[House Hearing, 114 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
VARIOUS MEASURES
=======================================================================
MARKUP
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
ON
H. Res. 634, H. Res. 660, H. Res. 728, H. Res. 729,
H. Res. 750, H. Res. 780, H. Res. 808, H. Res. 810,
H. Res. 821, H.R. 4481, H.R. 5537, H.R. 5732,
and H.R. 5094
__________
JULY 14, 2016
__________
Serial No. 114-207
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.foreignaffairs.house.gov/
or
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
20-747PDF WASHINGTON : 2016
____________________________________________________________________
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office,
Internet:bookstore.gpo.gov. Phone:toll free (866)512-1800;DC area (202)512-1800
Fax:(202) 512-2104 Mail:Stop IDCC,Washington,DC 20402-001
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS
EDWARD R. ROYCE, California, Chairman
CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York
ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida BRAD SHERMAN, California
DANA ROHRABACHER, California GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York
STEVE CHABOT, Ohio ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey
JOE WILSON, South Carolina GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia
MICHAEL T. McCAUL, Texas THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida
TED POE, Texas BRIAN HIGGINS, New York
MATT SALMON, Arizona KAREN BASS, California
DARRELL E. ISSA, California WILLIAM KEATING, Massachusetts
TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania DAVID CICILLINE, Rhode Island
JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina ALAN GRAYSON, Florida
MO BROOKS, Alabama AMI BERA, California
PAUL COOK, California ALAN S. LOWENTHAL, California
RANDY K. WEBER SR., Texas GRACE MENG, New York
SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania LOIS FRANKEL, Florida
RON DeSANTIS, Florida TULSI GABBARD, Hawaii
MARK MEADOWS, North Carolina JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas
TED S. YOHO, Florida ROBIN L. KELLY, Illinois
CURT CLAWSON, Florida BRENDAN F. BOYLE, Pennsylvania
SCOTT DesJARLAIS, Tennessee
REID J. RIBBLE, Wisconsin
DAVID A. TROTT, Michigan
LEE M. ZELDIN, New York
DANIEL DONOVAN, New York
Amy Porter, Chief of Staff Thomas Sheehy, Staff Director
Jason Steinbaum, Democratic Staff Director
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
MARKUP ON
H. Res. 634, Recognizing the importance of the United States-
Republic of Korea-Japan trilateral relationship to counter
North Korean threats and nuclear proliferation, and to ensure
regional security and human rights............................. 2
Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to H. Res. 634 offered
by the Honorable Matt Salmon, a Representative in Congress
from the State of Arizona.................................... 6
H. Res. 660, Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives
to support the territorial integrity of Georgia................ 10
H. Res. 728, Supporting human rights, democracy, and the rule of
law in Cambodia................................................ 17
Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to H. Res. 728 offered
by the Honorable Alan S. Lowenthal, a Representative in
Congress from the State of California........................ 22
H. Res. 729, Expressing support for the expeditious consideration
and finalization of a new, robust, and long-term Memorandum of
Understanding on military assistance to Israel between the
United States Government and the Government of Israel.......... 28
H. Res. 750, Urging the European Union to designate Hizballah in
its entirety as a terrorist organization and increase pressure
on it and its members.......................................... 32
H. Res. 780, Urging respect for the constitution of the
Democratic Republic of the Congo in the democratic transition
of power in 2016............................................... 37
Amendment to H. Res. 780 offered by the Honorable Edward R.
Royce, a Representative in Congress from the State of
California, and chairman, Committee on Foreign Affairs....... 44
Amendment to H. Res. 780 offered by the Honorable Christopher
H. Smith, a Representative in Congress from the State of New
Jersey....................................................... 46
H. Res. 808, Calling on the Government of the Islamic Republic of
Iran to release Iranian-Americans Siamak Namazi and his father,
Baquer Namazi.................................................. 47
H. Res. 810, Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives
regarding the life and work of Elie Wiesel in promoting human
rights, peace, and Holocaust remembrance....................... 50
Amendment to H. Res. 810 offered by the Honorable Edward R.
Royce........................................................ 54
H. Res. 821, Urging the Government of Gabon to respect democratic
principles during the August 2016 presidential elections....... 55
Amendment to H. Res. 821 offered by the Honorable Gregory W.
Meeks, a Representative in Congress from the State of New
York......................................................... 59
H.R. 4481, To amend the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 to provide
assistance for developing countries to promote quality basic
education and to establish the goal of all children in school
and learning as an objective of the United States foreign
assistance policy, and for other purposes...................... 60
Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to H.R. 4481 offered by
the Honorable Edward R. Royce................................ 88
H.R. 5537, To promote internet access in developing countries and
update foreign policy toward the internet, and for other
purposes....................................................... 110
Amendment to H.R. 5537 offered by the Honorable Edward R. Royce 126
H.R. 5732, To halt the wholesale slaughter of the Syrian people,
encourage a negotiated political settlement, and hold Syrian
human rights abusers accountable for their crimes.............. 127
Amendment to H.R. 5732 offered by the Honorable Mark Meadows, a
Representative in Congress from the State of North Carolina.. 166
Amendment #53 to H.R. 5732 offered by the Honorable Ileana Ros-
Lehtinen, a Representative in Congress from the State of
Florida...................................................... 170
Amendment #54 to H.R. 5732 offered by the Honorable Ileana Ros-
Lehtinen..................................................... 171
Amendment to H.R. 5732 offered by the Honorable Ted S. Yoho, a
Representative in Congress from the State of Florida......... 174
H.R. 5094, To contain, reverse, and deter Russian aggression in
Ukraine, to assist Ukraine's democratic transition, and for
other purposes................................................. 191
Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to H.R. 5094 offered by
the Honorable Eliot L. Engel, a Representative in Congress
from the State of New York................................... 215
Amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to
H.R. 5094 offered by the Honorable Gerald E. Connolly, a
Representative in Congress from the Commonwealth of Virginia. 245
APPENDIX
Markup notice.................................................... 252
Markup minutes................................................... 253
Markup summary................................................... 255
The Honorable Christopher H. Smith, a Representative in Congress
from the State of New Jersey: Prepared statement............... 257
The Honorable David Cicilline, a Representative in Congress from
the State of Rhode Island: Prepared statement.................. 258
The Honorable Michael T. McCaul, a Representative in Congress
from the State of Texas: Prepared statement.................... 260
The Honorable David A. Trott, a Representative in Congress from
the State of Michigan: Prepared statement...................... 261
VARIOUS MEASURES
----------
THURSDAY, JULY 14, 2016
House of Representatives,
Committee on Foreign Affairs,
Washington, DC.
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:04 a.m., in
room 2172, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Edward Royce
(chairman of the committee) presiding.
Chairman Royce. This committee will come to order.
Pursuant to notice, we meet today to mark up 13 bipartisan
measures. And without objection, all members may have 5 days to
submit statements or extraneous materials on today's business.
As members were notified yesterday, we intend to consider
12 of today's 13 bipartisan measures en bloc, and then we will
consider the Ukraine bill.
And so without objection, the following items previously
provided to members and in your packets will be considered en
bloc and are considered as read.
House Resolution 634,--I don't think we need to go
beyond--no. I think we will just do it very efficiently here.
House Resolution 660; House Resolution 728--but let me
mention deg. the Salmon amendment 146 in the nature of a
substitute to House Resolution 634; House Resolution
660, as I said deg.; House Resolution 728, with the
Lowenthal amendment 78 in the nature of a substitute; House
Resolution 729; House Resolution 750; House Resolution 780,
with Royce amendment 131 and Smith amendment to House
Resolution 780; House Resolution 808; House Resolution 810,
with Royce amendment 139; House Resolution 821, with the Meeks
amendment to House Resolution 821; H.R. 4481, with the Royce
amendment 130 in the nature of a substitute; H.R. 5537, with a
Royce amendment to that H.R. 5537; H.R. 5732, with Meadows
amendment 286, Ros-Lehtinen amendment 53, Ros-Lehtinen
amendment 54, and the Yoho amendment 104.
[The information referred to follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman Royce. Now, the ranking member is on his way. And
here he is.
As a token of my appreciation for the extensive bipartisan
work that went into today's business, I am going to limit to
two sentences per measure my comments.
So first, I want to thank Mr. Salmon for his leadership on
House Resolution 634. This expresses support for increased
trilateral cooperation with our Japanese and Korean allies, and
this support is critical, given North Korea's continued
belligerence.
I also want to thank Judge Poe and Mr. Connolly for House
Resolution 660, which urges the United States to deepen
cooperation with Georgia, especially through strengthening the
country's self-defense capabilities.
Next year, the current memorandum of understanding
regarding U.S. military assistance to Israel will expire, so I
want to thank Chairman Emeritus Ros-Lehtinen and Mr. Deutch for
introducing House Resolution 729, which urges the
administration to work expeditiously to finalize a new robust
agreement with our key security partner.
Few threats to Israel are as great as that posed by the
Iranian proxy Hezbollah. So I want to recognize the good work
of Mr. Deutch on House Resolution 750, which urges the European
Union to designate Hezbollah as a terrorist organization.
I also want to thank Mr. Smith and Ms. Bass for introducing
House Resolution 780, urging respect for free and fair
elections in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Elections
that have been delayed by President Kabila, as he seeks to
avoid a clear constitutional requirement that he step down from
power.
House Resolution 821 urges Gabon to hold free and fair
elections this August. Gabon is not on a good track. Election
observers, including the National Democratic Institute, report
the possibility of violence during the election period. If past
elections are an example, voter lists and vote counting will
surely be manipulated. The Gabonese people deserve better.
