EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS

∑ This ‘‘bullet’’ symbol identifies statements or insertions which are not spoken by a Member of the Senate on the floor.

Matter set in this typeface indicates words inserted or appended, rather than spoken, by a Member of the House on the floor.

June 6, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — Extensions of Remarks E 1155

TRIBUTE TO THE VETERANS OF

THE KOREAN WAR AND THE KOREAN WAR MEMORIAL

HON. SUE W. KELLY OF NEW YORK

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Tuesday, June 6, 1995

Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to America’s 5.7 million Korean war veterans, who so diligently answered their Nation’s

call to duty. As the anniversary of the July

1953 armistice at Panmunjom draws near, it is

important for us to honor our veterans for their

immeasurable contribution to the efforts of defending freedom. Their undeterred energy

played a pivotal role in containing Communist

aggression on the Korean peninsula and the

rest of Asia.

The American effort in the war was marked

by a simple yet central and focused goal—to

further the cause of freedom. Our servicemen

met this challenge through selfless, patriotic

measures. The Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, and Coast Guard worked in complete

cooperation to secure the South Korean capital of Seoul, and to initiate our eventual triumph in the cold war.

The bravery of these American men and

women, who so willingly made the ultimate

sacrifice, is embodied in the new Korean War

Memorial. This monument is scheduled to be

dedicated this coming July—a truly living tribute. This memorial includes 19 life-size,

bronze statutes of soldiers in a multiservice

formation. The 19 portraits of those statues

accurately reflect those Americans who so

proudly serve, and served, in our Armed

Forces. They attest to the sincere appreciation

held by all Americans for these soldiers, sailors, marines, and airmen, who fought with

such dedication and fortitude.

I know that this same dedication and fortitude went into the statues creation, and I am

proud to say that these 19 enduring pieces

were cast by the Tallix Art Foundry, in Beacon, NY just outside my district.

Mr. Speaker, I ask that you and all of my

colleagues join me in saluting our Korean war

veterans for their outstanding bravery. Because as long as there exists an America that

seeks to ensure democracy, our veterans

must be honored for their contributions to the

worthiest cause in the world—freedom.

WELCOME TO HSIAO-YEN CHANG

fHON. DAVID E. BONIOR OF MICHIGAN

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Tuesday, June 6, 1995

Mr. BONIOR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to

welcome Mr. Hsiao-Yen Chang. Mr. Chang is

currently serving as the Minister of Overseas

Chinese Commissioner in the Republic of

China and he is visiting the Metropolitan Detroit area today, June 6, 1995.

The Chinese-American community is honoring Mr. Chang by hosting a banquet at the

Golden Harvest in Warren, MI. The community

is pleased to have Mr. Chang as a guest because he is largely responsible for establishing

a Chinese cultural service center that is located in Troy, MI. This center serves approximately 30,000 Chinese who call Metropolitan

Detroit their home.

On behalf of the Chinese-Americans that reside in Michigan, and as the Representative of

the 10th Congressional District of Michigan, I

am pleased to officially welcome Mr. Chang to

our community. I know that the Macomb

County Board of Commissioners is preparing

a resolution to welcome Mr. Chang and I applaud their hospitality. We are all encouraged

by the level of importance demonstrated by

Mr. Chang’s visit that the Republic of China

places on its relationship with the Chinese

community in Michigan.

I ask that my colleagues join me in offering

a warm welcome to Hsiao-Yen Chang.

THE UNITED NATIONS’ INSPECTOR

fGENERAL

HON. LEE H. HAMILTON OF INDIANA

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Tuesday, June 6, 1995

Mr. HAMILTON. Mr. Speaker, many Members have been concerned about improving

the efficiency and effectiveness of the United

Nations. That concern was reflected in section

401 of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act

for fiscal years 1994 and 1995 (Public Law

103–236). In that law, the Congress withheld

significant funds from the U.S. contribution for

the United Nations until the United Nations established an independent office of inspector

general.

The Office of Internal Oversight Services

was established by the United Nations in the

fall of 1994. The first report of that office was

issued recently. On May 5, I wrote to U.N.

Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali raising my concerns about this report. I would ask

that my letter, his reply, and the reply of Mr.

Karl Paschke, the Under-Secretary-General for

Internal Oversight Services, be included in the

RECORD.

MAY 18, 1995.

Mr. LEE H. HAMILTON,

Ranking Democratic Member, Congress of the

United States, Committee on International

Relations, House of Representatives, Washington, DC.

DEAR MR. HAMILTON: Thank you for your

letter of May 5, 1995 with reference to the

MINURSO report issued on April 5, by the

United Nations Office of Internal Oversight

Services (OIOS).

I immediately transmitted your remarks

about the report to Under-Secretary-General

Paschke and requested him to reply to them.

The resolution establishing OIOS stipulates

that his office has operational independence.

The Secretary-General may comment on, but

may not change the contents of OIOS reports.

In assessing the MINURSO report it should

be borne in mind that MINURSO must carry

out its mission in a politically sensitive and

difficult environment. Some of the operational problems which have been alleged

are political in nature and cannot be dealt

with in an audit report. Such charges are not

a matter for Internal Oversight, but must be

weighed by the Security Council. In this context, I want to emphasize that Mr. Erik Jensen, my Special Representative for

MINURSO, has my full confidence for his

performance in a delicate and complicated

mission.

With regard to the issuance of other OIOS

reports, which you raise in the last paragraph of your letter, delays have been caused

by the UN requirement to translate every

document addressed to the General Assembly

into all six official languages prior to release. In view of the volume of some of the

OIOS reports and the unusual workload the

UN translating services have been facing because of the non-proliferation treaty conference, it has taken an unusually long time

to complete the required translations. The

reports you mention are being published this

week and should reach you shortly.

With best regards, yours sincerely,

BOUTROS BOUTROS-GHALI.

UNITED NATIONS,

May 19, 1995.

Reference: 4615a/95.

Mr. LEE H. HAMILTON,

Ranking Democratic Member, Congress of the

United States, Committee on International

Relations, House of Representatives, Washington, DC.

DEAR MR. HAMILTON: Secretary-General

Boutros Boutros-Ghali has transmitted your

letter of 5 May 1995 to me for a reply to the

points which you have raised about this office’s report on MINURSO.

I directed one of my most senior auditors

to carry out this investigation, a man whose

professional credentials and expertise are beyond question. He was instructed to address

Mr. Ruddy’s allegations in parallel to a follow-up on an audit mission which my office

had performed in MINURSO during the fall

of 1994. The report on this work is at present

being prepared for transmittal to the General Assembly. I am attaching an advance

copy for your confidential information.

The investigation was confined to Mr.

Ruddy’s allegations. As pointed out in paragraph 3 of the report, some of the information provided by Mr. Ruddy was based on

hearsay. This made the task of the auditors

more difficult.

The allegation that applicants who were to

be identified were not allowed free access to

the MINURSO centre was examined in the

context of ensuring the credibility of the

identification process. The lack of free access could have been verified if specific cases

of obstruction had been made available to

the auditor. This was not, however, the case.

Further investigation was not feasible as it

would have involved an inquiry into political

and diplomatic activities of certain Member

States, which is not within the purview of an

audit investigation.

As regards the specific cases concerning

transport and procurement mentioned by

Mr. Ruddy, these were carefully looked into

and the outcome reported in paragraphs 22,

23, 26, 27 and 29. Certain inadequacies in the