[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 154 (Friday, September 29, 1995)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1897-E1898]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                 SALUTE TO THE SIKH NATION OF KHALISTAN

                                 ______


                        HON. WILLIAM O. LIPINSKI

                              of illinois

                    in the house of representatives

                       Friday, September 29, 1995

  Mr. LIPINSKI. Mr. Speaker, today I would like to salute the Sikh 
nation of Khalistan on the eighth anniversary of its declaration of 
independence. The Sikh leadership declared Khalistan independent on 
October 7, 1987.
  Many of us have been long-time supporters of Khalistan's struggle to 
achieve its rightful place among the independent countries of the 
world. Frankly, it is in America's best interest to support the 
independence of Khalistan. Upon achieving its independence, Khalistan 
has promised to sign a friendship treaty with the United States, as 
opposed to occupying Indian regime which votes against the American 
position in the United Nations 84 percent of the time. I am inserting 
an article from India Abroad of May 5, 1995, on this issue. As India 
deploys the Prithvi nuclear missile and continues development of the 
Trishul, in violation of international standards, it would help promote 
America's interests in the region if we had a reliable, democratic ally 
which could serve as a buffer between India and Pakistan.
  But while strategic concerns are important, they are not the best 
reason to support freedom for Khalistan. We should support freedom for 
Khalistan because it is the right thing to do. Currently, the Sikhs of 
Khalistan live under the boot of brutal Indian oppression. This 
oppression has caused the deaths of more than 120,000 Sikhs since 
India's brutal attack on the Sikh Nation's holiest shrine, the Golden 
Temple at Amritsar, in June 1984. Thousands of Sikhs have been 
arrested, tortured and killed by the brutal Indian regime. Thousands of 
others have simply disappeared, never to be heard from again. In some 
cases, their families have been waiting for several years for word of 
their whereabouts. Our own State Department reported in 1994 that 
between 1991 and 1993, over 41,000 cash bounties were handed out to 
police officers as a reward for killing Sikhs. In November, the Indian 
newspaper Hitavada reported that the late governor of Punjab, Surendra 
Nath, had been paid the equivalent of $1.5 billion to organize and 
support covert terrorist activities in Punjab, Khalistan, and in 
neighboring Kashmir. I am again entering this report into the Record so 
that my colleagues can see clearly the true nature of Indian democracy.
  One definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and 
expecting different results. Despite years of evidence that their 
repression has only strengthened the Sikh Nation's determination to 
liberate Khalistan, the Indian regime continues to increase the 
brutality and tyranny in a futile effort to scare the Sikh Nation into 
submitting to India's brutal rule. So great is the Indian regime's fear 
of the Sikh Nation that when Sikh leader Simranjit Singh Mann called 
for a peaceful movement to liberate Khalistan, he was arrested and held 
in illegal detention for 6 months. So great is their fear that when 
Jaswant Singh Khalra, general secretary of the Human Rights Wing, 
Shiromani Akali Dal issued a report showing that the regime had 
arrested, tortured, and killed 25,000 young Sikh men, then declared 
their bodies unidentified and cremated them, the police kidnapped Mr. 
Khalra and made him disappear like so many before him. These are merely 
two of the most recent examples of India tyranny in occupied Khalistan. 
There are so many other examples, large and small, that it would take 
me the rest of the session to list them.
  There is only one way to secure freedom for the Sikh Nation; a 
sovereign and independent Khalistan. Only by supporting independence 
for Khalistan can the United States, the bastion of freedom for the 
world, help to insure freedom in the Indian subcontinent. It is time 
for our government to speak out in support of freedom for Khalistan and 
the other nations living under Indian misrule. Until then, I hope my 
colleagues will join me in congratulating the Sikh Nation on Khalistani 
independence day.

