[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 53 (Wednesday, May 3, 2000)]
[House]
[Pages H2417-H2422]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
RELATING TO CONTINUING HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS AND POLITICAL OPPRESSION
IN SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF VIETNAM
Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the
concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 295) relating to continuing human
rights violations and political oppression in the Socialist Republic of
Vietnam 25 years after the fall of South Vietnam to Communist forces,
as amended.
The Clerk read as follows:
H. Con. Res. 295
Whereas April 30, 2000, marks the 25th anniversary of the
fall of Saigon to Communist forces of North Vietnam;
Whereas 25 years after the Vietnam War ended, the Socialist
Republic of Vietnam is a one-party state ruled and controlled
by the Vietnamese Communist Party;
Whereas the Government of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam
continues to violate the liberties and civil rights of its
own citizens through arbitrary arrests, detentions without
trial, and the censorship of peaceful expressions of
political and religious beliefs;
Whereas the Department of State Country Reports on Human
Rights Practices for 1999 notes that the Government of the
Socialist Republic of Vietnam ``continued to repress basic
political and some religious freedoms and to commit numerous
abuses'';
Whereas the Socialist Republic of Vietnam still retains
Article 4 in its Constitution that ensures the supremacy of
the Vietnamese Communist Party as the only political party in
the country while continuing to enforce an extra-legal
administrative decree to detain or place under house arrest
any dissidents or civilians for up to two years, without
trial, under the pretext of ``endangering national
security'';
Whereas the Socialist Republic of Vietnam is one of the
most politically repressive and poorest countries in the
world, with an average annual per capita income of $330;
Whereas, according to the Department of State and
international human rights organizations, the Government of
the Socialist Republic of Vietnam continues to restrict
unregistered religious activities and persecutes citizens on
the basis of their religious affiliation through arbitrary
arrests and detention, harassment, physical abuse,
censorship, and the denial of the rights of free association
and religious worship;
Whereas the Department of State Annual Report on
International Religious Freedom for 1999 on Vietnam estimates
that ``there are from 30 to 50 religious prisoners'' but
``the number is difficult to verify with any precision
because of the secrecy surrounding the arrest, detention, and
release process'';
Whereas the Government of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam
continues to prevent human rights organizations from
unfettered and open investigations of allegations of state-
sponsored oppression of the right to worship by its citizens,
and has prevented the United Nations Special Rapporteur on
Religious Intolerance, Abdelfattah Amor, from meeting with
various religious leaders during his visit to Vietnam in
October 1998;
Whereas the Government of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam
systematically violates the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights in contravention of its status as a member of the
United Nations;
Whereas the Government of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam
systematically violates the International Covenant on Civil
and Political Rights in contravention of its status as a
signatory to that agreement; and
Whereas it is in the interest of the United States to
promote political, religious, and economic freedom throughout
the world: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate
concurring), That the Congress--
(1) requests the President to restate and make clear to the
leadership of the Government of the Socialist Republic of
Vietnam that--
(A) the American people are firmly committed to political,
religious, and economic freedom for the citizens of the
Socialist Republic of Vietnam; and
(B) the United States fully expects equal protection under
law with all Vietnamese citizens, regardless of religious
belief, political philosophy, or socio-political association;
(2) urges the Government of the Socialist Republic of
Vietnam--
(A) to cease violations of religious freedom as defined by
the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998;
(B) to release all religious prisoners, political
prisoners, and prisoners of conscience, and immediately cease
the harassment, detention, physical abuse, and imprisonment
of Vietnamese citizens who have exercised their legitimate
rights to freedom of belief, expression, and association;
(C) to allow all Vietnamese citizens the right to free
expression, freedom of association, freedom of the press, and
religious worship; and
(D) to formally commit to a framework and a set timetable
for open and fair elections that will facilitate the ability
of Vietnamese citizens to peacefully choose their own local
and national leaders, free from fear and intimidation; and
(3) commends the Vietnamese-American community for
initiating a memorial to American and South Vietnamese
soldiers who sacrificed their lives for the cause of freedom
during the Vietnam War, which is under development and will
be located in Westminster, California.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from New
York (Mr. Gilman) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) each
will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman).
General Leave
Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
[[Page H2418]]
may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their
remarks on House Concurrent Resolution 295, the measure under
consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from New York?
There was no objection.
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, I am pleased to rise today in support of
House Concurrent Resolution 295, which was introduced by my
distinguished colleague, the gentleman from California (Mr.
Rohrabacher). And I would also like to thank the chairman of the
Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific, the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr.
