[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 142 (Tuesday, October 4, 1994)]
[House]
[Page H]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: October 4, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING UNITED STATES POLICY TOWARD 
                                VIETNAM

  Mr. ANDREWS of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules 
and agree to the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 278) expressing 
the sense of the Congress regarding United States policy toward 
Vietnam.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                            H. Con. Res. 278

       Whereas the President has lifted the 30-year-old trade 
     embargo against Vietnam in the belief that doing so is the 
     ``best way'' to ensure progress in resolving the fate of 
     Americans missing since the conflict in Vietnam;
       Whereas the period of the Vietnam conflict and its 
     aftermath was one of the most distressing and painful periods 
     in our Nation's history;
       Whereas questions remain about the fate of several hundred 
     Americans missing in action;
       Whereas, on July 2, 1993, President Clinton stated that 
     further steps in United States-Vietnam relations would 
     be based on ``tangible progress'' towards the fullest 
     possible accounting of those missing in action;
       Whereas such ``tangible progress'' depends on further 
     efforts by the Government of Vietnam in the 4 key areas 
     outlined by the President, including the recovery and 
     repatriation of American remains, continued resolution of 
     discrepancy cases, further assistance in implementing 
     trilateral investigations with Laos, and accelerated efforts 
     to provide all POW/MIA-related documents;
       Whereas the Congress deeply empathizes with the families 
     and friends of the missing American servicemen;
       Whereas we owe nothing less than the ``fullest possible 
     accounting'' to these men and their families;
       Whereas Vietnam's criminal law is used to punish nonviolent 
     advocates of political pluralism, through charges such as 
     ``attempting to overthrow the people's government'' or 
     ``antisocialist propaganda'';
       Whereas the end of the Cold War provides an unprecedented 
     opportunity for democratic reform and improvements in human 
     rights throughout the world;
       Whereas recent economic reforms and initiatives undertaken 
     by the Government of Vietnam can best be encouraged and built 
     upon through political liberalization;
       Whereas the interests of the United States and the people 
     of Vietnam, and the international community would best be 
     served by having a friendly and democratic government in 
     Vietnam; and
       Whereas greater respect for internationally recognized 
     human rights and a peaceful transition to democracy in 
     Vietnam would greatly reduce the threat of instability in 
     Southeast Asia and enable the creation of a free-market 
     economy in Vietnam: Now, therefore, be it
       Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
     concurring), That it is the sense of the Congress that--
       (1) progress towards the ``fullest possible accounting'' 
     for the Americans missing and unaccounted for remains central 
     to our Nation's foreign policy toward Vietnam;
       (2) the ``fullest possible accounting'' of our missing must 
     remain the index by which further progress in relations must 
     be judged;
       (3) the primary functions of the United States Government 
     liaison office in Vietnam should be--
       (A) to facilitate efforts to achieve the ``fullest possible 
     accounting'', and
       (B) to establish a section within that office to assist 
     families and friends of those missing American servicemen in 
     their efforts to ascertain the status of their loved ones;
       (4) the United States should support the process of 
     nonviolent democratic reform in Vietnam including the goal of 
     free and fair elections; and
       (5) the United States should increase its support for Voice 
     of America programming in Vietnam.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from New 
Jersey [Mr. Andrews] will be recognized for 20 minutes, and the 
gentleman from New York [Mr. Gilman] will be recognized for 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Andrews].
  Mr. ANDREWS of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  (Mr. ANDREWS of New Jersey asked and was given permission to revise 
and extend his remarks.)
  Mr. ANDREWS of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, this resolution is brought 
before the House tonight under the leadership of the gentleman from New 
York [Mr. Ackerman] who is the chairman of the Subcommittee on Asia and 
the Pacific, and we commend him for his foresight and leadership in 
doing so.
  Mr. Speaker, many of us know that there is a hole in the heart of 
America tonight, and it is a hole that is there because of the absence 
of POW's and MIA's from every conflict in which our country has been 
involved. Perhaps the most acutely felt pain of many people in our 
country pertains to the POW's and MIA's which remain fro the Vietnam-
era conflict.
  Earlier this year there was a controversial decision by the 
administration to lift the 30-year-old trade embargo with Vietnam. 
There were those who disagreed with that decision and those who agreed 
with it. Not speaking for the committee but speaking for myself, as a 
Member, I disagreed with that decision. Regardless of our point of view 
on the wisdom or lack of wisdom of lifting the embargo, this resolution 
focuses our attention to the measuring stick for future improvement or 
lack of improvement by Vietnam.
  The gentleman from New York [Mr. Ackerman] I believe, has very wisely 
put forth that measurement stick as how well or how poorly Vietnam 
cooperates with respect to questions on the POW-MIA issue.
  This resolution speaks with specifically about the POW-MIA issue. It 
talks about cooperation in searches. It talks about the turning over of 
documentation. It talks about free visitation for those who wish to 
gain more information on this issue.
  I know that my friend and colleague, the gentleman from New York [Mr. 
Gilman] to this day wears a bracelet on his arm commemorating, I would 
assume, one of the POW's from the Vietnam-era conflict. The symbol that 
he wears is a symbol that many of us carry with us, and many of our 
constituents carry with them every day.
  Regardless of our position on the propriety of lifting the trade 
embargo, I believe we should join together and say that our evaluation 
of Vietnam's conduct in the future will be squarely tied to Vietnam's 
cooperation with the location and disposition of cases involving 
American POW's and MIA's.
  I would urge Members, therefore, to support this resolution.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  (Mr. GILMAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I want to commend the chairman of our 
Foreign Affairs Committee, Lee Hamilton, and the chairman of the Asia 
and Pacific Subcommittee, Mr. Ackerman, and the ranking republican 
Member of the subcommittee, Mr. Leach, for bringing House Concurrent 
Resolution 278, a resolution expressing the sense of the Congress 
regarding United States policy towards Vietnam, to the floor today.
  I am pleased that House Concurrent Resolution 278 recognizes that 
``the primary functions of the United States Government liaison office 
in Vietnam should be to facilitate efforts to achieve the fullest 
possible accounting of American POW/MIA's, and to establish a section 
within that office to assist families and friends of those missing 
American servicemen in their efforts to ascertain the status of their 
loved ones.''
  Regrettably, the administration has informed us that there won't even 
be one full time staff person in the liaison office to work with the 
military's Joint Task Force on POW's and MIA's operating in Vietnam. I 
find this difficult to understand because the President, on February 3, 
when he announced the end of the trade embargo on Vietnam stated that:

