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

90–362PDF 2003

RECOGNIZING THE CONTINUED IMPORTANCE OF

THE TRANSATLANTIC RELATIONSHIP AND PROMOTING STRONGER RELATIONS WITH EUROPE

BY REAFFIRMING THE NEED FOR A CONTINUED

AND MEANINGFUL DIALOGUE BETWEEN THE

UNITED STATES AND EUROPE

MARKUP

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON EUROPE

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON 

INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED EIGHTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

ON

H. Res. 390

OCTOBER 29, 2003

Serial No. 108–55

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 

JAMES A. LEACH, Iowa 

DOUG BEREUTER, Nebraska 

CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey, 

Vice Chairman 

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 

THOMAS G. TANCREDO, Colorado 

RON PAUL, Texas 

NICK SMITH, Michigan 

JOSEPH R. PITTS, Pennsylvania 

JEFF FLAKE, Arizona 

JO ANN DAVIS, Virginia 

MARK GREEN, Wisconsin 

JERRY WELLER, Illinois 

MIKE PENCE, Indiana 

THADDEUS G. MCCOTTER, Michigan 

WILLIAM J. JANKLOW, South Dakota 

KATHERINE HARRIS, Florida 

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 

BRAD SHERMAN, California 

ROBERT WEXLER, 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 F. NAPOLITANO, California 

ADAM B. SCHIFF, California 

DIANE E. WATSON, California 

ADAM SMITH, Washington 

BETTY MCCOLLUM, Minnesota 

CHRIS BELL, Texas 

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

ROBERT R. KING, Democratic Staff Director 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON EUROPE

DOUG BEREUTER, Nebraska, Chairman 

DAN BURTON, Indiana 

ELTON GALLEGLY, California 

PETER T. KING, New York 

JO ANN DAVIS, Virginia 

THADDEUS G. McCOTTER, Michigan 

WILLIAM J. JANKLOW, South Dakota 

ROBERT WEXLER, Florida 

ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York 

WILLIAM D. DELAHUNT, Massachusetts 

BARBARA LEE, California 

JOSEPH M. HOEFFEL, Pennsylvania 

EARL BLUMENAUER, Oregon 

VINCE MORELLI, Subcommittee Staff Director 

PATRICK PRISCO, Professional Staff Member 

JONATHAN KATZ, Democratic Professional Staff Member 

BEVERLY HALLOCK, Staff Associate 
(III)

C O N T E N T S 

Page

MARKUP OF: 

H. Res. 390, Recognizing the continued importance of the transatlantic relationship and promoting stronger relations with Europe by reaffirming the 

need for a continued and meaningful dialogue between the United States 

and Europe ........................................................................................................... 2

LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD 

The Honorable Doug Bereuter, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of Nebraska, and Chairman, Subcommittee on Europe: Prepared statement 7

The Honorable Robert Wexler, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of Florida: Prepared statement ........................................................................... 9

(1)

RECOGNIZING THE CONTINUED IMPORTANCE 

OF THE TRANSATLANTIC RELATIONSHIP 

AND PROMOTING STRONGER RELATIONS 

WITH EUROPE BY REAFFIRMING THE NEED 

FOR A CONTINUED AND MEANINGFUL DIALOGUE BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND 

EUROPE 

WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 29, 2003

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON EUROPE, 

COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS, 

Washington, DC. 

The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 1 p.m. In Room 2200 

Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Doug Bereuter [Chairman of 

the Subcommittee] presiding. 

Mr. BEREUTER. Pursuant to notice, I call up resolution H. Res. 

390 for purposes of markup. 

[H. Res. 390 follows:]
2

1

IV

108TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 390

Recognizing the continued importance of the transatlantic relationship and

promoting stronger relations with Europe by reaffirming the need for

a continued and meaningful dialogue between the United States and

Europe.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

OCTOBER 2, 2003

Mr. BEREUTER (for himself, Mr. LANTOS, Mr. WEXLER, and Mrs. JO ANN

DAVIS of Virginia) submitted the following resolution; which was referred

to the Committee on International Relations

RESOLUTION

Recognizing the continued importance of the transatlantic

relationship and promoting stronger relations with Europe by reaffirming the need for a continued and meaningful dialogue between the United States and Europe.

