U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

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

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

Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001

76–350PDF 2002

DESIGNATE THE NATIONAL FOREIGN AFFAIRS TRAINING CENTER

AS THE GEORGE P. SHULTZ NATIONAL FOREIGN AFFAIRS

TRAINING CENTER;

SUPPORT FOR THE 10TH ANNUAL MEETING OF THE ASIA

PACIFIC PARLIAMENTARY FORUM;

AMEND PUBLIC LAW 107–10 TO REQUIRE A U.S. PLAN TO

ENDORSE AND OBTAIN OBSERVER STATUS FOR TAIWAN

AT THE MAY 2002 SUMMIT OF THE WORLD HEALTH ASSEMBLY;

AND THE ZIMBABWE DEMOCRACY AND ECONOMIC RECOVERY

ACT OF 2001

MARKUP

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON

INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

ON

H.R. 3348, S. Con. Res. 58, H.R. 2739 and S. 494

NOVEMBER 28, 2001

Serial No. 107–64

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

HENRY J. HYDE, Illinois, Chairman

BENJAMIN A. GILMAN, New York

JAMES A. LEACH, Iowa

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

EDWARD R. ROYCE, California

PETER T. KING, New York

STEVE CHABOT, Ohio

AMO HOUGHTON, New York

JOHN M. MCHUGH, New York

RICHARD BURR, North Carolina

JOHN COOKSEY, Louisiana

THOMAS G. TANCREDO, Colorado

RON PAUL, Texas

NICK SMITH, Michigan

JOSEPH R. PITTS, Pennsylvania

DARRELL E. ISSA, California

ERIC CANTOR, Virginia

JEFF FLAKE, Arizona

BRIAN D. KERNS, Indiana

JO ANN DAVIS, Virginia

TOM LANTOS, California

HOWARD L. BERMAN, California

GARY L. ACKERMAN, New York

ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA, American

Samoa

DONALD M. PAYNE, New Jersey

ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey

SHERROD BROWN, Ohio

CYNTHIA A. MCKINNEY, Georgia

EARL F. HILLIARD, Alabama

BRAD SHERMAN, California

ROBERT WEXLER, Florida

JIM DAVIS, Florida

ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York

WILLIAM D. DELAHUNT, Massachusetts

GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York

BARBARA LEE, California

JOSEPH CROWLEY, New York

JOSEPH M. HOEFFEL, Pennsylvania

EARL BLUMENAUER, Oregon

SHELLEY BERKLEY, Nevada

GRACE NAPOLITANO, California

ADAM B. SCHIFF, California

DIANE E. WATSON, California

THOMAS E. MOONEY, SR., Staff Director/General Counsel

ROBERT R. KING, Democratic Staff Director

DANIEL FREEMAN, Counsel/Parliamentarian

MARILYN C. OWEN, Staff Associate

(III)

C O N T E N T S

Page

MARKUP OF H.R. 3348

Text of H.R. 3348, To designate the National Foreign Affairs Training Center

as the George P. Schultz National Foreign Affairs Training Center ............... 2

The Honorable Henry J. Hyde, a Representative in Congress from the State

of Illinois, and Chairman, Committee on International Relations: Prepared

statement regarding H.R. 3348 ........................................................................... 4

MARKUP OF S. CON. RES. 58 AND H.R. 2739

Text of S. Con. Res. 58, Expressing support for the tenth annual meeting

of the Asia Pacific Parliamentary Forum ........................................................... 6

Text of H.R. 2739, To amend Public Law 107–10 to require a United States

plan to endorse and obtain observer status for Taiwan at the annual summit of the World Health Assembly in May 2002 in Geneva, Switzerland,

and for other purposes ......................................................................................... 13

The Honorable Henry J. Hyde: Prepared statement regarding H.R. 2739 ......... 15

Amendment to H.R. 2739 offered by the Honorable Sherrod Brown, a Representative in Congress from the State of Ohio ................................................ 18

The Honorable Steve Chabot, a Representative in Congress from the State

of Ohio: Prepared statement regarding H.R. 2739 ............................................ 19

MARKUP OF S. 494

Text of S. 494, To provide for a transition to democracy and to promote

economic recovery in Zimbabwe .......................................................................... 22

The Honorable Henry J. Hyde: Prepared statement regarding S. 494 ............... 31

Amendment to S. 494 offered by the Honorable Doug Bereuter, a Representative in Congress from the State of Nebraska ..................................................... 38

Amendment offered by the Honorable Barbara Lee, a Representative in Congress from the State of California to the amendment to S. 494 offered

by the Honorable Doug Bereuter ........................................................................ 41

APPENDIX

The Honorable James A. Leach, a Representative in Congress from the State

of Iowa: Prepared statement regarding H.R. 2739 ............................................ 49

The Honorable Amo Houghton, a Representative in Congress from the State

of New York: Prepared statement regarding S. Con. Res. 58 .......................... 49

The Honorable Sherrod Brown: Prepared statement regarding H.R. 2739 ........ 50

(1)

DESIGNATE THE NATIONAL FOREIGN AFFAIRS TRAINING

CENTER AS THE GEORGE P. SHULTZ NATIONAL FOREIGN

AFFAIRS TRAINING CENTER; SUPPORT FOR THE 10TH ANNUAL MEETING OF THE ASIA PACIFIC PARLIAMENTARY

FORUM; AMEND PUBLIC LAW 107–10 TO REQUIRE A U.S.

PLAN TO ENDORSE AND OBTAIN OBSERVER STATUS FOR

TAIWAN AT THE MAY 2002 SUMMIT OF THE WORLD

HEALTH ASSEMBLY; AND THE ZIMBABWE DEMOCRACY

AND ECONOMIC RECOVERY ACT OF 2001

WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 28, 2001

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS,

Washington, DC.

The Committee met, pursuant to call, at 10:26 a.m. in Room

2172, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Henry J. Hyde (Chairman of the Committee) presiding.

Chairman HYDE. The Committee will come to order. I understand we have some votes very shortly on the Floor, but as long

as we have enough Members here, I would like to get started and

move along. And so pursuant to notice, I now call up the bill H.R.

3348 to designate the National Foreign Affairs Training Center as

the George P. Shultz National Foreign Affairs Training Center for

purpose of markup. Without objection, the bill will be considered as

read and open for amendment at any point.

[The bill, H.R. 3348, follows:]

2

3

4

Chairman HYDE. The Chair yields himself 5 minutes for purposes of making a statement. I welcome this opportunity to bring

H.R. 3348 before the Committee. Incidentally, this is the HydeLantos bill, Mr. Lantos being a chief cosponsor. The bill designates

the National Foreign Affairs Training Center after a distinguished

American, former Secretary of State George Schultz. Among his

many achievements, Secretary Schultz was responsible for the creation of the new foreign service training facility established in Arlington, Virginia. He undertook the difficult task of convincing Congress that the funds necessary to construct the new campus would

be an investment in the future of our foreign affairs community. In

1993, the professional and modern facilities opened as the National

Foreign Affairs Training Center.

Secretary Shultz had a strong belief that the Nation should have

a permanent home for training U.S. Government officials who

serve overseas. Since 1947, the State Department has operated an

in-service training institute, but by the late 1980s, it was apparent

there was need for expanded course offerings and a larger facility

to accommodate the increased numbers of participants.

Secretary Shultz successfully pursued his goal to have a first

rate training facility, which today has an enrollment of 30,000 students a year. It is a pleasure to bring this bill before our Committee to honor Secretary Shultz for his vision.]

[The prepared statement of Mr. Hyde follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE HENRY J. HYDE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, AND CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

I welcome this opportunity to bring H.R. 3348 before the Committee. This bill designates the National Foreign Affairs Training Center after a distinguished American, Former Secretary of State George Shultz. Among his many achievements, Mr.

Shultz was responsible for the creation of the new Foreign Service training facility

established in Arlington, Virginia. He undertook the difficult task of convincing Congress that the funds necessary to construct the new campus would be an investment

in the future of our foreign affairs community. In 1993, the professional and modern

facilities opened as the National Foreign Affairs Training Center.

Secretary Shultz had a strong belief that the nation should have a permanent

home for training U.S. government officials who serve overseas. Since 1947, the

State Department has operated an in-service training institute, but by the late

1980’s, it was apparent that there was a need for expanded course offerings and a

larger facility to accommodate the increased numbers of participants. Secretary

Shultz successfully pursued his goal to have a first-rate training facility, which

today has an enrollment of 30,000 students a year.

It is a pleasure to bring this bill before our Committee to honor Secretary Shultz

for his vision.

Chairman HYDE. And I now yield to the distinguished co-chief cosponsor of this bill, Mr. Lantos.

Mr. LANTOS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank you for

bringing this legislation before us. I am proud and delighted to cosponsor this bill because George Shultz deserves all the recognition

that this Congress and this country can offer. He was a brilliant

Secretary of State and guided the United States through a critical

time in our Nation’s history. I was a Member of this Committee

during Secretary Shultz’ entire tenure, and I had the pleasure of

working with him publicly and privately in a variety of settings on

a tremendous range of issues. After leaving Washington, Secretary

Schultz made the wise decision to return to my congressional disVerDate 11-MAY-2000 10:16 Mar 05, 2002 Jkt 076350 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 F:\WORK\FULL\M112801\76350 HINTREL1 PsN: HINTREL1
5

trict, and I have been delighted to claim him as an occasional constituent and always as a friend.

George Shultz is very proud of both his Princeton and his Marine

Corps background, and he has provided a quality of integrity and

intelligence and commitment to public service which is truly extraordinary. He may have left the government and moved away

from Washington, but George continues to be actively engaged in

our foreign policy and he is committed to strengthening and supporting our Department of State and the men and women who

work there.

I think it is more than fitting that the institution that he worked

so hard for and he has been so dedicated to should bear his name.

The Foreign Service Institute, established in 1943, provides training for the Department of State and 43 other Federal agencies,

teaches over 30,000 U.S. Government employees every year in a variety of subjects, including 63 foreign languages as well as courses

in management, leadership, diplomacy, security, economics and

many other subjects.

George Shultz was instrumental in obtaining the land and the

funding to move the institute to its current home on a 72-acre plot

at the National Foreign Affairs Training Center in Arlington, Virginia. I am delighted to cosponsor this bill to designate the National Foreign Affairs Training Institute as the George P. Shultz

National Foreign Affairs Training Institute. I want to thank the

Chairman for his leadership, and I urge all our colleagues to support this legislation.

Chairman HYDE. Without objection, if there are any further

statements in the nature of opening statements they will be admitted into the record at this point.

Are there any amendments? If not, then without objection, the

Chair is directed to take the bill up on the Floor under suspension

of the rules.

Pursuant to notice I now call up the bill S. Con. Res. 58, expressing support for the 10th annual meeting of the Asia Pacific Parliamentary Forum, for purposes of markup. Without objection, the

bill will be considered as read and open for amendment at any

point.

[The concurrent resolution, S. Con. Res. 58, follows:]

6

1

IV

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. CON. RES. 58

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

SEPTEMBER, 10, 2001

Referred to the Committee on International Relations

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Expressing support for the tenth annual meeting of the Asia

Pacific Parliamentary Forum.