       Our relationship with Vietnam should be guided by one 
     factor and one factor only: gaining the fullest possible 
     accounting for our prisoners of war and our missing in 
     action. We owe that to all who served in Vietnam and to the 
     families of those whose fate remains unknown.

  In addition, on April 4 of this year, in a letter from Richard Moose, 
Under Secretary of State for Management, Chairman Hamilton was informed 
that ``the Liaison Office will strengthen cooperation in resolving 
remaining POW/MIA issues * * *''
  Moreover on August 26 of this year, I received a letter from 
Assistant Secretary for Legislative Affairs, Ms. Sherman, stating:

       The actions we have taken to date to open a liaison office 
     and the proposed staffing of the office have been consistent 
     with the commitment made in the President's February 3 
     announcement to support the central focus of our relations 
     with Vietnam on the fullest possible accounting for our POW/
     MIA's.

  How can the administration fulfill its promises and commitments if it 
does not even assign one full time staff person to the POW/MIA issue in 
Vietnam?
  In addition, I find it curious that many of those supporting this 
resolution opposed Representative Snowe's motion to recommit the State 
Department authorization bill to remove sense of the Senate language on 
Vietnam. As opposed to this resolution, the Senate language praised 
Vietnam for its cooperation on POW/MIA accounting. It even went so far 
as to claim the process of human rights improvements was underway in 
Vietnam. Accordingly, I support House Concurrent Resolution 278 in the 
hope that the administration supports its words with deeds and tackles 
the POW/MIA issue with serious resolve.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 8 minutes to the gentleman from California [Mr. 
Rohrabacher].
  Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Speaker, I would like to go on record tonight to 
suggest that after spending years examining this issue, I find it 
difficult to believe that all of our POW's were returned in 1973 and 
that since I have been in Congress and personally participated in this 
issue, the Communist regime in Vietnam has not, as portrayed by this 
administration, been totally cooperative in our efforts to achieve a 
full accounting of the MIA's-POW's of the Vietnam war.
  Just from my vantage point, I have seen numerous examples of 
noncooperation, even though this obstructionism has been kept from the 
American people; our own population has been told the Vietnamese regime 
has been totally cooperative. I have seen a number of examples of what 
I consider to be obstructionism.
  Number 1, one of our own colleagues, the gentleman from Florida [Mr. 
Peterson] was a POW for 6 years.
  When I went to Vietnam with the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Peterson] 
about, I guess it was a year and a half ago now, part of a Presidential 
mission, I was talking to the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Peterson] on 
the airplane. He told me that during the first 3 years of his 
captivity, he was not a POW. He was an MIA. His family did not know 
that he was a POW. They did not know he had been captured. No one in 
the world outside of the Vietnamese regime knew that he was in the 
captivity of the Vietnamese.
  I asked him in prison, while he was incarcerated, if he was in with 
the other American prisoners. The answer was no.
  So at any time during those first 3 years, he could have been sent 
somewhere or kept and no one would have known the difference. It was 
only 3 years later that the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Peterson] 
became a POW. At that time he was placed in with other American 
prisoners. That tells me there was a purpose, there was a goal in mind 
in keeping some of our prisoners separate from the other prisoners.
  At any moment, as I say, during those first 3 years, he could have 
been kept, and we would have never known that he was ever a POW.
  When we got to Vietnam and negotiated with the Vietnamese, I asked 
for the records from the prison in which the gentleman from Florida 
[Mr. Peterson] was kept. That is what I would like to see, because 
obviously, if there was one Pete Peterson, there might have been a 
dozen Pete Peterson's there.

                              {time}  2300

  In fact, Vietnam, in the prisons where our POWs were kept, maybe 
there were a dozen Petersons, maybe there were 50, maybe there were 100 
Pete Petersons. We will never know because the Vietnamese's answer to 
my request was, ``I am sorry, but all of those records have been 
destroyed.'' Now this is from a regime that meticulously--communists 
are known for keeping meticulous records, yet all the records were 
destroyed. to me that is obstructionism.
  Only last year two Vietnamese majors came to our MIA/POW tasks force 
headquarters at Phnom Penh the Vietnamese majors suggesting that they 
had information of American POWs still being held in Vietnam. I 
personally followed up on this case, going to Cambodia to personally 
talk to the sergeant who received that report. Because I forced the 
issue, there was some followup.
  Until I forced the issue, there was no followup on this report. 
Finally, our MIA/POW team decided they should meet these two majors. I 
begged and pleaded that they not request these majors by name because, 
after all, what Vietnamese military personnel will ever step forward 
again now that we have requested to see these people, made this request 
of the Vietnamese regime? Well, our MIA/POW team made that request 
anyway.
  What did we get for that request? When the sergeant who took the 
report went to Hanoi to supposedly meet with these majors again and 
identify them, something that could very easily have been done, when 
this sergeant went to Hanoi to meet with these Vietnamese majors in 
order to identify them, he was not permitted to meet with them, 
something the Vietnamese regime could have done in a snap.
  Now, is this the full cooperation we have been hearing about?
  When I was in Vietnam the last time with our MIA/POW task force, our 
men were searching through the jungle in a horrendous effort to find a 
hospital that had been on the border of the Cambodian/Vietnamese border 
during the war. It was the hardest job. These men and women, the POW/
MIA task force are doing a terrific job individually. It is their 
leadership that I question. The fact is for weeks they were in the 
jungle searching for a hospital that the Vietnamese had thousands of 
their own people who had gone through this hospital and POW camp, I 
might add. They could have identified that location in a snap. Instead, 
our people were slogging around and wasting their time.

