by US Senator Robert Byrd
Wednesday 12 February 2003
"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.
Satement by US Senator Robert Byrd
-
Type: discussion