Fact
ba
.
se
Home
Search
Joe Biden
Other Presidents
Donald Trump
Topics
White House
White House Releases - Realtime
President's Public Calendar
Press Room Seating Chart
State of the Union Addresses
White House Correspondents' Dinner
Joe Biden
Browse Speeches and Interviews - Analysis
Videos
Other Presidents
Donald Trump
Enterprise
Blog
Contact
×
×
×
CONTACT
We'd love to answer your questions. There's a business contact form
here
, or just drop us a note below.
Send
Senate Floor: LIFTING THE ARMS EMBARGO ON BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA
LIFTING THE ARMS EMBARGO ON BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA [1994-05-12]
George J. Mitchell
Chris Dodd
Joe Biden
Bob Dole
Sam Nunn
Orrin G. Hatch
Joseph I. Lieberman
Russ Feingold
Paul Wellstone
Nancy Kassebaum
Daniel Coats
John McCain
John Chafee
Mitch McConnell
Barbara Boxer
Conrad Burns
John Warner
Bob Smith
Larry Craig
Carl Levin
Claiborne Pell
Kay Bailey Hutchison
Jesse Helms
Not Labeled
Daniel Patrick Moynihan
Bill Bradley
Robert Byrd
Paul Simon
Bosnia
the United States
the United Nations
Bosnian
American
Unknown
echo $back_button; ?>
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the Senate will now resume consideration of S. 2042, which the clerk will report.
Unknown
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The majority leader.
Unknown
George J. Mitchell
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the time for debate on the two Bosnia amendments be controlled as follows: That Senator Mitchell control the last 5 minutes of his time before the vote; Senator Dole the last 5 minutes of his time just prior to Senator Mitchell; and that Senator Nunn control 7 minutes of Senator Mitchell's time just prior to Senator Dole's time.
Slightly Positive
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Unknown
There will now be 1 hour for debate on amendments No. 1695 and No. 1696, offered by the Senator from Kansas [Mr. Dole], and the Senator from Maine [Mr. Mitchell], respectively.
Slightly Negative
George J. Mitchell
I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished Senator from Kansas.
Unknown
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Kansas [Mrs. Kassebaum] is recognized for 3 minutes.
Unknown
Nancy Kassebaum
Mr. President, today I rise in opposition to both amendments that have been offered by the distinguished leadership of the U.S. Senate, both Senator Dole and Senator Mitchell. I do so reluctantly because I support elements of both amendments, but as the Congress speaks on this important and difficult issue, we must do so with great care and deliberation.
Very Positive
Nancy Kassebaum
I first want to express my deep dissatisfaction with the administration's Bosnia policy. For the past 2 years, America and its NATO allies have dithered on the doorstep of Bosnia. We have been unwilling to force our way in and unable to walk away. Instead, we have sent in food for the hostages, muttered angry threats, and lobbed an occasional bomb at Serb tanks.
Very Negative
Nancy Kassebaum
Mr. President, despite my serious concerns about the status quo, I do not believe that either the Dole or Mitchell resolutions offer an improved course of action. Both amendments urge a policy which is unwise at best -- and dangerous at worst.
Neutral
Nancy Kassebaum
The Dole amendment mandates that the United States immediately and unilaterally left the arms embargo. While I strongly support lifting the embargo multilaterally, unilateral action is, I believe, a serious mistake. A number of other Senators, particularly my colleague from Virginia, Senator Warner, have set forth some compelling arguments against the Dole amendment. I would like to take just a moment to detail my worst fears about lifting the embargo unilaterally.
Slightly Negative
Nancy Kassebaum
First, I strongly believe that unilateral action on the embargo would set a very dangerous precedent. The United States -- which has a veto in the Security Council -- voted in favor of the embargo against what was then Yugoslavia. The Council subsequently reaffirmed the arms embargo.
Very Positive
Nancy Kassebaum
The supporters of the Dole amendment argue that the right to self- defense under article 51 of the U.N. Charter takes precedence over a Security Council resolution. Others, including the State Department, take a contrary view. Whatever the legalities of this issue, I am concerned about the practical consequences of unilaterally lifting the embargo.
Very Positive
Nancy Kassebaum
I have little doubt that the U.S. abrogation of a U.N. Security Council resolution would undermine other U.N. embargoes around the world. The most obvious example is Iraq, where a number of U.N. members support lifting the embargo. But in that case, the United States has argued forcefully, and correctly, that the U.N. embargo must stay in place.
Somewhat Positive
Nancy Kassebaum
A strong and muscular United Nations Security Council regime clearly serves United States interests -- from Iraq to North Korea to Serbia. If we take unilateral action, I fear that we will regret that decision for years to come.
Very Positive
Nancy Kassebaum
Second, unilaterally lifting the arms embargo would lead to a serious rift with our NATO allies. I recently met with a number of parliamentarians from Great Britain who raised a number of concerns about United States action. They believe, for example, that lifting the embargo would undermine the prospects for a political settlement.
Very Positive
Nancy Kassebaum
Many of our NATO allies have troops on the ground as part of the United Nations peacekeeping force. To take unilateral action -- in direct opposition to the wishes of our allies who have troops on the ground -- is terribly irresponsible. It could, for example, endanger the lives of their forces.
Neutral
Nancy Kassebaum
With the end of the cold war, NATO is undergoing a fundamental reevaluation of its role in this new era. Questions such as how to deal with the nations of Eastern Europe have already strained the alliance. At this delicate moment, unilateral United States action would damage the cohesion and strength of the NATO alliance.
Very Negative
Nancy Kassebaum
I make no apologies for the Europeans on the Bosnia question. Their leadership has been abysmal. But I continue to believe that we must work in concert with our allies. I agree with Senator Dole that we must lead -- but responsible leadership, not thoughtless, hasty and counterproductive unilateral action.
Very Positive
Nancy Kassebaum
Finally, lifting the embargo unilaterally means that we take on the responsibility for arming and supporting the Bosnian Government. To think otherwise is naive.
Slightly Positive
Nancy Kassebaum
This leads to a whole series of practical questions: How will the Bosnians get the arms? What type of arms will we send? If we are serious, do we need to send trainers? These are just a few of the many complicated questions that have not been answered. Before we head down this course of lifting the embargo alone, we must understand the full consequences.
Negative
Nancy Kassebaum
The Mitchell amendment takes a much more responsible approach to the arms embargo issue -- calling for the President to seek the multilateral lifting of the embargo at the United Nations. But, that is not all: The Mitchell amendment explicitly endorses air strikes in Bosnia.
Very Positive
Nancy Kassebaum
It embraces the status quo policy -- muddling along, issuing threats, launching occasional air strikes, and hoping somehow that the Serbs will tire of their handiwork and come to the negotiating table.
Somewhat Negative
Nancy Kassebaum
I, for one, believe this is a dangerous course. It allows us to be drawn deeper into commitments we have not made to a goal we have not set. In foreign policy, hoping for the best often guarantees the worst.
Very Positive
Nancy Kassebaum
Mr. President, we are all searching for a more effective and just Bosnia policy. I share the frustrations of those supporting the Dole amendment who want to help even the playing field. I also sympathize with the cosponsors of the Mitchell amendment who believe that air strikes will help protect the United Nations safe havens, where thousands of civilians are trapped.
Very Positive
Nancy Kassebaum
But we must judge the advantages and disadvantages of each proposal. I do not believe that either amendment offers an effective and wise policy at this stage, and I will oppose both.
Very Positive
Nancy Kassebaum
Mr. President, I suggest it is a very serious consideration and one of the reasons I will strongly oppose the amendment by Senator Dole.
Leans Positive
George J. Mitchell
Mr. President, I yield 5 minutes to the Senator from Rhode Island, the distinguished chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee.
Unknown
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Rhode Island [Mr. Pell] is recognized for 5 minutes.
Unknown
Claiborne Pell
Mr. President, earlier this week I spoke in depth about my opposition to the Dole-Lieberman legislation that would direct the President to lift the arms embargo unilaterally. As I said, lifting the arms embargo may seem like an easy, cost-free solution. Lifting the arms embargo may make us feel better, but I believe it is bad policy that could yield disastrous results.
Very Negative
Claiborne Pell
I would like to review briefly some of the reasons I believe it would be costly to lift the embargo unilaterally. The United States would be abrogating a U.N. Security Council resolution, setting a dangerous precedent which others could follow in breaking international embargoes such as those on Iraq and Libya. We would undermine our credibility as a trustworthy and responsible international partner and damage our relations in NATO, with Russia, and with other countries with troops on the ground in Bosnia. If we go it alone in lifting the arms embargo, we would take on a greater responsibility for the outcome of war. We could start down the slippery slope of greater U.S. engagement in the crisis. Lifting the arms embargo could have a terrible impact on the Bosnian people -- leaving them vulnerable to further Siberian obstruction of humanitarian assistance and to brutal attack. Finally, lifting the arms embargo could upset the delicate peace process now underway.
Very Negative
Claiborne Pell
There is a groundswell of support for taking some congressional action on Bosnia, but I do not believe that legislation mandating a lifting on the arms embargo, the Dole-Lieberman approach, need be the only outlet for congressional action. Accordingly, the majority leader has put forth legislation, of which I am a cosponsor, as an alternative to the Dole-Lieberman legislation.
Slightly Positive
Claiborne Pell
Senator Mitchell's amendment instructs the President to seek NATO and U.N. agreement to lift the arms embargo. I, for one, am not completely comfortable with the United States seizing the lead in lifting the embargo multilaterally. However, I am steadfast in my opposition to a unilateral lifting of the embargo, and accordingly, I view the majority leader's amendment as a helpful alternative to the Dole-Lieberman legislation.
Very Positive
Claiborne Pell
I agreed to cosponsor this legislation for these main reasons: it offers an alternative to the Dole-Lieberman legislation; it endorses a multilateral approach to ending the conflict in Bosnia; and it signals that Congress intends and expects to be involved in authorizing further United States military activity in Bosnia. I would urge my colleagues to join me in voting for this legislation.
Very Positive
George J. Mitchell
Mr. President, I yield 10 minutes to the Senator from Delaware.
Unknown
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Delaware [Mr. Biden] is recognized for 10 minutes.
Unknown
Joe Biden
Mr. President, it has been over 2 years, since the spring of 1992, during which the outside world has stood largely idle as the Republic of Bosnia -- a nation of Europe recognized by the United Nations -- has been attacked, raped, and dismembered by forces under the control and direction of a neighboring government.
Very Negative
Joe Biden
Decades from now, historians will reflect on the Bosnian tragedy and wonder what compelled Western leaders to stand inert in the face of a challenge that so clearly threatened Western interests and Western values.
Neutral
Joe Biden
Equally mysterious will be the language utilized to obfuscate Western inaction:
Slightly Negative
Joe Biden
We are told that the Bosnian crisis is a "difficult diplomatic problem" -- as if any foreign policy challenge were simple.
Very Negative
Joe Biden
We are told that we are doing all we can "consistent with our national interest" -- an articulation meant to imply that some larger strategic rationale requires us to be morally comatose.
Positive
Joe Biden
We are told that the genocide in Bosnia is a civil war, when it was obvious to all that the government in Belgrade was culpable in instigating the conflict.
Very Negative
Joe Biden
We have heard the Bosnian Government labeled "the Moslems" -- a choice of words designed to conjure up the frightful image of an Islamic tide sweeping across Europe -- when it was well understood that the Sarajevo government was multiethnic in character.
Slightly Negative
Joe Biden
We have designated safe areas, which have, until recently, been safe only for Serb gunners.
Very Positive
Joe Biden
We have deployed a United Nations protection force that, although equipped with ample supplies of courage, has barely been empowered to protect itself.
Very Positive
Joe Biden
We have delivered ultimatums that, when implemented by U.N. bureaucrats, became not firm dictates, but negotiable instruments of diplomacy.
Unknown
Joe Biden
We have purported to be neutral, while imposing an economic embargo against the aggressor and an arms embargo against the victim.
Very Negative
Joe Biden
And to demonstrate their evenhand- edness -- some U.N. commanders and European diplomats have gone so far as to accuse Bosnian forces of perpetuating the fighting -- a perverse form of moral relativism that equates Bosnian efforts in self-defense with illegal Serb aggression.
Very Negative
Joe Biden
The most recent display of neutrality by United Nations officials in Bosnia demonstrates that in fact they are not neutral at all -- but are willing to provide aid and comfort to the Serbs.
Very Positive
Joe Biden
Last week, the United Nations special envoy, Mr. Akashi, made an astonishing concession to the Bosnian Serbs: He granted them permission to transport tanks across Sarajevo.
Very Positive
Joe Biden
This, despite a NATO ultimatum, issued last February, barring the presence of any such weapons inside a zone extending 20 kilometers around Sarajevo.
Negative
Joe Biden
It would be comical if it were not so tragic.
Unknown
Joe Biden
Tomorrow, foreign ministers from the leading powers will gather in Geneva in hope of forging a joint approach to bring a negotiated settlement to the Bosnian war.
Slightly Negative
Joe Biden
As before, we will witness the sorry spectacle of our European allies pressing for an imposed settlement on the parties.
Slightly Positive
Joe Biden
I do not disagree that a negotiated settlement is the only way to end the Bosnia crisis. But an honorable -- and more importantly -- enduring settlement can only result with a shift in the balance of power on the ground.
Somewhat Positive
Joe Biden
An imposed peace might bring a temporary cessation of hostilities, but I fear that it would result in disastrous long-term consequences -- an unjust partition policed by United States and European soldiers who would quickly be transformed from peacekeepers to apartheid cops.
Very Negative
Joe Biden
It is said that a termination of the arms embargo would come too late for Bosnia. I do not agree.
Leans Negative
Joe Biden
The war is now at a critical stage. Although the guns have fallen silent in Sarajevo and around the other safe areas, Bosnian Serb troops are on the march elsewhere in the countryside.
Very Negative
Joe Biden
Having achieved most of their territorial aims, Serbia and the Bosnian Serbs seek to consolidate their conquests by expanding corridors which will assure the viability of a greater Serbia.
Very Positive
Joe Biden
Thus, after the siege of Gorazde assured the vitality of a route to the Adriatic, Serb forces are now converging in the northeast of Bosnia, poised to widen the corridor near Brcko that links Serbia with Serb-held areas in Croatia.
Very Positive
Joe Biden
Further to the south, Bosnian Serb forces are also massing near the town of Olovo, and are poised to squeeze government-held territory, centered on Tuzla, from two directions.
Slightly Positive
Joe Biden
Horrible atrocities and ethnic cleansing continue elsewhere in the country, outside the eye of U.N. observers and international media.
Very Negative
Joe Biden
In this context, lifting the arms embargo is the only feasible option that will permit the Bosnian Government the opportunity to defend itself against the Serb irregulars, who are well armed with the legacy of Tito's legions.
Very Positive
Joe Biden
I have been urging this course since the summer of 1992, and I have no illusions that it will be simple or without risk.
Slightly Negative
Joe Biden
In August of that year, the Senate approved a resolution that urged the use of all necessary means to ensure delivery of humanitarian relief in Bosnia.
Very Positive
Joe Biden
The following month, I added an amendment to the Foreign Operations Appropriations Act that urged the termination of the embargo as it applied to Bosnia, and authorized the transfer of $50 million in United States military equipment -- off the shelf -- to the Government of Bosnia.
Positive
Joe Biden
Last spring, I traveled to the region and met with the leaders of Bosnia, Croatia, and Serbia. Upon my return, I pressed for the so- called lift and strike option that was later embraced by the Clinton administration.
Leans Negative
Joe Biden
Many of those who have opposed my position in the past are now supporting of the Dole resolution. I welcome their change of heart.
Very Positive
Joe Biden
But let us all understand -- as I know the minority leader does -- that it will not be enough merely to lift the embargo.
Unknown
Joe Biden
Lifting the embargo, whether unilaterally or in the United Nations, also requires the following steps:
Positive
Joe Biden
The provision of air power to prevent the Serbs from overrunning Bosnian forces before military supplies can be provided.
Neutral
Joe Biden
The provision of weaponry and ammunition, including the $50 million in supplies authorized in the Biden amendment.
Slightly Negative
Joe Biden
It is also possible that UNPROFOR forces will have to be withdrawn, and in the short term, the humanitarian consequences will be grave.
Somewhat Negative
Joe Biden
We should also understand that any pretense of neutrality will be dissolved -- we will have taken sides with the Bosnian Government.
Unknown
Joe Biden
My only disagreement with the Republican leader today is about the means, not about the ends.
Somewhat Negative
Joe Biden
Given the opposition of our European allies to ending the embargo, I admit that the concept of unilateral termination has great appeal. Moreover, I am persuaded that there are legitimate legal and moral reasons to unilaterally lift the embargo.
Very Positive
Joe Biden
Legally, the right of self-defense -- an inherent right codified in article 51 of the United Nations Charter -- may only be circumscribed if the U.N. Security Council has taken "measures necessary to maintain international peace and security." Who would dispute that the Security Council has not taken the measures necessary to maintain international peace and security in Bosnia?
Very Positive
Joe Biden
Morally, it cannot be denied that the people of Bosnia have a right -- as stated so profoundly by Bosnian Prime Minister Haris Silajdzic -- to choose how they wish to die.
Leans Negative
Joe Biden
If the people of Bosnia choose weapons over food, it would be the height of arrogance for the international community to second-guess them.
