The 1-Year Anniversary of the Liberation of Iraq

THE 1-YEAR ANNIVERSARY OF THE LIBERATION OF IRAQ

Mr. KYL. Mr. President, I would like to speak for a moment about the historic day tomorrow, which is the 1-year anniversary of the liberation of Iraq, and the experience which Senator McCain and Senator Chambliss and Senator Cochran and I just had with a few others in meeting the Ambassador-designate from Iraq, Ambassador-designate Rend Al-Rahim.

She has been a leader in the movement for women's rights in Iraq, and has been designated by the Iraqi Governing Council to represent her country here in the United States at this historic time. In listening to her message, it simply should remind all of us of the importance of what we, as Americans, have been doing in support of freedom for the Iraqi people.

I wish to share a few of the comments which she made to us, and a bit of the response to that. First, she is a remarkable woman in her own right; she, as I said, has been fighting for Iraqi rights for a long time. It is no surprise that someone with her background and qualifications has been selected to represent her country in the United States.

Her first remarks were to thank the United States for helping to free the Iraqi people and making an opportunity available to them to govern themselves. She said that the main word in Iraq today is the word "democracy," that is what the Iraqi people are talking about, and they are going to be ready and, indeed, demand that when June 30 comes, they will be able to take control of the political affairs of their country.

This is something they have been waiting for a long time to accomplish, and they are very grateful to the United States for making this opportunity available to them. She made the point that democracy died in Iraq 35 years ago; that under the repressive regime of Saddam Hussein there was no freedom of expression, no ability to debate, political parties ceased to exist; he would not permit anyone to question him. But today she talked about the 150 new newspapers that have cropped up, debating all sorts of issues in the country, and the opportunity for people to present their views on free television.

She said throughout the country of Iraq today there is free and robust debate about the political future of their country; that political parties have grown, and the ability of Iraqis to govern themselves, in her view, is not in doubt.

She made the point the security problems the United States and coalition and Iraqi forces are facing today, while grave and serious, are not representative of any kind of popular uprising in the country as a whole; that in her view they represent a very thin slice of the Iraqi population, and Americans should not view this as the view of the Iraqi people in general. Indeed, the opposite would be the case; that most Iraqis support the presence of the United States, appreciate what we are trying to accomplish with the help of the Iraqi people there, and that this relatively small group of disaffected people does not represent the view of the Iraqi people as a whole.

In fact, her quotation, almost exactly-and she repeated it three times-was that the vast, vast, vast majority of the Iraqi people reject this point of view and support the presence of the United States and assistance to the people.

It was a remarkable performance by the Ambassador-designate who told us about the condition in which they found the Embassy when they came in and simply reminded us that we have a lot to do in supporting this new government and helping it to be a viable force, not just in the country of Iraq itself but in representing itself to the rest of the world, and most especially in the United States.

I was also moved by the strong statement made by my colleague from Arizona, Senator McCain, who had talked about his experience in Iraq and his experiences elsewhere in admonishing all of us to remember that there is no alternative to victory in this war on terror, and especially in the front we are conducting in Iraq today. Defeat is not an option. The consequences of defeat for the United States and the West and our position in the war on terror would be catastrophic. Our credibility would be lost, and that credibility is our primary asset in dealing with terrorism around the world.

Our ability to affect the future with respect to the terrorist threat would be diminished significantly if we were not to persevere and complete our job in Iraq. This means, as Senator McCain pointed out, we will have to acknowledge the hard reality that it will not be easy, and it will not be cheap. There will be casualties, and it is going to take a long time.

Remember President Bush first told us that when this war commenced, and in his State of the Union speech, pointing out that it would be a long, difficult struggle and that the American people would have to be prepared to persevere. The American people have persevered.

We are at a crossroads now. There are some among us who are raising questions. That, in and of itself, in a democracy is not only fine but critically important. The question is the tone of the criticism and the effect that it can have both on the morale of the Iraqi people and our own troops fighting there, as well as the message it conveys to the enemy terrorists. If the criticism is constructive and goes to questions of how we should be doing what we are doing, it could be very beneficial.

