partment of State negotiated with the government of China in 1992, these inspections were to be conducted easily and routinely in China. However, even though the Customs Service has made dozens of requests, only one factory has ever been inspected, and none has been in the last year and a half.

1. The Department of State should aggressively pursue its own MOU on inspecting suspected forced labor facilities, and it should emphasize to the Chinese government that over 95% of its own economy is also being unfairly disadvantaged by the existence of the forced labor system.

2. The Department of State should screen its own purchases to avoid slave-made goods, including those for the embassy in Beijing.

3. The Department of State should propose to all international agencies to adopt a policy to refuse to buy slave-made goods.

4. The Department of State should expand its coverage of this issue in its Country Reports on Human Rights.

RUSSIAN DEFAULTS TO THE AMERICAN TAXPAYER

Over the past decade, the countries of the former Soviet Union have conducted massive asset sales overseas by government agencies and various individuals. A vast amount of money received was left overseas in numerous investments and bank accounts, estimated authoritatively in the hundreds of billions of dollars. These funds are easily available for usage by the Russian and other governments of the former Soviet Union.

The Russian government (and others of the former Soviet Union) owe the American public (1) approximately $1 billion of bond debt from World War I, (2) approximately $1 billion of lend-lease debt from World War II, and (3) billions of dollars of recent U.S. agricultural loan defaults.

Unfortunately, the Department of State has on an annual basis routinely agreed to postpone collecting the World War II debt plus interest, and has not even asked for the World War I and agricultural loan defaulted amounts.

1. The Department of State should stop postponing collection of the World War II debts, and should press for collection of World War I debts and agricultural loan defaults.

2. The Department of State should also press aggressively to aid Americans who have filed valid claims with the Foreign Claims Settlement Commission against the countries of the former Soviet Union.

3. The Department of State should require the Russian government to make restitution to the victims of the deliberate shootdown of the KAL007 airliner.

US-USSR MARITIME BOUNDARY AGREEMENT

The unratified US-USSR maritime boundary agreement and an executive side agreement suffer from serious equitable and constitutional problems. The stated intent was to agree upon the seabed boundary between Alaska and Siberia.

This agreement was signed by Secretary of State James A. Baker III on June 1, 1990, approved by the Senate in September 1991, and ratified by President George Bush in December 1991. However, it has never been ratified by the Soviet/Russian side, and thus is not in force.

Also on June 1, 1990, Secretary of State Baker signed an executive side agreement that provided ** pending the entry into force of that (US-USSR Maritime Boundary) Agreement, the two Governments agree to abide by the terms of that Agreement as of June 15, 1990."

The major problems that these agreement present are:

A. They were negotiated by the Department of State in complete secrecy without any input or review by the Congress, the public, or the State of Alaska. The dates and places of the negotiations and the names of the negotiators remain classified materials. At least, this treaty fails the test of requiring prior advice by the Senate.

B. The exclusion of the State of Alaska from participating in the negotiations and from approving its terms violates the federal principle of state-federal sovereignty involving boundary lines. In essence the federal government arrogated to itself the ability to affect Alaska's land and seaward boundary and property without its consent or participation. The legislatures of Alaska and California have repeatedly protested this extra-constitutional treatment.

C. The proposed maritime boundary line places 8 Alaskan islands and their 200-mile exclusive economic zones on the Russian side. This amounts to a giveaway of thousands of square miles of territory and tens of thousands of miles of oil-rich seabeds to the Russians, valued in the billions of dollars. The affected Alaskan islands in the Arctic are Wrangell, Herald, Bennett, Jeannette, and

Henrietta, and the Alaskan islands at the end of the Aleutian chain are Copper Island, Sea Lion Rock, and Sea Otter Rock.

D. The proposed maritime boundary line creates a "western special area" on the U.S. side, but “*** the United States agrees that henceforth the Soviet Union may exercise the sovereign rights end jurisdiction derived from the exclusive economic zone jurisdiction that the United States would otherwise be entitled to exercise under international law.***" This appears to be a unique cession of sovereignty on American soil to a foreign power.

E. The executive side agreement purports to do exactly what the main agreement does. Maritime boundary agreements need to be in the form of treaties to be put into force. By adopting this side agreement, the Department of State appears to be arrogating the power to adopt maritime boundaries without any consent by Congress or the President.

We suggest the follow corrective actions:

1. The Department of State should withdraw the proposed US-USSR maritime boundary agreement.

2. The Department of State should re-negotiate it with the full participation and consent of the State of Alaska where it affects the Alaskan land and seabed boundary and property rights.

3. The Department of State should declassify the records of the negotiations over the agreement.

4. The Department of State should renounce the executive side agreement, and should provide a public report of its actions to implement this side agreement. It should also publicly renounce its unilateral ability of the Department of State to agree to matters that constitutionally belong to Congress, the Senate, or the President.

CUBA AND THE AMERICAN EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE

The Department of State has failed to exert the U.S. exclusive economic zone in the vicinity of U.S. islands around Cuba. When the country of Cuba was created by the United States following the Spanish-American War in 1898, the only territory was the island of Cuba itself. The only other island ceded to it by treaty from the U.S. was the Isle of Pines (Isla de la Juventad), which lies about 50 miles southwest. There are numerous other small American islands surrounding Cuba.

In negotiating a maritime boundary line between the U.S. and Cuba in 1977, the Department of State failed to measure the EEZ from the American islands and thus would negligently ceded the islands and the thousands of square mile of EEZ around them to Cuba.

Inasmuch as this maritime boundary agreement has not been consented to by the U.S. Senate or put into force, the Department of State should renegotiate the maritime boundary agreement to include the U.S. islands around Cuba.

HAITI AND AMERICAN NAVASSA ISLAND

The American Navassa Island is situated among Haiti, Jamaica, and Cuba. The Department of State has failed to assert the exclusive economic zone for it. Moreover, it has acceded to Haitian claims to EEZ around it. Haiti and Cuba have an agreement that creates a maritime boundary based on the assumption that Navassa belongs to Haiti. The Department of State should not only protest this agreement between Haiti and Cuba, but should assert the EEZ around Navassa and enter into negotiations with Haiti, Jamaica, and Cuba over the appropriate maritime boundary line.

U.S. PACIFIC ISLANDS AND EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONES

The Department of State has failed to assert the EEZ for Washington Island, Fanning Island, Kingman Reef, Baker Island, Nassau Island, and the Stewart Islands. These are valuable U.S. territories in the Pacific Ocean, and the Department of State should protect the public interest by asserting the EEZ for them.

ABANDONMENT OF AMERICAN STEWART ISLANDS

The Stewart Islands in the Pacific (near Guadalcanal in the Solomons) have been part of Hawaii since 1856. Nevertheless the Department of State has abandoned them and refused to recognize their American status. The inhabitants suffer several consequent problems, including outbreaks of malaria, one of the few places in the world where this disease still exists.

CREDIBILITY OF PUBLIC STATEMENTS

Information at the Department of State is subjected to various levels of secrecy. There are penalties for anyone divulging any secret information.

All statements made to the public contain only unclassified (nonsecret) information. Much of the time, when a public statement is made, there is related secret information that is not released. This secret information may amplify or even contradict the public statement. The public statement may well not be "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth." Public statements may well mislead the public, and this is not in the public interest. Years later if and when the secret information is declassified and released to the public, the truthful account of the situation is revealed.

In the interest of providing credibility to the American public, when the Department of State makes public statements in situations where there are related secret matters that amplify or contradict the public statement, the Department of State in its public statement should always include a disclaimer indicating that the public statement does not include significant related secret material.