Transcript - Senate Floor: NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1995 | Factba.se

The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senate will now resume consideration of S. 2182, which the clerk will report.

The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senate will resume the pending business, the Johnston amendment No. 1840.

The Senator from Alaska [Mr. Stevens] is recognized.

Ted Stevens

Mr. President, I ask the pending amendment be set aside temporarily and I that I may offer an amendment at this time.

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

Ted Stevens

Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk and ask for its immediate consideration.

The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will report.

Ted Stevens

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

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

The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The minority leader is recognized.

Bob Dole

Mr. President, as I understand it at this time it has been agreed to by the managers that myself, the distinguished Senator from Connecticut, Senator Lieberman, Senator McCain, and others would offer our amendment on lifting the arms embargo on Bosnia. If the Senator from Alaska has no objection, I wonder if he might be willing to set his amendment aside that we might proceed?

Bob Dole

I ask the amendment be temporarily set aside.

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

The minority leader is recognized.

Bob Dole

Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk and ask for its immediate consideration.

The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will report.

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

Bob Dole

Mr. President, I am pleased to be joined once again by the distinguished Senator from Connecticut, Senator Lieberman, in proposing this amendment to lift the arms embargo on Bosnia and Herzegovina, and we are pleased to have a number of cosponsors again this time to an almost identical amendment.

Bob Dole

The McCloskey-Gilman-Bonior-Hoyer amendment, which was almost identical, was adopted by the House, to the House defense authorization bill almost 2 weeks ago, by a substantial margin. We are probably going to hear again today, just as Members of the House heard, now is not the time to lift the arms embargo. Let me just suggest that you read the Washington Post today, if you think now is not the time to lift the arms embargo. They are preparing for war in that part of the world. I know there are these peace plans -- 51 to 49 percent -- whatever the percentages now are. Just read the Washington Post piece today, "Winds of War Blow in Balkans Despite Latest American-Backed Peace Plan." Those who are most unprepared for war are the people in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and I ask at the appropriate time this article be printed in the Record.

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs. Murray). Without objection, it is so ordered.

[See exhibit 1.]

Bob Dole

We have heard for the last 26 months now, usually with the same excuses -- that this is not the time to lift the arms embargo, that we are going to table something at the United Nations, that something is going to happen, that allies with troops on the ground oppose lifting the embargo, that the Russians oppose lifting the embargo, that it is too late, that it will hurt the negotiations. We have heard all these arguments for a long time now and we have gone along with failed policies in the name of consensus. We have forsaken principle for 2 years and ignored international law in the naive hope this war will end by the good graces of the very perpetrators of this aggression.

Bob Dole

It may be that once again we are on the brink of the signing of another settlement, but based on today's Washington Post story I am not certain that is the case. Once again we are pressuring the victims, the Bosnians, to accept ethnic partition. And, once again, the administration is using this as an excuse to do nothing.

Bob Dole

Do not get me wrong. I have just been to Sarajevo recently and I would like to see a peaceful settlement. I would like to see an end to this brutal war. I have seen its consequences, as I will indicate later, personally, as has the distinguished Senator from Delaware, Senator Biden, along with the distinguished Senator from Virginia, Senator Warner. Just 3 weeks ago I was in Sarajevo. I saw the victims of the Serbian assault on Gorazde and victims of sniper attacks in the Sarajevo hospital.

Bob Dole

I believe everyone in this body would like to see an end to this war. But that is not the issue. The issue is how to get to a just peace -- not just any peace -- not surrender.

Bob Dole

But for the moment, let us put aside issues of justice, morality, principle, or Bosnia's legal rights.

Bob Dole

There is one big question that no one in this administration can answer, or anyone else who advocates denying the Bosnians a right to self-defense. And that is: Who or what is going to make the Bosnian Serbs withdraw from 70 percent of Bosnia to 49 percent, as proposed by the so-called contact group? The Bosnian Serbs are not going to do it. They have taken over 70 percent of this independent nation.

Bob Dole

Again, I wish all of my colleagues could go to Sarajevo. They would not recognize Sarajevo. There is not much left in Sarajevo. They would recognize who occupies the high grounds.

Bob Dole

If they go to the hospital there, they can see this little, beautiful girl who, the night before our visit to the hospital, was hit by a sniper. We also saw a 15-month-old baby girl, and we handed her a teddy bear, and we wondered why there was no reaction. Well, she was blind, in addition to other multiple injuries. We are trying to see if we can work out some way to bring her to the United States for medical treatment.

Bob Dole

But this is happening every day: Discriminate fire hitting senior citizens, old people -- nobody engaged in the war -- children, babies.

Bob Dole

What do the Bosnians tell us? They do not want American troops. They do not even want air strikes. They want the right to defend themselves. It seems to me that this right is rather basic in America.

Bob Dole

We went up and down the streets of Sarajevo, and these little shops were opening, little shops, about the size of the table in front of me. That is about the size of their shops, about 6 feet by 5 feet. That was a shop. The people have a lot of courage -- I guess is the right word -- in Sarajevo. They understand what has happened to them.

Bob Dole

And what do the Bosnian people want? They want American leadership. They want American leadership. They are not asking us for anything but the right to defend themselves, the same right any of us would want if our homes are threatened or if anything else was threatened that we possess. We would want the right to defend ourselves.

Bob Dole

This is serious business -- there have been 200,000 people killed. I want to repeat what I read in the paper this morning, what the Bosnian Vice President said. He said, "We are getting a little tired of big rhetoric and small deeds." And he was right; we have a lot of big rhetoric around here, a lot of big rhetoric. Go to Sarajevo and you will understand how important this issue is to the people who live there.

Bob Dole

We Americans do have an interest. The interest that we have is that we believe in the right of self-defense. We understand Bosnia is an independent nation. We understand Bosnia is a member of the United Nations. We understand that article 51 of the United Nations Charter recognizes their right to self-defense. So what is all the argument about? The vote on this amendment should be 100 to 0. It ought to be 100 to 0. The President of the United States ought to persuade our allies to go along -- We do not want anybody hurt; we do not want anybody in harm's way. Let the U.N. protection forces leave, but give the Bosnian people the ability to defend themselves.

Bob Dole

So I do not see anything new happening. Maybe you can force the Bosnians to sign another peace agreement. We met with the President of Bosnia. He said, well, if you will not lift the arms embargo, maybe you can get the Serbs to come down to parity so they would reduce the weapons they have.

Bob Dole

We were told -- myself and the Senator from Connecticut, Senator Lieberman -- by the Bosnian Vice President, Mr. Ganic, the last time he was here, that they have one rifle for every four men -- one weapon. The Bosnians want antitank guns.

Bob Dole

It just seems to me we ought to do the right thing. About all the hope the Bosnians have is America. That is what they tell you, with tears in their eyes: "We're waiting for America; we're waiting for America." And that is what this debate is all about: Not American troops, not American air strikes, but American leadership, to say the Bosnians ought to have a right to defend themselves. It seems to me that is not too much to ask.

Bob Dole

So, Madam President, I want to again urge my colleagues. I know there are some Members who voted against this proposal the last time who may join us this time. I understand that the administration feels strongly about this, and it may be very difficult for some to oppose the administration. But this is not a partisan effort. It should not be a partisan effort.

Bob Dole

I just would like to take another look at some of the other arguments made against this amendment.

Bob Dole

First, the impact on the negotiations. Again, I think if somebody reads this morning's Washington Post, that piece about war looming in that part of the world, I think they will understand. There are not going to be any negotiated settlements. At least, that was the sense I had when I left Bosnia.

Bob Dole

History shows us that a stable peace can be achieved when there is a balance on the battlefield -- a balance on the battlefield. Our own history of negotiations with the Soviets taught us that negotiating from a position of strength produced the best results.

Bob Dole

The Bosnians are getting a little stronger; they are gaining a little more strength. They may have a little more negotiating power in the next weeks, months, or years. But again, if there was a balance, if we lift the arms embargo unilaterally, if the United States leads the way, they will have a chance. Good things happen when the United States leads the way; whether it is politics or economics or military, good things happen when the United States leads the way.

Bob Dole

So it seems to me the only potential outcome that is furthered by the continued arms embargo on the Bosnians is surrender.

Bob Dole

Some will say, "Oh, this can have a negative impact on NATO." It seems to me NATO has already suffered significant damage, but not as a result of our efforts to lift the arms embargo. NATO's credibility suffered because of decisions to subordinate NATO to the United Nations in Bosnia, allowing U.N. officials to have operational control over NATO forces. NATO's influence has been marginalized because of a failure to define a clear and independent role in the post-cold-war era.

Bob Dole

I read a piece in the Los Angeles Times which reported that Mr. Akashi and other U.N. officials are building monumental structures as if they want to stay in Croatia and Bosnia forever. UNPROFOR has 3,000 civilian employees. They have a bureaucracy going and they do not want to leave.

Bob Dole

I ask unanimous consent to print that article in the Record, too, in case some of my colleagues may have missed it. It tells what is really happening in Croatia and Bosnia and why some in the United Nations insist on staying there.

Bob Dole

Madam President, in addition to NATO's other shortcomings, NATO has been weakened by its willingness to allow Russia to dictate the terms of our security relations with former Warsaw Pact countries like Hungary, Poland, the Czech Republic, and Slovakia.

Bob Dole

I would like to address again the argument made by administration officials that unilaterally declaring this illegal arms embargo null and void will lead to the demise of legal U.N. embargoes against the perpetrators of aggression.

Bob Dole

I think it is fairly clear that Bosnia is not a perpetrator, Bosnia is a victim of aggression, while Iraq and Serbia are the aggressors. The arms embargo against Bosnia violates its inherent right to self- defense, as I said, a right which is recognized in, but not limited to, article 51 of the U.N. Charter.

Bob Dole

Whether or not the administration or other members of the U.N. Security Council choose to see it, right and wrong still exist in the world, legal and illegal actions still exist under international law. Obfuscation and moral equivalence may work in the short term, but will not work in the long term. History is going to judge our actions here. History will judge whether or not the United States exercised leadership in support of a just peace in Bosnia or not.

Bob Dole

Some opponents of our amendment may argue that lifting the embargo would endanger the U.N. protection forces. In my view, that puts the cart before the horse. The U.N. protection forces have not protected Bosnia. They have not protected -- they have been witnesses to all the suffering.

Bob Dole

As this recent Los Angeles Times article pointed out, the U.N. protection forces have become " * * * an empire more absorbed in keeping itself in business than restoring peace so it can disband and go home." That is the article I made reference to earlier.

Bob Dole

So for all the reasons I can think of, Madam President, this embargo must be lifted. And again, I know that one visit to Sarajevo does not make anybody an expert, but you can see the devastation, you can see the horror, you can see the tragedy, and it is still happening.

Bob Dole

About 150 sniper rounds a day from the hills come in, and children are hurt, babies are hurt, old people are hurt. They are not participants in any conflict. They are innocent. Again, I am not now asking us to become involved at all. I retreated from that position. I thought air strikes might be a good idea. But, let us forget about air strikes. Let us talk about lifting the arms embargo; let us talk about providing leadership for the rest of the world; and let us do it by a big, big vote on this amendment.

Bob Dole

Mr. BIDEN addressed the Chair.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Delaware.