Unfortunately, with no Presidential term limits in place, this
could be the low standard.
We also consider House Resolution 808, which calls on Iran
to immediately release Iranian Americans Siamak Namazi and his
father, Baquer Namazi, who are being held hostage by that
regime in Evin prison. The regime in Tehran has not changed its
ways, and it continues to threaten the United States, threaten
our allies, and threaten our citizens.
Our last resolution recognizes the great life and work of
the recently deceased activist and historian, Elie Wiesel. It
urges the continuation of his tremendous efforts to never
forget and to ensure the tragedies of the Holocaust are never
repeated.
We also consider H.R. 4481, the Education for All Act,
which increases direction and accountability for U.S. efforts
to improve access to basic education in developing countries,
particularly for girls and children affected by conflict and
crisis. And I want to thank Ranking Member Engel and Mr. Smith
for their good inputs into this measure and have welcomed, in
particular, the bill's emphasis on girls' access to education
and the importance of parental involvement in their children's
schooling.
Next, we turn to the Digital Global Access Policy Act,
which will make it U.S. policy to alert the private sector to
infrastructure projects in developing countries so that
companies have the option of installing Internet access prior
to a project's completion. This build-once policy is common
sense, and it will help more people in developing countries get
Internet access.
And lastly, the ongoing atrocities in Syria continue to
shock the world, so I am proud to be an original cosponsor of
the Caesar Syrian Civilian Protection Act of 2016, which should
make it harder for the Assad regime to acquire the tools to
keep bombing and to keep gassing and to keep killing Syrians.
And I thank our ranking member, Mr. Engel, who has long
been at the forefront of Syria policy. And I now recognize the
ranking member for his remarks.
Mr. Engel. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for
your kind words, and thank you for calling this markup. We are
going into our summer recess with a bang, taking up 13 measures
this morning, and I want to thank our members on both sides of
the aisle for all their hard work.
I am going to focus first on a bill that the chairman just
mentioned that I introduced, and it is one of the measures we
are considering en bloc. Earlier this week, Chairman Royce and
I introduced the Caesar Syrian Civilian Protection Act.
One of the most remarkable moments for me as ranking member
took place 2 years ago when the man known as Caesar visited
this committee. Our colleagues will remember that day very
vividly. He was a photographer who worked for the Assad
Government in Syria who defected to the opposition. He brought
with him horrific photographic evidence of violence and torture
and killing that the regime had inflicted upon its own people.
The need for American leadership to end this crisis has
never been greater, and my bill would provide the
administration with even more tools to help end the bloodshed
and usher in a political transition. This bill would impose new
sanctions on any parties that continue to do business with the
Assad regime, but leaves flexibility for the administration so
that if negotiations go forward, sanctions could be waived on a
case-by-case basis to keep things moving along.
The bill also addresses war crimes and crimes against
humanity that have been so obvious in this conflict by
facilitating evidence collection and requiring a report to name
and shame those responsible for human rights violations against
the Syrian people.
Lastly, this bill strengthens oversight of our cross-border
assistance going into Syria and requires a report on the
potential effectiveness, risks, and requirements of a no-fly
zone over or safe zone in Syria. I am grateful to the chairman
for joining me to introduce this bill, and I ask that all
members support it.
We have 11 other measures we are taking up en bloc, and I
am glad to support all of them. Mr. Salmon's resolution,
underscoring the importance of the U.S.-South Korea-Japan
trilateral relationship, enhances regional security and holds
North Korea accountable on its atrocious human rights record.
Mr. Poe's resolution expresses support for Georgia's
territorial integrity and condemns Putin's aggression and
supports the people of Georgia. Mr. Lowenthal's resolution
supports democracy, human rights, and the rule of law in
Cambodia, and urges Cambodia's Government, headed by the same
Prime Minister since 1985, to respect the democratic
aspirations of its people. Ms. Ros-Lehtinen's measure calling
for a new long-term memorandum of understanding between the
United States and Israel demonstrates our steadfastness in our
support of Israel's ability to defend itself. Mr. Deutch's
resolution appropriately calls on the European Union to
designate Hezbollah in its entirety as a terrorist
organization. Mr. Smith's resolution urges respect for the
Constitution of the Democratic Republic of the Congo in this
year's transfer of power. And Chairman Royce and I were in the
Democratic Republic of the Congo together just a few months
ago.
The chairman's measure calling on Iran's leaders to release
Iranian Americans Siamak Namazi and his father, Baquer Namazi.
It is outrageous that Iran continues to detain Americans on
trumped up charges, and we need to keep holding Iran's feet to
the fire on these issues.
Another resolution from Mr. Smith urges Gabon's Government
to respect and uphold democratic principles in the upcoming
Presidential elections. The Education for All Act, sponsored by
my neighbor from New York, Nita Lowey, helps ensure that
expanding access to basic education remains a foreign policy
priority in developing countries. A resolution from another New
York colleague, Mr. Israel, honors the life and work of Elie
Wiesel, a constant example of the sort of encourage needed to
stand up against hatred and evil.
And lastly, the chairman's Digital GAP Act, which I am
happy to cosponsor, promotes our interest in seeing more people
around the world get online. And I thank the chairman for his
work on this measure.
These are all good pieces of legislation I am glad to
support. Again, I thank everyone for their hard work. I wish
everyone a good summer break.
I ask unanimous consent to enter into the record a
statement of support for H.R. 4481, the Education for All Act,
from my good friend and ranking member of the Appropriations
Committee and author of the bill, Mrs. Lowey.
And I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Royce. Mr. Rohrabacher of California.
Mr. Rohrabacher. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. And let
me note that I certainly support almost all of the bills that
are being presented en bloc to us, but I have an absolute deep
opposition to the bill that is aimed at Georgia and the
situation in Georgia.
Again, we have heard over and over again misinformation
based on an irrational hostility toward Russia. We see this
over and over again. We are leading the world not to a new cold
war but the possibility of a real war with Russia; Russia who
pulled back their military forces from a large chunk of Europe
peacefully; Russia that has, yes, made some mistakes and
actually done some things that are worthy of condemning.
But if we take a look at what happened in Georgia and what
the situation is, Georgia had a truce with warring factions in
that part of the world. And what happened is that Georgia
withdrew from the Soviet Union after the fall of Communism,
which it had every right to do.
There are two provinces of Georgia that had been given to
Georgia by Joseph Stalin, two provinces that did not want to be
part of Georgia, traditionally, historically, were not
comfortable with having the Georgians over them: Ossetia and
Abkhazia. Those two provinces immediately after the withdrawal
from Russia began--there was an insurgency movement for
independence for those two provinces, very similar to what we
saw in Kosovo and Serbia. We sided with the Kosovars, by the
way, because they had a right of self-determination.
While the fighting that went on was so bloody that there
was a truce that was reached with negotiations, Russia involved
themselves in that truce by agreeing to have observers to that
agreement. That truce lasted for years, until the United States
decided that we were going to work with Georgia to bring
Georgia into NATO. NATO, an armed alliance aimed specifically
at Russia.
And so we decided to bring Georgia into NATO, and Russia
counteracted by offering the people in Ossetia and Abkhazia
Russian citizenship if they wanted it, which was then countered
by Georgia in an invasion of those two provinces. We keep
talking about an aggression by Russia against Georgia. The
truce that lasted--the truce that was there, the peace that was
there was violated by Georgia, and what we call the invasion of
Georgia was a retaliation. The very next day, they did not let
the Georgians get away--into Georgia.
And by the way, when the Georgians broke that truce and
invaded Abkhazia and Ossetia with their army, they killed
unarmed Russian observers of that truce agreement. Now, I don't
know what we would do if there are American observers of a
peace truce and they ended up being murdered by some people
coming in, unarmed, I might add, coming in to make sure that
their country took over two provinces like, I might say, just
exactly like Mr. Eliot and I were very, very active making sure
that the Serbians didn't get to kill everybody who got in their
way, wouldn't be part of the greater Serbia after the breakup
of Yugoslavia.
And the fact is that Georgia today--we keep talking about
the Russian aggression on Georgia. The Russian troops that we
are talking about only went into those two provinces. They are
now, yes, in those two provinces. And what we should do is make
an agreement for any withdrawal of those troops by letting
Ossetia and Abkhazia have a vote on where they want to be. Let
them have a vote that is taken by the OSCE and down there could
verify that vote. Let them make that determination.
What we are doing is a hostile anti-Russian act in the name
of trying to in some way make up for some act of aggression
that did not take place with Russia. Russia retaliated against
someone who had already broken a truce and broken the peace.
And by the way, I have said that a dozen times here. It is
always ignored. Condoleezza Rice was right at that table when I
said exactly the same thing, and instead of denying it, she
went around it.
Now, I think that if we want to have peace in the world, we
have to have a good working relationship with Russia. And
instead, in an irrational hostility toward Russia, based on the
fact that Stalin not only did this thing with Ossetia and
Abkhazia, giving it to Georgia, but he murdered millions of
people, Ukrainians. Stalin, and during the Soviet time,
murdered millions of people in these subjugated areas, whether
the Balkans or whether it is up in Latvia, Estonia, and
Lithuania, and now those people have a historic grudge. We
cannot let ourselves be pushed into a war with Russia because
there is a historic grudge that is going on among those people.
And if we are going to have peace in the world, we have to
be sure of what we are doing and be honest about it, and we
haven't been with Russia dealing with Georgia and dealing with
the Baltic States, which I have not seen any military
aggression going on in the Baltic States. Yet, we have B-52
bombers--B-52 bombers--which are nuclear weapons delivery
systems flying straight toward Russia and turning around as
they get over the Baltic States. This is insane.