  Is this cooperation?
  It appears to me the communist regime in Vietnam is doing its best to 
cover up a crime. The crime I am talking about is the murder of U.S. 
Servicemen who were left behind by our own government during our 
retreat from the Vietnamese conflict.
  For us to believe all prisoners were returned, we would have to 
believe, for example, that no men and women were ever interrogated by 
Russian military intelligence during the Vietnam war, because none of 
our airmen who were returned came back saying they had been 
interrogated by the Russians. That is hard to believe.
  We would also have to believe they released all of these prisoners, 
giving up all of their leverage at the time that the war was still 
going on in South Vietnam and still going on in Cambodia and still 
going on in Laos. In fact, of the hundreds of men shot down in Laos, 
only one or two were ever returned. That is unbelievable.
  No, they kept our men.
  Our Government left those men behind, let us add. Which one of these 
things is worse I do not know. But it is time to close this sorry 
chapter in the history of the United States of America and our 
relations with Southeast Asia. We do need to close the chapter. We do 
need to have a full accounting, and this legislation sets that as a 
goal.
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his supporting 
words. The gentleman has been a longtime supporter of the issue of MIAs 
and POWs.
  Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back 
the balance of my time.
  Mr. ANDREWS of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that the minority and the majority can join 
together in this resolution and say to our Administration, push the 
Vietnamese to collaborate on the POW/MIA issue. We say to the 
Vietnamese, we are watching and paying attention, and you will be 
measured on this issue. And we say to the families of the American POW/
MIAs, you are not forgotten.
  Mr. SKAGGS. Mr. Speaker, as a Vietnam veteran and an original 
cosponsor of H. Con. Res. 278, I strongly support this bipartisan 
resolution to express the sense of Congress that the President should 
continue to make human rights and democracy a central part of U.S. 
policy toward Vietnam. We should use the President's decision to lift 
the trade embargo as a backdrop against which to make it clear that 
further normalization will depend on progress on political reforms and 
adherence to international human rights standards.
  Vietnam is pressing ahead with economic reforms and is working more 
cooperatively with the United States on POW/MIA cases. This is 
certainly encouraging news. Its very distressing, however, that the 
Vietnamese government continues to persecute its citizens for seeking 
freedoms that are recognized throughout the world.
  After the conclusion of the second round of formal human rights 
discussions between U.S. and Vietnamese officials in August, the 
response of Vietnam to cases and concerns raised by the United States 
has been disappointing. Vietnamese officials have provided only limited 
information on the location and physical health of known political 
opponents of the regime who have been consigned to prison camps.
  Although economic liberalization and international cooperation are 
welcome steps, they don't bring us to the end of the line. Political 
reform is also needed, and the United States has an opportunity to play 
an influential role in that regard.
  The United States should take the lead in encouraging Vietnam to take 
the next steps on the road to international acceptance: free and fair 
elections, and legal recognition of the fundamental rights of its 
citizens. As the U.S. Government moves toward establishing normal 
relations with Vietnam--a process I support--Vietnam's actions with 
regard to human rights and democracy can't be left out of the 
normalization process.
  H. Con. Res. 278 will help close a gap in U.S. policy. It expresses 
the sense of Congress that the United States should support democratic 
reform in Vietnam, including the holding of free elections and the 
promotion of fundamental freedoms and the rule of law. By supporting 
this resolution, Congress will let Vietnam know that economic 
liberalization must be accompanied by democratic reform and adherence 
to international human rights standards By supporting non-violent 
democratic reform in Vietnam, we can serve the interests of the 
Vietnamese people, remain true to our own ideals, and contribute to 
regional stability in southeast Asia.
  I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of H. Con. Res. 278 to express 
Congress' support for democracy and human rights in Vietnam.
  Mr. ANDREWS of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests 
for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Poshard). The question is on the motion 
offered by the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Andrews] that the House 
suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution, H. Con. Res. 
278.
  The question was taken.
  Mr. WALKER. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a 
quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not 
present.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 5 of rule I, and the 
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be 
postponed.
  The point of order of no quorum is considered withdrawn.

   EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING HUMAN RIGHTS IN VIETNAM

  Mr. ANDREWS of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules 
and agree to the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 216) expressing 
the sense of the Congress regarding human rights in Vietnam, as 
amended.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                            H. Con. Res. 216

       Whereas President Clinton on October 19, 1992, promised to 
     the American/Vietnam community ``it is my firm belief that 
     the issue of human rights should be a part of the discussion 
     when addressing the issue of normalization with Vietnam'';
       Whereas the ``road map'' established between the United 
     States Government and the Government of Vietnam did not 
     mention provisions for human rights or democracy as a 
     precondition for lifting the embargo and normalizing 
     relations with Vietnam;
       Whereas Vietnam remains one of the last communist countries 
     in the world and maintains one of the most repressive 
     political and social systems and the Vietnamese people are 
     deprived of their basic human rights;
       Whereas Vietnam has released from labor camps large numbers 
     of persons suspected of disloyalty or having ties to the 
     South Vietnamese government, and yet has rearrested and 
     incarcerated some of these former prisoners and many other 
     individuals for nonviolent political and religious advocacy;
       Whereas one of the most repressed people in Vietnam are the 
     ethnic minorities known as the Montagnards whose traditions, 
     culture, and religious beliefs continue to be eradicated 
     through policies such as the destruction of tribal villages 
     comprised of ethnic Vietnamese migrants for the purposes of 
     forced assimilation;
       Whereas free expression is denied in Vietnam (for example, 
     independent radio and television stations, newspapers, 
     performing artists, book publishers, writers, artists, and 
     journalists are forced to conform to government approval or 
     censorship);
       Whereas the poet Nguyen Chi Thien, a recognized Amnesty 
     International Prisoner of Conscience in northern Vietnam for 
     the past 27 years, is still denied the right of expression 
     and remains under close government surveillance;
       Whereas most South Vietnamese writers and poets have been 
     denied the right to publish or compose since 1975;
       Whereas the 1992 Vietnamese Constitution still designates 
     the Communist Party as the ``force leading the state and 
     society'';
       Whereas Vietnam's criminal law is used to punish nonviolent 
     advocates of political pluralism, through charges such as 
     ``attempting to overthrow the people's government'' or 
     ``antisocialist propaganda'';
       Whereas participants in independent democratic parties and 
     movements have been subjected to harsh repression (for 
     example, Dr. Nguyen Dan Que, the leader of the Non-Violent 
     Movement for Human Rights in Vietnam; Professor Doan Viet 
     Hoat of the Freedom Forum; and Nguyen Dinh Huy of the 
     Movement to Unite the People and Build Democracy);
       Whereas even nonviolent political movements for democracy 
     consisting of former National Liberation Front members such 
     as the League of Former Revolutionaries have been repressed 
     and its leaders, Nguyen Ho and Ta Ba Tong, remain under house 
     arrest;
       Whereas prominent leaders from the Buddhist, Catholic, Cao 
     Dai, Hoa Hao, and Protestant faiths are in prison or under 
     house arrest for expressing their religious beliefs;
       Whereas 4 monks of the Unified Buddhist Church were tried 
     and convicted on charges of instigating public disorder on 
     November 15, 1993, in relation to a massive demonstration in 
     Hue protesting police detention and harassment of major 
     church leaders;
       Whereas Venerable Thich Huyen Quang, head of the United 
     Buddhist Church, is under house arrest and under strict 
     surveillance by security police; and
       Whereas Catholic and Protestant clerics and lay people are 
     imprisoned for conducting unauthorized religious activities, 
     including religious education classes and social programs: 
