[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 87 (Friday, July 1, 1994)]
[House]
[Page H]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: July 1, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
   WATCHING AND WAITING: THE CONFIRMATION OF DAVID BIRENBAUM AS U.S. 
             REPRESENTATIVE FOR U.N. MANAGEMENT AND REFORM

  Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, last Friday, June 24, 1994, the 
nomination of Mr. David Birenbaum to be U.S. Representative for United 
Nations Management and Reform was confirmed by the Senate. I want 
everyone to know that action did not have my consent. In fact, it was 
only through Cloakroom staff error that the nomination was cleared. It 
was not cleared by me, my staff, nor by other Senators who have 
supported me in this matter. I do not blame anyone specifically. Errors 
do occur from time to time. Everyone should realize, however, that Mr. 
Birenbaum has become the U.S. Representative because of the situation I 
have just described.
  Before clearing this nomination, Senator Helms and I had a few more 
questions for Mr. Birenbaum. In fact, a letter incorporating those few 
questions was ready for signature when the Senate acted last Friday. In 
view of the circumstances in which this nomination was cleared for 
consideration erroneously, I intend to submit the additional questions 
to Mr. Birenbaum and have called upon him to respond. I trust he will 
do so.
  Since ``60 Minutes'' aired a segment on U.N. mismanagement last 
September, this issue has gained momentum in Congress. U.N. management 
and peacekeeping reform are necessary to ensure that the United Nations 
functions more efficiently and effectively. Consequently, it is 
imperative that the newly confirmed U.S. Representative for U.N. 
Management and Reform not only be highly qualified, but also 
management-oriented.
  I have become concerned about David Birenbaum's prior activities as a 
consultant to the U.S. U.N. Mission. In his capacity as a consultant to 
Ambassador Albright since 1993, Mr. Birenbaum has advised the U.S. 
Mission regarding the creation of a permanent, U.N.-sponsored criminal 
court. A staunch opponent of the establishment of a permanent 
international criminal court, I have been concerned about the details 
of Mr. Birenbaum's consultancy and his willingness to make U.N. 
management and reform his top priority.
  Mr. President, I would think that David Birenbaum would have 
discussed his consultancy during this April 21, 1994, Senate 
confirmation hearing. While he mentioned on his formal Senate Foreign 
Relations Committee application that he served as a consultant to the 
U.S. Mission, he did not discuss his specific activities with regard to 
the creation of an international criminal court. I am curious why Mr. 
Birenbaum did not explain his consultancy in his testimony, as it would 
have demonstrated past involvement with the United Nations. I would 
think Mr. Birenbaum would have viewed his consultancy as an indication 
of his familiarity with the United Nations and its operations. Yet, he 
still chose not to raise this issue in his testimony before the 
committee.
  As a result, along with our colleague from North Carolina, Senator 
Helms, I sent a letter to Mr. Birenbaum with a request for specific 
information about his activities as a consultant to the U.S. Mission. 
Additionally, Senator Helms and I sent a letter to Secretary of State 
Warren Christopher regarding the State Department's official 
description of the responsibilities involved in the post of U.S. 
Representative for U.N. Management and Reform. Both the response from 
Mr. Birenbaum and the response on behalf of the State Department 
offered only pat answers. According to the letter from Wendy Sherman, 
Assistant Secretary for Legislative Affairs at the State Department, in 
answer to our questions about Mr. Birenbaum's potential involvement 
with the establishment of an international criminal court:

       Responsibility within the State Department for U.S. policy 
     towards an International Criminal Court (ICC) rests with the 
     Office of the Legal Adviser (L) in Washington. USUN's own 
     legal adviser works closely with L and reports directly to 
     Ambassador Albright. Ambassador Albright's counsel in her 
     Washington office also participates in matters related to the 
     ICC. We cannot rule out the possibility that one or another 
     of these offices may ask Mr. Birenbaum to comment on an ICC-
     related issue.

  This is hardly an official State Department assurance that David 
Birenbaum will not be devoting his time to issues relating to the 
court. It is more of an acknowledgement that David Birenbaum very well 
may be given the opportunity to work on the court's creation.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to place the letter to David 
Birenbaum, his response, and the letter to Secretary Christopher and 
his response in the Record at the end of my remarks.
  Recently, I have reviewed an unclassified copy of the executive 
summary of President Clinton's Decision Directive on Reforming 
Multilateral Peace Operations (PDD 25). Thus far, I have seen only the 
executive summary of PDD 25, as the full text of PDD 25 remains 
classified. I am pleased, however, that the executive summary notes the 
administration's support for much needed management reforms in the 
United Nations.
  While the President's acknowledgement of the seriousness of this 
issue in PDD 25 is an excellent step in addressing the United Nations' 
rampant management abuses, continued pressure and insistence from the 
President, Ambassador Albright, and now David Birenbaum, are absolutely 
necessary to ensure that management reforms are taken seriously by U.N. 
Secretary-General Boutros Ghali and representatives from other Member 
States in the General Assembly.
  I urge my colleagues to continue supporting for tough U.N. management 
reforms and to keep a watchful eye on the efforts of the U.S. 
Representative for U.N. Management and Reform. If the United Nations is 
to be an effective international body, U.S. support and funding are 
necessary. However, if the United Nations fails to reform and continues 
to mismanage peacekeeping operations, the United States cannot remain 
silent. We must not continue down the same wasteful spending paths that 
are notoriously synonymous with the United Nations.
  I am the sort of Senator who--if David Birenbaum performs well in the 
job--will not begrudge him and will praise his reform efforts. In fact, 
I have just sent a letter of praise to someone in a Federal agency 
whose nomination I originally opposed. I wish David Birenbaum success 
as our newest reform leader at the United Nations.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to place excerpts from Mr. 
Birenbaum's April 21, 1994, confirmation hearing in the Record at this 
time.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

