[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 190 (Thursday, November 30, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S17863-S17865]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                         OUR MISSION IN BOSNIA

  Mr. McCAIN. I congratulate the distinguished majority leader on a 
statesmanlike and nonpartisan statement. I will briefly add to 
it. Again, I hope his statement is paid attention to by colleagues on 
both sides of the aisle.

  I would like to restate in my opening remark what the distinguished 
majority leader has just stated, what we must understand, and what 
should be a framework for whatever debate ensues next week on the 
floor.
  The American people and my colleagues should understand one salient 
fact. The President will be sending 20,000 Americans to Bosnia for 1 
year, whether we approve or disapprove.
  We can argue about whether the President should have made the 
commitment almost 3 years ago to participate in the peace 
implementation force in Bosnia. As Senator Dole just stated, there are 
many other options I would have preferred to have employed besides this 
one. I would not have made that commitment. But the reality is the 
President did so commit and those troops are going to Bosnia.
  The President has the authority under the Constitution to do so, and 
he intends to exercise that authority with or without our approval. We 
can cut off funding, but the President will veto, and his veto will, 
without any doubt, be sustained. Even if we should force the President 
to renege on his commitment, we should understand that there would be 
very negative consequences to such an action. The credibility of the 
word of the U.S. President is an enormous strategic value of the 
American people and essential to our security. I urge my Republican 
colleagues to consider, in their deliberations on this question, how 
high a premium they would place on the credibility of a Republican 
President and place that same premium on this President's credibility. 
Our friends and enemies do not discriminate between Republican and 
Democratic Presidents when the word of an American President is given. 
When the President's word is no longer credible abroad, all Americans 
are less safe.
  Another consequence would be the severe damage to the stability of 
NATO, the most successful defensive alliance in history.
  And, finally, all signatories to the peace agreement have stated 
that, absent United States participation in the implementation force, 
the war in Bosnia will reignite. I repeat, the war in Bosnia will 
reignite and the atrocities we have all come to abhor will continue.
  Therefore, I intend to do everything in my power to ensure that our 
mission in Bosnia is, as the President said it would be, clear, limited 
and achievable, that it has the greatest chance for success with the 
least risk to the lives of our young men and women. That is our 
responsibility as much as the President's, and I intend to take that 
responsibility very seriously.

  We can best achieve this by ensuring that our Armed Forces do not 
engage in any nonmilitary activities such as refugee resettlement or 
other nation-building activities for which they are not trained. 
Therefore, we should condition our authorization of this deployment on 
the prohibition against our forces enforcing any other aspect of this 
agreement, other than the military provisions of the military annex to 
the general framework agreement.
  Further, we must ensure that the goals of their mission are clear and 
achievable and will justify, to some extent, the risk we will incur. A 
clear exit strategy is not time based but goal based. We must ensure 
that the peace we enforce for 12 months has a realistic prospect to 
endure in the 13th, 14th, 15th month and, hopefully, for years beyond 
that.
  Essential to that goal is a stable military balance. To achieve that 
balance, we will have to see to it that the Bosnian federation has the 
means and the training to provide for its own defense from aggression 
after we have withdrawn. Therefore, I believe our authorization of this 
deployment must be conditioned on the concrete assurance that the 
United States will do whatever is necessary, although without using our 
soldiers who are part of the implementation force, to ensure that the 
Bosnians can defend themselves at the end of our mission.
  Some will want to pursue military equilibrium through the arms 
builddown envisioned in the agreement, but to assume in a few months we 
can persuade all parties to build down to rough military equilibrium is 
incredibly naive. We should rightly have little faith in the prospects 
of arms control negotiations in such a short period. Therefore, we must 
insist that before we leave in a year there is a stable military 
balance which will have been achieved by helping the Bosnians to 
acquire the arms and the training to defend themselves that we have 
denied them for 4 years.
  In closing, let me again urge my Republican colleagues to consider 
very carefully the institution of the Presidency as they deliberate on 
this very difficult question. I spent much of my life defending the 
credibility and the honor of the United States. I have no intention of 
evading that responsibility now.
  Therefore, I intend to work on a resolution with Senator Dole and, 
hopefully, all of my Senate colleagues, that will maximize the 
prospects for the success of the mission and minimize American 
casualties. I am fully aware that in doing so, I will bear some of the 
responsibility in the event the mission fails. I do so readily, because 
my first responsibility is to do everything in my power to support and 
protect the fine young Americans we will send to Bosnia and to ensure 
that whatever sacrifices they will endure, they will have done so for a 
cause that was worthy and winnable.

