SPEAKERS       CONTENTS       INSERTS    
 Page 1       TOP OF DOC
43–453 CC
1997
THE ADMINISTRATION'S INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS BUDGET REQUEST FOR FISCAL YEAR 1998

HEARING

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON
INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED FIFTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

FEBRUARY 11, 1997

Printed for the use of the Committee on International Relations



COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

BENJAMIN A. GILMAN, New York, Chairman
 Page 2       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

WILLIAM GOODLING, Pennsylvania
JAMES A. LEACH, Iowa
HENRY J. HYDE, Illinois
DOUG BEREUTER, Nebraska
CHRISTOPHER SMITH, New Jersey
DAN BURTON, Indiana
ELTON GALLEGLY, California
ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida
CASS BALLENGER, North Carolina
DANA ROHRABACHER, California
DONALD A. MANZULLO, Illinois
EDWARD R. ROYCE, California
PETER T. KING, New York
JAY KIM, California
STEVEN J. CHABOT, Ohio
MARSHALL ''MARK'' SANFORD, South Carolina
MATT SALMON, Arizona
AMO HOUGHTON, New York
TOM CAMPBELL, California
JON FOX, Pennsylvania
JOHN McHUGH, New York
LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina
ROY BLUNT, Missouri
JERRY MORAN, Kansas
 Page 3       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
KEVIN BRADY, Texas
LEE HAMILTON, Indiana
SAM GEJDENSON, Connecticut
TOM LANTOS, California
HOWARD BERMAN, California
GARY ACKERMAN, New York
ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA, American Samoa
MATTHEW G. MARTINEZ, California
DONALD M. PAYNE, New Jersey
ROBERT ANDREWS, New Jersey
ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey
SHERROD BROWN, Ohio
CYNTHIA A. McKINNEY, Georgia
ALCEE L. HASTINGS, Florida
PAT DANNER, Missouri
EARL HILLIARD, Alabama
WALTER CAPPS, California
BRAD SHERMAN, California
ROBERT WEXLER, Florida
DENNIS J. KUCINICH, Ohio
STEVE ROTHMAN, New Jersey
BOB CLEMENT, Tennessee

RICHARD J. GARON, Chief of Staff
MICHAEL H. VAN DUSEN, Democratic Chief of Staff
 Page 4       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
MARK S. KIRK, Counsel
CAROLINE G. COOPER, Staff Associate

C O N T E N T S

WITNESSES

    Hon. Madeleine Albright, Secretary of State

APPENDIX

    Committee on International Relations Oversight Plan
    Opening statement of Chairman Benjamin A. Gilman
    Statement of Representative Elton Gallegly
    Statement of Representative Matthew G. Martinez
    Statement of Representative Steven R. Rothman
    Statement of Representative Donald M. Payne
    Statement of Hon. Madeleine Albright
    Responses to additional questions submitted for the record by Chairman Gilman to the Department of State

THE ADMINISTRATION'S INTERNATIONAL
AFFAIRS BUDGET REQUEST FOR
FISCAL YEAR 1998

 Page 5       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 11, 1997
House of Representatives,
Committee on International Relations,
Washington, DC.

    The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:58 a.m. in room 2172, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Benjamin A. Gilman (chairman of the Committee) presiding.
    Chairman GILMAN. The Committee will come to order.
    The Committee meets today in open session, pursuant to notice, to adopt its oversight plan for the 105th Congress and to receive the testimony of the Honorable Madeleine Albright, our new Secretary of State, on the international affairs budget for fiscal year 1998.
    The adoption of an oversight plan is required by Rule 10 of the Rules of the House of Representatives. This oversight plan was developed by the staff, with extensive input from the Minority and Subcommittee staffs. A draft was circulated to all Members last week, and the text before the Committee today contains only minor changes to that draft.
    Oversight is critical to the work of this Committee because of the special constitutional arrangement in the area of foreign affairs. We cannot and should not, in the ordinary course of events, constrain the executive branch too much by way of legislation. This means we must be vigilant in our oversight of the Administration to bring democratic accountability to the exercise of their formulation of power.
    The oversight plan is only a snapshot of our general intentions to oversight. The fact that an item is listed here does not mean that the Committee or any of its subcommittees is committed to holding a hearing on the subject. I hope that the Committee and its Subcommittee, through briefs, meetings, travel and other meetings, can touch on the greatest part of these items, but more issues will arise during the course of this Congress. These new events and the pace of our other work will dictate how much of this agenda will be achieved.
 Page 6       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    Are there any comments on the oversight plan? I am going to ask anyone to withhold any statements on welcoming any of our guests or with regard to our Ranking Minority Member at this time. If there are no comments on the oversight plan——
    Mr. HAMILTON. Mr. Chairman.
    Chairman GILMAN. Yes, Mr. Hamilton.
    Mr. HAMILTON. Let me just thank you for working with us in developing the Committee oversight plan. I commend you for it. It is a bipartisan document. I think it reflects a very ambitious schedule for the Committee, and I look forward to working with you and all of our colleagues on the Committee over the next 2 years to accomplish the objectives that you have set out.
    Chairman GILMAN. Thank you.
    If there are no further comments, without objection, the oversight plan will be forwarded to the Committees of House Administration and on Government Reform and Oversight. Without objection, the staff is empowered to make necessary technical, conforming and grammatical changes.
    We are waiting for the Secretary of State to arrive, and we will take just a very brief recess of a few minutes to give the Secretary an opportunity to be with us. The Committee stands in recess.
    [Recess.]
    Chairman GILMAN. We are honored today to welcome to our Committee our new Secretary of State, Madeleine K. Albright. While we note that Madeleine Albright has appeared before us in her capacity as our representative to the United Nations, this is her very first appearance as Secretary of State. On behalf of our entire Committee it is indeed a very great pleasure to say welcome, Secretary Albright.
    Secretary Albright served our country admirably as U.N. ambassador before becoming our 65th Secretary of State. At the United Nations, she worked tirelessly to isolate rogue regimes such as Iraq and Libya, to reduce a billion-dollar U.N. peacekeeping budget to a manageable size, and she has been a leading advocate for structural reform at the United Nations.
 Page 7       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    Secretary Albright, we recognize you now hold the second toughest job in our government next to the President, and the challenges before you are daunting: preventing the spread of weapons of mass destruction, combatting international terrorism and narcotics trafficking, fostering peace in the Middle East, in the Balkans and in Korea, implementing NATO expansion and maintaining stability in the former Warsaw Pact States, while keeping Russia happy and dealing with China. All that is just before lunch...
    It has become virtually a cliche to speak of retooling our foreign policy apparatus to meet the challenges of the 21st century, but it is no less true today. We in the Congress want to be as helpful as we can; and, in the spirit of bipartisanship, permit me to recall the pledge of Senator Arthur Vandenberg to end partisanship at the water's edge, to advance Americans' interests and to solve those problems.
    In this regard, I note that in your recent Baker Center speech in Houston, you stated a need for more resources, that is, spending on our international affairs activities.
    Madam Secretary, we look forward to working with you to produce an authorization bill that provides for a reasonable plan for payment of our U.N. arrears, State Department operations and for some foreign assistance.
    One year ago, President Clinton projected declining budgets for these activities. Last week, he boosted those estimates by requesting a total of $19.4 billion for our International Affairs account in fiscal year 1998, an increase of over 6 percent over fiscal year 1997. The request also includes a $3 1/2-billion General Agreement to Borrow for the International Monetary Fund and a $920-million arrears payment for the United Nations, to be paid by fiscal year 1999. That certainly is a tall order; but, as we said last week, your budget is ''Alive Upon Arrival.''
    Let me continue to express a few points of caution though.
 Page 8       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    First, The Washington Post noted in an editorial that three-quarters of the Administration's cuts to achieve a balanced budget will come after President Clinton leaves office. The Budget Committee will rebalance this budget and may reduce discretionary spending, including international programs, to even out our glide path to a balanced budget. While we look forward to working with you, our leadership and the Budget Committee to increase resources for our international activities, we do request the Administration's full budget proposal not be set at an absolute minimum for bipartisan cooperation.
    Second, any budget increase must be closely linked to and conditioned upon reform. We will need real U.N. reform, reforms that can appear in our authorizing bill, if Congress is to approve approximately $1 billion to pay our U.N. arrears. Obtaining an increase in other areas will require reform of our international agencies. I urge you to accept Chairman Helm's challenge that the Administration come up with its own consolidation plan by April for such agencies. You may be surprised at how forthcoming our response will be.
    Finally, I have some questions about the Administration's supplemental requests for U.N. monies not needed until fiscal year 1999. Previous Congresses denied President Bush's request for such advanced appropriations. I do share Chairman Helm's concern this supplemental request for funds not needed for another 2 years may become an end run around the House and Senate authorizing committees.
    I have been in contact with Chairman Livingston of the Appropriations Committee about proceeding within regular order, that is, to authorize these payments in our bill and to include provision for them in the regular appropriations bill. For our part, we plan to mark up a State and foreign assistance authorization bill in April for floor action in May. I have shared a draft bill with our Ranking Minority Member, Lee Hamilton, and transmitted a copy to you last week.
    I understand you intend to request a State Department authorization bill from our Committee. I appreciate that.
 Page 9       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    Permit me to note that AID has no major objection to our foreign assistance draft bill paving the way for cooperation in that area as well. If all of this cooperation is to work, we will need your detailed views on our draft bill next month; and we look forward to receiving them.
    Before recognizing our Ranking Minority Member, Lee Hamilton, for any opening statement he would like to make, I would like to take a moment to express how much this Committee will miss Lee when he steps down at the end of the 105th Congress. He will always remain a welcomed friend and a trusted advisor to this Committee. His contributions to the work of this Committee, to the entire Congress and to our Nation are distinguished and lasting. Meanwhile, we look forward to continuing our work with Lee Hamilton, working on our Hamilton-Gilman report to produce a bipartisan foreign assistance bill to put a cap to his many outstanding contributions as a Member of the Congress and our Committee.
    I understand our colleague, Mr. Gejdenson, has some comments he would like to make at this point.
    Mr. GEJDENSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    On behalf of the Minority Members of this Committee who had the privilege of serving with Mr. Hamilton as both the chairman and as Ranking Member, I wish to express for all the Members on this side the appreciation of the hard work, the serious attitude that he brought to very difficult problems, always trying to create a truly bipartisan foreign policy but one based on principles and one that seriously looked at the facts before us.
    For those of us who came to this Committee while Chairman Hamilton spent some years here—I think I am the next most senior individual, and I got here in 1980. That means Chairman Hamilton, our Ranking Member, was here since 1964. So his seniority, his wisdom, his history is going to be missed on this Committee. We will continue to look for him for leadership in these issues and hope that maybe the former ambassador and present Secretary might even find a spot for him—but after this Congress, not before.
 Page 10       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    Chairman GILMAN. As this time, I would like to recognize our Ranking Minority Member, Mr. Hamilton.
    Mr. HAMILTON. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Gejdenson, thank you for your very gracious remarks. I thought they were a little restrained. They could have been a little more effusive and perhaps a little longer, but I appreciate them very much.
    Of course, we are here today to welcome for her first visit the Secretary of State. One of the things I hope to get accomplished soon is to get that sign changed in front of you so that it identifies you properly. We certainly know the right title. But in any event, all of us join in wishing you great success.
    I know that these past few days have been difficult for you in many ways, and yet you are off to a remarkable start as Secretary of State. I want to do all I can, along with the Chairman and other Members of this Committee, to help you have a very successful tenure.
    Chairman GILMAN. Thank you, Mr. Hamilton.
    I will ask other Members to withhold any opening statements at this time in regard to the limitation of time and the amount of time that Secretary Albright has with us. Members, of course, will be welcome to question Secretary Albright and submit any of their opening statements for the record.
    Madam Secretary.

