[Congressional Record Volume 152, Number 107 (Tuesday, September 5, 2006)]
[Senate]
[Pages S8933-S8944]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                        REPORT ON FOREIGN TRAVEL

  Mr. SPECTER. Madam President, at the conclusion of these brief 
remarks, I ask unanimous consent that a full text of my report on 
foreign travel be printed in the record.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  (See exhibit I.)
  Mr. SPECTER. Madam President, as is my custom, when I return from 
foreign travel, I file a report with the Senate.
  From August 5 to August 24, I traveled abroad. I started with a 
delegation led by Senator Ted Stevens and Senator Dan Inouye to China 
where eight U.S. Senators participated in a forum with Parliamentarians 
from China. We discussed a broad range of issues, with the Chinese 
delegation being very forceful on their concern about the one-nation 
policy, that Taiwan not be

[[Page S8934]]

regarded as an independent nation. We had extensive discussions about 
the economic imbalance which exists in trade, on the manipulation by 
the Government of China of its currency, and on the issue of human 
rights.
  I raised with the Chinese officials the issue of human rights 
starting with the incident in 1999 where the Dickinson law librarian in 
Pennsylvania was kept in custody for some 7 months without being able 
to see a lawyer, and without being able to see his wife.
  Following that, an appropriation was made for approximately $2 
million in each of the past several years for Temple University to 
establish in Beijing a law school to teach human rights, with a focus 
on Chinese judges, Chinese professors, and Chinese lawyers.
  During the trip to Beijing, I met with almost 50 of the students at 
the school--some judges, some lawyers, and some academics--where there 
was a concern to understand due process of law. I was pleased to hear 
some reports that there has been an improvement in some situations on 
filing charges, on the access of counsel. I believe the school of law 
established by Temple University in Beijing is very useful. But I 
think, realistically, they have a very long way to go.
  From China, I then set out to Nepal, visited Katmandu, and spoke to 
the Prime Minister, who has had a very difficult time. There was a 
great deal of unrest in the country following the King's taking power 
from the elected government. Following strong public resistance and 
marches, the King stepped down. Seven political parties are trying to 
go through the formation of a new government.
  They are being challenged by malice, with an overriding concern about 
the possibility of violence there.
  I discussed a major situation where there are more than 100,000 
refugees in Nepal originating from neighboring Bhutan. I traveled next 
to Bhutan, which is a remarkable country situated between Nepal and 
Tibet. James Hilton's famous book, ``Lost Horizon,'' locates the 
idyllic spot, Shangri-La, with fantasy, in Bhutan or in Tibet.
  Bhutan is a country of about 700,000 people. It was totally isolated 
until 1950 when the King invited in foreigners. It was said that up 
until that time they lived in a medieval state. Now there is a King, 
51--very progressive, who has not waited for popular unrest to oust 
him. But they are moving ahead with the formation of a constitution--
and a very unique constitution where they are concerned about the gross 
national happiness product as opposed to the gross domestic product.
  I had a lengthy discussion with the King about setting up a 
constitution where the monarch must step aside at the age of 68. Bhutan 
is being modernized.
  The road from the airport city to the main city, Thimpu, is 60 
kilometers of treacherous highway road. But it is a remarkable country.
  There I talked to the Chief Justice of Bhutan. I talked to him about 
the formation of their constitution as I had done in Nepal. The issue 
of a constitution is one which is spreading around the world, with 
considerable modeling after the Constitution of the United States which 
was, as we know, the first complete written constitution.
  From Bhutan, I then traveled to Kuwait. I met with the Emir of Kuwait 
and with the Prime Minister and had extensive discussions about the 
concerns of the nuclear activities in neighboring Iran. We spent just 
an overnight there and then on to Israel. Regrettably, we had to make a 
stop in Cyprus. The rules are, if you come from an Arab country you 
can't fly directly to Israel, just as we cannot fly directly from 
Israel to Libya. But we had to make a stop in Cyprus, and coming from 
Kuwait, we had to make a stop in Amman, Jordan, before going on to 
Israel.
  In Israel, we met with Prime Minister Olmert and with Defense 
Minister Perez. We reviewed the situation and our findings there are 
set out more extensively in the written report.
  From Israel, we traveled on to Libya and saw a remarkable 
transformation of Libya and Libya's leader, Colonel Qadhafi. I think 
there has been a historic rehabilitation of the nation of Libya and the 
leader, Colonel Qadhafi, where they have moved from being the world's 
leading terrorist state in very heavy competition, at least at the time 
they blew up Pan Am flight 103 back in 1988 and blew up the German 
discotheque killing U.S. soldiers and wounding many more.
  We had an opportunity to meet Colonel Qadhafi. We took a plane flight 
from Tripoli for a couple of hours, moved on to the middle of the 
desert, met with him in his tent, and had a discussion with him looking 
for some guidance as to how a major world terrorist could rehabilitate, 
pay compensation, as to whether there could be any insight as to what 
we might do with North Korea and Iran today.
  Regrettably, those problems are beyond anyone's solution, but the 
rehabilitation of Libya and Qadhafi showed that there is some hope to 
turn major terrorists into a rehabilitated situation.
  We then flew overnight to China and returned to the United States. As 
I said, the details are set forth in the extensive written report which 
follows the conclusion of these extemporaneous comments.

                               Exhibit 1

                       Statement of Arlen Specter


                        REPORT ON FOREIGN TRAVEL

       Mr. President, I have sought recognition to report on 
     foreign travel, as is my custom, from August 5 to August 24, 
     2006. On August 5, I joined a delegation led by Senator Ted 
     Stevens which departed from Andrews Air Force Base at 11:00 
     a.m. en route to Guilin, China, via Beijing to participate in 
     the Untied States-China interparliamentary conference. 
     Senator Stevens is the Chairman of that conference and 
     Senator Daniel Inouye is the co-chairman. Senator Patty 
     Murray and Senator Norm Coleman serve as vice-chairmen. In 
     addition, the delegation consisted of Senator Thad Cochran, 
     Senator Mark Dayton, Senator Lamar Alexander and Senator 
     Richard Burr.
       Our first stop was Anchorage, Alaska where we landed at 
     Elmendorf Air Force Base after a flight of 7 hours. After 
     dinner and overnighting at the Captain Cook Hotel, we 
     departed for Beijing the next morning, August 6, at 9:00 a.m. 
     We passed the international date line and arrived in Beijing 
     at about 9:00 a.m. Beijing time on Tuesday, August 7. We then 
     flew an additional 3 hours to Guilin where the conference was 
     held. Most of us decided to stay up for the balance of the 
     day although we had already been up some 24 hours to try to 
     get on our regular body clock schedule. Joan and I took a 
     long walk, visited the town, had an early dinner, and 
     retired. It is always difficult to get much sleep on the 
     first night, but we awoke somewhat refreshed.
       On the morning of Tuesday, August 8, we took a trip on the 
     Li River hosted by the interparliamentary group's Chairman, 
     Sheng Hauren. It was a magnificent boat trip. The area is 
     heralded as one of the China's most extraordinary scenic 
     spots. With lunch being served onboard, it provided an 
     opportunity for extensive informal discussion with our 
     Chinese hosts.
       Chairman Sheng Hauren was a charming host in his mid-60s 
     with a full head of gray hair, portly, with a perpetual smile 
     and an easygoing disposition. I told him of my special 
     interest in human rights in China arising out of an incident 
     where a librarian from Dickinson College, Mr. Yongyi Song, 
     was detained by Chinese officials in 1999. Mr. Song was born 
     in China and immigrated to the United States where he was 
     about to fulfill his requirements for citizenship when he 
     returned to China for research. He was arrested, held for 7 
     months without an opportunity to see counsel or even his 
     wife. No charges were brought against him and no hearing had 
     been set when it was called to my attention.
       I filed a Senate resolution reciting the facts, condemning 
     the process which lacked even the fundamentals of due process 
     of law and urged his release. Shortly after filing the 
     petition, I was summoned by the Chinese Ambassador to the 
     United States to meet with him. It was a testy meeting with 
     the Ambassador beginning by challenging me for meddling in 
     internal Chinese affairs. I responded politely but forcefully 
     that it was hardly meddling in Chinese internal affairs when 
     they detained a Pennsylvanian under the circumstances noted 
     without any basic rights. I emphasized that I had great 
     respect for China, a powerful country of 1 billion, 250 
     million people at which point I was interrupted by the 
     Ambassador who said: ``please Senator, 1 billion, 300 million 
     people.'' From the time I had last checked the Chinese 
     statistics they had gained about 50 million people, about the 
     population of France. We continued to discuss the matter when 
     the Ambassador notified me that Mr. Song was about to be 
     released and would be arriving by air in Philadelphia in a 
     few days.
       I told Chairman Sheng Hauren about this incident as a 
     primer to discussing with him the action taken as a result of 
     the detention of Mr. Song. I introduced legislation to 
     appropriate approximately 2 million dollars to establish a 
     branch of the Temple Law School in Beijing to teach judges, 
     prosecutors, academics and students the fundamentals of due 
     process of law. Chairman Sheng Hauren listened politely and 
     said, of course, that he knew nothing about the specifics of 
     the case I cited. He said that with the developing

[[Page S8935]]

