[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 130 (Monday, October 7, 2002)]
[House]
[Pages H7112-H7117]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
TRANSATLANTIC SECURITY AND NATO ENHANCEMENT RESOLUTION OF 2002
Mr. GALLEGLY. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to
the resolution (H. Res. 468) affirming the importance of the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), supporting continued United States
participation in NATO, ensuring that the enlargement of NATO proceeds
in a manner consistent with United States interests, and for other
purposes, as amended.
The Clerk read as follows:
H. Res. 468
Resolved,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This resolution may be cited as the ``Transatlantic
Security and NATO Enhancement Resolution of 2002''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
The House of Representatives makes the following findings:
(1) Since 1949 the North Atlantic Treaty Organization
(NATO) has played an essential role in guaranteeing the
security, freedom, and prosperity of the United States and
its partners in the Alliance.
(2) NATO, founded on the principles of democracy,
individual liberty, and the rule of law, has proved to be an
indispensable instrument for forging a trans-Atlantic
community of nations working together to safeguard the
freedom and common heritage of its peoples and promoting
stability in the North Atlantic area.
(3) NATO is the only institution that promotes a uniquely
transatlantic perspective
[[Page H7113]]
and approach to issues concerning the security of North
America and Europe and remains the only multilateral security
organization demonstrably capable of conducting effective
military operations and preserving security and stability of
the Euro-Atlantic region.
(4) The security, freedom, and prosperity of the United
States remain linked to the security of the countries of
Europe.
(5) NATO remains the most visible and significant
embodiment of United States engagement in Europe and
therefore membership in NATO remains a vital national
security interest of the United States.
(6) NATO enhances the security of the United States by
providing an integrated military structure and a framework
for consultations on political and security concerns of
members which could impact the Alliance.
(7) The security of NATO member countries is inseparably
linked to that of the whole of Europe, and the consolidation
and strengthening of democratic and free societies on the
entire continent is of direct and material importance to the
NATO Alliance and its partners.
(8) The sustained commitment of the member countries of
NATO to a mutual defense has been a major contributing factor
in the democratic transformation of Central and Eastern
Europe.
(9) Members of the Alliance can and should play a critical
role in addressing the security challenges of the post-Cold
War era and in creating the stable environment needed for
Central and Eastern Europe to successfully complete political
and economic transformation.
(10) NATO should remain the core security organization of
the evolving Euro-Atlantic architecture in which all
countries enjoy the same freedom, cooperation, and security.
(11) NATO's military force structure, defense planning,
command structures, and force goals must be sufficient for
the collective self-defense of its members, and should be
capable of projecting power when the security of a NATO
member is threatened, and provide a basis for ad hoc
coalitions of willing partners among NATO members to defend
common values and interests.
(12) NATO must act to address new post-Cold War risks
emerging from outside the treaty area in the interests of
preserving peace and security in the Euro-Atlantic area,
including--
(A) risks from rogue states and non-state actors possessing
nuclear, biological, or chemical weapons and their means of
delivery;
(B) transnational terrorism and disruption of the flow of
vital resources; and
(C) conflicts outside the treaty area stemming from
unresolved historical disputes and the actions of
undemocratic governments and sub-state actors who reject the
peaceful settlement of disputes.
(13) All NATO members should commit to improving their
respective defense capabilities so that NATO can project
power decisively and sustain operations over distance and
time.
(14) The requirements to provide collective defense, to
project power, and to sustain operations dictate that
European NATO members possess military capabilities to
rapidly deploy forces over long distances, sustain operations
for extended periods of time, and operate jointly with the
United States in high-intensity conflicts.
(15) NATO's Defense Capabilities Initiative, which is
intended to improve the defense capabilities of the European
Allies, particularly the deployability, mobility,
sustainability, and interoperability of Alliance forces, must
continue to be pursued by all members of the Alliance in
order to develop balanced capabilities.
(16) With a few exceptions, European members of NATO have
been deficient in maintaining required military capabilities
and providing defense spending at levels adequate to meet
these capability shortfalls. Failure of the European NATO
members to achieve the goals established through the Defense
Capabilities Initiative could weaken support for the
Alliance in the United States over the long term.
(17) Members of the Alliance must also recognize that the
campaign against new and emerging threats to the security of
the Alliance requires other non-military capabilities and
efforts to be effective. Thus, the need to enhance
intelligence-sharing and cooperation, both bilaterally
between Alliance members and partners and within the Alliance
collectively, the facilitation of enhanced coordination among
Alliance member's law enforcement agencies, and improved
police and judicial cooperation and information exchanges are
critical to the overall effort.
