Floor Statements

I do thank my good friend and colleague for giving me this opportunity, Madam Speaker. I had to literally run to the floor, only to find out that this important piece of legislation is a special tribute not only to our colleague, but certainly a special friend and a mentor, and what I consider as an institution, an institutional, outstanding leader in our Nation, about to retire.

Madam Speaker, in this conference report I want to express my support of the U.S.-India Nuclear Cooperation Act of 2006, and I commend the chairman, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) and the ranking member, Mr. Lantos, of the International Relations Committee, Senator Richard Lugar and Senator Joseph Biden, chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Foreign Relations in the Senate, for moving this legislation forward.

With my time remaining, I wish I had more time, I cannot help but to say that we are going to miss one of the most outstanding leaders that we have had in our Nation, and I want to pay that special tribute to my good friend, and he is like a father to most of us, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), whom I am going to miss very much.

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of the U.S. and India Nuclear Cooperation Promotion Act of 2006 and I commend Chairman Henry Hyde and Ranking Member Tom Lantos of the House International Relations Committee, and Senators Richard Lugar and Joseph Biden, Chairman and ranking member of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, for their leadership in moving this legislation forward.

While some of our critics may argue that India has not signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPS), I submit that had it not been for our country's indifference, or benign neglect, if you will, India may have been a member of the nuclear club years ago and our discussion about the NPT would be a moot point. To be specific, India had a civilian nuclear program in place prior to the NPT being opened for signature in 1968 and, at the time, India was only months away from possessing nuclear weapons. But, in 1967, the U.S. joined with the Soviet Union in crafting a nuclear nonproliferation treaty which to this day states that only the United States, Russia, the United Kingdom, China, and France are permitted to own nuclear weapons because only these five nations possessed nuclear weapons at the time the treaty was open for signature.

Again, India had a civilian nuclear program in place and was only months away from possessing nuclear weapons prior to the NPT being opened for signature in 1968. But U.S. policy toward India precluded India from becoming a member of the exclusive nuclear club and this is why I agree with India's position that the NPT is, and has always been, flawed and discriminatory.

In fact, history speaks for itself. In 1962, when China attacked India, the U.S. responded by saying it might protect India against a future attack. But when China exploded its first nuclear bomb in 1964, the U.S.

welcomed China as a member of the nuclear club and we also supported China's bid to become a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council.

In 1965, when Pakistan attacked India, the U.S. remained neutral while China outspokenly supported Pakistan. Concerned for its own security and having little reason to rely on the U.S., India announced in 1966 that it would produce nuclear weapons and it is little wonder that India exploded its first nuclear device in 1974. Recent U.S. State Department declassified documents on U.S. foreign policy show that India had little choice given the hostile attitude assumed by the United States towards India during the Nixon/Kissinger years.

As we all can agree, India then and India today lives in one of the world's toughest regions and it is somewhat Eurocentric for the U.S. to treat India as if it is beholden to us for the safety, protection and well-being of her people. It is no grand gesture on our part that we now offer India civil nuclear cooperation. Instead, U.S.-India civil nuclear cooperation is long overdue and, quite frankly, the deal is as good for us as it is for India.

Madam Speaker, I commend President Bush and Prime Minister Singh for bringing this initiative to the table. I also applaud the efforts of Under Secretary of State Nicholas Burns who is the unsung hero of U.S.- India civil nuclear cooperation. As the lead negotiator for this agreement, he has represented this nation's interest with unprecedented distinction and I am honored to have worked with him during these critical months leading up to today's historic vote.

I also want to thank Mr. Sanjay Puri who worked in cooperation with Under Secretary Burns and Members of the House and Senate to bolster support for this agreement since the day it was first announced. I commend him for being a part of today's victory and I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of the conference report.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Res. 1087, designating Room H-139 of the Capitol as the ``Henry J. Hyde Room.'' I believe that this high honor is a fitting tribute to my friend and colleague for his 32 years of distinguished service in Congress.

Mr. Hyde is truly an institution in the Halls of Congress. His character, his wisdom, and his eloquence will long serve as an inspiration to those who will grace the Halls of Congress in the future. Through his leadership on the House Committee on International Relations, his guidance on the House Committee on the Judiciary, and his selfless dedication to the people of the 6th District of Illinois, Mr. Hyde has proven to be a true statesman, easily worthy of the honor this legislation would bestow on him.

In my experience working with Chairman Hyde on the International Relations Committee, he has proven himself time and again to be a strong leader. On many of the most pressing international issues of our time, such as the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, North Korea's nuclear ambitions, the humanitarian crisis in Darfur, our Nation's ongoing relations with China, and the pending nuclear agreement with India, Chairman Hyde has been the voice and the conscience of the American people.

Throughout his tenure in Congress, Mr. Hyde has focused on improving the lives of children, working families, seniors, and military veterans. Examples of his service in his home district include public works projects to provide flood control and clean drinking water, new housing developments for senior citizens and children with special needs, and grants to provide new equipment for the local fire and police departments.

A military veteran himself, Mr. Hyde has long championed the cause of today's military veterans. Mr. Hyde served in the U.S. Navy in the South Pacific, New Guinea and the Philippines during World War II and continued to serve in the U.S. Naval Reserve until 1968, retiring at the rank of commander. Earlier this year I was privileged to travel to American Samoa with Chairman Hyde where he recognized and acknowledged the military service and sacrifices of our Samoan soldiers in the global war on terror.

Chairman Hyde is my dear friend and a cherished colleague. He is highly regarded by members from both sides of the aisle for his leadership and integrity. I support H. Res. 1087 and I encourage my fellow members in Congress to support this resolution recognizing the invaluable contribution of Mr. Hyde to this great Nation.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 5682, the U.S. and India Nuclear Cooperation Promotion Act, and I want to certainly commend Chairman Henry Hyde and Ranking Member Tom Lantos for their leadership in moving this legislation forward. This proposed legislation is a classic example of what bipartisanship is all about, and I, again, commend our chairman and ranking member and their staffs for their statesmanship and initiative in bringing this bill to the floor for consideration.

I also want to compliment my colleague from New York (Mr. Ackerman) for giving our colleagues a little historical perspective about this whole question of non-proliferation, and I want to share with my colleagues a historical perspective of why India did not and could not sign the nuclear non-proliferation treaty.

Mr. Chairman, while some of our critics may argue that India has not signed the NPT, I submit that had it not been for our own country's indifference, I call it benign neglect, if you will, India may have been a member of the nuclear club and our discussion about the NPT would have been a moot point.

In the early 1960s, despite having a civilian nuclear program, India called for a global disarmament, but nations with nuclear weapons turned a deaf ear. In 1962, China attacked India claiming it was responding to border provocation. The United States responded by saying it might protect India against a future attack, but when China exploded its first nuclear bomb in 1964, the U.S. welcomed China as a member of the nuclear club, and we also supported China becoming a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council.

It may be of interest to our colleagues, Mr. Chairman, that India had a civilian nuclear program in place prior to the NPT being open for signatures in 1968, and at the time, India was only months away from possessing nuclear weapons. So while critics may argue that India has not signed the NPT, I agree with India's position that the NPT is, and has always been, flawed and discriminatory.

Therefore, it is little wonder that India exploded its first nuclear device in 1974. Recent U.S. State Department declassified documents on U.S. foreign policy show that India had little choice given the hostile attitude assumed by our country towards India during the Nixon- Kissinger years.

I commend President Bush and Prime Minister Singh for bringing this initiative to the table. I also applaud the effort of Under Secretary of State Nicholas Burns who was our chief negotiator in development of this agreement. He did an outstanding job and showed true statesmanship.

I also want to thank Mr. Sanjay Puri, a great leader in our Indian American community for all that he has done to rally support for this bill.

I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 5682, the U.S. and India Nuclear Cooperation Promotion Act and I commend Chairman Henry Hyde and Ranking Member Tom Lantos for their leadership in moving this legislation forward. This proposed legislation is a classic example of what bipartisanship is all about and I again commend our chairman and ranking member and their staffs for their statesmanship and initiative in bringing this bill

to the floor for consideration. I want to share with my colleagues a historical perspective why India did not and could not sign the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty.

Mr. Chairman, while some of our critics may argue that India has not signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, NPS, I submit that had it not been for our country's indifference or, benign neglect, if you will, India may have been a member of the nuclear club and our discussion about the NPT would be a moot point. In the early 1960s, despite having a civilian nuclear program, India called for global disarmament but nations with nuclear weapons turned a deaf ear.

In 1962, China attacked India claiming it was responding to border provocation. The U.S. responded by saying it might protect India against a future attack. But when China exploded its first nuclear bomb in 1964, the U.S. welcomed China as a member of the nuclear club and we also supported China to become a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council. It may be of interest to our colleagues that India had a civilian nuclear program in place prior to the NPT being opened for signature in 1968 and, at the time, India was only months away from possessing nuclear weapons. So while critics may argue that India has not signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, NPS, I agree with India's position that the NPT is, and has always been, flawed and discriminatory. Therefore, it is little wonder that India exploded its first nuclear device in 1974. Recent U.S. State Department declassified documents on U.S. foreign policy show that India had little choice given the hostile attitude assumed by the United States towards India during the Nixon/Kissinger years.

In 1965, believing India was weakened from its war with China, Pakistan attacked India. In response, the U.S. remained neutral while China outspokenly supported Pakistan. Concerned for its own security and having little reason to rely on the U.S., India announced in 1966 that it would produce nuclear weapons within 18 months. But, in 1967, the U.S. joined with the Soviet Union in crafting a nuclear non- proliferation treaty which to this day states that only the United States, Russia, the United Kingdom, China, and France are permitted to own nuclear weapons because only these five nations possessed nuclear weapons at the time the treaty was open for signature in 1968.

As we all can agree, India then and India today lives in one of the world's toughest regions and it is a bit Eurocentric for the U.S. to treat India as if she is beholden to us for the safety, protection, and well-being of her people. It is no grand gesture on our part that we now offer India civil nuclear cooperation. Instead, U.S.-India civil nuclear cooperation is long overdue and, quite frankly, the deal is as good for us as it is for India.

Mr. Chairman, I commend President Bush and Prime Minister Singh for bringing this initiative to the table. I also applaud the efforts of Under Secretary of State Nicholas Burns who was our chief negotiator in the development of this agreement. As the lead negotiator, Secretary Burns has represented our Nation's interest with distinction and true statesmanship, and I am honored to have worked with him during these critical months leading up to today's historic deliberation of this important bill.

I also want to thank Mr. Sanjay Puri, a great leader in our Indian- American community for all that he has done to rally support for this bill.

I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of H.R. 5682.

Mr. Speaker, in reference to H. Res. 905, I submit an address by former Senator Sam Nunn, Co-Chairman and CEO of the Nuclear Threat Initiative, presented on December 16, 2003 at a symposium entitled Kazakhstan: Reducing Nuclear Dangers, Increasing Global Security.

Symposium Keynote Address

(By Sam Nunn)

I want to thank our guests for joining us today in the

United States Senate, where so much deliberation has taken

place on how to stop the spread of nuclear weapons, and where

the example of Kazakhstan has been welcomed and celebrated as

a model of what we must see in the 21st century.

President Nazarbayev is one of the greatest champions of

nuclear nonproliferation in the world--not merely by his

words, but--most importantly--by his actions and his nation's

example.

President Nazarbayev tells a very striking personal story

in the prologue of his book Epicenter of Peace. As a child,

he remembered having in his home an army rifle that had been

taken by one of his relatives--a Kazakh militiaman--in a

rebellion against a regular Russian army unit in 1916. One

day his grandmother said that the rifle had brought

suffering--that it should be cast out of the house. So

President Nazarbayev's father took the rifle to the

authorities, but not before removing the bayonet, which the

grandmother ordered be made into a sickle. She supplied the

handle that she made herself from her old spindle. As a young

boy, the President used that sickle to cut hay. This

childhood event--dismantling a weapon and building from it a

tool of peace and commerce--foreshadowed the work of his

adult life. It is the heart of the Biblical passage ``they

shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears

into pruning hooks.''

President Nazarbayev dismantled his nation's nuclear

weapons and out of that action built a friendship with the

United States, an example for the world, and an opportunity

for his people to move toward a more promising future. Iran

and other nations could learn from Kazakhstan that a nation

can grow, modernize, make progress, and gain stature not in

spite of renouncing nuclear weapons, but because of it.

Increasing global security also has a critical economic

dimension. In making the decision to disarm, President

Nazarbayev also chose to use his nation's resources to build

an economic base that would benefit all the citizens of

Kazakhstan. The world's economy and stability depends on

diversifying our energy base--so the Kazakhstan role in

energy development is very important. The pressure is

appropriately increasing on both governments and industry

to embed ``transparent'' processes and good governance

practices into their management systems. The government of

Kazakhstan clearly understands this issue, given the

heightened attention to increased oil production in the

Caspian region. The transparency demonstrated by the

government of Kazakhstan recently in announcing at a press

conference the royalties received for a recent large

petroleum project is a very positive step, and one that

should be recognized, showcased, and supported widely.

Revenue transparency is an issue on which industry and

governments will likely continue to face pressure. I

applaud the inclusive and constructive approach that has

been taken to date, and I encourage all parties involved

to continue the dialogue and working together to advance

this important topic. Without economic stability--every

step in the security arena becomes more difficult.

Let me acknowledge and thank Minister Vladimir Shkolnik for

his role both in Kazakhstan's economic development and in its

nuclear disarmament example. President Nazarbayev had the

personal vision to renounce nuclear weapons, but he also had

something just as important. He had in Minister Shkolnik, a

man with the determination and the skill to get it done. The

world owes you a great debt, Mr. Minister.

I also want to thank Ambassador Saudabayev, who this past

August in Athens, Georgia, so graciously presented to me

Kazakhstan's highest award to non-citizens. The Ambassador is

a vigorous and talented advocate for Kazakhstan's interests

in the United States. He has a keen understanding of where

our nations' interests intersect, and how we can advance them

together. Kazakhstan is fortunate to have a man of his talent

in Washington.

