[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 13 (Monday, February 14, 2000)]
[House]
[Pages H346-H351]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




         PERMANENT MOST FAVORED NATION TRADING STATUS FOR CHINA

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 19, 1999, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf) is recognized 
during morning hour debates for 5 minutes.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, today I rise because of my concern about 
granting permanent normal trade relations to China.
  Mr. Speaker, there are good people on both sides of this issue and as 
we consider granting China MFN; we need to be honest in our debate. 
Yesterday, the New York Times had an article written by Joseph Kahn 
with the headline, ``Executives Make Trade With

[[Page H347]]

China a Moral Issue.'' This article describes how some members of the 
business community in Florida approached one of our colleagues saying 
that passing MFN was a moral issue, that extending normal trade status 
to China is a moral necessity.
  Mr. Speaker, this could be a dangerous line of reasoning for those 
who favor granting China MFN, particularly given China's human rights 
record.
  In light of what so many Chinese citizens face at the hands of the 
Chinese Government, the term ``moral'' is of concern.
  There are now at least eight Roman Catholic bishops being held in 
prison. Here is a picture of one of those, Bishop Jia. He had been 
arrested on August 15, 1999, been arrested to prevent him from 
conducting mass on an important Roman Catholic feast. He is 66 years 
old, has been in jail in a Chinese labor camp for 20 years.
  I will tell the gentleman from Florida, this is a moral issue.
  Just a few days ago, the Chinese Government arrested another Roman 
Catholic bishop, surrounding him late in the night by 150 policemen. 
Scores of Roman Catholic laymen were arrested. This is a moral issue.
  Countless Protestant house church leaders have been arrested and 
imprisoned simply for practicing their faith. Here is a photo of Pastor 
Li showing the police grabbing him and taking him off to jail. He has 
been in and out of prison since 1983. This is a moral issue.
  I have been to China. I have been to Tiananmen Square and seen where 
the tanks have rolled over the people and flattened them in the wake. I 
have been to Beijing Prison Number One where Tiananmen Square 
demonstrators were working on socks to export to United States. This, I 
would tell the gentleman from Florida, is a moral issue.
  I visited Tibet several years ago. In Tibet the Chinese have raped 
and pillaged that peaceful country, committing untold atrocities upon 
the Tibetan population. Scores of Buddhist monks and nuns are in prison 
because of their faith. This is a moral issue. There are more prison 
labor camps in China now than there were when Solzhenitzen wrote the 
book ``Gulag Archipelago.'' This is a moral issue.
  The Muslims in China are being persecuted daily and no one speaks 
out. This is a moral issue.
  As a Member of Congress, I am able to attend various national 
security briefings that I cannot go into here on the House, but I can 
say that the Chinese military presents fundamental dangers to the West 
and to our men and women in the armed services. We need to tread very 
carefully in our actions which give aid to the Chinese military and the 
government and who knows what the future may hold where the battle 
lines could be drawn. This is a moral issue.
  The People's Liberation Army are dumping assault weapons into the 
United States that are killing women and children. This is a moral 
issue.

                              {time}  1245

  So I would say that the Clinton administration and others in support 
of MFN should be careful in crafting their arguments in support of MFN 
by using moral language. This administration has done little or nothing 
to speak up with regard to China's human rights, going so far as to 
actually meet with the Chinese officials in Tiananmen Square. This 
administration has done nothing in many of these areas.
  So, in closing, there are good people on both sides of the issue in 
this Congress who care deeply about this. The Congress is split, 
however. I would say we need to focus on the real moral issues; the 
persecution of the Roman Catholics, the persecution of the Protestants, 
the persecution of the Buddhists in Tibet, the persecution of the 
Muslims, the prison labor camps, and the threat to our national 
security. These are moral issues.
  I would say to those gentlemen, have they written the State 
Department to ask that the pastor be released? Have they written the 
State Department to say, please, let the bishop out; he has been in 
jail for 20 years? My sense is they have not. And this, I would tell my 
colleagues on both sides of the issue, this is the moral issue that 
this Congress will have to face.
  Every segment of the United States is opposed to granting MFN for 
China until there is improvement on human rights because the American 
people care deeply about these moral issues.
  Mr. Speaker, I include for the Record additional information 
regarding this subject.

              Tibet--A First Hand Look--August 9-13, 1997

                   (By Representative Frank R. Wolf)


                              introduction

       I recently returned from a journey to Tibet where I visited 
     during the period August 9-13, 1997. Accompanied by a member 
     of my staff and by another Western man fluent in Tibetan and 
     steeped in its culture, history and religion, we traveled 
     with U.S. passports and on tourist visas issued by the 
     government of China. At no time was I asked nor did I make 
     known that I was a Member of Congress. Had I done so, I am 
     sure that my visit would not have been approved just as other 
     Members of Congress requesting permission to visit Tibet have 
     been turned down.
       No sitting Member of the U.S. House of Representatives has 
     visited Tibet since China began in 1959 its relentless (and 
     largely successful) effort to squeeze the life and very soul 
     out of this country, its culture and its people. Only three 
     U.S. Senators have visited Tibet in the last several decades 
     and they were closely shepherded by the Chinese. Aside from 
     U.S. ambassadors in Beijing and Assistant Secretary of State 
     John Shattuck, I am unaware of visits by senior officials 
     from any presidential administration during these years.
       To be sure, an approved delegation visit to Tibet would not 
     likely be all that revealing since frank conversations with 
     individuals could not take place. I cannot think of another 
     place in the world where a tighter lid is kept on open 
     discussion. Government agents, spies and video cameras guard 
     against personal outside contact. Offenders, even suspected 
     offenders, are dealt with quickly and brutally.