What we would do if Russian bombers were headed straight
into us--I mean, we are not talking about cruising along a
coastline or cruising along boundary lines, we are talking
about a war-type maneuver. And we are doing that in Georgia. We
are doing that in the Baltics. It is ridiculous. And I would
oppose this particular part of these bills today, but I support
the rest of them.
Chairman Royce. So now we go to Mr. Gerry Connolly of
Virginia.
Mr. Connolly. I thank the chair, and I thank the ranking
member for bringing before the committee H. Res. 660,
expressing support for the territorial integrity of Georgia. I
also want to welcome the Ambassador of Georgia to this markup,
who has joined us today.
I introduced this resolution with my friend and colleague
and cochair of the congressional caucus in Georgia, Judge Ted
Poe, who unfortunately is not with us today.
This resolution serves as a clear and unequivocal statement
in support of the sovereign territory of Georgia and reiterates
the longstanding United States policy to not recognize
territorial changes effected by force as dictated by the
Stimson Doctrine, established in 1932--not a new idea, not an
anti-Putin idea--1932, by then-Secretary of State Henry
Stimson.
In Georgia and elsewhere in the region, revisionist talk
notwithstanding, Russia has committed gross violations of these
principles by fomenting unrest and aiding separatist movements
in the countries along its periphery. Foundational,
multilateral agreements reached for the purpose of maintaining
a peaceful and stable international order, such as the Helsinki
Final Act of 1975 and the charter of the United Nations itself,
have been willfully disregarded by Russia at Vladimir Putin's
behest.
This resolution condemns strongly the forceable and illegal
occupation of Abkhazia and South Ossetia regions in Georgia,
and calls on Russia to withdraw its troops from those
territories of another sovereign country. Phony elections with
troops of a foreign power all over territory should be
rejected. Those aren't Democratic instruments.
Mr. Rohrabacher. Would the gentleman yield for a question
at that point that you just made?
Mr. Connolly. I would.
Mr. Rohrabacher. Would you say elections that--would you
agree that the solution to this would be elections in those
provinces under the supervision of the OSCE, let those people
decide?
Mr. Connolly. I would argue that with Russian troops in
those territories, no such election could ever be valid. And
the first order of business, like in the Ukraine and the
Crimea--which we are going to address separately--they must
withdraw. You cannot have any confidence in an election when
Russian troops are all over your territory. An election at the
point of the gun? What democrat, with a small D, in America
could ever consent to that? None of us can. None of us should.
This committee has an opportunity right now with this
resolution and with the Ukrainian resolution to follow to make
a clarion statement that can be heard in Moscow. We will be
unwavering in insisting on the territorial sovereignty of
sovereign states, whether Putin likes it or not, whether there
was Soviet history or not. We are where we are today, and we
don't solve problems in Europe at the point of a gun.
Mr. Rohrabacher. Would the gentleman yield for another
question?
Mr. Connolly. I would happily yield to my friend.
Mr. Rohrabacher. Do you recognize or do you not recognize
that the military action--that the initiator of the violence
that you are condemning was the Georgian army that broke a
long-lasting truce in that area and thus resulted in the
occupation forces that you were talking about?
Mr. Connolly. I would say, reclaiming my time to my friend,
believe it or not, there are international mechanisms for
dispute resolution. They do not include the invasion and
occupation for 8 long years of another country's sovereign
territory. That is not how we solve disputes.
Mr. Rohrabacher. The question that I had to you was do you
recognize----
Mr. Connolly. I yield again my time to my friend.
Mr. Rohrabacher [continuing]. That was the actual Georgians
and not the Russians that initiated that violence?
Mr. Connolly. Again, that is my friend's view of history,
and I respect my friend, but there is another point of view
about that history. And those disputes can be resolved in a
peaceful manner, but they cannot be resolved so long as there
are Russian troops occupying territory of another country.
Certainly, my friend would agree that this territory is
Georgian. That is not in dispute. And certainly, my friend
would also agree, there are Russian troops in Georgian
territory. Now, whether my friend wants to aid and abet Putin
in his hegemony and occupying and annexing, as he did illegally
in the Crimea, this territory of Georgia is a different matter.
But I am urging my colleagues to reject my friend's
argument and to wholeheartedly endorse this resolution so the
statement from this committee representing the foreign affairs
function of the United States Congress is as crystal clear as
can be so there is no ambiguity.
With that, I yield back.
Chairman Royce. And we go now to Mr. Chabot of Ohio.
Mr. Chabot. I thank the gentleman.
I would like to commend you, Mr. Chairman and the ranking
member, for bringing these bills before the committee today.
These are all important measures, and it is encouraging to see
the hard work of our colleagues that are being considered
today.
And again, the nature of this committee, for the most part,
on a bipartisan manner, oftentimes the disagreements aren't
necessarily between Republicans and Democrats; they are
oftentimes between Republicans and Democrats and one or a few
members of this committee sometimes. But--and I don't say that
in a critical way.
I rise in support of H. Res. 728, a bill that reaffirms the
U.S. commitment to promoting democracy, human rights, and the
rule of law in Cambodia. I am an original cosponsor of the
bill, and I also serve as cochair of the Congressional Cambodia
Caucus, along with my colleague, Mr. Lowenthal, and I commend
him for offering this bill that I am talking about.
In recent months, we have held a number of briefings and
meetings with the State Department officials, with Cambodian
Americans, as well as NGOs engaged in democracy building and
rural law issues in Cambodia. And I have to say, I am very
concerned about the situation there. Prime Minister Hun Sen
continues to use bully tactics to sway the elections in his
favor, and he has obviously been in control, in power in
Cambodia for a long time. I believe he is the longest, at
least, strong man serving in all of Asia.
Opposition leader Sam Rainsy, who I have met with many
times over the years, both in Cambodia and here, and who Mr.
Lowenthal and I met with just last month, has real doubts about
his ability even to return to Cambodia for fear of being in
prison there on trumped-up charges, or worse. And now the
deputy opposition leader Kem Sokha has seen charges brought
against him.
And there is reason to believe that there will be an
intensifying crackdown on opposition prior to the election,
which puts the election itself and its credibility in doubt,
unfortunately, because Cambodia has the potential of being a
truly great country and a very important part of the world. The
people still should be living under much better circumstances
than they are. It is obviously much better than it was when the
Khmer Rouge was in power, when the killing fields occurred, and
a quarter of the population was wiped out on the basis of, for
example, whether you wore glasses or whether you had an
education or a whole range of other issues.
So it is not nearly as bad as it was back then clearly, but
it should be so much better. And, unfortunately, because of the
leadership of Hun Sen, the democracy that ought to be taking
place in that country right now is being to a considerable
degree thwarted. And if this behavior by Hun Sen and his
supporters is allowed to continue and a suppression of the
opposition and coercion of the opposition, in many cases, this
could deal a serious blow to the democratic process just before
the upcoming 2018 election.
So I believe that this legislation will send a strong
signal that the United States is paying close attention to the
situation in Cambodia.
I want to, again, thank Mr. Lowenthal for his leadership on
this bill and on all issues in Cambodia, and I appreciate his
cooperation in working on this issue, again, in a bipartisan
way. So thank you very much.
And I urge my colleagues to support it and the other
legislation that we have discussed this morning and will
discuss, and I yield back my time.
Chairman Royce. Ted Deutch of Florida.
Mr. Deutch. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. Thanks to you and Ranking
Member Engel for, again, working in the spirit of
bipartisanship that has marked the leadership of this
committee.
I am proud to support this good slate of bills today, and I
would like to thank Ranking Member Engel for his continued
leadership on Syria with the Caesar Syrian Civilian Protection
Act. I am also proud to cosponsor Congressman Poe and
Congressman Connolly's resolution supporting Georgia's
territorial integrity.
And I would make a point of offering our thoughts and our
prayers to Judge Poe as he goes home to get well.
I also want to thank Chairman Royce and Mr. Connolly for
introducing H. Res. 808, calling on the Government of Iran to
release American citizens Siamak and Baquer Namazi. We cannot
and we must not be silent as Iran continues to unlawfully
detain American citizens, and we won't stop until the Namazis
are released. And we also will not stop--will not stop--until
Bob Levinson returns home to his family. He has now been
separated from them for 9\1/2\ years.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to just briefly talk about three
of the measures before us that I am proud to have introduced.
First, I would like to thank my friend and Chairman Ileana Ros-
Lehtinen for working with me to introduce H.R. 729, which urges
the expeditious conclusion of a new memorandum of understanding
between the United States and Israel. I thank the many members
of this committee who are also cosponsors. This resolution now
has over 270 cosponsors, which underscores the deep bipartisan
support for the U.S.-Israel relationship in this Congress.
I traveled to Israel last week to assess the current
security situation, and it is clear that Israel continues to
face unprecedented threats from Hamas rockets in the south to
Hezbollah's more than 100,000 rocket arsenal to ISIS
affiliates, both on the Syrian border and on the Sinai. And it
is because of the strong support from the United States that
Israel is able to defend itself against these threats, many of
which threaten our own strategic interests in the region.
But the conclusion of this MOU is about more than just
shared security threats. A new 10-year MOU will serve as the
backbone of this relationship, and it sends a message to the
entire world that the United States and Israel stand together.
The administration has made clear that it wants to conclude the
MOU as quickly as possible, that it is prepared to offer Israel
the largest aid package to date. And I heard many encouraging
things from those in Israel last week about the desire to reach
an agreement.
