[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 115 (Tuesday, July 10, 2018)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4860-S4866]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                                  NATO

  Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, I want to start by thanking my 
colleagues who will be joining me shortly on the floor to voice their 
support for the NATO alliance. Once again, we find ourselves facing a 
crisis of President Trump's own creation.
  For nearly 70 years, NATO has served as a pillar of stability and 
security for the United States and our democratic allies across Europe. 
It was there as Europe rebuilt after World War II. It was there to win 
the Cold War. It was there to defend the United States after September 
11. Yet today, for the first

[[Page S4861]]

time since World War II, an American President has given our closest 
allies in Europe reason to question the trustworthiness of the United 
States and our reliability as a NATO partner.
  President Trump's slapdash approach to foreign policy, borne out of 
heated campaign rallies instead of thoughtful Cabinet meetings, has 
real implications for our national security. Such reckless behavior by 
President Trump has weakened the United States on the global stage and 
has created a more dangerous world for our citizens and our troops 
serving abroad.
  Today the President is on his way to Europe, and his intentions are 
clear. President Trump will use every opportunity that comes his way to 
admonish our allies, alienate our closest friends, and degrade the 
post-World War II international order in the hopes of winning favor 
with the dictator from Moscow.
  In fact, this morning the President said his easiest meeting during 
this trip would probably be with Vladimir Putin. Is it easy because 
they share common values? Is it easy because he wants to be Putin's 
friend? Is it easy because Trump would rather deal with an autocrat 
than negotiate with democratically elected leaders?
  Let's be clear. Meeting with a thug intent on undermining American 
democratic values should not be easy, and it should not be chummy. Yet 
as National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster reportedly said in the past:

       The president thinks he can be friends with Putin. I don't 
     know why, or why he would want to be.

  I agree with those comments of the former National Security Advisor, 
General McMaster. It makes no sense. Attacking American democracy is 
not exactly an act of friendship.
  We know the circumstances are dire. The leaders of our intelligence 
community and the entire Senate Intelligence Committee, on a bipartisan 
basis, have concluded that Russia not only attacked the United States 
in 2016 through its cyber efforts but continues to sow discord and 
destabilize institutions that are at the very heart of American 
democracy.
  Yet to this day, President Trump continues to take Putin at his word. 
With his warm embrace of the Russian dictator, many of us find 
ourselves questioning the President's true loyalties, and it is no 
surprise that our allies in Europe are questioning the loyalty and 
commitment of the United States to the post-World War II international 
order.
  In the absence of U.S. Presidential leadership, I want to make clear 
to our allies abroad, as well as our adversaries in the Kremlin, where 
Members of the U.S. Senate stand. We stand for the rule of law and an 
international order based on liberal democratic values; we stand for 
security alliances among democracies based on mutual defense against 
our enemies; we stand against dictators who invade our neighbors with 
soldiers and cyber attacks; and we stand with our friends through thick 
and thin.
  Tomorrow, on the Foreign Relations Committee, we expect to make such 
a declaration explicit with a bipartisan resolution affirming that the 
U.S. national security is inextricably linked to the security of 
Europe. We are not schmucks, Mr. President, for leading an alliance 
that has brought peace and security for decades in the wake of two 
devastating World Wars.
  The Foreign Relations Committee will reaffirm a commitment to article 
5 of the NATO charter, which says that an attack on one is an attack on 
all.
  We recognize that since article 5 took effect, it has only been 
triggered once--only once--by and in support of the United States 
following the September 11 attack. To this day, nearly 17 years later, 
NATO troops still serve in Afghanistan in support of the American 
effort.
  These countries have all sent their sons and daughters to fight and 
die alongside ours. They stand with us--and we with them--against 
extremism, terrorism, authoritarianism, and proudly in support of 
democracy, human rights, and the rule of law.
  Members of the NATO alliance had been steadily increasing their 
defense spending for the past 4 years in reaction to Putin's invasion 
of Crimea and the implications for regional security, not Trump's 
bluster.
  Our allies understand the threat posed by a dictator who tears away 
territory from its neighbors. The question is, Does President Trump? Is 
there more work to be done to meet the 2-percent commitment 
in countries across the alliance? Of course, but we need to acknowledge 
the progress that has been made and the trend lines that are headed in 
the right direction. Let's not jeopardize those trends by insulting the 
very leaders we need by our side.

