A concurrent resolution calling for the suspension of Sudan's membership on the United Nations Commission on Human Rights.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and concur in the Senate concurrent resolution (S. Con. Res. 137) calling for the suspension of Sudan's membership on the United Nations Commission on Human Rights.

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

In April of 2004, Mr. Speaker, at the same time as world leaders were gathered in Kigali, Rwanda, to remember the Rwandan genocide of 10 years earlier, a humanitarian cease-fire was signed between the government of Sudan, the Sudan Liberation Movement/Army, and the Sudan Justice and Equality Movement to end the atrocities and reverse the humanitarian crisis in Darfur. The agreement was facilitated by the U.S., European Union, the African Union and the United Nations. All parties agreed to take immediate steps to stop the violence and atrocities being perpetrated by the Janjaweed militias.

Sadly, the agreement was not worth the paper it was written on, and the violence continued. The U.N. Humanitarian Coordinator for Sudan later said, ``The only difference between Rwanda and Darfur now is the numbers involved.'' President Bush confirmed this conclusion on September 9 by declaring ``The United States is appalled by the violence in Darfur, Sudan. The world cannot ignore the suffering of more than 1 million people.''

Mr. Speaker, despite the best efforts of the U.S. Government, including the extraordinary efforts of Ambassador Williamson at the U.N. Conference in Geneva, and I was there and I saw it up close and personal, he did an extraordinary job; Sudan was given nothing more than a half-hearted slap on the wrist during the sixtieth session of the U.S. Commission on Human Rights which concluded its work in May. Like I said, I was there in Geneva, and I was appalled when Sudan was reelected to serve on the commission for another 2 years. The hypocrisy of the election of Sudan, one of the worst violators of human rights on the planet, to serve on the U.N. Commission For Human Rights should not be lost on anyone. It is utterly outrageous.

Sudan now, as it has in the past, uses its clout on the Human Rights Panel to thwart scrutiny of its policies and to water down resolutions of condemnation. Sudan uses its seat on the committee to network and to collude with other rogue nations to run interference for the dictatorships. And again, I saw that firsthand as they were walking the halls in Geneva and working the room to try to water down resolutions.

Finally, let me just say, Mr. Speaker, the atrocities committed in Darfur have all been well documented. An estimated 50,000 people have been killed and another 300,000 face imminent death in the coming months. Over a million have been displaced, and some 200,000 others have been forced to flee to neighboring Chad. This atrocity must come to an end. This resolution again puts us on record in trying to mitigate and, hopefully, end this crisis.

Mr. Speaker, in April 2004, at the same time as world leaders were gathered in Kigali, Rwanda to remember the Rwandan genocide of 10 years earlier, a humanitarian cease-fire was signed between the government of Sudan, the Sudan Liberation Movement/Army, and the Sudan Justice and Equality Movement to end the atrocities and reverse the humanitarian crisis in Darfur. The agreement was facilitated by the United States Government, the European Union, the African Union, and the United Nations. All parties agreed to take immediate steps to stop the violence and atrocities being perpetrated by the Janjaweed militias.

Sadly, the agreement wasn't worth the paper it was written on and the violence continued. The U.N. Humanitarian Coordinator for Sudan later said, ``The only difference between Rwanda and Darfur now is the numbers involved.'' President Bush affirmed this conclusion on September 9 by declaring, ``The United States is appalled by the violence in Darfur, Sudan . . . The world cannot ignore the suffering of more than one million people.''

Despite the best efforts by the United States Government, including the extraordinary efforts of Ambassador Williamson, Sudan was given nothing more than a half-hearted slap on the wrist during the 60th Session of the U.N. Commission on Human Rights, which concluded its work in May. I was there in Geneva and was appalled when Sudan was reelected to serve on the Commission for another two years. The hyprocacy of the election of Sudan--one of the worst violators of human rights on the planet--to serve on the U.N. Commission for Human Rights should not been lost on anyone. It is utterly outrageous.

