implement policies within existing budgets, consistent with the purpose of the resolution.

We have discussed this approach with the Administration, which supports our resolution and is in the midst of reassessing current policy on broadcasting in Africa. I would like to thank Mr. Menendez, Mr. Smith, Mr. Berman, Mr. Jefferson, and Mr. Hilliard for their support of independent broadcasting in Africa. I urge my colleagues to support this resolution.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman GILMAN. Thank you, Mr. Royce.

Mr. Menendez.

Mr. MENENDEZ. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am happy to be a cosponsor with Mr. Royce on what I think is an incredibly important topic for Africa. In the past few years, in such places as Rwanda and Liberia, we have witnessed some of the detrimental effects of radio broadcasting in Africa when used by one party or one side to a conflict as a tool to control information or to generate conflict and violence. In sub-Saharan Africa, where much of the population is still illiterate and where televisions are scarce, the oral tradition remains strong. Radio is the primary source of information for many people. The need for unbiased radio programming is therefore tremendous.

As African nations increasingly turn toward democracy, the United States and the international community need to promote independent radio programming early on as a necessary component for democratic development. Radio can be a resource for the African people, not just to disperse the daily news and weather, but to convey lessons about agriculture, the environment, health, and democracy. Radio can be an educational tool for people in their daily lives and a crucial resource in times of crisis. The high listenership of radio makes it a good resource for informing people during a time of crisis. We should encourage and support African-led radio initiatives and assist in the training of African radio technicians and journalists.

I again want to commend the chairman of the Subcommittee for his resolution. I too urge its adoption.

Chairman GILMAN. Thank you, Mr. Menendez.

Mr. Campbell. Mr. Rohrabacher.

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Yes. I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate and thank Mr. Royce for the hard work that he has done not only on this project, but Ed has worked hard and long to ensure communications freedom throughout the world. His championship of Radio Free Asia, for example, ensured the fact that Radio Free Asia exists today.

We are going into an election in Cambodia this weekend. I can't tell you what an important role Radio Free Asia is playing in trying to bolster the democratic cause in that country which has suffered so much over these last two decades. I don't believe that Radio Free Asia would be in place if it wasn't for Mr. Royce.

I think we have to pay that same attention to the despotism in Africa. Ed has taken on his assignment as the chairman of the African Subcommittee with more commitment and serious thought than anyone I have seen in recent years. This resolution and trying to use radio as a tool for freedom and progress in the African con

tinent, has made me proud to be a neighbor of his in California and proud to sit with him here in this body and support this resolution. Chairman GILMAN. Thank you, Mr. Rohrabacher.

Is any other Member seeking recognition or seeking to offer any amendment? If not, the gentleman from Nebraska, Mr. Bereuter, is recognized to offer a motion.

Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Chairman be requested to seek consideration of the pending resolution on the suspension calendar.

Chairman GILMAN. The question is on the motion of the gentleman from Nebraska. As many as are in favor signify in the usual manner by saying aye.

Those opposed, indicate by saying no.

The ayes have it. The motion is agreed to. Further proceedings on this measure are postponed.

We will now turn to H.R. 3743, a measure to withhold voluntary proportional assistance for programs and projects of the International Atomic Energy Agency.

I now lay the bill before the Committee. The clerk will report the title of the bill.

Ms. BLOOMER. "H.R. 3743, to withhold voluntary proportional assistance for programs and projects of the International Atomic Energy Agency relating to the development and completion of the Bushehr nuclear power plant in Iran, and for other purposes.'

Chairman GILMAN. Without objection, the first reading of the bill is dispensed with. The clerk will read the bill for amendment.

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

Chairman GILMAN. Without objection, the bill is considered as having been read and is open to amendment at any point. [H.R. 3743 appears in the appendix.]

Chairman GILMAN. The bill was referred to the Subcommittee on International Operations and Human Rights but has not been acted upon. I now recognize the gentleman from New Jersey, Mr. Menendez, to introduce the bill. I recognize Mr. Menendez for 5 minutes.

