view, not less, involved in the world, and our diplomats must reengage, not disengage.

So, I hope you will let the President know that there is at least one person on this committee, and I suspect many more in this committee and in the Senate, who believes that the cuts in the international affairs budget must be reversed. It is a lot cheaper to support diplomatic missions in a foreign country now than to send in armored divisions later.

In the interest of time I have left out three-quarters of the world in this statement, Madam Ambassador. But suffice it to say that I look forward to working with you and President Clinton and with the Chairman of this committee and the leadership of the Republican Party because there is one thing I think the Chairman and I agree on: We all have the same aspirations for the United States in its foreign policy, and we all are looking for a way to try to make it as bipartisan as we can, as difficult as that may be.

But you give us the opportunity to start off with a new slate here in the new Congress, and I wish you luck. I have every reason to believe you will be confirmed swiftly.

I thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator. Now we will hear from you, Madam Ambassador.

STATEMENT OF HON. MADELEINE K. ALBRIGHT, OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, SECRETARY OF STATE DESIGNATE Ambassador ALBRIGHT. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. If I might, you were kind enough to introduce my daughters, who are a great source of pride to me. But I also have with me here today my sister, Cathy Silva, my brother, John Korbel, his wife, Pamela, my nephews, Peter and Joseph, my son-in-law, Jeffrey Watson, and my daughter's mother-in-law, Judy Bowe. So I am very pleased to have my entire team here.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, they cannot avoid standing up and being recognized. You will have to stand up. [Applause]

Good. You may proceed.

Ambassador ALBRIGHT. I am also very pleased to see my very good friend, Senator Barbara Mikulski, up there, sitting with all of you. She is a very close friend of mine and obviously the dean of the women Senators. So I am very pleased that she took the time to be here this morning.

Thank you, Barbara.

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I cannot tell you how grateful I am that Secretary Christopher was able to come here today to give me that fine send-off. It has been the highest honor for me to work with him closely. I think he has been the finest public servant. It is a great honor to have observed him, a master diplomat, for the last 4 years, and I do plan to stay in very close touch with him because I think he is a fount of wisdom.

I also want to thank the President for his trust, and I appreciate very much the committee's courtesy in scheduling this hearing so promptly. So if you all would like to stop right now and vote, it would be OK with me. [General laughter]

The CHAIRMAN. Fat chance. [General laughter]

Ambassador ALBRIGHT. Mr. Chairman, we have now reached a point more than half-way between the end of the Soviet Union and the start of the new century. Our Nation is respected and at peace. Our alliances are vigorous and our economy is strong. And from the distant corners of Asia to the emerging democracies of Central Europe and Africa, to the community of democracies that exists in our own hemisphere, and even to the one impermanent exception, Castro's Cuba, American institutions and ideals are a model for those who love freedom.

All this is no accident, and its continuation is by no means inevitable.

Democratic progress must be sustained as it was built, by American leadership, and our leadership must be sustained if our interests are to be protected around the world.

Do not doubt those interests are not geopolitical abstractions. They are real. It matters to our children whether they grow up in a world where the dangers posed by weapons of mass destruction have been minimized or allowed to run out of control. It matters to the millions of Americans who work, farm, or invest whether the global economy continues to create good new jobs, open new markets, or whether, through miscalculation or protectionism, it begins to spiral downward.

It matters to our families whether illegal drugs continue to pour into our neighborhoods from overseas. It matters to Americans who travel abroad or go about their daily business at home whether the scourge of international terrorism is reduced.

It matters to our workers and business people whether they will be unfairly forced to compete against companies that violate fair labor standards, despoil the environment, or gain contracts not through competition but corruption. And it matters to us all whether we allow small wars to grow into large ones that put our safety and freedom at risk.

To defeat the dangers and seize the opportunities, we must be more than audience, more even than actors. We must be the authors of the history of our age.

