[Congressional Record Volume 166, Number 2 (Monday, January 6, 2020)]
[Senate]
[Pages S17-S20]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                                  Iran

  Mr. KAINE. Madam President, I am glad to be joined today by my 
colleague from Illinois, who is a personal mentor of mine. We are here 
to talk about the threat of war with Iran and about the Constitution.
  I have been worried about this threat for some time, ever since 
President Trump chose to ignore the advice of his key national security 
professionals and allies by abandoning America's commitment to a 
diplomatic deal to limit Iran's nuclear program. The President's action 
since that tragic decision and the easily predictable responses of Iran 
to his actions have resulted in an escalating set of hostilities 
between the United States and Iran and its proxies.
  I will state at the outset my conclusion. I believe that the United 
States should not be at war in Iran and that, indeed, another war in 
the Middle East now would be catastrophic.
  But I recognize that some of my colleagues may have a different point 
of view. So I speak in the hopes of forging a consensus on at least one 
issue, and that issue is this: If there is to be a war with Iran, it 
should not be initiated by this President or any President acting on 
his or her own. It should only be initiated by a vote of Congress 
following an open and public debate in full view of the American 
people.
  Every Member of Congress should vote and then be accountable for the 
question of whether another war in the Middle East is a good idea. The 
demand for congressional accountability is constitutionally required in 
the unique constitutional framework that we have. We pledge to support 
and defend the principle that it is up to Congress to declare war, not 
the President.
  If we engage in a war, the odds are high that young American men and 
women will be killed or injured. Some will see their friends killed and 
injured. Some will have the remainder of their lives affected by 
physical and emotional injuries, post-traumatic stress, the pain of 
losing friends, and their families and friends will bear those scars as 
well. If we are to order our troops and their families to run that 
risk, then, it should be based on a public consensus as reflected in an 
open congressional debate and vote that war is in the national 
interest.
  If Congress debates the matter in full view of the public and reaches 
the conclusion that war is necessary, so be it. Even if I were to vote 
no, if the majority of my colleagues voted yes, I would agree that the 
decision to go to war was a legitimate basis to order our best and 
brightest into harm's way.
  But by what right do we consign our troops to possible injury and 
death if

[[Page S18]]

we are unwilling to have a debate and cast a vote ourselves? We cannot 
hide under our desks, outsource our constitutional duty to any 
President, and pretend that we can avoid accountability for war and its 
consequences.
  Over the course of this week, I will address three topics about the 
issue of war with Iran. The first subject which I will address today is 
this: How did we get here? How did we come to the place where the 
United States and Iran are trading violent attacks against one another 
and what does that mean for our country, the region, and the world?
  In the coming days, I will address two additional topics. I will 
discuss how Congress should reclaim its constitutional war-making 
powers by acting on a privileged resolution that Senator Durbin and I 
have filed on January 3 to remove U.S. troops from hostilities with 
Iran unless Congress passes a new declaration or legal authorization 
initiating such a war. The resolution, which is also being offered on 
the House side by Representative Slotkin, will give all 535 Members of 
Congress the opportunity to declare where they are on the advisability 
of a war with Iran, and it also gives them an opportunity to affirm 
their commitment to their oath of office.
  Finally, later in the week, I will address the larger question of how 
the United States should deescalate tensions in the Middle East so that 
we might better protect American lives and promote peace and stability 
in a very turbulent part of the world.
  How did we get here?
  The United States and Iran have a very troubled history. When Iran's 
democratically elected Prime Minister, Mohammad Mossaddegh, supported 
efforts to nationalize private energy resources, the United States and 
Britain orchestrated a coup that led to his ouster in 1953.
  The overthrow of Iran's democratic government, partially with U.S. 
support, led to the strengthened rule of Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, 
who ruled Iran as an Emperor until he was overthrown in the Iranian 
revolution of 1979. His dictatorial rule, with strong support from the 
United States, increasingly alienated the Iranian population. When he 
fled the country during the revolution, Iran abolished the monarchy and 
declared itself an Islamic republic.
  Within a few months after the revolution, Iranian protestors took 
over the American Embassy in Iran. For those of us who saw the protests 
outside the American Embassy in Baghdad last week, the images of the 
Iranian Embassy hostage taking in Iran in 1979 were at the front of our 
minds. The protesters cited America's role in the 1953 coups, and they 
asked the United States to return the Shah, who had come to the United 
States seeking medical attention, to Iran for trial. The United States 
refused. Iran held 52 Americans hostage for more than 440 days until 
they were finally released in the first days of the Reagan 
administration.
