Providing for Congressional Disapproval Under Chapter 8 of Title United States Code, of the Rule Submitted By the Environmental Protection Agency Relating to ``Air Plan Approval; South Dakota;

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. TILLIS. Mr. President, I appreciate the opportunity to come to the floor and talk about a couple of things.

Earlier today, we had a classified briefing on the situation in Venezuela. I have to say that I am very impressed and thankful for the expertise, the resources, and the work that was done by the men and women on the ground. It was truly an extraordinary operation that couldn't have been done by any other nation other than the United States.

As for those who were injured, I understand they are recovering and that some have been released from the hospital. I hope they heal up safely and that they know that we are eternally grateful for their bringing a transnational criminal to justice--hopefully so--as he goes through our court system. NATO

Mr. President, I am also here to talk about what I think is amateurish behavior with respect to the treatment of our NATO allies. It has to start with an interview that I saw with one of the President's senior policy advisers, Stephen Miller, on CNN, a couple of nights ago.

Mr. Miller said that the U.S. Government--``obviously, Greenland should be part of the United States.''

That is absurd. We have to go back and take a look at the relationship to Greenland.

Why am I coming to the floor, a Senator from North Carolina? Because since 2018, I have been the Republican leader for the Senate NATO Observer Group. I have gone to every NATO conference. I have gone to the security conference. I have met with almost all of the leaders of the countries that are part of the 32-nation coalition known as NATO, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

Now, let's talk about why I think it was an amateurish comment and something that a Deputy Chief of Staff and senior policy adviser should not have taken the position on.

No. 1, he doesn't speak for the U.S. Government. He speaks for the President of the United States, and on that basis, he can. But when he says that the U.S. Government thinks that Greenland should be a part of NATO, he should talk to people like me who have an election certificate and a vote in the U.S. Senate, because I know what he either doesn't know or he should know, and if he did know, I can't imagine why he would make the comments that he did the other night in a television interview.

Let me give you some facts about Denmark, for example. Denmark, which has responsibility for Greenland--although, Greenland is an autonomous territory under NATO. It is a part of the Kingdom of Denmark.

But let's talk about Denmark for a minute. Denmark was one of NATO's most disproportionately high contributors in Afghanistan, relative to its population, size, and force structure.

What do I mean there? There has been one time in the 75-year history of NATO that the NATO allies responded to the article 5 commitment, which means when one of our NATO allies is attacked, we go there to defend them. It has been exercised one time in the history of the alliance to come to the aid of the United States and the War on Terror in Afghanistan.

Since their first mission began, more than 18,000 Danish soldiers have deployed to Afghanistan with American and British forces. Throughout their deployments in Afghanistan, 43 of their soldiers lost their lives fighting alongside American soldiers, defending our freedom and holding the Taliban and al-Qaida responsible for the events of September 11.

Forty-three soldiers losing their lives--there are only about five or six NATO countries who lost more. And what is remarkable about this is this is a country of about 6 million people. On a per capita basis, Denmark suffered over six times the fatality rate of Germany and more than three times the fatality rate of France, matching or exceeding the losses of much larger allies with far greater resources.

So despite its small military, Denmark has deployed forces to some of the most dangerous, kinetic combat zones, particularly Helmand Province, fighting alongside UK units at the height of the insurgency. Danish forces accepted frontline combat roles--some lost their lives as a result of it--not low-risk symbolic missions.

For a small democracy, sustaining this level of risk over more than a decade reflects a serious commitment to NATO and a serious commitment to the safety and security of the United States.

Marines be printed in the Record.

Since their first mission began, more than 18,000 Danish soldiers have deployed to Afghanistan with American and British Forces. Throughout their deployments in Afghanistan, 43 soldiers were killed in action.

That is among the highest per-capita losses in the Alliance (second only to Estonia).

On a per-capita basis, Denmark suffered over six times the fatality rate of Germany and more than three times that of France, matching or exceeding losses of much larger Allies with far greater resources.

Despite its small military, Denmark deployed forces to some of the most kinetic combat zones, particularly Helmand Province, fighting alongside UK units at the height of the insurgency. Danish forces accepted front-line combat roles, not low-risk or symbolic missions.

For a small democracy, sustaining this level of risk over more than a decade reflects serious Alliance resolve.

Casualties (by current NATO members):

United States: 2,461; United Kingdom: 457; Canada: 159; France: 90; Germany: 62; Italy: 53; Poland: 44; Denmark: 43; Spain: 35; Romania: 27; Netherlands: 25; Turkey: 15; Czech Republic: 14; Norway: 10; Estonia: 9; Hungary: 7; Sweden: 5 (partner at the time); Latvia: 4; Slovakia: 3; Finland: 2 (partner at the time); Portugal: 2; Albania: 2; Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Lithuania, Montenegro: 1 each; Greece, Iceland, Luxembourg, North Macedonia, Slovenia: 0 recorded deaths.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. TILLIS. Mr. President, some people around here call me cranky. I have got a couple of buddies that call me cranky.

Do you know what makes me cranky? Stupid. What makes me cranky is when people don't do their homework. What makes me cranky is when we tarnish the extraordinary execution of a mission of fully supporting Venezuela by turning around and making insane comments about how it is our right to have territory owned by the Kingdom of Denmark.

Folks, amateur hour is over. You don't speak on behalf of this U.S. Senator or the Congress. You can say it may be the position of the President of the United States that Greenland should be a part of the United States, but it is not the position of this government because we are a coequal branch. And if that were to come to pass, there would be a vote on the floor to make it real, not this surreal sort of environment that some Deputy Chief of Staff thinks was cute to say on TV.

So you want to get me back to thanking the President for all the good things he is doing? Then give him good advice.

One of two things happened with Greenland. Either, one, the President came up with the idea that maybe we should have Greenland as a part of our assets, and somebody said that is a great idea, versus saying: Mr. President, take a look at our alliance. Take a look at the most important alliance in the history of the United States, the NATO alliance. This could actually destabilize that, Mr. President. Mr. President, you should know, at one point, we had 17 military installations in Greenland, and they would be happy to have us back. They are not refusing to allow us to have access to project power into the Arctic. We could do it without taking over a NATO country.

That is the sort of advice that should have been given. So if the President thought it was a good idea, then he needs the experts to say: Mr. President, that is why this is not a good idea.

I would defy you to find any credible general with a star on his shoulder who would say that it is because they understand that the NATO alliance is what has kept this Nation largely--or this world--largely safe for over 75 years.

The flip side could be that Mr. Miller or somebody else there said: Hey, this would be cool. Let's take over Greenland. It will be like a big aircraft carrier.

Well, that is stupid too. I am sick of stupid. I want good advice for this President because I want this President to have a good legacy. This nonsense on what is going on with Greenland is a distraction from the good work he is doing, and the amateurs who said it was a good idea should lose their jobs.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source