Motion to Discharge--S.J. Res. 39

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. LEE. Mr. President, I rise today to lend my support and urge my colleagues to lend theirs to S.J. Res. 39, offered by my friend Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky. The purpose of this particular resolution is to reconsider the billion-dollar arms sale between the United States and Saudi Arabia that was negotiated by the two governments earlier this year.

Under U.S. law, any arms sale approved by the State Department will go into effect within 30 days after that deal has been finalized, absent passage of a resolution of disapproval to prevent it from taking effect. That is exactly what Senator Paul's resolution aims to do. If passed by the Senate and the House, the resolution would raise formal objections to the sale of $1.15 billion worth of weapons and military equipment to the Government of Saudi Arabia.

Notice that there are Senators from both sides of the aisle working to pass this resolution of disapproval, supporting it in speeches and voting on it hopefully later today. It was introduced by a fellow Republican, and I am proud to join three of my Democratic colleagues as original cosponsors: Senator Chris Murphy from Connecticut, from whom we heard just moments ago; Senator Al Franken of Minnesota, from whom we heard after we heard from Senator Murphy; and Senator Martin Heinrich of New Mexico.

Some might call us strange bedfellows--two conservative Republicans and three liberal Democrats working together to achieve the same goal. But this observation misses the point entirely. Each one of us may have their own unique justification for supporting this resolution, but there is nothing strange about that; it simply proves that there are many reasons to consider and to reconsider this deal with Saudi Arabia.

One of those reasons and the basis for my support of Senator Paul's resolution is that there is no conclusive evidence that the Saudi arms deal will in fact advance the strategic and security interests of the United States. In fact, there is evidence that points in the opposite direction. We know that Saudi Arabia is heavily involved in the civil war that is raging at this moment in Yemen--a conflict that has left a humanitarian crisis of staggering proportions in its wake and continues to do so. We know that the Saudi military will use the equipment included in this deal--everything from machine guns to grenade launchers to armored vehicles and tanks--to increase its own engagement in that seemingly intractable conflict. What we don't know is exactly how America's involvement in the civil war in Yemen serves our national security interests and protects the American people.

I have no problem in principle with the United States approving the sale of weapons and military equipment to foreign governments when it is in our interest to do so. I certainly am not categorically opposed to selling arms to the Saudi Government. Saudi Arabia has long been an American ally in a very volatile region of the world, and I believe strengthening that alliance should be a priority for our foreign and military policy in the Middle East, but the fact that Saudi Arabia is an ally with whom we have a track record of selling arms is not in and of itself a sufficient reason to endorse this particular deal. It is not a reason that this deal should move through, should take effect without so much as a whimper from Members of Congress who might feel the need to raise possible concerns--concerns that relate to our own national security.

Yes, we want our allies to be strong. Yes, we want our allies to be capable of defending themselves. Yes, sometimes this means that we should offer them assistance in times of need. But the first and most fundamental responsibility of the U.S. Government is not to satisfy the requests of our allies reflexively, unflinchingly, and without asking acute questions; rather, the fundamental responsibility--the first job of the U.S. Government--is to protect the lives and liberties of the American people. That is where we need to be focused.

Now, the Government of Saudi Arabia clearly believes that intervening in this civil war in Yemen and participating in the decades-long sectarian conflict underlying that civil war in Yemen is in the best interest of the Saudi people. I don't doubt that, and it is not my place to question it, even if I did doubt it.

That is why the Saudi military has been fighting in Yemen since it first launched its intervention in March 2015. But can the same be said of the U.S. Government? Is intervening in this civil war a national priority for the American people? Is intervening in that civil war in our national security interest? Is it something that is going to make the American people safer?

Astoundingly, these are questions that have never been fully discussed and certainly have never been fully debated in this institution--an institution that likes to call itself and loves to be referred to as the world's greatest deliberative body.

This is more of an abdication of responsibility by Congress. It is more than just that. It is a national security hazard. It is not just that we are abdicating. It is not just that we are not doing something we are supposed to do. We are making things more dangerous than we need to.

The Framers of our Constitution gave important and exclusive foreign policy powers to the legislative branch because our Framers believed that the process of defining America's national interests and developing a foreign policy to pursue those interests must involve the participation of the people's representatives in Congress.

But alas, in recent years, Congress, in general, and the Senate, in particular, have happily taken a back seat to the executive branch in debating, developing, and defending to the public our Nation's foreign policy and grand strategy in the Middle East. That explains how it is possible that our military has actively supported the Saudi military's intervention in Yemen, including hundreds of air-to-air refueling sorties at a time when our military leaders unanimously contend that they are suffering from readiness and personnel shortfalls. It explains how it is possible that the U.S. military would be actively involved in the civil war in Yemen, even though many security experts point out that by supporting Saudi Arabia in Saudi Arabia's fight against the Houthis, we could be unintentionally assisting Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula and ISIS affiliates in Yemen.

I urge my colleagues today to support this resolution of disapproval. Let us pause our intervention in this foreign conflict and show the country--show our country--that the legislative branch can fulfill its obligations to the American people faithfully, that we can openly and thoughtfully evaluate our interventions abroad, and that we are focused on protecting the security, safety, and interests of the American people above all others.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source