[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 147 (2001), Part 10]
[House]
[Pages 14368-14372]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



                       ILSA EXTENSION ACT OF 2001

  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
bill (H.R. 1954) to extend the authorities of the Iran and Libya 
Sanctions Act of 1996 until 2006, as amended.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                               H.R. 1954

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``ILSA Extension Act of 
     2001''.

     SEC. 2. IMPOSITION OF SANCTIONS WITH RESPECT TO LIBYA.

       (a) In General.--Section 5(b)(2) of the Iran and Libya 
     Sanctions Act of 1996 (50 U.S.C. 1701 note; 110 Stat. 1543) 
     is amended by striking ``$40,000,000'' each place it appears 
     and inserting ``$20,000,000''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a) 
     shall apply to investments made on or after June 13, 2001.

     SEC. 3. REPORTS REQUIRED.

       Section 10 of the Iran and Libya Sanctions Act of 1996 
     (Public Law 104-172; 50 U.S.C. 1701 note) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subsection (b) as subsection (c); and
       (2) by inserting after subsection (a) the following:
       ``(b) Report on Effectiveness of Actions Under This Act.--
     Not earlier than 24 months, and not later than 30 months, 
     after the date of the enactment of the ILSA Extension Act of 
     2001, the President shall transmit to Congress a report that 
     describes--
       ``(1) the extent to which actions relating to trade taken 
     pursuant to this Act--
       ``(A) have been effective in achieving the objectives of 
     section 3 and any other foreign policy or national security 
     objectives of the United States with respect to Iran and 
     Libya; and
       ``(B) have affected humanitarian interests in Iran and 
     Libya, the country in which the sanctioned person is located, 
     or in other countries; and
       ``(2) the impact of actions relating to trade taken 
     pursuant to this Act on other national security, economic, 
     and foreign policy interests of the United States, including 
     relations with countries friendly to the United States, and 
     on the United States economy.

     The President may include in the report the President's 
     recommendation on whether or not this Act should be 
     terminated or modified.''.

     SEC. 4. EXTENSION OF IRAN AND LIBYA SANCTIONS ACT OF 1996.

       Section 13(b) of the Iran and Libya Sanctions Act of 1996 
     (Public Law 104-172; 50 U.S.C. 1701 note) is amended by 
     striking ``5 years'' and inserting ``10 years''.

     SEC. 5. REVISED DEFINITION OF INVESTMENT.

       Section 14(9) of the Iran and Libya Sanctions Act of 1996 
     (50 U.S.C. 1701 note; 110 Stat. 1549) is amended by adding at 
     the end the following new sentence: ``For purposes of this 
     paragraph, an amendment or other modification that is made, 
     on or after June 13, 2001, to an agreement or contract shall 
     be treated as the entry of an agreement or contract.''.

  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 
and include extraneous material on H.R. 1954.
  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 rise in support of H.R. 1954, the ILSA Extension Act. 
The Iran-Libya Sanctions Act requires that the executive branch 
consider sanctions against foreign firms that invest in the energy 
sectors of Iran and Libya. Its aim is to deprive those countries of 
revenues that they can use to foment terrorism against our Nation and 
its allies and to develop weapons of mass destruction. The act, which 
was initially passed in 1996, which I was pleased to sponsor, will 
expire on August 5.
  On May 9, the Subcommittee on the Middle East and South Asia held 
hearings on the bill in draft form. On May 23 I introduced a bill, the 
ILSA Extension Act, together with my colleague, the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Berman), that would renew the act for an additional 5 
years. On June 13, the Committee on International Relations favorably 
reported H.R. 1954 by a record vote of 41 ayes and 3 noes. On July 13, 
the House Committee on Ways and Means unanimously adopted to adopt a 5-
year renewal extension as well.
  Bipartisan support for renewing ILSA is strong in the Congress. At 
the present time, we have 252 cosponsors in the House of 
Representatives, and in the Senate 74 Senators. Support for extension 
remains strong because Iran continues to threaten our national security 
by developing weapons of mass destruction and by supporting radical 
groups that support terrorism. Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah 
Khamenei, calls Israel ``a cancerous tumor.''
  As for Libya, although Libyans stand convicted of killing Americans, 
Britons and others by bringing down Pan Am Flight 103, the Libyan 
Government has failed to take responsibility for its actions in this 
matter as required by the U.N. Security Council and to pay compensation 
to the victims' families.
  Thus, we remain firm in our opposition to both countries.
  Moreover, there is ample evidence that ILSA has delayed exploitation 
of Iran and Libya's energy resources and made their development more 
difficult and more expensive. As a result of this act, few major energy 
companies want to jeopardize their ties to the huge U.S. market in 
exchange for the difficult investment conditions that now prevail in 
both Iran and Libya.
  Finally, ILSA does not affect any American companies. It is aimed 
solely at foreign companies that take advantage of our executive-order 
ban on U.S. investment in Iran and in Libya.
  To prevent Iran and Libya from doing further harm, I respectfully 
urge my colleagues to vote for H.R. 1954 to renew ILSA for an 
additional 5 years.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1954.
  Mr. Speaker, let me first pay tribute to my good friend, the 
gentleman from New York (Chairman Gilman); the bipartisan leadership of 
the House of Representatives, the Republican Leader, the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Armey), and the Democratic Leader, the gentleman from 
Missouri (Mr. Gephardt); my good friend and colleague, the chairman of 
the Committee on International Relations, the gentleman from Illinois 
(Mr. Hyde); and over 250 colleagues who have seen fit to cosponsor this 
most important legislation.

