[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 146 (2000), Part 15]
[House]
[Pages 22267-22268]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



           OPPOSING THE SALE OF ATTACK HELICOPTERS TO TURKEY

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Bilirakis) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to voice my fierce 
opposition to the sale of 145 Bell-Textron attack helicopters to 
Turkey, as planned by the administration.
  First and foremost, there is simply no need to proceed with this 
sale. Turkey is already the most militarized state in that region, and 
it has the second largest army in NATO after the United States. Despite 
these facts, Turkey plans to spend $150 billion over the next 25 to 30 
years on military weapons; and it plans to implement the first $31 
billion phase in the next 10 years. This money could be better used to 
build schools, hospitals, or housing for the victims of last year's 
destructive earthquake. Mr. Speaker, the list is endless.
  Previous experience leaves no room for any optimism regarding 
legitimate use of such weaponry by Turkey. Quite the contrary, the 
record shows that the Turkish military has consistently failed to 
distinguish between civilian and military targets. For the last 16 
years, the Turkish military has been using American weaponry, most 
notably attack helicopters, to kill more than 30,000 civilians, destroy 
over 2,000 ethnic Kurdish villages and displace more than 2\1/2\ 
million ethnic Kurds.

                              {time}  1930

  The Turkish military has misused its equipment even though its 
government has signed numerous international agreements guaranteeing 
freedom of religion and human rights. Recently, Turkey used an American 
COBRA attack helicopter in its campaign against the Kurds in southeast 
Turkey, in direct violation of the Arms Export Control Act and the 
Foreign Military Sales Agreement which Turkey signed with the United 
States.
  Despite its repeated pledges and promises to make improvements, 
Turkey's record of human rights violations remains dismal. In a 
December 1997 meeting with U.S. officials, Turkish diplomats pledged to 
meet certain benchmarks for improving human rights in Turkey. In 
subsequent meetings, U.S. officials pledged to oppose the sale of U.S. 
attack helicopters or other military equipment to Turkey unless the 
Turkish government met these standards.

[[Page 22268]]

  And to what degree did Turkey honor its promises? According to the 
State Department's 1999 Country Report on Human Rights, Turkey has 
failed to meet any of the benchmarks set forth by the administration. 
How can we allow this sale to proceed when Turkey has repeatedly failed 
to live up to its promises? Our Nation risks a loss of credibility in 
permitting this sale while repeatedly proclaiming our commitment to 
respect and promote human rights and our opposition to Turkey's 
violations.
  Other countries have refused to sell Turkey weapons because of its 
human rights records. According to a report by Reuters on September 8, 
2000, Germany's ruling Social Democrats said their government would 
veto a $7.1 billion order to supply Turkey with 1,000 tanks because of 
Turkey's human rights violations. If Germany is willing to forego a 
lucrative arms deal based on these concerns, why should we feel any 
differently? Is our Nation any less committed to protecting human 
rights? Are our principles more ``flexible'' when a significant dollar 
amount is involved? I would hope not.
  Mr. Speaker, some values transcend geopolitical barriers, and respect 
for human rights is one of them. People around the world look to the 
United States for leadership and guidance precisely because of our 
strict adherence to such principles. The proposed arms sale to Turkey, 
viewed in the light of its past record on human rights, is contrary to 
the values we espouse, harmful to our imagine abroad, and threatens the 
security of a strategically important region.
  For these reasons, Mr. Speaker, I urge Members to join me in opposing 
this arms deal and in calling for its immediate cancellation.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I have long been concerned about the level 
of U.S. military aid and arms sales to Turkey. On average, the U.S. 
provides Turkey with more than $1 billion each year in direct military 
assistance and training and commercial arms exports. There are more 
particular reasons, however, for why I am opposed to the recently 
announced agreement for Turkey to purchase 145 attack helicopters worth 
$4.5 billion from U.S. arms manufacturers. Nothing could be more 
destructive to the efforts by the U.S. and the international community 
to bring peace and stability to the eastern Mediterranean region that 
this major arms purchase by Turkey.
  Human rights organizations inside and outside of Turkey have 
documented that Turkey has used American Cobra attack helicopters in 
its campaign against the Kurdish people in southeast Turkey. The 
Turkish military consistently fail to distinguish between civilian and 
military targets. For the past 16 years, the Turkish military has used 
American weaponry and especially attack helicopters to kill over 30,000 
civilian non-combatants, destroy over 2,000 ethnic Kurdish villages, 
and displace over 2.5 million ethnic Kurds. In its ``Report 2000,'' 
Amnesty International states that the practice of torture has actually 
increased in the past year.
  At a time when the world hopes for a break-through in negotiations on 
Cyprus, the U.S. approves a massive military sale to Turkey. At a time 
when the world is attempting to lessen the attacks and repressive 
actions taken against the Kurdish minority by the Turkish government, 
the U.S. approves a massive military sale to Turkey.
  Why is the Administration allowing this commercial sale to go 
forward? Turkey is already the most militarized state in the 
Mediterranean. It possesses vast military superiority over all its 
neighbors. There is no need to increase its military arsenal.
  Rather than spending $4.5 billion on the purchase of attack 
helicopters, the Government of Turkey might better target those funds 
toward rebuilding the communities ravaged by earthquakes, building more 
schools and health clinics, and addressing other basic economic needs 
of its people.
  I urge the Administration to revoke this export license and move away 
from the long-standing policy of militarizing Turkey--a policy 
supported by Republican and Democratic Administrations alike. What 
might have once made sense during the Cold War is now counter-
productive to efforts to demilitarize the region.
  The pursuit of regional peace and stability and respect for basic 
human rights are not helped by arms sales.

                          ____________________