[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 155 (2009), Part 16]
[Senate]
[Pages 21455-21457]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                          AMERICAN CHALLENGES

  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, there are a lot of things happening in the 
United States and the world today. There are many issues and challenges 
we face. Obviously, the issue of health care reform has dominated the 
news and our attention. We had a somewhat interesting joint session of 
Congress the night before last.
  But there are also other issues facing the Congress and the Nation. 
One of them, of course, is our strategy in Afghanistan. My colleagues 
have been discussing and debating that, and we will, as has the 
President, continue to debate and discuss as the President makes some 
very tough decisions concerning Afghanistan.
  I have the greatest respect and regard for my colleague and friend, 
the distinguished chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee. He 
and I are in agreement on many issues. It is very clear that Senator 
Levin wants a larger Afghan National Army. I have long maintained we 
need a larger Afghan Army. But I believe it is a false choice to try to 
grow the Afghan National Army while holding back on any additional U.S. 
combat troops.
  I remind my colleagues that the lesson of Iraq, and the one General 
McChrystal wants to put into place in Afghanistan, is we do not get 
very far

[[Page 21456]]

merely by putting individuals through a training course and releasing 
them into combat. As a matter of fact, when we examine the history, the 
very unhappy history of our engagement and involvement in Iraq, there 
was a time when the Iraqi Army was built up to a very large size--as I 
recall, around a couple hundred thousand--and then it basically 
collapsed, totally collapsed in the face of attacks from both Shia and 
Sunni extremists.
  I think the buildup of the Afghan Army is an important component but 
remember, the lesson of Iraq was that our troops went out and fought 
and lived and spent 24/7 with the Iraqi military and gradually, over 
time, they became a far more capable fighting force and one of which 
all of us can be proud. It is mentorship at every level, including 
partnership in joint operations with U.S. forces, that will build a 
robust and capable Afghan military and pave the way for our eventual 
successful exit from Afghanistan. To do this we need more U.S. combat 
troops in Afghanistan.
  There is a lot more I would like to say about it, but there are vital 
areas that are controlled by the Taliban and its allies today. It will 
require U.S. military force to shape, clear, hold, and build in those 
areas. If we await the day when the Afghan National Army is increased 
in size and is capable of carrying out all these operations fully on 
its own, it may well be too late. We are reaching a decisive moment in 
Afghan history and our own. I believe the United States must commit the 
decisive force levels to bring about a significant change in the 
security environment in Afghanistan with the aim of seeing real change 
over the next 12 to 18 months.
  This issue will continue to be an issue of mounting concern and 
importance to the American people. But I also want to point out, in the 
face of mounting reports of fraud and abuse carried out during the 
recent Afghan Presidential elections, I have real concerns about the 
integrity of the electoral process there. Yesterday, the Electoral 
Complaints Commission, a body backed by the United Nations, threw out 
votes from 83 polling stations across three provinces due to fraud. It 
also ordered recounts at hundreds of other polling stations and is due 
to examine irregularities in other areas of the country. These and 
other serious allegations of fraud undermine the perceived legitimacy 
of this election. I believe that perception is key to Afghan's 
political future. I believe we must urge the Electoral Complaints 
Commission to complete its work as soon as possible and to present a 
full report with its assessment of the fairness of the election in its 
entirety.
  The Afghan people desire and deserve a fair electoral process and a 
leader who is elected legitimately. This election must be breakthrough 
for Afghanistan in terms of better governance, more competence, and 
less corruption. They have suffered from poor governance for far too 
long. We should desire no less and take the necessary steps to ensure 
that the government we are backing in Kabul is legitimate and has the 
support of the Afghan people and the international community.
  I recall when it was fraud and an unfair election in Ukraine and the 
United States of America lent its weight and support of the then Orange 
Revolution and a free and fair election was held. We will wait until 
the electoral commissions issue their findings, but I am very concerned 
already about the information that we have concerning significant voter 
fraud. That may have called for a runoff election between President 
Karzai and his leading opponent, Abdullah Abdullah.
  While all Americans take occasion today to commemorate the terrible 
attacks of 2001, each of us also has cause to reflect on some of the 
lessons our Nation learned in the wake of 9/11. Its often hard to think 
clearly about the days before those attacks, when the world seemed at 
once a safer and more distant place, and our country a superpower in a 
secure neighborhood. We saw before 9/11 that America had interests 
across the globe, and we believed that our actions must be motivated by 
the ideals that have made us great. Yet we also often assumed--
wrongly--that the volatility that spilled across distant shores would 
never wash over ours; that instability and repression in remote and 
obscure places was cause for tragedy but not for alarm.
  We have learned a lot since that day. We have learned that history is 
often made in the very remote and obscure places that draw so little of 
our attention. We have learned that the degree of freedom and stability 
in other countries is connected to the security we enjoy at home. And 
we have learned that we must remain the authors of history, or face 
becoming its victims.
  Today I would like to spend just a few moments discussing recent 
events in one of those places which, I would bet, seems like a 
peripheral concern to most Americans. Few of us wake up in the morning 
scouring the papers for the latest news from Lebanon, or follow the ins 
and outs of politics in Beirut. Yet in recent days we, have seen the 
portents of new political crisis in Lebanon and, while all of us must 
hope that it will be resolved easily and peacefully, we know from the 
history of that country that it very well may not be.
  Yesterday, Prime Minister-designate Saad Hariri stepped down, unable 
to form a national unity government some 2\1/2\ months after his 
election in June. After his moderate and relatively pro-Western party 
won the largest number of seats in the Lebanese parliament, Mr. Hariri 
proposed the formation of a broad based government that would even 
award a share of the cabinet posts to Hezbollah.
  Yet Hezbollah has been intent on thwarting these efforts to form a 
cabinet.
  Despite the fact that the Lebanese constitution confers on the 
President and Prime Minister the power to make cabinet appointments, 
and irrespective of Mr. Hariri's repeated attempts to form a 
government, talks have broken down over the demand by a Hezbollah-
allied party that it retain the Telecommunications Ministry. This may 
appear to be a small and insignificant point of contention, and surely 
not one that would prompt an incoming Prime Minister to abandon his 
post, until we consider that Hezbollah badly wants to retain control 
over telecommunications and surveillance in Lebanon.
  Hezbollah, of course, not only possesses a surveillance capacity and 
an independent communications and broadcasting system, but also retains 
vast weaponry befitting its status as an independent militia. Along 
with its Syrian and Iranian sponsors, Hezbollah continues to both exert 
influence outside the constitutional process and invite foreign 
meddling in Lebanese affairs.
  I believe that the United States should take a strong stand in favor 
of respecting the outcome of the June democratic elections, and urge 
the parties in Lebanon to form a government in a manner that respects 
the constitutional process. Over the longer term, it is abundantly 
clear that there can be no durable peace in Lebanon, nor any long-term 
stability in the political process there, so long as Hezbollah 
continues to act freely as an armed, independent militia. According to 
some reports, Hezbollah remains today the best armed force in the 
country, better armed, indeed, than even the Lebanese Armed Forces. 
Such a situation invites further fighting at some point between 
Hezbollah and Israel and suggests that Hezbollah will continue to use 
its military power to induce cooperation with its demands at home. 
Sooner or later, one way or another, and as the U.N. Security Council 
has demanded, Hezbollah must be disarmed.
  We should also make perfectly clear to Syria that better ties with 
the United States will require an end to its malign interference in its 
neighbor's affairs. The administration has made a major effort this 
year to reach out Syria, sending a number of delegations to Damascus 
and making clear that better ties with the U.S. are possible if Syria 
changes its ways. Yet we should recall that it has been just 4 years 
since Mr. Hariri emerged onto the political stage after his father, 
Rafik Hariri, was murdered in a bombing. Reports indicate that suicide 
bombers continue to cross the Syrian border

