Ed Royce

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this legislation, and I rise to commend the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Leach) for his humanitarian efforts and his work over the years with AID and his efforts to bring focus on this issue of hunger in Africa, and also to commend the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Payne), the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Africa, for his efforts to raise before this body this critically important issue of what we can do to reduce hunger in sub-Saharan Africa. Far too little progress has been made over the years in fighting hunger. I believe that Congress has taken several tangible steps, in addition to this Hunger to Harvest legislation, that have helped in some way to reduce poverty and hunger in Africa. One that I wanted to focus on for just a minute was the fact that in May of 2000, after years of effort, Congress passed and the President signed into law the African Growth and Opportunity Act. Although the bill has only been in effect for a year, it has had a very positive development impact in terms of some of the poorest African countries. I will give my colleagues two examples: Malawi and Madagascar, two of the world's poorest countries, have experienced a 70 percent and 120 percent increase respectively in trade with the United States, causing a direct increase there in jobs and causing an increase in income to the neediest people in those countries; and that means food on the plates of children who might otherwise not eat, and shoes on their feet. Mr. Speaker, we should do more in fighting hunger in Africa, and this resolution focuses on that issue, and we should also do more to promote trade with Africa, which is good for African countries and, frankly, good for America too. With a global economic slowdown underway, Africa is one of the few regions in the world, frankly, where we are increasing trade, and Africa wants to do business with the United States. The U.S. has a growing commercial interest there. It has a growing strategic interest in Africa which has been described as the ``soft underbelly'' in our war against terrorism but, most important for us, the U.S. has an important humanitarian interest there. America has always had that humanitarian interest in Africa. I want to commend these Members of Congress who have routinely tried to keep that focus on that issue, and it is that interest that the Hunger to Harvest legislation speaks to. So I again wanted to commend the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Leach) and to commend the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Payne) for their efforts.

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the Senate bill (S. 494) to provide for a transition to democracy and to promote economic recovery in Zimbabwe, as amended.

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 3189, the bill under consideration.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3189) to extend the Export Administration Act until April 20, 2002.

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

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this bill. This is the extension of the Export Administration Act of 1979. It is H.R. 3189, and it is a measure approved by voice vote on October 31 by the Committee on International Relations. Enactment of this measure would reauthorize the existing Export Administration Act through April 20, 2002, thereby giving sufficient time for the House to act on comprehensive Federal Export Administration Act reform legislation considered on August 1, 2001. The Export Administration Act was extended for 1 year in the 106th Congress, but that authority lapsed on August 20, and I would argue that we need to act on this measure today so we can keep this stopgap authority in place to maintain our export control authorities and to ensure that the Bureau of Export Administration has the enforcement powers it needs to stop terrorists from acquiring any dual-use goods or technologies that could be used to produce weapons of mass destruction. The prompt enactment of this stopgap authorization will, moreover, enable the Bureau's administrators to protect licensing information and to increase the size of the fines for criminal and administrative sanctions against individuals and companies found to be in violation of our export control regulations. A comprehensive reform measure, H.R. 2581, the Export Administration Act of 2001, considered by the Committee on International Relations on August 1, has now been referred to seven other House committees, and it is not expected to come before the House for further consideration until early next year. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill which will preserve the integrity of our Nation's export control system at a time when we can afford no less. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Becerra) for his leadership on this resolution and for his work on building the relationship between South Korea and the United States on our interparliamentary exchange that we do between the U.S. Congress and the General Assembly in South Korea. So, again, I wanted to acknowledge his authorship of this measure, which I was proud to coauthor, and the focus and attention that he has brought to better relations between the United States and South Korea. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Kirk).

