[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 128 (Wednesday, September 23, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S10796-S10800]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
THE SITUATION IN KOSOVO
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, in the already strife-torn region of the
former Yugoslavia, the new year of 1998 was initiated with a new
declaration of war. A then-small group of pro-independence rebels
calling themselves the Kosovo Liberation Army announced its intention
to fight for the independence of the Kosovo region of what remains of
Yugoslavia. With the wounds from Bosnia still festering and U.S. and
allied troops seemingly locked-into an intractable peacekeeping
operation with no end in sight, Europe and the United States once again
found themselves with a serious dilemma involving life and death
decisions. The subsequent nine months of conflict in the Albanian
majority province of Serbia have illuminated the degree to which the
enlightened nations of the West continue to wrestle with the most
fundamental tenets of conflict prevention and resolution. The results
are not impressive.
We have not lacked for rhetoric, but we have proven woefully
inadequate at backing up our words with resolute action. Relatively
early in the conflict, but long after the gravity of the situation was
apparent, Secretary of State Albright warned that Serbia would ``pay a
price'' for its characteristically scorched-earth military campaign
against the KLA and its ethnic Albanian supporters. ``We are not going
to stand by and watch . . .,'' she declared, while ``. . . Serbian
authorities do in Kosovo what they can no longer get away with doing in
Bosnia.''
During the June meeting in Luxembourg of the European Union foreign
ministers, Britain's Foreign Secretary Robin Cook was quoted as
stating, ``Modern Europe will not tolerate the full might of an army
being used against civilian centers.'' A few days later, as reported by
the Washington Post,
Yugoslavia's reply to threats of NATO airstrikes could be
heard for miles around. The nightly bombardment of border
villages occupied by rebels of the Kosovo Liberation Army has
unleashed a flood of tens of thousands of refugees. Caught in
the cross-fire, they have seen their homes shelled, then
torched by government forces in what other nations and
international organizations have denounced as ``ethnic
cleansing''.
The next day, NATO fighter jets streaked across Albanian skies in a
show of force that was less than the sum of its parts. ``I'm very
glad,'' one Albanian said, ``because it shows that [NATO is] for the
liberation of Kosovo.'' In less time than it took our fighters to land
at Aviano, though, U.S. and allied credibility had descended to new
depths, and the victims of Serb aggression were once again lulled into
a false sense of security. United States foreign policy in the Balkans
has once again been shattered by the reality of a dictatorial regime
adept at manipulating the anemic diplomatic process that resulted in
tens of thousands of deaths in Bosnia and has now left Kosovo in ruins.
By conducting that aerial show of force back in June without
following-through, and by repeatedly allowing the regime of Yugoslav
President Slobodan Milosevic to employ his tactics from Bosnia of
professing compliance with United Nations demands one day only to
return to his policy of ethnic cleansing the next, the United Nations
has failed to accomplish the overriding goal for which it was created:
the resolution of conflict so that the crimes of the past would not be
repeated in the future. Mr. President, the scale of human tragedy
before us cries out for a European response that it has heretofore been
unwilling to countenance.
There is no question that Russian and Chinese opposition to Security
Council resolutions authorizing the use of force to compel Serb
compliance has been a serious, and tragic, obstacle to the kind of
resolute response circumstances demand. It is also inarguably difficult
to castigate the United Nations while simultaneously insisting that
United States and NATO policy should not be subordinate to the dictates
of the U.N. with regard to a conflict so central to European stability.
As is often the case in international relations these days, we do not
enjoy the luxury of the level of clarity prevalent during the Cold War
when Europe was firmly and evenly divided between competing centers of
power.
Europe must take responsibility for the security of the Balkins. The
United States cannot and should not be vested with responsibility for
maintaining security in the Balkins in perpetuity. Putting aside for a
moment the utter inability of the current Administration to articulate
and implement a sound policy with regard to Kosovo, both the
[[Page S10797]]
United States and Europe must come to terms once and for all with the
central imperative of supporting diplomacy with force.