Whereas for more than a half century transatlantic policy cooperation and coordination have been essential for the

preservation of peace and freedom in Europe, have enabled the development of free and prosperous economies,

and helped restore stability and unity in the Euro-Atlantic area;

Whereas a central goal of United States policy toward Europe remains that the development of a Europe united,

free, strong, and at peace is in the best interests of the
3

2

•HRES 390 IH

United States and Europe so long as the United States

and Europe continue to work as partners, not rivals or

counterweights;

Whereas the central pillar of the United States partnership

with Europe remains a strong and cohesive Atlantic Alliance;

Whereas the United States and the European community are

aware of their shared responsibility, not only to further

transatlantic security, but to address other common interests such as environmental protection, poverty reduction, combatting international crime and promoting

human rights, and to work together to meet those

transnational challenges which affect the well-being of all;

Whereas in recognition of the threats posed by global terrorism, terrorist states, the proliferation of weapons of

mass destruction, and the nexus of the three, the partnership should be expanded progressively from a transatlantic community of values to an effective transatlantic

community of action by developing a collaborative strategy and action plan for dealing with those challenges of

mutual interest and concern;

Whereas no policy disagreement, such as the dispute with respect to Iraq, should be allowed to significantly disrupt

transatlantic relations nor cause any member of the

Euro-Atlantic community to choose between partners;

Whereas a renewed commitment to strengthen the partnership through increased cooperation, communication, consultation and information-exchange is required to achieve

our common goals, which will continue to ensure peace

and prosperity between the United States and Europe;
4

3

•HRES 390 IH

Whereas Congress has played a constructive role in this cooperative approach to partnership with Europe through

mechanisms such as the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Parliamentary Assembly, the Transatlantic

Legislators’ Dialogue, and the Organization for Security

and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) Parliamentary Assembly which have for years brought together legislators

of both the United States and Europe for discussions of

issues of common interest in order to further transatlantic understanding and partnership at the parliamentary level; and

Whereas the House of Representatives welcomes and congratulates the newest member nations invited to join

NATO and the European Union and looks forward to

broader dialogue through their participation in these

transatlantic parliamentary organizations: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives—

2 (1) affirms the conviction of the United States

3 that, despite the occasional differences and difficul4 ties, the underlying ties which have historically

5 bound the people of the United States and of Eu6 rope remain strong;

7 (2) accepts the indivisibility of transatlantic se8 curity which provides an indispensable link between

9 North America and Europe;

10 (3) recognizes that both the United States and

11 Europe face new challenges at home and abroad and
5

4

•HRES 390 IH

1 must strengthen and adapt the transatlantic part2 nership to effectively meet these challenges;

3 (4) acknowledges that in order to strengthen

4 the transatlantic partnership there must be a re5 newed commitment to regular and intensive con6 sultation, information exchange and dialogue be7 tween the United States Government and the gov8 ernments of Europe and the European Union; and

9 (5) commits on its part to continue to improve

10 the transatlantic partnership by enhancing the com11 munication between the United States Congress and

12 the legislatures of Europe through the formal frame13 works of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly, the

14 Transatlantic Legislators’ Dialogue, the OSCE Par15 liamentary Assembly, and various other formal and

16 informal inter-parliamentary organizations.

Æ
6

Mr. BEREUTER. Without objection, the resolution will be considered as read and open for amendment at any point. I have a relatively brief opening statement on the issue. 

Today, the Europe Subcommittee will mark up H. Res. 390 which 

recognizes the continued importance of transatlantic relations. As 

the author of the resolution, I am pleased to be joined by the Ranking Democrat, Mr. Wexler, the Ranking Democrat of the full International Relations Committee, Mr. Lantos, and the Vice Chairwoman of the Subcommittee, Mrs. Davis, as cosponsors. 

In June, this Subcommittee, in the wake of the difficult debate 

over Iraq, held two hearings on the future of transatlantic relations. During the entire period of debate over Iraq, we read and 

heard all manner of doomsayers pronouncing the end of transatlantic relations and beginning the new, more contentious era in 

U.S.-European relations. 

However, at these hearings, in which we received testimony from 

both American and European experts, we heard that by any measure, the relationship between the United States and the nations of 

Europe, ‘‘old or new,’’ was certainly among the most important foreign relationships of the United States. 

No two regions in the world share a history, a common set of values and a global vision as much as do the United States and Europe. For the most part, our traditional and closest allies are in Europe. In Europe, our core national interests are fully engaged. Our 

trillion dollar economy, our multibillion dollar system of trade and 

our security are integrally linked with European continent. With 

our European partners, we share a wider range of interests and 

higher level of cooperation on issues than with any other region in 

the world, despite our occasional differences. 