 Excerpts From the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee Hearing on 
 the nomination of David Birenbaum To Be Representative of the U.S. to 
      the United Nations for Management and Reform, April 21, 1994

       Senator Pressler. Do you think he [Boutros Boutros-Ghali] 
     has proceeded in the direction of reform since he has come?
       Mr. Birenbaum. I am trying to answer that question. I said 
     I think in some ways he has and in other ways he has not. He 
     has, by initially supporting and then establishing the Office 
     of Inspection and Investigation which I thought was a 
     positive step, not a complete step, not a perfect step. It 
     requires further action, and we are committed to 
     accomplishing that action, but nonetheless it is a positive 
     step toward the direction of reform.
       He also reformed the Secretariat. I think he cut some 16 
     positions initially, high level positions. There has been, I 
     believe, some backsliding since then. There are two high 
     level . . .
       Senator Pressler. What has become of those 16 positions you 
     mentioned?
       Mr. Birenbaum. I do not know.
       Senator Pressler. Where did those people go?
       Mr. Birenbaum. I do not know the answer to that question. I 
     know the positions were cut. There was a reorganization of 
     the Secretariat.
       Senator Pressler. But the people are still in the U.N.?
       Mr. Birenbaum. I do not know what has happened to them.
       Senator Pressler. Would you find out what has happened to 
     them?
       Mr. Birenbaum. Yes
       Senator Pressler. They did not leave?
       Mr. Birenbaum. I do not know the status of those 
     individuals.
       Senator Pressler. But you brought it up.
       Mr. Birenbaum. They do not hold the position that they had 
     previously, which was one of the objectives that he sought to 
     accomplish. In addition . . .
       Senator Pressler. Since you raise that point, I think you 
     will find that those 16 people were reshuffled, that they are 
     collecting as much money as ever.
       Mr. Birenbaum. Well, that may be . . .
       Senator Pressler. Then why would that be a reform?
       Mr. Birenbaum. Well, if by reform we mean to make more 
     effective the management of the Secretariat, the fact that 
     those individuals are still present in the United Nations. . 
     . .
       Senator Pressler. But they are still in the Secretariat.
       Mr. Birenbaum. That does not necessarily mean, it seems to 
     me, that the restructuring, which has as its objective to 
     make the management system more effective, is not for real. 
     There have been any number of studies which, so far as I can 
     tell, are quite well-funded, that recommend that fewer people 
     report to the Secretary General than had been the case.
       Senator Pressler. These are not reform.
       Mr. Birenbaum. If I may complete my response, please.
       Senator Pressler. Yes, but I just want to get the specific 
     reforms you are citing. He has reassigned 16 people within 
     the same Secretariat.
       Mr. Birenbaum. I do not know whether they are in the 
     Secretariat. It is a very large institution. But what I am 
     saying here is that there were a very considerable number of 
     people who were reporting to the Secretary General, and 
     indeed there were a number of studies that I have seen that 
     criticized this on the basis that the Secretary General 
     cannot possibly effectively manage if he has so many people 
     reporting to him. Also, there were overlapping 
     responsibilities, and so coordination was a major problem and 
     a major headache. Now, I think one of the reforms that he 
     instituted initially was in the direction of regularizing 
     these reporting relationships and reconfiguring the 
     Secretariat so that now there are, as I understand it, six 
     departments as distinguished from whatever the number was 
     before, certainly much greater than that.
       Now, is this complete reform? Is this sufficient? Is this 
     the end of the story? Of course not, but I think it 
     represented a positive step that he took when he first became 
     Secretary General.
       Do I think this suggests that he is a great reformer and we 
     do not have to push him and that everything is going to be 
     fine? I do not. I think there is a great deal that we need to 
     do. We need to push him very hard, and if I am conformed in 
     this position, it would be my objective to do exactly that.
       Senator Pressler. But in all honesty, if you will look at 
     that reasoning of 16 people and the reshuffling, if you 
     consider that reform, we have a serious disagreement.
       Mr. Birenbaum. Well, one has to define terms, Reform is, of 
     course, not a self-defining term. I do know, and indeed there 
     is one study that I would refer you to, because it was 
     chaired by Senator Kassebaum and Chairman Hamilton, and it 
     was sponsored by the Stimson Center--it examined some of 
     these issues particularly with respect to peacekeeping.
       One of the points that was made, and I thought it was a 
     valid point, is that any Secretary General who is going to be 
     an effective administrator on reform, and certainly who wants 
     to accomplish that objective and certainly is going to be 
     able to run the business better, ought to have fewer people 
     reporting to him, and that it is important to consolidate 
     functions so as to avoid a lot of overlapping, confused and 
     decentralized decision making, which leads to many problems 
     at the United Nations. I think the initial reform that he 
     undertook was aimed in that direction. Does that mean staff 
     cutbacks, getting rid of people, etc? That is a different 
     objective, and I do not know that it does mean that. I do not 
     know that these people were relieved of the position that 
     they previously held are no longer with the United Nations. 
     If you have knowledge that they are still there, I do not 
     challenge that.
       Senator Pressler. What have Boutros-Ghali's views been with 
     regard to the Office of the Inspector General position?
       Mr. Birenbaum. Well, as you know, he supported the position 
     of the Office of Inspections and Investigations, and I 
     believe that, I do not know what his position will be on our 
     proposal for a General Assembly resolution to provide now a 
     legal basis and statutory basis, if you will, for the Office 
     of an Independent Inspector General. I do not know what his 
     position is on that.
       Senator Pressler. Well, he has expressed strong opposition 
     to it publicly.
       Mr. Birenbaum. I am not aware of this opposition publicly 
     to the establishment of the Office of Inspector General.
       Senator Pressler. Would you check on his statements on that 
     and put them in the record?
       Mr. Birenbaum. Yes.
       Senator Pressler. Since the President said that we must say 
     no to peacekeeping operations how many operations have been 
     established or renewed since the President's statement?
       Mr. Birenbaum. I do not know the answer to that question.
       Senator Pressler. How many operations have been abolished 
     or countries denied peacekeeping assistance during the same 
     period of time?
       Mr. Birenbaum. I do not know that any have been abolished, 
     but I do understand that the United States has successfully 
     resisted peacekeeping proposals which have come before the 
     Security Council or were on the verge of coming before the 
     Security Council.
       Senator Pressler. To its credit, the administration has 
     initiated efforts to reform planning, management, and 
     budgeting of U.N. peacekeeping operations. What specific 
     proposals have been submitted to the U.N., and which 
     committees?
       Mr. Birenbaum. I do not know the status of proposals that 
     we have made. I do know that there are a number of management 
     reforms in the area of peacekeeping that we have, that the 
     administration, I am sorry, has conceived. I do not know the 
     status of them, as far as their presentations to committees 
     are concerned.
