[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 9]
[House]
[Pages 12808-12809]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]


[[Page 12808]]

 NO REPEAL OF SECTION 907 WHILE AZERBAIJAN ILLEGALLY BLOCKADES ARMENIA 
                          AND NAGORNO KARABAGH

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Miller of Florida). Under the Speaker's 
announced policy of January 19, 1999, the gentleman from New Jersey 
(Mr. Pallone) is recognized during morning hour debates for 5 minutes.
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, late last month Secretary of State 
Madeleine Albright renewed the administration's unfortunate and 
misguided effort to repeal Section 907 of the Freedom Support Act. 
Section 907 restricts direct U.S. Government assistance to the 
Government of Azerbaijan until the President certifies that Azerbaijan 
has taken demonstrable steps to lift its blockades of Armenia and 
Nagorno Karabagh. Azerbaijan's illegal blockades of its neighbors has 
resulted in the disruption of supplies of vital goods to Armenia and 
Nogorno Karabagh, causing severe economic hardship and real human 
suffering.
  Mr. Speaker, Section 907 was good law when it was passed, and it 
remains good law 7 years later. Azerbaijan has done nothing to merit 
the repeal of Section 907, and despite these facts, the administration, 
with the strong backing of some of the major oil companies, is trying 
to urge Congress to repeal Section 907.
  Mr. Speaker, the Caspian Sea, which Azerbaijan borders on, is 
believed by some to contain vast oil reserves. The tantalizing prospect 
of a new source of petroleum resources has caused the administration to 
look the other way in terms of Azerbaijan's poor human rights record, 
its corrupt and undemocratic government, and its pattern of regional 
aggression.
  In written testimony submitted to the Senate Appropriations 
Subcommittee on Foreign Operations, Secretary Albright stated that the 
administration would renew its request to repeal Section 907. 
Presumably, the foreign operations bill which we will be debating later 
this summer would be the vehicle for repealing Section 907, just as was 
attempted last year. But, Mr. Speaker, I am proud to say that we 
succeeded in taking that language out of the bill on the House floor. A 
bipartisan coalition of Members of this House kept Section 907 as the 
law because it was the right thing to do.
  Mr. Speaker, I would say that it would be even more imprudent and 
unjustified now to repeal Section 907. As I mentioned, Azerbaijan's 
blockade is against both the Republic of Armenia and the Republic of 
Nogorno Karabagh. With the breakup of the Soviet Union, as the 
countries of the collapsing empire attained their independence, 
Azerbaijan attempted to militarily crush Nogorno Karabagh and drive out 
the Armenian population. But the Karabagh Armenians ultimately won 
their war of independence, and a cease-fire was signed in 1994.
  The U.S. has been one of the countries taking the lead in the peace 
process under the auspices of the Organization for Security and 
Cooperation in Europe. Late last year, the U.S. and our negotiating 
partners put forward a proposal known as the Common State Proposal as a 
basis for moving the negotiations forward.
  Despite some serious reservations, the elected governments of both 
Nogorno Karabagh and Armenia have accepted this Common State Proposal 
in a spirit of good faith to get the negotiations moving forward. And 
what was Azerbaijan's reaction to the proposal from the United States 
and our negotiating partners? An unqualified no.
  Yet, Mr. Speaker, unbelievable as it sounds, our State Department is 
trying to push Congress to reward Azerbaijan, a country that rejects 
our peace plan, by repealing Section 907, to the serious detriment of 
Armenia and Karabagh, the countries that accept our proposal. 
Furthermore, the administration's budget request actually proposes 
increasing aid to Azerbaijan and decreasing aid to Armenia. What kind 
of a message does that send? That rejecting peace is okay?
  Current law, Section 907, makes good sense and is morally justified. 
Section 907 does not prevent the delivery of humanitarian aid to the 
people Azerbaijan; to date, well over $130 million in U.S. humanitarian 
and exchange assistance has been provided to Azerbaijan through NGOs, 
nongovernmental organizations. The blockade of Armenia and Nogorno 
Karabagh has cut off the transport of food, fuel, medicine, and other 
vital supplies, creating a humanitarian crisis requiring the U.S. to 
send emergency life assistance to Armenia.
  The bottom line, Mr. Speaker, is that Azerbaijan has failed to live 
up to the basic conditions set forth in the U.S. law pursuant to 
Section 907, and that is: ``Taking demonstrable steps to cease all 
blockades and other offensive uses of force against Armenia and Nogorno 
Karabagh.''
  Mr. Speaker, I just hope that Secretary Albright and the State 
Department will reconsider their plan to repeal Section 907. And if 
not, Mr. Speaker, I hope that Congress will reject this effort as we 
have done now for several years.
  Mr. Speaker, late last month Secretary of State Madeleine Albright 
renewed the Administration's unfortunate and misguided effort to repeal 
Section 907 of the Freedom Support Act.
  What is Section 907? And why is it so important? Section 907 
restricts direct U.S. government assistance to the government of the 
Republic of Azerbaijan, until the President certifies that Azerbaijan 
has taken demonstrable steps to lift its blockades of Armenia and 
Nagorno Karabagh. Azerbaijan's illegal blockades of its neighbors has 
resulted in the disruption of supplies of vital goods to Armenia and 
Nagorno Karabagh, causing severe economic hardship and real human 
suffering.
  When the Freedom Support Act was adopted in 1992, establishing our 
new, post-Cold War U.S. foreign policy for the newly independent states 
of the former Soviet Empire, Section 907 was included as a way of 
holding Azerbaijan accountable for its blockades of its neighbors. 
Ideally, it might have been hoped that the Section 907 sanctions would 
prompt Azerbaijan to lift the blockades. But Azerbaijan has stubbornly 
maintained its counterproductive strategy of trying to strangle Armenia 
and Karabagh.
  Mr. Speaker, Section 907 was good law when it was passed, and it 
remains good law seven years later. Azerbaijan has done nothing to 
merit the repeal of Section 907.
  Despite these facts, Mr. Speaker, the Administration--with the strong 
backing of some of the major oil companies--is trying to push Congress 
to repeal Section 907. You see, the Caspian Sea, which Azerbaijan 
borders on, is believed by some to contain vast oil reserves. Much of 
these reserves remain unproven, and recent disappointing test drillings 
have prompted several international oil consortiums to pull out of 
Azerbaijan. But the tantalizing prospect of a new source of petroleum 
resources has caused the Administration to look the other way in terms 
of Azerbaijan's poor human rights record, its corrupt and undemocratic 
government, and its pattern of regional aggression.
  In written testimony submitted to the Senate Appropriations 
Subcommittee on Foreign Operations, Secretary Albright stated that the 
Administration would renew its request to repeal Section 907. 
Presumably the Foreign Operations bill, which we will be debating later 
this summer, would be the vehicle for repealing Section 907--just as 
was attempted last year. Last September, as we were working to finish 
up the appropriations bills before adjourning for the Congressional 
elections, a provision was included in the fiscal year 1999 Foreign 
Operations bill to repeal Section 907. But I'm proud to say, Mr. 
Speaker, that we succeeded in taking that language out of the bill on 
the House floor. A bipartisan coalition of Members of this House kept 
Section 907 as the law, because it was the right thing to do.
  Mr. Speaker, I would say that it would be even more imprudent and 
unjustified now to repeal Section 907.
  As I mentioned, Azerbaijan's blockade is against both the Republic of 
Armenia and the Republic of Nagorno Karabagh. Nagorno Karabagh is an 
historically Armenian-populated region of the Caucasus Mountains (known 
as Artsakh to the Armenian people) that Stalin's map-makers included as 
part of Azerbaijan--although even in Soviet times its distinctiveness 
and autonomy were officially recognized. With the break-up of the 
Soviet Union, as the countries of the collapsing empire attained their 
independence, Azerbaijan attempted to militarily crush Nagorno

