[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 147 (2001), Part 14]
[House]
[Pages 19868-19872]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



    AUTHORIZING PRESIDENT TO EXERCISE WAIVERS OF FOREIGN ASSISTANCE 
                 RESTRICTIONS WITH RESPECT TO PAKISTAN

  Mr. HYDE. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
Senate bill (S. 1465) to authorize the President to exercise waivers of 
foreign assistance restrictions with respect to Pakistan through 
September 30, 2003, and for other purposes.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                                S. 1465

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

     SECTION. 1. EXEMPTIONS AND WAIVER OF APPROPRIATIONS ACT 
                   PROHIBITIONS WITH RESPECT TO PAKISTAN.

       (a) Fiscal Year 2002 and Prior Fiscal Years.--
       (1) Exemptions.--Any provision of the foreign operations, 
     export financing, and related programs appropriations Act for 
     fiscal year 2002, or any provision of such Act for a prior 
     fiscal year, that prohibits direct assistance to a country 
     whose duly elected head of government was deposed by decree 
     or military coup shall not apply with respect to Pakistan.
       (2) Prior consultation required.--Not less than 5 days 
     prior to the obligation of funds for Pakistan under paragraph 
     (1), the President shall consult with the appropriate 
     congressional committees with respect to such obligation.
       (b) Fiscal Year 2003.--
       (1) Waiver.--The President is authorized to waive, with 
     respect to Pakistan, any provision of the foreign operations, 
     export financing, and related programs appropriations Act for 
     fiscal year 2003 that prohibits direct assistance to a 
     country whose duly elected head of government was deposed by 
     decree or military coup, if the President determines and 
     certifies to the appropriate congressional committees that 
     such waiver--
       (A) would facilitate the transition to democratic rule in 
     Pakistan; and
       (B) is important to United States efforts to respond to, 
     deter, or prevent acts of international terrorism.
       (2) Prior consultation required.--Not less than 5 days 
     prior to the exercise of the waiver authority under paragraph 
     (1), the President shall consult with the appropriate 
     congressional committees with respect to such waiver.

     SEC. 2. INCREASED FLEXIBILITY IN THE EXERCISE OF WAIVER 
                   AUTHORITY OF MTCR AND EXPORT ADMINISTRATION ACT 
                   SANCTIONS WITH RESPECT TO PAKISTAN.

       Any waiver under 73(e) of the Arms Export Control Act (22 
     U.S.C. 2797b(e)), or under section 11B(b)(5) of the Export 
     Administration Act of 1979 (50 U.S.C. App. 2410b(b)(5)) (or 
     successor statute), with respect to a sanction that was 
     imposed on foreign persons in Pakistan prior to January 1, 
     2001, may be exercised--
       (1) only after consultation with the appropriate 
     congressional committees; and
       (2) without regard to the notification periods set forth in 
     the respective section authorizing the waiver.

     SEC. 3. EXEMPTION OF PAKISTAN FROM FOREIGN ASSISTANCE 
                   PROHIBITIONS RELATING TO FOREIGN COUNTRY LOAN 
                   DEFAULTS.

       The following provisions of law shall not apply with 
     respect to Pakistan:
       (1) Section 620(q) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 
     (22 U.S.C. 2370(q)).
       (2) Such provision of the Foreign Operations, Export 
     Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2002, as 
     is comparable to section 512 of the Foreign Operations, 
     Export Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 
     2001 (Public Law 106-429; 114 Stat. 1900A-25).

     SEC. 4. MODIFICATION OF NOTIFICATION DEADLINES FOR DRAWDOWNS 
                   AND TRANSFER OF EXCESS DEFENSE ARTICLES TO 
                   RESPOND TO, DETER, OR PREVENT ACTS OF 
                   INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM.

