Sen. Snowe's Speech on the Iraq War

That is why I have joined with Senators LEVIN and REED on a bipartisan basis because in my view, given the record of demonstrated inaction on the part of the Iraqi Government, we are now beyond nonbinding measures. That is what we have accomplished in the last 6 months. We considered nonbinding measures. But now we are a mere 2 months from General Petraeus's September report, with no demonstrable evidence to suggest political progress. What time is more important than now, as we consider the pending Defense authorization bill, to maximize our voice and opportunity to send an unequivocal message that if the Iraqis fail to chart a different course politically, then we will chart a different course militarily?

The fact is, America requires more than Iraq's commitment to accomplishing the benchmarks that will lead to a true national reconciliation. We must see demonstrable results. That is why we are at this critical juncture. That is the answer to why now and why wait until September.

Because given all we know, I happen to believe we cannot lose precious time in delivering an unmistakable message that the Iraqi Government must take the consensus-building measures necessary for reconciliation.

For those who characterize this bill as tantamount to a precipitous withdrawal, let me say it is neither precipitous nor a withdrawal. I urge my colleagues to read the legislation, to read the amendment that has been drafted, to actually look at the language. I think it would be worthwhile, because I have heard mischaracterizations of what this legislation would accomplish. This legislation would result in redeployment, a change in mission, and reduced forces, but it does not suggest--it does not require--a precipitous withdrawal. In fact, it does not do that. It would reduce our troops and change our mission, beginning 120 days after passage, while specifically allowing the troops to remain for critical missions such as coun.ter.in.sur.gency and attacking al-Qaida, providing force protection, as well as training the Iraqis--again, goals that are very consistent with the Iraq Study Group.

I think it is very important for Members of the Senate to read--to actually read--the language which has been incorporated in the amendment that is pending before the Senate, because it requires a very different mandate than has been described here on the floor of the Senate. It is not a precipitous withdrawal. In fact, it allows the discretion to maintain troops by the commanders in order to complete those missions as described in the amendment that would allow us to continue to train the Iraqis and to fight al-Qaida.

Some of my colleagues have also opined that this proposal will limit the President's ability to conduct the war on terror. Last week we heard the President state that we are working to defeat al-Qaida and other extremists and aid the rise of an Iraqi Government that can protect its people. Well, again, this amendment rightly does nothing to detract from that objective. In fact, as I said, the amendment defers to the commanders on the group to determine the number of troops and forces necessary to fight al-Qaida.

Specifically, the amendment empowers the Secretary of Defense to deploy and maintain members of the Armed Forces in Iraq to engage in targeted coun.ter.ter.ror.ism operations against al-Qaida, al-Qaida-affiliated groups, and other international terrorist organizations, which encompasses maintaining Iraq's territorial integrity against terrorist groups, including those backed by foreign countries. So that is the reality of the language which has been included in this amendment that is pending before the Senate--not as some have described.

Furthermore, this measure would not take effect until 120 days after the passage of this legislation--after the passage of the Defense authorization. Let me note that in the last 4 years, the earliest approval of the National Defense Authorization Act occurred on October 17. That was the earliest date in which it became law in each of the last 4 years. So this isn't rash. This is reasoned, and this is responsible. Indeed, the language crafted by Senator Hagel in the amendment also seeks to internationalize our effort by calling on the U.N. to appoint an international mediator in Iraq and that the auspices of the United Nations Security Council, which has the authority of the international community to engage political, religious, ethnic, and tribal leaders in Iraq , and include them in the political process. This mediator will seek to bridge the divide between the competing sects to bring stability to Iraq and prevent a spillover into a civil war.

The Levin-Reed amendment specifically states it shall be implemented as part of a comprehensive, diplomatic, political, and economic strategy that includes sustained engagement with Iraq's neighbors and the international community for the purposes of working collectively to bring stability to Iraq . As the Baker-Hamilton report concluded, Iraqi political accommodations can be achieved only within a constructive regional framework supported by the international community, a statement that I believe highlights the necessity now in the United States to refocus its policy, its leadership, and its resources on directly helping the Iraqis to establish an inclusive political framework to begin to diffuse the violence.

Finally, to those with concerns about the April conclusion date included in the Levin-Reed amendment, let me also point out this is not an arbitrary date the Congress imposed but, rather, it reflects the reality on the ground. The ability to maintain this large force in Iraq becomes virtually impossible because of the overall size of the Army. We cannot sustain current troop levels in Iraq indefinitely. General Peter Shoomaker, the prior Army Chief of Staff, testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee in March that sustaining the troop increase in Iraq beyond August would be a challenge, he said. In fact, Andrew Krepinevich of the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, told the Senate Armed Services Committee in April that our ground forces, the Army in particular, are "broken" or in danger of "breaking." The reality is that without significantly changing the force structure or employing a "different force mix," we must begin to redeploy.

The bottom line is this is a defining moment. It is a defining moment for America's policy in Iraq and it is a defining moment for the Senate--indeed, the entire Congress--as to whether we are now prepared to assert our legislative prerogatives and authorities that are not without precedent, as I said earlier, to direct a different course and to alter our strategy--a strategy that reality warrants and demands. The decision before us is one of grave consequence because it is a matter of war. It demands that we look past the rhetoric and the partisanship which often enshrouds and clouds many of the most significant issues of our time, and that is certainly true with respect to this war.

We expect passion to run high, but I hope it doesn't create the inability on the part of our collective wisdom and desire to do what is right and what is best for our country and for the men and women in uniform who are on the front lines each and every day performing magnificent sacrifices, as we all well know, with the loss of lives we have experienced in each of our States across this country. Frankly, if it weren't for those men and women, you know, we wouldn't be the greatest Nation on Earth, because they have woven the fabric for greatness for this country throughout the generations.

So I would hope that at this moment in time, we can rise to the occasion and that in spite of the spirited debate, we

can come together to try to resolve this major question, because that is what the American people want. That is what my constituents want in the State of Maine. They are hoping and praying we can come together and unite and to do what is right for this country at this most challenging and vexing and consequential moment in our Nation's history. I hope we can live up to the moniker of the Senate as the world's greatest deliberative body, because certainly that moment is upon us.

Thank you, Mr. President.