Right now, the Serbs are conducting a major offensive against the
remnants of the KLA. In fact, this latest offensive cannot truthfully
be characterized as counterinsurgency in nature; the cold, hard fact
is, as with Bosnia before it, the Serb nation is carrying out the very
type of brutal, inhumane ethnic cleansing for which it was universally
criticized prior to the Dayton Accords. As with Bosnia, a strong,
meaningful--and I emphasize ``meaningful''--employment of military
power against Serb military forces and associated infrastructure at the
outset could have prevented the scale of devastation that has
subsequently transpired. Will Europe learn? If history is a guide, the
lessons for other peoples subject to domination by stronger neighbors
are not positive.
Our former majority leader, Bob Dole, upon returning from Kosovo,
stated that ``American and European leaders have pledged not to allow
the crimes against humanity which we witnessed in Bosnia to occur in
Kosovo. But from what I have seen, such crimes are already happening.''
Mr. President, prominently displayed in the United Nations building
in New York is Picasso's famous and haunting ``Guernica.'' That
painting symbolized for the artist the carnage, the human suffering on
an enormous scale, that resulted from the Spanish Civil War--a prelude
to the Second World War. Perhaps it is too abstract for those countries
in the United Nations that oppose the use of force to stop the
atrocities that have come to symbolize the former Yugoslavia, or that
believe the war in Kosovo is the internal business of Serbia. A few
minutes away from here is a reminder of what happens when Edmund
Burke's adage that ``all that is necessary for the triumph of evil is
for good men to do nothing'' is ignored.
Ethnic cleansing is not an abstract concept in the Holocaust Memorial
Museum. Technology has advanced to wondrous degrees during this
century, but the basic nature of man remains the same. He is capable of
great good; he is just as equally capable of the kind of actions that
have made places like Auschwitz, Cambodia, Rwanda, Srebrenica, the
Gulag Archipelego, and Nanking synonymous with sorrow. To this list,
will we have to add Kosovo? The situation is clearly not at that stage,
but the onset of winter could change that very quickly, with
implications that I don't want my small children to have to read about
in their history books with shame.
The Europeans have never been very adept at maintaining peace within
and between their boundaries. It is instructive that the longest single
period of peace the continent has experienced was during the Cold War
when the United States stationed over 300,000 troops there. That troop
strength has since been reduced by two-thirds, and the stabilizing
aspects of the bipolar structure are gone. The turbulence of the post-
Cold War world demands a level of competence on the part of those
entrusted with our national security and foreign policy that is sadly
lacking. The history of the conflicts in Bosnia and Kosovo are
histories of threats not carried out and of the strong being
outmaneuvered by the weaker. This Administration's conduct of diplomacy
with regard to Serbia, North Korea and Iraq is somewhat akin to what
would happen if Thucydides' Melian Dialogue were reversed, and the weak
were dictating terms to the strong.
But the stakes here are real. The situation in Kosovo is potentially
more dangerous than was the case in Bosnia. The KLA's professed long-
term goal of uniting the Albanian populations of Kosovo, Macedonia and
Albania into a greater Albania cannot be ignored. The conduct of
Serbia's campaign against the insurgents similarly holds the potential
for spreading beyond the confines of that beleaguered province. We
cannot afford the level of diplomatic ineptitude that has been
prevalent with regard to the former Yugoslavia since 1992.
The United Nations' stagnation as an instrument of conflict
resolution during the Cold War was, to an extent, understandable. Its
failure in the Balkans, however, is a very bad omen indeed for its
ability to perform its most essential core task. The Clinton
Administration's inability to comprehend the limitations of that body--
the U.N. is, after all, comprised of nations and not of ideals--do not
augur well for the protection of United States security interests
abroad. NATO, meanwhile, continues its contingency planning with a
range of military options, but anything less than truly decisive force
that makes the regime in Belgrade fear for its survival will leave us
with a battle yet to be fought, just as it has in Iraq. A token number
of cruise missiles will cost a lot of money, but will not accomplish
our goals. Missing is a strategy for ending the conflict, vice
compelling President Milosevic to agree to talk about negotiations. The
employment of military force must be sufficient to destroy the internal
power structure that sustains those prosecuting crimes against
humanity. In short, NATO must either be prepared to do what militaries
are trained to do, prevail, or it will reap limited gains of short
duration.