     country in China and the need for civil order there were 
     occasions where arrests were made which might seem extreme to 
     foreigners. I did not press the matter further, but I already 
     made my point about being concerned about human rights and 
     the rights of detainees in China.
       I asked Chairman Sheng Huaren about the relative authority 
     of the Chinese courts compared to the Executive Branch or the 
     National People's Congress. Chairman Sheng Huaren replied 
     that after the Supreme Court of China had ruled, their 
     decisions could be overturned by National People's Congress. 
     I replied that it was exactly the opposite in the United 
     States where the Supreme Court had the final word in deciding 
     the constitutionality of congressional enactments and the 
     Supreme Court had the authority to overrule the President's 
     exercise of executive power as the court has recently done in 
     the celebrated case of Hamdan v Rumsfeld when the Supreme 
     Court ruled the President did not have the authority to set 
     the rules of the trials of war criminals.
       I asked Chairman Sheng Huaren why there had been so much 
     more economic development in China contrasted with India 
     which had a population almost as large, one billion compared 
     to 1.3 billion, and the government of India had the benefit 
     of democratic institutions which would have been expected to 
     produce more individual initiatives. Chairman Sheng Huaren 
     replied that China had enjoyed greater success because of 
     China's planning and the diversification of ownership. He 
     pointed out that early on in China, employees had an interest 
     in ownership. He noted that there had been planning between 
     urban and rural areas with special attention being devoted to 
     agriculture as the primary industry with secondary attention 
     to manufacturing and beyond that the service industry. The 
     Chairman emphasized that there had been a special effort made 
     in China to achieve a harmonious social society which 
     promoted productivity and economic advancement.
       The boat ride ended mid-afternoon and we docked at a nearby 
     town where shopping was available and then drove back to 
     Guilin. The Chairman hosted a dinner that evening in a 
     magnificent dinning hall which was part of the large 
     conference center. The full delegation and spouses and staff 
     were present with almost 100 people in attendance for the 
     customary Chinese eight course dinner.
       The next morning, the delegates arrived for the traditional 
     photo session with the two hour morning program beginning at 
     9:30 AM. The topics which had been agreed upon were bilateral 
     relations and trade and investment. After a break for lunch, 
     again sumptuous, the afternoon session began at 2:00 PM and 
     ran until approximately 4:00 PM with international security 
     and energy as the topics.
       The tone of the meeting was very cordial. Senator Inouye 
     drew a laugh when he said it was better to talk than to 
     shoot. Chairman Sheng Huaren got down to business promptly 
     raising the issue of Taiwan which is very much on the minds 
     of the Chinese. Chairman Sheng Huaren stated that he 
     appreciated the reiteration of our one China policy and China 
     was totally opposed to unilateral action meaning any effort 
     by Taiwan to break away from China.
       At one point in the conference, Senator Stevens reiterated 
     that the United States stood behind the one China policy and 
     added, prefacing his remarks that it was intended to be in 
     the friendly constructive spirit, that the Chinese were 
     preoccupied with the one China issue. Senator Stevens noted 
     China was soon to play host to the 2008 Olympics which has 
     the promise to be the greatest Olympics ever and that event 
     should not be marred or spoiled by any military action 
     between China and Taiwan. The Chinese delegation appeared to 
     take the comments in good spirit and gave no specific reply.
       Senator Stevens said that the 21st century should be the 
     century of the Pacific and noted that the United States was 
     proposing an interparliamentary meeting with Japan and that 
     if that took root as the U.S.-Chinese group had, that they 
     might look forward to having the three major powers, the 
     U.S., China and Japan, join together to discuss the issues of 
     the Pacific. Senator Stevens pointed to the damage to plant 
     life and the threat to extinguishing species of fishes and 
     the air control over the pacific and the problems generally 
     with the water supply. The Chinese delegates emphasized the 
     enormous need for economic development in China with its 
     expanding population and the need to create millions of jobs 
     each year.
       On the morning of August 11th, I broke from the delegation 
     to speak to a group of students, lawyers and judges at 
     Tsinghua University outside Beijing. The Yongyi Song case in 
     1999 illustrated the lack of a transparent and fair legal 
     system in China. Since 2000, I worked to advance the rule of 
     law in China through Temple University's Rule of Law program 
     at Tsinghua Law School and approximately $2 million has been 
     secured annually for the program. During a prior visit to 
     China in 2001, I suggested to Premier Zhu Rong-ji that the 
     Chinese government work with Temple's program to develop an 
     agreement with the U.S. dealing with due process rights for 
     detained American citizens. That is still a work in progress.
       Upon arrival at Tsinghua, I was met by Temple professor 
     John Snagoola who provided an update on the program. Temple 
     has educated 612 legal professionals of whom 494 were from 
     the public sector including 184 judges, 107 prosecutors, 59 
     government officials, 97 law professors and 47 NGO legal 
     staff.
       I was received in the law school's lecture hall by 48 
     students and a panel of eight professors. I spoke to the 
     students about a wide variety of judicial and constitutional 
     issues being debated in the United States including the 
     detention facility at Guantanamo Bay and the NSA wiretapping 
     program. I explained to the students the importance of the 
     rule of law in American society and that no man is above the 
     law. I highlighted the benefits of a system where the accused 
     have the right to counsel, to a trial and to know why they 
     are being detained.
       I elaborated on the role of the courts as the final arbiter 
     and that neither the Congress nor the President could 
     overrule the courts. In contrast, the National People's 
     Congress of China supersedes any decision made by the courts. 
     The hour-long session provided ample time for dialogue with 
     the students. They asked a variety of questions with 
     special attention to civil liberties, national security, 
     medical care for women, same sex marriage and the war in 
     Iraq.
       I ask unanimous consent that the Special Report on Temple 
     Students compiled by the Beasley School of Law and letters 
     supporting the program be included in the record.
       I rejoined the delegation later that afternoon for a 
     meeting with Wu Banggou, Chairman of the National People's 
     Congress, at the Great Hall of the People. Our conversations 
     included a wide range of issues including national security, 
     weapons proliferation and trade. Following the meeting, 
     Chairman Wu hosted a banquet for all members of the 
     delegation at the Great Hall of the People.
       On August 12th, the delegation returned to the Great Hall 
     of the People for a meeting with President Hu Jintao. Many of 
     the issues raised during the visit were discussed during the 
     meeting. I specifically pressed President Hu about arms 
     transfers to Iran and China's efforts to ensure they are not 
     being transferred to third parties. I did not receive a 
     sufficient response.
       While my colleagues returned to the United States on August 
     12th, I traveled on to Kathmandu, Nepal. Prior to departing 
     from Beijing, I was joined by my aide Christopher Bradish, 
     Lieutenant Colonel Donald Walker, United States Army, and Dr. 
     Ron Smith, United States Navy.


                                 NEPAL

       From Beijing, I traveled to Kathmandu, Nepal where I was 
     met by Ambassador Bill Moriarty who provided me with insight 
     into Nepal's political situation and its struggle for 
     democracy. In June 2001 ten members of the royal family, 
     including King Birendra, were killed in an assassination-
     suicide, reportedly carried out by Crown Prince Dipendra. The 
     murdered king's younger brother, Gyanendra, now occupies the 
     throne. Nepal's recent history has been characterized by a 
     power struggle between the monarchy, political parties, and a 
     Maoist insurgency.
       In 1990, following a democratization movement, Nepal became 
     a parliamentary democracy under a constitutional monarch. In 
     a reversal of the longer-term trend towards a democratic 
     constitutional monarchy, on February 1, 2005, King Gyanendra 
     declared a state of emergency, assumed full powers, suspended 
     civil liberties, and placed opposition leaders under arrest. 
     The King explained his move as necessary, because of the 
     elected government's inability to put down the Maoist 
     insurgency. However, most analysts saw the move as an attempt 
     to also assert control over the country's democratic 
     elements.
       In response to the King's actions, Nepal's seven main 
     political parties announced they would work together to 
     reform the constitution, reinstate parliament, and limit the 
     powers of the king. Mutual rejection of the King's power grab 
     also led the parties to seek rapprochement with the Maoist 
     insurgents. In April 2006, popular anger at the King's abuse 
     of power resulted in three weeks of massive demonstrations 
     across the country and broad public support for a nationwide 
     general strike called by the coalition of political parties, 
     and backed by the Maoists.
       After unsuccessfully attempting to forcefully suppress the 
     demonstrations, the King announced the reinstatement of 
     Parliament on April 26, 2006. The Parliament has since taken 
     action to strip the King of his political and military 
     powers, reciprocated a Maoist cease-fire, and released 
     hundreds of guerrillas, including some of their top leaders, 
     from jail. In talks with the Maoists, the Parliament has also 
     agreed to the writing of an interim constitution, to the 
     formation of an interim government, and to hold new 
     elections.
       In February 1996, the leaders of the underground Communist 
     Party of Nepal (Maoist) and the United People's Front (UPF) 
     launched a ``People's War'' in the Midwestern region of 
     Nepal, with the aim of replacing the constitutional monarchy 
     with a one-party Communist regime. The insurgency has claimed 
     the lives of approximately 13,000 people. With an estimated 
     5,000-10,000 armed fighters utilizing guerrilla warfare 
     tactics including murder, torture, arson, sabotage, 
     extortion, child conscription, kidnapping, bombings, and 
     assassinations, the Maoists were able to establish a parallel 
     government to rule over substantial proportions of Nepal. A 
     string of bank robberies, combined with ``revolutionary tax'' 
     revenues, made the Nepalese Maoists among the wealthiest 
     rebel groups in Asia.

[[Page S8936]]

       Following the King's 2005 seizure of power, the Maoists 
     joined with Nepal's seven major political parties in 
     resisting the King's control of government. After the 
     restoration of Parliament, the Maoists offered the government 
     a cease fire and entered talks to join the government. In 
     June, the Maoists leader, Pushpa Kamal Dahal, also known as 
     ``Prachanda,'' agreed to dismantle the parallel government, 
     but refused to disarm until after elections are held for 
     constituent assembly to draft a new constitution. The Maoists 
     have offered to sequester their arms and men under 
     international supervision, provided the Nepalese military 
     does the same.
       The Maoists' message has included bellicose and anti-
     American rhetoric. In 2002, the Maoists claimed 
     responsibility for killing two off-duty Nepalese security 
     guards at the American Embassy in Kathmandu. On October 22, 
     2003, the Maoists stated that American-backed organizations 
     would be targeted for attack. The State Department does not 
     list the Maoists/UPF as a Foreign Terrorist Organization. 
     However, the Department's 2005 Country Reports on Terrorism 
     does list the groups amongst its list of ``Other Groups of 
     Concern.''
       In a statement before the Senate Foreign Relations 
     Committee's Subcommittee on Near Eastern and South Asian 
     Affairs on May 18, 2006, Assistant Secretary of State for 
     South and Central Asian Affairs Richard Boucher highlighted 
     that the Maoists have not renounced violence, nor agreed to 
     disarm. He further noted that the Maoists originally took up 
     arms in 1996 against an elected government and that Maoists 
     human rights abuses continue to be reported. He stated that 
     until the group renounces violence and shows respect for 
     human rights, the Administration ``will not be convinced that 
     they have abandoned their stated goal of establishing a one-
     party, authoritarian state.''
       Nepal is one of the poorest countries in the world. Up to 
     90 percent of its inhabitants earn a living through 
     agriculture. Continued reliance on subsistence farming could 
     keep Nepal poor for many years to come. Government efforts to 
     increase foreign trade and investment have been impeded by 
     political instability, the small size of the economy, its 
     remoteness, a lack of infrastructure and technological 
     development, and frequent natural disasters. Future economic 
     prospects will likely be influenced by the outcome of the 
     negotiations underway between the Parliament and Maoists.
       On August 13th, I met with Prime Minister Koriala for 45 
     minutes. Prime Minister Koriala expressed his gratitude for 
     U.S. financial assistance and that it aided in stabilizing 
     the government. He stressed his strong support for democracy 
     and emphasized that unless the Maoists give up their weapons 
     they could not joint the government. Koriala hoped that the 
     United Nations would be brought in to resolve Nepal's 
     internal conflict.
       Prime Minister Koriala had been jailed on several occasions 
     throughout his life for his political activities. These 
     sentences accounted for fourteen years of his life. Koriala 
     informed me that his life's goal was to bring all non-
     democratic elements, including the Maoists, into a 
     constitutional democracy, stating that he would never 
     surrender a democratic government to anyone. Koriala informed 
     me that he would succeed in order for terrorists all over the 
     world to learn from Nepal's example that dialogue was the 
     best way to solve disputes.
       Prime Minster Koriala said he favors a ceremonial monarchy 
     because it had been a unifying factor in Nepal since 1769. He 
     noted that, unless the Maoists gave up their weapons, the 
     interim constitutional drafting committee could not consider 
     the Maoist's suggestions, adding that their proposals for a 
     republic based on ethnic regions could fragment and 
     destabilize Nepal.
       PM Koriala expressed his concern about the Maoist's 
     intentions, especially as they have not given up their 
     weapons. Koriala informed me that they are still extorting 
     and collecting taxes from citizens despite their signing of 
     the 25-point code of conduct in which they agreed to stop 
     these activities. Many representatives I met with expressed 
     skepticism about the Maoists ability to implement what they 
     agree to do.
       Following my meeting with the Prime Minister, I met with 
     Subash Nemwang, Speaker of the House. The Speaker reiterated 
     the position of the Prime Minister that Maoists will not be 
     permitted to enter into any form of interim government until 
     they are disarmed. Speaker Nemwang expressed his desire to 
     see the Maoists repudiate violence and join the democratic 
     political process.
       I then met with the Home Minister Krishna Prasad Situala 
     who is also the point person on the Government of Nepal's 
     peace talks. The Home Minister expressed hope that the 
     Maoists could be brought peacefully into the political 
     mainstream, but warned that the Maoists had not lived up to 
     the pledges made in negotiations. He stressed the importance 
     between Nepal moving towards a successful democracy and the 
     need to have the Maoists disarmed. He believes that the 
     United Nations could playa positive role in facilitating the 
     transition to democracy. I urged the Home Minister, in his 
     role as chief negotiator, to be firm and tough with the 
     Maoists, whose actions are similar to those of thugs.
       Nepal has formed a Peace Secretariat, a think tank of 
     sorts, to advise the government on how to transition to 
     democracy. I met with the head of that agency, Vidyadhar 
     Malik, who also expressed an interest in having the UN 
     involved in Nepal. The Peace Secretariat believes the UN 
     could be able to provide some best practices options for 
     Nepal on how to ensure arms are not part of the political 
     equation.
       Armed groups or political parties cannot be permitted to 
     participate in government unless they disarm. Hezbollah and 
     Hamas, both terrorist organizations, were permitted to 
     participate in government much to the detriment of citizens 
     in the region. During my conversation with Mallik and other 
     leaders, it became clear that were the Maoists to come to 
     power, Nepal would be more unstable and ruled through 
     intimidation and fear.
       I was invited to the Ambassador's residence for a 
     roundtable discussion and lunch with the leaders of the 
     various Nepalese political parties. Attendees included: Sher 
     Bahadur Dueba, former Prime Minister and President of the 
     Nepali Congress, Madhav Kumar Nepal, General Secretary of the 
     Communist party, Ram Chandra Poudel, General Secretary of the 
     Nepali Congress party, Narayan Man Bijukche, President of the 
     Nepal Workers and Peasants party, Prakash Man Singh, Vice 
     President of the Nepali Congress, Chandra Prakash Mainali, 
     General Secretary of the Socialist party, Jhalanath Khanal, 
     Central Committee Member of the Communist party, Arjun 
     Narsingh, Central Committee Member of the Nepali Congress 
     party and Lilamani Pokhrel, Vice President of the People's 
     Front. We had a candid discussion about the parties efforts 
     to work together to confront the Maoists and the prospects 
     for a democratic Nepal.
       Later that day, the Ambassador invited me to a dinner 
     reception at his residence where there were roughly seventy 
     political party leaders, civil society representatives, human 
     rights and women's rights activists. I had the opportunity to 
     engage in dialogue with many of those in attendance about the 
     status of Nepal and the prospects for stability. Many of the 
     leaders expressed their appreciation to me for coming to 
     Nepal and the support the U.S. has provided the country.


