[Congressional Record Volume 150, Number 22 (Thursday, February 26, 2004)]
[House]
[Pages H676-H682]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                    AMERICA: A NATION STILL AT RISK

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Bishop of Utah). Under the Speaker's 
announced policy of January 7, 2003, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. 
Hoekstra) is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority 
leader.
  Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, tonight I want to build off the comments 
of perhaps some of the previous speakers in talking about America is 
still a Nation at risk.

[[Page H677]]

  In his new book, Why America Slept, author Gerald Posner raises the 
possibility that better tactical performance by the United States could 
have averted the September 11 terrorist attacks. He suggests that the 
problem was that law enforcement and other agencies failed to 
effectively identify and act on numerous clues in the months preceding 
those tragic events. This could be true, but it is more likely that the 
attacks could have been averted had the U.S. recognized a new enemy 
emerging in the 1990s and developed a strategy to effectively respond 
to it, a lapse that the United States Intelligence Community will have 
to make up as it reinvents itself to respond to a fluid world that I 
think was redefined by September 11.
  Terrorist attacks throughout the previous decade were treated as 
isolated criminal acts rather than a developing new emergent threat 
bent on destroying the United States, and I think this is a question 
that we have to ask ourselves, and we have to determine what we believe 
the threat will be in the future. We know what happened during the 
1990s. We know about the examples of the first attack on the World 
Trade Center in 1993. There was a bombing. In 1996, there was a bombing 
of the U.S. military barracks in Saudi Arabia, and also in the 1990s 
there were the attacks on our embassies in Africa, and then in 2000 the 
USS Cole was attacked. But these are just a small sample of the 
increasing number of terrorist attacks against the U.S., our people, 
our interests and our allies that took place throughout the 1990s.
  In 1995, two unidentified gunmen killed two U.S. diplomats and 
wounded a third in Karachi, Pakistan. In 1997, a Palestinian sniper 
opened fire on tourists atop the Empire State Building, killing a 
Danish national, wounding visitors from the United States and 
Argentina. In 2000, a bomb exploded across the street from the U.S. 
Embassy in Manila. We have had bombings in Turkey and other places.
  The strategic error that we made through the 1990s is that we assumed 
that with the collapse of the Soviet Union, American policymakers 
assumed that the international political environment had become more 
stable and more predictable. How wrong we were.
  During the 1990s, the international political environment became more 
volatile and more unpredictable, and this was not necessarily 
unrecognized by our leadership.
  In a February 17, 1998, speech President Bill Clinton said, And they, 
then in parenthesis, the predators of the 21st century will be all the 
more lethal if we allow them to build arsenals of nuclear, chemical and 
biological weapons and the missiles to deliver them. We simply cannot 
allow that to happen. There should be no doubt Saddam's ability to 
produce and deliver weapons of mass destruction poses a grave threat to 
the peace of that region and the security of the world. There is no 
more clear example of this threat than Saddam Hussein's Iraq. His 
regime threatens the safety of his people, the stability of his region 
and the security of all the rest of us. In the next century, the 
community of nations may see more and more the very kind of threat Iraq 
poses now, a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use 
them or provide them to terrorists who travel the world. If we fail to 
respond today, Saddam will be emboldened tomorrow by the knowledge that 
they can act with impunity.
  Again, on February 17, 1998, President Bill Clinton highlighted the 
threat not only of Saddam Hussein, but of this emerging threat that we 
saw in the 1990s of various terrorist organizations and people who seek 
to do us and our allies harm. In that same speech, the President at 
that time, President Bill Clinton, said, And someday, some way, I 
guarantee you he will use the arsenal, and I think every one of you who 
has really worked on this for any length of time believes that, too.
  Continuing, In this century we learned through harsh experience that 
the only answer to aggression and illegal behavior is firmness, 
determination and, when necessary, action. In the next century the 
community of nations may see more and more the very kind of threat Iraq 
poses now, again, a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready 
to use them or provide them to terrorists, drug traffickers or 
organized criminals who travel the world among us, unnoticed, a 
different kind of emerging threat to the United States and our 
security.
  December 17, 1998, President Bill Clinton, I am convinced the 
decision I made to order this military action, though difficult, was 
absolutely the right thing to do. It is in our interests and in the 
interest of people around the world. Saddam Hussein has used weapons of 
mass destruction and ballistic missiles before. I have no doubt he 
would use them again if permitted to develop them.

