|
STATEMENT OF
SENATOR PATRICK LEAHY
ON
COMBATING INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM
Nov. 1, 2001
Mr. President, it has been seven weeks since the horrifying attacks on
the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, and the crash of the plane in
Pennsylvania.
We have all struggled with a flood of thoughts and emotions about the
frightening and tragic loss of life, the national response to this cruel,
mindless assault on innocent people, and where we go from here.
My wife Marcelle and I have received hundreds of phone calls, letters
and e-mails from people who have offered thoughtful suggestions, and I
have read many articles, opinion pieces, and heartfelt letters to the
editor of the national and local newspapers.
I do not pretend to have all the answers. No one does. The United
States military is carrying out bombing missions against the Taliban and
terrorist sites in Afghanistan. The situation is unpredictable, and we are
learning more each day. But I do want to express some of my thoughts at
this time.
First and foremost, my thoughts are with the victims' families. It has
been hard, very hard, to see the images of the families as they try to
come to terms with the loss of loved ones.
I also share the pride in how our firefighters, police and other
emergency workers rushed to the scene intent on rescue without thought for
their own safety. We are in awe of the bravery of those on the United
Airlines flight who struggled with the hijackers and prevented that
aircraft from striking its target in Washington.
I am proud of the skill and courage of our Air Force pilots, who fly
thousands of miles, often in the darkness of night, into hostile
territory. They are constantly in our thoughts, and we pray that each of
them returns safely.
Amid all the sadness and anger, I have been tremendously heartened by
the way Americans of all races, religions and backgrounds rallied together
to help each other. It should not be surprising that we would respond this
way, but it is enormously uplifting and reassuring.
And I was also encouraged when millions of people in cities around the
world gathered to express their sympathy and support for the United
States. There were 200,000 in Berlin alone.
It was a vivid and moving reminder of how many people in so many
countries respect what our country stands for, and look to us for
leadership in solving the world's problems. It is that leadership, in
combating terrorism but also in addressing other pressing global issues,
that we must show today and in the future.
I have been impressed by the leadership shown by President Bush and
others in the Cabinet. I commend the President for voicing our common goal
to seek justice for the victims and for our country, our condemnation of
the despicable acts of harassment and intimidation of Muslims in the
United States, and our resolve to protect our country from future
terrorist acts.
Mr. President, it has been said over and over that "the world has
changed." In one sense that is true. Our country has suffered its
greatest loss of life on American soil, in a single day, since the Civil
War. Our response to this tragedy is causing changes throughout our
society.
However, in another sense, it has a lot more to do with our perceptions
of the world than with the world itself. The world was changing long
before September 11th, and threats that existed before that infamous day
are no less present today.
These attacks destroyed not only thousands of innocent lives, but they
destroyed mistaken assumptions about our safety in isolation. They also,
let us hope, erased our complacency. We are now beginning a struggle that
may take decades, shake foreign governments, and cause great disruption in
our daily lives.
We are responding decisively. The American people want to feel secure
and they want justice. If the Taliban continue to shelter bin Laden and
other terrorists they will pay a heavy price. They have already lost the
support of virtually every country in the world, and our military has
destroyed many of their military assets. Others who knowingly harbor
terrorists face similar consequences.
Yet as we seek justice and security, let us not be blinded by anger or
zealotry. We want a world without terrorists, but we owe it to ourselves
to calmly ask constructive questions, as we commit to this cause thousands
of American lives, billions of dollars, and the credibility of our nation.
Our response must single out those individuals, organizations, or
nations that are responsible for these atrocities. The terrorists want us
to overreact. They want us to strike back blindly and cause the deaths of
innocent civilians. They want to draw us into a so-called "holy
war," and they will use these images against us, alienating others in
the Muslim world whose support we need to combat this threat, and among
whom there are many who already resent our involvement in the Middle East.
We need to understand the fact that the civilian casualties caused by
our bombs in Afghanistan – despite the efforts made to prevent them –
are not only tragic but also exacerbate the hatred of America by Muslims
in many parts of the world, a hatred which has been building over many
years.
We are seeing this among Muslims in Pakistan, in Indonesia, in the West
Bank, even in Africa. Despite President Bush’s, Secretary Powell’s,
and Secretary Rumsfeld’ s clear statements to the contrary, they see our
actions as attacks on their religion.
We also know what happened to the Soviet army, and to the British
before them, in Afghanistan. Two of the world's most powerful militaries
suffered terrible losses and were forced to withdraw in humiliation. And
we should remember our own disastrous experience in Somalia.
