Emergency Supplemental Appropriations for Iraq and Afghanistan Security and Reconstruction Act, 2004

EMERGENCY SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS FOR IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN SECURITY AND RECONSTRUCTION, 2004

AMENDMENT NO. 1795

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, before proceeding to my remarks about the pending amendment, I point out to Members of the Senate that we are all familiar with the National Endowment for Democracy and the fact that it provides funds to the International Republican Institute and the National Democratic Institute, which operate overseas to help promote democracy, human rights, and all of the things that Americans believe are important.

The National Democratic Institute recently issued a report on Iraq that I think is noteworthy, and I am going to point out
some excerpts from that.

I ask unanimous consent that excerpts from this report be printed in the RECORD.

The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so ordered.

(See exhibit 1.)

Mr. McCONNELL. Former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright currently chairs the National Democratic Institute and she points out:

The past half-century provides ample proof that democracy is more than just another form of government; it is also a powerful generator of international security, prosperity and peace.

According to the NDI, inside Iraq there is an explosion of democratic politics.

.    .    . NDI will find fertile ground for democracy promotion initiatives on a scale not seen since the heady days of the fall of the Berlin wall.

That bears repeating, that the National Democratic Institute finds within Iraq today an explosion of democracy, and fertile ground for democracy promotion initiatives on a scale not seen since the fall of the Berlin wall.

Another finding of the NDI that I think is noteworthy is that the Iraqis are grateful for their liberation. There has been some notion promoted, I think by many in the press, that somehow the Iraqis are sorry that Saddam is gone. The NDI, headed by Madeleine Albright, finds that the Iraqis are grateful for their liberation.

In addition, the NDI finds significant evidence of support for the United States. For example, they say:

In Kirkuk, there was a large painted sign reading "Thank you USA" in English and in Kurdish.

Additionally, the NDI found overwhelming support for liberation, but lack of stability or economic opportunity obviously does erode, to some extent, support for the U.S.

They found that security and jobs are a precondition to democracy. We know that, and that is what this supplemental is all about. They found Iraqi frustrations are due to fear and uncertainty, not hostility toward the United States. This is the National Democratic Institute, headed by Madeleine Albright, which said that Iraqi frustrations are due to fear and uncertainty, not to hostility toward the United States.

The NDI also found that the Iraqis need our help now, and that is what this supplemental is all about. They also found that chaos and slow progress would feed the forces of radicalism, which seems an obvious statement to this Senator, and I believe their findings highlight the fact that time to act on the supplemental is now. That is why this bill is before the Senate and why we are moving forward with this important supplemental to finish the job in Iraq and give the Iraqis a chance to realize their aspirations.

As we all have recognized, the world changed dramatically on September 11, 2001. It changed in that the unprovoked attack on America required that America defend itself from the shadowy network of international terrorism.

To protect American lives and buildings, the President announced his intention to go after international terrorists wherever they were and after the regimes that supported those efforts, whoever they were. He warned that the costs would be high, that patience would be required, but that America would win the struggle.

Today we are here to pay the price of freedom by moving this supplemental forward. Many have already paid the ultimate price for freedom, whether it was soldiers in Iraq or Afghanistan, civilians in the World Trade Towers, passengers in airlines wrestling control from terrorist hijackers, or the passengers themselves giving their own lives. Yes, many have paid the ultimate price of freedom. The question is, Will Congress pay?

Some say the price of freedom is too high and we have already paid too much. So while we have won the war in Iraq, the struggle today is whether America will pay the price to win the peace, just as we did after World War II. This is a question, of course, we have struggled with before.

In the past, we have sometimes won wars but actually lost the peace. But not always. At the end of the Civil War, President Lincoln foreswore revenge, retribution, and reparation payments against the South. His spirit marched on as America paid for the reconstruction of the South, ravaged by the effects of 5 years of a new, more devastating type of warfare. Clearly, if we look at America today, we won that peace.

At the end of World War II, America again won the peace. We did not want the emergence of another Weimar Republic of Germany, which, racked by debt and desolation, would spawn yet another new greater threat. Of course, that was the result after World War I, costing us a second payment of even more lives and paying the price for freedom in World War II. Instead of a failed peace, such as we had after World War I, in 1948 the Marshall plan of aid and trade inaugurated a restoration of Europe, a halt to Communism and an unprecedented expansion of freedom and peace.