STATEMENT OF MADELEINE K. ALBRIGHT, SECRETARY OF STATE

    Secretary ALBRIGHT. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. It is a great pleasure for me to be here with all of you this morning.
    Mr. Hamilton, I definitely associate myself with the remarks made both by the Chairman and Congressman Gejdenson about the incredible service that you have, of course, performed for this country. I just hope it wasn't anything that I said when we had our courtesy meeting that made you do this. I will have some more to say about you at the end of my statement.
 Page 11       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    Also, Mr. Chairman, as I mentioned to you, because this is my first appearance here and we need to lay the groundwork, my oral statement is somewhat longer than I hope you will ever have to listen to again, but I think that it will be useful today.
    It is a pleasure to be here in my new capacity, having appeared before you a number of times before. I look forward to a relationship marked, as it has been previously, by mutual candor and by a shared commitment to the best interests of our country.
    In his State of the Union address last week, the President said that ''to prepare America for the 21st century, we must master the forces of change and keep American leadership strong and sure for an uncharted time.''
    We begin, as we undertake that challenge, with the wind at our backs. Today, our Nation is respected and at peace. Our alliances are vigorous, and our economy is robust, and the ideals enshrined in the American Constitution more than 200 years ago remain the most powerful and positive force for change in the world.
    All this is no accident, and its continuation is by no means inevitable. The growth of prosperity and the blossoming of freedom must be sustained as they were created—by American leadership.
    Today, with the help of Members of Congress from both parties, we are building a new framework for American leadership—adapted to the demands of a new century—that will protect our citizens and friends, reinforce our values and secure our future.
    In so doing, we will need a full range of foreign policy tools. That is why our armed forces must remain the best-led, best-trained, best-equipped and most respected in the world; and, as President Clinton has pledged and our military leaders ensure, they will.
    It is also why we need first-class diplomacy. Force, and the credible possibility of its use, are essential to keep America safe; but we will more often rely on diplomacy to protect our interests; and we will expect our diplomats to defend those interests with skill, knowledge and spine.
 Page 12       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, you would not have chosen to serve on this Committee if you did not understand that. Upon the success or failure of American foreign policy depends the character of our future and the future of the world. That is not an overstatement. That is a fact. The choices we make together will go far to shape the environment in which we and our children and their children will live.
    Accordingly, I pledge to work with all of you to ensure that we have the superb diplomatic representation that our people deserve and our interests demand. We cannot have that on the cheap. We must invest the resources required to maintain our leadership.
    Unfortunately, in recent years we have not been investing enough. We are the world's richest and most powerful nation, but we are also the No. 1 debtor to the United Nations and the international financial institutions. We are dead last among the industrialized nations in the percentage of our wealth that we use to promote democracy and wealth in the developing world; and, diplomatically, we are steadily and unilaterally disarming ours.
    During the last 4 years, the State Department has cut more than 2,000 employees and closed more than 30 overseas posts; and we have slashed foreign assistance by almost one-third. This trend cannot continue. We must have the diplomatic tools we need to protect our Nation.
    Spending on international affairs now constitutes barely 1 percent of the Federal budget. If this amount were to be cut further, it is our influence in the world, not the deficit, that would decline. Diplomatic readiness is not a luxury; it is an imperative.
    This morning, Mr. Chairman, I ask your support for the President's full budget request for international affairs; and I will review with you the policies and priorities upon which that request is based.
    On Saturday, I will begin an around-the-world visit to a number of key capitals in Europe and Asia. My purpose will be to explore opportunities for deeper cooperation in our most important alliances and relationships. These are the bonds that hold together not only our foreign policy but the entire international system.
 Page 13       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    When we are able to act cooperatively with the other leading nations, we create a web of power and purpose that elevates standards and spurs progress around the globe. In so doing, we create opportunities for advancing a range of strategic goals, such as reducing the threat posed by weapons of mass destruction, defusing dangerous regional conflicts, opening new markets and extending the rule of law. That cooperation begins with a transatlantic partnership.
    Fortunately, in Europe today, our leadership is on solid ground. America led the way in revitalizing NATO, ending the carnage in Bosnia, mobilizing support for Russian democracy and upholding the independence of Europe's new democratic nations. Now we are on the verge of realizing the most elusive dream of this century, an integrated, stable and democratic Europe.
    This summer, as part of our strategy to make that dream real, NATO will invite several of our democratic partners to begin negotiations to join the alliance. Our purpose is to do for Europe's east what NATO did 50 years ago for Europe's west—to integrate new democracies, defeat old hatreds, provide confidence in economic recovery and deter conflict.
    The process of enlargement has already encouraged the settlement of historic disputes between Hungary and Romania, Germany and the Czech Republic, and Poland and Ukraine. In the future, it can increase our confidence that there will be no more Bosnias, that the democracy revolutions of 1989 will endure, and the cold war-style division of Europe will not reopen in some new and dangerous form.
    That is what we are trying to achieve and just as important as what we are trying to avoid. For there are only two real alternatives to enlargement. We could replace the alliance with the lowest-common-denominator NATO that includes everyone and imposes obligations on no one or we could delay enlargement indefinitely, freezing NATO's membership along unjust cold war lines.
    These alternatives are not acceptable. The right approach is to proceed with a careful and transparent process of expansion, while offering to Russia the opportunity to be a full partner in building a united and peaceful Europe. To that end, NATO has proposed a formal charter to Russia that will allow us to cooperate, consult, train and respond to crises together. We have made steady progress toward this goal, which will be a major subject of my discussions in Europe.
 Page 14       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, the advance of democracy across Central and Eastern Europe and the Newly Independent States has been the most exciting and heartening development of our age, but it remains very much a work in progress.
    This year, the President is proposing a new Partnership for Freedom Initiative as a component of our $900-million request for assistance to the Newly Independent States. This reflects an evolution in our approach to the region. For years, we have been providing technical advice on how to achieve political and economic reform. Our focus now will be on cementing the irreversible nature of those reforms.
    The initiative will concentrate on activities to promote business, trade and investment and on those that would strengthen democracy and more fully establish the rule of law. Our efforts here are a priority because the democratic transformation of this region is of vital and historic importance to us, and because the ultimate victory of freedom over despotism in this part of the world is not yet assured.
    The same may be said for Bosnia. Here, progress continues in implementing the Dayton Accords, but grave obstacles and grave hatreds remain.
    In assessing the future, we should not forget how much has been accomplished. The savage killing has stopped, the streets are safer, the markets are busy, the people have hope, and the institutions of a stable and democratic future are being built.
    All this is due largely to American leadership. Our goal now is to work with our many partners to consolidate and build on those gains. Our strategy is to continue reducing the need for an international military presence by accomplishing a stable military balance, helping those displaced return safely to their homes and seeing that more of those indicted as war criminals are arrested and prosecuted.
    In all of this, we need your support. It may be our participation in Bosnia is not our most popular interest, but it is right. It serves our purpose and demonstrates American leadership on a continent that will be as central to our future as it has been to our past.
 Page 15       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    Mr. Chairman, America must remain a European power. We must, and will, remain a Pacific power as well.
    Today, with our partners, we are building an Asia-Pacific community based on shared interests and a common commitment to peace. We are opening markets for American goods, services and capital. We are strengthening our core alliances. We are engaged in wide-ranging discussions on security. We are continuing to support new democracies and to stress the importance of respect for human rights.
    And, in almost everything we do in this region, we work closely with Japan. Our alliance is one of the great successes of the post-war era, and it is a fundamental building block of Asian security and prosperity.
    One example among many is our effort, with Japan and another valued ally, the Republic of Korea, to implement the Agreed Framework freezing North Korea's development of nuclear arms. In recent weeks, we have worked closely with the South Korean Government to reduce tensions and improve prospects for dialog with the North.
    Accordingly, I ask for your support of our share of funding for the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization, or KEDO, which will be critical to sustaining this momentum.
    China's emergence as a world power and the evolution of its relation with other nations will do much to determine the history of our era. Our purpose is to encourage China's integration as a fully responsive and constructive member of the international community. Toward that end, we seek a continuing dialog with China. Our goal is to expand areas of cooperation, while being honest and candid about our differences.
    Those differences include aspects of trade, arms transfers and human rights, including Tibet and we have a deep interest and deep concerns about China's policy toward Hong Kong. But we also have many interests in common and have worked together both bilaterally and at the United Nations on a wide range of issues.
 Page 16       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    Although our interests demand that we direct our attention frequently to Europe and Asia, we cannot and are not neglecting our friends closer to home. We are proud to be among the community of democracies that exists now in our own hemisphere.
    Last week, in Houston, I had the opportunity to reaffirm America's friendship with Mexico, a nation with whom we share both a 2,000-mile-long border and an array of interests, including trade and the war against drugs.
    We are looking forward to the visit later this month of Chile's President, Eduardo Frei.
    With all our partners, we are committed to building on the 1994 Summit of the Americas to strengthen democratic institutions and promote higher standards of living through free trade and economic integration.
    Mr. Chairman, Africa, too, is a continent of importance to the United States. The democratic transition in South Africa stands as a monument to human courage and potential. Throughout the region, there are examples of nations taking the right steps to enlarge private enterprise, invest in education, expand opportunities for women and solidify democracies.
    Despite daunting problems, the overall economic outlook in Africa is improving and progress has been made in resolving ethnic and civil strife. The U.N. peacekeeping mission in Mozambique succeeded, and the mission in Angola remains on the right track. The outlook has improved in Liberia and Sierra Leone. In Central Africa, we are deeply engaged, with regional leaders and our allies, to keep the lid on an extremely tense and complex situation.
    The United States has important economic, security, political, and humanitarian interests in Africa. We need to stay engaged. And if we are to have the resources required to stay engaged, we will need the help of this Committee.
    Mr. Chairman, with American leadership, the world has made important progress in controlling nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction. For the first time since the beginning of the nuclear age, no Russian missiles are pointed at the United States and no American missiles are pointed at Russia. Nuclear weapons have been removed from Belarus, Kazakstan and Ukraine. The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty has been extended indefinitely and unconditionally, and the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty has been approved.
 Page 17       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    Despite these advances, the threat is far from over. That is why arms control and non-proliferation remain a fundamental part of our foreign policy framework and why we will continue to solicit your support for the many accounts within the President's budget that relate to the negotiation, implementation, monitoring and verification of agreements pertaining to all categories of deadly arms.
    Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, because of America's unique capabilities and unmatched power, the world often looks to us to help end conflicts and respond to crises. Yet our primary obligation is to protect our own citizens. We have limited resources and broad—but still limited—interests.
    To maintain our credibility and avoid quagmires, we must be careful in our commitments and selective in our actions. Nevertheless, we recognize that occasions will arise when our interests and those of our allies require an active American role.
    Today, we stand ready to play a continuing or increased role in helping to reduce tension in strategic regions such as Cyprus and the Aegean, South Asia, Nagorno-Karabakh and Northern Ireland. In each case, however, our role will be influenced heavily by the party's desire for our assistance and by their commitment to achieve a peaceful resolution of differences.
    In the Middle East, last month's agreement on the redeployment of Israeli forces in Hebron was an extraordinary success for U.S. diplomacy. It helped to create new confidence and trust between the parties. It provides a road map for the future, and it restores momentum to the overall peace process.
    Looking ahead, we have a three-part agenda. First, we will support continued progress between the Israelis and Palestinians. Second, we will search for ways to stimulate negotiations between Israel and Syria and Israel and Lebanon. Third, we will encourage other Arab States to expand their ties to Israel. And, of course, to support our diplomacy, we must retain our bilateral assistance to Israel, Egypt, Jordan, the West Bank and Gaza and Lebanon.
 Page 18       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    As you know, Prime Minister Netanyahu and Chairman Arafat will visit Washington this month; and President Mubarak and King Hussein will come next month. I can assure you that we will persevere in our quest for a secure, comprehensive and lasting peace between Israel and her Arab neighbors. In all our efforts, we will be guided by America's unwaivering commitment to Israel's security and by our equally strong opposition to those who would use violence and terror to obstruct peace.
    Mr. Chairman, shortly after President Clinton took office in 1993, he declared that we must compete, not retreat. Since then, his leadership has produced extraordinary success in creating jobs for Americans at home by opening markets abroad. The more than 200 trade agreements negotiated have helped our exports grow by 34 percent and created 1.6 million new jobs.
    But we cannot rest on past progress. In today's fiercely competitive world markets, our firms must often compete with foreign companies that receive active support from their governments. That is why the State Department must—and will—do all it can to ensure that American firms and workers receive fair treatment, and that is why I ask you to continue your support for the programs of the Export-Import Bank, the Overseas Private Investment Corporation, and the Trade and Development Agency.
    Mr. Chairman, the United States was founded on the principles of law, human dignity and freedom, not just for some but for all people. As a refugee from tyranny, I cherish these principles and I know that you do, too.
    America would not be America if we failed to speak out against egregious violations of human rights, wherever and whenever they occur. Since early in our history, we have extended a helping hand to others striving to build democracy in their own lands, just as we do today through the SEED program, the National Endowment for Democracy, in Haiti and in our effort to encourage democratic change in Cuba.
    We are also a nation of laws, and today we are striving to enhance international cooperation to defeat the drug kingpins and gangsters of organized crime that are corrupting governments and poisoning our kids. Here, too, rhetoric is not sufficient. We need your support for programs that will encourage others to work with us to eradicate illegal crops, seize illegal assets, interdict illegal shipments, and put the lawless behind bars.
 Page 19       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, I would like to close with a discussion of two matters that relate directly to the issue of America's global leadership.
    First, one of the most important ways we contribute to sustainable development is through our support for international family planning. By stabilizing population growth rates, developing nations can devote more of their scarce resources to meet the basic needs of their citizens. Moreover, our voluntary family planning programs serve our broader interests by elevating the status of women, reducing the flow of refugees, protecting the environment and promoting economic growth.
    This week, the House of Representatives is scheduled to decide whether to agree to the President's decision to release USAID's fiscal year 1997 population funds. The President has determined that a further delay will cause a tragic rise in unintended pregnancies, abortions and maternal and child deaths. I urge you to endorse the President's position.
    Second, the President is requesting $100 million this year and a $920 million advance appropriation, to be made available next year, to pay our arrears to the United Nations and other international organizations.
    Our goal is to ensure continued American leadership within these organizations and work with other member States, in consultation with Congress, toward further U.N. reform.
    Mr. Chairman, this is an area where it is absolutely imperative that we establish common ground. American leadership within the U.N. system matters, for this is where a great deal of the world's business is conducted. This is where compliance with nuclear safeguards is verified, efforts to end the exploitation of children is pursued, refugees are cared for, epidemic disease is contained, and standards are established that allow American companies to export billions of dollars in goods.
    This is but a sample. We have an enormous stake in this system, a system that Americans did more than any other nation to create.
 Page 20       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    Now, we are at a critical point. We are $1 billion behind in paying our assessments, which are required under rules to which our Nation long ago voluntarily agreed. We have a broad agenda for reform that, if approved, would go far to prepare these organizations for the 21st century. We have a new Secretary General who has made it clear that he supports reform but that he also believes, as our Nation has always believed, that obligations should be met.
    In these days ahead, I want to work with you to find a way to implement the President's plan. Our continued leadership at the United Nations depends on it, our principles require it, our budget allows it, and our interests demand it.
    Members of the Committee, let me say again that I appreciate the opportunity to be here today. I have laid out some, but by no means all, of what I see are the principal challenges and opportunities we will face over the next year and beyond. Clearly, we have a lot to do.
    In approaching that task, I hope we will bear in mind the tradition of foreign policy bipartisanship that the Chairman read us and that, when it prevails, such bipartisanship makes our country stronger. I hope we will bear in mind the proud legacy of past leadership from men and women of both parties, from military and civilian, public and private, that has made America a beacon of liberty and accomplishment through two centuries around the globe.
    I hope we will bear in mind the example, somewhat closer to home, of Representative Lee Hamilton, who has told us that this is his final term in Congress. Through the years, Lee Hamilton has worked shoulder to shoulder with many Secretaries of State. He has earned the respect of each. To many, including this one, he has also been a source of wisdom and counsel. He will be missed; but I hope that, by working together this term, we will add to his long list of accomplishments and thereby add, as well, to our own.
    Thank you very much, and now I would be very pleased to respond to your questions.
 Page 21       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    Chairman GILMAN. Thank you, Madam Secretary, for that very comprehensive review of our foreign policies and our proposals for the future.
    [The prepared statement of Secretary Albright appears in the appendix.]

