The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“REPORT ON TRIP TO LIBYA, IRAQ, AFGHANISTAN, UZBEKISTAN, AND MILITARY HOSPITAL IN GERMANY” mentioning the U.S. Dept of State was published in the House of Representatives section on pages H377-H390 on Feb. 4, 2004.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
{time} 2030
REPORT ON TRIP TO LIBYA, IRAQ, AFGHANISTAN, UZBEKISTAN, AND MILITARY
HOSPITAL IN GERMANY
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. King of Iowa). Under the Speaker's announced policy of January 7, 2003, the gentleman from Pennsylvania
(Mr. Weldon) is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader.
Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, the topic of my Special Order this evening, and I think I will be joined by other Members from both sides, is our recent trip to Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, Uzbekistan, and our military hospital for our troops in Germany. But before I get into my comments about the trip, let me put some specific quotes from Dr. Kay, who has just been referred to by a previous speaker, who made the allegation that Dr. Kay said there was no basis for our activity in Iraq.
Mr. Speaker, let me put the actual quote in the Record, not something that is paraphrasing, but the actual quote. In an interview that Dr. Kay conducted on NBC TV, he was asked to comment on whether it was prudent to go to war. Dr. Kay said, ``I think it was absolutely prudent. In fact, I think at the end of the inspection process, we will paint a picture of Iraq that was far more dangerous than we even thought it was before the war.''
Mr. Speaker, that is not me paraphrasing; that is not me summarizing or putting my own spin on what Dr. Kay said. That is a direct quote from Dr. Kay, and the American people and our colleagues need to understand that as we analyze what has been said in the findings of the Kay report, that we actually look at those statements, as opposed to trying to spin them. Some of our colleagues on the other side, especially those running for the Presidency, have tried to put a spin on what Dr. Kay said. It is more important for the American people and for our colleagues to look at in actuality what he said.
But, Mr. Speaker, there is one more point I want to make on this whole effort of the spin of Dr. Kay, which ties into our trip, because of the 45 meetings that we held over the 7 days, visiting eight different countries and traveling 25,500 miles in military aircraft, including a military aircraft to get over, a Navy plane, C-130s and Blackhawk helicopters in Iraq, I think the most significant meeting we had was in Iraq, and that meeting was with the individual who is actually responsible for the Iraqi Survey Group, which is actually doing the search for weapons of mass destruction.
Now, Mr. Speaker, many of our colleagues in this room and many of the people around America have been convinced by the media that Dr. Kay was in charge of the investigation for weapons of mass destruction. Mr. Speaker, that is wrong. Dr. Kay was a consultant to the general who was in charge of the Iraq Survey Group, and that general is a two star general by the name of Keith Dayton.
On our trip to Iraq, in Baghdad we were taken to the Fusion Center, where all of the intelligence is brought for the Iraqi Survey Group to do their work, and for 90 minutes members of the Republican Party and the Democrat Party who were a part of my bipartisan delegation had a chance to listen to the actual leader of the inspection process in Iraq give us an update.
I want to share with our colleagues, Mr. Speaker, what General Dayton said. First of all, he was perplexed. He was frustrated. He could not understand why David Kay came back to America and made this public report when he had not yet, first of all, talked to the individual who was responsible for the Iraqi inspection process, General Dayton. In fact, all of the individuals that we met who were overseeing the 1,500 people who are involved in the Iraq survey team were equally frustrated.
We learned, for instance, that when David Kay left Iraq, he was not entirely happy, because he was dissatisfied that General Dayton had other missions besides the search for weapons of mass destruction and actually had troops assigned to efforts like looking for our POW-MIA Scott Spiker, and also were involved in the anti-terrorism efforts on the ground. David Kay became upset and told this to General Dayton, that there were assets being diverted away from his efforts to look for weapons of mass destruction. That was one of the reasons why David Kay left the Iraqi theater to come back to America.
Mr. Speaker, I have not seen that in the American media. I have not heard that story yet brought forward. But the individual in charge of the Iraq Survey Group, General Keith Dayton, told us that when we had our meeting with him in Baghdad.
Mr. Speaker, we also learned that Dr. Kay had not been in Iraq for the last several months, during which time he could have had an exchange, an update of the work that was being done by the Iraq Survey Group. So, Mr. Speaker, I think it is essentially important that we take an additional step here.
Now, Dr. Kay has issued a report that I think stands on its own and speaks for itself. It does not help when Members of this body or the media or candidates for the Presidency misinterpret what David Kay said. But we need to go beyond that, Mr. Speaker. We need to bring over the individual who was actually responsible for the weapons of mass destruction search in Iraq. That is not Dr. Kay; that is General Keith Dayton. General Dayton has that responsibility, and it is he who oversees those 1,500 people.
General Dayton told us that they are in fact enthusiastic about the work they are doing. He explained to us the process now under way to send teams into the rivers of Iraq, the lakes of Iraq, the bodies of water where they have leads that perhaps weapons of mass destruction were dumped, and they are now conducting that search.
They also told us, General Dayton and his colleagues, that there are literally millions of pages and volumes of documents that have yet to be searched that can provide leads as to where weapons of mass destruction might be.
I can tell you after visiting the ``spider hole'' up in Takrit where Saddam Hussein was holed up for a number of days, that our military personnel went over top of that site a dozen times and never found Saddam Hussein. Now, that hole was rather large. So if we could not find a hole with Saddam in it for 8 or 9 months, then I think we certainly owe it to General Dayton to give him the time to continue the search for the evidence that he thinks in fact his team can come up with.
So the point is, Mr. Speaker, that on this meeting in Iraq with the general in charge of the survey team for weapons of mass destruction, we got a clearly different picture from that that is being portrayed by the American media, both in terms of Dr. Kay's report and the spin that has been made on that report.
Today, Mr. Speaker, Secretary Rumsfeld appeared before our Committee on Armed Services in the House, and I was the first Member of Congress that was invited to ask questions of Secretary Rumsfeld. I laid all of this out to him, and I asked him if he did not think it was time to do what the famous media person, Paul Harvey, used to say at the end of his stories: and now we will hear the other half of the story.
Mr. Speaker, today I requested of Secretary Rumsfeld that Major General Keith Dayton be brought back to America to testify before the Congress about the work that he is directing right now on looking for weapons of mass destruction. Then Members of Congress can ask him about the conditions under which David Kay operated, that he was in fact a consultant to General Dayton. Then we can ask the questions about the circumstances under which Dr. Kay left Iraq. Was there friction? What was that friction? Then we can ask the most important question for the American people of a two star general who is apolitical and is not going to put any kind of a spin on his statement, What is your current effort in Iraq and do you expect and do you anticipate the ability to find weapons of mass destruction over the next several months?
I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, what he told us unconditionally is that they are very much into this search. It has not ended; it is not winding down. In fact, they have placed more in the way of assets and resources into the search for weapons of mass destruction.
Now, oftentimes in this city we do not pay attention to the facts. We try to spin things. So I think it is extremely important that we bring over General Keith Dayton to give us a firsthand accounting of the search for weapons of mass destruction and to give us the other half of the story to the findings of Dr. Kay, who was a consultant to General Dayton.
Mr. Speaker, let me get back to the trip that we took, the bipartisan trip, which in fact was the first trip to Libya by Americans since 1969.
My job as a member of the Committee on Armed Services for the past 17 years has been to make sure that we give our military the best equipment, the best technology, and the best training to allow them to continue to be the best military on the face of the Earth, and we have done that. I am a self-described hawk in terms of supporting our military.
But, Mr. Speaker, as the vice chairman of the Committee on Armed Services, I consider my number one priority to be the avoidance of war, because war has always got to be the last choice, because when we commit our troops to war, then we put America's sons and daughters into harm's way, knowing full well that some or perhaps many of them will not return to their families.
So over the past 17 years, while serving on the Committee on Armed Services, making sure our military has the equipment they need, is properly trained, and has the financial support that they deserve, I have spent an equal amount of time on the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction technology and trying to find ways to take those enemies of ours and those would-be enemies of ours and turn them into, if not allies, at least countries that we can work with.
My primary focus has been with the former Soviet states, where I have traveled almost 35 times and established a relationship with the parliaments of all of those former nations that were once a part of the Soviet Union. For the past 13 years, with my colleague, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), we have co-chaired a formal effort with the Duma in the Russian Government, the legislative body of that country, to establish a close relationship of friends and partners. We have had some ups and downs, but the fact is that we are still working aggressively together.
We have done the same thing with Ukraine, with the Rada; with Moldova, with the Parliament; with Georgia, with their Parliament; with Azerbaijan and with Armenia. We have done it with Uzbekistan, and we are now reaching out to other countries that were once a part of the Soviet Union to bring all of those countries into a level of cooperation and understanding with us.
Mr. Speaker, the Soviet Union and its republics were the source of much of the technology that ended up in the hands of the Libyans, the Iraqis, the Iranians, the North Koreans and the Syrians. In fact, Mr. Speaker, during the 1990s, I must have given 100 speeches on what we saw occurring on a regular basis, the transfer of technology from Russia and China and those former Soviet states into the hands of those five countries that I just mentioned. Time and again there were violations of arms control agreements. But the response of the administration in the nineties was to pretend we did not see it, because the administration was more concerned with keeping Boris Yeltsin in power, even when the people of Russia had come to believe that he was no longer a credible leader for their nation.
Mr. Speaker, we did the same thing in reaching out to other countries, like China, that in fact were heading towards a course of perhaps being an enemy of the U.S.; leading six delegations to that Nation; being the only elected official asked to speak two times at the National Defense University of the People's Liberation Army in Beijing.
Finally, Mr. Speaker, last May, after 2 years of planning, I was proud to take the first delegation of Members of Congress, again a bipartisan delegation, into Pyongyang, North Korea, the goal there being to support the President and continuing the dialogue of the six nations to eventually resolve the conflict between North Korea, South Korea and the rest of the world.
In fact, Mr. Speaker, following the next round of six-way talks at the end of this month, I will again lead a delegation back into North Korea to continue a positive effort to support our President in finding a peaceful solution to the Korean nuclear crisis, again to avoid war, because of the consequence of putting America's sons and daughters into harm's way.
{time} 2045
Now, I also fully realize, Mr. Speaker, that that is not always possible, and one case in point was Iraq. We gave Saddam Hussein 18 chances to abide by U.N. resolutions, 18 opportunities to come clean, to basically come forward and tell the world what he had been doing. And the response of Saddam Hussein was to thumb his nose at us and at the rest of the world and to defy the world community. As a result, the President was left with no choice when he asked us to support him in a resolution of war.
For the life of me, Mr. Speaker, I cannot understand the logic of those in this body and the leader of France, Jacques Chirac, and the leader of Germany Gerhard Schroeder who criticized President Bush for going into Iraq to remove Saddam Hussein. Because what is interesting is, just 4 short years ago, many of these same people criticizing President Bush from this body, as well as Jacques Chirac and Gerhard Schroeder, were the very individuals pushing Bill Clinton into a war in Yugoslavia to remove Milosevic from power. And guess what, Mr. Speaker? When Schroeder and Chirac and some of the Members of this body who are criticizing President Bush pushed Bill Clinton into an armed conflict, they did not go to the U.N. for a resolution, because they knew full well that Russia would veto any such resolution of the Security Council. So what did they do? Bill Clinton, Gerhard Schroeder, and Jacques Chirac, supported by many of those in this body who have been criticizing President Bush, did not go to the U.N. as George Bush did, they went to NATO.
Now, Mr. Speaker, NATO is a defensive body. It was organized as a defensive entity to defend Europe and the NATO countries from an attack by a nation like the Soviet Union. NATO was never meant to be an offensive organization. But in 1999, many of those same people, including many of those Democrat candidates for President today, were out there supporting Jacques Chirac and Gerhard Schroeder and Bill Clinton in using NATO for the first and only time ever in its history as an offensive invasion force into a non NATO country.
So we invaded Yugoslavia. We bombed Serbia. We removed Milosevic, who was a war criminal. But what is so confusing to me, Mr. Speaker, is that those same people who were on Bill Clinton's band wagon to invade Serbia and Yugoslavia because Milosevic was a war criminal, all of a sudden, having supported George Bush, even though he went to the U.N. for the 17th and 18th time, even though Saddam Hussein has been characterized by everyone, from Max Vanderstadt, the U.N. Human Rights Advisor, to Amnesty International as the worst human rights abuser since Adolf Hitler, did not want to support the effort in Iraq. Sounds like politics to me, Mr. Speaker. It does not sound like much consistency or substance.
How can you be for removing a war criminal like Milosevic from power and not going through the U.N., but using NATO as an offensive force, and then 4 years later, criticize President Bush after having gone to NATO for the 17th and 18th time, after having given Saddam Hussein every opportunity, and then, in the end, who decided we had to remove this war criminal, this user of weapons of mass destruction, as he did against the Kurds, as he did against the Iranians, from power. It does not make sense to me, Mr. Speaker, unless, of course, you add in the political equation.
But again, in that case, I thought the military action was justified, but I would say in the case of North Korea and Libya and perhaps Iran, if we can avoid conflict, we should take every opportunity to explore that to its end.
That is why, Mr. Speaker, almost a year ago, at a conference on world energy issues in Houston, Texas, I challenged major international energy corporations to come together and establish an International Energy Advisory Council, to specifically focus on the use of energy as a mechanism to avoid war and as a mechanism to help us solve regional conflicts that could lead to major escalations of war. That group, headed up by Jeffrey Waterers, had an initial meeting in Washington, D.C. in July in the Rayburn Office Building, where Chalabi came over from Iraq and spoke to the energy leaders about Iraq postwar. We had major leaders from the State Department and DOD came into speak, and allowed the energy corporations, including those from Iraq and Iran, to come together and see if energy could not provide a partial solution to the crisis both in Iraq as well as other crises around the world.
In October, a second forum was held in London, again attended by all of the major leaders around the world in the energy industry, which I could not attend. But following that meeting, I set up a private meeting with Colonel Gadhafi's son, Saif al Saleem al Gadhafi, a 34-
year-old, London-educated, Ph.D. candidate at the London School of Economics, who today is apparently, according to some pundits, in line to succeed his father as the leader of Libya.
I wanted to meet this individual, because we had mutual interests, to see whether or not there was a possibility of breaking new ground with Libya politically, of seeing whether or not there would be a movement away from the policies of the past, which I had heard to be rumored back in the middle part of last year, unaware of what was happening with our own private discussions within our government. In January of this year, the meeting with Saif al Gadhafi took place. He and I had a long discussion. We talked about Libya's past relationship with the U.S. and the West. We talked about the horrible bombings, the terrible tragedy of Lockerbie, the bombings in Berlin, the linkage of Libyan state-sponsored terrorism, and I told Saif, we can never forgive and never forget. Likewise, he told me it was difficult for he and his father to forget that we had bombed their home and in fact killed his 1\1/2\ year old sister. But we both said it was time to look to the future as opposed to the past.
But Saif was one who was looking to settle the past problems with the Lockerbie victims' families, to look at putting to rest those issues where Libya had done horrible things, and that perhaps it was time to move into a new direction. So he invited me to bring a delegation of our colleagues to Tripoli. I said I would gladly take that invitation. Two days later, a formal written invitation came to my office in Washington from the chairman of the People'S Congress in Libya, inviting me to bring a delegation in. We secured a military plane and we decided our trip would involve not just Libya, but a trip that the White House had been encouraging me to take with Members to Iraq and Afghanistan.
So the plane was secured, and from the Speaker's list of Members who were asked to go to Libya and Afghanistan, we assembled a delegation, a bipartisan delegation, including my good friend, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Ortiz) who would have been here tonight, but he had a death of a close friend and is down back in his district; the gentleman from New York (Mr. Israel), a Democrat; the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Alexander), a Democrat; the gentlewoman from Michigan (Mrs. Miller), a Republican; the gentleman from California (Mr. Gallegly), a Republican; the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Souder), a Republican; and the gentleman from California (Mr. Issa), a Republican. The gentlemen from California (Mr. Gallegly) and (Mr. Issa) joined us the day before we left. They were not a part of the delegation going on to Iraq and Afghanistan; they only joined us for the Libyan portion of the trip.
And I would say, Mr. Speaker, any Member of Congress could have come with us on that trip into Libya. We had over 100 empty seats on our aircraft. So any Member of Congress could have joined us if they had just called and expressed an interest, as the gentlemen from California did the day before we left.
Mr. Speaker, our trip to Libya and the other countries was exhausting. As I mentioned earlier, we traveled 25,500 miles, we visited 8 countries, and we had 45 meetings. Members of our delegation on some nights got less than 2 hours sleep. When we arrived in Kuwait, before going into Iraq, we arrived at 4 o'clock in the morning from our plane, got to our hotel and had to be up at 6 o'clock in the morning for the military to take us into Baghdad. So I want to congratulate the members of the delegation that were on this trip because of their outstanding service to the country in performing an extremely difficult task, completing the mission that we set out for ourselves.
But I want to talk specifically about what we actually did and, in the end, I will ask to put our trip report in the Congressional Record.
We did not know what to expect in Libya, Mr. Speaker, because no one had been there from our country for the past 35 years. We were not sure what the response would be. In fact, we were told by the White House and the National Security Council that the Libyans did not want any presence of the U.S., they certainly did not want to see the flag flown, and they did not want America in any way displayed because it would upset the people of the country. In fact, up until the 11th hour, they did not want us to land our military plane at the Tripoli Airport. How wrong they were.
When we arrived in Tripoli, Mr. Speaker, and our plane pulled up to the tarmac, the number one spot in front of the air terminal at the main Tripoli Airport, there was a whole core of individuals from the leadership of Libya waiting to meet us. Officials from the government of the country, the foreign ministry, the people's Congress, all out there welcoming the Americans back to their nation. In fact, there was a huge media entourage, TV cameras, reporters who were there to ask us questions about why we were there and to follow us through our initial meeting which was held in the lobby of the Tripoli Airport.
The welcome was unbelievable; unbelievably positive. As we sat down and talked about our agenda for the 2 days we were going to be there, I had asked for less than a dozen meetings. Mr. Speaker, not only was every meeting that I asked for granted to us, but they even went beyond and gave us meetings we had not asked for. We met with the Prime Minister, the Deputy Prime Minister, the Vice Prime Minister, the Foreign Minister, the minister in charge of removing weapons of mass destruction from Libya. We met with the foundation established by Saif al Gadhafi, the same foundation overseeing the refunding of the money that is owed to those victims' families of the Lockerbie disaster. We met at the largest university in Libya, Al Fateh University, which has 75,000 students. We met with the leaders of the Libyan-American Friendship Society, which was started in 2000, where 400 people waited for 3 hours for us to arrive in this large tent to welcome us openly with American flags flying outside of the tent and inside of the tent, with children dressed up in colorful costumes to sing for us, with young people reciting poetry for us and speeches welcoming America back to Libya.
Everyplace we went, Mr. Speaker, every person we met, every group we talked to was hungry and starving for a new positive relationship with America.
In fact, during our first day in downtown Tripoli, I asked the delegation to break away with me to go on an unplanned event, to walk 3 or 4 blocks away from the hotel, and to go into the marketplace, the old city, the shopping district, where hundreds of shops and local stores are there for the Libyan citizens to buy their materials, their clothing, their housewares, their pots and pans, and the things that they need for their own lives. The delegation walked together, without any preannouncement, without guards around us, without any advanced alert, and we went through the marketplace. Every person we met in the Libyan marketplace in downtown Tripoli was positive. They came up to us, they shook our hands. A young 10-year-old, when the gentlewoman from Michigan (Mrs. Miller) said, Hi, how are you, said back to her, I am fine, how are you? And she said, You speak excellent English. He said, I have been practicing in school.
We met shopkeepers, an elderly gentleman who was pounding the copper, making pots, who looked up and said, We are glad to have you in our country. We hope it is a new beginning. Everyone we met on the streets of Tripoli, Mr. Speaker, were positive toward America. It overwhelmed us. It was not what we expected, it was not what we were told to expect by our own government back here in our country.
In fact, Mr. Speaker, Members sitting around the table at the university with the President of the Al Fateh University and about 25 of his department heads; and remember, this is a 75,000 student university, they have major programs in medicine, in law, in health care, in science, in technology, in education, in environment and agriculture. As he went around the room, each of these department heads, all of whom spoke excellent English, give us their background and what department they headed. It was unbelievable, Mr. Speaker. All but two of them were educated here in America. They told us what schools they attended: UCLA, Princeton, Colorado, Michigan, University of Pennsylvania, Louisiana, Georgia, all the major schools of our country.
{time} 2100
And they told us of their longing to once again reestablish ties with the American educational system and with the American people. In fact, one of the professors at the University, professor of English, Dr. T. T. Tarhuui, wrote a poem entitled ``Members of Congress,'' which I will enter into the Record when I place our trip report in at the end so the American people and our colleagues can read the poem he wrote for our visit.
So the response by the people and the leaders of Libya was unbelievably and overwhelmingly positive. In fact, we asked to see a weapons of mass destruction site. Not only did they take us to their nuclear complex but we had full access to their 10 megawatt research reactor which they opened to look into and to understand what they were doing with radio isotopes and discuss with them their nuclear program; but before we went to that site, they had us sit down with the minister who was in charge of the entire program to allow the IAEA and the U.S. and Great Britain to remove the weapons of mass destruction from that nuclear site and from Libya. In fact, much of that removal took place the same week that we were in Libya on a separate military aircraft.
But perhaps the most interesting meeting in Libya was with Colonel Qadafi. We did not know what to expect. We were taken to his residence that we had bombed in 1986. We saw the devastation still evident. We saw the lessons and the stories about his daughter who was killed. And we were then brought to another part of the complex where there was a large outdoor tent. We were led in and sat down on the sofas arranged in a semi-circle manner and awaited the arrival of Colonel Qadafi. About 5 minutes later, he came into the tent in his glowing purple robed outfit with his hat on, shook our hands, smiled and sat down. And for 2 hours we had a discussion among the group. And then I had a private session with him for 30 minutes.
In the trip report, Mr. Speaker, are the very quotes that Colonel Qadafi made to our group as transcribed by both our staff director, Doug Roach, and our military escort. We had two separate note takers in that meeting.
It was a very solemn meeting with Qadafi. For the first 25 or 30 minutes he talked to us in a very low tone, a very deliberate tone. And he said, You know, I am so happy that you are here, he said, but my question is why has it taken over 30 years for someone from your country to sit down with me and talk to me? I could understand if you met with me and you had problems because I had done something wrong, some terrible act, but if you would have met with me and talked with me and then felt that I was lying, you would have been justified in bombing me. But you did not talk to me for over 30 years.
He said, You do not understand the Libyan people. We understand America. We studied all about it. And I would ask you to help me in my effort to reestablish that relationship with your country.
Now, Mr. Speaker, we made no apologies to Colonel Qadafi. We let him and his leaders know that the past actions of his government and some of his people were outrageous and will never be forgiven nor forgotten. But we also said it is time to move into a new direction.