  This week in Brussels, the President should do something he has 
proven completely incapable of thus far--he should thank our allies for 
their steadfastness, for their resilience, and for their commitment to 
working with us to counter the threat posed by Russia.
  President Trump should work with our allies to collectively increase 
sanctions on Moscow. He should work with NATO to build our collective 
cyber defenses against the onslaught of Russian cyber attacks and 
disinformation. These are all things he should do--things a normal 
American President would do--but based on the tweets and his past 
actions, I have little hope he will choose such a path.
  The President should also work with our allies to continue the fight 
against ISIS. NATO countries form the core of the Global Coalition to 
Defeat ISIS. NATO governments host working groups, contribute 
resources, participate in airstrikes, provide stabilization assistance, 
and face serious challenges in addressing the plight of foreign 
fighters.
  In Iraq, NATO is working to share more responsibility in training the 
Iraqi security forces. This is exactly how strategic partnerships are 
supposed to work. We identify challenges, cooperate on solutions, share 
the burden of funding, troop deployments, and assistance in support of 
a shared objective--in this case, a stable, unified Iraq that can stand 
up to Iran.
  In Syria, NATO should be a natural ally in countering Russian and 
Iranian aggression. Despite regular, irrefutable evidence of war crimes 
and crimes against humanity committed by Bashar al-Assad, Putin 
continues to bolster the Butcher of Damascus.
  In fact, Russian forces are directly complicit in targeting civilians 
and civilian structures in Syria. These are facts that cannot be 
ignored. Russian forces are actively working with Assad's regime to 
bomb opposition in southern Syria into submission. These military 
operations are taking place today inside the very deescalation zone 
President Trump touted last year with Putin in Vietnam.
  These developments have led to the largest displacement of civilians 
in southern Syria since the beginning of this war. The President must 
make clear, once and for all, that Russia is not a constructive partner 
on Syria; that it is a willing accomplice and a perpetrator of war 
crimes.
  Our friends in Ukraine are fighting for their country on a daily 
basis, battling Russian troops. As the globe focuses on the World Cup 
in Russia, at least 17 Ukrainian troops have been killed or injured in 
their own country by Russian forces--killed or injured in their own 
country. We are helping our Ukrainian friends with training and 
equipment. Under no circumstances, can this aid be diminished in any 
way. President Trump needs to understand that any attempt to do so will 
be met with strong and unified opposition in the Senate. President 
Trump can never lose sight of the importance of eastern Ukraine, nor 
can he forget the plight of so many Crimeans who suffer under Russian 
repression to this day.
  Today I submitted a resolution with Senator Portman calling for the 
United States to declare a policy of nonrecognition of Russia's illegal 
annexation of Crimea. This idea is modeled under the Welles 
Declaration, which said the United States would never recognize the 
Soviet annexation of the Baltic States. The Welles Declaration meant 
something to the beleaguered people of Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia, 
all who yearned to be free of Moscow's repression, and today they are 
free.
  It represented the U.S. commitment to the territorial integrity of 
independent countries. Today we have the same opportunity to send the 
same message to those courageous Ukrainian citizens living in Crimea.
  President Trump was reported to have said the people of Crimea want 
to be part of Russia because they speak

[[Page S4862]]

