He called on his Congressional colleagues to oppose the Goodling amendment. The legislation is scheduled to be debated in the House beginning Monday.Democratic Congressman Gary Ackerman, who is co-Chairman of the Congressional Caucus on India and Indian-Americans, has given lead to the efforts to secure the defeat of the anti-India move. Republican lawmaker James Greenwood would sign a letter withAckerman, urging fellow Congressmen to oppose it.

Pallone also announced his support for a provision, sponsored by House International Relations Committee chairman Benjamin Gilman, seeking to extend by a year President Clinton's authority to waive sanctions that the US had imposed against India and Pakistan in protest against their nuclear tests in May 1998.

He, however, hoped that Congress would ultimately adopt a more far-reaching solution to the sanctions issue. He favours the Senate provision, which recommended suspension of the sanctions against the two countries for five years.

Earlier, Pallone questioned the method recommended by the Goodling Amendment to determine a country's attitude towards the United States on the basis of its voting behaviour in the U.N. General Assembly. "This is a largely irrelevant way of determining who our friends and foes are," he added.

"Under the Goodling Amendment, all of our other diplomatic, political, strategic or economic interests would be sacrificed to themostly symbolic indicator of General Assembly votes -- often on issues of peripheral importance," he added.

"In practical terms, this amendment would serve as a symbolic slap at India. At a time when Congress is working on a bipartisan basis to lift the unilateral sanctions imposed on India last year -- as evidenced by the Gilman Amendment -- enactment of the Goodling Amendment would set back much the progress we are trying to make," Pallone remarked. He felt "it would be seen as a purely punitive action, creating an atmosphere of distrust that would make it much more difficult for us to achieve vitally important goals."

In fact, he defended India's voting record in the world body. "The vast majority of resolutions adopted by the General Assembly are adopted by consensus. When you count those votes, India votes with the US 84 percent of the time. If you look at the votes identified as "important" by our State Department, including the consensus votes, India is with us 75 percent of the time," headded.

He said India also cooperated with the US in a wide range of other UN activities, ranging from health issues to cultural and scientific matters. "India has sent significant troop contingents to various peace-keeping missions around the world, serving as a partner to further our mutual interests."

"Most of the other countries that would be affected by this amendment are already barred from receiving US assistance under various sanctions, many of which have been on the books for decades. Thus, realistically, the amendment would cut $130,000 in IMET (International Military Education and Training) funding to one country, India, a democracy that shares many of our values and interests and works with us in countless positive ways," Pallone said.