[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 90 (Tuesday, June 18, 1996)]
[House]
[Pages H6469-H6478]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
{time} 1715
IRAN AND LIBYA SANCTIONS ACT OF 1996
Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the
bill (H.R. 3107) to impose sanctions on persons exporting certain goods
or technology that would enhance Iran's ability to explore for,
extract, refine, or transport by pipeline petroleum resources, and for
other purposes, as amended.
The Clerk read as follows:
H.R. 3107
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Iran and Libya Sanctions Act
of 1996''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
The Congress makes the following findings:
(1) The efforts of the Government of Iran to acquire
weapons of mass destruction and the means to deliver them and
its support of acts of international terrorism endanger the
national security and foreign policy interests of the United
States and those countries with which the United States
shares common strategic and foreign policy objectives.
(2) The objective of preventing the proliferation of
weapons of mass destruction and acts of international
terrorism through existing multilateral and bilateral
initiatives requires additional efforts to deny Iran the
financial means to sustain its nuclear, chemical, biological,
and missile weapons programs.
(3) The Government of Iran uses its diplomatic facilities
and quasi-governmental institutions outside of Iran to
promote acts of international terrorism and assist its
nuclear, chemical, biological, and missile weapons programs.
(4) The failure of the Government of Libya to comply with
Resolutions 731, 748, and 883 of the Security Council of the
United Nations, its support of international terrorism, and
its efforts to acquire weapons of mass destruction constitute
a threat to international peace and security that endangers
the national security and foreign policy interests of the
United States and those countries with which it shares common
strategic and foreign policy objectives.
SEC. 3. DECLARATION OF POLICY.
(a) Policy With Respect to Iran.--The Congress declares
that it is the policy of the United States to deny Iran the
ability to support acts of international terrorism and to
fund the development and acquisition of weapons of mass
destruction and the means to deliver them by limiting the
development of Iran's ability to explore for, extract,
refine, or transport by pipeline petroleum resources of Iran.
(b) Policy With Respect to Libya.--The Congress further
declares that it is the policy of the United States to seek
full compliance by Libya with its obligations under
Resolutions 731, 748, and 883 of the Security Council of the
United Nations, including ending all support for acts of
international terrorism and efforts to develop or acquire
weapons of mass destruction.
SEC. 4. MULTILATERAL REGIME.
(a) Multilateral Negotiations.--In order to further the
objectives of section 3, the Congress urges the President to
commence immediately diplomatic efforts, both in appropriate
international fora such as the United Nations, and
bilaterally with allies of the United States, to establish a
multilateral sanctions regime against Iran, including
provisions limiting the development of petroleum resources,
that will inhibit Iran's efforts to carry out activities
described in section 2.
(b) Reports to Congress.--The President shall report to the
appropriate congressional committees, not later than 1 year
after the date of the enactment of this Act, and periodically
thereafter, on the extent that diplomatic efforts described
in subsection (a) have been successful. Each report shall
include--
(1) the countries that have agreed to undertake measures to
further the objectives of section 3 with respect to Iran, and
a description of those measures; and
(2) the countries that have not agreed to measures
described in paragraph (1), and, with respect to those
countries, other measures (in addition to that provided in
subsection (d)) the President recommends that the United
States take to further the objectives of section 3 with
respect to Iran.
(c) Waiver.--The President may waive the application of
section 5(a) with respect to nationals of a country if--
(1) that country has agreed to undertake substantial
measures, including economic sanctions, that will inhibit
Iran's efforts to carry out activities described in section 2
and information required by subsection (b)(1) has been
included in a report submitted under subsection (b); and
(2) the President, at least 30 days before the waiver takes
effect, notifies the appropriate congressional committees of
his intention to exercise the waiver.
(d) Enhanced Sanction.--
(1) Sanction.--With respect to nationals of countries
except those with respect to which the President has
exercised the waiver authority of subsection (c), at any time
after the first report is required to be submitted under
subsection (b), section 5(a) shall be applied by substituting
``$20,000,000'' for ``$40,000,000'' each place it appears,
and by substituting ``$5,000,000'' for ``$10,000,000''.
(2) Report to congress.--The President shall report to the
appropriate congressional committees any country with respect
to which paragraph (1) applies.
(e) Interim Report on Multilateral Sanctions; Monitoring.--
The President, not later than 90 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, shall report to the appropriate
congressional committees on--
(1) whether the member states of the European Union, the
Republic of Korea, Australia, Israel, or Japan have
legislative or administrative standards providing for the
imposition of trade sanctions on persons or their affiliates
doing business or having investments in Iran or Libya;
(2) the extent and duration of each instance of the
application of such sanctions; and
(3) the disposition of any decision with respect to such
sanctions by the World Trade Organization or its predecessor
organization.
SEC. 5. IMPOSITION OF SANCTIONS.
(a) Sanctions With Respect to Iran.--Except as provided in
subsection (f), the President shall impose 2 or more of the
sanctions described in paragraphs (1) through (6) of section
6 if the President determines that a person has, with actual
knowledge, on or after the date of the enactment of this Act,
made an investment of $40,000,000 or more (or any combination
of investments of at least $10,000,000 each, which in the
aggregate equals or exceeds $40,000,000 in any 12-month
period), that directly and significantly contributed to the
enhancement of Iran's ability to develop petroleum resources
of Iran.
(b) Sanctions With Respect to Libya.--
(1) Trigger of Mandatory sanctions.--Except as provided in
subsection (f), the President shall impose 2 or more of the
sanctions described in paragraphs (1) through (6) of section
6 if the President determines that a person has, with actual
knowledge, on or after the date of the enactment of this Act,
exported, transferred, or otherwise provided to Libya any
goods, services, technology, or other items the provision of
which is prohibited under paragraph 4(b) or 5 of Resolution
748 of the Security Council of the United Nations, adopted
March 31, 1992, or under paragraph 5 or 6 of Resolution 883
of the Security Council of the United Nations, adopted
November 11, 1993, if the provision of such items
significantly and materially--
(A) contributed to Libya's ability to acquire chemical,
biological, or nuclear weapons or destabilizing numbers and
types of advanced conventional weapons or enhanced Libya's
military or paramilitary capabilities;
[[Page H6470]]
(B) contributed to Libya's ability to develop its petroleum
resources; or
(C) contributed to Libya's ability to maintain its aviation
capabilities.
(2) Trigger of discretionary sanctions.--Except as provided
in subsection (f), the President may impose 1 or more of the
sanctions described in paragraphs (1) through (6) of section
6 if the President determines that a person has, with actual
knowledge, on or after the date of the enactment of this Act,
made an investment of $40,000,000 or more (or any combination
of investments of at least $10,000,000 each, which in the
aggregate equals or exceeds $40,000,000 in any 12-month
period), that directly and significantly contributed to the
enhancement of Libya's ability to develop its petroleum
resources.
(c) Persons Against Which the Sanctions Are To Be
Imposed.--The sanctions described in subsections (a) and (b)
shall be imposed on--
(1) any person the President determines has carried out the
activities described in subsection (a) or (b); and
(2) any person the President determines--
(A) is a successor entity to the person referred to in
paragraph (1);
(B) is a parent or subsidiary of the person referred to in
paragraph (1) if that parent or subsidiary, with actual
knowledge, engaged in the activities referred to in paragraph
(1); or
(C) is an affiliate of the person referred to in paragraph
(1) if that affiliate, with actual knowledge, engaged in the
activities referred to in paragraph (1) and if that affiliate
is controlled in fact by the person referred to in paragraph
(1).
For purposes of this Act, any person or entity described in
this subsection shall be referred to as a ``sanctioned
person''.
(d) Publication in Federal Register.--The President shall
cause to be published in the Federal Register a current list
of persons and entities on whom sanctions have been imposed
under this Act. The removal of persons or entities from, and
the addition of persons and entities to, the list, shall also
be so published.
(e) Publication of Projects.--The President shall cause to
be published in the Federal Register a list of all
significant projects which have been publicly tendered in the
oil and gas sector in Iran.