According to all the witnesses who testified in June, I believe, 

the time was right to put the debate over the Iraq War behind us 

and to begin to energetically consider how to re-energize the transatlantic relationship in a positive manner which is forward-looking 

and which focuses on developing common strategies to address 

common challenges. 

In a recent speech to the NATO Parliamentary Assembly, this 

Member observed that the Iraq dispute really was not at all a 

straight-forward dispute between Europe and the United States. 

Europe was, in fact, split. As we know, the debate centered on the 

four nations which opposed the war against Iraq, but the debate almost totally ignored the other 18 nations of Europe which joined 

in support for the U.S. policy toward the regime of Saddam Hussein. 

Nevertheless, the harsh rhetoric which we heard on both sides of 

the Atlantic did, in varying degrees, damage the overall relationship between America and some European countries. The American 

public felt deep disappointment, frustration, and anger. This anger 

has abated but has not disappeared in its effect. 

The controversy also did some damage to the reputations of the 

United Nations Security Council, NATO and the European Union, 

especially to the latter’s Common Foreign and Security Policy, in 

which, according to many European leaders, France and Germany 

hoped to dominate. 
7

The resolution we are considering today was developed as a result of those hearings. The measure recognizes the continued importance of the transatlantic relationship and affirms the conviction that the relationship is too important and too strongly developed to allow policy disagreements, such as the one over Iraq, to 

significantly disrupt it. 

In addition, the resolution reaffirms the visibility of transatlantic 

security. 

And finally, H. Res. 390 urges enhanced efforts to develop stronger relationships with our friends and allies in Europe through enhanced dialogue and communication between this nation and Europe, especially through such mechanisms as the various formal 

and informal interparliamentary organizations which we have here 

in the Congress, such as the NATO Parliamentary Assembly, the 

Transatlantic Legislators’ Dialogue and the OSCE Parliamentary 

Assembly. 

I urge my colleagues to adopt the resolution, and I yield such 

time as you may consume to the gentleman from Florida, Mr. 

Wexler. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Bereuter follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE DOUG BEREUTER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEBRASKA, AND CHAIRMAN, SUBCOMMITTEE ON EU- ROPE

Today the Europe Subcommittee will mark up H.Res. 390 which recognizes the 

continued importance of transatlantic relations. 

As the author of this resolution, I am pleased to be joined by our Ranking Democrat, Mr. Wexler, the Ranking Democrat of the full International Relations Committee, Mr. Lantos and the Vice Chairwomen of the Subcommittee, Ms. Davis as 

original sponsors. 

In June, this Subcommittee, in the wake of the difficult debate over Iraq, held 

two hearings on the future of transatlantic relations. During the entire period of debate over Iraq, we read and heard all manner of doomssayers pronouncing the end 

of transatlantic relations and the beginning of a new, more contentious era in U.S.-

European relations. 

However, at these hearings, in which we received testimony from both American 

and European experts, we heard that by any measure, the relationship between the 

United States and the nations of Europe, ‘‘old or new,’’ was certainly among the 

most important foreign relationship of the United States. 

No two regions in the world share a history, a common set of values and a global 

vision as much as do the United States and Europe. For the most part our traditional and closest allies are in Europe. In Europe our core national interests are 

fully engaged. Our trillion dollar economy, our multi-billion dollar system of trade 

and our security are integrally linked with the European continent. With our European partners we share a wider range of interests and a higher level of cooperation 

on issues than with any other region in the world despite our occasional differences. 

According to all of the witnesses who testified in June, the time was right to put 

the debate over the Iraq war behind us and to begin to energetically consider how 

to re-energize the transatlantic relationship in a positive manner which is forwardlooking and which focuses on developing common strategies to address common 

challenges. 

In a recent speech to the NATO Parliamentary Assembly, this Member observed 

that the Iraq dispute, really was not at all a straight-forward dispute between Europe and the United States. Europe was in fact split. As we know, the debate centered on the four nations which opposed war against Iraq. But the debate almost 

totally ignored the other eighteen nations of Europe which joined in support for the 

U.S. policy toward the regime of Saddam Hussein. 

Nevertheless, the harsh rhetoric which we heard on both sides of the Atlantic did, 

in varying degrees, damage the overall relationship between America and some European nations. The American public felt deep disappointment, frustration and 

anger with several European nations, including France and Germany. This anger 

has abated but has not disappeared in its effect. 
8

The controversy also did some damage to the reputations of the U.N. Security 

Council, NATO and the European Union, especially to the latter’s Common Foreign 

and Security Policy in which, according to many European leaders, France and Germany hoped to dominate. 