  In another speech, this is by Richard Haas, he is a top Middle East 
expert on the National Security Council during the Bush administration. 
The stakes here are very real, and they are enormous. This is someone 
who has used weapons of mass destruction twice against his own people 
and against Iran. He does not have qualms.
  As we are going through the 1990s, and even as we were going through 
the first couple of years of the new millennium, we have seen that 
America was becoming more aware and our leaders were becoming more 
aware of these various threats.
  Madeleine Albright in a speech September 9, 1998, here is what she 
has to say. In this struggle, our adversaries are likely to avoid a 
traditional battlefield situation because there American dominance is 
well established. We must be concerned instead by weapons of mass 
destruction and by the cowardly instruments of sabotage and hidden 
bombs. These unconventional threats endanger not only our Armed Forces, 
but all Americans and America's friends everywhere. We must understand 
that this confrontation is long-term. It does not lend itself to quick 
victory. Force for peace, freedom and progress and law in the world, 
but no threat, no bomb, no terrorist can diminish America's 
determination to lead.
  She goes on, A second major threat to America's security also has 
entered a new phase, and that is weapons of mass destruction and the 
systems that deliver them. For decades we viewed this threat primarily 
through a narrow Cold War lens, and now our concerns have broadened. We 
are deeply concerned by regional tensions in South Asia where both 
India and Pakistan have conducted nuclear tests.
  Going on later on, she talks about chemical or biological warheads, 
and they are devilishly difficult to shoot down.
  Again, already in 1998 or maybe saying as late as 1998, Secretary of 
State Madeleine Albright identifying the threat to America, our people, 
our infrastructure and our allies. We need to continue this discussion 
and this debate to see whether this threat continues to be real.
  National Security Adviser Samuel Berger in an op-ed, Washington 
Times, October 16, 1998, And indeed, we have information that Iraq has 
assisted in the chemical weapons activity in Sudan with information 
linking Bin Laden to the Sudanese regime and the al-Shifa plant.
  The threats are real. They have been identified in administration 
after administration. This week and over the last couple of weeks, we 
have had the opportunity to get an update, and I would encourage my 
friends to take a look at some of the statements that have recently 
been made so that they can reach their own judgment as to the kind of 
threat that faces America today, because as we understand the threat 
and reach agreement as to what the threat may be, that will also then 
provide the foundation for our actions and our response to that threat.
  Steve Cambone, an Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence, 
delivered his views on this back on January 22, 2004. Here is what he 
had to say. We are a Nation at war. We do not know how long it will 
last, but it is unlikely to be short. We cannot know where or against 
whom all of its battles will be fought. There are multiple fronts in 
this war. There is no single theater of operations. We do know that we 
are all at risk, at home and abroad, civilians and military alike. We 
do know that battles and campaigns will be both conventional and 
unconventional in their conduct. Some of those battles and campaigns 
will be fought in the open, and others will be fought in secret where 
our victories will be known to only a few.

[[Page H678]]

  Going on, In describing the situation that we find ourselves in 
today, we are facing a turbulent and volatile world populated by a 
number of highly adaptive state and nonstate actors. Some of these are 
weighing whether to or to what extent or how they might oppose the 
interests of the United States and its friends. Others, such as 
terrorist organizations, who are responsible for attacks in the United 
States, Turkey, Indonesia, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, Israel, Kenya, the 
Philippines, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq and other places, have 
committed themselves to war.

                              {time}  1530

  ``In such a world, where largely ungoverned areas can serve as 
sanctuary for terrorists, and where political and military affairs in 
Europe, Asia, Africa, and South America continue to evolve, it is 
impossible to predict with confidence what nation or entity will pose a 
threat in 5, 10, or 20 years to the United States or to our friends and 
allies. In such a world, where our vulnerabilities are all too well 
understood by our potential adversaries, we should expect to be 
surprised.
  ``Not everything that unfolds in the coming years should be a 
surprise. We can expect that an adversary will continually search for 
an effective means to attack our people, our economic military and 
political power, and the people and the power of our friends and 
allies.
  ``We can also expect that an adversary will have access to a range of 
modern technologies and will be prepared to use them to magnify the 
destructiveness of their attacks, using truck bombs and improvised 
explosives; cyberintrusions to attack the computer systems upon which 
we rely; radio transmitters to jam our space assets; small laboratories 
to develop new biological or genetically altered agents; and chemical 
and nuclear technology and materials delivered by missile, plane, boat, 
or backpack to poison our environment and destroy human lives.''
  Also this week, I believe it was on Tuesday, Tuesday or Wednesday, 
February 24, George Tenant, the Director of the CIA, Director of the 
CIA under both President Clinton and President Bush, gave his update to 
the Senate Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and also the 
House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. And part of his 
testimony, unusual in that it is typically in closed session, but part 
of his testimony was given in open session, and that is available on 
various Web sites for people to read. And I encourage people to go back 
and read the full testimony that Director Tenant gave in front of the 
Senate's Select Committee on Intelligence.
  Let me just give you some brief excerpts of it. Because, again, what 
it does is it follows and builds on the conclusions, the statements, 
and the threat perception that President Clinton outlined for us in the 
late 1990s; that Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, that Sandy 
Berger and other members of the Clinton administration laid out as 
potential threats, and that now continue to be seen in this 
administration but are being seen in a new light. They are being seen 
through the lens of September 11.
  Here is what Director Tenant has to say: ``Terrorism: I will begin 
today on terrorism with a stark bottom line. The al Qaeda leadership 
structure we chartered after September 11 is seriously damaged, but the 
group remains as committed as ever to attacking the U.S. homeland. But 
as we continue the battle against al Qaeda, we must overcome a 
movement, a global movement infected by al Qaeda's radical agenda.
  ``In this battle we are moving forward in our knowledge of the enemy, 
his plans, capabilities, and intentions. And what we have learned 
continues to validate my deepest concern. It is a concern that was 
expressed to the Clinton administration, it is a concern that we 
continue to have,'' the statement concluding, ``that this enemy remains 
intent on obtaining and using catastrophic weapons.''
  During the 1990s, we saw what al Qaeda and other organizations were 
willing to do and what they were capable of doing. Director Tenant goes 
on and explains a little about the war against al Qaeda and its 
leadership:
  ``Military and intelligence operations by the United States and its 
allies overseas have degraded the group. Local al Qaeda cells are 
forced to make their own decisions because of disarray in the central 
leadership. We are creating large and growing gaps in the al Qaeda 
hierarchy. We are receiving a broad array of help from our coalition 
partners, who have been central to our effort against al Qaeda.''