Joe Biden

Madam President, for a couple years now, some of us in this Chamber -- Senator Lieberman from Connecticut and others -- have been urging that the arms embargo placed on Yugoslavia, and Bosnia, in particular, by the last administration, be lifted.

Joe Biden

As a matter of fact, in the waning hours of the Bush administration we actually adopted an amendment that I authored not only urging the President to lift the embargo but authorizing then President Bush to expend up to $50 million in military arms to make available to the Bosnian Government. The Bush administration did not act.

Joe Biden

The Clinton administration, although critical during the campaign of the Bush administration's position, came in and essentially adopted the same position. We have had no change. We have had herculean efforts on the part, I expect, of both administrations to try to negotiate something. But the essence of the negotiation always is, Bosnia, give up, as Czechoslovakia did in the thirties, part of your territory to the naked aggression sponsored by a foreign state, Serbia, in return for having the right to exist in any form as a nation state.

Joe Biden

That is the deal the Bosnian Government is asked repeatedly to sign. I made my position very clear. I think that this administration should be directed to move that the United Nations table a resolution demanding the lifting of the embargo, force our NATO allies to stand up and be counted. I predict to you they will not veto such a resolution. I predict to you they will not have the courage to go down on the wrong side of history. I predict to you that vigorous American leadership could reverse the arms embargo and do it multilaterally. But it seems that is not going to be done.

Joe Biden

This administration has not acceded to my pleas or those of others. We will be left in the Senate with the choice to vote for an amendment which I believe will be offered and, I suspect, supported by the administration -- an amendment which is well-intended, may even be correct -- although I happen to think not, but I suspect it will call for an interim step. That step will propose that if the Serbs do not agree to a negotiated settlement, then and only then will we lift the embargo. I know the Secretary of State, in talking to me, has been working vigorously to try to, if that route were taken, convince our allies that they would then join us in lifting the embargo.

Joe Biden

Well, on its face that seems to be reasonable, Madam President, except for one important factor. We have been on record in this administration from the outset, and a critical element of my position on this issue has been, that we will not dictate the partitioning of Bosnia. We, the United States, will not be party to insisting on the partitioning of Bosnia.

Joe Biden

The contact group proposal, the so-called contact group made up of the major European powers, our NATO allies and Russia, has put on the table for discussion a partitioning of Bosnia -- 49-51. It says that the Serbs must back off from the 70 percent they now control to 50 percent. The Serbs have no right to 1 percent, one-quarter of 1 percent.

Joe Biden

Now, I am not naive enough to think we can dictate an outcome which allows the Bosnian Government to be fully reconstituted -- multicultural and within the confines of the original nation of Bosnia-Herzegovina that we recognized several years ago. If we had acted when we should have, I believe we could have guaranteed that. But we are beyond that now.

Joe Biden

Now the question is, do we get on the wrong side of history in two ways. Do we get on the wrong side of history by saying, in this Chamber, to the President of the United States that we not only condone this partition, but insist that the Bosnian Government give up 49 percent of its territory.

Joe Biden

Now, the way it is going to be presented to us by the administration is that we are insisting the Serbs back off 20 percent of the 70 percent they now have.

Joe Biden

Well, the truth is that we will be endorsing the fact that Bosnia will be split and roughly half of it will be under the effective control of a guy named Milosevic, who happens to be President of an independent and separate country called Serbia. That is what this is about, separate and apart from whether or not the chronic debates that my friend from Virginia and my friend from Arizona and I have had about the utility of air strikes. It has nothing to do with that. This is a fundamental decision we are going to be asked to participate in: Do we officially condone, as a matter of United States policy, the partitioning of Bosnia after 2 years of insisting the territorial integrity of Bosnia, under the control of a single multiethnic government in Sarajevo, remain intact? That is the position the contact group, at least in a de facto way, is abandoning.

Joe Biden

So there is a principle at stake here that I caution the Senate not to go on record as supporting. Now, as often happens in complicated matters, we are presented with Hobson's choice here in the Senate. We get to this point because of inadvertence, bad policy, misguided policy or honest to goodness mistakes, well-intended in the beginning but nonetheless mistakes. We are left with several bad choices. The proposal of my friends, the Republican leader and my friend from Connecticut is, if taken in the abstract, misguided in my view. We should not be unilaterally lifting embargoes. We signed onto it with our allies. the Republican administration locked us into a position inherited by this administration. A position which is now not only inherited but now adhered to by this administration, compounding in my view the incredibly misguided judgment of the last administration and participating in that misguided judgment. And so we are left in this Chamber to vote on whether or not to unilaterally lift the embargo.

Joe Biden

Now, the alternative will be to vote, I suspect, on recognizing that the underlying premise of an alternative is to support the position of the contact group. The position dictates that Bosnia accept half its country or suffer the consequences.

Joe Biden

Now, fortunately for the contact group -- and in Machiavellian political terms it is probably going to turn out to be this way -- the Serbs will be stupid enough and greedy enough and vicious enough to reject even being handed half the country. They will probably insist on 70 percent of the country. And that is what Mr. Izetbegovic is going to bank on. I feel badly for the Bosnian Government. Mr. Izetbegovic is sitting over there along with Mr. Silajdzic and other leaders of the Bosnian Government and I bet you, after speaking with them for hours, their calculation of the discussion sounds something like this: Do we want to sign onto anything that says we voluntarily give up half our country? Then the counter will be, well, if we sign on, then the ball is in the Serbian court and they will be stupid enough not to sign, and then we will get help. Then someone will respond, and say, No, wait a minute. What if they accept? My Lord. Do I want to be a signatory to the demise of my country? Think about that in terms of what we would be doing -- "we," us, political leaders -- if put in a similar situation.

Joe Biden

The one thing I have found is that there is little difference between political leaders all over the world.

Joe Biden

So what are we left with? A choice of signing onto one alternative which has the possibility of lifting the embargo multilaterally because hopefully the administration will say that if the Serbs reject the contact group offer, they have agreement from the Russians and the other contact group members either to support lifting the arms embargo, or abstain from vetoing it. But that is a high risk, to actually say we support partitioning.

Joe Biden

Then there is the alternative. What is going to happen here? If the Dole-Lieberman proposal passes, what will happen? We will have established a precedent of unilaterally lifting an embargo. Well, I think it is just as likely the following will happen. If Dole-Lieberman passes, I believe it is equally as probable that the President will have to do what we have been pleading with him to do for 2 years. He will go to the United Nations, and to NATO and say that this is for real. I have no choice. So unless you want to blow the whole alliance, unless you want to blow the whole Security Council, listen to me. Either abstain or vote with me. That is what I demand.

Joe Biden

That is the alternative the President is going to be faced with. He is either going to be faced with vetoing this bill, if it passes -- a solid piece of legislation its managers have worked impressively and incredibly hard to put together in the interest of this country, or he and the Secretary of State will be forced to step up to the ball. They will have to lay it out for the Europeans, no ifs, ands, or buts; take all the varnish off. This is the deal.

Joe Biden

I doubt whether anybody in here really believes that the President of the United States and the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of State will say this is it, that they cannot get the votes. But at a minimum, I predict they will require a new try, or veto this bill.

Joe Biden

Let me say a few other things, and then I will yield the floor.

Joe Biden

I recently returned to Sarajevo with Senator Dole and Senator Warner. I had been to Sarajevo a year earlier. I had been to Sarajevo, and I had been to a number of other areas in Bosnia that were under siege then and under siege now. We had a chance to see the country, unfortunately. It is a magnificently beautiful country.

Joe Biden

We were riding back in the plane, Senator Dole, Senator Warner, and I. One of them asked me, "What has changed?" I remember saying on the plane that what has changed is the attitude of the people in Bosnia, the attitude of the Moslems and the Croats and the few Serbs who still live in Bosnia committed to the notion of a Bosnian government.

Joe Biden

When I was there a year and a few months ago, people were pleading for the United States to help -- pleading. It was obvious that the cities of Sarajevo, Tuzla, Srebrenica, the Bihac, the entire country, was in the process of disintegration. They saw what was coming, and they knew what was there, and they pleaded with us for air strikes, pleaded with us for help, pleaded with us to lift the arms embargo, pleaded with us to intervene with American forces.

Joe Biden

Well, this time I went back to a group of realists. This time as I stood in the streets of Sarajevo with my colleagues, or in the hospital next to the hospital beds, or with the relief workers, or in the shops, they looked at us with steely eyes, and said, we need Americans help to lift this embargo. But I tell you, pal. You lift the embargo, we will take care of our ourselves. We will take care of ourselves. They have figured out that they have a bigger army. They have a more committed army. They have fighters who can fight.

Joe Biden

I remember debating with some of my colleagues on the floor when I said send arms to them and other Members of this body argued that they do not know how to use those arms. Like heck they do not know how to use those arms. They have no problem. There was universal conviction in that country before it was divided up. The Moslems in Bosnia, the Croats in Bosnia are equally as tenacious and tough fighters as the Serbs in Bosnia and the Serbs in Serbia.

Joe Biden

So what I found in the change in attitude was, give us a chance.

Joe Biden

The second thing I found was, no matter what we sign, Senator, do not think we are going to permanently agree that Serbia has de facto control over half of our country. We may have to sign something here in order to get a cessation of hostilities. Part of their calculation will be that if they sign the agreement, my colleagues may say, do we keep the arms embargo on? Will we then agree to lift the arms embargo on Bosnia? My guess is we will be told we have to keep the arms embargo on. But the Bosnians are counting on it being lifted.

Joe Biden

Does anybody in here, after seeing the state of affairs in Bosnia, think that the Bosnian government is going to, once the arms embargo is lifted, no matter what they agreed to, sit there and say that is OK, keep Bihac, do not worry about Tuzla, Srebrenica and all along the Drina River is not a problem for us. Does anybody believe that?

Joe Biden

I want to make the point that what we want is a permanent settlement. I realize I sound like a broken record. I have been saying this for 2 years. The only way, in my reading of the history of that region, as well as in all Europe, is that there has only been a lasting -- "lasting" meaning decades -- peace when there is a stalemate on the battlefield, when both sides in the conflict conclude there is no more they can gain as a consequence of military engagement.

Joe Biden

I challenge anyone who has been to Bosnia. I challenge anyone who has been to Croatia and not Bosnia, or Serbia and not Bosnia, to tell me that they think the Bosnian government thinks that if they had arms they could not do any better.

Joe Biden

So the quickest road to peace is to let it be made clear to the Bosnian Government and to the Serbian Government and to the Serbian butchers, Karadzic and the military leader Mladic, that this is as far as they can go, and no sides go any further, not because of an international resolution, but because they are stopped on the battlefield.

Joe Biden

That is the reality of conflict in Europe. People like to try to educate me about the reality of the Balkans. Well, I am sure there are people who know more than I know about the Balkans, but I challenge anybody in this Chamber who thinks they know any more than I know about the history of the Balkans. I may be wrong in the conclusions I reach after reading history, but I do not fail to know the history. The truth of the matter is that nothing is ever resolved by international accords, agreements signed under duress, or agreements that do not have the standing and backing of the principals who signed those agreements.