    Chairman GILMAN. The Chair will recognize Members, alternating between both sides of the aisle. Pursuant to our rules, the Chair will first recognize Members who were present at the opening portion of this meeting in the order of seniority; and the Chair will then recognize Members who appeared after this opening part of the hearing in the order which they appeared before the Committee.
    Madam Secretary, I understand the State Department requested the U.N. arrears supplemental authorization bill for $921 million yesterday and will request a State Department authorization bill in the coming days. We missed your regular request for legislation during the 104th Congress, and we certainly welcome this change.
    A few weeks ago, we shared a draft State Department and foreign assistance measure with you and our Ranking Minority Member, Lee Hamilton. Last week, we formally transmitted a copy of this bill. AID's administrator, Brian Atwood, made some very positive statements about our foreign assistance measure. I believe his technical people see few problems in the measure. I note your bill includes a number of changes to the Foreign Assistance Act. Accordingly, will you request a foreign assistance authorization measure from this Committee, Madam Secretary?
    Secretary ALBRIGHT. Mr. Chairman, I would just like to assure you that we want to do everything to work with you in crafting an authorization bill. It is very important to us to develop a partnership with you. The reason that I took as much time as I did today in going through what our challenges and opportunities are is in order to show how much we need to work together.
 Page 22       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    We have not yet had a complete chance to look at what you have submitted to us, but we will be. There are a number of agencies involved, and I just want to assure you that we will be doing everything we can to work very closely with you.
    Chairman GILMAN. Madam Secretary, did you designate a specific team for us to negotiate with from this Committee with regard to our foreign assistance measure?
    Secretary ALBRIGHT. I will make every effort to do that, sir. I think that is an interesting idea.
    Chairman GILMAN. We would welcome that and of course I think it would help facilitate our work. As you know, we haven't had a foreign assistance authorization bill since 1985, and we would like to assist Mr. Hamilton in his achievements by accomplishing it this year.
    Madam Secretary, we understand that the report required by the Jerusalem Embassy Relocation Act was transmitted to Congress last Friday. However, the report was sent to the Speaker; and many of us have yet to find an opportunity to read it.
    We would welcome if you could summarize the status of the Administration's efforts to implement the act which declares, and I quote, ''Jerusalem should remain an undivided city in which the rights of every ethnic and religious group are protected. Jerusalem should be recognized as the capital of the State of Israel, and that the U.S. Embassy in Israel should be established in Israel no later than May 31st, 1999.''
    I would welcome if you could outline what steps the Administration is taking to ensure the law is implemented in a timely fashion.
    Secretary ALBRIGHT. Mr. Chairman, as required by the legislation, we have now submitted four reports that lay out in detail our thinking and approach on this issue, and we will, in fact, provide you with copies which lay out the variety of options.
    Let me say, Mr. Chairman, I know that you have heard my predecessors say that the question of Jerusalem is among the most sensitive and delicate that we have as we proceed with the overall Arab-Israeli peace process. And, as the President said when the legislation was passed, I remain convinced that it is unwise for the United States to take actions that could be interpreted as prejudicing sensitive matters such as Jerusalem, that the parties themselves have agreed should be decided in the final status.
 Page 23       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    I think that you would agree that as the parties begin to approach these permanent status questions next month, we need to be very careful in our approach to the question of Jerusalem so as to not make for complicated factors; and I do just want to assure you, Mr. Chairman, that we will be abiding by the law.
    Chairman GILMAN. And we will welcome your outline of the steps to be taken.
    One last question, following the decertification of Colombia for failure to fully cooperate with our counternarcotics efforts, we denied the Colombian national police and military the vital tools and equipment under the FMS and IMET programs needed to fight a narco-guerilla offensive. That narco-guerilla offensive now threatens the democracy there as well as our internal security here at home for massive amounts of cocaine and heroin which are flowing from a potential narco-state only 3 hours by aircraft from Miami.
    Madam Secretary, would you support changes in the law allowing the State to provide primarily related FMS and IMET assistance in some of the decertified nations?
    Secretary ALBRIGHT. Mr. Chairman, I think the whole issue of narcotics in Latin America, is of major concern. As you know, the President has named General Barry McCaffrey to lead our efforts and there has been an increased emphasis on making sure that something that really does undermine our security is being dealt with in a most effective way.
    We have, as you said, been working on the decertification of Colombia but I would like to take into consideration the suggestions you have made before I comment.
    Chairman GILMAN. Thank you, Madam Secretary.
    Mr. Hamilton.
    Mr. HAMILTON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Thank you for your gracious remarks, Madam Secretary; and we certainly wish you well on the trip you are about to embark upon to some of the major capitals.
 Page 24       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    I noted with approval your remarks about an increase in resources. I think the President is asking for a 6.7-percent increase in the International Affairs account. Certainly I intend to support that because of the sharp reductions we have had in the past years, but you know the Congress well enough to know that it is not going to be easy to get that amount of money. Suppose you just identify for us, if you would, what you think the consequences might be if we don't get that money, that 6.7-percent increase? What does that mean in terms of our ability to conduct or not to conduct American foreign policy?
    Secretary ALBRIGHT. Mr. Hamilton, we have tried very hard to have what is, basically, a bare bones foreign policy budget; and, even with the slight increase, it is not one that is overwhelmingly large. I have said in the past that, in effect, 1 percent of our budget will, in one way or another, create 50 percent of the history that is written about us.
    We have looked generally at our budget—and if I might answer it in this way—in five areas, and therefore not acting in those five areas I think is the best way to answer your question. I think it is very important for us to pursue our strategic priorities; and specifically, this year, the increase in our budget has to do with the money that we are asking for the Newly Independent States. I think we would all agree that having democratic, market-oriented reforms take place in the countries of the former Soviet Union is a major interest to the United States and that, while progress has been made, the progress itself is not irreversible. Therefore, having us deal with the myriad issues that have to do with the Newly Independent States, taking their part in the internal system, is very important to us.
    So I could talk more about that, but I think that that is understandable.
    Also, money will be going, additionally, to the SEED countries, Central and Eastern Europe. That also is very much a part of our desire to have peace and stability in a region of the world that has created two world wars. There are other examples in terms of pursuing strategic interests but I think, for the sake of brevity, those two are clear.
 Page 25       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    I think it is very important for us to keep our commitments, and that is more than just kind of being goody-two-shoes in foreign policy. Our major desire, as we move forward in the international community, is to establish a rule of law and to make sure that countries abide by their contracts. It means it is important for us to take a leadership in that ourselves. It isn't just a matter of establishing the rule of law.
    I, myself, have to tell you, after 4 years at the United Nations, know that our lack of payment takes a toll on our influence. Because every time we go into a room, somebody says, you know, you may want these kinds of reforms or you may want this kind of a resolution, but where is your money.
    As I have said, even our very closest friends, the British, were able to deliver a sound bite that they have waited 200 years to say, which is representation without taxation. So I would hope that we would be able to make sure that we live up to our obligations.
    The third area is meeting world food needs. We have wanted to make sure that there is money there for food assistance to a variety of countries in Africa as well as other poor places in PL 481. These are American foods that go there. It is good for our economy.
    Too, I think we all know very well that instability, ethnic problems, and strife come from people who are hungry and dissatisfied. A little-known fact is that, basically, those countries that get food aid actually ultimately develop into very good markets for the United States; and they buy additional food from us when they get on their feet.
    We also have to ensure adequate flexibility to meet crises. That is why the economic support fund and a variety of our funds have to do with providing funds to help countries where we are concerned about their stability and are important to us in strategic regions.
    Finally, to put all this together, you need the diplomats to do it. I think that people do not understand how sparse our diplomatic funds are now. People focus on some fancy embassies, but I have been to embassies where ambassadors wash dishes in the bathtub, where the telephone equipment doesn't work, where we are still kind of in the dark age on some of our technology.
 Page 26       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    So those, Mr. Hamilton, are examples of why we need the money.
    Mr. HAMILTON. Thank you.
    Chairman GILMAN. Mr. Bereuter.
    Mr. BEREUTER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    I have a limited amount of time, and I want to say I understand but regret the decision of Mr. Hamilton to retire at the end of this Congress. I counted him as one of our more knowledgeable, astute, and very distinguished colleagues. I personally view him as one of the three most distinguished Members I have served with, and he is the only active one. We are going to miss him a great deal.
    Madam Secretary, I want to join and congratulate you on your nomination and confirmation. I have known you some time because of Aspen and your distinguished service at the United Nations, and I have great respect for your capabilities and have high expectations of what you are going to do for our country. So best wishes to you as you launch your effort as Secretary of State.
    As I visited our embassies and consulates, I do believe you are quite right in saying that we are, ''diplomatically steadily disarming ourselves.'' It is one of the reasons why Mr. Hamilton and I sent the letter to the President on December 19th suggesting that he add at least $1 billion to his budget request. That is not a popular statement or decision for a Member of Congress to make, but I do think it is essential.
    At the same time, as I have listened to your foreign service officers and others, it seems there are a lot of good ideas about how you can spend your money more effectively. I would suggest, if I may, that you develop a procedure whereby your foreign service officers across the world can anonymously, not through a hierarchy, give suggestions about how you can more effectively spend your resources. I think the bureaucracy is creating some disincentives for spending it well. That is my suggestion.
 Page 27       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    I noted, second, that in your statement on page 9 you look for the Senate's swift approval of the CFE flank agreement, which seems to be a change from the August, 1996, intention to come to the House and the Senate for statutory approval. The House takes that request seriously and is prepared to move it, and I hope we are not going to be cut out of the process.
    Finally, I might say in the way of a question, while you might expect me to be quite supportive of the requests for so-called arrearages payments to the United Nations, as I had mentioned to you last November, I thought the State Department's spokesperson misstated the concerns of Congress in some respect.
    I do believe that we expect more than structure and personnel changes. The Congress, out of frustration, has been trying for over a decade to get our assessments for peacekeeping and general operations changed. We expect to pay our fair share but not extraordinarily more than our share. Out of frustration, the democratically controlled 103d Congress and the Republican-controlled 104th Congress have said we are not going to pay more than 25 percent assessment for peacekeeping. We are not going to pay 31.7 percent.
    In reality, because we are the only country with major airlift capability, every time there is an emergency or peacekeeping operation, we provide all that. We are really paying over 40 percent, on an average year, of peacekeeping costs. So we want some adjustments in those assessments for the general operation and for the peacekeeping.
    We will pay our fair share or even a little more than our fair share, but we have asked for reasonable reductions for more than a decade now. Out of frustration, the Congress is saying, we repudiate in the area of peacekeeping anything over 25 percent.
    Now that fact seems to be lost in the rhetoric that I am reading about the changes that the Congress is seeking. This one Member, I think speaking for a lot of other Members, believes that changes in the assessments are also necessary. That is part of the condition for us coming up with some of the additional funds but not to accept the arrearages that are so-called due by the United States.
 Page 28       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    Secretary ALBRIGHT. Congressman Bereuter, I, first of all, thank you very much for your kind words. I have enjoyed working with you in a variety of ways in the last few years; and I am looking forward to this new relationship very, very much.
    First on the question of ideas by Members, about foreign service officers, let me say that we have a dissent channel that does, in fact, do that. But let me, in addition to that, tell you that I may end up being a bureaucratic disaster because I plan to reach down into the system.
    I think we have very bright junior officers and younger people that are all over the place. I am very happy to say some of them are my students from Georgetown—whom I respect a great deal, and I respect what the people that are out in the field have to say.
    So I made that clear when I appeared before my colleagues at the State Department in my opening session and said I plan to reach down, and I will do that just exactly for those kinds of suggestions.