A half century ago, after Depression, Holocaust, and war, it was not enough to say that what we were against had failed. Leaders, such as Truman, Marshall, and Vandenberg, were determined to build a lasting peace; and together with our allies they forged a set of institutions that would defend freedom, rebuild economies, uphold law, and preserve peace.

Today, it is not enough for us to say that communism has failed. We must continue building a new framework adapted to the demands of a new century that will protect our citizens, our friends, reinforce our values, and secure our future.

In so doing, we will need a full range of foreign policy tools. That is why our armed forces must remain the best led, best trained, best equipped, and most respected in the world. And, as President Clinton has pledged and our military leaders insure, they will.

It is also why we need first class diplomacy. Force and the credible possibility of its use are essential to keep America safe. But we will more often rely on diplomacy to protect our interests and we will expect our diplomats to defend those interests with skill, knowledge, and spine.

If confirmed, one of my most important tasks will be to work with Congress to insure that we have the superb diplomatic representation that our people deserve and our interests demand. We cannot have that on the cheap. We must invest the resources needed to maintain our leadership.

Consider the stakes. We are talking here about 1 percent of the Federal budget. But that 1 percent may well determine 50 percent of the history that is written about our era.

Let me repeat that. The 1 percent that we are talking about may well determine 50 percent of the history that is written about our

era.

Unfortunately, as Senator Lugar recently pointed out, our international operations are under funded and under staffed. He noted as well that not only our interests but our efforts to balance the budget would be harmed if American disengagement were to result in nuclear terrorism, a trade war, an energy crisis, a major regional conflict, or some other preventable disaster.

Mr. Chairman, we are the world's richest, strongest, most respected Nation. We are also the largest debtor to the United Nations and the international financial institutions. We provide a smaller percentage of our wealth to support democracy and growth in the developing world than any other industrialized Nation. And over the past 4 years, the Department of State has cut more than 2,000 employees, downgraded positions, closed more than 30 overseas posts, and deferred badly needed modernization.

If confirmed, I will strive to fulfill my obligation to manage our foreign policy effectively and efficiently. I will work with this committee and the Congress to insure that the American public gets full value for each tax dollar spent. And I will also want to insure that our foreign policy successfully promotes and protects the interests of the American people.

In addition, I will want to work with you to pay our bills and to spur continued reform at the United Nations, an organization Americans helped to create and that reflects goals and interests we share.

The debate over adequate funding for foreign policy is not new in America. It has been joined repeatedly from the time the Continental Congress sent Ben Franklin to Paris to the proposals for Lend Lease and the Marshall Plan that bracketed World War II, to the start of the SEED and Nunn-Lugar programs a few years ago.

In each case, history has looked more kindly on those who argued for our engagement than on those who said we just could not afford to lead.

Mr. Chairman, any framework for American leadership must include measures to control the threats posed by weapons of mass destruction. Seize the opportunities that exist for settling dangerous regional conflicts, maintain America as the hub of an expanding global economy, and defend cherished principles of democracy and law.

At the center of that framework, however, are our key alliances and relationships. These are the bonds that hold together not only our foreign policy but also the entire international system. When we are able to act cooperatively with other leading Nations, we cre

ate a dynamic web of principle, power, and purpose that elevates standards and propels progress around the globe. This is our opportunity for in the post-cold war era Big Power Diplomacy is not a zero-sum game where for one side to win the other side must lose. A foremost example is the trans-Atlantic partnership. It is a central lesson of this century that America must remain a European power. We have an interest in European security because we wish to avoid the instability that drew America into two world wars. We have an interest in European democracy because it was the triumph of freedom there that ended the cold war. We have an interest in European prosperity because our own prosperity depends on having partners that are open to our export, investments and ideas.

