Hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee - U.S. Policy and Military Operations in Iraq and Afghanistan

Federal News Service

HEADLINE: HEARING OF THE SENATE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE

SUBJECT: U.S. POLICY AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN

CHAIRED BY: SENATOR JOHN WARNER (R-VA)

WITNESSES: DEPUTY SECRETARY OF DEFENSE PAUL WOLFOWITZ; JOINT CHIEFS CHAIRMAN GENERAL RICHARD MYERS; UNDERSECRETARY OF STATE FOR POLITICAL AFFAIRS MARC GROSSMAN

LOCATION: 106 DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING, WASHINGTON, D.C.

BODY:
SEN. JOHN CORNYN (R-TX): Thank you.

Thank you, gentlemen, for being here today. And I for one agree, I believe, with the comments of Senator Lieberman and Senator Sessions and those who have associated themselves with the importance of this committee conducting proper oversight and particularly in dealing with matters that are our present concern and planning for the future. I think we are at our best when we do that. I think we are at our worst when we look back and try to dissect lessons learned while we are still at war, in the battlefield. And that, unfortunately, particularly in a supercharged political environment leading up to a November election, I think, is not as constructive as we could or should be in dealing with the present and plans for the future.

But unfortunately, in this environment, when questions are raised and statements are made and not responded to, or when the context of the answer is not made clear, unfortunately, that has to be addressed.

And so it is in that context that I want to ask two questions.

Over the weekend we heard some unfortunate claims, one related to the 70 -- excuse me, the $87 billion supplemental that I want to ask you about, and one goes to the very nature of the conflict that we are currently engaged in in the war on terror.

The first question I have involves the $87 billion supplemental that Congress passed to fund the war on terror. It was said this weekend that even the generals in Iraq said that monies in that bill had no impact on their ability to continue the fight. And it was also said that that vote would never-that vote would never have prevented-that is, a negative vote against that supplemental-would never have prevented any of the body armor, ammunition, or anything from getting to our troops.

Now I had heard that statement earlier and it caused me to ask in another hearing, a SASC hearing, at which the vice chief of staff of the Army, General Casey, appeared, and I asked him about that $87 billion appropriation, and if it had not passed what the consequences would have been to our troops. He was unequivocal. He said this supplemental appropriation has enabled us to significantly increase the protection for our soldiers throughout the theater of Afghanistan and Iraq. I asked him, if Congress had not stepped up and funded the $87 billion supplemental, that it would have meant or resulted in increased causalities as a result of the failure to provide those up- armored Humvees and body armor? And General Casey agreed that it would have meant more causalities or the Army would have had to gut the Army budget to find the money to do this; that is, pay for the body armor or up-armored Humvees by other means.

My question for you, Secretary Wolfowitz and General Myers: Did the $87 billion supplemental have an impact on the ability of our men and women to fight and win the war on terror in which we are currently engaged?

MR. WOLFOWITZ: Senator Cornyn, I can't imagine how we could continue conducting operations without that supplemental. It not only provided for basic operations, but it also provided substantial amounts for things like body armor and up-armored Humvees and various force protection measures. There were two different pieces of the supplemental, of course. There was roughly 67 billion (dollars) that goes directly to our troops, which is absolutely indispensable.

Then there's the 18 billion (dollars) of -- 18.6 billion (dollars) to reconstruction funds, which are spending slower but they are already having an impact. And that-I think it's very important, as we said in testifying on the reconstruction funds, that money can help to create Iraqi security forces that can take the place of Americans. That money can help to create a positive political environment inside Iraq that will make our forces safer. So really the whole 87 billion (dollars) I think, and it covers Afghanistan as well, was essential to this war on terror.

SEN. CORNYN: General Myers.

GEN. MYERS: I really-I don't know how I can add anything more to that. That supplemental's absolutely essential to our ability to operate in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Secretary Wolfowitz-I think we approved 750 million (dollars) for force protection initiatives alone, and we can do more if required in that regard. But the general, just paying for our operational tempo. If we didn't do that, General Casey would be right: you'd gut the Army budget, and not only the Army budget but the Air Force and the Marine Corps and the Navy budgets as well. So it's absolutely essential to our operations.

SEN. CORNYN: This last week I was at the Red River Army Depot, where they are providing additional armor or metal containers essentially to upgrade Humvees for additional armor and protection for troops currently in the battlefield. And it's that kind of additional protection which I believe has led to the greater security and greater likelihood of success of our troops in the field.

My only other question, really, relates to the nature of the conflict in which we are engaged, in which, at last count I saw, we had 135,000 troops currently in Iraq fighting this conflict. It was said this weekend again, a reiteration of an earlier claim, that the war on terrorism is not primarily a military operation but that it is an intelligence-gathering, law enforcement and public diplomacy effort.

Now, I disagree with that completely, and I believe that indeed treating the war on terror previously, after we had been attacked, after the World Trade Center bombing in 1993, for example, as a criminal investigation and a law enforcement matter, as we've seen before the 9/11 commission, has led to insecurity and endangered American lives because of the lack of information sharing, among other things.

But I would just ask your response, Secretary Wolfowitz. Do you agree that what we are engaged in in Afghanistan and Iraq is not primarily a military operation but is rather an intelligence- gathering, law enforcement and diplomatic mission?

MR. WOLFOWITZ: Senator Cornyn, I think that I resisted these comparisons initially, when people said this is like the Cold War and it's going to be as long as the Cold War and as difficult as the Cold War, in the aftermath of September 11th. Increasingly I think it has all of those characteristics and then some, and it requires all the elements of national power, as the president has said over and over again, including military, including intelligence, including law enforcement, including diplomacy, including economic assistance, all those things working hand in hand reinforcing one another.

I mean, the fact is that one of the biggest successes in the intelligence/law enforcement arena in this war on terrorism was capturing the mastermind of September 11th, Khalid Sheik Mohammed, in Pakistan. I would note, by the way, for those people who say we were diverted by Iraq, it was done the month before Operation Iraqi Freedom that we captured this villain. But we would never have gotten him in Pakistan if he were still hiding in Afghanistan, if they still had that sanctuary. It is important to take the sanctuaries away from these people. At least in the case of Afghanistan and Iraq, it could not have been done except by military means.

But then we see the case of Libya, where the military, without doing anything, plays a critical role in supporting diplomacy, which achieved an enormous amount, in part thanks to some great work by the intelligence people that uncovered what Qadhafi was doing.

So all these things have to work together. That's point number one.

Point number two, I really do think if there's a single lesson from September 11th, to me it is that we can't wait until after the fact to find the perpetrators of events, of terrorist acts, and either bring them to court and bring them to trial or, if they're foreign countries, punish them with some kind of cruise missile retaliation. We have got to do preventive action. And preventive action in the last resort may sometimes be military, but when I say preventive action, I mean on a very broad scale.

I think one of the most important kinds of preventive action we could be undertaking as a country-and we're starting to, I'd like to see us do more-is to help countries like Pakistan that are trying to redo their education system so that instead of breeding terrorists in these madrassas that preach nothing useful and a lot of hatred, young, poor Pakistani children can go to a school where they learn how to succeed in the modern world.

So all of those instruments are necessary. It is a very broad effort. It's a big mistake to suggest that it can be narrowed.

SEN. WARNER: Thank you, Senator.

SEN. CORNYN: Thank you. My time's expired.