                        human rights protection

       My interest in Tibet and the driving force behind my visit 
     centers on work to help in stopping religious persecution and 
     protecting basic human rights. In 1996, the House passed 
     three measures concerning these issues, one specifically 
     relating to Tibet. This year I introduced H.R. 1685, the 
     Freedom From Religious Persecution Act of 1997, which 
     contains specific provisions relating to Tibetan Buddhism. It 
     has over 100 cosponsors. These are areas about which I and 
     others care very deeply.
       In Tibet humane progress is not even inching along and 
     repressed people live under unspeakable brutal conditions in 
     the dim shadows of international awareness. I want the world 
     to know what is going on in Tibet. When people know, they 
     will demand that China change its policy of boot-heel 
     subjugation and end what one monk I met termed ``cultural 
     genocide.''
       I found that the PRC has a near-perfect record of vicious, 
     immediate and unrelenting reprisals against the merest 
     whisper of Tibetan dissent. I met with monks, men and women 
     on the street and others who risked their personal safety and 
     well-being to steal a few moments alone with me to tell me 
     how bad conditions are in Tibet and to petition help and 
     support from the West.


                            tibet on the map

       Tibet is known as the roof of the world and, indeed it is. 
     The Tibetan plain rises above 12,000 feet. At night, with 
     skies so clear, more stars beam down on the observer than one 
     can imagine. Beneath this roof is the former home of the 
     Dalai Lama, the religious leader who ruled the country from 
     the impressive Potala Palace in the capital of Lhasa. In 
     1959, when China commenced a relentless program to erase 
     Tibet from the pages of history, the Dalai Lama left his 
     homeland for India where he and countless other Tibetans who 
     followed remain in exile today.
       Tibet is about the geographic size of western Europe with a 
     Tibetan population of around six million. It has been 
     estimated that in the past two decades nearly one million 
     Tibetans have been killed, starved or tortured. At the same 
     time the PRC has undertaken a program of mass infusion of 
     Chinese people who probably now outnumber Tibetans in their 
     own country. There are no valid census data, but some 
     estimate that in the capital of Lhasa there are about 160,000 
     Chinese and only about 100,000 Tibetans. The difference in 
     numbers may be less startling in remote areas but the 
     inescapable conclusion is that China is swallowing Tibet. 
     Stores, hotels, bazaars, businesses and tradesmen are 
     largely Chinese. Storefront signs bear large Chinese 
     writing beneath much smaller Tibetan inscriptions. Driving 
     out from Lhasa, one encounters as many Chinese villagers, 
     shepherds, farmers, construction workers and travelers as 
     Tibetan. In short, Tibet is disappearing.
       Tibet lies along the border of Bhutan, Nepal, India and 
     Pakistan and is rich in resources including agriculture, 
     timber and minerals. Its importance to China is both 
     strategic and economic. China seems certain to maintain its 
     death grip on this land and strives to do so behind sealed 
     doors. There is no independent press in Tibet. I did not see 
     a single newspaper or magazine available to the people. 
     Television is extremely limited and tightly controlled by the 
     PRC. Outside press is not welcome and not allowed. Only

[[Page H348]]

     Voice of America, to which virtually all Tibetans listen, and 
     Radio Free Asia, which is relatively new, beam information 
     into Tibet. Nothing goes the other way except slips of 
     information carried out by occasional tourists and visitors.


                             tibet up close

       What do the Tibetan people say? Before my trip I was told 
     that individuals would seek me out as an obvious Western 
     visitor to hear their story. I was also told this was very 
     dangerous to them; that informers were everywhere and being 
     caught talking to a westerner was a guaranteed ticket to 
     prison and more. Frankly, I was skeptical that anyone would 
     approach us. I was wrong. Someone took advantage of almost 
     every opportunity for a guarded word or two.
       During our first encounter with a Tibetan who realized we 
     were westerners and one of us was fluent in Tibetan, we found 
     that he could not contain himself. ``Many are in jail, most 
     for political reasons.'' We saw Drapchi prison, which is off 
     the beaten path in a slum area. Guards in pairs were ever 
     present.
       We saw the Sangyip prison complex and then Gusta prison. 
     Prisons seem to be a growth industry in Tibet. We told the 
     Tibetan not to take chances. He said it is so important that 
     we see these places that he didn't care and we continued on 
     what had become a nightmare tour. We passed the main security 
     bureau, the intelligence headquarters and then the prison 
     bureau, each heavily guarded. All the while we heard about 
     monks and nuns and common men and women who were dragged away 
     to prison and tortured. He said, ``Don't worry about me at 
     all,'' and continued to tell of the torture to which 
     prisoners were subjected.
       They are routinely beaten with sticks and kicked and poked 
     with electric sticks (cattle prods with a huge electric 
     charge). Political prisoners are isolated from the general 
     prison population and kept in unlighted and unheated areas 
     with no sanitary or medical facilities and almost no food or 
     water.
       He added that the people have no rights. They cannot talk 
     freely. Even though Tibetans view the Dalai Lama as their 
     spiritual and political leader, they are forbidden to show 
     their love for him. Possessing a picture of the Dalai Lama is 
     an offense which could draw harsh and brutal punishment and 
     imprisonment. ``We (Tibetans) must have permission from the 
     Chinese to do everything,'' he said. ``We can do nothing on 
     our own.''
       He further said, ``The Chinese say we have freedom of 
     religion but it is a life. Despite the Chinese saying that 
     Tibetans have freedom, there are no freedoms--not even one. 
     Everything is controlled by the Chinese and we are repressed. 
     We listen to Voice of America say that the West supports 
     Tibet, yet they continue doing business with China. That 
     doesn't help. Tibet feels left out and ignored.''
       ``The Dalai Lama has asked America and Taiwan for help,'' 
     he continued. ``Please help the Dalai Lama because we are 
     being ruined. The Chinese send Tibetan children to China for 
     education and teach them Chinese ways. Tibet is disappearing 
     little by little. The Tibetan language is being increasingly 
     de-emphasized in schools and our culture is being wiped 
     out.''
       All this from one man telling of his agony and the agony of 
     his people. Yet, he ended by saying, ``I am not afraid. 
     Someday the sun will again shine in Tibet.'' Throughout, we 
     found overwhelming support for and faith in the Dalai Lama by 
     every single Tibetan with whom we had contact.


