[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 147 (Tuesday, November 8, 2005)]
[Senate]
[Pages S12463-S12465]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
IRAQ
Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I rise today to address the valiant efforts
of our men and women serving overseas in Iraq. Their service for our
country is very close to my heart because I, like thousands of other
American parents across the United States, have a son who is fighting
for the cause of freedom in Iraq.
Like every American, and especially for those of us with loved ones
who are fighting overseas, I have carefully considered our actions in
Iraq, and I am as committed to staying the course today as I was when I
voted to authorize hostile action less than 3 years ago.
Today, we see the wreckage of roadside bombs plastered across our
media screens. We are constantly bombarded by a daily media barrage of
every hint of bad news in Iraq. The old adage, ``If it bleeds, it
leads,'' seems to be in full effect.
What about the good that is happening as a result of our efforts? I
can tell you this is the greatest concern our men and women in Iraq
have. They are doing good work, they are making progress, but they
don't hear any of the good things that are going on. This is
disheartening, as are some of the comments made by a few in the United
[[Page S12464]]
States who say they are not doing a good job, who denigrate their
efforts. We owe them better than that. I could cite for you letters I
have seen written to newspapers in my State by men who have served in
Iraq saying precisely this.
Has there been any progress made toward democracy this year? The
Iraqis themselves answered yes, resoundingly, when last month, on
October 15, an overwhelming majority of Iraqis voted peacefully to lay
the foundation for their country with a national constitution. Ten days
later, on October 25, the Independent Electoral Commission of Iraq
announced the approval of a constitution and stated that it had found
no evidence of significant voter fraud, as some had alleged.
The United Nations also participated in the referendum process and
concurred with the Commission's conclusions. On the day of the vote,
Sunni protests were minimal, with no violence reported. Not only did
the referendum pass with 15 of 18 provinces providing a majority
``yes'' vote, but all governorates recorded a high voter turnout, the
likes of which would put many of our voter districts in America to
shame. I can tell you from personal reports that in Sunni areas, Sunnis
were going out in record numbers to register. They were registering at
registration places protected solely by Iraqi security forces without
any violence against them.
When we look at the election results, the Kurds in Dahuk posted an
86-percent turnout, while the Shi'a in Karbala and Najaf posted a 57-
percent turnout. But let's consider the Sunni areas where critics say
we are making so little progress toward democracy.
Let's compare the percentage of voter turnout from last January's
elections to the October referendum last month. In Anbar, voter turnout
rose from 2 percent to 40 percent; in Diyala, from 33 percent to 67
percent; in Nayniwah, from 17 percent to 54 percent; and in Salahaldin,
from 29 percent to 91 percent.
Only two of those governorates voted overwhelmingly against the
referendum, and all of them saw record numbers of citizens exercising
their voices at the polls.
This, Mr. President, is progress toward democracy. Have we forgotten
that under Saddam, the Iraqi people had no vote, no opportunity to
express themselves?
I am not discouraged, as the critics say we should be, that there was
not near universal agreement on the referendum in Iraq. We have had a
hard enough time in our own country, the world's model for democracy,
in achieving overwhelming agreement on anything. And certainly this
body with its recent record of activity shows that democracies often
generate strong disagreements. The only time a national vote purports
to show universal agreement is when the election is held under the
tight control and dictation of a dictator such as Saddam Hussein.
So how do the critics explain this massive increase in voter turnout
and still maintain that democracy is dead in the water in Iraq, when
the people of Iraq for the first time in centuries now have a voice and
a common marketplace of ideas in which to express themselves? And why
isn't more attention given to the progress in Iraq for which our sons
and daughters overseas are fighting?
As for the media, it is my belief that the greatest threat to our
efforts in Iraq today is the enemy's ability to manipulate press
coverage of the conflict in order to influence U.S. public opinion to
force a premature withdrawal of our forces.
Last month, I spoke on the floor of the Senate about the acquisition
of a letter written by Osama bin Laden's principal deputy, Ayman al-
Zawahiri, to al-Qaida's foremost lieutenant on the ground in Iraq, Abu
Mus'ab al-Zarqawi. The letter underscored that al-Qaida will not relent
in pursuing its Sunni Islamo-fascist, extremist agenda, and it revealed
al-Qaida views its jihad in Iraq as the focal point in its effort to
establish a worldwide neofascist global caliphate. Zawahiri's recipe
for creating this Sunni extremist state is in this order: evict the
Americans from Iraq, create an Islamic extremist state in Iraq, swallow
up Iraq's neighbors and then destroy Israel, and from there go on to
bigger and better things. And how did Zawahiri advise Zarqawi to
achieve these goals? By augmenting his terror campaign with political
warfare and by manipulating the media. Zawahiri urged Zarqawi to tone
down egregious actions, such as beheadings, because they do not play
well on television screens. He approved of the violence but cautioned
him to execute Americans with a bullet to the head instead. Isn't that
nice of him?