Sudan uses its clout on the Human Rights Panel to thwart scrutiny of its policies and to water down resolutions of condemnation. Sudan uses its seat on the Committee to network and collude with other rogue nations to run interference for dictatorships.

Mr. Speaker, this is the third time in the past 4 months that this House has considered resolutions which have shed light on the crisis in the Darfur region. The first resolution, House Concurrent Resolution 403, condemned the Government of Sudan for its attacks against civilians in Darfur. The second, House Concurrent Resolution 467, declared that the atrocities taking place in Darfur constitute genocide. This declaration of genocide was affirmed by President Bush and Secretary of State Powell. Senate Concurrent Resolution 137, which lies before you now, represents a logical next step.

Senate Concurrent Resolution 137 endorses the Secretary of State's call for an investigation into violations of international humanitarian law and human rights law that have occurred in Darfur, and calls for Sudan's suspension from the Commission on Human Rights until that investigation has been completed. Should the investigation lead to a determination by the United Nations that genocide has occurred or is occurring in Darfur, the resolution calls for the removal of Sudan from the Human Rights Commission. Finally, the resolution calls upon the Member States of the Human Rights commission to convene an immediate special session to consider suspension of Sudan's membership.

The atrocities committed in Darfur have been well documented. An estimated 50,000 people have been killed, another 300,000 face certain death in the coming months, over a million have been internally displaced and some 200,000 others have been forced to flee to neighboring Chad. Attacks show a systematic pattern and include murder, rape, gender-based violence, and other scorched earth tactics. Despite the existence of a cease-fire, African Union monitors have confirmed government support for and participation in attacks against civilians in Darfur as recently as August 26, 2004. Human Rights Watch reports that the Sudanese Government has allowed the Janjaweed to maintain military camps in all Darfur states--several of which they share with the Sudanese Army--and that many Janjaweed have been incorporated into the army or police.

On July 22, 2004 the House voted unanimously to declare that the atrocities in Sudan constituted genocide. On September 9, 2004, the State Department followed suit, releasing a report which outlines these atrocities and concludes that the Sudanese Government has ``promoted systematic killings based on race and ethnic origin,'' and that these acts constitute genocide.

It is unconscionable that a government which has perpetrated genocide would be welcome to sit on the U.N. Commission on Human Rights--the very body charged with the protection of human rights around the globe. Sudan should be in the dock--being held accountable for crimes against humanity. Sudan's flagrant disregard for the principles enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights makes a mockery of the Human Rights Commission's work, and tangibly undermines that work. Its continued presence on that Commission degrades the United Nations system as a whole.

The preamble to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights places great importance on each member country having a common understanding of human rights and freedoms. One must wonder if the Government of Sudan, which has demonstrated such a flagrant disregard for these principles, has ever read that document. If they have, surely they have not taken it to heart.

Mr. Speaker, I welcome the recent adoption of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1565, which establishes the International Commission of Inquiry called for by both this body and by President Bush. But in light of the evidence already before us, I believe it would be extraordinarily difficult to make an argument against suspending Sudan's membership from the U.N. Commission on Human Rights. This resolution is timely, it is logical, and I urge your support.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from New York (Mr. McHugh) control the remaining time on our side.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time.

I too want to commend the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Payne). As the gentleman knows, I have been a member of this Congress since 1992; and it seems like ever since I have been a member of this Congress, we have been hearing about Sudan. We first heard about Sudan when the Secretary of State declared Sudan a state sponsor of terrorism and determined that they had been since 1993.

We may recall that Osama bin Laden, who many of us were unaware of who he was and what he was until 9/11, but he in fact had his base of operations in Sudan. He was sponsored by the government of Khartoum. It is the same Sudan that we are here today talking about. The gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Payne), the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf), Senator Brownback, many have traveled to Sudan. We have talked to refugees. We have talked to survivors from Southern Sudan, people who have witnessed their families being killed.

