[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.

                          ____________________