                                 BHUTAN

       On Monday, August 14th, we departed Kathmandu en route 
     Thimphu, Bhutan. Due to the mountainous terrain of Bhutan, we 
     had to take the Royal Druk Airline whose pilots are the only 
     ones permitted to fly into Bhutan. From the Paro airport we 
     took the windy ninety minute drive to the capital, Thimphu.
       Bhutan is the world's last Buddhist kingdom. Although the 
     government places a heavy influence on the preservation of 
     its Tibetan Buddhist culture, Bhutan is slowly emerging from 
     self imposed international isolation and is in the process of 
     evolving into a constitutional monarchy with a 
     representative government.
       The U.S. and Bhutan have not established formal diplomatic 
     relations; however, relations between the two governments are 
     cordial. The Public Affairs Section of the U.S. Embassy in 
     New Delhi administers the International Visitor (IV) and 
     Fulbright Exchange Programs for Bhutan. There are currently 
     sixty-seven Bhutanese alumni of the IV program including 
     Bhutan's Chief Justice, three Ministers, and six District 
     Governors. Thirty-three Bhutanese nationals have received 
     undergraduate degrees in engineering and the sciences through 
     the Fulbright Exchange Program. Most alumni now head 
     technical corporations working on infrastructure development 
     at Bhutan's regional level.
       The following morning, I met with Prime Minister Sangay 
     Ngedup. The Prime Minister began by expressing his 
     appreciation for the United States as a great democracy and 
     global leader. He also informed me that Bhutan is going 
     through a lot of changes. Most notably, the King announced 
     that Bhutan will be voting on its first constitution in 2008 
     and instituting a parliamentary democracy.
       The Prime Minister told me that this move is inspired in no 
     small part by the U.S. Constitution. Prime Minister Ngedup 
     said the country's leadership is working to ensure the 
     country will have good governance and good leaders for its 
     future. He believes Bhutan can serve as a model democracy for 
     the region. The Prime Minister expressed the view held in 
     Bhutan that happiness is the cornerstone of the society. In 
     fact, the country has developed a Gross National Happiness 
     indicator.
       When King Wangchuk came to power in 1972, he announced that 
     government policies would be based on the pursuit of high 
     ``Gross National Happiness'' rather than the conventional 
     Gross Domestic Product (GDP). The concept of GNH is based on 
     the premise that true development of human society takes 
     place when material and spiritual development occur side by 
     side to complement and reinforce each other. Since the King's 
     1972 announcement, the government has focused on what it 
     calls the ``four pillars'' of GNH (socio-economic growth, 
     cultural values, environmental conservation and good 
     governance) to guide the country's development plans. For 
     example, the government mandates that a minimum of 60 percent 
     of its land be covered in forest and has instituted policies 
     meant to encourage only high-scale environmentally 
     conscientious tourists to visit. The 2005 national census 
     found that 45.2 percent of Bhutanese are ``very happy,'' 51.6 
     percent are ``happy,'' and only 3.3 percent are ``not very 
     happy.''
       The Prime Minister reminded me of the provision penned by 
     Thomas Jefferson regarding the pursuit of happiness. In 
     Bhutan,

[[Page S8937]]

     they measure achieved happiness. The idea of a Gross National 
     Happiness is certainly unusual. I did commend my hosts 
     because it is wonderful that a government wants its people to 
     be happy and makes government work toward that end.
       The Prime Minister wears two hats in that he also serves as 
     the government's point person for agricultural issues. His 
     role in ensuring a high level of Gross National Happiness is 
     to provide an adequate supply of food, shelter, clothing, 
     clean air and water. He told me about his work to increase 
     food production, raise rural income and improve the 
     livelihood of the nation's large rural population while 
     preserving the pristine natural environment and conserving 
     the rich natural resources.
       We then met with Khandu Wangchuk, the Minister of Foreign 
     Affairs. Minister Wangchuk attended graduate school at Tufts 
     University. I pressed the Prime Minister on the issue of the 
     105,000 refugees living in UN-funded camps in Nepal. The 
     immigration of ethnic Nepalese to Bhutan has taken place 
     since the 17th century and ethnic Nepalese and ruling Drukpas 
     have shared cordial relations throughout the years. However, 
     in the late 1980s, concern over the increase 13 in the 
     population of and political agitation among ethnic Nepalese 
     prompted aggressive government efforts by Bhutan to assert a 
     national culture, to tighten control over the southern 
     regions, to control illegal immigration and to expel ethnic 
     Nepalese.
       Beginning in 1988, Bhutan's government expelled large 
     numbers of ethnic Nepalese through enforcement of new 
     citizenship laws. In response to this perceived repression, 
     ethnic Nepalese protested, sometimes violently, leading to a 
     government crackdown and the closure of local Nepalese 
     schools, clinics, and development programs. In 1991, ethnic 
     Nepalese began to leave southern areas of the country in 
     large numbers and to take refuge in Nepal. Today, over 
     100,000 ethnic Nepalese who were expelled from Bhutan are 
     encamped in seven United Nations High Commissioner for 
     Refugees (UNHCR) camps in southeastern Nepal.
       In October 2004, then-Assistant Secretary of State for 
     Population, Refugees and Migration Gene Dewey visited Bhutan 
     and discussed the refugee issue with the King. During this 
     visit, the King agreed to immediately repatriate certain 
     categories of refugees. However, to date, no refugees have 
     returned, because of procedural disagreements between Bhutan 
     and Nepal. In recent months, the international community, 
     through a Core Group on Bhutanese Refugees (consisting of the 
     US, Canada, Australia, the Netherlands, Denmark, Norway, and 
     New Zealand), has begun discussing a comprehensive solution 
     to the refugee problem that would likely include resettlement 
     of a large number of refugees to third countries. Ambassador 
     Moriarty noted that the U.S. could possibly accept upwards of 
     75,000 refugees spread out over many years.
       The Foreign Minister, well-versed in this issue, explained 
     that this refugee issue is unique and complicated. He 
     informed me that Bhutan, a country of 700,000 does not have 
     the capability to absorb large numbers of people in its 
     society and large-scale immigration would be difficult to 
     accommodate and perhaps pose a threat to stability due to the 
     scramble over resources and infrastructure.
       The major problem facing the bilateral relationship between 
     Bhutan and Nepal is the instability in Nepal. The constant 
     changes in Nepal's government have made it difficult for 
     Bhutan to negotiate.
       The Foreign Minister requested that my committee and 
     colleagues consider allowing Bhutanese students, studying in 
     the United States, the ability to have multiple entry visas 
     to allow them to return for holidays and to visit family. 
     Additionally, he requested I inquire about funds belonging to 
     Druk Air, the national airline, which were frozen by the 
     United States as a result of the sanctions placed on Burma.
       While in Nepal, many leaders expressed concern that if 
     those in UN camps were allowed to go to a third-party 
     country, such as the United States, Bhutan would expel 
     additional ethnic Nepalese. The Foreign Minister assured me 
     that the government would do no such thing.
       Following our meeting with the Foreign Minister, we had an 
     audience with King Jigme Singye Wangchuk who ascended to the 
     throne in 1972 at the age of 17. As head of state, the King 
     is responsible for all matters relating to the country's 
     domestic policies, security, and sovereignty. However, in 
     1998, King Wangchuk voluntarily transferred his executive 
     powers to the ten member- Council of Ministers. Ministers are 
     nominated by the King and approved by the 150 member National 
     Assembly, 106 of whom are elected by the people. The 
     remaining Assembly members are selected by the King, Buddhist 
     clergy, and the Council of Ministers.
       In March 2005, King Wangchuk unveiled a draft constitution, 
     which envisions a constitutional monarchy with a Parliament 
     consisting of an upper and lower house. The proposed draft 
     Constitution legalizes political parties and guarantees 
     fundamental human rights such as the right to life, liberty 
     and security of person, the right of association, freedom of 
     speech and press, freedom from torture or inhuman punishment, 
     and freedom from discrimination based on race, sex, language, 
     religion, or politics. The draft also mandates the abdication 
     of the monarch on his 65th birthday and would allow the 
     National Assembly to force a royal abdication if the motion 
     was backed by three-quarters of its members. The draft has 
     reportedly been sent to every household in the country for 
     review. The King has said the Constitution will be ratified 
     through a public referendum, although a date has not yet been 
     set.
       In December 2005, King Wangchuk announced that when the 
     nation holds elections for its first elected government in 
     2008, he will abdicate to his son, Crown Prince Dasho Jigme 
     Khesar Namgyal Wangchuck. I asked the King why he chose to 
     reduce the power of the monarchy. The King responded that he 
     ``became King due to birth, not merit... which is a flaw of 
     monarchies'' and that ``national interests come first.'' I 
     found this action rare and refreshing in contrast to a world 
     where more and more people are trying to gain more and more 
     power. We spoke at great length about a wide variety of 
     issues including terrorism, the Middle East, radical Islam, 
     Iraq and Afghanistan. We had an informative dialogue and I 
     was impressed with the King's knowledge of world events 
     during the course of our hour-long meeting.
       Following the meeting with the King, I had the opportunity 
     to meet with the Chief Justice of the Royal Court, Sonam 
     Tobgye. The Bhutanese legal system is primarily based on 
     Buddhist natural law. The court has three levels, the High 
     Court, established in 1968, over which the Chief Justice 
     presides, the Dzongkhag Court, established in 1960, and the 
     Dungkhad Court, established in 1978. The High Court consists 
     of seven to nine Judges. A Dzongkhag court comprises of a 
     minimum of single judge and a maximum of three judges. A 
     Dungkhag court is comprised of one judge.
       The drafting committee for Bhutan's constitution is headed 
     by the Chief Justice and consists of 39 members of elected 
     representatives. The current system of government provides 
     for a unicameral assembly. The new government will be a 
     bicameral system with an assembly, or lower house, and an 
     upper house. I asked the Chief Justice why the King supports 
     a move towards this form of governance. He responded by 
     saying that the King told him, ``it is better to trust the 
     people than to hope for the best in one person.''
       From Bhutan we flew back to Kathmandu, passing Mount 
     Everest, to change planes before heading to Kuwait.


