Tom Lantos

Mr. LANTOS

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I would like to invite my colleagues to join me in commending the Croatian Government's vigorous prosecution of Dinko Sakic, the commander of the notorious Jasenovac concentration camp during World War II and one of the worst war criminals alive today. On October 4, Sakic was found guilty in a Zagreb court of crimes against humanity and sentenced to twenty years in prison--the maximum allowable penalty under Croatian law. I welcome and applaud this verdict. Tens of thousands of Jews, Gypsies, Serbs, and anti-fascist Croats were murdered at Jasenovac, called the ``Auschwitz of the Balkans.'' Mass executions, random killings, torture, and starvation took place there and at other concentration camps run by the pro-Nazi Ustashe regime during World War II. According to evidence presented during his trial, Sakic not only supervised these atrocities, but also took part in many of them himself. At the end of World War II Sakic fled to Argentina, where he lived for over half a century under his real name. When he was finally deported to stand trial in Croatia last year, Sakic responded to his critics by defending the genocidal policies of the Ustashe dictatorship. ``I am proud of all I did,'' he said. ``I regret that we hadn't done all that is imputed to us, for had we done that then, today Croatia wouldn't have had problems, there wouldn't have been people to write lies!'' In addressing his personal responsibility for the atrocities that occurred under his watch at Jasenovac, Sakic asserted the defense made famous by Goering, von Ribbentrop, and other Nazi leaders at Nuremberg: He was simply following orders. ``I wasn't making decisions,'' Sakic declared, despite overwhelming information to the contrary, ``but I obeyed the orders consciously because they were in accordance with my convictions of national interests and the efforts to preserve the biological survival of the Croatian people.'' During the trial, Sakic laughed at camp survivors who testified against him and claimed that he has ``no guilty conscience whatsoever.'' Based on the appalling account of his unspeakable crimes, he certainly should have a guilty conscience. Mr. Speaker, the Croatian Government's timely and public efforts to hold Dinko Sakic accountable for his crimes merit the appreciation of all who care about international justice and human rights. It is imperative that Croatia's leaders continue to confront the country's World War II past as they have done so effectively with the prosecution of Dinko Sakic and that the Croatian government aggressively oppose World War II and Holocaust revisionism. It is my hope that other newly democratic nations in Central and Eastern Europe will follow the example of the Sakic trial, and that they will work to honor the memory of the millions who lost their lives during the Holocaust.

Mr. LANTOS

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I would like to make a comment concerning my good friend's observations concerning NATO's participation in the recent hostilities in the former Yugoslavia. Mr. Speaker, probably at no time in military history has there been such a deliberate attempt to minimize civilian casualties as was the case on the part of NATO. As a matter of fact, the NATO command went out of its way, even jeopardizing its own pilots, to minimize to the maximum possible extent civilian casualties. But I think it is self- evident that in a society where civilian and military facilities and infrastructure are intertwined and adjacent and contiguous the notion that warfare can be conducted without any civilian casualties is simply not realistic. The Geneva Convention makes a very clear distinction between tragic civilian casualties, unintended, inadvertent, and the deliberate punishment, maiming, killing of civilians. Let the record show that at no time did NATO do anything to deliberately injure civilians. Now I think a special comment needs to be made with respect to Milosevic's television facilities. As any dictator, Milosevic has used the propaganda apparatus of the Serbian television network to spread falsehood, rumors, disinformation, thereby prolonging this tragic war. It would have been unthinkable for NATO not to take out Serbian television, and the post mortems following the conclusion of military activities has concluded as one of the main criticisms of NATO's action that the television facilities were not taken out earlier. I think we need to draw a very sharp line of demarcation between the deliberate injuring of civilians and the inevitable civilian losses which are entailed in military activities. NATO must indeed be proud of its extraordinary efforts to protect all civilians and all civilian facilities. Railroad stations, bridges, radio stations, television stations are part and parcel of today's war, and to attempt to conduct a war where military and civilian facilities are so inextricably intertwined, as they are in all modern industrialized societies, is simply absurd. I think it is incumbent upon all of us not to misread or misinterpret the Geneva Conventions. The Geneva Conventions deal with deliberate injury, maiming and killing of civilians. The Geneva Conventions realistically understand that in the tragic event of war there will be civilian casualties, and that is what happened in the case of the Kosovo encounter.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 5 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich).

