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.
BACK TO TOP
|