April 7, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD— SENATE S5557 

BOSNIA SPRING 

∑ Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, 

spring has arrived here in Washington, 

the Grounds of the Capitol are looking 

their best and we welcome the change. 

Unfortunately, spring in Bosnia is not 

a welcome event. Spring in Bosnia 

means the cease-fires of winter melt 

away and the war will resume with all 

its ferocity. 

I have taken this floor many times to 

decry the ethnic cleansing that continues in Bosnia and to urge our Government, and the U.N. Security Council, to act more responsibly in addressing this terrible tragedy. It comes as 

no surprise that those affected by our 

inaction are astonished at our apparent 

indifference, and chastise us for failing 

to uphold basic moral and legal norms. 

On Wednesday, the Washington Post 

printed a portion of a statement by 

Vinko Cardinal Puljic, archbishop of 

Sarajevo. While the United States, 

along with the U.N. Security Council 

and NATO sit on our hands, we cannot 

also cover our ears. The archbishop of 

Sarajevo knows of what he speaks. The 

Senate would do well to listen. 

I ask that the article be printed in 

the RECORD. The article follows: 

[From the Washington Post, Apr. 5, 1995] 

FOR THE RECORD

(By Vinko Cardinal Puljic) 

I, like so many in Bosnia-Herzegovina, am 

astonished and bewildered . . . at the international community’s indifferent, halfhearted, inconsistent and ineffectual response to aggression and ‘‘ethnic cleansing.’’

Not only has [it] not acted decisively, it has 

even contributed to the ethnic division of 

Bosnia and has legitimized aggression by 

failing to uphold basic moral and legal 

norms. If the principles of peace and international 

justice are buried in the soil of the Balkans, 

Western civilization will be threatened. . . . 

I am convinced that there are moral means 

to thwart immoral aggression. The international community must have the will to 

use the means available to it to protect 

threatened populations, to encourage demilitarization and to establish other conditions 

necessary for progress toward peace. The solution cannot be simply to give up and withdraw. If the United Nations and the international community do not now have effective means to respond to the humanitarian 

crisis in Bosnia and elsewhere—and it is 

clear that they do not—then nations have 

the responsibility to take the steps necessary to develop more effective international structures. 

This is not a religious conflict, but some 

would misuse religion in support of ethnic 

division and extreme nationalism. Therefore, 

as a religious leader, I believe I have a special responsibility to stand beside those who 

are victims of injustice and aggression, regardless of their religious, ethnic or national 

identity. I also believe that, even though a 

just peace seems far off, religious and other 

leaders must not wait for an end to war to 

begin the daunting task of reconciling deeply divided communities.

f 

∑ 

THE SUPPLEMENTAL 

APPROPRIATIONS BILL 

∑ Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, last 

night, I voted for final passage of the 

supplemental appropriations bill. 

The bill, as amended by the compromise substitute, is a distinct improvement over the legislation reported by the Appropriations Committee. The compromise reduces Federal spending by nearly $16 billion and 

restores funding to a number of critical 

programs affecting children and education. 

This includes a broad range of programs that I very strongly support: 

Head Start, education reform, safe and 

drug free school programs, the Women 

Infants and Children Program, the 

childcare block grant program, title I 

programs to improve reading, writing, 

and math skills for educationally disadvantaged kids, impact aid, and the 

TRIO Program for first generation college-bound students, and the national 

service college scholarship program—

AmeriCorps. 

However, the legislation still cuts 

too deeply into important programs 

which the American people approve of 

such as assisting the States in protecting the quality and safety of our 

drinking water, the opening of Jobs 

Corps centers already announced, and 

for which communities across the 

country have expended funds and resources and funding for the promised 

environmental cleanup of military 

bases. 

One of the great disappointments on 

this bill was the defeat of the Mikulski 

amendment by a vote of 68 to 32. 

The Mikulski amendment would have 

restored funds for a number of important national programs such as the 

housing program, and also would have 

funded the EPA Center in Bay City, the 

CIESIN facility in Saginaw, and announced Job Corps centers in nine cities across the country, including Flint. 

I have already begun discussions with 

colleagues in an effort to restore some 

of these cuts in conference between the 

House and the Senate.

f 

∑ 

U.S.-HONG KONG POLICY ACT 

REPORT 

∑ Mr. MACK. Mr. President, the March 

31, 1995 report required by the U.S.- 

Hong Kong Policy Act made some useful contributions to the historical 

record of Hong Kong’s transition from 

a dependent territory of the United 

Kingdom to a special administrative 

region of the People’s Republic of 

China. The report correctly assessed 

Governor Patten’s highly touted legislative reforms as modest. 

The account given of threats to press 

freedoms was also important, in light 

of the People’s Republic of China’s recent actions against Hong Kong and 

other journalists. While the report included the case of Xi Yang, the Hong 

Kong reporter imprisoned inside mainland China for ‘‘stealing state financial 

secrets,’’ it would have been appropriate for the report to have included 

the detail that the secrets were 

planned increases in interest rates and 

the sale of gold. 

Most important, the report expressed 

U.S. support for ‘‘continued development of democratic institutions * * * and the conduct of free and 

fair elections after July 1.’’ I hope the 

United States Government is making 

this position clear to the People’s Republic of China in no uncertain terms. 

The report neglected to discuss a 

number of important developments 

which I highlight here because they are 

so critical to the future of the territory. 

Much as China’s treatment of the 

press has had a chilling effect on Hong 

Kong journalists, the People’s Republic 

of China’s harsh and arbitrary treatment of businessmen is having pernicious effects in Hong Kong. The People’s Republic of China frequently arrests, imprisons, and holds incommunicado, foreign businessmen—almost 20 

in the past 3 years—particularly those 

with whom People’s Republic of China 

state-owned enterprises have commercial disputes. For example, at the instigation of the People’s Republic of 

China, James Peng, an Australian citizen, was arrested by Macau police and 

deported to Shenzen in Guandong Province. Mr. Peng’s offense was that he 

won a legal battle to retain control of 

his company, a Sino-foreign joint venture listed on the Shenzen stock exchange. Another businessman, Zhang 

Guei-Xing, who holds an American 

green card, was jailed under horrific 

conditions in a detention camp in 

Zhengzhou for 21⁄2 years. A Miami businessman, Troy McBride, has been detained in Anhui province since midMarch, his passport confiscated, because of a commercial dispute. In the 

People’s Republic of China today, economic disputes have become economic 

crimes. Arrests, detention, and harassment of businessmen are just one more 

business practice. The ultimate goal is 

a settlement involving the surrender of 

property or other assets—in effect, a 

ransom payment. 

Hong Kong’s Independent Commission Against Corruption [ICAC] reports 

a sharp increase in corruption complaints as the People’s Republic of 

China and Hong Kong markets become 

more intertwined. The People’s Republic of China’s treatment of businessmen, the absence of the rule of law, and 

the insidious spread of corruption from 

the mainland to Hong Kong, must be 

included in future U.S.-Hong Kong Policy Act reports. 

The report’s recognition of the lack 

of progress and even stalling on rule of 

law issues within the joint liaison 

group is also important. However, the 

report should have acknowledged that 

the role the joint liaison group has assumed in this transition period is contrary to the terms of the joint declaration, which expressly states that the 

joint liaison group is ‘‘not an organ of 

mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS