S. Korea's Chosun Ilbo newspaper: U.S. Leaders at Odds over N.Korea-Syria Nuke Connection U.S. Leaders at Odds over N.Korea-Syria Nuke Connection

WASHINGTON - A fight has erupted between conservatives on national security and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice over the Bush administration's diplomacy with North Korea in the face of intelligence that North Korea might have helped Syria begin construction on a nuclear reactor.

The debate moved to Capitol Hill on Wednesday, when Rice had a tense private meeting with Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen of Florida, the senior Republican on the House Foreign Affairs Committee. Just days earlier, Ros-Lehtinen was the co-author of an opinion article questioning the White House approach, which offers incentives to North Korea to dismantle its nuclear program.

That article also criticized the Bush administration for what the article called the "veil of secrecy" surrounding intelligence that led to an Israeli airstrike in Syria last month on the suspected reactor site, and for the fact that only a handful of lawmakers have been briefed on the subject.

Congressional officials said Ros-Lehtinen contended that if more lawmakers knew about the intelligence, more would be concerned about a pending nuclear agreement with North Korea.

Commercial satellite photographs have begun to circulate that appear to show a reactor possibly under construction at a site in Syria near the Euphrates River. The images were taken during the summer, a month before the Israeli raid.

The White House now finds itself charting a course similar to the one for which it heaped criticism on the Clinton administration in 2002, accusing it of being too trusting. At that time, a diplomatic agreement with North Korea collapsed after the White House accused North Korea of secretly continuing work on a nuclear weapon.

Now, the White House is trying to deflect criticism from fellow Republicans - including hawkish officials within the administration - that Rice is putting her desire for a diplomatic agreement above national security interests.

One senior administration official, who has seen the intelligence about the Syrian site and advocates a tougher line against North Korea, said he was frustrated that even in light of possible North Korean help on a Syrian nuclear program, "we are shaking hands with the North Koreans because they have once again told us they are going to disarm."

Conservatives remain deeply suspicious of the Rice approach, fearing that it rewards North Korea. Bush was persuaded by Rice and his chief North Korea negotiator, Christopher R. Hill, that there was no other path. Hill acknowledged in a recent interview that the approach was a sharp reversal from the first term.

"Republicans are brokenhearted that the administration has done a complete U-turn on this issue," said John R. Bolton, former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations and an advocate of a tough approach to North Korea.

But Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr., D-Del., the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and a candidate for the Democratic Party nomination for president, said the new intelligence was even more reason to take a diplomatic approach to North Korea: "To rein these guys inside a deal that has some transparency."

Several diplomats and administration officials representing both sides of the debate were interviewed on condition of anonymity because the intelligence about the Syrian site remained classified.

The administration and the Israeli government have kept silent about the airstrike, but American and foreign officials with access to intelligence reports have said the target was a partly constructed nuclear reactor, apparently modeled on one North Korea has used to generate its stockpile of nuclear weapons fuel. They said it would have been years before Syria could have produced nuclear weapons fuel on its own.

The Institute for Science and International Security, a private group in Washington, released a report Wednesday that pinpointed the site in a satellite image taken Aug. 10, nearly a month before the Israeli strike.

"This looks like a reactor site," said David Albright, president and founder of the institute and a former U.N. weapons inspector.

Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ros-Lehtinen, Ros-Lehtinen, Ros-Lehtinen, Ros-Lehtinen

WASHINGTON

U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said on Wednesday the United States would cut off Iran's "malignant" activities in Iraq and was working urgently to impose more punitive measures against Tehran.

Speaking to the House of Representatives Foreign Affairs Committee, Rice said Washington was looking closely at "new designations" against Tehran, which the United States accuses of fomenting violence in Iraq and of pursuing an atomic bomb.

"One of our best levers, and it is a really simple proposition, Iran should not be able to use the international financial system to move its ill-gotten gains from proliferation or terrorism around the world," she said.

"We are working very urgently to get some of that ready," she said of new sanctions against Iran. She did not provide details of when or what might be imposed.

However, U.S. officials say the Bush administration is very close to imposing restrictions on the elite Qods force of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, which the United States accuses of arming and training militants in Iraq.

Florida Republican Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen said the Bush administration appeared to be taking a "slow, deliberative course" on Iran and should designate the entire Revolutionary Guards Corps a terrorist group.

"Why not put the whole corps on the list?" Ros-Lehtinen asked.

Demonstrators greeted Rice with screams of "war criminal" and one woman waved her blood-colored hands in Rice's face before she was shoved away by police and the group was removed from the hearing room.

JEOPARDIZING SECURITY

In her prepared testimony, Rice said Iran was jeopardizing the security and prosperity of its neighbors by supporting extremist forces across the region.

"Iran is supporting select Shia militants in Iraq who kill innocent Iraqi civilians, Iraqi security personnel and coalition forces," she said.

"We are determined to cut off Iran's malignant activities in Iraq by apprehending and eliminating Qods Force members and other actors who endanger human life and overall national stability," she said.

Iran strongly denies that it has destabilized Iraq and says it is the actions of the United States that have led to chaos in its neighbor.

Rice said Iran also provided support to the militant group Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in the Palestinian Territories and the Taliban in Afghanistan.

The United States is pushing the U.N. Security Council to impose a third round of sanctions against Iran over its nuclear program, which Tehran says is for civilian power use and the West says is aimed at building a nuclear bomb.

Rice said the combination of terrorism, its own domestic politics and the pursuit of nuclear weapons was a "very dangerous mix" and the United States would push hard for a third U.N. sanctions resolution.

Russia and China are lukewarm to further punitive measures against Iran and Moscow has said dialogue rather than sanctions or military action is how to deal with Tehran.

Rice reiterated the U.S. position that diplomacy was the way forward: "The president has been very clear, that while he doesn't take any options off the table, he is committed to a diplomatic course on Iran."

Rice said it was unclear what Tehran's change from Ali Larijani as nuclear negotiator to the more hard-line Saeed Jalili meant for Iran's approach to the nuclear issue.

Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ros-Lehtinen, Ros-Lehtinen, Ros-Lehtinen, Ros-Lehtinen

WASHINGTON (AP) - A U.S. House of Representatives' panel endorsed legislation Tuesday that would require insurance companies to disclose information on Holocaust-era policy holders.

The legislation aims to address concerns among some survivors that payment by the International Commission on Holocaust Era Insurance Claims did not address all outstanding claims.

The measure approved by the House Foreign Affairs Committee Tuesday would allow survivors or their heirs to sue foreign companies in U.S. courts to recover payments on claims.

The legislation's prospects are uncertain. It would have to be approved by the full House as well as the Senate and signed by the president to become law.

ICHEIC was established in 1998 after negotiations between European insurance companies and U.S. insurance regulators to settle individual Holocaust era insurance claims. It resolved more than 90,000 claims and paid out $306 million (euro215 million) to more than 48,000 Holocaust survivors, heirs and family members.

But critics have charged that it did not force European insurance companies to disclose their documentation on Holocaust-era claims.

"This legislation offers an important opportunity to bring long-awaited justice and closure to Holocaust survivors and their families," said Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, the author of the new legislation.

Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ros-Lehtinen, Ros-Lehtinen, Ros-Lehtinen, Ros-Lehtinen

By LONA O'CONNOR

Palm Beach Post Staff Writer

Tuesday, October 23, 2007

Even though Jack Rubin and Alex Moskovic passed their citizenship tests 50 years ago, nothing could have prepared them for the real-life civics lessons they've had to learn since then.

They are but two of many fighting for restitution to Holocaust survivors. Their opponents have been mighty, foremost among them the German and Austrian governments and the Swiss banking community, all of which eventually agreed to pay restitution.

Now the survivors are taking on the international insurance industry — for the second time. And the stakes get higher by the hour.

At the center of the battle is the International Commission on Holocaust Era Insurance Claims, formed in 1998, whose mandate was to make restitution payments to survivors claiming insurance policies their families bought during the Nazi occupation of Europe.

The commission stopped accepting claims this year, saying it had satisfied more than half the applications it received. Survivors argued that they never had enough information, including the names of policyholders, to make their claims. Two of the world's largest insurance companies, Generali and Allianz, were active during the Nazi era. They satisfied some restitution claims, but critics say it was only a tiny fraction of the potential payout.

House Resolution 1746, which the House Foreign Affairs Committee plans to discuss today in Washington, would reopen those closed doors. It would require the insurance companies to reveal previously unseen lists of World War II-era clients, a move that would allow survivors and their families to sue the insurance companies.

Rubin, of Boynton Beach, and Moskovic, of Hobe Sound, along with other survivors, claim that at least 800,000 Nazi-era insurance policies were sold to Jews.

Many of the Jewish policyholders were never able to make their claims because they died in Nazi concentration camps. If Moskovic, 76, and Rubin, 78, and survivor organizations prevail, the value of those policies, amounting to several billion dollars, would be used to support indigent survivors.

"It's not for me anymore," said Rubin, a successful retired furrier who saw his mother drop her wedding ring into a bucket for the Nazis and survived slave labor in a brick factory.

He kept a copy of his restitution check for $1,000 but donated the money to a survivors charity. "It's for the ones who have no food and cannot pay for medicines and have to be alone," he said.

Some would say those insurance policies have been paid off to the best of the companies' abilities. German Ambassador Klaus Scharioth sent a letter Friday to U.S. Rep. Tom Lantos, D-Calif., chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee and the only Holocaust survivor in Congress. In the letter, he asked Lantos to reconsider his support of the resolution.

"The German government does not have any evidence that millions of insurance holders' names have been withheld," said the ambassador, adding that more than half of the insurance claims from survivors and their heirs were fulfilled.

Survivors contradict those figures, claiming that only 3 percent to 5 percent of survivors received restitution.

Scharioth further objected to the fact that the resolution would allow survivors to sue insurance companies for their claims. He reminded Lantos that such lawsuits could make the companies reluctant to cooperate in voluntary restitution.

"Before the committee considers this legislation, I would like to work with you to address these issues," he concluded.

At an Oct. 3 congressional committee hearing, a State Department spokesman defended the international insurance commission.

"Was it a perfect process? No, but it was a process to address a set of issues that probably were never addressed before," Ambassador J. Christian Kennedy, the State Department's special envoy for Holocaust issues, told the panel. "People who had documentation, who could get at documentation, were able to get insurance claims processed in many cases. This was for the people who had no evidence and, as such, I think it was a process that met its goals."

The Bush administration views the commission's actions as a success and opposes the bill, Kennedy said.

Struggling against such opposition, Rubin and Moskovic have cajoled, shamed and begged the powerful, always insisting that their adopted country hold to the principles inherent in the citizenship test: human rights and the rule of law. Having evaded death at the hands of the Nazis, they view their current task as just one more difficulty in a lifelong series.

They learned their civics lessons well, lobbying Congress and testifying in national hearings, which most lifelong citizens never do.

"After what I went through, it doesn't scare me," said Moskovic, who survived slave labor at Auschwitz-Birkenau and later won eight Emmys as an editor for ABC Sports.

His dry wit belies his horrific experiences behind barbed wire.

Rubin recently approached Lantos in the House office building, speaking to him in Hungarian, their common birth language.

"I begged him," Rubin said. "I said we are dying faster than the snow melts in Florida. If something is not done in the next few months, it will be too late, there will be nobody left to holler."

Lantos agreed and hugged Rubin.

The lack of time was not lost on U.S. Rep. Robert Wexler, D-Delray Beach, who, with U.S. Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, R-Miami, introduced the resolution in March.

The resolution has to make its way through other committees and then be introduced in the Senate. Wexler, whose constituency includes thousands of survivors, is working urgently.

"This is the last and best opportunity to provide Holocaust survivors with a measure of financial justice," Wexler said. "This is tens of billions of dollars, and the last group that ought to keep that money are German or Austrian insurance companies that were unjustly enriched because they withheld payment of insurance policies to Holocaust survivors."

Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ros-Lehtinen, Ros-Lehtinen, Ros-Lehtinen, Ros-Lehtinen

By Stanley Kurtz

If people had known how close we came to World War III that day there would have been mass panic. That is how a very senior British ministerial source recently characterized Israel’s September raid on what was apparently a Syrian nuclear installation. Whether matters were quite that grave is an open question. Yet it does seem clear that the full story of the Israeli raid has not been told, nor its full significance recognized. Now two key members of Congress have raised an alarm about this event, thereby throwing our nuclear agreement with North Korea into question.

Briefings

Peter Hoekstra and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, as senior Republicans on the House Intelligence and Foreign Affairs Committees, respectively, were among the mere handful of members of Congress briefed on the Israeli air strike. What they learned obviously dismayed them greatly, as is evident from “What Happened in Syria?” a Wall Street Journal opinion piece published by Hoekstra and Ros-Lehtinen this past Saturday.

In that piece, Hoekstra and Ros-Lehtinen protest the “unprecedented veil of secrecy, thrown over the airstrike” noting that the vast majority of foreign relations and intelligence committee members have been left in the dark on the details of the raid. Hoekstra and Ros-Lehtinen acknowledge that they have personally been “sworn to secrecy,” yet add that: “...based on what we have learned...it is critical for every member of congress to be briefed on this incident, and as soon as possible.”

Hoekstra and Ros-Lehtinen obviously believe that Syria obtained “nuclear expertise or material” from outside state sources. And while they base their concern on press reports, it seems likely that their top-secret briefings confirmed this fact. Notable here is Hoekstra and Ros-Lehtinen’s repeated use of the phrase “North Korea, Iran, or other rogue states” when referring to Syria’s possible nuclear collaborators. After their briefing, Hoekstra and Ros-Lehtinen seem just as concerned about Iranian involvement as North Korean.

Hoekstra and Ros-Lehtinen protest the administration’s willingness to provide the press with anonymous information on background, “to shape this story to its liking,” while keeping members of Congress in the dark. “We believe this is unacceptable,” they say, noting that the administration has ignored numerous letters from Congress asking that all members be briefed. Hoekstra and Ros-Lehtinen specifically express concerns about two administration-influenced stories in the New York Times and one in The Washington Post. Finally, Hoekstra and Ros-Lehtinen threaten to oppose any nuclear deal with North Korea unless all members of congress are briefed on the reasons for the Israeli raid.

While the secrecy that surrounds this issue forces us to read between the lines, two broad factual questions emerge from Hoekstra’s and Ros-Lehtinen’s oped. First, in what sense has the administration been shaping (or misshaping) the Syria story to its liking? Second, is there more to this story than recent press reports have indicated?

North Korea’s Role

Consider one of the articles singled out by Hoekstra and Ros-Lehtinen, an Oct. 14 New York Times story by David Sanger and Mark Mazzetti.

While this story confirmed that Israel had struck “a partially completed nuclear reactor, apparently modeled on one North Korea has used to create its stockpile of nuclear weapons fuel,” the article also raises doubts: “...American and foreign officials would not say whether they believed the North Koreans sold or gave plans to the Syrians, or whether the North’s own experts were there at the time of the attack. It is possible, some officials said, that the transfer of the technology occurred several years ago.”

Yet the suggestion that North Korean personnel might not have been involved in the ongoing construction of the reactor contradicts a New York Times story of October 9, just a few days before, which said that within the administration “there appears to be little debate that North Koreans frequently visited a site in the Syrian Desert that Israeli jets attacked Sept. 6.” The story on October 9 was that the North Koreans were surely present at the Syrian installation, but that the nuclear nature of the site was less certain. Once nuclear activity at the site was confirmed by the Times on October 14, however, administration sources on background apparently did their best to foster uncertainty about North Korean involvement. In other words, if the Koreans are there, it might not be nuclear, and if it’s nuclear, the Koreans might not be there.

The point is that the administration is subtly attempting to cast doubt on any reported link between North Korea and the Syrian reactor (without directly denying such a link). Otherwise it would become obvious that North Korea is flagrantly violating its nuclear agreement with the United States. Apparently, their secret briefing has led Hoekstra and Ros-Lehtinen to believe that the administration is obfuscating the reality of North Korean proliferation, in order to preserve the six-party deal.

In fact, from the beginning until the present, press reports have given strong indications of ongoing North Korean involvement in the Syrian nuclear project. One of the first reports (and still arguably the most extensive and important report) on the raid, from the London Sunday Times of Sept. 16, quoted Andrew Semmel, who was the acting deputy assistant secretary of state for nuclear nonproliferation policy. Speaking of Syria’s nuclear project, Semmel was asked if North Korean technicians were present there. Semmel replied, “There are North Korean people there. There’s no question about that.”

Another Sunday Times piece, of Sept. 23, offered further evidence of North Korean involvement. Israeli intelligence had suggested to the administration over the summer that North Korean personnel were at the Syrian site, said the Sunday Times. In fact, Israeli defense sources were said to have taken to referring to the target site as the “North Korean project.” The Sunday Times also noted the unusual stridency of North Korea’s condemnations of an event so far from East Asia. In a sense, the North Koreans were outing themselves by their protests. The Sunday Times also reported that diplomats stationed in North Korea and China, based on intelligence reports reaching Asian governments, believed that a number of North Koreans had actually been killed in the raid.

More recent reports have taken up the same theme. On October 7, Washington Post columnist Jim Hoagland noted that a senior official with access to highly classified intelligence reports said that “...the Israelis destroyed a nuclear-related facility and caused North Korean casualties at the site....” And October 19, ABC News quoted “a senior U.S. official claiming that the Syrians could not have built their reactor without North Korean ‘expertise,’ meaning that ‘the Syrians must have had ‘human’ help from North Korea.’”

If these reports are true, Hoekstra’s and Ros-Lehtinen’s concerns about efforts by the administration to lead the press away from the North Korean connection (without explicitly denying it), is completely understandable. Again, Hoekstra and Ros-Lehtinen appear to fear that the administration’s now dominant policy-making faction (led by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Defense Secretary Robert Gates) is trying to protect the six-party agreement by suppressing the reality of North Korean proliferation.

Iran’s Role

What about Iran? As noted, the persistent and strong emphasis Hoekstra and Ros-Lehtinen place on possible Iranian participation in the Syrian nuclear program can’t help but make us suspect that their secret briefing contained reports of Iranian involvement. Yet Hoekstra and Ros-Lehtinen refer to press reports of an Iranian role, and there are some such reports.