It is fitting that we meet here in the halls of the United

States Senate, because it was here that the first legislative

debate took place on the question of reducing the nuclear

threat in the post-Cold War world.

Let us recall what was at stake back in 1991. In December

of that year, Vice President Dick Cheney was then Defense

Secretary, and he offered this analysis:

``If the Soviets do an excellent job retaining control over

their stockpile of nuclear weapons--let's assume they've got

25,000-30,000; that's a ballpark figure--and they are 99

percent successful, that would mean you could still have as

many as 250 that they were not able to control.''

So far--strong, visionary actions by many people have kept

that dire but plausible scenario from becoming reality. Dick

Lugar was an indispensible partner in creating the Nunn-Lugar

Program and a central crucial force in the Senate for

spending U.S. dollars to help secure nuclear weapons and

materials in the former Soviet Union. Graham Allison was a

brilliant voice from the outside urging action. At the start,

many members of Congress criticized this effort as aid to the

Soviet military. Six weeks or so later, the Senate voted 86-8

to spend $400 million to help secure the Soviet nuclear

stockpile and limit the spread of nuclear weapons as one

country split into fifteen countries, and one nuclear power

was replaced by four.

This first vote was not a blank check; it was a challenge.

We had to prove to the Congress that Cooperative Threat

Reduction made a clear contribution to our national security.

The courageous actions of President Nazarbayev, Kazakhstan

and Ukraine made a world of difference in proving the

effectiveness of our efforts.

I understand the term ``Kazakh'' is a version of a Turkic

word meaning ``free or independent''. The moment Kazakhstan

became free, it set an independent course among the nations

of the world. Its President declared the nation would

renounce nuclear weapons. Its parliament voted in 1993 to

confirm that--and set in motion the plans to destroy more

than one hundred SS-18 ICBMs, each with 10 high-yield

warheads, along with other smaller nuclear weapons--a larger

nuclear arsenal than held by China, France or the United

Kingdom.

President Nazarbayev's view was like his grandmother's:

these weapons have caused only suffering; they should be cast

out of the country.

The world should understand, more than it does, the

Kazakhstani suffering that led to that decision. As everyone

here knows, the Soviet Union's premier nuclear test site was

located in Kazakhstan at Semipalatinsk, where it was the

site of the first Soviet nuclear explosion, and nearly 500

more over the next forty years, more than one hundred of

them above ground. Because of the environmental

devastation caused by the Soviet nuclear test site at

Semipalatinsk, President Nazarbayev ordered the test site

closed on August 29, 1991--four months before the collapse

of the Soviet Union and 42 years to the day after the

first nuclear test there.

The release of radiation at the test site was far more

severe than Chernobyl--yet the world hears much of Chernobyl

and little of Semipalatinsk. Seventy percent of all Soviet

nuclear testing took place there. More than a million people

suffered dangerous doses of radiation from exposure to

fallout from the test site. Those exposed have suffered high

rates of cancer, infant mortality, birth defects, immune

deficiencies and nervous system disorders. Many of these

health defects don't end with the first generation; they are

passed on to children.

It was in large part an understanding of their suffering

and a respect for their sacrifice that caused Kazakhstan to

become a world leader in renouncing nuclear weapons.

Kazakhstan was not only willing to dismantle its nuclear

arsenal, but also eager to destroy the test sites.

Kazakhstan and the United States became strong security

partners from that decision forward, and money appropriated

here in the Congress helped pay for the dismantling of the

nuclear weapons, the destruction of the silos and the sealing

of the nuclear test tunnels.

That is an impressive record of security cooperation. Yet

there is another accomplishment of U.S.-Kazakhstan relations

that is a model for nuclear nonproliferation, and that is

Project Sapphire. In 1993, Kazakhstani officials approached

the U.S. Ambassador in secret, alerting him to the existence,

at the lightly-secured Ulba Metallurgical Plant, of 1,300

pounds of weapons-grade uranium--enough to make dozens of

nuclear weapons. Both Iraq and Iran were known to be seeking

this kind of high-grade material. It was dangerous, plentiful

and vulnerable.

After a year of planning, a 31-person team from the

United States flew to the region and worked with

Kazakhstani experts for six weeks to take the material out

of its containers, take precautions to make it safe during

transport, repackage it, and then ship it back to the

United States on two Air Force transporters. Once securely

stored in Tennessee, this uranium was blended down and

used to generate civilian power, in a continuation of the

``swords to plowshares'' tradition.

This example shows how indispensable cooperation is in

keeping weapons of mass destruction out of the hands of

dangerous people. The U.S. team arrived back in the United

States in late November. Elections three weeks before had

turned leadership of several legislative committees in

Congress over to new chairmen, some of whom were opposed to

Cooperative Threat Reduction. Project Sapphire offered

dramatic and visible proof of the security value of this

program and helped strengthen the arguments of those of us

who fought to continue funding.

Project Sapphire also provided a model for future

operations of this kind--such as an operation four years

later in the Republic of Georgia; a recent operation in

Serbia called Project Vinca, where NTI working with the U.S.,

Russian and Serbian officials, removed 100 pounds of highly

enriched uranium from the nuclear research reactor near

Belgrade; an another successful operation in Romania a few

months ago.

The United States and Kazakhstan must intensify our ties

across the board--economic, educational, cultural, and

especially on matters of security.

We have to continue to work together to shut down

Kazakhstan's fast breeder reactor that generated weapons-

usable plutonium. We have to make sure the weapons scientists

who used to work at the Stepnogorsk anthrax factory can find

peaceful work. NTI is working with Kazakhstan now on how to

convert an active research reactor from using 90% enriched

uranium to low-enriched uranium, and on blending down tons of

fresh HEU power reactor fuel for sale as LEU.

Kazakhstan has an important role in global security. Much

remains to be done and each crucial step is important to

Kazakhstan security, U.S. security and world security.

We must recognize and our priorities and resources must

reflect that:

1. The gravest danger in the world today is the threat from

nuclear, biological, an chemical weapons.

2. The likeliest use of these weapons are in terrorist

hands.

3. Preventing the spread and use of nuclear, biological and

chemical weapons should be the central organizing security

principle for the 21st century.

Terrorists are racing to get weapons of mass destruction,

and we are not yet racing to stop them. The citizens of all

nations need to understand that no one--no matter where in

the world they live--is safe from the consequences of a

terrorist nuclear attack. The economic impact of the

September 11 attacks was felt in all parts of the globe.

Tourism dollars plunged. Airlines went bankrupt. Corporations

announced layoffs.

But a nuclear 9/11 would make World Trade Center attacks

look like a warning shot. It would be impossible to calculate

the economic costs, because there is no way to calculate how

long it would take for citizens to recover the confidence

they need to spend and invest. The public would assume that

if the terrorists had one nuclear weapon, they could get

another. If they would use it in one city, they would use it

in another. If even one goes off, it's hard to see how we

could fully recover. We have to prevent it from happening--

ever.

How difficult is it for terrorists to attack us with a

nuclear weapon? That depends on how difficult we make it. No

terrorist can launch an attack without weapons-grade

material--plutonium or highly enriched uranium. Most

terrorists lack the sophisticated infrastructure necessary to

produce these materials; they would have to steal or buy

them.

So the most effective, least expensive way to prevent

nuclear terrorism is to lock down and secure weapons and

fissile materials in every country and every facility that

has them. The world is in a race between cooperation an

catastrophe. To win this race, we have to achieve cooperation

on a scale we've never seen or attempted before--not because

cooperation will give us a warm feeling of community, but

because every. other method will fail.

Sam Nunn is co-chairman and chief executive officer of the

Nuclear Threat Initiative (NTI), a charitable organization

working to reduce the global threats from nuclear, biological

and chemical weapons. He is also a senior partner in the law

firm of King & Spalding, where he focuses his practice on

international and corporate matters. He served as a United

States Senator from Georgia for 24 years (1972-1996).

Raised in the small town of Perry in middle Georgia, he

attended Georgia Tech, Emory University and Emory Law School,

where he graduated with honors in 1962. After active duty

service in the U.S. Coast Guard, he served six years in the

U.S. Coast Guard Reserve. He first entere politics as a

member of the Georgia House of Representatives in 1968.

During his tenure in the U.S. Senate, Senator Nunn served

as chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee and the

Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. He also served on

the Intelligence and Small Business Committees. His

legislative achievements include the landmark Department of

Defense Reorganization Act, drafted with the late Senator

Barry Goldwater, and the ``Nunn-Lugar'' Cooperative Threat

Reduction Program, which provides assistance to Russia and

the former Soviet republics for securing and destroying their

excess nuclear, biological and chemical weapons.

In addition to his work with NTI, Senator Nunn has

continued his service in the public policy arena as a

distinguished professor in the Sam Nunn School of

International Affairs at Georgia Tech and as chairman of the

board of the Center for Strategic and International Studies

in Washington, D.C.

He is a board member of the following publicly held

corporations: ChevronTexaco Corporation, The Coca-Cola

Company, Dell Computer Corporation, General Electric Company,

Internet Security Systems Inc., and Scientific-Atlanta Inc.

He is married to the former Colleen O'Brien and has two

children, Michelle and Brian, and one grandchild.

On the nuclear front: the mission is difficult--but it is

not complicated. We know where the dangerous and vulnerable

materials are; we know what how to be done; we know how to do

it; we have made some progress--but not enough.

There remains a dangerous gap between the pace of our

progress and the scope and urgency of the threat. The threat

extends well beyond the former Soviet Union. There are 100

nuclear research reactors and other facilities in 40

countries using highly enriched uranium--the raw material of

nuclear terrorism. Some of it is secured by nothing more than

an underpaid guard sitting inside a chain-link fence. In

August 2002, when nuclear weapons material was removed from

the research reactor near Belgrade, the U.S. and Russia said

they were going to move quickly on 24 similar sites. But it's

now been over a year and only one additional site has been

addressed. Two out of 25 shows the lack of urgency of this

work. We can argue as to who is to blame--Russia or the

United States or other countries--but the bottom line is that

our security is at stake no matter who is to blame.

Most governments and most leaders have still not

acknowledged by their actions, by their resource priorities,

and by their cooperation that the threat of catastrophic

terrorism is the most immediate, most likely, most

potentially devastating threat we face; that it threatens all

of us equally; that it demands urgent action; that it

requires a new level of cooperation. This is the kind of

danger that ought to focus our attention--because if we don't

prevent this threat, nothing else will matter.

What must we do? NTI has funded a project that brings

together a consortium of 21 research institutions across

Europe, Russia, the U.S. and Asia to work together on threat

reduction. Let me summarize their conclusion:

1. Nuclear weapons and materials--wherever they are in the

world--represent a grave danger. We must secure all of it,

everywhere, quickly to reduce the terrorist threat.

2. Tactical nuclear weapons must be accounted for and

secured.

3. All excess weapons-grade nuclear materials should be

secured and then destroyed.

4. Chemical weapons--every one of them--should be secured

and destroyed.

5. Biological weapons facilities of the former Soviet Union

must be open and transparent. We must help convert these

facilities and the labors of the scientists who used to work

in them, to peaceful commercial purposes.

The most positive recent development in Cooperative Threat

Reduction came in the summer of last year when the G8 nations

pledged $20 billion over ten years to launch the Global

Partnership and to secure and prevent the read of weapons and

mass destruction. Since this announcement many other nations

have joined the partnership. Kazakhstan has a great deal to

contribute to the partnership, and I hope that you will join.

The partnership should include everyone who has something to

safeguard and who has something to contribute to safeguarding

it. Kazakhstan is unique as an example of leadership.

A great opportunity to accelerate the work of the global

partnership comes next summer in Sea Island, Georgia, where

the leaders of the G8 will meet again. Either the G8 will

dramatically expand its threat reduction efforts, or the

Global Partnership will remain a second-tier response to a

first-tier threat--and leave grave dangers to our children.

In the race between cooperation and catastrophe, we have

taken steps in the right direction, but we're long past the

time when we can take satisfaction with step in the right

direction. A gazelle running from a cheetah is taking steps

in the right direction. It's not just a question of

direction; it's a matter of speed.

If a terrorist nuclear device exploded tonight in

Washington, New York, Astana, Moscow or London, what would we

wish we had done to stop it? Why aren't we doing that now?

Mr. Speaker, in reference to H. Res. 905, I submit an address by Senator Richard Lugar, Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, presented on December 16, 2003 at a symposium entitled Kazakhstan: Reducing Nuclear Dangers, Increasing Global Security.

Symposium Keynote Address by Senator Richard Lugar (R-IN), Chairman,

Senate Foreign Relations Committee

It is a pleasure to be here today to celebrate the decision

made by Kazakhstan to join the Nuclear Nonproliferation

Treaty (NPT) as a non-nuclear state. A little more than a

decade ago, when the Soviet Union collapsed, Kazakhstan

became the fourth largest nuclear power in the world. But

instead of enlarging the nuclear club, Kazakhstan joined

Ukraine and Belarus in turning away from weapons of mass

destruction. Courageous leaders chose instead to embrace the

NPT and the arms control process in eliminating offensive

nuclear, chemical and biological arms from Kazakhstan.

The world cheered when Kazakhstan became a non-nuclear

state in November 1996. I am proud of the role the United

States played in Kazakhstan's decision and of our role in

facilitating the removal of thousands of nuclear warheads and

the elimination of hundreds of SS-18 intercontinental

ballistic missiles, silos, and command centers. The addition

of three more nuclear weapons states would have been a

devastating setback to the reduction of offensive nuclear

arms around the world.

historic significance

Kazakhstan's wise and brave choice stands in stark contrast

to events in India, Pakistan, North Korea, and Iran. In 1998,

the world was shocked by the testing of nuclear weapons in

India and Pakistan. In January of this year, the

international arms control process was again shaken by the

departure of North Korea from the NPT. Last month, the world

watched closely as the IAEA deliberated over Iran's numerous

NPT violations amid Tehran's threats of withdrawal should the

body seek to enforce the treaty's provisions.