Whereas the Asia Pacific Parliamentary Forum was founded

by former Japanese Prime Minister Yasuhiro Nakasone

in 1993;

Whereas the Tokyo Declaration, signed by 59 parliamentarians from 15 countries, entered into force as the founding

charter of the forum on January 14 and 15, 1993, establishing the basic structure of the forum as an interparliamentary organization;

Whereas the original 15 members, one of which was the

United States, have increased to 27 member countries;

Whereas the forum serves to promote regional identification

and cooperation through discussion of matters of common

concern to all member states and serves, to a great extent, as the legislative arm of the Asia-Pacific Economic

Cooperation;

7

2

SCON 58 RFH

Whereas the focus of the forum lies in resolving political, economic, environmental, security, law and order, human

rights, education, and cultural issues;

Whereas the forum will hold its tenth annual meeting on

January 6 through 9, 2002, which will be the first meeting of the forum hosted by the United States;

Whereas approximately 270 parliamentarians from 27 countries in the Asia Pacific region will attend this meeting;

Whereas the Secretariat of the meeting will be the Center for

Cultural and Technical Exchange Between East and

West in Honolulu, Hawaii;

Whereas the East-West Center is an internationally recognized education and research organization established by

the United States Congress in 1960 largely through the

efforts of the Eisenhower administration and the Congress;

Whereas it is the mission of the East-West Center to

strengthen understanding and relations between the

United States and the countries of the Asia Pacific region and to help promote the establishment of a stable,

peaceful and prosperous Asia Pacific community in which

the United States is a natural, valued, and leading partner; and

Whereas it is the agenda of this meeting to advance democracy, peace, and prosperity in the Asia Pacific region:

Now, therefore be it

1 Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives

2 concurring), That the Congress—

8

3

SCON 58 RFH

1 (1) expresses support for the tenth annual

2 meeting of the Asia Pacific Parliamentary Forum

3 and for the ideals and concerns of this body;

4 (2) commends the East-West Center for hosting

5 the meeting of the Asia Pacific Parliamentary

6 Forum and the representatives of the 27 member

7 countries; and

8 (3) calls upon all parties to support the endeav9 ors of the Asia Pacific Parliamentary Forum and to

10 work toward achieving the goals of the meeting.

Passed the Senate September 6, 2001.

Attest: JERI THOMSON,

Secretary.

9

Chairman HYDE. The Chair recognizes our distinguished colleague, Mr. Houghton of New York, for an explanation of the bill.

Mr. HOUGHTON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As some of you

know, the Asia Pacific Parliamentary Forum is an organization of

about 27 nations, and it has done, I think, an outstanding job.

Former Prime Minister of Japan, Mr. Nakasone, started this thing,

an extraordinary man, and is still driving it. It has been hosted in

a variety of different countries every year throughout its 10-year

history: Australia, Chile, Japan, Canada, Korea and Mexico.

Mr. Bereuter, Mr. Faleomavaega and Don Payne and other people like that have attended it. Between January 6th and January

9th of this year, the United States, for the first time, will be

hosting this conference in Hawaii. Dan Akaka, our Senate co-Chair,

has introduced a resolution supporting this in the Senate, and I

certainly thank Chairman Hyde for his indulgence for allowing us

to take up the bill and move it on the suspension calendar. The

East-West Center is going to be the organizer of this session. It is

headed up by Charles Marson. The subjects range all over the

place, from terrorism to the economy, environmental issues, defense cooperation, and of course, the reason we are part of this

group is because of California, Washington, Oregon, Alaska, and

Hawaii.

The Speaker is going to open the session. What I would like to

do is to urge consideration of this bill and express our support for

the 10th annual meeting.

Mr. BEREUTER. Would the gentleman yield? I thank the gentlemen for yielding. I certainly want to commend the gentlemen for

his interest in support of this legislation. The gentleman has been

a leader in the American participation, along with the former senator from Delaware, Senator Roth. I did have the privilege of attending a meeting with the gentleman from New York. I think it

is an interparliamentary body that is growing in significance; the

membership is broadening; the type of people attending are more

influential in their own respective parliaments.

I feel Members, if they are not familiar with the East-West Center, should certainly become familiar with it because it is an important asset for the United States in that region of the world. Its programs are diverse. Much of its program includes very important research. They now have an annual seminar for senior political leaders around the region which is gaining in its significance.

Along with the East-West Center, we also have the Asia Pacific

Center for Security Studies, also located in Honolulu. These are

major elements in our foreign policy and, with respect to the latter

institution, in building better military-to-military relations across

the whole region. Alumni of the East-West Center are in very important positions across Asia Pacific region. I think they have a tremendous impact on improving our relationship with their respective countries. So I certainly rise in strong support of this measure

and encourage the Members to become familiar with the East-West

Center if they are not already.

Chairman HYDE. The gentleman from California, Mr. Lantos.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I will just take a moment to strongly

support S. Con. Res. 58. I want to commend my dear friend from

10

New York for taking the leadership on this very important bill. I

urge all of our colleagues to support it.

Chairman HYDE. The gentleman from New York, Mr. Gilman.

Mr. GILMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank you for

bringing this important resolution before our Committee at this

time. The 10th annual meeting of the Asia Pacific Parliamentary

is significant for many reasons. That forum serves to promote regional identification and cooperation through discussion of matters

of common concern to all American States. It also serves as a legislative arm of the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation Forum. The

focus of the forum lies in resolving political, economic, environmental, security, law and order, human rights, education and cultural issues.

Accordingly we want to express our support for the 10th annual

meeting of the Asian Pacific Parliamentary Forum and commend

the East-West Center for hosting it. I urge my colleagues to support this measure.

Chairman HYDE. Mr. Faleomavaega.

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I also would like

to associate myself with the comments made earlier by our previous speakers and Members of this Committee, especially to commend the gentleman from New York for his leadership, Mr. Houghton, over the past years in trying to get the interest among the

Members not only of the Committee, but certainly in our institution, to participate more actively with the parliamentarians from

the Asian Pacific region.

I have been in this Committee now for 13 years. When I first became a Member of the Committee, nobody wanted to do anything

with the Asia Pacific region. The whole focus of our national posture was always the Middle East and Europe. And I am just so

happy to see that the distinguished Senator from Hawaii, Mr.

Akaka, has taken the leadership in introducing this resolution.

I certainly want to commend my friend and former Chairman of

our Asia Pacific Subcommittee, Mr. Bereuter from Nebraska, for

his outstanding leadership in getting the interest not only of our

country, but our political leaders to see that the Asia Pacific region

ought not to be neglected. I have only been happy in the past 3 or

4 years, now that everybody has expressed a real serious interest

about what is happening in that region of the world, especially

when two-thirds of the world’s population lives in the Asia Pacific

region.

I would like to say that perhaps we already have well established

parliamentarian forums with our European neighbors, but I am

sure we need to do more with Africa, and we can do more with the

Western Hemisphere, because these are important regions. I think

not only does it affect our economic security interests, but certainly

for the Members of our Committee, to be more responsive and

knowledgeable about what is happening in those areas of the

world.

So for this reason, I want to thank the gentleman from New York

for his leadership and sincerely hope that Members of our Committee will attend this parliamentary forum. One of the problems

every time we say that we are going to be holding hearings in Hawaii, is that our friends from the media always blast Members, say

11

it is a junket, it is fun, sun and tan, not realizing when we go

through the process of these meetings it is not sun, fun and tan.

I seriously hope that the Members will not even consider these

accusations. Sometimes our media does a great disservice not only

to our country, but certainly to our Members, who are honestly trying to be more responsive and get a greater understanding what

is happening, not only in the Asian Pacific region, but other regions

of the world.

So thank you, Mr. Chairman, for bringing this resolution to the

Committee, and I certainly thank Mr. Lantos also for his leadership. I hope we pass this on the suspension calendar. Thank you,

Mr. Chairman.

Chairman HYDE. The gentlelady from California, Ms. Watson.

Ms. WATSON. Mr. Chairman, and Members of the Committee, I

want to strongly support the attendance by as many Members of

this Committee as possible to the East-West conference. It is absolutely essential that we become an integral part to help develop

democratic beginnings in this area of the world. My fear is that

what is happening currently in the Middle East will spread to

these other islands and other adjoining nations in this area, and

we must get as many Members over there as possible. We must

speak of democratic values and principles. We must explain to

them what we are all about here in America.

I think that with the current events in Afghanistan, and after

9/11, it is very clear to me that we need to let the world know of

the humanity that we possess here in America. I think the Asian

Pacific region is the place to do it. We need to spur economic development in these areas. And based on the research that has been

done, we need to be sure it is implemented in every area of Asia

Pacific as we can reach. If these countries that are developing are

allowed to lag behind, we are going to see more problems around

the globe like those we are facing now in the Middle East.

So I support, I condone, and I applaud all of you who had a part

in bringing this resolution in front of us and encourage the attendance and the spreading of democratic ideas to the extent possible.

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. I want to share with our colleagues the

wealth of expertise of the gentlelady from California, who is a

former Ambassador to the Federated States of Micronesia. I think

she has a wealth of knowledge and understanding of events and

things transpiring in that part of the world.

I don’t know if many of our colleagues know that we detonated

over 76 nuclear explosions in the Marshall Islands. It is that part

of the Pacific where we need to have a sense of appreciation of

what happened to the inhabitants of those islands and the impact

of the nuclear holocaust, the madness that drove us in doing so

many different things constructively as well as destructively.

I think this is something that our Members will be well aware

of. I want to thank and commend the gentlelady from California for

her membership on the Committee. I am sure that she is going to

share a wealth of knowledge and expertise with the Members of

our Committee concerning the Asia Pacific region. I thank her for

yielding.

12

Chairman HYDE. Are there any amendments? If not, without objection the Chair is directed to take the bill up under suspension

of the rules.

Pursuant to notice, I now call up the bill H.R. 2739, amending

Public Law 107–10 to require a United States plan to endorse and

obtain observer status for Taiwan at the annual summit of the

World Health Assembly in May 2002 in Geneva, Switzerland, and

for other purposes, for purposes of markup. Without objection, the

bill will be considered as read and open for amendment at any

point.

[The bill, H.R. 2739, follows:]

13

1

I

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 2739

To amend Public Law 107–10 to require a United States plan to endorse

and obtain observer status for Taiwan at the annual summit of the

World Health Assembly in May 2002 in Geneva, Switzerland, and for

other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

AUGUST 2, 2001

Mr. BROWN of Ohio (for himself and Mr. CHABOT) introduced the following

bill; which was referred to the Committee on International Relations

A BILL

To amend Public Law 107–10 to require a United States

plan to endorse and obtain observer status for Taiwan

at the annual summit of the World Health Assembly

in May 2002 in Geneva, Switzerland, and for other purposes.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. AMENDMENTS TO PUBLIC LAW 107–10.