  I yield the floor.
  Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, let me just take a moment to thank my 
colleague from Arizona. He knows as well as I do what the public 
opinion polls are showing; 80 percent, in some cases higher, ``Do not 
send the troops.'' As we have tried to point out, that is not the 
option anymore. The option is to have an exit strategy and to make 
certain that in that exit strategy we train the Bosnians so they can be 
an independent force to defend themselves so we can come home; second, 
to take every step we can to ensure the casualties will be as low as 
possible.
  The Senator from Arizona is not unaccustomed to courage and making 
courageous stands--this is another example--in the face of public 
opinion. But that is what leadership is all about. I have to believe, 
once the Americans are there starting next week and once the images on 
television are of Americans and the children and the families and the 
security they have, the attitude of Americans will change.
  The Senator from Arizona made a point that I think deserves 
repeating. That is, NATO--NATO has been very important. It has 
preserved freedom for a half century. We have given our word. In 
effect, we are NATO, as far as I am concerned, the United States. 
Without the United States as a partner in NATO, you would not have 
NATO.
  But, in addition, the President of the United States, without 
consulting Congress, but it was the President of the United States in 
1993 who, in effect, gave his word that the United States, if there 
were peace to keep, would send 20,000 Americans as part of a 60,000-
member force. Then we invited all the parties to come to Ohio, to 
Dayton, OH, where they stayed for about 3 weeks. The implication was 
clear. The Americans had taken over the negotiations. The peace talks 
had broken down. I talked with the Prime Minister of Bosnia less than 3 
hours ago. They were all packed, ready to go home; then Mr. Milosevic, 
the President of Serbia, made some concessions. But the implication 
throughout was that the United States would be the principal player. 
You cannot have peace, according to him, unless the United States is 
present. Not that they do not have great respect for the Europeans who 
have been there and the U.N. Protection Forces for the past several 
years, who lost about 200 lives total.
  So, it seems to me that our responsibility now is not to say we are 
going to pass some resolution here that says--it is only two lines 
long: ``The Senate is opposed to deploying U.S. forces.'' Let me 
repeat. They are going to be there next week, about 3,000. 

