Mr. BONKER. This whole question is so new, and it has not even been properly defined, so I doubt whether we have gone that far. Mr. DYMALLY. Mr. Leach, any comment on that?

Do we have any accommodation in our law for religious persecution? Do we grant asylum?

Mr. LEACH. We grant asylum for a series of things that includes the threat of loss of life. Religious and political persecution are sometimes intertwined. We are taking steps to bring as many Baha'is into this country, and very properly so.

If you have any concerns on that issue, it is my hope that you would bring them out.

It is our understanding that our Government has worked very hard with the Baha'is in this instance, and it is also my understanding that we have not wanted to wave a flag about it in case the possibility that this might be counterproductive.

Mr. DYMALLY. Through quiet diplomacy, the Members of Congress could impress upon the State Department the urgency of this problem, and to increase the quota for Iranians who are persecuted because of religious belief, that is, the Baha'is, and that is something we can do through private channels.

Mr. BONKER. The record should note that the subcommittee has sent a number of letters to the State Department concerning this matter, and we have received responses and assurances that the Baha'is would be granted asylum in the United States.

We will put those letters into the official record, but, as I understand it, that is not the answer, because Baha'is want to be able to practice their faith in their country.

Judge NELSON. Most of them, of course, have no desire to leave. That is their country, their culture, their language, their people. Mr. DYMALLY. I was referring to those who are outside of Iran and who are in no-man's-land without any status.

Judge NELSON. Mr. Mitchell has directed our petition to you in that regard, and you are correct, and thank you.

Mr. DYMALLY. And, of course, I am concerned about the internal problems that exist now in Iran for those who reside there, the children and families, and those who have no intention of coming to the United States, who perhaps cannot come for a number of reasons. That is something that has to be given some careful thought, and to the extent that I can be personally helpful, I would like to be in touch with you, Judge, about that.

Judge NELSON. Thank you.

Mr. DYMALLY. The other questions are really of a human nature and personal.

How does a Presbyterian become a Baha'i?

Judge NELSON. I was well past the age of 15 at the time. I encountered this just before I entered law school, as a matter of fact. My wife and I came upon the Baha'i faith in a study of comparative religion, and, after 5 years, we began to see that there was a thread which unites the peoples of the world and a belief in a common essence we call God and that God had revealed his purpose in every age, and we came to believe that in this age of the maturity of mankind, that the Baha'u'llah was the spokesman for mankind now, and we became dedicated to establishing the principles of the faith wherever we could.

We did it in the same way that a child of 15 does it, and it is a matter of internal conversion.

It is a matter that once having done it, you will never be the same, and there is not any way you could turn back the clock to what you were before.

It is as if you leave one school and go on to the next. Though you may be loyal to your junior high school, you achieve even higher loyalties to your high school, to your college, and to your law school.

Mr. DYMALLY. Professor, do you think the absence of a high priest gives rise to suspicion among the Mullahs in Iran? There is no priest-like fear in the Baha'i faith?

Mr. KAZEMZADEH. I think that it is the Baha'i abrogation of the clergy in its own religion; that is to say, all of a sudden, it becomes clear to the people that you can actually get to heaven without your priest.

Mr. DYMALLY. That sounds threatening.

Mr. KAZEMZADEH. That is very threatening, indeed. I do not dismiss at all-I don't think that it would be correct-the fact that some of the Mullahs, not all of them, but some of them, are perfectly sincere in their hatred of the Baha'is.

People do take their religion seriously.

We Baha'is know it from the victims' end, but we cannot deny it to the perpetrators of the crime; either, so some of these Mullahs are absolutely sincere, and they feel they have the monopoly of truth; that they know the will of God; and the will of God is that the renegade shall die.

The person who believes differently shall not be permitted to believe differently, and here the Baha'is stand up and make what to the Mullahs are outrageous and heretical statements, and what is a good Mullah to do? He has to act it out, and this is the essence. Also, among the Mullahs there are opportunists, all kinds of vicious and evil people who don't even kill cleanly. When you are killed with cause, righteously, so to speak, by someone who believes, at least you have the satisfaction of facing someone in whom you recognize a fellow human being.

He believes his way and you believe yours, and there is a clash, and you are dead. You are a martyr. That is not as awful as being killed on the accusation of being a Russo-an Americo-British-Israeli spy, and a prostitute.

That demeans the whole discourse and turns this into some kind of a bloody travesty.

Mr. DYMALLY. What is the phenomenon that accommodates such a large percentage of blacks in the Baha'i faith?

I find that very fascinating, that statistic.

Mr. MITCHELL. It would be hard to describe the phenomenon, itself, but the Baha'is do believe in the unity of mankind and Baha'u'llah has spoken very strongly about the necessity of eliminating all forms of prejudice, racial or otherwise. This has been taught to American Baha'is in very particular ways, because, in 1912, the son of the founder of the Baha'i Faith visited this country, was here for about 9 months, spent time in Washington, D.C., spoke at various places, spoke at Howard University, and one of the statements that he made, in fact, was that the unity of the whites and

the blacks in America would be a cause of the world's peace, and the Baha'is take this very seriously, and so I think that a number of blacks in this country find this very appealing.

