[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 4]
[House]
[Page 5204]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                DANGER OF UNILATERAL ACTION AGAINST IRAQ

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, President Bush continues to strongly 
suggest that America will go to war against Iraq without the support of 
the United Nations or a significant number of our traditional European 
allies. Following his lead, many Americans, as well as media 
commentators, have become critical of the United Nations and the member 
nations of the Security Council that have expressed opposition to U.S. 
military action at this time.
  My concern, Mr. Speaker, is that the United States is needlessly 
losing the world opinion war with dangerous implications for the real 
war against Iraq or, even worse, for the larger war against terrorism.
  I voted against the congressional resolution that authorized 
unilateral U.S. military action against Iraq in part because of my fear 
that President Bush would have less incentive to create the type of 
world coalition that was so successful in the Gulf War. We tend to 
forget that the Gulf War was successful in many ways beyond the mere 
fact that the U.S. liberated Kuwait. The coalition of support meant 
that many countries provided manpower, money, and the political support 
that made U.S. actions justified in world opinions, even in Muslim 
countries.
  The situation, Mr. Speaker, we now face with Iraq is very different. 
The logistics to carry out the war may suffer from the inability to 
utilize bases or air flight over countries that were previously 
supportive in the Gulf War.
  The cost of the war will be borne almost entirely by the United 
States. President Bush has not included the costs, estimated from 50- 
to $200 billion in his budget. And this does not even include the cost 
to rebuild Iraq. It also does not include assistance that other 
countries are demanding. For example, Turkey, which has asked for an 
aid package in the tens of billions.
  My greater concern, Mr. Speaker, is whether the lack of support by 
other countries stiffens the resolve of the Iraqis to fight and makes 
it more difficult for U.S. forces to conduct the war or alternatively 
encourage the fundamentalist forces that perceive American action as 
anti-Muslim and, therefore, accelerate terrorist attacks against the 
United States.
  I keep asking why the Bush administration feels it is necessary to 
adopt the rhetoric of unilateral action given the perils that might 
accompany it. Why do the President and his advisors insist that they do 
not need the United Nations and our traditional allies even while they 
pursue resolutions in the Security Council and try to convince other 
countries to support us.
  It often seems that their rhetoric makes it all the more difficult to 
achieve the world coalition that was so successful in the Gulf War.
  Mr. Speaker, it is crucial that in the next few days and the next few 
weeks, the Bush administration make every effort to achieve the support 
of the United Nations as well as the key countries such as France, 
Germany, Russia and China that have voiced U.S. opposition to U.S. 
policy in Iraq. The President can best accomplish this goal if he makes 
it clear that a world coalition is crucial to the United States.
  Mr. Speaker, I hope that we can avoid a war altogether by working 
within the Security Council to successfully disarm Iraq. I still hope 
that that can be accomplished. But absent that, the President must work 
a lot harder to build a world coalition to support a war if it is going 
to take place and avoid the political perils of unilateral military 
action.

                          ____________________