                                 KUWAIT

       On Friday, August 18th, we landed in 118 degree weather at 
     Ali al Salem Air Base located 45 minutes outside Kuwait City 
     and forty miles from the border with Iraq. We were met by 
     First Secretary and Chief of the Political section from the 
     U.S. embassy, Natalie Brown.
       Ali Al Salem Air Base is located just 39 miles from the 
     border with Iraq and the bomb damage from Iraq's occupation 
     of Kuwait is still visible. Kuwait can host as many as 90,000 
     U.S. military personnel at any one time, most of whom are 
     rotating in or out of Iraq. Following the U.S.-led effort to 
     liberate Kuwait from Iraq in 1991, Kuwait signed a ten year 
     defense pact with the U.S. In September 2001, the pact was 
     renewed for another ten years. On April 1, 2004, the Bush 
     Administration designed Kuwait as a Major Non-NATO Ally 
     (MNNA), a designation held by only one other Gulf state 
     (Bahrain).
       Kuwait privately supported the invasion of Iraq in 2003, 
     even though it publicly opposed the U.S. action. In the run 
     up to the invasion, Kuwait closed off 60% of its territory in 
     order to secure the U.S.-led invasion force of about 250,000 
     personnel and several thousand pieces of armor; allowed U.S. 
     forces to use two air bases, as well as its international 
     airport and sea ports, and provided $266 million in burden 
     sharing to support combat operations. Kuwait has contributed 
     $213 million in burden sharing support to OIF in FY2005, and 
     is expected to contribute $210 million in both FY2006 and 
     FY2007. Kuwait has also built a water line into Iraq, assists 
     the Polish-led security sector in Hilla, Iraq, and runs a 
     humanitarian operation center (HOC) that has funneled over 
     $500 million in assistance to Iraqis since the fall of 
     Saddam.
       Prior to the toppling of Saddam Hussein, Kuwait hosted 
     about 1,000 U.S. Air Force personnel enforcing the ``no fly 
     zone'' over southern Iraq. Kuwait also hosted about 5,000 
     U.S. forces during Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) in 
     Afghanistan that ousted the Taliban.
       On Saturday, August 19th, I met with U.S. Ambassador 
     Richard LeBaron who updated me on the recent developments in 
     the region. Ambassador LeBaron informed me that Kuwait plays 
     host to the largest military base outside Iraq in the Middle 
     East. Kuwait also gives more aid and support than any other 
     country to support U.S. efforts in Iraq.
       According to the Ambassador, Kuwait is very concerned about 
     Iraq and what they describe as the ``emergence of a failed 
     state.'' LeBaron requested I pursue the issue of Iraq with 
     Kuwaiti leaders and seek their views on the future of its 
     northern neighbor. LeBaron further asked me to seek the views 
     of Kuwait on the problem of Iran. While the US. is primarily 
     concerned about Iran's capability to attain nuclear weapons, 
     Kuwait is concerned about the environmental hazards 
     associated with nuclear energy. More specifically, Iran's 
     Bushehr nuclear facility is located closer to Kuwait city 
     than Tehran. Any accident or leak at the facility could have 
     a profound impact on Kuwait's water supply and air quality.
       The State Department's 2005 Country Reports on Terrorism 
     credits Kuwait for bolstering measures to protect U.S. forces 
     in

[[Page S8938]]

     Kuwait from terrorist attacks but notes that Kuwait has been 
     ``reluctant to confront extremist elements within the local 
     population.'' In May 2006, Kuwaiti judges dismissed charges 
     against five Kuwaitis who were repatriated from the U.S. 
     facility at Guantanamo Bay. In December 2005, Kuwait 
     convicted six men of belonging to a terrorist group (``Lions 
     of the Peninsula'') allegedly planning attacks on U.S. troops 
     in Kuwait. Since January 2005, Kuwaiti security forces have 
     engaged terrorists in at least five confrontations in Kuwait 
     City. Shortly after the September 11, 2001, attacks, Kuwait 
     moved to block the accounts of suspected Al Qaeda activists 
     in Kuwait, and the State Department reports that Kuwait has 
     established an office at the Ministry of Social Affairs and 
     Labor to monitor Islamic charities.
       On the social and political fronts, Ambassador LeBaron 
     reported that Kuwait has taken steady steps towards 
     liberalization. Women received the right to vote in 2005 and 
     ran in elections in 2006. However, no women were elected. The 
     U.S. has been providing technical assistance to Kuwait 
     through organizations like the International Republican 
     Institute and the National Democratic Institute. Kuwait has 
     had a functioning legislature for forty years which the 
     Ambassador portrayed as a ``serious body'' that is not a 
     rubber stamp and is often critical of Kuwait's leadership.
       The royal family is widely respected by the people of 
     Kuwait. The Ambassador pointed out that they do not 
     monopolize wealth and are part of the system. Kuwait's 
     substantial oil wealth, which accounts for ten percent of the 
     world market and three percent of U.S. imports, is not owned 
     by the ruling family but rather the Kuwaiti people. 
     Currently, there is much debate about over how much oil the 
     country has, but the Ambassador said Kuwait has plenty and is 
     still finding more.
       For some time, I have questioned the validity of claims 
     that the U.S. Ambassador to Iraq, April Glaspie, told Saddam 
     Hussein that the U.S. would not stand in the way should he 
     wish to take Kuwait. Unfortunately, this answer still eludes 
     me as Ambassador LeBaron did not have an answer.
       As Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, I have been heavily 
     involved in examining the issues surrounding the detainees at 
     Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. The U.S. released six Kuwaitis who were 
     later tried and released in Kuwait. However, five Kuwaitis 
     remain at Guantanamo.
       Our discussion expanded to many issues confronting the 
     region, namely the Arab-Israeli conflict. The Ambassador 
     informed me that many in the Arab world would like to see the 
     peace process rejuvenated. Even if progress is slow, Arabs 
     want to see the United States and others engaged in a process 
     and working towards a solution.
       The Ambassador and I then headed to Seif Palace to meet 
     with the Amir of Kuwait, Shaykh Sabah Al-Ahmed Al-Jaber Al-
     Sabah, the fifteenth Amir of Kuwait. During the hour-long 
     session, I asked the Amir what needs to be done to get Iran 
     to stop aiding Hezbollah and the insurgents in Iraq. The Amir 
     responded by saying that Iraq will not be stable in the next 
     few years and that Iran has been emboldened and strengthened 
     by the chaos in Iraq and the situation in Lebanon. He advised 
     me that the U.S. should speed up the training of the Iraqi 
     army and that U.S. forces should not enter town and cities 
     unless invited.
       I asked Amir Sabah if it is realistic to think that a 
     United Nations peacekeeping force of 15,000 in Lebanon can 
     stabilize the situation between Israel and Hezbollah. The 
     Amir felt the force will only be effective if they are given 
     a good mandate and the necessary authority to control the 
     region.
       When I asked about Kuwait's bilateral relationship with 
     Iran, the Amir told me Kuwait had good relations but that 
     they are concerned about the impact a nuclear accident in 
     Iran would have on Kuwait and their fear that Iran will 
     transfer peaceful nuclear technology to a military 
     capability. Given his concern about Iran becoming a nuclear 
     state, I asked if Kuwait had pressed Iran to stop their 
     pursuit of weapons. The Amir responded in the negative with 
     the rationale that if the U.S. and Europeans could not 
     convince Iran to give up their pursuit, a small country like 
     Kuwait would not be able to make any progress. However, the 
     Amir did say he would support sanctions.
       I asked the Amir about his views on the Arab-Israeli 
     conflict. Former National Security Advisor, Brent Scowcroft, 
     wrote an article suggesting relations between the two could 
     improve if Israel retreated to its 1967 borders. Saudi Arabia 
     reportedly said it would enter into a peace agreement with 
     Israel if it agreed to this proposal. The Amir also said 
     Kuwait would support such a proposal and pointed out that the 
     Arab League declared its support for such a proposal at the 
     2002 Arab summit. However, we both expressed doubt that 
     Israel would agree to such a proposal.
       I asked the Amir what should be done about Hamas and their 
     view that Israel should be destroyed. The Amir doubted Hamas 
     had the capability to destroy Israel and that Hamas attacks 
     Israel with ``fireworks.'' I informed the Amir that 
     ``fireworks do not kill people.''
       The Amir asked me to review the case of five Kuwaitis being 
     held in U.S. custody at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba and work to 
     secure their release to his government. The Amir assured me 
     that they would be tried for any crimes and punished 
     accordingly if found guilty. Six Kuwaitis were released to 
     Kuwait from Guantanamo, tried and found not guilty.
       Following my audience with the Amir, I met with Prime 
     Minister Nasser Al-Mohammed Al-Ahmed Al-Sabah. The Prime 
     Minister served as Ambassador to Iran for ten years and 
     shared with me his views on that country. He pointed out that 
     President Ahmadinejad came to power via democratic means and 
     therefore he must be recognized and dealt with. The Prime 
     Minister suggested that the U.S. should directly engage Iran 
     in a frank and direct manner because, as is the case with all 
     conflicts, dialogue and discussions should be exhausted 
     before any other action is pursued. I agreed with the Prime 
     Minister's assessment with the caveat that Iran's support for 
     terrorism and its desire to possess nuclear weapons poses a 
     threat to the region and the world. When Nasser suggested 
     that the U.S. meet with Iran in Vienna to discuss the issues 
     confronting our bilateral relationship, I informed him of my 
     prior meetings with Iranian officials in New York and my 
     desire to have a parliamentary dialogue.
       On the issue of peacekeeping efforts in Lebanon, the Prime 
     Minister hoped the U.N. efforts would be fruitful but that 
     the key to success will be having a coalition of nations 
     respected by both sides. On the issue of Hamas, the Prime 
     Minister said that Hamas was democratically elected and that 
     they must be recognized. However, he noted that Kuwait has 
     counseled Hamas that they are now policymakers inside the 
     government and must act accordingly. Following my meetings at 
     Seif Palace, we left the Gulf for Israel.


                                 ISRAEL

       On Saturday, August 19th, we landed at Ben Gurion in Tel 
     Aviv after a technical stop in Amman, Jordan. The following 
     morning I met with Israel's Defense Minister, Amir Peretz in 
     Jerusalem. Joining the meeting were Major General Etian 
     Dangott, military aide to Minister Peretz, Eyal Sela from the 
     Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Amos Gilad, Political Director 
     of the Ministry of Defense and Commander Tom Williams, United 
     States Navy.
       Peretz expressed his view that the International Community 
     must examine the rules of war for the U.N. mission in 
     southern Lebanon as Hezbollah is not a conventional force. If 
     Hezbollah is not disarmed, the U.N. must know that Israel 
     maintains the right to defend itself. Peretz was disappointed 
     that the U.N. has not been quick to provide the necessary 
     forces to implement the Security Council resolution and asked 
     the U.S. to pressure nations who have committed troops, such 
     as France, to make good on their word. I concurred and 
     believed that if there is not a sufficient force on the 
     ground in short order, Hezbollah will have the opportunity to 
     re-arm and we will find ourselves in the same situation in 
     the future. Israel agreed to the cease-fire based on the 
     U.N.'s commitment to provide 15,000 troops, of which France 
     was to provide 3,500. As of the time of our meeting, France 
     had only provided 200.
       After sharing with me information that Iran has provided 
     training and equipment via Syria to Hezbollah, I asked him if 
     Israel considered retaliating against Iran and/or Syria for 
     their open support of Hezbollah. He said that Israel did not 
     want to open another front on the war and in particular, 
     Israel felt fighting Syria would move them closer to Iran and 
     result in Syria moving back into Lebanon. Peretz told me that 
     there is much debate over whether to fight Syria or try to 
     have a dialogue with them in an attempt to move them out of 
     Iran's sphere of influence.
       I asked the Defense Minister to update me on the status of 
     the Israel Defense Force soldiers taken by Hamas and 
     Hezbollah and the likelihood that they will be returned to 
     Israel. Peretz expressed optimism that through negotiations 
     with Abu Mazen and Egypt that the soldier taken by Hamas 
     could be returned to Israel. However, he declared that Israel 
     will not negotiate with Hezbollah as they do not want to 
     strengthen the hand of Hassan Nasrallah who has not only 
     requested the release of Lebanese prisoners from Israel, but 
     also Palestinians.
       I asked the Minister whether there was any possibility 
     Israel would return to its pre-1967 borders. He expressed 
     concern that without the disarmament of Hamas and Hezbollah, 
     the proposal would only permit them to hit targets further 
     inside Israel. He felt it was a complicated proposal because 
     the question of Jerusalem remained unanswered and that Syria 
     would have to be brought in as well.
       Following my meeting with the Defense Minister, I went to 
     Israel's Supreme Court to meet with the Chief Justice, Aharon 
     Barak. Barak has served on the court for 28 years, of which 
     he was Chief Justice for the last eleven. Barak will be 
     retiring in September 2006 due to an Israeli limitation that 
     judges must retire at 70. We discussed many issues 
     including the interrogation of detainees, the use of 
     torture, the power of the executive, rule of law and 
     abortion.
       Barak has had a long and distinguished career having served 
     as dean of the law school, being appointed as Attorney 
     General by Yitzhak Rabin in 1975 and serving through the 
     Menachem Begin administration prior to his appointment to the 
     court. Barak expressed his view that democracies cannot 
     conduct or condone torture and that those taken into custody 
     must be interrogated properly and given a prompt trial. Aside 
     from our legal discussions, I asked him his