With these events in mind, the world should be especially

appreciative of the course selected by Kazakhstan. Leaders in

Almaty faced the same choices as their counterparts in New

Delhi, Islamabad, Pyongyang, and Tehran. But instead of

violating international norms and pursuing nuclear weapons,

Kazakh leaders made the right choice. When searching for

success stories, the international community should turn

to Kazakhstan.

The presence of dangerous weaponry in the states of the

former Soviet Union was not a problem that the U.S.

Government was prepared to deal with in 1991. Most decision-

makers in Washington were highly skeptical of assisting the

newly independent states in eliminating their inherited

arsenals. In fact, many were opposed to committing funds to

any program that seemed to benefit the former Soviet Union.

The atmosphere was decidedly hostile to initiatives that

focused on foreign problems. Americans were weary of the Cold

War and the Gulf War. Both Congress and aspirants in the 1992

Presidential election had decided that attention to foreign

concerns was politically a lowered priority.

In this atmosphere, Senator Nunn and I proposed legislation

to commit a portion of Defense Department resources each year

to the cooperative dismantlement of the old Soviet arsenal.

The House of Representatives had previously rejected a plan

to commit one billion dollars to addressing the problems of

the former Soviet Union. That outcome did not give Senator

Nunn and me much of a springboard for our initiative. Yet we

brought together a bipartisan nucleus of Senators who saw the

problem as we did. Remarkably, the Nunn-Lugar Program was

passed in the Senate by a vote of 86 to 8. It went on to gain

approval in the House and was signed into law by President

George H.W. Bush.

Many believed that the Nunn-Lugar Program would be a

relatively simple affair wherein weapons would be quickly

safeguarded and destroyed. But these efforts were far more

complex than most expected. It wasn't until Sam Nunn and I

took high-ranking Bush Administration officials with us on a

trip to the former Soviet Union that executive branch

implementation was accelerated and a strong commitment was

established.

At a cost of less than two-tenths of one percent of the

annual U.S. defense budget, the Nunn-Lugar Program has

facilitated the destruction of 520 ballistic missiles, 451

ballistic missile launchers, 7 mobile missile launchers, 122

bombers, 624 long-range nuclear air-launched cruise missiles,

408 submarine missile launchers, 445 submarine launched

ballistic missiles, and 27 strategic missile submarines. It

also has sealed 194 nuclear test tunnels. Most notably,

6,212 warheads that were on strategic systems aimed at the

United States have been deactivated. To put this into

perspective, Nunn-Lugar has dismantled more nuclear

weaponry than the countries of Great Britain, France, and

China currently possess in their stockpiles and arsenals

combined.

Nunn-Lugar also has undertaken previously-classified

emergency missions in cooperation with the government of

Kazakhstan to thwart proliferation. Project Sapphire is the

best known. In the pre-dawn hours of November 20, 1994, as

winter descended upon northeastern Kazakhstan, experts from

the Departments of Defense and Energy took possession of

enough highly enriched uranium to make between 20 and 30

nuclear weapons. Two U.S. C-5 cargo planes then flew 20 hours

with five mid-air refuelings, to deliver the material safely

to the United States and prevent it from falling into the

hands of rogue states or terrorist cells.

Nunn-Lugar also assisted Kazakhstan in eliminating the

former Soviet nuclear weapons testing complex. The Degelen

Mountain Test Tunnel Complex and Balapan were the sites of

hundreds of nuclear weapons tests throughout the Cold War. In

close cooperation with Kazakh partners, the Nunn-Lugar

Program systematically dismantled the complex and sealed

nearly 200 nuclear test tunnels and shafts. These facilities

will never again contribute to the weapons systems that

threatened the world during the Cold War.

More recently, the Nunn-Lugar Program concluded an

agreement with Kazakhstan to raze to the ground the world's

largest anthrax production and weaponization facility.

Stepnogorsk, built by the Soviet Union during the height of

the Cold War, will be completely eliminated and

decontaminated.

The Nunn-Lugar Program has already eliminated or dismantled

equipment necessary for the production of biological weapons.

But now we will take the additional step of razing the

weapons-related buildings to the ground. Currently, American

contractors are removing windows, non-load bearing walls, and

other debris and disposing of it prior to the commencement of

demolition. Each building will be contained and eliminated in

a secure and ecologically safe manner.

Mr. Speaker, in reference to H. Res. 905, I submit an address by Dr. Graham Allison, Professor at Harvard University and Director of the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, presented on December 16, 2003 at a symposium entitled Kazakhstan: Reducing Nuclear Dangers, Increasing Global Security.

Symposium Remarks

(By Graham Allison)

It is a great honor for me to participate in this happy

event and to celebrate the twelfth birthday of Kazakhstan,

and, as the Minister said, the tenth anniversary of

Kazakhstan's participation in the Nunn-Lugar CTR Program.

I want to congratulate Ambassador Saudabayev and his

colleagues for putting together such a remarkable event, and

President Nazarbayev for the actions that make it possible

for us to celebrate this occasion.

I am going to make four points.

First, I want to agree strongly with Sam Nunn about the

importance of the success of Kazakhstan. John Kennedy had a

saying, which he would frequently observe, that ``success has

a thousand fathers, or mothers, and failure is an orphan.''

If we are celebrating a success today, I would say this is

a success of President Nazarbayev for a leadership that is

truly remarkable and which one gets some sense for in his

book, Epicenter of Peace.

But I would also celebrate Sam Nunn and Dick Lugar for

their initiative without which the events that we are

celebrating surely would not have occurred.

Without the Nunn-Lugar Program, an initiative undertaken by

members of Congress, not by Administration, that put this

issue front and center and provide the wherewithal to deal

with it, the story of Kazakhstan, I believe, would have

turned out differently.

So I want to congratulate the two of them and to say what a

remarkable process I believe this was.

Historians have a hard time dealing with counterfactual. In

fact for all of us when something has happened, it seems

like, well, it almost had to happen.

But let us imagine what might have been.

Just imagine that a Kazakh leader, let's call him President

Nazarbayev, sought to rest operational control of some 1,400

nuclear weapons, the fourth largest arsenal in the world,

from former Soviet Strategic Rocket Forces' troops whose

chain of command continued to run to Moscow. Would they have

succeeded? Would Moscow have taken these efforts to seize

operational effort as a casus belli and attacked these

missile facilities or indeed Kazakhstan itself? Had a

contest for control of the nuclear arsenals ensued, would

some of these weapons have been fired? If so, since most

of the warheads were mounted on ICBMs that had been

programmed to hit and were targeted against the United

States, millions of Americans could have suffered instant

nuclear death.

I had a great fortune to work in the first Clinton

Administration on nuclear weapons issues. And I believe that

without the courageous actions of President Nazarbayev, the

Kazakh government and the cooperation of the U.S. and Russian

government in that effort, and the US participation through

the Nunn-Lugar Program, these events would not have occurred

the way they did. That's my first point.

Second point. I also wanted to support Sam Nunn in talking

about Kazakhstan being too modest, I think, too reserved, too

reticent about taking its example of nuclear disarmament to

others. I was actually encouraged when Ambassador Saudabayev

read the letter from President Nazarbayev and I am afraid I'm

not quoting him exactly, but I think he said, ``Kazakhstan

has earned the moral right to call on the world to follow its

example.'' I think that's exactly correct. And I think if the

Kazakh Government were a more active player with other

governments, especially acting on the basis of the moral

right that it has earned, the world would become a safer

place.

Who could better deal with Iran than Kazakhstan?

President Nazarbayev knows Iranian leadership very well

indeed. So who can explain to them the consequences of

alternative path better than President Nazarbayev? So I

thought that this has come to the point when Kazakhstan needs

to be less modest and less reserved. It should be proud of

what it accomplished becoming a nuclear-free nation.

Thirdly. If the denuclearization of Kazakhstan, Ukraine,

and Belarus whose nuclear arsenal was eliminated was the

signal success of the 1990s, I believe, the signal failure

was the failure to capitalize on those events to push through

a more general solution.

In 1998 nuclear tests were conducted by India and Pakistan

when they declared themselves nuclear weapons states. But

could one of them turn to example provided by Kazakhstan, and

Ukraine and Belarus, more, even more, becoming a platform or

a foundation of a more global effort to prevent nuclear

terrorism and to realize that the nuclear war could be lost?

And I believe the answer is yes.

So, my fourth and final point, especially for Christmas

season, is a piece of good news. Good news that, I think, Sam

has already suggested, but I would like to put slightly more

provocatively.

The unspoken and frequently unrecognized fundamental

insight, I believe, is that nuclear terrorism is preventable.

Nuclear terrorism is, in fact, preventable. In the absence of

fissile material, either enriched uranium or plutonium, there

could be no nuclear programs and, therefore, no nuclear

terrorism.

So, all that we have to do, all is a lot, but all that we

have to do, is to prevent terrorists from acquiring nuclear

weapons or fissile materials for these weapons to develop.

Fortunately, manufacturing or producing new highly enriched

uranium or plutonium is a successive lengthy process that

requires large and visible and indeed vulnerable facilities.

Until now, all the fissile materials that currently exist

were successfully protected. The technology for doing so

already exists: Americans lose no gold from Fort Knox, nor

does Russia lose items from the Kremlin Armory.

So all that we have to do, and it's a lot, but all that we

have to do is prevent production of new fissile material,

lock down or eliminate all the fissile materials that

currently exist.

I have a piece in the current issue of the Foreign Affairs

that is coming out next week, in which I make this argument

at some length and propose a new doctrine of what I would

call the ``Three No's'':

1. No new nuclear weapons.

2. No new programs, no new facilities for producing either

enriched uranium or plutonium.

3. No new nuclear states.

Kazakhstan, I think, is the best example of all three of

these.

There's no question that Kazakhstan can be a source of

nuclear 9/11, because Kazakhstan has no nuclear weapons, it

has no production facilities of either enriched uranium or

plutonium, and it has no fissile material.

I believe that is something that people with Nuclear Threat

Initiative and Sam Nunn should be given credit for. And I

congratulate our Kazakh partners for their extraordinary

endeavor.

Director of Harvard's major Belfer Center for Science and

International Affairs (BCSlA), Professor Graham Allison has

for three decades been a leading analyst of U.S. national

security and defense policy with a special interest in

terrorism. As Assistant Secretary of Defense in the first

Clinton Administration, Dr. Allison received the Defense

Department's highest civilian award, the Defense Medal for

Distinguished Public Service, for ``reshaping relations with

Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, and Kazakhstan to reduce the former

Soviet nuclear arsenal.'' This resulted in the safe return of

more than 12,000 tactical nuclear weapons from the former

Soviet republics and the complete elimination of more than

4,000 strategic nuclear warheads previously targeted at the

U.S. and left in Ukraine, Kazakhstan, and Belarus when the

Soviet Union disappeared.

As Director of BCSlA, Dr. Allison has assembled a team of

more than two dozen leading scholars and practitioners of

national security to analyze terrorism in its multiple

dimensions. Products include: Avoiding Nuclear Anarchy

(1996), America's Achilles Heel: Nuclear, Biological, and

Chemical Terrorism and Covert Attack (1998), Catastrophic

Terrorism (1998), and others.

A 1995 Washington Post op-ed by Dr. Allison warned that:

``In the absence of a determined program of action, we have

every reason to anticipate acts of nuclear terrorism before

this decade is out.'' Dr. Allison was the organizer of the

Commission on America's National Interests (1996 and 2000)

that included leading Senators and national security

specialists from across the country (former Senator Sam Nunn,

Senators John McCain, Bob Graham, and Pat Roberts,

Condoleezza Rice, Richard Armitage, Robert Ellsworth, and

others). The Commission's work highlighted the threat of

mega-terrorism as a major challenge to American national

interest. Senator Roberts credited the work of the

Commission as inspiration in his creating a Subcommittee

on Emerging Threats of the Senate Armed Services

Committee. At the initial session of that Subcommittee on

March 11, 1999 he warned that there is ``a real

opportunity for a handful of zealots to wreak havoc on a

scale that hitherto only armies could obtain. Targets will

be selected for their symbolic value, like the World Trade

Center in the heart of Manhattan, because terrorists need

to escalate their

attacks, making each more spectacular and horrific than

its predecessor.

Dr. Allison is also a leading analyst of Russia and its

transformation to democracy and market economy as well as an

authority on the threat of loose nukes and weapons of mass

destruction. He has written numerous articles and op-eds in

the foremost journals and newspapers and is a sought-after

speaker and commentator. Dr. Allison's seminal book, Essence

of Decision: Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis, first

published in 1971, and significantly revised and re-issued in

1999, ranks among the bestsellers in political science with

more than 350,000 copies in print.

Dr. Allison was born and raised in Charlotte, North

Carolina. He was educated at Davidson College; Harvard

College (B.A., Magna Cum Laude, in History); Oxford

University (B.A. and M.A., First Class Honors in Philosophy,

Politics, and Economics); and Harvard University (Ph.D. in

PoIitical Science).

Madam Speaker, I certainly would like to thank the gentleman from Missouri for offering me this opportunity to say a few words in support of this resolution.

I certainly want to extend my commendation to the gentlewoman from California for being the chief sponsor of this bill, and I regret to say I should have been an original cosponsor, and I want to be on record that I want to be on as an original cosponsor of this resolution.

Madam Speaker, August 6, 1525 means a lot to the Salvadoran Americans in our country. As the gentlewoman from California said earlier, we almost have a million fellow Americans whose ancestry is from El Salvador.

On August 6, 1525, the official founding of Villa De San Salvador was declared in the Valle de las Hamacas, or the Valley of the Hammocks, where the indigenous ancestors of El Salvador fought historic battles against the submission and abuse of Spanish colonialism in order to preserve the life and liberty of the Cuscatleco population.

This is very significant and important, Madam Speaker, and I certainly want to say that we truly are a Nation of immigrants. Whether you be from South America, and even if you are from Ireland, we can never forget the problems there, the people starving to death, and there was the Irish potato.

Madam Speaker, I don't know why you call it the Irish potato; potato came from America, and that is what saved millions of our fellow Irish people coming over here to this country.