(18) NATO has embarked upon an historic mission to share
its benefits and patterns of consultation and cooperation
with other nations in the Euro-Atlantic area through both
enlargement and active partnership.
(19) NATO has enlarged its membership on four different
occasions since 1949.
(20) The NATO summit meeting to be held in the fall of 2002
in Prague will provide an historic opportunity to chart a
course for NATO in the new millennium by reaffirming the
importance of NATO to the collective security of the Euro-
Atlantic region, by addressing new threats, developing new
capabilities, and by extending invitations to additional
countries of Europe to become members of the Alliance.
(21) The governments of NATO member countries have stated
that enlargement of the Alliance is a further step toward the
Alliance's basic goal of enhancing security and extending
stability throughout the Euro-Atlantic region.
(22) The enlargement process of NATO helps to avert
conflict, because the very prospect of membership serves as
an incentive for aspiring members to resolve disputes with
their neighbors and to push ahead with reform and
democratization.
(23) The Partnership for Peace, created in 1994 under
United States leadership, has fostered cooperation between
NATO and the countries of Central and Eastern Europe, and
offers a path to future membership in the Alliance.
(24) At the Washington Summit of the NATO Alliance in April
1999, the NATO heads of state and government issued a
communique declaring ``[we] pledge that NATO will continue to
welcome new members in a position to further the principles
of the [North Atlantic] Treaty and contribute to peace and
security in the Euro-Atlantic area''.
(25) In 1999 NATO launched a Membership Action Plan
designed to help interested Partnership for Peace countries
prepare for membership by offering advice and assistance on
programs and membership-related issues.
(26) The Membership Action Plan establishes certain
political, economic, social, and military-related goals that
aspiring candidate nations are expected to meet, including
the peaceful resolution of territorial disputes, respect for
democratic procedures and the rule of law, human rights,
democratic control of the military and other military
reforms, and a commitment to stability and well-being through
economic liberty and social justice.
(27) In May 2000 in Vilnius, Lithuania, nine nations of
Europe issued a statement (later joined by a tenth) declaring
that their countries will cooperate in jointly seeking NATO
membership in the next round of NATO enlargement and since
then have taken concrete steps to demonstrate this
commitment, including their participation in Partnership for
Peace activities and their commitment to the concept of the
Membership Action Plan.
(28) On June 15, 2001, in a speech in Warsaw, Poland,
President George W. Bush stated ``[all] of Europe's new
democracies, from the Baltic to the Black Sea and all that
lie between, should have the same chance for security and
freedom--and the same chance to join the institutions of
Europe''.
(29) The enlargement of the NATO Alliance to include as
full and equal members additional democracies in Europe will
serve to reinforce stability and security in Europe by
fostering their integration into the structures which have
created and sustained peace in Europe since 1945.
(30) As new members of NATO assume the responsibilities of
Alliance membership, the costs of maintaining stability in
Europe will be shared more widely. The concurrent assumption
of greater responsibility and development of greater
capabilities by new members of NATO will further reinforce
burdensharing.
(31) The membership of the Czech Republic, Hungary, and
Poland has strengthened NATO's ability to perform the full
range of NATO missions by providing bases, airfields, and
transit rights for NATO forces during Operation Allied Force
in the Balkans, by their contributions of military forces to
NATO missions in Bosnia and Kosovo, and by their support for
Operation Enduring Freedom.
(32) The Czech Republic, Hungary, and Poland, due to their
similar recent history, have bolstered NATO's capability to
integrate former communist nations into a community of
democracies and have served as mentors to other countries
that aspire to join NATO.
(33) In supporting NATO enlargement all candidate countries
must be fully aware of the costs and responsibilities of NATO
membership, including the obligation set forth in Article X
of the North Atlantic Treaty that new members be able to
contribute to the security of the North Atlantic area, and
further to ensure that all countries admitted to NATO are
capable of assuming those costs and responsibilities.
(34) For those candidate countries that receive an
invitation to join NATO at the Prague Summit, the process of
joining NATO does not end with the invitation but rather with
meeting the full responsibilities of a NATO member, including
the completion of issues identified by the Membership Action
Plan, which will continue beyond Prague.
