[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 36 (Thursday, March 6, 2003)]
[House]
[Pages H1674-H1676]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




           AMERICA'S ROLE IN FINDING A SOLUTION TO TERRORISM

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Bishop of Utah). Under the Speaker's 
announced policy of January 7, 2003, the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. 
Jackson-Lee) is recognized for 60 minutes.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I take this time to try to 
craft and articulate the burden that so many of us feel as we hope to 
be part of a solution that respects life over death, and clearly 
captures the role and the position of the United States of America as 
the singular world power, the problem solver, the great humanitarian.
  Mr. Speaker, I believe that the American people every day epitomize a 
caring Nation, a population that is charitable and eager to be of help. 
I know that, Mr. Speaker, because none of us are the same since 9-11. 
We cried, we hoped, we prayed, and all we wanted to do was to embrace 
our brothers and sisters who had lost their loved ones; and even to 
find some sense of hope that more would be found alive. We watched 
steadfastly every day, every hour, every minute, every second as the 
brave first responders were looking to find life.
  So I know that Americans truly are those who care about people; and 
yes, where there is no justice, Americans desire to march in to create 
justice.
  Mr. Speaker, we could find almost zero divide when Americans rose to 
the floor of the House in the United States Congress after 9-11 and 
authorized the President's authority to fight the war against 
terrorism. Not only did Members of the United States Congress offer 
themselves as soldiers in the political process of fighting the war on 
terrorism, but all of America joined.
  As we looked around as far as the eye could see, and as far as we 
could hear, and as far as we could imagine, nations all over the world, 
Mr. Speaker, joined us in our horror, in our hurt and pain, but in our 
resolve. As I traveled on behalf of this Congress, whether it was in 
the Caribbean, in Africa, in Asia; whether it was in the Pacific or in 
South America, Australia and other places, they all, to a one, said, we 
are with you. We feel the pain of this Nation, and we wish to fight 
with you.

                              {time}  1630

  Mr. Speaker, there is nothing like a coalition of strength and 
resolve that will make democracy and freedom a breathing, living 
entity, not just words.
  Mr. Speaker, I was eager to join my colleagues shortly after 9-11 and 
shortly after we began the war on terrorism as we went to Afghanistan. 
One of my major concerns, Mr. Speaker, was to make sure I greeted and 
met with the men and women of the United States military, as I have 
done, Mr. Speaker, in going to Bosnia during the middle of that war 
before the Dayton Peace Treaty was signed; meeting with the respective 
presidents at that time, Milosovic who obviously told an untruth and 
got his just todo by being tried before the war crimes tribunal. And 
then as I went to Kosovo to meet with General Wesley Clark near the 
muddy near Albania as we were in a collaborative effort with NATO 
raising our voices against ethnic cleansing, murderous acts, stopping 
that with our allies; and then going into Afghanistan to see the troops 
and to go into that nation to begin to hopefully encourage it to be a 
