[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 42 (Thursday, April 10, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3001-S3010]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


                           EXECUTIVE SESSION

  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, in executive session, I ask unanimous 
consent that the majority leader, after consultation with the 
Democratic leader, may proceed to the consideration of Executive 
Calendar No. 34, the nomination of Pete Peterson to be Ambassador to 
Vietnam. I further ask that the nomination be considered under the 
following time limitation: 30 minutes equally divided between the 
majority leader and Democratic leader or their designees. I further ask 
unanimous consent that immediately following the expiration or yielding 
back of the time, the Senate proceed to a vote on the nomination and 
that, immediately following the vote, the President be notified of the 
Senate's action and the Senate then return to legislative session.
  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, is it the 
understanding of Senators on both sides of the aisle that this would 
not require a rollcall vote?
  Mr. LOTT. That is my understanding at this time, Mr. President.
  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that in the 
unlikely event that a rollcall vote is necessary, that it would take 
place following the final vote on the nuclear waste bill next Tuesday.

[[Page S3002]]

  Mr. LOTT. I hope that, after all that we have done, we can get this 
concluded tonight. I know that would be your preference. That is my 
understanding as to the parties that have been interested. I think we 
can get it done tonight.
  Mr. DASCHLE. I make that unanimous-consent request, but I don't think 
it will be necessary.
  Mr. LOTT. I have no objection.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. LOTT. For clarification, there was no objection to the unanimous 
consent request that I made, as amended by Senator Daschle.
  Mr. DASCHLE. I had no objection.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, with regard to Calendar No. 34, the 
nomination of Pete Peterson to be the Ambassador to Vietnam, I would 
like to specifically thank the Senator from New Hampshire for his 
cooperation and for the very serious questions that he has raised, 
which needed to have proper attention. I believe that we have gotten 
some progress made in that regard. We do have now a letter that has 
been sent to me, in response to our questions, from the National 
Security Council, Mr. Berger. Senator Smith has had a chance to review 
that. I personally have had very serious concerns all along about the 
normalization of relations with Vietnam. I think the certification has 
been flawed in the way it has been handled, and I think that those 
points needed to be made. But I also felt that Pete Peterson was an 
excellent choice for this assignment. And I appreciate the cooperation 
of Senator Smith in the way he handled this matter, and Senator McCain 
for his cooperation. I know he has a personal involvement and interest 
in the nominee. I just wanted to thank them both for their efforts.

  I would like to yield the remainder of my time to the Senator from 
New Hampshire.
  Mr. SMITH of New Hampshire. Thank you, Mr. President. I yield 3 
minutes to the Senator from Arizona.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The nomination will be stated.


   NOMINATION OF PETE PETERSON, OF FLORIDA, TO BE AMBASSADOR TO THE 
                     SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF VIETNAM

  The assistant legislative clerk read the nomination of Pete Peterson, 
of Florida, to be Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the 
United States of America to the Socialist Republic of Vietnam.
  The Senate proceeded to consider the nomination.
  Mr. McCAIN addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona is recognized.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I thank the majority leader for all of his 
efforts in making this possible.
  I also would like to especially thank my friend from New Hampshire 
who is a dogged, a determined, a zealous, and a committed advocate of 
attaining a complete and full accounting of those who are still missing 
in action in Vietnam.
  The Senator from New Hampshire and I have had differences of view on 
this issue from time to time. But no one has ever questioned the 
absolute dedication of the Senator from New Hampshire to the commitment 
to those fellow Americans for whom we still have not been able to 
obtain an accounting.
  Mr. President, I thank him because if it had not been for him this 
very important letter from the White House would not have come over to 
our leader signed by Sandy Berger, Assistant to the President for 
National Security Affairs. It lays out a very important set of 
priorities for further actions that need to be taken by the United 
States and by the Vietnamese so that we can finally put this very 
difficult chapter behind us.
  I thank the Senator from New Hampshire for his efforts in that 
direction.
  Finally, Mr. President, I would like to wish, since I am confident 
that Pete Peterson will be confirmed by the Senate, a dear friend, 
Godspeed. He is traveling back to a place that he found quite 
uncomfortable the last time he resided there, and I am very grateful 
that we have an American like Pete Peterson who is willing to go back 
and serve his country in a very vital and important manner. And perhaps 
one could argue that only Pete Peterson could do this job in the way 
that it needs to be done in this very difficult and very critical time 
in our relations with Vietnam and Asia.
  So we all wish Pete Peterson every success, and we are grateful that 
we have someone like him who is willing to continue to serve his 
Nation.
  Thank you, Mr. President. I yield the remainder of my time to Senator 
Smith.
  Mr. SMITH of New Hampshire. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from 
Arizona for his kind words, and also for his cooperation in working 
with me on this issue.

  Mr. President, there were some concerns which I had raised, and they 
have been addressed thanks to the cooperation of Senator Lott, Senator 
Daschle, Senator Shelby, Senator Bob Kerrey, and certainly Sandy Berger 
with the National Security Council of the President of the United 
States.
  I think because of the willingness to address the concerns that I 
have raised we were able to resolve this matter tonight.
  Let me first of all say clearly and for all the world to see and know 
that this issue has never been about the qualifications of Pete 
Peterson to be the Ambassador to Vietnam. It has been about the 
accounting process and how best to go about getting a fullest possible 
accounting for our missing.
  In regard to former Congressman Pete Peterson, he was a POW in 
Vietnam for a number of years, suffered greatly at the hands of the 
Vietnamese, as did my colleague Senator McCain. I am sure the 
accommodations as Ambassador will be a little better than he had on his 
last trip over there as a POW. But I have worked with him on the United 
States-Russian Commission. I like him. I respect him. He is an 
honorable and decent man, and he will be I believe a good ambassador.
  My concerns have been addressed in the past on this floor in terms of 
the problems that I believe we have with the Vietnamese. I am hopeful 
now, with this clarification that we have been able to receive from the 
White House, and with the support of Senator McCain, Senator Shelby, 
and others, that Ambassador Pete Peterson will be able to seek this 
information and finally get this information from the Vietnamese.
  It has always been my concern that rather than to say that the 
Vietnamese are fully cooperating and then we will send an Ambassador 
over there, I think it is more honest to say we don't have all of the 
information, the Vietnamese can provide more information, and let's 
send the Ambassador over there to get it. I think that is more honest. 
I believe that is what we have resolved here tonight.
  Mr. Berger was kind enough to indicate by letter that the President 
commits to continue to press the Government of Vietnam to cooperate on 
full accounting, and that they have established the mechanisms to do it 
with the Vietnamese to provide information that the Vietnamese have 
only available to them. I interpret that to mean that there is a lot of 
information that the Vietnamese can unilaterally provide, as the League 
of Families has so often said under its leader, Andrew Griffiths, that 
we want the information whatever that may be that the Vietnamese can 
unilaterally provide. We all know, and I think this compromise 
indicates, that there is information still that the Vietnamese can 
unilaterally provide. I hope that the Ambassador will be able to 
encourage the Vietnamese, and finally hopefully persuade the Vietnamese 
to provide it.
  I want to be specific in four areas that I believe are the major 
areas of information.
  One, the Politburo records concerning U.S. POW's: These records are 
important. Vietnamese officials have not provided them. And we believe 
they can provide many of them. They may have lost some. But we think 
there are some they can provide. DOD analysts have testified under oath 
that access to these records has not been provided.
  So I hope that Ambassador Peterson will pursue that venue very 
directly with the Vietnamese. I have ever assurance that he will.
  Second, North Vietnamese military records on U.S. POW's and MIA's 
from the country of Laos: As you know, North Vietnam occupied Laos 
during the war. We lost a lot of American fliers in Laos during the 
war, and the Vietnamese have not been forthcoming about a lot of the 
shootdown records pertaining to U.S. losses in Laos.