(35) In considering the enlargement of NATO at Prague and
in issuing invitations to the candidate countries who have
made significant progress toward achieving their objectives
in the Membership Action Plan established by NATO, there is a
recognition that each country invited to join NATO should
accede on a common date but before the date on which the next
announced NATO summit is to take place.
(36) The countries that will be invited to begin accession
negotiations with NATO at the NATO summit in Prague should
not be the last such countries invited to join NATO and there
should be a continuing process and progress toward the
admission of additional democracies in Europe beyond 2002
depending on the degree to which those countries meet the
criteria set forth in NATO's Membership Action Plan.
[[Page H7114]]
(37) The process of NATO enlargement entails the consensus
agreement of the governments of all 19 NATO member countries
and ratification in accordance with their constitutional
procedures.
SEC. 3. COOPERATION BETWEEN NATO AND THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION.
The House of Representatives makes the following findings:
(1) The admission into the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization (NATO) of new members from countries in Eastern
and Central Europe, such as the Czech Republic, Hungary, and
Poland, will not threaten any other country.
(2) Since the end of the Cold War, NATO has attached
particular importance to the development of constructive and
cooperative relations with the Russian Federation in order to
overcome remaining vestiges of confrontation and competition
in order to strengthen mutual trust and cooperation between
NATO and the Russian Federation.
(3) In 1994, building on previous efforts at cooperation,
Russia joined the Partnership for Peace Program, further
enhancing the emerging NATO-Russian Federation dialogue.
(4) On May 27, 1997, in an expression of strong commitment
to work together to build a lasting and inclusive peace in
the Euro-Atlantic area, the heads of state and government of
NATO and the Russian Federation signed the ground-breaking
``Founding Act on Mutual Relations, Cooperation and Security
Between NATO and the Russian Federation''.
(5) On March 18, 1998, the Russian Federation formally
established its mission to NATO and appointed a senior
military representative to facilitate military and defense-
related cooperation between NATO and the Russian Federation.
(6) Since 1998, NATO and the Russian Federation have worked
cooperatively with each other in the Balkans and elsewhere
setting the stage for the ability of an enlarged NATO to
continue the cooperative spirit embodied in the Founding Act.
(7) On May 28, 2002, in an historic step toward the
Alliance's long-standing goal of building a secure,
cooperative, and democratic Euro-Atlantic area, NATO took the
decisive and substantial step of deepening the NATO-Russian
Federation relationship by establishing the new NATO-Russia
Council.
SEC. 4. UNITED STATES POLICY TOWARD NATO.
The House of Representatives declares the following to be
the policy of the United States:
(1) The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) should
remain the primary institution through which European and
North American allies address security issues of
transatlantic concern.
(2) The member states of NATO should reaffirm, at the
Prague Summit in the fall of 2002, the continued importance
of NATO, renew their commitment to strengthen the
transatlantic partnership, reinforce unity within NATO,
maintain a vigorous capability to carry out collective
defense, and harmonize security policies and strategies for
transatlantic affairs.
(3) At the Prague Summit, the Alliance, while maintaining
collective defense as its core function, should as a
fundamental Alliance task, continue to strengthen national
and collective capacities to respond to new threats wherever
such threats occur, including from abroad.
(4) The Alliance, in addition to the strategic concept
adopted by the Allies at the summit meeting held in
Washington in 1999, must recognize the need to develop new
capabilities, and agree to consider acting upon the threats
posed by the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and
terrorism by intensifying consultations among political and
military leaders, and by developing comprehensive
capabilities to counter these threats to the international
community.
(5) The Alliance should make clear commitments to remedy
shortfalls in areas such as logistics, strategic airlift,
command and control, modern strike capabilities, adequate
shared intelligence, and the other requirements identified by
NATO's Defense Capabilities Initiative necessary to provide
the ability to carry out the full range of NATO's missions.
(6) The Alliance must ensure a more equitable sharing of
contributions to the NATO common budgets and to overall
national defense expenditures and capability-building.
(7) The President, the Secretary of State, and the
Secretary of Defense should fully use their offices to
encourage the NATO allies to commit the resources necessary
to upgrade their capabilities to rapidly deploy forces over
long distances, sustain operations for extended periods of
time, and operate jointly with the United States in high
intensity conflicts, thus making such NATO allies more
effective partners.
(8) The member states of NATO should commit to enhanced
intelligence-sharing, law enforcement, police, and judicial
cooperation, and expanded information exchanges within and
among Alliance members in order to meet the challenges of new
and emerging threats.
