[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 161 (2015), Part 3]
[House]
[Pages 3075-3080]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




 WILL THE U.S. AND THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY ALLOW IRAN TO DEVELOP A 
                            NUCLEAR WEAPON?

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 6, 2015, the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Stewart) is recognized 
for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader.
  Mr. STEWART. Mr. Speaker, I am honored tonight to lead this Special 
Order on what is one of the most critical issues facing our Nation in 
generations. Now, I know that sounds dramatic and that it sounds like 
it is a statement that is just designed to capture people's attention, 
but it is actually true. This is a question that will define our safety 
and our security for generations to come.
  The question we face and the issue that we want to address tonight 
is: Will the U.S. and the international community allow Iran to develop 
a nuclear weapon?
  For generations, it has been the policy of Republican and Democratic 
administrations that we would not allow that to happen. It is critical 
to the security of our friends and allies in the region that we are 
successful in denying them this. It is critical to our own national 
security, to the interests at home, and to our interests abroad that we 
not allow Iran to nuclearize their weapons program. So we come to this 
question: Will we allow that to happen?
  Tonight, I stand here, along with many of my colleagues, to express 
my great concern about what the President is doing and the state of the 
negotiations as they are now. Tomorrow, we get to hear from the Prime 
Minister of Israel. I look forward to hearing his comments. He 
certainly has, as they say, a dog in this fight, but so do we. Let me 
begin by telling you a little bit about my background.
  I spent 14 years as a pilot in the Air Force. I flew the B-1. At one 
point, I was the pilot rep for the implementation of the Strategic Arms 
Reduction Talks, or START I and START II, implementing a treaty that we 
had with the former Soviet Union. This was a very interesting 
experience. I learned a lot from this. I certainly learned of the

[[Page 3076]]

details and the necessity of following through with every tiny detail 
of these treaties and of implementing them. Our Russian counterparts 
could show up at our base at any time with only a few-hours' notice. 
They had access to the most highly sensitive areas. They would measure; 
they would observe; they would talk; they had incredibly sophisticated 
ways of verifying that we were complying with elements of the START 
Treaty, as we did with Russia.
  These elements, in my opinion, are one of the keys to making sure 
that this treaty that the President is negotiating is successful, which 
brings us then to, really, one of our central questions, because I 
learned from my own experience that, for a treaty as sophisticated as 
this would have to be to be successful, there has to be a modicum of 
trust, an element of trust, between the two parties--a grain, a core of 
trust--where they both want the treaty to succeed. I don't know if we 
have that now.
  I had the opportunity to address this concern with Secretary Kerry 
just last week. I asked him very simply: Can you name me a single 
example where the United States or our allies for generations have had 
a positive, constructive experience with Iran? Can you show me any 
example of how they have worked with us in a positive manner? He could 
not provide me with a single example.
  Once again, this is one of the central questions that we have to 
address, so let's ask this question: Can we trust Iran? Let me explain 
to you why I think the answer to that is ``no.''
  You see this map beside me. This indicates Iran's range of influence 
around the world, and it reaches, as you see, from North Korea, through 
central Asia, through the Middle East, through parts of Europe, to 
South America and to Mexico. Iran has been a state sponsor of terrorism 
for more than 30 years. They, by themselves, have developed an 
extensive military complex--the Defense Industries Organization, as 
they call it. The DIO is able to supply Iran with all of the materials 
that they need in order to carry out their terrorist activities around 
the world--all of the ammunition, all of the equipment, all of the 
weapons.
  In fact, Iran is the primary supplier of the weapons and ammunition 
of two other officially recognized state sponsors of terror--Sudan and 
Syria. It is the primary sponsor of a number of listed foreign 
terrorist organizations, including Hezbollah and Hamas and numerous 
Shi'a militias in Iraq.
  Iran has directed the terrorist activities of numerous of these Shi'a 
militias, and let me point out this fact: over the last dozen years or 
so, these Iranian-backed militias have been responsible for the deaths 
of hundreds of American soldiers working in the theater. Hundreds of 
American soldiers have lost their lives due to the direct activities of 
Iran.
  As I mentioned, and as you can see on the map, they engage in 
narcotics trafficking and human smuggling in Mexico. In the tri-border 
area of Brazil and Argentina and Paraguay, Hezbollah has a safe haven 
for recruiting, training, and fundraising. Even Venezuela is, 
similarly, a safe haven. In India, they provide support for Syed Kalbe 
Jawad, who is recruiting Shi'a militias to fight in Iraq and Syria. 
They cooperate with North Korea in cyber warfare. The list of their 
interventions in a negative and a destructive way around the world is, 
indeed, very long.