(f) Exceptions.--The President shall not be required to
apply or maintain the sanctions under subsection (a) or (b)--
(1) in the case of procurement of defense articles or
defense services--
(A) under existing contracts or subcontracts, including the
exercise of options for production quantities to satisfy
requirements essential to the national security of the United
States;
(B) if the President determines in writing that the person
to which the sanctions would otherwise be applied is a sole
source supplier of the defense articles or services, that the
defense articles or services are essential, and that
alternative sources are not readily or reasonably available;
or
(C) if the President determines in writing that such
articles or services are essential to the national security
under defense coproduction agreements;
(2) in the case of procurement, to eligible products, as
defined in section 308(4) of the Trade Agreements Act of 1979
(19 U.S.C. 2518(4)), of any foreign country or
instrumentality designated under section 301(b)(1) of that
Act (19 U.S.C. 2511(b)(1));
(3) to products, technology, or services provided under
contracts entered into before the date on which the President
publishes in the Federal Register the name of the person on
whom the sanctions are to be imposed;
(4) to--
(A) spare parts which are essential to United States
products or production;
(B) component parts, but not finished products, essential
to United States products or production; or
(C) routine servicing and maintenance of products, to the
extent that alternative sources are not readily or reasonably
available;
(6) to information and technology essential to United
States products or production; or
(7) to medicines, medical supplies, or other humanitarian
items.
SEC. 6. DESCRIPTION OF SANCTIONS.
The sanctions to be imposed on a sanctioned person under
section 5 are as follows:
(1) Export-import bank assistance for exports to sanctioned
persons.--The President may direct the Export-Import Bank of
the United States not to give approval to the issuance of any
guarantee, insurance, extension of credit, or participation
in the extension of credit in connection with the export of
any goods or services to any sanctioned person.
(2) Export sanction.--The President may order the United
States Government not to issue any specific license and not
to grant any other specific permission or authority to export
any goods or technology to a sanctioned person under--
(i) the Export Administration Act of 1979;
(ii) the Arms Export Control Act;
(iii) the Atomic Energy Act of 1954; or
(iv) any other statute that requires the prior review and
approval of the United States Government as a condition for
the export or re-export of goods or services.
(3) Loans from united states financial institutions.--The
United States Government may prohibit any United States
financial institution from making loans or providing credits
to any sanctioned person totaling more than $10,000,000 in
any 12-month period unless such person is engaged in
activities to relieve human suffering and the loans or
credits are provided for such activities.
(4) Prohibitions on financial institutions.--The following
prohibitions may be imposed against a sanctioned person that
is a financial institution:
(A) Prohibition on designation as primary dealer.--Neither
the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System nor the
Federal Reserve Bank of New York may designate, or permit the
continuation of any prior designation of, such financial
institution as a primary dealer in United States Government
debt instruments.
(B) Prohibition on service as a repository of government
funds.--Such financial institution may not serve as agent of
the United States Government or serve as repository for
United States Government funds.
The imposition of either sanction under subparagraph (A) or
(B) shall be treated as 1 sanction for purposes of section 5,
and the imposition of both such sanctions shall be treated as
2 sanctions for purposes of section 5.
(5) Procurement sanction.--The United States Government may
not procure, or enter into any contract for the procurement
of, any goods or services from a sanctioned person.
(6) Additional sanctions.--The President may impose
sanctions, as appropriate, to restrict imports with respect
to a sanctioned person, in accordance with the International
Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 and following).
SEC. 7. ADVISORY OPINIONS.
The Secretary of State may, upon the request of any person,
issue an advisory opinion to that person as to whether a
proposed activity by that person would subject that person to
sanctions under this Act. Any person who relies in good faith
on such an advisory opinion which states that the proposed
activity would not subject a person to such sanctions, and
any person who thereafter engages in such activity, will not
be made subject to such sanctions on account of such
activity.
SEC. 8. TERMINATION OF SANCTIONS.
(a) Iran.--The requirement under section 5(a) to impose
sanctions shall no longer have force or effect with respect
to Iran if the President determines and certifies to the
appropriate congressional committees that Iran--
(1) has ceased its efforts to design, develop, manufacture,
or acquire--
(A) a nuclear explosive device or related materials and
technology;
(B) chemical and biological weapons; and
(C) ballistic missiles and ballistic missile launch
technology; and
(2) has been removed from the list of countries the
governments of which have been determined, for purposes of
section 6(j) of the Export Administration Act of 1979, to
have repeatedly provided support for acts of international
terrorism.
(b) Libya.--The requirement under section 5(b) to impose
sanctions shall no longer have force or effect with respect
to Libya if the President determines and certifies to the
appropriate congressional committees that Libya has fulfilled
the requirements of United Nations Security Council
Resolution 731, adopted January 21, 1992, United Nations
Security Council Resolution 748, adopted March 31, 1992, and
United Nations Security Council Resolution 883, adopted
November 11, 1993.
SEC. 9. DURATION OF SANCTIONS; PRESIDENTIAL WAIVER.
(a) Delay of Sanctions.--
(1) Consultations.--If the President makes a determination
described in section 5(a) or 5(b) with respect to a foreign
person, the Congress urges the President to initiate
consultations immediately with the government with primary
jurisdiction over that foreign person with respect to the
imposition of sanctions under this Act.
(2) Actions by government of jurisdiction.--In order to
pursue consultations under paragraph (1) with the government
concerned, the President may delay imposition of sanctions
under this Act for up to 90 days. Following such
consultations, the President shall immediately impose
sanctions unless the President determines and certifies to
the Congress that the government has taken specific and
effective actions, including, as appropriate, the imposition
of appropriate penalties, to terminate the involvement of the
foreign person in the activities that resulted in the
determination by the President under section 5(a) or 5(b)
concerning such person.
(3) Additional delay in imposition of sanctions.--The
President may delay the imposition of sanctions for up to an
additional 90 days if the President determines and certifies
to the Congress that the government with primary jurisdiction
over the person concerned is in the process of taking the
actions described in paragraph (2).
(4) Report to congress.--Not later than 90 days after
making a determination under section 5(a) or 5(b), the
President shall submit to the appropriate congressional
committees a report on the status of consultations with the
appropriate foreign government under this subsection, and the
basis for any determination under paragraph (3).
(b) Duration of Sanctions.--A sanction imposed under
section 5 shall remain in effect--
(1) for a period of not less than 2 years from the date on
which it is imposed; or
[[Page H6471]]
(2) until such time as the President determines and
certifies to the Congress that the person whose activities
were the basis for imposing the sanction is no longer
engaging in such activities and that the President has
received reliable assurances that such person will not
knowingly engage in such activities in the future, except
that such sanction shall remain in effect for a period of at
least 1 year.
(c) Presidential Waiver.--
(1) Authority.--The President may waive the requirement in
section 5 to impose a sanction or sanctions on a person
described in section 5(c), and may waive the continued
imposition of a sanction or sanctions under subsection (b) of
this section, 30 days or more after the President determines
and so reports to the appropriate congressional committees
that it is important to the national interest of the United
States to exercise such waiver authority.
(2) Contents of report.--Any report under paragraph (1)
shall provide a specific and detailed rationale for the
determination under paragraph (1), including--
(A) a description of the conduct that resulted in the
determination under section 5(a) or (b), as the case may be;
(B) in the case of a foreign person, an explanation of the
efforts to secure the cooperation of the government with
primary jurisdiction over the sanctioned person to terminate
or, as appropriate, penalize the activities that resulted in
the determination under section 5(a) or (b), as the case may
be;
(C) an estimate as to the significance--
(i) of the provision of the items described in section 5(a)
to Iran's ability to develop its petroleum resources, or
(ii) of the provision of the items described in section
5(b)(1) to the abilities of Libya described in subparagraph
(A), (B), or (C) of section 5(b)(1), or of the investment
described in section 5(b)(2) on Libya's ability to develop
its petroleum resources,
as the case may be; and
(D) a statement as to the response of the United States in
the event that the person concerned engages in other
activities that would be subject to section 5(a) or (b).
(3) Effect of report on waiver.--If the President makes a
report under paragraph (1) with respect to a waiver of
sanctions on a person described in section 5(c), sanctions
need not be imposed under section 5(a) or (b) on that person
during the 30-day period referred to in paragraph (1).
SEC. 10. REPORTS REQUIRED.
(a) Report on Certain International Initiatives.--Not later
than 6 months after the date of the enactment of this Act,
and every 6 months thereafter, the President shall transmit a
report to the appropriate congressional committees
describing--
(1) the efforts of the President to mount a multilateral
campaign to persuade all countries to pressure Iran to cease
its nuclear, chemical, biological, and missile weapons
programs and its support of acts of international terrorism;
(2) the efforts of the President to persuade other
governments to ask Iran to reduce the presence of Iranian
diplomats and representatives of other government and
military or quasi-governmental institutions of Iran and to
withdraw any such diplomats or representatives who
participated in the takeover of the United States embassy in
Tehran on November 4, 1979, or the subsequent holding of
United States hostages for 444 days;
(3) the extent to which the International Atomic Energy
Agency has established regular inspections of all nuclear
facilities in Iran, including those presently under
construction; and
(4) Iran's use of Iranian diplomats and representatives of
other government and military or quasi-governmental
institutions of Iran to promote acts of international
terrorism or to develop or sustain Iran's nuclear, chemical,
biological, and missile weapons programs.
