[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 72 (Wednesday, June 5, 2002)]
[House]
[Pages H3219-H3227]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




  RECENT BIPARTISAN TRIP TO RUSSIA, CHINA, UZBEKISTAN AND NORTH KOREA

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Otter). Under the Speaker's announced 
policy of January 3, 2001, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon) 
is recognized for 60 minutes.
  Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I will perhaps not take the 
entire hour, but I want to take this opportunity to review a recent 
congressional delegation trip that I led over the Memorial Day recess.
  Mr. Speaker, this was a historic trip, and one that has laid the 
groundwork for, I think, some future historic activities for this 
Nation in a number of areas. The trip was to basically countries 
involving Russia, a visit to Moscow and then on to Tashkent, 
Uzbekistan; on to Beijing, China; Seoul, Korea; visiting military sites 
along the way. And the only disappointment of our trip was that we

[[Page H3220]]

had planned to be the first large bipartisan delegation into Pyongyang, 
North Korea, to begin a dialogue with the leadership of that nation to 
lower the tension and the rhetoric and to see if we could not find some 
common ground in comparison to the recent negative feelings between the 
U.S. and the North Korean leadership.

                              {time}  1900

  Unfortunately, despite our best efforts to try throughout the entire 
trip, we were not successful, and I will talk about that effort over 
the next several minutes.
  The bipartisan delegation consisted of 13 Members of the House. We 
had 7 Democrats and 6 Republicans. The delegation represented almost 
every one of our major committees in the Congress, but had a heavy 
emphasis of the Committee on Armed Services. The delegation was 
interested in a number of issues, but in particular cooperative threat 
reduction, ways that we could decrease the threat posed by nuclear 
weapons and stockpiles, ways that we could retrain, help retrain those 
individuals, especially in Russia, that were involved in nuclear and 
weapons activities, issues involving counterproliferation of weapons of 
mass destruction, and ways that we could work with former Soviet states 
and other nations to continue our counterproliferation efforts, dealing 
with the issue of nuclear waste and contamination and other 
environmental issues, energy production and distribution, cooperative 
efforts in the war on terrorism, Sino-American relations, and North and 
South Korean relations.
  In addition to meetings that we had formally, we met with a number of 
our military troops and I will talk about some of the findings that we 
came away with as we visited troops throughout the region.
  Mr. Speaker, we left Washington a week ago this past Friday on May 
24, and traveled initially to Moscow. In Moscow, we were met by both 
our embassy officials and other Russia leaders that had been advised of 
our visit. On the first day, despite a very long trip, we spent some 
time with our embassy officials and got a briefing on an American 
company that is based in the district of the gentlewoman from Florida 
(Ms. Brown). The gentlewoman of suggested that we visited with 
officials of the Atari Corporation, which we did, and got an overview 
of the kinds of activities that they are involved with, including the 
presence of that company here in America.
  We continued our visit over the weekend with a trip to the American 
University in Moscow, an institution that was started over 10 years 
ago. Their director assembled a group of academics and leaders in the 
educational area, and briefed us on a whole new series of initiatives 
relative to the training and education of young Russian leaders with 
American institutions, and in this case the American University in 
Moscow.
  We have a continuing dialogue with the American University, and in 
fact the exchange process has already started in terms of cooperation 
on academic programs with the American University.
  Also on Sunday we met with the leadership of the Kurchatov Institute. 
Dr. Evgheny Velikhov is the head of Kurchatov. Kurchatov is the largest 
and most prestigious nuclear institute in Russia, named after its 
founder, who was the developer of the atomic weapon for the Soviet 
Union. Today Kurchatov, which is smaller than it was in the Soviet era, 
has a number of nuclear scientists that are in need of work. Part of 
the efforts of our government through the Department of Energy and the 
Cooperative Threat Reduction Program has been to find ways to have 
those nuclear scientists and weapons scientists work in a productive 
way for both Russian and American corporations, and take them away from 
the former work that they did, which was all military-related.
  Our discussions with Kurchatov centered around a number of very 
specific projects and programs, programs that involve American 
corporations, American NGOs, and American governmental entities. They 
were very positive meetings, and we discussed everything from fusion 
energy, disposition of fissile materials, nuclear sites, clean fuel 
cycles, magnetic fusion, low-yield nuclear warheads, ballistic missile 
defense interceptors, and a number of other issues. We came away with a 
number of ideas of how we can further engage the folks at Kurchatov in 
a cooperative way to benefit both the United States and Russian people 
peacefully.
  In addition to that meeting, we met with leaders of the petroleum 
industry and the oil and gas industry in Russia, and talked about the 
efforts of many of us to steer America away from our reliance on Middle 
Eastern crude, and to work with the Russians, who have huge deposits of 
energy, to allow us to help them develop that energy, thereby giving us 
a new source of fossil fuels and gas, reducing our dependency on Middle 
Eastern crude, and at the same time helping Russia grow its economy. 
Those meetings were very positive, and I think will be fruitful in the 
future.
  In addition, at that meeting, I invited the North Korean commercial 
attache in Moscow, Mr. Ku Song Bok, to attend an evening event with us. 
I did that as a gesture of good faith toward the North Korean 
government, the DPRK government, to show them that this delegation was 
interested in starting a positive initiative to work to establish a 
framework for discussion between the leaders in DPRK and those of us in 
the Congress that want to pursue this new avenue of dialogue with North 
Korea's leaders, both their president or chairman, as well as the 
members of their high parliament.

  Mr. Speaker, we also had meetings with the Moscow and the Russian 
Duma. The Duma is the lower body of the Russian parliament, the 
Federation Council the other body. In our meetings, we had probably 
some 40 Duma deputies and Federation Council members interact with us. 
We had a number of discussions relating to a variety of issues. But the 
key issue was a document that many of us in this body produced last 
fall, a document that I have addressed on this floor in the past.
  This document, 45 pages long with 108 specific recommendations, was 
prepared to provide President Bush and President Putin a new format for 
relations between our two nations, with 11 key areas involving energy, 
the environment, health care, local government, culture and education, 
science and technology, agriculture, and defense and security, among 
others; recommendations that we could undertake to bring the Russian 
people and the American people, Russian institutions and American 
institutions, closer together.
  This document, as I have explained to my colleagues in the past, was 
given to both President Bush and President Putin over the signatures of 
over one-third of the House and the Senate, members of both political 
parties equally divided, signed on to say to our President before the 
most recent summit that we want to change the nature of our 
relationship with Russia.
  Perhaps one of the highlights of our trip, Mr. Speaker, was during a 
lunch that we had on Monday afternoon, two of the top leaders of the 
Russian Duma both said publicly that the Russian approach to the most 
recent Bush-Putin summit was largely based on this document.
  This was significant because this was the first time that Russia 
publicly acknowledged that the work of our Congress and our Senate in 
producing this document actually was the basis for the Russian lead-up 
to the summit between President Bush and President Putin. We knew that 
they had taken this document seriously because they had produced a 
document in Russian in response to what we had produced. This document 
is the Russian Academy of Sciences' response to our proposal for these 
new initiatives.
  My understanding is that the Academy of Sciences is setting up 11 
task forces to work on the specific areas that we identified as key 
areas for America and Russia to work together. So our meetings in 
Moscow were extremely fruitful. They were positive. They were building 
on the success of President Bush and President Putin for a new 
relationship that in fact is much broader and much more engaging than 
our past relationship, which was largely based on agreements of 
strategic weapons.
  The contention here by many in this body is for us to have even 
greater success in strategic and defense issues, we have to work 
aggressively to build more confidence.