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Evans).

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Let me first pay public tribute to my good friend and distinguished colleague the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sam Johnson) for bringing this matter to the body and for his heroic service to our Nation. We are deeply in his debt. I also want to commend the distinguished gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman), the chairman of the Committee on International Relations, for sponsoring this legislation. I am, of course, delighted to ask all of my colleagues to support H. Con. Res. 102. The Geneva Conventions, Mr. Speaker, were concluded in 1949, 50 years ago, to address the terrible practices that occurred during the Second World War. They established a comprehensive framework for dealing with treatment of combatants and civilians alike. The conventions include a wide range of protections. Persons who are not or are no longer taking part in hostilities according to the conventions need to be respected, protected and treated humanely. They must be given appropriate care, without discrimination of any kind. Captured combatants and other persons whose freedom has been restricted must be treated humanely. They need to be protected against all acts of violence, particularly against torture. If they are put on trial, they must enjoy the fundamental guarantees of proper judicial procedures. The right of parties to an armed conflict to choose methods of warfare are not unlimited. There must be no unnecessary or superfluous injury or suffering inflicted. In order to spare the civilian population, armed forces at all times must distinguish between civilian populations and civilian objectives on the one hand and military objectives on the other hand. I think it is extremely important for us to state with pride that the American armed forces have gone out of their way to minimize or to eliminate what is typically called collateral damage, damage to civilian populations. Since 1949, these and other protections have been critical in stopping at least some of the violence and abuse of both combatants and civilians. Through the good offices of the International Committee of the Red Cross, large numbers of American soldiers and citizens have been assisted in the invocation of these conventions. In this connection, I want to pay tribute to Elizabeth Dole, who led the American Red Cross with such distinction over a long period of time. I urge all of my colleagues to vote for this 50th commemorative celebration of the Geneva Conventions. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague and friend for his comments, and let me just conclude by saying that the Chairman of our Joint Chiefs, General Shelton, General Wesley Clark, the head of NATO, are no less committed to fully observing the Geneva Conventions than are all the Members of this body, and with that, Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to support this resolution.

Mr. LANTOS. I yield to my good friend from Ohio.

Mr. LANTOS

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, it rarely happens that a freshman Member of this body makes as powerful an impact on our work as my good friend, the gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky). I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky).

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney), who has brought to this body potent powers of persuasion and the commitment to decency and human rights across the globe.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, before yielding to my good friend from New Jersey (Mr. Payne), I would like to pay tribute to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Bilirakis), the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney), and my good friend, the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Burton), for their leadership on this issue. Mr. Speaker, it gives me a great deal of pleasure to yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Payne), one of the most distinguished Members of this body and a strong leader on the Committee on International Relations. (Mr. PAYNE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise to urge all of my colleagues to give their strong support H. Con. Res. 188. It rarely happens in the course of human events that two historic enemies, through misfortune and tragedy such as an earthquake, suddenly find themselves looking at each other with a different set of eyes. This is what is happening with respect to Greece and Turkey. We have grown accustomed over decades and generations to view Greece and Turkey as irreconcilable opponents and even enemies, this despite the fact that they both are members of NATO; this despite the fact that both have excellent relations with the United States. The tragic earthquake has brought together these two historic opponents. I want to pay strong tribute to the leadership in both countries and express the hope on behalf of all of my colleagues that the beginnings of a more benign dialogue between Greece and Turkey might just be a harbinger of a new era to come. This will require a great deal of understanding, a great deal of acceptance on both sides; but for the first time in modern history, we see responsible Greek officials like the foreign minister making kind statements about Turkey and vice- versa. Such a development, Mr. Speaker, would not only be in the interests of these two countries and the stability of Europe and the cohesion of NATO, but it would be of tremendous value to United States national interests. It is our earnest hope that this tragic set of events, acts of nature, might have brought together these two formerly opposed countries, and I strongly urge my colleagues to support the resolution. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LANTOS