       (a) Drawdowns.--Notwithstanding the second sentence of 
     section 506(b)(1) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 
     U.S.C. 2318(b)(1)), each notification under that section with 
     respect to any drawdown authorized by subclause (III) of 
     subsection (a)(2)(A)(i) that the President determines is 
     important to United States efforts to respond to, deter, or 
     prevent acts of international terrorism shall be made at 
     least 5 days in advance of the drawdown in lieu of the 15-day 
     requirement in that section.
       (b) Transfers of Excess Defense Articles.--Notwithstanding 
     section 516(f)(1) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 
     U.S.C. 2321j(f)(1)), each notification under that section 
     with respect to any transfer of an excess defense article 
     that the President determines is important to United States 
     efforts to respond to, deter, or prevent acts of 
     international terrorism shall be made at least 15 days in 
     advance of the transfer in lieu of the 30-day requirement in 
     that section.

     SEC. 5. APPROPRIATE CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEES DEFINED.

       In this Act, the term ``appropriate congressional 
     committees'' means the Committee on

[[Page 19869]]

     Foreign Relations and the Committee on Appropriations of the 
     Senate and the Committee on International Relations and the 
     Committee on Appropriations of the House of Representatives.

     SEC. 6. TERMINATION DATE.

       Except as otherwise provided in section 1 or 3, the 
     provisions of this Act shall terminate on October 1, 2003.

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


                             General Leave

  Mr. HYDE. Madam 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 S. 1465.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Illinois?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. HYDE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Madam Speaker, the pending bill permits the President to scrape from 
the hull of a great ship, the foreign relations law of the United 
States, some of the barnacles that prevent us from aiding our ally, 
Pakistan. It is an appropriate response to the emergency situation 
confronting our Nation and to the difficulties facing Pakistan as it 
assists us to stabilize their region.
  Pakistan has been for decades a friend of the United States. It stood 
by us, for example, by committing its armed forces on our side in the 
Gulf War, unlike some of its neighbors who were mild and somewhat 
equivocal in their response to Saddam Hussein. Of course, it was the 
launching place for our long, difficult joint effort to free the Afghan 
people of the Soviet Army.
  While Pakistan and the United States have had serious disagreements 
on proliferation policy and other issues and we remain concerned with 
the overthrow of the elected government by President Musharref, we can 
and should work with Pakistan during the coming years and establish a 
new relationship based on trust, mutual interest, and common values.
  The bill waives for fiscal years 2002 and 2003 legislative provisions 
with respect to Pakistan prohibiting direct assistance on account of 
the deposition of a duly elected head of government by a military coup. 
It provides additional flexibility by eliminating certain notification 
periods with respect to certain provisions of the Arms Export Control 
Act and the Export Administration Act. It exempts Pakistan from certain 
provisions of law which would prevent it from receiving assistance 
should it be in default on certain debts. It permits drawdowns of 
defense articles and the transfer of excess defense articles subject to 
shorter congressional notification periods.
  Madam Speaker, our military is in the air over Afghanistan as we 
speak. Our forces are depending on Pakistani facilities and 
intelligence. Our assistance to Pakistan helps ensure the stability of 
the government of an ally and the welfare of its people. I urge my 
colleagues to support this bill and send it to the President for his 
signature.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LANTOS. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of S. 1465. This is a very 
significant piece of legislation; and I want to commend my 
distinguished friend, the gentleman from Illinois (Chairman Hyde), for 
bringing this bill to the floor in an expedited fashion.
  As we speak, Madam Speaker, the Secretary of State of the United 
States is in Pakistan underscoring the importance of our relationship 
and the importance of this legislation.
  We are engaged in an epic struggle against the forces of 
international terrorism; and our fighting men and women are risking 
their lives as we speak to end this terrible threat, not only to the 
United States, but to every civilized country on the face of this 
planet. In this fight, we have called upon all nations to make every 
contribution they can to prevail against these forces of evil.
  Pakistan in particular, by geography and history, must shoulder an 
unusually heavy burden in this effort. While it is true that Pakistan 
had a hand in creating the Taliban, it is also true that Pakistan today 
is playing a critical role in ensuring that Afghanis know Afghanistan 
is no longer a base for international terrorism.
  President Musharref's decision to stand with the United States and 
the civilized global community was a wise and courageous choice. But as 
we laud him for making the right choice, we must acknowledge that it 
will not be an easy commitment to keep. The terrorist attacks on 
September 11 shed light on the life-and-death struggle that is being 
waged for the future of Pakistan. It is a battle against the 
destructive and anarchist forces of religious fanaticism and violence 
which seek to capitalize on the despair of the poor.

