Sale of Fighter Jets to Pakistan

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. MURPHY. Madam President, I thank Senator Cardin and Senator Corker for how diligently they have worked over the course of the last several months, as both of them have stated on the floor, to make this sale much more palatable and to address many of the concerns that both the chairman and the ranking member had about the nature of the sale and this long history of conflict with the Pakistanis when it comes to our mutual concern of confronting terrorism.

The reason I come to the floor is because this body historically has had a history of deep engagement on questions of major arms sales, especially in regions as dangerous and as complicated as the Middle East. As it stands today, virtually the only two Members who are deeply and meaningfully engaged in the question of attaching conditions to these very important arms sales are the ranking member and the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee. I trust their ability to hold the administration's feet to the fire--whether it be the Pakistanis', the Saudis', the Emirates' feet to the fire as they request weapons from the United States, but this body writ large has to get back into the game of providing meaningful oversight on a radical and significant increase in the amount of arms sales the United States is providing to the rest of the world.

From 2011 to 2015, our arms exports have increased by 27 percent. When you compare these two periods, it is striking to note that during that period of time our arms sales to the Middle East have increased by 61 percent.

This Senate has, at its best moments, raised important questions about these sales. I bring you back to the 1980s, when the Senate raised important questions and concerns about the sale of AWACS to Saudi Arabia. On this side of the aisle, it was Senator Biden and Senator Kerry opposing those sales. Those motions of disapproval were ultimately unsuccessful, but through that process of deep congressional introspection, new conditions were placed on the sale of that technology to the Saudis that ended up a much better and safer deal for American national security interests and for the security of our partners in the region.

With respect to the specific sale of F-16 to Pakistan, my colleagues have already pointed out--and I think Senator Paul will do a better job than I of pointing out--the ways in which our aims of fighting terrorism have been contradictory with the actions of the Pakistanis, whether it be their unwillingness to confront the Haqqani network, whether it be their oftentimes open coordination with elements of the Taliban that the United States is fighting inside Afghanistan. The Pakistanis have been an unreliable partner over the course of the last 10 years in the fight against extremism, but what I worry more about is that these F-16s will provide cover, will provide a substitute for truly meaningful action inside Pakistan to take on the roots of extremism. Frankly, it is too late in many respects to beat these extremist groups if they are so big, so powerful, so deadly that you have to bomb them from the air.

Today there are 20,000 madrassa, religious schools. Many, if not most, are funded by the Saudis, the Gulf States, and the Iranians and are often preaching an intolerant version of Islam that when perverted, forms the basis of the extremist groups the United States is fighting in the Middle East and throughout the world.

The Pakistanis have done little to nothing to try to reduce the influence of those madrassas, of those religious schools, and of the foreign funding that often breeds this intolerant version of religious teaching. In a sense, we let them off the hook by selling them new weapons systems that will, in effect, constantly force the Pakistanis to chase their own tail.

I think it is important to understand that the Pakistanis are not making the real meaningful contributions to rooting out extremism, and just handing out weapon systems on the back end doesn't do the job.

I would point this body to the path forward. This is an incredibly important conversation that we are having with respect to the F-16s, but we have other pending military sales that will directly involve the United States in regional civil wars and conflicts, unbeknownst often to the American people.

One of them is a major military sales agreement with the Saudis that would eventually resupply them for their bombing campaign in Yemen, a campaign that has killed hundreds of thousands of civilians, that has stopped emergency relief from reaching those who have been the victims of this humanitarian disaster, and frankly that has created space for the expansion of ISIS and Al Qaeda, groups that want to do damage and attack the United States, inside the newly ungovernable territory of Yemen. Yet we are going to be confronted with another military sale to Saudi Arabia that would double down the U.S. commitment on one side of a civil war that if you look at the reality, doesn't seem to be advancing our national security interests. It doesn't seem to be helping us win the fight against ISIS and Al Qaeda.

I hope that after the break we will have the opportunity to discuss that military sale as well because it is time for Congress to get back into the game when it comes to our constitutional responsibility to oversee the foreign policy led by the executive branch. It is time for Congress to start having a meaningful impact when it comes to these massive arms sales that often undermine U.S. national security and come without the necessary conditions to change the reality of the decisions made in places such as Pakistan.

I am going to support Senator Paul's resolution today, although I hope in the future we will approach these resolutions of disapproval with a slightly greater degree of subtlety in this respect. This is an outright disapproval. If we vote in favor of it, this sale will not go forward. There is another way. Congress could pass a motion of disapproval with conditions. We could disapprove of a sale to Pakistan pending, for instance, their commitment to join the fight against the Haqqani network; contingent upon, for instance, their movement to implement a law to shut down the worst and most intolerant of the madrasas. I would suggest that should be our path forward when it comes to the sale to the Saudis. Simple conditions could be applied to that resolution--making sure the munitions we are selling to the Saudis aren't used to target civilians inside Yemen; committing the Saudis to open up pathways of humanitarian relief and assistance; a promise that none of the funding from the United States to the partners in the coalition to fight the Houthis will be used to directly aid extremist groups. That is probably the better path forward for this body to take.

This is a very blunt instrument, a resolution of disapproval. I think it is important for some of us to be on record supporting it to show that Congress is getting back in the game when it comes to overseeing this fairly substantial increase in arms sales to our named partners in the Middle East, but I think there is a better way forward. I hope that Senator Paul and others, as we start to go about doing due diligence on future sales, will take a look at maybe a more meaningful contribution this body can take rather than expressing our outright unconditional disapproval. How can we make sure, if these arms sales go forward, that they go forward with conditions attached that are in the best interest of the United States and our partner nations?

Again, I thank Senators Corker and Cardin for their important work in the Foreign Relations Committee, of which I am a member, and I thank Senator Paul for having the courage to bring this resolution to the floor.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source