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New Jersey for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, I will just take a minute of the body's time to express my strong support for the resolution as the Democratic cochair of the Congressional Human Rights Caucus. I want to associate myself with the remarks of the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Payne) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Campbell). I also want to take this occasion to pay tribute to both of these gentlemen for having devoted such an extraordinary portion of their personal and congressional time and energy to improving conditions in Africa. Both of them have been leaders in this field, and they deserve our highest commendation. I know that the gentleman from California (Mr. Campbell) and his wife have devoted untold numbers of days to dealing with problems of Africa, and they fully deserve our thanks and our commendation, as does the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Payne).

Mr. LANTOS

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, as my very good friend and colleague has pointed out, we approved this resolution in a slightly different form sometime back and we are now adopting it again because the Senate made some very useful, minor modifications. My good friend, the gentleman from California (Mr. Campbell), outlined the issue. I can only add one footnote. At a time when the peace process is moving in the area, it is incumbent upon Yassir Arafat and the Syrian leadership and all those who have any influence over the government that holds these unfortunate prisoners of war for the last 17 years to exert every effort to have them finally released. This action is long overdue. I urge all of my colleagues to join me in supporting this resolution.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. LANTOS

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to the extraordinary contributions of my dear friend, Walter L. Johnson, the Secretary-Treasurer of the San Francisco Labor Council (AFL-CIO) and one of our nation's most devoted advocates for worker rights and progressive causes. A patriot, a crusader, and a man of genuine compassion and decency, Walter deserves the gratitude and appreciation of all of us who care about economic justice, civil rights, worker safety, and affordable health care. Walter Johnson's life of community service began seventy-five years ago in the small town of Amenia, North Dakota. While still a teenager, he joined the United States Army and fought in World War II. At the conclusion of his military service, Walter moved to the Bay Area, where he met and married his wonderful wife Jane. They are the parents of three wonderful children. He also contributed his significant energies to his union--Local 1100 of the United Food & Commercial Workers Union (UFCW). Walter's talents as an organizer quickly became apparent to his colleagues in the UFCW, who selected him for a series of important positions in Local 1100--Business Agent in 1957, President in 1958 and Executive Officer in 1965. Walter later was chosen to lead the San Mateo County Labor Council. It was while he served in this position that I first worked closely with him on issues of concern to working men and women in our area. Throughout these years and the decades that have followed, he developed a reputation as a fighter for the rights of working people and an articulate spokesman on critical issues affecting the Bay Area. On the basis of his outstanding record, Walter Johnson was elected Secretary- Treasurer of the San Francisco Labor Council on May 13, 1985, a position he still holds. There he has continued to fight for the causes to which he has devoted his life. Mr. Speaker, whenever an injustice has been committed against any one of the Labor Council's 75,000 members, Walter Johnson can be found leading the crusade to right this wrong. When irresponsible corporations breach contracts or hire strikebreakers or operate sweatshops or discriminate against minorities or ignore worker safety laws, it is Walter who rallies San Francisco's working men and women to stand up against these injustices. It makes no difference whether the violated include truck drivers, bike messengers, hotel employees, teachers, or workers in any other profession--Walter is there, leading a picket line or rallying public opinion behind a just cause. Walter Johnson's commitment to our nation's fundamental values extend well beyond defending the interests of the membership of the San Francisco Labor Council. He has worked, along with other leaders of the California Labor Federation (AFL-CIO), to educate citizens about matters that affect our diverse society in so many different areas: child labor, health care for young people and the underprivileged, quality child care, human rights and the proliferation of sweatshops abroad, and the civil rights of women, minorities, and immigrants. Walter's principled activism has touched many lives, and I am grateful for it. Walter's dedication to community service has benefitted the people of San Francisco in just every way imaginable. He has served on the Board of Directors of the United Way of the Bay Area, the Bay Area Economic Forum, the Nature Conservancy, the San Francisco Bay Area Girl Scouts Council, the Council for Civic Unity, the Shelter Network (which provides housing and assistance for the homeless), and a wealth of other civic, cultural, charitable, and educational institutions. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in paying well-deserved tribute to Walter Johnson and in recognizing the exceptional contributions of this outstanding man, who has devoted his life to fighting for the interests and values of San Francisco's working men and women.