[[Page S17864]]
 They are already deployed and the others will follow.
  We do have some responsibility, when the President of the United 
States, whoever that may be, gives his word to the international 
community that this is what will happen and this is a responsibility we 
will assume.
  So, I hope we have a good debate. We hope to start it next Wednesday, 
if we can. It is not going to be easy. It is not politically popular. 
But it is the right thing to do, and sometimes it takes a while for 
people to understand when you do the right thing.
  So I commend my friend from Arizona, Senator McCain. I know he 
understands, probably better than anyone on this floor, what loss of 
freedom and loss of liberty might be like--what it was like for him for 
several years. So this is about America. This is about American forces. 
This is about our responsibility as Congress--not about Republicans and 
Democrats. It is about the Congress. As the Senator said, we could cut 
off funds. That would be vetoed. I do not think anybody wants to cut 
off funds.
  And I do not suggest everybody who has a different view is posturing. 
But there will be some of that. There always is. So, this is a very 
important time in American history.
  It is a very important commitment that the President has made. We 
wish he would have listened to us--this Senator, the Senator from 
Arizona and the Senator from Connecticut--about lifting the arms 
embargo a year ago. We would not be talking about sending American 
troops now. But that did not happen. So here we are.
  I believe the Congress will do the right thing. We will end up 
supporting U.S. forces. We will attempt to do everything we can to 
reduce casualties, and we will have an exit strategy in the resolution. 
We believe it will be bipartisan. We hope that we can have the same 
spirit of bipartisanship in the House and that we can send a resolution 
to the President for his signature --if not next week, the first part 
of the following week.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. McCAIN addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona.
  Mr. McCAIN. There is very little I can add to the eloquent words of 
the majority leader, except that I would also like to note the presence 
of the Senator from Connecticut, Senator Lieberman, who has labored 
long and hard on this issue in a very bipartisan fashion. He and I, the 
majority leader and others, will be working on this resolution so we 
can get it to the floor, get it debated, and get it passed as quickly 
as possible.
  Mr. President, often bandied about by politicians is reference to the 
Constitution of the United States. It is very clear to me that the 
President of the United States, by virtue of his election by a majority 
of the American people, has the authority to send these troops. I 
believe that it is up to us to do everything we can to ensure their 
safety, and if that means that there is some political damage inflicted 
by that decision I will hearken back to my first responsibility, and 
that is to minimize the loss of a single American life. I believe we 
can do no less.
  I want to thank the majority leader, and I look forward to hearing 
the views of my colleagues. I hope that we can work together with as 
little rancor as possible on this very emotional, divisive issue.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. LIEBERMAN addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Connecticut is recognized.
  Mr. LIEBERMAN. Mr. President, I thank the Chair.
  Mr. President, I rise to offer respectfully a word of thanks to the 
distinguished majority leader and to the Senator from Arizona.
  The Senator from Arizona described the remarks of the majority leader 
as statesmanlike. I say that the remarks of the majority leader were 
more than statesmanlike. They were, in fact, patriotic in the sense 
that, in taking the position that he has, he has put the interest of 
his country ahead of politics. All that I know about the majority 
leader says to me that one should not be surprised to see him do that. 
Nonetheless, the action he has taken today should not pass without 
being commented on, and should be appreciated.
  Senator Dole and I, Senator McCain and others, Senator Biden on this 
side, have been working in a bipartisan way now for almost 4 years 
through the administration of President Bush, and now President 
Clinton, trying to create a reaction that was effective to what we have 
seen all along--acts of aggression against Bosnia, taking advantage of 
its military weakness, and ultimately becoming not just acts of 
aggression but acts of genocide.
  The four of us, and others on both sides, ultimately becoming a 
resounding majority, a bipartisan majority, cried out for the raising 
of the arms embargo, feeling it was immoral, it was unfair, and it was 
unrelated to reality to continue to impose on the warring parties there 
an embargo that was adopted in 1991 as an attempt to stop the war from 
breaking out. But the war did break out.
  On one side, the Serbs possessed most of the military war-making 
capacity of the former Yugoslavia. On the other side, the Bosnians had 
little or none, and, as a result, they were victimized.
  Particularly after the attack by the Serbs on the undefended, so-
called ``safe haven'' of Srebrenica and the brutal, inhumane slaughter 
that occurred there, this brought the United States-led NATO to carry 
out a series of air attacks that finally convinced the aggressors that 
the rest of the world would not stand by and watch wars spread in 
Europe, watch people be slaughtered because of their religion, watch 
NATO and the United States lose their credibility and the respect that 
they enjoyed throughout the world. President Clinton led the effort in 
NATO to carry out those air strikes and then designated Secretary 
Christopher and Ambassador Holbrooke to bring the stature and force of 
the United States of America to bear to bring the parties to peace. No 
other country in the world could have done this. It is remarkable that 
each of the warring parties trust the United States more than any other 
country in the world. That is to say, that all three of them trust us. 
In Bosnia, in the Middle East, and perhaps in Northern Ireland, we have 
credibility, and we have strength. With that strength comes 
responsibility. But I would say also that with that strength and 
credibility comes increased security for each and every citizen of the 
United States.
  I agree with the commitment that President Clinton has made to send 
these 20,000 troops to be part of an international force of 60,000 
because I understand that without that commitment, there never would 
have been peace, the three warring parties would never have come to the 
peace table and our allies in NATO would never have joined to keep the 
peace. So while I strongly support the commitment that was made--and I 
understand that my friends and colleagues who have just spoken do not--
what I particularly respect and appreciate is that the Senate majority 
leader and the Senator from Arizona understand that the question now is 
not whether we all agree with the commitment that was made; the 
question now is whether we will honor that commitment. What is on the 
line there is the credibility and reliability of America's word in the 
world, of America's leadership in the world.
  Somebody asked in the Armed Services Committee hearing that we held 
on Tuesday of a panel of witnesses, three people who had served in 
various administrations, ``Is Bosnia worth dying for?'' And, of course, 
each and every one of us hopes and prays and believes that there will 
not be casualties among our forces, that we are taking every 
precaution, learning from Somalia and Haiti, and how important it is to 
limit our objectives here with the military objectives easily carried 
out, to make sure that our troops have robust rules of engagement, 
which means if their safety is threatened in the slightest they can 
strike back with overwhelming force. But we understand that there are 
risks involved in any military operation, any sending of American 
troops to a zone where there may be combat, even if it is to keep the 
peace as it is today.
  While we understand all of that, what is important here is that my 
colleagues have to answer the question which the former Under Secretary 
of Defense answered on Monday when the question was asked, ``Is Bosnia 
worth dying for?'' He said, ``That is not the right question.'' In the 
gulf war situation, 

