AUTHORIZING PRESIDENT TO EXERCISE WAIVERS OF FOREIGN ASSISTANCE RESTRICTIONS WITH RESPECT TO PAKISTAN -- (House of Representatives - October 16, 2001)

[Page: H6795]

---

   Mr. HYDE. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the Senate bill (S. 1465) to authorize the President to exercise waivers of foreign assistance restrictions with respect to Pakistan through September 30, 2003, and for other purposes.

   The Clerk read as follows:

S. 1465

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

   SECTION. 1. EXEMPTIONS AND WAIVER OF APPROPRIATIONS ACT PROHIBITIONS WITH RESPECT TO PAKISTAN.

    (a) FISCAL YEAR 2002 AND PRIOR FISCAL YEARS.--

    (1) EXEMPTIONS.--Any provision of the foreign operations, export financing, and related programs appropriations Act for fiscal year 2002, or any provision of such Act for a prior fiscal year, that prohibits direct assistance to a country whose duly elected head of government was deposed by decree or military coup shall not apply with respect to Pakistan.

    (2) PRIOR CONSULTATION REQUIRED.--Not less than 5 days prior to the obligation of funds for Pakistan under paragraph (1), the President shall consult with the appropriate congressional committees with respect to such obligation.

    (b) FISCAL YEAR 2003.--

    (1) WAIVER.--The President is authorized to waive, with respect to Pakistan, any provision of the foreign operations, export financing, and related programs appropriations Act for fiscal year 2003 that prohibits direct assistance to a country whose duly elected head of government was deposed by decree or military coup, if the President determines and certifies to the appropriate congressional committees that such waiver--

    (A) would facilitate the transition to democratic rule in Pakistan; and

    (B) is important to United States efforts to respond to, deter, or prevent acts of international terrorism.

    (2) PRIOR CONSULTATION REQUIRED.--Not less than 5 days prior to the exercise of the waiver authority under paragraph (1), the President shall consult with the appropriate congressional committees with respect to such waiver.

   SEC. 2. INCREASED FLEXIBILITY IN THE EXERCISE OF WAIVER AUTHORITY OF MTCR AND EXPORT ADMINISTRATION ACT SANCTIONS WITH RESPECT TO PAKISTAN.

    Any waiver under 73(e) of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2797b(e)), or under section 11B(b)(5) of the Export Administration Act of 1979 (50 U.S.C. App. 2410b(b)(5)) (or successor statute), with respect to a sanction that was imposed on foreign persons in Pakistan prior to January 1, 2001, may be exercised--

    (1) only after consultation with the appropriate congressional committees; and

    (2) without regard to the notification periods set forth in the respective section authorizing the waiver.

   SEC. 3. EXEMPTION OF PAKISTAN FROM FOREIGN ASSISTANCE PROHIBITIONS RELATING TO FOREIGN COUNTRY LOAN DEFAULTS.

    The following provisions of law shall not apply with respect to Pakistan:

    (1) Section 620(q) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2370(q)).

    (2) Such provision of the Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2002, as is comparable to section 512 of the Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2001 (Public Law 106-429; 114 Stat. 1900A-25).

   SEC. 4. MODIFICATION OF NOTIFICATION DEADLINES FOR DRAWDOWNS AND TRANSFER OF EXCESS DEFENSE ARTICLES TO RESPOND TO, DETER, OR PREVENT ACTS OF INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM.

    (a) DRAWDOWNS.--Notwithstanding the second sentence of section 506(b)(1) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2318(b)(1)), each notification under that section with respect to any drawdown authorized by subclause (III) of subsection (a)(2)(A)(i) that the President determines is important to United States efforts to respond to, deter, or prevent acts of international terrorism shall be made at least 5 days in advance of the drawdown in lieu of the 15-day requirement in that section.

    (b) TRANSFERS OF EXCESS DEFENSE ARTICLES.--Notwithstanding section 516(f)(1) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2321j(f)(1)), each notification under that section with respect to any transfer of an excess defense article that the President determines is important to United States efforts to respond to, deter, or prevent acts of international terrorism shall be made at least 15 days in advance of the transfer in lieu of the 30-day requirement in that section.

   SEC. 5. APPROPRIATE CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEES DEFINED.

    In this Act, the term ``appropriate congressional committees'' means the Committee on Foreign Relations and the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate and the Committee on International Relations and the Committee on Appropriations of the House of Representatives.

   SEC. 6. TERMINATION DATE.

