[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 135 (Friday, September 23, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: September 23, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
                  DAY FIVE OF THE OCCUPATION OF 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, I note that it is day five of the occupation 
of Haiti and, as our colleague who has spoken just before me pointed 
out, the costs are mounting. Fortunately, so far we have been pretty 
much able to avoid any fatalities among our American troops, and that, 
of course, is the main aim, and the easiest way to solve that problem 
and that worry is in bringing our troops home as soon as possible, and 
today would not be too soon in my view.
  The second problem that seems to be creeping in as we, fortunately, 
have avoided fatalities, is that we are now getting a chance to take a 
look at what this ill-advised foreign policy has finally led us to.
  I heard on National Public Radio this morning as I got up that 
suddenly our reserve training fund for the Navy had run out, and part 
of that is because we have spent moneys on misadventures like Haiti 
that are draining our resources apparently.
  Here we are confronted with the fact that we cannot go with a normal 
business as usual for our military because we do not have the funds. 
You ask why, and apparently part of the answer is because of these 
unforeseen expenditures on places like Haiti.
  It is a little tough to accept that, but then, when you go on to the 
next part of your day and read the newspaper in the morning after 
listening to the radio for a minute, you find in the Washington Post a 
statement that says the toughest task in Haiti is going to be reviving 
the economy. Now I do not know where it says that the U.S. taxpayers 
are supposed to revive the economy of a country that for 200 years has 
been the poorest in this hemisphere on an increasing scale.
  But one thing is very clear: The Haitians expect that we are going to 
rebuild their country for them. They understand that the sanctions, the 
embargo that has been put on their country, has been a U.S. embargo 
even though it is paraded under a U.N. flag, and they are expecting the 
United States to come in there once the situation settles down a little 
bit, and presumably President Aristide is returned, and rebuild the 
country and pay for all the damages that have taken place.
  Now let me tell you that may be an expectation that the Haitians 
have, but I do not think it is an expectation that the United States 
taxpayers have because we are talking in excess of billions--and that 
is ``b,'' billions--of dollars, to get that country to a point where it 
even can be slightly self-sustaining at this point given the total 
shambles of the economy, the infrastructure, and any form or semblance 
of government that exists in that country today.
  So if, indeed, those colleagues who felt that the Clinton 
administration's policy was good to keep this embargo going, then those 
colleagues are going to be the ones that are going to have to explain 
to the Haitians or the United States taxpayers why either anticipation 
is going to fall short.
  The curious part of all this is that part of the accord that 
President Carter signed on behalf of President Clinton with provisional 
President Jonassaint last Sunday which did accomplish the objective of 
avoiding an armed hostile conflict, for which we are all grateful; 
nevertheless one of those provisions was that the sanctions, the 
embargo, would be lifted immediately.
  Here it is, the fifth day of the occupation, and we are still 
squabbling, apparently in the United Nations, about whether or not that 
embargo should be lifted, and maybe it should not be lifted until 
President Aristide returns.

  Now a problem here is very clear. We have got two separate agreements 
now that bind the United States, one signed by President Carter on 
behalf of President Clinton and the other the Governors Island accord a 
few years ago, and unfortunately they are not consistent. They promise 
different things, that do not work, to different people.
  For example, the Governors Island accord says that General Cedras 
will leave Haiti. The accord signed by President Carter on behalf of 
President Clinton says that General Cedras may stay in Haiti as long as 
he is no longer in the military. This has created different 
expectations and severe problems, and this is the kind of thing that 
comes about when you have an ill-advised, poorly thought out, little-
understood, lack of experience team of people giving you foreign 
policy.
  We have got now a situation where the amnesty question is very much 
up in the air. Who is going to grant the amnesty? Is it the Parliament 
that is there today that the Aristide followers say is illegal and 
cannot grant amnesty, whereas the Cedras people are saying, ``But the 
other Parliament is no longer in the country, and they won't come back 
to grant amnesty, and we aren't leaving until amnesty is granted?'' So 
we have got another catch-22 on the amnesty problem.

                              {time}  1250

  Everywhere you look in this Haitian policy, there is a problem. There 
are anticipations that cannot be met. Of course, the most important 
responsibility we have in Congress is the concern of the well-being of 
our troops. The second concern right after that is the question of how 
we are using or abusing the taxpayers' dollars in this situation.
  It is clearly time, as the gentleman from California [Mr. Cox] has 
said, for this debate to come to the Halls of the U.S. Congress. We 
have been forestalled in having this debate by the Democratic 
leadership. They are stone walling to protect the President on this.
  The American people want some accountability; they want to know what 
is going on, and we have got to have this debate before we adjourn sine 
die, which is coming very soon. I cannot conceive of going home to my 
district, leaving those troops in harm's way, all of those costs 
mounting, and looking my voters in the eye and saying, yeah, we are in 
control of the situation. We know what is going on. That would not be 
being truthful.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in this quest to get 
this on the floor.

                          ____________________