We praised him personally for the public statements that he has made about his willingness to remove his weapons of mass destruction and about his willingness to turn over a new page in a relationship with the West.
He talked about his country's coming into the arms control regimes that for decades they have not been a part of. And for that we thanked him. And we said to Colonel Qadafi, Your words are important and we praise them, but words will not carry the day. You must show us with your actions that you truly are serious with removing the weapons of mass destruction, about changing the ways of the past, about working with us on the problem of terrorism, about rooting out those cells that exist in your country, and about laying down a new foundation for the future.
We told him that we would judge Libya and their colonel's comments based on substance as opposed to words and dialogue. But we also told him that if that process continued that we were sure that one day a normalization of relations would occur. And when that day came, we in the Congress, Democrats and Republicans, were prepared to help our President establish a new relationship with the people and the institutions of Libya.
Our meetings with Qadafi were productive, were candid, and were designed to convey a positive message of support for the leadership of our President in stating that Libya has become a model of moving in the right direction away from terrorism.
One of the things that Colonel Qadafi said to us was that he was taking tremendous heat from the other Arab leaders in the region who were making fun of him, who were criticizing him and calling him because of his decision to renounce weapons of mass destruction. And his concern was that America not abandon him if, in fact, he continues to do the kinds of things that have happened over the past several weeks with both the IAEA, Great Britain, and the United States.
So, Mr. Speaker, I think our trip to Libya was extremely positive. We were not there to become a patsy for anyone. We were not there to try to brush over what has happened in the past. We were there to do what I said earlier is my top job as the vice chairman of the Committee on Armed Services, to avoid another war, to find a way not to appease anyone, but to continue on the path that our President has laid down, to turn a former terrorist nation, a nation that has been involved in state-sponsored activity in a new direction to becoming friends with the U.S.
The second part of our trip moved us to Iraq. We had amazing meetings with the troops. We had time with Ambassador Bremer, with General Sanchez. We asked them to give us updates on the troops' activities, on the stability inside of that country.
We had a meeting with Dr. Pachachi, who is the leader of the governing council. We had several of his colleagues there with us as we talked about the plan to hand Iraq over to his people. And he thanked us for that support. We assured him that America was there for the long haul; and that even though the political rhetoric of this election year will cause Democrats and Republicans to criticize each other, that we were not going to as Americans abandon what we had started in Iraq.
We then went out with the troops, Mr. Speaker. I mentioned we talked at length with the Iraq survey team. I will not review that because I did it at the beginning of my Special Order. But we went out and had other meetings as well in Iraq. In fact, we traveled up to Tikrit. We went in a C-130, and we saw the terrible trauma that our C-130 pilots are under as they have to evasively fly into airports to do unbelievable maneuvers so they can avoid the surface-to-air missiles that still exist in Iraq.
On the ground up in the Tikrit area, we were able to take Blackhawk helicopters out into the troop areas to meet with troops, to go to the spider hole where Saddam had been holed up, to visit with our Special Forces. In fact, we were able to be a part of a ceremony as one of our young Special Forces, Mr. Reyes, Sergeant Reyes, reenlisted. We became a part of that ceremony to honor him for his commitment to our country.
We had a tremendous interaction with the general in charge of the 4th Infantry Division, General Odierno, who gave us a personal update as to the encounters that were taking place on a daily basis. In fact, I had a very moving experience there with General Odierno because one of my constituents, a 24-year-old young man who I had nominated to West Point, was killed in an attack back in the latter part of 2003.
As General Odierno was describing to us some of the attacks on his troops, he talked about a young 24-year-old that he had come to know, an outstanding leader whose convoy was attacked, whose troops came under heavy fire, who himself was hit, and in spite of his own injuries, continued to protect and save the lives of at least one and possibly two other soldiers before his life was snuffed out.
As the general talked, and as I described to him the 24-year-old that I had nominated to West Point, the general asked me his name. And I said Bernstein. He said Congressman, that is who I was talking about. He went to school with my son at West Point. I happen to have a 3-page letter with me from Lieutenant Bernstein's parents thanking me for the praise we had acknowledged for him to his family, including comments from those who knew the lieutenant, who had been touched by him during his brief life. I gave a copy of that letter to the general. He was very moved and presented me with the unit coin which I will present to the Bernstein family in remembrance of their son, a brave American hero.
Our visit with the troops in both Iraq and Afghanistan, Uzbekistan was to assess what they needed. We came back with the idea that they need more linguistic support, they need more UAVs, and we need better benefits and support for our Guard and Reservists who are serving so well. And that message was conveyed throughout the trip.
In leaving Iraq, we went to Islamabad and then flew into Afghanistan into the capital city of Kabul where we met with King Zahir Shah to assess his continuing role as the leader of that country, someone who helped us get the Afghanis to convene Aloya Jirga to bring together the leaders to establish a constitutional government.
In following the meeting with King Zahir Shah, we met with the leader of the government of Afghanistan, Hamid Karzai. He talked to the success only made possible by the leadership of the United States. In between we met with more of our troops.
Then we flew from Kabul up to our K2 base in Uzbekistan, a former Soviet military site where we spent a day and a half with the troops. Each member of our delegation walked through the wards. We went to the bedsides of those soldiers, some who had shrapnel wounds, some who had been shot in the leg, some who had piercings of the eyes, some who had skin diseases. And we told them that they were our heroes.
We met with those that were on the way out in transition, that were coming back to the States. In fact, we offered seats to 12 of those young soldiers who came back with us to America and then were taken to the Army medical facility here in Washington, D.C. for further treatment and eventual transport back to their districts.
We had two town meetings in the military base in K2. As we stayed overnight, we had dinner one night and breakfast the next morning with the troops. And during the evening and the morning, we had town meetings to allow the troops to tell us what was on their minds. They told us the good things and bad things; but without any question, Mr. Speaker, the morale of our troops in every visit we made was overwhelmingly positive. They knew why they were there. They were positive for being there. And they were happy that we came.
We delivered 10,000 Valentine's cards, made by schoolchildren all over America. We delivered 25 cases of Tasty Cakes so the troops could get a fresh taste of America and the treats that come from my hometown city of Philadelphia. We even brought over shirts from the Philadelphia Eagles. Unfortunately, not many wanted them because the Eagles had lost a terribly embarrassing game before in the playoffs, but we gave them out anyway.
Mr. Speaker, our trip was an overwhelming success. I am proud of those Members of Congress that went on this journey to try to improve relations with these nations, with these emerging democracies, and the conversion of this former arch enemy of ours.
Now, Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield to the gentleman from Indiana
(Mr. Souder) for whatever time he would like to consume, one of the stars on this trip. He was the only member of the delegation not on the Committee on Armed Services, the other five were; but he is a strong supporter of our military and, more importantly, he is the chairman of the oversight committee that oversees all of our anti-narcotics and abuse efforts worldwide. He has been a leader in helping the President and the administration deal with the problems of narcoterrorism, and he and his staff were there to specifically focus on that issue, and he did it extremely well at every stop. But it was a pleasure to have him with us. He has traveled in the past with me to Russia. And I was proud to have him as a colleague on this trip.
{time} 2115
Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Speaker, I first want to praise the gentleman for his continuing efforts in this often, and previously, ignored region of the world. He has been an expert in Russia for a long time. I believe he said 33 different trips to Russia, someone who is a familiar face there, who will go nose to nose with the Russians, and at the same time the Russians know he will be back again and again and again. He is our friend while he is also arguing with us.
I have watched the gentleman practice that in tough negotiations with Russia and prepare himself for the other types of things that he has been working with in this troubled region of the world.
He has spent time in the Ukraine, in Georgia. His commitment to Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan and the so-called ``Stans'' was there long before we had the focus in the recent post-9/11 issues. The gentleman was interested in this for a long time since the Republicans came into control in Congress and even before that in his career.
His efforts in North Korea. He has been in the world hot spots before they were known as the world hot spots; therefore, the particular trip that we were able to do, as the gentleman has explained tonight, we cannot overstate the gentleman's role and the connections and how these things are connected.
Because the gentleman is involved in the energy, he got to know Mohammar Khadafi's son, who would enable us to get into places we were never able to get in and help facilitate the breakthrough that we are having in Libya. The gentleman deserves that credit. No matter how many times it is said, the fact remains that we were able to get into places that we were not able to get into, that Americans would not have been able to get into had the gentleman not been spending a lot longer than just the most recent time, but time way before that. I thank the gentleman very much for that.
Let me kind of reinforce a couple of things that the gentleman said. First, I would like to start with Libya because there were many of us, and let me just in my little piece that I got to say to the leader, Mr. Khadaffi, it was very clear. I said, look, I am a fundamentalist Christian. I am a strong supporter of Israel. I am one of your critics. But at the same time, and I did not particularly like some of the things he was claiming to be, this great democracy and how great socialism was working. We did not agree. But he said it in a debating type of way, probably a little nicer than some of the debate we had here earlier this evening. It was a good discussion. He seems to want to start to communicate.
While I found some of the things he said offensive or in disagreement, the bottom line is he took a huge step to open up a country that was previously and still is on our terrorist list, that may be networking; and those of us who have seen all sorts of classified things know we have Libyan suspects all over the world for potential networks suspects. If he shuts this down, if he shuts this nuclear development down, look, I am willing to sit through a few lectures. I am willing to talk. If somebody can be moved off the terrorist list, if somebody can be moved off the nuclear list, we can sit down and talk. It does not mean that we are apologizing or that we are agreeing with past things. Okay. What is done is done.
If we have a chance at a time when we are under assault all over the world to find a friend who wants to fight al Qaeda, who wants to take on bin Laden, who wants to dismantle, and on the whole I would just as soon they did health research and tried to figure out how to put their nuclear research into desalinization of water. They want our help to try to figure out how to get more water in Libya so they can irrigate. And that is a lot better than developing bombs to blow up our people.
His comment that you referred to where he said, we do not know much about Libya, partly we will never know that much about Libya. And some of it was rhetoric and frustration we hear all around the world. But you know what, we did just not know much about Libya. I love to study history. We did not know hardly anything about Libya. Apparently, our government does not either.
They were telling the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon) that we cannot land there. We do not know how we will be received. They will be hostile. There will be no press coverage. And we landed, and there is not any other way to state this, it was the friendliest place I've even been on a CODEL.
Everybody was so excited to see us. Once the leader said, this is okay, all this Americanism is pouring out. The gentleman mentioned the university. They want to get our education. The 38 of the top 40 people have been educated in America. The U.S.-Libyan Friendship Society, there is hundreds of people waiting 3 hours to have lunch with a few Congressmen.
The excitement of the whole trip there, you go, something is a disconnect. We do not understand. And at one of the dinners where the Libyan husband of an American citizen asked me, Are you guys over here just to tick off the French? And I said, What? I said, I hate to be an ignorant American here, but why would we be ticking off the French? He said, You do not understand. In North Africa, Libya, Tunisia, Algeria, the French and the Italians are viewed as the occupiers. The Americans came in in World War II and liberated us. We like America. And I am thinking, no, no, these are the guys that hate us.
It is not that we just do not know much about Libya; we do not know anything. We had it backwards. If they are willing to work with us, hey, look, it is trust but verify. They could have taken us into a nuclear facility.
The gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon) knew more than I did because he has been to Russia so many times, he goes, oh, that is a Russian system. Were you working with this university? Were you working with that university? It is clear that the pressure that President Reagan put on communism to get the fall of the Berlin Wall and the change in Russia meant that it also dried up a lot of the assistance they were getting in Libya. And then they had to go into the market to pick up a few things. That knowledge, while the gentleman knows a lot, quite frankly, he said repeatedly, look, there is only so much we can do. The President makes these decisions. We can input. We can help once it goes through, how to put these plans together, but the bottom line is we want nuclear scientists to look at their nuclear facilities. We want experts to verify what we have heard.
