National Defense Authorization Act For Fiscal Year 2017

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. MURPHY. 4299.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. MURPHY. Mr. President, not a lot of Americans know this, but we are at war in the Middle East. We are part of the Saudi-led coalition that is in the middle of a very dangerous and catastrophic war inside Yemen. The Saudi-led campaign inside Yemen began on March 26, 2015. The Houthis, a group within Yemen, had captured the capital in September of 2014. The Saudi-led campaign, of which the United States is a member, had intended to push the Houthis out of the capital.

The war has been absolutely devastating from both a humanitarian perspective and a U.S. national security perspective. Senator Paul and I have submitted an amendment that I will not call up right now--but I may do so later in the proceedings--which would place some very reasonable conditions on the U.S. participation in this coalition, and in particular on the U.S. transfer of munitions to Saudi Arabia in order to continue this campaign.

What is the status of this civil war inside Yemen today? Well, first of all, as I mentioned, it has been an absolute humanitarian disaster. The war has left 3,000 civilians dead, and the total number of deaths is 6,200. At this time 80 percent of Yemen's population is wholly dependent on international humanitarian relief because they don't have adequate food, water, or medical care.

The capital, Sanaa, has been without electricity or running water for over a year. The capital of this country has had no electricity or running water for over a year. Nearly the entire population of an entire country, Yemen, is now dependent on international humanitarian aid in order to subsist.

During this time, the U.N. has documented 101 attacks on Yemeni schools and hospitals, 48 of which were attributed to this coalition- led bombing campaign that the United States is a part of. Hundreds of health facilities have closed due to damage and lack of fuel for generators, supplies, and shortage of medical personnel.

There have been multiple reports of cluster bombs--U.S. made cluster bombs being used in or near civilian populations. The United States has enabled this campaign. It would not happen without U.S. participation. There would not be a Saudi-led bombing campaign in Yemen without the United States. Why? Well, first of all, it is billions of dollars in U.S. weapons and U.S. munitions that are being dropped inside Yemen, including those cluster bombs. It is our intelligence that is providing the basis, the foundation, for all the targeting that is being done. One can argue that targeting has been dramatically insufficient given the number of civilian casualties, but there would be little way for the Saudis to do targeting at all without U.S. intelligence. It is Air Forces Central Command that has flown 709 air-to-air refueling sorties, offloading 26 million pounds of fuel to coalition aircraft. It is American refueling missions that allow for the coalition planes to fly. So the United States is an indispensable part of this coalition; thus, the United States is at war inside Yemen today, and very few people are talking about it. But we should, because in addition to a U.S. and Saudi-led coalition resulting in the death of thousands of civilians inside Yemen, this war is in direct contravention with U.S. national security interests.

First, the damage done to U.S. credibility in the region and amongst Muslim populations should be obvious to all of us when it is our bombs that are killing civilians. If you talk to Yemeni Americans, they will tell you that in Yemen this is not a Saudi bombing campaign; this is a U.S.-Saudi bombing campaign, so every death inside Yemen is attributed to the United States. We need to accept that as a consequence of our participation in this campaign.

Secondly, this coalition has made a very purposeful decision to target the Houthis instead of targeting terrorist groups, such as AQAP, which have used this civil war to expand their base of operations. The coalition has made a very purposeful decision to target the Houthis instead of targeting ISIS, which had virtually no footprint in Yemen before this bombing campaign and now is growing by the day.

Here is what the State Department's annual counterterrorism report states about the civil war inside Yemen:

AQAP benefitted during 2015 from the conflict in Yemen by significantly expanding its presence in the southern and eastern governorates. . . . The group was able to increase its recruiting and expand its safe haven in Yemen. It also insinuated itself among multiple factions on the ground, which has made it more difficult to counter.

I almost want to read that again because what our own counterterrorism report has told us is that the U.S. intervention in Yemen has resulted in the dramatic growth in the strength of AQAP, an element of Al Qaeda, a named enemy of the United States.

We don't have a resolution that commits the United States to war against the Houthis. We have never given the administration the power to fight the Houthis. We have given the administration the power to fight Al Qaeda. There is still a pending effective authorization of war against Al Qaeda. Inside Yemen, there are the Houthis and there is Al Qaeda. A Saudi-led campaign, with participation from the United States, is fighting the Houthis--not a named enemy of the United States--while largely ignoring AQAP, which has grown in scale and scope.

The State Department further affirms that both AQAP and ISIL have ``carried out hundreds of attacks'' in Yemen last year, including suicide bombings, car bombings, assassinations, et cetera, et cetera.

So why are we doing this? Why is the United States relatively quietly facilitating a Saudi-led bombing campaign in Yemen that is in contravention to our national security interests? Well, there are a lot of guesses as to why.

