[Congressional Record Volume 165, Number 13 (Tuesday, January 22, 2019)]
[House]
[Pages H976-H979]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
NATO SUPPORT ACT
Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill
(H.R. 676) to reiterate the support of the Congress of the United
States for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, and for other
purposes.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 676
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``NATO Support Act''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress finds that:
(1) The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which
came into being through the North Atlantic Treaty, which
entered into force on April 4, 1949, between the United
States of America and the other founding members of the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization, has served as a pillar of
international peace and stability, a critical component of
United States security, and a deterrent against adversaries
and external threats.
(2) The House of Representatives affirmed in H. Res. 397,
on June 27, 2017, that--
(A) NATO is one of the most successful military alliances
in history, deterring the outbreak of another world war,
protecting the territorial integrity of its members, and
seeing the Cold War through to a peaceful conclusion;
(B) NATO remains the foundation of United States foreign
policy to promote a Europe that is whole, free, and at peace;
(C) the United States is solemnly committed to the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization's principle of collective
defense as enumerated in Article 5 of the North Atlantic
Treaty; and
(D) the House of Representatives--
(i) strongly supports the decision at the NATO Wales Summit
in 2014 that each alliance member would aim to spend at least
2 percent of its nation's gross domestic product on defense
by 2024;
(ii) condemns any threat to the sovereignty, territorial
integrity, freedom and democracy of any NATO ally; and
(iii) welcomes the Republic of Montenegro as the 29th
member of the NATO Alliance.
SEC. 3. SENSE OF CONGRESS.
It is the sense of Congress that--
(1) the President shall not withdraw the United States from
NATO; and
(2) the case Goldwater v. Carter is not controlling legal
precedent with respect to the withdrawal of the United States
from a treaty.
SEC. 4. STATEMENT OF POLICY.
It is the policy of the United States--
(1) to remain a member in good standing of NATO;
(2) to reject any efforts to withdraw the United States
from NATO, or to indirectly withdraw from NATO by condemning
or reducing contributions to NATO structures, activities, or
operations, in a manner that creates a de facto withdrawal;
(3) to continue to work with NATO members to meet their
2014 Wales Defense Investment Pledge commitments; and
(4) to support robust United States funding for the
European Deterrence Initiative, which increases the ability
of the United States and its allies to deter and defend
against Russian aggression.
SEC. 5. PROHIBITION ON THE USE OF FUNDS TO WITHDRAW FROM
NATO.
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no funds are
authorized to be appropriated, obligated, or expended to take
any action to withdraw the United States from the North
Atlantic Treaty, done at Washington, DC on April 4, 1949,
between the United States of America and the other founding
members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from New
York (Mr. Engel) and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. McCaul) each will
control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York.
General Leave
Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have
5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and
include extraneous material on H.R. 676, reiterating the support of the
Congress of the United States for the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization, currently under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from New York?
There was no objection.
Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, let me start by thanking the author of this bill, the
gentleman from California (Mr. Panetta). I was glad to join him as an
original cosponsor, and I am grateful as well to our ranking member,
Mr. McCaul, for his strong support of this legislation.
Mr. Speaker, for nearly 70 years, the NATO alliance has been the
bedrock of transatlantic peace, security, and stability. For seven
decades, NATO has been synonymous with Western democracy.
The organization's architects had a tremendous vision, and that
vision translated into the most successful political military alliance
in history, an alliance that won the Cold War, that brought peace to
the Balkans, that fought terrorism in Afghanistan, that today is
guarding against Russian aggression in Europe and training forces in
Iraq and elsewhere.
Now, Mr. Speaker, we have heard, most notably from the President,
that NATO is obsolete, that it is ill-suited to 21st century
challenges. That is just plain wrong.
Would we be safer without Article 5, the principle that says an
attack on one is an attack on all, an attack on one NATO member is an
attack on all NATO members, the commitment that brought our NATO allies
to fight at our side after September 11? Would we be better off without
28 other countries that share our values and that know how to fight
together effectively? Of course not.
NATO is not a burden, Mr. Speaker. It is a bulwark against aggressive
forces that seek to undermine democracy and the rule of law, against
strongmen who flout international law and act as though might makes
right.
