[Congressional Record Volume 165, Number 167 (Tuesday, October 22, 2019)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5941-S5943]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                    Nomination of Andrew P. Bremberg

  Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, I come to the floor to express my 
opposition to the nomination of Andrew Bremberg to be Representative of 
the United States to the Office of the United Nations in Geneva. He is 
not qualified for this position, and his views on women's rights and 
access to reproductive healthcare conflict with longstanding positions 
of the U.S. Government and more than three-quarters of the American 
public.
  I take my position as ranking member for the Foreign Relations 
Committee seriously. I have a duty to thoroughly vet all nominees who 
come before the committee whether they be political nominees like Mr. 
Bremberg or career civil servants.
  The criteria I use to determine their fitness to represent our 
country abroad include their foreign policy experience, their core 
values, and whether they will be responsive and honest with Congress as 
we conduct our oversight. I am disappointed to say that Mr. Bremberg 
fails even these basic criteria. He has no relevant foreign policy 
experience.
  I repeat, the nominee to represent the United States at Geneva has no 
foreign policy experience. Mr. Bremberg has served as Assistant to the 
President and Senior Advisor for Domestic Policy at the White House and 
as a political appointee to the Department of Health and Human Services 
in the Bush administration.
  When it comes to Mr. Bremberg's core values, his nomination hearing 
left me deeply troubled. Our voice at Geneva must stand up for the core 
principle that reproductive rights are human rights; yet Mr. Bremberg 
made clear that he opposes access to reproductive health services for 
women and girls who are victims of sexual violence in conflict in the 
world. This radical view of women's rights and access to reproductive 
healthcare is totally outside the mainstream, not just for the 
Democratic Party but the Republican Party and the American people at 
large. That is why 40 reproductive health groups wrote a joint letter 
opposing Mr. Bremberg's nomination.
  Moreover, in his positions at the White House, Mr. Bremberg led and 
advanced divisive and incendiary policy proposals, such as the infamous 
Muslim ban Executive order and the addition of a citizenship question 
on the census.
  When questioned on these subjects, Mr. Bremberg frequently cited 
confidentiality interests and declined to elaborate further. When 
pressed by Senators on whether he was exerting any form of privilege or 
executive privilege, he insisted he was not; yet he continued to refuse 
to answer questions. Clearly, we cannot rely on this nominee to be 
honest and forthright with this body.
  Beyond Mr. Bremberg's lack of experience, his extreme far-right 
views, and his lack of respect for Congress, there is the issue of his 
erroneous declarations on government documents. Indeed, his nomination 
was significantly delayed because my staff discovered Mr. Bremberg's 
claim that he had terminated from his political consulting company--of 
which Trump for America was a client--when the truth is he did not. In 
fact, Mr. Bremberg did not terminate his political consulting firm 
until forced to as part of the Foreign Relations Committee's vetting 
process.
  Once again, the Trump administration has displayed a basic inability 
to conduct even the most cursory vetting to ensure that a nominee is 
qualified and fit to hold office, free from potential financial or 
ethical conflicts of interest.
  We have nominees with restraining orders, nominees who have failed to 
mention sexual harassment lawsuits, and nominees whose virulent, troll-
like approach to social media should disqualify them from holding any 
office, much less a Senate-confirmed representative of the American 
people.
  Unfortunately, the Trump administration has decided to advance 
unqualified and unfit nominees even as it withdraws a number of 
qualified civil servant nominees from consideration.
  The failure of the political leadership at the State Department to 
stand up and defend qualified, veteran Ambassadors when they come under 
fire from the White House is nothing short of cowardice.
  It was reported last week that Fiona Hill, the former White House 
foreign policy adviser, concluded that one Trump administration 
Ambassador was so unprepared for his job that he actually posed a 
national security risk. Mr. Bremberg is cut from the same mold.
  If his performance before the Foreign Relations Committee 
demonstrated anything, it is that his views are completely outside 
those of mainstream America. He is unprepared to represent our Nation 
on the world stage, and he has little to no respect for the Senate and 
the role of Congress as a coequal branch of government. Surely, we can 
do better than this. The American people certainly deserve better than 
this.
  I urge my colleagues to oppose his nomination and to demand that this 
administration nominate an ambassador to the United Nations 
organization in Geneva who is worthy of representing our country on the 
world stage.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Cruz). The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. RISCH. 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. RISCH. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that amendment Nos. 
946 and 947 be withdrawn.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendments (No. 946 and No. 947) were withdrawn.


