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.