[[Page S8939]]

     views on the Arab-Israeli dilemma. The Chief Justice felt 
     constrained from speaking candidly on this question as the 
     Chief Justice, but said that ``there is light at the end of 
     the tunnel but the problem is that the tunnel keeps getting 
     longer.''
       After lunch, I traveled to the Knesset to meet with Prime 
     Minister Ehud Olmert. The Prime Minister began the meeting by 
     expressing his realization that he knew his job would be 
     difficult but that he did not expect to be in the middle of a 
     war a few months into the job. He described in some detail 
     the assistance Iran and Syria were giving to Hezbollah and 
     the great threat that poses to Israeli security. He gave me 
     many examples supporting his conclusion and pointed out that 
     Hezbollah guards were trained in Iran and Iranian 
     Revolutionary Guards are in Lebanon. He further explained how 
     Iran has provided top class weapons to Hezbollah.
       The Prime Minister said the Israeli forces were extremely 
     effective in eliminating most of the long range and medium 
     range missiles through its sophisticated systems and that no 
     launcher fired a rocket twice. He declared that Israel won 
     every confrontation with Hezbollah, but that fighting against 
     well-equipped guerrillas is difficult. Despite these 
     victories, he expressed concern about the growing influence 
     being projected by Iran.
       I asked the Olmert if he was frustrated that Israel could 
     not retaliate against Iran. The Prime Minister explained that 
     Israel should not have to deal with Iran alone and that the 
     international community must realize the threat Iran poses 
     and act to confront it accordingly. Olmert reminded me that 
     it was only 65 years ago when a dictator declared his desire 
     to eliminate Jews and now there was another leader who has 
     stated a similar desire and who is seeking nuclear weapons--a 
     convincing argument as to why the world should be moving 
     aggressively to eliminate the threat posed by Iran.
       I asked the Prime Minister if the ceasefire will hold. 
     Olmert informed me that he had received criticism from 
     Israelis for agreeing to the ceasefire and that he agreed to 
     the proposal after assurances that a robust international 
     force would be provided to bring calm to the region. He 
     further explained that Security Resolution 1701 has to be 
     implemented or Israel will be left with no choice but to 
     continue to defend itself. He mentioned that this proposal 
     was not of Israeli origin but rather from the French and the 
     United States.
       On the question of Hamas, the Prime Minister expressed hope 
     that Abu Mazen will exert his authority and garner more 
     control over the territories. He doubted there could be any 
     progress with Hamas and he refuses to negotiate with them. He 
     did believe that there could be progress in getting back 
     soldiers taken by Hezbollah, possibly in exchange for those 
     taken by Israel during the conflict.
       I asked Prime Minister Olmert his views on the idea that if 
     Israel returned to the 1967 borders, peace would come between 
     the Arabs and Israelis. He responded by saying it was an 
     outdated proposal and Hamas still wants to destroy Israel. 
     Olmert expressed his belief that the next few years will be 
     critical for Israel's survival as they combat Hezbollah, 
     Hamas, Syria and most importantly Iran--who is seeking the 
     capability to wipe Israel off the map.


                                 LIBYA

       On the morning of August 21, 2006, we departed Tel Aviv en 
     route Tripoli, Libya with a brief technical stop in Cyprus. 
     We were greeted at Mitiga International Airport by Dr. 
     Suleiman al-Shahumi, the General People's Congress Secretary 
     of Foreign Affairs and by Charge Greg Berry and Political and 
     Economic Officer, Elizabeth Fritschle.
       After a brief rest at the hotel, we traveled to the U.S. 
     embassy annex in Tripoli for a country team briefing. The 
     U.S. Embassy is temporarily located in the hotel we were 
     staying at, but is insufficient to serve as a place for the 
     U.S. Government to do its business. Charge Berry requested my 
     assistance in speaking with Libyan leadership in hopes of 
     security land for a permanent facility to build a mission. 
     Additionally, he informed me that airline companies in Libya 
     were in the process of deciding between Boeing and Airbus to 
     supply them with a new fleet. President Chirac, Prime 
     Minister Blair and Chancellor Merkel have all visited Libya 
     and offered their support for Airbus. Charge Berry requested 
     my assistance in sharing the benefits of the Boeing product.
       In October 2005, Boeing received an order for two 737-800s 
     from Buraq Air, a privately held airline, valued at $250 
     million and the planes are scheduled to be delivered by 
     November 2006. However, Boeing is competing against Airbus to 
     sell up to fourteen 737s and twelve 787s to Libyan Airways, 
     the flag carrier. This deal is estimated to be worth $2.9 
     billion. Boeing has a significant footprint in Pennsylvania 
     employing 4,681 workers and 915 venders and suppliers. Boeing 
     spent $264,279,109 in Pennsylvania in 2005. In each of my 
     meetings with Libyan officials, I described the benefits of 
     the Boeing aircraft and highlighted the fact that it 
     incorporates the latest technologies and offers significant 
     fuel efficiencies.
       Following the brief, we met with Dr. Suleiman al-Shahumi 
     for about an hour. Dr. Shahumi expressed his government's 
     desire to continue the improvements in our bilateral 
     relationship. He briefed me on Libya's efforts to combat 
     terrorism and their desire to have peace in Africa and the 
     Middle East. Dr. Shahumi and I discussed our country's 
     efforts to combat terrorism and our views on the issue of 
     Iran. We both agreed that we are entering a new phase in 
     U.S.-Libyan relations but that three decades of no 
     communication will take some time to overcome.
       Dr. Shahumi shared with me Libya's problems with illegal 
     immigration. I told him about the ongoing immigration debate 
     in the United States and the eleven million illegal 
     immigrants residing in the country. Dr. Shahumi informed me 
     that an estimated 50,000 illegal immigrants pass through 
     Libya every month in an attempt to leave the continent for 
     Europe.
       I told Dr. Shahumi that it was important that the U.S. be 
     permitted to establish an embassy quickly and he concurred. 
     The people to people exchanges are very valuable in 
     establishing sound relations between our countries. It was 
     brought to my attention that the note taker from the Libyan 
     government studied at Penn State University in 1980 and that 
     her son was born in State College, PA.
       I asked Dr. Shahumi to work with the United States to 
     permit Dr. Donald White, an archaeology professor at the 
     University of Pennsylvania, to continue to have access to 
     various sites in Libya. Dr. White had previously had 
     difficulty securing the appropriate documents needed to enter 
     Libya. I also raised this issue with other members of the 
     Libyan leadership during my stay. Following our meeting, Dr. 
     Suleiman al-Shahumi hosted us for dinner at a beautiful 
     downtown Tripoli restaurant located adjacent to an arch 
     constructed in honor of Marcus Aurelius.
       The following morning we departed for the Ministry of 
     Justice to meet with Ali Umar al-Hasnawi, Secretary of the 
     General People's Committee for Justice. As was customary 
     during all of my meetings with Libyan officials, the meetings 
     always began with a brief dialogue about the problems between 
     the U.S. and Libya in the past and both nations' desire for 
     better relations in the future.
       I pressed Mr. Hasnawi about resolving the outstanding 
     issues surrounding the cases involving the bombings of Pan Am 
     Flight 103 and the La Belle Disco. On December 21, 1988, a 
     bomb exploded on Pan Am flight 103, over Lockerbie, Scotland 
     killing 270 people, including 189 Americans. The U.N. 
     Security Council passed three resolutions that placed 
     sanctions on Libya until its government surrendered for trial 
     men suspected of the Pan Am flight and the bombing of French 
     flight UTA 772 in 1989. Libya surrendered the two men on 
     April 5, 1999, and the U.N. suspended sanctions the same day. 
     In August 2003, Libya accepted responsibility for the Pan Am 
     bombing and agreed to pay the families of each American 
     victim $10 million in compensation. To date, the victims' 
     families had been paid $8 million each over two payments with 
     the remaining $2 million to be paid when the U.S. removed 
     Libya from the list of State Sponsors of Terrorism. Libya has 
     been removed but the final payment has not been made.
       On November 13, 2001, a German court found four 
     individuals, including a former employee of the Libyan 
     embassy, guilty in connection with the 1986 La Belle disco 
     bombing. Two U.S. servicemen were killed and eighty other 
     servicemen and women were injured in the bombing. In August 
     2004, a compensation deal for non-U.S. victims was agreed to; 
     however U.S. victims continue to pursue their claims in 
     federal court. While the U.S. Government was not party to 
     either of these suits, I stressed the importance of having 
     these outstanding issues resolved and the benefit it will 
     have in aiding Libya reemerge into the international 
     community. Mr. Hasnawi informed me that both sides are 
     working to bring the issue to a conclusion by the end of 2006 
     and should the cases go to court, he pledged that Libya would 
     accept the ruling.
       Charge Berry raised the issue of the five Bulgarian female 
     nurses and one Palestinian male doctor who were arrested in 
     1999 on charges that they infected 426 Libyan children with 
     HIV. They were found guilty on May 6, 2004, and sentenced to 
     death by firing squad. However, a French doctor testified at 
     the trial that the children had been infected in 1997, one 
     year before the Bulgarians and the Palestinian arrived in 
     Libya. On December 25, 2006, Libya's Supreme Court overturned 
     the convictions and death sentences, and ordered a retrial 
     which began in May 2006. Mr. Hasnawi responded that he 
     anticipates a ruling in the case by no later than November 
     2006.
       I then traveled to the Foreign Ministry to meet with Abdul 
     Rahman Shalgam, Deputy Secretary of the General People's 
     Committee for Foreign Relations. I asked Mr. Shalgam what can 
     be done to address the tragic situation in Sudan. He informed 
     me of Libya's involvement over the last three years to bring 
     all sides in the conflict to Tripoli to participate in a 
     dialogue. The key to peace and stability in Sudan, according 
     to Shalgam, is to fulfill three requests made by all parties 
     involved. Each of whom want to participate in power, benefit 
     from the country's wealth and participate in a federal form 
     of government to allow for local administration of the 
     various regions. I requested that his government apply 
     pressure on the government in Khartoum to permit the United 
     Nations to enter the country.
       I found the about-face in our bilateral relationship unique 
     in modern history and asked Mr. Shalgam what were the factors 
     that convinced Libya to reengage the United States and could 
     it be used as a template to improve relations between the 
     U.S. and Iran.