Mr. LANTOS

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 1887--legislation that will put a stop to the outrageous production and sale of so-called ``crush videos.'' These disturbing videos show women crushing small animals to death with their feet. Kittens, hamsters, guinea pigs, birds, small dogs and other animals are taped to the floor while a woman, sometimes barefooted and sometimes in spiked heels, step on the animal until it dies. These vicious videos sell for as much as $100 and, as incredible as it seems, there are over three thousand titles now for sale. Mr. Speaker, numerous studies have demonstrated that the individuals who commit violent acts against animals are also the same individuals who commit violent acts against humans. In the last Congress I introduced legislation which dealt with that problem. The Congressional Friends of Animals, of which I am the Democratic Co-Chair, held a briefing last year to explore the link between animal abuse and domestic violence. Based on the information we received at that briefing, I introduced a resolution which recognized this link and called on Federal and local law enforcement officials to treat animal cruelty seriously ``because such cruelty is a crime in its own right in all 50 states, and because it is a reliable indicator of the potential for domestic and other forms of violence against humans.'' My resolution urged Federal agencies to focus greater research in order to understand the link between animal cruelty and violent crime. It is no surprise that individuals who brutalize animals are very often guilty of committing similar crimes against people. Violence against animals in many cases precedes and frequently coexists with spouse abuse, elder abuse, as well as murder and assault. A 1997 survey found that over 85 percent of women in shelters, who suffered violence in the home, also reported violence directed against pets or other animals. The American Psychiatric Association considers animal abuse as one of the diagnostic criteria of a conduct disorder. Brutality against animals is not normal behavior, and we must make that clear, as this legislation does, that this is a crime and it will be punished. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 1887 is a narrowly drafted bill tailored to prohibit the creation, sale or possession with the intent to sell or distribute the depiction of animal cruelty in interstate commerce for commercial gain. It does not preempt state laws on animal cruelty, but rather strengthens the reach of state laws in the state where the cruelty occurred. The bill provides our nation's law enforcement officials with the tool they need in order to prosecute the vicious and vile individuals who produce these ``crush videos.'' Mr. Speaker, this is an important step to stop this abhorrent practice. I strongly urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

Mr. LANTOS

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I would like to bring to the attention of my colleagues the 100th Anniversary of the Italian Cemetery and Mausoleum of Colma, California. This institution has made a significant contribution to the Italian-American community of the Bay Area, and I want to recognize the institution and pay tribute on this centennial observance. The Italian Cemetery serves as dignified resting place for Italian- Americans. To date, some 50,000 individuals have been laid to rest in this beautiful location, and many of these are prominent Italian Americans who have played a leading role in the growth and progress of our area. Mr. Speaker, the Italian Cemetery is not only a distinguished burial ground, but it is also a place of beauty to which the entire Bay Area looks with pride. The cemetery contains some of the most beautiful and architecturally acclaimed mausoleums that have been built throughout our entire nation. The Italian Cemetery was first used in 1899, one year after it was established by La Societa Italiana Di Mutua Beneficenza, the oldest continuous Italian organization in the United States. After more than 75 years of service to the community, the Italian Cemetery became a nonprofit corporation, with the goal of maintaining the cemetery for future generations. The Italian Cemetery's service to the Italian community of California is commendable and deserves our recognition and commendation. I would like to invite my colleagues to join me in congratulating the Italian Cemetery and Mausoleum on its 100th anniversary.

