TO THE SECURITY COUNCIL OF-- --TO THE SECURITY COUNCIL. AGAIN,
           I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY SENATORS HAVE ADDRESSED THE SECURITY
           COUNCIL, I KNOW HE PRECEDED ME. AND I CAN'T THINK OF ANYONE
           ELSE IN MY MEMORY THAT'S DONE THAT. AND HE WENT TO THE UNITED
           NATIONS AND IN HIS TYPICAL SOUTHERN GENTLEMANLY FASHION WAS
           BLUNTLY FORTHRIGHT ABOUT WHAT HIS OBJECTIVES WERE. I REMEMBER

           AT THE TIME READING IN THE PRESS SOME FAIRLY HARSH CRITICISM OF
           HIS GENERAL TALLMANLY ASSERTIONS, ASSERTIONS MADE IN A GENERAL
           TALLMANLY MANNER AND IN NEW YORK. AGAIN, ALMOST EVERYONE WAS
           WRONG BECAUSE THEY PARTICIPATED WHAT THE RESPONSE WOULD BE OF
           FURTHER FREEZING RATHER THAN THAT YOUING OF THE RELATIONSHIP
           BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND THE OWE -- AND THE U.N. AND A
           TEVENDS SI OF THOSE IN THE U.N. WHICH WAS A VAST MAJORITY WHO

           THOUGHT WE SHOULDN'T HAVE DONE IT THIS WAY OF HUNKERING DOWN
           AND DENYING US ULTIMATELY THE RIGHT TO VOTE IN THE UNITED
           NATIONS BECAUSE OF "NOT PAYING OUR DUES." WELL, AS USUAL, MY
           COLLEAGUE, ALTHOUGH WE ARRIVED AT THE SAME YEAR, HE ARRIVED
           WITH MORE WISDOM THAN I DID. MY COLLEAGUE ONCE AGAIN
           DEMONSTRATED THAT HE KNEW WHAT HE WAS DOING. A VERY CLOSE
           FRIEND OF HIS AND A MAN WHO ACTUALLY IS A FORMER DEMOCRATIC

           STATE SENATOR I'M TOLD -- AT LEAST THAT'S WHAT HE TOLD ME --
           WORKED WITH SENATOR HELMS IN YEARS GONE BY. HIS CONTEMPORARY
           WAS THE PUBLIC DELEGATE TO THE UNITED NATIONS. I WILL NEVER --
           FROM NORTH CAROLINA. I'LL NEVER FORGET AND I DON'T THINK ANYONE
           EVER ANTICIPATED THEY WOULD SEE A DINNER IN NEW YORK ORGANIZED
           BY OUR AMBASSADOR TO HONOR SENATOR HELMS WHERE IF I'M NOT

           MISTAKEN, ORIGINALLY SOMETHING ON THE ORDER OF 100 INVITATIONS
           WERE SENT OUT, BUT SO MANY DELEGATES, SO MANY AMBASSADORS
           WISHED TO COME, I DON'T WANT TO GUESS THE NUMBER BUT IT WAS
           CLOSE TO 140, I THINK, OF THE 180 SOME NATIONS THAT SHOWED UP
           IN A LARGE BALLROOM OF A LARGE HOTEL IN NEW YORK CITY TO HONOR
           THE MAN EVERYONE THOUGHT IN THE PRESS AND OTHER PLACES THEY
           WOULD HAVE WANTED TO VILIFY. AND I NEVER THOUGHT I'D LIVE TO

           SEE THE DAY WHEN I SAW SENATOR JESSE HELMS, HENRY KISSINGER,
           HOLBROOKE, AND MR. BELK, THE PUBLIC DELEGATE FROM NORTH
           CAROLINA AND THE U.N. BRASS HAVING THEIR PICTURE TAKEN IN THE
           MIDDLE OF THAT BALLROOM WEARING BLEW U.N. CAPS -- WEARING BLUE
           U.N. CAPS. NOW, THAT WAS A BIT OF AN EPIPHANY FOR ME. I WAS

           SITTING AT THE TABLE WITH THE GERMAN AMBASSADOR. AT MY TIME
           THERE WERE AT LEAST THREE MEMBERS OF THE SECURITY COUNCIL
           SITTING THERE. I WAS AMAZED TO WATCH WHAT HAPPENED. EVERYONE
           LOOKED AT IT SOMEWHAT BEMUSED AND AMUSED BUT THEN I NOTICED ALL
           THESE VERY DIGNIFIED DIPLOMATS AMONG THE HIGHEST RANKING
           PERSONS IN THE GOVERNMENTS OF THEIR RESPECTIVE COUNTRIES LINING
           UP VERY TACTFULLY AS IF THEY REALLY WEREN'T WANTING A PICTURE