nation, and as well to see the pain that was there.
  I do not have the pictures of the faces of children, but when you go 
to an orphanage with a thousand children's scars and sores all over 
their faces, you have a resolve to say America is here now; we are 
going to help you.
  I mentioned Afghanistan last before I discussed this dilemma with 
Iraq because I have just heard the pleas of women from Afghanistan 
saying that even with the commitment of this Nation, there is fear in 
Afghanistan now because they wonder about America's resolve to help 
them. I am thinking, of course, of the battle fiercely going on there 
with our troops bravely fighting against the Taliban that are in the 
respective mountains and caves that maybe which cleared the city.
  But Afghans will tell you the Taliban are still there, that the 
terrorists still abound. What does this say to America and our foreign 
policy and to this Congress? Unlike 20 years ago, we cannot abandon 
Afghanistan and so Afghanistan becomes a front that deals with the 
needs for American military to be present, and in essence the needs for 
us to continue our war against terrorism.
  But how do we do that, Mr. Speaker? We are now yielding to what I 
consider an untimely move toward war in Iraq, when in actuality our job 
is not finished in Afghanistan. And in fact we have options to be able 
to address the question in Iraq. There is no doubt that a despot rules 
that country. I hesitate to say, Mr. Speaker, tragically we could 
probably list 30 to 31 nations with that kind of despotic leader; and 
so the United States has to be methodical, we have to work with 
coalitions, we have to be able to reflect upon history.
  We have to look at the Berlin Wall and as Americans saw that wall 
crumbling brick by brick. How did it go so? Because the United Nations, 
the allies and America had a resolve to have a strong defense and to be 
able to allow the German people to see a better way; and it crumbled 
from within, not without, of course, a strong military from the allies 
making it known to Germany that we would not tolerate the continued 
existence. The resolve brought the wall down. And out of that, we saved 
thousands of lives without going to war.
  Russia, the Soviet Union, is not the Soviet Union of yesteryear. And 
the independent European countries that used to be part of the Soviet 
Union are clamoring to be part of NATO. How did we do that with our 
resolve and our persistence in a coalition?
  There is nothing worse than this Nation going forward unilaterally 
and preemptively against Iraq. What we will be intending to do may not 
be the result because all of those wonderful people that we want to 
save, those 6-year-old babies, 2-month-old babies, those elderly women, 
elderly men, those young families who are seeking nothing but a better 
life will be the collateral damage, how cold a word, of our unilateral 
attack on Iraq and Bagdad. Lives will be lost, and certainly large 
numbers of the brave young men and women in the United States military 
who without one bit of criticism are there in the Mid East now will be 
lost.
  War should be the last option, Mr. Speaker. I have not said war 
should never be an option because I do not believe in this Nation being 
a wimp. And I believe that if this Nation needed defending, every 
American would step over each other in order to be on the frontline. 
But you cannot characterize one patriotism on the basis of raising the 
doubts of a war at this juncture