Russian. Instead of misinformed judgments from the President, we and 
the world need clear leadership that says definitively to President 
Putin that we will not stand for his illegal occupation of Crimea; we 
will not stand by in the face of ongoing attacks in eastern Ukraine by 
Russian forces; we will not stand by while President Putin participates 
in the commission of war crimes in Syria; and we will not stand by 
while Russia attacks democratic institutions in the United States and 
those of our closest allies.
  I hope our President will meet with Putin in Helsinki and express 
these simple but powerful statements. Yet nothing in his track record 
gives me much hope that he will do so.
  We have a President who is so enamored of Putin that to this day, he 
still refuses to criticize the Russian leader, a President who sought 
early in his term to lift sanctions on Russia, a President who has 
questioned Ukraine's sovereignty over Crimea, and a President who 
routinely trashes partners in the strongest military alliance the world 
has ever seen. This behavior is bizarre, it is erratic, and it is no 
reflection of who we are as a country or a people.
  In closing, I would remind the President that the Russia sanctions 
law, CAATSA, restricts his ability to unilaterally lift sanctions on 
Russia. Such a move would be subject to approval. So as he embarks on 
his ``easiest meeting'' with Vladimir Putin, he is constrained by a law 
that was supported by 98 Senators.
  We know Putin seeks sanction relief. We must make clear that such 
relief will only come when he withdraws from Ukraine, returns Crimea, 
ends his support for Bashar al-Assad, and stops interfering in our 
elections.
  As someone who is personally sanctioned by Vladimir Putin, I will not 
stop working to ensure that the CAATSA law is fully implemented by this 
administration.
  The hallmark struggle of our time is between those who champion 
democracy and autocrats who use oppression, military evasions, and 
disinformation to achieve their nefarious ends, and this week this 
battle comes into sharp contrast.
  Will our President side with our democratic allies in Brussels or 
will he side with an autocrat in the Kremlin? Either way, the world 
needs to know the U.S. Senate has made its view clear. We stand with 
NATO. We stand with our allies. We stand for democracy and the rule of 
law. We stand for the international liberal order that has kept the 
peace for decades. We stand on these values today, and we will never 
shy away from their defense.
  With that, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Democratic leader.
  Mr. SCHUMER. First, Mr. President, let me thank my colleague, my 
neighbor from New Jersey, for the excellent job he does in just about 
anything he does but particularly today as ranking member of the 
Foreign Relations Committee. His leadership is invaluable to this 
country so I thank him for it.
  Mr. President, President Trump is on his way to attend the annual 
summit of NATO leaders in Brussels. The President should use the 
occasion to reinforce and build up the transatlantic alliance rather 
than tear it down.
  Since its founding nearly 70 years ago, NATO has become the most 
powerful and successful security partnership ever created. The first 
half of the 20th century was marked by unprecedented human suffering--
depression, war, and genocide. After World War II, in the face of 
Soviet aggression and expansion, NATO showed the world a different way.
  Working together with other international institutions, NATO 
established the political and economic rules of the road that have 
promoted our national security and our mutual prosperity.
  This institution now finds itself under incredible and completely 
unnecessary strain from Russia's interference in democracies across 
Europe and including the United States, from China's rapacious economic 
aggression and geopolitical provocations, from the evolving threat of 
terrorism, and, shockingly, from within.
  Our President, President Trump, has routinely berated the leaders of 
our NATO allies in far harsher terms than the President has ever 
criticized President Putin of Russia, a dictator who has invaded a 
sovereign country, murdered journalists and political dissenters, 
directed a nerve agent attack in the United Kingdom, and continues to 
prop up the brutal Assad regime in Syria. He has shown an eagerness to 
impose tariffs against Europe but a reluctance to sanction President 
Putin and his cronies. He has accepted the word of President Putin over 
the consensus of 17 agencies of the American intelligence community.
  For reasons that continue to baffle so many, President Trump will 
follow up his summit with a one-on-one meeting with President Putin in 
Helsinki, a mere 100 miles from the Russian border.
  Before leaving for Europe this morning, the President summed up his 
agenda. He said: ``I have NATO, I have the UK . . . and I have Putin. 
Frankly, Putin may be the easiest of all. Who would think?''
  Who would think? President Trump, considering all you have said and 
done in the past 2 years, considering your kid glove approach to 
President Putin that has everyone here scratching their head, any one 
of us could have predicted that Putin would be your easiest meeting, 
but every one of us is in fear of what Putin might get out of it.
  Every time the President has negotiated one-on-one with President Xi, 
with Kim Jong Un, our rival has gotten the better of him and of our 
country. And many of us fear what President Trump will do alone with 
Putin, what he will concede and what Putin will get out of him.
  The President of the United States should be a clarion voice for our 
values, bolstering our allies and isolating our adversaries. President 
Trump has, unfortunately and alarmingly, been the opposite.
  The values at the foundation of our NATO alliance are worth fighting 
for--free markets, free and fair elections, representative government, 
rule of law. These are the values that protect our citizens from the 
encroachment of tyranny. President Trump should recognize that power 
resides in the values shared by our NATO allies as well as the 
strategic sense of using NATO as a powerful bulwark against the abuses 
of a resurgent Russia.
  Later this afternoon, the Senate will vote on a motion to instruct 
conferees on the Defense bill to reaffirm Congress's enduring and 
unequivocal support for NATO. I hope it receives the overwhelming 
bipartisan, if not unanimous, approval it so deserves.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Flake). The Senator from Connecticut.
  Mr. MURPHY. Mr. President, 2 weeks ago, Secretary Pompeo appeared 
before the Senate Appropriations Committee, and I got the chance to ask 
him a simple question. I asked him whether it was still the position of 
the United States that Russia should not be allowed to join the G7 
without adhering to the outlines of the Minsk agreement. That is the 
agreement that seeks to try to resolve the crisis that has been created 
in Europe and in Ukraine by the Russian invasion of eastern Ukraine. I 
give Secretary Pompeo credit because his answer was brutally honest. He 
said that he certainly could foresee a series of trade-offs with the 
Russians by which they would be allowed to join the G7--rejoin the G7--
without withdrawing their forces from eastern Ukraine or Crimea.
  That is a stunning reversal of prior U.S. policy--the idea that we 
would trade away Ukraine for some set of concessions from Russia on 
another area of national security, maybe in the Middle East--but it is 
not surprising. It is not surprising because, as Donald Trump has made 
clear over and over again, his primary objective is to become friends 
with Vladimir Putin. His primary objective is to try to square himself 
and the Kremlin without regard to the consequences for U.S. national 
security.
  So I am very pleased to join Senator Menendez and Senator Schumer and 
Senator Reed on the floor today to express our hope and desire that 
President Trump finds some way to stop undermining the NATO alliance as 
he heads for this important summit and understands that Russia presents 
a real and present danger to the world order, to American security, and 
to the future of global security if we continue to communicate to them 
that they pay no

