[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 157 (2011), Part 10]
[House]
[Pages 13597-13598]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




            A COST-EFFECTIVE CIVILIAN SURGE FOR AFGHANISTAN

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from 
California (Ms. Woolsey) for 5 minutes.
  Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, yesterday the U.S. embassy and NATO 
headquarters in Kabul were attacked. The Taliban, which we know has 
exerted its influence in many of the remote regions of the country, is 
now flexing its muscle in the supposedly secure capital. It's just the 
latest piece of evidence that the military occupation of Afghanistan is 
having exactly the opposite of its intended effect. Nearly a decade 
after we allegedly defeated the Taliban and drove them from power, they 
remain as fearless and undaunted as ever.
  The longer we have boots on the ground, the more we prop up the very 
enemy we are supposed to be fighting. And for this, the American people 
have the privilege of shelling out $10 billion a month.
  I ask my friends on the other side of the aisle, the ones who are 
lecturing us every day about cutting spending, isn't there something 
better we can do with the taxpayers' money?
  Well, it turns out there is, and it would do more to promote security 
and counterterrorism than waging a bloody and violent war.
  For years now, I've been promoting a platform I call ``SMART 
Security.'' SMART Security represents a wholesale change in the way we 
protect our country and promote our values abroad. It puts us in a 
position of partner, not invader. It's smart because it treats warfare 
as a very last resort. It's smart because it uses different tools to 
engage other nations and resolve global conflicts. It's smart because 
it emphasizes diplomacy, pursues multilateralism, promotes democracy, 
and respects human rights. And it's smart because it would dramatically 
increase our investment in international development projects that will 
lift people up instead of tearing their country down.
  What we need in Afghanistan and poor countries around the world is a 
civilian surge, one that will rebuild infrastructure, power lines, 
schools, hospitals, economic opportunity, and much more, whatever that 
nation would find useful that we could help with.
  You think it sounds expensive? It's a drop in the bucket. I'm talking 
about pennies on the dollar compared to a 10-year military occupation. 
In fact, The Washington Post noted last week that civilian efforts in 
Afghanistan have cost the United States about $1.7 billion over the 
last 2 years. Let's compare $1.7 billion over 2 years to $10 billion a 
month in Afghanistan. And even that level of funding is now facing 
tough scrutiny here on the Hill. Are you kidding me? Let's put this 
into perspective--$1.7 billion, we spend that much on the war in 
Afghanistan in less than a week, and that's what we invest in 2 years 
of civilian efforts.
  If we ended this war, we could reinvest the money in the bigger, 
bolder surge that we really need and still have plenty left over to 
create jobs right here at home and meet other important obligations. 
But right now, Mr. Speaker, our priorities are completely distorted. We 
are sacrificing the lives of our troops in a morally reprehensible war 
that is fiscally reckless and strategically an epic, historic failure. 
After 10 years, it's time to bring our troops home, make the change we 
so desperately need.

[[Page 13598]]

  Embrace and adopt the principles of SMART Security.

                          ____________________