[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 68 (Thursday, May 17, 2001)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E857-E859]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


    FOREIGN RELATIONS AUTHORIZATION ACT, FISCAL YEARS 2002 AND 2003

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                          HON. JOHN D. DINGELL

                              of michigan

                    in the house of representatives

                        Wednesday, May 16, 2001

       The House in Committee of the Whole House on the State of 
     the Union had under consideration the bill (H.R. 1646) to 
     authorize appropriations for the Department of State for 
     fiscal years 2002 and 2003, and for other purposes:

  Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to this 
amendment, and in great bewilderment over it's purpose. Passing this 
amendment will damage the credibility of the United States in the 
Middle East, weaken the government of Lebanon, and further isolate and 
endanger Israel. It, in fact, runs counter to the objectives of 
establishing stability along the Lebanese-Israeli border and fostering 
a climate more conducive to peace in the Middle East.
  While this amendment doesn't help the U.S., Lebanon, or Israel, it 
does strengthen the appeal of extremist groups in South Lebanon and 
increases Syrian influence over Lebanon. This amendment lands a 
haymaker on the person of innocent Lebanese civilians, USAID and U.S. 
educational institutions. Mr. Chairman, I cannot believe that my good 
friend from California really wants the result he is going to get.
  Proponents of this reckless amendment have quoted a lot of sources, 
but I want to read what Secretary of State Colin Powell had to say 
about this matter. ``The Department opposes the amendment proposed by 
Representative Lantos to H.R. 1646. If enacted, this amendment would 
severely impede our ability to pursue the critical U.S. policy 
objectives in Lebanon and the region, including stabilizing the south 
and providing a counterweight to the extremist forces.'' Mr. Chairman, 
I submit a copy of this letter for the Congressional Record. 
Colleagues, if you want to perpetuate instability in Lebanon and 
undermine the Lebanese government's efforts to rebuild the nation, the 
Lantos amendment is the mechanism for doing so.
  Kofi Annan, Secretary General of the United Nations, has been quoted. 
He had this to say about what the Lebanese are doing: ``At present, 
Lebanese administrators, police, security, and army personnel function 
throughout the area (southern Lebanon), and their presence and 
activities continue to grow. They are reestablishing local 
administration in the villages and have made progress in reintegrating 
the communications infrastructure, health, and welfare systems with the 
rest of the country.''
  That is what this amendment would bring to a halt. He goes on to say. 
``The Lebanese Joint Security Forces proceeded smoothly, and the return 
to Lebanese administration is ongoing. I appeal to donors to help the 
Lebanese meet urgent needs for relief and economic revival in the 
south, pending the holding of a full-fledged donor conference.''
  Mr. Chairman, I submit the Secretary General's full report of October 
31, 2000, for the Record. Mr. Annan has gone on to point out that we 
should help, not hurt, the Lebanese in these undertakings.
  United Nations Security Council Resolution 425 has been cited today. 
I submit for the Record the entire text of that resolution. Had 
proponents of this measure read UNSCR 425, they would know that Lebanon 
is neither required to deploy a specific number of troops to south 
Lebanon, nor take specific steps to reestablish ``effective control.'' 
However, U.S. Assistant Secretary for Near Asian Affairs Ned Walker 
testified to Mr. Lantos' committee on March 29
  Last May, Israel withdrew its troops from south Lebanon for the first 
time since 1977. Only then did Lebanon regain the ability to govern the 
south. Lebanon, which is in the process of rebuilding its economy after 
years of war, has actively sought international aid to assist in its 
efforts to reunite the south with the rest of the country, replace 
infrastructure, and provide basic social services. Congress recognized 
that providing USAID assistance to Lebanon in wake of Israel's 
withdrawal was critical, and increased the Lebanese assistance package 
from $12 to $35 million. I would note that the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Lantos) joined me by signing a letter to President 
Clinton in support of this aid. I would also note that Israel received 
$4.1 billion. Israel even received $50 million from the U.S. to finance 
its withdrawal from Lebanon. This figure was larger than the entire 
Lebanese aid program.
  USAID-Lebanon has developed ties and initiated projects in south 
Lebanon, helping fill the vacuum created by the Israel's departure. 
Without access to the basic life-sustaining services provided by USAID, 
to whom does this author think the people of south Lebanon will turn 
to?
  Rebuilding a country after years of occupation and civil war is not 
an easy job. However, it is a job that is made much easier with the 
financial support and encouragement of the United States. The money we 
spend in Lebanon is minimal, but provides funding for essential public 
works projects, basic social services, and American educational 
institutions. The administration and the United Nations support these 
efforts, which demonstrate American goodwill to the Lebanese people at 
a critical time. The Lantos amendment is the way to kill these efforts 
and further poison the well and harm U.S. interests in the region.
  I know my colleagues who support this amendment steadfastly believe 
that it in some way helps Israel. It won't. It does not help Israel's 
defenses, nor does it foster stability along the Lebanese border. It 
does nothing to improve relations between Israel and Lebanon, and 
further isolates Israel. The Lantos amendment, in fact, only increases 
the appeal of organizations in South Lebanon hostile to Israel.
  The only message being sent by this message is directed at the people 
of Lebanon, and the message being conveyed is that the United States' 
Middle East policy is biased against Lebanon. Instead of hope, 
goodwill, and encouragement, we are telling Lebanon that we are not 
friends and have no vested interest in helping the Lebanese rebuild 
their country and economy.
  I urge my colleagues to read this amendment, see what it really does, 
and vote no. This amendment is unwise, it is irresponsible, it is 
destructive of American interests, it is destructive of the interests 
of Lebanese citizens, and it is destructive of the interests of the 
people of Israel and the region.
  Mr. Chairman, if you want peace, if you want this country to work for 
and be able to effectively lead the people in this troubled area, 
reject this amendment. Show the Lebanese people that you support their 
efforts to redevelop a peaceful land. And do something else: 
Demonstrate to people in Lebanon and across the Middle East that this 
is a country that wants to be a friend of all parties.