[[Page S4863]]

consequences for their erasure of borders in and around their periphery 
and for their continued attempts to manipulate elections outside of 
their borders.
  I hope there are others in the room with President Trump and Vladimir 
Putin when they meet because it is hard for us to understand what 
leverage Putin has over Trump such that he would continue to give away 
so much to Russia without getting very much in return; why he would 
continue to do Russia's bidding in trying to tear apart NATO, in trying 
to tear apart the EU, without getting anything in return. I don't know 
what leverage Putin has over Trump, but I would feel much more 
comfortable if there were some other people in that room who could be 
witness to those discussions to make sure the discussion with Putin 
doesn't go the same way the discussion with President Kim did in North 
Korea.
  I also am here on the floor to remind my colleagues about the 
importance of this underlying relationship with Europe. I am sure my 
colleagues have already said it, but let's just remember that article 5 
has only been exercised one time, and that was in the defense of the 
United States. That was when the United States was attacked, and we 
asked our NATO allies to join with us to try to rid Afghanistan of a 
government that had given shelter to those who had attacked us. Don't 
forget that NATO exists for our benefit as well as for Europe's 
benefit.

  Also don't forget that for 4 consecutive years, European governments 
have been increasing their defense spending. For 4 consecutive years, 
countries have been scaling up their contributions to their defense 
budgets. But I also don't want my colleagues to think that the measure 
of transatlantic security is simply the amount of money we are putting 
into a defense budget. I am not saying that isn't important, but this 
administration from the beginning has had backwards the way in which 
you protect America from the threats that we face all around the world. 
Peace does come through military strength, but increasingly, the 
threats we face--increasingly, the threats Russia presents to the 
United States and to our allies--are nonkinetic threats, are not 
military threats, and they require other means of counteraction.
  So as we are trying to measure whether Europe is a full and 
meaningful participant in a security arrangement with the United 
States, I don't mind measuring defense contributions, which are 
increasing year by year, but let's also remember that it is Europe that 
is handling the flood of refugees leaving the security vacuum in the 
Middle East. The United States is doing nothing--nothing of 
consequence, of importance--to handle that refugee flow. It is Europe 
that is dealing with that refugee flow.
  It is Europe that often deals with the most mature terrorist 
organizations setting up cells inside of Europe. It has, in fact, been 
Europe that has borne the brunt of terrorist attacks since 9/11 due to 
those mature organizations being able to exist inside Europe. It is the 
counterterrorism capacity and the law enforcement capacity that Europe 
offers to confront those threats that also matters to our security.
  It is Europe that has had to stand up capacities to counter Russian 
propaganda that floods in particular Eastern Europe and the Balkans but 
also Central and Western Europe as well. We don't measure those 
counterpropaganda resources in the defense budget, but they are serious 
and they are increasing.
  It is Europe that has spent billions of dollars trying to diversify 
their energy supplies so as to cut off Russia's most important revenue 
source--the export of oil and gas. The United States provides advice to 
Europe on how to do that, but it is Europe that is spending hard 
dollars--reverse flowing, diversifying domestic energy, bringing in gas 
from other countries besides Russia, which has made the biggest 
difference.
  I want my friends here to understand the holistic nature of the 
security partnership that we enjoy with Europe and with our NATO 
allies. Yes, defense spending matters, but it is representative of this 
administration's unwillingness to understand the panoply of ways in 
which we need to defend our country, besides just a robust defense 
budget, which causes them to misunderstand the nature of this 
relationship. It is Europe's focus on refugee resettlement. It is 
Europe's focus on counterpropaganda capacities. It is Europe's focus on 
fighting Russian propaganda and their focus on diversifying their 
energy supplies that add, frankly, just as much to our joint security 
as their defense spending does.
  Now, I don't expect that Donald Trump, given how little study he 
affords to the national security of the United States, is going to get 
up to school on all of these different capacities that Europe lends to 
the alliance, but it is important for us on a bipartisan basis to 
recognize that this is a strong alliance and that as much as we both 
push and pull each other, it remains strong. And don't think that the 
grievances only lie on our side of the aisle. Our European partners for 
years told us that we were making our collective security weaker by 
continuing an invasion and occupation of Iraq that was creating more 
terrorists than it was killing. So we have grievances with our partners 
in Europe, but they have had historic grievances with us, and it is 
important for us to recognize that historical fact as well.
  I am here to express my desire that this President acknowledge the 
importance of this alliance. I am here expressing the hope that the 
summit won't be the unmitigated disaster that most people think it will 
be given the spirit in which the President leaves for it--castigating 
our NATO allies on his way out the door. And I don't want us to come to 
the conclusion that without NATO, without the European Union, without 
the post-World War II structures that we created in the midst of the 
rubble of that global conflict, that global security can be preserved.
  We have taken for granted that countries don't march on each other, 
by and large, any longer. While we still have instability, we don't 
have nations invading other nations in the way that we did 100 years 
ago. That is because of NATO. That is because of the set of global 
security structures that the United States and Europe have helped stand 
up together. And if they fall apart--as it seems that this President 
roots for on a regular basis--then our assumption of how conflict will 
play out or not play out over the course of the next 10 to 20 years 
falls apart as well.
  I am glad to join my colleagues today in support of the NATO alliance 
and in hope that the President understands the importance of it as he 
heads off to this critical summit.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Rhode Island.
  Mr. REED. Mr. President, today I have submitted a motion to instruct 
conferees on the National Defense Authorization Act regarding the 
critical importance of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization for the 
security of the United States, for our protection. I join my colleagues 
this afternoon in support of the motion, which sends an important 
message to our allies, our partners, and our adversaries that the 
United States is unwavering in its support of Europe--a Europe free 
from the threat of external aggression--and in support of the rules-
based international order that has promoted international security for 
decades.
  The motion to instruct provides important guidance at this critical 
juncture before the NATO summit in Brussels and the U.S.-Russia summit 
in Helsinki. The motion instructs the Senate conferees on the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 to ensure that the final 
conference report on the NDAA reaffirms the ironclad U.S. commitment 
under article 5 to the collective defense of the alliance. It reaffirms 
the U.S. commitment to NATO as a community of shared values, including 
liberty, human rights, democracy, and the rule of law.
  The motion also calls for the United States to pursue an integrated 
approach to strengthen European defense as part of a long-term strategy 
that uses all elements of U.S. national power to deter and, if 
necessary, to defeat Russian aggression.
  It also calls on the Trump administration to urgently complete a 
comprehensive, whole-of-government strategy to counter Russian malign 
influence activities, as required by last year's National Defense 
Authorization Act, and to submit that strategy to Congress without 
delay. We are still