What we see is they need it economically. His son, who is the next potential leader, wants to change the country. He is being schooled at the London School of Economics. When you go into Tunisia, you can see the differences between there and Libya. So can all their people next door. They have reasons to want to change. He does not want to be caught in a spider hole like Saddam was.
All the evidence suggests that this is real. What the chairman said, to go up to Libya, was a huge breakthrough. The administration is moving rapidly and this may be one of the biggest things in our life time that saves lots. And it is much to the gentleman's credit, and it was a great stop in Libya.
I only want to mention one thing about Iraq because I agree with everything the gentleman has stated about that, from everything to morale to others; but I supported and the gentleman mentioned about getting General Dayton in here and the weapons of mass destruction, trying to understand that the consultants somehow got more high profile than the people that are actually running the weapons of mass destruction program, that there are multiple directions here; but what I wanted to comment on particularly was the spider hole itself.
It taught me something else with this that I have been trying to communicate back home as well. That hole was not very big. I am not a particularly big person, maybe a little overweight but not that much, but I did not fit into the hole very well. The bigger you were, the tighter it was. The taller you were, the tighter it was. It was a very small hole.
What we heard was that there was inside information, we had already been to that farm twice looking for it, looking for him. Saw nothing. Then inside information, not voluntarily given, told them where it was. They went in with Special Forces and still did not find it. Found a different hole. Then they had to go back and get a drawn map to go.
First off, if you think of the hole as very small and the part where he would go down into basically like a casket with a higher ceiling, there was not much room when you got down in there. You could not move barely at all.
No wonder he was disoriented. If he had American troops tromping around above him while they are making several visits with a little tube going down, he was probably getting very little oxygen, it was dark, there was no food, it is not like it is a lighted well-structured cell. It was a little dirt box that he was in. And if it is that hard by the time they put the grass over the top of it and something over the top of that, there was no way even Special Forces with a map could find it. Put this in the context of weapons of mass destruction.
If you cannot find Saddam when you have a map from his top staffers, and you have your top forces searching for it with a map and it takes you two runs, we may never find some of this stuff. Just because we do not find it does not mean it does not exist. We have already proven it was worthwhile to go in there because they were clearly developing.
The other thing was in going down to the Believer's Palace at the bottom, when we went down and saw the supposed place where he would feed back all this stuff to us and we were one of the first groups, I believe they had just opened up the basement there, and you saw the ability to put 200 of his special guards and his cabinet and himself in there. What we saw was not only the masks that you always hear about, chemical and biological masks, but they had controls on the wall for different types of chemical and biological weapons to control the air systems and other things. This guy was not preparing for conventional war.
Whether he was preparing now or a year from now or 2 years from now may be debated, but he was getting ready to fight an unconventional war.
In Afghanistan, which was one of my primary goals to talk again to President Karzai, who I met here as well as the former King, about narcotics. Afghan heroin is again flooding the market. We have major obligations here with Afghanistan. As the King said in Rome, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon) took the first delegation in. We followed shortly after that, and the King told me at that time, we used to grow all sorts of crops where they now do poppy, and Afghanistan is often remembered when there is trouble, but then you forget us because we are a poor country that gets run over by all the major powers. My people are hungry.
I have never seen a country without a middle class or even nice hotels. It was a suburb of hell, quite frankly, in Kabul. They need help. Yet at the same time, I think 85 percent of the people turned out in a recent election even though al Qaeda was threatening to kill them. They are excited. They have a multiparty system, multicandidates running.
We have to figure out how to get them off the heroin because their farmers are not making that much from heroin. It is going to middle men. And these middle men that are making the money are often tied to the terrorist networks. They use narcotics, human trafficking and other illegal substances to fund it. So what I was trying to explain and President Karzai has been helpful, the general, the nephew I think of the King, said that we need Special Forces, Afghani Special Forces to go in after the heroin because the RPGs and the bombs and the suicide bombers are getting funded in Afghanistan largely by the fact that when the heroin poppy goes into market, that money then gets to middle men who take that money to buy armaments and to build al Qaeda and other terrorist networks around the world.
It is a very close link between drugs and terrorism, a very close link to reestablishing the control in Afghanistan. They have the will. They are turning out to vote at greater rates than we are. They are excited about the freedom. Women have their first freedom. We have an American-educated leader who really is dynamic in what he wants to do in Afghanistan, a King who has shown his commitment for 40 years and then transferring it to democratic power there.
I was hopeful for Afghanistan even though it is a very tough country that has been abused by every major power through world history for hundreds and hundreds of years. This was an eye-opening trip. It was a tremendous privilege to be allowed on it.
I commend the gentleman for leading a breakthrough in Libya, major steps in Iraq, and showing the courage to go into Afghanistan even when people were telling us, the day we were still going in, do not go in there. It is not safe right now; we went in. President Karzai was able to go in front of his media and say, look, the Americans are here. They are backing us up. They are not bailing out just because two suicide bombers hit us in the last few days and somebody hit an ammunition dump. We are not retreating. This is real. It is not just the President; it is the Congress that is behind you.
I thank the gentleman for his leadership.
Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I want to add a comment about the role of this body and members of foreign policy.
There are some who say that Members of Congress should not travel overseas or travel to countries that we are having problems with.
I will say that is absolutely, totally wrong. There are some within the State Department who take offense to the fact that Members of Congress will travel to countries like this. Let me say to my colleagues in this body, many of you will be here for 10 years or 20 years. If you focus on one country or a group of countries, you will have far more opportunities to specialize in that country than a State Department official who spends 3 years in one post and moves on someplace else.
There is a very real and substantive role for Members of Congress to play, and we must play it. This is not a case where the executive branch controls everything and we are just subservient to them. We are an equal part of the Federal Government, and we have the responsibility because we appropriate the dollars, we levy the taxes, and we oversee the way the money is spent, to travel to these countries, to open doors, to look for new ways to establish relationships, and to support the administration, which we did on this trip as we have on every major trip. But there is a role for the Congress to play.
I am convinced that Members of Congress can play an extremely constructive role because we do not have to act as diplomats. We do not have to watch how we sit, how we sip our tea, what words did we use, because we are not representing the President. We are not representing the Secretary of State. We are representing ourselves. The members of Congress on this CODEL, as it has been on every CODEL that I have been a part of, did a fantastic job on behalf of America.
{time} 2130
Mr. Speaker, I would like to at this point in time place the trip report in the Record, filed as a part of our process as we do for every trip that gives the American people and our colleagues a complete, factual understanding of what we did, where we went and how we represented our country.
I am proud of this delegation, Democrats and Republicans alike, opening new doors to help in the security of not just America but of all those countries that want peace around the world.
Congressional Delegation (CODEL) Weldon to Libya, Tunisia, Kuwait,
Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Uzbekistan, and Germany--January 25-31,
2004
Summary
A bipartisan congressional delegation (CODEL) led by Representative Curt Weldon (R-PA), traveled to Tripoli, Libya; Tunis, Tunisia; Kuwait City, Kuwait; Baghdad, Balad Air Base, and Ad Dawr, Iraq; Islamabad, Pakistan; Kabul, Afghanistan; Karshi Kharnabad (``K2''), Uzbekistan; and Ramstein Air Base and Landstuhl Regional Medical Center, Germany January 25-31, 2004. The delegation met with the leadership of Libya, Afghanistan, and Iraqi Governing Council representatives, the former Kuwaiti Ambassador to the United States, reviewed U.S. military operations and visited personnel supporting Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) in Kuwait and Iraq and Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Uzbekistan. The delegation included:
Representative Curt Weldon (R-PA)Representative Solomon Ortiz (D-TX)Representative Steve Israel (D-NY)Representative Rodney Alexander (D-LA)Representative Candice Miller (R-MI)Representative Elton Gallegly (R-CA)Representative Mark Souder (R-IN)Representative Darrell Issa (R-CA)
A listing of the complete delegation and key personnel contacted at each location is provided at attachments 1 and 2, respectively.Libya, January 25-26
The delegation was the first bipartisan congressional delegation to meet with Colonel Moammar Gaddafi in 35 years. Fourteen other meetings were held with senior ministry, legislative, educational, and charitable foundation officials. The discussions with Colonel Gaddafi and all other senior leaders were extraordinarily positive regarding the potential for normalized relations between Libya and the U.S. The delegation encouraged the Libyan leader to follow through on his encouraging public statements regarding elimination of Libyan weapons of mass destruction (WMD) programs, with swift, verifiable elimination of those programs. Further, the delegation spoke with Libyan leaders regarding numerous public and private cooperative science, technology, environmental, health care, economic development, and energy-related programs that could be developed and instituted immediately upon normalization of relations. The delegation also delivered introductory letters from American University students to students of Al Fateh University in Tripoli.
Colonel Gaddafi thanked Chairman Weldon for making the visit possible: ``coming at a very critical time''--observing that he wished that ``such a meeting could have taken place thirty years ago'' and stating his hope ``to be able to compensate for what we missed.'' He commented at length on the need for countries to communicate and engage in dialogue before taking up arms against one another. He denied any responsibility for the night club bombing in 1986 that led to the U.S. bombing of Libya and the death of his step daughter:
``For 30 years we haven't discussed anything with each other . . . taking the wrong approach right from the beginning, with wars, losses, damage, loss of valuable time, without a good, specific reason for doing so . . . The picture of Gaddafi (in the U.S.) is not a real one. When I took the decision on elimination of weapons of mass destruction, I did it for my people, out of conviction . . . If I had the atomic bomb I would put it on the table. There is no reason for Libya and the United States not to have good relations. The right course is the one you have taken: to come here and meet . . . the policies were wrong in the past. We can't rectify such wrongs . . . We have to compensate for what we have missed. . . I highly value your visit because it is necessary that you know us very well. Because once you know us well, then you will take the appropriate policy decisions.''
He further commented regarding what he believed to be a lack of knowledge in the U.S. about Libya's government:
``Americans don't even know the governing system in Libya. We know the governing system in the U.S.: the White House, the NSC (National Security Council), Congress . . . We know about the Pentagon. We know about the newspapers, one by one. We even know the writers. We know names of companies and specializations. Nevertheless, Americans don't know anything about our congresses, peoples' committees, revolutionary committees, social structure, leadership, or anything about the Green Book.''
Colonel Gaddafi also mentioned criticism from Arab countries he said was aimed at Libya for deciding to eliminate its WMD programs:
``In the past year there have been bad mediators. Tunisia, Egypt and other Arab countries see it as not in their best interest for Libya and the United States to have good relations. These countries are benefiting from the embargo and seek a continuation of the embargo for their own interests. How would you expect them to work for good relations between Libya and America? The Arabs are waging a fierce campaign against us for deciding to get rid of WMD. I hope they are not successful in taking revenge against us. I hope that even Libyans are not sorry for taking such a step. It all depends on your supporting us. It does deserve support and encouragement so that Libyans won't be disappointed.''
Chairman Weldon stated that before coming to Libya the delegation had been told by U.S. officials of the positive attitude taken by Libyans in cooperating with the survey of Libyan WMD programs and initial steps to eliminate WMD programs:
``There is no doubt in my mind that your policies and leadership will lead to normalized relations between our countries. Even President Bush, in his recent State of the Union message, mentioned Libya as a model for other countries. You have to understand that President Bush has been criticized by elements of our society for calling Libya a model, just as you have been criticized by Arab leaders who want to see Libya and America stay apart.''