[[Page S8940]]

     He informed me that it was in the best interest of Libya to 
     have good relations, commerce and trade with the United 
     States and that living under sanctions was detrimental to the 
     economy and the Libyan people. He further stated that Libya 
     wants recognition for their actions to eliminate weapons of 
     mass destruction and their cooperation on counterterrorism 
     efforts. It is this recognition, and a seat at the 
     international table, that Iran seeks, according to Shalgam. 
     He believes the U.S. should directly enter into dialogue 
     with Iran--a response shared by most officials I met with 
     during my trip.
       After lunch, I departed for a meeting with Ali Baghdadi al 
     Mahmudi, Secretary of General People's Congress. Mr. Mahmudi, 
     whose position is not unlike that of a Prime Minister, was 
     running a cabinet meeting which was running overtime. This 
     delay provided me an opportunity to speak with Mohammad 
     Siala, Secretary of International Cooperation, about the 
     steps Libya has taken to restore its economy. Prior to 
     serving in his current capacity, Mr. Siala led Libya's 
     tourism bureau. Mr. Siala, echoing the statements of Mr. 
     Shalgam, stressed the importance of U.S. markets, in 
     particular, the U.S. financial and banking system, to the 
     growth of the Libyan economy. He expressed his interest in 
     having a delegation from the U.S. Export Import Bank come to 
     Libya in the near future to discuss proposals to aid Libya's 
     infrastructure and commerce.
       When the cabinet meeting broke, I met with Mr. Mahmudi who 
     shared his view that the U.S.-Libyan relationship was on a 
     positive track. He expressed his desire for enhanced trade 
     and tourism with the U.S. and greater cooperation on issues 
     of mutual concern such as radical Islam. Mahmudi views 
     delegations from the U.S. as invaluable in enhancing our 
     understanding of one another and hoped that more would come 
     in the future.
       During our discussion on Iran, Mr. Mahmudi believes the 
     U.S. should not impose preconditions for talking to Tehran. 
     On the issue of Libya serving as a framework in which the 
     U.S. and Iran could foster better relations, he warned that 
     the U.S. has not done enough to show the advantages of 
     ditching weapons of mass destruction. Many Libyans question 
     the move to surrender the weapons as they have not seen 
     anything in return for their actions, such as technology and 
     knowledge transfers. He believes that should the U.S. want to 
     convince Iran to forego nuclear weapons, it should set an 
     example by aiding Libya and showing the benefits that can be 
     brought to those who chose that path. He mentioned that Libya 
     has good relations with Iran and North Korea and that Libya 
     may be able to play a role in future negotiations.
       Following my meeting with Mahmudi, I was whisked to Mitiga 
     International Airport as I was to meet Colonel Muammar 
     Qadhafi in Surt, located about a one hour flight from 
     Tripoli. Upon arrival at a vacant airport, I was led in a 
     motorcade into the desert. The drive revealed the desolate 
     landscape which was dotted with a few tents and camels. I 
     arrived at Qadhafi's location to find a man-made pond, 
     paddleboat, a few tents and a recreational vehicle. Perhaps 
     the strangest fixture at this location was Congressman Tom 
     Lantos, who was also meeting with Qadhafi. He commented how 
     difficult it was to see each other in Washington, D.C. and 
     how odd it was to be chatting in Libya.
       As the sun was setting, we were summoned to enter Qadhafi's 
     tent. We exchanged pleasantries and our desires for enhanced 
     relations between our countries. I pressed Qadhafi to move 
     expeditiously towards settling the outstanding disputes 
     involving the bombings of Pan Am 103 and the La Belle disco.
       I also requested he work expeditiously to grant the U.S. 
     the necessary land to build an embassy. Qadhafi said that the 
     U.S. would be given land, but that it would not be a typical 
     embassy. He elaborated that the mission in Tripoli would not 
     serve as an ``outpost for democracy and opposition'' and that 
     the U.S. Ambassador should not interfere with local affairs. 
     Charge Berry responded by reassuring Qadhafi that ``the U.S. 
     will be good guests.'' Qadhafi declared that he did not want 
     the U.S. mission involved in Libyan politics and did not want 
     U.S. funds being distributed to political parties and 
     democracy efforts. Charge Berry quipped that he did not have 
     any money to spend.
       I asked Qadhafi if democracy was in Libya's future. He 
     responded by saying democracy was derived from an Arabic term 
     and that he hoped the United States would follow Libya's form 
     of government declaring it was the most pure form of 
     democracy in history. He believed that direct representation 
     does not serve the people of the United States and that 
     Libyans do not use proxies to make decisions on their behalf. 
     Qadhafi believes that peace will happen only when all the 
     people are in power and can decide the course of their 
     government. He further declared his desire to end the 
     existence of armies, classes, parliaments and to place wealth 
     back into the hand of the people.
       Qadhafi informed me that there was no animosity held by the 
     Libyan people for Americans but that leaders of countries are 
     typically responsible for actions that create animosity 
     between peoples. For an example, he recanted his 
     confrontation with President Ronald Reagan and the action 
     taken by the United States which resulted in the killing of 
     his daughter. He asked the question, ``was that a decision of 
     the American people?''
       I discussed the problems the United States is having with 
     Iran and their support for terrorism in the region, their 
     desire to attain nuclear weapons and their statements seeking 
     to wipe Israel off the map. I asked Qadhafi if there were any 
     lessons to be learned from the experience between the U.S. 
     and Libya and if it would be applicable to dealing with Iran. 
     Qadhafi informed me that Libya urged North Korea and Iran to 
     turn over their weapons and halt nuclear programs. However, 
     Qadhafi believes that unless the U.S. shows the benefits of 
     the actions taken by Libya to give up its weapons of mass 
     destruction, the U.S. will not be able to approach either 
     North Korea or Iran with any such proposals.
       I asked Qadhafi what he wanted from the U.S. He replied by 
     saying President Bush promised he would help with technology 
     transfers and knowledge transfers but that nothing has 
     happened since the agreement was reached in 2004. He also 
     suggested that the United States provide free power 
     facilities for Libya. While I could not promise they would be 
     free, I concurred that the U.S. should aid Libya with their 
     infrastructure.
       Qadhafi declared it would be counterproductive for us to 
     look towards the past and expressed his desire for the U.S. 
     and Libya to confront international terrorism, disease, 
     climate change and Middle East peace. I asked Qadhafi how we 
     should combat the issue of fundamentalism and terrorism. He 
     responded by saying that the U.S. is supporting it by 
     supporting Saudi Arabia. I told him we did not do so 
     intentionally and that some U.S. leaders, myself included, 
     have long been concerned about our relationship with Saudi 
     Arabia. I highlighted my frustration with the Saudi 
     government which began with their lack of cooperation 
     following the Khobar Towers bombing in 1996 to their support 
     for textbooks which incite hatred. I told him about 
     legislation I have authored, the Saudi Arabia Accountability 
     Act, and my desire for a closer examination of our 
     relationship with Riyadh.
       He further stated that Wahabbism, which emanates from Saudi 
     Arabia, is spreading across the region and is taking root in 
     the Horn of Africa and is a threat to the entire Muslim 
     world. Qadhafi went on to say that Saudi Arabia was 
     responsible for the Bali bombings and behind the escape of 
     seven individuals from Yemen responsible for the attack on 
     the U.S.S. Cole. I asked Qadhafi to provide evidence to 
     support these claims and did so at a subsequent meeting but 
     was not provided anything to back up these charges.
       Our meeting lasted about 45 minutes after which I was 
     escorted through the desert back to the air base and back to 
     Tripoli where we arrived at approximately 10:00 p.m.
       On August 23rd, we departed Tripoli for Shannon, Ireland to 
     rest and refuel prior to returning to Philadelphia on August 
     24, 2006.
       I yield the floor.
                                  ____


   Temple University, Beasley School of Law, Rule of Law Projects in 
                China--Special Report on Temple Students


                           executive summary

       Temple's initiatives in the People's Republic of China are 
     grounded on the common theme of developing carefully-selected 
     Chinese legal professionals who are poised to make 
     significant contributions to the rule of law in China. Temple 
     accomplishes this goal through three main categories of 
     programs: the Temple Beijing LL.M degree program, non-degree 
     education programs for judges and prosecutors, and law 
     development and reform initiatives. Each of these programs is 
     operated in cooperation with influential and high-level 
     Chinese partners.
       Education is long-term investment in the legal 
     infrastructure of a society. However, Temple's programs have 
     the benefit of also having an immediate impact. We are 
     educating judges and prosecutors who are in the courtroom 
     interpreting China's laws and applying them to real cases 
     every day. Temple educates National People's Congress 
     Legislative Affairs Committee members who are using their 
     legal education to draft China's legislation. We instruct law 
     professors who incorporate program content and critical 
     teaching methods into their own classes, thus shaping more 
     future judges, prosecutors, and lawyers. Temple graduates are 
     developing the rule of law from within the system. As these 
     leaders advance in their careers, the opportunities to use 
     their Temple legal education will only gather momentum to 
     bring about even more truly effective law reform.
       The Temple-educated legal community has the potential to be 
     enormously useful to the U.S. Government as it supports the 
     rule of law in China. Temple graduates and current 
     participants represent a reflective, highly-placed community 
     of judges, prosecutors, state officials, professors, and 
     legal advocates who have a special understanding of the 
     principles of the U.S. legal system.
       A total of 554 legal professionals have participated or are 
     participating in at least one of Temple's China educational 
     programs since 1997. Of these, 81 percent are from the public 
     sector. We maintain contact with all graduates through the 
     newly formed Temple Law Alumni Association of China (TLAAC), 
     publishing directories, maintaining a website, and hosting 
     national reunions at least once a year.
     The Master of Laws (LL.M.) degree program
       The Temple Beijing LL.M. degree program, operated 
     cooperatively with Tsinghua University, is the most 
     comprehensive educational program Temple--or any other 
     foreign legal educational institution--offers in China. The 
     educational experience is designed for Chinese legal 
     professionals and

[[Page S8941]]

