destruction and common ruin of all Ireland in the civil disruption that would then

ensue.

I fully appreciate this position, but I am unable to project upon myself or my country the responsibility for so momentous a decision, since it is a decision that I believe rightfully belongs with the people directly involved. I do not believe that a precipitous withdrawal of British troops, without a viable alternative means of securing civil order and stability that has been agreed upon by the parties involved, would be a realistic course of action. However imperfect the presence of troops may be-and I am the first to agree that they have lost any semblance of neutrality in the eyes of the Catholic minority-I believe they are certainly preferable to the civil war that is likely to ensue on their departure, in the absence of an agreed upon alternative presence. Such a civil war, I should add, according to most observers, would result in the decimation of the Catholic minority in the face of the overwhelming superiority of arms held by the majority.

A PRODUCTIVE U.S. ROLE

I believe that the United States may productively act in this tragic situation in a number of ways. We can certainly make available our good offices should the parties involved indicate their acquiescence, and we may also make all efforts, private and public, to secure a settlement through negotiations. This includes bringing the matter up for discussion before the United Nations, as my resolution indicates, or before other international forums. I note with great interest the suggestion of my colleague in the Senate, Mr. Brooke, that the matter be placed before the European Commission on Human Rights. Certainly this is a possibility that merits further investigation.

As the New York Times noted recently in an editorial, there is no doubt that despite the increasing polarization of the two communities in Norther Ireland, the majority of the population still fervently desires a peaceful solution for the future of the troubled region. It is my sincere hope that all sides in the dispute will not lose sight of this ultimate goal-an equitable political settlement--in the heat of the tragic events that surround them. A negotiated settlement would demand a price from all involved, as everyone is well aware, but the hope of reaching such an agreement is, perhaps, increased by the growing general realization that the only alternative to an early settlement may well be prolonged civil war and sectarian strife.

It is my strong hope that unification will be the ultimate result of any settlement, and I believe that the hope of such a solution draws closer as the government in Dublin begins to show signs of recognizing that it, too, will be required to make certain adjustments.

For its part, there is no doubt that the Ulster Government of Brian Faulkner as well as the previous government of Chichester Clark can be credited with some movement toward reform in the essential areas of discrimination in housing, employment, education and political representation. But in each instance, these reforms have been inadequate and have come too late. More steps must be taken, and taken quickly, if there is to be any hope of a settlement. First, I believe there must be a phasing out of internment, coupled, perhaps, with a timetable for a gradual reduction and eventual elimination of British troops, in return for Catholic participation in negotiations. Such developments might well require that Westminster assume direct responsibility for security in Ulster. This is one of a number of possible solutions.

I reiterate that the United States can and should continue to offer its services and suggestions, but the exact scenario for a settlement must be the result of negotiation among the parties directly involved. If we have learned nothing else in the past decade, we must have learned that the world's ills are not necessarily amenable to sweeping solutions imposed from the outside, by this nation or any other.

I believe that the legislation I have proposed offers a realistic and responsible approach to solving the terrible Northern Ireland situation. I believe that my proposals are consistent with the political realities of the situation and are sufficiently restrained to be truly effective in the critical effort to end the violence and discrimination in Northern Ireland.

STATEMENT OF HON. THOMAS P. O'NEILL, JR., A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MASSACHUSETTS

Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the Committee for this opportunity to address myself to the current situation in Northern Ireland. The Congress has over and

over again enunciated its determination to effect a settlement of the dispute in that nation.

The brutality and inhuman policies which the British government has been pursuing are unprecedented in the history of the problem. Over 230 people have been killed since the disorders broke out 3 years ago, and already this year more 25 more people have been added to the toll. It should be abundantly clear that the present British policies and practices with regard to Northern Ireland have not worked, and that if continued, can only lead to further division, hatred and bloodshed.

We in Congress can have little respect for the callous and obdurate attitude which the British have displayed toward the trouble in Northern Ireland. Their response has been to repress dissent, to foster animosity and to dampen any hope of settlement through escalating policies of brutality. They have even refused to listen to the courts of their own nation. When the High Court of Northern Ireland ruled that a regulation empowering army officers to make gatherings of people disperse was invalid, the Parliament took swift and immediate action to eradicate that decision. The British House of Commons met immediately to legislatively overrule a decision which had struck a blow for decency, reasonableness and order. Instead of obeying the Court finding and seeking reconciliation, the British government manifested its concern by abrogating the decision before the print on its pages had even dried.