Mr. MENENDEZ. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank you for having placed this bill on today's agenda. First, let me say that I recognize the importance of the International Atomic Energy Agency and its role in ensuring the safety of nuclear sites around the world. In recent months, we have witnessed their struggle to carry out inspections in Iraq. This bill, however, will not affect the IAEA's safeguards program. The bill does not seek to withhold any funds from the IAEA safeguards program in Iran or elsewhere. The only funds affected by this bill are voluntary, not assessed contributions to the IAEA's technical assistance and cooperation fund for Iran.

Prior to 1994, U.S. law required the withholding of proportional IAEA voluntary funds from all countries on our list of terrorist states. Despite the change in law, the Administration continued to withhold these funds for 2 more years until 1996. What this bill does is require that the Administration reinstate proportional withholding of IAEA voluntary funds from Iran. It also requires the

Secretary of State to undertake a comprehensive review of all IAEA programs and projects in other states that sponsor international terrorism to determine if the IAEA is sponsoring any other projects that conflict with U.S. nuclear non-proliferation and safety goals.

As it is, since the IAEA's inception, more than $52 million for the Technical Assistance and Cooperation Fund has gone to countries on the U.S. list of states that sponsor terrorism. The United States is the largest supporter of the IAEA. We provide it with more than 25 percent of its annual budget. In the Technical Assistance and Cooperation Fund, we contribute about 32 percent or $16 million annually in voluntary funds. It is from these funds that the IAEA intends to provide $1.5 million for the development of the Bushehr power plant between 1997 and 1999.

Now the Clinton Administration has publicly stated its opposition to Iran's development of nuclear reactors and its concern about the development of the Bushehr nuclear power plant. In Senate testimony last year, Deputy Assistant Secretary Bob Einhorn explained, and I quote, "In our views, this is a large reactor project. It will involve hundreds of Russians being in Iran, hundreds of Iranians or more being in Moscow being trained. This large-scale kind of project can provide a commercial cover for a number of activities that we would not like to see, perhaps much more sensitive activities than pursuing this power reactor project. It also will inevitably provide additional training and expertise in the nuclear field for Iranian technicians. In our view, given Iran's intention to acquire nuclear weapons, we do not want to see them move up the nuclear learning curve at all. We believe this project would contribute to them moving up that curve.”

Given Iran's historic support for terrorism, coupled with the fact that Iran boasts immense oil and natural gas reserves, and given the seismic activity near Bushehr, we must question Tehran's motives for constructing expensive nuclear reactors. Moreover, the development of the nuclear reactors has been an economic nightmare for Iranians. Clearly, Iran does not need additional energy sources, nor is nuclear energy an economic choice for Iran.

So finally, what do we need to ask? We need to ask one basic question. Does it make sense for the United States and U.S. taxpayers to provide any kind of support for the construction of nuclear reactors that we clearly and justifiably oppose? This bill seeks to protect U.S. taxpayers from assisting countries like Iran that sponsor international terrorism, denounce the United States, and seek to develop weapons of mass destruction that may be used against us and our allies. It is ludicrous for the United States to support even indirectly a plant that would pose a threat to the United States and to stability in the Middle East.

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment that is technical in nature. At the appropriate time, I wish to offer it. I thank the Chair.

Chairman GILMAN. The gentleman may offer his amendment at this time.

Mr. MENENDEZ. I would offer my amendment at this time. I have an amendment at the desk, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman GILMAN. The clerk will distribute the amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

Ms. BLOOMER. "Amendment offered by Mr. Menendez. Page 2, beginning on line 19, strike”.

Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the amendment be considered as read.

Chairman GILMAN. The amendment is considered as read, without objection.

[The amendment to H.R. 3743 appears in the appendix.]

Chairman GILMAN. The gentleman may explain his amendment. Mr. MENENDEZ. Very briefly, Mr. Chairman, my amendment makes a number of technical corrections, all of which I have made at the Administration's behest. In addition to technical corrections, I amend section 4 of the bill to clarify that the Administration is not required to oppose programs and projects of the IAEA that provide for the discontinuation, dismantling, or safety inspection of nuclear facilities or related materials, or for inspections and similar activities designed to prevent the development of nuclear weapons by Iran pursuant to its activities at Bushehr.

I think that the amendment, in addition to being technical, clearly takes care of some of the concerns that the Administration has. I would urge its adoption.

