[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 105 (Thursday, July 30, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S9343-S9346]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




             DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1999

  The Senate continued with the consideration of the bill.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I understand the Senator from California 
would like to speak on the Hutchinson amendment.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Not on this amendment, Mr. President, but the 
Hutchinson amendment.
  Mr. STEVENS. The Hutchinson amendment that I made a motion to table, 
the one pertaining to China.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. That is correct.
  Mr. STEVENS. Although I made a motion to table, I think it is in 
order until 2 o'clock that they may be able to speak.


                           Amendment No. 3409

  Mrs. HUTCHISON. I am prepared to leave the floor, but I have two 
things. First, I ask unanimous consent that Senator Abraham be added as 
a cosponsor of amendment No. 3409.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mrs. HUTCHISON. Secondly, I ask the manager of the bill if he still 
wants me to offer the other amendment that I was to offer, or would he 
prefer to go forward with Senator Feinstein, and I can always do that 
after the votes.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I did request the Senator from Texas 
offer her Bosnia amendment so it will be the pending amendment after 
the votes this afternoon. I appreciate that she did that at this time. 
I urge she save the statement to be made until after the Senator from 
California, who has been waiting to make comments on the China 
amendment which I have already moved to table.


                    Amendment No. 3391, As Modified

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I send to the desk a technical correction 
to amendment No. 3391 previously adopted. I ask unanimous consent that 
the amendment be modified. It is strictly a

[[Page S9344]]

technical error in the amendment that was previously adopted.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment (No. 3391), as modified, is as follows:
       On page 34, line 24, strike out all after ``$94,500,000'' 
     down to and including ``1999'' on page 35, line 7.
       On page 42, line 1, strike out the amount 
     ``$2,000,000,000'', and insert the amount ``$1,775,000,000''.
       On page 99, in between lines 17 and 18, insert the 
     following:
       Sec. 8  . (a) In addition to funds provided under title I 
     of this Act, the following amounts are hereby appropriated: 
     for ``Military Personnel, Army'', $58,000,000; for ``Military 
     Personnel, Navy'', $43,000,000; for ``Military Personnel, 
     Marine Corps'', $14,000,000; for ``Military Personnel, Air 
     Force'', $44,000,000; for ``Reserve Personnel, Army'', 
     $5,377,000; for ``Reserve Personnel, Navy'', $3,684,000; for 
     ``Reserve Personnel, Marine Corps'', $1,103,000; for 
     ``Reserve Personnel, Air Force'', $1,000,000; for ``National 
     Guard Personnel, Army'', $9,392,000; and for ``National Guard 
     Personnel, Air Force'', $4,112,000''.
       (b) Notwithstanding any other provision in this Act, the 
     total amount available in this Act for ``Quality of Life 
     Enhancements, Defense'', real property maintenance is hereby 
     decreased by reducing the total amounts appropriated in the 
     following accounts: ``Operation and Maintenance, Army'', by 
     $58,000,000; ``Operation and Maintenance, Navy'', by 
     $43,000,000; ``Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps'', by 
     $14,000,000; and ``Operation and Maintenance, Air Force'', by 
     $44,000,000.
       (c) Notwithstanding any other provision in this Act, the 
     total amount appropriated under the heading ``National Guard 
     and Reserve Equipment'', is hereby reduced by $24,668,000.

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that it be in 
order for the Senator from California to speak on the amendment that 
was offered by Senator Hutchinson, following the offering of the Bosnia 
amendment by the Senator from Texas.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection it is so ordered. The 
Senator from California is recognized.
  Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I think the unanimous consent 
agreement was to allow me to offer my amendment, and then I will defer 
to the Senator from California.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct.


                           Amendment No. 3413

(Purpose: To condition the use of appropriated funds for the purpose of 
    an orderly and honorable reduction of U.S. ground forces in the 
                  Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina)

  Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk and 
ask for immediate consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Texas [Mrs. Hutchison], for herself, Mr. 
     Stevens, Mr. Craig, Mr. Sessions, Mr. Smith of Oregon and Mr. 
     Feingold, proposes an amendment numbered 3413.

  Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the 
reading of the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:
       At the appropriate place in the bill, insert the following:
       Sec.  .(a) The Congress finds the following:
       (1) United States Armed Forces in the Republic of Bosnia 
     and Herzegovina have accomplished the military mission 
     assigned to them as a component of the Implementation and 
     Stabilization Forces.
       (2) The continuing and open-ended commitment of U.S. ground 
     forces in the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina is subject 
     to the oversight authority of the Congress.
       (3) Congress may limit the use of appropriated funds to 
     create the conditions for an orderly and honorable withdrawal 
     of U.S. troops from the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
       (4) On November 27, 1995, the President affirmed that 
     United States participation in the multinational military 
     Implementation Force in the Republic of Bosnia and 
     Herzegovina would terminate in about one year.
       (5) The President declared the expiration date of the 
     mandate for the Implementation Force to be December 20, 1996.
       (6) The Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint 
     Chiefs of Staff expressed confidence that the Implementation 
     Force would complete its mission in about one year.
       (7) The Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint 
     Chiefs of Staff expressed the critical importance of 
     establishing a firm deadline in the absence of which there is 
     a potential for expansion of the mission of U.S. forces.
       (8) On October 3, 1996, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of 
     Staff announced the intention of the United States 
     Administration to delay the removal of United States Armed 
     Forces personnel from the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina 
     until March 1997.
       (9) In November 1996 the President announced his intention 
     to further extend the deployment of United States Armed 
     Forces in the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina until June 
     1998.
       (10) The President did not request authorization by the 
     Congress of a policy that would result in the further 
     deployment of United States Armed Forces in the Republic of 
     Bosnia and Herzegovina until June 1998.
       (11) Notwithstanding the passage of two previously 
     established deadlines, the reaffirmation of those deadlines 
     by senior national security officials, and the endorsement by 
     those same national security officials of the importance of 
     having a deadline as a hedge against an expanded mission, the 
     President announced on December 17, 1997 that establishing a 
     deadline had been a mistake and that U.S. ground combat 
     forces were committed to the NATO-led mission in Bosnia for 
     the indefinite future.
       (12) NATO military forces have increased their 
     participation in law enforcement, particularly police 
     activities.
       (13) U.S. Commanders of NATO have stated on several 
     occasions that, in accordance with the Dayton Peace Accords, 
     the principal responsibility for such law enforcement and 
     police activities lies with the Bosnian parties themselves.

     SEC. 2. LIMITATIONS ON THE USE OF FUNDS.

       (a) Funds appropriated or otherwise made available for the 
     Department of Defense for any fiscal year may not be 
     obligated for the ground elements of the United States Armed 
     Forces in the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina except as 
     conditioned below.
       (1) The President shall continue the ongoing withdrawal of 
     American forces from the NATO Stabilization Force in the 
     Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina such that U.S. ground 
     forces in that force or the planned multi-national successor 
     force shall not exceed:
       (A) 6500, by February 2, 1999;
       (B) 5000, by October 1, 1999.
       (b) Exceptions.--The limitation in subsection (a) shall not 
     apply--
       (1) to the extent necessary for U.S. ground forces to 
     protect themselves as the drawdowns outlined in sub-paragraph 
     (a)(1) proceeds;
       (2) to the extent necessary to support a limited number of 
     United States military personnel sufficient only to protect 
     United States diplomatic facilities in existence on the 
     date of the enactment of this Act; or
       (3) to the extent necessary to support non-combat military 
     personnel sufficient only to advise the commanders of North 
     Atlantic Treaty Organization peacekeeping operations in the 
     Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina; and
       (4) to U.S. ground forces that may be deployed as part of 
     NATO containment operations in regions surrounding the 
     Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
       (c) Construction of Section.--Nothing in this section shall 
     be deemed to restrict the authority of the President under 
     the Constitution to protect the lives of United States 
     citizens.
       (d) Limitation on Support for Law Enforcement Activities in 
     Bosnia.--None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made 
     available to the Department of Defense for any fiscal year 
     may be obligated or expended after the date of the enactment 
     of this Act for the--
       (1) conduct of, or direct support for, law enforcement and 
     police activities in the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 
     except for the training of law enforcement personnel or to 
     prevent imminent loss of life;
       (2) conduct of, or support for, any activity in the 
     Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina that may have the effect 
     of jeopardizing the primary mission of the NATO-led force in 
     preventing armed conflict between the Federation of Bosnia 
     and Herzegovina and the Repulika Srpska (`Bosnian Entities');
       (3) transfer of refugees within the Republic of Bosnia and 
     Herzegovina that, in the opinion of the commander of NATO 
     Forces involved in such transfer--
       (A) has as one of its purposes the acquisition of control 
     by a Bosnia Entity of territory allocated to the other 
     Bosnian Entity under the Dayton Peace Agreement; or
       (B) may expose United States Armed Forces to substantial 
     risk to their personal safety; and
       (4) implementation of any decision to change the legal 
     status of any territory within the Republic of Bosnia and 
     Herzegovina unless expressly agreed to by all signatories to 
     the Dayton Peace Agreement.