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of House Concurrent Resolution 77. It is coauthored by the gentleman from California (Mr. Becerra) and myself. I serve as chairman of the U.S.-Republic of Korea Interparliamentary Exchange. Several of our colleagues met with South Korean legislators this past spring to discuss the critical relationship between the two countries, between South Korea and the United States; and we found that the issue of Korean-Americans here having a chance to participate in family reunifications was a key issue. Out of those discussions and in consultation with the Korean-American community, this resolution was developed. There are over 500,000 Korean-Americans with relatives in North Korea that reside now in the United States. None of these individuals have been privy to any of the three family reunions that have taken place between the Republic of Korea and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. This legislation calls for the Congress and the President to support efforts to reunite U.S. citizens of Korean ancestry with their families in North Korea as soon as possible so they might have a chance to travel to North Korea and see their families. Many of these individuals are quite elderly, and they would like the opportunity before their loved ones pass away to do that. After World War II, the 38th Parallel was used to draw a line between freedom on one side and tyranny on the other. What at the time seemed an easy resolution to a difficult diplomatic problem between communist Russia and the United States turned out to be the worst nightmare for millions of Koreans. The 38th Parallel cut through the country of Korea. It cut through villages, through communities, and in this case it cut through families. Millions of parents were separated from their children. Mothers were separated from fathers, grandparents from their grandchildren. In a culture centered around the family, this was absolutely devastating. On June 25, 1950, North Korea invaded South Korea; and a war ensued for 3 harsh years. After the Korean War, the border became heavily fortified and closed. No one in North Korea was allowed out, and no one from South Korea was allowed in. Since 1953, South Korea, with the help of the United States, has made numerous overtures to North Korea to allow family members to reconnect. The Stalinist North said no. In 1998, Kim Dae Jung assumed the South Korean presidency and instituted a ``sunshine policy,'' as he called it. Since last year, President Kim has enabled 300 South Koreans to see relatives they have not seen for over 50 years. I applaud these important steps. But a very important component is missing from these reunions. The United States is home, as I said, to over 500,000 Korean Americans. Both the gentleman from California (Mr. Becerra) and I represent large Korean-American communities in our districts. These Americans have suffered the pain of having relatives in North Korea they have not seen in over 50 years. Mr. Speaker, this is unacceptable. The United States has demonstrated a longstanding commitment to the Korean peninsula. In 1950, when North Korea unleashed an all-out attack on South Korea, the United States acted swiftly and decisively. At least 37,000 Americans unfortunately died defending South Korea. These American soldiers paid the ultimate price to ensure South Korea's sovereignty. We have defended South Korea ever since. In 1997, the United States spearheaded the international community's effort to ensure that South Korea's economy remained strong. The United States has provided hundreds of millions of dollars in humanitarian food aid to North Koreans. Needless to say, our country has dedicated great amounts of diplomatic and financial contributions to Korea, which is extremely important to maintaining peace and maintaining stability on that peninsula. For that, the Korean people are appreciative and our strategic interests are served. But we should also have a strong commitment to Korean Americans. Currently, a petition is being circulated by the Korean-American community, including church groups and students and private citizens, to be sent to our President, to be sent to the President of South Korea, to the President of North Korea, to Secretary-General Kofi Annan and others urging them to make it possible for Korean Americans to be reunited with their families, to see their families in North Korea. I believe this is a reasonable request that requires urgent attention. It has been 50 years since these estranged relations have seen each other. Many people have died, and for many others it is their last wish that they might see their brother or sister or their aunt or uncle once again. I urge passage of this bill so that this historical calamity can be rectified in however small terms. The United States should stand behind its citizens and undertake measures immediately to ensure that Korean- American families have a chance to see one another. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H. Con. Res. 77, the resolution under consideration.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 77) expressing the sense of the Congress regarding the efforts of people of the United States of Korean ancestry to reunite with their family members in North Korea.

