Amendment to Montreal Protocol (``Kigali Amendment'')

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. CORNYN. Madam President, for each of the past 61 years straight, the Senate has passed the National Defense Authorization Act. I still remember the Presiding Officer's predecessor, John McCain, who used to rail on the Senate to get this done and making the very correct point that this should be the No. 1 priority of the U.S. Congress--making sure that our men and women in uniform received the training, the support, and the weapons they need in order to keep America safe.

The annual Defense bill is part of Congress's commitment to give our men and women in uniform the resources they need to surmount the growing threats of today and prepare for the ones that inevitably will come tomorrow.

As we know here in the Senate, the global threat landscape is not getting easier. It is getting more and more dangerous. Some of the changes happen quickly and can be traced to a single moment in time.

For example, September 11, 2001, changed everything in our conversation and our acts to fight terrorism across the world. That single day and that single act forced us to reexamine our longstanding military paradigm and change course as rapidly as we could.

But other threats grow over time. Just look at the rise of the People's Republic of China. Over the course of roughly four decades, China has transformed itself from a poor, isolated country to the world's second largest economy. Its wealth is used to finance a powerful military, with increasingly aggressive and hostile acts.

Looking back over the last year or so, it is remarkable to consider how much has happened and how quickly the global threat picture has shifted.

Last year at this time, American troops were still on the ground in Afghanistan, but President Biden made the decision to retreat ahead of the 20th anniversary of September 11, and our servicemembers and diplomats were preparing for what we assumed would be an orderly withdrawal. There wasn't much optimism about the long-term fate of the Afghan Government, but it was expected to hold out for at least 6 months following our withdrawal.

At the same time, tensions between Russia and Ukraine were high, but nothing really much new. The countries have had a long, tense relationship since the collapse of the Soviet Union, but there didn't seem to be any reason for immediate alarm. Ukrainian cities were as vibrant, lively, and free as ever.

In a little over a year's time, though, all of that has changed. The Taliban took control of Afghanistan before our troops even exited, leading to a chaotic exit and the loss of 13 heroic servicemembers and other Americans left behind.

In this period of time, Russia has launched an unprovoked war on Ukraine, bringing death and destruction to the Ukrainian people. Over the past several months, thousands of Ukrainian civilians have died and more than 13 million have been displaced. Europe is now experiencing the largest refugee crisis since World War II.

To finance its ongoing war machine, Russia is developing even closer ties to communist China. Meanwhile, North Korea has declared itself a nuclear weapons state. Iran appears to be inching even closer to acquiring a nuclear weapon, and China's threats against Taiwan have only grown more dangerous in this period of time.

It is striking to consider how much has changed in such a short period. Last summer, it would have been nearly impossible for us to predict that this is where we would be some 14 months later.

I am reminded of former Secretary of Defense Bob Gates' words in 2011. He said:

When it comes to predicting the nature and location of our next military engagements, since Vietnam, our record has been perfect. We haven't gotten it right once.

Of course, he is absolutely correct. It is impossible to anticipate the challenges that face us and that are on the horizon, but that doesn't mean we should sit idly by and hope that we are ready for what is coming. There is simply no security in that sort of fantasy. We need to start taking actions today to ensure that we are prepared for whatever comes knocking at our door.

Everybody knows that in order to secure our defense and be prepared to deter aggression from aggressive actors we need money. We need to make sure that we have the weapons that are needed not only to supply countries like Ukraine, not only to replenish the supply from our NATO allies that have been, in turn, supplying weapons to Ukraine, but we need to be ready for whatever comes knocking at our door.

Our military leaders need to plan and train every single day for the unknown, and that is exactly why a strong, on-time National Defense Authorization Act is absolutely critical. Now more than ever, we need to take stock of evolving threats and start preparing.

