[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 171 (Wednesday, November 1, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S16491-S16492]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                       MILITARY ACTION IN BOSNIA

  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, this is a subject which has been spoken 
about on our floor and has been the subject of action by the House--
that is, the subject of not having military action in Bosnia, which 
utilizes United States troops without prior consent by the Congress of 
the United States. This is a very, very important subject, Mr. 
President, for many reasons.
  We have learned from the bitter experience of Vietnam that the United 
States cannot successfully wage a war which does not have public 
backing, and the first indicia of public backing is approval by the 
Congress of the United States.
  We have deviated from the constitutional requirement that only the 
Congress can declare war. In Korea, we had a conflict, a war without a 
declaration of war and, again, in Vietnam. When a Republican President, 
President George Bush, wanted to act under Presidential authority to 
move into the gulf with military action, I was one of many Senators who 
stood on this floor and objected to that, because it was a matter that 
ought to have been initiated only with congressional action.
  Finally, in January 1991, in a historic debate on this floor, the 
Congress of the United States authorized the use of force, and I 
supported that policy for the use of force. But the more important 
principle involved was that the President could not act unilaterally, 
could not act on his own.
  Similarly, I think that is a mandatory consideration on the Bosnian 
situation. I have disagreed--many of us have--with the President's 
policy in Bosnia. On this floor, I have said on a number of occasions, 
as have others, that the arms embargo against the Bosnian Moslems was 
bad public policy, that the Bosnian Moslems ought to be able to defend 
themselves against Serbian atrocities.
  After the Senate voted overwhelmingly to lift that embargo, and the 
House voted overwhelmingly to lift that embargo, only then did the 
President become involved in the Bosnian situation and effectuated a 
policy of United States airstrikes. And I, among many others, argued 
with the administration and the military leaders that we should have 
undertaken airstrikes to use U.S. military power in a way which did not 
put large numbers of our troops at risk.
  We were told by the administration and by military leaders that air 
power without ground support would be ineffective. But, finally, when 
the administration was faced with no alternative, except to face a 
possible override on their veto of the legislation lifting the arms 
embargo, then, and only then, was air power employed, and very, very 
effectively. I believe that the use of U.S. air power is entirely 
appropriate, but the use of ground forces is not.
  We have seen the policy in Somalia, where this administration went 
beyond 

[[Page S 16492]]

humanitarian purposes to nation building. It was up to the Congress of 
the United States to withhold funding. That might be necessary again, 
in a very unsatisfactory way, to have the constitutional mandate that 
only the Congress can declare war, enforced through the congressional 
power of the appropriations process. It is most unsatisfactory to have 
a Presidential commitment and to have U.S. troops involved and then to 
have it terminated only by the withholding of funds.
  So it is my hope, Mr. President, that President Clinton will not act 
unilaterally, as he did in Haiti, against the overwhelming sense of the 
Senate and sense of the House that there not be an invasion of Haiti. 
Fortunately, it was done without bloodshed. But this is a 
constitutional issue of the highest import. If the President wishes to 
exercise the use of force in Bosnia, he ought to follow the 
constitutional doctrine, the precedent of the gulf war, and he ought to 
come to Congress for authorization. Then, and only then, will there be 
an appropriate opportunity to debate the matter and for Congress to 
exercise its will under the Constitution.
  On the state of the record, my view is that there ought not to be an 
American commitment of troops. But, certainly, that ought not to be 
done by the President unilaterally. The matter ought to come before the 
Congress, and it ought to be a congressional decision one way or 
another, under the constitutional provision that only the Congress has 
the authority to declare war.
  I yield the floor.

                          ____________________