  This is something that we found out in some of the travels and in the 
opportunities I have had to meet with individuals in the Middle East.
  ``We have a number of allies in the war against al Qaeda. Since the 
May 12 bombings, the Saudi government has shown an important commitment 
to fighting al Qaeda in the kingdom, and Saudi officers have paid with 
their lives. Elsewhere in the Arab world we have received valuable 
cooperation from Jordan, Morocco, Egypt, Algeria, the UAE, Oman, and 
many others. President Musharraf of Pakistan remains a courageous and 
indispensable ally, who has become a target of assassins because of the 
help he has given us.
  ``Partners in Southeast Asia have been instrumental in the roundup of 
key regional associates of al Qaeda. Our European partners work closely 
together to unravel and disrupt the continent-wide network of 
terrorists planning chemical, biological, and conventional attacks 
in,'' not in America, not in the U.S., ``in Europe.''
  Again continuing to quote: ``So we have made notable strides. But do 
not misunderstand me. I am not suggesting al Qaeda is defeated. It is 
not. We are still at war. This is a learning organization that remains 
committed to attacking the United States, its friends and its allies.''
  Again, these are the words of our Director of Intelligence, Director 
Tenant.
  Going on again: ``Successive blows to al Qaeda's central leadership 
have transformed the organization into a loose collection of regional 
networks that operate more autonomously. These regional components have 
demonstrated their operational prowess in the past year. The sites of 
their attacks span the entire reach of al Qaeda: Morocco, Kenya, 
Turkey, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and 
Indonesia.
  ``Al Qaeda seeks to influence the regional networks with operational 
training consultations and money. Khalid Shaikh Mohammed sent Hambali 
$50,000 for operations in Southeast Asia. You should not take the fact 
that these attacks occurred abroad to mean that the threat to the 
United States homeland has waned. As al Qaeda and associated groups 
undertook these attacks overseas, detainees consistently talk about the 
importance the group still attaches to striking the main enemy: the 
United States.
  ``Across the operational spectrum, air, maritime, special weapons, we 
have time and again uncovered plots that are chilling. On aircraft 
plots alone we have uncovered new plans to recruit pilots and to evade 
new security measures in Southeast Asia, the Middle East, and Europe. 
Even catastrophic attacks of the scale of 11 September remain within al 
Qaeda's reach. Make no mistake, these plots are hatched abroad, but 
they target U.S. soil or that of our allies.''
  Again, this is Director Tenant speaking to the Senate Permanent 
Select Committee on Intelligence earlier this week. And I encourage my 
colleagues to go to the Web sites and read this testimony in complete 
detail to better understand the threats that we still face; and if they 
have questions, to peel back the layers so that they can make their own 
personal assessment of the threats that still face the United States.
  Again Director Tenant goes on: ``So far I have been talking only 
about al Qaeda, but al Qaeda is not the limit of terrorist threat 
worldwide. Al Qaeda has infected others with its ideology, which 
depicts the United States as Islam's greatest foe.
  ``Mr. Chairman, what I want to say to you now may be the most 
important thing I tell you today. The steady growth of Osama bin 
Laden's anti-U.S. sentiment throughout the wider Suni extremist 
movement, and the broad dissemination of al Qaeda's destructive 
expertise, ensures that a serious threat will remain for the 
foreseeable future with or without al Qaeda in the picture.''
  I believe that if you go back and take a look at the statements in 
the Clinton