                         religious persecution

       We visited numerous monasteries where monks, nuns and 
     others sought us out. Their stories amplified what we had 
     already learned. Every monastery we visited was tightly 
     controlled by a small group of resident Chinese overseers. 
     Every report was heard told of a dramatic reduction in the 
     number of monks at each monastery. Many were imprisoned for 
     not turning their back on the Dalai Lama or even refusing to 
     give up pictures of him. Young monks under 15 (it was 
     possible to enter a monastery as young as 6 years of age) 
     were turned out. Since the cultural revolution many 
     monasteries had been largely destroyed. Rebuilding has 
     been painfully slow.
       The slightest resistance to Chinese interference was met by 
     the harshest punishment. It was common to hear reports of 
     monks being imprisoned, many during ``reeducation'' which 
     involves turning one's back on the Dalai Lama. Imprisonment 
     is for a long time. Imprisonment means years of brutal 
     beatings with infrequent visitors from the outside. And when 
     imprisonment finally ends, monks are expelled from their 
     monastery and exiled to their home village. Many try to 
     escape to India or Nepal. Many do not make it.
       We were told on several occasions that all monks are 
     afraid. When asked what message they would like me to take 
     back to America, I was told to say that they are not allowed 
     to practice their religion and that the people are suffering 
     greatly. Their biggest hope is to be free from China. One 
     said, ``Please help us. Please help the Dalai Lama.'' He said 
     if he were overheard talking to us he would immediately be 
     put in prison for four or five years.
       Other monks voiced their concern with not being free to 
     practice their religion. Hundreds have been imprisoned simply 
     for not removing pictures of the Dalai Lama from places of 
     worship. Their prayers are restricted and they have few 
     opportunities to talk away from the overseers, even in the 
     monastery.
       From monasteries all around Lhasa and the surrounding area, 
     the message was the same. I am reluctant to be too specific 
     in describing conversations because I do not want them traced 
     back to a specific monk or person. To do so would be to 
     impose a heavy sentence and punishment on someone already 
     suffering an unbelievable burden.
       At one place we met a woman at worship. When she realized 
     we were American, she burst forth. As she talked she began 
     sobbing. Tears poured down her face as she told us of 
     conditions. She said, ``Lhasa may be beautiful on the outside 
     but, inside, it is ugly. We are not allowed to practice what 
     we want to practice. Senior monks are gone and there are no 
     replacements and they are our teachers.''
       Asked for a message to America, she said, ``Please help us. 
     Please help the Dalai Lama. When there is pressure from the 
     West, things loosen up a bit before returning to as before. 
     Please have America help us.''
       Every single person with whom we spoke had positive 
     feelings toward America. We were always given a thumbs up or 
     a smile or a comment such as, ``America is great.'' People 
     would not stop talking to us, even when their safety was 
     threatened. Sometimes we had to turn away just to keep them 
     from being seen talking with us. Some even risked exposure by 
     gesturing to us from roof tops to meet with them.


                        the chinese stranglehold

       China's assault on the city, the countryside and the 
     environment has been no less harsh than its assault on the 
     people. Tibetan areas in Lhasa are being demolished and 
     replaced with smaller and more confined structures with the 
     remaining space given over to Chinese uses. The area at the 
     base of the Potala Palace has been completely leveled and a 
     new open space similar to Tiananmen Square has been created. 
     Forests are being leveled and many have seen convoys of 
     trucks piled with timber moving north into China.
       This is not a pretty picture. The glowing reports of 
     progress from Beijing or Shanghai where business is booming, 
     skyscrapers are rising and industry, education and the 
     standard of living are all soaring has a false ring when 
     heard from the plain of Tibet.
       America and the rest of the free world must do more to urge 
     China to back off from its clear goal to plunder Tibet. The 
     true story of Tibet is not being told. Aside from a 
     courageous few journalists working largely on their own, the 
     real story about Tibet is not reaching our ears. America and 
     others must strive for more open coverage.
       The U.S. government's policy seems to be based solely on 
     economics; to open more and more markets with China and to 
     ignore every other aspect of responsible behavior. The 
     American people need to hear this message about Tibet. 
     Knowing the real story, I believe the American public will 
     decide that we need to do better and that we can do better. I 
     hope this report is a beginning.
       The clock is ticking for Tibet. If nothing is done, a 
     country, its people, religion and culture will continue to 
     grow fainter and fainter and could one day disappear. That 
     would indeed be a tragedy. As one who visited a Soviet prison 
     camp during the cold war (Perm Camp 35) and Romania before 
     and immediately after the overthrow of the ruthless Ceausescu 
     regime to see things first-hand, I believe conditions in 
     Tibet are even more brutal. There are no restraints on 
     Tibet's Chinese overseers. They are the accuser, judge, jury, 
     prison warden and sometimes executioner rolled into one. 
     Punishment is arbitrary, swift, vicious and totally without 
     mercy and without recourse.
                                  ____