    Except as otherwise provided in section 1 or 3, the provisions of this Act shall terminate on October 1, 2003.

   The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. HYDE) and the gentleman from California (Mr. LANTOS) each will control 20 minutes.

   The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. HYDE).

   GENERAL LEAVE

   Mr. HYDE. Madam 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 S. 1465.

   The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Illinois?

   There was no objection.

   Mr. HYDE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

   Madam Speaker, the pending bill permits the President to scrape from the hull of a great ship, the foreign relations law of the United States, some of the barnacles that prevent us from aiding our ally, Pakistan. It is an appropriate response to the emergency situation confronting our Nation and to the difficulties facing Pakistan as it assists us to stabilize their region.

   Pakistan has been for decades a friend of the United States. It stood by us, for example, by committing its armed forces on our side in the Gulf War, unlike some of its neighbors who were mild and somewhat equivocal in their response to Saddam Hussein. Of course, it was the launching place for our long, difficult joint effort to free the Afghan people of the Soviet Army.

   While Pakistan and the United States have had serious disagreements on proliferation policy and other issues and we remain concerned with the overthrow of the elected government by President Musharref, we can and should work with Pakistan during the coming years and establish a new relationship based on trust, mutual interest, and common values.

   The bill waives for fiscal years 2002 and 2003 legislative provisions with respect to Pakistan prohibiting direct assistance on account of the deposition of a duly elected head of government by a military coup. It provides additional flexibility by eliminating certain notification periods with respect to certain provisions of the Arms Export Control

[Page: H6796]
Act and the Export Administration Act. It exempts Pakistan from certain provisions of law which would prevent it from receiving assistance should it be in default on certain debts. It permits drawdowns of defense articles and the transfer of excess defense articles subject to shorter congressional notification periods.

   Madam Speaker, our military is in the air over Afghanistan as we speak. Our forces are depending on Pakistani facilities and intelligence. Our assistance to Pakistan helps ensure the stability of the government of an ally and the welfare of its people. I urge my colleagues to support this bill and send it to the President for his signature.

   Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

   Mr. LANTOS. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

   Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of S. 1465. This is a very significant piece of legislation; and I want to commend my distinguished friend, the gentleman from Illinois (Chairman HYDE), for bringing this bill to the floor in an expedited fashion.

   As we speak, Madam Speaker, the Secretary of State of the United States is in Pakistan underscoring the importance of our relationship and the importance of this legislation.

   We are engaged in an epic struggle against the forces of international terrorism; and our fighting men and women are risking their lives as we speak to end this terrible threat, not only to the United States, but to every civilized country on the face of this planet. In this fight, we have called upon all nations to make every contribution they can to prevail against these forces of evil.

   Pakistan in particular, by geography and history, must shoulder an unusually heavy burden in this effort. While it is true that Pakistan had a hand in creating the Taliban, it is also true that Pakistan today is playing a critical role in ensuring that Afghanis know Afghanistan is no longer a base for international terrorism.

   President Musharref's decision to stand with the United States and the civilized global community was a wise and courageous choice. But as we laud him for making the right choice, we must acknowledge that it will not be an easy commitment to keep. The terrorist attacks on September 11 shed light on the life-and-death struggle that is being waged for the future of Pakistan. It is a battle against the destructive and anarchist forces of religious fanaticism and violence which seek to capitalize on the despair of the poor.

   

[Time: 14:45]

   It is a battle that President Musharraf must win to restore hope to the people of Pakistan and to secure a future for the children of Pakistan. It is vital, Madam Speaker, that the United States demonstrate to the people and government of Pakistan our commitment to help them secure that future as long as Pakistan continues its commitment to eradicate international terrorism. It is for this reason that I support the legislation before us today.

   The situation in South Asia, Madam Speaker, is highly volatile, and I am convinced that any military assistance or armed sales in the current environment would only serve to further inflame tensions in the region. I urge our administration to refrain from actions that will accelerate the arms race on the subcontinent and further destabilize the already fragile situation there. I will continue to monitor this issue closely.

   Finally, I want to reiterate to the people of Pakistan our continued support for a return to democracy in that country. President Musharraf has given his word that he is committed to democracy and we in Congress intend to hold him to his word.

   Madam Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to support S. 1465.

   Mr. LANTOS. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. PALLONE).

   Mr. PALLONE. Madam Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from California (Mr. LANTOS), the ranking member, for yielding me this time.

