Congressional Record, Volume 153 Issue 86 (Thursday, May 24, 2007)

[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 86 (Thursday, May 24, 2007)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6578-S6581]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

IRAQ

Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, let me say that I am very honored today to
join my friends, Senator Salazar of Colorado and Senator Alexander of
Tennessee, in their efforts to try to restore some nonpartisanship to
our discussion on Iraq. I feel very strongly that we should never have
a party-line vote on Iraq. We have 160,000 troops on the ground. It is
just too important an issue for one party to take one side, the other
party to take another side, and for the White House to do one thing and
Congress to do another. In fact, we talk often in this Chamber about
how there needs to be a political solution inside Baghdad. The truth
is, there needs to be a political resolution inside of Washington, DC,
when it comes to Iraq.
I am honored to lend my name today to this effort by Senator Salazar
and Senator Alexander.
One thing I have noticed in the last several weeks and months--maybe
in the last year--when it comes to Iraq is that there is a lot of
rhetoric. To be honest, that is not helpful. It is not bringing our
troops home earlier. It is not providing more stability inside Iraq. It
is not allowing Iraq to function as a sovereign nation. We need to tone
down the rhetoric and roll up our sleeves and work through this
together.
I also understand that Senator Bennett, Senator Gregg, and Senator
Casey have all joined in this effort as well. It is an honor for me to
be part of this bipartisan solution.
One of the things we are going to emphasize here is Iraqi
accountability. We know that is something which needs to happen inside
Iraq. The Iraqis need to take responsibility for their own country. The
Iraq Study Group talked about this a lot in the pages of their report,
where on page after page they talk about what they believe needs to
happen inside Iraq.
So this bill which Senators Salazar and Alexander will be filing in
the coming weeks talks about diplomatic efforts, about securing Iraq's
borders, promotes economic commerce and trade inside Iraq, political
support, and it talks about a multilateral diplomatic effort. It talks
about milestones and also about redeploying troops. After talking to so
many people in my State and around the country, I think that is where
America wants us to be. They want a stable Iraq.
It is a little bit like what Colin Powell said: It is the Pottery
Barn principle; that is, if you break it, you own it. Well, we went
into Iraq, and we have a lot of responsibility there. I think most
Americans understand that. They don't like what they see on the front
pages of the papers every day or on the evening news, but they do know
we have a responsibility inside Iraq, and they want us, in the Senate,
in the House, and also at the White House, to show leadership. This is
a time for leadership, a time for us to come together on these
principles which the Iraq Study Group laid out--not that every one of
them is exactly right, but they laid out a lot of principles that I
believe many people in this Chamber can rally around and hold on to. If
we implement these and make that our national policy, then I think we
can get better results on Iraq than we have had in the past.
I know General Petraeus has mentioned that we cannot rely on a purely
military solution inside Iraq. I think he is exactly right; I think he
is 100 percent right on that. It needs to be a multifronted effort--
security, political, economic, and diplomatic. We need to do a lot to
help Iraq get back on its feet and become a functioning nation again.
Mr. President, I am honored to join my colleagues in this effort. I
invite other colleagues to look at the Salazar legislation and consider
joining it as well in the coming weeks.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Salazar). The Senator from Utah is
recognized.
Mr. BENNETT. Mr. President, I am honored to join with my friends in
this particular effort. I congratulate the occupant of the chair,
Senator Salazar, and Senator Alexander for putting this forward. We are
seeing people come on board in equal numbers on both sides of the aisle
to demonstrate that this is a bipartisan effort.
Some might say this is an attack on the President's plan. I do not
see it in that fashion at all. I think this is a demonstration of
bipartisan support for an American plan, to see what we can do to get a
more stable Iraq.
When I go to Iraq and talk to the experts, they tell me the war is
being fought on two fronts: It is being fought in Iraq and in
Washington, DC. Al-Qaida has declared Iraq as the front line of their
war on the ``great satan,'' which to them is the United States of
America. The battle being fought in Washington, DC, has to do with
America's resolve in standing up to al-Qaida. The word that is going
out from Osama bin Laden in his audiotapes, and the letters that are
being circulated, is that if we can just hold on long enough, the
battle will be resolved in Washington, DC, as the Americans decide they
no longer want to continue the fight.
By demonstrating in a bipartisan fashion that the Senators of the
United States are willing to talk about long-term commitments and long-
term solutions, we are making our contribution to winning the war in
Washington. General Petraeus has been charged with the security portion
of the war in Iraq. The Iraqi Parliament and the Iraqi Government
themselves must deal with the political problems in Iraq. We must not
let them down by partisan bickering in Washington that encourages al-
Qaida to believe America will walk away from its responsibilities.

This piece of legislation is not about name calling or blaming for
past mistakes. There is no question there have been past mistakes. We
will let the historians sort that out. Our responsibility is to do
today what is needed to bring about an eventual proper resolution.
In every war America has been in, there have been times of darkness,

[[Page S6579]]

times of despair. Think about Abraham Lincoln and what he faced with
the continuing bad news from the front in his effort to keep the Union
together. Think about World War II and the bad news that came out of
the first encounters in North Africa and some of the other American
efforts where we were repulsed. If we had all said we are going to turn
our backs on this and walk away, we would not have the kind of world of
peace we have received as a result of our efforts in those wars.
Now is the time for the Congress to say: Regardless of what may or
may not have been a mistake in the past, we still have to stand
together and move forward on the basis of intelligent analysis, and we
are using as our starting point as that analysis the Iraqi Study Group.
The President is not hostile to this. I think he is open to it, and I
think it is incumbent upon the Congress to say to him: Look for new
solutions, but base them on sound analysis, and if you will, we will be
with you, we will move forward in a bipartisan manner to see to it
America does not fail in Iraq.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Pennsylvania.
Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I am honored today to join in a bipartisan
initiative to introduce legislation based upon the recommendations of
the Iraq Study Group. I proudly stand with my distinguished
colleagues--you, Mr. President, as well as Senators Alexander, Bennett,
Pryor, and Gregg--in affirming that this bill will offer a new way
forward for the United States in Iraq.
The detailed recommendations contained in this bill offer a
comprehensive blueprint for renewed diplomacy, restructured economic
assistance, and a redeployment of U.S. military forces in Iraq to
emphasize training and equipping of Iraqi security forces, conducting
limited counterterrorism missions, and protecting our own forces.
These recommendations were issued in December 2006, over 5 months
ago, but, if anything, their utility is even more apparent today.
Our troops should not be refereeing a civil war. And so this Congress
and the President must come together--must come together--to form and
to forge a new path. The Iraq Study Group's final report is the only
comprehensive plan on the table to do that.
I approach this bill from a slightly different perspective than some
of my cosponsors. In fact, I cosponsored the Reid resolution to change
our direction in Iraq, with a goal of completing that redeployment no
later than March of 2008. That position has been reflected in the votes
I have cast, the questions I have asked as a member of the Foreign
Relations Committee at hearings, and the statements I have delivered on
the Senate floor. I strongly opposed the President's decision to
escalate the number of combat troops in Iraq. For that reason, I voted
for the first supplemental bill sent to the President's desk which
called for a more restricted U.S. military mission and a phased
redeployment of our combat forces from Iraq.
A majority of Congress has made clear their desire to change course.
Yet unless we achieve a more bipartisan consensus in the Congress that
change is necessary, an impasse will continue and our troops will
continue to pay the price. It is for that reason I believe the Iraq
Study Group's prescribed course of action represents our best hope for
a bipartisan consensus in an approach to wind down this combat role in
Iraq and successfully transition our mission there.
The members of this Iraq Study Group included foreign policy and
military experts, as well as other distinguished Americans with
impressive experience in public service.
There is no challenge greater than determining how the United States
can salvage our effort in Iraq in a manner that protects our core
national interests, that does right by the Iraqi people, and enables
our troops, who have accomplished every mission they have been given
over the past 4 years, to come home finally.
After months of study and focused deliberations with almost 200
experts, including leading U.S. and Iraqi Government officials and
regional scholars, the Iraq Study Group released last December a
detailed report with 79 recommendations. This report prescribed a
comprehensive diplomatic, political, and economic strategy that
includes sustained engagement with regional neighbors and the
international community in a collective effort to bring stability to
Iraq.
There are a few recommendations in the Iraq Study Group report that
I, in fact, disagree with personally. But the comprehensive plan put
forth by the group, and particularly the elements emphasized in our
bill, represents the best thinking we have on how to resolve the Iraq
dilemma in the long run.
Time is running out to change course in Iraq. In Pennsylvania, 166
men and women have died. Yesterday we learned 9 Americans were killed
in a series of attacks across Iraq. Meanwhile, we continue to search
for two American soldiers taken hostage, and at the same time we hear
the grim news that the body of a third missing U.S. soldier was
identified yesterday.
It is time for a change, and I know of no more detailed proposal, no
more exhaustively researched set of recommendations and findings and no
more comprehensive solution than that offered by the Iraq Study Group.
This bill, brought forward by a bipartisan group of Senators, with a
diverse set of perspectives and opinions, transforms the
recommendations of this group into the declared policy of the U.S.
Government.
This bill offers our best chance to forge a change of direction at
long last in Iraq and to do so in a fashion that, indeed, brings our
Nation together.
Mr. President, I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Hampshire.
Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I join my colleagues this morning
especially in thanking and congratulating the Senator from Colorado and
the Senator from Tennessee for bringing forward this approach. There is
no question but that we are going to begin disengaging from Iraq. The
question is: Is that disengagement going to be done in a manner which
strengthens our security as a nation or is it going to be done in a
manner which undermines our security as a nation? Are we going to leave
an Iraq which is stable enough to govern itself and maintain its own
security and have a government that functions or are we going to leave
an Iraq which becomes divided into warring factions which may lead to
literally a genocidal event with an element of the country which is a
client state for Iraq, an element of the country which is a safe haven
for al-Qaida, and an element of the country which is perceived as a
threat to Turkey?
Clearly, we cannot precipitously abandon the people of Iraq or our
own national interests in having a stable Iraq. So we need to look for
a process which is going to allow us to proceed in an orderly way and
in a way which, hopefully, can start to bring our own Nation together
as we try to address this most difficult issue.
Looking to the proposal of the Iraq Study Group is, in my opinion,
the appropriate way to proceed. It is interesting that today we are
going to see, I believe, the passage of a supplemental bill which will
fund our soldiers in the field, which we absolutely have an obligation
to do, which, after a lot of pulling and tugging and different ideas
being put on the table, has reached a position which, hopefully, will
have a consensus vote and will represent a majority which will be able
to pass that bill and, thus, fund the soldiers in the field in a manner
which has both sides working together, the Democratic leader having
endorsed the language and the President having endorsed the language.
But this agreement today which has in it the Warner language, which I
supported, is a precursor to the next step, and the next step should be
a broader coalition within our political process of developing a plan
for disengagement from Iraq that assures the security of the United
States and the stability of that country. Thus, I think the step which
is being proposed today by the Senator from Colorado and the Senator
from Tennessee and is supported by the Senator from Pennsylvania, the
Senator from Arkansas, the Senator from Utah, and myself is an effort
to set out a blueprint or a path which we can, hopefully, follow in a
bipartisan way as we proceed down this road.
The Iraq Study Group did this country an enormous service--former
Congressman Hamilton and former Secretary of State Baker--in
extensively

