[Senate Hearing 112-735]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 112-735
NOMINATIONS OF THE 112TH CONGRESS--SECOND SESSION
=======================================================================
HEARINGS
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
----------
FEBRUARY 7 THROUGH NOVEMBER 28, 2012
----------
Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Relations
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/
S. Hrg. 112-735
NOMINATIONS OF THE 112TH CONGRESS--SECOND SESSION
=======================================================================
HEARINGS
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
FEBRUARY 7 THROUGH NOVEMBER 28, 2012
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Relations
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
79-797 WASHINGTON : 2013
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office,
http://bookstore.gpo.gov. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center, U.S. Government Printing Office. Phone 202�09512�091800, or 866�09512�091800 (toll-free). E-mail, [email protected].
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS
112th CONGRESS--SECOND SESSION
JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts, Chairman
BARBARA BOXER, California RICHARD G. LUGAR, Indiana
ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey BOB CORKER, Tennessee
BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho
ROBERT P. CASEY, Jr., Pennsylvania MARCO RUBIO, Florida
JIM WEBB, Virginia JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma
JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire JIM DeMINT, South Carolina
CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware JOHNNY ISAKSON, Georgia
RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming
TOM UDALL, New Mexico MIKE LEE, Utah
William C. Danvers, Staff Director
Kenneth A. Myers, Jr., Republican Staff Director
(ii)
?
C O N T E N T S
----------
[Any additional material relating to these nominees may be found
at the end of the applicable day's hearing.]
----------
Page
Tuesday, February 7, 2012 (a.m.)................................. 1
Hon. Larry L. Palmer, of Georgia, to be Ambassador to Barbados,
St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Lucia, Antigua and Barbuda, the
Commonwealth of Dominica, Grenada, and St. Vincent and the
Grenadines..................................................... 6
Hon. Phyllis M. Powers, of Virginia, to be Ambassador to the
Republic of Nicaragua.......................................... 9
Jonathan D. Farrar, of California, to be Ambassador to the
Republic of Panama............................................. 11
Julissa Reynoso, of New York, to be Ambassador to the Oriental
Republic of Uruguay............................................ 14
------
Tuesday, February 7, 2012 (p.m.)................................. 35
Hon. Nancy J. Powell, of Iowa, to be Ambassador to India......... 40
------
Tuesday, March 13, 2012.......................................... 65
Hon. Frederick D. Barton, of Maine, to be an Assistant Secretary
of State (Conflict and Stabilization Operations) and to be
Coordinator for Reconstruction and Stabilization............... 67
Hon. William E. Todd, of Virginia, to be Ambassador to the
Kingdom of Cambodia............................................ 69
Sara Margalit Aviel, of California, to be United States Alternate
Executive Director of the International Bank for Reconstruction
and Development................................................ 72
------
Wednesday, March 14, 2012........................................ 113
Hon. Pamela A. White, of Maine, to be Ambassador to the Republic
of Haiti....................................................... 121
Hon. Linda Thomas-Greenfield, of Louisiana, to be Director
General of the Foreign Service................................. 125
Gina K. Abercrombie-Winstanley, of Ohio, to be Ambassador to the
Republic of Malta.............................................. 128
------
Tuesday, March 20, 2012.......................................... 147
Jacob Walles, of Delaware, to be Ambassador to the Tunisian
Republic....................................................... 152
John Christopher Stevens, of California, to be Ambassador to
Libya.......................................................... 155
Hon. Carlos Pascual, of the District of Columbia, to be an
Assistant Secretary of State (Energy Resources)................ 157
------
Wednesday, March 21, 2012........................................ 185
Hon. Tracey Ann Jacobson, of the District of Columbia, to be
Ambassador to the Republic of Kosovo........................... 187
Hon. Richard B. Norland, of Iowa, to be Ambassador to Georgia.... 191
Hon. Kenneth Merten, of Virginia, to be Ambassador to the
Republic of Croatia............................................ 193
Mark A. Pekala, of Maryland, to be Ambassador to the Republic of
Latvia......................................................... 196
Jeffrey D. Levine, of California, to be Ambassador to the
Republic of Estonia............................................ 199
------
Thursday, March 22, 2012......................................... 221
Hon. Scott DeLisi, of Minnesota, to be Ambassador to the Republic
of Uganda...................................................... 225
Makila James, of the District of Columbia, to be Ambassador to
the Kingdom of Swaziland....................................... 227
Michael Raynor, of Maryland, to be Ambassador to the Republic of
Benin.......................................................... 231
------
Wednesday, May 16, 2012.......................................... 253
Piper Anne Wind Campbell, of the District of Columbia, to be
Ambassador to Mongolia......................................... 257
Hon. Peter William Bodde, of Maryland, to be Ambassador to the
Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal........................... 261
Dorothea-Maria Rosen, of California, to be Ambassador to the
Federated States of Micronesia................................. 265
------
Thursday, May 17, 2012........................................... 277
David J. Lane, of Florida, to serve as U.S. Representative to the
United Nations Agencies for Food and Agriculture, with the rank
of Ambassador.................................................. 281
Edward M. Alford, of Virginia, to be Ambassador to the Republic
of The Gambia.................................................. 285
Mark L. Asquino, of the District of Columbia, to be Ambassador to
the Republic of Equatorial Guinea.............................. 287
Douglas M. Griffiths, of Texas, to be Ambassador to the Republic
of Mozambique.................................................. 290
------
Wednesday, June 6, 2012.......................................... 309
Hon. Michele Jeanne Sison, of Maryland, to be Ambassador to the
Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka and to serve
concurrently as Ambassador to the Republic of Maldives......... 313
Brett H. McGurk, of Connecticut, to be Ambassador to the Republic
of Iraq........................................................ 315
Susan Marsh Elliott, of Florida, to be Ambassador to the Republic
of Tajikistan.................................................. 324
------
Wednesday, June 13, 2012......................................... 365
Hon. Richard L. Morningstar, of Massachusetts, to be Ambassador
to the Republic of Azerbaijan.................................. 370
Jay Nicholas Anania, of Maryland, to be Ambassador to the
Republic of Suriname........................................... 373
Timothy M. Broas, of Maryland, to be Ambassador to the Kingdom of
the Netherlands................................................ 376
------
Wednesday, June 27, 2012......................................... 405
Hon. Derek J. Mitchell, of Connecticut, to be Ambassador to the
Union of Burma................................................. 410
------
Thursday, July 12, 2012.......................................... 437
Hon. Gene Allan Cretz, of New York, to be Ambassador to the
Republic of Ghana.............................................. 440
Deborah Ruth Malac, of Virginia, to be Ambassador to the Republic
of Liberia..................................................... 443
David Bruce Wharton, of Virginia, to be Ambassador to the
Republic of Zimbabwe........................................... 446
Alexander Mark Laskaris, of Maryland, to be Ambassador to the
Republic of Guinea............................................. 449
------
Wednesday, July 18, 2012......................................... 461
Greta Christine Holtz, of Maryland, to be Ambassador to the
Sultanate of Oman.............................................. 464
Thomas Hart Armbruster, of New York, to be Ambassador to the
Republic of the Marshall Islands............................... 467
Hon. Michael David Kirby, of Virginia, to be Ambassador to the
Republic of Serbia............................................. 470
John M. Koenig, of Washington, to be Ambassador to the Republic
of Cyprus...................................................... 473
Hon. Marcie B. Ries, of the District of Columbia, to be
Ambassador to the Republic of Bulgaria......................... 476
------
Tuesday, July 31, 2012........................................... 497
Hon. James B. Cunningham, of New York, to be Ambassador to the
Islamic Republic of Afghanistan................................ 501
Hon. Richard G. Olson, of New Mexico, to be Ambassador to the
Islamic Republic of Pakistan................................... 507
------
Wednesday, September 12, 2012.................................... 549
Joseph E. Macmanus, of New York, to be Representative of the
United States of America to the Vienna Office of the United
Nations and to be Representative of the United States of
America to the International Atomic Energy, with the rank of
Ambassador..................................................... 552
Sharon English Woods Villarosa, of Texas, to be Ambassador to the
Republic of Mauritius and the Republic of Seychelles........... 557
Walter North, of Washington, to be Ambassador to Papua New
Guinea, the Solomon Islands, and the Republic of Vanuatu....... 559
------
Thursday, September 13, 2012..................................... 583
Hon. Stephen D. Mull, of Virginia, to be Ambassador to the
Republic of Poland............................................. 586
Dawn M. Liberi, of Florida, to be Ambassador to the Republic of
Burundi........................................................ 588
------
Wednesday, September 19, 2012.................................... 603
Hon. Robert Stephen Beecroft, of California, to be Ambassador to
the Republic of Iraq........................................... 607
------
Wednesday, November 28, 2012..................................... 635
Hon. Robert F. Godec, of Virginia, to be Ambassador to the
Republic of Kenya.............................................. 638
Deborah Ann McCarthy, of Florida, to be Ambassador to the
Republic of Lithuania.......................................... 641
NOMINATIONS OF LARRY PALMER, PHYLLIS POWERS, JONATHAN FARRAR, AND
JULISSA REYNOSO
----------
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 7, 2012 (a.m.)
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Foreign Relations,
Washington, DC.
----------
Hon. Larry L. Palmer, of Georgia, to be Ambassador to Barbados,
St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Lucia, Antigua and Barbuda,
the Commonwealth of Dominica, Grenada, and Saint
Vincent and the Grenadines
Hon. Phyllis M. Powers, of Virginia, to be Ambassador to the
Republic of Nicaragua
Jonathan D. Farrar, of California, to be Ambassador to the
Republic of Panama
Julissa Reynoso, of New York, to be Ambassador to the Oriental
Republic of Uruguay
----------
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:05 a.m., in
room SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Robert
Menendez, presiding.
Present: Senators Menendez, Lugar, and Rubio.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. ROBERT MENENDEZ,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW JERSEY
Senator Menendez. Good morning. This hearing will come to
order.
Today the Senate Foreign Relations Committee will consider
four nominations: Ambassador Larry Palmer to be the Ambassador
to Barbados, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Lucia, Antigua, and
Barbuda, and the Commonwealth of Dominica, Grenada, St.
Vincent, and the Grenadines. That's a lot of territory to
handle. [Laughter.]
Ambassador Phyllis Powers to be the Ambassador to
Nicaragua; Mr. Jonathan Farrar to be the Ambassador to Panama;
and Deputy Assistant Secretary for Central America and the
Caribbean; and Julissa Reynoso, to be the Ambassador to
Uruguay.
Let me welcome you on behalf of the committee, and your
families and friends. I'll make a statement, and then I'll turn
to Senator Rubio.
I want to congratulate you all on your nominations. If
confirmed, you'll serve the U.S. Government as its highest
representative to the countries to which you have been
nominated, and you'll be called upon to implement the policies
of our government and to protect and advance the interests of
the American people.
I know many of you have already had this opportunity in
different places, though such an honor is bestowed upon
relatively few in our country.
I would encourage you to respond expeditiously to any
questions that may be submitted subsequently for the record so
the committee can act on your nominations as soon as possible.
The deadline of submissions for the record for members will be
the close of business on Friday.
All of today's nominees are being considered for
ambassadorial positions to the Western Hemisphere. The four
embassies you are being called upon to lead are spread
throughout the hemisphere, from the Caribbean to Central
America to the southern cone of Latin America. The wide range
of bilateral issues that confronts these embassies is as broad
and complex as America's multifaceted relationship with the
region itself.
In light of our geographic proximity, our shared history,
our economic and cultural ties, and the ability to instantly
share information through the Internet, the Western
Hemisphere's 840 million people are inextricably linked like
never before.
America's relationship with our neighbors in the region can
best be described as a partnership. When one looks at the
incredible amount of goods and services flowing across the
borders, the migration of our peoples, the art and music that
we share, it's clear the United States and its neighbors have
forged an incredibly strong and interminable relationship, and
the bond that cements this partnership is called democracy.
Over the last few decades, we have seen some incredible
democratic progress in the Western Hemisphere, with most
countries possessing a representative democracy and with more
and more people enjoying the same rights and privileges that we
have in the United States.
There are, of course, notable exceptions, among them Cuba,
Venezuela, and, in my view since last November, Nicaragua. When
I think about the hemisphere, I think at a different time it
would have been unimaginable for Ahmadinejad to have been
welcomed anywhere within the Western Hemisphere. Is it a
coincidence that one of the world's pariah leaders, Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad, recently visited all three of these countries on
his recent tour of tyrants, as my House colleague, Ileana Ros-
Lehtinen, has so eloquently stated?
What does it say about the leaders of these three countries
when they invite to their capitals a repressive leader of Iran
who, in June 2009, was reelected through massive fraud,
disputed ballots, and a biased electoral board? A leader who,
when the people of his country rallied in the streets to
protest, unleashed his security forces to crush the protesters?
On November 6, Daniel Ortega used the Ahmadinejad election
playbook to stay in power, and then had the gall to invite his
mentor to his coronation in January. Where was the
international outrage when Ortega altered the constitution,
allowing him to run for a third straight term? Where was the
Organization of American States, who concluded that despite
irregularities, that Ortega had actually won the election?
Now, right in front of our eyes, we're watching the same
movie in Venezuela, the harassment of the opposition, the
closing of independent media outlets, and restrictions on
nongovernmental organizations that echo events ongoing now in
Egypt. It's all happening again, and I don't see anyone
speaking out except for some very brave human rights
organizations and individuals on the ground. I will be pretty
outraged if we have to chair another hearing in November to
examine how Chavez stole the election in Venezuela.
Repression is as wrong in the Western Hemisphere as it is
in the Middle East. As Dr. King said, ``Injustice anywhere
threatens justice everywhere.'' There is no better time for the
leaders of our hemisphere to reinforce the democratic gains of
the last two decades than at the Summit of the Americas in
Cartagena this April, not just through talk but by action. The
Organization of American States, for example, must be more
effective and given all the necessary resources it needs to
defend and promote human rights and democracy throughout the
Americas, including by strengthening the Inter-American
Commission on Human Rights.
This is not the time for the OAS to back down or retreat
from its mission or be bullied by Chavez. This is the time to
double-down and reclaim its hemispheric leadership.
I'm extremely supportive of Secretary Clinton's efforts to
bolster the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, and I
hope the State Department will continue to put more emphasis on
the region.
Just as the United States addresses the fires in other
parts of the world, so too must we address the issues
smoldering in our own hemisphere. Antidemocratic forces are
gathering strength in too many nations. In some countries like
Nicaragua, these forces are explicit and visible at the ballot
box, and in others it is more hidden in the repression of media
and civil society, and the weakening of society fostered by
drug cartels that feed on desperation and poverty and
corruption. These forces are harder to find and more opaque,
but they are equally corrosive and self-serving.
It's time to wake up and start dedicating the resources and
our attention in a hemisphere which is incredibly important to
the national interests and security of the United States, just
as we do in other parts of the world. I look forward to these
nominees being part of that effort. I hope that the President's
budget, which will be released next Monday, will reflect this
hemisphere as a policy priority.
With that, I'm pleased to recognize the ranking Republican
on the committee, my friend and colleague, Senator Rubio.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MARCO RUBIO,
U.S. SENATOR FROM FLORIDA
Senator Rubio. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It's an honor to
have with us today as well the ranking Republican on the
Foreign Relations Committee, Senator Lugar, who is a legend in
the foreign relations world. So it's great to have you here.
Thank you for being a part of it.
Thank you all for your service to our country and for your
willingness to serve in these new posts.
The Western Hemisphere actually is, I hope, will become of
increasing attention and importance. I think it's been
neglected. There are major issues going on elsewhere in the
world that have distracted us over the last few years, but I
think what's going on in the Western Hemisphere very much is at
the core of what American foreign policy should be about.
The expansion of democracies around the world have led to
free markets, and free markets have led to prosperity, freedom,
and security, and nowhere is that more apparent than in the
Western Hemisphere, where all but one nation has embraced
democracy and elections. Unfortunately, one of the trends that
we're starting to see in this hemisphere is a little
backsliding from that. We're certainly seeing that in
Nicaragua. We're certainly seeing that in Venezuela and some of
the countries allied with them, and then obviously in Cuba,
where for over 50 years now has been a totalitarian government.
And so at a time when there is this ongoing debate in the
world about who is going to win, is it going to be the liberal
democracies like the United States and some of these emerging
ones in the Western Hemisphere, or is it going to be
totalitarian governments like Iran and China, Russia, two of
those three countries which are trying to increase their
footprint in the Western Hemisphere?
So your appointments come at a critical time when, more
than ever before, the United States needs to be a clear and
bold voice on behalf of liberal democracy, on behalf of self-
determination, on behalf of people having their basic human
rights respected.
Now, your assignments are all different, but they're more
challenging ones in some places than in others. In Nicaragua,
as this chairman just announced, I think we saw an absolute
outrage last year and a fraudulent election that no
international organization would certify, that the very
candidacy of the man who won violated the very constitution of
its own country.
Later this year we'll see elections in Venezuela, in Mexico
and the Dominican Republic. And so I think it's important for
all of you, as you go to your new posts, that you be firm
advocates on behalf of democracy, on behalf of freedom, on
behalf of the right of the people of these countries to self-
determination. The challenges are different in different
places, but if there's a growing tendency in the region in some
places, it's a desire to undermine all of these institutions,
whether it's the press, the courts, or the elections
themselves, and it's important that the United States clearly
know where we stand.
I once had a visitor--I think he was from Nicaragua; in
fact, he was--say to me that sometimes the United States is
more interested in stability than it is in democracy; that, in
essence, too often in the past in our foreign policy,
particularly in Latin America and in the Western Hemisphere, we
have looked the other way because we would rather that country
be stable and not have a migration problem or some other issue
than actually speak up on behalf of democracy.
But that can't be the case, because democracy functions
from time to time. They may elect people that don't agree with
us on everything. They may say some things that we don't like.
But in the big picture, in the global picture, in the long
term, it's better for our country, for our region, and for the
world for people to have a voice in selecting their own
leaders. History has proven that time and again. And as
representatives of the single greatest republic in all of human
history, you're going to be uniquely positioned to be a strong
voice on behalf of these principles that have not just made our
Nation great but have made the world safer and more prosperous.
So I welcome your willingness to serve in these new posts.
I look forward to hearing your testimony today, and in
particular your ideas about how, in your specific assignments,
you intend to be a voice on behalf of freedom and democracy and
self-determination. Thank you.
Senator Menendez. Thank you, Senator.
Senator Lugar, do you have opening comments?
We thank you for being here with us today.
With that, let me introduce the panel. So let me start off
taking a few moments to speak about each of you and your
history, and then we'll ask you to make a statement of about 5
minutes. Your full statements will be included in the record,
and certainly introduce your family or friends, since we
understand that family is a critical part of your mission in
terms of support and help, and we understand it is, in essence,
an extended service of themselves as well, and we appreciate
that.
But, Ms. Reynoso, you have to limit how many people you can
introduce. [Laughter.]
Because as I was entering, I met several of your
supporters, so it might take most of the hearing time.
[Laughter.]
So with that, Larry Palmer is the nominee to be the
Ambassador to Barbados, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Lucia,
Antigua, and Barbuda, the Commonwealth of Dominica, Grenada,
St. Vincent and the Grenadines. He has recently served as the
Ambassador to Honduras from 2002-2005. Prior to being
Ambassador to Honduras, Mr. Palmer served as the deputy chief
of mission and Charge d'Affaires in Quito, Ecuador, and
counselor for Administration in the Dominican Republic.
Phyllis Powers was sworn in as Ambassador of the United
States to the Republic of Panama on September 10, 2010. She
previously served as the Director of the Office of Provincial
Affairs at the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad, the deputy chief of
mission of the U.S. Embassy in Lima, Peru, and Director of the
Narcotics Affairs Section responsible for Plan Colombia.
Jonathan Farrar was the chief of mission of the U.S.
Interests Section in Havana, Cuba. He has served as the
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of the State Department's
Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, and was DRL's
Acting Assistant Secretary. Mr. Farrar also served as Deputy
Assistant Secretary in the State Department's International
Narcotics and Law Enforcement Bureau, with responsibility for
INL's programs in the Western Hemisphere, Africa, Asia, and
Europe.