                              {time}  2015

  They are a strategic ally of Russia and China. They provide port 
facilities. They are a strategic ally of North Korea. They have 
cooperated with North Korea to develop ballistic missiles.
  So, once again, let me come back to my conversation with the 
Secretary of State, where I ask him: Can you give us a single example 
of a positive or constructive alliance or agreement or partnership that 
we have had with this Nation of Iran?
  And the answer has, once again, been no.
  Iranian leaders have stated their objective is to destroy Israel and, 
of course, the great Satan, the U.S. In fact, I can show you.
  Look at this picture, and you may wonder what it is. It is not 
something taken from World War II or from another war. This actually 
happened last week, where Iran completed a successful exercise in a 
simulated attack on a U.S. aircraft carrier. Does that sound like the 
activity of a potential partner?
  Hezbollah has stockpiled approximately 60,000 surface-to-surface 
rockets in Lebanon. Hamas has stockpiled approximately 10,000 surface-
to-surface rockets in Gaza. Iran is, of course, the primary supplier of 
both of these, and their stated purpose is to destroy Israel, to wipe 
it off the map.
  As the current Iranian President Rouhani said: ``The Zionist regime 
has been a wound in the body of the Islamic world for years, and the 
wound should be removed.''
  The former President said, in 2012, that Iran has no roots in the 
Middle East and that it would be eliminated.
  So let me conclude my part of this hour by emphasizing once again 
that Iran has demonstrated several generations now of destructive, war-
like, deadly activities around the world designed to destroy Israel, 
designed to weaken or destroy the United States, killing American 
soldiers overseas, and this is the partner that we think we can trust 
with one of the most critical issues of our day. I hope the President 
realizes the danger that we would face if they prove not to be a 
reliable partner.
  I will let others share in my time today. First, I would like to 
invite my friend, Dennis Ross from Florida, a member of the Financial 
Services Committee, to speak.
  Mr. ROSS. I thank my good friend from Utah (Mr. Stewart).
  Madam Speaker, on November 4, 1979, the American Embassy in Tehran 
was seized and Iranians held 50 American hostages for more than 444 
days. Each year, on November 4, Iranians celebrate Death to America Day 
to commemorate the 1979 seizure of our Embassy. So while we are 
celebrating Thanksgiving, President's Day, Martin Luther King Day, 
Memorial Day, and Labor Day, for the last 35 years, Iran has been 
celebrating, once a year, Death to America Day. The party with whom we 
are negotiating nuclear capabilities celebrates Death to America Day.
  In 1983, two car bombs exploded in Beirut, killing 300 United States 
marines. Iranian-backed Hezbollah militants claimed responsibility for 
this mass murder.
  Make no mistake, Iran is the lead sponsor of radical Islamic 
terrorism throughout the world today, including sleeper cells in the 
United States.
  As Mr. Stewart just pointed out, last week, Iran's Revolutionary 
Guard staged war games in the Strait of Hormuz. When they blew up that 
mock U.S. aircraft carrier, Iran's Supreme Leader, the Ayatollah 
Khamenei, proclaimed that ``Americans are ready to be buried at the 
bottom of the water''--the supreme commander, leader of the party with 
whom we are negotiating a nuclear capabilities deal.
  Madam Speaker, my point is that Iran has a ruthless track record of 
terrorizing the West, including the United States. Let's be perfectly 
clear: Iran wants to destroy America, as they claim every November 4, 
and as they demonstrated last week in the Strait of Hormuz. Iran is a 
nuclear threshold state.
  Recently, just 2 weeks ago, I had the privilege of traveling to 
Israel and meeting with Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu. During my 
visit, the Prime Minister and I discussed in great detail the threat 
posed by Iran to Israel and the region. Iran openly declares its 
intention to destroy the State of Israel.
  Today, Iran has the largest and most diverse missile arsenal in the 
Middle East. The missiles are capable of carrying nuclear and chemical 
weaponry within a rage of 1,500 miles. With bared teeth, Iran, in 
conjunction with North Korea, is developing a longer range missile 
capable of reaching the United States. In just a few years, they will 
have that technology.
  I am deeply concerned about the current round of negotiations between

