A more accurate - and pertinent - description of ICAO's structure is that the Assembly is the "whole organization" while Council is the governimg board, its board of directors. In the Assembly, which meets formally only once every three years, every Member State has one equal vote. The Council . . . works differently, to a sigmificant extent.
The role of the U.S. Permanent Representative to the Council, with rank of Ambassador, isn't just ceremonial or "stuffed shirt" and also isn't overtly technical. For the latter, there's the Air Navigation Commission, while for the former, there are a goodly number of officials in the State Department (and the Congress) who will gladly punch out the diplomatic platitudes.
In the past several seasons I've met and discussed "stuff" with a number of Council reps from major aviation states, including the U.S. Their most essential attribute and quality was credibility, not some Harvard- professor-like ability to pontificate on abstruse diplomatic concepts. One prior U.S. Permanent Rep had a legal background and high-level responsibility for one of the largest airports in the country. Another U.S. Rep had background covering senior military and flying roles, airline flying, and U.S. government interagency role as well.
The current nomination is an excellent choice. ICAO is approaching a crossroads, though it may be impolitic to say it out loud. But just for openers, as the Council continues its process of the Article 55 (e) investigation of the Ryanair FR4978 incident, would anyone be surprised that Amb. Sullenberger (if confirmed) will be a forceful, broadly credible, and even compelling advocate for an investigatory process of irrefutable and undeniable integrity?
The Senate should confim him Without Delay. And I'd gladly drop eveything and work with the nominee to brief up for the confirmation hearing, pro bono publico.