Reckless Administration May Reap Disastrous Consequences
Senate Floor Speech – Wednesday 2/12/2003, by US
Senator Robert Byrd
To contemplate war is to think about
the most horrible of human experiences. On this February day, this nation
stands at the brink 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 US 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 US intentions are suddenly subject to damaging
worldwide speculation. Anti-Americanism based on mistrust,
misinformation, suspicion, and alarming rhetoric from US 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, underfunding 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.