[[Page 3077]]

President Obama and Iran. The current deal coming out of the White 
House would allow Iran to develop nuclear weapons after 10 years. A 
long-term deal that allows Iran to develop nuclear capabilities only 
strengthens the hand of Iran and fortifies their determination to 
destroy Israel, dominate the Middle East, the Muslim world, and the 
entire globe, including the United States.
  Iran says its nuclear program is entirely for peaceful purposes and 
not aimed at developing nuclear weapons. However, Madam Speaker, 
history is replete with examples that argue quite the opposite. Iran is 
not our friend. Iran should never be allowed to develop nuclear 
weapons.
  Madam Speaker, I look forward to hearing Prime Minister Netanyahu 
detail his opposition to this agreement that would grant Iran a license 
to develop nuclear weapons.
  President Obama cannot unilaterally implement this dangerous plan. 
Congress has the responsibility to prevent this foreign policy disaster 
from ever occurring. We must stand firmly with Israel. Unless Iran is 
willing to forgo its entire nuclear program, the United States should 
not ease sanctions and should allow Iran to become a nuclear state.
  Mr. STEWART. Thank you, Mr. Ross, for your comments tonight and for 
your defense of these concerns that we have.
  I would ask the question, to emphasize something that you said, sir: 
Why is Iran building ICBMs?
  As Charles Krauthammer pointed out in the last few days in an 
article, he said: You don't build ICBMs to deliver dynamite.
  It is very clear what their intentions are, I would think. And 
although we will come back to this, I would like to follow up with one 
other point that you made. But before we do that, let me turn the time 
now to my friend, Mr. Roger Williams from Texas. He also serves on the 
House Financial Services Committee.
  Mr. WILLIAMS. Madam Speaker, on Tuesday, Israel's Prime Minister will 
make a direct appeal to the American people. His plea will not be made 
in front of cameras at a press conference. They will not be made from 
his home country 6,000 miles away. Tomorrow morning, Israeli Prime 
Minister Binyamin Netanyahu will stand right here behind me at this 
podium to address this Congress.
  The Prime Minister will speak before us to directly petition Congress 
and the American people because, sadly, he has, like so many, lost 
faith in the abilities of our Commander in Chief. The Prime Minister 
has lost faith in an administration whose foreign policy summarized the 
President's guiding advice: Don't do stupid stuff.
  He no longer trusts this American President, whose aides slander his 
name to the press. He is skeptical about the State Department's trust 
above all else policy with Iran, whose leaders have publicly proclaimed 
their desire for Israel to be wiped off the map. He regrets the 
President's inability to outright condemn Hamas, a U.S.-designated 
terrorist organization, without blaming Israel in the same sentence.
  Mr. Netanyahu has rightly questioned America's once unwavering 
commitment to his homeland, Israel--Israel, our partner, our ally, but 
most importantly, our friend.
  Madam Speaker, we have responsibility--no, we have a commitment--to 
watch over and protect our greatest advocate in the Middle East. To my 
colleagues in this body that do not believe in the United States' moral 
obligation to watch over Israel, I remind them about the United States' 
strategic obligation. Israel's interests are closely aligned with ours. 
Israel benefits from a secure America, just as America benefits in 
having a secure, stable, and trustworthy ally in a very volatile, 