 Congressional Delegation to the Soviet Union and Perm Labor Camp 35, 
  U.S. Representatives Frank Wolf and Chris Smith, August 4-11, 1989--
      Final Report Delegation Findings and Follow-up, October 1989

       This report provides a brief account of the findings of the 
     Wolf/Smith delegation to the USSR, outlines our joint follow-
     up initiatives, and offers recommendations for U.S. officials 
     and non-government organizations and activists interested in 
     the progress of legal and penal reforms, prison and labor 
     camp conditions, and the status of alleged political 
     prisoners.
       Purpose of the trip: Inspection visit to Perm Labor Camp 35 
     and substantive discussions on legal and penal reforms and 
     human rights. U.S. Reps. Frank Wolf and Chris Smith, 
     accompanied by Richard Stephenson of the U.S. State 
     Department, interviewed 23 of the 38 inmates reportedly still 
     in Perm 35 at the time of the trip, and one inmate at the 
     Perm investigation prison.


                        Background and Findings

       Perm 35, a Soviet correctional labor camp known for its 
     severe conditions and mistreatment of prisoners, including 
     prisoners of conscience, was the principal focus of our 
     delegation. Marking the first time any U.S. or Western 
     official has been allowed into a Soviet ``political'' labor 
     camp, the trip's findings served to confirm and amplify much 
     of the existing documentation on camp conditions and the 
     existence of many prisoners believed to be incarcerated for 
     basically political activities.
       Helsinki Watch, Amnesty International, and others, 
     including former prisoners themselves, provided background 
     information for this trip. Many well-known political 
     prisoners have been confined in the Perm Camp

[[Page H349]]

     complex, which now includes only Perm 35: Natan Sharansky, 
     Professor Yuri Orlov, Alexander Ginsburg, Deacon Vladimir 
     Rusak, Father Alfonsas Svarinskas, and many others.
       Interviews with prisoners ranged from 5-40 minutes, all in 
     the presence of camp administrators and an official of the 
     Soviet Ministry of Internal Affairs (MVD). We viewed 
     punishment cells and other areas of the camp and were 
     permitted to take photographs and videotape much of the camp 
     and our interviews with prisoners.
       The broader purpose of the delegation was to discuss Soviet 
     progress toward legal reforms advancing the ``rule of law'' 
     in Soviet society. That is, our discussions focused on the 
     need to institutionalize the positive changes occurring in 
     Soviet human rights practices, open up the Soviet prison and 
     labor camp system to greater scrutiny, and establish due 
     process. We held discussions with Ministry of Foreign 
     Affairs (MFA) officials on legal reforms, including the 
     critically important draft laws on ``freedom of 
     conscience'' (whose principal impact will be upon 
     religious communities), draft laws on emigration, and 
     reform of the Soviet criminal code. The delegation 
     questioned representatives of the Procurator General and 
     Ministry of Internal Affairs (MVD) regarding the Soviet 
     penal system.
       As members of the U.S. Commission on Security and 
     Cooperation in Europe (Helsinki Commission), we emphasized 
     that our interest in proposed Soviet legislation is to find 
     indications that changes are systemic and not simply 
     arbitrary. We reminded Soviet officials of the importance 
     which the American people place on respect for fundamental 
     human rights like freedom of speech, peaceful assembly and 
     the right to publish and organize independent groups. While 
     not presuming to ``teach'' this to the Soviets, we spoke 
     about the lasting impression such changes would make on the 
     American people. For religious believers, in particular, a 
     well-written law on conscience will offer legal recourse 
     should local authorities decide to be heavy-handed. With 
     respect to the 1991 Human Rights Conference in Moscow, we 
     stressed that the adoption and implementation of laws 
     guaranteeing freedom of conscience will have a direct bearing 
     on U.S. support and enthusiasm for the Conference.
       The rights of religious believers, including those in 
     prison, was our major concern in meetings with the MVD, 
     Council on Religious Affairs and religious officials, 
     including the All-Union Council of Evangelical Christians/
     Baptists (Baptist Union). We also spoke with activists and 
     dissidents in the religious communities, including former 
     prisoners, to find their perspective on the present situation 
     for religious communities in the USSR.
       Our visit to Perm Labor Camp 35 was a key element in the 
     overall equation of assessing Soviet human rights 
     performance. The Soviet ``gulag'' (Russian acronym for the 
     Soviet labor camp system) remains a stark symbol of ``old 
     thinking'' in a country where political reform and dissent 
     are coming into the open. Glasnost, or openness, has failed 
     thus far to penetrate into the gulag, either to change 
     conditions in the labor camps or to impact penal procedures 
     which have led to systematically cruel and unusual 
     punishment. It is important to recognize that the lingering 
     fear of incarceration in the Soviet gulag threatens to hold 
     hostage any meaningful reforms in Soviet society. Bringing 
     ``glasnost to the gulag'' is an important step the Soviets 
     can take to deal with concerns that President Mikhail 
     Gorbachev's reforms might be reversed or undermined.
       We have urged the Soviets to begin a process of opening up 
     prisons and labor camps to independent human rights monitors, 
     both Westerners and Soviet citizens. We have encouraged human 
     rights organizations to request access to prisons and labor 
     camps. And finally, we pressed the Soviets to permit visits 
     by clergymen and to allow religious literature into prisons 
     and labor camps.
       Our foremost concern remains the plight of the 24 prisoners 
     whom we met in Perm 35. They have endured severe conditions 
     and several of them are already counted by the United States 
     among the nearly one hundred remaining suspected political 
     prisoners in the Soviet Union. U.S. human rights policy has 
     long embraced advocacy for individual prisoners' cases, a 
     practice rooted in American values recognizing the inherent 
     dignity and rights of each human being.
       Our evaluation of the Perm 35 cases in question is based on 
     the claims of several inmates that they are political 
     prisoners, the documentation of human rights groups which 
     support those claims, and the findings from our interviews. 
     Our conclusion is that, regardless of any dispute over these 
     definitions of political prisoners, most of these prisoners 
     would not be prosecuted for similar ``crimes'' today, or 
     their offenses would be treated far less severely. In view of 
     the excessive punishment endured by these prisoners, we have 
     called on the Soviets to reexamine their cases in the context 
     of ``new political thinking'' and release them on 
     humanitarian grounds.