(b) Other Reports.--The President shall ensure the
continued transmittal to the Congress of reports describing--
(1) the nuclear and other military capabilities of Iran, as
required by section 601(a) of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation
Act of 1978 and section 1607 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1993; and
(2) the support provided by Iran for acts of international
terrorism, as part of the Department of State's annual report
on international terrorism.
SEC. 11. DETERMINATIONS NOT REVIEWABLE.
A determination to impose sanctions under this Act shall
not be reviewable in any court.
SEC. 12. EXCLUSION OF CERTAIN ACTIVITIES.
Nothing in this Act shall apply to any activities subject
to the reporting requirements of title V of the National
Security Act of 1947.
SEC. 13. EFFECTIVE DATE; SUNSET.
(a) Effective Date.--This Act shall take effect on the date
of the enactment of this Act.
(b) Sunset.--This Act shall cease to be effective on the
date that is 5 years after the date of the enactment of this
Act.
SEC. 14. DEFINITIONS.
As used in this Act:
(1) Act of international terrorism.--The term ``act of
international terrorism'' means an act--
(A) which is violent or dangerous to human life and that is
a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of
any State or that would be a criminal violation if committed
within the jurisdiction of the United States or any State;
and
(B) which appears to be intended--
(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(ii) to influence the policy of a government by
intimidation or coercion; or
(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by
assassination or kidnapping.
(2) Appropriate congressional committees.--The term
``appropriate congressional committees'' means the Committee
on Finance, the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban
Affairs, and the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate
and the Committee on Ways and Means, the Committee on Banking
and Financial Services, and the Committee on International
Relations of the House of Representatives.
(3) Component part.--The term ``component part'' has the
meaning given that term in section 11A(e)(1) of the Export
Administration Act of 1979 (50 U.S.C. App. 2410a(e)(1)).
(4) Develop and development.--To ``develop'', or the
``development'' of, petroleum resources means the exploration
for, or the extraction, refining, or transportation by
pipeline of, petroleum resources.
(5) Financial institution.--The term ``financial
institution'' includes--
(A) a depository institution (as defined in section 3(c)(1)
of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act), including a branch or
agency of a foreign bank (as defined in section 1(b)(7) of
the International Banking Act of 1978);
(B) a credit union;
(C) a securities firm, including a broker or dealer;
(D) an insurance company, including an agency or
underwriter; and
(E) any other company that provides financial services.
(6) Finished product.--The term ``finished product'' has
the meaning given that term in section 11A(e)(2) of the
Export Administration Act of 1979 (50 U.S.C. App.
2410a(e)(2)).
(7) Foreign person.--The term ``foreign person'' means--
(A) an individual who is not a United States person or an
alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence into the
United States; or
(B) a corporation, partnership, or other nongovernmental
entity which is not a United States person.
(8) Goods and technology.--The terms ``goods'' and
``technology'' have the meanings given those terms in section
16 of the Export Administration Act of 1979 (50 U.S.C. app.
2415).
(9) Investment.--The term ``investment'' means any of the
following activities if such activity is undertaken pursuant
to an agreement, or pursuant to the exercise of rights under
such an agreement, that is entered into with the Government
of Iran or a nongovenmental entity in Iran, or with the
Government of Libya or a nongovernmental entity in Libya, on
or after the date of the enactment of this Act:
(A) The entry into a contract that includes responsibility
for the development of petroleum resources located in Iran or
Libya (as the case may be), or the entry into a contract
providing for the general supervision and guarantee of
another person's performance of such a contract.
(B) The purchase of a share of ownership, including an
equity interest, in that development.
(C) The entry into a contract providing for the
participation in royalties, earnings, or profits in that
development, without regard to the form of the participation.
The term ``investment'' does not include the entry into,
performance, or financing of a contract to sell or purchase
goods, services, or technology.
(10) Iran.--The term ``Iran'' includes any agency or
instrumentality of Iran.
(11) Iranian diplomats and representatives of other
government and military or quasi-governmental institutions of
iran.--The term ``Iranian diplomats and representatives of
other government and military or quasi-governmental
institutions of Iran'' includes employees, representatives,
or affiliates of Iran's--
(A) Foreign Ministry;
(B) Ministry of Intelligence and Security;
(C) Revolutionary Guard Corps;
(D) Crusade for Reconstruction;
(E) Qods (Jerusalem) Forces;
(F) Interior Ministry;
(G) Foundation for the Oppressed and Disabled;
(H) Prophet's Foundation;
(I) June 5th Foundation;
(J) Martyr's Foundation;
(K) Islamic Propagation Organization; and
(L) Ministry of Islamic Guidance.
(12) Libya.--The term ``Libya'' includes any agency or
instrumentality of Libya.
(13) Nuclear explosive device.--The term ``nuclear
explosive device'' means any device, whether assembled or
disassembled, that is designed to produce an instantaneous
release of an amount of nuclear energy from special nuclear
material (as defined in section 11aa. of the Atomic Energy
Act of 1954) that is greater than the amount of energy that
would be released from the detonation of one pound of
trinitrotoluene (TNT).
(14) Person.--The term ``person'' means--
(A) a natural person;
(B) a corporation, business association, partnership,
society, trust, any other nongovernmental entity,
organization, or group, and any governmental entity operating
as a business enterprise; and
(C) any successor to any entity described in subparagraph
(B).
[[Page H6472]]
(15) Petroleum resources.--The term ``petroleum resources''
includes petroleum and natural gas resources.
(16) United states or state.--The term ``United States'' or
``State'' means the several States, the District of Columbia,
the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Commonwealth of the
Northern Mariana Islands, American Samoa, Guam, the United
States Virgin Islands, and any other territory or possession
of the United States.
(17) United states person.--The term ``United States
person'' means--
(A) a natural person who is a citizen of the United States
or who owes permanent allegiance to the United States; and
(B) a corporation or other legal entity which is organized
under the laws of the United States, any State or territory
thereof, or the District of Columbia, if natural persons
described in subparagraph (A) own, directly or indirectly,
more than 50 percent of the outstanding capital stock or
other beneficial interest in such legal entity.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Stearns). Pursuant to the rule, the
gentleman from New York [Mr. Gilman] and the gentleman from Indiana
[Mr. Hamilton] each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York [Mr. Gilman].
(Mr. GILMAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3107, the Iran and Libya
Sanctions Act of 1996 which mandates sanctions on persons making
investments that would enhance the ability of Iran to explore for,
extract, refine, or transport by pipeline petroleum resources.
It would also establish a mandatory sanctions regime on foreign
persons who violate United Nations Security Council Resolutions 748 and
883 by selling weapons, aviation equipment, and oil equipment to Libya,
a country responsible for the cowardly and unforgivable attack on Pan
Am flight 103 in December 1988.
I take great pleasure in bringing before the House a bill that would
put our country on the front lines of our fight to combat state-
supported terrorism and that will help to induce our allies in Europe
and Asia to join us in a multilateral sanctions regime against Iran.
This multilateral sanctions regime will allow the President to waive
the application of sanctions against the nationals of a country that
has put in place its own sanctions regime against Iran, but it will
also require him to impose an enhanced sanction--in the form of a
reduction in the trigger level for investment in Iran from $40 to $20
million--against the nationals of all other countries.
In short, the bill requires foreign companies to choose between
investing in our market and those of Iran and Libya. In the process, it
gives the President the policy tools he needs to begin fulfilling his
pledges to increase diplomatic and economic pressure on the Iranian and
Libyan Governments.
As approved by the Ways and Means Committee in close consultation
with the House International Relations Committee, this bill imposes a
sanction regime on companies helping to develop the oil and gas
industries in Iran and Libya. Its enactment can sharply diminish the
future revenues from oil and gas production of these rogue regimes and
will put a halt to their campaigns of state-sponsored terrorism and
their efforts to develop weapons of mass destruction.
Iran looms as the principal long-term threat to United States
interests in the Persian Gulf and the Middle East. It continues its
terrorist and subversive activities against its neighbors in the Gulf
states and around the world, as far away as Argentina. Over the past
year, Iran has actively supported efforts to destabilize Bahrain,
promoting the Gulf Cooperation Council to issue a public statement
admonishing Iran to put a halt to its subversive policies in the
region.
