[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 91 (Thursday, July 14, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: July 14, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
      FOREIGN OPERATIONS, EXPORT FINANCING, AND RELATED AGENCIES 
                        APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1995

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senate will now resume consideration of 
H.R. 4426, which the clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       A bill (H.R. 4426) making appropriations for foreign 
     operations, export financing, and related programs for the 
     fiscal year ending September 30, 1995.

  The Senate resumed the consideration of the bill.

       Pending:
       (1) Dole Amendment No. 2245, to establish a congressional 
     commission for the purpose of assessing the humanitarian, 
     political, and diplomatic conditions in Haiti and reporting 
     to the Congress on the appropriate policy options available 
     to the United States with respect to Haiti.
       (2) McConnell (for Brown) Amendment No. 2247, to reduce 
     available funds for the United Nations Development Program.
       (3) McConnell (for Brown) Amendment No. 2248 (to committee 
     amendment on page 2, lines 12-21), to make Poland, Hungary, 
     and the Czech Republic eligible for allied defense 
     cooperation with NATO countries.
       (4) McConnell (for Brown) Amendment No. 2249, to freeze 
     contributions to the International Development Association.
       (5) McConnell (for Brown) Amendment No. 2250, to maintain 
     funding for the Global Environment Facility at fiscal year 
     1994 level and to make the funds available pending certain 
     reform measures.
       (6) McConnell (for Brown) Amendment No. 2251, to establish 
     an independent commission to study the salaries and benefits 
     of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund.
       (7) McConnell (for Brown) Amendment No. 2252 (to committee 
     amendment on page 2 lines 12-21), to make Poland, Hungary, 
     and the Czech Republic eligible for allied defense 
     cooperation with NATO countries.
       (8) Helms Amendment No. 2253 (to committee amendment on 
     page 2, lines 12-21), to prohibit U.S. Government 
     intervention with respect to abortion laws or policies in 
     foreign countries.
       (9) Helms Amendment No. 2254, to prohibit the availability 
     of funds for the United Nations Development Program.
       (10) Helms Amendment No. 2255, to prohibit the use of funds 
     for foreign governments engaged in espionage against the 
     United States.
       (11) Helms Amendment No. 2256, to prohibit funds for Russia 
     while that country is not in compliance with the Biological 
     Weapons Convention.
       (12) Helms Amendment No. 2257, to limit the provisions of 
     assistance to Nicaragua until a full investigation is 
     conducted relating to the existence of a terrorist/kidnapping 
     ring.
       (13) Helms Amendment No. 2258, to limit the authority to 
     reduce U.S. Government debt to certain countries.
       (14) Helms Amendment No. 2259, to provide conditions for 
     renewing nondiscriminatory (most-favored-nation) treatment 
     for the People's Republic of China.
       (15) Helms Amendment No. 2260, to establish an 
     Ambassadorial rank for the head of the United States 
     delegation to the Conference on Security and Cooperation in 
     Europe.
  McCONNELL. Mr. President, Deputy Secretary Talbott has characterized 
the administration's recent policy shifts as refinements of an existing 
strategy rather than flip-flops and reversals. Unfortunately, the 
public does not quite see it that way. Nor for that matter do some of 
his strongest supporters.
  In May, my colleague from Iowa, Senator Harkin urged the 
administration to ``get some steel in their spine and quit 
equivocating.''
  A policy of anarchy is how the chairman of the Black Caucus summed up 
the situation.
  I think the public's frustration level is only surpassed by the 
suffering of the citizens of Haiti.
  And, now we have a dangerous mass exodus underway which has produced 
over 15,000 refugees in a brief few weeks.
  I can only wonder how dismal the conditions in Haiti must be to force 
a parent to pack their children in flimsy dinghys and risk their lives 
on the high seas.
  And, how did we end up with this human exodus?
  I trace it back to candidate Clinton's denouncing the Bush policy of 
returning Haitians for processing in Haiti. Within weeks of assuming 
office, faced with a human wave of misery, Clinton retreated and 
adopted the Bush line.
  Unfortunately, the radical fluctuations in policy did not stop there.
  True the Governor's Island Accords held out fleeting hope which was 
shattered. Frankly, I was never quite clear why the military with all 
the power--in essence with all the cards--would simply fold and go back 
to their barracks.
  Next we seemed to stagger about like Gulliver under attack by 
Lilliputians--Haitians armed with sticks drove back the U.S.S. Harlan. 
Randall Robinson, in William Raspberry words, ``using his life as a 
lever'' managed to starve a significant retreat out of the President on 
refugee policy.
  Now, we have a series of selected leaks about invasion training 
exercises, I guess in the hope of bluffing the military leadership out 
of office.
  The Haiti policy, like other foreign policy positions taken by the 
administration seem to be monuments to the mood of the moment--not 
enduring, principled, well constructed edifices.
  We have all been disheartened by the perilous policy twists and 
turns--that may be policy refinement in the Clinton play book, but the 
public can't understand his calls.
  As we creep closer and closer to the use of force, no one understands 
why.
  Vague official commentary about restoring democracy is overshadowed 
by internal criticism of the alleged symbol of democracy, Aristide.
  Concern about the consequences of a tidal wave of refugees is muddled 
by senior officials who understandably engage in public hand wringing 
over images of children starving.
  And, the talk of invasion, purportedly to protect American lives is 
rejected by the very Americans who the administration wants to save.
  Sadly, I think Carl Rowan was right when he said he thought the 
President was about to invade because he didn't have the foggiest 
notion what else to do.
  I think we may very well be reduced to this option because we have 
squandered our credibility and forfeited our resolve in enforcing any 
other option.
  At the end of the day a few thousand poorly trained, barely armed 
thugs have terrorized a nation and intimidated the United States.
  In public and private comments the military leadership in Haiti 
scorns the United States and speaks with contempt at the prospect of an 
invasion. Bravado? Maybe, but so far they have little reason to believe 
we are as good as our word.
  Mr. President, I have heard senior officials lament time and time 
again that the policy appears confusing because the situation is 
changing rapidly and new circumstances must be evaluated and addressed. 
They are feeling their way through troubled waters.
  I urge the administration to chart a course and stick with it. Just 
as the public was skeptical about the Persian Gulf during the buildup, 
when a clear message was consistently delivered, when the economic and 
political principles at stake were starkly defined, the American people 
supported the President.

                          ____________________