[[Page H1675]]

with Iraq, unilaterally and preemptively, or with what I call an 
unwilling coalition.
  Both Britain and the United States would do well to look to the 
options that have been represented by the U.N., which is more 
projected, extended, defended U.N. inspections. Hans Blix truly 
believes that he has made some successes; and of course, we will hear 
further tomorrow. And maybe the added time that Canada wants to have 
until the end of the month, maybe the added time that some of our 
allies want to have extended time are worthy of one building a willing 
coalition, but as well preparing the innocent lives, the victims, the 
people of Iraq for what might come and find a way to minimalize the 
loss of life. Is that not important to the United States?

  What about an option, Mr. Speaker, of gathering the religious leaders 
of the world in an intense closed-door negotiations? How do we know 
that we might not find the pathway for the exile of Saddam Hussein? We 
have not asked them. This is religious leaders from all denominations. 
We have just heard from the Pope yesterday. This past Sunday I called 
for weeks and months of prayer to instruct the leadership of the world 
and our Nation to be able to find a way to end this deadlock without a 
war. Many may say that Saddam Hussein is playing games with us and he 
will dismantle the missiles and then start up again.
  Well, Mr. Speaker, it is well known that the U.N. inspectors while 
they were there were able to disarm Saddam Hussein more than the Gulf 
War of 1991, 1992; and so we do have options. That is what is 
important. We want to give those babies in Iraq the option to live, 
those mothers the option to live. We want to provide them with the milk 
and medicine that they need to live. We want to create individuals who 
clamor after democracy, not hate America because they view that we are 
going to do this unilaterally. We want a peaceful solution in the Mid 
East between the Israelis and the Palestinians. We want a free and 
independent Israel. We want the Palestinians to abhor as we do the 
suicide bombings and we want them to stop so there can be co-existence 
and freedom. We cannot do that if we do not give attention to a 
solution, full attention.
  We cannot make Afghanistan whole and rid ourselves of the Taliban and 
get rid of those cells that are growing terrorists if we do not pay 
attention to Afghanistan; if we do not pay attention to women who are 
still being abused and treated disrespectfully and unequally. And I 
respect the Muslim faith. I know that the Muslim faith is quite 
different from the Taliban autocratic rule that extinguishes all 
rights. America is the single world power, and there is much 
responsibility that comes with privilege. And they are lining up, Mr. 
Speaker, and in a war with Iraq takes the toll where there may not be a 
solution that we would welcome. And then we have the crisis in 
Afghanistan, we have the terrible horrific loss of life, the jeopardy 
to the homeland security. And frankly, Mr. Speaker, we have North 
Korea, the North Korea that I believe this administration should be 
engaged in with policies that will recognize that they pose a problem 
with nuclear weapons.
  We know that North Korea in 1998 succeeded in developing a No Dong 
missile with a range estimated at up to 900 miles capable of covering 
South Korea and most of Japan. And North Korea reportedly deployed 
nearly 100 No Dong missiles by 2003. On August 31, 1998, North Korea 
test-fired a three-stage rocket, apparently the prototype of a Taepo-
Dong One missile. The third stage apparently was an attempt to launch a 
satellite. In 1998, officials told CNN that North Korea is constructing 
at least two new launch facilities for medium-range missiles as we have 
just noted.
  It is well known that North Korea has the capacity, Mr. Speaker, in 
fact, an atomic reactor with the capacity of about 5 electrical 
megawatts constructed between 1980 and 1987, reportedly is capable of 
expending enough uranium fuel to produce about 7 kilograms of plutonium 
annually, enough for the manufacture of a single atomic bomb annually. 
North Korea in 1989 shut down a reactor for about 70 days. And our 
intelligence officials believe that they removed some of the fuel rods 
from the reactor at that time.
  The information I shared is public knowledge. And so we have an 
ongoing crisis that requires us to not singularly look to Iraq as the 
solution to our concerns about terrorism, threats against Americans, 
and the despotism of the world. Because, Mr. Speaker, there are human 
rights violations all over the world, as I said earlier, in upwards of 
30 countries. And interestingly enough, the United States has been 
effective in negotiations with a strong military.
  Why not take up the offer of leaders of government, heads of 
religious organizations doing an intense negotiations to extract Mr. 
Saddam Hussein out of there? Do we not recognize that we can be strong 
in diplomacy?
  Mr. Speaker, I would also argue that this Congress needs to assess 
options. Why do I say that? Because the Constitution clearly dictates 
that the Congress declares war under article 1, section 8. The 
President is the Commander in Chief. I respect that. And as I stated, I 
said that if these troops are deployed, there is no quarrel with the 
United States military. No quarrel with the troops. We will be in full 
support of the efforts that they are making. Let the resounding sound 
of the vote that we took yesterday make it very clear that there is no 
divide on our appreciation for the Reservists, the enlisted personnel, 
the civilians who are now fighting for our freedom. Let it be known, of 
course, that our prayers are with them and there will be no divide on 
the work that they are doing for us.
  That is why I have come to the floor today, Mr. Speaker, because I 
believe there are options. We can have a strong military presence and 
Saddam Hussein will have nowhere to run. And we can allow those U.N. 
inspectors to vigorously be in Iraq, and we can save lives, and we can 
build a coalition of allies enthusiastically supporting this effort, 
similar to the effort in 1991.
  And in this Congress there was a difference of opinion. But the 
coalition was strong, the debate was strong, the debate was 
knowledgeable. Why, Mr. Speaker? Because the debate was right before 
the invasion or the launch of our efforts, right before.