4 (a) FINDINGS.—Section 1(a) of Public Law 107–10

5 (115 Stat. 17) is amended by adding at the end the fol6 lowing:

14

2

•HR 2739 IH

1 ‘‘(12) On May 11, 2001, President Bush stated

2 in his letter to Senator Murkowski that the United

3 States ‘should find opportunities for Taiwan’s voice

4 to be heard in international organizations in order to

5 make a contribution, even if membership is not pos6 sible’, further stating that his Administration ‘has

7 focused on finding concrete ways for Taiwan to ben8 efit and contribute to the WHO.’.

9 ‘‘(13) On May 16, 2001, as part of the United

10 States delegation to the World Health Assembly

11 meeting in Geneva, Switzerland, Secretary of Health

12 and Human Service Tommy Thompson announced

13 the Administration’s support of Taiwan’s participa14 tion in the activities of the WHO.’’.

15 (b) PLAN.—Section 1(b)(1) of Public Law 107–10

16 (115 Stat. 17) is amended by striking ‘‘May 2001’’ and

17 inserting ‘‘May 2002’’.

Æ

15

[The prepared statement of Mr. Hyde follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENTS OF THE HONORABLE HENRY J. HYDE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, AND CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

H.R. 2739

First, I would like to take this opportunity to thank the people of Taiwan for the

generous gift they presented to the victims of the September 11th tragedy on the

occasion of my old friend, Fred Chien’s, recent visit and for their continued expressions of support and acts of generosity.

I was cheered, as we all were, to hear the recent news of Taiwan’s accession to

full membership in the World Trade Organization (WTO), immediately following

that of the People’s Republic of China. One notes that there was no objection from

any quarter because Taiwan’s WTO accession serves both Taipei’s and Beijing’s

long-term economic interests.

In my view, Taiwan’s participation in the World Health Organization as an official observer would serve the health needs of all the people of Taiwan as well as

the interests of all the countries in East Asia. In the face of mounting international

concerns regarding the spread of infectious diseases, Taiwan has much to contribute

with its highly trained medical personnel and outstanding health facilities.

Why, then, does the international community tolerate the denial of access for Taiwan to the global network of medical information and organizations represented by

the World Health Organization? Why is Beijing allowed to unilaterally set the rules

for international membership based on cynical self-interest and the whims of a leadership sealed off from world opinion?

The aftermath of the September 11th tragedy, with the new threats of anthrax

and bioterrorism of all kinds, underscores the need for the people of Taiwan, an island with a population of over twenty-three million people, to be part of the global

medical network.

This is not a matter of statehood, since Taiwan seeks only observer status; it is

a question of fundamental human rights. I urge the Members of this Committee to

express their support for the health needs of our friends in Taiwan by giving prompt

support to this vital legislation.

Chairman HYDE. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California, Mr. Lantos for purposes of making a statement.

Mr. LANTOS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am just pinch-hitting

for our colleague, Sherrod Brown, whose legislation this is, and at

the outset, I want to commend him for his persistence in pushing

for Taiwan’s observer status at the World Health Assembly. This

Congress has addressed, on several occasions, this issue and we

will continue to raise it until this inexplicable inequity is resolved.

Mr. Chairman, the World Health Organization makes an enormous contribution to the global community every single day. WHO

has new and innovative programs to stop the spread of HIV/AIDS

and other infectious diseases, to support the development of basic

health care services throughout the world, and to provide humanitarian aid as needed. As we speak, Mr. Chairman, WHO is laying

the groundwork for helping to meet health care needs in post conflict Afghanistan. In this long and difficult struggle, I might say,

the WHO, even its member countries, should be looking for help

wherever they can get it.

And we certainly can get it from Taiwan. Unfortunately, due to

the irrational opposition of the Chinese government in Beijing, Taiwan’s efforts to obtain observer status to the annual World Health

Assembly meetings in Geneva have fallen on deaf ears. While the

Administration has indicated support for Taiwan’s bid for WHA observer status, it is unwilling to ruffle any feathers to make this bid

a reality.

16

The State Department argues that the majority of World Health

Organization members would never support observer status for

Taiwan, and therefore the United States shouldn’t make a concerted effort on Taiwan’s behalf. This reminds me of the classic observation that nothing will ever be attempted if all possible objections must first be overcome.

Mr. Chairman, this Committee should strongly reject this weakkneed logic of the Department of State and demand that the Administration make a strong effort to ensure Taiwan’s participation

in this critical international organization. The bid may fail, but I

can guarantee that Taiwan won’t be allowed to participate if we

never try to get them through the door.

Taiwan is a strong and vibrant democracy, and there is nothing

we want to see more globally than strong and vibrant democracies.

Taiwan has the financial, scientific and humanitarian resources

that can help the World Health Organization and its member

states. Taiwan is not asking to join the World Health Organization

as a state, but only as an observer. The case for Taiwan’s observer

status at the WHA is clear, it is filled with integrity and honesty,

and the Administration should do its utmost to make it happen. I

strongly support H.R. 2739. I urge all of our colleagues to do so as

well.

Chairman HYDE. Mr. Gilman.

Mr. GILMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to commend you,

Chairman Hyde, and Mr. Brown and Mr. Chabot, for bringing this

important measure to amend Public Law 107–10 to require a

United States plan to endorse and obtain observer status for Taiwan at the annual meeting of the World Health Assembly in May

2002, which will be held in Geneva, Switzerland.

Bringing this measure before our Committee for consideration, I

think, is extremely important. Since 1972, Taiwan’s 231⁄2 million

citizens have been denied access to the World Health Organization.

Over the years, Taiwan has offered its resources, its scientists, its

health practitioners to people in need around the world. It is certainly time that the world unties Taiwan’s hands so the world may

benefit from their professional community.

Accordingly, I strongly support H.R. 2739 providing observer status for Taiwan at the World Health Organization. I urge my colleagues to fully support this measure.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman HYDE. The gentleman from California, Mr. Berman.

Mr. BERMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I rise in very strong

support of the bill, H.R. 2739. We all know that Taiwan was recently admitted to the World Trade Organization. Everything that

has happened in Taiwan over the last 18 to 20 years reflects the

values that I believe we in the Congress consider to be human values, pluralism, democracy, peaceful transition of power, free elections, free press, openness, and massive economic growth as a result of rewarding entrepreneurship. It is a model of the kinds of development that we should be pushing throughout the world. And

it puts the lie to the notion that somehow Asian values don’t include liberalism and self-determination and democratic rights of

participation in the political process.

17

But this particular resolution offers more for the rest of the

world than it does for Taiwan. Because by putting Taiwan’s significant scientific and medical know-how and technologies to the benefit of the rest of the countries of the world, through its participation in WHO, it will make a great contribution to curing the illnesses and epidemics and health problems throughout Third World

countries. I strongly support it. I congratulate the sponsors for putting this bill in. I urge the Committee to pass it.

Chairman HYDE. Mr. Brown of Ohio.

Mr. BROWN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you, Mr. Lantos, for addressing this important bill in Committee today. I appreciate their efforts to move this bill to the Floor on a timely basis.

The WHO strives, ‘‘for the attainment by all peoples of the highest

possible level of health.’’ Despite WHO’s stated mission to ensure

optimal health for all peoples, Taiwan, as we know, is barred from

participating. Good health is a basic right of every citizen in the

world. Participation in the World Health Assembly would help foster that right for the 231⁄2 million citizens of that country.

To this end, I have introduced H.R. 2739. It authorizes the Secretary of State to create a plan to help obtain observer status for

Taiwan in the WHO’s annual World Health Assembly in Geneva.

Observer status does not require statehood. In fact, the Palestinian

Liberation Organization, the Knights of Malta, Vatican City, Rotary International and the International Red Cross all have observer status at the WHO. Taiwan does deserve that same observer

status. The designation would simply enable Taiwan to observe the

global health conferences and represent the interests of its 23 million citizens. Observer status would unite rather than divide the

world community, as improved public health should be common

ground.

In the last 50 years, Taiwan has undergone great changes. In the

last 18 years, as my friend, Mr. Berman said, those changes have

been even more remarkable. It has evolved into a healthy, prosperous nation governed by the rule of law. This weekend, Taiwan

will demonstrate its respect for democracy by conducting a nationwide election for its mayoral, county and parliamentary offices. The

people of Taiwan have proven to the whole world that freedom and

democracy are not just some western ideals, they are universal

principles that apply to every individual, every nation. This bill is

an important first step in fulfilling the commitment we made in the

1994 Taiwan Policy Review, to more actively support Taiwan’s

membership in organizations such as the U.N. and the World

Health Organization.

Mr. Chairman, in conclusion, I have a couple of amendments at

the desk and at the appropriate time would like to offer them en

bloc.

Chairman HYDE. Without objection the amendments may be offered en bloc. The Chair has reviewed them and they are just technical in nature. They do not make any really substantive changes

in the bill, and so they have been distributed.

[The information referred to follows:]

18

1

H.L.C.

AMENDMENT TO H.R. 2739

OFFERED BY MR. BROWN OF OHIO

Page 2, line 12, strike ‘‘Service’’ and insert ‘‘Services’’.

Page 2, line 12, after ‘‘announced’’ insert ‘‘to the

American International Club’’.

Amend the title so as to read: ‘‘A bill to amend Public Law 107–10 to authorize a United States plan to

endorse and obtain observer status for Taiwan at

the annual summit of the World Health Assembly in

May 2002 in Geneva, Switzerland, and for other

purposes.’’.

19

Chairman HYDE. So if there is no objection, we will move to

adopt them by unanimous consent. Is that all right with you, Mr.

Lantos?

Mr. LANTOS. On the Democratic side, we have no objections.

Chairman HYDE. We have no objection either. Therefore, without

objection, the amendments offered by Mr. Brown are adopted. And

are there any further amendments? No further amendments. If not,

the question occurs on the motion to report the bill H.R. 2739 favorably as amended. All in favor say aye. Opposed nay. The ayes

have it. The motion to report favorably is adopted.

The Chairman is authorized to move to go to conference pursuant to House Rule XXII. Without objection, the staff is directed to

make any technical and conforming changes. Without objection, the

bill will be reported favorably to the House in the form of a single

amendment in the nature of a substitute incorporating the amendments adopted here today. And the title is amended.

We have one more bill to do.

Mr. CHABOT. Could I ask unanimous consent that a statement

that I would have given be placed in the record?

Chairman HYDE. Without objection, it may be put in the record

in a prominent place.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Chabot follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE STEVE CHABOT, A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF OHIO

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for scheduling consideration of this legislation today,

and I want to commend Mr. Brown for his sponsorship and longtime support of Taiwan’s participation in the World Health Organization. As in years past, I have

joined him in this effort, and I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

As my colleague has stated, H.R. 2739 would amend current law to require the

United States to develop a plan to endorse and obtain observer status for Taiwan

at the annual World Health Assembly summit to be held in Geneva this coming

May.

The people of Taiwan have a great deal to offer the international community. It

is terribly unfortunate that even though Taiwan’s achievements in the medical field

are substantial and it has expressed a repeated willingness to assist both financially

and technically in WHO activities, it has not been allowed to do so. Passage of H.R.

2739 will merely be a first step in the right direction.