Very Negative
Joe Biden
My position is simple and straightforward: We should lift the arms embargo, but we should first make one more attempt, in good faith, to end it where it began -- in the U.N. Security Council.
Very Positive
Joe Biden
It is said that the allies will never agree to lifting the arms embargo because their forces constitute the bulk of UNPROFOR forces on the ground. Or that Russia will not agree.
Slightly Negative
Joe Biden
But the proposition has never been fully tested.
Unknown
Joe Biden
To be sure, the Secretary of State consulted with the allies during his ill-fated mission a year ago. They gave him the cold shoulder. But when in the history of the alliance have our European friends agreed to anything unless we showed them the way?
Very Positive
Joe Biden
Whether or not the allies agree with us, I believe that we should proceed to the Security Council, and table a resolution to lift the embargo.
Slightly Positive
Joe Biden
On this occasion, we should bring the full weight of American diplomacy to bear.
Unknown
Joe Biden
My agreement to go with this amendment and not to go with the minority leader's amendment today is conditioned upon the commitment of the administration to make a genuine effort at the United Nations to in fact lift the embargo, and to table, if this amendment passes, a resolution in the U.N. Security Council seeking the lifting of the embargo.
Very Positive
Joe Biden
It is not enough to suggest in my view that if this Mitchell amendment becomes law that they just vote with such an effort to lift the embargo.
Unknown
Joe Biden
Once the resolution is tabled, then let the member states stand up and be counted. At the end of the day, I do not believe that the permanent members will have the courage to veto such a resolution. But we will never know until we try.
Positive
Joe Biden
If the Council fails to pass a resolution, then, and only then, should we consider unilateral action. This is exactly the course set forth in the Mitchell amendment.
Negative
Joe Biden
Under the Mitchell amendment, the President must take the following steps:
Unknown
Joe Biden
The President must consult with the allies about lifting the embargo; He must then promptly propose or support a resolution in the U.N. Security Council to terminate the arms embargo; if that fails, the President must promptly consult with Congress regarding unilateral termination of the embargo.
Somewhat Positive
Joe Biden
In my judgment, this is the only realistic course available to us.
Unknown
Joe Biden
When the arms embargo was imposed by the Security Council in September 1991, it was passed with the full participation and support of the United States.
Very Positive
Joe Biden
The other members of the Council will surely question our commitment to future U.N. actions if we walk away from this resolution without attempting to do it by the rules first, going to the United Nations and seeking it being lifted.
Very Positive
Joe Biden
If we are unsuccessful in the Council, it is my hope and expectation that the President will come to us with a strategy for unilaterally lifting the embargo.
Leans Positive
Joe Biden
Madam President, we signed on to this embargo -- an ill-fated decision by President Bush. We did it under the rules. We should now go back under the rules. The President should commit to us, as he does in this amendment if it passes, that he will push for lifting that embargo, and table a resolution.
Slightly Positive
Joe Biden
Therefore, I will vote for the Mitchell amendment and against the Dole amendment, notwithstanding the fact that I think I was the first one on this floor to call for the lifting of this embargo.
Unknown
Joe Biden
Mr. SMITH addressed the Chair.
Unknown
George J. Mitchell
Madam President, I understand that Senator Smith is about to take time from Senator Dole's time.
Unknown
Bob Smith
That is correct.
Unknown
Bob Smith
Madam President, I yield myself 3 minutes under the time controlled by the Republican leader, not under the leader's time, but under the time controlled by the leader.
Unknown
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is recognized for 3 minutes.
Unknown
Bob Smith
Madam President, I rise today in strong support of the Dole-Lieberman legislation to lift the arms embargo against the Bosnian Moslems.
Very Positive
Bob Smith
I want to commend Senator Lieberman and Senator Dole for their leadership in this debate.
Positive
Bob Smith
This is the kind of thing we are going to look back on several year from now, depending on how the outcome is, and either regret very much what we did or be very glad that we did what we did, depending on the outcome.
Leans Positive
Bob Smith
I believe that the administration's foreign policy is in a shambles. And in Bosnia the President is now leading us across a Rubicon from which there is no return. We are on a course for catastrophe. We have no strategic interests at stake. We have no military objective. We have no established rules of engagement. We have no effective command structure, no definition of, or timetable, to achieve success, and no consensus for support among the American people.
Very Negative
Bob Smith
Under these circumstances, it is unconscionable to risk the lives of the American military men and women merely to advance the cause of multilateralism and some grand vision of the United Nations. It is unconscionable to do that. When are we going to learn?
Very Positive
Bob Smith
The only reasonable strategy is for America to terminate further escalation of military involvement and to immediately lift the arms embargo against the Bosnian Moslems, and, yes, unilaterally if the President does not exercise leadership to get the other members of the United Nations or NATO to join us.
Very Positive
Bob Smith
Let those who are being persecuted meet destiny on their own terms from behind their own weapons, not cowering in the ruins of some unsafe haven. We have neither the legal nor the moral authority to play policeman in this centuries-old civil war. Let us step back and allow the Bosnian Moslems the dignity and the capability to defend themselves. This is exactly what the Dole-Lieberman resolution does. It terminates the American arms embargo against the Government of Bosnia and allows them to exercise their right of self-defense under article 51 of the U.N. Charter.
Very Negative
Bob Smith
Madam President, the only route to legitimate, lasting peace in the former Yugoslavia is through meaningful negotiation and compromise. The inhabitants of the former Yugoslavia alone hold the key to their future. The United States and the international community at large can and should encourage and support the peace process. But reconciliation cannot be imposed. It must be negotiated and accepted. This is something that the citizens of the former Yugoslavia and they alone must determine. At present, the military equation in Bosnia is completely one-sided. The Dole amendment will enable the Moslem forces to better defend themselves and level the playing field until a mutually acceptable peace settlement can be reached.
Very Positive
Bob Smith
I support this amendment and urge its adoption.
Positive
Bob Smith
I yield the floor.
Unknown
Bob Smith
Mr. FEINGOLD addressed the Chair.
Unknown
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Wisconsin.
Unknown
Bob Smith
If no one wishes to speak on the other side, Madam President, I yield 3 minutes to the Senator from Wisconsin from the time controlled by Senator Dole.
Leans Negative
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is recognized for three minutes.
Unknown
Russ Feingold
Madam President, I once again rise in support of the bill to lift the U.N. arms embargo that continues to tie the hands of the sovereign Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina. As my colleagues know, I have been steadfast in my call for this critical action since I came to this body 18 months ago. In March 1993, I introduced Senate Resolution 79 and joined a few other colleagues in warning that this arms embargo, imposed in 1991 upon a now defunct Yugoslavia, would legitimize a disparity in the military balance among the warring factions. Moreover, it would deny the most fundamental assistance to the Bosnian people who were, then as now, under a brutal siege by those calling for "ethnic cleansing" in the name of a Greater Serbia.
Very Negative
Russ Feingold
I urged then that the embargo be lifted in collaboration with our allies, but I have found the arguments to lift the embargo unilaterally are growing more and more compelling. I also believe that now that Bosnia and Croatia have agreed to join in a confederation that we should be debating lifting the embargo against the Republic of Croatia as well.
Very Positive
Russ Feingold
Opponents of this bill say this is not the time to act unilaterally and risk the loss of allied support in future multilateral actions of interest to the United States. Well, I say this is the time to stop squandering our energies on the vagaries of hypothetical future actions. The issue before us today is a concrete reality, the reality of an obsolete measure of questionable contemporary legality that is doing unquestionable harm to those whom we claim are already victims. Of course, we must consider the collateral consequences of our decisions, but let's put it in perspective.
Slightly Negative
Russ Feingold
Do we really think that a unilateral United States action to lift this arms embargo will determine the positions of Security Council members such as China or Russia on future questions like North Korea or even Libya? Conversely, do we really think that if we vote down this measure that Ambassador Albright will somehow be better able to carry some future U.N. debate by reminding the Security Council members how we toed their line on this perverse embargo?
Very Positive
Russ Feingold
Let us not flatter ourselves by thinking that our actions will so easily eclipse the self-interests of other nations; let us also not insult the intelligence of our allies by suggesting that all embargoes are equivalent and that their votes are somehow fungible commodities to be traded at the U.N. marketplace. U.N. members vote and act according to their national values and self-interests; we must do the same and this arms embargo is neither consistent with our values nor in our self-interest.
Very Positive
Russ Feingold
While the situation in Bosnia has changed considerably, the essential rationale for lifting the embargo has remained unchanged since early 1992. When the United Nations admitted Bosnia as a member state, it afforded it all of the rights of membership, including the right to self-defense, recognized around the world and -- yes -- codified in article 51 of the U.N. Charter. That article clearly states that nothing in the Charter shall impair the inherent right of self-defense in the face of an armed attack until the Security Council has restored peace and security. Last month it was suggested that the second part of article 51 limits our ability to lift the embargo unilaterally. I respectfully disagree. The rest of article 51 simply stipulates that self-defense measures taken by member-states shall not affect the authority and the responsibility of the Security Council to take other actions to restore peace and security. This stipulation pertains to the member nation who is defending itself, in this case Bosnia, not to other members who persist in their embargo of Bosnia.
Very Positive
Russ Feingold
Madam President, some very distinguished Senators have suggested that our unilateral action will risk putting a "Made in the U.S.A." stamp on solutions to the Bosnia problem. Last month we pondered the possibility that, to quote the Senator from Virginia [Mr. Warner]:
Negative
Russ Feingold
The question for us and for everyone in the world community is how to respond within that reality. Mr. President, as to the notion that our actions will be seen as taking sides, I do not advocate taking sides in this conflict. I do not believe this bill is about the United States siding with the Bosnian Moslems.
Positive
Russ Feingold
On the contrary, I also believe that we should lift the same embargo in place on the Republic of Croatia as well. To Serbia I would say that the evidence is overwhelming that you have engaged in cross-border aggression and atrocities in Bosnia; until you stop, we should use every possible measure to tighten the arms embargo on your republic. If that is taken sides, it is on the side of humanity and the rule of law.
Leans Positive
Russ Feingold
Madam President, we have all watched the diplomatic events of recent weeks with continued hope that the world community will finally respond in a coherent manner. I am convinced that our leadership in lifting the embargo can provide a solid foundation for future diplomatic progress, for no diplomatic solution built upon this flawed arms embargo can withstand the test of time. Suppose, for instance, that a fragile peace emerges in Bosnia. Will that be the time to lift the arms embargo on Bosnia and Croatia? Would that not disrupt the balance? And if it is not lifted, are these nations supposed to be unarmed, without a military? If so, then do they become wards of the U.N. Security Council, a U.N. protectorate or trusteeship? What does that imply for future levels of U.N. operations and U.S. support in the Balkans and elsewhere?
Very Positive
Russ Feingold
My colleague from Virginia again has spoken eloquently on this matter with the command of the details for which he has become known in such debates. He pondered a wide range of very serious technical considerations which need to be addressed before the United States actually provides arms to Bosnia. I share his concerns but I do not believe that they are the proper domain for Senate debate here today.
Slightly Positive
Russ Feingold
Let us permit the President to be President and leave to his administration those details which could be best described as the execution of policy. All our vote today will do is give the President the unfettered authority to provide arms support to Bosnia and strengthen his hand to do what he wants to do: lift the embargo. As in the case of most other authorizations, the President has considerable latitude to determine exactly how when to act.
Very Positive
Russ Feingold
In any case, it seems to me that this authorization places the administration in a stronger position to bring positive and fresh leadership to the diplomatic table in the weeks ahead.
Very Positive
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The time of the Senator has expired.
Unknown
Who yields time?
Unknown
Joseph I. Lieberman
I yield 2 minutes from the time controlled by Senator Dole to the Senator from Texas [Mrs. Hutchison].
Unknown
Kay Bailey Hutchison
Madam President, I rise to speak in favor of the Dole-McCain bill.
Positive
Kay Bailey Hutchison
Like Somalia before it, United States policy with respect to Bosnia is "a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma." When Winston Churchill used that phrase, he was referring to Russia, and he went on to say that the key to the riddle was Russian national interest. We must find the key to our predicament with regard to the administration's foreign policy. The question that we must answer for ourselves is, "What U.S. national security interests are at stake in Bosnia, and if no vital national security interests are at stake, do we then have a moral obligation to support the Bosnians?" It is clear that the United States has no strategic interests in Bosnia. Therefore, I feel it is not in our interest to place U.S. ground troops in harms way.
Very Positive
Kay Bailey Hutchison
We do, however, have a moral obligation to follow declared U.S. doctrine, as enunciated by U.S. Presidents from John F. Kennedy to George Bush in that we will lend our support to oppressed people who are willing to fight for the freedom.
Slightly Positive
Kay Bailey Hutchison
It is not always our responsibility to fight for them, but we must be willing to support them. The issue is American leadership and resolve. There are despots in the world who may mistakenly be tempted into challenging our vital interests if we are perceived as weak.
Very Positive
Kay Bailey Hutchison
Three years ago, the United States formed and led a coalition of diverse nations to a stunning victory in operation Desert Storm. At that time, the United States was the unquestioned leader of the world. Are we now perceived as simply a member of the community of nations rather than its leader? The danger lies in the false sense of security that leadership in some way will evolve from consensus.
Very Positive
Kay Bailey Hutchison
Nothing could be further from the truth. Consensus follows leadership -- leadership does not, not will it ever, evolve from consensus. It is up to us to provide that leadership.
Somewhat Positive
Kay Bailey Hutchison
There is an old adage that it is preferable to die fighting on your feet than to live begging on your knees. It is clear that the Bosnians have made their choice, and it is to fight on their feet.
Very Negative
Kay Bailey Hutchison
We must allow them to do that. I urge support of the Dole-McCain amendment.
Very Positive
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?
Unknown
George J. Mitchell
Madam President, I yield 2 minutes to the Senator from Illinois.
Unknown
Paul Simon
Madam President, I just heard our colleague from Texas say -- and I have heard it two or three times today -- that we have no strategic interest.
Slightly Positive
Paul Simon
We do have strategic interests. The interest is in maintaining stability. Frankly, our policy has been anemic in Bosnia. On the 700th day of the artillery shelling of Sarajevo, we said, "If you do not stop it, we are going to have airstrikes," and then the airstrikes stop. It should not have been the 700th day; it should have been the 2d or 7th day.
Positive
Paul Simon
Right now, we face a choice of the Mitchell amendment or the Dole amendment. I am going to vote for the Mitchell amendment and against the Dole amendment today. But I have to say time is running out. If we do not get action in 15 or 20 days -- and I do not want to set an absolute deadline, but very, very shortly -- I am going to be voting for a Dole-type of amendment. I do not like to see us do that unilaterally. We should not be a "Lone Ranger" in the world. You have to work with the community of nations. But the administration has to understand that we feel their policy has been anemic; it has not been strong, and we have to do better. If we adopt the Mitchell amendment and should defeat the Dole amendment, that does not mean that this issue is settled. The administration has to lead, or I am ready to vote for a Dole-type of amendment.
Positive
George J. Mitchell
Madam President, the distinguished chairman of the Appropriations Committee has a question, and I am prepared to yield him time for his question and for my response.
Slightly Positive
Robert Byrd
I thank the distinguished majority leader.
Somewhat Positive
Robert Byrd
Madam President, may I say to my leader that it is not my intention to vote for the amendment by Mr. Dole. I hope that I can vote for the amendment by the majority leader. I have a question regarding the language, however, that is in paragraph 2. This is the language:
Positive
Robert Byrd
My question goes to the definition of the words "appropriate military assistance." Are these words to be interpreted to mean manpower, training capability, or to weaponry only? If so, if it only applies to weapons, what is there to ensure that this will not be seen as an open-ended authorization, which the President can interpret to mean that, regardless of the appropriations and costs, or whatever, he is being authorized by the Congress to proceed in such a manner as he deems fit -- in other words, in an open ended way?
Leans Positive
George J. Mitchell
Madam President, it does not include anything other than equipment. Stated another way, it is not intended to cover personnel in any form.
Unknown
George J. Mitchell
Second, to respond to the second part of the chairman's question, it is my intention to seek to add to the language the words "subject to the regular notification procedures," which would directly involve the Congress in those decisions.
Unknown
Robert Byrd
Does the majority leader intend to refer to the appropriate congressional committees in that language?
Unknown
George J. Mitchell
That is correct.
Unknown
Robert Byrd
The courts are increasingly looking to the four corners of the law, rather than to legislative history as expressed on the Senate floor. I know the majority leader's intentions are what he said they were, namely, that this term "appropriate military assistance" would mean only equipment, weapons, supplies as I understood him.
Negative
George J. Mitchell
That is correct. I will seek to gain consent to modify it as I have stated. And if it is not approved by the Senate, I will offer an amendment at a later time in the deliberations of another measure.
Very Positive
Robert Byrd
I thank the distinguished majority leader for his consideration. I hope that in conference every effort will be made to tie this language down to mean weapons or equipment only, and to exclude manpower in any way.
Leans Positive
George J. Mitchell
I am prepared to give the Senator my full assurance in that regard.
Very Positive
Robert Byrd
I thank the distinguished majority leader.
Somewhat Positive
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Connecticut.
Unknown
Joseph I. Lieberman
Madam President, from the time allocated to Senator Dole, I yield 2 minutes to the Senator from Utah [Mr. Hatch].
Unknown
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Utah is recognized for 2 minutes.
Unknown
Orrin G. Hatch
I thank the colleague from Connecticut.