     SEC. 4. PRESIDENTIAL REPORT.

       (a) Not later than December 1, 1998, the President shall 
     submit to Congress a report on the progress towards meeting 
     the drawdown limit established in section 2(a).
       (b) The report under paragraph (a) shall include an 
     identification of the specific steps taken by the United 
     States Government to transfer the United States portion of 
     the peacekeeping mission in the Republic of Bosnia and 
     Herzegovina to European allied nations or organizations.

  Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the 
amendment be laid aside.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mrs. HUTCHISON. This is the amendment on Bosnia that we will discuss

[[Page S9345]]

immediately following the stacked votes this afternoon. I am happy to 
yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The distinguished Senator from California is 
finally recognized.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. I thank the Chair.


                           Amendment No. 3124

  Mr. President, as one who has watched China for some 35 years now, 
and been a frequent visitor for the past 20 years, I would like to make 
a few comments on the Hutchinson amendment, which effectively would set 
up a protocol whereby officials beneath the rank of Cabinet officials 
could be refused visas to come to this country.
  The amendment, while it promotes a worthy goal, goes about it in a 
completely, I believe, counterproductive way. I do not think there is 
any Senator in this body who does not condemn the practice of forced 
abortion, forced sterilization, or any other coercive population 
control device or measure. We all condemn it.
  I do not think there is any Senator in this body who does not condemn 
religious persecution that prevents people from freely exercising their 
own personal religious beliefs. Of course, not. We all condemn that. 
This amendment takes a stand on a principle but it does nothing to help 
solve the problem it is designed to address, and there is the rub.
  We all agree there are certain practices and policies still in China 
that we oppose. The question we need to ask ourselves is this: What is 
the best contribution we can make to producing change, real change, in 
China? I submit that the answer is, we can engage China at all levels, 
all levels of government. Academia, business, law, and every other kind 
of social interaction should be energized. We should welcome every 
chance to interact with the Chinese people and officials as an 
opportunity to expose them to our values, to expose them to the rule of 
law, to Democratic values, to individual liberties.
  The path set out by this amendment, I believe, is extraordinarily 
dangerous and it takes us on the opposite path. It is a path of 
isolation and containment. It cuts ourselves off from the very people 
we need to help educate and persuade and expose to Western values. And 
it would surely spark similar countermeasures by the Chinese Government 
to deny visas to U.S. officials, further deepening our isolation from 
one another, and developing the adversarial relationship that many of 
us believe need never happen. It could go on and on in a vicious cycle.
  Do any of my colleagues seriously believe that any Chinese official 
would be dissuaded from conducting any human rights action because they 
would be denied a visa to the United States? I think not. I do deeply 
believe that if Chinese officials are exposed to U.S. society--and this 
has begun. I know it has been criticized, but I see it working. I come 
from a Pacific rim State where there is a great deal of interaction 
with Asia. I see our values go across the Pacific. I see them enter the 
Chinese mainland. I see the changes that have been made.
  Mr. President, when Richard Nixon went to China in 1972, China was 
still in the midst of the Cultural Revolution. There has never been a 
more brutal period in Chinese history than the Cultural Revolution. We 
have seen those dark days recede. We have seen a new leadership in 
place.
  For the first time, I believe that this new leader now has the face, 
has consolidated his power, to begin to make certain major reforms. I 
very deeply believe we are going to see those reforms in the next few 
years. Already, there is writing here and in China about the order 
given to the Chinese military to remove themselves from all commercial 
endeavors.
  Surprisingly enough, this, for the first time, has been done with 
transparency--in other words, a public statement for all to know that 
the new policy of the Chinese Government is that the Chinese military 
will not run commercial operations in trade, in business, or in any 