    Secretary ALBRIGHT. On the issue of the flank agreement, we believe that it is important to move fairly rapidly with that because of the way that the whole issue of CFE and NATO expansion and our charter with the NATO Russian charter operates. I think it shows the importance of being up to date in terms of CFE.
    Let me say that we are looking for the appropriate vehicle so that it is possible to have both chambers look at it, but I think our question here is an issue of trying to get agreement to it.
    Mr. BEREUTER. By what time?
    Secretary ALBRIGHT. I am sorry. We have until May 15.
    On the question of the whole U.N. package, we are going to have to spend a lot of time with you. If I might just take 1 second on this, the issue of assessments is definitely part of what needs to be talked about, and the whole reason for having this forward appropriation is in order to show the United Nations that there is money at the end of this line, and to give us some heft and leverage to be able to get the kinds of reform that we want at a lower assessment rate is among those.
 Page 29       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    But I just want to assure you that we will spend a lot of time with all of you on this subject.
    Chairman GILMAN. Thank you, Mr. Bereuter.
    Mr. Gejdenson. Thank you.
    Mr. GEJDENSON. Madam Secretary, we are all very excited about your tenure, and I, for myself, am particularly excited about your desire to get the public engaged in understanding how important foreign policy is to every citizen in this country. Clearly, there have been other periods throughout the history of this planet where we see peace and then see that peace disappear and human suffering increase. So I think we are all very excited and we are looking forward to working with you there.
    There are obviously many issues that we want to discuss. The recent activities by the Chinese in Hong Kong are very troubling, and, recognizing that we have to engage the Chinese, it is difficult to see, with all the issues that are before us in that instance—chemical proliferation, nuclear missile proliferation—what kinds of things in human rights we can do there.
    The issue of CNN's operations in Cuba: We now have a booster in Senator Helms. It seems to me if a lesson of Eastern Europe—if anything at all, it is clear that getting information in helps getting information out, and that will be to our benefit as well.
    I would also hope—not necessarily at this moment—that you can get to me a review of the sanctions on Iran and Libya and how they have been working. But my primary concern at the moment really is one that affects both China and the Soviet Union. I am a little late in getting to book Lenin's tomb, but my parents who fled the Soviet Union at the end of World War II, it was always clear to me that the economic pressures inside the Soviet Union, the status of the individual, led to its downfall.
    It seems to me the greatest dangers to stability in the world today are those economic pressures both in the former Soviet Union to see the pressures on democracy for people to see their standard of living either having slid tremendously or continuing to slide—what we are going to do there and also in the situation of China.
 Page 30       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    China has the potential to explode on us maybe even worse than what we saw in the aftermath of the Soviet Union. One of the things I think we need to figure out how to engage in our foreign policy more seriously are issues of workers' rights and environmental issues, and while they seem to be domestic issues possibly at first view, it seems to me unless in the former Soviet Union now, through democratic institutions and our economic help, people get to improve their life, democracy will be in danger.
    In China, I think the danger is at some point a political, if not a military, explosion occurs because people are continuing to be subrogated because there are no environmental standards because there are no labor rights because we still have issues of slave labor.
    So I guess how do we take this great engine and your great ability in our foreign policy and start to use it in a way that helps really put people in the position where democracy is going to be important to them because their stomachs are going to be full? That is a lot.
    Secretary ALBRIGHT. I think that by the series of questions you have asked, you really have pinpointed the major challenges that we have ahead of us as we are looking at the end of this century, entering into the next.
    On the subject of Russia and our assistance to the Newly Independent States, I think you have exactly put your finger on the problem. With the end of communism and with the newly elected leadership there, there is a sense of tremendous excitement that people could participate in the political process.
    I think in my previous work in Russia and other times, I know that people are very exhilarated by the thought of participating in a political process, but they also, as you have put it, have stomachs. And I think what has to be done is to assist the economic development there, which is exactly why we have made our proposal for that kind of work to push forward economic development and more of a partnership role with Russia and the Newly Independent States to do that.
 Page 31       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    In China also, I think we have to be very concerned about how the economic development takes place, and the subjects that you have raised. Workers' rights and environmental issues are the kinds of myriad of subjects that we now raise with the Chinese.
    Now let me say regarding both of these issues that we have to be very sophisticated in the way that we deal with both these huge countries. They need to be respected; they need to be understood as an important part of our national system, that we do not hold our discussions there hostage to any one subject but have a huge number of issues that we have to deal with, with them, because their global responsibility or their participation globally helps us also. So we are going to be talking about those subjects within a context.
    But let me also say no one should ever doubt that I will not stop talking about the importance of human rights. And without giving too much of a plug to one media outlet, I happen to believe that CNN played a major role in the downfall of communism in Central and Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union, and I think the more information that the people of Cuba can have, the more likely we are to be able to move to democratization and to get rid of the last dinosaur that exists on this earth.
    Chairman GILMAN. Thank you, Mr. Gejdenson.
    Ms. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen.
    Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Madam Secretary, it is always a pleasure to see you, and the South Florida community that I represent looks forward to a return visit from you in the near future.
    For the Members that do not know, Ambassador Albright spoke in front of an overflow crowd in the Orange Bowl. Our community was in grave sorrow over the deaths of four brave pilots of Brothers to the Rescue who were on a humanitarian mission, totally unarmed, and shot down by Castro's thugs in international airspace, and we commend you for the leadership that you showed in that difficult time.
 Page 32       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    Madam Secretary, I have some questions regarding the implementation of Helms-Burton, and title 3, the area that deals with lawsuits that companies can bring in U.S. courts for the confiscation illegally of their property in Cuba as well as title 4 part of the Helms-Burton which deals with the exclusion of certain executives who continue to traffic in stolen property.
    And the other question—and they are all tied together—is the WTO complaint against Helms-Burton and against the United States. At several meetings and hearings that I participated in with Ambassador Eizenstat, State Department officials, and other representatives of the USTR, they had told us that the waiver of title 3 would not be used or in any way, shape, or form during consultations with our allies regarding the WTO complaint that they had against the United States we were assured that there was no basis for that complaint; in fact, it had no substance to it.
    However, the President has in fact invoked the waiver soon after his re-election. I wanted to ask you about that waiver. Was it being used all along as a tool of negotiations with our allies even though it was never the intention of Congress to use it as that bargaining chip? Do you agree with the President's decision to waive title 3? And do you think that title 3 has a value: That is, the part about the lawsuits should be diminished or undermined to such an extent that it becomes a continuing bargaining tool with the President?
    And with regards to the WTO complaint, I am interested in knowing your position regarding what the U.S. role will be in fighting that complaint. Are we forcefully fighting it, or are we looking for an excuse to not fight it?
    And the other part having to do with title 4, the exclusion and the visas: What will your recommendation be to the President about continuing to exclude other companies from coming into the United States? And when title 3 waiver comes up again, which it does every 6 months, what will your position be and what will you advise the President?
 Page 33       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    Secretary ALBRIGHT. Thank you very much, Congresswoman.
    I have felt very strongly about what the Cubans did to our unarmed pilots and have pursued that subject vigorously. Let's say that whenever I feel even vaguely depressed, it is time to go to South Florida. People there are wonderful, and I have been very pleased to have the relationship.
    On the issue of Helms-Burton—and I must say that I think we need to keep in mind the goal of all this, and the goal is to try to have democratization, transition of democracy, take place in Cuba, and that is the way the Administration has seen the purpose of our action.
    We also do believe it is important for those Cuban Americans. I think people sometimes forget that these are Americans who ought to be compensated for what they have lost. Previously when people have lost property, they are somehow compensated for it.
    But our goal is basically to get others to move with us to pursue the democratization aspect of Helms-Burton. And I spent time in Latin America persuading some of our friends there. Stuart Eizenstat has undertaken a huge mission. And I just want to tell you that the waiver was really a result of our success with them, not as a tool, because they have agreed that pursuing democratization measures is also important.
    We obviously will be watching this very carefully and will continue to try to get them to take action, along with us, to make sure that the democratization aspects of this continue. I would like to reserve my judgment on where we go with this from now on. Obviously it is not something that can be decided ahead of time, but you know my own commitment, and my commitment is to do what this government can to bring about democratization, and we have to use the tools that we have.
    We do not specifically just want to punish our friends, we want to have them work with us, and I think that is what Stuart Eizenstat was able to do so well.
 Page 34       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    On the WTO issue, we have been saying that basically we have told the European Union that we don't believe that the WTO is an appropriate forum for resolving this, because this is not a trade issue but a political issue.
    Chairman GILMAN. Thank you.
    Ileana Ros-Lehtinen.
    Mr. Lantos.
    Mr. LANTOS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Let me first turn to my friend, Lee Hamilton, and tell him how much we will miss his thoughtful, and mature, and dignified, and effective approach to foreign policy.
    Madam Secretary, I am more than delighted to welcome you here in your new role. You and I have shared the special kinship by having had our lives impacted by Hitler's Germany and Stalin's Soviet Union.
    In your entire magnificent statement, there is only one observation I would like to take issue with. You refer to yourself as a refugee from tyranny. And while you may have been as a child a refugee from tyranny, I think of you as a fighter against tyranny, because your entire adult life has been dedicated to expanding democracy and human rights and opposing tyranny in all its forums. And I look forward to an enormously successful tenure as Secretary of State.
    A couple of observations that I would like to make, and then I would like to ask a few specific questions.
    The chairman referred at the opening to the word ''bipartisanship,'' and Senator Vandenberg, and as probably one of the Members of this body who is most passionately committed to bipartisanship, I want to caution that we don't confuse rhetorical acceptance of bipartisanship with effective bipartisanship inaction.
    As one of the few Democrats who enthusiastically supported President Bush when he came to us to face up to Iraqi aggression, I would very much like to ask you, when I finish my observations, to comment on your recent visit with President Bush, because from fragmentary newspaper reports, it seems he is supporting bipartisanship in a very specific and fundamental fashion, and on some of the key issues, the support of the former Republican President will be invaluable in your work.
 Page 35       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    I would like to ask you to address the following issues briefly, if I may: Ever since its inception, we have viewed NATO correctly as a defensive security alliance. And I think that it would be the utmost mistake to yield to those in the Russian political scene who view expansion of NATO as an aggressive move.
    NATO, since day one, has been a defensive security alliance. And as we invite other countries to join NATO, we will merely expand the arena of this defensive security alliance with no aggressive designs on the Soviet Union.
    As you know, I recently visited the region, and I think it is extremely important that we don't draw lines now in a highly delicate situation. As you indicated, Madam Secretary, Romania and Hungary recently made a historic move to put aside their long-standing misunderstandings. The new Romanian Government came into office by peaceful and democratic means, the first such change since 1928.
    It is my recommendation to you and to the President that NATO invite five countries, not three, to join the alliance: Poland, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Romania, and Slovenia. When they join should be determined by objective criteria as they meet admission standards, but not to invite the two that are not much talked about, I think, would create great tension in the region.
    Second, Madam Secretary, I would like to ask you to comment on recent policies by Egypt. I was one of the strongest supporters of Egypt when Egypt was one of the strongest supporters of peace in the region, but many statements both by the President and particularly the Foreign Minister have been counterproductive to peace.
    I think it is important for our Egyptian friends to understand that when we deal with foreign aid appropriations, we will reward those like Jordan who effectively support peace in the region and we will be less generous vis-a-vis those that, by their actions, have been less than helpful.
 Page 36       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    I would also like to suggest a word with respect to Arafat. I was the first Member of Congress to go down to Gaza City to meet with him after the Oslo Accords, and we have supported him in many ways, but I think the time has come for him to put an end to terrorism and finally to remove from the PLO charter the clause calling for the destruction of the State of Israel.
    I will not support one more move for the Palestinian Authority until that clause is removed. It is an outrage that, years after we have been providing aid and assistance, after countless promises by Arafat, the clause calling for the destruction of Israel is still part of the PLO charter. This must end.
    Finally, I want to associate myself with my friend's comments—Congressman Bereuter's—about assessments. Kofi Annan, who is a wonderful breath of fresh air and will do a great job, must understand that we will not accept arbitrary assessments and anything above the 25 percent will not be paid by this Congress.
    I would be grateful if you would comment on my observations.
    Chairman GILMAN. Madam Secretary, I hope you will keep your responses brief. We are running out of time, and we have a large number of Members here today who would like to speak.
    Please, Madam Secretary.
    Secretary ALBRIGHT. I will do the best I can.
    President Bush and I had a great time. It was very important.
    Mr. LANTOS. Would you care to go into details?
    Secretary ALBRIGHT. President Bush and Mrs. Bush, we had a discussion. I think what is very important about the President's support for the Chemical Weapons Convention and for funding for the budget—which I am asking his full support for, as well as the U.N. arrears, because he understands, having sat in that seat himself, how important it is for the United States to be there full strength.
 Page 37       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    Which allows me to go to your last point very quickly, which is that it is important for us to have a negotiated reduction of our assessment, because then we do not have to deal with the fact that it is a unilateral action. And that is part of the package we need to spend time talking with all of you to work out: What reforms are necessary in order for that forward funding to be released.
    On the question of NATO, let me just say that we obviously are very grateful for your support on this and understanding and the necessity of not creating artificial dividing lines, and we will take into consideration what you have suggested.
