[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 20]
[House]
[Pages 29800-29804]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




  EXPRESSING GRAVE CONCERN REGARDING ARMED CONFLICT IN NORTH CAUCASUS 
                      REGION OF RUSSIAN FEDERATION

  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the 
concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 206) expressing grave concern 
regarding armed conflict in the North Caucasus region of the Russian 
Federation which has resulted in civilian casualties and internally 
displaced persons, and urging all sides to pursue dialog for peaceful 
resolution of the conflict, as amended.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                            H. Con. Res. 206

       Whereas during the Russo-Chechen War of 1994-1996, Russian 
     Federation military forces used massive force against 
     civilians in Chechnya, causing immense human casualties, 
     gross human rights violations, large-scale displacement of 
     individuals, and destruction of property;
       Whereas Chechnya has been the site of internal lawlessness 
     and numerous kidnapings, including that of United States 
     citizen Fred Cuny, whose exact fate is still unknown;
       Whereas in recent months, extremist forces based in 
     Chechnya have mounted armed incursions into the adjacent 
     Russian Federation Republic of Dagestan and attempted to 
     establish a political entity therein against the wishes of 
     the majority of the population of Dagestan;
       Whereas almost 300 persons have died as a result of 
     unsolved terrorist bombings in Russia that coincided with the 
     armed incursions into Dagestan and Russian authorities have 
     attributed the terrorist bombings to Chechen insurgents;
       Whereas the United States recognizes the territorial 
     integrity of the Russian Federation;
       Whereas Russian Federation armed forces have conducted 
     armed attacks against Chechnya and positioned forces with the 
     stated intention of sealing Chechnya's borders and creating a 
     security zone in the region;
       Whereas such attacks and indiscriminate and 
     disproportionate use of force have harmed innocent civilians 
     and given rise to over 100,000 internally displaced persons, 
     most of whom have escaped into neighboring regions of Russia;
       Whereas such indiscriminate attacks are a violation of 
     paragraph 19 of the Code of Conduct on Politico-Military 
     Aspects of Security, approved at the 1994 Summit of the 
     Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, held in 
     Budapest, Hungary, which states that in the event of armed 
     conflict, participating States ``will seek to create 
     conditions favorable to the political solution of the 
     conflict. They will cooperate in support of humanitarian 
     assistance to alleviate suffering among the civilian 
     population, including facilitating the movement of personnel 
     and resources to such tasks'', and paragraph 36, which 
     states, ``If recourse to force cannot be avoided in 
     performing internal security missions, each participating 
     State will ensure that its use must be commensurate with the 
     needs for enforcement. The armed forces will take due care to 
     avoid injury to civilians or their property.'';
       Whereas the conflict in the North Caucasus may threaten 
     democratic development, the rule of law, and respect for 
     human rights throughout Russia;
       Whereas authorities in Moscow and other cities of the 
     Russian Federation have used terrorist bombings as a pretext 
     to intensify a campaign against individuals from the North 
     Caucasus region, including the detention and forcible 
     expulsion of such individuals from these cities; and
       Whereas in response to Russian attacks the elected 
     Government of Chechnya has declared its solidarity with 
     renegade Chechen forces in opposing Russian attacks: Now, 
     therefore, be it
       Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
     concurring), That the Congress--
       (1) urges the Government of the Russian Federation and all 
     parties to cease the indiscriminate use of force against the 
     civilian population in Chechnya, in accordance with 
     commitments of the Organization for Security and Cooperation 
     in Europe;
       (2) urges all parties, including the Government of the 
     Russian Federation, to enter into negotiations on the North 
     Caucasus conflict with legitimate political representatives 
     of the region, including President Maskhadov and his 
     Government, and to avail itself of the conflict prevention 
     and crisis management capabilities of the Organization for 
     Security and Cooperation in Europe, which helped broker an 
     end to the 1994-1996 War;
       (3) urges the Chechen authorities to use every appropriate 
     means to deny extremist forces located in its territory a 
     base of operations for the mounting of armed incursions that 
     threaten peace and stability in the North Caucasus region;
       (4) urges the Chechen authorities to create a rule of law 
     environment with legal norms based upon internationally 
     accepted standards;
       (5) cautions that forcible resettlement of internally 
     displaced persons would evoke outrage from the international 
     community;
       (6) urges that the Government of the Russian Federation 
     seek and accept international humanitarian assistance to 
     alleviate the suffering of the internally displaced persons 
     from Chechnya, so as to reduce the risk of civilian 
     casualties; and
       (7) calls on the Government of the United States to express 
     to all parties the necessity of resolving the conflict 
     peacefully, with full respect to the human rights of all the 
     citizens of the Russian Federation, and to support the 
     provision of appropriate international humanitarian 
     assistance.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from New 
York (Mr. Gilman) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) each 
will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman).


