SPEAKERS CONTENTS INSERTS
Page 1 TOP OF DOC
81–893PDF
2002
AFFIRMING THE IMPORTANCE OF NATO, AND
FOR OTHER PURPOSES; RECOMMENDING THE
INTEGRATION OF LITHUANIA, LATVIA AND
ESTONIA INTO NATO; AND RECOMMENDING
THE INTEGRATION OF THE REPUBLIC OF
SLOVAKIA INTO NATO
MARKUP
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON EUROPE
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON
INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
Page 2 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
ON
H. Res. 468, H. Con. Res. 116 and H. Res. 253
SEPTEMBER 25, 2002
Serial No. 107–113
Printed for the use of the Committee on International Relations
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.house.gov/international—relations
COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
HENRY J. HYDE, Illinois, Chairman
BENJAMIN A. GILMAN, New York
JAMES A. LEACH, Iowa
DOUG BEREUTER, Nebraska
CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey
DAN BURTON, Indiana
ELTON GALLEGLY, California
ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida
CASS BALLENGER, North Carolina
DANA ROHRABACHER, California
EDWARD R. ROYCE, California
Page 3 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
PETER T. KING, New York
STEVE CHABOT, Ohio
AMO HOUGHTON, New York
JOHN M. McHUGH, New York
JOHN COOKSEY, Louisiana
THOMAS G. TANCREDO, Colorado
RON PAUL, Texas
NICK SMITH, Michigan
JOSEPH R. PITTS, Pennsylvania
DARRELL E. ISSA, California
ERIC CANTOR, Virginia
JEFF FLAKE, Arizona
BRIAN D. KERNS, Indiana
JO ANN DAVIS, Virginia
MARK GREEN, Wisconsin
TOM LANTOS, California
HOWARD L. BERMAN, California
GARY L. ACKERMAN, New York
ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA, American Samoa
DONALD M. PAYNE, New Jersey
ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey
SHERROD BROWN, Ohio
CYNTHIA A. McKINNEY, Georgia
EARL F. HILLIARD, Alabama
Page 4 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
BRAD SHERMAN, California
ROBERT WEXLER, Florida
JIM DAVIS, Florida
ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York
WILLIAM D. DELAHUNT, Massachusetts
GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York
BARBARA LEE, California
JOSEPH CROWLEY, New York
JOSEPH M. HOEFFEL, Pennsylvania
EARL BLUMENAUER, Oregon
SHELLEY BERKLEY, Nevada
GRACE NAPOLITANO, California
ADAM B. SCHIFF, California
DIANE E. WATSON, California
THOMAS E. MOONEY, SR., Staff Director/General Counsel
ROBERT R. KING, Democratic Staff Director
Subcommittee on Europe
ELTON GALLEGLY, California, Chairman
DOUG BEREUTER, Nebraska
PETER T. KING, New York
JOHN COOKSEY, Louisiana
NICK SMITH, Michigan
Page 5 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
BENJAMIN A. GILMAN, New York
JAMES A. LEACH, Iowa
DAN BURTON, Indiana
ERIC CANTOR, Virginia
MARK GREEN, Wisconsin
EARL F. HILLIARD, Alabama
BRAD SHERMAN, California
ROBERT WEXLER, Florida
JIM DAVIS, Florida
ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York
WILLIAM D. DELAHUNT, Massachusetts
BARBARA LEE, California
JOSEPH CROWLEY, New York
VINCE MORELLI, Subcommittee Staff Director
VALERIE VAN BUREN, Democratic Professional Staff Member
PATRICK PRISCO, Professional Staff Member
FRAN MARCUCCI, Staff Associate
ANNA KRUSE, Legislative Fellow
C O N T E N T S
MARKUP OF
Page 6 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
H. Res. 468, Affirming the importance of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), supporting continued United States participation in NATO, ensuring that the enlargement of NATO proceeds in a manner consistent with United States interests, and for other purposes
H. Con. Res. 116, Recommending the integration of Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia into the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)
H. Res. 253, Recommending the integration of the Republic of Slovakia into the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)
LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE MARKUP
The Honorable Elton Gallegly, a Representative in Congress from the State of California, and Chairman, Subcommittee on Europe: Prepared statements on H. Con. Res. 116 and H. Res. 253
The Honorable Doug Bereuter, a Representative in Congress from the State of Nebraska: Prepared statement on H. Res. 468
The Honorable John Shimkus, a Representative in Congress from the State of Illinois: Prepared statement on H. Con. Res. 116
The Honorable Bart Stupak, a Representative in Congress from the State of Michigan: Prepared statement on H. Res. 253
Page 7 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
AFFIRMING THE IMPORTANCE OF NATO, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES; RECOMMENDING
THE INTEGRATION OF LITHUANIA, LATVIA AND ESTONIA INTO NATO; AND
RECOMMENDING THE INTEGRATION OF THE REPUBLIC OF SLOVAKIA INTO NATO
WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 25, 2002
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Europe,
Committee on International Relations,
Washington, DC.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10 a.m. in Room 2172, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Elton Gallegly [Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
Mr. GALLEGLY. I call the hearing of the Europe Subcommittee to order. Pursuant to notice. I call up for the purposes of markup H. Res. 468. The clerk will report the bill.