                                       The Secretary of State,

                                                       Washington.
     Hon. Joe Knollenberg,
     House of Representatives.
       Dear Mr. Knollenberg: Thank you for your letter and the 
     chance to elaborate on my congressional testimony of May 10 
     on Lebanon.
       The Department opposes the amendment proposed by 
     Representative Lantos to H.R. 1646. If enacted, this 
     amendment would severely impede our ability to pursue 
     critical U.S. policy objectives in Lebanon and the region, 
     including stabilizing the south and providing a counterweight 
     to extremist forces.
       The United States has provided assistance for the essential 
     framework for alleviating destabilizing influences in 
     Lebanon. Our economic assistance program strengthens Lebanese 
     central government institutions, and provides a foundation 
     for improved economic and social conditions. Our modest 
     international military education and training (IMET) program 
     helps build an important unifying institution. As such, U.S. 
     assistance helps foster stability and mitigates sectarianism.
       I strongly oppose the proposed amendment. I want to assure 
     you that we are actively encouraging the Government of 
     Lebanon to deploy its forces and assert its authority in the 
     south, and will continue to do so. I look forward to working 
     with Congress to advance this shared goal as part of our 
     broader effort to work for comprehensive peace in the region.
           Sincerely,
                                                  Colin L. Powell.

                                  ____
                                  

   United Nations Security Council--Interim Report of the Secretary-
         General on the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon


                              introduction

       1. The present report is submitted pursuant to Security 
     Council resolution 1310 (2000) of 27 July 2000, by which the 
     Council extended the mandate of the United Nations Interim 
     Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) for a further period of six months, 
     until 31 January 2001, and requested me to submit an interim 
     report on progress towards achieving the objectives of 
     resolution 425 (1978) and toward completion by UNIFIL of the 
     tasks originally assigned to it and to include 
     recommendations on the tasks that could be carried out by the 
     United Nations Truce Supervision Organization (UNTSO).