Joe Biden

My second point is, purely from a pragmatic standpoint, it makes sense to allow the Bosnian Government to find out whether their present disposition is correct. I assure you if it is not, they will be at the table to sign for 49 percent.

John Warner

Will the Senator yield for a brief question?

Joe Biden

Yes, I am happy to yield for a question.

John Warner

I had the privilege of traveling with you and the distinguished Republican leader. This debate today should focus on the choice between the United States unilaterally lifting the embargo, or lifting the embargo along the lines of an alternate amendment which the Senator from Georgia [Mr. Nunn] and myself and others will shortly introduce, whereby we do it in conjunction with our allies.

John Warner

That is the key question, given the value of our alliance today, as it has been in the past, and will be in the future. This week, the Armed Services Committee had extensive testimony from Great Britain, France, Denmark, Spain, and others. Without exception, each witness told us that if you lift this unilaterally, this war becomes stamped "made in America." We cannot let that happen.

John Warner

Would the Senator narrowly focus on that as he concludes his remarks, so that the distinguished majority leader and others may address the Senate?

Joe Biden

I would be happy to. Unfortunately, I began this before the Senator was on the floor. I started off by saying that the choices were stark. They were Hobson's choices; neither was very good.

Joe Biden

The reason I could not go the route the Senator from Virginia and others are going to propose is because an essential element of that resolution is signing on implicitly, if not expressly, to the contact group's requirement that the sides accept the 49-51 split. That is counter to American policy stated thus far. The alternative offered by my friend from Connecticut and our friend from Kansas, although not a good alternative, I believe has an equally or better chance of forcing the President to do what needs be done -- going to the allies and saying that the embargo is going to be lifted, and you better join me now to do it multilaterally. I predict that will happen. I could be dead wrong. That is a very short version of what I took 10 or 15 minutes to explain prior to the Senator being on the floor.

Joe Biden

I will conclude by making a much more parochial point. First, we cannot get on the wrong side of history and, as a nation and a Chamber, condone that an independent country we recognized, which was later invaded by another country and partitioned by and with the help of another country, be partitioned in any degree, whether 49-51, 60-40, or 10-90. That is a matter of principle, and we should not sign on to that.

Sam Nunn

Will the Senator yield to me for approximately 30 seconds for the purpose of introducing a second-degree amendment?

Joe Biden

Sam Nunn

Madam President, I send an amendment to the desk and ask for its immediate consideration.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.

Sam Nunn

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

Sam Nunn

I thank the Senator from Delaware.

Joe Biden

Madam President, let me conclude. The weapon of choice by the Serbs who are engaged in this carnage from day one has been indiscriminate terrorism.

Joe Biden

First, setting up rape camps, concentration camps for the purposes of raping and permanently defiling Moslem women, because of the nature of the impact that has on the culture.

Joe Biden

Second was indiscriminate shelling. Literally there are photographs of Serbian -- I will not even call them soldiers -- Serbs sitting in the hills where the Olympic ski jumps were, in shirtsleeves, sunning themselves and drinking wine and eating cheese, dropping in shells and indiscriminately firing on cities. I remember showing my colleagues where I had stood a year earlier, showing them the opening in the old city between the buildings up into the mountains where the clear shot of the gun was maneuvered for the express purpose of being able to hit an area where people were getting drinking water from a spigot or a pipe coming out of the side of a building.

Joe Biden

Other forms of terror have been employed from the outside. I would like to add onto something the Republican leader said. The Senator from Virginia, the Senator from Kansas, and I, went to a hospital, and we observed the young children that Senator Dole spoke of. It would break your heart to see them. But as leaders of a great country of 250 million, we cannot make foreign policy based upon our emotions, notwithstanding how wrenching the experience was to see that magnificent little girl, who until she looked at us looked perfectly normal and stared at us with these big blue eyes. The doctor said to us, "She cannot see you." When she turned her head, you could see that half the side of her head was gone where a sniper bullet had gone through. We walked over to a bed and were holding onto a magnificent looking little 9-year old girl whose leg had been shattered by a sniper's bullet, lying there whimpering, because it had only occurred the night before. We saw four men who were sniper victims two and three nights earlier.

Joe Biden

I do not say this to give a catalog of horrors, because all you have to do is go to Rwanda and you would see horrors that far outstrip anything I have described. Let me tell you why I raise it. I think inadvertently the minority leader said "indiscriminate" firing. There was nothing indiscriminate about this. The only way these children were hit was intentionally. Snipers wait for children, get them in their sights with high-powered weapons, with night scopes, and deliberately shoot the children. None of these people we saw were hit as a consequence of a spray of bullets. They were all hit by a single shot, fired from a single weapon by a single terrorist, for the express purpose of terrorizing the community.

Joe Biden

Few times in modern warfare has it been a matter of policy to bring down a government, break the moral resolve of a nation by singling out 9-year-old children. We were walking across a street where there were blankets hanging like you would see in the old movies of the lower east side of New York, laundry hanging from fire escapes, and some of the young people with us said, "What is this for?" I explained to them. They put blankets across these streets to cut off the angle of the snipers so they cannot see their victim. That is why it is done. The snipers are not up there indiscriminately spraying machine guns. They are sitting in buildings waiting for children like they wait for rabbits.

Joe Biden

And that I will say, Madam President, is the quintessential example of what characterizes the people waging the war to bring down this government and partition this nation.

Joe Biden

As I said, people can cite for me and I can cite for you, in terms of quantity, evidence of brutality that far exceeds what we saw, but I doubt whether you can cite for me the policy condoned by a government, engaged in by a people, that is as brutal and as lacking in humankindness as this group of people who are attempting to bring down this government.

Joe Biden

If, in 1935, it had been Lutherans or Catholics or Presbyterians who had been rumored to be in those death camps in Europe, I believe the world would have reacted differently. If we were not talking about Moslem children, if we were not talking about a Moslem-dominated government, I believe the world would also react differently.

John McCain

Madam President, will the Senator yield?

Joe Biden

I would be delighted to yield for a question.

John McCain

I am curious as to how much longer the Senator from Delaware intends to speak.

Joe Biden

John McCain

I thank the Senator.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader is recognized.

George J. Mitchell

Madam President, this is an important debate and discussion, and I hope that it will occur in a manner that permits both sides to be fairly presented during the debate.

George J. Mitchell

I would like to respond to several of the points made by the Senator from Delaware, but I would like to respond first to the last point made describing some of the horrors which have occurred in the former Yugoslavia.

George J. Mitchell

Those horrors will be multiplied thousands of times over if this war widens. Yet that will be the inevitable result of the unilateral lifting of the arms embargo by the United States.

George J. Mitchell

Is our revulsion against killing a reason to encourage more killing? If so, then emotion will have overwhelmed reason.

George J. Mitchell

No one disputes the fact that this war has been harmful and catastrophic, but the course of action prescribed by those who support the unilateral lifting of the arms embargo will inevitably -- indeed, according to the Senator from Delaware himself, the very reason for lifting it is to encourage the Bosnians to fight -- the inevitable result will be a much wider war, much more killing, much more pillage and many more of the horrors against which he has understandably rebelled.

George J. Mitchell

Madam President, this is an emotional argument, but let us not permit emotion to overwhelm reason. Some killing, horrible as it is, should not induce us to adopt a policy which encourages more killing.

George J. Mitchell

The issue here is a narrow one, as the Senator from Virginia has noted. It is whether the arms embargo imposed by the United Nations on the former Yugoslavia with the support of the United States shall now be lifted unilaterally by the United States in defiance of the United Nations' action and contrary to the interests and views of our allies. That is the narrow issue.

George J. Mitchell

The amendment offered by the Senator from Georgia [Mr. Nunn], and the Senator from Virginia [Mr. Warner], points out that right now the United Nations has imposed sanctions on Iraq with the support of the United States, has imposed sanctions on Haiti with the support of the United States, has imposed sanctions on Libya with the support of the United States, has been discussing and may soon resume discussing sanctions against North Korea with the support of the United States.

George J. Mitchell

If we now unilaterally lift the arms embargo in the former Yugoslavia, we will be saying to every participant in those other sanctioned countries, you can jump out whenever you see fit. We will completely undermine the international effort through the United Nations and with our allies to use sanctions as a means of attaining universally accepted international objectives.

George J. Mitchell

Turkey wants out of the sanctions against Iraq. How are we going to insist that they stay in when we unilaterally get out of those sanctions that we do not like? Others want out of the sanctions against Libya and Haiti. And others do not want to join in the sanctions against North Korea. We will be sending a signal across this world that any international effort to impose sanctions can be disregarded by any nation at any time for any reason it chooses.

George J. Mitchell

Madam President, it has been stated here several times by the proponents of this amendment that they have been to the former Yugoslavia and they are familiar with the history of the Balkans. That is useful and helpful. But I would note that many Senators have been to the former Yugoslavia, many Senators are familiar with the history of the Balkans, and a visit there imparts to no one special insight and knowledge. People who have been on both sides of the issue have been there and have reached different conclusions.

George J. Mitchell

Madam President, there is much about this debate that is deeply disturbing, but from my standpoint nothing is more so than the manner in which our allies have been treated with what can only be described as condescension and insult.

George J. Mitchell

We are told, in words demeaning to the British and French, that we simply have to tell them what to do. We are told what we have to do is lay it out for the Europeans. And we were told, in the previous debate last month on this subject, we are not the British or French, we are the Americans.

George J. Mitchell

Well, I ask every Member of this Senate and every American to consider these facts: Right now in the former Yugoslavia there are more than 5,500 French troops, more than 3,400 British troops, more than 2,000 Dutch, more than 2,000 Canadians, nearly 1,500 Spanish, and more than 1,000 Belgians. And during the course of this tortured conflict, 936 of them have been wounded and 49 killed.

George J. Mitchell

There are no American combat ground forces there. Talk is cheap. Action is expensive. While we talk, they act.

George J. Mitchell

Who are we to insult and demean our allies? Who are we to preach at the British and French, as they send thousands and thousands of their young men there, see hundreds of them wounded, and dozens of them killed?

George J. Mitchell

Every Member of this Senate knows, and every American knows, that if there were 15,000 American troops in Bosnia, if 936 Americans had been wounded and 49 Americans had been killed, these Senators who are out here giving these speeches today would be falling all over themselves to offer the first resolution to withdraw the Americans. Everybody knows that. And there is not one of these Senators -- not one -- who will vote to unilaterally lift the embargo who will stand up and say that he now favors sending thousands of Americans to replace the British and French. Not one. Talk is cheap. Action is expensive.

George J. Mitchell

Who are we to preach to the British and French? They are sovereign nations. They are democracies. They are our allies. They are doing what we have been unwilling to do. Their men are being killed. Their men are being wounded. Their countries are spending hundreds of millions of dollars to try to bring about a resolution of this conflict. And here we are preaching at them, insulting them, telling them, "You've got to do what we say." How would Americans feel if the British and the French Government said to the United States Government, "You do it our way"? No discussion; no debate.

George J. Mitchell

We have a responsibility for leadership. We are not only the leader in the free world, we are the leader of the world. But we also have a responsibility to treat our allies with the same respect we expect from them, to encourage action in a multilateral way. But let us rid this debate of any condescension toward our allies.