It is simply a travesty that during times of crisis such as the 1998 entovirus outbreak in Taiwan, the World Health Organization has been unable to help. That

virus killed 70 Taiwanese children and infected more than a thousand. In 1999, a

tragic earthquake in Taiwan claimed more than 2,000 lives. Sadly, we learned in

published reports that the communist government of the People’s Republic of

China—whose belligerent insistence that Taiwan be denied a role in international

organizations—demanded that any aid for Taiwan provided by the United Nations

and the Red Cross receive prior approval from the dictators in Beijing. That is simply outrageous.

Certainly, Mr. Chairman, we can do better. Let’s begin by passing this legislation

today so that the first steps can be taken.

I thank the Chairman and, once again, commend my colleague from Ohio for his

work on this legislation.

Chairman HYDE. We have one more bill to do. It is an important

bill. We have a vote pending on the Floor. As soon as the votes are

over, I would request that you all return. There will be votes possibly on the bills that we previously adopted. And there will certainly be a vote on the Zimbabwe bill, so please come back. The

Committee stands in recess.

[Recess.]

Chairman HYDE. The Committee will come to order.

20

Pursuant to notice, I now call up the bill S. 494, the Zimbabwe

Democracy and Economic Recovery Act of 2001, for purposes of

markup. Without objection, the bill will be considered as read and

open for amendment at any point.

The Chair recognizes Mr. Royce for purposes of introducing this

bill.

Mr. ROYCE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I thank you for taking up this legislation. With elections approaching and the conditions on the ground in Zimbabwe rapidly deteriorating, it is important that we pass this legislation before adjourning.

The State Department has indicated that this legislation, which

was passed unanimously by the Senate, would be quite helpful to

its diplomatic efforts. In Zimbabwe, we are sadly seeing a dictator,

power-crazed, over time, literally burning his country down. Desperate to keep his perks and avoid accountability for his crimes,

President Robert Mugabe has sanctioned anarchy in his homeland

in an attempt to win an election he has been pressured by

Zimbabweans into holding.

If he had his way, Mugabe would undoubtedly run Zimbabwe as

a one-party state, the same way as he ran it in the 1980s. Mugabe

has spared no means in his attempt to suppress democratic expression. His Zanu PF Party thugs have employed murder, they have

employed mass beatings of teachers, systematic torture, gang rape,

house burning, death threats and every type of police brutality.

And while Zimbabwe police are quick to crack down on peaceful

political protests, violent Zanu PF operatives are rarely brought to

justice. The Zimbabwe lawyers human rights group has observed

that it is ‘‘outraged by the continued brutality, lack of respect for

fundamental human rights and political partisanship of the

Zimbabwe republic police.’’

Dozens of political opponents have been murdered in state-sanctioned violence, yet Mugabe doesn’t speak out against those doing

the violence. He instead calls the peaceful political opposition terrorists, in his words, and vows to crush them.

Having led a Congressional delegation to Zimbabwe, I saw then

several years ago the climate of fear that the Zimbabwe government has created in Harare, and in Bulawayo. This legislation provides reasonable guideline for U.S. engagement with Zimbabwe. It

expresses the United States’ interest in assisting the Zimbabwean

people with economic development and it provides funding for such

efforts, but only when the climate is right, and that is when the

rule of law has been established and when free and fair elections

are possible.

We must be realistic, though. The prospects are increasingly remote that the presidential elections, which must be held by March,

will be free and fair.

The U.S.-based International Foundation for Electorial Systems

has been chased from the country. The government rejected a call

by the European Union to allow for election monitors. While it recently relented on this decision, it is likely to reverse course.

I was scheduled to lead an election observation team for the 2000

parliamentary elections, but the Zimbabwean government pulled

the visas at the last minute.

21

A U.S. District Court judge in New York recently ruled that

Zimbabwe’s government and its political party, Zanu PF, were liable for murdering and torturing their political opponents in the run

up to those elections. The court found that Zanu PF, in its organized violence and methodical terror, worked in tandem with the

Zimbabwean government officials. The Mugabe government continues this method of operation.

Mugabe is doing all he can to see that the world is not watching

him. Washington Post and New York Times reporters have been

denied visas to cover his chaos. Foreign journalists are routinely

harassed and intimidated. It is Zimbabwean journalists, though,

who have really borne the brunt of all of this. Newspaper offices

have been bombed.

In the meantime, the Zimbabwean economy is in ruins with

farmland under government siege, and half a million Zimbabweans

face starvation. The current government is oblivious to this suffering. Zanu PF leadership is not hurting, though. The U.N. recently reported how Zimbabwean troops are clearcutting forests in

the Democratic Republic of Congo. Proceeds from this environmental crime assuredly are going to supporting the affluent lifestyle being led by Zimbabwe’s ruling elite.

This legislation importantly asks the Administration to begin a

process of identifying the assets of this clique, to impose personal

economic sanctions against them for breaking down the rule of law

in Zimbabwe.

This legislation provides aid for lawful and transparent land resettlement. I believe that this will have to come after there is a

new government. We shouldn’t lose sight of the fact that Mugabe

has sanctioned the violent land invasions and the murders of

Zimbabweans, Black and White, precisely because it serves his political interests.

That is why many attempts by the international community to

aid a lawful land reform program have gone for naught. Mugabe’s

land reform program has been to take land and give it to those who

are his cronies, to military officers, to Libyan business partners

who are associates of Qadhafi.

So what a depressing contrast between Zimbabwe’s Robert

Mugabe and South Africa’s Nelson Mandela. Mandela prized democracy. He prized the rule of law. He stepped down from power

when people were telling him he was a king. He brought races together while Robert Mugabe, on the other hand, threatens his political opponents with death. What we have in Zimbabwe is a man

who sends his thugs to terrorize teachers working for a better future.

A recent Zimbabwe Catholic bishop’s conference pastoral letter

noted, violence, intimidation and threats are the tools of failed politicians. I urge enactment of this measure.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

[The act, S. 494, follows:]

22

1

I

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 494

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

AUGUST 2, 2001

Referred to the Committee on Banking and Financial Services, and in addition to the Committee on International Relations, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of

such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

AN ACT

To provide for a transition to democracy and to promote

economic recovery in Zimbabwe.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Zimbabwe Democracy

5 and Economic Recovery Act of 2001’’.

6 SEC. 2. STATEMENT OF POLICY.

7 It is the policy of the United States to support the

8 people of Zimbabwe in their struggle to effect peaceful,

9 democratic change, achieve broad-based and equitable eco10 nomic growth, and restore the rule of law.

23

2

S 494 RFH

1 SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

2 In this Act:

3 (1) INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL INSTITU4 TIONS.—The term ‘‘international financial institu5 tions’’ means the multilateral development banks

6 and the International Monetary Fund.

7 (2) MULTILATERAL DEVELOPMENT BANKS.—

8 The term ‘‘multilateral development banks’’ means

9 the International Bank for Reconstruction and De10 velopment, the International Development Associa11 tion, the International Finance Corporation, the

12 Inter-American Development Bank, the Asian Devel13 opment Bank, the Inter-American Investment Cor14 poration, the African Development Bank, the Afri15 can Development Fund, the European Bank for Re16 construction and Development, and the Multilateral

17 Investment Guaranty Agency.

18 SEC. 4. SUPPORT FOR DEMOCRATIC TRANSITION AND ECO19 NOMIC RECOVERY.

20 (a) FINDINGS.—Congress makes the following find21 ings:

22 (1) Through economic mismanagement, un23 democratic practices, and the costly deployment of

24 troops to the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the

25 Government of Zimbabwe has rendered itself ineli26 gible to participate in International Bank for ReconVerDate 11-MAY-2000 10:16 Mar 05, 2002 Jkt 076350 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 F:\WORK\FULL\M112801\76350 HINTREL1 PsN: HINTREL1
24

3

S 494 RFH

1 struction and Development and International Mone2 tary Fund programs, which would otherwise be pro3 viding substantial resources to assist in the recovery

4 and modernization of Zimbabwe’s economy. The peo5 ple of Zimbabwe have thus been denied the economic

6 and democratic benefits envisioned by the donors to

7 such programs, including the United States.

8 (2) In September 1999 the IMF suspended its

9 support under a ‘‘Stand By Arrangement’’, approved

10 the previous month, for economic adjustment and re11 form in Zimbabwe.

12 (3) In October 1999, the International Develop13 ment Association (in this section referred to as the

14 ‘‘IDA’’) suspended all structural adjustment loans,

15 credits, and guarantees to the Government of

16 Zimbabwe.

17 (4) In May 2000, the IDA suspended all other

18 new lending to the Government of Zimbabwe.

19 (5) In September 2000, the IDA suspended dis20 bursement of funds for ongoing projects under pre21 viously-approved loans, credits, and guarantees to

22 the Government of Zimbabwe.

23 (b) SUPPORT FOR DEMOCRATIC TRANSITION AND

24 ECONOMIC RECOVERY.—Upon receipt by the appropriate

25

4

S 494 RFH

1 congressional committees of a certification described in

2 subsection (d), the following shall apply:

3 (1) DEBT RELIEF AND OTHER FINANCIAL AS4 SISTANCE.—The Secretary of the Treasury shall—

5 (A) undertake a review of the feasibility of

6 restructuring, rescheduling, or eliminating the

7 sovereign debt of Zimbabwe held by any agency

8 of the United States Government;

9 (B) direct the United States executive di10 rector of each multilateral development bank to

11 propose that the bank should undertake a re12 view of the feasibility of restructuring, resched13 uling, or eliminating the sovereign debt of

14 Zimbabwe held by that bank; and

15 (C) direct the United States executive di16 rector of each international financial institution

17 to which the United States is a member to pro18 pose to undertake financial and technical sup19 port for Zimbabwe, especially support that is

20 intended to promote Zimbabwe’s economic re21 covery and development, the stabilization of the

22 Zimbabwean dollar, and the viability of

23 Zimbabwe’s democratic institutions.

24 (2) ESTABLISHMENT OF A SOUTHERN AFRICA

25 FINANCE CENTER.—The President should direct the

26

5

S 494 RFH

1 establishment of a Southern Africa Finance Center

2 located in Zimbabwe that will include regional offices

3 of the Overseas Private Investment Corporation, the

4 Export-Import Bank of the United States, and the

5 Trade and Development Agency for the purpose of

6 facilitating the development of commercial projects

7 in Zimbabwe and the southern Africa region.

8 (c) MULTILATERAL FINANCING RESTRICTION.—

9 Until the President makes the certification described in

10 subsection (d), and except as may be required to meet

11 basic human needs or for good governance, the Secretary

12 of the Treasury shall instruct the United States executive

13 director to each international financial institution to op14 pose and vote against—

15 (1) any extension by the respective institution

16 of any loan, credit, or guarantee to the Government

17 of Zimbabwe; or

18 (2) any cancellation or reduction of indebted19 ness owed by the Government of Zimbabwe to the

20 United States or any international financial institu21 tion.

22 (d) PRESIDENTIAL CERTIFICATION THAT CERTAIN

23 CONDITIONS ARE SATISFIED.—A certification under this

24 subsection is a certification transmitted to the appropriate

27

6

S 494 RFH

1 congressional committees of a determination made by the

2 President that the following conditions are satisfied:

3 (1) RESTORATION OF THE RULE OF LAW.—The

4 rule of law has been restored in Zimbabwe, including

5 respect for ownership and title to property, freedom

6 of speech and association, and an end to the lawless7 ness, violence, and intimidation sponsored, condoned,

8 or tolerated by the Government of Zimbabwe, the

9 ruling party, and their supporters or entities.