[[Page 21457]]

into Iraq. And Syria maintains its hostility to Israel and its close 
ties to the government of Iran. We must be clear that there must be 
real change on these issues in order for Syria to enjoy significantly 
warmer relations with the United States.
  Some Americans might reasonably ask why. Why should we care about the 
freedom and democratic aspirations of the Lebanese people? What matter 
is it of ours? Don't we have enough problems here at home, without 
spending our time and attention on the affairs of a small country far 
from our shores?
  In answering this, I would return to the theme with which I set out 
these brief remarks. We have learned since the attacks of 9/11 that 
instability in such places is not often confined to its borders. In 
lands where repression and despair are rife, intolerance and extremism 
grows in the hearts of some, and violence in the minds of a few. In 
Lebanon, as in so many other places around the world, the population 
aspires to something better than to be pulled from side to side by a 
thuggish and cruel militia. The vast majority of the Lebanese people 
want only that which we here in America desire, the freedom and 
security to build, through their talents and industry, a better life 
for themselves and their children. As Americans, we must demonstrate 
that we stand beside them in this hope. As we commemorate today the 
terrible acts of a small group dedicated to extinguishing this very 
ideal throughout the world, we should, I believe, rededicate ourselves 
and our policies to advancing this noble goal.
  Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. REID. I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call 
be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, are we in a period of morning business?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Yes.

                          ____________________