George J. Mitchell

Madam President, this is a fateful moment in the Balkans. War, which has raged intermittently for nearly 500 years based upon ancient religious and ethnic hostilities which have repeatedly erupted over that period of time, is now threatened on a scale much wider and much more devastating than that which has occurred before. Imperfect and halting and sometimes mistaken as they have been, our European allies, with very little support from us, have attempted to bring about a peaceful resolution. And, as I said, they have placed 15,000 of their men in risk, seen nearly 1,000 of them wounded, and 49 of them killed in the process.

George J. Mitchell

They have made it clear beyond any doubt, in private and public statements, that if the United States unilaterally lifts the arms embargo, they will, as they must, withdraw all of their forces, and what has been a multilateral effort will then become an American effort.

George J. Mitchell

I say to my colleagues that history will judge this action to have been a fateful error because, when that war widens, as it inevitably will, and when the horrors, described with such feeling by the Senator from Delaware, multiply by the thousands, and when the debate increases for the Government which has taken the step and has triggered this wider war to now do something about it, everybody here knows that those who vote for this unilateral lifting of the embargo will not be prepared to do anything. Not one will vote to send an American soldier over there to face injury and death.

George J. Mitchell

We are not going to end the history of the Balkans by what we do here today. We are not going to eliminate or mitigate ancient religious and ethnic hostilities which have occurred for nearly 500 years and beyond. But we can take a sensible, prudent, responsible step, and that is to adopt the resolution offered by the Senators from Georgia and Virginia, which encourages the action underway to try to bring about a peaceful resolution and a containment of the war, and which provides for a multilateral effort to lift the arms embargo should those efforts at a peaceful resolution fail. That is the choice that we have.

George J. Mitchell

There are very strong feelings on all sides. Americans have been moved by the televised scenes described by the Senator from Delaware. But I say to my colleagues, if this unilateral lifting of the arms embargo is adopted and, as they will, our allies withdraw all of their forces and, as it will, this war widens, there are going to be many, many more such televised scenes.

George J. Mitchell

I ask my colleagues to tell us what it is they are prepared to do now. Tell us now whether they will vote to send thousands of Americans into the place now occupied by the British and the French and our other allies, risk those Americans to injury and death. I ask them to tell us that now. Because if they will not, then they ought to make that clear to the people in the region. This is a very, very difficult question. It is a very difficult issue. But I believe it is at a critical stage.

George J. Mitchell

I hope that in the course of this debate the Senator from Virginia and the Senator from Georgia will describe in detail their amendment, which I strongly support and which I encourage all Senators to support because I believe it represents the most sensible and reasonable course to take in a very difficult situation.

John Warner

Madam President, will the Senator yield for one brief question?

George J. Mitchell

Yes, certainly, one question.

John Warner

Madam President, the remarks made by the distinguished majority leader covered all issues save one, which I think should be included, and that is that we are at a critical moment in history with respect to the relationships between the Western World and Russia.

John Warner

Russia has made it very clear that if this unilateral lifting were to take place they would be constrained to align themselves with their allies through history, and that is Serbia.

John Warner

I wonder if the distinguished majority leader would add that element to his otherwise very broad and carefully laid remarks, because I am deeply concerned that it would reverse the progress the Western World is now making with respect to Russia: Notably, this week, the Partnership for Peace. To my understanding the Russian Foreign Minister is in Corfu today, working again in a multilateral forum. Unilateral action by the United States could bring about a reversal of that progress.

George J. Mitchell

Madam President, I thank my colleague.

George J. Mitchell

The most significant event, in my judgment, of the second half of the 20th century has been the collapse of communism and the demise of the Soviet Union and the end of the cold war -- with the United States as the resultant lone superpower. We have a lot of foreign policy interests, but I think most Senators would agree that among the highest is the new relationship with Russia and the former states of the Soviet Union.

George J. Mitchell

Reference was made earlier here today to the history of the Balkans. I urge all of my colleagues to go back and familiarize themselves with the history of the Balkans in the period immediately preceding the First World War. That war -- which as the name suggests was the first truly global conflict -- was triggered precisely because of the situation in the Balkans and the very powerful commitment of Russia to what are known as the south Slavs, the center in modern Serbia. It was the conflict between the south Slavs and the Austro-Hungarian Empire, the desire for the south Slavs to have a Slavic dimension to the Austro- Hungarian Empire, which was, as the name suggests, based primarily in Austria and Hungary, that triggered the events that led directly into the First World War.

George J. Mitchell

The Russians aligned themselves with the south Slavs. The Germans aligned themselves with the Austro-Hungarians. And ultimately all of the nations of Europe and eventually the United States were drawn into a conflict that resulted in millions of deaths. That attraction, that relationship, is no less today. There is a very powerful imperative in Russia -- political, historical, economic, and military -- to strongly support the Serbs. And the Russians have made it clear, as the Senator from Virginia suggests, if we are going to lift the arms embargo and supply arms to the Bosnians, then they are going to supply arms to the Serbians. And we will then be back in a situation tragically reminiscent of the cold war, where the provision of arms by outside forces accelerates and widens conflict in different parts of the globe. And it will be a wider conflict. Everyone knows that.

George J. Mitchell

Just in this mornings's Washington Post there is a report about the lengthening shadow of the prospect of wider war and how the only hope of preventing that is for some progress to be made by the so-called contact group in bringing about a peaceful resolution.

George J. Mitchell

None of this is to condone any of the actions of the Serbs, the Bosnian Serbs or those residing in Serbia. There have been atrocities on all sides, but it is clear for all to see that the fundamental aggressors have been the Serbs and the primary victims have been the Bosnians, primarily Moslems but including some Bosnian Croats and some Bosnians Serbs. That is not the issue.

George J. Mitchell

The issue is, how do we go about pursuing a policy most likely to produce a peaceful resolution without the prospect of wider war? It is a narrow difference. But this conflict has the potential not just for involving many others in the region, not just for expanding the number of dead and wounded dramatically, but also for causing a very serious break and rupture in relations between the United States and Russia. That is something that everyone ought to keep in mind as we debate this matter.

George J. Mitchell

Madam President, I yield the floor.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona.

John McCain

Madam President, while the majority leader is still on the floor, he asked the question several times as to whether proponents of this amendment are willing to send United States young men and women to Bosnia. The answer is, obviously, no. In fact, the only proposal I have heard to send American troops to Bosnia is that, I believe, supported by the majority leader -- he can correct me if I am wrong -- of sending 25,000 American troops in the unlikely event that there is some kind of peace agreement. I do not support sending troops because I do not believe any agreement is going to be enforceable. So my response -- --

George J. Mitchell

The Senator is wrong.

John McCain

So my response, and I know that of the Senator from Kansas, who was the prime sponsor of this resolution, is "no." Our answer is "no." We will not support sending American troops to that region, nor would we countenance such a thing. The connection between the amendment of the Senator from Kansas and sending American troops there is spurious at best.

John McCain

Mr. MITCHELL addressed the Chair.

John McCain

On the issue of sanctions -- I have just responded to the question by the majority leader. I did not interrupt his statement. But if he wishes to speak further, I will be glad to yield to him.

George J. Mitchell

The Senator just said, "Correct me if I am wrong." I took that to be an invitation to correct him if he is wrong, and my answer is he is wrong.

John McCain

Do I understand that the Senator from Maine does not approve the administration proposal that, in the event of a peace agreement in the Balkans, we would send 25,000 troops? He does not support that?

George J. Mitchell

There has never been a number to which I have agreed.

George J. Mitchell

I said that if a peace settlement occurs, we should consider -- I would consider the administration's request to send troops there, not in any numbers, and awaiting the context.

John McCain

So my understanding is the majority leader's position is he would only consider such a thing?

George J. Mitchell

John McCain

Let me make clear to the majority leader that I would not consider such a thing. I would not consider such a move. It would be an exercise in foolishness and futility, and it would result in the death and wounding of thousands of young Americans.

George J. Mitchell

That is the answer I expected. That is why I asked the question.

John McCain

The majority leader knows, since he likes so much to refer to history, that American casualties would be an inevitable result. American casualties would be the inevitable result of dispatching troops to an area which, as the majority leader mentioned, has been involved in a civil war for about 500 years.

John McCain

I would like to address the comment about sanctions and the argument that if sanctions were removed and the arms embargo were lifted, sanctions in other places would also fall. The argument being that if we do not support these U.N. sanctions, that other sanctions would not be valid either.

John McCain

Madam President, there is a fundamental difference between the sanctions that have been imposed on Yugoslavia -- and by the way, the sanctions were imposed on Yugoslavia, not Bosnia -- and the sanctions that have been imposed on Haiti, Iraq, and Libya.

John McCain

The difference is, Madam President, that these nations are not trying to defend themselves. They are not under attack.

John McCain

The U.N. charter says that every Nation has the right to self- defense, and no action on the part of the United Nations may impair that right to defend themselves. Madam President, not only is Bosnia under attack, but 70 percent of its territory has been absorbed by the enemy. What this embargo does is impair the ability of Bosnia to defend itself.

John McCain

To me, it is incredible. It is incredible that we should sit here in judgment of the Bosnians, who are pleading and crying and begging for us to allow them to defend themselves.

John McCain

Iraq is not under attack from another country. Haiti is not under attack from another country. Iran is not under attack from another country. Libya is not under attack from another country. But Bosnia is. And Bosnians should have the right to defend themselves.

John McCain

To compare a nation that has seen hundreds of thousands of its people killed and millions of them displaced with other nations who are under U.N. embargo clearly begs logic and reason.

John McCain

I do not believe there will be a settlement. In fact, the Washington Post, which has been referred to several times this morning, says: "Winds of War Blow in Balkans Despite Latest, American-Backed Peace Plan." I ask unanimous consent that this and an article from the Washington Times be printed in the Record at this point.

John McCain

Madam President, the reason why the winds of war are blowing in the Balkans, as all of us know, is because the settlement that is being imposed on Bosnia is unjust and unworkable.

John McCain

(Mrs. BOXER assumed the chair.)

John McCain

Madam President, it is unjust to tell a country they have to give up half their territory because another nation has come in and taken it from them and practiced genocide and ethnic cleansing and all the things we know about. It is unjust.

John McCain

In the Middle East peace process, we are demanding that Israel give back the land that they gained as a result of the 1967 war. We have taken the position that there can be no peace in the Middle East until that happens.

John McCain

Yet here we are in Bosnia supporting a settlement which requires that country, which now only has 30 percent of its territory, to give up half its territory. It is unjust.

John McCain

Madam President, it is unworkable because it is unjust. Until the Bosnian people are able to regain their lost territory, there will be no prospects for peace in the region. Will there be an increase in casualties? Tragically, yes. Who will absorb at least half those casualties and probably more? The Bosnians. The Bosnian Government, freely elected democratic government leaders are telling us, as short a time ago as yesterday, "Please let us die fighting. We are dying; let us die fighting." Is the embargo working, Madam President? According to the Washington Times this morning:

John McCain

We are enforcing an embargo which prevents us from helping the Moslems but allows one of the most dangerous nations on Earth, Iran, to provide those weapons, to gain the allegiance and loyalty of the Bosnians and others in the Balkans and throughout the world who are sympathetic to the plight of the Bosnians.

