[Congressional Record Volume 156, Number 100 (Wednesday, June 30, 2010)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5648-S5651]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


             NOMINATION OF DAVID H. PETRAEUS TO BE GENERAL

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will 
proceed to executive session to consider the following nomination, 
which the clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read the nomination of David H. 
Petraeus, Department of the Army, to be General.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, there will now be 20 
minutes for debate with respect to the nomination, with the time 
equally divided and controlled between the Senator from Michigan, Mr. 
Levin, and the Senator from Arizona, Mr. McCain, or their designees.
  The Senator from Michigan.
  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I yield myself 8 minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is recognized.
  Mr. LEVIN. The Senate will soon vote on the nomination of GEN David 
Petraeus, who is once again stepping forward to render invaluable 
service to our Nation, as he has so often in the past. Certainly the 
events that bring General Petraeus to this moment were unforeseen. But 
we can be certain that when confirmed, he will bring highly experienced 
leadership and a profound understanding of the President's strategy in 
Afghanistan which he helped shape as Commander of the U.S. Central 
Command.
  General Petraeus confirmed yesterday before the Armed Services 
Committee that he fully supports the President's strategy. That 
strategy includes a surge of U.S. combat troops who will be in place 
later this year.
  That strategy includes a counterinsurgency campaign focused on 
securing the safety of Afghanistan's population and pursuing the 
insurgents who threaten that safety. The President's strategy, which 
General Petraeus supports, includes the setting of a July 2011 date to 
begin reductions of U.S. combat troops as a way of focusing the 
attention of the Afghan Government and military on preparing Afghan 
forces to take greater responsibility for the security of their own 
people. I have long believed that focusing on building the capacity of 
the Afghan security forces to secure their nation's future is

[[Page S5649]]

critical to the success of our mission in Afghanistan. General Petraeus 
agrees. He told our committee yesterday:

       We want Afghan ownership of Afghan problems, whether it's 
     security problems, political problems, economic problems, you 
     name it.

  That is what the Afghans want as well. That is what we were told. A 
number of us were there a year ago in Afghanistan when 100 or so elders 
gathered at a shura in southern Afghanistan. When we asked them what 
they wanted the United States to do, they told us we should train and 
equip the Afghan Army to provide for their country's security and then 
depart. And the 1,600 delegates to Afghanistan's Consultative Peace 
Jirga, which occurred at the beginning of June, adopted a resolution 
calling on the international community to ``expedite'' the training and 
equipping of the Afghan security forces so they can gain the capacity 
``to provide security for their own country and people.''
  The Afghan Army fields about 120,000 troops, including 70,000 combat 
troops. They should, wherever possible, be leading the fight against 
the insurgents. The Afghan Army enjoys the support of the Afghan 
people. That means that Afghan troops leading the fight would be the 
Taliban's worst nightmare. It would demonstrate that insurgent 
propaganda, which portrays us as out for domination and for our own 
ends, is a lie. If the Afghan people are to see this as their fight, it 
should be a fight led by their own soldiers with our support and not 
the other way around.
  I wish to read an exchange from yesterday's hearing on this issue. I 
asked General Petraeus the following question:

       The urgent increase in the size and capability of the 
     Afghan army and having Afghan forces leading operations more 
     and more is bad news for the Taliban. Now, I've described 
     that as the Taliban's worst nightmare, because their 
     propaganda that they are fighting against foreign forces who 
     want to control Afghanistan will ring more and more hollow 
     with the Afghan population [if] the Afghan army, which has 
     the support of the Afghan people, [is] leading the effort to 
     defeat the insurgents.

  Then I asked General Petraeus: Is that something you would generally 
agree with? His answer was that he agreed with that statement.
  I am also encouraged that General Petraeus committed at our hearing 
to a review of deployments by the Afghan Army to see how more Afghan 
troops might be deployed to the south where operations are the most 
intense and to ensure that Afghan leaders are leading operations in the 
south wherever possible.
  General Petraeus also reiterated to the committee his support for the 
July 2011 date to begin reductions of U.S. combat troops. As he put it:

       I saw [setting that date] most importantly as the message 
     of urgency to complement the message of enormous additional 
     commitment.

