[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 5]
[House]
[Pages 6164-6165]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




 IF NATO HAS ITS WAY, ALBANIAN KOSOVARS WILL NOT REMAIN PART OF SERBIA

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Paul) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, the U.S.-NATO war against Serbia is illegal 
by all standards. Congress has not declared war. Therefore, the 
President has no authority to wage war. Attacking a sovereign nation 
violates long-standing international law as well as the NATO and U.N. 
charters.
  NATO's aggression is immoral as well. It forces U.S. citizens and 
others in Europe opposed to the war to pay for it, and some are even 
forced to fight in it against their will. If the war expands, we can 
expect the return of the draft to make sure there are enough soldiers 
to participate.
  As ugly as the Yugoslavian civil war may be in Kosovo, and as heart 
wrenching as the pictures of mass refugees fleeing their homeland is, 
one evil can never justify another. If one is disinclined to be 
persuaded by law and morality and responds only to emotions, propaganda 
and half-truths, then one must consider the practical failure of 
compulsive intervention in the affairs of other nations.
  Prior to NATO's expanding the war in Yugoslavia, approximately 2,000 
deaths in the past year were recorded in Kosovo. As a consequence of 
NATO's actions, the killing has now escalated and no one can hardly be 
pleased just because now Serbs, our once-valiant allies against the 
Nazis, are dying. Those who are motivated by good intentions while 
ignoring facts cannot be excused for the escalating and dangerous 
crisis in Yugoslavia.
  The humanitarian concerns for Albanian refugees is justified, but 
going to war because of emotional concerns while ignoring other 
millions of refugees around the world only stirs the passions of the 
oppressed, whether they are Kurds, Palestinians, Tibetans, East 
Timorans or Rwandans.
  When NATO talks of returning Albanians to their homes in Kosovo, I 
wonder why there is no reference or concern for the more than 50,000 
Serbs thrown out of their homes in Bosnia, Slovenia and Croatia. 
Current NATO policy in Yugoslavia will surely encourage more ethnic 
minorities around the world to revolt and demand independence.
  Some in Congress are now saying that although they were strongly 
opposed to the administration's policy of bombing in Yugoslavia prior 
to its onset, conditions are now different and an all-out effort to win 
with ground troops, if necessary, must be undertaken. This, it is said, 
is required to preserve NATO's credibility.
  Who cares about NATO's credibility? Are American lives to be lost and 
a greater war precipitated to preserve NATO's credibility? Should the 
rule of law and morality be thrown out in an effort to preserve NATO's 
credibility? Can something be wrong and misguided before it is started 
and all of a sudden deserve to be blindly supported?
  This reasoning makes no sense.
  No one has quite figured out the secret motivation of why this war 
must be fought, but I found it interesting that evidence of our weapons 
shortage is broadcast to the world and to the Serbs. Surely one result 
of the war will be a rapid rush by Congress this year to massively 
increase the military budget. But a serious discussion of our flawed 
foreign policy of intervention that has served us so poorly 
unfortunately will not occur.
  Political leaders and pundits are struggling to define an exit 
strategy for the war. In the old days when wars were properly declared 
for national security reasons, no one needed to ask such a question. A 
moral war fought against an aggressor for national security reasons was 
over when it was won. It has only been since Congress has reneged on 
its responsibility with regards to war power that it has become 
necessary to discuss how we exit a war not legitimately entered into 
and without victory as a goal.
  The political wars, fought without declaration, starting with the 
Korean War to the present, have not enhanced the long-term security and 
liberty of the American people. Institutionalizing a collective 
approach to war seems a result of the obsession to save face for NATO. 
Never before in our history have we Americans accepted so casually the 
turning over of a military operation to foreign control with non-
American spokesmen briefing us each day.
  This is a major step in further solidifying the world government 
approach to all political problems. There is, however, one major 
contradiction to the internationalist desire to assimilate all 
countries and ethnic groups and have them governed by a single world 
government.
  Quite ironically, ethnic diversity will surely be the casualty of all 
of this mischief. NATO and the U.S. are co-conspirators and military 
allies of a Serbian province that is seeking to become a separate 
ethnic country. Let there be no doubt, if NATO has its way, Albanian 
Kosovars will not remain part of Serbia.
  The US-NATO War against Serbia is illegal by all standards. Congress 
has not declared war; therefore the President has no authority to wage 
war. Attacking a sovereign nation violates longstanding international 
law, as well as the NATO and UN Charters.
  NATO's aggression is immoral as well. It forces US citizens and 
others in Europe, opposed to the war, to pay for it and some are even 
forced to fight in it against their will. If the war expands we can 
expect the return of

[[Page 6165]]

the draft to make sure there are enough soldiers to participate.
  As ugly as the Yugoslavian civil war may be in Kosovo and as heart 
wrenching as the pictures of mass refugees fleeing their homeland is, 
one evil can never justify another.
  If one is disinclined to be persuaded by law and morality and 
responds only to emotions, propaganda, and half-truths, then one must 
consider the practical failure of compulsive intervention in the 
affairs of other nations.
  Prior to NATO's expanding the war in Yugoslavia approximately 2,000 
deaths in the past year were recorded in Kosovo. As a consequence of 
NATO's actions the killing has now escalated and no one can hardly be 
pleased just because now Serbs, our once valiant allies against the 
Nazi's, are dying. Those who are motivated by good intentions while 
ignoring facts cannot be excused for the escalating and dangerous 
crisis in Yugoslavia.
  The humanitarian concerns for Albanian refugees is justified, but 
going to war because of emotional concerns, while ignoring other 
millions of refugees around the world, only stirs the passions of the 
oppressed, whether they are Kurds, Palestinians, Tibetans, East 
Timorans, or Rwandans. When NATO talks of returning Albanians to their 
homes in Kosovo, I wonder why there's no reference or concern for the 
more than 500,000 Serbs thrown out of their homes in Bosnia, Slovenia, 
and Croatia. Current NATO policy in Yugoslavia will surely encourage 
more ethnic minorities around the world to revolt and demand 
independence.
  Some in Congress are now saying that although they were strongly 
opposed to the administration's policy of bombing in Yugoslavia prior 
to its onset, conditions are now different and an all-out effort to win 
with ground troops if necessary, must be undertaken. This, it is said, 
is required to preserve NATO's credibility. Who cares about NATO's 
credibility? Are American lives to be lost and a greater war 
precipitated to preserve NATO's credibility? Should the rule of law and 
morality be thrown out in an effort to preserve NATO's credibility? Can 
something be wrong and misguided before it's started and all of a 
sudden deserve to be blindly supported? This reasoning makes no sense.
  No one has quite figured out the secret motivation of why this war 
must be fought. But I found it interesting that evidence of our weapons 
shortage is broadcast to the world and to the Serbs. Surely, one result 
of the war will be a rapid rush by Congress this year to massively 
increase the military budget. But, a serious discussion of our flawed 
foreign policy of intervention that has served us so poorly, 
unfortunately, will not occur.
  Political leaders and pundits are struggling to define an ``exit 
strategy'' for the war. In the old days when wars were properly 
declared for national security reasons, no one needed to ask such a 
question. A moral war, fought against an aggressor, for national 
security reasons, was over when it was won. It's only been since 
Congress has reneged on its responsibility with regards to war power, 
has it become necessary to discuss how we ``exit'' a war not 
legitimately entered into, and without victory as the goal. The 
political wars fought without declaration, starting with the Korean War 
to the present, have not enhanced the long-term security and liberty of 
the American people.
  Institutionalizing a collective approach to war seems to be a result 
of the obsession to ``save face'' for NATO. Never before in our history 
have we Americans accepted so casually the turning over a military 
operation to foreign control with non-American spokesmen briefing us 
each day. This is a major step in further solidifying the world-
government approach to all political problems.
  There is, however, one major contradiction to the internationalist's 
desire to assimilate all countries and ethnic groups and have them 
governed by a single world government. Quite ironically, ethnic 
diversity will surely be the casualty of all this mischief.
  NATO and the US are co-conspirators and military allies of a Serbian 
Province that is seeking to become a separate ethnic country. The full 
force of our efforts, no matter what humanitarian picture is painted to 
justify our actions, is to make Kosovo an Albanian Muslim state 
separate from Serbia.
  Current NATO and US policy completely contradict the professed goal 
of multi-ethnicity and assimilation of all people. NATO's operation, by 
its very nature, is bureaucratically burdened by the effort to appease 
the political concerns of 19 different countries. This inefficiency and 
the contradiction of supporting the establishment of an ethnic state 
will guarantee NATO's deserved demise. The sooner we get out of 
Yugoslavia the better off everyone will be.

                          ____________________