[Congressional Record Volume 150, Number 62 (Thursday, May 6, 2004)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4973-S4980]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
The Republic of Georgia
Before I speak on that, I want to draw the attention of my colleagues
to something that happened, on a very positive note, in the Republic of
Georgia, one of the former Soviet Union
[[Page S4974]]
countries. It was reported today that one of the breakaway regions,
Ajaria, has voluntarily come back into Georgia. The people have thrown
out, vanquished kind of a local thuggish dictator, Aslan Abashidze, who
had ruled this region for about 10 years. Thousands of Ajaris are now
out in the streets, bringing Georgia back together, throwing out this
guy who had been really a ruthless local, small-scale dictator in the
region, and bringing the people back together of Georgia.
This doesn't get the publicity of Georgia's ``rose revolution'' of
last November, but the people are rising up and saying they want
democracy, they want to be part of this country. We need a change in
leadership. They have done it by nonviolent means. It is inspiring to
read about and to see that has taken place and that the Georgians who
we are working with and supporting are getting this done. A number of
people celebrating this victory are waving Georgian flags and American
flags. A number of places in the world would not be standing free if it
weren't for us, and they appreciate that.
Mr. President, now speaking on Iraq and Mr. Negroponte's nomination
to the position of Ambassador of the United States to Iraq, he is an
eminently qualified individual. I have worked with him in the Foreign
Relations Committee. He worked in Central America, and he has been our
representative in the U.N. He is the exact type of person we need to
have in the region. He will take us from being the occupying power to a
supporting role and not a governing role in Iraq. He understands that
in a great way. Mr. Negroponte has great relationships around the world
and he is a very wise man. I think he will do an excellent job for us.
We all lament what has taken place in the Iraqi prisons and the
problems and images that created. But more than the moral outrage this
has generated, these terrible acts by a few do a great disservice to
the men and women who have already lost their lives in the effort to
free Iraq and help the people of Iraq to govern themselves.
I had a closed town hall meeting with soldiers at Fort Reilly. They
had recently returned from Iraq--about 300 Army men and women who had
come back and served for an extended stay in Iraq. To a person, they
were positive about the events that have taken place overall in Iraq.
Yes, there have been problems and, yes, this is war. But they would
talk about helping the children; they would talk about opening schools;
they would talk about power services being brought back to levels
higher, to pre-Saddam levels in that country. They would talk in
glowing terms about what they are getting done on building a free,
open, democratic Iraq.
Yes, problems, yes, difficulties, and, yes, lost American lives. We
have had 37 people stationed at Fort Reilly killed in this conflict.
We have had a number of Kansans, as there have been people from all
over the Nation, who have given their lives for the freedom of the
people of Iraq and security for the people of American. We should not
let the actions of a few do disservice to so many who have given their
lives in this great and worthy cause.
The damage done to our credibility in Iraq and the Middle East is
going to be difficult to rebuild, but we must do that in earnest.
People must be held accountable, especially those in the chain of
command with direct control over the prison system. Perhaps it is time
this prison that has such a terrible legacy in Iraq in the Saddam era
simply be closed, torn down, and never used as a prison again.
Let's keep in mind why we are in Iraq. I met with Jalal Talabani. He
is one of the key leaders of the Iraqi Governing Council. He is a
gentleman with whom I worked over the years as we moved forward in this
country to confront the dictatorship of Saddam Hussein.
Let me give a very brief history lesson. He was involved in the Iraqi
coalition, the diaspora. Actually, he is from the Kurdish part of the
country, so he was in country. He has been involved in that group for
some period of time seeking the United States to come forward and
support the liberation of Iraq.
I remind my colleagues, in 1998, we passed the Iraq Liberation Act
which called for regime change in Iraq. That was signed into law by
President Bill Clinton who supported it. Mr. Talabani was involved in
that effort from the outset. The Kurdish region has self-governance and
has had it for the past 10 years and is doing remarkably well. He
reminded me of a poll recently taken by CNN that had the Kurdish people
supporting America and George Bush by over 95 percent and thankful for
what is taking place, the liberating of their country and their region.
He also said this to me: It is shameful to us that we as Iraqis are
sitting down and not taking on the role of governing and security
within our country while American soldiers are being killed.
He said: It is our duty--the Iraqis' duty--to fight the terrorists,
and we must do this as soon as possible.
I agree, exclamation mark, and we have to move in that direction. For
years, the people of Iraq suffered under the brutal dictatorship of
Saddam Hussein. There will be a trial sometime soon, hopefully this
year, of Saddam Hussein. The world will see the atrocities, the
hundreds of thousands of people buried in mass graves as a result of
this man's rule.
Yet few--except for some countries in the region, Kuwait and Israel--
dare to denounce Hussein for what he did to his own people. Especially
those countries we call our allies in the Middle East, Egypt and Saudi
Arabia, have failed to assume the moral leadership to tell about the
Saddam Hussein regime. We stepped into this void to do what others were
unwilling to do. We did so grudgingly because going to war is never an
easy decision for any country, particularly for America.