                        findings on perm camp 35

     The prisoners and camp conditions
       Mikhail Kazachkov has spent nearly 200 days of his 14-year 
     incarceration in punishment cells, up to 15 days at a time in 
     the ``shizo'' cell.
       We were given a rare glimpse of the infamous ``shizo.'' 
     Veterans of the Soviet gulag have provided vivid accounts of 
     this notorious four-by-eight-foot cell. It contains a wooden 
     plank fastened to the wall on which to sleep, with no bedding 
     or blankets, and a cement stump on which to sit. The cell, 
     and the punishment, is designed to make the natural cold of a 
     Soviet labor camp that much more severe--that is, the 
     unbearable, cold temperature is used as torture. Prisoners 
     complained that it is difficult to sleep on the hard, 
     narrow plank. The walls are made of a rough pointed-like 
     concrete, which scrapes and cuts prisoners who might lean 
     or sleep up against it.
       We had to insist that Kazachkov be offered the opportunity 
     to speak to us. He had been moved from Perm 35 to the Perm 
     investigation prison shortly before our visit. While 
     describing some instances of physical abuse in Perm 35, 
     Kazachkov explained that general-purpose beatings were no 
     longer a regular occurrence in Perm 35. Kazachkov suffered an 
     injured arm in trying to resist a forced head-shaving, a 
     practice which he described as a widespread form of 
     humiliation against Soviet prisoners.
       Kazachkov, imprisoned in 1975 one week after applying to 
     emigrate, recently led eight other inmates at Perm 35 in a 
     work strike to protect unsafe working conditions. Together 
     these prisoners formed a Helsinki/Vienna human rights 
     monitoring group in Perm 35. Through completely within their 
     rights under the Helsinki Accords and the 1989 Vienna 
     agreement ``to promote the Helsinki process,'' camp 
     authorities used harsh measures to stop them. Just three 
     weeks after our visit, Kazachkov was singled out for his role 
     in the protest. He was put on trial for ``refusal to work'' 
     and sentenced to serve the next three years of his 18 and 
     one-half year term in the more severe regime of Chistopol 
     Prison.
       We interviewed 23 inmates in Perm Labor Camp 35 who 
     requested to meet with us. A theme running through their 
     stories emphasized the conditions and treatment of prisoners 
     in the camp: long periods of isolation in punishment cells, 
     severe cold used as torture, and being cut off from family 
     and friends due to routinely intercepted mail and arbitrarily 
     canceled visits. We were never allowed to meet alone with any 
     prisoners. Prisoners gave their side of the story boldly and 
     bravely, several of them condemning the abuses of the KGB and 
     camp officials in their very presence. Many, though not all, 
     of the 24 inmates we met (those in Perm 35 plus Kazachkov) 
     claimed to be political prisoners. Many of the prisoners 
     expressed thanks to those in the West who had written letters 
     to Soviet officials on their behalf and to them personally.
       We sought and received assurances beforehand from Soviet 
     officials in the Procuracy, Ministry of Internal Affairs and 
     the camp that no retribution would be brought against any 
     prisoner. We repeated this Soviet promise loudly during 
     meetings with many prisoners. The prisoners told us there had 
     been reprisals against some who met with New York Times 
     reported A.M. Rosenthal during his visit to Perm 35 in 
     December 1988 (the first visit by any Westerner to a labor 
     camp). Some prisoners said that they understood reprisals 
     were a possible consequence of speaking to us; however, we 
     continued to stress that assurances had been given by the 
     Soviets that there would be no reprisals. One prisoner simply 
     said, ``there is nothing more they can do to us.''
       Most of the Perm 35 cases demand a review by the Soviets, 
     including the following:
       Oleg Mikhailov said that he was put in ``shizo'' simply for 
     requesting to meet with Rosenthal. Mikhailov was imprisoned 
     in 1979 on charges of ``treason to the motherland'' and 
     ``anti-Soviet agitation'' for preparing to steal and escape 
     the country in a cropduster plane. He condemned the Soviets 
     for their treatment of prisoners. Although one and one-half 
     years of internal exile remain on his sentence, the Soviets 
     have stated that the system of exile has been abolished. 
     Mikhailov is due to be released October 21.
       Byelorussian Christian Alexander Goldovich was charged with 
     ``treason'' for attempting to flee across the Black Sea in a 
     rubber raft, and carrying pictures allegedly depicting how 
     bad life is in the Soviet Union. Goldovich admits to having 
     the pictures, which the Soviets charged was secret 
     information, and explains that they were snapshots of his 
     apartment.
       Goldovich is a physicist. Arrested April 21, 1985. 
     Sentenced December 2, 1985, to 15 years strict-regimen labor 
     camp and 5 years exile on charges including treason (Article 
     64), anti-Soviet agitation and propaganda (Article 70) and 
     leaking government secrets. Accused of attempting to escape 
     from the USSR and intending to leak secret information. To be 
     released April 2005.
       Goldovich had requested a Bible during the Rosenthal visit 
     to Perm 35. He was denied one by camp authorities. We gave 
     him a Bible and offered Bibles to any other prisoners who 
     wanted one--all but two did. The Soviets assured us they 
     would be allowed to keep them. Several times, he thanked 
     people in the West for writing on his behalf. Asked whether 
     there is any glasnost in the Perm camp, he replied, ``No, 
     not in the smallest degree.'' Goldovich's case has been 
     raised continually with the Soviets.
       Ukrainian Bohdan Klimchak attempted to flee from the USSR 
     to Iran carrying his science fiction short stories, which he 
     intended to publish abroad. After nine days in Iran, he was 
     returned to Soviet custody. His writings were deemed 
     ``nationalistic,'' and he was arrested in November 1978 and 
     sentenced to 15 years strict-regimen labor camp

