On the recordJuly 11, 2019
I appreciate the comments of the gentleman from Rhode Island, and I want to agree in substantial measure with what he said about the progress that Cyprus has made both in countering Russian influence and in combating international money laundering and other issues on which we have been working with them. I do believe that, as the gentleman indicated, the embargo that has been in place since 1987 ought to be considered and looked at, and there ought to at least be considered a plan to gradually move away from that embargo if and as Cyprus continues to make progress in weaning itself off Russian weapons and the other priorities that we have with them. What I worry about is, all of a sudden, in a total of a 10-minute debate on the National Defense Authorization Act, that we come in and say, ``Okay, the embargo is gone; what has been in place since 1987, never mind anymore,'' without really thinking through the consequences and having that plan that helps us work with Cyprus to get to a better place. And I don't need to remind Members that this area is very complex, with a number of actors that have intense interest in what happens in Cyprus and in the region. I am not saying that we don't move in that direction, but I am saying, to come here with a 10-minute debate and say, ``Okay, never mind what we have done since 1987'' is fraught with danger. So, for that reason, I must oppose this amendment.…