Mr. PRISCO. H. Res. 468.
Mr. GALLEGLY. Without objection, the resolution will be considered as read and open for amendment at any point.
[H. Res. 468 follows:]
Page 8 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
81893b.eps
81893b.AAC
81893b.AAD
81893b.AAE
81893b.AAF
Page 9 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
81893b.AAG
81893b.AAH
81893b.AAI
81893b.AAJ
81893b.AAK
Page 10 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
81893b.AAL
81893b.AAM
81893b.AAN
81893b.AAO
81893b.AAP
Page 11 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
81893b.AAQ
81893b.AAR
81893b.AAS
81893b.AAT
Mr. GALLEGLY. I have an opening statement, and then I will defer to other Members.
On September the 7th, 2001, in the aftermath of the tragedy of September 11th and during the campaign against the al Qaeda and Taliban forces in Afghanistan, the House of Representatives debated and passed by a vote of 372 to 46 H.R. 3167, the Gerald B.H. Solomon Freedom Consolidation Act of 2001. That legislation explicitly endorsed the vision of further enlargement of the NATO Alliance and implicitly reaffirmed the Congress's continued support for NATO.
Page 12 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
This coming November 21 and 22, the heads of state and government of the 19 members of the NATO Alliance will gather in Prague in what will arguably be the most important meeting of the Alliance in a decade. At Prague, the future of the Alliance will be thoroughly debated, including the critical issue of whether the Alliance can agree on what threats the Alliance is likely to face in the future and whether the Alliance members will make a serious and credible commitment to develop the military capabilities necessary to meet those threats.
In addition, the summit will reaffirm the new relationship with Russia and will make history by likely issuing invitations to the largest number of new members to join the Alliance. At the time of the House vote on the Solomon bill, we were entering the beginnings of a debate within the Congress, the Bush Administration, the media, and the expert community and among our own NATO partners over the future of the Alliance and what kind of alliance we would be inviting new members to join. Consequently, I felt the Committee should take some time to address several of the questions being raised regarding the Alliance.
Some of those questions included: Was NATO still relevant to Euro-Atlantic security? Were the Alliance's roles and missions in need of new definition? What was the ability of the Alliance to carry out those missions? What was the rationale for adding new members, and what could those new members provide the Alliance? And finally, what would be the impact of an enlarged NATO on a West-leaning but still somewhat skeptical Russia?
In an attempt to find answers to those questions, I laid out a comprehensive plan to gather the necessary information to make an informed judgment to present to the House.
Page 13 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
The Subcommittee held three comprehensive hearings on the future of NATO and enlargement. We heard from outside experts, the Bush Administration, our SACEUR and the Ambassadors of the 10 candidate countries seeking NATO membership. I met with numerous foreign visitors, both Alliance members and candidates alike. I travelled to three of the candidate states to review the commitment they are making to becoming responsible members of the Alliance.
The Subcommittee staff has attended countless meetings, including several with the Administration's NATO Working Group, attended numerous briefings, twice travelled to NATO headquarters in Brussels, visited several of the candidate states, and have reviewed as much of the literature as there is available. All of this was designed to ensure that the Subcommittee, and subsequently the whole House, would feel comfortable supporting the NATO Alliance and endorsing new countries wishing to join the Alliance.
H. Res. 468 is the work product of the Subcommittee's efforts to address the importance of the events which will take place at Prague. H. Res. 468 reaffirms the need for and our commitment to the NATO Alliance. It addresses the need for upgrading NATO's military capabilities. It addresses the need for a strong NATO-Russia cooperative partnership. And finally, it affirms that the further enlargement of the Alliance is appropriate and welcome.
In a few moments I will offer an amendment which will endorse several of the candidate states which I believe have met the criteria for NATO membership. Given the importance of NATO to the United States and the upcoming Prague Summit, I believe the House of Representatives should play an active role in expressing our views on NATO and providing our input on which countries should be admitted into the Alliance. I believe H. Res. 468 provides the mechanism for such an expression of the will of the House, and I urge its adoption.
Page 14 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
At this time the gentleman from Nebraska will be recognized for the purposes of an opening statement.
Mr. BEREUTER. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I would like to first express my appreciation to you for your efforts as we work together in drafting H. Res. 468, which is an important and historic resolution before the Subcommittee on Europe today. I also want to express my appreciation quite sincerely to our staff for their exceptional work and to our Legislative Fellow, Ms. Anna Kruse, who contributed significantly to this work as well.
