[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 170 (Tuesday, October 31, 1995)]
[House]
[Pages H11568-H11569]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




  SERIOUS QUESTIONS MUST BE ANSWERED BEFORE WE COMMIT TROOPS TO BOSNIA

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Ms. Pryce). Under a previous order of the 
House, the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Chabot] is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CHABOT. Madam Speaker, I am taking time tonight, along with some 
of my colleagues, to talk about what I fear could become one of the 
most serious foreign policy blunders in memory.
  Yesterday this House sent a resounding message to President Clinton. 
The message was simple: Do not send American ground troops to Bosnia 
without the approval of Congress. And I want to point out to those 
critics in the administration that this was a bipartisan message. Three 
hundred fifteen Members, including half of the President's own party in 
this body, voted in favor of this sense-of-the-House resolution.
  Yesterday's vote was a first step, and I want to emphasize first 
step, in this matter, and now I am confident that this House will take 
even stronger action in the coming days. Our colleagues, the gentleman 
from Colorado [Mr. Hefley] and the gentleman from California [Mr. 
Rohrabacher], have introduced a binding legislative bill that will 
require the Clinton administration to seek the authorization of 
Congress before deploying any ground troops 

[[Page H11569]]

into Bosnia. We are not talking politics here, as much as the President 
would like to make this a partisan issue. We are talking about 
Congress' plenary control of the power of the purse and its moral 
obligation to address this fundamental policy issue. I fully expect 
this House to exercise its constitutional authority in the very near 
future.
  Madam Speaker, many of us in the Congress have a number of very 
serious questions we would like the Clinton administration to answer, 
and to date those answers have been few and far between. For instance, 
what kind of risk to our troops are we talking about? What is this 
operation going to cost in terms of American lives? Almost certainly 
there will be casualties in that treacherous and mountainous region of 
the world.
  I explicitly asked the Vice President for the administration's 
casualty estimates weeks ago, but I have not yet received an answer, 
not one word, from the administration on this matter. What is it going 
to cost in terms of taxpayer dollars? And where is the money going to 
come from? What are the rules of engagement? What happens the first 
time a stray bullet hits an American peacekeeper? What is the exit 
strategy?
  Madam Speaker, Secretaries Christopher and Perry insist that troops 
will be home in a year. Few believe that, but, if so, then what? An 
outbreak of lasting peace in the Balkans? If you believe that, I have 
got a bridge I would like to sell to you.
  These are critical questions, and the answers, are not forthcoming 
from the White House.
  Now I would submit that there is a reason that those answers have not 
been forthcoming. The reasons is that there is no clear mission. 
President Clinton mistakenly, and apparently without consulting anybody 
in Congress, promised to send American ground troops to Bosnia in the 
event of a peace agreement. If he had bothered to ask, somebody would 
have told him that the last three peace agreements in Bosnia have been 
dismal failures and that the presence of American troops in that 
troubled region would likely do little to improve the attitudes of the 
warring parties.
  Does President Clinton have the support of the American people in 
this instance? Absolutely not. I have received numerous calls and 
letters in my particular district in Cincinnati from people who have 
urged me to prevent United States troops from going in on the ground in 
Bosnia. I am still waiting for one call or one letter from anybody who 
thinks it is a good idea to send young Americans into Bosnia on the 
ground.
  One of the major newspapers in my district, the Cincinnati Enquirer, 
published an editorial last week which I think sums up the views of 
most of my constituents and the constituents of many other Members in 
this body, and I would like to insert that in the Record at this point. 
This is a copy of the article:

                [The Cincinnati Enquire, Oct. 24, 1995]

  No Way--Sending U.S. Troops to Bosnia Would be a Disastrous Blunder

       It may throw a wet blanket on the United Nations' 50th 
     birthday party, but someone besides Russian President Boris 
     Yeltsin should ask some tough questions about the U.N. 
     debacle in Bosnia.
       Start by asking President Clinton: How can a contortionist 
     who twisted himself into ethical pretzels to avoid Vietnam, 
     send 20,000 U.S. troops marching into quicksand in Bosni?
       The echoes of Vietnam are unmistakable: Another war in 
     which unsupported troops fight for unexplained goals in an 
     ungrateful land. For all his recent rhetoric about rescuing 
     NATO and performing a ``peacekeeping'' role, Clinton still 
     has not offered a reason why one American life -- much less 
     20,000 -- should be risked for a shameful paper ``peace'' 
     that ratifies the rape and plunder of Bosnia.
       The fragile truce now in effect (between attacks) exists 
     only because the Bosnian Serbs dread Croatain attacks more 
     than air strikes or U.N. scolding. Bloodthirsty Bosnian Serbs 
     who bombarded unarmed cities are fleeing from the Croatian 
     army.
       So now they suddenly want to talk peace. If a real peace 
     agreement can be worked out in talk that begin Oct. 31 at 
     Wright-Patterson Air Force Base in Ohio, there will be plenty 
     of soldiers on all side to enforce it.
       Sending U.S. troops into a flammable pit of ethnic hatred, 
     where death has been a fact of life since 1992, will invite 
     hostage taking and terrorism against our soldiers, to inflame 
     American outrage against Clinton's policy. Somalia and the 
     near-loss of a U.S. flier in Bosnia should be fresh, painful 
     reminder that it is sheer folly to gamble American blood in a 
     game where our nation has no cards to play.
       If that's not enough Clinton can recall his own protests 
     against Vietnam.
       Instead, he threatens to invoke his presidential war powers 
     to send troops, even if Congress balks.
       Clinton's crew is already squishy, backing down on promises 
     that U.S. troops would be out in one year. Former Defense 
     Secretary Dick Cheney told CBS, ``To talk about a timetable 
     that we will be out within a year, when do don't know what 
     the objective is, and haven't really develop a plan for 
     executing that, raises serious questions about the quality of 
     the decision making process within the administration.''
       After leaving Bosnia policy on U.N. cruise control until it 
     ran into a ditch, Clinton now wants to floorboard U.S. 
     intervention. If he does, it will take more than a wrecker to 
     pull us out.

  Madam Speaker, I want to stress again this is not a partisan issue. 
This is an issue where first and foremost we are talking about American 
lives, young men and young women who may be sent to die in a foreign 
land. We all remember the tragedy in Lebanon. Who can forget the image 
of those flag-draped caskets coming home from a peacekeeping mission in 
a land where there was no peace? And we remember the more recent 
tragedies when this Government sent more of its young people on a 
loosely defined mission to Somalia. The image of that young American 
soldier's body being dragged through the streets is forever etched in 
our memories.
  Madam Speaker, let us not commit our young soldiers to another so-
called peacekeeping mission which is doomed to failure. Let us put a 
stop to this ill-advised Bosnian plan before it is too late.

                          ____________________