The interesting thing about it, too, is I have been to Central America and I have been to El Salvador, and I say that for good reason, millions of these people coming from Latin America come to this country why? Because they love freedom, they seek opportunity for jobs, and want the best America has to offer. What's wrong with that?

I think this resolution signifies the importance that we should recognize not only the presence of our fellow Salvadoran Americans, but also the contributions that they made to this great country.

Again, I commend the gentlewoman from California for proposing this resolution and I urge my colleagues to support it.

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

(Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen) for the management of this legislation.

Madam Speaker, just over a week ago I had the tremendous pleasure of watching the thrilling finale of the World Cup championship match in Germany. As the winning penalty kick zipped past the French goalkeeper, I felt the joy of millions of Italians as they celebrated their historic fourth World Cup victory. For that matter, the entire planet with billions of people witnessing this special event, the number one sport in the world, not American football, I beg to say, Madam Speaker.

The Italians are known for the passion they exhibit in every endeavor they undertake. I cannot agree more with that. Whether it is in art, literature, mathematics, business or especially soccer, Italians all over the world pour their heart and soul into every task they assume.

Madam Speaker, this passion has led great men like Christopher Columbus, Amerigo Vespucci, Constantino Brumidi, Enrico Fermi and captains of industry A.P. Giannini, to contribute to the rock-solid foundation on which this country is built. Not to mention some of my favorite singers, Mario Lanza, Frank Sinatra, Tony Bennett, Perry Como, and the list goes on. This passion has also contributed mightily to the strong alliance between Italy and the United States since the end of World War II. Our bond with Italy kept the Soviet menace at bay during the decades of the Cold War.

Today, Italy aids in the fight for democracy. Our Italian allies fight, bleed, and even die to bring democracy to the people of Afghanistan and Iraq.

This passion was unabashedly unleashed in the worldwide celebrations following the Italian national soccer team's historic victory in Germany. I, for one, reveled in the images of our Italian friends singing and dancing around the world.

In all this praise for Italy and its fantastic soccer team, I would like to congratulate the fans who traveled to Germany to support their beloved Azzurri, as the national soccer team is known. During the month-long tournament, the fans were a model of civility and good spirits.

Madam Speaker, the Italian fans, along with those from 31 other nations, enjoyed the beautiful country of Germany and all of its 64 thrilling soccer matches without any major incidents.

Finally, I would like to commend those involved with the security of the World Cup tournament. As we all know, this kind of world gathering, unfortunately, presents potential terrorist opportunities as well as other

dangers. The German Government and security officials performed magnificently, the venues were safe, and the atmosphere always enjoyable.

This was an exciting month, capped off with an unforgettable ending for our longtime friends and allies, the Italian people. I strongly support this resolution.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I just have a couple of minutes and I want to yield to myself to again commend the gentleman from New York (Mr. Fossella) for offering this legislation.

We have a long way to go as far as the sport of soccer is concerned. I just wish that maybe if it wasn't so much into American football, our Nation could concentrate and focus on the fact that this is the number one sport in the world. And I am sure that if we turn our resources, our technology, our know-how into becoming competent and being really proactive in this support, maybe our own country could also be favored to be among the top players in this sport.

It was interesting to note, Madam Speaker, that all the expectations were supposed to be on Brazil, and the great player Renaldo was supposed to give Brazil another World Cup. And then even Argentina was supposed to focus on this. But never was there any expectation that teams from Europe would dominate as they did, where Italy has now won this great sport.

Madam Speaker, I did have the gentleman from New York (Mr. Crowley) to come and also make a presentation, but unfortunately he is tied up with other meetings, but I am sure that he will have a separate statement to be submitted to be made part of the Record.

Madam Speaker, I have no further speakers and yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I might consume.

(Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Madam Speaker, again I want to thank my good friend, the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen), especially in her capacity as chairperson of the Subcommittee on the Middle East and Eastern Europe, and especially my good friend, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Ackerman), who is our ranking member of the subcommittee. I certainly want to thank also Chairman Henry Hyde and Mr. Tom Lantos, our senior ranking member of the House International Relations Committee. Without their support, Madam Speaker, House Resolution 905 would not be possible. And I really, really appreciate their help and assistance in providing this resolution now before the floor.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of House Resolution 905, congratulating Kazakhstan on the 15th anniversary of the closure of the world's second largest nuclear test site in Semipalatinsk region of Kazakhstan, and for its efforts on the nonproliferation of weapons of mass destruction.

House Resolution 905 is historic for these reasons, Madam Speaker. It is historic because this is the first time the U.S. House of Representatives has considered legislation in praise of Kazakhstan, a former Soviet republic that has proved to be a true ally of the United States.

It is also historic because it is being considered on the 60th birthday of my dear friend and brother, I consider my brother, the Honorable Kanat Saudabayev, the Ambassador of the Republic of Kazakhstan to the United States. Ambassador Saudabayev has worked tirelessly to represent the interests of Kazakhstan in the United States and has served His Excellency, Mr. Sursultan Nazarbayev, the President of Kazakhstan, with distinction and honor.

Ambassador Saudabayev and his wife and children and grandchildren are with us. It is my privilege to wish him a happy birthday and commend him for his service to his nation and certainly to the United States as well.

Madam Speaker, House Resolution 905 recognizes Kazakhstan as a model for advancing the cause of nuclear nonproliferation. After the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, Kazakhstan inherited a ruined economy and became

overnight the world's fourth largest recipient and supplier of nuclear weapons.

This arsenal of nuclear weapons could possibly have helped to resolve the financial problems of this young and struggling nation. However, under the leadership of President Nazarbayev, the people of Kazakhstan, knowing firsthand the horrible effects of nuclear tests, made a choice to renounce nuclear weapons all together. In fact, immediately after achieving independence, and in spite of threats from the Kremlin, President Nazarbayev closed and sealed the world's second largest nuclear test site at Semipalatinsk, where the Soviet Union conducted almost 500 nuclear tests from 1949 to 1991.

Our Nation assisted President Nazarbayev to dismantle these nuclear weapons through the leadership of former Senator Sam Nunn and Chairman Richard Lugar, with the enactment of the Nunn-Lugar Act that provided the necessary funds to carry out the elimination of these nuclear weapons.

Madam Speaker, today few know about President Nazarbayev's heroic decision which, in my humble opinion, changed the course of modern history. Few know that this story about Kazakhstan did not bargain and did not lobby to gain political or economic dividends from its choice. Rather, Kazakhstan, for the sake of global peace and security, consciously chose to ensure a brighter future for their children and for the rest of the world.

Can you believe a Muslim country having in its possession all these nuclear weapons that President Nazarbayev could have easily doled out, sold them, and made it such that it could have been a very, very dangerous situation for the world.

I believe we should speak out more often of Kazakhstan's example, Madam Speaker. While I am grateful that the world is aware of the Chernobyl disaster, where several thousands perished, I am saddened that the world knows so little about the tragedies of Semipalatinsk, the Marshall Islands and French Polynesia, where children and elderly have gone dying for decades as a result of Cold War policies and also being directly affected because of nuclear contamination.

At Semipalatinsk, Kazakhstan, the cumulative power of explosions from nuclear tests conducted by the former Soviet Union is believed to be equal to the power of 2,500 explosions of the type of bombs dropped in Hiroshima, Japan in 1945. More than 1.5 million people of Kazakhstan suffered from nuclear contamination as a result of these tests, and a horrifying array of diseases will continue to destroy the lives of these good people.

Madam Speaker, as a Pacific Islander, I have a tremendous affinity to the people of Kazakhstan because the Marshallese and the Polynesian Tahitians also know firsthand the horrors of nuclear testing. Bikini is one of 29 atolls and five islands that compose the Marshall Islands. These atolls are located north of the equator and are scattered over some 357,000 square miles of the Pacific Ocean. Because of their location away from regular air and sea routes, these atolls were chosen by our government to be the nuclear proving grounds for the United States.

From 1946 to 1958 the United States detonated 67 nuclear weapons at the Marshall Islands, which included the first hydrogen bomb explosion of what is known as the Bravo shot, a 15 megaton shot, which is equivalent to 1,000 times more powerful than the bombs we dropped on Nagasaki, Hiroshima. Acknowledged as the greatest nuclear explosion ever detonated by the United States, the Bravo shot vaporized six islands, and created a mushroom cloud 25 miles up in the atmosphere. It has been said that if one were to calculate the net yield of the tests conducted in the Marshall Islands, it would be equivalent to the detonation of 1.7 Hiroshima nuclear bombs every day for 12 years.

The U.S. nuclear testing program exposed the people of the Marshall Islands to severe health problems and genetic abnormalities for generations. The U.S. nuclear testing program in the Marshall Islands also set a precedent for France to use the islands of the Pacific for its own testing program. For some 30 years the French Government detonated approximately 218 nuclear bombs on Moruroa and Fangataufa atolls near Tahiti.

In 1995, while the world turned a blind eye, the newly elected President, Jacques Chirac, announced that France would violate the 1992 world moratorium on nuclear testing and exploded eight more nuclear bombs on Moruroa and Fangataufa atolls beginning in September 1995.

Chirac said the nuclear explosions would have no ecological consequences. Give me a break. They described his decision as irrevocable. And what is known about this is that we even told France, you don't need to explode any more nuclear bombs. You can do it electronically. Despite all of this, still couldn't do it.

I also made an irrevocable decision to accompany Mr. Oscar Temaru, the current President of French Polynesia on the Greenpeace warrior vessel which took us to Moruroa as part of some 20,000 demonstrators who came from Europe, from Japan, from the United States, from New Zealand, Australia and elsewhere to protest President's Chirac's decision to break France's commitment to a moratorium not to conduct any more nuclear tests.

Later I personally visited Moruroa under the supervision of the French Government, and to this day portions of that atoll is still contaminated.

Madam Speaker, in 2003, as a direct result of my friendship with the good Ambassador from Kazakhstan, I became aware of the magnitude of the problem of Semipalatinsk. In August, 2004, I felt a deep sense of obligation as a Member of Congress who had visited the nuclear test sites in the Marshall Islands and in French Polynesia and also now to the Semipalatinsk test site. During my visit and in later discussions with President Nazarbayev, I learned that I was the first American legislator to set foot on ground zero where the Soviet Union exploded its first nuclear device in 1949. And guess what, Madam Speaker? It is still contaminated to this day.

Madam Speaker, considering the courageous decision made by President Nazarbayev to shut down the Semipalatinsk test site so that you and I and future generations may live in peace, I believe we have a moral responsibility to bear the burdens of our brothers and sisters in Semipalatinsk. This is why I am pleased that this House resolution calls upon the administration to establish a joint working group with the Government of Kazakhstan to assist in assessing the environmental damage and health effects caused by nuclear testing in the Semipalatinsk region by the former Soviet Union.

As important as this resolution is, Madam Speaker, I also believe the international community should more fully acknowledge Kazakhstan's tremendous contribution to world peace. While I am pleased this year's Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to the United Nations director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, the IAEA, I believe President Nazarbayev, Senator Richard Lugar, and Senator Sam Nunn should also be seriously considered for the Nobel Peace Prize for reaffirming the worth and advancing the rights of human beings around the world and by dismantling the world's fourth largest nuclear arsenal, closing and sealing the Semipalatinsk test site, and most recently blending down 6,600 pounds of weapons-usable highly enriched uranium, or enough to produce up to 25 nuclear warheads, converting the material for peaceful use and thereby preventing it from falling into the hands of terrorist organizations.

I submit, Madam Speaker, these are some of the achievements that President Nazarbayev and Senator Lugar and Senator Nunn have made, and they certainly should be recognized by leaders of our world community.

I want to share with my colleagues the substance of the paper that was delivered by my good friend, Ambassador Saudabayev, concerning what happened in Kazakhstan. And I quote:

``The people of Kazakhstan have experienced firsthand the devastating force of nuclear weapons. During four decades, the Soviet Union conducted 456 nuclear explosions at the world's largest nuclear test site at Semipalatinsk. The cumulative power output of these explosions equaled 2,500

Hiroshima-size bombs. More than 1.5 million Kazaks were exposed.

``That is, Kazakhstan made the unprecedented step in the history of the world and became the first country to shut down a nuclear test site and renounce the world's fourth largest nuclear arsenal. At that time this arsenal was larger than the nuclear weapons stockpiles of Great Britain, France, and China combined. Kazakhstan had 1,040 nuclear warheads for intercontinental ballistic missiles SS-18 and 370 nuclear warheads for cruise missiles and 40 strategic multipurpose bombers TU- 95 to deliver them.''

The point I wanted to make about the Ambassador's statement, Madam Speaker, is that Kazakhstan is no longer involved in this madness of developing as well as holding on to nuclear weapons.

With the recent announcement of our need to establish a global initiative to combat nuclear terrorism and on the occasion of the 15th anniversary of the closure of the world's second largest nuclear test site at Semipalatinsk, it is only fitting and fair that we should acknowledge Kazakhstan's commitment and leadership in nuclear disarmament and nonproliferation. For this reason I urge my colleagues to support the House Resolution 905.

Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of this resolution. H. Res. 905 congratulates Kazakhstan on the 15th anniversary of the closure of the world's second largest nuclear test site in the Semipalatinsk region of Kazakhstan and for its efforts on the nonproliferation of weapons of mass destruction.

H. Res. 905 is non-controversial and historic. It is historic because this is the first time the U.S. House of Representatives has considered legislation in praise of Kazakhstan, a former Soviet Republic that has proved to be a true ally of the U.S.

It is also historic because it is being considered on the 60th birthday of my friend and brother, His Excellency Kanat Saudabayev, Ambassador of the Republic of Kazakhstan. Ambassador Saudabayev has worked tirelessly to represent the interests of Kazakhstan in the U.S. and has served his President, Nursultan Nazarbayev, with distinction and honor and, today, it is my privilege to wish him a happy birthday and commend him for his service to his nation and ours.

Also, at this time, I thank Chairman Henry Hyde and Ranking Member Tom Lantos of the International Relations Committee for their support in moving this important legislation forward. I also thank Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen and Congressman Gary Ackerman, Chair and Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on the Middle East and Central Asia, for cosponsoring this legislation. Without their support, H. Res. 905 would not be possible.