John McCain

In every mosque, from Malaysia to Tehran, it is being said that Western nations, including the United States, are allowing the murder of Moslems. The legitimate question is being asked in these mosques all over the world: If Bosnia was a Catholic nation, if it was a Protestant nation, would the Western nations, including the United States of America, sit by and watch them be slaughtered?

John McCain

I think it is a very legitimate question. I think it is an extremely legitimate one and one we may pay for in the alienation of the Moslem world in the months and years to come.

John McCain

I want to repeat again, these sanctions were not imposed on Bosnia. They were imposed on Yugoslavia, which no longer exists. These sanctions directly violate the Charter of the United Nations, which says no action on the part of the United Nations will impair a nation's ability to defend iteself.

John McCain

The fact is, according to news reports, that there are arms coming into Bosnia. The distinguished majority leader said, well, then the Russians will supply arms to the Serbs if we supply arms to the Bosnians. One thing the Serbs are not short of, Madam President, is weapons. They are not short of weapons. In fact, the overwhelming preponderance of weapons is on the Serbian side. This is the major complaint we have with these sanctions because it froze in place an unequal battlefield equation which has led to the deaths -- needless deaths, in my view -- of hundreds of thousands of Bosnians.

John McCain

Finally, let me say, history, which has been referred to many times here, tells us one thing which is irrefutable. And that is, when an aggressor nation is faced with equal or greater force and cannot achieve its goals -- which in this case the Serbian goals are the acquisition of Bosnia, or the large majority of it -- then they cease that aggression. And if they are not assured of defeat or an extremely high cost on the battlefield, they will continue that aggression.

John McCain

Unless the Serbs are absolutely convinced that the price of aggression in Bosnia is an unacceptable loss of treasure and blood on the Serbian part, their aggression will continue. I freely admit that the casualties will probably go up in the short term if this embargo is lifted. But should we not listen to the nation that is the victim of the aggression? Should we not pay attention to the pleas and cries of their freely elected leaders and citizens? I suggest we should.

John Warner

Will the Senator yield for a question?

John McCain

I will be glad to yield.

John Warner

Madam President, the distinguished Senator from Arizona is particularly qualified to answer this question. As we are here today in this Chamber debating this very important issue, the command and control arrangements now governing the embargo are primarily in the hands of U.S. officers. We have the NATO South Command under Admiral Smith, we have the air command conducting the air cap, and so forth, under U.S. officers.

John Warner

This debate today, I hope, can focus on what I perceive as a very important but clear distinction between the Republican leader, who wishes unilateral withdrawing, and the Nunn-Warner amendment which wants to do it in conjunction with our allies.

John Warner

But the question to the Senator, a former distinguished Naval officer and one who understands command and control in NATO, what happens to the NATO structure now implementing the U.N. resolution through U.S. officers? Would we not have to withdraw our senior officers in the face of an adoption by this body of the resolution of the Senator from Kansas [Mr. Dole]?

John McCain

Madam President, I say to my friend from Virginia -- and I thank him for his always kind remarks -- what would happen is that the admiral would remain in Naples and the aircraft carrier would probably steam away and the Air Force assets that are flying out of Italy would probably remain on the ground or perform other functions.

John McCain

But I want to say to my friend, I do not see that the Nunn-Warner resolution just calls for a multilateral lifting of the embargo. Very frankly, that is the preferred step, that is the preferred method. The embargo should be lifted multilaterally. But the resolution is not that simple.

John McCain

I read this, and I may be wrong, that the lifting of the embargo would not only be done multilaterally but only as part of a peaceful settlement and it would only happen eventually. I guess that is why the word "eventually" is there.

John Warner

Madam President, the word "eventually" is one I worked on in the draft. It is not a part of the amendment at the desk. I apologize to my distinguished friend from Arizona.

John Warner

But if you read carefully, the Nunn-Warner proposal lays out sequential steps to be taken, which include, if the contact group fails or in some circumstances if it succeeds, a lifting of the embargo.

John Warner

But the important thing is that it is done in partnership with the allies who have stood with us since 1917 through 1940, through many conflicts, including Korea. It is essential that the relationship between the United States of America and its principal allies be preserved.

John Warner

Therefore, I plead with Senators to examine these two amendments very carefully, because the Nunn-Warner amendment moves further in the direction that the distinguished Republican leader has set as a goal for some period of time.

John McCain

I thank my friend from Virginia. But I would also admonish my colleagues to do the same, to read this amendment as I read it. It says, "As part of a peaceful settlement, the lifting of the United States embargo." "As part of a peaceful settlement." I say to my friend from Virginia, I see no prospects of a peaceful settlement. I see the prospects of a peaceful settlement being brought about by the Bosnians being able to defend themselves. So I read the Nunn-Warner amendment significantly different than just a multilateral lifting of the arms embargo. I read it as saying that it has to be part of a peaceful settlement.

John Warner

Madam President, if the Senator will read b. and c. -- --

Sam Nunn

Will the Senator yield for a brief clarification on this question?

John McCain

I will be glad to yield.

Sam Nunn

On this point, because this is an important point, the resolution, that is, the Nunn-Warner resolution has three different ways that the embargo can be lifted but all of them are under multilateral methods. That is the fundamental distinction. The Senators have just identified one of those ways. It is my view -- and this is paragraph a. under (d) on page 3. I think the Senator from Arizona was just reading that -- one of the ways of lifting the embargo -- it can be done multilaterally in my view -- is absolutely essential and that is as part of a peace agreement because no nation can defend itself without arms, and the Bosnian Government in my view has a right to those arms if it is going to be a sovereign state.

Sam Nunn

As the Senators know, I disagree with the embargo. I am not in any way disagreeing with the Dole position and McCain position in terms of the embargo. It is my fervent belief though to do it unilaterally is a mistake.

Sam Nunn

Now, the second way, the second way the embargo in my view can be lifted -- and this is paragraph b. -- is if during the course of these discussions -- and they may go on for another 2 or 3 months or another couple years for all we know. It may be a long, long time before the parties come to any agreement. If during that period the Bosnian Serbs violate the safe havens, then paragraph b. makes it clear that the U.S. Government position should be that we would call for a limited lifting of the embargo so that each safe haven that is violated by the Bosnian Serbs would get defensive arms immediately on a multilateral basis. So that is the second way that I believe our Government should be vigorously pursuing it with NATO and with the U.N. Security Council.

Sam Nunn

The third way is paragraph c., and that is if the Bosnian Serbs do not respond constructively to the peace proposal of the contact group -- and that is a subjective judgment. I would stipulate that -- the immediate lifting of the arms embargo on the Government of Bosnia. And in my view it would be realistic about what has to happen in the event we do lift that embargo -- the orderly withdrawal of the United Nations protection force and humanitarian relief personnel.

Sam Nunn

So really these are the ways that I believe we have to pursue it, these 3 ways, and none of them do it unilaterally but all of them could develop depending on the events there and depending on how successful American leadership is and how assertive we are in pursuing these avenues with our allies.

Sam Nunn

I just wanted to make sure that was clarified.

John McCain

I thank the distinguished chairman. Let me just point out with regard to the first option that the resolution says "including the following." I think perhaps you should make it "one of the following" or "either one of the following." The second situation, if the Bosnian Serbs attack the safe areas designated by the United Nations? Yesterday, yesterday, I say to the chairman, and I can provide him with the information, they attacked the safe areas and they violated their commitments. So b. should be operative right now.

Sam Nunn

I would agree with the Senator on that. I have been pushing for that for several months. I think b. should be operative now. That should be done in lieu of the threat on bombing or in addition to the threat on bombing because I would agree now our allies have not agreed to that nor has our Government proposed that. But that is what I would agree it should be.

John McCain

Then it would seem to me that the Senator from Georgia would support the Dole amendment because the Bosnian Serbs are, as we speak, attacking the safe areas designated by the U.N. Security Council. If the United Nations fails to take that into cognizance, or our allies take that into cognizance, I think we should.

Sam Nunn

So do I, but I do not think we ought to do it unilaterally. That is the distinction.

John McCain

I see. So we really are getting down to whether the United States policy should be dictated by our allies or by what is in the best interests of the United States of America and Bosnia.

John Warner

Madam President, the word dictate is unfair.

John McCain

I would like to finish. I will be glad to yield later to my friend from Virginia.

John McCain

The resolution states: "If the Bosnian Serbs do not respond constructively to the peace proposal of the contact group." Obviously, the Bosnians have not responded positively for quite a long period of time. But I would suggest over time that the Bosnian Serbs will probably act affirmatively since they have absorbed 70 percent of the country and will be allowed to have 50 percent of the country.

John McCain

Since when is it U.S. national policy to endorse and ratify the aggression and absorption of half a country? In the Middle East peace process, as I mentioned earlier, we are demanding that Israel literally return every piece of land that they acquired as a result of the 1967 war. In Bosnia, however, we are going to say, well, you have taken 70 percent of the country and you have killed 200,000 people and you have displaced 2 million people, but as a reward for that we are going to give you half the country. Instead, instead, why can we not let these people defend themselves and gain that territory back?

John Warner

Madam President, if I could pick up with my second question to my colleague -- --

John McCain

John Warner

And then I will yield the floor because there are many anxious to speak, and I have had a fair opportunity. I hope the Senator would revisit the word "dictate." The history of this country, certainly in this century, has been in working with our allies, and really the future of this country is predicated on our ability to form coalitions and work with our allies in trouble spots throughout the world. The Nunn-Warner resolution does not involve being dictated to but working in partnership with our allies.

John Warner

But I come back to the earlier comment by my distinguished colleague, and that is if the United States, pursuant to the Dole resolution, were to trigger the unilateral lifting of the embargo -- that means the withdrawal of U.S. officers from the NATO command, that means the withdrawal of the UNPROFOR forces, it means a total reversal of what has been put in place.

John Warner

We were told yesterday by a distinguished officer from Great Britain that nowhere, where French and British and other UNPROFOR are now stationed, is there rape or pillage or killing. Certainly in those areas they have been able to contain it.

John Warner

But if the United States is the triggering mechanism and this conflict then becomes stamped "Made in USA," I say to my friend, there will be a complete dichotomy between our work and our deeds. We will send nothing, no troops to fill the vacuum when the killing takes place. The pictures will then show the killing and the question will be: Where is the country that brought about the reversal that resulted in the greater killing?

John Warner

How can we then withstand the pressures not to come in and try and in a material way aid the Bosnians? In all probability the Bosnians will call on us for technical expertise and training as is necessary to operate the arms they receive.

John Warner

I ask my friend, How can we reject those pleas?

John McCain

First of all, I would say in response to the initial question about what would happen to our involvement with NATO. We would remain in NATO. Our officers and people would remain exactly where they are. As you know, they are not in Bosnia. They work in places like Naples and other places. I do not see them being withdrawn from anywhere except perhaps not involving themselves in the Bosnian conflict.

John McCain

As far as the UNPROFOR forces are concerned, if the Europeans decide that they want to leave, that is a decision that is up to them, not up to the United States. As far as the issue of our relations with our allies, what has been missing here in this equation is leadership. We should lead our allies. We should be the ones, as we did during the Persian Gulf war, forming the coalition. If the administration believes that we should multilaterally lift the arms embargo, let us go to them and ask them, or say that we are not in favor of lifting the embargo. But for the President of the United States just to say, "Yes, I support lifting the arms embargo," and not instruct our Ambassador in the United Nations to do anything to try to bring that about is, frankly, not what I call leadership.