     Now, therefore, be it
       Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
     concurring), That it is the sense of the Congress that--
       (1) the Department of State, in its formal human rights 
     dialogue with Vietnam (which was announced by the United 
     States and Vietnam on January 10, 1994), should place a high 
     priority on seeking--
       (A) the release of all nonviolent political prisoners, and
       (B) reforms in Vietnam's legal procedures and practices to 
     bring them into conformity with international human rights 
     standards;
       (2) the Secretary of State should submit a progress report 
     on this dialogue to the Congress within 6 months of the date 
     on which this resolution is adopted by the Congress;
       (3) the United States should actively support resolutions 
     at the United Nations Commission on Human Rights expressing 
     concern about the imprisonment of nonviolent political and 
     religious dissidents in Vietnam;
       (4) the United States should urge the Government of Vietnam 
     to invite international humanitarian organizations to provide 
     their confidential humanitarian services to prisoners in 
     Vietnam, as a step towards improving their treatment and the 
     poor condition of imprisonment;
       (5) the United States should consult with its allies, 
     including Japan, Australia, Canada, and the European 
     Community, to coordinate international public and private 
     appeals for improvement in human rights in Vietnam, drawing 
     attention to the statement issued by the World Bank-convened 
     donors' conference in Paris on November 10, 1993, that notes 
     that economic and social development in Vietnam require 
     ``more attention to democratization and the promotion of 
     human rights'' by the Government of Vietnam; and
       (6) in U.S. bilateral relations with the Socialist Republic 
     of Vietnam, the President should place a high priority on the 
     following concerns, and should assess the progress that has 
     occurred on them before taking steps to complete the full 
     normalization of relations with Vietnam:
       (a) whether article 4 of the Vietnamese constitution and 
     any other articles concerning ``democratic centralism'' and 
     ``the leading role of the Communist party'' (guaranteeing the 
     permanent rule of the Communist Party of Vietnam) are 
     repealed;
       (b) whether article 69 of the Vietnamese constitution which 
     strictly controls all religious activity including each 
     individual's right to worship, teach and publish religious 
     materials is repealed, and all Vietnamese regulations, codes, 
     and constitutional provisions prohibiting free expression, or 
     denying the freedoms of association or religious worship, are 
     eliminated; and
       (c) whether the Vietnamese Government and the Communist 
     Party of Vietnam make formal commitments to permit free and 
     fair elections, so that the citizens of the country may 
     determine the future leadership and orientation of their 
     government.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from New 
Jersey [Mr. Andrews] will be recognized for 20 minutes, and the 
gentleman from New York [Mr. Gilman] will be recognized for 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Andrews].
  Mr. ANDREWS of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  (Mr. ANDREWS of New Jersey asked and was given permission to revise 
and extend his remarks.)
  Mr. ANDREWS of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I want to commend the 
distinguished ranking member from New York [Mr. Gilman] who is with us 
tonight, for being the moving force behind this resolution. I am sure 
he will explain it very well and in great detail.
  I simply want to say in support of Mr. Gilman's resolution: Very 
often the Government of Vietnam will protest that those of us in 
America and the West are exaggerating the degree of abuse of human 
rights that takes place. We are given documentation and speeches and 
arguments about how we are exaggerating this.
  Mr. Speaker, this resolution makes a number of very powerful points, 
but its most powerful point is this: That it says to the leaders of 
Vietnam:

