[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 106 (Friday, July 29, 2005)]
[House]
[Pages H7603-H7604]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STRATEGY FOR SUCCESS IN IRAQ
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of
January 4, 2005, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Moran) is recognized
for 26 minutes.
Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I rise because what the gentleman
from North Carolina (Mr. Price), my friend, has said is terribly
important to be said. And what is even more important is that it be
made available to the public at large.
Mr. Speaker, I think it is important, appropriate, to inform the
gentleman and the rest of the Congress who may not be aware that the
elements of the strategy for success, the identical language which the
minority leader, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), has
requested in the form of an amendment, has actually been included in an
appropriations bill, the Iraq supplemental appropriations bill, passed
earlier this year.
That language was included in an amendment that I submitted to the
Iraq supplemental bill. It also included the benchmarks that the
gentleman has suggested, as well as even more specific information. We
have received that report on the strategy for success, Mr. Speaker.
The most important elements of that report, in fact though, were
included in an addendum which was classified. And so I and those who
have seen the report are not at liberty to give the kind of specific
information that at least I feel should be shared with the American
public.
But I would like to address what was in the body of the report, which
does in part respond to the very specific questions, as to Iraq's
military capability, its economic viability, and its political
stability.
The American people need to know whether in fact Iraq will ever be
able to fully control its borders and provide security for its society
and its economy. And we need to know how successful we have been in
training and equipping Iraqi forces, because we have been working at
that for more than 2 years.
The American people also need to know what has happened to the tens
of billions of dollars that we have appropriated for economic
reconstruction.
{time} 1345
Will Iraq ever be or is even close to being economically viable? Is
its physical infrastructure in place so that its economy can rebound in
a way that will provide economic opportunities for its population?
The American people also need to know, in addition to where Iraq is
in terms of military capabilities and economic viability, how stable
its government can ever be and at what point will the decisionmakers,
the policymakers in Washington decide that its governance is stable
enough to be able to return Iraq over to a democracy that is worthy of
our military efforts.
Mr. Speaker, I oppose this war. I voted against it. I voted against
most of the funding for it. I did vote for the Iraq supplemental
because it included this language that I felt was vitally important,
requiring what, while we do not call it an exit strategy, is certainly
appropriately entitled ``a strategy for success.'' That language was
included and could only have been included if it was offered in a
bipartisan, nonpolitical context, without a whole lot of fanfare. But
working with the majority we could get some answers to the questions
that the American people, our constituents, are asking. We did not have
those questions answered when we went to war.
I opposed the war because I felt that it was unjustified. I knew that
Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with the attacks on 9/11. Suggestions
to the contrary were a ruse. The reasons given were at best
unjustified; at worst, deliberately deceptive.
I also opposed it because as our senior military officers will tell
you we ought not go to war without a plan to win the peace. We had no
plan to win the peace. And, in fact, the 41st President of the United
States, George Bush, when he had the opportunity to go into Baghdad and
take out Saddam when we had Saddam's Republican Guard on the run, he
chose not to do so because his advisors, understanding the country,
acting with foresight and knowledge of the political context within the
Middle East, were afraid that we would be thrust into the role of an
occupier. And they knew, and I think were absolutely right, that the
United States should never be playing the role of an occupier, but
always that of a liberator. So they chose not to go to Baghdad. The son
chose differently with very different people advising him, and I think
for different reasons.
But now that we are in Iraq, what do we do? That is what senior
military officers are asking us. And it is certainly what the mothers
and fathers of the young men and women who are fighting this war are
demanding to know. They need to know what is our strategy. How long
will we be there? How much more money is absolutely necessary to
continue this military engagement? And they are getting none of those
answers.
Unfortunately, I cannot disclose any of the specific information that
has now been provided, but I certainly can share, at least with my
constituents, the fact that in my judgment we are nowhere near being
able to withdraw a substantial number of our troops in a responsible
manner because, in my judgment, the Iraqi military is nowhere near
being able to secure its borders. The Iraqi police forces are nowhere
near being able to restore law and order in that country. The economic
infrastructure is nowhere near being able to support a viable economy.
And even the government is nowhere near being able to pass a
Constitution that not just would be acceptable to the American people
who have sacrificed so much to bring it about, but it is not even in
the situation where it would be enduring and accepted by the vast
majority of the Iraqi people.
Mr. Speaker, we are in a quagmire here. We need answers. We need
answers from the people who put us in that quagmire. It is wrong to
continue to be sending troops to a war that is this unwinnable, Mr.
Speaker.