Julissa Reynoso is currently the Deputy Assistant Secretary
for Central America and the Caribbean in the Bureau of Western
Hemisphere Affairs. Prior to joining the Foreign Service, Ms.
Reynoso practiced international arbitration and antitrust law
at Simpson Thatcher and Bartlett in New York, clerked for
Federal Judge Laura Taylor Swain of the U.S. District Court for
the Southern District of New York.
So welcome to all of you again. And with that, I know one
of my colleagues wants to add some words of introduction, and
hopefully by that time we will have that opportunity.
So we'll start with you, Ambassador Palmer. Welcome back to
the committee, and we look forward to your testimony.
STATEMENT OF HON. LARRY L. PALMER, OF GEORGIA, TO
BE AMBASSADOR TO BARBADOS, ST. KITTS AND NEVIS,
ST. LUCIA, ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA, THE COMMONWEALTH OF DOMINICA,
GRENADA, AND ST. VINCENT AND THE GRENADINES
Ambassador Palmer. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, thank you for
the honor and privilege of appearing before you as a nominee
for the United States Ambassador to the Caribbean nations of
Antigua and Barbuda, Barbados, Dominica, Grenada, St. Kitts and
Nevis, St. Lucia, and St. Vincent and the Grenadines. I am
grateful to President Obama and Secretary Clinton for their
confidence and trust in nominating me for this position.
My wife, Lucille, of 39 years, who has accompanied me to
every other Senate appearance, could not be here today. She
chose to be with my newly born grandson in Tennessee.
Mr. Chairman, if confirmed by the Senate, I look forward to
representing our country and working with you to advance the
interests of the United States in the Caribbean. Barbados and
the Eastern Caribbean nations represent nearly half of all
countries in the Caribbean, an important region on the United
States southern border. Traditional allies and friends, with
shared culture and dedication to democracy and the rule of law,
these nations play an important role both bilaterally and in
multilateral organizations like the Organization of American
States and the United Nations. I am honored to have been
nominated to represent the United States in this important
region.
If confirmed, I will make the continuing safety of American
residents and visitors in the Caribbean my top priority. The
continuing success of the Caribbean Basin Security Initiative
is vitally important to providing for the safety and security
of the United States by ensuring that Barbados and the Eastern
Caribbean can combat transnational organized crime and avoid
the violence and instability seen elsewhere in the hemisphere.
As a result of ongoing CBSI programming and engagement, the
United States and countries of the Caribbean are working more
closely than ever before on security and justice system-related
projects. The inclusion of anticrime and antigang youth
development and empowerment programs is an important component
of CBSI and reflects the role the youth plays in these
societies and in the development of their nations.
We are also working closely with Barbados and the Eastern
Caribbean to combat trafficking in persons.
The global economic downturn has hit the region
particularly hard, exacerbating already significant economic
hardship. Some Eastern Caribbean countries are struggling with
very high debt levels, and a number have undertaken
International Monetary Fund standby programs and are reaching
out to the Paris Club for debt restructuring. This difficult
economic situation has prevented the Eastern Caribbean nations
from reaching their full development potential. And if
confirmed, I will build on prior work and lead American efforts
to promote economic prosperity, trade, and entrepreneurship in
the region.
As 2011 marked the 50th anniversary of the Peace Corps, I
would like to note our longstanding Peace Corps presence in the
Eastern Caribbean which plays a major role in providing U.S.
assistance to the region. St. Lucia was among the first
countries
to receive volunteers in 1961, and currently 115 volunteers
work
the region in four main areas: youth development, institutional
and NGO development, small business development, and special
education.
Thank you again for giving me the honor of appearing before
you today, and I would be happy to answer any questions that
you may have.
[The prepared statement of Ambassador Palmer follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Larry L. Palmer
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, thank you for the honor
and privilege of appearing before you as nominee for the United States
Ambassador to the Caribbean nations of Antigua and Barbuda, Barbados,
Dominica, Grenada, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Lucia and St. Vincent and
the Grenadines. I am grateful to President Obama and Secretary Clinton
for their confidence and trust in nominating me for this position. If
confirmed by the Senate, I look forward to representing our country and
working with you to advance the interests of the United States in the
Caribbean.
Barbados and the Eastern Caribbean nations represent nearly half of
all countries in the Caribbean, an important region on the United
States southern border. Traditional allies and friends, with shared
culture and dedication to democracy and rule of law, these nations play
an important role both bilaterally and in multilateral organizations
like the Organization of American States and the United Nations. I am
honored to have been nominated to represent the United States in this
important region.
Mr. Chairman, if confirmed, I will make the continuing safety of
American residents and visitors in the Caribbean my top priority. The
continuing success of the Caribbean Basin Security Initiative (CBSI) is
vitally important to providing for the safety and security of the
United States by ensuring that Barbados and the Eastern Caribbean can
combat transnational organized crime and avoid the violence and
instability seen elsewhere in the hemisphere. As a result of ongoing
CBSI programming and engagement, the United States and the countries of
the Caribbean are working more closely than ever on security and
justice system-related projects. The inclusion of anticrime and
antigang youth development and empowerment programs is an important
component of CBSI and reflects the role youth play in these societies
and in their development as nations. We are also working closely with
Barbados and the Eastern Caribbean nations to combat trafficking in
persons.
The global economic downturn has hit the region particularly hard,
exacerbating already significant economic hardship. Some Eastern
Caribbean countries are struggling with very high debt levels and a
number have undertaken International Monetary Fund (IMF) standby
programs and are reaching out to the Paris Club for debt restructuring.
This difficult economic situation has prevented the Eastern Caribbean
nations from reaching their full development potential. If confirmed, I
will build on prior work and lead American efforts to promote economic
prosperity, trade, and entrepreneurship in the region.
The high cost of energy in the region also affects Caribbean
economies. The United States seeks to promote alternative energy in
Barbados and the Eastern Caribbean. Our goal under the President's
Energy and Climate Partnership of the Americas (ECPA) is to assist
countries to diversify energy supplies with more renewable energy, and
to increase engagement on climate change adaptation. Under an ECPA
grant, six Eastern Caribbean country proposals were selected by the OAS
to receive clean energy technical assistance. These projects range from
solar energy pilot projects in national parks to the development of
geothermal resources. Secretary Clinton in June announced an ECPA
climate change adaptation initiative focused on Caribbean-specific
climate modeling and adaptation planning in partnership with the
University of the West Indies and one or more universities in the
United States. If confirmed, I will work to further these projects and
continue to promote cheaper and more sustainable energy throughout the
region.
Another critical challenge in the region is HIV/AIDS. HIV/AIDS
infection rates in Barbados and the Eastern Caribbean, while lower than
those in some neighboring countries, are nevertheless high in
vulnerable populations, especially among youth and women. HIV/AIDS-
related illnesses are a major cause of death for persons between the
ages of 15 and 44. If confirmed, I will strongly support U.S. programs
of prevention and services in the region through the President's
Emergency Action Fund for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) which is integral to
these efforts.
While women in Barbados and the Eastern Caribbean have made some
gains since the United Nations Fourth World Conference on Women in
1995, significant barriers to full and equal citizenship still remain.
Women in these countries play a strong role in politics, education, and
social issues. Access to education is high and the majority of
university students are women. However, after their education is
complete, many women are either unable to find jobs or only find work
in lower status and lower paying positions. While women are represented
among government ministers, they constitute only a tenth of
parliamentarians in Barbados and most of the Eastern Caribbean.
Domestic violence and violence against women remain grave concerns in
the region. Despite these obstacles, women leaders in Barbados and the
Eastern Caribbean are extraordinary, and are diligently working to
overcome the challenges they face. If confirmed, I will work to
increase awareness and action to improve the opportunities available to
women and girls. Along with this, the integration of women's issues
throughout our policies and programs is absolutely necessary,
particularly in such programs as CBSI, ECPA, and economic participation
and entrepreneurship support.
As 2011 marked the 50th anniversary of the Peace Corps, I would
also like to note our longstanding Peace Corps presence in the Eastern
Caribbean which plays a major role in providing U.S. assistance to the
region. St. Lucia was among the first countries to receive volunteers
in 1961. Currently 115 volunteers work in the region in four main
areas: Youth Development, Institutional/NGO Development, Small Business
Development, and Special Education.
Thank you again for giving me the honor of appearing before you
today. I would be happy to answer any questions you may have.
Senator Menendez. Ambassador, you even had extra time. So
you're on your way to confirmation, I can see that. [Laughter.]
Before we turn to Ms. Powers, I see our colleague, Senator
Gillibrand, is here and I know she wants to add words of
introduction and welcome.
So, Senator Gillibrand.
STATEMENT OF HON. KIRSTEN GILLIBRAND,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW YORK
Senator Gillibrand. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am very
honored to have the distinct pleasure of introducing Julissa
Reynoso, an extraordinary Latina from my home State of New
York, to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee as my
colleagues consider her nomination by President Obama to serve
as Ambassador to the Oriental Republic of Uruguay.
Ms. Reynoso has the qualities and experience to be an
outstanding ambassador. She served as the Deputy Assistant
Secretary for Central America and the Caribbean in the Bureau
of Western Hemisphere Affairs at the Department of State since
November 16, 2009. Ms. Reynoso is an attorney by trade, and
prior to joining the State Department she practiced
international law, focusing on international arbitration,
antitrust, and also served as the deputy director of the Office
of Accountability to the New York City Department of Education.
Her education is stellar, as she holds a B.A. in Government
from Harvard, a Master's in Philosophy from Cambridge in the
U.K., and a J.D. from Columbia; and her desire to make a life
of public service was evident right after law school when she
clerked for the Honorable Federal Judge Laura Taylor Swain.
Ms. Reynoso has also been a prolific writer, with her work
published widely in both Spanish and English on a range of
issues including regulatory reform, community organizing,
housing reform, immigration policy, and Latin American politics
for both popular press and academic journals.
As the first Dominican ever nominated and one of the
youngest people to be nominated, Julissa Reynoso is poised to
become a trailblazer for many, many more young women to follow.
In an era where women serve in the highest levels of government
as Secretary of State, Supreme Court Justices, and many other
offices of great distinction, we have yet another opportunity
to show young women and girls across our country and beyond
that anything is possible if you put your mind to it.
I urge my colleagues to send her nomination to the full
Senate for consideration. I'm confident that if confirmed, her
intellect and drive, she will represent our country with great
honor and distinction.
Thank you, Chairman. Thank you.
Senator Menendez. Thank you, Senator Gillibrand, very much.
Ambassador Powers.
STATEMENT OF HON. PHYLLIS M. POWERS, OF VIRGINIA, TO BE
AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF NICARAGUA
Ambassador Powers. Thank you, Senator. Mr. Chairman and
distinguished members of the committee, it is an honor to
appear before you today as the President's nominee to serve as
the U.S. Ambassador to Nicaragua. I am grateful for the trust
and confidence the President and Secretary Clinton have shown
in sending my name to the Senate for your consideration.
I would like to recognize my family, including my sister
and brother-in-law, Pam and Don Curley, who are here today,
friends and colleagues who have supported me throughout my
career.
The skills and experience acquired in my career in the
Foreign Service have prepared me to serve in this distinguished
position. If confirmed, I will embark on my sixth tour in the
region. The 7 years I spent in the U.S. Embassy in Colombia, as
well as my time as the deputy chief of mission in Lima, Peru,
and as the Director of the Office of Provincial Affairs in
Iraq, taught me the importance of developing a partnership with
host governments and civil society to achieve our goals.
I feel strongly that a culture of lawfulness is key to any
strong democratic society. As the current U.S. Ambassador to
Panama, I have seen firsthand that building and sustaining
democratic institutions is the responsibility of all citizens.
Our most successful programs have clearly been those with
community involvement, such as our programs in the area of
prevention with youth at risk to ensure the future leaders of
Panama have the opportunities they deserve.
The active participation of parents, community leaders,
private sector, and law enforcement provides Panama's young
people with viable alternatives to gang membership and
encouraging their progress as productive members of the
community. I am proud of the role our programs have played in
this effort.
While we're on the subject of community involvement and
civil society, the State Department has been clear in stating
its concerns that the recent Nicaraguan elections were not
transparent and were marred by significant irregularities.
There is a serious concern about the erosion of democracy in
Nicaragua. From the marshes of the Euphrates in Iraq to the
interior jungles of Peru and Colombia, I have witnessed that
citizens want to participate in the electoral process and, when
given the chance, will exercise their right. If confirmed, I
will speak clearly and with conviction about the importance of
protecting fundamental freedoms and democratic institutions,
and stress the importance of an empowered civil society,
independent media, informed citizenry, and effective local
government and political party participation.
Our relationship with Nicaragua is broad and complex.
Bilateral trade between the United States and Nicaragua has
grown by two-thirds in the 5 years since the Central America-
Dominican Republic Free Trade Agreement went into effect; and,
in fact, more than 125 U.S. companies are currently doing
business in Nicaragua. If confirmed, I will be a staunch
advocate for U.S. businesses in Nicaragua. I was pleased to
note that a small U.S. company with operations in Nicaragua,
Sahlman Seafoods, Inc., recently won the Secretary of State's
Award for Corporate Excellence for global corporate social
responsibility. We should promote and encourage cooperation
between the people of the United States and Nicaragua in
support of both our mutual interests.
Protecting U.S. citizens is the first responsibility of any
ambassador and, if confirmed, I will ensure that the U.S.
Embassy in Managua continues to provide a high level of service
and attention to our citizens. More than 14,000 American
citizens live and work in Nicaragua. Our diplomatic
representation includes representatives from eight U.S.
agencies, including a Peace Corps contingent of approximately
220 Volunteers.
Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, thank you again for
the opportunity to appear before this committee today. If
confirmed by the Senate, I look forward to working with you and
your colleagues to advance our Nation's interests in Nicaragua.
I would be happy to answer any questions you may have. Thank
you.
[The prepared statement of Ambassador Powers follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Phyllis M. Powers
Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the committee, it is an
honor to appear before you today as the President's nominee to serve as
the U.S. Ambassador to Nicaragua. I am grateful for the trust and
confidence the President and Secretary Clinton have shown in nominating
me for this critical post.
I would like to recognize my family, friends, and colleagues who
have supported me throughout my career. I firmly believe that no one
gets here alone and am confident I would not be here if they were not
beside me.
The skills and experience acquired in my career in the Foreign
Service have prepared me to serve in this distinguished position. If
confirmed, I will embark on my sixth tour in the region. The 7 years I
spent in the U.S. Embassy in Colombia, as well as my time as the deputy
chief of mission in Lima, Peru, and as the Director of the Office of
Provincial Affairs in Iraq taught me the importance of developing a
partnership with host governments and civil society to achieve our
goals.
I feel strongly that a culture of lawfulness is key to any strong
democratic society. As the current U.S. Ambassador to Panama, I have
seen firsthand that building and sustaining democratic institutions is
the responsibility of all citizens. Our most successful programs have
clearly been those with community involvement such as our programs in
the area of prevention with youth at risk to ensure the future leaders
of Panama have the opportunities they deserve. Our programs in
Chorrillo, a neighborhood in Panama City with many social and economic
needs are an example of what can be accomplished through partnerships
with the community. The active participation of parents, community
leaders, private sector, and law enforcement provides Panama's young
people with viable alternatives to gang membership and encouraging
their progress as productive members of the community. I am proud of
the role our programs have played in this effort.
While we're on the subject of community involvement and civil
society, the State Department has been clear in stating its concerns
that the recent Nicaraguan elections were not transparent and were
marred by significant irregularities. There is a serious concern about
the erosion of democracy in Nicaragua. From the marshes of the
Euphrates in Iraq to the interior jungles of Peru and Colombia I have
witnessed that citizens want to participate in the electoral process
and when given the chance, will exercise that right. If confirmed, I
will speak clearly and with conviction about the importance of
protecting fundamental freedoms and democratic institutions, and stress
the importance of an empowered civil society, independent media,
informed citizenry, and effective local government and political party
participation.
Our relationship with Nicaragua is broad and complex. Bilateral
trade between the United States and Nicaragua has grown by two-thirds
in the 5 years since the Central America-Dominican Republic Free Trade
Agreement went into effect and in fact more than 125 U.S. businesses
are currently doing business in Nicaragua. If confirmed, I will be a
staunch advocate for U.S. businesses in Nicaragua. I was pleased to
note that a small U.S. company with operations in Nicaragua, Sahlman
Seafoods, Incorporated, recently won the Secretary of State's Award for
Corporate Excellence for global corporate social responsibility for its
dedication to community development and environmental sustainability.
We should promote and encourage cooperation between the people of the
United States and Nicaragua in support of both our mutual interests.
Protecting U.S. citizens is the first responsibility of any
ambassador, and, if confirmed, I will ensure the U.S. Embassy in
Managua continues to provide a high level of service and attention to
our citizens. More than 14,000 American citizens live and work in
Nicaragua. Our diplomatic representation in Nicaragua includes
representatives from eight U.S. agencies, including a Peace Corps
contingent of approximately 220 Volunteers who work at sites throughout
the country.
Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, thank you again for the
opportunity to appear before this committee today. If confirmed by the
Senate, I look forward to working with you and your colleagues to
advance our Nation's interests in Nicaragua. I would be happy to answer
any questions you may have.
Senator Menendez. Thank you, Ambassador. We have a trend
going. You had extra time as well. Not that I want to put
pressure on the rest of the nominees.
Mr. Farrar.
STATEMENT OF JONATHAN D. FARRAR, OF CALIFORNIA, TO BE
AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF PANAMA
Mr. Farrar. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Distinguished members
of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, it's an honor to
appear today before you as the President's nominee as
Ambassador to Panama. I am deeply grateful to the President and
to the Secretary of State for their continued trust and
confidence.
I'd like to introduce the members of my family who are here
today. First of all, my wife, Terry, who has been with me
throughout our 31 years in the Foreign Service and has worked
tirelessly overseas to help those in need in the countries in
which we have served.
Also with us today is our daughter, Melissa, and our
youngest son, Nathaniel. Our oldest son, Jonathan, and our
daughter-in-law, Leigh, are not with us today as last month
they welcomed their first child and our first grandchild.
The Foreign Service has taken our family throughout the
Western Hemisphere, to North, South, and Central America, and
to the Caribbean. I've had the good fortune during the past
three decades to work on the full panoply of challenges in the
hemisphere, including democracy, human rights, law enforcement,
trade investment, and protection of the environment.
All of these issues are relevant to our relationship with
Panama. Panama's location and role in global trade makes its
success vital to our prosperity and national security. While
Panama's economic growth rate is the highest in the hemisphere,
Panama continues to face the challenge of making this growth
more inclusive so that all of its citizens can enjoy the
opportunity to build a better life for themselves and their
families.
The recently approved Trade Promotion Agreement holds the
promise to greatly expand our economic partnership, to the
mutual benefit of both our peoples. U.S. exports to Panama have
grown rapidly, and the United States is by far the leading
exporter of goods to Panama. Yet, we are facing increasing
competition for market share.
If confirmed, I would take what I have learned from three
assignments as an economic and commercial officer overseas and
harness the resources of our entire Embassy to promote U.S.
exports and create American jobs.
Panama is making major investments in the Canal and other
infrastructure amid annual economic growth averaging 8 percent
since 2006. A key element of my mission, if confirmed, would be
to work with American businesses to ensure they are able to
compete and win on a level playing field. Our implementation of
the Trade Promotion Agreement and our bilateral Tax Information
Exchange Agreement afford new opportunities to increase the
transparency of operations of governmental and financial
entities, and thus strengthen democratic institutions in
Panama.
The ties between the United States and Panama are strong.
Nowhere is this more evident than in our cooperation to combat
illegal drug trafficking and other criminal activity. In 2011
alone, Panama seized more than 30 tons of cocaine, much of
which otherwise would have made its way to our shores. The
government and the people of Panama rightfully are concerned
about the security threat posed by drug trafficking
organizations and criminal gangs.
