part of the scene. It took us generations

to recognize that not only all men are created equal, but all women

are created equal, and we are still a long way from making a reality of the phenomenally impressive and deep and moving statements of our founding documents.

Now Austria does not share a democratic past, and with this

painful election where 27 percent of the Austrian voters voted for

the party of a man who declares Hitler’s labor policies to be admirable, who expresses his admiration for the Waffen SS, one of the

most sickening military units of Europe in the 2nd World War, it

is important for the Congress to express its views.

Before closing, Mr. Chairman, I feel obliged to mention that one

of our colleagues, a strong supporter of the resolution, Mr. Salmon,

has expressed the thought that perhaps serious support against the

Haider regime may be made part of this resolution.

I obviously share his views that it is indicative of the nature of

the Haider regime that the only government that expressed support for it is the dictatorial government of Assad in Syria.

Let me say my resolution enjoys the support of some of the leading Republican Members of our body including yourself, Mr. Chairman, and I ask my colleagues to support the resolution unanimously, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Chairman GILMAN. Thank you, Mr. Lantos. I commend the gentleman from California and express my appreciation to him for inviting me to join with him in sponsoring this important resolution.

H.R. 429 places the House on record regarding our concerns over

the participation of the extremist freedom party, the FPO, in the

government of Austria that was recently formed. The former leader

and founder of the FPO, Joerg Haider, has propelled the FPO into

the mainstream of Austrian politics by appealing to some of the insecurity of Austria’s people.
8

He also capitalized on a large measure of dissatisfaction with the

political status quo that was represented by Austria’s traditional

political establishment among the Austrian electorate.

It is important, therefore, that we express our strong condemnation to many of the statements that Haider has expressed, his demagogic attempts to stir up resentment of Austria’s largest immigrant community, and his apparent sympathies for the aspects of

Austria’s tragic Nazi past.

This measure I think is balanced. It is aimed at the government

of Austria and not at the people of Austria, with many of whom

we’ve enjoyed a close and enduring friendship.

While we are expressing our concern, we are withholding any

final judgment with regard to the direction the new government

will choose to lead Austria. It calls upon our own government to

make clear our concerns and to carefully monitor Austrian policies

so that if further action on our part becomes necessary we will be

able to take them without delay.

Accordingly I ask the support of our colleagues for H. Res. 429

so that there is no misunderstanding of the depth of our concern

expressed to Austrian officials.

Mr. Crowley.

Mr. CROWLEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for the opportunity to speak on Mr. Lantos’ resolution. First let me thank my

colleague, Mr. Lantos, for his words before about our involvement

and to let you know and express to you how important and how

delighted we were to work with you on this resolution.

As someone who has been a victim, himself and his family of the

atrocities of the Nazi regime and what it meant not only in Germany but throughout Europe, and to others like you who live today

in many respects to see that governments like that do not develop

again, I know how important this resolution is to you and to so

many other Members of this House.

Mr. Chairman, everyone on the Committee has heard the comments made by Joerg Haider and the leaders of the Freedom Party

of Austria. Comments praising Hitler’s policies, statements praising the Waffen SS, assertions consistently blaming problems in

Austria including low employment, high taxes, and the spread of

disease on immigrant populations. His views are clear, his intentions are known, and his attempts to apologize each time he makes

an offensive statement have grown as tiresome to me as his hateful

statements.

Although Mr. Haider has resigned his position, his party, the

Freedom Party, remains in a coalition government, albeit frail, in

Austria, with the People’s Party. This must not be accepted.

That is why I’ve joined with Congressman Lantos, Chairman Gilman, Ranking Member Gejdenson, and a number of my colleagues

in introducing House Resolution 429. It is not only appropriate but

also necessary that the U.S. Congress put itself on record as disapproving of this government.

I thank the Chairman and I urge all my colleagues to support

this important resolution.

Chairman GILMAN. Thank you, Mr. Crowley.

Any other Members seeking recognition?

Mr. Rohrabacher.
9

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Let me suggest that we should move forward

in Congress with a little more caution than I hear today.

First of all, Austria has a democratic tradition and we are talking about a democratic election. No one is suggesting that the election that Mr. Haider and his party received a certain significant

part of the vote was anything more or less than a democratic election.

We do not like some of the things Mr. Haider has said, we do

not like some of the policies of that party. Yet we have this incredible response to him winning an election or getting that part of the

electorate in Austria.

There are dictatorships around the world that we are not mentioning. You’ve all heard me talk about communist China over and

over again, yet they’re our strategic partners. I do not hear the outrage that there’s genocide going on in Tibet, and Mr. Lantos obviously is a very active person in the human rights community.

And yes, I have joined with Mr. Lantos time and time again

when there was evidence of anti-semitism that I believed warranted not only our concern but our active opposition to in Russia,

when Mr. Lantos presented a resolution about some of the anti-semitic statements made by some of the new leaders in Russia. Not

only did I join him, but I asked if we could strengthen that resolution by putting meat into it rather than simply having a condemnation.

