[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 13 (Tuesday, January 24, 2017)]
[Senate]
[Pages S426-S430]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
EXECUTIVE CALENDAR
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will
proceed to executive session to consider the following nominations en
bloc, which the clerk will report.
The senior assistant legislative clerk read the nominations of Nikki
R. Haley, of South Carolina, to be the Representative of the United
States of America to the United Nations, with the rank and status of
Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary, and the Representative of
the United States of America in the Security Council of the United
Nations; and Nikki R. Haley, of South Carolina, to be Representative of
the United States of America to the Sessions of the General Assembly of
the United Nations during her tenure of service as Representative of
the United States of America to the United Nations.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. There will now be 30 minutes of debate,
equally divided in the usual form.
The Senator from South Carolina.
Mr. SCOTT. Mr. President, today I stand in support of my good friend
and Governor, Nikki Haley, who has been nominated for the position of
Ambassador to the United Nations. Simply put, Governor Haley is the
right choice, and I could not be prouder to support her nomination. She
has shown amazing leadership during very trying times in South
Carolina, and I know that she will bring the same strength and resolve
in reinforcing and
[[Page S427]]
strengthening our relationships with our allies.
As she showed through her confirmation hearing, Nikki is a strong,
principled leader. During a time with so much international
instability, we need a decisive and compassionate leader like Governor
Haley representing our Nation. She is the type of visionary leader who
will help turn the diplomatic tide of the past few years and reassure
our allies that the United States stands in strong support of them.
Nikki has served the people of South Carolina very well, and she will
be missed. But now, I look forward to addressing her by her new title--
Ambassador.
I yield the floor.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I know we are going to vote here fairly
soon, but I just want to address the body before the vote.
Nikki Haley is soon to be the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations,
I believe with a very strong vote in the committee, 19 to 2. Senators
Corker and Cardin did an excellent job of running the hearing. Governor
Haley conducted herself very well. I know that, as Governor of South
Carolina, she has brought us together at home.
She has dealt with some things that are incredibly difficult for any
State. We had a thousand-year flood, and we had the tragedy in
Charleston, with Dylann Roof shooting nine parishioners praying at
Mother Emanuel Church in Charleston. She handled these historic crises
with dignity and grace. She was able to rally the State and remove the
Confederate battle flag from the capitol grounds.
All I can say is that the skill set she has of bringing people
together I have seen. As she goes into this new job, she can learn the
nuances of foreign policy, but diplomacy is something you either have
or you don't. She is tough and determined, and I think she is very
capable of being the United States' voice in the United Nations. As a
matter of fact, I think she will represent us extremely well.
The bottom line is that her story is a uniquely American story--
immigrant parents coming to a small town in South Carolina. She said
very pointedly: I was too light to be African American or Black, and I
was too dark to be White. She is Indian American. She and her family
have contributed greatly to our State.
I think all of us can be proud that Nikki Haley will soon be our
voice and America's face in the United Nations. I think President Trump
chose wisely. I look forward to helping her in her new job. I urge this
body to support her nomination because I have seen her in action. I
think she will represent us all very well.
I yield the floor.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, it has become fashionable, particularly
among supporters of the Trump administration, to accuse the United
Nations of just about everything. This is, however, nothing new. The
U.N has been an easy target, especially for some Republicans, for a
long time, because like any unwieldy international organization
comprised of member states with very different priorities and interests
it will probably never be as efficient or effective as we would like.
But there is simply no question that the U.N. serves many vital
functions that are fully consistent with key U.S. interests and values.
For that reason, it is essential that the U.S. continues to play a
leadership role in the U.N., which we were instrumental in creating
seven decades ago, in a manner that strengthens the institution.
At times, I have expressed my own frustrations with the U.N. It
wastes inordinate amounts of time debating and adopting redundant
resolutions that accomplish next to nothing. It has suffered from
personnel policies that make it difficult if not impossible to fire
underperforming employees. It pays its officials at rates that dwarf
what many could earn in their own countries. It has been too slow to
implement procedures to ensure transparency and accountability,
including for whistleblowers who have suffered retaliation for exposing
corruption and other misconduct.
So there is no dispute that the U.N. needs to do better. The new
Secretary General, Antonio Guterres, knows this as well as anyone and
he has made clear that he is going to do his best to put the
institution on a road to real reform.