If confirmed, I will bring my experience with
counternarcotics and law enforcement programs across Latin
America to direct a missionwide effort to deepen our bilateral
security cooperation and ensure that it remains closely
integrated into our overall efforts in the region.
Above all, if confirmed, my highest priority as ambassador
would be the protection of the nearly 45,000 Americans who
reside in or visit Panama at any given time, and the more than
100 American companies that do business there. My commitment to
helping our fellow Americans abroad began 31 years ago in the
consular section in Mexico City and continues today.
Mr. Chairman, thank you again for the honor of appearing
before the committee today. If confirmed, I pledge to work with
you and your colleagues to advance the vital interests of the
United States in Panama, and I'd be pleased to answer any
questions you may have. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Farrar follows:]
Prepared Statement of Jonathan D. Farrar
Mister Chairman, distinguished members of the Senate Foreign
Relations Committee, it is an honor to appear today before you as the
President's nominee to be Ambassador to Panama. I am deeply grateful to
the President and to the Secretary of State for their continued trust
and confidence.
I would like to introduce the members of my family who are here
today. First of all, my wife Terry, who has been with me throughout our
31 years in the Foreign Service and who has worked tirelessly to help
those in need in the countries in which we have served. Also with us
today is our youngest son, Nathaniel.
The Foreign Service has taken our family throughout the Western
Hemisphere to North, South, and Central America, and the Caribbean. I
have had the good fortune during the past three decades to work on the
full panoply of challenges in the hemisphere, including democracy,
human rights, law enforcement, trade, investment, and protection of the
environment.
All of these issues are relevant to our relationship with Panama.
Panama's location and role in global trade make its success vital to
our prosperity and national security. While Panama's economic growth
rate is the highest in the hemisphere, Panama continues to face the
challenge of making this growth more inclusive, so that all of its
citizens can enjoy the opportunity to build a better life for
themselves and their families.
The recently approved bilateral Trade Promotion Agreement holds the
promise to greatly expand our economic partnership to the mutual
benefit of both our peoples. United States exports to Panama have grown
rapidly and the United States is by far the leading exporter of goods
to Panama, yet we are facing increasing competition for Panama's import
market share. If confirmed, I would take what I have learned from three
assignments as an economic and commercial officer overseas and harness
the resources of our entire Embassy to promote U.S. exports and create
American jobs. Panama is making major investments in the Canal and
other infrastructure amid annual economic growth averaging 8 percent
since 2006. A key element of my mission, if confirmed, would be to work
with American businesses to ensure they are able to compete and win on
a level playing field. Our implementation of the Trade Promotion
Agreement and our bilateral Tax Information Exchange Agreement afford
new opportunities to increase the transparency of operations of
governmental and financial entities and thus strengthen democratic
institutions in Panama.
The ties between the United States and Panama are strong. Nowhere
is this more evident than in our cooperation to combat illegal drug
trafficking and other criminal activity. In 2011 alone Panamanian
authorities seized more than 30 tons of cocaine, much of which
otherwise would have made its way to our shores. The Government and
people of Panama rightfully are concerned about the security threat
posed by criminal gangs and drug trafficking organizations. If
confirmed, I would bring my experience with counternarcotics and law
enforcement programs across Latin America to direct a missionwide
effort to deepen our bilateral security cooperation and ensure it
remains closely integrated into our overall efforts in the region.
Above all, if confirmed my highest priority as Ambassador would be
the protection of the nearly 45,000 Americans who reside in or are
visiting Panama at any given time, and of the more than 100 American
companies that do business there. My commitment to helping our fellow
Americans abroad began 31 years ago in the consular section in Mexico
City, and continues today.
Mr. Chairman, thank you again for the honor of appearing before the
committee today. If confirmed, I pledge to work with you and your
colleagues to advance the vital interests of the United States in
Panama.
I would be pleased to answer any questions you may have.
Senator Menendez. Thank you.
Ms. Reynoso.
STATEMENT OF JULISSA REYNOSO, OF NEW YORK, TO BE AMBASSADOR TO
THE ORIENTAL REPUBLIC OF URUGUAY
Ms. Reynoso. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman and
members of the committee, I appreciate very much the
opportunity to appear before this committee today as President
Obama's nominee to be U.S. Ambassador to Uruguay. I am very
grateful and humbled by the confidence that President Obama and
Secretary Clinton have shown in me by this nomination. This
nomination is a great honor for me and I look forward to
another opportunity to serve my country, if confirmed.
With the chairman's permission, I wish to recognize the
many family and friends I have here today, and mentors and
colleagues. I'm not going to name all of them, but they're all
here, pretty much on my right-hand side, that have supported me
over the years, many of them here today, my mother in
particular, and many of them came from New York City, my home.
It is only with their steady support that I am here seeking the
U.S. Senate's confirmation, and I wish to sincerely thank them
for their guidance and support throughout the years.
The relationship between the United States and Uruguay is
extremely strong. We share important values, including a
commitment to democracy, rule of law, sound economic policies,
strong labor rights, environmental protection, investment in
people, the desire to see the peaceful resolution of disputes
between nations, and a commitment to the multilateral system.
If confirmed, I look forward to continuing the productive
dialogue between our two countries and will work diligently to
advance these goals.
Uruguay is a constructive partner which plays an important
role in promoting regional stability and democracy. The country
is also a partner in conflict resolution, contributing to
peacekeeping missions throughout the globe. Uruguay remains one
of the top troop and police contributors per capita to United
Nations peacekeeping overall. We welcome their contributions to
improving security in Haiti, as well as in other difficult
locations throughout the world.
If confirmed, I look forward to working with President
Mujica, Foreign Minister Almagro, the Uruguayan Government,
civil society and the private sector as we advance bilateral
relations and strengthen the political, commercial, and
cultural ties between our two countries. If confirmed, I would
give the highest priority to ensuring the well-being and safety
of U.S. citizens who live and travel in Uruguay.
I would seek opportunities for enhanced trade between the
United States and Uruguay and promote United States exports to
Uruguay. I would advocate for further cooperation under our
Science and Technology Agreement, as well as our Trade and
Investment Framework Agreement.
United States exports to Uruguay have steadily increased
over the last years to $973 million in 2010, up 30 percent from
2009, and we enjoyed a $738 million goods trade surplus with
Uruguay. There are approximately 100 U.S. companies currently
operating in Uruguay at this time. If confirmed, I will work
vigorously to promote U.S. businesses and believe we can
continue to find new opportunities for increased trade between
the two countries, and I would encourage programs that improve
inclusive economic growth as well as promote public-private
partnerships.
To build greater understanding and mutual understanding
through direct contact between Uruguayans and Americans, I will
work to establish more partnerships between colleges and
universities in Uruguay and the United States.
Members of the committee, my work in the Department of
State has offered me significant insights into the vital
partnerships that exist between the branches of government and,
if confirmed, I will work diligently to further develop these
partnerships.
If I am confirmed as Ambassador, I look forward to working
with you, each of you, your distinguished colleagues and your
staff to advance our priorities with the Oriental Republic of
Uruguay.
Thank you again for the great opportunity to appear before
you today, and I welcome any questions you may have. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Reynoso follows:]
Prepared Statement of Julissa Reynoso
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I appreciate very much
the opportunity to appear before this committee today as President
Obama's nominee to be U.S. Ambassador to Uruguay. I am very grateful
and humbled by the confidence that President Obama and Secretary
Clinton have shown in me by this nomination. This nomination is a great
honor for me and I look forward to another opportunity to serve my
country, if confirmed.
With the chairman's permission, I wish to recognize my family,
friends, mentors and colleagues that have supported me over the years--
many of them are here today, many from New York City. It is only with
their steady support that I am here, seeking the U.S. Senate's
confirmation and I wish to sincerely thank them for their generous
guidance and support.
The relationship between the United States and Uruguay is strong.
We share important values, including a commitment to democracy, rule of
law, sound economic policies, strong labor rights, environmental
protection, investment in people, the desire to see the peaceful
resolution of disputes between nations, and a commitment to the
multilateral system. If confirmed, I look forward to continuing the
productive dialogue between our two countries and will work diligently
to advance these goals.
Uruguay is a constructive partner which plays an important role in
promoting regional stability and democracy. The country is also a
partner in conflict resolution, contributing to peacekeeping missions
worldwide. Uruguay remains one of the top troop and police contributors
per capita to U.N. peacekeeping overall. We welcome their contributions
to improving security in Haiti as well as in other difficult locations
throughout the world.
If confirmed, I look forward to working with President Mujica,
Foreign Minister Almagro, the Uruguayan Government, civil society, and
the private sector as we advance bilateral relations and strengthen the
political, commercial, and cultural ties between our two countries.
If confirmed, I would give the highest priority to ensuring the
well-being and safety of U.S. citizens who live and travel in Uruguay.
I would seek opportunities for enhanced trade between the United States
and Uruguay, and promote U.S. exports to Uruguay. I would advocate for
further cooperation under our Science and Technology Agreement as well
as our Trade and Investment Framework Agreement. U.S. exports to
Uruguay have steadily increased over the years to $973 million in 2010,
up 30 percent from 2009, and we enjoyed a $738 million goods trade
surplus with Uruguay. There are approximately 100 U.S. companies
operating in Uruguay at this time. If confirmed, I will work vigorously
to promote U.S. businesses and believe we can continue to find new
opportunities for increased trade between the two countries and I will
encourage programs that improve inclusive economic growth as well as
promote public-private partnerships.
To build greater mutual understanding through direct contact
between Uruguayans and Americans, I will work to establish more
partnerships between colleges and universities in Uruguay and the
United States.
My work in the Department of State has offered me significant
insights into the vital partnerships that exist between the branches of
government and, if confirmed, I will work diligently to further develop
these partnerships. If I am confirmed as Ambassador, I look forward to
working with you, your distinguished colleagues, and your staff to
advance our priorities with the Oriental Republic of Uruguay.
Thank you again for the opportunity to appear today. I welcome any
questions you may have.
Senator Menendez. Thank you very much.
This is a record. All of you had extra time.
My congratulations and those of the committee to Ambassador
Palmer and Mr. Farrar on being granddads, either again or for
the first time.
We'll do 7-minute rounds. I have a lot of questions here,
so we'll see how far we can get.
Let me start with Ambassador Powers. I'd like to know what
you make of the fiasco of election day in Nicaragua. The Carter
Center had to send a study mission to watch the elections
because the Nicaraguan Government's regulations didn't adhere
to the Declaration of Principles for the International
Observation of Elections. The EU and OAS observers were not
permitted to enter into some polling places until after the
voting had started, and so could not observe the ballot boxes
that were brought in. Domestic experience observer groups were
denied credentials to enter polling places even though they had
followed all of the regulations.
I appreciate Secretary Clinton's statement in January
noting that the elections were not conducted in a transparent
and impartial manner and that the entire electoral process was
marred by significant irregularities. I have two of the
examples of actual certified results in a couple of districts
in Nicaragua, and it's pretty amazing. The fraud is so
transparent.
On these official ``actua scrutinia,'' which is basically
the election result sheet certified by the election members, it
says the total number of ballots received, 400. That's the
maximum number of votes that could be cast there. And yet when
you look at the certification of results, in one of these
election districts the total number of votes was in excess of
900 when there were only 400 ballots.
In another one, there is a certification of three election
districts in which again the total number of ballots received
by the election board was 400. And yet when you add up the
number of votes received by individual parties, they add up to
2,000, when 400 were the number of ballots received.
So it's pretty obvious that the type of fraud that has been
alleged is pretty clear when you take the election results and
you see that 400 ballots were given, and yet there is in one
district 900 ballots, 900 votes cast when there are only 400
ballots, and 2,000 votes cast when there are only 400 ballots.
Something is fundamentally wrong.
So the question, Ambassador, is now what? What do we do
now? And as the nominee to go to Nicaragua, how will you work
with a government that obviously did not win through a
transparent and open process?
Ambassador Powers. Thank you, Senator, for that question.
Now what? Now we utilize the report that the OAS just completed
and published at the end of January and the recommendations
they made to work with our partners in the Americas and
elsewhere to assess fully any initiative and all initiatives
that we can utilize to help reinforce democratic institutions
and ensure that recommendations made by the OAS are enacted by
the Nicaraguan Government to ensure that future elections do
not suffer from similar irregularities and a lack of
transparency so that the Nicaraguan people can have their
rights restored to vote in a free and transparent process and
have leaders that they have selected that will be accountable
to them.
How do we work with the government? We work with the
government at all levels, but we also work with civil society
and the Nicaraguan people to ensure that they understand that
the United States stands with them as they seek to move forward
to rebuild democratic institutions and to protect their rights
as citizens of Nicaragua. This will mean being out there, doing
outreach, making sure that they understand and have someone out
there, me if I'm confirmed, and the mission, to ensure that
they understand that they've got people supporting them and
will be working with them to ensure democracy and human rights
are protected.
Senator Menendez. Well, I appreciate that. I know you
started off by using the OAS report. I have a problem with the
OAS report. First of all, the OAS Secretary General called
Ortega to congratulate him on the successful peaceful elections
on the evening of
November 6, which is pretty amazing to me. Then the very
essence of the legality of the election, Ortega running for a
third term, is not even spoken about. And I don't get the sense
that the OAS report even considers whether the election itself
was valid.
So I worry about that, and I look at the German
Government's announcement that it was cutting aid to Nicaragua
due to the EU's concerns about irregularities in that
Presidential election. Is the United States reevaluating the
aid it provides to Nicaragua in light of a sham election that
took place? Should it?
Ambassador Powers. Thank you, Senator. Yes. The United
States is in a very vigorous process of reviewing financial
assistance to Nicaragua, most of which goes to nongovernmental
organizations, not to the government. We are also aggressively
scrutinizing all loan projects with the international financial
institutions to make sure that any loans that are being
considered meet the highest standards of the institutions, and
that they will have a direct impact on development for the
people of Nicaragua.
Senator Menendez. I appreciate you mentioning the
international institutions because I want to direct your
attention to the IDB, the Inter-American Development Bank,
lending to the Nicaraguan Government, much of it in the form of
what we call quick disbursing loans.
For example, on October the 28, less than 2 weeks before
the election, the IDB granted Ortega a $45 million quick
disbursing loan, ``to improve social protection and health
spending management.'' Two weeks before the election, $45
million. I cannot believe that the United States, sitting on
the IDB board, permitted such a loan to occur 2 weeks before
the election, that we would provide an enormous infusion of
money to the entity running in an undemocratic election and
fuel the possibility to help them out 2 weeks before the
election. It's amazing to me.
So given the fact that we just plussed up the IDB's capital
account and are looking to do the same again this year, I hope
that part of your charge, should you be confirmed, would be to
provide input to the State Department about flows of money
coming from, in large part, U.S. taxpayers to an entity that
certainly many of us on this committee believe is undemocratic.
Senator Rubio.
Senator Rubio. I would defer to Senator Lugar if he has any
questions first.
Senator Menendez. Senator Lugar.
Senator Lugar. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. Reynoso, the trade that we have enjoyed with Uruguay,
as you pointed out, has been very substantial. Long ago I
suggested, along with many others, a free trade agreement
between the United States and Uruguay. This administration has
not shown interest in negotiating a free trade agreement. With
that in mind, perhaps implementing a limited trade preference
arrangement as a standby mechanism is in order until interest
magnifies.
Given that you have analyzed this in your various roles,
could you tell us why we have not pursued a free trade
agreement to begin with, and if there is any value in having a
preference agreement? What suggestions do you have as to how we
are going to accelerate trade with Uruguay? While you have
already pointed out that such trade is substantial, in my
opinion it could be significantly increased given the nature of
Uruguay's economy and the instincts of the people there.
Ms. Reynoso. Thank you, Senator, for the question. As you
noted, our trade with Uruguay is substantial. It's complex.
It's elaborate. It ranges from agriculture to energy to
infrastructure. We do have a Trade Investment Framework
Agreement in place with Uruguay that we use in a very robust
and, I believe, an effective way. We meet regularly with our
Uruguayan counterparts, and we have many matters in terms of
commercial interests on the table to pursue to allow for even
greater opportunity to come from that agreement.
As you also noted, there was talk in the past of a free
trade agreement with Uruguay. My understanding is that that is
no longer on the table, and I think both parties chose not to
pursue it for domestic reasons.
Should I be confirmed, Senator, I do look forward to
working within the context and the framework of the current
TIFA, of the current Trade and Investment Framework Agreement,
to expand its impact in terms of the opportunities for U.S.
businesses and U.S. trade, but also consult at the highest
level within the Uruguayan Government, and obviously consult
with the highest levels in this government, to assess whether
there is any interest in pursuing, in a firm and serious way, a
trade agreement with Uruguay.
Senator Lugar. Are there protectionist sentiments in
Uruguay? You mentioned that the free trade agreement has not
progressed because of reticence on both sides. Sometimes that's
occurred on our side. But is that the case in Uruguay?
Ms. Reynoso. Well, Senator, my understanding is that there
were reservations in Uruguay. I can't tell you the particulars
of who, how, but I do understand that there were some domestic
concerns as to why a trade agreement, at the time that it was
being considered, was not opportune.
Senator Lugar. I appreciate your mention in your testimony
of the potential for more college student exchanges between the
countries. How many Uruguayan students come to the United
States now? Do you have any idea?
Ms. Reynoso. I would imagine, and I can get back to you
with real numbers, Senator, but I would imagine in the
thousands, tens of thousands, I would imagine.
[The requested information follows:]
Approximately 18,000 Uruguayans were approved for travel to the
United States last year. Tens of thousands more already possess visas.
Of those travelers, approximately 400 Uruguayan students and scholars
pursued academic endeavors in the United States last year. The
Department of State is committed to promoting education, professional,
and cultural exchange. Embassy Montevideo expects student numbers to
increase in coming years. As I mentioned in my testimony, if confirmed,
I look forward to working to expand these numbers, and to be supportive
of President Obama's 100,000 Strong initiative.
Senator Lugar. I see. So already there is quite a bit of--
--
Ms. Reynoso. There is quite a bit of back and forth in
terms of exchange. Yes, Senator.
Senator Lugar. Mr. Farrar, recently an article was written
by Andres Oppenheimer in the Miami Herald, January 18, and I
cite his name because he suggested, in fact, that Panama has
been a Latin American star, with a 6.8-percent economic growth
rate and the other statistics that you mentioned. However, at
the same time, he states that the education system of Panama,
which might support this competitive aspect, is very deficient,
and there appears to be very little movement on the part of the
government to improve that.
Likewise, he notes that Panamanian growth is largely
fostered by the Canal and projects and enterprises that are
associated with that. Economic growth there may not be as
strong as it could be given, perhaps, the lack of education or
preparation.
What is your judgment about that situation, and in what
ways could the United States be helpful during your
ambassadorship there?
Mr. Farrar. Thank you very much, Senator, for the question.
The Panamanian economy, as you mentioned, has shown incredible
growth over the past 5 or 6 years. Much of it has been fueled
by investment not only in the Canal but in other major
infrastructure projects.
Panama is seeking to create what it calls a ``City of
Knowledge'' in Panama City to attract educational institutions
to try and improve the educational system. They recognize some
of the deficiencies there, and their deficiencies have been
noted not only by Mr. Oppenheimer but also by the World
Economic Forum and others as truly holding back even further
economic progress.
If confirmed, Senator, I would love to explore the
opportunities for more engagement in the educational exchange
between the United States and Panama. I would note that the
Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute has been in Panama for
more than 60 years and it's a leading institution for
scientific investigation in the world. And I had the
opportunity to visit the institution here in Washington last
week and heard some amazing things regarding their operations
there and their plans moving forward.
Thank you.
Senator Lugar. Well, I thank you for that testimony.
Obviously, the rate of growth is astounding and important. The
need for our country to work with the Panamanians to sustain
this and improve it is obviously of value. But I thank you for
your testimony.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Menendez. Thank you, Senator Lugar.
Senator Rubio.
Senator Rubio. Thank you very much. First, let me just
begin with Ms. Reynoso. I think this applies to all the folks
here, but
just reviewing your resume, it's pretty impressive. What are
you
doing in government is my biggest question. Congratulations to
you. I know your family is here, and they should be very proud
of your accomplishments, and I look forward to supporting your
nomination.