Even before the Iraqi war resolution in 2002, we spent years
supporting the passage of one resolution after another at the U.N. to
make clear that the Iraqi regime was an outlaw regime condemned by the
international community. We engaged the American people. After a
thorough debate in the Senate regarding the risk, this Congress
overwhelmingly voted to give the President the legal authority to go to
war in Iraq. We decided as a nation we did not want America to
compromise its moral authority by avoiding the demands of leadership.
We sought freedom for the Iraqis and for that freedom to spread
throughout the Arab world, and we desired security for Americans.
It is a heavy burden. At critical moments in world history, we have
not hesitated to carry this burden places far from home. Wherever we
went, our men and women in uniform inspired others, bringing hope and
freedom to millions.
I can quote a young man from Union Town, KS, who died in Afghanistan.
I talked with his mother about his death and his service. He died at 21
years of age. His mother said: He e-mailed me home, and he said:
I would rather die for a cause than of one.
How better do we summarize it than that? He put his life on the line
so others in Afghanistan, on the other side of the world, can be free.
On the interrogations, I understand interrogations are necessary in a
war against a merciless enemy. But we have a long and honorable
military tradition that is certainly not reflected in the photos from
the Iraqi prison. Let's be guided by the moral courage to acknowledge
our mistakes and to change what needs to be changed, and we will, and
that is our pledge to the world. We need to behave better, be more
humble, and understand that the war in Iraq, and the broader war on
terrorism, is also a war of ideas and values.
Those who threaten our soldiers, our diplomats, and even ordinary
Americans, as happened on 9/11, believe in hateful ideas. We do not
agree with those ideas. We need to help the people of Iraq and others
in the Middle East understand this war of ideas; that it is not
something we can do for them, they must do it for themselves. Only the
people of Iraq and the millions of Arabs who yearn for freedom can do
that.
We must continue in our effort to give the Iraqis self-rule and free
elections. These are our aspirations for the Iraqi people, and they are
their aspirations as well. It is up to them to have the courage to move
on, to realize these aspirations in a free nation that will bring
democracy to their country and to the Middle East.
We have in Ambassador Negroponte the chance to start a new chapter.
On
[[Page S4975]]
July 1, sovereignty will pass to the Iraqis. Ambassador Negroponte has
enormous responsibility, and judging by his background, I cannot think
of anybody better qualified to do this.
In his capacity as the Ambassador to Iraq, I know he understands his
role to be fundamentally different from that of Ambassador Bremer.
Whereas the CPA is the ultimate political authority in Iraq, the
Embassy will be in a supportive, not commanding, role. His role is to
provide support in democratization and rule of law, religious freedom
and tolerance, economic reconstruction, and security and
counterterrorism. His mission will be to further cooperation with the
U.N., the international community, and independent Iraqi electoral
authorities, and all aspects of election preparation, which is critical
for elections for a transitional national assembly, no later than the
end of January 2005.
He will need to assist the U.N. in establishing an independent
electoral commission, an electoral law, and a political parties' law,
encourage Iraqis to establish effective governing institutions in
Baghdad and the provinces, as well as a myriad reconstruction efforts.
This will be a critically important area because he will be responsible
for holding these projects to the highest standards of financial
accountability. He has the responsibility to the American people that
the money for Iraq will be spent without waste and fraud, and in this
context, he will need to encourage Iraq's new leaders to choose sound
economic policies and enforce high standards of integrity in public
administration.
Ambassador Negroponte will also need to play a key role in building
and strengthening the capacity of Iraqi security services to deal with
both domestic extremists and foreign terrorists so that they patrol and
deal with terrorists in their country and our troops are garrisoned. He
should continue to bolster the role of a robust multinational force,
but mostly build up the Iraqi force.
Finally, he should make sure the role of the U.N. does not come at
the expense of U.S. influence or interest, but rather the efforts be
well coordinated and complementary.
Ambassador Negroponte has a big job. He is up to it, and I support
his nomination to be Ambassador for the United States in Iraq.
Mr. President, I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Chafee). The Senator from Oregon.
Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, what is the parliamentary situation?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority side has 80 minutes.
Mr. HATCH. We are on the Negroponte nomination?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is correct.
Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I stand today in full support of the
President's nominee to be our first ambassador to the new Iraq,
Ambassador John D. Negroponte. This is the most important nomination
for an ambassador that we have considered in several decades.
This moment is historic.
We are asked to approve the President's choice for an ambassador to a
country whose previous leadership was an enemy to America, to its
neighbors and to its own people. That dictatorship, the brutal and
bloody regime of Saddam Hussein, was removed by force, by a coalition
of nations led by this country, in a military campaign where we still
face, every day, bloody resistance from the remnants of Saddam's
Ba'athis regime, his criminal associates, and the international
jihadists who have joined forces with the tattered remnants of the Arab
world's bloodiest regime.
We are engaged in a conflict we cannot, and will not, lose and the
President has shown that our military determination is matched by our
political determination to return this country to its people, beginning
with the opening of an American embassy on July 1 of this year.
