[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 85 (Wednesday, June 11, 2003)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7690-S7702]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
BURMESE FREEDOM AND DEMOCRACY ACT OF 2003
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the bill by title.
The bill clerk read as follows:
A bill (S. 1215) to sanction the ruling Burmese military
junta, to strengthen Burma's democratic forces and support
and recognize the National League of Democracy as the
legitimate representative of the Burmese people, and for
other purposes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The assistant Republican leader.
Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, the situation in Burma is indeed dire
and requires our immediate response. We will make that response within
the next hour.
S. 1215, which is now the pending business in the Senate, has 56
cosponsors. I particularly want to thank Senator Feinstein, who will be
speaking on this measure, and Senator McCain, who have had a particular
interest in this subject for quite some time.
Until yesterday, Aung San Suu Kyi and other democracy activists have
been held incommunicado by the repressive State Peace and Development
Council, SPDC, following an ambush on her convoy several hundred
kilometers north of Rangoon. Scores are feared murdered and injured in
this blatant assault on democracy in Burma.
In the 11th hour of his trip to Rangoon, the SPDC finally allowed
U.N. Special Envoy Razali Ismail a 15-minute meeting with Suu Kyi. We
are all relieved that his initial statements indicate that she is alive
and unharmed, but the fate of other activists arrested remains unknown.
But simply seeing is not freeing. Razali's meeting with Suu Kyi was
not a private one and she remains under the total control of SPDC
thugs. Her continued silence in the wake of this bloodshed could not be
more deafening, nor--despite Razali's brief visit--her predicament more
pressing.
Horrific details of the attack continue to emerge and heighten the
need for a swift and decisive response to the SPDC's brutality.
According to Monday's front-page article in the Washington Post, in
the ``pitch dark amid the rice paddies'' thugs posing as Buddhist monks
stopped Suu Kyi's car. Soon after, a crowd ``set upon her convey,
attacking the entourage with wooden clubs and bamboo spikes. . . .
Several hundred more assailants ambushed the motorcade from the rear.''
This is no simple act of harassment or intimidation. It was an act of
terrorism against innocent civilians who simply believe in democracy
and the rule of law in Burma.
The free world and free press have been quick to condemn the SPDC.
But strong words from foreign capitals must be matched by stronger
actions.
Last week, I introduced the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act of
2003, along with Senators Feinstein and McCain. As I indicated earlier,
we now have 56 cosponsors. I ask unanimous consent that the list be
printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
S. 1215 cosponsors
Akaka, Alexander, Allard, Allen, Baucus, Bennett, Biden,
Bingaman, Boxer, Breaux, Brownback, Bunning, Burns,
Chambliss, Clinton, Coleman, Collins, Corzine, Daschle,
Dayton, Dole, Domenici, Dorgan, Durbin, Edwards, Feingold,
Feinstein, Frist, and Grassley.
Hagel, Harkin, Hutchison, Jeffords, Kennedy, Kerry, Kyl,
Lautenberg, Leahy, Levin, Lieberman, Lugar, McCain, Mikulski,
Murkowski, Murray, Nelson, Ben (Nebraska), Reid, Rockefeller,
Santorum, Sarbanes, Schumer, Smith, Specter, Stabenow,
Voinovich, and Wyden.
Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, this bill, among other sanctions,
imposes a ban on imports from Burma.
I am pleased that many of my colleagues--including the majority and
minority leaders of the Senate and the chairmen and ranking members of
the Senate Foreign Relations and Finance Committees--are cosponsors of
this important legislation.
Let me share with my colleagues some of the feedback we have gotten
from around the country on the act:
An editorial in today's Los Angeles Times stated:
[Burma's] trading partners, other countries in the region
and aid givers like Japan need to get tougher by imposing
sanctions and aid suspensions to push the country toward
democracy; that's the outcome Myanmar's citizens show they
favor every time they get the chance.
By the way, they haven't gotten a chance since 1990.
A Washington Post editorial yesterday advised that because Burmese
dictators ``control the nation' economy, an import ban would affect
those most responsible for Burma's repression, and senators supportive
of democracy in Asia should vote for the bill without conditions or
expiration dates.''
Deputy Secretary of State Rich Armitage recently wrote:
. . . we support the goal and intent of this legislation and
agree on the need for many similar measures. . . . We are
also considering an import ban, as proposed in your
legislation.
A June 6 editorial in the Washington Post suggested that:
[[Page S7691]]
While the [Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act] moves through
Congress, Mr. Bush could implement many of its provisions by
executive order. He could find no better way to demonstrate
his commitment to democracy and his revulsion at a brutal
dictatorship.
A New York Times editorial endorsed the import ban and recommended
that:
Europe . . . should now block Myanmar's exports as well.
The junta has had a year to demonstrate that its opening was
genuine. Now all ambiguity is gone, and the world's response
must be equally decisive.
A Boston Globe editorial stated that President Bush:
. . . could and should issue an executive order that would
swiftly accomplish [an import ban]. This is not a partisan
matter. The great lesson that ought to have been learned in
the last century is that free democrats betray their unfree
brothers and sisters when they seek to appease dictatorships.
Dallas Morning News editor at large Rena Pederson, who also penned a
superb article on this topic in the Weekly Standard, wrote in an op-ed:
The strongest possible pressure must be turned on the
Burmese generals, who apparently calculated their opposition
could be decapitated while the world was preoccupied with
events in the Middle East. They shouldn't be allowed to get
away with such a cowardly fast one. The Bush administration
should support tougher sanctions now. Senator Mitch
McConnell, R-KY., is pushing for increased sanctions.
That is the bill we have before us.
``He will need help . . .''
And we obviously are going to have help with 56 cosponsors, and I
hope a very overwhelming vote shortly.
``He will need help, or the Bush administration could accomplish the
same thing by executive order.''
A Baltimore Sun editorial rightly concluded: ``. . . this regime
ought to be treated somewhat like North Korea, from which imports have
long been barred.''
Finally, in endorsing the act, the American Apparel and Footwear
Association called upon ``the rest of Congress for the swift and
immediate passage of such import legislation.''
The idea of a ban on imports from Burma is not a new one to this
body. In he 107th Congress, S. 926 sought to impose such restrictions
and was cosponsored by 21 Senators. I would offer that the need for an
important ban has only become more urgent in the wake of the May 30
attack on democracy in Burma.
Supporters of a free Burma want America to take the lead in defending
democracy in that country.
Supporters of a free Burma believe that serving the cause of freedom
is America's challenge and obligation. We should not abandon the people
of Burma during the greatest moments of need. The people of Burma have
made their aspirations known, and the regime has not silenced them into
submission. They have not stilled their hearts for political change and
they will not succeed in stemming our collective resolve.
Supporters of a free Burma agree with President Bush that:
Men and women in every culture need liberty like they need
food and water and air. Everywhere that freedom arrives,
humanity rejoices: and everywhere that freedom stirs, let
tyrants fear.
It's time for tyrants to fear in Burma.
I ask unanimous consent that the following items be printed in the
Record: a Washington Post article dated June 9; a letter from Under
Secretary of State Rich Armitage; editorials from the Los Angeles
Times, and the Baltimore Sun, and a Rena Pederson article in the Weekly
Standard.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
[From the Washington Post, June 9, 2003]
Attack on Burmese Activist Seen as Work of Military
(By Alan Sipress and Ellen Nakashima)
Bangkok, June 8.--Burmese opposition leader Aung San Suu
Kyi's motorcade was rattling along a pocked one-lane road
near Mandalay in Northern Burma after the sunset when a pair
of men, disguised in the burnt orange robes of Buddhist
monks, motioned for it to stop. They asked her to alight and
make an impromptu speech to at least 100 people gathered at a
narrow bridge over a creek and blocking her way, according to
Burmese exiles who spoke with witnesses. But she was running
late. It was already pitch dark amid the rice paddies.
When one of her bodyguards, a young unarmed man, got out of
the four-wheel-drive vehicle to convey Suu Kyi's regrets, the
crowd set upon her convoy, attacking the entourage with
wooden clubs and bamboo spikes, according to the exiles and
diplomats who also have spoken to witnesses. Several hundred
more assailants ambushed the motorcade from the rear.
By the time the battle was over late in the evening of May
30, at least four of Suu Kyi's bodyguards were dead. Burmese
exiles and diplomats said scores of her supporters were also
probably killed. And Suu Kyi, the 1991 Nobel Peace Prize
laureate, suffered head and shoulder injuries, they said,
when her car windows were shattered and she was detained by
Burmese soldiers along with at least 17 supporters.
U.S. and other diplomats have concluded that the attack was
an ambush orchestrated by Burma's military rulers and carried
out by a pro-government militia reinforced by specially
trained prison inmates.
Suu Kyi, 57, has remained in custody, incommunicado and out
of public sight ever since, prompting protests from the
United Nations, the United States other governments.
The attack was not only a stunning bid to intimidate Suu
Kyi and deflate a pro-democracy movement that over recent
months had been attracting larger and larger crowds despite
mounting governmental harassment, according to exiles and
diplomats in Rangoon and Bangkok. It was also an effort by
Burma's top leader, Gen. Than Shwe, who had been
consolidating control in recent months, to make clear he had
lost patience with those in the military advocating dialogue
with Suu Kyi.
``This was a brutal power play to show them who is in
charge here,'' a European diplomat said. ``This was a message
from Than Shwe to the softies in the military that you [had]
better watch out. You are not to tolerate Aung San Suu Kyi.''
Although supporters of political reform have despaired of
progress for months, the attack outside Mandalay--the
bloodiest confrontation since Burma crushed a pro-democracy
uprising in 1988--could mark the end to the spring of hope
that began almost exactly one year ago.
Under intense international pressure, the Burmese
government had released Suu Kyi from house arrest in May
2002. Some high-ranking military officers had calculated that
Suu Kyi's popularity had faded during her detention and that
she no longer posed the same threat as she had in 1990 when
her party, the National League for Democracy, won a landslide
election victory, Burmese and other analysts said. Those
results were voided by the military, plunging Burma into its
current political crisis and a decade of international
isolation.
The Burmese government, however, discovered that Suu Kyi
still attracted jubilant crowds when she traveled the country
reopening nearly 200 local offices for her party. Tens of
thousands turned out to chant her name. Many supporters
walked miles to see her. Increasingly, her rallies drew
Buddhist monks, who command great respect in Burmese society,
further alarming the military.
``They are worried that despite all the threats they can
employ against the pro-democracy movement, people are
continuing to go out and see Aung San Suu Kyi,'' said Win
Min, a Burmese researcher who studies civilian-military
relations.
Suu Kyi, who has always preached reconciliation, was also
becoming openly critical of the government's unwillingness to
engage in meaningful dialogue for a political settlement. The
optimism that accompanied her release from house arrest had
long dissipated.