dangerous region.
  Despite my personal beliefs that America has a moral obligation to 
ensure Israel's peace and prosperity, I cannot disregard the obvious 
strategic benefits our relationship has brought us. The Obama 
administration's inability to realize this twofold bond between the 
United States and Israel illustrates how out of touch they really are.
  Mr. Prime Minister, I welcome you to the Chamber of the United States 
House of Representatives.
  Mr. President, you and your supporters who refuse to meet with our 
friend, I must remind you of your foreign policy advice. Simply, you 
said: Don't do stupid stuff.
  In God we trust.
  Mr. STEWART. Thank you, Mr. Williams.
  I can't let the moment pass without reemphasizing something you said: 
Don't do stupid stuff.
  Is it stupid to trust Iran? Is it stupid to negotiate an agreement 
that is fatally flawed? And I have deep concerns about this agreement 
in that it is fatally flawed.
  For example, and perhaps most glaringly, there is this provision that 
allows for a sunset. We are not precluding Iran from developing nuclear 
weapons. In the very best case scenario, we are simply delaying them 
from developing nuclear weapons.
  How in the world is it within the interest of the United States or 
our allies in the region or others in the area, as well, to simply say 
we are going to stop you from developing nuclear weapons for 10 years, 
which is reportedly one of the provisions of this agreement?
  That doesn't stop them. It delays them. It delays them only if it 
assumes that they adhere to the agreement, something that many of us 
are very skeptical about.
  I could elaborate, but let me turn the time now to my friend, Robert 
Pittenger from North Carolina. We came to Congress together. He is 
active in the foreign affairs community, and, I am proud to say, he is 
the chairman of the Congressional Task Force on Terrorism and 
Unconventional Warfare.
  Mr. Pittenger.
  Mr. PITTENGER. Thank you, my good friend, Congressman Stewart, for 
your leadership tonight on the very important timing of this, 
precluding the important meetings we will have this week.
  Madam Speaker, I am here tonight to pay tribute and gratitude to 
Prime Minister Netanyahu for taking the time to come to the United 
States to express his grave concern over the perilous threat that he 
sees for the United States and for Israel.
  Since 1948, with the inception of Israel, they have been a steadfast, 
loyal, democratic ally for the United States. They have stood strong as 
a surrogate on our behalf, fighting terrorism, Hamas, Hezbollah, and al 
Qaeda.
  Being there in Israel last week, in the Golan Heights, I saw young 
men and women, 20 and 21 years old, in the tank division prepared for 
battle. They were courageous. Down in Gaza, the same type of 
commitment. They had the recognition of the realities of those missiles 
firing across, those missiles that are funded by Iran.
  I met with the Prime Minister and I asked him the same question I 
asked him a year ago: Mr. Prime Minister, at such time that you need 
America, will America be there for you?
  The best answer he could say was: Congressman, I hope so.
  What a sad commentary on a relationship that we have with our most 
important ally in the Middle East.
  The footprint of the terrorism of Iran is throughout the Middle East 
and, yes, throughout the world. They have been the primary funding 
agent for terrorism for the last 35 years. Every incident that you have 
seen in Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon, Yemen and other parts has their hand 
of funding and commitment.