[[Page H3221]]

  One other interesting offer made by the Russians at our final 
luncheon meeting in Moscow, Mr. Speaker, I bring forward to this body 
and ask for our consideration and help, and it shows the state and the 
change of our relationship. Ten years ago a meeting between Russian 
officials and American officials would probably have had some screaming 
and shouting and accusations against each other. Our meetings today are 
totally changed. Over the past 10 years we have established a major new 
positive dialogue so that the last discussion we had before we left 
Moscow and in the spirit of the goodwill games currently being held in 
Japan and South Korea was a challenge by our Russian Duma colleagues to 
have a series of athletic events between members of the Duma and 
Members of the House.
  So, Mr. Speaker, I challenge our colleagues to work with me, having 
played in a number of congressional baseball games where our Democrat 
teams play our Republican teams and we raise money for charity, and 
being aware of our congressional basketball games and our golf matches 
where Republicans play Democrats and other events, we now have a new 
challenge. Members of the Russian Duma have challenged this body to a 
series of athletic contests in the spirit of goodwill both in Moscow 
and Washington, where we can get together and have some friendly fun 
and also agree to a series of what hopefully will become annual events 
between the leaders of two parliaments.
  Mr. Speaker, I look forward to establishing a task force on the 
American side, hopefully comprised equally of Democrats and 
Republicans. We will look at what types of competition we want to have 
because some that we would do would be favorable to America, some the 
Russians might want to do would be favorable to them. We want to find 
the middle ground. We will start a whole new era of cooperation in the 
same spirit that we have in this city in basketball and baseball and 
other competitions between our two parties. In the spirit of friendship 
and goodwill, we will now take the same atmosphere to our colleagues in 
the Russian Duma.

  Mr. Speaker, we left Moscow on Monday afternoon and flew again on 
military transport to Tashkent, Uzbekistan. We wanted to visit 
Uzbekistan because it is a prominent former Soviet state, a Central 
Asian nation that has stepped up and played a critical role in our 
battle against terrorism. In that country, after having met with the 
officials of the Uzbeki embassy here in Washington, we were greeted 
with a meeting with President Karimov. It was an extremely positive, 2-
hour meeting as we discussed a new level of cooperation with 
Uzbekistan, efforts to bring more focus on the Central Asian nations, 
and to thank the people of Uzbekistan for allowing America to use a 
base in their country with the cooperation of their military to fight 
the war on terrorism.
  In fact, when we met with President Karimov, as we did in our meeting 
with the foreign minister, Mr. Kamilov, our U.S. embassy country team, 
we also extended an invitation through members of their parliament to 
establish a bilateral parliamentary exchange, much like we started with 
the Russian Duma. We now challenged the Uzbekistan parliament to 
establish a formal relationship between the House and the parliament, 
the lower body, actually the only body in Uzbekistan. They accepted 
overwhelmingly, and very eagerly anticipate the first meetings of the 
delegation that will start an annual series of meetings both in 
Tashkent and Moscow to find ways to work closer together with the 
people of Uzbekistan.
  Our ultimate goal is to produce a document similar to this document, 
outlining ways that we can bring the people and the institutions of 
Uzbekistan closer to the people and institutions of America.
  In addition to our visit with the President and the foreign minister, 
which were separate meetings, we traveled to one of our primary 
military bases in Uzbekistan at Karshi-Khanabad, more commonly known as 
K-2. This military base is down fairly close to the Afghan border. We 
have right now approximately 3,000 troops at that site. They are doing 
a variety of work, and represented most of the services.
  The purpose of our visit was to assess the spirit and morale of our 
troops, and to let them know how proud we are of their work. In fact, 
we carried with us almost 7,000 cards and letters from school children 
across America who are writing to individual members of our military to 
thank them for the services that they are providing to our country. We 
also took from my home State of Pennsylvania cases of TastyKakes and 
Hershey bars, and boxes of homemade cookies made by individuals and 
families and the spouses of Members of Congress to give to the troops 
to thank them from the people back home for the job that they are 
doing.

                              {time}  1915

  I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, the morale of our troops at the K-2 base 
was unbelievably positive. The morale was so evident in everyone that 
we met with. Their needs are being met. They obviously would like to be 
home with their families, but they are there to do a mission, they 
understand that mission, and they are committed to follow through and 
complete the task assigned to them by our President and by our military 
command officers.
  We did have a problem with one of the engines on our cargo plane that 
took us into the K-2 base. While I bring up this not to embarrass our 
military, I bring it up to show that we are having success because the 
starter would not work on one of our engines as we prepared to leave. 
But because we have taken great efforts in this body to provide 
additional funds for spare parts and training, and that has been 
supported by both Democrats and Republicans, within 2 hours a spare 
part was made available and the men and women of the unit in K-2 were 
able to replace that so that we could take off in time to make our 
meeting with President Karimov back in Tashkent.
  So our military, in fact, is doing a fantastic job. We are proud of 
them, and we were there to say thank you on behalf of not only Congress 
and the House but all America. Following our 1-day trip to Tashkent, 
having achieved our objectives to work with the President and a 
commitment to follow on with the parliament of that nation, we traveled 
and arrived late at night in Beijing, China, starting on May 29.
  In the People's Republic of China, in Beijing, we met with President 
Jiang Zemin, a very historic opportunity for us to meet with the top 
leader of the People's Republic. The meeting was extremely interesting 
because President Jiang spoke to us not just in Chinese but also in 
English, which showed the level of comfort that he had with our 
delegation. He was very much interested in hearing our views. He put 
forth his commitment to work with America in trying to provide some 
stability in the current conflict between India and Pakistan, and he 
reiterated his commitment to work with us to provide peace for the 
world.
  We discussed the issue of Taiwan. We heard his strong feelings toward 
that independent entity, and we again reaffirmed to President Jiang 
that we are committed to a one-China policy, and we are committed to 
the peaceful process of bringing China and Taiwan together. We also 
reiterated the fact that the Congress would not tolerate any armed 
hostilities in an attempt to bring Taiwan back in, and he assured us 
that that was not China's intent, that they were certainly totally 
committed to a peaceful resolution of the independent status of the two 
nations so they in fact could become one China again.
  In addition to those meetings, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Turner) 
and the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Bachus) had been in China for 
approximately 4 days. They were a part of the delegation but did not 
formally join us until we arrived and they had been there in advance. 
They were there for a very historic purpose and opportunity. Mr. 
Speaker, they went to a suburban city outside of Beijing. The purpose 
of their visit with a group of UPS officials was to help build a new 
school for a small Chinese community to bring the Internet and 
computers to that village and to that institution. As we all know, 
China's income level for their average person in that country is about 
$300 per year. So when you get outside of Beijing and Shanghai, there 
is not much in the way of modern technology.