Bereuter), for his work in crafting the current language in this
resolution.
Mr. Speaker, it is truly unfortunate that 25 years after the end of
the Vietnam War the Socialist Republic Vietnam is still a one-party
state ruled and controlled by the Vietnamese Communist party.
Regrettably, the government in Hanoi continues to repress basic
political and some religious freedoms, and to commit numerous human
rights abuses.
This resolution rightfully requests the President to make clear to
the government of Vietnam the firm commitment of the American people to
fundamental human rights and equal treatment for all people of Vietnam
still persist.
It further urges Vietnam to cease its violations of human rights and
to undertake the long overdue liberalization of its antiquated
political system.
And, finally, it appropriately commends the Vietnamese American
community for a memorial to fallen American and South Vietnamese
soldiers being developed in Westminster, California. In that regard, I
call upon the Vietnamese government to do all it can to assist in
bringing our POWs and MIAs home to American soil.
Mr. Speaker, democracy and human rights are not eastern or western
values, as some might contend. They are universal values and the right
of people everywhere, including the 77 million people of Vietnam. I
want to praise this resolution for pointing out the injustice that
tragically exists in Vietnam today. Communism is a dead idealogy.
Somehow, and surprisingly, the government in Hanoi still has not
received that news.
I sincerely hope that the bureaucrats in Hanoi are listening today
and, as a result, will undertake the necessary reforms to release minds
and spirits of the Vietnamese people. The people of Vietnam clearly
deserve much better.
Once again I commend the gentleman from California (Mr. Rohrabacher)
for introducing this resolution and his continuing commitment to human
rights and democracy, and I also want to commend the distinguished
chairman of the Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific, the gentleman
from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter), for bringing it to the floor at this
time. Accordingly, I urge my colleagues to strongly support this
measure.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume,
and I rise in strong support of this resolution.
At the outset, I would like to commend my friend, the gentleman from
California (Mr. Rohrabacher), for crafting this resolution, which is so
necessary to focus attention on the continuing violations of human
rights in all forms in Vietnam.
I also want to commend the chairman of the Committee on International
Relations, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman), and the chairman
of the Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific, my good friend, the
gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter) for their work on this
resolution.
Mr. Speaker, Vietnam continues to be--25 years after the conclusion
of that tragic war--one of the most repressive societies on the face of
this planet. Similarly to China, Vietnam has opened up its economy to
some extent, but its political system is as rigid, unbending, and
repressive as it has ever been.
I call, therefore, on the government of Vietnam to release all
religious and political prisoners, all prisoners of conscience; and to
immediately cease the harassment, detention, physical abuse and
imprisonment of Vietnamese citizens who are exercising their legitimate
rights to freedom of belief, expression, and association.
I call on the government of Vietnam, Mr. Speaker, to abolish article
four of the Vietnamese constitution and repeal all regulations and
codes and decrees prohibiting citizens the rights to free expression,
freedom of association, freedom of the press and religious worship.
I also think it is critical that we as a body call on the government
of Vietnam to set an early timetable for open and fair elections that
at long last will facilitate the inclusion of Vietnam in the community
of civilized nations and allow its citizens to peacefully choose their
own local and national leaders, free from fear and intimidation.
I think it is particularly significant, Mr. Speaker, that the
government of Vietnam has prevented the United Nations special
rapporteur on religious intolerance from meeting with the various
religious leaders during his visit to Vietnam. Vietnam has an
obligation, as a signatory of the appropriate treaties, to allow access
by United Nations' officials to all religious practitioners.
We are indeed pleased that a quarter century has gone by since the
conclusion of that tragic war, but we are appalled at the continued
suppression of the Vietnamese people. I earnestly hope and trust that
this move by the Congress of the United States, which I trust will be
approved unanimously, will begin the process of opening up the
political situation in that country. And I once again commend my friend
from California (Mr. Rohrabacher).
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Rohrabacher), the sponsor of the measure.
Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman of the committee,
the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman), and the chairman of the
subcommittee, the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter), as well as
the ranking member, the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) for
being very cooperative on this measure.
This is one of those measures, Mr. Speaker, that goes through
Congress that has bipartisan support because it reflects fundamental
values which I believe that this body is supposed to be all about. This
is a body that represents the greatest democracy in the world, and all
of us who meet here share these values of democracy and freedom. And
when we are talking about issues that go to the heart of our country,
we stand united.
This resolution commemorates the 25th anniversary of the end of the
Vietnam War and expresses a tribute to the Americans and South
Vietnamese who gave their lives in the cause of freedom in that
conflict. The international press reports from Vietnam this past
weekend unanimously emphasized the ongoing repression that the people
of Vietnam have had to suffer under the Communist regime in Hanoi.