Mr. LANTOS

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Dieter A. Schmidt, Director of the Institute for Foreign Relations of the Hanns Seidel Foundation of Munich, Germany. Mr. Schmidt is a true friend of the United States and a longtime force for stability and cooperation in Europe. One of Mr. Schmidt's most lasting accomplishments has been his leadership of the Franz Josef Strauss Symposium, a highly regarded international conference on foreign and security policy. The Symposium--which will be held for the twentieth time later this year in Munich--has provided a platform for senior American officials and Members of Congress to meet and discuss with their German counterparts perspectives on critical issues relating to Germany and European affairs. For the past two decades, this outstanding forum has provided an excellent opportunity to consider and evaluate the dramatic changes that have taken place in Central Europe--the fall of the Berlin Wall, the end of the Cold War, the enlargement of NATO, and the changing nature of international institutions in the post-Cold War era. Dieter Schmidt's guidance--from helping to establish the Symposium in 1979 to chairing its meetings and working tirelessly to bring together policy makers on both sides of the Atlantic--has provided a critical forum for leaders of both of our countries to meet, to build strong personal relationships and to create greater mutual understanding and cooperation. Throughout his career, Schmidt has time and time again worked to strengthen German-American relations. In 1957, as a young officer, he attended an exchange program at the United States Military Academy at West Point. In 1968, Schmidt returned to the United States for CBW warfare training at Fort McClellan, Alabama. After his military career, he became the international secretary of the Christian Social Union Party. In that capacity, Schmidt played a key role in the founding of the International Democratic Union (IDU), a worldwide association of Christian Democratic and conservative political parties. For many years now he has served as a member of the Committee for International Affairs of the IDU, where he was instrumental in expanding the organization to include American participation. In 1981, in his capacity as Director of the Institute for Foreign Relations at the Hanns Seidel Foundation, Dieter Schmidt initiated a series of annual conferences to educate congressional staff about the German and European political processes. In the past eighteen years, these extremely valuable conferences have involved the participation of almost two hundred Congressional staff members, and they have provided the participants with a much broader and more meaningful understanding of Germany and of America's other key allies and partners in Europe. Mr. Speaker, as we mark the twentieth gathering of the Franz Josef Strauss Symposium, I invite my colleagues to join me in paying tribute to the remarkable contributions of Dieter Schmidt to the close ties between Germany and the United States. His efforts merit our great appreciation and our respect.