[[Page H679]]

administration, what Director Tenant laid out earlier this week is very 
little different; is very, very consistent with what the Clinton 
administration outlined during the 1990s. There is a real threat out 
there. That threat continues to evolve, it continues to change, and it 
continues to mature and respond to the steps that we take against it.
  Again going back to Director Tenant's testimony: ``A decade ago, bin 
Laden had a vision of rousing Islamic terrorists worldwide to attack 
the United States. He created al Qaeda to indoctrinate a worldwide 
movement and global jihad with America as the enemy, an enemy that 
would be attacked with every means at hand. In the minds of bin Laden 
and his cohorts, September 11 was the shining moment, their shot heard 
round the world, and they want to capitalize on it.
  ``And so even as al Qaeda reels from our blows, other extremist 
groups within the movement it influences become the next wave of 
terrorist threat. Dozens of such groups exist. These far-flung groups 
increasingly setting the agenda are redefining the threat we face. They 
are not creatures of bin Laden, so their fate is not tied to his. They 
have autonomous leadership. They pick their own targets. They plan 
their own attacks.
  ``Beyond these groups with the so-called foreign jihadists, 
individuals ready to fight anywhere they believe Muslim lands are under 
attack by what they see as infidel invaders. They have drawn broad 
support networks, have wide appeal, and enjoy a growing sense of 
support from Muslims who are not necessarily supporters of terrorism. 
The foreign jihadists see Iraq as a golden opportunity.''
  He kind of closes this part of his presentation to the Senate 
Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence with these words:
  ``Let me repeat: For the growing number of jihadists interested in 
attacking the United States, a spectacular attack on the U.S. homeland 
is the brass ring that many strive for.'' Let me just repeat that: 
``For the growing number of jihadists interested in attacking the 
United States, a spectacular attack on the U.S. homeland is the brass 
ring that many strive for.'' He then goes on, ``with or without 
encouragement by al Qaeda's central leadership.''
  Like I said, I would encourage my colleagues to go to various 
different sources and review this material from Director Tenant that 
was given in open session and is available to them. Go through it in 
detail. It is that important that they have that information as we move 
through this year.
  I genuinely believe and agree with the assessments that came out of 
the Clinton administration, that are coming out of this administration, 
and that have come out of Director Tenant as he worked with the Clinton 
administration and as he works in this administration, that the threat 
is real. I believe that that is a bipartisan conclusion.
  Working on the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, one of the 
things that you find is that on issues of national security there are 
not partisan differences. We strive to leave the partisan labels at the 
door when we move in. We recognize that the issues that we work on are 
so critical that we cannot politicize them. We cannot make them 
partisan. We need to have and focus on what is best for the security 
interest of the United States.
  In light of that, on a number of occasions members of the Permanent 
Select Committee on Intelligence have had the opportunity to travel 
abroad together to meet with leaders from different countries to assess 
what is going on in Iraq or what is going on in Afghanistan. And in 
that light, six of us had the opportunity a week and a half ago to go 
to Libya, to go to Iraq, and to go to Afghanistan.
  Let me just give a few highlights of that trip. I will have a diary 
available within the next week or so, if Members want to see a more 
detailed explanation of exactly my views of what happened on this trip; 
but it is a bipartisan delegation, four Republicans and two Democrats, 
who went on this trip.