The violation of human rights and the denial of democracy for the
people of Vietnam has been just a horrific experience over these last
25 years and has caused a firsthand observer, Senator John McCain, to
state that regardless of America's shortcomings in conducting that war,
that the wrong side won.
Singapore's senior statesman and ASEAN founding member, Lee Kuan Yew,
commented recently that the sacrifices by the Americans in Vietnam in
the 1960s and 1970s gave the rest of the region, which also faced
Communist-backed guerilla movements, time to stabilize and even
prosper. So, yes, there were some good things that came out of Vietnam,
yet the people of Vietnam still suffer.
And there was great sacrifice during that war: 58,000 Americans
perished and more than 300,000 were wounded. In addition, 270,000 South
Vietnamese military personnel perished, and over 570,000 were wounded.
And that was before, of course, the final offensive by the Communist
forces 25 years ago today.
[[Page H2419]]
This resolution honors their sacrifice and calls attention to the
cause of freedom in Vietnam. This resolution is entirely in support of
the people of Vietnam who deserve the right and the opportunity to
participate in the democratic process of a free and Democratic society.
The greatest example of the potential of Vietnam is perhaps the
tremendous educational and economic success of the Vietnamese American
community, such as that in Little Saigon, which is in my district. And
I am very proud to represent these freedom loving people who came here
in such turmoil and have made a success of their lives despite great
hardship.
{time} 1045
In fact, the fact that they came here with little more than the
shirts on their back and now live in relative prosperity and have made
wonderful citizens for our country indicates just how important freedom
and democracy is considering that the people that they left behind
still languish in poverty and still are repressed and suffer great
tyranny there in Vietnam.
This resolution expresses the hope that some day the people of South
Vietnam will enjoy the same kind of freedom that the people who came
here after the war enjoy. The resolution urges the Vietnamese regime to
commit to a framework, a set timetable for open and free elections.
Twenty-five years after the end of the war, it is time for Vietnamese
leaders to make peace with their own people and to permit their
citizens to peacefully choose their own local and national leaders
without fear of intimidation.
This resolution also, as the gentleman from New York (Chairman
Gilman) stated, congratulates the Vietnamese-American community in
Southern California and throughout the United States for initiating and
funding through private donations the first memorial to honor both
American and South Vietnamese military personnel who sacrificed their
lives during the Vietnam War, which is now being developed in Orange
County, California.
Finally, I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support
this bipartisan resolution which honors the sacrifice of American
citizen soldiers who perished for the cause of freedom during the
Indochina conflict by supporting the struggle for democracy in Vietnam.
And finally, I would like to salute a member of my staff, Mr. Al
Santoli, who is standing behind me at this moment, who helped me put
this resolution together. Al Santoli, a triple Purple Heart winner from
the Vietnam War, has dedicated his life to the cause of freedom and
justice not only in Southeast Asia but throughout the world; and we
appreciate the effort that he put into this resolution, as well.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, in the relatively short time that she has been with us,
the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Sanchez) has demonstrated
extraordinary qualities of leadership in many fields but particularly
in the field of defending human rights.
Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to yield 3 minutes to my friend and
colleague, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Sanchez).
Ms. SANCHEZ. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from California for
yielding me the time for this gracious ability to give me some time to
speak a little about April 30, 1975, marking the beginning of a
treacherous boat journey for many Vietnamese who sought refuge in an
unknown land to them and an uncertain future. These individuals risked
everything for a chance to live freely and to provide better
opportunities for their children and their families.
I rise today as a proud cosponsor of the H. Con. Res. 295,
legislation relating to continuing human rights violations and
political oppression in the Socialist Republic of Vietnam still 25
years later since the fall of Saigon.
I also rise to pay special tribute and to recognize the efforts of
those servicemen and women who served as Vietnam War veterans and also
to the Vietnamese who fought for freedom and democracy in Vietnam.
As my colleagues know, I represent the largest Vietnamese-American
community in the Nation in Orange County, California. As a proud member
of the Congressional Human Rights Caucus, it was my distinct honor just
last month to hold a second hearing on the human rights conditions in
Vietnam. We held one a couple years ago.
We received testimony from expert witnesses who tell us still freedom
of religion, freedom of expression, freedom of the press, freedom of
collective bargaining are still sorely missed in Vietnam.
The Vietnamese Government continues to grossly violate human rights
by incarcerating prisoners of conscience and placing dissidents under
strict surveillance.
