Congressional Record, Volume 164 Issue 115 (Tuesday, July 10, 2018)

[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.