We need to recognize that there are parts of the world, dominated by
fierce warlords and clans, that we do not understand and probably cannot
understand. We should be very, very careful not to repeat past mistakes.
Our campaign against terrorism has no direct precedent, and we are
still feeling our way forward. At this stage of the military dimensions of
this effort, neither the President nor the Pentagon have yet explained,
except in the most general way, what they expect to accomplish militarily
in Afghanistan within the next month, six months, or year, and how they
expect to accomplish it. Nor have they yet explained the risks to our
Armed Forces, except to say that there will be casualties.
Meanwhile, the American people have been asked to be patient, and they
have been. Members of Congress have been asked to give the President and
the Pentagon great latitude, and they have done so. But we are all in this
together, and the time for clearer goals and more direct answers about our
strategy is approaching.
The fact that two weeks ago the Pentagon told us that they had
eviscerated the Taliban’s military capabilities, and a week later
expressed surprise that the Taliban has proved to be a determined foe,
already has raised troubling questions.
No one wants to see an end to the Taliban more than I, and I have no
doubt that we can force them from power. But there is no evidence it can
be done by bombing alone, at least not without many civilian casualties.
How many ground troops would it take, over what period of time? And then
what? Surely the Taliban would regroup and fight from somewhere else.
The American people will deserve and need answers to these and other
questions.
There is no doubt that we will need help from others to fight
terrorism, which exists in every corner of the globe. To his credit, the
President showed admirable patience in building a coalition to track down
terrorists and their sources of income. The President must also continue
to show an understanding of the particular situation of each country in
the coalition, and of how much we can reasonably demand of them given
their circumstances, their capabilities, their history.
The situation we are in is unlike any that we have seen before. It is
difficult always to know who the enemy is or where they may be hiding.
They may be right among us, or they may be in the mountains of Central
Asia. Secretary Powell and others have been clear that we are preparing
for a long, sustained, comprehensive campaign, using all the means at our
disposal -- diplomacy, intelligence, law enforcement, financial, economic,
and military.
We must confront the entire superstructure of terrorism -- the states
that knowingly provide terrorists with support and safe haven, the system
of financial support, and sources of recruits, and the hatreds that spawn
them.
In doing this, we must heed the lessons from other so-called
"wars" that we have fought against other deeply rooted, complex
problems -- the war on poverty and the war on drugs. These
"wars" have been fought with many weapons. They also depend on
foreign cooperation. Yet we are nowhere near to winning either of those
wars, despite the fact that we have spent tens of billions of dollars, and
even, in the war on drugs, imprisoned thousands of people and deployed our
forces in foreign countries.
We must be resolute but realistic. We can no more completely eliminate
terrorism from the face of the Earth than we can eliminate poverty. But
there is a great deal we can do to protect ourselves.
The President has waived sanctions against Pakistan so we can assist
them in this effort. I have heard proposals that we should set aside other
laws which affirm our commitment to the protection of human rights in our
international relations. Others speak of waiving limitations on our
support for dictatorial regimes in Central Asia, or countries that have
engaged in proliferation of nuclear, chemical or biological weapons.
I will listen to what the Administration proposes, but I am also
mindful of the lessons of history. We supported the fighters who became
the Taliban, when they sought to expel the Soviets. Today the Taliban, led
by religious fanatics, systematically terrorize and brutalize their own
people. The country has been turned into a virtual prison, where its
inhabitants, many too weak from hunger and disease to flee, suffer the
daily cruelty of the Taliban’s tyrannical rule.
We gave weapons to Iraq, and to the Shah of Iran, whose secret police
tortured Iranian citizens who spoke out for democracy. We have supported
other regimes that committed atrocities, which to the victims were no
different from acts of terrorism. We must not repeat those mistakes.
We must reaffirm the principles that make this country a beacon of hope
around the world, and which reflect the most deeply held ideals of our
people -- ideals which the terrorists hate -- our civil liberties, our
individual and religious freedoms. These ideals, far more than our
military power, are our country's greatest strength. Let us not lose sight
of the fact that acts of terrorism are human rights atrocities. As we go
forward, we must continue to show the world what sets us apart from the
terrorists. Defense of human rights is one of these cherished principles.
Mr. President, there can be no excuse, no justification whatsoever, for
attacks against unarmed civilians -- whether it is the suicide bomber or
the suicide highjacker, or a government that commits acts of terrorism
against its own citizens.