                              {time}  1545

  Our first stop was in Libya. It is kind of amazing as the individuals 
who were leading this trip were planning it in late November and 
December, I do not think that any of us would have expected when we 
traveled overseas in February that we would be stopping in Libya. That 
is one place that congressional delegations and Americans basically did 
not go. But in December and early January, Colonel Qadhafi started 
signals out that he was willing to disengage in his weapons of mass 
destruction program, and he was willing to move forward and allow U.N., 
NATO or U.S. inspectors into the country to look at his programs and 
then destroy those programs, and then move into the area of having 
closer economic and cultural ties with the U.S. and Europe.
  So our State Department requested that we stop in Libya and meet with 
Colonel Qadhafi and encourage him in the direction that he was moving. 
After much effort and seeing much of the Libyan countryside, that is 
exactly what we had an opportunity to do, to express our appreciation 
to Colonel Qadhafi about the direction he was going and encourage him 
to continue in that direction.
  We still have a number of issues with Colonel Qadhafi in terms of how 
he treats the people in Libya, but we will continue to work with him on 
those outstanding issues, but recognize as he dismantles the weapon of 
mass destruction program in Libya, that provides us with a huge step 
forward. It is a significant step forward. Already we have learned much 
about how that whole network of chemical, biological, and nuclear 
weapons worked. It has helped us expose things in Pakistan and give 
some kind of a better understanding what currently may be available in 
North Korea, what may be available in Iran, and what these countries 
may have had access to on the international market, and how they would 
have accessed these goods and services and products, and how far they 
might have progressed.
  There has been much benefit as to Colonel Qadhafi and the steps he 
has already taken. We encourage him to continue moving in that 
direction.
  We also had some very interesting quotes as we sat down with an 
individual that we had read much about, but none of us ever had the 
opportunity or ever expected to have the opportunity to be in the same 
room with him or any of his parliamentary leaders. Some of their quotes 
included, ``God created man on this Earth. Therefore, they have natural 
needs and natural rights. These are not bestowed by anyone else, and 
they cannot be taken away by men.''
  Another quote that came out of our discussions, and remember, this is 
the Libyans talking to Members of the U.S. House of Representatives, 
``Every person has the right to develop to their full potential to live 
in peace, security, and prosperity.''
  Another quote, ``How can you enslave people who are born free?''
  Something that they are very proud of, and it is captured in this 
quote, ``The leader of the revolution has even received recognition 
with an international human rights award.''
  Let me go back to the first quote, and would it not be great if Libya 
and others lived by what they told us, ``God created man on this Earth. 
Therefore, they,'' meaning men, ``have natural needs and natural 
rights. These are not bestowed by anyone else, and they cannot be taken 
away by men.''
  We had an opportunity to spend about an hour and 45 minutes with 
Colonel Qadhafi. As I said, we were supposed to meet with him in the 
morning, and we finally ended up meeting with him late in the 
afternoon. It was a fascinating discussion. The message that he first 
delivered us, even though we were in a situation where we had been 
adversaries for such a long time, we never knew each other. It was felt 
that was not good, we ought to get together, and we ought to have a 
dialogue. And I think we agreed that we want to have that dialogue, and 
not just a dialogue on weapons of mass destruction, but also on human 
rights within his country.
  He talked about his decision to dismantle the weapon of mass 
destruction program and denounce terrorism, which was based solely on 
the self-interest of Libya. Our concern was not why Colonel Qadhafi has 
moved in that direction, but we ought to be thankful that he has 
decided to move in that direction. Colonel Qadhafi expressed a desire 
for the normalization of relationships between our countries, a desire 
for political economic ties, as well

[[Page H680]]

as cultural and student exchanges between Libya and the United States. 
It was a fascinating opportunity to get an insight into this man and 
into this country and to be part of perhaps history, to be part of a 
history that will be part of rewriting the chapter of relationships 
between the United States and Libya.
  We then went on to Iraq. I have been to Iraq a number of times before 
in measuring the progress of what has been going on. There are a number 
of reasons that we ought to be pleased about the success that we are 
having, but as we go through this, I think it is important to recognize 
that there is still so much to do. There is no doubt that we are making 
progress on the economic side. There is no doubt that we are making 
progress on the political side. There is no doubt that we are making 
progress on the national security side, but the bottom line is there 
was so far to go.
  Both Iraq and Afghanistan, remember, they had either been under the 
control of someone like Saddam Hussein for the last 30 years, a total 
destruction of the fiber within the country, the fiber of a civil 
society.
  In Afghanistan, we have the same thing, which has been under control 
of the Taliban or the Russians for the last 10, 12 years, and as 
President Karzai told us, what little we had in terms of infrastructure 
and a civil society, what little we had was destroyed during the 1990s.
  But we are now in the process of helping these countries rebuild a 
civil society, and by a civil society we mean there is a rule of law, 
that they understand the rules by which they as a society have agreed 
to live by; that they have an enforcement mechanism, and that they have 
a police force to monitor and enforce the laws and the rules that have 
been put in place; that they have a judiciary that can adjudicate 
disputes between the people in a peaceful way; and they also have the 
opportunity for representative government, and that they have an 
opportunity for transparent government bureaucracies.