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, as a co-sponsor I rise in strong support. Throughout Africa we are seeing natural resources being misused and fueling conflict; and this is the case with diamonds in Sierra Leone, timber in Liberia, cobalt in the Democratic Republic of Congo. In many places on the continents, natural resources are bringing nothing but misery to the African people. We listened to the testimony of little children missing their arms and in some cases without legs, testifying about their ordeal, representing over 5,000 children in Freetown alone, the victims of the Revolutionary United Front, the victims of men like Foday Sanko and Charles Taylor, both enriched by blood diamonds. This legislation promises to help to ensure that diamonds do not fuel conflict. It is an important step. The international community needs to recognize its responsibility to not be party to the misuse of diamonds and other natural resources. I would like to commend the Members who have worked hard on this legislation and especially to commend the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Hall) and the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Houghton), because they have worked tirelessly in trying to bring the issue of conflict diamonds before this body. They have worked hard to reach consensus with the administration, which is what this bill represents. But let me say that after passage of this bill we still have to address as an institution the fact that there are heads of state in the region, like Charles Taylor of Liberia, who have enriched themselves, who have maintained their power through the use of blood diamonds, and there should be an accounting. There should be justice on behalf of those child victims that were, frankly, sacrificed, who lost their limbs, and in many cases lost their lives as part of this strategy to create wealth for a few men in this part of the world. I do want to commend all of those who worked so hard on this, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Hall), the gentleman from New York (Mr. Houghton), the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf). I thank them so much.

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, this legislation will promote economic growth in Latin America and in Africa. It is going to promote American national security. Last year, the African Growth and Opportunity Act was signed into law. It was bipartisan legislation. For the first time, our country stated its interests and established a meaningful policy to trade with the nations of Africa. The U.S. Government and, more importantly, the U.S. private sector have begun to treat Africa as a place to do business; and this bill will help further. As chairman of the Subcommittee on Africa, I am pleased to report this legislation is having a profoundly positive impact on Africa. Several of the African countries that are making the market reforms required in the bill are attracting levels of foreign investment, and they are importing well beyond expectations. In these countries, desperately needed jobs are being created as more jobs are being created overall in the United States as a result. It is strengthening the rule of law in Africa. The bolstering of the rule of law and economic reforms are good for Africa, and they are good for the U.S. U.S. exports to Africa are up since it went into effect, and there is a national security gain for us. Yesterday, I chaired a hearing on Africa's role in the fight against global terrorism. One witness described the continent as the soft underbelly in the fight against terrorism. One thing is for sure, when people are jobless, they are more susceptible to those who would lure them into radicalism. The bill also won us political goodwill in Africa, a valuable asset in today's world where cooperation matters more now than ever. We are going to be doing more to promote trade with and economic development in Africa and Latin America, and I describe this legislation as a step in the right direction for our many interests in the southern hemisphere; but we better be running a sprint, not walking, in many parts of the developing world if we are going to be effectively combatting terrorism. We need to be doing all that we can, as soon as we can, to see that large parts of the world are not mired in hopelessness. It is a tall task to change that. It will not happen overnight; but we have some tools, including this legislation, to help our interests in Africa and in the western hemisphere.

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, today we had a luncheon where we heard from Prime Minister Vajpayee. It is always good to see the Prime Minister consulting with the Congress and the administration to strengthen the ties between India and the United States. We all know how the ties between India and the United States have solidified over the years. However, since September 11 that relationship has reached new heights. India has been with the United States every step of the way. India has long known the horrors of terrorism, and now the United States has joined India in the fight against terrorism. India quickly condemned the attacks and immediately offered assistance to the U.S. India has provided the intelligence support, as well as the use of its military bases and air space. I had a chance to be there during the international fleet review in Mumbai and see why Colin Powell, our Secretary of State, said that India has the strength to keep the peace in the vast Indian Ocean and its periphery. Today, President Bush is skillfully leading what will be a difficult struggle, but India has demonstrated that it will be a key ally in this war. For that, we are appreciative.

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I want to thank my colleagues for their support. Now, some might question whether broadcasts to this part of the world would really make that much of a difference. I suggest that if done right, these broadcasts would make a profound difference in our war on terrorism, and I want to give an example. Yesterday, the Wall Street Journal reported that on the streets of Tehran in Iraq, young people, Iranians born after the revolution of Ayatollah Khomeini and fed up with extreme theocracy, are in the streets, in the streets last night, chanting ``We love the USA.'' Yes, ``We love the USA.'' That is what was occurring in the streets in Iran. And these young people, because they want freedom, are our allies and our friends. The hard-line mullahs, who have run on the ``America is the great Satan'' line for years, are deadly fearful of these rumblings. What is being credited with prompting these expressions is a message of freedom that is being sent by a private television station in Los Angeles, run by Iranian expatriates. These broadcasts are challenging the power of the repressive theocracy, the power of the mullahs who would control every aspect of Iranian lives. And these broadcasts are speaking to Iranian women's desires to play a role in modern society. These and other broadcasts are revolutionary and, in this case, it is an Iranian revolution in America's favor. Now, Iran is not Afghanistan, that is true, but there are parallels, and what is the same is the power of ideas, the urge for freedom and for individual dignity. That is the desire that Radio Free Afghanistan will be able to bolster, which will significantly aid our war against terrorism. And that is why I urge my colleagues to pass this legislation and why I urge final passage of the bill.