John McCain

The second thing is where do we get this idea that if we lift the embargo and allow those people to defend themselves that somehow it is a "Made in the U.S.A." struggle? It was not a "Made in the U.S.A." struggle 500 years ago. It may not be, tragically, a "Made in the U.S.A." struggle 500 years from now. All we are proposing is allowing these people the sovereign right of all nations, and that is to defend themselves.

John McCain

Back about 20 years ago, there was an invasion of Afghanistan. That country was invaded by Russia. We did not send American troops there. But we did arrange for the Afghan Freedom Fighters to have the equipment to repel the invader. Frankly, we did not expect to go in there with American troops. It was not stamped "Made in the U.S.A." But I tell you what it did. It made the Russians eventually leave Afghanistan and allow that country to sort out its affairs by itself. Admittedly it is a miserable situation. But at least they are not occupied by Russian troops, and that was a key factor, in the view of many of us, in the ending of the cold war.

John McCain

So because the United States no longer enforces an unfair and unjust embargo on the Bosnian people and Government, who are pleading for it to be lifted, somehow we translate that into "Made in the U.S.A." that is clearly not logical to assume, in my view.

John McCain

I would like to yield the floor because I know that the Senator from Connecticut and the Senator from Nebraska are waiting.

John McCain

I thank my friend from Virginia.

John McCain

I yield the floor.

John McCain

Several Senators addressed the Chair.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas is recognized.

Kay Bailey Hutchison

Thank you, Madam President.

Kay Bailey Hutchison

Madam President, I wish I could support the Nunn-Warner second-degree amendment because the right solution is clearly that all of our allies would come together to lift this embargo. But the reality is every one of us on the Armed Services Committee sat there yesterday and listened to the defense representatives of our allies. And they said, "Don't lift the embargo." They do not favor lifting the embargo.

Kay Bailey Hutchison

I said to them: "I wish we could get your support because this is the right thing to do." And they said no. In fact, most of them said that they would probably in one degree or another leave Bosnia if we unilaterally lift the embargo.

Kay Bailey Hutchison

We have been talking about lifting the arms embargo on these people while they see thousands of their countrymen die. They see their women raped. They see people in a marketplace on a Saturday morning killed, defenseless.

Kay Bailey Hutchison

So we had the opportunity in the Armed Services Committee yesterday to hear from the Vice President of Bosnia, the duly elected leader of that country. And I asked him the question specifically.

Kay Bailey Hutchison

Do you want the embargo lifted?

Kay Bailey Hutchison

So we have the specter of our allies over there not defending them, not fighting with them, but sitting basically on our hands. We are doing the humanitarian mission, yes. Those people need defense. They need someone willing to fight for them. And if we are not willing to fight for them, let them fight for themselves.

Kay Bailey Hutchison

So I asked the second question of the Vice President. "If the NATO forces leave, are you still prepared to say that is the best alternative, that you will be there by yourselves?" He said "yes." The distinguished majority leader asked the question. "Are we willing to vote or support sending our troops into Bosnia?" The answer is emphatically "no." It is for that very reason that I believe we must let these people defend themselves. I am not willing to support spilling even one drop of American blood in Bosnia.

Kay Bailey Hutchison

So how can we sit here and say that without saying we will give them the means to defend themselves, to die protecting the soil of their country? This is a war we should not be involved in. So we should let them settle it within their country.

Kay Bailey Hutchison

I hope our allies will come around. I hope our allies will come with us and say let these people defend themselves. I hope that we will not leave them there.

Kay Bailey Hutchison

But, Madam President, we cannot sit here debating month after month while these people are living this nightmare. They are the duly elected representatives of this country and they have asked us to lift this embargo. And I just think we must do it.

Kay Bailey Hutchison

I hope that we can come to a resolution of this very quickly so that they will have the opportunity to do what every country inherently has the right to do; that is, defend themselves.

Kay Bailey Hutchison

I wish we could do it with the support of our allies. We have waited too long. We have asked for their support for too long. The time has come for us to take this action, even if it must be unilaterally, which is not the best of circumstances. But it is the only alternative that we have.

Kay Bailey Hutchison

Several Senators addressed the Chair.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nebraska.

J. James Exon

I thank the Chair.

J. James Exon

Madam President, there is an old expression in the U.S. Navy: "Now hear this." I hope that all in the Senate, all in the House of Representatives, as much as is publicly possible, heard the tremendously moving statement that was made by the majority leader on this subject before the Senate within the hour. I wholeheartedly subscribe to the statements that the majority leader made. I wholeheartedly rise to endorse the best possible resolution to the dilemma offered by Senator Nunn and Senator Warner.

J. James Exon

Madam President, while there is sharp debate on this matter, I am rather proud of the U.S. Senate in the way this debate has been handled and has been broken out. There are obviously very strongly held views. Just as obviously, in the opinion of this Senator, there is no certain, definite road to go on the matter that we are debating.

J. James Exon

This Senator had the opportunity or the obligation to chair one-half of the hearings that were held yesterday in the Armed Services Committee on this matter, where we had a great divergence of opinions and views from people on both sides of the issue, which I thought was confusing, but I also thought it was very informative.

J. James Exon

While those hearings were not very well covered by the press, I think a copy of them would be available to anyone who is interested. It points up again the strongly held views, and some of the views that have been very thoroughly thought through by both sides on this issue, so that the public understands the importance of this debate, and also the importance of how it is eventually resolved.

J. James Exon

I want to say before I continue with my comments, which will not be lengthy, Madam President, that interestingly enough, the partisanship is not running rampant on this debate, because there are Democrats and Republicans on each side of this issue. In fact, many of my closest associates and personal friends are on the other side of the issue, as the Senator from Nebraska sees it. That indicates, more than anything else, that I think there is room for differences of opinion and that all of those expressing opinions today, and those who will follow in expressing their opinions, I have great respect for.

J. James Exon

But the problem we have before us is how do we cut through all of these clouds? What action do we take? Certainly, the majority leader, in his remarks, outlined the precarious situation that I think we find ourselves in. I believe that the majority leader outlined, as well as anyone could, the reasons why this Senator feels we should reject the Dole, et al, offer and accept the solution offered by the chairman of the Armed Services Committee, Senator Nunn, and our distinguished colleague from Virginia, Senator Warner.

J. James Exon

Madam President, I simply say that of the group that was before the Armed Services Committee yesterday -- a group all Democrats, I might add -- who were speaking for a very large group of Democrats and Republicans, important officeholders, and several previous Democratic and Republican administrations, all were basically taking the position that has been offered in support of the Dole amendment and the other Members of the Senate who have spoken very eloquently on why they think it is absolutely essential that the United States of America unilaterally lift the arms embargo.

J. James Exon

I am not certain that I agree completely with everything that the present administration has done on this matter. However, I hope this matter will not deteriorate any further into a system of Presidential bashing, when it is not a political matter at all. It is a matter that concentrates on what we are going to do now. And what we do now has to do with our future relations and world peacekeeping efforts.

J. James Exon

I was rather astonished at those very, very distinguished people that appeared yesterday afternoon in front of the committee holding the view that we should do it unilaterally, notwithstanding what our traditional partners want to do, which has been explained by Senator Mitchell, Senator Nunn, and Senator Warner. Do not pay any attention to them, they are wrong. We go full-blown ahead and lift the arms embargo. I asked those three representatives yesterday afternoon that if they are for lifting the embargo, and if they believe the outright commitments, if not assurances, that we have received from our traditional allies, then -- and I will not mention again this morning their record, but they are well known to all.

J. James Exon

I simply say that 2 days ago the Armed Services Committee also held a closed meeting with the Foreign Minister of Great Britain. He was not at the hearing yesterday in the Armed Services Committee. But what he told us in that closed meeting essentially tracks identically with what others have said, that if we move ahead unilaterally, our traditional allies that have many troops there, as outlined in great detail by the majority leader, would pull out.

J. James Exon

Some people say that will not happen. I believe it will. At least that is what they have told us on numerous occasions, without any equivocation or mental reservation. If we lift the embargo, that is something I would eventually like to see happen, but not unilaterally. As has been explained by those who supported the Nunn-Warner proposition previously, including the majority leader, we all would like to see the embargo lifted to allow the Bosnians the wherewithal in the form of arms that they probably could obtain to defend themselves and maybe take back some of the territory that has been brutally taken over by the Serbs.

J. James Exon

Let them fight for themselves. Who can argue with that, except those of us who would like to see action to stop the fighting? I believe that the contribution of men and women and facilities by our allies in the absence of any ground troops by the United States of America, those who are attempting to keep the peace there now, should be given some consideration.

J. James Exon

If we lift the embargo unilaterally, and if our traditional allies -- our partners in NATO, and our partners in the United Nations who have sanctioned the present situation -- sit back and look and see what is happening because of the unilateral action by the Government of the United States of America, as suggested by the Dole amendment, then all of the peacekeepers would leave, and the Bosnians would be better off because they certainly would be in a position to obtain more arms than they have now to defend themselves.

J. James Exon

But the basic proposition is that when the peacekeepers leave, however good a job they are doing or not doing, there is one calculation that I think is very clear, and that is that new bloodshed would break out. More deaths would occur. Possibly, very possibly, Madam President, that would allow, through all of that bloodshed and war, the good people of Bosnia to regain some of their territory. I simply say that it has been alluded to on many occasions.

J. James Exon

I asked the three distinguished members representing a large group of great Nebraskans, who want unilateral action by the United States, that while I did not accuse any of them as being hypocrites -- because they are very distinguished Americans and that is the last thing I would do -- I did ask the question: Did it appear to anyone that the actions that they were taking turned out to be hypocritical in nature? I asked each and every one of them whether or not they felt that if the Dole amendment was accepted and we unilaterally lifted the embargo, we should as a result thereof -- and since our traditional allies in Europe would be leaving -- did they think it would be wise now or at some future date for us to send ground troops into Bosnia? Oh, no, that is the worst thought anybody could make.

J. James Exon

It seemed a little hypocritical to me -- hypocritical in action, Madam President -- for those who propound a procedure that would force the leaving of the peacekeepers that are there now, to provide arms to the Bosnians that I would like to see happen for their good but simply at the same time saying: Oh, no; we will be party to a program that will remove any of the peacekeepers from the area now that have made some of the sacrifices, as very eloquently outlined by the majority leader, but we are not going to send in our ground forces.

J. James Exon

Madam President, I do not think we should send in our ground forces either. But I am not going to be a party to what I consider hypocritical action by saying to our European allies that we are going to do this because we think it is the right thing, and if you want to take your peacekeeping forces out of there go ahead, but we are not going to send ours in.

J. James Exon

I hope, Madam President, that we can have further mature discussion on this. I hope and I plead with the Senate, regardless of the strongly held feelings that I know are very sincere of my colleagues, both Democrats and Republicans, on this issue, we will stand back a little bit and take a look at this thing before we rush into anything, which I think is as irresponsible for both the short-term and the long-term interests of peace, NATO, and the United Nations, by taking overt action now in the heat of legitimate passion that we have in trying to help the Bosnians out of a most difficult situation.

