[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 139 (Wednesday, October 7, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S11644-S11645]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
KOSOVO AND MILITARY READINESS
Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I have asked for this time today to
address two serious and interrelated concerns: One, the President's
plans to intervene in Kosovo; and, two, the already evident crisis in
readiness of the U.S. military.
There are some who believe that these two concerns should be dealt
with separately. Some may argue that linking the two is merely an
excuse for U.S. inaction. I wish to be very clear. Developments in
Kosovo may compel the United States and our allies to intervene.
However, this intervention should not be paid for by further hollowing
out of the Armed Forces.
I and many of my colleagues, will not support airstrikes in Kosovo,
and especially a ground force presence, unless the President agrees to
submit a budget that addresses the related readiness and operational
tempo requirements of the U.S. military.
Also, we must be careful not to believe that there is an easy or
inexpensive long-term solution to the problems in Kosovo. The
administration would have us believe that NATO airstrikes will somehow
solve the problem. I, and many colleagues, disagree.
The recent massacre of ethnic Albanians in two small villages in
Kosovo has heightened awareness and condemnation of Serbian aggression.
Powerful airstrikes and military action could send a strong and
unambiguous message to the Serbian leader. As in Bosnia, empty threats
of NATO action never does anything to get the job done.
There is good reason to be concerned about 400,000 Albanians forced
from their homes as winter approaches. I am concerned. I am deeply
concerned about that. But I am more concerned about involving U.S.
lives in ill-conceived military campaigns. I am deeply concerned that
we will be sending an already weary and overextended military into a
situation for which there is no quick and easy solution.
Mr. President, as you know, the U.S. defense budget has declined for
the past several years. At the same time, nontraditional deployments
have stretched an already extended military force to its limits. This
is largely the result of downsizing of our force structure while
increasing the number and the frequency of deployments overseas for
purposes other than a war.
We have been asking our Armed Forces to do more with less for several
years. They are finally admitting that they cannot do more with what
the President has given them. Yet, the administration is asking them to
still do more.
Now I and many of my colleagues wish to ask the administration one
question: Will you do more? Will you ensure that readiness does not
suffer further? Will you stop the hollowing out of our military forces?
Some may think that this readiness issue isn't real. I am sure there
are those who think that there is no crisis in readiness. Well, I
believe that a few examples of the crisis in readiness are absolutely
persuasive.
Here are just a few of the symptoms of this crisis:
One, Navy pilot retention has sunk to an all-time low of 10 percent.
This is the lowest in recorded history of pilot retention programs.
Air Force pilot retention is at 30 percent, and it is projected to
decline further. The Air Force is now 700 pilots short.
The aircraft deployed on primary, peacekeeping deployments--such as
Bosnia--are being ``cannibalized,'' meaning, they are being stripped
for spare parts to keep at least a few flying. It is not uncommon for
this to happen at a low-priority unit in the United States; however,
allowing this to happen in the front-line deployments like Bosnia where
we might soon go into combat is inexcusable.
Aircraft carriers are being deployed with personnel slots empty. A
recent report has one carrier on a peacekeeping mission with a crew
that is lacking 1,000 persons to perform the essential tasks. In other
words, the United States has aircraft carriers on missions that are
lacking about 20 percent of what is considered a full crew. How ready
are these carriers to perform their missions?
We have Army units arriving for critical combat training at the
Army's national training center in California with mechanics and
``mounted'' infantry simply missing. These units have junior
noncommissioned officers filling roles traditionally filled by senior
experienced noncommissioned officers.
This is a problem that permeates every branch of the Armed Forces. We
simply are not retaining the seasoned, well-trained military personnel
and professionals. I and Senator Stevens are commissioning an important
study by GAO to find out exactly why our military persons are leaving
the service in unprecedented numbers.
The troops that I personally visited in the Persian Gulf made it
clear that morale is low there. They are tired of constantly being
separated from their families. I believe this separation would be
tolerable if the operational tempo required of them were humane.
I believe the separation would also be eased, if they were assured
that their families had adequate housing and food on the table.
I believe the separation would be tolerable and their loyalty to the
military secure, if it weren't for the fact that they also question the
purpose of the missions.
Mr. President, I believe we are failing own soldiers on all counts.
That brings us to the question of money. There is simply not enough
money in the defense budget as it is currently projected to do
everything that needs to be done. There is an effort underway to
provide emergency supplemental funding for military readiness. I
support that effort. However, this will not solve the bigger problems.