Mr. Lantos also brought to our attention what was going on in

Hungary, in which I supported him.

These were clear examples of anti-semitism.

I am not sure that what we have here today is a clear example

of anti-semitism. We have Mr. Haider who has made some, I would

again say despicable statements about, well, the Nazis at least

made the trains run on time type of thing. And, by the way, let me

just say as far as I am concerned the SS were the worst type of

perverts and sadists in the history of humankind. I have got no

problem condemning them. Let us remember those people in Austria; however, Mr. Lantos’ statement was correct. Those people

were Hitler’s allies and they have yet to come to grips with their

past. They have yet to do what the Germans did, which is fess up,

hey, our people were in the SS.

My suggestion is I think Mr. Haider made that statement, and

my guess is he has properly apologized for that statement. It is obvious whoever hears it should jump on anybody’s case for saying

something like that, and I certainly do not hold back in condemnation of that statement. But again, I think he apologized.

There are lots of people, let me say, that I have heard over the

years, say good things about Mao Tse Tung on the liberal side of

the spectrum. I cannot tell you how many times I’ve been at meetings and been in television shows and been in the public debate

and heard liberal Democrats saying, ‘‘Well at least Mao Tse Tung

did this,’’ or ‘‘At least Stalin did that,’’ or ‘‘At least Fidel Castro’s

provided some kind of healthcare for his people,’’ totally ignoring

the incredible human rights abuses that have gone on under those

regimes. I have to equate those two a little bit in my mind in terms

of anybody who said something good about Mao or Stalin or Fidel

Castro—do I automatically call them a communist? No, I do not.
10

Sometimes I call them aside and say, you know, you really

should take a look at what the Sandinistas did or that Castro did.

These are dedicated people, the communists and the Nazis, to

things that we do not believe in.

But again, you have to use caution because people are, again,

human beings and Austria has to come to grips with its Nazi past.

It should not even be in their minds that the SS was anything but,

as I say, perverts and sadists of the worst kind.

But let me say this again. I do not believe that neo-Nazism is

what we are talking about here. If it were, I would be the first one

in supporting this resolution. I do not believe that’s what we are

talking about here.

There have been a couple of statements by Mr. Haider that

sound bad, and he apologized for them, but I do not believe that

he is a neo-Nazi and the people over there in Austria do not believe

he’s a neo-Nazi either. They would not have voted for him if he

were neo-Nazi.

But I think that what he is concerned about, what his party’s

been talking about, is the threat especially of illegal immigration

into their country. I think that’s the truth of the matter.

He got his votes because his party was the one party that

stepped up to talk about illegal immigration. I have been called a

racist skinhead in my district by liberal Democrats because it is my

position that we should not provide benefits to illegal immigrants.

I am not a racist skinhead. I am not a neo-Nazi. I am not any of

those things. I have love in my heart for all our fellow human

beings, and I think that racism, as I say when I see it, demands

that we all step forward and condemn it.

But I’ve been called those names, so why am I surprised now to

hear those same refrains about Austria’s 8 million people. In the

blink of an eye you could have a total change in their society. People who are totally different culturally and different nationally, racially and every other way, coming into that country. Now they’re

different people who will control Austria, unless they control their

borders, and that’s what those people are concerned about. That is,

I believe, a legitimate concern.

Now tell me if I am being wrong or a racist for saying that. I

think we have a concern in this country that we had at least 10

million illegal immigrants pouring into this country, and we have

a population of 225 to 250 million people.

So I think we’ve got to be a little cautious here in saying that

someone, simply because they’re involved in an effort to try to prevent illegal immigration into a country of 8 million people, is automatically a racist or automatically a neo-Nazi. I think that that

concern is what’s foremost in the mind of those voters.

Let me just say, I’ve met Haider twice. The guy came in, he was

in the Austrian embassy, he was touring town, and he was ushered

into my office to say hello. I found him to be a personable human

being. Then again, as Mr. Lantos so amply demonstrated by using

the comparison to David Duke, someone who didn’t know David

Duke might, just with a 15 minute meeting, might think he’s a

good guy, too. But the fact is that David Duke is a racist and a

phony and I’ve spent considerable personal capital in the Republican party trying to counter David Duke and any in-roads he
11

would have into our party. So maybe Mr. Lantos is right about

that.

Mr. Lantos have you met Haider at all and talked to him?

Mr. LANTOS. If my good friend will yield?

Mr. ROHRABACHER. I will be happy to yield.

Mr. LANTOS. Let me first pay tribute to my friend from California, who has stood with me on all of the issues from Tibet to

the Soviet Union. We have been colleagues and comrades in arms

and I appreciated that.