SEC. 5. POLICY WITH RESPECT TO THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION.
It is the sense of the House of Representatives that--
(1) while maintaining its essential and inherent right to
make its own decisions, the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization (NATO) should seek to strengthen its relations
with the Russian Federation as an essential partner in
building long-term peace in Europe, and to that end, the new
NATO-Russia Council, in which member states and the Russian
Federation will work as equal partners on mutually-agreed
matters, should be welcomed and supported;
(2) while retaining its primary commitment to collective
defense, NATO enlargement should be carried out in such a
manner as to underscore to the Russian Federation that NATO
enlargement will enhance the security of all countries in
Europe, including the Russian Federation; and
(3) in seeking to demonstrate NATO's defensive and
security-enhancing intentions to the Russian Federation, it
is essential that neither fundamental United States security
interests in Europe nor the effectiveness and flexibility of
NATO as a defensive alliance be jeopardized.
SEC. 6. POLICY WITH RESPECT TO NATO ENLARGEMENT AND
DESIGNATION OF COUNTRIES ELIGIBLE FOR NATO.
It is the sense of the House of Representatives that--
(1) at the Summit to be held in Prague in the fall of 2002,
the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) should extend
invitations for accession negotiations to any appropriate
candidate country that meets the objectives and targets for
NATO membership as outlined in the Membership Action Plan
process established by NATO in 1999, including--
(A) a commitment to the basic principles and values set out
in the Washington Treaty;
(B) the capability to contribute to collective defense and
the Alliance's full range of missions; and
(C) a firm commitment to contribute to stability and
security, especially in regions of crisis and conflict, and
to be willing and able to assume the responsibilities of NATO
membership;
(2) the candidate countries of Albania, Bulgaria, Croatia,
Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, the Former Yugoslav Republic of
Macedonia, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia should be
commended on the significant progress such countries have
made thus far in political and economic liberty and military
reform necessary for meeting the objectives for prospective
members of NATO as set out in their own Membership Action
Plans;
(3) each candidate country, despite recognized Membership
Action Plan deficiencies requiring further refinement, could
in its own way contribute to stability, freedom, and peace in
Europe as a whole, as many of such countries have done thus
far in the Balkans and in Afghanistan, and would make a
positive contribution toward furthering the goals of NATO
should it become a NATO member country;
(4) having made significant progress in reforming their
societies and their military forces, and having developed
reasonable, affordable, and sustainable plans to be able to
work within the Alliance structure and to contribute
positively to the collective defense of the Alliance and
other NATO missions, the candidate countries of Bulgaria,
Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia
have met in a satisfactory manner, the criteria established
by NATO in the Membership Action Plan process, would likely
make a positive contribution to NATO, and should be invited
to begin the accession process to join the Alliance at the
Prague summit;
(5) with respect to candidate countries invited to join
NATO, such countries should accede on a common date before
the next announced NATO summit is to take place;
(6) after the Prague summit those candidate countries
invited to join the Alliance should continue to participate
in the Membership Action Plan until accession, and the
accession process should take into account work conducted
under the Membership Action Plan; and
(7) the process of NATO enlargement should continue beyond
the inclusion of such candidate countries invited to join
NATO at Prague, to include those candidate countries not so
invited at Prague as well as other democratic European
countries which may express interest in joining the Alliance,
and which agree to utilize the Membership Action Plan to
facilitate such NATO enlargement.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
California (Mr. Gallegly) and the gentlewoman from California (Ms.
Watson) each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California (Mr. Gallegly).
General Leave
Mr. GALLEGLY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their
remarks and include extraneous material on the resolution under
consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from California?
There was no objection.
Mr. GALLEGLY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, on November 21 and 22, the heads of state and government
of the 19 members of the NATO alliance will gather in Prague in what
will arguably be the most important meeting of the alliance in a
decade.
[[Page H7115]]
At Prague, the future of the alliance will thoroughly be debated.
That debate will include the critical issue of whether the alliance can
agree on what threats the alliance is likely to face in the future and
whether the alliance members will make a serious and credible
commitment to the development of the military capabilities necessary to
meet those threats.
In addition, the summit will affirm the new relationship with Russia
and will make history by likely issuing invitations to the largest
number of new members ever in the history of the alliance.