The Zawahiri letter so clearly unveils the insidious nature of this
clever enemy we are up against. Therefore, I urge every American with
access to the Internet to read the letter. Go to the Web site
www.dni.gov, and look under ``News Releases.'' But Americans shouldn't
have to go to a Web site to discover its content. It should have been
dissected in painstaking detail on the nightly news or at least given a
fraction of the time allotted to the critical coverage of the war.
It amazes me how there is such a blinding skepticism about anything
that supports our effort in Iraq today. Last week, my staff spoke to a
respected scholar in London about what he thought about the Zawahiri
letter. He said it must have been a fabrication. When asked what
evidence he had for that assertion, he responded: None, but it just
makes Bush's case, so the letter can't be genuine.
As a member of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, I can
tell you that we have absolutely no indication at all this letter was a
fabrication. So I ask again, why isn't the media delving into this?
We ought to take a brief look at the nature of the enemy we are
fighting in Iraq. I believe President Bush said it well last week
during his speech in Norfolk when he called their evil form of Islamic
radicalism Islamo-fascism.
We are fighting a radical ideology that has crept up over the past
few decades that is taking hold in countries around the world. We see
it in Palestine, in Indonesia, the Philippines and, yes, now even in
Europe. For the past week, we have seen the signs of it with riots
outside Paris. Rioters burned areas of the country for over a week,
lashing out against the Western society in which they live. Arab
experts explain the violence as an identity problem among young Arabs
who see themselves first as Muslims looking for a country of their own,
rather than French, English, or American citizens.
Al-Qaida preys on such youth, encourages their unjustified acts of
violence, and is now telling them that their new home will be in Iraq.
This is why in Iraq today we see so many foreign fighters flocking to a
radical cause. An insurgent fights within his country's borders to
defend it from occupation or to oust a government with which he does
not agree. This is the definition of an insurgent. A terrorist is one
who travels outside his country to wage politically motivated violence
elsewhere.
While there remain many Sunni Baathist insurgents who would like to
bring back Saddam, there is an ever growing and a proportionally lethal
number of terrorists flooding into Iraq to fight what they see as the
ultimate jihad, identified as their extremist neofascist interpretation
of Islam.
These are the terrorists who are fueling simmering insurgencies.
These are truly the Islamofascists. Iraq has become the epic battle
with the West that al-Qaida has been looking for and we must win it. We
cannot afford to lose. This enemy cannot be negotiated with and will
never reform its ways or be deterred from its path of violence. The
only option we have with such an enemy who wants to slaughter American
men, women, and children is to eliminate them.
Last week former President Jimmy Carter appeared on ``Larry King
Live'' and criticized President Bush for his policy of preemption in
the war on terror. He claimed this policy was a break in U.S. national
policy from all previous Presidents and administrations. Therefore, he
declared our actions in Iraq radical.
It is radical precisely because we find ourselves in dire
circumstances. It is a break from the past because in the past we were
not facing organized, ruthless bands of terrorists with declared
intentions to annihilate Americans, whose acquisition of weapons of
mass destruction was a distinct possibility.
Every student of national security understands that threat equals
capability plus intent. The intent of the
[[Page S12465]]
terrorists to annihilate us is indisputable, as is their stated
intention to acquire weapons of mass destruction to do so. Their power
is only limited by their current capability.
As David Kay said, in the Iraqi Survey Report which we discussed in
the Intelligence Committee and has now been released, Iraq, despite our
inadequate intelligence, was a far more dangerous place even than we
knew because radical terrorists were running loose in an unorganized
country that had the potential to produce weapons of mass destruction
for them.
We must erode the capability of those terrorists for if we sit back
and allow it to grow, we will face threats to the future such as we
have never seen before. Long-distance runners say there comes a time in
the race when their bodies yearn to succumb to the temptation to give
up the fight but they must press on. That is when they remind
themselves of the reasons for their struggle and when they remind
themselves why they run; they find strength to press on. Only those who
are resolute and full of conviction win the race. Let us hold to our
conviction that democracy is better than tyranny, achieving peace is
worth our struggle, and those who are counting on us in Iraq have a
reason to hope.
We must maintain the course and be ready to fight neofascists and
Islamo-fascism, wherever it exists. Right now it is Iraq, but there are
other theaters as well. Southeast Asia could become one added to the
list. Let us press on, for only if we do so will we one day win this
long distance race. It is not a short one, but it is one we cannot
afford to lose if we want to ensure that we have no more 9/11s or we at
least reduce the likelihood we will have such tragedy on our shore.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the Senator from
Illinois is recognized.
Mr. DURBIN. I ask for the indulgence of the Chair to notify me when I
have 3 minutes remaining on my statement.
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Very well.
____________________