If you take a look at the background in your folder today under tab 2, there is as excellent a presentation of the issue and the background and the course ahead of us as I think you will find.
Indeed, as original cosponsor of this resolution, as a strong supporter of NATO and NATO enlargement, and as Chair of the House delegation to the NATO Parliamentary Assembly, I am pleased that H. Res. 468 enjoys bipartisan cosponsorship, including support from the House leadership and from the full International Relations Committee leadership. I hope the resolution will quickly move to the House Floor for its consideration and passage in this Congress.
Mr. Chairman, I want to go to some of the questions that have been asked about NATO enlargement, and I will do that directly, but I would ask unanimous consent that my entire statement be made part of the record.
Page 15 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. GALLEGLY. Without objection.
Mr. BEREUTER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Why the interest in enlarging NATO membership? Why does NATO remain relevant and even crucial? What are the benefits of and concerns about enlargement? Why should Congress, the American people and the NATO member nations support a robust NATO expansion for countries at the Prague Summit? Well, despite the demise of the Soviet Union and positive changes in Russia, a resilient and vital NATO is needed, one, to perform its core function as a mutual defense pact against the possibility of direct aggression against NATO or a member state; two, to provide a forum to facilitate a greater degree of consultation, cohesion and cooperation among NATO members; and three, to serve as a source of integrated military strength to address conventional or unconventional threats or demands for out-of-area peacekeeping activities that are vital to NATO's interest.
Next, NATO is the only multilateral security organization in place potentially to be augmented by non-NATO participants in NATO's Partnership for Peace (PfP), capable of conducting effective military operations and preserving the security and stability of the Euro-Atlantic region.
Furthermore, an expanded NATO provides the stable environment needed by its new member-nations and aspirant countries in Central and Eastern Europe to successfully complete the political and economic transformation for integration into Europe and the community of Western democracy.
Page 16 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Already NATO membership requirements have been absolutely crucial in moving aspirant nations to civilian control of their militaries, transparency in military budgeting, interoperability of their military forces with NATO, resolution of internal ethic conflicts and territorial disputes, greater respect for human rights, reduced governmental and business corruption, judicial reform, market-oriented economies and functioning parliamentary democracies. It is not that these countries didn't want to move in that direction, but I think this provided some encouragement and opportunities for them to take the leadership and to put things in place.
Additionally, NATO military force structure with its enhanced level of interoperability, joint defense planning, command, control and communication intelligence systems, and common force goals and doctrines provide the crucial basis for forming ad hoc coalitions of willing NATO countries to take on combat, peacekeeping or humanitarian relief missions, supplemented by those Partnership for Peace participants as in Bosnia and in Kosovo.
Next, NATO membership motivates member states generally to sustain their commitment to collective defense, and in particular to meet the goals of NATO's defense capabilities initiative, which goes by the initials DCI. Thus our allies improve their military capabilities and are less dependent upon American forces.
Also, NATO has accepted a new role in the war against terrorism and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and their delivery systems among rogue states and nonstate actors. Success will require more than the capability for a rapid and effective military response. It will also require an enhanced level of intelligence-sharing; coordination among NATO members, law enforcement agencies; improved police, judicial and financial agency cooperation and general information exchanges.
Page 17 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Next, Russian civilian leadership has gradually recognized in that NATO is not a threat, but, rather, a forum where Russia can most effectively communicate with their Western neighbors. Additionally, Russia civilian leadership is beginning to understand that an effective relationship in the NATO Russia Council and the confidence-building and cooperative steps that follow from the new Council can lead to the economic prosperity and security of the community of Euro-Atlantic democracies.
At a time when overt threats from Russia to its neighboring states to the west have declined or disappeared, and when intense opposition to NATO expansion by the civilian Russian leadership has noticeably declined, there should be less reticence among NATO members to accept Baltic nation members and to willingly bear the mutual defense costs and concerns related to their prospective NATO membership.
Furthermore, with a careful redirection of some of NATO's focus away from meeting a massive Soviet Russian attack against NATO/Europe and toward a new task of peacekeeping, responding rapidly to out-of-area military or terrorist actions, and fighting the war on terrorism in NATO countries, the aspirant countries with fewer resources and generally smaller populations than most NATO members can bring specialized military capability to the table for use in the new NATO missions.
Finally, we must recognize that NATO is adapting to meet new threats to its member nations and its collective interest. With the implementation of the Combined Joint Task Force (CJTF) concept for assembling effective coalitions of the willing, NATO now has far more flexibility to address a range of new and very different threats. When the U.S. must defend its interest out of area, we are more likely to have some friends from NATO at our side who can effectively operate with us despite a very troubling U.S.-European military capabilities gap.