The resolution we are considering today was developed as a result of those hearings. The measure recognizes the continued importance of the transatlantic relationship and affirms the conviction that the relationship is too important and too 

strongly developed to allow policy disagreements such as the one over Iraq, to significantly disrupt it. 

In addition, the resolution reaffirms the indivisibility of transatlantic security. 

And finally, H.Res. 390 urges enhanced efforts to develop stronger relations with 

our friends and allies in Europe through enhanced dialogue and communication between this nation and Europe especially through such mechanisms as the various 

formal and informal inter-parliamentary organizations which we have here in the 

Congress, such as the NATO Parliamentary Assembly, the Transatlantic Legislators’ Dialogue, and the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly. 

I urge my Colleagues to adopt this resolution.

Mr. WEXLER. Thank you, Chairman Bereuter. 

I want to thank you especially for introducing this resolution, 

and I share your strong belief that there is no more important economic, military and political relationship to the United States during these dangerous and trying times than our transatlantic relationship to Europe. 

The resolution before the Subcommittee expresses the need for 

renewed and meaningful dialogue across the Atlantic as we work 

in concert to address the short- and long-term threats of the proliferation of mass destruction and global terrorism. I hope passage 

of this resolution will help mend tattered transatlantic relations, 

which have moved beyond heated rhetoric in recent weeks and resulted in substantive progress on the ground, including greater 

U.S.-European cooperation in rebuilding Iraq and Afghanistan. 

This resolution also highlights the undeniable fact that the 

present and future of America and Europe are intrinsically interwoven and cannot be separated without grave consequence to either side. 

Finally, it is a reminder of the historic partnership resulting in 

a multitrillion-dollar trade relationship and cooperation in the promotion of human rights, global health, democracy, counterterrorism 

and intelligence. 

Last February, Germany and the Netherlands assumed control of 

the International Security Assistance Force from Turkey, where 

they remain in joint command of the peacekeeping force in Kabul. 

I strongly believe it is in the transatlantic community’s best interest to work jointly through organizations such as NATO, which has 

expanded its scope beyond the Cold War mandate and engaged in 

a new theater of operation in the ‘‘Greater Middle East.’’

I also welcome the recent inauguration in the Netherlands of the 

new NATO Response Force. According to our Ambassador to 

NATO, Mr. Burns,

‘‘The NATO Response Force is an important new military capability for NATO and further evidence of NATO’s ongoing transformation to meet the new threats from global terrorism.’’

Mr. Chairman, I would like to offer a word of caution to our European allies that while most Americans support the strengthening 

of the European Union and the formation of European Security and 

Defense Policy, believing it is in the best security and economic in-
9

terest of our Nation, there are many in Washington who are concerned that the construction of these new European institutions, 

especially the European Security and Defense Policy aspect, are 

being established as a counterweight to America and NATO. 

I strongly believe a European defense capability, including a recent plan by France, Germany, Belgium, and Luxembourg to create 

a new military headquarters, however, goes beyond the scope of 

Berlin Plus and will severely strain transatlantic relations and possibly lead to the dismantling of NATO as we know it. Our European allies must work very closely with us to close the capabilities 

gap in terms of defense spending between us and them. We spent 

roughly $376 billion in 2003, compared with $140 billion spent by 

the 18 NATO allies. 

Despite forward momentum and growing transatlantic cooperation at the recent Madrid Donors Conference, in the United Nations Security Council and in dealing with the threat of Iran, there 

remains a deep rift that cannot be ignored. We would be doing us 

and Europeans a great disservice if we did not evaluate the policy 

divergences that took place over Iraq and take appropriate steps to 

make certain that the two most important actors on the world 

stage worked together in concert, not in opposition. 

Mr. Chairman, it is critical that Europe accept the realities of a 

post-Saddam Iraq and the potential for transformation in the 

‘‘Greater Middle East.’’ At the same time, the Bush Administration, 

which has definitely managed to turn most of Europe against 

America, must understand that military power alone is not necessarily a panacea to guaranteeing our security, fighting terror or 

halting the proliferation of mass destruction. 

Ultimately this cannot be achieved without the assistance of our 

allies in Europe and throughout the world. It is this message of 

friendship, understanding and cooperation that I hope will lay the 

future of transatlantic ties. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for pursuing this resolution. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Wexler follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE ROBERT WEXLER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF FLORIDA

Chairman Bereuter, I want to thank you for introducing this resolution and share 

your strong belief that there is no more important economic, military and political 

relationship to the United States during these dangerous and trying times than our 

Transatlantic relationship with Europe. 