Somewhat Positive
Orrin G. Hatch
Madam President, I rise as a cosponsor of S. 2042. More than 2 years ago, I called for the lifting of the arms embargo for the victims of Serbian aggression. The need for this action was clear then, and it is even more clear now: Only by creating a balance of power on the ground will Serbia accept a just, negotiated settlement.
Very Positive
Orrin G. Hatch
American policy in the former Yugoslavia has been morally and politically bankrupt. We have been an active partner in a policy of deference to the aggressor and indifference to the victims of aggression.
Very Negative
Orrin G. Hatch
The decision to impose an arms embargo was motivated by the understandable intent to try to restrain the conflict by cutting off the supply of weapons to the combatants. However, that concept was tragically flawed. Serbia and its allies in Croatia and Bosnia controlled the vast majority of the weapons from the arsenals of the former Yugolsavia and the bulk of the former Yugoslavia's arms and munitions factories.
Very Negative
Orrin G. Hatch
In theory, the arms embargo appeared even-handed. In reality, it fundamentally favored Serbia and enabled Serbia to launch its war of aggression at minimal cost and risk.
Very Negative
Orrin G. Hatch
Madam President, the Croatian and Bosnian people do not need our pity, they need our weapons. The world disarmed these peoples. The world told these peoples to put their faith in the international community. The result has been ethnic cleansing and unspeakable violence and atrocities.
Very Negative
Orrin G. Hatch
This bizzare policy has been supported by the United States. In consonance with our European allies and Russia, we have kept the victims of Serbian aggression grossly handicapped in defending themselves.
Neutral
Orrin G. Hatch
Those who claim that lifting the embargo means the United States will take sides in the conflict are misguided. We have already been intervening in the conflict through the arms embargo, but we have been intervening on the wrong side. This policy has aided and abetted Serbian aggression. It is time to end it.
Very Negative
Orrin G. Hatch
If the Security Council will not repeal the embargo, the United States should do so unilaterally. If the other members of the Security Council are willing to stand by while genocide takes place, the United States should not join them.
Very Positive
Orrin G. Hatch
Article 51 of the United Nations Charter states that nothing in the charter overrules the inherent right of a state for individual and collective self-defense. No Security Council resolution -- including the one establishing this arms embargo -- can negate the right of self- defense.
Very Positive
Orrin G. Hatch
The opponents of this bill will argue that article 51 only operates until the United Nations has acted to establish peace and stability. But the fact is that the United Nations has yet to do anything to establish peace and stability.
Very Positive
Orrin G. Hatch
It has imposed the arms embargo, but that has only assisted the aggressors.
Somewhat Negative
Orrin G. Hatch
It has sent so-called peacekeepers. But they have not kept the peace and have hardly been able to defend themselves. They have watched the Serbs perpetrate war crimes -- the same crimes we have watched on television night after night.
Negative
Orrin G. Hatch
The United Nations has sent negotiators. But they have failed time after time. The Serbs are no closer to accepting a just settlement than they were 2 years ago.
Neutral
Orrin G. Hatch
Let us face facts. The United Nations has no intention of taking strong military action to restore peace and stability. Consequently, there are no grounds to restrict Bosnia's article 51 right of individual and collective self-defense.
Very Positive
Orrin G. Hatch
Given the present balance of power, the Serbs will only accept an agreement that ratifies the gains of their aggression. Only if we change the balance of power will the Serbs accept a just peace that involves the return of territories seized by force and ethnically cleansed. We will only end the war if the Serbs understand that further aggression will be too costly.
Very Positive
Orrin G. Hatch
What needs to be done is simple: Remove U.N. peacekeepers from the region, lift the arms embargo, and use NATO to conduct selected air strikes against strategic Serbian targets, such as supply lines, depots, and command and control centers.
Neutral
Orrin G. Hatch
Current administrations policy depends totally on the use of air strikes. But air strikes alone will not work. Even President Clinton admitted on April 20 that "NATO's air power alone cannot prevent further Serb aggressions or advances or silence every gun." It makes no sense to adopt a policy that you know in advance will not work.
Very Negative
Orrin G. Hatch
We are committed to defending the safe haven around six Bosnian towns. In this respect, I want to pose several questions for the supporters of the administration's policy:
Very Positive
Orrin G. Hatch
Will NATO air forces respond to all future Serbian attacks on these six cities, including low-level infantry and mortar attacks? If not, we have no policy to deal with those kind of attacks, which have been continuing around Gorazde and other cities.
Very Negative
Orrin G. Hatch
Will NATO air forces respond to Serbian attacks along fronts other than the six cities? If not, we have no policy to stop Serbian aggression in general.
Very Negative
Orrin G. Hatch
Will NATO air forces be used to give Serbia a real incentive to pull out of territory already acquired by force? If not, we have no policy to compel Serbia to accept and to implement a just settlement.
Very Positive
Orrin G. Hatch
The fact is that we have no policy on any of these points. Token gestures and occasional threats of air strikes will not solve the problem.
Very Negative
Orrin G. Hatch
Madam President, the Senate has an opportunity to begin to rectify the failure of United States policy in the former Yugoslavia. We have a moral responsibility to do so.
Somewhat Positive
Orrin G. Hatch
There is a wider moral issue at stake in this vote. The arms embargo deprives Bosnia of the ability to defend itself. If the United States continues to uphold the embargo -- if the Senate fails to vote to repeal the embargo -- than the United States takes upon itself the moral responsibility for what happens to Bosnia.
Somewhat Positive
Orrin G. Hatch
Let me restate that point. If we allow Bosnia to defend itself by repealing the embargo, the Bosnian Government is morally responsible for its survival and future. If we deprive Bosnia of its right of self- defense, the United States becomes morally responsible for Bosnia's survival.
Very Positive
Orrin G. Hatch
The United States has been in a similar position before. It was in 1963 in a place called South Vietnam. When the Kennedy administration backed the coup against President Diem, it destabilized the country and triggered a chain reaction of events that led to the deployment of 500,000 U.S. troops.
Positive
Orrin G. Hatch
By arrogating to itself the right to determine who ruled in Saigon, the Kennedy administration made the United States morally responsible for South Vietnam's fate.
Very Positive
Orrin G. Hatch
We must not make a similar mistake in Bosnia. We must let the Bosnian people carry the responsibility for their own future. We should not arrogate to ourselves the right to determine whether or not they will survive.
Leans Positive
Orrin G. Hatch
If we keep the embargo in place, make no mistake about it: We are also accepting the moral burden for what happens in Bosnia. And, if we do so, we could well be forced to carry out our moral responsibility at the price of American blood.
Very Negative
Orrin G. Hatch
Supporters of the administration policy argue that negotiations can still work. I ask them to look down the road on which they urge us to travel.
Leans Positive
Orrin G. Hatch
That road will lead to the deployment of tens of thousands of U.S. troops as peacekeepers to enforce whatever settlement is reached. The Clinton administration makes no bones about the fact that if a settlement is negotiated, the United States will deploy 20,000 or more troops to Bosnia.
Very Positive
Orrin G. Hatch
I do not want to see American ground troops sent to enforce a settlement in Bosnia. I want the Bosnians to be strong enough to enforce their side of the settlement on their own. That can only happen if we lift the embargo.
Very Positive
Orrin G. Hatch
I will predict today that if we send peacekeepers to enforce a settlement in Bosnia, there will be significant casualties. It will lead to another Somalia or another Lebanon as surely as night follows day. We need not take that road if we create a military offset against the Serbs by arming the Croatians and the Bosnians.
Very Positive
Orrin G. Hatch
Madam President, our focus must, above all, be the interests of the United States. That is our first responsibility. It is not in our interest to play eternal referee in the conflicts within the former Yugoslavia. We should not expend the lives of our sons and daughters by putting them in the line of fire of Serbian forces who have studied the lessons of our experience in Somalia and Lebanon.
Leans Positive
Orrin G. Hatch
History shows that until a balance of power exists among belligerents, conflict will continue. There is no such balance of power in the former Yugoslavia. The Serbs have the big stick. They have overwhelming superiority in arms and materiel. Until equilibrium in armaments is attained between the Croats and Bosnians on the one hand and the Serbs on the other, the war will continue.
Negative
Orrin G. Hatch
I hope all Members will reflect on the course this administration is taking. No settlement can endure without military equilibrium. Any settlement we broker that requires the Serbs to give up land will cause the Serbs to view us as an adversary or enemy. In that context, the United States must not make the mistake of embroiling its ground forces in the role of referee in terrain favoring guerrilla warfare and against Serbian forces who have no intention of forgiving or forgetting.
Slightly Positive
Orrin G. Hatch
Madam President, the sine qua non of successful resolution of the conflict in the former Yugoslavia is the repeal of the arms embargo. I urge support for S. 2042.
Very Positive
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?
Unknown
Joseph I. Lieberman
Madam President, I yield 3 minutes to the Senator from Michigan [Mr. Levin].
Unknown
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Michigan is recognized for 3 minutes.
Unknown
Carl Levin
Madam President, I support the resolution of Senators Dole, Lieberman, and others.
Positive
Carl Levin
To those who say it makes no sense to allow Bosnians to defend themselves because that will result in more arms flowing into the region, I agree that is not the world's first choice. We and the nations of the world, acting through the United Nations, are unwilling to take actions necessary to protect the civilians in Bosnia against ethnic cleansing and aggression. So the fire continues to burn, primarily in one direction, against the Bosnian Government.
Positive
Carl Levin
If we are not willing to defend them, we must surely allow the primary victims of aggression to defend themselves, a guarantee that is in the U.N. Charter.
Somewhat Positive
Carl Levin
Some have argued that our allies and other nations have personnel on the ground in Bosnia assisting in humanitarian relief efforts, and these forces would be endangered if more arms flowed into the region. They might then decide to withdraw forces and humanitarian relief might be interrupted.
Somewhat Positive
Carl Levin
But the Bosnian Government has consistently appealed for the end of the embargo and said many times that if it is a choice between being allowed to defend themselves without one of their hands tied behind their back, or receiving humanitarian relief from UNPROFOR on the ground, they would prefer to defend themselves and not become casualties and victims for humanitarian relief workers to care for.
Very Positive
Carl Levin
The arms embargo is preserving a disparity that allows the Bosnian Serbs a continuing advantage in weaponry and has proven to be a counter-incentive toward a fair settlement.
Somewhat Positive
Carl Levin
Of course, we should seek allied support for exempting Bosnia from the arms embargo. Of course, we should seek Security Council agreement on lifting that embargo. But those efforts have failed. We know they are going to fail again.
Leans Positive
Carl Levin
There is not a shred of evidence that an effort at the U.N. Security Council to lift the arms embargo multilaterally is going to succeed. It is immoral for the world -- particularly for Europe, but the world as a whole -- to not have taken the risk sooner to defend Bosnia against ethnic cleansing. It is incredible not to let the Bosnians defend themselves. It is unconscionable to keep the embargo on arms going to Bosnia when the other side has them in quantity.
Slightly Negative
Carl Levin
Even though the allies are not persuaded, and will not be persuaded, to lift the embargo, we should act. The alternative is either no settlement, or a settlement so one sided in its imposed terms, that it will spawn continuous war in retribution. A settlement will come only after the parties want it, and that will happen only if the parties have some parity in the military equation.
Leans Negative
Carl Levin
I thank my friend from Connecticut, and I yield the floor.
Very Positive
Joseph I. Lieberman
Madam President, I yield 5 minutes to the Senator from Arizona [Mr. McCain].
Unknown
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona is recognized for 5 minutes.
Unknown
John McCain
Madam President, in a little while the Senate will make a very important determination: whether we should defend the sovereignty of a nation where our vital national interests are not at stake or whether we should allow that nation the opportunity to provide for its own defense. That is, in essence, what this choice between the legislation offered by Senators Dole and Lieberman and the amendment offered by Senator Mitchell will resolve.
Very Positive
John McCain
I believe Senators Dole and Lieberman and all those Senators supporting this bill have adequately refuted the many arguments posed against it. The unlawfulness of the embargo has been well established. Those who fear that other embargoes will be undermined should we act unilaterally should remember that as the sole superpower left in the world, as the leading nation in NATO, and as the greatest force for good on earth, the United States should have sufficient influence left to discourage our closest allies from breaking international law and acting against our and their best interests. All the logistic questions raised against lifting the embargo were raised against our support for the Afghan resistance. Those problems were overcome then, and they can be overcome in this situation.
Very Positive
John McCain
In the end, the Dole-Lieberman legislation is a matter of simple justice. I do not know if it will shorten or lengthen the war. I do not know if the Bosnian Government can prevail in this conflict. I do not know if they can win back sufficient territory to make a settlement more equitable. But they have the inalienable right to defend themselves, and no nation, certainly not the leader of the free world, should deny them that right unless we are prepared to defend Bosnia ourselves.
Very Positive
John McCain
The distinguished majority leader's amendment, in effect, asks us to authorize the U.S. assumption of the responsibility to defend Bosnia. As I made clear in my statement the other day, I believe that is a profound mistake.
Neutral
John McCain
Further, Senator Mitchell's amendment does not require the President to lift the embargo -- multilaterally if possible, unilaterally, if necessary. It does instruct the President to immediately seek NATO agreement to end the embargo, and upon such agreement to propose that the Security Council terminate this unjust interference with Bosnia's inherent right to self defense.
Very Positive
John McCain
That would be an improvement over current circumstances, Mr. President. That the President needs to be instructed to take such action is a rather sad commentary on the administration. For as often as the President has declared his support for ending the embargo, we have no evidence that his administration has taken the first step in the United Nations or in NATO to achieve that laudable goal. It is the administration's failure to act that made it necessary for the distinguished minority leader and Senator Lieberman to offer their legislation.
Neutral
John McCain
Unfortunately, given the intensity of the administration's opposition to the Dole-Lieberman legislation, and their record of nonsupport in the past, I have no confidence that if the administration encounters the least opposition from NATO or the Security Council that it will seriously try to overcome that opposition or to act unilaterally if necessary.
Leans Positive
John McCain
By actively opposing this legislation to lift the unlawful arms embargo against Bosnia, the administration has revealed once again the abject poverty of its foreign policy commitments. With their typical resort to obfuscation, the administration has yet again sought to climb down from another frequently expressed promise to act.
Slightly Positive
John McCain
Time and again, the President has voiced his support for lifting the embargo. What has the administration done to give force to his support? Absolutely nothing. And it will do nothing tomorrow or the next day or the day after that. Instead, the administration will once again attempt to fill the great yawning abyss between its rhetoric and its action with cynical and specious arguments that are intended, as is so much of their diplomacy, to transfer the responsibilities and the authority of the world's only superpower to any other nation or nations willing to relieve them of the burden.
Very Positive
John McCain
We are rapidly approaching the point, Madam President, when the word of the United States, purchased over the years with so much blood and treasure, is no longer worth the television time the administration uses to make their faithless promises. It is time, Madam President, for the Congress to step in and restore some credibility to American foreign policy. It is time for Congress to assume the responsibilities which the administration has abrogated, and make the word of the United States stand for something greater than the clatter of broken promises.
Very Positive
John McCain
I urge all of my colleagues to vote against delaying simple justice for Bosnians any longer, to vote against authorizing the use of American force in a conflict which we are not prepared to win, and where our own vital national interests are not threatened. I urge all of my colleagues to support the just and necessary legislation offered by Senator Dole and Senator Lieberman, and lift the arms embargo against Bosnia now.
Very Positive
Joseph I. Lieberman
Madam President, I yield 3 minutes to the Senator from Virginia [Mr. Warner].
Unknown
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Virginia is recognized for 3 minutes.
Unknown
John Warner
Madam President, at this very moment, the Senate Armed Services Committee is conducting a hearing on Somalia. One of the witnesses is a father who lost a son.
Somewhat Negative
John Warner
I read from that father's testimony:
Unknown
John Warner
Madam President, I most respectfully say to both of my leaders, I do not think we have conducted this debate in a manner that is adequate to the gravity of the decision about to be made.
Very Positive
John Warner
I spoke on Monday and laid out a series of questions in opposition to both Leader Dole's amendment and Leader Mitchell's amendment. I stand today in opposition to both, and I offer these questions: Has the Senate considered this resolution in committee? No; neither one. Has it conducted briefings directed specifically at the issues in the resolution? No. Yet, we are about to make a decision which could result in a subsequent hearing of the Armed Services Committee or other committees which would require that we look squarely into the eyes of parents and families who have lost sons and daughters in this region of the world.
Very Negative
John Warner
I say to the Mitchell resolution -- and forgive me for rushing, because I have but a minute left -- technically, I would say this resolution can be interpreted as much like the Dole resolution. It is a unilateral lifting.
Very Positive
John Warner
Yes, we go to the United Nations, but it does not speak to whether the United Nations supports or rejects. It implies that once that action is taken, then we begin, as the distinguished Senator from West Virginia put it, to send in supplies. Are we sending in supplies without personnel to explain or train how to use them, to maintain them? I say that much is left to be answered.
Very Positive
John Warner
Second, the Mitchell resolution says "to protect the UNPROFOR." UNPROFOR would have to pull out, in my judgment, and the judgment of many in the administration, if the embargo is lifted.
Somewhat Positive
John Warner
The resolution does not speak to what use of air power is then made if UNPROFOR is pulled out, and the Bosnian Government is rearmed. It speaks to only isolated areas in that region of tragic conflict as to what air power can do.