This is a picture of President Truman signing the Marshall plan in 1948. Interestingly enough, that was in the middle of a tough Presidential election. It would have been easy for the Republican-controlled Congress to have politicized that effort, to have criticized President Truman for advocating that kind of spending on the reconstruction of Europe, but instead they came together on a bipartisan basis.

Arthur Vandenberg, Joseph Barton, and the other Republicans who were in the majority in the Congress that year joined hands with President Truman and said: Let's make this bipartisan, let's finish the job in Europe, let's do it right and give the Europeans a chance to develop democracy and freedom, something that was lost after World War I.

Today we face the very same challenges. Historians may very well record that now is when the American Millennium began anew, and an unprecedented expansion phase, not of America herself, but of the idea that America represents and shares with all freedom-loving countries.

Through one of history's great ironies, the very ideas that were attacked on September 11, 2001, American ideas like democracy, individual freedom, limited government, and free markets—these ideas when attacked did not retreat but were revitalized, not just here but in countries where history records little evidence of even the most basic human rights.
But now, here, today, the scribes of history can say this is when civilization, freedom, and peace began a new march forward, rather than a stagnant period of isolationism of war, oppression, and decline.

I agree this will be the defining debate of this Congress. As history hangs in the balance, as the world wonders whether
America will promote the freedom and democracy we brought to Western Europe and Japan after World War II, and to Eastern Europe and Russia after the cold war victory, America should look on this debate with hope and fear. America should hope we in Congress will come together to give peace and freedom a birth in a region not known for it, but we fear that politics may prevent that.

The challenge we face today to which I alluded earlier is to come together behind the President's request, like the Congress did on a bipartisan basis for President Truman and the Marshall plan: to give Iraq a true opportunity to become a bastion of democracy and freedom in the Middle East.

This bill signing I referred to earlier was the first of a total of $10.9 billion appropriated for the Marshall plan during 1949 to 1951, to rebuild Europe and Japan. When you adjust that for inflation, that is equivalent to about $83 billion in today's dollars, over 4 times what the President is calling for in the rebuilding of Iraq. The Marshall plan was four times larger than what the President is asking us to do today in rebuilding Iraq. Polling data back in that era, 1948, showed only 68 percent of
Americans had heard of the Marshall plan, and only half of those who had heard of it approved of it. Back in 1948, clearly, spending money to rebuild Europe was not popular, but Republicans and Democrats put aside their differences, rallied behind President Truman and, as I indicated earlier, people like Arthur Vandenberg of Michigan, Charles Eaton of New Jersey, and Joseph Martin of Massachusetts, along with others in a Republican-controlled Congress, joined hands with President Truman to get the job done.

We need leaders like the Vandenbergs and Martins, leaders like those who crossed the aisle to enact President Truman's Marshall plan to rebuild Europe and Japan. We need those leaders today. The election is 13 months away. Let's not start it this soon. Let's do the right thing here in the Senate to give Iraq a real opportunity to achieve its dreams. Let's do what is right for America. The politics will take care of itself in the next year.

What I had hoped for was a high level of bipartisanship. Unfortunately, we have gotten a high level of politics out of all of this. This is the first great military challenge to America in the new millennium. We hear calls out on the Presidential campaign trail for the President's impeachment. One Member of the Senate said that. Or regime change, said another
Member of the Senate running for the Presidency. We heard the war for Iraq was a fraud and that the removal of an unbelievably brutal dictator was described by one candidate as "supposedly" a good thing. We hear there is no chance for military success, like that of World War I, World War II, Korea, the cold war, or Desert Storm, that gave freedom to Western Europe, Japan, North Africa, South Korea, Russia, Eastern Europe, or Kuwait. We are told our military efforts can only end in a Vietnam-style quagmire and failure. We hear that paying the price to win the peace and bring our soldiers home is too much.

And last, and most destructively, we hear every benefit of the doubt given to a brutal dictator, while every conceivable doubt is hurled upon this administration, our intelligence networks, and our allies.