I think the David Duke analogy is not a bad analogy. If David

Duke is ushered into somebody’s office and is on his good behavior

and you know nothing about him, he’s a well dressed, articulate,

intelligent and very pleasant person.

If you know what David Duke stands for, then you become revolted. Even though David Duke may apologize for his statements

subsequently, then he says it again in a different form, and yet

again apologizes, which of course has been Haider’s pattern.

What I really would like to respond to in my colleague’s observations is the early remark that these were free and open and democratic elections. Adolf Hitler got a higher percentage of the vote in

free and open and democratic elections in Germany.

It is not in our power to undo the results of free and open and

democratic elections. I respect the right of the Austrian people to

elect anybody they choose to any office. But I reserve the right

through Congress to express our views about the kinds of people

they have elected and the philosophies those people represent.

Haider is a racist. His statements about people with a different

pigmentation from his are unprintable. He hates, he hates blacks.

I am not concerned about Mr. Haider’s anti-semitism. What I am

concerned about is his profound, deeply felt hatred along all racial

and religious lines. What I am concerned about is that in a continent such as Europe, particularly Central and Eastern Europe,

where the veneer of civilization is paper thin as we have seen it

in the former Yugoslavia, ethnic and racial and religious hatreds

can be whipped up with tremendous ease. This is what Haider has

done. This is what members of his political party have done. This

is why Austrians who hardly ever go out in the streets, tens of

thousands of them, have been demonstrating against this racist political party being included in the new coalition government of Austria.

Now David Duke is sort of a bizarre and passing phenomenon in

this country. We do not expect David Duke to get 20 percent of the

vote in a general election in the United States, but unless I am

mistaken, David Duke ran for statewide office in Louisiana and got

a very respectable number of votes. I forget now, maybe some of

my colleagues can help me, how high that vote was, but it was a

frightening vote because it was a vote for racism.

For the Congress of the United States not to express itself on

racism in its ugliest form when it manifests itself in Europe while

expressing itself on all of these issues in Tibet, in Cuba, and everywhere else where we have totalitarian governments or political parties that would like to get into government, would be a very serious

mistake.
12

I know this resolution will pass overwhelmingly. I would only

hope since my good friend has stood in the forefront of fighting racism and religious intolerance and so many other issues, he would

see his way clear to join us in making this vote unanimous.

I want to thank my friend for yielding.

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Reclaiming my time, let me just say I thank

the Chairman for indulging us in this very good discussion. I would

like to see the quotes from Mr. Haider that indicate the racism

that you’re talking about. I would look at them. If someone could

give me a white paper, a couple of pages of things that indicate

that he is indeed a racist and has said racist type things, and if

he has said too many racist things who cares if he apologizes or

not. It is reflecting his soul, and I’d like to see that. That would

have a lot to do with my reaction.

Let me just say about David Duke, I spent a considerable portion

of my own campaign funds to donate to people who were running

against David Duke, as I know that the likes of David Duke pollutes the whole debate in our country because he tries to pretend

he’s a conservative, and he’s not. I do not want him around, and

I want him defeated, because it does tend to create a residue that’s

an evil residue.

Mr. LANTOS. But if my friend will yield for another moment.

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Yes.

Mr. LANTOS. I would just say that I would not think of two more

similar people in outlook, attitude, philosophy on the political scene

globally than David Duke and Joerg Haider. They are both highly

presentable, highly attractive, highly articulate, peddling philosophies of hate; and if my friend is as strongly opposed to David

Duke as I know he is, I would think he would want to associate

himself with our resolution.

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Let me take a look at those quotes because,

again, from a distance what it appears to me is that Mr. Haider

has been speaking not as a racist, but as someone who is speaking

up against illegal immigration into his country. With a country of

eight million people, again, I think that’s a legitimate issue for people to think about in that country.

Now whether or not Austria has come to grips with its Nazi past,

I think you’re correct in that. I think they should, and they need

to. But that does not mean that the Austrian people, unlike many

other countries of the world, in fact most other countries in the

world, do not have a legitimate concern in preventing massive illegal immigration into their country.

I do not know any country that doesn’t control its borders in that

regard. People have high standards. Israel has very high standards

as to who they permit to immigrate into their society. Other countries—we have a bad illegal immigration problem, but we officially

have high standards as to who immigrates into our country.

So I’d like to see the racist statements you’re talking about that

Haider made and I may well join you on the floor in supporting

your resolution then.

Mr. CROWLEY. Would the gentleman yield for——

Mr. ROHRABACHER. I will yield back the balance of my time to

whoever wants the floor so they can have it.
13

Chairman GILMAN. Mr. Sherman is next, and then I will recognize Mr. Crowley.

Mr. Sherman.

Mr. SHERMAN. I think Mr. Haider’s comments go well beyond immigration policy. He opposes both legal and illegal immigration.

