[Congressional Record Volume 150, Number 57 (Thursday, April 29, 2004)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4702-S4709]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. McCONNELL (for himself, Mrs. Feinstein, Mr. McCain, Mr. 
        Leahy, Mr. Brownback, Mr. Daschle, Mrs. Dole, Ms. Mikulski, Mr. 
        Burns, Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Allen, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Nickles, Mr. 
        Corzine, Mr. Santorum, Mr. Biden, Mr. Feingold, Mr. Alexander, 
        Mr. Allard, Mr. Bennett, Mr. Bunning, Mr. Campbell, Mr. 
        Chambliss, Mr. Cochran, Mr. Domenici, Mr. Frist, Mrs. 
        Hutchison, Mr. Kohl, Mr. Kyl, Mr. Lugar, Ms. Murkowski, Mr. 
        Smith, Mr. Specter, and Mr. Voinovich):
  S.J. Res. 36. A joint resolution approving the renewal of import 
restrictions contained in Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act of 2003; to 
the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I, along with Senators Feinstein, 
McCain, Leahy, Brownback, Daschle, Dole, Mikulski, Burns, Clinton, 
Allen, Edwards, Nickles, Corzine, Biden, Feingold and Santorum, am 
introducing today a joint resolution renewing import sanctions against 
Burma. My colleagues may recall that these sanctions--along with 
several other restrictions against the State Peace and Development 
Council (SPDC) in Rangoon--were included in the Burmese Freedom and 
Democracy Act, which was signed into law by President Bush on July 28, 
2003.
  The act received broad support in the Senate. Sixty-one members 
cosponsored the bill which passed in record time by a vote of 97-1. Our 
quick action last year sent an unequivocal message to the SPDC that its 
ambush and attack on the National League for Democracy (NLD) and 
freedom in Burma would not go unpunished.
  Today, we need to send the same strong message. America must continue 
to lead the world's democracies in supporting the struggle for freedom 
in Burma.
  My colleagues will be dismayed to learn that since last year's 
horrific SPDC-orchestrated massacre there has been no progress toward 
reconciliation and democracy in Burma. Thirteen-hundred prisoners of 
conscience continue to suffer in squalid Burmese prisons for advocating 
freedoms that most of us take for granted--including thought, speech 
and association.
  Burmese democracy leader Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and other NLD leaders 
continue to be under house arrest and surveillance by the SPDC, and the 
majority of NLD party offices remain

[[Page S4703]]

forcibly closed; United Nations and Thai efforts at engagement with the 
junta--through repeated visits to Rangoon and the so-called ``Bangkok 
Process''--have predictably failed; according to the White House, Burma 
``failed demonstrably'' in counternarcotics efforts, allowing drug 
gangs to freely operate inside Burma and amphetamine-type stimulants to 
proliferate throughout the region, posing a ``major threat to national 
security and public health''; and, finally, the repressive and 
abhorrent SPDC policies of murder, rape, forced labor, forced 
relocation and child soldiers continue unabated.

  Just yesterday, we learned from credible sources that 11 NLD 
supporters arrested in the wake of last year's premeditated attack were 
sentenced by the regime from 7 to 22 years in prison. This is in 
addition to the death sentences given to a Burmese sports writer who 
complained about soccer related corruption and to three Burmese men for 
having contact with the United Nations International Labor 
Organization.
  Should my colleagues need a second opinion, let me quote Secretary of 
State Colin Powell in a March 10 Congressional hearing: ``I see no 
improvement in the situation. Aung San Suu Kyi remains unable to 
participate in public, political life in Burma and we will not ignore 
that.'' When I asked Secretary Powell in an April 8 Foreign Operations 
Subcommittee hearing whether he supported the continuation of sanctions 
against Burma, his answer was straightforward and clear: ``Yes.''
  The Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act denies Burma 13 percent of its 
export market (according to CIA figures), visas for SPDC officials and 
their families, and, above all, legitimacy. In addition, $13 million 
worth of financial transactions to Burma have been blocked by the 
Treasury Department. While palpable impacts, these sanctions alone will 
not push the SPDC in the direction of meaningful reconciliation with 
the NLD and ethnic minorities.
  South African Archbishop Desmond Tutu--no stranger to the struggle 
for freedom and justice--said earlier this year: ``To dismantle 
apartheid [in South Africa] took not only commitment, faith and hard 
work, but also intense international pressure and sanctions. In Burma, 
the regime has ravaged the country, and the people, to fund its illegal 
rule. Governments and international institutions must move past 
symbolic gestures and cut the lifelines to Burma's military regime 
through well-implemented sanctions.''
  Amerca already cut that lifeline; it is time for other democracies to 
do the same. For freedom's sake, our allies and the European Union must 
impose targeted sanction regimes on Burma. If they are unwilling to 
take such action in support of the courageous and determined people of 
Burma, they should act for the sake of the security and stability of 
the region. Burma's exports to its immediate neighbors include illicit 
narcotics, HIV/AIDS, refugees and trafficked women and children. 
Further, Rangoon's connections with Russia and North Korea, in 
particular, deserve closer scrutiny by foreign capitals and the United 
Nations.
  If my colleagues haven't done so already, they should read Monday's 
Washington Post op-ed entitled ``A Need to Act on Burma'' by our 
colleague from Arizona and former-Secretary of State Madeleine 
Albright. I agree with their assertion that we should not be duped by 
SPDC window dressing in the weeks leading up to the May 17 
constitutional convention charade. Even if Suu Kyi is released before 
that date it is not sufficient, as there are no guarantees for her 
security, no assurances that she will be able to freely express her 
views to the nation or to meet with ethnic leaders, and no sure bet 
that the junta will grant visas to journalists to travel to Burma.
  The op-ed also raises the question of repercussions for the continued 
perpetuation of the status quo in Burma by China, Thailand, India, and 
other Asian nations. I look forward to exploring with my colleagues the 
most appropriate and effective ways that we can encourage those 
countries to support the legitimately elected leaders of Burma. If no 
change is in the offing, Burma's chairmanship of the Association of 
Southeast Asian Nations in 2006 will be a tremendous loss of face to 
that organization and each individual member state.
  Let me close by saying that sanctions must remain in place until 
Burma embarks on an irreversible path toward reconciliation and 
democracy. I intend to work closely with my colleagues--particularly 
the chair and ranking member of the Finance Committee--to ensure that 
the Senate acts just as decisively and expeditiously as we did last 
year. To do anything less would be to betray Suu Kyi and all those 
struggling for freedom and justice in Burma.
  I ask unanimous consent that the following items be printed in the 
Record: A copy of the referenced Washington Post op-ed; a copy of a 
Boston Globe editorial entitled ``No Compromise on Burma'' dated March 
29, 2004; a copy of a Washington Post op-ed by the Chairman of the 
Senate Foreign Relations Committee entitled ``Seeds of Trouble from 
Burma'' dated September 28, 2003; a copy of a tribute to Suu Kyi 
authored by rock star Bono in Time Magazine's recent special edition on 
the world's 100 most influential people; and a letter supporting the 
renewal of import sanctions by the President and CEO of the American 
Apparel and Footwear Association.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