   I come to the House floor today to rise in opposition to S. 1465, as we know, a bill that waives certain sanctions against Pakistan. Section 508 of the Foreign Operations Act for fiscal year 2001 was passed by Congress to prohibit the export of U.S. weapons and military assistance to countries whose duly-elected head of government is deposed. In 1999, General Perez Musharraf overthrew the civilian-elected government of Pakistan in a military coup and since then has governed Pakistan under military rule. As a result, section 508 sanctions have been in place and U.S. policy has maintained that no military assistance would be provided to Pakistan.

   Under the current circumstances due to the attacks of September 11, I do feel that it is appropriate to provide economic assistance to Pakistan because of General Musharraf's willingness to support the U.S. in seizing Osama bin Laden and eliminating the al-Qaeda terrorist network. Pakistan is not only a country suffering from severe poverty in some regions, but it is also a fragile society. Pakistan's pleas to the U.S. for economic help are understandable, and any humanitarian, education, economic, and social assistance is worthy of being granted on an expedited basis.

   However, Madam Speaker, I stand strong in my argument against military aid to Pakistan, even under the current circumstances. Since the first day of U.S. military action against the Taliban in Afghanistan, it has become clear that Pakistan's armed forces are not participating in the antiterrorism effort in Afghanistan. If Pakistan's forces are not being used directly against the Taliban and terrorist groups, there is no justification for providing military aid.

   South Asia is today one of the most politically volatile areas in the world. Pakistan is a nuclear power, but has been unstable and, like I said earlier, very fragile. Until sound democracy is established in Pakistan, it is unclear what purpose military artillery and weapons will be used for.

   My fear is that if we provide weapons to Pakistan or lead to that possibility, they may inadvertently fall into the wrong hands and be used in ways contrary to U.S. interests. And Pakistan has Iran to the west of its borders and India to the east. Sri Lanka and several other countries contribute to the volatile makeup of the region.

   Historically, U.S. arms exports to Pakistan have been used against India, primarily through cross-border military action in Kashmir. We saw a terrifying example of this on October 1 when a suicide car bomb exploded in front of the Jammu and Kashmir State Assembly while it was in session. This terrorist attack left at least 40 dead and many more injured. Jaish-e-Muhammad, a Pakistani-based group, is the terrorist group that came forward and claimed responsibility for this horrific act. This group is now on the Treasury Department's list of terrorist groups whose assets will be frozen by the U.S., but this example of cold-blooded murder by a Pakistani-based group should be evidence enough that weapons can and will fall into the hands of terrorist networks and potentially be used against India or other U.S. allies.

   The Pakistan government is currently not only supportive of the Taliban but, in fact, is one of the proponents that created the Taliban movement in Afghanistan. Due to the deep ties between Pakistan and the Taliban, and the deep ties between the Taliban and Osama bin Laden, I feel that it is in the best interests of the U.S. to uphold its current policy of restricting military assistance at this time. Given Pakistan's instability, nuclear proliferation capabilities, and current military rule, I do not see a reasonable argument for compromising our democratic values by waiving section 508.

   Finally, for my colleagues that feel that we should grant Pakistani aid requested, including military aid, I would note that under section 614 of the Foreign Assistance Act, the U.S. may provide weapons and military assistance when U.S. national security interests are at stake. Given that Osama bin Laden and his al-Qaeda network have not only savagely attacked us, but continue to pose a threat to the U.S., the President could provide U.S. military assistance to Pakistan under section 614. Unless the President certifies that that assistance provided under 614 is insufficient, there is no reason for Congress to waive section 508.

[Page: H6797]

   If and when Pakistan takes steps towards establishing a democracy with a civilian-elected government, perhaps section 508 would be irrelevant. However, General Musharraf has shown no steps towards returning Pakistan to democratic rule and, in fact, has moved in the opposite direction for at least the past several months. On June 20 he declared himself President of Pakistan, which is a clear indication of his desire to maintain a dictatorial stronghold. Musharraf's past actions include dissolving Pakistan's National Assembly and four provincial assemblies. He has claimed that he will hold fair national elections by 2002; however, this has only been lip service so far. As a self-proclaimed President, Musharraf may be seen with more credibility in the eyes of the international community at large, but the fact remains that the people of his Nation never elected him. I believe that repealing section 508 clearly sends the wrong message, given the General's actions.

   Mr. LANTOS. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 4 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. LOWEY), the ranking Democratic member of the Subcommittee on Foreign Operations, Export Financing and Related Programs.

   Mrs. LOWEY. Madam Speaker, I rise in reluctant support of S. 1465, and I would like to address several concerns about this bill which would authorize the President to exercise certain waivers with respect to Pakistan.