                              {time}  2215

  The Iran-Libya Sanctions Act imposes sanctions on foreign companies 
that invest in either Iran or Libya's energy sector. It, therefore, 
limits those

[[Page 14369]]

two nation's oil profits, which each of those countries is using to 
bankroll weapons of mass destruction and terrorist activities.
  Now, the initial reasons for applying sanctions on Iran and Libya are 
as compelling today, Mr. Speaker, as they were 5 years ago when this 
body saw fit to impose these sanctions on these 2 dictatorial, 
terrorism-supporting nations.
  Iran continues to support terrorism. Iran continues to develop 
weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear weapons, and it is 
fanatically opposed to the peace process in the Middle East and to the 
very existence of the only democratic nation in the Middle East, our 
ally, the State of Israel.
  Let me say a word regarding Iran's record of terrorism, Mr. Speaker. 
In its most recent annual edition entitled Patterns of Global 
Terrorism, our Department of State describes Iran, ``as the most active 
State sponsor of terrorism on the face of this planet.'' Even since 
ILSA, the Iran-Libya Sanctions Act, took effect, Iran has continued to 
assist terrorists in the murder of Americans. In announcing the 
indictments for the Khobar Towers tragedy, the 1996 bombing in Saudi 
Arabia that took the lives of 19 of our servicemen and servicewomen, 
Attorney General John Ashcroft said, ``Elements of the Iranian 
government inspired, supported, and supervised'' members of the Saudi 
Hezbollah, the group thought to be primarily responsible for the 
attack. The indictment makes clear Iran's deep involvement with the 
suspects themselves.
  Iran also provides aid and training and resources to the most blood-
thirsty terrorists in the world, Hamas, Palestinian's Islamic Jihad, 
Lebanon's Hezbollah, all of which share totalitarian goals. Iran's 
patronage of these Middle Eastern terrorist groups has been 
demonstrated repeatedly by scholars, by journalists, and by our own 
judiciary.
  In 10 cases, Mr. Speaker, in recent years, U.S. courts have ruled in 
favor of U.S. citizens seeking damages from Iran as victims, or family 
members of victims, for Iran-backed terrorism. One of these cases 
involved a direct attack by a member of the Iranian Revolutionary 
Guards. The other nine involved attacks by Hezbollah, Hamas, and the 
Palestinian Islamic Jihad which were proven to our courts' satisfaction 
to be dependent on Iranian training, money, and arms.
  Mr. Speaker, there is no sign of a let-up. According to the highly 
respected military affairs correspondent, writing just a few days ago 
on July 17, ``Iran has transferred hundreds of tons of weapons, 
ammunition and other materials to Hezbollah through Syria in recent 
days.'' This highly respected journalist writes, ``Iranian assistance 
via Hezbollah to Palestinian terrorist organizations that attack Israel 
is increasing and Hezbollah in turn is training Palestinian terrorists 
in Hezbollah bases in Lebanon's Beka'a Valley.''
  The list of murderous and terrorist actions carried out by Iranian-
backed terrorists is endless. Sixty-three people killed, including 17 
Americans, in the April, 1983 U.S. embassy bombing in Beirut. Mr. 
Speaker, 241 U.S. Marines killed in the barracks bombing in October 
1983. I might mention parenthetically some of us visited with those 
Marines just days before they lost their lives because of Iranian-
supported terrorism.
  Mr. Speaker, 29 were killed in the 1992 bombing of the Israeli 
embassy in Buenos Aires. Sixty-six innocent men, women and children 
were killed in the 1994 bombing of the Jewish Community Center in 
Buenos Aires. I have not even begun to exhaust the most infamous 
incidents. What about all the kidnapping, torture, and murders that are 
the daily fare of these groups, the casual violence that barely makes 
the headlines. All of this, Mr. Speaker, has occurred with active 
support of the Islamic Republic of Iran.
  This disgrace has been going on for more than 2 decades now. It is 
quite a tradition that Iran has established, and the very least we can 
