Laken Riley Act

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, earlier this week, President Biden went to the State Department and offered a final assessment of his record on foreign policy. He insisted that his leadership had ``increased America's power in every dimension,'' that we were ``stronger at home, stronger in the world, and . . . more capable . . . than we have been in a long time.''

I suspect the only people who buy that assessment were right there in the room with the President. No doubt, those watching from further afield found those remarks unconvincing. What most of us saw was a final rearguard action to cover for an administration that has been in retreat for 4 straight years.

The President's tough talk about Putin is undone by his chronic and well-documented fear of escalation--the hesitation and half measures that kept critical tools out of Ukrainian hands when they could have made a difference. Even his most senior aides inadvertently acknowledged the truth. In a legacy-shopping column in the New York Times, Secretary Blinken and Secretary Austin say it was ``steadfast American leadership'' that rallied the world to ``help Ukraine survive the Kremlin's imperial onslaught.''

To help Ukraine survive. Not to help defeat aggression, not to help restore sovereignty, not to help degrade the power of a major adversary--just to let Ukraine's resistance languish on the slow drip of critical capabilities moving far slower than the speed of relevance.

Or take this administration's approach to the Middle East. On Monday, the President was optimistic about the prospects of defeating Iran's terror proxies and restoring credible deterrence under which Israel and its neighbors could live in peace. But absent entirely was any recognition that it was Israel, not the United States, that has created this geopolitical opportunity.

And no recognition that Israel has done so in spite of the administration's best efforts to restrain a sovereign ally's self- defense. In the 468 days since the horrors of October 7, the President's public scolding of a close ally under attack and refusal to check the growing anti-Israel streak poisoning his party have exposed his ironclad commitment to Israel as something of a hollow gesture.

This, after a disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan had given allies and partners enough reason to doubt the strength of America's word--and his administration's competence.

And behind President Biden's bluster about ``winning the worldwide competition'' with China is a record of paltry investment in the hard power America needs to meet aggression and to reassure our allies.

For 4 straight years, he submitted defense budget requests that failed to even keep pace with inflation, let alone the pacing threat of the PRC.

While America's primary long-term strategic competitor extended its lead in developing and producing lethal capabilities, the Biden administration focused on climate diplomacy. And its signature climate protectionism picked avoidable trade fights with allies and partners we will need to deter or defeat Chinese aggression.

In light of the PRC's headway and closer alignment with other adversaries, America's warfighters are no better equipped today to deter and defeat aggression than we were 4 years ago and no more certain that the institutions designed to support them actually have their backs.

And from Europe to the Middle East to the Taiwan Strait, the forces that wish harm to America, to our people, to our values, to our interests, and to our allies have seized an opportunity.

On Monday, President Biden's foreign policy will end, and a new Commander in Chief will have to contend with his staggering failures. A new administration will have to clean up the mess their predecessors made of American power and American credibility.

It is no secret that the incoming national security team will take a distinctly different approach. The President-elect has expressed repeatedly his intention to reorient American national security decision making around a simple guiding principle: peace through strength. And he would be right to do so.

His administration's work must begin with restoring American hard power and bolstering our deterrent. The world they will inherit is more dangerous and more hostile to U.S. security interests than the one he left to President Biden 4 years ago.

The free world is less likely to trust our commitments, and the authoritarians convening against us are more likely to scoff at our threats. Russia, Iran, North Korea, and the PRC are finding more and more that the desire to weaken the United States and undermine the order we lead is a shared objective and one toward which they are now working together in coordination to weaken the United States.

As I have counseled the President-elect already, we cannot afford to discount this coordination. No matter how loudly others press him to embrace retreat and retrenchment, America cannot address grave threats to our interests a la carte. And as I have said repeatedly, there is no language these adversaries understand more clearly than strength.

There is no surer way to restore meaningful deterrence against them than by investing in our capacity and proving our willingness to impose devastating costs.

It is common to refer to today's challenges as the gravest America has faced since World War II, but we certainly don't invest like we believe that is the case.

So here is a good way of looking at it: Beating the axis in World War II meant spending 37 percent of our GDP on defense; in the Korean War, it took nearly 14 percent; the height of Vietnam, 9 percent; the Reagan buildup at 6 percent. Today we are spending 3 percent of GDP on the arsenal of democracy.

Peace through strength must be more than a pithy phrase--vaguely tough-sounding but functionally benign. It must instead stand for a clear and measurable commitment to rebuild the arsenal of democracy and the most lethal fighting forces in the world.

As chairman of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, I take the President-elect's commitments very seriously, and I know he knows that deterring a war is cheaper than fighting one. And I stand ready to work closely with this administration in the current urgent work ahead, rebuilding the capabilities and capacity we need in order to credibly pursue peace through strength.

That work, of course, begins with assembling an experienced and well- qualified team. The incoming administration is right to expect swift consideration of Cabinet nominations and broad deference on the confirmation of nominees whose credentials and records prove them worthy of the highest public trust and whose policy views align with the administration's goal.

Nominees whose professional experience is commensurate with the responsibilities of the office and who have demonstrated in detail their command of relevant policy will certainly have my vote. I intend to support a large slate of nominees who satisfy these conditions. In particular, I will vote to confirm nominees to senior national security roles whose record and experience will make them immediate assets, not liabilities, in the pursuit of peace through strength.

Our chance to turn the page on the damage of the Biden administration's record simply cannot come soon enough.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source