[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.
____________________