                             General Leave

  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may 
have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks 
on H. Con. Res. 206.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from New York?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I support the resolution introduced by our colleague, 
the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith). I believe that it makes 
important points with regard to the current hostility in the region of 
Chechnya and Russia.

                              {time}  1515

  Most importantly, this measure calls attention to the tens of 
thousands of innocent civilians who are suffering terribly due to the 
Russian government's indiscriminate use of force, and that Russia is 
violating its own commitments as a member state of the Organization on 
Security and Cooperation in Europe. This resolution states the obvious.
  A peaceful settlement is what is required in Chechnya if the 
suffering of those innocent civilians is to end soon. This resolution 
also states, and I think quite appropriately, that there has been a 
wave of internal lawlessness and kidnappings within Chechnya in recent 
years and an armed attack on a neighboring region of Russian by 
extremist forces from Chechnya. Although that does not excuse the 
current military actions by Russia in Chechnya, it underlines why there 
is no clear consensus yet as to what the international community should 
do with regard to this latest conflict in that region.
  However, I would like to take this opportunity to state my belief 
that the latest Russian military offensive will very likely do little 
to address the underlying causes of instability in the North Caucasus 
region and indeed throughout Russia. Those underlying problems include 
vast corruption at all levels of the Russian government and an absence 
of real economic reforms, allowing the North Caucasus region to slip 
into grinding poverty that is in turn breeding yet more instability.
  This resolution, Mr. Speaker, makes several important statements; but 
I would specifically point out the resolution's statement that Russia's 
use of indiscriminate force in Chechnya is in direct violation of its 
commitments as a member state of the Organization on

[[Page 29801]]

