c. 1998 Religion News Service

WASHINGTON _ The Senate Friday (Oct. 9) concluded months of negotiations by backing compromise legislation making the encouragement of religious freedom abroad a focal point of U.S. foreign policy _ an initiative first advanced by religious conservatives.

The International Religious Freedom Act of 1998 requires the White House to consider in its dealings with foreign governments how they treat religious believers. Nations that engage in”egregious”patterns of religious persecution would be subject to a series of White House responses, ranging from quiet diplomacy to economic sanctions.

The measure establishes a commission to monitor religious freedom abroad headed by an”ambassador-at-large for religious liberty”and requires an annual State Department survey of how nations treat believers of all faiths.

The Clinton administration agreed to back the bill after language was inserted allowing a president to waive a response if an”important national interest”might otherwise be compromised. Earlier, more restrictive wording allowed such a waiver only when”national security”was at stake.

The Senate passed the measure 98-0 early Friday.

The House _ which had earlier passed its own version of the bill _ was poised to adopt the Senate’s language and forward the measure to the White House for Clinton’s signature.

Leading supporters hailed the act as a landmark in human rights legislation.”Peoples’ lives, millions of peoples’ lives, are going to be changed, and many of them saved, because of this piece of legislation,”said Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman, D-Conn.”We are a great exporting country, and we are about to export our first value articulated at the founding of our nation, and that is religious freedom,”added Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa.

The lopsided, bipartisan vote Friday came only after months of intense lobbying on the measure.”Don’t let that 98-0 vote lead you to believe this was an easy task,”said Sen. Daniel R. Coats, R-Ind.

Religious conservatives began lobbying for passage of religious freedom abroad legislation in early 1997, maintaining that Christians in particular faced persecution ranging from systematic rape, torture and imprisonment to limitations on openly practicing their faith. Nations such as China, Sudan, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Vietnam and Cuba were among those most often mentioned as gross violators of religious freedom.

The first bill on the issue, introduced in the House by Rep. Frank Wolf, R-Va., and in the Senate by Specter, called for mandatory economic sanctions.

That provision was opposed by the White House, which feared it would limit a president’s foreign policy options and anger nations, such as Saudi Arabia, that are otherwise important U.S. allies.

Republican free-trade advocates and business leaders also opposed the provision, saying U.S. companies would also be hurt.

Some moderate religious groups additionally weighed in against the provision, maintaining that already persecuted believers could be subjected to further oppression if their governments became angry over losing U.S. aid and trade opportunities.

Meanwhile, Muslims and some in the human rights community criticized supporters’ emphasis on the persecution of Christians and the seeming elevation of religious freedom over rights concerns.

After months of negotiations, Sen. Don Nickles, R-Okla., and Lieberman unveiled a compromise measure earlier this month that addressed most of the major criticisms. Significantly, it included no mandatory sanctions and broadened presidential options in responding to religious persecution, ending the key opposition of the White House and Republican free-traders.

One such critic, Sen. Rod Grams, R-Minn., termed the act that emerged from the negotiations”far superior”because it was”less inflammatory”than earlier legislation requiring automatic sanctions.

Nickles said the legislation’s intent was”never to punish,”but to”encourage positive behavorial change.” While the impetus for religious freedom legislation began with religious conservatives, many moderate and liberal religious groups had long since signed on to the Nickles-Lieberman legislation prior to Friday’s voting.

This week, the National Council of Churches, among the most influential of the moderate religious groups still not endorsing the legislation, gave its”qualified support”as well, saying last-minute compromises had gone”a long way toward meeting our concerns.

The NCC, which represents more than 30 Protestant and Orthodox Christian faith groups, listed among those concerns the exercise of care”so that traditions and cultures of other nations are respected.” In addition to the NCC, other religious groups backing the act included the U.S. Catholic Conference, the Episcopal Church, the National Association of Evangelicals, the Christian Coalition, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, the Union of American Hebrew Congregations, the Southern Baptist Convention’s Religious Liberty Commission, and the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America.

DEA END IR