       Senator Pressler. Now, last year the Secretary General 
     established an Office of Inspections and Investigations. How 
     does this office compare--or what does this office do, first 
     of all?
       Mr. Birenbaum. Well, I think as far as the scope of the 
     responsibility is concerned it is similar to the Office of 
     Inspector General that we have in mind. The difference, 
     however, is that we want first of all, and I think most 
     importantly, to have a statutory foundation which underpins 
     the Office of Inspector General. That does not exist now. 
     This Office of Inspections and Investigations was created by 
     act of the Secretary General. What the Secretary General 
     does, of course, he can undo or modify in his discretion, if 
     that is not acceptable.
       There are a number of other very important aspects of our 
     proposal for the establishment of an independent Inspector 
     General Office that differentiate that office from the 
     current Office of Inspection and Investigation. In particular 
     there is the issue of the appointment and removal authority. 
     Right now it rests with the Secretary General. Our proposal 
     would require that any appointment or removal decision made 
     by the Secretary General be subject to ratification by vote 
     of two-thirds of the General Assembly, which is very 
     important constraint and one that we are insisting upon in 
     connection with our resolution or will be, I should say, when 
     it is introduced.
       We also want to make sure that the budget for the Office of 
     Inspector General is treated separately and not in normal 
     course, which again reinforces the independent status and 
     stature of the Office of Inspector General.
       And one other point I would make in this connection, 
     because I think it is also very important, and that is that 
     the Inspector General would have the title of Under 
     Secretary, not Assistant Secretary which is the current rank 
     that the incumbent has within the U.N. system.
       Senator Pressler. So in other words you consider the Office 
     of Inspections and Investigations as a whitewash, basically, 
     is what you are saying?
       Mr. Birenbaum. No, I am not saying that, Senator. I am 
     saying I think it is a useful step but it is only that, and 
     that we need to make sure that there is a statutory 
     foundation which supports the independence of the functioning 
     of the Inspector General. That will be terribly important.
       Senator Pressler. Well, but if it is a useful step, you 
     just have laid out all these things that it cannot do that 
     the Inspector General could do. What can the Office of 
     Inspections and Investigations, what have they done, if it is 
     a useful step?
       Mr. Birenbaum. Well, he can conduct investigations. He has, 
     I think, power commensurate with the position of an 
     independent Inspector General.
       Senator Pressler. Have you seen any reports from it?
       Mr. Birenbaum. I have not seen any reports from it, but 
     then I think it has only been in existence for a fairly short 
     time. But rather than critique what the Secretary General has 
     done which was an act taken on his own authority, he 
     obviously cannot himself enact a resolution of the General 
     Assembly that requires General Assembly. It seems to me to 
     be, now at least for us, terribly important to focus on what 
     it is that we want the General Assembly to do by way of 
     making sure that this is the kind of Office of Inspector 
     General that we want, and then take the actions necessary and 
     appropriate to secure action by the General Assembly in short 
     period of time, and that is I believe the present policy.
       Senator Pressler. I am just using your words. You said this 
     was a useful step.
       Mr. Birenbaum. Yes.
       Senator Pressler. What has resulted?
       Mr. Birenbaum. Well, I cannot tell you what has resulted 
     except for the establishment of the office and the 
     constitution.
       Senator Pressler. Then how do you know it is a useful step, 
     then?
       Mr. Birenbaum. Because it is a useful step to establish an 
     Office of Inspections and Investigations within the United 
     Nations system with powers of investigation and the 
     responsibilities of auditing and monitoring and evaluation 
     this office has.
       Senator Pressler. Well, how many people are in this office? 
     How many people are in this Office of Inspections and 
     Investigations?
       Mr. Birenbaum. I do not know the population, although I do 
     know that it combined a number of operations that had existed 
     before then in a fairly uncoordinated way, which is another 
     aspect of the positive step as I have characterized it. But I 
     do not want to get hung up on this because I share your view 
     that what we need at the United Nations is a truly 
     independent Inspector General, basically on the American 
     model. And that is the administration policy.
       Senator Pressler. Well, yes, I am in agreement there. But 
     according to my information this Office of Inspections and 
     Investigations is not different from the previous 
     internal oversight mechanisms and that it does not have 
     autonomy from the Secretary General and it just has 
     absolutely no power at all and has not done anything.
       Mr. Birenbaum. I do not know what it has done. But I do 
     know that as a matter of the instruments that constitute it 
     it does have authority and it also has a reporting 
     responsibility. Now, I left that out because it is very 
     important, I think to us, in terms of fashioning the 
     resolution which we would like to present to the General 
     Assembly that it be very clear that the Inspector General 
     report to the General Assembly through the Secretary General 
     and that his report not be altered by the Secretary General 
     that the membership will have undiluted the recommendations 
     and analysis of an independent Inspector General and take 
     whatever action it deems necessary.
       Senator Pressler. But the present office cannot go directly 
     to the UNGA. The Secretary General has to sign off before it 
     goes to the UNGA, which makes it just an instrument of his 
     office. Is that not true?
       Mr. Birenbaum. I am not sure.
       Senator Pressler. The head of the OII cannot issue 
     criticism of the Secretary General's management practices to 
     the UNGA unless he signs off.
       Mr. Birenbaum. If you will give me a moment, I think I can 
     answer that question. I think that is right, that the OII, 
     the head of the OII, does not report directly but reports to 
     the Secretary General and the Secretary General files a 
     report based on the activities of the OII to the General 
     Assembly. That is one of the changes that we are insisting 
     on. That is one of the responsibilities or powers that we 
     would like to have the Inspector General possess, that is, 
     the power to report to the General Assembly through the 
     Secretary General with no alteration.
       Senator Pressler. It is my understanding that the State 
     Department is prepared to accept with some modifications that 
     the OII, that is the Office of Inspections and Investigation, 
     meets the requirements of an OIG, that is an Office of 
     Inspector General. There appear to be serious differences 
     between the two concepts in the areas of appointment, 
     reporting, operating authority, staffing and budgeting 
     levels. Under these circumstances, how would the 
     administration defend the OII as meeting the requirements for 
     an OIG outlined by the President in his statement to the 
     United nations General Assembly?
       Mr. Birenbaum. Well, I do not know. I guess I would not 
     accept the premise of that question, that is, the Department 
     of State or the administration is prepared to accept an OII 
     with minor tinkering. My understanding of the position of the 
     policy of the administration is that it supports 
     enthusiastically and will aggressively seek to have 
     established a truly independent IG, and that it does have 