  As the Presiding Officer well knows because he is an esteemed member 
of our committee, General Petraeus literally wrote the book on 
counterinsurgency. He led the effort to write our military's manual on 
counterinsurgency. As commander of U.S. forces in Iraq and the U.S. 
Central Command, he has served his country with great distinction at a 
time of great need. We are fortunate that once again he has answered 
his Nation's call, and we are grateful for the sacrifices he, his wife 
Holly, and his family are willing to once again accept.
  I strongly support his nomination. His nomination was unanimously 
supported by the Armed Services Committee yesterday. I hope our 
colleagues will give General Petraeus an overwhelming vote of support.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona is recognized.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, how much time remains?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona has 10 minutes.
  Mr. McCAIN. I thank the Chair.
  Mr. President, I rise to speak on behalf of the nomination of GEN 
David Petraeus to be Commander of the International Security Assistance 
Force in Afghanistan, and Commander of U.S. Forces-Afghanistan. General 
Petraeus is quite simply one of the finest military leaders our country 
has ever produced. And we are all grateful for his willingness to 
answer the call of service in yet another critical mission--a mission 
that will once again take him far away from his family, especially his 
beloved wife Holly, whose support and sacrifice over many decades, both 
for General Petraeus and for our men and women in uniform, can never be 
overstated. General Petraeus is an American hero, and I urge my 
colleagues to confirm his nomination.
  Before I go further, let me say a word of praise for another American 
hero: GEN Stanley McChrystal. He is a man of unrivaled integrity, and 
what is most impressive about his long record of military excellence is 
how much of it remains cloaked in silence. Few understand fully how 
General McChrystal systematically dismantled al-Qaida in Iraq, or how 
he began to turn around our failing war in Afghanistan. These 
achievements, and others like them, are the true measure of Stanley 
McChrystal, and they will earn him an honored place in our history.
  We are calling on General Petraeus at a critical moment for the war 
in Afghanistan. I agree with the President that success in Afghanistan 
is ``a vital national interest,'' and I support his decision to adopt a 
counterinsurgency strategy, backed by more troops and civilian 
resources. This is the only viable path to true success--which I would 
define as an Afghanistan that is increasingly capable of governing 
itself, securing its people, sustaining its own development, and never 
again serving as a base for attacks against America and our allies. In 
short, the same results we are slowly seeing emerge today in Iraq, 
thanks in large part to the work of General Petraeus and the forces he 
commanded.
  Before heading out to Iraq 3 years ago, General Petraeus told the 
Armed Services Committee that the mission was ``hard but not 
hopeless.'' I would characterize our mission in Afghanistan the same 
way. Afghanistan is not a lost cause. Afghans do not want the Taliban 
back. They are good fighters, and they want a government that works for 
them, and works well. And for those who think the Karzai government is 
not an adequate partner, I would remind them that, in 2007, the Maliki 
government in Iraq was not only corrupt; it was collapsed and complicit 
in sectarian violence. A weak and compromised local partner is to be 
expected in counterinsurgency. That is why there is an insurgency. The 
challenge is to support and push our partners to perform better. That 
is what we are doing in Iraq, and that is what we can do in 
Afghanistan. But we need to make it clear that, as long as success in 
Afghanistan is possible, we will stay there to achieve it.
  I appreciate the President's statement last week that July 2011 is 
simply a date to ``begin a transition phase'' to greater Afghan 
responsibility. And for those who doubt the President's desire and 
commitment to succeed in Afghanistan, his nomination of General 
Petraeus to run this war should cause them to think twice. I know that 
General Petraeus will do everything in his power to help us succeed in 
Afghanistan. I know that if he believes he needs something he does not 
have, or if he thinks that changes should be made to our war effort, he 
will not hesitate to offer his best professional military advice to the 
President and to Congress. I am encouraged that this is the man the 
President has given his confidence. And I believe this should be an 
opportunity for the Senate to join together, on a broad bipartisan 
basis, not just to support the nomination of General Petraeus, but to 
demonstrate to the Americans we represent, as well as to our friends 
and allies abroad, that we are fully committed to the success of our 
mission in Afghanistan.
  We must give General Petraeus every opportunity to succeed in his new 
command. And I believe that means stating clearly that the withdrawal 
of U.S. forces from Afghanistan must be determined solely by conditions 
on the ground. What we are trying to do in Afghanistan, as in any 
counterinsurgency, is win the loyalty of the population--to convince 
people who may dislike the insurgency, but who may also distrust their 
government, that they should line up with us against the Taliban and 
al-Qaida. We are asking them to take a huge risk, and they will be far 
less willing to take that risk if they think we will begin leaving in a 
year. In a news report yesterday, one U.S. marine described the effect 
of the

[[Page S5650]]