These developments were an affront to Than Shwe, the
junta's leader, who so loathes Suu Kyi that, as one European
diplomat said, he ``hates even to hear her name mentioned.''
Than Shwe, 70, chairman of the ruling State Peace and
Development Council and armed forces commander, has moved
since last year to strengthen his grip on power. He has
beefed up the United Solidarity and Development Association,
the pro-government militia that witnesses said attacked Suu
Kyi's motorcade. He has manipulated the military, government
and courts to weaken his leading rivals while placing his
loyalists in influential post, said diplomats and Burmese
exiles.
``Than Shwe has been taking his time,'' said Zin Linn of
the opposition National Coalition Government of the Union of
Burma. ``He has purged many of the senior military men who
are soft-liners and are in some way impressed with Aung San
Suu Kyi'' and Tin Oo, the vice chairman of her party.
Most notably, Than Shwe's ascent has come at the expense of
Gen. Khin Nyunt, 64, the head of military intelligence and a
leading advocate of dialogue with Suu Kyi. His patron, former
dictator Gen. Ne Win, died in December. While Khin Nyunt
remains the third-highest-ranking official in the junta, his
authority in running military intelligence has been limited
and he has told diplomats that he no longer has a mandate to
pursue the reconciliation talks, which had been medicated by
U.N. special envoy Razali Ismail.
The dispute pits so-called pragmatists, such as Khin Nyunt,
who believe Burma can string out the talks with Suu Kyi while
placating foreign governments, against officers urging that
the pro-democracy movement be crushed. But diplomats and
analysts stress that the military is united in its
determination to retain power.
Suu Kyi's recent month-long swing through northern Burma
offered an opportunity for Than Shwe to deliver a resounding
message to the pragmatists that their moment had passed,
diplomats and exiles said.
[[Page S7692]]
As expedition to the northernmost state of Kachin, which
began May 6, was her seventh road trip since her release. It
was meant in part to bolster the morale of loyalists in her
party, who were disappointed that the reconciliation talks
had ground to a halt, said Debbie Stothard, coordinator of
ALTSEAN-Burma, a human rights group in Southeast Asia.
The trips, especially this last, had provoked growing
harassment by the government, which has staged protests by
machete-wielding activists, blasted music to drown out Suu
Kyi's speeches and blocked her way with logs and barbed wire.
At least once, a firetruck turned its hoses on her
supporters.
If the military wanted to escalate the confrontation,
Sagaing Division northwest of Mandalay was a good place,
Burmese exiles and diplomats said. This impoverished region
is the stronghold of Lt. Gen. Soe Win, a Sagaing native and
former military commander in the area. He was promoted by
Than Shwe in February to the junta's fourth-highest position.
Soe Win is also a leading activist in the militia and had
toured several towns earlier this year demanding that
dialogue with Suu Kyi be halted.
Diplomats and exiles said they have received reports that
Soe Win was at a military headquarters in nearby Monywa
either during or shortly before the ambush against Suu Kyi's
motorcade. Exiles said they believe he ran the operation.
Military officials knew Suu Kyi was coming. She had been
required to give them her itinerary.
``Clearly, orders were given for a violent attack,'' a U.S.
Embassy official in Rangoon said.
The following account of the May 30 attack was provided by
that official based on the findings of a two-person U.S.
Embassy team dispatched to Sagaing Division late last week to
investigate the incident. Much of the story has been
corroborated by information from witnesses provided to other
diplomats and exiles.
As Suu Kyi's motorcade traveled north toward the town of
Dipeyin about two miles from Monywa, it was met by 100 to 200
people at the bridge. Most of them were disguised as monks
but shed the costumes when the fighting erupted. About 400
other convicts and militia recruits disguised as monks with
shaved heads, and wearing white armbands, blocked the
motorcade from behind.
Though Suu Kyi's supporters tried to assuage the mob, the
assailants began beating them and smashing the vehicles'
windows. Trying to stave off the attack and shelter Suu Kyi,
members of her party stood on the road and locked arms.
At the site, the investigating team found bloodied clothes,
clubs and spears, broken glass and debris from damaged
vehicles.
``It was pretty clear that a big fight had taken place,''
the embassy official said.
The team's findings contradict the brief version provided
by the government--that the confrontation lasted two hours
and was provoked by Suu Kyi's party. The government said four
people were killed and 50 others injured.
The U.S. team reported that gunfire was heard in the middle
of the night when the army arrived to clean up the site.
According to other accounts, gunshots rang out during or
shortly after the clash.
Reports reaching other diplomats and exile groups said Suu
Kyi's driver, trying to remove the democracy activist from
the melee, gunned the engine as the crowd pounded the car
with rocks and other objects. She was detained by security
forces farther down the road in Dipeyin.
Tin Oo, 75, the vice chairman of Suu Kyi's party, was
assaulted when he left his car, according to Burmese exiles,
who have expressed concern about his condition and
whereabouts.
Following the attack, the military closed most of the
party's offices across Burma, arrested other democracy
activists and criticized Suu Kyi's movement in the press.
Some suggest that these steps were part of a planned,
concerted crackdown, not just a hurried attempt to prevent
Suu Kyi's supporters from protesting the attack and arrests.
They noted that in the weeks before the incident, 10
activists from the opposition party were arrested and
sentenced to prison terms of two to 28 years.
Since the attack, more than 100 party activists have been
arrested and at least a dozen imprisoned, said Stothard,
coordinator of the human rights group.
Those killed trying to protect Suu Kyi, or ``The Lady,'' as
she is popularly known, reportedly included Toe Lwin, 32, a
rising star in the party's youth division who held a
philosophy degree and was studying English in Rangoon, a
Western diplomat said. He was in Suu Kyi's vehicle, wearing
his orange opposition party jacket with its red badge
emblazoned with a gold fighting peacock. Suu Kyi treated
these supporters as ``surrogate sons,'' and saw in them a
future generation of political leaders, Stothard said.
Suu Kyi is being held at Yemon military camp, about 25
miles outside Rangoon, without access to her doctor, party
members or Western envoys, concerned diplomats said.
``If they lift her incommunicado status, she will speak,''
a European diplomat said. ``She will speak the truth and this
will be damaging for them.''
____
Deputy Secretary of State,
Washington June 6, 2003.
Hon. Mitch McConnell,
Chairman, Subcommittee on Foreign Operations, Committee on
Appropriations, U.S. Senate.
Dear Mr. Chairman: We are outraged by the May 30 attack on
Aung San Suu Kyi and her convoy. The deteriorating conditions
in Burma are of grave concern to the Administration and we
appreciate your leadership in advancing legislation to
respond to these events.
The Department of State also appreciates the opportunity to
review and comment on the ``Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act
of 2003 (S. 1182),'' which you introduced on June 4, 2003. We
fully support the goal and intent of this legislation and
agree on the need for many similar measures. For example, we
are working on a unilateral expansion of the visa ban,
extending it to all officials of the Union Solidarity
Development Association (part of the SPDC) and their
immediate families, rather than just to senior officials, as
is current practice. We will also be adding managers of the
state-run enterprises and their families to the list.
We agree on the need to prevent IFI funds going to the
junta. We will continue to use our voice and vote in those
institutions to oppose loans that benefit the military
regime. We also agree on the need to express strong support
for the NLD, and are doing so in every international forum in
which the United States participates, including at the UN.
Also significant are the findings of the annual Country
Report on Human Rights Practices, Trafficking in Persons
Report and Report on International Religious Freedom, which
identify and strongly condemn known SPDC abuses. The
President's Annual Report on Major Drug Transit or Major
Illicit Drug Producing Countries has also identified Burma as
a country that demonstrably has failed to meet its
international obligations regarding narcotics.
In addition to the above efforts, which are already
underway, we are determined to pursue additional measures
against the regime, including an asset freeze, a possible ban
on remittances and, with appropriate legislation, a ban on
travel to Burma. We hope to move forward with these measures
expeditiously and with the support of the Congress. We are
also considering an import ban, as proposed in your
legislation. We support the intent behind the ban but are
reviewing the proposal in light of our international
obligations, including our WTO commitments.
Again, thank you for your leadership on this issue and your
commitment to the cause of freedom. We look forward to
working with you on the bill.
Sincerely,
Richard L. Armitage.
____
[From the Los Angeles Times, June 11, 2003]
Freeze Myanmar Assets
The military thugs running Myanmar finally may have opened
their eyes to the esteem in which Aung San Suu Kyi is held
outside their nation. They already knew how much their
oppressed citizens thought of the woman who should be leading
the nation formerly known as Burma: The huge numbers greeting
her on her journeys around her country provided graphic
evidence of her popularity.
Harboring despots' fears of ouster by a charismatic pro-
democracy leader, the army rulers arrested Suu Kyi, again,
after a deadly attack on her motorcade May 30. However, they
let United Nations representative Razali Ismail meet with the
democracy activist Tuesday after stalling for days.
Delay is not new for Razali, who has sought for two years
to push the nation's autocrats toward democracy. He deserves
credit for insisting on a meeting with Suu Kyi, so does his
boss, U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan, who denounces the
generals.
In 1947 a political rival assassinated Suu Kyi's father, an
architect of the independence movement. Forty years later,
his daughter began campaigning against the military regimes
that ruled the country for much of its post-independence
history. In 1990, she and her party won a parliamentary
election but the military scrapped those results and kept her
under house arrest. It also refused to let her leave to
receive her 1991 Nobel Peace Prize or to be with her husband
as he lay dying in England.
But a year ago, the junta let Suu Kyi travel again. Seeing
her popularity undimmed, the government organized the May 30
ambush of her motorcade and cited the violence as cause for
her arrest. She was held incommunicado until Razali met her.
Nearby nations like Thailand and Malaysia feebly protested
the assault and arrest.
The U.S. Congress is considering tougher measures to freeze
the assets of the Myanmar government held in the United
States and to bar the country's leaders from traveling here.
Those steps are warranted unless Suu Kyi is released and
allowed to travel freely. The United States and other
countries earlier imposed economic sanctions on Myanmar that
devastated its economy. Trade with Thailand and China, plus
the export of narcotics, has kept it afloat.
The trading partners, other countries in the region and aid
givers like Japan need to get tougher by imposing sanctions
and aid suspensions to push the country toward democracy;
that's the outcome Myanmar's citizens show they favor every
time they get the chance.
____
[From the Baltimore Sun, June 6, 2003]
Squeeze the Junta
A top United Nations envoy was to arrive today in Myanmar,
formerly known as
[[Page S7693]]
Burma, and not a moment too soon: Human rights and democracy
once again are under siege by the narco-state's ruling
military party.
The United Nations is demanding that Yangon's generals
release 1991 Nobel Peace Prize laureate Aung San Suu Kyi,
arrested Saturday after a violent attack on her pro-democracy
party by security forces.