                              {time}  1445

  It is a battle that President Musharraf must win to restore hope to 
the people of Pakistan and to secure a future for the children of 
Pakistan. It is vital, Madam Speaker, that the United States 
demonstrate to the people and government of Pakistan our commitment to 
help them secure that future as long as Pakistan continues its 
commitment to eradicate international terrorism. It is for this reason 
that I support the legislation before us today.
  The situation in South Asia, Madam Speaker, is highly volatile, and I 
am convinced that any military assistance or armed sales in the current 
environment would only serve to further inflame tensions in the region. 
I urge our administration to refrain from actions that will accelerate 
the arms race on the subcontinent and further destabilize the already 
fragile situation there. I will continue to monitor this issue closely.
  Finally, I want to reiterate to the people of Pakistan our continued 
support for a return to democracy in that country. President Musharraf 
has given his word that he is committed to democracy and we in Congress 
intend to hold him to his word.
  Madam Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to support S. 1465.
  Mr. LANTOS. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 5 minutes to the 
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone).
  Mr. PALLONE. Madam Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Lantos), the ranking member, for yielding me this time.
  I come to the House floor today to rise in opposition to S. 1465, as 
we know, a bill that waives certain sanctions against Pakistan. Section 
508 of the Foreign Operations Act for fiscal year 2001 was passed by 
Congress to prohibit the export of U.S. weapons and military assistance 
to countries whose duly-elected head of government is deposed. In 1999, 
General Perez Musharraf overthrew the civilian-elected government of 
Pakistan in a military coup and since then has governed Pakistan under 
military rule. As a result, section 508 sanctions have been in place 
and U.S. policy has maintained that no military assistance would be 
provided to Pakistan.
  Under the current circumstances due to the attacks of September 11, I 
do feel that it is appropriate to provide economic assistance to 
Pakistan because of General Musharraf's willingness to support the U.S. 
in seizing Osama bin Laden and eliminating the al-Qaeda terrorist 
network. Pakistan is not only a country suffering from severe poverty 
in some regions, but it is also a fragile society. Pakistan's pleas to 
the U.S. for economic help are understandable, and any humanitarian, 
education, economic, and social assistance is worthy of being granted 
on an expedited basis.
  However, Madam Speaker, I stand strong in my argument against 
military aid to Pakistan, even under the current circumstances. Since 
the first day of U.S. military action against the Taliban in 
Afghanistan, it has become clear that Pakistan's armed forces are not 
participating in the antiterrorism effort in Afghanistan. If Pakistan's

[[Page 19870]]