But, of course, he cannot do that by himself. He is empowered only to
the extent that the U.N. member states, and particularly the permanent
members of the Security Council, support him.
Attempts by past the Secretary Generals to implement reforms have
been partly stymied by resistance from governments that prefer the
status quo. While I believe the prospects for U.N.reform have never
been better, that will not be possible without the active leadership
and skillful diplomacy of the United States.
And that is where our U.N. Ambassador comes in.
I have known many of them, although I was only 7 years old in 1947
when Warren Austin of Vermont, nominated by President Truman, became
our third U.N. Ambassador.
The position of U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. has also been held by
such accomplished people as Henry Cabot Lodge, Adlai Stevenson, George
H.W. Bush, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, Thomas Pickering, and Madeleine
Albright. Each was recognized and widely admired across the political
spectrum for his or her depth of foreign policy experience and wisdom.
Today we are considering the nomination of Nikki Haley to be the next
U.S. Ambassador. Governor Haley's record as Governor of South Carolina
was decidedly mixed, and I will not take time today to discuss that
record. What is most relevant here, however, is her dearth of
experience for the job she has been selected for. That is not so much a
criticism of Governor Haley as it is of President Trump, as there are
certainly well qualified, seasoned diplomats in the Republican Party
who would be well received by members of both parties.
Instead, we are asked to support a nominee who will no doubt be
confirmed but will be starting from square one. If there ever were a
case of having to learn on the job, this will be it. That might not
concern me if it were not for the indispensable role of the United
Nations in an increasingly dangerous and polarized world, the
importance of this position, and the complex challenges the next U.S.
Ambassador will face on her first day on the job.
It was painfully apparent during her confirmation hearing that
virtually everything Governor Haley said in her opening remarks and in
her responses to questions of Senators, she had learned in the previous
2 months since she was chosen for the job. Her answers largely parroted
popular Republican talking points with little substance to back up her
response and revealed only an elementary understanding of how the U.N.
functions. Her stated interest in U.N. reform is well placed, but it
did not appear that she grasps what U.N. reform entails or what it
takes to build the necessary support for reform.
Again, I do not blame her for that. Her career has focused entirely
on issues relevant to the State of South Carolina. But that does not
make her qualified to be our Ambassador to the U.N.
As Governor, she jumped on the politically expedient bandwagon and
opposed the resettlement of any Syrian refugees in her State over
``security concerns,'' although it being a Federal decision some
Syrians have been resettled there. In other words, she supported a
blanket prohibition against an entire nationality of people--men,
women, and children--regardless of the merits of their individual
status as refugees fleeing war.
She stated, in spite of the fact that all of our major European
allies supported the nuclear agreement with Iran, that Russia's and
China's support was a ``red flag,'' without acknowledging the reality
that without their support it would be impossible to achieve an
agreement to halt Iran's nuclear weapons program or any of our other
key objectives at the U.N.
She condemned the U.S. abstention on U.N. Security Council Resolution
[[Page S428]]
2334 regarding Israeli settlements and incorrectly implied that it is
inconsistent with longstanding U.S. policy and interests. In fact, she
insisted that the resolution, not settlements themselves, makes peace
negotiations more difficult--a view with which I disagree. She seemed
to acknowledge that the U.S. does not support settlement construction,
but stated that the U.S. should have vetoed the resolution anyway.
She mischaracterized U.S. law regarding our share of dues in support
of U.N. peacekeeping missions that the U.S.--Republican and Democratic
administrations--voted for, failing to acknowledge that we have a
treaty obligation to pay 28.5 percent of U.N. peacekeeping costs. She
made little mention of and gave little if any credit to the troop-
contributing countries themselves, other than to highlight incidents of
sexual exploitation and abuse. This is a critical issue that I and
others here have been working with the U.S. Mission to the U.N. to
address, and progress is being made in developing meaningful
accountability procedures.
She stated that the cut-off of U.S. funding for UNESCO as a result of
the vote of a majority of its members to accept Palestine as a member
state, which led to our loss of influence, is a ``good thing'' and that
she would continue to support the cut-off of funding. She and I
disagree about that and what it could mean for the future. I think even
the Israeli Government has come to recognize that it is better for the
U.S. to be at the table, using our influence to deflect attempts to
unfairly target Israel, than on the sidelines.