Now, I suspect what is going to happen, and it was further confirmed
yesterday by the Secretary and by some of the senior military officers
who have been in a consultation with them, that we will start a
substantial withdrawal. But I think that withdrawal, I feel that
withdrawal will be motivated more for political reasons than for
military or foreign policy reasons. We have our fist in the middle of a
beehive, and we are getting stung. The advisors that sent us there are
not getting stung because they figure they can say or do anything
[[Page H7604]]
to avoid repercussions and accountability. But, boy, our young men and
women are being stung every day.
We need to figure out how to extricate in a way that is responsible
and will justify their sacrifice. We cannot cut and run. And yet the
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murtha), one of the most respected
Members of the House, the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Defense
of the Committee on Appropriations, is afraid and, in fact, predicts
that is what we will do, and we will do it for political reasons, not
for substantive policy reasons.
We need to get more countries involved in a real way, not in a way so
that with a few troops they can list their participation. We need to go
through international bodies like the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization, NATO. We need to work with the United Nations, which we
continue to bash and beat up on and scapegoat for our own problems in
terms of our credibility throughout the world. We need to get the rest
of the world involved because the rest of the world had a stake here in
getting rid of a ruthless dictator, in restoring stability in Iraq, in
giving Iraq some ability to seize control of its own destiny, but in a
way that it chooses. That is what we should be about.
We should not be about, in my estimate, spending hundreds of millions
of dollars to build an American Embassy in Baghdad that only serves to
confirm what our enemies are telling their recruits, that we are there
for the long run; that we are there as occupiers; that we are there to
take advantage of their oil reserves; to exploit Iraq's resources, and
to exploit its people for our own political purposes. They are wrong,
but we have to prove that they are wrong.
We have to show the world that we have a strategy for success, a
responsible one. It will leave Iraq in better shape than before we
entered it. We never, as I said, should have entered, but now we have a
responsibility to fix it before we leave. And that strategy for
success, as I say, Mr. Speaker, is not going to be achieved
unilaterally. It is going to have to be achieved by working with the
rest of the world in an international context, letting the Iraqi people
control their own destiny, not dictating to them.
As much as I would love for us to hand them a Constitution that made
us feel good about what we have accomplished, I do not think that is
going to work. They have to own that Constitution. I pray to God that
they will not exclude women, that they will not continue some of the
arcane habits, the laws and the regulations that only serve to support
religious clerics and a very conservative, even extremist in some
cases, religious system of governance, but, in fact, will open it up to
a true democracy where both men and women can fully participate a free
enterprise, an uncorrupted economy, and, in fact, a strong military and
police force that will provide the security to the Iraqi people that
they have not had in generations.
That has got to be our objective. We cannot achieve it on our own. We
have got to work with the rest of the world. We have got to sit down
and maybe even eat a little humble pie and come up with an
international solution for this, and to not require our soldiers to
bear the brunt of the injuries and the death that they have.
Changing Iraq's leadership was more in the interest of so many other
countries than it was in America's interest. We went because we had the
ability to go, and I am afraid there was some political motivation
involved as well. But now that we are there, we in the Congress need to
require of the executive branch that they give us the answers, that
they share with us and then to the American people, they need to share
with the American people what is their plan, what is their strategy for
success. And if they do not do that, there will be political
accountability as there ought to be.
Mr. Speaker, the report that we received 2 weeks late, but that we
did finally receive 2 weeks ago, is an important first step, but it is
grossly inadequate. The language that I put in the appropriations bill
several months ago required a 90-day update. Every one of those updates
needs to be more specific, needs to be fleshed out better than the
prior reports. And most importantly, Mr. Speaker, it needs to be shared
with the American public. It is their money. It is their sons and
daughters. That is what this war, unfortunately, is about, from their
standpoint.
How do you make this worth the effort? How do you succeed in a way
that their sons and daughters can be proud of what they contributed and
the risk they undertook? The administration owes that to them. We will
continue to insist that it provides that information, not in a
classified document that can be kept from the public's eyes and ears,
but within a spirit of full disclosure. And if they do not have a plan
that will work, they need to come up with one.
They need to consult with the rest of the world, be willing to work
with the legislative branch, with our other allies and even those we do
not consider allies. It is in this planet's interest to bring about a
free world, a safe world for its future generations.
So I ask the administration that has been twice elected to do the
right thing, to get us out of Iraq, but to get us out in a way that we
can turn back knowing that we have accomplished something that was
deserving of the sacrifice, the loss, the risk that our best young men
and women have been willing to undertake.
____________________