       If you are claiming that we in America and those in the 
     West are exaggerating your abuses of human rights, then open 
     your prisons. Let international observers come in and see 
     firsthand the way that political and other prisoners are 
     treated in Vietnamese prisons. If you are unafraid to do so, 
     then perhaps we will begin to believe you are more cognizant 
     of human rights concerns, as you say.

  I believe this is a resolution that is powerful and important. I urge 
my colleagues to support it.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  (Mr. GILMAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the distinguished Chairman 
of our Foreign Affairs Committee, the gentleman from Indiana, Mr. 
Hamilton for bringing H. Con. Res. 216, legislation expressing the 
sense of the Congress regarding human rights in Vietnam, to the floor 
today for consideration. In addition, I want to thank the distinguished 
subcommittee Chairman, the gentleman from New York, Mr. Ackerman and 
Ranking Republican Member, the gentleman from Iowa, Mr. Leach of the 
Asia and Pacific Subcommittee for favorably reporting H. Con. Res. 216. 
I especially want to thank our good friend and colleague, the gentleman 
from California, Mr. Rohrabacher, for his input and expertise on the 
methods and means by which to effect change in Hanoi.
  Recently, in a guest editorial for the National Review, Dan Rather 
spoke of his anger when a Vietnamese Government official told him 
earlier this year that the United States would lift the trade embargo 
because ``money moves America.'' Many of us have on occasion reacted 
the same way when confronted by similar statements made by officials of 
a foreign government.
  After all, ours is the Nation that liberated Europe, and just this 
summer we marked the fiftieth anniversary of the Normandy invasion, a 
campaign in which thousands of young Americans gave their lives to 
defeat fascism.
  No doubt our struggle against the Axis powers was also motivated by 
the belief that if we did not fight them in Europe then we would have 
had to contend with them on our shores. But there was no doubt in 
anyone's mind back then that we were there to liberate Europe. And 
liberate it we did.
  Similarly, our effort in Vietnam was not only motivated by the 
struggle by the South Vietnamese against the communist North and an 
indigenous insurgency funded by foreign forces, we were also concerned 
that we needed to contain Soviet and Chinese communism. We believed 
that our freedom could not be secure while those two growing 
totalitarian powers continued to attempt to expand their influence.
  We could have stayed at home safely protected behind our nuclear 
umbrella but in our hearts we believed we should, as President Kennedy 
said, ``bear any burden'' to bring freedom to all people who struggled 
against tyranny.
  There are good reasons to debate America's involvement in Vietnam. 
But the motivation that led us to sacrifice 58,000 young American lives 
is something that bears out our Nation's determination and the 
determination of those courageous men and women--and the veterans of 
that war.
  If we do not continue our struggle for human rights and political and 
religious freedom in Vietnam then those men and women died in vain. 
And, worst of all, it would give substance to the dictators in Hanoi 
when they say ``money moves America.''
  Meanwhile, the State Department has been moving full speed ahead with 
its plans to open a Liaison Office that looks more and more like an 
Embassy as official relations between our nation and the Socialist 
Republic of Vietnam becomes a foregone conclusion.
  Accordingly, while I have strongly disagreed with the 
administration's lifting of the trade embargo, it is my sincere hope 
that the President's action eventually pays some dividends. If next 
year, Amnesty International, Asia Watch, the National League of 
Families, the American Legion and the National Alliance of Families had 
some cause to commend the government in Hanoi, we would all be 
grateful.
  Accordingly, I urge my colleagues to support H. Con. Res. 216.

