{"database": "openregs", "table": "congressional_record", "rows": [["CREC-2026-02-26-pt1-PgS699", "2026-02-26", 119, 2, null, null, "EXECUTIVE CALENDAR--Continued", "SENATE", "SENATE", "SEXECCAL", "S699", "S701", "[{\"name\": \"Tim Kaine\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "172 Cong. Rec. S699", "Congressional Record, Volume 172 Issue 38 (Thursday, February 26, 2026)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 38 (Thursday, February 26, 2026)]\n[Senate]\n[Pages S699-S701]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                     EXECUTIVE CALENDAR--Continued\n\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Virginia.\n  Mr. KAINE. Mr. President, I rise to discuss a matter that will likely\nbe before the body next week, a vote on my bipartisan War Powers\nResolution to advance the proposition we shouldn't be at war against\nIran without a vote of Congress.\n  I want to take a few minutes today to put this in a context that we\nmay all be discussing a little more next week. I believe very strongly\nthat a war with Iran today is both unnecessary and dangerous. I want to\nspend a little bit of time talking about why we are at this moment\nright now where President Trump, as recently as Tuesday night at the\nState of the Union, is suggesting that we may possibly need to be at\nwar with the Nation of Iran.\n  The history of relations between the United States and Iran from the\nbeginning of the 20th century to now is very, very tragic. The United\nStates and Iran were generally allies from the turn of the 1900s until\nthe early 1950s.\n  In the middle of World War II, at the Tehran Conference, President\nRoosevelt, Prime Minister Churchill, and Leader Stalin basically\ndevised what would be the boundaries of the current-day Iran. That has\nessentially stuck.\n  Iran's prehistory was very complicated, and the United States earned\nreally good--significant good will from the Iranian people, from the\nIranian Government being involved in that discussion.\n  We continued being seen as a real ally of Iran. In the early 1950s,\nafter having had essentially a dictatorship or monarchy, Iran elected a\npopular Prime Minister. The British Government was worried about that\ngovernment--the Iranian Government's efforts to potentially nationalize\nBritish oil assets.\n  So the British Government tried to talk the United States into a\nmilitary action to topple the Government of Iran. The United States\nrefused and convinced Britain not to do it. But later in 1953, the\nUnited States and Britain together arranged--and these are basic facts,\nno supposition, no opinion here--the United States and Britain joined\nin an effort to foment a coup d'etat that toppled the popularly elected\nGovernment of Iran and installed Reza Pahlavi as the Shah of Iran over\nthe objections of the Iranian people.\n\n  We did that. Britain did that.\n  The United States then funded the training of a secret police\noperation in Iran, the SAVAK, that between 1953 and 1979 perpetrated\ngross human rights abuses against the Iranian people.\n  This is a history that is not that well known to Americans, but a\nhistory that is very well known to Iranians.\n  That dictatorship and the human rights abuses perpetrated by the\nSAVAK and the Pahlavi regime eventually led to an uprising in Iran in\n1979, and Ayatollah Khomeini, another opposition leader, toppled the\nPahlavi regime and took control of the Iranian Government.\n  Most Americans remember that Iranian protestors stormed the U.S.\nEmbassy, took 52 hostages in that Embassy, and held them for 440-plus\ndays. It was not as a result of the change in regime, but there was an\nadditional fact.\n  After the regime changed, the Shah of Iran sought to come to the\nUnited States for refuge and medical treatment. The State Department\nurged President Carter not to allow it on the grounds they were trying\nto at least maintain some positive future relationship with the Iranian\nGovernment, but the United States allowed the Shah of Iran to come into\nthe United States for medical treatment and care, and that led Iranian\nprotestors to attack the American Embassy.\n  That was a horrible, unlawful act, and the hostages held for 440 days\nwere treated very, very badly. But that then led to a series of back-\nand-forths between the United States and Iran.\n  The United States, in the 1980s, funded Iraq in an 8-year war against\nIran that cost hundreds of thousands of Iranian lives. The United\nStates supplied military assets to Iraq, to Saddam Hussein, to carry\nout war against Iran. We transferred military assets, including\nchemical weapons, to Saddam Hussein that were used against the Iranian\npopulation.\n  The Iranian population grew to have a deep distrust and fear and even\nhatred of the United States because of this toppling of the Prime\nMinister through U.S. funding of a war against Iran.\n  During this Iran-Iraq war, the USS Vincennes, a Navy ship,\naccidentally shot down an Iranian airliner in the region, killing more\nthan 250 Iranian civilians. It was an accident, but Iran didn't believe\nit was an accident because they knew that the United States was funding\nIraq in the war against it, and they viewed that attack on their\ncivilian aircraft as something they could not countenance.