EIZENSTAT, SHATTUCK ON RELIGIOUS FREEDOM ACT
USIA
09 October 1998
TRANSCRIPT: EIZENSTAT, SHATTUCK ON RELIGIOUS FREEDOM ACT
(Passed US Senate by a vote of 98-0 October 9) (2720)
Washington -- Under Secretary of State Stuart Eizenstat told reporters
October 9 he was pleased "that the Administration is able to support
the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998, which passed the
Senate a short time ago by a 98-0 vote.
"I want to thank Senators Nickles, Lieberman, Biden, Baucus, Hagel,
Feinstein, Lugar and Grams for all their help in working so closely
with the Administration on this legislation," he said.
"With the changes that we have now negotiated," Eizenstat said, "the
bill advances the cause of religious freedom while giving the
President the flexibility he needs, and without undermining relations
with important countries around the world, which had been among the
causes of our objection to earlier versions of similar legislation."
Following is the State Department transcript:
(begin transcript)
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Office of the Spokesman
October 9, 1998
ON-THE-RECORD BRIEFING
BY UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE STUART E. EIZENSTAT,
ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF STATE JOHN SHATTUCK
AND SPECIAL REPRESENTATIVE FOR INTERNATIONAL RELIGIOUS FREEDOM, ROBERT
SEIPLE, ON INTERNATIONAL RELIGIOUS FREEDOM ACT
Washington, D.C.
UNDER SECRETARY EIZENSTAT: Thank you very much, Jim. I am pleased that
the Administration is able to support the International Religious
Freedom Act of 1998, which passed the Senate a short time ago by a
98-0 vote. I want to thank Senators Nickles, Lieberman, Biden, Baucus,
Hagel, Feinstein, Lugar and Grams for all their help in working so
closely with the Administration on this legislation.
With the changes that we have now negotiated, the bill advances the
cause of religious freedom while giving the President the flexibility
he needs, and without undermining relations with important countries
around the world, which had been among the causes of our objection to
earlier versions of similar legislation.
This bill allows the President to choose among a range of actions;
provides appropriate presidential waiver authority; avoids a piling-on
effect by taking into account prior actions by the President to
advance human rights. The bill avoids also stigmatizing any country or
group of countries. This effort demonstrates the kind of accommodation
between the legislative and executive branches needed on sanctions
legislation. With an appropriate bipartisan show of comity between the
branches, progress can be made in advancing important American values,
such as religious freedom, as an integral part of our foreign policy.
We enthusiastically support the goals of this legislation to advance
the cause of religious freedom for believers everywhere. These goals
are fully consistent with the Administration's firm and long-standing
support for all human rights, including the right of all believers to
practice their faith without fear. We've worked hard with the bill's
sponsors to help craft legislation that will accomplish that, to the
benefit of practitioners of all religions -- whether Muslim,
Christian, Jewish, Buddhist, Hindu or other faiths -- and I am
convinced that this legislation will help do that.
In supporting this bill, I can assure you it is not directed against
any particular religious group; against any country, or against any
particular region. It is intended to benefit all believers of all
faiths.
We're pleased that the bill is consistent with many of the sanctions
reform principles that we've sought to advance, and that I outlined in
my testimony recently before the Senate.
The constructive dialogue that we've had with the bill's sponsors over
the last few weeks -- and in particular with Senator Nickles, Senator
Lieberman and Senator Feinstein Wednesday night and Thursday -
demonstrates in a most concrete way the principle we have sought to
advance: That we most effectively advance our common goals when we
work together in a spirit of comity to forge a common and effective
approach. This spirit of cooperation demonstrates the kind of
flexibility that's the hallmark of the broader question of sanctions
reform that we'll be taking up in the months ahead.
The bill provides that the decisions under the act will not
automatically trigger a broad variety of actions under other human
rights legislation. It offers the President a menu of actions to
advance the cause of religious freedom, which will give him increased
flexibility to tailor our response to specific (situations) --
something the original House bill did not.
The bill mandates applications of restrictive economic measures only
against countries that engage in systematic, ongoing and egregious
violations of religious freedom. For sanctions to apply, such
violations must be accompanied by reprehensible practices such as
torture, prolonged arbitrary detention without charges, or other
flagrant denial of the right to life, liberty or security of person.
The bill also allows the President to take into account other
substantial measures which have already been taken to advance the
cause of human rights and which are still in effect in order to avoid
a cascade effect of ever-increasing sanctions.