[[Page S4864]]

awaiting--for over a year now--this strategy.
  Finally, the motion reiterates U.S. support for the rules-based 
international order and for expanding and enhancing our alliances and 
partnerships, which are some of our greatest security advantages.
  No one should ever doubt the U.S. resolve in meeting its commitments 
to the mutual defense of the NATO alliance. Unfortunately, this motion 
has become necessary because some of our closest allies have come to 
question the U.S. commitment to collective self-defense. President 
Trump has at times called the alliance ``obsolete'' and has denigrated 
NATO as being ``as bad as NAFTA,'' which he strongly opposes. Our 
allies are starting to wonder whether they can rely on the United 
States to come to their defense in a crisis. Recently, German Foreign 
Minister Maas said the ``world order that we once knew . . . no longer 
exists.'' He added that ``old pillars of reliability are crumbling'' 
and that ``alliances dating back decades are being challenged in the 
time it takes to write a tweet.''
  To make matters worse, the administration's eagerly scheduled summit 
meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin, on the heels of the NATO 
summit in Brussels, only adds to fears that President Trump does not 
share the security concerns of our European allies and partners. 
Instead of concentrating on rebuilding alliance cohesion and unity 
after his divisive diplomacy at the G7 meeting in Canada, President 
Trump appears intent on orchestrating another photo op with an 
authoritarian ruler who oppresses his people and threatens the security 
of the United States, its allies, and partners--this time in the person 
of President Putin.
  Meeting with Putin now is, in my view, ill-advised, and President 
Trump appears to be ill-informed about the threat Russia poses to the 
security of the United States and that of our allies and partners. The 
National Defense Strategy, which this administration authored and 
promoted, refocused our attention from international terrorist groups 
to our two major challenges, Russia and China. Yet the President, in 
his actions and words, appears to be undercutting his own National 
Defense Strategy.
  In addition, I am deeply concerned that President Trump is meeting 
one-on-one with a former KGB spymaster like Putin. President Trump's 
``attitude'' will not be enough to challenge Putin over Russia's 
aggression against the United States and our allies.
  Let's be clear. President Putin is not ``fine.'' As recently 
reaffirmed by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, on which I 
sit, President Putin directed an attack on our 2016 elections with the 
intent of undermining public confidence in our democratic process. To 
this day, Russia continues, according to administration intelligence 
officials, to target elections in democratic countries, including the 
upcoming midterm elections in the United States. Russia's use of hybrid 
operations--including disinformation, propaganda, corruption and 
financial influence, hidden campaign donations, and even chemical 
attacks on civilians in foreign countries--fundamentally threatens our 
security and the security of our allies. And Russia's ongoing 
aggression against the sovereignty and territorial integrity of 
neighboring countries, including Ukraine, is unacceptable and violates 
international norms.
  In light of this Russian threat, President Trump should take the 
opportunity at this important NATO summit to lead the alliance toward 
greater solidarity and cohesion. Unfortunately, President Trump's 
statements ahead of the summit point in the opposite direction.
  I understand and share the concern of many across the political 
spectrum that our NATO allies are not spending enough on their own 
defense, and many are not on track to meet the pledge to be spending 2 
percent of GDP on national defense by 2024. This issue has been raised 
by previous administrations, including the Bush and Obama 
administrations. But, ultimately, the United States participates in 
NATO because we believe the transatlantic partnership is in the U.S. 
national security interest and not because other countries are paying 
us for protection.
  We must look at the whole picture of allied contributions to NATO 
operations and to the strategic competition with Russia and China that 
I mentioned was the singular point of the National Defense Strategy 
approved by President Trump after being prepared by Secretary of 
Defense Mattis. The whole picture includes the following:
  Our allies stood with us following the September 11, 2001, terrorist 