\n  As this was happening, then-Iran-funded Shia militias and terrorist\ngroups bombed the Marine barracks in Beirut in the early 1980s as the\nIran-Iraq war was going on and the United States was funding the war\nagainst Iran. This back-and-forth started to escalate.\n  Later, as you all know, the United States invaded Iran's two\nneighbors--to the west, Iraq; to the east, Afghanistan--and put U.S.\ntroops all around Iran in its neighborhood. Iran interpreted those\ninvasions as a piece of the toppling of their government and the\ndowning of the commercial aircraft and the funding of the Iraq war.\n  And so, by the time we get into the 2000s, the depth of enmity\nbetween the United States and Iran was so intense, the Iranian regime\nchants ``Death to America'' because of this history. And we were\nfriends just 60 or 70 years ago. We took a fundamental turn in the\nrelationship and opened the path for a potential new chapter in United\nStates-Iranian relationships when, during the Obama administration, the\nUnited States, European allies and China and Russia joined together to\nnegotiate with Iran to curb their nuclear program.\n  I wrote a piece of legislation, the Iran Nuclear Review Act, that led\nto a\n\n[[Page S700]]\n\nvote on the floor of the Senate on a diplomatic treaty with Iran to\ncurb their nuclear program.\n  The diplomatic treaty, on the first page, in the first paragraph, in\nthe first sentence, had this declaration: Iran reaffirms it will never\nseek to purchase, acquire, or develop a nuclear weapon.\n  And the agreement contained other provisions limiting for many years\nIranian centrifuge production, Iranian enhancement of uranium. It\ncompelled significant inspections of the Iranian facilities by the\nInternational Atomic Energy Agency.\n  This deal was a solid deal that, for the first time in 60 years,\nactually had us around the table with a party that had grown to be an\nenemy, together with other allies but also adversaries, like Russia and\nChina, to control Iran's nuclear program.\n  Many of you know that in President Trump's first term, over the\nobjection and advice of his first Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and\nhis first Secretary of Defense James Mattis, told President Trump:\nPlease maintain the JCPOA. Please maintain the agreement that curtails\nIran's nuclear program and use U.S. sanctions against other Iranian\nbehavior; bad actions in the region, human rights violations,\ndevelopment of missile programs. The JCPOA allowed the United States\nand other nations to use sanctions to punish Iran for nonnuclear\nactivity.\n  President Trump's team told him keep the deal in place and use the\nsanctions against some of these other bad behaviors.\n  Contrary to the advice of these seasoned foreign policy\nprofessionals, seasoned defense professionals, Donald Trump tore up the\nJCPOA, and the United States walked away from it, even though our\nallies said it was working, even though China and Russia said it was\nworking, and even though the International Atomic Energy Agency said\nthat it was working.\n  The consequences of abandoning that deal were very obvious at the\ntime. If the United States walked away from a deal that was working, so\nwould Iran. And so they began again to enhance the enrichment of\nuranium. They began again to produce centrifuges. They ceased allowing\nthe intrusive inspections that had been a component of the JCPOA.\n  But that wasn't the only effect of President Trump abandoning the\ndeal. The parties around the table--our allies who had worked with us\non it--couldn't believe that the United States was walking away from\ndiplomacy. It weakened trust with our allies, and maybe more\nimportantly, we had China and Russia--two of our great adversaries\ntoday--at the table with us to make sure there was not a nuclear Iran.\nAnd by walking away from the deal, we further poisoned relationships\nwith those nations that now pose such challenge to the United States.\n  There was an additional consequence. We were in the middle of\nnegotiating with North Korea about limits to their nuclear program. As\nsoon as they saw the United States abandon a deal that was working,\nthey stopped negotiating with us over limits to their nuclear program.\n  Why would we do a deal with the United States if the United States\nwill back out of it? And there has been no real and meaningful progress\nabout the denuclearization of North Korea since the United States\ndecided to pull the plug on the JCPOA.\n  So here is where we are today. We have an armada around Iran. The\nPresident has said multiple times--and when he says it, you have to\nbelieve it because he bombed Iran in the summer--that he is potentially\non the verge of going to war with Iran.\n  What does it mean to have the armada? Let me use a Virginia example.\nThe USS Ford carrier is now positioned near Iran to be used in the case\nof an attack.