The resolution before the subcommittee expresses the need for renewed and 

meaningful dialogue across the Atlantic as we work in concert to address the short 

and long-term threats of the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and global 

terrorism. I hope passage of this resolution will help mend tattered Transatlantic 

relations, which have moved beyond heated rhetoric in recent weeks and resulted 

in substantive progress on the ground, including greater U.S.-European cooperation 

in rebuilding Iraq and Afghanistan. This resolution also highlights the undeniable 

fact that the present and future of America and Europe are intrinsically interwoven 

and cannot be separated without grave consequence to either side. Finally, it is a 

reminder of the historic partnership resulting in a multi-trillion dollar trade relationship and cooperation in the promotion of human rights, global health, democracy, counter-terrorism and intelligence. 

Since 9/11, America has worked shoulder-to-shoulder with our European allies to 

paralyze financial conduits funding terror and arrest Al Qaeda operatives, while 

also collaborating on a variety of levels to prevent future attacks. Last February, 

Germany and the Netherlands assumed control of the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) from Turkey, where they remain in joint command of the peacekeeping force in Kabul. I strongly believe it is in the Transatlantic communities’ 
10

best interest to work jointly through organizations, such as NATO, which has expanded its scope beyond its Cold War mandate and engaged in a new theater of operation in the ‘‘Greater Middle East.’’ I also welcome the recent inauguration in the 

Netherlands of the new NATO Response Force. According to American Ambassador 

to NATO Nicholas Burns, ‘‘ The NATO Response Force is an important, innovative 

new military capability for NATO, and further evidence of NATO’s on-going transformation to meet the new threats from global terrorism.’’

Like Chairman Bereuter, I would like to offer a word of caution to our European 

allies that while most Americans support the strengthening of the European Union 

and the formation of European Security and Defense Policy (ESDP)—believing it is 

in the best security and economic interest of our nation—there are many in Washington who are concerned that the construction of these new European institutions, 

especially ESDP, are being established as a counterweight to America and NATO. 

I strongly believe a European defense capability, including a recent plan by France, 

Germany, Belgium and Luxembourg to create a new European Union military headquarters, that goes beyond the scope of Berlin Plus would severely strain Transatlantic relations and possibly lead to the dismantling of NATO as we know it. In 

addition, our European allies must close the massive capabilities gap in defense 

spending between the United States and Europe—the U.S. defense budget reached 

$376 billion in 2003 compared to $140 billion spread between 18 NATO allies. 

Despite forward momentum and growing transatlantic cooperation at the recent 

Madrid Donors Conference, in the United Nations Security Council and in dealing 

with the threat of Iran, there remains a deep rift that cannot be ignored. We would 

be doing Americans and Europeans a great disservice if we did not evaluate the policy divergences that took place during the debate over Iraq and take appropriate 

steps to make certain that the two most important actors on the world stage are 

joined together in concert, not opposition. 

Mr. Chairman, it is critical that Europe accept the realities of a post-Saddam Iraq 

and the potential for transformation in the ‘‘Greater Middle East.’’ At the same 

time, the Bush Administration, which has deftly managed to turn most of Europe 

against America, must understand that military power alone is not necessarily a 

panacea to guaranteeing our security, fighting terror or halting the proliferation of 

weapons of mass destruction. Ultimately, these goals cannot be achieved without 

the assistance of our allies in Europe and throughout the world. It is this message 

of friendship, understanding and cooperation that I hope will lay the future of transatlantic ties.

Mr. BEREUTER. Thank you, Mr. Wexler. 

I appreciate the fact that you pointed out the establishment of 

a separate headquarters for ESDP is in violation of the Berlin Plus 

agreement which was unanimously agreed to. 

Are there further opening statements? 

Mrs. Davis. 

Mrs. DAVIS. Thank you. 

Mr. Chairman, I support H. Res. 390 and wish to commend you 

for bringing this measure before the Subcommittee at this time. 

The recent debate over Iraq was a particularly difficult time for 

overall transatlantic relations. Although, as you correctly stated, 

this dispute was with four nations in particular and not the whole 

of Europe, France and Germany are important friends and allies, 

and it was particularly frustrating that we were having such a disagreement with them. 

Now, however, it is time to move on. We must work to reestablish the kind of strong transatlantic relation with all of Europe 

which is required for us to deal effectively with those international 

issues which affect us on both sides of the Atlantic. As the resolution correctly states, the transatlantic relationship is much too important to allow issues such as Iraq, however difficult, to result in 

both us and Europe drifting apart. 