It should not be that way and it doesn't have to be that way. We can come together. The President's plan says yes, let's make aid and trade work together, not just to rebuild Iraq and end the terrorism, but to build a working democratic state based on individual freedom and free markets. That is how to win the peace. But, frankly, in its details, democracy and peace is pretty routine stuff. It doesn't get a lot of press. Winning the war, that gets a lot of press. So do efforts that threaten the peace. But winning the peace itself involves terribly mundane stuff.

For example, taking out a terrorist training camp is news. But building police training academies is not. The former wins the war, the latter wins the peace.

Using bulldozers to cover the populations of whole Iraqi towns in mass graves is part of the horrific terror that gets press coverage. But using garbage trucks to keep towns clean and safe from pestilence and disease is the boredom of peacetime.
When humans are treated as refuse, that is a sign of war. When human refuse is treated, that is a mark of peacetime.
Garbage trucks and police academies are the mundane, boring signposts that peace and democracy are progressing. We see all sorts of routine signs of progress that get no press. Fifty-eight of the largest cities of Iraq have hired police forces. Some 70,000 Iraqis are patrolling the streets of their country. No one reports this—no one. Medical supplies are flowing to hospitals, with regular paychecks going to doctors and nurses. No one is reporting that. Vaccinations are available across the country and antimalaria sprays are proceeding. No one is reporting that. Again, more mundane stuff that makes for peace and progress. Airports are reopening and so are ports. Provisional representative councils are formed in major cities, especially in Baghdad, and 150 newspapers are publishing, with foreign publications, radio and television broadcasts also available. That is a radical change over there, but show me the press clippings covering the progress. I haven't seen any—none.

We see other signs of progress we would call a normal life—120,000 Baghdad students returning to classrooms last May; 1.2 million school kits are being prepared for the coming school year which started this week; 5 million math and science books will be distributed. Banks are opening, crops are being harvested, the Baghdad symphony is performing, bookstores are reopening, and artists are displaying their works. None of this is reported because it is not newsworthy here in the United States. But it is news there, and proof of peace and democracy sprouting up all over Iraq.

Peace and democracy are sprouting in Iraq, but you would be hard pressed to find news reports here because mainly failure and setbacks count as news. And, of course, certain papers and broadcasters focus on the Presidential candidates, calling the
President's efforts a failure. We should not be too surprised. Presidential politics is the most powerful political force in America. But I urge people to ask themselves, why didn't Presidential politics destroy the Marshall plan back in 1948, closer to a Presidential election year than we are now? Presidential politics did not destroy the Marshall plan because Members of the Senate on a bipartisan basis rose above that and did what was right for America and right for Europe.

I believe it was due to the fact that Republicans and Democrats alike wanted to ensure history did not repeat itself. They knew of their friends and comrades who died in World War II because they failed to win the peace after World War I. The threat of poverty and despair in Europe was real, and so was the effort by communists to take advantage of that. But mostly, they didn't want the sacrifice of their sons, brothers, fathers and husbands in World War II to be in vain. to them and us, lives and freedom should be more important than power and politics.

So I ask, can we set aside politics and ask what happens if we fail in Iraq? Perhaps we are not motivated by the good that can come from a democratic Iraq. But surely we should consider the disaster that can befall the world if in this war against terrorism, we fail to bring peace and democracy to Iraq and Afghanistan. Our children and their children will have lost their chance for peace, freedom and prosperity.

This is a defining moment, but if we look after the interest of the next generation rather than the next election—like President Truman and the Republican Congress did back in 1948 with the Marhsall plan—we can do something great for Iraq, for the world and for our children.

So, I ask us to think of the future generations like those who formed the Marshall plan considered in their deliberations. I ask us to come together to do what is right for future generations. I ask for unity, and to promote that end, I will offer an amendment that should unify this body. Let us set aside the rancor and agree that the Armed Forces of the United States have performed brilliantly in Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan and in Operation Iraq Freedom in Iraq.

Since October 7, 2001, when the Armed Forces of the United States and its coalition allies launched military operations in Afghanistan, designed as Operation Enduring Freedom, our soldiers and allies have removed the Taliban regime, eliminated Afghanistan's terrorist infrastructure, and captured significant and numerous members of Al Qaeda.

