Diplomacy and International Cooperation the Right Way to End Iranian Nuclear Program

Last week I spoke on the House floor about the significant threat posed by Iran’s nuclear program and about the real ways to end this threat.  A reckless rush into an armed conflict with Iran would be foolish. I am concerned that recent signs from the Bush Administration point to a move in this direction.  Diplomacy and cooperation with the international community should be our only options at this point, and military action should only be considered after much deliberation and discussion.  I have included the full text of my remarks on Iran below.

Mr. ANDREWS. Madam Speaker, I would like to begin my remarks with words of appreciation for Mr. Robert Knotts, who served with distinction as my legislative director and who will be leaving our office next week to further advance his career. I want to express my appreciation to Robert, Madam Speaker, for the service he has given to our constituents and the fine work he has done as a member of this institution. He has helped me prepare these remarks tonight, and I mean them in a heartfelt way to say thank you.

For the last 25 years, the regime in Iran has secretly and unlawfully commenced the process of acquiring a nuclear weapon. This is a grave threat to peaceful and freedom-loving people around the world. This is a regime headed by a president who just recently has said that one Holocaust was not enough, that we need another one; a regime headed by a president who said that Israel should be wiped off the face of the Earth; a regime that has flagrantly and blatantly disregarded international law in pursuing this weapon of mass death.

I believe that it should be a policy not only of our country but of freedom-loving nations around the world that this regime in Iran must never have a nuclear weapon that it could use against its neighbors or other peace-loving people around the world. It is truly a grave threat. In my view, Madam Speaker, it is a grave threat that calls for diplomacy, strategy, and cooperation, and not for a reckless rush into armed conflict. That is the purpose, Madam Speaker, of my remarks here this evening.

I am troubled by recent signs that I have seen from our administration with respect to the issue of Iran. Placement of naval assets in that area of the world is justified as a defensive measure, but I worry that it may be a provocative measure. The words of our President are words which can be taken, and I hope they are meant in the spirit of warning and cooperation, but they could also be taken in the spirit of provocation, and I hope and pray that they are not meant in that regard.

My principal message though this evening is not one about answering the question as to what we should do about the threat of a nuclear weapon in Iran. My principal message is to find who the ``we'' in that sentence is, what ``we'' should do about the question of nuclear proliferation in Iran.

The Constitution of this country vests the sole authority to declare war in the Congress of the United States of America. Our Presidents as commanders in chief have inherent authority to protect our country in time of emergency and to act in self-defense, but it is a clear principle of this Constitution that the power to initiate hostilities, the power to declare war, rests in this body and the other body.

I think it is imperative in the days and weeks ahead that in whatever forum, in whatever way, this House go on record as reaffirming that constitutional prerogative with specific reference to the issue of what we should do about Iran.

If there is to be consideration of military action involving Iran, in my judgment, such consideration would be reckless and premature at this time and under these facts. But if there is to be consideration of military action, it should be careful, deliberate, thoughtful consideration done under the auspices of this Constitution.

America's greatest resource in the area of national defense is the men and women who step forward voluntarily to serve this country and wear the uniform of this country. They step forward because of their faith that we are a country that follows the rule of law, and not the edict or desire of any one man or woman irrespective of what office he or she is elected to. It is my concern that that faith would be eroded and indeed misplaced if we do not follow the rule of law in this crucial instance.

This House needs to affirm our constitutional prerogative in this matter. There should be no consideration of the initiation of any preemptive hostilities against Iran or anyone else without the careful, thorough, constitutional consideration that such a question mandates and demands. 

Return to the Washington Updates Page