By passing this resolution today, Congress will go on
record with the overwhelming bipartisan support for the U.S.-
Israel relationship, and I urge my colleagues to support it.
Second, I urge the committee to support H. Res. 750, which
calls on the European Union to designate the whole of Hezbollah
as a terrorist organization. I thank my colleagues,
Representatives Bilirakis, Israel, Kelly, Lieu, Jeffries,
Zeldin, and Davis, for joining me in introducing this
resolution.
In 2012, Congress passed a resolution that I authored with
Congressman Kelly calling on the EU to designate Hezbollah. In
2013, the EU designated the military wing of Hezbollah. Mr.
Chairman, we all know there is no distinction between the
military and political wings of a terrorist organization. There
is only one Hezbollah; it is a terrorist organization. This
country makes no distinction. Canada makes no distinction. The
Gulf Cooperation Council and the Arab League make no
distinction.
Hezbollah is responsible for terrorist attacks in Europe,
Latin America, and in Asia. It has well over 100,000 rockets
pointed at Israel. Its fighters are on the ground in Syria
doing Iran's dirty work helping the Assad regime slaughter tens
of thousands of innocent Syrians.
This organization uses the international financial system
to fund its worldwide criminal enterprises, which in turn fund
its terror activities. And I applaud our allies in Europe for
the work they have done to crack down on Hezbollah's criminal
activities. That is why they should take the next logical step
of designating the entirety of Hezbollah as a terrorist
organization. This designation will allow the EU to work even
more closely with American authorities to prevent Hezbollah
from using the international banking system to fund its global
terror. I urge my colleagues to support this good and timely
bill.
And finally, I would like to thank the committee for moving
swiftly to bring up H. Res. 810, recognizing the life and the
incredible contributions of Elie Wiesel. It is difficult to
truly capture the immense positive impact that Elie Wiesel had
on our world.
After surviving one of humanity's darkest moments, he
worked to keep alive the memories and the stories of the
millions of lives that were lost. He committed himself to
fighting for the voiceless. He refused to stay silent as
atrocities transpired against others. He was a source of
inspiration for millions of people throughout the world, and he
will forever live in history as one of the greatest and most
influential and the bravest figures of his time.
By passing this resolution today, particularly today, after
the challenging month that our own Nation has had, we honor
Elie Wiesel. And we recommit ourselves to overcoming even the
most insurmountable of obstacles. We inspire ourselves to
greater tolerance and to upholding the principle of never
again.
I appreciate it very much, Mr. Chairman. And I yield back.
Chairman Royce. Thank you, Mr. Deutch.
We go now to Ileana Ros-Lehtinen.
Ms. Ros-Lehtinen. Thank you so much, Chairman Royce and
Ranking Member Engel, for bringing before the committee my
resolution, H. Res. 729, which is simple bipartisan common
sense, and, as my colleague, Congressman Deutch, pointed out,
has the support of over 270 cosponsors, including almost every
single member of our committee. It calls upon the
administration to conclude a new robust and long-term MOU on
military assistance to Israel.
I also wanted to express my support for H.R. 5732, the
Caesar Syrian Civil Protection Act. In 2012, we passed in this
committee a bill I authored, the Iran Threat Reduction and
Syria Human Rights Act, which later became law, and part of our
bill before us builds upon those sanctions. And I have offered
two amendments that I think add to what we are trying to
accomplish.
And later today, Mr. Chairman, as you know, I will convene
a hearing in our subcommittee on a GAO report that Ted Deutch,
Ron DeSantis, Gerry Connolly, and I requested on undelivered
humanitarian assistance into Syria. And I would also like to
commend my friend, Mark Meadows, for offering his important
amendment to name and shame the human rights violators in
Syria. And I yield back.
Chairman Royce. Mr. Lowenthal, were you seeking time? Yes,
Alan.
Mr. Lowenthal. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you
for working with me.
And thank you, Ranking Member Engel, for bringing up House
Resolution 728 supporting human rights, democracy, and the rule
of law in Cambodia.
You know, Mr. Chair, you have been a leader on human rights
and the rule of law in Cambodia for years, and I was so pleased
to work with you to bring this resolution forward.
I also want to thank Congressman Chabot. You have worked
with me as the cochair on the Cambodia Caucus. We have brought
together a bipartisan approach to democracy and the rule of law
in Cambodia, and I just want to thank you as we bring this
resolution forward.
And I also want to thank Chairman Matt Salmon, who has been
the Republican lead on this resolution. He brought it up in the
Asia Subcommittee markup last week, where it was passed, and I
want to thank him for working with us and his leadership on
this issue. It is very much appreciated.
Cambodia holds great promise for being one of the few open,
free, and democratic societies in a region where democracy has
been on the defensive. However, in recent years, the Cambodian
Government, presided by the Prime Minister Hun Sen for the past
31 years, has severely cracked down on the political opposition
and all forms of dissent.
This resolution outlines numerous instances of political
violence since the 2013 national elections, which prolonged Hun
Sen's grip on power and were marred by allegations of voting
irregularities. The Cambodian Government has undertaken a
comprehensive campaign to undermine the political opposition.
Last year, the Cambodian Government revived a 7-year-old
defamation charge against opposition leader Sam Rainsy,
expelling him from the Parliament and forcing him into self-
imposed exile. Since then, the government has sought to arrest
Kem Sokha, the deputy opposition leader who remains under
effective house arrest.
And just this last weekend, prominent political activist
and outspoken critic of the government, Kem Ley, was brutally
gunned down in the streets of Phnom Penh. The true motive of
his killing is not yet known, but the current unrest in
Cambodia and the long history of political assassinations have
led many to suspect the government's involvement in his murder.
Just yesterday, I spoke with Mr. Kem Sokha, the deputy
opposition leader. He told me now that he not only fears arrest
by the government but that now he truly fears for his life. The
deteriorating political situation in Cambodia demands action
from the United States. That is why it is so important that we
pass this resolution and show that Congress stands with the
people of Cambodia and reaffirms our commitment to democracy,
to human rights, and the rule of law in Cambodia.
By passing House Resolution 728 today, we will send an
important signal to the Cambodian Government that political
violence of any kind will not be tolerated and that the
Cambodian people must be able to enjoy freedom of speech and
freedom to choose their own leaders.
Again, I urge my colleagues to support the resolution and
thank Chairman----
Mr. Rohrabacher. Would the gentleman yield?
Mr. Lowenthal. Yes.
Mr. Rohrabacher. Would the gentleman yield?
Mr. Lowenthal. Yes, I will.
Mr. Rohrabacher. Let me just commend Congressman Lowenthal
for his unstopping energy that he puts into this effort to
bring peace and democracy to Cambodia.
Over the years, I have tried to be supportive of his
efforts. And I have been to Cambodia a number of times. It is
time for Hun Sen to go. There was an argument that Hun Sen
helped get rid of Pol Pot, who was a monster who murdered
millions of his own people. Whatever happened in the past does
not justify Hun Sen's continuing iron-fisted grip. And this is
crony capitalism or crony communism, however you describe it in
Cambodia. And we are going to have--they deserve our support
for creating a more democratic society there.
And thank you, Mr. Lowenthal, for all you are doing in this
regard.
Mr. Lowenthal. Thank you.
Chairman Royce. I will just make the observation that we
are going to have business on the floor at 10:05, so if any of
the members here could submit their statements for the record,
that would be very helpful.
We are going to go to Mr. Weber of Texas.
Mr. Weber. I thank the gentleman, thank the chairman.
And I am going to speak on 660. I want to thank my good
friend, Congressman Poe from Texas, for his excellent work on
the resolution. Seems there has been some discussion about it.
I will put my good friend, Mr. Connolly from Virginia, down as
a ``lean yes'' and our good friend from California as an
``undecided.''
I do want to commend the work that Congressman Poe and Mr.
Connolly have done on this bill. I want to commend the work of
the chairman and my colleagues on the full slate of legislation
being marked up today.
From the prompting of the EU to designate Hezbollah a
terrorist organization, to the honoring of a true statesman, as
many have already alluded to, Mr. Elie Wiesel, to the call for
the release of yet more Iranian Americans illegally jailed, we
have a block of legislation that is both timely and significant
in its reach. And I appreciate the bipartisan work done on this
committee.
Mr. Chairman, in 2008, Russia signed a cease-fire agreement
with Georgia committing to, among other things, the withdrawal
of their military troops to prewar position. Eight years later,
they have instead created an entire military base and continued
to expand their territory within the sovereign nation of
Georgia. In fact, reports suggest that Russian military and
special forces invaded a village within the District of Guria
where they created roads through the gardens of 48 local
residents, divided the village cemetery in two, and destroyed
the stadium along with thousands of apple trees. Additionally,
Russian soldiers have kidnapped a number of Georgian citizens
near the administrative border line separating South Ossetia
and the rest of Georgia, and the detentions are on the rise.
Russia is refusing to honor their agreement. Instead, they
are signaling their desire to reclaim Georgia by the blatant
attempt to co-op the upcoming October elections, as Mr.
Connolly alluded to at the point of a gun perhaps, also via
propaganda and the influence of Russian oligarch and
billionaire Bidzina Ivanishvili. Worth at least $5 billion, Mr.
Ivanishvili was recently exposed by the Panama Papers for his
offshore financial deals, his illicit arms trades, and his
continued efforts to control the Georgian Government behind the
scenes.
