[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 147 (2001), Part 18]
[House]
[Pages 24978-24979]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



                        PAKISTAN TIES TO TALIBAN

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I come to the House floor this evening to 
talk about several matters of concern regarding Pakistan.
  I appreciate Pakistan's willingness to assist us in the fight against 
Osama bin Laden and his terrorist networks, and I know that General 
Musharraf continues to make a concerted effort to cooperate with the 
United States in our global fight against terrorism. Under the current 
circumstances, due to the attacks of September 11, I do feel that it is 
appropriate to provide economic assistance to Pakistan for General 
Musharraf's willingness to support the U.S. in seizing Osama bin Laden 
and eliminating the al Qaeda terrorist network. In fact, I also felt 
that it was appropriate that the economic sanctions that were in place 
against Pakistan were rightfully lifted by President Bush earlier this 
year.
  However, Mr. Speaker, I stand strong in my argument against military 
aid to Pakistan, even under the current circumstances. I oppose the 
lifting of military sanctions, and I still feel the U.S. should 
exercise its discretion not to provide military assistance.
  The Pakistani dictatorial government has in the past been directly 
involved in the planning and logistical support of Taliban military 
operations. Not only has Pakistan provided institutional support to 
terrorist activities by the Taliban and other groups, it has also 
provided weapons as a result of its irresponsible weapons export 
policies. Withholding military assistance to Pakistan will help 
pressure Musharraf to withdraw its support to terrorist groups.
  Mr. Speaker, there have been several recent reports that corroborate 
the difficulty Pakistan has in separating itself from the Taliban. 
According to an article from last Saturday's New York Times, Western 
and Pakistani officials report that one month after the Pakistani 
government agreed to end its support of the Taliban, its intelligence 
agency was still providing safe passage for weapons and ammunition to 
arm them.
  In September, the U.S. issued an ultimatum to Pakistan that if they 
wanted to join the United States in the fight against terrorism, 
Pakistan had to end its ties to the Taliban.
  Pakistani intelligence claims that the last sanctioned delivery of 
weapons to the Taliban occurred about a month after the U.S. issued 
this ultimatum. However, it is clear that the Inter-Services 
Intelligence, ISI, has perpetuated military support of the Taliban. The 
ISI is a powerful group of military jihadi who are not representatives 
of the government. Nevertheless, they operate fiercely within Pakistan; 
and accordingly, Pakistan inevitably engages in logistical and military 
support of the Taliban.
  My other concern at this time, Mr. Speaker, regarding Pakistan is 
that it is a nuclear power. A country with nuclear power that has links 
to the Taliban and al Qaeda is a recipe for disaster. An article 
reported that nuclear experts in Pakistan may, in fact, have links to 
al Qaeda. The fear is that nuclear experts have the knowledge and 
experience to provide nuclear weapons and related technology to 
transfer these goods to terrorists.
  The article in the New York Times reports that American intelligence 
officials are increasingly convinced that Pakistan may become the site 
of a furtive struggle between those trying to keep nuclear technology 
secure and those looking to export it for terrorism or for profit.
  Mr. Speaker, my last comment is that historically, U.S. arms exports 
to Pakistan have been used against India, primarily through crossborder 
military action in Kashmir. Since the terrifying example of terrorism 
in India on October 1 when a suicide car bomb exploded in front of the 
Kashmir State Assembly while it was in session, there have literally 
been murder incidents on a daily basis in Kashmir. The escalated 
terrorist violence in India has been horrific and left numerous 
civilians and military men victim to cold-blooded murder.
  Last week I read that suspected terrorists shot and killed a judge in 
Kashmir, along with his friends and two guards. This is the first 
attack on the judiciary of Jammu and Kashmir state. Over the weekend I 
read that an Islamic militant group invaded an Indian army convoy in 
Kashmir and the attack left nearly 10 men dead and over 20 wounded.
  These examples of murder by Pakistani-based militant groups should be 
evidence enough that weapons can and will fall into the hands of 
terrorist networks and potentially be used against India and other U.S. 
allies.
  Mr. Speaker, I realize that the Bush administration is not proposing 
any major change in policy with regard to

[[Page 24979]]

military assistance to Pakistan, but with removal of congressional 
sanctions, stepped up military assistance remains a possibility. I 
continue to oppose that option, and I believe that the circumstances in 
Pakistan this weekend and over the last few weeks still do not warrant 
that kind of military assistance.

                          ____________________