Chairman Weldon indicated that normalization of relations between the two countries would permit initiatives to be undertaken between the Libyan General Peoples' Congress and the U.S. Congress, much like has been done with the Russian Duma and other parliaments, to further governmental and non-governmental cooperation between peoples of the two countries, leading to better understanding, peaceful cooperation, and providing for a better quality of life for all peoples: ``The path forward will not be easy, good things have to be worked for . . . I am convinced that if we work as hard on our side as you have on your side, we can start a new chapter in our relationship, without make judgments about your country or your culture, but to work together, as partners.''Kuwait-Iraq, January 26-28
The delegation traveled to Baghdad to meet with and receive updates from L. Paul Bremer, Administrator of the Coalition Provisional Authority; General Sanchez, Commander, Joint Task Force Seven; the Iraq Survey Group, responsible for the search for weapons of mass destruction; representatives of the primary factions of the Iraqi Governing Council; and the Deputy Commanding General, 1st Armored Division, responsible for the security of Baghdad.
Four members of the delegation met with Sheik Saud al Sabah, former Kuwaiti Ambassador to the United States, to renew acquaintances and discuss the general political, economic, and military situation in the region. Sheik Sabah has personally established a fund for families of U.S. military personnel killed in the 1991 Gulf War.
Coalition Provisional Authority
Ambassador Bremer indicated that work continues on formulating the strategic framework for Iraqi security, its economy, and political transition. He noted that while the security situation had improved, there still exists a major terrorist threat. He further stated that the ``consumption economy'' is working well, but structural problems exist, largely due to the distorting economic effects of five cents a gallon gasoline. The focus is in getting capital into the economy. Work continues, as well, on the transition to a National Assembly by July 1, 2004. Differences within the Governing Council and among the general populace on the selection of delegates by caucus or direct election continue to cause significant debate and public demonstrations. Ambassador Bremer noted that an announcement is due in the near future from the United Nations on its recommendations on elections in Iraq based on the results of a study completed by a visiting United Nations team.
CJTF-7
General Sanchez indicated that the number of attacks by former regime elements, foreign terrorists, and others had continued to decline since the capture of Hussein, now averaging less than 20 per day, down from a high of 50 per day.
Iraqi Governing Council
The delegation met with four members of the Iraqi Governing Council (IGC), representing the primary political and religious factions within Iraq. The President of the IGC, Dr. Adrian Pachachi, a secularist, indicated the Council was in the final phase of establishing basic laws, establishing the details of a provisional government, and completing the constitution. Dr. Pachachi further indicated his belief that the draft constitution covers every conceivable right: freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, the rule of law, etc. Three of the four council members--Dr. Pachachi, the Sunni, and Shia IGC Members--were unanimous in stating their views that it is an oversimplification to conclude that individual Iraqi religious affiliation dictates the views of the Iraqi people on various policy issues: ``the reality is that the fanatics are a tiny minority, but very vocal and very well organized.'' The Sunni IGC member indicated that Sunni and Shia will vote on the issues, not on the basis of religion, but on the substance of the issues under consideration--``the educated middle class in Iraq is much more open minded.''
The Kurdish member stated that the Kurds live under a different system and different culture, observing that they have suffered under Iraqi rule, and ``have the right to establish their own way.'' Dr. Pachachi, acknowledged that
``from the beginning we have recognized that the Kurds are distinct, that their special status will be maintained. We are in the process of agreeing to that arrangement.'' Dr. Pachachi further indicated that the problem at hand is deciding the best way to select members of the legislature:
``The problem is that it will be difficult to have credible elections in such a short period . . . If the UN doesn't believe elections are possible, they will likely propose other possibilities.''
Iraq Survey Group
Major General Keith Dayton, Director of the Iraqi Survey Group, provided a classified update on the search for weapons of mass destruction and counter terrorism programs. A common misperception is that Dr. Kay headed the hunt for WMD. While Dr. Kay has been a very valuable advisor in the hunt for WMD, General Dayton has headed the group responsible for the hunt for WMD since its inception in June 2003, and with Dr. Kay's departure, will continue to head the group.
What can be said about the delegations' discussions is that there, the people in the trenches actually doing the day-to-day searches, collecting, and analyzing the data and material, expressed a sense of ``frustration and dismay'' over ``what Dr Kay is doing''--or at least some of the media's characterizations of ``what Dr. Kay is doing,'' as he exits from his high visibility role in the hunt for WMD.
The ISG has responsibilities beyond the sole search for WMD. Although not the Commander of the ISG, but responsible as the special advisor for WMD, apparently Dr. Kay sought total control of all the assets under the ISG for the sole purpose of the hunt for WMD. It was a matter of ``all or nothing.'' And when he didn't get all of the assets--even when those assets were increased to provide additional funds for areas other than the search for WMD, Dr. Kay objected, ultimately being a factor in his departure.
Those responsible for the search for WMD in Iraq believe that while no large stockpiles of WMD have yet to be uncovered, no shortage of leads exist--with literally tens-of-millions of documents remaining to be fully examined and considerable leads and circumstantial evidence to be pursued--``with much remaining to be done.''
General Dayton believes the declared failure by some to yet find large stockpiles of nuclear, chemical, or biological weapons is premature and ignores the significance of the evidence that has been found about the undisputed activities in each of these areas providing evidence of future intentions and breakout capabilities being pursued and proven to have existed. In the nuclear area, Dr. Kay said as recently as January 28 that, ``Look, the man had the intent to acquire these weapons, he invested huge amounts of money in them. The fact is he wasn't successful.''
In the end, Dr. Kay's judgment, regardless of the disappointment resident in the ISG, came down on the side of the continued search. In an interview on NBC in which he was asked to comment on whether it was prudent to go to war, Dr. Kay said ``I think it was absolutely prudent. In fact, I think at the end of the inspection process we'll paint a picture of Iraq that was far more dangerous than we even thought it was before the war . . .''
Balad Air Base-Ad Dawr
At Balad Air Base, the delegation met with the Commanding General of the 4th Infantry Division, Major General Mike Odierno and the Commander, Third Brigade, 4th ID, Colonel Fred Rudesheim. The delegation also visited the capture site of Saddam Hussein at Ad Dawr. At each stop the Members had an opportunity to meet with military personnel from their home states and districts.Afghanistan, January 29
The delegation met with President Hamid Karzai and the former King of Afghanistan, Zahir Shah. President Karzai expressed his appreciation to the delegation for the many sacrifices made by America to further political stability, economic progress, and increased employment in Afghanistan and for America's continued war on terrorism . . . ``Our people know what America has done.'' He described the Loya Jirga process, the adoption of the Afghan Constitution, patterned after the U.S. Constitution, and the anticipated general elections.
President Hamid Karzai
President Karzai cited the key importance of Pakistan to stability in Afghanistan, by not interfering in Afghan affairs, yet assisting in elimination of the Taliban threat. The President and the delegation discussed the significant problem of continued high levels of poppy cultivation in Afghanistan. President Karzai acknowledged. Afghanistan's failed efforts to eliminate poppy cultivation and described the government's plan to destroy poppy fields, while assisting farmers in alternative crop cultivation, interdiction of drug routes, and destruction of heroin production labs. The President concluded that for Afghanistan to emerge as a nation-state it has to destroy the poppy crop:
``to destroy terrorism, we must destroy poppies.'' The delegation cited its support and commitment to Afghanistan,
``for the long haul.''
His Highness, Zahir Shah
The former King, Zahir Shah, thanked the delegation for U.S. assistance in establishing peace and security in Afghanistan. He observed that the political process in Afghanistan is based on a tribal structure--a democracy that functions within a tribal structure--with the same goals as the people in America.
Uzbekistan, January 29-30
Following meetings in Kabul, the delegation traveled to Karshi-Kharnabad (``K2''), Uzbekistan, to visit U.S. military personnel supporting OEF. In addition to being able to speak informally at the evening and breakfast meals with personnel from their districts, the delegation received mission orientated briefings, toured a mission aircraft, and viewed a static display of a Uzbek Air Force SU-27.Germany, January 30-31
Commander, USAF Europe and U.S. Consul General
General ``Doc'' Foglesong and Consul General (CG) Peter Bodde discussed NATO-related military and regional political issues. General Foglesong described the challenges posed by making the NATO Response Force (NRF) viable given the current limited expeditionary capabilities of the NRF. He also described the efforts at re-sizing NATO and U.S. operations--
``mining manpower positions''--and the use of ``reach back capabilities'' to allow functions in the U.S. such as intelligence to support the European theater instead of having to have the capability resident in Europe. General Foglesong further described efforts to develop niche capabilities among NATO partners to preclude all nations from having to have all military capabilities with some developing expeditionary capabilities for billeting, some with medical, others with civil engineering, etc.
Representative Souder expressed his deep concern regarding Austria's, France's, Turkey's and Germany's various degrees of lack of support for U.S. operations in Iraq. He also commented on the cumbersome rules of engagement within NATO in the war in Kosovo. General Foglesong indicated his
``cautious optimism'' about relations and support in dealing with the countries within NATO: ``They recognize that terrorists don't recognize borders.''
Representative Ortiz, expressing frustration, observed that
``it would be nice if the State Department would consider us
(Congress) equal players,'' indicating the both State and Defense Departments frequently take action without consultation or regard for the views of Congress.
Chairman Weldon concluded that regardless of the some troubling aspects in the execution of foreign policy and some military operations, ``the American peoples' support and the support of Congress for the troops are solid and unequivocal--and the troops need to know that.''
Contingency Aero-medical Staging Facility & Lanstuhl Regional Medical
Center
The delegation visited with injured military personnel from Afghanistan and Iraq at the Landstuhl Regional Medical Center and Aero-medical Staging Facility at Ramstein Air Base. The delegation was pleased to provide transportation for ten soldiers, awaiting transportation to the U.S. to continue their treatment at Walter Reed Army Medical Center for injuries suffered in Iraq.
Political, Economic, and Security Environment
The CODEL visit to Libya came shortly after Libyan leader Moammar Gaddafi's pledge to rid his country of weapons of mass destruction.
The Iraq visit took place six weeks after the capture of Saddam Hussein near Ad Dawr and nine months after the declared end to major combat operations in Iraq. In October 2003, Congress had approved President Bush's $87 billion fiscal year 2004 supplemental request for military, intelligence, and reconstruction costs in Iraq and Afghanistan. Acts of terrorism being conducted by former regime elements, fundamentalist extremists, foreign terrorists, and common criminals against coalition forces and Iraqi civilians continued to cause casualties, although at a reduced rate since Hussein's capture and the end of Ramadan. The Iraqi people, particularly the police, have increasingly become the target of the random terrorist attacks.
The Afghanistan visit came shortly after the adoption of the Afghanistan constitution by the ``Loya Jirga.'' Lingering Taliban elements and Al Qaeda continued efforts to threaten the evolution of democratic Afghanistan through intimidation and sporadic terrorist attacks against coalition forces, non-governmental international aid organizations and Afghans.