   In recent weeks, the President has invoked special authorities to enable the provision of $100 million in economic assistance for Pakistan. I have been consulted on these decisions and I have supported them as necessary to carry out our campaign against terrorism. But the passage of this bill today will remove all remaining legislative restrictions on assistance to Pakistan for both fiscal year 2002 and fiscal year 2003. It is my understanding that the administration will soon inform Congress of its intention to provide an additional $500 million in economic assistance to Pakistan to be taken from the $40 billion emergency supplemental.

   There is simply no question that the United States should move rapidly to provide economic assistance to Pakistan in light of its cooperation in the war on terrorism, and because of the severe economic crisis there, but I caution my colleagues against relinquishing our role in this process. With the passage of this bill, we give extraordinary discretion to the administration to determine the extent and content of our assistance. While I support a bold and significant assistance program for Pakistan, I believe it must have appropriate congressional oversight.

   The Pakistani government has requested billions in economic assistance to meet its cash shortfall and to address its significant infrastructure, education, and health needs, and I expect we will provide $600 million to respond to that request. But at the moment, there is no clear plan for how this assistance will flow, and we have very little monitoring capacity to ensure funds are spent for their intended purposes. Under normal circumstances, Congress has a role in directing the use of appropriated funds prior to their disbursement, and I hope we will be included in the current process as well.

   At this point, we have not been informed of any plan to provide significant military assistance to Pakistan. However, that could and likely will change as the situation develops. There are no legislative guidelines in place to ensure that we will have appropriate assurances from the Pakistani government that the use of such assistance will be restricted to the fight against terrorism. While it is my expectation that the President would seek and obtain such assurances, Congress does not currently require him to do so.

   Finally, I am puzzled that this bill takes the unusual step of waiving a provision of law on a bill that is not yet written: the fiscal year 2003 Foreign Operations bill. I understand and support the need to send a strong signal to Pakistan and to provide some assurance that our commitment to them is long term, but I submit that providing $600 million is a very strong signal. The Committee on Appropriations, under the leadership of the gentleman from Florida (Mr. YOUNG), has responded with speed and cooperation to the President's request for resources to fight this war. We neglect our oversight responsibilities when we provide prospective waivers for bills that have yet to be written.

   Madam Speaker, I support this bill, but I urge my colleagues to carefully consider these concerns as we move forward.

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

   Mr. HOLT. Madam Speaker, I rise today to address my colleagues regarding S. 1465.

   As we pass this legislation today, I wanted to note for the record certain reservations I have about authorizing the President to waive sanctions against Pakistan. I am in favor of providing aid to Pakistan and helping them develop economically. This development is crucial for a transition to a democratic form of government. Our relationship with Pakistan is especially important in light of the events since September 11. We must continue to cement our alliance with Pakistan and all interested countries in order to maintain our campaign against al Qaeda and the Taliban. However, I question whether waiving restrictions on U.S. arms exports is the best way to help these countries.

   South Asia, as we now know, is an extremely volatile area. In the last 50 years, India and Pakistan, who both have nuclear capabilities, have fought three conflicts. As we have seen in just the last few days, the area around Kashmir continues to be a source of tension in the region. Any weapons that we export to these countries could be used in future conflicts. Do we really want to contribute to the instability of this region by providing more weapons?

   United States law prohibits the export of arms to government in power due to a military coup. Section 508 of the Foreign Operations Act for FY01 prohibits the export of weapons and military assistance to countries whose duly elected head of government is deposed. Reversing this policy without making any stipulations about the re-establishment of democracy could send the wrong message to undemocratic regimes.

   These are extraordinary times. Extreme measures may be necessary. But the President has already exercised his right to provide American weapons and military assistance when national security interests are at stake, as allowed by section 614 of the Foreign Assistance Act. Congress should not waive sanctions on arms export to India and Pakistan unless the President shows that the assistance he has already provided is insufficient.

   If these sanctions are waived, there is no guarantee that the United States has any control over the weapons exported. Our experiences in Somalia, Iran, Iraq, an Afghanistan demonstrate this. How do we know that American weapons will not fall into the hands of potential enemies and threaten our troops at a future date? The Taliban may own up to 100 Stinger missiles that were provided by the United States in the 1980s for their clash with the Soviet Union.

