[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 31 (Thursday, March 3, 2011)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1173-S1174]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
SOMALI PIRATES
Mr. KIRK. With the cold-blooded murder of four Americans by pirates,
our country faces a dangerous enemy as old as the second Washington
administration and the earliest days of the U.S. Navy.
This danger now stretches across our vital oil supply lanes and
threatens not just Americans handing out Bibles at Indian Ocean ports
of call but our vital supply of energy. I think it is time to recall
the tough choices made by the Jefferson administration to suppress the
21st century's pirates in this new chapter.
We may forget that as much as 10 percent of all Federal revenues were
paid by the Washington administration to the Barbary pirates operating
in what became Libya. Payments continued under the Adams and Jefferson
administrations, but as always with kidnappers and pirates, ransoms
only led to more danger on the high seas.
In 1801, President Thomas Jefferson decided that payments of tribute
to the Barbary States in exchange for the safe passage of American
shipping vessels had gone far enough. Over the next 5 years, Jefferson
sent the new U.S. Navy--ironically built over his objection--to attack
and defeat the pirates. In the conflict that followed, new American
heroes were made, especially Captain Stephen Decatur. Decatur's
exploits were dangerous and involved close quarters in combat. In his
honor, my State of Illinois named one of its major cities after him,
placing his statue in the city's center.
In the end, piracy was defeated and the flag of the United States was
not strongly challenged by pirates until this century.
In the wake of the murder of four Americans by Somali pirates, we
need to recall Jefferson's policy under what I would call the ``Decatur
Initiative'' against Indian Ocean pirates.
Since 2006, pirates attacked more and more vessels. There were over
400 attacks just last year. According to the New York Times, the
modern-day pirates of the 21st century currently hold 50 vessels and
more than 800 hostages. According to the International Maritime Bureau,
pirates murdered 379 people with an additional 199 individuals reported
missing between 1993 and 2009.
According to reports, the typical pirate ransom in 2005 was between
$100,000 and $200,000. By 2008, the average ransom grew to between
$500,000 ad $2 million. One year later, in 2009, the average ransom
reportedly grew again to a range between $1.5 million and $3.5 million,
In late 2010, ransoms now hover around $4 million per vessel. Ransom
payments as large as $9.5 million for a tanker carrying crude oil have
also been reported by the media.
Recently, pirates captured a supertanker worth $200 million carrying
2 million barrels of oil bound for the U.S. Its ransom may become the
mother load for pirates to extend their reach across the Indian Ocean
and into the Red Sea and Persian Gulf. We would be naive not to expect
profits from piracy will not be used to support terrorism against the
West.
The Horn of Africa is of crucial importance, not only to the U.S.
economy, but also to the global market as it serves as a major artery
of international shipping. The oil tankers that cruise these waters
provide much of the world's energy supply and we cannot risk the safety
of those shipments. This region is a potential incubator for the growth
of two burgeoning al Qaida franchises: al Qaida in the Islamic Magreb,
AQIM, and Somalia's al-Shabaab group, which has pledged its loyalty to
Osama bin Laden.
Yesterday, I raised this issue with our Secretary of State, Hillary
Clinton. She hinted that our policy may be changing and that is welcome
news. I asked, ``if we can't be tough on pirates, who can we be tough
on?''
Today, I am announcing the start of an effort here in the Senate to
draft legislation and support administration action along the lines of
Jefferson's policy on pirates.
These legislative concepts shall be collectively referred to as the
``Decatur Initiative,'' Decatur, whose most daring mission involved
recapturing the U.S.S. Philadelphia from pirates.
The time has come for us to advance the following: 1. A defined
``Pirate Exclusion Zone'' that would allow the immediate boarding and/
or sinking of any vessel from Somalia not approved and certified for
sea by allied forces; 2. an expedited legal regime permitting trial and
detention of pirates captured on the high seas; 3. a blockade of
pirate-dominated ports like Hobyo, Somalia; 4. broad powers and
authority to on-scene commanders to attack or arrest pirates once
outside Somalia's 12-mile territorial limit--this would include the
summary sinking of pirate ships if a local commander deems it
warranted.
Additionally, I will explore actions to attack the financial links
between pirates and the terrorist groups such as al Shabaab and target
pirates with financial sanctions in the same way as other terrorist
networks.
In the wake of the recent tragedy in the Arabian Sea, where American
missionaries were gunned down in cold blood, I am hopeful that many of
my colleagues will be willing to join me in taking bold action against
the pirates who have been operating in the waters off East Africa. It
is ironic that the United States and our allies station substantial
naval forces against pirates in this region but take little aggressive
action against them. While the pirates have substantial strength on the
ground in Somalia, once they're put to sea, we can be their masters and
they have very weak means to oppose us. A set of vessels blockading
pirate-dominated ports with aggressive orders to attack and sink any
vessel leaving Somalia should make quick work of pirate operations.
The cost of oil and the price of gas is high enough. Further
increases could endanger our slowly recovering economy. As part of the
effort to stabilize the price of gas in America, we need to recover
Jefferson's policy and attack and defeat Somali pirates as soon as they
leave Somalia's territorial waters.
In addition, as this body begins to finalize spending legislation for
the remainder of the year, I would like to highlight the growing danger
to the U.S. economy and our country.
We all know that the national debt now tops $14 trillion but we
should note that this means we are adding $35 billion to our debts each
week or over $5 billion borrowed each day.
That $4 billion cut represents just .3 percent of this year's annual
deficit or just three one-hundredths of 1 percent
[[Page S1174]]
of the current money we owe. The famous Harvard economic historian
Niall Ferguson said you can mark the decline of a country when it pays
more money to its lenders than to its army. We have already crossed
that point. This year the Congressional Budget Office estimates that
interest payments we will pay to our money lenders will top $225
billion. That is more than the cost of our Army, which we currently
estimate costs about $195 billion, or our Air Force, which we estimate
costs $201 billion, or even our Navy, which will cost $217 billion this
year.
Our money lender costs now are higher than the entire gross domestic
product of the country of Denmark, at $201 billion. We must pay $4
billion per week in interest or $616 million per day to our money
lenders. What is worse, interest payments are expected to more than
double over the next decade and will top $778 billion. That means soon
we will have to pay our money lenders more than it costs to operate our
Army, Navy, and Air Force combined at $623 billion.
Remember also that interest payments on the debt are a form of wealth
transfer from hard-working middle-class Americans who pay Federal taxes
to wealthy lenders, many of whom live abroad. For those in the Senate
who are opposing budget constraints put in by the House, we should
force them to admit that they are either for higher taxes for the
American people or more borrowing that transfers wealth from hard-
working middle-class Americans to high-income money lenders, most of
whom now live abroad.
Mr. President, I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Will the Senator withhold his
request?
Mr. KIRK. I withhold.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Arizona.
Mr. KYL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak in morning
business for 10 minutes.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so
ordered.
____________________