H. Res. 905 recognizes Kazakhstan as a model for advancing the cause of nuclear nonproliferation. After the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, Kazakhstan inherited a ruined economy and the World's fourth largest nuclear arsenal. This arsenal could possibly have helped to resolve the financial problems of this young and struggling nation.

However, led by President Nazarbayev, the people of Kazakhstan, knowing firsthand the horrible effects of nuclear tests, made a choice to renounce nuclear weapons. In fact, immediately after achieving independence and in spite of threats from the Kremlin, President Nazarbayev closed and sealed the world's second largest nuclear test site at Semipalatinsk where the Soviet Union conducted more than 450 nuclear tests from 1949 to 1991.

Today, few know about President Nazarbayev's heroic decision which undoubtedly changed the course of modern history. Few know this story because Kazakhstan did not bargain and did not lobby to gain political or economic dividends from its choice. Rather, Kazakhstan, for the sake of global peace and security, consciously chose to ensure a brighter future for their children and ours.

For this reason, I believe we should speak more often of Kazakhstan's example. While I am grateful that the world is aware of the Chernobyl disaster where thousands perished, I am saddened that the world knows so little about the tragedies of Semipalatinsk, the Marshall Islands and French Polynesia where children and the elderly have been dying for decades as a result of Cold War policies that to this day have never been set right.

In Semipalatinsk, the cumulative power of explosions from nuclear tests conducted by the former Soviet Union is believed to be equal to the power of 2,500 explosions of the type of bomb dropped on Hiroshima, Japan in 1945. More than 1.5 million people in Kazakhstan suffered from nuclear contamination as a result of these tests and a horrifying array of disease will continue to destroy the lives of many more.

As a Pacific Islander, I have a special affinity for the people of Kazakhstan because the Marshallese and Polynesian Tahitians also know firsthand the horrors of nuclear testing. Bikini is one of 29 atolls and five islands that compose the Marshall Islands. These atolls are located north of the equator and are scattered over 357,000 square miles of the Pacific Ocean. Because of their location away from regular air and sea routes, these atolls were chosen to be the nuclear proving ground for the United States.

From 1946 to 1958, the United States detonated 66 nuclear weapons in the Marshall Islands including the first hydrogen bomb,or Bravo shot, which was 1,000 times more powerful than the bomb dropped on Hiroshima. Acknowledged as the greatest nuclear explosion ever detonated by the U.S., the Bravo shot vaporized 6 islands and created a mushroom cloud 25 miles in diameter. It has been said that if one were to calculate the net yield of the tests conducted in the Marshall Islands, it would be equivalent to the detonation of 1.7 Hiroshima nuclear bombs every day for 12 years.

The U.S. nuclear testing program exposed the people of the Marshall Islands to severe health problems and genetic anomalies for generations to come. The U.S. nuclear testing program in the Marshall Islands also set a precedent for France to use the islands of the Pacific for its own testing program. For some 30 years, the French Government detonated approximately 218 nuclear devices at Moruroa and Fangataufa atolls in Tahiti. In 1995, while the world turned a blind eye, the newly elected President of France, Jacques Chirac, announced that France would violate the 1992 world moratorium on nuclear testing and explode 8 more nuclear bombs at Moruroa and Fangataufa atolls beginning in September 1995. Chirac said that the nuclear explosions would have no ``ecological consequences'' and described his decision a ``irrevocable.''

I also made an irrevocable decision and, in August 1995, accompanied Mr. Oscar Temaru, who is now the President of French Polynesia, on the Green Peace Warrior which took us to Moruroa in protest of President Chirac's decision to break the world moratorium. Later, I personally visited Moruroa under the supervision of the French Government and I remember well the fact that on certain areas of the island, it was off- limits and obviously contaminated and unfit for human occupation. After years of denial, the French Government has finally admitted there are leakages of radioactive materials from these atolls where the nuclear tests were conducted. As a result, some 10,000 Tahitians are believed to be severely exposed to nuclear radiation and the French Government has done little or nothing to properly diagnose or even give medical treatment to the Tahitian workers who were victims of this tragedy.

In 2003, as a direct result of my friendship with Ambassador Saudabayev, I became aware of the magnitude of the problem of Semipalatinsk. In August 2004, I felt a deep sense of obligation as a Member of Congress who had visited the nuclear test sites in the Marshall Islands and Tahiti to also visit the Semipalatinsk test site. During my visit and in later discussions with President Nazarbayev, I learned that I was the first American legislator to set foot on ground zero in Kazakhstan.

Considering the courageous decision made by President Nazarbayev to shut down the Semipalatinsk test site so that you and I and future generations may live in peace, I believe we have a moral responsibility to bear the burdens of our brothers and sisters in Semipalatinsk. This is why I am pleased that H. Res. 905 calls upon the Administration to establish a joint working group with the Government of Kazakhstan to assist in assessing the environmental damage and health effects caused by nuclear testing in the Semipalatinsk region by the former Soviet Union.

As important as this resolution is, I also believe the international community should more fully acknowledge Kazakhstan's contribution to world peace. While I am pleased that this year's Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to the Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), I believe President Nazarbayev should also receive the Nobel Peace Prize for reaffirming the worth and advancing the rights of the human person by dismantling the world's 4th largest nuclear arsenal, closing and sealing the Semipalatinsk test site, and most recently blending down 6,600 pounds of weapons-usable highly enriched uranium, or enough to produce up to 25 nuclear warheads, converting the material for peaceful use and thereby preventing it from falling into the hands of terrorist organizations.

I also believe Senator Richard Lugar and former Senator Sam Nunn should likewise be honored for establishing the Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) program which provides assistance to Russia and the former Soviet republics for securing and destroying their excess nuclear, biological and chemical weapons.

With the recent announcement of our need to establish a global initiative to combat nuclear terrorism and on the occasion of the 15th anniversary of the closure of the world's second largest nuclear test site at Semipalatinsk, it is only fitting and fair that we should acknowledge Kazakhstan's commitment and leadership in nuclear disarmament and nonproliferation. For this reason, I urge my colleagues to support H. Res. 905 and I thank Minority Leader Pelosi and Majority Leader Boehner for bringing this timely resolution to the floor.

Madam Speaker, I gladly yield 5 minutes to my dear friend and colleague from the great State of Nevada (Ms. Berkley).

Madam Speaker, how much more time do I have on this side?

Thank you, Madam Speaker.

I want to commend the gentlewoman from Nevada for a most eloquent statement. And nothing pleases me more than to know that one of my colleagues has had personal experience in dealing with nuclear testing.

I must say for the record I am probably one of the few Members who have ever visited the actual nuclear test sites. I have been to French Polynesia. I have been to Moruroa. It is not a very pleasant sight when you see a nuclear explosion like a flower, a beautiful array of colors, but very deadly. I have been to Semipalatinsk, ground zero, where the Soviet Union exploded its first nuclear weapon in 1949. That place is still contaminated. So with 10,000 French Tahitians who were exposed to nuclear contamination, 1.5 million people of Kazakhstan exposed to nuclear contamination, several hundred Marshallese people exposed to nuclear contamination, Madam Speaker, I submit we have a moral obligation to help these people, to assist them with their medical needs. And, unfortunately, I must say my own government has not done a very good job in helping the people of the Marshall Islands, providing the best medical treatment that we can give.

When that 15-megaton hydrogen bomb was exploded, there was no warning given to the people living in Rongelap and Utirik. And guess what? That nuclear cloud that came over as result of the explosion of this hydrogen bomb literally caused some very serious problems. I have talked to some of the women in the Marshall Islands. Five times they have had to have cancer operations of the lymph nodes. And this is just an example of our failure as a government to fulfill our responsibility to what we have done to these people in the Marshall Islands.

And I want to say that I commend also the Government of Kazakhstan and all the efforts that they are making. I visited the hospitals, seen the nuclear victims and, sad to say, the cancer, the results of women not giving birth in normal cycles.

This is very bad, and I sincerely hope that my colleagues and we as a government could be more responsible, especially in our responsibility to the people of the Marshall Islands.

Madam Speaker, I have several documents of a symposium that was conducted December 16, 2003, here in Washington, D.C., and I will include in the Record the statement of Ambassador Kanat Saudabayev and a table also indicating the various nuclear explosions that had taken place since we started this madness in 1945 up until 1998.

A realistic comparison to make here: We exploded a 15-megaton bomb. The Soviet Union exploded a 50-megaton hydrogen bomb in 1961, which was 3,333 times more powerful than the Hiroshima and Nagasaki atom bombs that we exploded in Japan. You can just imagine what this means to the 1.5 million Kazaks who were exposed in this terrible, terrible time of our world's history, what the Soviet Union had done to these good people.

Madam Speaker, again I want to thank my good friend, the gentlewoman from Florida for her support and management of this legislation.

I urge my colleagues to support this resolution.

Symposium Remarks by Kanat Saudabayev

Hon. Senator Nunn, Congressmen Faleomavaega, Your

Excellencies, Ladies and gentlemen, It is difficult to

overestimate the pressing urgency of today's symposium;

weapons of mass destruction and the desire by international

terrorists to use them have become the most dangerous threat

in the world.

The people of Kazakhstan have experienced first-hand the

devastating force of nuclear weapons. During four decades,

the Soviet Union conducted 456 nuclear explosions at the

world's largest nuclear test site at Semipalatinsk. The

cumulative power output of these explosions equaled 2,500

Hiroshima-size bombs. More than 1.5 million people suffered

from these tests in Kazakhstan, and vast territories became

absolutely useless for life.

That is why Kazakhstan made the unprecedented step in the

history of the world, and became the first country to shut

down a nuclear test site and renounce the world's fourth

largest nuclear arsenal. At that time this arsenal was larger

than the nuclear weapons stockpiles of Great Britain, France

and China combined. Kazakhstan had 1,040 nuclear warheads for

intercontinental. ballistic missiles (ICBMs) 55-18 and 370

nuclear warheads for cruise missiles, and 40 strategic

multipurpose bombers TU-95 to deliver them.

Today, there are no nuclear weapons in Kazakhstan. The

infrastructure of the test site has been demolished. This was

possible due to close cooperation between our two countries

during the past decade under the Nunn-Lugar Program.

It could have been very different. In the early days of

independence, there was no shortage of foreign emissaries

asking our President to keep the nuclear weapons, saying that

you are going to be the first and only Muslim nation with

nuclear weapons and that you are going to be respected by the

whole world. I must say that a significant portion of

Kazakhstan's elite of that time were also in favor of

keeping the nuclear arsenal. Today it would be fair to say

that our renunciation of nuclear weapons was a courageous

choice of historic significance by the President of

Kazakhstan, Nursultan Nazarbayev.

The President convincingly tells the story of what was

behind that choice in his book, Epicenter of Peace, which we

present to you today. I must say that the book's first

presentation in Washington was supposed to happen on

September 11, 2001. The time that has passed since that

tragic day has only confirmed and reinforced the urgent need

to tackle the problems discussed in the book. Yet another

argument against weapons of mass destruction and their

proliferation is the photo exhibit, Kazakhstan: From Nuclear

Nightmare to Epicenter of Peace, which you can see here.

Today Kazakhstan strongly urges the world to follow our

example and further reduce and eliminate nuclear arsenals as

well as other weapons of mass destruction, and prevent them

from falling into the hands of terrorists.

This is the reason Kazakhstan has become a strong partner

of the United States and the international coalition in the

fight against terrorism from the very first days after the

tragedy of September 11. We provide assistance to Operation

Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan. Today our troops, the only

ones. from our region, are taking part in the postwar

stabilization and restoration of Iraq.

I believe Kazakhstan's experience of cooperating with the

United States in nonproliferation of weapons of mass

destruction and eliminating the infrastructure that supports

them provide meaningful answers to modern challenges.

We are eager to further strengthen our cooperation with the

United States and other nations who are interested in the

prevention of further proliferation of WMDs.

Today's forum, taking place in the U.S. Congress, a

universally recognized citadel of democracy and freedom, is

vivid proof of strengthening cooperation between Kazakhstan

and the U.S. to ensure security in the world.

There are people in this room today who by the call of duty

and the call of heart are committed to the ideal of

nonproliferation and are doing everything possible to free

the world of the threat of weapons of mass destruction. The

symposium has gained a special significance with the

participation of outstanding statesmen such as senators Sam

Nunn and Richard Lugar who established the famous Cooperative

Threat Reduction Program. I believe their enormous

contribution to global security has yet to be fully

appreciated by the world.

The Presidents of our two countries, George W. Bush and

Nursultan Nazarbayev, support this symposium's goals and each

sent a message. It is with great pleasure that I would like

to carry out the honorable mission assigned to me by

President Nursultan Nazarbayev and read out his message to

the symposium.

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

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

(Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I also would like to commend the distinguished chairman of the International Relations Committee, Mr. Hyde, and the senior ranking member, Mr. Lantos, for their support of this legislation that was introduced by the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Pitts).

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this resolution. The breakup of the Soviet empire in the early 1990s jolted the international political system and fundamentally changed the course of global history. More than a dozen new nations emerged from the ruins of the Soviet Union, stretching from the heart of Europe to deep in Central Asia.

While the dissolution of the Soviet Union greatly advanced the progress of democracy and human rights, this forward march was not without setbacks. Looking at the map today, half of the nations formerly within the Soviet orbit have truly embraced democracy, human rights and economic reform, while others continue to struggle with debilitating other totalitarian regimes.

Mr. Speaker, since their first steps towards freedom from the firm grasp of the Soviet Union in 1990, the Mongolian people have strongly embraced democracy and human rights. They took to the streets in the bitter cold to force the Mongolian Communist Party from power, and quickly replaced it with a democratically elected government.

Since 1990, Mongolia has held several rounds of free and fair elections for president and parliament. While the rapid development of democratic institutions has not been without growing pains, the government of Mongolia remains a strong and vibrant democracy which has sought to play a responsible role in the global community.

With a newly shared commitment to democracy, the bilateral relationship between the United States and Mongolia has flourished over the last decade and a half. Mongolia has contributed troops, engineers and medical personnel to Operation Iraqi Freedom, and

helped to train units of the Afghan National Army.