There is no question that Moscow is mounting an attack via
Mr. Ivanishvili to acquire full control over Georgia once
again. New pro-Russian political parties, blocks, and
coalitions are being created almost daily thanks to the funding
by Mr. Ivanishvili and Russian intelligence services. Pro-
Russian propaganda has taken control of the television space in
Georgia with the only pro-Western TV station, Rustavi 2, now
facing the threat of a shutdown, all of these efforts
personally organized and funded by Mr. Ivanishvili.
Mr. Chairman, as evidenced by other resolutions on today's
agenda, including those related to the countries of Cambodia,
the Democratic Republic of Congo, and Gabon, this committee
takes free elections very seriously, despite the recent
revelation that our own Department of State used hundreds of
thousands of dollars in taxpayers' funds to support election
campaign efforts in opposition to Israeli Prime Minister
Benjamin Netanyahu, the leader of one of our strongest allies
in the world. That thwarts the very essence of a governing
democracy. It goes against the very founding of our principles.
Mr. Chairman, we must take a stand for the national
sovereignty of our allies. We must push Russia to stand by
their words and remove their troops from Georgia. We must
provide a better example to those around the world by demanding
free and fair elections.
And in standing by those principles, in word indeed, I
wholeheartedly support Congressman Poe's legislation. I thank
my friend from Virginia for his part in it, and I also support
the full slate of legislation today. I urge passage.
And with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Chairman Royce. I thank the gentleman.
I would remind our members we still have the Ukraine bill
that we need to debate, and so if we could be succinct in our
comments.
Mr. Cicilline is next from Rhode Island.
Mr. Cicilline. With that request, Mr. Chairman, I will
submit my comments for the record and just say thank you to you
and to Ranking Member Engel for, again, conducting this markup
in a bipartisan way. I think we should all be very proud of the
resolutions that are before the committee today, which I think
reflect our commitment to important allies around the world and
our commitment to human rights, democracy, and rule of law, and
international stability and peace.
And with that, I will submit this, and thank you and yield
back.
Chairman Royce. Thank you, Mr. Cicilline. I deeply
appreciate you submitting that for the record.
We now go to Mr. Smith of New Jersey.
Mr. Smith. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I will submit most
of my comments for the record.
Just very briefly to speak on the Democratic Republic of
the Congo, which I think members realize faces a perilous
course as elections scheduled for November look increasingly
unlikely. The mandate for President Joseph Kabila and his
country's national legislature will expire in late December and
unless there is some way to either speed up the process for an
acceptable election or find a way to create an acceptable
transition in government to manage the election process, many
of us, the State Department included, fear that that country
could descend into chaos.
I have met with Kabila's Special Envoy recently who tried
to explain why, in the 5 years since the last election, the
government couldn't make the necessary preparations to hold
this election on time. His reasons did not justify the delays
that have put his country on the brink of a constitutional
crisis. That is why we have introduced H. Res. 780, to press
the Kabila government to avoid a situation in which he remains
in power indefinitely, contrary to the intent of his country's
Constitution and the will of the people.
I also would point out that backing the resolution is a
group of the Congolese diaspora, including an opposition party
member, religious leaders, and civic society groups. Because H.
Res. 780, this coalition is calling for a process by which
Kabila would appoint a Prime Minister under his country's
emergency provisions to take over temporarily to hold the
elections that will be considered acceptable to the Congolese
people.
Let me also point out the resolution on Gabon. H. Res. 821
calls for an orderly peaceful, free, and fair Presidential
election in that country. The 2009 elections were plagued with
election irregularities and provoked destruction
demonstrations, and a repeat of such a significantly flawed
process could endanger the stability of that country. Our
championing of a successful election for free, fair, and
violence-free election puts governments on notice that we mean
what we say about democracy, we will be watching and watching
carefully.
And finally, on H. Res. 660, about 10 days ago, I was in
Tbilisi, Georgia. Eight years ago, I was there about 10 days
after the invasion by the Russian troops, and I can tell you
the scars are real. One hundred ninety-two thousand people were
displaced at the time. Several hundred were killed. I remember
I had some of my own constituents trapped in South Ossetia. We
got them out, thankfully, after weeks of negotiations and many
other children, American children, who were in Abkhazia as
well. But this is a festering sore, and the Russians took South
Ossetia and Abkhazia by force. They violated the Helsinki Final
Act and follow-on agreements about territorial integrity.
And I was at a checkpoint just 10 days ago, on the Georgia-
South Ossetia border, and it was like the old Soviet Union. The
Russian troops came to the checkpoint. They had made people
wait upwards of 12 hours to cross over with food stuffs to get
to people on the other side, and out came a Russian guard with
a camera filming me and a few other Members who were standing
there. It was the old Soviet reprise that we saw for so many
years. The tensions are thick. It is important that we send
this message.
So thank you, Ted Poe and Mr. Connolly, for the resolution.
Those two areas, South Ossetia and Abkhazia, were taken by
force. Yes, there was perhaps a provocation of sorts, but
nothing that caused the counteraction by the Russians in
invasion and, again, it caused large losses of life and
displacement of so many people.
I thank the chairman. I yield back.
Chairman Royce. Mr. Alan Grayson.
Mr. Grayson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
When I look at these resolutions regarding Abkhazia, South
Ossetia, the bill regarding the Ukraine and the Crimea, what is
missing to me is a sense of respect for the wishes of the
people involved. Too often we find ourselves viewing those
people as pawns, as puppets, and we view this as some kind of
colossal battle between one government and another without any
regard for what the people involved actually want.
As I indicated the last time we had a bill involving the
Ukraine, the people of the Crimea voted overwhelmingly time and
time again for pro-Russian parties. When they were part of the
Ukraine, that is what they did. That reflected their will.
There is no indication at this point, whether or not Russian
troops are there, that most people in the Crimea would want to
rejoin the Ukraine. Quite the contrary, the indication is that
they would not, that they were not comfortable being part of
that country when they were part of it, and they are not
comfortable now with the idea or notion that they would be
forced to rejoin the Ukraine.
With regard to Abkhazia, with regard to South Ossetia, both
of these areas held elections within the past 2 years. There is
no evidence that has been provided that these elections were
somehow twisted or perverted by the presence of foreign troops.
In fact, from the looks of things, they had multicandidate
elections. The elections looked to be fair. They certainly were
vigorously contested. And they reached results that seemed to
reflect the local priorities. The turnout was actually very
high in both cases.
So one has to wonder exactly what we think we are
accomplishing by choosing sides against the will of the people
in places like Abkhazia, in places like South Ossetia, in
places like Crimea and so on.
One of the great battles of the later part of the 20th
century was the battle for decolonization. One of the great
battles that I see for the early part of this century is the
battle against internal colonization, taking large groups of
people, that sometimes number in the millions, and keeping them
trapped within a country they don't feel a part of against
their will. It is no longer true of the Soviet Union. It still
is true of Iran. Frankly, if South Ossetia and Abkhazia were
returned to Georgia, it would be true of those places as well.
We show all too much regard for the concept of territorial
integrity without any regard for the concept of self-
determination and the concept that people have the right to be
part of a country that they want to be part of. It is that
simple. And too often we find large groups of people who feel
trapped in the wrong country.
I agree that these matters should always be resolved
without force. I think it is regrettable whenever any shot is
fired over an issue of self-determination. But what we need, I
think, more than anything else right now in these situations,
whether it is Abkhazia, South Ossetia, Crimea, or anywhere
else, we need some kind of peaceful resolution that reflects
the popular will. And that is something that was never provided
to the people of Crimea, never provided to people of Abkhazia,
and South Ossetia, by the governments that purported to be
governments covering those areas, whether we are talking about
Georgia, Ukraine, or otherwise.
We need to have some kind of consensus that it is all
right, it is okay for a territory that is part of a government
to separate and to do so through peaceful means, as we saw an
attempt to do in Scotland recently and as we will see time and
time again in Western democracies and other democracies all
around the world. Yes, these things should be done through
democratic means, but there must be a mechanism to do them.
I yield back.
Chairman Royce. We are going to go to Mr. Meadows for 1
minute and then 1 minute to Mr. Sherman, but then we are going
to have to go to the vote.
Mr. Meadows.
Mr. Meadows. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
My amendment basically works in very close harmony with the
gentlewoman from Florida, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen's, fine work on
the Syrian issue and to make actually the human rights abusers
directly accountable for their crime. And so it puts in
reporting language of 120 days for the President to submit a
report on the 47 individuals that actually are either
responsible or complicit in the human rights violation in
Syria. So I would like to thank her, the Syrian Emergency Task
Force, and certainly the author of the underlying bill for
their work and leadership.
And with that, I will yield back, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Royce. Thank you, Mr. Meadows.
We will now go to Mr. Sherman of California.
Mr. Sherman. I will associate myself with Mr. Lowenthal's
comments on Cambodia. And while I will vote for the Georgia
resolution, we should recognize that we often support not
territorial integrity but self-determination, and we are often
somewhat inconsistent on this. We supported the breakup of the
Soviet Union, Yugoslavia, and the division of the Republic of
Serbia. We oppose the division of Croatia, Georgia, and the
Ukraine.
In each case, we have taken the anti-Russian position. We
should at least try to be as calm as possible with Russia, to
recognize that we are not always consistent and absolute in our
position, and that we should avoid pushing things to the very
edge where we put military forces right up against a border
when that is unnecessary. And I look forward to working with
the members of this committee, even Mr. Rohrabacher, for a
calmer relationship with Russia.
I yield back.
Chairman Royce. I thank the gentleman.
Hearing no further requests for recognition, the question
occurs on items considered en bloc.
All those in favor, say aye.
All those opposed, no.