[[Page H350]]

     and five years exile. His sentence was reduced under amnesty 
     and Klimchak was due to be released in September 1989 (end of 
     exile around March 1992). Convicted under Articles 64 
     (``treason'') and 70 (``anti-Soviet agitation and 
     propaganda'') of Soviet criminal code.
       Ruslan Ketenchiyev, a lathe worker, was arrested August 27, 
     1982, charged with ``treason,'' and sentenced to 10 years 
     strict-regimen labor camp. Ketenchiyev tried to contact 
     American journalists and U.S. embassy personnel in order to 
     emigrate to the West. Instead of the American diplomat he 
     expected to meet, a disguised KGB agent entrapped him and he 
     was prosecuted on treason charges. His sentence reduced under 
     amnesty, Ketenchiyev is due to be released January 21, 1990.
       Ketenchiyev told us of terrible conditions and various 
     punishment methods in Perm 35, including the well-documented 
     use of cold in punishment cells. He particularly noted the 
     lack of medical care in the camp. Responding to prisoners' 
     formal complaints about the extreme cold, camp doctors 
     declared the temperature in punishment cells to be 
     sufficiently warm.
       Leonid Lubman, an economist and electronics engineer, was 
     arrested August 29, 1977, charged with ``treason,'' and 
     sentenced to 13 years strict regimen labor camp. He is 
     scheduled to be released on August 29, 1990. Lubman compiled 
     a manuscript providing 30 profiles of corrupt officials and 
     attempted to send it abroad.
       Lubman may have become mentally disturbed in labor camp and 
     suffers from chronic headaches and stomach ailments. He 
     looked well over his 50 years and spoke much slower than the 
     others we met. He said the authorities have an interest in 
     not releasing him because he has learned the methods of his 
     incarcerators. He described some sort of torture, which 
     sounded like electrical shock and exposure to infrared waves. 
     He said he was punished after the December 1988 visit by 
     Rosenthal to Perm 35.
     Resolving the Perm 35 cases
       Many of the acts committed by those in Perm 35 would not 
     have been considered crimes under Gorbachev. Although the 
     Soviets frequently contend these prisoners are criminals, 
     Soviet officials have repeatedly declined to open their 
     files. They refused to open the files to us, although the 
     U.S. State Department has provided court records and case 
     files to the Soviets on disputed U.S. cases. The exception 
     was a brief look at Kazachkov's file when Procuracy official 
     Alexander Korshunov sought to refute charges of punishment 
     made by Mikhail Kazachkov. When the open file revealed a 
     picture of a head-shaved Kazachkov, it was quickly snapped 
     shut.
       Prior to the signing of the Vienna Concluding Document, in 
     December 1988, Mikhail Gorbachev declared at the United 
     Nations that there are no longer any persons in prison 
     ``sentenced for their political or religious convictions.''
       However, the release of remaining political prisoners was 
     made a condition for U.S. agreement in Vienna to schedule a 
     Helsinki follow-up conference in Moscow in 1991. The Vienna 
     agreement was signed in January 1989. The Soviets 
     subsequently agreed to a process of review for most of nearly 
     one hundred prisoners remaining on U.S. political prisoner 
     lists. Many of these ``disputed cases'' are the cases of 
     those we met in Perm 35.
       The prisoners who remain in Perm 35 are held under 
     basically three charges: attempting to flee the country 
     (including hijacking, in some cases); war crimes; and 
     espionage. Many languish under Article 64 of the Soviet 
     criminal code, ``treason'' in combination with more clearcut 
     political offenses like Article 70, ``anti-Soviet agitation 
     and propaganda.''
       Soviet officials claim they hold no political prisoners 
     because all who were sentenced exclusively under one of the 
     four purely political criminal code articles (like Article 
     70, those used to prosecute free speech, peaceful assembly, 
     etc.) have been released in amnesties under Gorbachev.
       Prosecution on charges of treason for the forbidden 
     activities of the Brezhnev era no longer makes sense in 
     today's Soviet Union. Article 64 was interpreted far too 
     broadly under Soviet law and used to threaten prisoners with 
     capital punishment and to extract testimony before they have 
     even seen a lawyer. Those who landed in Perm 35 for acts of 
     violence related to hijack attempts, or other acts of 
     violence, are not political prisoners, although cruel 
     punishment should not be simply excused in their cases 
     either. It is high time, however, for review of the excessive 
     punishment meted out for nonviolent ``crimes'' that would not 
     be prosecuted today, or would be treated far less seriously.
       We conveyed to the Soviets that it was in the interests of 
     all sides for these cases not to linger beyond preparations 
     for the Vienna Follow-up Meeting at Copenhagen in 1990. 
     Should they linger until the already controversial Moscow 
     Human Rights Conference in 1991, the Soviets would face a 
     great embarrassment.
       While these prisoners' cases remain unresolved, we sensed 
     from our discussions the Soviets' desire to be cleared of the 
     charges that political prisoners remain. Therefore, we call 
     on the Soviets to reexamine these cases in view of their 
     ``new political thinking'' and release them on humanitarian 
     grounds.