               [From the Washington Post, Sept. 28, 2003]

                      Seeds of Trouble From Burma

                         (By Richard G. Lugar)

       The military junta that rules Burma has long been known as 
     a group committed to retaining power at cost. The price has 
     been paid mainly by Burma's citizens, but the consequences 
     may now spread well beyond Burma's borders.
       The generals have killed thousands of democracy supporters 
     since the student protests in 1988 and waged war on ethnic 
     insurgents. To tighten their grip on the population, over the 
     past 15 years they have doubled the size of the military, 
     which now consumes 40 percent of the budget, at the expense 
     of spending on health and education.
       Consequently, hundreds of thousands of their citizens have 
     died as a result of the broken-down health care system. The 
     generals who run the country are notorious for their 
     widespread use of forced labor, which the International Labor 
     Organization calls ``a contemporary form of slavery.''
       The junta has maintained these abhorrent policies despite 
     sanctions, aid cutoffs and repeated denunciations by many 
     Western countries, including the United States.
       Yet it makes the headlines only when it commits an 
     especially acute outrage, such as that of last May 30, when 
     pro-government militia crashed a political rally near 
     Mandalay and murdered several bodyguards and supporters of 
     Nobel laureate Aung San Suu Kyi, the fearless democracy 
     crusader who had been freed only last year from a lengthy 
     house arrest.
       The junta rearrested Suu Kyi, shut down offices of her 
     political party and detained her at a secret location. She 
     returned home Friday for a new stint of indefinite house 
     arrest.
       I am pleased that the Senate reacted quickly in June to put 
     pressure on the junta by voting for a ban on all Burmese 
     imports. Until now this record of bloody repression and 
     economic ruin has primarily victimized the long-suffering 
     Burmese people, and world attention has often drifted away 
     from what some consider an internal problem. But it is time 
     to take a closer look. Burma's generals are quietly moving in 
     new directions that could make that dismal country a source 
     of instability throughout South and Southeast Asia.
       Strategically situated between regional rivals India and 
     China, Burma is seeking to leverage the two powers' battle 
     for influence.
       China is the regime's major arms supplier and has assumed 
     significant economic power over the country, recently 
     extending debt relief and a $200 million loan to Burma, which 
     has been cut off from most other external funding. China, 
     reports indicate, has built a port and shipyard south of 
     Rangoon to help export products from China's landlocked 
     western provinces.
       India, concerned about China's rising dominance, has 
     stepped up its relations with Burma. Indian Prime Minister 
     Atal Bihari Vajpayee met with the Burmese foreign minister 
     earlier this year, the highest-level contact between the two 
     countries in more than a decade, and India is also reportedly 
     building a port on Burma's coast.
       Improving ties with regional powers is not necessarily a 
     bad thing, especially if they would push Burma toward more 
     civilized behavior.
       But neither Beijing nor New Delhi has shown any such 
     inclination. Instead the two huge neighbors are using Burma 
     as a pawn in their rivalry, making it a potential source of 
     friction, not a buffer. Japan is increasingly concerned about 
     China's penetration of Burma, and it was to counter China's 
     influence that the regional grouping of smaller

[[Page S4704]]

     countries, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations 
     (ASEAN), decided to admit Burma as a member several years 
     ago. These countries see now that the junta was cynically 
     using them to try to gain legitimacy.
       More troubling is the news that Burma, one of the poorest 
     countries on earth, has contracted with Russia for a nuclear 
     reactor. Both sides insist it is for medical research 
     purposes, but even if that's true, it would add an 
     unnecessary proliferation risk to a world where terrorists 
     are on the prowl for nuclear material. Some 300 Burmese have 
     been in Russia receiving training to operate the facility, 
     and Burma has also bought 10 MiG-29 fighter jets from Russia.
       Most disturbing of all Burma is renewing ties with North 
     Korea that were cut off after North Korean agents in 1983 set 
     off a bomb in Rangoon that killed 21 people, including four 
     visiting South Korean cabinet members. Besides possibly 
     reestablishing formal diplomatic relations, the two have held 
     high-level discussions on military cooperation.
       The link-up of these two parish states can only spell 
     trouble. North Korea's main export is dangerous weapons 
     technology, and there have been reports that Burma is getting 
     missiles and other arms from Pyongyang.
       These developments have been largely overlooked as we 
     concentrated on the war in Iraq, challenges in the Middle 
     East and unpredictable developments on the Korean peninsula. 
     But they are the seeds of a major threat to Asian security 
     and stability. The world should take notice, and the United 
     States needs to make Burma a priority in its relations with 
     Russia, China, India and ASEAN so that we can forge a 
     multilateral plan to turn the generals from their dangerous 
     course.
                                  ____


                 [From the Boston Globe, Mar. 29, 2004]

                         No Compromise on Burma

       The brutal criminality of the military junta ruling Burma 
     has unified disparate elements along the American political 
     spectrum. In hearings on Burma held by subcommittees of the 
     House International Relations Committee last week, a rare 
     solidarity among both Democrats and Republicans was on 
     display.
       The current regime in Rangoon is complicit in narcotics 
     trafficking, ethnic cleansing, forced labor, gruesome abuse 
     of ethnic minorities, and the violent suppression of free 
     speech and political opposition.
       In response to a deliberate massacre of fellow democrats 
     traveling last May with Nobel Peace Prize laureate Aung San 
     Suu Kyi, the Bush administration last July signed into law 
     tough sanctions that ban imports from Burma. The House 
     hearings were in preparation for renewal of those sanctions.
       Without mincing his words, Lorne Craner, the State 
     Department's assistant secretary for human rights, told the 
     lawmakers that notwithstanding hints about democratization 
     dropped by the junta's chairman, Than Shwe, and his 
     accomplices, the outlaw regime in Rangoon has not taken steps 
     that would justify the lifting of sanctions. ``For all the 
     hype about a `road map for democracy,' nothing has changed 
     for the better for democracy or human rights in Burma,'' 
     Craner said.
       The junta has intimated it might release Suu Kyi from house 
     arrest in April. This would be a gesture the people of Burma 
     would welcome, as would everyone around the world who 
     cherishes human rights and democracy. Suu Kyi narrowly 
     escaped being killed in the assault that the regime staged 
     last May. Over the years she has accepted painful personal 
     sacrifices for the sake of democracy in Burma--without ever 
     deviating from her devotion to the principles of nonviolence.
       As much as her compatriots long for the release of Suu Kyi, 
     however, that will not by itself be enough to justify the 
     lifting of U.S. sanctions on the junta. Her party, the 
     National League for Democracy, won 80 percent of the seats in 
     Parliament in a 1990 election--a popular verdict the military 
     regime still refuses to accept. Until Than Shwe and the other 
     uniformed thugs on the junta complete what assistant 
     secretary Craner called ``an irreversible transition to 
     democracy,'' sanctions should remain in place.
       Suu Kyi's fellow Nobel peace prize winner Desmond Tutu has 
     written: ``As in South Africa, the people and legitimate 
     leaders of Burma have called for sanctions . . . To dismantle 
     apartheid took not only commitment, faith and hard work, but 
     also intense international pressure and sanctions.''
       Tutu's wisdom should be heeded not only by Washington but 
     also by the European Union, which is currently considering 
     targeted sanctions on timber and gems, direct sources of 
     junta revenue.
                                  ____