Security and Cooperation in Europe, just as its previous military 
operation in Chechnya was in violation of those OSCE commitments. I 
would also note that Russia has violated the treaty on conventional 
forces in Europe in the course of this operation.
  The summit of the OSCE heads of state is to be held in Istanbul 
within the next few days. Mr. Speaker, it is time for our government to 
call Russia to task for its violation of those OSCE commitments and its 
disregard for the CFE treaty, a treaty that, in fact, has already been 
revised to meet the Russian demands. The OSCE summit is a perfect venue 
in which to do just that. We may not see it on our television screens, 
but many innocent people are suffering terribly from the indiscriminate 
force used by Russia in Chechnya as well as from the extremism of some 
of those on the Chechen side. It is time to bring the two sides to the 
table. As this resolution points out, the OSCE can help, if Russia 
lives up to its commitments. Accordingly, Mr. Speaker, I would support 
adoption of this motion suspending the rules and passing this 
resolution.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I 
rise in strong support of H. Con. Res. 206.
  Mr. Speaker, first I want to commend my good friend and distinguished 
colleague the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), chairman of the 
Subcommittee on International Operations and Human Rights of the 
Committee on International Relations for introducing this resolution. 
It is a resolution which is overdue, and it is a resolution which I 
honestly hope this body will pass unanimously.
  The issue is not a simple one, Mr. Speaker, and not all the angels 
are on one side, if indeed there are any angels on any side of this 
conflict. Extremist, terrorist fundamentalists from Chechnya a few 
months ago invaded a neighboring republic, with extravagant statements, 
threats, visions of great conquests. It was easily predictable that 
having humiliated Russia once before, 4 years ago in the first Russian-
Chechen war, they will not get away with it this time.
  And for a whole set of complex reasons, including internal political 
reasons of the current prime minister, Mr. Putin, Russia has decided to 
finally put an end to Chechnya as a military entity. This resolution 
properly calls on the Russian Federation to stop this indiscriminate 
and brutal assault on the civilian population of Chechnya with vast 
numbers of utterly innocent Chechens, men, women, and children, dying, 
being maimed, made homeless as the winter approaches.
  As a matter of fact, there is reasonable anxiety, Mr. Speaker, that 
the tens of thousands of refugees from and within Chechnya, displaced 
persons, will not even have the tentlike protection that we were 
planning for the displaced people of Kosovo just a few months ago. I 
think it is appropriate for the United States Congress to call on 
Russia to terminate this brutal, nondiscriminating military assault on 
a whole people, to accept the mediation of the Organization for 
Security and Cooperation in Europe, and to recognize that as a major 
power, it has a responsibility for the safety of all the citizens 
living within its borders.
  Now, I understand, Mr. Speaker, the annoyance and irritation that the 
Russian leadership and the people of Russia felt. I was in Moscow a few 
weeks ago when presumably Chechen terrorists engaged in terrorist 
activities, costing the lives of several hundred innocent civilian 
citizens of the capital city of Moscow. But the reaction has been 
indiscriminate and excessive. It is out of proportion to anything the 
terrorist tragedy has created in Moscow.
  It is clear that the current Russian government is taking full 
advantage of a patriotic upsurge which has swept Russia in the wave of 
these terrorist attacks to put an end once and for all to Chechen 
extremism. Nevertheless, Russia is a civilized country and it is high 
time it returned to civilized behavior. It must accept European 
observers who have been excluded from many territories where the 
warfare currently is unfolding, it must accept western humanitarian 
aid, and it must cooperate with the civilized world in seeing to it 
that the innocent people of Chechnya get through this very difficult, 
very cruel winter which is so typical of that area.
  I believe, Mr. Speaker, also, that our government officially must 
take cognizance of what is happening in Chechnya. There is no way of 
averting our eyes from what is, in fact, a bloodbath unfolding in the 
Caucasus. I call on our government to join us in the Congress in 
expressing its displeasure with the current Russian government which 
pursues a policy of indiscriminately killing large numbers of innocent 
civilians.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield such time as he may 
consume to the distinguished gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), the 
chairman of the Subcommittee on International Operations and Human 
Rights who is the sponsor of this resolution.
  Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman 
from New York (Mr. Gilman) the chairman of the full committee and the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) for their eloquent remarks 
today.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in very strong support of H. Con. Res. 206. This 
resolution addresses an issue of utmost urgency, the war in Chechnya 
and the plight of innocent people caught in the Russian military 
onslaught. In August and September of this year, Islamic extremists 
based in Chechnya, independent of the government of Chechnya, twice 
staged armed incursions into the neighboring Russian Federation 
Republic of Dagestan with the intent of creating a separate political 
entity within Dagestan.
  In response, the Russian government has sent its army to reoccupy 
Chechnya, an area that had won de facto independence from Russia as a 
result of a very bloody war from 1994 to 1996. The Russian government 
is justified in rebuffing armed aggression against its territorial 
integrity. Moreover, one can certainly sympathize with Russia's 
frustration when unsolved bombings kill almost 300 persons in Russia.
  But this does not justify reactivating a war against a civilian 
population in Chechnya. Several news reports have, in detail, described 
the air raids and the artillery shelling of noncombatant villages, 
homes, and farms. The November 6 edition of the Guardian, for example, 
in Great Britain said, and I quote, missiles smash into a crowded 
marketplace, killing and maiming hundreds. A tank shell explodes among 
a group of village boys playing football; seven die, others lose legs 
or eyes. Orphans of an earlier war shake and sob with terror as 
warplanes on bombing runs boom low over their outdoor camp.
  Mr. Speaker, the death toll is in the hundreds, perhaps thousands, 
and the number of internally displaced persons is now put at around 
200,000. This figure, of course, does not include those persons trapped 
in the besieged Chechen capital of Grozny. Many of these are elderly 
ethnic Russians with absolutely nowhere to flee. The government of 
Chechnya has not been entirely blameless as my friend from California 
pointed out earlier in this situation. Since achieving de facto 
independence from Russia in 1994, Chechnya has degenerated into a 
morass of lawlessness and violence with a government powerless to 
establish law and order and an economy unable to recover from the 
devastation of war.
  Mr. Speaker, specifically H. Con. Res. 206 urges the government of 
the Russian Federation and all parties to cease the indiscriminate use 
of force against the civilian population in Chechnya. The government of 
Russia and all parties are urged to enter into negotiations and to 
avail themselves to the capabilities of the OSCE which helped broker 
the end of the war in 1996.
  Additionally, this resolution calls upon Chechen authorities to make 
every effort to deny bases to radical elements committed to violent 
actions in the North Caucasus and urges

[[Page 29802]]