  What does that mean? It means that the people have a high degree of 
confidence that the actions that are going on in the institutions of 
government are free from corruption and are achieving the results to 
benefit the people of the nation and not a few of the rulers.
  So we are working to establish a civil society in both Iraq and 
Afghanistan; and we are making progress, but do not underestimate the 
amount of work that needs to take place. Recognize how far these 
countries have to go, and recognize where they started from.
  When this Nation was founded, we started with the Articles of 
Confederation, found out that they did not work the way that we wanted 
them to, and then we developed the current Constitution. When our 
Founding Fathers got together that second time to develop the 
Constitution as we now know it, it took them 4\1/2\ months to write it.
  Afghanistan has just completed writing its Constitution and ratifying 
it. Hopefully they will be moving, and we are expecting that they will 
be moving towards elections this summer. It is a significant step 
forward and guarantees equal rights to men and women. Twenty-five 
percent of their new Parliament are guaranteed to be women by the 
nature of their Constitution.
  In Iraq, we are asking this government to come up with a process for 
selecting the people who will write their Constitution. And then 
developing the Constitution, we are basically giving them right around 
4 months to do that. It is important that we have an accelerated 
process, but we are asking these folks to do a lot in a very short 
period of time, and we are asking them to do it in a dangerous and 
difficult environment.
  There are still folks out there who want to ensure that we do not 
have a civil society in Iraq and that we do not have a civil society in 
Afghanistan because they recognize that as the roots of a civil society 
take place, they will no longer be able to benefit at the expense of 
the larger population, and they realize that they will lose the power 
to intimidate the people of Iraq and Afghanistan. These were brutal 
rulers in both of these regimes, killing thousands of their own people. 
In Iraq, it is estimated that Saddam Hussein and his henchmen killed 
over 300,000. We are asking to provide an opportunity to move these 
societies to the rule of law, transparent government, functioning 
judiciaries, a functioning free press and an openness in their society.
  There are a lot of statistics that are out, and I believe these are 
also available on various Web sites from the Pentagon, talking about 
the progress that we are making in Iraq, talking about the progress 
that we are making in the area of electricity, talking about the 
progress that we are making in the area of oil production, and talking 
about the progress that we are making in the area of education, opening 
schools, inspecting new schools, training teachers, having 1,500 
secondary students participate in student exchange programs, talking 
about what is going on in health care, providing training to 2,500 
medical staff by April 4. These are folks who for 20 years have been in 
isolation. There are all kinds of positive things that are going on 
that are helping to bring back a civil society in Iraq. We are making 
sure that we provide folks with basic human needs, including food and 
those types of things, telecommunications.
  There is a lot of information about the progress that we are making, 
but I just want to share a few things that I think are maybe as 
indicative, if not more indicative, of the change that may be taking 
place in Iraq. Let me state again, there is a tremendous amount of work 
that still needs to take place in Iraq. There is a tremendous amount of 
work that still needs to take place in a relatively short period of 
time in a difficult environment with people who are committed to seeing 
not that the coalition fails, but that the folks in Iraq, the Iraqis 
who want to build a new nation, that they will fail. These are folks 
that are thrilled that they have been liberated and that America is 
there. They are thrilled that Saddam Hussein is gone.
  The interesting story in Afghanistan is the most popular person, as 
President Karzai talked to us in Afghanistan, and he is a very popular 
President because he represents the move toward civil society in 
Afghanistan, but the most popular person in Afghanistan today is the 
American Ambassador to Afghanistan. President Karzai said it is a good 
thing your ambassador is not on the ballot because he might win.
  The Iraqis and the Afghans are optimistic about the opportunity they 
have to create a new Iraq and create a new Afghanistan.

                              {time}  1600

  Like I said, one of the most moving parts of our trip was when we 
went to one of the police academies in Baghdad. Part of creating a 
civil society is to make sure that not only do you have the rule of law 
which is going to be developed in their constitution but that the 
person on the street recognizes that there is a rule of law and there 
is a mechanism to enforce that. Part of that is the police force. We 
all know that that is essential by what the folks who are opposed to 
the coalition and to a new Iraq have been doing over the last couple of 
months. They are no longer targeting Americans and coalition forces. 
Sure, they will take a shot at us if they see a vulnerability or an 
opening, but what they are now doing is they are attacking those folks 
that are helping to put together the pieces of a new Iraq. A critical 
part of that is the police force.
  The week before we went to Iraq, there were a couple of just dramatic 
bombings, deadly bombings. Over 100 policemen or recruits were killed 
in two bombings. Each time we go on this trip and when we come home, we 
are committed to honoring the lives and the sacrifices of American and 
coalition forces in Iraq. What we also wanted to do this time is we 
wanted to extend our appreciation to the young men, and the young 
women, in Iraq who are stepping up and taking their place eagerly in 
the new Iraqi police force, recognizing that when they leave that 
academy they become the targets, because they are that link of the new 
Iraqis who are going to be putting together and enforcing and creating 
a civil society.
  They are the targets for those that are opposed to our success. They 
recognize that in the last couple of weeks 100 of them had been killed. 
Just this past Monday, I believe, or this past weekend, there was 
another bombing, another seven policemen were killed. We

[[Page H681]]