     reporting and removal responsibilities that I have outlined.
       Senator Pressler. Now, when he assumed office, Secretary 
     General Boutros Boutros-Ghali announced plans for a sweeping 
     reorganization and a reform of U.N. operations and programs. 
     What progress has been achieved since Boutros-Ghali took 
     office?
       Mr. Birenbaum. Well, Senator, apart from the discussion 
     that we had a few minutes ago I do not know that I have 
     anything to add.
       Senator Pressler. And that discussion was that you felt 
     that the Office of OII was a useful step?
       Mr. Birenbaum. I thought that the establishment of the 
     Office of OII was a useful step and that I thought that the 
     reconfiguration of the secretariat was a useful step. Those 
     are two postiive steps.
       Senator Pressler. Have either of those resulted in less 
     fraud, theft, or waste, or resulted in a change in the 
     personnel policies?
       Mr. Birenbaum. I cannot answer that, Senator.
       Senator Pressler. Could you find out? I mean if it is a 
     useful step we need to know what some of the results have 
     been. Is that a fair question?
       Mr. Birenbaum. No, I do not think it is a fair question to 
     ask whether it has resulted in the diminution of fraud. How 
     do you measure that? I think as far as fraud, waste, and 
     abuse is concerned, as you pointed out, this is a very 
     serious and real problem. It should not exist and it is 
     intolerable. It is intolerable at any time, and particularly 
     now when governments are strapped for funds and the United 
     Nations responsibilities have become so much more important. 
     That is one reason, not the only reason, but one reason, why 
     the administration is so strongly committed to the 
     establishment of an independent Inspector General function. 
     It will be his responsibility to look into instances of that.
       Senator Pressler. I very much appreciate that, and they 
     came to that conclusion under very heavy pressure from 
     Congress because a couple of years ago they were very much 
     opposed to it, or a year and a half ago.
       Let me ask you this, either here or for the record, if you 
     feel there has been some reform under Boutros Boutros-Ghali? 
     He announced all of these plans, and indeed you can have a 
     reorganization or you can create an office. But is it a fair 
     question to ask you to cite one or two things that have 
     resulted in improvements in the functioning of the U.N.?
       Mr. Birenbaum. I think certainly it is a fair question, and 
     I am not sure that I can give you a complete catalog, if 
     there is a catalog to be made of the positive results that 
     have ensued as a consequence of reform measures that he 
     supported. The only reform measures that come to my mind are 
     the ones that I have indicated. I can certainly ask for an 
     inventory of other reform measures, if you like, and I can 
     make that available to you. I am not sure one can connect 
     that with particular results. That is very hard. But I can 
     seek to provide you with more information on this point.
       Senator Pressler. All right. You mentioned that 16 
     positions were eliminated. At the same time, the Secretary 
     General has created a number of special representative 
     positions, usually at the rank of Under Secretary General. 
     How many special representatives are now funded by the U.N.?
       Mr. Birenbaum. I do not know the answer to that question.
       Senator Pressler. My question then is what is the function 
     of each of these and their salary level, and if you will 
     submit it for the record you will find that they are at a 
     very high level. Indeed, the bureaucracy has expanded rather 
     than decreased.
       Now, did the U.S. approve or support the establishment or 
     funding of each or any one of these additional new high-level 
     conditions?
       Mr. Birenbaum. I do not know the answer to that.
       Senator Pressler. Do you consider that part of Boutros-
     Ghali's reform?
       Mr. Birenbaum. Well, you are asking me if something 
     happened. I do not know whether it happened or not. And 
     whether the United States Government supported it, I cannot 
     say. And whether that is part of reform is all part of the 
     same package. Frankly, I do not know what has happened in 
     this connection and I cannot say whether it is part of 
     reform, now knowing what these functions are.
       Senator Pressler. Well, I would not have asked this 
     question except you brought up that he had eliminated 16 
     high-level positions.
       Mr. Birenbaum. Yes. But I want to be clear about that, and 
     I think there has been some confusion between us on this 
     issue. I am not touting this as an instance of cost-saving, 
     necessarily. What I was suggesting to you is that it is an 
     indication of a desire to reconfigure the management 
     structure of the Secretariat, and that is an objective, if 
     one has in mind sound management practices, that makes some 
     sense, whether it results in cost-saving or not.
       Now, there is a further decision as to what should happen 
     to the people who have been removed from high-level positions 
     that they held previously as a consequence of the management 
     reconfiguration within the Secretariat. I do not know the 
     answer to that. I do not know what happened to these 
     individuals. I do not know whether the jobs that they are 
     doing are jobs that they should be doing. I just cannot 
     answer that.
       Senator Pressler. Okay. I keep going around in circles here 
     became I am trying to identify these. You have told me that 
     you believe that Boutros-Ghali has made some progress and 
     reforms. You cited the 16 and you said this reconfiguration 
     or whatever it is that he has done is a reform. But yet we 
     see that none of these people left and that we have 
     created a number of special representative positions at 
     the rank of Under Secretary General. And so it has become 
     even more proliferated. Who do these people report to?
       Mr. Birenbaum. I do not know that that is correct, the 
     premise of your question, that is, that the 16 people who 
     were removed from the position they had previously are now 
     Under Secretary Generals with different reporting 
     responsibility. I do not know whether that is correct or not.
       Senator Pressler. Well, I understand that they report to 
     him.
       Mr. Birenbaum. I just do not know.
       Senator Pressler. So the number of people reporting to 
     Boutros-Ghali has been reduced?
       Mr. Birenbaum. That is what I have been informed. That is 
     what I have seen or read.
       Senator Pressler. How many people report directly to him?
       Mr. Birenbaum. I do not know the answer to that question, 
     but I do know there are six separate departments that were 
     created which reduced immediately the number of department 
     heads reporting to the Secretary General. I do not know 
     exactly how many people report to him now.
       Senator Pressler. What is the current total number of high 
     level positions at the U.N.?
       Mr. Birenbaum. I do not know the answer to that question.
       Senator Pressler. What criteria exists to determine if 
     these positions are at the appropriate level or if they are 
     even necessary?
       Mr. Birenbaum. I do not know the answer to that question.
       Senator Pressler. So we need criteria?
       Mr. Birenbaum. Yes. I think one very important 
     responsibility as far as reform is concerned is in the field 
     of personnel, and I believe the mission will be making a 
     proposal in that regard.
       There will be proposals and classifications and all of 
     that.
       Senator Pressler. Does the establishment of a high-level 
     position require General Assembly approval?
       Mr. Birenbaum. I do not know. I do not know the answer to 
     that.
       Senator Pressler. Can you find out how many posts receive 
     General Assembly approval prior to their establishment?
       Mr. Birenbaum. Well, I can inquire about that.