That we are providing our advice and consent on this ambassadorial
nomination demonstrates that this President is dedicated to returning
sovereignty to the Iraqi people. Under the President's direction,
Ambassador Bremer and the Coalition Provisional Authority, working with
the international community, now represented by U.N. Special Envoy
Lakhdar Brahimi, have listened to Iraqi leaders and are holding to the
deadline of June 30 for the transfer of authority.
That transfer of authority and the return of sovereignty require that
the U.S. political presence be transferred from the office of the
administrator, held by Ambassador Bremer, to a U.S. embassy, to be led,
if this Senate approves, by Ambassador Negroponte.
Jerry Bremer and John Negroponte are two of the finest diplomats ever
to serve this country. Their contributions throughout their careers
reveal skill and dedication that will set the standards for our
diplomatic corps for generations to come.
I truly hope that Ambassador Bremer, when his historic mission is
over with the CPA, will continue to play a leading role representing
our country to the world.
Ambassador Negroponte has represented our country to the world on
many fronts, serving as ambassador in the Philippines, Mexico and
Honduras. Most recently he has served as permanent representative to
the United Nations, where he has been as our ambassador since September
18, 2001.
There are those who charge that this administration has been unduly
unilateral, caustic to coalition-building, and dismissive of
the diplomacy necessary to winning the war on terrorism that erupted on
our land on September 11, 2001.
Frankly, that charge, now becoming a theme in a campaign year, leaves
me baffled.
It reveals deeply flawed thinking, and deeply flawed perception.
Diplomacy cannot be measured by outcomes as expected by the
multilateralists. This is a definition of diplomatic success that
becomes a euphemism for subjugating national interest to international
veto.
The citizens of Utah reject this thinking, and they are correct. And
I believe the rest of the country does as well.
If diplomacy cannot be measured by multilateral consensus, it should
not be shunted by unilateral arrogance. To suggest, as many on the left
seem to do these days, that this administration has ignored diplomacy
is to, in my opinion, ignore the facts.
This administration has been, in my opinion, extraordinarily engaged
in the international community.
No President since the founding of the United Nations has been as
respectful, solicitous and encouraging of the United Nations as has
President Bush. That he has done so without ever sacrificing the
fundamental sovereignty that rests in our Constitution makes him no
less remarkable for the very public appeals he has made directly to the
United Nations.
On November 10, 2001, fewer than 2 months after the most catastrophic
terrorist attacks on our homeland in the history of the Republic,
President Bush traveled from Washington to speak before the U.N., where
he recognized:
The United Nations has risen to this responsibility. On the
12th of September, these buildings opened for emergency
meetings of the General Assembly and the Security Council.
Before the sun had set, these attacks on the world stood
condemned by the world. And I want to thank you for this
strong and principled stand.
Less than a year later, on the day after the first anniversary of
September 11, President Bush traveled from the White House to address
the General Assembly again, where he declared:
The conduct of the Iraqi regime is a threat to the
authority of the United Nations, and a threat to peace. Iraq
has answered a decade of U.N. demands with a decade of
defiance. All the world now faces a test, and the United
Nations a difficult and defining moment. Are Security Council
resolutions to be honored and enforced, or cast aside without
consequence? Will the United Nations serve the purpose of its
founding, or will it be irrelevant?
The President answered the question:
The United States helped found the United Nations. We want
the United Nations to be effective, and respectful, and
successful. We want the resolutions of the world's most
important multilateral body to be enforced.
Critics of this administration have declared that our doctrine of
preemption, not a doctrine new to this administration, is incompatible
with a desire for international consensus.
This is simply not true.
For a nuanced perspective, may I recommend a review of none other
than Secretary General Kofi Annan's words,
[[Page S4976]]
in his address of October, 2003 before the General Assembly? In that
speech, he was expected to denounce the doctrine of preemption. But
while he stood by the principle of collective action enshrined in
article 51 of the U.N. Charter, he recognized, as the honest man he is,
that states which were threatened had to respond, and that if the
United Nations were to retain its legitimacy in the 21st century, it
would have to develop mechanisms to promptly address the threats of
this new century.
In my view, this was a recognition, by the Secretary General of the
United Nations no less, that in dealing with Iraq, 12 years and 14
resolutions without resolve could not be the way the United Nations
retained its relevancy in addressing the security challenges we face
today.
In that same week, President Bush addressed the General Assembly yet
a third time. And I note that no President of the United States has
addressed the General Assembly three times in one term. He declared:
The Security Council was right to be alarmed about Iraq.
The Security Council was right to declare that Iraq destroy
its illegal weapons and prove that it had done so. The
Security Council was right to vow serious consequences if
Iraq refused to comply. And because there were consequences,
because a coalition of nations acted to defend the peace, and
the credibility of the United Nations, Iraq is free and today
we are joined in the General Assembly by representatives of a
liberated country.
John Negroponte, as ambassador to the United Nations, stood by the
President during those three historic addresses to the international
community.
Today, the President has chosen our current ambassador to the United
Nations, John Negroponte, to be the first U.S. ambassador to an Iraq
liberated from tyranny.