           TO HAVE THEIR PICTURE TAKEN WITH SENATOR JESSE HELMS. NOW, I
           DON'T KNOW IF SENATOR HELMS EVER EXPECTED THAT. I DON'T THINK
           HE DID KNOWING HIM. BUT I CITE IT NOT TO BE HUMOROUS, NOT TO
           TELL YOU ALL THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS WAS SORT OF AN INTERESTING
           THING THAT HAPPENED BUT TO POINT OUT THAT BECAUSE OF SENATOR
           HELMS, FOR THE FIRST TIME IN THE 28 YEARS I'VE BEEN HERE, THERE

           IS A GENUINE SENSE OF WARMTH, THERE IS A DIFFERENT DEGREE OF
           TRUST, THERE IS A GREATER OPENNESS THAT HAS OCCURRED AS A
           CONSEQUENCE ON HIS INSISTENCE IN SAVING THE AMERICAN TAXPAYERS
           MONEY. I RELUCTANTLY WENT ALONG WITH THE CONDITIONS, AS MY
           FRIEND FROM NORTH CAROLINA KNOWS. I HAVE NO DOUBT THE REFORMS
           WERE NEEDED. I THOUGHT WE SHOULD HAVE AGREED ON OUR BACKDUES,
           AND I AGREE WITH HIM ON THE NUMBER, PAY THE BACKDUES, AND THEN
           -- AND THEN PROSPECTIVELY INSIST ON CONDITIONS IN THE FUTURE.

           IT WAS A DISTINCTION WITH SOME DIFFERENCE, BUT, BUT I WANT TO
           REMIND EVERYONE -- AND WE'LL HAVE PEOPLE COME TO THE FLOOR, I
           EXPECT, AND SAY, WELL, THIS IS THE WRONG WAY TO GO ABOUT IT. I
           WOULD POINT OUT TO THEM WHEN WE WERE DEBATING THIS AND I ASKED
           MY FRIEND FROM NORTH CAROLINA TO CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, I
           DON'T REMEMBER ANYBODY ELSE WHO SUPPORTED THE U.N. WERE ABLE TO
           GARNER ONE SINGLE PENNY IN BACKDEUCE. I REMEMBER SAYING A VERY
           SIGNIFICANT FORMER MEMBER OF THE HOUSE WHO WAS UPSET WITH THE
           HELMS-BIDEN APPROACH. I SAID I'LL WITHHOLD PUSHING THIS. I'LL

           GIVE YOU A WEEK. IF YOU CAN COME BACK TO ME AND TELL ME YOU'RE
           ABLE TO RAISE ONE SINGLE CENT IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
           TO PAY THE BACKDUES, I'LL WITHDRAW. I'LL WITHDRAW. THE POINT
           WAS EVERYONE TALKED ABOUT THE PURE IF I -- THE PURITY OF WE
           SHOULD DO IT THE RIGHT WAY WHICH LEAVES -- LEADS ME TO MY
           SECOND POINT I WANT TO MAKE. I'VE SERVED WITH MY FRIEND TOO
           LONG NOT TO UNDERSTAND HE HAS A VERY HEALTHY SKEPT TIFM OF

           INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS. NOT A HOSTILE, A SKEMTISM. I'VE
           SERVED WITH HIM TOO LONG NOT TO KNOW THAT HE HAS A SKEPTICISM
           FOR INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS MADE WITH PEOPLE WHO HAVE
           HISTORIES OF NOT KEEPING INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS. I SERVED
           WITH HIM TOO LONG TO UNDERESTIMATE HIS ABILITY TO KNOW HOW TO
           GET THINGS DONE. HE KNEW BETTER THAN MOST OF US THAT EVEN IF HE
           THOUGHT THERE SHOULD BE NO CONDITIONS, WHICH HE THOUGHT THERE
           SHOULD BE, THAT YOU WEREN'T GOING TO GET ANYTHING DONE HERE.

           YOU HAD TO BRING ALONG A STPHRANT PORTION OF THE HOUSE AND A
           SIGNIFICANT MINORITY OF THE UNITED STATES SENATE WHO DIDN'T
           EVEN WANT TO PAY THE BACKDEUCE, DIDN'T WANT TO PAY ANYTHING,
           CONDITIONS OR NOT. SO AS AN OLD SAW GOES OVER THE LAST 30
           YEARS, JUST AS NIXON CAN GO TO CHINA, ONLY HELMS CAN FIX THE
           U.N. THAT'S TRUE. THAT IS ABSOLUTELY, POSITIVELY TRUE. FOR IF
           MY FRIEND HAD NOT -- AND I'M SURE HE'S TAKEN SOME HEAT FROM HIS