J. James Exon

Now hear this, hear the statement, and read the statement. It should be required reading for all, at least among the decisionmakers and I hope the public at large. I happen to feel that this is a healthy debate. I hope that the healthy debate turns out eventually in the acceptance of the resolution offered by Senator Nunn and Senator Warner.

J. James Exon

I think that is the reasonable, thoughtful way that we should proceed at this juncture.

J. James Exon

Madam President, I yield the floor.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The chairman of the committee.

Sam Nunn

Madam President, we have had a lot of good debate this morning, and I am not sure whether the majority and minority leader want to bring this to a vote today or are going to wait until next week. Nevertheless, I think the debate has been healthy. I cannot say this on all debates of the U.S. Senate.

Sam Nunn

I think the people on both sides of this debate are absolutely dedicated to doing what they believe to be right. The difficulty in this situation is knowing what is right and what will be effective.

Sam Nunn

When I hear Senator Levin in the committee or on the floor, or Senator Lieberman or Senator Dole here, I hear a lot of words that I have been saying myself for the last 2\1/2\ years, and that makes it particularly frustrating for me to be on the other side of the issue from them because I think morally they are correct in terms of the overall position that they have.

Sam Nunn

I think that a nation should be able to defend itself. I believe that the embargo has been counterproductive. I do not think it was intended to be counterproductive, but I believe that without some kind of level playing field at some point in time, there is not going to be any hope of stability.

Sam Nunn

So on the central thrust of their resolution, I would have to say that I generally agree. The difficulty is that you cannot look at Bosnia without looking at a broader picture. The United States does not have the luxury of looking at only one aspect of a tragic situation, and tragic it is. We have to look at what happens around the world. We have to be able to distinguish between what is vital to the United States and what is important to the United States, and what is purely humanitarian.

Sam Nunn

In the case of Bosnia, we have important interests, we have humanitarian interests, and if the conflict spreads, we could have vital interests. But we do not have vital interests in Bosnia itself. By the term vital, I mean an interest that would warrant the commitment of U.S. military forces -- if necessary, alone -- always preferably with allies, but if necessary alone. We do not have that.

Sam Nunn

If we did, then we would have military forces there now. If we did, the Senator from Michigan, the Senator from Connecticut, and the Senator from Kansas would be on the floor saying: Let us put military forces in because this is unacceptable. This tragedy cannot be permitted to continue.

Sam Nunn

They are not doing that. I think they are right. I think they are right.

Sam Nunn

I would be joining them in that cry if it were a vital interest.

Sam Nunn

So it may be that some people disagree with this, but I think the first thing we need to understand as we debate this issue is that even though that conflict could spread in Macedonia, it could spread and involve our allies in NATO, even the Greeks and the Turks on the opposite side of the conflict, it could spread and you could have Russia involved with Serbia, perhaps not militarily, but directly in aid. You could have Russia squaring off on one side of the conflict and the United States on the other side of the conflict.

Sam Nunn

Then it becomes vital. Then it becomes vital. Then it is much bigger than important.

Sam Nunn

Madam President, if someone believes it is vital, then I think they ought to stipulate this on the floor of the Senate, and I think they ought to prepare to get a resolution that is unlike either the Dole- Lieberman resolution or the Nunn-Warner resolution, both of which make it clear we are not going to put combat forces into that country, as tragic as it is.

Sam Nunn

So I think the first thing in framing this debate is we have to understand the difference between vital and important. Other people may have a different definition, but my definition of vital is an interest so crucial to the United States that we are willing to send our young men -- and increasingly, young women -- to die in that conflict, if necessary, always hopefully with our allies side by side. But if it is truly vital, we have to be prepared to go it alone.

Sam Nunn

Madam President, I think it is important also as we frame this debate to understand what is in the vital interests of the United States. In the world that we are in now, it is very difficult sometimes when we read a headline and a whole set of news media questions one week on Haiti, the next week on Somalia, the next week it is on Rwanda, the next week it is back on Bosnia, the next week it may jump over to North Korea and South Korea. And then every now and then, you will see something in the paper about a possible potential conflict which could truly be a tremendous difficulty for us and for allies all over Europe and around the world, and that is a conflict between Russia and the Ukraine, which has not happened because of the leadership of President Yeltsin and President Kravchuk and others. We do not hear much about that, but it is there. It is looming.

Sam Nunn

I think it is important for us in the Senate, if we are going to get explicit about foreign policy resolutions and basically give instructions to the executive branch, and we are, that we understand that we have to look at a bigger scope. We have to look at a bigger picture. It has to be more than Bosnia and what is the right answer for Bosnia, as important as that is. It has to also concern what is the right answer for the United States where we do have vital interests.

Sam Nunn

Madam President, we have a vital interest in Korea. We have 38,000 combat forces in Korea. Those forces are near the DMZ. And if there is a conflict in Korea, we are in on day one, and we will have people dying on day one, and we are going to be killing North Koreans on day one, and our blood will be shed on day one. And everybody, I think, who has looked at Korea understands that. We have a vital interest there, and we have declared it to be vital. We even fought a war there. We kept some 40,000 to 60,000 combat forces on the ground there for years and years. We even had tactical nuclear weapons there for years and years and years, and they were pulled out in 1991, some believe prematurely, based on subsequent developments.

Sam Nunn

So, Madam President, we have a vital interest in Korea. What is the connection between Bosnia and Korea? There is a connection. What is the connection? The connection is that I think most people in this body would say that if the North Koreans do not comply with their recent commitments to stop their nuclear program while discussions take place, and to have that verified, then the first thing we are going to have to do is we are going to have to go to the Security Council and we are going to have to ask the Security Council to impose sanctions on the North Korean regime.

Sam Nunn

The second thing we are going to have to do, if they do vote for it, neither China nor Britain nor France nor Russia will veto it. Then we have to ask China and Russia and Japan, particularly, but others also, to join in an embargo and sanctions on that regime. And if that does not work, and we really believe that the North Korean Peninsula is vital, which I do, and we really believe that stopping North Korea from becoming an exporter of nuclear arms and becoming an armed nuclear power is vital to the United States, then I do think we have to be willing to take other steps.

Sam Nunn

And those other steps could very well include military action, and we all ought to be clear about that. And there I think there is no doubt that American military forces will be involved.

Sam Nunn

Now what is the connection? The connection is that in Bosnia the resolution before us, well-meaning though it may be -- and I have already said I agree with the thrust of it -- it calls on us to basically say to the U.N. Security Council, we do not care what is on the books at U.N. Security Council on Bosnia in terms of an embargo and on the overall form in Yugoslavia. It was passed with the United States voting for it in 1991. We do not care about that anymore because we are fixed on that country and we are going to come up with the right solution -- the right solution -- and we do not care what you think. We are basically going to have a unilateral lifting of the embargo.

Sam Nunn

And, guess what? The next day we may be before that same group saying, "Would you please vote to impose sanctions on North Korea?" Madam President, it is easy to stand up on the floor and say -- and I have read editorials to this effect -- "Well, just tell the Russians and the Chinese and the British and the French what we want to do and march out and do it. Just tell them. And then tell them that we want them to vote for sanctions in the Security Council against North Korea. And then tell China that they better do it." They do not ever say, "or what?" Are we going to invade China? I do not think anybody is seriously thinking we are going to do anything like that. Are we going to threaten our allies with some kind of sanctions themselves if they do not go along with us breaking one embargo while we ask them for another one? No, I do not think anybody believes that.

Sam Nunn

Madam President, the truth of it is, whether we like it or not, the United States is not the only person on the Security Council. Can we be more assertive? Yes. Have we been assertive enough on Bosnia? No. Have we pushed hard enough lifting the embargo on Bosnia? No. Can the administration do better? Yes.

Sam Nunn

But should we do it alone? Should we march off and say to our friends and colleagues, the British and French that we fought two wars with, that we are going to basically disregard everything you say and think, even though, as the majority leader pointed out so vividly this morning so accurately, even though they are the ones on the ground in Bosnia, they are fighting and dying? Are we going to do it anyway?

Sam Nunn

But, by the way, we want you to help us on North Korea. And, by the way, to Turkey, who is suffering from the embargo on Iraq that we voted for -- in fact, we were the ones who urged that embargo be placed on Iraq; and I support that also -- are we going to say to Turkey, "Even though it is costing you money every day to keep the pipeline closed and not to have trade with Iraq, but we are going to break the embargo in Bosnia and we want you to keep the embargo on Iraq, even though it hurts you"?

Sam Nunn

Madam President, the first result of a unilateral breach of the embargo on Bosnia without getting our allies to go along, the first result may very well be the end of the embargo on Iraq.

Sam Nunn

Now that is not what the people on this resolution intend, but that is one of the things they have to accept as a probable, at least possible consequence.

Sam Nunn

Madam President, I do not agree with what we are doing in Haiti right now, but our country is on record and we voted at the Security Council to have an embargo on Haiti. I think it is counterproductive, because I think the poor people there that are either attempting or being tempted to have an exodus from that country are the ones who are suffering from that. That is another question.

Sam Nunn

Nevertheless, we are on record imposing an embargo on Haiti. On U.N. Security Council Resolution 875, the United States led the way.

Sam Nunn

We are also on record supporting an embargo on Libya, also voted by the United States at the U.N. Security Council.

Sam Nunn

So are we going to say to our friends on the Security Council, "Forget about Libya, forget about Iraq, forget about Haiti, forget about what we may have been asking you on North Korea if these negotiations don't no succeed. We have focused on Bosnia now and we know the right answer. We here in the Senate and House of Representatives, we know the answer on this and we are going to tell you what it is and we are not going to worry about any other consequence." Madam President, we have to be able to distinguish what is vital and what is important, and we have to understand that if we unilaterally lift the embargo in one area, without -- in fact, in defiance of -- the Security Council and against most of our allies in NATO, then we are not likely to get their cooperation when it comes down to something that is truly vital like North Korea.

Sam Nunn

And if we do not get their cooperation now, then we may have to skip the sanctions step if the negotiations break down and we may end up having to move toward some other option which could certainly be a military option. That may be required anyway. I hope not. I hope the negotiations succeed and I hope North Korea will give up their nuclear quest.

Sam Nunn

But we would be foolish to believe that this situation in North Korea is over. We would be foolish to believe that it is over. The North Koreans play brinkmanship, they play games, they go right down to the brink. They have done it over and over again. Occasionally, they go over the brink -- and they did so in the early 1950's -- and then you have a war.

Sam Nunn

Madam President, what is vital and what is important and what is humanitarian? There is no easy answer in this post-cold-war world. But if this body cannot begin to distinguished between what is vital and what is important and what is humanitarian and make those differences, and if our own Government cannot distinguished between those, then we are going to be lost in the aftermath of the cold war and we are going to be bouncing from one foreign policy crisis to another with no principles guiding us -- with no principles guiding us. Some of them may work out all right and some of them may be disasters. We have to have some principles. We have to have some things that are important.

Sam Nunn

Madam President, I hope out of this debate, the thing that I am most hopeful for, in terms of my own position, is that the administration downtown not misread it, because I am not satisfied with our position; I am not satisfied with the United States leadership in this area.