At that time we suspected that religion may be the root cause because many of those in Southern Sudan were Christians. The Khartoum government was a Muslim government. All was a factor. But whatever the factors, we spoke out and as this House sponsored a sanction, a similar sanction to what the U.N. is considering now against the oil. The Sudanese government duly pulled back at that time, and we passed with only two dissenting votes. It was a strong sanction. It went over to the Senate, and it died there.

Since that time, the one difference in the sanctions that are being considered now and the sanctions that were being considered then is that 2 million Sudanese have died. Action is too late for them. Their bones have long since been buried in Sudan where there are too many graves.

This latest action by Sudan, and all this time they were members of a select group, the United Nations Commission on Human Rights, a country where we have witnessed the worst human rights violations and the worst humanitarian violations known to the world, has sat this entire time on the U.N. body that is designed to take action against. What a travesty. What an embarrassment. What a blight on our international community and on the U.N.

This resolution is a start; but, I would say, and the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf) and I had thought maybe he might do it today, he introduced back on September 9 ``Documenting Atrocities in Darfur.'' And what we are now witnessing in Western Sudan, for a while in Southern Sudan it was hidden, and there were explanations given by the Sudanese government. There is no explanation. There is no justification. There is no, there are simply no grounds for what is happening in Western Sudan today.

It follows a pattern. And the Sudanese government says we cannot control these Arab militia, Janjaweed. We cannot control them. They say this is a historic thing between nomadic Arab tribesmen and black farmers, and it is just something that has gone on for hundreds of years.

What has gone on for hundreds of years is they have lived peacefully together for hundreds of years. What is going on today is not an Arab militia out of control. It is, in fact, the government of Khartoum.

Thirteen hundred survivors were interviewed, and 25 percent of them said it was not Arab militia. It was government bombers and aircraft and helicopters who flew over our villages, strafed our villages, killed our people. It was not Arab militia because the Arab militia did not have aircraft. They did not have helicopters. This was the government of Khartoum.

Of those interviewed, half of the survivors say that government troops participated in these raids and in these attacks. Read, if you will, what some of these refugees said. Here is what one said. He said, ``Slaves run. Leave the country. You don't belong here. Why are you not leaving this area? This area is for Arab cattle to go graze, not yours.''

A Sudanese tribesman was told by a man in a brown uniform and a hundred of his followers, ``This place belongs to Arab tribes. Blacks must leave.''

Look, if you will. I would ask every Member to read ``Documenting Atrocities in Darfur.'' It is only five pages long.

First, the government aircraft comes in and strafes the village, and then the Janjaweed or government soldiers come in. They burn the village. They kill the livestock, they drop them down the wells to poison the wells, but then they began shouting racial epithets at the survivors. They rape women in front of their husbands and children. They kill any young man that is of military age between the ages of 18 and 25 and then they drive the rest off.

Today, as a result of all this, what do we find? We find that 1.25 million Sudanese are living in refugee camps. Those are the fortunate ones that have survived, but they are not fortunate by any other terms because they are at this time permanently displaced.

Let me say this. This is what we should always be mindful of. We need a permanent solution. What the Sudanese Government has done is, they have allowed humanitarian aid to come in on occasion to feed these people in these refugee camps. They have talked to some of the leaders of the opposition. They have engaged in talks, and they have allowed government troops from other areas to come in and protect the refugee camps. But all of this time, they have not gone after the Arab militia.

They have not controlled them. They are continuing to arm them, and they go out in the villages and destroy villages, this month, last month. And their design is to never let these people return home, never to let them go home, to allow them to stay in these refugee camps, a permanently displaced population of millions of people, and let international forces feed those people. That simply will not do.

Those people need to return to their villages. They need to be protected. These Arab militia and their leaders need to be brought to justice, and we can at least start this process.

The last time we voted sanctions on Sudan, 3 years ago and a million deaths ago, two Members of this body voted against it. Today, I hope, as God is our witness, that this is a unanimous vote and that it is not the end of things, it is only the beginning of things.

I second everything that the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer) and the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf) said about the United Nations. This is genocide in every sense of the word. It is ethnic cleansing in every sense of the word. And for it to be permitted, sanctioned by the United Nations is a travesty and an atrocity in and of itself.

