Libya's Last Day as a "State Sponsor of Terrorism" - Will They Pay Up?

By Andrew Cochran

The champagne corks are popping in Tripoli - yesterday was the end of an era, the day on which Libya's status as an official "state sponsor of terrorism," according to the United States of America, was supposed to end (pending official confirmation). Michael Kraft, who posted an extensive history of Libya's status on May 15, reminds me that "Libya was one of the first countries put on the list in 1979 and only the second taken off under the formal notification procedures (Iraq was first)." Today, the U.S. House passed the bill which would fund the State Department for fiscal year 2007. The bill includes the Sweeney Amendment, which would bar funding of the normalization process until Libya keeps its financial commitments to victims of Libyan terrorism. But yesterday, the Administration issued its Statement of Administration Policy (SAP) on the bill, and it expresses concern over that section and others "that purport to direct or burden the conduct of foreign relations, and of negotiations with foreign countries or international organizations, as well as condition the President’s decisions regarding the use of armed forces..." So while the Administration doesn't voice outright opposition to the Sweeney Amendment, the SAP could be cited in order to water down the Sweeney Amendment in the Senate.

There was one troubling statement from the State Department yesterday on this, indicating no explicit official support to enforce Libya's commitments to the victims. "We're not going to interpret the agreement. That agreement, as I said, is a legal document to which we are not a party and which does not come under our authority or under our jurisdiction. It is a legal agreement between the families and the Libyan government." And when a reporter asked, "So what you're saying is that the rescission of Libya from the list is totally and absolutely unrelated, in your view, to this particular payment?", the answer from a State Department spokesman was a simple, "Yes." That would not please Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ), who has championed the victims' cause in the Senate. Here are his comments on the Senate floor yesterday:

Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, today the Bush administration is taking an action that is almost incomprehensible. Frankly, it is outrageous, when you think about it. The administration is removing Libya from the State Department's list of state sponsors of terror even though Muammar Qadhafi has not fulfilled his commitments to the American victims of Libyan terror. Even though Qadhafi is not keeping his promise to Americans who lost loved ones when agents of his government bombed Pan Am flight 103, the administration is going to give Libya full diplomatic privileges.

The President is taking this action even though this Senate recently passed my resolution which said that diplomatic credentials should not be given to Libya until Qadhafi provides all of the restitution promised to the families of the victims of the Pan Am Flight 103 bombing and other acts of terror supported by Libya. I know a lot of those families, families from New Jersey and in the area generally, who lost loved ones on that flight. Many of the victims were young college students from Syracuse University. I have a nephew who went there. He was to take that trip but at the last minute had to change his plans. He lost several very good friends.

I have been to Lockerbie, Scotland, and know too well what happened that fateful day when 270 people were killed, with the airplane and human remains falling onto that beautiful little community, Lockerbie, in Scotland. I have seen the remnants, the souvenirs that the victims had bought on that trip that was during the Christmas period. I saw Mickey Mouse hats and things that college kids enjoy. Even bottles of wine that survived were then put in a warehouse of things that were collected on the ground but could not be assigned to any single family because they didn't have any sort of identification attached to them.

It was a sad moment for mankind, for sanity in our world. Libya ultimately was convicted of providing the resources for those terrorists who brought that airplane down. Libya has not paid all of the claims that were awarded to the families of the victims; Libya has not paid the last installment of compensation due as a condition of being removed from the list of state sponsors of terror. That was the agreement. That was the understanding.

No matter how many years pass, these families will never forget their loss, their grief; neither will anyone who knows these families, who knows the pain visited upon these people when they heard that their son or daughter was killed in the downing of that airplane.

If Libya has indeed renounced terrorism, that is great news, as is the fact that Libya, which was thought to be engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction, has agreed to stop that pursuit. Still, the Libyan government has an obligation it agreed to meet so that it could rejoin the community of nations, to achieve a level of acceptance around the world. Their past behavior cannot be excused. They murdered Americans and they must be held fully accountable.

Today, the Bush administration has rejected accountability for Libya. Today, the administration has put other interests ahead of the interests of the American victims of terrorism. What are those interests that prevailed in the end? We will let the investigative journals figure that one out.

But when leaders of our country say ``we must never forget the lessons'' of acts of terrorism, I think they should mean it. Libya should fulfill its promise, its commitment to the families of the victims of Pan Am 103 and not let that commitment be forgotten because part of it has been fulfilled but not all of it. We must not forget that Libya has failed to comply entirely with the basic promise to those families.

We urge the President and the administration to hold fast and insist that Libya pay its bills. The money will never compensate these families for the loss of their child, brother or sister, father or mother--never. But at least it shows that Libya is serious about honoring it commitments, something that is essential before it can achieve anything approximating the status of nations that follow the rule of law. So we must insist on that.

I yield the floor.

TrackBack