Since March 19, 2003, when the Armed Forces of the United States and its coalition allies launched military operations, designated as Operation Iraqi Freedom, our soldiers have removed Saddam Hussein's regime, eliminated Iraq's terrorist infrastructure, ended Iraq's illicit and illegal programs to acquire weapons of mass destruction, and captured significant international terrorists.

During all this time, during the heat of battle, our soldiers have acted with all the efficiency that war time commands, but all the compassion and understanding that an emerging peace requires. They have acted in the finest tradition of U.S. soldiers and are to be commended by this body.

That is what this situation requires of us today. I hope as we move forward with this debate on the supplemental, Members will remember the importance of pulling together to finish the job in Iraq.

I yield.

EXHIBIT 1

EXCERPTS FROM A RECENT NATIONAL DEMOCRATIC INSTITUTE REPORT ON IRAQ

"The past half-century provides ample proof that democracy is more than just another form of government; it is also a powerful generator of international security, prosperity and peace."—Madeleine K. Albright, NDI Chairman

An Explosion of democratic politics: "After three days in Baghdad it is already clear that NDI will find fertile ground for democracy promotion initiatives on a scale not seen since the heady days of the fall of the Berlin wall. There has been a virtual explosion of politics in Iraq's capital city with as many as 200 parties and movements having made themselves known to the Coalition Provisional Authority."

The Iraqis are grateful for their liberation. "NDI's overwhelming finding—in the north, south, Baghdad, and among secular, religious, Sunni, Shiite, and Kurdish groups in both urban and rural areas—is a grateful welcoming of the demise of Saddam's regime and a sense that this is a pivotal moment in Iraq's history. A leading member of a newly formed umbrella movement, the Iraq Coalition for Democracy, put it this way, "We already see the positive results the Americans have brought—we are free to talk to you, to organize a movement and party, free to meet and demonstrate and all of this was made possible by the Americans."

Significant evidence of support for the United States: "In Kirkuk, there was a large painted sign reading, "Thank you
USA!" in English and in Kurdish. In Erbil and Suleimaniya, there were many "Thank you to the USA", "Thank you to
President George Bush" banners as well as "peace and prosperity come with democracy."

Overwhelming support for liberation, but lack of stability or economic opportunity erode support for the U.S.: "Across the board, the people of NDI met with in southern Iraq supported the forceful ouster of Saddam—a person many described as "Nero" and a "criminal towards his people". Although southerners were clearly conscious of the discrimination they had suffered under Saddam's Baathist rule, many were quick to add that poor security conditions and a lack of basic necessities are having a negative impact on attitudes toward the U.S."

"The main findings of the research reveal that, in every community, the Iraqis are grateful for the ouster of Saddam Hussein but have a strong desire for order and governance. They feel a mix of excitement and fear about the prospect of freedom and democracy, and have differing views about the role of Islam in the country's new political order."

Security and jobs are a precondition to Democracy. "One former general, previously part of the Free Officers Movement, summed up the state of Iraqi "anxious ambivalence" this way, "People need a rest. They need security and jobs and, maybe after a year they can be educated about political parties and democracy and then they can choose heir future properly."

Iraqi frustrations are due to fear and uncertainty, not hostility to the United States. "Faced with rising crime, uncertain economic prospects, and chaotic daily conditions, complaining—to anyone who will listen—has become a national pastime.
Part of the problem is a perceived lack of access to those in authority, but mostly the complaints are a symptom of uncertainty, not an expression of hostility to the United States or its aims in for Iraq."

The Iraqis need our help now. "Time is not on the side of the coalition or Iraqi democrats. Current conditions play into the hands of extremists—religious and nationalist—who point to lack of progress as proof of the need for a strong hand."

Chaos and slow progress feed the forces of radicalism. "In fact, many Iraqi political forces are benefiting from the societal chaos. Islamic forces, including the Shia dominated Da'awa party and Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, with their inherent legitimacy, established networks, and communications facilities through the Mosque, are flourishing and establishing positions of dominance in Shiite slums, small cities and the underdeveloped countryside."

Time to act on the supplemental is now. "In conclusion, this is not a time for despair or second-guessing but for action.
There is an urgent need for democratic education, party strengthening, for coalition building and for material assistance to democratic movements and organizations. The political vacuum is being filled by those with an interest in destroying and separating rather than uniting and building—only concerted efforts to strengthen the democratic middle can help stem that tide."