[[Page H3222]]

  UPS, United Parcel Service, with 40 of their employees and two 
Members of Congress, set up a process to build a new school, which they 
did, and to equip that school with computers for the children that live 
in this community. It was an outstanding success and, in fact, the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Turner) and the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. 
Bachus) on the day after that we met with President Jiang Zemin, along 
with the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sessions), the three of them were 
given an audience with Premier Zhu Rongji. President Zhu expressed his 
thanks to the people of America, to UPS and to our three Members of 
Congress for their outstanding work in helping to provide this new 
resource for the children of the community in China known as Zunhua.
  Mr. Speaker, also in China we met with the Deputy Foreign Minister 
Zhou. It was a very positive meeting regarding economic reforms in 
China. He gave us an overview of the economic program that is in place. 
We talked about how America and China must work together to open new 
markets for American companies to allow that balance of trade to become 
more equal. He talked to us specifically about Taiwan, and we discussed 
again as we did with President Jiang Zemin the need for us to have a 
peaceful dialogue and a peaceful resolution of the Taiwan-China 
situation.
  We were hosted on our visit to China by the Chinese People's 
Institute for Foreign Affairs. President Mei was our host. He had a 
luncheon arranged for us. In fact, the discussion there was broad 
ranging and discussed everything from economic cooperation to 
advancements in science and technology. It was very positive, and again 
they were the host that allowed us to arrange the meetings that took 
place in China.
  Mr. Speaker, one of the highlights for me of our trip to China was 
the opportunity for me to speak for the second time at the National 
Defense University of the People's Liberation Army. It was a real eye 
opener. I had spoken at this university back 5 years ago. I believe I 
was the first elected official invited to speak at what is the premier 
military training institution for their mid- and senior-level officers. 
This invitation came before I went to Beijing to again address senior 
military officers in the PLA.
  What was interesting about this trip was that it was not just me 
going to the National Defense University. In fact, eight of our 
colleagues who were with the delegation went with me. We drove for 
about 1 hour out of downtown Beijing until we arrived at the compound 
that is the major training site for China's mid- and senior-level 
officers. On the way, we talked to our defense attache who briefed us 
on what to expect. He told us to expect the Chinese officers to have 
canned questions, not to have any ability to go off the party line, and 
to be very stern and strict in terms of the way that they asked 
questions of me once I had finished my presentation.

  Mr. Speaker, I told our defense attache on the way in that I was 
going to do something different this time, that I was going to break 
this large group of officers into subgroups and have Members of 
Congress directly interact with them. Our defense attache said, ``That 
will never happen. The Chinese will never go for that. They are not 
used to doing things in an ad hoc way.''
  Mr. Speaker, what a great surprise we had in store for us. When our 
bus arrived at the front door of the main building of the National 
Defense University, after having driven through the entranceway, there 
was a full Chinese PLA military band and orchestra. In fact, it was all 
female, all dressed up in their military uniforms, which were white in 
color; and there they were playing for us a series of military musical 
selections, welcoming us to the premier training center for the Chinese 
military. As we departed the bus and walked up the stairway, a number 
of generals and top leaders greeted us to welcome us to the National 
Defense University. It certainly was a good start to our meeting.
  Inside, I was taken aside and allowed to meet with the general in 
charge of the National Defense University, where I explained to him 
that following my presentation, which would last about 40 minutes, 
instead of me answering questions, I wanted to divide the group up and 
allow Members of Congress to directly interact with the soldiers and 
leaders of the Chinese military. He looked at me in some bewilderment, 
but did not object.
  So we went into the room, and there in the auditorium were some 300 
senior military leaders of the Chinese People's Liberation Army. As 
they sat in the room and were extremely attentive, I was introduced, 
and I made my presentation which I did not have in writing but 
basically gave from my own feelings about the need to improve our 
relations with China, and I went through the entire context of why we 
were there. I discussed the meeting we had had with President Jiang 
Zemin, and I challenged them to help us find new areas of common 
concern where we could bring our military together with the Chinese 
military to reduce the potential for conflict and misunderstanding.
  Mr. Speaker, following my presentation, I told the assembled group 
that I wanted to divide them up into four groups and have two Members 
of Congress each set aside with those individual groups and have a 
dialogue. Within 5 minutes, the group divided itself into four, the 
Members of Congress broke up into groups of two, we had interpreters at 
each group, and for the next 45 minutes, something happened that I 
would never have thought could occur. American Members of Congress were 
interacting not in a formal way but informally in answering questions 
and asking questions of the next generation of Chinese military 
leaders.
  Mr. Speaker, I must tell you, the comments were all positive. The 
tone was positive. And there were no canned questions or canned 
responses. It was an absolutely unbelievable opportunity to see 
American Members of Congress, our colleagues, interacting in an 
informal, sit-down way with Chinese military leaders around them in 
kind of a small-group setting asking questions and responding about 
American-China relations.
  Mr. Speaker, this gave me a great deal of encouragement and leads me 
to believe that we must do more of this. We must continue to reach out, 
to tear down the barriers of misunderstanding and find ways to engage 
and be candid in the process where we have disagreements but also let 
these people know that we want to be friendly with them. We are not 
looking to have animosity or tension, but rather find ways that we can 
address common concerns together.

  Mr. Speaker, leaving China, we had planned to go into North Korea. 
Unfortunately, all along the way, despite numerous attempts, we were 
getting nowhere with the DPRK leadership. In fact, I even at one point 
in time, one morning in Beijing had a call from Kofi Annan at the U.N., 
whom I had asked to assist us. Kofi Annan from the U.N., the Secretary-
General, and five other groups were working aggressively with us to 
convince the DPRK leadership that it was in their best interest that 
this delegation be allowed in, not to criticize the North Korean 
leaders but to begin a dialogue, to talk, to try to break down the 
barriers and discuss common areas of concern and opportunity. 
Unfortunately, that was not to be.
  But throughout our trip in Moscow, again in Uzbekistan and throughout 
our stay in China, we sent faxes, e-mails, telephone calls, had 
meetings with representatives of groups that were working in North 
Korea but were not having success, so finally we decided to leave 
Beijing and travel directly to South Korea. In Seoul, South Korea, our 
first stop was at the Yongsan U.S. Army air base. There we spent time 
with the troops. They were having a picnic on Saturday afternoon. We 
visited with the family members. We thanked them for the work they are 
doing, and we spent time letting them know that we wanted to hear about 
the concerns that they had being stationed in that country.
  Mr. Speaker, this is something that we heard throughout our stop in 
South Korea with all of our military: this body and the other body and 
the Pentagon has got to do more to increase the pay level, to provide 
more incentives and decrease the amount of time that our troops have to 
spend when they are assigned to South Korea. We learned from our 
military leaders, from our top generals, and from our CINC in

[[Page H3223]]

that region that South Korea is the least desirable stay that any 
member of the military has when they are given an assignment. In fact, 
in many cases, a young soldier would rather go to a theater where there 
is active hostility than they would to South Korea because the tour of 
duty is longer, usually a year, and the pay rates are significantly 
lower because of added incentives in going to Japan or other theaters. 
They are significantly lower when our military is assigned to South 
Korea.
  Mr. Speaker, as you well know, we have 37,000 troops in South Korea. 
It is a major location for our troops overseas. This Congress has got 
to respond by changing the way that we are currently operating so that 
young people who are serving in Korea can bring their families with 
them, because today the bulk of them cannot get the pay level they 
should get when they serve in other parts of the world, and find ways 
to reduce the level of commitment in terms of the time they have to 
serve there. The commanding officers in that theater understand what 
steps they have to take.
  And so our delegation came back to America convinced that we are 
going to work to commit to that military to change those requirements, 
to change those support mechanisms, so that our military when it is 
assigned to South Korea does so with pride, wants to go there, and does 
not feel that being assigned to South Korea is the least possible 
priority that they would have as a part of their military career and 
tenure.
  Mr. Speaker, we spent time with Ambassador Hubbard. He gave us an 
overview of Korea. We had an in-team briefing with our leaders, both on 
South Korea, and they also gave us a briefing on the North.