But to reduce the threat of terrorism, of whatever form, over the long
run, we must work to resolve the issues that foster deep and lasting
hatreds the terrorists feed on, that produces their funding, and their
recruits.
Recently, the House of Representatives approved, after minimal debate
and without a dissenting vote, payment of $582 million in arrears to the
United Nations. That was both noteworthy and encouraging, since those
funds had been held hostage by the House for years over unrelated issues
like international family planning. How shortsighted that was.
Many of those same Members took pride in cutting our foreign aid
budget. Foreign aid, a meager one percent of the Federal budget -- far,
far less than most people believe it is -- is used, in part, to help
alleviate the pervasive poverty in the Middle East, Africa and Asia that
leads to despair, instability, violence, and hatred -- conditions that
breed recruits for terrorist organizations.
Instead of one percent, we should increase five-fold the amount we
spend to combat poverty, especially in parts of the world where there is
such resentment toward the United States.
We are surrounded by a sea of desperate people. Two billion people -- a
third of the world’s inhabitants, live on the edge of starvation. They
barely survive on what scraps they can scavenge, and many children die
before the age of five.
Refugees and people displaced from their homes, number in the many tens
of millions.
The world is on fire is too many places to count, and at most of those
flash points poverty, and the injustice that perpetuates it, are at the
root of the instability.
Our foreign assistance programs provide economic support to poor
countries, health care to the world's neediest women and children, food
and shelter for refugees and victims of natural and man made disasters,
and technical expertise to promote democracy, free markets, human rights
and the rule of law.
But as important as this aid is, the amount we give is a pittance, when
considered in terms of our wealth and the seriousness of the threats we
face. The approximately $10 billion that we provide in this type of
assistance -- whether through our State Department and the Agency for
International Development, or as contributions to the World Bank, the
United Nations Development Program, the World Food Program, and other
organizations, amounts to less than $40 for each American each year.
Forty dollars. It is embarrassing. We are failing the American people,
and we are failing future generations.
Mr. President, our economy is suffering, and people are hurting in this
country. We are trying to help them, and we need to do more. But we cannot
continue to bury our heads in the sand. We cannot protect our national
interests in today’s complex, dangerous world on a foreign assistance
budget that in real terms is less than what it was 15 years ago. We
cannot.
Our world is not simply our towns, our states, our country. It is the
whole world. We live in a global economy. The Ebola virus is like a
terrorist -- an airplane’s flight away. We can try our best to control
our borders, but we cannot hide behind an impenetrable wall.
We have to go to the source of the problem, and that is to countries
that are failing -- from AIDS, from ignorance, from poverty, from
injustice.
We need a better understanding of the world we live in, and how to
protect our security. Almost 60 percent of the world’s people live in
Asia, and that number is growing. Seventy percent of the world’s people
are non-White, and 70 percent are non-Christian. About 5 percent own more
than half the world’s wealth. Half the world’s people suffer from
malnutrition. Seventy percent are illiterate.
How can we justify spending so little to address these needs? We
cannot, any more than we can justify failing to anticipate and prevent the
attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. The Pentagon would be
the first to say that they cannot solve these problems.
I would hope that one of the positive things that comes from this time
of national soul searching and recovery, is that we begin to think
differently about what the future holds, and our role in the world.
Let us act like a superpower. Let us lead the world in combating
poverty, in supporting the development of democracy. Let us start paying
our share. As the world’s wealthiest nation we have a moral
responsibility. But we also, because of who we are, have the most at
stake.
Like the Congress, the White House also needs to change its thinking.
For the past six months, it took a hands-off approach to solving complex
global problems, turning its back on half a dozen treaties and
international agreements, ranging from arms control to protecting the
environment. The unmistakable message is that we are so powerful that we
do not need the rest of the world, that somehow we are immune from the
world's problems.
That notion was arrogant, dangerous and naive then, as it is today. We
must move beyond the tired battles over foreign aid and the United
Nations, and forge common approaches to global threats. It is clear that
this is what is necessary to fight terrorism, and the same is true of
AIDS, global warming, and so many other problems.
This brings me to the difficult question of the Middle East conflict.
No one who is familiar with the history of the Israeli-Palestinian
conflict believes it will be resolved without the active, sustained
involvement of the United States. And never has that involvement been so
urgently needed, because to maintain strong Arab participation in the
coalition we are organizing against terrorism, there must be visible
progress toward peace between Israelis and Palestinians.
