Executive Session

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. RUBIO. Madam President, this is an important nomination, at a
time when this country faces very significant national security
threats.

AUMF

As I commented yesterday, the President came to us yesterday asking
us to authorize the use of force, and I think we should do that. I am
not necessarily sure we should do it in the way he has asked us to do
it. I think it should be a pretty straightforward authorization, and
here is what it should say. It should say we authorize the President of
the United States to destroy ISIS and to defeat their military. It is
up to the Commander in Chief to decide the right way in which to do
that.

I have very serious concerns and very serious reservations about our
current strategy when it comes to ISIS. I am not sure it is sufficient.
I think it is a strategy that will contain them but will not defeat
them. In fact, ISIS is now popping up, for example, in Libya, where
they have a very significant hub. They have a very significant presence
in Benghazi. Just a few days ago they carried out an attack in Tripoli.
We are now hearing media reports that ISIS has a presence in
Afghanistan, perhaps even terrorist training camps.

So they continue to grow their affiliates, they continue to grow
their presence, and we need an authorization of the use of force that
allows us to defeat them anywhere in the world where they are to be
found.

The President's suggestion has been well received. We thank him for
submitting one. But now it is the responsibility of the Senate to do
its job and to write one of its own. It may reflect many of the things
the President wants, but what I believe it should reflect more than
anything else is that we authorize him to defeat ISIS no matter what it
takes and no matter how long it takes. If we have problems with the
President's strategy, there are different ways to address it. I do have
problems with the strategy and I want that to be addressed.

Israel

Mr. Carter's nomination comes at another important moment. In that
same region of the world, one of America's strongest allies and its
very existence is under attack. Of course I am talking about Israel,
the Jewish State--an extraordinary story in the history of the world.
Here is a country founded after the end of World War II as a homeland
for the Jewish people so that never again--never again--would they have
nowhere to go if they faced the sorts of oppression, the sort of
genocide they faced during the Holocaust.

Since that time the Jewish State has had an extraordinary story. From
an economic perspective, it is a vibrant, first-rate country with a
first-rate economy. What is most interesting is this is not a country
with oil or a country with vast supplies of natural gas. This is not a country that is an agricultural superpower, yet it has a world-class economy providing prosperity and upward mobility to millions of its people, and it has done so on the basis of innovation.

There is a very good book recently written called ``Start-up Nation''
that talks about the extraordinary story of Israel.

It is also a very vibrant democracy--in fact, observers of Israeli
politics often joke perhaps a little too vibrant. They have heated
debates. But it is a democracy.

So what we have here is a democratic nation with a vibrant free
enterprise economy in the middle of the Middle East.

Israel is everything we want that region of the world to become. We
wish every nation in that region were a real democracy, a vibrant one.
We wish every nation in that part of the world had a first-rate economy
that provided upward mobility to everyone. And we wish every nation in
the Middle East was as strong an ally of the United States as Israel
has been.

This is the extraordinary story of this small but important nation,
and this country must continue to be their strongest ally in the world.
But they face extraordinary threats to their safety, to their security,
and to their existence.

It begins with what I believe is a concerted effort around the
world--including in American academia, including in the universities of
this very country--to delegitimize Israel's right to exist and its
right to exist as a Jewish state, and it is an outrage.

It continues with the growth of anti-Semitism all over the world,
increasingly in Europe. Every day we see stories of a mass exodus as
more and more Jews are leaving Europe because of the growth of anti-
Semitism.

We saw what happened in Paris--not just the attack that happened but
how Jews were deliberately targeted for death by terrorists. It was not
a random attack. It was a deliberate act to target Jews. It was a
deliberate act of violence in the furtherance of anti-Semitism.

In every international body in the world, Israel is often the target
of scorn and criticism, without any consideration whatsoever to what
its enemies intend to do to them. And now perhaps the greatest risk of
all is to its very existence from the threat of an Iranian nuclear
program.

I, like everybody else, wish that I would wake up tomorrow morning to
the news that the Ayatollah had come to his senses and realized Iran
cannot continue down its path; that they have given up their nuclear
weapons ambition; that they have given up sponsoring terrorism all over
the world; that they have given up their anti-Israeli, anti-Semitic
rhetoric; that they have given up oppressing their own people. But I
know that is not going to happen because Iran is not governed by a
normal leader the way we would consider a leader of a nation. Iran is
governed by a radical shia cleric--a radical shia cleric who believes
he is not only the head of Iran, he believes he is the head of all
Islam everywhere in the world. Iran is where he lives. Iran is where he
is based. But Iran is not what he believes is his domain; he believes
every Muslim on the planet under the Sun is under his control and
leadership.