Mr. ROYCE. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. English).

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

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2998) to authorize the establishment of Radio Free Afghanistan, as amended.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) for his leadership on the Committee on International Relations where this bill, the Radio Free Afghanistan Act, passed by voice vote last Thursday. I would also like to acknowledge the work of my co- author, the gentleman from California (Mr. Berman), who is traveling back from business in the district and could not be here yet today. Mr. Speaker, the primary source of current news and information for the people of Afghanistan is the radio. Eighty-five percent of Afghans get their information from the radio. They do not have television there. That was banned under the Islamic law that the Taliban enforces. All of the televisions were destroyed. So Afghans saw no footage of the devastation at the World Trade Center. They had not had the opportunity to see what happened at our Pentagon. Throughout that country on September 11 people held up small transistor radios to their ears to listen to news accounts. However, the news accounts they heard are far different from those that we heard in this country. Throughout the region, they heard that the attacks on the World Trade Center were the work of the Israel Government, the work of the Israelis with help from the Indian Government with the United States trying to cover this up. Why? Why did they believe this? Well, they were told by al-Qaeda and others that there were 4,000 Jewish Americans who did not go to work that day because they were tipped off; there was a plot to blame all this on Osama bin Laden. We know that, in fact, is a lie; but they do not have access to that information. Because long before the terrorist attacks of September 11, bin Laden sympathizers waged a psychological war for the minds of Afghans. They shrewdly used radio to spread hatred of the United States, hatred of democracy, hatred of Israel, and hatred of Muslims who rejected their hate. I believe that the establishment of a Radio Free Afghanistan by Radio Free Europe is essential to winning the information war. Radio Free Europe, Radio Liberty does one thing very well. It engages in surrogate broadcasting, and they will operate as if Afghanistan had a free and vibrant press. They will counter these lies. The Taliban and the terrorists they are harboring use propaganda, and they use censorship to maintain power. They must be countered. As William Safire points out in last Thursday's New York Times, he says, ``That message that is sent should be the Taliban are corrupting the Koran, the Taliban and their terrorist guest bin Laden are the cause of Afghan casualties. As soon as the fanatic Saudi outsiders surrender then peace and food and jobs will come to the country.'' I have been calling for Radio Free Afghanistan for several years, since 1996; and I think it is fair to say that the previous administration had little interest in this type of aggressive broadcasting in Afghanistan. I talked to the former Under Secretaries of State. I talked to the Secretary of State about this, and at one point I argued in committee that Afghanistan would pose a national security threat to the United States if what was happening there was not countered. If we had Radio Free Afghanistan up and running for several years, the terrorists would not have had the fertile ground they have found in Afghanistan to prepare, to train, to be funded. It is very hard to organize like this when you are on the run. I believe Radio Free Europe, Radio Liberty is the best organization for broadcasting to Afghanistan for the following reasons: first, it had an outstanding impact behind the Iron Curtain during the Cold War; second, there are eight employees there who ran Radio Free Afghanistan during the Soviet invasion in 1985. It has the experience, the expertise. It was helpful at rallying the Afghan people against the Soviets, and I think it will have the best chance of providing information that will help turn the Afghan people against the Taliban and other extremists. It is the voice of Afghans talking about the radicalism of the Taliban, frankly, that will be our best ally. This legislation will provide for 12 hours of broadcasting a day; 6 in Pashto, 6 in Dari, the two major languages. In addition, this legislation provides for three transmitters to be moved from Spain to Kuwait. They are not currently being used. Kuwait is an ideal location geographically for transmission to Afghanistan. Although it is my intention that these transmitters be primarily used to broadcast to Afghanistan, they may also be used to broadcast throughout the Middle East or to China. The concept behind Radio Free Afghanistan is to do what was done with Radio Free Europe in Poland and in the Czech Republic and across Eastern Europe. When we talk with leaders of Poland, Lech Walesa, when we talk to Vaclav Havel of the Czech Republic, they say that the hearts and minds of those people in those countries were turned by the opportunity to listen daily to a radio broadcast which explained what was actually happening inside their society. These broadcasts were able to explain and put in context what they would be hearing from the Soviet broadcasts. Over time we know from these leaders that this was the most effective single thing that changed the attitudes of the average person in Eastern Europe. We know what happened to the Berlin Wall, and part of this was because they had access to information. Radio Free Europe broadcast to all of Eastern Europe during the Cold War except for one country, and that country was the former Yugoslavia. We all know the atrocities that have taken place there. I remember a young Croatian journalist telling me, if only we had had the type of broadcast they had in Czechoslovakia in Yugoslavia we would not have had the slaughter. We would have been able to teach people about political pluralism and tolerance and democracy. So we know that surrogate broadcasting works. China spends a tremendous amount of time attempting to jam the broadcasts in Radio Free Asia. Saddam Hussein has long complained about Radio Free Iraq, calling these broadcasts an act of aggression. The Iraqi dictator has apparently become so irked by this attempt to undermine his control over the media, that intelligence officials have recently uncovered a plot by Iraq to bomb Radio Free Europe's headquarters in Prague. Evil regimes like the Taliban hold power through ignorance and propaganda. The Afghan people deserve something better. They deserve to hear the truth, and I hope my colleagues will support this bill for Radio Free Afghanistan. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ROYCE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to express my appreciation to the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos), the ranking member of the House Committee on International Relations, who is a strong supporter of public diplomacy based upon his own unique experiences. I look forward to continuing to work with him in the future in doing more in this critical area, and I thank him for the focus he has brought to this.