One is that as a consequence of the Iran nuclear agreement, we have to make a renewed commitment to the Saudis to push back on Iranian influence in and around the region. There is no doubt that there is a very direct connection between the Houthis and the Iranians. Houthis are not an Iranian proxy, but there is a link, and there are going to be times where I would support U.S. efforts to push back on Iranian influence in the region. But in this instance, there is an indirect connection between the Houthis and the Iranians and all sorts of damage done to U.S. credibility and national security interests by participating in this coalition in the way that we are today.

The second argument is that if the United States weren't involved, the targeting would be even worse. There wouldn't be 3,000 civilian deaths; there would be 20,000 civilian deaths if the United States were not helping. Well, that may be true, but that is not an invitation to be involved in a civil war, because U.S. intelligence and targeting could probably always mean that fewer civilians would be killed. The fact is that it is likely that Saudi Arabia wouldn't engage in this conflict or bombing campaign at all if it weren't for U.S. support.

I think it is time for this body to do some oversight on a conflict that has been raging for over a year with billions of U.S. dollars at stake, the consequence being the dramatic increase of the power of terrorist organizations that have plots against the United States. Remember, AQAP is the most lethal and most dangerous element of Al Qaeda when it comes to potential threats directly to the U.S. homeland. It is AQAP that sits at the pinnacle of Al Qaeda's potential ability to strike the United States. Yet this Congress has remained almost completely silent as a bombing campaign funded and orchestrated in part by the United States has allowed for AQAP to get stronger.

God forbid that AQAP is successful in attacking the United States and that they do it from a base in Yemen that was made possible by U.S. paid for and directed bombs dropped on that country.

I think the White House has recently recognized the danger of continuing along this same pace. There are reports that the White House recently placed a hold on a pending arms transfer of U.S.-origin cluster munitions to Saudi Arabia over concerns about their use in Yemen in areas inhabited by civilians. But we have to do our due diligence and our oversight as well. If we are really serious about upholding our article I responsibilities to oversee the foreign policy of this Nation, then we have to add some conditions as well.

The amendment that I have helped offer to the NDAA would place two pretty simple conditions on our support for the Saudi-led coalition. Importantly, my amendment doesn't prohibit the United States from continuing to fund this effort. If I had my druthers, I certainly would argue that we at least take a pause, but I understand that the consensus may not be here in this body to temporarily or permanently halt our support for this campaign.

All I am suggesting is that we place effectively two conditions on our financial support and logistical support for this campaign inside Yemen:

No. 1, that the Saudi-led coalition make a commitment that it is doing everything necessary to reduce civilian casualties and that they are conducting this campaign in concert with international humanitarian law. I can't figure out why anybody would oppose that. Let's just say that if we are going to fund this bombing campaign, those we are funding should make a commitment to try to kill fewer civilians instead of more civilians.

Second, those in the coalition should make a commitment to use U.S. support to fight terrorist groups--Al Qaeda and ISIS--instead of just fighting the Houthis. The United States isn't at war with the Houthis. We haven't declared war on that group. We have declared war on Al Qaeda, and Al Qaeda is growing in its lethality, influence, and territorial control inside Yemen.

Another condition, as contemplated by our amendment, is to simply have the President certify as a condition of continued support for the bombing campaign that the coalition is fighting terrorist groups alongside the Houthis.

I think if I had 100 different conversations with Members of the Senate, I can't imagine there would be a lot of objection because of course we want to fight terrorism. Of course that is our priority, not the Houthis. And of course we want to do everything possible to reduce civilian casualties.

I am grateful to Senator McCain, Senator Reed, and also Senator Cardin and Senator Corker, who have some jurisdiction here, too, that they are willing to take a look at this amendment. I am not offering it today because we are contemplating ways to structure the language to make it acceptable to the chair and to the ranking member.

I will end this with a plea for the Senate to get back in the game when it comes to the oversight of this administration's foreign policy, in particular in places like Yemen. We have been out to lunch when it comes to authorizations of military force for a long time. There is no authorization right now to fight ISIS, but we are doing it. There is a decade-old authorization to fight Al Qaeda that we should renew. If we are going to be involved in spending all of this money and all of this time putting our soldiers and airmen at risk in the Yemen campaign, then we should authorize that, too, and if we don't authorize it, then the administration shouldn't do it.

So this is not an authorization I am proposing; it is simply a couple of commonsense conditions. I hope we can find a pathway to get a vote on this amendment, and I hope this body has the courage in the future to step up and call a spade a spade and do our constitutional duty, perform our constitutional responsibility to provide oversight of the foreign policy by this administration.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source