Remarks of U.S. Senator Russ Feingold
On S.J. Res. 9, A Significant Step Toward Ending Our Involvement
in Iraq
March 14, 2007
Mr. FEINGOLD Mr. President, under the strong leadership of Senator
Reid, the Democratic caucus has produced a joint resolution that takes
a significant step toward ending our involvement in the war in Iraq.
I support the resolution and I hope my colleagues will do the same.
The resolution does not go as far as I would like. I continue to
believe that the only way we are ultimately going to end the President’s
failed policies in Iraq is by exercising Congress’s power of
the purse to safely bring our troops out of Iraq. I have introduced
legislation that would do just that, and I will continue looking for
every opportunity to bring up my bill for a vote. But I will support
this resolution because it avoids the mistakes of previous proposals
to address Iraq. It does not allow the President’s misguided
policies to continue. It does not tacitly re-authorize the war. And
it does not focus solely on the so-called “surge.” This
is binding legislation that would bring to an end our involvement
in perhaps the greatest foreign policy mistake in our country’s
history.
Some of my colleagues continue to argue that Congress should defer
to the Commander in Chief when it comes to Iraq, that we should give
him the opportunity to change course in Iraq, or that we should allow
his escalation plan the chance to succeed. Those arguments ignore
our congressional responsibilities. Congress authorized this war and
it is in our power to bring it to a close. More importantly, we have
not just the power but the responsibility to end a war that is draining
vital national security resources in pursuit of a goal that cannot
be achieved militarily. The political problems that are driving much
of the insurgency and sectarian strife in Iraq are tragic and important.
They require the attention of U.S. policy-makers. They do not require
– in fact, they cannot be solved by – a massive and indefinite
U.S. military presence in Iraq.
Some of my colleagues raise the specter of dire consequences if we
redeploy U.S. forces from Iraq. That is precisely why we need a strategic
approach to redeployment, one that addresses ongoing instability and
other threats with our intelligence, diplomatic, economic and, in
a limited manner, military capabilities. Not only is the continuation
of this war not going to end sectarian and insurgent violence, it
puts off the day when we develop a comprehensive strategy for Iraq
that is sustainable and fits squarely within the larger struggle of
fighting al Qaeda.
As long as the President’s policies continue, our troops will
continue to put their lives on the line, our constituents will continue
putting billions of their dollars into this war, our military readiness
will continue to erode, our Guard and Reserve members will continue
to face heavy burdens, and our ability to respond to an array of national
security challenges will continue to suffer. From Somalia to Afghanistan
to the ongoing fight against al Qaeda, we face threats and challenges
that require serious attention and resources. Right now, far too much
of both are being spent on a single country. It is this single-minded
and self-defeating policy that needs to end, and it is up to Congress
to do so.
Time and again, the President has made it clear that nothing –
not the wishes of the American people, not the advice of military
and foreign policy experts, not the concerns of members of both parties
– will dissuade him from pursuing policies in Iraq that are
not working. Faced with a clear mandate from the voters last November,
he stalled for time, before announcing not just a continuation but
an escalation of his policies. Congress cannot wait for the President
to change course – we need to change the course ourselves.
This resolution recognizes, and acts on, that reality. It would effectively
terminate the misguided resolution authorizing force in Iraq, while
allowing a minimal number of troops to remain to perform very limited
functions: protecting personnel and infrastructure, training and equipping
Iraqi forces and conducting targeted counter-terrorism operations.
The latter provision is a particular priority of mine, which is why
my legislation includes the exact same language. Clearly, the U.S.
has an ongoing role to play in addressing the terrorist threat in
Iraq. While Iraq was not a hot-bed of terrorism before the President
led us to war in that country, al Qaeda and its allies are trying
to use the anger and frustrations unleashed by that war to their advantage.
Like Afghanistan and Somalia, Iraq will need to be closely monitored
to ensure that it does not become a failed state and breeding ground
for terrorism. And we must be prepared to pursue targeted missions
to take out terrorists. But maintaining 140,000 U.S. troops in Iraq
is not the way to defeat al Qaeda. And military operations of any
size will only succeed if they are combined with other measures –
including diplomatic, economic and intelligence measures – as
part of a comprehensive strategy for defeating the terrorists who
threaten our country. Al Qaeda is not a one-country franchise –
it is a global threat that requires a global response.
The Reid resolution would require the President to begin redeploying
combat forces not essential to the three limited functions within
120 days, with a goal of finishing redeployment by the end of March
2008. While I support a faster redeployment with a firm deadline,
these provisions are binding and would make clear that the President’s
commitment to an open-ended, massive military mission in Iraq is over.
That is what the American people want, and that is what this Congress
should ensure.
Regardless of what happens this week, I believe that the introduction
of this resolution with the cosponsorship of some 41 Senators represents
a significant step toward ending the war. The overwhelming majority
of Democrats are saying that the war must come to a close and that
they are prepared to take binding steps to do just that. The question
each of us will face as this debate continues is how to best end our
involvement in the war and redeploy our troops. I look forward to
the opportunity to offer an amendment to the upcoming supplemental
that would use Congress’s appropriations power to require safe
redeployment of our troops. While I do not agree with much of what
is said by those in this body who continue to defend a disastrous
war, they are right about one point – if we are serious about
opposing the war, we must be serious about ending funding for the
war.
Mr. President, I am pleased that the Senate has voted to allow debate
on the Reid resolution to go forward. Unfortunately, however, some
in this body continue to make arguments that undermine the ability
of Congress to have a serious discussion of the Iraq war. They fail
to recognize that this body has an obligation to address the most
pressing issue facing the country today, and to respond to the overwhelming
sentiment of our constituents. They purport to defend the President’s
prerogatives, and the morale and well-being of our troops, but their
rhetoric has the effect of trying to stifle open and honest debate.
While I cannot speak for the President, I am confident that our troops,
and our constituents, are ready for this debate. They know that, in
a democracy like ours, discussion of major policy issues can and should
be conducted openly. So I am glad that the Senate is beginning such
a discussion today, and I will continue pushing this body to finally
bring to a close our involvement in a war that has been a disaster
on so many fronts.
I yield the floor.
Audio
Only
|