       Senator Pressler. That should not be hard to figure out.
       Mr. Birenbaum. It would be. Certainly, there would have to 
     be, it would have to be in the budget, which is approved by 
     the General Assembly. Now, how this process functions, in 
     terms of authorizing positions, I do not know.
       Senator Pressler. This Secretary General created a whole 
     number of new special representative positions, usually at 
     the rank of Under Secretary General, during this period of 
     time when you feel he was making steps towards reform. Did he 
     have those approved?
       Mr. Birenbaum. I do not know.
       Senator Pressler. Would you find out and answer for the 
     record?
       Mr. Birenbaum. Yes.
       Senator Pressler. Now, if you are not a member of the 
     ACABQ, nor a member of the other expert bodies associated 
     with United Nations administrative and budgetary issues, and 
     not on the Fifth Committee, what will your role be at the 
     United Nations?
       Mr. Birenbaum. Well, I concede my role to be 
     multidimensional. One is I will surely have supervisory 
     responsibility with respect to the way in which the United 
     Nations presently functions. And, in that connection, the 
     person whom I will certainly work with. I would expect to 
     work with the person who does sit on the Fifth Committee now. 
     I am not saying that that will not be my responsibility to 
     sit on that Committee or not. I, frankly, at this stage do 
     not know whether that is a function that I would be asked to 
     perform, or whether it would be appropriate. I really cannot 
     answer that question.
       Another very important component of the portfolio, which I 
     would hold if confirmed to this position, has to do with 
     reforming the United Nations, meaning on a going forward 
     basis, not just making sure that the rules as they exist now 
     are complied with. That is very important. But I think no 
     less important is helping to conceive of a plan for a 
     thorough going, serious reform of the United Nations in many 
     of its dimensions, in many of its practices.
       I would want, with you and the others who are concerned 
     about this in Congress, to help develop a meaningful, 
     substantial and comprehensive reform agenda, and then to work 
     for its acceptance and implementation. Because I think what 
     is, is not good enough.
       Senator Pressler. Yes. But how do you envisage your job 
     just on a daily basis? I mean, you are not a member of the 
     Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions. 
     You are not a member of the Fifth Committee. You are not a 
     member of any of the other expert bodies associated with the 
     United Nations administrative or budgetary issues. What will 
     you do?
       Mr. Birenbaum. Well, I do have people who are in all of 
     those capacities reporting to me. And I would expect to make 
     sure. I would expect to supervise them and work with them in 
     the discharge of their responsibilities. In addition to that, 
     as I said, I think there is an enormous amount of work to be 
     done.
       Senator Pressler. The person who goes to the Fifth 
     Committee will report to you?
       Mr. Birenbaum. Well, frankly, I do not know whether that 
     person will report to me or not. What I do know is that I 
     will work that person.
       Senator Pressler. Now, it is my understanding that 
     currently two U.S. United Nations Ambassadors are involved in 
     United Nations reform. Ambassador Inderfurth is responsible 
     for reform of the Security Council and peacekeeping 
     operations. Ambassador Victor Marrero follows reform in the 
     economic and social areas. If appointed, will responsibility 
     for these issues be transferred to you?
       Mr. Birenbaum. Well, I think I responded that I really do 
     not know how I will relate to Ambassador Inderfurth and 
     Ambassador Marrero. That will have to be worked out. I have 
     not tried to do that as yet.
       Senator Pressler. But as one who follows these matters 
     somewhat, here we are confirming, and this is not your 
     decision, somebody in the State Department made this 
     decision. But could you please, for the record submit, would 
     you ask the State Department, but I will ask you. I am trying 
     to get a definition of what your job is going to be compared 
     to Ambassador Inderfurth's and Ambassador Marrero. They have 
     these divisions of responsibility up there, and what is yours 
     going to be, that is what I am trying to get to here.
       Mr. Birenbaum. I understand that, Senator.
       Senator Pressler. Is that a fair question, if we are 
     sending an ambassador someplace?
       Mr. Birenbaum. Of course it is a fair question, but I think 
     one should understand that in the area that we are talking 
     about, namely reform, there is a necessary overlap between 
     somebody whose responsibility is reform oriented rather than 
     subject matter oriented, and the people who are already 
     working and who have responsibility for particular subject 
     matters such as ECOSOC, such as peacekeeping management 
     reform.
       Now, I do not want to leave you with the impression, 
     because it would surely not be accurate, that no one has been 
     doing anything by way of pursuing reform pending my arrival 
     there. That surely is not the case. There have been certain 
     steps taken with respect to reforming the ECOSOC operation, 
     which Ambassador Marrero has been responsible for. And, of 
     course, Ambassador Inderfurth has been deeply engaged in 
     reforming the management of peacekeeping operations.
       Now, how I will relate when I get there, if I am confirmed, 
     to what they are actually doing now, and have been doing for 
     some period of time, I am not sure that I can answer you. And 
     I am sure, frankly, that that is something one should try to 
     map out with such precision and specificity. I think it would 
     be much better to see whether one cannot work out, which 
     would be my expectation, a collegial and cooperative way of 
     working together on what will be a common objective, namely 
     reform.
       Senator Pressler. How many ambassadors do we have up at the 
     U.N.?
       Mr. Birenbaum. I believe in New York there are five.
       Senator Pressler. We have five. Ed Zorinsky, who passed 
     away, God bless his soul, a Senator from Nebraska, used to 
     always try to get the jobs of some of these ambassadors 
     defined before we sent them, but I find myself struggling. I 
     mean with these other two ambassadors already doing this 
     function, are they going to drop out of that area?
       Mr. Birenbaum. No, no certainly not.
       Senator Pressler. So there will be three ambassadors 
     working on reform.
       Mr. Birenbaum. Well, that depends on how you look at it. 
     One could say that Ambassador Albright herself is a fourth 
     ambassador working on reform because, of course, the chief of 
     mission is responsible for all of our efforts, including 
     reform. What I am saying is that there is an overlap, and it 
     seems to me not to be extraordinary or difficult or terribly 
     confusing. The word reform is not self-defined, it can be all 
     encompassing, it can be limited, and I am not sure that at 
     this point it makes a great deal of sense to try to flesh it 
     out with great specificity right now.
       I think it is much better, it is very clear that there is a 
     hard-core set of reform responsibilities that would come to 
     me, that I will be responsible for. There are also a lot of 
     other reform areas which presently are being worked by other 
     people who are there because they fall under their subject 
     matter jurisdiction, if you would like. ECOSOC is an example 
     and so is peacekeeping.
       I would expect to work on a cooperative basis with the 
     ambassadors who have primary responsibility in those areas. 
     There is a difference between subject-matter responsibility 
     and, if you like, proceed. Reform is more of a procedural 
     nature.
                                  ____