met with these young recruits. They are going to go through 4 to 6 
weeks of training. Some of them may be selected to go on for more 
advanced training. They will be the ones that in many cases will be 
patrolling the streets of Baghdad with coalition and American forces, 
to get additional training. We went there. Eloquently, the leader of 
our delegation, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Boehlert), expressed 
our appreciation and expressed our sympathy to these recruits in 
recognizing that 100 of their colleagues had died recently.
  We then had the opportunity to go around and to talk to many of these 
recruits as they were lined up in formation, and we shook hands with 
probably over 200 to 250 of the 500 troops or the policemen that were 
assembled there. Universally, the message was consistent. You could see 
the energy, the enthusiasm and the excitement on their faces and in 
their eyes. They were excited about what they were doing. You could 
hear it by what they said, because the message consistently as they 
shook our hands was, thank you. Thank you. Thank you for being here. 
Thank you for liberating us from Saddam Hussein and thank you for 
coming to us and expressing your support for what we are doing and the 
training and the jobs that we have committed ourselves to and 
recognizing the sacrifice that Iraqis are paying in building a new 
Iraq.
  And then as we moved past, as we shook their hands, they took their 
hand, placed it on their heart and moved it away, meaning the true 
sincerity by which they were expressing their words and their actions 
and their emotions. As we left and as we finished meeting with and 
talking with these recruits, they broke out into a spontaneous applause 
and cheer, recognizing the partnership and the kinship, although very 
few of them spoke English, but the partnership and the kinship that 
they felt with a congressional delegation from the United States and a 
police academy headed by a Brit that we all were on the same page, 
working and moving in the same direction of building a new and a free 
Iraq with a civil society and that we were united in the effort to 
fight terrorism in Iraq and Afghanistan.
  We saw the same kinds of things as we went and drove the streets in 
Iraq, the actions of the kids as we walked by or as we drove by through 
the streets of thumbs up. They knew what it was like before. They know 
what it is like now. They can only anticipate. But they anticipate with 
eagerness what they see happening in the future.
  I just want to share a few more things. One of the great things now 
about Iraq, it was a closed society for 30 years. There was a story of 
someone who was imprisoned. They asked him, there was a question as to, 
or there was somebody who wanted to help us, they said, well, he was a 
Baathist and these types of things and people were suspicious. But then 
he said, well, you know, I spent a year in jail, at which point in time 
it kind of perked the interest of some folks. They said, maybe this guy 
is all right. They said, why did you get into jail? He said, I 
badmouthed Saddam Hussein. I badmouthed Saddam Hussein to my best 
friend and my best friend told the authorities, and I ended up in jail.
  That was the kind of Iraq that they saw for 30 years. So they eagerly 
anticipate going in places they have never been. In this new society, 
they are experimenting, and they are seeing things they never had 
before. Freedom of dissent, freedom to express opinions, access to 
technology they never had before, cell phones, satellites; and as soon 
as they have that, they have access to information they never had 
before, and in a very short period of time, they are now finding that 
many Iraqis are putting up their own Web pages, communicating in e-
mails, talking about what it is like to be in a new Iraq, what they 
hope for in the future. Here is one story off one of the Web pages. 
Thursday, February 12, 2004:
  Hi, friends. I received this e-mail from a Kurdish Iraqi who now 
lives in exile. I post this without any editing on my part. This has 
moved me.
  This is an e-mail that someone gave to me and thought I would be 
interested in reading it.
  For the love of our nation. I am a big fan of Iraq. I love it inch by 
inch from Zakho to al-Fao. I love Iraq's mountains. I love Iraq's 
desert. I love Iraq's big cities and small villages. I love Iraq's old 
and new music. I love Iraq's poetry. I love Iraqis' sarcastic sense of 
humor. I love Iraq's tea shops. In short, without Iraq, there is no me.
  Born a Kurd in the breathtakingly beautiful North, I was taught as a 
child to speak, read and write both of Iraq's main languages, Kurdish 
and Arabic. Oh what a feeling it would be when one day I learn how to 
speak Assyrian and Turkish so that I could communicate with my 
Assyrian, Chaldean and Turkman brothers and sisters in their native 
language. I love the sound of the speakers at dawn when Iraqis are 
called to prayer, not because of my religious passion but because it is 
the practice of my people. I love the bells of the Iraqi churches on 
Sundays, not because of my Christian views or lack thereof but simply 
because of my Iraqiness.
  You see, comrades, I would like to ask of you a small favor. I want 
you to please look at the word Iraq. Look at it. Now picture it on 
Ahmad Radhi's jersey. Picture it on the atlas. Picture it in the index 
of every book where civilization is mentioned. Picture it at the United 
Nations. Picture it on your passport. The secret is very simple. To 
love Iraq and Iraqis without exception is to not think of Iraq as 
Saddam Hussein, as those in favor of the occupation and those opposed 
to it. It is not to think of it as to whom Kirkuk belongs. But what's 
really beautiful about Iraq is the fact that it predates all of these 
things, not as a piece of land through which two rivers flow but as a 
civilization where the setting of the stage for all that human beings 
have accomplished began. That is Iraq and we are blessed to be members 
of this land that has fascinated the world in its entirety.
  Why am I writing this? I am writing this because I see among us a 
bigger sense of division than unity. I see among us more feelings of 
resentment than those of joy. I see among us more anger than soberness. 
I see among us people like fanatic Kurds and people who instead of 
trying to understand them or convince them otherwise, they attack their 
people as if they have a mandate from the Kurds of Iraq.
  In Kirkuk, Kurdish flags virtually crisscross the city. In response 
to the Kurdish obsession with their flag, the Turkmans have done the 
same with their flag. The Arabs of Kirkuk are virtually trapped in the 
middle of too much ethnic tensions. They have every right to Kirkuk 
just as the people of Dohuk have every right to Najaf as long as their 
desire for residency is on the basis of their Iraqiness rather than 
their Kurdishness or Arabness or Shiaism or Turkmanism. Yes, I am 
inventing these terms because they should not exist.
  Am I boring you? Well, read on. There are 1 million Kurds living in 
Baghdad. That number is larger than the Kurds of Kirkuk, Sulaimania, 
Arbil and Dohuk, not combined but individually. What does that mean? In 
a democratic Iraq; that means 1 million votes. We are often deceived of 
hearing the Sunni center without considering the number of Kurds and 
Shia, not to mention Christian and Yezidi Iraqis that live in Baghdad 
and around Baghdad. We hear the Kurdish North without looking at Mozul, 
the second largest Arab city in Iraq after Baghdad. We hear of the Shia 
South without considering the Sunni, Kurds and Arabs that live all 
around the south from Basra to Hilla to Najaf to Karbala.
  The bottom line is, Iraq is the land of the Iraqis. The groups that 
constitute our beautiful mosaic should be Iraqis before they are 
Kurdish, Arabic, Assyrian. Once an Iraqi government is established and 
the various Iraqi groups are given something to lose, they will 
naturally feel more Iraqi. Once we are sober and awakened, things will 
be different. Have faith in Iraq because there is no land on Earth that 
is more beautiful than Iraq. Behold, one little beautiful flower of new 
Mesopotamian nationalism blossoms. More will follow. Salaam.
  There are all kinds of these. Let me go to the last one. This is 
interesting because one of the key issues about what is going to be 
happening in Iraq and Afghanistan and other parts of the Muslim world 
is what is going to happen to the women, will they have equal rights. 
Like I said, in Afghanistan 25