     aims to have a profound impact on these key legal change 
     agents.
       A total of 293 Chinese legal professionals, including 
     judges, National People's Congress and State Council 
     legislative officers, prosecutors, government officials, and 
     law professors have graduated from or are currently enrolled 
     in Temple's Beijing and Philadelphia LL.M. programs. Of 
     these, 64% are from the public sector. Moreover, 12.7% are 
     ethnic minority lawyers, many from traditionally 
     disadvantaged regions within China.
       The number of Temple-educated Chinese lawyers is impressive 
     and important. Temple has educated a substantial core 
     community of influential Chinese lawyers who have a deep 
     understanding of the fundamental principles of the rule of 
     law such as transparency, due process, accountability, and 
     high ethical standards. They will carry these ideas with them 
     as their careers mature.
       Temple is constantly seeking out lawyers who work in NGOs 
     and public interest work to admit to the LL.M program. Among 
     our current students: Tu Lijuan is an experienced human 
     rights advocate, having worked for the Domestic Violence 
     Network; Shui Miao is a drafter with the Legislative Affairs 
     Office of the National People's Congress; and Xue-Dan Is the 
     Director of Training for the State Intellectual Property 
     Organization. Jiefeng Lu, a protege of the famous anti-
     discrimination lawyer, Professor Zhou Wei, worked on cutting-
     edge employment discrimination cases in China, plans to 
     become an activist-scholar in discrimination law.
       Four LL.M. students from the public sector, including two 
     law professors, one official with the Legislative Affairs 
     Office of the State Council, and one official with the 
     Ministry of Justice (All China Lawyers Association), 
     participated in a one month internship at Reed Smith. Their 
     experience culminated in mock trial before Senior Circuit 
     Judge Edward Becker of the U.S. Third Circuit Court of 
     Appeals. The fact pattern simulated that of Kelo vs. New 
     London, the controversial property rights case involving the 
     government taking of private property for private economic 
     development. The students will take this knowledge on the 
     U.S. law of condemnation back to China, where the similar 
     issue of confiscation of private property is a sensitive 
     issue that requires public participation and commentary.
       Each year Temple makes efforts to locate law professors to 
     attend the LL.M. program. To date, we have educated 19 law 
     professors, including seven during the term of this grant. We 
     know that these professors are incorporating what they have 
     learned into their courses in Chinese law schools, thereby 
     having a direct impact on what is being taught and, perhaps 
     more importantly, how it is being taught. As a result, a new 
     generation of Chinese lawyers will be able to critically 
     examine Chinese law and be exposed to principles of U.S law.
       Class of 2006 Beijing LL.M. student and Professor Meng 
     Yanbei teaches antitrust at Renmin University. She reports 
     that her Temple education directly influences her teaching 
     and scholarship--and how she assesses her students. Meng took 
     antitrust with Professor Burton Caine in the fall of 2005 and 
     learned how to analyze cases from different angles and 
     appreciate how judges with different opinions set forth their 
     legal reasoning, and synthesize the law. The class 
     discussions often focused on how cases differ and overlap, 
     creating a living body of law, thus providing Meng with 
     greater insight into the law and how it should be taught. 
     Prior to her Temple education, she read antitrust and 
     anticompetitive law materials through translation into 
     Chinese, but now she reads the original source materials in 
     English. She said that many translated materials are 
     imprecise or misleading, and her improved English abilities 
     allow her to teach more competently about U.S. sources of 
     law. She also provides English case materials to her 
     students, explaining to them that it is better to work hard 
     at reading the original cases rather than fall back on 
     translations.
       On March 7, 2006, we observed Meng's fourth-year 
     undergraduate law school anti-competition law class at Renmin 
     University. She arranges in advance for students to discuss 
     various topics and have them lead discussions using Power 
     Point. In the class we observed, the student made a series of 
     creative arguments in an effort to categorize the various 
     forms of anticompetitive behavior, and Meng made comments to 
     supplement the student points while also stimulating class 
     discussion to help the presenter clarify her ideas. She also 
     encouraged the students to think creatively about the law, 
     how a court may consider public policy in making decisions, 
     and to take a more active. role in their learning.
       The impact of any program its demonstrated by its graduates 
     and what they do with their education. Our alumni report that 
     they are profoundly affected by their education. The 
     following anecdotal stories--from a judge who published a 
     book on how to cite legal authority and rationales in 
     judicial opinions; a prosecutor who writes the standards for 
     the Beijing People's Procuratorate stressing prosecutorial 
     restraint; and a teacher who uses advocacy techniques in the 
     courtroom and classroom--all illustrate the varied ways 
     Temple graduates are using their education to promote the 
     rule of law in China.
       Mr. Feng Wensheng is the deputy director of the research 
     and policy division of the Supreme People's Court of Hebei 
     Province. Judge Feng graduated from the Temple Beijing LLM 
     program in 2003 and is now responsible for drafting internal 
     court procedures for all courts in the province--with 
     emphasis on judicial conduct. He continually focuses on 
     matters regarding judicial neutrality and the role of the 
     judge to seek truth from the facts before making any legal 
     determinations. His Temple experience also enabled him to 
     publish ``Reasoning and Annotations'' (Law Press: 2005), in 
     which Judge Feng draws on principles of U.S. and 
     international law to create a model for Chinese judicial 
     rationale drafting.
       Mr. Chang Guofeng is the Director of the Discipline and 
     Guidance division of the Beijing People's Procuratorate. Mr. 
     Chang graduated from the Temple Beijing LL.M. program in 2004 
     and is responsible for writing policy directives that are 
     distributed to the entire Beijing procuratorial system. He 
     reports that his Temple education gave him a stronger view of 
     prosecutorial restraint, and his directives reflect the 
     spirit that the role of prosecutors is to vigorously 
     represent the interests of the state without trampling the 
     rights of the defendant. His directives include strategies 
     and suggestions for prosecutors to take a middle course when 
     carrying out investigations and prosecutions, as the larger 
     interest of the state is not just to convict the guilty but 
     to ensure a fair trial and accurate result for all 
     participants.
       Ms. Shen Jia is a professor of law at Beijing City 
     University and 2005 graduate of the Beijing LL.M. program. 
     Professor Shen reports in a recent e-mail:
       ``To be frank, I am proud of what I have learned from 
     Beijing LLM program . . . Just think, two years ago, I knew 
     nothing about common law system, not to mention trial 
     advocacy. But now I can stand in front of a judge trying to 
     persuade the court what I've got to say. I know what the 
     judge wants from me by asking those questions, so I can turn 
     them into advocating for our side. It's because of the help 
     from all Temple professors . . . that made all these things 
     possible.''
       Professor Shen teaches a U.S. common law course at Beijing 
     City University. She now provides a fresh and updated 
     teaching presentation to her students using strategies 
     similar to those employed in her Temple trial advocacy class. 
     Her teaching will inspire students to take a greater interest 
     in the importance of transparent laws and effective advocacy 
     trial practice.
     Non-degree judicial education program
       Temple has had a partnership with the National Judicial 
     Training College of the Supreme People's Court to operate a 
     non-degree judicial education program since 2002. Associate 
     Chief Justice Cao Jianmin personally oversees the program and 
     meets with Dean Robert Reinstein each year to discuss 
     progress and future collaboration.
       The program consists of a three-month Introduction to the 
     U.S. Legal System course at the National Judicial College of 
     the Supreme People's Court, followed by a concentrated four-
     week program in the United States. As part of the U.S. 
     module, participants attend a three-week session on the role 
     of the judiciary in a rule-of-law based legal system at New 
     York University School of Law's Institute for Judicial 
     Training. The judges also visit the Temple main campus in 
     Philadelphia for a discussion on judicial review hosted by 
     Dean Reinstein. Moreover, they visit Washington, D.C., 
     meeting with their American judicial colleagues, the 
     Department of Justice, and other legal institutions.
       The Judicial Education Program was created primarily to 
     educate those judges who could benefit from some exposure to 
     U.S. and international law, but could not enter the LL.M. 
     program due to work commitments. To date, 138 judges have 
     completed or are participating in the program.
       Participants are from geographically diverse parts of 
     China, including many judges from lesser-developed Western 
     regions. Temple maintains records on program participants and 
     has integrated the judges into the Temple Alumni Association 
     of China.
       Judge Li Xinfang of the No.1 Civil Chamber of the Zhanjiang 
     Intermediate Court, Guangdong Province, reports that the 
     Introduction to U.S. Legal System course and one-month 
     session in the United States in 2005 has greatly expanded the 
     scope of resources she now uses to decide cases. In 
     particular, her visits to courts and interaction with 
     colleagues in the United States provided her a fresh 
     perspective on dispute resolution while underscoring the use 
     of due process and transparent norms as the guiding principle 
     for all judicial action.
       Previous program participants report that their Temple 
     education allows them to exercise greater influence in their 
     home courts. The judges emphasize that they are often asked 
     to share information from their Temple training with their 
     colleagues at staff meetings and through written reports. 
     Their Temple experience also allows them to answer individual 
     questions for colleagues who must resolve an issue currently 
     unsettled under Chinese law but that may have common practice 
     in the United States. Judges state that this multiplier 
     effect allows their Temple education to carry tremendous 
     weight and influence in courts well beyond the training of 
     one individual judge.
       Past Judicial Education Program participants also emphasize 
     the long-term value of the program.
       Mr. Bai Zongzhao is a judge on the Supreme People's Court 
     of Sichuan Province. He participated in the 2003 Judicial 
     Education Program and then graduated from the

[[Page S8942]]

     Temple Beijing LLM program in 2004. He is now the deputy 
     director of the high court's criminal division. Judge Bai has 
     indicated, in a 2005 interview, that his Temple education 
     provided him with a profound sense of substantive knowledge 
     and court procedure. When he is the presiding judge in a 
     case, he now holds a pre-trial hearing and instructs the 
     prosecutors and defense attorneys on more efficient court 
     practice-skills Judge Bai says he learned in his Temple trial 
     advocacy class. He informs counsel that the purpose of the 
     hearing is to resolve questions the judges have about the 
     weak points of the cases, and not simply to recite the 
     written pleadings. Judge Bai insists that creating a more 
     adversarial-style hearing allows him to ask more detailed 
     questions and arrive at a more legally accurate conclusion. 
     Overall, he concludes that the Temple program positively 
     affects graduates' way of thinking about law, with greater 
     adherence to law and procedure, and will pay long-term 
     dividends in China's legal culture.
       Temple and the National Judicial College remain very 
     satisfied with the educational experience and the progress of 
     our graduates. This year we have added an additional course 
     in Civil Procedure to the Beijing portion of the program.
       The National Judicial College has recently agreed to 
     conduct a joint survey with Temple of all judges who have 
     attended the program with the specific goal determining what 
     has been most useful to our participants. We will likely use 
     our findings as a basis to refine the curriculum.
     Non-degree prosecutorial education program
       In 2002 the Supreme People's Procuratorate invited Temple 
     to create a non-degree prosecutor education program modeled 
     on our successful partnership with the Supreme People's 
     Court. In December 2005, the second prosecutorial education 
     program was held in Beijing, Philadelphia and Washington, 
     D.C.
       Seasoned and well-reputed Temple faculty delivered sessions 
     on search and seizure protections, pre-arrest warnings, jury 
     trial procedures, and proper police practices in collecting 
     evidence. To supplement the faculty discussions, Temple was 
     fortunate to procure the enthusiastic participation of the 
     U.S. Attorney's Office in Philadelphia as well as the 
     Department of Justice in Washington DC. Investigators from 
     the Federal Bureau of Investigations in both cities also took 
     part. Experienced U.S. prosecutors and FBI agents delivered 
     sessions on motion practice, importance of defense lawyers, 
     and strategies for combating official corruption.
       An underlying strategy of the Temple program was to 
     underscore the importance of due process and transparent 
     norms at all stages of criminal investigation and 
     prosecution. Mr. Xu Yanping, Vice President of the Shanghai 
     Pudong District Procuratorate, served as group leader and 
     provided continual feedback to the program directors. He 
     continually remarked how the program impressed upon the 
     participants the depth and scope of U.S.-style protections, 
     the tremendous knowledge of the faculty and practitioners, 
     and the importance of an open and transparent system. This 
     combination of factors will influence the prosecutors to 
     carry out their own laws with fairness as well as to 
     continually bring themselves to higher levels of professional 
     excellence.
       In a follow-up interview with Mr. Xu in Shanghai in 
     February 2006, he underscored the value to him of his 
     participation in the program, particularly how the material 
     now provides him a new frame of reference in making decisions 
     in his current job.
       Similarly, Bian Fei, a participant in the 2003 program, 
     reported that his superiors asked him to do a presentation on 
     the information he acquired from the program to 100 of his 
     peers upon his return. Some of the ideas were subsequently 
     used in an office reorganization plan.
       Participants reported that the training program was well-
     run and extremely beneficial to their professional 
     development. They underscored that many areas of their 
     prosecutorial practice, particularly criminal procedure, are 
     still being developed in China--and that understanding of US. 
     practice helps to fill certain gaps. Some participants were 
     trial prosecutors, others were administrators and 
     prosecutorial researchers, so the multiplier effect of 
     training one person will also carry weight in various levels 
     of the Chinese prosecutorial system.
       As part of Temple's overall plan to create a community of 
     U.S.-educated legal professionals, participants have been 
     fully integrated into the Temple Law Alumni Association of 
     China.
       By all accounts, this program is effective and highly 
     valued by the Supreme People's Procuratorate. Unfortunately, 
     this program's funding was cut from the current year's grant.
     Outreach to ethnic minorities in China
       Temple is committed to identifying and supporting minority 
     students in our programs, and we aggressively recruit 
     qualified minority students, particularly from the Western 
     regions of China. Our partner organizations in China have 
     indicated that further development of the Western regions of 
     China is critical to the overall stability of China's legal 
     system, and so Temple has created a minority outreach program 
     to educate students who have the social commitment to return 
     to their home regions and carry out rule-of-law reforms in 
     less-developed areas.
       Temple has an extraordinary record of success in educating 
     qualified minorities with a law degree--a rare commodity. 
     Temple's reputation is so well-known that minority students 
     are beginning to refer their friends to the program.
       To date, 29 ethnic minorities have either graduated from or 
     are currently attending our LL.M. program. Thirteen minority 
     graduates now work in the public sector: four are judges, 
     three are prosecutors, and one works at the State Council. 
     Four graduates are law professors, currently teaching at the 
     laws schools of Central University for Nationalities, 
     Zhengzhou University, and Sichuan University. The LL.M. 
     program has educated nine Tibetans, eight Huis, three 
     Manchurians, two Mongolians, and one each Kazak, Li, Miao, 
     Tijia, Uigyur, Yi, and Zhuang.
       As part of our partnership with the Central University for 
     Nationalities, Temple has supported Mr. Kalsang Tsering. Mr. 
     Tsering is an ethnic Tibetan who studied English in Temple's 
     Intensive English Language Program for two years. Upon his 
     graduation from Temple in May 2006, returned to Tibet to work 
     with the Tibet Hengfeng Law Firm to provide legal services to 
     the Tibetan community. Mr. Tsering states that his Temple 
     education will help him to provide access to justice for more 
     Tibetans while also assisting in facilitating foreign 
     investment in Tibet. He also feels a social obligation to 
     serve his community, and he ultimately hopes to work both as 
     a lawyer and law lecturer at newly-created law department at 
     Tibet University.
       Kalsang studied international human rights course and wrote 
     a scholarly paper on how the Chinese government can take 
     additional action to protect Tibetan language rights and 
     establish a bilingual system in Tibetan regions.