  After this attack--this inexcusable attack on the American Embassy--
U.S. and Iran diplomatic relations were severed. The United States has 
imposed significant economic sanctions against Iran for decades. The 
United States provided support for Iraq in its 8-year war against 
Iran--a war in which hundreds of thousands of Iranians were killed.
  In 1988, the U.S. Navy cruiser USS Vincennes shot down an Iranian 
commercial airliner, killing 290 passengers and its crew.
  Iran has engaged in hostilities against the United States and our 
allies in many settings--through targeted attacks and assassinations 
around the world, covert and overt support for terrorist organizations, 
and development of weapons systems in violation of U.N. security 
resolutions. Iran has been directly responsible for the deaths of 
thousands of Americans and indirectly responsible for many, many more. 
These activities over many decades have led America for years to view 
Iran as a key promoter of terrorism and one of the most concerning 
nation-state adversaries of the United States.
  In recent years, a particular focus has been Iran's nuclear program. 
Despite Iran's claim that it sought nuclear power purely for peaceful 
purposes, legitimate suspicion of its intent led to a global campaign 
led by the United States to sanction Iran even more as a means of 
getting the country to abandon its quest for nuclear weapons.
  After years of negotiations between six nations--France, Britain, the 
United States, Germany, Russia, China--and Iran, an agreement was 
reached in 2015 whereby Iran would pledge never to seek, acquire, or 
develop nuclear weapons in exchange for gradual relaxation of sanctions 
against Iran. The agreement, known as the JCPOA, contained strict 
limits on Iran's nuclear program that would gradually relax over 25 
years. Iran's pledge to never acquire or develop nuclear weapons was 
permanent, as was its commitment to abide by the inspection protocols 
of the International Atomic Energy Agency to ensure compliance with 
that fundamental pledge. The JCPOA was not perfect, but it carefully 
preserved the ability of the United States and other nations to 
continue sanctions against Iran for its other activities and offered an 
opportunity for the first time in four decades for the United States 
and Iran to communicate through an established diplomatic process.
  As the Trump administration took office, the President pledged to 
undo this diplomatic deal, the JCPOA. The nations that agreed to the 
deal pointed out that Iran was complying with the deal, as did the 
IAEA, and the key officials of President Trump's national security 
team--Defense Secretary Mattis, Secretary of State Tillerson, National 
Security Advisor McMaster, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff 
General Dunford--all argued that the agreement was working and should 
be maintained.
  But President Trump made the decision that the United States should 
abandon the diplomatic deal. The U.S. abandonment of a working 
diplomatic deal was historic. No U.S. President had ever walked away 
from a diplomatic commitment of this kind.
  Many of us, at the time, warned the President that abandoning 
diplomacy, against the advice of allies and our national security 
professionals, would likely lead us to an unnecessary war. It was just 
a matter of time. Indeed, since the beginning of the Trump 
administration, there have been increasing back-and-forth provocations 
that have now led us to a state of active hostilities between the 
United States and Iran.
  Unclassified examples of U.S. activity under the Trump administration 
that have escalated hostilities with Iran include the following:
  On December 12, 2017, the United States and Israel reached a joint 
strategic work plan to counter Iranian activity in the Middle East that 
included preparation for military escalation scenarios against Iran.
  On May 8, 2018, President Trump unilaterally withdrew from the JCPOA 
after promising to do so for months.
  On May 21, 2018, Secretary of State Pompeo, who had earlier expressed 
a preference for bombing Iran rather than entering into the JCPOA, 
vowed to ``crush'' Iranian operatives and proxies.
  On July 23, 2018, President Trump tweeted a threat to President 
Rouhani, warning that Iran would ``SUFFER CONSEQUENCES THE LIKES OF 
WHICH FEW THROUGHOUT HISTORY HAVE EVER SUFFERED BEFORE.''
  On August 6, 2018, the Trump administration unilaterally imposed 
economic sanctions lifted as part of the JCPOA, despite Iran's 
continued compliance with the deal.
  In September of 2018, it was reported that new National Security 
Advisor John Bolton had asked the Department of Defense to prepare war 
plans against Iran. Later the same month, Bolton warned Iran that there 
would be ``hell to pay'' if the nation ever crossed the United States.
  On October 3, 2018, the Trump administration terminated the 1955 
Treaty of Amity affirming friendly relations between the United States 
and Iran. The United States terminated it. The treaty itself had long 
ago been made irrelevant by the actual hostilities between the nations, 
but the action of the United States in finding the treaty and publicly 
terminating it unilaterally was seen as a part of a pattern of hostile 
intent.
