[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 154 (2008), Part 5]
[House]
[Page 6298]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




             THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION'S MIDDLE EAST POLICIES

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Ms. WOOLSEY. Madam Speaker, I rise to bring to the House's attention 
a potentially, very dangerous new turn in the administration's policies 
in the Middle East. In recent weeks the administration has been 
stirring up the pot on Iran again, and that has caused many Americans 
to worry that the administration is getting ready to launch another 
attack in the region, this time in Tehran.
  In fact, there's more than enough evidence to show that the 
administration may be laying the groundwork for military action. In an 
interview last month, the President said that the Iranians, and I quote 
him, he said, ``the Iranians have declared they want to have a nuclear 
weapon to destroy people.''
  That would be troubling, Madam Speaker, if it were true. But the 
Iranians haven't said anything of the kind. It is shocking to me that 
our Commander-in-Chief would make unsubstantiated and misleading 
statements about a subject as important and as serious as nuclear 
weapons.
  Another troubling sign came last month when Admiral William Fallon 
retired. Admiral Fallon was a bulwark against the Iran hawks in the 
administration, and his departure raised fears that he was, first, 
forced to retire, and that next, the rush to war was on.
  And several weeks ago, Vice President Cheney said that he has ``high 
confidence'' that the Iranians have an ongoing nuclear enrichment 
program. Of course, the most recent national intelligence estimate 
reported that the Iranians stopped working on a suspected nuclear 
weapons program 4 years ago.
  And finally, General Petraeus told Congress last week that Iranian-
backed special groups now pose the greatest long-term threat in Iraq.
  For years, the administration told us that the main enemy was al 
Qaeda or Sunni insurgents, or Shiite militia. Now they tell us, forget 
them; it's Iran. In my mind, this raises legitimate concerns that the 
administration may be inventing new excuses to stay in Iraq by trying 
to convince the American people to support war against Iran.
  Madam Speaker, I too am concerned about Iran. The Iranians should 
stay out of Iraq. They should not develop nuclear weapons. No country 
should develop nuclear weapons. But if we want Iran to behave well, we 
must stop threatening to attack them. Instead, our first line of 
defense must be engagement and aggressive diplomacy.
  The absolutely essential first step in that process must be the 
redeployment of our troops out of Iraq. How can we expect Iraq's 
neighbors to cooperate in stabilizing the region while we insist on an 
open-ended foreign occupation with 140,000 troops and tens of thousands 
of military contractors?
  Ending the occupation will allow us to launch a broad initiative to 
bring the nations in the region to the table, to address the relevant, 
the political, the economic and the security issues.
  And Madam Speaker, when it comes to Iran's nuclear challenge, we must 
retake the high moral ground in the United States of America. When we 
turn our backs on nuclear nonproliferation, abandon the comprehensive 
test ban treaty and develop new nuclear weapons of our own, under what 
circumstances can we tell another nation to abandon their nuclear 
dreams?
  The American people do not want a wider conflict in the Middle East. 
They want our leaders to spend every waking moment working to bring 
peace to the region. This is not the time for heated rhetoric, for 
bullying and new threats. It is time to try the one thing we haven't 
tried, diplomacy.

                          ____________________