Page 18 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
In conclusion, bringing new qualified nations to NATO is not on balance a burden. It is not a burden. Aspirant countries' vigorous interest in membership and their commitment to democracy, peace and stability will make NATO a more vital organization in the Eastern European neighborhood. These countries have been striving to meet NATO membership qualifications and to finally join the ranks of the prosperous, peaceful, democratic nations of the Euro-Atlantic region.
My question is to my colleagues: How morally can we deny them this tremendous step toward those worthy goals some 57 years after the end of World War II?
I urge my colleagues to support the resolution as it will be amended by Chairman Gallegly. I thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. GALLEGLY. I thank the gentleman from Nebraska.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Bereuter follows:]
PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE DOUG BEREUTER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEBRASKA
H. RES. 468
Mr. Chairman, I would like to express my appreciation to you for your efforts as we worked together in drafting H.Res. 468, the Transatlantic Security and NATO Enhancement Resolution, which is an important and historic resolution before the Subcommittee on Europe today. I also want to express my appreciation to our Subcommittee staff and Legislative Fellow, Ms. Anna Kruse, for their exceptional background work on this resolution. Indeed, as an original co-sponsor of this resolution and as a strong supporter of NATO and NATO enlargement, I am pleased that H.Res. 468 enjoys bipartisan co-sponsorship, including support from the House Leadership and from the full International Relations Committee. I hope that this resolution will quickly move to the House Floor for its consideration and passage.
Page 19 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
The disintegration of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War, with dramatic changes in Russia, have necessitated the evolution of NATO as an organization—a process of change that is accelerating. Among three of the most notable changes are—Alliance enlargement, a new focus on terrorism and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and the creation of the NATO-Russia Council.
The first post-Cold War legislation endorsing NATO enlargement was the NATO Participation Act of 1994, which the House of Representatives approved on October 7, 1994. The Senate, which has responsibility for ratifying the necessary changes to the NATO Treaty, shortly followed suit. At the NATO Madrid Summit of 1997, the Alliance began the process of expanding its membership from the lineup of eager former Warsaw Pact nations. The Czech Republic, Hungary, and Poland became full members in March of 1999. Overall this expansion has been very positive for NATO and for these three countries.
The Alliance is headed for a second enlargement round, with accession decisions expected at the Prague Summit in November. There are formally ten aspirant countries: all of the remaining Warsaw Pact satellite partners of the Soviet Union, the Baltic States, the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Croatia. (Because it did not begin the formal accession process until May 2002, Croatia will not be eligible to receive an invitation to join NATO this year.) Our European and Canadian allies acknowledge that in the upcoming Summit the U.S. assessments of the readiness of the aspirant countries will be crucial. The consensus emerging in the Alliance is that seven new members will be invited to formally begin the accession process in Prague.
Page 20 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
The House in November 2001 passed the Gerald B.H. Solomon Freedom Consolidation Act, which I introduced and named for our esteemed, departed colleague, a committed and active supporter of NATO. The Act, which had strong bipartisan support from House leadership, expressed congressional support for a robust second expansion round at Prague. It also authorized U.S. foreign military financing for seven aspirant countries: Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia. After an appeal from President Bush, the Senate's limited but influential opposition to a second expansion round relented, and the Senate approved the House bill by a vote of 85–6 on May 17, 2002.
On June 27, 2002, Chairman Gallegly and I introduced H.Res. 468, with the initial original co-sponsorship of Representatives Tom Lantos and Chris Cox. As introduced, the resolution was intentionally silent on which countries the House would recommend for accession invitations at the Prague Summit. Like leaders in our Executive Branch, we want to keep the pressure on the leading aspirant countries to address remaining deficiencies in their individual Membership Action Plans (MAPs) and in meeting the commitments that are important for NATO membership.
Today, with my full support and consultation, the Chairman of this Subcommittee will offer an amendment which will express the sense of the House of Representatives that the seven most qualified countries be offered invitations to join NATO. We anticipate that before the end of this Congress, the House will debate and vote on the measure. The resolution's passage will signal to the world U.S. House support and membership recommendations for the enlargement decisions at the Prague Summit. It also will demonstrate to the American electorate our support for our Senate colleagues as they assume their treaty ratification responsibilities to implement the Prague enlargement decisions during the next Congress.
Page 21 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Why the interest in enlarging NATO membership? Why does NATO remain relevant and even crucial? What are the benefits of and concerns about enlargement? Why should Congress, the American people, and the NATO member nations support a robust NATO expansion round countries at the Prague Summit?
Despite the demise of the Soviet Union and positive changes in Russia, a resilient and vital NATO is needed (1) to perform its core function as a mutual defense pact against the possibility of direct aggression against NATO or a member state, (2) to provide a forum to facilitate a greater degree of consultation, cohesion and cooperation among NATO members, and (3) to serve as a source of integrated military strength to address conventional or unconventional threats or demands for out-of-area peacekeeping activities vital to NATO's interests.