The United States has also provided over $150 million in assistance to the Mongolia people since 1991. Mongolia is now eligible for funding from the Millennium Challenge Account, and it is our strong hope that a compact with Mongolia will be signed in the near future.

Ties between the United States and Mongolia were further solidified by visits to Mongolia in 2005 by the President of the United States and the Secretary of Defense.

The United States and Mongolia have also shared a commitment to working for freedom for the Tibetan people. As a Buddhist nation, Mongolia has twice welcomed His Holiness the Dalai Lama, despite enormous pressure from Beijing to prevent this from happening. Mongolia's willingness to resist China's strong-arm tactics demonstrates the nation's deep-seated commitment to human rights and religious freedom.

Mr. Speaker, since it emerged from the iron clutch of the Soviet Union in 1990, Mongolia has been a good friend and ally of our Nation. With passage of this resolution introduced by my good friend, Mr. Pitts, Congress will further signal its support for even stronger ties between our two nations.

Mr. Speaker, this year marks the 800th anniversary of Mongolian statehood. I am pleased that this body can play a small role in commemorating this important and significant anniversary in the lives of the people of Mongolia. I urge my colleagues to support this resolution.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I again want to thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania for introducing this legislation. It was my personal privilege to know personally the previous ambassador of Mongolia to the United States, and I have known him for several years as he made every effort to establish a relationship between our two nations. Again, I commend my good friend from Pennsylvania for introducing this legislation.

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

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

(Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I want to commend my dear colleague and chairman of the Asia Pacific Subcommittee on International Relations, the distinguished gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Leach), for his authorship of this important resolution.

Mr. Speaker, as the world's oldest democracy, the American Government rarely takes the time to mark important events in the lives of the world's few remaining monarchs. The key decisions affecting the livelihood of nations and the stability of the world system are made in the halls of parliaments and in the offices of presidents and prime ministers around the world.

But a handful of the world's monarchs continue to play a critically important role in the lives of their nations, and are worthy of our praise and admiration. The King of Thailand is just such a monarch.

As Thailand celebrates the 60th anniversary of the King's ascension to the throne, it is important to remember the King's many contributions to the prosperity and stability of our closest ally in Southeast Asia.

While Thailand is governed by democratically elected parliament and prime minister, the King has kept a firm hand on the tiller of the nation.

After a military coup in 1992 in which hundreds of Thai citizens were killed in the streets of Bangkok, the King summoned the general to a nationally televised audience. The Thai people watched as the general crawled across a carpet to the feet of the monarch where he was promptly upbraided for his actions which threatened the stability of the nation. The general promptly resigned and democracy was restored.

Just over the past few months the King again has played an important role in resolving a political crisis which had led to large street demonstrations in Bangkok. After strong words from the King, Thailand's judiciary moved to approve a new round of national elections in which all of the major political parties will participate.

The King's ability to influence the outcome of these two events is directly related to the enormous esteem in

which he is held by the good people of Thailand. The Thais, from all walks of life, greatly respect and admire the King and give much credence to his words as well as his actions.

Thailand's democratic development under the King's leadership has greatly enhanced U.S.-Thai relations. Our two nations remain treaty allies, and Thailand was designated as a major non-NATO ally in 2003.

Mr. Speaker, Thailand also made significant contributions to the reconstruction of Afghanistan and Iraq and has participated in many vital United Nations peacekeeping missions. Economic ties between the United States and Thailand have also grown significantly over the past decade.

With the passage of this resolution, Congress not only commemorates the 60th anniversary of the King's ascension to the throne, it also celebrates the strength of the U.S.-Thai relationship and Thailand's many contributions to regional and international security.

It has been my personal experience also, you know who your friends are, and I remember this as a Vietnam veteran, Thailand was there and stood with us.

It might also be of interest to our colleagues, it so happens that the number one golfer in the world's mother is from Thailand, Mr. Tiger Woods.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I know that our relationship between our two nations could not be closer. And again, I commend the gentleman from Iowa for introducing this resolution.

I also want to commend the chairman of our committee, Mr. Hyde, and our senior ranking member, Mr. Lantos, for their support and leadership in bringing this resolution to the floor.

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

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

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I first would like to express my appreciation to Chairman Bonilla and our senior ranking member, Ms. DeLauro, for allowing me this opportunity to introduce this amendment on behalf of my colleagues, the gentleman from Puerto Rico (Mr. Fortuno), the gentlewoman from Guam (Ms. Bordallo), and the gentlewoman from the Virgin Islands (Mrs. Christensen).

I yield to the gentleman from Texas.

I thank the distinguished chairman and the ranking member for their support of my amendment.

Mr. Chairman, the bill as reported by the committee provides five hundred thousand dollars for the Resident Instruction Grants Program for Institutions of Higher Education in the Insular Areas. Our amendment would increase this amount by two hundred thousand dollars for a total of seven hundred thousand dollars for this program.

The Resident Instruction Grants Program is a competitively-awarded program administered by the Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service of the United States Department of Agriculture. The Program is authorized by Section 7503 of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002.

Resident Instruction Grants, as described by C-S-R-E-E-S, are designed to promote and strengthen the ability of institutions in the insular areas to carry out teaching and education programs within the food and agricultural sciences and related disciplines. This Program helps the land-grant institutions in the territories meet their unique needs by strengthening their institutional educational capacities in instruction and curriculum, and by enhancing the quality of teaching and learning. Funding this program at a more sufficient level will allow for a more efficient use of existing educational funds by the institutions in the territories. Partnerships between faculties at insular area and mainland institutions can be forged with continued and increased funding for this program.

The amendment would reduce the amount appropriated for the National Research Initiative competitive grants program by a corresponding amount to ensure budget neutrality. The NRI is slated to receive roughly a five percent increase over the Fiscal Year 2006 level under this bill. The Congressional Budget Office has reviewed this amendment and determined that it is budget neutral.

Adoption of this amendment would fund the Resident Instruction Grants Program at an amount closer to what my colleagues from the territories and I have requested in this cycle. The additional two hundred thousand that this amendment would provide is still below the amount my colleagues and I originally requested. This figure is also below the amount recommended for this program by the National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges.

Mr. Chairman, for the past three fiscal years my colleagues and I have requested a level of funding for this program proportional to the level provided under this bill for historically black colleges and universities, Hispanic-serving institutions and tribal colleges. The land grant institutions in our districts, in ways similar to the 1890 and 1994 institutions, are underserved and have unique needs that deserve to be addressed.

We have written to the subcommittee chairman and to the ranking member to request their support for the Resident Instruction Grants Program. We have done so most recently as of last week regarding this specific amendment, a version of which was preprinted in the May 16 Congressional Record by my colleague from Guam, Ms. Bordallo. We are grateful Mr. Chairman that Chairman Bonilla has recognized the unique needs of the land-grant institutions in the insular areas. He understands their potential to contribute more substantially with USDA support to national agricultural research missions.

This Program was first funded two years ago with the support of Chairman Bonilla and our colleague from Ohio, Ms. Kaptur. This program is important to strengthening the curriculum in the agricultural and food sciences in the territories. The territorial colleges were designated by Congress in 1972 as part of the land grant university system, and are considered 1862 institutions. They include American Samoa Community College, the University of Guam, the University of the Virgin Islands, the University of Puerto Rico at Mayaguez, Northern Marianas College, and the College of Micronesia in Palau, Pohnpei, and the Marshall Islands.

The institutions in the territories do not have the advantage of housing long-established and historically well-funded agricultural and food science programs as do many of the flagship programs within the 1862 institutions. Our institutions boast a much smaller faculty and student enrollment compared with the most reputable 1862 institutions on the U.S. mainland. Our institutions also do not have the capability and capacity, from an institutional perspective, to effectively compete for National Research Initiative dollars at the national level. The inherent disadvantages experienced by our institutions are significant concerns from a policy standpoint. We seek to address these concerns with the amendment.

The amendment simply recognizes that the 1972 community--the land grant in the territories--should have the ability to compete amongst themselves for research and instruction grants. This amendment would afford them that opportunity. I hope the gentleman from Texas, Chairman Bonilla, and the gentle lady from Connecticut, Ms. DeLauro, can support this amendment and, provided that it is adopted, will work to support this increased level of funding in conference with the other body.

I thank the gentleman from Texas for committing the first funds for this program two years ago and for his continued support of the land- grant colleges in the territories. I also want to thank Mr. Chairman, the Ranking Member for her support, as well as the assistance of Martin Delgado and Martha Foley of the subcommittee staff. This program is important to us and to our institutions in the territories. We hope we can strengthen the Resident Instruction Grants Program in future years, but we recognize that the modest increase proposed by this amendment is a good start. I urge adoption of this amendment.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of Senate bill 1235, the Veterans Housing Opportunity and Benefits Improvement Act of 2006, and I thank my colleagues for including my provision which makes it possible for Samoan or Hawaiian or Native American veterans to qualify for VA home loans.

In 1992, as a result of the leadership of the chairman and ranking members of the Veterans' Affairs Committee of both Houses, we were able to establish a pilot program in 1992 which became Public Law 102-547, making it possible for Native Americans, Native Hawaiians and American Samoans to qualify for VA home loans.

One of the problems that was encountered by the thousands of Native Americans, Native Hawaiians and American Samoans was the fact that they were not able to get any commercial loans because they lived in reservations for Native Americans; they lived in reservations for Native Hawaiians. They lived in homestead lands. For my people, they lived in communally owned lands. What this legislation does is it simply allows these people to participate in this important program. I especially want to thank Chairman Steve Buyer and Ranking Member Lane Evans of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs and also Chairman John Boozman and Ranking Member Stephanie Herseth of the Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity, and Mary Ellen McCarthy, Democratic Staff Director for Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs, for their support and tireless efforts in making this possible.

I also want to thank the VA for assisting the Veterans' Affairs Committee and my office in drafting the appropriate language to make this a go.

Mr. Speaker, as we approach Memorial Day to remember and honor our military men and women who have died in serving our Nation during a time of war, I believe Senate bill 1235 is a fitting tribute to the veterans who are still with us. And I am especially pleased that this legislation provides my district's veterans with the housing opportunities and other benefits that they deserve. For this reason, I again thank my colleagues and I sincerely ask my colleagues to approve this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague and dear friend, the gentleman from California, Mr. Honda, who is managing this Special Order, but more especially also as an outstanding leader in our Asian Pacific American community and currently serving as chairman of our Asian Pacific Congressional Caucus.

I want to also commend our Democratic leader, Ms. Nancy Pelosi, for her outstanding remarks. The fact that she also is a Member who has one of the largest constituencies in not only the State of California of our Asian Pacific American community, but, as Ms. Pelosi was making her statement, I recalled also her predecessor, someone whom I have had the highest admiration and respect for, a giant of a man not only in his ways but as an example, with a real great sensitivity and compassion for the needs of the Asian Pacific American community people, none other than the late Congressman Phil Burton.

I would also like to commend my colleagues, Congresswoman Juanita Millender-McDonald and Congressman Al Green, for their outstanding remarks this evening in this Special Order.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in celebration of the Asian Pacific American Heritage Month to acknowledge the contributions of our Asian Pacific American individuals and communities to the success of our great Nation. I commend my colleagues who founded this celebration in 1977 by introducing a resolution calling upon the President to proclaim the first 10 days in May Asian Pacific Heritage Week, former Representatives Norm Mineta and Frank Horton, and Senators Daniel K. Inouye and Senator Spark Matsunaga.

I think we need to also understand, Mr. Speaker, the dynamics. Those of us who are Americans, and we are very, very proud of being Americans, but whose roots are from the Asian Pacific region, and the dynamics of why the Asian Pacific region is so important, it is in our national interests, not only our national security, the economics, just about every phase of what is really critically important in our Nation in dealing with this region of the world which, by the way, two-thirds of the world's population is the Asian Pacific region. Six of the 10 largest armies in the world are in the Asian Pacific region. Our trade with the Asian Pacific region is four times greater than any other region in the world, including especially that of Europe.

I am reminded a couple of years ago what Senator Inouye said, for every one 747 that flies between the Atlantic and the United States, four 747s fly between the Asian Pacific region and our country.

Mr. Speaker, the Asian Pacific American community is vibrant and growing

with an estimated 14 million Asian American residents and another 975,000 Pacific Americans. I am proud to be a member of this Asian Pacific American community, a community that has produced so many inspiring individuals. In government, in the military, in the sciences, sports, entertainment, business, you name it, we have it.

In government, for example, especially from the great State of Hawaii, among the first, I guess you might say, U.S. Senator Hiram Fong, Senator Daniel Inouye, Senator Daniel Akaka, the first elected Asian American Governor of any State, Governor George Ariyoshi, our first native Hawaiian Governor, Governor John Waihee, our first Filipino American Governor, Governor Ben Cayetano.

We also have Mayor Neal Blaisdell, and the newly elected mayor of the city and county of Honolulu, Mufi Hannemann. We also have Lieutenant Governors Jimmy Kealoha and Duke Ainoa. Norm Mineta, a good friend of mine who is not only partly responsible for initiating this Heritage Month, but was always the first Asian Pacific American mayor of a major U.S. city like San Jose, he was also the first Asian Pacific American to be a member of a Presidential Cabinet when he was appointed as Secretary of Commerce in the year 2000 by former President Clinton and now is U.S. Secretary of Transportation appointed by President Bush.

Elaine Chao, another first. Secretary Chao is the first female Asian American Cabinet member, appointed Secretary of Labor by President Bush.

Gary Locke, first Asian American Governor on the mainland United States, elected Governor of the State of Washington in 1996. And I could never forget and my deepest respect to the late Congresswoman Patsy Mink, first Asian American female elected to the U.S. Congress since 1964. Then our late colleague and friend, my dear friend, the late Congressman Bob Matsui, who inspired me and mentored me throughout our time here together as a senior member of the House Committee on Ways and Means.

As a Vietnam veteran, Mr. Speaker, it would be ludicrous for me not to say something to honor the hundreds of thousands of Asian Pacific Americans who have and continue to serve in all the branches of the armed services of our Nation.