The violence, in which activists allege scores were killed,
and the subsequent closing of Myanmar's universities and all
of the offices of Ms. Suu Kyi's National League for Democracy
mark a sudden darkening of the new dawn proclaimed last May
when the military regime last released her from house arrest,
promising dialogue with the NLD aimed at national
reconciliation.
The renewed repression begs for stronger economic sanctions
by the United States to squeeze this illegal junta.
This is a regime that competes with North Korea on human-
rights abuses--including long quashing the NLD, a legally
elected opposition party. As U.N. Secretary General Kofi
Annan recently put it, the political aspirations of the
Burmese people ``are overwhelming in favor of change.''
In 1990, Ms. Suu Kyi's party crushed the military's
candidates in Myanmar's last legal parliamentary election;
since then, she has spent much of the time under house
arrest. In response, the United States barred new American
investments in Myanmar in 1997. But that didn't end the
involvement of Unocal Corp., the California energy giant, in
a 1995 deal with the junta to extract natural gas off the
Burmese coast and transport it via a 250-mile pipelines--a
project allegedly built with forced labor and accompanied by
military murders and rapes.
As a result, Unocal faces a groundbreaking federal lawsuit
brought by international activists for 15 unnamed Burmese
villagers under a 1789 U.S. statute allowing lawsuits against
U.S. multinational corporations, holding them abroad to the
same standards as at home. The outcome could be far-reaching;
the Bush administration has weighed in on Unocal's side,
arguing that such human-rights cases interfere with U.S.
foreign policy and the war on terrorism.
This is precisely the wrong stance. Instead, the U.S.
government ought to be moving quickly toward tightening the
screws on Myanmar's generals and anyone keeping them afloat
financially.
Trade sanctions against Myanmar were proposed last year but
dropped when Ms. Suu Kyi was last released. This week, House
and Senate bills were entered that call for an import ban and
other sanctions, all of which seem fully warranted. Already,
a leading U.S. apparel and footwear trade group and many
large retailers--from Wal-Mart to Saks--are boycotting
Burmese goods.
In other words, this regime ought to be treated somewhat
like North Korea, from which imports have long been barred.
Granted, Myanmar doesn't pose North Korea's nuclear threat,
but it plays such a major role in the world's heroin trade
that it's a destabilizing force internationally.
Ms. Suu Kyi is again detained and her party remains under
attack because Myanmar's generals figure they can get away
with it. The United States must send a stronger message that
that's no longer an option.
____
Burma's Junta ``Disappears'' the Country's Leading Democract
(By Rena Pederson)
In the Trademark manner of thugocracies, Burma's military
government, seeking to silence its critics, sent a mob to
attack the motorcade of longtime democracy activist Aung San
Suu Kyi on the night of Friday, May 30, as she traveled to a
speaking engagement in the north of the country. The Nobel
Peace Prize winner was assaulted and taken to an undisclosed
location.
The government would say only that she had been placed in
``protective custody'' and that she had not been injured. But
reports persisted that Suu Kyi had suffered a severe blow to
the head and possibly a broken arm. Inside Burma, it was said
that hundreds of her supporters had been murdered;
international news agencies reported at least 70 killed and
50 injured. At least 18 people were believed detained.
``The problem with getting an accurate story about what
happened is that everyone who could speak the truth in Burma
is under arrest,'' said one democracy advocate in Washington.
The government controls the only two newspapers and TV
stations, and the leading journalist is in prison. One in
four citizens reportedly spies for the government, so
everyone is guarded about what is said in public.
Nevertheless, clandestine sources inside Burma that have
proved reliable in the past report that hundreds of armed men
attacked the motorcade, some disguised as Buddhist monks.
Some were convicts released at the government's behest. They
beat Suu Kyi's supporters with bamboo clubs three feet long
and riddled her car with bullets. The window was shattered,
and either a rock or a brick was thrown at Suu Kyi's head
while she was seated in the car. Several students reportedly
tried to shield her with their bodies, but they were beaten
severely, and she was dragged away bleeding. According to
this account, she was taken to a military hospital for
stitches and then transferred to Yemon military camp about 25
miles from Rangoon.
Plainly, Suu Kyi, who is 57 and weighs about 100 pounds,
faces long odds--though not for the first time. Since 1988,
she has been standing up to one of the most brutal regimes in
the world. In the process, she has become the photogenic
symbol of democracy in Asia. In 1990, her party, the National
League for Democracy, won 80 percent of the vote in elections
the junta mistakenly had though they could control. Instead
of seating the winners in parliament, the generals threw many
NLD leaders in jail and placed Suu Kyi under house arrest,
where she remained for most of the ensuing 13 years.
In this country, few people know her name, much less how to
pronounce it (awn sawn soo chee). But her story has the sweep
and drama of ``Gone With The Wind.'' Her father, General Aung
San, was a leader of the democracy movement in Burma after
World War II and was expected to become the first president
after Great Britain relinquished control. He was assassinated
when his daughter was only 2. His wife, a wartime nurse, went
on to become ambassador to India.
Suu Kyi was educated at Oxford and married a fellow
student, who became a professor of Tibetan studies. She lived
quietly in England as a wife and mother of two boys until her
own mother suffered a stroke in 1988, and she returned to
Burma to care for her. In riots that year, soldiers shot and
killed more student demonstrators than would die in 1989 at
Tiananmen Square. Suu Kyi was entreated to stay and help lead
the democracy effort, which she did, at great personal
sacrifice. She has seen her sons only sporadically since. And
four years ago, as her husband was dying of cancer, the junta
refused to grant him a visa to visit her.
The international response to her rearrest has been near
unanimous condemnation. In the midst of peace negotiations in
the Middle East, President Bush expressed his deep concern
and called for the immediate release of Suu Kyi and her
supporters, as did United Nations Secretary General Kofi
Annan. The most tepid responses came from Burma's Southeast
Asian neighbors, who have their own concerns about
stability. They asked for an explanation of Suu Kyi's
detention, but would not demand her release. Japan, the
leading investor in Burma, said the situation was not
``good'' and dialogue was needed for a democratic
solution.
It will be up to the United States to increase pressure on
the Burmese generals, who apparently thought they could
decapitate their opposition while the world was concentrating
on the Middle East. The Bush administration must back up its
words with actions. On Capitol Hill, Sen. Mitch McConnell, a
Kentucky Republican, and Rep. Tom Lantos, a Democrat from
California, moved to toughen existing sanctions on Thursday.
They will need help. As the Boston Globe pointed out,
President Bush could issue an executive order that would
accomplish the same thing.
The world hardly needs another crisis at this moment, but
the situation in Burma could be destabilizing. Burma has been
seeking aid from China, its neighbor to the north, which
wouldn't mind having Burma as a vassal state providing port
access to the Indian Ocean. That prospect has alarmed India,
its neighbor to the west. At the same time, Thailand, to the
east, is overwhelmed by the thousands of refugees pouring
across the border each day to escape the rapacious Burmese
military.
Further complicating the picture, Burma is one of the
world's largest producers of heroin and amphetamines. Drug
dealers are often seen playing golf with high-ranking
generals and hold high positions in major banks. And, oh yes,
Burma has one of the fastest-growing AIDS rates in the world-
and one of the worst health systems.
When I spoke with Aung San Suu Kyi in February, she
expressed frustration that the junta had not opened a
dialogue with her party after her release from house arrest
in May 2002. ``The government promised that it would begin
discussions about the transition to democracy,'' she said.
``They have not. They promised they would release all
political prisoners. They have not.'' And they promised to
allow the publication of independent newspapers. She asked
with a wry smile, ``You haven't seen one, have you?''
This spring she began speaking out more forcefully. When
she ventured into the northern states two weeks ago,
thousands of supporters risked their lives to greet the woman
they call ``the Lady.'' Government harassment then increased.
On May 24, 10 NLD members were jailed. On May 29, the day
before the ambush, clashes broke out between government
supporters armed with machetes and NLD backers, leaving
several dead.
Even if Aung San Suu Kyi eventually emerges unharmed, the
movement for free elections has been set back by the violent
turn of events. The main office of the National League for
Democracy, in Rangoon, has been closed, padlocked, and placed
under guard, and other party offices have been shuttered.
Universities, too, have been shut to prevent student
protests.
``The Lady'' is in greater jeopardy than ever before. It
remains to be seen what the long-repressed Burmese people and
the much-distracted international community will do about it.
Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, I note that Senator Feinstein is
here. I yield the floor and retain the remainder of my time.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from California.
[[Page S7694]]
Mrs. FEINSTEIN. I thank the Chair, and I also thank the distinguished
Senator from Kentucky for his leadership on this issue. I am very proud
to join with him.
Madam President, in 1996, Senator William Cohen and I introduced a
sanctions bill on Bumra. It passed in 1996, and was signed by the
President. In 1997, the sanctions were exercised.
We had a brief period of hope during that time, and the ASEAN nations
were going to be helpful. It looked like the military junta was going
to be receptive. Then, recently, for a brief period, Aung San Suu Kyi,
the democratic leader of Burma, was released, and discussions took
place. Well, that was short lived and this diabolical attack took place
on Aung San Suu Kyi.
According to reports, her motorcade was met by 100 to 200 people at a
bridge near Mandalay in northern Burma. Most of these people were
disguised as monks. Another 400 people--convicts and other militia
recruits who were also disguised as monks--blocked the convoy from the
rear. Both groups then discarded their costumes and attacked the
entourage with bamboo sticks and wooden clubs, smashing vehicles and
beating up their targets. Officially, four people were killed and 50
injured. Witnesses contend that as many as 70 may have been killed and
many more injured.
This is outrageous. The level of coordination, the deception, and the
brutality of the crimes cannot go unanswered. They really demand a
forceful and a substantive response that makes clear the United States
will not deal with this junta and will not tolerate such blatant
disregard for common human decency.
This legislation sends a message. It says: We will not import their
products. And those Burmese exports to the United States are about 25
percent of what Burma exports. So it is a considerable message. It has
to be remembered, Aung San Suu Kyi is the democratic leader of Burma.
She has never been permitted to serve. Her people have been arrested.
Members of the Parliament have been arrested and held in custody. Over
1,300 political prisoners are still in jail, many of them elected
parliamentarians. The practice of rape as a form of repression has been
sanctioned by the Burmese military. The use of forced labor is
widespread. Trafficking in young boys and girls as sex slaves is
rampant, and the government engages in the production and distribution
of opium and methamphetamine. So the United States must act. Now, in
general, I do not support trade embargoes as an effective instrument of
foreign policy. However, there are certain circumstances--South Africa
was one of them, largely because of the world response, and the world
saying enough is enough--where there must be change, and where we are
prepared to carry out these sanctions together to effect that change. I
hope in this sense the United States will lead the way to enact these
sanctions in a meaningful way in which other nations will follow.