NATO is the only multilateral security organization in place, potentially to be augmented by non-NATO participants in NATO's Partnership for Peace (PfP), which is capable of conducting effective military operations and preserving the security and stability of the Euro-Atlantic region.
An expanded NATO provides the stable environment needed by its new member nations and aspirant countries in Central and Eastern Europe to successfully complete the political and economic transformation for integration into Europe and the community of Western democracies. Already, NATO membership requirements have been absolutely crucial in moving aspirant nations to civilian control of their militaries, transparency in military budgeting, interoperability of their military forces with NATO, resolution of internal ethnic conflicts and territorial disputes, greater respect for human rights, reduced governmental and business corruption, judicial reform, market-oriented economies, and functioning parliamentary democracies.
Page 22 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
NATO's military force structure, with its enhanced levels of interoperability, joint defense planning, command/control/communication/intelligence systems, and common force goals and doctrine, provides the crucial basis for forming ad hoc coalitions of willing NATO countries to take on combat, peacekeeping, or humanitarian relief missions—supplemented by PfP participants, as in Bosnia and in Kosovo.
NATO membership motivates member states generally to sustain their commitment to collective defense and, in particular, to meet the goals of NATO's Defense Capabilities Initiative (DCI). Thus, our allies improve their militarily capabilities and are less dependent on American forces.
NATO has accepted a new role in the war against terrorism and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and their delivery systems among rogue states and non-state actors. Success will require more than the capability for a rapid and effective military response. It also will require: an enhanced level of intelligence-sharing; coordination among NATO members' law enforcement agencies; improved police, judicial and financial agency cooperation; and information exchanges.
Russian civilian leadership is gradually recognizing that NATO is not a threat but rather a forum where Russia can most effectively communicate with her western neighbors. Additionally, Russian civilian leadership is beginning to understand that an effective relationship in the NATO-Russia Council and the confidence-building and cooperative steps that follow from the new council can lead to the economic prosperity and security of the community of Euro-Atlantic democracies.
Page 23 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
At a time when overt threats from Russia to its neighbors immediately to the west have declined or disappeared, and when intense opposition to NATO expansion by the civilian Russian leadership has noticeably declined, there should be less reticence among NATO members to accept Baltic nation members and to willingly bear the mutual defense costs and concerns related to these prospective NATO members.
With the careful redirection of some of NATO's focus away from meeting a massive Soviet/ Russia strike against NATO Europe, and toward new tasks of peacekeeping, responding rapidly to out-of-area military or terrorist actions, and fighting the war on terrorism in NATO countries, the aspirant countries, with fewer resources and, generally, smaller populations than most NATO members, can bring specialized military capabilities to the table for use in these new NATO missions.
We must recognize that NATO is adapting to meet new threats to its member nations and to its collective interest. With the implementation of the Combined Joint Task Force (CJTF) concept for the assemblage of effective coalitions of the willing, NATO now has far more flexibility to address a range of new and very different threats. When the United States must defend its interests out of area, we are more likely to have some friends from NATO at our side who can effectively operate with us, despite a very troubling U.S.-Europe military capabilities gap.
Finally, and in conclusion, bringing in new qualified nations to NATO is not, on balance, a burden. Aspirant countries' vigorous interest in membership and their commitments to democracy, peace and stability will make NATO a more vital organization in an eastern European neighborhood. These countries have been striving to meet NATO membership qualifications and to finally join the ranks of the prosperous, peaceful, democratic nations of the Euro-Atlantic region. How, morally, can we deny them this tremendous step toward these worthy goals—some 57 years after the end of World War II? I urge my colleagues to support the resolution as amended by Chairman Gallegly.
Page 24 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. GALLEGLY. Mr. Green, do you have an opening statement?
Mr. Smith from Michigan, do you have an opening statement?
Mr. SMITH. Mr. Chairman, just very briefly. NATO is extremely important to the United States. The United States participation is important. My interest is making sure that the United States does not carry an undue burden of the responsibilities, financially or militarily, as we work together to accomplish mutual ends in NATO. Likewise, as we consider additional countries becoming part of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, those countries should carry their fair share in terms of contribution and military support. And I yield back.
Mr. GALLEGLY. I thank the gentleman from Michigan.
The gentleman from New York, Mr. Gilman, do you have a statement?
Mr. GILMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank you and Congressman Bereuter for bringing the importance of NATO to our attention. I know that Congressman Bereuter for many years has worked diligently as Chairman of our NATO delegation, and I would like to voice my support as a cosponsor of this resolution.
It is my firm belief that NATO enlargement will not only further contribute to the stability and security of Europe, but preserve and enhance its ability to effectively combat the scourge of terrorism.