I would like to share with you the contributions of tens of thousands of Japanese American soldiers who volunteered to fight our Nation's enemies in Europe during World War II.

Mr. Speaker, we are all aware of the fact that after the surprise attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, by the Imperial Army of Japan, there was such an outrage and cry for an all-out war against Japan. In days afterwards, our President and the Congress formally declared war. But caught in this crossfire were hundreds of thousands of Americans, mind you Americans, who happened to be of Japanese ancestry.

Our national government immediately implemented a policy whereby over 100,000 Americans of Japanese ancestry were forced to live in what were called, supposedly, ``relocation camps''; I call them ``concentration camps.'' Their lands, their homes, and their properties were confiscated without due process of law.

It was also a time in our Nation's history that there was so much hatred and bigotry and racism against our Japanese American community. And yet despite all of this, leaving their wives, their parents, their brothers and sisters behind barbed-wire fences in these prison camps, the White House accepted the requests from tens of thousands of Japanese Americans who volunteered to join the Army, and as a result, two combat units were organized.

One was called the 100th Battalion, and the other was known as the 442nd Infantry Combat Group. Both were sent to Europe to fight. And I might say that I am very, very proud to have been associated and been a former member of the 100th Battalion, 442nd Infantry Combat Group out of the State of Hawaii.

Mr. Speaker, in my humble opinion, history speaks for itself in documenting that none have shed their blood more valiantly for our Nation than the Japanese American solders who served in those two combat units while fighting enemy forces in Europe during World War II.

The military records of the 100th Battalion and the 442nd Infantry are without equal. Those Japanese American units suffered an unprecedented casualty rate of 314 percent, and received over 18,000 individual decorations, many awarded posthumously for bravery and courage in the field of battle.

For your information, Mr. Speaker, 52 Distinguished Service Crosses, 560 Silver Stars, and 9,480 Purple Hearts were awarded to the Japanese American soldiers of the 100th Battalion and 442nd Infantry Group. I find it unusual, however, that only one Medal of Honor was given. Nonetheless, the 442nd Combat Group emerged as the most decorated combat unit of its size in the history of the United States Army.

President Truman was so moved by their bravery in the field of battle, as well as the tremendous sacrifices of the African American soldiers in World War II, that he issued an executive order to finally desegregate all of the branches of the armed services.

Senator Inouye lost his arm while engaged in battle against two German machine gun posts, and he was awarded the Distinguished Service Cross. After a congressional mandate to review again the military records of these two combat units some 5 years ago, I was privileged to attend a White House ceremony where President Clinton presented 19, 19 Congressional Medals of Honor to the Japanese American soldiers who were members of the 100th Battalion and 442nd Combat Infantry. Senator Inouye was one of those recipients of the Congressional Medal of Honor.

I submit, Mr. Speaker, these Japanese Americans paid their dues in blood to protect our Nation from its enemies. It is a shameful mark on the history of our country that when the patriotic survivors of the 100th Battalion and the 442nd Infantry returned to the United States to be reunited with their families, who were locked up behind barbed wire fences, living in prison camps, and could not even get a haircut in downtown San Francisco, simply because they looked Japanese, they were Japanese, and for that reason alone, even with their uniforms on, they were not given the privilege of getting a haircut.

My former colleague and now U.S. Secretary of Transportation, Norm Mineta, and the late Congressman Bob Matsui from Sacramento both spent some of the early years of their lives in these prison camps. Secretary Mineta told me one of the interesting features of these prison camps was posting of machine gun nests all around the camp, and everyone was told that these machine guns were posted to protect them against rioters. But then Secretary Mineta observed, if these machine guns were posted to guard us, why is it that they are all directed inside the prison camp rather than outside it?

I submit, ladies and gentlemen, my good friends, my colleagues, the wholesale and arbitrary abolishment of the constitutional rights of these loyal Japanese Americans should forever serve as a reminder and testament that this must never be allowed to occur again.

When this miscarriage of justice unfolded during World War II, Americans of German and Italian ancestry were not similarly jailed en masse. Some declared the incident as an outright example of racism and bigotry in its ugliest form.

After viewing the Holocaust Museum in Washington, I understand better why the genocide of some 6 million Jews has prompted the cry ``Never again, never again.'' Likewise, I sincerely hope that mass internments on the basis of race alone will never again darken the pages of the history of this great Nation.

Now, to those who say, Well, that happened decades ago, we must say that we have to continue to be on our guard for this kind of thing to happen again. I remember years ago the case of Bruce Yamashita, the Japanese American born and raised in the State of Hawaii, who was discharged from the Marine Corps after a training program as an officer candidate and an ugly display of racial discrimination.

The Marine Corps superiors taunted Yamashita with ethnic slurs and told him, We do not want your kind around here, go back to your own country. The

situation was made worse when a leading officer of the Marine Corps made a statement on the 60 Minutes program who said, Marine officers who are minorities do not shoot, swim or use compasses as well as white officers.

The Commandant later apologized for his remarks, but it was a little too late. And I am really happy to know that after all of the investigations that the Secretary of the Navy finally awarded Mr. Yamashita his commission as an officer and a captain in the United States Marine Corps.

The tradition continues today of the thousands of Asian Pacific Americans who served in the armed services. Retired General Eric Shinseki was the first Asian Pacific American four-star general who served as U.S. Army Chief of Staff.

Our Asian American Pacific Island soldiers are fighting for freedom in Iraq even as I speak. Just this past weekend I was privileged to witness in Germany the swearing in of a Samoan soldier by the name of Command Sergeant Major Iuniasolua Savusa as the Command Sergeant Major for U.S. Army Europe and the 7th Army.

I am very proud of Command Sergeant Major Savusa for his accomplishments. He is an inspiration and a great role model for our youth and other Asian Pacific Americans who currently serve in the military.

Mr. Speaker, I think at this point I want to defer to my good friend, the gentleman from California (Mr. Honda) the manager of this special order this evening. And I am sure that he may want to continue portions of his statement as well.

Mr. Speaker, how much time do we have remaining?

Mr. Speaker, I would like to offer my closing remarks. I say, Mr. Speaker, when I envision America I do not see a melting pot designed to reduce or removal racial differences. The America I see is a brilliant rainbow, a rainbow of ethnicities and cultures with each people proudly contributing in their own distinctive and unique way a better America for generations to come.

Asian Pacific Americans wish to find a just and equitable place in our society that will allow, like all Americans, to grow, to succeed, to achieve and to contribute to the advancements of this great Nation.

I would like to close my remarks by asking all of us here this evening, What is America all about?

I cannot think of it said better than on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial in the summer of 1963 when an African American minister by the name of Martin Luther King, Jr., poured out his heart and soul to every American who could hear his voice when he uttered these famous words, ``I have a dream. My dream is that one day my children will be judged not by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.''

That is what I believe America is all about, Mr. Speaker. Again, I thank my colleague and my good friend, the gentleman from California, for his management of this Special Order honoring all of the Asian Pacific American community in our country and the contributions that they have made to make our country to form a more perfect union.

I rise today in celebration of Asian Pacific American Heritage Month, to acknowledge the contributions of our Asian Pacific American individuals and communities to the success of our great Nation.

I commend my colleagues who founded this celebration in 1977 by introducing a resolution calling upon the President to proclaim the first ten days in May Asian/Pacific Heritage week--Representatives Norm Mineta and Frank Horton, and Senators Daniel K. Inouye and Spark Matsunaga.

The Asian Pacific American community is vibrant and growing, with an estimated 14 million Asian American residents and another 975,000 Pacific Americans.

I am proud to be a member of this Asian Pacific American community, a community that has produced so many inspiring individuals in government, the military, the sciences, sports, entertainment, and business. In government, for example: from Hawaii

Senators Hyrum Fong, Daniel Inouye, Daniel Akaka.

Governors George Ariyoshi, John Waihee, Ben Cayetano.

Mayors Neal Blaisdell and Mufi Hannemann, Lt. Governors Jimmy Kealoha and Duke Aiona.

Norm Mineta--my good friend was not only partly responsible for initiating APA Heritage Month, but was also the first Asian Pacific American mayor of a major U.S. city (San Jose). He was also the first Asian Pacific American to be a member of the Presidential Cabinet, when he was appointed as Secretary of Commerce in 2000 by former President Clinton and five years ago Mr. Mineta was appointed by President Bush as U.S. Secretary of Transportation.

Elaine Chao--another first, Secretary Chao is the first female Asian- American cabinet member, appointed Secretary of Labor in 2001, also appointed by President Bush.

Gary Locke--the first Asian-American governor on the mainland U.S., elected governor of Washington, 1996.

Patsy Mink--the first Asian-American female elected to Congress, in 1964 from Hawaii.

Bob Matsui--my dear friend and colleague who inspired me and mentored me throughout our time together here as a senior member of the House Committee on Ways and Means.

As a Vietnam Veteran, it would be ludicrous for me not to say something to honor the hundreds of thousands of Asian-Pacific Americans who have and continue to serve in all the branches of armed services of our Nation. I would like to share with you the contributions of the tens of thousands of Japanese-American soldiers who volunteered to fight our Nation's enemies in Europe during World War II.

Mr. Speaker, we are well aware of the fact that after the surprise attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, by the Imperial Army of Japan--there was such an outrage and cry for all-out war against Japan, and days afterward, our President and the Congress formally declared war--but caught in this cross-fire were hundreds of thousands of Americans--Americans mind you who happened to be of Japanese ancestry.

Our national government immediately implemented a policy whereby over one-hundred thousand Americans of Japanese ancestry, were forced to live in what were called relocations camps--but were actually more like prison or concentration camps. Their lands, homes and properties were confiscated without due process of law.

It was also a time in our Nation's history that there was so much hatred, bigotry and racism against our Japanese-American community--and yet despite all this--leaving their wives, their parents, their brothers and sisters behind barbed wire fences in these prison camps-- the White House accepted the request from tens of thousands of the Japanese-Americans who volunteered to join the Army. And as a result two combat units were organized--one was the 100th Battalion and the other known as the 442nd Infantry Combat Group--both were sent to fight in Europe.

In my humble opinion, history speaks for itself in documenting that none have shed their blood more valiantly for our Nation than the Japanese-Americans soldiers who served in these two combat units while fighting enemy forces in Europe during World War II.

The military records of the 100th Battalion and 442nd Infantry are without equal. These Japanese-American units suffered an unprecedented casualty rate of 314 percent and received over 18,000 individual decorations, many awarded posthumously, for bravery and courage in the field of battle.

For your information Mr, Speaker, 52 Distinguished Service Crosses, 560 Silver Stars, and 9,480 Purple Hearts, were awarded to the Japanese-American soldiers of the 100th Battalion and 442nd Infantry Group. I find it unusual; however, that only one Medal of Honor was ever given. Nonetheless, the 442nd Combat Group emerged as the most decorated combat unit of its size in the history of the United States Army.

President Truman was so moved by their bravery in the field of battle, as well as that of African-American soldiers during World War II, that he issued an executive order to finally desegregate all branches of the Armed Services.

Senator Inouye lost his arm while engaged in battle against two German machine gun posts and he was awarded the Distinguished Service Cross. After a Congressional mandate to review again the military records of these two combat units 5 years ago--I was privileged to attend the White House ceremony where President Clinton presented nineteen Congressional Medals of Honor to the Japanese-American soldiers who were members of 100th Battalion and 442nd Combat Infantry group--Senator Inouye was one of those recipients of the Medal of Honor.

I submit, Mr. Speaker, these Japanese-Americans paid their dues in blood to protect our Nation from its enemies. It is a shameful mark on the history of our country that when the patriotic survivors of the 100th Battalion and the 442nd Infantry returned to the United States to be reunited with their families who were locked-up behind barbed wire fences, living in prison camps--and could not even get a haircut in downtown San Francisco because they all looked Japanese--despite the fact that they too were Americans.

My former colleague and now U.S. Secretary of Transportation, Norman Mineta, and the late Congressman Bob Matsui from Sacramento both spent some of the early years of their lives in these prison camps.

Secretary Mineta told of one of the interesting features of these prison camps were postings of machine gun nests all around the camp and everyone was told that these machine guns were posted to protect them against rioters.

But then Secretary Mineta observed--if these machine guns are posted to guard us, why is it that they are all directed inside the prison camp compound and not outside?

I submit, ladies and gentlemen, the wholesale and arbitrary abolishment of the constitutional rights of these loyal Japanese- Americans should forever serve as a reminder and testament that this must never be allowed to occur again. When this miscarriage of justice unfolded during World War II, Americans of German and Italian ancestry were not similarly jailed en masse. Some declare the incident as an example of outright racism and bigotry in its ugliest form. After viewing the Holocaust Museum in Washington, I understand better why the genocide of some 6 million Jews has prompted the cry, ``Never Again, Never Again!'' Likewise, I sincerely hope that mass internments of the basis of race alone will never again darken the history of our great nation.

To those that say, well, that occurred decades ago, I say we must continue to be vigilant in guarding against such evil today.

Not long ago, we had the case of Bruce Yamashita, a Japanese-American from Hawaii who was discharged from the Marine Corps officer training program in an ugly display of racial discrimination. Marine Corps superiors taunted Yamashita with ethnic slurs and told him, ``We don't want your kind around here. Go back to your own country.'' The situation was made worse by the Commandant of the Marine Corps, a four star general, who appeared on television's ``Sixty Minutes'' and stated: ``Marine officers who are minorities do not shoot, swim, or use compasses as well as white officers.'' The Commandant later apologized for his remarks, but it was a little too late.

After years of perseverance and appeals, Mr. Yamashita was vindicated after proving he was the target of vicious racial harassment during his officer training program. The Secretary of the Navy's investigation into whether minorities were deliberately being discouraged from becoming officers resulted in Bruce Yamashita receiving is commission as a captain in the Marine Corps.

The tradition continues today of the thousands of Asian-Pacific Americans who serve in the armed services. Retired General Eric Shinseki was the first Asian-American four-star general who served as U.S. Army Chief of Staff. Our Asian-American and Pacific Island soldiers are fighting for freedom in Iraq even as I speak.