Very Negative
John Warner
Is there any limitation on the Bosnian Government to utilize this new military equipment to regain what they have lost? It is silent as to that.
Very Negative
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired.
Unknown
John Warner
Madam President, the Mitchell resolution speaks to the fact that we should come back if there is a further question of ground troops.
Unknown
John Warner
Why is there silence to other Americans who are flying, who are at sea? Are they entitled to less protection than those that may be involved on ground?
Somewhat Positive
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired.
Unknown
John Warner
Yes, regrettably the time of 3 minutes on this tragic thing has expired. I regret that. The opposition has not been given, in my judgment, a fair opportunity to reply.
Slightly Positive
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?
Unknown
George J. Mitchell
Madam President, I just wanted to say that this matter was before the Senate 2 days ago. Any Senator who wanted to speak had the opportunity to speak for as long as he or she wanted to. We stayed in session for as long as any Senator wanted to speak.
Positive
George J. Mitchell
The Senator from Virginia availed himself of that opportunity. He spoke at length. Others chose not to do so. I can make it possible for any Senator who wants to speak to do so, but I cannot force a Senator to speak on the subject if he or she chooses not to do so.
Slightly Positive
John Warner
I thank the distinguished leader. I did speak for the better part of an hour on Monday, and indicated my desire to speak for 10 minutes as part of any time agreement in opposition to both resolutions. I have to accept the responsibility that that request went astray.
Very Positive
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?
Unknown
George J. Mitchell
Madam President, I yield 7 minutes to the distinguished Senator from Georgia.
Unknown
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Georgia is recognized for 7 minutes.
Unknown
Sam Nunn
Madam President, my bottom line is, I support the Mitchell resolution and oppose the Dole resolution. But I do have a lot of caveats about it. The largest caveat about the whole debate is that we are in real danger in this country, not simply in the Senate. We are in real danger of concentrating so much on interests that are humanitarian and important that we do not focus on what is truly vital.
Positive
Sam Nunn
What we do here today may very well have a bearing on one of our vital interests where tens of thousands of Americans are at risk, and that is Korea. I think everyone ought to keep that in mind.
Very Positive
Sam Nunn
It is hard for me to conceive of a unilateral lifting of an embargo that has gone through the Security Council at the same time we are on the verge of having to request that same Security Council to put an embargo on Korea.
Very Positive
Sam Nunn
We move against one that we voted for and say we are going to take this action unilaterally and, at the same time, we go to China and Russia and others on the Security Council and say, "Now, go along with us on Korea, because we believe that is vital." We are in real danger of losing sight of the difference between important and humanitarian, and vital.
Leans Positive
Sam Nunn
America has a tremendous stake in Korea. If that one goes wrong, we will lose an awful lot of people. And I do agree with that part of what Senator Warner said a few minutes ago.
Very Negative
Sam Nunn
The second thing that I think is important to keep in perspective is whether we go into a lifting of the embargo or whether we go into a massive bombing campaign, which we have already threatened at some point we may have to carry out. And, in my view, there should be sanctuaries if we begin that process. Either of those steps is incompatible, with tens of thousands of U.N. relief workers and humanitarian workers and military forces who are lightly armed still being under the gun of the Bosnian Serbs.
Leans Negative
Sam Nunn
Whatever we do here has to be done in concert with our allies, because they have people on the ground. In spite of our disagreements -- and I have profound disagreements with our allies on this one -- I believe the embargo should have been lifted a long time ago. I still believe it ought to be lifted.
Very Negative
Sam Nunn
But, in spite of that, to do it unilaterally when they have the forces at risk is to ask for the beginning of, I think, a disintegration of the alliance itself, and I mean by that the NATO alliance.
Very Negative
Sam Nunn
I am not saying this would be the fatal blow, but this would be the beginning of the unraveling of the kind of collective security we have had since World War II.
Very Negative
Sam Nunn
I understand where the proponents of the Dole resolution are coming from. I identify with those instincts to the bottom of my heart. But I do not believe this is the way to do it.
Very Positive
Sam Nunn
I would have to add that I think the embargo is counterproductive. I think the embargo is, in many aspects, immoral. And I think we are in grave danger -- "we" being the entire United Nations and the NATO alliance -- of reversing what some people have probably forgotten, but it was a pretty good doctrine, called the Nixon Doctrine, which says the first thing we do is help other people by arming them, letting them fight for themselves when they are willing, and the last thing we do is use our own military forces. That came out of Vietnam.
Very Positive
Sam Nunn
Collectively, NATO and the United Nations are reversing that doctrine.
Positive
Sam Nunn
Madam President, I believe it is enormously important that we coordinate whatever we do, as frustrating as it may be. It will require very strong American leadership. It will require the President of the United States being personally involved. It will require, if we are going to have a lifting of the embargo or any other kind of decisive collective action by our allies, more leadership than has thus far been exerted on behalf of our own country, as well as on behalf of other countries. But we should not do it unilaterally.
Very Positive
Sam Nunn
Madam President, I want to throw out just one example of something that I believe should be considered, but it could not be considered unless we do it collectively. It would be impossible. The debate on lifting the embargo is all involved in either lifting it or not lifting it. There is a way to calibrate a lifting of the embargo that has not really been explored with our allies. But it would require exploring with our allies -- and not only our allies, it would require the Croatians to be involved -- and that is, first of all, for the Security Council to authorize the lifting of the embargo on Bosnia to permit the controlled entry of selected defensive weapons to meet the needs of Bosnian defenders if further Serbian attacks take place on the safe havens.
Unknown
Sam Nunn
No. 2, that an international screening body be set up by the United Nations to ensure that the weapons to be provided are the type and the quality and the quantity suitable for defensive action and calibrated to enable a defense rather than a sustained offensive action. That is why our allies are opposed to lifting the embargo. They fear a sustained kind of Bosnian Moslem or Bosnian Government offensive action which would just spread the war and have tremendous bloodshed. We cannot dismiss that as simply a frivolous fear.
Very Negative
Sam Nunn
The third thing that I would suggest is that we seek to involve -- with our NATO allies -- the Russians as well as the East Europeans, where they have stockpiled defensive weapons, where those in former Yugoslavia have already known how to operate those weapons because some of them were in the Yugoslavian Army; that we have some of those weapons be included and that we involve the Russians, here, in helping to select the kind of weapons that would be provided. I have in mind, certainly, antitank missiles. There is absolutely no excuse anyone can offer for denying antitank weapons for people who are being victimized and run over by tanks. But we cannot do it unilaterally.
Very Negative
Sam Nunn
The fourth step is that such weapons and equipment be earmarked for the safe areas and other populated areas and that we tell the Bosnian Serbs in advance, "We are going to release this equipment if you continue your attack." This would give us, in my opinion, a bigger lever than the threat of bombing, because this lever could be done with somewhat less risk to the collateral damage that we would have from bombing.
Very Negative
Sam Nunn
The fifth step, the Bosnian Moslem forces located in and around these safe areas, that some of them be provided training now; that we begin to train them on these weapons now so that would let the Bosnian Serbs and others know that this kind of defensive package is coming if they resume their attacks.
Very Negative
Sam Nunn
The sixth step, the sixth part of this, would be to have Croatia agree to let the arms flow across Croatia, which is necessary.
Somewhat Positive
Sam Nunn
Seventh, that the United States and our allies be prepared to air drop these kinds of weapons in after appropriate training. And I am not one of those who think training is going to take 6 or 8 months. I think it could be done much sooner than that.
Neutral
Sam Nunn
Last but of tremendous importance to our allies -- and I repeat what I said earlier, that we have to understand that although we would like to have it in every direction, we would like to be able to lift the embargo, continue the humanitarian aid, or start a big bombing campaign in response to an attack and then still continue humanitarian aid, at some point we have to understand these missions are incompatible. We have heard over in the Armed Services Committee this morning about incompatible missions. In Somalia we saw what that led to. If we continue to have this kind of lack of dialog and lack of understanding with our allies, at some point if aggression is resumed we are going to have a humanitarian disaster to the U.N. personnel or to the lightly armed forces in that country. And everybody is going to say why did it happen? Why did it happen? We will have a postmortem investigation. But it is predictable now. If we continue to have debate with our allies and no agreement with our allies and continue to debate this in a vacuum not considering the effect of our action on those people who already are in harm's way on the ground in Bosnia, we are going to have some kind of real tragedy.
Very Negative
Sam Nunn
So, I regret that I have to oppose the Dole-Lieberman amendment, but doing this unilaterally is not the way to do it. It will haunt us all over the world. It will begin to haunt us in areas where we have truly vital interests and where a huge number of Americans are in harm's way. And I talked specifically about Korea.
Very Positive
Sam Nunn
Without the cooperation of China and Russia and Japan and of course South Korea and others including Britain and France, we will not solve the Korean problem and that problem is of tremendous and vital interest to the United States. So we have to consider this in a broader context than our natural instincts on both humanitarian concerns, on the tragedy, on the atrocities that have been committed, and on our concern for that area. We have to begin to look at American foreign policy in a broader context. We cannot debate every single element of American foreign policy as if there is nothing else in the world that exists. That is what we are doing here on the floor today.
Slightly Positive
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Kohl). The time of the Senator has expired.
Unknown
Sam Nunn
I yield the floor.
Unknown
George J. Mitchell
Mr. President, I yield 1 minute to the Senator from California.
Unknown
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator California is recognized for 1 minute.
Unknown
Barbara Boxer
I thank the Chair.
Somewhat Positive
Barbara Boxer
Mr. President, if I might ask the majority leader to comment, on the completion of my thoughts? I have been very tortured about how I was going to vote on this. I feel that Senator Dole and Senator Lieberman and others have made an extremely important point through this debate, and that they have moved in fact the resolution that the majority leader is offering. I want to make sure I understand it completely.
Neutral
Barbara Boxer
My own view is that, as I believe most have said today, that the embargo should be lifted. My further view is that the best thing is if it is lifted by all the nations and done through the United Nations. That would be my preference. And if that does not happen, I believe we need to then move expeditiously in a unilateral way.
Very Positive
Barbara Boxer
Mr. President, it is my understanding that is exactly what the majority leader has said here. On page 2, on No. 2 where the majority leader says, "The Congress favors the termination of the arms embargo against the Government of Bosnia." And further down "If the Security Council fails to pass such a resolution the President shall" -- and you have added "within 5 days" -- "consult with Congress regarding unilateral termination of the arms embargo." It is my understanding that at that time either the majority leader, or Senator Lieberman or Senator Dole could in fact offer this unilateral lifting -- at that time. Am I correct in that assumption?
Leans Negative
George J. Mitchell
The Senator is correct. And of course we should know that that could happen at any time in any event.
Unknown
Barbara Boxer
Exactly. So nothing in the majority leader's resolution precludes such a unilateral resolution?
Unknown
George J. Mitchell
That is right.
Unknown
Barbara Boxer
I thank the leader for clarifying that.
Somewhat Positive
John Chafee
Could I just ask the leader a question on that in 30 seconds?
Unknown
George J. Mitchell
Mr. President -- yes.
Positive
John Chafee
OK. Can the administration lift the embargo without any resolution of Congress anytime it wants?
Positive
George J. Mitchell
That is a matter of some dispute. Some contend the administration does have the power to do so, and so that event could occur.
Somewhat Negative
John Chafee
What does the majority leader contend?
Neutral
George J. Mitchell
I am not making that contention in that argument.
Somewhat Negative
John Chafee
Thanks for the guidance.
Positive
Larry Craig
Mr. President, the violence that has pervaded the former Yugoslavian Republic has resulted in the loss of thousands of lives and more than 1 million refugees. The Balkan conflict has not only seized those involved; people around the world have watched in horror as this conflict has progressed.
Very Negative
Larry Craig
Here in the United States emotions and reactions to the conflict have ranged from frustration to devastation. The concerns of my fellow Idahoans, as well as my own concerns, have also run that course of feelings.
Very Negative
Larry Craig
The situation in Bosnia at present is quiet and somewhat stable. But this conflict has taught us one thing; peace agreements are difficult to obtain and when they are secured they are short lived. Therefore, this conflict is far from over and, unfortunately, few policy options remain.
Very Positive
Larry Craig
The proposal being debated today would lift the United States arms embargo on the former Yugoslavia, as it applies to Bosnian Moslems. This policy option is not without some flaws, which concerns me. For example, I am concerned about the safety of U.N. peacekeeping troops that are presently on the ground in the region. Their safety needs to be kept in mind in carrying out this or any other policy option.
Very Positive
Larry Craig
In addition, I am concerned about the potential escalation of the conflict. After all, we are not alone in our involvement in this situation. The conflict is in Europe, and that is where the repercussions of an escalation in the fighting will be felt. And, containment of this policy suits the interests of the United States, as well as Europe.
Neutral
Larry Craig
However, having said that, the positive aspects of lifting the arms embargo on Bosnia outweigh my concerns.
Very Positive
Larry Craig
As a firm supporter of second amendment rights in the United States, I also believe that the Bosnian Moslems have the right to protect themselves from Serbian aggression. We have seen these people brutally slaughtered as this conflict has progressed, and all without the ability to protect themselves.
Somewhat Positive
Larry Craig
Lifting the arms embargo and allowing the Bosnian Moslems to protect themselves is far more acceptable than an alternative such as the introduction of U.S. ground troops. I am concerned about the potential direction that other policy options may take, which would lead toward the involvement of U.S. ground forces. I do not support the use of U.S. forces in this conflict at this time.
Very Positive
Larry Craig
In addition, lifting the arms embargo provides an opportunity to bring some balance to this conflict that will force the involved parties to the negotiating table. That is an important point, Mr. President, because the roots of this conflict run deep and the desire to be the winner is very strong. Therefore, both sides to the conflict need to see that getting to the negotiating table is in their best interest. Then a lasting cease-fire or peace agreement can be achieved.
Very Positive
Larry Craig
Therefore, Mr. President, I will be supporting Senator Dole's bill, S. 2042.
Positive
Daniel Coats
Mr. President, with the indulgence of the Senator from Kansas I am going to just make a brief statement relative to the issue that will be before us upon the vote on the current issue, and that is the lifting of the arms embargo on Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Unknown
Daniel Coats
A wise man once said, "The success of a policy is measured by the catastrophes that do not ensue." Mr. President, the catastrophe that we call Bosnia is worse than the result of a policy that has failed. It is the result of no policy at all.
Very Negative
Daniel Coats
In Bosnia, as in Haiti, Somalia, North Korea, and elsewhere, this administration's action has not been characterized by the insightful analysis, decisive action, or strategic vision that is required and necessary in the conduct of foreign policy.
Positive
Daniel Coats
Rather than a plan to guide international relationships and to protect America's vital interests abroad, this administration's foreign policy goals seem to be the abrogation of America's right to act as a sovereign nation, and the subrogation of its treasure, resources and the lives of its young men and women in uniform to the whims and aspirations of the United Nations.
Very Positive
Daniel Coats
In his own statements, the President has declared that "economic progress is at the center of our policy abroad." And he says his primary goals are to "foster new democracies or restore them where overthrown." Mr. President, while those are noble motives, they do not constitute a foreign policy.
Very Positive
Daniel Coats
As President Kennedy once so aptly observed, "The purpose of foreign policy is not to provide an outlet for our own sentiments of hope or indignation; it is to shape real events in a real world." Mr. President, we are operating in a vacuum of Presidential leadership, and we now find ourselves in a situation in Bosnia with few, if any, viable options.
Leans Negative
Daniel Coats
Yet something must be done to break the stalemate. Something must be done to prevent a deepening of our commitment to the conflict. And something must be done to provide the Bosnians with a measure of defense against an intractable enemy that now strikes with impunity.
Very Negative
Daniel Coats
Therefore, Mr. President, with considerable reservation, I will support a lifting of the arms embargo against Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Positive
Daniel Coats
What I do not support is further U.S. involvement in this war.
Leans Negative
Daniel Coats
I harbor no illusions that lifting the embargo will somehow effect the result, but if lifting the embargo will allow the United States to exit this conflict with some sense that it has not left the Moslems in a defenseless status caused by our own misguided policy decisions, then such a decision is probably worth supporting. The fact of the matter is it is highly unlikely that we have any intention of providing more effective assistance to the Moslems. To pretend otherwise is to hold up the mistaken hope that the United States will intervene in this conflict in such a manner as to advance the Moslem interest.
Very Positive
Daniel Coats
But our intervention will not be in a manner that can effectively achieve the desired Moslem goal of recapturing lost territory, nor will it effect a meaningful settlement of the conflict. Such a result cannot be achieved by threat, as the administration has learned or, hopefully, has learned.
Slightly Positive
Daniel Coats
It cannot be achieved by a so-called and entirely misnamed U.N. peacekeeping operation. It cannot be achieved by air strikes as any military commander will tell you, and as we have already learned. It can only be achieved by massive infusion of United States ground forces, which we should not, and hopefully will not, support. After listening to Member after Member of this body come here and say we will not commit U.S. ground forces on the ground in this area of the world, I doubt that Congress will authorize that.
Neutral
Daniel Coats
We will not authorize U.S. forces because this administration has not defined what vital strategic U.S. interest lies at the heart of this policy. We have not defined a strategy. We have not defined a mission. We have not defined how once having inserted U.S. troops we can safely ensure they can accomplish their mission and we can bring them back out. And we have not, obviously, secured the support of this Congress or the American people.