NATO is our greatest strategic advantage, one built over time and at
great sacrifice. We simply cannot cede such an advantage. Past and
future generations alike would never forgive the squandering of
something so precious. We cannot betray our young soldiers, sailors,
airmen, and marines by sending them into battle alone, without capable
allies to share the burden.
So this bill, again, reiterates Congress' commitment to NATO. It
would also prohibit any withdrawal from NATO.
I am glad we are considering it so early in this Congress. It sends a
clear message to our allies, to our adversaries, and to the
administration that this branch of government fully supports the
alliance, the collective defense of our allies, and peace across the
North Atlantic region.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
[[Page H977]]
Mr. McCAUL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to endorse the NATO Support Act. We are
rapidly approaching the 70th anniversary of the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization, a fitting time for the House to reaffirm the importance
of the transatlantic alliance.
NATO was born out of the chaos of World War II and built to fortify
European democracies against Soviet totalitarianism. Time and again,
the alliance has proven that the free peoples of the world are
strongest when they stand together.
From the confrontation with communism during the Cold War, to the
defeat of Milosevic in Kosovo, to the battlefields of Afghanistan,
American soldiers and those of her NATO allies have fought and bled
together to protect our country and to make others free.
This alliance has enhanced our military capability, increased our
intelligence collection, and created a bulwark against international
terror. NATO is critical to our national security and to the
preservation of our military prowess around the world.
It solidifies our friendship with the individual countries in the
alliance. But friends also must be honest with each other. That is why
I am glad that this bill strongly supports the decision of the Wales
Summit in 2014, that each member country should ramp up defense
spending to 2 percent of their GDP.
An alliance of mutual defense is only as strong as each country's
commitment to its spending goals. While some member countries have made
great strides toward this commitment, others are still lagging behind.
Statements of support, like this bill, are important in affirming our
relationships around the world. But actions speak louder than words. No
statement about the importance of NATO speaks as loudly as the tangible
commitment each country makes to ensuring the strength of the alliance.
In the meantime, I am glad to join this effort to reaffirm the
continuing importance of NATO, which deserves our full support.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Panetta), the author of this legislation who has worked
very hard on this legislation.
Mr. PANETTA. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate this opportunity. Obviously, I
would like to share my appreciation of Chairman Engel for everything
that he has done as a leader of all of his constituents in his district
and, more importantly, all of our fellow countrymen and -women here in
the United States of America; as well as Ranking Member McCaul; and the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hurd), my good friend.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 676, the NATO Support
Act. This is a bipartisan bill that allows Congress to assert our
Nation's support for NATO; to answer anybody who questions the purpose
of this alliance; and to reaffirm the NATO pledge, that an armed attack
on one of us is an attack on all of us.
The mutual defense pledge is why NATO has been the most successful
military alliance in human history. It is an interdependency that has
stood as a sturdy, strong, and sound anchor for peace that has
prevented new world wars, fostered Western prosperity, and advanced
democratic governance.
It has been the will of our Nation, the United States of America, to
lead and to finance the defense of other nations, which has allowed
them to develop and prosper economically, and to expand and evolve
democratically.
Yet, at the same time, Moscow never went to war with a NATO partner.
We got bases and a guarantee that we would not have to fight alone.
Europe became our largest trading and investment partner and our chief
diplomatic and military companion. And everybody on the European
Continent got stability and peace to strengthen their democracies.
Now, all of us agree that we can continue to put pressure on our NATO
partners to pay their self-stated goal of 2 percent of their GDP to
this alliance. But that doesn't mean that we want to get out of NATO.
In fact, doing such would be a historic mistake.
NATO is not--is not--a transactional relationship. Our sole focus
can't be just on who pays and who gets what. Being a part of NATO is
not like being a part of a country club. Instead, we value our NATO
partners, and more importantly, we realize that the power of the NATO
partnership is absolutely--absolutely--invaluable. The tangible results
prove it, not just what we have seen in the past, but what we are
seeing now.
In our enduring fight against terrorism, our NATO partners' will to
join that effort was demonstrated just hours after the attack on 9/11,
as partner nations volunteered to invoke Article 5.
Now, I served alongside many troops from many NATO countries during
my service in Afghanistan from 2007 to 2008. I left that country in
2008, but I can tell you, after 17 years of war, NATO troops are still
there, serving alongside our sons and daughters who are serving in
uniform.