                              {time}  1930

  We talked about the upcoming elections. We were scheduled to meet 
with the candidates for the presidency, but because they were off 
campaigning with elections coming up next week, we were not able to 
have those meetings. We did meet with Foreign Minister Choi. We met him 
at his home. We talked for over 1 hour about our relations between the 
South and America, and we talked about our interests in going to the 
DPRK, or North Korea.
  He, along with the Japanese, along with the Chinese, along with the 
Russians and the Uzbekistanis, all said that our intent to go to North 
Korea is extremely important. President Jiang Zemin encouraged us to 
pursue entrance to North Korea, the leadership in Moscow encouraged us 
to pursue our entry into North Korea, and so did the South Koreans. 
That was articulated by the foreign minister of South Korea. We talked 
about programs that we have together between our two nations, and we 
talked about ways that we could work even closer together, assuming we 
can break down the barrier by gaining entrance into North Korea.
  Mr. Speaker, we met with Members of the National Assembly of the 
Republic of Korea. We talked about the importance of our forces there. 
They are unequivocal in saying that they want America to maintain a 
presence. It is extremely important to deter conflict on the peninsula.
  We talked about cooperation in the war on terrorism, political and 
military stability in the Korean peninsula, the strong desire for 
unification of the two Koreas, and we talked about e-government and the 
need to bring our government and their governments into the new digital 
divide and the way we can in fact bring information technology to all 
the people in South Korea.
  We also met with the Senior Combatant Commander for United Nations 
Command Forces, General Leon LaPorte, to get a detailed assessment of 
the current operations of the United Nations' efforts in South Korea.
  We had meetings with the American Chamber of Commerce in Seoul. They 
also told us that they had tried to take a delegation into North Korea. 
Mr. Speaker, they had had a group of American companies that are 
prepared to go to Pyong Yang and announced they were going to invest 
significant new dollars in North Korea. Despite being assured by the 
North Korean leadership that they would be given entrance, as they went 
to get their visas, they were told they were denied and they should 
come back later.
  It is extremely frustrating, Mr. Speaker, to try to open doors in a 
positive way with a regime so closeted and isolated from the rest of 
the world. So I appeal today, Mr. Speaker, that those leaders in the 
Democratic Republic of Korea, the DPRK, that they understand that we 
want to go to their country not to cause problems, not to blame, not to 
cast negative statements against them, but, rather, to simply open a 
dialogue, because having a dialogue is a way to eventually ease 
tensions and find ways to deal with common concerns and common 
opportunities.
  While also in South Korea, Mr. Speaker, the delegation was given an 
opportunity to travel to the DMZ, or Demilitarized Zone. Traveling up 
to Panmunjom, members were able to meet with our military once again, 
engage with the various military officials, and the gentleman from Ohio 
(Mr. Chabot) took on a personal crusade to engage our military on the 
issue of the remains of Corporal Edward Gibson who has been missing in 
action since November 26, 1950.
  The gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Chabot) raised the issue that so many 
Americans continue to be concerned about, the lack of a full accounting 
of those who are missing in action from the Korean conflict, the 
Korean War.

  As an indication of the support of the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. 
Chabot) and the honor that Corporal Gibson gave to his Nation by paying 
the ultimate price, he had an American flag flown over the DMZ in honor 
of Corporal Gibson. In fact, every member of Congress had the same 
flown. Corporal Gibson's family will be given that flag by the 
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Chabot) back in Ohio.
  We discussed the issue with the leadership along the DMZ about that 
very hostile environment, perhaps the most tense environment today in 
the world, where American and North Korean forces and allied and North 
Korean forces stare each other down across this boundary line of barbed 
wire and concrete, that differentiates the North from the South. It 
really gives one a full perspective of the need, the absolute need, for 
us to find a way to begin a dialogue with the leadership of North 
Korea.
  Mr. Speaker, the delegation's trip was exciting. It was almost 
without flaw. Unfortunately, the final part of our mission, the trip 
into North Korea and Pyong Yang, did not occur. But, Mr. Speaker, we 
are not giving up. We are renewing our efforts.
  We have already started work on another visit. This visit will go 
into Pyong Yang, we will meet with their leaders and we will begin a 
positive dialogue, so we reduce the tensions and find ways that we can 
find common ground.
  Hopefully President Bush's envoy, Ambassador Pritchart, will travel 
to Pyong Yang very shortly to open the door that the administration has 
in fact offered, and following that visit, I am extremely optimistic 
that a congressional delegation that I will be a part of will travel to 
Pyong Yang in an historic way so we can begin a process, much like we 
began 15 years ago in the Soviet Union. Look at where we are today with 
Russia's leaders. Today, we have just completed a major thrust of new 
initiatives. We are challenging each other to athletic contests and we 
are now considered good friends.
  Hopefully that same process can occur and grow in China as we saw in 
our meetings at the National Defense University, and will also begin to 
grow in North Korea as we reach out to the people, as we reach out to 
show them that America wishes no harm, America only wants to find ways 
to understand, to have a dialogue, and to reduce the threats that come 
from the kind of actions that the North Korean leadership have taken 
over the past 20 years in building up a vast military complex, while 
denying many of their citizens the most basic human needs.
  Mr. Speaker, I will insert the entire CODEL report in the 
Congressional Record at this point, to make it available for the public 
to see all of the various actions I have described, the delegation 
members, the various contacts, the people that we interacted with, 
because I think it is important that we take these kinds of trips, and 
that we have total transparency in terms of our purpose, our actions, 
and the results that we achieved.

[[Page H3224]]

  I want to thank all of my colleagues who went with me. It was an 
outstanding trip. We truly have an unbelievable institution. Thirteen 
members of Congress, seven Democrats and six Republicans, working 
together with a common agenda, working together to achieve peace and 
harmony, in those nations that in the past have been our adversaries, 
or in the future might become our adversaries.
  So I thank my colleagues for their cooperation, I thank you, Mr. 
Speaker, and the staff for sticking around long enough for me to make 
this report to our colleagues and the American people on the 
congressional delegation trip that took place from May 24 to June 3, 
2002.

  U.S. Congressional Delegation (Codel Weldon) to Russia, Uzbekistan, 
  Peoples Republic of China and Republic of Korea, May 24-June 3, 2002