[[Page S17865]]
after Saddam Hussein moved into Kuwait, the question appropriately 
would not have been, ``Is Kuwait worth dying for,'' because there was 
much more on the line there as there is here. What is on the line here 
is the credibility and the reliability of the word of the President of 
the United States, who alone has made this commitment and is authorized 
to execute the foreign policy of the United States.
  Five-hundred and thirty-five Members of Congress cannot be at every 
meeting, every negotiation that the President of the United States is 
involved in. The Presidency, beyond this President, must have that 
reliability, that credibility, that strength. In that strength and 
reliability rests not just some distant esoteric governmental structure 
or authority point of view; in that reliability rests the security of 
each and every American.
  So I thank my colleagues for understanding that there is more at work 
here. The reliability and credibility of our word, the controlling of a 
conflict, hopefully ending a conflict that could have spread and become 
a wider war and drawn us in later on at a much higher price, the 
renewed strength of NATO on which we will rely to help us share the 
burdens of peacekeeping, not just here but around the world.
  We called on NATO allies in 1990 and 1991 in the gulf war and said we 
needed their help, and our allies came to our assistance, fought by our 
side. Today, in effect, they in Europe are asking our help--not to do 
it all, but to provide one-third of an international force. Who knows? 
A year or two from now, we again may find that some strategic interest 
or moral principle of ours has been challenged around the world and we 
will turn to our allies in Europe and NATO and ask them for help. If we 
say no today, then what can we reasonably expect them to say to us 
tomorrow?
  So, Mr. President, I thank again the majority leader and the Senator 
from Arizona for rising above politics and partisanship, doing what is 
not popular but doing what they have concluded and I believe is best 
for our country and best for those 20,000 soldiers who are going into 
peacekeeping in Bosnia.
  The last thing I think we would want to do is to send those 20,000 
soldiers into Bosnia wondering whether they have the support of anybody 
besides the President of the United States. It is up to us in Congress, 
as representatives of the people of this country, every State and 
district of this country, to say to those brave soldiers--the finest 
fighting force that has ever existed in the history of the world, in my 
opinion--we are with you. We stand behind you. The time for partisan 
debate is over. You have a mission to do, and now we are focused on 
doing everything we can to support your mission and to help, as Senator 
Dole has said, to make sure that it can be carried out swiftly, 
successfully, and with good effect.
  I agree with my colleagues that part of that is to make sure that the 
Bosnian military is adequately armed and equipped to deter aggression 
once the NATO peacekeeping force leaves Bosnia.
  Mr. President, there are moments when not only the people of the 
United States but Members of Congress are disappointed, frustrated, 
discouraged by what happens here. There are other moments when we are 
elevated and inspired and encouraged because we see among our 
distinguished colleagues an extraordinarily able group that has been 
sent here from around the country. We see really the finest, in a sense 
I would say the most noble of human behavior, real acts of leadership, 
and I respectfully suggest that we have seen such an act from the 
Senate majority leader today and from the Senator from Arizona.
  I look forward to working with them and, hopefully, with a strong 
bipartisan majority of colleagues, to draft and then pass an 
appropriate resolution of support for those 20,000 troops and for the 
President and the Presidency that has made this commitment.
  I thank the Chair, and I yield the floor.

                          ____________________