   As I mentioned earlier, I worry about the message that the United States sends to undemocratic regimes by allowing exports to countries without stipulations about the establishment of democracy. To allow such a waiver regardless of a country's human rights standards violates one of the central tenets of U.S. foreign policy. Congress should exercise caution, for allowing such waivers now may lead to broader waivers later. The fight against terrorism should not be at the expense of our principles.

   Madam Speaker, instead of providing military aid, the United States should target its aid toward the more immediate needs of the people of Pakistan and India. Pakistan and India rank No. 127 and No. 114, respectively, in the U.N.'s Human Development Index. More weapons will not move them up in these rankings. The United States should provide economic assistance to the people of Pakistan and India--not more weapons.

   Mr. GILMAN. Madam Speaker, I reluctantly rise in support of S. 1465, a bill that would waive certain restrictions on U.S. assistance to Pakistan.

   While we need to attempt to be helpful to President Musharraf for permitting the United States access to its bases and in an attempt to build a relationship with Pakistan, I am very concerned about working too closely with Pakistan at this point and providing for them to have too much of a role in forming the future Government of Afghanistan.

   In the past, the Government of Pakistan and President Musharraf have given to the Taliban the support they needed to take and stay in power. Pakistani military officials have guided and counseled Taliban military leaders in their war against the National Alliance. Indeed without the support of Pakistan the Taliban would not even exist.

   The Taliban originated from Islamic fundamentalist religious schools in Pakistan. President Musharraf and other Pakistani leaders throughout the years have provided the

[Page: H6798]
Taliban a lifetime by giving it military, economic, and logistical support.

   As Secretary Powell seeks to be helpful to the Afghans as they attempt to form a new government I would hope that we do not take Pakistani advice to install a ``reinvented'' Taliban in power.

   We should also not forget that Pakistan, bin Laden, and the Taliban have been responsible for terrorist acts that have led to the deaths of innocent Indian civilians in Kashmir and throughout India for many years.

   Pakistan has used its military against India time and time again. Given that, while it makes sense to give Pakistan economic support I do not believe that it is wise to give it military support until we are clear about the way in which it intends to use that support. Accordingly, I reluctantly support S. 1465.

   Mr. BEREUTER. Madam Speaker, this Member rises in strong support for S. 1465, a bill authorizing the President to exercise waivers of foreign assistance restrictions with respect to Pakistan through September 30, 2003. This Member would like to commend the distinguished gentleman from kansas serving in the other body, Mr. BROWNBACK, who previously served in this body, for his commitment to develop an expertise in South Asian and Central Asian issues and for introducing S. 1465. This Member would also like to thank the gentleman from Illinois, the chairman of the International Relations Committee, Mr. HYDE, for expeditiously moving this measure to the floor.

   Pakistan is located in a neighborhood where its alignment with the United States during the cold war was neither an easy nor popular choice, and yet Pakistan served well as an ally to the United States during that era. Following the unspeakable and horrific terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, the world has entered a new era, and, to its credit, Pakistan has once again made a choice that was neither easy nor popular--that is, to align itself with the United States in the war against global terrorism.

   Madam Speaker, this legislation provides President Bush with the tools he needs to encourage Pakistan's continued participation in United States efforts to combat terrorism. It provides the President with the opportunity to provide increased assistance to Pakistan is critical and very appropriate at this time.

   However, this Member would note that even if the terrorist attacks had not occurred, reviewing current sanctions against Pakistan, as provided in S. 1465, would have been appropriate. Following the October 12, 1999, unfortunate, but bloodless coup, which brought him to power, General Musharraf has abided by the Pakistani Supreme Court's prescribed timetable for reinstating local elections, and he continues to promise that Pakistan will conduct Federal elections in October 2002. Additionally, freedom of the press appears to be improving according to the Pakistan Country Report on Human Rights Practices for 2000. While the Pakistani economy continues to suffer, reports indicate that General Musharraf's administration has made progress in improving transparency and in liberalizing trade. Certainly, these steps would have warranted the consideration of resuming foreign assistance which could foster continued improvements in these areas. It could also assist in supporting improvements in other human rights areas.

   Madam Speaker, this Member encourages his colleagues to support S. 1465.

   Mr. ACKERMAN. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of S. 1465 but do so with some serious reservations. While I think we all agree that the President needs a significant amount of flexibility in order to effectively prosecute the war on terrorism, I believe we should be careful about the types of assistance that could flow to Pakistan under this particular proposal.