other pursuit. This is a very healthy, a very positive advance, which I 
think the entire free world should take hold of.
  Additionally, you heard voluntarily the President of China, after 
many of us have importuned him over a long period of time, I myself 
beginning in 1991 carrying messages from His Holiness, the Dalai Lama, 
to the President of China, urging that there be a meeting--for the 
first time, the President of China has said publicly, with 
transparency, that if His Holiness, the Dalai Lama, makes a statement 
that respects the fact that Tibet is a part of China and that 
independence is not a part of the discussions, that there can be 
meetings that follow.
  This is, true, a breakthrough in rhetoric, but it has never happened 
before in the 8 years I have been trying to achieve it. That happened 
while the President was in China. So these changes are being made.
  One by one--perhaps not enough--the freeing of political dissidents, 
the adoption of a 30-day period of administrative leave, the Chinese 
interests in developing exchanges in the rule of law, to develop a 
modern commercial code, a modern criminal code, hopefully to press for 
the independence of the judicial branch of Government which currently 
is subject to party control --all of these are the breakthroughs that 
we should begin to press.
  We have certain intellectual property, certain intellectual property 
concerns. How could those ever be brought about if we could not have an 
exchange of lower level officials to see to it that intellectual 
property laws are being carried out? It makes no sense to me. I believe 
it is one step toward containment and isolation. I believe that both of 
those are unwarranted, highly counterproductive----
  Mr. HUTCHINSON. Will the Senator yield for a question?
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. I am happy to yield for a question.
  Mr. HUTCHINSON. You were speaking very positively about the changes 
in China. My question is, How do we reconcile the recent round of 
arrests that occurred in the 2 weeks--actually, the week subsequent to 
the President's visit--headlined in all of the newspapers across the 
country? Those who had attempted to register as an opposition political 
party and were arrested, some of whom are still incarcerated, as well 
as the tests of rocket engines that occurred even while the President 
was in China, how do we reconcile that with this supposed great reform 
that is taking place in China? And then also, the question I would pose 
is, The amendment that you are opposing simply says that visas should 
not be granted to those who are involved in forcing--compelling--
abortions on women against their will and those who are involved in 
persecution of religious believers of various faiths. Do you oppose 
denying visas to those individuals who are involved in forced abortions 
and religious persecution?
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. I would be happy to answer the questions of the 
distinguished Senator from Arkansas.
  Yes, I oppose a measure which would oppose the granting of visas. The 
normal diplomatic and pragmatic efforts of a government-to-government 
effort to engage and discuss, to bring to light of day, to continue to 
persuade and develop a better sense of values would be truncated and 
cut off.
  I believe, I say to the Senator, as one who has watched China for 
some 35 years now, that this is a country which has been humiliated by 
the West in the past. This is a country that has 5,000 years of 
dictatorship by one individual, generally an emperor, an emperor who 
could cast aside people, who could kill people at will--then 
revolutionary war heroes, basically people who were uneducated.
  This is the first post-revolutionary war leadership that has had some 
Western education, that has some Western understanding. China closed 
itself off from the West after the Boxer Rebellion and because of what 
happened in the opium trade, never wanting any kind of interaction with 
the West.

  Now, for the first time, China is open, I believe, to Western values, 
to Western ideas. I happen to believe it is to our interest. We didn't 
settle the enormous intellectual property and piracy problems by 
saying, if you commit a piracy act, you won't have a visa to the United 
States. We settled it by sending over delegation after delegation of 
officials to let the Chinese Government know what this was all about, 
to identify and help identify those factories that were producing 
illegal goods, and to follow up and see, in fact, that the Chinese 
Government was willing to take action to shut them down. It has worked. 
It will be a bumpy road.

[[Page S9346]]