  As early as the fall of 2018, Department of Defense officials began 
to express concern that the U.S. maximum security pressure campaign 
against

[[Page S19]]

Iran was raising the risk of Iranian retaliation against American 
troops in Iraq and Syria. In an October 26 article in the Wall Street 
Journal, DOD officials were quoted as expressing concern that Iran's 
belief that the United States was helping Israel with airstrikes would 
jeopardize American lives in the region.
  On November 5, 2018, President Trump imposed additional sanctions on 
Iranian oil, shipping, and banking sectors.
  On February 3, 2019, President Trump stated on ``Face the Nation'' 
that troops being withdrawn from Syria would be moved to Iraq to serve 
as a check against Iran.
  On February 11, 2019, Advisor Bolton released a video addressed to 
the 40th anniversary of the Iranian revolution, stating that Iran's 
leaders would not ``have many more anniversaries to enjoy.''
  On February 13, 2019, the Trump administration convened a meeting in 
Poland that was publicly described by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin 
Netanyahu on his official website as designed to ``advance the common 
interest of war'' against Iran.
  In March 2019, press accounts revealed that the Department of Energy 
had approved seven transfers of nuclear technical information from U.S. 
companies to Saudi Arabia without informing Congress. The transfers 
were made despite U.S. awareness that the Government of Saudi Arabia 
had publicly threatened to develop nuclear weapons to counter Iran.
  On April 8, 2019, the United States designated the Iranian 
Revolutionary Guard as a foreign terrorist organization, the first time 
that had ever been used to apply to a foreign governmental entity.
  On May 5, 2019, Advisor Bolton announced deployment of the Lincoln 
Carrier Strike Group and a bomber task force to the U.S. Central 
Command for the expressed purpose of countering Iran.
  On May 8, 2019, the Trump administration ordered new sanctions 
against Iran's metal industry.
  On May 10, 2019, the New York Times reported on war plans developed 
by the administration that could deploy up to 120,000 additional U.S. 
troops to the Middle East to counter Iran. On the same day, the 
administration deployed Patriot missiles to U.S. Central Command to 
counter Iran.
  On May 24, 2019, the Trump administration bypassed Congress, 
declaring an emergency citing ``Iranian malign activity'' in order to 
sell weapons to Saudi Arabia and the UAE.
  In June of 2019, President Trump ordered 3,500 more troops of the 
U.S. military to the Middle East to check Iran.
  On June 20, 2019, the United States initiated a strike against 
Iranian positions that was aborted at the last minute by President 
Trump.
  On June 24, 2019, President Trump imposed additional sanctions 
against Iran.
  On September 15, 2019, after drone attacks on two key oil 
installations in Saudi Arabia, President Trump tweeted that the United 
States was ``locked and loaded depending on verification from the 
Kingdom as to who they believe was the cause of the attack.''
  On November 19, 2019, President Trump notified Congress that 
``consistent with the War Powers Resolution,'' he was deploying 
additional U.S. weapons and troops to Saudi Arabia to counter Iran.
  On December 29, 2019, following a rocket attack from an Iranian-
backed militia in Iraq that killed an American contractor and wounded 
several others, the U.S. military struck Iranian-backed militia groups 
in Iraq and Syria, killing dozens.
  On January 2, 2019, President Trump ordered a drone strike killing 
Qasem Soleimani, a key Iranian military commander as well as a key 
Iraqi military leader. The December and January strikes in Iraq were 
carried out despite the objections of the Iraqi Government and without 
any prior notification to Congress. Two days after the Soleimani 
strike, the President notified Congress of the action, which had been 
in the newspaper, obviously, ``consistent with the War Powers 
Resolution.''
  Now, during the same time, Iran has conducted escalatory activities 
as well. Their bellicose behavior includes continued arming and 
financial backing of Hezbollah, a designated foreign terrorist 
organization which carried out the bombing of the marine barracks in 
Beirut as well as efforts to target Israeli citizens and troops; 
support for the Houthis, including the supplying of ballistic missiles, 
thus escalating the civil war in Yemen; direct participation of troops 
and commanders in support of Bashar al-Assad's murderous campaign 
against the Syrian people; support for the Popular Mobilization 
Committee-affiliated Shia militias in Iraq, which pose a direct threat 
to U.S. personnel; unjust detention of U.S. citizens; cyber attacks on 
U.S. officials, agencies, and companies; the downing of a U.S. unmanned 
aerial vehicle in June of 2019; UAV strikes against Saudi oil 
facilities in September 2019; persistent interference with commercial 
shipping in the Strait of Hormuz; militia attacks on the Iraqi base in 
December that killed an American contractor; and stoking popular unrest 
against the United States in Iraq that encouraged the assault on the 
U.S. Embassy in Baghdad last week.