   Clearly, everyone supports the provision of economic assistance to Pakistan. Among the poorest nations in the world, Pakistan was, until a recent rescheduling, in default on U.S. loans and continues to need assistance with its massive foreign debt. In addition, the Pakistani economy remains weak although General Musharaff should be given credit for adhering to the structural adjustment plan required by the International Monetary Fund. Pakistan should also be given assistance to provide health care and education. Life expectancy is low, infant mortality is high, and too many of Pakistan's children are educated in Madrassas that provide only lessons in hatred.

   The problem with this bill is that it opens the door to a significant new arms relationship with Pakistan and before the United States even considers going down that road, we must consider who the arms are likely to be used against. It is clear from looking at Pakistan's immediate neighbors that the threats to Pakistan are low. In Afghanistan, the expectations for a post-Taliban government are that it would not be a threat to Pakistan. Since China is Pakistan's long-time partner on nuclear and missile-related technologies, it is unlikely Pakistan would use the weapons there. There are tensions between Iran and Pakistan but they don't seem to rise to the level of armed conflict. That leaves India, which is where any weapons we provide are likely to be used. We should think long and hard before we agree to supply Pakistan with any weapons or spare parts that would be used against India. India strongly supports the U.S.-led coalition against terrorism and does so without preconditions or reservations. Now is not the time for the U.S. to abandon its democratic friends in South Asia, or elsewhere.

   One final point, Madam Speaker, we should remember that among the sanctions we are waiving here today are those imposed because of the October 1999 coup in Pakistan. The message from this waiver must not be that democracy is no longer important. In fact, the one lesson we should draw from the current situation is that democracy remains the solution to extremism everywhere. We must continue to urge Pakistan to return to democracy as soon as possible.

   Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of this legislation, which will allow for the temporary waiver of economic restrictions with respect to Pakistan.

   We currently find ourselves involved in a military action far from home. This is only possible due to the coordinated efforts of many nations that have demonstrated their commitment to eliminating terrorism from the earth. Pakistan has contributed mightily to our efforts in Afghanistan, both diplomatically and otherwise.

   Madam Speaker, President Clinton imposed sanctions on Pakistan and India for their dual nuclear tests in 1998 under the Glenn Amendment of the Arms Export Control Act. In addition, the October 1999 overthrow of the democratically elected government of Pakistan triggered additional sanctions under the Foreign Appropriations Act. Foreign Assistance Act also imposed restrictions on Pakistan for arrearages in bilateral debt payments. On September 22, 2001, President Bush triggered waivers to lift remaining sanctions on Pakistan as a good faith gesture towards this nation for its cooperation in eradicating terrorism. The Congress must also demonstrate its commitment to our allies in this struggle, while respecting the long-term policy goals our sanctions are designed to promote and protect. This legislation achieves this goal by granting the President waiver authority for fiscal year 2002. However, for the following fiscal year, the waiver is only extended if the President can show this Body that the waiver would ``facilitate the transition to democratic rule in Pakistan; and is important to United States efforts to respond to, deter, or prevent acts of international terrorism.'' Thus, this House ensures that we do not disregard our commitment to the spread of viable stable democracies throughout the world, while recognizing the need to commit resources to those nations willing to facilitate the development of peace throughout both the region and the world.

   Pakistan is also given the opportunity to continue its support of our military efforts in FY 2003 by allowing the President to waive arms control export laws if President Bush deems it necessary and notifies Congress 45 days in advance. The leadership of Pakistan, though not elected, has recognized the urgent need for the Peace of Nations in this world. Despite sustained protests and alleged destabilization by Taliban infiltrators from Afghanistan, the leadership of Pakistan has proven that it has renounced its ties to the Taliban, and agreed to play a decisive role in the shaping of a new democracy within Afghanistan. Our actions here today ensure that we will play a decisive role in pursuing the goal of democracy within Pakistan.

   Finally, Madam Speaker, this bill ensures that we do not sell ourselves for the sake of our pursuit of the Taliban. This legislation ``sunsets'' on October 1, 2003. By limiting the scope of this waiver, we respect our constitutional function of checking the power of the executive to pursue policies against our long-term interests longer than necessary for the swift administration of justice

   Though the times we live in are uncertain, we are not desperate, for our cause is just and our will strong. This Congress is charged to face unpleasant realities for the sake of our children's futures. S. 1465 does this, and in a way that ensures the children of Pakistan might someday know democracy, too.

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

   The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. BIGGERT). The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. HYDE) that the House suspend the rules and pass the Senate bill, S. 1465.

   The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor thereof) the rules were suspended and the Senate bill was passed.

   A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

END