[[Page S6580]]

studying the issue and coming back with very concrete and specific
proposals as to how we can, hopefully, effectively deal with settling
the Iraq situation.
I congratulate both of these Senators for this initiative. I am happy
to join in it. I look forward to it being the template upon which we
build a broader coalition which I hope will be bipartisan and which I
hope can settle a little of the differences which are so dividing our
Nation and which will give not only the Iraqi people the opportunity to
have a surviving, stable government, but will give ourselves the
direction we need to assure our safety as we move forward in this very
perilous time confronting terrorists who wish to do us harm.
Mr. President, I yield the floor.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Tennessee.
Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from New Hampshire.
I can think of no two Senators on our side of the aisle whose words are
listened to more carefully and more respectfully than the Senator from
New Hampshire and the Senator from Utah. I salute the Senator from
Pennsylvania for his statement and leadership, and the Senator from
Arkansas, who spoke so constructively, and especially the Senator from
Colorado, who is the principal sponsor of this legislation and whom I
am proud to join.
Senator Pryor is exactly right when he said this morning that it is
time for us to stop having partisan votes on Iraq. If I were an
American fighting in Iraq, I would be looking back at us and wondering:
What are they doing in Washington, DC, arguing and sniping at each
other while we are fighting and dying? I would be thinking: If they are
going to send us to Iraq to do a job, at least they could agree on what
the job is.
We owe it to our troops and to our country to find a bipartisan
consensus to support where we go from here in Iraq. We need a political
solution in Washington, DC, as much as we need a political solution in
Baghdad.
The announcements today by four more Senators, each well respected--
Senators Pryor, Bennett, Casey, Gregg--suggests the recommendations of
the Iraq Study Group is the way to do that. Three Republicans, three
Democrats from the North, South, East, and West, some relatively new
Senators, some who have been here a long time, fresh voices, a fresh
approach for a fresh attitude for this debate. Before the end of the
week, I believe there will be two more Senators--one Democrat, one
Republican. Then in June when we return to Washington, the six or the
eight of us intend to offer the legislation Senator Salazar and I have
drafted to implement the recommendations of the bipartisan Iraq Study
Group.
Today we are only six, perhaps eight--a modest beginning. But even we
six or eight are a more promising bipartisan framework of support for a
new direction in Iraq than we have seen for some time in the Senate.
Those who know the Senate know we usually do our best and most
constructive work when a handful of Senators cross party lines to take
a fresh look at a problem, embrace a new strategy, and try to do what
is right for our country.
We are not going to put hundreds of thousands of American troops into
Iraq. We are not going to get out of Iraq tomorrow, and the current
surge of troops in Baghdad, which we all hope is successful, is not by
itself a strategy for tomorrow. The Iraq Study Group report is a
strategy for tomorrow. It will get the United States out of the combat
business in Iraq and into the support, equipment, and the training
business in a prompt and honorable way. It will reduce the number of
troops in Iraq. Those who stay will be less in harm's way--in more
secure bases, embedded with Iraqi forces. Special forces will stay to
counter al-Qaida. The report says this could--not must but could--
happen in early 2008, depending on circumstances.