Chairman GILMAN. Thank you. Is any Member seeking recognition on the amendment?

Mr. HAMILTON. Mr. Chairman.

Chairman GILMAN. Mr. Hamilton.

Mr. HAMILTON. Mr. Chairman, I would like to direct some questions to the Administration on this bill.

Chairman GILMAN. Will the Administration witness please identify himself?

Mr. KLOSSON. My name is Michael Klosson. I am the Deputy Assistant Secretary in legislative affairs at the State Department. Chairman GILMAN. And you are joined at the table by?

Mr. KESSLER. Chris Kessler from the Bureau of Political Military Affairs.

Chairman GILMAN. Thank you. Mr. Hamilton.

Mr. HAMILTON. Gentlemen, I understand that the Administration opposes the bill. Is that correct?

Mr. KLOSSON. That is correct, Mr. Hamilton.
Mr. HAMILTON. Can you tell us why?

Mr. KLOSSON. We certainly oppose completion of the Bushehr reactor project and the Administration has been working very hard at very high levels to try to accomplish that. We don't think this piece of legislation is the way to get at that problem. We object to the bill requiring us to withhold a portion of our contribution. We feel that this, the approach that is laid out in this legislation would be counter-productive.

Mr. HAMILTON. Let me ask you this. Do you see any benefits to the bill? All of us want to stop weapons proliferation in Iran. Do you see this bill as having a positive impact in stopping that weapons proliferation?

Mr. KLOSSON. Our judgment is that it would not end the Bushehr project.

Mr. HAMILTON. And that is a civilian nuclear project.

Mr. KLOSSON. Correct.

Mr. HAMILTON. So as you look at the bill, you do not identify any benefits that flow to American policy as a result of the enactment of this bill. Is that correct?

Mr. KLOSSON. That is correct.

Mr. HAMILTON. Now what about the risks of the bill. Can you identify for me what the risks may be in this bill? You have already said you don't think it is going to stop the Bushehr nuclear power plant. Will it make Iran's nuclear power program less safe if the IAEA gives in to the United States here?

Mr. KLOSSON. Let me have my colleague who works the IAEA issues address that.

Mr. KESSLER. Thank you. Yes, sir. We believe that it has that potential.

Mr. HAMILTON. Does it make it more difficult for the United States to convince others to contribute to the IAEA Technical Assistance and Cooperation Fund?

Mr. KESSLER. For us to withhold a part of our voluntary contribution that's based on an agreement struck on the overall program could have that effect. Yes, sir.

Mr. HAMILTON. Will it make it more difficult for the United States to get information about Iran from the IAEA?

Mr. KESSLER. We believe it would.

Mr. HAMILTON. Will it make it more difficult for the United States to convince developing countries of the merits of IAEA safeguards when we are trying to block technical safety and regulatory assistance?

Mr. KESSLER. Our concern here is that Iran has been relatively open with the new safeguards procedures that the IAEA has adopted since the Gulf War in 1991. It could lead Iraq to judge that that course is not the best course for them and to become less cooperative.

Mr. HAMILTON. Now, obviously, this is a popular bill and a popular proposal and all of us recognize that it will pass easily in this Committee and in the House. I must say that I myself am considerably torn on it. I think at the moment my attitude is that I'll not oppose the bill, but I do have serious doubts about it, as some of my questions reflect. I reserve my position with regard to action on the floor.

I guess where I come down in all of this is that it is a bill which is carefully drafted, but I don't see much benefit coming from the bill. I see a lot of downside to the bill that potentially could be difficult.

Do you want to make any further comment about the bill?

Mr. KESSLER. Sir, I would say only that we strongly support and I think that our record is clear on that, the objective that the authors of the bill have articulated with respect to stopping the Bushehr reactor in Iran. It is simply our judgment that this bill will not make a contribution in that direction and will have some ancillary downsides.

Mr. HAMILTON. Now the IAEA, quite apart from Iran, is a very important institution in the world. Is it not?

Mr. KESSLER. Yes.

Mr. HAMILTON. It does a lot of very good work so far as we are aware, I think Mr. Menendez said this, in terms of setting up nu