STATEMENT OF SENATOR JOHN WARNER Chairman WARNER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Secretary Rumsfeld, I read, with great interest, an account of your testimony before the House yesterday. I was particularly moved by your comments with regard to Israel, its role in the 1991 episode, and the threats poised as a consequence of this extraordinary unrest relating to Iraq. I wrote the President a letter on August 2, a copy of which went to you. I went to the floor of the Senate today and put that letter in the record, expressing my deep concern about this conflict and my compassion for the people of Israel who have suffered these devastating losses. I would hope, in due course, that could be taken into consideration, because I think there's a connection between the unrest that is a consequence of the tragic disputes between the people of Israel and the Palestinian people and the options that we face as we examine the problems in Iraq. So I thank you, Mr. Chairman, for this hearing. I begin by commending President Bush for the leadership he has shown on the issue of the threat to the world, not just the United States, posed by Saddam Hussein in his relentless drive to manufacture and acquire weapons of mass destruction. We would not be holding this hearing today-we, in all likelihood, would not be having the full attention of the United Nations-had it not been for the bold leadership given by President George Bush together with the Prime Minister of Great Britain, Tony Blair, who both brought attention to the threat posed by Saddam Hussein to the whole world. I commend you, Mr. Secretary, the Secretary of State, Colin Powell, and others who have been in the very forefront of bringing into sharp focus threats posed by the weapons of mass destruction which he possesses today and which every single day he is working to augment and build. Mr. Chairman, on August 27, I wrote you, as a follow on to our previous discussions, a letter requesting that the committee hold these hearings on Iraq. You and I have concurred on a series of hearings, the details of which are forthcoming. We're going to go into this situation very carefully. [The information referred to follows:] Chairman CARL LEVIN, Committee on Armed Services, United States Senate, Washington, DC. August 27, 2002. DEAR CARL: We have been regularly discussing the role of our committee in the on-going debates in Congress and in the public on Iraq. Together, we decided to defer setting a schedule for hearings on Iraq until the Senate Foreign Relations Committee undertook an initial exploration of policy-related considerations. Those hearings, which were conducted on July 31 and August 1, turned out to be constructive and beneficial. Since the commencement of our recess on August 1, the crescendo of debate on Iraq has reached an extraordinary level, with knowledgeable people—many of whom have served in public office-rendering conscientious, constructive opinions, with a growing diversity of viewpoints. The time has come, I think you will agree, for you and I to set a schedule of hearings for our committee to explore the national security implications of possible military action against Iraq. While any schedule of hearings will follow our regular procedures for selecting witnesses, I believe we should begin with administration witnesses-preferably Secretary Rumsfeld and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs General Myers. As I look back on the 1990 and 1991 congressional activities related to Iraq, the work of our committee was crucial. Sam Nunn, as the chairman, and I, as the ranking member, held a series of hearings throughout the fall and winter of 1990, leading up to the historic debate on the Gulf War resolutions on January 10-12, 1991. As you may recall, when our committee conducted a series of hearings in 1990 following the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, our first hearing was with_then-Secretary of Defense Cheney and then-Chairman of the Joint Chiefs General Powell on September 11, 1990. I was the principal author of the resolution to authorize the use of force against Iraq, which passed by a mere five votes on January 12, 1991. Immediately following that vote, having satisfied itself that the Senate had had a full and fair debate, all united in support behind the President. This resolution is now being cited as it was during the previous administration—as one of the legal foundations for military action against Iraq. Our committee performed an essential role through its hearings in 1990 in developing the body of fact that was used during the Senate floor debate and the public debate. It is important, subject to protecting classification of certain facts, that the American people be informed. Their support is essential. While I cannot predict all that the Senate will do in the coming weeks prior to adjournment, I believe that the issue of Iraq will be central. Our committee, therefore, should convene a series of hearings on Iraq, as soon as possible, to contribute to a full body of fact for any Senate deliberations on this issue. As I read and follow the debate, there appears to be a "gap" in the facts possessed by the executive branch and the facts possessed by the legislative branch. I am encouraged that the President and his senior advisors have repeatedly stated that there will be "consultations" with Congress prior to the initiation of any military action against Iraq. Our committee has an important role to play in these consultations. We must act to provide the necessary facts so individual members can make informed decisions. Congress, as a co-equal branch of government, is, in my opinion, not going to sit on the sidelines. It is essential, I believe, in this extraordinarily complex foreign policy debate, that Congress step up and assume its responsibilities, and share with the President and the executive branch accountability to the public for such actions as may be taken regarding military action against Iraq. Speaking for myself, I do not contest the President's right, as Commander in Chief under the Constitution, to initiate the use of military force when U.S. interests are threatened. Through our 24 years in the Senate, you and I have witnessed many Senate debates over the War Powers Resolution and related issues, and those issues will not be resolved now. I do believe, as do a majority of members, that Congress has a responsibility to add its voice to the debate on an issue involving the use of U.S. military force. Hearings by our committee on Iraq are an essential first step in exercising that responsibility. We owe no less to the brave men and women of our Armed Forces, and their families, who stand by, as always, to carry out the orders of the Commander in Chief. With kind regards, I am Sincerely, JOHN WARNER, In 1990 and 1991, when I was privileged to be ranking member of the committee, together with Senator Nunn as chairman, our committee was critical in putting together a record for the historic debate on the Senate floor early in January. The committee held a series of nine hearings and two closed briefings on the situation in the Persian Gulf in the fall and winter of 1990, leading up to the debate on the Senate floor on January 10, 11, and 12, 1991. Those hearings developed the body of fact that was used during the Senate floor debate and, indeed, the equally