Former U.N. ambassador John Bolton has expressed concerns that both North Korea and Iran may be “outsourcing” their nuclear programs in Syria. We know that Syria has served as a conduit for North Korean shipments of missile components to Iran, and there are concerns that North Korean nuclear material may have taken the same route (see Sunday Times, Sept. 16). On Sept. 12, a New York Times report said “The Israelis think North Korea is selling to Iran and Syria what little [nuclear material] they have left.” A useful recent overview of the Israeli raid titled “How close were we to a third world war?” adds an important bit of new information based on earlier reports in the Kuwaiti press. Ali Rheza Ali, a former Iranian deputy defense minister who defected several months ago, supplied intelligence sources in the West with information about the site targeted by the Israelis. Of course, that knowledge would imply close Iranian involvement in Korea’s nuclear project. (For more on possible Iranian involvement, see my “Deterrence Lost.”)

Distress over North Korean and Iranian involvement in nuclear proliferation to Syria — possibly as a way of hiding their own nuclear programs from the United States — would certainly make sense of Hoekstra’s and Ros-Lehtinen’s public complaint. Yet there may be more at work. The American press reports cited by Hoekstra and Ros-Lehtinen have so far seemed to confirm only the existence of a “nascent” plutonium reactor modeled on North Korea’s facility at Yongbyon, a construction project that could take as many as three to six years to complete (see NYT Oct. 14). While Syrian wrath at Israel’s destruction of even a nascent nuclear reactor could certainly have led to a retaliatory attack and general war in the Middle East, worries over a potential “world war three” caused by Israel’s destruction of a reactor three to six years from completion seem a bit overblown. These worries might make more sense if there is something more to this story than what American news sources have confirmed.

Warhead?

Several early and unconfirmed reports on the Israeli raid point to the possibility that in the days immediately before the airstrike, the North Koreans may have shipped a cache of fissile material — possibly including a nuclear warhead — to Syria. According to the Sept. 16 Sunday Times, preparations for the attack began when the head of Israel’s intelligence agency, the Mossad, presented Prime Minister Ehud Olmert with evidence that “Syria was seeking to buy a nuclear device from North Korea.” The fear was that the warhead would be fitted atop one of Syria’s North Korean-made Scud-C missiles, already armed with North Korean designed chemical warheads. “This was supposed to be a devastating surprise,” said an Israeli source, “Israel can’t live with a nuclear warhead.” The Sept. 16 Sunday Times goes on to connect the warhead story with a Washington Post report that the raid was linked to “the arrival three days earlier of a ship carrying North Korean material labeled as cementbut suspected of concealing nuclear equipment.”

A “nascent” nuclear reactor, three-to-six years from completion, does not give off radiation. Yet the London Sunday Times reported on Sept. 23 that Israeli commandos seized samples of nuclear material and returned them to Israel for examination. “A laboratory confirmed that the unspecified material was North Korean in origin.” The Washington Post’s Jim Hoagland reported on October 7 that a senior official with access to highly classified intelligence reports said that the Israelis provided the United States with “physical material and soil samples from the site — taken both before and after the raid.” Soil samples are commonly used to confirm the presence of fissile material.

Here is where we begin to see potential contradictions, or at least difficulties. Some stories speak of nuclear material or even warheads, while other stories refer only to an incomplete reactor, and even deny that fissile material was present at all. For example, the ABC story of Oct. 19, claims that “no fissionable material was found because the facility was not yet operating.” The U.S. hesitated to approve the attack, according to this report, precisely because of the lack of fissionable material. While the ultimate nuclear intentions for the site were “unmistakable,” the U.S. apparently worried that it would be challenged without the sort of absolute proof provided by fissionable material.

Reactor and More?

Yet reports that fissionable material of some sort was involved in the raid persist, and there are a ways in which these reports could be reconciled with the ABC story. The October third edition of Britain’s Spectator carried a more detailed account of the fate of the North Korean shipment of “cement” than earlier reports. This is the same article, by the way, in which “a very senior British ministerial source” said we’d come close to “world war three that day.”

According to the Spectator, the Israelis tracked the North Korean “cement” shipment to the same site that had already been under intense Israeli surveillance as a possible nuclear installation (i.e. the incomplete reactor). It was at this point, just days before the attack, that elite Israeli commandoes were dispatched to collect the soil samples that indicated the ship cargo had been nuclear (and, according to the London Sunday Times, of North Korean origin). So it’s possible that the ABC report and the report from the Spectator could both be correct. The U.S. may have worried through the summer months about attacking the nascent reactor because of the lack of fissile material (and also for fear of what a raid would do to the six-party talks). Yet the arrival of the North Korean shipment of “cement” three days before the attack, and the subsequent Israeli soil samples, may have turned the tide and led the U.S. to approve what the Israelis at that point surely felt compelled to do.

Conclusions

Our examination of diverse news accounts of the Israeli raid on the Syrian nuclear facility yields several conclusions. First, there is significant evidence of ongoing and recent North Korean involvement. Especially given the informed criticisms of Hoekstra and Ros-Lehtinen, apparent efforts by select administration sources to downplay North Korean involvement appear unconvincing. Second, especially in light of the informed concerns expressed by Hoekstra and Ros-Lehtinen, but also in light of press accounts, there is reason to fear significant Iranian involvement in Syria’s nuclear program, either as a facilitator, as a destination for North Korean nuclear material transiting Syria, or both. Third, there is at least some significant evidence for direct North Korean transfer of fissile material — perhaps even a nuclear warhead — to Syria and/or Iran. That, of course, would constitute the most serious possible violation of the six-party agreement, and would be a grave threat to the security of the United States and the world.

In light of this evidence, should Congress now oppose America’s nuclear agreement with North Korea? And along with North Korea, should Iran be held to account in this affair? Perhaps. In any case, based on an analysis of press reports, and on the informed protests of Representatives Peter Hoekstra and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, it’s clear that we need more open information before we can confidently sign on to the six-party agreement. At a minimum, the scope of congressional briefings on the Israeli raid needs to substantially increase.

— Stanley Kurtz is a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center.

Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ros-Lehtinen, Ros-Lehtinen, Ros-Lehtinen, Ros-Lehtinen

Oct. 18 (Bloomberg) -- Republican Senator Jon Kyl and other lawmakers will urge the U.S. Treasury tomorrow to conduct ``the most rigorous review'' of a plan by a Chinese company to buy a stake in U.S. technology company 3Com Corp.

According to a copy of a letter the lawmakers are sending to the Treasury Department, they will urge the administration to examine any links that Huawei Technologies Co., has to the People's Liberation Army. The company is China's largest maker of telecommunications-networks equipment.

``We are deeply troubled by the national security implications of this sale and ask for your assurances of the most rigorous review of these suspected ties before the transaction is approved,'' the letter says.

Bain Capital LLC, the Boston-based buyout firm, announced Sept. 28 that it plans to buy Marlborough, Massachusetts-based 3Com for $2.2 billion. Huawei, a former partner of 3Com, will take a 16.5 percent stake, and that share may grow.

Bain Capital said it has voluntarily submitted the acquisition for a review by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, or CFIUS, which is led by the Treasury Department. The committee examines whether foreign investments in the U.S. will compromise national security.

``We are confident CFIUS will conclude that 3Com remains firmly in the control of an American firm, has only a small minority foreign shareholder, and that the transaction presents no risk to national security,'' Bain Capital said in an e-mailed statement today. 3Com doesn't contract directly with the government, the statement said.

A spokesman for 3Com didn't immediately return a voice mail and e-mail asking for comment. Huawei didn't immediately respond to an e-mail.

Huawei President Shenzhen, South China-based Huawei is China's top seller of switches and routers, which direct data flowing through computer networks.

The complaints from Congress, which has also raised alarms in the last two years over proposed purchases by a Dubai, United Arab Emirates-based company of U.S. ports and a Chinese company of Unocal Corp., is centered on the ties of Ren Zhengfei, Huawei's president, to the Chinese army, or PLA.

Ren ``founded Huawei with PLA funds and built the business through strong ties to the PLA,'' the letter says.

Among 3Com's products is an ``intrusion prevention'' technology that helps clients protect themselves from hackers. The company has a number of U.S. technology contracts.

Eight Republicans, led by Florida's Representative Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, the top Republican on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, have already proposed legislation urging the administration to turn down the sale of 3Com to Bain and Huawei.

`Least Transparent'

It would be a mistake to ``permit minority ownership in 3Com by one of the least transparent companies operating in China, a firm with shadowy ties to Chinese army and intelligence services,'' Ros-Lehtinen said.

In the legislation, the lawmakers said that Huawei expanded from a small enterprise in 1988 to become a company of 61,000 employees with revenue of $8.5 billion through government subsidies and ``aggressive pricing.''

Kyl's letter will be sent to Deputy Treasury Secretary Robert Kimmitt because Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson recused himself from examining the transaction.

Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ros-Lehtinen, Ros-Lehtinen, Ros-Lehtinen, Ros-Lehtinen, Ros-Lehtinen

Congress awarded the Dalai Lama its highest civilian honor Wednesday as lawmakers urged Chinese authorities to allow him to visit Beijing before the 2008 summer Olympics.

The pleas for China to engage with the exiled Tibetan spiritual leader framed the ceremony in the Capitol rotunda, during which President Bush and congressional leaders presented the Dalai Lama with the Congressional Gold Medal.

Tom Lantos, D-Calif., chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said it would reflect well on Beijing, as it prepares to host the Olympics, to allow the Dalai Lama to visit the country for the first time in more than 50 years.

“There is nothing that will guarantee the right atmosphere for the Beijing Olympics more certainly and more forcefully than you inviting this man of peace to Beijing for serious discussions,” Lantos said.

Lantos emphasized that the Dalai Lama is not a “splittist” trying to drive a wedge between Tibet and Beijing. He said the Dalai Lama sought cultural and religious freedom for Tibetans within the framework of a unified, sovereign China.

China refuses to recognize the Dalai Lama, regarding him as a subversive who wants to undermine China’s control over Tibet. China took control of Tibet in 1950, asserting claims of sovereignty that go back to the Ming dynasty of the 14th century. The Dalai Lama fled to India in 1959, after Chinese forces crushed a rebellion in Tibet.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., who co-wrote the resolution that became law last year (PL 109-387) authorizing the medal, echoed Lantos’ sentiments.

“He is not seeking independence but meaningful autonomy within the People’s Republic of China,” she said.

Feinstein also referred to the Tibetan Policy Act, which became law as part of the fiscal 2002-03 State Department authorization (PL 107-228). That law establishes as U.S. policy that Chinese and Tibetan leaders should meet for discussions without preconditions as soon as possible.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., emphasized what she called the Dalai Lama’s “middle-way approach” and noted the “special relationship” between the Dalai Lama and the United States.

Focus on Religious Freedom

Republicans focused on the issue of religious freedom in China and criticized the Chinese Communist Party for failing to respect minority rights within its borders.

Ileana Ros-Lehtinen of Florida, the ranking Republican on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, castigated China for what she called its “iron grip” over Tibet, where its communist government “continues to bring systematic attacks aimed at destroying [Tibet’s] national and cultural identities.”

“The Tibetan people have a right to their heritage and their freedom,” added Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky.

House Minority Leader John A. Boehner, R-Ohio, called the Tibetan struggle “a beacon for any people anywhere yearning to break the chains of tyranny and live and worship in peace.”

The Chinese Embassy in Washington declined to comment on the ceremony, but in Beijing, a government official called the ceremony a “farce.” In protest against the award ceremony, China pulled out of a planned meeting of world powers regarding Iran’s nuclear pursuits.

In his own remarks at the ceremony, the Dalai Lama stressed that he would not use cultural and religious autonomy as a “steppingstone” toward Tibetan independence and called on foreign nations to help him convince the Chinese government of his sincerity. He criticized Beijing for what he cited as its failure to embrace the rule of law and freedom of information.

The Dalai Lama’s mollifying influence on Capitol Hill was palpable. Acknowledging the rare unanimity among Democrats, Republicans and the president, Pelosi said: “Today you bring peace to the capital of the United States.”

Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ros-Lehtinen, Ros-Lehtinen, Ros-Lehtinen, Ros-Lehtinen

Over the last few weeks, State Department officials have reported major diplomatic breakthroughs that will roll back North Korea's nuclear weapons program, allow Pyongyang to be removed from the U.S. state sponsors of terror list, and normalize relations between our two countries. North Korea reportedly has agreed to disable its nuclear facilities and has, as it has done many times before, promised to give a full accounting of its nuclear program by December 31, 2007. Congress has been asked to support this agreement which State Department officials claim will benefit our nation and promote regional stability.

Then, early last month, Israel conducted an airstrike against a facility in northern Syria that press sources have linked to nuclear programs by North Korea, Iran, or other rogue states. If this event proves that Syria acquired nuclear expertise or material from North Korea, Iran, or other rogue states, it would constitute a grave threat to international security for which Syria and any other involved parties must be held accountable.

The Bush Administration, however, has thrown an unprecedented veil of secrecy around the Israeli airstrike. It has only briefed a handful of very senior Members of Congress and left even the vast majority of foreign relations and intelligence committee members in the dark. We are among the very few Members who were briefed, but we have been sworn to secrecy on this matter. However, we are prepared to state based on what we have learned, that it is critical for every Member of Congress to be briefed on this incident as soon as possible.

We are concerned that although the Bush Administration refuses to discuss the Israeli airstrike with the American people or with the majority of Congress, it has not hesitated to background the press to shape this story to its liking. New York Times writer David Sanger authored and co-authored articles on October 14 and 15 that appeared to reflect extensive input from senior policymakers. Washington Post writer Glenn Kessler co-authored an article on September 21 that also cited inside information from the Administration. We believe it is unacceptable that the Bush Administration has perhaps been discussing more of this story with the news media than it will share with the American people or their elected representatives in Congress.

We want to remind President Bush that Congress is the Article I branch bestowed by our Founding Fathers with certain Constitutional authorities over the foreign policy process. Not only does Congress have an obligation to the country to conduct oversight over these matters, but is accountable to the people of the United States in ensuring that their security and interests are safeguarded. For example, the proposed deals with North Korea will involve substantial expenditures of U.S. funds to pay for heavy fuel oil deliveries. Congress will be asked to approve the authorization of funds for this expenditure. We cannot carry out our duties when we are being denied information about these critical national security matters.

We all want to secure agreements that addresses the proliferation of nuclear weapons, ballistic missiles, and unconventional weapons. However, for these agreements to have long-term viability, they must be transparent and based on close consultations and collaboration with the Congress. If true that the September 2007 Israeli airstrike is related to covert nuclear collaboration involving Syria and either North Korea, Iran, or other rogue states, this may or may not be an issue that can be easily addressed by negotiations alone. It is certain, however, that such a serious international security issue will not stay secret forever.

Congress therefore needs to be fully briefed not just on the details of the September 2007 Israeli airstrike on the facility in Syria, but on how to address this matter and how and, if press reports are true, how rogue states will be held accountable for what could amount to a very serious case of WMD proliferation.

We regret that the Administration has ignored numerous letters from Congress asking that all Members be briefed on the Israeli airstrike. Failing to disclose the details of this incident to the Legislative branch, preventing due diligence and oversight, but talking to the press about it, is not the way to win support for complex and difficult diplomatic efforts to combat proliferation by rogue nations. Until Congress is fully briefed, it would be imprudent for the Administration to move forward with agreements with state proliferators. Congress must be a full partner in this process and, from this point forward, must be kept dutifully and currently informed about this matter.

Congressman Peter Hoekstra (R-MI) and Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) are respectively the senior Republican Members on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the House Foreign Affairs Committee


Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ros-Lehtinen, Ros-Lehtinen, Ros-Lehtinen, Ros-Lehtinen

WASHINGTON: Over furious objections from China, Congress bestowed its highest civilian honor Wednesday on the Dalai Lama, the exiled Tibetan spiritual leader whom Beijing considers a troublesome voice of separatism.

Dressed in flowing robes of burgundy and orange, Tenzin Gyatso, the 14th Dalai Lama, beamed and bowed as President George W. Bush and members of Congress gave him a standing ovation upon his arrival at the Capitol where he came to receive the Congressional Gold Medal. Lawmakers praised him as a hero of the Tibetan struggle. Bush called him "a man of sincerity and peace."

But the Dalai Lama also said that he felt "a sense of regret" over the sharp tensions with China unleashed by his visit and the honors conferred upon him.

In gentle language and conciliatory tones, he congratulated China on its dynamic economic growth, recognized its rising role on the world stage, but he also gently urged it to embrace "transparency, the rule of law and freedom of information."

The 72-year-old spiritual leader, reading at times with difficulty from the English translation of a speech written in Tibetan, made clear that "I'm not seeking independence" from China, a division that Beijing ardently opposes.

Nor, he said, would he use any future agreement with China "as a steppingstone for Tibet's independence."

What he wanted, the Dalai Lama said, was "meaningful autonomy for Tibet."

After speeches by the president and the top leaders of each party as well as by the Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel, another Nobel Peace Prize laureate and Congressional Gold Medal winner, the Dalai Lama accepted the medal, drawing a standing ovation from a crowd that included such Tibet sympathizers as the film director Martin Scorsese and the actor Richard Gere.

But earlier in Beijing, Chinese officials had offered sharp new criticism. The top Chinese religious affairs official condemned as a "farce" the American plans to honor the Dalai Lama.

"The protagonist of this farce is the Dalai Lama," said Ye Xiaowen, director general of the State Administration for Religious Affairs, Reuters reported. Other officials have warned that the award ceremony could have a "serious impact" on American-Chinese relations.

But Bush, when asked about the political fallout from Beijing during a news conference earlier Wednesday, appeared unconcerned.

"I don't think it ever damages relations when an American president talks about, you know — religious tolerance and religious freedom is good for a nation. I do this every time I meet with him," he said.

The two men have met three times before. But in the face of the Chinese broadsides, their encounter on Tuesday was as low-key as possible in the circumstances, with the meeting in the White House residence, not the Oval Office, and with no cameras present. White House officials insisted that the meeting was that of a president and a spiritual, not a political, leader.