July 2011 date on the Afghans she encounters: ``That's why they won't 
work with us,'' she said. ``They say you'll leave in 2011, and the 
Taliban will chop their heads off.''
  In addition to being harmful, the July 2011 withdrawal date 
increasingly looks unrealistic. That date was based on assumptions made 
back in December about how much progress we could achieve in 
Afghanistan, and how quickly we could achieve it. But war never works 
out the way we assume. Secretary Gates said last week, ``I believe we 
are making some progress. [But] it is slower and harder than we 
anticipated.'' I agree. Marjah is largely cleared of the Taliban, but 
the holding and building is not going as well as planned. Our operation 
in Kandahar is getting off to a slower and more difficult start than 
expected. The performance of the Afghan government over the past 7 
months is not as even or as rapid as we had hoped. Some of our key 
allies plan to withdraw their forces soon, and it looks increasingly 
unlikely that NATO will meet its pledge of 10,000 troops.
  None of this is to say that we are failing, or that we will fail, in 
Afghanistan. It just means that we need to give our strategy the 
necessary time to succeed. This is all the more essential now with 
General Petraeus assuming command, pending his confirmation. He has 
proved that he can lead our forces to success. He has proved that he 
can work effectively with local partners in counterinsurgency. He has 
proved that he is an ideal partner for our many allies and friends, who 
are so critical to success in Afghanistan. In short, David Petraeus has 
proved that he is a winner, and we need to give him every opportunity 
and remove every obstacle so that he can help the United States and our 
allies to win in Afghanistan.
  General Petraeus has my full support, and I urge my colleagues to 
vote to confirm his nomination so he can take up his new mission as 
soon as possible.
  I yield back the remainder of my time.
  Mr. FEINGOLD Mr. President, it is my general policy to defer to 
Presidents on executive branch nominations. General Petraeus is clearly 
qualified for this position and, accordingly, I will vote in favor of 
his confirmation. But regardless of who is in command, the President's 
current strategy in Afghanistan is counterproductive. We should set a 
flexible timetable for responsibly drawing down U.S. troops, not just a 
start date, so that we can pursue a sustainable, global campaign 
against al-Qaida and its affiliates.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, with 100,000 troops fighting on the front 
lines of our battle against terrorists in Afghanistan, the stakes could 
not be higher. That's why I was pleased that President Obama chose a 
proven leader for our forces in Afghanistan in GEN David Petraeus.
  General Petraeus is the right choice to lead this mission in 
Afghanistan. He has demonstrated that he can effectively carry out a 
counterinsurgency strategy and prepare local forces to take over the 
U.S. combat mission.
  The resounding bipartisan support that General Petraeus received in 
the Armed Services Committee and on the Senate floor sends the right 
message to our forces on the ground in Afghanistan, our allies who 
share our mission of defeating terrorism and the enemies who seek to 
harm us.
  It says that we are committed to success in Afghanistan and we will 
continue to take the fight to the Taliban. And it also says that we 
will continue to work to transfer responsibility to Afghan forces--with 
the recognition that our commitment in Afghanistan is not open-ended.
  As our Commander in Chief, President Obama must have a military and 
civilian team that has his full confidence, and with General Petraeus' 
confirmation, he now has that team in place.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Michigan is recognized.
  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, is there any time remaining?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is 3 minutes.
  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, first of all, let me say I very much join 
Senator McCain's comment about General McChrystal. I spoke about his 
heroics yesterday, his integrity yesterday at the Armed Services 
Committee in my statement, and I reiterate them today. General 
McChrystal is someone who has the deep respect of all who know him. And 
while fate took a strange bounce in his life, he has the strength and 
integrity of character that he is going to be able to deal with it very 
well.
  We all want success in Afghanistan, and setting a date, as the 
President has done and General Petraeus supports, to begin reductions 
of our forces is critical to that success, because it is the Afghans 
who must succeed, with our support. It is the Afghan Army that must 
grow and get stronger because it is that way where the people will be 
supportive of this effort, where they will take the risks if they know 
the Afghan Army is large. They know already it is on their side. They 
will take the risks to tell that army where the bad guys are, where the 
insurgents are, and not be afraid.
  General Petraeus was asked yesterday whether he backs the President's 
approach with respect to a deadline, and his answer was clear: ``Not 
only did I say that I supported it, I said that I agree with it.''
  President Obama has made a decision. General Petraeus is very much a 
part of that decision. He agrees with that decision that we need to 
begin reductions in July of 2011 of our troops as a way of sending a 
powerful message to the Afghan leadership about their responsibility to 
provide security for their own country. And when they do take the 
lead--whether it is in operations in Kandahar or elsewhere--that is the 
way the people will rally behind the government, will rally against the 
hated Taliban.
  The Taliban has no love among the people of Afghanistan. The Afghan 
Army does, and it is that army which must take the lead for the sake of 
success in Afghanistan. That is what setting this date is all about. 
That is why General Petraeus supports setting that date, not for 
withdrawal of all of our troops but for the beginning of reductions of 
our troops, as that powerful signal about what is at stake here and 
what the Government of Afghanistan must do to achieve success for them 
and for us.
  A few final words about the July 2011 date set by the President for 
the beginning of reductions in our combat presence in Afghanistan. That 
decision also made clear that the pace of those reductions would be 
dependent on circumstances at the time, and that the United States 
would continue a strong strategic commitment to Afghanistan.
  That July 2011 date imparts a necessary sense of urgency to Afghan 
leaders about the need to take on principal responsibility for their 
country's security. We saw in Iraq the importance of setting dates as a 
way of spurring action. President Bush in November 2008 decided to move 
all U.S. forces out of Iraqi cities and towns by June 2009 and to 
withdraw all U.S. forces from Iraq by the end of December 2011. That 
decision helped focus the Iraqi Government and military on the need to 
take principal responsibility for the security of their country. The 
Afghans' success, and ours, depends on that happening in Afghanistan as 
well.
  We have already seen a positive effect of setting the July 2011 date 
to begin reductions of our troops. Lieutenant General Caldwell, who 
commands our training efforts in Afghanistan, told us that when 
President Obama announced the date, the Afghan leadership made a 
greater effort to reach out to the local leaders and elders, resulting 
in a surge in recruits for the Afghan army.
  General Petraeus has said he agrees with the President's policy 
setting that July 2011 date, and told me that if he ceases to agree he 
will so advise his Commander in Chief, which he, of course, has a 
responsibility to do as a military commander.
  Mr. President, I yield back the remainder of my time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona is recognized.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, this is not the time for debate over 
strategy. I would point out that no one follows an uncertain trumpet, 
and for us to assume the Afghan people will now rally to the side of 
democracy and freedom, when they think we are leaving and unable to 
sustain a counterinsurgency on their own, is the same kind of thinking 
that opposed the surge in Iraq, the