Very Positive
Daniel Coats
Mr. President, the burgeoning economic conflicts erupting throughout the world make it more likely that, in the future, we will be facing challenges that look a lot more like Bosnia than Desert Storm.
Leans Positive
Daniel Coats
But until we have a President who understands that foreign policy is more than just another item to be successfully navigated in daily press briefings, or avoided by holding a summit, or abdicated by passing it off to the United Nations, many more such catastrophes will ensue.
Very Positive
Daniel Coats
While Bosnia is a terrible problem, it is just one small part of a much larger problem that must be addressed -- our lack of any coherent, consistent foreign policy. I intend to address that issue at length at a later time.
Very Negative
Daniel Coats
Mr. President, as we look to the vote which will be occurring shortly on lifting the arms embargo, I trust that it can be a means of expressing a way out of this conflict, not a further step into this conflict. We can then say with, I think, ample justification that we are providing an opportunity for the Bosnian people to defend their territory, but that the United States simply will not be engaged in standing by their side in this conflict and achieving some very dubious ends.
Somewhat Positive
Daniel Coats
Mr. President, with that I yield back whatever time I have remaining and again thank the Senator from Kansas for her patience in allowing me to address both of these subjects.
Somewhat Positive
Jesse Helms
Mr. President, Senator Dole is right on target. We are witnessing wholesale slaughter of the Bosnian people, yet the United Nations will not allow them to defend themselves. So, what Senator Dole and I, and many others, have said many times before, we are saying again: Lift the arms embargo on the people of Bosnia.
Somewhat Positive
Jesse Helms
Reminders of Vietnam are inevitable: No strategy, no commitment, no leadership. Timidity and vacillation are unbecoming to the United States of America. Let's disassociate the United States from the embargo. Above all, let us not kow-tow to our allies or to the United Nations. Let them do as they wish. Let us do what is right.
Very Positive
Jesse Helms
The time is long past due for President Clinton to make a decision and stick by it. He must not again talk about air strikes and then declare that he doesn't know what he means by airstrikes. He must let the American people know what he's considering: Missile attacks? Pinprick bombing raids? Will U.S. fliers be exposed to antiaircraft fire? Will U.S. forward observation units be on the ground?
Very Negative
Jesse Helms
Who can answer those questions? Who's calling the shots? Will the United Nations order U.S. pilots to make air strikes? Will the United States support handing off authority over NATO aircraft to the United Nations?
Very Positive
Jesse Helms
The State Department and the White House can't answer those questions. It is clear that they don't have a policy.
Somewhat Positive
Jesse Helms
I don't support airstrikes -- for the time being, at least -- but I do support, in the name of decency, the United States lifting the arms embargo on Bosnia and letting those pitiful people proceed with defending themselves.
Positive
Jesse Helms
One last point, Mr. President: It is heartbreaking to note the murder in Bosnia, but in the long term, the price the world will pay will be higher still. With empty threats, hollow ultimatums, and embarrassing flip-flops, the credibility of the United States has been whittled away.
Very Negative
Jesse Helms
It is not only the Serbs who are thumbing their noses at the United States; North Korea, Haiti, and other tin-pot dictatorships are ridiculing America. If this does not stop, the debate one day will not be about who lost Bosnia. It will be about who lost America.
Very Negative
Conrad Burns
Mr. President, I rise today to state my intention to vote against Senate bill 2042. This bill would lift the arms embargo against the Bosnian Government.
Unknown
Conrad Burns
I think we can all agree that the bloodshed in the former Yugoslavia has got to stop. We cannot afford to let this situation drag on. It is destroying this once fine country and its people. And the longer it continues, the more of a threat it is to its neighbors, U.N. peacekeepers, NATO troops, and all of the world.
Very Negative
Conrad Burns
As we look at this tragic situation, we have to keep this in perspective, pick through all the conflicting messages and come to a reasoned decision. And I mean reasoned -- not one based on flip-flop policies or on media coverage. We have to keep in mind that this is just one outburst out of many, many outbursts in this area of the world. This region has bickered over its borders for hundreds of centuries.
Negative
Conrad Burns
This region is a powder keg ready to explode. Throwing more weapons into the arena is like throwing gasoline on a burning fire. I do not see how arming the Bosnians is going to do anything but fan the flames. We have to put this fire out and get all sides to the negotiating table.
Somewhat Positive
Conrad Burns
Too many times when all sides are at the table, the Bosnians see a sign from the West and grab onto it like a last straw. I am concerned that lifting the arms embargo will only give the Bosnians a signal, encouraging them to launch offensive actions. The last thing we want to do is to send a signal that we may just possibly get deeper involved in this situation than we already are.
Positive
Conrad Burns
NATO is already carrying out air strikes under the authorization of the United Nations. There are lightly armed U.N. peackeeping troops and NATO warplanes and troops in the area. They are in the middle of the violence. We have to be mindful of their position when we seek to change direction in our policy. The United Nations decided to put an arms embargo on the country. I am not arguing whether that should have happened under the United Nations Charter, I am just saying that there are now other players in the area that will be affected by our decision.
Leans Positive
Conrad Burns
We have to take all sides of this issue into consideration. Great Britain and France are considering removing their troops from Bosnia and Herzegovina. The United Nations will have lost its position in the area and all of our humanitarian efforts will be lost. This vote is a vote on our role in this region.
Very Positive
Conrad Burns
There is more at stake than whether to lift the arms embargo. It will stake our new course, setting the wheels in motion for our future role, and that of our allies.
Unknown
Conrad Burns
We are in this as a multilateral effort. This effort tends to weave and bob, but it is a concerted effort nonetheless. The United States is losing credibility in foreign affairs. We need to either take the lead or get in line with our NATO and U.N. partners. Lifting the arms embargo is only one step. What is the next step? Without a distinct plan, I am afraid that this little step will only be one more twist in this tangled web of a policy in this region.
Neutral
Conrad Burns
In short, I cannot support this bill. There are too many questions left dangling. We need a coherent policy, not a garbled message. And after looking at it from every side, I just do not see that it makes sense.
Leans Negative
John Chafee
Mr. President, I would like to make several comments about the pending legislation on Bosnia, which has been offered by Senator Dole.
Somewhat Positive
John Chafee
First of all, I share the outrage of all Americans about the terrible situation in the former Yugoslavia. I have received hundreds of letters and phone calls from Rhode Islanders who are absolutely sickened by the conflict in Bosnia.
Very Negative
John Chafee
For nearly 2 years, reports from the war have been broadcast around the world: about ethnic cleansing, about the siege of Sarajevo, and most recently about the bombardment of innocent civilians in the so- called safe city of Gorazde. The war has revealed the Serbian combatants to be ruthless aggressors in this conflict.
Very Negative
John Chafee
Americans want the slaughter stopped. Clearly, lifting the arms embargo would send a strong signal to the Serbian government, and possibly help force the Serbians to the peace table. Senator Dole has proposed that the arms embargo be lifted, and further that the United States should lift it unilaterally. The question presented by the Dole legislation is as follows: "What approach is in the best interests of the United States of America: unilaterally lifting the arms embargo or a multinational initiative?" I am convinced that multilateral action -- in connection with our allies and the United Nations -- is the Nation's best course of action in Bosnia. Accordingly, I plan to oppose the pending Dole legislation.
Very Positive
John Chafee
Throughout nearly 24 months of conflict in Bosnia, two principles have guided our policy toward Bosnia. First, the United States should not inject ground troops into the conflict, and second, efforts to secure a lasting peace in Bosnia must be led by a multinational coalition. I see no good reason to depart from these principles at this time.
Very Positive
John Chafee
Let us now examine the specific problems of the pending legislation:
Negative
John Chafee
First, the senior Senator from Virginia [Mr. Warner] has made the persuasive argument that unilateral action would send a clear signal to our allies, and the world, that the United States is prepared to go it alone in Bosnia. In short, it would Americanize the conflict.
Leans Positive
John Chafee
The implications of an Americanized war are extremely troubling. Would the United States deliver weapons throughout the country? Would we train the Bosnians? Would that training be done in Bosnia by our forces?
Very Negative
John Chafee
These questions all point toward a major escalation of United States involvement in Bosnia. I don't think that the American people would support such military involvement, involvement that could lead the United States into a military and political quagmire.
Very Positive
John Chafee
Second, I am troubled by the precedent of unilateral action to violate a U.N. resolution, a resolution that reflects the will of the Security Council and binds all member nations. The United Nations currently has sanctions on a number of nations around the world, including Iraq, Libya, and Haiti. If the United States ignores the United Nations on Bosnia, it would send a dangerous signal to other nations that it is free to violate U.N. decisions as well.
Slightly Positive
John Chafee
For instance, the U.N. embargo on Iraq is of critical importance to the United States. Other nations, notably the French, have been unenthusiastic about abiding by the embargo. Unilateral United States action in Bosnia could lead to a total breakdown of the United Nations ability to enforce sanctions on Iraq. Furthermore, it could completely undermine the United Nation's ability to affect international behavior through binding resolutions.
Very Positive
John Chafee
Third, it is important to remember that our allies -- in particular, the British and the French -- have troops on the ground in Bosnia. These nations do not want the United States to take unilateral action in that country; it could imperil the lives of their troops. Moreover, lifting the ban unilaterally would almost certainly disrupt the important United Nations humanitarian relief efforts that the peacekeeping troops are coordinating in Bosnia.
Very Positive
John Chafee
Finally, I fear that unilateral action would undermine the fragile peace negotiations that are underway between the United States, the United Nations, and the Russians. We must all remember that the ultimate goal in the former Yugoslavia is peace. Unilateral action could well prolong the conflict and delay a peaceful settlement in Bosnia.
Very Positive
John Chafee
Mr. President, I believe that the United States needs to work with the United Nations -- especially our allies in Europe -- to stop Serbian aggression. American leadership can best be demonstrated by leading a multinational effort to end the conflict.
Very Positive
John Chafee
Unilateral action is the wrong approach.
Negative
Frank R. Lautenberg
Mr. President, I intend to vote for both amendments.
Unknown
Frank R. Lautenberg
This is not a debate about whether to lift the arms embargo. It is a debate about how we can best do it.
Very Positive
Frank R. Lautenberg
I believe the arms embargo against the Bosnian Moslem's should be lifted. Thousands of innocent Bosnian Moslems have been slaughtered before our eyes as the world has debated the proper way to provide them with the means to defend themselves. The international community has left the Bosnian Moslems defenseless, forced them to fight their Serbian aggressors with both hands tied behind their backs, contributed to their slaughter. I am a cosponsor of the Dole-Lieberman amendment because I believe the arms embargo should be lifted. I will vote for that amendment.
Very Negative
Frank R. Lautenberg
However, I also intend to vote for the Mitchell amendment. I prefer international consensus through the United Nations. The President has asked for more time to seek the agreement of our allies. I want to empower the President in his efforts to prevail up on the allies to lift the arms embargo. But I am not willing to give him forever.
Very Positive
Frank R. Lautenberg
Lifting the arms embargo to ensure that the Bosnian Moslems will be able to defend themselves is the right thing to do. The United States should lift it, and so should the international community.
Very Positive
Daniel Patrick Moynihan
Mr. President, as I stated on the floor yesterday, this is an extremely difficult issue. Unilateral lifting of the Bosnian arms embargo gives me no pleasure. No doubt it is preferable for the United Nations Security Council to agree to fulfill its responsibilities and to lift the arms embargo. Better for Bosnia. Better for the Security Council.
Very Positive
Daniel Patrick Moynihan
I find it significant that Senator Biden -- an early supporter of lifting the embargo -- is supporting the Mitchell amendment because he received a commitment from the administration that the United States will table a resolution in the Security Council to lift the embargo. In addition, the majority leader makes a powerful argument concerning the safety of the gallant U.N. peacekeepers and aid workers in Bosnia.
Very Positive
Daniel Patrick Moynihan
I find elements of both proposals compelling. This is particularly true because I disagree with some of the proponents of the Dole amendment when they say that the United States has no stake in this contest, and when they oppose Senator Mitchell's endorsement of NATO involvement. Some who support Senator Dole's amendment say we should lift the embargo and then wash our hands of Bosnia. I disagree. In fact, if we are to lift the embargo we should be prepared to support the implementation of that policy with air power.
Very Positive
Daniel Patrick Moynihan
Taken together, the two amendments constitute the strongest position. A unilateral lifting of the arms embargo, combined with multilateral air strikes. I hope that it will be understood by the administration that there were those in the Senate who supported both. And that it will be understood that many who voted only for the Mitchell amendment did so as the very last step short of unilateral action.
Very Positive
Daniel Patrick Moynihan
Mr. President, the credibility of the United Nations guarantee of a collective response to aggression is at stake in Bosnia. If the United Nations Security Council fails in its responsibility to provide a collective response to aggression and at the same time purport to forbid other countries from assisting Bosnia, then the credibility of the Charter itself will be at stake in Bosnia.
Leans Positive
Mitch McConnell
Mr. President, there are remarkably circular arguments at work in this debate.
Negative
Mitch McConnell
With very few exceptions, even opponents of the Dole bill claim they want the embargo lifted, but it should be done in concert with our allies.
Neutral
Mitch McConnell
The President joins this chorus. He says he wants the embargo lifted, but he is powerless to make that decision, or affect that change.
Very Negative
Mitch McConnell
Unfortunately, if we don't demonstrate American resolve, the United Nations and Europe will not move -- the fact that the international community is paralyzed, in turn, has become the excuse the administration uses for not acting.
Neutral
Mitch McConnell
American policy is caught in an endless circle of accusation, blame and counter-accusation.
Very Negative
Mitch McConnell
Frankly, what's missing is American leadership. I had hoped that in the weeks since this measure was first brought to the floor that the State Department and Ambassador Albright, at a minimum would have tried to establish in the Security Council that the embargo did not apply to Bosnia.
Positive
Mitch McConnell
Obviously, many of us hoped that the President would go further and take advantage of the time since the legislation was introduced to press the case with our allies to lift the embargo entirely.
Very Positive
Mitch McConnell
Instead, no effort has been made. The President keeps saying he thinks it ought to be lifted, yet there is no evidence that he is matching words with diplomatic action.
Very Negative
Mitch McConnell
So, the Senate is left with the obligation to take the initiative.
Unknown
Mitch McConnell
The fact of the matter is the vote today is much a message of support to the Bosnian Moslems as it is a last gasp attempt to motivate the administration to do what needed to be done a long time ago -- define and defend American interests.
Very Positive
Mitch McConnell
The vote today will not end the embargo. In all likelihood this bill will never see the light of day in the House -- House rules and the administration will make sure of it.
Somewhat Positive
Mitch McConnell
We should accept that what we are doing is largely symbolic, and, as such, represents the enormous collective frustration we share as we watch America's credibility erode and our interests subcontracted out to the United Nations.
Very Positive
Mitch McConnell
Earlier in the week, I defined this as a debate about American leadership.
Unknown
Mitch McConnell
I am convinced the United Nations and our allies in Europe will continue to stand on the sidelines and wring their hands unless they are presented with decisions and firm direction from the leader of our great Nation.
Very Positive
Mitch McConnell
Sadly, the United States of America has joined the ranks of hand wringers.
Positive
Mitch McConnell
A year ago, I was uncomfortable telling a new administration how to conduct the foreign policy business of this Nation.
Somewhat Negative
Mitch McConnell
But, after a year of administration missteps, misquotes and missed opportunities, it is time for the Senate to act to fill the foreign policy vacuum.
Leans Positive
Mitch McConnell
We cannot schedule the President's day. We cannot force the men on the President's national security team to make decisions.
Somewhat Positive
Mitch McConnell
In fact, I am not persuaded they ever will make the tough choices -- I am not confident the administration wants to define our goals and be forced to bear responsibility for a sustained commitment to a strategy.
Somewhat Negative
Mitch McConnell
It seems the best the Administration can do is plead with the Majority Leader for more time. The alternative to Senator Dole's measure declares our support for the status quo urging the President to promptly seek the support of our allies and the United Nations in lifting the embargo.
Very Positive
Mitch McConnell
I suppose the proponents of this strategy set some stock in telling the President to act promptly.
Unknown
Mitch McConnell
But, let's remember, this legislation was the pending business of the Senate April 21. The administration has had three weeks to act promptly and they have done absolutely nothing.
Unknown
Mitch McConnell
I don't think this debate should be about 2 more days or 22 more days. What the Senate needs to address is the pattern of indecision which jeopardizes American credibility and only guarantees more pain, more losses and prospects for peace in Bosnia.
Somewhat Negative
Mitch McConnell
As days lapse into months, the Serbs have come to understand that our tough talk is not followed by decisive action. They have and will continue to take advantage of the administration's wobbling and inconsistency.
Neutral
Mitch McConnell
The Bosnian Moslems should not have to continue to pay a price for the failure of American leadership. The embargo should be lifted. Let us not compound our failure with half hearted attempts to buy time. I urge my colleagues to support the Dole-Lieberman legislation.
Neutral
Chris Dodd
Mr. President, I rise in support of the pending amendment by the distinguished majority leader, Senator Mitchell. I want to commend him for his work in putting together this important piece of legislation and for bringing this crucial matter to the attention of the Senate.
Very Positive
Chris Dodd
I also want to commend the distinguished chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, Senator Pell, and the distinguished chairman of the Armed Services Committee, Senator Nunn, for their contribution to this amendment.