In the opinion of the Chair, the ayes have it, and the
measures considered en bloc are agreed to.
And without objection, the measures considered en bloc are
ordered favorably reported as amended. Staff is directed to
make any technical and conforming changes, and the Chair is
authorized to seek House consideration under suspension of the
rules.
The Chair now calls up for consideration H.R. 5094, the
Stability and Democracy for Ukraine Act. Without objection,
Engel amendment 284 in the nature of a substitute will be
considered base text, is considered read, and is open for
amendment at any point.
[The information referred to follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman Royce. And I want to thank the ranking member for
authoring this important measure which tightens sanctions on
Moscow, especially related to the forcible annexation of Crimea
and includes measures to counter sanctions evasion.
I now recognize the ranking member for his remarks on the
bill.
Mr. Engel. Thank you, again, Mr. Chairman.
I am grateful that we are taking up the STAND for Ukraine
Act, which I introduced in April with Mr. Kinzinger, a former
member of this committee. The legislation underscores America's
support for Ukraine's right to defend itself. Parts of Ukraine,
as we know, are illegally occupied, so our aim with this bill
is rooted in America's nonrecognition policy during the 50-year
Soviet occupation of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania.
This bill links any sanctions relief to Russia fulfilling
its obligations under the Minsk Agreement as well as making
Crimea-related sanctions permanent so long as the Russian
occupation there continues. It also tightens sanctions
enforcement with a new anti-evasion framework and requires
regular reports on banks illegally controlling Ukrainian
assets, particularly Russian banks in Crimea.
Additionally, this bill tries to drive new private sector
investments in Ukraine, clamps down on Russia buying defense
equipment or services from our NATO allies, targets human
rights abuses in Russian-occupied areas, and calls for a
strategy to push back against Russian propaganda.
I want to thank Mr. Connolly of Virginia for offering an
amendment, making clear that Crimea-related sanctions should
not be dropped until Ukrainian sovereignty of Crimea has been
restored. Let me also thank the gentleman for his tireless work
on this issue. Thank you, Mr. Connolly. He has been laser-
focused on it since the first day of this crisis and this
measure makes this bill stronger.
We need to send a message to the people of Ukraine that we
stand with them and to Putin that his aggression and bullying
won't go unanswered. I ask that all members support this bill,
and I yield back.
Chairman Royce. On the amendment referenced by Mr. Engel
that has not yet been offered but will be, and before I yield
the chair or turn over the chair to Mr. Smith, I did want to
speak to this issue. And I think it is an issue we should all
think on before we adopt this amendment, and I will tell you
why.
First, I want to thank the gentleman from Virginia for
offering the amendment, although I have to oppose it, because I
admire his long-established commitment to Ukraine and
especially to Crimea. However, as we are all aware, the
provision in the ranking member's bill that that amendment
would strike allows the President of the United States to lift
the existing sanctions related to Crimea if there is a
resolution of the region's status that--and here is the key
concept in the underlying bill--that a democratically-elected
Government of Ukraine judges to be satisfactory and that has
been reached through an internationally supervised process. In
other words, the people of Ukraine would make that decision.
My concern is that to strike that language to prevent a
situation from arising in which the Ukrainian Government
concludes an agreement that it believes is good for the nation,
but the U.S. nevertheless says, that is not good enough for us,
we would have in effect be claiming to be more Ukrainian than
the Ukrainians. This amendment would potentially bind the U.S.
to a position that the Ukrainian Government itself might have
left behind.
As the gentleman is aware, the central goal of U.S. policy
toward Ukraine is to allow a sovereign and democratic Ukraine
to choose its own destiny, just like the United States. So I
believe that should continue to be our goal. I think the
underlying bill states it very effectively. So we should be
prepared to support Ukrainian's decisions of what is best for
Ukrainians.
Therefore, I must oppose the amendment. I just don't see
the sense of offering it in these circumstances, given how
strong the underlying bill already is. But with that----
Mr. Connolly. Would the chairman yield?
Chairman Royce. You will have your own time. I have to go
to the floor right now----
Mr. Connolly. The chairman has preemptively attacked an
amendment.
Chairman Royce. And if you withdraw the amendment, I will
withdraw my preemptive attack.
Mr. Connolly. But I kind of wanted to give my colleagues an
opportunity for the counterargument.
Chairman Royce. I would love to have that argument, but I
cannot have it today, I can't have it at this moment. But I
will yield you 5 minutes.
Mr. Connolly. I will move up. I have an amendment at the
desk. I am sorry. Are you recognizing me to speak?
Chairman Royce. I am recognizing you to speak. I was
recognizing you to speak on the underlying measure. But
inasmuch as I discussed your amendment, feel free to segue into
that amendment.
Mr. Connolly. Thank you so much.
First of all, I want to thank Mr. Engel for bringing this
resolution up, and I want to thank the chairman for bringing
the resolution up.
The chairman has given a point of view. And I listened
carefully to my friend Mr. Weber about Georgia and the Ukraine.
I have consistently insisted, since the illegal invasion and
annexation of the Crimea, that we must be clear as a bell, no
ambiguity, no other conditionality.
My friend Mr. Chabot and I introduced a bill this committee
supported, the Crimea Annexation Non-Recognition Act. This
isn't a Democratic or Republican issue.
Here is my concern, and I hope it is yours. That language
looks innocent. My amendment would delete that language and
leave it with silence about what the Ukrainian Government
decides to do. If the Ukrainian Government decides tomorrow,
``You know what, we don't need the Crimea, we are going to give
it up,'' obviously, a President is going to come to Congress
saying, ``Well, that is their decision,'' and we would have to
consider it. But why offer it on a plate by the U.S. Congress?
I have worked with my friend Mike Turner, Republican from
Ohio. He heads up the NATO Parliamentary Assembly. I head up
the U.S. delegation. We have worked together to make sure there
is no dilution of language on this subject in NATO, and there
have been attempts.
This is, without intention, I fear, to be construed as,
``Well, if you don't get out of Crimea, how about you negotiate
something, and we will call it a day?'' We don't want to do
that.
Now, contrary to what my friends have heard from Mr.
Grayson, there is terrible human rights abuse going on by the
Russians in Crimea today against Tartars, against political
dissenters, against anybody with a different political point of
view. As Mr. Weber indicated, they dominate media, and the
propaganda and the harassment are quite considerable. And life
for the indigenous Crimean population is very difficult. People
who have family members there report that.
I am delighted to have the support of the author of this
resolution, Mr. Engel, for this amendment. And I know a number
of my colleagues also heard from the Ukrainian Congress in
support of this amendment as well.
This isn't a Democrat or Republican issue. This isn't
something designed in any way to embarrass the leadership of
this committee. This is a sincerely felt policy position so
that we speak with one voice and as clearly as we can, just as
we just did in Georgia, on the Ukraine.
I was in the Ukraine recently. They need our support. They
need to know in Kiev that we are unwavering so that they do
what they have to do. If they ever change their minds, they are
always free to come back. We don't need a provision to invite
it. What we need is a clear, unequivocal statement that the
settlement about the Crimea is a Ukrainian issue, not an issue
for Russia and the rest of the world.
With that, I yield back.
Mr. Smith [presiding]. The Chair recognizes Mr.
Rohrabacher.
Mr. Rohrabacher. Well, let me just ask my colleague from
Virginia, Mr. Connolly, do you sense that we actually agree on
self-determination, or do we not? Meaning, if, indeed, there
were no Russian troops involved and no military action taking
place, that the people, as we heard from Mr. Grayson, the
people do have a fundamental right, even if they are a part of
another country, they are on a periphery of a country and want
to be independent or part of another nation, that they have a
right by majority to do so. Is that correct? And it is the
occupation, it is the introduction of Russian troops at
Abkhazia.
Mr. Connolly. Yeah, that is like, other than the
unpleasantness, how did you like the play at Ford's Theatre?
Mr. Rohrabacher. I yield time to respond.
Mr. Connolly. I thank my friend.
No, we don't agree, because you are assuming, even if
Russian troops got out--a big if--which Mr. Grayson apologizes
for that, he dismisses that, I don't know how any reasonable
person can say there can be a free and fair election with
Russian troops over all the territory.
Mr. Rohrabacher. We did.
Mr. Connolly. But with respect to your question.
Mr. Rohrabacher. Yes.
Mr. Connolly. It is for Ukraine to make that decision.
Mr. Rohrabacher. Yes.
Mr. Connolly. Otherwise, I would say to my friend, then you
would have to say those parts of Spain that have an inclination
to secede, we ought to have an international election and let
them do it, irrespective of the wishes of the Spanish
Government in Madrid. That is interference in another sovereign
state's affairs. It is up to the Ukraine, I would say to my
friend from California, to decide on the disposition of its own
territory, not up to us and not up to Russia.
Mr. Rohrabacher. Yeah. Then you would suggest that we
should be part of the British Empire. Is that correct? After
all, we did forcefully declare our independence, and I guess
you do, then, renounce when in the course of human events that
it comes time to separate the bonds between, that doesn't--go
right ahead. I yield.
Mr. Connolly. All right. No, the proper analogy actually is
the American Civil War, Mr. Rohrabacher. It was not up to the
United Kingdom and France to recognize Confederate
independence. It was up to the United States of America to
decide on that, and we did.
Mr. Rohrabacher. Reclaiming my time. Let me just note that
had the South, during the Civil War, permitted women and
permitted slaves and not had slavery, and it was not a slave
situation, where if they had been permitted to vote, I doubt if
they would have voted for secession, but had they done so and
the South didn't have slavery, well, then, that would have been
fine for them to secede, if we do believe in the Declaration of
Independence.