Mr. President, people are dying. Prevarication, the modus operandi of
this administration when decisive actions are required, carries a price
in lives. The world will look to this body for a glimpse of the level
of U.S. resolve, seeing little in the White House. That is a burden we
must face with the grace and dignity and moral fortitude that comes
from representing the citizens of the greatest country in history. It
is a burden that carries with it implications that none should take
lightly. Not just in Kosovo but elsewhere where our interests are
threatened, the world must know that the United States will stand firm
and will not follow the path that leads to the inclusion of more places
in the list of sorrow.
Mr. President, last night I was at a function here in Washington. All
of us who are Members of the Senate attend many functions, many of them
nightly. This was kind of a special evening, at least for many of us,
and that is because we honored Senator Bob Dole, our former majority
leader of the Senate and former nominee of our party for President of
the United States.
Bob Dole gave a moving, persuasive and compelling speech, probably
the likes of which I have never heard him give in the many years I have
been a friend and a compatriot of Senator Dole.
This speech that he gave last night, Mr. President, was so strong and
so compelling that I ask unanimous consent that it, along with my
introduction, be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
Remarks by Senator John McCain Awarding the IRI 1998 Freedom Award to
Senator Robert Dole, September 22, 1998
If you will permit me, I would now like to talk a little
bit about some other attributes of Senator Dole's character.
It is my privilege tonight to present the 1998 Freedom Award
to Bob, and to make a few, brief remarks explaining why the
IRI Board of Directors was pleased to recognize with this
award Bob's contribution to the American cause--the cause of
freedom.
I am at a little disadvantage, however. Two years ago, when
Bob honored me by asking me to place his name in nomination
at the Republican Convention in San Diego, I tried as best I
could to state succinctly why I admire Bob so much, and why I
thought he would make a great president. I fear that there is
little I can offer tonight that would be a truer expression
of my regard for Bob than the thoughts I offered in that
speech. So I thought I would begin by doing what most
politicians love to do: and that is, by quoting myself.
I wanted to open my speech in San Diego with a statement
that would encompass all the reasons I believe Bob Dole to be
such an honorable man; what it was that so distinguished Bob
that I thought him worthy to hold the highest office in the
land. After considerable thought on the matter, I came up
with a description of Bob's character that could also serve
as a pretty good definition of patriotism. It reads as
follows:
``In America we celebrate the virtues of the quiet hero;
the modest man who does his duty without complaint or
expectation of praise; the man who listens closely for the
call of his country, and when she calls, he answers without
reservation, not for fame or reward, but for love. He loves
his country.''
Today, no less than two years ago, Bob Dole and patriotism
are synonymous to me. He loves his country, and has served
her faithfully and well all of his adult life. And though his
country is honored by his service, he has asked nothing of
his country in return save the opportunity to serve her
further.
He loves his country's cause, and has since he took up arms
many years ago to defend
[[Page S10798]]
American freedom, been a champion for the cause of freedom
wherever it is opposed. He was and is an outspoken advocate
for all those who are denied their God-given rights to life,
liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
His was among the first voices to bring America's attention
to the terrible assault on human life and dignity in Bosnia.
For many years, he has tried to alert the world to the
persecution of ethnic Albanians in Kosovo. From the Balkans
to Latin America, he has distinguished himself as an ardent
defender of the rights of Man, as many people who have
struggled courageously to claim those rights would attest.
He has done so, I believe, because he had cause in his life
to appreciate how sacred are those rights, and how great are
the sacrifices that are too often necessary to defend them.
``There is nothing good about war,'' Bob once wrote, ``for
those who have known the horror of battle. Only causes can be
good.'' And of his war, the Second World War, he wrote,
``millions of servicemen like myself found a cause to justify
the greatest losses.''
They were losses that Lieutenant Bob Dole witnessed
personally, suffered personally. But the experience did not
embitter him, but only reaffirmed for him the nobility of the
cause he served. And he has, since the day he lay wounded in
a valley in Northern Italy, found his honor in service to
that cause.