Chechen authorities to create a rule of law environment with legal 
norms based on internationally accepted standards.
  Finally, H. Con. Res. 206 calls upon our own government to express to 
all parties the necessity of resolving the conflict peacefully and to 
express the willingness of the U.S. to extend appropriate assistance 
toward such resolution, including humanitarian assistance as needed.
  Mr. Speaker, I commend to the reading of my colleague an excellent 
article in the Wall Street Journal, an op-ed piece by Zbigniew Brzenski 
who, as we all know, was National Security Advisor and a very prominent 
and insightfull leader is in international affairs. He points out that 
unlike the earlier war, this time the Russians have no intention of 
engaging in costly street fighting against the entrenched and 
determined Chechens.
  Instead, their plan is to use new weapons to launch devastating 
attacks from a safe distance. Using a combination of explosives and 
chemical agents, they will aim to wipe out the thousands of Chechen 
fighters squeezed by Russian pressure into compressed urban ruins. 
There have been reports that gas masks have already been distributed to 
the Russian troops. Among the new weapons will be so-called fuel air 
explosives which blanket targeted terrain with a flammable vapor cover 
and following a massive explosion precipitate a lethal vacuum. Even 
deeply dug-in Chechens will be exterminated.
  The cumulative result of this tragedy will be the killing of most 
fighting-age Chechen males. Mr. Brzenski goes on to state and I quote, 
so far the Clinton administration has been callously passive while 
international reaction has been muted even though a Russian success in 
the war would have wide and negative consequences. Then he goes on to 
further develop that case.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to emphasize that this resolution is not anti-
Russian or pro-Chechen. Many observers who wish to see a prosperous and 
democratic Russia have been deeply disturbed by the present campaign in 
Chechnya. Recently, the chairperson of the Moscow Helsinki Group, 
Ludmilla Alexeeva, and Dr. Elena Bonner and several other prominent 
human rights activists in Russia issued an appeal in which they 
condemned the Russian government for having chosen full scale war in 
Chechnya as the means to fight terrorism.

                              {time}  1530

  The appeal states, and I quote, ``We believe that authorities' 
actions will not solve the problem in Chechnya. The most that they will 
accomplish will be a long-term occupation of Chechnya which will deform 
Russian democratic institutions and will once and for all transform 
Russia into a police state,'' close quote.
  Mr. Speaker, last week the State Department accused Moscow of failing 
to meet human rights standards set out in both the Geneva Conventions 
and the codes of conduct of the OSCE, a very welcome statement on 
behalf of our government. Unfortunately, when Attorney General Janet 
Reno visited Moscow last month, her evasive comments about the war in 
Chechnya prompted the October 23, 1999, edition of the Moscow Times to 
conclude that, and I quote, ``Reno's Quiet Gave War a Green Light.'' 
Hopefully, the administration will continue, as it has begun now, to 
speak with one voice in the future and to avoid any such mixed 
messages.
  Meanwhile, Mr. Speaker, criticism of Russia's actions in Chechnya is 
mounting throughout the world. From the European Union and the Council 
of Europe to the United Kingdom, Germany and Canada; the government of 
Bahrain is reportedly taking steps to have the humanitarian situation 
in Chechnya considered by the U.N. Security Council. The proposal to 
win IMF funding for Russia while it continues its bloody outrage in 
Chechnya is an excellent idea, and I would hope that the Congress would 
consider it when the next session opens in January.
  Finally, in an editorial entitled ``No Funds for Russia's War,'' this 