Our legislation imposes a complete ban on all imports until the
President determines and certifies to Congress that Burma has made
substantial and measurable progress on a number of democracy and human
rights issues.
As Senator McConnell will indicate, there is a provision in the
legislation, similar to the most favored nation status for China, that
will allow an annual review of this to assess progress. It allows the
President to waive the ban should he determine and notify Congress that
it is in the national security interest of the United States to do
this. It would freeze the assets of the Burmese regime in the United
States. It directs United States executive directors at international
financial institutions to vote against loans to Burma. It expands the
visa ban against past and present leadership of the junta, and it
encourages the Secretary of State to highlight the abysmal record of
the junta in the international community.
Now, Senator McConnell mentioned that both business and labor are
united in support of this legislation. He said the American Apparel and
Footware Association, which represents apparel, footware, and sewn
products companies and their suppliers, has called for this ban. The
president and CEO has stated--and I think this is worth being in the
Record--``The government of Burma continues to abuse its citizens
through force and intimidation, and refuses to respect the basic human
rights of its people. AAFA believes this unacceptable behavior should
be met with condemnation from not only the international public
community, but from private industry as well.''
So well said.
A number of stores, including Saks, Macy's, Bloomingdales, Ames, and
The Gap have already voluntarily stopped importing or selling goods
from Burma. The AFL-CIO and other labor groups also support this
legislation.
In addition, the International Labor Organization, for the first time
in its history, called on all ILO members to impose sanctions on Burma.
Such diversity in support of this legislation speaks volumes about
the brutality of this military junta and its single-minded
unwillingness to take even a modest step toward democracy and national
reconciliation.
And to add to it, Aung San Suu Kyi, the democratic leader, is once
again being held in custody. This is unacceptable.
The military junta knows full well they do not enjoy the popular
support of the Burmese people. That is why they resort to such actions.
As Aung San Suu Kyi traveled the country, and thousands turned out to
hear her speak, the junta realized that after years of house arrest and
repression, they had failed to curb the power of her message of
democracy, of human rights, and the rule of law. They realized that the
Burmese people were determined to see the democratic elections of 1990
fully implemented without delay. So in a cowardly and despicable manner
they took this action.
Now we must take action. We must take a stand on the side of the
people of Burma and on the side of the values we cherish the most.
I urge support and I hope it will be unanimous.
Thank you very much, Madam President. I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kentucky.
Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that Senator
Kohl be added as a cosponsor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, I say to my friend from California,
as she was describing the provisions of the bill, the way it is now
structured, we will have an annual debate about whether or not these
sanctions should be lifted. It will be reminiscent of the most favored
nation debates that we had annually regarding the People's Republic of
China, which has now graduated to a new status.
But if ever there were a regime that deserved an annual review by
those of us here in the Congress, this is a regime that deserves that.
So I think that is a debate we are going to look forward to having.
Would you not agree, I say to my friend from California?
Mrs. FEINSTEIN. I certainly agree, I say to the Senator through the
Chair. I think it would be very useful. And I think when the
recalcitrance, the repression, is on the floor of this Senate every
year, hopefully it will be helpful in changing the minds of this
military junta.
Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, I first introduced a bill on this
subject back in 1993. It is one of these issues that, I must
regretfully say, you take an interest in and follow over a period of
time and never see anything change. There is never any progress that
could be measured--until a year or so ago when the junta led Aung San
Suu Kyi basically out of house arrest. We were supposed to applaud that
as some kind of remarkable step in the direction of recognizing the
outcome of the election in 1998 in which she and her party got 80
percent of the vote. She won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1991 while she
was essentially incarcerated. She remained under house arrest--except
for about a year or so--ever since.
Various strategies have been tried. The Thai Prime Minister, who was
in town yesterday--some of us talked with him, and I know he met with
the President--this new Prime Minister in Thailand decided to engage in
what he called ``constructive engagement.'' Obviously, constructive
engagement doesn't work. What this regime needs is to be isolated. I
know there are some skeptics even in this body with regard to the
ability of sanctions to have a real impact.
[[Page S7695]]
Let me tell you, if there is one place in the world where sanctions
worked, it was South Africa. The reason it worked there is because
everybody participated and they were truly isolated. They became a
pariah regime throughout the world, and that led to the dramatic
changes that brought Nelson Mandela to power after decades in jail.
That can happen here. The United States needs to lead. Secretary
Powell is going out to the ASEAN regional forum in Phnom Penh on June
18 and 19 next week. This is an opportunity for him to put it at the
top of the agenda.
I said to the Thai Prime Minister that I thought constructive
engagement wasn't working and they needed to join with us and help us
lead the other ASEAN countries in the direction of a sanctions regime,
on a multilateral basis, that could shut these people down. Some would
say, well, if you have effective economic sanctions, it hurts the
people. It doesn't hurt the people in Burma because the regime takes
all profits off of the exports. They make money on the exports and the
drug traffic, which they are quite good at.
So this regime needs to be squeezed by the entire world, isolated,
and that is a strategy that we hope to begin today with the passage of
this legislation in the next 30 or 45 minutes.
I know on our side, Senator McCain wants to speak, Kay Hutchison
wants to speak, and, I believe, Senator Brownback wants to speak. How
much time remains?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. There are 15 minutes 43 seconds.
Amendment No. 882
Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, there is a substitute amendment at
the desk. I ask for its consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Kentucky [Mr. McConnell], for himself,
Mrs. Feinstein, Mr. McCain, Mr. Akaka, Mr. Alexander, Mr.
Allard, Mr. Allen, Mr. Bennett, Mr. Biden, Mr. Bingaman, Mrs.
Boxer, Mr. Breaux, Mr. Brownback, Mr. Bunning, Mr. Chambliss,
Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Coleman, Ms. Collins, Mr. Corzine, Mr.
Daschle, Mr. Dayton, Mrs. Dole, Mr. Domenici, Mr. Durbin, Mr.
Edwards, Mr. Feingold, Mr. Frist, Mr. Hagel, Mr. Dorgan, Mr.
Burns, Mr. Kohl, Mr. Harkin, Mrs. Hutchison, Mr. Jeffords,
Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Kerry, Mr. Kyl, Mr. Lautenberg, Mr. Leahy,
Mr. Levin, Mr. Lieberman, Mr. Lugar, Ms. Mikulski, Ms.
Murkowski, Mrs. Murray, Mr. Nelson of Nebraska, Mr. Reid, Mr.
Rockefeller, Mr. Santorum, Mr. Sarbanes, Mr. Schumer, Mr.
Smith, Mr. Specter, Ms. Stabenow, Mr. Voinovich, Mr. Wyden,
Mr. Grassley, and Mr. Baucus, proposes an amendment numbered
882.
Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that further
reading of the amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
(The amendment is printed in today's Record under ``Text of
Amendments.'')
Amendment No. 883 To Amendment No. 882
Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, there is a technical amendment to the
substitute at the desk, and I ask for its consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Kentucky [Mr. McConnell], for himself, Mr.
Grassley, and Mr. Baucus, proposes an amendment numbered 883
to amendment No. 882.
Mr. McCONNELL. I ask unanimous consent that further reading of the
amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:
(Purpose: To clarify the duration of certain sanctions against Burma,
and for other purposes)
On page 5, line 5, insert ``and except as provided in
section 9'' after ``law''.
Beginning on page 7, line 23, strike all through page 8,
line 3, and insert the following:
(4) Appropriate congressional committees.--In this Act, the
term ``appropriate congressional committees'' means the
Committee on Foreign Relations, the Committee on Finance, and
the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate and the
Committee on International Relations, the Committee on Ways
and Means, and the Committee on Appropriations of the House
of Representatives.
On page 8, beginning on line 5, strike all through line 13,
and insert the following:
(1) In general.--The President may waive the prohibitions
described in this section for any or all products imported
from Burma to the United States if the President determines
and notifies the appropriate congressional committees that to
do so is in the vital national security interest of the
United States.
On page 11, beginning on line 16, strike ``Committees on
Appropriations and Foreign Relations of the Senate'' and all
that follows through ``House of Representatives'' on line 19,
and insert ``appropriate congressional committees''.
On page 12, beginning on line 1, strike ``Committees on
Appropriations and Foreign Relations of the Senate'' and all
that follows through ``House of Representatives'' on line 4,
and insert ``appropriate congressional committees''.
On page 12, after line 16, insert the following:
(3) Report on trade sanctions.--Not later than 90 days
before the date that the import restrictions contained in
section 3(a)(1) are to expire, the Secretary of State, in
consultation with the United States Trade Representative and
other appropriate agencies, shall submit to the appropriate
congressional committees, a report on--
(A) conditions in Burma, including human rights violations,
arrest and detention of democracy activists, forced and child
labor, and the status of dialogue between the SPDC and the
NLD and ethnic minorities;
(B) bilateral and multilateral measures undertaken by the
United States Government and other governments to promote
human rights and democracy in Burma; and
(C) the impact and effectiveness of the provisions of this
Act in furthering the policy objectives of the United States
toward Burma.
SEC. 9. DURATION OF SANCTIONS.
(a) Termination by Request From Democratic Burma.--The
President may terminate any provision in this Act upon the
request of a democratically elected government in Burma,
provided that all the conditions in section 3(a)(3) have been
met.
(b) Continuation of Import Sanctions.--
(1) Expiration.--The import restrictions contained in
section 3(a)(1) shall expire 1 year from the date of
enactment of this Act unless renewed under paragraph (2) of
this section.
(2) Resolution by congress.--The import restrictions
contained in section 3(a)(1) may be renewed annually for a 1-
year period if, prior to the anniversary of the date of
enactment of this Act, and each year thereafter, a renewal
resolution is enacted into law in accordance with subsection
(c).
(c) Renewal Resolutions.--
(1) In general.--For purposes of this section, the term
``renewal resolution'' means a joint resolution of the 2
Houses of Congress, the sole matter after the resolving
clause of which is as follows: ``That Congress approves the
renewal of the import restrictions contained in section
3(a)(1) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act of 2003.''
(2) Procedures.--
(A) In general.--A renewal resolution--
(i) may be introduced in either House of Congress by any
member of such House at any time within the 90-day period
before the expiration of the import restrictions contained in
section 3(a)(1); and
(ii) the provisions of subparagraph (B) shall apply.
(B) Expedited consideration.--The provisions of section 152
(b), (c), (d), (e), and (f) of the Trade Act of 1974 (19
U.S.C. 2192 (b), (c), (d), (e), and (f)) apply to a renewal
resolution under this Act as if such resolution were a
resolution described in section 152(a) of the Trade Act of
1974.
Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the
substitute amendment be agreed to.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment (No. 882) was agreed to.
Mr. McCONNELL. I ask unanimous consent that the technical amendment
to amendment No. 882 be agreed to.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment (No. 883) was agreed to.
Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, I will retain the remainder of my
time, if I may.
Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Madam President, I will just use a quick minute. I
mentioned some of the retail establishments supporting this but I left
out a couple. I mentioned Saks Fifth Avenue, and there is also Macy's,
the Gap, Bloomingdale's, Ames, Williams Sonoma, IKEA, Wal-Mart,
Nautica, and Pottery Barn. I am very proud of these retail
establishments for standing up and joining us. I wanted to recognize
that on the floor.
Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, I am glad the Senator from California
mentioned those important corporations. Obviously, they could
conceivably benefit from low-cost imports but they are choosing not to
allow the regime to make a profit off of these American corporations.
They deserve our commendation.
I reserve the remainder of my time, and I suggest the absence of a
quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
[[Page S7696]]
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. BIDEN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. BIDEN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to be able to
proceed on the time controlled by Senator Feinstein.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. BIDEN. Madam President, I rise in support of the efforts of
Senator McConnell and Senator Feinstein and acknowledge the leadership
of Senator Baucus, as well, in working this out. Senator McConnell has
been tireless in his efforts to promote democracy in Burma and has been
an acknowledged leader in this area. I thank him for not relenting.
I think it is to state the obvious that it is vital for us to express
our concern for the freedom of Aung San Suu Kyi, leader of the National
League for Democracy and a winner of the Nobel Peace Prize. On May 30,
Government-affiliated thugs ambushed an automobile convoy carrying the
leader and many of her supporters. Dozens of people were reportedly
killed and injured in the crash. She was detained by Government
authorities, who also ordered the NLD offices closed nationwide.
Aung San Suu Kyi remains under arrest, and the Government has refused
to allow supporters or members of the diplomatic community to meet with
her.
When Burma's military rulers freed Aung San Suu Kyi of house arrest
last year, they claimed her release was unconditional and they pledged
to continue the U.N.-facilitated dialog, which led to her freedom. With
last month's premeditated attack and her current detention, the junta
has abrogated all of its commitments and warrants no more time.
It is not hard to discern the motives of the junta.
They are scared. They are scared the people of Burma will rally and
remove them from power, and they are right to be afraid. As Aung San
Suu Kyi has toured schools, hospitals, businesses, and government
organizations around Burma, she has been met by joyous crowds, and it
is obvious to all observers that she remains as loved by the people of
Burma as the military junta is reviled. It is time for the present
military oligarchy to fade into history.
Burma's transition to democracy would be a most welcome development
for all of Southeast Asia.
Despite pledges to crack down on narcotics production, the military
continues to collaborate with heroin and methamphetamine traffickers.
It has failed to address the legitimate demands of ethnic minorities
for significant regional autonomy within a federal state, preferring
military pressure to political accommodation.
The generals have enriched themselves while bankrupting the country.
They have dismantled Burma's education system and ignored the growing
threat to public health posed by AIDS, malaria, and tuberculosis. As
the State Department notes with characteristic understatement in its
most recent human rights report:
The quality of life in Burma continues to deteriorate.
That may be the understatement of the month. It is well past time for
the generals to do what they said they would do; namely, begin a
process that would eventually transfer the reins to a representative
civilian government that would enjoy domestic and international
legitimacy.
Unfortunately, there are few indications that the regime intends to
step down. Indeed, they apparently had high hopes the United States
Government, taking note of Aung San Suu Kyi's release last year, would
take steps to lift the many sanctions imposed when the army brutally
suppressed Burma's democracy movement in 1988. The regime spent
$450,000 to retain the services of a prominent Washington lobbying firm
to help push the President and Congress to normalize relations, restore
access to international financial institutions, and resume foreign aid.
They were willing to spend $450,000 to improve their image, but last
year the officials operating the government spent less than $40,000
nationwide on HIV/AIDS care and prevention. Each of the nation's 35,000
primary schools receives on average less than $1 from the central
government each year; $35,000 for the national education budget;
$450,000 for lobbying in Washington.
No amount of money can hide the character of the Burmese military
rulers. As the United States people stood with Nelson Mandela in his
bid for freedom and democracy for the people of South Africa, so we
should now stand with those who are moving Burma toward a free and open
society and the National League for Democracy as they try through
peaceful means to end the tyrannical, brutal rule of Burma's military
rulers.
Again, I thank Senators McConnell and Feinstein for their leadership
in this area, and I am confident we will win wide support of our
colleagues. It is time that we are clearly standing on the right side
of this issue.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The assistant Republican leader.
Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, I thank my friend, the ranking member
of the Foreign Relations Committee, for his contributions to the
debate. I very much appreciate it.
I yield 8 minutes to the Senator from Arizona.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona.
Mr. McCAIN. Madam President, I thank my colleague from Kentucky,
Senator McConnell, for his leadership, and I thank the Senator from
California, Mrs. Feinstein. I thank Senator McConnell for his
longstanding support of this brave and heroic person and the movement
she leads.
Several years ago, I happened to visit Myanmar, which I will refer to
from now on as Burma. I had the great honor--one of the great honors of
my life--to meet this incredible hero, this incredible leader, this
incredible person who has spent her life under duress, under
punishment, under pressure, under house arrest, even to the point of
physical mistreatment at the hands of this gang of thugs that runs and
has ruined this country.
I will never forget the day I met her. I will never forget the grace,
the dignity, and the heroism that was clearly radiating from every part
of this incredible person who very appropriately has been recognized
with the Nobel Peace Prize.
I remind my colleagues that she has been kept under house arrest for
many years. She was released in 1995 finally, and then she was again
confined to house arrest in 2000. Just a few days ago, as a motorcade
of about 250 people drove through, about 500 armed soldiers, members of
the military-backed Union Solidarity and Development Association, and
an unknown number of convicts recruited from Mandalay prison with the
promise of reward and freedom rushed and attacked it.
In the ensuing melee, which lasted about an hour, the attackers beat
up NLD members, shot them with catapults, soldiers opening and firing,
killing and wounding a large number of NLD members.
Aung San Suu Kyi was taken into custody in an unknown place.
Apparently, thank God, according to the U.N. envoy, Mr. Ishmael, she is
in good physical condition.
This junta has ruined the country. It has deprived the people of
their fundamental freedoms. This gang of thugs has mistreated this
great person in the most disgraceful fashion. She should be free. She
should be free to lead her country as was already endorsed by one free
and fair election overwhelmingly.
Why did they do that this time? Because everyplace Aung San Suu Kyi
went, the people welcomed her by the thousands, and the junta could not
stand it. So they had to kill her people, her supporters, and they had
to throw her back into prison.
What did one of the leaders who is supposed to be a moderate, whom I
also met when I was in Burma, GEN Khin Nyunt--remember that name--say?
He said:
Everyone needs to abide by the rules and regulations to be
observed everywhere.
Adding:
It is to be noted that the basic human rights would not
protect those who violate an existing law.
What existing law? What existing law that would ever be judged a
legitimate law in any court in the world was Aung San Suu Kyi in
violation of when they killed her supporters, mistreated her, and put
her back into prison?
I do not know why the Japanese, the Thais, the Chinese, and the ASEAN
nations, that ostensibly are supposed to
[[Page S7697]]
be standing up for freedom and democracy, are not doing everything
possible to punish this regime, free this incredible person, and let
the people of Burma have a free and fair election.
I thank, again, Senator McConnell. I point out that we should be
taking every single measure possible, and I do not believe the
Secretary of State should attend the ASEAN gathering in Phnom Penh,
Cambodia, unless Aung San Suu Kyi and the situation in Burma are No. 1
on the agenda of ASEAN. Are we going to sit by and watch the
brutalization of a people, the imprisonment of a Nobel Peace Prize
winner, and the repression and devastation of a nation be carried out
by a gang of thugs that call themselves generals? I hope not.
I hope the message today in the legislation we are considering,
thanks to the Senator from Kentucky, is a message that this is the
beginning--this is the beginning--of our efforts to free this person
and to free the people of Burma.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Vermont.
Mr. LEAHY. Madam President, I strongly support the Burmese Freedom
and Democracy Act of 2002 that has been introduced by Senators
McConnell and Feinstein. The legislation, as was said, seeks to
pressure the military junta in Burma to release Aung San Suu Kyi, and
to help bring democracy and human rights to Burma.
Several days last week--in fact, time and time again--Senator
McConnell came to the floor to speak on this issue. I want to commend
my colleague, the senior Senator from Kentucky, for his steadfast
leadership. I associate myself gladly with his remarks. I have also
joined him as an original cosponsor of this legislation.
The message the legislation sends to the ruling junta in Burma is
clear: Its behavior is outrageous. By any standard anywhere in the
world, its behavior is outrageous. Aung San Suu Kyi is the rightful and
democratically elected leader of Burma. It is that simple. Aung San Suu
Kyi is the rightful, elected leader of Burma, and the ruling junta does
not want her to take office because they know that their days of
repression, corruption, torture, and murder would be over. She and her
fellow opposition leaders must be immediately released.
This legislation also sends a clear signal to the administration, to
ASEAN members, and to the international community that we need to turn
up the heat on this illegitimate regime.
The efforts of Senators McConnell and Feinstein are already having an
impact. On June 5, 2003, our State Department issued a strong
statement, which reads:
The continued detention in isolation of Aung San Suu Kyi
and other members of her political party is outrageous and
unacceptable.
I agree. But we all know that U.S. actions can only go so far.
Bringing democracy and human rights to Burma is going to require active
pressure from Burma's neighbors in Southeast Asia, particularly
Thailand, Japan, and China. I hope they apply the pressure for human
rights and democracy that many of them profess to support. They should
disavow the failed policies of engagement.
I am pleased to see that the McConnell-Feinstein legislation attempts
to trigger a process to ratchet up the regional pressure on the Burmese
Government. I am glad to see that the United States has demarched every
government in Southeast Asia on this issue. I agree with the Bush
administration on this very much. We have to bring this kind of
pressure. As Senator McConnell has pointed out, the administration
could, on its own initiative, impose many of the sanctions called for
in this legislation.
All of us were relieved yesterday when the U.N. envoy in Burma was
finally able to see Aung San Suu Kyi. According to CNN, the U.N. envoy
said that she shows no sign of injury following clashes with the pro-
government group. His exact words were:
She did not have a scratch on her and was feisty as usual.
That is indeed good.
I was also glad to see the U.N. envoy calling on the members of the
ASEAN to drop the organization's policy of nonintervention. He stated:
ASEAN has to break through the straitjacket and start
dealing with this issue. . . .The situation in Burma can only
be changed if regional actors take their positions to act on
it.