important public debate on Iraq. The committee will fulfill that same important function today. I was privileged to be an author of the resolution that was debated on the floor, and it carried by a mere five votes. My distinguished colleague to my right, Mr. Lieberman, was my principal cosponsor on that resolution. We started the committee hearings on Iraq on Tuesday with testimony from the Director of Central Intelligence, George Tenet, and the acting Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, Rear Admiral Jake Jacoby. It was a sobering, thorough assessment that was given to all members of the committee, a common base of knowledge about the clear and growing threat that Saddam Hussein poses to the United States, to the region, and to the entire international community. In particular, Saddam Hussein's relentless pursuit of weapons of mass destruction and the means to deliver these weapons represents a present threat and an immediate challenge to the international community. Our President made that ever so clear in his speech. We must end Saddam Hussein's continued defiance of the clear pronouncements of the international community as expressed in a series of 16 U.N. Security Council resolutions, beginning with the resolution which mandated the council's terms and conditions for how the war was to end. I remind my colleagues that the Iraqis agreed in writing on April 6, 1991, in a letter to the U.N. Secretary General from the Iraqi Foreign Minister, to accept the cease-fire conditions as embodied in U.N. Security Council Resolution 687. Prior to that, we all watched as Iraqi generals, at the direction of Saddam Hussein, met in a tent at the Safwan Airfield in Iraq, with General Norman Schwarzkopf, the brave commander who led the U.S. and coalition forces to victory, to discuss the conditions for a ceasefire. Those conditions have never been met. It is now most appropriate that we hear from the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs on the role of the Department of Defense-and particularly the men and women in uniform-in implementing U.S. policy toward Iraq as that evolves. Most important is the readiness of our Armed Forces and their ability to carry out such military operations as may be directed in the future. Our President didn't go to the U.N. and declare war. He went to the U.N. to say, "It's time for you to become accountable to your charter, to your forebears, to those who conceived this organization, and to the world." One week ago, our President gave a historic speech at the United Nations, challenging the U.N. to live up to its responsibilities as stated in Article I of the U.N. Charter and "to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace." In my view, President Bush's speech was clearly one of the finest and most important speeches ever given by a head of state to the August assembly of the United Nations. The speech dramatically elevated the level of debate and the attention of the world's leaders on Iraq's conduct and continued defiance of the United Nations. It further challenged the nations of the world to think long and hard about what they expect from the United Nations. Is it to be effective and relevant and live up to its Charter, or is it to be irrelevant and fall into the dustbin of history, as did the League of Nations as the world descended into darkness in the aftermath of World War I? Of equal importance, the President's U.N. speech articulated a clear, decisive, and timely U.S. policy on Iraq, that is, to remove the threat before Iraq is able to use weapons of mass destruction now in its arsenal and every day being added to the arsenal. The U.S. is now firmly on a course to accomplish this policy and invites the nations of the world to join. I remind my colleagues that the President's policy of regime change is the same policy that Congress adopted with the unanimous support of the Senate in October of 1998 and the policy that President Clinton later endorsed and vigorously defended. Over the past several weeks, many Members of Congress and many American citizens have expressed their hope for meaningful consultations between Congress and the President, as well as consultations with our allies and the United Nations. Our President has done exactly that. It is now time for Congress to express to the people of our Nation and to the world its support squarely and overwhelming behind our President as he leads the international community. The price of inaction is far too great if the international community fails to confront this danger now, once and for all. By bringing his case to the U.N., President Bush clearly demonstrated his belief that the effort to counter Saddam Hussein is an international responsibility. The United States strongly desires multilateral action. But if the U.N. fails to act, the United States, like all other member nations under the U.N. Charter, reserves unto itself the right to take whatever action is necessary to protect our people and our Nation from the threat of Saddam Hussein. Predictably, the Iraqi regime has responded to the President's speech with a tactical move designed to fracture the consensus that was forming in the United Nations. It is merely a trap, in my opinion, to buy more time for Saddam Hussein to further delay compliance with international mandates, as expressed in the 16 U.N. Security Council resolutions. I shall not recite those resolutions, but just place them in the record. [The information referred to follows:] Saddam Hussein's Defiance of United Nations Resolutions Saddam Hussein has repeatedly violated each of the following resolutions: UNSCR 678 - November 29, 1990 • Iraq must comply fully with UNSCR 660 (regarding Iraq's illegal Invasion of Kuwait) "and all subsequent relevant resolutions." • Authorizes UN Member States "to use all necessary means to uphold and implement resolution 660 and all subsequent relevant resolutions and to restore international peace and security in the area." UNSCR 686 - March 2, 1991 • Iraq must release prisoners detained during the Gulf War. • Iraq must return Kuwaiti property seized during the Gulf War. • Iraq must accept liability under international law for damages from its illegal invasion of Kuwait. UNSCR 687 - April 3, 1991 • Iraq must "unconditionally accept" the destruction, removal or rendering harmless "under international supervision" of all "chemical and biological weapons and all stocks of agents and all related subsystems and components and all research, development, support and manufacturing facilities." • Iraq must "unconditionally agree not to acquire or develop nuclear weapons or nuclear-weapons-usable material" or any research, development or manufacturing facilities. • Iraq must "unconditionally accept" the destruction, removal or rendering harmless "under international supervision" of all "ballistic missiles with a range greater than 150 KM and related major parts and repair and production facilities." Iraq must not "use, develop, construct or acquire" any weapons of • Iraq must reaffirm its obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. • Creates the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM) to verify the elimination of Iraq's chemical and biological weapons programs and mandated that the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) verify elimination of Iraq's nuclear weapons program. |