So as we continue to move forward with furthering relations between
our two countries, it is my hope that we will address the current human
rights issues in Vietnam: the violations, the religious persecution,
the social injustice that many individuals still face in Vietnam.
Mr. Speaker, as we reflect on this tragic day, it is our duty as
Members of Congress to honor the memories of the individuals that have
fought for liberty and democracy in Vietnam.
Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 5 minutes to the
gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter), the distinguished chairman of
the Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific.
(Mr. BEREUTER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding me the
time.
Mr. Speaker, as the chairman of the Subcommittee on Asia and the
Pacific, I rise in strong support of H. Con. Res. 295.
This Member congratulates and thanks the distinguished gentleman from
California (Mr. Rohrabacher) for bringing this matter to the body's
attention and for recognizing that the 25th anniversary of the fall of
Saigon was an important time to focus the American attention on what we
were fighting for and to also recognize the contributions of so many
men and women among our countrymen who made tremendous sacrifices in
that war and I imagine with the hope that some impact might prevail in
Vietnam, as well.
I also, once again, want to thank the distinguished gentleman from
California (Mr. Lantos), the ranking minority member of the
subcommittee, for his cooperation and his assistance in bringing this
legislation to the floor.
We were happy to work with the gentleman from California (Mr.
Rohrabacher) on any kind of perfecting amendments, but his legislation
is very timely and was very well crafted to begin with.
Certainly it is appropriate to express concerns about the continuing
human rights violations and the political repression in the Socialist
Republic of Vietnam.
Even as the United States moves forward in establishing relations
with Vietnam, which this Member supports, we should be mindful that
serious human rights concerns do remain.
Indeed, in the 25 years since the end of the war, regretfully this
Member must say flatly that there has been no discernible progress, no
discernible progress, towards representative government or basic
democratic freedom in Vietnam.
The Vietnamese Constitution enshrines the principle of one-party
communist rule. Political dissidents are routinely harassed or arrested
for attempting to exercise their fundamental human rights, such as
freedom of speech and association.
The Vietnamese Government also continues to restrict unregistered
religious activities and to persecute citizens on the basis of their
religious affiliations. Vietnam can be said to be an equal opportunity
oppressor of religious freedoms as Buddhists, Christians, and over
groups also suffer to some extent from Government harassment and
repression.
The Government has also refused to allow human rights groups and the
U.N. special rapporteur on religious intolerance unfettered access to
investigate allegations of religious oppression.
This resolution urges the Government of Vietnam to release religious
and political prisoners and cease harassment of those exercising their
legitimate rights to allow basic freedoms, such as freedom of speech
and
[[Page H2420]]
association, and to commit to a framework and a timetable for open and
fair elections.
It is time that the Vietnamese Government realizes that one-party
communist regimes have no place in the modern world. It is time that
the talented, hard-working, and energetic people of Vietnam enjoy their
rights to fundamental religious, economic, and political freedom.
Mr. Speaker, a few minutes ago the gentleman from California (Mr.
Rohrabacher) referred to comments recently made by the senior senator
from Arizona, Senator McCain, who said the wrong side won.
Well, I would also like to reference the senior senator from my home
State of Nebraska, a member of the opposite party, Senator Robert
Kerrey, who is a courageous, distinguished American who won the
Congressional Medal of Honor in Vietnam and who lost part of his leg in
the process. He came home and protested the way the war was being
conducted.
But this past weekend, in the major papers of our State, he had an
opinion piece; and he said, I was fighting and we were fighting on the
right side. Upon reflection, upon visitation to Vietnam and to
Southeast Asia, I understand what we were doing there was appropriate.
I want and will include that as a matter of the Record. It is an
outstanding reflection upon his service in Vietnam and also his
reflection upon service in the Congress of the United States as he
prepares to retire from the other body.
Mr. Speaker, this resolution attempts to send a clear message to the
Vietnam regime about the need for fundamental reforms. This Member
urges his colleagues to support strongly H. Con. Res. 295.
Mr. Speaker, I include the following article authored by Senator
Kerrey for the Record:
Vietnam: 25 Years Later; In Hindsight, A Just Cause
(By Bob Kerrey)
Today we mark the 25th anniversary of the fall of Saigon,
the day Americans witnessed the end of a war in which our
enemy emerged victorious and our ally defeated. For many
years afterward, Americans buried this experience and turned
their backs on the problems of Southeast Asia. Anger and
self-absorption dominated the debates that occasionally
occurred about what went wrong.