I do have a question about organized crime in Uruguay. I'm
reading an article here from the Christian Science Monitor
dated the 26th of January, and it talks about how traditionally
Uruguay has been one of the safest countries in Latin America,
but there's this increasing battle going on between different
drug trafficking organizations, and the fear that some of this
violence is spreading in that country.
What are your thoughts about it in the short term? What can
we be doing? What kind of assistance can we be providing?
What's the general mindset in regards to how serious a problem
it is and what we can be doing to head it off before it rises
to the level of some of the other countries in the region?
Ms. Reynoso. Thank you, Senator. As you noted, there is a
sense of that there is an increase in insecurity in Uruguay.
The population itself has taken notice, and the Government of
Uruguay has also taken notice. We have a very robust and
productive working relationship with the Uruguayan Government
with respect to security. Our law enforcement agencies are very
much working closely with them, and obviously at this point
we're looking at possibilities of working even more closely
because, as you noted, the risk and the insecurity, and we
understand that there is an increase in certain types of
organized crime.
Our Office of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement
under Ambassador Brownfield has been working with counterparts
in Uruguay to provide support in terms of assessing risks,
especially around issues of illicit trafficking and organized
crime. So there is already a dialogue with the Uruguayans in
this regard. We have very good cooperation with them in terms
of law enforcement.
But I think, as an initial matter, we're trying to assess,
working with them, what the problem is, so we can get a better
idea of how we can work with them to tackle it.
Thank you.
Senator Rubio. Thank you. And as we move forward in your
assignment there, my opinion is it ought to be one of our
priorities, because one of the things that could really slow up
the miracle that's happening there and that kind of economic
growth is if they have to divert resources to fighting off--
we've seen the horrible impact that that's had on these other
countries.
Ambassador Palmer, welcome. Thank you again for your
service to our country. First of all, I'm very pleased that you
mentioned PEPFAR, which is a phenomenal program that our
country pursues around the world, and certainly in the
Caribbean as well. I'm pleased to see as well that you
mentioned in your opening statement the challenges that women
face, particularly when it comes to domestic violence and the
lack of opportunities, and I'm glad that that's something
you'll focus on.
The one thing I didn't hear you mention and I am concerned
about is some of these nations' association with a Bolivarian
Alliance for the Peoples of Our America, or what's known as
ALBA, which quite frankly is, in my opinion an anti-American
platform. More importantly, this is an alliance to which,
according to a recent press report ``Dominica, St. Vincent, the
Grenadines, Antigua and Barbuda are members, and St. Lucia has
applied for formal inclusion.'' These are some of the things
the group said when they met this past weekend.
No. 1, they came out in support of the Syrian Government in
the midst of a bloodbath that government is carrying out in
that country. No. 2, they blasted England's so-called
imperialist intentions against Argentina over the Falkland
Islands.
Given our Nation's close relations with these countries,
what the United States means for them, what our relationship
with them means, why are these countries participating in this
anti-American bloc? Why are they involved in this, and isn't
there some point where we take a stand and say, you know,
you've got to make choices about who you want to be aligned
with and who you want to be associated with? Why would any
nations want to be associated with such ridiculous things as
statements of support for the Syrian Government, which just
happened this weekend, on the 5th of February, in the midst of
what we're watching happening over there, which is a bloodbath?
Ambassador Palmer. Thank you very much, Mr. Senator. As you
mentioned, of the countries in the region, Barbados plus six,
three of them, Antigua and Barbuda, Dominica and St. Vincent
and the Grenadines are members of ALBA. There's much
speculation as to why, but many of those countries are
signatories to the Petro Caribe agreement in which they receive
oil and produce at reduced rates and with long-term periods to
repay it at reduced interest.
However, upon close examination, all of those countries are
stable democracies. They share our values of free markets. They
believe in free press. They believe in free speech. They have
respect for human rights and respect for the rule of law. They
stand by us in votes with our multilateral organizations, and
we engage very, very comprehensively in those countries.
For example, in the region, we have the Caribbean Basin
Security Initiative in which we help them fight illegal drug
trafficking and promote social justice. We engage with their
police. We help them fight corruption. We help them protect
their borders and their maritime waters.
I think all of this engagement by far out-shines any other
type of influence that they may get from ALBA governments and
ALBA philosophy.
Senator Rubio. So, without putting words in your mouth,
basically in exchange for cheap oil, they're willing to stand
by and support things like the Syrian Government's shelling and
killing of civilians, as it occurred last weekend and normal
countries around the world said it is an outrage. But in
exchange for cheap oil, these countries are willing to sit
around and listen to people like Hugo Chavez and Daniel Ortega
say some of the most ridiculous things that one could imagine.
I think it's concerning, obviously, but I think you've
outlined some of the other realities. But it was important to
get to that because I still don't understand why they would
want to be a part of a block of nations like this, but I think
you shed some light on it.
Ambassador Palmer. I think that brings up the importance of
our people-to-people programs, because we do have people-to-
people programs that work with the NGOs, who proliferate our
philosophies in terms of basic freedoms and democracy. And if
confirmed, I will work diligently to support these programs and
advance their causes.
Senator Menendez. We thank you.
I have some more questions, so we'll see if there are other
members as well.
Let me go back to you, Ambassador Powers. One final
question, but I think it's an important one. In July of this
year, under section 527 of the Foreign Relations Authorization
Act, Secretary Clinton will have to decide whether to grant
Nicaragua a waiver for failure to compensate U.S. citizens for
properties that were confiscated by the Sandinistas during the
1980s. And while there has been some progress made, there are
many cases where this compensation has not been granted.
If the Secretary fails to grant the waiver, is it your
understanding that the United States would be obliged to vote
against the loans and grants to Nicaragua at the IDB World Bank
and IMF?
Ambassador Powers. Senator, yes. It's my understanding that
there are consequences if the waiver is not granted based on
the Article 527 resolution. I can tell you that we are working
very hard on these property rights issues. There's a full-time
team at the Embassy, and if confirmed, it will be one of my
priorities under my responsibility to protect U.S. citizens and
their rights to ensure that all tools are used to move this
forward, resolve these cases in accordance with the statute,
just as I have worked to help resolve issues revolving around
land investment in Panama.
Senator Menendez. I appreciate that. Assuming your
confirmation takes place speedily and you get to Nicaragua, can
I ask you to commit to the committee that this will be one of
the first things that you'll look at, since a July decision
will be pending and I'd like to have a sense of how much
progress has been made and whether the Secretary should, in
fact, not grant the waiver?
Ambassador Powers. Clearly, Senator, yes. Given that these
are rights for U.S. citizens, it will be one of the first
things on my list to address at the highest levels of the
Nicaraguan Government to ensure we can get some progress on
this issue.
Senator Menendez. Thank you very much.
Ambassador Powers. If confirmed.
Senator Menendez. I have a sense it's going to happen, so
that's why I'm working prospectively.
Mr. Farrar, do you share the concerns of some civil society
groups that judicial independence in Panama has deteriorated
under the Martinelli government? In particular, President
Martinelli has introduced a bill in the Congress that would
create a fifth court. If approved, the new court would have
three new justices, all appointed by him, and would deal with
constitutional issues, one of them being the constitutionality
of presidential term limits.
What's your view of that?
Mr. Farrar. Thank you very much, Senator. First of all, let
me just say that the United States strongly supports the
principles of judicial independence and separation of powers,
and those principles are enshrined in article 3 of the Inter-
American Democratic Charter.
Our human rights report on Panama also points up to this
issue of judicial independence in Panama. And as you mentioned,
it's an item under vigorous public debate in Panama right now.
Part of this debate includes a package of recommendations
for constitutional reforms, some of which may, depending upon
how the debate goes, result in strengthening judicial
independence. I think looking forward, this is something that
the Embassy has been following very closely. It's of critical
importance to us. If confirmed, I would certainly continue to
follow that and would be prepared to speak out as needed to
defend the principles that I mentioned at the beginning of my
response.
Thank you.
Senator Menendez. Thank you.
Ms. Reynoso, President Mujica is a little over a year-and-
a-half into his term. How well do you think his administration
has worked with the United States compared to his predecessor,
President Vasquez?
Ms. Reynoso. Thank you, Senator. We have a very good
working relationship with the Uruguayan Government. We had a
very good relationship with President Vasquez. President Mujica
shares a similar vision of Uruguay and a similar vision of our
relationship with Uruguay. The principles of democracy, of
conflict resolution, of economic stability and social inclusion
continue under this administration, as they did under President
Vasquez.
So I believe, if confirmed, the engagement with the
Uruguayan authorities and President Mujica himself will be as
productive and as effective as we had under President Vasquez.
Senator Menendez. And finally, Ambassador Palmer, part of
our subcommittee's jurisdiction in the Western Hemisphere is
also global narcotics, and we have seen the use of the
Caribbean as a transshipment point for illegal drugs from Latin
America to the United States. And while it has diminished over
the past decade as we've seen that route go to Mexico and
Central America, we have seen a resurgence of trafficking
through the Caribbean region.
How will you deal and engage with the countries that you're
going to be our Ambassador to on this issue?
Ambassador Palmer. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. As
you mentioned, there has been an apparent resurgence in that,
and to combat this, the Department has established a
partnership with the countries in the Eastern Caribbean called
the Caribbean Basin Security Initiative. It is an initiative
that grew out of the 2009 Summit of the Americas.
As a part of this initiative, we work with each--it's a
regional plan, and we have individual plans with all of these
countries. For example--and, of course, the goal is to stem
illegal trafficking, promote social justice, and to increase
citizens' safety. As a part of this, for example, this year six
countries in the Eastern Caribbean will receive interdiction
boats to protect their maritime borders. In addition to that,
we work with their police. We train their police. We equip the
police with the things that they need to make arrests. We also
work with the judges and the prosecutors. We work with
financial intelligence units so not only can the police arrest
them, but they can be prosecuted, to look not only at drugs but
also money laundering.
But as part of this, we want to invest in the future. And
so we take a look at the youth, and as a part of the Caribbean
Basin Security Initiative we have set up youth rehabilitation
academies. We just had 216 Caribbean youth graduate from the
first part of these.
We engage the resources of our Department of Health, DHS.
They come in and they expand their activities in their ports,
the airports. We have set up a net, a security net in which
each country shares intelligence about drug trafficking with
and between. And as well, we work with the regional security
section that sets up an air wing that does aerial surveillance.
All of these things relieve some of the burden on our own
assets, for the Coast Guard, for example, in the region, and
we've seen progress toward reducing some of this drug traffic.
Senator Menendez. Thank you very much.
Let me take the prerogative of the Chair for a moment just
to recognize that our distinguished colleague from the House,
Congressman Serrano, has come to be supportive of Ms. Reynoso.
We appreciate his presence. We appreciate his support, for the
record, of Ms. Reynoso to be the Ambassador to Uruguay, and we
thank you for joining us.
Do any of my other colleagues have any further questions?
Senator Lugar.
Senator Lugar. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I would like to raise a broader question about which any of
you might have a comment. About 30 years ago, a little bit less
than that, this committee was seized with the excitement of
events taking place in countries located mostly in Central
America. El Salvador, Guatemala, Nicaragua, and Honduras were
all nations that some of us went to in order to serve as
election observers or help set up ballot paper and all the
rudiments for elections. It was an exciting period in which our
government obviously was heavily involved, deeply interested in
the evolution of democracy in the Caribbean and then in South
America, and often it was pointed out during this period of
time that every country in our hemisphere became a democracy
with the exception of Cuba.
But that was then. The excitement has subsided. We've been
involved, unfortunately, in military action in the Middle East,
and deeply involved with the states of the former Soviet Union.
I'm just wondering, as each one of you is deeply involved
in the developments in the region, has there been a feeling of
being let down among those countries with which we previously
had this intense interest? In a related matter, how should we
enhance our own communication with the people of the region?
Should it be through our broadcasting or social media programs?
Is tourism stronger in the midst of all of this, quite apart
from political developments or things we discuss in this
committee?
Ms. Powers, do you have a thought about any of this?
Ambassador Powers. Thank you, Senator. Yes, I do. Speaking
about what I've learned about Nicaragua, Nicaraguan people have
a very positive view of the United States, much because of the
types of assistance that we have provided over the years under
three pillars: one, fighting malnutrition and poverty; two,
working to increase and improve good governance in the country;
and three, working with the Nicaraguan Government on security
and counternarcotics issues. Recent polls have shown that the
Nicaraguan people are very pleased and have a very positive
view of the United States in spite of a difficult bilateral
relationship.
In my experience in other countries, what the United States
puts forward in assistance and support resonates well with the
people, even if it doesn't always resonate well with the
governments.
Thank you.
Senator Lugar. Ambassador Palmer, do you have a reflection?
Ambassador Palmer. Thank you, Mr. Senator. I agree with
Ambassador Powers very much. It is our actions with the people
that have been very, very effective.
Senator Rubio, you mentioned my comments in terms of
PEPFAR. For example, HIV/AIDS in the Eastern Caribbean, the
prevalence is very high, second only to sub-Saharan Africa. But
we have six of our agencies engaging in the PEPFAR program
there, USAID, DOD, CDC, our Peace Corps. We are engaging in
that. Peace Corps, for example, with 115 Volunteers, are
involved in youth education and programs to prepare youth, to
provide opportunities for jobs. We help them, as I mentioned
before, with citizen safety.
All of these programs ring very well with the citizens, and
as a result the citizens of the Eastern Caribbean have a very
positive view of the United States.
In addition, we engage the diaspora. We have a number of
citizens here in the United States, and they all help to push
these things forward.
So as Ambassador Powers mentioned, our programs ring well
with the people and with most governments.
Senator Lugar. Mr. Farrar, do you have a thought?
Mr. Farrar. Yes. Thank you, Senator. I would say that
there's an excitement in United States-Panama relations today.
The excitement you mentioned 30 years ago continues. There's
excitement over implementing the trade promotion agreement, to
bring free trade between our two countries. There's an
excitement over the expansion of the Panama Canal, an expansion
which is also sparking investment in the United States, in U.S.
ports that are getting ready to handle the ships that will
transit the Canal beginning in late 2014.
I read a recent poll which showed that there is tremendous
good will in Panama toward the United States. There's
tremendous interest in Panama toward greater cooperation with
the United States in the area of counternarcotics and security
cooperation; and interestingly, a lack of knowledge about what
we're doing already. So I think we can do more to get the word
out. But there is a tremendous excitement still.
Thank you.
Senator Lugar. Ms. Reynoso.
Ms. Reynoso. Thank you, Senator. Uruguay is a model of
democracy in the region. It did, as did many other countries in
South America, undergo a transformation in the 1980s.
With respect to Central America in particular, I can say
that democracy is a work in progress. We have seen some
victories. We have seen some things go well. We have also seen
some things
that have not gone well at all, as we stated with the
Nicaraguan elections.
The good news is that I have seen, based on my experience
over the last 2 years, that the Nicaraguan people and the
Central American people generally understand the basic
principles of democracy and want it, and are looking for ways
to make it part of their daily routine, and are angered. They
have voiced anger to us. They voice their anger through their
votes. They voice their anger through civic engagement.
We have to create and help them create methods of
accountability that allow their institutions to surpass any
type of dramatic institutional deterioration, as has happened
in Nicaragua. That is hopefully something that the United
States and our partners in the region, a country like Uruguay,
can help the Central Americans and the countries in the
Caribbean and other countries that require support to be able
to move forward in that direction.
Senator Lugar. I thank each one of you for your comments.
Thank you for your previous service. I look forward to
supporting each of your nominations and wish you every success.
Senator Menendez. Thank you, Senator Lugar.
Senator Rubio.
Senator Rubio. Thank you, and I'll be brief. Thank you all
again for being here today.
Just two quick observations I wanted to make for the record
on both Nicaragua and Panama. My sense of talking to people
both in Nicaragua that have visited us and people living here
in the United States of Nicaraguan descent is that while
generally the population is grateful for some of the money that
Venezuela has poured into that country, they're concerned about
it too. Obviously, there's real concern that it's not
sustainable, and rightfully so. And the second is some of the
price they've had to pay in exchange for this support.
Obviously, we've seen how the elections have been undermined
and all the institutions that are critical to a democracy have
come under attack.
But then there's some of the associations that Mr. Ortega
has made around the world. Just as he took the oath of office a
few weeks ago, he was flanked on stage by both Mr. Chavez and
Ahmadinejad, and he pilloried the U.S. occupation, as he termed
it, of Iraq and Afghanistan. He lamented the death of former
Libyan leader Moammar Qadhafi, and he paid respects to former
Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein.
This is embarrassing to the Nicaraguan people, who are
rightfully concerned, but they're also embarrassed by the image
of their country. By the way, I saw polling that President
Obama is more popular than Mr. Ortega is in Nicaragua. So I
think that goes to some of the comments that were made earlier
about the views of the United States.
But Iran is more than just an irritant, and this
relationship with Iran is more than just an irritant. This is a
country that uses asymmetrical attacks, things like terrorism,
as a foreign policy tool. We saw that very recently with the
allegations, the uncovering of a plot to assassinate the Saudi
Ambassador to the United States.
I just hope that the administration, and it would be
through you, is going to make it very clear to Mr. Ortega that
if he wants to say these sorts of things that embarrass him
with his own people, that's one thing, but there are some
bright redlines that he should not be crossing, or that any
nation in the Western Hemisphere should not be crossing, when
it comes to the relationship with Iran. There are things that,
for the security of this Nation, we will not tolerate in terms
of an Iranian presence in this hemisphere, and I think it's
important that that message be made very clear. I hope in your
role that you'll encourage the State Department and the
administration to move in that direction.
As far as Panama is concerned, Mr. Farrar, as you know in
your previous nomination, I've had some disagreements about the
approach that you took in your previous role in the Interests
Section in Cuba. That being said, you're now going to Panama, a
country that for most of us is seen as a place with a stable
democracy and real economic promise. But there are some
troubling signs emerging from Panama.
As was outlined earlier by Senator Lugar, in a recent
article by Mr. Oppenheimer, who is a well-informed observer of
the Western Hemisphere, he talked about a growing concern over
Mr. Martinelli's strong-arm ruling style. Mr. Oppenheimer says
that President Martinelly already controls the National
Assembly and the Supreme Court. His critics say that he could
move to control the electoral tribunal, the independent agency
that oversees the Panama Canal, and he may even seek to reelect
himself despite a constitutional ban on reelection.
It's hard for people to give up power. Sometimes when these
guys or gals get there, they don't want to let go of it. I
think we take that for granted in this country. Sometimes after
8 years, our Presidents aren't ready to leave, but they have
to. In some of these countries, they figure out a way to get
around it. I hope that in your new role, if, in fact, he takes
this country in that direction--and we hope they don't--you
will be a strong voice on the side of democratic and
independent institutions. I don't care how good the economy is;
I don't care how great our relationships are on other issues.
We cannot stand by and watch one more nation join the ranks of
countries where their leadership are deliberately undermining
the institutions of democracy and while we do nothing about it.
So I hope in this role, when you get there, that you will
pledge to be a strong voice to condemn any move in this
direction.
Thank you.
Senator Menendez. Thank you, Senator.
I think you all have a sense of where we're at on these
issues. I appreciate your testimony and answers here today. I
look forward to supporting all four of you in your nomination
when it comes before the full committee.
I will rectify a previous statement I made. Instead of
keeping the record open until Friday, we will keep the record
open for QFRs for 24 hours. This will give us the best chance
of having all of your nominations before the next business
meeting, which will take place on, of all days, Valentine's
Day. [Laughter.]
So with that, and with no other business to come before the
committee, this hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:20 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
----------
Additional Questions and Answers Submitted for the Record
Responses of Julissa Reynoso to Questions Submitted by
Senator Richard G. Lugar
Question #1. Please explain what relevant experience you have had
to prepare you to represent the United States of America as Ambassador
to Uruguay. What interaction have you had with Uruguay in an official
U.S. Government capacity?