                              {time}  2030

  The Prime Minister understands the critical role that is played in 
addressing this threat. Like Winston Churchill, he is coming to America 
to awaken the world to this perilous threat, a threat that Winston 
Churchill saw, that he spoke of time and again. While the world allowed 
Germany to take Austria and Czechoslovakia, we deferred, we appeased, 
we thought nothing else would happen.
  We have given concession after concession after concession to Iran, 
$12 billion in repatriated oil profits have been

[[Page 3078]]

remunerated back to Iran. We have fueled their economy, sustaining 
their economy, enabling them to go forward.
  You know, in any negotiation--and I have been involved in many--you 
succeed with your adversary when you tighten the screws, not when you 
loosen them. We have had an inverse effect in this entire communication 
and dialogue with Iran.
  What we have done has created an entity that is willing and able to 
continue this further negotiation because we have sustained their 
economy. Yes, the oil prices have come down, but what if we had kept 
the screws on them?
  You know, the Soviet Union came to the table back in the late 1970s 
and the early 1980s and through the 1980s. Why did that happen? Because 
we had sustained economic pressure, sustained political pressure, 
sustained military pressure, sustained human rights pressure--we kept 
the pressure on.
  We have relieved the pressure from Iran; and, as a result, we are 
faced with the consequences now where they have changed the entire 
narrative. The narrative in the beginning was: Should Iran have nuclear 
materials? Now, the narrative is: What level of nuclear materials 
should we allow Iran to have? That is how much we have lost in this 
process.
  This is no time to be weak-kneed. This is a time to work with our 
allies in the Middle East. I have been and sat down with the Crown 
Prince in United Arab Emirates. I have sat down with the Emir in Qatar 
and with President el-Sisi. They all understand the gravity of 
terrorism. They all understand the issue of Iran. The world sees this 
threat. This is no time to appease; this is no time to defer.
  This is the time to be strong. Ronald Reagan was strong. The world 
knew America was strong--yet he never fired a shot, and the Wall came 
down. When America is strong, the world is at peace. God help us to 
understand the gravity of this hour, the importance of the message that 
will come from Prime Minister Netanyahu.
  Mr. STEWART. I thank Mr. Pittenger for his remarks and for the great 
work that he does as the chairman of the Task Force on Terrorism and 
Unconventional Warfare.
  I have to interject here for just a moment something that others have 
alluded to as well, and that is this idea of a sunset provision. We 
have to recognize what a dramatic change in policy that is.
  It is no longer our policy that we would not allow Iran to have 
nuclear weapons. It is simply our policy if that provision is agreed to 
that we would delay them from having nuclear weapons.
  The sunset provision allows them to grow their economy. It lifts the 
sanctions. They can sell their oil. They can continue to finance terror 
operations around the world, all under the understanding that, in 10 
years, they could resume their nuclear program. Again, that assumes 
that they don't cheat in the interim which is, in my opinion, likely 
that they will.
  Let me ask this question: Why a sunset provision? Do you think the 
world is going to be more stable in 10 years than it is now? Will Iran 
become our trusted friend and ally over the next 10 years? Will they 
lose all of their regional ambitions? It will lead inevitably to a 
dangerous and chaotic and destabilizing arms race in the region.
  Let me quote our own President. In an interview with The Atlantic 
about 3 years ago, he said: ``It will not be tolerable to a number of 
States in that region for Iran to have a nuclear weapon and them not to 
have a nuclear weapon . . . and so the dangers of an Iran getting 
nuclear weapons that then leads to a free-for-all in the Middle East is 
something that I think would be very dangerous for the world.''
  Mr. President, I could not agree more, which is why it makes no sense 
for your agreement to contain anything close to a sunset provision that 