In the past 10 years, anger and self-absorption have been
replaced with active, optimistic policies. In Southeast Asia,
we have seen impressive successes. Beginning with President
Bush's initiatives to bring peace to Cambodia and continuing
with President Clinton's initiatives to normalize relations
with Vietnam, we have started to return with an American
spirit that advances the cause of freedom.
No doubt the war affected America, but it wasn't our worst
war-connected failure. The most difficult war of the last
century was not Vietnam; it was World War I. In 1943, the
year I was born, veterans of the Great War were remembering
the 25th anniversary of their armistice while their sons were
fighting in Italy and the Pacific against enemies whose
military strength was ignored on account of the bitter
memories of the failures of the first World War. So, as I
remember April 30, 1975, I will also remember Nov. 11, 1918,
and what happened when America isolated itself from the
world. But I will also remember the pride I felt when I sat
in joint sessions of Congress listening to Vaclav Havel, Kim
Dae Jung, Lech Walesa and Nelson Mandela thank Americans for
the sacrifices they made on behalf of their freedom.
The famous photo of South Vietnamese ascending a stairway
to a helicopter on the roof of our Saigon embassy represents
both our shame and our honor. The shame is that we, in the
end, turned our back on Vietnam and on the sacrifice of more
than 55,000 Americans. We succumbed to fatigue and self-
doubt, we reneged on the promise we had made to support the
South Vietnamese, and the communists were able to defeat our
allies. The honor is that during the fall of Saigon we
rescued tens of thousands of our South Vietnamese friends,
and in the years following we welcomed over a million more
Vietnamese to our shores.
For a young, college-educated son of the clean, optimistic
American heartland, the war taught some valuable lessons. My
trip to Vietnam gave me a sense of the immense size and
variety of our world. I was also awed by something that still
moves me: That Americans would risk their lives for the
freedom of another people. At the Philadelphia Naval
Hospital, I learned that everyone needs America's
generosity--even me.
During the war, I knew the fight for freedom was the core
reason for our being in Vietnam. But after the war, as I
learned more about our government's decision-making in the
war years, I became angry. I was angry at the failure of our
leaders to tell the truth about what was happening in
Vietnam. I was angry at their ignorance about the motives of
our North Vietnamese adversaries and the history of Vietnam.
Our leaders didn't seem to understand the depth of commitment
of our adversaries to creating their version of an
independent Vietnam. I particularly detested President Nixon
for his duplicity in campaigning on a promise to end the war,
and then, once in office, broadening the war to Cambodia. But
time has taught me the sterility of anger. So, as I recently
told former Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara, I forgive
our leaders of the Vietnam period.
I am able to forgive, not out of any great generosity of
mine, but because the passage of time and the actions of the
communist government of Vietnam have proven to me we were
fighting on the right side. In their harsh treatment of the
Vietnamese people, in denying them medicine and essential
consumer goods, and in persecuting religious practice, the
Vietnamese communists in the post-war years proved themselves
to be communists. The most eloquent comment on life under Ho
Chi Minh's heirs was the flight of millions of Vietnamese who
risked death on the high seas rather than live under that
regime. If there was to be a trial to determine if the
Vietnam War was worth fighting, I would call the Boat People
as my only witness.
Was the war a mistake, or was it worth the effort and
sacrifice? Everyone touched by it must answer that question
for themselves. When I came home in 1969 and for many years
afterward, I did not believe it was. Today, with the passage
of time and the experience of seeing both the benefits of
freedom won by our sacrifice and the human destruction done
by dictatorships, I believe the cause was just and the
sacrifice not in vain.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 6 minutes to the
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) who is the chairman of our
Subcommittee on International Operations and Human Rights.
Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, let me just begin by thanking
the gentleman from California (Mr. Rohrabacher) for his excellent piece
of legislation, which tells the truth about the ongoing repression in
Vietnam.
Today, Mr. Speaker, I want to share some observations from a human
rights fact-finding mission I made in December to Saigon. The principal
purpose of the trip was to inspect the new refugee processing program,
which, as most of my colleagues know, has recently moved from Bangkok
to our new U.S. Consulate in Saigon.
As I think many of my colleagues know as well, I am very pleased to
have been the sponsor, the prime author, of comprehensive foreign
policy legislation, the Foreign Relations Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2000 and 2001, which became law last November.
That bill provided for an extension of the McCain amendment on
Vietnamese refugee children through fiscal year 2001, along with an
expansion of the amendment to cover the so-called co-residency cases.
The new law also included very important language making clear that
our refugee programs in Vietnam should be far more than a token effort.
