[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 61 (Thursday, April 17, 2008)]
[House]
[Page H2470]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION'S MIDDLE EAST POLICIES
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey) is recognized for 5 minutes.
Ms. WOOLSEY. Madam Speaker, I rise to bring to the House's attention
a potentially, very dangerous new turn in the administration's policies
in the Middle East. In recent weeks the administration has been
stirring up the pot on Iran again, and that has caused many Americans
to worry that the administration is getting ready to launch another
attack in the region, this time in Tehran.
In fact, there's more than enough evidence to show that the
administration may be laying the groundwork for military action. In an
interview last month, the President said that the Iranians, and I quote
him, he said, ``the Iranians have declared they want to have a nuclear
weapon to destroy people.''
That would be troubling, Madam Speaker, if it were true. But the
Iranians haven't said anything of the kind. It is shocking to me that
our Commander-in-Chief would make unsubstantiated and misleading
statements about a subject as important and as serious as nuclear
weapons.
Another troubling sign came last month when Admiral William Fallon
retired. Admiral Fallon was a bulwark against the Iran hawks in the
administration, and his departure raised fears that he was, first,
forced to retire, and that next, the rush to war was on.
And several weeks ago, Vice President Cheney said that he has ``high
confidence'' that the Iranians have an ongoing nuclear enrichment
program. Of course, the most recent national intelligence estimate
reported that the Iranians stopped working on a suspected nuclear
weapons program 4 years ago.
And finally, General Petraeus told Congress last week that Iranian-
backed special groups now pose the greatest long-term threat in Iraq.
For years, the administration told us that the main enemy was al
Qaeda or Sunni insurgents, or Shiite militia. Now they tell us, forget
them; it's Iran. In my mind, this raises legitimate concerns that the
administration may be inventing new excuses to stay in Iraq by trying
to convince the American people to support war against Iran.
Madam Speaker, I too am concerned about Iran. The Iranians should
stay out of Iraq. They should not develop nuclear weapons. No country
should develop nuclear weapons. But if we want Iran to behave well, we
must stop threatening to attack them. Instead, our first line of
defense must be engagement and aggressive diplomacy.
The absolutely essential first step in that process must be the
redeployment of our troops out of Iraq. How can we expect Iraq's
neighbors to cooperate in stabilizing the region while we insist on an
open-ended foreign occupation with 140,000 troops and tens of thousands
of military contractors?
Ending the occupation will allow us to launch a broad initiative to
bring the nations in the region to the table, to address the relevant,
the political, the economic and the security issues.
And Madam Speaker, when it comes to Iran's nuclear challenge, we must
retake the high moral ground in the United States of America. When we
turn our backs on nuclear nonproliferation, abandon the comprehensive
test ban treaty and develop new nuclear weapons of our own, under what
circumstances can we tell another nation to abandon their nuclear
dreams?
The American people do not want a wider conflict in the Middle East.
They want our leaders to spend every waking moment working to bring
peace to the region. This is not the time for heated rhetoric, for
bullying and new threats. It is time to try the one thing we haven't
tried, diplomacy.
____________________