Answer. Both my professional career and my education have prepared
me to represent the United States as Ambassador. As the Deputy
Assistant Secretary of State for Central America and the Caribbean in
the Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs since November 2009, I have
worked diligently to advance U.S. priorities within the region and, if
confirmed, I welcome the opportunity to utilize this experience as
Ambassador to Uruguay.
Additionally, my education, which includes a substantial
international component, has also prepared me for this opportunity. I
have a B.A. in Government from Harvard University, a Masters in
Philosophy from the University of Cambridge in the United Kingdom, and
a J.D. from Columbia University School of Law. Prior to working at the
State Department, I practiced law at the international law firm of
Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP in New York, focusing on international
arbitration and antitrust law and was a fellow at New York University
School of Law and Columbia Law School.
In my official capacity as Deputy Assistant Secretary, I have
worked with the Government of Uruguay on vital issues in the context of
the Haiti Group of Friends, as Uruguay is currently the Chair, as well
as with MINUSTAH. Uruguay is a leading partner in U.N. peacekeeping
and, if confirmed, I look forward to continuing the important dialogue
and cooperation with the Government of Uruguay.
Question #2. Despite Uruguay's small size and geographic location,
U.S. initiatives to expand diplomatic and commercial ties with Uruguay,
could afford an opportunity for the United States to constructively and
strategically, extend its influence in the Southern Cone, a subregion
historically given less attention by U.S. foreign policymakers compared
to other areas of Latin America. Please explain your views regarding
the importance of countries of the Southern Cone for United States
foreign policy objectives in South America. Please explain Uruguay's
importance for United States foreign policy objectives in the Southern
Cone.
Answer. The countries of the Southern Cone are critically important
for U.S. foreign policy objectives in the hemisphere precisely because
these countries include some of Latin America's oldest, strongest, and
most successful democracies. The United States principal strategic
goals in the region are supporting citizen security, strong
institutions, and democratic governance. Healthy and successful
Southern Cone democracies that respect rights, enforce rule of law, and
sustain growing economies that welcome foreign investment serve as an
important example for the entire region. Uruguay, in particular, is a
model, high-functioning democracy in the Southern Cone, and, as such,
is an important partner in advancing shared policy objectives. I am
committed to continuing, and expanding, as appropriate, the range of
programs whereby the United States supports citizen security, strong
institutions, and democratic governance in Uruguay.
Question #3. The Vazquez administration sought to reduce its
reliance on Argentina and Brazil by strengthening ties with the United
States. Since taking office, the Mujica administration has shifted the
emphasis of Uruguay's foreign policy, prioritizing improved relations
with Uruguay's neighbors and further diversification of global trade.
Please explain how you would encourage President Mujica to redirect
Uruguay's foreign policy back to making the strengthening of ties with
the United States a priority. If confirmed, what specific proposals
(commercial and political) would you offer to persuade President Mujica
that closer ties with the United States are in Uruguay's national
interest?
Answer. While it is true that President Mujica has placed more
emphasis than his predecessor on what he has called Uruguay's
``integration in its region,'' it is also worth noting that President
Mujica's efforts to diversify Uruguay's trade relations are opening new
avenues for commercial and investment ties to the United States. Among
my top priorities as Ambassador, if confirmed, will be reviewing
outstanding issues in agricultural trade between the United States and
Uruguay with a view to enabling freer--and more mutually advantageous--
trade between our two countries. Again if confirmed, it is my intention
to personally engage with and support U.S. firms interested in doing
business in Uruguay. In addition, President Mujica's focus on education
reform in Uruguay and his expressed desire for more scientific and
technical exchange with the United States will be an ever more
important source of ties between Uruguayan and American institutions
and individuals, as we strive to achieve President Obama's 100,000
Strong in the Americas goal. Our cooperation programs with Uruguay's
Armed Forces--building their multilateral peacekeeping, emergency
response and border patrol capabilities--will also build closer ties
with the United States, and can advance shared objectives.
Question #4. Uruguayan Government officials concede that Uruguay
has a problematic historical, and most recently, commercial
relationship with Argentina, particularly in the wake of disagreements
such as the dispute over the construction in Uruguay of a cellulose
pulp mill near the Uruguayan border with Argentina. Have Uruguay's
problems with Argentina weakened Uruguay's relations with MERCOSUR? If
confirmed, please explain how you will work with U.S investors to
develop lucrative commercial initiatives that could also help make up
for Uruguay's commercial losses as a result of its difficulties with
Argentina?
Answer. In spite of numerous commercial and bilateral challenges in
the Uruguay-Argentina relationship, the Government of Uruguay remains
solidly committed to MERCOSUR. It appears that the Uruguayan Government
has determined to seek to resolve commercial differences by appealing
to MERCOSUR solidarity, and by taking advantage of the strong
relationship between President Mujica and his fellow MERCOSUR
Presidents.
Our Embassy in Montevideo is working closely with the U.S. business
community to advocate for greater opportunities in the logistics,
information technology, agriculture, energy, security, and
infrastructure/construction sectors, among others. We have seen
enthusiastic responses to our commercial initiatives, and we are
confident that U.S. investment and exports will continue to increase in
Uruguay as the local economy expands. The Embassy is also pursuing
opportunities for U.S. firms through innovative public-private
partnerships in Uruguay, a new mechanism that has opened public works
and infrastructure projects to private sector participation.
Question #5. Would you characterize Uruguay's political
relationship with Brazil as closer than Uruguay's relationship with the
United States? Would you characterize Uruguay's commercial relationship
with Brazil as being closer than Uruguay's commercial relationship with
the United States?
Answer. Uruguay's foreign policy and political relations with
Brazil are strong. President Mujica personally invests time and effort
in his relationship with President Rousseff, and he also maintains a
productive and close friendship with former President Lula. Geography,
joint membership in MERCOSUR and UNASUR, and economic relations in the
context of the dynamic success of the Brazilian economy, are all
important factors in the strong relationship between Uruguay and
Brazil.
Brazil is Uruguay's largest export market (approximately $1.6
billion in 2011), and Brazilian exports account for the largest share
of total imports from any country (just over $1.9 billion). The United
States was Uruguay's fourth-largest supplier of goods in 2011, with
$734 million, while Uruguay exported roughly $245 million to the United
States last year. United States-Uruguayan economic ties remain robust,
and if confirmed, I will work diligently with American companies to
find expanded markets for American products and services.
Question #6. Would you characterize Uruguay's commercial
relationship with China as being closer than Uruguay's commercial
relationship with the United States?
Answer. China has become an increasingly important trading and
investment partner for Uruguay, as it has for many countries in the
Americas, including the United States. Chinese foreign direct
investment in Uruguay is centered on auto manufacturing and port
development, while Chinese exports are found across a range of sectors
in Uruguay. China is an important purchaser of Uruguayan soy and beef,
as well as other commodities that transit through free trade zones.
In 2011, China was the third-largest exporter to Uruguay (roughly
$1.4 billion), while Uruguayan exporters supplied $664 million in goods
to China--the second-largest export destination after Brazil. The
United States stood as the fourth-largest exporter to Uruguay in 2011
with $734 million, compared with $245 million in Uruguayan goods
exported to the United States. United States-Uruguayan economic ties
remain strong, and if confirmed, I will work with American companies to
find expanded opportunities for enhanced trade and commerce.
Question #7. Trade ties between the United States and Uruguay have
grown since 2002, when the countries created a Joint Commission on
Trade and Investment. The joint commission has provided the means for
ongoing United States-Uruguay trade discussions, which led to the
signing of a bilateral investment treaty in October 2004 and a Trade
and Investment Framework Agreement (TIFA) in January 2007. The TIFA is
a formal commitment to pursue closer trade and economic ties. Although
then-President Bush and Vazquez initially sought to negotiate a free
trade agreement with Uruguay, in your confirmation hearing on February
7, 2012, before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, you mentioned
that both the United States Government and the Government of Uruguay
chose not to pursue a free trade agreement due to ``reticence'' from
both sides in the fall of 2009.
Please provide a detailed explanation regarding why the United
States Government (USG) chose not to pursue a Free Trade Agreement
(FTA) agreement with Uruguay in 2009. What is the likelihood of
beginning talks regarding negotiating an FTA with Uruguay during the
Obama administration? Is it a priority of the Obama administration to
pursue an FTA with Uruguay?
Answer. The United States and Uruguay have utilized the TIFA as the
principal mechanism to advance bilateral commercial and investment
issues. This agreement, which includes advanced supplementary protocols
on trade and the environment as well as trade facilitation, provides
for yearly meetings of a bilateral trade and investment council. If
confirmed, I look forward to working within the framework of the TIFA
to facilitate expanded commercial opportunities and advance trade
between the two countries.
The MERCOSUR charter does not permit MERCOSUR members, which
includes Uruguay, to negotiate individually an FTA with another
country. We have no indication that MERCOSUR, as a bloc, is prepared at
this time to take on the commitments that would be required to enter
into an FTA with the United States.
Question #8. Uruguay is now losing markets and jobs to countries
that have free trade agreements with the United States. In Uruguay
there is particularly concern about the situation of the Uruguayan
textiles and apparel industry, which has shrunk over the last decade,
with a slight recovery since 2003. Heavily based on wool production,
this sector employs about 21,000 workers, though its unemployment rate
remains high. Uruguayan textile and apparel producers face high tariffs
in the U.S. market (17.5 percent for wool-based apparel and 25 percent
for wool fabrics), as well as strong competition from FTA signatories
with the United States (mainly Chile, Mexico, and Peru). Uruguay also
faces difficulties in exporting fabric to these countries since the
FTAs require that apparel be produced with U.S.-sourced or local
fabrics. The combination of MERCOSUR restrictions, high entry tariffs,
and rules of origin specifications has caused Uruguay to lose its
market share in the United States. U.S. trade preferences for textiles
and apparel would help Uruguayan exporters regain market access in the
United States and have a dramatic positive economic impact on Uruguay.
These industries are key sources of employment in Uruguay that have
been hurt by both U.S. tariffs and the economic downturn.
By granting Uruguayan goods expanded access to the U.S. market, the
USG would solidify its image as a reliable and strategically important
partner, thereby strengthening the bilateral relationship with Uruguay.
U.S. trade preferences would be viewed as a vote of support for the
Government of Uruguay (GOU). The Obama administration seems
disinterested in the negotiation of an FTA with Uruguay, but unilateral
tariff preferences might be an appropriate intermediate step toward
deepening our relations with Uruguay--unilateral trade preferences can
lead to the negotiation of a reciprocal FTA.
Please explain your views regarding granting unilateral
tariff preferences for Uruguayan textiles and apparel, to
expand commercial ties between the United States and Uruguay,
as an intermediate step toward an FTA.
Answer. The U.S. Government remains committed to deepening
commercial ties between the United States and Uruguay. As Ambassador,
one of my top priorities will be the health and strength of the
bilateral relationship, and the promotion of U.S. interests in Uruguay.
The granting of trade preferences to any nation, either unilaterally or
through a Free Trade Agreement (FTA), is a matter for the President and
the Congress to decide and, if confirmed, I would work to advance our
foreign policy initiatives.
We currently have a Trade and Investment Framework Agreement (TIFA)
with Uruguay, which is typically a precursor to an FTA. However, the
MERCOSUR charter does not permit MERCOSUR members, which includes
Uruguay, to negotiate individually an FTA with another country. We have
no indication that MERCOSUR, as a bloc, is prepared at this time to
take on the commitments that would be required to enter into an FTA
with the United States.
______
Responses of Julissa Reynoso to Followup Questions Submitted
by Senator Richard G. Lugar
Question. Please provide a detailed explanation regarding why the
United States Government (USG) chose not to pursue a Free Trade
Agreement (FTA) agreement with Uruguay in 2009.
Answer. It is my understanding that former President Bush discussed
the idea of negotiating an FTA with Uruguay's President Vazquez in the
spring of 2006. Later in September 2006, the Uruguayan Government
expressed interest in negotiating an FTA under Trade Promotion
Authority (TPA). However, with the expiration of TPA on June 30, 2007,
and MERCOSUR's limitations, the two governments did not move forward
with negotiations. The nature of the MERCOSUR charter presented
complications for Uruguay to pursue an FTA with the United States,
because the charter does not permit MERCOSUR members, which includes
Uruguay, to negotiate individually an FTA with another country.
Instead, the two sides worked very hard to negotiate a rigorous
Trade and Investment Framework Agreement (TIFA), which was signed on
January 25, 2007, and reaffirms the commitment of our two governments
to expand trade and economic opportunities between both countries. I
understand that the Government of Uruguay has not expressed interest in
pursuing an FTA. I do believe, however, that there are opportunities to
expand on current agreements and partnerships to enhance both our
political and economic relationship with Uruguay, and if confirmed, I
will look to actively utilize these existing agreements and instruments
to further advance commerce and trade between our two countries.
Additionally, if confirmed, I will work closely with you, your staff,
and the Foreign Relations Committee, to advance trade and economic ties
between the United States and Uruguay.
Question. Please explain with specifics, how if confirmed, you will
work through the framework of the TIFA to further expand commercial
opportunities and advance trade between our two countries. What sectors
will be your priority to facilitate expanded commercial opportunities
and trade between our two countries? Are textiles and apparel areas
where commercial opportunities can be expanded under TIFA?
Answer. The TIFA has two main protocol agreements, one focusing on
overall trade facilitation and the second on the environment. We
utilize the TIFA as an umbrella agreement in which we can facilitate
the active dialogue between our countries and aggressively consider
new, expanded avenues for trade. Indeed, in the context of TIFA
discussions, we incorporate many aspects of our commercial, trade, and
economic agenda including the Energy Climate Partnership of the
Americas (ECPA), the USDA's Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS) program
and related instruments. If confirmed, I look to broaden and deepen our
bilateral relations and will evaluate the possibility for textiles and
apparel opportunities. Another area I look forward to expanding, if
confirmed, is Uruguay's participation within ECPA. Uruguay is a partner
country in an ongoing FAS-led program to promote agricultural
production and use of renewable biomass for energy, an ECPA initiative.
This ongoing 2-year FAS program promoted agricultural production and
use of renewable biomass for energy, and included an initial planning
workshop and subsequent scientific exchange of fellows, a study tour,
and in-country demonstration projects.
Another opportunity is through our existing partnership within the
energy industry and our MOU on Alternative Energy and Energy Efficiency
which was signed in September 2008. Through the MOU, our Embassy in
Montevideo has pursued a series of biofuels and alternative energy-
related initiatives with the Government of Uruguay. For example,
visiting experts have given seminars on topics such as cellulosic
biofuels, the EPA's Methane to Markets program, land use management,
the use of carbon credits to fund biofuels projects, and biofuels'
compatibility with current engine design. Our Embassy also provides
technical assistance to identify equipment suppliers as well as
information on standards for ethanol.
I believe there are opportunities to expand on these agreements and
partnerships to enhance both our political and economic relationship,
and if confirmed, I will look to actively utilize these existing
networks and instruments to further advance commerce and trade between
our two countries.
Question. In answering question #3 of the first round of questions
you stated, ``Among my top priorities as Ambassador, if confirmed, will
be reviewing outstanding issues in agricultural trade between the
United States and Uruguay with a view to enabling freer--and more
mutually advantageous--trade between our two countries.'' What
outstanding issues in agricultural trade are you referring to? Through
what mechanism will you be ``enabling freer--and more mutually
advantageous--trade between our two countries'' in the area of
agricultural trade?
Answer. Uruguay and the United States continue to look for
opportunities to expand our trade in agricultural products as both
countries have significant and mature domestic industries with a wide
range of exportable products and services. Agricultural machinery and
fertilizers are key U.S. exports to Uruguay currently and, if
confirmed, I will work with American companies operating in Uruguay to
seek new markets to expand trade and create opportunities for these
American products. I also would look for opportunities for American
companies not already operating in Uruguay to enter the Uruguayan
market and utilize Uruguay's position within Mercosur as an additional
avenue to gain market access to Mercosur countries.
Examples of expanding agricultural trade and the removal of trade
impediments between our countries include the pending market access for
Uruguayan ovine meat and citrus fruit to the United States and American
beef in Uruguay. The process of gaining market access, while detailed
and possibly lengthy, offers avenues for additional and complementary
markets for American products and services. If confirmed, I will
aggressively seek these opportunities.
Question. In answering question #3 of the first round of questions
you stated, ``In addition, President Mujica's focus on education reform
in Uruguay and his expressed desire for more scientific and technical
exchange with the United States will be an ever more important source
of ties between Uruguayan and American institutions and individuals, as
we strive to achieve President Obama's 100,000 Strong in the Americas
goal.''
If confirmed, how do you intend to do this in concrete terms? Would
you consider encouraging and assisting Uruguay to pursue a strategic
bilateral agreement with a specific U.S. state, such as the Chilean
Government's strategic bilateral agreement with the state of
Massachusetts (which focusses on collaborative research in the areas of
education and biotechnology)? Please provide your views on pursuing
strategic bilateral agreements. If you approve of this approach, please
provide your specific ideas, if confirmed, for developing strategic
bilateral agreements with Uruguay.
Answer. The United States and Uruguay have a long history of
collaborating on science and technology-related projects. On April 29,
2008, the United States and Uruguay signed a bilateral Science
&Technology agreement that provides a framework to advance science and
technology cooperation. Priority areas include health and medical
research, alternative energies, and Antarctic research. Other areas of
cooperation include agriculture; meteorology; hydrology; fisheries;
atmospheric sciences; disaster response and management; science policy
networking; capacity-building and research and professional exchanges;
and fostering innovation through public-private partnerships. This
foundation of collaborative research represents a wealth of
opportunities for expanded cooperation between scientific institutions
in Uruguay and the United States.
If confirmed, I will work to create new linkages between American
and Uruguayan universities and research centers in the key fields of
science, technology, engineering, and mathematics--the so-called STEM
fields--as well as in other academic disciplines. These linkages would
facilitate expanded educational exchanges. Beyond these linkages
between institutions, I also would encourage the development of
strategic bilateral agreements between our two countries at either the
state or local levels and would work to facilitate these avenues of
cooperation. If confirmed, I will encourage all sections of our Embassy
to develop close relationships with key academic institutions in
Uruguay with whom visiting U.S. delegations can engage to build
productive partnerships. I am a firm believer in educational exchanges
and would dedicate time and energy to furthering these opportunities.
I wish to highlight that I would look first to the State of
Minnesota as a possible partner for Uruguayan institutions, given the
existing connections with numerous academic and research institutions
and the high interest in sustainable urban development in Minneapolis.
Additionally, the University of Minnesota with its strong agricultural
base would be a natural fit for cooperation with Uruguay's leading
universities. The State of Connecticut might be another possibility as
it has an existing and active U.S. Department of Defense State
Partnership Program that, if confirmed, I would look to leverage for
expanded opportunities.
Question. In answering question #8 of the first round of questions
you stated ``The MERCOSUR charter does not permit MERCOSUR members,
which includes Uruguay, to negotiate individually an FTA with another
country. We have no indication that MERCOSUR, as a bloc, is prepared at
this time to take on the commitments that would be required to enter
into an FTA with the United States.''
On July 15, 2005, the new FTA between Mexico and Uruguay entered
into force, as the result of an intense process of negotiations boosted
by the Presidents of both nations with the aim to reinforce the 54
Complementary Economic Agreement signed by MERCOSUR and Mexico.
Since Uruguay is a member country of the Common Southern Market, it
operates as a gateway for Mexico to enter into the MERCOSUR. Mexico
aims to participate in the block as an associated country in the free-
trade area. The prospect of a similar kind of agreement for the United
States is very attractive not only because of the advantages of a trade
agreement with Uruguay, but also because it would operate as a gateway
for the United States to enter into the MERCOSUR and trade with Brazil,
Argentina and Paraguay, as well.
Please explain your views regarding the process that took Uruguay
and Mexico to sign an FTA, normally outlawed by MERCOSUR. Please
explain why the United States can, or cannot pursue a similar process.