forces are not being used directly against the Taliban and terrorist 
groups, there is no justification for providing military aid.
  South Asia is today one of the most politically volatile areas in the 
world. Pakistan is a nuclear power, but has been unstable and, like I 
said earlier, very fragile. Until sound democracy is established in 
Pakistan, it is unclear what purpose military artillery and weapons 
will be used for.
  My fear is that if we provide weapons to Pakistan or lead to that 
possibility, they may inadvertently fall into the wrong hands and be 
used in ways contrary to U.S. interests. And Pakistan has Iran to the 
west of its borders and India to the east. Sri Lanka and several other 
countries contribute to the volatile makeup of the region.
  Historically, U.S. arms exports to Pakistan have been used against 
India, primarily through cross-border military action in Kashmir. We 
saw a terrifying example of this on October 1 when a suicide car bomb 
exploded in front of the Jammu and Kashmir State Assembly while it was 
in session. This terrorist attack left at least 40 dead and many more 
injured. Jaish-e-Muhammad, a Pakistani-based group, is the terrorist 
group that came forward and claimed responsibility for this horrific 
act. This group is now on the Treasury Department's list of terrorist 
groups whose assets will be frozen by the U.S., but this example of 
cold-blooded murder by a Pakistani-based group should be evidence 
enough that weapons can and will fall into the hands of terrorist 
networks and potentially be used against India or other U.S. allies.
  The Pakistan government is currently not only supportive of the 
Taliban but, in fact, is one of the proponents that created the Taliban 
movement in Afghanistan. Due to the deep ties between Pakistan and the 
Taliban, and the deep ties between the Taliban and Osama bin Laden, I 
feel that it is in the best interests of the U.S. to uphold its current 
policy of restricting military assistance at this time. Given 
Pakistan's instability, nuclear proliferation capabilities, and current 
military rule, I do not see a reasonable argument for compromising our 
democratic values by waiving section 508.
  Finally, for my colleagues that feel that we should grant Pakistani 
aid requested, including military aid, I would note that under section 
614 of the Foreign Assistance Act, the U.S. may provide weapons and 
military assistance when U.S. national security interests are at stake. 
Given that Osama bin Laden and his al-Qaeda network have not only 
savagely attacked us, but continue to pose a threat to the U.S., the 
President could provide U.S. military assistance to Pakistan under 
section 614. Unless the President certifies that that assistance 
provided under 614 is insufficient, there is no reason for Congress to 
waive section 508.
  If and when Pakistan takes steps towards establishing a democracy 
with a civilian-elected government, perhaps section 508 would be 
irrelevant. However, General Musharraf has shown no steps towards 
returning Pakistan to democratic rule and, in fact, has moved in the 
opposite direction for at least the past several months. On June 20 he 
declared himself President of Pakistan, which is a clear indication of 
his desire to maintain a dictatorial stronghold. Musharraf's past 
actions include dissolving Pakistan's National Assembly and four 
provincial assemblies. He has claimed that he will hold fair national 
elections by 2002; however, this has only been lip service so far. As a 
self-proclaimed President, Musharraf may be seen with more credibility 
in the eyes of the international community at large, but the fact 
remains that the people of his Nation never elected him. I believe that 
repealing section 508 clearly sends the wrong message, given the 
General's actions.
  Mr. LANTOS. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 4 minutes to the 
distinguished gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey), the ranking 
Democratic member of the Subcommittee on Foreign Operations, Export 
Financing and Related Programs.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Madam Speaker, I rise in reluctant support of S. 1465, 
and I would like to address several concerns about this bill which 
would authorize the President to exercise certain waivers with respect 
to Pakistan.
  In recent weeks, the President has invoked special authorities to 
enable the provision of $100 million in economic assistance for 
Pakistan. I have been consulted on these decisions and I have supported 
them as necessary to carry out our campaign against terrorism. But the 
passage of this bill today will remove all remaining legislative 
restrictions on assistance to Pakistan for both fiscal year 2002 and 
fiscal year 2003. It is my understanding that the administration will 
soon inform Congress of its intention to provide an additional $500 
million in economic assistance to Pakistan to be taken from the $40 
billion emergency supplemental.
  There is simply no question that the United States should move 
rapidly to provide economic assistance to Pakistan in light of its 
cooperation in the war on terrorism, and because of the severe economic 
crisis there, but I caution my colleagues against relinquishing our 
role in this process. With the passage of this bill, we give 
extraordinary discretion to the administration to determine the extent 
and content of our assistance. While I support a bold and significant 
assistance program for Pakistan, I believe it must have appropriate 
congressional oversight.
  The Pakistani government has requested billions in economic 
assistance to meet its cash shortfall and to address its significant 
infrastructure, education, and health needs, and I expect we will 
provide $600 million to respond to that request. But at the moment, 
there is no clear plan for how this assistance will flow, and we have 
very little monitoring capacity to ensure funds are spent for their 
intended purposes. Under normal circumstances, Congress has a role in 
directing the use of appropriated funds prior to their disbursement, 
and I hope we will be included in the current process as well.
  At this point, we have not been informed of any plan to provide 
significant military assistance to Pakistan. However, that could and 
likely will change as the situation develops. There are no legislative 
guidelines in place to ensure that we will have appropriate assurances 
from the Pakistani government that the use of such assistance will be 
restricted to the fight against terrorism. While it is my expectation 
that the President would seek and obtain such assurances, Congress does 
not currently require him to do so.
  Finally, I am puzzled that this bill takes the unusual step of 
waiving a provision of law on a bill that is not yet written: the 
fiscal year 2003 Foreign Operations bill. I understand and support the 
need to send a strong signal to Pakistan and to provide some assurance 
that our commitment to them is long term, but I submit that providing 
$600 million is a very strong signal. The Committee on Appropriations, 
under the leadership of the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young), has 
responded with speed and cooperation to the President's request for 
resources to fight this war. We neglect our oversight responsibilities 
when we provide prospective waivers for bills that have yet to be 
written.
  Madam Speaker, I support this bill, but I urge my colleagues to 
carefully consider these concerns as we move forward.
  Mr. LANTOS. Madam Speaker, we have no further requests for time, and 
I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. HOLT. Madam Speaker, I rise today to address my colleagues 
regarding S. 1465.
  As we pass this legislation today, I wanted to note for the record 
certain reservations I have about authorizing the President to waive 
sanctions against Pakistan. I am in favor of providing aid to Pakistan 
and helping them develop economically. This development is crucial for 
a transition to a democratic form of government. Our relationship with 
Pakistan is especially important in light of the events since September 
11. We must continue to cement our alliance with Pakistan and all 
interested countries in order to maintain our campaign against al Qaeda 
and the Taliban. However, I question whether waiving restrictions on 
U.S. arms exports is the best way to help these countries.
  South Asia, as we now know, is an extremely volatile area. In the 
last 50 years,