I have sponsored several measures aimed at alleviating the situation in Northern Ireland, including Congressman Carey's bill providing for a rather comprehensive program of reconciliation and self determination. I have written to the President on several occasions asking that he use his good offices to assist in reaching an accord. I have spoken with the State Department and members of the diplomatic corps in an effort to learn of their assessment of the present problem. I know that other members of Congress have done the same. And yet, we are frustrated because the situation in Northern Ireland appears to continually deteriorate, as more people are killed, more are interned without due process of law, and the implementation of reforms promised by the government of the United Kingdom in 1968 become unfulfilled platitudes.

The Congress of the United States is in a position, through this Committee and the measures which are before it, to exert considerable and constructive influence in achieving an end to the tragedy in Northern Ireland. I come to the Committee having sponsored several of these measures. I urge the Committee to report out a bill which will not only demonstrate American concern, but will have some real effect on the people involved. I know the Chairman of this Committee is very interested in doing so. And I am sure that the Congress will respond positively to the deliberations of this Committee.

Thank you.

STATEMENT OF HON._CHARLES B. RANGEL, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, I appreciate having this opportunity to express my support for the resolutions introduced by my colleagues with my cosponsorship calling for a withdrawal of British troops in Northern Ireland and their replacement by a U.N. peacekeeping force. This, I believe is critical if the civil rights and liberties of all the citizens of Northern Ireland are to be guaranteed until a political settlement agreeable to all can be found.

I am fully aware that its charter does not entitle the U.N. to intervene in the internal affairs of another country unless requested to do so and that at the present time Northern Ireland is an integral part of Great Britain. Yet it seems to me that it would be in Britain's own self-interest to accept this alternative, and that it is incumbent upon the United States and the United Nations to use their "good offices" with Britain, as recently requested by the Irish Foreign Minister Dr. Patrick Hillery, to impress upon the British government the wisdom of this proposal. As the recent tragic events have shown us, the British troops have clearly failed in their peacekeeping efforts in Northern Ireland. If civil war is to be averted in Ulster, other alternatives should be promptly considered.

When British troops first arrived in Northern Ireland in 1969, they were greeted by the Catholic minority as protectors. They had been sent to Ulster to prevent Protestant extremists from harassing Catholic civil rights groups agitating for the redress of well-justified grievances. Their grievances included discriminatory practices in the local franchise which assured large Protestant majorities through extensive gerrymandering and the denial of the principle of one-man-one-vote, as well as discrimination in housing and employment.

Over the past three years, the British, by their actions and policies, have completely discredited their Army as an impartial peacekeeping force. They have become the instrument of the repressive Ulster government. Instead of checking the rising tide of violence and bloodshed, they have tragically contributed to it. The policy of internment without trial, introduced last August, was directed almost exclusively against Catholics, while Protestant vigilantes were left alone. Catholic homes are repeatedly broken into and subiected to humiliating searches, while the homes of Protestants are generally immune from search. Far from restoring “law and order," these practices have served only to further alienate the Catholic population and provoke new waves of violence. The senseless shooting last January 30 into a crowd of unarmed civilians which had peacefully gathered to protest the hated policy of internment has ended any kind of usefulness the British presence in Northern Ireland might have had in the search for peace.

BRITISH PRESENCE AN OBSTACLE

Indeed, the very presence of British troops in Ulster has itself become an obstacle to a peaceful settlement. Internment without trial, the shameful practice of torture to extort information from those illegally detained, added to systematic military repression, have only aggravated the rift between the two communities. To protest these policies, Catholic opposition members have had no choice but to boycott the Northern Ireland Parliament. Many Catholic officials have resigned from their government posts. The I.R.A. has gained in popularity. Civil disobedience is spreading rapidly in the form of lent strikes, refusal to pay gas and electricity bills, and more protest rallies. Northern Ireland now finds itself on the brink of civil war. The British claim that if they do withdraw their troops from Ulster civil war will inevitably break out. Yet their continued presence seems to guarantee that which they seek to avoid. Since the Army has identified itself with the Protestant maiority, there appears to be no hope for a political solution to the crisis as long as it remains. A U.Ñ. peacekeeping force holds the chance of restoring a sense of impartiality, lost by the British, which would enable leaders of the Catholic minority to resume their duties and engage in talks with the Protestants. I am talking about the basic struggle for human rights which we as a nation are committed to seek. The struggle in Northern Ireland closely parallels that in the United States and that in the Portuguese colonies of Africa, in Rhodesia and in the Republic of South Africa.