Overview
A bipartisan congressional delegation (CODEL) comprised of eight Members of Congress, led by Representative Curt Weldon
(R-PA), traveled to Tripoli, Libya; Tunis, Tunisia; Kuwait City, Kuwait; Baghdad, Balad Air Base, and Ad Dawr, Iraq; Islamabad, Pakistan; Kabul, Afghanistan; Karshi Kharnabad
(``K2''), Uzbekistan; and Ramstein Air Base and Landstuhl Regional Medical Center, Germany January 25-31, 2004. The delegation met with the leadership of Libya and Afghanistan, representatives of the Iraqi governing Council (IGC), the former Kuwaiti Ambassador to the U.S., reviewed U.S. military operations and visited personnel supporting Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) in Kuwait and Iraq and Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Uzbekistan. In addition, thousands of Valentines Day cards from U.S. school children as well as other gifts were presented to U.S. troops serving in OIF and OEF in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Uzbekistan in the war against terrorism.Tripoli, Libya, January 25-26
The delegation was the first bipartisan congressional delegation to visit Libya and meet with Colonel Moammar Gaddafi in 35 years.
Arrival Meeting
The delegation was met by a delegation led by Abdullatife Aldali, Chairman of the Tripoli Conference, who welcomed the delegation: ``We look forward to a new relationship between Libya and America.''
Following an introduction of the delegation, Chairman Weldon indicated the delegation was in Libya to open a new chapter in U.S.-Libyan relations, to listen and learn from its Libyan counterparts: ``There are strong U.S. interests in both political parties to be friends with Libya, to work to resolve common concerns. We don't come here to represent the Secretary of State or the President, but as representatives of a coequal branch of the United States Government, looking forward to normalized relations between our countries.'' Chairman Weldon described many of the inter-parliamentary relationships Congress has with the parliaments in Russia, Ukraine, Uzbekistan, Azerbaijan, and the European Parliament and indicated his hope that there would one day be a similar relationship with the General Peoples' Congress Great Jamahiriya of Libya.
Representative Ortiz indicated that there is much to be gained by both countries by being friends and thanked the hosts for their warm welcome.
Overview of Ministry, Legislative, Educational, & Foundation Meetings
The delegation met with Colonel Gaddafi for two hours and had fourteen other meetings with senior ministry, legislative, educational, and charitable foundations. The delegation spoke with the Libyan leaders about cooperative governmental and non-governmental programs that could be developed and instituted, much like has been done with the parliaments of other countries. Chairman Weldon noted that discussions regarding such programs could be started immediately upon normalization of relations.
Chairman Weldon prefaced each of the discussions with Libyan leaders with an explanation of the congressional role in the U.S. federal system of separate, but equal branches of government: ``We are not here to negotiate, that is the responsibility of the executive branch of our government. But after you take the necessary steps to follow through on your stated intention to eliminate your WMD programs, Congress can encourage our President and Secretary of State to expedite normalization of relations with your country. Following that, we can work with you, like we have with a number of other parliaments around the world, to establish governmental and non-governmental programs to bring our two countries closer together and improve the welfare of both our peoples.'' The discussions with Colonel Gaddafi and all other senior leaders with whom the delegation met were extraordinarily positive regarding the potential for normalized relations between Libya and the U.S.
Colonel Gaddafi
Colonel Gaddafi thanked Chairman Weldon for making the visit possible: ``coming at a very critical time,'' observing that he wished that ``such a meeting could have taken place thirty years ago'' and stating his ``hope to be able to compensate for what we missed.'' He commented at length on the need for countries to communicate and engage in dialogue before taking up arms against one another. He denied any responsibility for the night club bombing in 1986 that led to the U.S. bombing of Libya and the death of his step daughter:
``For 30 years we haven't discussed anything with each other . . . taking the wrong approach, right from the beginning, with wars, losses, damage, loss of valuable time, without a good, specific reason for doing so . . . The picture of Gaddafi in the U.S. is not a real one. When I took the decision on elimination of weapons of mass destruction, I did it for my people, out of conviction . . . If I had the atomic bomb I would put it on the table. There is no reason for Libya and the United States not to have good relations. The right course is the one you have taken: to come here and meet . . . the policies were wrong in the past. We can't rectify such wrongs . . . We have to compensate for what we have missed. . . .I highly value your visit because it is necessary that you know us very well. Because once you know us well, then you will take the appropriate policy decision.''
He further commented at length at what he believed to be a lack of knowledge in the U.S. about Libya's government:
``You don't even know the governing system in Libya. We know the governing system in the U.S.: the White House, the NSC (national security council), Congress. We know about the Pentagon. We know about the newspapers, one by one. We even know the writers. We know names of companies and specializations. Nevertheless, Americans don't know anything about our congresses, peoples' committees, revolutionary committees, social structure, leadership, or anything about the Green Book.''
Colonel Gaddafi commented on the criticism he said was aimed at Libya for deciding to eliminate its WMD programs:
``In the past there have been bad mediators. Tunisia, Egypt and other Arab countries see it as not in their best interests for Libya and the United States to have good relations. They are benefiting from the embargo and seek a continuation for their own interests. How would you expect them to work for good relations between Libya and America? The Arabs are waging a fierce campaign against us for deciding to get rid of WMD. I hope they are not successful in taking revenge against us. I hope that even Libyans are not sorry for taking such a step. It all depends on your supporting us. It does deserve support and encouragement so that Libyans won't be disappointed.''
Chairman Weldon stated that before coming to Libya the delegation had been told by U.S. officials of the positive attitude taken by Libyans in cooperating with the survey of Libyan WMD programs and initial steps to implement the WMD program elimination.
``There is no doubt in my mind that your policies and leadership will lead to normalized relations between our countries. Even President Bush, in his recent State of the Union message, mentioned Libya as a model for other countries. You have to understand that President Bush has been criticized by elements of our society for calling Libya a model, just as you have been criticized by Arab leaders who want to see Libya and America stay apart.''
Chairman Weldon indicated that normalization of relations between the two countries would permit initiatives to be undertaken between the Libyan General Peoples' Congress and the U.S. Congress, much like has been done with the Russian Duma and other parliaments, to further government and non-governmental cooperation between peoples of the two countries, leading to better understanding, peaceful cooperation, and providing for a better quality of life for all people: ``The path forward will not be easy, but most good things you have to work hard for . . . I am convinced that if we work hard on our side as you have on your side, we can start a new chapter in our relationship, not to judge your country, your culture, but to work together, as partners.''
The delegation encouraged the Libyan leader to follow through on his encouraging public statements regarding elimination of Libyan weapons of mass destruction (WMD) programs, with swift, verifiable elimination of WMD programs.
General Peoples' Congress Great Jamahiriya
Zinati Zinati, Speaker of the General Peoples' Congress Great Jamahiriya, welcomed the delegation and expressed his appreciation for the ``extraordinary effort'' the delegation took to be in Libya: `` This is evidence of the great will on your part to develop, promote and enhance relations between our two countries.'' The Speaker provided the delegation with a general overview of the structure of the ``basic congresses'' and the General People's Congress, the annual legislative agenda, and the Libya legislative procedures.
Chairman Weldon noted that the delegation was the first U.S. bipartisan delegation to visit Libya in over 35 years. He expressed his appreciation for the warm reception and how this portended very productive discussions. The Chairman also cited the gratifying experience of the delegation shortly after the official arrival when the delegation had been able to take advantage of a short period before the beginning of the official itinerary to visit the nearby souq (market). There, the delegation had an opportunity to meet several Libyans, including small children, shopping and tending their stores, who in each and every case warmly greeted the members of the delegation, often in English.
Chairman Weldon indicated that the delegation had come to Libya to praise Col Gaddafi for the ``bold steps he had taken to begin to bring our countries back together.''
``The positive steps Libya has taken in settling international claims against Libya; agreeing to rejoin international non-proliferation organizations and treaties; and declared intentions to deal with weapons of mass destruction have been very well received around the world. In fact the focus of the world is on Libya. It is a positive focus, that can lead to normalized relations between our countries. We came to let your Congress know that once normalized relations can be established, that our Congress can work with you, like we have done with the parliaments of Ukraine, Russia, Europe, and other parliaments to establish cooperative programs for the benefit of both our peoples.''
Chairman Weldon further described the detailed program established with the Russian Duma outlined in A New Time, A New Beginning, as described in attachment 3, prepared by members of the U.S. Congress, that was promulgated for the purpose of providing a catalyst for Russia and the U.S. to work together to benefit the peoples of both countries. He explained that a similar program and process for implementation could be established between Libya and the U.S. once normalized relations could be achieved. He further states ``that, something more fundamentally important that can occur is to change the image of Libya in America, and the world. The American people have a limited knowledge of Libya. By enhancing our formal relationship between our parliaments we would have an opportunity to further understanding between our peoples.''
Representative Ortiz commented that ``someone has a vision to get us together and I want to thank my Chairman for his vision.'' Mr. Ortiz quoted LBJ (Lyndon Baines Johnson):
``Let's sit down and reason together.'' Adding, ``that is what we are here to do today. There have been incidents that have caused us to drift apart. We can't change history, but we don't want to repeat it . . . We have taken the first step. I come from Texas and we have had a great relationship with Libya in the past. We have only been here a few hours, but I like what I see and I like what I hear. For the sake of the future generations, we need to give them a chance to hope, to dream, and to plan. We pledge we will do everything to strengthen the bonds between our two countries.''
Chairman Weldon thanked the Speaker for the efforts of Saif al Saleem al Gaddafi, Colonel Gaddafi's son, and Abdulmagid Mansouri, a member of the International Energy Advisory Council for their efforts in facilitating the visit of the delegation. Chairman Weldon further stated that: ``I am happy we are opening a new door between our countries and I want to keep that door open and not repeat the tragedies of the past.''
Suleiman Al Shahoumi, Secretary of Foreign Affairs of the General Peoples' Congress, observed that:
``Libya is a small country that inherited an ancient system with people living in poverty and experiencing starvation. The revolution in 1969 sought to bring up the level of life for the Libyan people. The Libyan people have chosen a political system--a direct democracy--in harmony with Libya's culture and principles in life . . . A system based on placing all authority in the hands of the people, distributed through 450 Peoples' Basic Congresses. This system is independent and balanced . . . The policies of these congresses support national liberation for states and nations and call for the respect of human rights and condemns all forms of terrorism. This policy also believes that the only way to resolve conflicts is through dialogue, calling for peace, stability, and order and cooperation between peoples and states. This policy believes that prosperity is achieved through democracy and development. Therefore Libya, thanks to the revolution, has been able to provide all types of rights to the people: utilities, education, human resources, housing, fresh water--all related to mankind. In spite of the term human rights not being precisely defined, my country has signed onto all treaties related to human rights.''
Secretary Shahoumi, commenting on terrorism, cited the difficulty in ``differentiating between terrorism and the legitimate right of nations and peoples to fight for their freedom and human rights.'' He added that, ``we deny and refuse the ways of connecting terrorism and Islam because we believe terrorism has no religion, has no state or country or home, and has no nationality.''
In commenting on weapons of mass destruction, the Secretary noted that ever since the 1969 Revolution, Libya has been calling for making the Middle East a region free of weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear weapons:
``But nobody has ever responded to this initiative. Therefore because of no response to our initiative, we thought as a small country, a modest way to protect ourselves was to establish WMD as part of our defense policy. However, after breakthroughs in resolving conflicts like UTA and Lockerbie and because of serious thoughts of the international community to get rid of WMD, Libya decided to formally announce its decision to dismantle its WMD programs. In this regard, we wish to express our deep appreciation for the positive international response to our initiative and we again call for making the region a WMD-free zone. As a step to that end, Libya has signed all relevant treaties and conventions related to this topic, including treaties banning all types of experiments related to WMD . . . And we call on your support to make the Middle East a WMD-free zone.''
The Secretary further provided his view that the people of Libya believe and have in fact published a White Book on the topic of peace in the Middle East. He indicated the White Book makes a ``practical and persuasive case'' for making Israel and Palestine a ``bi-state country,'' modeled after South Africa, with Muslims, Jews, and Christians all living together with ``all rights and duties.''