                                                  U.S. Senate,

                                    Washington, DC, June 13, 1994.
     Mr. David Birenbaum,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. Birenbaum: We have reviewed with great concern and 
     security your nomination to be Deputy Permanent 
     Representative to the United Nations for Management and 
     Reform. In doing so, we have been interested in knowing what 
     duties as you performed during your tenure as a 
     ``consultant'' to U.S. Permanent Representative, Madeleine 
     Albright.
       Neither in your formal Foreign Relations Committee forms 
     nor during your confirmation hearing, did you explain what 
     your consultancy to the United Nations involved. A December 
     14, 1993, White House press release describing your 
     nomination indicated you ``served as a public member of the 
     U.S. Delegation to the UN Commission on Human Rights, and as 
     a consultant to the U.S. Mission to the United Nations on the 
     proposal to establish an international criminal court.'' Not 
     once have you mentioned that you consulted Ambassador 
     Albright on the creation of a permanent, UN-sponsored 
     international criminal court nor have you--to the best of our 
     knowledge--disclosed financial information in conjunction 
     with either your consultancy or your service as a Public 
     Member of the U.S. Delegation to the UN Conference on Human 
     Rights. As opponents of the establishment of a permanent 
     international court, your involvement with this issue is of 
     grave concern to us.
       Prior to floor consideration on your nomination, we would 
     appreciate receiving specific answers to questions regarding 
     your position as a consultant to the UN and your interest in 
     the creation of a permanent international criminal court. We 
     would like to obtain detailed responses to the following 
     questions:
       What functions did you perform as a consultant to 
     Ambassador Albright? How long did you serve as a consultant? 
     How did you become involved as a consultant to the U.S. 
     Mission? Was this at Ambassador Albright's request? Were you 
     paid for your work as a consultant? Where you paid when you 
     served as a Public Member of the U.S. Delegation to the U.N. 
     Conference on Human Rights in 1993?
       Do you support the creation of the international criminal 
     court? As a consultant, did you promote the establishment of 
     an international criminal court? If so, what functions did 
     you perform in the promotion of the court?
       If confirmed, what would be your involvement with regard to 
     the creation of a permanent court? Do you plan to promote the 
     establishment of an international criminal court if 
     confirmed? Do you intend to devote a substantial amount of 
     your efforts on the progress of the court or will you focus 
     on UN rerform and management?
       Did you consult the U.S. Mission with regard to the 
     Yugoslav War Crimes Tribunal? If so, what specifically is 
     your view on progress toward the establishment of the 
     Tribunal?
       As supporters of a more effectively managed United Nations, 
     it is of utmost importance to us that a qualified everseer 
     and reformer be confirmed for the position to which you have 
     been nominated. It has been our understanding that your job 
     as U.S. Representative and Reform is to focus exclusively on 
     management and administrative functions at the United 
     Nations. We are concerned that you envision your duties for 
     this UN position as parallel to your previous work consulting 
     the United Nations on the establishment of a permanent 
     criminal court. The effective management of the United 
     Nations--not the creation a UN-sponsored criminal court--
     should be a priority issue to which you should devote great 
     energy.
       We look forward to receiving your responses to the 
     questions we have raised and to discussing these matters with 
     your further.
           Sincerely,
     Jesse Helms.
     Larry Pressler.
                                  ____