When it comes to Russia, our NATO partners will continue to play an
important role as a deterrent for their aggression, and they will
continue to coordinate and collaborate with us as we not only ready for
a conventional war but also push back against Russia's use of hybrid
warfare.
NATO is instrumental in setting us apart from Russia. Why? We have
allies that will stand by us; Russia does not. That is the foundation
for our NATO partnership, and that is the foundation for the NATO
Support Act, an act that rejects efforts to withdraw from NATO and
prohibits any funds to be used as such.
It supports increased defense spending by NATO partners, as well as
the funding of the European Deterrence Initiative to deter against
Russian aggression. It reaffirms our unwavering support of NATO, not
only as a defense pledge, not only as a partnership, but as a proven
core for an international order that favors democracy and peace.
Once again, Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Engel. I also thank Daniel
Silverberg from Majority Leader Hoyer's staff, Jacqueline Ramos from
the Foreign Affairs Committee, and Matt Manning and Jay Hernandez from
my office.
Mr. Speaker, I respectfully thank and ask all of my colleagues,
Republican and Democrat, for their support on H.R. 676, the bipartisan
NATO Support Act.
Mr. McCAUL. Mr. Speaker, in the spirit of the bipartisanship behind
supporting this bill, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia
(Mr. Connolly).
Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Speaker, I do want to take a moment to clarify a
conversation we had here on the floor last week on sanctions
legislation against Mr. Deripaska, a Russian oligarch. My remarks were
passionate and aimed at the administration's proposed policy to lift
sanctions on that individual. In no way did my remarks intend to
reflect on the integrity of my friend from Texas, who was, in fact,
comanaging the bill to oppose that action.
As my friend from Texas knows, I admire him deeply, and I believe
that he is a leader of integrity. Nothing I said last week was meant in
any way to deflect from that. I wanted to clarify that publicly on the
floor.
I thank my good friend for yielding me time, and I look forward to
talking about the issue at hand. I, again, thank my good friend from
Texas.
Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Virginia (Mr. Connolly), a very respected member of the House Foreign
Affairs Committee.
Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Speaker, I thank my dear friend, the distinguished
chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, and I thank my friend,
the distinguished ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs
Committee, for helping Mr. Panetta bring this bill to the floor.
I rise today in support of H.R. 676, the NATO Support Act,
reiterating congressional support for the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization and prohibiting U.S. withdrawal from that organization.
As we mark 70 years of the NATO alliance this year, it is critical we
recognize the invaluable role that NATO has played in protecting U.S.
national interests and global stability.
NATO remains the foundation of U.S. foreign policy to promote a
Europe that is whole, free, and at peace. NATO
[[Page H978]]
has invoked Article 5, the commitment to collective defense, only once
in 70 years, and that invocation was on behalf of the United States
after we were attacked on 9/11.
As a result, nearly one-third of the fatalities suffered by coalition
forces when we fought in Afghanistan to rid that country of al-Qaida
and the Taliban--one-third of the casualties--were from non-U.S. NATO
member and partner countries.
{time} 1715
They put their blood and their flesh on the line on behalf of this
country as part of that alliance.
Despite these sacrifices, unfortunately, our President has questioned
the value of NATO and falsely claimed that NATO allies owe the United
States money.
As head of the United States delegation to the NATO Parliamentary
Assembly and rapporteur for the political committee of that assembly, I
can attest to the anxiety within NATO regarding this administration's
commitment to the alliance.
Case in point: one can't talk about the U.S. commitment to Article 5
in 2019 without mentioning President Trump's failure to embrace it in
full view of our NATO allies during his first Presidential trip to
Brussels in 2017.
This past summer at NATO's annual summit in Brussels, President Trump
injected further discord into the alliance by calling our NATO ally,
Germany, a ``captive of Russia'' and demanding that ``delinquent''
alliance members increase their defense spending ``immediately.''
The President's provocative comments undermined the summit's goal of
projecting unity in the face of renewed Russian aggression, especially
given that they occurred just days before what turned out to be a very
difficult, if not disastrous, Helsinki summit with Vladimir Putin.
Meanwhile, Russia continues its forcible and illegal occupation in
the Crimea, eastern Ukraine, Abkhazia and South Ossetia in Georgia, and
parts of Moldova, and its attack on democracies throughout Europe and
even in our own country.