               [From the Washington Post, April 27, 2004]

                         A Need To Act on Burma

                (By John McCain and Madeleine Albright)

       ``Apathy in the face of systematic human rights abuses is 
     immoral. One either supports justice and freedom or one 
     supports injustice and bondage.'' So said Archbishop Desmond 
     Tutu, the South African Nobel laureate and anti-apartheid 
     leader, who knows something about the struggle for human 
     freedom in the face of tyranny.
       The world's democracies have a common moral obligation to 
     promote justice and freedom. In few places is this obligation 
     more acute than in Burma, a country in which a band of thugs, 
     led by Gen. Than Shwe, controls the population through 
     violence and terror. The regime has a record of unchecked 
     repression. It has murdered political opponents, used child 
     soldiers and forced labor, and employed rape as a weapon of 
     war. Nearly one year ago the Burmese military junta launched 
     an orchestrated, violent attack against democracy leader Aung 
     San Suu Kyi and hundreds of her supporters. Since then the 
     regime has kept more than 1,000 political activists 
     imprisoned, including elected members of parliament. It 
     recently sentenced three Burmese citizens to death for 
     contacting representatives of the International Labor 
     Organization.
       The Burmese junta, with the cynical support of neighboring 
     governments, has announced a ``road map to democracy,'' 
     beginning with a constitutional convention in May. The 
     convention is expected to be stage-managed by the junta, 
     which has offered no meaningful participation to Suu Kyi's 
     National League for Democracy, no timetable for progress 
     toward a political transition, no release of political 
     prisoners and no guarantee that the military will cede 
     control to democratically elected leaders. Instead, the 
     junta's proposals seem designed to institutionalize military 
     control by creating a veneer of civilian authority, while 
     meeting only the minimum expectations of Western democracies 
     in order to avoid further sanctions.
       The Burmese regime's recent actions demonstrate that years 
     of international engagement and patience have not made the 
     dictatorship more humane, reasonable or open to accommodation 
     with its political opponents. On the contrary, it is only in 
     response to international pressure that the regime has made 
     even the smallest moves toward a political settlement with 
     the democratic opposition. The lesson is clear: The world's 
     democracies and Burma's neighbors must press the junta until 
     it is willing to negotiate an irreversible transition to 
     democratic rule.
       The legitimacy, authority and commitment of Burma's 
     democratic leaders to govern their country is not in doubt. 
     But the international commitment to Burma's democratic 
     transformation remains uncertain. The Western democracies and 
     Burma's neighbors should immediately take three steps to 
     bolster Burma's legitimate democratic leaders.
       First, Congress should promptly renew, and the president 
     should sign into law, the ban on Burma's imports enacted into 
     law last July. These sanctions, which are set to expire 
     after a review period beginning Friday, are supported by 
     Burma's National League for Democracy. The restrictions 
     have made it more difficult for the Burmese military to 
     tap financial assets abroad, travel or accumulate revenue 
     through trade. The European Union, whose member 
     democracies care deeply about protecting human rights, and 
     whose trade and assistance programs give it critical 
     leverage in Southeast Asia, is set to announce a new 
     Common Position on Burma on Thursday. As part of this new 
     policy, the EU should also initiate targeted sanctions 
     against the regime.
       Second, the EU and the United States, with support from 
     Asian nations, should urge the junta to implement immediately 
     the provisions of the U.N. Commission for Human Rights and 
     the U.N. General Assembly resolutions--including democracy, 
     the rule of law and respect for human rights. The United 
     States and the EU should also formally place the issue on the 
     agenda of the U.N. Security Council, and work urgently toward 
     a resolution threatening credible sanctions against the 
     Burmese regime unless it initiates meaningful progress toward 
     democracy.
       Third, China, Thailand, India and other Asian nations 
     uncomfortable with a tougher response to the junta's crimes 
     must understand that diplomatic obfuscation and obstruction 
     on Burma will profoundly affect their broader bilateral 
     relationships with the Western democracies. Thailand in 
     particular should consider this point when it convenes its 
     planned international conference to discuss what it 
     optimistically calls ``Burma's progress toward democracy.''
       Beyond these steps, the United States, Europe and Asian 
     countries must demand the unconditional release of Aung San 
     Suu Kyi and her fellow political prisoners, but make clear 
     that the releases, while necessary, are insufficient. In 
     addition, they should continue calls for a political 
     settlement that reflects the results of the free and fair 
     elections held in 1990. This settlement must include a 
     central, determinative role for the National League for 
     Democracy.
       In another era, a dissident playwright named Vaclav Havel 
     wrote of the ``power of the powerless'' to overcome rule by 
     fear and force, at a time when such a revolution in human 
     freedom seemed impossible. The international community today 
     has the power to help the powerless inside Burma throw off 
     the shackles of tyranny. It is time to assume this moral 
     responsibility. It is time to act.
                                  ____


                  Aung San Suu Kyi--Unbearable Choices

                               (By Bono)

       It's hard not to become a monster when you are trying to 
     defeat one. Aung San Suu Kyi is the moral leader of Myanmar, 
     the country more correctly known as Burma. She has been, in 
     effect, under house arrest since 1989.
       Why? First, because of the military juntas who came to 
     power in a bloody coup in 1962, and have been running the 
     country with a truncheon ever since. Second, because of us.