Its leaders openly advocate the destruction of the state of Israel
and its support for terrorist groups in Lebanon have led to renewed
rounds of violence in that country and have set back the prospects for
a peace accord in the Middle East.
Iran, like Iraq, has launched a clandestine program to build nuclear
weapons and missile systems capable of delivering weapons of mass
destruction payloads to targets up to 1,000 kilometers from its
borders, thereby threatening key allies in the region including Jordan,
Israel, and Turkey.
In his testimony before the House International Relations Committee
on November 9, 1995, Peter Tarnoff, Under Secretary of State for
political Affairs, noted that any foreign investment to help increase
offshore oil and gas production would inevitably lead to increase
financial support by Iran for its weapons of mass destruction and
terrorist activities.
An April 1996 report on proliferation issued by the Office of the
Secretary of Defense came to the same conclusion in regard to Libya. It
noted it particular, that and I quote:
.Libya probably dedicates several hundred million dollars
annually to acquire nuclear, biological and chemical weapons
and missiles made possible by its substantial income from oil
and gas exports.
In the most recent State Department report on global terrorism, it
was noted that the end of 1995 marked the 4th year of Libya's refusal
to comply with the demands of U.N. Security Council Resolution 731.
This measure was adopted following the indictments on November 1991 of
two Libyan intelligence agents for the bombing in 1988 of Pan Am flight
103 which killed 189 Americans.
This resolution endorsed the demands of the United States, the United
Kingdom, and France that Libya turn over the two suspects for trial in
the United States or the United Kingdom, pay compensation to the
victims and fully cooperate in the investigations into the bombings of
Pan Am 103 and UTA flight 772.
U.N. Security Council Resolution 748 was adopted in April 1992 as a
result of Libya's refusal to comply with UNSCR 731.
Resolution 748 imposed sanctions that embargoed Libya's civil
aviation and military procurement efforts and required all states to
reduce Libya's diplomatic presence.
Yet another resolution adopted in November 1993, UNSCR 883, imposed
additional sanctions on Libya, including a freeze on limited assets and
an oil technology ban. To date, none of these efforts have produced
these two indicted officials for trial either in the U.S. or the U.K.
I have consistently argued for and urged the administration to
increase the pressure to comply with all existing U.N. resolutions and
should adopt policies that can begin to implement some of the campaign
promises that Governor Bill Clinton made in September 1992 to the
family of one of the Pan Am 103 victims to broaden oil sanctions on
Libya.
Adoption of the provisions in this bill in regard to Libya will put
teeth in these U.N. sanctions and give the President the authority he
needs to begin imposing sanctions on companies making new investments
in the oil and gas sector in this terrorist country.
By imposing a total embargo on Iran in March of last year, the
administration took an important step in our efforts to isolate Iran.
Together with the Junior Senator from New York, Mr. D'Amato, I have
been pressing the administration to take additional steps to reduce
Iran's funding sources for its worldwide subversive activities and for
its programs supporting weapons of mass destruction.
If we want our deeds to match our words in this effort, enactment of
this bill is the next and necessary step to contain the terrorist
activities of both Iran and Libya. By asking foreign companies to make
a simple choice between the American market and those of Iran and
Libya, this bill will help the administration deliver an unmistakable
message to our European and Asian allies that the era of critical
bilateral dialog is over and the time for multilateral action has now
begun.
The bipartisan bill before us today requires the President to impose
sanctions on companies making investments of $40 million or more that
would enhance the ability of Iran to develop its petroleum resources.
If he made such a determination, the President would have to pick two
or more sanctions from a list of six sanctions including: A denial of
Eximbank assistance; a denial of specific licenses for the export of
controlled technology; a suspension of imports under the provisions of
the International Emergency Economic Powers Act; a prohibition on a
sanctioned financial institution from serving as a primary dealer in
U.S. Government debt instruments; a prohibition on any U.S. financial
institution from making any loan to a sanctioned
[[Page H6473]]
person over $10 million a year; and a ban on any U.S. Government
procurement of any goods or services from a sanctioned person.
The legislation allows the President to delay imposition of sanctions
for 90 days to pursue consultations with the government of the
sanctioned person to end the sanctionable activities. An additional 90
day delay is permitted if he determines that he is making progress
toward this goal.
The President may also waive any of these sanctions if he determines
that doing so is in the national interest.
This bill also includes a 5-year sunset provision.
Adoption of a companion Iran and Libya sanctions bill in the Senate
on December 22, 1995, has already had a deterrent effect on potential
investors and oil field suppliers to Iran and Libya. The enactment of
this measure today will ensure that we can maintain this deterrent on
further investments in these rogue regimes.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to pay tribute to the many members on the
International Relations Committee and the Ways and Means Committee who
worked long and hard to make the legislation possible. Subcommittee
Chairman Dan Burton, Representative Peter King, the respective ranking
members of the Asia and Pacific Subcommittee and the International
Economic Policy and Trade Subcommittee, Representatives Howard Berman
and Sam Gejdenson, as well as Chairman Bill Archer and Trade
Subcommittee Chairman Phil Crane.
I urge the adoption of H.R. 3107.
Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HAMILTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 3 minutes.
Mr. Speaker, I want to begin by commending the Members I think are
most responsible for producing this compromise bill. The gentleman from
New York, Chairman Gilman, the gentleman from Texas, Chairman Archer,
and the gentleman from Iowa, Chairman Leach, all deserve credit for
their willingness to look for creative solutions to their differences.
I also want to say a word of appreciation to the gentleman from
Connecticut [Mr. Gejdenson] and the gentleman from California [Mr.
Berman] and the other original cosponsors of the bill because of their
willingness to advance the bill and to support the agreement that has
been reached today.
Finally, may I say that the administration, which supports this bill,
also deserves credit, I think, for helping Members understand the
implications of the bill for U.S. diplomacy and U.S. economic
interests.
There is very little disagreement between the United States and its
allies about the challenges posed by the two countries that are the
focus of this bill. Iran poses a serious threat to several shared
security interests. It is a confirmed sponsor of terrorism. It is
trying to develop weapons of mass destruction. It seeks to undermine
the Middle East peace process. It is pursuing a military buildup that
could enable it to threaten shipping traffic in the Persian Gulf. Libya
continues to harbor terrorists responsible for the death of more than
300 Americans and others on Pan Am flight 103, and it is also
developing weapons of mass destruction and threatening the security of
its neighbors.
The premise of this bill, which I believe to be a correct one, is
that the best way to curb Iran and Libya's dangerous conduct is to
limit the oil and gas export earnings that help pay for it. This has
been a principal goal of U.S. policy for several years. In our effort
to squeeze the economies of Iran and Libya, the United States has cut
off all of its trade with both countries. But the impact of unilateral
sanctions is limited, so we also have urged Iran's and Libya's main
trading partners to restrict or sever their economic ties.
Despite our efforts and despite the egregious conduct of Iran and
Libya, many of our friends have maintained their ties with both
countries. So the dilemma here for United States policy is to find ways
to increase the economic isolation of Iran and Libya without, in the
process, causing undue harm to our own economy or to our relations with
our allies.
H.R. 3107 makes a very good start in responding to that policy
dilemma. The ultimate goal of this bill is not to punish foreign firms
but to persuade other governments to adopt measures that squeeze the
economies of Iran and Libya.
We do not know whether we are going to achieve that goal for some
time, but this bill does give to the President of the United States the
tools to enable him to have the flexibility in implementing U.S.
sanctions. For that and other reasons, I strongly urge the approval of
this bill.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New
York [Mr. Solomon], distinguished chairman of our Committee on Rules.
Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman, the chairman of the
Committee on International Relations, for yielding time to me.
I rise in very strong support of this measure which would tighten
economic sanctions against two deadly enemies of the United States, the
dictatorial Governments of Iran and Libya. I commend the distinguished
chairman of the Committee on International Relations for his
outstanding work in bringing this bill to the floor. This measure uses
our best weapon against these regimes and other countries which support
them, the power of the American purse. With 260 million American people
and the highest standard of living on Earth, the United States
represents a market that is just too lucrative for other countries to
ignore when they want to trade with us.
That is why this bill makes so much sense, Mr. Speaker.
It would impose a range of economic sanctions against other countries
that irresponsibly abet the terrorist activities of Iran and Libya by
investing their oil sectors or supplying them with oil-related goods or
technologies.
