ブラウンバック議員がヒル承認に反対演説(3) |
以下、ブラウンバック演説の原文引用の最後である。赤字箇所が日本人拉致に触れた部分。
なお、下記エントリも参照。
ブラウンバック議員のヒル批判(1)
http://island.iza.ne.jp/blog/entry/601056
ブッシュ政権の「職務怠慢」に憤る共和党有力議員
http://island.iza.ne.jp/blog/entry/625327
【証拠写真】ヒル氏に牧師(拉致被害者)夫人の書簡を渡す米有力議員
http://island.iza.ne.jp/blog/entry/628588
……
SEE ATTACHMENT.
I ask that this correspondence be placed in the record.
In another case, one that I know is of great concern to the Ranking Member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Ms. Ros-Lehtinen, Chris Hill told a reporter that he had no recollection of receiving a letter from, and had provided no response to, the spouse of Reverend Kim Dong-Shik, a US permanent resident and father of a US citizen, who was kidnapped in North Korea in 2000.
Just days later, media obtained photos of Ms. Kim, along with Congresswoman Ros-Lehtinen, personally handing the letter to Ambassador Hill. What this shows is that at the very least, Chris Hill, and his staff, did not regard the incident of sufficient worth to remember or to deal with.
On the issue of nuclear disarmament, Ambassador Hill also misled Congress. During his February 2007 testimony, Hill insisted that
But when the North Koreans’ belated declaration of nuclear activity did not even mention their Uranium program, even when there were reports that the documents themselves that they gave us had traces of uranium on them, Ambassador Hill still insisted on rewarding the North Korean regime with delistment from the terrorism list.
On dealing with proliferation, later that year before the House subcommittee, Ambassador Hill said:
“Clearly, we cannot be reaching a nuclear agreement with North Korea if at the same time they are proliferating. It is not acceptable.”
Yet only months later, Hill reached just such an agreement before Congress had a chance to answer key questions about
What all this shows is a disturbing pattern by Ambassador Hill to tell Congress one thing, and then do another.
Mr. President, congressional testimony is not a formality. It is not a venue for Executive officials to parrot what members of Congress want to hear—regardless of whether such parroting reflects reality.
Rather, congressional hearings provide a means to reassure the American people that their tax dollars are being spent wisely, and their interests are being preserved.
In this case, we had a right to know that the tens of millions of dollars worth of Heavy Fuel Oil sent to Kim Jong Il, and the other serious concessions Ambassador Hill was handing over, were at least going to improve our national security, if not help end the oppression of the North Korean people.
And in that respect, I would like to address the substance of Ambassador Hill’s deals with the North Korean regime. The record can be summarized by stating the concessions that both sides obtained through the negotiations.
First, Ambassador Hill is credited with a victory in bringing the North Koreans back to the table in 2005. But in doing so, he admits to exceeding his instructions to avoid bilateral talks with the regime.
Second, Hill oversaw and managed a complicated process that involved
Neither of these gains in process provided us with concrete evidence of progress on denuclearization, despite the fact that the North Koreans traded them for substantial material gain from our side.
Ambassador Hill did obtain a declaration of nuclear activities from the regime. But as noted earlier, this declaration was half a year overdue and so incomplete as to render it useless. The declaration provided no confirmation of the number of bombs that were made, no admission or information on the uranium program, and nothing on proliferation. It was a radioactive set of documents of dubious worth.
Additionally, Ambassador Hill was able to get the DPRK to implode the cooling tower at Yongbyon. But according to many analysts, the step was mostly a symbolic gesture in that
In exchange for these paltry gains in process and symbolism, the concessions we forked over were substantial. Tens of millions of dollars worth of Heavy Fuel Oil were shipped over to supply the regime with “energy assistance,” ostensibly so that it could continue to carry out its policies of belligerence and oppression.
Congress was asked to pass legislation waiving Glenn Amendment sanctions against
We delisted the DPRK from the list of state sponsors of terror, despite their failure to account for the Japanese abductees and
We removed sanctions pursuant to the Trading with the Enemy Act, and facilitated the transfer of money to the regime that otherwise should have been confiscated by the Treasury Department under financial regulations for nuclear proliferators.
We looked the other way on the role that the DPRK played in constructing a nuclear reactor in
What is worse, after we gave up so much leverage, the DPRK is now just as hostile and dangerous as ever. Next week the regime plans on launching a ballistic missile over
And to push the limits of our tolerance even further, on March 17, North Korean border guards abducted two American journalists—Laura Ling and Euna Lee—and reports indicate that since their capture they have been subjected to “intense interrogation.”
Taken all together, this is an unfortunate legacy for Ambassador Hill. Broken commitments to Congress, free-lancing diplomacy, disregarding human rights, and giving up key leverage to the DPRK in exchange for insubstantial gestures.
Such things have harmed our national security and ignored our moral obligations, a legacy ill-suited for the next Chief of Mission to
Mr. President, I will conclude not with my own words, but with the words of Rabbi Abraham Cooper, associate dean of the Simon Wiesenthal Center, who wrote a piece for the Korea Times last month, which I ask to be included in the record.
“By exclusively pursuing the nuclear tail around the six-party table, we have contributed to the horrible suffering of the people of North Korea and degraded the United States’ long-standing commitment to fundamental human rights.
“Like the inmates of the Soviet Gulag or the Nazi concentration camps of the 1930s, about 200,000 to 300,000 hapless victims in North Korean camps wait for help. Our silence to these and other outrages is perhaps
Mr. President, I do not acquiesce to this nomination.
Posted by Michael Goldfarb on March 25, 2009 06:18 PM