[[Page S4705]]

     There has been no real roar against these human rights 
     abusers, just the odd bark. Yet even single-party democracies 
     check their mail. They're not just muscle; they're vain. Even 
     juntas measure just how many boos and hisses they can get 
     away with. Suu Kyi's peaceful bloody-mindedness is driven by 
     courage, but her captors' bloody bloody-mindedness is driven 
     by fear--fear of losing the business they are running for 
     themselves.
       Suu Kyi is a real hero in an age of phony phone-in 
     celebrity, which hands out that title freely to the most 
     spoiled and underqualified. Her quiet voice of reason makes 
     the world look noisy, mad; it is a low mantra of grace in an 
     age of terror, a reminder of everything we take for granted 
     and just what it can take to get it. Thinking of her, you 
     can't help but use anachronistic language of duty and 
     personal sacrifice.
       U2 wrote the song Walk On to honor this amazing woman who 
     put family second to country, who for her convictions made an 
     unbearable choice--not to see her sons grow and not to be 
     with her husband as he lost his life to a long and painful 
     cancer. Suu Kyi, with an idea too big for any jail and a 
     spirit too strong for any army, changes our view--as only 
     real heroes can--of what we believe to be possible. The jury 
     is still out on whether we deserve the faith she has put in 
     us.
       Walk On won record of the year at the Grammys, a very proud 
     moment. But in front of an audience of millions, I did what 
     I've begged others not to do. I forgot to say thank you to 
     the woman in front of the song. Thank you.
                                  ____

                                                American Apparel &


                                         Footwear Association,

                                                    April 5, 2004.
     Hon. Mitch McConnell,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator McConnell: Last year, you were instrumental in 
     an effort that led to the successful enactment of the Burmese 
     Freedom and Democracy Act of 2003 to send a clear and 
     unmistakable message that the United States is not interested 
     in doing business with regimes such as the one that brutally 
     enslaves the people of Burma. The American Apparel & Footwear 
     Association in proud to have supported this historic measure.
       This landmark legislation included a total ban on imports 
     from Burma. As you may recall, the import ban will expire 
     unless Congress passes, and the President signs into law, a 
     one-year renewal by the end of July.
       Since this law took effect, the ruling military junta in 
     Burma has shown no willingness to address the many problems 
     that made these sanctions necessary. Indeed, as the most 
     recent State Department Human Rights report (in what appears 
     to be an echo of more than a decade of similar reports) 
     states, ``The Government's extremely poor human rights record 
     worsened [in 2003], and it continued to commit numerous 
     serious abuses.'' Moreover, last week, State Department 
     officials told the House International Relations Committee, 
     ``Sanctions are a key component of our policy in bringing 
     democracy to Burma and have been a key source of support for 
     the morale of many democracy activists.''
       Now is the time to reinforce our sanctions tools against 
     this regime, and, more importantly, to actively seek similar 
     steps from other countries. Accordingly, we urge you to 
     introduce as soon as possible the legislation necessary to 
     renew this import ban, as articulated in Section (9)(b)(2) of 
     the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act of 2003.
       We look forward to working with you to see this renewal 
     swiftly considered and enacted.
       Please accept my best regards,
           Sincerely,
                                                   Kevin M. Burke,
                                                  President & CEO.

  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I want to take a moment to provide my 
colleagues with insights into how serious and dedicated those who 
support the struggle for freedom in Burma remain.
  Since the enactment of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act in July 
2003, numerous colleagues and I have written to the administration and 
the United Nations in support of democracy in Burma. The following is a 
list of those letters that I have initiated or signed--but it is by no 
means an exhaustive list as it does not include any letters individual 
members may have sent themselves:
  August 1, 2003: a letter to President Bush signed by myself and 
Senators Feinstein, Brownback, and Leahy expressing concern with 
Thailand's lack of support for the struggle of freedom in Burma.
  September 12, 2003: a letter to Secretary Powell signed by myself 
encouraging him to bring up the plight of Suu Kyi and other Burmese 
democracy activists with the United Nations and all Security Council 
members, particularly China.
  September 30, 2003: a letter to President Bush signed by myself and 
Senators Feinstein, McCain, Hollings, Santorum, Graham, Allen, Dodd, 
Sessions, Mikulski, Campbell, Clinton, Smith, Murray, Collins, 
Feingold, Edwards, Bennett, Landrieu, Burns, Cantwell, Corzine, Wyden, 
Brownback, Lautenberg, Kohl, Murkowski, Bunning, Lieberman, Sarbanes, 
Harkins, Dayton, Voinovich, Leahy, and Durbin urging his support for 
Thailand to play a more constructive role within ASEAN to promote 
genuine national reconciliation in Burma.
  November 24, 2004: a letter to U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan 
signed by myself and Senators Feinstein, McCain, and Brownback calling 
on the U.N. to assume a leadership role to enforce the will of the 
international community in recognizing the results of the 1990 
elections.
  March 1, 2004: a letter to President Bush signed by myself and 
Senators Feinstein, McCain and Representatives Lantos, King and Pitts 
urging continued sanctions against Burma and increased engagement with 
the EU.
  March 29, 2004: a letter to Secretary Powell signed by myself urging 
him to use the Berlin donor conference on Afghanistan to work the Burma 
issue with the EU and Japan.
  I would be remiss if I did not acknowledge the support and leadership 
of Senators Feinstein and McCain. Both have stood steadfastly with the 
people of Burma. They are champions of freedom in that country, and I 
am pleased and proud to once again work with them on this issue.
  The partnership between Congress and senior members of the 
Administration on Burma has been productive and commendable. I look 
forward to working with President Bush, Secretary Powell and others on 
this important issue throughout this calendar year.
  This joint resolution will renew sanctions against Burma for an 
additional year.
  Roughly a year ago, Senator McCain, Senator Feinstein, and I came to 
the Senate floor to talk about the arrest and reincarceration of Aung 
San Suu Kyi, the hero of the Burma democracy.
  To refresh everyone's memory, she and her party won an overwhelming 
landslide election back in 1990 when the military thugs who run the 
country--mistakenly, from there point of view--allowed an election. The 
NLD and Suu Kyi won virtually 80 percent of the vote and were never 
allowed to take over. She was then essentially put under house arrest 
and has been mostly under house arrest all these years. Here we are 
some 14 years later.
  During that time, her husband passed away while living in England. 
She didn't get to visit him because she knew if she went to England, 
she would never be allowed back into the country. She is the symbol of 
Burmese freedom and democracy and has been under house arrest all these 
years.
  A little over roughly this month last year, she was allowed to go out 
and go around the country. Her motorcade was attacked and a number of 
people were killed. She was injured and was sent into confinement once 
again--raising the issue again in the public mind, which, 
unfortunately, has not been in the forefront as often as it should have 
been over the years. Burma for many people has been sort of out of 
sight and out of mind. It has not enjoyed the kind of international 
attention that repression deserves.
  What Senator McCain, Senator Feinstein, and I have been trying to do 
is lead the United States to have a more proactive interest in this. 
That is what the Burma sanctions bill is about. It passed last June and 
was signed by the President Last July. Secretary Powell was before the 
Foreign Operations Subcommittee a few weeks ago, and he indicated that 
the administration supports renewal of these sanctions for an 
additional year. That is what the joint resolution I just introduced on 
behalf of Senator Feinstein, Senator McCain, and others will do.
  Sanctions have had some impact. We all know sanctions have mixed 
results in bringing down regimes. Frequently, they do not work, but 
there is one really classic example of a place where international 
sanctions made a difference, and that was changing the regime in South 
Africa. In that particular instance, the United States led and the rest 
of the world followed, and the sanctions became so widespread and the 
pressure so intense that it actually brought about a change in the 
regime in South Africa, and the majority there was allowed to take 
power.
  We have had a difficult time getting the kind of international 
cooperation