But here is the scariest thing he believes: He believes it is his job
to trigger an apocalyptic showdown between the Muslim and non-Muslim
world because that would bring about the emergence of the 13th Imam--
the Hidden Imam, the Mahdi, as they call him--who will then come and
govern the entire world under the flag of Islam--his version of radical
Islam. We may say that stuff sounds a little far-fetched. That is what
he believes. That is what he passionately and legitimately believes.

So when someone wants to trigger an apocalyptic showdown between the
Muslim and non-Muslim world, when someone says they want to destroy the
State of Israel, wipe it off the face of the Earth, and that person is
trying to acquire nuclear weapons capabilities, we had better be very
concerned, and we had better conclude that is an unacceptable risk for
us to take. It is particularly scary for Israel because they are closer
to Iran than we are. They are in their crosshairs both verbally and
militarily.

The administration would have us believe that we are in the midst of
this negotiation and hopefully we will delay the Iranian nuclear
program or extend the amount of time they would need to break out. Let
me break it to everyone: They are not going to break out. They are
going to sneak out. They will concoct some sort of excuse at some point
in the future as to why they need a nuclear weapons program.

Let me begin by saying that Iran is an oil-rich nation. They have no
need for civilian nuclear power. But if they want one, they can have
it, like most of the other countries in the world do, by importing
enriched uranium or reprocessed plutonium and using it for their
reactors for peaceful purposes. But instead they insist on the ability
to enrich and reprocess, and there is only one reason why they would
insist on that--because they want the infrastructure necessary to one
day build a weapon when they decide they need it.

But don't take my word for it. That is not the only thing they are
doing. There are two other aspects of their program that aren't even
being discussed.

The first is that they continue to develop long-range rockets. Why do
they need intercontinental missiles? Why do they need long-range
rockets? They don't need them for conventional purposes. They don't put
a conventional warhead--they don't spend all the time and energy and
money that it takes to build that capacity to bomb someone with a
conventional weapon. There is only one reason to build long-range
rockets such as those, and that is to put a nuclear warhead on them.
That is not being discussed in these negotiations, and they continue to
make unabated progress toward their long-range rocket capabilities.

The other is a weapons design. The three things they need for a
nuclear weapons program: a weapons design, long-range rockets, and the
ability to enrich and reprocess. They are already building the rockets.
The weapons design they can literally buy from dozens of people around
the world who will sell it to them. And the reprocessing? Even under
the deal the President is asking for, if it went down exactly the way
the President is asking for, they would still keep all the
infrastructure, all the things that it takes to enrich to weapons-
grade. They would have all the equipment, all the scientists, all the
infrastructure.

Here is one more point. Iran has always had a secret component to
their nuclear program. They have always had some secret component to
their program. And I would venture to guess that right now they have a
secret component to their program as well that we do not know about.

That is why I have little hope in this deal, and that is why Prime
Minister Netanyahu is so concerned about the deal. See, he doesn't have
the luxury of living an illusion. He doesn't have the luxury of
pretending that somehow we can work this out, as if somehow we are
negotiating with Luxembourg or Belgium. He knows the neighborhood he
lives in, and he knows his enemy. He knows their true nature. He knows
their true intentions. And it is his obligation not just to protect his
people but to fight for that nation's very existence. So he has chosen
to come before the Congress at the invitation of the Speaker. I am glad
he has accepted his invitation, and I think we owe him the courtesy to
hear what he has to say.

I want you to go back and look at the United Nations rollcall votes.
Time and again, when the interests of this country are being challenged
around the world, I want you to see how many times Israel is one of the
few countries--often the only country--that vote with the United States
of America in that international forum. I want you to see all the times
that the Israelis have stood with America on issue after issue around
the world.

I also want you to think about what it says about us as a nation if
we are not prepared to make it very clear that before anything else, we
are the friends of our allies. What does it say to our other allies
around the world, to other nations in other parts of the world that are
counting on the American security guarantee for their own existence and
their own security, what does it say to Japan and to South Korea and to
our allies in NATO if the United States is prepared to create daylight between us and the State of Israel?

That is exactly the message people will get--that there is a division
between us and Israel--if, in fact, Members of Congress carry through
on their threat to boycott the Prime Minister's speech before Congress
on the 3rd of March. If a significant number of Members of the Senate
and the House boycott his speech, that message will be heard not only
by Israel's enemies but also by our allies. And the message will be
twofold--one, that America is no longer firmly on the side of Israel as
it once was, and two, that America is an unreliable ally; look what
they just did to Israel.

I think everyone has the right to go or not go to any speech they
want, but I hope my colleagues who are thinking about not going will
reconsider. You may not like the way this went down. You may not like
the fact that the Speaker did it the way he did it. That is your
choice. But I want you to think about the implications beyond that. I
want you to think about the implications this leaves on Israel. I want
you to think about the message this sends to Israel's enemies because
what we have seen decade after decade is that anytime Israel's enemies
get the perception that somehow America is no longer as committed to
Israel's security as it once was, it emboldens them to attack Israel,
and Israel has no shortage of enemies that want to not just attack them
but destroy them. We have seen what Hamas has done. We have seen what
Hezbollah has done. We have seen what Iran wants to do and is doing.