Page 25 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Today the case for NATO enlargement is stronger than ever before. The September 11th attacks have reminded us of the common interest we all share with our European allies. Thus not only will NATO enlargement contribute to the process of integration that so stabilized Europe over the past 50 years, it will also help promote the development of strong new allies in our war on terrorism. Far from backing away from NATO enlargement, we should welcome all these European democracies whose political stability, military contributions and commitment to NATO's solidarity will be an asset to the Alliance.
Each of the candidate countries have made remarkable progress in transitioning to Western-style democracies and free-market economies. While each Nation's challenge is different, they share a common thread, the desire to adopt a pluralistic form of democracy that respects human and civil rights, practices tolerance for ethnic and religious diversity, and demonstrates the health and respect for the rule of law. They should be commended for both their accomplishments in their continued pursuit of these goals.
Accordingly, I am pleased to support the integration of the Republic of Slovakia into NATO and recommending the integration of the Baltic nations of Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia into NATO. It is my firm belief that the integration of those nations into NATO is in our own Nation's best interest.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. GALLEGLY. I thank the gentleman from New York.
Page 26 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
The gentlelady from California, Ms. Lee, do you have an opening statement?
The gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Cantor, do you have an opening statement?
Mr. CANTOR. No, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. GALLEGLY. Okay. With that, the Chair offers an amendment. Will the clerk please read.
Mr. PRISCO. Amendment to H. Res. 468 offered by Mr. Gallegly. Page 18 beginning on line 11, strike ''the most qualified candidate countries'' and all that follows through ''House of Representatives, should'' on line 14 and insert the following:
''the candidate countries of Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia have met in a satisfactory manner the criteria established by NATO through the Membership Action Plan process, would likely make a positive contribution to NATO, and should.''
Mr. GALLEGLY. I yield myself 5 minutes for the purpose of explaining the amendment. This amendment is pretty self-explanatory. It endorses seven of the candidates for NATO membership. Yesterday each Member of the Subcommittee received a report prepared by the Subcommittee staff detailing the candidacies of each of the Vilnius 10 countries.
This report was compiled after reviewing the extensive information available to the staff from numerous sources, including the Administration and NATO itself. The report is modelled after the issues addressed by NATO through the Membership Action Plan, or MAP, and focuses on the political, economic and social development of each democracy, its ability to develop a military structure capable of providing for the overall security of the Alliance, and a commitment to provide the resources necessary to ensure the military capability.
Page 27 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
This analysis by no means is exhaustive, but it is intended to provide the Members with an overview of what issues are important to NATO and what issues were important to the staff in order to make an informed assessment of each candidate.
Overall, the 10 candidates should be congratulated on the efforts they have made thus far to meet the criteria for becoming a member of NATO. Progress in every aspect, from political and military reform to resources commitment, to ensuring the support of the population, has been impressive. Each have displayed a level of enthusiasm and commitment to the Alliance, as we saw demonstrated when the Ambassadors of the 10 testified before this Subcommittee. Each has already displayed its willingness to be a fully participating member of the Alliance through its action in the Balkans and with respect to the campaign against terrorism.
These attributes make them all desirable members, either now or in the future. Each candidate brings with it its own individual strengths. Each is a vital democracy which shares a pro-Euro-Atlantic view. Each is committed to market economies. All have embraced military reform. Each provides a unique geopolitical perspective or geostrategic location.
On the other hand, each candidate has its weaknesses. Not all have truly stable political systems or strong institutions. Some have weak economies and structural deficiencies needing attention. Not all have sufficiently addressed corruption. Some possess military structures in need of further reform. Some need more modern equipment. All need to spend more money.
Nevertheless, it is our judgment that each of the seven countries listed in the amendment have thus far met the MAP criteria in a most satisfactory way, and each have been judged to be a potential net contributor to Alliance security. Does this mean they have nothing left to do? Far from it. Each has plenty more work to be done, and that work must continue up until Prague and beyond Prague, whether they receive an invitation to join or not.
Page 28 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
To conclude, I want to say a word about the three we did not recommend. Croatia has been working very hard for the past 2 years on MAP criteria, even though they have only just become a formal MAP participant. In terms of the process, Croatia is basically in the first phase of the MAP, where all the others are entering the fourth phase. Croatia, I believe, understands that they are too far behind to be offered an invitation at this time.
Macedonia has worked hard on all the aspects of MAP, but the recent conflict in that country has set their candidacy back. The fact that NATO forces are present in that country, in effect as a peace guarantor, indicates that politically, economically and militarily they just have too much work yet to do.
Similarly, Albania has made impressive progress given where they were just a few years ago. However, political uncertainty of the kind we witnessed in 1997 and again earlier this year still plagues their candidacy. Their economy remains weak, and scarce resources may require more attention to domestic needs. Finally, their military, while strongly committed to reform, does not seem far enough along to contribute to the Alliance.
