[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 43 (Friday, March 14, 2014)]
[House]
[Pages H2478-H2481]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
AID TO PAKISTAN
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of
January 3, 2013, the Chair recognizes the gentleman from California
(Mr. Rohrabacher) for 30 minutes.
Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Speaker, for 2 months, public attention has been
riveted on Ukraine. Today, I suggest it is harmful to our security to
just focus on Ukraine and ignore the battle against radical Islam and
the ensuing threat of China that is far more dangerous to us than which
direction Crimea goes.
Yesterday, Secretary of State John Kerry requested that Congress
approve aid to Pakistan. That is foreign aid to Pakistan. The
administration is requesting $881.8 million for aid to Pakistan. The
Congress and the American people should pay attention to this request.
Since 9/11, the United States has given Pakistan over $25 billion,
with over $17 billion of that going to the Pakistani security services,
services that target and kill American soldiers through helping those
elements in that part of the world that kill American soldiers and
terrorize civilian populations.
Our generosity has only emboldened Pakistan's military clique--that
clique that actually rules the country, that clique that gave refuge to
Osama bin Laden.
Most importantly, Pakistan has not been acting as our friend--not
just that clique, but the government itself of Pakistan; and we don't
need to be supplementing the countries and supporting the countries and
giving aid to the countries that are hostile to America's interests and
hateful of our way of life.
It is a charade to believe that our aid is buying Pakistan's
cooperation in hunting down terrorists, as Secretary Kerry stated
yesterday. Frankly, that is wishful thinking, but that is not facing
the reality of what we confront in South Asia.
A Pakistani commission reported on the bin Laden raid--the raid that
brought bin Laden, the murderer of so many Americans, to justice--and
the Pakistani commission points out negative developments in U.S.-
Pakistan relations in recent years, and it is, in their view, ``a
growing American threat'' to Pakistani interests.
These are not the sentiments of a regime that wants to work with us.
These are not the sentiments of friends.
Remember, when our SEAL teams went to get Osama bin Laden, the
Pakistani Government took the wreckage of one of our helicopters--a
stealth helicopter, cutting-edge technology that was used in that
raid--and gave it to the Communist Chinese.
Of course, the Pakistanis call the Chinese their all-weather friend,
and we are supposedly just their fair-weather friend; yet we should be
giving, according to this administration, over $881 million more in
aid, on top of the billions that we have already given the Pakistanis.
Indeed, a study by the Pew Research Center's Global Attitudes Project
found that 81 percent of those surveyed in Pakistan were favorable to
Communist China--Communist China--which represses its own Muslim
population, murders Christians, and is a dictatorship of a clique--of a
crony capitalist clique that controls that country.
When 81 percent of those surveyed in Pakistan are favorable to that
country, while only 11 percent are favorable to the United States,
should we be spending money that we are borrowing from China, in order
to give money to a country that likes China more than it likes the
United States, and we end up giving money to the country and to the
people that don't like us?
Well, no. We should cut off our aid to Pakistan because it is not an
ally, and any money we send to them only strengthens their ability to
act against us and against our friends in Afghanistan and elsewhere.
We cannot buy the friendship of the people of Pakistan, nor can we
buy the friendship of the Government of Pakistan. These are people who
feel that their core interests and their values go totally against what
we believe in and who we are, as a country.
[[Page H2479]]
At a time of tight budgets, we should reserve our aid for friends and
allies. We should never give assistance to those who target and kill
Americans or even support those elements that do target and kill
Americans. Perhaps we could reexamine our motives and our ability to
provide such assistance throughout the world.
Obviously, we can't be supporting our enemies like this; but even
with our friends in friendly countries, we are having to borrow money
from China and elsewhere, in order to give money, as aid, to other
countries. That makes no sense to me.
{time} 1245
We need to restructure our aid situation. Yes, America does have a
moral obligation to try to help others in need, but perhaps we should
focus on emergency situations and limit our aid to those countries who
have tsunamis or earthquakes or other catastrophes in which much of
their population is in grave danger or is suffering. That type of
foreign aid is something we can be proud of, and we can channel it to
any group of people in the world who are ordinary people who are in
danger. We can then reach out and show our generosity, and perhaps we
will receive some gratitude from people who are in a desperate
situation rather than transferring our money to governments that are
often anti, against, everything America stands for.
How do we know that Pakistan still has a government that considers--
at least a clique that runs their government and that tells their
government--that considers the United States less than a friend,
perhaps an enemy? It is very easy to see.