Governor Haley suggested that the U.S. may want to reconsider
participation in and funding for the U.N. Human Rights Council, despite
overwhelming evidence that our role serves to protect our interests and
has reduced substantially the council's disproportionate and wasteful
focus on Israel. At no time did she acknowledge the many council
resolutions that are fully consistent with U.S. interests or that the
influence lost by the U.S. is simply ceded to the very governments she
opposes having a say in the council.
On the other hand, Governor Haley did repeatedly reject what she
described as ``slash and burn'' tactics when it comes to budget
cutting, and on that, I fully agree with her.
She said she supports moving our embassy to Jerusalem, although there
is no compelling need to do so, it is strongly opposed by our ally
Jordan, would likely incite a violent reaction in Arab countries, and
could do more to drive a nail in the coffin of what little remains of
the Middle East peace process than anything else.
In responses to written questions she betrayed a serious lack of
understanding about Cuba, its economy, and the failures of the 55-year-
old U.S. embargo. Indeed, if she were to apply her answers regarding
Cuba to other countries with repressive governments, we would have to
close dozens of U.S. Embassies, end diplomatic relations, and impose
ineffective, unilateral sanctions against each of them.
I urge Governor Haley, as our U.N. Ambassador, to listen to the
overwhelming majority of Americans and Cubans, including many
Republican Members of Congress, who support a policy of engagement. I
urge her to travel to Cuba and see and hear for herself, unlike those
who continue to favor a Cold War embargo that has been exploited by the
Cuban Government to justify its repressive policies and that has hurt
the Cuban people.
I have been a congressional delegate to the United Nations three
times, after being nominated by Presidents of both Republican and
Democratic parties. I appreciated that opportunity because I have long
believed that it is in the strong interest of the United States to play
an active, leadership role in the U.N.
That is only possible if we, by far the world's wealthiest country,
meet our financial commitments. And it is only possible if we build
coalitions through skillful diplomacy and refrain from the tactics that
some critics of the U.N. advocate, such as bullying and ultimatums,
which are often self-defeating.
I recognize that Governor Haley will be confirmed, and I wish her the
best. I hope she becomes a great U.S. Ambassador. I urge her to seek
out and listens to a wide range of views, particularly on controversial
issues like the Middle East, Iran, and how the U.S. can best help make
the U.N. work better for everyone.
I will do everything I can to support Secretary General Guterres, the
budget of the U.S. Mission to the U.N., and funding for U.N. agencies
like the World Food Program, the U.N. Development Program, UNICEF, the
U.N. Environment Program, the U.N. Population Fund, U.N. Women, the
U.N. Voluntary Fund for Victims of Torture, and so many others that
carry out lifesaving humanitarian and development programs around the
world.
And if there are other ways that I can help soon-to-be Ambassador
Haley to defend the values and effectively advance the interests of the
United States at the U.N. and to bring about needed reforms I will
gladly do so.
Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, in 1945, at the close of World War II,
the 50 Allied nations formed the United Nations to help prevent another
world war. Since its founding, the U.N. has grown to 193 nations. While
it has many serious flaws, it has been an important tool for promoting
peace, protecting human rights, providing humanitarian assistance, and
safeguarding the environment.
U.S. Ambassadors to the U.N. have included some of America's leading
figures, including Henry Cabot Lodge, Jr., Adlai Stevenson, Arthur
Goldberg, George H.W. Bush, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, Andrew Young,
Madeleine Albright, Bill Richardson, and John Danforth. President
Eisenhower raised the ambassadorship to cabinet rank. Although both
Presidents Bush removed the position from Cabinet level, President
Obama restored it to that level. I am pleased that President Trump has
decided to keep it there.
The U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. must advance principles that the
United States has promoted over the years--the rule of law, individual
liberties, and human rights. Our ambassador must not only maintain, but
strengthen our relationships with our allies.
Unlike many past ambassadors to the U.N., Governor Nikki Haley has
little experience in foreign policy. But as Governor, she developed
important experience building coalitions, and that skill should serve
her well as ambassador to the U.N.
Some positions that Governor Haley took during her confirmation
hearing give me pause. For example, Governor Haley made some statements
about the 2015 Iran nuclear agreement that indicated unfamiliarity with
the joint comprehensive plan of action. I am pleased, however, that
Governor Haley distanced herself from some of President Trump's most
divisive positions, and I will support her nomination.
Mr. GRAHAM. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, shortly we will be voting on the U.S.
Ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley. She went through her
confirmation hearings at the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and I
had a chance during those confirmation hearings to ask her a series of
questions. I have also had an opportunity to meet with her and talk
personally about her vision of the United Nations and the United
States' role in how she would conduct her leadership at the United
Nations.
I must say, originally there was some concern because of her lack of
foreign policy experience, but I must tell you, I was extremely
impressed about her competency as Governor of South Carolina--the work
that she did, dealing with some very difficult issues, including a
tragedy that occurred in her State, as well as dealing with the
Confederate flag and removing it from the State Capitol.
She handled these issues with real professionalism and sensitivity to
all communities, and during her confirmation hearing, she displayed a
willingness to reach out, to understand more about world affairs, and
to become fully knowledgeable in these areas. She
[[Page S429]]
exercised, I thought, a commitment and passion for the commitments that
are important to this country--good governance, human rights, and
democracy.
I was impressed during the confirmation hearing about her commitment
to the importance of the United Nations and the important work that it
does. The United Nations, as we all know, does do work as peacekeepers
to try to avoid conflicts but also does an incredible job on
humanitarian needs with refugee assistance, as well as the sustainable
development goals that provide help to people around the world,
increasing maternal health, reducing infant mortality, dealing with
women's education needs. These original Sustainable Development Goals--
originally the Millennium Development Goals, now the Sustainable
Development Goals--have saved millions of lives.
I must tell you, Governor Haley was very mindful of this and very
committed to the United Nations and the work that it does and the U.S.
participation in the United Nations. She recognized that it is
important that we engage the international community in the work that
is done within the United Nations.
When she was questioned about whether she thought it was a good idea
to slash funds to the United Nations in order to make a point about
votes that we thought were unpopular, she said no. She opposed that
slash-and-burn strategy; we need to engage and find ways to leverage
our participation to get more favorable results.
I might tell you, she was very strong about her sensitivity that the
United Nations has not been fair to one of our key allies, Israel, and
she would be a strong voice to make sure those types of issues are
dealt with and the United States uses all the tools at its disposal to
fight against those types of bias and prejudice within the United
Nations.
We have talked a great deal in our committee about moral clarity from
our nominees, so there is no misunderstanding anywhere in the world
that the United States stands for human rights, that the United States
stands against abuses that take place around the world, and that it
will fight for democracy in all parts of the world and support those
causes through our diplomacy, through our development assistance,
through our tools.
She was very clear about the moral certainty issue. Just to give a
few examples, we talked a great deal about Russia and its conduct and
what it is doing in the United States about the attack on our free
election system. She was very clear about how outraged she was with
that type of conduct--what Russia has done in Ukraine, its occupation
of Crimea. She acknowledged that Crimea is not Russian, that it belongs
to Ukraine, and she spoke very strongly about defending Ukraine's
rights and sovereignty.
We talked specifically about what was happening in Syria and Russia's
support for the Assad regime and the atrocities that have taken place
in that country, most recently in Aleppo. When we asked if she would
characterize that type of conduct as war crimes, without any
equivocation she said: Absolutely--that this was a matter that required
international accountability.
I also brought up with her what was happening in the Philippines, one
of our allies, where the President of the Philippines, Mr. Duterte, has
done extrajudicial killings and how she would characterize that as
gross violations of human rights. She agreed that type of conduct
cannot be tolerated, that we need to speak to whether they are friend
or foe when they commit this type of conduct, that this is wrong and
the United States must stand up for our principles. I was impressed by
the way that she spoke to those types of issues.
One of the more telling questions that we asked was whether she would
support any registry for any subgroup of ethnic or religious Americans,
and she said: Absolutely not.
We had, I thought, moral clarity in her response to some of the most
important questions. I think all of us feel that she has the passion to
represent the United States and our views well at the United Nations.
What was particularly important to us is how she would speak out to
power within the United Nations; that she had no problem in dealing
with Mr. Putin and calling his conduct exactly what it was and would
not be intimidated by Mr. Putin saying ``Well, you need me for some
other issue''; that we have to be clear that we will not tolerate that
type of conduct that violates basic human rights.
She gave us confidence that, on behalf of the American people, she
would speak up in the Cabinet room with Mr. Trump and the Cabinet as to
these values. For all those reasons, it was a comfortable vote for me
to support her nomination and confirmation.