                                overview

       A bipartisan congressional delegation of 13 Members of the 
     House of Representatives, led by Representative Curt Weldon, 
     ``CODEL WELDON,'' visited Moscow, Russia; Tashkent and 
     Karshi-Khanabad, Uzbekistan; Beijing, China; Seoul, Yongsan 
     (U.S. Army) Base, and the Demilitarized Zone, Republic of 
     Korea, May 24 through June 3, 2002. The delegation also made 
     considerable efforts prior to departure from Washington, 
     D.C., to arrange meetings with the leadership of the 
     Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea (DPRK). These efforts 
     continued throughout the delegation's travel, to no avail. 
     Given the major issues of mutual concern, the delegation was 
     disappointed that the DPRK leadership did not accept the 
     opportunity to open a dialogue and engage such a large 
     delegation of the Congress.
       Delegation members included Representatives Curt Weldon (R-
     PA), Solomon Ortiz (D-TX), Roscoe Bartlett (R-MD), Jim Turner 
     (D-TX), Silvestre Reyes (D-TX), Joe Wilson (R-SC), Steve Horn 
     (R-CA), Eni Faleomavaega (Del-American Samoa), Corrine Brown 
     (D-FL), Alcee Hastings (D-FL), Carrie Meek (D-FL), Steve 
     Chabot (R-OH), and Brian Kerns (R-IN).
       In each of the countries visited, the delegation met with 
     the senior executive branch and legislative branch officials; 
     political leaders and organizations, educational groups and 
     technical institute officials; U.S. and foreign military 
     officers; and U.S. and foreign business leaders for the 
     purpose of furthering greater communication; expanding inter-
     parliamentary exchanges and information sharing; and 
     addressing common concerns on issues vital to international 
     economic growth, human rights, peace and stability. Issues 
     addressed included:
        Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR):
       --Securing nuclear stockpiles and materials in Russia.
       --Retraining human resources.
        Counterproliferation of Weapons of Mass 
     Destruction:
       --Protecting, reducing and/or Eliminating Weapons of Mass 
     Destruction.
        Nuclear Waste and other environmental issues.
        Energy Production and Distribution.
        Cooperative Efforts in the War On Terrorism:
       --Furtherance of trade through better inspection methods at 
     ports of debarkation and embarkation.
        Sino-American Relations.
        North and South Korean Relations.
       The Members also took the opportunity to visit with U.S. 
     military personnel based in Karshi-Khanabad (``K-2''), 
     Uzbekistan serving in the war on terrorism in Afghanistan; 
     military personnel in Seoul and the DMZ; and their families 
     in the Republic of Korea supporting peace and stability in 
     Southeast Asia. Representatives Bartlett, Ortiz, Turner, 
     Reyes, and Wilson visited Morale, Welfare, and Recreations 
     sites and facilities in the Seoul area.
       The delegation visits coincided with a number of 
     international events and crises that reinforced the critical 
     nature and timeliness of the purpose of its meetings and 
     discussions. The delegation arrived in Moscow the day 
     following the historic signing of the strategic arms 
     reduction treaty and declaration of strategic partnership by 
     Presidents George W. Bush and Vladimir V. Putin. Shortly 
     thereafter the NATO nations met in Rome and agreed to Russian 
     limited membership in NATO. India and Pakistan experienced 
     increased tension and cross-border firings resulting in 
     casualties on both sides. Pakistan completed several medium 
     range ballistic missile tests. The war on terrorism continued 
     in Afghanistan. And suicide bombings and reprisals continued 
     the cycle of violence between the Israelis and Palestinians.
     Moscow, Russia (May 25-27)
       State Duma
       In Moscow, the delegation had several opportunities to meet 
     with their legislative counterparts, Members of the State 
     Duma, in furtherance of the objectives of the Duma-Congress 
     Study Group--the official interparliamentary exchange that 
     engages U.S. and Russian lawmakers in meetings and 
     discussions. The delegation also met with Russian business 
     leaders, many of whom are involved in gas and oil exploration 
     and energy production; Kurchatov Institute officials, to 
     discuss energy and counterproliferation issues; and American 
     University in Moscow officials.
       Discussions with Members of the State Duma were in 
     furtherance of the issues address in ``U.S.-Russia 
     Partnership,'' (see attachment 1), coauthored by 
     Representative Weldon, supported by a bipartisan group of 
     one-third of the U.S. Congress, and presented to the Duma in 
     September of 2001, that provides over 100 recommendations in 
     11 subject areas for U.S.-Russian engagement. The 
     delegation was advised by State Duma representatives that 
     the recommendations made in this document had been used as 
     the foundation for the Russian initiatives to President 
     Bush during his visit. The State Duma Members indicated 
     that the Speaker of the Duma had prepared a response to 
     ``U.S.-Russia Partnership.'' Representative Weldon stated 
     his desire to establish U.S.-Russia co-chairs at the 
     earliest opportunity in each of 11 subject areas addressed 
     in the study.
       International Republican & National Democratic Institutes
       A meeting sponsored by the International Republican 
     Institute, with National Democratic Institute participation, 
     allowed Member-to-Member/House-Duma dialogue on a number of 
     subjects, including the status of the repeal of Jackson-Vanik 
     (Cold War legislation that conditions U.S. trade relations on 
     Russian Jewish emigration); combating international 
     terrorism; using academic research and science to address 
     political problems; joint environmental efforts; WTO; steel 
     and poultry imports/exports; the Bush-Putin statement on the 
     U.S.-Russian strategic partnership; and engaging the youth of 
     both countries in issues of mutual interest, including 
     cultural and sports events. Members on both sides 
     demonstrated their belief that there is a new basis for 
     working together on issues of common interest and concern 
     because for the first time there is mutual agreement on goals 
     and values and a sharing of vision on the security threats of 
     the 21st Century.
       Kurchatov Institute
       The delegation also visited the Russian Research Center, 
     the Kurchatov Institute. The Institute was established to 
     design the Soviet Union's first nuclear weapons. Its current 
     mission is research on safe and environmentally friendly 
     nuclear fission and fusion power generation and fundamental 
     physical research and development. The staff of the Institute 
     is down to approximately 5,000 people from a Cold War high of 
     11,000. A goal of the Institute's Cooperative Threat 
     Reduction (CTR) and counterproliferation programs has been to 
     provide productive training and employment training and 
     employment for many of the Institute's personnel. The 
     Institute's President, Evgheny Velikhov, and his staff 
     engaged the Members in briefings and discussions of 
     counterproliferation; CTR; nuclear site physical security; 
     disposition of fissile materials, fusion energy, nuclear 
     medicine; safe, clean fuel cycles; magnetic fusion; 
     electromagnetic pulse effects; low yield nuclear warhead, 
     Russian-like, ballistic missile defense interceptors; a 
     thorium-based nuclear fuel cycle (the Institute claims that 
     the Department of Energy won't agree to consider programs 
     that provide an alternative to Yucca Mountain); joint NAS-
     Institute programs for nuclear energy based space programs; 
     software technologies for counter-terrorism; information 
     technology training programs for former nuclear weapons 
     scientists and engineers; and a visit to a nuclear power 
     reactor being used for testing of thorium-based fuel.
       American University in Moscow
       The delegation also met with the staff and supporters of 
     the American University in Moscow to demonstrate support for 
     their program. Representative Weldon and the delegation were 
     presented a copy of the ``Russian response'' to ``U.S.-Russia 
     Partnership.'' Other discussion topics included the 
     transportation of nuclear waste and initiation of U.S.-Russia 
     Exchange Centers (information exchange using the internet) 
     between cities in the U.S. and Russia.
       Moscow Petroleum Club
       The delegation met with senior Russian government 
     officials, Members of the Federation Assembly, and business 
     leaders from the oil and gas industry. Victor Chernomerdrin, 
     the former Prime Minister, led the Russian delegation. Also 
     included, at the request of the U.S. delegation, were KU Song 
     Bok, commercial attache of the Democratic Peoples Republic of 
     Korea, and his assistant, KIM Jong-Do.
     Tashkent & Karshi-Khanabad, Uzbekistan (May 27-28)
       In Tashkent, the delegation met with President Karimov; 
     Foreign Minister Kamilov; the U.S. Embassy country team; and 
     visited U.S. military personnel at Karshi-Khanabad. The 
     delegation expressed to the President, U.S. appreciation for 
     Uzbekistan's support for the war on terrorism. For his part, 
     the President acknowledged his nation's shortcomings in human 
     rights and economic reforms, but indicated he is taking 
     actions in these areas in making reforms. The President 
     provided an assessment of the regional geo-political 
     environment and his views on the campaign in Afghanistan. He 
     emphasized a desire for a long-term U.S. presence in Central 
     Asia and Afghanistan and expressed a concern over the long-
     term intentions of Russia, Iran and particularly China. He 
     was supportive of Representative Weldon's proposal to 
     establish a joint U.S. Congress-Uzbek parliamentary working 
     group. President Karimov sees the

[[Page H3225]]