Representative Issa observed that Libya's stated intent to eliminate its WMD programs represents a ``huge step'' toward the goal of a WMD-free Middle East: ``Your offer made in Beirut two years ago to normalize relations with Israel was also a huge step . . . I will have to admit that I am a little cynical that Palestinians and Jews should join into one country so readily. Your dream is still a good one. Either option is acceptable to me. I hope you will join us in seeking either option as an acceptable approach to achieving peace in the Middle East.''
Prime Minister
Prime Minister Shokri Ghanem observed that strained relations between Libya and the U.S. existed due to
``misunderstandings or misfortunes,'' and Libya wishes to change that.
Representative Issa stated that it is important to sustain the momentum that has developed in normalizing relations:
``Momentum is like magic when it works . . . it is about expectations. Colonel Gaddafi turned on a dime in an amazing way. With no missteps, the U.S. could have an Embassy here in 300 days.''
Prime Minister Ghanem stated that ``with good intentions, with each party trying to understand one another,'' differences can be worked out: ``When we talk we understand one another. You are a big country--a super power--we are a small country, yet neither of us has a monopoly on wisdom. We have a duty to one another, and should not listen to a third party. We are very interested in going the whole way. We suffered from terrorism more than you. We failed to communicate. We need to talk.'' Chairman Weldon added:
``Honesty and candor are critical.''
Representative Gallegly mentioned the change that has taken place in American attitudes and the high level of apprehension that exists since 9/11. He further commented on the ``extremely warm welcome'' the delegation had received. He added that ``the press can often become the wedge, frequently seeing the glass as half empty. We can't let the press control the debate on this issue.'' Prime Minister responded that: ``the people are open and warm and have no grudges whatsoever.''
Prime Minister Ghanem concluded that after 9/11 the whole world is different: ``We can work together. Libya is a small country. When we talk and listen you can find wisdom in a small country. You will find us a good ally. The United States was the number one place we sent our students. We would like to do that again.''
Foreign Minister
Foreign Minister Abdulrakman Shalgam stated: ``it is an honor for us to start a new era of relations with the U.S. .
. . I believe this is a chance for you to learn about our people. Our expectation, our ideas and thoughts can benefit from international peace . . . In the past there was a joint misunderstanding. It is the mission for both of us to clear up that misunderstanding . . . Certain circumstances caused a misunderstanding. We started a bit late, but better late than never. It is an honor to be receiving the first delegation from America.''
Chairman Weldon stated that the delegation didn't know what to expect in coming to Libya: ``Your people have overwhelmed us with their warm greetings--in your markets and in all of our meetings . . . The eyes of the world are on Libya because of what you have done. Your decision to rid your country of WMD and rejoin related treaties has caused Libya to become the centerpiece for discussion all over our country. The highest respect we can give is coming here personally . . . As you know, we are not here to negotiate, that is not our job. But if you continue the path you have chosen, as an equal branch of our government, we believe we can institute a process that will benefit both of our peoples. We have spoken with your Congress about that day and talked to them about the work we have done with other parliaments. We are excited, optimistic, and with your leadership, we believe normalized relations can be established.''
Representative Ortiz observed that he never believed that one day he would be in Tripoli. He also spoke of the warm greetings extended to the delegation.
Gaddafi International Foundation for Charitable Associations the
Gaddafi Human Rights Foundation & The Libyan Red Crescent
The delegation visited with officials of the Gaddafi International Foundation for Charitable Associations, the Gaddafi Human Rights Foundation, and the Libyan Red Crescent to discuss their programs.
Al Fateh University
The delegation met with the President of Al Fateh University, department heads, and delivered introductory letters from American University students to students of the University. Professor Tarhuui read a poem that he had prepared to celebrate the delegation's visit, attachment 4.Baghdad, Iraq, January 27
The delegation traveled to Baghdad to meet with and receive updates from L. Paul Bremer, Administrator of the Coalition Provisional Authority; General Sanchez, Commander, Joint Task Force Seven; the Iraq Survey Group, responsible for the search for weapons of mass destruction; representatives of the primary factions of the Iraqi Governing Council; and the Deputy Commanding General, 1st Armored Division, responsible for the security of Baghdad.
Coalition Provisional Authority
Ambassador Bremer indicated that work continues on formulating the strategic framework for Iraqi security, its economy, and political transition. He indicated that while the security situation had improved, there still exists a major terrorist threat. He further indicated that the
``consumption economy'' is working well, but structural problems exist, largely due to the distorting effects of five cents a gallon gasoline. The focus is in getting capital into the economy. Work continues, as well, on the transition to a National Assembly by July 1, 2004. Differences within the Governing Council and among the general populace on the selection of delegates by caucus or direct election continue to cause significant debate and public demonstrations. An announcement is due in the near future from the United Nations on its recommendations on elections in Iraq based on the results of a study completed by a visiting United Nations team.
CJTF-7
Lieutenant General (LTG) Ricardo Sanchez, the senior U.S. military officer in Iraq (Commending General V Corps and Coalition Joint Task Force 7), provided an update on combat, security, and U.S. military personnel issues. General Sanchez indicated that the number of attacks by former regime elements, foreign terrorists, and others had continued to decline since the capture of Hussein, averaging less than 20 per day, down from a high of 50 per day.
Iraqi Governing Council
The delegation met with four members of the Iraqi Governing Council (IGC), representing the primary political and religious factions within Iraq. The President of the IGC, Dr. Adnan Pachachi, a secularist, indicated the council was in the final phase of establishing basic laws, establishing the details of a provisional government, and completing the constitution. Dr. Pachachi indicated his belief that the draft constitution covers every conceivable right: freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, the rule of law, etc. Three of the four members--Dr. Pachachi, the Sunni, and Shia IGC Members were unanimous in stating their views that it is an oversimplification to conclude that religious affiliation dictates the views of the Iraqi people: ``the reality is that the fanatics are a tiny minority, but very vocal and very well organized.'' The Sunni IGC member indicated that Sunni and Shia will vote on the issues, not on the basis of religion, but on the substance of the issues under consideration--``the educated middle class in Iraq is much more open minded.''
The Kurdish member stated that the Kurds live under a different system and culture, that they have suffered under Iraqi rule, and ``have the right to establish their own way.'' Dr. Pachachi acknowledged that ``from the beginning we have recognized that the Kurds are distinct, that their special status will be maintained. We are in the process of agreeing to that arrangement.'' Dr. Pachachi further indicated that the problem at hand is deciding the best way to select members of the legislature: ``The problem is that it will be difficult to have credible elections in such a short period . . . If the U.N. doesn't believe elections are possible, they will likely propose other possibilities.''
Iraq Survey Group
Major General Keith Dayton, Director of the Iraqi Survey Group, provided a classified update on the search for weapons of mass destruction and counterterrorism programs. A common misperception is that Dr. Kay headed the hunt for WMD. While Dr. Kay has been a very valuable advisor in the hunt for WMD, General Dayton has headed the group responsible for the hunt for WMD since its inception in June 2003, and with Dr. Kay's departure will continue to head the group.
What can be said about the delegation's discussions is that there, the people in the trenches actually doing the day-to-day searches, collecting, and analyzing the data and material, expressed a sense of ``frustration and dismay'' over ``what Dr. Kay is doing''--or at least some of the media's characterization of ``what Dr. Kay is doing,'' as he exits from his high visibility role in the hunt for WMD.
The ISG has responsibilities beyond the sole search for WMD. Although not the Commander of the ISG, but responsible as the special advisor for WMD, apparently Dr. Kay sought total control of all the assets under the ISG for the sole purpose of the hunt for WMD. It was a matter of ``all or nothing.'' And when he didn't get all of the assets--even when those assets were increased to provide additional funds for areas other than the search for WMD, Dr. Kay objected, ultimately being a factor in his departure.
Those responsible for the search for WMD in Iraq believe that while no large stockpiles of WMD have yet to be uncovered, no shortage of leads exist--with literally tens-of-millions of documents remaining to be fully examined and considerable leads and circumstantial evidence to be pursued--``with much remaining to be done.''
General Dayton believes the declared failure by some to yet find large stockpiles of nuclear, chemical, or biological weapons is premature and ignores the significance of the evidence that has been found about the undisputed activities in each of these areas providing evidence of future intentions and breakout capabilities being pursued and proven to have existed. In the nuclear area, Dr. Kay said as recently as January 28 that, ``Look, the man had the intent to acquire these weapons, he invested huge amounts of money in them. The fact is he wasn't successful.''
In the end, Dr. Kay's judgment, regardless of the disappointment resident in the ISG, came down on the side of the continued search. In an interview on NBC in which he was asked to comment on whether it was prudent to go to war, Dr. Kay said ``I think it was absolutely prudent. In fact, I think at the end of the inspection process we'll paint a picture of Iraq that was far more dangerous than we even thought it was before the war . . .''.
1st Armored Division
Brigadier General Mark Hertling, Deputy Commanding General, 1st Armored Division, provided an update on security and Iraqi police training programs within Baghdad.Kuwait, January 27
Four members of the delegation met with Sheik Saud al Sabah, former Kuwaiti Ambassador to the United States, to renew acquaintances and discuss the general political, economic, and military situation in the region. Sheik Sabah has personally established a fund for families of U.S. military personnel killed in the 1991 Gulf War.Balad Air Base & Ad Dawr, January 28
Major General Ray Odierno, Commanding General, 4th Infantry Division, and Colonel Frederick Rudesheim, Commander, 3rd Brigade Combat Team, 4th ID, escorted the delegation to the site of Saddam Hussein's capture near Ad Dawr and briefed the delegation on operations and reconstruction efforts in his area of responsibility.Islamabad, Pakistan January 29
AMB Nancy J. Powell briefed the delegation on issues relating to the bilateral relationship between the United States and Pakistan, and responded to members' questions.
Chairman Weldon asked if Usama Bin Ladin were in Baluchistan (the southern tribal area bordering Afghanistan), and if he were being protected by Pakistani government officials. AMB Powell responded that she does not believe there are Al Qaeda sympathizers among the Pakistani leadership, but the question of Taliban supporters is
``trickier.'' She noted that in general, Pakistani cooperation has been excellent: Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was taken down by Pakistani elements, and that another high value target was captured within 90 minutes of transmitting U.S. intelligence to Pakistani forces.
Chairman Weldon followed up with a question concerning the likelihood of assassination of President Musharraf AMB Powell responded that it is always a danger--he recently survived two attempts on his life, which Musharraf blames on Al-Qaeda. AMB Powell pointed out that the 1988 plane crash that claimed the life of President Zia is still surrounded by questions.
Chairman Weldon asked how extensive our contacts with Pakistani officials were. AMB Powell responded that we lost contact with an entire generation of Pakistani officers when Pakistan was under sanctions between 1990-2001, but just this last year we brought 75 junior officers into our training programs. Chairman Weldon also asked about the F-16s that Pakistan bought but were denied under sanctions, and AMB Powell replied that they had been paid back.
Chairman Weldon suggested that Chairman Souder lead an effort to create a tripartite interparliamentary exchanges with Pakistani, Indian, and U.S. legislators. AMB Powell remarked that this would be particularly helpful to Pakistani parliamentarians: they passively await legislation drafted by the government; they have no staff; no working committee system.Kabul, Afghanistan January 29
The delegation met with President Hamid Karzai and the former King of Afghanistan Zahir Shah. President Karzai expressed his appreciation to the delegation for the many sacrifices made by America to further political stability, economic progress, and increase employment in Afghanistan and for America's continued war on terrorism . . . ``Our people know what America has done.'' He described the Loya Jirga process, the adoption of the Afghan Constitution, patterned after the U.S. Constitution, and the anticipated general elections.
