[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 34 (Thursday, March 21, 2002)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2251-S2253]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                         GREEK INDEPENDENCE DAY

  Mr. REED. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize the 181st 
anniversary of Greek Independence that will be celebrated Monday, March 
25. Not unlike our founding fathers who sowed the seeds of the American 
revolution by forming the underground society, the ``Sons of Liberty,'' 
Greek patriots seeking democracy established the ``Friendly Society'' 
in Odessa in 1814. Their ideals spread and the Greek people eventually 
rose up on March 25, 1821. This day would mark the beginning of an 8 
year struggle against the might of the Ottoman Empire which

[[Page S2252]]

had ruled Greece for 400 years. In 1829, the Greeks were the first to 
win their independence from the Ottoman Empire, and were formally 
recognized in 1832. Their success spurred on other groups.
  But this 19th century revolution was not the first time the Greeks 
had contributed greatly to our world. In ancient times, Greek 
civilization established traditions of democracy, society and culture 
that resonate today. These Greek cultural accomplishments deeply 
influenced thinkers, writers and artists, especially those in ancient 
Rome, Medieval Arabia, and Renaissance Europe. Modern democratic 
nations owe their fundamental political principles to ancient Greece. 
Because of the enduring influence of its ideas, ancient Greece is known 
as the cradle of Western civilization.
  In fact, Greeks invented the idea of the West as a distinct region 
because they lived west of the powerful civilizations of Egypt, 
Babylonia, and Phoenicia. Today we continue to marvel at their advances 
in philosophy, architecture, drama, government, and science, with 
people worldwide enjoying ancient Greek plays, studying the ideas of 
ancient Greek philosophers, and incorporating elements of ancient Greek 
architecture into the designs of new buildings.
  So I am proud to recognize the continued contributions of today's 
Greek-Americans to our country and my home State of Rhode Island. 
Although the earliest Greeks to come to America were men of the sea, 
sailing with Christopher Columbus, Ferdinand Magellan and other Spanish 
expeditions to the New World, today's Greek Americans are involved in 
all aspects of American business and society, contributing with their 
hard work and active citizenship.
  I would also note that the Greece-US relationship has deepened over 
the years and there are extraordinary opportunities to strengthen it 
even more. We share mutual concern for greater security, stability and 
prosperity in the Mediterranean, Southeastern Europe, and the Caucasus. 
The Greeks have traditionally been active as well as a force of 
progress in these regions and their experiences will help the United 
States as the two countries partner to face the challenges of the new 
century.
  I am proud to join many of my colleagues as a co-sponsor of Senate 
Resolution 214 which designated March 25, 2002 ``Greek Independence 
Day: A National Day of Celebration of Greek and American Democracy.'' I 
give Greek Americans my best wishes as they celebrate Greece's 
independence.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, over the past few days and weeks the 
drumbeat for war against Iraq has been rising in both volume and tempo. 
I rise today to express my concern, and to urge President Bush to 
proceed with care and prudence.
  At a minimum: the United States must first exhaust every diplomatic 
solution that might avoid war, with war seen as a last resort; the 
United States must assure sufficient international support, similar to 
the coalition that made the Gulf War viable; and, the administration 
must fully consult with Congress, which has a significant 
constitutional obligation in this matter, and receive proper 
authorization.
  Let me be clear: There is little question that Iraq poses a grave 
risk to the United States and our friends and allies. How to deal with 
Iraq remains, as it has for over a decade, one of the top foreign 
policy priorities for the United States.
  At this point we can not and should not lose sight of the fact that 
we still have considerable work to do in Afghanistan. Rushing 
precipitously towards another military confrontation, unless the need 
is imminent, would not be prudent.
  We are all aware of the nature of the threat: Iraq under Saddam 
Hussein seeks to develop WMD, has used these weapons against its own 
people, has invaded its neighbors and threatened others in the region 
with its missiles.
  And we are all well aware that Iraq, having agreed to United Nations 
inspectors after its defeat in the Gulf War a decade ago, banned them 
in 1998. For 4 years the international community has had no access to 
Iraq and no ability to inspect its weapons facilities.
  The administration believes Iraq is continuing to develop chemical 
and biological weapons, and is seeking nuclear weapons. As a member of 
the Intelligence Committee I believe that the administration is correct 
in this assessment.
  And the administration has argued that Iraq's weapons of mass 
destruction must be dismantled before President Saddam Hussein forms an 
alliance with Al Qaeda or other terrorist groups.
  It is critical, therefore, that the United States, through the United 
Nations, seek additional inspections, under a ``go anywhere, anytime'' 
inspection regime, to provide Iraq with the opportunity, one last time, 
to either work with the international community on this issue or, by 
its refusal, admit guilt and face the consequences.
  I also believe that it is critical that, should an imminent threat 
require U.S. action, that the Administration come to Congress to seek 
its judgment and assent.
  The resolution authorizing the use of force against the September 11 
attackers provides the President authority to take military action only 
against those groups, individuals, or nations who aided in the 
September 11 attacks, or harbored those involved.
  It states: ``The President is authorized to use all necessary and 
appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he 
determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist 
attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such 
organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of 
international terrorism against the United States by such nations, 
organizations, or persons.''
  On its face, then, this resolution is both narrow and specific, in 
that it applies only to the September 11 attacks.
  In order to take action against Iraq under this resolution, the 
President must determine both that Iraq has harbored any Al Qaeda 
members, or anyone else who aided in the September 11 attacks, and that 
such an attack would ``prevent any future acts of international 
terrorism,'' as also required by the resolution.
  On the other hand, if the President attacks Iraq simply to destroy 
its weapons of mass destruction, which may be a justified action under 
certain circumstances, this resolution does not provide the authority 
for such an attack. Iraq's WMD program, if not directly linked to the 
September 11 attacks, is a separate issue not covered by the September 
resolution.
  In such a circumstance the President would need to, must, seek an 
additional authorizing resolution from Congress.
  I was pleased to see that Secretary of State Powell has indicated 
President Bush will fully consult with Congress before any military 
action is taken against Iraq.
  It is imperative that we comply with the provisions of the War Powers 
Resolution, a joint legislative act that will ensure: ``The collective 
judgment of both Congress and the President will apply to the 
introduction of United States armed forces into hostilities.''
  Given the gravity of placing potentially large numbers of America's 
forces in harm's way, I think anything less than such a ``collective 
judgment'' would tarnish the sacred trust our people have in their 
government.
  As our colleague Senator Byrd wrote in The New York Times earlier 
this week: ``The Constitution states that the President shall be 
commander in chief, but it is Congress that has the constitutional 
authority to provide for the common defense and general welfare, raise 
armies, and to declare war. In other words, Congress has a 
constitutional responsibility to weigh in on war-related policy 
decisions.''
  The challenges in taking action against Iraq underscore the need for 
the United States to work with our friends and allies in the region and 
elsewhere if we are to take effective action against Iraq.
  The administration has made great strides in creating as wide an 
international coalition as possible for action against terror and 
terrorists, it must do likewise for any action against Iraq.
  In contemplating any such action against Iraq, we must consult with 
allies and build the kind of coalition that supported our efforts in 
the Gulf War, especially those countries whose peoples and governments 
are bound to be affected by such an undertaking.

