[Congressional Record Volume 162, Number 113 (Wednesday, July 13, 2016)]
[House]
[Pages H4821-H4822]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
1-YEAR ANNIVERSARY
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from
Illinois (Mr. Roskam) for 5 minutes.
Mr. ROSKAM. Mr. Speaker, tomorrow marks the 1-year anniversary of the
Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, the so-called Iran nuclear deal.
President Obama made a series of promises to the American people. One
was that Iran would cease its illicit nuclear activity. And yet, last
week, Mr. Speaker, Germany reported that Iran has increased its illegal
proliferation of nuclear technology.
President Obama also promised that the nuclear deal would moderate
Iran. In other words, there was a gentle, nice Iran that was waiting to
come out, if only we would be more understanding. But in the past year,
the Islamic Republic has launched nuclear ballistic missiles in
violation of U.N. security resolutions, kidnapped U.S. sailors, shot
rockets within 1,500 yards of U.S. Navy ships, and increased their
support for terror regimes and terror groups, and remain the world's
largest state sponsor of terrorism.
The President also stated that the U.S. sanctions regime would stay
in place against Iran's terror activity while it was being lifted
against the nuclear activity.
But, instead, the U.S. has become Iran's negotiator in chief on the
world stage and has rewarded companies that continue to support the
Iranian National Guard Core and is devising ways to give Iran access to
the U.S. financial system.
One year after the President agreed to a dangerous nuclear deal, Iran
continues to be a major adversary. Congress needs to highlight and
spotlight Iran's malevolent activity. The good news is Congress is
doing just that, Mr. Speaker.
I am encouraged that the House will take up three very important
pieces of legislation. It will deal with the heavy water bill.
Think about this. Iran gets caught manufacturing heavy water. Rather
than calling out the Iranian regime, in clear violation of the nuclear
deal, what does the administration do?
The administration says: Well, we are going to help Iran comply with
the deal that they have just violated by using United States taxpayer
money to buy the heavy water from Iran.
You can't make this up. It is so absurd. We are only given excuses.
We have got to focus in on what else is happening on this issue.
Now, Boeing and Airbus have failed to understand the deep risks that
come from doing business with Iran. These aren't necessarily risks for
their bottom line. They are very willing to sell to a terrorist regime.
But they are risks to freedom-loving people around the world.
Both Airbus and Boeing want to do what?
[[Page H4822]]
They want to sell a product that can be used for terrorism. They can
use airlines for the purpose of moving things into illicit areas.
We all know that Iran Air was sanctioned for ferrying weapons and
troops to rogue regimes and terrorist groups. We know that Iran Air was
implicated in North Korea's ballistic missile tests. And we also know
that Iran systematically uses their commercial aircraft to transport
weapons, troops, missiles, cash, and other supplies to terror groups.
Mr. Speaker, on my left is a display. This is a computer printout
that shows a flight from Tehran to Damascus last week. Now, think about
this. This is the hubris of the Iranian regime: the Iranian Air Force
flying a Boeing 747 in the middle of the night from Tehran to Damascus.
Do we think that this is for commercial purposes? Of course, not.
Did we think that this is for tourism? Of course, not.
Do we think that they are flying baby formula or textbooks? Of
course, not.
What they are doing is a bad act, and we ought to not be complicit in
this.
Mr. Speaker, 1 week ago, this House passed, on a bipartisan basis,
limitations to the Financial Services Appropriations bill that would
prevent this sale. And we did it by voice vote. What a voice vote means
is that nobody substantially rose in opposition.
Why? Because there is no real reason to rise because more and more
people are recognizing that these types of sales should not go through.
In response, the CEO of Boeing, Dennis Muilenburg, essentially said:
Well, look, us selling to Iran is a good business opportunity to do
business with the Iranians.
And then he also said: Well, if Boeing can't sell, then nobody else
should be able to sell.
But did you notice something, Mr. Speaker, in those two comments?
He didn't say: Look, we have got this under control. He didn't say:
We are positive that nothing is going to be used for terrorism. He
didn't say that this wouldn't jeopardize national security. He just
said: If we can't do it, nobody should be able to do it.
Look, I agree, if Boeing can't do it, nobody should be able to do it.
It is well known that all of Boeing's competitors--Airbus of France,
Bombardier of Canada, Embraer from Brazil, Comac from China--each of
these companies sources at least 10 percent of their components from
the United States. They require the same license that Boeing does.
But that is not the point. What we need are iconic American companies
following the lead of companies like Lockheed Martin--which has said
they won't pursue this--Northrop Grumman, and others that haven't
sullied their reputation.
It is time for Congress to continue to do its good work.
____________________