Ambassador Negroponte has worked with the United Nations through this
most historic of times. During this time, he worked closely with U.N.
Special Envoy Lakhdar Brahimi on supporting Afghanistan after our
forces deposed the Taliban. Ambassador Brahimi's efforts to guide the
transition in Iraq from the Coalition Provisional Authority to
sovereignty under an interim government has, as my colleagues know, the
support of President Bush and his administration.
Ambassador Negroponte understands this. In his statement before the
Senate Foreign Relations Committee, he said:
The prospect of legitimacy that the United Nations can
bring to the process of political reconciliation is a point
of crucial interest in both the region and the broader
international community. With an expanded United Nations role
in the political arena, I believe that it will be easier to
generate the international support that the successful
rehabilitation of Iraq requires. Secretary General Annan's
and Ambassador Brahimi's contributions may well open the door
to creative thinking about ways in which the international
community, as well as the Coalition, can further contribute
to the process of rehabilitating Iraq, both politically and
economically.
I want to be clear that a vital United Nations role does not come at
the expense of the United States' influence or interests. Our efforts
can be well coordinated and complementary; there is ample evidence
across a broad range of situations that a strong partnership with the
international community, including the United Nations organization, is
in our strategic interest.
I hope my colleagues recognize that in supporting this nominee, we
are supporting a man of exceptional experience, a man who represents
the best thinking by this administration on the challenges we still
face in Iraq. He is also a very good man, a good father, a good
husband. He is an example to us all.
Let us be honest: The challenges in Iraq remain large.
Our engagement there is historic, and our commitment to support this
engagement until we achieve success must remain strong.
As all of my colleagues, I have been shocked by the reports out of
Abu Ghraib prison in the past weeks.
I have been shocked and I have been disgusted.
I join the people of Utah, and the good citizens throughout this
country, in expressing how appalled we all are at the barbarous acts we
have witnessed. In the prison that Saddam Hussein used to torture
Iraqis, a few Americans have engaged in acts that demean Iraqis and
besmirch the honor of Americans in uniform.
Every day, members of the American military are risking their lives
in Iraq, in order to bring about a better society for the Iraqi people.
In combat, American military, the best trained in the world, have,
time and again, exercised restraint of force in order to minimize
civilian casualties. Sometimes that restraint has resulted in
increasing the risk to our soldiers. That a handful of American
soldiers committing brutalities in one of Saddam's reclaimed prisons
could occur is worthy of all of our outrage--not least because we are
proud of the honor and decency and sacrifice offered by the vast
majority of our military in Iraq everyday.
We must expose what went on in Abu Ghraib prison. We must conduct
full investigations, and follow those investigations wherever they
lead. Those who committed crimes must and will be held accountable.
Respect for the Iraqi people demands this, as does respect for the
honor of all Americans in uniform, and all Americans who support them.
The security situation in Iraq is still hostile. We face enormous
challenges, challenges we will meet. We have learned in recent days
about the President's request for appropriations to fund our historic
mission. This will lead to further debate, as it should.
Our duty as legislators is to render democratic scrutiny to the most
important issues before this government.
If you want to support the transition to the first stage of Iraqi
sovereignty, as the President has committed to do by the end of June,
if you want to support continuing our appeal to the international
community to join in the historic cause of rebuilding Iraq, and if you
want to support this President, as he asserts his constitutional
prerogative to conduct diplomacy at this most critical time in the
history of our foreign policy, you must support his superb selection of
John D. Negroponte to be the first Ambassador to an Iraq free of
despotism.
He is certainly going to have my vote. I have met him in various
nations around the world. I have seen him in action in diplomacy. I
know what a brilliant man he is, I know what a good man he is, I know
what a fine man he is, I know what a good family man he is, and I know
what he has meant to the diplomatic corps in this country, and I know
what he has meant at the United Nations.
I support him fully, and I hope every other Senator in this body will
support him as well. There may be some who do not, but if they don't,
they just plain do not know the man.
This is not an easy position. This is a position which will take a
great deal of courage, a great deal of diplomacy, a great deal of
common sense, a great deal of genius. This is the fellow who can
provide all that.
Mr. President, 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. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President. I do appreciate the opportunity to
discuss my very good friend, John Negroponte, in support of his
nomination to be the United States Ambassador to Iraq. John and I have
known each other since 1977 with his appointment as Deputy Assistant
Secretary of State for Oceans and Fisheries Affairs with the rank of
Ambassador. Because he handled several fisheries negotiations of vital
interest to my state, John was a frequent visitor to Alaska. In 1978,
John negotiated a breakthrough agreement with the Government of Japan
which provided crucial protection for Alaskan salmon stocks from
Japanese high seas fishing fleets. This agreement provided countless
benefits to the Alaskan fishing community which endure to this day.
I have also had the pleasure of working with John in his subsequent
assignments: as Ambassador to Honduras; as Assistant Secretary for
Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs, as
Ambassador to the Philippines and more recently as U.S. Ambassador to
the United Nations. In each situation, I was able to witness
[[Page S4977]]
first hand his ability to manage large and complex diplomatic missions
and to observe his effectiveness and sensitivity in dealing with his
foreign counterparts.