Did you oppose our efforts in Kosovo, Mr. Connolly?
Mr. Connolly. I opposed secession, certainly, in the United
States history.
Mr. Rohrabacher. You are being consistent.
Let me note, I don't believe there is that big a difference
between most of the members here and some of these issues that
we are raising, because whether or not what the Russian action
was at this point, at this point, whether or not somebody else
committed, initiated a violence that ended up with the current
situation, I think that what unites Americans is that we do
believe that people have a right, through the ballot box, to
determine their destiny. And you would suggest that they have
to be part of a bigger entity, and that bigger entity has to
agree to it. I think that is where we disagree.
But I think the right of people to determine through the
ballot box rather than bullet box is the way we should be
supporting and ending some of these conflicts. And I certainly
agree with that in the Ukraine, and I certainly agree with that
in Georgia, and all of these different things that we are
talking about.
So I do not interpret my own position as being pro-Russian
in some of these things. I really believe that local people
have a right. I supported Kosovars. I supported the Scots. Even
if they didn't get their vote, I would have appreciated it. And
the Catalonians, if they want to be free from the rest of
Spain. People have a right to their self-determination. I think
that is what our Declaration of Independence was all about. And
just a thought. I thought I would throw that in the air.
Thank you very much, Mr. Connolly, for that exchange.
Mr. Smith. Mr. Sherman.
Mr. Sherman. I think both gentlemen are right. We have been
on the side of self-determination. We have been on the side of
territorial integrity. We were born in a war of secession. We
were baptized in a great civil war against secession. We tore
asunder the British Empire in 1776 and prevented our Nation
from being torn asunder fourscore and 7 years later.
I don't agree with Mr. Rohrabacher that just any group for
any reason can say, ``Give us a vote and we get our
independence.'' That is only true if David Cameron is your
Prime Minister.
The fact is, the San Fernando Valley would make an
excellent country. I know it would have outstanding leadership.
And, yet, we weren't even given a free vote to secede from the
City of Los Angeles, let alone from the United States.
The fact is, these questions are answered in our
Declaration of Independence, which says you shouldn't create
your own country just because, well, that is how you feel that
day or you think you would do a little better, only when you
can lay out to the world truly extraordinary oppression from
the State that is governing you and truly extraordinary reasons
for your independence.
But getting back to the bill, I think this is a very strong
pro-Ukrainian bill. I do not think that we need an additional
amendment to be more pro-Ukraine. I think the gentleman from
Virginia is right, though, in saying that this is a decision to
be made in Kiev by Ukrainians. And if Ukraine, as the bill
states, if Ukraine negotiates a settlement with Russia for
whatever level of autonomy or whatever relationship Crimea will
have to Russia or the Ukraine, that that is something that we
ought to be prepared to accept.
Now, the gentleman from Virginia points out that we
shouldn't invite that, but the fact is, we should invite the
Ukraine to do whatever it considers best for the people of the
Ukraine and the Crimea.
Mr. Connolly. Would my friend yield?
Mr. Sherman. And to tie the President's hands and say that
we have to continue these sanctions, even if a democratically-
elected Ukrainian Government in Kiev is asking us to remove the
sanctions, I think makes the bill more unwieldy, more
permanent, more locked in, more written in stone than it needs
to be.
I will make one point, then I will yield to the gentleman
from Virginia, and that is he is correct in pointing out that
human rights in the Crimea are not being respected. However,
there were times in Ukrainian history where they did not have a
democratic government, where there were levels of oppression
for all of the people of Ukraine, including those of the
Crimea, and particular concerns of the Russian-speaking
majority in the Crimea. So I don't think we can say that Kiev
always provides the highest level of human rights while Moscow
always imposes oppression.
But the Crimea was made part of the Ukraine, and we should
be following the Ukraine in whether to remove sanctions.
I yield to the gentleman from Virginia.
Mr. Connolly. I thank my friend. I find it interesting that
we are concerned about ``tying the hands of the President.''
There are so many other examples where we have no compunction
about doing that, including my friend from California.
Mr. Sherman. You are absolutely correct.
Mr. Connolly. But I will simply point out, there is nothing
in my amendment, which has yet to be introduced, that ties
anybody's hands. It simply removes this provision and is silent
about it. It is a false argument to say we tie the President's
hands. We most certainly do not. I am not adding language. We
are subtracting language to be clear.
Secondly, the language here----
Mr. Sherman. Reclaiming my time. Reclaiming my time.
Mr. Connolly. Thanks for the courtesy.
Mr. Sherman. Every time a member of this committee tries to
strike language that provides for a Presidential waiver, the
response is that we are tying the President's hands. So the
fact that you are striking language does not mean that you are
not making the bill more binding, shifting, and depriving the
President of an ability to act quickly. Sometimes we should and
sometimes we should not provide such waivers.
And I will yield to you whatever remaining time I have. My
time has expired.
Mr. Smith. The time of the gentleman has expired.
The Chair recognizes Chairman Chabot.
Mr. Chabot. Mr. Chairman, if I could ask your advice at
this point in time. Mr. Connolly has not yet actually
introduced the amendment. So for other members who may want to
speak, and I do want to speak on this, I would be happy to wait
until the amendment is introduced, or otherwise, we can all
take two bites of the apple.
Mr. Smith. Once the amendment has been introduced,
obviously, we could have a debate on that.
Mr. Chabot. Can I ask, are there any other members that
wish to speak prior to the amendment being offered? Because I
will wait.
Mr. Smith. On the underlying bill, or whatever you want to
speak on.
Mr. Chabot. This was sort of like a parliamentary inquiry.
So you have answered my parliamentary inquiry. Thank you.
Mr. Smith. Mr. Lowenthal.
Mr. Lowenthal. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would like to claim
time, and I would like to yield it to my colleague from
Virginia.
Mr. Connolly. I thank the gentleman from California.
I will point out to my colleagues, unlike what Mr. Sherman
characterized, let's read the language here. This language
doesn't say, ``Well, only if Ukraine initiates something and
chooses a process, well, then, of course, we would respect
it.'' It actually says the status of the Crimea has been
resolved through an internationally supervised process to the
satisfaction of the Ukrainian Government. That can be construed
as an imposed settlement. So somebody else decides, whether
Ukraine likes it or not, that this is good for them, this is
the best we can get, and they have to accept it.
The other point I would make, which really troubles me
about Mr. Sherman's argument, I was just in the Ukraine. They
have a democratic government. They had a revolution to get it.
They overthrew the previous government because it was corrupt,
it was a kleptocracy. They are struggling. They need our
support.
I went with my friend Peter Roskam, a Republican, the head
of the House Democracy Project, to go to the Ukraine to show
support for what they are trying to do. This would dishearten
them, I can assure you. This is not a signal of support. This
is a retreat. It may not be intended as such, but it will be
construed as such. We can be silent by eliminating this and not
make the point.
I am glad to have Republican support for the amendment yet
to be introduced. I am disheartened that one of my fellow
Democrats feels otherwise. But I really do believe that the
purpose here is to speak with one clear voice: You must
withdraw from your illegal annexation and occupation of the
Crimea.
And if the President ever wants, whatever President, to
come to Congress with a different idea, there is nothing in
here that precludes that, and there is nothing in here to
preclude our consideration of it. We are silent about it. That
is all I am doing, so that we were speaking clearly on this
policy.
If Mr. Sherman wants me to yield, I do--with Mr.
Lowenthal's permission.
Mr. Sherman. Just one point. Yes, the Ukrainian Government
is democratic today. I was just making the point that
sovereignty does not depend upon democracy. That is to say,
Crimea was part of the Ukraine when they had a bad government.
Crimea was part of the Ukraine when the Ukraine was part of the
Soviet Union. Crimea is part of the Ukraine today. And I yield
back to the gentleman.
Mr. Connolly. I thank my friend. And I yield back to Mr.
Lowenthal.
Mr. Smith. Do you yield back?
Mr. Lowenthal. And I yield back.
Mr. Smith. Okay.
Any other members like to be heard on the underlying bill?
Having heard no further request to speak on the bill, are
there any amendments to the bill?
Mr. Connolly. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the
desk.
Mr. Smith. The clerk will report the bill.
Ms. Marter. Amendment to the amendment in the nature of a
substitute to H.R. 5094 offered by Mr. Connolly of Virginia.
Page 5, line 15, strike ``that'' and all that follows through
``Ukraine's'' on line 16 and insert ``that Ukraine's.'' Page 5,
line 17, strike ``; or'' and insert a period. Page 5, strike
lines 18 through 21.
[The information referred to follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Smith. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia
for 5 minutes to speak on his amendment.
Mr. Connolly. I thank my friend.
I think I have made it as clear as a bell what we are
trying to do here. It is simple, it is uncomplicated, and it is
designed to show solidarity with our democratic friends
struggling in the Ukraine.
The Ukraine is losing soldiers every single day. So far,
6,000 casualties--6,000 casualties--to Russian aggression. We
must do everything in our power to reverse what they are doing
and to make it clear that is not how disputes are settled in
modern day Europe.
And with that, I yield to my good friend, Mr. Chabot from
Ohio.
Mr. Chabot. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
It is rare that I disagree with my chairman on this
committee. I have been working with Mr. Connolly on issues
related to Crimea for some time now. I thank him for his
leadership on this.
Our position with respect to Russia invading Ukraine and
Crimea should be crystal clear, the world's position should be
crystal clear, and that is that the Russians should get the
hell out of Crimea, as simple as that. I think this language
just muddies up our position and the waters, and it ought to be
as clear as that, Russian has to get out.