We should never forget. And the real bellwether for this is the
treatment of Dr. Afridi. As we ponder our policies, let us not forget
Dr. Afridi, the heroic Pakistani doctor who was instrumental in the
effort to capture or kill bin Laden. Dr. Afridi was arrested on May 22,
2011, 3 weeks after the United States raid which brought Osama bin
Laden to justice. He has been in a Pakistani jail ever since. He was
initially held beneath the ISI's headquarters in Islamabad. There he
was tortured and kept blindfolded for 8 months and handcuffed for a
year, leaving physical damage on this heroic friend of America.
This man is a hero who risked his life to bring to justice the
terrorist monster who organized the 9/11 attack that killed 3,000
Americans. Dr. Afridi risked his life to bring justice, and we leave
him in Pakistan in a dungeon. We abandon him. We leave him to rot in
that dungeon. In May 2012, Dr. Afridi was moved to the Peshawar Central
Jail after being sentenced to 33 years in jail.
Dr. Afridi told FOX News he helped the CIA out of love for the United
States and swore that he would help America again despite the fact that
these people were torturing him. We have not only abandoned him, but
Congress is considering, as I say, giving even more, hundreds of
millions of dollars. In fact, the total amount of aid that they want to
give to Pakistan this year is $1.3 billion in American aid to Pakistan.
This is an abomination. It is shameful. It is cowardly. It is a
cowardly betrayal of a man who risked his life for us. Who else, who
will stand with us in the future if we treat our friends this way?
America all so often treats our friends in a shabby way, abandons
them at a time, and then our government has the gall to request that we
give aid to those people who are the tormentors of Dr. Afridi. In fact,
these are the men who we know this government in Pakistan is run by and
controlled by a clique of people who hid Osama bin Laden, gave refuge
to the murderer of 3,000 Americans for years, and then, of course, they
claim they didn't know he was there--there--right next to the school
where they train all of their military officers.
Pakistan is supporting America's enemies who are attacking American
soldiers in Afghanistan and have targeted and, of course, brutally
murdered other Americans and brutally murdered other people throughout
that region who are hostile to their radical Islamic terrorist agenda.
Secretary Kerry says that we must give support to placate the
positive elements in Pakistan. It sort of reminds me of when somebody
was saying back before World War II, we better try to get with Hitler
because there are some really bad guys in the Nazi Party, even worse
than Hitler. Give me a break. Hitler was an evil man, and the people in
Pakistan, the clique that runs that country and engages in terrorism is
an evil clique, and we should not be providing them the resources they
need to build their military capabilities.
Well, Pakistan's fight against militancy is, of course, against our
military. It is very evident because what we have got is attacks being
conducted by what? By people who are stationed, whose operations they
are operating out of areas in Pakistan. And that has been going on for
years. Well, trying to give them money, from the United States to the
Pakistani Government, is not buying us friendship, and it is not buying
future or even current peace.
By the way, the money that we give them that isn't being used to
attack Americans and friends of ours is being used to butcher their own
people and suppress the opposition within Pakistan to this brutal
regime. They are terrorizing; the Pakistani Government is terrorizing
whole populations of their country like the Balochis and the Sindhis.
The Balochis and the Sindhis are people that would prefer not to be
under the heel of a Pakistani Government run in Islamabad. The Baloch
people live in an area of South Asia now claimed by Pakistan, Iran, and
Afghanistan. But in Pakistan in particular, they comprise an important
segment of the population, and they live in the least developed
province. Unfortunately, it may be the least developed province, and it
is where the poorest of all Pakistanis reside. All of that, if you take
a look at being the poorest and least developed, but you also look at
one other factor, it is the richest in natural resources of all the
provinces of Pakistan. So what we have is a looting of Balochistan by
that clique that runs the Pakistani Government in a way that does not,
of course, benefit the people of Balochistan.
Until the arrival of the British Empire, the Baloch people had
organized themselves into sort of a confederation of tribal chiefs.
That is where the power was, very similar to Afghanistan's tribal and
village system. And these people, the Balochi, who recognize themselves
as a national entity, they would like to control their own destiny
again. But the Balochi people have been terrorized and beaten into
submission by the Pakistani military.