Educated at Yale, he speaks five languages fluently--something that I
consider a true asset for this position.
I believe President Bush, on the recommendation of Secretary of State
Powell, has chosen extremely wisely and well in his selection of John
to be our Nation's representative in Iraq. I also believe that at this
point in time in our Nation's history, it is vital to have John at the
helm in Iraq--we will need his expertise to help guide us through the
next few months. I can tell you without any question, this man is one
of the most distinguished public servants that I have had the honor of
knowing and serving with. I know his family and I know this man.
With the unfortunate development we have recently had in terms of the
conduct of some of the people involved in the prisons in Iraq, I am
confident that John Negroponte is the man necessary to be there, in
Iraq, to represent our Government. He will represent us well, and we
will be very well served by his confirmation.
I urge the Senate to quickly confirm John Negroponte as our
Ambassador to Iraq. I thank the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Jersey.
Mr. CORZINE. Mr. President, may I inquire of the time allocation for
each side?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. There are 10 minutes remaining.
Mr. CORZINE. I request permission to use 5 of those minutes and be
informed when 4 minutes have been used of the time allocated.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. CORZINE. Mr. President, like you, I sit on the Foreign Relations
Committee and I reviewed the nomination of this experienced diplomat,
our U.N. Ambassador, John Negroponte. I, too, both in the Foreign
Relations Committee and on the floor, will have voted for his
confirmation.
I do that, acknowledging, however, there are legitimate questions
that can be raised about previous concerns in his tenure as an
ambassador in Honduras, and human rights violations which are so
important in the context of some of the things that are of great
concern to us today.
But more troubling to me is the context in which this confirmation is
actually being considered.
The reality is, once again we are doing something on the fly. We are
rushing to confirm an ambassador to maybe the most important choice and
role we have. In and of itself, it is indicative of the crisis we have
in Iraq--frankly, the mess Ambassador Negroponte will be walking into.
If the administration--I am very troubled about this--sticks with an
arbitrary, artificial June 30 deadline, Ambassador Negroponte's job
will begin in less than 2 weeks with little or no definition about what
he will be doing. There are no secure or thoughtful political or
security plans in place. We do not know who will be making those
judgments, how those people will be chosen, their role, or what the
true definition of sovereignty in the context of this June 30 transfer
will be all about. We do not know how they will be selected. We do not
know what the role of the Ambassador will be with regard to those
individuals. It is very unclear what sovereignty means.
By the way, put into the most dramatic terms today, what is the role
of the new ambassador with regard to what is happening to the prison
guards? Who will be responsible for that? Sovereignty questions are
totally unclear. We still do not have a structure for our forces and
how they fit in and what we do going forward and what is the
relationship with the United Nations.
This is a real problem. We continue with failed and confusing
policies. They are true with regard to the U.S. Ambassador. But they
reflect the basic incompetence we have seen with regard to our crippled
occupation from the start, some might even say our crippled war from
the start, because we executed this with real questions about what the
justification was with regard to weapons of mass destruction in
relation to al-Qaida. We have continued it with poor planning, or no
planning, with regard to the occupation that has been in place.
Right from the start, there were questions about what the force
structure needed to be on the ground. We have heard over and over again
the warnings General Shinseki gave us, several hundred thousand troops,
dismissed out of hand by the Pentagon. The administration has refused
to talk about the cost of this occupation and what the cost to the
American people will be, aside from the tragedy of the loss of life.
When there have been predictions, they have been so far off base it has
made no sense in the context of reality.
The administration promised or thought we would be greeted as
liberators. We have been anything but that. Seventy percent of the
Iraqi people believe we are occupiers. There has been serious
resistance with the insurgency. By the way, history would have shown
that would be the indication that would occur in the Middle East. But
we dismissed every single outside expert, Member of Congress, who might
have raised any questions about it and emphasized we had a coalition of
the willing that was anything but a serious coalition.
Ninety percent of the cost, 90 percent of the troops, 90 percent of
the effort, or more, were all American. It is an American occupation.
The administration continues with these failed policies. As we go
forward, I certainly think we see it very clearly in the lack of
clarity with regard to this tragic situation we see now with regard to
the administration of prisons and detainees. The fact is, no matter
what we do, every time the administration executes one of these
policies, there is a flip-flop.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator has 1 minute remaining.
Mr. CORZINE. The idea that we were not going to have the U.N.
involved; now we have the U.N. involved. We were going to have de-
Baathification; and then we have reentry of Baaths. The issue of
deployment of troops.
I am supportive of this Ambassador, but it is high time we get a
consistent, thoughtful policy that is vetted with more than a few,
narrow interests inside the Pentagon and maybe inside the White House.
We need to have a real discussion about the direction of our policies
on occupation and transition of political power and sovereignty. It is
too costly.
In the context of this series of events that all Americans are
repulsed by, we need to stand back and say it is time to be thoughtful
and fully vet the kinds of policies we are going to put in place
because this is a long-term project.
I yield the floor.