allows them to develop their nuclear weapons a few years down the road.
  I would like to turn the time now to the gentleman from New Jersey, 
my friend Tom MacArthur. He serves on the House Committee on Armed 
Services, as well as the Committee on Natural Resources. He is one of 
the bright, young Members of the Congress.
  Mr. MacARTHUR. Madam Speaker, I rise today with so many of my 
colleagues to not only reaffirm our friendship with the State of 
Israel, but to express my deep appreciation for it.
  Our two countries share an unbreakable commitment to the democratic 
ideals of individual, religious, and economic freedom. Israel stands as 
a beacon of democracy in a region characterized by political 
repression. For that, she should be honored and protected.
  Our friendship with Israel should not be a political talking point. 
It shouldn't be a friendship of convenience. We can't settle merely for 
maintaining the relationship between our two countries. We must 
strengthen it. Too often, we talk about the threats to Israel or what 
is in Israel's interest.
  Madam Speaker, a threat to Israel is a threat to us. Israel's 
interest is our interest. As our closest ally in a highly unstable part 
of the world, Israel faces countless threats and challenges to her very 
existence. Without qualification or hesitation, the United States must 
stand by Israel's right to defend herself against terrorism and 
aggression by those who would do her harm.
  The rise of the Islamic State and the growing instability in the 
region remind us that we cannot take our ally for granted. We must 
stand against a nuclear-capable Iran, as we have heard tonight, a very 
real and imminent threat that would jeopardize not only our ally, not 
only this region, but the freedom Israel deserves and the stability of 
the world.
  The partnership between the United States and Israel is strong. Our 
shared history of cultural exchange and collaboration has enriched 
countless lives. Our open lines of trade have benefited not just 
Israel, but both of our great countries.
  This is a friendship that will endure for generations, but we have to 
commit ourselves to it. If we continue our robust military aid and 
cooperation to Israel to ensure her security in the region, then the 
United States and Israel will continue to stand together as shining 
examples of democracy and freedom in the world.
  Mr. STEWART. Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my friend, Mr. 
MacArthur.
  I now recognize another friend, someone who I have come to respect 
tremendously from the tireless work that she does on the House 
Committee on Armed Services and has become a leader among her peers 
here in Congress, the gentlelady from Indiana (Mrs. Walorski).
  Mrs. WALORSKI. I thank the gentleman from Utah, and I commend those 
of my colleagues tonight who are here as well talking about the 
existential threat of a nuclear Iran.
  Madam Speaker, I rise today to express my deepest concern over the 
growing threat of a nuclear Iran and the threat it poses to the rest of 
the world. Satellite images show that Iran's nuclear weapons can reach 
the eastern seaboard of the United States.
  If Iran, the world's largest state sponsor of terrorism, achieves 
nuclear weapons capability, the effects would be catastrophic. While it 
is certain that a rogue Iran would target Israel as a one-bomb country, 
it is also certain that the U.S. is their target and final target.
  News from last week's nuclear negotiations with Iran is troubling. 
Iran will be allowed the right to enrich, retain thousands of 
centrifuges--which they don't deserve--and build a plutonium reactor, 
which they should never have practical need of; yet during these talks, 
they continue to obstruct inspectors, who reported last week about the 
possible existence in Iran of undisclosed development of a nuclear 
payload for a missile.
  What is more disturbing is that amidst of a hurting economy and harsh 
sanctions, Iran still managed to find a way to build, develop, and test 
their nuclear weapons capability.
  Can you imagine the possibility of their capability if the current 
administration were to even lift those sanctions? One thing is very 
clear. We have made too many compromises since trying to broker a deal 
with Iran, and

