Kerry, Meehan Take Iraq Stance
By Randy Trick and Marni Zelnick
WASHINGTON, Oct. 16, 2002–Two members of the Massachusetts delegation came off the fence Wednesday, announcing where they stand on authorizing the use of force against Iraq.
Sen. John Kerry said he will vote “yes” on a resolution authorizing President Bush to use force against Iraq, while Rep. Martin T. Meehan, D-Lowell, favors pursuing a multilateral approach through the United Nations.
Kerry’s statement came after weeks of cautious enthusiasm for the administration’s efforts to embrace the international community.
“In giving the president this authority, I expect him to fulfill the commitments he has made to the American people in recent days,” Kerry said on the Senate floor, “to work with the United Nations Security Council to adopt a new resolution setting out ‘tough, immediate’ inspections requirements and to ‘act with our allies at our side’ if we have to disarm Saddam Hussein by force.”
Kerry reiterated his opposition to the United States’ engaging Iraq over issues other than disarmament. He stated unequivocally that he did not consider reasons put forth by the administration such as the return of Gulf War prisoners, the desire for regime change or Saddam Hussein’s treatment of the Iraqi people to be justifiable grounds for war.
“Let me be clear,” Kerry said, “I am voting to give this authority to the president for one reason and one reason alone: to disarm Iraq of weapons of mass destruction if we cannot accomplish that objective through new tough weapons inspections.”
Meehan said he plans to vote for a proposal authorizing force against Iraq only if a resolution from the United Nations Security Council is obtained and weapons inspections fail.
That proposal is in the form of an amendment that Rep. John Spratt, a Democrat from South Carolina, has offered.
“The amendment allows all members of Congress to register their support for a multilateral approach. That’s the way to go,” Meehan said in an interview.
According to Meehan, if the Security Council does not approve force, or if weapons inspections fail, the landscape of the conflict will change and will need to be reexamined.
The amendment Meehan plans to vote for will have Congress vote later on a new resolution authorizing unilateral force, should it be needed. It would also allow the new resolution to be dealt with rapidly.
Meehan hesitated to say, however, how he would vote on the Bush-endorsed resolution if the Spratt amendment fails.
From the neighboring district, Rep. John Tierney, D-Salem, took an unequivocal stance against authorizing another Iraqi war.
“The administration says that Hussein is bad, and no one disagrees,” Tierney said on the House floor Wednesday. “Nor do we disagree with the notion that the U.N. resolutions must be enforced by U.N. Security Council action. The administration, though, asserts that the U.S. must act peremptorily and right now because Iraq is an imminent threat. But the truth be told, it has not met the burden of truth to that claim.”
Sen. Edward M. Kennedy was also on the Senate floor Wednesday, reaffirming his resolve to vote against a resolution. In a statement released earlier this week, Kennedy characterized any action by Congress as premature, arguing that the potential costs of a war with Iraq have yet to be adequately outlined for the American people.
“The American people deserve to know what a conflict in Iraq might be like,” Kennedy said. “They deserve to know how many casualties there might be. They deserve to know the true preparedness of our troops to fight in a chemical or biological environment…. They deserve to know how a conflict with Iraq will affect them and whether they are likely to be called up for duty.”
Both Massachusetts senators called on the administration to provide a more detailed plan for the reconstruction of post-conflict Iraq. Kerry criticized the administration for giving “more lip service than resources” to the rebuilding of Afghanistan.
Published in The Lawrence Eagle Tribune, in Massachusetts.
