[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 16 (Wednesday, January 29, 2003)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1704-S1706]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                       STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS

  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I was privileged to be present last night 
at the President's State of the Union Address. Earlier today, I said 
the State of the Union Address was delivered magnificently, in a way 
that I think touched the hearts and souls of millions of Americans. 
Certainly this heart and soul was deeply touched. I was very proud for 
the manner in which the President delivered that message--with 
sincerity, calmness, and confidence. It happened to be my 25th State of 
the Union Message. For a quarter of a century I have been privileged to 
represent the great State of Virginia and be a part of this 
institution. I have never been more proud of any President at any time 
than I was of George Bush last night.
  I want to address those very clear remarks with regard to the state 
of the world and, most specifically, the leadership that our Nation has 
given in the worldwide fight against terrorism. We are committed, and 
committed until the end, and the end is nowhere in sight. We made great 
progress. The President detailed that progress. We have much more 
progress to make. I am very pleased over the creation of the Department 
of Homeland Security. I have been a strong supporter of that from the 
beginning. I remember, before the White House staff decided we should 
move in that direction, I was among those, with many others in the 
Chamber, who advocated that we move in the direction to create a 
separate Department. We have done that. We have selected a fine 
Secretary and two of his first deputies to take up the heavy 
responsibilities. It is my hope that we will give it strong support in 
this Chamber, that we will give it strong financial support in terms of 
appropriations.
  We must guard against a competitive battle between the Department of 
Homeland Security and the Department of Defense, because homeland 
security begins on the far-flung battlefields of the world. Today, it 
is Afghanistan and Indonesia; it is all across the world. And to the 
extent that we can defeat the efforts of any one, two, three, or four 
groups of individuals who, through the mechanism of terrorism wish to 
bring harm against the United States, let us hope we can do that in the 
far-flung lands of the world. That is homeland defense. That is the 
principal responsibility of the Department of Defense, with our troops 
in forward projection. They are to deter, first and foremost, to stop, 
discourage before it starts, any attack against the United States; but 
should that attack occur, then engage.
  We have seen the heroism of the men and women of our Armed Forces, 
together with the Armed Forces of other nations in Afghanistan. While 
that operation is by no means complete--and certainly in the last few 
days we witnessed another outbreak of hostilities--we are making steady 
progress.
  As we approach our budgetary responsibilities of the Department of 
Defense, and now the new Department of Homeland Security, we don't want 
to see a competition and a push-pull. Each is deserving of our full and 
strongest measure of attention and, eventually, authorizations and 
appropriations. I hope to take a strong lead in that effort.
  Returning to the remarks of our great President last night, he 
outlined the steps we have taken thus far with regard to the enormity 
of the threats posed by Iraq, most particularly under the leadership of 
Saddam Hussein, and recited what we have done. The President did not 
have to come to the Congress of the United States, but he did come to 
the Congress, and he received an overwhelming vote of approval--77 
colleagues, I among them as one of the coauthors of the resolution--77 
strong votes.
  He has now indicated further steps he is taking, working with the 
community of nations in the world--the United Nations and other nations 
such as Great

[[Page S1705]]

Britain, Great Britain having taken a strong leadership role. He will 
be meeting with the Prime Minister of Great Britain in the coming days, 
talking regularly with heads of state in government worldwide in an 
effort to strengthen the already strong coalition of those nations 
willing, if force is necessary, to use force, to join us in support.
  The President has always said war is the last option. He reiterated 
that last night. Quite clearly, the steps he is taking, this weekend 
with heads of state in government, by sending our distinguished 
Secretary of State Colin Powell to the United Nations to, once again, 
undertake the persuasion, which he has brilliantly displayed to date, 
are required among various nations in the course that is right and the 
course that is just and the course that will preserve the integrity of 
the United Nations as an organization.
  Saddam Hussein has thumbed his nose at that organization for 12 
years, defied all the resolutions, even kicked the inspectors out, 
inspectors who were there pursuant to resolutions of the Security 
Council. That is a sad and distressing record, and we would not be 
where we are today with the world focusing on this situation, with the 
United Nations Security Council meeting, acting, and passing Resolution 
1441, which is good and tough, had it not been for the leadership of 
our President working with Prime Minister Tony Blair and other heads of 
state in government.
  We owe our leaders a great debt because there may be a legitimate 
discussion about certain aspects of the policy on Iraq--and I welcome 
that debate; I think it strengthens our resolve--but there can be no 
dispute that Saddam Hussein possesses these weapons of mass 
destruction, has used them in the past, and today he is in absolute 
defiance of Resolution 1441.
  An impartial observer, Hans Blix, charged with the mission of 
conducting the inspections under the resolution has now reported to the 
United Nations and reported to the whole world about the continuous 
noncompliance, lack of cooperation by Saddam Hussein.
  Let me read a part of the Blix report. In Mr. Blix's words:

       Iraq appears not to have come to a genuine acceptance, not 
     even today, of the disarmament that was demanded of it and 
     which it needs to carry out to win the confidence of the 
     world and live in peace.

  Saddam Hussein has the power this afternoon, tomorrow, as he had for 
the 2 months of the inspections, to comply with Resolution 1441 and 
avoid even the threat, much less the actuality, of the use of force. 
But he has been defiant day after day, night after night, and I commend 
Mr. Blix and his organization for doing their best and for putting 
forward to the United Nations and the Security Council and, indeed, 
the whole world a very frank and candid report.