do is answer. That is what ILSA, the Iran-Libya Sanctions Act, does. It 
is our response to murder, our attempt to dry up some of the monies 
that nourishes this terrorist monster.
  Last year, Mr. Speaker, Iran successfully tested an 800-mile range 
missile capable of delivering these catastrophic weapons of mass 
destruction against its neighbors, including potentially Turkey, Egypt, 
Jordan, and Israel. Now, Iran recently held an election for President 
and the winner was the incumbent, Mr. Khatami, the most reform-oriented 
of the candidates that the clinical establishment allowed to run.
  As my colleagues know, Mr. Speaker, one cannot just run for office in 
Iran. One must have the good housekeeping seal of approval of the 
ruling Ayatollah. The President in Iran is far less powerful than 
Iran's chief clerical official, the supreme leader. Real control in 
that country is in the hands of the clergy. The security organizations, 
the judiciary, the media, and the military are all under the control of 
the Ayatollah.
  Now, I have spoken mainly of Iran, but there is a lot to be said of 
Libya. This country, which for so long has been run in a dictatorial 
fashion, still refuses to accept responsibility for the downing of Pan 
Am 103 and refuses to provide compensation for the families of all 
those innocent victims.
  I would like to say a word, Mr. Speaker, about the effectiveness of 
the Iran-Libya Sanctions Act. Some argue that ILSA has not had an 
impact on the Iranian economy. That, Mr. Speaker, is demonstrably 
false. Even Iranian officials, including the President of Iran, have 
acknowledged that our legislation has had an enormous economic impact. 
In a 1998 report to the United Nations, Iran complained that ILSA had 
caused ``disruption of its economy, decline in its gross national 
product, and contributed significantly to the reduction of 
international investment in oil projects and cancellation of some 
contracts.'' That is precisely what we are after.
  As one obvious example of ILSA's impact, I would like to point to the 
energy resources of the Caspian Sea. For several years now, Mr. 
Speaker, Iran, Russia, and Turkey have been vying to host the main 
export pipeline for newly discovered oil and gas in Azerbaijan. Several 
of the international energy companies involved in the region prefer to 
pipe their product through Iran to the Persian Gulf. Economically and 
geographically, clearly, that would be the way to go. The reason they 
have chosen not the Iranian route is our legislation. Amoco, Exxon, and 
others do not want to risk the sanctions imposed by this body.
  Recently, BP Amoco agreed to export Azerbaijani gas through Turkey, a 
member of NATO, rather than Iran. No major pipeline for Azerbaijani oil 
has been built yet, but when it is, it will go through Turkey and not 
Iran, all of that thanks to our legislation.
  I am very proud of the fact, Mr. Speaker, that our Committee on 
International Relations, with an overwhelming bipartisan vote of 41 to 
3, saw fit to expand our legislation for an additional 5 years. The 
Bush administration attempted to cut the length of time of this 
extension to 2 years, and overwhelmingly, on a bipartisan basis, our 
committee rejected the Bush administration's proposal, as will this 
House, tomorrow morning when we vote on this matter.
  This piece of legislation is one of the most important items we will 
pass during the current Congress directly related to our national 
security. I want to again thank all of my colleagues who have worked on 
this in the various committees where this legislation has been 
carefully considered.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Kirk), a former staff associate on our 
House Committee on International Relations.
  Mr. KIRK. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this legislation 
to extend the Iran-Libya Sanctions Act. I want to applaud the 
leadership of the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman), my former boss 
and now colleague, and the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos), our 
ranking Democratic member, who is a leader for us all on the issue of 
human rights.