      [From Heritage Foundation Study: India Abroad, May 5, 1995]

         Think Tank Lists India's U.N. Votes and Receipt of Aid

       A study by the Heritage Foundation, an influential 
     conservative think tank in Washington, has found that India 
     is high on the list of the top 10 countries receiving 
     American aid though it voted against the U.S. at the United 
     Nations, Aziz Haniffa writes. The study noted that India, 
     which is slated to receive over $155 million in U.S. aid this 
     year, voted against the U.S. last year at the U.N. Meanwhile, 
     the World Bank is seeking to convince industrial nations, 
     specially the U.S., that aid can be profitable, Ela Dutt 
     reports.

 TOP 10 COUNTRIES VOTING AGAINST THE UNITED STATES AT THE U.N. AND TOTAL
             UNITED STATES FOREIGN AID FOR FISCAL YEAR 1995             
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  U.N.                  
                                                 votes                  
                                                against                 
                                                 United     Fiscal year 
                                               States in     1995 aid   
                                                  1994                  
                                               [Percent]                
------------------------------------------------------------------------
India........................................         84    $155,479,000
Laos.........................................         80       2,000,000
China........................................         77         771,000
Labanon......................................         71       9,195,000
Burundi......................................         70      15,772,000
Srl Lanka....................................         70      35,872,000
Zimbabwe.....................................         70      31,729,000
Algeria......................................         69          75,000
Angola.......................................         69       5,000,000
Ghana........................................         69      58,587,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                    Study Links U.N. Voting With Aid

                           (By Aziz Haniffa)

       Washington.--A study by the Heritage Foundation, an 
     influential conservative think tank here, particularly in 
     Republican circles, has found that India headed the list of 
     the top 10 countries receiving U.S. aid, while voting against 
     the United States in the United Nations.
       The study, written by Bryan T. Johnson, a policy analyst, 
     with the foundation, noted that India, which is slated to 
     receive over $155 million in U.S. assistance in the fiscal 
     year 1995, cast its ballot in opposition to America 84 
     percent of the time last year at the U.N. ``That is as often 
     as Cuba,'' the report said.

 TOP 10 LARGEST RECIPIENTS OF UNITED STATES FOREIGN AID AND THEIR VOTING
                                 RECORD                                 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              U.N. votes
                                                               against  
                                           Fiscal year 1995     United  
                                                 aid          States in 
                                                                 1994   
                                                              [Percent] 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Israel..................................     $3,003,800,000            5
Egypt...................................      2,121,729,000           85
India...................................        155,479,000           54
Peru....................................        150,516,000           55
Bolivia.................................        134,178,000           58
Bangladesh..............................        112,679,000           64
Ethiopia................................         92,148,000           51
Haiti...................................         85,813,000           57
South Africa............................         82,463,000           58
Philippines.............................         74,004,000           61
------------------------------------------------------------------------

       According to the document, India was followed closely by 
     Laos (80 percent anti-U.S. voting record, while receiving $2 
     million in U.S. aid); China (77 percent, $771,000); Lebanon 
     (71 percent, $9.1 million); Burundi (70 percent, $15.7 
     million); Sir Lanka (70 percent, $35.8 million); Zimbabwe (70 
     percent, $31.7 million); Algeria (69 percent, $75,000); 
     Angola (69 percent, $5 million), and Ghana (69 percent, $56 
     million). By contrast, Russia, which as part of the Soviet 
     Union confronted the U.S. on nearly every issue during the 
     Cold War, was found by the Heritage study to have voted 
     against the U.S. only 33 percent of the time last year. It 
     also said that of the 10 countries that voted with the U.S. 
     the most, nine are former Soviet-bloc countries. The study 
     noted that some 74 percent of U.S. foreign aid recipients 
     voting in the 1994 U.S. session did so against the U.S. a 
     majority of the time. It said that of the 113 countries 
     that are foreign aid recipients and also members of the 
     U.N., 95 of them voted against the U.S. more often than 
     Russia.
       It reported that the top 10 countries, headed by India, 
     that voted against the U.S. the most would receive nearly 
     $313 million in foreign aid in the fiscal year 1995.
       All but one of America's top 10 largest recipients, which 
     the report identified as Israel, voted against the U.S. a 
     majority of the time in the 1994 U.N. session.
       While acknowledging that while there are many reason why a 
     country may vote with 

[[Page E 1898]]
     or against the U.S. at the U.N., Johnson contended that ``clearly the 
     amount of aid they receive from the U.S. is not one of 
     them.''
       Thus, he asserted in his report, ``If the voting record of 
     an aid recipient at the U.N. is any record of whether 
     countries are serving U.S. interests--and champions of 
     foreign aid must conclude that it is--then the U.S. is not 
     getting its money's worth.''