Last November, when the House voted on the Solomon Freedom
Consolidation Act, we were entering the beginning of a debate within
the Congress, the Bush administration, the media, and among our NATO
partners over the future of the alliance and what kind of alliance we
would be inviting new members to join.
As chairman of the Subcommittee on Europe of the Committee on
International Relations, I felt it would take some time to address
several of the questions being asked regarding the alliance. Some of
those questions included: Was NATO still relevant to Euro-Atlantic
security? Were the alliance's roles and missions in need of new
definition? What was the ability of the alliance to carry out those
missions? What was the rationale for adding new members, and what could
those new members provide the alliance? Finally, what would the impact
of an enlarged NATO on a West-leaning but still somewhat skeptical
Russia be?
To attempt to find those answers, I laid out a comprehensive plan to
gather the necessary information to make an informed judgment to
present to the House. The subcommittee held several hearings on the
future of NATO and enlargement. I met with numerous foreign visitors,
both alliance members and candidates alike. I traveled to three of the
candidate states to review the commitments they are making to becoming
responsible members of the alliance.
Subcommittee staff attended countless meetings, analyzed much of the
information available on the alliance and the candidate countries, and
twice traveled to NATO headquarters in Brussels. All this was designed
to ensure that the subcommittee, and subsequently the whole House,
would feel comfortable supporting the NATO alliance and endorsing new
countries wishing to join the alliance.
H. Res. 468 is the work product of the Subcommittee on Europe's
efforts to address the importance of the events which will take place
in Prague. H. Res. 468 reaffirms the need for our commitment to the
NATO alliance. This is also the view held by President Bush and
Secretary Powell.
H. Res. 468 addresses the urgent need for upgrading NATO's military
capabilities in order to meet today's changing threat environment. It
agrees with the need for a strong NATO-Russia cooperative partnership.
Finally, it affirms that the further enlargement of the alliance will
further the stability of Europe, add to the security of the alliance,
and is appropriate and welcomed.
During consideration of H. Res. 468 in the subcommittee, I offered an
amendment regarding enlargement which was unanimously adopted. That
amendment endorsed the candidates of seven countries, including
Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia.
This endorsement was determined after reviewing an extensive report
prepared by our staff. The report addressed the progress the candidates
had made in accordance with NATO's member action plan or MAP. The
analysis focused on political, economic, and social development with
each candidate. It looked at their ability to develop a military
structure capable of providing for the overall security of the
alliance, and it reviewed the commitment to provide the resources
necessary to ensure that the reforms continued and that required
military capability would be achieved.
The analysis was by no means exhaustive, but it was intended to
provide the Members an overview of what issues are important to NATO in
making an informed assessment of each candidate. Overall, all 10
candidates should be congratulated for the efforts they have made thus
far to meet the criteria for becoming a member of NATO.
Progress in the candidate countries, ranging from political and
military reform, resources commitment, to ensuring the support of the
population, has been very impressive. Each has displayed a level of
enthusiasm and commitment to the alliance as we saw demonstrated when
the ambassadors of all 10 of the candidate countries testified before
our subcommittee. Each has already displayed their willingness to be a
fully participating member of the alliance through their actions and
contributions in the Balkans and with respect to the campaign against
terrorism. Each candidate brings with it its own individual strengths.
Each is a viable democracy which shares a pro Euro-Atlantic view. Each
is committed to market economies, all have embraced military reform,
and each provides a unique geopolitical perspective or geostrategic
location. These attributes make them all desirable members, either now
or in the near future.
On the other hand, each candidate has its weaknesses. Not all have
mature political systems or strong institutions. Some have weak
economies with structural deficiencies needing attention. Not all have
sufficiently addressed corruption. Some need further reform of their
militaries and more modern equipment. Of course, all need to spend more
money.
Nevertheless, it is our judgment that each of the seven countries
listed in the amendment thus far meet the MAP criteria in a
satisfactory way.
{time} 1715
And each has been judged to be a potential net contributor to the
alliance security. Does this mean they have nothing left to do? Far
from it, Mr. Speaker. Each has plenty more to be done, and that work
must continue until Prague and beyond Prague, whether they receive an
invitation to join or they do not.
To conclude, Mr. Speaker, given the continued importance of NATO to
the United States and the importance of the upcoming Prague summit, I
believe the House of Representatives should play an active role in
expressing our views on NATO and its future. I believe we should also
provide our input on which countries should be admitted to the alliance
as guidance for the administration, which will play a key role in
determining who ultimately will be invited; and we offer our advice to
our colleagues in the other body who, as stipulated in the
Constitution, will be called on to ratify those selections.