 But cutting off visas of officials isn't the way to handle problems, 
whether they relate to IPR, whether they relate to technology transfer, 
whether they relate to other military endeavors or trade matters, I 
believe.
  I must say, I believe this is the first time in the last year that 
the administration has really made up their mind that what they are 
going to do is engage China fully and completely at the top level. I 
believe it is having enormous dividends and that we will see in the 
years to come a much more open country, a country that has taken steps 
to make greater reforms.
  You have to realize that to those of us who sit on the west coast, 
the Pacific rim is our world of trade. The Pacific rim has by far 
exceeded the Atlantic Ocean as the major theater of trade. In my State, 
approximately over a third of the jobs depend on trade with Asia. We 
want to have positive relations with Asia, positive relations with the 
Philippines, with Taiwan, with South Korea, with China, with all of the 
ASEAN countries as well. Increasingly, we have an opportunity, we 
believe, on the Pacific, to form a Pacific rim community that is 
peaceful, where trade can take place, where like values can be shared. 
I must tell you, I buy into that dream. I want to see it happen.
  Mr. HUTCHINSON. Will the Senator yield?
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. I am happy to yield.
  Mr. HUTCHINSON. Mr. President, coerced abortion and religious 
persecution are two practices that the Chinese Communist Government 
denies take place in China.
  How, then, would denying visas to Chinese officials in which we have 
credible evidence that, in fact, they are doing--how would that impede 
the kind of positive relationship that you want to see?
  I again reiterate the questions: How do we reconcile the most recent 
rounds of arrests of those who tried to form a democracy party in China 
when they were detained and incarcerated? And the test of the rocket 
engines while the President was in China, how do we reconcile that with 
this supposed breeze of freedom that we now have blowing through China?
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. I don't think it is all going to be smooth and all 
going in one direction. I find the arrest of dissidents in the wake of 
the President's visit or prior to the President's visit as 100 percent 
wrong.
  Senator, if there is one thing I have learned about the Chinese, they 
can be ham-handed in how they function. They can be their own worst 
enemies in how they handle, because they function under a different, I 
think, value system in this regard. Sometimes, I believe, it is 
overreaction. I have read things, and I sit back and say, why did this 
have to happen?
  Now, let's talk for a moment about forced abortion. I think it is an 
abysmal practice, it is a barbaric practice. China says they do not 
countenance and they do not want to permit it. That is the official 
government policy. Are there occasions where, in this vast country, 
forced abortion is committed, do I believe? I believe there are 
instances where forced abortions are, in fact, committed. I also 
believe, though, that by pointing this out continually, we will see 
some changes.
  I think it has to be understood that China still has over 100 million 
people way under the poverty line, some living in caves, some living in 
the most impoverished circumstances, particularly in western China. It 
has to be understood that China is a nation of 1.2 billion people, 
growing rapidly.
  When I first went to China in 1979, what I was told was, what we have 
for one person must be extended to five people. I have seen since that 
time the quality of life improving for people. I have seen the easing 
of restrictions. I have seen the improvement in the dialog. I have seen 
the stress on education. I have seen the opening of the society. I have 
to think that is healthy for the society. I think if we engage that 
society, if we talk with people on equal levels, if we treat China 
without humiliating China but treat China with equality, that we will 
see major positive changes in the future.
  So I appreciate the opportunity to have this dialog. I respect your 
values. I respect what you are trying to do in this regard. I just 
happen to believe, based on my knowledge, my understanding, and my 
experience with China and the Chinese people, I believe it would be 
highly unproductive.
  I just wanted an opportunity to come to the floor and have that 
opportunity to state my views. I thank the distinguished Senator.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The distinguished Senator from Michigan.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Will the Senator yield?
  Last evening I had asked the majority leader just for 5 minutes at 
some time during the period when he was propounding the consent 
request. I am glad to cooperate with the floor managers on when would 
be the most appropriate time to do so, but since we are starting off on 
an amendment, I don't want to interrupt the debate on the amendment, 
and I am glad to inquire of my friend from Michigan what period of time 
he intends to take.
  Mr. ABRAHAM. If the Senator from Massachusetts would like to speak 
for up to 5 minutes, the Senator from Michigan would be happy to 
propose a unanimous consent agreement by which the Senator from 
Massachusetts is yielded 5 minutes to speak, in morning business or 
whatever, and then establish that the Senator from Michigan would be 
recognized to proceed with the amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Michigan desire to make 
that request in the form of a unanimous consent request?
  Mr. ABRAHAM. I ask unanimous consent that the Senator from 
Massachusetts be permitted to speak for 5 minutes at this time, to be 
followed by the Senator from Michigan to then resume discussion of my 
amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The Senator from Massachusetts.
  Mr. KENNEDY. I thank the Senator from Michigan.
  As the Senator knows, the Judiciary Committee, of which we are both 
members, is starting hearings at this time as well. I appreciate his 
kindness in permitting me to address the Senate at this time.

                          ____________________