President Hamid Karzai
President Karzai cited the key importance of Pakistan to stability in Afghanistan by not interfering in Afghan affairs, yet assisting in elimination of the Taliban threat. The President and the delegation discussed the significant problem of continued high levels of poppy cultivation in Afghanistan. President Karzai acknowledged Afghanistan's failed efforts to eliminate poppy cultivation and described the government's plan to destroy poppy fields, while assisting farmers in alternative crop cultivation, interdiction of drug routes, and destruction of heroin production labs. The President concluded that for Afghanistan to emerge as a nation-state it has to destroy the poppy crop:
``to destroy terrorism, we must destroy poppies.'' The delegation cited its support and commitment to Afghanistan,
``for the long haul.''
His Highness, Zahir Shah
The former King, Zahir Shah, thanked the delegation for U.S. assistance in establishing peace and security in Afghanistan. He observed that the political process in Afghanistan is based on a tribal structure--a democracy that functions within a tribal structure--with the same goals as the people in America.Karshi-Kharnabad, Uzbekistan, January 29-30
The delegation remained overnight at Karshi-Kharnabad (``K-2''), Uzbekistan following meetings in Kabul to visit U.S. military personnel supporting OEF. In addition to being able to speak informally at the evening and breakfast meals with personnel from their districts, the delegation received mission orientation briefings and visited unit assigned aircraft and a static display of a Uzbek SU-27 provided by the Uzbek Air Force.Ramstein and Lanstuhl Medical Center Germany, January 30-31
General ``Doc'' Foglesong and Consul General Bodde
General ``Doc'' Foglesong and Consul General (CG) Peter Bodde discussed NATO-related military and regional political issues. General Foglesong described the challenges posed by making the NATO Response Force (NRF) viable given the current limited expeditionary capabilities of the NRF. He also described the efforts at re-sizing NATO and U.S. operations--
``mining manpower positions''--and the use of ``reach back capabilities'' to allow functions in the U.S. such as intelligence to support the European theater instead of having to have the capability resident in Europe. General Foglesong further described efforts to develop niche capabilities among NATO partners to preclude all nations from having to have all military capabilities with some developing expeditionary capabilities for billeting, some with medical, others with civil engineering, etc.
Representative Souder expressed his deep concern regarding Austria's, France's, Turkey's and Germany's various degrees of lack of support for U.S. operations in Iraq. He also commented on the cumbersome rules of engagement within NATO in the war in Kosovo, ``when eight foreign ministers were involved in approving target lists.'' General Foglesong cited need for ``balance'' in each of these relations and for future planning, the need to assess our abilities to deploy into and out of various countries and determine which countries will allow the U.S. to ``kinematically execute'' from their bases.
The delegation also discussed the status of relationships with the French and German governments. General Foglesong and CG Bodde highlighted a number of efforts by Germany to assist the U.S., e.g., providing air base security to permit U.S. security personnel to be deployed to support operations like OIF and OEF. General Foglesong indicated his optimism in dealing with the countries within NATO: ``They recognize that terrorists don't recognize borders.''
Representative Ortiz, expressing frustration, observed that
``it would be nice if the State Department would consider us
(Congress) equal players,'' indicating that both DOD and DOS frequently take action without consultation or regard for the views of Congress. Chairman Weldon also noted what seems to be apparent ``disconnects'' between the State Department, DOD, and NSC on foreign policy issues.
Chairman Weldon concluded that regardless of the many troubling aspects in the execution of foreign policy and some military operations, support for the troops is solid and unequivocal and the troops need to know that.
Contingency Aero-medical Staging Facility & Lanstuhl Regional Medical
Center
Colonel Brenda McEleney provided the delegation a tour of the Contingency Aero-medical Staging Facility where they were able to visit with a number of troops awaiting transportation to Walter Reed Medical Center.
Colonel Steven Older and Colonel Carol Gilmore provided the delegation a tour of the Landstuhl Regional Medical Center where the delegation was able to meet with a number of military personnel recovering from injuries sustained in Iraq.
The delegation provided transportation from Ramstein Air Base to Andrews Air Force Base for ten soldiers en route to Walter Reed Army Medical Center where they were to receive further treatment for injuries sustained in Iraq.
DELEGATION
MEMBERS
Representative Curt Weldon (R-PA), Representative Solomon Ortiz (D-TX), Representative Steve Israel (D-NY)*, Representative Candice Miller (R-MI), Representative Rodney Alexander (D-LA), Representative Elton Gallegly (R-CA)**, Representative Mark Souder (R-IN), Representative Darrell Issa (R-CA)**.
Professional Staff
Doug Roach, Harald Stavenas, Richard Mereu**, Marc Wheat***.
U.S. Army Escorts
Lt Colonel Craig Collier, Lt Colonel Gregg Blanchard, Sgt Thai Kov, Sgt Hugh Griffin.
*Kuwait-Iraq only.
**Libya only.
***29-31 Jan.
KEY PERSONNEL
Libya
Colonel Moammar GaddafiShokri Ghanem, Prime MinisterAbdulrakman Shalgam, Foreign MinisterZinati Mohammad Zinati, Speaker of the General Peoples'
CongressMatoug M. Matoug, Deputy Prime Minister for Service Affairs
(weapons of mass destruction)Honorable Suleiman Al Shahoumi, Secretary of Foreign Affairs at the General Peoples' CongressDr. Abdulhafed M. Jaber, Director, Technical Cooperation
Office, Ministry of Service Affairs (weapons of mass destruction)Abdulatife Aldali, Chairman of Tripoli Conference (Mayor of
Tripoli)Abdulmagid Mansuri, Member, International Energy Advisory
CouncilTajura Nuclear Research CenterProfessor E.F. Ehtuish, Chairman, Board on the EnvironmentSaleh Saleh, General Manager, Gaddafi International
Foundation for Charity AssociationsDr. Giuma Atigha, Gaddafi Human Rights FoundationDr. Mohamed Lutf Farhat, President, Al-Fateh UniversityDr. Muftah M. Etwilb, Director of International Relations,
Libyan Red CrescentLibyan-American Friendship Association
Baghdad
Ambassador L. Paul Bremer, Administrator of the Coalition
Provisional Authority (CPA) (c/o CPA Legislative Affairs,
1401 Wilson Blvd, Floor 5, Arlington, VA 22209-2306)Dr. Adnan Pachachi, President, Iraqi Governing Council
(secularist)Dr. Roj Schaways, Iraqi Governing Council Member (Kurd)Dr. Muwaffak A1 Rubuic, Iraqi Governing Council Member (Shiia religious leader)Samir Sumaidaie, Iraqi Governing Council Member (Sunni)Ambassador Richmond, UK Special Representative to IraqLieutenant General (LTG) Ricardo Sanchez, the senior U.S. military official in Iraq (Commanding General V Corps and
Coalition Joint Task Force 7) (HQ CJTF-7 CPA Command
Group, Unit 91400, APO AE 09342-1400)Major General Keith Dayton, Commander, Iraqi Survey Group (c/
o CPA Legislative Affairs, 1401 Wilson Blvd, Floor 5,
Arlington, VA 22209-2306)Brigadier General Mark Hertling, Deputy Commanding General,
1st Armored Division (Unit 93054 APO AE 09324-3053)Robert Kelley, Legislative Counselor to Ambassador Bremer (c/
o CPA Legislative Affairs, 1401 Wilson Blvd, Floor 5,
Arlington, VA 22209-2306)Lt Colonel Richardson, Distinguished Visitors Bureau
(Security detail) (c/o CPA Legislative Affairs, 1401
Wilson Blvd, Floor 5, Arlington, VA 22209-2306)
Kuwait
Sheik Saud al Sabah, former Kuwaiti Ambassador to the United
StatesJoe Porto, U.S. Embassy Control Officer (US Embassy, Unit
69000, APO AE 098809000)
Balad Air Base
Major General Ray Odierno, Commanding General, 4th Infantry
Division (ID) (APO AE 92628)Colonel Frederick Rudesheim, Commander, Third Brigade, 4th
ID, APO AE 09323
Islamabad, Pakistan
Nancy Powell, U.S. Ambassador to Pakistan, (Unit 62200, APO
AE 09812-2200)Joel Reifman, economic section/control officer, U.S. Embassy
Kabul, Afghanistan
Hamid Karzai, President of AfghanistanZahir Shah, former King of AfghanistanSardar Abdulwalij, General, retired (nephew and associate of
H.E. Zahir Shah)Zalmay Khalilzad, U.S. Ambassador to AfghanistanHank Tucker, political-military section/control officer, U.S.
Embassy
Karshi-Kharnabad, Uzbekistan
Jon R. Purnell, U.S. Ambassador to Uzbekistan (pouch address:
7110 Tashkent Place, Dulles, VA 20189-7110)Colonel Scott Wagner, Installation Commander (Unit HHC 213
ASG APO AE 09311)Lt. Colonel Hosil Mirzaev, Uzbekistan Air Force, (SU-27 display)
Ramstein Air Base and Landstuhl Regional Medical Center, Germany
General Robert (Doc) H. Foglesong, Commander, U.S. Air Forces
EuropeLt General Arthur J. Lichte, Vice Commander, U.S. Air Forces
EuropePeter W. Bodde, Consul General, U.S. Embassy, Frankfurt
(American Consulate General, Siesmayerstrasse 21, 60323
Frankfurt, Germany)Brigadier General Rosanne Bailey, Commander, 435th Air Base
WingColonel Philip Lakier, Deputy Surgeon General, USAF, EuropeColonel Brenda McEleney, Deputy Commander, 435th Medical
Group Colonel Steven Older, Acting Commander, Landstuhl Regional
Medical CenterColonel Carol Gilmore, Landstuhl Regional Medical CenterLarry Wright, Vice Consul, U.S. Consulate, Frankfurt
C-40 Aircraft crew (Fleet Logistics Support Squadron-VR 59, 1050
Boyington Dr. Ft Worth, Texas 76127-5000)
Commander Bill Snyder, Aircraft CommanderLt. Commander Benjamin White, CopilotAE2 Michael Marr, crew chiefAK2 Lyndal Crow, LoadmasterAD1 James Davis, flight attendantHM2 Letty Owour, flight attendantAM2 Shawn Smith, maintenance technicianMAI Daniel Topper, securityMA2 John Eagles, securityMA2 Jason Stafford, securityMA3 Daniel Veccholla, security
A New Time; A New Beginning
A New Time, A New Beginning was published in 2001 under the leadership of Representative Curt Weldon (PA-7), co-chairman of the Duma-Congress Study Group, to provide a comprehensive bipartisan program for cooperation between the United States and Russia. It was endorsed by nearly one-third of the members of Congress and provides 108 recommendations for U.S.-Russia cooperation in the following 11 major subject areas: Agricultural Development, Cultural/Education Development, Defense and Security, Economic Development, Energy/Natural Resources, Environmental Cooperation, Health Care, Judicial/Legal Systems, Local Governments, Science and Technology, and Space and Aeronautics.
Members of Congress
Welcome, men of Congress.To the land of bless.Here, peace is the belief.And love is man's relief.We are a nation of norms.Disbelievers in terror of all forms.Destructive arms is not our goal.We are for peace, body and soul.Our guide is sweetness and light,First in beauty, first in might.Think not of terrorMan's imposed horror.Such sickly deedsAre but evil seedsThat cause man to fallAnd end the universe for all.
Dr. T.T. TarhuuiProfessor of English,Al Fateh UniversityTripoli Libya
____________________