Recently, I attended a conference of African and American legislators and government officials in Lusaka, Zambia, and at that time I had the opportunity totlalk with representatives of the liberation movements in Angola and Mozambique. I also had the opportunity to speak with those who have witnessed and suffered the discrimination and subiugation of Black Rhodesians and Black South Africans by their governments.

Zambian President Kenneth D. Kuanda pointed out the moral obligation of the United States to the search for human dignity and civil rights around the globe: "The future of African-American relations will be greatly determined by the United States policy in matters relating to self-determination in southern Africa. No maior power genuinely committed to peace and the welfare of mankind can ignore the unfolding crisis in this part of the world."

I might add at this point that the United States government has hypocritically condoned the practice of racism and apartheid in our own NASA tracking station in Johannesburg, South Africa. Discriminatory policies in employment, pay scales, educational opportunities and even the use of physical facilities is the admitted practice at that American facility.

It was in 1776, nearly two centuries ago, that we pledged ourselves to the principles that all men are created equal and that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights. We said that governments are instituted among men to guarantee these rights and that any government which becomes destructive of those rights may be abolished or altered by the people.

Those basic rights are at stake in Northern Ireland today, just as they are at stake in southern Africa. Those rights cannot be assured except under conditions of peace. That is why we in Congress have an obligation to make our voices heard on behalf of a peaceful settlement in Northern Ireland. A United Nations peacekeeping force would help defuse a highly explosive situation and enable the people of Northern Ireland to work out a settlement guaranteeing each citizen his human rights and civil liberties. The British must seize this chance before it is too late.

STATEMENT OF HON. PETER W. RODINO, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY

Mr. Chairman, I want to commend you for scheduling hearings on the tragic situation in Northern Ireland, and I appreciate the opportunity to present testimony.

More than two years ago, on September 3, 1969, I spoke before the House of Representatives when I introduced a Resolution directed toward helping to find a solution to the crisis then confronting Ulster. I said, on that day,

"I am sure we have all been deeply shocked and saddened by the strife and bloodshed that have rent this unhappy country. It is appalling to realize that the divisive forces have deteriorated into a fratricidal conflict of violence and hatred." Certainly these words are equally valid today-most unhapply so.

That day in 1969 I went on to say that "there is no doubt that the strife has developed from the Northern Ireland Government's discrimination against its Catholic minority."

Today-two years and some months later-we face the same bitter situation. The Ulster Government is still not adhering to the basic principles that must be observed by any government that considers itself democratic in assuring equal protection and equal rights under the law for all its citizens.

Conditions have not improved for the citizens of Ulster, but in fact harrassment and persecution have intensified. On January 30 thirteen citizens were killed in a confrontation with British troops. On February 6, a week later, thousands of Irish citizens marched in silence and dignity in the largest civil rights demonstration in Northern Ireland's history to protest the slayings of the week before. This demonstrates, beyond doubt, the dedication of the people of Ulster to achieve their self-determination and the fact that violence can be avoided.

The 50-year old history of Ulster is one of flagrant violation of principles embodied in the Charter of the United Nations, and one completely antithetical to the dedication of our country to equality and justice for all.

I am a member of the House Judiciary Committee, and ever since I came to Congress I have fought for the cause of equal rights. In recent years, in the United States, we have concentrated upon the "one man-one vote" principle.

Now this basic right for every individual is being sought in Northern Ireland, in addition to other essential elements of equality of justice-freedom against discrimination in employment, housing, education and religion.

Since August 9 of last year Irish citizens have been subject to a cruel internment policy that rivals the dictatorial operations of the Greek Junta. Tragically, the Government of Great Britain fails to realize that the presence and the increasingly aggressive activities of its troops in Northern Ireland are compounding the violence, instead of contributing to peace and a settlement of differences.

For this reason, in recent years I have participated in several legislative initiatives and other actions in the hope of helping to resolve this desperate and sorrowful situation.

In September of 1969 I introduced H. Res. 524 urging the President to utilize all the avenues available to him to seek a settlement of the conflict, to provide assistance to the innocent victims of the conflict in Ireland and to offer all the resources of the United States relating to our own efforts "to achieve the ideal of a democracy based on the principle of one man, one vote, and to assure equal opportunity in all areas for every citizen." I was very pleased, I might add, that in October of 1969 an official of the Irish Embassy in Washington called to express his government's interest in my proposal.