[[Page E858]]

                      maintenance of the ceasefire

       2. From the end of July until early October, the situation 
     in the UNIFIL area of operations was generally calm, except 
     for numerous minor violations of the line of withdrawal, the 
     so-called Blue Line. These violations were attributable 
     mainly to Israeli construction of new military positions and 
     fencing along the line; they were corrected in each case 
     after intervention by UNIFIL. Minor Lebanese violations 
     occurred as a result of shepherds or fishing vessels crossing 
     the line; in a few instances, vehicles were driven across the 
     line. For several weeks, Hizbollah maintained a post across 
     the line east of Kafr Shuba. The personnel there stated that 
     they had permission to be there but would leave if ordered to 
     do so by the Government. UNIFIL repeatedly raised this 
     violation with the Lebanese authorities but without effect. 
     Hizbollah vacated the position on 7 October in connection 
     with its attack across the Blue Line (see below).
       3. In addition to these violations, there were daily 
     incidents of Lebanese civilians and tourists hurling stones, 
     bottles filled with hot oil and other items across the line 
     at Israeli soldiers and civilians, some of whom were injured. 
     On several occasions the soldiers fired warning shots and 
     rubber bullets, which caused some injuries. Most of these 
     incidents occurred at the so-called Fatima Gate west of 
     Metulla. There was also friction at a tomb on Sheikh Abbad 
     Hill (east of Hula), which straddles the Blue Line and is 
     considered a holy site by both Muslims and Jews. In 
     September, Lebanese civilians held several demonstrations 
     east of Kafr Shuba, in some cases crossing the line. Rolf 
     Knutsson, my Personal Representative, and Major General Seth 
     Obeng, the Force Commander of UNIFIL, repeatedly urged the 
     Lebanese authorities to take the necessary measures to put an 
     end to those incidents and violations.
       4. A serious incident occurred on 7 October. In the context 
     of the tension in the Occupied Territories and Israel, about 
     500 Palestinians and supporters approached the line south of 
     Marwahin to demonstrate against Israel. As the crowd 
     attempted to cross the Israeli border fence, Israeli troops 
     opened fire, killing three and injuring some 20. Since then, 
     the Lebanese authorities have prevented further 
     demonstrations by Palestinians on the line.
       5. Later the same day, in a serious breach of the 
     ceasefire, Hizbollah launched an attack across the Blue Line 
     about 3 kilometers south of Shaba and took three Israeli 
     soldiers prisoner. The attackers withdrew under cover of 
     heavy mortar and rocket fire, targeting all
       6. Hizbollah has stated that its operation had been planned 
     for some time in order to take prisoners and thus obtain the 
     release of 19 Lebanese prisoners still held by Israel. The 
     Secretary-General, who had been pursuing the question of 
     these prisoners with the Israeli authorities, remains ready 
     to work with the Governments of Israel and Lebanon with a 
     view to resolving this matter.
       7. On 20 October, in what appears to have been a local 
     initiative, three Palestinians crossed the Blue Line east of 
     Kafr Shuba and tried to break through the Israeli technical 
     fence, which runs some distance behind the line. The Israeli 
     forces responded with heavy fire. One of the three was 
     killed; the others managed to get away.


                     RETURN OF GOVERNMENT AUTHORITY

       8. On 9 August the Lebanese Government deployed a Joint 
     Security Force of 1,000 all ranks, which is drawn from the 
     Internal Security Forces and the Lebanese army. The Force has 
     its headquarters in Marjayoun and Bint Jubayl and carries out 
     intensive patrolling, with occasional roadblocks. Lebanese 
     security services have established a strong presence in 
     Naqoura, and the Lebanese police have resumed operations in 
     key villages. Although it is outside the UNIFIL area of 
     operation, it is worth mentioning that the Lebanese army 
     deployed in mid-September in the Jezzine area, which the de 
     facto forces had vacated in January.
       9. At present, Lebanese administrators, police, security 
     and army personnel function throughout the area, and their 
     presence and activities continue to grow. They are re-
     establishing local administration in the villages and have 
     made progress in re-integrating the communications, 
     infrastructure, health and welfare systems with the rest of 
     the country. In late August the former Israeli-controlled 
     area participated for the first time since 1972 in a 
     parliamentary election.
       10. However, near the Blue Line the authorities have, in 
     effect, left control to Hizbollah. Its members work in 
     civilian attire and are normally unarmed. They maintain good 
     discipline and are under effective command and control. They 
     monitor the Blue Line, maintain public order and, in some 
     villages, provide social, medical and education services. On 
     several occasions, Hizbollah personnel have restricted the 
     Force's freedom of movement. The most serious incidents of 
     this kind occurred after Hizbollah's operation on 7 October, 
     one on the same day, the other four days later. In both, 
     Hizbollah forced UNIFIL personnel at gunpoint to hand over 
     vehicles and military hardware they had found on the terrain. 
     UNIFIL protested all such incidents to the Lebanese 
     authorities.
       11. The Government of Lebanon has taken the position that, 
     so long as there is no comprehensive peace with Israel, the 
     army would not act as a border guard for Israel and would not 
     be deployed to the border.


