Counterterrorism Blog

The Bush Administration’s decision to take Libya off the terrorism list is an example of how the sanctions mechanism is supposed to work, even though it leaves some questions and some of the families of Pan Am 103 families are unhappy.

Libya is the first country proposed for removal that has not undergone a change in government (such as Iraq) or a merger with a neighbor (South Yemen). If Congress does not block the removal, Libya could be off the terrorism list in 45 days. See Andy Cochran’s earlier blog posting with links to key statements.

Ironically, the terrorism list of state sponsors of international terrorism was prompted by Libya. It was created by the Export Administration Act of 1979 partly in reaction to the Commerce Department’s approval of the sale to Libya of 400 heavy duty trucks that could be used as tank transports instead of moving oil equipment as claimed in the license application

A formal designation by the Secretary of State that a country is a “repeated supporter of international terrorism,” triggers more than half a dozen sanctions, including bans on foreign assistance, tightened scrutiny of export licenses for dual use items, and prohibitions against financial transaction. One of the sanctions is designed to discourage investments. It denies tax credits to American firms or individuals who earn income in a designated country.

U.S. business interests, especially oil companies, have been pressing for Libya’s removal from the terrorism list, just as various financial interests have generally opposed sanctions against other terrorist-supporting countries.

To remove a country from the terrorism list, the President has to make a determination that:

(i) the government concerned has not provided support for international terrorism during the preceding 6-month period; and

(ii) the country has provided assurances that it will not support acts of international terrorism in the future.

Then the rescission has to lie before Congress for 45 days before taking effect.

This advance notification provision was added in the Anti-Terrorism and Arms Export Amendments Act of 1989 in reaction to Iraq’s removal from the list in 1982 without any advance Congressional notification or consultation.

In October 1991, Congress added a new provision to the State Department Authorization Act allowing it to block a rescission by passing a joint resolution of disapproval, with the President’s signature, within the 45-day notification procedure specified under the 1989 law. Congress presumably could, however, also add a rejection amendment to a “must-have” piece of legislation.

Whether Congress would do so is doubtful at this stage. The Administration appears to have laid the groundwork with Congress, at least with the leadership, and had been publicly hinting that the move was likely. Senator Richard Lugar, Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and Rep. Tom Lantos, the senior Democrat on the House International Relations Committee, were quick to issue statements in support of the removal.

Regardless of the long standing oil-industry interests in lifting sanctions against Libya, there is a counterterrorism policy rationale for removal of Libya from the terrorism list if, indeed, the President’s notification to Congress withstands scrutiny.

The terrorism list was not intended as an end it itself and it is not carved in stone. The list and the sanctions it triggers were intended to be used as tools to prod a country to change its behavior and drop its tangible support for terrorism.

If Libya has done so as the Administration claims, there is merit in demonstrating to other countries that if they also change their ways and end their support for terrorism, they too can get off the list. In recent years, the State Department top Counterterrorism officials have said that they hoped countries like Libya and Sudan would take the necessary steps so the U.S. could show that once a country is on the list, it can be removed if it cleans its hands of terrorism support. Iran, Syria, Sudan, North Korea and Cuba remain on the list.

Questions still remain about the reports that Muammar Qaddafi’s regime was involved in effort to assassinate King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia in 2003, when he was crown prince. David Welch, the Assistant Secretary of State for Near East Affairs, told a press briefing today that King Abdullah pardoned the accused conspirators last August and that Libya and Saudi Arabia have “closed the door” on the issue.

Nevertheless, Libya’s exact role and motivation are questions that Congress might look into when it considers the Presidential determination as well as the strength of the Libyan assurances that it will not engage in terrorism in the future.

BACKGROUND:

What became known as “the terrorism list” of state sponsors of terrorism began as a congressional measure intended to force the executive branch to more closely scrutinize and control exports of dual-use equipment, such as heavy-duty trucks and aircraft that could be used for civilian activities but also for military purposes or to support terrorist activities.

In the late 70’s, at a time of tension between Libya and Egypt, State Department officials were concerned that the Commerce Department had approved licenses to export 400 heavy-duty off-road trucks to Libya. The trucks were the same kind used by the U.S. and Canadian armies to transport tanks - but they were not on the munitions-control list for exports because they lacked bullet-proof glass and armor plating. Such trucks could be used by Libya to mobilize a large number of tanks on the Libyan-Egyptian border.

A State Department official seeking help in blocking the sale approached New Jersey U.S. Rep. Millicent Fenwick, a Republican member of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs (and better known as the pipe-smoking model of Doonesbury’s cartoon character Lacy Davenport. I was her foreign policy legislative assistant at the time and had worked previously on terrorism issues for the recently defeated Republican Senator Clifford Case the ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.)

Meanwhile the administration approved export licenses to Syria for six civilian versions of the C-130 cargo plane. The Syrians had been shelling the Christian areas of East Beirut when it intervened in the Lebanese civil war. This touched off the ire of Congressmen with Lebanese-American constituents.

Working with congressional Democrats who were then in the majority, we drafted an Export Administration Act amendment that required the State Department to notify Congress 30 days before export licenses were issued for goods or services that would significantly enhance the military or terrorism-supporting capacity of a country the Secretary of State determined "repeatedly provided support for acts of international terrorism." Libya, Syria, Iraq and South Yemen were the first countries designated after Congress enacted the legislation in late 1979. Thus the "terrorism list."

The amendment's original intent was to make sure -- through the requirement to notify Congress of pending licenses -- that the proposed exports were scrutinized at the highest levels for their foreign policy implications.

Over the years, additional sanctions were added, such as bans on economic assistance and military exports and denial of U.S. tax credits for income earned in a terrorism-list country. These sanctions were intended to pressure the designated countries to modify and end their support for terrorism. With the exception of Iran, most of the designated countries have reduced their support.

After the State Department took Iraq off the list in 1982, without consulting Congress, lawmakers led by Rep. Howard Berman (D-Calif.) a member of the House International Relations Committee, eventually enacted legislation requiring presidential certification and advance notice to Congress before a country could be de-listed.

If Libya indeed comes off the terrorism list in 45 days, it will be an important development in the successful use of sanctions and other pressures to prod a country to stop supporting terrorism.

As Senator Richard Lugar of Indiana, Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said in a statement today:

“Our normalization of relations with Libya also sends a signal to other states that concrete benefits will follow the verifiable renunciation of weapons of mass destruction and terrorism. Without continued progression in the U.S.-Libyan relationship, the positive decisions that Libya has made on WMD, terrorism, and other subjects would have far less impact in the rest of the world.“

At the same time, it is not a case of forget and forgive. Certainly some of the Pan Am 103 families are opposing the the move and will seek Congressiona support. And in view of Qaddafi’s mercurial nature, the intelligence community will have to watch Libya closely to make sure it keeps its hands clean. A country that goes off the list can also be put back on if necessary.