  TOP 10 COUNTRIES VOTING WITH THE UNITED STATES AT THE UNITED NATIONS  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Percent of votes                   
                                      against United    Fiscal year 1995
                                      States in 1994          aid       
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Israel.........................                  5     $3,003,000,000
2. Georgia........................                 10             75,000
3. Slovak Republic................                 20          1,580,000
4. Hungary........................                 20          3,420,000
5. Czech Republic.................                 21          1,954,000
6. Poland.........................                 22          4,068,000
7. Bulgaria.......................                 22          1,682,000
8. Albania........................                 22          1,249,000
9. Moldova........................                 23          1,011,000
10. Slovenia......................                 24            125,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

       He wrote that these voting records demonstrate that an 
     overwhelming majority of the recipients of U.S. foreign aid 
     fail to support U.S. interests abroad, adding. ``In fact, the 
     data show that some of these countries actually undermine 
     U.S. policies abroad.''
       The study said that this information begs the question: Why 
     is the U.S. spending so much money on countries who care 
     little about America's interests abroad? Consequently, the 
     report urged that when foreign aid is scrutinized as a target 
     for cutting the federal budget, ``Congress would do well to 
     look further into these numbers.''
       It said, ``Not only has foreign aid failed at its primary 
     mission of promoting economic development, it often has 
     failed, too, at supporting America's national interests 
     abroad.''
       The U.S. Agency for International Development, which has 
     come under heavy criticism since Republicans took control of 
     Congress in November, with Sen. Jesse Helms, North Carolina 
     Republican and chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, 
     calling for its abolition, dismissed the findings of the 
     Heritage report.
       USAID said in a statement that ``to use recorded votes in 
     the United Nations as an indication of support for American 
     interests is a red herring.''
       It said the figures released by Johnson's report ``do not 
     reflect the overall voting picture'' of U.S. aid recipients, 
     and noted that 77.4 percent of U.N. votes are determined by 
     consensus, leaving less than one-quarter of its votes to be 
     resolved by recorded votes. Consequently, the statement 
     argued, the fact that countries often side with the United 
     States during consensus votes are ignored by the Heritage 
     report.
       The statement also said a country's U.N. voting record ``is 
     only one dimension of its relations with the United States,'' 
     emphasizing, ``Bilateral economic, strategic and political 
     issues are often more directly important to U.S. interests.''
       However, Johnson in an interview with India Abroad argued 
     that it is the recorded votes that matter and not the 
     consensus votes that simply deal ``with minor issues related 
     to procedural, administrative things.''
       He asserted that the recorded votes are what ``deal with 
     the big issues like extending the embargo on Cuba, Bosnia, 
     things like that, and even in the U.S. Congress it is the 
     recorded votes that analysts and pollsters always look at.''
       Johnson ridiculed the agency's contention as a ``poor way 
     of arguing,'' saying that the recorded votes on particular 
     issues ``is where the distinction can be made very clearly, 
     unlike consensus votes.'' He denied that he was being 
     judgmental or specifically identifying individual countries, 
     declaring, ``One of the last things I would want to do is to 
     say that foreign aid should be used to try to affect the 
     voting records of various countries in the U.N.'' He said the 
     rationale for the study was essentially to rebut the Clinton 
     administration's contention that there was a connection 
     ``between our foreign aid dollars spent and America's 
     national interest being supported by the foreign aid 
     recipients.''
       Congressional sources, however, acknowledged that the 
     Heritage study was ``bad news for India,'' and that when 
     Congress reconvenes, India critics on Capitol Hill like Rep. 
     Dan Burton, Indiana Republican, would use the report as 
     fodder to justify their attacks on India and to call for cuts 
     in U.S. development aid to that country.

