Senate Floor Speech
Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison
August 5, 1999 -- Page: S10273

(The nomination of Richard Holbrooke, of New York, to be the Representative of the United States of America to the United Nations with the rank and status of Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary, and the Representative of the United States of America in the Security Council of the United Nations)

MRS. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I will speak about why I am going to vote against the Holbrooke nomination. I start by saying, I have never put a hold on this nomination. I thought the process should go forward in due course. I think Richard Holbrooke is a principled man. I think he is a committed public servant. I admire his tenacity, his dedication. I have nothing personal against Richard Holbrooke.

I am voting against him because I disagree with the policy that he has put forward in the Balkans. I just can't, in good conscience, vote for someone who I think is taking our country in the wrong direction.

This is his policy: that the United States should spend billions of dollars, wear and tear on our equipment and our troops, stretching our military for a goal that I believe is not achievable.

I would commit our military immediately if I thought the goal and the mission were the correct one, but I believe our policy in the Balkans is to force factions to live together in an American model, when the circumstances are different from any we have ever had in our country. I don't think we can put American requirements into the Balkans with any chance to succeed.

We have had a policy that the United States could use force of vast proportions without strategically assessing what would be more proportional responses in line with our own security threat and our other responsibilities in the world. Richard Holbrooke did not allow the United States, through his policies, to lift the arms embargo on one faction in Bosnia, so one group was unarmed against two groups that were armed. I think if we had lifted the arms embargo 3 years before the Dayton accords, those people would have had a fair chance. I don't think we would have seen the mass slaughter of the Moslems that we did. I disagree with that policy.

We never looked at the opportunity for self-determination in the Balkans. We never looked at the opportunity to let these people form governments within their ethnic groups. They are 98 percent in ethnic groups now in Bosnia, but we are still trying to force them to have a coalition government. If we walked out today, I think every expert would agree the fighting would continue.

The Washington Post yesterday had a headline, `NATO Losing Kosovo Battle.' This was not a headline 2 months ago. It was yesterday.

The reason is, we have a policy in the Balkans that I think is going to hurt our own national security by overdeploying our military troops, by wear and tear on our equipment, by not having a sense of proportion in looking for other options, not looking at all of our commitments in the world, but instead trying to force an American model that I think is unrealistic today.

I think there are other options to try to help the people in the Balkans create stability with self-determination and then, eventually maybe, they would be able to live closer together in harmony.

Mr. President, I want to say I am only voting against Mr. Holbrooke on his foreign policy principles, not on him as a person. I will say again that I think he is a committed public servant. I think he is tenacious in his beliefs, and I admire that in a person. I just believe that our foreign policy is going in the wrong direction in this country. I think we are going to pay a high price for it, and I think Richard Holbrooke is one of the architects of this policy that I believe is quite erroneous. So, for that reason, I will vote against Richard Holbrooke.

Thank you, Mr. President.