Bush reminded reporters that he had informed President Hu Jintao of China, when they met recently in Sydney, that he would be meeting with the Dalai Lama. Later, in his remarks under the Capitol Rotunda, the president urged the Chinese to do the same.

"They will find this good man to be a man of peace and reconciliation," he said.

In apparent protest over the award for the Dalai Lama, China pulled out of a meeting this month at which world powers were to discuss Iran. It also canceled an annual human rights dialogue with Germany, displeased by Chancellor Angela Merkel's meeting last month with the Tibetan spiritual leader.

Among the several lawmakers who spoke Wednesday, Representative Ileana Ros-Lehtinen of Florida, the ranking Republican on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, took sharp aim at the Chinese Communist government. She spoke of Tibetans who "continue to suffer under the iron grip of Beijing's rulers," and said the Tibetans know "that truth and justice will prevail over evil and repression."

Representative Tom Lantos, the California Democrat is who chairman of the committee, denied Chinese charges that the Dalai Lama is a separatist. And he issued a challenge to China: "Let this man of peace visit Beijing."

The president's 30-minute meeting with the Dalai Lama on Tuesday had been cloaked in secrecy.

"We in no way want to stir the pot and make China feel that we are poking a stick in their eye," Dana Perino, the White House press secretary, told reporters. "We understand the Chinese have very strong feelings about this."

White House spokesmen said the two men discussed the situations in Tibet and in Myanmar, formerly Burma, where that nation's government, which has close economic ties with China, has cracked down recently on pro-democracy protesters. The United States has urged China to press the Burmese military government to ease off.

The Dalai Lama has lived in exile in India since the Chinese Army crushed an uprising in his homeland in 1959. Tibetan Buddhists revere him as their spiritual leader.

He has been pressing, without success, to go to China to advocate for greater cultural and religious freedoms for his followers. He won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1989.

Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ros-Lehtinen, Ros-Lehtinen, Ros-Lehtinen, Ros-Lehtinen

Lawmakers are brushing aside concerns that Wednesday’s award ceremony for the Dalai Lama will upset the delicate balance of U.S.-China relations.

Tibet’s spiritual leader will receive the Congressional Gold Medal in the Capitol Rotunda and then make a public address on the West Lawn in a ceremony that is expected to draw thousands of Tibetans and supporters of Tibet. The award is being billed as one of the most significant tributes to the Dalai Lama since he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1989.

The Capitol Rotunda ceremony has already drawn strong rebukes from China, as has President Bush’s decision to meet the Dalai Lama in public. The two have already met several times, but it will be the first time a sitting U.S. president has received the exiled Tibetan leader in public.

Members of both chambers praised the decision to award the medal. While some said the meeting will not affect the relationship between the U.S. and China, others said it will send a message to Beijing about Tibetan independence.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), who sponsored the Senate bill for the medal, said the award is not meant to be a political statement, but a gesture to honor a world-renowned religious leader.

“It’s official recognition of a lifetime of work on behalf of the Tibetan people and a doctrine of compassion and hope,” she said. “He is a religious leader, and religious leaders ought to be seen that way.”

Lodi Gyaltsen Gyari, special envoy of the Dalai Lama, said the 72-year-old Buddhist spiritual leader sees the ceremony as an opportunity to reach out to Chinese leadership.

“His Holiness is trying to reach out to China through the president, through the Speaker and through the Congress,” he said. “We are always in favor of the best and strongest relationships with China and the U.S.”

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) will preside over the event.

“For millions around the world, His Holiness the Dalai Lama is a source of spiritual refuge and a connection to inner peace and harmony,” said Pelosi in a statement. “He has used his position to promote wisdom, compassion, and non-violence as a solution — not only in Tibet — but to other world conflicts.”

A spokesman with the Chinese Embassy, Wang Baodong, said that awarding the medal “constitutes the Congress interfering in Chinese affairs and violates norms governing international relations,” adding that the move hurts the feelings of the Chinese people and has damaged relations between the two countries.

Feinstein said she has received visits from several Chinese officials trying to discourage her support.

“There has been unprecedented efforts by the Chinese government to stop this,” Gyari said, an allegation that Baodong confirmed.

Gyari met personally with lawmakers in an effort to dispel China’s claims that the Dalai Lama is a separatist who is bent on Tibetan independence. The Dalai Lama has repeatedly denied the claim, saying he only wants greater autonomy and respect for Tibetan culture and religion.

“The Dalai Lama has been engaging himself in splitist activities, and he’s not just a religious figure, or just a spiritual leader — he is a political figure in exile,” Baodong said. “In that sense, the Chinese are strongly disappointed and opposed to the decision by the Congress.”

Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-Calif.), who sits on the House Foreign Affairs Asia subcommittee, said he is not concerned about the effect that awarding the nation’s highest civilian honor to the religious leader might have. “The truth is that the people of Tibet are repressed and brutalized, and America should be on the side of the oppressed rather than the oppressors,” Rohrabacher said.

Rep. Steve Chabot (R-Ohio), who also sits on the Asia subcommittee, said the Dalai Lama is being honored as a “historical figure on peace and brotherhood.”

“The last thing we want to worry about is what they think after they’ve committed these horrendous civil rights abuses,” Chabot said.

Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.), a member of the Senate Foreign Relations East Asian subcommittee, said the medal issue is not a concern because there are “plenty of other things to be arguing about” with the Chinese.

Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.), who sponsored the House bill, said the event and the president’s attendance will send a message to the Chinese government about Tibetan independence.

“The Dalai Lama is a world-renowned spiritual leader, and that he would pose a threat to the Chinese says a lot about how weak the regime may be,” Ros-Lehtinen said.

Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ros-Lehtinen, Ros-Lehtinen, Ros-Lehtinen, Ros-Lehtinen

By Kevin Drawbaugh

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Eight U.S. lawmakers called on the Bush administration on Monday to block a proposed buyout of Massachusetts-based technology group 3Com Corp (COMS.O: Quote, Profile, Research), saying a Chinese company's role in the $2.2 billion transaction "threatens the national security of the United States."

Led by Florida Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, the House of Representatives members are backing a measure that says the 3Com deal should not be approved by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), a federal inter-agency panel that reviews international takeovers.

Coming at a time of growing tension over Chinese imports and corporate expansion, the House measure is a nonbinding resolution that would not have the force of law if passed.