     U.S. as a political, legal, and economic model he would like 
     to replicate.
       American Embassy officials noted their concerns about the 
     long term economic health of the country, citing the 50 
     percent inflation rate over the past year and the 
     unwillingness of most foreign companies to invest in 
     Uzbekistan because of the lack of convertability of the 
     currency.
       The delegation was transported via an Air Force C-130 cargo 
     aircraft to Karshi-Khanabad in southeastern Uzbekistan, near 
     the Afghanistan border, to visit with U.S. forces personnel 
     deployed in support of Operation Enduring Freedom. All 
     Members had an opportunity to meet with constituents and took 
     the opportunity to make the military members fully aware of 
     the total support of the American people for the job that 
     they are all doing.
       The President, acknowledging fully ``what wars can cause on 
     the main continent, briefly digressed, citing China's 
     experience with a number of wars--``Japan against China''--
     and mentioned his personal participation in Japan's war 
     against China. ``China and the U.S. were on the same side 
     against Japan in Japan's War of Aggression.'' He further 
     mentioned his visit to Hawaii and the Arizona War Memorial--
     ``I shared the same feeling as your Commander of the Pacific 
     Fleet. If you look at history and major events, you see 
     history evolves in cycles. People unify then fall apart. Now 
     Japan and the U.S. get along well . . . Maintenance of the 
     imperial system in Japan had a lot to do with General 
     MacArthur.''
       ``My advice to the U.S. is that not every place in the 
     world can follow the U.S. model. In the world, each place has 
     its own model, but that should not stop contacts and 
     communication . . . The first principle should be to seek 
     common ground while putting aside differences . . . Do not 
     let differences interfere with communication . . . We have 
     more in common than divergences.''
       Premier Zhu Rongii
       Representative Turner, accompanied by Representative 
     Spencer Bachus (R-AL) and Arnie Welman, Vice President of 
     Commercial Affairs for the UPS Corporation, met with Premier 
     Zhu at the Purple Light Pavilion for over an hour.
       Representatives Turner and Bachus, along with 
     Representative Pete Sessions (R-TX) had participated in the 
     construction of a computer laboratory with 40 UPS government 
     affairs employees in the City of Zunhua, located northeast of 
     Beijing in Hebei Provice.
       Premier Zhu expressed his appreciation to the 
     representatives' and the UPS employees' for their tangible 
     contribution to the children of Zunhua and was pleased that 
     the group had experienced rural China.
       Premier Zhu stated the importance of the ``one China'' 
     policy and stated that the PRC does not desire to use force 
     against Taiwan to achieve reunification. He cited Hong Kong 
     as a successful example of reunification and said 
     reunification with Taiwan would not require a change in 
     Taiwan's economic system. Representative Turner expressed his 
     support for the ``one China'' policy and indicated that his 
     support for permanent normal trade relations and the PRC's 
     admission to the WTO was based on his belief that the ability 
     of the U.S. and the PRC to build a strong bond of friendship 
     and cooperation is critical to world peace and prosperity 
     over the next 25 years.
       Assistant Foreign minister Zhou
       In a later meeting, Assistant Foreign minister Zhou 
     outlined China's plan to ``intensify'' its economic reform 
     program. ``With 25 million people entering the work force 
     each year, if we are to avoid problems, we need to speed up 
     reform.'' He stated
     Beijing, China (May 29-June 1)
       In the Peoples Republic of China (PRC), the delegation met 
     with President Jiang and senior foreign ministry officials; 
     met officials of the Chinese Peoples Institute of Foreign 
     Affairs; engaged the U.S. Country team in discussions; and 
     visited the National Defense University, where Representative 
     Weldon addressed the student body and delegation members met 
     in breakout sessions with the PLA students attending the 
     University. There was also a side-group meeting by 
     Representatives Turner and Bachus with Premier Ju.
       President Jiang
       In the delegation meeting with President Jiang, 
     Representative Weldon expressed the desire of the majority of 
     the American people for a productive long-term relationship 
     with the PRC.
       President Jiang indicated that China and the U.S. have more 
     interests in common than differences and encouraged mutual 
     respect and moderation. He urged that the U.S. should accept 
     that there are other acceptable models than that of the U.S. 
     for political and economic development. President Jiang 
     stated that the most important and sensitive issue in Sino-
     American relations is Taiwan. He cited the importance of 
     continuing the ``one China'' policy. ``The Chinese 
     relationship boils down to one question: Taiwan . . . The 
     question is a very simple one . . . We have already agreed 
     (citing normalization, the three joint communiques, and 
     ``three no's'') . . . we don't understand why the U.S. is 
     sending weapons to Taiwan . . . We place much hope in you as 
     representatives that we can get much done.''
       Representative Weldon indicated he supported the ``one 
     China'' policy. ``Arms sales take place when there is a 
     perception, right or wrong, that a threat exists to the 
     people of Taiwan . . . I am the Chairman responsible for 
     authorizing the procurement of all our military systems. But 
     I am a teacher by profession. I would like to spend money on 
     education, not weapons . . . We do not want conflict with 
     China in any form.''
       Representative Hastings, citing the importance to both 
     China and the U.S. of engaging the DPRK, asked President 
     Jiang if he would consider having his officials contact the 
     DPRK on the delegation's behalf to arrange a visit. He also 
     asked the President what China is doing to ease tensions 
     between India and Pakistan. The President encouraged the 
     delegation visit to the DPRK, but ``whether they allow the 
     visit must be totally up to them . . . We cannot take 
     decisions in their place. North Korea will have to decide. 
     China is China. North Korea is North Korea.'' On India and 
     Pakistan, the President indicated that both countries are 
     ``China's neighbors'' and said he hoped the Kashmir problem 
     can be solved peacefully. ``Although people are of a view 
     that we are closer to Pakistan, we are trying to get each 
     side to work together. Our relationship with India has 
     fluctuated, but more recently we have had a constantly 
     improving relationship with India.'' He also said that 
     because of the U.S. need to fight terrorism, he believed that 
     ``the U.S. attitude toward Pakistan has changed.'' the 
     purpose of their foreign policy is world peace and common 
     development. ``China is not a threat to anyone and should 
     not be perceived as a threat . . . perception is important 
     . . . China is an important force in the region for peace 
     . . . In our relationship, we have accomplished a lot . . 
     . the only problem is Taiwan . . . The issue of Taiwan 
     should be left to the Chinese to work out. The U.S. should 
     not become involved . . . Our policy goal of peaceful 
     reunification remains. If they (Taiwanese) accept one 
     China, we can be very patient. I hope you will not send 
     signals that can be misinterpreted.''
       Representatives Bartlett suggested that Taiwan is a ``tiny 
     island'' with relatively small population and that China and 
     the U.S. should focus on the 90 percent of what we have in 
     common. Representative Horn indicated that ``it would be the 
     biggest mistake ever made for China to invade Taiwan.'' Mr. 
     Horn also expressed his concern over a quote attributed to a 
     Chinese admiral citing ``missiles over LA'' as a Chinese 
     option. Minister Zhou indicated that such a quote was 
     incorrect.
       In response to Representative Brown, Minister Zhou agreed 
     there are both obligations and benefits to entry into the 
     World Trade Organization (WTO). ``We will honor our words.'' 
     He indicated there would be challenges for China as a WTO 
     member, but also opportunities. In acknowledging the $100 
     billion annual trade imbalance between the U.S. and China, 
     Minister Zhou said that ``China wishes to buy more, but that 
     there are too many restrictions.'' Also in response to 
     Representative Brown, he cited the need for the Three Gorges 
     Dam project as primarily for flood control, acknowledged the 
     importance of environmental protection, and said that 
     electricity production is secondary.
       In response to a question from Representative Hastings on 
     India and Pakistan, Minister Zhou indicated that the Foreign 
     Ministers involved had talked and cited the need ``to be 
     cautious and avoid escalation . . . The President of Pakistan 
     said he would not use force. We have encouraged them to talk 
     together.''
       Minister Zhou concluded that ``China will not commit to not 
     use force in the case of Taiwan because we don't want to use 
     force . . . If we make such a commitment (Taiwan) separatists 
     will push for a proclamation of independence, which would be 
     a disaster for everyone.'' Representative Hastings indicated 
     that the issue of Taiwan would likely take care of itself 
     over time because of the large and increasing investment by 
     Taiwan interests in mainland China.
       Chinese Peoples Institute for Foreign Affairs (CPIFA)
       President Mei indicated that the CPIFA had worked for 50 
     years doing exchanges, sponsoring research on international 
     affairs, and hosting high level delegations to promote mutual 
     understanding and bilateral relationships. He cited the 
     importance of economic development and discussed the wide 
     variance within China of economic well-being, with per capita 
     GDP in cities like Shanghai being $4,000, while in many 
     regions it is $300/person. He stated that last year began a 
     policy of developing China's west (12 provinces, two-thirds 
     of China's land area) and cited the need for a stable 
     international environment for economic development. He also 
     discussed the Taiwan issue, citing all of the same factors 
     mentioned by President Jiang and Assistant Foreign 
     Minister Zhou.
       In response to a question from Representative Horn, 
     President Mei said China had three domestic goals: develop 
     the west economically, achieve sustained growth throughout 
     the country, and advance education in science and technology. 
     ``The quality of human resources is key to China's 
     development.''
       National Defense University
       Representative Weldon addressed the military students at 
     the National Defense University for the Peoples Liberation 
     Army on Sino-American relations; America's policy toward 
     Taiwan; the need for increased dialogue and cooperative 
     programs between the PLA and U.S. military; the common threat 
     to China and the U.S. posed by the proliferation of weapons 
     of mass destruction and drug trafficking; and the role the 
     Congress plays in the U.S. system of government. After 
     Representative Weldon's address, Members of

