[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 7 (Monday, January 31, 2005)]
[Senate]
[Pages S656-S657]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. LUGAR (for himself, Mr. Biden, and Mr. Hagel):
  S. 209. A bill to build operational readiness in civilian agencies, 
and for other purposes; to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
  Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I am re-introducing today a bill that was 
on the legislative calendar of the 108th Congress when it adjourned in 
December. The Stabilization and Reconstruction Civilian Management Act 
is intended to build operational readiness in the civilian agencies to 
improve our nation's capacity to carry out post-conflict stabilization 
and reconstruction missions.
  Until very recently, the concept of ``nation building'' was 
considered to be pejorative by many Members of Congress and government 
officials. The foreign policy orthodoxy of both parties was skeptical 
of missions that entailed long-term peacekeeping or stabilization 
commitments. If military force was necessary, most policymakers 
believed it should be used only for relatively brief periods followed 
by rapid withdrawal.
  But experience has taught us that this approach rarely can be 
accommodated if we are serious about protecting our own security in an 
age of terrorism. We have seen how terrorists can exploit nations 
afflicted by lawlessness and desperate circumstances. They seek out 
such places to establish training camps, recruit new members, and tap 
into a global black market in weapons technology. If we are to deny 
sanctuaries to terrorists, we must be involved in post-conflict 
stabilization.
  With this in mind, the Foreign Relations Committee took up the issue 
of how best to organize and prepare for post-conflict missions. Well 
over a year ago, we held our first bipartisan roundtable that brought 
together some of the best minds from inside and outside of government 
to consider this issue. From this process, we developed the 
Stabilization and Reconstruction Civilian Management Act of 2004. I 
introduced this legislation with Senators Biden and Hagel, and the 
Committee passed it unanimously. The purpose of our bill is to 
establish a more robust civilian capability to respond quickly and 
effectively to post-conflict situations or other complex emergencies. 
The bill puts the State Department at the center of the civilian 
reconstruction and stabilization effort, while coordination between 
State and Defense would continue at the NSC level.

  The Defense Science Board (DSB), which recently recommended a similar 
strengthening of stabilization and reconstruction capacity in the 
Defense Department, endorsed our legislation. On January 26, I 
introduced S. 192, new legislation that took the DSB recommendations 
and provided the executive branch the necessary authorities to carry 
them out. It calls upon the Secretary of Defense to take immediate 
action to strengthen the role and capabilities of the Department of 
Defense for carrying out stabilization and reconstruction activities as 
well as to support the development of core competencies in other 
departments and agencies, principally the Department of State. The bill 
has been referred to the Senate Armed Service Committee for that 
Committee's consideration.
  While recognizing the critical challenges that our military has 
undertaken with skill and courage in both Afghanistan and Iraq, we must 
acknowledge that certain non-security missions will be better served in 
the future by a more organized civilian response. Our post-conflict 
efforts frequently have had a higher than necessary military profile. 
This is not the result of a Pentagon power grab or institutional 
fights. Rather, the military has led post-conflict operations primarily 
because it is the only agency capable of mobilizing sufficient 
personnel and resources for these tasks. As a consequence, military 
resources have been stretched and deployments of military personnel 
have been extended beyond expectations. If we can improve the 
capabilities of the civilian agencies, they can take over many of the 
non-security missions that have burdened the military.
  In re-introducing the Stabilization and Reconstruction Civilian 
Management Act'' in the 109th Congress, I am well aware of the impact 
it has already had on both the debate on this issue and developments to 
date. In fact, some initiatives contained in the legislation have moved 
forward without its having been enacted. My Senate colleagues on the 
Foreign Operations Appropriations Subcommittee agreed with the need to 
provide an emergency conflict response fund for stabilization and 
reconstruction crises. And the Commerce, Justice, State appropriators 
in both the Senate and the House agreed with the need to establish a 
new office at the State Department to take the lead in organizing our 
civilian efforts. Indeed, an Office of Reconstruction and Stabilization 
has now been organized and a highly capable coordinator named. At her 
confirmation hearings, Dr. Rice demonstrated detailed knowledge of the 
Office and its work. I am confidant that she has already embraced the 
Department's role as a core mission and will work to support the Office 
with appropriate funding and the kind of Department-wide backing and 
support from management that it will need to do its job.
  So why continue to pursue the legislation? It is still important to 
seek enactment because the legislation provides a permanent basis in 
law for the established office as well as new authorities that the 
Department will need to be successful.
  The Bush Administration's action on this issue demonstrates its 
ability to recalibrate policy and organization to address a changing 
world. We know that the President will continue to provide leadership 
in organizing the U.S. government for this mission. As demonstrated by 
the Senate Foreign Relations Committee vote of 19-0, and by actions 
taken by the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, 
State and the Judiciary and the Senate Subcommittee on Foreign 
Operations, there is significant support in the Congress for his work 
and for the foresight he is already demonstrating.

  The new Office, headed by Carlos Pascual, is doing a government-wide 
inventory of the civilian assets that might be available for 
stabilization and reconstruction tasks. It is also pursuing an idea 
proposed in our bill of a Readiness Reserve to enable rapid 
mobilization of post-conflict stabilization personnel. It will work 
closely with the Secretary to assist in the coordination of policy, the 
preparation and management of response, and in developing cooperative 
arrangements with foreign countries, international and regional 
organizations, nongovernmental organizations, and private sector 
organizations.
  I am hopeful that the Office also will develop the concept of a 250-
person active duty Response Readiness Corps that is contained in the 
legislation. In Army terms, that is less than a small battalion of 
well-trained people--a modest but vigorous force-multiplier that would 
greatly improve our nation's stabilization capacity. This Corps would 
be composed of State Department and USAID employees who have the 
experience and technical skills to manage stabilization and 
reconstruction tasks in a hostile environment.
  Secretary Rice has been one of the most enthusiastic supporters of 
enhancing standing civilian capacity to respond to post conflict 
situations. In answer to one of my questions during the confirmation 
process, she said: ``Creating a strong U.S. Government stabilization 
and reconstruction capacity is an Administration national security 
priority.''

[[Page S657]]

  She asserted that ``experience has shown that we must have the 
capacity to manage 2 to 3 stabilization and reconstruction operations 
concurrently. That means [we need] staff in Washington and in the field 
to manage and deliver quality programs.''
  Dr. Rice is prepared to make the State Department an effective inter-
agency leader as it should be--in post-conflict operations. I look 
forward to working closely with her on this effort. I consider this new 
mission to be one of the most important long-term defenses that the 
State Department can mount against future acts of terrorism.
                                 ______