[[Page S4706]]

on sanctions on Burma we would like to see, but we have started down 
that path.
  This bill, which was signed last year, this Burma sanctions bill, 
spurred other nations to toughen their stance against Burma, denied the 
military regime 13 percent of its export market, and blocked $13 
million in financial transactions to Burma. That is not a huge amount 
of money but it is a start. If the other countries in that area of the 
world, the ASEAN countries, and the Europeans, would give the attention 
to this that it deserves, we could have meaningful international 
sanctions that really bite.
  The European Union and the U.N. will, frankly, have to be much more 
supportive of freedom in Burma. Both need to be much more proactive 
than they have been if this is going to work.
  Bishop Tutu, with whom we are all familiar, the South African bishop, 
believes if we had the kind of international pressure and cooperation 
on Burma sanctions that we had on South African sanctions, it could, 
indeed, bring about a change in the regime in Burma.
  My friend Senator McCain and I have had an opportunity to discuss 
this issue off and on over the years. He had a unique opportunity, 
which I have never experienced. I have gotten notes from Aung San Suu 
Kyi but never actually had a chance to meet her. I know Senator McCain 
had that opportunity. He and I both have been inspired by the example 
she has set. I believe, am I not correct, Senator McCain, you dealt 
with her in your most recent book as an example of the kind of courage 
that should be widely applauded?
  Mr. McCAIN. I thank the Senator. Mr. President, I ask unanimous 
consent that the Senator from Kentucky and I be allowed to engage in a 
dialog.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Ensign). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  Mr. McCAIN. Senator McConnell, I thank you and Senator Feinstein for 
your leadership on this issue. What you have done last year is 
important. It is very important again this year.
  Senator McConnell, you put your finger on one of the real tough 
aspects of this. People all over Burma, including the members of the 
National League for Democracy, the party that was overwhelmingly 
elected to take power and run the country of Burma, are grateful to us. 
It is very tough for opposition within a country to support sanctions 
which hurt that country economically. Yet this organization, which she 
leads, supports sanctions because of the terrible things this group of 
gangsters have done to their country.
  Senator McConnell, you point out very importantly, apartheid was 
overthrown in South Africa because of a united front which the United 
States led, an issue in which you were heavily involved. Now the 
Europeans seem to be dragging their feet.
  We have quite often heard--sometimes justified, sometimes 
unjustified--criticism from our European friends about our lack of 
attention to human rights, too much attention to politics, et cetera. 
This is an opportunity for our European friends to join us and bring 
about the freedom of the Burmese people--I refuse to call it Myanmar--
the Burmese people, free this great Nobel Peace Prize winner and spread 
democracy and freedom through the world.

  I thank again Senator McConnell for his leadership. This legislation 
would not have been passed without the leadership of you and Senator 
Feinstein. I am very grateful.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Thank you very much, I say to my friend from Arizona.
  He was mentioning the fact that we, this country, is frequently 
criticized because it does not take a multilateral approach to 
difficult issues. What we have been advocating as aggressively as we 
can is a widespread multilateral, multinational approach to dealing 
with this Myanmar regime, which no one defends but seems to be allowed 
to continue to operate because they are out of sight and out of mind. 
Here we are advocating a multilateral approach. As the Senator from 
Arizona points out, where are the Europeans?
  Mr. McCAIN. I think we need to make this a very high priority both in 
the United Nations and with the European Union and with others. I know 
Senator McConnell is very familiar with this brave woman and her 
followers. A lot of Americans, unfortunately, are not.
  Three Burmese citizens were recently sentenced to death for 
contacting representatives of the International Labor Organization. 
They were sentenced to death for contacting members of the 
International Labor Organization. This woman has been kept under house 
arrest. Her followers have been beaten and killed. The cruelties, the 
unspeakable cruelties that have been inflicted on the Burmese people by 
these thugs are incredible.
  Senator McConnell, recently we were talking about Iraq and freeing 
the people of Iraq. We celebrated the 10-year anniversary of Rwanda and 
we said never again. Eight hundred thousand people were killed in 
Rwanda and we said never again. After the Holocaust, we said never 
again. Are we going to look back on Burma and say never again after 
thousands of people have been tortured and murdered and imprisoned and 
mistreated?
  Security forces, according to national organizations, continue to 
commit extrajudicial killings, rape, forcibly relocate persons, and the 
use of forced labor. It is going on. Are we some years from now going 
to say never again? Are we internationally going to exert the pressures 
of which we are capable--by the way, including our friends in ASEAN who 
took Burma into ASEAN with the announced intention of reforming this 
gang of thugs?
  Mr. McCONNELL. And the ASEAN meeting is scheduled to be in Burma in a 
few years.
  Mr. McCAIN. Remarkable in itself. What kind of an organization can 
call itself an advocate of freedom and democracy and have a meeting in 
the center of a repressive outrageous gang of thugs?
  Mr. McCONNELL. It was a stunning decision to schedule the meeting 
there. And now, if they stick with the schedule, I wonder how ASEAN can 
explain their tolerance of this regime? Give this regime nuclear 
weapons and it would look very much like North Korea, would it not, I 
ask my friend?
  Mr. McCAIN. That is an excellent point. One of the reasons, perhaps, 
we do not pay as much attention to them is because they do not have 
weapons of mass destruction. The only difference between them and 
Pyongyang is that they do not and the North Koreans do. That is a heck 
of a comment on the attention of us.