As Chair of the U.S. delegation of the Transatlantic Legislators’ 

Dialogue, I am especially pleased that the resolution mentions the 

importance of this organization and the dialogue the TLD promotes 
11

with counterparts in the European Parliament. As you know, in 

July we had a very successful meeting of the TLD. During that 

meeting, both delegations pledged to strengthening the transatlantic partnership by renewing our pursuit of common values 

such as democracy, human rights and open markets and societies 

and by reinforcing interparliamentary contacts through mechanisms such as additional exchanges and video-conferencing. We 

also agreed to try to enhance the effectiveness of our operations by 

establishing new consultative mechanisms which would serve as an 

‘‘early-warning system’’ which would allow intensified dialogue on 

possible contentious issues at early stages of the legislative process. 

In just 3 weeks, our colleagues from the Parliament will be coming to the United States to continue this discussion. I believe we 

all understand and appreciate the importance of this dialogue and 

the need to continue to support stronger relations with Europe and 

its Union through mechanisms such as these. 

Again, Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you for your efforts on behalf of transatlantic relations and for your support for interparliamentary dialogue. 

I urge passage of this resolution. 

Mr. BEREUTER. Thank you very much, Mrs. Davis. 

It is the lack of food that is getting to you, and I am responsible 

for it. 

I appreciate the leadership that you bring to the Transatlantic 

Legislators’ Dialogue, which is a longstanding effort which was formerly known as the U.S.–E.U. Parliamentary Exchange. 

We have an interesting challenge before us. Mr. Amo Houghton, 

my dear colleague, has invited Members to join a caucus that he 

is taking leadership on. It is the Congressional Caucus on France. 

And I had the pleasure to introduce him to Pierre Lellouche, who 

is here today, a member of the French National Assembly, who is 

the co-Chairman of the U.S. Friendship Group in the French Assembly. They are looking forward to meeting on a routine basis if 

that is possible. 

Are there further opening statements? 

Mr. Delahunt. 

Mr. DELAHUNT. I do not have an opening statement, Mr. Chairman, but I decided to make some observations. 

Mr. BEREUTER. Please do. 

Mr. DELAHUNT. I am reminded of that childhood taunt of ‘‘Sticks 

and stones will break my bones, but words will never hurt me.’’

Well, I think what we have all observed and should take notice 

of, in the course of the past 6 months to a year, while the debate 

on Iraq has raged within this country as well as internationally, 

words do have consequences, serious consequences; and I really 

want to applaud you. Let me also acknowledge Mrs. Davis for her 

efforts in terms of attempting to abate what, if left unattended, 

could be a deteriorating situation between ourselves and our traditional allies, ones with whom we have had differences, ones with 

whom we have had moments of vigorous debate. But that is, I 

would suggest, the essence of democracy. We have it here every 

day. 

You and the Ranking Member speak of Europe being divided. 

Well, we were divided here. In fact, the majority of the Democratic 
12

Caucus voted against the resolution authorizing the President to 

intervene militarily in Iraq. I think we all, both here domestically 

as well as internationally, have to look forward; and we can only 

do that, I suggest, if we are sincere and genuine about where we 

are going and how we get there in a way that is based on neutral 

respect. 

I am proud to sign on as a cosponsor to this resolution———

Mr. BEREUTER. Okay. 

Mr. DELAHUNT [continuing]. And want to thank you for your efforts, in terms of, while acknowledging the differences, trying to get 

us out of this quagmire of finger-pointing and reducing ourselves, 

I think, to a level where that childhood taunt becomes a benchmark. 

Mr. BEREUTER. Thank you, Mr. Delahunt, for your thoughtful 

comments, and I appreciate your kind words for Mrs. Davis and 

myself. 

The last 2 days, three of our colleagues, a bipartisan group, plus 

myself were in Ottawa; and as you may remember, my counterpart, 

a Canadian, to the NATO Parliamentary Assembly had some very 

sharp words to say, which she thought were off-microphone, and so 

did a Minister in the Canadian Government. But the two Speakers 

invited our delegation to come up and spend 2 days with them, the 

Speaker of the House of Commons and the Speaker of the Canadian senate; and it was most productive. And while they did not 

support our military action in Iraq, they are assisting today in rebuilding; and as a matter of fact, in Afghanistan they have, on a 

per capita basis, the largest contribution. 

