Nomination of Linda Thomas-Greenfield

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. COTTON. Madam President, today, the Senate will vote on Linda Thomas-Greenfield's nomination to be Ambassador to the United Nations. I will oppose her nomination.

The United Nations is a troubled institution. Too often, the U.N. is, at its best, a feckless debating society, but at worst--and that is more common, sadly--an apologist for tyranny, corruption, and hypocrisy.

Our Ambassador must give voice to our interests, priorities, and the conscience of the United States and regularly confront our enemies on the world stage. This position requires foresight, judgment, and courage, the courage to speak truth in a den of liars.

Unfortunately, Ms. Thomas-Greenfield hasn't demonstrated these qualities when it comes to the world's most notorious liar: Communist China.

Little more than a year ago, Ms. Thomas-Greenfield delivered a speech at a China-funded Confucius Institute at Savannah State University. In her remarks, she could have condemned China's economic regression, denounced China for flooding our streets with deadly drugs like fentanyl, objected to their ethnic cleansing of Uighurs and Tibetans, called for Beijing to uphold its international commitments to Hong Kong's autonomy, or criticized their predatory lending practices in Africa.

Instead, she praised China. She excused their behavior in Africa and said there is much the United States can learn from China. It is beyond me how anyone, especially a seasoned diplomat, could utter such a grotesque line. America has nothing to learn from a genocidal, Communist tyranny.

She excused China's debt-trap diplomacy and said she could ``see no reason'' why China couldn't help spread values that included ``good governance, gender equity, and the rule of law.'' Gender equity? Would that include China's barbaric one-child policy, which led to the elimination of millions of unborn girls over decades of sex-selection abortion or China's policy of systematic rape of religious and ethnic minority women in Xinjiang Province? Gender equity, indeed.

She showed a similar lack of tact and understanding on the subject of trade with China. She asserted that the United States and China should simply ``come to an understanding'' without uttering a sentence, not a word, not even a syllable of criticism of China's unrestricted and illegal economic aggression against our workers and our companies.

She also asserted that ``we are not in a [new] Cold War'' with China. This statement, along with the rest of her speech, shows a strategic blindness that is disqualifying for a senior foreign policy post.

Ms. Thomas-Greenfield has expressed regret for her speech, and some people say a single speech shouldn't define an entire career, but this isn't some ancient speech dug up from a long-lost era by political opponents. She gave it just 16 months ago. The whole world knew--and certainly a career diplomat would have known--about China's long, dark, lamentable catalog of crimes against America, international order and stability, and its own people.

And these remarks were not isolated mistakes or a slip of the tongue. This nominee has spent years minimizing the threat of China's actions in Africa and has spoken repeatedly in favor--in favor of China's Belt and Road Initiative, which is a transparent ploy to spread Communist Chinese influence into other countries.

And the Biden administration's attempts to excuse this speech have done her no favors. After her speech came to light, President Biden's transition team stated that Ms. Thomas-Greenfield was ``repulsed'' by what she saw at the Confucius Institute. Really? Repulsed? If that were true, why didn't she speak out then? Why did she keep the money from the speech?

Either President Biden's team is misleading the public or this nominee failed to speak up when it mattered most on another occasion. Neither possibility reflects favorably on the administration or the nominee.

To be honest, I doubt that Ms. Thomas-Greenfield or the administration are particularly ``repulsed'' by Confucius Institutes. That is why, after all, in his first week in office, President Biden withdrew a rule that would force universities to disclose their secret agreements with Confucius Institutes.

This was an unnecessary, undeserved, and unwise gift to China, as well as a payoff to higher education, a client and a patron of the Democratic Party. Many colleges have become addicted to Chinese Communist money, and the Biden administration isn't about to shut off that gravy train. After all, Joe Biden's son Hunter takes Chinese money, so how could he object to liberal universities taking Chinese money?

I will conclude by saying that in the last month, we have witnessed a gradual erosion of America's resolve in confronting China. This nomination is just another signal of weakness to Beijing. Supporters of Ms. Thomas-Greenfield's nomination can pretend that this dove has talons, but any fairminded observer, and especially those in Beijing, know that is not true.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source