 Protocol to the North Atlantic Treaty of 1949 on the Accession of the 
                      Republic of North Macedonia

  Mr. RISCH. Mr. President, I rise today to support the accession of 
the Republic of North Macedonia to the North Atlantic Treaty 
Organization and to encourage my Senate colleagues to vote in favor of 
this protocol.
  As we know, this past April marked the 70th anniversary of the NATO 
alliance, the world's strongest and most successful political military 
alliance in the history of the world.
  In honor of this, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee held a 
hearing to reflect on the alliance's successful past and to consider 
its future. The Senate also passed and recognized NATO's many 
accomplishments, and the resolution I authored, S. Res. 123, did so. I 
am grateful to have another opportunity to demonstrate strong Senate 
support for NATO by welcoming North Macedonia as a new member. As we 
all know, this matter has been in the works for a long time.
  NATO was founded by the United States and 11 other countries after 
the shock of the Soviet blockade of Berlin. The Berlin airlift in 1948 
made us realize the significant and real threat that the Soviet Union 
posed to peace and prosperity. That conflict is far behind us, but NATO 
has remained a critical piece of the framework that supports our 
collective security.
  NATO worked to help the United States in Afghanistan after the 
attacks of September 11 and has ended genocides and maintained peace in 
the Balkans. It has trained troops of the new Iraqi Government; it has 
run air policing missions on Europe's eastern flank; it has helped end 
the genocide in Darfur; and it provided assistance to the United States 
after Hurricane Katrina. Most importantly, it has maintained a period 
of unprecedented peace among the major European powers.
  NATO has proven to be not only a military success but also a 
political and economic one. NATO's security umbrella has provided the 
kind of stable environment necessary for economic growth and 
investment. Former Soviet bloc countries clamored for--and continue to 
clamor for--NATO membership, not only for the protection against Russia 
that they sought and seek but for the economic strength that membership 
could foster.
  U.S. trade with fellow NATO members remains vital to the U.S. 
economy. NATO allies remain the largest

[[Page S5942]]