10 (2) ELECTION OR PRE-ELECTION CONDI11 TIONS.—Either of the following two conditions is

12 satisfied:

13 (A) PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION.—Zimbabwe

14 has held a presidential election that is widely

15 accepted as free and fair by independent inter16 national monitors, and the president-elect is

17 free to assume the duties of the office.

18 (B) PRE-ELECTION CONDITIONS.—In the

19 event the certification is made before the presi20 dential election takes place, the Government of

21 Zimbabwe has sufficiently improved the pre22 election environment to a degree consistent with

23 accepted international standards for security

24 and freedom of movement and association.

28

7

S 494 RFH

1 (3) COMMITMENT TO EQUITABLE, LEGAL, AND

2 TRANSPARENT LAND REFORM.—The Government of

3 Zimbabwe has demonstrated a commitment to an

4 equitable, legal, and transparent land reform pro5 gram consistent with agreements reached at the

6 International Donors’ Conference on Land Reform

7 and Resettlement in Zimbabwe held in Harare,

8 Zimbabwe, in September 1998.

9 (4) FULFILLMENT OF AGREEMENT ENDING

10 WAR IN DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF CONGO.—The

11 Government of Zimbabwe is making a good faith ef12 fort to fulfill the terms of the Lusaka, Zambia,

13 agreement on ending the war in the Democratic Re14 public of Congo.

15 (5) MILITARY AND NATIONAL POLICE SUBORDI16 NATE TO CIVILIAN GOVERNMENT.—The Zimbabwean

17 Armed Forces, the National Police of Zimbabwe,

18 and other state security forces are responsible to and

19 serve the elected civilian government.

20 (e) WAIVER.—The President may waive the provi21 sions of subsection (b) or subsection (c), if the President

22 determines that it is in the national interest of the United

23 States to do so.

29

8

S 494 RFH

1 SEC. 5. SUPPORT FOR DEMOCRATIC INSTITUTIONS, THE

2 FREE PRESS AND INDEPENDENT MEDIA, AND

3 THE RULE OF LAW.

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—The President is authorized to

5 provide assistance under part I and chapter 4 of part II

6 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 to—

7 (1) support an independent and free press and

8 electronic media in Zimbabwe;

9 (2) support equitable, legal, and transparent

10 mechanisms of land reform in Zimbabwe, including

11 the payment of costs related to the acquisition of

12 land and the resettlement of individuals, consistent

13 with the International Donors’ Conference on Land

14 Reform and Resettlement in Zimbabwe held in

15 Harare, Zimbabwe, in September 1998, or any sub16 sequent agreement relating thereto; and

17 (3) for democracy and governance programs in

18 Zimbabwe.

19 (b) FUNDING.—Of the funds authorized to be appro20 priated to carry out part I and chapter 4 of part II of

21 the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 for fiscal year 2002—

22 (1) $20,000,000 is authorized to be available to

23 provide the assistance described in subsection (a)(2);

24 and

25 (2) $6,000,000 is authorized to be available to

26 provide the assistance described in subsection (a)(3).

30

9

S 494 RFH

1 (c) SUPERSEDES OTHER LAWS.—The authority in

2 this section supersedes any other provision of law.

3 SEC. 6. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON THE ACTIONS TO BE

4 TAKEN AGAINST INDIVIDUALS RESPONSIBLE

5 FOR VIOLENCE AND THE BREAKDOWN OF

6 THE RULE OF LAW IN ZIMBABWE.

7 It is the sense of Congress that the President should

8 begin immediate consultation with the governments of Eu9 ropean Union member states, Canada, and other appro10 priate foreign countries on ways in which to—

11 (1) identify and share information regarding in12 dividuals responsible for the deliberate breakdown of

13 the rule of law, politically motivated violence, and in14 timidation in Zimbabwe;

15 (2) identify assets of those individuals held out16 side Zimbabwe;

17 (3) implement travel and economic sanctions

18 against those individuals and their associates and

19 families; and

20 (4) provide for the eventual removal or amend21 ment of those sanctions.

Passed the Senate August 1, 2001.

Attest: JERI THOMSON,

Secretary.

31

[The prepared statement of Mr. Hyde follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENTS OF THE HONORABLE HENRY J. HYDE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, AND CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON INTER- NATIONAL RELATIONS

S. 494

The situation in the nation of Zimbabwe continues to deteriorate. A once productive African nation is now faced with starvation. Just about a month ago, the government rejected free market enterprise for a socialist economy. The jobless and

hungry masses are now forbidden to plant crops, and the rapid spread of the AIDS

virus makes matters worse. The regional implications for a humanitarian disaster

are grave and very real. Neighboring nations could lose stability.

In the words of Judge Mazebedi, a Zimbabwean poet, ‘‘Freedom is not ideology,

but every man’s necessity.’’ The principle of freedom under rule of law has obviously

fallen. Brute force in the form of harassment, intimidation, and murder is how the

government treats its people. Political opponents are special targets. The reason is

clear; the upcoming presidential elections threaten the very existence of Zimbabwe’s

liberator-turned-tyrant, Robert Mugabe.

I would like to commend the gentleman from Tennessee, Senator Frist, for introducing this worthy legislation. Senate bill 494 declares it U.S. policy ‘‘to support the

Zimbabwean people in their struggles to effect peaceful, democratic change, achieve

broad-based and equitable economic growth, and restore the rule of law.’’ This legislation shows that the United States Congress stands for:

• The Restoration of law;

• Free and fair elections; and

• Equitable, legal, and transparent land reform in Zimbabwe.

The April, 2002 presidential elections in Zimbabwe are fast approaching. Speedy

passage of this bill is paramount. Congress will support any electoral outcome that

satisfies the conditions of this bill. It is my hope that we can move this bill forward

today and that the Committee of primary jurisdiction, the Committee on Financial

Services, will act expeditiously as well.

I urge all of my colleagues to support the bill in its current form. I now yield to

the Gentleman from California, and Chairman of the Subcommittee on Africa, Mr.

Royce.

Chairman HYDE. Thank you.

Mr. Lantos.

Mr. LANTOS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is very important that

our Committee support this Zimbabwe Democracy and Economic

Recovery Act.

This act is designed to support the people of Zimbabwe and provides a clear strategy for the United States and Zimbabwe to reengage in normal political and economic activity. This bill is an incentives bill.

It provides that when the government of Zimbabwe meets certain

political conditions, restoring the rule of law, creating a pre-election

environment which is conducive to honest elections, equitable, legal

and transparent land reform, a good faith effort to end the war in

the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and civilian control of military and police, the United States will initiate an economic recovery policy.

The situation in Zimbabwe is increasingly grim. Parties and political violence condoned by Mugabe have crippled a once prosperous economy. Once an exporter of maize, the country is set to

run out by February of next year. Without foreign emergency humanitarian assistance, hundreds of thousands of people in

Zimbabwe will go hungry, fall prey to disease, and starve to death.

Mugabe has made the land question central to his political campaign and used it to justify this pervasive violence. He has unVerDate 11-MAY-2000 10:16 Mar 05, 2002 Jkt 076350 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 F:\WORK\FULL\M112801\76350 HINTREL1 PsN: HINTREL1
32

leashed ‘‘war veterans’’ and party militants on Black farm workers,

White farmers, journalists, professionals, academics and anyone

who opposes his land seizure policy.

His policy has not unified the country behind him. To the contrary, according to a recent opinion poll, the criminal practices of

his government are turning the people of Zimbabwe against him.

Sixty-six percent of those with definite opinions blamed Mugabe for

their economic and political troubles, with only 34 percent blaming

Whites, foreigners and the opposition party.

Mr. Chairman, Zimbabwe’s economic and political disaster

threatens the whole of Southern Africa.

The new partnership for Africa’s development and millennium

renewal plan developed by the Presidents of South Africa, Nigeria

and Algeria, three of Africa’s largest economies, calls for a new relationship between Africa and the international community to address the development chasm. It is premised on African states

making commitments to good government, democracy and human

rights. Zimbabwe under Mugabe is the antithesis of this vision.

Mr. Chairman, our bill provides a set of incentives for Mugabe

and his government to move in the right direction, away from intimidation, away from violence, away from corruption and away

from Draconian economic policies toward a land reform policy that

reflects the rule of law and policies that restore an independent judiciary, allow political competition, and support a free and independent media.

Mr. Chairman, I urge all Members of our Committee to vote for

this bill. It will send a strong signal to Mugabe that the people of

America reject the violent situation he has created and support the

people of Zimbabwe. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman HYDE. The distinguished gentleman from New York,

Mr. Gilman.

Mr. GILMAN. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, I want to voice my support for this measure, which declares that it is U.S. policy to support the Zimbabwe people in their struggle to affect a peaceful

democratic change to achieve broad-based and equitable economic

growth and to restore the rule of law to that troubled nation. Furthermore, I fully support the bill’s sense of Congress for additional

funding to nongovernmental organizations working with the people

of Zimbabwe to promote good governance and the rule of law.

I want to commend the distinguished Chairman of the Africa

Subcommittee, Mr. Royce, for his work on this measure, as well as

the comments made by the Ranking Minority Member, Mr. Lantos.

Today Zimbabwe continues to face difficult social, economic, and

political problems.

The goal of U.S. policy toward Zimbabwe should be to assist its

development into a stable, free market democracy both as a goal

in itself and as a bulwark against regional instability and conflict.

However, this can only be achieved when the government of

Zimbabwe undertakes comprehensive reforms to enfranchise its

people politically and economically.

The essential foundations of freedom and democracy are free and

fair elections, a free and open press, and the development of democratic institutions based on the rule of law. However, all evidence

points to the conclusion that these institutions do not currently

33

exist in Zimbabwe and that respect for the rule of law is seriously

lacking. I regret that a sense of Congress is needed to express our

view that sanctions must be necessary to bring about the necessary

reforms and democracy to Zimbabwe.

Let me be clear. Our goal is not to harm the people of Zimbabwe,

but rather to send a clear signal to their government that an expeditious transition to democracy is imperative. The people of

Zimbabwe have waited far too long and endured far too many hardships and clearly deserve a much better way of life.

I also want to voice my concern with regard to Libya’s attempts

to establish military ties with the government of Zimbabwe. Let’s

hope that the Zimbabwe government foresees its future in aligning

itself with western democracies and not with any state sponsors of

terrorism, such as Libya.

We truly hope that the government of Zimbabwe takes advantage

of the opportunities presented by this legislation and will seek to

build better relations with our nation. Should the government of

Zimbabwe choose to improve its democratic record and to establish

good governance and the rule of law, its success can serve as a

model to other nations in that region. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman HYDE. Thank you, Mr. Gilman. The learned gentleman

from New York, Mr. Houghton.