Analysis of the refugee interviews points to a pattern of

abuse against members of Darfur's non-Arab communities,

including murder, rape, beatings, ethnic humiliation, and

destruction of property and basic necessities. Many of the

reports detailing attacks on villages refer to government and

militia forces, preceded by aerial bombardment, acting

together to commit atrocities. Respondents said government

and militia forces wore khaki or brown military uniforms.

Roughly one-half of the respondents noted GOS forces had

joined Jingaweit irregulars in attacking their villages.

Approximately one-quarter of the respondents said GOS forces

had acted alone; another 14 percent said the Jingaweit has

acted alone. Two-thirds of the respondents reported aerial

bombings against their villages; four-fifths said they had

witnessed the complete destruction of their villages. Sixty-

one percent reported witnessing the killing of a family

member. About one-third of the respondents reported hearing

racial epithets while under attack; one-quarter witnessed

beatings. Large numbers reported the looting of personal

property (47 percent) and the theft of livestock (80

percent).

Most reports followed a similar pattern:

1. GOS aircraft or helicopters bomb villages.

2. GOS soldiers arrive in trucks, followed closely by

Jingaweit militia riding horses or camels.

3. GOS soldiers and militia surround and then enter

villages, under cover of gunfire.

4. Fleeing villagers are targets in aerial bombing.

5. The Jingaweit and GOS soldiers loot the village after

most citizens have fled, often using trucks to remove

belongings.

6. Villages often experience multiple attacks over a

prolonged period before they are destroyed by burning or

bombing.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this resolution, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I would first like to commend our colleagues in the Senate for passing this critically important resolution. The passage was in the spirit of a bipartisan, bicameral coalition that has worked together over the last few years and few months, in particular, on the problem in Darfur, to bring peace and justice there. I commend the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) on his statement and all of those who have worked so diligently, including the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Tancredo), the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf), the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cummings) of the Black Caucus, who have all come together to support the terrible actions of the government of Sudan.

Mr. Speaker, this past May, the United Nations Economic and Social Council voted on candidate states for 14 open seats on the Human Rights Commission, the monitoring watchdog of the United Nations. To the dismay of the international community, Sudan was nominated from the Africa group.

Just one month later, the commission censured Sudan over its severe human rights violations in the country's western Darfur region. Sudan was charged with systematically destroying whole villages, executing civilians, raping women and displacing hundreds of thousands of people. I went to that region, to Chad and went 30 miles from the border of Sudan and talked to the refugees there and heard firsthand the horrible stories that they told us about rapes and beatings of children, boys being forced into huts and the huts being burned, just horrible, horrible stories.

Mr. Speaker, this is the same government that gave sanctuary to Osama bin Laden from 1991 to 1996, allowing him to build his terror network worldwide. In fact, I would argue that al Qaeda was conceived and created in Sudan in the early 1990s. Other terrorist acts also link current officials directly to a number of the terrorist acts, and they still sit in the government of Sudan.

Mr. Speaker, in the north-south conflict, more than 2 million people perished, and an estimated 5 million people have been displaced over the last decade. It is the same government that terrorized, enslaved and killed innocent civilians in southern Sudan and the Nuba that is now yet again engaged in the terror campaign that we see in Darfur in western Sudan. We cannot stand idly by, silent and allow Sudan a seat on that body while it is responsible for the ongoing genocide against the people of Darfur.

Before the House and Senate adjourned for summer recess, both chambers took a historic step in passing a resolution declaring that genocide is occurring in Darfur. The Congress has never declared genocide while it was occurring. So this was a giant step forward.

Finally, the administration came to the same conclusion following its own independent investigation, that the Sudanese government was sponsoring genocide by the Janjaweed militia against the ethnic Africans in Darfur.