Answer. Interlocutors inform us that the trade agreement, which is
an Economic Complementation Agreement signed by Mexico and Uruguay in
November 2003, is an exception to Mercosur's prohibition on bilateral
agreements between a member and a third party. It is built on an
existing 1999 economic agreement between Mexico and Uruguay, as well as
the 2002 Mexico-Mercosur complementary economic agreement. The 2002
agreement endorsed the idea of pursuing closer trade with Mexico and
helped to justify the exception afforded to Uruguay and was
``grandfathered'' into the agreement.
At this time, we have no indication that MERCOSUR, as a bloc, is
prepared to take on the commitments that would be required to enter
into an FTA with the United States. That said, if confirmed, I will
look to utilize all existing agreements, like the TIFA and all other
related instruments, to expand trade and commercial opportunities for
American products and services.
Question. Please provide specific information regarding your role
as U.S Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere
Affairs for Central America, Caribbean, and Cuba, in efforts to gain
the humanitarian release of Alan Gross from Cuba. Alan Gross has been
held since his arrest in December 2009, accused of bringing satellite
and other communication equipment into the country illegally. He has
acknowledged he was working on a USAID-funded democracy program, but
says he meant no harm to the government and was only trying to help the
island's small Jewish community.
Answer. Alan Gross has been unjustly imprisoned for more than 2
years. He is a dedicated international development worker who has
devoted his life to helping people in more than 50 countries and he was
in Cuba to help the Cuban people connect with the rest of the world. We
deplore the fact that the Cuban Government specifically excluded Mr.
Gross from the 2,900 prisoners it decided to release at the end of
December.
For more than 2 years, in close coordination with Mr. Gross's
family and lawyer, we have used, and will continue to use, every
opportunity to seek his release from this unjust imprisonment. We have
also used every channel to press the Cuban Government for Mr. Gross's
immediate release so he can return to his family, where he belongs. The
Department has urged more than 40 countries around the world to press
the Cuban Government on this issue. At the United Nations, we have
raised Mr. Gross's case to the General Assembly. We have met prominent
figures traveling to Cuba and encouraged them to advocate for Mr.
Gross's release, which they have done. And, we have done the same with
religious leaders from many different faiths. Additionally, we have
also made numerous public statements pressing for Mr. Gross's release.
As Deputy Assistant Secretary of State, I have worked especially
closely with Mr. Gross's family and lawyer, and have been involved in
all of the efforts mentioned above. In addition, I have also directly
pressed for Mr. Gross's release in meetings with Cuban Government
officials, including raising Alan Gross countless times with the Chief
of the Cuban Interests Section in Washington. In these meetings, I have
made clear that the Cuban Government should immediately release Mr.
Gross.
NOMINATION OF NANCY J. POWELL
----------
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 7, 2012 (p.m.)
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Foreign Relations,
Washington, DC.
----------
Hon. Nancy J. Powell, of Iowa, to be Ambassador to India
----------
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:33 p.m., in
room SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. John F. Kerry
(chairman of the committee) presiding.
Present: Senators Kerry, Menendez, Webb, Udall, and Lugar.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN F. KERRY,
U.S. SENATOR FROM MASSACHUSETTS
The Chairman. The hearing will come to order.
It is my great, great pleasure, together with Senator
Lugar, to welcome Nancy J. Powell, who has been nominated to be
Ambassador to India.
And before we start talking about India, I want to say a
few words, if I can, at the top of this hearing about Egypt.
Egypt is much on the minds of all of my colleagues right now,
and the recent events in Egypt are particularly alarming.
The attacks against civil society in Egypt, including
American organizations like NDI, IRI, the International Center
for Journalists, and Freedom House, are particularly
disturbing. Yesterday's prosecutions are, frankly, a slap in
the face to Americans who have supported Egypt for decades and
to Egyptian individuals and NGOs who have put their futures on
the line for a more democratic Egypt.
Right now, it appears some people are engaging in a very
dangerous game that risks damaging both Egypt's democratic
prospects and the United States-Egyptian bilateral
relationship. I have traveled to Egypt three times now since
the events of last year--the revolution. And it is of
particular concern to see things moving in this direction.
The challenge in front of Egypt is predominantly an
economic challenge. Egypt has burned through much of its
reserves--Treasury reserves. From some $40 billion, $42
billion, they have gone down to less than $20 billion, burning
perhaps $1 billion to $1.5 billion a month.
In order for Egypt to make it, to provide for its citizens,
Egypt is going to have to turn its economy around. And to turn
its economy around, it is going to have to reattract the
investors, the businesspeople who helped to create an economy
that was growing at 7 percent a year before the events of
Tahrir Square.
Now that economy is moribund. A tourist trade which equaled
about 8 percent or more of the gross domestic product is at a
standstill. When I was in Egypt, the hotel occupancies were at
about 3 percent, 5 percent, maybe 11 percent on one of the
trips.
Clearly, without the ability to revitalize tourism, it is
going to be difficult to revitalize the economy. And without a
revitalized economy, it is going to be difficult to sustain any
kind of political leadership.
And unless people get a message of stability and a message
that is warm and welcoming to business and to capital, it is
going to be very hard to turn that economy around and provide
the stability necessary. This is a revolving circle, and it
needs to be a virtuous circle.
Egypt faces an array of critical challenges: a pending
fiscal crisis, a worsening security environment, a difficult
political transition. So I believe it is important that the
Egyptian Government recognize that it just can't continue to
undermine civil society and persecute the very talent that is
seeking to bring Egypt security and prosperity.
America stands as a ready and willing partner to support
Egypt's democratic transition and economic stabilization, but
it requires an atmosphere in which Egypt's civil society and
its American friends are protected. So I hope that this current
crisis or challenge, standoff, what everyone wants to term it,
can be resolved in a thoughtful and intelligent way, or it may
become very difficult to be able to do the kinds of things
necessary.
And Egypt, obviously, is important. It is a quarter of the
Arab world. It is important to the stability of the region, and
it is important to a peace process ultimately with respect to
Israel and the Palestinians.
And with all the other turmoil in Syria and other parts of
the world, the challenge of Iran, the last thing one needs is
an Egypt that isn't moving strongly and directly and
forthrightly on the path to democratic transition and to a
strengthening of its economy.
Now turning to India, we are really pleased to have this
opportunity to discuss what is, without doubt, one of the most
significant partnerships in U.S. foreign policy. There are few
relationships that will be as vital in the 21st century as our
growing ties with India and its people.
On all of the most critical global challenges that we face,
India really has a central role to play, and that means that
Washington is going to be looking to New Delhi not only for
cooperation, but increasingly for innovation, for regional
leadership.
India's growing significance has been clear to many of us
for some time now. In the 1990s, I traveled to India, took one
of the first business trade missions right after the economic
reforms were first put in place, and I have been there many
times since.
And President Obama, immediately upon entering office,
invited Prime Minister Singh to be his guest at the very first
state dinner. Secretary Clinton has visited India twice. And
both countries inaugurated the U.S.-India Strategic Dialogue 2
years ago.
Republicans and Democrats alike understand the need to
capitalize on the democratic values and strategic interests
that our two countries share. And that is why it is important
that we work together every day, as I believe we are right now,
to further cultivate the relationship.
Given the significance of that relationship, we are
particularly pleased that President Obama has nominated Nancy
Powell to represent us in New Delhi. Nancy is a former
Ambassador to both Nepal and Pakistan, and she has served tours
of duty in both India and Bangladesh, making her one of the
foremost South Asia experts in the Foreign Service. She is one
of our best, and it is only appropriate that she be tasked with
one of the State Department's most important postings.
I think Ambassador Powell would agree with me that United
States and India interests and values are converging today, as
perhaps never before. And consequently, America is an
interested stakeholder in India's increasing ascent to greater
economic and greater global power and participation.
India's economy is projected to be the world's third-
largest in the near future, and total trade between our
countries reached $73 billion in 2010 and could exceed $100
billion this year.
On defense, our security cooperation has grown so
dramatically that India now conducts more military exercises
with the United States than any other country.
Education is fast becoming one of the strongest links
between our nations, and I look forward to building on the
progress that we made at the higher education summit last fall.
Whether it is helping India to build a network of community
colleges that could revolutionize access to education or
whether it is creating educational opportunities via the
Internet, we can give millions of people a greater set of
choices and opportunities for the future.
As our economies and education systems grow more
intertwined--and I am convinced they will--our peoples will
have greater opportunity to work together on technological
breakthroughs. Already, India is playing a leading role in
clean energy innovation. A report released last week found that
India saw a 52-percent growth in clean energy investment in
2011, a rate higher than any other significant global economy.
With leadership from companies like Suzlon and Reliance
Solar, India has the world's fourth-largest installed wind
capacity and incredible solar energy potential. That is why I
strongly support the 2009 U.S.-India Memorandum of
Understanding on Energy and Climate Change signed by President
Obama and Prime Minister Singh, which is being implemented
through initiatives like the Partnership to Advance Clean
Energy.
It is clear that India's strategic role is also growing. We
all agree that the dynamism of the Asia-Pacific region requires
India's sustained presence and engagement, whether to combat
nuclear proliferation, to promote economic stability in
Afghanistan, or to encourage human rights in Burma and Sri
Lanka.
India enjoys strong cultural, historical, people-to-people,
and economic links to East Asia, and I frequently hear that its
eastward neighbors see real merit in India's contributions to
regional peace and prosperity. In the coming years, I hope our
two countries can deepen our cooperation throughout Asia not
based on any common threats, but on the bedrock of shared
interests and values.
One area that is showing signs of promise, especially on
economic cooperation, is the India-Pakistan relationship. I am
encouraged that Pakistan granted India most-favored-nation
status and that the two nations are continuing their dialogue
on a host of issues. And I hope both countries can seize this
moment to break with the perilous and somewhat stereotyped
politics of the past.
There is no doubt that even as India moves forward and even
as we celebrate the pluses that I just enumerated, it is clear
that India will also have to continue addressing its own
complex domestic challenges, including the challenge of
building its own infrastructure, of dealing with booming energy
demand, of dealing with some restrictive trade and investment
practices, and also the problem, which is not just India's, but
a global problem of human trafficking.
Moreover, there are some 500 to 600 million people living
in poverty. But clearly, India is moving rapidly, through its
own economic development, to address that, and I am confident
that that will continue to change.
So we can be real partners in this effort, and we can do so
in ways that empower all classes of Indian society. And
Indians, I hope, will feel that a partnership with the United
States delivers real, tangible benefits to their everyday
lives.
So, Ambassador Powell, we thank you and your family for
your service, and we look forward to the Senate moving your
confirmation as quickly as possible.
Senator Lugar.
May I just say that we have a Finance Committee markup this
afternoon on the transportation bill. So I am going to have to
turn the gavel over to Senator Udall shortly in order to be at
that, and I appreciate Ambassador Powell's understanding of
that.
Senator Lugar.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD G. LUGAR,
U.S. SENATOR FROM INDIANA
Senator Lugar. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Let me just take the liberty of joining you in the concern
you expressed about events in Egypt. I was startled, I should
say shocked, by the arrest and detainment of those Americans
involved in attempting to work with citizens of Egypt to
promote democracy.
I think each one of us over the years who have been
involved in delegations going to other countries to monitor
elections or to assist citizens with the National Democratic
Institute, the International Republican Institute, and various
other groups, know how much we cared about those countries and
the follow-through that we have exemplified.
It is especially important, as the chairman has pointed
out, that given the status of the Egyptian economy and those in
the countryside, far away from Tahrir Square, who lack adequate
food supplies, that the United States is generous and eager to
be helpful. But we are facing certainly comments from our
colleagues who are wondering how we can consider providing $1.5
billion in assistance to Egypt given both this new development
and, more broadly, the deficit situation we have in our own
country. I am hopeful that the Egyptians will reconsider their
position and that this matter will be resolved promptly.
In any event, I join the chairman in welcoming Ambassador
Powell back to the Foreign Relations Committee. This hearing
presents us with an opportunity not only to evaluate the
distinguished nominee, but also to examine the current state of
our evolving ties with India.
I start from the premise that enhancing our relationship
with India is a strategic and economic imperative. India is
poised to be an anchor of stability in Asia and a center of
economic growth far into the future.
It has a well-educated middle class larger than the size of
the entire U.S. population. It is already the world's second-
fastest-growing major economy, and bilateral trade with the
United States has more than tripled during the past 10 years.
The United States and India are working to build a
strategic partnership that will benefit both sides, and we have
ongoing cooperation with India on many fronts. This includes
efforts to ensure security in South Asia. India and the United
States have strong incentives to cooperate on counterterrorism
in the region and beyond. We also share concerns about the
stability of Afghanistan and Pakistan and the growing military
capabilities of China.
Energy cooperation between the United States and India also
should be at the top of our bilateral agenda. India's energy
needs are expected to double by 2025. The United States has an
interest in expanding energy cooperation with India to develop
new technologies, cushion supply disruptions, address
environmental problems, and diversify global energy supplies.
The United States own energy problems will be exacerbated
if we do not forge energy partnerships with India and other
nations experiencing rapid economic growth. In 2008 the United
States concluded the civil nuclear cooperation agreement with
India. The legislation lifted a three-decade American
moratorium on nuclear trade with India and opened the door for
trade in a wide range of other high-technology items, such as
supercomputers and fiber optics.
This agreement remains important to the broad strategic
advancement of the United States-Indian relationship. But in
the narrower context of nuclear trade with India, it has yet to
bear significant fruit. In large measure, this stems from the
Indian Parliament's adoption of the Civil Liability for Nuclear
Damage bill. This legislation effectively rules out Indian
accession to the Convention on Supplementary Compensation for
Nuclear Damage, the CSC, and could frustrate the United States
nuclear industry's efforts to play a role in India's expanding
nuclear power sector.
The bill's plain terms are fundamentally inconsistent with
the liability regime that the international community is
seeking to achieve in the CSC. To date, this administration has
made very little progress on the CSC with India, and I am
hopeful that you will address the Obama administration's
strategy for advancing United States-Indian nuclear
cooperation.
What high-level exchanges have occurred between our
governments regarding the status of liability protections for
United States nuclear exporters to India? More broadly, what is
the current state of our energy dialogue with New Delhi?
I would also appreciate the Ambassador's views on ongoing
security cooperation efforts in South Asia. In light of the
Obama administration's intent to reduce U.S. forces in
Afghanistan and our complex relationship with Pakistan, what
opportunities exist for United States-Indian initiatives
designed to combat terrorism?
I look forward to hearing Ambassador Powell's thoughts
about how to address these and other important issues in the
United States-India relationship. I thank the chair.
The Chairman. Thanks very much, Senator Lugar. Appreciate
it.
Ambassador Powell, we welcome your testimony. And I don't
know if you want to introduce any family members or anybody who
may be here with you, but we welcome that also.
STATEMENT OF HON. NANCY J. POWELL, OF IOWA,
TO BE AMBASSADOR TO INDIA
Ambassador Powell. Mr. Chairman, Senator Lugar, I am
honored to appear today as President Obama's nominee to be the
Ambassador of the United States to the Republic of India, and I
am grateful for the President and Secretary Clinton's trust and
confidence.
I would like to thank the committee for giving me the
opportunity to appear again before you. If confirmed, I look
forward to working closely with you to advance our strategic
partnership with India.
I would like to say a special thank you to my State
Department family members who are here today with me and for
their support and advice during my preparations for the
hearing.
I have had the pleasure of serving in India previously from
1992 through 1995 as the Consul General in Kolkata and Minister
Counselor for Political Affairs in New Delhi. I thoroughly
enjoyed my time in India, where I had the opportunity to
observe the beginnings of India's dramatic economic
transformation and to participate in the early efforts to
expand our bilateral relations.
Today, I see an India that has catapulted itself onto the
global stage. India is becoming an economic powerhouse, having
averaged 7 percent annual economic growth over the last decade,
lifting tens of millions of its citizens out of poverty.
India will also be a leading security partner of the United
States in the 21st century. The number and kinds of
interactions between our two countries at all levels is
staggering in its breadth and depth. At its heart are the
people-to-people links--students, businesses, and tourists,
along with the 3-million-strong Indian-American community.
At the government-to-government level, our relations are
firmly grounded in a set of shared democratic values and an
increasingly shared strategic vision of both the opportunities
that can promote those values, as well as the threats that can
undermine them.
If confirmed, I will be working with an interagency team at
the Embassy in New Delhi and our four consulates to advance a
growing agenda that includes issues that are most vital to our
national security and prosperity. Among our top priorities will
be the following.
Bolstering trade and investment. We have made unprecedented
progress in expanding our economic relations with India. Our
bilateral goods and services trade will top over $100 billion
in 2012. This represents an astounding quadrupling of trade
since 2000, moving India up from our 25th-largest trading
partner to our 12th.
I look forward to working with the interagency team and
with our Indian counterparts to reduce barriers, including
through the negotiation of a bilateral investment treaty, and
to expand the areas where we do business. I am eager to support
efforts to ensure full implementation of the civil nuclear
cooperation agreement, including ensuring a level playing field
for American companies in the commercial applications of
nuclear energy.
The U.S. mission in India actively seeks opportunities to
keep and create jobs in America. In response to the President's
National Export Initiative, the U.S. mission promotes the
export of U.S. products, services, and technologies supporting
tens of thousands of jobs in the United States. India, with its
population of 1.2 billion and its large consumer economy,
represents a huge fast-growing market for U.S. manufactured
goods.
Our exports are growing at nearly 17 percent a year. At
this rate, exports from the United States to India are expected
to nearly double in 5 years.
Another priority is our defense cooperation, which
currently is at an all-time high. U.S. defense sales to India
reached nearly $8 billion last year, and India holds more
military exercises with the United States than with any other
country.
As stated in the National Security Strategy, we see India
as a net security provider in the Indo-Pacific region. As India
continues to modernize its armed forces, there are additional
opportunities for us to expand our cooperation across all the
services and at all levels. I appreciate the Congress' support
for expanding defense ties and note the report delivered to
Congress in November on potential defense cooperation with
India.
We will also work to enhance our cooperation in
international and multilateral fora. Reflecting its growing
importance, India is an increasingly active member of key
international bodies, including its current tenure on the
United Nations Security Council, its inclusion in the G20, the
East Asia summit, the South Asian Association for Regional
Cooperation, and the World Trade Organization.
In December, we held the first-ever trilateral
consultations with Japan, India, and the United States.
Encouraging India's leadership in cooperation across the Asia-
Pacific will be a top priority.
If confirmed, I look forward to expanding our consultations
and collaboration, narrowing our differences on key
multilateral issues, and working with the Government of India
to advance international peace and security through common
understandings and approaches to strengthening these bodies and
the international community's ability to address the threats
that face our world.
Another priority will be encouraging India's role in
supporting peace and stability in the Indian Ocean region.
India and the United States share a common interest in
supporting continued efforts to establish a peaceful,
prosperous, and democratic Indian Ocean region.
Taking a cue from history, the new silk road vision
foresees a network of economic, transit, trade, and people-to-
people connections across South and Central Asia. India
supports this vision and is a significant donor in Afghanistan
and has taken steps to facilitate better trade with Pakistan.
I look forward to increasing cooperation on
counterterrorism and global threats. Terrorist groups like
Lashkar-e-Taiba pose a critical threat not only to our partners
like India, but also to United States strategic objectives in
the region.
If confirmed, I will work to expand the current level of
consultation and coordination on key counterterrorism
exchanges, as well as to advance our efforts to expand
cooperation in the areas of nonproliferation and nuclear
security. As national intelligence officer for South Asia,
these were issues that I dealt with firsthand.
If confirmed, I will also continue United States engagement
with Indians to advance human rights and freedoms that are
constitutionally protected in both our countries and to work to
encourage democratic institutions in countries like
Afghanistan.
If confirmed, I look forward to participating in and
advancing the U.S.-India Strategic Dialogue, as well as the
substantive exchanges on more than 20 distinct policy areas,
including education, agriculture, energy, and development. I
hope we can use this framework to address issues of mutual
concern and to enhance collaboration to achieve concrete
results that create additional opportunities for our two
peoples and that eliminate threats to our two democracies.
I take seriously my role as chief of mission in the
management of our Government resources--the people,
infrastructure, and programs that are committed to this
relationship--and will work to ensure that they are protected
and used creatively to enhance U.S. interests.