Mr. BUNNING. Mr. President, I want to talk briefly about Ambassador
John Negroponte and support his confirmation to be the United States'
first ambassador to the free and democratic Iraq. Not only will he be
the first ambassador to the free and democratic Iraq, but he will be
the first ambassador to Iraq since the first Gulf War in 1991.
Ambassador Negroponte is one of the most experienced diplomats in the
State Department. His experience is necessary for this job because he
will be assuming one of the most challenging and important positions
the State Department has ever had.
Throughout his career in the State Department, Ambassador Negroponte
has been stationed at eight different posts covering most parts of the
world. While he has not been previously stationed in the Middle East, I
have no doubt in his ability to handle the task ahead. His experience
representing the United States at the United Nations since September 11
and serving in nations like Vietnam and Honduras during periods of
turmoil will guide him during Iraq's transition to democratic self-
government.
Many challenges lie ahead for Iraq, including holding orderly
elections, establishing government bodies, reconstructing
infrastructure and the economy, and securing the country. The United
States will be a partner for Iraqis throughout the coming challenges.
Critical to the successful transition to a sovereign Iraq is the
participation of the international community. Ambassador Negroponte has
earned respect among his colleagues while representing the United
States at the United Nations. He will do a fine job
[[Page S4978]]
working with other nations to help Iraq flourish under the rule of
Iraqis.
In summary, I believe President Bush has made a fine choice in
nominating Ambassador Negroponte. I support his nomination and
encourage my colleagues to swiftly confirm him to this vital position.
Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, I rise in strong support of the nomination
of John Negroponte to be our U.S. Ambassador to Iraq. When he takes his
oath of office, Ambassador Negroponte will be our first ambassador to
Iraq since the Gulf War of 1991.
I have had the pleasure of meeting with the ambassador many times
over the last 3 years. He was a member of the Foreign Service from 1960
to 1997 and he is currently serving as the U.S. Permanent
Representative to the United Nations. His leadership there has been
exemplary as he has provided our country with a strong voice and a
presence at the United Nations that has been vital during these
extremely difficult times. His experience at the United Nations gives
him a great deal of insight into the thinking of the international
community that will be invaluable in his new role in Iraq.
Soon Iraq will be welcomed back into the family of nations and the
rights and freedom so cherished by the people of our nation will become
a part of daily life in Iraq. Given our history in the region, I am
certain my colleagues understand the wisdom of appointing an
experienced diplomat with an informed opinion and a vision for the
installation of a new government and the birth of a new nation of Iraq.
During our consideration of Ambassador Negroponte's nomination, I
have heard some of my colleagues express their concerns about recent
events in Iraq. That is understandable, because these are concerns we
all share about this sensitive region of the world. We must not,
however, allow those legitimate concerns to be politicized and used as
a club against the President and his efforts to stabilize Iraq and
introduce democracy there. Our soldiers' lives are on the line and we
owe them every consideration while they are in harm's way.
Before anyone says I am being overly sensitive to the rhetoric of a
campaign year, let me share with you a few of the details about what
happened during a trip I took in April when I was able to visit wounded
U.S. soldiers at Landstuhl Regional Medical Center in Germany. Before
we met them, I was anticipating they would need some encouragement and
we should try to lift their spirits after all they'd been through. The
opposite turned out to be the case. They encouraged me and strengthened
my spirit and resolve to see this through to the end. Every one of
them, these brave men and women, said to me--``We are making a
difference in Iraq. We know the people there. We know our job. We are
doing our job and the people are responding to what we are doing. We
are making a difference and we want to go back there with our comrades
so we can finish the job.''
I don't believe anyone knows better than those who are serving on the
front lines--those actually doing the work and living the dangers of
life in a war zone every day. We have made a difference in Iraq. We
have removed a brutal dictator from power and we are working with the
Iraqi people to build a nation based on democracy and freedom. We are
continuing to make a difference every day in the schools we help to
build and operate, in the infrastructure we continue to improve and
repair, and in the sovereignty of the people of Iraq which continues to
command our deepest respect. We will continue to make a difference
through democratization and the rule of law, economic reconstruction,
and security and counterterrorism. By supporting all these areas, our
diplomatic, civilian, and military personnel will make a lasting
difference in the lives of the Iraqi people and they will, through
their efforts have literally changed the world.
I hope my colleagues will remember that when we speak here on the
Senate floor, our words are heard by those brave men and women
overseas. Our words are heard by their families and their friends who
make it possible for them to serve our Nation so well. They are also
heard by our enemies who look to twist and distort our open discussions
to make it appear that we have lost our will to see this through to the
end. We must remember that fact each time we speak. If you wonder how I
know if what I say is true, I can share my sources with you--our U.S.
soldiers. They have asked me more than once: How come everything sounds
so bad back home when it is improving in Iraq? We keep hearing this
rhetoric which is based on the fight to win a presidential election,
and it has nothing to do with what is happening in Iraq. Nonetheless,
it has an impact on the morale and safety of our troops.