           HISTORICALLY LOYAL AND TRADITIONAL FRIENDS ON THE SENATE RIGHT
           FOR EVEN DOING THIS. I HAVE FOR DOUBT HE'S TAKEN SOME HEAT. BUT
           AS USUAL, A MAN WHO STICKS TO HIS PRINCIPLES, HE TOOK THE HEAT,
           BUT IN THE PROCESS OF DOING SO, HE QUITE FRANKLY REPEDERED THE
           ARGUMENT AGAINST US PARTICIPATING -- RENDERED THE ARGUMENT
           AGAINST US PARTICIPATING IN THE PROPER U.N., RENDERING IT --

           HOW CAN I SAY IT -- NOT NULL AND VOID. RENDERED IT -- LET ME
           PUT IT THIS WAY. PUT IT IN A POSITION WHERE IT HAD NO
           CREDIBILITY FOR HOW COULD ANYONE CHALLENGE ON THE SENATE RIGHT
           THE SENATOR FROM NORTH CAROLINA. NOBODY DOUBTS HIS CONVICTIONS
           OF PRINCIPLES. HE'S TOO DARN CONSERVATIVE FOR ME. I LOVE HIM,
           BUT HE'S TOO DARN CONSERVATIVE FOR ME. ABOUT YOU IF JOE BIDEN
           HAD COME ALONG AND DONE THIS, IF TRENT LOTT, THE LEADER OF THE

           REPUBLICAN PARTY CAME ALONG AND DID THIS, IF OTHER RESPECTED
           MEMBERS DID THIS AND IT HAD BEEN LOTT-BIDEN, IT HAD BEEN
           ANYBODY ON THE REPUBLICAN SIDE-BIDEN AND NOT HELMS, THIS WOULD
           NOT HAVE GOTTEN DONE. AND SO I WANT TO PAY TRIBUTE NOT ONLY TO
           THE SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES HE'S WROUGHT BUT PAY TRIBUTE TO HIS
           TACTICAL GENIUS IN HOW TO GET IT DONE. BECAUSE IT WOULD NOT

           HAVE GOTTEN DONE. AND WE WOULD BE STANDING HERE TODAY IN
           SEMICRISIS ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT WE STAY IN THE U.N., WHETHER OR
           NOT OUR VOTE HAD BEEN TAKEN FROM US, WHETHER OR NOT IT WAS ANY
           LONGER RELEVANT. WE WOULD HAVE HAD SOME BITTER IDEOLOGICAL
           DEBATES ON THIS FLOOR HAD HE NOT GOTTEN US TO THIS PLACE. AND I
           FOR ONE THINK THE UNITED NATIONS AND THE INCREDIBLY VALUABLE

           INSTITUTION, THAT ON BALANCE OVERWHELMINGLY, OVERWHELMINGLY
           BENEFITS THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. BUT I SAY TO MY COLLEAGUES, DON'T
           DO WHAT NONE OF US WHO HAVE SERVED WITH SENATOR HELMS FOR SOME
           TIME NEVER DO. DON'T UNDERESTIMATE WHAT THIS FELLOW DID AND
           DOES AND HOW KNOWLEDGEABLE HE IS ABOUT GETTING SOMETHING DONE.

           I'M JUST GLAD WE ARE NOT ONLY ON THE SAME HYMNAL ON THIS ONE
           BUT ON THE SAME PAGE ON THIS ONE. SO I WANT TO PERSONALLY THANK
           HIM. HE DID MORE THAN SAVE THE AMERICAN TAXPAYERS $170 MILLION
           AND MORE TO COME. HE DID MORE THAN SET AN ATMOSPHERE AND TONE
           WHERE NOW IN THE UNITED NATIONS BECAUSE OF WHAT HE DID, THERE
           IS OPEN DISCUSSION AND DEBATE AMONG THE MEMBERS NOT INCLUDING

           US ABOUT THE NEED TO REFORM. HE WAS SORT OF THE FELLOW WHO CAME
           ALONG AND SAID, HEY, BUT THE EMPEROR HAS NO CLOTHES. EVERYBODY
           IS SITTING THERE KNEW THE EMPEROR HAD NO CLOTHES ON BUT UNTIL
           SENATOR HELMS SAID, NO CLOTHES, UNTIL HE STARTS TO GET DRESSED,
           I'M NOT PLAYING. NOW I ASK A RHETORICAL QUESTION. DID MY FRIEND
           EVER THINK HE'D HEAR A DEBATE WITH EVERYONE FROM THE CHINESE
           AMBASSADOR TO THE GERMAN AMBASSADOR TO THE FRENCH AMBASSADOR
           TALKING ABOUT THE NEED FOR FURTHER REFORM AND GOING BACK TO