Speaking of America, Bob could have been speaking of
himself when he said that in war, America ``found its
mission. It was a mission unique in human history and
uniquely American in its idealism: to influence without
conquest and to hold democratic ideals in sacred trust while
many people waited in captivity.''
The word ``duty'' was once as common to our political
lexicon as the words ``soundbite'' and ``spin control'' are
today. We don't hear it mentioned much anymore. Rarely do
public office holders offer the pledge that we once expected
of all public officials: to do their duty as God has given
them light to see it.
Of course, we do have an abundance of pledges in politics
today. At times, we seem to be practically drowning in them,
and as another election approaches I'm sure we will hear them
all more than once. But what we should hear more, what I
believe every American wants to hear, is the most solemn
promise of all--the promise to put the country's interest
before our self-interest.
I think the American people are almost desperate to believe
once again that their leaders conceive of their duty in no
lesser terms than that: to put the country and its cause
first, and to that end, to pledge, as our Founding Fathers
once memorably pledged, our lives, our fortunes and our
sacred honor.
Bob Dole always construed his duty in those terms,
believing that to do otherwise would not only ill-serve his
country, but shame him personally. Not once, in his long
years of service, has Bob given this country any reason to
doubt that he has always done his duty, that he has always
put his country first.
Late in 1995, President Clinton decided to commit American
troops to Bosnia in the hope that they might keep the peace
while the principles of the Dayton Accords took root in that
sad country. The decision was not overwhelmingly popular in
Congress, even less so among many Republicans who worried
that the mission was ill-defined, and the problem too distant
from American interests to justify risking American lives. I
must admit that I, too, harbored strong doubts, and still do
about the mission.
Bob had his misgivings as well, although he believed
strongly, devoutly, that rendering assistance to the victims
of aggression and unspeakable human atrocities wherever they
were suffering was always America's business. So, he resolved
to support the President's decision, and win from the Senate
he led an expression of our support as well. It was neither
an easy task nor a universally popular one within our own
caucus.
Bob's opponents for the Republican presidential nomination
had already spoken out in opposition to the decision, and
were beginning to put extraordinary pressure on Bob to do
likewise.
Were he to win the nomination he would be running against
the man whose controversial decision to put Americans into
harm's way Bob had now resolved to defend. You will remember,
at the time, most people expected our soldiers to suffer more
than a few casualties. I suspect more than one of Bob's
campaign consultants advised him to walk away from the issue;
to let someone else assume the burden of supporting our
troops. But Bob conceived his duty differently.
He is a good Republican, but he is an American first. He
has personal ambitions, but they are secondary to his ideals
and his ambitions for his country. The President had decided
to send American soldiers to Bosnia, and so they would go.
Bob Dole intended to stand with them. They would risk their
lives for a just cause. Bob Dole would risk his ambitions for
them.
It was a simple, and these days, all too rare act of
patriotism from a public servant who cannot conceive of
sacrificing his country's interests for personal gain.
I have never been prouder of any man than I was of Bob Dole
on that day when he reminded me how great a love is love of
country, and how richly God has blessed America to spare us
leaders, when we need them most, of courage and conscience.
Bob Dole has, through all the vicissitudes and temptations
of a long life in public service, stayed true to his mission,
the mission he glimpsed in a long ago battle on a now
tranquil field in Italy. He has done his duty, as God gave
him light to see his duty. And he has been a credit to
America and American ideals.
Bob's hero has always been another Kansan, Dwight David
Eisenhower, and he took as the model of faithful, honorable
service that exacting sense of duty that characterized
Eisenhower's leadership in war and peace. In all the
voluminous archives of President Eisenhower's papers, no
single article expresses more perfectly his decency, his
courage, and his sense of personal responsibility to America
than does the statement he wrote on the night before the
allied invasion of France.
Prayerful that the invasion would succeed, but prepared for
it to fail, General Eisenhower sat down, alone, to write a
statement that assigned the blame for the decision should D-
Day prove the calamity many feared it would be. He assigned
it to himself, and himself alone.
``Our landings in the Cherbourge-Havre area have failed to
gain a satisfactory foothold and I have withdrawn the troops.
My decision to attack at this time and place was based upon
the best information available. The troops, the air and the
Navy did all that bravery and devotion to duty could do. If
any blame or fault attends to the attempt, it is mine
alone.''