Mr. DYMALLY. One final question.

Mrs. Nourani, I take it you plan to finish your Ph. D. work when things settle down somewhat?

Mrs. NOURANI. I was. I am not really sure at this point. I will have to see how things will go.

Mr. DYMALLY. Thank you very much. I do not have a form in front of me to sign yet, Mr. Chairman, but I'm pretty close to it. Mr. BONKER. You got to have the experience, too, Mr. Dymally. Mr. DYMALLY. Give me a little time.

Mr. BONKER. It seems to me that there are several threats to the clergy in Iran, and one is how you practice the faith. The Islamic faith is fairly rigid in social matters and something of a theocracy as it is now being translated into Government matters.

Whenever you depart from the rigid faith, you get into that sort of thing. Again, going back to the parallel with Jews and the Christians. Christ was preaching departure, a very dramatic departure from the law as it was being practiced such as the Sabbath and so on and so forth. But, of course, they tried to embrace the law insofar as possible so that they were not getting too much from it.

Yours may be a little more distinct, and, second, it seems like since the birth of the Baha'is that Iran, over the course of history, has needed scapegoats from time to time to distract attention from other problems. Professor, you state here that Mullahs needed a scapegoat that could be blamed for the decline of Islam and for all the evils of the rapidly changing society. The most recent example is with Iran being literally torn apart by various factions and the lack of central authority. They need a scapegoat, and however they can rationalize it, it is the Baha'is. I really feel this hearing has given us a good focus. We are attempting to identify religious persecution wherever it exists. We are trying to decide whether we should look at regions of the world or whether we should attempt to single out certain examples of religious persecution.

I gather from the testimony today that we are on the right track. If we are going to really focus attention, we have got to specify where that persecution is.

I want to thank each of you for your testimony. You have certainly contributed to our understanding, and you may have picked up a convert or two.

The subcommittee will be working on a resolution that will have some teeth in it. We will attempt to extend this concern beyond the Congress to the U.N. Commission on Human Rights. Through a resolution and our delegations efforts perhaps to set up a working group that would provide more consistent monitoring of the situation in Iran and in other places.

I wish to thank all of you for being here.

Mr. LEACH. Thank you.

Mr. BONKER. The subcommittee stands adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 4:50 p.m., the subcommittee adjourned.]

RELIGIOUS PERSECUTION AS A VIOLATION OF

HUMAN RIGHTS

Pentecostals and Other Christians in the Soviet
Union and Eastern Europe

TUESDAY, JULY 27, 1982

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS,

SUBCOMMITTEE ON HUMAN RIGHTS AND

INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS,

Washington, D.C.

The subcommittee met in open markup session at 2:45 p.m., in room 2255, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Don Bonker (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.

Mr. BONKER. The subcommittee will come to order.

I apologize for the delay. Scheduling conflicts are a way of life around here. I appreciate your patience and the patience of my colleagues.

Before we commence with the hearing, I would like to take up Senate Concurrent Resolution 18, which expresses congressional concern about the repression of the Ukrainian Orthodox and Catholic Churches in the U.S.S.R. and calls upon the Soviet Government to permit the restoration of these churches.

This resolution is sponsored and has been brought to this subcommittee's attention by our colleague, Mr. Derwinski. I see that he is not here but we will keep the record open for his statement. The resolution is short, it is self-explanatory, and if I hear no objection, I would move either for unanimous consent or perhaps a motion from one of my colleagues to move this resolution out of subcommittee.

Mr. BARNES. So moved, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. BONKER. Moved by Mr. Barnes.

All those in favor?

[Chorus of "ayes."]

Mr. BONKER. Opposed?

[No response.]

Mr. BONKER. The resolution is passed and will be sent to the full committee.

[Mr. Derwinski's comments and the resolution follow:]

OPENING PREPARED STATEMENT BY HON. EDWARD J. DErwinski, a REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, ON SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 18 TO SEEK THE RESURRECTION OF THE NATIONAL CHURCHES OF THE UKRAINE

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate your taking up this resolution, S. Con. Res. 18, which is similar to the resolution, H. Con. Res. 123, which I introduced on May 1, 1981. The situation of religion in the Ukraine is a most serious problem. The national churches of the Ukraine-the Ukrainian Orthodox and Catholic Churches and other independent religions-have not merely been subjected to religious and civil repression but to physical extermination by the Soviet authorities.

The evidence that will be placed in the Committee record today will detail the extent of the repression of religion in the Ukraine; I will not repeat it. Suffice it to say that the attention of the Congress, the Administration and of national and international religious bodies should be brought to bear on these crimes and on possible redress.

Inasmuch as the resolution before the Subcommittee, S. Con. Res. 18, passed the Senate on June 19, 1981, I endorse it for action by the Subcommittee and referral to the Full Committee on Foreign Affairs.