Positive
Chris Dodd
Let me take this opportunity as well to commend the distinguished minority leader, Senator Dole, along with my colleague from Connecticut, Senator Lieberman. Senator Dole and Senator Lieberman have played an instrumental role in the debate and the dialog over this issue for the better part of a year. Their efforts have helped to keep the issue of Bosnia and the plight of the Bosnian people firmly in the center of the American foreign policy agenda.
Very Positive
Chris Dodd
Mr. President, the amendment that has been proposed by Senator Dole and Senator Lieberman raises important and complex questions that deserve very careful consideration by every Member of this body. In all candor, I must say that I find myself in sympathy with much of what this legislation seeks to do.
Very Positive
Chris Dodd
Like the sponsors of the Dole amendment, I too am deeply troubled by the arms embargo against the people of Bosnia and Herzegovina, an embargo that in my view has needlessly contributed to the suffering of the Bosnian Moslem population. And I must admit that there is a certain emotional appeal to the solution this legislation proposes, which is to lift the embargo now and to provide arms to the Bosnian Moslem faction.
Slightly Positive
Chris Dodd
But however much I may be in sympathy with the Dole-Lieberman language, and however strong the appeal of this legislation may be, I cannot lend my support to the solution this amendment would propose. This legislation would require the administration to take an action that flies directly in the face of our commitments to our allies and to the rest of the international community. As much as I would like to see an end to the embargo against Bosnia, that is a course of action I cannot support at the present juncture.
Very Positive
Chris Dodd
Mr. President, I would remind my colleagues that the U.N. arms embargo was imposed by a binding resolution in the Security Council. I would remind my colleagues that the United States voted for this resolution and pledged to abide by its terms. Just as we would insist that our allies adhere to Security Council resolutions, even those they might later find inconvenient or distasteful, so must we apply that standard to ourselves.
Very Positive
Chris Dodd
It has been argued by the proponents of the Dole amendment that the U.N. arms embargo is politically and morally wrong, and that the embargo may in fact be contrary to law. It has been argued that the embargo is a violation of article 51 of the U.N. Charter, which guarantees every nation the right to self defense. This is an important question, and one on which I think it is safe to say the international legal community has been greatly divided.
Very Negative
Chris Dodd
Unfortunately, while the Dole amendment raises this and other important questions, it also attempts to answer these questions, and to do so in a manner that in my view may be premature. In truth, this legislation asks us to simply declare that our view is the right view, and that since we are right and the Security Council is wrong we should no longer consider ourselves bound by the Security Council's judgments.
Neutral
Chris Dodd
Make no mistake, Mr. President: What this legislation would ask us to do is to serve as judge and jury over the actions of the United Nations. I am not certain that this is the kind of international order our allies and partners around the world have in mind, nor do I believe this is the kind of international order that will serve our own interests in the long run.
Neutral
Chris Dodd
Just imagine for a second, Mr. President, the kind of pandora's box such an action would open. What if Great Britain, or Greece, or Turkey, were to decide that the U.N. arms embargo against Iraq was no longer in their interest? Perhaps they might even come up with some provision of the U.N. charter that in their view nullified it or rendered it illegal. Would that give them the unilateral right to ignore the arms embargo?
Leans Negative
Chris Dodd
What if Canada, or Venezuela, were to decide that they no longer felt themselves bound by the United Nations trade embargo against Haiti? Would it be acceptable for them to ignore that embargo as well? These are questions we need to ask ourselves before proceeding with this legislation today.
Positive
Chris Dodd
Moreover, Mr. President, it is unclear whether a unilateral lifting of the arms embargo would ultimately even benefit the people of Bosnia and Herzegovina. One can argue, of course, that the provision of U.S. arms and supplies to the Moslem faction in Bosnia might help them gain an equal footing in the conflict, and perhaps even hasten the war's end.
Very Positive
Chris Dodd
But there would be a cost to such unilateral action as well, Mr. President, and the cost might be very steep indeed. Over the 3 years that this conflict has been fought, the international community has taken a number of steps to limit the spread of the fighting and to limit the impact on innocent civilians. If the United States were to decide to lift the embargo unilaterally, these important efforts could be put at risk.
Somewhat Positive
Chris Dodd
In Croatia, some 14,000 U.N. peacekeepers have been in place since the early part of 1992, helping to enforce a truce between Serbian and Croatian forces. In the former Republic of Macedonia, U.N. peackeepers have been deployed in order to keep the war from spreading. And in Bosnia, U.N. peacekeepers have secured the Sarajevo airport and have been using that airport to carry out airlifts of humanitarian assistance. That effort has now been under way for nearly 2 years, longer even than the famed Berlin airlift of 1948-49.
Very Positive
Chris Dodd
The international community has also had some success, I might add, in deterring certain instances of aggression by Serbian forces. This past February, after a mortar attack against an open-air market in Sarajevo, the United Nations and NATO issued an ultimatum banning any Serb heavy artillery from within 20 kilometers of the city. Last month, this ultimatum was extended to cover the Bosnian city of Gorazde as well. While there have been violations of these ultimatums, Serbian forces have for the most part adhered to the NATO mandates.
Slightly Positive
Chris Dodd
Mr. President, I do not mean to imply that the international community has done everything it can in the former Yugoslavia. Clearly there is more that the United Nations and other international organizations can and should be doing to bring a halt to the aggression by Serbian forces. But if we lift the embargo now, if we blatantly ignore our obligations under the U.N. Security Council, then we run the risk of undoing all of the cooperation that has been enjoyed to this date.
Very Positive
Chris Dodd
Do that, Mr. President, and we inject the United States into this conflict in a way that we have never been before. Do not think that we will continue to gain the cooperation of the British, or the French, far less the Russians. No, what we will have is an American conflict, with an American agenda and an American role. That is not in the interest of America. That is not in the interest of the international community. And ultimately, Mr. President, that is not in the interest of the people of Bosnia.
Neutral
Chris Dodd
Mr. President, fortunately there is an alternative to a unilateral lifting of the embargo and that is contained in the amendment by the distinguished majority leader, Senator Mitchell. The proposal he has put forth is a carefully crafted measure that would strengthen the hand of the United Nations and NATO in dealing with the Serbian aggression, while at the same time preserving our obligations to the international community.
Very Positive
Chris Dodd
This amendment would lend specific congressional approval to the use of NATO air strikes in order to enforce the exclusion zones around Sarajevo, Gorazde, and other U.N.-designated safe havens. This will give the President a free hand to back up these important NATO mandates with all necessary military force.
Very Positive
Chris Dodd
At the same time, Mr. President, this legislation also makes very clear that before any United States troops can be sent to Bosnia in order to enforce an overall peace agreement, the President shall be required to seek prior congressional approval. This approach represents a careful and judicious balance between the rights of the executive and the legitimate interests and responsibilities of the Congress.
Very Positive
Chris Dodd
But the most important part of the Mitchell substitute, in my view, is the section pertaining to the United Nations arms embargo. Mr. President, no matter what one things of the issue of multilateral or unilateral action, it is quite clear that as a matter of policy, the U.N. arms embargo has been a failure. In fact, in the 2\1/2\ years since the U.N. arms embargo was imposed, Serbian forces have been able to victimize the Bosnian population with almost complete and total impunity.
Somewhat Negative
Chris Dodd
With thousands of innocent people killed and countless wounded in aggression that continues to the present day, I believe it is time for us to see the arms embargo for what it is: An anachronism, a failure, and one that should be relegated to the ash heap of history as quickly as possible.
Very Negative
Chris Dodd
That is very clearly the view that is represented in the majority leader's amendment. The amendment says, and I quote, "The Senate favors the termination of the arms embargo against the Government of Bosnia and Herzegovina." The amendment goes on to insist that the President seek immediately the agreement of NATO allies to terminate the embargo, and that it promptly lend its support to a resolution in the U.N. Security Council to achieve this very objective.
Very Positive
Chris Dodd
Mr. President, the importance of this last provision cannot be overstated. One year ago, in May 1993, the Clinton administration attempted to gain the consent of our European allies to lift the arms embargo against Bosnia. Those efforts were unsuccessful, and there were some observers at the time who believed the administration could have done a more forceful job of pressing its case.
Very Positive
Chris Dodd
Mr. President, I do not presume to judge what the administration can and cannot achieve in the course of negotiations with our allies. But I do know this: Now is the time for the administration to make every effort -- and to spend the political capital needed -- to bring our allies in line with our own policy objectives. Those objectives include, and should continue to include, a lifting of the arms embargo on the Bosnian people.
Unknown
Chris Dodd
Mr. President, in the former Yugoslavia today, the people of Bosnia are crying out for our help. The least we can do is to give them the means to defend themselves. But if by doing so we shatter the fragile international coalition that we have worked so hard to build, then we will have done the Bosnian people, not to mention ourselves, more harm then good.
Slightly Negative
Chris Dodd
Yes, Mr. President, we should lift the arms embargo. If we are a humanitarian society, we must lift the arms embargo. But if we value the rule of law among nations, and if we value the future of multilateral cooperation, then we should not -- and must not -- do so on our own.
Very Positive
Chris Dodd
For these reasons, Mr. President, I will vote for the Mitchell amendment, and I urge its adoption by my colleagues.
Unknown
Barbara Boxer
Mr. President, I have listened with great interest to this debate, and I have decided, after much deliberation to vote in favor of the amendment offered by the majority leader, Senator Mitchell, and against the amendment offered by Senator Dole.
Very Positive
Barbara Boxer
I believe that the Bosnian people have a fundamental right to defend themselves and that the current arms embargo deprives them of the right. I voted earlier this year with 86 of my colleagues to urge the President to lift the Bosnian arms embargo.
Very Negative
Barbara Boxer
The arms embargo is a failed policy, with terrible consequences for both Bosnia and the United States. For the Bosnians, the embargo means that their army remains outgunned, their land overrun, and their people murdered. For the United States and its allies, continuation of the embargo makes us tacit collaborators in maintaining the Serbian military advantage, which if left unchallenged, will lead to additional deaths, and the eventual destruction of the Government of Bosnia and Herzegovina. If at all possible, the arms embargo should be terminated where it originated -- in the U.N. Security Council. The amendment by the majority leader requires the administration to propose or support a resolution in the Security Council to repeal the embargo. When faced with such a resolution, I hope that our allies will see the wisdom of our position and will not exercise their veto authority.
Very Positive
Barbara Boxer
However, I want to be perfectly clear on this point: Should the United Nations fail to repeal the arms embargo, I will support lifting it unilaterally. The Mitchell amendment requires that within 5 days of the Security Council failing to approve such a repeal, the President must consult with Congress about acting alone. This means that in a worst-case scenario -- if our NATO allies the United Nations flatly reject our efforts to lift the embargo -- we will be back on the Senate floor debating another amendment to lift the arms embargo. And if we are forced to debate a similar amendment in the future, I believe that it will pass by a wide margin.
Very Positive
Barbara Boxer
Mr. President, innocent people are being slaughtered in Bosnia and we are not doing enough to stop it. I believe that our Nation has a moral obligation to help the Bosnian people defend themselves and stop this horrifying genocide. However, the best way to accomplish this goal is to work with our allies through the United Nation. If absolutely necessary, I will support unilateral action. However, before taking such drastic action, I believe that the administration should resolve this issue through the United Nations.
Very Positive
Dirk Kempthorne
Mr. President, today, I will vote in favor of the Dole amendment. I do so because I do not believe that we can continue to impose against the people of Bosnia an arms embargo that denies them the right to self-defense.
Somewhat Negative
Dirk Kempthorne
I have long supported, and often spoken in favor of, efforts to lift the arms embargo on Bosnia because I believe the current arms embargo does not achieve its objective. Since it is primarily the Serbians who now have arms we have created an imbalance which favors the Serbs over other combatants.
Very Positive
Dirk Kempthorne
At the same time, I want to take this opportunity to stress my support for efforts to lift the arms embargo in concert with our allies. I hope the United States will not have to go it alone in this action because it is undeniable that cooperative action with our allies is preferable. But, the United States has often been called upon to lead in world affairs, and one of the burdens of leadership is sometimes loneliness. The bottom line is that the embargo must be lifted and by our act we now can and must encourage our allies to join us.
Very Positive
Dirk Kempthorne
Thank you Mr. President, I yield the floor.
Somewhat Positive
Bill Bradley
Mr. President, I would like to clarify that my vote against the amendment offered by the distinguished majority leader does not imply any lack of support for NATO airstrikes as described in the amendment. I fully support the use of air power, provided it is part of a comprehensive strategy toward ending the fighting in Bosnia. Indeed, I believe the use of airpower has, to date, been too little and too late.
Very Positive
Bill Bradley
I will vote against the majority leader's amendment because I believe it is time to send a clear signal to the administration that the arms embargo against Bosnia must be lifted. The Bosnian Government must be allowed the means to defend itself. In the absence of countervailing force, or the prospect of countervailing force, the Bosnian Serbs have no incentive to end their land grabs and ethnic cleansing. It is clear that the United Nations and NATO will not provide that countervailing force. We owe it to the Bosnian Government to permit it to try.
Very Positive
Bill Bradley
The Senate has voted before in support of lifting the embargo. However, given the nonbinding nature of previous Senate action, the administration has been free to ignore Senate sentiment.
Very Positive
Bill Bradley
The Dole-Lieberman amendment will at least force the administration to come clean. It will set the clock ticking for administration action, either to negotiate a lifting of the arms embargo by the time the bill passes both Houses and reaches the President's desk, or openly to oppose lifting the embargo and, if necessary, veto the legislation. Only an unambiguous signal from the Senate -- approval of Dole-Lieberman and rejection of Mitchell -- can end the ambiguity and force the administration to decide its policy.
Somewhat Positive
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Republican leader has 7 minutes.
Unknown
The Chair recognizes the Republican leader.
Unknown
Bob Dole
I yield the 7 minutes to the Senator from Connecticut.
Unknown
Joseph I. Lieberman
I thank the Senator from Kansas.
Somewhat Positive
Joseph I. Lieberman
Mr. President, we come once again to a crossroads. In the two votes that we will cast in a short while, we will make a fateful decision for the war-torn people of Bosnia and also for our own people, as we consider what part we shall play in the post-cold-war world. How shall we protect our security and uphold our principles?
Very Positive
Joseph I. Lieberman
The decision we have is not to express whether we care about the slaughter and suffering in Bosnia. I know that all Members of the Senate care. The question is, what are we going to do about it? Will we lead or will we follow? Will the trumpet we sound be strong and certain, or will it be muted? That to me is the fundamental choice between these two amendments and that is why I will vote no on the first amendment and yes on the second, which I am proud to cosponsor with the Senator from Kansas, and which will unilaterally lift the illegal and immoral arms embargo against the people of Bosnia.
Very Positive
Joseph I. Lieberman
This amendment is genuinely a bipartisan effort. It was never intended to be antiadministration, although I know the administration opposes it. It was in fact conceived as an unifying expression of support for the lift and strike policy that was adopted by the Clinton administration more than a year ago, but never fully implemented -- primarily because of the opposition of our allies.
Leans Positive
Joseph I. Lieberman
The strike part of the policy came into effect after the President reacted to the slaughter in Sarajevo in February of this year. This amendment gives us now the opportunity to strengthen the President's hand in implementing the lift part of his policy.
Very Positive
Joseph I. Lieberman
Mr. President, this amendment is premised on two large lessons that emerge from the sad story of diplomacy in the Bosnian war.
Very Negative
Joseph I. Lieberman
First, the Serbs have only responded when the world community acted forcefully and they have had something to fear.
Negative
Joseph I. Lieberman
Second, the world will not act forcefully unless the United States takes the leadership by being forceful ourselves.
Positive
Joseph I. Lieberman
This embargo is immoral because it denies an independent country and its people the arms with which to defend themselves against aggression, invasion by Serbia for the purpose of conquest, and genocidal acts.
Very Negative
Joseph I. Lieberman
The comparisons that have been made in this debate between this embargo and the embargoes against Serbia and Iraq, for instance, totally miss the point and fail to distinguish between embargoes that are imposed by the world community on aggressor nations and an embargo, this one, against the Bosnian people that prevents the victim of aggression from defending itself.
Very Negative
Joseph I. Lieberman
Make no mistake about it, this embargo is not just a piece of paper or a resolution adopted at the U.N. or implemented by Executive order of the President, as this one was. This is an embargo that American military personnel on ships in the Adriatic are enforcing today. We are party to denying, by our actions, the Bosnian people the weapons with which to defend themselves.
Very Negative
Joseph I. Lieberman
The embargo is illegal because it violates article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations which gives every country the right to defend itself. It is illegal because, in a technical sense, this embargo was imposed on the former Yugoslavia which no longer exists. And it is illegal because it was imposed before Bosnia came into being.
Very Negative
Joseph I. Lieberman
The Senate knows all this. As my colleagues have said, one after the other, most Members of the Senate are against the embargo and want to lift it. In fact, the Senate voted 87 strong on January 27, 1993 to urge -- not demand, not unilaterally lift -- but to urge the lifting of the embargo. What happened? Nothing. Neither our allies nor our enemies took that action seriously, and that is why we have to act forcefully today and take a leadership role by lifting the embargo unilaterally.
Somewhat Positive
Joseph I. Lieberman
Mr. President, we have debated and debated for more than 2 years in this Chamber. Meanwhile, the people of Bosnia have continued to be shelled by artillery, attacked by tanks, forcibly removed from their homes simply because of their religion -- in this case Moslem -- and have seen their communities destroyed, their lands stolen, and their loved ones raped and killed. There are 200,000 dead and 2 million refugees.