When, by the end of June 6, it became clear that the allied
forces had, against daunting odds, accomplished most of their
initial objectives, and the invasion had been a success,
Eisenhower simply crumpled up the statement and threw it into
a waste basket. His foresighted aide retrieved the paper and
persuaded the General to preserve it for posterity so that
Americans might someday benefit from his example of
patriotism and principled leadership.
It is more than fitting, Bob, that IRI's 1998 Freedom Award
include as a testament to your service, a rare copy of the
original hand-written note by General Eisenhower provided to
us by the Eisenhower Library in Atchison, Kansas. I take
great pleasure in presenting it to you along with photograph
of the General addressing his troops on the eve of D-Day, and
a first edition copy of his personal account of the war,
Crusade in Europe.
In addition, IRI is privileged to make a contribution in
your name to the cause that is today so close to your heart,
and which you serve as National Co-Chairman, the World War II
Memorial Campaign. We offer this award to you with the
knowledge that it is but a small expression of the esteem you
are held in by IRI, everyone here tonight, and by the
millions of people whose aspirations IRI was formed to
support.
But the most important tribute we can offer you is to
simply observe of those Americans who with you once
sacrificed for something greater than their self-interest--
those who came home with you to the country they loved so
dearly, and those who rest forever in the European
cemeteries--how proud they must be of you for having honored
so well, in the many years since the guns fell silent in
Europe, their faith and yours in the America of our hearts,
the last, best hope of Earth.
____
Speech delivered by Senator Bob Dole to the International Republican
Institute, September 22, 1998
Senator McCain, Friends, Ladies and Gentlemen: It is a
genuine honor to receive the Freedom Award from the
International Republican Institute. It is an honor to be
recognized by the IRI and also to be in the company of
previous recipients, such as President Reagan and Colin
Powell.
The IRI has made promoting freedom around the world its
mission. In Latin America, Africa and Europe--in countries
like Burma, Cambodia, Haiti, and Mexico. Bulgaria, Romania
and Belarus, South Africa and Angola, the IRI has worked to
promote freedom and in so doing, has made a real difference.
Ask President Constantinescu how valuable IRI's training was.
The proof was in the stunning 1996 election results that
finally put Romania on the road to democracy.
IRI's mission is based on the recognition that there cannot
be freedom without democracy, rule of law and free market
economics. The IRI's job is to turn the legacy of communism
and dictatorship into a future of liberty and prosperity.
This is a monumentally important task.
I would like to commend the IRI staff and join in
recognizing those staff that are here from Nicaragua, Romania
and South Africa. The process of democratization is not an
easy one--especially in countries like these which have a
recent history of great strife, inequality and lack of
liberty. Because of individuals like those recognized this
evening and because of organizations like IRI, there is not
only hope, but amazing progress--progress that would not have
been imaginable two decades ago.
Tonight, I would like to take a few minutes to talk about a
matter which I believe is of great importance to America--and
of direct relevance to the critically important work of the
IRI in fostering freedom. That is the situation in Kosovo.
Last Friday I met with President Clinton and National
Security Adviser Berger to discuss this growing crisis. I
told them what I witnessed and what I believed must be done.
This is what I would like to share with you this evening.
[[Page S10799]]
There is a war going on right now in Kosovo because the
United States, for nearly a decade, did not make liberty,
democracy and free market economics the priority in the
former Yugoslavia.
If the United States had made its priority in the former
Yugoslavia democracy as opposed to unity, if the United
States had promoted reform, instead of status quo, if the
United States had isolated dictator Slobodan Milosevic,
instead of embracing him, I believe we would not have seen
three wars in the Balkans and would not now be witnessing the
fourth--and perhaps the most dangerous conflict there since
1991.
Last week, I returned from a human rights and fact-finding
mission to Kosovo with the very able Assistant Secretary John
Shattuck. I was last in Kosovo in 1990, when the repression
against the Kosovo Albanians had just begun. The Kosovars had
been stripped of their political autonomy; the beginning of
an apartheid-like system was just becoming apparent. Upon my
return, I joined the few voices warning the US State
Department, Pentagon and White House that war would come to
Yugoslavia. And, it did. First Slovenia, then Croatia and not
long after, Bosnia.