The report allows support for General Petraeus and his troops by
specifically authorizing a surge, such as the current surge. Because
there would still be a significant long-term presence in Iraq, it will
signal to the rest of the Middle East to stay out of Iraq.
It aggressively encourages diplomatic efforts. The President of the
United States has spoken well of this report recently, and embraced
parts of it, but it is not his plan. The Democratic majority has
borrowed parts of the Iraq Study Group report, but it is not the
Democratic majority plan. That is why the report has a chance to work.
It has the seeds of a bipartisan consensus.
We six or eight, or hopefully more, will introduce our legislation in
June, making the recommendations of the Iraq Study Group the policy of
our country and inviting the President to submit a plan based upon
those recommendations. I hope President Bush will embrace this
strategy. I hope more Senators will.
It is ironic for the oldest democracy, the United States, to be
lecturing the youngest democracy, Iraq, about coming up with a
political consensus when we, ourselves, can't come up with one. This is
the foremost issue facing our country. The Iraq Study Group report is
the most promising strategy for a solution: getting out of the combat
business in Iraq and into the support, equipping, and training business
in a prompt and honorable way.
Mr. President, I yield the floor.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Colorado.
Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, how much time remains?
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The majority has 20 minutes.
Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I rise this morning, first of all, to
congratulate my colleagues. Senator Alexander has worked tirelessly
with us in putting together the legislation on the implementation of
the Iraq Study Group recommendations. He has been a key leader in
trying to pull a group of us together to try to develop a new direction
going forward in Iraq. I thank him for his leadership.
I also wish to thank both Senator Pryor and Senator Casey for joining
us as cosponsors of this legislation. They are people who are trying to
search for a solution on the Democratic side, and I very much
appreciate their efforts. As for Senator Gregg and Senator Bennett, I
appreciate also their statements, their cosponsorship of this
legislation, and their desire to come forward to a solution that might
unite us in the Senate on a way forward.
Let me say at the outset that when we think about what it is we are
trying to do with respect to Iraq at this point in time, we have a lot
of people who are looking backward and saying there are lots of
problems, lots of failures that have happened--from prewar
intelligence, to decisions going into Iraq, to the prosecution of the
war, et cetera--but the fact is we are there now. The fact is, we have
140,000 American troops on the ground in Iraq today. So the real
question for us ought to be, as the Congress, how it is we are going to
move forward together.
I think in the broadest sense there is not a disagreement on what it
is we want. What is the end stake for us in Iraq? We want to bring our
troops home. I think we all would like to have our troops back home,
reunited with their families and out of harm's way. That is the goal we
want to get to. The second goal we want to get to is a stable Iraq and
a stable Middle East. The fact is, Iraq does not stand alone. It is in
a sea of very difficult political turmoil at this point in time. So we
want us to have success in Iraq.
There has been a lot of debate about what it is we ought to have been
doing in Iraq over the last several years. But the only group that has
taken a significant amount of time and thought through the best way
forward in Iraq was the Iraq Study Group. It was this bipartisan group
of leaders, led by former Secretary of State James Baker and
Congressman Hamilton, as cochairs of a bipartisan commission of elder
states men and women, that came up with the most thoughtful,
comprehensive approach on the way forward.
The essence of what that report said is that the Iraqi Government has
a responsibility to move forward and to meet the milestones that are
set forth for success in that report. It says: If you do that, Iraqi
Government, we, the United States, are going to be there to help you.
On the other hand, if you don't do that, we, the United States, are
going to reduce our help to you. It is an effort to put pressure on the
Iraqi Government and the Iraqi people to

[[Page S6581]]

deal with the sectarian violence they have in place and to move forward
in a fashion that will create stability in Iraq.
I am hopeful, as we move forward from this day, and by the time we
come back from the Memorial Day break, that besides the six Senators
who have joined as cosponsors of this legislation, we will have
additional cosponsors. At the end of the day, it seems to me that we,
as the Congress, have a responsibility to the men and women who are on
the ground in Iraq to try to find a common way forward.
On the issue of war and peace, there should not be a Republican and
Democratic divide. What we ought to be doing is trying to find a common
way forward where we can bring Democrats and Republicans together to an
understanding of how we will ultimately achieve success in Iraq and
bring our troops home.
Mr. President, I yield the floor, and I thank my colleague from
Tennessee, Senator Alexander.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Rhode Island.

____________________