[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 68 (Monday, April 28, 2008)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3420-S3421]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
NEGLECTING AFGHANISTAN
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, so much of the debate here in the Senate
is consumed by the seemingly endless war in Iraq. I just left a hearing
of the Democratic policy conference. It was the 13th hearing relative
to the waste and abuse that took place during the course of this war.
To think that we have spent almost $700 billion in the course of this
war and how much of it has been wasted. We asked those who were
testifying who were actually on the ground a few years ago in charge of
allocating equipment and watching conduct. The estimates ranged from 30
percent to 80 percent of the money spent being wasted--taxpayers'
dollars, dedicated to make a safer place for our troops--actually
wasted and stolen. Unfortunately, little or nothing has been done about
it.
The hearing from the Democratic policy conference began with Senator
Dorgan back when the Republicans were in control of Congress and
refused to hold the same hearings in the official committee structure.
Now there are more hearings and more investigations both on the House
and Senate side. But we can only hope, when a new President is elected,
that President will decide it is time for a thorough investigation of
the billions of dollars, taxpayers' dollars, that have been wasted in
this war in Iraq--money not spent to make our troops safer, not spent
to achieve our objectives but, rather, to line the pockets of greedy
people.
This isn't the first war in which this has happened, but it is
certainly the only time I can recall when an administration has been so
cavalier when it comes to this occurrence.
We talk a lot about the war in Iraq. We should not forget what is
happening in Afghanistan. This is a war that was declared shortly after
September 11, unanimously in the Senate. Given how much blood and
treasure has been lost in Iraq, it is easy to forget the stakes in
Afghanistan.
Afghanistan was the original home for al-Qaida. It is where Osama bin
Laden planned his attack on the United States. He may very well still
be alive in the border area of Afghanistan or nearby in Pakistan. If
Taliban hosts freely allowed al-Qaida terrorists to train in camps
there, we understand the threat that could pose. The Taliban also
ruthlessly suppressed its own people, particularly its women.
Let's remember what the 9/11 Commission said about Afghanistan:
Bin Ladin appeared to have in Afghanistan a freedom of
movement he lacked in Sudan. Al-Qaida members could travel
freely within the country, enter and exit it without visas or
any immigration procedures, purchase and import vehicles and
weapons. . . . The Taliban seemed to open the doors to all
who wanted to come to Afghanistan to train in the camps. The
alliance with the Taliban provided al-Qaida a sanctuary in
which to train and indoctrinate fighters and terrorists,
import weapons, forge ties with other jihad groups and
leaders, and plot and staff terrorist schemes.
Why revisit this history? Because the Taliban and al-Qaida have been
regrouping along the Afghan and Pakistan border. In fact, now, more
than 6 years into the war in Afghanistan, we are at risk of losing some
of our hard-
[[Page S3421]]
fought gains, gains paid for with the blood of American soldiers.
Recently, Admiral Mullen, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff,
stated the obvious--that the U.S. military has too many troops tied
down in Iraq to send reenforcements needed in Afghanistan. It is clear
again this President decided before he won the war in Afghanistan to
start a new war in the Iraq, at the expansion of our original mission.
According to Admiral Mullen, ``There are force requirements [in
Afghanistan] that we can't currently meet.'' He said, ``Having forces
in Iraq at the level they're at doesn't allow us to fill the need that
we have in Afghanistan.''
The GAO just released an assessment of U.S. efforts to counter
terrorist activity in the border area of Pakistan. The report concluded
that the United States has not met its national security goals in
Pakistan's tribal areas and that ``. . . al-Qaida has established a
safe haven near Pakistan's border with Afghanistan.''
A top Army commander, MG Jeffrey Schloesser, warned that Afghanistan
could see record levels of violence this year.
Just the other week, the British charity Oxfam released a report
noting that Western countries have failed to deliver $10 billion of
nonmilitary assistance pledged to Afghanistan since 2001. The United
States is responsible for one-half of that shortfall. Despite the
billions that have been spent in Iraq, we have failed to keep our
promises when it came to humanitarian assistance, nonmilitary
assistance, in Afghanistan.
This is not isolated. The World Bank has spent approximately half of
its commitments to Afghanistan; the European Commission and Germany,
less than two thirds; and the Asian Development Bank in India, a third.
Take another example--support for the National Solidarity Program,
widely regarded as one of the most successful development efforts in
Afghanistan. The 5-year-old program is funded by international donors,
administered by the Government of Afghanistan. It is one of the few to
reach into rural areas. In this program, village residents work
collaboratively with local governments to identify developing needs.
There is a feeling of ownership, of participation. Women are actively
involved. Because of the sense of ownership, the Taliban is less likely
to destroy these local projects.
Take for example the recent example profiled in the Washington
Monthly. In the village of Dadi Khel, residents came together to decide
on developing a small hydroelectric turbine for the nearby river. When
finished, it will be able to provide electricity to about 300 families
in the village.
Next to the site is a poster nailed to a tree that clearly shows to
all the disbursement of funds for the project. A local teacher told the
reporter, ``This is our money. All the time we are checking whether
it's spent correctly.''
Yet this novel program is facing a shortfall of hundreds of millions
of dollars to continue work in existing communities--let alone to
expand into Afghanistan's remaining 7,000 villages. While Canada,
Germany, and the U.K. have all increased financial support for this
program, U.S. funding was reduced between 2006 and 2007.
It's not surprising therefore that the Oxfam report said that
international development aid to Afghanistan remains ``woefully
inadequate.'' Oxfam noted that only $7 is spent in international
development assistance in Afghanistan for every $100 in U.S. military
expenditures.
That translates into less development aid per capita in Afghanistan
than the world spent in postconflict Bosnia or East Timor.
How could we let this happen? How could we take our eye off the ball?
Of course, part of the answer is that this administration diverted
critical military, intelligence, and civilian assets from Afghanistan
to Iraq.
Just imagine how much more progress we could have made in Afghanistan
if we had not gone into Iraq.
But another part of the problem is that we have not done enough to
support long term development efforts so critical in winning the hearts
and minds of the Afghan people.
I remember during a visit to Afghanistan last year that there were
only six American agricultural experts for the entire country--I think
today there are eight. That is right, for a nation with an agricultural
economy and record poppy harvest, only a handful of agricultural
development experts.
Sadly, I suppose this is not really surprising. USAID has seen its
number of full time Foreign Service officers drop from a historic high
of over 5,000, to only 1,000 today. The Peace Corps has seen its budget
in real dollars drop by almost 40 percent since its inception in 1961.
America's strength comes not just from its military might, but from
the power of its ideas, from its generosity, and from its ability to
serve as a beacon of hope, human rights, and democracy. I fear in
recent years a measure of this leadership has been lost.
We must ensure that the efforts in Afghanistan, and in Pakistan,
receive the resources they deserve. We must invest in development
activities that work to develop economic and educational opportunities.
We must help with agricultural and democratic development.
And, we must work with our allies to ensure that the Taliban and al-
Qaeda do not reemerge.
I hope all Members of the Senate will understand that as this
administration comes to an end in just another 8 or 9 months, there
will be a temptation on the other side of the aisle to blame this
woeful state of affairs somehow on the Democratic Party. But this war
in Iraq was initiated by this President with the overwhelming support
of his party. This President has refused to change the policy in Iraq,
and we continue to see an endless war, costing us dramatic sums of
money, creating sacrifice in the United States, still endangering our
troops, with no end in sight. That is the legacy of the Bush
administration in Iraq, and that is why the war in Afghanistan, today,
continues to be a challenge to the United States.
I yield the floor.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Texas.
____________________