This past Saturday, the U.N. Security Council approved a U.S.- sponsored resolution asking U.N. Secretary Kofi Annan to set up an investigative commission. This Commission would determine whether the violence in Darfur amounts to genocide. The resolution also threatens oil and other targeted sanctions against Sudan if atrocities continue in Darfur.

We were disappointed by the weak nature of this resolution and for its limited effects. The reaction from Khartoum that ``it could have been a lot worse'' shows us how far we are from a strong resolution on Darfur. While it passed by 11 votes, I must express extreme disappointment with China, Algeria, Russia and Pakistan, the four nations that abstained from supporting this resolution. As a matter of fact, China had declared that it may veto it, and therefore, the resolution was really diluted, and they still abstained.

We, as the United States, need to rethink our relationships with these nations. One suggestion could be that we revoke Normal Trade Relations status with the People's Republic of China. How would they like it if we said, no longer do you have normal trade relations or, as we used to call it, preferential treatment. I think it would perhaps make them sit up and listen.

Pakistan, called a friend by the administration for its partnership in the war on terrorism, is promoting the terrorist government of Sudan by abstaining on the vote. In a statement today, Khartoum called these nations its ``true friends.''

While the government of Sudan grudgingly accepted the resolution, as we speak its surrogate militias continue their gruesome assault on innocent men, women, and children in Darfur. Further, in response for calls to international civilian protection forces, Khartoum's leaders threatened to open the ``five gates of hell'' against such protection.

In a cynical attempt to pretend it has taken action to protect its civilians, Khartoum has recycled Janjaweed militia killers to the Sudan police force and is now using them to guard the camps for the displaced.

Mr. Speaker, how can we expect killers to protect those who they seek to kill? It is an unconceivable notion. How can we stand by and allow this murderous regime to sit on the U.N. Human Rights Commission?

Mr. Speaker, with more than as many as 50,000 civilians slaughtered and over 1 million driven off their lands into unprotected camps, we cannot allow Khartoum to degrade the purposes of the Human Rights Commission by its presence. It is incumbent that the United States Government continue to lead the world on this matter of genocide and do everything possible to have Sudan suspended from the Commission.

The African Union should be recognized for what they are doing in sending 300 monitors to Darfur, but this is definitely not enough. The AU has been sponsoring negotiations between the parties in Abuja, Nigeria, since August 23. The combination of international pressure and facilitation by the AU hopefully will help move Darfur out of this crisis and on to the road of peace.

Mr. Speaker, I commend Secretary of State Colin Powell for finally calling the Darfur genocide by its rightful name. I also want to say that we must, as Secretary Powell has stated, support the AU. It is our responsibility as members of the international community and the United States in particular, as the world's wealthiest Nation, to work along with the African Union and not leave the formidable Darfur crisis to fall on their shoulders alone. They need our support.

So, therefore, I would like to also urge all of our colleagues in the House to support H.R. 5061, introduced by the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Tancredo) and myself to provide assistance for the current crisis in the Darfur region of Sudan and to facilitate a comprehensive peace plan in Sudan. I urge my colleagues to support S. Con. Res. 137.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

General Leave

Mr. Speaker, let me thank the gentleman who has really done an outstanding job in this area for a decade, and I certainly would like to associate myself with his remarks.

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer).

I thank the gentleman from Alabama for his very passionate remarks and all of his support for

many years, even in the capital market sanctions. I really commend him for that.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Meeks).

(Mr. MEEKS of New York asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

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

Mr. President, the 2004 Summer Olympic Games in Athens, which took place between August 13-29, have added a vivid and memorable chapter to the Olympic tradition, which first took shape in Greece nearly three millennia ago, and which in its modern form dates back to 1896. The Athens 2004 Organizing Committee, the U.S. Olympic Committee, the International Olympic Committee and dozens of other organizations, the U.S. Olympic Team and thousands of athletes from all over the world, the unwavering determination to meet unprecedented challenges and the good will and hard work of the people of Greece all contributed to assuring the success of the Games. In tribute to their magnificent achievement, today I am joined by a number of my colleagues in introducing a resolution to express our gratitude and congratulations.