When these countries face the prospect of losing part of our vast
American market, they will think twice about their investments in these
two outlaw nations, and that is what they are.
Mr. Speaker, the terrorist threat is real. It is growing. Stiff
measures like this are called for. We all know that Libya, under
Colonel Qadhafi, and Iran, under fundamentalist dictatorship, are two
of the world's major sponsors of terrorism. Their capabilities to
conduct acts of terror are increasing at an alarming rate.
Let us take a look at Iran. As we speak, Iran is in a furious drive
to acquire weapons of mass destruction aided and abetted by Communist
China, which by the way is another nation we ought to be imposing
sanctions on instead of giving them carte blanche favored-nation
treatment. We will deal with that a little bit later this month.
In the past few months alone, we have seen reports that Communist
China has been supplying Iran with cruise missiles, chemical weapons
technology and plutonium processing technology. Couple this with
nuclear reactor technology supplied by another great country, Russia,
and we can clearly see what Iran is up to and what kind of threat we
face.
Mr. Speaker, it is time to act now before it is too late. That is why
Chairman Gilman and Chairman Archer deserve our highest praise for
working so hard to bring this bill to the floor. Come over here and let
us pass it. It is important.
Mr. HAMILTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from Connecticut [Mr. Gejdenson] who is an original sponsor
of the bill.
Mr. GEJDENSON. Mr. Speaker, Iranian profits are used to murder
innocent civilians on the streets of Tel Aviv and Jerusalem and those
who trade with Iran, like those who traded with the Nazis, irrespective
of their murderous act, aid and abet them.
The debate we have here today is what action we can take following
support of the chairman and the ranking member of the Committee on
International Relations and the President of the United States in
trying to isolate Iran and reduce its ability to assist the murder of
innocent civilians.
Unfortunately, most of our democratic allies in Europe and Japan are
not being helpful. They will pay a price as surely as the nations who
ignored terrorism in the early 1960's and 1970's soon found that it
existed not just isolated in Israel and the Middle East but across the
globe.
[[Page H6474]]
There is a clear and direct link between Iran's ability to profit
from its oil sales and assistance to terrorist Hezbollah and other
causes. When Secretary of State Christoper was in Syria, it was
reported that Iranian planes with arms landed there to aid Hezbollah
attacks on the Israelis and the peace process.
Today it is Iranian rockets, grenades and bombs. But what happens if
Iran, months or years from now, when they have the ability to deliver
nuclear or chemical weapons. Today Iran threatens women and children
and men on buses. An Iran which uses its profits to develop nuclear and
chemical weapons will be an Iran that threatens the globe.
Corporate profits must be put aside here as the President has led us
and in the so-called civilized world.
We must deny companies who profit from exports to Iran the
opportunity to access our markets. We have begun that process with this
legislation. I am writing to the banks and economic entities in the G-7
countries warning them that we will monitor their activity. And if they
fail to join us, we will take further actions.
If the Baader Meinhof gang had territory, would the German Government
have traded with them when they blew up innocent German civilians? I
think not. The Iranians may have territory and a government, but they
should not be allowed to continue to profit and murder innocent
children.
Some of my European and Japanese friends have been offended that I
point out their complicity. Well, if this offends them, it does not
worry me in the least. It offends me to see the arms and legs and
bodies of children and adults strewn on the streets of Israel.
Mr. Speaker, I include for the Record the following letter:
One Hundred Fourth Congress, Congress of the United
States, Committee on International Relations, House of
Representatives,
Washington, DC, June 18, 1996.
Mr. Jochen Sanio,
Vice President, Federal Banking Supervisory Office,
Gardschutzenweg 71-101, D-12203 Berlin, Germany.
Dear Mr. Sanio: As you may be aware, many of my colleagues
and I are concerned about the flow of foreign money into
Iran's petroleum sector. The U.S. State Department has found
that Iran's financial capability to build weapons of mass
destruction and to support international terrorism depends on
Iran's ability to explore for, extract, refine, or transport
by pipeline its petroleum resources.
In legislation now proceeding through Congress, the
President will be required to impose sanctions on foreign
companies that invest in Iran's oil sector. To some extent,
the legislation will stop short of imposing sanctions on
foreign entities that finance such investments. However,
financing of these projects remains a major concern.
I know that your government shares our concern over the
threat posed by an Iran armed with nuclear weapons. I would
hope that your government would therefore take action to
preclude the financing of petroleum development by the
financial institutions in your country. The U.S. Congress
will be carefully monitoring foreign funding of Iran's oil
development. Should foreign banks choose to ignore the threat
posed by Iran, I have no doubt that the U.S. Congress will
revisit this issue and pass legislation that would impose
sanctions on foreign institutions that finance petroleum
development in Iran.
I look forward to working with you on this issue of mutual
concern.
Sincerely,
Sam Gejdenson,
Ranking Member, Subcommittee on International Economic
Policy and Trade.
Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Roth], chairman of our Subcommittee on
International Economic Policy and Trade.
Mr. ROTH. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman, my chairman, for
yielding time to me.
Mr. SPEAKER, first let me commend the gentleman from New York [Mr.
Gilman] and the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Archer] for their work on
this issue.
No one can question their commitment to fighting terrorism.
Moreover, there is no doubt that Iran and Libya are rogue states.
The leaders of these regimes have violated every standard of
acceptable behavior.
I share the goal of turning Iran and Libya away from terrorism, away
from making weapons of mass destruction and away from brutality against
their own people.
But I believe this legislation is a step backward not forward.
In my judgment, this bill will not work, for three reasons.
First, economic sanctions simply do not work in today's world when
the United States acts alone.
Sanctions did not work against Vietnam. They have not worked against
Cuba. And they have not worked against China. Iran has 65 million
people and a $300 billion economy.
Libya has 5 million people and a $33 billion economy.
Neither country can be isolated, geographically or economically. In
both countries, exports are growing. From 1988 to 1994, Iran's exports
grew nearly 50 percent, to $19 billion. Libya's exports grew nearly 10
percent, to $8 billion.
The reality is, none of Iran's or Libya's major trading partners will
go along with our sanctions. Not Germany, not France, not Italy, not
Spain, not Japan.
Without their cooperation, how will our sanctions ever work?
This brings me to the second flaw in this bill.
This legislation would impose a secondary boycott on our closest
allies. The sponsors argue that the bill will force Europe to choose
between trading with us and trading with Iran and Libya. This will
never work.
The only effect of this bill has been to unify the European Union--
all 15 members--against our policy toward Iran and Libya.
If this becomes law, we should expect blocking statutes to prevent
European companies from complying. Aside from Europe, the Muslim
countries of the Middle East, South Asia, and the Caucasus will not
comply.
Look what is happening with Iran. Pakistan now has an economic
alliance with Iran.
Kazakhstan and Armenia have started a new joint venture with Iran to
develop a huge oil field and build a pipeline.
We have invested a lot to cultivate good relations with these former
Soviet Republics.
Are we going to impose sanctions and throw away all our work over the
past 5 years? And if we do sanction these countries, how will they
respond?
This legislation is not isolating Iran or Libya--it is isolating
ourselves. No one should be surprised. After all, the Arab League
boycott of Israel has been a total failure.
We and the Europeans all prevented our companies from complying. The
same thing will happen with this legislation.
Finally, this bill is a mistake because it provides the leaders of
Iran and Libya with a convenient excuse for their own failures. Both
regimes have inflicted great suffering on their people.
The elites siphon off more and more money to prop up their regimes.
But as the discontent rises among the Libyan and Iranian people,
Gaddhafi and the Ayatollahs will just point to the United States and
say: ``See what the Americans are doing to you.''
Mr. Speaker, our goal should be to change Iran's and Libya's
behavior.
But whatever we do, it has to be effective. We need our allies with
us, not against us.
There was a time when the United States could sound the alarm and
Europe would rally to our side. That day is over.
Economic sanctions do not work when they are unilateral. If we enact
this bill, we will take a step backwards.
Iran and Libya will still be rouge regimes. And we will have
jeopardized our relations with the very countries whose support we need
to eventually reach the goal of turning Iran and Libya away from
terrorism. This bill will pass--but what will be the result?
{time} 1730
Mr. HAMILTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from California [Mr. Berman], also an original cosponsor of
the bill.
Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member of the committee
for yielding this time.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to focus my comments in addressing the
remarks just made by my friend, the gentleman from Wisconsin. First of
all, given his
[[Page H6475]]
comments, I am quite pleased that he was willing to support this bill
when it moved through the Committee on International Relations, and I
appreciate that support.