                              {time}  2310

  Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from California [Mr. 
Rohrbacher], a member of our Committee on Foreign Affairs.
  Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Speaker, before this administration ended our 
economic embargo on Communist Vietnam, I handed a list of 538 political 
prisoners in Vietnam to the head of the Communist Party of Vietnam. I 
handed that very same list of 538 political prisoners now being held in 
Vietnam, I handed that same list to President Clinton and told him what 
I have done. I told him that all he needed to do was make one simple 
phone call, and some of these people, these heroes of freedom, 
languishing in prison, some of them would probably be released simply 
as a sign of good faith. Well, I entered that same list of 538 
political prisoners into the Congressional Record.
  How much more can I do? How much more can a Member of Congress do to 
say to the Vietnamese, ``Please give us a sign that indeed you're going 
to make some movement on human rights''?
  I even asked the President of the United States to give that some 
consideration, and I say to my colleagues that not one of those 
prisoners has been released as far as I know. They can still release 
those prisoners. Tonight I call on the government of North and South 
Vietnam to release at least some of those 538 political prisoners as a 
sign of good faith to us if they want to have any more and any better 
relations with the United States of America. But there has been no 
movement in that direction.
  Mr. Speaker, Buddhists are still being jailed and tortured in Vietnam 
today, and they have been over the last 6 months. There has been no 
liberalization in the arena of political rights. We should move no 
further down the path of normalization until we see some movement on 
their part towards democracy in Vietnam, until we see some sign of at 
least an inkling of respect for human rights.
  Finally, Mr. Speaker, about this argument that economic development 
is going to bring democracy: I believe that this is being used, this 
argument, as was used in China and is being used today about Vietnam. 
It is nothing more than a cover for the crassest types of profiteering 
off human misery. We are talking about American companies that are 
willing to do business with the devil in order to make a dollar. I 
would suggest that the Hitler regime in Nazi Germany represented a very 
developed country, and in fact they had held elections before Hitler 
came to power. The fact is dealing with Adolph Hitler 
economically, treating him in the same way that we did democratic 
governments, would have been a mistake and was a mistake to the degree 
that we did it before World War II.

  I believe in free trade. I believe in free trade between free people. 
America must stand for more than just profiteering. We must stand for 
liberty and justice for all.
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from California [Mr. 
Rohrabacher] for his supporting remarks.
  Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back 
the balance of my time.
  Mr. ANDREWS of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I have no requests for time, 
and I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Poshard). The question is on the motion 
offered by the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Andrews] that the House 
suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution, House 
Concurrent Resolution 216, as amended.
  The question was taken.
  Mr. WALKER. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a 
quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not 
present.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 5, rule 
I, and the Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this 
motion will be postponed.
  The point of no quorum is considered withdrawn.

                          ____________________