Very Negative
Joseph I. Lieberman
The time for talk is over. The time for action is here. How many more Bosnians are we going to allow to die before we stand together with the victims of this brutal aggression and shout, "Enough"?
Very Negative
Joseph I. Lieberman
Will this amendment give the Bosnians hope? Absolutely. Not the false hope of the American cavalry riding over the hill to save them. They are not asking for that. They have soldiers -- their own -- and what they want is the arms with which to fight their battles.
Leans Positive
Joseph I. Lieberman
In debate here, some have said that lifting the arms embargo unilaterally would lead the United Nations' peacekeepers to leave Bosnia, putting the Bosnians in harm's way; or that sending the arms in would actually lead to the death of more Bosnians. Mr. President, it seems to me that we ought to listen to the words of the democratically elected leaders of Bosnia as to what is best for the Bosnian people and not from this place make the judgments about their well-being as they suffer and struggle through a war.
Very Negative
Joseph I. Lieberman
We have heard from those leaders. Prime Minister Silajdzic wrote yesterday to Senator Dole and me and to all Members of the Senate through us, pleading with us to adopt the amendment to unilaterally lift the arms embargo. He quoted Edmund Burke saying: "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." Mr. President, we have done nothing for too long, and we have seen the triumph of evil. Lifting the arms embargo is the least we can do.
Unknown
Joseph I. Lieberman
So we have to listen to the pleas of the Bosnian people, the victims of this aggression. We have to listen to the words of Edmund Burke and to our own conscience which tells us to do what is right; to our intellect which knows that this embargo is illegal; and to the echoes of history which tell us that those who invade neighbors, as the Serbs have, for the purpose of conquest and to carry out genocidal acts will cease their brutality, not when they hear the language of diplomats, but only when they face the weapons of soldiers.
Very Negative
Joseph I. Lieberman
Mr. President, the question before us in these two votes is how we will answer the pleas of the Bosnian people for help. Will we say, yes, we will help, or will we say maybe? I hope and pray that we will say yes.
Very Positive
Joseph I. Lieberman
I thank the Chair, and I yield the floor.
Somewhat Positive
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Republican leader is recognized.
Unknown
Bob Dole
Mr. President, was leaders' time reserved?
Unknown
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Yes, it has been and the Senator can use his 10 minutes at this time.
Positive
Bob Dole
Mr. President, first I want to thank my colleague from Connecticut for underscoring right up front that this is bipartisan. This is not an effort to undermine the President of the United States. In fact, we thought when we started it was an effort to help the President of the United States because he had talked so often about lifting the arms embargo. In fact, many of us have visited with the President at the White House, and he talked not only about that but about air strikes. Some of us were prepared to support him in both cases, including the Senator from Kansas.
Very Positive
Bob Dole
If we go back to the Revolutionary War, the Americans were engaged in self-defense, and we were helped by other countries. The right of self- defense is inherent. It does not have to be in the U.N. Charter. It is a basic inherent right: The right of self-defense.
Leans Negative
Bob Dole
If you read the letter we received yesterday from the Prime Minister of Bosnia, Haris Silajdzic, I think the one statement that stands out -- and there are a number that stand out -- first of all, he says:
Neutral
Bob Dole
They are looking to us for leadership. They are looking to America for leadership. This is what this is all about: Leadership. Bipartisan leadership.
Unknown
Bob Dole
He also makes the statement, which I have been trying to make the last several times I have spoken on this issue:
Unknown
Bob Dole
To me that says it all. I am surprised some here would say, "Well, I'm going to vote for the other amendment because we are going to let the United Nations authorize the United States air power under U.N. direction and require us to abide by U.N. interpretation of what Bosnia's rights are." That is in my colleague's amendment, the distinguished majority leader.
Very Positive
Bob Dole
We have had all this debate about the United Nations having too much authority now and about the U.N. directing this and the United Nations directing that, and some are about to vote for an amendment that would authorize the United Nations to direct air power and to authorize air power. We have already had problems with Mr. Akashi who had our pilots flying around up there for hours while he is trying to talk somebody out of having air strikes, while he is having conversations with the Serbs. It is outrageous.
Leans Positive
Bob Dole
So I hope that people read both resolutions before they vote.
Positive
Bob Dole
We also address the specific question raised by the distinguished Senator from West Virginia [Mr. Byrd.] We make it very clear we are not talking about personnel. Let me repeat, we are not talking about ground forces. In our amendment, in the Lieberman-Dole amendment, the bipartisan amendment, with 30-some cosponsors, Democrats and Republicans, all we suggest is to give these people a right to self- defense. Remove the British forces, remove the French forces, remove all the U.N. protection forces so nobody is going to be in harm's way, and that is all that Mr. Silajdzic asked for in his letter delivered yesterday. And we hope that every Senator has had a chance to look at it.
Very Positive
Bob Dole
In my view, he should know better what is best for the people of Bosnia than anybody on this floor, any of us.
Very Positive
Bob Dole
So he just says:
Unknown
Bob Dole
It is never too late for justice.
Very Positive
Bob Dole
Now, he has seen it all. He has seen 200,000 Bosnians slaughtered in the past 25 months. He has seen shelling of hospitals, shelling of the Red Cross, children shot before their parents' eyes. And all we are saying is let us send a statement -- we are not France. We are not Great Britain. We are the United States of America, and we have had moral authority in this world for a long time and moral leadership in this world for a long time, and the people of the world look to us for leadership. We do not send any armed forces. We do not send any ground forces. We do not have air strikes. All we do is lift the embargo so they can defend themselves.
Somewhat Positive
Bob Dole
This vote ought to be unanimous. It was 87 to 9 in January, almost the same amendment, a sense of the Senate amendment, and now we have made it a little tougher. The vote was 87 to 9, and some of the nine voted against it because they were concerned that we might authorize personnel, so we made that very clear in this amendment. We made it very specific. We are not authorizing the use of personnel, American personnel. All they want are defensive weapons.
Slightly Positive
Bob Dole
We were told, Senator Lieberman and I, by the Prime Minister and by the Vice President, Mr. Ganic, about 2\1/2\ weeks ago, they have one rifle for every four men. They have 8 tanks to 300 tanks the Serbs have.
Unknown
Bob Dole
Now, how do we empower ourselves to sit in judgment on a people who only want the right to fight for survival? And we are saying, "No, you can't have that right. We are not going to give you that right. Oh, we are for you, but we are not going to give you that right unless the United Nations says OK." Again, we are the United States of America. We are not risking one American life. We are not risking one American pilot, one American airplane, one American anything. What is so wrong with the Dole- Lieberman resolution?
Very Positive
Bob Dole
There is nothing wrong with it. And I note that Mr. Lake this morning said on a morning talk show, "The option is still on the table. If our current efforts to work out a diplomatic settlement don't succeed, then we think we should go back to that option." Well, this option has been on the table for months, and now we have the French Foreign Minister over here saying we ought to impose a settlement on the Bosnians. Sure; why not? Why not take all their country and give it to the Serbs? They control about 70-some percent of it now. And we are saying, well, maybe we can get it down to 51 percent. Then they ought to be happy. Then we will send U.S. ground forces there to impose a settlement on the Bosnians.
Very Positive
Bob Dole
It does not make any sense to this Senator. I am not a diplomat, but I am a Senator. And we will have, in about 20 minutes, an opportunity to say something very simple, that we believe in the right of self- defense. If 87 Senators said that in January and only 47 say it today, I am going to wonder what happened, what have we done wrong? What has Bosnia done wrong except witness more slaughter of innocent men, women and children? The Serbs are the aggressors, and they have been the aggressors. They have the arms. They have the tanks. And they thumb their nose at us at every opportunity.
Leans Negative
Bob Dole
I do not understand. I listened to the arguments on the other side, and if I were suggesting we send one American, or risk one American life, I would agree with the Senator from Virginia and others. But we are not. We are not.
Somewhat Negative
Bob Dole
So it seems to me that we can dither along here and wait another 3 weeks and if the United Nations does not act -- they are not going to act. They are not going to take up any resolution even though the President might table the resolution, so they turn it back and we come back in 5 or 6 weeks and then, some people say, well, then I will vote for it. But first we have to kill about 10,000 more Bosnians before I have this moral outrage that permits me to speak up and to vote correctly. That is what this is all about.
Slightly Negative
Bob Dole
We do not need any hearings on this resolution. We do not need anything on this resolution but for somebody to read it. If every Senator reads the Dole-Lieberman resolution -- and it is all on one page -- in my view they will vote for it, unless they want to go contrary to what the Prime Minister says. He says they are praying for us today to do the right thing -- us, Republicans and Democrats.
Very Positive
Bob Dole
It seems to me that now is the time. We have made all the arguments. They do not want anything. They do not want American forces. They do not want air strikes. They would like air strikes, but they would be willing to settle for just lifting the arms embargo.
Leans Negative
Bob Dole
In my view, if we take this action today, you will see the British and the French follow suit. That is what American leadership is all about. If we do not provide the leadership in the world, nothing happens. In this case, only bad things have happened. So I hope my colleagues who are undecided and maybe some who may be on the wrong side will read the resolution and then read the letter from the Prime Minister. And if you can vote no after reading those two documents, then you should vote no.
Very Negative
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader is recognized.
Unknown
George J. Mitchell
Mr. President, I have read both documents, and I will vote "no" I urge all of my colleagues to do so.
Slightly Negative
George J. Mitchell
First, there is no disagreement on our objective. It is a peaceful and fair resolution of the conflict raging in that region.
Very Negative
George J. Mitchell
Second, it is to obtain a lifting of the arms embargo. But the appropriate way to do it is not in the manner prescribed in the amendment offered by my colleague, Senator Dole.
Unknown
George J. Mitchell
Over the past year, I have been present at several meetings with President Clinton on the subject of Bosnia. Members of the House and Senate, Republicans and Democrats, have been asked to give the President their views. They did so, and the views ranged over a wide range of options, many contradictory. But on one point there was no disagreement. Every Senator or House Member who spoke to the President said, "You cannot do it alone. You must involve our allies." No one expressed a contrary view, not one, in those meetings, because they recognized that we cannot now simply unilaterally discontinue this embargo without regard to the views of our allies or the safety of the citizens and troops of our allies.
Very Negative
George J. Mitchell
It is all well and good for U.S. Senators, not one of whom would now vote to send a single American soldier to Bosnia, to talk about morality and authority when there are several thousand British and French troops on the scene in danger, under fire, and have been for years. Who are we to scorn the British and French? Who are we to demean the British and French? Who are we to suggest that the British and French have not played a part when they have been willing to and have sent thousands and thousands of their young men into Bosnia where they have been exposed to danger all of these years as we have talked.
Very Negative
George J. Mitchell
Mr. President, it is easy to make speeches. It is tough to take action. Let us consider also the effect of this vote on other multilateral actions imposing sanctions or other collective actions in other parts of the world.
Slightly Positive
George J. Mitchell
Right now there are sanctions against Iraq which have been in place since the time of the Gulf war. There are sanctions against Haiti; just voted. And we all know, as Senator Nunn so rightly pointed out, that we are going to soon face the possibility of seeking collective action against North Korea.
Very Negative
George J. Mitchell
Every Senator here should understand that if we now vote to unilaterally lift these collective actions by the United States, then others will do the same in those areas. Just a few months ago, in my office a few feet from here, I met with the Prime Minister of Turkey. She made a powerful and impassioned statement of the adverse effects on her country of the sanctions against Iraq. Of course, they do not hurt our economy. So we are all for it.
Very Positive
George J. Mitchell
There can be no doubt that if the Senate now votes that the United States unilaterally lift the arms embargo in Bosnia, the Turkish Government will unilaterally lift the sanctions against Iraq and cite the U.S. Senate as the justification for their action. Is that what the Members of the Senate want?
Leans Negative
George J. Mitchell
Just 2 weeks ago, Senator Dole and I met in my office with the Prime Minister and the Foreign Minister of Greece. The Foreign Minister devoted a good part of the meeting to describing to us the extreme adverse economic effects upon his country of the economic sanctions against Serbia. He told us how the front line States, Greece, Romania, Bulgaria, and Hungary, are suffering from those sanctions.
Unknown
George J. Mitchell
There is no doubt that if we now vote to unilaterally lift the arms embargo on Bosnia, those States will unilaterally terminate the economic sanctions against Serbia. Will that help the Bosnians? One of the most effective actions that has been taken has been the economic sanctions on Serbia. And that is directly related to this incident.
Somewhat Positive
George J. Mitchell
Mr. President, we know we cannot take the position that others must participate in multilateral actions, but the United States alone can pick and choose those in which it will participate. We know we cannot have it both ways. But that is exactly what those who vote for the Dole amendment will be saying -- "We want it both ways. We want to pick and choose when we can drop out of multilateral actions, but others don't have that same right." Obviously, that is not a standard which other countries are going to accept, especially those countries who have placed thousands of men and women into the area of conflict, in danger, as we have refused to do so and as we have then preached at them. They are not going to accept that standard, nor would we.
Very Negative
George J. Mitchell
It is also very important for everybody here to recognize that the lifting of the embargo does not mean the immediate delivery of arms to the Bosnian forces. Any heavy equipment will have to be delivered through Croatia. If we are willing to violate the United Nations action, we do not know that the Croats will be willing to do so. So this could be an empty gesture, unless others drop out as we have done.
Somewhat Negative
George J. Mitchell
And even if Croatia decides it wants to violate the U.N. action as we would be doing, it would take a good bit of time for heavy arms to reach Bosnia. Then there would be training, and who is going to conduct the training? Is the next step going to be an immediate action by our colleagues to have American trainers involved?
Leans Negative
George J. Mitchell
Finally, Mr. President, let us ask ourselves this question. Every time we get into one of these situations, someone gets up and criticizes the President and says, "Well, we have a lot of what-if questions. What if this happens? What if that happens? What if the other happens? And we want answers to those before we will decide." We have not heard one of those questions or answers on this resolution. Well, I would like to pose one. What if the arms embargo was lifted? What if, as many credible observers believe, it leads to a much wider war involving several competing armies and forces in the region, causing the deaths of hundreds of thousands of others, and ranges out of control? And then they come back to us, and, say, "Well, look here, you Americans. We need you to send some people over here to end this conflict." What if? Is there one Senator who is going to vote for the Dole amendment who will vote to send an American into that region then? Is there one?
Somewhat Negative
George J. Mitchell
The answer is obvious. The silence is deafening. The answer is clearly no. Think about the consequences of our actions.
Leans Negative
George J. Mitchell
Let me make one other point before I conclude. What we do hear today has consequences beyond Bosnia and beyond 1994. The United States is a Nation unique in history at a time that is unique in history. We are the dominant military, economic, and cultural power in the world. There have been other dominant powers in history. But never before has a dominant military power possessed a moral authority that the United States now possesses. Every previous dominant power was ringed by hostile forces, and had to fight their way onto other countries' soil. The United States does not.
Very Positive
George J. Mitchell
Our problem is the opposite. Because we seek no military ambition, because we do not seek to dominate others, we not only do not have to fight to get our forces onto other soils, we have to fight to bring our forces back from other countries. Our political problem is that people want our Armed Forces on there territory.
Very Negative
George J. Mitchell
In the past 2 years, I have met with the leader of every European government, and I have asked each of them this question: Now that the Soviet Union no longer exists, and they are withdrawing their forces to Russia, should the United States withdraw our military forces back to the Continental United States?
Very Positive
George J. Mitchell
In every single case, the answer was no; not even a maybe. And those countries which do not have American military forces on their soil want us to send them there. You combine that fact, the United States' unique position in history, with the unleashing of ethnic, tribal, religious, and nationalist violence that is rising in the world, and this country, this Government, and this Senate is going to be confronted over the next several decades with the number of requests for American intervention that is without precedent in our history, or in human history.
Very Negative
George J. Mitchell
We are going to be asked to solve everything. The Senators from Connecticut and Kansas spoke eloquently of the thousands of people killed in Bosnia. Well, there have been 250,000 killed in Rwanda, according to most press reports. Do those lives not matter? Or should we now say, well, we are going to have an American solution to that problem? And what about the Sudan, what about Jordan, and what about Azerbaijan? What about events everywhere in the world?
Very Negative
George J. Mitchell
The United States is the world leader, and will be the world leader for centuries to come. But there is no nation with the capacity, financial or military, that can solve every problem in the world by itself. We require collective action. We need the involvement of others, and the involvement of others means more than saying to them, or criticizing them and saying, we and only we have the solution. We have to involve them in the process. We have to lead, but as part of a community of nations. That is the sensible, that is the prudent, approach, and that is the one that is most consistent with our national interest.
Very Positive
George J. Mitchell
I say to my colleagues, we cannot disdain or demean our allies. They are our allies. We have a long history of cooperation and friendship with them. We do sometimes disagree. We have to lead aggressively and actively. But we cannot solve every problem in the world by ourselves. Every problem in the world is not and will not be an exclusively American problem requiring an exclusively American solution. Increasingly, it will require collective actions.
Slightly Negative
George J. Mitchell
If we now undermine the concept of collective action, for however worthy a cause, a cause with which I, frankly, agree, I think we have done our Nation a longstanding harm and made it much more difficult to deal with the situations of the future.
