[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 34 (Thursday, March 23, 2000)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1691-S1692]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                AGAINST LIFTING THE TRAVEL BAN ON LIBYA

  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, on Wednesday of this week, a team of 
State Department officials departed for Libya as part of a review of 
the travel ban that has been in effect since 1981.
  State Department officials will be in Libya for 26 hours in the next 
few days, visiting hotels and other sites. They will then prepare a 
recommendation for the Secretary to help her determine if there is 
still ``Imminent danger to . . . the physical safety of United States 
travellers,'' as the law requires in order to maintain the ban.
  Because of the travel ban, American citizens can only travel to Libya 
if they obtain a license from the Department of the Treasury. In 
addition, the State Department must first validate a passport for 
travel to Libya.
  The travel ban was imposed originally for safety reasons and predates 
the terrorist bombing of Pan Am Flight 103. But lifting the ban now, 
just as the two Libyan suspects are about to go on trial in the 
Netherlands for their role in that atrocity, will undoubtedly be viewed 
as a gesture of good will to Colonel Qadhafi.
  Indeed, just after the State Department announced that it would send 
this consular team, a Saudi-owned daily paper quoted a senior Libyan 
official as saying the one-day visit by the U.S. Team was a ``step in 
the right direction.''
  The official said the visit was a sign that ``the international 
community was convinced that Libya's foreign policy position was not 
wrong and there is a noticeable improvement in Libya's relations with 
the world.''
  I have been in contact with many of the families of the victims of 
Pan Am Flight 103, and they are extremely upset by the timing of this 
decision. The families want to know why the Secretary of State is 
making this friendly overture to Qadhafi now--just six weeks before the 
trial in the Netherlands begins. They question how much information the 
State Department will be able to obtain by spending only 26 hours in 
Libya. They wonder why the Department cannot continue to use the same 
sources of information it has been using for many years to make a 
determination about the travel ban.
  These courageous Americans have waited for justice for eleven long 
years. They feel betrayed by this decision. They have watched with 
dismay as our close ally, Great Britain, has rushed to reestablish 
diplomatic relations with Libya, before justice is served for the 
British citizens killed in the terrorist bombing. The State Department 
denies it, but the families are concerned that the visit signals a 
change in U.S. policy, undermines U.S. sanctions, and calls into 
question the Administration's commitment to vigorously enforce the Iran 
Libya Sanctions Act. That Act requires the U.S. to impose sanctions on 
foreign companies which

[[Page S1692]]

invest more than $40 million in the Libyan petroleum industry, until 
Libya complies with the four conditions specified by the UN Security 
Council.
  The bombing of Pan Am Flight 103, in which 188 Americans were killed, 
was one of the worst terrorist atrocities in American history. The 
State Department should not have sent a delegation to Libya now and it 
should not lift the travel ban on Libya at this time. The State 
Department's long-standing case-by-case consideration of passport 
requests for visits to Libya by U.S. citizens has worked well. It can 
continue to do so for the foreseeable future.

                          ____________________