[Congressional Record Volume 167, Number 16 (Wednesday, January 27, 2021)]
[Senate]
[Pages S162-S163]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                           ADVICE AND CONSENT

  Mr. SULLIVAN. Madam President, the Senate is focused on one of its 
constitutional roles right now, which is meeting with and discussing 
with the new Biden administration's Cabinet--our advice and consent 
role. The consent role, obviously, is confirmation votes here on the 
floor of the U.S. Senate, which we are doing a number of these on the 
floor and in committee. But there is also the advice role, given to us 
by the Founding Fathers. On the advice, we are providing whether we 
vote for some of these nominees or not to the Cabinet. It is a big part 
of the Senate's role. So I am going to take a minute to provide a 
little bit of advice to some of the new, incoming Biden team.
  Now, look, we are seeing it particularly in the foreign policy realm. 
A lot of the Biden team has actually come from the Obama-Biden team--
maybe too many. You worry about stale thinking, because when they were 
in power 4 years ago, or a little bit over 4 years ago, there are a lot 
of things that have changed in the world--particularly on foreign 
policy, a lot that has happened in the world. So you need fresh views, 
but we are where we are.
  But an example of this kind of stale thinking that I was shocked to 
see recently at the White House is the use of the term ``strategic 
patience'' as a foreign policy concept. Now, this was the phrase the 
Obama administration used to describe its policy toward North Korea, 
and I think most people would recognize--Democrats and Republicans--
that that was not a very successful policy, a pretty failed policy.
  Now, granted, North Korea is difficult. There is no doubt. But the 
policy that was known as strategic patience was the policy that enabled 
the North Korea rogue regime to massively build up a nuclear arsenal. 
So kind of like leading from behind, the Obama administration's term 
``strategic patience'' became synonymous with a passive and even weak 
foreign policy approach as it related to North Korea, certainly.
  So I was very surprised yesterday to hear the White House Press 
Secretary trot out this term again, ``strategic patience,'' but this 
time when talking about the Biden administration's policy with regard 
to China.
  Now, this is almost certainly music to China's ears--the leadership 
of China--because it is kind of a subtle green light to Xi Jinping and 
the other authoritarians in China of its failure to uphold promise 
after promise to the United States--something I refer to as

[[Page S163]]

``promise fatigue'' that we have here--or continuing to call itself a 
developing country, when it is not, or continuing its attempts to 
dominate the South China Sea with the militarization of that important 
strategic sea lane, or continuation of intellectual property theft, or 
all the challenges that we have with China. The idea that we are going 
to have strategic patience, I think, sends a signal to the Chinese that 
we don't take these issues urgently, and that is the wrong message. 
These are urgent issues.
  In my discussions during the confirmation process and in hearings 
with now-Secretary of Defense Austin and Secretary of State Blinken, I 
sensed they had a sense of urgency. As a matter of fact, they both 
acknowledged that the previous administration--the Trump 
administration's national security strategy, national defense strategy 
that says we need to turn to great power competition, with China as the 
pacing threat for the United States, they agreed with.
  Even in General Austin's--now-Secretary Austin's--confirmation 
hearing, one of my colleagues, Senator Blackburn, actually said this 
term, ``strategic patience,'' doesn't seem to be the right term and 
pressed him on it.
  So here is some continued advice. In the Senate's role, in terms of 
our constitutional role of advice and consent, words matter, especially 
from the White House podium. We need a strong, bipartisan, and lasting 
China policy from the United States of America. This is the biggest 
geostrategic issue we will be facing as a country for the next 50 to 
100 years, but it is also a challenge that is here and now, a challenge 
that needs immediate action. So here is my advice: Ditch the 
``strategic patience'' phrase.
  The vast majority of the Senators in this body, Democrats and 
Republicans, want to know the Biden administration is focused on this 
challenge now. It is a serious challenge that China poses to the United 
States now, and ``strategic patience'' sends the wrong message to the 
Senate, to the American people, and to China's leadership. So they need 
to do better.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas.
  Mr. CORNYN. Madam President, let me express my gratitude to the 
Senator from Alaska for his words. I could not have said it better than 
he did, and I am grateful to him for coming and articulating that 
important message so clearly and emphatically.
  Chris Wray, the FBI Director, is a pretty laid-back guy. As a matter 
of fact, I frequently tell people he reminds me of the typical G-man--
you know, not a lot of emotion, not a lot of animation. But the FBI 
Director, who I think is doing an outstanding job and has been doing an 
outstanding job, gets positively animated when it comes to China and 
the threats presented there. Of course, the FBI is principally in 
charge of the counterintelligence mission against foreign countries 
like China that try to steal our intellectual property, spy on our 
country using a number unconventional means. I just want to say to our 
friend from Alaska: Thank you for making that point. It is really, 
really important.

                          ____________________