Tate Zeigler (202-224-5972) or Kevin Bishop (864-250-1417)

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) today made this statement on his vote against the Paul Amendment.  The amendment failed 10-81.

“The Paul Amendment was so poorly drafted it could cut off funding to close American allies like Israel.  Under the Paul Amendment, if Hamas – a terrorist organization committed to the destruction of Israel -- were to ‘attack, trespass, or breach’ the U.S. Embassy in Tel Aviv, the United States would be forced to cut off assistance to Israel.

“Al-Qaeda and like-minded radical Islamist groups would love nothing more than for the United States to withdraw from the region and world at large.  No matter how well-meaning Senator Paul’s amendment may be, now is not the time to give radical Islam a big victory.  Therefore, I could not support the Paul Amendment.

“In many ways the Mideast is on fire and the flames are being stoked by radical Islamists who understand they cannot achieve their goals unless they drive the United States out of the region.  These radical Islamists, along with their close Al Qaeda associates, are desperately trying to cut off the oxygen supply to many of the new Mideast governments which have been formed through democratic elections.”

“Finally, there was no consultation with the Director of the CIA, General David Petraeus, about what passage of this amendment would mean.  I have been informed by the intelligence community that now is the worst possible time to disengage.  While cutting off foreign assistance may make for good short-term politics, it creates dangerous long-term national security concerns.

“Since 9/11 we have been well-served by taking the fight to the enemy in their own backyard.  The terrorists would love for us to disengage from the region so they could regain a lost foothold.  If we disengage, I’m convinced the fight would once again move to our back yard.

“Our aid to the Egyptian and Pakistani military and Libyan government provides leverage and influence at a time when we need it the most.  I will do everything in my power to keep the fight in the terrorist’s backyard.  That requires us staying involved in a constructive way, not just by the use of military force.”

#####

• Pakistan is a nuclear-armed nation which must not be allowed to fall into the hands of the radical Islamic extremists.  Under current law, United States aid to Pakistan is contingent on their cooperation on security issues.  Senator Graham has expressed support for recent agreements with Pakistan that reopen the supply route to American troops in neighboring Afghanistan.

• Egypt is the heart of the Arab World and is struggling to find its footing after years of dictatorship.  Senator Graham was the author of American law which put conditions on continued Egyptian aid.  Under the Graham provision, if Egypt breaks their treaty with Israel, American aid will stop.  Likewise, if democratic institutions in Egypt are shut down, American aid will stop.

• Libya:  The assassination of the American Ambassador to Libya and other Americans was a terrorist attack plotted and executed by radical Islamists.  The attack does not represent the views of the beliefs of the Libyan populace.  In recent elections, the radical Islamists only received about 10 percent of the vote.  Withdrawal of American aid would only embolden and empower the radical Islamists who hate democracy, tolerance and modern thought.

Tate Zeigelr (202-224-5972) or Kevin Bishop (864-250-1417)

Washington – U.S. Senators Lindsey Graham, John McCain, and Joe Lieberman and today released the following statement regarding the decision to scale back combined operations between coalition and Afghan forces:

“In light of the tragic recent attacks on U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan, we understand and respect the rationale for scaling back combined operations between coalition and Afghan troops. However, we also believe this decision raises questions about the broader strategy that the Obama Administration has been pursuing in this conflict, especially with respect to its timetable for drawing down our military forces in Afghanistan.

“Over the past three years, the Administration has repeatedly deployed fewer forces than our commanders recommended, and is now drawing down those forces in larger numbers and at a faster pace than our commanders advised. Our military leaders have testified to Congress that these decisions have put our mission in Afghanistan at greater risk, and those risks are now becoming more apparent. In particular, we are concerned that the rush to build up the Afghan National Security Forces as quickly as possible – so that U.S. forces could begin withdrawing on the Administration's timetable – has contributed to the problem of the so-called ‘insider attacks.’

“The President has said that the drawdown of U.S. forces from Afghanistan would be responsive to conditions on the ground. We believe those conditions are now worrisome enough to justify an immediate suspension of further U.S. troop withdrawals at this time. The purpose of this ‘strategic pause’ should be to give our commanders time to evaluate the effects of recent troop withdrawals and to offer their best military advice on how we can achieve our goals in Afghanistan, while preventing further attacks on our forces and those of our allies. We cannot afford to rush to failure in Afghanistan.

“Despite the despicable acts of violence by a few Afghans, we must remember that there are literally hundreds of thousands of other Afghans who have been waging this war side-by-side with our own forces. They are risking their lives – and giving their lives – in far greater numbers than Americans or any of other coalition partner, in order to prevent al Qaeda and its allies from regaining control of Afghanistan. These brave Afghans embody the hopes and dreams of the vast majority of their fellow citizens, who do not want their country to become a terrorist safe haven again, as it was before 9/11, and who simply want to live in peace. After all we have committed to this conflict over 11 challenging years, and considering the critical national security interest we have at stake in Afghanistan, we should now take a step back in light of conditions on the ground to determine what we must do to succeed in this war.”