If confirmed, I will be returning to this committee often to ask your support for our vision of an integrated, stable, and democratic Europe. This summer, as part of our strategy to make that vision real, NATO will invite several of our democratic partners to begin negotiations to join the alliance. Our purpose is to do for Europe's East what NATO did 50 years ago for Europe's West-to integrate new democracies, defeat old hatreds, provide confidence in economic recovery, and deter conflict.

To those who worry about enlargement dividing Europe, I say that NATO cannot and should not preserve the old Iron Curtain as its eastern frontier. That was an artificial division imposed upon proud Nations, some of which are now ready to contribute to the Continent's security.

What NATO must and will do is keep open the door to membership to every European Nation while building a strong and enduring partnership with all of Europe's democracies, including Russia. Building a more cooperative and integrated Europe will be one of the many issues discussed when President Yeltsin visits the United States in March. A democratic Russia, like a democratic Ukraine, can and must be a strong partner in achieving this shared goal.

European stability and democracy also depends on continued implementation of the Dayton Accords. Although the full promise of those accords is not yet fulfilled, much has changed during the past 13 months.

Those of us who have had an opportunity to go to Sarajevo during the war and who have returned since can see the difference. Although not all the wounds have healed and the sorrow remains, the streets are safe, the markets are busy, the people have hope, and the institutions of a stable and democratic future are being built.

Much of this is due to American leadership. Our goal now is to work with our many partners to consolidate and build on those gains. Our strategy is to continue reducing the need for an international military presence by establishing a stable military balance, helping those displaced return safely to their homes, and seeing that more of those indicted as war criminals are arrested and prosecuted.

Mr. Chairman, America must remain a European power. We must and will remain a Pacific power as well.

Much of Asia is undergoing breathtaking economic expansion and measured but steady movement in the direction of democracy.

President Clinton has elevated this dynamic region on our agenda, and I plan to devote much of my attention to its promise and perils.

Our priorities here are to maintain the strength of our core alliances while successfully managing our multifaceted relationship with China.

Because of our commitment to regional security, we have maintained our military presence in the Western Pacific. We are encouraging regional efforts to settle territorial and other disputes. We are working hard to open new markets for American goods and services. We are broadening our diplomatic and security ties in Southeast Asia, and we are working with Japan and another valued ally, the Republic of Korea, to reduce tensions on the Korean Peninsula, reinforce the nuclear freeze, and improve prospects for dialog with the North.

We are also working to build a strong bilateral relationship with China. Our goal is to expand areas of cooperation, reduce the potential for misunderstandings, and encourage China's full emergence as a responsible member of the international community.

We have important differences, especially on trade, arms transfers, and human rights, including Tibet, and we have concerns about Chinese policy toward Hong Kong. But we also have many interests in common and have worked together on issues including the Korean Peninsula, crime, the global environment, and nuclear testing.

U.S. policy toward China has long been an issue of controversy in Congress and among the American people. There are disagreements about the proper balancing of the various elements of that policy. There should be no doubt, however, about the importance of this relationship and about the need to pursue a strategy aimed at Chinese integration, not isolation.

Mr. Chairman, the cold war may be over, but the threat to our security posed by weapons of mass destruction has only been reduced, not ended. Arms control and nonproliferation remain vital elements in our foreign policy framework.

In recent years, with U.S. leadership, much has been accomplished. Russian warheads no longer target our homes. Nuclear weapons have been removed from Belarus and Kazakhstan. In Ukraine, the last missile silos are being planted over with sunflowers.

The Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty has been extended, a comprehensive ban on nuclear tests has been approved, and a chemical weapons ban will soon be in effect. These initiatives help keep Americans safe. We pursue them not as favors to others but to advance our own interests.

But arms control and nonproliferation are works in progress, and we will need your help to continue that progress. Our earliest priority is ratification of the Chemical Weapons Convention, or CWC, before it enters into force in late April.

As this committee well knows, the CWC was begun under President Reagan and negotiated under President Bush. It is supported by many in both parties, by the business community, and by our military. The CWC is no panacea, but it will make it more difficult