As terrible as the war in Bosnia proved to be, the war that
both the Bush and Clinton administrations feared most was in
Kosovo--where it seemed inevitable that conflict would easily
spread into neighboring countries, thus destabilizing the
entire region. In 1992, President Bush warned Serbian leader
Slobodan Milosevic that the United States was prepared to use
military force against Serb-instigated attacks in Kosovo.
When he took office, President Clinton repeated this so-
called ``Christmas warning.''
Now six years later, Milosevic is again on the warpath.
Based on what I saw two weeks ago, there should be no doubt
that Serbia is engaged in major, systematic attacks on the
people and territory of Kosovo.
Prior to my trip, I had seen some television reports of the
suffering in Kosovo. These few images, however, were only a
pale reflection of the widespread devastation of lives,
property, and society. Many homes have been firebombed; we
saw one home ablaze only yards away from a Serb police
checkpoint. Entire villages have been abandoned. We
encountered armed Serbian police every couple of miles and
twenty checkpoints in just six hours.
The Albanians we met--mostly women, children and, the
elderly ``are living in fear for their lives. They are afraid
to go where there are Serb police or other Serb armed forces.
And so, despite the near freezing temperatures at night,
hundreds of thousands of Kosovar Albanians remain hiding in
the hills--without adequate food, water or shelter. Many
thousands no longer have homes to return to. The children, in
particular, are already showing signs of a vitamin deficient
diet; they have sores on their mouths and most have scabies
or other skin ailments resulting from a lack of sufficient
hygiene. Humanitarian aid personnel are being harassed and
even attacked. These aid organizations do not enjoy freedom
of access, nor can they bring in certain critical supplies
because Belgrade has placed an internal embargo on them.
During our visit, we also heard chilling testimony from
eyewitnesses to human rights abuses and atrocities, including
direct artillery attacks on civilians; seizures at gun point;
and, as in Srebrenica in Bosnia, the separation of women and
children from men.
There may be some even in this audience who may think this
is a terrible humanitarian disaster, but why is it important
to the United States? What does it have to do with freedom
and democracy and American interests?
Yes, with hundreds of thousands of displaced persons and
winter fast approaching, Kosovo is a humanitarian and human
rights catastrophe. However, the problem in Kosovo is not a
humanitarian one. It is a political and military crisis,
whose most visible symptoms are humanitarian.
And so, while more humanitarian aid is desperately needed,
such assistance will not solve the problem. And not solving
the problem means that stability in that entire region--from
Montenegro to Albania, Macedonia and Greece--is dangerously
threatened.
America cannot wait three years, as it did in Bosnia, to
deal effectively with this foreign policy crisis. We cannot
afford to wait three months--for humanitarian and geo-
political reasons. Tiny Montenegro has closed its doors to
fleeing Kosovars, burdened under the strain of thousands
already seeking refugee there and by the struggle to distance
itself from Milosevic. Albania is on the brink of anarchy. In
the blink of an eye, violence could spread into Macedonia and
tear that fragile new democracy in two.
And what is the American policy response at this moment?
Active participation in diplomatic meetings that result in
policy statements calling on Slobodan Milosevic to halt his
attacks on Kosovo. In short, tough talk and no action.
As in Bosnia, America is asking the victims to negotiate
with those who are attacking them. As in Bosnia, there is a
real attempt to impose a moral equivalence--this time between
Serbian forces and the rag-tag band of Albanians, known as
the KLA, who have taken up arms against them. As in Bosnia,
the United States is not leading its allies, but hiding
behind their indecision. As in Bosnia, instead of firing up
the engines, NATO is firing up excuses.
The bottom line is that once again, Western diplomats are
trying to avoid the difficult decisions and are desperate not
to take on the person most responsible for the misery,
suffering and instability not only in Serbia, but the region:
Slobodan Milosevic. As my friend Jeane, who is here tonight,
has stated, Bosnia represents the single biggest foreign
policy failure of the United States since World War II.
Are we ready to repeat that failure?