\n  Carrier deployments--and the USS Ford deploys out of Virginia,\nthousands of sailors--carrier deployments last about 7 months. The\ncarrier was in the Middle East. President Trump ordered the Ford to go\nto the Caribbean--to be a show of force around Venezuela before it\nsteamed to the Caribbean. Now the President has ordered the Ford back\nto the Middle East.\n  A normal deployment for a carrier is 7 months. This is a deployment\nthat is now going to be 11 months long. Our sailors who thought they\nwere going to be home seeing their families for Christmas--it is now\ngoing to take 11 months. It will be the longest deployment of any\ncarrier since the Vietnam war, and our sailors are just ready to be\nhome.\n  The problems with the Ford are almost ones that I don't want to talk\nabout on the floor. Many of the toilets on the Ford are inoperable.\nThese are the kinds of things that happen during a deployment, and that\nis why you limit a deployment to certain months. You get the ship back\nin port, and you fix it up. The Ford is in tough shape right now and\nneeds to come back to port so that the sailors can see their families,\nbut also the quality of life and morale on the Ford are in dramatic\ndecline.\n  So we are at a precipice, with U.S. military troops arrayed around\nIran.\n  I just want to say this: War is unnecessary, and war is dangerous.\nThen I will conclude.\n  War is unnecessary.\n  The President says we may need to go against Iran to stop their\nnuclear program. We had stopped it through diplomacy. Do we really\nprefer war to diplomacy? And President Trump, in the bombing of Iran in\nthe summer--you will remember he said we had obliterated the Iranian\nnuclear program. Well, if that was true 6 months ago, there is no need\nfor us to invade Iran now to stop their nuclear ambitions.\n  The President said we may need to go to war against Iran to protect\nthe protesters. There are protesters against dictatorial governments\nall over the world. Are we going to put our sons and daughters in\nharm's way against those nations to protect protesters?\n  I have to say I don't really accept that the President is that\nworried about Iranian protesters. Why not? The President is currently\ndeporting people to Iran--Iranians who were in the United States who do\nnot have appropriate immigration status, even Iranian Christians, even\nIranian dissidents who would be subject to persecution if they were\nreturned to Iran. President Trump has now sent more than 100 of them\nback to Iran. If he really cared about the rights of Iranians and how\nthey would be treated by their government, he wouldn't be doing that.\n  Finally, the President has said Iran has ballistic missiles. They do,\nbut the U.S. overmatch to Iran's military is so dramatic that any\neffort by the Iranians to use missiles--and there has been no evidence\nthat that is their intent against the United States unless we use\nmissiles against them--we would obliterate that capacity in an instant\nwere they to use it.\n  War is unnecessary.\n  War is dangerous. War is dangerous for U.S. troops.\n  We have put troops all around Iran, all around its borders in\nLebanon, in Israel, in Syria, in Iraq. We not only have troops, we have\nconsulates, for example, in Erbil, in the Kurdish section of northern\nIraq.\n  U.S. assets are everywhere. We can do a great job of protecting an\nawful lot of territory, but it would not be hard for even an\novermatched nation like Iran, if they are attacked, to reach out and do\nharm to the U.S. troops or U.S. consulates or U.S. civilians. And for\nwhat?\n  This is dangerous to U.S. troops, and I say this as a father of a\nU.S. marine and representing a State that is one of the most military\nStates in the Nation.\n  War is dangerous to the region.\n  When the United States has believed it could change regimes before in\nIraq, in Afghanistan, in Libya, what has it gotten us? What has it\ngotten us? Has it created a more stable region? Hardly. Hardly.\n  To think that we could go in at the barrel of a gun and invade a\nnation and guarantee that lives lost or injured in that would be worth\nit because we would be producing something would be making a prediction\nabout the Middle East that has not been borne out by events in the last\n25 years.\n  War is dangerous to broader diplomacy.\n  We had the nations of the world, both our friends in Europe and China\nand Russia, around the table, and we broke a diplomatic deal, and it\nwould suggest that we are preferring war to diplomacy. Why would\nnations want to engage in diplomacy with us if they can't trust the\nUnited States to stick to our word?\n\n[[Page S701]]\n\n  Finally, war is dangerous to the U.S. economy.\n  An invasion of Iran would immediately lead to dramatic increases in\nthe price of oil. American citizens, Virginians, are already laboring\nunder costs that are too high for energy, for health, for groceries,\nfor building supplies. The last thing we need is an unnecessary war\nthat will drive energy prices even higher.\n  War also risks inciting other dictators.