[[Page 14370]]

  Mr. Speaker, Iran claims that it has a new moderate status, but all 
we see is the persecution of the Baha'is and Jewish minorities. We see 
terrorist bombings from the Beirut bombing to Khobar Towers. I want to 
make a special note for the life of John Phillips, a U.S. Marine from 
Wilmette, Illinois, that lost his life in the Beirut bombing.
  Iran sponsors terrorism through its intelligence service, the MOIS. 
We saw that over 200 days ago the MOIS's wholly owned subsidiary, 
Hezbollah, kidnapped three Israeli soldiers.

                              {time}  2230

  For 200 days we have had no proof of life. For 200 days we have had 
no word on their condition. That is the current record of Iran today, a 
record added to by the launch of the Shahab-3 missile, a long-range 
missile with components from North Korea that we know is pointed 
straight at U.S. forces in the Persian Gulf and at Jerusalem.
  Mr. Speaker, with this extension we send a message that a state that 
sponsors terrorism, that proliferates weapons of mass destruction, 
cannot do business as usual. I applaud the committee and urge adoption 
of this measure.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to commend the previous speaker for his powerful 
and eloquent statement.
  Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cardin), the distinguished senior ranking 
member of the Committee on Ways and Means.
  Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, let me first thank the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Lantos) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman) 
for their leadership on this issue not just in bringing the extension 
bill to the floor but also in their work on the original bill in 
passing the Sanctions Act. It has been an extremely important tool that 
we have had available to us, and it has helped us enforce the sanctions 
against these two terrorist countries.
  There is no mistaking that Iran and Libya both are countries that 
harbor terrorists and terrorist activities and have been involved in 
the production of arms of mass destruction.
  I am very pleased, Mr. Speaker, that on the Committee on Ways and 
Means, on which I have the honor of serving, we were able to also agree 
to a 5-year extension. I think the 5-year extension is a very important 
part of this legislation. It gives us the continuity of foreign policy 
against terrorist countries that extends beyond any one administration, 
that it is clear that this is not a matter that is of one 
administration's concern but this is our concern, our Nation's concern, 
and one policy that we want to be able to continue.
  It is a tool that is available to the administration. It is a tool 
where the administration has plenty of flexibility under this statute, 
as we want the administration to have. But we want to make it clear 
that if one does business with terrorist states we do not want them 
doing business with us. We do not want our people supporting terrorist 
activities. That is what this legislation does. It speaks to our 
priorities. It speaks to what we believe in as a nation.
  I am very proud to have joined my colleagues in this effort. It is a 
very important bill. It is one that I am sure will enjoy strong support 
in this body and has enjoyed strong support in both the committees that 
considered it.
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield such time as he may 
consume to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Engel), from the Committee 
on International Relations.
  Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from California for 
yielding time to me. He spoke so eloquently that there is nothing left 
to say, because he so thoroughly covered the reasons why this bill 
ought to be supported.
  I want to also commend my colleague, the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
Gilman), for his hard work and energy on this issue. I have no doubt 
that when we vote tomorrow it will overwhelmingly pass, because it 
deserves to pass. It is an important bill.
  I am delighted to be back on the Committee on International 
Relations, where I voted for this bill, as did virtually the entire 
committee.
  Mr. Speaker, the Iran-Libya Sanctions Act is an act that is very, 
very important. We must resoundingly say no to terrorism wherever it 
rears its ugly head in any place in the Earth.
  Iran and Libya are two countries that have been at the forefront of 
exporting terrorism. No one can deny that. Actions speak louder than 
words. Time and time and time again various countries, including our 
own, have felt the brunt of their terrorist activities. They also have 
weapons of mass destruction that they sell to rogue states, and they 
work hard to undermine anything that is decent throughout the world.
  I am also delighted that this bill has been extended for 5 years, as 
was pointed out by the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos). That had 
been questioned, and it is right to be extended for 5 years, because 
anything less would be a retreat.
  We must be unequivocal. This Congress must be unequivocal, this 
Nation must be unequivocal, and our world must be unequivocal in saying 
no to terrorism.
  I would have taken it one step further, if I had my total way. I 
would have included Syria on the list of nations that export terrorism 
and would have covered Syria with similar sanctions. But that was not 
to be. There will be other resolutions and other legislation covering 
Syria, which has a stranglehold on Lebanon, and Syria needs to get out 
of Lebanon.
  But Hezbollah, which operates in Lebanon, is backed by the Iranians. 
They could not function if it were not for Iran and Syria, so it is 
important that we tell Iran that we are not going to tolerate their 
terrorism or their weapons of mass destruction.
  The same with Libya. The world looks to the United States. We are the 
last remaining superpower in the world. If we stand for anything, it 
should be for human rights and squarely against terrorism.
  Mr. Speaker, I am very proud to join my colleagues in supporting 
ILSA, the Iran-Libya Sanctions Act, and let this Congress send a strong 
message to the world that terrorism and weapons of mass destruction 
used in a terrorist way will not be tolerated.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield my remaining 
time, 2 minutes, to my colleague, the gentleman from California (Mr. 
Sherman), a distinguished member of the Committee on International 
Relations.
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, since we have additional time, I am pleased 
to yield 3 more minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Sherman).
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Kirk). The gentleman from California 
(Mr. Sherman) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to 
me.
  Mr. Speaker, I commend the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman) and 
the gentleman from California (Mr. Berman) for authoring this statute. 
I commend the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) for standing so 
strong against efforts to weaken this bill, standing as strong as the 
Athenians at Marathon after attack after attack to try to water down, 
weaken, or shorten this important act.
  I want to associate myself with the comments of all previous 
speakers, because this bill is critical to American values and to our 
allies. But I want to point out that this is the most important thing 
we can do here in Congress to protect American national security, 
because in this century the greatest threats to our security are 
terrorism, and as the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) and others 
pointed out, much of that originates in Tehran, and nuclear 
proliferation.
  Iran is the country hostile to the United States most likely to 
develop nuclear weapons. It is the combination of those two threats, 
nuclear terrorism, that poses the single greatest combined threat to 
the safety of Americans.
  What this bill does is it focuses on Iran's economy. Iran is not a 
small

