[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 4]
[House]
[Pages 5054-5055]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




           TIME FOR AMERICA TO SLOW DOWN AND CONSIDER OPTIONS

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the order of the House of 
January 7, 2003, the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer) is 
recognized during morning hour debates for 5 minutes.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, the recent cavalcade of events 
surrounding the actions of the United States in Iraq and other foreign 
affairs has compounded the apprehension that many have felt these last 
8 months. It is time for the United States collectively to slow down, 
take a deep breath, step back and consider our options.
  Comments I have received from constituents at home, from my Web site, 
as well as just simply reading the many conflicting poll results, 
suggest that most Americans would appreciate a reflective pause.
  Terrorism is the greatest threat to Americans at home and abroad, 
despite the recent obsession with Iraq. Notwithstanding the performance 
by the Department of Homeland Security, which resembled a ``Saturday 
Night Live'' skit with talk of duct tape and plastic, terrorism is 
still serious business.
  I am not opposed to the United States using force when appropriate. I 
think most of us now wish we had done so to deal with the genocide in 
Rwanda. Previously, I supported military action in the Balkans when 
some of the now-hawkish Republican colleagues of mine would not support 
force to stop genocide in the former Yugoslovia.

                              {time}  1300

  It is clear that we have mishandled the northern situation; that we 
have been less than diligent with Pakistan; that we have missed 
opportunities to retire weapons and nuclear material from the former 
Soviet Union. Moreover, the administration clearly did not provide 
adequate money for reconstructing Afghanistan in its most recent 
budget.
  It is in an effort to highlight this situation that I have chosen to 
cosponsor a resolution offered by my colleague,

[[Page 5055]]

the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio), to rescind Congress' 
authorization of force passed last year. Even though this proposal is 
unlikely to be approved by the House, it is important to send the right 
signal to the administration. It is not too late to be more strategic 
and to learn from our past mistakes.
  Most important, especially if we are going to follow the route the 
administration is pursuing, a proper foundation is critical. If we 
expect multilateral cooperation and accountability from our friends, 
allies, and other world powers, we must demonstrate those 
characteristics ourselves. It would be outrageous if, as part of a deal 
with Turkey to secure their support, we end up selling out the Kurds in 
Iraq, the only people that have a modicum of self-determination.
  Should we go to war, the American people are unprepared by the 
administration for the probable consequences of the inevitable United 
States short-term victory. Even supporters of the Bush policy admit 
that a post-Saddam situation in Iraq will very likely resemble 
Yugoslavia without Tito. There, after hundreds of thousands of lives 
were lost and billions of dollars spent, we still have 20,000 troops in 
the Balkans and the region remains a basket case. Our past actions 
should give people pause.
  The United States gains little by rushing to war with Iraq. We should 
continue to work with our allies, pursue a program of coercive 
inspections, and marshall a much broader coalition in support of our 
effort.
  Just as critically, we must try to stop the situation with North 
Korea from spinning out of control while reconnecting with South Korea. 
More time and money and effort should be expended on the Nunn-Lugar 
program to invest in decommissions of weapons of mass destruction in 
the former Soviet Union. Pakistan and its activities with the North 
Koreans and potential links to terrorists need to be elevated in our 
awareness and policy issues. Nuclear and other weapons of mass 
destruction are much less likely to come from Iraq than they are from 
North Korea, from dissident elements in Pakistan, or remnants of the 
former Soviet Union.
  Most important, we need to acknowledge that the threats posed to 
America at home and abroad come primarily from terrorism. We should 
provide resources for the cash-strapped States and localities that have 
been dealing every day since September 11 with the consequences and 
potential for terrorism at home. This is beyond homeland security, this 
is hometown security, and deserves priority.
  Our actions overseas should be appraised carefully as to the impact 
on our efforts to track down terrorists and prevent future attacks. It 
is important that the administration and Congress level with the 
American people that this is an expensive, arduous, complex task. It 
will require money, commitment, and, most important, patience over the 
long haul.
  We certainly should be clear about the costs of any action in Iraq, 
and prepare the American public for the likely consequences our policy 
will have in that volatile part of the world. Americans may be 
conflicted about Iraq and anxious as to terrorism, but I know they are 
willing, as never before in my lifetime, to come together for the 
protection of their communities and the greater good of our country and 
peace in the world. Should we not take advantage of their interest and 
intention, we will regret this lost opportunity for years to come.

                          ____________________