"Only if Saddam understands that we are prepared to use military force will a peaceful means for disarming him have a chance to succeed," Senator Collins said. "In my view, there are times in dealing with a tyrant when the best -- indeed, perhaps the only -- chance to avoid war is to express in unmistakable terms your willingness to wage it. And this is one of those times." Describing the issue as "difficult and complex," Senator Collins, a member of the Senate Armed Service Committee, said in remarks prepared for delivery later today on the Senate floor that the bipartisan resolution now being considered "is a considerable improvement over the Administration''s earlier draft." The early draft, she said, placed "insufficient emphasis on pursuing diplomatic means first and working through the United Nations Security Council." By contrast, the bipartisan resolution -- sponsored by Senators Lieberman (D-CT), Warner, (R-VA), McCain (R-AZ) and Bayh (D-IN) -- "specifically requires a presidential determination that further reliance on diplomatic or other peaceful means alone would not adequately protect our national security nor lead to the enforcement of relevant United Nations resolutions." Senator Collins called discussions with Secretary of State Colin Powell a crucial element in her decision. "Secretary Powell has convinced me," she said, "that the prospects for effective action by the United Nations to disarm Iraq depend on the credible threat of the use of force, and that is the reason I will cast my vote in favor of this resolution." —More--- In her prepared remarks, Senator Collins presented a detailed assessment of Iraq''s biological and chemical weapons program, citing a variety of foreign and domestic intelligence sources and federal briefings to demonstrate that the program is "active and in some cases larger and more advanced than before the Gulf War." "While the evidence of Iraq''s pursuit of biological and chemical weapons is overwhelming," she added, "it is more difficult to determine the state of Iraq''s development of nuclear weapons. Numerous reports suggest, however, a renewed determination by Saddam to obtain materials for a nuclear bomb. One analysis suggests that if Iraq were to acquire fissile material from a foreign source, it could produce a nuclear bomb perhaps within a matter of months."
In summary, Senator Collins said, "Saddam Hussein has continued to develop a stockpile of the deadliest chemical and biological agents known to mankind and has continued to seek nuclear weapons in defiance of international obligations."
Under these circumstances, she said, "The risks are simply too catastrophic for the world to allow Iraq to continue on its present course. Given Saddam's insatiable desire to possess chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons, this danger will not disappear on its own, and the price we may have to pay today to eliminate it will prove modest compared to the price we will have to pay tomorrow. As difficult as the decision to authorize military action is, one need only consider how much more difficult it will be when Saddam has a nuclear bomb." "From the beginning of this debate, I have emphasized my belief that military force should be the last resort, not the first alternative," Senator Collins said. "Today, I still hold out hope that military action will not be necessary to disarm this dangerous regime. A strong United Nations resolution to compel Iraq to declare its weapons and to accept unfettered, rigorous inspections may well be successful in convincing Saddam that he must disarm." In her conclusion, Senator Collins cited the remarks of former Defense Secretary James Schlesinger, who testified, "The greater the degree to which the President and the Congress are united in purpose with respect to Iraq, the greater the likelihood that the United Nations will take a firm and appropriate stand towards Iraq."
Senator Collins emphasized her strong belief that the United States should act in concert with allies as a new Security Council resolution is pursued and in the event that military action becomes necessary. "While the United States must always retain the right to defend itself, our prospects for dealing effectively with the Iraqi threat, our standing in the community of nations, and our ability to continue to wage an effective global effort against terrorism depends on our forging a multilateral coalition."