[[Page S3003]]

  The so-called Group 559 shootdown record turned over in September 
1993 contains only summary information, and the DOD analysts--not 
Senator Smith--have concluded that ``It is clear that this record was 
compiled after the fact from original records.'' So we need those 
original records. I hope that along the lines that the analysts have 
testified in their testimony last year that we would be able to get 
that information from the Vietnamese.
  It is clear that the Vietnamese did have direct knowledge of these 
losses. We know that. Hopefully now they will provide it. We deserve to 
know the fate of these United States POW's who were shot down in Laos 
and captured by the Vietnamese, and in some cases killed by the 
Vietnamese in this instance. But in the province in Northern Laos which 
I personally visited, none of them really in that area have been 
accounted for at all from the Communist side. We know that they have 
information because some of these people were captured and filmed.
  Third, the unilateral action by Vietnam in 461 cases unaccounted for: 
These are records that we believe based on our best information the 
Vietnamese could provide more data, and we have had testimony from 
again the intelligence community saying that they believe based on our 
information that they could get that information.
  Finally, Mr. President, the prison camp records pertaining to U.S. 
POW's: I think we are not interested in what somebody did as a POW or 
didn't do as a POW in getting those documents. They can be screened and 
carefully taken care of by the intelligence community, should we get 
them. What we are interested in is what happened to some of these 
people who were in the prison system who were not returned, who were 
seen on film and on tape--sometimes used for propaganda--and have never 
been accounted for. So we believe that the Vietnamese would know 
something about those people, and certainly what happened to them. We 
would hope that they would provide that information.
  So those are the four areas that I have focused on and on which I 
hope the Ambassador will focus on. I think that is what is referred to 
in the letter here from Mr. Berger.
  I think also when the Intelligence Committee--I thank Senator Shelby 
for his cooperation in this regard because basically he looked into 
this matter for me and we have now come to a conclusion that there is 
further information that the intelligence community really didn't have 
input into the certification process, and, therefore, they need to have 
that information.
  If you read the testimony on the House side and some other testimony 
where analysts have spoken, they have talked about the fact that this 
access is important, and there are two documents--the so-called 735 and 
1205--that come out of the Russian archives which are very 
controversial. And we are now pursuing those in the United States-
Russian Commission where Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts, myself, 
and others were members, and Pete Peterson was a member. We are still 
pursuing that information.
  So I want to again conclude on a couple of points and then yield to 
anyone else who may wish to speak on this matter.
  Pete Peterson is an outstanding public servant. He served his country 
well. He went through hell in Vietnam, and the fact that he now is 
willing to go back and pursue information on POW's, on his fellow 
colleagues, POW's and MIA's, fellow comrades in arms, I think is a 
tribute to him and the type of person that he is.
  I want to say again what has been distorted, as usual in the media so 
many times, specifically the Boston Globe, and other places where 
apparently untruths were hyped by the papers, they had it all wrong. I 
was never opposed to Pete Peterson in any way, shape, or form being the 
Ambassador. My concern is with what I just addressed, which is we need 
to try to get the fullest possible accounting. We have not gotten the 
fullest possible accounting, and with the Ambassador going to Vietnam 
he will do that. I am all for it.
  Let me just also say in regard to Mr. Hoang, who I talked with who is 
now out of the country and is not here, I hope and believe that should 
Mr. Hoang come back into the country that he ought to come before the 
Governmental Affairs Committee and answer any and all questions put to 
him regarding not only Vietnam but anything else regarding these 
matters in terms of how policy was developed. But at this point he is 
not in the country to do that.
  So let me again thank everyone involved in working this decision out. 
One of the nicest things about the Senate, even though it is 
frustrating if you are on the other side of something, is that you get 
the opportunity to work together.
  I remember the first day I was on the floor in 1991. Senator 
Mitchell, then the majority leader, came over to me and introduced 
himself. He said, ``Hello,'' and said, ``Bob, welcome. It is nice to 
have you. I wish we could have gotten a Democrat, but we got you. But 
let me just say this. We will work with you over here. It is not like 
the House, not because we want to but because we have to.'' That is OK. 
I mean that is the way the process works here. When you have a concern, 
people on the other side work with you to get it resolved. You do the 
best you can, and sometimes it works out. And more often than not it 
does work out even though you take some flak.
  So I am very pleased with those on all sides of this issue who worked 
with me to address my concerns. Especially I am grateful to Sandy 
Berger who I called this morning and asked to prepare a letter. I gave 
him the concerns that I had. He responded before the end of the day to 
Senator Lott with the concerns that I raised. I can't thank him enough.
  I think the fact that the nomination will go through tonight is to a 
large extent due to the willingness of the administration, specifically 
Mr. Berger to address my concerns. I am very grateful to them for that.
  I wish Ambassador Peterson the best of luck. I look forward to 
working with him as Ambassador to Vietnam to get more information on 
our missing men and a few women in Vietnam.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have relevant material 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

 Areas Where Vietnam Is Not ``Cooperating in Full Faith'' or Providing 
              Full Disclosure on Unaccounted for Americans

       (1) Politburo records concerning U.S. POWs.--Vietnamese 
     officials have not provided wartime politburo documents in 
     which the total number of captured U.S. POWs were discussed. 
     This is critical because of the information passed to the 
     U.S. Government in 1993 by Russian intelligence which 
     contained reported transcripts of two secret North Vietnamese 
     wartime speeches in which the number of captured U.S. POWs 
     referenced was substantially higher than those who were 
     returned by Hanoi in 1973. U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of 
     Defense for POW/MIA Affairs, James Wold, confirmed in a 
     meeting with Senator Smith and Congressman Johnson on 
     February 4, 1997, that he has not succeeded in convincing 
     Hanoi to cooperate on this matter--and DoD analysts have 
     testified under oath that access to such records has not been 
     provided.
       (2) North Vietnamese military records on U.S. POW/MIAs from 
     Laos.--Since September, 1993, Vietnam has not provided 
     additional documentation on a North Vietnamese shootdown 
     record pertaining to U.S. losses in Laos. (The so-called 
     ``Group 559 Shootdown Record'' turned over in September, 
     1993, contains only summary information, and DoD analysts 
     have concluded that ``it is clear that this Record was 
     compiled after the fact from original records'' and that ``it 
     is very difficult to believe that additional Group 559 
     documents could not be turned over forthwith'' and that 
     ``analysis of this document makes clear that the Vietnamese 
     have additional Group 559 records that may contain 
     information useful to POW/MIA case resolution.'' DoD analysts 
     testified under oath to Congress last year that with regard 
     to about 253 Americans captured or lost in Laos, it was not 
     clear that the Vietnamese had direct knowledge of these 
     losses, and ``they should have known exactly what happened to 
     the person.'' U.S. intelligence also indicates that 
     Vietnamese officials should have direct knowledge of the fate 
     of U.S. POWs known to have been held by the Pathet Lao during 
     the war in Sam Neua province in northern Laos--none of whom 
     have ever been accounted for by the Communist side.
       (3) Unilateral Action by Vietnam on 461 cases of 
     unaccounted for men.--In January, 1996, the State Department 
     indicated that Assistant Secretary Winston Lord had 
     ``expressed disappointment to Vietnamese officials in the 
     level and quality of unilateral work they perform on cases.'' 
     Last summer, General Wold passed to Vietnam 461 ``unilateral 
     cases'' of unaccounted for men--cases

[[Page S3004]]

     where General Wold stated that ``critical Vietnamese 
     assistance'' was needed. Such assistance has not been 
     forthcoming in these cases, according to the comprehensive 
     review of all cases conducted by DoD in response to 
     Congressional legislation in 1995. It is not clear that this 
     situation has dramatically improved over the last six months 
     since General Campbell assumed command of Joint Task Force 
     (Full Accounting.)
       (4) Prison Camp Records Pertaining to U.S. POWs.--The U.S. 
     has reportedly not received access to prison camp records 
     detailing the fate of many POWs, including so-called ``died-
     in-captivity'' cases, and the prospects for final 
     accountability for these men (ie: information on the location 
     or disposition of remains). These records would also help 
     resolve eyewitness accounts of reported American POWs in 
     captivity which U.S. intelligence agencies have collected 
     over the years.
                                                                    ____



                                                  U.S. Senate,

                                   Washington, DC, March 24, 1997.
     Hon. Richard C. Shelby,
     U.S. Senate, Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
       Dear Dick: I am writing to request an inquiry by the staff 
     of the Select Committee on Intelligence into certain 
     documents pertaining to American POW/MIAs from the conflict 
     in Southeast Asia.
       As you know, Senator Bob Smith has raised questions about 
     intelligence information on which President Clinton based his 
     1996 certifications required by law as a condition for the 
     expansion of relations with Vietnam. He has specifically 
     raised concerns relating to two documents acquired from the 
     archives of the former Soviet Union. These documents came to 
     light after the Senate Select Committee on POW/MIA Affairs 
     was disbanded in 1993.
       I would appreciate your directing a staff inquiry examining 
     the intelligence basis for the President's certifications--
     specifically addressing the two documents--in as expeditious 
     a fashion as possible. Because I hope that full Senate can 
     consider the pending nomination of former Congressman 
     Peterson to be Ambassador to Vietnam the week of April 7th, I 
     would appreciate receiving the results of the inquiry prior 
     to that time.
       Thank you for your consideration of my request. With best 
     wishes, I am
           Sincerely yours,
     Trent Lott.
                                                                    ____