I have spoken here on the Senate floor about the importance of
supporting our troops. I noted that we must remember to pray for our
troops. When we do, I think we should also be praying for the
opposition as well. We should pray that the hearts of those we fight
will soften, and they will realize the role they are playing in the
world and in Iraq. It is not too late for them to join us in the effort
to build a better Iraq for all its people. Praying can make a
difference, and it is up to all of us to do that every day. It is
something we can do that is real and it has real power. With our faith,
and our belief in our cause because it is just, we will continue to
provide the brave men and women who serve in our armed forces, their
spouses and their families with the support and encouragement they need
and deserve by keeping them in our thoughts and in our prayers.
We also need to pray for those few soldiers at Abu Ghraib whose
actions were severely misguided as well as those who suffered the shame
and humiliation of those acts. I have heard many speak today about
tearing down this prison facility, and that is a good idea. Let's rid
the world of this terrible prison and do it completely so that it will
never house or harm another Iraqi.
I hope that people in the United States and throughout the world will
remember that these deeds do not represent the character of any but a
few misguided American soldiers. This should not be the image that the
world has of our troops because it is not the truth. I am pleased that
action is being taken immediately to address this situation. Charges
are being levied, investigations are continuing, and changes are being
made to the prison administration. We are blessed to have a truly
exceptional military force whose image should not be tarnished by the
actions of a few.
We have a job to finish in Iraq and we must not shy away from
completing it. The more rapidly the people of Iraq are able to stand on
their own, the sooner our troops will be able to come home. We have
undertaken a job, and we cannot afford to fail to complete the task at
hand.
I have often heard it said that exceptional times call for
exceptional people to lead us through them. We must have someone in
Iraq who is able to fully represent the United States at the time the
Coalition Provisional Authority transitions out of the country. As the
chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee stated this morning, we
cannot expect to wake up the morning on July 1 and have a fully
functioning U.S. Embassy. The time to plan for that day is upon us and
I encourage my colleagues to join me in taking the first vital step by
supporting Ambassador Negroponte's nomination. With the confirmation of
this exceptional individual, we will ensure that we have a strong U.S.
voice on the ground and the right person in charge who will show the
world the level of our commitment to Iraq. It will also underscore our
determination to make life better for Iraqis for generations to come.
It is a dream we share with the Iraqi people and, with the right people
in charge, it is a dream that will come true.
Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I rise to express my great admiration of
our brave Montana servicemen and women in Iraq, Afghanistan and
elsewhere in the world. These brave men and women have put their lives
on hold and on the line. Their families and their communities--our
communities--support them. These Montanans and all American soldiers
are in our thoughts and prayers. We want them to come home quickly and
safely.
We need a plan to bring their mission in Iraq to conclusion. And we
need the administration to communicate that strategy clearly to the
world, and to our brave troops.
I am deeply troubled by the allegations of abuse of Iraqi prisoners.
I was
[[Page S4979]]
horrified by the images we have seen over the last week. Our nation,
which our men and women are serving with such honor, must lead by
example if we want to win the global ``war of ideas''.
Although we know the vast majority of our men and women in uniform
are serving honorably, these allegations of abuse demonstrate that we
are not giving our troops all of the support that they need.
These images of prisoner abuse are not at all consistent with the
principles I know our men and women in the Armed Forces hold clear. Our
men and women went to Iraq to protect this Nation, to make the world a
safer place. They have performed admirably under harsh conditions,
sometimes with insufficient equipment, because they believe in their
mission. I believe in them and I will continue to make sure that they
get the support they need.
What our troops need now more than ever is visionary leadership. They
Need to know what their mission is and when that mission has changed.
They must be trained for that mission and given all of the resources
they need for it, be it body armor or bottled water.
In order to win the war of ideas and make the world safer, we must
share our vision of how to win the global war on terrorism. Sharing the
vision to win means building effective, lasting partnerships with not
just other countries and governments, but international institutions.
The whole world benefits from a stable Iraq. The U.S. needs to work
together with other nations to share the risk and responsibility U.S.
forces face today.
Sharing our vision of how to win the war on terrorism also means
ensuring exemplary leadership for every private first class in the
United States armed services. We want to ensure that the unconscionable
actions of a few misguided soldiers do not endanger the mission of the
thousands who work day in and day out to fulfill that vision.
This is why I supported the President's nomination of Ambassador
Negroponte to be Ambassador to Iraq. This administration must
demonstrate that it has not only the determination but also the vision
to win the war on ideas that the war on terror truly has become.
Now is the time when we must share our vision with the troops who
serve with dignity and honor, with the American people and with the
world.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?
Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I inquire of the Chair how much time
remains on both sides.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The minority has 5 minutes and the majority
has 60 minutes.
Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, in a moment I will ask for a quorum call
and then shortly after that, ask unanimous consent all time be yielded
back and we proceed to the question on Ambassador Negroponte.
For the moment, having given a clear signal, I suggest the absence of
a quorum and ask the time be charged equally to both sides.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, we are about to vote. I had an opportunity
to speak earlier today. Let me conclude and then yield back whatever
time remains by saying Mr. Negroponte is a serious diplomat with
significant experience. When he appeared before our committee, he
impressed me that he was more likely to be straightforward and
unequivocal in answering our questions.