\n  If the United States can decide, well, we are going to invade a\nsovereign nation because we want to do it, what is our ability to stand\nand justly criticize Vladimir Putin and Russia for invading Ukraine?\nWhat argument can we have to China to suggest that they shouldn't incur\nupon and invade Taiwan?\n  The United States should uphold a moral standard so that we can look\nothers in the eye and say: You should uphold a moral standard.\n\n  We would badly degrade our ability to prevent dictators from invading\nother sovereign nations if we are to get into a war with Iran.\n  Look, Iran is not a good guy. Iran is a bad guy. Iran punishes\nprotesters. Iran is engaged in all kinds of activity in the region--\nfunding terrorist groups in Syria, in Iraq, Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas\nin Gaza, the Houthis in Yemen. They are doing that. They are doing that\nat the expense of their own people.\n  Iran engages in activities far away from the Middle East. They have\nhad to remove their Ambassadors from nations as far-flung as Morocco\nand Australia because of activities that are designed in those\ncountries to destabilize them. Iran funded a bombing of a Jewish\ncultural center in Argentina a couple decades ago, and they still\nhaven't been held to account.\n  So they are not a good guy; they are a bad guy. But are they worth\nwasting U.S. lives, U.S. money, U.S. credibility over? Let's use other\ntools, like sanctions, and not use our own kids' lives to deal with\nthis threat.\n  I will conclude and just say this: My time as Governor from 2006 to\n2010 coincided with the mass deployment of Virginians into wars in Iraq\nand Afghanistan. As the Governor of Virginia, I had an authority over\nmembers of the Virginia National Guard. The Virginia National Guard\ndeployed in the thousands to Iraq and Afghanistan, and I went to the\ndeployments, and I went to the homecomings, and I went to the wakes,\nand I went to the funerals.\n  Some of these are too emotional for me to describe on the floor, but\nin an odd way, one of the most emotional was the day that I went to the\nVirginia War Memorial to watch a homecoming. U.S. troops coming out of\nAfghanistan had landed in a base in New Jersey, and they had hopped on\na bus to come back to Virginia to reunite with their families. They\nexited the bus. They got in formation, and their commander announced\nthat this National Guard unit was now returned all present and\naccounted for.\n  I knew that commander. He had been a Richmond police officer, and he\nwas deployed with his unit. I saw in his face that for that entire 6-\nmonth deployment, he labored under the incredible strain of wanting to\nbe able to say those words at the end of the deployment--``all present\nand accounted for.''\n  I saw him say those words, and I saw the care and the tension and the\nfear melt away. It made me think of the other homecomings I had been to\nwhere the commander couldn't say those words, and it made me think\nabout them and what they had labored under.\n  I made a vow when I came to this body that I would do everything in\nmy power to fight tooth and nail against sending our sons and daughters\ninto unnecessary wars. I am on the Armed Services Committee. I voted\nfor war authorizations. If we need to go to war to defend this country,\nthen those who have signed up to do that, knowing that that might be a\npossibility, they are ready to serve us to defend the Nation. But an\noptional war at the whim of a President--ordering troops here and there\naround the globe as if they are a palace guard--for no articulated\nrationale puts our kids at risk in a completely unacceptable way.\n  We will have a vote next week on something that I believe is just\nbedrock constitutional law. We shouldn't be at war without a vote of\nCongress. We shouldn't be at war with Iran unless Members of this body\nhave the guts to have a debate and vote and put their thumbprint on it\nand say: This is in the national interest.\n  No shortcuts. No end runs around Congress. No end runs around debate\nin front of the American people and laying out the stakes for them.\n  I can't believe that Virginia, one of the most military States in the\ncountry, is so different than other parts of this Nation. I can't\nbelieve that this Nation is itching for another war in the Middle East.\nHaven't we learned something from a quarter of a century of war in the\nMiddle East? I hope we have.\n  I hope my colleagues will join me next week in suggesting no war\nunless we vote to authorize it.\n  I yield the floor.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Florida."]], "columns": ["granule_id", "date", "congress", "session", "volume", "issue", "title", "chamber", "granule_class", "sub_granule_class", "page_start", "page_end", "speakers", "bills", "citation", "full_text"], "primary_keys": ["granule_id"], "primary_key_values": ["CREC-2026-02-26-pt1-PgS699"], "units": {}, "query_ms": 33.83584402035922, "source": "Federal Register API & Regulations.gov API", "source_url": "https://www.federalregister.gov/developers/api/v1", "license": "Public Domain (U.S. Government data)", "license_url": "https://www.regulations.gov/faq"}