attack, invoking for the first and only time, as my colleagues have 
said, the obligation under article 5 of the NATO treaty for collective 
self-defense.
  As of the end of this year, 7 of the 28 non-U.S. NATO members will 
meet the 2 percent of GDP pledge on defense spending. In addition, 18 
members have put forth a credible plan to get to 2 percent of GDP by 
2024.
  Since 2014, all NATO members have halted the decline in their 
national defense spending, and total defense expenditures have 
increased by more than $87 billion.
  U.S. foreign military sales to NATO members are up significantly in 
the past few years, from less than $5 billion in 2015 to an estimate of 
nearly $40 billion in 2018.
  Our NATO partners provide significant host nation support to the tens 
of thousands of U.S. troops stationed in Europe, including Germany's 
$51 billion in military infrastructure and $1 billion annually in host 
nation support to the 33,000 U.S. troops stationed in Germany.
  NATO members have deployed thousands of troops on NATO operations in 
Afghanistan, Kosovo, the NATO training mission in Iraq, and elsewhere, 
with many making the ultimate sacrifice. NATO soldiers have died 
serving side by side with U.S. soldiers, sailors, marines, and airmen 
in defense of the fundamental values we share, and we cannot ignore 
that.
  The motion to instruct recognizes that in strategic competition with 
near-peers Russia and China--again, the singular feature of the new 
National Defense Strategy of this administration--one of the United 
States' greatest competitive advantages is our alliances and 
partnerships and the benefits they bring to the fight.
  I urge my Senate colleagues to support the motion to instruct. This 
is not a partisan issue. It is not a Republican issue or a Democratic 
issue. It is a national security issue. In fact, the motion supports a 
number of provisions in the Senate version of the fiscal year 2019 NDAA 
proposed by my Republican colleagues on the Armed Services Committee 
that reaffirm the U.S. national security interest in the NATO alliance.
  At this critical juncture before the summits in Brussels and 
Helsinki, Congress, as a coequal branch of government, has an 
opportunity to lead, just as Congress demonstrated leadership in 
overwhelmingly passing the Russia sanctions bill as part of the 
Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act, or CAATSA, by a 
vote of 98 to 2. That bill sent a clear message to Russia that there 
are costs to its malign activities and that Russia's behavior must 
change.
  Similarly, strong Senate support for the motion to instruct will send 
an important message to our allies, our partners, and our adversaries. 
It will demonstrate solidarity with our NATO allies and partners and 
support for the vision of a Europe whole, free, and secure. It will 
send a message of support for the rules-based international order and 
the need for Russia to stop its disruptive behavior. It sends a message 
to President Putin that his behavior is not fine, that there is a 
continuing cost to be paid for Russia's malign activities, and that he 
will not succeed in dividing the NATO alliance.
  In conclusion, I urge my colleagues to send a strong message of U.S. 
support for NATO by voting later today for the motion to instruct.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The minority whip is recognized.
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I thank my colleague from Rhode Island, as 
well as those who were on the floor earlier. The remarks we are 
delivering today address the future of our relationship with the NATO 
alliance, particularly in light of the visit that President Trump is 
now making to meet with Vladimir Putin of Russia.
  I am glad many of my colleagues came here today to speak on the 
threats posed by President Trump to America's core national security 
alliance--something that would have once

[[Page S4865]]

been unimaginable. In fact, there was a time when a Republican 
President named Ronald Reagan really inspired the United States and the 
world by noting how important the NATO alliance is to the world and to 
the United States. In a speech that he gave to the Parliament of Great 
Britain in 1982, Ronald Reagan said:

       We're approaching the end of a bloody century plagued by a 
     terrible political invention: totalitarianism. Optimism comes 
     less easily today, not because democracy is less vigorous, 
     but because democracy's enemies have refined their 
     instruments of repression. Yet optimism is in order, because 
     day by day democracy is proving itself to be a not-at-all 
     fragile flower.