[[Page 3079]]

there have been too little consequences for their unwillingness to 
cooperate.
  Past administrations were adamant that our position was zero 
enrichment and zero centrifuges. Under President Obama, this has been 
abandoned as being unrealistic. Negotiations began with an offer to end 
Iranian enrichment. Now, today, the deal is a temporary arrangement 
that allows a strong, internationally authorized nuclear program.
  If we lift sanctions and legitimize their nuclear developments, we 
are sending a signal to the rest of the world that a rogue state can 
disobey all rules, maintain their supply of illegal enrichment, and 
still get international leaders to approve an enrichment program.
  A nuclear-armed Iran would dramatically change the balance of power 
in the Middle East and threaten freedom and peace for the rest of the 
world. They would clearly spark a nuclear arms race in the Middle East 
and destabilize the entire region.
  Other nations, like Egypt, Turkey, and others will have no choice but 
to develop their own nuclear programs to protect their countries from 
the threat of Iran, not to mention that Iran will likely share their 
nuclear technology and know-how with extremist groups hostile to not 
only the United States, but also to our allies in the West.
  If there is to be any hope of reaching a peaceful deal and if Iran 
wants prosperity and success for its own people, it must stop its 
pursuit of a nuclear weapon, sponsorship of terrorism, and human rights 
abuses.
  If they truly want to move forward, they must give inspectors 
unfettered access to covert facilities. Iran has to cooperate and stop 
obstructing inspectors. Preventing Iran from acquiring a nuclear 
weapons capability is the surest way to prevent war and preserve peace.
  As this unrest continues, the United States must maintain our rich 
partnership with our allies, including Israel, who is our closest ally 
in the Middle East. I welcome Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to the 
people's House tomorrow.
  Mr. STEWART. Mrs. Walorski and the other speakers bring up many good 
points. Let me emphasize just a few of them if I could.
  The New York Times reported just last week that the IAEA said Iran 
was still refusing to answer questions regarding its previous weapons 
program. Even in the midst of negotiating with the administration, they 
are still refusing to answer questions about their previous nuclear 
weapons program.
  I think the administration, even now, has refused to release the full 
text of the deal. It has even been reported that there is an informal 
side deal that is something like a 30-plus page text.
  These facts prevent observers, like myself and others, who are 
interested and concerned, from determining what constitutes cheating by 
the Iranians. There are so many other reasons that we are concerned 
about this.
  Let me just mention one more very quickly. It was reported that Iran 
can still produce enough nuclear material to fuel a bomb in as little 
as 2 months. In as little as 2 months, they would be a breakout nation 
that would keep the region--and, in fact, the entire world--on a 
knife's edge, wondering if they would make the decision to weaponize 
and to break out. Those are some of the concerns that we have.
  Let me recognize my friend, the gentleman from Ohio, Brad Wenstrup. 
He is a past Army Reserve officer--thank you, sir, for your service. He 
is a doctor. He serves with me on the House Permanent Select Committee 
on Intelligence, as well as he serves on the Committee on Armed 
Services.
  Dr. Wenstrup.