Second, Mr. Speaker, the bill does not affect exports to Iran. The
bill affects and imposes sanctions on companies which invest in Iran,
which meet the threshold of investment in Iran, and just in Iran's
energy sector. It is a targeted bill focused on trying to squeeze the
source of financing for a totally accepted, universally acknowledged
practice that the Iranians have of exporting terrorism and financing
terrorism throughout the Middle East and in other areas, as well to
meet their own purposes. It seeks to squeeze the financing by blocking
the investments in Iran's energy sector so they are hampered in what
everybody acknowledges is their concerted effort to develop weapons of
mass destruction.
Iran is seeking a nuclear reactor. They claim they are for peaceful
purposes. This is the most oil-rich country in the world. The notion
that they need a peaceful nuclear energy program for energy sources is
absurd on its face. No one but the most innocent and unsophisticated
observer can assume there is any other purpose in their particular
program.
I want to comment on the European reaction, particularly the German
and Japanese reaction. They say our way is better, our way is
constructive dialog. They have been engaged in this constructive dialog
for years and years and years, with nothing to show for it. The Iranian
and Libyan effort to develop weapons of mass destruction continues. The
support for terrorism continues. I suggest that these arguments about
finding moderate, geopolitical considerations, are all smokescreens for
commercial interests which are governing that particular policy.
What happened to a western alliance of free would countries that was
committed in the course of the cold war to dealing with totalitarian
actions, imperialism, aggressive conduct, and seeking to reduce and
avoid the threat of nuclear war? Has it been so blown apart that
countries that share our values and claim to share our values turn
their back, pursue policies that are just smokescreens for commercial
interests, and watch this happen?
This bill that the gentleman from New York [Mr. Gilman] and the
gentleman from Connecticut [Mr. Gejdenson] are sponsoring, and I am a
cosponsor of, and has been supported in our committee, is one crucial
step to make our sanctions meaningful. They are a message to countries
that we are allied with normally, that they have to think twice about
what has come from constructive dialog.
Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the
distinguished gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Boehner], the chairman of our
House Republican Conference.
Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the Iran
Oil Sanctions Act of 1996. This legislation is the result of much hard
work and compromise between the Committee on International Relations
and the Committee on Ways and Means. I really want to commend my
colleagues for bringing forward this very important piece of
legislation.
The bill is necessary to erode Iran's and Libya's ability to finance
international terrorism in chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons
development programs. By targeting these countries' primary moneymaking
industries, this legislation strikes at the heart of Iran's and Libya's
efforts to undermine the Middle East peach process and to terrorize its
peaceful neighbors.
This bill sends a clear message to these countries that the United
States will not tolerate the flouting of international law and
international norms of behavior. At the same time, it shows strong
leadership to our allies and serves as an example to be followed.
I urge my colleagues to support this very important bill.
Mr. HAMILTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from Maryland [Mr. Cardin].
(Mr. CARDIN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished ranking member of
the Committee on International Relations for yielding me this time and
for the work that he has done in this area.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to urge all my colleagues to support the
Iran-Libya Sanctions Act. This is a tough bill. It is a bill that I
think has been made smarter and tougher as a result of the negotiations
that took place between the three committees that had jurisdiction on
the bill: the Committee on International Relations, the Committee on
Banking and Financial Affairs, and the Committee on Ways and Means. I
am particularly pleased that we were able to strengthen the bill in a
very important area. That is for a multinational approach to dealing
with this issue.
Mr. Speaker, we offer a carrot-stick approach to our allies to assume
responsibility as to the terrorist activities that Iran and Libya are
engaged in, to enter into an international effort to isolate these
countries. Make no mistake about it, the investments that go into
Iranian infrastructure for oil finance the money that are being used
for terrorist activities. The President, the Secretary of State, the
director of the CIA, have all identified Iran as the world's leading
sponsor of international terrorism. This bill is directly aimed at
dealing with that fact, it is indisputable, to dry up the dollars
supporting international terrorist activities. That is in the security
interests of the United States.
The families of the victims of PanAmerican 103 keep us focused on the
continued treachery of Libya. We must continue to strengthen the
enforcement of sanctions against Libya as approved by the United
Nations. All this bill does is to make it clear that we are going to
isolate those two countries. It preserves the leadership of the United
States in making it clear to countries that harbor terrorists that we
will not allow them to participate in the international marketplace and
to secure international investments. That is what this stands for.
We, before, provided the leadership to the world in the actions that
we did in the former Soviet Union. This is a bill that is worthy of the
entire support of this membership and I urge Members to vote for it.
Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Zimmer].
Mr. ZIMMER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to
me, and I thank the gentleman from New York and the gentleman from
Texas [Mr. Archer] for bringing this important bill before us today.
Mr. Speaker, I am a cosponsor of the Iran and Libya Oil Sanctions
Act. I strongly urge Congress to pass it, and the President to sign it
into law swiftly. Terrorism has emerged in the wake of the cold war as
the leading threat to democracy and world security. Innocent men,
women, and children have been brutally murdered by vicious acts of
violence of those who prefer destruction to peace. In many cases, this
terrorism has been sponsored not by private fringe groups but by
national governments. I strongly believe the United States should be as
bold in isolating and weakening these governments as they are in the
support that they lend to the destruction of innocents.
We have the opportunity to address this international pathology in
the Iran and Libya Oil Sanctions Act, which is aimed at two of the
world's leading sponsors of terrorism. The State Department considers
Iran the No. 1 state sponsor of international terrorism, and reports
that its terrorist activities are increasing. It is the major financier
of some of the most sinister terrorism groups in the world, including
Hamas and the Islamic Jihad.
Libya is constructing the world's largest chemical weapons complex.
That rogue nation harbors terrorists and refuses, to this day, to hand
over those suspected of instigating the terrorism bombing of Pan
American Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, which took 270 innocent
lives, including 189 Americans. My home State of New Jersey suffered
more lost lives, 37, than any other single State in that deliberate act
of horror.
Mr. Speaker, what Iran and Libya have sponsored is murder. We should
never accept the idea of aiding and abetting, directly or indirectly,
any nation that knowingly and willfully sponsors terrorism and
threatens world peace.
Mr. HAMILTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished
gentlewoman from California [Ms. Pelosi].
[[Page H6476]]
Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to
me, and I commend him and the gentleman from New York [Mr. Gilman], as
well as the leadership of the Committee on Ways and Means and everyone
else who had anything to do with bringing this to the floor. I think it
is a very important piece of legislation.
Mr. Speaker, we must have zero tolerance for terrorism. I think this
bill sends a very strong message that we are serious about that. I
support the bill, as I said, and I am particularly pleased about the
requirement in the bill called Presidential reports. It says:
The bill requires the President to report periodically to
Congress on efforts to persuade other countries to pressure
Iran to cease weapons of mass destruction programs, support
of international terrorism, and on attempts to urge Iran's
and it goes on for some other consideration about diplomats.
It also only grants the President a waiver if the President certifies
to Congress that Iran has ceased its efforts to develop and acquire a
nuclear explosive device, chemical or biological weapons, or ballistic
missiles or missile technology, and has been removed from the countries
determined under the Export Administration Act of having supported
international terrorism.
I call this to the attention of our colleagues, Mr. Speaker, because
it seems to me this is a very important step to take. This requirement
on the President is an important one. At the same time, though, as we
are putting out these requirements, indeed even the same day, the
Committee on Ways and Means is moving on China MFN. These two issues
are not connected, except in one way: China is one of the leading
suppliers of technology for nuclear, chemical, and missile weaponry,
weapons of mass destruction.
So if our purpose in this legislation is to reduce terrorism, if our
purpose in this legislation is to say that the President may only waive
this bill when Iran stops developing nuclear and chemical, biological,
and the list goes on, ballistic and other explosive devices, then why
do we not get to the source and take action against those countries,
China being leading among them, that are supplying Iran with that
technology? The sanctions should be at the source as well as with Iran,
who deserves them.
{time} 1745
Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Connecticut [Mr. Gejdenson], the senior member of our Committee on
International Relations.
Mr. GEJDENSON. Mr. Speaker, I would like to engage the chairman in a
colloquy, if I may. I have several technical questions about H.R. 3107,
as amended.
First, section 5(e) of the bill as amended states, ``The President
shall cause to be published in the Federal Register a list of all
significant projects which have been publicly tendered in the oil and
gas sector in Iran.'' Will this be a comprehensive list for purposes of
the sanctions provisions of the bill?
Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. GEJDENSON. I yield to the gentleman from New York.
Mr. GILMAN. No, Mr. Speaker the list may not necessarily be
comprehensive. In such a case, the investor could be subject to
sanctions under the bill notwithstanding that the project did not
appear on the list published in the Federal Register.
Mr. GEJDENSON. Second, if section 5(f)(3) of the bill as amended
exempts from the bill's requirement to impose sanctions ``products,
technology, or services provided under contracts entered into before
the date on which the President publishes in the Federal Register the
name of the person on whom the sanctions are to be imposed,'' does this
provision mean the sanctions cannot be imposed under section 5(a) or
5(b) on a person for actions taken by that person prior to the
publication of that person's name in the Federal Register?
Mr. GILMAN. No, that would be an illogical construction of the
provisions. Section 5(f)(3) is essentially a contract sanctity
provision.
Mr. GEJDENSON. Third, I was hoping the chairman could explain how
section 5(d) of the bill as amended is intended to apply. Am I correct
that under section 5(d), if a parent company engages in investment
activities that cause the subsidiary to be subject to sanctions, the
parent itself will be subject to sanctions?
Mr. GILMAN. That is correct.
Mr. GEJDENSON. Am I also correct that if the parent company
supervises and guarantees the subsidiary's investment activities, the
parent will be subject to sanctions?
Mr. GILMAN. That is correct.
Mr. GEJDENSON. Am I further correct that if the parent company has an
equity share or profit-sharing relationship to the investment, the
parent company also will be subject to sanctions?
Mr. GILMAN. That is correct.
Mr. GEJDENSON. Finally, I would like to draw the gentleman's
attention to the concern I expressed in my statement about the prospect
that foreign banks may finance oil development in Iran. I would ask the
gentleman, does he share my concern?
Mr. GILMAN. I certainly do. The financing of oil development in Iran
poses virtually the same threat as investments in those same projects.
Mr. HAMILTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentleman from Florida [Mr. Deutsch].
Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Speaker, this is a bill that unfortunately we might
look back in 5 to 10 years and say this is one of the most important
pieces of legislation that this Congress will pass in this session of
Congress. It really is dealing with a threat that is out there, not
just to the United States but to the entire world, a threat dealing
with issues of Iran's terrorism in terms of their activism, in terms of
the islands off Iran in the Strait of Hormuz, including their issues in
terms of missiles, in terms of diesel submarines.
We have the ability by this legislation to weaken their potential to
do that. That is exactly what we are trying to do. It is very narrowly,
specifically drawn in terms of attacking them where it could hurt the
most in terms of their ability to increase their production of oil and
to gain revenues to do that.
Iran stands out as really a rogue nation today, committed to force
terrorism throughout the entire planet, not just in our hemisphere. I
urge support of the amendment.
Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
California [Mr. Berman].
(Mr. BERMAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I seek to have a colloquy with the chairman.
I have several technical questions about provisions in the amendment
in the nature of a substitute to H.R. 3107.
Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. BERMAN. I yield to the gentleman from New York.
Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I will be pleased to respond to the
questions of the distinguished ranking minority member of our
Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific.
Mr. BERMAN. First, I note in section 6 of the amendment in the nature
of a substitute there are six possible sanctions that could be imposed
pursuant to section 5. Is it the case that the President must, under
section 5(a) for example, select two of the sanctions listed in section
6 to apply to a sanctioned person, but after selecting them the
President may decide not to actually apply them to the sanctioned
person?
Mr. GILMAN. No, that is not the intent of section 6. The sanctions
identified in section 6 are intended to be mandatory when selected
pursuant to either section 5(a) or 5(b)(1).
Mr. BERMAN. I thank the chairman.
Second, it is suggested that the President may have flexibility under
sections 5 and 6 to impose sanctions on a person that, because of the
nature of that person's business, are meaningless to that person as a
practical matter. Would such action by the President be consistent with
the intent of sections 5 and 6?
Mr. GILMAN. No, the imposition of meaningless sanctions would be
inconsistent with our intent.
Mr. BERMAN. Finally, I note that the definition of ``investment'' set
forth in section 14(9) states, ``The term `investment' does not include
the entry into, performance, or financing of a contract to sell or
purchase goods,
[[Page H6477]]
services, or technology.'' What is the purpose of this exception?
Mr. GILMAN. This language in the definition of ``investment'' is
intended to underscore that, particularly with respect to Iran, the
amendment in the nature of a substitute does not contain a trade
trigger for the imposition of sanctions.
Mr. BERMAN. I thank the chairman.
Mr. HAMILTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Torricelli].
Mr. TORRICELLI. I thank the gentleman for yielding time.
Mr. Speaker, I too, want to congratulate the gentleman from New York
[Mr. Gilman], the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Hamilton] and the work of
our committee in bringing this sanctions legislation before the House
today. But I would be less than honest if I did not also express some
profound disappointment.
If this legislation today had come before the House in an amendable
fashion, I would have been offering an amendment to provide that the
sanctions against Iran would remain in place not simply until it ceases
terrorism against the world but until it respects the rights of its own
people. In enacting sanctions against Iraq, Vietnam and Cuba, this body
respected the rights of the people in those countries and insisted upon
strong sanctions until the war against them, their political rights,
their freedom and their safety was respected. Somehow with regard to
the Iranian people, despite the deaths of the Baha'is, Christians,
Jews, a Moslem majority, we take no such action. Because this bill
comes before us on the suspension calendar, that amendment is not
possible and indeed it is on the suspension calendar so such amendments
are not possible.
It will be difficult to explain to Iranian-Americans and indeed one
day to the people of Iran when they ask, ``You took sanctions to defend
yourselves, why did you not take them to respect us? ''
Second, Mr. Speaker, I also express profound disappointment because
this is not the same legislation that left the Committee on
International Relations. We had sanctions against Libya but they were
mandatory. Until Colonel Qadhafi handed over to international justice
those who were responsible for Pan Am 103, there were going to be
sanctions, no ands, ifs, or buts. But between the cup and the lip, they
became optional. A sigh of relief in Tripoli, and, frankly, Mr.
Speaker, a difficult explanation in my State to the 37 families who
thought we were going to have mandatory sanctions and now are left at
home wondering why.
Mr. Speaker, I have participated in many proud and principled moments
on this floor when this Congress has taken strong positions. I am glad
today that we, if we alone in the world, stand up to Iran and Libya in
their injustice. But frankly we could have done more, for Iranians
locked in the prison of their own country who want someone to stand up
not only to international terrorism but domestic abuse as well, and to
those poor families left wondering why there is an option in standing
up to Qadhafi.
Mr. HAMILTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentlewoman from Connecticut [Ms. DeLauro].
Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, the Iran Oil Sanctions Act strikes at the
heart of international terrorism.
For too long, terrorists have menaced innocent people around the
world with their cowardly attacks. Sadly, we have seen the tragic
effects of these attacks many times this year. Hamas bombings claimed
nearly 60 lives in Israel while recent rocket launches by Hezbollah
threatened the lives of those in northern Israel.
Talking reason will not get us very far with fanatics who are willing
to kill men, women, and children whose only fault was to be in a
marketplace, on a bus, or on an airplane at the wrong time. We need to
cut the supply line that allows terrorist groups to continue their
disgraceful campaigns. We need to cut the flow of funds to these
criminals.
Iran and Libya stand out as major sponsors of terrorism around the
world. This bill strikes at these backers of devastation and will limit
their ability to underwrite acts of terror as they have done for far
too long.
I urge my colleagues to take this stand against those who bankroll
cruel terrorist violence.
Mr. HAMILTON. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I
yield back 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, in the most recent State Department report
on international terrorism, Iran was again deemed the most dangerous
state sponsor of terrorism.
On May 21, in a speech before a symposium of a prominent Middle East
think tank, the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, our
Secretary of State, Mr. Christopher, said Iran was guiding, as well as
funding and training, radical groups opposed to the Arab-Israeli peace
process.
Earlier this month, Bahrain presented hard evidence that Iran was
involved in attempts to destabilize that country, an important U.S.
ally in the gulf. Several of those captured by Bahraini authorities
admitted to have been trained in Iran and by Iranian agents in Lebanon.
We have learned just last week that Iran is using its virtual
takeover of the Abu Musa island in the Persian Gulf to improve port
facilities on that island and Iran could use that expanded port
facility to handle the fast patrol boats it has recently received from
China.