source of foreign, direct investment to the United States.
  NATO is not perfect. It faces several challenges from within. First 
is the need to invest more in defense. Those of us who serve on the 
Foreign Relations Committee have for many, many years urged our friends 
and colleagues--the majority of whom are not in compliance--about the 
need to invest more in defense. But the number of allies spending 2 
percent of their GDP on defense and 20 percent of their defense budget 
on equipment has increased, adding more than $100 billion in European 
defense spending. Eight allies currently meet this pledge, but it is 
critical that all allies meet their Wales Summit commitment by 2024.
  Second, NATO faces different security threats in different parts of 
the alliance. Southern Europe is understandably worried about migrant 
flows, while Eastern Europe faces the challenge of Russian military 
buildup along its borders and domestic disinformation campaigns sowing 
disorder by the Russians, just as we know Russia has attempted to do 
here in the USA.
  NATO has recently begun to think about security risks that China 
poses to individual allies and the alliance as a whole.
  Tackling all of these security risks will be challenging. But if NATO 
allies commit to the alliance and needed reforms, NATO will be up to 
the task.
  Bringing a new member into the alliance also prompts us to reassess 
the status of current members, and I feel compelled to address the 
growing discussion regarding NATO allies that do not uphold the 
democratic principles enshrined in the treaty's preamble.
  I agree that there are NATO allies whose democracies are weakening 
instead of strengthening and whose recent behavior does not demonstrate 
a commitment to the alliance. To fix these issues, the alliance must 
work from within.
  There is no other alliance in the world like NATO. China and Russia 
do not have allies. They have short-term, transactional-only partners 
they have bullied into cooperation. NATO's strength and success come 
from its commitment to the allies and to working through problems when 
they arise.
  On the expansion of NATO itself, which is what we are here to deal 
with today, since 1949, NATO has expanded 7 times and now includes 29 
countries. The entrance of North Macedonia will make 30. Adding a 30th 
member during the alliance's 70th year sends a strong signal to our 
fellow allies and enemies alike of the continued strength of this 
alliance.
  The U.S. Senate's consideration of North Macedonia as a member of 
NATO is a piece of long-delayed and unfinished business. North 
Macedonia was originally eligible for NATO entry in 2008 and was to 
have joined the alliance alongside Croatia and Albania. As we know, an 
ongoing dispute about North Macedonia's name prevented that from 
happening. But the leaders of both North Macedonia and Greece 
demonstrated great political courage in concluding the Prespa agreement 
earlier this year, which has made today's decision possible.
  The courage of Prime Minister Zaev and former Prime Minister Tsipras 
to move the situation in the Balkans forward should be applauded. I met 
with both leaders this year to thank and congratulate them.
  Not only does Prespa pave the way forward for North Macedonia into 
both NATO and the European Union, but it is an excellent example of how 
other conflicts in the region could be resolved.
  When the Senate Foreign Relations Committee held its hearing earlier 
this year to consider North Macedonia's eligibility for alliance, the 
committee heard strong and unequivocal testimony from top officials at 
the Departments of State and Defense that North Macedonia would be a 
strong partner to the allies and is ready for the requirements of NATO 
membership.
  After reviewing all relevant facts and holding hearings and meetings 
with NATO, U.S., and North Macedonian officials for the better part of 
this year, I am confident that North Macedonia is ready to fulfill its 
NATO obligations and will benefit the alliance. It was ready in 2008 
and is ready now. North Macedonia has a credible plan to meet the 2-
percent spending requirement by 2024 and is already on track to spend 
20 percent on equipment. It hosts the Krivolak training area, a top-
notch Army training facility that has already been utilized by many 
U.S. soldiers. Strategically, North Macedonia's membership would 
provide NATO a direct land path from the Aegean to the Adriatic Sea, 
facilitating military movements should they ever be needed. It will 
continue to contribute soldiers to NATO's international mission as it 
has done in Afghanistan and Iraq since 2002.
  North Macedonia isn't perfect. As a small country with a young 
democracy, it will certainly require further government reforms and 
military modernization as have most new NATO allies. For example, it 
will need to continue its transition from legacy Soviet equipment, 
further reform its intelligence services, and above all, resist Russian 
interference and continue to strengthen its anti-corruption efforts. I 
urge North Macedonia to make these reforms and to continue on its 
positive path inside the alliance with the help of its other democratic 
NATO allies.
  Expanding NATO to include North Macedonia is about what the country 
will bring to the alliance and what the alliance brings to North 
Macedonia, but it is not just about North Macedonia and its 
qualifications for membership. Through its open-door policy, NATO has 
promised membership to any European country that fulfills the 
requirements of the alliance. Accepting North Macedonia as a new member 
is a strong symbol and a message for European countries with NATO 
aspirations that with hard work and perseverance, along with the 
willingness to make tough reform decisions, they can provide a better 
future for their people. As long as countries honor this commitment, 
NATO's door should and will remain open.
  It is important to note that this is a strong anti-Russian vote. 
Standing here today, I can tell you the Russians are very much opposed 
to this, not the least of which is exemplified by the way they resisted 
this and pushed back against this as North Macedonia attempted to get 
this done for their people.
  I say to the Presiding Officer and colleagues, this day is a long 
time in the making, and I am pleased it is finally here.
  I urge all of my colleagues to support North Macedonia's bid to 
become our newest NATO ally, No. 30, by voting in favor of this 
protocol.
  Thank you.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will state the resolution of 
ratification.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       Resolved, (two-thirds of the Senators present concurring 
     therein),

     SECTION 1. SENATE ADVICE AND CONSENT SUBJECT TO DECLARATIONS, 
                   AN UNDERSTANDING, AND CONDITIONS.

       The Senate advises and consents to the ratification of the 
     Protocol to the North Atlantic Treaty of 1949 on the 
     Accession of the Republic of North Macedonia, which was 
     opened for signature at Brussels on February 6, 2019, and 
     signed that day on behalf of the United States of America 
     (the ``Protocol'') (Treaty Doc. 116-1), subject to the 
     declarations of section 2 and the conditions of section 3.

     SEC. 2. DECLARATIONS.