As the diplomats' argument often goes, the situation on
Kosovo is ``complicated'' and NATO needs UN Security Council
authorization to act. Both of these assertions are dead
wrong. First, the situation is not complicated. Indeed, it
could not be clearer: This is a war against civilians, and we
know who is responsible: Slobodan Milosevic. Second, NATO
does not need and should not seek UN Security Council
resolution authorizing it to take action to respond to a
crisis in Europe that threatens stability in the region. All
NATO needs is some leaderhsip--from the United States first
and foremost, and then from Britain, France and Germany.
Let us not forget that NATO's credibility suffered in
Bosnia when it acted as a subcontractor to the United
Nations. Tying NATO to the UN now--with respect to Kosovo--
will repeat that mistake. And, this time it could have an
even more damaging effect on the credibility and relevance of
the Atlantic Alliance.
When Secretary Shattuck and I met with Milosevic two weeks
ago, he did not act like a man cowering in fear of NATO
action. Instead, he acted like a man who had already gotten
away with murder and would be rewarded for it. Milosevic
denied any offensives were underway or being planned, yet
within 36 hours of our departure, a serious offensive was
begun in the region of Pec.
The time is long overdue for the US to embrace a policy
that will end Milosevic's reign of terror. The United States
had the opportunity to do so when Milosevic was shelling the
ancient Croatian port city of Dubrovnik in 1991. It did not.
The United States had the opportunity again when the citizens
of Sarajevo first had to man the barricades of their city in
1992. It did not. The United States had its most significant
opportunity to do so at Dayton and did not. Indeed, the
Clinton Administration's failure to address the status of
Kosovo at Dayton may be the single greatest failure of the
already badly-flawed Dayton peace process.
The United States and its NATO allies must press urgently
for a cease-fire and a simultaneous withdrawal of Serbian
police and military forces by a date certain. the KLA must
also commit not to attack. NATO must back this ultimatum with
a plan to use major force immediately and effectively against
Serb military assets if all of the conditions laid out are
not met.
Let me be clear, the only language Milosevic understands is
force.
With a cease-fire and withdrawal of all Serbian police and
Yugoslavia Army forces, people can safely return to their
homes and rebuild their lives with international assistance.
There would also be progress on the diplomatic front. Only
if civilians are not under attack can Albanians and Serbian
leaders engage in genuine negotiations--on a level playing
field--with the goal of achieving a sustainable peace that is
built on democratic institutions. Such a peace would
guarantee that instability would not spread into Montenegro,
Macedonia or Albania.
Let me also emphasize that a peace based on democratic
principles and the creation of democratic institutions would
also serve to strengthen the position of the fledgling
democratic opposition in Serbia--especially by depriving
Milosevic of the opportunity to distract Serb citizens from
their deteriorating economy and near-pariah position in
Europe. Such a deal would provide significant momentum to the
democratization process, momentum which the IRI could
capitalize on by expanding its programs there.
In conclusion, let me emphasize that half-measures and
interim deals will not do. The options are not easy, but that
cannot be a justification for Bank-Aid diplomacy. Over the
past eight years numerous opportunities have been wasted.
American officials at the highest levels have publicly
pledged not to allow the crimes against humanity that we
witnessed in Bosnia to be repeated in Kosovo. From what I
have seen first-hand, such crimes are already occurring--and
the ramifications will not be limited to the plight of the
Kosovars.
Freedom and liberty--the principles that America stands
for--are at stake. American credibility and European
stability are on the line. What is urgently needed now is
American leadership and a firm commitment to a genuine and
just peace in Kosovo. It is my hope that President Clinton
will do the right thing and that there will be strong
support--among Republicans and Democrats. Many of you here
tonight can play a role in forging broad bipartisan support
for American resolve to end this conflict once and for all.
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, Senator Dole spoke about the crisis in
Kosovo. We all know that with the ongoing scandal in our Nation's
Capital, many of our important national security issues are being
ignored, whether it be Iraq or Korea or the Middle East peace process.
But Bob Dole focused the attention and riveted the attention of the
audience last night, as he did in a recent op-ed piece in the
Washington Post, on this terrible situation that exists today and the
impending terrible
[[Page S10800]]
tragedies that will ensue in Kosovo with the onset of winter.