[[Page 19871]]

India and Pakistan, who both have nuclear capabilities, have fought 
three conflicts. As we have seen in just the last few days, the area 
around Kashmir continues to be a source of tension in the region. Any 
weapons that we export to these countries could be used in future 
conflicts. Do we really want to contribute to the instability of this 
region by providing more weapons?
  United States law prohibits the export of arms to government in power 
due to a military coup. Section 508 of the Foreign Operations Act for 
FY01 prohibits the export of weapons and military assistance to 
countries whose duly elected head of government is deposed. Reversing 
this policy without making any stipulations about the re-establishment 
of democracy could send the wrong message to undemocratic regimes.
  These are extraordinary times. Extreme measures may be necessary. But 
the President has already exercised his right to provide American 
weapons and military assistance when national security interests are at 
stake, as allowed by section 614 of the Foreign Assistance Act. 
Congress should not waive sanctions on arms export to India and 
Pakistan unless the President shows that the assistance he has already 
provided is insufficient.
  If these sanctions are waived, there is no guarantee that the United 
States has any control over the weapons exported. Our experiences in 
Somalia, Iran, Iraq, an Afghanistan demonstrate this. How do we know 
that American weapons will not fall into the hands of potential enemies 
and threaten our troops at a future date? The Taliban may own up to 100 
Stinger missiles that were provided by the United States in the 1980s 
for their clash with the Soviet Union.
  As I mentioned earlier, I worry about the message that the United 
States sends to undemocratic regimes by allowing exports to countries 
without stipulations about the establishment of democracy. To allow 
such a waiver regardless of a country's human rights standards violates 
one of the central tenets of U.S. foreign policy. Congress should 
exercise caution, for allowing such waivers now may lead to broader 
waivers later. The fight against terrorism should not be at the expense 
of our principles.
  Madam Speaker, instead of providing military aid, the United States 
should target its aid toward the more immediate needs of the people of 
Pakistan and India. Pakistan and India rank No. 127 and No. 114, 
respectively, in the U.N.'s Human Development Index. More weapons will 
not move them up in these rankings. The United States should provide 
economic assistance to the people of Pakistan and India--not more 
weapons.
  Mr. GILMAN. Madam Speaker, I reluctantly rise in support of S. 1465, 
a bill that would waive certain restrictions on U.S. assistance to 
Pakistan.
  While we need to attempt to be helpful to President Musharraf for 
permitting the United States access to its bases and in an attempt to 
build a relationship with Pakistan, I am very concerned about working 
too closely with Pakistan at this point and providing for them to have 
too much of a role in forming the future Government of Afghanistan.
  In the past, the Government of Pakistan and President Musharraf have 
given to the Taliban the support they needed to take and stay in power. 
Pakistani military officials have guided and counseled Taliban military 
leaders in their war against the National Alliance. Indeed without the 
support of Pakistan the Taliban would not even exist.
  The Taliban originated from Islamic fundamentalist religious schools 
in Pakistan. President Musharraf and other Pakistani leaders throughout 
the years have provided the Taliban a lifetime by giving it military, 
economic, and logistical support.
  As Secretary Powell seeks to be helpful to the Afghans as they 
attempt to form a new government I would hope that we do not take 
Pakistani advice to install a ``reinvented'' Taliban in power.
  We should also not forget that Pakistan, bin Laden, and the Taliban 
have been responsible for terrorist acts that have led to the deaths of 
innocent Indian civilians in Kashmir and throughout India for many 
years.
  Pakistan has used its military against India time and time again. 
Given that, while it makes sense to give Pakistan economic support I do 
not believe that it is wise to give it military support until we are 
clear about the way in which it intends to use that support. 
Accordingly, I reluctantly support S. 1465.
  Mr. BEREUTER. Madam Speaker, this Member rises in strong support for 
S. 1465, a bill authorizing the President to exercise waivers of 
foreign assistance restrictions with respect to Pakistan through 
September 30, 2003. This Member would like to commend the distinguished 
gentleman from kansas serving in the other body, Mr. Brownback, who 
previously served in this body, for his commitment to develop an 