[[Page H682]]

percent of the new parliament will consist of women. The women are 
guaranteed equal rights in the constitution, equal rights between men 
and women. It is a very, very positive statement. Here is another: 
``Iraqi Women Groups Take to the Streets.''
  Iraqi women representing 55 women groups and organizations from all 
over Iraq gathered at Fardus Square this morning to sign a petition 
against resolution 137 to demand equal rights and fair, unbiased 
representation, at least 40 percent, in the future Iraqi transitional 
council, governorate and municipal councils. Forty percent. They are 
not satisfied with what they got in Afghanistan with 25. They want at 
least 40 percent.
  The sit-in was organized by the Supreme Council of Iraqi Women, the 
Advisory Committee for Women Affairs, and the Iraqi Women Network. 
Other noted women groups were present such as the Iraqi Contemporary 
Women Movement, Organization for Women Freedom in Iraq, Iraqi Hope 
Association, Independent Women Organization, Women's Union of 
Kurdistan, Kurdistan Free Women Movement, Iraqi Women Revival 
Organization, and the Iraqi Students and Youth Union. Over 55 different 
groups. Think of it, in a very short period of time, the number of 
organizations that are forming and learning how to participate in 
representative government. They will make mistakes, but they are going 
through a very constructive process. They are learning how to express 
their voice in a meaningful way that they have not had the opportunity 
to do.
  Several women activists gave speeches. Planning Minister Dr. Mahdi 
Al-Hafudh shyly gave a brief word of support and signed the petition. 
It got interesting when a woman in a burqa showed up at the gathering 
with her three kids. Remember, this is all on their Internet, the Web 
pages. Reporters all stormed forward trying to interview her. Her 
husband was imprisoned for years by the former regime for political 
reasons, only to be executed in the end and for her to pay for the 
bullets. A very heart-rending story. She held his death certificate, as 
you can see in the pictures. She said, we didn't wait all these years 
without the most basic rights to be denied them now. An Arab reporter 
asked her if she was Sunni or Shiite.

                              {time}  1615

  Her quote: `` `I'm neither,' she snapped at him. `I'm an Iraqi 
citizen first and foremost, and I refuse to be asked such a question.'
  ``AYS, and I, skulked around Fardus square and took pictures. Omar 
joined us later. We signed the petition against Resolution 137 and the 
woman offered us a rose. If you want to sign it, there is an on-line 
petition which you can find at this site. Equality in Iraq. The 
petitions are to be submitted to Paul Bremer, and Kofi Annan later this 
week. Bremer has made it known that he will veto any law that will not 
recognize basic civil freedoms, but Resolution 137 is yet to be vetoed.
  ``You can find pictures of the gathering'' as well.
  Communication and representative government and participation is 
alive and well, as the other e-mail indicated and closed, ``Behold, one 
little beautiful flower of new Mesopotamian nationalism blossoms. More 
will follow.'' Let us hope and pray that that is exactly what will 
happen in Iraq. There is a tremendous amount of work that has been 
accomplished in Iraq. There is a tremendous amount of work that has 
been accomplished in Afghanistan. There is a tremendous amount of work 
that needs to still occur for those flowers, additional blossoms, to 
bloom. But that is what we are working for so that these folks can have 
a representative government, a new and free Iraq and a new and free 
Afghanistan.

                          ____________________