[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 170 (Tuesday, October 31, 1995)]
[House]
[Pages H11565-H11566]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




  MORE ON FOREIGN OPERATIONS APPROPRIATIONS ARMS TO PAKISTAN PROVISION

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Pallone] is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. PALLONE. Madam Speaker, I just wanted to talk a bit about the 
conference report on the foreign operations appropriations bill which 
was passed just in the last hour or so. As I mentioned on the floor, it 
is sort of a mixed bag. I supported the bill because I think overall it 
is a good bill. But there are some good and bad items in it.
  I want to talk about one good aspect and one bad aspect, if I could 
in the time that I have allotted this evening.
  First of all, I was very pleased to see that the conferees actually 
reduced the amount of economic assistance to Turkey. Last year Turkey 
received $45 million in United States economic support. This year it 
will be down to $33.5 million, significantly less than the $100 million 
that was requested by the administration. I think in large part that is 
due to the efforts of Congressman John Porter from Illinois and the 
amendment that he had successfully adopted on the House floor back in 
June, which was supported by myself and others.

  That amendment basically pointed out that Turkey has been involved in 
a number of issues that are detrimental both to the United States and 
to a lot of other ethnic groups as well as other countries in its 
vicinity.
  First of all, the reduction in aid, I believe, clearly recognizes the 
unlawful blockade by Turkey of Armenia. It also recognizes the 
treatment that Turkey has been giving to the Kurds, an ethnic minority 
within its borders and even beyond its borders. Turkey has been 
systematically annihilating Kurds, tearing down, burning burning 
villages. In the conference report specific reference is made to one of 
my constituents, a U.S. citizen by the name of Aliza Marcus, who is a 
Reuters journalist and a New Jersey resident who is being tried in 
Turkey on charges of provoking racial hatred for reporting on the 
Turkish military's forced evacuation and destruction of villages in 
southeastern Turkey. The conferees say they expect that the Government 
of Turkey will protect freedom of expression and information by 
interceding with the military-sponsored state security courts on behalf 
of Aliza Marcus. This woman has done nothing more than do her job and 
now she is being tried in Turkish courts.
  In addition to that, I believe the reduction in aid to Turkey 
recognizes that Turkish intransigence on the Cyprus issue. I believe 
very strongly that Cyprus should be reunited, that the Turkish military 
should pull out and, in fact, the conference report specifically 
earmarks $15 million for Cyprus among other things aimed at 
reunification of that island. So I believe that our efforts on behalf 
of both Armenia, the Kurds and the Cypriots to point out that Turkey 
really is no ally of the United States is clearly reflected in the 
conference report.
  I am concerned, though, and I did want to express my concern, that 
the conference report does include the Senate language which permit the 
transfer of seized military equipment to the Government of Pakistan. 
This provision was not part of the House-passed bill, and I regret that 
this ill-advised and dangerous provision is in the conference report. 
During the conference I was joined by 40 of my House colleagues from 
both sides of the aisle in writing to the conferees urging that they 
not recede to the Senate provision with regard to the arms sales to 
Pakistan.

  As we noted in our letter to the conferees, during the last decade 
Pakistan was the third largest recipient of United States military 
assistance. Pakistan asked for the help of the United States in 
becoming conventionally strong militarily and, in exchange, promised 
not to develop nuclear weapons. But by 1985, United States intelligence 
had strong evidence that Pakistan was taking United States arms while 
going back on its word about developing nuclear capability.
  In response to Pakistan's confirmed assurances in 1985, the Congress 
enacted the Pressler amendment to allow Pakistan to continue to receive 
United States assistance so long as the President could annually 
certify that Pakistan does not have a nuclear device. But in 1985, 
after passage of the Pressler amendment, Pakistan contracted for the 
delivery of 68 F-16 fighters and other military equipment totaling $2.6 
billion.
  In 1990, Pakistan had received 40 of the 68 planes and a considerable 
amount of other equipment had been delivered when President Bush was 
forced by overwhelming evidence to find that Pakistan had the bomb. The 
Pressler amendment was invoked ending all military assistance, 
including weapons contracted and paid for.
  Unfortunately, this provision, which is in the conference report, 
would essentially take away the strong force of the Pressler amendment 
and allow significant amount of these arms sales to take place and be 
transferred to Pakistan. I think that that is unfortunate. 

[[Page H11566]]

It violates the Pressler amendment, and it contributes extensively to 
more instability in Southeast Asia.
  Overall though the conference report is a good report and that is why 
I supported it.

                          ____________________