                                             Fried, Frank, Harris,


                                           Shriver & Jacobson,

                                    Washington, DC, June 20, 1994.
     Hon.Larry Pressler,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Pressler: Thank you for your letter of June 
     13. I am pleased to have this opportunity to reassure each of 
     you as to my dedication to the vital cause of improved U.N. 
     management and reform. My answers to the questions which you 
     raised are given in the attachment.
       Should you wish to discuss these matters, I am available to 
     meet with you at any time.
           Sincerely,
                                               David E. Birenbaum.
                                  ____


Functions and Responsibilities--Representative of the United States of 
      America to the United Nations for U.N. Management and Reform

       The U.S. Representative for U.N. Management and Reform is 
     charged with the principal oversight of all matters relating 
     to U.N. reform, budget management, fraud and mismanagement, 
     procurement practices and interaction with U.S. business.
       The U.S. Representative carries the rank of Ambassador, to 
     highlight the importance that the U.S. attaches to U.N. 
     management and reform issues. The incumbent will shape and 
     advance U.S. interests before those bodies charged with 
     budget and management matters, in particular the Fifth 
     Committee, one of the main committees of the U.N. General 
     Assembly, charged with oversight of Administrative and 
     Budgetary matters.
       In addition to pursuing issues related to sound management 
     and needed reform, the U.S. Representative insures that 
     American companies are provided with opportunities to compete 
     fairly for U.N. procurements of material and services. In 
     this regard, the U.S. Representative works closely with New 
     York-based Department of Commerce officials.
       The U.S. Representative for U.N. Management and Reform 
     reports to the Chief of Mission, who is the U.S. 
     Representative to the United Nations.
                                  ____


   Questions Submitted by Senators Helms and Pressler to Ambassador-
              Designate David E. Birenbaum, June 13, 1994

       1. Q. What functions did you perform as a consultant to 
     Ambassador Albright?
       A. I provided legal advice to the Mission (with the 
     assistance of other lawyers at my firm) concerning the 
     proposal before the U.N. for the establishment of an 
     international criminal court, in particular the draft statute 
     for such a court prepared by a working group of the 
     International law Commission. I also assisted in presenting 
     the Mission's position to other U.S. government agencies.
       2. Q. How long did you serve as a consultant to the U.S. 
     Mission?
       A. I served as a consultant from May 18, 1993 until the 
     present.
       3. Q. How did you become involved as a consultant to the 
     U.S. Mission? Was this at Ambassador Albright's request?
       A. I was asked by Ambassador Albright to consult with the 
     U.S. Mission.
       4. Q. Were you paid for your work as a consultant?
       A. My firm received a fixed fee of $2500 and reimbursement 
     of incurred expenses not to exceed $1500.
       5. Q. Were you paid for your work as a Public Member of the 
     U.S. Delegation to the U.N. Conference on Human Rights in 
     1993?
       A. My work as a Public Member of the U.S. Delegation to the 
     U.N. Conference on Human Rights was performed without charge. 
     I was reimbursed for incurred expenses in accordance with 
     established government procedures.
       6. Q. Do you support the creation of an international 
     criminal court?
       A. I believe that an international criminal court could 
     make a useful contribution to the prosecution of crimes of an 
     ``international character.'' I would only support such a 
     court if it were clear that it will safeguard U.S. law 
     enforcement interests and assure due process of law to those 
     charged.
       7. Q. As a consultant, did you promote the establishment of 
     an international criminal court? If so, what functions did 
     you perform in the promotion of the court?
       A. I did not promote the establishment of an international 
     criminal court with the Congress or the public. My sole 
     function was providing internal advice to Ambassador Albright 
     and her staff and assisting them in discussions with other 
     members of the Executive Branch.
       8. Q. If confirmed, what would be your involvement with 
     regard to the creation of a permanent court? Do you plan to 
     promote the establishment of an international criminal court 
     if confirmed? Do you intend to devote a substantial amount of 
     your efforts on the progress of the court or will you focus 
     on U.N. reform and management?
       A. I have attached a description of the responsibilities of 
     the U.S. Representative to the United Nations for U.N. 
     Management and Reform. If confirmed, I would devote myself to 
     carrying out those responsibilities to the best of my ability 
     and on a full time basis. In response to your specific 
     question whether, if confirmed, I intend to devote a 
     substantial amount of my efforts to the progress of the 
     court, the answer is no. I intend to focus on U.N. reform and 
     management.
       9. Q. Did you consult the U.S. Mission with regard to the 
     Yugoslav War Crimes Tribunal? If so, what specifically is 
     your view on progress toward the establishment of the 
     Tribunal?
       A. My consultancy did not include the Yugoslav War Crimes 
     Tribunal. My only involvement with regard to this Tribunal 
     was to participate in a meeting of experts convened by 
     Ambassador Albright on May 13, 1993, before Resolution 827 
     (1993), providing for the establishment of the War Crimes 
     Tribunal, was adopted by the Security Council and prior to 
     commencement of my consultancy. The purpose of the meeting 
     was to review the report of the U.N. Secretary-General called 
     for by Resolution 808 (1993).
                                  ____