expertise in South Asian and Central Asian issues and for introducing 
S. 1465. This Member would also like to thank the gentleman from 
Illinois, the chairman of the International Relations Committee, Mr. 
Hyde, for expeditiously moving this measure to the floor.
  Pakistan is located in a neighborhood where its alignment with the 
United States during the cold war was neither an easy nor popular 
choice, and yet Pakistan served well as an ally to the United States 
during that era. Following the unspeakable and horrific terrorist 
attacks on September 11, 2001, the world has entered a new era, and, to 
its credit, Pakistan has once again made a choice that was neither easy 
nor popular--that is, to align itself with the United States in the war 
against global terrorism.
  Madam Speaker, this legislation provides President Bush with the 
tools he needs to encourage Pakistan's continued participation in 
United States efforts to combat terrorism. It provides the President 
with the opportunity to provide increased assistance to Pakistan is 
critical and very appropriate at this time.
  However, this Member would note that even if the terrorist attacks 
had not occurred, reviewing current sanctions against Pakistan, as 
provided in S. 1465, would have been appropriate. Following the October 
12, 1999, unfortunate, but bloodless coup, which brought him to power, 
General Musharraf has abided by the Pakistani Supreme Court's 
prescribed timetable for reinstating local elections, and he continues 
to promise that Pakistan will conduct Federal elections in October 
2002. Additionally, freedom of the press appears to be improving 
according to the Pakistan Country Report on Human Rights Practices for 
2000. While the Pakistani economy continues to suffer, reports indicate 
that General Musharraf's administration has made progress in improving 
transparency and in liberalizing trade. Certainly, these steps would 
have warranted the consideration of resuming foreign assistance which 
could foster continued improvements in these areas. It could also 
assist in supporting improvements in other human rights areas.
  Madam Speaker, this Member encourages his colleagues to support S. 
1465.
  Mr. ACKERMAN. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of S. 1465 but do so 
with some serious reservations. While I think we all agree that the 
President needs a significant amount of flexibility in order to 
effectively prosecute the war on terrorism, I believe we should be 
careful about the types of assistance that could flow to Pakistan under 
this particular proposal.
  Clearly, everyone supports the provision of economic assistance to 
Pakistan. Among the poorest nations in the world, Pakistan was, until a 
recent rescheduling, in default on U.S. loans and continues to need 
assistance with its massive foreign debt. In addition, the Pakistani 
economy remains weak although General Musharaff should be given credit 
for adhering to the structural adjustment plan required by the 
International Monetary Fund. Pakistan should also be given assistance 
to provide health care and education. Life expectancy is low, infant 
mortality is high, and too many of Pakistan's children are educated in 
Madrassas that provide only lessons in hatred.
  The problem with this bill is that it opens the door to a significant 
new arms relationship with Pakistan and before the United States even 
considers going down that road, we must consider who the arms are 
likely to be used against. It is clear from looking at Pakistan's 
immediate neighbors that the threats to Pakistan are low. In 
Afghanistan, the expectations for a post-Taliban government are that it 
would not be a threat to Pakistan. Since China is Pakistan's long-time 
partner on nuclear and missile-related technologies, it is unlikely 
Pakistan would use the weapons there. There are tensions between Iran 
and Pakistan but they don't seem to rise to the level of armed 
conflict. That leaves India, which is where any weapons we provide are 
likely to be used. We should think long and hard before we agree to 
supply Pakistan with any weapons or spare parts that would be used 
against India. India strongly supports the U.S.-led coalition against 
terrorism and does so without preconditions or reservations. Now is not 
the time for the U.S. to abandon its democratic friends in South Asia, 
or elsewhere.
  One final point, Madam Speaker, we should remember that among the 
sanctions we are waiving here today are those imposed because of the 
October 1999 coup in Pakistan. The message from this waiver must not be 
that democracy is no longer important. In fact, the one lesson we 
should draw from the current situation is that democracy remains the 
solution to extremism everywhere. We must continue to urge Pakistan to 
return to democracy as soon as possible.