One of the problems that Britain faced in World War II is they did not heed Winston Churchill's warning about the growing military strength and ambitions of Nazi Germany. Britain, in the end, as a result, was hanging on by a thread, and that is where the United States got involved in becoming the arsenal of democracy in the Lend-Lease Program, which provided the Brits the military equipment they needed, the aviation platforms, and the weapons in order to defend themselves and to survive until the United States got involved in World War II, following the attack at Pearl Harbor by the Japanese.

Over the last 20 years, we have developed a military that is used to fighting unconventional, asymmetrical threats, like insurgent groups in the Middle East. We have been focused on the war on terrorism since 9/ 11, but things have changed in the interim. Now, a conflict with China or Russia seems more likely.

To prevent or to prevail in such a conflict, we need a more conventional, highly technological modern military.

In addition to determining what capabilities we need, we also have to ask ourselves whether our defense industrial base--that arsenal of democracy, as Franklin Roosevelt called it in World War II--whether our defense industrial base can even support the production of what our military will need to prepare for in the future.

There is clearly a lot of work that needs to be done, but, like a lot of things, it can't happen overnight. That is why it is so important that we get started today. In order for the military to invest in these new programs and capabilities to deter Chinese and Russian aggression against American interests and American allies and in order to send the demand signal to our industrial base for new and emerging defense requirements, we have to pass the National Defense Authorization Act.

It is not just the long-term threats that we need to address. We need to close the near-term security gaps too. If another conflict came knocking at our door today, we would be at a tremendous disadvantage; and that is, as I said, because the United States has been supplying weapons to Ukraine to defend its own sovereignty. But when we do that, that means those weapons are not available to us should President Xi decide to invade Taiwan or some other military conflict pops up around the world.

We provided Ukraine with unprecedented defense aid, including Javelins, Stingers, grenade launchers, small arms, ammunition, and much more. This assistance, to be sure, is not a handout. This is not a charity project. Like our allies, the United States has made a strategic decision to invest in the outcome. It is not just that we want Ukraine to win this war; we also need Russia to lose. We cannot risk a Russian victory that will embolden the Kremlin to push its fight even farther West.

There is no question that this is the right thing to do, both strategically and morally, but we must remain clear-eyed about the risks that our assistance carries. Every piece of equipment or weapon that we send is one less that we have ourselves in our arsenal. We need to ensure that the assistance that we provide does not end up weakening our own military readiness. The cards are already stacked against us, and we certainly don't need to weaken our own hand.

That is why Senator Shaheen and I have introduced the Securing American ARMS Act, which will help us replenish our defense stockpiles more quickly. The Pentagon is already working toward this goal, but there are a lot of bureaucratic hurdles and just redtape that stand in the way.

The Defense Department can't place an order for more Javelins and have them show up at the Pentagon 5 to 7 business days later. It doesn't work like that. The process of purchasing, manufacturing, and deploying lethal aid takes a lot of time which, frankly, we don't have.

That is where the Securing American ARMS Act comes in. This bill will remove some of those time-consuming hurdles to allow the Defense Department to fast-track the procurement process. It will allow us to provide critical support for our partners and allies now and in the future without compromising our own national defense.

I appreciate Senator Shaheen working with me on this bill, which now has more than a dozen bipartisan cosponsors. I am offering this legislation as an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act, and I hope my colleagues will join me in supporting its inclusion in the final bill.

Now more than ever, a well-prepared and well-funded military is an imperative. The rapid changes in the threat landscape should serve as a wake-up call for anyone who thinks we can carry on with the status quo.

For our forces to continue fighting and defeating evil in every corner of the world, we need to provide that funding. They need the stability, and they need the unwavering support of the U.S. Congress.

As new powers rise and old powers fall, our country must be prepared for whatever changes are on the horizon. Congress has a critical role in that preparation, and we can't ignore our responsibility. We need to pass a strong National Defense Authorization Act as soon as possible, and I would urge Senator Schumer, the Senate majority leader, to bring that bill to the floor as soon as possible.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source