    On the question of Egypt and Arafat, frankly, let me just say that with these four visits that are coming up, I think the kinds of issues that you have raised will be the kinds that we will discuss, which is the importance of establishing relations with Israel, living up to obligations and creatively working on formulas that will allow us to move forward. And the question specifically on the charter part of the PLO: we have pressed that, and they are working on it.
    So this is as brief as I can be, Mr. Chairman.
    Chairman GILMAN. Thank you, Madam Secretary.
    Mr. Ballenger.
    Mr. BALLENGER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Madam Secretary, it is a pleasure to be with you here, I would also like to add my thanks to the many times that Lee Hamilton has been more than fair to me as a Member of this Committee.
    Having just come back from the inauguration of the new President in Nicaragua with Congressman Faleomavaega, it was apparent to the people in Nicaragua and the people in the other countries of Central America—namely, El Salvador and Guatemala which we visited—that somehow they have seemed to disappear from the map as far as the United States is concerned.
 Page 38       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    As an example, when Mrs. Chamorro was elected, I think 26 Congressmen went down to witness her inauguration. I thank Mr. Faleomavaega for going. There were only two Members of Congress that showed up this time.
    I would just like to say that Time magazine—you probably have seen it this week—came out with some statements on Haiti. There were quite a few of us that argued against putting our troops in there, but it appears what we have done is spent $35 million in training a police force that is almost doing the same horrible things as far as human rights that the army did before we chased them out.
    Have we not created the same situation that we sent troops there to end? I just wondered, do you have a statement along those lines?
    Secretary ALBRIGHT. Thank you very much, Congressman.
    Let me just say, first of all, to get to one statement that you made, I think we need to pay more attention to this hemisphere, and I think you are going to see, in terms of the President's travels, an emphasis on the Summit of the Americas as well as my own interest and spending much more time dealing with where I think we have a great strength, the solidarity of the Americas. This is a very important hemisphere to us, and we need to treat the countries there with respect and a sense of membership. So I think you will see that.
    As far as Haiti is concerned, again, I think that our role in Haiti has been a positive one. People have a tendency to forget how awful things were 3 or 4 years ago, with thousands of people on rafts seeking to escape Haiti and a situation there which was despair.
    There has now been a peaceful transfer from one democratically elected President to another, and while there obviously continue to be some problems and bumps in the road in terms of the training of the police and establishing a judicial system, I think that we have made great progress there.
    I would in no way compare the situation previous to President Aristide and President Preval which said to us that was a horrendous situation. While there are clearly some problems which we are working on, I think we need to understand how far we have come and continue to pursue that so the people in that country can, in fact, enjoy democracy.
 Page 39       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    But I am not saying it is now perfect, but it is a lot better than it was, sir.
    Mr. BALLENGER. Do we have future plans for handling the situation there?
    Secretary ALBRIGHT. Well, first of all, there is a peacekeeping force there now. The police force is a part of that. And we will be very careful in watching the evolution of Haiti. Having invested care as well as money into it and our armed forces, I think we need to make sure that the evolution there continues.
    But most important, sir, I think we need to understand the following, and it goes to a question asked previously on a different area. The economic development is important. The people there need to see hope, and therefore trying to get working with their Government in order to improve privatization, getting international funding and reconstruction into Haiti, using economic levers, not military ones, in order to get progress there, because ultimately that is how the solution there will come.
    Mr. BALLENGER. Thank you, ma'am.
    Chairman GILMAN. Thank you, Mr. Ballenger.
    Mr. Berman.
    Mr. BERMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    I won't take the time to talk about how much I will miss Lee Hamilton or how excited I am by Ambassador Albright's appointment to be Secretary of State because you will use that against me in counting time. So instead I would like to focus on the budget issue.
    Chairman Gilman, you have spoken several times about the importance of bipartisanship, about a draft bill that has been shown to the Administration, I gather to the Minority staff, at least. And I haven't spoken with my colleagues on the Democratic side about this, and Ranking Member Hamilton and I have only had a brief conversation, but it seems to me the key part of getting bipartisanship this year is to deal with that which has not yet been dealt with, for understandable reasons, and that is the number, the money, the resource question, the question of what we are going to do in international relations.
 Page 40       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    No function of government has been cut by anywhere near as much as this function of government since 1985. No function of government is going to be more cut in either the Republican version of the out-year budget that was passed by the Budget Committee last year or even the President's version of the budget in the out-years as the 150 function, the international relations function.
    I am very gratified to see the President's proposal. I know the Secretary of State has a tremendous role to play, as well as your predecessor, in building support for that request, and I think the key to getting the bipartisanship that I think we all seek is to make the decision that this is something that we will stand up for.
    In that line, I just want to pass on to the Secretary of State my hope that she will be able to persuade the President, who has already made the tough decision to propose the increase in a time of serious budget constraints, to go even further—if I might say, to go to a State legislative chamber and speak on behalf of the importance of a 150 function for this country's future, to show our colleagues on the other side that he is willing—if we are asking them to come forward and join us in this higher number, that he is willing to spend even more of his political capital by speaking to the American people about why this is so important.
    I think that is one more critical step that needs to happen to help all of this congeal around turning what has happened in the last 12 years around in this particular area. And I just hope you consider that and consider passing that on.
    I have one question. About a week ago, I read that the Iranians had a press conference where they announced that about $5 billion in loan guarantees have been provided by European countries and Japan to subsidize investments in their energy sector, directly contrary to the legislation which Chairman Gilman sponsored on this side, along with a number of us and Senator D'Amato on the other side, in direct contravention of the goals of that legislation. It is one thing for the Iranians to say it; it is another thing for it to really be happening.
 Page 41       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    But I am curious whether you have any information either now, or, if you don't, if you could check it out and get back to me, about whether that is in fact true, and what does that say about the State of the Western Alliance in the wake of the end of the cold war and what kinds of common values hold us together when we are dealing with a country that clearly has a program to develop a weapon of mass destruction, a nuclear program, that actively supports terrorism, and seems to topple not just the normal suspects, but topples regimes throughout the Middle East in the Arab world through the use of terrorism?
    And I would be interested to what extent you have information about the accuracy of these funds given not by a private company but by the governments of our allies in Europe and also Japan was mentioned by them.
    Secretary ALBRIGHT. Thank you very much, Congressman Berman.
    Let me just say that the President is the leader of the band as far as making clear to the American people the importance of foreign policy for the average American, and I think the State of the Union made that quite clear.
    I think what we are all doing is trying to make foreign policy less foreign to the American people. We want to make people understand that jobs are a fabric of life in terms of drugs or environmental issues, and these are very real issues for the American people, and I think you are going to be hearing a lot more of that.
    On the subject of Iran, let me say that we are, in fact, reviewing some of the issues, some of the things that you read about, so that we can make a determination on those, and we will get back to you on that.
    But I have to tell you that we have, in fact, seen some disagreement with our allies on the issue of Iran. They believe that there should be a critical dialog. We think that the actions of Iran are such that they don't warrant that kind of interchange. It is an ongoing subject. It clearly will be a subject of discussion as I make my first trip abroad.
 Page 42       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    We are concerned about Iran's actions, and we are concerned about the kinds of things that you have read about. We have a serious problem in terms of what we know about Iran and how it acts within the international community and in its own region. So we are very much looking into the kinds of things that you are talking about.
    But I have to tell you that as I talked to our European allies—I did in New York on a variety of subjects such as this—I think we need to make clearer our own assessment of where our national interests are on this and that we are in this together. So we will be looking at that much more closely, sir.
    Chairman GILMAN. Thank you, Mr. Berman.
    Madam Secretary, I would request that you brief our Committee or arrange for a briefing with regard to the proposal for Iran and funds, and we would welcome that at some early date.
    Mr. Royce.
    Mr. ROYCE. Thank you.
    Madam Secretary, like the others on this Committee, I look forward to working with you, and we wish you the best as you begin your tenure.
    I have two quick questions, one regarding Angola. On February 20, the Government of National Unity will——
    Chairman GILMAN. If I might interrupt, Mr. Royce, I have a problem. With some 30 Members who are asking to make inquiries and with the Secretary having to leave shortly after 12 noon, I am going to ask our Members to restrict themselves to one question from this point onward.
    Mr. Royce.
    Mr. ROYCE. Returning to Angola, Madam Secretary, this is a potential opportunity for a significant step forward in resolving the Angolan conflict, but it is only a potential opportunity. My question is, what is the Clinton Administration doing to ensure that the government will be a true instrument of reconciliation capable of building a national consensus in Angola?
 Page 43       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    Secretary ALBRIGHT. Mr. Royce, Angola is a special interest of mine. I went there when I was Ambassador of the United Nations. We are working very hard with the United Nations, the peacekeeping operation there, UNAVEM, to make sure that the peace agreements and peace process are followed through. We have one of our best ambassadors there, Mr. Steinberg, and I think that we are pursuing what we can in terms of trying to get this government of unity to come together.
    There have been lots of comings and goings, if I might put it that way, in terms of the possibility of having things work and then one of the parties draws back. But we have been personally involved. President Savimbi was here. President Clinton made it quite clear to him the American interest in having such a government of unity come about, and it is very much on our minds, and we will pursue that; I will assure you of that, sir.
    Mr. ROYCE. Thank you, Madam Secretary.
    Mr. Chairman, could I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from New Jersey, who had a question?
    Chairman GILMAN. Yes, providing we limit each person to one question, because we do have a limited time, and I would like to note that Members will have the opportunity to submit their questions for the record.
    Mr. SMITH. I thank my friend for yielding. And, Secretary Albright, I regret not being here at the outset of your testimony. I am vice chair of the Veterans' Affairs Committee, and we heard from the VFW and it ran a little bit over, so I apologize. I would like to associate myself with the remarks of Mr. Bereuter. I, too, sincerely wish you well. I have a deep respect for you, and I wish you well in all that you do on behalf of the U.S. Government.
    In your closing comments in your presentation, you asked for early release of the population control funding. I, too, will push for release of even more funding for population control but with the very modest pro-life conditions that were in effect during the Reagan and Bush years that separated abortion from family planning.
 Page 44       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    I believe the real consensus is with providing family planning funds but not, however unwittingly, empowering the pro-abortion movement overseas to bring down the right-to-life laws as they exist in approximately 100 countries of the world. I was wondering if you could tell us if you are familiar with International Planned Parent Federation's statement called Vision 2000?
    Secretary ALBRIGHT. No.
    Mr. SMITH. Well, let me just say—and I would like to provide this to the Department—this is the manifesto, if you will, the statement that was passed in 1992 by International Planned Parenthood Federation, based in London, and their 140 affiliates that, frankly, is their statement that they are going to promote abortion in every country of the world.
    Now I will just very briefly read a statement from it. In its Vision 2000 strategic plan, IPPF and its 140 affiliates made it perfectly clear—and this is their words—that they would bring pressure on governments and campaign for policy and legislative change to remove restrictions against abortion. Fred Sai, the former IPPF chairman, said—and this is his quote—''Now, for the first time, the IPPF strategic plan, Vision 2000, unanimously adopted at the Members assembly in Delhi''—this is in 1992—''outlines activities at both the Secretariat and at the family planning association level to further IPPF's explicit goal of increasing the right to access to local abortion.'' They have made it their mandate to promote abortion, especially in these developing countries where the law or the Constitution or the administrative policy protects the unborn.
    You, Madam Secretary, have stated before our Subcommittee that this Administration doesn't promote abortion. Phyllis Oakley, as recently as December 4, testified before my Subcommittee that the U.S. Government does not promote abortion and does not support the performance of abortion overseas.
 Page 45       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    Let me make it very clear——
    Chairman GILMAN. The gentleman's time has expired.
    Mr. SMITH. I would ask to finish my statement if I could, Mr. Chairman.
    Chairman GILMAN. In consideration of our Members, please cut your statement.
    Mr. SMITH. Then I will make it very simple. We are talking about empowering the surrogates, the extensions of U.S. foreign policy, in each of these developing countries to do just what the IPPF Vision 2000 says. I take them at their word. This is their walking orders. This is their marching orders. And I would hope that the Administration would say the money is more important, separate abortions from family planning; and I would ask you if the funds are more important. Because my amendment, or bill, cosponsored by Mr. Oberstar and by Mr. Hyde, would release the funds in toto on March 1st, $385 million, no metering, all there in one big pot of gold, but it would go to pure family planning, not to those that are acting as surrogates to bring down right-to-life laws.
    Chairman GILMAN. The gentleman has exceeded his time. Time has expired. Mr. Ackerman.
    Secretary ALBRIGHT. Congressman Smith, let me just say, just to repeat, the United States does not fund the performance nor promotion of abortion anywhere in the world, and what we are concerned about is, the restrictions that are envisioned in your language would preclude USAID from working with organizations that provide effective voluntary family planning and women's health services in countries where abortion is legal.
    I think the issue here, sir, is that we desperately need the money in order to try to get women out of the terrible poverty that exists, the family planning programs, not to fund abortion, and I think that we are cutting off a major source of support to try to get many of these countries away, to emerge from the poverty that then leads to the instant that we are all concerned about. I have said, I will say every time we have the subject come up—and it will—that we do not promote abortion.
 Page 46       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    Chairman GILMAN. Mr. Ackerman.
    Mr. ACKERMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Madam Secretary, long before you had portfolio either in your present position or as Ambassador to the United Nations or anything else official, many of us on this Committee, as we have traveled throughout the world, especially during those critical first days when the Iron Curtain started to melt and the Berlin Wall started to crumble, found you in various places during our travels at those critical times.