past Sunday, the Washington Post called for an end to IMF funding for 
Russia and wrote, and I quote: ``Few would oppose a Russian campaign to 
eliminate terrorism, the stated purpose of the military campaign. But 
Russia's violence against Chechen civilians has become so 
indiscriminate and massive that no one can take seriously any longer 
the official justifications. Just on Friday, a Russian prime minister 
flatly stated that ``Chechnya's capital will be destroyed.''
  I urge support for the resolution.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  As we approach the millennium, there will be a great deal of glib 
oratory about this new and civilized and highly developed society that 
we have evolved. But we are getting too many reminders almost on a 
monthly basis from Kosovo to East Timor and now to Chechnya that man's 
inhumanity to man has taken no pause.
  As we enter the 21st century, it will be increasingly clear that the 
dominant theme of the next century will be the struggle for human 
rights wherever they are violated, in Kosovo, in East Timor, in 
Chechnya, in Cuba, in Tibet, in China, wherever the ruling authorities, 
using their power, attempt to squash and destroy and eliminate and 
pulverize those who choose to disagree with them.
  This episode we are dealing with today is far from Washington, but it 
is not far from our central concerns, because clearly, we cannot have 
normal relations with Russia, as much as we would like to, as long as 
the Russian government perpetrates a policy of indiscriminate 
slaughter. Innocent Chechen children are dying as we speak, and it is 
the responsibility of the Congress to speak out on this issue. I 
strongly urge my colleagues to support this resolution.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Sanford), a member of our Committee 
on International Relations.
  Mr. SANFORD. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this resolution, 
because I think it makes common sense and because I think that it 
points out two glaring inconsistencies that need to be addressed. I 
think that what this resolution really gets at is, first of all, 
proclaiming that what is going on over there is not okay.
  Mr. Speaker, it is interesting to me that the Chechen foreign 
minister came out in today's press conference, actually in Prague with 
Radio Free Europe and Radio Liberty, and his words were these: ``Moscow 
is creating a Chechnya, basically around a zone of total destruction in 
which everything that moves is doomed to death.''
  My colleague from New Jersey made comments that pointed out Mr. 
Brzezinski's comments, that so far, the Clinton administration has been 
callously passive to this zone of death that is being talked about over 
in Prague just a few hours ago.
  What I think is interesting is that this same administration said 
that what is going on in Kosovo is absolutely unacceptable based on 
world standards today; and, therefore, we have to do something about 
it. They led the effort toward $15 billion of taxpayer money being 
spent over there to do something about it; they led the effort in 
aircraft carriers and submarines and jets going over there to do 
something about it. Yet, in this episode, they are very, very quiet. 
There is just a huge inconsistency there. I think that this resolution 
gets at that inconsistency.
  The other thing that this resolution gets at is the fact that with 
these civilian atrocities, I think that there is breach of the Helsinki 
agreement, there is breach of the Geneva Convention, there is breach of 
a number of different international standards that Russia has signed on 
to, and the result of the signing of those agreements is that it is 
then permissible for them to get U.S. taxpayer funding indirectly 
through the IMF. I think the answer has to be a very strong no.
  As we may remember, last year Russia received $4.5 billion through 
the IMF; and indirectly, that means Americans are helping to finance 
these atrocities. So I think there is a giant