  I have given you these examples for a reason. You can see the reason. 
There has been an escalation that began with the U.S. decision to 
destroy a diplomatic deal, and it has been one nation acting and the 
other responding, and the other acting and the other responding, and 
now we are on the brink of war. The escalation has been so significant 
between the United States and Iran that now each country has been 
responsible for actively inflicting injuries and deaths on the other, 
and we are at the brink of war.
  Thousands of American servicemembers enjoying the holidays with their 
families were surprised by notices in the last few days that they must 
now deploy to the Middle East yet again. The current state of 
hostilities is causing other serious consequences.
  The U.S. abandonment of the diplomatic deal, together with other 
actions, has seriously jeopardized our relations with many allies, 
particularly our European allies. The U.S. abandonment of a diplomatic 
deal over a nuclear program has made it much harder to find a 
diplomatic deal with North Korea. The U.S. decision to carry out 
strikes on Iraqi soil over Iraqi objections has badly damaged U.S.-Iraq 
relations. Just yesterday, the Iraqi Parliament voted to ask all U.S. 
troops to leave Iraq. If that occurs, it will further destabilize a 
country that has been wracked with protests in recent months, and it 
will embolden both ISIS and Iran.
  U.S. actions have had the unlikely effect of driving three of our 
principled nation-state adversaries into historically unprecedented 
levels of cooperation. Just recently, Iran, China, and Russia conducted 
joint naval operations in the Gulf of Oman.
  Notably, the U.S. actions that I have described here have been 
carried out mostly by President Trump without congressional approval 
and often without any notice or any consultation with Congress. Members 
of Congress on the relevant committees have had to read about these 
actions in the newspapers rather than being informed by the Trump 
administration.
  At this particular moment, with the specter of war so present, it is 
time for Congress to assert itself. We cannot let a President destroy 
American diplomacy on its own. We cannot let a President take our 
Nation, take our troops, and take our best and brightest into an 
unnecessary war on his own. Indeed, we cannot leave the lives of our 
troops up to the whim of this President or of any President.
  That is why Senator Durbin and I have introduced, pursuant to the 
same War Powers Act referenced by the President, a resolution that will 
force the removal of U.S. troops from hostilities with Iran unless 
Congress independently votes that we should be at war. Congress has the 
responsibility, and Congress must act to shoulder its responsibility.
  I will offer more comments on the resolution later this week, but I 
appreciate the support of my colleague, who, as I said, in many ways, 
is my mentor in the Senate, the Senator from Illinois.
  I yield the floor to him.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The minority whip.
  Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, I thank the Senator from Virginia for 
his clarion call for the U.S. Senate to assert its constitutional 
responsibility

[[Page S20]]

when it comes to the prospect of a war with Iran.
  He has referenced, many times, the War Powers Act. The War Powers 
Act, students of history will remember, was passed by the U.S. Congress 
after the end of the Vietnam war so Congress would assert, with 
specificity, its authority when it came to the execution of a war. The 
President at the time, Richard Nixon, opposed the War Powers Act and 
vetoed it, and because of what the United States had endured during the 
course of the Vietnam war, Congress overrode the veto of President 
Nixon to make it clear, with the War Powers Act, that we would never 
ever, by design, find ourselves in the same moral predicament we did 
with the war in Vietnam.
  Almost 50,000 American lives were lost in that war in Vietnam, a war 
which was not a declared war under the Constitution but one which still 
exacted a heavy, incalculable price on American families--families I 
know and everyone knows, whose lives were touched by that Vietnam war, 
whose sons and daughters may have served or may have given their lives 
in service. The decision was made in Congress never again. We are not 
going to let this happen again. We are not going to find ourselves 
backsliding into a war.
  The American people, through their elected men and women representing 
them in Congress, will make the decision as to whether it is time for 
us to go to war and will make the decision as to whether our men and 
women in uniform are going to risk their lives at war. The decision 
will be made by the American people through their elected 
representatives in Congress. It was not a novel idea. We find it in 
this little Constitution, which we are all handed when we take the oath 
of office.