I agree. The international community has the responsibility to act
together to pressure the SPDC. The time, if there ever was a time, for
appeasement is over. It is always a time for democracy to flourish.
Democracy has spoken. It is being held back by the junta in Burma. It
is time for them to step aside.
I see the distinguished senior Senator from Kentucky in the Chamber.
I again commend him for his leadership, and I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Alexander). The Senator from Kentucky.
Mr. McCONNELL. I thank my good friend from Vermont for his important
contribution in this debate and his kind words about how we got to this
point. Ultimately, I guess we will all be judged by whether or not this
is effective, I say to my friend from Vermont. For these sanctions to
be truly effective, we have to lead and the rest of the world has to
join us in sanctions of a regime that truly operates on a multilateral
basis like those that worked in South Africa.
I ask unanimous consent that Senator Campbell be added as a cosponsor
to this bill.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, today I am pleased to express my strong
support for the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act of 2003. This bill
sends a powerful message to the ruling military junta in Burma that
their violent restrictions against freedom and democracy will not be
tolerated and will have serious consequences. Their recent actions have
yet again demonstrated to the world that this junta cannot be trusted.
The international community cannot allow the crimes committed by the
Burmese military against the rightfully elected leader of Burma, Aung
San Suu Kyi, her followers, and the Burmese people to go unpunished.
So, it is my great hope that the actions that the Senate is taking
today will provide the international leadership needed to put the
spotlight on the Burmese military junta and make them change their
ways.
I know that other countries, including the European Union, are also
considering sanctions against Burma. A multilateral effort must be made
so that we send the right message and so that our efforts are as
effective as possible.
I am proud to be an original cosponsor of the Burmese Freedom and
Democracy Act of 2003. I look forward to continuing to work with my
colleagues to help bring freedom and justice to the Burmese people.
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, when Aung San Suu Kyi and her supporters
were so viciously assaulted last month, Burma's brutal leaders were
responsible for yet another major crime against human rights. The
violent repression of these democracy activists is a tragic and
appalling example of the Burmese Government's shameful and continuing
suppression of genuine reform.
Only a year ago, Suu Kyi had been released from one of her previous
house arrests in Burma, and that arrest had lasted 19 months. This new
atrocity has outraged the world once again, and stronger action by the
United States and the entire international community is long overdue.
The Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act calls for stiffer economic
sanctions and the immediate release of Suu Kyi and her supporters. She
won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1991 for her inspiring courageous
leadership. Again and again, she shows us why she deserves it. She is
an inspiration to all who care about justice and human rights.
Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I stand today in support of S. 1182,
introduced by Senator McConnell that I am cosponsoring. This bill
answers the rising concern that democracy cannot begin to take its
first promising steps in Burma. The news in the last few days clearly
indicates that democracy in Burma is in serious trouble again.
On Friday, May 30, in its latest crackdown against the National
League of Democracy, Burma's military regime detained Aung San Suu Kyi,
a popular prodemocracy activist,
[[Page S7698]]
and other leaders of her political party. There are reports that her
car had been hit by gunfire, and conflicting reports whether she had
been hurt.
The clash came in a town 400 miles north of the capital city of
Rangoon. She was transported to Rangoon where she remains under house
arrest. It took nearly 2 weeks of constant international pressure on
Burma's military regime for a United Nation's envoy to visit her
yesterday. The envoy reported she is in good spirits and had not been
hurt in the clash that resulted in her detention, but Burmese officials
still refuse to give a timetable for her release.
When Aung San Suu Kyi was detained, the Burmese Government closed the
offices of the National League of Democracy and arrested some of its
provincial leaders. They also closed all university and college
campuses. The Burmese military government is acting with renegade
abandon.
The detention of Aung San Suu Kyi follows a clear pattern by the
ruling military over the past decade to prevent her and her political
party from assuming power, despite the democratic election they won by
a landslide in 1990. Barely a year ago, the Burmese Government released
her from 19 months of house arrest, but only after intense
international pressure.
Aung San Suu Kyi captured the world's attention as a leader in the
prodemocracy movement in her country after her Government refused to
let her party take office. She received the Nobel Peace Prize in 1991
for her nonviolent efforts to promote democracy. Today, the military
rule in Burma has shackled Aung Sun Suu Kyi again, but the world has
not lost notice.
It is time to isolate this oppressive regime and demand the release
of those it is holding for doing nothing more than seeking democracy
for their nation.
Senator McConnell's bill will sanction the ruling Burmese military
junta, strengthen Burma's democratic forces, and support and recognize
the National League of Democracy as the legitimate representative of
the Burmese people. It is time to increase the pressure on those who
seek to snuff out the flame of democracy in a nation whose people
clearly support it.
Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I rise today to echo the condemnations of
the military rulers of Burma that my colleagues have so forcefully
offered.
Burma should by all rights be a prosperous country. It has over 50
million people, abundant natural resources, and a population hungry for
democracy.
Instead, it is an international outcast, ruled by a few military men
who finance their country through drug trafficking and forced labor.
Perhaps most egregious is the failure of the military rulers to
recognize the results of a free and fair election in which the Burmese
people overwhelmingly chose Aung San Suu Kyi as their leader. Rather
than sitting at the head of a democratic Burmese Government, she is
sitting in a Burmese jail, a prisoner of the military rulers.
The existence of a democratically elected government-in-waiting makes
Burma unique, but that is not all that makes Burma unique.
Suu Kyi has consistently supported sanctions against the military
rulers of Burma, and 3 years ago, the International Labor Organization,
for the first time in its 82-year history, urged the world to impose
sanctions against those rulers.
The bill we consider today will send a strong message to the
illegitimate military regime in Burma that their recent actions in
attacking Suu Kyi and her followers and imprisoning Suu Kyi are
intolerable. A unanimous passage would send that signal loud and clear.
These sanctions would be most effective if the whole world joined us.
Unilateral sanctions can send a strong message, but they are rarely
effective. In fact, they can even end up unintentionally adding further
misery to an already oppressed people while leaving their rulers
unscathed.
Multilateral sanctions, on the other hand, can have a dramatic
effect. I know that others are considering sanctions, including the
European Union. I applaud their attention to this issue and urge them
to act as we have acted.
I also urge the administration to work with our allies, particularly
those in the region, to create a united front of sanctions against the
military rulers of Burma. We must work toward multilateral support.
Importantly, this bill ensures that Burma will never fade from
congressional minds. We will not simply impose sanctions now and then
forget all about Burma.
Every year, we will vote on renewing sanctions. Every year, we will
be talking about Burma and how best we can work to aid those working
for democratic change in that country.
The military rulers of Burma should know that their crimes against
Suu Kyi, her followers, and the Burmese people will be neither forgiven
nor forgotten.
I appreciate the leadership of Senators McConnell and Feinstein on
this issue. They deserve our thanks for consistently bringing the
important issue of human suffering in Burma to the attention of this
body.
I would also like to thank Senator Grassley. He and I worked hard to
make changes to this bill that, in my view, make it better.
I urge my colleagues to pass this bill unanimously today, and I urge
the House of Representatives and the President to act soon to pass this
bill into law. Let's send the strongest signal possible to the
illegitimate regime in Burma.
Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, 13 years ago, Aung San Suu Kyi and her
party, the National League for Democracy, won an election in Burma with
82 percent of the vote.
It was a clear sign that the Burmese people had rejected its military
rulers that had been in place since 1962. Unfortunately, the people of
Burma were denied its true leader when the military regime arrested Suu
Kyi and thousands of her supporters.
For the past 13 years, Suu Kyi has courageously pushed for democratic
reform in Burma through nonviolent means even through she spent a great
deal of this time under house arrest. For her bravery and dedication to
freedom and democracy, she was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1991.
Last year, the military rulers of Burma released Suu Kyi from house
arrest. But, apparently, the strong support Suu Kyi continues to
receive from the Burmese people was too much for the ruling military
regime.
On May 30, in a northern Burmese town 400 miles from Rangoon,
supporters of the military regime attacked Suu Kyi's convoy and had her
arrested. Suu Kyi and thousands of her supporters were reportedly
injured in the attack. Scores of Suu Kyi supporters were reportedly
killed.
The international community must not let this act of brutality stand.
That is why I am pleased to cosponsor and support Senator McConnell's
legislation to increase sanctions on Burma.
This legislation will impose a total import ban on Burmese goods,
freeze the military regime's assets in the United States, tighten the
visa ban on Burmese Government officials, and make it U.S. policy to
oppose any new international loans to Burma's current leaders.
This is an important step. It is also important to make sure that the
international community and regional powers do their part to provide
real and sustained pressure on Burma's illegitimate rulers.
I was pleased to see that the United States has sent formal
diplomatic requests to 11 nations in the region asking them to pressure
the Burmese Government on the release of Suu Kyi.
I also sent a letter to the Japanese Ambassador asking his nation to
put more pressure on Burma's military rules after Japan's Foreign
Minister indicated that this incident would not set back
democratization efforts in Burma. I know our Japanese friends will help
us in this important issue of human rights and provide a stronger
condemnation of the attack on Suu Kyi.
All nations, the international community, and regional organizations
must take a stand against this outrage carried out by Burma's military
leaders. We must do our part to support this brave woman and her
followers.
Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, I rise today to support S. 1215 and to
express my dismay about the current human rights situation in Burma.
On May 30, opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi and at least 17
officials of
[[Page S7699]]
her party were detained after a violent clash with members of the Union
Solidarity Development Association, a government-created organization
that has increasingly taken on paramilitary activities.
The military junta that rules Burma has stated that ``only'' four
died in the violence.
But the National League for Democracy, Suu Kyi's party, has put the
death toll at 75. Furthermore, it is likely the Burmese Government
deliberately provoked the clashes to justify cracking down on
opposition leaders and closing down universities.
Since May 30, the junta has kept Suu Kyi, who is the 1991 Nobel Peace
Prize recipient, in an undisclosed location.
We have recently received word from a U.N. envoy that Suu Kyi is
safe, and members of the Burmese Government have promised that they
will release her expeditiously.
I join with my colleagues in this body, and with the American people,
in demanding that the Burmese regime fulfill this promise immediately.
The Government must also find those responsible for the violence and
hold them accountable.
The bill we have before us today addresses the serious human rights
situation in Burma. The recent violence and detainment of opposition
leaders exemplify Government repression conducted on a systematic and
frequent basis.
S. 1215 would punish Burma's dictators, who have a chokehold on the
nation's economic life, by barring the import into the United States of
goods manufactured in Burma and by freezing the U.S. assets of the
regime's leading generals. These are targeted sanctions that would
punish the military dictators in Burma, those who are directly
responsible for suppressing human rights there.
Nearly 55 years after the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and
only weeks after fighting a war to liberate 24 million Iraqis, the U.S.