We made that clear in all kinds of cases. For example, with the
Montagnards who were turned down because they kept fighting the
Communists after 1975, with reeducation camp survivors whose refugee
applications were denied because they were afraid to talk in front of
government-hired interpreters, with former U.S. Government employees
who were turned down for no good reason at all, and with people who
have suffered recent persecution for their political or religious
beliefs, we need to be far more generous than we have been in the past.
It is too early, Mr. Speaker, to know whether or not our Saigon
refugee program will live up to those expectations, which is the clear
meaning and intent of the law. But I promise, as Chairman of the
Subcommittee on International Operations and Human Rights, to keep my
eye on the ball and to keep pushing hard for it.
In addition to focusing on the refugee programs, Mr. Speaker, we also
focused heavily on the human rights issues, democracy, and transparency
in Vietnam, which we have also done in our subcommittee over the last
several years.
I met with Dr. Nguyen Dan Que, who--like the great Professor Hoat,
who is now in this country--is a courageous and brilliant former
prisoner of conscience. He is now under virtual house arrest, however,
in Saigon. His
[[Page H2421]]
phone is tapped. His Internet connections have been cut off. He and
members of his family are followed wherever they go.
Notwithstanding the fact that I had a Government thug following me
wherever I went, Dr. Que invited us into his home and gave us a
fascinating lecture on the future prospects for reform and democracy in
Vietnam.
He explained, for example, that the principal contradiction in
Vietnamese society is not between North and South, not between
traditionalism and modernity, but between the Politburo and everybody
else in the country.
We also met with religious leaders, including Archbishop Man, Father
Chan Tin, and members of the Hoa Hao Buddhist Church. And we met with
Montagnard students, some of whom are Protestants who have been
forbidden to have prayer meetings in their country.
Unfortunately, on the advice of Ambassador Peterson, we were unable
to meet with the leaders of the Unified Buddhist Church, who have come
in for some of the most brutal treatment of all. The ambassador felt
the time was not right. The next trip, I can assure my colleagues, we
will meet with them. But we have continued to raise their issues, as
well.
One thing that was very clear from all of our conversations with
human rights advocates, religious figures, and ordinary Vietnamese was
that international pressure does indeed work.
For example, Dr. Que pointed out that while trade may bring some
reforms to Vietnam, these reforms will come quicker if the United
States strongly uses each economic concession, especially the prospect
of a bilateral trade agreement, as leverage to require immediate
progress on human rights.
If anyone doubts that economic leverage works to change the behavior
of the Vietnamese Government, these doubts should be resolved by the
experience of the ROVR program.
In mid-1996, the Vietnamese Government promised that if the 20,000 or
so people who were eligible for ROVR would return to Vietnam, the U.S.
would be able to interview them for refugee resettlement in the U.S.
Eighteen months after making this promise, the Vietnamese Government
had let us interview only a few hundred of the 20,000 people. But when
it was made clear to them that they would not get a waiver of the
Jackson-Vanik amendment, which would be necessary to allow subsidized
loans under the U.S. Export-Import and OPIC programs, they allowed us
to start interviewing people almost immediately.
We eventually got 18,000 people to freedom under the ROVR program. So
linkage to economic issues does work.
Let me also focus on a couple of human rights issues. As the
gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) said so eloquently, the
Vietnamese Government must stop imprisoning people for their political
or religious beliefs. They must release all prisoners of conscience
that they currently hold.
{time} 1100
Hanoi insists that it has no political or religious prisoners, only
ordinary law breakers. When visiting, American delegations like my own
point out that these law breakers include Catholic priests and Buddhist
monks. When we raise these issues, they say that these people have been
imprisoned for such crimes as activities to overthrow the government,
which is utter nonsense, or using freedom and democracy to injure the
national unity, whatever that means.
Vietnamese officials cheerfully remind visitors that they have a
``different system.'' They need to be persuaded that if they are going
to do business with us they have to abide by internationally recognized
norms regarding human rights.
The Vietnamese government must eliminate other gross human rights
violations such as its two-child-per-couple policy, which deprives the
parents of unauthorized children of employment and other government
benefits.
It must grant workers the right to organize independent trade unions
and stop the practice of forced labor. It has to stop jamming Radio
Free Asia, which tries to bring the Vietnamese people the kind of
broadcasting they would provide for themselves if their government
would allow freedom of expression.
Mr. Speaker, I would submit for the Record an excellent article
written by Le Van Tien on ``Vietnam's Failed Revolution.'' It was in
the Asian Wall Street Journal on April 28, 2000.
