I have actually a series of questions I would like to ask, and would like to get through all of them. So any time you can, if you can just give me a yes or no answer.

Is the primary purpose or reason for the Syria Accountability Act Syria's ties to terrorists?

Mr. ENGEL. That is one of the primary reasons. The other would be, as Mr. Wexler just mentioned, the occupation of Lebanon; the fact that they are violating the oil sanctions against Iraq and the fact that they are producing weapons of mass destruction. I would say those four pillars.

Mr. COOKSEY. Thank you. Well, I abhor terrorism. I think all terrorists are either cowards or crazy or all of the above-period, end quote. It's the most cowardly act that any human being can do to another human being.

But I would point out with a very superficial review of history that there is a long history of terrorism in that part of the worldall parties, all countries, all religions and they are all cowardly acts. So I agree and I hope you do.

Now to comment on President Bashar Assad-there is no question that the history was not good under his father. His father was military man. I never met his father. I have met the last three Prime Ministers of Israel, and I think they're fine people and have some merit.

I have met Arafat, and he has his supporters. I have met his leaders, and yet, Bashar Assad is a physician. And being a physician, I think he has the opportunity to be a kinder, gentler leader and will move Syria in the right direction.

I happened to have met with him last year with a delegation in Damascus, and I think he is, hopefully, the type of young, new leader they will have over there. I really think that they need to get rid of people that have either a military background or a terrorist background or a political background and have more people from business-I met all the leaders of Lebanon.

They are all three-two of the three of them are businessmen, and very successful businessmen; and hopefully, that will be the direction that the Middle Eastern countries go to.

My third question-do you think this is the time bring this Syria Accountability Act at a time that we are preparing for war against Iraq? And then, my last series of questions is, number one, has the President asked for this legislation? Has the White House asked that this legislation be tabled or defeated?

Does Syria directly threaten the United States at this time, because our primary responsibility as Members of Congress is our allegiance and our loyalty to the United States. So my question is, does Syria directly threaten the United States, and has the President asked for this legislation?

Mr. ENGEL. I tried to write down the questions, and I hope I got them

Mr. GILMAN. If I might interrupt, we have a distinguished panel waiting for us, and I am going to ask our colleague to be considerate so we can get on to the panel. If you would keep your remarks as short as possible. Mr. Engel?

Mr. ENGEL. Yes. Let me say that I don't think there is another country in the world, in my opinion, that harbors terrorists to the

depth that Syria does. I think we would be hard pressed to find it. In fact, I believe that Syria, even more than Iraq, has been aiding and abetting terrorism and harboring terrorists.

Bashar Assad-I think that many of us had high hopes for him just like King Abdullah of Jordan. I think King Abdullah of Jordan has risen and shown that he is a young man who is moderate and has vision. Unfortunately, in my estimation, Bashar Assad has shown that he is even worst than his father, who was no friend to the United States for many, many years. It has been very, very sad that he has not, unlike King Abdullah, moved up to the task in my estimation.

I believe this is the right time. I believe that as we are facing the threat in Iraq, and going after terrorists in al-Qaeda, this is the right time to say to all countries which harbor terrorists that we are not going to tolerate it any more.

Finally, the Administration does not support this bill as previous Administrations have not supported any bills that the Congress has come up with because the Administration generally believes that it's their purview to conduct foreign policy, and generally, resents anything that the Congress does.

When we had the Iran and Libya Sanctions Act, it was also opposed by Administrations, as have all these kinds of acts been opposed. So this is no different. The Administration will say that they share our goals. They think what we're trying to do is the right thing, but they don't think this is the right way to do it. This is not the right time.

I have heard this from the State Department in the 14 years I have been in Congress. To them, I would say, if this is not the right time when we are embarking on a campaign to fight terrorism, then I don't know when the right time will ever be.

Mr. GILMAN. The gentleman's time has expired.

Mr. COOKSEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Engel. Mr. GILMAN. Ms. Berkley? And I am going to, again, ask our Members to please be brief so we can get on to the next panel.

Ms. BERKLEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will also submit my opening statement for the record.

Mr. GILMAN. Without objection.