To allow additional pressure, basically, to be put on the
Ukrainian Government, which I think this ultimately would do--
Russia is a bully, we know that. They have threatened to cut
off energy. They have invaded not just Crimea, but the eastern
border of Ukraine, and they are continuing in that. It is an
off-and-on, literally, military battle going on. The
Ukrainians, unfortunately, are outgunned by the Russians over
and over again. And I think we have been remiss, this
administration's policies have been remiss in providing
additional necessary arms to allow the Ukrainians to defend
themselves.
But we ought to be, as I say, crystal clear on this, and we
ought not allow that aggressive behavior by the Russians to be
rewarded. To accept Russian aggression in Crimea and with
respect to Ukraine is just going to invite additional Russian
aggression, whether it is in Lithuania, whether it is in
Latvia, whether it is in Estonia, whether it is in Poland.
I think this language sends the wrong message altogether,
and it does invite some international supervised process,
whatever that means, to come in and just muddy the whole
situation up, and it ultimately gives the Ukrainians a
decision, which is kind of a take-it-or-leave-it thing. We
ought not to go down that road. That is the wrong way to go. We
ought to stay with our position, which is, Russia, get out of
Crimea.
And I thank the gentleman for his leadership on this issue.
And I yield back to Mr. Connolly.
Mr. Smith. You still have some time remaining.
Mr. Connolly. I would be glad to yield to anyone or yield
back, Mr. Chairman. I know we are pressed for time.
Mr. Smith. The gentleman yields back.
I recognize myself in favor of the amendment.
Let me just say to my colleagues, I remember standing with
Ronald Reagan in my first term, 35 years ago, when he
proclaimed Captive Nations Week and continued a tradition that
began in the late 1940s, that was through Democrat and
Republican administrations, of not recognizing Latvia,
Lithuania, and Estonia, because they were captive nations.
Our maps did not recognize that they had been annexed,
conquered by the Soviet Union. And we stood firm. Half a
century later, those countries are free and prospering and
great friends and allies in the European Union, as well as with
the United States and NATO.
Let me just say that I think this language, well-meaning as
it is, to me looks like an engraved invitation to do something
other than recognize Ukraine's sovereignty over the Crimea. You
know, when we say, ``to the satisfaction of a democratically-
elected government of Ukraine,'' Ukraine is under tremendous
pressure, both financially and militarily, with such occupiers
and such acts aggression happening every single day, now
outside of Crimea, in other parts of Ukraine. And they would be
at a very disadvantaged position to resist international
pressure to accept a solution that is not truly in their best
interest.
So I support the Connolly amendment, and I do yield back my
time.
I would like to go to the Democrat side next. I can't see
it.
Mr. Boyle, sorry.
Mr. Boyle. I know I am way down here. But thank you, Mr.
Chairman.
I just want to speak briefly to strongly support the
Connolly amendment. You know, since the end of World War II,
the first time we have seen the boundaries actually jeopardized
in Europe, one nation-state invading another, was Putin's
invasion of Crimea.
We need to be doing far more to support Ukraine. We cannot
support some process by which essentially it would be agreed
that Russian aggression is being rewarded. That would be a
mistake for Ukraine, it would be a mistake for the Baltics, and
it would be a mistake for the rest of Europe.
Putin's actions in Crimea and actions that continue today
in the eastern part of Ukraine, where people are suffering,
where relatives of constituents of mine in Philadelphia and
suburban Philadelphia continue to suffer, to recognize and
actually award that sort of aggression would be a mistake with
terrible consequences. And if we learned nothing from history,
that is something that we should have learned and relearned by
now.
So I strongly support the Connolly amendment, and I will
take this opportunity, again, to urge our own administration to
be doing more to assist Ukraine in their time of need.
I yield back.
Mr. Smith. Thank you, Mr. Boyle.
I would like to yield 5 minutes to Mr. Rohrabacher, the
gentleman from California.
Mr. Rohrabacher. Thank you very much. And I also appreciate
the fact that the chair recognized captive nations speeches by
the President, because I am the one who wrote them. It seems
that we are having time for a little philosophical part of the
discussion. Let me share this, especially with Mr. Connolly.
When I was working on this captive nation speech for
President Reagan, I remember what almost scuttled the first
captive nation speech that I worked on, and that was I wanted
to be fair about it, and I wanted to declare that the Russian
people themselves were the first captive nation, that they
themselves had been oppressed by communism, and it was
communism that was the enemy, not Russian people.
And you know that the Baltic groups, especially, but the
other people who were now in those occupied countries at the
time were so adamant that we not include anything about the
damn Russians. They hated the Russians. They did not
differentiate between the Soviet Union and the Russian people.
And they almost, with their hatred toward the Russian people,
almost scuttled the President of the United States' solid
statement on how we were opposed to the Russians occupying all
of these countries in Eastern Europe.
That is the same mentality that is going on today. There is
such a hatred. It is based on basically an historic hatred for
the fact that Stalin and Russian people under Communist control
murdered millions of people throughout Europe and these
countries. They can't get rid of that hatred and that
resentment toward that country which they see has caused that,
when it was really communism, it was the evil of communism.
It is like right now, we shouldn't hate the people of Iran.
You and I, Mr. Connolly, agree totally on Iranian policy. We
don't hate the people of Iran. We don't like the mullahs and
that vicious dictatorship of the mullahs that is pro-terrorist.
Well, I believe that a lot of what we are talking about
dealing with whether it is Ukrainian policy or whether it is--
wherever that is, it is all based on a hatred of Russia and an
unwillingness, thus, to see that Saakashvili was the one who
caused the crisis in Georgia. He is the one who broke a long-
term truce, sent troops in, and murdered, I might add, truce
observers that were unarmed, Russian truce observers.
So we don't want to recognize that as a factor. For the
Russians, that was a major factor. There would not have been
any Russian troops going into that area, had Saakashvili not
done that.
And I will tell you, when it comes to Georgia, that is one
thing. We have Ukraine. And, Mr. Connolly, I respect you, you
are my friend, but I also respect your opinions. But the fact
is, you just mentioned, yeah, we overthrew that former
government that was a kleptocracy. That was a conspiracy from
our EU members and in collusion with the United States to
overthrow an elected government.
Chris Smith will tell you, he was there observing the
election of Yanukovych. Yanukovych was a legally-elected
President who was overthrown, and if they would have waited
until the next election, there would have been none of this
problem. The Russians would not have gone in if he would have
lost the election. But instead, we overthrew, we participated
in collusion with the overthrow of an elected government that
then threatened the status quo to the detriment of Russia.
We have to expect Russia to watch out for its own
interests. What would we do if that same thing happened in
Mexico? We would be involved.
Well, I suggest that we need to make sure that we try to,
number one, live at peace with Russia, recognizing that it is
no longer the Soviet Union, but it is a country that is large
and has its interests, the same way we do and other countries
that are allied with us do. And we cannot just have a double
standard, saying we can overthrow that government in Ukraine
and the Russians have to accept it.
And we have, in terms of self-determination, I really
appreciate Mr. Sherman's remarks about the Declaration of
Independence. I will think about what he just said. But we may
have a difference in philosophy, not with Brad, but here in
this committee, as to whether or not the right of self-
determination is something that should be a consideration of
U.S. policy.
So with that said----
Mr. Sherman. If the gentleman will yield? I fully agree
with----
Mr. Smith. The gentleman is out of time.
Mr. Rohrabacher. My time is up. Thank you very much. I
appreciate it.
Mr. Smith. The Chair recognizes Mr. Sherman.
Mr. Sherman. I would just say that I may not accept Mr.
Rohrabacher's views anywhere else in the world, but an
independent San Fernando Valley is something I am looking
forward to.
Mr. Rohrabacher. I supported that.
Mr. Smith. Do you yield back?
Do any other members seek recognition on the Connolly
amendment?
Mr. Connolly. Mr. Chairman, might I just note for the
record, because he is necessarily on the floor, the author of
the resolution has endorsed this amendment, for the record.
Mr. Ribble. Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Smith. The Chair recognizes Mr. Ribble.
Mr. Ribble. Mr. Chairman, thank you for a moment to speak
on this issue, and I will be brief.
There are about 55 miles at the narrowest point that
separates the United States in the State of Alaska from the
Russian border. Under this self-determination argument that has
been made here, if a certain percentage of Alaskans decided
they want to be part of Russia, would we ever, under any
circumstances--ever, under any circumstances--accept a Russian
invasion of Alaska? We would not.
I support this amendment, and I encourage its adoption.
I yield back.
Mr. Smith. Thank you, Mr. Ribble.
Hearing no further requests for time, the question occurs
on the amendment offered by Mr. Connolly.
All those in favor, say aye.
Opposed, no.
In the opinion of the Chair, the ayes have it, and the
amendment is agreed to.
Hearing no further requests for amendments, the Chair now
moves that the committee agree to H.R. 5094, as amended.
All those in favor, say aye.
All those opposed say, no.
In the opinion of the Chair, the ayes have it, and H.R.
5094, as amended, is agreed to.
Without objection, the amended bill is ordered favorably
reported as a single amendment in the nature of a substitute.
Staff is directed to make any technical and conforming changes,
and the chairman is authorized to seek House consideration
under suspension of the rules.
That concludes our business for today. I want to thank
members on both sides of the aisle for their input.
The committee is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 10:37 a.m., the committee was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
----------
Material Submitted for the Record
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Statement submitted for the record by the Honorable Christopher H.
Smith, a Representative in Congress from the State of New Jersey
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]