[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 101 (Thursday, July 28, 1994)]
[House]
[Page H]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: July 28, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
                        NEW INFORMATION ON HAITI

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Florida [Mr. Goss] is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, we have new information on what is going on in 
Haiti which I think is very important for this body to understand. The 
administration is bent on what can only end up being a long and 
hazardous and expensive approach to the situation going on down there. 
And I might point out that it is a particularly harmful approach for 
Haitians, and it is an approach that is not yielding any results right 
now.
  What has happened recently is we are now actively seeking the 
authorization of a new U.N. peacekeeping operation for Haiti. That is 
somewhat remarkable, but what is more remarkable is that we are also in 
the process of going to the Security Council and setting up a 
peacemaking operation. That is a euphemism for an invasion of Haiti 
under the color of some type of a multinational flag. But basically it 
will be a United States effort, United States paid for, with United 
States men and women in the armed services leading the charge and doing 
the dirty work.
  Where do Members of Congress fit into this debate?
  That is a very curious question. Members notice we are here in 
special orders and we are discussing the subject. Why are we not 
discussing it in the legislative process we normally do of due 
deliberation? I suspect it may be because the administration really 
does not want us to be talking much about what is going on down there. 
I am not sure they are particularly proud of the way they have been 
handling it.
  I think it is time we were notified of what is going on with the 
United Nations. We are talking about our leadership at the White House 
consulting with the United Nations while the Congress of the United 
States, who represents the people of the United States of America, are 
being pretty well shut out of the debate. There is more dialogue going 
on with foreigners in the White House about this subject than there is 
with Members of Congress who represent the people of the United States 
of America. I suspect that should not go on too much longer because it 
probably makes as many Americans as mad as it obviously makes me.
  Let us talk about what is finally starting to come about regarding 
this military mission, what they are talking about in the U.N. Security 
Council. Actually it is a little scary. We have phase 1 and this is 
going to last for a couple of months. That is 12,000 to 15,000 troops 
that are going to go down and disarm and pacify the population in 
Haiti.
  Let me say there has been a problem in Haiti for 200 years and in a 
few months we are going to send 15,000 American troops down there and 
they are going to solve this problem?
  We do not have any commitments, to my knowledge, from any other 
countries that are going to participate, although we are told there 
will be some. Nor do we know what the troop strengths of these 
countries will be. But probably they will be limited.
  We are told that the funding for this, because it will be a 
multinational force, will come from the Department of Defense, not from 
the Department of State or any of our other peacekeeping funds we have. 
This will be a special charge against DOD and will further erode the 
cuts we have already made against DOD this year. As many know, we are 
concerned about the hollow force we are developing in our country by 
underfunding the Department of Defense.

                              {time}  1810

  This is going to be 1 billion dollars' worth taken away from DOD 
before we get through.
  Then comes phase 2. Phase 2 lasts until January 1996 at least. This 
will be an officially sanctioned U.N. peacekeeping effort. That means 
that we can pay for it through the State Department rather than the 
Defense Department. We will still get the bill. It will be about $200 
million a year. That is not including the humanitarian aid. That is 
just to have the 6,000 or so troops be down there in Haiti trying to 
preserve the stability which has eluded them for some 200 years in that 
nation.
  I would point out that while we are going to take that on, we 
presently have 13 ongoing peacekeeping missions right now in the world. 
The United Nations has 17. I think we know who is paying for most of 
that, and the costs are not insignificant here. Not only are we going 
to be charged another $200 million a year for just the Haiti project, 
we are already well in arrears, I think as many know, on our 
obligations to the United Nations. And some of these peacekeeping 
efforts are not working very well, regrettably.
  I guess the theory is that once the U.N. Security Council has 
sanctioned this peacemaking force, that the administration is then free 
to do what they want; they do not have to come to Congress. 
Specifically they made it a point that they do not have to come to the 
Congress of the United States of America and suggest what they would 
like to do or review the plan or discuss, debate or deliberate it, 
because they have already got the might assembled, and all they are 
waiting for is the green light from the United Nations.
  Now, how can we be standing here in Washington, DC, as duly elected 
representatives of the people of this country, suggesting that it is a 
good idea for the White House to get a green light to invade a 
neighboring friendly country, but we are not going to consult with the 
U.S. Congress? That just does not add up, and I do not think it is 
something that makes much sense to most Americans.
  I see my time is about up. This is an issue that is not going to go 
away. We will pursue it again.
  I will end on the note by saying the four friends of Haiti 
traditionally working with us, none want to invade Haiti. Invading 
Haiti is a very bad idea, whether the United Nations thinks it is a 
good idea or not.

                          ____________________