[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 22 (Wednesday, March 2, 2005)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1888-S1889]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          THE PRESIDENT'S TRIP

  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, the distinguished Senator from Kentucky 
has yielded to me his time. I will take about 7 or 8 minutes.
  It is so important for Members of this body to reflect on the 
President's most recent trip to Europe. Without being presumptuous, in 
my judgment, I think it was one of his best, maybe his finest, and in 
the years to come, I hope he can parallel the achievements of this 
particular trip.
  My views are important, perhaps, but more important are the views of 
the representatives from nations in Europe to the United States. I had 
several of the ambassadors visit in my office this week to discuss the 
President's trip.
  I would like to read some quotes from television programs on which 
these three ambassadors appeared recently. Jean-David Levitte is 
France's Ambassador, and I have had a particularly warm and productive 
relationship with this ambassador since he was posted. He has had an 
extraordinary career. He has been here in Washington a number of times 
in previous positions.
  It is well known he is very close to President Chirac. When asked a 
question about the relationship between our country in the context of 
the President's trip, he said as follows:

       Yes, I do think so. Wolf, I participated--I was privileged 
     to participate in the dinner in Brussels between the two 
     Presidents, and it worked very well.

  That is his appraisal.
  Then Wolfgang Ischinger, Germany's Ambassador, when asked the 
question, Has the relationship, based on what you know, Mr. Ambassador, 
improved? he replied:

       Oh, I certainly think so, Wolf. In fact, I don't really 
     think we really needed the meeting in minds, President Bush's 
     visit to Germany this past week, to improve this relationship 
     between the two governments. I think we've been doing quite 
     well over the last year already.

  He continued when pressed again:

       I think there has also been substantive movement and 
     change, not only because President Bush, by visiting the 
     European Commission, put to rest the suspicions in this 
     country and in Europe that America might no longer be 
     supportive of the European Union, of the idea of European 
     integration, but also because in the meeting with the German 
     side, in which I had the chance of participating, President 
     Bush, I believe, enhanced the degree of U.S. support. He went 
     a step further in terms of expressing his support for 
     European efforts on Iran.

  Then Sir David Manning of Great Britain. I have had a warm and 
productive relationship through the years with this fine individual, 
another individual who has been posted to this country on a number of 
occasions. When asked a similar question about the President's trip, he 
replied:

       Well, I think we're all very encouraged by the President's 
     visit and, indeed, by Secretary Rice's visit, because this 
     has been an issue that's been discussed by all our heads of 
     government, and much more widely than the three of us here.

  The point I make is, as I read through the press reports from these 
three ambassadors in the United States, they were all very strong on 
the issue of the success of the President's visit, together with our 
distinguished Secretary of State.
  Then to another subject that President Bush quite properly raised, it 
is one of concern to this Senator and I think a number of us here in 
the Senate. I would like to quote from the President on his trip. He 
said as follows:

       Well, I talked about this issue with President Chirac last 
     night, and Prime Minister Blair.

  The issue, if I might step back, is:

       Mr. President, European countries are talking about lifting 
     their 15-year arms embargo on China. What would be the 
     consequences of that? And could it be done in a way that 
     would satisfy your concerns?

  The President replied:

       Well, I talked about this issue with President Chirac last 
     night, and Prime Minister Blair, and I intend to talk about 
     it in a couple of hours at the European Union meeting. We 
     didn't discuss the issue at NATO, by the way. And here's what 
     I explained. I said there is deep concern in our country that 
     a transfer of weapons would be a transfer of technology to 
     China, which would change the balance of relations between 
     China and Taiwan, and that's of concern. And they, to a 
     person, said, well, they think they can develop a protocol 
     that isn't--that shouldn't concern the United States. And I 
     said I'm looking forward to seeing it. . . .

  Referring to the protocol.
  I discussed this with several ambassadors when they came into my 
office and, indeed, a team is to be forthcoming from the European 
nations to visit the United States. I think we should hold final 
judgment until we have had the opportunity, in a courteous way, to 
reflect on those precautions that the European countries will take in 
the context of lifting this ban.

  But I point out that in my study of the relationship between China 
and not only the United States and Taiwan but the entire region, they 
are on a very fast pace to modernize a wide array of weapons--weapons 
that could, for the first time, begin to pose in the outyears a threat 
to our fleet units.
  I select the fleet units because our concept of the projection of our 
force forward is dependent on the protection of naval components, 
particularly our carriers. I see on the horizon grave concerns about 
lifting this embargo in terms of China's capability militarily in the 
outyears.
  A third subject I would like to cover in the context of the 
President's visit is he was addressing the challenge to, indeed, all 
free nations as we participate to try and give support to Israel and 
the Palestine Government to come to a final consensus to resolve their 
problems and to bring about a cessation of the turmoil in that region.
  I am so deeply grateful the President made the following statement:

       President Bush on his recent trip to Europe stated, 
     ``America and Europe have made a moral commitment. We will 
     not stand by as another generation in the Holy Land grows up 
     in an atmosphere of violence and hopelessness.''

  Yesterday, the Armed Services Committee had a hearing. General Jones, 
the NATO Commander, was on the stand. I questioned him regarding a 
concept which General Jones and I have discussed on a number of 
occasions over the past several years, and that is the possibility of 
NATO playing a role of peacekeeping on behalf of the Palestinian and 
Israeli interests. That would have to be at the invitation of both of 
those Governments.
  Why NATO? Our country is very proud of a very long relationship with

[[Page S1889]]

the State of Israel, an island of democracy in that part of the world. 
We have very strong ties there, as we should. Correspondingly, Europe 
has had very strong ties with the Palestinian people through the years. 
It goes way back. Significant portions of their population have ties to 
that region. So a NATO peacekeeping force comprised of both the 
military units from the European nations and some, I would say, 
proportionate amount of American forces would be perceived as a 
balanced force and could come, in my judgment, and provide a sense of 
security to support such frameworks of peace and accords as these two 
nations could hopefully achieve with our help and the help of other 
nations.
  Again, it would only be at the invitation of the two Governments, but 
I think it is a concept that I have addressed on this floor many times. 
Others have likewise; indeed, some prominent journalists whom I 
respect. I do hope that it be given consideration.
  General Jones in his testimony yesterday said it has been brought up 
in the North Atlantic Council of recent. Other nations are interested 
in this concept, and I hope our Nation, the United States, can get 
behind and explore the options.
  I thank the distinguished Senator from Kentucky.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kentucky.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, how much time remains in morning 
business?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is 25\1/2\ minutes remaining.

                          ____________________