                       UNITED NATIONS ACTIVITIES

       12. UNIFIL monitored the area through ground and air 
     patrols and a network of observation posts. It acted to 
     correct violations by raising them with the side concerned, 
     and used its best efforts, through continuous, close liaison 
     with both sides, to prevent friction and limit incidents. 
     However, UNIFIL so far has not been able to persuade the 
     Lebanese authorities to assume their full responsibilities 
     along the Blue Line.
       13. At the end of July and in early August UNIFIL 
     redeployed southwards and up to the Blue Line. The 
     redeployment proceeded smoothly, with the Lebanese 
     authorities assisting in securing land and premises for new 
     positions. At the same time, in order to free the capacity 
     needed for the move south, UNIFIL vacated an area in the rear 
     and handed it over to the Lebanese authorities. In the 
     interest of economy, UNIFIL continues to use its larger 
     facilities in that area. A map showing the current deployment 
     of UNIFIL is attached.
       14. The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) 
     continued to lead the efforts of the United Nations system in 
     working with the Lebanese authorities on a plan of action for 
     the development and rehabilitation of the area vacated by 
     Israel. In this
       15. The clearance of mines and unexploded ordnance was an 
     important concern, especially in connection with the 
     redeployment. UNIFIL also assisted in humanitarian demining 
     activities and set up an information management system for 
     mine action. In Tyre, Lebanon, a regional mine action cell 
     was established with the help of the United Nations Mine 
     Action Service, which cooperated closely with the Lebanese 
     national demining office. During the period, three children 
     died and eight persons were injured by exploding mines and 
     ordnance.


                              Observations

       16. During the past three months there has been further 
     movement towards the implementation of Security Council 
     resolution 425 (1978). Except for Hizbollah's attack on 7 
     October, the area was relatively calm. The deployment of both 
     UNIFIL and the Lebanese Joint Security Force proceeded 
     smoothly, and the return of the Lebanese administration is 
     ongoing. While much remains to be done to restore the full 
     range of government services to a standard comparable to that 
     in the rest of the country, there has been tangible progress 
     in that direction.
       17. The sequence of steps foreseen in Security Council 
     resolution 425 (1978) is clear and logical: the Israeli 
     forces must withdraw, there must be no further hostilities, 
     and the effective authority of the Lebanese Government must 
     be restored. Thereafter, the Governments of Israel and 
     Lebanon are to be fully responsible, in accordance with their 
     international obligations, for preventing any hostile acts 
     from their respective territory against that of their 
     neighbour. It is relevant to recall in this connection that 
     both Governments have committed themselves, despite 
     misgivings, to respect the Blue Line established by the 
     United Nations for the purposes of confirming the Israeli 
     withdrawal in accordance with resolution 425 (1978).
       18. I believe that the time has come to establish the state 
     of affairs envisaged in the resolution. This requires, first 
     and foremost, that the Government of Lebanon take effective 
     control of the whole area vacated by Israel last spring and 
     assume its full international responsibilities, including 
     putting an end to the dangerous provocations that have 
     continued on the Blue Line: Otherwise, there is a danger that 
     Lebanon may once again be an arena, albeit not necessarily 
     the only one, of conflict between others.
       19. I had the opportunity to speak about these matters with 
     the President and Prime Minister of Lebanon during my recent 
     visit to Beirut. We also discussed Lebanon's need for 
     international assistance to address longstanding problems, in 
     particular the reintegration of the area that was until 
     recently occupied. I appeal to donors to help Lebanon meet 
     urgent needs for relief and economic revival in the south, 
     pending the holding of a full-fledged donor conference.
       20. The present report is being written at a time of high 
     tension in Arab-Israeli relations and continuing 
     confrontations in the occupied Palestinian territories. Under 
     the circumstances, I deemed it prudent not to submit 
     suggestions for the reconfiguration of the United Nations 
     presence in south Lebanon, as requested in paragraph 12 of 
     Security Council resolution 1310 (2000). With the