Ms. BERKLEY. I want to thank you, Mr. Engel, for coming forward at this time. I agree with you that if not now, when? Not only do I agree with the contents and substance of the Accountability Act, I am very thankful for your passion on this issue that I share.

I also recall when Assad took over from his father, and the belief I had that, perhaps, this was a turning point in the relationship in the Middle East. And with his Western education that people were touting, that he might become a kinder and gentler leader.

But I don't care if he's a doctor, a lawyer, a plumber, a carpenter-this is not a kinder and gentler leader. This is a kinder and gentler terrorist, and we don't need another one of those.

He is no different from his father; perhaps, even worse because he should know better. This is a disgrace that this country isn't standing up to this terrorist and making sure that this type of behavior is not only condemned, but eliminated.

So I want to thank you very much. I do have questions, but I think I will hold them for the next panel. I appreciate the fact that you have the guts to sit here and share with us your concerns. Mr. GILMAN. Thank you, Ms. Berkley.

Mr. ENGEL. Thank you.

Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Chabot?

Mr. CHABOT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. In the interest of time in getting to the next panel, I think I will hold my questions to the next panel as well.

Mr. GILMAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Chabot. Mr. Rohrabacher?

Mr. ROHRABACHER. I find myself in agreement and disagreement with the proponents of this legislation. Eliot and Mr. Wexler, of course, have made this point that Syria in some way should be castigated for what it is doing, and what it has done in Lebanon. And having visited Lebanon, and talked to all the parties in Lebanon, I found all of them grateful to Syria for coming into their country at a time when it was totally chaotic.

I have been to Lebanon several times, and I have had a broad range of discussions-as broad a range of discussions as you can have, and I don't know; perhaps, obviously, Lebanon should be free and independent of Syrian occupation eventually, but let's not forget the tragedy that was going on there prior to the Syrian invasion.

That in no way, of course, justifies the Syrian harboring of terrorists, which they obviously do. So I find myself in agreement with the idea that we have to put pressure on Syria and we should do so officially and we should make sure we are uncompromising, which is what I believe you are trying to do here to make sure that they know that if any country harbors warriors who are making war on women and children and blowing up bar mitzvahs in Israel or organizations that set up bombs in Pizza Huts-that country should not be a friend of the United States.

They have to know they are making war, not just on people who eat pizza at Pizza Huts in Israel, but they are making war on all civilized people. So I agree with your goal in trying to put pressure on Syria for that.

But again, let's make sure we try to be fair in terms of what was going on historically in terms of what Syria did in Lebanon. If you want them to take us seriously about not harboring terrorists, we have to try to be accurate in terms of what happened historically in Lebanon.

I think there is a difference between Syria and Iraq. Syria is not headed by a man who holds a blood grudge against the United States. Saddam Hussien holds a blood grudge against us, and I think that he means to do us harm. Syria is harboring terrorists who attack Israel, and as such, is not a friend of the United States or a friend anybody who opposes terrorism.

So with that said, I am probably going to support the legislation, but I do think that there are some things that we need to put in a little bit more better perspective. Thank you, Eliot.

Mr. ENGEL. Let me just say to my friend and colleague that we certainly share the goals of this legislation in terms of fighting terrorism and getting Syria to stop it support of terrorism.

81-812 D-2

But the Lebanese people who have come to Washington that I have spoken with; particularly, the Christians, don't welcome Syrian occupation of their country. They believe that Syria should leave.

Syria, in my estimation, is in violation of the Taif Accord where they agreed to pull their troops out of Lebanon and U.N. Resolution 520 passed in 1982. Section 4 calls, again, for the strict respect of the sovereignty, territorial integrity, unity and political independence of Lebanon under the sole and exclusive authority of the government of Lebanon through the Lebanese army throughout Lebanon and I would just say

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Eliot, can I ask a question?

Mr. ENGEL. If I could just finish. I would just say that the Syrian army undermines Lebanese sovereignty and prevents the Lebanese from running their own country. And if you really speak with many of the groups; particularly, the Christian groups in Lebanon, they all want the Syrians out of Lebanon.

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Eliot, what was the death rate going on in Lebanon of violent killings prior to the Syrian evasion?