Senate must remain steadfast in its resolve to preserve the freedom of
peoples throughout the world.
As a strong advocate for human rights and democratic governance in
Southeast Asia, I call on this body to stand up to the military junta
of Burma by passing this important legislation. We need to send a
message to these thugs that their brutal reign of oppression and terror
does not go unnoticed and will not last.
Mr. McCONNELL. How much time do I have remaining?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Five minutes.
Mr. McCONNELL. I reserve the remainder of my time, and I suggest the
absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I believe I have about 5 minutes
remaining.
Mr. ALEXANDER. That is correct.
Mr. McCONNELL. How much time remains on the other side?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. One minute 48 seconds.
Mr. McCONNELL. Maybe we could get some time on the other side. I
yield the remainder of my time to the Senator from Kansas.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kansas.
Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, I thank my colleagues for allowing me
to speak on this legislation.
The weekend before last, the military junta in Burma, ironically
going by the name of the State Peace and Development Council, staged a
violent clash between a government-supported militia called the United
Solidarity and Development Association and activists of the National
League for Democracy, the NLD.
As reported in the press, during the ensuing assault on the NLD,
these thugs attacked the caravan of supporters led by Nobel Peace Prize
laureate and democratic activist Aung San Suu Kyi and subsequently
detained her and 19 members of the NLD, killed scores of NLD activists
and, in the aftermath, closed down universities and NLD offices in the
country. This is intolerable. Today I hope this institution can stand
tall by roundly condemning this thieving, bantam tyranny that is taking
place in Burma.
The regime claims they are detaining her, a Nobel Peace Prize winner,
and NLD supporters for their safety. They accuse her of causing unrest
and violence and claim she is in danger because of inflammatory
speeches she has been giving on her tour of northern Burma.
I find this accusation to be absolutely ridiculous, but nevertheless,
a common refrain coming from a government known for flaunting its human
rights abuses which include slave labor, rape and forced prostitution,
pressing children into the military, all a carefully constructed
campaign to terrorize the people of Burma and consolidate the petty
kleptocracy.
Aung San Suu Kyi's whereabouts are now known; the UN Secretary
General's envoy Mr. Razali Ishmail is in Rangoon working to negotiate
her release. I cannot bring myself to believe a word of what the SPDC
says. It was reported in the press that she has a serious head injury;
however, today I hear that Mr. Razali has seen her and that she is
unharmed. My colleague from Kentucky and I do not believe it. And the
regime has done nothing to reassure any member of the international
community of their intentions. Aung San Suu Kyi is not free, Burma is
not free.
In fact, this is part of a clear pattern of continually thwarting the
advance of democracy and freedom in Burma--something for which Aung San
Suu Kyi is the living symbol. More than that, she has recruited some of
the most talented and most dedicated young people to her cause.
As reported by yesterday's Washington Post, one of those young people
was a young man by the name of Toe Lwin. This young man, and many
others in NLD like him, dedicated every once of his being to the cause.
Bringing change to Burma and protecting Aung San Suu Kyi were the
things for which he was willing to die.
This young man died trying to protect her. I am told that she sees
all of these dedicated, inspiring young people as her children. I am
sure that it breaks her heart to know that blood has been spilt in this
effort.
We cannot seek a better tribute to this young man's life than by
aiding the cause of democracy by passing this bill.
The SPDC seems like a bunch of bush-league autocrats. But what I want
my colleagues to know is that this group of thugs is not just some
common banana republic or petty dictatorship.
In 1988, the then-called State Law and Order Restoration Council,
SLORC, took power and began its repression of pro-democracy
demonstrations. After National Assembly elections in 1990, which were
poised to overwhelmingly bring to power Aung San Suu Kyi and the NLD,
SLORC annulled the elections, began jailing thousands of democracy
activists, suppressed all political liberties, and periodically placed
Aung San Suu Kyi under house arrest.
And this is just the opening line of the story. These thugs conscript
thousands of their citizens, including children, into the military to
serve as porters and to work on state development projects. In
addition, narcotics is a big business for the ruling Burmese generals;
however, there are some who will claim that we are getting full
cooperation in combatting Burma's trade in heroin and amphetamines.
The most recent International Narcotics Control Strategy Report
published by the Department of State reads, ``Burma is the world's
second largest producer of illicit opium.'' It continues stating ``. .
. no Burma Army Officer over the rank of full Colonel has ever been
prosecuted for drug offenses in Burma. This fact, the prominent role in
Burma of the family of notorious narcotics traffickers, and the
continuance of large-scale narcotics trafficking over the years of
intrusive military rule have given rise to speculation that some senior
military leaders protect or are otherwise involved with narcotics
traffickers.''
Yet I understand there was an active effort by some embedded
bureaucrats to give the junta a free pass on drug certification. We are
not dealing with the boy scouts of Southeast Asia.
I think that is the wrong approach to dealing with the problem of the
SPDC's
[[Page S7700]]
brutal rule. If today's paper is accurate, then it looks as if our
government is beginning to take the correct steps to respond to the
situation. We have put eleven countries on notice, notably Thailand and
China, for their support of Burma.
This may be the mortal blow that weakens the regime. That is why next
Wednesday I have planned hearings to discuss the support for the SPDC
coming from key players in the region. Some of these countries need to
give us some private assurances about their willingness to forgo
continued support of the regime. Others need to be put on notice for
the degree and nature of support for the SPDC junta.
Singapore, North Korea, Russia, and Malaysia have all been in
cooperation or given assistance in the political, economic or military
spheres. I will be inviting members of the administration and the NGO
community to give their knowledge of on-the-ground support for the
SPDC.
This week, the Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra of Thailand is in
town for an important visit with President Bush. It was reported that
the President has already weighed in with the Prime Minister. I hope to
do the same when I attend a luncheon today for the Prime Minister
hosted by Senator Bond.
Because the can predict the perils of dealing with a thieving,
murderous dictatorship, many companies, especially here in the U.S.,
are avoiding doing business with these guys altogether. Department
stores, clothing manufacturers, footwear and apparel companies are all
telling the junta to take a hike.
Maybe the Senate should consider telling them the same.
I note my personal experience. I was on the Thai-Burma border in late
2000. This was on a trip where we were working on the issue of
trafficking in persons, sex trafficking. We found at that point in time
in 2000, and it continues today, one of the highest trafficked areas in
the world was between Burma and Thailand. What was taking place was the
people of Burma were fleeing this totalitarian dictatorship that
brutalized its own people. The people of Burma were fleeing into
Thailand. On that border, then, they were fresh meat for the people who
traffic in persons, primarily for sex exploration, primarily of young
girls. We saw girls 11, 12, 13 years of age, even younger, being
taken--abducted in some cases--and in some cases sold because the
family was so poor, sold into what they thought was a condition they
would serve someone in a home or work in a restaurant. Instead, they
were put in a brothel in Bangkok or someplace else in Thailand to a
horrific environment at this very young age, with most of them
contracting AIDS, tuberculosis, and dying at a young age. This was one
of the key traffic areas of the world. It was being caused by this
government in Burma that cared nothing about its people.
These were the most wonderful people in the world. They were trying
to eke out some mere existence. This was a government that cared
absolutely nothing at all about them.
Now they have gone and arrested the Nobel Prize-winning activist,
democracy activist who has done this in a peaceful way in Burma to try
to bring her country forward. They have taken the next step down the
road on this anarchy of horrific treatment of their own people, a
complete movement against the way the rest of the world is moving.
I support this resolution. It is very timely. I applaud Senator
McConnell for his work. It is important we send this message that this
regime is treating its own people so badly that these sorts of
conditions arise. We need to be on record. The rest of the world needs
to be on record to press this regime to stop persecuting its own people
in such terrible ways.
I hope this will send a message to the regime in Burma and to people
around the rest of the world that we will continue to bring economic
and diplomatic pressure in a quick fashion against this regime in
Burma. This should not wait for years to develop.
Furthermore, there are big questions many times about whether these
sanctions work. Against a big economy there are legitimate questions.
Against a small economy, against a situation in a country such as
Burma, where it is located, I think these work very well and it sends
an extraordinary message to Burma. It also sends a big message to
Thailand, which is a key country for us, to get their attention that
they should not repatriate the Burmese back into Burma and we should
recognize the refugee status for the Burmese in Thailand, a country
that wants to work closely and carefully with us.
I yield the floor.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Kansas for his
contribution. I am not aware of any more speakers on this side.
Mr. LEAHY. Nor on this side. I am willing to yield back the remainder
of the time.
Mr. McCONNELL. Therefore, I ask unanimous consent all time be yielded
back.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. McCONNELL. I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There is a sufficient second.
The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading and was read
the third time.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The bill having been read the third time, the
question is, Shall it pass?
The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. REID. I announce that the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Kerry)
and the Senator from New York (Mr. Schumer) are necessarily absent.
I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from
Massachusetts (Mr. Kerry) would vote ``yea''.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber
desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 97, nays 1, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 220 Leg.]
YEAS--97
Akaka
Alexander
Allard
Allen
Baucus
Bayh
Bennett
Biden
Bingaman
Bond
Boxer
Breaux
Brownback
Bunning
Burns
Byrd
Campbell
Cantwell
Carper
Chafee
Chambliss
Clinton
Cochran
Coleman
Collins
Conrad
Cornyn
Corzine
Craig
Crapo
Daschle
Dayton
DeWine
Dodd
Dole
Domenici
Dorgan
Durbin
Edwards
Ensign
Feingold
Feinstein
Fitzgerald
Frist
Graham (FL)
Graham (SC)
Grassley
Gregg
Hagel
Harkin
Hatch
Hollings
Hutchison
Inhofe
Inouye
Jeffords
Johnson
Kennedy
Kohl
Kyl
Landrieu
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Lincoln
Lott
Lugar
McCain
McConnell
Mikulski
Miller
Murkowski
Murray
Nelson (FL)
Nelson (NE)
Nickles
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Roberts
Rockefeller
Santorum
Sarbanes
Sessions
Shelby
Smith
Snowe
Specter
Stabenow
Stevens
Sununu
Talent
Thomas
Voinovich
Warner
Wyden
NAYS--1
Enzi
NOT VOTING--2
Kerry
Schumer
The bill (S. 1215), as amended, was passed, as follows:
S. 1215
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Burmese Freedom and
Democracy Act of 2003''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress makes the following findings:
(1) The State Peace and Development Council (SPDC) has
failed to transfer power to the National League for Democracy
(NLD) whose parliamentarians won an overwhelming victory in
the 1990 elections in Burma.
(2) The SPDC has failed to enter into meaningful, political
dialogue with the NLD and ethnic minorities and has dismissed
the efforts of United Nations Special Envoy Razali bin Ismail
to further such dialogue.
