To contemplate war is to think about the most horrible of human experiences.
On this February day, as this nation stands at the brink of battle,
every
American on some level must be contemplating the horrors of war.
Yet, this Chamber is, for the most part, silent -- ominously, dreadfully
silent. There is no debate, no discussion, no attempt to lay out for
the
nation the pros and cons of this particular war. There is nothing.
We stand passively mute in the United States Senate, paralyzed by our
own
uncertainty, seemingly stunned by the sheer turmoil of events. Only
on the
editorial pages of our newspapers is there much substantive discussion
of
the prudence or imprudence of engaging in this particular war.
And this is no small conflagration we contemplate. This is no simple
attempt
to defang a villain. No. This coming battle, if it materializes, represents
a turning point in U.S. foreign policy and possibly a turning point
in the
recent history of the world.
This nation is about to embark upon the first test of a revolutionary
doctrine applied in an extraordinary way at an unfortunate time. The
doctrine of preemption -- the idea that the United States or any other
nation can legitimately attack a nation that is not imminently threatening
but may be threatening in the future -- is a radical new twist on the
traditional idea of self defense. It appears to be in contravention
of
international law and the UN Charter. And it is being tested at a time
of
world-wide terrorism, making many countries around the globe wonder
if they
will soon be on our -- or some other nation's -- hit list. High level
Administration figures recently refused to take nuclear weapons off
of the
table when discussing a possible attack against Iraq. What could be
more
destabilizing and unwise than this type of uncertainty, particularly
in a
world where globalism has tied the vital economic and security interests
of
many nations so closely together? There are huge cracks emerging in
our
time-honored alliances, and U.S. intentions are suddenly subject to
damaging
worldwide speculation. Anti- Americanism based on mistrust, misinformation,
suspicion, and alarming rhetoric from U.S. leaders is fracturing the
once
solid alliance against global terrorism which existed after September
11.
Here at home, people are warned of imminent terrorist attacks with little
guidance as to when or where such attacks might occur. Family members
are
being called to active military duty, with no idea of the duration of
their
stay or what horrors they may face. Communities are being left with
less
than adequate police and fire protection. Other essential services are
also
short-staffed. The mood of the nation is grim. The economy is stumbling.
Fuel prices are rising and may soon spike higher.
This Administration, now in power for a little over two years, must
be
judged on its record. I believe that that record is dismal.
In that scant two years, this Administration has squandered a large
projected surplus of some $5.6 trillion over the next decade and taken
us to
projected deficits as far as the eye can see. This Administration's
domestic
policy has put many of our states in dire financial condition, under
funding
scores of essential programs for our people. This Administration has
fostered policies which have slowed economic growth. This Administration
has
ignored urgent matters such as the crisis in health care for our elderly.
This Administration has been slow to provide adequate funding for homeland
security. This Administration has been reluctant to better protect our
long
and porous borders.
In foreign policy, this Administration has failed to find Osama bin
Laden.
In fact, just yesterday we heard from him again marshaling his forces
and
urging them to kill. This Administration has split traditional alliances,
possibly crippling, for all time, International order-keeping entities
like
the United Nations and NATO. This Administration has called into question
the traditional worldwide perception of the United States as
well-intentioned, peacekeeper. This Administration has turned the patient
art of diplomacy into threats, labeling, and name calling of the sort
that
reflects quite poorly on the intelligence and sensitivity of our leaders,
and which will have consequences for years to come.
Calling heads of state pygmies, labeling whole countries as evil,
denigrating powerful European allies as irrelevant -- these types of
crude
insensitivities can do our great nation no good. We may have massive
military might, but we cannot fight a global war on terrorism alone.
We need
the cooperation and friendship of our time-honored allies as well as
the
newer found friends whom we can attract with our wealth. Our awesome
military machine will do us little good if we suffer another devastating
attack on our homeland which severely damages our economy. Our military
manpower is already stretched thin and we will need the augmenting support
of those nations who can supply troop strength, not just sign letters
cheering us on.
The war in Afghanistan has cost us $37 billion so far, yet there is
evidence
that terrorism may already be starting to regain its hold in that region.
We
have not found bin Laden, and unless we secure the peace in Afghanistan,
the
dark dens of terrorism may yet again flourish in that remote and devastated
land.
Pakistan as well is at risk of destabilizing forces. This Administration
has
not finished the first war against terrorism and yet it is eager to
embark
on another conflict with perils much greater than those in Afghanistan.
Is
our attention span that short? Have we not learned that after winning
the
war one must always secure the peace?
And yet we hear little about the aftermath of war in Iraq. In the absence
of
plans, speculation abroad is rife. Will we seize Iraq's oil fields,
becoming
an occupying power which controls the price and supply of that nation's
oil
for the foreseeable future? To whom do we propose to hand the reigns
of
power after Saddam Hussein?
Will our war inflame the Muslim world resulting in devastating attacks
on
Israel? Will Israel retaliate with its own nuclear arsenal? Will the
Jordanian and Saudi Arabian governments be toppled by radicals, bolstered
by
Iran which has much closer ties to terrorism than Iraq?
Could a disruption of the world's oil supply lead to a world-wide recession?
Has our senselessly bellicose language and our callous disregard of
the
interests and opinions of other nations increased the global race to
join
the nuclear club and made proliferation an even more lucrative practice
for
nations which need the income?
In only the space of two short years this reckless and arrogant
Administration has initiated policies which may reap disastrous consequences
for years.
One can understand the anger and shock of any President after the savage
attacks of September 11. One can appreciate the frustration of having
only a
shadow to chase and an amorphous, fleeting enemy on which it is nearly
impossible to exact retribution.
But to turn one's frustration and anger into the kind of extremely
destabilizing and dangerous foreign policy debacle that the world is
currently witnessing is inexcusable from any Administration charged
with the
awesome power and responsibility of guiding the destiny of the greatest
superpower on the planet. Frankly many of the pronouncements made by
this
Administration are outrageous. There is no other word.
Yet this chamber is hauntingly silent. On what is possibly the eve of
horrific infliction of death and destruction on the population of the
nation
of Iraq -- a population, I might add, of which over 50% is under age
15 - -
this chamber is silent. On what is possibly only days before we send
thousands of our own citizens to face unimagined horrors of chemical
and
biological warfare -- this chamber is silent. On the eve of what could
possibly be a vicious terrorist attack in retaliation for our attack
on
Iraq, it is business as usual in the United States Senate.
We are truly "sleepwalking through history." In my heart of
hearts I pray
that this great nation and its good and trusting citizens are not in
for a
rudest of awakenings.
To engage in war is always to pick a wild card. And war must always
be a
last resort, not a first choice. I truly must question the judgment
of any
President who can say that a massive unprovoked military attack on a
nation
which is over 50% children is "in the highest moral traditions
of our
country". This war is not necessary at this time. Pressure appears
to be
having a good result in Iraq. Our mistake was to put ourselves in a
corner
so quickly. Our challenge is to now find a graceful way out of a box
of our
own making. Perhaps there is still a way if we allow more time.
