NEWS

House Foreign Affairs Committee

U.S. House of Representatives

Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ranking Republican

CONTACT: Sam Stratman, (202) 226-7875, February 13, 2007

                  Lee Cohen (202) 225-1139

For IMMEDIATE Release

Ros-Lehtinen Floor Statement on Iraq Resolution

(WASHINGTON) – Text of remarks delivered today by U.S. Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL), Ranking Republican on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, during floor consideration of H. Con. Res. 63:

As we begin this debate on Iraq, we must always be aware that our remarks will not be confined to the American public. Our words will be heard not just by our friends, but by our enemies also. They are watching to see what America will do. No weakness of ours; no internal political struggle, will go unnoticed. 

The suicide bombers, the leaders of al Qaeda, the rulers of Iran, and many others are listening, seeking encouragement for their fellow extremists, listening for signs of our defeat. We know from many sources that al Qaeda, the terrorists in Iraq, and our enemies planning further attacks on us closely follow what is said and done in the U.S. and use that knowledge to help them calculate their next steps against us. 

They routinely cite statements by U.S. sources as validation of their strategy to defeat America. Let me quote Muhammad Saadi, a senior leader of Islamic Jihad, who said that talk of withdrawal from Iraq makes him feel "proud."

"As Arabs and Muslims we feel proud…Very proud from the great successes of the Iraqi resistance. This success that brought the big superpower of the world to discuss a possible withdrawal."  They are looking for concessions of defeat, signs of weakness and irresolution.

It is within this context that we embark on this debate. The question before us concerns not the past but the future—where should our country go from here? We are not merely debating a resolution but are deliberating on our nation’s future.  The war in Iraq is part of a far larger struggle-- a global struggle--the struggle against Islamist extremist militants.

As in the Cold War, our current struggle is one of survival. The enemy does not mean merely to chase us away.  The goal of the Islamist extremist radicals is to destroy us. If we run, they will pursue. If we cower, they will strike. The choice before us is this:  Do we fight and defeat the enemy? Or do we retreat and surrender?

We should not believe that we can accommodate our enemies and thereby secure their cooperation. We must not fool ourselves into believing that the enemies’ demands are limited and reasonable and thus easily satisfied; or that we can find safety by withdrawing from the world. That strategy has been tried in the past with catastrophic consequences.

Neville Chamberlain genuinely believed that he had brought “peace in our time,” by washing his hands of what he believed to be an isolated dispute, in what he termed: “a far-away country between people of whom we know nothing.” That country was Czechoslovakia, and Chamberlain’s well-intentioned efforts to withdraw Britain from the problems in that far-away area of the world, only ensured that an immensely larger threat was thereby unleashed. The threat of Hitler did not appear suddenly out of a vacuum.

The challenge we face today has been building for many years. We experienced the first attack on the World Trade Center in 1993, the destruction of our embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, the bombing of Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia in 1998, the attack on the U.S.S. Cole in 2000, and then,  most dramatically, the terrible events of 9/11. 

As these attacks built over the years, we did little in response. Our enemies came to believe that they could strike us with impunity; that we would shrink from our responsibilities – from defending our interests; that we would not stand for our survival. They felt safe in planning for larger assaults.

Now, our fight is truly one of global proportions. Some may not want to believe it. The terrorists, however, certainly intend it as such. As stated by senior al-Qaeda leader al-Zawahiri:

“…Jihad in Iraq requires several incremental goals: The first stage: Expel the Americans from Iraq. The second stage: Establish an Islamic authority or emirate, then develop it and support it until it achieves the level of a caliphate – over as much territory as you can to spread its power in Iraq …The third stage: Extend the jihad wave to the secular countries neighboring Iraq. The fourth stage: It may coincide with what came before: the clash with Israel, because Israel was established only to challenge any new Islamic entity.”

This al-Qaeda leader went on to say:  “The whole world is an open field for us." What then are the consequences of a U.S. withdrawal and surrender? The terrorists, our mortal enemies, will have demonstrated that they have defeated us, the strongest power on earth.  They will have proven that our enemies only have to make the cost too high for us, and that we will give up. The result would be an extraordinary boost to their morale and standing in the world resulting from such an historic and momentous accomplishment on their part. They will become heroes in the minds of millions. They will be inundated with recruits, with financing, with support of all types. And they will be eager to go after us.

A leader of the terrorist organization Islamic Jihad recently said of an American withdrawal from Iraq: "There is no chance that the resistance will stop." He said an American withdrawal from Iraq would: "prove that resistance is the most important tool and that this tool works. The victory of the Iraqi revolution will mark an important step in the history of the region and in the attitude regarding the United States."