  I don't want to take too much time, but I will relate a story with 
which Senator McConnell is familiar. Aung San Suu Kyi was married while 
in England to a wonderful man and has two sons. A few years ago, a very 
short time ago, her husband was dying in England. This gang of thugs 
said that she could, of course, go with her husband--he was not allowed 
to come to Burma--to be with her husband while he was dying but she 
could not come back. So these unspeakable characters would not allow 
her to go be with her husband as he died.
  This is a remarkable statement of her courage and dedication and also 
remarkable commentary on the kind of people with whom we are dealing. 
The next time the delegate from the U.N., the special delegate--they 
call it Myanmar--come to see us, our European friends come to see us 
and talk about powers of persuasion, remind them of that story. I think 
it would be very difficult to argue that these people are rational or 
willing to listen to reason.
  Again, I thank Senator McConnell for all of his hard work.
  Mr. McCONNELL. If I could say to my friend from Arizona, staff 
reminds me, Burma takes the chairmanship of ASEAN in 2006. They 
actually take the chairmanship. That is a completely absurd and 
unacceptable result.
  Mr. McCAIN. Americans are great people. We are providing a service 
today with your and Senator Feinstein's legislation to bring attention 
to the plight of the people halfway around the world and their noble 
and courageous leader who has been a Nobel Peace Prize winner.
  Every once in a while we do something very worthwhile around here and 
I thank the Senator for his leadership.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Kentucky and 
the Senator from Arizona for their words. I had hoped to join them on 
the floor earlier, but I was in the Judiciary

[[Page S4707]]

Committee. So I am very pleased to be able to be here now to say a few 
words in support of this effort.
  I first became involved in the Burmese, or Myanmar, dilemma back in 
1995-1996 with then-Senator William Cohen, and we offered some 
legislation at that time. So we have had the opportunity to follow this 
situation. I then worked with Senator McConnell a year ago on this 
legislation. And now I am very pleased to support the renewal of the 
sanctions imposed on Burma by the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act of 
2003.
  Last year, in response to a brutal and vicious coordinated assault by 
progovernment paramilitary thugs on members of the National League for 
Democracy (NLD), and the arrest and detention of NLD's leader, the 
Nobel Peace Price winner, Aung San Suu Kyi, the U.S. Congress 
overwhelmingly passed this act. The purpose was to impose a complete 
import ban on products from Burma.
  Working together, the Congress and the administration demonstrated 
our determination to put pressure on the ruling State Peace and 
Development Council--that is the military junta formerly known as the 
SLORC--to release Suu Kyi, and also to respect the 1990 elections 
decisively won by the National League for Democracy party in Burma and 
put Burma on an irreversible path of national reconciliation and 
democracy. One year later, it is clear that the SPDC has failed to make 
substantial and measurable progress toward implementing a democratic 
government to have those sanctions lifted.
  The junta has failed. The world has condemned the arrest of Aung San 
Suu Kyi. They have called for her unconditional release. She still 
remains under house arrest. NLD Vice-Chairman U Tin Oo also remains in 
custody.
  Last August, the junta proposed a seven-point ``roadmap'' to 
democracy. That included a national convention to take place the 
following month to draft a new constitution. Yet there is no timetable 
for restoration of democracy, no assurance that the junta will give up 
power, and no meaningful participation for Suu Kyi and her party.
  Numerous human rights abuses, including torture, forced labor, rape, 
and sex trafficking continue unabated.
  The most recent State Department report indicates that:

       The Government's extremely poor human rights record 
     worsened [in 2003] and it continued to commit numerous 
     abuses.

  Recently, the junta sentenced three Burmese citizens to death for one 
thing: for meeting with representatives of the ILO, the International 
Labor Organization. That is how repressive this regime is. If you meet 
with an organization not favored by the government, you could be 
sentenced to death.
  Mr. President, 1,300 political prisoners are still in jail, many of 
them elected parliamentarians. According to the State Department, three 
political prisoners died in custody last year.
  The government engages in the production and distribution of opium 
and methamphetamine.
  The Thai-sponsored ``Bangkok Process''--designed to mediate a 
solution to the political situation in Burma--collapsed after one 
meeting with the SPDC's refusal to attend further sessions with ``like-
minded'' countries. The regime said it was ``too busy'' to attend this 
week's session.
  For years, we have been working with ASEAN nations to put pressure on 
the military junta to make changes. But these nations were reluctant to 
do so. The Thailand-sponsored Bangkok Process aimed to do the same 
thing. However, what is clear is that the military junta has ignored 
those efforts.
  So over the past several months, the regime has gone to great lengths 
to rehabilitate its standing with neighbors and the international 
community. Some thought this was evidence that the junta was committed 
to national reconciliation, that engagement works, and that the 
sanctions and other pressures on Rangoon should be eased to facilitate 
the implementation of this new roadmap.

  But I think they are mistaken because I think we have learned 
something now about this regime's intentions. So what we need is 
substantive and meaningful action, not more promises and empty 
statements and failure to deliver on commitments.
  For over 15 years, this junta has engaged in a systematic campaign to 
wipe out the democratic movement in Burma and the NLD's 1990 election 
victory.
  For over 15 years, we have listened to assurances that the junta was 
committed to national reconciliation and a dialog with all parties on 
restoring democracy, and still nothing has happened.
  I was actually cautiously optimistic when Suu Kyi was first released 
from house arrest 2 years ago. Yet sure enough, 1 year later, she was 
back in custody. The regime showed its true colors in orchestrating and 
carrying out a brutal attack. After her release, Aung San Suu Kyi had 
gone on the road. She was greeted with enormous popularity. The junta's 
forces attacked her caravan. Many of her people were killed; many were 
arrested; and she was shoved back into house arrest for doing nothing 
more than what she was elected originally to do.
  So whatever the regime might say about ``roadmaps'' and ``national 
conventions,'' their actions have clearly demonstrated they are 
uninterested in restoring democracy to the Burmese people and, more 
importantly, they are going to take any steps they can to hold on to 
power.
  Even if, as we all hope, Aung San Suu Kyi is released and is invited 
to take part in a national convention, I think we should maintain the 
pressure on this junta and keep the sanctions in place.
  Now, earlier this week, the junta allowed members of the NLD, the 
democratic party, to meet with Aung San Suu Kyi to discuss their 
participation at the convention. But this is hardly progress.
  ``Substantial and measurable'' progress is just that, and we should 
not settle for lofty pronouncements when they have a record of breaking 
their word on virtually every statement they have made.
  So I am very pleased that Secretary of State Colin Powell has 
testified that the administration supports reauthorizing the sanctions. 
He recently stated:

       I have seen no improvement in the situation. Aung San Suu 
     Kyi remains unable to participate in public political life in 
     Burma, and we will not ignore that. We will not shrink from 
     the strong position we have taken.

  So now is not the time to reduce our support for this brave leader. 
Now is the time to stand with her side by side, to buttress her, to 
reinforce her, to point out, over and over again that she is the 
elected democratic leader of that country; now is the time to show the 
SPDC that America is not going to stand by and see members of the 
parliament jailed, not going to stand by and see her people continually 
attacked, and not going to stand by and see every promise the junta 
made violated.
  So I feel very strongly and am very pleased to join with the 
distinguished Senators from Kentucky and Arizona in supporting this 
extension legislation.