The inclusion of important national interest waiver authority will
also give the President and Secretary the flexibility and discretion
to use the required economic measures most effectively. Only the
President can balance the complex range of US interests that such
decisions may involve, and to tailor our response so it most
effectively advances our national interest.
Ultimately, this principle of presidential flexibility is so crucial;
and I believe this bill will effectively help promote the end we seek
with that flexibility -- namely, the protection of religious freedom
worldwide -- rather than becoming an issue of contention between us
and our partners around the world.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY SHATTUCK: I'd like to put in a broader context of
our work on human rights and the promotion of religious freedom the
legislation that's just been described by Under Secretary Eizenstat.
Our overarching purpose is to promote respect and enjoyment of
universal human rights; and religious freedom is among the most
cherished of human rights. It is an internationally accepted principle
of human rights, recognized particularly in the International Covenant
on Civil Rights and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Our own country was founded on the right to worship freely and to
exercise tolerance and respect of others. President Clinton and
Secretary Albright have made this issue a central element of US
foreign policy. They've raised the issue with foreign leaders, created
an Advisory Committee on Religious Freedom Abroad, and most recently,
established the position of Special Representative on International
Religious Freedom, Dr. Robert Seiple, whom I will introduce in just a
moment.
Religious freedom is interconnected with other human rights, such as
freedom of expression; freedom of conscience; freedom of association;
and freedom of movement, among others. As we promote religious
freedom, we promote a set of human rights principles and encourage
tolerance of all faiths and beliefs.
As we look around the world, we see that the denial of religious
freedom not only brings suffering to many individuals, but also can
lead to conflict and violent instability where communities cannot live
with religious differences. Much of the work we do on religious
freedom is aimed at building the foundation for peace and the
opportunity for democratic governance.
This bill, as passed by the Senate this morning, offers a serious and
effective means to pursue greater religious freedom around the world.
For this reason, the Administration supports the bill. I'd like to
introduce now Dr. Robert Seiple.
DR. SEIPLE: Thanks, John.
As the Secretary's Special Representative for International Religious
Freedom, I am very pleased to be here today to announce my support for
the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998. The bill, introduced
by Senator Don Nickles and Senator Joseph Lieberman, provides serious
and effective tools to pursue religious freedom around the world.
Just as important, the bipartisan cooperative process we've engaged in
over the past few weeks in crafting the bill's provisions, has
demonstrated to the world that the United States speaks with one
strong voice on this critical issue.
My job is to coordinate US Government policies to advance religious
freedom. The strong consensus supporting this bill will support our
continuing efforts to convince friends and foes alike that they must
act to protect this very basic universal human right. We want to work
with governments, religious organizations, NGOs and others to promote
religious freedom and tolerance everywhere. This bill will help us do
that.
QUESTION: Can any of you get country-specific -- how the bill might
impact, say, China, Saudi Arabia, Russia?
UNDER SECRETARY EIZENSTAT: The sponsors of the bill made clear that
they intended to promote religious freedom and tolerance without
targeting any particular religion or region. We're not in a position
now, certainly, to make any determinations.
What is important about this legislation is that it sets a very
reasonable but tough standard for egregious violators. In order to be
in the first category of countries of egregious violators, to which
more of the menu of sanctions would apply, you have to have been
guilty of systematic, ongoing, egregious violations. And these include
things such as torture, prolonged detention, disappearance, flagrant
denial of life and liberty. We will have to go through this analysis
to determine which countries would meet that definition.
For the second category of countries -- those who tolerate
discrimination -- we are not required to make a finding of violation.
This is very important: Because it avoids a list and automatic
sanctions; it gives us a great deal of discretion. What is so
different about this bill from its earlier versions in the House --
and for that matter, in the Senate, but particularly in the House --
first, it provides a menu of actions which can be taken all the way
from a private demarche through voting against a country in
international financial institutions. Second, it provides the kind of
waiver authority that we have been seeking more broadly in sanctions
reform legislation, so that presidents can use that in an effective
way to balance other foreign policy interests. Third, the definition
of particularly severe violators -- this first tier of countries -- is
one that we think is appropriately limited and targeted. And fourth,
we were able to get -- in certain sections where the President was
mandated to do things like consult with NGOs -- discretion to do so.
So this gives us the flexibility; it accomplishes the purposes, as
John and Robert indicated, but it allows us to take our broader
foreign policy interests into effect, and it will not be perceived as
targeting any particular group of countries.
Q: Mr. Eizenstat, this bill, if I understand correctly, will have to
go to committee, to conference?
