-9999
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. COONS. Madam President, I am, in a moment, going to ask unanimous consent that we proceed to confirm a nominee.
Stephanie Sullivan has been nominated to be U.S. Ambassador to the African Union. She was nominated June 15, 2022, for a position now vacant since January of this year.
Let me briefly say why this is important.
The African Union is the entity most likely to successfully negotiate peace in Sudan, a country now roiled by domestic violence, by a war between one faction of its military and another, and thousands of Americans are at risk.
I think it is crucially important to fill all of our vacant ambassadorial positions, but this one is particularly critical because of the role the AU can and should play in resolving this conflict. But we lack an ambassador in this vital continent-wide organization.
I will go on at some greater length about the qualifications and the background of this talented career Foreign Service officer who has been an ambassador twice before in Africa. But I will also say that statements that she has made in her role as an ambassador reflect the policy of the administration at the time, not her personal preferences or values. She is a talented representative of the United States, as a diplomat, whose actions and statements reflect the administrations she has served.
68, Stephanie Sanders Sullivan, to be Representative of the United States to the African Union, and that the Senate vote on the nomination without any intervening action or debate; that, if confirmed, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, and the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. COONS. Madam President, would the Senator yield?
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. COONS. Go ahead.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. COONS. At, apparently, another time, I look forward to having the opportunity to hearing some substantiation of the wild charges just made by my colleague from Ohio.
I did as much research as I could before appearing in what I had understood, mistakenly, to be the foundation of his objection. Now I look forward to figuring out how this nominee to serve again as an ambassador is an advocate of far-left gender therapies of some kind.
Let me make two simple points, if I can, in response to the comments I just heard on the floor. As someone who chairs the Senate Appropriations subcommittee that funds our development efforts around the world, and particularly in Africa, and as someone who was just in five different countries across the continent, to characterize China's engagement with Africa as one that promotes development in a positive way that is respectful and uplifting, and our engagement as simply ``hectoring,'' badly misses decades of the United States' being the No. 1 supporter of public health across the continent.
We are just now celebrating the 20th anniversary of President Bush's signature initiative, PEPFAR, which has saved 25 million lives. The Chinese do not invest in public health anything like the scale and scope the United States does. The Chinese, it is true, don't ask questions about the suppression of minorities, about the mistreatment of journalists, about the closing of political space, about domestic repression, and the United States does. So, if that is to be characterized as hectoring, then I would be glad to stand up for hectoring.
We do challenge autocrats across the continent of Africa, and we do stand up for democracy. We also invest significantly in human development at a time when China invests principally in airports and soccer stadiums and highways.
So I would be happy to have a debate at any time that my colleague from Ohio chooses to stay long enough to have the discussion about the foundations of our engagement in the developing world.
I also, frankly, take exception to his characterization of a talented, long-serving member of the Foreign Service who represented us as a confirmed ambassador in both Ghana and the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
Let me make the core point that I intended to make earlier, but in order to accommodate my colleague's need to be interviewed on television, I cut my comments short.
In Sudan today, a newly emerged war is raging between two militaries. Thousands of people are at risk. In particular, Americans are at risk. It is the African Union--a continent-wide organization headquartered in Addis, in Ethiopia's capital--that could and should be the entity that leads to peace in Sudan. To not have a confirmed ambassador is to weaken our ability to engage with the AU and to engage with the leaders of these two military factions in Sudan.
For too much of the 2 years of the Biden administration, we have struggled to get confirmations here on the floor of the Senate of talented nominees. We have worked closely together to make sure that we have overcome some of the holds and some of the blocks to nominees in the past. I am disappointed and frustrated by the spurious argument by my colleague as to why he is standing in the way of this particularly capable, seasoned, and experienced member of our Foreign Service.
I had imagined, based on previous statements made by my colleague, that he might be objecting to something she said on the occasion of George Floyd's murder, and I came to the floor today with significant, detailed content from the previous administration, making it clear that she wasn't acting simply on her own, that she wasn't acting on some leftist agenda, but that she was acting in response to the direction from both the Africa Bureau and the Deputy Secretary of State.
I had thought he might also be referencing a posting that was made on the occasion of a pride event, of an LGBTQ pride event--something that happens in Embassies all over the world and that reflects a shared commitment by the American people to human rights that is understandably part of diversity and inclusion.
My hunch is that I will have to wait for another time for my colleague to prioritize debate on the floor of the Senate over making his way to a cable television hit, but I respect my colleague. He is someone who has written a very compelling book, who has been elected by the people of Ohio, and whom I expect to have the opportunity to get to know. We have only served together now for several months, and today was literally the first time we had exchanged words.
So I hope there will be more reason and more substance to his opposition to this nominee than what I heard on the floor tonight, and I look forward to engaging with him in that discussion and that debate.
With that, I conclude my remarks on this particular topic, and once handed the closing remarks, will speak briefly and then close the floor.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source