I do want to relay the fact that she does represent the American
story. She is a daughter of immigrants who came to this country at
great risk in order to seek a better life for their children. She
experienced some of the discrimination against immigrant communities as
she grew up in this country and tried to participate in the business
and political sphere. She overcame all of those types of challenges and
is extremely sensitive, I think, to all the needs of Americans.
For all those reasons, I am proud to recommend her to our colleagues
on both sides of the aisle. I hope we will support her confirmation. I
think she is the right person now to represent us at the United
Nations. For all those reasons, I will support her nomination.
With that, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. CORKER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. CORKER. Mr. President, I am going to speak only for a few minutes
so that we can have the vote occur at 5:30, on time. I wanted to say
that I am pleased to be here to support Governor Nikki Haley as our
Ambassador to the United Nations.
The United Nations is at a crossroads and really needs someone who is
very reform-minded for the United States to lead our efforts in that
regard. That not only would benefit U.S. interests, but candidly it
would benefit the world. She is someone who has shown that ability as
Governor of South Carolina.
She also has a clarity about her as it relates to representing U.S.
interests. People on both sides of the aisle in our committee were able
to recognize that her instincts relative to where the United States
needs to be on certain issues--I think most of us understand that the
United States leading on issues of human rights, leading on issues of
conscience, that the American values we all hold dear and want to
promote around the world are things that she has the ability to
communicate and cares deeply about, and I think people were very
impressed.
The United Nations has multiple issues relative to peacekeeping that
have not been addressed. Sexual exportation and abuse by peacekeepers
have been rampant, and things have not been done in that regard to
curtail that activity or at least not in the ways that they should, and
I know she is very passionate about that issue.
There is no question that she is not the most adept person at foreign
policy. She would be the first person to say that. She has spent most
of her time out of the country solely on economic development trips. I
think where the United Nations is today is at a place where we need a
really driven person who cares about our own U.S. national interests
but also has the ability to break through the clutter and reform.
She has worked with legislators to bring people together, to make
that happen in her own State. She has had an exemplary record in that
regard. My guess is that is really the first effort that needs to take
place. Over time, through the relationships she develops there, the
travel that will take place, I am absolutely certain--especially with
the drive that she has--she will develop some of the other capacity
that I know she will want to utilize there at the United Nations.
I am here to recommend her. I look forward to supporting her. Our
committee did so in a voice vote with only two dissents.
In spite of the fact that I am disappointed that we are handling our
Secretary of State in a manner that is not in keeping with bipartisan
precedent, and in spite of the fact that we
[[Page S430]]
are not going to handle that in a way that we should and could today,
through a vote on that, I am appreciative of the minority leader
allowing this vote to take place today, and I am glad she is going to
be confirmed overwhelmingly as our United Nations Ambassador.
With that, I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Rubio). Under the previous order, the
question is, Will the Senate advise and consent to the Haley
nominations en bloc?
Mr. CORKER. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There appears to be a sufficient second.
The clerk will call the roll.
The senior assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
The result was announced--yeas 96, nays 4, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 33 Ex.]
YEAS--96
Alexander
Baldwin
Barrasso
Bennet
Blumenthal
Blunt
Booker
Boozman
Brown
Burr
Cantwell
Capito
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Cassidy
Cochran
Collins
Corker
Cornyn
Cortez Masto
Cotton
Crapo
Cruz
Daines
Donnelly
Duckworth
Durbin
Enzi
Ernst
Feinstein
Fischer
Flake
Franken
Gardner
Gillibrand
Graham
Grassley
Harris
Hassan
Hatch
Heitkamp
Heller
Hirono
Hoeven
Inhofe
Isakson
Johnson
Kaine
Kennedy
King
Klobuchar
Lankford
Leahy
Lee
Manchin
Markey
McCain
McCaskill
McConnell
Menendez
Merkley
Moran
Murkowski
Murphy
Murray
Nelson
Paul
Perdue
Peters
Portman
Reed
Risch
Roberts
Rounds
Rubio
Sasse
Schatz
Schumer
Scott
Sessions
Shaheen
Shelby
Stabenow
Sullivan
Tester
Thune
Tillis
Toomey
Van Hollen
Warner
Warren
Whitehouse
Wicker
Wyden
Young
NAYS--4
Coons
Heinrich
Sanders
Udall
The nominations were confirmed.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the motions to
reconsider are considered made and laid upon the table and the
President will be immediately notified of the Senate's action.
The majority leader.
____________________