Mr. HOUGHTON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I support this. I am not really very happy with it, though, because I have never been comfortable with sense of Congress resolutions anyway, particularly when you are dealing with somebody

who is a very aggressive, articulate demagogue such as we have in

Mr. Mugabe.

What I wanted to do, which I will not, was to put in an amendment that had some sort of better approach. It is not just the incentives. I would be happy if there were a little bit of a threat there,

and now I suppose you could say that there is one because if the

elections don’t go well, then obviously the sanctions will not be lifted.

But we have got to say something. I would agree with Mr. Royce,

Mr. Gilman, and Mr. Lantos, that it is a signal. I just plead with

this Committee, please follow this thing up, because it could so easily turn into something we don’t want. I mean, you have this man,

Senagari, who could easily be murdered before the election. What

do we do? What is our reaction? I am very queasy about this whole

situation.

I think this bill is a good move and I will support it. But I think

a lot of monitoring and follow-up is necessary. Thank you very

much.

Chairman HYDE. Is there any further discussion?

Mr. Payne.

Mr. PAYNE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Let me first express my

appreciation to you and the Ranking Member, Mr. Lantos, on behalf of the Subcommittee and Mr. Royce, for bringing this important legislation for consideration by the Full Committee. Let me

make a few comments here to try to give a little background about

this legislation and why it is important to take action at this time.

Indeed this legislation has been in works for more than a year.

Several years ago the Senate passed a version of the Zimbabwe

34

bill, which, in my opinion, was damaging. It did not accomplish

anything for the people of Zimbabwe. It simply criticized President

Mugabe. I asked the Senate if they would take that legislation

back, because it served no real purpose. I asked if they would rework the legislation so that the people of Zimbabwe would end up

having a fair opportunity to live the lives that we live here, and

the lives of many people here today who are originally from

Zimbabwe, but who live here in the United States of America

under the opportunity to vote without reprisals, without fear, and

to run for office without worrying about their homes being broken

into.

I have spent a lot of time in Zimbabwe. I was there in 1972 when

Ian Smith urged the people there to adopt a constitution, but it

was a flawed constitution. They elected Bishop Muzorewa under a

false government, because out of the 78 parliamentary seats, 28 of

those seats were restricted for Whites, and 50 for Blacks. In order

to change the constitution you need to have 60 votes, therefore this

denied the Black majority any opportunity to change the constitution.

Mr. Nkomo and Mr. Mugabe were restricted from the 1972–1973

election. Ian Smith ran the election, and urged the people to vote

Yes because it was a flawed government.

The western colonies, and particularly this former colony, was a

break-away colony as you know, but Britain came in and said this

is a false constitution and that there would have to be an allZimbabwean election. At that time, Mr. Nkomo with Zanu and Mr.

Mugabe with Zappo were different parties, both fighting for independence. I took the opportunity to go to Mr. Nkomo’s funeral because I had such a high respect for him and what he really did as

the father of that great country.

This legislation is not about sanctions and does not impose sanctions. As a matter of fact, this legislation, if passed, will start to

undo sanctions if the elections are fair. With this moving forward

we will now ask the IMF and the World Bank, who have said we

will not give loans to Zimbabwe, to start a process going so that

the day that the election is over those funds from the world can

go back into Zimbabwe to help the people.

So there has been a total mischaracterizing of what this bill is

all about. The last people that I would attempt to do something

against are the people of Zimbabwe. I have spent 28 years struggling with Zimbabwe, was there even when the war was going on.

I have had the opportunity to meet many people here who are big

advocates, who perhaps have not even been there.

Indeed this legislation has been in the works for years. I had serious reservations, as I mentioned, about the first legislation. Then

staff on both sides negotiated for several months to come up with

what we have today.

And why is this legislation now and why Zimbabwe? What is

going on? Zimbabwe is too important to ignore. This legislation offers a credible policy option to deal with the challenges in

Zimbabwe.

Zimbabwe is not in anarchy now, but it is moving toward that.

Therefore, this bill is to prevent chaos. This bill is to say let us

have fair and free elections. And so the bill actually is to save

35

Zimbabwe, not to penalize it. It is not a punitive piece of legislation.

The situation in Zimbabwe is deteriorating. I think everyone

knows that. Dozens of people have been killed. The rule of law is

nonexistent. Authorities’ tendencies have reached a very dangerous

level. HIV and AIDS are killing people. We had to fight the President to declare that it was an illness in that country.

Chairman HYDE. The gentleman’s time has expired. Does the

gentleman seek additional time?

Mr. PAYNE. Yes, if someone would yield.

Chairman HYDE. How much time do you want?

Mr. PAYNE. I will cut it down from 30 minutes. I will take another 4 or 5.

Chairman HYDE. The gentleman is recognized without objection

for 4 minutes.

Mr. PAYNE. Thank you. As I was saying then, this legislation is

to take control of the situation, to level it off, and to see if

Zimbabwe, which is such a key part of the Southern African Development Community nations, can move forward.

As I indicated, some people have portrayed this legislation as punitive, and I must admit, they are succeeding. Some of the lobbyists are going around saying this is a sanctions bill. This is not a

sanctions bill. There is a sense of Congress that says that if people

break the law, if people prevent folks from exercising their rights,

then those people who break the law should not be welcome to

come to this country.

Sanctions are already on Zimbabwe. What we are doing is saying, have fair and free elections so sanctions will be removed. What

are the key objectives of this? In the entire legislation, it doesn’t

even mention the name of President Mugabe. It is not targeted to

him, it is basically for the people of Zimbabwe.

Let me get to the land. We know there must be land reform.

That should have been done years ago. But for 20 years it was not

a big issue, and it should have been right from the beginning of the

new government of Mr. Mugabe. For the last 4 or 5 years, White

farmers have benefitted. They have lived high on the hog. We are

now saying that we want to have money from the U.S. Government

to go into a fund to purchase land for the veterans it should have

gone for.

We are also urging the EU to put up money so that land can be

purchased, not taken forcefully, so that the people who were supposed to get the land—the veterans, not the generals who got the

original land—but the people can get the land.

We are urging that this legislation is important. We want to send

a signal that we are supportive of the people of Zimbabwe; we want

to see sanctions removed from Zimbabwe if the election goes fair

and free, then we will urge the IMF and the World Bank to let the

funds start to flow. We will urge the U.S. Government to once

again have bilateral assistance which we don’t have now because

of the situation.

It is a pro-Zimbabwe bill. I just wanted to try to make that clear.

With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.

Chairman HYDE. Without objection the gentleman’s full statement will be made a part of the record.

36

[The information referred to was not available at time of printing.]

Chairman HYDE. The Chair recognizes for purposes of striking

the last word, the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Paul.

Mr. PAUL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The gentleman from New

York, Mr. Houghton, mentioned that he had some reservations

about this bill. And indeed, I think that we all should have some

reservations about this bill. The one thing, though, that I would

concede to the authors of this bill is the description of the problem

that exists in Zimbabwe. There is no doubt about that.

The question I have, though, is whose responsibility is it? Is it

the responsibility of us in the U.S. Congress to deal with this? Is

it the responsibility of the American taxpayers to deal with it?

Quite frankly, I just don’t agree, no matter how bad the situation

is, that it is our responsibility.

If it is using the course of powers of government, there certainly

are ways to help people who are in need in a more voluntarily fashion. But to think that we have to back this up with taxation and

who knows, military action or what, once we embark on nation

building, that is what I say this is—nation building. I don’t think

that should be our job. The very good intentions, as far as I am

concerned, are not enough to justify this.

Traditionally and historically so often, if not always, our good intentions backfire. We send money around the world so often, especially in situations like this with the goal of helping those who are

suffering and those who are poor. And unfortunately, the funding

or the assistance ends up into the hands of the very people that

we are trying to undermine. So I don’t think it works in a practical

sense, a theoretical sense. As far as whether we should do it or not

is one thing, but in a practical sense, these efforts rarely work, if

ever.

And we talk here about restoring the rule of law into Zimbabwe,

which is a noble gesture. But I might just point out that in the last

several weeks, our journals and our newspapers have been filled

with articles and editorials about the rule of law, and the concern

about the loss of rule of law in the United States with the establishment of military courts here.

Now, there is a subject that I think we should be dealing with.

For me, I think it is just presumptuous. We can certainly form an

opinion and condemn what we see, but the presumption that we all

of a sudden can make sure that there is perfect rule of law in

Zimbabwe when we are now, indeed, by an executive order, being

threatened with the introduction, for who knows how long, of military courts, I think it should be reason for us to pause and just

think about this for a minute.

And for these various reasons, I oppose this legislation. I yield

back.

Chairman HYDE. The Chair has a suggestion. Mr. Bereuter has

an important amendment to offer, following which Ms. Lee has an

important amendment to offer. I would suggest we get those

amendments adopted or debated so the bill is in its final shape,

there being no other amendments that I am aware of, and then I

will recognize people to strike the last word, and then you can be

talking about the bill as it will be, not as it is now.

37

Mr. LANTOS. I strongly support your suggestion.

Chairman HYDE. Thank you very much. Well, with that in mind,

the Chair recognizes Mr. Bereuter.

Mr. BEREUTER. I do have an amendment at the desk.

Chairman HYDE. Clerk will report the amendment.

Ms. BLOOMER. Amendment offered by Mr. Bereuter, page 4, line

2, strike the following, shall apply——

Chairman HYDE. Without objection, further reading of the

amendment is dispensed with, and Mr. Bereuter is recognized for

5 minutes in support of his amendment.

[The information referred to follows:]

38

1

H.L.C.

AMENDMENT TO S. 494

OFFERED BY MR. BEREUTER

Page 4, line 2, strike ‘‘the following shall apply’’ and

all that follows through ‘‘undertake a review’’ and insert

‘‘the Secretary of the Treasury shall undertake a review’’.

Page 4, line 8, strike the semicolon at the end and

insert a period.

Page 4, strike line 9 and all that follows through

line 7 on page 5.

39

Mr. BEREUTER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and colleagues. I certainly want to commend the description of the current situation in

Zimbabwe. It has been given by Mr. Royce, by yourself, Mr. Lantos

and others.

The description of this bill by Congressman Payne as primarily

an incentive bill and not one of sanctions, I think, is entirely accurate. He is right in suggesting what will happen based on current

policy of the IMF and the World Bank if, in fact, free elections are

held in Zimbabwe. And so that should be an important incentive.

As the Members no doubt know, the primary Committee referral

on this legislation is the Financial Services Committee. Section 4

in particular gives me some concerns as currently written.

This is a bill which will come to the Subcommittee in Financial

Services that I chair. I think it is important legislation. I would

like to expedite the legislation. And it is in that respect that I offer

this amendment. Let’s examine briefly some of the reasons why, in

my judgment, we have some problems in section 4 that I attempt

to address.

First of all, when the bill was before the Senate, the Administration issued a coordinated response based out of the State Department which said that the South African Finance Center, proposed

to be established on the bottom of page 4 and on to page 5, was

unnecessary.