We provide the Pakistani military with the weapons and the resources
they need to conduct their terrorism not only against their neighbors,
not only against Christians throughout the world, but against their own
people. The Pakistani military has been unrelenting in its attacks and
targeted terror raids against the Baloch population. Baloch aspirations
for independence have been checked by force and by denying basic human
rights and the unleashed brute force against them by a basically state
terrorist repression of their people by their own government.
One particularly grotesque method of intimidation of the Baloch is
called ``kill and dump.'' That is when the body of a man or woman who
has disappeared from a village is later dumped in the middle of that
village. And who do you think is doing this? We are talking about the
Pakistani military authorities who are conducting this type of
terrorism on their own people, even, as we have said, the same people
who gave safe haven to bin Laden who had massacred 3,000 Americans, the
same people who offered their territory as a staging area to launch
attacks into Afghanistan supporting the Taliban.
This abysmal human rights record is the record of the Pakistani
Government, and it is shameful. It is shameful that we are even
considering giving a government like this more American aid, and we are
even going to have to borrow that aid from China to give it to them.
It is even worse, of course, because American foreign and military
aid contributes to the security forces which, of course, are killing
the Baloch. We are not just giving foreign aid; we are giving military
aid as well. The Baloch people have a right to self-determination and
not to live under the control of Islamabad if that is what they
[[Page H2480]]
choose. At the very least, no military aid should be given to Pakistan
to be used against its own people, whether they be Baloch or Sindhi or
any other minority.
I have already proposed legislation, H.R. 1790, to end all aid to
Pakistan, and have also offered amendments to both the Defense and
State Department authorization bills to end this aid, but what needs to
be seriously discussed is not just ending aid. We need to seriously
discuss a fundamental shift in America's policy towards South Asia, a
strategy. We have had the same strategy since the cold war, but those
policies that we established during the cold war no longer make sense.
In the 1960s, China fought battles in both India and the Soviet
Union. The India-Soviet alignment at that point alienated the United
States during the cold war, and what resulted was clearly an
adversarial relationship with India.
When the Soviets invaded Afghanistan in 1979, the U.S. and Pakistan
worked together to support the Afghan insurgents who were then battling
against Soviet occupation troops. Yes, during the cold war, Pakistan
was an ally, but the cold war is over. And even then when we fought
with them, when they helped us support the mujahideen fight against the
Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, they channeled our money, they
channeled the lion's share of our support to radical Islamist
terrorists who should never have had any support from the United
States. Much of it went to a fellow named Gulbuddin Hekmatyar. This man
is horrendous. He has a horrendous record. Even then they knew that,
when this man was in college, he would throw acid into the faces of
young women who refused to wear burkas. And we were giving our aid to
Pakistan who gave it to a man like that?
Well, the cold war is over, and there is no reason for us to give
them aid that they can pass on to terrorists any more. Yes, the cold
war is over, and since the Soviet Union's collapse in the early 1990s,
basic elements of American security have fundamentally changed.
The Pakistani-China friendship since that time has deepened. And who
is our adversary today? It is no longer--Russia gets in the news, but
who is really our threat? Radical Islam and an emerging China that is
much more aggressive than the Russians could conceive of being.
It is ever more intense and is now clearer that an alliance with
India against Pakistan is in the interest of the United States because
Pakistan is clearly moving in the direction of becoming a self-declared
enemy of the United States even as we give them military and other
types of aid. Pakistan's gut hostility towards India and its shaping of
its now ever-increasing alliance with China puts them not only as an
enemy to India, but as an adversary at the very least, an adversary to
the United States.
Pakistan is in partnership with terrorist groups like the Taliban,
and that is very clear to people who are active in that part of the
world. We should not be treating this enemy as a friend. In fact, we
should reach out to India and try to reestablish, just to establish--
perhaps not reestablish, but to establish a positive relationship that
will lead to a stronger stance for peace and stability in that part of
the world as we offset the terrorist support that is coming from
Pakistan.
{time} 1300
We should not be treating an enemy country like Pakistan as a friend.
It will not make them our friend. It will, instead, make them disdain
us. They will disdain our giving people money who are our enemies. They
will look at it as we are cowardly; and it is an example of such
cowardice. We are giving billions to a military and a government that
is controlled by a military clique that despises us and is cooperating
with those who would destroy us. Not one cent to Pakistan. The money
going to Pakistan is going contrary to our interests, to our security,
and to the stability of South Asia. Let us double our efforts to work
with India and other countries in South and Central Asia that truly
desire to be America's friends.