[[Page S5651]]

same kind of thinking that would have doomed us to failure, the same 
kind of rhetoric that was voiced during our debate on Iraq 3 years ago. 
They were wrong then; they are wrong now.
  I would hope they would have learned the lesson of our success in 
Iraq: that we must show our friends and allies alike that we will be 
there to complete the mission; not as a young soldier said the other 
day: that they fear the Americans are leaving and the Taliban will cut 
their heads off.
  It is a fundamental of warfare that you have to see the mission 
through to completion or failure. To announce a date of withdrawal is 
to announce a date for defeat.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Michigan.
  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I would also now reclaim the remainder of 
my time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired.
  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent for 30 seconds to 
respond.
  Mr. McCAIN. I object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
  The question is, Will the Senate advise and consent to the nomination 
of GEN David H. Petraeus to be General?
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There appears to be a sufficient second.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
  The result was announced--yeas 99, nays 0, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 203 Ex.]

                                YEAS--99

     Akaka
     Alexander
     Barrasso
     Baucus
     Bayh
     Begich
     Bennet
     Bennett
     Bingaman
     Bond
     Boxer
     Brown (MA)
     Brown (OH)
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Burr
     Burris
     Cantwell
     Cardin
     Carper
     Casey
     Chambliss
     Coburn
     Cochran
     Collins
     Conrad
     Corker
     Cornyn
     Crapo
     DeMint
     Dodd
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Ensign
     Enzi
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Franken
     Gillibrand
     Graham
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hagan
     Harkin
     Hatch
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Inouye
     Isakson
     Johanns
     Johnson
     Kaufman
     Kerry
     Klobuchar
     Kohl
     Kyl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     LeMieux
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lincoln
     Lugar
     McCain
     McCaskill
     McConnell
     Menendez
     Merkley
     Mikulski
     Murkowski
     Murray
     Nelson (NE)
     Nelson (FL)
     Pryor
     Reed
     Reid
     Risch
     Roberts
     Rockefeller
     Sanders
     Schumer
     Sessions
     Shaheen
     Shelby
     Snowe
     Specter
     Stabenow
     Tester
     Thune
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Vitter
     Voinovich
     Warner
     Webb
     Whitehouse
     Wicker
     Wyden
  The nomination was confirmed.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the motion to 
reconsider is considered made and laid upon the table.
  The President will be immediately notified of the Senate's action.

                          ____________________