                              S.J. Res. 36

       Whereas the State Peace and Development Council (SPDC) has 
     failed to make substantial and measurable progress toward 
     implementing a democratic government in Burma;
       Whereas the courage and determination of the people of 
     Burma in their struggle for freedom and justice remains 
     steadfast and strong;
       Whereas import sanctions and other restrictions against the 
     SPDC and its affiliated entities should remain in force until 
     Burma embarks on an irreversible path of reconciliation that 
     includes the full and unfettered participation of the 
     National League for Democracy and ethnic minorities in the 
     country; and
       Whereas the Department of State supports the continuation 
     of sanctions against the SPDC: Now, therefore, be it
       Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
     United States of America in Congress assembled, That Congress 
     approves the renewal of the import restrictions contained in 
     section 3(a)(1) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act of 
     2003.
                                  ____

  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I would like to commend Senators McConnell 
and Feinstein for introducing legislation that will renew sanctions 
contained in last year's Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act. I am proud 
to be an original cosponsor of this resolution.
  The world's democracies have a common moral obligation to promote 
human rights. In few places is the lack of freedom and justice more 
appalling than in Burma, a country in which a band of thugs, led by 
General Than Shwe, controls the population through

[[Page S4708]]

violence and terror. The Burmese regime has a record of unchecked 
repression. It has murdered political opponents, used child soldiers 
and forced labor, and employed rape as a weapon of war. Nearly one year 
ago the Burmese military junta launched an orchestrated, violent attack 
against democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi and hundreds of her 
supporters. Since then the regime has kept more than 1,000 political 
activists imprisoned, including elected members of parliament. It also 
recently sentenced three Burmese citizens to death for contacting 
representatives of the International Labor Organization.
  And Aung San Suu Kyi remains a captive. Because she stands for 
democracy, this heroic woman has endured attacks, arrest, captivity, 
and untold sufferings at the hands of the regime. The junta fears Aung 
San Suu Kyi because of what she represents--peace, freedom and justice 
for all Burmese people. The thugs who run Burma have tried to stifle 
her voice, but they will never extinguish her moral courage. Her 
leadership and example shines brightly for the millions of Burmese who 
hunger for freedom, and for those of us outside Burma who seek justice 
for its people. The work of Aung San Suu Kyi and the members of the 
National League for Democracy must be the world's work.
  In recognition of this, last year the Congress overwhelmingly passed 
the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act. In doing so, we took active 
steps to pressure the military junta, and we sent a signal to the 
Burmese people that they are not forgotten--that the American people 
care about their freedom and will stand up for justice in their 
country.
  The State Department released just this week a new report on U.S. 
trade sanctions against Burma. This report notes that the Freedom and 
Democracy Act encouraged ASEAN nations to take a critical stance on 
Burma, and that these pressures were likely a factor behind the junta's 
August announcement of a ``roadmap'' toward democratic transition. 
While this roadmap is sorely lacking, it does point to the tangible 
effect that our efforts are having inside the country.
  Yet since we passed our bill last year, the ruling State Peace and 
Development Council has failed to make substantial progress toward 
implementing a democratic government in Burma. The new State Department 
report indicates that Burma's ``extremely poor human rights record has 
worsened over the past year, and it continued to commit serious 
abuses.'' Pro-democracy activists remain in detention, the National 
League for Democracy offices remain closed, and citizens do not have 
the right to change their government. Security forces continue to 
commit extrajudicial killings and rape, forcibly relocate persons, and 
use forced labor. The military junta refuses to tolerate any form of 
political opposition. On top of this, the dismal economic polices 
implemented by Burma's rulers have led to widespread poverty and the 
flight of most foreign investors.

  Sadly, the picture is clear. So long as this band of thugs rules 
Burma, its people will be never be free. They will remain mired in 
poverty and suffering, cut off from the world, with only their 
indomitable spirit to keep them moving forward.
  For this reason I stand in support of the joint resolution that will 
renew the import restrictions contained in last year's legislation--
sanctions that are supported by the National League for Democracy. 
These restrictions must remain until Burma embarks on a true path of 
reconciliation--a process that must include the NLD and Burmese ethnic 
minorities. I note, however, that while the American people have spoken 
with one voice in support of freedom in Burma, it is past time that the 
leaders of other nations do the same. No other country has yet 
implemented U.S.-style economic sanctions. The Europeans should reject 
half measures and join the United States in targeted sanctions against 
the military regime. China, Thailand, India and other Asian nations 
uncomfortable with a tougher response to the junta's crimes must 
understand that diplomatic obfuscation and obstruction on Burma will 
profoundly affect their broader bilateral relationships with the 
Western democracies.
  Mr. President, this week I co-authored with former Secretary of State 
Madeleine Albright an editorial on Burma for the Washington Post. This 
article enumerates several of the points that I have made here, and 
illustrates the bipartisan consensus that we must act to promote 
democracy and human rights in Burma. I ask unanimous consent that a 
copy of our editorial be printed in the Record at the end of my 
remarks.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection; it is so ordered.
  (See exhibit 1.)
  Mr. McCAIN. In this article, we quote Archbishop Desmond Tutu, a man 
who knows quite a bit about life under tyranny and oppression. The 
Archbishop said that ``Apathy in the face of systematic human rights 
abuses is immoral. One either supports justice and freedom or one 
supports injustice and bondage.'' Mr. President, today we support 
justice and freedom.

                               Exhibit 1

               [From the Washington Post, April 27, 2004]