                 prospects for legal and penal reforms

       To the Soviets' credit, the kind of access we were granted 
     to Perm 35 would have been unthinkable even months ago. The 
     Soviets have closed down two political labor camps in the 
     vicinity of Perm 35 for lack of need as a result of prisoner 
     amnesties. Soviet authorities say that they have removed 
     hundreds of camp guards responsible for past human rights 
     abuses. Officials of the Soviet Procuracy, as well as the new 
     Supreme Soviet legislature, have talked about penal reforms. 
     The highest ranking Soviet procurator supervising Legality in 
     Correctional Facilities, Yuri Khitrin, admitted to us that it 
     was necessary to discuss ``humanizing'' the Soviet penal 
     system.
       These statements would bode well for the prospect of 
     reform. However, the practical impact on prison and labor 
     camp conditions has thus far been minimal, and the Soviets 
     have publicly stated few commitments to improve or 
     reconstitute their gulag practices. On the other hand, the 
     Soviets have promised for more than two years to institute 
     legal reform which will decriminalize political dissent.
       We discussed legal reforms with officials of the Council on 
     Religious Affairs. Deputy Minister Alexander Ivolgin 
     explained to us that they were reluctant to discuss a draft 
     of ``laws on conscience'' which we put before them--one of 
     two thus far published. Ivolgin claimed that the new law on 
     religious groups had not yet been formally drafted for 
     consideration by the Supreme Soviet. An official from CRA's 
     legal office, Tatyana Belokopitova, offered a very 
     disappointing response on the question of requiring 
     registration of religious groups. The latest proposal would 
     establish the right of ``judicial person'' (legal recourse) 
     only for religious groups who submit to registering with 
     central religious authorities. This proposal would fail to 
     resolve either the present lack of legal rights for all 
     churches or the desire of many believers not to register--it 
     would instead pit these concerns against each other.
       In a meeting with First Deputy Foreign Minister Anatoly 
     Adamishin, the question of new religious laws was side-
     stepped by referring us to the Council on Religious Affairs. 
     However, Mr. Adamishin assured us that the Supreme Soviet 
     would place a high priority on new religious laws during its 
     fall session. He was less optimistic about action on draft 
     emigration (exit/entry) legislation. In general, Adamishin 
     declared that economic and constitutional reforms would take 
     precedent over both matters. On freedom of conscience, 
     Adamishin commented, ``We used to have a problem in regards 
     to freedom of conscience, but we never had a total absence of 
     religious freedom. The freedom to perform religious rites was 
     always allowed, so we are not starting from scratch.''
       Regarding penal reforms, there appears to be a much tougher 
     hill to climb. We met with a panel of procurators and 
     investigators from the All-Union Procuracy and Ministry of 
     Internal Affairs who denied our references to the arduous 
     conditions in prisons and labor camps. We encountered a 
     Soviet willingness to discuss ``rule of law'' questions, even 
     while some observations caused a degree of discomfort: 
     prosecutors bring charges only with sufficient evidence for a 
     presumption of guilt; they are held responsible for 
     ``losing'' cases; and all trial attorneys are answerable to 
     the Procurator General.
       We raised the issue of establishing due process for charges 
     brought while prisoners are serving sentences--no sooner had 
     we left than Mikhail Kazachkov was victimized for such 
     pitfalls in the Soviet system. We identified those issues 
     raised by former prisoners: cruel punishments, 
     malnourishment, inadequate medical care, severe 
     restrictions on family visits. We were assured that draft 
     legislation excludes provisions which disallowed family 
     visits in the past. In addition, we were told that the 
     Procuracy now shares the responsibility for supervision of 
     correctional facilities with public commissions under the 
     new Supreme Soviet which guarantee ``law, legality and 
     order.''
       The Soviets indicated openness to future visits to prisons 
     and labor camps by official and non-official groups. Mr. 
     Khitrin offered agreement in principle to a follow-up visit 
     by Director of the U.S. Bureau of Prisons, Mr. Michael 
     Quinlan, and Chairman of Prison Fellowship International, Mr. 
     Charles Colson. We mentioned that groups such as Amnesty 
     International, Helsinki Watch and the International Red Cross 
     should be permitted access to prisoners in prisons and labor 
     camps to monitor and report on conditions. We advocated on 
     behalf of independent Soviet monitors who wish to have access 
     to correctional facilities.
       Finally, we received assurance that prisoners could have 
     Bibles and other religious literature and that clergy would 
     be allowed to visit. Both have been forbidden in law and 
     practice in the past. Khitrin told us that a decision had 
     been made that from now on ``all correctional labor colonies 
     will have Bibles in necessary quantities and permit ministers 
     of faith to visit.'' We urged the Soviets to put such 
     commitments into practice by granting requests to visit 
     prisons and camps.