Just this past weekend, I was privileged to witness the swearing in of the Samoan soldier CSM Iuniasolua Savusa as the Command Sergeant Major for U.S. Army Europe and the 7th Army. I am very proud of Command Sergeant Major Iuni Savusa for his accomplishments. He is an inspiration and a great role model for our youth and other Asian- Pacific Americans who currently serving in the military.

Other outstanding Asian-Pacific Americans who have made significant contributions to our nation:

Dr. David Ho--pioneered treatment for HIV/AIDS and named by Time Magazine as its ``Man of the Year'' in 1996.

Dr. Hideyo Noguchi--isolated the syphilis germ in 1911, leading to a cure for the deadly disease.

Dr. Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar--Nobel Prize winner, evolution of stars, led to modern astrophysics.

Ellison Onizuka--the first Asian-American astronaut, 1985, Died aboard the Space shuttle Challenger in 1986.

Kalpana Chawla--Astronaut, first Indian American woman in space.

News, Sports, and Entertainment--

Ellen Nakashima--chief reporter for the Washington Post in Southeast Asia.

Connie Chung--in 1993, became the first Asian American to be a nightly news anchor for a major network.

Keanu Reeves--internationally renown actor.

Apolo Ohno--Olympic Gold & Silver Medalist, speed skating.

Jet Li--movie actor.

Kristi Yamaguchi--Olympic Gold Medalist, figure skating.

Dwayne Johnson--also known as the ``Rock,'' professional wrestler and movie star--Scorpine King, Walking Tell, Doomed.

Dr. Sammy Lee, Olympic gold medalist high diver.

Greg Louganis--Olympic gold.

Michelle Kwan: Olympic Silver and Bronze medalist, Figure skating.

Duke Kahanamokee, gold medalist swimmer.

Angela Perez Baraquio: First Asian American Miss America 2001 (Miss Hawaii).

Sarah Chang: world famous violinist.

Lucy Liu: Actress.

Bruce Lee: Martial Artist and Actor.

Tiger Woods: Golf Professional.

Michelle Wie: Professional Golfer.

Akebono (Chad Rowan): Sumo Wrestler (retired), yokozuna.

Konishiki Salevaia Afigaroe: Sumo wrestler, oyeki.

Musashimaru Peitari, Sumo wrestler, retired, yokozuna.

24 Samoan NFL football players in 2005/2006 season.

9 Native Hawaiian NFL football players.

5 Tongan Americans--NFL football players.

Mr. Speaker, when I envision America, I don't see a melting pot designed to reduce and remove racial differences. The America I see is a brilliant rainbow--a rainbow of ethnicities and cultures, with each people proudly contributing in their own distinctive and unique way--a better America for a generation of Americans yet unborn.

Asian-Pacific Americans wish to find a just and equitable place in our society that will allow them--like all Americans--to grow, to succeed, to achieve and to contribute to the advancement of this great nation.

Mr. Speaker, first as an American, whose roots are from the Asian Pacific Region, I would like to close my remarks by asking all of us here tonight, what is America about? I think it could not have been said better than on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial in the summer of 1963 when an African-American minister named Martin Luther King Jr. poured out his heart and soul to every American who could hear his voice, when he uttered these words: ``I have a dream. My dream is that one day my children will be judged not by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.''

That is what I believe America is all about.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my good friend and colleague for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, I also would like to offer my commendation to the chairman of our House International Relations Committee, Mr. Hyde, for his leadership and for his support of this resolution. I would also like to thank our senior Democratic ranking member on the committee, Mr. Lantos from California, and especially also my good friend and chairman of the House Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific, the gentleman from Iowa, Chairman Leach, for his support as well of this resolution.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H. Res. 692, commending the people of the Republic of the Marshall Islands for the contributions and sacrifices they made to the United States nuclear testing program in the Marshall Islands.

I want to especially thank the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake), my good friend and colleague. He and I also had the privilege of visiting the Marshall Islands a year ago, and is an original cosponsor with me on this legislation, as well as my dear friends and colleagues who have also. In the spirit of bipartisanship, I want to submit for the Record the list of the Members who have also signed on as cosponsors of this resolution.

h. res. 692

Title: Commending the people of the Republic of the

Marshall Islands for the contributions and sacrifices they

made to the United States nuclear testing program in the

Marshall Islands, solemnly acknowledging the first detonation

of a hydrogen bomb by the United States on March 1, 1954, on

the Bikini Atoll in the Marshall Islands, and remembering

that 60 years ago the United States began its nuclear testing

program in the Marshall Islands.

Sponsor: Rep Faleomavaega, Eni F. H. [AS] (introduced 2/16/

2006) Cosponsors (36).

Latest Major Action: 2/16/2006 Referred to House committee.

Status: Referred to the House Committee on International

Relations.

Rep. Abercrombie, Neil [HI-1]--3/30/2006

Rep. Ackerman, Gary L. [NY-5]--3/30/2006

Rep. Baca, Joe [CA-43]--3/30/2006

Rep. Berman, Howard L. [CA-28]--3/30/2006

Rep. Blumenauer, Earl [OR-3]--3/30/2006

Rep. Bordallo, Madeleine Z. [GU]--3/30/2006

Rep. Brown, Corrine [FL-3]--3/30/2006

Rep. Brown, Sherrod [OH-13]--3/30/2006

Rep. Burton, Dan [IN-5]--3/30/2006

Rep. Cardoza, Dennis A. [CA-18]--3/30/2006

Rep. Castle, Michael N. [DE]--3/30/2006

Rep. Delahunt, William D. [MA-10]--3/30/2006

Rep. Engel, Eliot L. [NY-17]--3/30/2006

Rep. Flake, Jeff [AZ-6]--2/16/2006

Rep. Gallegly, Elton [CA-24]--3/30/2006

Rep. Gutierrez, Luis V. [IL-4]--3/30/2006

Rep. Honda, Michael M. [CA-15]--3/30/2006

Rep. Jackson-Lee, Sheila [TX-18]--3/30/2006

Rep. Kennedy, Patrick J. [RI-1]--3/30/2006

Rep. Kind, Ron [WI-3]--3/30/2006

Rep. Kucinich, Dennis J. [OH-10]--3/30/2006

Rep. Lantos, Tom [CA-12]--3/30/2006

Rep. Leach, James A. [IA-2]--3/30/2006

Rep. Lee, Barbara [CA-9]--3/30/2006

Rep. Lewis, John [GA-5]--3/30/2006

Rep. Miller, George [CA-7]--3/30/2006

Rep. Napolitano, Grace F. [CA-38]--3/30/2006

Rep. Payne, Donald M. [NJ-10]--3/30/2006

Rep. Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana [FL-18]--3/30/2006

Rep. Schiff, Adam B. [CA-29]--3/30/2006

Rep. Spratt, John M., Jr. {SC-5]--3/30/2006

Rep. Udall, Tom [NM-3]--3/30/2006

Rep. Waters, Maxine [CA-35]--3/30/2006

Rep. Watson, Diane E. [CA-33]--3/30/2006

Rep. Watt, Melvin L. [NC-12]--3/30/2006

Rep. Wexler, Robert [FL-19]--3/30/2006

Mr. Speaker, 60 years ago in 1946, the United States began testing nuclear weapons in the Marshall Islands. Over a 12-year period until 1958, the United States conducted 67 nuclear tests with the equivalent yield of more than 7,000 Hiroshima nuclear bombs. In fact, the nuclear test code-named Bravo was a 15-megaton hydrogen bomb that was detonated on March 1, 1954, in the Marshall Islands and its equivalent yield was 1,000 Hiroshima-sized nuclear bombs. Acknowledged as the greatest nuclear explosion ever at that time detonated, the Bravo test vaporized six islands and created a mushroom cloud 25 miles in diameter.

Because people were living in these South Pacific islands during the time of the U.S. nuclear testing program, the people of the Republic of the Marshall Islands were exposed to severe radiation poisoning. Even today, 60 years after the U.S. nuclear testing program began, the people of the Rongelap Atoll, as well as other atolls, are still exiled from their own land due to the radioactive fallout.

Mr. Speaker, as the ranking member of the House International Relations Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific and as a Pacific Islander myself, I feel I have a special responsibility to look after the interests of our Pacific Island community, especially from the Marshall Islands which have sacrificed greatly for our common good.

From 1946 to 1958, the United States detonated 67 nuclear weapons in the Marshall Islands, representing nearly 80 percent of all atmospheric tests ever conducted by the United States. If one were to calculate the net yield of these tests, it would be equivalent to the detonation of 1.7 Hiroshima bombs every day for 12 years. These tests exposed the people of the Marshall Islands to severe health problems and genetic anomalies for generations to come.

The U.S. nuclear testing program in the Marshall Islands continues to devastate the Marshall Islands, and the funds provided by the United States under the Compact of Free Association I submit, Mr. Speaker, are grossly inadequate to provide for the health care, environmental monitoring, personal injury claims, or land and property damages.

Pursuant to the compact and the accompanying section 177 agreement, the United States accepted responsibility for the damage to the property and environment of the Marshall Islands and the health of its people. This agreement did not constitute a final agreement, as evidenced by the inclusion of article IX authorizing the government of the Marshall Islands to petition the U.S. Congress in the event of ``changed circumstances that render the provisions of this agreement manifestly inadequate.''

The government of the Republic of the Marshall Islands has submitted a request to Congress based on a changed circumstances claim. The administration, however, as represented by the State Department in its report evaluating the Marshall Islands' request, rejected the argument made in the Marshall Islands' petition, contending that the claims did not constitute changed circumstances as defined in the agreement.

For the record, Mr. Speaker, I want to make it clear that I take issue with the State Department's position. While the State Department denies that there is no legal basis for Congress to hear this petition, the fact remains that we in Congress should decide this for ourselves.

Mr. Speaker, the State Department issued a report in November of 2004 evaluating the Marshall Islands' petition, concluding that the Marshall Islands' request does not qualify as changed circumstances within the meaning of the agreement, so there is no legal basis for considering additional payments.

Mr. Speaker, the State Department fails to explain how the declassified documents released 10 years after the agreement was reached, indicating a wider expanded radioactive fallout than previously disclosed, or that the National Cancer Institute study indicating that more cancers will surface do not constitute a legal basis for Congress to consider their circumstances.

Mr. Speaker, I submit this is much larger than a legal issue. This is a moral issue. The fact is the people of the Marshall Islands are still suffering severe, adverse health effects directly related to our nuclear testing program, and they are still unable to use their own lands because of the radiation poisoning. We have a moral obligation to provide for health care, environmental monitoring, personal injury claims, and the land and property damage in the Marshall Islands. This is the least we can do, Mr. Speaker, considering the historic contribution the people of the Marshall Islands have made in the Cold War struggle to preserve international peace and promote nuclear disarmament.

Mr. Speaker, the people of the Marshall Islands do not want handouts. They have brought these ongoing health environmental and loss of land issues to Congress for our consideration. While we may find that we cannot provide the amount of money requested, I believe we do have an obligation to examine carefully the application they have submitted to ensure that we live up to the responsibility we embraced over 50 years ago when we began nuclear testing in the Pacific. We should not be looking for ways to sidestep this responsibility. We should ask ourselves if we have done everything we can possibly do to make things right for the people of the Marshall Islands who have sacrificed their lives, their health and their lands for the benefit of the United States.

I have reviewed the petition. I have researched this issue extensively, and I believe enough evidence exists to justify a thorough review of the changed circumstances in the petition.

Mr. Speaker, I do not know if my colleagues can see this picture. These are some of the children who were born to mothers this day last year, deformed children, still as a result of nuclear testing that we conducted in the Marshall Islands, and how dare that our government say that we do not have

any further responsibility to the people of the Marshall Islands. It is still there, and we should pay attention to this.

Mr. Speaker, I am probably one of the few Members who has ever been to the Marshall Islands and have seen the results of our nuclear testing program. Some of our colleagues may ask how come we stopped our nuclear testing in the Marshall Islands. I will tell you why: because of the radiation, a nuclear cloud that floated all over to the United States and we found strontin-90 on milk products coming out of Minnesota and Wisconsin. That is why we stopped our nuclear testing there in the Marshall Islands.

I am probably one of the few Members who also visited the French nuclear testing in the South Pacific in French Polynesia where the French Government detonated over 220 nuclear bombs in the atmosphere, on the surface, under the ocean; and guess what, those atolls are beginning to leak now. The French Government refuses to allow international scientific teams to go down there and find out exactly the extent of the nuclear damage that the French Government has done to those people in the Pacific.

Last year, Mr. Speaker, I was invited by the President of Kazakhstan to visit that country; and to my surprise, I did not realize that this is where the Soviet Union conducted their nuclear testing program. They detonated 500 nuclear devices in Afghanistan before Afghanistan became independent; and as a result of the Soviet Union nuclear testing, 1.5 million Kazakhs were exposed to nuclear radioactivity, very similar to the problems that we have just had a resolution on on Chernobyl.

It is madness. It is madness, Mr. Speaker, and I submit this is something we should at least do for the people of the Marshall Islands. They are not asking for handouts, Mr. Speaker. They are just simply asking for fairness. If we were so deliberate in our efforts to fund the Cold War, let us give the Marshall Islands people at least what they deserve, a good medical treatment for the mothers that still continue to have cancers in thyroid glands, cancers all over, several hundred, and their descendants still continue to be exposed because of what we had done to these people 60 years ago.

Mr. Speaker, I submit and I ask my colleagues, I request with all due respect that the least we could do is to pass this resolution. With this resolution, Mr. Speaker, we want to acknowledge the historic contribution the people of the Marshall Islands have made in the Cold War struggle to preserve the peace that we are seeking throughout the world. We commend the people of the Marshall Islands for the contributions and sacrifices they made, and we hope and I hope, sincerely hope, that my colleagues will join me in providing for appropriate legislation so that we can give these people the proper medical care that they deserve.

With that, Mr. Speaker, again, I thank my good friend, the chairman of our Asia Pacific Subcommittee, Mr. Leach, and my good friend, senior Democratic member, Mr. Lantos, for their support and management of this bill.