    You were there then when many of us did not know who you were and we found you there talking to the new emerging leadership about democracy and pluralism and open markets and the destruction of tyranny and all the things that we hold dear. And we started to discover who you are. Let me congratulate you on becoming Secretary of State and to just tell you that we, all of us, are very, very proud of you.
    I have a whole litany of questions, which I will forego, because the Chairman has admonished us to try to keep this brief. But allow me just to say that I have some concerns about Latin America and the increasing role of militaries there and what we can do to promote democracy and to reduce any kinds of threats that may occur.
    Also, I have just come back from a trip to Taiwan and Hong Kong and especially Beijing, where they look with great anticipation to your projected visit. They are really hyping it.
    There was a tremendous concern with some of the remarks that were made by the chairman of this same committee in the other House about not welcoming people from that part of the world who had a different perspective or who are elected to the transitional legislature in Hong Kong, because he did not share their views, and hopefully you can be a settling influence on some of the anxiety that is going on over there.
    The main question that I would like you to address, however, goes to the category of unfinished business. Press reports have recently indicated that there are over 3,000 members of the Nazi SS Waffen Korps who are collecting pensions from Germany and living in the United States. And we have discovered that none of them were vetted to the extent as to whether or not there are any war criminals, as one might assume, within such a large known group. In addition to that, their identity has not been made known to our government.
 Page 47       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    Many of us here are very concerned about that, and we are working in a nonpartisan fashion, not just myself but Representative King, Representative Menendez, Representative Hastings, and many others will be joining us. We would like to find out in this category of unfinished business about what war criminals may be in that group, and we are trying to get that determination with the cooperation of the Government of Germany, and we would like to know the view of the Administration and how you see this matter and how we might resolve it.
    Secretary ALBRIGHT. Thank you very much, Congressman Ackerman.
    We have no information on this specific issue beyond what was read, but we are looking into it, and we will obviously let you know and will then determine our action according to that.
    If I might just say, first of all, thank you for your kind words. But I think in the way you expressed it, I think that maybe the Chairman and the other Members will understand why I consider it that we have a golden opportunity now to take advantage of the fact that we are living in a new world where there are more democracies than ever before, many countries that lived under totalitarian leadership, that are looking to us not for handouts but for affirmation of the fact that they belong within the international community of civilized nations, that respect human rights and care about democracy and want it to develop.
    That is why I am looking forward so much to working with all of you, because we have a chance in a lifetime to do what people thought they could do at the end of the Second World War, and they were blocked from it by the advance of communism and by the setbacks that that brought.
    So I just see this as an opportunity for all of us to work together and why I am so thrilled beyond belief at the opportunity to be Secretary of State of the United States.
    Chairman GILMAN. Thank you, Mr. Ackerman.
 Page 48       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    Chairman GILMAN. Members of the Committee, I have a further problem. We have some 28 Members who have not inquired yet and the Secretary has agreed to extend her time to 12:15. That leaves 30 minutes. I am going to ask our Members to confine themselves to 1 or 2 minutes a piece and submit any additional questions you may have.
    Mr. King.
    Mr. KING. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Madam Secretary, it is a pleasure to greet you, and I certainly wish you well. Also, since my friend Mr. Ackerman has a tendency to take undeserved credit for himself, I would just like to point out that when you did live in Long Island, you lived in a part of Nassau County, which was in my district and not his. And I just want the record to show that very clearly.
    Madam Secretary, I would like to ask you several questions about the Irish peace process. There were a series of stories this weekend in the London Times and Daily Telegraph in London which said that you had had certain disagreements with the President's policy on Ireland, that as a result of that, Jean Kennedy Smith may be recalled and also that you would be meeting with Sir Patrick Mayhew when you are in Britain next week. I appreciate you——
    Secretary ALBRIGHT. Congressman, I don't know if you have ever had this experience yourself, but sometimes the press is wrong.
    First of all, we have no intention of recalling Ambassador Jean Kennedy Smith. Second, I endorse the policy that the Administration has had and am very interested in spending much more time on the new process.
    Mr. KING. Don't lose your voice now.
    Secretary ALBRIGHT. It will be there. But I really do think that there are many stories that come out of whole cloth and that is definitely one of them.
    Mr. KING. In your statement you are critical of the IRA for breaking the cease-fire. I fully agree with you on that. I would just ask, though, as the United States proceeds as an honest broker, to keep in mind that for 18 months of the cease-fire the British refused to come to the table and that just 2 months ago the British Government rejected a proposal put forth by all the Nationalist parties, north and south, and, as I understand, a policy that was endorsed by this government, to bring about a cease-fire, if they would give a date certain for talks to begin. So I would ask that we keep that in mind.
 Page 49       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    Secretary ALBRIGHT. We will, sir. And the talks have resumed. Senator Michel's role in this is very important. We have complete confidence in the way that he is undertaking that, and I think that you would agree that a peaceful resolution of this issue is the best way to go.
    Mr. KING. Thank you, Madam Secretary. I appreciate the reassurance. Thank you.
    Chairman GILMAN. Thank you, Mr. King. I appreciate your brevity.
    Mr. Menendez.
    Mr. MENENDEZ. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Madam Secretary, let me just also congratulate you. I think that you are the embodiment of the continuing principle that in America everything is possible.
    In that respect, I hope that you will look at the State Department that you have inherited as it relates to Hispanics at all levels of the State Department of the Foreign Service. It has one of the horrendous records. I welcome, as the Ranking Member on the Africa Subcommittee, comments on Africa both in writing and orally and hope you will join us in making sure that the development fund for Africa has the resources that the Administration has asked for. We want to have greater trade with Africa, but I think some of your comments recognize the need in Africa for our continual engagement through the various AID programs and particularly through the development fund.
    You have often made the comment that, in fact, you cannot have diplomacy on the cheek, and I am in full agreement with you. I saw some of the difficulties of our embassies abroad, particularly when I was over in Geneva at the U.N. Commission on Human Rights presenting the resolution on Cuba, and I saw some of the difficulties they labor under the enormous issues they have.
 Page 50       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    But I am concerned about agencies that we contribute to, such as the International Atomic Energy Agency, which you note in your comments, and it has recently been brought to my attention based upon a request that I and other Members made to the GAO to investigate some of the aspects of IAEA that, in fact, the United States, which contributes about 25 percent of their budget, has monies going to the IAEA to countries that are on our list of terrorist countries like Cuba for the Juragua plant that we don't ever want to see built, we don't need another Chernobyl here in the United States; like Iran; like Syria. And my concern is we don't even have access to the reports that we are contributing for to understand whether or not safety and questions of implementation are being met.
    While I support the type of budget that you seek, I think we need to make sure that our interests are being pursued in agencies like IAEA. I wish you would respond to those issues.
    Secretary ALBRIGHT. Congressman, I have the highest respect for the IAEA. I have visited them in their location and they do some very important and difficult work for the international community in terms of assuring us of the continuation of safeguards in the possibility of nuclear proliferation.
    I know it might seem as if the assistance is actually going to the countries in which—you mentioned, Cuba, Syria, et cetera. But the issue, the way I see it, is they are doing our work for us by making sure that those countries are not operating outside the safeguards regime, because that is the one thing that is really holding it all together.
    I do not know the answers to why they don't disclose the reports. I will look into that. But I do think that it is important for us to see the IAEA as our tool to assure ourselves that countries that have the potential for using nuclear power in a way that we consider beyond the safeguards are, in fact, guarded by the IAEA, which is the watchdog agency.
    Chairman GILMAN. Thank you, Mr. Menendez. Mr. Campbell.
 Page 51       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    Mr. CAMPBELL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Madam Secretary, congratulations. All university professors are proud of you.
    A question please about the war powers resolution in Bosnia. As I recall, we have introduced troops in October 1995 with the intent that they be there for a year. We now understand that they will be there until July 1998, 2 1/2 years. The war powers resolution states that after 120 days the President is obliged to put a resolution before the Congress seeking approval where the use of American forces are placed into hostilities or hostilities are imminent.
    At my request, the Chairman of this Committee sent a letter to the President last year and he received a reply from the Acting Assistant Secretary of State for Legislative Affairs saying that the reason why the war powers resolution had not been complied with was because there were no hostilities in Bosnia.
    Now, that is being extremely hypertechnical with a fundamental issue of constitutional obligation. I think that the President who asks for the involvement of the Congress pursuant to the war powers resolution only bolsters support for his policy.
    Can you tell me, please, why the President has not invoked the war powers resolution regarding Bosnia?
    Secretary ALBRIGHT. Congressman, thank you very much for the professor note. And I think it is very important for us to understand that as far as Bosnia is concerned, that we have played and continue to play a very important role in and have consulted with Congress at length about what our forces are doing there and generally the mission. I think that you do know that all administrations have talked about the constitutionality of the War Powers Act and that we behave consistent with it.
    Mr. CAMPBELL. Is it your belief that the War Powers Act is unconstitutional?
 Page 52       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    Secretary ALBRIGHT. I am not a constitutional lawyer but I think that the issue here is one where we want very much to consult with you, to work with you so that there is support for what we are doing in Bosnia and to remind us all that had it not been for the United States, there would continue to be a threatful situation in Bosnia whereas now, I stated in my statement, there are people that are establishing institutions, getting ready for elections, rebuilding their houses and moving toward the possibility of a peaceful resolution in that area.
    And we will continue to consult with you very closely on the disposition of our forces there as part of SFOR.
    Chairman GILMAN. The gentleman's time has expired. Thank you, Mr. Campbell. Mr. Hastings.
    Mr. HASTINGS. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
    Madam Secretary, I add my congratulations of course, and I would be terribly remiss and couldn't go home if I didn't add my mama's congratulations as one who is a very fond admirer of yours. She constantly reminds me to say kind things when the opportunity presents itself.
    Of all the important things said here today, I would think your comment with reference to making foreign policy less foreign or to the American people is particularly poignant. Before I make any remarks and the only question that I would have put would have to do with Cyprus and any new initiatives, and I will ask a staffer to respond with reference to that.
    I would like to associate myself with the remarks of my colleagues about Lee's indication that he is retiring and to have it known that I, too, as well as many of us, consider him our leader and mentor on our Committee and in foreign policy throughout the world and are going to miss him in that regard. But of course we have 2 years to work with him.
    Couple of suggestions, Madam Secretary. I think that the President ought to set foot on the continent of Africa. In addition, I think the President ought to set foot in the country of India, and I believe after you have come from around-the-world trip, you will likely have many of the same views.
 Page 53       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    I think India is being ignored to our peril. As large as it is, it does have 50 years of democracy and that is going to be celebrated in August. I think it would be a tremendous opportunity for the President of the United States to visit during that celebration. I believe we would benefit immensely.
    Concerning our embassies around the world, please do one thing. You will be in Beijing soon and you will be with Ambassador Sasser. Many of us on this Committee and other committees, particularly Congressman Bereuter, Congressman Porter, all of us have been to China recently. It is despicable what our embassy looks like and the conditions those people work under there. It is just horrible. And you know that. Everybody on this Committee does not necessarily know that. Therein lies the problem.
    One additional thing.
    Chairman GILMAN. The gentleman's time is expiring. Be brief.
    Mr. HASTINGS. Go with any one of the kids to where they live in Beijing as I did and I believe you will be able to make more powerful arguments regarding the living conditions of those that served in the foreign services.
    Chairman GILMAN. The gentleman's time has expired. Thank you, Mr. Hastings. Mr. Gallegly.
    Mr. GALLEGLY. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. In the interest of brevity, I would ask unanimous consent that my printed remarks be added to the record instead of me going over them, and for the strict purpose of brevity I would ask unanimous consent that that be done.
    Chairman GILMAN. Without objection. We thank you, Mr. Gallegly.
    Mr. GALLEGLY. First of all, I would like to join so many of my colleagues in praising my good friend, our good friend, Lee Hamilton. Over my lifetime, there have been few people that I have ever met that come close to being on a par with Lee Hamilton, both professionally and personally, and I just look forward to working with you these next 2 years as I have for the last 10, Lee, and we will miss you over that period of time but I have a feeling you will still be around and have an influence on what is happening around the world.
 Page 54       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    Madam Secretary, I want to congratulate the President on what I think is one of the most exciting choices in appointments that I have seen in a long time and we welcome you.
    Madam Chairman, there are going to be many things that I look forward to working with you and your office in the upcoming years as the new Subcommittee Chairman on Western Hemisphere. Certainly we have talked about Colombia and other things relating to drugs already in this hearing, but I would like to associate myself with a problem that we see with our neighbors to the south in Mexico. When we have the Mexican mafia providing 70 percent of the cocaine and 50 percent of the marijuana into the United States and paying out as much as $500 million in protection money to government officials in that country, it concerns me. When we have the Mexican Government, using their words, not mine, that on the issue of illegal immigration, their economy is largely dependent on, their numbers, $4 to $5 billion in money sent back to their country by those that have illegally entered the country, what incentives do the Mexican Government have when their economy is largely dependent on the continued unchecked flow of illegal immigration? I mean, this is a very complex issue——
    Chairman GILMAN. The gentleman's time is expiring.
    Mr. GALLEGLY [continuing]. And obviously we are not going to get a resolution in this hearing. I would just ask if we continue to work with your agency and perhaps you could give me some kind of a written response in a general sense what we are talking about.
    Secretary ALBRIGHT. If I might, Mr. Chairman. I met with Foreign Minister Gurria on Saturday in Houston and we looked at beginning dialog on a whole series of issues, and it is one that you mentioned.