But beyond that, his comments are showing a remarkable level of

comfort with the Nazi institutions of Austria’s past—reason enough

for us to be concerned and to express the concerns in a resolution.

My colleague from California compares Haider or a Haider-influenced government in Vienna with China and Beijing, and I would

simply say that in looking at developments around the world we

grade on the curve and we look at the history of the country. China

has never had a democratic government and if they were to get one

as democratic as the government in Vienna, even today, that might

be a reason for celebration.

But to see the government of Austria, which has been democratic

and has not been marred by public statements of racism or public

support for Nazi institutions of the past, taking a step backward

is something that we should comment on.

I think in other resolutions that we have passed, there are a variety of times when we have passed resolutions praising governments for democratic elections where there were a few problems

with those elections, but we compared that country to its own past,

not to Denmark or Canada. I think if you look at this Austrian government, there is reason for us to express our concern that this is

a big step backward.

Chairman GILMAN. Thank you, Mr. Sherman.

Mr. Crowley, without objection——

Mr. CROWLEY. Just a point. Thank you for yielding the time.

Regarding Mr. Rohrabacher’s statement earlier. The point I

think I’d like to make is that a majority of the people of Austria

did not vote for the Freedom Party. In fact less than 30 percent,

27 percent, that means that over 70 percent voted for one of the

other parties. But they were unable to make a government out of

those parties; therefore the People’s party, it is my understanding,

created a coalition government. Therein lies the difference between

maybe the threat of a David Duke in this country and what has

happened with Mr. Haider in the parliamentary system in which

Austria’s tradition of democracy has developed.

I think that’s a statement that has to be made. In the tradition

of the European style of democracy—a parliamentary system—it is

possible that this can take place not only in Austria but within

other European countries as well; so I think it is important for us

to make a strong statement, as I think it is important for the EU

to speak out or any other democracy to do the same thing when

something like this has occurred.

I do not have a fear that Mr. Duke will come to power in Louisiana or any other national office very soon, but I do have fear of

a tradition in Europe of anti-semitism, of racial hatred growing

again. That’s what my concern is and that’s why I again applaud

Mr. Lantos.

Chairman GILMAN. Thank you, Mr. Crowley. If there are no

other Members——

Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Chairman?
14

Chairman GILMAN. Mr. Payne, I am sorry.

Mr. PAYNE. Yes, I would certainly like to associate myself with

the remarks of Mr. Lantos and others who have expressed concern

about the statements that have been made. In many instances,

there are all kinds of code words. You can be anti-immigration, especially if the immigrants are of a different religion or race. We

even see some of that in Germany today. Turks who have lived

there for generations have had, as you remember, some homes

burned, and people were killed because they were from Turkey.

So to use sort-of a code word, if you’re against this illegal immigration, many times that sends a signal. As you know, Adolf Hitler

came to power because Germany was in disarray. Unemployment

was high. He used the demagoging of a group of people to say that

they were their problems. This is the same kind of thing being used

by this gentleman.

I think that anyone who has positive things to say about Adolf

Hitler they are talking about a person who when the Olympics

were held in Berlin, refused Jesse Owens, one of the greatest athletes the world has ever known. Adolf Hitler refused to shake his

hand when his hand was extended, and refused to give him the

medal because he was black, although he broke all kinds of existing records.

So anyone who can see Hitler as anything positive, I think they

send signals. Code words are used even in our country here.

So I wholeheartedly support the resolution, Mr. Lantos. I think

that we have to be concerned about neo-Nazism. I do not see anywhere where the people of Austria have been condemned. I think

it was very carefully crafted so that we are not saying what people

should do internally.

So I certainly add my support, Mr. Lantos, and will certainly let

it be known. Thank you.

Chairman GILMAN. Thank you, Mr. Payne.

If there are no other Members seeking recognition, the gentleman from California, Mr. Rohrabacher is recognized to offer a

motion.

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Chairman be

requested to seek consideration of the pending resolution on the

suspension calendar.

Chairman GILMAN. Thank you, Mr. Rohrabacher. The question is

now a motion. The gentleman from California, those in favor of the

motion signify by saying aye.

[Chorus of ayes.]

Chairman GILMAN. Those opposed, say no.

[No response.]

Chairman GILMAN. The ayes have it. The motion is agreed to.

Further proceedings on this matter are postponed.

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Chairman——

Chairman GILMAN. The record will remain open for 1 week to receive additional statements from Members, and in particular the

statement from Mr. Salmon will be received in the record.

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Chairman, I have remarks by Mr. Royce

I’d like to submit for——

Chairman GILMAN. Without objection, the remarks will be entered into the record.
15

If there are no further requests, the Committee stands adjourned.

[Whereupon, at 1:50 p.m. the Committee was adjourned.]

(17)

A P P E N D I X

MARCH 9, 2000
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33