[Congressional Record Volume 169, Number 143 (Wednesday, September 6, 2023)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4233-S4235]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                         ORDER FOR ADJOURNMENT

  Ms. SMITH. Mr. President, if there is no further business to come 
before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that it stand adjourned 
under the previous order, following the remarks of Senator Kennedy.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Louisiana.


                                Ukraine

  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I am going to talk for a few minutes 
about NATO, but before I do that, I want to make two preliminary 
points.
  I believe that America's aid to Ukraine is not charity. I believe 
that aid is in America's national security interest, and I have voted 
accordingly.
  I am convinced that Vladimir Putin, President Xi Jinping, and the 
Ayatollah of Iran are working together. I am convinced that their 
objective is to have Russia dominate Central and Eastern Europe; the 
Ayatollah from Iran dominate the Middle East; and China, through 
President Xi, dominate the Indo-Pacific, Sub-Sahara Africa, and South 
America. That is not a world that is safe for the United States of 
America. That certainly isn't a world that is safe for democracy. That 
is point one.
  Point two, I have been sorely disappointed at the refusal of the U.S. 
Senate to appoint or to pass a bill that would allow the President to 
appoint--confirmed by the U.S. Senate--a special inspector general to 
follow the money in Ukraine.
  Once again, I have voted to send that money to Ukraine not as an act 
of charity but because I believe it is in America's national security 
interest. But that money didn't just fall from Heaven. That money that 
we sent to Ukraine--we thank Heaven for it, but it came out of the 
pockets of the American taxpayer. I understand that we have an 
inspector general from the Department of Defense following the money, 
and I don't mean to be overtly critical.
  I would point out as an aside that I find it somewhat ironic that the 
Department of Defense inspector general says ``We have got this,'' but 
yet the Department of Defense has never been audited. Ever. Never. The 
Department

[[Page S4234]]

of Defense is the only Agency in the U.S. Government that has never 
been audited, and the American people know that.
  That is why I and a number of my colleagues have asked this Senate to 
pass a bill to allow the President to pick a special inspector general 
of his choosing to be confirmed by the U.S. Senate to follow every 
single dollar we are sending to Ukraine and to answer to the Members of 
the Senate, Members of the House, and, most importantly, to the 
American people.
  Many Republicans and many Democrats have supported that effort, but 
many Democrats and many Republicans on both sides of the aisle have 
refused. Now, I am going to keep trying, but, as I said, this money 
didn't just fall from Heaven; it came out of people's pockets.
  (Ms. BALDWIN assumed the Chair.)


                                  NATO

  Mr. KENNEDY. Madam President, a word about NATO. For the past 18 
months, the United States and our NATO allies have worked together to 
support our Ukrainian friends as they push back against Russian 
President Vladimir Putin's violent attack on their sovereignty.
  Putin's war in Ukraine is illegal, and it has presented one of the 
most serious challenges that NATO--the North Atlantic Treaty 
Organization--has faced in decades. As with many challenges in life, I 
believe that the difficulties we face today can make NATO stronger 
tomorrow. I believe that. But that will only happen if we are honest 
with each other. Friends tell friends the truth. Friends tell friends 
the truth.
  Here is the truth as I see it: NATO is one of the most impactful 
defense PACs in all of human history. The United States is a proud NATO 
member. The American people support NATO. But it is also no secret that 
some of our friends in NATO have not been taking their own defense and 
defense spending seriously, and they had not been taking their own 
defense and defense spending seriously even before Vladimir Putin began 
his illegal assault on Ukraine.
  As the full extent of Putin's cruelty unfolded last year, NATO 
leaders--they appeared at first to regard it as a wake-up call, and 
that is a good thing. It was a wake-up call for many people throughout 
the world. But sometime, somehow, over the past year, those same 
countries fell back asleep.

  You see, when Putin began his march into Ukraine, key NATO leaders 
said that they would start spending 2 percent of their gross domestic 
product on defense. That is a promise that they had made before but had 
reneged on until Putin's assault. But it took less than a year after 
Putin entered Ukraine for those same leaders to begin to renege again, 
and that is just a fact. Friends tell friends the truth. Recent 
analysis shows that as of today, just 11 out of the 31 countries 
currently in NATO are on track to fulfill their 2 percent defense 
spending obligation.
  Now, this is becoming a frustrating pattern for some of our NATO 
allies. As a smart person once said, history doesn't repeat itself, but 
sometimes it rhymes, and that is the case here. If you take a look at 
NATO today and compare it to NATO in 2014, it, frankly, would make 
Michael Avenatti blush.
  Let me paint the picture for you. NATO countries first agreed to 
spend 2 percent of their gross domestic product on defense in 2006. The 
2 percent figure was designed, as the Presiding Officer knows, to be a 
floor, not a ceiling. And this didn't mean--this promise made by all 
NATO countries in 2006--this didn't mean that each country was required 
to cut a check to NATO. That is not what it meant. It just meant that 
each country would spend 2 percent of its gross domestic product on 
itself--on itself--in its own military and in its own national 
security. Why? Because all NATO countries understood then that our 
alliance was stronger when everyone pulled their weight.
  Now, we know a lot of what has happened since then. The world economy 
sank into a recession in 2008. We all felt the brunt of that, including 
the American people. But for some of our friends in NATO, that 2 
percent commitment fell apart. After the great recession, as we call 
it, just three NATO members--three--fulfilled their promise to invest 2 
percent or more in defense. Do you know who took note? Vladimir Putin.
  In 2014--fast-forward a few years--Putin invaded Ukraine's Crimean 
Peninsula. Putin made it clear that he intended to take that key block 
of land on the Black Sea and make it his own, and he did. This was a 
blatant violation of Ukrainian sovereignty. It was an unmistakable 
foreshadowing as well of what would come.
  Now, Putin's aggression outraged NATO. It should have. It outraged 
all fairminded, freedom-loving people. At a conference that year, 2014, 
in Wales, each member country of NATO reaffirmed their commitment to 
spend 2 percent of their GDP on defense by 2024.
  At the time, President Obama was President. In a speech at the 
conference in Wales where each country pledged to spend 2 percent--the 
second time it made the pledge--President Obama said:

       [T]his commitment makes clear that NATO will not be 
     complacent.

  I remember when the President said that.
  President Obama also said:

       Our Alliance will reverse the decline in defense spending 
     and rise to meet the challenges that we face in the 21st 
     century.

  He later added:

       Here in Wales, we also sent a strong message to Russia that 
     actions have consequences.

  Well, that turned out to be debatable. By 2021, just a few years 
later, only seven NATO members were spending the minimum 2 percent on 
defense, and that is just a fact. Friends tell friends the truth. In 
fact, President Trump was met with scorn when he asked our friends in 
NATO to keep their word and reinvest in defense. Germany's Foreign 
Minister, Heiko Maas, said:

       Our common response today to the President of the United 
     States and his assertion of ``America First'' must be 
     ``Europe United.''

  Apparently, Germany and others felt that upholding their pledge to 
spend 2 percent on their own defense was somehow an ``America First'' 
policy. And do you know who took note? Vladimir Putin.
  Flash-forward to 2022. Putin's tanks are rolling farther into 
Ukraine. And just like in 2014, our NATO friends issued statements a 
third time once again pledging to spend 2 percent of their gross 
domestic product on their own security. Yet, today, despite Putin's 
ongoing attack on Ukraine, today, some of our friends in NATO have 
already stopped or postponed their 2 percent spending plans, and that 
is just a fact. Friends tell friends the truth.
  French President Macron, for example, promised to increase France's 
defense spending in the days following Putin's invasion. I remember 
when he made that promise. But French officials have also announced 
that it will take until 2025 to hit the 2 percent defense spending 
threshold. Similarly, Italy announced it would not hit 2 percent until 
2028. Spain said it won't hit its 2 percent goal until 2029. Belgium 
said it won't hit its 2 percent goal until 2035.

  The war is going on.
  To be fair, Belgium and Spain, both good friends of America, have 
made some small progress in their defense spending over the past year. 
I want to make that clear. They may come through eventually. But 
France's spending has hardly changed at all, and Italy will actually 
spend less on defense this year, in the middle of the war which is 
happening in Europe, than it did in 2021, before Putin even entered 
Ukraine.
  Germany's failure to follow through on its 2 percent commitment is 
especially disappointing and consequential. As the world's fourth 
largest economy--Germany is the world's fourth largest economy behind 
only the United States of America, China, and Japan, the world's fourth 
largest economy. So Germany's defense spending shortfall, and it is a 
shortfall, leaves a much bigger hole. We are talking about a lot of 
money. Germany will only spend 1.6 percent of its GDP on defense in 
2023. That is $18.1 billion short of the commitment that it has made 
not once, not twice, but three times.
  Now, NATO is an alliance. It means we are friends, and we are. It 
means we know that we are stronger together. It means that if you come 
for one of us, you are going to have to fight all of us. That is what 
it means.

[[Page S4235]]

  At the end of the day, an alliance, though, is just a promise. That 
is all it is, but it is built on mutual trust. It states that we won't 
leave each other to fight threats alone, and that is what NATO is 
supposed to stand for and I am very proud of that and so are the 
American people. We support NATO.
  But when countries in NATO choose not to keep their commitment to 
spend 2 percent on their own defense, they weaken the alliance of NATO. 
It shows us and it shows our enemies that we cannot count on those 
countries to step up to help keep all of us safe. And it tells Putin--
it tells Putin that some NATO members are content sitting back and 
waiting, rather than remaining strong together, and that is just a 
fact. Friends tell friends the truth.
  Now, the United States of America, we keep our promises. And all 
along, every year through the history of NATO, we have proudly invested 
in our defense to the benefit of our allies--to our own benefit but to 
the benefit of our allies. And it was important to our allies in 
Europe. It was.
  I don't know what would have happened in Europe had the American 
people not come to Ukraine's rescue. Putin may be in Paris right now, 
for all I know, God forbid.
  Now, a few of our NATO friends have kept their commitment, and I want 
to thank them. Our friends in Greece, for example, our friends in the 
United Kingdom, our friends in Estonia, they spent 2 percent of their 
GDP on defense before Putin invaded. Our friends in Lithuania and in 
Hungary and Romania and Slovakia, they will all reach the 2-percent 
threshold by the end of this year. And that is a good thing. Thank you, 
Greece. Thank you, United Kingdom. Thank you, Estonia. Thank you, 
Lithuania and Hungary and Romania and Slovakia, for keeping your word.
  Now, Finland--Finland just joined NATO. We are so pleased. Our 
friends in Finland spent 2 percent on defense before joining NATO, but 
they didn't use the alliance as a reason for taking their foot off the 
gas. Instead, Finland increased their defense spending even more to 2.4 
percent of GDP. Thank you, Finland. I hope our allies, which have been 
nestled safely under the NATO umbrella for years without pulling their 
financial weight, will take note of Finland's dedication.
  Let me say it again: Thank you, Finland.
  And we have got to commend Poland. Poland spent 2 percent on defense 
long before Putin invaded Ukraine, but over the past 2 years, it hasn't 
spent 2 percent--Poland hasn't. It nearly doubled its defense spending 
to 4.3 percent. It is investing that money, in part, by buying American 
weapons, and it is showing Putin that Poland is serious about its 
sovereignty and that Poland is serious about freedom. By the end of 
this decade, Poland is on pace to have more tanks than the United 
Kingdom, than Germany, than France, than the Netherlands, than Belgium 
and Italy put together--put together. Thank you, Poland.
  Now, I understand you don't have to be Mensa material to understand 
that Putin's threat is more visceral when it is happening next door, 
and of course Poland is much closer to Russia than Germany or France 
is. I get that. But when you are allies, when you are friends, when you 
have promised not once, not twice, but three times to have each other's 
backs, you are not only supposed to think of yourself and your 
proximity to the threat.
  You know, as Americans, we have got an entire ocean between us and 
Russia. We have got an entire ocean as our buffer against Putin's 
tanks. But I doubt that Germany or France--both good friends, love them 
to death--but I doubt that Germany or France would support the United 
States backing away because we aren't close enough to the shelling to 
be bothered.
  Let me be frank. Allies through NATO have pledged to have each 
other's backs, and I see no sense in bubble-wrapping it. That starts by 
putting your money where your mouth is.
  I want to be frank again. Some of our friends in NATO have engaged in 
a cycle of broken promises time and time and time again. Putin shows 
his cruel aggression, and horrified European leaders pledged to invest 
in defense. Then Putin's aggression maybe falls off the front page of 
the paper, and leaders forget their promise to invest until Putin's 
rockets start blowing up another city.
  It has been more than a year, as the Presiding Officer knows as well 
as I do, since Putin sent Russian tanks and troops into Ukraine. And 
maybe for some the horror of it all has worn off, maybe. It hasn't worn 
off for most Americans, and it sure hasn't worn off for Ukraine. 
Citizens of a sovereign Ukraine are still dodging missiles on their own 
streets, and Putin is still watching too many NATO members bury their 
heads and drag their feet. And so is President Xi Jinping.
  Now, I don't mean to offend anyone--I don't--but friends tell friends 
the truth, and everyone in NATO is a friend. And I am so proud that the 
United States of America is a member of NATO. But NATO is only as 
strong as our confidence in one another. If we want to strengthen 
NATO's ability to deter bad actors from bad acts, we have each got to 
do our part. It is time for all of us in NATO to start keeping our 
promises and investing in our defense.
  The American people have sent over $100 billion to fight Putin in 
Ukraine, and I don't regret a single penny. We kept our word. But, 
again, friends tell friends the truth: Not all of our allies in NATO 
have, and it is time they put their money where their mouth is.

                          ____________________