If confirmed, I will devote my energies and experience to
enlarging and expanding our relations with India. I believe we
can continue to convert our vision for a future of peace and
prosperity based on our mutual democratic values into a reality
through expanded exchange, dialogue, and engagement at all
levels of society and government.
Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Ambassador Powell follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Nancy J. Powell
Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, I am honored to appear
today as President Obama's nominee to be the Ambassador of the United
States to the Republic of India and am grateful for the President's and
Secretary Clinton's trust and confidence in me. I would like to thank
the committee for giving me the opportunity to appear before this
esteemed body today. If confirmed, I look forward to working closely
with you to advance our strategic partnership with India.
I have had the pleasure of serving in India previously from 1992
through 1995 as Consul General in Kolkata and Minister-Counselor for
Political Affairs in New Delhi. I thoroughly enjoyed my tour in India
where I had the opportunity to observe the beginnings of India's
dramatic economic transformation and to participate in the early
efforts to expand our bilateral relations. Today I see an India that
has revolutionized itself onto the global stage. India is becoming an
economic powerhouse, having averaged 7 percent annual economic growth
over the last decade, lifting tens of millions of its citizens out of
poverty. India will also be a leading security partner of the United
States in the 21st century. The number and kinds of interactions
between our two countries at all levels is staggering in its breadth
and depth. At its heart are the people-to-people links--students,
businesses, and tourists along with the 3 million strong Indian-
American community. At the government-to-government level, our
relations are firmly grounded in a set of shared democratic values and
an increasingly shared strategic vision of both the opportunities that
can promote them as well as the threats that can undermine them.
If confirmed, I will be working with an interagency team at our
Embassy in New Delhi and the four consulates to advance a growing
agenda that includes issues that that are most vital to our national
security and prosperity. Among our top priorities will be the
following:
Bolstering trade and investment: We have made unprecedented
progress in expanding our economic relations with India. Our
bilateral goods and services trade will top $100 billion in
2012. This represents an astounding quadrupling of trade since
2000, moving India up from our 25th largest trading partner to
our 12th. I look forward to working with a wide interagency
team and with our Indian counterparts to reduce barriers,
including through negotiation of a Bilateral Investment Treaty,
and to expand the areas where we do business. I am eager to
support the efforts to ensure full implementation of the Civil
Nuclear Cooperation Agreement, including ensuring a level
playing field for American companies in the commercial
applications of nuclear energy.
The U.S. mission in India actively seeks opportunities to
keep and create jobs in America. In response to the President's
National Export Initiative, the U.S. mission promotes the
export of U.S. products, services, and technologies, supporting
tens of thousands of jobs in the United States. India, with its
population of 1.2 billion people and large and balanced
consumer economy, represents a huge, fast-growing market for
U.S. manufactured goods, and our exports are growing at nearly
over 17 percent a year. At this rate, exports from the United
States to India are expected to nearly double in the 5 years
from 2009 to 2014.
Expanding our defense cooperation, which currently is at a
cumulative all-time high: U.S. defense sales to India reached
nearly $8 billion last year and India holds more military
exercises with the United States than any other country. As
stated in the National Security Strategy, we see India as a net
security provider in the Indo-Pacific region. As India
continues to modernize its armed forces, there are additional
opportunities for us to expand our cooperation across all the
services and at all levels. I appreciate the Congress' support
for expanding defense ties, and note the report delivered to
Congress in November on potential future defense cooperation
with India.
Enhancing our cooperation in international and multilateral
fora: Reflecting its growing importance, India is an
increasingly active member of key international bodies,
including its current tenure on the United Nations Security
Council, its inclusion in the G20, the East Asia summit, the
South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation, and the World
Trade Organization. In December, we held the first ever
trilateral consultations with Japan, India, and the United
States. Encouraging India's leadership and cooperation across
the Asia Pacific will be a top priority. If confirmed, I look
forward to expanding our consultations and collaboration,
narrowing our differences on key multilateral issues, and
working with the Government of India to advance international
peace and security through common understandings and approaches
to strengthening these bodies and the international community's
ability to address the threats that face our world.
Encouraging India's role in supporting peace and stability
in the Indian Ocean region: India and the United States share a
common interest in supporting continued efforts to establish a
peaceful, prosperous, and democratic Indian Ocean region.
Taking its cue from history, the New Silk Road vision foresees
a network of economic, transit, trade, and people-to-people
connections across South and Central Asia that will embed
Afghanistan more firmly into its neighborhood. India supports
this vision and is a significant donor in Afghanistan and has
taken steps to facilitate trade with Pakistan.
Increasing cooperation on counterterrorism and global
threats: Terrorist groups like Lashkar-e-Taiba pose a critical
threat not only to our partners like India, but to U.S.
strategic objectives in the region. If confirmed, I will work
to expand the current level of consultation and coordination on
key counterterrorism exchanges, as well as advance our efforts
to expand cooperation in the areas of nonproliferation and
nuclear security. As National Intelligence Officer for South
Asia, these were issues I dealt with firsthand.
If confirmed, I will continue U.S. engagement with all
Indians to advance human rights and freedoms that are
constitutionally protected in both of our countries, and work
with India to encourage democratic institutions in countries
like Afghanistan.
If confirmed, I look forward to participating in and advancing the
U.S.-India Strategic Dialogue, as well as the substantive exchanges on
more than 20 distinct policy areas, including education, energy,
agriculture, and development. I hope we can use this framework to
address issues of mutual concern and enhance collaboration to achieve
concrete results that create additional opportunities for our two
peoples and that eliminate threats to our two democracies.
I take seriously my role as chief of mission in the management of
our government resources--the people, infrastructure, and programs that
are committed to this relationship--and will work to ensure that they
are protected and used creatively to enhance U.S. interests.
If confirmed, I will devote my energies and experience to enlarging
and expanding our relations with India. I believe we can continue to
convert our vision for a future of peace and prosperity based on our
mutual democratic values into reality through expanded exchange,
dialogue, and engagement at all levels of society and government. Thank
you.
Senator Udall [presiding]. Thank you, Ambassador Powell.
We really appreciate your testimony. And I came in a little
bit late, and I think, as Chairman Kerry said, I am supposed to
take over for him.
Let me just say initially that in looking at your resume
and seeing your long history of service to the State Department
that we really appreciate that public service. I mean, some of
the areas you have served in are very difficult areas in the
world, and I am sure you have done it with enthusiasm and a
great spirit of public service. So thank you for doing that.
I just returned, Ambassador Powell, from recently visiting
India for the first time. I was lucky to go with a group, a
CODEL headed by Senator Warner, and we had both of the cochairs
of the India Caucus. Senator Warner is the cochair in the
Senate, and Joe Crowley, the Congressman from New York, is the
cochair in the House. And they had been there a number of
times. I think Representative Crowley had been there eight
times.
And so, I learned a lot from that discussion. And one of
the things I did was meet with the Nobel Laureate, Dr. Rajendra
Pachauri. Dr. Pachauri and I had a long discussion about
India's energy needs and energy demands and the need to address
climate change.
He expressed his disappointment with the outcome in Durban,
South Africa, and his belief that a multilateral solution is
needed to really make progress on this issue. With regards to
the scientific issues, he stated he believes that the findings
on the committee that he cochairs are stronger and that heat
waves and other abnormal climatic events are increasing in
frequency and intensity.
And while meeting with him and other business leaders, I
stressed not only the need to invest in renewable energy, but
also the opportunities presented by increased investment and
partnership between the United States and India. With India in
need of increased sources of energy to maintain its economic
growth, how do you think the United States should work to
facilitate partnerships between the United States and India to
promote renewable energy?
Ambassador Powell. Senator, I am pleased that you had the
opportunity to visit India and look forward, if confirmed, to
welcoming you back often.
Senator Udall. Thank you.
Ambassador Powell. On the energy side, I think those who
look at India's progress and its potential almost universally
will point to energy as one of the key determinants in how
India addresses its growing energy needs not only for its
economic development, but also for advancing the needs of its
people for electricity and other sources of energy.
I think we are poised to be very, very good partners on
this. We have an energy dialogue as part of the 20 that I
mentioned in my testimony. It is done at the highest levels and
involves a look at traditional sources of energy, as well as
new technologies.
We also have a partnership that Senator Lugar mentioned in
his testimony that is looking particularly at innovations in
energy. I think, given the very strong scientific communities,
the very strong entrepreneurial communities in both of our
countries, that this is an extraordinarily important complement
to the government efforts.
There will certainly have to be support for some of these
technologies, support for the research regulatory framework
that allows them to be used. But the ingenuity and
entrepreneurial spirit of our two countries I think provide us
with opportunities to look at these new sources.
The partnership provides funding. AID is also working with
what they consider to be an innovation incubator approach to
development in India that will allow for programs to be--
experiments and others to be looked at for plus-up by the
private sector in India for use in other parts of the
developing world.
I think all of these are very important. Obviously, the
civil nuclear energy piece is another important part of the
dialogue of trying to make sure that as India turns to nuclear
energy to provide some of its energy resources that it can
benefit from the extraordinary technology that United States
companies bring to nuclear energy, to the safety and security
standards, and to working with those companies with the
Government of India to find a way for us to have a level
playing field for that endeavor.
Senator Udall. Ambassador, thank you very much for that
answer.
And I think one of the areas--and thank you for your
willingness to work on the renewable energy issues--I think one
of the areas that could be a welcome development would be with
the villages in India. As you know, I mean, you have served
over there. We have double than the people who live in the
United States, 700 million people that live in villages, many
times without adequate drinking water, clean drinking water, no
electricity.
And those kinds of conditions are really ripe for deploying
solar panels or wind or something out in those villages. Dr.
Pachauri, by the way, has an NGO where he has started an
entrepreneurial model. He puts a solar panel in a village, has
one of the women who really organizes the village take charge
of it. She then leases out the solar panel to charge solar
lanterns, and this replaces the kerosene lanterns, which are
very dangerous and can't be used under mosquito nets and things
like that.
And it seems to me that this whole area is one that there
is a huge potential, if we work with them, if we partner with
them, to help them get electricity into the villages without
moving all of the village people into the cities, which I think
could end up causing serious problems.
And with that, I am not really asking a question there, but
it is an honor to be here with Senator Lugar and to be up here
chairing this. And I look forward to his questions and any
others as we move along.
Senator Lugar. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Let me just raise a different subject for the moment
because at least today's press reports indicate that India's
Oil and Natural Gas Corporation, the ONGC, has come under
pressure to finalize a service contract for natural gas
production with Iran. Now could you please give us your
thoughts on an Indian company's involvement in Iran's energy
sector, particularly something of this significance?
Ambassador Powell. So, Iran and India have a long tradition
of trade across energy and other fields. It is one that is
clearly a part of our sanctions regime that we are hoping to
see it significantly reduced.
I noted in Foreign Secretary Mathai's speech yesterday, he
indicated that the current efforts to diversify India's sources
of oil and petroleum and a reduction in their use of Iranian
oil to 10 percent or less, and I think these are positive
developments. I think our own efforts to support India in
looking at other sources of energy will be a contributor to
this, and we will certainly, if confirmed, I know that this is
going to be one of the issues that I will be spending a great
deal of time on and working with the Iranian sanctions
legislation with our own policies and with the Indians to work
with them.
Senator Lugar. Well, speaking of our assistance in this
respect, as you pointed out earlier, large numbers of Indians
lack access to electricity, and energy poverty limits their
economic advancement options. The scale of this challenge,
however, demands transformational technologies, such as Senator
Udall was pointing out, and this leads to my question.
Could you please describe the efforts, as you see them,
which are being made by Indian entrepreneurs to tackle energy
poverty? Furthermore, what barriers stand in the way for
American entrepreneurs to enter the Indian market for the so-
called transformational strategies that are going to be able to
meet the doubling of demand?
Ambassador Powell. The two official government-to-
government dialogues are on energy policy specifically and then
on trade, which includes a variety of looking at various ways
to encourage trade, to determine how barriers can be reduced,
and to look at ways to make it possible for American companies
to participate. We have some very good success stories.
I was looking at the results of an Arizona company that has
been quite successful on solar energy and to find, using our
resources at the Embassy, our commercial services, our
discussions with the private sector through the India Business
Council, U.S.-India Business Council, the American Chamber of
Commerce, and others, to find those links where we can put
American companies in touch with opportunities for them to
provide their expertise.
I would also point to what USAID is doing. Although the
amounts of money are relatively small, I think the payback
potential is very, very high if we can encourage innovation. We
are partnering with Indian private sector on this. We are also
providing a mechanism for funding, called the Clean Energy
Finance Center, that will develop opportunities to think
creatively about how to finance new and somewhat risky
adventures sometimes. But to make it possible for the private
sector to participate in this, not to depend strictly on
government funding.
I think although our projects are relatively small in their
scope, the Indians have a very good network of working with the
many, many villagers and trying to work on this. So if I could
just piggyback on Senator Udall's comments? My experience in
Nepal with the lanterns was a fantastic one. It made an
enormous amount of difference in the ability of children to do
their homework, to stay in school, and to have an opportunity
to encourage literacy.
It also, in a similar way, empowered women and provided a
source of income for them through the sales of these very
small-scale entrepreneurships with the lamps. And I think it is
a very, very good program. It has been used in other countries
as well.
Senator Lugar. Well, we are counting on you to reduce the
barriers to American entrepreneurs working with Indian
entrepreneurs to the benefit of the people.
Ambassador Powell. Thank you.
Senator Lugar. You mentioned earlier the dialogue between
the United States and India on 20 different areas. Last year,
Secretary Clinton visited India and engaged in the U.S.-India
Strategic Dialogue which, as you pointed out, includes
security, regional cooperation, partnership, and technology.
Can you highlight for us the most effective parts of the
dialogue and the ones on which you believe the administration
hopes to make the most progress in the coming year?
Ambassador Powell. I think my timing is quite good. Foreign
Secretary Mathai is in the United States right now. And
although I am not in a position to meet with him, my colleagues
at the State Department are. And he had, I believe, extensive
meetings this morning, setting up the agenda for the June or
July meeting, the next meeting here in Washington of the
strategic dialogue.
He also spoke yesterday, and I believe I could certainly
endorse the agenda that he put forward, of the things that are
very, very important. Certainly, the energy dialogue is one of
those, the trade dialogue, our cooperation in looking at our
defense partnership, our look at making sure that we are
looking at what we would call our homeland security dialogue.
Our counterterrorism dialogue is a new and, I think, a very
dynamic part of the dialogue that will continue to be a
priority for both countries.
Maritime security I feel certain will be part of the
dialogue as well this summer. And as a former high school
teacher, I would like to see the education dialogue raised to
the Cabinet-level strategic dialogue as well.
Senator Lugar. And presumably intelligence-sharing will be
a part of that?
Ambassador Powell. Absolutely, as part of the homeland
security and counterterrorism.
Senator Lugar. Thank you very much.
Senator Udall. Senator Menendez.
Senator Menendez. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. Powell, congratulations on your nomination.
Ambassador Powell. Thank you.
Senator Menendez. I have a concern. I am a strong believer
that the relationship between the United States and India is a
critical one, but, as I am sure you are aware, in December, I,
along with other colleagues, sponsored legislation in the
Congress by amendment that the Senate passed unanimously and
the President signed into law with reference to comprehensive
sanctions on the financial institutions of the Central Bank of
Iran.
And I have been encouraged by the efforts of Japan, South
Korea, and others to look for ways to come into compliance with
the law. They have come to it even as they face challenges,
with the attitude of how do I meet the spirit of these
sanctions and try to ensure that we are not subject to any
sanctions and that we are working not only with the United
States, but the international community to ensure that Iran
does not achieve nuclear power.
However, the Indian Government, which is one of Iran's
largest crude customers, seems to be rebuking the sanctions and
looking for workarounds, including considering payments in gold
and transactions that detour around the Central Bank of Iran,
which at the end of the day still is helping the Iranian
Government have the resources to fuel its nuclear ambitions.
For our sanctions to be effective, it is really crucial
that all nations, particularly democratic nations like India,
work together to confront Iran and insist that it terminate its
efforts to achieve nuclear weapons capability.
What is your view of the Indian Government's rationale
behind supporting the Iranians in this regard? And if you are
confirmed as our Ambassador, will you carry the message to New
Delhi that this is a policy priority for the United States and
that we will not hesitate, as appropriate, to pursue the law as
it exists?
Ambassador Powell. Senator, certainly, if confirmed, I
understand and appreciate that this is going to be a very
important topic and one of those that I will be dealing with
very seriously and very early in my tenure.
I think approaching it perhaps a little bit differently
than you did, but to recognize that India shares with us a
desire to see a nonnuclear state in Iran. They have supported
us in the IAEA four times. We continue to have a very important
dialogue at the most senior levels of the U.S. Government, and
I fully intend to be a part of that dialogue.
I believe that making sure that there is clarity on what
the legislation and the U.S. sanctions mean, what their
implications are for India is one step. Also looking to make
sure that we understand what actions India is taking. Foreign
Secretary Mathai yesterday in his republic remarks commented
that there already appears to be a reduction in the amount of
oil, the percentage of oil that India receives from Iran out of
its total imports. That would be a very good sign.
But I will certainly commit to working very hard on this
issue.
Senator Menendez. Well, I appreciate that. This is
incredibly important to us. If countries like India are going
to pay in gold or find other ways to circumvent the sanctions,
then while I appreciate what you said about India sharing our
goals, it could ultimately continue to facilitate the resources
that are necessary for Iran to achieve its nuclear power.
And so, we need more than their goodwill of sharing our
goals. We need their actions to join us and the rest of the
international community in that regard. And I hope that, if
confirmed and in short order will hopefully be in India, that
this will be one of your top priorities.
Would you tell the committee, that this will be one of your
top priorities when you get there?
Ambassador Powell. It most certainly--it will be one of the
top priorities.
Senator Menendez. Now, last, and I won't take all of the
time that I have left, but I do want to ask a question that I
would like you to answer for the record. And it has to do with
the work that has to be done for our overall recruitment. I am
seriously concerned that despite years that I have been raising
this, including with your advent to this office, that the issue
of Hispanic recruitment at the State Department remains
pathetic.
The 2010 Census has indicated that there are over 50
million Hispanics in the United States, 16 percent of the
population. Yet, however, Hispanics make up only 5 percent of
the State Department's employees, 3.9 percent of the Foreign
Service officers, and about 6 percent of Foreign Service
specialists.
So, I would like two things for the record. One, can your
office share the most recent statistics with the committee as
well as what barriers you have encountered in any effort to
improve your outreach, recruitment, and retention of qualified
Hispanics?
In all of my work in this regard, this is really one of the
worst departments of the Federal Government as it relates to
Hispanic participation. I appreciate what has been said about
the State Department reflecting the look of America but when
Hispanics make up 16 percent of the population and their rate
of growth is not reflected at the State Department, that
doesn't include a full look of America.
So, as you move on to your next assignment, I would like to
get the benefit of whatever challenges there were so that we
can look at your successor in this role and have a strategic
plan as to how we turn those numbers around.
[The requested information follows:]
The Department of State is committed to a workforce that reflects
the diversity of America (racial/ethnic/national-origin, gender,
geographic, educational, and occupational) with the skills, innovation,
and commitment to advance our national interests in the 21st century.
Hispanics make up 4.7 percent of State Department Civil Service
employees, 3.9 percent of Foreign Service officers, and 6.6 percent of
Foreign Service Specialists. The number of self-identified Hispanics
who took the Foreign Service officer test during 2011 was 2,030 or 10
percent of the total. In FY 2011, the Department hired 49 Hispanics
into the Foreign Service, or 4 percent of all new Foreign Service
hires, and 27 into the Civil Service, or 2 percent of all Civil Service
hires. Our statistics are based on individuals who self-identify, and
do not take into account individuals who are multiracial.
