[Congressional Record Volume 169, Number 71 (Thursday, April 27, 2023)] [House] [Pages H2056-H2069] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
Date: 2023-04-27
Chamber: HOUSE
Mr. JAMES: I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I will start by commending both gentlemen from Florida for their concern about our Nation's ongoing military engagements. It is one I share as a veteran of the global war on terrorism. Unfortunately, there are no silver bullets in policymaking, and when we try to make one, we usually end up shooting ourselves in the foot. It is for this reason and this reason alone that I stand in opposition. I served in Operation Iraqi Freedom as an attack helicopter pilot. As a combat veteran, Mr. Speaker, I can assure you that no one hates war more than those who have come face-to-face with it. I do not look back on the days of American military overreach and intervention in the Middle East with nostalgia. That said, as a West Point graduate, I understand history and the lessons it teaches. The siren song of isolationism is tempting, but allowing vacuums of American influence around the world to be filled by terrorists and exploited by communists is a direct threat to Americans at home. While each Presidential administration has made errors in the conduct of its foreign policy since the tragedies of 9/11 22 years ago, the most egregious of these errors is continuing to concede America's diplomatic leverage and allowing our agricultural, manufacturing, and energy independence to erode. It is Congress, this body, that has lazily conceded its constitutional duty to guard its war powers jealously from the executive branch. Congress' failure to hold each administration this century accountable for their vague, broad, and failing foreign policies may force Congress to exercise our war powers again in my lifetime. That is why I agree with Mr. Gaetz, in large part, that war should never be on autopilot nor open-ended. Americans have the right and Congress has the responsibility to understand and approve of the sacrifice that we will be asking our country to make. Our servicemembers are real people with families. They are sons and daughters. Many weren't even born when 9/11 occurred. Congress needs to do its job, but it needs to do its job the right way. That is why, rather than continuing an open-ended, 22-year-old law, I believe we must work together to first replace it with an Authorization for Use of Military Force that focuses on today's critical terrorist threats and requires Congress to stay engaged. We must prioritize first building an America that is strong at home, or we will never have hope of being strong abroad. Regrettably, my friends, today's resolution does little toward those ends. It will merely direct the removal of U.S. forces from Somalia. That will not work. Less than 2 years ago, we saw what happens when we pull troops with no plan. Joe Biden's botched Afghanistan withdrawal forced our troops to abandon billions of dollars in taxpayer-funded military equipment. It resulted in 13 young American servicemembers dead. It left hundreds of thousands of American veterans who served in Afghanistan wondering if their efforts were in vain. It embarrassed America on the world stage and left a gaping hole that China and the Taliban rushed to fill in. What have we learned? The Biden administration responded with the Commander in Chief checking his watch during a dignified transfer of servicemembers killed, and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin claiming he had no regrets about the withdrawal. What have we learned? Lest my argument be debased or derided as petty partisanship, let me flip the script. Mr. Speaker, I ask you, what happened the last time Republicans tried to repeal something without a plan to replace it? I tell you the truth: What happened then will pale in comparison to the consequences of ceding the global strategic high ground of the future to those who mean to harm us. I will be the first to argue that we have become overdependent on the military rather than investing in ourselves, in our industrial base at home, wielding diplomacy, and harnessing economic statecraft as our tools of first resort. There is no global stability when America is economically weak and militarily impulsive and has a reputation of retreat. The most devastating effect of abandoning our allies--even now, thousands of our fellow Americans are on the battlefield--is that our friends don't trust us and our enemies no longer fear us. If we want nations around the world to choose America instead of dictators and despots, we must give them a reason to do so. This premature withdrawal from Somalia will be a great victory for a dangerous al-Qaida affiliate that seeks the death of America. There is another group of adversaries to keep in mind, as well. Russia and the Communist Party of China would like nothing more than to see the U.S. take a foreign policy of isolationism. There is already a Chinese military base on the east coast of Djibouti. There are reports of more coming to the west coast of Africa, which will pose a direct threat to America.  If we cavalierly withdraw from Africa, the CCP will rush to fill in the void like they did in Afghanistan. By emboldening terrorists, Russia, and Communist China, this resolution would harm the national security of the United States. Again, Mr. Speaker, I applaud the gentleman from Florida's initiative for forcing this long-overdue debate. I also applaud leadership for allowing it to come to the floor. I invite the gentleman to work with me to end this executive overreach of over two decades, to pull back our war powers and Article I authority under the Constitution in a way that truly puts America first. As it stands today, regretfully, this resolution will not strengthen America at home or keep her safe abroad. It is for that reason, and again, that reason alone, that I urge my colleagues to join me in opposition. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.