On the recordJuly 1, 2020
there is another side to this story, and I think, when you hear those promoting this particular amendment, it is one we all agree--we want an end to the war. We want this to happen. But there are some other reasons that this probably is not the best way to do it. First of all, the amendment directs a calendar-based withdrawal from Afghanistan rather than a conditions-based. We have talked about this quite often. It is something that you can't just say ``It is going to happen by this date'' but, rather, under these certain circumstances. It undermines peace negotiations and the Trump administration's Afghan strategy. He has talked about that publicly. I think a lot of people agree with that. I do. It would also undermine the February 2020 U.S. agreement with the Taliban that tries to map out a path to peace. According to the plan, U.S. forces' reductions must be tied to Taliban counterterrorism commitments. That is part of the plan. Repealing it--the 2001 authorization for use of military force--would undermine the authority of the President of the United States for countering terrorists in Afghanistan but also would undermine the GITMO detention and other global counterterrorist efforts. The DOD and the White House would oppose this because it removes an authority for using military force and would significantly undermine counterterrorism authority. So I move to table the Paul amendment No. 2011, and I ask for the yeas and nays. The PRESIDING OFFICER.…
Source
govinfo.gov