Mr. LANTOS

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, in Kazakhstan just over a week ago, on October 10, the first round of elections were held for the Mazhilis-- the lower house of the Parliament. There was little suspense or excitement about the results. In fact, there was little suspense or uncertainty even before the elections were held. These elections simply confirmed the nondemocratic nature of the Kazakh government, and they raise extremely serious questions about the future of United States relations with this country. The elections were far from democratic in substance, although there were some cosmetic efforts to make the elections appear to be free. Furthermore, the modest efforts to make the elections appear democratic were not voluntarily adopted by the government of Kazakhstan. They were taken reluctantly and only under international pressure including a Congressional Human Caucus briefing on the electoral process which was held a few months ago. The election fell far short of the standard of free and fair elections. Mr. Speaker, in a blatant affront to democracy, the President of Kazakhstan, Nursultan Nazarbayev, presented to the out-going parliament his choice for the new Prime Minister of Kazakhstan last Tuesday--the second day after the election and the day before the results of the first round of elections were announced. Standard procedure in any democratic country would be for the newly elected parliament to approve a new Prime Minister. This affront to democratic procedure is truly mind-boggling! Mr. Speaker, not only was the Prime Minister approved by the lame- duck parliament, the elections themselves were seriously flawed. The Organization on Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) sent an official international observer group which monitored the elections. Their report on the parliamentary contest highlighted the gravity of the problems. According to the observer group, ``the OSCE said there was widespread official interference in the run-up to the campaign against opposition candidates and the independent media'' (Agence France Presse report from Kazakhstan, October 11, 1999). International observers reported ``widespread abuses in the runup to Sunday's parliamentary and local elections in the Central Asian republic of Kazakhstan.'' These reports also quoted the OSCE that ``the government interfered, opposition parties faced discrimination from local authorities, and individual candidates were intimidated.'' At one polling place in Almaty, Kazakhstan's largest city, election observers uncovered duplicate tally sheets with falsified results. The majority of the electoral commissions, which are charged with monitoring and assuring the fairness of the election process, were dominated by supporters of the pro-presidential party (Deutsche Presse-Agentur, the independent German news agency, and the independent Russian news agency, ITAR-TASS both on October 11, 1999). The official statement of the OSCE stated that several steps ``seriously undermined'' these polls. Executive officials' ``illegal interference'' and ``bias of local electoral commissions against opposition representatives and candidates'' placed parties in unequal conditions, the statement said. Opposition parties were ``intimidated and obstructed.'' The most blatant example of this outrageously flawed election is the concerted action of the government against former Kazakh Prime Minister Akezan Kazhegeldin, who established the Republican People's Party and attempted to contest the parliamentary elections. Mr. Kazhegeldin has faced government-created obstacles to every attempt he has made to participate in Kazakhstan's political life since he left office as Prime Minister in 1997 after serving three years in that post. He was disqualified from participating in the last presidential race on a technicality. Shortly after he declared his intention to run for the presidency in 1998, the government announced that he was under investigation for tax evasion. The allegations were that he owned property abroad that he had not declared on his tax forms. But as soon as a court ruled that Kazhegeldin could not run for president due to the minor offense of attending a nonsanctioned meeting, the investigation into his foreign holdings stopped. Mr. Speaker, the campaign against Mr. Kazhegeldin started up again this past spring, at the same time that he announced his new political party, the Republican People's Party, would participate in the parliamentary elections. Mr. Kazhegeldin left Kazakhstan to acquaint leaders in other countries, notably the United States, about his party's existence. During this trip, he appeared at a briefing of the Congressional Human Rights Caucus here in Washington. Once he left the country, however, it became obvious the prosecutor general's office was moving to arrest him on tax evasion charges, and he said he would not return home unless he received a guarantee that he would not be arrested. He stayed away from Kazakhstan until last month. The government's very public effort to brand Kazhegeldin as a tax cheat left his Republican People's Party at a serious disadvantage in contesting the election. Furthermore, party candidates complained that their campaign efforts were hampered by government forces. On September 9, just a month before the date of the election, the Central Elections Commission announced that Kazhegeldin was ineligible to run in the elections because of the tax evasion charges, and the following day, the Republican People's Party announced it was withdrawing from the election race. Mr. Kazhegeldin, who was in Moscow for medical treatment, said the party should not boycott the elections. But he was detained that same day by Russian police because the Kazakh government had put out a warrant for his arrest. Russian authorities under great international pressure, including efforts by our own Secretary of State Madeleine Albright subsequently permitted Mr. Kazhegeldin to return to London. Meanwhile, back in Kazakhstan, the Central Elections Commission declared that it was too late for the party to withdraw from the elections, and the party's candidates were left on the ballots. The publicity surrounding Mr. Kazhegeldin's arrest in Moscow and the call for a boycott of the election insured that the Republican People's Party and its leader had minimal success at the polls last week. Mr. Speaker, at my request on July 15 of this year, our distinguished colleague Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky of Illinois, chaired a briefing of the Congressional Human Rights Caucus on the political situation in Kazakhstan at which Mr. Kazhegeldin testified. His testimony about the threats facing advocates of democracy and human rights proved prophetic, and foreshadowed his arrest in Moscow at the request of the Kazakhstan government on trumped up charges and the appalling results of the recent election. Mr. Speaker, I was extremely disappointed by the response of the Government of Kazakhstan to the hearings conducted by the Human Rights Caucus in July and by its subsequent actions leading up to the failed parliamentary elections. To my great dismay, the Government of President Nazarbayev has responded to neither the criticism leveled against his government by the Human Rights Caucus, nor to concerns voiced earlier this year by the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). Mr. Speaker, the Congressional Human Rights Caucus is gravely concerned about the violations of human rights and political liberties in Kazakhstan, most clearly and convincingly demonstrated in the undemocratic elections that were held just two weeks ago. The fact that the Government of President Nazarbayev continues to ignore the concerns raised by the Human Rights Caucus, international organizations concerned with democratization and human rights, and a number of governments, including the United States, is a serious matter. The concerns with democratization in Kazakhstan are extremely serious in their own right, Mr. Speaker, but there are also security concerns involving this country. We recently learned about the sale of about 30 MiG 21 fighter jets by Kazakhstan to North Korea, a prime sponsor of international terrorism. This irresponsible and reckless sale of advanced military equipment to North Korea calls into question the Kazakh government's commitment to building good relations with the West and its interest in international security and stability. It is my strong view, Mr. Speaker, that United States assistance to Kazakhstan and assistance of international financial institutions should be conditioned upon fundamental improvement in political liberties and fundamental freedoms in Kazakhstan. Further, Mr. Speaker, it is my view that any visit by Mr. Nazarbayev to Washington should be postponed until such an improvement takes place.

