On the recordApril 29, 1998
First, I want to add a fact. I consulted with the distinguished Senator from Texas, and she said that she, in turn, has consulted with Ambassador Hunter, who preceded the Ambassador you just referred to, the incumbent--and, by the way, the incumbent, we all know, was associated with the Senate and was a staffer at one time. He has risen through the ranks and has now gotten due recognition and was given that very important post. He carries with him an extraordinary corporate knowledge of this institution and the general subject of NATO. So I think the appointment is a good one. But Ambassador Hunter gave some technical advice in the preparation of the amendment. I read the language in paragraph 1 down there, ``between and among allies . . .'' and so on. I sought clarification of one or two words, and I was advised Ambassador Hunter was the source of some of that language. I am not suggesting that Hunter said this is the right thing to do, but at least he gave some technical advice. The amendment is so straightforward. It simply says we will take--and many of us have grave concerns about the missions of NATO as they are now being formulated--and they, regrettably, will not be made known until a year hence, at the very time we are asked to vote. I have dwelled on that point and will continue tomorrow. The point is that I think the Senator is entitled to ask for the support of her colleagues, not to simply table it.…
Source
govinfo.gov