I will end where I began. I quite frankly think we owe him and his
wife a debt of gratitude for being willing to take on what, without
exception, in my view, is the most difficult and, at this moment, most
dangerous job in U.S. diplomacy.
I urge my colleagues to vote for Mr. Negroponte, notwithstanding that
they may feel, as I do, that this administration's policy on how to
handle the circumstance in Iraq has been seriously wanting.
Do not confuse the lack of a coherent policy, from my perspective,
anyway, with a lack of competence and ability of Ambassador Negroponte.
I urge a yes vote on Ambassador Negroponte.
Mr. President, I yield the remainder of my time.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Indiana.
Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I appreciate again the assistance of the
distinguished ranking member of the Foreign Relations Committee,
Senator Biden, and, for that matter, all members. Many of the members
of our committee, of which the distinguished Chair is a member, have
spoken today, and have indicated they plan to support John Negroponte,
as I will.
I think one reason why the committee has this feeling is that we
appreciate the fact he has been forthcoming in response to our
questions. He understands the gravity of the situation and its
complexity. He does not have a doctrinaire point of view, but clearly
recognizes the political realities in Iraq, in this country, and in our
international relations.
As a part of his responsibilities at the United Nations, even as we
speak, he is working with other nations on behalf of the best ideals of
our country, and is attempting to bring to the people in Iraq the full
possibilities that might come from much more intense and favorable and
constructive relations with the United States and its allies.
I was impressed in our hearing with Ambassador Negroponte, that he
has been there many times before, in the sense of very difficult
situations, tortuous circumstances, dangerous predicaments, ways in
which he had to work with the elements of whatever administration he
served, that may or may not have agreed with his point of view, but at
the same time, through his experience and the gravity he brought to the
issue, he was persuasive and effective.
Finally, I conclude by saying John Negroponte is not any more certain
than Senator Biden or I am of precisely what is going to happen day by
day in Iraq. It is a day-by-day story. And that is not all bad, in the
sense that sometimes we make improvements day by day. Sometimes we are
able to listen to the evidence, try to take a look at the rest of the
world, talk to other people, consult more broadly.
But the fact is, I believe Ambassador Negroponte is prepared to
consult. He is prepared to talk. He is prepared to open up. He is
responsive to our committee, to the Senate and, I believe, to the
Congress and, therefore, through us, to the American people, the people
we serve.
The final point I want to make in this debate is I believe Members of
the Senate are not unreasonable, I believe members of our committee are
not unreasonable, in asking for discussion and consultation during
these very difficult times, because the support of all of us--Democrats
and Republicans, Americans--is going to be required.
I appreciate, on very short notice, the preparation for the hearing
of the Ambassador. But I had the feeling he did not need much notice;
that, as a matter of fact, he has been thinking about these issues for
a long time. His responses indicated a degree of both maturity but,
likewise, willingness to listen that I found very appealing and
reassuring.
I encourage Members to vote for him so he might proceed to his
duties.
Having said that, Mr. President, I yield back the remainder of the
time available on our side and ask that the Chair pose the question.
Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There is a sufficient second.
The question is, Will the Senate advise and consent to the nomination
of John D. Negroponte, of New York, to be Ambassador Extraordinary and
Plenipotentiary of the United States of America to Iraq.
The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. McCONNELL. I announce that the Senator from Wyoming (Mr. Thomas)
is necessarily absent.
Mr. REID. I announce that the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Kerry)
is necessarily absent.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Cornyn). Are there any other Senators in
the Chamber desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 95, nays 3, as follows:
[[Page S4980]]
[Rollcall Vote No. 85 Exe.]
YEAS--95
Akaka
Alexander
Allard
Allen
Baucus
Bayh
Bennett
Biden
Bingaman
Bond
Boxer
Breaux
Brownback
Bunning
Burns
Byrd
Campbell
Cantwell
Carper
Chafee
Chambliss
Clinton
Cochran
Coleman
Collins
Conrad
Cornyn
Corzine
Craig
Crapo
Daschle
DeWine
Dodd
Dole
Domenici
Dorgan
Edwards
Ensign
Enzi
Feingold
Feinstein
Fitzgerald
Frist
Graham (FL)
Graham (SC)
Grassley
Gregg
Hagel
Hatch
Hollings
Hutchison
Inhofe
Inouye
Jeffords
Johnson
Kennedy
Kohl
Kyl
Landrieu
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Lincoln
Lott
Lugar
McCain
McConnell
Mikulski
Miller
Murkowski
Murray
Nelson (FL)
Nelson (NE)
Nickles
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Roberts
Rockefeller
Santorum
Sarbanes
Schumer
Sessions
Shelby
Smith
Snowe
Specter
Stabenow
Stevens
Sununu
Talent
Voinovich
Warner
Wyden
NAYS--3
Dayton
Durbin
Harkin
NOT VOTING--2
Kerry
Thomas
The nomination was confirmed.
Mr. LUGAR. I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. CRAIG. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the President shall
be immediately notified of the Senate's action.
____________________