                              {time}  2045

  Mr. WENSTRUP. Thank you, Congressman Stewart. I thank you for your 
service to our Nation in the Air Force and your service to our Nation 
here in Congress. I thank you for organizing this event here on the 
floor tonight.
  As my colleagues have highlighted this evening, on the eve of Prime 
Minister Netanyahu's address to Congress, we stand with Israel and the 
Israeli people, shoulder to shoulder, in the face of growing Islamic 
extremism. The United States was the first country to recognize Israel 
upon its founding in the years after World War II.
  Madam Speaker, it took us just 11 minutes to recognize the new nation 
cradled along the Mediterranean, in the land of Judea. Time and time 
again since then, Israel has been besieged, but our relationship has 
always stood firm, and that is because our friendship is built on the 
shared values of democracy, free enterprise, respect for life, and a 
commitment to a lasting peace.
  Madam Speaker, I contend that when your very existence is in question 
and your neighbors vow to wipe you off the map, it is more than helpful 
to have a committed ally; it is necessary for your very survival.
  Whether by the threat of terror tunnels and rocket barrages or the 
looming nuclear aspirations of Iran, now is not the time to turn away 
from our friend Israel.
  In these challenging times, I am disappointed when I hear disparaging 
comments coming from our own government directed towards our friends in 
Israel. I am disappointed when an anonymous senior Obama administration 
official describes the Prime Minister with words I can't repeat in this 
Chamber.
  I am disappointed when National Security Adviser Susan Rice calls the 
visit of our ally ``destructive.'' I am disappointed when my colleagues 
publicly turn their back on our ally and boycott the Prime Minister's 
speech.
  To them, I say: ``Let us make it clear that we will never turn our 
backs on our steadfast friends in Israel, whose adherence to the 
democratic way must be admired by all friends of freedom.'' These 
aren't my words, Madam Speaker. These are the words of John F. Kennedy 
56 years ago, and they still ring true today.
  In stark contrast to the resolute JFK, the President is asking 
Congress to stand silently to the side in his quest to negotiate with 
Iran. I cannot do that. In these perilous times, we can't afford 
silence. Iran's unhindered quest for a nuclear weapon and support for 
global terrorism threatens the stability of the Middle East, the 
security of our allies in the region, and the very existence of Israel.
  Just last week, Iran conducted military drills to sink a replica 
Nimitz class aircraft carrier. While it made for some great propaganda 
film, I can't say it builds my confidence in Iran as negotiating in 
good faith. These hostile actions shouldn't be rewarded with further 
appeasement.
  Madam Speaker, I daresay that this administration is more willing to 
negotiate with Iran than with Congress. If this administration was as 
firm in negotiating with Iran as with veto threats, we might actually 
stop Iran from getting the bomb.
  We have a close ally in a dangerous region of the world and must 
stand strong. We are seeing too vividly the threat of radical Islam as 
its depravity sweeps across the Middle East. There is no more urgent of 
a time than right now for Congress to unequivocally stand with Israel.
  Tomorrow, Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu will be in this 
very Chamber speaking to Congress. The subject matter is timely: the 
threat of a nuclear Iran. In recent years, I have heard the leaders of 
Ukraine and South Korea address Congress, and we will soon hear from 
leaders of Afghanistan and the Vatican as well.
  I understand that President Ashraf Ghani of Afghanistan was invited 
in exactly the same manner as Prime Minister Netanyahu. It is curious 
as to why we don't hear the same roar of disapproval.
  We know that a nuclear Iran would tilt the balance of power across 
the region and across the world, throwing weight to the ill intentioned 
and the evil terrorist actors. This is a message that bears repeating 
again and again, whether by me or by the Prime Minister of Israel or by 
anybody who recognizes the threat.
  As steadfast allies in our commitment to freedom, democracy, and 
peace, I welcome Prime Minister Netanyahu tomorrow.

[[Page 3080]]


  Mr. STEWART. Thank you, Dr. Wenstrup.
  So we conclude our time tonight. Do you sense, do you understand, 
those of you who are listening and watching, do you see that we have 
legitimate and deeply-held concerns about the direction that this 
administration is moving? There are so many questions. Can we trust 
Iran?
  You have seen and heard example after example of how they have worked 
against our interests, how they have been a destructive influence in so 
many parts of the world.
  We ask the question, as I asked Secretary Kerry last week: Can you 
give me a single example of them partnering with us or any of our 
allies in any positive way? The answer was no.
  Are we being true to our allies? Israel is our only friend and ally 
in a chaotic part of the world. They recognize and respect human 
rights, including minority rights, including the rights of women.
  They have called this an existential threat. There is a reason they 
call Israel a one-bomb nation. That is all it would take to destroy 
their entire country. Could we allow ourselves to be put in a position 
where that might be their reality? Is this in agreement with our own 
national interest?
  Remember the map that I showed you, North Korea, throughout Asia, the 
Middle East, Central and South America, even on our borders of Mexico.
  Finally, Madam Speaker, I hope the President understands our 
concerns. I hope he isn't so determined to add a feather in his legacy 
cap that would conclude an agreement that endangers our allies or our 
own national interest.
  I sit on the House Select Committee on Intelligence. I am reminded 
almost daily in the briefings that we have that we live in a dangerous 
and chaotic world. It is unpredictable. It is becoming more so. It is 
dark and chaotic.
  As Abraham Lincoln said, we are the ``last best hope of Earth.'' That 
was true when he said it. It is true when I taught my children that. It 
will still be true when my children teach my grandchildren, but it will 
only be true if we stand by those principles that allow us to secure 
our own freedom and to protect the interests of our allies to whom we 
have made meaningful and important promises.
  With that, we conclude this time, asking the President to listen to 
our concerns and to address them as he moves forward with this 
critically important issue.
  Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

                          ____________________