       The advice and consent of the Senate under section 1 is 
     subject to the following declarations:
       (1) Reaffirmation that united states membership in nato 
     remains a vital national security interest of the united 
     states.--The Senate declares that--
       (A) for 70 years the North Atlantic Treaty Organization 
     (NATO) has served as the preeminent organization to defend 
     the countries in the North Atlantic area against all external 
     threats;
       (B) through common action, the established democracies of 
     North America and Europe that were joined in NATO persevered 
     and prevailed in the task of ensuring the survival of 
     democratic government in Europe and North America throughout 
     the Cold War;
       (C) NATO enhances the security of the United States by 
     embedding European states in a process of cooperative 
     security planning and by ensuring an ongoing and direct 
     leadership role for the United States in European security 
     affairs;
       (D) the responsibility and financial burden of defending 
     the democracies of Europe and North America can be more 
     equitably shared through an alliance in which specific 
     obligations and force goals are met by its members;
       (E) the security and prosperity of the United States is 
     enhanced by NATO's collective defense against aggression that 
     may threaten the security of NATO members; and

[[Page S5943]]

       (F) United States membership in NATO remains a vital 
     national security interest of the United States.
       (2) Strategic rationale for nato enlargement.--The Senate 
     declares that--
       (A) the United States and its NATO allies face continued 
     threats to their stability and territorial integrity;
       (B) an attack against North Macedonia, or its 
     destabilization arising from external subversion, would 
     threaten the stability of Europe and jeopardize United States 
     national security interests;
       (C) North Macedonia, having established a democratic 
     government and having demonstrated a willingness to meet the 
     requirements of membership, including those necessary to 
     contribute to the defense of all NATO members, is in a 
     position to further the principles of the North Atlantic 
     Treaty and to contribute to the security of the North 
     Atlantic area; and
       (D) extending NATO membership to North Macedonia will 
     strengthen NATO, enhance stability in Southeast Europe, and 
     advance the interests of the United States and its NATO 
     allies.
       (3) Support for nato's open door policy.--The policy of the 
     United States is to support NATO's Open Door Policy that 
     allows any European country to express its desire to join 
     NATO and demonstrate its ability to meet the obligations of 
     NATO membership.
       (4) Future consideration of candidates for membership in 
     nato.--
       (A) Senate finding.--The Senate finds that the United 
     States will not support the accession to the North Atlantic 
     Treaty of, or the invitation to begin accession talks with, 
     any European state (other than North Macedonia), unless--
       (i) the President consults with the Senate consistent with 
     Article II, section 2, clause 2 of the Constitution of the 
     United States (relating to the advice and consent of the 
     Senate to the making of treaties); and
       (ii) the prospective NATO member can fulfill all of the 
     obligations and responsibilities of membership, and the 
     inclusion of such state in NATO would serve the overall 
     political and strategic interests of NATO and the United 
     States.
       (B) Requirement for consensus and ratification.--The Senate 
     declares that no action or agreement other than a consensus 
     decision by the full membership of NATO, approved by the 
     national procedures of each NATO member, including, in the 
     case of the United States, the requirements of Article II, 
     section 2, clause 2 of the Constitution of the United States 
     (relating to the advice and consent of the Senate to the 
     making of treaties), will constitute a commitment to 
     collective defense and consultations pursuant to Articles 4 
     and 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty.
       (5) Influence of non-nato members on nato decisions.--The 
     Senate declares that any country that is not a member of NATO 
     shall have no impact on decisions related to NATO 
     enlargement.
       (6) Support for 2014 wales summit defense spending 
     benchmark.--The Senate declares that all NATO members should 
     continue to move towards the guideline outlined in the 2014 
     Wales Summit Declaration to spend a minimum of 2 percent of 
     their Gross Domestic Product (GDP) on defense and 20 percent 
     of their defense budgets on major equipment, including 
     research and development, by 2024.
       (7) Support for north macedonia's reform process.--The 
     Senate declares that--
       (A) North Macedonia has made difficult reforms and taken 
     steps to address corruption, but the United States and other 
     NATO member states should not consider this important process 
     complete and should continue to urge additional reforms; and
       (B) North Macedonia and Greece's conclusion of the Prespa 
     Agreement, which resolved a long-standing bilateral dispute, 
     has made possible the former's invitation to NATO, and the 
     United States and other NATO members should continue to press 
     both nations to persevere in their continued implementation 
     of the Agreement and encourage a strategic partnership 
     between the two nations.