  Reagan went on to say:

       Our military strength is a prerequisite to peace, but let 
     it be clear we maintain this strength in the hope it will 
     never be used, for the ultimate determinant in the struggle 
     that's now going on in the world will not be bombs and 
     rockets, but a test of wills and ideas, a trial of spiritual 
     resolve, the values we hold, the beliefs we cherish, the 
     ideals to which we are dedicated.

  President Reagan then went on to say to the British Parliament:

       I've often wondered about the shyness of some of us in the 
     West about standing for these ideals that have done so much 
     to ease the plight of man and the hardships of our imperfect 
     world.

  Contrast what President Reagan said about the partnership of the 
Atlantic alliance nations in NATO with what has happened with this 
current White House and President regarding some of these same key 
Western allies at the G7 summit last month.
  First, President Trump stunned the Western world by saying even 
before arriving at the summit that Russia should be welcomed back into 
the group of G7 nations, even though Russia was expelled after invading 
and seizing sovereign Ukrainian territory, which it still holds. 
President Trump made this plea to try to win over this effort of 
support for Putin to a Western world that is skeptical of Putin and his 
tactics.
  Putin launched an aggressive cyber act of war right here in the 
United States in an attempt to void and change a national election and 
to favor his candidate over another. That, in many respects, is a cyber 
act of war, which President Trump refuses to acknowledge.
  At the summit itself, President Trump arrived late and left early 
after letting it be known that he didn't even want to attend the G7 
summit with our traditional allies. The President, sad to say, was 
utterly disrespectful to our Nation's oldest and most reliable allies.
  In fact, a White House trade adviser, Peter Navarro, said that 
Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau ``stabbed us in the back,'' and 
then Mr. Navarro went on to say, ``There's a special place in hell for 
any foreign leader that engages in bad-faith diplomacy with President 
Donald J. Trump and then tries to stab him in the back on the way out 
the door.'' Navarro's comments echoed a series of tweets from the 
President withdrawing from a joint G7 statement after initially 
agreeing to it.
  Then the President went on in this tweet, personally attacking Prime 
Minister Trudeau in the coarsest terms and criticizing and disparaging 
America's oldest Western allies simply for imploring him not to end 
decades of shared Western-led international order and cooperation.
  One senses that President Trump's sense of history extends to the day 
before yesterday. Has he forgotten that since the attack on the United 
States of 9/11, the Canadians have stood by us, as so many other 
countries have as well? One hundred fifty-nine Canadians have given 
their lives standing by our troops in Afghanistan in a NATO effort 
since operations began there in 2002. Could we ask anything more of a 
trusted ally than to sacrifice the lives of its young soldiers? Canada 
has, and continues to, despite this language from President Trump.
  Then, to add insult to injury, President Trump showered one of the 
world's most brutal nuclear-armed dictators with glowing warmth, pats 
on the back, flattery, and even a White House-made propaganda video 
showing North Korean leader Kim Jong Un as a great statesman.
  Can anyone here imagine what would have happened if President Obama 
had constructed a propaganda video before beginning his negotiations 
with Iran or if the President had saluted an Iranian general? FOX TV, 
the Republicans, and many other leaders would have had a field day with 
that image.
  I am all for talking to one's adversaries in the pursuit of 
diplomacy. I have met with my share of autocrats around the world, 
trying, in my small way, to advance America's interests and values, but 
I don't check America's values or reality at the door at those 
meetings. I do not know of any modern President who let normal 
disagreements between key allies turn into a personal spat that 
alienates our friends and undermines our security.
  In fact, I am increasingly convinced that President Trump is so 
enamored by validation-seeking autocrats and offended by our 
traditional allies expressing disagreements that he is incapable of 
distinguishing friends from enemies. This is truly problematic and 
dangerous. Now, our allies have just cause to worry that President 
Trump will give away concessions to Vladimir Putin, just as he did with 
the North Korean dictator.
  Against all reason and international norms, Trump is considering 
recognizing Russia's illegal occupation of Crimea because, sadly, 
President Trump has no sense of history and little knowledge of 
Vladimir Putin's true agenda.
  He is making threats and belittling NATO, the strongest alliance on 
the face of the Earth, while at the same time craving time with 
Vladimir Putin, whom he describes as a fine man. That is something 
which I am sure the people in our NATO alliance find incredible.
  Quite simply, the first and long overdue statement from Trump to 
Putin ought to be: Do not interfere in America's elections ever again. 
I don't want your help, which was an attack on our democracy, and I do 
not believe your denials.
  That ought to be the opening remark with Vladimir Putin. My guess is 
that it will not even be close.
  I can think of few times in history that the party of Ronald Reagan 
has sat so quietly on its hands while an American President's actions 
threatened our Western security alliance and our place in the world. I 
don't understand why the Senate Foreign Relations Committee has not 
held a full committee hearing on Russia in more than 1 year, not to 
mention ever conducted an investigation into Russia's attack on our 
last election--something clearly within the jurisdiction of this 
committee and which it did in the past amid allegations of foreign 
election interference.
  What of the Republicans' stunning silence about President Trump's 
undermining of NATO? There are some national needs and congressional 
responsibilities that ought to call on all of us in both political 
parties to rise to the occasion. Think about what Russia's President 
Putin would most like to see happen in the West and compare it to what 
is happening under President Trump. President Trump has called NATO 
obsolete and questioned the centrality of the collective security 
guarantee of article 5. He has questioned whether NATO should come to 
the aid of NATO's Baltic States--NATO members. In fact, President Trump 
reportedly asked NATO at the recent G7: Why do we need it?
  Is that now the official position, not just of President Trump but of 
his Republican Party? I would implore those Members of the Senate of 
both parties who have visited the Baltic nations and understand the 
vulnerability of those states and their bloody history over the last 
century and a half to speak up on behalf of the need for NATO to stand 
in concert and in alliance with those Baltic States.
  This week the Canadians sent their forces and representatives to 
Latvia, where they are providing special help on the ground. Similar 
NATO forces are in Lithuania and Estonia. They are doing their best to 
convince Putin not to engage in acts of aggression against these small 
nations, while at the same time the President of the United States 
questions the purpose of this effort.
  President Trump has withdrawn the United States from key 
international agreements on trade, climate, and even the expansion of 
nuclear weapons in Iran. In doing so, the President has estranged the 
United States from its allies. While I hope we do reach a diplomatic 
agreement with North Korea, I