[[Page E859]]

     agreement of the Security Council, I proposed to address this 
     subject in the report that I shall be submitting prior to the 
     expiration of the UNIFIL mandate.

                                  ____
                                  

                         Resolution 425 (1978)


                            of 19 March 1978

       The Security Council,
       Taking note of the letters from the Permanent 
     Representative of Lebanon and from the Permanent 
     Representative of Israel,
       Having heard the statements of the Permanent 
     Representatives of Lebanon and Israel,
       Gravely concerned at the deterioration of the situation in 
     the Middle East and its consequences to the maintenance of 
     international peace,
       Convinced that the present situation impedes the 
     achievement of a just peace in the Middle East,
       1. Calls for strict respect for the territorial integrity, 
     sovereignty and political independence of Lebanon within its 
     internationally recognized boundaries;
       2. Calls upon Israel immediately to cease its military 
     action against Lebanese territorial integrity and withdraw 
     forthwith its forces from all Lebanese territory;
       3. Decides, in the light of the request of the Government 
     of Lebanon to establish immediately under its authority a 
     United Nations interim force for Southern Lebanon for the 
     purpose of confirming the withdrawal of Israeli forces, 
     restoring international peace and security and assisting the 
     Government of Lebanon in ensuring the return of its effective 
     authority in the area, the force to be composed of personnel 
     drawn from Member States;
       4. Requests the Secretary-General to report to the Council 
     within twenty-four hours on the implementation of the present 
     resolution.
       Adopted at the 2074th meeting by 12 votes to none, with 2 
     abstentions (Czechoslovakia, Union of Soviet Socialist 
     Republics).

                                  ____
                                  

                         Resolution 426 (1978)


                            of 19 March 1978

       The Security Council,
       1. Approves the report of the Secretary-General on the 
     implementation of Security Council resolution 425 (1978), 
     contained in document S/12611 of 19 March 1978;
       2. Decides that the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon 
     shall be established in accordance with the above-mentioned 
     report for an initial period of six months, and that it shall 
     continue in operation there-after, if required, provided the 
     Security Council so decides.
       Adopted at the 2075th meeting by 12 votes to none, with 2 
     abstentions (Czechoslovakia, Union of Soviet Socialist 
     Republics).

                                Decision

       At its 2076th meeting, on 3 May 1978, the Council proceeded 
     with the discussion of the item entitled ``The situation in 
     the Middle East: letter dated 1 May 1978 from the Secretary-
     General to the President of the Security Council (S/12675)''.

                                  ____
                                  

                         Resolution 427 (1978)


                             of 3 May 1978

       The Security Council,
       Having considered the letter dated 1 May 1978 from the 
     Secretary-General to the President of the Security Council,
       Recalling its resolutions 425 (1978) and 426 (1978) of 19 
     March 1978,
       1. Approves the increase in the strength of the United 
     Nations Interim Force in Lebanon requested by the Secretary-
     General from 4,000 to approximately 6,000 troops;
       2. Takes note of the withdrawal of Israeli forces that has 
     taken place so far;
       3. Calls upon Israel to complete its withdrawal from all 
     Lebanese territory without any further delay;
       4. Deplores the attacks on the United Nations Force that 
     have occurred and demands full respect for the United Nations 
     Force from all parties in Lebanon.
       Adopted at the 2076th meeting by 12 votes to none, with 2 
     abstentions (Czechoslovakia, Union of Soviet Socialist 
     Republics).

     

                          ____________________