[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 3]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 4654]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




              PEACEKEEPING OPERATIONS IN KOSOVO RESOLUTION

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                            HON. KAY GRANGER

                                of texas

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, March 11, 1999

       The House in Committee of the Whole House on the State of 
     the Union had under consideration the concurrent resolution 
     (H. Con. Res. 42) regarding the use of United States Armed 
     Forces as part of a NATO peacekeeping operation implementing 
     a Kosovo peace agreement:

  Ms. GRANGER. Mr. Chairman, there are many occasions when this body 
meets to consider important matters of national business. But none more 
important than this.
  To discuss and debate a resolution regarding the development of 
American troops in a foreign land is the utmost in constitutional and 
moral responsibility. It is one we do not undertake lightly.
  Yesterday during testimony before the House International Affairs 
Committee, former U.N. Ambassador Jeane Kirkpatrick was asked if she 
thought it was appropriate for this Congress to debate this issue at 
this time.
  Ambassador Kirkpatrick, who supports potentially deploying U.S. 
troops in Kosovo, replied that it is always the constitutional 
prerogative of the Congress to weigh in on grave matters of national 
security. And so we do.
  But we do so with caution and concern. I approach this issue from the 
perspective of preserving our national security and protecting our 
national interest. These are two essential principles that I believe 
must guide our policy as we work to guide the world toward peace.
  How will it affect our national security--and how is it in our 
national interest? These are two questions which must be decided--
before any troops can be deployed.
  As someone who has been at once an internationalist in foreign policy 
and an advocate for more defense spending, I do have to say I find it 
somewhat ironic that we continue to discuss deploying our troops 
overseas to provide protection for other nations while here in our own 
nation we fail to provide basic protections for our own troops like 
good pay, benefits, training, and equipment.
  I would urge this Congress to address the need to increase defense 
spending. Across the board. For every armed service. No more delays. No 
more broken promises.
  Beyond that, I want to state for the record in no uncertain terms--
that I believe the atrocities of Milosevic are despotic, demonic, and 
despicable. I need no clarification as to whether he is evil or whether 
he will do more evil. He is. And he will.
  We don't need to guess what he will do in the future--we have seen 
what he has done in the past. The prospect of another Croatia or 
another Bosnia can give us little comfort.
  Yet I remain deeply troubled by the possibility of deploying United 
States troops in Kosovo. Can we really make a difference in this far 
away land? At this point, I have my doubts. It's probably only wishful 
thinking, but it is tempting to think of what might have been.
  If only the administration would consult the Congress more fully and 
more openly. They haven't.
  If only Ambassador Holbrooke could outline a specific agreement with 
all parties involved. He can't.
  And if only we thought that an agreement would change Milosevic. It 
won't.
  But more importantly, I find myself returning to the two questions I 
raised at the beginning--how will this impact our national security--
and how is it in our national interest?
  On these two grounds, I cannot justify the deployment of U.S. troops. 
Sending American soldiers and sailors will impact our national security 
by placing American service men and women directly in the line of fire.
  For example, one of the often discussed goals of this mission is to 
take the weapons away from the Kosovo Liberation Army.
  Mr. Chairman, a situation the American Army is trying to take weapons 
away from another Army--is a situation ripe for American casualties.
  And how is this in our national interest? Supporters of the 
deployment tell us that Milosevic is a Hitler in the making. They argue 
that if we don't stop him now, he will continue to expand his sphere of 
influence into other areas of Europe.
  Admittedly, on the issue of our national interest, it is a much 
closer call for me. I do think Milosevic is a threat to the entire 
region. However, I am not convinced he is a threat to the entire world.
  But more importantly, I am not convinced that his actions in Kosovo 
warrant the sacrifice of our most sacred national asset--the men and 
women who wear the uniform.
  Mr. Chairman, in closing, I want to say that this has been a solemn 
and sobering process for me. The decision that I have reached has not 
been easy. It has been gutwrenching.
  I will oppose this resolution not because I believe there is nothing 
at stake in Kosovo or because I am unconvinced of Milosevic's evil.
  I do so only because I believe that the deployment of U.S. troops 
requires that we meet an extremely high threshold. We should seek peace 
throughout the world.
  But not at the expense of our national security and not in the 
absence of a national interest. We owe the world nothing more. We owe 
our troops nothing less.

                          ____________________