  Again, our President continues to work within the framework of 
nations seeking a course referred to as diplomacy to try to avoid the 
use of force, to try to have compliance with the security resolution.
  For 12 years, he has defied the United Nations, and subsequent to 
Resolution 1441 we have had these 2 months or so of inspections. Again, 
I commend you, Mr. President, for the calmness, for the confidence, and 
for the wisdom to continue on the course that you established, on the 
course that 77 of the colleagues in this Chamber strongly backed, but 
at the same time, Mr. President, reminding Saddam Hussein and reminding 
the world that diplomacy can be no stronger than the resolve of the 
nations to enforce it, and that resolve is there.
  In the words of the President, let there be no doubt, he will not let 
the security interests of this Nation or those of our principal allies 
and friends be put in peril by Saddam Hussein and his inventory of 
weapons of mass destruction if diplomacy fails.
  No timetable was established. Again, step by step he is proceeding 
through a process that is very important.
  I draw a contrast to what happened in 1991. Again, I was privileged 
to be the coauthor of that resolution. At the time, I was, with Senator 
Dole, one of the floor managers on this side of that historic debate. 
Mind you, we had some 500,000 men and women of the United States in 
position in the gulf region. We had a coalition of at least 12 nations 
with combatant troops that were going to join. This Chamber had its 
historic debate and, by a mere margin of five votes, was the resolution 
approved. Action was taken, and, very quickly and properly, the Members 
of this Chamber rallied behind the President and rallied behind the 
troops.
  We have troops today and will have troops tomorrow, as they did 
yesterday and the day before, leaving their families, leaving their 
homes, leaving their military assignments in the United States, 
individually and as units, and being forward deployed. Those forward 
deployments are essential because they back up the resolve of those 
trying to settle this matter diplomatically through a group of nations. 
Were it not for those deployments and the announcement by Great Britain 
and, indeed, some others to contribute forces, a lot of the rhetoric, a 
lot of the effort would simply not send a message to Saddam Hussein.
  I wish to commend our President. I notice there has recently been a 
statement to the effect that some of our colleagues might believe we 
should at this time, which surprises me--we want to stand solidly 
behind our President at this time as he continues his work with the 
heads of state in government; as our Secretary of State once again goes 
to the United Nations, we want to stand solidly behind him. But yet our 
colleague, Mr. Kennedy, issued a release yesterday which said:

       Much has changed in the many months since Congress debated 
     war with Iraq.

  I think the inspectors have diligently worked hard. Some could say 
progress is being made. But stop to think of the progress that would 
have been made had Saddam Hussein just complied with Resolution 1441 
and shown the inspectors where his arsenal was located, such that it 
could be verified, such that it could be audited and eventually 
destroyed. If we are to undertake debate, whether it is today or 
tomorrow, as indicated by my distinguished friend and colleague who 
serves on the Armed Services Committee, the first question I put is: Is 
the debate timely in terms of the steps our President committed to 
take, and has taken, this week and next week? Is the time of such a 
debate helpful to our President?

  Second, he says much has changed. Is there any indication Saddam 
Hussein has done one thing to comply with the most recent Resolution 
1441, much less the resolutions of the 12 previous years? As an 
individual Senator, I have worked and attended almost all the briefings 
on this subject. I have participated in most of the debates. I have not 
seen a Senator bring to the forefront clear and convincing evidence 
that Saddam Hussein has done anything to comply with the terms of 
Resolution 1441. If anything, he has taken steps to thwart the efforts 
of the inspectors, to impede them.
  This type of inspection regime is not new. It was implemented in 
South Africa successfully. It was implemented in the Ukraine 
successfully. So there is a track record with the United Nations that 
is well known in the field of diplomacy and among the nations of the 
world, but that does not have any parallel to what Saddam Hussein has 
steadfastly refused to do. He has not budged an inch to comply with the 
current Security Council resolutions.
  That would be the second question I pose to Mr. Kennedy or other 
colleagues were they to come to the Chamber. Is it timely? Show me what 
Saddam Hussein has done to merit this further consideration, either by 
debate or otherwise in this Chamber.
  Time is not on our side. I am not suggesting I can set a timetable. 
Under the Constitution, that is the prerogative of the President of the 
United States, in accordance with those provisions which say that the 
executive branch shall negotiate. The executive branch sets the foreign 
policy of this country. We have the right to disagree, but they set the 
foreign policy. And the President did that last night.
  It is clear to me that every day that goes by, Saddam Hussein has the 
ability to take these weapons of mass destruction, which nobody 
disagrees he has--Hans Blix pointed it out clearly--and proliferate 
them around the world, and not necessarily by truckloads. A very small 
vial, one, two, or three dozen, can be distributed into the hands of a 
terrorist network. Those vials can make their way back and do untold 
harm to free citizens in the world. He has ability to disperse tons

[[Page S1706]]

of anthrax. Two envelopes directed at this very Senate Chamber, which 
were never opened, resulted in tragic loss of life by postal workers 
and others. That was just two little envelopes, not vials, not tons, 
which he possesses.
  These are the threats that concern me. Time is not on our side. It is 
on Saddam Hussein's side. So I welcome the debate, if it is to come, 
and I hope those questions which I have posed today can be answered.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Utah.

                          ____________________