[[Page 19872]]


  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of this 
legislation, which will allow for the temporary waiver of economic 
restrictions with respect to Pakistan.
  We currently find ourselves involved in a military action far from 
home. This is only possible due to the coordinated efforts of many 
nations that have demonstrated their commitment to eliminating 
terrorism from the earth. Pakistan has contributed mightily to our 
efforts in Afghanistan, both diplomatically and otherwise.
  Madam Speaker, President Clinton imposed sanctions on Pakistan and 
India for their dual nuclear tests in 1998 under the Glenn Amendment of 
the Arms Export Control Act. In addition, the October 1999 overthrow of 
the democratically elected government of Pakistan triggered additional 
sanctions under the Foreign Appropriations Act. Foreign Assistance Act 
also imposed restrictions on Pakistan for arrearages in bilateral debt 
payments. On September 22, 2001, President Bush triggered waivers to 
lift remaining sanctions on Pakistan as a good faith gesture towards 
this nation for its cooperation in eradicating terrorism. The Congress 
must also demonstrate its commitment to our allies in this struggle, 
while respecting the long-term policy goals our sanctions are designed 
to promote and protect. This legislation achieves this goal by granting 
the President waiver authority for fiscal year 2002. However, for the 
following fiscal year, the waiver is only extended if the President can 
show this Body that the waiver would ``facilitate the transition to 
democratic rule in Pakistan; and is important to United States efforts 
to respond to, deter, or prevent acts of international terrorism.'' 
Thus, this House ensures that we do not disregard our commitment to the 
spread of viable stable democracies throughout the world, while 
recognizing the need to commit resources to those nations willing to 
facilitate the development of peace throughout both the region and the 
world.
  Pakistan is also given the opportunity to continue its support of our 
military efforts in FY 2003 by allowing the President to waive arms 
control export laws if President Bush deems it necessary and notifies 
Congress 45 days in advance. The leadership of Pakistan, though not 
elected, has recognized the urgent need for the Peace of Nations in 
this world. Despite sustained protests and alleged destabilization by 
Taliban infiltrators from Afghanistan, the leadership of Pakistan has 
proven that it has renounced its ties to the Taliban, and agreed to 
play a decisive role in the shaping of a new democracy within 
Afghanistan. Our actions here today ensure that we will play a decisive 
role in pursuing the goal of democracy within Pakistan.
  Finally, Madam Speaker, this bill ensures that we do not sell 
ourselves for the sake of our pursuit of the Taliban. This legislation 
``sunsets'' on October 1, 2003. By limiting the scope of this waiver, 
we respect our constitutional function of checking the power of the 
executive to pursue policies against our long-term interests longer 
than necessary for the swift administration of justice.
  Though the times we live in are uncertain, we are not desperate, for 
our cause is just and our will strong. This Congress is charged to face 
unpleasant realities for the sake of our children's futures. S. 1465 
does this, and in a way that ensures the children of Pakistan might 
someday know democracy, too.
  Mr. HYDE. Madam Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Biggert). The question is on the motion 
offered by the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) that the House 
suspend the rules and pass the Senate bill, S. 1465.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor 
thereof) the rules were suspended and the Senate bill was passed.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________