[[Page S4866]]

want to note that what little was agreed to in Singapore doesn't even 
come close to the terms and inspections that were in the Iran nuclear 
agreement from which President Trump simply walked away.
  President Trump has insulted and strained relations with America's 
closest European and Western allies, so much so that European Council 
President Donald Tusk recently dismissed the United States by saying: 
``With friends like that, who needs enemies.''
  It has reached the point that just ahead of the NATO summit, we lost 
another senior career diplomat when James Melville, our Ambassador to 
Estonia, resigned over frustration with the controversial comments 
being made by President Trump. Ambassador Melville served under 6 
different Presidents and 11 Secretaries of State, and he never thought 
the day would come when he couldn't support a President's policies--
until now.
  President Trump has tried to discredit key democratic institutions 
and processes in the United States, sowing mistrust in our political 
system and government. He has insulted poor nations, made immigrants a 
manufactured enemy, separated children from parents forcibly, and 
declared that America must come first in this world, isolating the 
United States day by day and more and more from the nations and 
countries that have been our traditional allies.
  Why in the world is this President pursuing the agenda of one of our 
adversaries, who attacked our election process, militarily seized 
sovereign territory of our allies, murdered and attempted to murder 
dissidents on our allies' soil, provided weapons to Ukrainian 
separatists that shot down a Malaysian commercial airliner, killing 
hundreds of innocent people, repeatedly buzzes and tests NATO defenses, 
and jails and represses its own people when they advocate for basic 
democratic rights?
  Before departing this morning for Brussels, instead of setting a 
positive tone for the NATO meeting to follow, President Trump, 
incredibly, decided to take to Twitter to criticize our allies again.
  My friend and American patriot, Senator John McCain, was one of the 
few Republicans--one of the few--to recently speak up on behalf of our 
alliance. Here is what he said:

       To our allies: bipartisan majorities of Americans remain 
     pro-free trade, pro-globalization & supportive of alliances 
     based on 70 years of shared values. Americans stand with you, 
     even if our president doesn't.

  I couldn't agree more. I wish John McCain were on the floor of the 
Senate today to deliver those remarks in person, but his spirit is here 
among those on both sides of the aisle who value our NATO alliance and 
cannot understand the relationship between President Trump and Vladimir 
Putin.
  The cause of democracy and freedom in this world requires a strong 
alliance that stands together for values the Americans believe in, 
share, fight for, and die for in war after war. We need that spirit to 
return again to the United States.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Johnson). The Senator from Iowa.