Mr. ENGEL. I think

Mr. ROHRABACHER. We are talking about a massive blood-letting that was stopped. I am not saying we should forgive Syria for any of its faults, and believe me, I'm with you on their support of terrorism, and I have made that point to them personally.

I just don't think we are being accurate here, and I have talked to Christian leaders in Lebanon. People are shaking their head, I'm sorry. I have. I have been there twice.

I met with all of the Christian leaders, and while they are officially telling us, yes, we want the Syrian occupation to be over; unofficially, they are acknowledging that before the Syrians came in, people were slaughtering each other in the streets. It doesn't take a genius to take a look at what was going on there.

Mr. GILMAN. The gentleman's time has expired.

Mr. ENGEL. If I might just

Mr. GILMAN. The gentleman's time has expired. I am trying to preserve time for our panel. By unanimous consent, a non-member of our Subcommittee, Ms. McKinney.

Ms. MCKINNEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I only have one question, and I will be brief. I just would like to ask my colleague, on September 25th, the governor of Minnesota, Jessie Ventura, is going to lead a delegation to Cuba.

I am just looking at this article, "Walls Around Cuba are Cracking," and basically, there are a couple of quotes I would like to read here.

One is a question along the lines of what Congressman Cooksey asked. And that is, "Is there any corporation in America that would cling to the same failed business practice for 40 years?"

That is speaking about the U.S. embargo of Cuba. Further, a Member of the House goes on to say that the problem with our policy is that we elevate Castro. We allow him to blame us for all the failures of socialism.

If we will simply empower people over there, through commerce and trade and interaction, we can move around him. so my question is, is there another strategy short of embargo and sanctions

sanctions that can move United States and Syria where they need to be. And if there is no other strategy, why do you think that there is no other strategy?

Mr. ENGEL. Well, let me say that as Majority Leader Armey and I pointed out in our testimony, since 1979, when the State Department first put forward its list of countries which aid and abet terrorism, Syria has been on that list since the inception since 1979. We have heard a series of Administrations say, well, let us handle Syria diplomatically, and hopefully, we can get it to change its ways. In the 23 years, I have not seen any change in the ways of Syria. In fact, I've seen it get worse.

When Hafez Assad, Bashar Assad's father, ran Syria and then died, we all had hope that when the son took over it would be a new generation-Western educated and that he would not follow the policies of his father.

What we have seen in the few years that he has ruled Syria with an iron fist, he is actually worse than his father because his father was stronger and could make certain decisions, where he appears to be very, very weak and relies on the ultra-hard liners in Syria.

So I believe they've regressed and we have no choice but to put forward this legislation to give them the opportunity to change their ways because they've shown no desire to do it otherwise.

I do think that the Congress has a responsibility to help guide our country in foreign policy, and this is one the ways that we do it. So I would say that I put forward this legislation really as a last resort out of frustration that Syria, if anything, is getting worse not better.

Ms. MCKINNEY. Mr. Chairman, I promised only one question, but I do have a follow up. I have not visited Syria, but if Bashar is weak-and significantly weaker than his father and we make war in Iraq and we make sanctions on Syria, don't we contribute to increased turmoil and tension in the area?

As a result of that, there are discussions that there will be potential for civil war in Saudi Arabia. There are all kinds of things that are being postulated as we embark upon this war.

Do we do more damage to the neighbor or to the region by moving in this way, or is there possibly another way that is through diplomacy that we can move our two countries to a closer position? Mr. ENGEL. Well, we've tried diplomacy, as I mentioned, for 23 years and it hasn't worked. When I look at countries that harbor terrorism, I frankly think Syria has a worse record that Iraq.

I think Syria probably has the worst record of any country in the world; perhaps, other than Iran. And so, if we are going to make terrorism the goal, it doesn't make sense to me that we are somehow moving into Iraq, but we're looking the other way when it comes to Syria.

I think, as the President rightly said, that you are either with us or with the terrorists. We have to fight terrorism wherever it rears its ugly head, and frankly, I think Syria is at the top of the pack when it comes to terrorism.

Mr. GILMAN. The gentlelady's time has expired.

Ms. MCKINNEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. GILMAN. We will now proceed with the next panel. Mr. Engel, we thank you for your patience. We ask if you will join our