But, as we all know, in the meantime no significant improvement in the situation took place. The conditions of injustice, inequality and repression remained.

Last October, therefore, I joined my distinguished colleagues in Congress, Representative Carey of New York and Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts, in sponsoring H. Res. 654 urging:

(1) Termination of the invidious internment policy and immediate release of all persons detained under it.

(2) Full respect for the civil rights of all the citizens of Northern Ireland and the termination of all political, social, economic and religious discrimination.

(3) Implementation of the reforms promised by Great Britain since 1968, including those reforms in the fields of law enforcement, housing, employment and voting rights.

(4) Dissolution of the Parliament of Northern Ireland.

(5) Withdrawal of all British forces from Northern Ireland and the institution of law enforcement and criminal justice under local control acceptable to all parties.

(6) Convening of all interested parties for the purpose of accomplishing the unification of Ireland.

Subsequently, I joined Representative Tiernan of Rhode Island in another legislative initiative H. Con. Res. 523-which stresses the use of the United Nations to help solve the problem. This includes further actions, such as arranging for consultation among all parties, including the Irish Republican Army, to bring about a cessation of the conflict. It also proposes replacing British troops in Northern Ireland with a United Nations peacekeeping force and an international inquiry into the tragic events of Sunday, January 30, 1972.

Mr. Chairman, I hope your hearings will result ultimately in the adoption of legislation to express the deep and sincere concern of our government about the tragedy in Ulster and to help find a solution to it.

In 1969 His Holiness Pope Paul spoke out for all men of good will and humanity in urging a solution without violence that would assure equal rights for all. Today, as then, we should follow his leadership and remember his words that "those who. are fighting each other are Christians."

STATEMENT OF HON. SAMUEL S. STRATTON, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Mr. STRATTON. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to appear here to present my own views on the various proposals before this subcommittee relating to the tragic situation that now exists in Northern Ireland.

I am deeply concerned, as I am certain members of this subcommittee and all of us in Congress are concerned, over the violence that has escalated in recent months in that country. Unlike some members of the administration, however, I also feel strongly that the United States does have an obligation to take a more active role in ending this turmoil and in helping to work out a peaceful solution between all the parties.

Mr. Chairman, let me say that I for one do not agree with the idea that what is happening in Northern Ireland is none of our affair.

Surely, if the President of the United States can go half way around the world to try in part to mediate the conflict between mainland China and Taiwan, then we Americans ought to be clever enough to make some helpful suggestions that could bring an end to the violence in a country with such close ties to America and whose people have made such great direct contributions to our own heritage. I feel strongly that the administration ought to take a much more active role in moving both parties toward bringing the present terrorism to an end and working out a peaceful solution than they have been willing to take up to now. And therefore I believe strongly that Congress, with this subcommittee in the lead, should take the initiatives that the State Department has refused to take and come up with a suitable resolution.

With that goal in mind, I have introduced several bills in this Congress relating to the Ireland situation. These bills include H. Res. 136, introduced January 22, 1971-a bill I have introduced regularly over the past 14 years-calling for a UN-sponsored referendum on the unification of Ireland; H. Res. 656, introduced on October 20, 1971, in company with Mr. Bingham, urging the UN to send a peacekeeping force to Northern Ireland. On February 3, 1972, I joined Mr. Tiernan in introducing H. Con. Res. 523, which calls for an end to the internment policy, negotiations between all parties, a UN peacekeeping force, and an international inquiry into the events of "Bloody Sunday." And I have asked also to be placed on Mr. Carey's bill, which I understand he will be reintroducing the week of March 13. That bill you are, of course, already familiar with, since it is identical to the Kennedy bill.

UNIFIED IRELAND NEEDED

Each of these bills has a slightly different approach to meeting the problem, but each is really based on what I regard to be the key to any lasting and peaceful settlement in Northern Ireland, namely honest and realistic movement in the direction of a unified Ireland, which I called for back in 1959 when I first came to the House.

Basically, I believe that any satisfactory solution-in Northern Ireland-and thus any resolution which this House adopts to deal with the issue--should include the following three points.

First, as a beginning step, I believe the United States should encourage and promote direct discussions between Prime Minister Lynch of Ireland and Prime Minister Heath of Great Britain to develop some specific formula for the eventual reunification of all Ireland.