  As Senator Kaine from Virginia has noted, article I, section 8, in 
just a few words, says: The Congress shall have the power to declare 
war. It is not equivocal. There are no footnotes, asterisks, or 
question marks. The Congress shall have the authority to declare war.
  Now, at this moment in time, with the assassination of General 
Soleimani and the escalation of the conflict between the United States 
and Iran, Senator Kaine and I come to the floor and ask this Congress, 
Republicans and Democrats alike: Do these words count? Do we have a 
constitutional responsibility to stand up and speak up and to challenge 
this President or any President of either political party when they 
start moving us toward a moment of war which could easily claim the 
lives of many Americans?
  That is the purpose of our resolution. It is simple and 
straightforward, but it really goes to a fundamental question. The men 
and women who serve this country in uniform--God bless them for their 
sacrifice and their courage. We know that when they take the oath to 
serve, they are prepared to risk their lives in service. Many of us 
have attended the funerals of servicemembers who gave their lives in 
Iraq and Afghanistan and so many other places. It is a heartbreaking 
experience to see that emotional family leaving a church or a synagogue 
after a service honoring someone in uniform who has given their life 
for this country. That is so fundamental.
  Senator Kaine and I have come to the floor today to say we are 
finding ourselves now moving, day by day, closer and closer to a 
confrontation with Iran that could result in a war. What Senator Kaine 
has catalogued and gone through is this long buildup under the Trump 
administration that brings us to this moment.
  To think President Trump inherited from President Obama an 
international agreement that included the signatories of not only our 
traditional European allies but also China and Russia to stop Iran from 
developing a nuclear weapon; to think that that agreement was being 
monitored by international overseers who reported back to us that they 
had ready access throughout the nation of Iran when it came to making 
certain that the JCPOA agreement was lived up to; to think that that at 
least gave us the assurance that Iran would not develop a nuclear 
weapon--and then this President, with a series of tweets and actions, 
swept it away and said we are going to ignore this treaty, we are going 
to walk away from it, and we are going to confront the Iranians in a 
variety of ways, as Senator Kaine has spelled out.
  So we come to the floor this afternoon to really appeal to our 
colleagues on both sides of the aisle. On behalf of the American 
people, let us learn the lessons of history--a lesson bitterly learned 
during the Vietnam war--that if Congress does nothing, a war can 
develop and continue at great human cost.
  I know the moments of great decision that are made in the U.S. 
Congress, and I have been fortunate to be part of some of them. I 
remember October 16, 2002, as if it were yesterday. I remember that 
well, at that place that I point to, where in the early morning hours, 
three of us--three Senators stood and spoke to one another as we left 
to go home. There had just been a vote for an authorization for use of 
military force in Iraq. The three of us had gathered in the well, 
including Senator Paul Wellstone from Minnesota and Senator Kent Conrad 
from North Dakota, and we looked at one another, having all three voted 
against the invasion of Iraq, and realized we were headed home to face 
the electorate on that decision. It was an emotional moment.
  I remember saying to Senator Wellstone, who had voted against the 
invasion of Iraq, as I had: Paul, I hope this doesn't cost you the 
election. He said: Dick, if it does, it is all right because that is 
what I was elected to do, to come here and to vote on issues. Is it 
possible there is any issue more important than the issue of asking 
American families to give their children in service of this country in 
a war?
  Senator Wellstone passed away a few days later in an airplane crash. 
It was my last conversation with him, but I remember that moment, and I 
remember the responsibility we had. What Senator Kaine and I are doing 
now is to appeal to our colleagues on both sides of the aisle. Do not 
walk away from our responsibility when it comes to the future decision 
of whether we go to war with Iran. Stand up for those American families 
who sent us here to do our constitutional duty and engage in the debate 
as to whether it is the right thing at the right moment of history or 
whether it is an impulsive decision by a President who broke away from 
a political campaign meeting to authorize the assassination of General 
Soleimani and then returned to the campaign meeting. Make the decision 
as to whether this is the right moment in history. Don't point to the 
President that it is his responsibility; it is our responsibility. That 
is what this Constitution says.
  (Mr. BOOZMAN assumed the Chair.)
  Now, with that responsibility, we need to stand up and act. I am 
honored to join Senator Kaine. We have filed our resolution. We are 
seeking a ruling by the Parliamentarian, and we want to move forward on 
a schedule for a debate on the floor of the Senate. It may be the 
single most important debate we face this year for many years to come.
  I yield the floor.

                          ____________________