                                                      U.S. Senate,


                             Select Committee on Intelligence,

                                    Washington, DC, April 8, 1997.
     Hon. Trent Lott,
     Majority Leader, U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. Leader: In response to your March 24, 1997 letter, 
     we are attaching the findings of a preliminary staff inquiry 
     into the U.S. Intelligence Community input that formed the 
     basis of the 1996 Presidential determinations regarding 
     Vietnam's accounting for American POW/MIAs, including 
     accelerating efforts to provide POW/MIA-related documents.
       The President determined last year that, based upon 
     information available to the U.S. Government at that time, 
     the Socialist Republic of Vietnam was cooperating in full 
     faith on the POW/MIA issue. These determinations were made by 
     the President in response to Public Law conditioning the 
     release of funds for U.S. diplomatic or consular post in the 
     Socialist Republic of Vietnam on Presidential certification.
       The staff inquiry has found:
       1. That the Intelligence Community appears to have played 
     no formal role in the determinations.
       2. That regarding the so-called ``735'' and ``1205'' 
     documents from the Russian archives:
       They have not been the subject of a coordinated community-
     wide analysis. Elements of the Intelligence Community did 
     contribute to a 1994 Department of Defense assessment and the 
     State Department's Office of Intelligence and Research (INR) 
     prepared several memoranda analyzing the documents;
       The 1994 DoD assessment and the 1993 INR analysis 
     identified numerous errors in the documents and raised 
     questions about their accuracy, but could not dismiss them as 
     fabrications; and,
       Time constraints have not allowed the Committee staff to 
     completely investigate all activities taken since 1994, but 
     attempts by the Intelligence Community to gain additional 
     information on the documents appear to have been limited.
       We want to emphasize that this is not a comprehensive 
     Committee review. We will explore whether the Committee 
     should conduct further inquiry after consultation with all of 
     the Committee Members.
           Sincerely,
     Richard C. Shelby,
       Chairman.
     J. Robert Kerrey,
       Vice Chairman.
       Attachment.


                             staff inquiry

                              Background.

       A primary role of U.S. intelligence is to help American 
     foreign policy makers make informed decisions. In general, 
     U.S. Government's certification on foreign affairs matters is 
     assumed to be based on a number of factors including input 
     from the Intelligence Community. The process of collecting 
     and analyzing sensitive and open-source information is 
     complicated and subjective, but is the essence of the work 
     done by the Intelligence Community. In most instances, the 
     quality and source of information is such that it can be 
     interpreted in more than one way and isolated reports of 
     information may easily be misinterpreted. It is critical to 
     take all information--including information derived from 
     sensitive intelligence sources and methods, and information 
     related to policy implementation--into account when judging 
     the validity of information on which to base a certification 
     or determination.

                               Findings.

       1. The Intelligence Community appears to have played no 
     formal analytical role in the determinations.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Footnotes follow at end of article.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
       a. Prior to the 1996 Presidential certifications, or in 
     this case ``determinations,'' \2\ the National Security 
     Council did not request an Intelligence Community assessment 
     on whether the Socialist Republic of Vietnam was cooperating 
     in full faith on POW/MIA issues specified in Public Law 104-
     134 and Public Law 104-208, which included ``accelerating 
     efforts to provide documents that will help lead to the 
     fullest possible accounting of POW/MIAs.''
       b. The U.S. Intelligence Community did not on its own 
     provide an assessment on whether Vietnam was cooperating in 
     full faith on the key POW/MIA issues.
       c. The Defense POW/MIA Office (DPMO) and State East Asian & 
     Pacific Affairs Office (EAP), two policy directorates 
     (outside the oversight of the Intelligence Community) within 
     the Offices of the Secretaries of Defense and State, were 
     asked to provide input for a Presidential ``Memorandum of 
     Justification for Determination.'' DPMO and EAP officials 
     indicated to Committee staff that their input did not include 
     any Intelligence Community product but they did rely on in-
     country reporting from the State Department Embassy officers 
     and the DoD personnel with the Joint Task Force--Full 
     Accounting.\3\ Apparently, collection requirements pertaining 
     to the POW/MIA issue were in place during the 1980s and early 
     1990s, but were removed from the President's Decision 
     Directive on the Intelligence Community's priority 
     requirement list on the recommendation of the National 
     Security Council in 1995.
       d. The only formal POW/MIA issue assessments identified by 
     the U.S. Intelligence Community was a 1987 Special National 
     Intelligence Estimate (SNIE) and a 1996 critique paper. The 
     SNIE was titled, Hanoi and the POW/MIA Issue.\4\ Its term-of-
     reference and key judgment were:
       ``Resolution of the fate of the 2,413 American servicemen 
     still unaccounted for in Indochina remains a priority 
     humanitarian issue for the U.S. Government, which believes 
     that it should be treated separately from other political and 
     economic concerns. While Vietnam also publicly characterizes 
     such an accounting as a humanitarian issue, Hanoi has used 
     the POW/MIA issue as a means to influence public opinion in 
     the United States and to achieve broader political 
     objectives.''
       ``There is a considerable body of evidence that the 
     Vietnamese have detailed information on the fates of several 
     hundred personnel. We estimate that the Vietnamese have 
     already recovered and are warehousing between 400 and 600 
     remains. Thus, Hanoi could account quickly for several 
     hundred U.S. personnel by returning warehoused remains and by 
     providing material evidence that could aid in determining the 
     fate of other personnel.''
       e. In response to Congressional requests in 1996 for 
     declassification of the 1987 SNIE, Richard Bush, the National 
     Intelligence Officer for East Asia, initiated an Intelligence 
     Community Assessment challenging the SNIE. It concluded that 
     ``[s]ubsequent evidence does not support the Estimate's 
     hypothesis that Hanoi held 400 to 600 sets of remains'' since 
     it was based on ``limited direct evidence whose reliability 
     was open to question.''
       2. That regarding the so-called ``735'' and ``1205'' 
     documents from the Russian archives:
        they have not been the subject of a coordinated 
     community-wide analysis. Elements of the Intelligence 
     Community did contribute to a 1994 Department of Defense 
     assessment and the State Department's Office of Intelligence 
     and Research (INR) prepared several memorandum analyzing the 
     documents;
        the 1994 DoD assessment and the 1993 INR analysis 
     identified numerous errors in the documents and raised 
     questions about their accuracy, but could not dismiss them as 
     fabrications; and,
        time constraints have not allowed the Committee 
     staff to completely investigate all activities taken since 
     1994, but attempts by the Intelligence Community to gain 
     additional information on the documents appear to have been 
     limited.
       a. In the view of at least one senior Soviet official, the 
     information contained in the ``735'' and ``1205'' documents 
     was highly significant. They purport to be transcripts of 
     secret wartime reports by North Vietnamese officials in which 
     the number of American POWs captured and held in North 
     Vietnam during the war was referenced. In the first document, 
     dated 1971, a North Vietnam official states that ``735'' 
     American POWs are being held. In the second document, dated 
     1972, another North Vietnamese official states that 1,205 
     American POWs are being held. Both numbers are significantly 
     higher than the 591 American POWs who were actually released 
     by Vietnam in 1973.