                              {time}  1645

  So all of the people had all of the facts. The Congress knew about 
anything that needed to be known about, and there was disagreement but 
there was authority given. We debated the Iraqi resolution when no one 
knew about North Korea, those facts were not given to us. I was 
represented to us that we could have a willing coalition, with NATO 
would be with us. The facts are different now, Mr. Speaker.
  So I want for this country the best. I want for Americans the best. I 
want the world to know that these are the best people you could ever 
get to know.
  We have shed the ugly American. There is no such person, because we 
care about what happens to people in this world. I know that because my 
constituents every day sign up and volunteer for the United States 
military to go and fight for people who cannot fight for themselves, 
including United States of America.
  But this war in Iraq will turn the tide, and it may not get the 
results we would like, but what I think is important to know for 
Americans is that as we make these decisions, a war decision will push 
us into the center of Baghdad for 20, 30 years while we have to be in 
the center of Afghanistan for 20 or 30 years, while we have to be in 
the center or North Korea for a long time.
  Is not it preferable, Mr. Speaker, to try the options of 
negotiations? Is it not worth trying to save American lives as well?
  Just to show my colleagues that we do lose civilians overseas, in 
Vietnam we lost civilians in high numbers. Looks like we lost close to 
30,000 it seems in the embassy bombings in Beirut, 1983; embassy 
bombing, Kenya, 1998. Civilians lives being lost to a nonmilitary, and 
that is not 30,000. I think that is less than that.
  I believe it is important, Mr. Speaker, as we think about the 
decisions that have to be made that we look at the option for peace. I, 
too, want a free and democratic Iraq. It is important to note that it 
will not come overnight and it is all in the way we do it.
  There is now a united Germany. There is now a united number of Soviet 
countries, united around the concept of democracy, and the Soviet Union 
does not stand.

[[Page H1676]]

  I believe it is imperative, Mr. Speaker, that we look at options 
other than war, and I will continue to work with colleagues who 
believe, as many Americans believe, that we can find an option to save 
lives. We do not know what the toll will be, and by not knowing what 
that toll will be, we cannot factually say that the results will be as 
we would desire it, but we do know that if we continue in negotiation 
and strength, and that we are steadily, methodically disarming Iraq and 
Saddam Hussein, we know that, we have seen that proof, there is no 
reason why we could not continue that path because America has the 
strength, the resolve and the power to be able to win a war with Iraq. 
There is no doubt.
  Do we have the strength and the power and the resolve to rebuild the 
alliances, to be able to have a coalition that has resolve to help us 
in Iraq? That is success. I am concerned that that may not be the full 
case, and so I do want to acknowledge the words of Dr. Martin Luther 
King, who said that in order to find peace we must become ecumenical 
and not sectional; that the judgment of God is upon us; that we must 
find a way to live in this world as brothers and sisters.
  No, Mr. Speaker, it is not a simplistic perspective. It is not an 
imagined perspective. I am a realist, Mr. Speaker, but I said at the 
beginning, democracy is not about simple words. It is to be practiced, 
and the way we can convince the world is because we are a democracy and 
not a monarchy and that the people's voices can be listened to.
  I believe there are people of goodwill in America who would be 
welcoming of negotiations that could be extending so that we could 
negotiate a peaceful resolve in Iraq, and then, Mr. Speaker, that if 
the ultimate results did not resolve themselves, that the case may have 
to be ultimately made for that last option, but it seems to me with a 
domestic agenda rising, it is imperative that we be concerned about 
America's destiny, its senior citizens, its children, those suffering 
and not having mental health services, those needing health care 
services, those needing housing, those who are addicted to drugs or 
infected with HIV/AIDS. Every day there is a cry for help, those 
needing funding of the children protective services, all of those, the 
homeless youth, homeless veterans, veterans who need to have service.
  Mr. Speaker, the list is long, but I would simply say to my 
colleagues that we can find a better way than the loss of lives of 
hundreds of Americans overseas that I have just noted in Vietnam and 
Beirut in 1983 and Kenya in 1998. We can find another way, and I hope 
to work over the next week, as I said, with coalitions who are eager to 
work in a manner that will generate the freedom and the expression of 
freedom through the practicing of America's democracy by showing to the 
world that we know with our resolve how to negotiate, how to be part of 
the United Nations, how to embrace our allies and get the job done. We 
can do this peacefully, but with resolve and that is what my commitment 
is.
  Mr. Speaker, I hope my colleagues will join me on this.

                          ____________________