Mr. LANTOS

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I invite my colleagues to join me in paying tribute to the Alliance for the Mentally Ill, an outstanding non-profit association which will celebrate its 25th Anniversary on October 14, 1999. The Alliance for the Mentally Ill is a special organization whose membership includes individuals who suffer from mental illnesses and their families. These dedicated people contribute almost all the funding for this nationwide group. Their hard work and commitment to the improvement of the lives of the mentally ill is truly remarkable. Mr. Speaker, the founders of Alliance for the Mentally Ill first met in San Mateo County, California, in 1974 to discuss their concerns about the treatment of their mentally ill children. The organization has grown tremendously since then, but it still has the same intense personal concern for the people it serves. In 1979 a national group was established, based in Washington D.C. I am happy to say that the National Alliance for the Mentally Ill (NAMI) now has representatives in all fifty states. As its membership grew from ten people to over two hundred thousand, the fundamental mission of the Alliance has remained the same--to fight discrimination, to educate the public and those who are suffering, and to strive towards better treatment and research for an illness that has been historically misunderstood. This organization fights the traditional isolation and fear of mental illness with knowledge and compassion. The Alliance for the Mentally Ill provides a network of support groups and educational services to assist families of the mentally ill at the local level. It has now assumed a vital role in our nation's health care community and is working closely with professionals on a variety of programs. Some of the programs it has helped to implement include a local mental health care center and an agency that provides supported housing. Newsletters and speakers keep the community active and informed about the important issues affecting the mentally ill. The organization has promoted a greater awareness of mental illness and encouraged our community colleges to implement peer counseling programs. As always, the Alliance has focused on helping adolescents and children, who are so much in need of special support. Mr. Speaker, I want to pay tribute to the Alliance for the Mentally Ill on this important 25th anniversary. This outstanding organization deserves our gratitude and our congratulations for a quarter century of selfless and dedicated service to the people of our nation.

Mr. LANTOS

Mr. LANTOS. Madam Speaker, I rise on behalf of the large group of senior, frail, and low-income citizens in my congressional district in the city of Pacifica. They have been shopping at Safeway for decades, but Safeway--in a display of corporate arrogance and irresponsibility-- suddenly closed that store. These folks have no automobiles. They are too frail and too old to walk two miles to another store. Safeway should have found a way to keep open this facility. But in an irresponsible act of corporate recklessness, it closed the store, and the seniors are left high and dry, trying to fend for themselves. I call on Safeway--a multi-billion-dollar corporation--to change its course and recognize its corporate responsibility. It has the duty to serve the people who have kept it profitable for decades. It can't just walk out on them.