[[Page 12809]]

Karabagh and drive out the Armenian population. But the Karabagh 
Armenians ultimately won their war of independence, and a cease-fire 
was signed in 1994.
  Although the shooting war has essentially ceased--except for 
occasional sniper fire from Azerbaijan's soldiers against the defenders 
of Karabagh--a more permanent peace has been elusive. The United States 
has been one of the countries taking the lead in the peace process, 
under the auspices of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in 
Europe (OSCE). Late last year, the U.S. and our negotiating partners 
put forward a proposal, known as the ``Common State'' proposal, as a 
basis for moving the negotiations forward.
  Despite some serious reservations, the elected governments of both 
Nagorno Karabagh and Armenia have accepted this Common State proposal 
in a spirit of good faith, to get the negotiations moving forward. And 
what was Azerbaijan's reaction to the proposal from the United States 
and our negotiating partners? An unqualified ``no.'' In other words, 
Armenia and Karabagh have agreed to work with the U.S. for peace in 
this strategically vital region of the world. Azerbaijan has rejected 
American efforts to achieve peace and stability.
  Yet, Mr. Speaker, unbelievable as it sounds our State Department is 
trying to push Congress to reward Azerbaijan, the country that rejects 
our peace plan, by repealing Section 907--to the serious detriment of 
Armenia and Karabagh, the countries that accept our proposal. 
Furthermore, the Administration's budget request actually proposes 
increasing aid to Azerbaijan and decreasing aid to Armenia. What 
message does that send? That rejecting peace is okay?
  Current law, Section 907, makes good sense and is morally justified. 
Section 907 does NOT prevent the delivery of humanitarian aid to the 
people of Azerbaijan; to date, well over $130 million in U.S. 
humanitarian and exchange assistance has been provided to Azerbaijan 
through NGOs (non-governmental organizations). The blockade of Armenia 
and Nagorno Karabagh has cut off the transport of food, fuel, medicine 
and other vital supplies--creating a humanitarian crisis requiring the 
U.S. to send emergency life-saving assistance to Armenia. Armenia is 
land-locked, and the Soviet-era infrastructure routed 85 percent of 
Armenia's goods, as well as vital energy supplies, through Azerbaijan. 
That life-line is now cut off. Despite these disadvantages, Armenia has 
established democracy and market reforms, and is trying to integrate 
its economy with the West.
  But the bottom line, Mr. Speaker, is that Azerbaijan has failed to 
live up to the basic condition set forth in U.S. law, pursuant to 
Section 907: ``taking demonstrable steps to cease all blockades and 
other offensive uses of force against Armenia and Nagorno Karabagh.''
  I hope that Secretary Albright and the State Department will 
reconsider their plan to repeal Section 907. If not, I hope Congress 
will reject this effort, as we have done for years.

                          ____________________