Reckless Administration May Reap Disastrous Consequences
by US Senator Robert Byrd
Senate Floor Speech - Wednesday, February 12, 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. |