[[Page H3226]]

     the delegation had the opportunity to participate in small 
     group discussions with the military students. Taiwan was 
     again a topic of discussion. Also of interest to the 
     students, was the Members' views on international terrorism 
     and the Falun Gong.
     Seoul, Yongsan U.A. Army Base, and the DMZ, Korea (June 1-3)
       In Korea the delegation met with the foreign minister; the 
     U.S. Ambassador, Thomas C. Hubbard; Members of the National 
     Assembly; senior U.S. and Korean military officials; Korean 
     business leaders; and family members of U.S. military 
     personnel.
       Ambassador Hubbard
       Ambassador Hubbard provided the delegation an overview of 
     the Republic of Korea (ROK) political and economic situation, 
     indicating that the South Korean economy continues its 
     recovery from the 1997 economic crisis, currently growing at 
     five-to-six percent a year, making its growth second only in 
     the region, to China. He also advised the delegation of the 
     significant and prompt support provided by the ROK to the 
     events of 9/11. The ROK ``stepped up quickly to our war 
     against the Taliban and al-Queda in Afghanistan, and provided 
     shipping, aircraft, and a field hospital to support U.S. 
     operations . . . In addition they have provided $40 million 
     in aid to Afghanistan.'' The Ambassador further highlighted 
     the critical importance of local and provincial elections 
     taking place in June and the national election in December 
     2002. He indicated that the South Koreans continue to make 
     major strides in political and democratic reforms.
       Foreign Minister Choi
       In the delegation meeting with Foreign Minister Choi, 
     Representative Weldon expressed his appreciation for all that 
     the ROK had done and continues to do in support of the 
     international war on terrorism. He also reaffirmed our total 
     commitment to the defense of the ROK. Foreign Minister Choi 
     indicated that his country's prompt support for the U.S. 
     led war on terrorism was an expression of the importance 
     of the effort as well as its appreciation for all the U.S. 
     has done on the Korean Peninsula.
       Foreign Minister Choi highlighted the rather significant 
     contribution to ROK-Japanese relations made by the joint 
     sponsorship of the on-going World Cup. He commented that the 
     opening ceremonies were the first time that the Japanese 
     national anthem had been played at an official event in the 
     ROK. He also noted that at the opening ceremonies, in a 
     spontaneous sign of friendship, the two Presidents stood and 
     raised clasped hands, signaling the friendship between their 
     two countries. Foreign Minister Choi described the event as a 
     ``spectacular moment'' for the two countries--the ``first 
     time this has happened in a thousand years.''
       Representative Weldon also expressed to the Foreign 
     Minister, the delegation's consternation with the North 
     Korean, DPRK, failure to approve the delegation's visit 
     request. The delegation had hoped to visit the DPRK to open a 
     dialogue with the North, to express the interest of the 
     legislative branch of the U.S. Government in addressing food 
     aid, agriculture, health, education and other humanitarian 
     assistance. The delegation had hoped to deliver a ``totally 
     positive'' message to the North--that as a coequal branch of 
     the U.S. government, Congress could work with the DPRK to 
     further peace and stability on the Peninsula and help the 
     people of North Korea.
       Foreign Minister Choi indicated that the ROK continues its 
     efforts to maintain the dialogue with the North, but the pace 
     of discussions is much slower than what had been hoped for. 
     He expressed considerable concern over the state of the DPRK 
     economy and the well-being of its people. ``Our interest is 
     to try and engage, help them improve their situation, to try 
     and increase cooperation.'' The foreign minister indicated 
     the North is in desperate need of food, health care, and 
     electrical power. He also indicated that the next year will 
     be a critical period because of ROK elections, potential 
     instability in the North due to its dysfunctional economic 
     system, the issue of the DPRK nuclear power reactor and 
     related required inspections by the international community.
       National Assembly
       The delegation later met with Members of the ROK National 
     Assembly. Discussions related to trade; the importance to the 
     ROK of U.S. Forces in Korea for deterrence purposes; the war 
     on terrorism; political and military stability on the Korean 
     Peninsula; the strong desire for eventual reunification of 
     the DPRK and ROK; internet voting in the ROK; ``e'' 
     government; and the ``digital divide.''
       United Nations/Combined Forces Command
       The Members of the delegation also met with the senior 
     combatant commander, General Leon LaPorte, and his staff to 
     get a detailed assessment of the military balance, force 
     readiness, personnel morale, and classified issues.
       American Chamber of Commerce
       Regarding the difficulty and frustration the Delegation 
     experienced in attempting to arrange a visit with DPRK 
     leadership, American Chamber of Commerce officials the 
     delegation met with indicated a similar frustration with the 
     ``on again, off again'' nature of visits they had attempted 
     to arrange.
       Demilitarized Zone (DMZ)
       Delegation Members were provided the opportunity to visit 
     the DMZ. Representative Chabot was able to engage military 
     officials on behalf of the relatives of Corporal Edward 
     Gibson, who has been missing in action since November 26, 
     1950. Representative Chabot acquired an American flag which 
     had been flown at the DMZ in honor of Corporal Gibson and 
     will present the flag to the Gibson family. During the course 
     of the CODEL, Representative Chabot also stressed to Foreign 
     Minister Choi, Ambassador Hubbard, and other U.S. Embassy 
     personnel the importance of making every effort to recover 
     the remains of Corporal Gibson and other U.S. servicemen 
     missing in action.
                                  ____


