The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“MUSHARRAF'S VISIT TO THE UNITED STATES” mentioning the U.S. Dept of State was published in the House of Representatives section on pages H267 on Feb. 12, 2002.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
MUSHARRAF'S VISIT TO THE UNITED STATES
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone) is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I rise this evening to discuss my concerns with H. Con. Res. 322, a resolution introduced by the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Pitts) this afternoon that commends General Musharraf of Pakistan for his leadership and friendship and welcomes him to the United States.
Mr. Speaker, I agree that General Musharraf was faced with a difficult decision when he was asked, and he cooperated, with the United States in the fight against terrorism. There is much civil unrest throughout Pakistan, and I do believe that there was a risk involved when Musharraf decided to side with the United States.
However, there have been some major shortcomings in Musharraf's promises to root out the Taliban, al Qaeda and certain terrorist groups in Kashmir that are linked to al Qaeda. I sent a letter to President Bush today outlining these shortcomings, and I will include that in the Record at this point.
Congress of the United States,
House of Representatives,
Washington, DC, February 11, 2002.Hon. George W. Bush,President of the United States, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. President: I understand that you, along with other officials in your administration, will be meeting with General Pervez Musharraf on Wednesday during his visit to the United States. I am writing to explain why I continue to oppose lifting the ban on military assistance to Pakistan and the proposal in your budget to provide $50 million in such assistance.
Since September 11 and Musharraf's supposed willingness to fight against terrorism, Pakistani-based militant groups have been carrying out violent cross-border terrorist attacks on innocent civilians throughout Kashmir on a daily basis. In addition, the largest symbol of democracy, the Indian Parliament, was attacked on December 13, 2001 by the same terrorist groups operating out of Pakistan near the Kasmir border.
Musharraf has claimed to crack down on terrorists operating in Pakistan since the attack on the Parliament, however it remains my concern that this is not the case. Although he has arrested nearly 1600 individuals, there is no assurance that these individuals are criminals and there is no notice of whether these individuals are terrorist fighters. In addition, there has been no progress on Pakistan's part to quell the violence taking place in Kasmir. In fact, the Kashmir Solidarity Day last week, Musharraf delivered a speech, which I found to incite violence among these terrorist groups that he refers to as ``freedom fighters''. Pakistan has openly acknowledged that it provides logistical and moral support to these groups, however, the support extends beyond that to arms and weapons transfers. It is clear that Musharraf is in fact supporting terrorist activities under the guise of calling these groups ``freedom fighters''.
When you asked Congress last fall to lift the ban on military assistance to Pakistan, there were no plans to provide any such assistance to General Musharraf. State Department representatives appeared before the House International Relations Committee at the time, and in response to my question, stated that no military aid to Pakistan was anticipated.
In your FY 2003 budget proposal you have requested $50 million in military assistance to Pakistan. Frankly, I don't see that the situation has changed in Pakistan to justify such a turnaround. It is alarming that you are proposing military assistance to a country that verbally condemns terrorism on a global level, but that actively supports terrorist activities in its own backyard.
I agree that Pakistan needs extensive aid to rebuild its economy, education system and social structure. However, I cannot support a proposal that funds military assistance to Pakistan given its current leadership under a dictator and its continued backing of militant groups. Historically, U.S. military assistance to Pakistan has been used to arm cross-border terrorists in their attacks on Indian civilians in Kashmir and throughout the nation. There is continued evidence that terrorist groups operating in Pakistan are linked to Al-Qaeda and that their attacks on India are experiments for future attacks on the United States. I do not believe it is in our best interest to provide military assistance to Pakistan, despite their agreement to help in our war on terrorism. South Asia is a very volatile, unstable region and given the current military standoff between Pakistan and India, $50 million worth of U.S. weapons will only aid future conflict in that region.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Frank Pallone, Jr.
However, tonight, Mr. Speaker, I would like to focus on democracy, or the lack of democracy, in Pakistan. In the Pitts resolution, there is mention of President Musharraf's pursuit of a return to democracy and civil society, in addition to his adherence to the timetable for restoring democratic elections to Pakistan. I do not support this resolution because the opposite is true. Mr. Speaker, Musharraf has made no concrete attempt to restore democracy in Pakistan, and I urge the Congress and the administration to be very wary of any guarantees of a return to civilian rule in Pakistan.
In 1999, General Pervez Musharraf overthrew the civilian-elected government of Pakistan in a military coup and since then has governed Pakistan under military rule. General Musharraf has shown no steps toward returning Pakistan to democratic rule and, in fact, has moved in the opposite direction.
On June 20 of last year, Musharraf declared himself President of Pakistan, which is a clear indication of his desire to maintain a dictatorial stronghold. Musharraf's past actions include dissolving Pakistan's National Assembly, or parliament, and four provincial assemblies. He has claimed that he will hold fair national elections by October of 2002. However, there are no indications that this is likely to occur. October is only 9 months away. As a self-proclaimed president, Musharraf may be seen with more credibility in the eyes of the international community at large, but the fact remains that the people of his nation have never elected him.
Mr. Speaker, on October 16 of last year, the House debated lifting section 508 that would allow military assistance to Pakistan. The United States prohibited the export of U.S. weapons and military assistance under section 508 to countries whose duly elected head of government is deposed.
Today the House debated the Pitts resolution which praises Musharraf for his steps toward returning Pakistan to democracy.
If and when Pakistan exemplifies steps towards establishing a democracy with a civilian-elected government, perhaps then section 508 discussion would have been relevant and perhaps the Pitts resolution would be relevant. But until then, Mr. Speaker, it is crucial for Congress to indicate its support for a restoration to democracy and civilian rule in Pakistan.
____________________