I believe H. Res. 468 provides a mechanism for such expression of the
will of the House, and I urge its adoption.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. WATSON of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I stand in strong support of this resolution. I would
first like to commend my colleague from California (Mr. Gallegly) for
introducing this important resolution and the gentleman from Illinois
(Mr. Hyde) for allowing it to move quickly to the House floor.
The resolution before the House today endorses the expansion of NATO
and specifically supports the NATO candidacy of Bulgaria, Estonia,
Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovenia, and Slovakia. The resolution also
reaffirms that NATO is the primary institution through which Europe and
North American allies address security issues and calls on NATO to
strengthen national and collective capacities to respond to new
threats.
Mr. Speaker, the U.S. Congress has consistently led the way in
supporting NATO enlargement and a strong and robust role for NATO in
Europe. NATO is the longest surviving alliance of our time, and it has
endured because it is an alliance of free democratic nations.
There can be no better endorsement of NATO's success and continuing
importance than the desire of the newly emerging Central and East
European democracies to join this alliance. Whether all seven of these
aspiring NATO members are invited to join the alliance at the Prague
summit next month or not, there must be opportunities in the future for
all European states who accept the conditions of membership to join
NATO.
Mr. Speaker, the post-September 11 era has brought us new realities,
and one of them is the crucial role that NATO can play in the fight
against terrorism. The countries which have applied to NATO have
already joined the
[[Page H7116]]
United States by participating directly in the war on terrorism and by
other means such as sharing intelligence and cutting off terrorist
financing. While the record of accomplishments and contributions by the
aspirant countries, working with their membership action plans, is
impressive, none can afford to become complacent now. The process of
reforming the NATO aspirant nations will not and cannot end with
Prague.
The process of reform must continue after membership, including
dealing with the problem of corruption, the treatment of minorities,
relations between the governments and opposition, and Holocaust-era
issues.
I would also like to emphasize the need for continued strong
cooperation with the Russian Federation under the new NATO-Russia
Council. I welcome President Putin's new attitude towards NATO
enlargement. This represents an important change in the Russian
perceptions of the NATO alliance and is a sentiment that we should
continue to strongly encourage. I strongly urge my colleagues to
support this legislation.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I join my colleagues in urging adoption of
House Resolution 468, which expresses the support of the House for the
enlargement of NATO that is planned for the Prague Summit later this
fall. Millions of Americans of Central and East European descent share
that view, as they demonstrated since the NATO expansion of 1999, when
Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic were invited to become members
of the North Atlantic Alliance. They--and most other Americans--
recognize that a vital U.S. foreign policy interest will be served by
continuing to expand the zone of democracy and stability in Europe.
I have been and remain a strong proponent of NATO enlargement to
include those countries that have demonstrated their commitment to
democratic reforms, including full protection of minority rights of the
diverse ethnic communities that live in these countries of Central and
Eastern Europe.
Mr. Speaker, I want to mention a particular interest and concern
regarding minority rights of two large historic Hungarian communities--
the 1.5 million Hungarians in Romania and the 520,000 in Slovakia. The
major unresolved issue affecting the minority communities of both
countries is the continued postponement of the implementation of laws
for restitution and/or compensation for communal property confiscated
from Hungarian religious and educational institutions. Although both
Romania and Slovakia have taken important steps to address this
critical question of property restitution, progress has been both slow
and disappointingly limited.
Mr. Speaker, I urge both countries to pursue restitution more
vigorously in the coming months, until fair and complete restitution is
implemented according to the rule of law. Only by the safeguarding of
religious and minority rights and freedoms will the NATO zone of
stability be extended to nations that share a demonstrated commitment
to democracy and a true community of values. I urge the governments of
Romania and Slovakia to work to resolve these important issues, and I
urge all of the countries who seek admission to the North Atlantic
Alliance to remember that we in the United States consider treatment of
ethnic minorities as an important measure of a democratic society.
Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, this Member would like to express his very
strong support for H. Res. 468, the Transatlantic Security and NATO
Enhancement Resolution, which is an important and historic resolution
before the House today. Additionally, this Member would like to express
his appreciation to the Chairman of the International Relations
Subcommittee on Europe, the distinguished gentleman from California
(Mr. Gallegly) for his efforts as we worked together to draft this
resolution, consider this resolution in the Europe Subcommittee, and
bring this resolution to the Floor. Furthermore, this Member would like
to thank the Chairman of the International Relations Committee, the
distinguished gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde); and the Ranking
Member of the International Relations Committee, the distinguished
gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) for agreeing to waive the full
Committee's jurisdiction over H. Res. 468 so that the House can debate
and vote on this measure before Congress adjourns.
Indeed, as an original co-sponsor of this resolution and as a strong
supporter of NATO and NATO enlargement, this Member is pleased that H.
Res. 468 enjoys bipartisan co-sponsorship, including support from the
House Leadership and from the full International Relations Committee.
The disintegration of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War,
with dramatic changes in Russia, have necessitated the evolution of
NATO as an organization--a process of change that is accelerating.
Among three of the most notable changes are--Alliance enlargement, a
new focus on terrorism and the proliferation of weapons of mass
destruction, and the creation of the NATO-Russia Council.
The first post-Cold War legislation endorsing NATO enlargement was
the NATO Participation Act of 1994, which the House of Representatives
approved on October 7, 1994. The Senate, which has responsibility for
ratifying the necessary changes to the NATO Treaty, shortly followed
suit. At the NATO Madrid Summit of 1997, the Alliance began the process
of expanding its membership from the lineup of eager former Warsaw Pact
nations. The Czech Republic, Hungary, and Poland became full members in
March of 1999. Overall this expansion has been very positive for NATO
and for these three countries.
The Alliance is headed for a second enlargement round, with accession
decisions expected at the Prague Summit in November. There are formally
ten aspirant countries: all of the remaining Warsaw Pact satellite
partners of the Soviet Union, the Baltic States, the Former Yugoslav
Republic of Macedonia and Croatia. (Because it did not begin the formal
accession process until May 2002, Croatia will not be eligible to
receive an invitation to join NATO this year.) America's European and
Canadian allies acknowledge that in the upcoming Summit the U.S.
assessments of the readiness of the aspirant countries will be crucial.
The consensus emerging in the Alliance is that seven new members will
be invited to formally begin the accession process in Prague.
On November 7, 2001, the House passed the Gerald B.J. Solomon Freedom
Consolidation Act, which this Member introduced and was named for our
esteemed, departed colleague, a committed and active supporter of NATO.
The Act, which had strong bipartisan support from House leadership,
expressed congressional support for a robust second expansion round at
Prague. It also authorized U.S. foreign military financing for seven
aspirant countries: Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania,
Slovakia, and Slovenia. After an appeal from President Bush, the other
body's limited but influential opposition to a second expansion round
relented, and the other body approved the House bill by a vote of 85-6
on May 17, 2002.
On June 27, 2002, Chairman Gallegly and this Member introduced H.
Res. 468, with the initial original co-sponsorship of the Ranking
Member of the International Relations Committee, the distinguished
gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos); and the Chairman of the House
Republican Policy Committee, the distinguished gentleman from
California (Mr. Cox). As introduced, the resolution was intentionally
silent on which countries the House would recommend for accession
invitations at the Prague Summit. Like leaders in our Executive Branch,
the Subcommittee wanted to keep the pressure on the leading aspirant
countries to address remaining deficiencies in their individual
Membership Action Plans (MAPs) and in meeting the commitments that are
important for NATO membership.
On September 25, 2002, during the Subcommittee mark-up, and with this
Member's full support and consultation, the Chairman of the Europe
Subcommittee offered an amendment which expresses the sense of the
House of Representatives that the seven most qualified countries be
offered invitations to join NATO. The Subcommittee approved the
amendment by voice vote and favorably reported the resolution, as
amended. The resolution's passage will signal to the world U.S. House
support and membership recommendations for the enlargement decisions at
the Prague Summit. It also will demonstrate to the American electorate
House support for members of the other body as they assume their treaty
ratification responsibilities to implement the Prague enlargement
decisions during the next Congress.
Why the interest in enlarging NATO membership? Why does NATO remain
relevant and even crucial? What are the benefits of and concerns about
enlargement? Why should Congress, the American people, and the NATO
member nations support a robust NATO expansion round countries at the
Prague Summit?
Despite the demise of the Soviet Union and positive changes in
Russia, a resilient and vital NATO is needed (1) to perform its core
function as a mutual defense pact against the possibility of direct
aggression against NATO or a member state, (2) to provide a forum to
facilitate a greater degree of consultation, cohesion and cooperation
among NATO members, and (3) to serve as a source of integrated military
strength to address conventional or unconventional threats or demands
for out-of-area peacekeeping activities vital to NATO's interests.