If you boycott this speech, if a significant number of Members of
Congress boycott this speech, you will send an incredibly powerful
message to Israel's enemies. So I hope you will reconsider.

I don't question anyone's commitment on this issue. I believe there
are supporters of Israel who won't attend the speech because they think
it is disrespectful to the President. This is a lot bigger than that.
We are talking about the existence of this nation. We are talking about
whether people in that nation will survive in 20 years or 15 years.
That is how important and monumental this moment is.

I am not claiming that by you not attending the speech, somehow that
is going to lead to Israel's destruction. I am claiming that if you
boycott this speech, you will send a message to Israel's enemies that
could embolden them, and I hope you will reconsider that position.

I find it quite frankly outrageous that reports are that the White
House has asked Members of Congress to boycott the speech. I find it
outrageous that the Vice President of the United States--the Vice
President--has decided to boycott that speech. I find it outrageous,
for example, that on the one hand we are more than glad to send
administration officials at the highest levels to sit down and meet
repeatedly with the highest ranking officials that Iran will send, but
our strongest ally's Prime Minister is coming to Washington and they
won't even meet with him? One of our strongest ally's Prime Minister
wants to speak before the Congress and they won't even attend the
speech? What do you think the headlines will be read as in Iran, by the
terrorists in Gaza, by the terrorists in Judea and Samaria, by the
terrorists in all parts of the world, such as in Lebanon, who want to
destroy Israel? What do you think they are going to read into it? What
they are going to read into it, unfortunately, is that somehow
Congress's commitment to the future security of Israel is not as strong
as it once was. And I fear what the implications of that will be. We
should not take this lightly.

I can think of no nation on Earth that needs our help more right now
than Israel, and I can think of no people on Earth who deserve our
support more than they do. As I said earlier, they are a reliable,
strong, committed ally of this Nation. We have strong links to them on
personal, cultural, political, and economic levels. They have stood by
us time and again in international forums when America's interests have
been challenged. They are everything we want the Middle East to look
like in the future--free, prosperous, democratic, aligned with America,
peace-loving, desirous of a better future. What more do you want? What
more could they do? What else could they be for us to be any stronger
an ally of theirs than we should be or are right now? Yet there are
people who are talking about boycotting the speech to protest because
their feelings are hurt, because they are upset about the way it went
down, because they don't like the way it was scheduled, because it was
disrespectful to the President.

You have the right to voice your concerns, but don't do this to an
ally. Don't do this to a nation that is as threatened today as it has
ever been at any time in its existence. Don't do this to a people who
are in the crosshairs of multiple terrorist groups with the capability
of attacking them. Don't do this to a nation whose civilians are
terrorized by thousands of rockets launched against them at a moment's
notice. Don't do this to a country that is facing down the threat of a
nuclear weapon annihilating them off the face of the Earth. Don't do
this to a people who are being stigmatized all over the world even as
we speak, who are being oppressed. Don't do this to a country that in
forum after forum has become the subject of delegitimization, as people
argue that somehow Israel's right to exist is not real. Don't do this
to them.

I hope my colleagues will reconsider their decision to not attend.
This is an important speech. It is the Prime Minister's choice,
obviously. He must always act in the best interests of his nation and
his people. But I hope he will speak to us on March 3, and I hope he
will speak to us clearly. I hope that through his speech he will open
the eyes of this Congress and the American people that this is not
child's play, that what Iran intends to have is not just a nuclear
weapon to destroy Israel but ultimately to terrorize the world. I hope
he will speak to us bluntly about the true nature of this threat.

I know there is a lot going on in the world, but there is no greater
threat to the long-term security of the planet than the Iranian nuclear
ambition. No people and no nation on Earth know that better than the
people of Israel, and no leader on Earth understands that better than
Prime Minister Netanyahu.

I think after years of commitment to this alliance, after the bravery
he has shown in his time in office and the bravery the Jewish people of
Israel have shown in defending their nation's right to exist after
being attacked multiple times throughout their history and even to this
modern day, they deserve our unambiguous support. Of course, there are
differences between allies. There always have been and always will be.

If we won't stand for Israel, for whom will we stand? If the United
States of America will not defend its ally, whom will we defend? What
message do we send to our alliances across the planet and what message
do we send to our enemies and Israel's enemies?

I hope cooler heads will prevail. I hope Members of the House and
Senate who have announced they are boycotting will reconsider. I hope
we will all be there, if we can, to hear what the Prime Minister has to
say the first week in March.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source