Negative
George J. Mitchell
Mr. President, we have heard the debate on this issue. There is clearly no disagreement on the goal we want to achieve. We want to see an end to the fighting in Bosnia and a peaceful resolution to the conflicts which have existed in the former Yugoslavia for centuries, a tangle of ethnic, religious, and other differences.
Somewhat Negative
George J. Mitchell
What we have come down to is a difference over the best way to achieve our common goal. The approach proposed by Senator Dole and his colleagues would direct the President to simply lift the arms embargo on Bosnia unilaterally. The alternative presented by myself, Senators Pell, Nunn, and Bumpers would instead have the United States aggressively seek the support and concurrence of our allies in NATO and the United Nations to end the arms embargo on Bosnia.
Very Positive
George J. Mitchell
Our alternative goes beyond addressing the issue of the arms embargo. It also expresses support for the decisions made by the President and NATO to support and protect the United Nations forces in and around the U.N. designated safe areas, to use NATO's air power in the Sarajevo region, and to authorize air strikes against Bosnian Serb heavy weapons and other military targets in the exclusion zones around the safe areas. No mention of that is made in the alternative.
Very Positive
George J. Mitchell
While we are encouraged by the results achieved so far by resolute action on the part of the NATO allies, we cannot be lulled into a false sense of success.
Very Positive
George J. Mitchell
The threat of deeper involvement by NATO forces is real. The attack on Danish peacekeepers in Tuzla less than 2 weeks ago was proof of the continuing peril that Bosnian Serb promises, as others before them, will not be kept.
Very Negative
George J. Mitchell
This is the moment, however, for the consolidation of gains already made to find an end to this bloody war and support the renewed diplomatic initiative of the "`Contact Group," made up of representatives of the United States, Russia, the European Union, and the United Nations.
Very Positive
George J. Mitchell
Those who believe that the United States and the United Nations should be more aggressive in dealing with this situation should support the alternative we are presenting because the other alternative is silent on those matters.
Very Positive
George J. Mitchell
I was in the region 2 years ago. Later, I expressed support for an end to the arms embargo on Bosnia. I reached that conclusion reluctantly, because I recognized that it could trigger a much more widespread and more destructive conflict than has occurred. But I believe then, and believe now, that on balance it is the right thing to do.
Very Negative
George J. Mitchell
But I believe that it would not be right for anyone now to simply unilaterally discontinue this embargo without regard to the views of our allies or the safety of citizens and troops of our allies.
Positive
George J. Mitchell
At this time there are several multilateral actions imposing sanctions or other collective actions in other parts of the world and in this part of the world. Right now there are sanctions against Iraq which have been in place since the time of the Persian Gulf war. The United Nations has just voted to impose tighter sanctions against Haiti. And, as all of us know, there is a possibility that there will be collective action to impose sanctions on North Korea if that country persists in its refusal to permit inspection of its atomic facilities.
Very Negative
George J. Mitchell
My colleagues should consider the consequences of a vote to force the President to lift the arms embargo unilaterally and how other countries will view this move. Unilaterally lifting the arms embargo against Bosnia and Herzegovina will open the door for other nations to pick and choose which U.N. actions they wish to ignore.
Neutral
George J. Mitchell
A few months ago, I met with the Prime Minister of Turkey. She made a powerful, impassioned statement of the adverse economic effects on her country resulting from the sanctions against Iraq. They have a negligible impact on the American economy but they are crippling the Turkish economy because Turkey borders on Iraq and they had substantial trade.
Somewhat Positive
George J. Mitchell
In my view, it is a near certainty that if the United States now unilaterally drops out of the arms embargo on Bosnia, the Turkish Government will unilaterally drop out of the economic sanctions on Iraq. Is that something that we in the Senate want?
Positive
George J. Mitchell
Just 2 weeks ago, Senator Dole and I met with the Prime Minister and Foreign Minister of Greece. In the course of the discussion, the Foreign Minister described at some length the adverse effects that the economic sanctions on Serbia are having on Greece's economy.
Somewhat Negative
George J. Mitchell
The economic sanctions on Serbia are directly related to the matter upon which we are about to vote, the conflict in Bosnia. Because of the Serbian actions with respect to Bosnia, economic sanctions were imposed on Serbia. They are a collective action. And, as always, the pain of these is not equally felt. We are not feeling much pain in this country from the sanctions against Serbia, but the front-line states are -- Greece, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria.
Leans Negative
George J. Mitchell
Those countries have been asked to bear the burden. They are not going to continue to do that if they see that the United States picks and chooses which collective action it will participate in.
Neutral
George J. Mitchell
We cannot take the position that others must participate in multilateral actions but we can pick and choose when we want to participate. We cannot have it both ways. But that is what the Dole amendment tries to do. It says, in effect, that the U.S. can opt out of collective efforts when it chooses, but others have the same right. Obviously, no other country is going to accept that standard.
Slightly Positive
George J. Mitchell
It is also important to consider that lifting the embargo does not mean immediate delivery of arms to the Bosnian forces. Rapid delivery of substantial amounts of military equipment by air would be perilous if not impossible, given the strategically located Bosnian Serb artillery and antiaircraft artillery positions around Bosnia's airports. In any case, heavy weapons would have to be delivered through Croatia's Adriatic ports. if Croatia cooperated, and that is not certain, in violating the United Nations arms embargo, needed heavy weapons from any source could not begin reaching Bosnia for weeks or months.
Neutral
George J. Mitchell
If the heavy weapons made it into the hands of the Bosnian Government forces, those soldiers would require training in their use and maintenance. Training in the operation of sophisticated weaponry has been estimated at anywhere from 1 to 6 months. And who would conduct this training of the Bosnian soldiers? Would American military trainers have to go to Bosnia?
Leans Negative
George J. Mitchell
Furthermore, the consequences for the Bosnian Government forces and UNPROFOR and Bosnia's civilian population of a likely all-out preemptive Serbian offensive and interdiction of humanitarian resupply efforts could be catastrophic. This is something that every Senator must keep in mind.
Very Negative
George J. Mitchell
The United States is in a position relative to other nations that I believe is unique in history. The United States is the dominant military and economic power in the world.
Very Positive
George J. Mitchell
There have been other dominant powers in history. But there has been no other which possessed the moral authority and the trust which the United State now possesses. Prior empires have all had to fight their way on to the soil of other countries. They were constantly at war with hostile nations who resisted their drive for domination.
Very Negative
George J. Mitchell
The United States has no territorial ambitions. As a result, not only do we not have to fight to get on to other people's soil, other people are constantly asking us to send our military forces on to their soil.
Slightly Positive
George J. Mitchell
In the last 2 years, I have spoken with the leaders of almost every government in Europe. I have asked each of them this question: Now that the Soviet Union no longer exists and its forces are being withdrawn to Russia, should the United States withdraw its forces from Europe?
Leans Positive
George J. Mitchell
Without exception, the answer was no. The Russians, the Germans, the French, the Italians, and all the others; they want American military forces in Europe.
Slightly Negative
George J. Mitchell
In fact, in several of the countries which I visited where American forces are not presently located, the governments requested that we send them there. This is a situation without parallel in history. People know that the United States does not have territorial ambitions. They know we are not trying to conquer other countries. So they trust us.
Very Positive
George J. Mitchell
The demise of communism and the rise of ethnic conflict and nationalism will create uncertainty turmoil around the world. We are going to be asked over and over again to send American forces to every part of the world.
Very Negative
George J. Mitchell
The question we must ask ourselves as we prepare to vote on this bill is: Are we now to say that every problem in the world is going to be an American problem that requires an American solution? Or are we going to say, as I believe we should, that the United States is the world leader, but it cannot by itself solve every problem in the world and we are going to have to ask others to join with us in dealing with problems, especially those distant from our shores.
Very Negative
George J. Mitchell
I think that common sense, prudence, and our national interest all combine to lead us to include that, in the face of a rising chorus of requests for Americans to intervene everywhere in the world, we must involve other countries in dealing with there problems in the future.
Neutral
George J. Mitchell
For years to come, Members of this Senate are going to be confronted over and over again with requests for Americans to intervene in every part of the world. We cannot do it all by ourselves now or at any time in the foreseeable future. We can lead and we must lead. But we must have the help and support of other countries. We are not going to get that help or support from them in other instances if we say that we do not care about their views in this instance.
Very Positive
George J. Mitchell
We agree that the arms embargo on Bosnia should be lifted. We should take that step, but we should not take it alone. That is my point. We should be doing it in concert with our allies.
Slightly Positive
George J. Mitchell
The amendment which I proposed sets forth a process for doing so. It states that the Congress favors the termination of the arms embargo. It directs the President to seek immediately the agreement of NATO allies to terminate the embargo. It then directs the President to propose and support a resolution in the U.N. Security Council to terminate the embargo. Finally, should the Security Council fail to pass such a resolution, the President shall within 5 days consult with the Congress regarding unilateral termination of the arms embargo.
Very Positive
George J. Mitchell
If we are going to take this step let us do it in a sensible way that is consistent with our national interests, by involving our allies: First, by seeking immediately the agreement of our NATO allies; second, by presenting the matter at the U.N. Security Council and seeking its approval; and then, if that fails to come back and consider unilateral termination at that time.
Very Positive
George J. Mitchell
For the reasons I have outlined I ask my colleagues now to cast their vote for my amendment which I believe is most consistent with the best interests of the United States.
Very Positive
The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time has expired.
Unknown
Bob Dole
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I have 1 additional minute.
Slightly Positive
George J. Mitchell
Certainly. I am pleased to.
Very Positive
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Unknown
Bob Dole
Mr. President, I point out that Iraq is an enemy, and Korea is a potentially enemy. Bosnia is our friend. Whatever the Greeks and Turks may say, they get hundreds of millions of dollars in United States foreign aid. I do not think they would be too happy to give that up if they wanted to have a unilateral lifting of some embargo. I am not concerned about that.
Positive
Bob Dole
I am not so concerned about that. But again I just say, in the 20 seconds I have left, that I think the majority leader agrees -- we are in agreement, basically. We are not talking about committing troops or getting involved. We can talk about that "what if" questions. But what if another 100,000 Bosnians are slaughtered while we talk about this and think about it, when all they want us to do is to lift the arms embargo -- no American troops, no air strikes -- nothing, nothing, nothing, but lifting the arms embargo.
Neutral
Paul Wellstone
Mr. President, today we consider legislation to end the United States arms embargo on Bosnia. As many of my colleagues know, I have for over 2 years operated within a very interventionist framework on Bosnia. I have persistently argued that brutal Serb aggression has been intolerable, and that we must do what we can to stop it in a much more forceful way than we have so far.
Very Negative
Paul Wellstone
When the Senate voted in January on this issue, I supported the view that the U.N.-sponsored international arms embargo against the Bosnian Moslems should be lifted. I continue to believe that. Today we must choose between two alternative men of reaching that goal.
Slightly Positive
Paul Wellstone
My trip to the former Yugoslavia a few months ago underscored for me the proportions of the crisis, and the need for more forceful intervention by United States and our NATO allies. It confirmed what I had believed for many months with respect to the role of the U.N. forces there: that they have been struggling under a mandate that is much too limited. I know they have been subjected to much criticism, some of it justified. They have been in a very difficult position for a very long time.
Very Negative
Paul Wellstone
During my trip, I talked with United Nations troops throughout the region, who have been doing a tough job with relatively few resources and too little political support for their difficult mission. If we are to expect the U.N. forces there to do its job better, they need a tougher, broader mandate to enable them to respond more quickly and more forcefully to Serb aggression and harassment.
Neutral
Paul Wellstone
I saw the results of the war, talked with refugees about the devastating impact of the war on their families, their homes, their lives, and their futures. And I returned to the United States more convinced than ever that the United States must take a firmer stance toward Serbian aggression.
Very Negative
Paul Wellstone
And we have in recent months begun to take a firmer stand, shamed into it by the marketplace bombing of Sarajevo and the continued bombardment of innocent civilian populations in and around Gorazde. The continued threat of NATO air strikes to protect the Moslem enclaves, which are authorized by Congress in the Mitchell amendment, must be real and immediate.
Very Negative
Paul Wellstone
The senseless slaughter of innocent noncombatants, and the persistent ethnic cleansing campaigns, must be stopped by forceful NATO and U.N. action. We cannot continue to allow the U.N. and Bosnian Moslem forces to bear the brunt of persistent Serb harassment and attack.
Very Negative
Paul Wellstone
To do this, I believe we must lift the embargo now. If possible, we should do it with the assent of the international community, in full recognition of the implications of that action.
Unknown
Paul Wellstone
That has not always been my position. For many months, I opposed lifting the arms embargo. But I returned from my sobering trip last December convinced that the embargo policy is no longer sustainable. We must send a strong signal of our willingness to at least allow the Bosnian Moslems to defend themselves.
Very Positive
Paul Wellstone
The Mitchell amendment does that. It is the one of the two alternative approaches that I believe makes the most strategic sense, and that poses the greater likelihood of success in our efforts to protect civilian populations there.
Very Positive
Paul Wellstone
For months, the administration has pressed our Western allies unsuccessfully to lift the arms embargo against the Bosnian Moslems. Today we read in the papers that the dispute over how to handle Bosnia between the United States and France is rising to new heights. Those tensions will continue to grow, and frankly do not look like as though they can be resolved very easily at the Security Council.
Neutral
Paul Wellstone
But if our high-minded commitment to a new world order in which the United Nations helps to act as a guarantor of rights and freedoms around the world is to mean anything at all, we must give the Security Council another, final chance to reconsider its opposition to lifting the arms embargo.
Very Positive
Paul Wellstone
The Mitchell amendment requires the President to seek immediately the agreement of our allies to terminate the embargo. I urge him to do that with all the diplomatic and political force that can be mustered, as soon as possible.
Positive
Paul Wellstone
If the Security Council vetoes such an effort, or if the President refuses to pursue it vigorously at the United Nations, then I think we must pursue the immediate lifting of the embargo if circumstances continue to deteriorate there, and allow the Bosnian Moslems to defend themselves against Serb aggression. That is why I requested that a firm deadline be included in the amendment, to guarantee that the administration's consultations with Congress to lift the embargo proceed as quickly as possible if the United Nations refuses to go along.
Very Positive
Paul Wellstone
I must say honestly, while I intend to vote for the Mitchell amendment today, I am at the end of my rope on this question. If the international community is unwilling to act to lift the embargo, and is unwilling to intervene more forcefully by military and other means to protect humanitarian aid delivery and noncombatant populations in the enclaves, then we must act to lift the embargo, and provide certain limited and defense military materiel, in the form of the heavy artillery and mortars which they lack, to the Bosnian Moslems. It is unjust and immoral to allow them to continue to be pounded by Serb attacks without adequate means of protecting themselves.
Very Negative
Paul Wellstone
This military assistance is limited to the provision of appropriate arms that would allow the Bosnian Moslems to defend themselves. It does not urge, nor would it authorize, the dispatch of U.S. military advisors or other troops to the region. Even in the face of the continuing horrible tragedy there, that would be a serious mistake.
Very Negative
Paul Wellstone
The Mitchell amendment does require that any intervention by U.S. ground troops be explicitly authorized by Congress; that is a key provision. It also requires the President to clearly define in law the goals and purposes of any such military action, the rules of engagement, the respective roles of U.S. and U.N. forces, and the plan for disengagement of Western forces there.
Very Positive
Paul Wellstone
I will vote to approve the Mitchell amendment, and against the Dole amendment, for the reasons I've described. I know that colleagues on both sides of this debate all share the same goal: to stop the killing and stabilize the situation in Bosnia so that a more just peace can be sought under the auspices of the international community. I believe the Mitchell amendment best meets that goal, and does so in a way that satisfies our international commitments. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the Mitchell amendment.
Very Positive
George J. Mitchell
I ask unanimous consent to permit the Senator from Virginia to ask a question.
Slightly Positive
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The Senator from Virginia is recognized.
Unknown
John Warner
Mr. President, I seek clarification of the language in paragraph 2. It says:
Unknown
John Warner
The next sentence raises the inference that we proceed, with or without such an agreement:
Neutral
George J. Mitchell
Mr. President, if I might respond, the amendment sets forth a series of steps that will occur. It does not contemplate stopping at any particular one point because, in fact, were we successful to get collective action to lift the arms embargo, the further actions would be rendered unnecessary. So it is a sequence of events. If the first one does not succeed, we first get our allies and then we go to the United Nations.
Very Positive
John Warner
But if you do not get the agreement, what then?
Leans Negative
George J. Mitchell
We go to the U.N. and try there.
Unknown
John Warner
Irrespective of the absence of the agreement?
Positive
George J. Mitchell
That is right.
Unknown
John Warner
Does that not contradict your thesis that we should not act without the partnership of our allies?
Neutral
George J. Mitchell
No, because it says we go to the U.N. and try to get their agreement.
Slightly Positive
John Warner
Mr. President, I thank the majority leader and I yield the floor.
Somewhat Positive
George J. Mitchell
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that my amendment be modified, and I believe it has been cleared on both sides.
Somewhat Positive
George J. Mitchell
I send the modification to the desk.
Unknown
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment is so modified.
Unknown
George J. Mitchell
Mr. President, by a prior order, the second and third votes will be 10-minute votes. There will be three. The first will be on my amendment; the second will be on Senator Dole's amendment; and the third will be on the conference report, on the access to clinics conference report.
Unknown