[[Page 14371]]

country with a huge amount of oil. It is not Abu Dhabi. It is a country 
with an increasingly large population and an economy that is not doing 
well. Iran will become a net importer of oil if it does not get western 
capital and western technology to expand and improve its oil fields.
  Largely as a result of our actions here today and the actions taken 
by this Congress 5 years ago, Iran has not been able to obtain that 
capital and technology, and the vast majority of requests for proposals 
and requests to contract with western oil companies have been denied.
  One can only imagine the nuclear weapons program that Iran could have 
financed if this bill had not been passed 5 years ago, and we must 
focus on extending it now for another 5 years.
  The Iran-Libya Sanctions Act for the last 5 years has made it more 
difficult for the Iranian government to have the financial wherewithal 
to engage in an all-out program to develop nuclear weapons, and it must 
be continued.
  Now, we are told that there is this new rise of moderates in Iran. 
There may be differences in Iran on domestic issues and cultural 
issues, but the so-called moderates and so-called extremists are united 
in two things, support for international terrorism and a belief that 
Iran should develop nuclear weapons. No amount of discord in Tehran 
should distract us from our need to make sure that that government does 
not have the assets it could use to develop nuclear weapons and to 
continue its support of terrorism.
  Mr. Speaker, there are those who wonder whether our sanctions are 
successful. The gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) quoted the 
statement of the government of Iran saying that, in fact, we have 
deprived that government of money, that we have adversely affected its 
gross national product.
  More recently, the country of Sudan, subject to different sanctions, 
subject to the threat of sanctions here in this Congress, did not 
obtain investment from Canada's Tasman Oil Company because this 
Congress was merely considering sanctions, namely, delisting from the 
New York Stock Exchange of those who invest in Sudanese oil.
  So sanctions have been successful, both in dealing with Iran and in 
dealing with Sudan. As to Libya, yes, we have not achieved the change 
of policy we would like, but why did Libya turn its two murderers over 
to international justice, or the two accused of murder, one who was 
convicted? Only because of international sanctions spearheaded by the 
United States.
  Recently, there have been those who have asked us to extend this act 
for only 2 years. If we had done that, it would have been such a sign 
of weakness as to give courage and strength to the most aggressive 
elements in Tehran.
  I want to commend all of those who took a leadership role in making 
sure that this bill would be extended for 5 years. I look forward to an 
enormous affirmative vote tomorrow.
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield such time as he may 
consume to the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos).
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I have two issues. The first is a technical 
one.
  I would ask the gentleman, is it not the case that in the report of 
the Committee on International Relations accompanying H.R. 1954 it was 
the intention of the Committee in the last line on page 8 that the 
report states ``Iran or Libya'' rather than just ``Libya''?
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. LANTOS. I yield to the gentleman from New York.
  Mr. GILMAN. That is my understanding of what the committee intended. 
The amendment to ILSA made by section 4 of H.R. 1954 applies both to 
Iran and Libya.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, if I may continue our colloquy, I would like 
to raise issues concerning recent developments of direct relevance to 
our discussion of ILSA. I am referring to major oil investment deals 
that both the Italian national oil company, ENI, and Japan's national 
oil company have recently announced.
  As we know, the Italian company recently agreed to invest $550 
million in an Iranian oil field in a deal that will ultimately be worth 
well over $1 billion. This deal is the first time that a foreign 
concern has been allowed to invest in an onshore Iranian oil field. It 
is also uniquely structured as a buy-back deal that could, if realized, 
serve as a model for future oil developments in Iraq.
  It is now apparent, Mr. Speaker, that a number of foreign oil 
companies have been watching the Italian national oil company's growing 
investment in Iran, now totalling over $2.5 billion, to determine 
whether it will elicit a U.S. response under the Iran-Libya Sanctions 
Act.
  In addition, Mr. Speaker, Japan made a commitment last week through 
its oil company to invest in a gas field in Iran, indicating that 
foreign companies and their governments are increasingly confident that 
the United States will not impose the sanctions that Congress mandates, 
should these companies invest in Iraq. In fact, the Japanese trade 
minister himself defiantly stated when signing the deal in Tehran that 
Japan is not affected by U.S. pressure.
  Both the Italian and the Japanese companies are not private entities 
acting independently of their government. The Japanese oil company is 
wholly-owned by the Japanese government, and the Italian government 
owns 36 percent of the Italian oil company.
  Given this state of affairs, I urge President Bush to approach the 
Italian and Japanese governments to convince them to halt these morally 
repugnant investments.

