Mr. SOLOMON. I understand the thrust of the legislation. I just want to get a clarification. Normally, peacekeeping funds come out of the security assistance budget of Foreign Operations, and this $150 million is coming out of the Defense Department? I don't quite understand. It is not coming out of the 1989 appropriations for the Defense Department?

Chairman FASCELL. You are right.

Mr. SOLOMON. Then, a followup question. Where is it coming from?

Chairman FASCELL. Unobligated 1988 funds.

Mr. SOLOMON. Defense Department funds?

Chairman FASCELL. Only if the Appropriations Committee agrees to it.

Mr. SOLOMON. You mentioned if we pass this legislation, it has to have Appropriations Committee approval, or do they actually have to legislate? Do they have to appropriate these funds by legislation, an Act of Congress, or is it done by some kind of agreement?

Chairman FASCELL. Part of this bill will be transfer authority for that purpose.

Mr. SOLOMON. This is like a joint referral. We have to pass it, and they have to pass it.

Chairman FASCELL. Absolutely.

Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Chairman, one question, on line 10 of page 2, it says, "and the Western Sahara." Now, that is a civil matter within a sovereign country and a very strong ally of ours. I want to make sure that no peacekeeping troops or anything can enter the Sahara or into Morocco without the request of the Government of Morocco; is that correct?

Chairman FASCELL. Well, this bill wouldn't authorize them to do anything.

Mr. SOLOMON. No. I am saying-OK. So, in other words, we are not authorizing anything. Under present procedure, Morocco would have to ask for the peacekeeping forces before any could go in there?

Mr. WOLPE. Would the gentleman yield? No peacekeeping forces can be mobilized without the consent of all the parties.

Mr. SOLOMON. Right. That answers the question. I have no objection to the legislation.

Chairman FASCELL. Mr. Wolpe.

Mr. WOLPE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I, too, want to support the resolution that is before us. I think it implements the long-standing U.S. policy reflected in the number of votes in the United States to support the United Nations peacekeeping plan for Libya embodied in conflict through ceasefire and referendum and self-determination, as well as the other peacekeeping ventures, efforts that are under way.

I want to stress that this is important to pass without additional language, that it passes clean. I could not support if the other body chose to impose any new policies or conditions on the sensitive issues as they come near to the settlement.

I think that would force a very substantial reassessment, and require-support for this kind of effort. But as a clean resolution, I think it is interesting to support on a bipartisan basis.

Chairman FASCELL. Mr. Yatron.

Mr. YATRON. Mr. Chairman, I support this draft bill, which was a product of discussions between the Administration and majority and minority staffs.

As I understand, it would provide the Administration with the authority to transfer up to, but not to exceed, $150 million from the Department of Defense for new U.N.-sponsored peacekeeping activities which may arise between now and March 1 of next year. There are a number of international disputes moving toward peaceful resolutions which may require the involvement of U.N. peacekeeping forces. This transfer authority would be for possible use for peacekeeping activities for Afghanistan, Iran-Iraq, southern Africa, Cambodia, and Western Sahara.

The Congress will be adjourning shortly, and the Administration may need this authority to fulfill U.S. obligations.

The $150 million figure is the Administration's projected estimate for U.S. support for these operations up until March 1. It is pro-rated based on an estimate of $212 million projected for new peacekeeping activities for fiscal year 1989 if these operations are fully implemented.

Reprogramming requirements in current law would apply to any transfer. The bill excludes earmarked funds and authorizes the Administration to notify the relevant committees in the House and Senate, including the Foreign Affairs Committee.

This authority is not for the U.N. assessed account and is not for long-standing peacekeeping operations. It is for new activities which may arise when the Congress is out of session. The cases in which the Administration would need such authority directly serve U.S. interests and are entirely consistent with Congressional mandates promoting negotiated settlements of all these disputes.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to commend Chairman Mica, Ms. Snowe and Mr. Solomon for the leadership they have provided regarding this legislation, and for their bipartisan approach to U.S.U.N. policy and U.N. peacekeeping operations.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman FASCELL. I thank the gentleman for his complete explanation in this matter, and reemphasize again that this legislation provides for the usual prior notification to this committee and other appropriate committees of each such expenditure pursuant to the regular reprogramming process.

Without objection, Ms. Snowe's statement on this bill will be inIcluded in the record.

[The prepared statement of Ms. Snowe follows:]

STATEMENT BY

CONGRESSWOMAN OLYMPIA J. SNOWE

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS

MARK UP OF U.N. PEACEKEEPING AUTHORIZATION

OCTOBER 4, 1988

Mr. Chairman, I am pleased that the committee is moving this legislation expeditiously.

The

Several months ago, few would have anticipated significant new peacekeeping efforts by the U.N. Now, there suddenly is a real prospect for the settlement of long-running regional disputes in the Persian Gulf, Angola, Afghanistan, and the Western Sahara. settlement of these disputes, in turn, might require the establishment of U.N. peacekeeping forces during the time that Congress is out of session.

If progress is made in one or several of these regions, I believe that it will be important for the United States to be able to act quickly to enable the formation of new U.N. peacekeeping forces. For this reason, I support the Administration's request for transfer authority for U.N. peacekeeping.

There are several important safeguards built into this

authorization:

1. Transfer authority would expire on March 1, 1989.

2. No more than $150 million can be transfered.

3. Any actual transfer will require the committee's approval

under reprogramming procedures.

4. No new funds will be required.

Finally, I would note that last Thursday U.N. Peacekeeping Forces were awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. This award recognizes the impressive accomplishments of U.N. Secretary General Perez de Cuellar. Over the past several years, others might have become discouraged by seemingly intractable problems. But the Secretary General continued to work tirelessly for a resolution of regional conflicts such as the Iran-Iraq war. I hope that he can achieve similar accomplishments in other areas, particularly in Cyprus, which continues to suffer after 14 years of Turkish occupation.

I urge support for this legislation.

Chairman FASCELL. Mr. Hyde.

Mr. HYDE. I support the purpose of this resolution, this legislation, but I deplore it is coming out of the 050 account, military account, military budget has been negative growth for four years. I realize the need or the desire to protect development assistance and all the other good things that foreign aid provides, but I just think that there ought to be a limit to what you do to the defense budget.

There are some contingencies that can occur there, too. I wish there was a mix between foreign assistance and economic support and not all coming out of the military budget.

With that reservation, I yield back.

Chairman FASCELL. Suffice it to say that doing exactly what you are talking about was considered. It ran into several problems. First, most of the money is earmarked in our bill, so there wouldn't be enough funds. Second, the Appropriations Committee saw fit to prohibit the use of those funds when they passed their bill, which the President signed. So, facing those facts of life, I don't think the Administration would have much choice.

Is there further discussion? If not, the question is on agreeing to the legislation. All those in favor, signify by saying aye.

All opposed, no.

The ayes have it. The legislation is agreed to.

HOUSE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 381

Mr. Dornan. Is Mr. Dornan back here?

Mr. DORNAN. Yes.

Chairman FASCELL. You have got the resolution on Lebanon, I believe.

Mr. DORNAN. Yes, I do, sir. I ask unanimous consent to bring up H. Con. Res. 381.

Chairman FASCELL. Without objection, H. Con. Res. 381 will be considered. The Chief of Staff will report.

Mr. BRADY. H. Con. Res. 381, resolution regarding

Chairman FASCELL. Without objection, further reading is dispensed with and printed in the record in full and open for amendment.

[H. Con. Res. 381 follows:]