Now, the key issues are as follows: The conditions and infrastructure in Zimbabwe are not conducive to such a center. Currently

OPEC and the Export/Import Bank have no offices abroad, and

they are not interested in establishing offices abroad at this point.

With respect to the Trade and Development Agency (TDA), President Bush announced in early November, as a result of debates

probably in the Senate, the creation of a similar structure which

would involve TDA at least in Johannesburg, South Africa. I think

that is the appropriate location for it.

I have some concerns about the degree of incentives that we are

offering here to a country led by a person who has repeatedly and

routinely incited racial violence and has been condemned by a

broad cross-section of international organizations and spokespersons and nations.

I have this morning, in a short period of time, worked with Members on both sides of the aisle, and most recently with a Member

on the other side of the aisle, that have a strong interest in the

passage of this legislation.

I think that the adoption of my amendment with a second degree

amendment offered by the gentlelady from California, Ms. Lee,

would enable us to avoid any contentious debate or consideration

and, in all probability, to waive consideration of the bill by the Financial Services Committee.

And so I regard her amendment, which we have discussed previously with her and other Members, as a friendly amendment that

I would encourage you to support as a secondary amendment to the

amendment that I offer here today. I yield back the balance of my

time.

Chairman HYDE. Is there further discussion on the Bereuter

Amendment? Ms. Lee.

40

Ms. LEE. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk which

is the secondary amendment to Mr. Bereuter’s amendment.

Chairman HYDE. You have a perfect perfecting amendment, and

the clerk will report the amendment.

Ms. BLOOMER. Amendment offered by Ms. Lee to the amendment

offered by Mr. Bereuter. Insert—— Chairman HYDE. Without objection, further reading of the perfecting amendment is dispensed with. The gentlelady from California is recognized for 5 minutes in support of her perfecting

amendment.

[The information referred to follows:]

41

1

H.L.C.

AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MS. LEE

TO THE AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MR. BEREUTER

Insert after the second amendatory instruction the

following:

Page 4, after line 8 insert the following:

1 It is the sense of Congress that upon receipt by the appro2 priate congressional committees of a certification de3 scribed in subsection (d), the Secretary of the Treasury

4 should—

Amend the third amendatory instruction to read as

follows:

Page 4, strike line 24 and all that follows through

line 7 on page 5.

42

Ms. LEE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Let me just say—I came to

this Committee prepared to listen to the debate which I am listening to and prepared to make my decision based on the debate at

this Committee.

I, too, initially believed that this was a sanctions bill. And I definitely would oppose this bill if it were a sanctions bill. I believe

that the people of Zimbabwe have a right to choose their leaders.

It is up to the international community not to determine who those

leaders are but to ensure that fair and free elections take place. We

must do this before the elections.

We did this, and I was in an election observer in Nigeria with

my colleague, Congressman Meeks, and in South Africa also. Those

elections were determined and certified to be fair and free. Now,

many of us, many of on this Committee will disagree about the

elections in Florida. But we are dealing with after the fact now

with regard to Florida.

First, I committed and determined and truly believe that we

have got to fix our election process in this country, and we have

got to ensure where we are involved and where we believe that fair

and free elections should occur throughout the world, that we take

measures in advance of those elections to ensure that the people

of those countries participate in the fairest system possible. I believe that this bill ensures that that could and would take place.

Secondly, I would not vote for a bill that I believe imposed sanctions on the people of Zimbabwe or any peoples, because sanctions

as I have seen, and many on this Committee have seen, sanctions

hurt people. They may not necessarily hurt governments, but people suffer under sanctions. I supported debt forgiveness, debt relief,

debt cancellation. And I believe, as I read this bill, and I want to

make sure, Mr. Chairman, that I am reading it correctly, that this

bill does ensure that if free and fair elections do take place, sanctions by these multilateral institutions would be lifted and, in fact,

finally the meager resources this country should have put up 30

years ago, now, as a result of this bill, I believe 20 million is authorized.

So I just want to say, for the record, that those provisions are

what they are in this bill, and what my amendment does actually

is reinstate a sense of Congress resolution on page 8 that ensures

that if the conditions do take place, that this Committee supports

the lifting of these sanctions. That is what my amendment to Mr.

Bereuter’s amendment does. It memorializes that fact in this Committee.

Mr. BEREUTER. Will the gentlelady yield? I thank the gentlelady

for yielding. That would certainly be the intent.

By leaving in sections B and C on page 4, we clearly express the

sense of Congress that it would be our expectation and hope that

the executive director of the various multilateral development

banks would act in accordance with the directions in B and C.

Of course, as the gentlelady knows, we can’t require the World

Bank or the IMF to do anything. We can only direct our executive

directors of those two institutions to do that. But the current policy

of both institutions, we have been reassured by staff on both sides

and from my own knowledge, is that when, in fact, free elections

are held, they will lift, in effect, the sanctions that they have today.

43

And I just wanted to offer that clarification and assurance if it

is necessary.

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

may I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from New Jersey, Mr.

Payne, on my own time?

Chairman HYDE. You certainly may.

Mr. PAYNE. Thank you very much. When the previous speaker

indicated that United States taxpayers’ money should not go to

countries like Zimbabwe, as we have in the bill, to help the process

of purchasing land, I just want to instruct the gentleman that back

when the Lancaster House Agreements were made back in 1981–

1982 in Britain, Britain was taking the majority lead in the process

of purchasing the land back for the government.

But in the U.S. the Carter Administration said that we would

also assist. And so this isn’t anything new. This is just 25 years

later that we are saying that maybe we should do what we said

we would do.

And, secondly, I just want to assure you that the United States

is not interested in sending any troops to Zimbabwe.

Chairman HYDE. The Chair asserts that he is informed reliably

that there is an agreement that Ms. Lee’s perfecting amendment,

will be acceptable to Mr. Bereuter.

Mr. Bereuter’s amendment will then be accepted. This is the

agreement that is reached with an overwhelming majority here. So

the question occurs on the Lee perfecting amendment to Mr. Bereuter. All those in favor say aye. Opposed nay. In the opinion of the

Chair, the ayes have it. The ayes have it. The perfecting amendment is agreed to.

Now the question occurs on the Bereuter amendment as amended. All in favor say aye. Opposed nay. The ayes have it and the Bereuter amendment, as amended, is agreed to. Are there further

amendments?

If not, the Chair is mindful of his previous pledge to recognize

people to strike the last word. Mr. Flake has been seeking recognition.

Ms. MCKINNEY. Ms. McKinney also seeks recognition.

Mr. MEEKS. And Mr. Meeks.

Chairman HYDE. All right.

Very well. Mr. Flake.

Mr. FLAKE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Mr. Bereuter for your amendment. I believe it is important that we not,

on one hand, provide debt relief, and on the other hand, just assume that whichever government is elected in Zimbabwe will create an atmosphere conducive to bind us to more debt and more involvement in that way. It just seems inconsistent to me. I had the

good fortune to spend 6 months in Zimbabwe soon after Mr.

Mugabe’s first election, during the time when there was great hope

that there would be a shining star in Southern Africa.

It has not been that way. And I want to associate myself with

some of the comments of Mr. Paul, that we have to understand

sometimes the limits of our influence and involvement. I am not a

fan of sanctions. I don’t think they have served us well in other instances. I would be reluctant, even though it has been pointed out

44

that this is not a sanction bill, per se, there are some elements that

could lead to that.

We have to be careful, as I mentioned, to make sure that we are

not putting all of our eggs in the basket of whichever government

is elected, or that Mr. Mugabe won’t be elected again. It may happen differently. If we have a good government, then as they say in

Zimbabwe (speaking in foreign language), ‘‘Very, very, good’’ (translated).

But if we don’t, we don’t, and we have to be prepared for that.

I think it is premature to assume that we ought to jump right back

in with promises to establish financial centers and to hand over aid

and support on that basis. And with that I yield back.

Chairman HYDE. Ms. McKinney, the gentlelady from Georgia.

Ms. MCKINNEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I respect the opinion

of my colleague, Donald Payne, who has worked on these issues for

a very long time. And I also would like the record to reflect that,

of course, we would want to do nothing that is harmful in any way

to the people of Zimbabwe. I do have some questions though, Mr.

Chairman, about the bill.

I do support Congressman Bereuter’s amendment, and I am glad

that it passed because I agree with the gentleman who just spoke

that establishing financial centers and all of that was something

that needed a little bit more study than was given.

But this legislation talks about utilizing debt relief. I was just

wondering if there was anybody here who could answer this question for me: What debt has the United States eliminated from any

country? It is a carrot that is being held out in the legislation. But

has this country ever eliminated any debt?

Chairman HYDE. The gentleman from California.

Mr. LANTOS. The answer to my colleague’s question is yes, on

many occasions. Probably the most significant, recent one relates

to the forgiveness of $7 billion to Egypt. I was one of the Members

of this Committee when we dealt with that issue and was one of

the Members who supported that debt relief for Egypt. We have

also moved with respect to debt relief vis-a-vis numbers of other

countries.

It has been in the American tradition, when circumstances warrant, to provide for debt relief.

Ms. MCKINNEY. Thank you. And I was also——

Mr. PAYNE. I believe that Uganda received U.S. debt relief.

Mr. LANTOS. That is correct.

Ms. MCKINNEY. Does that mean elimination? That is the question I am asking is debt elimination. Maybe I didn’t phrase it correctly.

Mr. PAYNE. I can’t answer whether it was totally eliminated. But

I know the bilateral debt was put on a schedule of forgiveness. And

actually what was done was that health institutions were requested to be done in lieu of the debt structure that Uganda owed

the U.S.

Ms. MCKINNEY. I just don’t want us to pass legislation that has

got carrots in it that aren’t real. And the legislation talks about rescheduling or eliminating. And I would hope that what we discuss

is not rescheduling, but real elimination.

45

In addition, the legislation talks a lot about the rule of law. I am

just wondering how did the farmers who are in question get title

to the land that is in question? Is there any one here who can answer that?

Then my final concern is about the fact that there is reference

made in the legislation to the ongoing conflict in the Democratic

Republic of Congo. I understand that we want conflict in the Democratic Republic of Congo to cease, and we want Zimbabwe to participate in the negotiations for peace.

However, Zimbabwe was invited by the government of the Democratic Republic of Congo to protect its territorial integrity. It is

amazing to me that we can introduce legislation here and pass legislation here that talks about Zimbabwe subverting funds and the

utilization of funds. I am sitting here now reading the United Nation’s second report on the illegal exploitation of Democratic Republic of Congo, and we are talking about Zimbabwe, which has entered into these contracts with the government that is recognized

by the world, and yet no mention at all is being made of Rwanda,

or Uganda, and the fact that that they get assistance from the IMF

and the World Bank and they go over there and even acknowledge

that they’re waging war on the resources of Democratic Republic of

Congo, and we are sitting here and we are castigating Zimbabwe

and discussing the rule of law.

No one can even tell me how the land in question was given title

to the people in question.