So I think that kind of interparliamentary dialogue can oftentimes bring a more tolerant discussion. That was the case in the 

Parliamentary Assembly which I participated in, in contrast to the 

Security Council and to the North Atlantic Council and within 

NATO itself. 

I think the fact that we know each other fairly well for a period 

of time, that does lead us to understand the other’s position or at 

least to accept it tolerantly in most cases. 

Are there other opening statements? 

The gentleman from South Dakota, Mr. Janklow. 

Mr. JANKLOW. Mr. Chairman, I do not have a statement, but I 

have just a brief comment. 

Mr. BEREUTER. You are recognized. 

Mr. JANKLOW. Thank you. 

You know, sometimes I think that Iraq is more of a symptom of 

the problem in our relationships than the substance of them, when 

we deal with some of these other countries. 

When you look at that map over there on the wall, you look at 

this country, and recognizing what an incredible melting pot we 

are, a huge amount, a huge amount of our historical immigration 

and culture comes from what we call ‘‘Europe,’’ a lot of different 

countries. We have a tendency at times to take an isolated country 

or two in Europe and call them ‘‘Europe,’’ as opposed to dealing 

with them or thinking of them on an individual basis. 

I think it is just what you said, Mr. Chairman, with respect to 

your recent visit to Canada. I heard a person say a long time ago, 

‘‘Countries do not have permanent relationships; they have perma-
13

nent interests,’’ and I think more and more we see that come into 

play in this complex world that we live in. 

We talk about violation of the Berlin Plus with the FTC, but the 

reality of the situation is, it is going to move forward. People that 

have gone through all the effort of putting together to plan publicly 

announcing on it and a decision having been made, but it is going 

to go forward, irrespective of whether we think it is or is not in violation of some understanding or agreement. 

With respect to foreign trade, more and more all the time as the 

economy has become skewered, they become more protectionist. We 

are not any different than some of these other countries, but the 

reality of the situation is, whether it is militarily, whether it is 

trade, whether it is supportive of other nations through foreign aid 

and support, America, or the United States, not having had a colonial empire, we do not have a unique historical relationship with 

other parts of the world. Our relationships primarily, other than 

this continent, have been built as a result of military escapades 

that our Nation had been about, where we befriended individuals 

afterwards and they befriended us, and we have gone on to become 

immense allies. 

I think this resolution is a great idea, I applaud you and the others for introducing it and cosponsoring it. I think anything that can 

be done to move forward, to continue to move forward, to try to understand other people’s positions is incredibly important, but I also 

think the reality of the situation is, we will continue to live in a 

more and more isolated world all the time, as people look within 

for the support that they need around the world and look without 

for the material support that they need to move forward with their 

political agendas. 

And so I think anything that can be done to continue a dialogue, 

especially in a world as hostile and dangerous as this is, not fearing land armies, not fearing invasions, but fearing what can be 

done utilizing technology and commitments of individuals who are 

basically of a suicidal nature means, really, civilized people of the 

world, all of them, need to figure out how to work together better, 

work together more effectively, more efficiently, and really improve 

the well-being of us here on Earth and those in the future. 

Thank you. 

Mr. BEREUTER. Thank you, Governor. 

Are there further opening statements? 

I see none, but Mr. Wexler, do you want to be recognized? 

Mr. WEXLER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

If I could make a suggestion, to the extent that Members of this 

Subcommittee have not had an opportunity to look at the German 

Marshall Fund, if we could provide that to the Members of the 

Committee, I think that would be a fascinating thing for people to 

read, to get a better understanding of the view of Europeans toward the United States and vice versa. But I think what is most 

telling is the view of Europeans of us; and I think we all could 

learn a great deal from us not putting it in partisan terms. But we 

have a huge perception problem that goes beyond government-togovernment relations. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 
14

Mr. BEREUTER. I think it is a good idea, and as a matter of fact, 

we will do that. I remember the one thing that stood out on that 

report that is absolutely shocking to me is that one out of three 

Germans polled under the age of 30 believed that the United States 

was directly complicit or caused the attack on the World Trade 

Center and the Pentagon on 9/11. It is just incredible. 

Mr. DELAHUNT. Would the gentleman yield for a moment? 

Mr. BEREUTER. Pardon? 

Yes, I will yield. 

Mr. DELAHUNT. I mean, this is kind of a relaxed markup, and I 

think that we are having more of a conversation than we normally 

do. I would concur with the request and just note that the President himself, according to newspaper reports, was really taken 

aback on his trip to Asia by what he saw as the attitude of Muslim 

leaders in terms of their understanding and their perception of the 

United States’ true intentions. 