UNDER SECRETARY EIZENSTAT: The bill goes to the House. A statement has
been made on the Senate floor -- and I can only repeat the statement;
I can't speak for the Senate or the House. The statement that was made
was that the House had agreed to accept identical legislation. Now
again, that is up to the House; I can't speak for the House, but that
is the understanding we have been given.
Q: Okay, and also, what are the range of actions? Could you be more
specific about what latitude the President would now have under this
Senate bill?
UNDER SECRETARY EIZENSTAT: Under the Senate bill there are a variety
of actions that can be taken: anywhere from a private demarche
through, again as I mentioned, voting against countries in
international financial institutions; cutting off foreign aid; denying
state visits; denying visas -- it's a whole menu. For those who are in
the most egregious violator category, that menu starts with the more
difficult sanctions; I think it's nine through 16. For those who are
in the earlier category, you can choose from a wider range. But I
think it's important to know what we already do.
First of all, this is the first Administration -- and Secretary
Shattuck is significantly responsible, along with Secretary Albright,
for this initiative -- to issue a religious freedom report. This has
already been done; it's been done this year. Second, we already
demarche every year each country on a global basis about their
religious practices. So those kinds of activities will simply continue
for this second tier of countries; although we can, if we wish, take
some of the actions that are allowed in the menu of options.
The House version -- the original House bill -- did not have that
menu. There was an automaticity that was required for those who fit
the definition. This Senate bill provides much greater flexibility for
the President to balance interests; and again, it has a waiver
provision that is, we think, a more systemically important waiver
provision for other sanction legislation. So in that sense, this is an
example of how, on a very complex, very emotional issue, we can work
out sanctions bills, taking into account the concerns the Congress and
the Administration have on issues like religious freedom, at the same
time giving the President the necessary flexibility and discretion to
balance other foreign policy interests.
Q: You talked a great deal about the sort of flexibility this
legislation will give the President, and the menu of options. Can you
talk a little bit about what is it about this legislation that makes
it more effective in achieving the stated goals? I mean, what is it
about this legislation that increases religious freedom abroad?
UNDER SECRETARY EIZENSTAT: I'll talk about that briefly, and then I'll
ask John and Robert to talk about this.
By elevating the whole issue of religious persecution, we think that
this will heighten awareness around the world of the concern. And
although we do have a menu of options, particularly for egregious
violators, there will have to be determinations made and sanctions
potentially used. So it will certainly elevate the whole issue. It
gives the President a menu of options that he can use to promote those
interests. In that sense, it advances the cause of religious freedom
beyond that which existed in general human rights legislation, where
religious persecution was not particularly identified.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY SHATTUCK: I think this also provides a strong
platform for the work that's being done in the area of religious
freedom and the centrality that that work has to our foreign policy.
The appointment of Dr. Seiple is certainly the best concrete example
of that. But now we're going to be seeing, I think, whenever an
approach is made to another government, clearly the backing of the
entire United States Government in a broad consensus with, basically,
the interests of the American people being reflected in that
consensus.
I think that will strengthen our hand in international arenas in a
whole variety of ways that this legislation demonstrates. So the
legislation brings the Administration and the Congress together behind
what is clearly a foreign policy priority, in this world where
conflict is such a major part of our foreign policy concerns in the
instability of the world, and where religious persecution is sometimes
behind that conflict. Bob, do you want to add anything?
DR. SEIPLE: Just one additional thought that I don't think should be
overlooked. In a town that institutionalizes differences, it is no
small thing to have this overwhelming support from both branches of
Congress and the American people. This is an issue that essentially
came from the people -- small groups, coalitions, churches,
faith-supported from private citizens to other coalitions of people;
sometimes strange bedfellows. And to the place where we now have
something that has received this kind of unanimous endorsement,
essentially, I think it's a tremendous statement for what really is at
the heart of how we feel as a people. And obviously it's a tremendous
statement for all the people around the world who are suffering
because of their faith.
Q: I just wonder what you would be doing, Dr. Seiple. Will you be
meeting with religious groups, traveling, researching, compiling
reports?
DR. SEIPLE: We will be promoting religious freedom in its broadest
scope, which is to say meeting, establishing relationships, continuing
the coalitions, continuing the work of monitoring, working with other
folks in the State Department, outside of government, inside of
government. We'll also be promoting reconciliation where the issue of
conflict has been implemented along religious lines -- a situation
like Bosnia. And obviously we'll also make sure that these kinds of
things are interwoven into the foreign policy of the United States.
That's a quick answer; that's also a mouthful.
(end transcript)