                     follow-up and recommendations

     Release of Perm 35 prisoners
       We have an obligation to work for the immediate release of 
     all remaining Perm prisoners on humanitarian grounds. The 
     Soviets are obligated to release all political prisoners in 
     compliance with their commitments under the Helsinki Final 
     Act and Vienna Concluding Document. In addition, one criteria 
     for agreeing to the Moscow Human

[[Page H351]]

     Rights Conference was the release of all political prisoners. 
     While Soviet authorities have raised questions in connection 
     with many of these cases, we as members of the Helinski 
     Commission have argued that the burden of proof is on the 
     Soviets to prove the individuals in question are criminals. 
     We have initiated or recommended the following action on 
     behalf of remaining prisoners, including those in Perm 35:
       (1) We have publicly called on the Soviets to release all 
     those in Perm 35 convicted for nonviolent acts. We believe 
     that in view of the excessive and cruel punishment these 
     prisoners have suffered, a positive Soviet response would 
     signal a truly humanitarian gesture.
       (2) We have written Secretary of State James Baker to urge 
     him to continue the practice of raising individual cases at 
     the highest levels in U.S.-Soviet dialogue.
       (3) We have discussed Soviet reforms and the status of 
     prisoners with Deputy Secretary of State Lawrence 
     Eagleburger, urging that human rights remain a top priority 
     in U.S.-Soviet relations. While Soviet human rights 
     improvements have occurred, we should continue identifying 
     problems that persist and pressing our concerns while the 
     Soviets seem willing to discuss and respond to them.
       (4) We have urged human rights groups to advocate the 
     immediate release of political prisoners.
       (5) We urge concerned Westerners to reinvigorate campaigns 
     on behalf of these prisoners, including letter-writing to 
     Soviet officials, camp authorities and to the prisoners 
     themselves.
     Advancing glasnost to the gulag
       The Soviets should begin a process of opening up prisons 
     and labor camps to interested individuals and human rights 
     groups. Only by following our inspection visit by 
     permitting further visits will the Soviets make progress 
     in erasing the Stalinist stigma of the gulag.
       (1) We have urged Westerners and human rights organizations 
     to request to visit prisons and labor camps and meet with 
     prisoners in order to report on conditions.
       (2) We have urged members of the media, particularly the 
     Moscow press corps, to make visits and report on prisons and 
     labor camps. Since our visit, a few members of the media have 
     been granted access to camps.
       (3) We have helped to secure official Soviet approval for 
     the visit of Bureau of Prisons Director, Michael Quinlin, and 
     Prison Fellowship International chairman, Charles Colson, to 
     visit several prisons and labor camps in the USSR and discuss 
     reforms and ways to reduced crime and recidivism in that 
     country.
       (4) We have urged that Western Leaders and human rights 
     groups advocate on behalf of Soviet citizens who wish to 
     visit prisons and labor camps, including clergy to perform 
     rites or offer pastoral counsel.
       (5) We have raised these concerns in congressional 
     hearings, and support Helsinki Commission hearing to focus on 
     conditions in the Soviet gulag.
     Reforms
       (1) We have shared our findings on the progress of legal 
     reforms--including ``freedom on conscience,'' freedom of 
     emigration, and criminal code revisions--with prominent non-
     government organizations and urge their continued vigilence 
     in encouraging further institutionalization of basic freedoms 
     and that such laws be consistent with international law and 
     with CSCE commitments.
       (2) We have raised concerns about Soviet legal reforms in 
     recent hearings sponsored by the Congressional Human Rights 
     Caucus and, in the past, in CSCE hearings.
       (3) We have expressed our support to Soviet and American 
     officials for programs developed in a human rights framework 
     to promote Soviet Progress on ``rule of law'' issues and in 
     other areas where U.S. expertise is helpful and welcomed by 
     the Soviets.


                        prisoners met at perm 35

       Following is the list of prisoners (not all of them are 
     necessarily political prisoners) who spoke with Reps. Wolf 
     and Smith at Perm Labor Camp 35 in August 1989. For more 
     information on these prisoners and their cases, please 
     contact Helsinki Commission (U.S. Commission on Security and 
     Cooperation in Europe, House Annex 2, Room 237, Washington, 
     DC 20515).
       Mailing address for prisoners (Moscow post office box): 
     SSSR, RSFSR, S. Moskva uchr. 5110/VS, Last name, First 
     initial.
       Aleksandr Goldovich, Ruslan Ketenchiyev, Bogdan Klimchak, 
     Lenoid Lubman, Viktor Makarov, Nikolay Nukradze, Aleksandr 
     Rasskazov, Mikhailov Kazachkov, Valery Smirnov, Oleg 
     Mikhaylov, and Igor Mogil'nikov.
       Yuriy Pavlov, Aleksandr Udachin, Arnol'd Anderson, Maksim 
     Ivanov, Vyacheslav Cherepanov, Vadim Arenberg, Vladimir 
     Potashov, Akhmet Kolpakbayev, Anatoliy Filatov, Igor 
     Fedotkin, Vladimir Tishchenkov, Viktor Olinsnevich, and 
     Unidentified Central Asian.
       Acknowledgment: We wish to thank Richard Stephenson, Soviet 
     Desk Officer at the State Department, who accompanied us on 
     the trip to Perm 35, providing translation and other 
     assistance.

                          ____________________