Frankly, I have been dismayed as our credibility in the Middle East has
badly eroded, and as resentment toward the United States has intensified
and spread among Muslims throughout that region. We have to confront this
problem earnestly and honestly, and recognize its historical and cultural
roots. It is clearly in our security interests, as well as those of
Israel, that we take actions to reestablish credibility with the
Palestinians and their Arab supporters, while continuing to keep faith
with Israel and its people – a valued ally and a leading democracy.
We must get both Palestinians and Israelis back to the negotiating
table, working seriously toward a viable peace agreement that addresses
their long term needs and aspirations -- a viable, Palestinian state, and
lasting security for Israel.
I do not count myself among those who believe that the deranged,
hate-filled perpetrators of the September 11th terrorist attacks would not
have carried out their heinous crimes if Israel and the Palestinians had
already made peace. It may be that sympathy for the Palestinians had
nothing to do with it.
Nor do I believe that a solution to the Middle East conflict will solve
the problem of international terrorism. But I am convinced that, as
difficult a problem as it is, the Palestinian-Israeli conflict must be
solved if we are to make tangible progress against some of the breeding
grounds of terrorism.
The same goes for our relations with the rest of the Arab world. In our
single-minded zeal to secure a steady supply of Middle East oil to fuel
our insatiable and growing demand for cheap gasoline, we have turned a
blind eye to widespread repression by governments whose policies,
including the systematic abuse of women, vary sharply from our own. We
must take dramatic measures to reduce our wasteful consumption of oil and
our dependence on these regimes.
Mr. President, at the same time that we combat terrorism around the
world, we must also get our domestic house in order.
Over the last decade this country has put an enormous effort into
counter-terrorism. It has been a top priority of the FBI, the CIA and
other agencies. Yet, all those resources and all that concentrated work
failed to prevent this enormous tragedy. It is astounding how unprepared
we were, how even the simplest safeguards were ignored, how many
weaknesses were waiting for the terrorists to exploit. It was a massive
failure of our defenses.
Let us look hard and honestly at where our defenses failed, and work to
correct those weaknesses. We need to strengthen our intelligence agencies,
law enforcement, border control, emergency response and all the manifold
capabilities we will need to defend ourselves. That includes taking steps
to eliminate the destructive competition between these agencies, which has
impeded coordination and undermined their effectiveness.
We have worked with the Administration on legislation to support law
enforcement and our intelligence community, while at the same time
protecting our constitutional freedoms. As Benjamin Franklin said, "a
people who would trade their liberty for security deserve neither."
As we work to become more secure, we must also protect our liberty.
I am concerned about press reports of people held in custody for weeks,
who have not been charged with any crime, being denied meaningful access
to counsel. This, if true, may be a common practice in some countries, but
it should not be the practice in ours.
I am also concerned about the erroneous assertion that the Congress has
tied the CIA's hands by limiting its ability to recruit informants with
unsavory backgrounds. There is no such law. In fact, the only constraint
is the CIA's own internal guidelines, which require prior approval of
senior management before recruiting such an asset. There are sound reasons
for those guidelines, and the CIA leadership has said repeatedly that this
is not a problem.
Even more disturbing are claims that we need to change the
"law" prohibiting assassinations of individuals involved in
terrorism. Again, there is no such law. There is an Executive Order, first
signed by President Ford and reaffirmed each year since then by every
succeeding Administration that prohibits assassinations. No law, or
executive order for that matter, protects Osama bin Laden or any other
terrorist from the exercise of our legitimate right of self-defense,
including use of lethal force.
A policy of pre-emptive assassinations would be morally repugnant, a
violation of international law, and fraught with dangers for our own
government, as well as for our allies. It is also ineffective, because it
creates martyrs whose deaths become a terrorist's rallying cry for
vengeance. And we have seen how easily foreign identities can be mistaken
or stolen, with potentially irreversible, tragic consequences.
Mr. President, our country has suffered a grievous loss. We have had to
face our own vulnerability as never before. As we support the victims'
families and set about to prevent future terrorist attacks, we should also
rededicate ourselves to upholding the principles which set our nation
apart: freedom, tolerance, diversity, respect for the rule of law, and the
unique value of every individual. If our leaders appeal to these values --
to the better angels of our human nature, not to the instincts of hate or
fear or revenge -- then this trial by fire will refine us, instead of
coarsen us.
And let us go forward from this experience, which has shown in such a
tragic way how connected we are to the rest of the world and how much we
need the support of other countries, to provide stronger leadership not
only to combat the scourge of international terrorism but other urgent
global problems, and make this world a better and safer place for all.
# # # # #
|