Mr. Speaker, that is why I urge my colleagues to support Mr.
Panetta's bill. This bill affirms the U.S. support for NATO and
preempts any attempts to withdraw from the same.
Mr. McCAUL. Mr. Speaker, let me first say to Mr. Connolly, we have a
lot of passionate partisan debates on this floor, but I have to say,
that was a class act on his part, and I thank him for his comments.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr.
Hurd), an original cosponsor of the bill.
Mr. HURD of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to join with my colleagues
to introduce this bipartisan bill to reaffirm the commitment of
Congress to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, as we know it. We
call it NATO.
For 70 years now, almost 1 billion people from Los Angeles and
London, to Tallinn and Thessaloniki have lived in peace and prosperity,
in no small part due to the security provided by NATO.
As a CIA officer in Afghanistan, like my friend and colleague from
California, I had the opportunity to serve side by side with NATO
forces in the fight against al-Qaida and the Taliban. I saw every day
the professionalism and dedication of these brave men and women who,
like our soldiers, were fighting to protect their nations and way of
life.
More than 1,000 NATO soldiers paid the ultimate sacrifice fighting
alongside the United States in Afghanistan.
In the global fight against terrorism, NATO allies have stood with us
time and time again. As my friend from the Commonwealth of Virginia
noted, in NATO's entire history, 9/11 was the first time the alliance
invoked Article 5, the commitment that an attack against one ally is an
attack against all.
In our darkest hour, every member of NATO answered the call to fight
terror at home and abroad.
In Europe, NATO countries continued to deter Russia from threatening
our democratic partners. Through military exercises in forward
deployments in Eastern Europe, we have demonstrated our shared resolve
against the aggressive ambitions of Vladimir Putin. That includes a
stronger commitment by our allies to provide for their own defense.
They have spent over $2.8 trillion on defense in the last decade, with
spending increasing for the fourth straight year in 2018.
These partners, not Russia, are our true friends, and we must always
stand with them.
We face many shared challenges, and the only way we can overcome them
is by working together and continuing the strong transatlantic bond
that unites our Nations.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this
legislation. It is an honor to work alongside my friend from the great
State of California, Mr. Panetta, the chairman, and the ranking member
of this important committee.
Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McCAUL. Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers. I am prepared to
close, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, we cannot overstate the critical role that NATO has
played in the history of the 20th century, and for 7 decades, it has
been the cornerstone of international security and a force for freedom
around the world.
I look forward to its continued vitality in defending America and our
allies for another 70 years.
Mr. Speaker, I urge all Members to support this bill, and I yield
back the balance of my time.
Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, let me again, in closing, thank my friend from Texas
(Mr. McCaul); Mr. Panetta; our majority leader, Mr. Hoyer; and all of
this bill's sponsors.
As this debate has made perfectly clear, there is no partisan
disagreement in this body when it comes to the importance of NATO.
Right now, we are dealing with an adversary in Russia that desires
nothing more than to see the western alliance splinter. Vladimir
Putin's aim is to undermine democracy, to split us apart from our
allies, to drive division in the organizations that have kept Russia in
check.
The last thing the United States should do is send mixed signals
about our commitment, as this President, unfortunately, has done. It
plays right into Putin's hands.
From Congress, you will get no such ambiguity. We hope our allies
hear that and we hope Putin hears it as well.
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to support this bill strongly, I urge
Members to do the same, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R.
676, critical legislation that expresses the unified opposition of
Congress to any attempt by the President to withdraw from the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and reaffirms that it is the policy
of the United States to remain a member in good standing of NATO and
its commitment to Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty and its
principle of collective defense.
In the aftermath of World War II, the greatest conflict in all of
human history, the United States, Canada, and their Western Europe
allies founded the North American Treaty Organization (NATO) on April
14, 1949 in Washington, D.C.
Founded on the principle of collective defense, Article 5 of the
North Atlantic Treaty states that, ``The Parties agree that an armed
attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be
considered an attack against them all.''
In the 69 years since the Treaty's ratification, Article 5 has only
been invoked once, following the terrorist attacks of September 11,
2001, when NATO members came to the aid of the United States.
NATO sent seven planes with 830 crewmen from 13 countries to protect
American skies until May 2002, marking the first time in American
history that the continental United States was protected by foreign
forces.