Bob Dole pointed out that literally hundreds of thousands of people
of Albanian nationality are in the mountains around Kosovo. These
people will freeze to death, they will starve to death, and they will
die by the thousands and thousands if something isn't done and done
quickly.
Bob Dole's speech and his commitment on this issue should serve as a
compelling call to this administration to act--to act--on Kosovo in
consultation with the Congress of the United States and the American
people.
Six months ago, the Secretary of State of the United States of
America stated we will not allow the Serbs to do in Kosovo what we have
prevented them from doing in Bosnia, and exactly what we prevented in
Bosnia is taking place in Kosovo at the cost of possibly hundreds of
thousands of innocent lives.
I urge all of my colleagues to read the speech that Bob Dole
delivered last night, which has already been printed in the Record.
Read it and take heed, because I know of no one who has the credentials
that Bob Dole has to speak on not only all issues of national security
but particularly this issue because of his deep and profound and
prolonged involvement, and now very emotional involvement, in this
issue.
Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. President, I was inspired to come to the
floor to respond and to support the words of my friend from Arizona as
he spoke very eloquently and emotionally about the plight of the people
of Kosovo. Growing up as a little boy, I have to tell you, I saw, with
all Americans, reports and film footage from the Second World War where
we saw a holocaust carried out in a previous decade. And I reacted with
horror at things that I saw that humankind could do to one another.
It just seemed to me, at a young age, that if we had the ability to
stop holocausts in our time that we should. I know we cannot be the
policemen of the world, but I am here to tell you we are right now in
Bosnia. We supported our President. And we are maintaining peace in
Bosnia. But right next door we are witnessing a holocaust unfold before
our eyes, and we apparently are paralyzed in our efforts to respond.
Winter is coming, and tens of thousands of Kosovar Albanians are in
the hills and will soon die if something is not done to ensure their
rights, to ensure their safety, and to stop the bloodshed.
Mr. President, I want to suggest that one person is solely and
directly responsible for the catastrophe unfolding before our eyes, and
that is President Milosevic of Serbia. He has indicated no willingness
to negotiate a solution that will allow the Kosovar Albanians to
exercise their legitimate political rights. He is interested in one
thing and one thing only--the consolidating and maintaining of his
power on that country and region. And he apparently will do anything to
ensure that this remains the case.
Mr. President, for months the United States and our allies have stood
by and watched one onslaught after another in Kosovo, rendering
enormous tragedies in that land; and yet we just respond with critical
statements in the face of Serb offenses. For months the United States
has told Milosevic that we will not let him get away with in Kosovo
what he has done in Bosnia, but yet we do nothing. We do nothing to
stop his onslaught. For months, the United States has threatened the
use of force if Mr. Milosevic does not take necessary actions to
withdraw his forces from Kosovo and to begin a serious process of
negotiation.
I am saddened to say the other day a reporter just outside this
Chamber asked me if we were doing nothing as a country in the face of
this holocaust because of the President's internal difficulties,
because of his unwillingness to wag the dog, if you will. I cannot
think of anything more indicative of why we need to make sure our
Commander in Chief can respond, to have a Commander in Chief that can
respond with the integrity of his office. And here we sit paralyzed in
the face of unfolding, unspeakable tragedy.
I am here to say one thing to Mr. Milosevic: Our patience in the U.S.
Senate is running out. I join the Senator from Arizona, and many
others, in saying time has run out and that I will support vigorous
and, if necessary, unilateral use of force against Serbian
installations in Kosovo and in Serbia proper. It is time for American
leadership in Kosovo. It is unfortunate that we have thus far not seen
evidence of this from the Clinton administration.
If it is up to Congress to provide the leadership, so be it. I
welcome Senator McCain's call for action. I understand the former
majority leader, Bob Dole, has made the same call. And I join them
today in support of America doing something unilaterally, if necessary,
to take action to stop this tragedy, this unfolding holocaust.
Thank you, Mr. President. I yield the floor.
Mr. McCAIN. Madam President, I now ask for the regular order.
____________________