And nowhere, of course, is our hesitancy to do that, to reach out and
to try to support our friends, nowhere is that hesitancy more evident
than now and what we are doing with Egypt. I would call the attention
of the American people to what is going on in Egypt. In terms of the
long run, it is far more important to American security and the
stability of the world and world peace what is going on in Egypt right
now than what is happening in the Crimea right now.
The Egyptian army is the most potent force standing between radical
Islam and its objective to terrorize and subjugate whole populations
throughout the Middle East and thus put themselves into a position of
facing down and defeating Western civilization.
We are talking about radical Islamists who believe in what they
believe in. Just as in the cold war, the communists believed in that
gobbledygook. But the fact is, radical Islam sees that, and they see
Western civilization as the enemy, and the United States as the
foundation of Western civilization, and they see any government that is
trying to be democratic as their adversary and enemy.
It is clear the Egyptian people understood that when they rejected
the radical overtures of the former regime that was in power in Egypt.
They rose up against that government, the Morsi government, and right
now whether or not Egypt is a sucked into a turmoil and whether radical
Islam takes over that country, it is now in the hands of a very few
leaders of that country who are we shunning. It is clear that our
reluctance to back the stance of Egypt is emboldening the radical
Islamic terrorist elements who now will target Egypt because we are
hesitant to get behind General al-Sisi and the Egyptian military, who,
by the way, are committed to bringing back democratic elections and
having democratic elections and a democratic process as compared to the
regime that they will be replacing, which was dedicated to establishing
an Islamic caliphate and was in the process of trimming back the
democratic capabilities of the Egyptian people.
How ironic is it that if Egypt falls, there will be chaos and radical
Islamic expansionism in that part of world, and how important it is for
us not to have that for world stability and our own national security.
How ironic is it that we are holding back, but Russia, under Mr. Putin,
just last month provided, maybe 2 months ago, went over to Egypt and
provided $2 billion worth of military aid to help them defeat radical
Islam. Russia's proposed arms deal with Egypt and its endorsement of
Egypt's military ruler, General al-Sisi, and his efforts to run for
President is a signal to the Arab leaders that, unlike the United
States, Russia will back those courageous enough to take on the radical
Islamic threat to human freedom and human progress.
The Egyptian people were saved from Islamic extremist rule. They were
saved by a small group of people who we are putting roadblocks in the
way of General al-Sisi. We actually convinced the Egyptian military to
be dependent on the United States over the years, and now, when they
are in a crisis, we are refraining from selling them the helicopters
and the spare parts they need to thwart the radical Islamic terrorists
who threaten a battle in the Sinai desert. If we let the Egyptian
military down and we send that signal, we abandon them, as we have
abandoned Dr. Alfridi. No one in the world will ever trust us again.
There will be a major expansion of radical Islamic terrorist regimes,
and the world we know will be far less stable and far less secure. Our
country, and other democratic countries in the world, will be in
dramatic danger.
The Egyptian people were saved from Islamic extremist rule by a very
courageous group of people. We can't let them hang out on a branch by
themselves. And yes, the United States and the rest of the world were
saved by the actions of a small group of people who stood up as Morsi
and the former government was cutting away the freedom of those people
and establishing this radical Islamic caliphate. Well, a small group of
courageous people stood up to side with the people who had gone into
the streets to oppose that and said, No, we are not going to let this
government superimpose this type of regime. It is contrary to the will
of the Egyptian people. And they have, I might add, put Egypt back on a
course towards free elections.
Egypt, of course, is one of the most strategic countries. Yet, as I
say, we
[[Page H2481]]
don't hear our administration, this administration, coming here to
plead the case about giving aid to those brave people in Egypt who are
fighting radical Islamic terrorism. Instead, they are requesting
hundred of millions of dollars, yes, over a billion dollars in aid to
Pakistan, which is aiding radical Islamic terrorists and siding with
China.
Well, if you think that none of this makes sense, you are right, it
doesn't, but it is up to us, the American people, to hold our own
government accountable, to make sure that we do not give aid to our
enemies and to make sure that our government is doing things that make
sense. We should be sticking with our friends and opposing our enemies.
How much more common sense does it take, although our government has
not been operating that way. It is up to us, the American people, to
make sure that we do not give aid to Pakistan and we support those
people who would have Western democratic government in Egypt, and to
support the people like the Baloch and the Sindhis, who are struggling
under the oppression of radical Islamic terrorist regimes, to try to
find their own way and have their own government and have their own
democratic system
With that, Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
____________________