                         A Need To Act on Burma

       ``Apathy in the face of systematic human rights abuses is 
     immoral. One either supports justice and freedom or one 
     supports injustice and bondage.'' So said Archbishop Desmond 
     Tutu, the South African Nobel laureate and anti-apartheid 
     leader, who knows something about the struggle for human 
     freedom in the face of tyranny.
       The world's democracies have a common moral obligation to 
     promote justice and freedom. In few places is this obligation 
     more acute than in Burma, a country in which a band of thugs, 
     led by Gen. Than Shwe, controls the population through 
     violence and terror. The regime has a record of unchecked 
     repression. It has murdered political opponents, used child 
     soldiers and forced labor, and employed rape as a weapon of 
     war. Nearly one year ago the Burmese military junta launched 
     an orchestrated, violent attack against democracy leader Aung 
     San Suu Kyi and hundreds of her supporters. Since then the 
     regime has kept more than 1,000 political activists 
     imprisoned, including elected members of parliament. It 
     recently sentenced three Burmese citizens to death for 
     contacting representatives of the International Labor 
     Organization.
       The Burmese junta, with the cynical support of neighboring 
     governments, has announced a ``road map to democracy,'' 
     beginning with a constitutional convention in May. The 
     convention is expected to be stage-managed by the junta, 
     which has offered no meaningful participation to Suu Kyi's 
     National League for Democracy, no timetable for progress 
     toward a political transition, no release of political 
     prisoners and no guarantee that the military will cede 
     control to democratically elected leaders. Instead, the 
     junta's proposals seem designed to institutionalize military 
     control by creating a veneer of civilian authority, while 
     meeting only the minimum expectations of Western democracies 
     in order to avoid further sanctions.
       The Burmese regime's recent actions demonstrate that years 
     of international engagement and patience have not made the 
     dictatorship more humane, reasonable or open to accommodation 
     with its political opponents. On the contrary, it is only in 
     response to international pressure that the regime has made 
     even the smallest moves toward a political settlement with 
     the democratic opposition. The lesson is clear: The world's 
     democracies and Burma's neighbors must press the junta until 
     it is willing to negotiate an irreversible transition to 
     democratic rule.
       The legitimacy, authority and commitment of Burma's 
     democratic leaders to govern their country is not in doubt. 
     But the international commitment to Burma's democratic 
     transformation remains uncertain. The Western democracies and 
     Burma's neighbors should immediately take three steps to 
     bolster Burma's legitimate democratic leaders.
       First, Congress should promptly renew, and the president 
     sign into law, the ban on Burma's imports enacted into law 
     last July. These sanctions, which are set to expire after a 
     review period beginning Friday, are supported by Burma's 
     National League for Democracy. The restrictions have made it 
     more difficult for the Burmese military to tap financial 
     assets abroad, travel or accumulate revenue through trade. 
     The European Union, whose member democracies care deeply 
     about protecting human rights, and whose trade and 
     assistance programs give it critical leverage in Southeast 
     Asia, are set to announce a new Common Position on Burma 
     on Thursday. As part of this new policy, the EU should 
     also initiate target sanctions against the regime.
       Second, the EU and the United States, with support from 
     Asian nations, should urge the junta to implement immediately 
     the provisions of the U.N. Commission for Human Rights and 
     the U.N. General Assembly resolutions--including democracy, 
     the rule of law and respect for human rights. The United 
     States and the EU should also formally place the issue on the 
     agenda of the U.N. Security Council, and work urgently toward 
     a resolution threatening credible sanctions against the 
     Burmese regime unless it initiates meaningful progress toward 
     democracy.
       Third, China, Thailand, India and other Asian nations 
     uncomfortable with a tougher

[[Page S4709]]

     response to the junta's crimes must understand that 
     diplomatic obfuscation and obstruction on Burma will 
     profoundly affect their broader bilateral relationships with 
     the Western democracies. Thailand in particular should 
     consider this point when it convenes its planned 
     international conference to discuss what it optimistically 
     calls ``Burma's progress toward democracy.''
       Beyond these steps, the United States, Europe and Asian 
     countries must demand the unconditional release of Aung San 
     Suu Kyi and her fellow political prisoners, but make clear 
     that the releases, while necessary, are insufficient. In 
     addition, they should continue calls for a political 
     settlement that reflects the results of the free and fair 
     elections held in 1990. This settlement must include a 
     central, determinative role for the National League for 
     Democracy.
       In another era, a dissident playwright named Vaclav Havel 
     wrote of the ``power of the powerless'' to overcome rule by 
     fear and force, at a time when such a revolution in human 
     freedom seemed impossible. The international community today 
     has the power to help the powerless inside Burma throw off 
     the shackles of tyranny. It is time to assume this moral 
     responsibility. It is time to act.

  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, it saddens me to rise today to speak about 
the situation in Burma. Burma is a beautiful country with a rich 
history. Regrettably, this great nation, with so much potential, is 
being destroyed by the despotic junta, the State Peace and Development 
Council, SPDC.
  Natural resources are pillaged, ethnic minorities are brutally 
repressed, and most notably, Nobel Laureate, Aung San Suu Kyi, is under 
house arrest--denying her the right to help lead her nation.
  For more than a decade, the brutal and autocratic regime, the SPDC 
has played an outrageous ``game'' with Aung San Suu Kyi. It goes 
something like this: pretend to allow Aung San Suu Kyi freedom to move 
around the country; when her movements become too threatening, put her 
under house arrest; keep her there until international pressure becomes 
too intense; eventually let her out, starting it all over again. In 
other words, isolate Aung San Suu Kyi and stall for time, while looting 
the country of its resources.
  Once again, we find ourselves in this situation. About a year ago, 
the SPDC launched a vicious, pre-meditated attack against Aung San Suu 
Kyi and other members of the NLDF. The SPDC then placed Aung San Suu 
Kyi under house arrest, using the absurd justification that it is for 
her own safety. Virtually nothing has changed since that time. Aung San 
Suu Kyi remains under house arrest and the outrageous activities of the 
SPDC continue unabated.
  It is for this reason that I join Senators McConnell and Feinstein 
today in introducing the joint resolution to extend the sanctions 
provided for in the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act. The senior 
Senators from Kentucky and California have already discussed the 
situation in Burma and made the case why this legislation is so 
important. I want to associate myself with their remarks and will be 
brief here today.
  The message that we are sending to the ruling junta in Burma is 
clear: its behavior is outrageous. Aung San Suu Kyi is the rightful 
leader of the democratic opposition in Burma. She and other opposition 
leaders must be immediately released.
  But, as important as U.S. leadership is on this issue, we all know it 
is not enough. Burma's neighbors--India, Thailand, and China--must also 
act. For too long, the silence of these key nations has been deafening. 
To obtain real change in Burma, these and other nations in the region 
must change course, speak out and disavow the failed policies of 
engagement.
  I know that the sponsors of the legislation recognize this. I have 
heard Senator McConnell speak frequently of the need for a ``full court 
press'' by the international community on this issue. While I am not so 
naive as to believe that this legislation will instantly cause a change 
of heart among the SPDC, I am hopeful that constant pressure U.S. 
pressure and others will, one day, lead to a breakthrough.
  Everyone in the Senate would like to see the SPDC tossed on the ash 
heap of history, but there is widespread recognition that this regime 
is well entrenched and will not go away overnight. The immediate goal 
should be to get Aung San Suu Kyi out of house arrest and give her and 
the NLDF an equal seat at the table. Considering that the NLDF was 
democratically elected to lead Burma, this is a modest goal indeed.
  Aung San Suu Kyi and her supporters have been denied for too long. It 
is time for a change in Burma. I hope that this is the beginning of the 
end for the SPDC and the start of a new era in Burma, allowing that 
country and its people to achieve the democracy and progress they 
deserve.

                          ____________________