                              {time}  2245

  Should these diplomatic initiatives fail, I believe President Bush 
has a moral obligation to impose sanctions on the relevant governments, 
as he is directed under ILSA, without waiver.
  Would the chairman agree that it is now time for the United States to 
react firmly in the face of such flagrant disregard for international 
principles and both the spirit and the provisions of our legislation?
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will continue to yield, I 
too would like the President to act. Hopefully, President Bush will 
consider publicly stating that ILSA will be fully implemented, if these 
deals proceed forward, without any waivers. If we fail to act 
resolutely in these cases, the credibility of our Nation's foreign 
policy and international sanction regimes will almost certainly be 
undermined.
  Mr. LANTOS. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the 
chairman very much for his strong and unequivocal statement.
  And let me just add as a direct message to both the Italian and 
Japanese companies concerned, that should the administration not take 
appropriate action, we will come here with new legislation mandating 
sanctions against these companies or others that might take similar 
action.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume, 
and I want to thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) for his 
strong support of this measure and his being a cosponsor. As a ranking 
member of our committee, he has been an eloquent speaker and has been a 
long-time supporter of human rights in our committee and making certain 
that the world of nations abide by peaceful principles.
  Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. GILMAN. I yield to the gentleman from California.
  Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I want to associate myself with the 
comments made in this colloquy and say that to those two companies, in 
addition to all of the sanctions outlined in ILSA, we should come back, 
if necessary, in this Congress, and mandate that those who violate 
ILSA's strict provisions are denied all access to American capital 
markets and that their stocks and bonds will not be listed on NASDAQ or 
the New York Stock Exchange.
  We are studying those types of provisions in the Committee on 
Financial Services, and I am confident that we will have the votes to 
make sure that this access to American capital markets, which is 
increasingly important

[[Page 14372]]

