[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 119 (Thursday, September 19, 2002)]
[Senate]
[Pages S8897-S8899]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
DRAFT JOINT RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE THE USE OF U.S. ARMED FORCES
AGAINST IRAQ
Mr. MURKOWSKI. Madam President, I am going to briefly turn to another
matter, and that is the recognition that today OPEC announced they were
not going to increase the production of oil from the OPEC nations. What
does this mean? It simply means that as we look at going into a
showdown with Iraq, the Mideast nations that control oil--basically
OPEC--are not going to increase production. That means to the American
consumer a continuation of high gasoline prices, high oil prices,
perhaps well beyond $30 a barrel.
We have seen the development of that cartel over a period of time. It
initiated a program that said, in effect, if the price fell below $22 a
barrel, they would reduce supply to stabilize the price. They wanted a
price structure of $22 to $28. That puts a tremendous burden on the
structure of our society and our economy.
It is rather revealing to recognize that as we continue to address
our situation with Iraq, we also continue to import oil from Iraq. I
think currently we are importing about 600,000 barrels from Iraq each
day.
We have delivered from the White House to the Speaker, majority
leader, minority leader, as well as the House minority leader, a
transmittal, which is the consequences of discussions with the
President, identifying a suggested form of resolution with respect to
Iraq. I ask unanimous consent this be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
The White House,
Washington, September 19, 2002.
Hon. J. Dennis Hastert,
Speaker of the House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Thomas A. Daschle,
Majority Leader, U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Trent Lott,
Minority Leader, U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Richard A. Gephardt,
Minority Leader, House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Dear Speaker Hastert, Leader Daschle, Leader Lott, and
Leader Gephardt, As a follow-up to your discussion yesterday
morning with the President, we enclose a suggested form of
resolution with respect to Iraq. We stand ready to meet with
you or your staffs to discuss our proposal.
As the President indicated to you, it is our hope that we
can reach early agreement on the proposal at the leadership
level to allow you to proceed to consider the resolution in
your respective chambers as soon as possible.
Sincerely,
Nicholas E. Calio,
Assistant to the President for Legislative Affairs.
Alberto R. Gonzales,
Counsel to the President.
____
Joint Resolution To Authorize the Use of United States Armed Forces
Against Iraq
Whereas Congress in 1998 concluded that Iraq was then in
material and unacceptable breach of its international
obligations and thereby threatened the vital interests of the
United States and international peace and security, stated
the reasons for that conclusion, and urged the President to
take appropriate action to bring Iraq into compliance with
its international obligations (Public Law 105-235);
Whereas Iraq remains in material and unacceptable breach of
its international obligations by, among other things,
continuing to possess and develop a significant chemical and
biological weapons capability, actively seeking a nuclear
weapons capability, and supporting and harboring terrorist
organizations, thereby continuing to threaten the national
security interests of the United States and international
peace and security;
[[Page S8898]]
Whereas Iraq persists in violating resolutions of the
United Nations Security Council by continuing to engage in
brutal repression of its civilian population, including the
Kurdish peoples, thereby threatening international peace and
security in the region, by refusing to release, repatriate,
or account for non-Iraqi citizens wrongfully detained by
Iraq, and by failing to return property wrongfully seized by
Iraq from Kuwait;
Whereas the current Iraqi regime has demonstrated its
capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction
against other nations and its own people;
Whereas the current Iraqi regime has demonstrated its
continuing hostility toward, and willingness to attack, the
United States, including by attempting in 1993 to assassinate
former President Bush and by firing on many thousands of
occasions on United States and Coalition Armed Forces engaged
in enforcing the resolutions of the United Nations Security
Council;
Whereas members of al Qaida, an organization bearing
responsibility for attacks on the United States, its
citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred
on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq;
Whereas Iraq continues to aid and harbor other
international terrorist organizations, including
organizations that threaten the lives and safety of American
citizens;
Whereas the attacks on the United States of September 11,
2001 underscored the gravity of the threat that Iraq will
transfer weapons of mass destruction to international
terrorist organizations;
Whereas the United States has the inherent right, as
acknowledged in the United Nations Charter, to use force in
order to defend itself;
Whereas Iraq's demonstrated capability and willingness to
use weapons of mass destruction, the high risk that the
current Iraqi regime will either employ those weapons to
launch a surprise attack against the United States or its
Armed Forces or provide them to international terrorists who
would do so, and the extreme magnitude of harm that would
result to the United States and its citizens from such an
attack, combine to justify the use of force by the United
States in order to defend itself;
Whereas Iraq is in material breach of its disarmament and
other obligations under United Nations Security Council
Resolution 687, to cease repression of its civilian
population that threatens international peace and security
under United Nations Security Council Resolution 688, and to
cease threatening its neighbors or United Nations operations
in Iraq under United Nations Security Council Resolution 949,
and United Nations Security Council Resolution 678 authorizes
use of all necessary means to compel Iraq to comply with
these ``subsequent relevant resolutions;''
Whereas Congress in the Authorization for Use of Military
Force Against Iraq Resolution (Public Law 102-1) has
authorized the President to use the Armed Forces of the
United States to achieve full implementation of Security
Council Resolutions 660, 661, 662, 664, 665, 666, 667, 669,
670, 674, and 677, pursuant to Security Council Resolution
678;
Whereas Congress in section 1095 of Public Law 102-190 has
stated that it ``supports the use of all necessary means to
achieve the goals of Security Council Resolution 687 as being
consistent with the Authorization for Use of Military Force
Against Iraq (Public Law 102-1),'' that Iraq's repression of
its civilian population violates United Nations Security
Council Resolution 688 and ``constitutes a continuing threat
to the peace, security, and stability of the Persian Gulf
region,'' and that Congress ``supports the use of all
necessary means to achieve the goals of Resolution 688'';
Whereas Congress in the Iraq Liberation Act (Public Law
105-338) has expressed its sense that it should be the policy
of the United States to support efforts to remove from power
the current Iraqi regime and promote the emergence of a
democratic government to replace that regime;
Whereas the President has authority under the Constitution
to take action in order to deter and prevent acts of
international terrorism against the United States, as
Congress recognized in the joint resolution on Authorization
for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40); and
Whereas the President has authority under the Constitution
to use force in order to defend the national security
interests of the United States: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This joint resolution may be cited as the ``Further
Resolution on Iraq''.
SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.
The President is authorized to use all means that he
determines to be appropriate, including force, in order to
enforce the United Nations Security Council Resolutions
referenced above, defend the national security interests of
the United States against the threat posed by Iraq, and
restore international peace and security in the region.
Mr. MURKOWSKI. This contains a number of ``whereas's.'' It is
transmitted by the Assistant to the President for Legislative Affairs
and the Counsel to the President. At the conclusion of the resolution
that is going to be before this body is a joint resolution cited as
``Further Resolution on Iraq.'' I will read the ``resolved'' portion:
The President is authorized to use all means that he
determines to be appropriate, including force, in order to
enforce United Nations Security Council Resolutions
referenced above, defend the national security interests of
the United States against the threat posed by Iraq, and
restore international peace and security in the region.
We undoubtedly will be addressing this issue in the very near future.
I encourage my colleagues to recognize the significance of what this
obligation means to each and every Member of the Senate. We know Saddam
Hussein is unpredictable. We know he is dangerous. We know he has
weapons of mass destruction. We know he has used those weapons--
certainly chemical warfare--on his own people.
I had an opportunity several years ago, with a small group of
Senators, to visit Baghdad. Later we had an opportunity to meet with
Saddam Hussein. His ruthlessness was apparent at that time.
To reflect a little bit on that particular time, there was at issue
an allegation that Iraq was importing a delivery capability consisting
of a huge cannon-type device that had been intercepted in the docks of
London. This was going to have the capability of delivering a
projectile farther than any projectile had ever been delivered by
conventional methods, as opposed to a missile-type system.
There was allegedly a triggering device also found on the docks of
London.
When we confronted Saddam Hussein, he advised us these were parts for
his refinery, these were technical developments by the Baghdad
Institute of Technology. This was prior to the Persian Gulf war.
My point is, he has been misleading, if you will, the Western World
for an extended period of time and continues to do so. The announcement
he made that he would welcome U.N. inspectors is a guise. He will not
allow U.N. inspectors to have free rein in his country, and we will
clearly see this as we continue the process of evaluating our position.
But we have an opportunity now to fish or cut bait. We are going to
have this resolution before us. I encourage each and every Member of
the Senate to review it in detail and recognize the insecurity of our
Nation oil supply. Currently, we are importing somewhere close to 60
percent of our oil, primarily from the Mideast. We have the capability
of reducing that dependence here at home. It is an issue in my State.
ANWR has been debated in this Chamber. It has been supported by the
House but not the Senate.
The technology that we have to develop this area is evident. To
suggest we can do it safely is something that most people with an
objective view would recognize clearly. The reserves are as much as we
would import from Saddam Hussein in 40 years or from Saudi Arabia in 30
years.
This matter is in the conference. It is being discussed. It will be
determined by the conference as to what the disposition will be. But I
encourage Members to recognize that we have an opportunity to take a
position that would affirmatively reduce our dependence on imported oil
and send a very strong message to the Mideast that we intend to reduce
that dependence.
Recognize that we do have an alternative. I think in future times, as
we address our continued vulnerability and dependence on the Mideast,
we are going to have to assert ourselves to find some relief. That
relief partially might be in the joining together of Canada, Mexico,
the United States, Alaska, and Russia as an offset to our dependence on
imported oil from the Mideast. While we do not have the depth of
reserves, we have substantial reserves collectively. The idea of an
energy group made up of those nations could clearly send a message to
the Mideast that we will not be held hostage by policies of the cartel
which are designated to simply maintain high prices for oil by
continuing to keep the availability of oil at a minimum.
As this matter comes before the Senate for further discussion and
consideration, as well as the conference, I urge my colleagues to keep
an open mind and recognize that, again, we are going to have to vote
not on what is necessarily the litany of America's environmental
community but what is right for America. To suggest we should not have
these jobs in the
[[Page S8899]]
United States as if we do not have the technical capability to open up
this area safely is not fraught with any degree of accuracy but it is
simply misleading arguments that environmental groups continue to use
to generate revenue in dollars.
I encourage each Member to recognize the obligation that we have.
That obligation is do what is right for America. What is right for
America is to produce more energy and and to produce clean energy here
at home.
One of the inconsistencies we have is that nobody seems to really
care where they get the oil as long as they get it. They do not concern
themselves with whether it comes from a scorched Earth, lack of any
environmental oversight a field in Iraq, or from fields in Saudi
Arabia, or from the rain forests of Colombia. They only care if they
get it.
As I have said time and time again, the world will continue to depend
on oil, because that is what the world moves on. We have no other
alternative.
Some people suggest we have alternatives, but hot air is not going to
move us in an out of Washington, DC, although occassionally there is
quite a bit of it here.
I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Carper). Without objection, it is so
ordered.
____________________