(3) According to the State Department's ``Report to the
Congress Regarding Conditions in Burma and U.S. Policy Toward
Burma'' dated March 28, 2003, the SPDC has become ``more
confrontational'' in its exchanges with the NLD.
(4) On May 30, 2003, the SPDC, threatened by continued
support for the NLD throughout Burma, brutally attacked NLD
supporters, killed and injured scores of civilians, and
arrested democracy advocate Aung San Suu Kyi and other
activists.
(5) The SPDC continues egregious human rights violations
against Burmese citizens, uses rape as a weapon of
intimidation and torture against women, and forcibly
conscripts child-soldiers for the use in fighting indigenous
ethnic groups.
[[Page S7701]]
(6) The SPDC has demonstrably failed to cooperate with the
United States in stopping the flood of heroin and
methamphetamines being grown, refined, manufactured, and
transported in areas under the control of the SPDC serving to
flood the region and much of the world with these illicit
drugs.
(7) The SPDC provides safety, security, and engages in
business dealings with narcotics traffickers under indictment
by United States authorities, and other producers and
traffickers of narcotics.
(8) The International Labor Organization (ILO), for the
first time in its 82-year history, adopted in 2000, a
resolution recommending that governments, employers, and
workers organizations take appropriate measures to ensure
that their relations with the SPDC do not abet the
government-sponsored system of forced, compulsory, or slave
labor in Burma, and that other international bodies
reconsider any cooperation they may be engaged in with Burma
and, if appropriate, cease as soon as possible any activity
that could abet the practice of forced, compulsory, or slave
labor.
(9) The SPDC has integrated the Burmese military and its
surrogates into all facets of the economy effectively
destroying any free enterprise system.
(10) Investment in Burmese companies and purchases from
them serve to provide the SPDC with currency that is used to
finance its instruments of terror and repression against the
Burmese people.
(11) On April 15, 2003, the American Apparel and Footwear
Association expressed its ``strong support for a full and
immediate ban on U.S. textiles, apparel and footwear imports
from Burma'' and called upon the United States Government to
``impose an outright ban on U.S. imports'' of these items
until Burma demonstrates respect for basic human and labor
rights of its citizens.
(12) The policy of the United States, as articulated by the
President on April 24, 2003, is to officially recognize the
NLD as the legitimate representative of the Burmese people as
determined by the 1990 election.
SEC. 3. BAN AGAINST TRADE THAT SUPPORTS THE MILITARY REGIME
OF BURMA.
(a) General Ban.--
(1) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law
and except as provided in section 9, until such time as the
President determines and certifies to Congress that Burma has
met the conditions described in paragraph (3), no article may
be imported into the United States that is produced, mined,
manufactured, grown, or assembled in Burma.
(2) Ban on imports from certain companies.--The import
restrictions contained in paragraph (1) shall apply to, among
other entities--
(A) the SPDC, any ministry of the SPDC, a member of the
SPDC or an immediate family member of such member;
(B) known narcotics traffickers from Burma or an immediate
family member of such narcotics trafficker;
(C) the Union of Myanmar Economics Holdings Incorporated
(UMEHI) or any company in which the UMEHI has a fiduciary
interest;
(D) the Myanmar Economic Corporation (MEC) or any company
in which the MEC has a fiduciary interest;
(E) the Union Solidarity and Development Association
(USDA); and
(F) any successor entity for the SPDC, UMEHI, MEC, or USDA.
(3) Conditions described.--The conditions described in this
paragraph are the following:
(A) The SPDC has made substantial and measurable progress
to end violations of internationally recognized human rights
including rape, and the Secretary of State, after
consultation with the ILO Secretary General and relevant
nongovernmental organizations, reports to the appropriate
congressional committees that the SPDC no longer
systematically violates workers rights, including the use of
forced and child labor, and conscription of child-soldiers.
(B) The SPDC has made measurable and substantial progress
toward implementing a democratic government including--
(i) releasing all political prisoners;
(ii) allowing freedom of speech and the press;
(iii) allowing freedom of association;
(iv) permitting the peaceful exercise of religion; and
(v) bringing to a conclusion an agreement between the SPDC
and the democratic forces led by the NLD and Burma's ethnic
nationalities on the transfer of power to a civilian
government accountable to the Burmese people through
democratic elections under the rule of law.
(C) Pursuant to the terms of section 706 of the Foreign
Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Year 2003 (Public Law
107-228), Burma has not failed demonstrably to make
substantial efforts to adhere to its obligations under
international counternarcotics agreements and to take other
effective counternarcotics measures, including the arrest and
extradition of all individuals under indictment in the United
States for narcotics trafficking, and concrete and measurable
actions to stem the flow of illicit drug money into Burma's
banking system and economic enterprises and to stop the
manufacture and export of methamphetamines.
(4) Appropriate congressional committees.--In this Act, the
term ``appropriate congressional committees'' means the
Committee on Foreign Relations, the Committee on Finance, and
the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate and the
Committee on International Relations, the Committee on Ways
and Means, and the Committee on Appropriations of the House
of Representatives.
(b) Waiver Authorities.--
(1) In general.--The President may waive the prohibitions
described in this section for any or all products imported
from Burma to the United States if the President determines
and notifies the appropriate congressional committees that to
do so is in the vital national security interest of the
United States.
(2) International obligations.--The President may waive any
provision of this Act found to be in violation of any
international obligations of the United States pursuant to
any final ruling relating to Burma under the dispute
settlement procedures of the World Trade Organization.
SEC. 4. FREEZING ASSETS OF THE BURMESE REGIME IN THE UNITED
STATES.
Not later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this
Act, the Secretary of the Treasury shall direct, and
promulgate regulations to the same, that any United States
financial institution holding funds belonging to the SPDC or
the assets of those individuals who hold senior positions in
the SPDC or its political arm, the Union Solidarity
Development Association, shall promptly report those assets
to the Office of Foreign Assets Control. The Secretary of the
Treasury may take such action as may be necessary to secure
such assets or funds.
SEC. 5. LOANS AT INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS.
The Secretary of the Treasury shall instruct the United
States executive director to each appropriate international
financial institution in which the United States
participates, to oppose, and vote against the extension by
such institution of any loan or financial or technical
assistance to Burma until such time as the conditions
described in section 3(a)(3) are met.
SEC. 6. EXPANSION OF VISA BAN.
(a) In General.--
(1) Visa ban.--The President is authorized to deny visas
and entry to the former and present leadership of the SPDC or
the Union Solidarity Development Association.
(2) Updates.--The Secretary of State shall coordinate on a
biannual basis with representatives of the European Union to
ensure that an individual who is banned from obtaining a visa
by the European Union for the reasons described in paragraph
(1) is also banned from receiving a visa from the United
States.
(b) Publication.--The Secretary of State shall post on the
Department of State's website the names of individuals whose
entry into the United States is banned under subsection (a).
SEC. 7. CONDEMNATION OF THE REGIME AND DISSEMINATION OF
INFORMATION.
(a) In General.--Congress encourages the Secretary of State
to highlight the abysmal record of the SPDC to the
international community and use all appropriate fora,
including the Association of Southeast Asian Nations Regional
Forum and Asian Nations Regional Forum, to encourage other
states to restrict financial resources to the SPDC and
Burmese companies while offering political recognition and
support to Burma's democratic movement including the National
League for Democracy and Burma's ethnic groups.
(b) United States Embassy.--The United States embassy in
Rangoon shall take all steps necessary to provide access of
information and United States policy decisions to media
organs not under the control of the ruling military regime.
SEC. 8. SUPPORT DEMOCRACY ACTIVISTS IN BURMA.
(a) In General.--The President is authorized to use all
available resources to assist Burmese democracy activists
dedicated to nonviolent opposition to the regime in their
efforts to promote freedom, democracy, and human rights in
Burma, including a listing of constraints on such
programming.
(b) Reports.--
(1) First report.--Not later than 3 months after the date
of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of State shall
provide the appropriate congressional committees a
comprehensive report on its short- and long-term programs and
activities to support democracy activists in Burma, including
a list of constraints on such programming.
(2) Report on resources.--Not later than 6 months after the
date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of State shall
provide the appropriate congressional committees a report
identifying resources that will be necessary for the
reconstruction of Burma, after the SPDC is removed from
power, including--
(A) the formation of democratic institutions;
(B) establishing the rule of law;
(C) establishing freedom of the press;
(D) providing for the successful reintegration of military
officers and personnel into Burmese society; and
(E) providing health, educational, and economic
development.
(3) Report on trade sanctions.--Not later than 90 days
before the date that the import restrictions contained in
section 3(a)(1) are to expire, the Secretary of State, in
consultation with the United States Trade Representative and
other appropriate agencies, shall submit to the appropriate
congressional committees, a report on--
[[Page S7702]]
(A) conditions in Burma, including human rights violations,
arrest and detention of democracy activists, forced and child
labor, and the status of dialogue between the SPDC and the
NLD and ethnic minorities;
(B) bilateral and multilateral measures undertaken by the
United States Government and other governments to promote
human rights and democracy in Burma; and
(C) the impact and effectiveness of the provisions of this
Act in furthering the policy objectives of the United States
toward Burma.
SEC. 9. DURATION OF SANCTIONS.
(a) Termination by Request From Democratic Burma.--The
President may terminate any provision in this Act upon the
request of a democratically elected government in Burma,
provided that all the conditions in section 3(a)(3) have been
met.
(b) Continuation of Import Sanctions.--
(1) Expiration.--The import restrictions contained in
section 3(a)(1) shall expire 1 year from the date of
enactment of this Act unless renewed under paragraph (2) of
this section.
(2) Resolution by congress.--The import restrictions
contained in section 3(a)(1) may be renewed annually for a 1-
year period if, prior to the anniversary of the date of
enactment of this Act, and each year thereafter, a renewal
resolution is enacted into law in accordance with subsection
(c).
(c) Renewal Resolutions.--
(1) In general.--For purposes of this section, the term
``renewal resolution'' means a joint resolution of the 2
Houses of Congress, the sole matter after the resolving
clause of which is as follows: ``That Congress approves the
renewal of the import restrictions contained in section
3(a)(1) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act of 2003.''
(2) Procedures.--
(A) In general.--A renewal resolution--
(i) may be introduced in either House of Congress by any
member of such House at any time within the 90-day period
before the expiration of the import restrictions contained in
section 3(a)(1); and
(ii) the provisions of subparagraph (B) shall apply.
(B) Expedited consideration.--The provisions of section 152
(b), (c), (d), (e), and (f) of the Trade Act of 1974 (19
U.S.C. 2192 (b), (c), (d), (e), and (f)) apply to a renewal
resolution under this Act as if such resolution were a
resolution described in section 152(a) of the Trade Act of
1974.
Mr. SANTORUM. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________