The U.S. defense budget has been in a constant decline since 1985. In
the case of Bosnia, the administration has relied on Congress to
repeatedly supply ``emergency supplemental'' moneys to provide for a
``contingency'' operation that started in December, 1995. We are
currently supporting over 8,000 troops in Bosnia, and the President
persists in asking us to join him in a charade that the U.S. presence
in Bosnia is an ``unforeseen emergency.''
The budget shortfalls are eroding readiness, but, more importantly,
they
[[Page S11645]]
are contributing to a precipitous decline in the moral of the soldiers
in uniform.
Mr. President, we believe it would be an unacceptable policy to send
our troops into harm's way without addressing the scarcity of spare
parts and relevant readiness issues that currently permeate the forces.
Of course, I am not prepared to support the half baked, not thought
through ideas that I fear are still being contemplated by this
administration for what currently serves as our ``policy'' in Bosnia
and Kosovo.
We must send a clear signal to the administration that we will not
paint ourselves into another Bosnia, especially without the
administration's assurance that our military will not once again be
asked to do more with even less.
Before we commit American lives to another dangerous mission
overseas, we must clearly define our objectives and be realistic in the
commitment required to achieve them. More importantly, we must give our
men and women in uniform sufficient assurance that their loyalty is not
a one-way street. This can only be achieved by stopping the decline in
defense budgets and ensuring a higher quality of life for our soldiers.
I am pleased to be joined by the distinguished Senator from Texas in
these remarks this morning.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired.
Mr. DOMENICI. I yield the floor.
Mrs. HUTCHISON addressed the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas.
Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I want to really follow on what the
distinguished Senator from New Mexico was saying, because I think he
laid out very well the problems that we are facing with our military
today. No one questions the job our military is doing. They are doing
their jobs well. But it is clear that we are losing our experienced
people.
As the Senator from New Mexico has just pointed out, we are losing
our experienced pilots, we do not have enough parts to keep the
airplanes running, and the Army had its worst recruiting year last year
since the late 1970s.
At the time that we are looking at mission fatigue, our troops being
overdeployed away from their families on missions that are not security
threats to the United States, we are now seeing a mixed message from
this administration about yet expanding their responsibilities.
We were told in the last few weeks that NATO is contemplating
airstrikes in Serbia. This is, of course, a terrible and tragic
situation in Kosovo. And, clearly, we want to try to do everything
possible to curb atrocities that are happening and may happen in the
future in Kosovo. But, Mr. President, a superpower cannot fling around
the world without a plan, without a thought, and have credibility.
I ask the question of the administration, Have we done everything we
can do at the bargaining table with Mr. Milosevic? Have we put every
economic sanction that can be put? Have we isolated this country to the
extent that we can--as we have also tried to do with Iraq--to show this
leader that he cannot continue to act in an irresponsible manner toward
human beings in his own country and get by with it?
Have we done everything we can do first? If we have--and I don't
think we have--if the administration makes the case that we have, then,
and only then, should we be considering other options.
Mr. President, if we are going to bomb another country because of a
civil conflict, a sovereign country that is in a civil conflict, have
we thought through what the exit strategy is? Have we thought through
what our responsibility is going to be for doing that? I haven't seen a
plan. I haven't seen any kind of ``after plan'' after bombing. Yes, we
have talked about bombing. But if we are bombing for the purpose of
saying to Milosevic, ``You must withdraw your police so that the
Albanians who live in Kosovo can come out of the hills and go into
their homes,'' how is that to be enforced?
We have been told by administration officials that there would not be
American troops on the ground unless there is a peace agreement,
something to enforce. Yet yesterday the Secretary of Defense opened the
door on American troops on the ground with NATO forces. Yet we haven't
seen a plan. We haven't seen what the American role will be. We have
certainly not been consulted to determine if the United States is ready
to expand its mission in the Balkans.
We were told we would be out of Bosnia a year ago. We were told a
year and a half ago, we were told 2 years ago that our mission in
Bosnia would be complete when the parties were separated and the
elections had been held. The parties are separated. The elections have
been held. Yet American taxpayers have spent $10 billion in Bosnia, and
the President is now saying there is an ``unending mission'' there. He
has refused to put a timetable on it. This week the President has asked
the U.S. Congress for $2 billion more for Bosnia in a supplemental
appropriation, as if this were an emergency. Why didn't the
administration put this in the budget? He says it is an unending
mission, yet we have an emergency appropriation.
I conclude by saying we cannot fling ourselves around the world
without a clear strategy and a clear role for the United States. I am
looking to the President for leadership and I haven't seen it.
I yield the floor.
____________________