But Ros-Lehtinen, the senior Republican on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said in a statement: "It would be a grave error for U.S. regulators to approve a deal that permits minority ownership in 3Com by one of the least transparent companies operating in China, a firm with shadowy ties to Chinese army and intelligence services."

3Com said recently that a 16.5 percent stake in the company would transfer to China's Huawei Technologies Co Ltd as part of a deal in which Bain Capital would buy out 3Com.

"I'm certain that the Department of Defense is quite perturbed by this whole thing," said John Tkacik, senior Asian Studies researcher at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank.

Tkacik said recent reforms to the CFIUS review process put the Pentagon "in a strong position to block this acquisition."

The largest telecommunications gear maker in China and one of the largest in the world, Huawei could raise its stake in 3Com another 5 percent under the terms of the Bain agreement.

Based in Marlborough, Massachusetts, 3Com could not immediately be reached for comment on the House resolution.

Bain, a major private equity firm, agreed to submit the deal for CFIUS review. It said: "We are confident CFIUS will conclude that 3Com remains firmly in the control of an American firm, has only a small minority foreign shareholder, and that the transaction presents no risk to national security."

Bain said in its statement that Huawei would not have access to sensitive U.S. technology or U.S. government sales.

According to a 3Com regulatory filing, Huawei would have no operational control or decision-making power for 3Com.

3Com and Huawei were involved in a joint venture known as H3C for several years, giving the companies access to each other's markets. H3C about a year ago was providing more than half of 3Com's revenues, industry analysts estimated.

In the House resolution, Ros-Lehtinen and other lawmakers said Huawei is a privately held company set up in 1988 by a former Chinese army officer and it may still have links to the Chinese government and the army.

The resolution said 3Com sells data-networking equipment to the Defense Department and other government agencies.

(Additional reporting by Ritsuko Ando in New York)

Ros-Lehtinen, Ros-Lehtinen, Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen

Americans have always believed that they have a duty to share their many blessings with those in this country and beyond who face chronic hunger, deadly disease, grinding poverty and hopeless misery. But their legendary generosity is grounded in an expectation that their money will be spent wisely.

The spotty record of our foreign assistance programs over the past several decades clearly demonstrates that good intentions, large-scale projects and an open checkbook are too often a recipe for failure. The most important lesson is that only the private sector, and not governments, can generate wealth. Korea, Taiwan and other former recipients of foreign assistance have demonstrated that robust economic growth is the only effective mechanism for lifting countries out of poverty.

Mountains of aid have accomplished little lasting change in those countries in which the private sector remains shackled. Economists have long recognized that the availability of credit plays a central role in economic growth.

If it is to be useful in undeveloped countries, credit has to be available not only to established businesses but also to individuals who are at the starting gate, those whose dreams may be small in comparison to vast government programs, but who are motivated to make those dreams real through their own hard work.

Micro-credit fits that need.

Although not as widely known as more glamorous endeavors, micro-credit is well-established and boasts a record of success. Its origins lie largely in the work of one man, Dr. Muhammad Yunus, an economist in Bangladesh who established the first true micro-credit lending institution, the Grameen Bank, in 1976.

The concept is simple: In impoverished countries, the self-employed often comprise half the workforce, but most do not have access to credit. Banks judge loans to this sector as too risky and too small to bother with, while informal creditors often charge crippling rates of interest.

Through micro-credit institutions like the Grameen Bank, however, loans typically less than $100 are made to applicants who would otherwise have no access to credit. Because collateral is difficult to come by, peer groups of loan recipients are created who then collectively guarantee each loan. The incentive for repayment is reinforced by the fact that a default on one loan can cut off credit to the entire group.

Today, there are more than 10,000 micro-credit institutions in more than 100 countries, with the numbers of participants estimated as high as 100 million people, most of whom live on incomes of less than one dollar a day.

It is easy to overstate what the micro-credit approach can accomplish. Not every recipient of micro-credit will prove to be a successful entrepreneur.

But most do. And although the accomplishment may seem modest, the difference between living on one dollar a day and the two or more dollars that a micro-credit loan may help produce can be the difference between starvation and survival.

In recognition of the role of micro-credit in alleviating poverty, the United Nations designated 2005 as the International Year of Micro-credit, and Mr. Yunus was awarded the 2006 Nobel Peace Prize.

Micro-credit is an example of the concepts that our assistance programs must incorporate, if we are to accomplish the results the American people expect from us, namely providing genuine assistance to those in greatest need in other countries.

Micro-credit programs build self-reliance rather than dependence on foreign aid.

And there is one other thing they provide, something difficult to define but indispensable to belief in one's own success: hope.

U.S. Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, R-Miami, serves as the senior Republican on the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ros-Lehtinen, Ros-Lehtinen, Ros-Lehtinen

The proposed takeover of 3Com by Bain, the private equity firm, and Huawei, the Chinese telecommunications equipment maker, came under further pressure in Washington after lawmakers called on the administration to block the acquisition of the US technology group.

A non-binding resolution introduced by Ileana Ros ­Lehtinen, the most senior Republican on the House foreign affairs committee, said the transaction in its current form threatened national security and should not be approved by the inter-agency panel that investigates foreign transactions. Under the terms of the $2.2bn deal, Huawei will take a minority stake in 3Com.

The move is the most formal objection against the deal to date. It underscores that acquisitions involving sensitive US assets continue to be vulnerable to scrutiny on Capitol Hill in spite of recent legislation designed to instil more confidence in the executive branch Committee on Foreign Investment in the US (Cfius), which is charged with investigating such deals.

Dubai Ports World was forced last year to abandon its bid for US port terminals after lawmakers said the takeover represented a threat.

The scrutiny of the 3Com transactionraises the prospect that lawmakers could try to scupper the deal, which will be reviewed by Cfius. Bain has said it is committed to working with US officials to satisfy them the transaction presents no US national security risks.

The resolution, which was co-sponsored by seven other House members, cited reports that Huawei was one of the "least transparent [companies] in China" and was a supplier of air defence systems to Iraq during the 1990s. It also quoted reports of alleged cyber-attacks on the US by China.

Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ros-Lehtinen, Ros-Lehtinen, Ros-Lehtinen