If, on the other hand, it suggests political motives for the President and the administration, suggests there is no support for the position we are taking, and suggests what little support there might be will erode to the point that we will not be able to sustain our position, then people begin to wonder. The people of Iraq who are still not secure, who are still fearful there are those among them who would cause them harm if they only had a chance, including the old Baathists, are going to be less secure and bold going forth with their new government and less willing to continue to support the United States.

Our allies, the same message. Our troops would wonder, Is this a fight worth fighting; their families wondering, Is it worth my son or daughter dying? Of course, the message to the terrorists, If we wait these people out, these Americans have shown that they are willing to only fight for so long, and then they will cut and run if we make life difficult enough for them.

This is a message we cannot afford to send. It is important the tone of the debate, the content of debate, the motives ascribed to leaders in this country all take into account the way the message is portrayed elsewhere, the way it will be played on Arab television, for example. These are not small matters. These are matters of fine-tuning a debate in the United States so that it will not adversely affect the way we can conduct the war on terror generally, and on operations in Iraq specifically.

I think sometimes we fail to take into account how our words are listened to all over the world. I know as a Senator, it is still hard for me to appreciate, knowing who I am and where I came from, that when I speak, my words may have pretty significant consequences to an awful lot of people. It is hard for me to remember that. I don't look at myself any differently than I did when I was a lawyer 20 years ago. But we in the United States tend to forget that others view us very closely, and everything we do they pay a lot of attention. So the words we speak in this Chamber and in other forums are going to be parsed very carefully by others around the world for meaning.

When those words suggest either there is a lack of support in this country for the policies being pursued, that were overwhelmingly supported by the Members of this body, the House of Representatives and, of course, the administration, when there is a suggestion that there is a lack of support for that policy or that support is eroding, and if terrorists continue to ply their trade they can undercut us to the point we will cut and run, when the words are interpreted in that way, then they undercut not just our policy but the people who are fighting for us in that region, and the people on whose behalf we are trying to help secure freedom.

That is why it is so important for us to conduct this debate in a civil and measured and responsible way. I urge all of my colleagues to try to approach the subject in that fashion. I criticize no one for raising questions or even for criticizing the President or the administration. It is perfectly appropriate in our country to do that. There is certainly no right or wrong in exactly how we are approaching each of these issues. The decisions are made in the fog of war. Many of them are somewhat gray.

I would only ask my colleagues, as we conduct this debate, that we consider the tone so it doesn't have an adverse effect on the actual war on terrorism itself.

As my colleague, Senator McCain, said, defeat is not an option. It is impossible, given our military power, for us to lose the war in Iraq, but it would be possible to lose that war at home if we don't conduct ourselves in the same fashion and same spirit we ask our troops to conduct themselves when they are fighting for us abroad. That is an important responsibility we take on.

When I listened to the words of the Ambassador-designate today about looking at the future of her country with such optimism and such courage and such hope, it rekindled in me the desire to come and talk about the fact that we have to do our part. Our troops are doing their part. We have to do our part as well. We need to make wise decisions. We need to support the troops. We need to support the administration to the absolute extent we can. Our partisanship should stop at the shores, as it historically has.

I know in an election year it is going to be difficult for us to discipline ourselves in that way, but we have to do so because of the stakes involved.

I find after 1 year of the liberation of the Iraqi people, great cause for hope.

We should not minimize the difficulties that lie ahead. I think we need to be extraordinarily candid about the problems we will continue to confront. But at the end of the day, if we persevere as we know we can, if we have the same resolve and strength of character our young men and women do who are there fighting right now-and you only have to talk to a few to be imbued with their spirit-then I have no doubt the United States will stay strong, our great ally Great Britain will do the same, as well as other members of the coalition that have assisted us so strongly; and in persevering and staying the course, we will be able, No. 1, to turn over political control of Iraq on June 30 to the Iraqi Governing Council and, No. 2, we will be able to stay for as long as it takes to help secure that country.

Just as we have had the opportunity to govern ourselves, the Iraqi people will have the same opportunity. That will, in turn, show others in the region how they too can govern themselves democratically, they can live in an environment of freedom, and that is infectious and probably would do more than any other single thing to ensure that region of the world can enjoy peace, and that peace can even come to the troubled relationship between the Palestinians and Israelis. It is something to be hoped for. It all depends on our ability right now to persevere, stay the course, and to maintain the hope and optimism we had when we began this operation.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.