                   [From the Hitavada, Nov. 6, 1994]

                  Surendra Nath Paid to Fan Militancy?

                           (By Sukhbir Osan)

       Chandigarh, November 5.--Was the late Punjab Governor, Mr. 
     Surendra Nath, who died in a plane crash with nine family 
     members, behind the thousands of killings in Punjab and 
     Kashmir through a third agency?
       According to highly placed sources, the Union Government 
     had made available a huge amount of Rs. 4500 crore to Mr. 
     Surendra Nath, IPS, who held many a prestigious post from 
     time to time, to ``prop up'' terrorism in Punjab and Kashmir 
     in a bid to defame the Punjab and Kashmir militants. Both the 
     Union Home Minister Mr. S.B. Chavan and the Internal Security 
     Minister Mr. Rajesh Pilot were well aware of the fact that 
     Mr. Nath had very successfully infiltrated ``officials'' of 
     the Punjab and Kashmir Government into various terrorist 
     groups.
       What is further intriguing the minds of the people of 
     Punjab is the ignorance being feigned by the Government of 
     India, especially its Home Ministry regarding the 
     ``seizures'' made from ``Punjab Raj Bhawan'' after the demise 
     of Mr. Nath. The total ``collection'' amounts to Rupees 800 
     crore inclusive of cash, jewelry, and other immovable 
     property. In fact, according to sources, this ``body'' seems 
     to be a part of the amount of Rs. 4500 crore which was placed 
     at the disposal of Mr. Surendra Nath to root out terrorism.
       Mr. Surendra Nath played an all important role to give 
     strength to the hitherto lesser known C.I.S.F. (Central 
     Industrial Security Force) and it is being alleged that some 
     of ``its'' men were used to kill innocent persons including 
     the family members of the Punjab police personnel as well as 
     teachers, doctors, engineers, media men and political 
     personalities.
       A ``suspended'' police official Bakhsish Singh remained 
     very close to Mr. Surendra Nath. Mr. Singh was the security 
     in charge of the all time high-profile top Akali leader and 
     the former Punjab Finance Minister Mr. Balwant Singh who was 
     gunned down by ``terrorists'' in a broad day light. Mr. 
     Bakhsish Singh was immediately suspended after the ghastly 
     murder of Mr. Balwant Singh. But with the advent of Mr. 
     Surendra Nath as the Governor of Punjab, Mr. Bakhsish Singh, 
     a Nath confidant, re-appeared on the scene and enjoyed a very 
     easy access to Mr. Surendra Nath even at ``odd'' hours and 
     was ``well informed'' of all the ``secret missions'' of the 
     late Governor.
       Though the Union Home Minister, Mr. S.B. Chavan has denied 
     that currency has been seized from the Punjab Raj Bhavan, he 
     has further complicated the issue by saying that only the 
     Prime Minister Mr. Rao could say anything about the 
     ``seizures'' made from the Raj Bhavan.
       Though the veteran CPI leader and the former Punjab 
     Minister, Mr. Satyapal Dang as well as the Khalistan 
     protagonist Mr. Simranjit Singh Mann have asked for a CBI 
     probe into the Punjab Raj Bhavan seizures, the Government of 
     India is maintaining a studied silence. Meanwhile, a Human 
     Rights protagonist and an advocate of the Punjab and Haryana 
     High Court has filed a written petition in the Supreme Court 
     for a CBI probe into the matter.
       According to sources, the list of seizures prepared by 
     intelligence agencies is very long and is consisting of 
     Rupees 110 crore in cash, jewelry worth Rupees 40 crore, 
     immovable property worth Rupees 650 crore, various political 
     bangalows and farm houses and above all his attempt to grab 
     land near Kullu at a throw away price of Rupees 8 crore.
       The Prime Minister, these sources maintain, is annoyed with 
     both Mr. Chawan and Mr. Pilot since he feels that their 
     infighting is behind all this ``leakage'' to media persons 
     and may have a ``damaging influence'' on the Congress I 
     performance in the ensuing election being held in the 
     Southern States.