           THEIR CONSTITUENTS AND SAYING WE'VE REFORMED?
           WE'RE SAVING OUR -- THEIR TAXPAYERS MONEY AS WELL. AND SO
           THAT'S A BIG DEAL. BUT THE BIGGER DEAL IN MY VIEW IS THERE IS A
           NEW SENSE OF LEGITIMACY AND VITALITY IN THIS CHAMBER, IN THIS
           GOVERNMENT, IN THIS COUNTRY FOR THE UNITED NATIONS. AND I'M NOT

           POLYANISH ABOUT THIS. I DON'T THINK THE UNITED NATIONS IS A
           ONE-WORLD GOVERNMENT LEADING TO NERVAN NERVANDO. FARTHER FROM
           WHAT IT IS. BUT IT IS A PRACTICAL TOOL IN A NUMBER OF
           CIRCUMSTANCES AND AN INCREASINGLY NECESSARY FORM FOR THE ONE
           SUPER POWER IN THE WORLD TO BE ABLE TO MAKE HER VIEWS KNOWN AND
           GARNER THE SUPPORT OF OR AT LEAST PIK THE CONSCIENCE OF THE

           REST OF THE WORLD SO WE'RE NOT CONSTANTLY PUT IN THE POSITION
           OF THAT GREAT NATION IMPOSING HER VIEW ON ALL THE REST OF THE
           WORLD. WHAT MOST OF OUR COLLEAGUES DON'T UNDERSTAND, WE
           AMERICANS ARE UNCOMFORTABLE BEING THE SOLE SUPER POWER. I OFTEN
           TELL OUR EUROPEAN FRIENDS WHICH I'M DEEPLY -- MY COLLEAGUE
           KNOWS I'M DEEPLY INVOLVED AS HE IS WITH NATO AND EUROPE. I
           OFTEN TELL THEM WHEN THEY COMPLAIN ABOUT US BEING THE ONLY
           SUPER POWER, YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND. AMERICANS WEREN'T SEEKING TO

           SEEK THIS TITLE. WE DON'T WANT TO BE THE SUPER POWER. IF THERE
           HAS TO BE ONE, IT WOULD BE US, BUT THAT'S NOT OUR GOAL. WE HAVE
           NO -- WE HAVE NO COUNTRIES TO CONQUER. WE THIS NO DESIRE TO
           IMPOSE OUR WILL. AMERICANS WOULD JUST AS SOON TEND TO THEIR
           BUSINESS AND BE HOME. BUT THAT'S HOW WE'RE CAST TODAY. THAT'S
           HOW WE'RE CAST, BY OUR FRIENDS AS WELL AS OUR FOES. AND I THINK
           IN THAT CONTEXT, THE UNITED NATIONS TAKES ON DIFFERENT AND

           DYNAMIC ROLE POSSIBLY FOR OUR INTEREST. AND SO WHAT MY FRIEND
           FROM NORTH CAROLINA DID IS MAKE THAT POSSIBLE. WHETHER IT MEETS
           ITS EXPECTATIONS, WHETHER IT CONTINUES DOWN THE ROAD TO REFORM,
           WHETHER IT DOES WHAT IT HAS THE POTENTIAL TO DO REMAINS TO BE
           SEEN. BUT WE WOULD NOT EVEN BE IN THE POSITION TODAY, FEBRUARY
           7, 2001, TALKING ABOUT THIS POSSIBILITY WERE IT NOT FOR HIS

           INSISTENCE. AS I SAID, ONLY NIXON COULD GO TO CHINA. ONLY HELMS
           COULD MAKE THE U.N. RELEVANT AT THE END OF THIS CENTURY AND THE
           BEGINNING OF THE NEXT. AND I DON'T EVEN THINK HE -- I KNOW HE
           UNDERSTANDS BUT KNOWING HOW HE IS, HE PROBABLY REFUSES TO
           BELIEVE THAT THAT'S AS BIG A ROLE HE PLAYED. BUT IT LITERALLY
           IS THAT BIG. THAT'S THE DEAL. THAT'S WHY THIS IS SO
           CONSEQUENTIAL. THIS LEGISLATION BEFORE US IS IN A SENSE
           INCONSEQUENTIAL. WE'RE CHANGING ONE WORD OR ONE NUMBER IN A

           PIECE OF LEGISLATION TO ACCOMMODATE WHAT WE BELIEVE TO BE THE
           GOOD-FAITH SERIOUS EFFORT TO HAVE EMBARKED UPON AND STAY
           EMBARKED UPON MAKING AN INSTITUTION OF THE 20TH CENTURY
           RELEVANT IN THE 21ST
{END: 2001/02/07 TIME: 13-45 , Wed.  107TH SENATE, FIRST SESSION}