to Japanese and European companies, will not be available to those 
companies that invest significantly in the Iranian petroleum sector.
  Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, there are a number of problems with this move 
to extend the Iran/Libya Sanctions Act.
  First, the underlying Act places way too much authority both to make 
determinations and to grant waivers, in the hands of the President and 
the Executive Branch. As such, it is yet another unconstitutional 
delegation of authority which we ought not extend.
  Moreover, as the Act applies to Libya, the authority upon which the 
bill depends is a resolution of the United Nations. So, any member who 
is concerned with UN power should vote against this extension.
  Furthermore, the sanctions are being extended from a period of five 
years to ten years. If the original five year sanction period has not 
been effective in allaying the fears about these governments why do we 
believe an extra five years will be effective? In fact, few companies 
have actually been sanctioned under this Act, and to the best of my 
knowledge no oil companies have been so sanctioned. Still, the 
sanctions in the Act are not against these nations but are actually 
directed at ``persons'' engaged in certain business and investments in 
these countries. There are already Executive Orders making it illegal 
for US companies to undertake these activities in these sanctioned 
countries, so this Act applies to companies in other countries, mostly 
our allied countries, almost all of whom oppose and resent this 
legislation and have threatened to take the kinds of retaliatory action 
that could lead to an all out trade war. In fact, the former National 
Security Advisor Brent Scrowcroft recently pointed out how these 
sanctions have had a significant adverse impact upon our Turkish 
allies.
  Mr. Speaker, I support those portions of this bill designated to 
prohibit US financing through government vehicles such as the Export-
Import Bank. I also have no problem with guarding against sales of 
military technology which could compromise our national security. 
Still, on a whole, this bill is just another plank in the failed 
sanctions regime from which we ought to loosen ourselves.
  The Bush Administration would prefer this legislation to expire and, 
failing that, they prefer taking a first step by making the extension 
last for a shorter period. In this I believe the Administration has 
taken the correct position. For one thing, there have been moves, 
particularly in Iran, to liberalize. We harm these attempts by 
maintaining a sanctions regime.
  I also have to point out the inconsistency in our policy. Why would 
we sanction Iran but not Sudan, and why would we sanction Libya but not 
Syria? I hear claims related to our national security but surely these 
are made in jest. We subsidize business with the People's Republic of 
China but sanction Europeans from helping to build oil refineries in 
Iran.
  There has been a real concern in our country regarding the price of 
gasoline. Since these sanctions are directly aimed at preventing the 
development of petroleum resources in these countries, this bill will 
DIRECTLY RESULT IN AMERICANS HAVING TO PAY A HIGHER PRICE AT THE 
GASOLINE PUMP. These sanctions HURT AMERICANS. British Petroleum and 
others have refused to provide significant investment for petroleum 
extraction in Iran because of the uncertainty this legislation helps to 
produce. The tiny nation of Qatar has as much petroleum related 
investment as does Iran since this legislation went into effect. Again, 
this reduces supply and raises prices at the gas pump.
  Will the members of this body return to their district and tell 
voters ``I just voted to further restrict petroleum supply and keep gas 
prices high''? I doubt that.
  Mr. Speaker, I am fully aware of the legislative realities as regards 
this legislation and the powerful interests that want it extended. 
However, it is not just myself and the Bush Administration suggesting 
this policy is flawed. The Atlantic Council is a prestigious group co-
chaired by Lee Hamilton, James Schlesinger and Brent Scowcroft that has 
suggested in a recent study that we ought to end sanctions upon Iran.
  Mr. Speaker, I believe the time has come for us to consider the U.S. 
interest and the benefits of friendly commerce with all nations. We are 
particularly ill-advised in passing this legislation and hamstringing 
the new Administration at this time. I must oppose any attempt to 
extend this Act and support any amendment that would reduce the 
sanction period it contemplates.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Iran-Libya 
Sanctions Extension Act. I do not believe that now is the time to end 
the provisions set out under ILSA. While I hope that the internal 
situation in Iran and Libya may one day merit lifting the provisions of 
ILSA, it does not appear to be the case at this time. Recognizing the 
tenuous nature of peace in the region, and our continued support of our 
ally, Israel, I believe we must support the Iran-Libya Sanctions 
Extension Act.
  Iran is still actively seeking to obtain weapons of mass destruction 
(WMD) assisted by China, Russia, and North Korea. Such a threat to our 
allies, such as Israel, and to international peace and security is not 
indicative of a state concerned with immediate reform. According to the 
State Department, Iran remains an active state sponsor of international 
terrorism. Any state that resorts to terrorism is cowardly and 
certainly deserves no special consideration. I also would like to 
stress that Iran continues to commit human rights abuses, particularly 
against members of certain religious faiths.
  Libya has not yet compensated the families of the victims of Pan Am 
flight 103. Libya also continues to harbor and foster terrorism and is 
likely seeking weapons of mass destruction.
  Given these realities and many others, I again do not believe now is 
the time to end sanctions on Iran and Libya.
  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. Kirk). The question is on the motion 
offered by the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman) that the House 
suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 1954, as amended.
  The question was taken.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds of 
those present have voted in the affirmative.
  Mr. LANTOS. 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.

                          ____________________