All three countries should be commended for their commitment and efforts thus far and should be encouraged to continue to work on their criteria in order to be prepared for the next round of enlargement, which I am sure NATO is already contemplating.
I urge the adoption of the amendment.
The gentleman from Nebraska.
Page 29 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, I understand the need to be brief here, but I did want to say that I agree totally with your assessment and your sentiments about future members. I would say also that the NATO Parliamentary Assembly endorsed these same seven states at its Sofia meeting over the Memorial Day recess. The U.S. and several delegations abstained, but we abstained only because we wanted to keep, frankly, the seven moving along and progress continuing and encouragement given to them. But without exception, the House delegation to the NATO Parliamentary Assembly, which has some ideological breadth and is bipartisan, is supportive of these seven. I would call our colleagues' attention and the public's attention to the last paragraph of the basic resolution which says that the process of NATO enlargement should continue beyond the Prague Summit. And so those three countries and others we certainly will encourage for future membership. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. GALLEGLY. I thank the gentleman.
Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Chairman, move the resolution.
Mr. GALLEGLY. First of all, are there any other amendments?
Hearing no further requests, then the question occurs on the amendment. All in favor, say aye.
All opposed, nay.
The ayes have it, and the amendment is adopted.
Page 30 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
The Chair will now entertain a motion that the bill be reported favorably to the Full Committee.
Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, I move we report the resolution favorably as amended.
Mr. GALLEGLY. The question occurs on the motion to report the resolution, H. Res. 468, favorably as amended. All in favor, say aye.
All opposed, no.
The motion is approved, and the bill will be reported favorably to the House.
The staff is directed to make any technical and conforming amendments.
Mr. GALLEGLY. We have two additional measures on the schedule, H. Con. Res. 116, introduced by Mr. Shimkus, which endorses the integration of the Baltic states into NATO, and H. Res. 253, introduced by Representative Stupak, which endorses the integration of Slovakia into NATO. Without objection, I ask that both of these be adopted and favorably reported to the Full Committee.
[H. Con. Res. 116 and H. Res. 253 follow:]
Page 31 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
81893a.AAB
81893a.AAC
81893a.AAD
81893c.AAB
81893c.AAC
Page 32 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
81893c.AAD
Mr. GALLEGLY. In addition, I ask that my statements and those of Mr. Shimkus and Mr. Stupak be made a part of the record of the hearing. Is there any objection?
[The prepared statements of Mr. Gallegly follow:]
PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE ELTON GALLEGLY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND CHAIRMAN, SUBCOMMITTEE ON EUROPE
H. CON. RES. 116
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.Con.Res. 116 which was introduced by our Colleague from Illinois, John Shimkus.
In light of the action taken by the Europe Subcommittee and just now by the House which endorsed the Baltic state for membership in NATO, I believe this Resolution is complimentary to H.Res 468 and should be adopted
This Resolution endorses the candidacies of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania for NATO membership and discusses in detail why the three Baltic nations deserve to be invited into the Alliance.
Page 33 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Last year the Baltic nations celebrated the tenth anniversary of the resumption of their independence after a long period of Soviet dominance. The changes which have taken place in those countries has been amazing in every aspect.
In fact, during the August recess, I traveled to all three of the Baltic states to see first hand what they had accomplished and how they were preparing for NATO membership.
The total political, economic, and social transformation they have gone through in preparation for NATO and EU membership have been impressive and they deserve to be recognized for their accomplishments by being invited to join the Alliance.
The author of this legislation, John Shimkus, has long been a supporter and spokesman for the Baltics, serving as Chairman of the Baltic Caucus in the House. He has given tireless devotion to promoting these countries and their accomplishments. Passage of this Resolution is as much about his dedication as it is about theirs.
Mr. Speaker, I do not believe there could be any better additions to the NATO Alliance than these three nations.
I urge the adoption of the Resolution.
Page 34 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
H. RES. 253
H.Res. 253 was introduced by our Colleague from Michigan, Bart Stupak and endorses the candidacy of Slovakia for NATO membership.
In light of the action just taken by the House, I believe this Resolution is complimentary to H.Res 468 and elaborates on the reasons why Slovakia should be included in NATO.
Five years ago, Slovakia was seriously under consideration for NATO membership but was denied due to the government in power at that time. That government was subsequently replaced but it threatened a return to power this year again calling into question Slovakia's candidacy.
However, Slovakia just recently held very important national elections and the current government has been returned to office. The outcome of the elections were one of the keys to the status of Slovakia's application for NATO.
The election results did come out to everyone's satisfaction and this has lessened the apprehensions about Slovakia's commitment to NATO.
I want to congratulate the people of Slovakia for their strong showing in the elections—I am told 70 percent of the voting population actually voted.