[From the Wall Street Journal, Fri., Apr. 28, 2000]
Vietnam's Failed Revolution . . .
(By Le Van Tien)
We are marching to Saigon.
We are entering the city.
We are liberating the South.
This was the song I heard the National Liberation Front
soldiers singing as they marched behind the North Vietnamese
tanks that rolled into Saigon on April 30, 1975. Later the
lyrics were taught to children, who sang them
enthusiastically enough. Say what you will about the
Communists, they have always understood that children love
parades.
In the years just after the unification of Vietnam, even as
many South Vietnamese were either fleeing in boats or being
sent to prison or ``re-education,'' others--particularly
young people--were willing to join the Communists in efforts
to rebuild the country. Many were even willing to fight and
die in the wars against Cambodia and China.
Yet 25 years later most of the survivors can barely
remember the songs they used to sing about the revolution.
For those of us who were imprisoned or forced into exile, it
is tempting to judge the revolution by our own standards. It
is more instructive, however, to judge a movement by the
extent to which it has met its own goals. Life in Vietnam has
indeed changed in many ways since 1975, but not in any of the
ways promised by the revolution.
Vietnam was never a rich country, but now it is one of the
poorest in the world, with a per capita GDP of about $300.
Teachers make $20 per month, construction workers about $30,
medical doctors $35. Of the 37 million working-age
Vietnamese, only 7 million have stable jobs, almost all in
government or in state-owned enterprises. The remaining 30
million are seasonal workers employed for 200 days or less
per years.
Almost everyone in Vietnam is struggling for survival day
by day, and almost everyone blames the government--especially
corruption in government. It is no accident that people in
rural areas are the poorest of all (according to the World
Bank, about 45% of Vietnamese farmers live below the poverty
line) because these are the areas where government is most
corrupt and has the greatest power over people's lives.
Despite the harsh measures taken by the Vietnamese
government against those who openly express their displeasure
with government policies, there have been periodic
demonstrations and even uprisings among rural people
protesting corruption and oppression.
In 1989, several hundred people from villages in the Mekong
Delta traveled to Saigon, now called Ho Chi Minh City, to
demand improved conditions in the countryside. These
demonstrations were partly motivated by resentment at
continued North Vietnamese domination of the South, but in
the early 1990s there were riots in three provinces in
Central Vietnam, in an area known as the ``cradle of the
revolution.''
These events culminated in 1997 in Thai Binh, a northern
province noted for the unusually high percentage of
enthusiastic Communists among its people, in which thousands
of peasants and farmers detained armed public security
officers and demanded an end to confiscatory taxes,
corruption, and other official abuses. Even a group of high-
ranking Army officers from Thai Binh openly announced that
``the Communist party has succeeded in abolishing the old
regime in which man exploited man, only to replace it with a
regime in which the Party itself exploits the people.'' Many
of the Thai Binh demonstrators were sent to prison or re-
education, but the government also dismissed about 50
officials including the head of the provincial People's
Committee.
The poor living conditions of the farmers and the working
class contrast sharply with the lifestyle of many Communist
cadres, government officials, and executives in state-owned
enterprises. They can afford conspicuous consumption not
because of their salaries, but because of their far larger
income from official corruption. In recent years, the
government itself has recognized that corruption is at the
heart of its problems, strangling the economy and scaring
away foreign investors.
In mid-1999 General Secretary Le Kha Phieu announced a two-
year campaign of ``self-criticism.'' The campaign is intended
to end bribery, extortion, smuggling, and other corrupt
practices, in order to win the confidence of the people and
also of foreign investors. These investors were initially
attracted by the official policies of economic ``renovation''
and ``openness'' announced in the early 1990s, but they have
been discouraged not only by the burdens of corruption and
hyperregulation, but also by the consequent decline in
economic growth rates from about 8% annually to just over 4%.
Most ominously, many are frighted by the prospect of
political instability as a consequence of the steady erosion
of the government's legitimacy.
The Vietnamese government seems to understand that it is in
danger of losing its grip on power. It has been quietly
advised by scholars, international financial institutions
[[Page H2422]]
and representatives of other governments that it must act to
regain the trust of the Vietnamese people. The most obvious
way to do this would be through a campaign of renovation and
openness extending beyond the economic sphere to include
freedom of expression, religion, and the press as well as
steps toward more representative government.
Party leaders, however, regard these freedoms as an even
greater threat to their power than the current popular
dissatisfaction with government. In August 1999, at the
closing session of the Seventh Communist Party Plenum,
General Secretary Le Kha Phieu stated that ``there will be no
sharing of power. The Communists will hold firmly to
leadership. Any request for democracy, freedom, human rights,
or `peaceful evolution,' is a conspiracy by the enemy forces
to erase the socialist regime in Vietnam.''
This injunction has manifested itself in strong measures by
local authorities throughout the country against actions
suspected to be harmful to internal stability and order. Most
recently, a number of Hoa Hao Buddhists were imprisoned for
participating in a ceremony to commemorate the 53rd
anniversary of the disappearance of their founder.
Father Chan Tin, an outspoken Roman Catholic priest and
human rights advocate, was recently ``tried'' in absentia at
public meeting organized by the People's Committee in the
district where his church is located. Father Tin was charged
with such crimes as ``seeking to abolish the leadership of
the Communist Party'' and ``destroying the solidarity between
religions and the state.'' And the principal leaders of the
Unified Buddhist Church of Vietnam, the country's largest
religious denomination, remain under virtual house arrest.
The government also recently arrested, searched, and
deported French reporter Sylvaine Pasquier, who was
apprehended outside the house of former political prisoner
Nguyen Dan Que, whom she was attempting to interview. Ms.
Pasquier reports that at one point her interrogator made a
gesture to simulate a gun at her head and said she could put
heroin in her purse and condemn her as a drug smuggler.
Next month Mr. Phieu will make an official visit to France
at the invitation of President Chirac--the first visit to a
democratic country by a General Secretary of the Vietnamese
Communist Party since Ho Chi Minh visited France in 1946. The
Phieu visit was arranged with the help of the French
Communist Party, which recently announced its determination
to ``rejuvenate the spirit of communism'' as a movement
committed to ``return political power to the individual
citizen.''
Perhaps Mr. Phieu and his colleagues in the Vietnamese
Communist Party will come to share the insight of their
French comrades that Communism can only survive by finding a
way to coexist with democracy and individual freedom. If
not--if they keep trying to cure the consequences of
Stalinism with more Stalinism--it is hard to imagine that
anyone will be singing songs about the revolution in another
25 years.
Mr. Speaker, I want to salute the gentleman from California (Mr.
Rohrabacher) for this excellent resolution.
Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr.
Smith) for his supportive comments.
Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of the time to the distinguished
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Davis).
Mr. DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend, the gentleman
from New York (Mr. Gilman), for yielding me this time.
Mr. Speaker, I rise to support H. Con. Res. 295 relating to
continuing human rights violations and political oppression in the
socialist Republic of Vietnam, 25 years after the fall of South Vietnam
to Communist forces.
This past weekend, April 30, marked the fall of Saigon, which ended
the Vietnam war 25 years ago. There were a series of events held across
America, including in my district in Northern Virginia, to commemorate
this tragic event in history.
Vietnamese Americans from the Washington, DC, metropolitan area
gathered this past weekend to honor the fallen heroes who sacrificed
their lives in the name of freedom. In addition, they staged an all-
night candlelight vigil, a flag ceremony, and a peaceful demonstration
to keep the hope and flame of democracy alive for those still living in
the socialist Republic of Vietnam.
The Vietnam war took its toll on American families sending fathers,
brothers, husbands, and uncles thousands of miles away to the jungles
of Vietnam to fight the enemy they could never face. We must never
forget that over 58,000 Americans and over 300,000 South Vietnamese
soldiers lost their lives defending and protecting fundamental ideals,
such as freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and free and open
elections.
Their noble sacrifices should serve as a reminder that the Vietnam
war was fought on the principles and values of democracy.
H. Con. Res. 295 is a timely resolution which reiterates America's
commitment to political, religious, and economic freedom for the
citizens of the socialist Republic of Vietnam.
Furthermore, this resolution urges the government to release all
political and religious prisoners and prisoners of conscience, to allow
their citizens the right to freedom of speech, freedom of association,
freedom of the press and freedom of religious worship, and more
importantly to formally commit to a framework and timetable for open
and fair elections.
Finally, H. Con. Res. 295 recognizes and commends the Vietnamese
American community for initiating an international memorial to American
and South Vietnamese soldiers who gave their lives for the cause of
freedom during the Vietnam war, which will be located in Westminster,
California.
I urge my colleagues to support H. Con. Res. 295 to honor all those
who valiantly fought during the Vietnam war and to commemorate the fall
of Saigon.
I commend the gentleman from California and his staff for their hard
work to bring to our attention this important issue.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Gutknecht). The question is on the
motion offered by the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman) that the
House suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution, H. Con.
Res. 295, 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 8 of rule XX and the
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be
postponed.
____________________