[[Page S3005]]

       b. In 1993, the State Department, INR produced four 
     memoranda analyzing the ``735'' and ``1205'' documents. These 
     analyses were provided to State Department policymakers and 
     distributed to other agencies interested in the POW-MIA 
     issue. The State Department has provided these classified 
     memoranda for Committee review. Because they are still 
     classified, the Committee is unable to cite specific findings 
     in the memoranda, but the conclusions were similar to those 
     in the subsequent 1994 DOD assessment.
       c. On January 24, 1994, the Department of Defense released 
     a coordinated, interagency intelligence analysis titled, 
     ``Recent Reports on American POWs in Indochina: An 
     Assessment.'' The analysis assessed the ``1205'' and the 
     ``735'' and cast doubt on the accuracy of the numbers.\5\ It 
     Also included an assessment of the so-called ``Dang Tan'' 
     reports, first surfaced to the public by the U.S. Government 
     in 1971, which were based on a North Vietnamese defector who 
     claimed Hanoi was holding approximately 800 Americans in the 
     late 1960s. The assessment concludes in the case of:
       The ``735'' document, that it ``is too fragmentary to 
     permit detailed analysis, but the numbers cited are 
     inconsistent with our own accounting.''
       The ``1205'' document, that it ``is not what the Russian 
     GRU claims it to be and the information suggesting that more 
     than 600 additional POWs existed is not accurate. . . .we 
     need more information to understand its origin and meaning.''
       The ``Dang Tan'' documents, that ``the number was so much 
     higher than the United States Government believed had been 
     captured that it detracted from Tan's credibility on other 
     points.
       The concluding paragraph of the analysis stated, ``[w]e 
     believe there is more information in Russian, and 
     particularly GRU, archives on this issue. There probably is 
     also more information in Vietnamese party and military 
     archives that could shed light on these documents. We 
     continue to pursue information on these issues in both 
     locations.''
       The Russians have persistently claimed that the ``1205'' 
     and ``735'' documents were genuine Russian intelligence 
     reports. The Vietnamese have dismissed the ``735'' and 
     ``1205'' documents as fabrications.
       Recently reviewed classified information in the hands of 
     the U.S. Government provides additional germane information 
     that was not factored into the above assessment. While this 
     new data will contribute to a better understanding of the 
     overall issue, to date it has not provided any definitive 
     resolution to the outstanding questions of total numbers of 
     American POW/MIAs known to the North Vietnamese in the early 
     1970s.
       d. On June 19, 1996, during a House National Security 
     Subcommittee hearing, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense 
     for POW/MIA Affairs General James Wold was asked by Chairman 
     Dornan, ``General Wold, have you ever raised these Russian 
     documents, ``1205'' and ``735'', with the Vietnamese . . . 
     ?'' General Wold responded, ``I have, probably 18 months ago, 
     with the Minister of Foreign Affairs. The response was a lot 
     of excited rebuttal. . . We have raised it. It's still a 
     matter of interest. I still consider it [1205] a document to 
     pursue.'' With a time constraint of two weeks the staff 
     inquiry was not able to ascertain what steps, if any, have 
     been taken by the U.S. Government since General Wold's 
     testimony, and the 1994 analysis which concluded that Vietnam 
     needed to be pressed for more information from its party 
     archives to shed light on the ``735'' and ``1205'' documents. 
     We note that personnel from the Defense POW/Missing Personnel 
     Office have testified that Vietnam has not provided any such 
     access to its wartime party archives. We also note that 
     Vietnam has apparently not yet facilitated access to the 
     ``735'' report's alleged author, Hoang Anh, who is reported 
     to be living in retirement in Vietnam.
       e. Although the 1994 analysis and General Wold's 1996 
     testimony emphasize the need to press for more information in 
     order to better understand these documents, the analysis 
     appears to have been used in at least one instance to justify 
     dismissing further investigation. On March 21, 1997, 
     Assistant Secretary of State for Legislative Affairs Barbara 
     Larkin signed a letter in response to a Congressional request 
     stating that the ``1205'' and ``735'' documents had not been 
     raised with Vietnamese officials (specifically alleged 
     ``1205'' author General Tran Van Quang) by the U.S. Charge 
     d'Affaires in Vietnam because of ``the interagency 
     intelligence analysis released by the Department of Defense 
     on January 24, 1994, in which the U.S. Government concluded 
     that these documents were not a reliable source of 
     information.''
     \1\ In response to a staff request for DCI's ``input'' on the 
     President's certifications, an April 3, 1997 CIA letter to 
     Committee staff states ``[b]ecause the Defense Department's 
     Defense POW/MIA Office (DPMO) is responsible for intelligence 
     bearing on the POW/MIA issue, other elements of the Community 
     were not formally involved in the certification process.''
     \2\ In Presidential Determinations #96-28 and #97-10, the 
     President noted his Administration's position that the 
     related sections of Public Laws 104-134 and 104-208 are 
     unconstitutional because they ``purport to condition the 
     execution of responsibilities--the authority to recognize, 
     and to maintain diplomatic relations with, a foreign 
     government--that the Constitutional commits exclusively to 
     the President.''
     \3\ On July 16, 1993, the Secretary of Defense consolidated 
     four DoD offices located within the Washington, D.C. area. 
     Each was charged with different functions of the prisoner of 
     war/missing in action (POW/MIA) issue, but each dealt with 
     the same mission: to obtain the fullest possible accounting 
     for Americans missing from the nation's wars. The 
     Intelligence Community's only POW/MIA analytical element, the 
     Defense Intelligence Agency's Office of POW/MIAs Affairs, was 
     transferred out of the National Foreign Intelligence Program.
     \4\ The 1993 Final Report of the U.S. Senate Select Committee 
     on POW/MIA Affairs noted that the 1987 SNIE was the ``only 
     national intelligence estimate produced on this issue since 
     the end of the war.''
     \5\ This analysis effort and contributions from elements 
     within the Intelligence Community, predominately from INR/
     State and the Defense Intelligence Agency. However, in July 
     1993, this 48-person Defense Intelligency Agency element was 
     transferred in-total to the Defense POW/Missing persons 
     Office, a policy office within the Office of the Secretary of 
     Defense.
                                                                    ____



                                              The White House,

                                       Washington, April 10, 1997.
     Hon. Trent Lott,
     Majority Leader, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. Leader: You have requested clarification from me 
     regarding Administration policy on POW/MIA issues with 
     Vietnam, in view of a report recently provided to you by the 
     Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on 
     Intelligence. I am happy to respond, and I realize that some 
     Members of the Senate have linked these matters to a 
     confirmation vote on Douglas ``Pete'' Peterson to be our 
     first Ambassador to the Socialist Republic of Vietnam.
       First, the President commits to continue to press the 
     Government of Vietnam to cooperate on full accounting. We 
     have established mechanisms through which the Vietnamese can 
     respond to requests for information available only to them.
       As you know, the President has determined that Vietnam is 
     providing full-faith cooperation with U.S. efforts to obtain 
     this information. We believe the President's determination is 
     backed up by tangible assistance provided by Vietnam to the 
     Department of Defense Joint Task Force (Full Accounting). I 
     will direct the Intelligence Community to prepare a special 
     National Intelligence Estimate on this matter, something that 
     was last done in 1987. We will consult with the Chairman and 
     Vice-Chairman of the Intelligence Committee concerning the 
     terms of reference for this new study.
       Second, we will take immediate steps to ensure that 
     collection requirements pertaining to the POW/MIA issue 
     remain as a high priority for the U.S. Intelligence 
     Community, and we will stay in close contact with the 
     Intelligence Committee on this matter.
       Third, I will ask for an updated assessment from the 
     Intelligence Community on the so-called ``735'' and ``1205'' 
     documents from Russian archives. We will continue efforts 
     already underway to acquire additional information on these 
     documents from the Vietnamese Government, including access to 
     the alleged ``735'' author Hoang Anh, as well as other 
     relevant party and government archival materials.
       Fourth, the President asserted when we agreed to establish 
     diplomatic relations with Vietnam that our principal goal was 
     to enhance the full accounting process. This issue will be 
     Mr. Peterson's highest priority as Ambassador. This task will 
     include pressing for additional unilateral efforts by the 
     Government of Vietnam to provide records and remains. We, 
     therefore, hope the full Senate will confirm Mr. Peterson at 
     the earliest possible date.
       I trust this is responsive to your concerns.
           Sincerely,