     SEC. 3. CONDITIONS.

       The advice and consent of the Senate under section 1 is 
     subject to the following condition: Prior to the deposit of 
     the instrument of ratification, the President shall certify 
     to the Senate as follows:
       (1) The inclusion of North Macedonia in NATO will not have 
     the effect of increasing the overall percentage share of the 
     United States in the common budgets of NATO.
       (2) The inclusion of North Macedonia in NATO does not 
     detract from the ability of the United States to meet or to 
     fund its military requirements outside the North Atlantic 
     area.

     SEC. 4. DEFINITIONS.

       In this resolution:
       (1) Nato members.--The term ``NATO members'' means all 
     countries that are parties to the North Atlantic Treaty.
       (2) Non-nato members.--The term ``non-NATO members'' means 
     all countries that are not parties to the North Atlantic 
     Treaty.
       (3) North atlantic area.--The term ``North Atlantic area'' 
     means the area covered by Article 6 of the North Atlantic 
     Treaty, as applied by the North Atlantic Council.
       (4) North atlantic treaty.--The term ``North Atlantic 
     Treaty'' means the North Atlantic Treaty, signed at 
     Washington April 4, 1949 (63 Stat. 2241; TIAS 1964), as 
     amended.
       (5) United states instrument of ratification.--The term 
     ``United States instrument of ratification'' means the 
     instrument of ratification of the United States of the 
     Protocol to the North Atlantic Treaty of 1949 on the 
     Accession of North Macedonia.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the adoption of 
the resolution of ratification of Treaty Document No. 116-1.
  Mr. RISCH. 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.
  Mr. THUNE. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator 
from Georgia (Mr. Isakson).
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Colorado (Mr. Bennet), 
the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Booker), the Senator from California 
(Ms. Harris), the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders), the Senator from 
Massachusetts (Ms. Warren), and the Senator from Rhode Island (Mr. 
Whitehouse) are necessarily absent.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Johnson). Are there any other Senators in 
the Chamber desiring to vote?
  The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 91, nays 2, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 327 Ex.]

                                YEAS--91

     Alexander
     Baldwin
     Barrasso
     Blackburn
     Blumenthal
     Blunt
     Boozman
     Braun
     Brown
     Burr
     Cantwell
     Capito
     Cardin
     Carper
     Casey
     Cassidy
     Collins
     Coons
     Cornyn
     Cortez Masto
     Cotton
     Cramer
     Crapo
     Cruz
     Daines
     Duckworth
     Durbin
     Enzi
     Ernst
     Feinstein
     Fischer
     Gardner
     Gillibrand
     Graham
     Grassley
     Hassan
     Hawley
     Heinrich
     Hirono
     Hoeven
     Hyde-Smith
     Inhofe
     Johnson
     Jones
     Kaine
     Kennedy
     King
     Klobuchar
     Lankford
     Leahy
     Manchin
     Markey
     McConnell
     McSally
     Menendez
     Merkley
     Moran
     Murkowski
     Murphy
     Murray
     Perdue
     Peters
     Portman
     Reed
     Risch
     Roberts
     Romney
     Rosen
     Rounds
     Rubio
     Sasse
     Schatz
     Schumer
     Scott (FL)
     Scott (SC)
     Shaheen
     Shelby
     Sinema
     Smith
     Stabenow
     Sullivan
     Tester
     Thune
     Tillis
     Toomey
     Udall
     Van Hollen
     Warner
     Wicker
     Wyden
     Young

                                NAYS--2

     Lee
     Paul
       

                             NOT VOTING--7

     Bennet
     Booker
     Harris
     Isakson
     Sanders
     Warren
     Whitehouse
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. On this vote, the yeas are 91, the nays are 2.
  Two-thirds of Senators present, a quorum being present, have voted in 
the affirmative. The resolution of the ratification to the protocol of 
the North Atlantic Treaty of the Republic of North Macedonia is agreed 
to.
  The Senator from Indiana.