                               conclusion

       We are gratified by the accomplishments of Temple's rule of 
     law projects in China. Temple's programs are making tangible 
     contributions to China in its ongoing process of developing a 
     credible legal system. It is an honor and a privilege to be 
     entrusted with such an important job by the Department of 
     State.
                                  ____


               My View of the Temple/Tsinghoa LLM Program

       Senator Specter: I am greatly honored for this opportunity 
     to express my view of the Temple/Tsinghua Program by writing 
     a letter to you.
       First of all, heartiest thanks to you for your brief and 
     instructive speech to us students of the program during your 
     visit to China. Among the students, I was the luckiest person 
     to have had the chance to answer your inquiry about the 
     protection of the rights related to the accused persons in 
     China. In my opinion, there are many differences between 
     America and China on this issue, and the reasons are quite 
     complicated.
       Politically speaking, China has a more than 2000 years 
     history of feuda1ism which is charateristic of autocracy, 
     that is to say, we have a strong tradition to give more than 
     enough belief and reliance to the government to decide 
     whether a person is guilty or not. Even though we are trying 
     to apply modern criminal procedure strictly to protect the 
     legal rights of accused persons, the phenomenon of 
     disregarding the suspects' legal rights still exists. More 
     time is needed to change, and I hope the sooner the better.
       Judicially speaking, we have used the standard of the 
     presumption of guilt for many years, as it was hard to 
     believe that a person could be innocent when he/she was 
     accused of a crime in the past. From 1997, we began to apply 
     a new standard of the presumption of innocence, however, in 
     reality, we could not completely remove the influence of the 
     old notion. I am sure things will change with the development 
     of law in China.
       Economically speaking, we have been focusing more on 
     economic development than on social justice. Sometimes we do 
     not have time to pay attention to the legal rights of accused 
     persons. But now we have put forward the social object of 
     justice, which no legal right can be ignored, nor can be the 
     accused persons' legal rights.
       As far as I know, the difference about the protection of 
     the rights of the accused persons between America and China 
     is so large that it is usually difficult for us to understand 
     and agree with each other. Personally speaking, I think that 
     America may give too much protection to the accused person, 
     which is not very often good for the control of crime, and 
     that China may pay too much attention to social stability and 
     economic development, which sometimes sacrifices the accused 
     persons' legal rights. Therefore, the two countries can make 
     efforts to find common ground through communication. This 
     program will surely enhance the mutual understanding of each 
     other's legal systems.
       I also know that it is your instrumental role in promoting 
     this program that makes the judicial communication between 
     America and China so specific and effective. All the students 
     of the program have benefitted a lot from the program, and we 
     will play a fundamental role in the legal communication 
     between America and China.
       Once again thanks for your continued attention to the 
     program and to us students. We will try our best to study in 
     the program. I am looking forward to hearing your thoughts on 
     this matter.
           Yours sincerely,
                                              Feng Zhaojiu/Thomas,
                               Student of LL.M of Temple/Tsinghua.

[[Page S8943]]

     
                                  ____
              My Impression of the Temple/Tsinghua Program

       Senator Specter: First of all thanks for your supports to 
     the program and meeting with us!
       The exchange and cooperation between Temple University and 
     Tsinghua University law school is very valuable. It provides 
     a good platform for Chinese judges, prosecutors, attorneys, 
     and government officials to understand the legal system of 
     the United States. The Master of Laws Program of Temple/
     Tsinghua University provides legal education that causes 
     fruitful development in China. It opens a window for us to 
     use the advanced legal system of the United States for 
     references.
       I come from the Dongying Intermediate Court of Shandong 
     Province. I have been working as a criminal judge for six 
     years, hearing more than 150 cases. I chose to attend this 
     program with the encouragement of my American teachers when I 
     studied in National Judicial College this year. What 
     impressed me most is their patience and responsibility!
       As to this program, I wish that it could contain more 
     hands-on practical training, so that it could be even more 
     efficient and valuable to us. In addition, I wish we can be 
     given more lectures by American judges, prosecutors, and 
     government officials; this will provide us additional 
     information to help us carry out our jobs as judges in China.
       Finally, this program is a big challenge to me because 
     English is not my native language, and America's legal 
     culture is very different from China's legal culture. I will 
     do my best to achieve my goal in the program, meanwhile I 
     wish I can obtain more help. I know it is only beginning, 
     even if I can survive the LLM program! My dream is to become 
     an excellent judge. In the future, I wish I can do some 
     beneficial work for judicial exchange and cooperation between 
     China and the United States.

                                                  Chen Litian,

     Graduate of the LLM of Temple/Tsinghua University.
                                  ____

       August 24, 2006.
       Dear Senator Specter: I am very pleased to write this 
     letter to you. I truly admire you for your abundant 
     experience and your contribution to the judicial relationship 
     between the United States and China. Your excellent and 
     useful lecture impressed me deeply.
       I am a young female Chinese judge of Bayannaor Intermediate 
     Court in Inner Mongolia. I was appointed to the judiciary in 
     March 1997.
       I am very lucky to have this good opportunity to take part 
     in Temple/Tsinghua LLM program. First of all, it is very 
     convenient for Chinese law practitioners to learn the legal 
     system of the United States at Tsinghua, which is a famous 
     university in China, and then spend two months at Temple 
     University in Philadelphia. We really appreciate the 
     financial aid supplied by the American government. Secondly, 
     the program has opened a broad vision for us to master the 
     American legal system in such a short time with the help of 
     American law professors. Thirdly, the ``checks and balances'' 
     principle of the American legal system causes us to 
     reconsider our own legal system, as it is also very helpful 
     as a model for Chinese judicial reform.
       As a judge, I have handled over 200 cases including both 
     civil cases and criminal cases. In dealing with cases, I have 
     found many problems which need to be solved in the Chinese 
     legal system, although there has been progress: such as when 
     police officers question suspects in the investigation 
     process, and when lawyers or records are needed. We have 
     absorbed American due process theory and set up a similar 
     system. However, other problems need to be solved. For 
     instance, there is only one Civil Code and one Civil 
     Procedure Law in China. All judges apply the same law, but 
     different judges make different decisions on similar factual 
     matters. The parties cannot understand the results. I was 
     taught some the fundamentals of U.S. law and the legal system 
     by professors of Temple University. I found the interaction 
     very useful to help me solve legal problems in my own 
     practice. The Supreme People's Court of China should set up 
     some cases system to instruct judges in applying new laws and 
     principles.
       I believe this study experience in Temple University will 
     bring me great success in my future career.
           Sincerely.
     Wei Xiaoxia.
                                  ____



                                  Tsinghua University Beijing.

                                                   August 20, 2006
       Hon. Senator Specter: I do appreciate your visit! Thank you 
     very much for your care and support for our program!
       I have been engaged in civil case trials for 15 years in 
     the Fujian Province High People's Court. I first worked in 
     the civil division for 11 years, and now work in supervision 
     division. It is my honor to enter the LLM of Temple 
     University at Tsinghua University.
       The function of the judge in the civil law and common law 
     systems is different. However, the role of Chinese judges is 
     undergoing change with the development of China. Judges no 
     longer apply law mechanically. We are realizing the 
     transformation of adapting the letter of the law to social 
     reality and demands. No judge acquires the wisdom to apply 
     laws without long-term study and practice. The judicial 
     system based on case law is the essential element of American 
     law. This is just what we should learn and refer to. So never 
     can we learn the extensive and profound American law without 
     the knowledge of a specific case and its process. So we need 
     this opportunity to learn.
       Although I have rich work experience and profound basis of 
     legal theory, I wish to enlarge my scope of knowledge, to 
     acquire more knowledge of the U.S. legal system, by taking 
     advantage of this opportunity. I also want to improve my 
     knowledge base in order to excel in my duties as a judge in 
     the future.
       Thank you again!
           Yours faithfully,
     Zhao, Yumei.
                                  ____

       Dear Senator Specter: I am glad to have attended the 
     meeting in which I met with you in Beijing on July 11th. It 
     is a great honor for me to further discuss with you the topic 
     of the Temple Program's value to strengthen the cooperation 
     and communication between the Sino-US legal systems.
       I am the deputy presiding judge of the No. 1 Civil Tribunal 
     (trial of civil cases, mainly including real estate, tort, 
     contract, and domestic relations) of the Intermediate 
     People's Court of Wuxi City, Jiangsu Province. I began my 
     judicial career in the court since I graduated from China 
     University of Political Science & Law in Beijing in 1994. 
     During that same year, I passed the National Lawyer's 
     Qualification Exam. I have worked as a clerk, an assistant 
     judge, and a judge in the same court for more than 12 years. 
     In 2004, I passed the entrance exam of Juris Master Degree in 
     Pudan University (located in Shanghai. 126 kilometres away 
     from Wuxi City) with the third highest score and am pursuing 
     that degree part time.
       Since 1999, I have been engaged in the trial of tort, 
     contract, intellectual property, bankruptcy, and commercial 
     matters involving foreign aspects as a judge in my court. In 
     2004. I become a presiding judge through tough competition. 
     At present, all the cases which I was the main judge and 
     wrote judicial opinions for have exceeded 370, not including 
     those which I took part in as a member of the panel or a 
     presiding judge.
       Through my resume, you can imagine how challenging and 
     exciting the job is. I am strongly interested in the 
     practical trial of cases while I deeply know the importance 
     of legal research beside the overload of the job. 1 like to 
     read valuable treatises and communicate with other 
     outstanding judges and some scholars to broaden my eyesight.
       On Feb. 2006, I was selected to attend the program of 
     training judges co-sponsored by the P.R. China Judicial 
     College and Temple University. It is a good opportunity to 
     obtain an international view over the Chinese legal system 
     and jump out from the busy daily work to think about what I 
     can do to improve it.
       This three-month training course is very impressive. As one 
     of the monitors of the training course, I fully noticed that 
     all the professors in the group treated the job seriously and 
     devoted their extra efforts to adapt to our critical judges. 
     For example, Professor Melindah Bush, the group leader, was 
     so popular that she approved our request for her to give more 
     lectures every weekend and kept doing it from the first 
     beginning till the last end. She also invited some 
     experienced and smart personal friends to give us extra and 
     helpful lectures, all at which exceeded the duty she must do 
     and showed the program's friendliness and flexibility to 
     adapt to our needs. Another example is Professor Peter 
     Castagnaro, an expert in linguistics, who tried to convince 
     us, mostly in our thirties or forties, to commence a 
     scientific new style to learn English as a foreign language, 
     which proved to be very effective. He even brought A4 paper 
     for us to do homework when he heard we talked about the 
     inconvenience to buy it. Surely the result of the training 
     course manifested that their works brought us so many new 
     ideas and was so successful that all the judges requested the 
     program to be extended as long as possible until most of them 
     must go to New York for the next stage training course. We 
     were very grateful to see the request had been met again.
       For my individual point of view, I acquired a general idea 
     of American legal system from the judges training program. 
     Different with an American attorney's emphasis on the 
     distinction between Sino-US legal systems, whose lecture 
     pointed out more than 10 differences, I found more important 
     the common points between the two legal systems and arrived 
     at a conclusion that doing further research about US legal 
     system will be very helpful to improve our own legal system. 
     As a judge, I prefer to avoid to arrive at any hasty 
     decisions. But the extremely effective training program is a 
     powerful supporting evidence to encourage me to apply for 
     attending the Temple-Tsinghua LLM Program. I believe the 
     precious opportunity will be beneficial to enhance my 
     judicial ability and enable me to share new knowledge with 
     other Chinese judges. I hope I can make full use of the time 
     in the LLM program, learn new and practical ideas as much as 
     possible to improve my court's judicial reform, and become 
     familiar with the American culture and promote the 
     communication and understanding between the people.
       Finally, I shall express my deepest thanks to your kind 
     support and serious concern with the program which provides 
     such an effective way for me to learn something valuable to 
     improve our judicial work and

[[Page S8944]]

     strengthen the understanding of US legal system.
           Yours sincerely,
                                                     Shen Dongemi,
           Judge of the Intermediate People's Court of Wuxi City, 
     Jiangsu Province, P.R. China.

                          ____________________