                                             Samuel R. Berger,

                                        Assistant to the President
                                    for National Security Affairs.
  Mr. SMITH of New Hampshire. At this point, Mr. President, I yield the 
floor to anyone else who may wish to speak on the issue.
  Mr. HAGEL. Mr. President, I would like to add my thoughts regarding 
the nomination.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair would observe that the majority has 
1 minute and 20 seconds remaining, and the minority manager, the 
distinguished Senator from Massachusetts, has 15 minutes.
  Mr. SMITH of New Hampshire. I yield whatever time I have remaining to 
the Senator from Nebraska, and perhaps the Senator from Massachusetts 
might give him another minute.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nebraska is recognized.
  Mr. HAGEL. Thank you, Mr. President. I will be very mindful of my 
distinguished colleagues' time. I too want to add my thoughts and 
thanks to my distinguished colleague from New Hampshire and fellow 
Vietnam veterans.
  Mr. President, I join my colleagues tonight in confirming former 
Congressman Pete Peterson to be our Nation's Ambassador to the 
socialist Republic of Vietnam. Through his integrity, hard work, and 
bipartisan temperament, he has earned the highest possible regard of 
his former colleagues in Congress on both sides of the aisle, and I 
think that is evident tonight.
  I can think of no other American better suited to be the first United 
States Ambassador to Vietnam, and I know, as do my colleagues, that 
Congressman Peterson will bring his integrity and

[[Page S3006]]

unique personal experiences to this extraordinarily challenging job 
which we all wish him well with and we all will help him with.
  As a Vietnam veteran, as my colleagues here in the Chamber, I know 
well how the issue of Vietnam has for so long divided this country, but 
all the Senate Vietnam veterans agree that not only is it time for the 
United States to have an Ambassador to Vietnam, we also agree that 
Congressman Peterson, soon to be Ambassador Peterson, is an outstanding 
choice for this difficult assignment.
  A small minority of Americans continue to question whether this is 
appropriate, whether it is an appropriate time in United States-Vietnam 
relations to have a United States Ambassador in Hanoi, and certainly 
those views deserve respect. Personally, however, I believe that the 
time for healing has, indeed, arrived, and Congressman Peterson is the 
one to lead us in that direction.
  Congressman Peterson will bring not only his own experience to the 
POW Vietnam combat veteran, but he also has been a successful 
businessman and respected Member of Congress, the recipient of 18 
military medals including the Legion of Merit, two Purple Hearts. He is 
a man of great personal strength and mind with something missing for 
too long in this business, a quiet dignity, a quiet confidence, a 
respect for others.
  Clearly, President Clinton has chosen well with his nomination, and I 
am pleased to join with my colleagues in confirming Pete Peterson to be 
the first United States Ambassador to a united Vietnam.
  On a personal note, Mr. President, I might add I bring him greetings 
from his family and his friends in Nebraska. The Congressman was off to 
a good start early on in life; he was born in Omaha, NE, and still has 
many relatives and friends there. And so that gives him probably an 
unfair advantage to be a most unusual and a most effective Ambassador 
for this country, and we wish him well.
  Mr. President, I thank the Chair and I thank my distinguished 
colleague from Massachusetts and fellow Vietnam veteran for allowing me 
a little of his time.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, if I could just clarify one thing, I am not 
sure we did allow any of our time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Massachusetts is correct. The 
Senator from Nebraska ended up precisely on the time that was allowed 
to him by the previous order. The Senator from Massachusetts is 
recognized and has 15 minutes.
  Mr. KERRY. I thank the Chair. I ask for the similar interpretation of 
time on our side. I am glad to recognize the Senator from Illinois for 
5 minutes.
  Mr. DURBIN. I thank my colleague from Massachusetts for yielding.
  What extraordinary symmetry, what exceptional justice this evening 
that we consider the nomination of Pete Peterson to be our first 
Ambassador to Vietnam.
  Thirty-one years ago as an Air Force pilot, Pete Peterson was flying 
his 67th combat mission over Vietnam when his plane was shot down. He 
told me the story when we were colleagues in the House of 
Representatives. I will not forget that as long as I live, what he went 
through as that plane came crashing down and he was parachuting out, 
with broken bones and beaten up, run through the streets by the crowds 
and pushed into a prison cell, and then to spend 6\1/2\ years--6\1/2\ 
years--of his life as a prisoner of war, to come home finally in 1973 
with all of the deserved tribute for his service to his country, to 
return to his home State of Florida and his family finally and then 
decide once again to make a commitment to this Nation and to run and 
serve in the House of Representatives and after three terms to be 
designated by the President of the United States, President Clinton, to 
be America's first Ambassador to Vietnam, the same country where his 
plane had crashed and where he had been a prisoner of war for so many 
years.
  I say to my colleague, the Senator from Nebraska, who really said it 
so well, the quiet dignity of Pete Peterson will bring a lot to this 
job, the kind of stature which we need in those who speak for the 
United States.
  He served this country well for 27 years in the Air Force, 6 years in 
the House of Representatives, and now once again we have called Pete 
Peterson into service for his country. To think that he will be 
returning to Vietnam to speak for this great Nation, to meet some of 
the people who may have rescued his body and thrown him in prison and 
today will be greeting him is an amazing turn in history. But it is 
appropriate.
  I know what his agenda will be--not only to service this country well 
with honor, as he always has, but also to work diligently for a full 
accounting of the POWs/MIAs who were not accounted for from that 
conflict and also to bring some new level of understanding between our 
countries.

  I think Pete Peterson is clearly the person for this task. We are 
fortunate tonight to have this bipartisan feeling about Pete Peterson 
and his confirmation as Ambassador to Vietnam.
  I thank Senator Lott as the majority leader, Senator Daschle on the 
minority side, Senator Smith, particularly Senator John McCain of 
Arizona, a man who has lived this same experience, who carries those 
scars, and will for the rest of his life, as a prisoner of war in 
Vietnam, who worked diligently to bring Pete Peterson's nomination to 
the floor this evening. My hat is off to John McCain for his 
extraordinary efforts.
  My colleagues, Senator Kerry and Senator Reed, will speak as veterans 
of that war. I am not a veteran of that war, but I feel I am paying 
tribute to one of the best veterans of that war in Pete Peterson. This 
is his night and I want to tell him that it is time for the speeches to 
come to a close and for Pete Peterson's service to his country on a 
full-time basis to resume as our first Ambassador to Vietnam.
  I yield back the remainder of my time.
  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I am very pleased to speak today in 
support of the nomination of Congressman Pete Peterson to be our 
Ambassador to Vietnam. This day has been a long time coming, and I want 
to thank Congressman Peterson for his patience.
  Mr. President, I traveled to Vietnam in 1991 as a member of the 
Select Committee on POW/MIA Affairs and then again in November 1996 as 
part of a congressional delegation. The change that has taken place in 
Vietnam in those 5 years is staggering. Vietnam is a dynamic country 
with great potential. The United States needs a full diplomatic 
presence in Hanoi to represent our interests in Vietnam adequately, and 
I am very pleased that this is about to happen.
  Congressman Peterson is an excellent choice for a wide variety of 
reasons, not the least of which is his deep and personal understanding 
of our troubled history with Vietnam. He understands firsthand the toll 
of the war, and, while much good work has been done on the relationship 
between our two countries, much more remains to be done. Representative 
Peterson is among the best qualified to continue that work.
  He is also eminently qualified to continue the work on one of our 
most important national priorities--achieving a full accounting of 
those Americans missing in action. In each of our meetings with 
Vietnamese Government officials during our recent trip, our 
congressional delegation stressed the high priority the United States 
places on resolving these remaining cases. The Vietnamese pledged 
ongoing cooperation, and I feel fully confident that Pete Peterson will 
see that we get it. As he pointed out in testimony before the Foreign 
Relations Committee, he has a personal stake in achieving the fullest 
possible accounting of those still missing, since many are personal 
friends of his.
  In addition to the POW/MIA issue, I am happy that Congressman 
Peterson will be in Hanoi to help shepherd our developing economic and 
trade relations with Vietnam. Vietnam's interest in achieving full 
economic relations with the United States is clear. The most recent 
evidence was the agreement it reached last month with the United States 
to repay millions of dollars of debt incurred by South Vietnam for 
roads, power stations, and grain shipments during the Vietnam war.
  Although the United States does not yet have full economic ties with 
Vietnam, its dynamic economy offers great trade opportunities for 
United States businesses. During my recent trip to Vietnam, we met with 
the United

[[Page S3007]]