    I do think we have to understand the sensitivity to Mexico on some of the issues that we are dealing with, and deal with these concerns in an appropriate way.
 Page 55       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    The importance of supporting NAFTA, which really showed that the Mexicans would like their economy to function better so people do not leave.
    So we have lots to talk about, and I will be very pleased to work with you in your role on the Subcommittee.
    Chairman GILMAN. Thank you.
    Chairman GILMAN. Mr. Rothman.
    Mr. ROTHMAN. Madam Secretary, it is a great pleasure to have you here before the Committee.
    This is my maiden question-and-answer session as a freshman. I have an hour and a half worth of questions, and I have got a minute and some change left.
    I have got a son—a little boy—a little girl, and as was earlier alluded to, you are an example to them of what hard work, great intelligence, and integrity can accomplish here in the United States of America, and I am just delighted at your confirmation.
    Lots of questions, but I am only going to ask one. I am concerned about Israel's continued denial of membership in the Asian Regional Group in the United Nations, and I am going to be circulating a letter to my colleagues about perhaps getting Israel in another group, Western Europe and others group.
    I am also concerned about the persecution of Christians in Communist and religious dictatorships, such as China, Sudan, Pakistan, Egypt, Cuba, and Saudi Arabia, to name a few. But here is my question.
    Turkey is regarded by many as a strategically important ally of the United States and of the West, and yet there were some threats to secularism there in Turkey; they are blocking Armenia and threatening to go into Caria. How do you see the situation in Turkey with regards to those three issues, secularism in Armenia and with regards to Caria?
    Secretary ALBRIGHT. Congressman Rothman, we can do our maiden times together here, and let me just say on the question of Israel, I worked very hard to try to get Israel into the Western European Group when I was at the United Nations. I think we do need to find a location for Israel and generally do what we can to make the United Nations more Israel-friendly. We were on our way to that, and I think that needs to be pursued.
 Page 56       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    On the question of Turkey, I think we need to understand its importance to us as a strategic ally and where it sits at crossroads of so many civilizations. It is very important to us that Turkey be a secular country, a statement that we have made a number of times, and the issues of Nagorno-Karabakh and Armenia are also examples of the importance of how Turkey deals with its neighbors; issues that we will be looking at very closely.
    If I might take advantage of your being a freshman here, I had thought about saying this in response to a number of questions; one Congressman who had gone to Nicaragua and somebody else to China. I hope very much, Mr. Chairman, that you and your Members will travel. I believe it is very important for Members of Congress to go and see these things for themselves. I know that is the way I learned about major areas of the world. I think if you don't see it, you don't feel it. That is the way not only to see the conditions of our embassies but, more importantly, see the countries for which we are providing a number of programs.
    So I know there has been a lot of criticism of this. I think it is vital that Members of Congress travel and study and go to these countries. That will help us all.
    Chairman GILMAN. And to that, Madam Secretary, we say amen. Too often, the Chinese have said, when you travel horseback, you can't smell the flowers, and one picture is worth 1,000 words. So often the press has been critical of travel, and I want to second and associate myself with your remarks.
    Thank you, Madam Secretary.
    Mr. Smith.
    Mr. SMITH. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
    Madam Secretary, we had our first hearing of the Committee a couple of days ago to hear from Secretary Shattuck, who did a great job of talking about the country, ports, and human rights practices, and from the four human rights organizations, including Amnesty, Freedom House, Human Rights Watch, all of whom were very, very critical of the Administration.
 Page 57       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    You mentioned earlier that rhetoric is not sufficient, that saying something is wrong, there needs to be concrete, tangible action and enforcement to try, as much as wisdom would allow, for us to effect the policies when egregious human rights abuses are taking place.
    Amnesty testified again that, with this Administration, human rights is an island, there is a disconnect between what is said and there is very little in terms of tangible implementation of policy. Mr. Payne pointed out how African human rights abuses very often go unnoticed. And I know you believe very deeply in these issues, and yet we don't see in the highest quarters—other quarters, I should say—human rights being very effectively prosecuted.
    When the President meets with the President of China, there are still a number of very, very notable dissidents being held. Wei Jingsheng comes to mind, and others.
    Will the President make the release of these individuals a precondition to his meeting with the President of China? Because, as we all know, as soon as John Shattuck met with Wei, and I met with him a couple of weeks before that in Beijing, he was picked up, his kangaroo trial was held, and now he's lost somewhere in the Laogai.
    Will the President make it a precondition that some of these people, at least as a sign of good faith on the part of the Chinese, that human rights will be respected there?
    Secretary ALBRIGHT. Congressman Smith, I am very glad actually that we have a chance for another exchange, because I wanted to say this. Even though you and I will disagree on the population issue every time, I hope I have the highest respect for you, and we have spent other times agreeing with each other, so I am glad to have a chance to say that.
    On the human rights issue, I am very proud of the human rights reports as they have been put out by the Department, and I introduced them myself. This time I thanked all the people who worked so hard on them. I think human rights is the signature element of our foreign policy.
 Page 58       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    But at the same time, Congressman, I believe that we have a lot of business to do with countries that are very important to the international system and that it is a mistake to hold our relationship with China hostage to one issue, whatever the issue is.
    That does not mean that when I go to China now I will not discuss this issue, or that the President will make his views clear, but I think that we are limiting our own national interests or limiting our ability to pursue our national interests if we only focus on one subject. I think we need to speak loudly and clearly on it but not forget that engaging China at this time is important for the United States.
    Chairman GILMAN. The gentleman's time has expired. Thank you.
    Mr. Clement.
    Mr. CLEMENT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Madam Secretary, it is a pleasure to have you here. I am in my sixth term, but this is my first time on the International Relations Committee, so I guess we can congratulate each other since you have taken over the helm as Secretary of State.
    I also want you to know I am a former college president, so I have a lot of appreciation for university professors. I can support your budget; I think it is realistic, and I think it is very, very necessary.
    I wanted to ask you about the United Nations. I am very pleased with our new Secretary General, and I do feel very strongly that we need to bring about reform. I remember being in high school and I debated the issue whether the United States should be a member of the United Nations, and I am still very pleased that we are a very active, energetic member of the United Nations.
    But I also want to know about the waste and inefficiency of the United Nations, as well as outright corruption at times. Under the new Secretary General, what reforms are going to take place? because I want us to pay those arrears.
 Page 59       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    Secretary ALBRIGHT. I think we should have a professor caucus.
    Mr. CLEMENT. Believe it or not, I am working on that this week.
    Secretary ALBRIGHT. First of all, let me say I am very glad to hear of your support for the United Nations. We created and have been a major bulwark within it, and I am very saddened when we get criticized for not supporting it as others expect us to and as our obligations require us to.
    On the question of reform, let me say we have worked very hard in the last 4 years, to put reform right up there. As a result of our push, Under Secretary for Administration, an American, Joe Connor, has been able to eliminate 1,000 jobs, and put in a lot of streamline procedures. We managed to get an inspector general, a very American concept, into this organization.
    Kofi Annan, the new Secretary General, has pledged himself to further reforms. He has, however, also explained that not all of it is in his hands. Some of it has to do with the other 185 members of the United Nations.
    So what we need to do here is work with all of you and with them to get a package of reforms that really works to streamline the place further and make sure that the Inspector General has enough. Congressman Rogers has called the Inspector General not a junk-yard dog, and I have said well, it is a junk-yard puppy. So we have to make sure there are more teeth there and work with all of you on the appropriate set of reforms.
    It is hard for a new Secretary General to make something happen overnight. I have some sympathy with Kofi Annan, having started my job just a few weeks later than he started his, and we just need to work with him and press him to finish some of the reform we have in mind.
    Chairman GILMAN. The gentleman's time has expired.
 Page 60       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    Mr. Brady.
    Mr. BRADY. Thank you.
    Since I now have more than 4 weeks of seniority in Congress, my vast knowledge of foreign relations is a bit limited, and I appreciate your comments on the concepts expressed in the Summit of the Americas, and I hope we can together, Congress and the Administration, pick up the pace toward free trade throughout Latin America and this country.
    But to the United Nations for a moment. For many years the United States has been making significant in-kind contributions to the U.N. peacekeeping. Largely they have not been credited to us, and because they don't show up in our functional and 50 tables, they are paid for out of the Pentagon.
    And my question is, isn't it time we got credit for those in-kind considerations, and nations that lecture us on our lack of leadership be made aware, that they are told, that the contributions that we make are not simply limited to our dues?
    So I ask, what were our in-kind contributions last year, the amount, and what approach do you plan to take for getting us credit on these contributions?
    Secretary ALBRIGHT. Congressman, this subject came up last year, and the issue was the following. We do make in-kind contributions. I can't give you the number right now, but we will. But it is a voluntary effort on our own, and a lot of it has to do with supporting our own forces. And the thing that is often missed is that other countries also make in-kind contributions.
    I have had this discussion with our Western allies, and if one were to get full credit for the in-kind contributions, we would be in the position of the United Nations paying out more than it gets in. And because we are not alone in this, it is a very complicated issue. It just in many ways would make you say exactly what you said, but the problem is, as I said, some of them are voluntary, we volunteer to do this and, second, there are other nations that do the same thing.
 Page 61       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    But I think we need to talk more with you and others about this so we can explain the problem.
    Chairman GILMAN. The gentleman's time has expired.
    Secretary Albright has graciously agreed to take one additional question from each of the Members. Please be brief; she has a very tight schedule.
    Mr. Faleomavaega.
    Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Madam Secretary, I too would like to offer my personal congratulations for your nomination by our President, and I believe the President could not have selected a more capable leader to be the chief spokesman for our Nation on foreign policy.
    Madam Secretary, I am pleased in your statement at page 14 about the important principles of democracy and self-determination, and these are not abstract terms, they are real and certainly the cornerstone of our own country as a democracy.
    I do have a very serious problem in Indonesia, Madam Secretary. It is not on East Timor but it is on West Papua, New Guinea. There are 2 million Melanesians who are never given the right of self-determination. Even though the world has got its attention, the fact that two Nobel Laureates have been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, Father Belo and Mr. Horta, on East Timor; but I am very seriously worried about West Papua, New Guinea.
    The military government right now in Indonesia, Madam Secretary, does not exactly relish the idea of democracy and freedom in that area, and the fact that these Melanesians that live in West Papua, New Guinea, have no cultural, no historical, no social, no way relationship to Indonesia, and yet because of convenience, these people were subjected and are still being subjected to the Indonesian military government. And I want to look forward to working with your Administration to see that we look into the human rights violations of these 2 million Melanesians.
 Page 62       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    I also want to commend your favorable consideration of Mr. Stanley Roth to become Assistant Secretary of East Asian affairs, hopefully. Not only has he been an outstanding member of the staff of this Committee and has my highest confidence and esteem as a professional, but hopefully the Administration will see that he be nominated as Assistant Secretary of East Asian Pacific affairs.
    Could you kindly comment on that, if possible.
    Secretary ALBRIGHT. Thank you. Let me just say on the Indonesia issue generally, we obviously work with Indonesia; we have a lot of issues to discuss with them. They have just finished also being on the Security Council. But on my visits to Indonesia and with Indonesians, we have also made clear the importance we attach to minority rights and civil and human rights, so we shall pursue that. Stanley Roth is a good friend of mine. I think he is great. Thank you.
    Chairman GILMAN. The gentleman's time has expired.
    Mr. Chabot.
    Mr. CHABOT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will be brief and talk very fast. I would first like to thank the Ranking Member for his service to our country. My district is right next to Mr. Hamilton's and I just want to thank him very much and wish him the best in the future.
    Madam Secretary, when I was first elected to Congress and sworn in a couple of years ago, we had an opportunity to meet in my office, and I was very impressed with your commitment to reform the United Nations. I think the President has made a wonderful choice in picking you to be Secretary of State and I look forward to working with you in the future.
    My principal concern—I will be brief—as I look at the budget projections for the next few years is that we are looking at an increase in international affairs outlays for fiscal year 1998/1999, followed by a decrease in the discretionary budget in the out years, when of course we are supposed to be closing in on balancing the budget. Maybe I am getting a little cynical but I find it hard to believe the President is going to be coming back to us in 2 years asking for less money in 2000 and 2001 than we proposed in 1997, an appropriation the President said was far too little. Is my skepticism well founded?