Mr. ROYCE. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Kirk).

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor Marilyn Buchi, a constituent of mine from Fullerton, California. As the outgoing President for the California School Boards Association (CSBA) for 2001, I wanted to recognize Marilyn for her continuous efforts on behalf of children and education throughout the local community and the State of California. Her involvement has benefited a variety of organizations, including the American Association of University Women, League of Women Voters, National Assistance League and American Heart Association. She was named the 1998 Woman of the Year by the Fullerton Chamber of Commerce. Marilyn has served on the Fullerton high school board since 1983 and has been on the board of the North Orange County Regional Occupational Program. She has been active in the CSBA for more than a decade. Her leadership benefits our community and she serves as a role model for our youth. It is with great pride that I recognize the achievements of Marilyn and bring to the attention of Congress this successful educator as she finishes her term as President of CSBA.

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. If the gentlewoman would yield, I would just like to second your observation that a return to the constitution and the rule of law in this part of the world is absolutely essential along with the development of a broad-based inclusive government in Afghanistan. We have to commit ourselves to that. We have had an opportunity to see the terror that can result when rule of law, when Democratic principles are subverted, and that terror has given rise to an ability of Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda to use a network of terrorist training camps across that country. Now, if there had been a Democratic regime or if there had been a broad-based government there, there is no way that these types of terrorist training camps could be used in order to wage war ultimately on the United States. Terrorists have a difficult time when they are on the run. But when they have a state, as the Taliban in Afghanistan presented as a state, the opportunity for terrorists to come and train and plan and prepare and be financed and to rehearse and not just rehearse attacks but to use gas and chemicals. All of this was offered to bin Laden and al- Qaeda by the Taliban. This is why it is important to us in the United States in terms of our own lives. Not only should we care about the human beings in the rest of the world that live under this type of tyranny, and tonight we have talked a great deal about just how bereft people are in Afghanistan of any fundamental rights and how women are treated worse there than under any other regimes in the world, but we should also recognize that when the world community and when the United States ignores this type of evil, it eventually, I think, catches up with us as well.