06 October 2002
Leaders of Democrats in U.S. Congress Support Strong Steps on Iraq
(Daschle, Gephardt, others appear on Sunday talk shows) (1180) By Thomas Eichler Washington File Staff Writer Washington -- The leaders of the Democrats in the Senate and House of Representatives, speaking Sunday October 6 as the two legislative bodies made plans to debate and then vote on proposed resolutions on Iraq, expressed support for effective steps to end Iraqi weapons of mass destruction capabilities, and for regime change in Iraq if that is necessary to achieve the weapons goal. Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, speaking on NBC's "Meet the Press," expressed general support for a draft resolution already accepted by the White House and the House International Relations Committee (HIRC) and introduced in the Senate that would authorize the president to undertake military action if necessary to destroy Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. Daschle said, however, that he favors more restrictive language in the resolution to "tie it as directly as we can to the question of weapons of mass destruction." Daschle said Democrats "support strongly the president's position for regime change in Iraq. We have said from the very beginning if there is no other recourse we will do everything possible to ensure that that goal can be achieved, as long as it is tied to the weapons of mass destruction." Daschle also called for continued efforts to win United Nations support for any Iraqi action. "Let's explore to the maximum degree possible our options through the United Nations," he said. "Let's ensure that we have the broadest international support for whatever it is we decide that we can achieve. That's what we are doing. I think in large measure that's what the resolution will acknowledge when we pass it sometime later on this week or sometime shortly thereafter. We will first attempt to use every diplomatic means available. ... We ought to, if no other option is available, after we have exhausted those diplomatic means, use preemptive force -- unilaterally if necessary." House Minority (Democratic) Leader Richard Gephardt, who spoke on ABC's "This Week," has expressed support for President Bush on the Iraq issue and was a co-sponsor of the draft resolution approved by the HIRC. Gephardt said his view of the issue is much influenced by the September 11 terrorist attacks. "This was a seminal event," he said. "This was the ultimate wake-up call. Now, if you're worried about being in a world of terrorists and terrorism and you're especially worried about them getting their hands on weapons of mass destruction, your first candidate for where they could get those weapons or parts of those weapons is Iraq. That's why Iraq is a problem. They have flouted U.N. resolutions for 12 years. We have to deal with it. And I've said many times, diplomatically if we can, militarily if we must." Asked about evidence of ties between Iraq and the al Qaeda terrorists, Gephardt said "there's lots of intelligence, and it's additive as you go along, of meetings between Iraqi military and intelligence officials and members of al Qaeda. There's no smoking gun. I don't think you'll have one. If we had had a smoking gun on 9/11, we would have done something about it. Your standard of proof of what you're looking for here has to go down, given that we live in a world of terrorists and terrorism. ... We have to prevent a weapon of mass destruction being detonated in the United States. We have to do everything in our power to avoid that. It is unthinkable and we cannot let it happen." Prominent Democratic Senator Ted Kennedy, on the other hand, in comments on CBS's "Face the Nation," reaffirmed his support, first articulated in a September 27 speech, for making a strong initial effort to deal with the Iraqi threat through the United Nations. "President Bush deserves great credit in galvanizing the nation and galvanizing the international community" after the September 11 attacks, Kennedy said. "And because we were able to galvanize not only our country but the international community, we made very, very important progress in the battle against al Qaeda. Saddam Hussein is a dangerous figure. He's got dangerous weapons. But the administration hasn't made the case that this is a clear and present and imminent danger to the United States of America." Kennedy said he will not support the draft resolution approved by the HIRC and introduced in the Senate. He said he supports a two-step process. "The proposals that we have ... are basically a one-step process. It says that when you pass that resolution, you are authorizing the president of the United States to effectively go to war. I think a war ought to be the last resort, not the first resort. I think we have to use the United Nations." He said he believes that "we should go to the United Nations, have a strong Security Council resolution that will permit unfettered inspections by the United Nations investigations. And then they ought to come back to the Congress of the United States if they want a declaration of war." Democratic Senator Joseph Lieberman, who also appeared on "Face the Nation," has expressed strong support for the White House position on Iraq, and is a co-sponsor in the Senate of the White House-HIRC draft resolution. "We don't know that an [Iraqi] attack is imminent," Lieberman, said, "but we know that he [Saddam Hussein] has violated the United Nations requirements with regard to inspections. We know for a fact that he has chemical and biological weapons, and he is developing very unsettling capacity to deliver those weapons on distant targets. ... [M]y question is not why are we doing this now -- why are we confronting Saddam now? My question is: Why didn't we do it earlier? Because I think if we don't confront him and either disarm him or get him out of power, he will do terrible damage to the American people before long." Lieberman disagreed with those who argue that threatening Saddam Hussein with war would make Iraqi use of weapons of mass destruction more likely. If it is accepted that Saddam Hussein's main goal is to survive, he said, giving the president authority to take military action in Iraq may, first, "finally get him to let the inspectors in, go anywhere they want whenever they want and disarm. That would be a way to get out of this crisis." And second, it "may in fact encourage some close to Saddam to take their own action to eliminate him and make a military action unnecessary. War is the last resort. We all agree with that. But when you are dealing with a bully, and a dangerous bully like Saddam, the way to get him to do something you want him to do, or to get others to get him out of there, is to be strong. And that's what we are doing now." (The Washington File is a product of the Office of International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