NATO allies and partners have stood with the United States in joint
operations in the Western Balkans, Afghanistan, Iraq, and elsewhere
around the world.
Until the current President took office, every American president
since the treaty's signing in 1949--Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy,
Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, George H.W. Bush, Clinton, George
W. Bush, and Obama--has publicly reaffirmed the American commitment to
Article 5.
American presidents have affirmed this nation's commitment to come to
the aid of any NATO member that is under attack.
That is the symbolic meaning of the immortal words spoken by
President Kennedy in
[[Page H979]]
West Berlin at the Brandenburg Gate in 1963: ``Ich bien ein Berliner.''
Mr. Speaker, the principle of collective defense is the core of
NATO's founding treaty and the NATO alliance has been the backbone of
American national security and foreign policy for nearly 70 years.
The strength and solidarity of this western alliance kept Western
Europe whole, prosperous, and free and paved the way for the collapse
of the Soviet Union and the liberation of the nations of Eastern and
Central Europe, many of which have now been integrated into NATO.
The Constitution of the United States grants Congress the sole power
to declare war, but Article 5 does not increase the chance of war.
Rather, NATO is a bulwark against the outbreak of war because it
deters aggression by any adversary.
As a result, NATO is the most successful military alliance in world
history, successfully deterring the outbreak of a third world war,
seeing the Cold War to a victorious conclusion, and protecting the
principle of territorial integrity.
This is why I strongly support H.R. 676, which reaffirms the
commitment of the Congress to Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty.
The legislation also expresses support for the agreement reached at
the 2014 NATO Wales Summit calling upon each NATO member nation to
allocate at least two percent of its gross domestic product to defense
by 2024.
The legislation also expresses congressional support for robust
United States funding for the European Deterrence Initiative, which
increases the ability of the United States and its allies to deter and
defend against Russian aggression.
Finally, H.R. 676 provides that no funds are authorized to be
appropriated, obligated, or expended to take any action to withdraw the
United States from the North Atlantic Treaty signed on April 14, 1949,
in Washington, D.C., between the United States of America and the other
15 founding members of the North Atlantic Treaty 16 Organization.
I urge all Members to join me in affirming the commitment of the
United States to the North Atlantic Treaty, which has kept the peace on
the European continent for nearly 70 years and continues to serve as a
bulwark and deterrent to Russian aggression and its long-held strategic
objective of splitting the Western Alliance that has done more than any
other collective enterprise in history to preserve and maintain
international peace.
Mr. KINZINGER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 676, the
NATO Support Act.
For almost 70 years, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization has
formed the cornerstone of national security policy for the postwar
world order. Through this alliance, we have successfully defeated
communism, halted genocide in the Balkans, defended against threats
from terrorism in Afghanistan, and maintained cohesion with our like-
minded democratic partners. By forming these relationships, we have
successfully defended our values and principles in the face of
repression and tyranny. While we no longer face the same existential
threat posed by the Soviet Union, NATO's resolve and stability has
helped maintain peace in a world drowning with strongmen. That is why I
stand in support this bipartisan legislation.
H.R. 676 codifies Congressional support of the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization, while calling on our allies to modernize their
capabilities and meet the Wales Defense Investment Pledge. Five years
ago, NATO members agreed to reverse their declining defense budgets and
balance the responsibilities that come with our partnership. While it
was an ambitious goal, we have already seen many of our partners
increase their commitments to our mutual security by meeting the agreed
upon threshold of spending 2 percent of GDP on defense.
As part of our commitment, we must continue to support the European
Deterrence Initiative, by maintaining a robust U.S. presence throughout
the European theater. Most importantly, this legislation would ensure
that no matter which way the political winds blow no administration
could use funds to withdraw from this treaty without the consent of the
coequal branch of government in Congress.
NATO is not some outdated relic from past conflicts. We are living in
a world where repression is on the rise, and human freedom is
increasingly in jeopardy. What our partnership stands for, what NATO
defends--it gives hope to the repressed. That is why I urge my
colleagues in joining me in passing this legislation.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from New York (Mr. Engel) that the House suspend the rules
and pass the bill, H.R. 676.
The question was taken.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds
being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further
proceedings on this motion will be postponed.
____________________