Sam Nunn

I think we have to be more assertive. I think we have to explain to the British and the French and even the Russians that the U.S. Government believes firmly that there are important moral principals here and that a country does have the right to defend itself. And I think we have to be very clear to the contact group that is now meeting and negotiating and trying to put together both carrots and sticks to both sides to try to bring about some peaceful resolution, I think we have to explain to them that, even if you get a peaceful resolution in Bosnia, even if both sides agree, that the embargo has to be lifted at some point during that peaceful transition or otherwise you have a country that does not have a right to defend itself.

Sam Nunn

Do the British and the French and the Russians think we are going to have an embargo on Bosnia forever? We cannot. We should not. We must not.

Sam Nunn

So, Madam President, just briefly, the resolution sets forth the alternative to the Dole resolution. It sets forth the history of the other embargoes the United States is participating in that we voted for at the Security Council. It also sets forth the important consideration of North Korea and what may happen there, the eventualities that may happen there. It also sets forth the fact that our allies, as the majority leader made clear, are already on the ground in Bosnia. And I have no doubt if we unilaterally lift the embargo that the French and perhaps the British, but certainly the French and I would say the likelihood of everyone on the ground there, are going to pull out. They are going to pull out and it is going to be real interesting to see how it works out. Because the United States is over there right now flying with our allies, putting an air cap over Bosnia, saying we are going to shoot down any aircraft, helicopters seem to be an exception -- but shoot down any aircraft that flies in.

Sam Nunn

Madam President, if we lift the embargo, how are we going to get the arms in there? Because if the British and the French pull out, the Serb guns that have been collected are going to be available to them again. I hope they will destroy them before they leave but they may not.

Sam Nunn

The Serbs still have a lot of guns. It is going to be almost impossible to get enough guns in there to begin with to the Bosnians to let them defend themselves against what will be an onslaught by the Serbs before an embargo can be effectively phased out by the United States.

Sam Nunn

So we are going to have to put supplies in there by air. What happens to the air cover? Certainly with the United States we would pull out of that -- we would have to pull out of that. Certainly we are not going to shoot down our own airplanes, so we would have to pull out of that. Do the allies keep their air cover there? Or take away the air cover? If they take away their air cover, who has the airplanes? It is not the Bosnian Moslems. Are we going to give them airplanes? What are we going to give them, F-18's? F-16's? Where are the airports?

Sam Nunn

You are talking about training people. So who is going to have the airplanes to fly? It will not be the Moslems. It will not be the Bosnians. It will be the Serbs. Are we going to be flying in supplies one way and are we going to be participating in the air cover the other way, shooting down some planes while we go in?

Sam Nunn

Has anybody thought through this? You have to think through it with your allies, that is the point.

Sam Nunn

Can it be done? It is possible it can be done but it has to be done with our allies. It cannot be done unilaterally, no matter what we pass on the floor of the Senate. It cannot be done unilaterally.

Sam Nunn

Madam President, what about the naval blockade? We have American military forces out there right now participating in a naval blockade. They are stopping ships, time after time after time, preventing arms from going anywhere in that part of former Yugoslavia.

Sam Nunn

What happens if the embargo is ended unilaterally? Are we going to tell our naval forces to come home? If so what do the allies do? Are they going to pull off the embargo on Serbia and let economic goods flow into Serbia? Are they going to stop ships? And say if this is oil for Serbia, we are not going to let it through? But if this is mortars for Bosnia we are?

Sam Nunn

What are we going to do? What are the practical implications of this? It has to be thought through with our allies.

Sam Nunn

I repeat we have to be more assertive. I repeat I believe the embargo should be lifted but I do believe there is a bigger world out there that we have to think about. It would be the ultimate irony if we end up damaging an American vital interest because we want to impose our own view on our allies unilaterally of what we should do in an area that is not vital but is, I would stipulate, important.

Sam Nunn

So Madam President, I think there are three ways the embargo can be lifted as a practical matter and I think the administration ought to think about all three of them. And I think they ought to be discussing this with our allies.

Sam Nunn

One way is, pursuant to a peace agreement. And one of the things we ought to be saying to the contact group -- and if we are not we are making a mistake. I do not know what our position is there -- that if there is going to be a peace settlement there has to be an end of the arms embargo. Bosnia has to be able to have enough arms to defend themselves. Unless the United States wants to be over there for the next 5 to 10 years with 20,000 or 30,000 military forces defending the borders between two factions that inevitably are going to end up, as they have for a long time, with a lot of animosity. The recent tragedies make that even more likely -- in fact inevitable.

Sam Nunn

The second way we can end the embargo -- and this is also part B of the resolution that is the alternative -- if during the course of these discussions, moving hopefully toward some peace settlement that can be equitable and fair -- if during the course of that the Bosnian Serbs, as they have in the past, start shelling in a substantial way -- start shelling the safe havens and defy the United Nations once again, then it is my view that we ought to with our allies put in defensive arms immediately. And that will require flying some of them in, in all likelihood.

Sam Nunn

That would mean putting in antitank weapons where tanks are the threat. Or putting in enough counterbattery or mortar capability to counter the artillery sitting up on the hills. That does not have to be a complete lifting of the embargo. If the allies are concerned about that we could table the proposal of partially lifting the embargo depending on which safe haven is under threat and getting arms in there immediately to the safe haven that is under threat, that is where the United Nations resolution is being defied by the Bosnian Serbs. So that is the second way I think we could as a nation be assertive in our position.

Sam Nunn

The third way is if the contact group tables a proposal, that is fair and equitable and just -- if those are achievable words in this case, and probably no one will ever agree to what that is -- but if the contact group tables the proposal and the Bosnian Serbs say, no, we are absolutely not going to sign anything that is fair and just and leads to a coherent stable Bosnian border -- if they do that, then it is my view that multilaterally we ought to lift the embargo much like the resolution calls for. But there is another side of that.

Sam Nunn

There is another side of that. Madam President, at some point our allies have to understand -- and I think we have to understand -- that you cannot have humanitarian aid in the middle of a war. You can do your best but you cannot have large deployments of ground forces sitting there under the gun at the same time you are either bombing or lifting an embargo that the Serbs interpret as being partial to one side -- even though I think they would be wrong in that because I think we would be leveling the playing field -- they would interpret that direct involvement. In that stage we have to have an orderly withdrawal of humanitarian forces and military forces and we have to get arms in there very rapidly because if we do not and we do not do it jointly it will not be done correctly. We have to put the Bosnian Government in a position to defend their own people. But when we do that we have to understand that the humanitarian mission is likely to be over. You cannot do both. I think we have to think through the consequences of this.

Sam Nunn

I welcome the debate. I hope there is no misinterpretation of my own view on this because I think the time has been -- really is overdue, in terms of lifting the embargo. But I do believe it matters how we do it. I do believe it matters that we coordinate what we do with the British and the French, other members of the Security Council, members of NATO, and particularly as the majority leader said so well, those forces on the ground there who have already suffered substantial casualties.

Sam Nunn

Madam President, I hope people understand the resolution. I hope they read it. I hope they will give this careful consideration.

Sam Nunn

There is no good answer. None of this is perfect. I do not think anybody on either side is going to say we have the perfect answer. I would again stipulate what we have done so far, we being the Western community, has not in my view been the correct policy. We have done some good things. A lot of courageous people have sacrificed a lot. A lot of humanitarian workers have risked their lives every day and they have saved tens of thousands of lives. But overall I think we have not taken the correct course. But the fact that we have not does not mean that we cannot take a situation that is bad and turn it into an absolute disaster.

Sam Nunn

You can take a bad situation and make it worse. And I think that is what the Senate of the United States is going to have to contemplate. I thank the Chair.

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Moseley-Braun). The majority leader is recognized.

George J. Mitchell

Madam President, I will not address the pending matter. I have already spoken on that and will do so again at a later time. I expect this debate to resume shortly. But I wanted to set forth for the Members of the Senate the schedule for the remainder of the day and for next week, prior to the July 4 recess.

George J. Mitchell

Madam President, at this moment the Senate is in a catch-22 situation. A substantial number of Senators have left. And, having arrived at their destinations, have contacted other Senators who are still here and urged those Senators not to permit any votes to occur.

George J. Mitchell

So a majority of Senators stayed because it had been our hope and expectation that we could debate and vote on amendments to this bill, but some of the Senators who remained have made it clear to me that they will not permit votes to occur on amendments to the bill, either on the amendment with respect to Bosnia, on the B-2 amendment or any one of the other amendments.

George J. Mitchell

So we are in a catch-22 where we have a very important bill, a very large number of amendments pending to the bill, with most Senators here prepared and willing and desirous of voting on the bill, but some Senators here indicating that in order to protect Senators who left, they will not permit a vote to occur. So it is a classic catch-22 situation.

George J. Mitchell

We have already had one procedural vote, and we will shortly have another one. I cannot force a vote on an amendment to the bill because Senators have a capacity under the rules to prevent that. I can force a vote on a procedural matter and will do so.

George J. Mitchell

I simply say to Senators that there are certain items which we will have to complete next week before we go on recess. Not being able to vote on any amendments to this bill today makes the burden of next week that much greater. But so there can be no misunderstanding on anyone's part as to next week, we will have at least two nominations and perhaps others on which we must act. I am required by unanimous-consent agreement entered into some weeks ago to proceed to the product liability bill before the close of business today, and I will, of course, honor that agreement and do so. We must complete action on that bill in one form or another.

George J. Mitchell

We have pending two appropriations bills, the foreign operations appropriations bill and the energy appropriations bill, and we will complete action on those two bills before we leave next week. And, finally, of course, we have to finish the Department of Defense authorization bill.

George J. Mitchell

So, therefore, the Senate will remain in session next week until we complete action on the measures which I have just described: Certain pending nominations, product liability, foreign operations appropriations bill, energy appropriations bill, and the Department of Defense authorization bill. Those Senators who have absented themselves today and then, having absented themselves, have gotten others here to protect them from votes have made it much more difficult for all of us next week, but that is the unfortunate situation we are in.

George J. Mitchell

I have no authority to do anything other than to have the procedural vote, which we are now going to have, and to insist that we remain in session until we complete action on these measures.

George J. Mitchell

In a moment, therefore, Madam President, I am going to suggest the absence of a quorum, and when the clerk reports that no quorum is present, I will move to instruct the Sergeant at Arms to request the presence of absent Senators and ask for a rollcall vote.

Daniel Coats

Madam President, could I just inquire of the majority leader a procedural question?

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator may proceed.

Daniel Coats

If the majority leader will yield just for a question, how does this decision translate into our duties and activities scheduled for Monday of next week? I assume we will be in session, but if the majority leader can give us some indication.

George J. Mitchell

I am unable to do so now for two reasons. First, we are trying to get a finite list of amendments to this bill. We have had no success so far and, of course, the absence of such a list makes a Senate session on Monday with votes more likely than would otherwise be the case.

George J. Mitchell

And second, I have yet to meet with the principal proponents of the product liability bill to determine how they wish to proceed before making a judgment on how to proceed on that bill. I will have an announcement on that before the close of business today, but I am unable to answer the question at this time.

Daniel Coats

I thank the Senator.