Now, we all have been active in political life, otherwise we 

wouldn’t be here, and we know that oftentimes there is a great disparity between perception and reality. But again, perception, when 

you’re not talking with folk, becomes their reality. 

And also let me again further throw a cue toward the Chairman 

about these interparliamentary conferences. 

Obviously, government-to-government relationships in many 

ways fill out and define our foreign policy, but my own experience 

in Latin America has been in interparliamentary conferences, relationships are incredibly important in terms of understanding each 

other. So that perception becomes more accurate, whatever it may 

be, and it does change, shift. 

And I can, you know, spend hours relating what good results 

have occurred because of the efforts of Cass Ballenger in Latin 

America, along with Bob Menendez and others, in terms of creating 

interparliamentary relationships that, I think in some cases, might 

very well have avoided serious problems for the United States. 

So I think these things are all important. And you, Mr. Chairman, as a senior Member of the Full Committee, who is highly respected on both sides, I think that putting forth a request for this 

Committee to be polled about attitudes, whether they be in Europe 

or elsewhere on the globe is something that should be considered 

and should be reflected upon. 

You mentioned Germany. When the Irish Independent, the paper 

of record in Ireland, does a poll that is published, pre-Iraq war, 

that says the majority of people in Ireland considered George Bush 

more of a threat to world peace than Saddam Hussein, we have got 

some serious problems; and this is what we better start to deal 

with. 

I yield back and thank the gentleman. 

Mr. BEREUTER. Thank you. 

The gentleman from Massachusetts, I will get to you in a second, 

and I just want to commend you for the work that you yourself do 

in Latin America. I think it is a major contribution. 

The gentleman from Michigan. 

Mr. MCCOTTER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This is a very informal setting. 
15

I would first like to cite your work on this resolution. I think it 

is very kind, especially in light of the European Parliament resolution which I read, which they offered to us. 

I think that when we deal with perception, delicate words are 

nice, but concrete deeds are more important, and so when we hear 

about the numbers of people, perhaps in Germany or somewhere 

else that may think United States was complicitous on September 

11, I believe that they are people beyond redemption. I believe that 

we should not have the time of day to spend with them, even more 

than the Germans who created the Holocaust. I think that if they 

think we did this to our own people, to hell with them; and I will 

not let their perception of America, defending themselves, influence 

America any more than we absolutely have to. 

In terms of France, that is fine. You know, we have a long history with them. I have said it before, but they had an empire, they 

had an empire. I am an Irish Catholic. I know that Britain had an 

empire. I do not want to hear that we are a threat to world peace, 

and we want to control anybody. If that was true, if I worried 

about that perception, I would point out that Paris is currently 

France’s national capital, where maybe after World War I or World 

War II, Paris would be France’s State capital if we were so inclined. But we were not; we buried our dead and left. 

It should never inhibit our duty in those areas. So I appreciate 

your resolution; I will vote for it. I will bite my tongue now and 

vote for it. 

Mr. BEREUTER. Thank you very much, Mr. McCotter. 

In our judgment, our prime responsibility is to—at least to our 

national interest; and the thing that concerns me most about that 

particular group that you’re referring to in Germany, by your description, is that unfortunately they have an influence on others 

who are uninformed or who are still in a juvenile—literally juveniles, and so they can do great damage. 

If there are no further opening comments? 

Mr. BLUMENAUER. I will bide my time. 

Mr. BEREUTER. You do not have to. We rarely get a chance to 

talk to each other in what I think is a proper fashion. 

Are there any amendments to the resolution? 

Seeing none, then the Chair will now entertain a motion that the 

resolution be reported favorably to the Full Committee. 

Thank you. 

Mr. JANKLOW. So move. 

Mr. BEREUTER. The request occurs on the motion to report the 

resolution, H. Res. 390, favorably. 

All in favor, say aye. 

All opposed, no. 

The motion is approved. The bill is reported favorably. 

Without objection, the bill will be reported favorably to the Full 

Committee. I would simply ask staff to make any technical and 

conforming amendments. 

Without objection, hearing no objection, that will be the order. 

I thank my colleagues for their time today and the interest in the 

resolution; and anyone who would like to be a cosponsor can certainly join in that effort before we move the bill from the room 

today. 
16

Mr. WEXLER. Thanks. 

Mr. BEREUTER. The Subcommittee is adjourned. 

Time for lunch. 

[Whereupon, at 1:39 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]

Æ