Greece took on a daunting challenge when, in 1997, the nation was designated by the International Olympic Committee to serve as host to the 2004 Summer Games. With the exception of Finland, where the 1952 Games took place, in terms of population Greece is the smallest Olympic host ever. To prepare for the return of the Games to Athens, where the first modern Olympics were held in 1896, the whole nation came together in a great common effort. The President and Managing Director of the Athens 2004 Organizing Committee for the Olympic and Paralympic Games and their associates worked closely with the Mayor of Athens, the Ministries of Public Works and Culture and other government agencies to assure a setting and facilities uniquely appropriate to the great events. The people of Greece, in Athens and also in communities around the Nation, gave their full support to the preparatory efforts and opened their hearts to the athletes.

The events of September 11, 2001 raised the challenge of preparing for the Olympic Games to unprecedented heights, for they fundamentally changed the security and logistical context for all major international events--and indeed, as we know from our recent political conventions, for all large gatherings. As the Athens Games were the first summer Games to occur after 9/11, Greece had neither precedents nor guidelines upon which to rely in planning for the security of some 10,500 Olympic athletes, 5,500 team officials and literally millions of visitors. The challenges were all the more formidable because many of the events, including soccer and shot put, were held in places as distant from Athens as Thessaloniki and ancient Olympia.

Greece undertook to do everything ``humanly possible'' to ensure the safety and success of the Games. The Athens 2004 Organizing Committee carried out a careful study and analysis of the security arrangements for the somewhat smaller Winter Games that had taken place in 2002, in Salt Lake City.

A specially trained security force of 45,000 men and women was deployed, which included military and air force personnel, coast guards, fire fighters, law enforcement officials and private security contractors. The government of Greece worked in close collaboration with the United States, Britain, Israel, France, Germany, Australia, and Spain, along with NATO, guided by two principles: every single nation had an interest in having its athletes compete safely, and all nations working toward a common objective--the ultimate success of the Games--would provide the most effective deterrent to a terrorist act. As a result, while security measures were comprehensive and complex they were expertly and unobtrusively carried out, in no way detracting from the spirit of the Games. Athletes and visitors alike moved about unimpeded, and competition went forward in the finest Olympic tradition.

Major investments in infrastructure also contributed significantly to the smooth functioning of the Games. Athens today is a city transformed. Since 1997, when the International Olympic Committee designated Greece as the host country for the 2004 Games, transportation and telecommunications systems have been expanded and modernized. The investments Greece has made in connection with the Olympics have created unprecedented opportunities for the future. The Olympic stadium complex, which includes the aquatic and tennis center, as well as the indoor arena and main stadium, will serve as major training facilities for many years to come. The soccer facilities will be highly sought after for international soccer events. Overall, infrastructure improvements have laid a sound foundation for economic growth and prosperity nationwide. Having met a daunting challenge, Greece is now poised to take on new responsibilities in an expanded European Union, and in the broad international community. Where the cherished tradition of the Summer Olympics is concerned, Greece has shown what can be accomplished. The experience in Athens will surely prove invaluable to China, which fours years from now will play host to the Games in Beijing.

As a Marylander, I am especially proud of the signal accomplishments of Maryland athletes, and I am sure my colleagues take similar pride in the athletes from their respective states. The performance of the U.S. Olympic Team members in one stirring event after another will long be remembered, as anyone fortunate enough to have witnessed the competition firsthand will attest.

Above and beyond the excitement and the triumphs of the different events, however, the Athens Olympics gave us something more. The 2004 Games showed that even in uncertain and turbulent times, it is possible with determination and planning and foresight to bring together men and women of good will from every corner of the globe in a great common endeavor. This is for all of us a both a reminder and an inspiration.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that several articles be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, in a few minutes, I will be propounding a number of unanimous consent requests and

completing business for the day. One of the unanimous consent requests I will propound shortly has to do with one of the most significant humanitarian crises of recent years--and most people would say it is the most dramatic humanitarian global crisis of today--the atrocities that are occurring in Sudan, in the Darfur region of Sudan, which is a region in western Sudan which is about the size of France.

