Darfur Peace And Accountability Act Of 2006

DARFUR PEACE AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT OF 2006 -- (House of Representatives - September 25, 2006)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

For as long as I can remember, we have received conflicting messages about the situation in Sudan. My staff and I, like many people in this body, have met with Sudanese government officials. We have met with African Union officials and Darfur rebel leaders in Khartoum, Darfur, Addis Ababa, Abuja, and in Washington; and we have gotten varying accounts and assurances between the northern and southern officials in the Sudan government, between the African Union military and political departments, and between the SLM factions and the JEM.

Unfortunately, the past few months have brought more of the same. On May 5, 2006, we welcomed the news that the government of Sudan had signed a peace agreement with the largest rebel group in Darfur, the Minni Minnawi-led faction of the Sudan Liberation Movement Army. Modeled after the peace agreement which ostensibly ended over 20 years of war in southern Sudan, the Darfur Peace Agreement was hailed as a breakthrough in the peace process that had seen little progress in 2 years.

Our hopes for peace in Darfur were further raised on August 30 as the United Nations Security Council finally approved Resolution 1706, authorizing the transition of the well-meaning but severely constrained African Union Mission in Sudan, AMIS, to a larger, more capable U.N. peacekeeping mission with a robust mandate providing for civilian protection.

Before the microphones were silenced and the ink had dried, however, it became clear that eloquent speeches and agreements on paper would do little, if anything, to protect human life in Darfur.

Given its conduct of the war in the south, it should have been come as no surprise to learn that the government of Sudan had launched a new major military offensive in north Darfur in late August, in direct violation of the peace agreement it had signed just 3 months earlier.

Rather than serving as a harbinger of peace, it appears that the Darfur Peace Agreement has emboldened the Sudanese government, the Janjaweed militias, and rebel groups in Darfur to act with even greater impunity in killing, abusing and displacing civilians as they seek to consolidate their positions before international peacekeepers are deployed.

And despite assurances that a U.N. peacekeeping mission would be accepted upon conclusion of a peace agreement, Security Council Resolution 1706 was greeted by the Sudanese government with unmitigated hostility.

Regardless of the fact that a U.N. peacekeeping mission already exists in southern Sudan, the Sudanese government now seeks to portray the proposed expansion to Darfur as a ``western invasion'' and has called upon jihadists to attack any U.N. peacekeepers who dare to deploy in Darfur.

While it is not require under U.N. Security Council Resolution 1706, the Sudanese government's intransigence and inflammatory remarks have all but guaranteed that the long-awaited transition of AMIS will not take place before the end of this year.

It is these sharp contrasts between word and deed in Sudan which underlie the importance of today's consideration of H.R. 3127, the Darfur Peace and Accountability Act.

H.R. 3127, which was authored by Chairman Hyde and cosponsored by Mr. Lantos, Mr. Payne and me and 160 other Members, passed the House in April and was amended by the Senate just last week. It offers the President the tools he needs both to support the immediate expansion of AMIS and to facilitate its transition to a U.N. peacekeeping mission as soon as possible. It also provides the President with the authority to provide emergency economic and development assistance to marginalized areas in Sudan, including southern Sudan and Darfur.

H.R. 3127 also carries punitive measures intended to promote accountability in Sudan and act as a deterrent against further atrocities. It imposes targeted sanctions against individuals determined to be complicit in or responsible for acts of genocide, war crimes or crimes against humanity in Darfur. It calls upon the President to take all necessary actions to deny the government of Sudan access to oil revenues, which have been used to fund its genocidal campaign in Darfur. H.R. 3127 also calls for the suspension of the government of Sudan's rights and privileges at the U.N. until it has honored its commitments before that body.

The Senate amendment updates the bill to reflect events that have taken place following House passage last April and expresses the conviction of this Congress that AMIS must be transitioned to a larger, more capable U.N. mission. It also allows the President to provide limited military assistance to the government of southern Sudan, thereby fulfilling commitments to facilitate the transformation of the Sudan People's Liberation Army from a rebel group to a professional military force.

I note with considerable regret that the Senate amendment also strikes an important provision to make clear that nothing in this bill shall preempt State laws on divestment.

I am very proud of the fact that New Jersey has divested its pension fund investments from companies that do business with Khartoum. I would note that some States like Illinois are in court, in litigation, because they have done likewise. This provision would have made clear that nothing in the bill would preempt State laws on disinvestment. That is a loss, but there are many other things in this bill that I think warrant its passage.

Mr. Speaker, in their addresses to the U.N. Assembly last week, both President Bush and Secretary General Kofi Annan recognized the transcendent importance of a show of resolve on Darfur. While it is true that the bill before us as amended by the Senate requires Members to make difficult compromises, it is nevertheless a solid bill. It is a serious bill. It is an urgent bill. Far too much time has lapsed. Far too many graves have been filled since we first began debating this resolution. The time to show Congress's resolve is now.

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

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

I would like to just at this point thank the following congressional staff for their extraordinary work and persistence in shaping this bill. As my colleague from Minnesota pointed out earlier, we did mark this bill up 15 months ago in my subcommittee, and it has been a long, arduous journey to this night on this Hyde-Lantos legislation. So I want to thank Joan Collins, Gregory Simpkins, Pearl Alice Marsh, Noelle LuSane, Ian Campbell, Hannah Royal, Aysha House-Moshi, Greg Adams, Samantha Stockman, Walker Roberts, Jock Scharfen, David Abramowitz, Will Lowell.

And I hope I didn't leave anybody out because there was an extraordinary amount of give and take on this legislation. Again, some of its aspects that we would have liked to have seen dealing with disinvestment was dropped by the Senate. I think that was a setback. But it is still a very solid piece of legislation and deserves the full support of this body to advance our efforts to mitigate and hopefully end the genocide in Darfur.

This now goes to the President, as I have just been reminded, and I think he will sign it very quickly. I urge its passage.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

http://thomas.loc.gov/