I also want to commend the work of our Ambassador Ron Weiser and his entire embassy team for efforts to encourage strong voter turnout.
Page 35 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
I urge the adoption of the Resolution.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Shimkus follows:]
PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE JOHN SHIMKUS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ILLINOIS
H. CON. RES. 116
Chairman Gallegly, Ranking Member Hilliard, and honorable members of the Subcommittee on Europe, I am sorry I cannot join you this morning for the consideration of H.Con.Res. 116, a sense of Congress that the Baltic countries should be invited to join NATO. I commend this committee for its ongoing leadership and hard work on the issue of NATO expansion and I am pleased that you will be recognizing the Baltics this morning in their journey to become new members of the alliance.
As a member of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly and Chairman of the House Baltic Caucus, I have had many opportunities to interact with representatives from Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia, and have never failed to be impressed. In the short time after reasserting their independence, these countries have developed constitutional democracies, the rule of law, and a respect for human rights. Immediately upon the breakout of hostilities in Bosnia and Herzogovina and Kosovo, Lithuania deployed troops in support of both NATO missions. Not constrained by the old Soviet force structure, the Baltics are moving to light infantry for deployability and forest defense. The countries' rapid ascent to functioning democracies, tolerance for their Russian minority, and a willingness to put a painful 20th Century history behind them, make them deserving candidates for alliance membership.
Page 36 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
A poignant memory from my Spring 2002 NATO Parliamentary Assembly trip I took to Vilnius was the jeweler from the open air historical museum of Rumsiskes. Above the door of his shop were these words in English, ''I want to be in NATO, because my family died in Siberia.'' Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia have been run over numerous times and have suffered great destruction but have never given up. Most recently, at the hands of Germany and the Soviet Union in World War II. No Baltic citizen was untouched by those events. Yet the current governments have energetically sought good relations with all of their neighbors, including Russia.
Why should the Baltics be allowed to join NATO?
For many years the Statue of Liberty has been a symbol of freedom, security, and economic opportunity for many immigrant families. The Statue faces east, welcoming immigrants to our shores. Now I think as she faces east, she also looks east toward Europe at these former captive nations who struggle as newly emerged democracies. Many of us multi-generational immigrants, after years of security and freedom, take our liberties for granted. Many of us are too young to have experienced the fresh air of newly found freedom. My trip to Vilnius revived my senses. Not only could I smell the sweet air of freedom; I could see it, touch it, and taste it. I am a better father, citizen, and representative for it.
This will be true for NATO. For NATO to be relevant, it must expand its current protective umbrella over these new emerging democracies. By expanding, NATO will experience heightened senses—seeing, feeling, touching, and tasting freedom. This will be essential as NATO counteracts the evil of global terrorism.
Page 37 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
As President Clinton said, the goal of NATO is to ''expand the frontier of freedom.'' I hope this subcommittee will follow the vision of President Bush when he said: ''from the Baltic Sea to the Black Sea, a Europe whole, free, and secure.''
I urge you to pass H.Con.Res. 116 and affirm the House of Representatives' support for the Baltics' efforts to join NATO.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Stupak follows:]
PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE BART STUPAK, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MICHIGAN
H. RES. 253
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding today's sub-committee mark-up in support of the expansion of the North American Treaty Organization (NATO).
I appreciate this opportunity to ask for the Sub-Committee's support for my resolution, H. Res. 253, which expresses the sense of the House that the Slovak Republic should be commended for its progress toward political and economic liberty and for its efforts to meet the guidelines for prospective NATO members.
Slovakia, a once authoritarian regime, embraced a pro-Western government in 1998 and freed its citizens from international isolation. Last Saturday, September 21, 2002, the Slovak government successfully held the third free and fair elections since independence. Over 70 percent of eligible voters turned out to express their newfound democratic right.
Page 38 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
The Slovak Republic now stands ready to play an integral part in defense of the free world. As a member of NATO, Slovakia would contribute to the protection of member states and significantly benefit the security and peace of Europe and the region as a whole. Slovakia's leaders value the prospect of serving in our military alliance, while its citizens align themselves with NATO's common values and democratic mission.
The NATO Summit to discuss enlargement is scheduled for November 23, 2002, in Prague. Among the other European countries vying for membership, Slovakia boasts the highest Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and a key geographical advantage, surrounded by other NATO member states. Let's send them a clear message that Slovakia would make an excellent partner and deserves to be counted among the newest members of NATO.
Please support H.Res. 253 and urge our international community to give Slovakia's bid for NATO membership due consideration.
Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, would you have my statement to be part of the record as well?
Mr. GALLEGLY. Without objection, the statement from the gentleman from Nebraska will be made a part of the record of the hearing. And hearing no objection, that will be the order.
The Subcommittee stands adjourned.
Page 39 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
[Whereupon, at 10:26 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]