Sudan is a huge country, and this whole Darfur region since a year before last February has been the geographic location where 30,000 to 50,000 people have died, with another 1.4 million and maybe as high as 1.7 million people displaced from their homes--action that we condemned on the floor of the Senate, and the House did likewise, at the end of July before our recess, and designating in the most dramatic terms that this is genocide.

Unfortunately, not a lot has happened on the ground that is constructive since that point in time. Thirty days passed and a United Nations determination on what was going on didn't have very much teeth to it, and the Government in Khartoum of Sudan simply hasn't responded. Thus these atrocities--the rape, the pillaging, the murder, the total destruction of the villages--have continued. It is important that the United Nations continue to act and address this issue. It is also important, since the United Nations has not really acted, that we in the United States lead with clarity, boldness, and, I would say, moral clarity.

The resolution we will be addressing shortly takes that next step for what we in this legislative body can do. The resolution calls upon the Secretary of State to take action to push for the immediate suspension of Sudan's membership on the United Nations Commission on Human Rights. A government that is engaged in committing genocide should simply not have a seat on the Commission on Human Rights.

Since the initial resolution we passed in July designating this as genocide, I have had the opportunity to go to Sudan once again, which I do at least once a year as part of the medical mission work I do. But this time I had the opportunity to go to the country of Chad, which is just west of the Darfur region of Sudan where we have had thousands and thousands of people flee to escape the Janjaweed, the militia that is being funded by the Government of Khartoum.

In these refugee camps--Tulum is one I immediately think of where 15,000 people fled--the stories you hear would be a woman who says: Last month, I was there with my three little kids, and my husband was in the fields working, and the Janjaweed military in uniform came and destroyed our entire village. My two children, I don't know where they are. I assume they have been killed. Here is one child with me. My husband is dead, and I have no home and nowhere to go, so I am in the refugee camp.

That is going on. After 1,200 interviews that have occurred over the last month, the Secretary of State this past week in a Foreign Relations hearing said: Yes. Based on our findings independent of what Congress decided, this is genocide.

What we don't have yet is a determination by the United Nations because there are countries such as China and Russia and Pakistan and others that sit on the Security Council. Basically they have not yet made a determination. Meanwhile people continue to die. The atrocities continue. Thus, this body today in this resolution will take action to push for the immediate suspension of Sudan's membership on the United Nations Commission on Human Rights.

The Senate resolution further states that the United Nations should immediately move to determine whether genocide has been conducted in Darfur, and if it has, that the Secretary of State should push for Sudan's removal from the United Nations Commission on Human Rights. A government, as I said, engaged in genocide should not have a seat on this Commission. It makes a mockery of the Human Rights Commission. This is an affront to all responsible countries that embrace and promote human rights.

The 1948 Genocide Convention calls on state parties to punish genocide--those are the words it uses--when it occurs. The United States is party to this 1948 Convention on Genocide and so is Sudan. The United States has taken a number of actions to provide relief to the people of Sudan. We have introduced resolutions to the U.N. condemning Khartoum's actions. We have taken a number of actions. The United States has already placed comprehensive sanctions on Sudan for its actions as a state sponsor of terrorism.

What we are doing today is pushing to suspend Sudan from the Human Rights Commission, which is consistent with our obligations under that Genocide Convention. It makes sense. It is the right thing to do. I hope the House of Representatives will take up this resolution quickly and pass it forthwith. I also hope in the meantime, Secretary Powell will listen to the will and intent of the Congress and begin taking appropriate action. If we are going to preserve the credibility of the United Nations and its separate commissions, if we are going to advance the causes of human rights, if we are going to protect oppressed peoples around the globe, and especially in Darfur, then the U.N. must take more aggressive action.

I turn to the resolution and ask unanimous consent the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. Con. Res. 137, which was submitted earlier today by Senators Frist and Daschle.

I ask that the concurrent resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, and any statements be printed in the Record.