States Chamber of Commerce in Ho Chi Minh City. The size of that 
contingent was a graphic evidence of United States businesses' interest 
in United States economic ties with Vietnam.
  There are many issues that need to be resolved in fashioning a 
comprehensive bilateral trade agreement with Vietnam that is a 
prerequisite to full economic relations. In particular, Vietnam remains 
committed to a system of central planning, which conflicts with the 
free market economic principles it espouses. Work has begun on an 
agreement to resolve these issues, but much remains to be done. This is 
an important priority for the United States, as Congressman Peterson is 
well aware.
  Another important issue that merits Congressman Peterson's attention 
is conveying to the Vietnamese the important priority the United States 
attaches to Vietnam's human rights practices. Despite its economic 
progress, Vietnam continues to impose restrictions on political and 
religious freedom. We must work with the Vietnamese to address these 
practices.
  There is another issue to which I attach great importance, a fact 
that I stressed to each of the Vietnamese leaders I met with during my 
visit last November. For more than a decade, scientists in the United 
States and Vietnam had been working together to attempt to understand 
the health effects resulting from our use of agent orange during the 
Vietnam war. However, nearly 2 years ago, Vietnam executed a major 
change in policy with regard to their support of collaborative research 
between United States and Vietnamese scientists.
  In June 1995, Vietnamese customs officers seized without warning 
documents and specimens from a team of American scientists who had been 
on the first official scientific mission from the United States. All 
papers, even the most innocuous, such as curriculum vitaes, were 
confiscated. Newly collected specimens were also taken.
  Though I find the seizure and subsequent refusal to return the 
materials or address the issue quite disturbing, I am even more 
concerned that this may be Vietnam's way of telling us that they no 
longer want to collaborate on this vitally important issue. To do so 
would be a shame, not only for our veterans and their families, but 
also for the Vietnamese. Just last February, the Wall Street Journal 
published an article that outlined the myriad of health problems and 
birth defects occurring among the Vietnamese who live in areas that 
were heavily sprayed. Here in the United States, many dioxin experts 
are now looking to research in Vietnam as the next step in fulfilling 
our commitment to conduct a comprehensive evaluation of the health 
effects of exposure to agent orange. Yet, without cooperation from 
Vietnam, our efforts to further understand these issues will fall 
short. We must press to obtain agreements for future cooperation on 
scientific issues of mutual importance, or we must have clear, rational 
explanations for why additional research is not warranted. The 
stonewalling is puzzling at best, and injurious at worst.
  I received some positive signs from the Vietnamese during my trip, 
and corresponded with Do Muoi, General Secretary of the Communist 
Party, upon my return to secure an agreement to release the seized 
documents and specimens. Unfortunately, I have still not received a 
response to my inquiry. I have communicated to Congressman Peterson my 
concerns and interest in working with him in his new role to 
expeditiously resolve this issue. We owe it to American veterans and 
their families.
  In conclusion, let me stress my belief that Congressman Peterson will 
be an important and valuable advocate of United States interests in 
Vietnam. I congratulate him and look forward to working with him in the 
coming years.
  Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I rise today in support of the nomination 
of my good friend Pete Peterson, and I urge his swift confirmation as 
our Ambassador to Vietnam. There is no better person for this job.
  Just over 3 years ago I joined the majority of my Senate colleagues 
in encouraging President Clinton to lift the trade embargo against 
Vietnam. I did do because I was convinced that it would strengthen and 
expand joint United States-Vietnamese efforts to determine the fate of 
those POW's-MIA's still unaccounted for in Vietnam.
  I was less certain about the establishment of full diplomatic 
relations with Vietnam. I feared that such a step would remove an 
important incentive to completing our efforts to determine the fate of 
every POW-MIA. But people like Pete Peterson and John McCain convinced 
me that reestablishing diplomatic relations was the best way to achieve 
our objectives in Vietnam--a full accounting of all POW's-MIA's; the 
implementation of democratic reforms and economic modernization; and 
respect of basic human rights and fundamental freedoms.
  There is no person more qualified to achieve these noble objectives 
than Pete Peterson. After spending 6\1/2\ years as a prisoner of war in 
Vietnam--and having left so many of his friends behind--we all can take 
comfort in knowing that Pete will not rest until every single American 
POW and MIA is fully and honestly accounted for. This fact was 
recognized by the Veterans of Foreign Wars, who last year endorsed 
Pete's nomination.
  Pete's qualifications as an advocate for economic freedom and U.S. 
business are also quite remarkable. He has served as a member of the 
House Small Business Committee, fighting for average Americans who are 
seeking the American dream by building their own businesses. Pete has 
demonstrated that he will be a fantastic advocate for American business 
in Vietnam.
  Pete's experience as a prisoner of war gives him unique 
qualifications to speak frankly and honestly about human rights. As 
someone who lost every human right, every freedom, and nearly his life 
in Vietnamese prisons, Pete can speak from the heart on the importance 
of these basic human values in a way that few of us can. And I know 
that he will do a superb job.
  And who could be more qualified to heal the wounds of the war, and to 
build bridges between the peoples of our two nations. Pete has often 
said that he ``left the bitterness at the gate'' when he left his 
prison in Vietnam. His leadership is a major reason that the United 
States and Vietnam are poised to begin a new era of friendly relations.
  I have had the honor of working with Pete for the past 6 years. Pete 
represents everything that is great about our country. He is selfless--
having served bravely in the Air Force, flying 67 combat missions over 
Vietnam, and 6\1/2\ years as a POW--Pete came home and went to work to 
make our country a better place. He has faced personal tragedy--losing 
his wife Carlotta to cancer--and moved on to make good come out of his 
suffering. And after 26 years in the U.S. Air Force, Pete felt 
compelled to continue a life of public service. Now having served for 6 
years in the House of Representatives, Pete will return to Vietnam 
under very different circumstances than those under which he left. But 
he will continue his lifelong commitment to the American people, and I 
am honored to speak on behalf of this great American.
  There is another quality that Pete possesses that I think will serve 
him well in his position as our Ambassador to Vietnam. That quality is 
patience. Pete has waited patiently for over a year for his nomination 
to come to the floor of the Senate. I am very pleased that Pete's long 
wait is about to come to an end, and I urge my colleagues to join me in 
voting to confirm Pete Peterson as the United States Ambassador to 
Vietnam.
  Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, I yield 5 minutes to the Senator from Rhode 
Island.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Rhode Island is recognized.
  Mr. REED. I thank the Chair.
  I rise with a great deal of pride to speak to the confirmation of 
Pete Peterson as our Ambassador to the Republic of Vietnam.
  Simply stated, Pete Peterson is a great man. He was a great man 
before he ever put on the uniform of the U.S. Air Force because he is a 
man of outstanding character and a deep devotion to his family and 
country. As my friend and colleague, the Senator from Nebraska, pointed 
out, he has that rare quality of dignity and purpose, not flamboyant, 
but quiet and determinative.
  Pete is a remarkable person. One of the great privileges I had in my 
life was to serve with him in the House of

[[Page S3008]]