          U.S.-Russia Partnership--A New Time, A New Beginning


                       Summary of Recommendations

     Agricultural development
       Assist in agricultural production.
       Expand private-sector investment.
       Enhance capacity to purchase essential agricultural inputs, 
     commodities and equipment.
     Cultural/educational development
       Expand cultural ties outside the major cities.
       Assist regional museums in generating tourism.
       Provide for more Russian language and cultural studies in 
     U.S. schools.
     Defense and security
       Initiate new bilateral talks similar to the Ross-Mamedov 
     talks on a Global Protection System.
       Move forward with joint talks on a new nonproliferation 
     regime.
       Encourage progress on the RAMOS program and restructure the 
     Nuclear Cities Initiative.
     Economic development
       Help facilitate Russia's accession to the WTO and its 
     acceptance of all WTO agreements.
       Increase funding for OPIC and EX-IM Bank projects in 
     Russia.
       Work with Russia to improve intellectual property rights.
     Energy/natural resources
       Foster cooperative pilot projects, starting with oil and 
     gas exploration in Timan Pechora.
       Convene bilateral task force to discuss the energy 
     ramifications of the war on terrorism.
       Eliminate bureaucratic obstacles to joint cooperation on 
     energy.
     Environmental cooperation
       Develop a revolving fund to assure development of promising 
     Russian technologies.
       Expand debt for nature swaps.
       Dramatically expand cooperation on marine science research.
     Health care
       Increase emphasis on chronic diseases like cardiovascular 
     disease and diabetes.
       Develop more extensive physician exchange programs.
       Augment existing cooperation between NIH and appropriate 
     Russian research institutes.
     Judicial/legal systems
       Support expansion of jury trials into all Russian regions.
       Expand Environmental Public Advocacy Centers into Russia.
       Encourage a doubling of the number of legal clinics.
     Local governments
       Propose ways to expand the tax base available to local 
     governments.
       Encourage political participation by increasing local 
     partisan affiliations.
       Encourage the gradual devolution of services to the local 
     level.
     Science and technology
       Increase cooperation in the area of nuclear fuel cycles.
       Expand cooperative fusion research on nonpolluting energy 
     solutions.
       Involve Russian industry in embryonic U.S. nanotechnology 
     efforts.
     Space and aeronautics
       Utilize commercial joint ventures to enable Russia to meet 
     its Space Station obligations.
       Increase joint projects on space solar power, propulsion 
     technology, and weather satellites.
       Cooperate on mutually-beneficial planetary defense tracking 
     technologies.
                                  ____


                               Delegation


                          members of congress

       Rep. Curt Weldon (R-PA), Rep. Solomon Ortiz (D-TX), Rep. 
     Roscoe Bartlett (R-MD), Rep. Jim Turner (D-TX), Rep. 
     Silvestre Reyes (D-TX), Rep. Joe Wilson (R-SC), Rep. Steve 
     Horn (R-CA), Delegate Eni Faleomavaega (D-American Samoa), 
     Rep. Corrine Brown (D-FL), Rep. Alcee Hastings (D-FL), Rep. 
     Carrie Meek (D-FL), Rep. Steve Chabot (R-OH), and Rep. Brian 
     Kerns (R-IN).


                            committee staff

       Mr. Pete Steffes, Mr. Carl Commenator, Mr. Ryan Vaart, and 
     Mr. Doug Roach.


                          department of state

       Mr. John Merrill and Mr. Mark Cameron.


                           Drexel University

       Dr. Roy Kim.


                             medical staff

       Dr. Michael Keith.


                         u.s. air force escorts

       Colonel Pete Bunce, Lt. Colonel Laura Shoaf, Senior Master 
     Sergeant JJ Cook, and Staff Sergeant Dave Scieszka.

[[Page H3227]]

                              Key Contacts


                             Moscow, Russia

       Victor Chernomerdrin, Former Prime Minister.
       Andrey Kokoshin, Member, Chairman of the Committee on 
     Industry, Construction Industries, and High Tecnologies, 
     State Duma, and former National Security Advisor to President 
     Yeltsin.
       Vladimir Lukhin, Member, State Federation Council.
       Grigory Vavlinsky, Vice Speaker, State Duma.
       Andrey V. Skoch, Member, State Duma, Metallurgy and Mining 
     Caucus.
       Valdimir Rushkov, State Duma.
       Svetlana Gvozdeva, Member, State Duma.
       Boris Nadezhdin, Member, State Duma, Union of Right Forces.
       Alexander Burataeva, Member, State Duma.
       Evgheny Velikhov, President, Kurchatov Institute.
       Nikolai Ponomarev-Stepnoi, Vice President, Kurchatov 
     Institute.
       Ku Song Bok, Commercial Attache, DPRK.
       Seth Grae, Thorium Corporation (USA).
       Dr. Edward Lozansky, President, American University, 
     Moscow.
       Karen Aguilar, U.S. Embassy.
       U.S.-Russia Business Council.
       International Republican Institute.
       National Democracy Institute.
       American Chamber of Commerce.
       Moscow Petroleum Club.


                          Tashkent, Uzbekistan

       Islam Karimov, President.
       Abdulaziz Kamilov, Minister of Foreign Affairs.
       John E. Herbst, U.S. Ambassador, Uzbekistan.
       Larry Memmott, Chief Political-Military Section, U.S. 
     Embassy.


                 Karshi-Khanabad, Uzbekistan (``K-2'')

       Colonel Lovelad.


                             Beijing, China

       Jiang Zemin, President, PRC.
       Ju Ryang Zi, Premier, PRC.
       Zhou Wenzhong, Assistant Foreign Minister.
       Mei, Zhaorong, President, Chinese People's Institute of 
     Foreign Affairs.
       Clark T. Randt, U.S. Ambassador, PRC.
       Brigadier General Gratton Sealock, Defense Attache, U.S. 
     Embassy.
       James Wayman, U.S. Embassy.
       National Defense University.


                              Seoul, Korea

       Sung Hong, Choi, Foreign Minister.
       Jay Kun Yoo, Member of National Assembly, ROK, Chairman of 
     U.S.-Korea Interparliamentary Exchange Council.
       Dai-Chul Chyung, Member of the National Assembly, PhD.
       Unna Huh, Member of National Assembly, ROK, Information 
     Technology Committee.
       Joo Hong Nam, Professor of Unification and National 
     Security, Kyounggi University.
       Un Yong Kim, Executive Board, International Olympic 
     Committee.
       Kyung Soon Chang, Chairman, Senior Council, The 
     Parliamentarians Society.
       Thomas C. Hubbard, U.S. Ambassador, South Korea.
       General Leon LaPorte, Commander In Chief, United National 
     Command (UNC), Combined Forces Command (CFC), and U.S. Forces 
     Command (USFC).
       Lt General Dan Zanini, Chief of Staff, USFC.
       Brigadier General John Defreintas, J-2 (Intelligence), 
     USFC.
       Colonel Bud Redmond, J-5 (Plans), USFC.

                            H. Con. Res. 36

       Whereas over one million Americans suffer from juvenile 
     (Type 1) diabetes, a chronic, genetically determined, 
     debilitating disease affecting every organ system;
       Whereas 13,000 children a year 35 each day are diagnosed 
     with juvenile diabetes;
       Whereas 17,000 adults a year 46 each day are diagnosed with 
     juvenile diabetes;
       Whereas juvenile diabetes is one of the most costly chronic 
     diseases of childhood;
       Whereas insulin treats but does not cure this potentially 
     deadly disease and does not prevent the complications of 
     diabetes, which include blindness, heart attack, kidney 
     failure, stroke, nerve damage, and amputations;
       Whereas the Diabetes Research Working Group, a non-partisan 
     advisory board established to advise Congress, has called for 
     an accelerated and expanded diabetes research program at the 
     National Institutes of Health and has recommended a $4.1 
     billion increase in Federal funding for diabetes research at 
     the National Institutes of Health over the next five years; 
     and
       Whereas a strong public private partnership to fund 
     juvenile diabetes exists between the Federal Government and 
     the Juvenile Diabetes Foundation, a foundation which has 
     awarded more than $326 million for diabetes research since 
     1970 and will give $100 million in fiscal year 2001: Now, 
     therefore, be it
       Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
     concurring), That Federal funding for diabetes research 
     should be increased in accordance with the recommendations of 
     the Diabetes Research Working Group so that a cure for 
     juvenile diabetes can be found.

                          ____________________