                                                  U.S. Senate,

                                    Washington, DC, June 14, 1994.
     Hon. Warren M. Christopher,
     Secretary of State,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. Secretary: We are encouraged by the creation of 
     the new position at the United Nations designed specifically 
     to address UN mismanagement. This post--U.S. Representative 
     for Management and Reform--can serve as a focal point in 
     meeting the UN Inspector General requirements outlined in 
     Section 401 of the recently signed Foreign Relations 
     Authorization Act.
       As strong supporters of both UN reform and the 
     establishment of an independent UN Inspector General's 
     Office, we are interested in knowing what duties David 
     Birenbaum--if confirmed--will perform in this newly created 
     management post. We are concerned over David Birenbaum's 
     nomination, having learned that he consulted the U.S. Mission 
     in 1993 with regard to the establishment of a permanent 
     international criminal court.
       While Mr. Birenbaum mentioned that he served as a 
     consultant to the U.S. Permanent Representative to the United 
     Nations in 1993, he never indicated--at any time during his 
     confirmation hearing nor in his formal Foreign Relations 
     Committee application--that he consulted the U.S. Mission on 
     the establishment of the court. However, a December 14, 1993, 
     White House press release indicated that Mr. Birenbaum 
     ``served as a public member of the U.S. Delegation to the UN 
     Commission on Human Rights, and as a consultant to the U.S. 
     Mission to the United Nations on the proposal to establish an 
     international criminal court.'' We are concerned that Mr. 
     Birenbaum may envision his post as involving responsibilities 
     paralleling those during his tenure as a consultant on the 
     criminal court.
       Recently, the Administration submitted a report pursuant to 
     Section 517 of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act to the 
     Senate Foreign Relations Committee regarding the progress of 
     the international court's establishment. According to this 
     report, the Administration currently is reviewing the 
     International Law Commission (ILC) draft statute for the 
     creation of a permanent UN-sponsored court. U.S. officials 
     are preparing comments to the ILC draft so they can be 
     considered during the current session of the ILC. If 
     confirmed will Mr. Birenbaum be a part of this review 
     process, given his past consulting experience? Would this be 
     one of the responsibilities of the new U.S. Representative 
     for UN Management and Reform?
       We would appreciate your specific description of the 
     functions for the position of U.S. Representative for 
     Management and Reform. What are the responsibilities of this 
     post? We need assurances that the position to which David 
     Birenbaum has been nominated will not involve work toward the 
     creation of a permanent international court.
       We need to ensure that David Birenbaum will concern himself 
     solely with the effective management and needed fiscal reform 
     of the United Nations. It is important for us to know that 
     nominees are not only qualified for their respective posts, 
     but that they do not fulfill duties which are not within the 
     scope of the positions to which they have been confirmed. We 
     would appreciate your prompt attention to this matter.
           Sincerely,
     Jesse Helms,
       Senator.
     Larry Pressler,
       Senator.
     Benjamin A. Gilman,
       Representative.
                                  ____



                                     U.S. Department of State,

                                    Washington, DC, June 20, 1994.
     Hon. Larry Pressler,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Pressler: Thank you for your letter of June 14 
     to Secretary Christopher regarding the responsibilities of 
     the United States Representative to the United Nations for UN 
     Management and Reform. As you know, the President has 
     nominated Mr. David Birenbaum to fill this position.
       Mr. Birenbaum will--if confirmed--be part of a team working 
     under the direction of Permanent Representative Madeleine 
     Albright. Each of the five Ambassadors accredited to our 
     mission (USUN) in New York has a set a responsibilities which 
     are clearly spelled out and to which they devote their full 
     energies. Occasions do arise, of course, in which they must 
     fill in for one another, or where responsibilities overlap. 
     Ambassador Albright seeks to take full advantage of the 
     experience and abilities of all those at the mission in 
     furthering American objectives at the UN.
       The U.S. Representative for UN Management and Reform will 
     be charged with principal responsibility for oversight of all 
     matters relating to UN reform, budget management, fraud and 
     mismanagement, procurement practices and interaction with the 
     American business community.
       We have re-titled and re-defined, this Ambassadorial 
     position to highlight our interest--which we know you 
     strongly share--in improving the efficiency and effectiveness 
     of United Nations operations and programs. To this end, the 
     U.S. Representative will work to shape and implement 
     strategies to achieve our reform objectives and to establish 
     budget priorities at the UN that reflect our own interests.
       In response to the concerns expressed in your letter, we 
     can assure you that Mr. Birenbaum's past consultancy and 
     current expertise on the International Criminal Court will 
     not impede his efforts in behalf of UN reform.
       Responsibility within the State Department for U.S. policy 
     towards an International Criminal Court (ICC) rests with the 
     Office of the Legal Adviser (L) in Washington. USUN's own 
     legal advisor works closely with L and reports directly to 
     Ambassador Albright. Ambassador Albright's counsel in her 
     Washington office also participates in matters related to the 
     ICC. We cannot rule out the possibility that one or another 
     of these offices may ask Mr. Birenbaum to comment on an ICC-
     related issue. We can assure you, however, that any response 
     he might make to such a request would not come at the cost of 
     attention of other duties.
       You should also know that the Administration has completed 
     its review of the International Law Commission's draft 
     statute for the creation of an ICC. Thus, Mr. Birenbaum would 
     not have the opportunity in his position in New York to 
     review or prepare comments to this draft.
       In closing, let me reiterate our desire to see Mr. 
     Birenbaum confirmed soon. We need the strongest possible team 
     working in New York for UN reform.
           Sincerely,

                                             Wendy R. Sherman,

                                              Assistant Secretary,
     Legislative Affairs.

                          ____________________