[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 85 (Wednesday, May 23, 2007)]
[House]
[Page H5693]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                 U.S. SHOULD NOT SELL ARMS TO PAKISTAN

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I come to the floor this evening to discuss 
a contract recently awarded by the U.S. Government to Lockheed Martin 
for 18 Sniper Advanced Targeting Pods, or ATPs, to be sold to the 
Government of Pakistan. Sniper ATPs allow aircrews to perform 
intelligence, targeting, surveillance and reconnaissance missions from 
extended standoff ranges.
  Mr. Speaker, I believe it is irresponsible for the U.S. Government to 
sell high-grade weapons technology to Pakistan, a nation that has 
turned a blind eye to the increasingly dangerous Taliban insurgency in 
the western region of its country.
  Numerous press accounts in recent months have discussed the growing 
presence of Taliban training camps and bases in the tribal regions of 
western Pakistan that border Afghanistan. Just last week, in the port 
city of Karachi, over 40 people were killed, with even more injured 
during 2 days of gun battles and mayhem in response to an 
antigovernment rally. Most reports claim that this violence against 
protesters was perpetrated by the Muttahida Quami Movement, or MQM, 
which is an ethnically based Mafia allied with Pakistani President 
Musharraf.
  In a country that claims to be somewhat democratic, the actions of 
the MQM and President Musharraf seem to be just the opposite. Coupled 
with the Pakistani President's refusal to put forth a good-faith effort 
to root out Taliban insurgents in his country, it hardly seems like a 
good idea for the United States to be selling arms to the Government of 
Pakistan.
  Earlier this year, Democrats passed H.R. 1, which implemented the 
recommendations of the bipartisan 9/11 Commission. Included in this 
bill was language that would end U.S. military assistance and arms 
sales licensing to Pakistan in the 2008 fiscal year unless Pakistani 
President Musharraf certifies that the Islamabad government is ``making 
all possible efforts to end Taliban activities on Pakistani soil.''
  I believe that the U.S. should live up to this commitment by ceasing 
the sale of arms to the Government of Pakistan. I fear that if we do, 
in fact, provide these weapons technologies to countries in unstable 
regions, such as Pakistan, they could be used against U.S. allies, such 
as India.
  This U.S. policy of military sales to Pakistan will contribute to 
increasing security concerns throughout South Asia. The U.S. has no way 
of knowing if these technologies will be used against al Qaeda and the 
Taliban, and not against India or other peaceful nations. In fact, the 
government has simply watched while terrorist groups like Lashkar-e-
Tayyaba, or LET, committed terrorist acts in Jammu and Kashmir and 
other parts of India. The actions within its own country prove 
themselves not fit for, in this case Pakistan, for receiving these 
weapons.
  Mr. Speaker, although Pakistan has claimed to be an ally in the 
global war on terror, it clearly has not taken the necessary steps to 
end terrorism in its own backyard. I strongly believe that economic 
assistance is necessary to support economic restructuring that will 
stop Pakistan from becoming a breeding ground for terrorists.
  At the time after 9/11, when we decided that we would allow economic 
assistance to Pakistan and development assistance, I was all for it 
because I think it makes sense; that's the way to lead to a democratic 
and stable Pakistan. But military assistance is another matter. 
Allowing this sale sends the wrong message, I think, particularly in 
the climate that we live in here today, and what Pakistan has been 
doing in not living up to its part of the deal in fighting the Taliban.

                          ____________________