We know that the terrorists would draw these conclusions because they have done so before when we recoiled in the face of terrorist attacks. In bin Laden’s 1996 ‘Declaration of Jihad’ and other statements, he repeatedly pointed to America’s weakness being its low threshold for pain.  As evidence, he pointed to the U.S. withdrawal from Somalia in 1993 because of casualties from attacks by al-Qaeda and its allies.

Bin Laden said:  “When tens of your soldiers were killed in minor battles and one American pilot was dragged in the streets of Mogadishu, you left the area carrying disappointment, humiliation, defeat and your dead with you,’ he wrote. ‘The extent of your impotence and weakness became very clear.”

We witnessed the consequences of Somalia, and the ensuing inaction. However, the implications of withdrawal and surrender in Iraq could be even greater. There would be an intensification of the violence. 

As the National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq recently affirmed: “… If Coalition forces were withdrawn rapidly during the term of this estimate, we judge that this almost certainly would lead to a significant increase in the scale and scope of sectarian conflict in Iraq, intensify Sunni resistance to the Iraqi Government, and have adverse consequences for national reconciliation…”

Iraq would become, as one of my Democrat colleagues said in Dec. 2005, a “snakepit for terrorists.” Sunni Arabs throughout the Middle East would certainly view the resulting situation as a Shiite victory in Iraq and, in turn, as a win for the regime in Iran.

Neighboring countries would likely seek to prevent Iranian domination of Iraq and the region, by providing financial and other support, including, potentially, troops, to anti-Iranian factions. It would be interpreted as a defeat of the U.S. and would thus strengthen rogue regimes in Syria and Iran.

Iran would be free to expand its influence throughout the Middle East, including its long-term effort to dominate the Persian Gulf and the world’s oil supply. Iran’s sponsorship of terrorist organizations such as Hamas and Hezbollah would likely increase, thereby ensuring the murder of countless civilians and a further destabilization of countries in the region and beyond.

Let us not forget that Iran’s proxy, Hezbollah, twice attacked in our own Hemisphere—in Argentina-- in mid 1990s. Let us not forget that, in a 2002 court case, one of two men were convicted of financing Hezbollah with $2 million  in illegal activity in the U.S., and that last year an individual from Detroit was charged with supporting Hezbollah financially, and was described by the United States Attorney in the case, as a `fighter, recruiter, and fundraiser'. 

Let us also not forget that Iran is a nation believed to be pursuing nuclear weapons and, thus, leaving the region vulnerable to Iranian domination would have grave consequences for U.S. security priorities.

Surrendering Iraq over to the terrorists would erode trust in the U.S., affecting our critical strategic interests in the region negatively. Our allies such as Kuwait, Jordan, Bahrain, and Egypt may become reluctant to continue their cooperation with us, which currently includes providing access to their facilities and logistical support we need to protect our interests in the region.

The damage would not be confined to the Middle East. Our enemies would be encouraged to join forces in a coalition to directly challenge the U.S. and to expand their efforts to undermine us and our allies. It is already happening. Venezuelan strongman Hugo Chavez is openly forming an alliance with Iran and recently called on Iran and Venezuela to join forces to “finish off the U.S. empire.”

Let us consider the consequences of withdrawing and surrendering Iraq to the Islamist militant extremists. As James Woolsey, the former Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, has emphasized: “We have to do our damned best to win this thing, in spite of the history of mistakes in tactics and strategy. The stakes are too high to do otherwise – the whirlwind we will reap if we lose means that we owe it to the world and future generations to do everything humanly possible to avoid giving the Islamists the encouragement they will certainly obtain if they win.”

Mr. Speaker, this is not just an abstract policy discussion for me. This is a subject close to my heart. My stepson Doug and his wife Lindsay are both Marine pilots who served in Iraq alongside other brave Americans. They understand the consequences of defeat. They recognize the deadly enemy we are facing. Lindsay will soon be deployed to Afghanistan where depending on our actions in this Chamber this week, she could face a more deadly enemy.

All of us long for a world in which the mortal challenge of Islamist militant extremism does not exist. But that world is a fantasy and that’s the world this resolution seems to address. Many times in our history, we have encountered great challenges. Many of them seemingly insurmountable. And yet every time, we rose to face them. And prevailed.

We are faced once again with an overwhelming challenge: that of Islamist militant extremists focused on our destruction and on world domination. There is no path backward, nor retreat. Because that will bring only disaster.

##30##