Representatives for 6 years. He brought all of this talent, this energy 
and this fierce patriotism to his work in every capacity. We all know 
the story. He was a young man, hailed from Nebraska, joined the U.S. 
Air Force, was in 1966 sent to Thailand, flew 66 missions in Vietnam 
and on his 67th mission he was shot down. He was captured. He spent 
6\1/2\ grueling, arduous years in captivity in three different prison 
camps.
  In all that time, not only did they not break his spirit but they 
could in no way touch that core of deep respect, regard for all people 
that he still maintains. He emerged from an experience, which would 
have seared and destroyed so many other people, unbroken, unbowed and 
without bitterness, a remarkable testimony to his character.
  Pete could have returned in 1973 and said, I have done my duty as an 
Air Force officer, as a patriot. He returned, in fact, in 1973 to greet 
his wife, his beloved wife, who sadly passed away and will not see this 
triumph today but I am sure understands from where she is what a great 
day it is for Pete. He, in fact, saw for the first time a son he had 
never met.
  Yet, despite all that, he still heard the call of his country, and he 
served with distinction the second district of Florida for 6 years.
  There has been some controversy about this nomination, but it has not 
been about Pete Peterson because there is no one in this Chamber or in 
this country that I think ever doubted his capacity or commitment to 
serve as Ambassador to Vietnam. The controversy is about the issue of 
POW's and MIA's, which was articulated by the Senator from New 
Hampshire. Those are serious, important issues which cannot be 
neglected. Indeed, I believe Pete Peterson is the best person to 
address those issues.
  He will go to Vietnam, a place where he has already spent one-tenth 
of his life, with the credibility of one who has served and with the 
vision of one who understands what went on there during the war and 
what we must do to bring our country and that country closer together. 
And he will not neglect the search for the unanswered questions of his 
comrades who are still missing and unaccounted for.
  Pete has long been involved in this issue. He has, along with my 
distinguished colleague from Massachusetts, Senator Kerry, and the 
distinguished Senator from New Hampshire, been involved with the 
Vietnam working group. He has been involved with the U.S.-Russian joint 
commission on POW-MIA affairs. These gentlemen have committed 
themselves to search for the answers, and that type of commitment I 
know will resolve the question.
  We have a great responsibility to develop a relationship, a mutually 
supportive relationship between the United States and the Republic of 
Vietnam. Pete Peterson can do that. He is not only a warrior but he is 
also a businessman. He understands that one of our challenges is to 
bring economic prosperity to both our countries, and he will be a 
leader in that regard also.
  I believe the President has made the wisest choice possible with this 
nomination. We will vindicate and recognize that choice this evening, 
and we will send a strong message, a message of reconciliation and of 
progress, a message that wars will end and peace will be begun, and a 
message also that a life of service to your country, selfless service 
to your country, will be rewarded by further responsibilities 
commensurate with that service.
  I, too, thank the majority leader and the Democratic leader, the 
Senator from New Hampshire, and particularly the Senator from Arizona 
for all his efforts to bring this nomination to the floor and, like 
Pete Peterson, also a heroic veteran of the war in Vietnam. As someone 
who served in the military for 12 years at that time but not in 
Vietnam, I recognize all of the tremendous contributions of the 
veterans of that war in this Chamber, in the other body and throughout 
our society. Pete Peterson will make us all proud but particularly 
those brave men and women who served in Vietnam.
  I thank the Senator. I yield back the remainder of my time.
  Mr. KERRY addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Massachusetts is recognized.
  Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, I yield myself such of the remaining time 
as I may use.
  I thank the majority leader for his efforts to bring this nomination 
to the floor this week so that the Senate may act on it rapidly. It is 
a nomination that has been overdue, and it is important that we 
proceed.
  I think it is safe to say that with this nomination and with the 
approval of the Senate, which I expect, we really begin the process in 
earnest of ceasing to treat Vietnam as a war and beginning in earnest 
to treat it like a country. That is an enormous transition for this 
country, and we have traveled a difficult journey through these years.

  As a friend and one who has worked closely with Pete Peterson on the 
POW-MIA issue, I really cannot think of a better person to be our 
Ambassador to Vietnam. Pete Peterson, Senator McCain, Senator Smith, 
myself, and others have spent an enormous amount of time, energy, and a 
great deal of the taxpayers' money of this country trying to ensure 
that the families of American servicemen missing from the war in 
Vietnam get answers.
  There is absolutely no doubt, Mr. President, that many families have 
gotten those answers in the last years as a result of the accounting 
process that we now have in place. But I recognize that for some whose 
loved ones were lost in that wrenching war questions remain. I am 
convinced personally that having an ambassador in the country, having 
an American flag again flying in Hanoi and elsewhere in the country 
will provide us with the opportunity to be able to leverage those 
answers. Having a man who himself served, as both of my colleagues so 
eloquently stated, 6\1/2\ years of his life as a prisoner of war in 
Vietnam will enhance our credibility and greatly facilitate our ability 
to be able to find those answers.

  As a fighter pilot, as a POW, Pete Peterson has served this Nation 
with enormous distinction and courage. When he returned from the war, 
as we know, he became a successful businessman and served in Congress. 
During that period he served as chairman of the Vietnam working group 
of the United States-Russia Joint Commission On POWs. He returned to 
Vietnam twice already in order to meet with Vietnamese officials and 
travel throughout the countryside, both to find answers as well as to 
understand what Vietnam is like today. It is entirely appropriate that 
Congressman Peterson should therefore return to Vietnam as our first 
ambassador since the war and literally help to bridge the gap that 
remains between our two countries. He went once in war, and as our 
ambassador he would now go in peace. I cannot think of greater poetic 
symmetry.
  I know he has the ability as well as, if not better than, anyone to 
understand and explain to the Vietnamese, and to others, the full 
breadth of the emotions that the Vietnam war has generated among us in 
this country for 30 years or more. His experience as a prisoner gives 
him the extraordinary standing and importance to represent our country 
in all of the ramifications of the war. No one in Vietnam could doubt 
his word or his intentions, because he has gone through his own 
personal process of resolution, and he has emerged from that process 
prepared to return to Vietnam and build a normal relationship between 
that country and the United States. No one in this country could or 
should doubt his desire and determination to complete the process of 
POW-MIA accounting or his commitment to the principles of our country, 
which he fought for, which are still at issue with respect to our 
relationship with Vietnam.
  So, as Ambassador, Congressman Peterson will confront those issues 
that are personal, and he will confront a set of issues that are 
critically important to the regional and bilateral interests of the 
United States: Vietnam's relationships with its neighbors, particularly 
China; legal and political reform within Vietnam; human rights; trade. 
I have every confidence in his ability to deal with these issues 
effectively. He has publicly expressed his willingness and enthusiasm 
to take on the job, and he comes in with a deep belief in our ability 
to build a viable and important relationship with Vietnam.
  I had the privilege of traveling in Vietnam on one of those trips 
with Pete Peterson. I have witnessed myself his personal journey of 
rediscovery and

[[Page S3009]]

his determination to keep faith with his fellow veterans. I know he 
will represent us extraordinarily well as the first ambassador since 
the war. And I say to all those who have legitimately expressed 
concerns--Senator Smith has been as dogged and as determined as any 
person in the U.S. Senate to get these answers, and I admire that. I 
would say to him and to anyone else who might fear that sending an 
ambassador to Vietnam would lessen our ability to get answers, I say 
look at the record of the last few years and look at Pete Peterson. He 
and that record show that by having him there, I think families can 
rest assured that they will have the greatest connection to their past, 
to his past, and to our past, and to our future. That future will be a 
future that will sustain this POW-MIA accounting effort and also 
sustain the principles for which their loved ones, and Pete Peterson, 
fought.
  So I look forward to the Senate finally accepting this moment. I 
thank the Senator from New Hampshire and others who have helped to 
bring us to this important point.
  Mr. SMITH of New Hampshire. I ask unanimous consent to have three 
letters printed in the Record.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a letter to Senator Lott 
from the executive director of the National League of Families, Ann 
Mills Griffiths, a letter from the Disabled American Veterans to 
Senator Lott, and a letter from The American Legion to Senator Lott be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the letters were ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

         National League of Families of American Prisoners and 
           Missing in Southeast Asia,
                                    Washington, DC, April 9, 1997.
     Hon. Trent Lott,
     Senate Majority Leader, Russell Senate Office Building, 
         Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Lott: It is our understanding that an interim 
     report on intelligence regarding the issue of our missing 
     relatives will soon be forwarded from the Senate Select 
     Committee on Intelligence. We further understand that this 
     report is linked to the confirmation vote on Congressman Pete 
     Peterson as our new US Ambassador to Vietnam.
       For many years, the National League of Families has 
     supported a policy of reciprocity; that is still our policy. 
     Unfortunately, the Clinton Administration has not provided 
     incentives in advance, but inaccurately justified each step 
     on the basis of POW/MIA cooperation to include the 
     President's certification to Congress that Vietnam is 
     ``cooperating in full faith.'' Official information on which 
     we have always relied does not support this certification. We 
     are confident that an objective oversight effort will confirm 
     what we know.
       On May 7th, a League Delegation will again travel to Laos, 
     Vietnam and Cambodia to hold discussions with the leadership 
     of each country. Our last such trip was in 1994. It is our 
     sincere hope that whatever the outcome of current Senate 
     deliberations, a clear signal will be sent to Vietnam and the 
     Clinton Administration that further unilateral actions on the 
     POW/MIA issue by the government of Vietnam are expected and 
     will be a continuous subject of Senate oversight. This signal 
     is overdue and will help not only our delegation, but 
     reinforce Congressman Peterson when he undertakes his 
     difficult mission.
       We are grateful for the concern shown by the Senate and 
     look forward to providing you the results of our upcoming 
     trip.
           Respectfully,
                                              Ann Mills Griffiths,
     Executive Director.
                                                                    ____