Chairman HYDE. The gentlelady’s time has expired. The Chair

would like to remind the audience this is not a theatre, and we

don’t applaud. And so please no demonstrations of support or opposition.

Mr. Meeks, the gentleman from New York.

Mr. MEEKS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think in lieu of some

of the other statements that have been made earlier, it should be

clear and the record should reflect that we can debate the sources

of culpability for the way the current political, economic, and social

conditions in Zimbabwe have deteriorated to crisis-like proportions.

There is clearly ample internal and external sources of blame to go

around.

I think President Mugabe’s role in Zimbabwe should be also recognized in forging its independence there from the process of centuries of British colonial oppression, exploitation, undemocratic

rule. I am also, like others, critical of his role for failing to address

the issues of transforming access to land for all Zimbabweans, for

playing politics with this issue. I am also critical of Mr. Mugabe’s

involvement in supporting economic policies which have enabled a

small elite class around Mr. Mugabe to enrich themselves while

perpetrating the very same colonial-derived systems of land usage

and structures of agricultural production which have served the interests of large commercial farmers at the expense of equal economic opportunities for the majority of Zimbabweans.

But the international community also has a long history of pledging to help, more so than actually helping to address Zimbabwe’s

structural issues. In addition, many of the internationally supported land reform initiatives that have been proposed have often

been contingent upon Zimbabwe accepting conditions which impose

46

constraints on all the changes such reforms would produce. The

two ironies of this history of failure for the Zimbabwean people are

the elevation of the principle of willing buyer, willing seller to a

sacrosanct level while ignoring the fact that much of the land we

all want to see the majority of Zimbabweans gain access to via a

fair and transparent land reform process was in the first place acquired through the use of violence and taking from Black people

without compensation.

In addition, I think that it is, and some will applaud the author- ization of $20 million in support of the land reform process, that

amount, given the scope of the issue, pales in comparison to the robust and almost radical nature of land reform initiatives which the

United States aggressively supported in Asia during the Cold War.

Such reforms laid a foundation for decades of economic growth in

Asia, and we should have the same courage to adopt a similar approach in Zimbabwe today.

I came here today fully prepared to vote against this measure because I thought, too, that this was a sanctions bill and that we

need to do something to help the people of Zimbabwe, and sanctions would not do that. But after listening to the debate and conversations with some of my colleagues here and then reading the

bill again, I come away convinced that this is not a sanctions bill,

that in fact that it leaves the opportunity to have sanctions removed, which I think would help the people of Zimbabwe. And with

some anxiety and some hesitation, given the content of the Bereuter and Lee amendments, I believe in the end, Mr. Chairman, I will

vote for this bill.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman HYDE. Thank you. Mr. Hilliard of Alabama.

Mr. HILLIARD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move to strike the

last word.

Chairman HYDE. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.

Mr. HILLIARD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I hope that we fully

recognize what we are doing today. I imagine there are other African countries looking at what we do. In a historical sense I think

we have been here before. I think that the United States has

agreed at one time or another in our history to contribute money

to Zimbabwe in its effort to buy land from farmers who use violence, or their ancestors used violence, to take the land that they

had.

If we really appreciate what we are doing, we will realize that

this bill is in a real sense toothless and meaningless, because we

already have sanctions imposed. The only thing we are saying is

we will remove them if the election is a fair election and so forth.

Well, that is very good and very noble, but the real issue in

Zimbabwe is the land. I would like to think that America is really

concerned about the land being distributed to the landless people

in Zimbabwe, and that we are not concerned about it being distributed to one or two so-called political figures in the Zimbabwe government.

What I am really saying is that if we really want to tackle the

issue, that we would keep the agreement that was made earlier.

The new agreement brings less to the table than the last agreement, and what we are proposing in terms of dollars and cents is

47

inadequate, insufficient, and it doesn’t do anything about solving

the acute problem with the land.

I don’t think what we do here will have any consequences on the

Zimbabwe government and its people. I think what we really need

to do, if we are really going to be sincere, is set up a mechanism

by which land can really be redistributed and negotiate as much

as we can with the government before we put up any money so

that the process could really be implemented, perhaps somewhere

along the nature of what we did in South Korea, because anything

less is going to be meaningless.

Ms. MCKINNEY. Would the gentleman yield for just a minute? I

would like to point out, regarding what the gentleman said, that

in 1976 Secretary of State Henry Kissinger pledged $1.5 billion to

assist with land reform, and it is my understanding that the

United States hasn’t given a dime. So I agree with the gentleman.

Mr. HILLIARD. Mr. Chairman, I am going to vote yes on this bill

because it creates an opportunity, and I hope that no one has to

say I told you that it would not work. But we need to go further

and we need to do more, and we cannot do it with what we have

here. But I am willing to give it a try.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Chairman HYDE. Mr. Rohrabacher.

Mr. ROHRABACHER. I will be very quick, Mr. Chairman. First of

all, I would like to commend Ed Royce for the terrific job he has

been doing on this as Chairman of the Africa Subcommittee and

also for the job and the hard work he has put into this piece of legislation. I think this legislation has to be viewed not just in terms

of what it does for this particular country in Zimbabwe, but instead

for the standard that it sets for other countries as well.

I have voted against aid programs, for example, aimed at Central

Asian republics because they neglected to put prerequisites for

American aid and American assistance and the forgiveness of debt

to those other countries. They forgot to put a prerequisite it has to

be a democratic government and a respect for human rights. So I

opposed that when we had a bill about Central Asia just a few

months ago.

This bill does not make that same mistake. This is not a sanctions bill. This is an incentives bill. We are giving an incentive to

a government that now does not meet the human rights and democratic standards that we think are fundamental to a civilized society. We are saying before you get these benefits from the United

States of America you have got to reach that standard. We are giving them an incentive to do so.

It certainly isn’t any sanctions bill because we are not taking

anything away that we have already given. But I think these same

standards should not just apply to this country or to African countries but should apply to all countries that go through this Committee. We should have the same exact democratic and human

rights standards for every country, and as I say, I voted against the

Central Asian republics for their aid package for that very reason.

One last note, Ed has already mentioned Nelson Mandela and

how he served as an example. Well, it was George Washington who

started that example a long time ago as a father of his country.

After a term in office and after getting things laid down and pointVerDate 11-MAY-2000 10:16 Mar 05, 2002 Jkt 076350 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 F:\WORK\FULL\M112801\76350 HINTREL1 PsN: HINTREL1
48

ed in the right direction, George Washington decided not to run for

reelection and continue control of his government. Nelson Mandela

did the same thing in South Africa. Leaders like Mugabe, whether

they are in Central Asia or whether they are in Africa, should

learn when it is time to step down and quit trying to run a country,

which ends up degenerating their own regimes into corruption and

brutality and dictatorship.

So again I will be voting for this bill and commend Mr. Royce for

all the work he has put into it.

Chairman HYDE. There is a vote on the Floor on the rule on the

Department of Defense, for which all Members are entreated to

participate. So if we could terminate the discussion and vote on

this, we will have finished our business.

And therefore the question occurs on the motion to report the

bill, S. 494 favorably, as amended. All in favor say aye. All opposed, nay. The ayes have it. The motion to report favorably is

adopted.

Without objection, the Chairman is authorized to move to go to

conference pursuant to House Rule XXII. Without objection, staff is

directed to make any technical and conforming changes. Without

objection, the bill will be reported favorably to the House in the

form of a single amendment in the nature of a substitute incorporating the amendments adopted here today.

The Committee stands adjourned.

[Whereupon, at 12:50 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.]

(49)

A P P E N D I X

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING RECORD

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE JAMES A. LEACH, A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF IOWA

H.R. 2739

As my colleagues may recall, earlier this year the Congress passed and the President signed into law H.R. 428 (Public Law 107–10), legislation which authorized the

Administration to initiate a plan to endorse and obtain observer status for Taiwan

in the World Health Organization during the May, 2001 World Health Assembly in

Geneva.

H.R. 2739 simply amends that prior law to authorize the Secretary of State to initial a U.S. plan to endorse and obtain observer status for Taiwan at the annual

week-long summit of the World Health Assembly in May, 2002 in Geneva and to

instruct the U.S. delegation there to implement such a plan. In other words, it simply extends the effective authorization from May, 2001 to May, 2002.

It should be stressed that nothing in this measure implies a change in this country’s one-China policy, which has been based for 30 years on the three communiques

and the Taiwan Relations Act. At the same time, however, care should be taken not

to arbitrarily exclude the 23 million people of Taiwan from participation in appropriate economic and humanitarian venues.

I commend the gentleman from Ohio, Mr. Brown, for sponsoring this resolution,

and urge its adoption. Thank you.

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE AMO HOUGHTON, A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW YORK

The Asia Pacific Parliamentary Forum is an organization of parliamentarians

from the nations of the Pacific Rim that now includes 27 nations, since Ecuador was

added last January. The APPF was started a decade ago by former Prime Minister

Yasuhiro Nakasone and our former colleague Senator Bill Roth of Delaware.

The Forum is hosted in a different country every year—Australia, Chile, Japan,

Canada, Korea, Mexico and Thailand to name a few. This January 6–9, 2002, the

United States will host the Forum for the first time ever. We’ll meet in Honolulu,

Hawaii—a convenient gathering spot for nations surrounding Pacific Ocean. Danny

Akaka, our Senate Co-Chair, introduced the resolution supporting the Forum in the

Senate, and I thank Chairman Hyde for his indulgence in allowing us to take up

the bill and move it on the suspensions calendar.

The East-West Center will host the Forum in Waikiki. Dr. Charles Morrison at

the Center has a terrific program planned to discuss issues important to the region:

terrorism, the economy, environmental issues, defense cooperation, cultural ties,

multilateral organizations and activities, and others as they are suggested by the

various nations.

We are thrilled that Speaker Denny Hastert will speak at the Forum’s opening

ceremony. We have had participation from Members of this Committee in the past,

including that of Doug Bereuter and Eni Faleomavaega. Other Members who have

participated include our colleagues Phil English, Marty Meehan and Jim

McDermott.

Essentially, the bill expresses support for the tenth annual meeting of the Asia

Pacific Parliamentary Forum and for the Forum’s ideals and concerns; commends

the East-West Center for hosting the meeting; and calls upon all parties to support

the Forum’s endeavors and to work toward achieving meeting goals.

50

I urge the Members of the Committee to give this bill their unanimous support.

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE SHERROD BROWN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF OHIO

I would like to thank Chairman Hyde and Ranking Member Lantos for addressing

this important bill in the Committee today. I appreciate your efforts to move this

bill to the House floor on a timely basis.

The World Health Organization strives for the ‘‘attainment by all peoples of the

highest possible level of health.’’ Despite WHO’s stated mission to ensure optimal

health for all peoples, Taiwan is barred from participating.

Good health is a basic right of every citizen of the world, and so I urge the Members of the Committee to adopt this legislation extending Taiwan’s right to observer

status at the annual World Health Assembly to be held in May, 2002 in Geneva,

Switzerland.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to offer an amendment to H.R. 2739 that will make

technical changes in the bill that are recommended by the Department of State.

Æ