We are calling on other nations now to curtail any efforts to
refinance Iran's mounting bilateral debts and to end their supply of
arms and technology to Iran and to Libya. We strongly urge Russia to
stop work on its contract to finish Iran's nuclear reactor in Iran.
Enactment of this bill is a vital element in the administration's
policy of containment of Iran and of Libya and I urge its immediate
adoption.
Mr. FAZIO of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the
legislation before us today. The Iran Oil Sanctions Act of 1996 will
impose sanctions on persons exporting certain goods or technology that
would enhance the ability of Iran or Libya to explore for, extract, or
refine their petroleum resources.
This bill will help to deter these rogue states from supporting
international terrorism or acquiring weapons of mass destruction which
would lead to greater regional instability.
I believe that this bill is a critically important element in our
policy of cutting off the sources of funding to the Iranian and Libyan
regimes who are responsible for much of the state-sponsored terrorism
which continues to plague the region.
Since the 1979 seizure of the American Embassy in Tehran, economic
sanctions have formed a key part of our Nation's policy toward Iran.
Various actions taken by our Government have disqualified Iran from
receiving United States foreign aid, sales of items on the United
States munitions lists, Eximbank credits, and United States support for
foreign loans. In addition, strict licensing requirements are needed
for any United States exports of controlled goods or technology.
This legislation adds to these restrictions by exploiting Iran's
economic vulnerabilities, particularly its shortages in hard currency.
By pressuring the Iran Government in this fashion, we will force it to
change its behavior.
Iran threatens our national interests. It openly sponsors groups bent
on regional and global acts of terror and it is actively pursuing
weapons of mass destruction. As Under Secretary of State Peter Tarnoff
said before the House International Relations Committee last fall, ``a
straight line links Iran's oil income and its ability to sponsor
terrorism * * * .''
This bill serves that link. I urge all of my colleagues to support
H.R. 3107.
Mr. ARCHER. Mr. Speaker, as many of my colleagues know, I was not a
proponent of H.R. 3107 as introduced. I want to thank Mr. Gilman, Mr.
Leach, Mr. Clinger, and the respective committees involved for their
efforts to work out the agreed substitute amendment, which was approved
by the Committee on Ways and Means on June 13. These changes, which are
incorporated in the bill before us today, make it possible for me to
support the Iran and Libya Sanctions Act of 1996.
While we can differ on approach, Americans are united in their
perception that Iran is using economic benefits, gained through foreign
investment in its oilfields, to support expanded terrorist attacks and
the accumulation of weapons of mass destruction.
Likewise, Libya refuses to relinquish the two individuals accused of
bombing the Pan Am 103 flight over Scotland to face criminal charges,
and fails to respect norms governing weapons of mass destruction.
Americans remain fundamentally dismayed that, as our
[[Page H6478]]
firms pull back from investment and trade with these countries, our
trading partners and allies are not restrained in their pursuit of lost
United States contracts.
The bill reported from the Ways and Means Committee reaffirms my goal
that our trading partners join with the United States in a
multilaterally agreed regime to stem Iran's ability to export
international terrorism to the rest of the world. Too many innocent
individuals have suffered at the hands of Iran's Government for
business as usual to persist. In this bill, we make clear that our
allies cannot continue to look the other way.
However, this legislation puts a priority on supporting the
achievement of a multilateral agreement to isolate Iran economically.
In order to keep the focus on achieving change in Iran, the
substitute contains provisions providing discretion for the President.
Thus, we ensure that he is in the best position to be persuasive with
our trading partners, and to respond to violations judiciously. Where
the President determines a country has taken substantial measures to
join with us to contain the threat of Iran to international peace and
security, section 4 of the bill permits a waiver of the application of
sanctions.
While the investment trigger for Iran remains mandatory in the new
bill, the substitute increases the number of choices available to the
President on the menu of sanctions he has to choose from.
In this and all other cases the President has authority to waive
sanctions if their application would hurt the national interest. The
waiver authority is intended to be broad enough to accommodate
instances when invoking sanctions would be violative to international
trade obligations.
I want to emphasize that the bill as reported from the Committee on
Ways and Means treats the cases of Iran and Libya differently, because
of their unique economic histories and geopolitical circumstances.
While a mandatory trade trigger is viewed by the Committee on Ways and
Means as unworkable for Iran, and therefore not included in the
substitute, such a mechanism has been included as a tool for Libya. The
difference is that a multilateral regime is already in place for Libya.
Subsection 5(c) also provides the President with the discretion to
impose sanctions in connection with new, large investments in Libya's
petroleum sector, if he believes it would advance U.S. interests to do
so.
I hope our allies can appreciate the deep and urgent commitment in
Congress for increasing pressure on Iran and Libya to end their lawless
behavior. While the approach of H.R. 3107 carries with it the risk of
exposing U.S. exporters and investors to possible retaliation, this
threat has been minimized in the substitute. With the addition of solid
contract sanctity language, and strict limitations on vicarious
liability for companies with parents or subsidiaries located abroad,
the bill should not engender the same serious criticism.
Finally, the 5-year sunset provision in the bill ensures that this
type of legislation does not remain on the books indefinitely. The
committee report indicates that because this is such a difficult policy
area, it will be important for Congress to revisit these issues in 5
years in order to evaluate the behavior of Iran and Libya, and whether
this bill has been effective.
To summarize, Mr. Speaker, my greatest fear has been that world
attention would shift to United States violations of trade agreements
and away from the targets of our condemnation--Iran and Libya. I
strongly urge the President to implement H.R. 3107 in a manner that
respects our international trade obligations. To the nations of Europe,
Japan, Australia, and others I renew a pledge to work together to
establish a multilateral solution that isolates these two outlaw
nations.
Let's join forces and accomplish the job. Working together involves
each country taking substantial measures that achieve results--mere
words will no longer suffice.
Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my
concern with the precedent that could be set by provisions of H.R.
3107, legislation originating in the International Relations Committee,
and referred to the Ways and Means Committee on which I serve.
No one argues that the goal of bringing the Pan Am 103 bombers to
justice, nor with containing international terrorism and the
proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. We must find ways to
increase United States and international pressure on these rogue
nations and the threat they pose to U.S. interests. However, I do have
concerns with H.R. 3107's provisions that may rely on unilateral
actions rather than multilateral cooperation.
The concept of a secondary boycott was opposed by the United States
when the Arab League used it against Israel in the 1970's and 1980's,
and remains contrary to the principles endorsed by this very body when
it approved NAFTA and GATT. Indeed, U.S. law, most recently enacted in
the Export Administration Act, has long prohibited any U.S. person from
``complying with or supporting'' a foreign boycott against another
country.
The use of trade sanctions to accomplish trade law compliance is
vital and appropriate but the use of trade sanctions as a foreign
policy tool to coerce other sovereign nations to do our bidding
breaches America's commitment to preserving independence from
international control. It is fundamental to U.S. participation in trade
agreements that other governments should not be permitted to dictate
business relationships among U.S. firms and citizens, as H.R. 3107
could do for our trading partners.
Mr. Speaker, as the world's greatest exporter, the United States
benefits tremendously from free and open trade with our allies. Given
our past commitment to an international trading regimen, the United
States should not expose United States exporters and investors to
possible retaliation through abrogation of international rules, or
exacerbate the dispute with our allies over policies toward Iran and
Libya. If it becomes possible for countries to dictate each other's
policy under threat of trade sanctions, U.S. participation in these
important organizations could be threatened.
Put at risk by unilateral U.S. action are the benefits to the U.S.
economy created by strong protection of intellectual property rights,
the guarantee of competitive bidding opportunities under the Government
Procurement Code and dramatic tariff reductions for U.S. exports--all
of which were improved and expanded by NAFTA and GATT.
Instead, I would urge that we work to avoid the painful consequences
of trade retaliation and continue pressing for additional multilateral
action and enforcement of existing agreements. As in the case with the
extraterritorial Helms-Burton law which penalizes firms outside the
jurisdiction of the United States for trading with Cuba, foreign
governments will not permit their firms to comply with such
legislation. As we seek to contain and punish terrorists and those
states that sponsor them, we do not want to drive a costly wedge
between the United States and its allies whose support we are seeking.
While I will be supporting H.R. 3107, I am doing so because it
provides the administration adequate discretion in executing the
provisions of this bill. Moreover, in doing so, it is my hope that the
administration will effectively implement multilateral sanctions
against Iran and Libya.
Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Stearns). The question is on the motion
offered by the gentleman from New York [Mr. Gilman] that the House
suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 3107, as amended.
The question was taken.
Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
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.
____________________