NATO is the only multilateral security organization in place,
potentially to be augmented by non-NATO participants in NATO's
Partnership for Peace (PfP), which is capable of conducting effective
military operations and preserving the security and stability of the
Euro-Atlantic region.
[[Page H7117]]
An expanded NATO provides the stable environment needed by its new
member nations and aspirant countries in Central and Eastern Europe to
successfully complete the political and economic transformation for
integration into Europe and the community of Western democracies.
Already, NATO membership requirements have been absolutely crucial in
moving aspirant nations to civilian control of their militaries,
transparency in military budgeting, interoperability of their military
forces with NATO, resolution of internal ethics conflicts and
territorial disputes, greater respect for human rights, reduced
governmental and business corruption, judicial reform, market-oriented
economies, and functioning parliamentary democracies.
The Alliance's military force structure, with its enhanced levels of
interoperability, joint defense planning, command/control/
communication/intelligence systems, and common force goals and
doctrine, provides the crucial basis for forming ad hoc coalitions of
willing NATO countries to take on combat, peacekeeping, or humanitarian
relief missions--supplemented by PfP participants, as in Bosnia and in
Kosovo.
NATO membership motivates member states generally to sustain their
commitment to collective defense and, in particular, to meet the goals
of NATO's Defense Capabilities Initiative (DCI). Thus, our allies
improve their militarily capabilities and are less dependent on
American forces.
The Alliance has accepted a new role in the war against terrorism and
the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and their delivery
systems among rogue states and non-state actors. Success will require
more than the capability for a rapid and effective military response.
It also will require: an enhanced level of intelligence-sharing;
coordination among NATO members' law enforcement agencies; improved
police, judicial and financial agency cooperation; and information
exchanges.
Russian civilian leadership is gradually recognizing that NATO is not
a threat but rather a forum where Russia can most effectively
communicate with her western neighbors. Additionally, Russian civilian
leadership in the NATO-Russia Council and the confidence-building and
cooperative steps that follow from the new council can lead to the
economic prosperity and security of the community of Euro-Atlantic
democracies.
At a time when overt threats from Russia to its neighbors immediately
to the west have declined or disappear, and when intense opposition to
NATO expansion by the civilian Russian leadership has noticeably
declined, there should be less reticence among NATO members to accept
Baltic nation members and to willingly bear the mutual defense costs
and concerns related to these prospective NATO members.
With the careful redirection of some of NATO's focus away from
meeting a massive Soviet/Russia strike against NATO Europe, and toward
new tasks of peacekeeping, responding rapidly to out-of-area military
or terrorist actions, and fighting the war on terrorism in NATO
countries, the aspirant countries, with fewer resources and generally,
smaller populations than most NATO members, can bring specialized
military capabilities to the table for use in these new NATO missions.
Mr. Speaker, Congress must recognize that NATO is adapting to meet
the threats to its member nations and to its collective interest. With
the implementation of the Combined Joint Task Force (CJTF) concept for
the assemblage of effective coalitions of the willing, NATO now has far
more flexibility to address a range of new and very different threats.
When the United States must defend its interests out of area, it is
more likely to have some friends from NATO at its side who can
effectively operate with it, despite a very troubling U.S.-Europe
military capabilities gap.
Finally, and in conclusion, bringing in new qualified nations to NATO
is not, on balance, a burden. Aspirant countries' vigorous interest in
membership and their commitments to democracy, peace and stability will
make NATO a more vital organization in an eastern European
neighborhood. These countries have been striving to meet NATO
membership qualifications and to finally join the ranks of the
prosperous, peaceful, democratic nations of the Euro-Atlantic region.
How, morally, can we deny them this tremendous step toward these worthy
goals--some 57 years after the end of World War II?
Mr. Speaker, this Member urges his colleagues to vote ``aye'' on this
resolution.
Ms. WATSON of California. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for
time, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. GALLEGLY. Mr. Speaker, I have no other speakers, and I yield back
the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Petri). The question is on the motion
offered by the gentleman from California (Mr. Gallegly) that the House
suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, H. Res. 468, as amended.
The question was taken.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds of
those present have voted in the affirmative.
Mr. GALLEGLY. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be
postponed.
____________________