         Disabled American Veterans, National Service and 
           Legislative Headquarters,
                                    Washington, DC, April 7, 1997.
     Hon. Trent Lott,
     Senate Majority Leader, U.S. Senate, Russell Senate Office 
         Building, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Lott: The Disabled American Veterans is deeply 
     concerned for the thousands of American servicemen still 
     unaccounted for in the aftermath of the Vietnam War. Since 
     the end of that war, numerous efforts by high level American 
     delegations, including members of Congress, have visited 
     Southeast Asia in continuing efforts to resolve the fate of 
     these brave men without success.
       Although the Socialist Republic of Vietnam has committed to 
     renew and increase their unilateral, as well as joint 
     efforts, to account for America's POW/MIAs, we have seen no 
     meaningful efforts taken by Vietnam to account for our 
     missing service personnel.
       This is particularly true with regards to the unilateral 
     actions which Vietnam should be able to undertake to account 
     for a large number of our POW/MIAs based on the case 
     assessments prepared by our government last year. These case 
     assessments showed that the Vietnamese should be able to 
     provide information on at least 400 POW/MIAs. To date, the 
     Vietnamese have failed to come forth with information on 
     these individuals to any significant extent.
       As a result of Vietnam's failure to provide the fullest 
     possible accounting of our POW/MIAs, the delegates at our 
     last National Convention in New Orleans, Louisiana, July 28-
     August 1, 1996, passed a resolution expressing our opposition 
     to further economic and political relations between the 
     United States and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam. 
     Accordingly, it is our firm belief that the confirmation of a 
     U.S. Ambassador to Vietnam should be postponed until there is 
     tangible evidence of Vietnam's commitment to provide the 
     fullest possible accounting of our POW/MIAs. Our position 
     does not mean that the DAV is opposed in any way to the 
     individual nominated by President Clinton.
       I would appreciate learning of your views on this matter.
           Sincerely,
                                                  David W. Gorman,
     Executive Director, Washington Headquarters.
                                                                    ____

                                              The American Legion,


                                            Washington Office,

                                    Washington, DC, April 3, 1997.
     Hon. Trent Lott,
     Senate Majority Leader, U.S. Senate,
     Russell Senate Office Bldg., Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Lott: The American Legion urges you in the 
     strongest possible terms not to proceed with Senate 
     confirmation of a United States Ambassador to Vietnam. While 
     the Legion does not question the personal fitness of the 
     nominee himself, we believe it is premature to approve any 
     nomination for an Ambassador to Vietnam at this time.
       We know that many others share The American Legion's 
     concern that Vietnam has failed to take the necessary actions 
     to achieve the fullest possible accounting of missing 
     Americans from the war in Southeast Asia.
       This is particularly true with regard to the unilateral 
     actions Vietnam should be able to immediately undertake to 
     repatriate remains, which would dramatically increase 
     accountability. In fact, the purpose of last year's 
     Presidential Delegation to Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia, on 
     which The American Legion was represented, was to gain 
     commitments from the Vietnamese government to take just such 
     unilateral actions.
       However, despite the pledges by Vietnamese officials with 
     whom the Delegation met, Vietnam has not been forthcoming to 
     any appreciable extent. Enclosed is a copy of a letter to 
     President Clinton expressing The American Legion's concerns 
     about the trip report from last year's Presidential 
     Delegation to Vietnam. This report was a basis for the 
     President's decision to certify Vietnam's cooperation on the 
     POW/MIA issue.
       Vietnam also promised to turn over military archival and 
     documentary evidence as well as other records which would 
     lead to additional accountability. However, such disclosures 
     have not been forthcoming to any significant extent.
       Finally, recent reports of illegal campaign financing by 
     Indonesian businessman Mr. Mochtar Riady of the Lippo Group 
     (who advocated normalizing U.S. relations with Vietnam) have 
     raised serious concerns about possible improper influence of 
     official U.S. policy. These are disturbing reports which The 
     American Legion takes very seriously. We firmly believe that 
     Senate action on the confirmation of a U.S. Ambassador to 
     Vietnam should be delayed until Congressional Hearings into 
     these matters have concluded.
       The American Legion does not support or oppose any 
     nomination put forth by the President for any office of 
     government. However, with respect to the process, we are 
     adamantly opposed to moving forward with the confirmation of 
     an Ambassador to the Socialist Republic of Vietnam until such 
     time that Hanoi is fully forthcoming in an effort to honestly 
     resolve the remaining cases of our missing American 
     servicemen.
           Sincerely,
                                                  Joseph J. Frank,
                                               National Commander.

  Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, I am pleased to support the nomination of 
former Congressman Pete Peterson for the Post of Ambassador to Vietnam. 
At this critical juncture in our relations with Vietnam and Southeast 
Asia there are many important United States interests that can be 
advanced only with the presence of an able Ambassador in Hanoi.
  The most important of these interests is the continued accounting for 
our POW/MIA's. A Vietnam veteran and former prisoner of war, Pete 
Peterson has both a professional and profoundly personal stake in 
ensuring the fullest possible accounting of his comrades-in-arms. As 
ambassador, he has pledged to make achieving that goal his highest 
priority.
  In addition to enhancing cooperation on the POW/MIA issue, Peterson 
will be charged more broadly with encouraging and facilitating Hanoi's 
entry as a peaceful, cooperative member of the community of nations. 
Vietnam has begun working with us in the important area of 
counternarcotics, and this cooperation should be expanded to curtail 
the flow of heroin and other deadly drugs from Southeast Asia to our 
shores. We have also begun a dialogue

[[Page S3010]]

on human rights which must be buttressed by expanded cultural ties and 
educational opportunities.
  The advocacy of a strong United States Ambassador coupled with the 
collective efforts of the American people and numerous nongovernmental 
organizations can do much to foster greater Vietnamese respect for 
international norms in the areas of human rights, democracy, and 
religious freedom.
  Finally, approving the nomination of Congressman Peterson as 
Ambassador to Hanoi will greatly assist efforts already underway to 
advance United States economic interests in Vietnam and throughout 
Southeast Asia. Vietnam has made significant progress toward 
transforming its inefficient centrally planned economy to a market-
based economy, and it is actively seeking foreign participation in its 
economic development. Vietnam's efforts to rebuild its infrastructure 
and modernize its economy present great opportunities for United States 
businesses in the areas of energy, telecommunications, health, 
education, tourism, and environmental protection. But for United States 
firms to compete successfully with the numerous foreign companies 
already doing business in Vietnam, the administration must negotiate 
and Congress must approve a comprehensive bilateral trade agreement. As 
Ambassador, Peterson will play a central role in expediting 
negotiations on an agreement which will safeguard U.S. commercial 
interests in the fastest growing region of the world.
  There are some who have speculated about the administration's motives 
for normalizing relations with Vietnam at this time, questioning 
whether officials from the Lippo Group or other United States 
businesses with prospective commercial interests in east Asia sought to 
influence the decision in exchange for their campaign contributions to 
the Democratic National Committee.
  As our colleague, Senator McCain--like Congressman Peterson a former 
POW--noted at Congressman Peterson's confirmation hearing, ``This rumor 
is entirely unsubstantiated by fact.'' President Bush and Secretary 
Baker put the United States firmly on the path toward normalization in 
1989 when they drafted a ``road map'' whose goal was the establishment 
of full diplomatic relations.
  The pace of normalization has actually slowed during the Clinton 
administration. As Senator McCain stated during the Foreign Relations 
Committee hearing, the Clinton administration was worried about the 
political ramifications for the President in making a decision to 
normalize--with the veterans organizations and others--and was not 
possessed with concern about helping business interests, whether 
domestic or foreign.
  In short, we have reached the point of preparing to exchange 
ambassadors because of the bipartisan conviction that normalizing 
relations is in our best interests. It had nothing to do with foreign 
lobbyists or contributions to any Presidential campaign.
  Peterson traveled first to Vietnam 30 years ago as an Air force 
fighter pilot. He served his country nobly, receiving two Silver Stars, 
several Bronze Stars, and two Purple Hearts. he flew 66 combat missions 
over Vietnam before his aircraft was downed near Hanoi on September 10, 
1966. He then endured almost 7 years of unimaginable hardship as a 
prisoner of war, before finally returning home in March 1973.
  Now he seeks to return to Vietnam, not as a warrior, but as an 
ambassador of peace, helping to heal old wounds and bring Vietnam into 
the world community after 30 years of isolation. It is a testament to 
Congressman Peterson's commitment to public service that he is willing 
to take on this difficult mission. I wish him God's speed.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on the confirmation of the 
nomination.
  Without objection, the nomination is confirmed.
  The nomination was confirmed.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The President will be notified.

                          ____________________