 Page 63       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    Secretary ALBRIGHT. Well, I think that it is very clear from the President's own statements that he is very concerned about balancing the budget and that this is one of his highest priorities. He made that clear in the State of the Union, and I think that as he is around today talking with other Members of Congress, he will also make that clear.
    I think we want to make sure that this country is well served and that the portion of the, 150 portion, is not one that is debilitating to achieving a balanced budget.
    As I said, the balancing of the budget, it is hard to do it on the basis of the small amounts of money that are in the 150 account, but I take what you are saying and I know that the President fully understands this, as we have discussed the out years with him.
    Mr. CHABOT. Thank you.
    Chairman GILMAN. The gentleman's time has expired. Thank you.
    Mr. Sherman.
    Mr. SHERMAN. I want to echo the statements about our Ranking Member, and, as a new Member of Congress, it is a unique honor—unfortunately, I guess we are the last class that will have this honor—to have the opportunity to serve with Mr. Hamilton on this Committee.
    Madam Secretary, I want to thank you for your eloquence. I believe we need to spend more on the line 150 item on the budget, and I want to associate myself with Mr. Berman's comments.
    Unfortunately, for many years our foreign policy has been marked by a single plea to the rich nations of the world: Please give us the honor of defending you and your interests and our mutual interests for free, and in return for that honor, we would like to make some major trade concessions.
    I am concerned, Madam Secretary, about your comments about our share of internal expenditures on promoting peace, development, and democracy. Your chart indicates that we spend less of our GDP on that than some other countries, and yet your chart leaves out our entire defense budget, which I believe is very much spent on promoting peace and foreign democracy. I think we should spend more, but we should not ignore the shameful negligence of our richer allies when it comes to shouldering the mutual costs of defense and foreign development and peace expenditures.
 Page 64       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    My one question relates to an oil deal that is in process with Sudan where an American company has been allowed to bid on a deal of almost $1 billion. As you know, Sudan has supported terrorism, suppressed its own minorities, has a terrible human rights record, and is even rumored to be engaged in allowing slavery in some parts of its country.
    Do you think we need to tighten the loopholes that allow American companies to contract in Sudan and whether allowing trade with Sudan by American companies weakens our ability to urge the Europeans to stop their dealings with Iran and Libya?
    Secretary ALBRIGHT. First of all, on the first part of the question you raised, I think the reason that NATO is so important to us and the United Nations is, these are mechanisms for sharing the burden so the United States does not have to do everything alone.
    I think while we are often critical of our allies in some respects, I think we do have to understand that they do carry a large proportion also of defending our common interests, as they did in Bosnia and participated in Desert Storm. So that I do think one has to be careful in acting as if we do everything by ourselves; we do not. We are the superpower, but others do assist.
    And let me also say that one reason I believe that we need money in the foreign affairs budget is that it is still cheaper than using our military, and we have to understand that diplomacy is a very good deal financially. And not only protecting our people, if we have to go ultimately, but it preserves some of the treasure in terms of spending less to achieve the same ends.
    Chairman GILMAN. Thank you. The gentleman's time has expired.
    Mr. Fox.
    Mr. FOX. First of all, my congratulations, Madam Secretary, on your appointment. We are very proud of you, and we know your record will be one of the best of any Secretary of State.
 Page 65       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    At the same time, I would like to congratulate Congressman Hamilton on his outstanding service to our country, and I know we will have a chance to have many important items accomplished during the last 2 years of his tenure.
    The question I would have today is, in January Israel and the Palestinian Authority reached an agreement on deployment of Israeli forces in Hebron. As part of the agreement, the U.S. special coordinator, Ambassador Dennis Ross, prepared a note for the record which specified followup actions be taken by both Israel and the Palestinian authority. Among these provisions is that it stipulates the Palestinian side must complete the process of revisiting the charter to expunge all clauses calling for Israel's destruction.
    What is the Administration doing to ensure that the Palestinians make the necessary changes to the charter?
    Secretary ALBRIGHT. Congressman Fox, it is very important to us that this process go forward, and it is a subject of discussion as we proceed under the commitments made in Hebron.
    Mr. FOX. We will be talking to you further about it.
    Thank you very much.
    Chairman GILMAN. Thank you, Mr. Fox.
    Mr. Payne.
    Mr. PAYNE. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Let me also congratulate you and also my comments about Mr. Hamilton, I have to do it very fast. Let me say it is good to see you. I just have some quick questions.
    I agree with my colleagues that there need to be more Hispanics in our State Department and in our Government in general, but especially foreign affairs. I think it makes us stronger. Also, as you know, I feel there needs to be more diversity, African Americans, and sometimes we tend to pit one group underrepresented against another, and I know that under your leadership we simply need to open up so there can be increases with both groups.
 Page 66       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    Let me just very quickly say that back in 1993 the development fund for Africa had its all-time high of $856 million. It was authorized for $1.2 billion, but we never got the appropriations up to the authorization amount. But it was at $856 million in 1993. It is down to $665 million in 1997, and we are very disturbed at that trend.
    In addition to that, the African Development Bank, the African development fund, the loans have been zeroed out, the IDF loans have been seriously reduced. I would just ask if you would fight for increased attention.
    And let me also comment as my colleague did, Mr. Menendez, the Ranking Member on the Africa Subcommittee, that I do appreciate your statement about Africa, and in your written testimony, this is the first time that I have been on this Committee now for 9 years that a Secretary of State in her initial remarks had ever mentioned Africa, and I would like to say that is a breath of fresh air and we look forward to working closely with you.
    Secretary ALBRIGHT. Thank you, Congressman, and I am concerned about making sure that we give enough assistance to Africa, and we will be spending quite a lot of time on this.
    Let me also say the Vice President will be going to Africa this weekend, so we are very much more attuned, I think, to the issues in Africa and their importance in our foreign policy effort.
    Mr. PAYNE. And also thank you for saying to Members that it is not the worst thing to travel, because my last election, they beat me up on that.
    Secretary ALBRIGHT. This may be another issue where the press doesn't have it quite right.
    Chairman GILMAN. Thank you. The gentleman's time has expired.
    Mr. Wexler.
    Mr. WEXLER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
 Page 67       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    This is my first Committee meeting, and your presence will make it something I will remember forever.
    I would like to reiterate Mr. Rothman's comments, and on the plane this morning I read an article by A. M. Rosenthal which I thought was both enlightening and damning in a certain way; enlightening because it pointed out that many Christians are living with extraordinary religious persecution in China and, in particular, in Saudi Arabia; enlightening because I think most people often don't view Christians as living in the world with persecution; damning because while I think it may have pointed out that this Administration and the Bush Administration may have been very well intentioned with respect to human rights, that effectively it has not resulted in greater freedoms for certain people. And I respectfully ask, are there any specific plans that might be different from what has transpired in the past with respect to highlighting, for instance, the religious persecution or the opportunity for religious freedom in Saudi Arabia?
    Secretary ALBRIGHT. First of all, I found Mr. Rosenthal's column very interesting myself. In fact, he and I had talked about it, and I think there is an advisory committee on persecution of Christians that I am going to be meeting with. And I speak from the heart when I say it doesn't matter what you are, the persecution is the same whatever religion you are, and it is unacceptable, whatever religion you are or ethnic background you are.
    In terms of Saudi Arabia, I think we need to be aware of those people that are there, how their rights should be carried out within the context of Saudi Arabia. I will be looking into this very carefully. I appreciate the question.
    Chairman GILMAN. Thank you, Mr. Wexler.
    Mr. Kucinich.
    Mr. KUCINICH. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and I want to thank the Chair for assisting in extending this time and also Mr. Hamilton for his leadership among our caucus.
 Page 68       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    Madam Secretary, thank you very much for your service and for you being available to all of us today. The State Department, as you know, has criticized human rights policy in Burma. The military regime there has overthrown a democratically elected government, and that regime was down to its last $15 million due to official U.S. action to strip Burma of various trade benefits in the USA.
    Now we see that Unocol, a California-based transnational, has a relationship with the Army there which has generals raising villages for a natural gas pipeline, and the Army has forced villagers to work without wages or food for security for the oil companies under contract with the regime. In exchange, this oil company is pumping about $400 million into the military's coffers annually to purchase the weapons with which to suppress the civilian population, and this undermines U.S. foreign policy.
    So my question is, Madam Secretary, what is the position of the State Department with respect to recommending that corporations which work at cross purposes with U.S. foreign policy stop their business activities in countries or lose their tax breaks or subsidies? And I am speaking specifically about those countries, rather, that the United States has identified as human rights, terrorist, or drug war policy offenders.
    Secretary ALBRIGHT. Burma is a subject of great pain, I think, to all of us. We have visited with Aung San Suu Kyi and had quite a spirited exchange with the SLORC, General Kunya, who kept telling me that his people were smiling and therefore happy, and I told him that my experience with dictatorial countries is that the smile quotient and happiness didn't necessarily go together and that it might be out of fear.
    So we are watching Burma very carefully. We ourselves have imposed some visa restrictions and are cutting off assistance. We are now examining the Cohen-Feinstein amendment to see if it is applicable to what is going on in Burma now, and we believe that it is important for the Government, for the SLORC, to understand where we are coming from in terms of human rights and think that American investment there causes problems.
 Page 69       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    So we are looking at this issue just as you are now discussing it.
    Mr. KUCINICH. Thank you.
    Chairman GILMAN. Thank you.
    Mr. Capps.
    Mr. CAPPS. I think I am the last one on the list here. I want to thank you very much for providing this opportunity.
    Chairman GILMAN. You are, and we thank you for your patience, Mr. Capps.
    Mr. CAPPS. I actually think I am going to be asking one of the more interesting questions of the day, even though it comes at the end of the time. I have been a great admirer of certain writers in the Czech Republic, such as Tomas Masaryk, Jan Patochka, Vaclav Havel, those involved in The Velvet Resolution. And what I admire so much about them, that whole group of people, is they seem to know exactly where they were, and the meaning of the time in which they lived. They had a strong and reliable sense of where the world is in a post-cold war period when the period of conflict between the two superpowers is over, not altogether over, but after it subsided.
    We tend to refer to the present time still as a post period, as in post-cold war. I would hope that we could find better language for it, that we could move into the period we are now in not as post something that once was and is no longer, but have a good sense of where we are now and greet it in positive, constructive terms. I am looking to your leadership to help us make those moves.
    But the question, I guess, is, how do you name and identify the period that we are in now?
    Secretary ALBRIGHT. Well, people have been trying to come up with some catch phrase, and it is hard. It is the kind of thing that comes to you by accident rather than preplanning.
 Page 70       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    I agree with you, I think it is time to stop talking about this period as ''post'' something. I think we should address ourselves a little bit, while we think about what President Clinton has said, and I feel highly honored to. If I behave myself well, I may in fact be the last Secretary of State of the 20th century, and we need to think about the preparation for the 21st century, when there will be greater opportunity for American citizens in a world where we will be able to feel that we can move freely through the world without threat of terrorism or with the dangers that come from rogue States, where we will be much more integrated as an international community, and where we will have the opportunity to have a functioning international system.
    So I think whatever the word or phrase is, it is preparation for the 21st century, and I am honored to be in a position to be able to do something about it.
    Chairman GILMAN. Thank you, Mr. Capps.
    I want to thank Secretary Albright for her patience in extending her time today, and I note that Secretary Albright's staff has asked that one technical correction be made to her prepared testimony. We have been asked to delete the words ''the Senate'' in the second sentence of the first full paragraph on page 9. The purpose of this change is to clarify that the Administration has not withdrawn its August 1, 1996, request for approval of the CFE Flank Agreement by both the House and Senate. Without objection, this correction will be made to the Secretary's prepared testimony.
    I also ask unanimous consent that Members will have 5 days to submit any written questions for Secretary Albright to be answered to be made part of the record. Without objection, so approved.
    Madam Secretary, we wish you a safe trip. Thank you for being with us today.
    Thank you very much. Thank you, Members. The Committee stands adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 12:35 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.]
 Page 71       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC