[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 148 (2002), Part 11]
[Senate]
[Pages 15375-15377]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 133--EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF CONGRESS THAT 
  THE UNITED STATES SHOULD NOT USE FORCE AGAINST IRAQ, OUTSIDE OF THE 
EXISTING RULES OF ENGAGEMENT, WITHOUT SPECIFIC STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION 
 OR A DECLARATION OF WAR UNDER ARTICLE I, SECTION 8, CLAUSE 11 OF THE 
                   CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES

  Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself and Mr. Leahy) submitted the following 
concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign 
Relations:

                            S. Con. Res. 133

       Expressing the sense of Congress that the United States 
     should not use force against Iraq, outside of the existing 
     Rules of Engagement, without specific statutory authorization 
     or a declaration of war under Article I, Section 8, Clause 11 
     of the Constitution of the United States.

[[Page 15376]]

       Whereas, in accordance with United Nations Security Council 
     Resolution 687 (1991), Iraq--
       (1) agreed to destroy, remove, or render harmless all 
     chemical and biological weapons and stocks of agents and all 
     related subsystems and components and all research, 
     development, support, and manufacturing facilities related 
     thereto;
       (2) agreed to destroy, remove, or render harmless all 
     ballistic missiles with a range greater than 150 kilometers, 
     and related major parts and production facilities;
       (3) agreed not to acquire or develop any nuclear weapons, 
     nuclear-weapons-usable material, nuclear-related subsystems 
     or components, or nuclear-related research, development, 
     support, or manufacturing facilities; and
       (4) agreed to permit immediate on-site inspection of Iraq's 
     biological, chemical, and missile capabilities, and assist 
     the International Atomic Energy Agency in carrying out the 
     destruction, removal, or rendering harmless of all nuclear-
     related items and in developing a plan for ongoing monitoring 
     and verification of Iraq's compliance;
       Whereas the regime of Saddam Hussein consistently refused 
     to comply with United Nations Special Commission weapons 
     inspectors in Iraq between 1991 and 1998 by denying them 
     access to crucial sites and documents;
       Whereas on October 31, 1998, Iraq banned the United Nations 
     weapons inspectors despite its agreement and obligation to 
     comply with United Nations Security Council Resolution 687 
     (1991);
       Whereas Congress declared in Public Law 105-235 that ``the 
     Government of Iraq is in material and unacceptable breach of 
     its international obligations, and therefore the President is 
     urged to take appropriate action, in accordance with the 
     Constitution and relevant laws of the United States, to bring 
     Iraq into compliance with its international obligations'';
       Whereas, in his State of the Union Address on January 29, 
     2002, the President of the United States stated that the 
     ``Iraqi regime has plotted to develop anthrax, and nerve gas, 
     and nuclear weapons for over a decade'';
       Whereas it is believed that Iraq continues in its efforts 
     to develop weapons of mass destruction, in violation of 
     United Nations Security Council Resolution 687 (1991) and 
     subsequent resolutions, and that the regime of Saddam Hussein 
     has used weapons of mass destruction against its own people;
       Whereas the development of weapons of mass destruction by 
     Iraq is a threat to the United States, and its friends and 
     allies in the Middle East;
       Whereas Public Law 107-40 authorizes the President to use 
     United States Armed Forces against ``those nations, 
     organizations or persons he determines planned, authorized, 
     committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on 
     September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons 
     in order to prevent any future acts on international 
     terrorism against the United States by such nations, 
     organizations, or persons'';
       Whereas no such evidence has been forthcoming linking Iraq 
     to the September 11, 2001 attacks; and
       Whereas Article I, Section 8, Clause 11 of the Constitution 
     of the United States confers upon Congress the sole power to 
     declare war: Now, therefore, be it
       Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives 
     concurring), That (a) it is the sense of Congress that--
       (1) the United States and the United Nations Security 
     Council should insist on a complete program of inspection and 
     monitoring to prevent the development of weapons of mass 
     destruction in Iraq;
       (2) Iraq should allow the United Nations weapons inspectors 
     ``immediate, unconditional, and unrestricted access to any 
     and all areas, facilities, equipment, records and means of 
     transportation which they wish to inspect'' as required by 
     United Nations Security Council Resolution 707 of August 15, 
     1991, and United Nations Security Council Resolution 1284 of 
     December 17, 1999; and
       (3) the United States should not use force against Iraq 
     without specific statutory authorization or a declaration of 
     war under Article I, Section 8, Clause 11 of the Constitution 
     of the United States, except as provided in subsection (b).
       (b) Subsection (a)(3) does not apply to any use of force in 
     compliance with the existing Rules of Engagement (ROE) used 
     by coalition forces to exercise the right of self-defense or 
     under the National Security Act of 1947.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, on behalf of Senator Leahy and myself, 
I rise today to submit a concurrent resolution. This resolution is 
aimed to deal with a great deal of the speculation we read about in the 
public press as to whether there is an intent of the administration for 
use of force against Iraq.
  We all know that use of force requires a specific statutory 
authorization or declaration of war under article I, section 8, clause 
11 of the Constitution of the United States. I believe the issue is not 
a question of whether or not Iraq is a rogue state. It is. It is also 
not a question of whether Saddam Hussein is a brutal dictator. He is.
  The question, however, is what is the best policy for the United 
States and how to address these issues, and if we are to use force, 
that we do so only after full debate and consideration of all of the 
options and with a united Government and with the specific statutory 
authorization of the Congress.
  Under the Constitution, only the Congress can declare war, and I 
offer this resolution because of the growing sense, both within the 
United States and abroad, that the Bush administration is poised to 
launch a major military offensive against the Nation of Iraq.
  Thus far, the administration has submitted no evidence of any Iraqi 
connection to 9/11 to this Congress, and the resolution authorizing the 
use of force against al-Qaida is specifically worded so that hard 
evidence of such a connection is needed to justify military action.
  Conclusive proof that Saddam Hussein is, indeed, harboring weapons of 
mass destruction, that he is providing shelter for al-Qaida terrorist 
cells, or that he is in any way linked to the attacks of September 11 
would quickly galvanize support for military action. As of now, 
however, no such evidence has been substantiated.
  At this time, moreover, I know of no formal support for a full-scale 
military action from any other nation. I know of no formal grant to fly 
over or landing rights which would be granted by any nation in 
connection with any invasion plan.
  As far as I know at this point, the United States would be alone, 
unilaterally taking action. To take action without support from our 
allies or the United Nations would clearly identify the United States 
as an aggressor and may well prompt a series of potentially 
catastrophic actions.
  Both Turkey and Jordan, two of our most loyal and longstanding allies 
in the region, have been open about their concern about United States 
unilateral action at this time, making clear their opposition. They 
have also pinpointed that the present crisis between the Israelis and 
the Palestinians should be the world's primary focus in the Middle 
East.
  Until the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is stabilized, until more than 
a semblance of security and stability has returned to Israel and 
Palestine, a massive invasion against Iraq could expose the Israeli 
people to possible missile strikes from Baghdad.
  We should also remain focused and stay the course in our war on 
terror. The government of Hamid Karzai in Afghanistan is increasingly 
unstable. There are serious questions and concerns about security 
throughout Afghanistan. The warlords are restless and asserting power, 
and previously dissipated Taliban elements are returning to 
Afghanistan. The situation remains volatile.
  The stabilization of Afghanistan, its successful transition to a 
democratic government, and its restoration of its war-torn economy 
should remain a top priority for all of us. I believe it would be a 
tragic mistake if the United States turns its attention and effort from 
Afghanistan before the new Afghan Government is stabilized and security 
in the country is improved.
  I, for one, strongly believe that Iraq should promptly agree to the 
return of the United Nations weapons inspectors it expelled in 1998. If 
the government of Saddam Hussein has nothing to hide, something it 
continues to claim, then now is the time to prove it to the entire 
world.
  Iraq's refusal to cooperate is tacit admission of deception and of 
the pursuit and stockpiling of chemical, biological, and, yes, 
admission that the rumors of his pressing ahead to develop nuclear 
warheads are, in fact, true.
  Last week, at a meeting in Vienna, United Nations Secretary General 
Kofi Annan told an Iraqi delegation in no uncertain terms that the 
Iraqi Government must allow U.N. inspectors back in or there was no 
point to continue discussions and negotiations.
  There was no response from the Iraqi delegation, who simply left 
Vienna and returned to Baghdad. I understand that Saddam Hussein is a 
brutal dictator

[[Page 15377]]

who during a 34-year reign of terror has systematically eliminated all 
internal opposition, even including members of his own family. He has 
ruthlessly persecuted Iraq's Kurdish minority. He has used chemical 
weapons against the Kurds and his own people. He has initiated a 
decade-long war against Iran, at the cost of nearly 2 million 
casualties. He has financially supported Palestinian terrorists and he 
has invaded Kuwait, prompting the United States to launch Operation 
Desert Storm.
  In the history of our Nation, we have never attacked another country, 
except in response to an attack on our own shores, our people or our 
national interests. Until and unless the administration is prepared to 
come forward to offer its rationale, to submit its evidence to the 
American people, and to allow Congress to vote to authorize the use of 
force, an attack on Iraq, I believe, is both unwise and ill timed.
  Unwise because it would certainly encourage an unprecedented response 
by Saddam Hussein, most likely targeted against Israel. Unwise because 
until the administration has thought through the who, the what, and the 
how of the regime that will take power in Iraq after Saddam Hussein is 
disposed of, any military action may well have unintended and 
undesirable consequences.
  One cannot overemphasize how important the nature of the next Iraqi 
regime is to the future of the Middle East. It will require that the 
United States engage in nation building, something this administration 
has been reluctant to do. Call it what you will, but in the wake of 
toppling Saddam Hussein our commitment to Iraq must not be brief or 
perfunctory. This, I believe, is ill timed because of the unfinished 
business in Afghanistan, the continuing threat of al-Qaida, and the 
fact that at least two-thirds of the al-Qaida leadership, including 
Osama bin Laden, remain at large.
  The war against terror has not yet been won. We should stay the 
course. So before rushing precipitously forward in an attack on Iraq, I 
urge the Bush administration to work with allies and the United Nations 
to develop a multilateral approach to compel Iraq to live up to its 
obligations under Security Council Resolution 687.
  Should Iraq be unwilling to live up to its obligations and the 
President determines that there is just cause for military action 
against Iraq, I urge him to come before this Congress, to come before 
the American people, to make his case and let us in turn discharge our 
constitutional duty to debate and vote on the authorization of the use 
of force. The many thousands of our sons and daughters who will bear 
the brunt of such an operation, some of whom will surely pay the 
highest price, deserve no less.
  I ask unanimous consent that the concurrent resolution be printed in 
the Record.

                          ____________________