[[Page 29803]]

inconsistency here. The issue needs to be raised. This resolution does 
so.
  I thank the chairman for both granting me the time and for leading 
the efforts on this.
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, but I 
am pleased to yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Lantos).
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman yielding me this 
time.
  I will respond to my friend who has just spoken, because this is the 
last time to engage in cheap partisan rhetoric. There is an enormous 
difference between Kosovo and Chechnya; and the difference between 
Kosovo and Chechnya is not the difference in the suffering of the 
innocent civilians, but in the obvious fact that Russia today has a 
vast reservoir of nuclear weapons; it is still a nuclear superpower. It 
would be utterly irresponsible on the part of our government not to 
recognize this difference. We simply cannot ignore or pretend that we 
are unaware of military realities. We have taken on the regime of 
Milosevic because this was a dictatorship of most limited military 
capabilities. No one in his right mind would advocate engaging in 
military action against a nuclear-equipped Russia.
  What we have to do is what we are doing here and what our 
administration is doing: denouncing the uncivilized actions of the 
Russian military; calling for a cease-fire; calling for the Russians to 
accept Western assistance so that the long-suffering people of Chechnya 
will be able to get through this winter.
  We did not start the war in Chechnya, neither did Congress nor this 
administration. Chechen terrorists started this particular military 
engagement, and to take this opportunity to slam the administration, I 
think, is singularly inappropriate and out of place.
  This body is effective when it speaks with a bipartisan voice.
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, would it be possible for the gentleman from 
California, Mr. Lantos, to get his time back?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Shimkus). The gentleman may request 
unanimous consent to retrieve his time.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to reclaim my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from California?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, how much time do I have remaining?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman) has 
4 minutes remaining, and the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) has 
12\1/2\ minutes remaining.
  The gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) may proceed on his own 
time.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I had earnestly hoped that we can pass a resolution on denouncing 
excessive Russian military action, the mindless assassination of 
innocent civilians on a bipartisan basis without taking cheap shots at 
our administration, which is no less concerned by these developments as 
are Members of this body, every single Member of this body, the 
gentleman on the other side, and myself included. I would hope that we 
can conclude this debate by recognizing the irresponsible action of the 
Russian government, by criticizing their action, by calling for the 
restoration of peace in the region, and avoiding any partisan attacks 
which are so uncalled for in this particular situation.
  Mr. SANFORD. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. LANTOS. I yield to the gentleman from South Carolina.
  Mr. SANFORD. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, I applaud the gentleman's efforts. He has been such a 
great advocate for human rights around the globe. My only point is 
this: I am not ignoring the nuclear realities that exist in the former 
Soviet Union. My simple point is this, and I do not mean this as a 
political cheap shot: there has been a disparity where the 
administration has been concerned in talking about the human rights of 
Kosovars and the human rights of the people in Chechnya. All I am 
suggesting is that maybe if we looked at a squeeze on IMF funding, it 
might get their attention. That is all I am raising.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, if I may reclaim my time, I am very happy to 
have this clarification from my friend.
  It is important to be discriminating in the arena of foreign policy. 
When the outrages are perpetrated by Milosevic and his thugs, there are 
no overriding reasons why the United States should act with great 
caution or should speak with great caution. With respect to Russia, we 
have a tremendous range of issues on the plate, most importantly the 
presence of tens of thousands of nuclear weapons in Russian possession. 
It would be utterly irresponsible for our government not to be 
cognizant of this fact in taking positions on the matter of Chechnya.
  If my friend will look at the statements of the appropriate officials 
of our Department of State and the White House on this issue, he will 
find to his satisfaction that the Chechen outrages have been denounced 
by our government as they should have been; but at the same time, a 
different policy is called for vis-a-vis Serbia and vis-a-vis Russia.
  Mr. SANFORD. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman would yield for one more 
minute, I am in complete agreement on his pronouncements. I guess the 
divergence here is on what has been actually done, because in Kosovo, 
very strong action was taken. My suggestion is that a limit, a freeze, 
on IMF funding is a very limited and curtailed activity. It is 
something we could do, but it has not been talked about from the 
administration. What I am looking for from the administration is simply 
action. That is all.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Virginia (Mr. Wolf).
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time.
  I rise in strong support of this resolution. I have visited Chechnya. 
I was in Chechnya from May 28 to June 2 of 1995. And while I am not 
here to attack anyone, I think at this time it is fair to say that this 
administration could have done more to be a force in Chechnya.
  One of the recommendations that we made after our trip was that the 
administration appoint a prominent American with negotiating experience 
such as former Secretary of State James Baker, or former Senator George 
Mitchell, who frankly probably deserves a Nobel Peace Prize for what he 
has done in Ireland, or former Senator Sam Nunn, to help bring the 
Chechnya situation to a close.
  We were in the village of Samashki where a massacre took place, and 
the people came up and told us about the Russian soldiers who came into 
the village and took the heroin that they carry when they are wounded 
and mixed the heroin with fruit juices and injected it into their veins 
and shot up the whole time. We have pictures of the town on video. We 
have the interviews with the people. Now, if my colleagues looked at 
The Washington Post the other day, the Russian soldiers have gone back 
into the same town and have bombarded the town.

                              {time}  1545

  So rather than laying blame, although I do think the administration 
could have done more, I think it would be important to do what the 
gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Sanford) said, what I heard him say, 
which is to put some pressure on the government with regard to aid.
  I think the situation is different than Kosovo, although I was one of 
the 31 Republican Members that voted for the bombing of Kosovo. But 
there are a large number of people, and I believe for many, the fact 
that Chechnya is so far away and the fact that they are Muslims and the 
fact that few people have visited there, the fact that very few people 
are willing or able to speak out on the part of the West, makes it a 
difficult issue.

[[Page 29804]]

  So this resolution is very, very good. I hope it passes with a 
unanimous vote. I would also ask that perhaps the administration could 
pick one person with strong negotiating skills, who would go not with a 
club, but go to Russia and try to do everything possible to stop the 
shelling and the bombing. If they do not, this winter will be so 
brutal.
  I would be one who would support aid by the Western governments, 
including ours, to the people who have gotten out of there and gone 
into Ingushetia. But we should do more, and bring some pressure on the 
Russians to stop the activity which is taking place. With that, I hope 
the resolution passes with a unanimous vote.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I strongly urge all colleagues to vote for 
this concurrent resolution. I have no further requests for time, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Shimkus). The question is on the motion 
offered by the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman) that the House 
suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution, H. Con. Res. 
206, as amended.
  The question was taken.
  Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and 
nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the 
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be 
postponed.

                          ____________________