[[Page S2253]]

  We should not take action against Iraq until both we, the American 
people and our regional partners, are convinced of the reasons for so 
doing and that there is a clear mission and goal in mind.
  The United States must also consider carefully the consequences of 
precipitous action.
  Can we assure our regional partners that our actions will not involve 
the de-stabilization of the region?
  Might unilateral unsupported action against Iraq result in attacks 
against close allies such as Israel or protests against regional 
leaders in Egypt, Saudi Arabia or Jordan?
  Following any military action, are we prepared militarily and 
financially to remain in the region until Saddam is removed, the people 
of Iraq are free, and a viable democratic government is in place?
  These are complex questions to which there may be no easy answers. 
But they are questions that must be addressed before we take any action 
if those actions are to be successful and the results, enduring.
  If this matter is not handled properly, there is a profound risk that 
the Middle East will be further destabilized, and place U.S. interests 
in the region and in the war against terrorism in jeopardy.
  None of us has the wisdom or foresight to see where this war will 
lead us, how long it will last, or when it will end.
  But we are all foursquare in our determination that we, and all 
civilized peoples, succeed.
  I offer my thoughts and comments today not as a criticism of the 
administration, but rather because I feel that we have a deep 
obligation to make sure that as we proceed with this endeavor we do so 
with thoughtfulness, not afraid to ask the tough questions that must be 
asked or address the issues that must be addressed, and with the unity 
of purpose that will guarantee our success.

                          ____________________