DEPARTMENT OF STATE'S LARGE-SCALE RECRUITMENT EFFORTS
Targeted outreach is the cornerstone of the Department's
recruitment strategy. Specific recruitment portfolios include African-
Americans, Hispanics, Asian-Americans, American Indians and Alaskan
Natives, Native Hawaiians/Pacific Islanders, women, military veterans,
and those with disabilities. In FY 2011 our Diplomats in Residence and
Washington-based recruiters personally engaged an estimated 50,000
potential candidates at events across the country, supported by an
events management system which markets our public events across our
social recruitment networks. The system also facilitates ongoing
engagement and communication between the Department and prospects/
candidates.
The Department's careers Web site (www.careers.state.gov) is the
hub for all online recruitment engagement and receives an average of
60,000 visitors a week. Public forums that provide quick and open
responses to questions regarding Department career opportunities have
proven extremely successful, continuously receiving more than 20
million views since their inception in 2010.
Marketing studies demonstrate that minority professionals use
social media at higher rates than nonminority professionals. Our public
outreach is integrated with a comprehensive marketing and recruiting
program that includes leveraging new media and networking technologies
(Facebook, Linked-In, Twitter, YouTube), direct sourcing, e-mail
marketing, and online and limited print advertising with career and
niche-specific sites and publications (Hispanic Business, NSHMBA,
LatPro, Saludos, LATINAStyle).
In FY 2011, the Department spent $42,350 on advertising in Hispanic
print and electronic media. In addition, 39.5 percent of the total we
spent on print and electronic media included general diversity-specific
sites which incorporated Hispanics. In FY 2012, we are allocating
$95,789 to Hispanic-focused, career-specific media which is 21 percent
of our total spending on advertising in print and electronic media. An
additional 20 percent of the total media buy will include diversity-
specific sites which incorporate Hispanics.
The Department's Recruitment Outreach Office developed and hosted
Diversity Career Networking Events as a tool to target diverse
professionals for Department of State careers, specifically
highlighting deficit Foreign Service career tracks. In FY 2011, events
were hosted in Los Angeles; Denver; Santa Fe, Albuquerque, and Las
Cruces, NM; Miami; Cincinnati (to attract attendees at the National
League of United Latin American Citizens conference), Houston, Dallas,
New York, and Washington, DC, reaching over 1,000 candidates including
African Americans, Asian Americans, Hispanics, Native Americans, women,
and critical language speakers. In addition, over 900 Department
employees have volunteered to support our strategic outreach,
highlighting the diversity of our existing workforce and leveraging
existing networks of internal affinity groups like the Hispanic
Employment Council in Foreign Affairs Agencies (HECFAA).
COOPERATIVE EDUCATION PROGRAMS
The Department strives to achieve diversity throughout its
workforce through various career-entry programs, including the
Presidential Management Fellowship. All qualified applicants referred
to the Department by the Office of Personnel Management are given full
consideration. The Office of Recruitment conducts regular outreach to
institutions that serve Hispanics in order to increase the pool of
applicants from the Hispanic community and promote awareness of entry-
level employment opportunities.
Our outreach to college students plants the seeds of interest in
global public service and promotes a long-term interest in our
internships, fellowships, and careers. In FY 2009, Congress funded
additional paid internships for recruitment purposes. In 2009, 2010,
and 2011, our Diplomats in Residence identified outstanding, diverse
candidates for those internships, providing them the chance to
experience work in Washington, DC, and embassies and consulates around
the world. In 2011, 20 percent of these 80 paid interns were Hispanic.
Two particularly successful student programs are the Thomas R.
Pickering Foreign Affairs Undergraduate and Graduate Fellowships and
the Charles B. Rangel International Affairs Fellowship. These ROTC-like
programs provide financing for graduate school and paid professional
experience in Washington and at our embassies to highly qualified and
mostly minority students, in exchange for their commitment to the
Foreign Service. Diplomats in Residence help recruit candidates for
these fellowships, which have been essential to increasing the presence
of underrepresented groups in the Foreign Service. In FY 2011, 10 out
of 40 (25 percent) Pickering Fellows and 4 out of 20 (20 percent)
Rangel Fellows were Hispanic.
Ambassador Powell. Senator, may I respond just briefly?
Senator Menendez. Absolutely, sure.
Ambassador Powell. We clearly will give you more details in
the taken question, but I took very seriously your charge to me
when I accepted the Director General position, was confirmed by
the committee, to try to improve the outreach to the Hispanic
and other minority communities, to make sure that they
understood what opportunities were available to them at the
State Department, whether it was the Foreign Service or the
civil service and to expand the information that they had,
their ability to ask questions, to be informed, and to
participate with us.
I share with you a desire to see a better than 5-percent
ratio for the Hispanics in the Foreign Service and a 4.9 for
the civil service. But I do have some encouraging statistics
about the efforts of a very, very vigorous and targeted
recruitment effort that we have undertaken over the last 2 to 3
years.
In the past year, we have among the people who have taken
the Foreign Service test, we had an increase of 82 percent
among the Hispanics. From those who passed the test, having
taken it, 172-percent increase by Hispanics, and for the
hiring, a 43-percent increase. Those statistics, if we can
maintain them--and I certainly think that my successor will be
committed to the effort that we started--represent an
opportunity to improve on our total percentage of Hispanics.
I would also like to share one other statistic with the
committee because the other part of our outreach, in addition
to our minority populations, was to our disabled veterans. And
we have been able in the Foreign Service generalists to
increase by 350 percent the hiring of disabled veterans. And
among our specialists, a whopping 4,700-percent increase.
So I would also like to comment that the number of
minorities, including Hispanics, that are part of our Pickering
and Rangel Fellowship Programs, and these are opportunities
that provide graduate education opportunities as well as
internships and other experience in the department, has
increased dramatically.
And I personally served as the mentor for our Hispanic
affinity group, which has been reenergized under the leadership
of its new president, and I took great pride in working with
them.
Senator Menendez. Well, I appreciate that. I look forward
to seeing the employment figures which you gave, which sound
promising, what sections across the spectrum they are.
But thank you very much.
Senator Udall. Senator Webb.
Senator Webb. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And Ambassador--congratulations. I wish you well in the new
assignment, for which I know you are going to be confirmed. You
have got a terrific wealth of experience in this region. I
think you are going to be very valuable to our country when you
go there.
India is a long way from Iowa. I went to high school in
Nebraska. I can remember one cold winter morning working in a
grocery store, I was reading ``Hawaii'' by James Michener and
becoming fascinated with the stories of Asia, and he talked
about mangoes. I looked over on a shelf in this grocery store I
was working in--and there was a mango. I had never seen one
before and I bought it with all my tip money. I brought it home
that night, and I could not figure out how to peel it.
But I said someday I am going to go where they grow these
mangoes, and of course, a couple of years later, Uncle Sam
helped me out and sent me to Vietnam. But I know what it is
like to really become so intensely interested in an area, and
you certainly have the background when it comes to South Asia
and India.
That leads me to a question. Just something that I have
been wondering for some time, and I think from your background,
maybe you can help me understand it--help us understand it.
We consistently speak about India as a democracy, and in
political terms, one would think that is true. It certainly
seems demonstrably true. We talk consistently about the
entrepreneurship that comes out of India. Some of the most
wealthy entrepreneurs in the world are in India. Those who have
come to this country from India do extremely well.
And yet, if you look at ``The World Factbook,'' the per
capita income in India is about $800--at least the one that I
just looked at, ``The Economist World Factbook''--which is less
than $3 a day. What would be your observations about the nature
of this democracy in terms of the obvious, glaring inequality
from top to bottom in its society?
Ambassador Powell. Senator, I think India's democracy is a
thriving one with right now they are engaged in five states
voting, with over 200 million residents in one of those states.
So that part of the democracy, in terms of its forms and its
norms, is well established.
They are voting after a very vigorous debate over policies
and, particularly in these five states, are looking at the
economic reforms, whether they have answered the question that
we would ask here in the United States. Are you better off than
you were at the last election?
They are very, very vigorous in that debate. They are
looking at it very seriously.
I take a lesson from my time as a teacher of American
Government and American history of reminding myself that our
Constitution starts with the words about ``forming a more
perfect union.'' I think that India is in the process of doing
that as well.
It has enormous societal inequalities based on historic
caste systems of economic differences. But surely, one of the
engines that moves a society is the commitment to democracy, a
ballot box that allows people to vote for their leaders and to
vote for change, but also a rising economy.
I contrast my earlier time in India, where they were just
emerging from a very, very closed economic system, one which
required enormous amounts of work to start a business or to
close one, for that matter, with the current system. It is not
perfect yet. It still takes a long time in India. It is still
not a redtape free society. But all of those things are freeing
up India.
I think we have seen over the 20 years of economic reforms
a tremendous number of people who have been removed from
absolute poverty. They are into the Indian middle class now.
They are able to afford education for their children. They are
dedicated to that as one of the first things that they use
their disposable income for, but also a rising consumer
network, better housing.
Senator Webb. So you would say--and I have got one other
question I want to ask you, You are optimistic about the
potential for broader sharing of the wealth in that society?
Ambassador Powell. I am. I am very optimistic about India.
Senator Webb. I wanted also to get your comment on the
obvious and growing interrelationship among the United States,
ASEAN, and India in terms of naval activities, but also
security activities not only in the Indian Ocean and around
into what we call the Western Pacific or the South China Sea.
We have seen cooperative naval maneuvers between India and
Vietnam, for instance. At the same time, we have seen over the
past couple of years on many different levels increased Chinese
naval activity into the Indian Ocean. What are your thoughts
about this new mix?
Ambassador Powell. I think India is certainly one of those
countries that is a rising power in this part of the world. It
has interests that match ours in many ways, particularly as we
have looked at our defense dialogue of looking at maritime
security, of looking at the potential for cooperation and
humanitarian relief and disaster assistance. And also in
looking at piracy, particularly off the coast of Somalia, of
cooperating with the international effort there.
The dialogue that we have through the Defense Policy Group,
through ASEAN, through the Indian Ocean rim conferences, with
India playing a growing role in that, I think will assist us in
aligning a policy that works internationally to make sure that
we can protect those sea-lanes, that we will have a peaceful
area there.
Senator Webb. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Udall. Ambassador, the ongoing friction between
India and Pakistan is a strategic concern for the United States
and for the region. Do you believe that there may be a more
proactive role for the United States to play, which could help
ease tensions between the countries?
For instance, Sandia National Laboratories Cooperative
Monitoring Center--Sandia is located in Albuquerque, NM--has
programs to help create trust between countries, such as border
monitoring. As part of its mission, Sandia's Cooperative
Monitoring Center assists political and technical experts from
around the world to acquire the technology-based tools they
need to implement nonproliferation, arms control, and other
cooperative security measures.
It is a soft power tool that I believe could be utilized in
such hot spots. I would note that this is not a new proposal,
that a paper released by the Cooperative Monitoring Center in
2001, which was written by retired Pakistani Major General
Mahmud Ali Durrani, called for a ``cooperative border
monitoring experiment.''
What are your thoughts on these and other proposals to
relieve security tensions in the region?
Ambassador Powell. Senator, I firmly believe in encouraging
a dialogue and the resolution of problems between India and
Pakistan. I believe that ideas that are supported by both
countries, if General Durrani's ideas were to be endorsed
through the Track II or Track I negotiations that are very
active on both levels, that there would be a role for the
United States to play.
I have had the opportunity to meet many of the people that
are engaged in these dialogues and certainly think that the
United States plays a role in encouraging ideas and looking for
additional creative solutions, but that the primary
responsibility rests with the two countries. Having worked with
so many of their leaders and their diplomats, I am very
confident that they have the ability to do that, but certainly
don't rule out our ability to assist.
Senator Udall. Thank you.
During our visit to India, we visited a USAID site in
Jaipur. This site truly highlighted the needs of rural and
impoverished Indians. Work being done by USAID included aiding
women with prenatal care, vaccinations and other child
services, and training for women to help them interact with
other groups to help discuss community needs and solutions.
Madam Ambassador, what are your thoughts on such programs,
and how do you think our relations would be impacted if there
are substantial cuts to such USAID programs?
Ambassador Powell. I am very, very supportive of these
efforts. I think particularly supporting women's health has a
major impact on the health of their children. I have a
particular interest in looking at women's education
opportunities. Particularly in rural India, as in many parts of
the developing world, women have not had equal opportunity and
access to education. This is an area that as India needs to
expand its economy is one that I think is very important.
The AID programs that are being conducted in India are ones
that I look forward to visiting and to having a better
understanding of. But I think particularly the one you visited
is one that would warm my heart. I would like to have the
opportunity to do that, if confirmed, but also to look at the
opportunities to do things like the new stoves that are both
ecologically and in terms of health a much improved facility.
This is something that Secretary Clinton has taken a great deal
of interest in.
In terms of the impact of our aid program, our numbers and
the amount of assistance to India has been reduced
substantially from what I remember. But I think it is a quality
program, and I would like to see it continued so that it can be
this incubator for innovation and development technology and
development programming, that we can identify things that work
in this environment and see how they can be plussed up by the
private sector, by the government of India, but also exported
to other developing countries that may have similar problems.
Senator Udall. Ambassador, we went into a village and saw--
you mentioned the cookstoves and Secretary Clinton's
initiative. We went in and saw in a village locals cooking on
traditional stoves. It was fueled, I think, by dung. It was
very dirty. The smoke was all over the house. I mean, it was a
pretty dreadful situation.
Could you tell us a little bit more about the initiative
Secretary Clinton has on the stoves and how that has
progressed?
Ambassador Powell. I am going to have to take the question
to get you the details on it, but I know that it is one she is
committed to. And I have had the similar experience that you
had. Not only do you deprive the fields from the benefits of
having the fertilizer, but you also spread enormous amounts of
smoke that, particularly for the lungs and health of children
and the women who are doing the cooking, is quite dramatic.
And the new smokeless stoves both cut down on the amount of
energy that is required, but also contribute far, far less to
pollutants that damage their health.
Senator Udall. Thank you.
And if you would supplement the record a little more on
that, I think that would be great.
Ambassador Powell. I will be glad to do so.
[The requested information follows:]
Secretary Clinton announced the Global Alliance for Clean
Cookstoves in September 2010 as an innovative public-private
partnership led by the United Nations Foundation to save lives, improve
livelihoods, empower women, and combat climate change by creating a
thriving global market for clean and efficient household cooking
solutions. Today, the Alliance comprises of over 250 partners,
including 27 countries. In November 2011, the Alliance published a
roadmap to achieve universal adoption of clean cookstoves and fuels.
Under this strategy, the Alliance will work with its public and private
partners to focus on three core thematic activities: enhancing demand
for clean cookstoves and fuels; strengthening supply of clean
cookstoves and fuels; and fostering an enabling environment for a
thriving market for clean cookstoves and fuels. The U.S. Government's
commitment to the Alliance includes diplomatic support and an
investment of up to $105 million across 10 Federal agencies over the
first 5 years of the Alliance, with a focus on financing, applied
research, capacity-building, stove testing, field implementation, and
evaluation. The Secretary held a public event in Chennai, during her
July 2011 visit to India, to announce new Indian private sector
partners and raise international awareness and engagement on these
issues. Special Representative for Global Partnerships, Kris
Balderston, would be happy to provide you a detailed briefing on the
activities of the Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves.
Senator Udall. Senator Lugar.
Senator Lugar. I have no further questions. I simply wish
the very best to the Ambassador.
Ambassador Powell. Thank you.
Senator Lugar. I look forward to strongly supporting your
nomination.
Ambassador Powell. Thank you very much.
Senator Udall. Ambassador, let me, on behalf of the
committee, just thank you very much for your testimony today.
We are going to keep the record open for questions for the
record for 24 hours. We would ask that all members please
submit any questions before tomorrow afternoon.
Senator Udall. Also, I have been informed by Chairman Kerry
that the committee is working to get Ambassador Powell's
nomination on the agenda for the business meeting to take place
on February 14, and I believe, Senator Lugar, the ranking
member, is also aware of that? Yes.
Ambassador Powell. Thank you very much.
Senator Udall. So, thank you.
And being no further questions and no further business, the
hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 3:40 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
----------
Additional Questions and Answers Submitted for the Record
Responses of Hon. Nancy J. Powell to Questions Submitted by
Senator John F. Kerry
Question. How can the United States best support India and Pakistan
in their talks and efforts to resolve regional tensions? If confirmed,
what types of steps will you take to facilitate improved relations
between India and Pakistan?
Answer. The United States has always welcomed dialogue and better
relations between India and Pakistan. The pace, scope, and character of
the dialogue are for Indian and Pakistani leaders to decide. If
confirmed, I will encourage all dialogue between India and Pakistan,
particularly including the expansion of trade and strengthening of
people-to-people linkages between the countries. The United States
should continue to encourage both Track I and Track II efforts to
improve relations. We particularly welcome the upcoming meeting of
trade ministries and the planned visit to Pakistan of a large
commercial delegation. Normalizing trade relations will bring benefits
to both countries.
We applaud the dialogue between India and Pakistan on bilateral
issues, including on expanding economic contacts. The latest rounds of
dialogue have produced concrete steps to improve relations in ways that
will directly benefit the Indian and Pakistani people, particularly on
easing barriers to trade and commerce. It is our hope that this process
of normalization in both directions, including the eventual extension
of most-favored-nation status by Pakistan and the reduction of
nontariff barriers by India, will lead to expanded economic opportunity
and stability for both countries that also could serve as a much-needed
catalyst for regional integration.
Question. What steps can the Indians realistically take this year
to liberalize their economy, particularly to encourage more foreign
investment?
Answer. In November 2011, India's Cabinet voted to allow 51 percent
FDI in the multibrand retail sector and 100 percent investment in the
single brand retail sector. Multibrand retail implementation has been
postponed, but we remain hopeful it will be implemented. The FDI
increase in single-brand retail has moved forward, though with local
procurement and small business provisions that foreign companies will
need to work through before they can enter the Indian market in a
significant way. We have also continued to encourage liberalization in
the aviation, pensions, and insurance sectors, as well as in defense-
offsets. The release of India's FY 2013 budget and 12th Five-Year Plan
in March may provide some additional clarity into the government's
plans for its economic reform agenda.
Question. How can the United States work with India to encourage
further political and economic reforms in Burma?
Answer. India serves as a model for the values we hope will become
universal across East Asia and is in a strong position to encourage
Burma to deepen its democratic reform efforts. Although India and the
United States have historically approached Burma differently, both
countries have welcomed the significant Burmese reforms, share a strong
desire to see these reforms continue, and support Burma's reintegration
into the region. In support of this goal, the Indian Government hosted
a Burmese parliamentary delegation in December 2011 to study India's
democracy ahead of Burmese by-elections this spring. India's continued
outreach, both to the Burmese Government, as well as to opposition
leaders, such as Aung San Suu Kyi, reinforces this message. In fall
2011, India offered Burma a $500 million line of credit to support
development of transport and energy infrastructure and is exploring the
development of new transport corridors through Burma that would link
India with markets in Southeast Asia. We continue to urge the Indian
Government to use its deep historical friendship and cultural ties with
Burma to engage its civil society and encourage concrete action on
political and economic reform and national reconciliation. In addition,
Special Representative and Policy Coordinator for Burma, Derek
Mitchell, has proposed to visit India in the coming months to explore
ways to deepen our bilateral cooperation.
Question. How can the United States work with India to encourage
further political and economic reforms in Sri Lanka?
Answer. The Department of State believes the Government of Sri
Lanka needs to take concrete actions to promote national
reconciliation, strengthen democratic institutions, and credibly
investigate violations of international humanitarian law and
international human rights law alleged to have occurred during Sri
Lanka's 26-year separatist conflict. We continue to engage closely with
India on encouraging Sri Lanka to implement a comprehensive national
reconciliation process that includes holding those credibly alleged to
have violated international humanitarian law and international human
rights law accountable for their actions. Both the United States and
India have also emphasized the need to implement the recommendations of
Sri Lanka's own Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission in a
timely manner.
Question. Last week Bloomberg New Energy Finance released a new
report showing that India led in the growth of renewable energy
investments in 2011, with a 52-percent jump to over $10 billion. This
jump in investments was helped by India's growing wind and solar
sectors. If confirmed, please describe what you plan to do to connect
this growing market demand with the technologies and private sector
investment based in the United States, where we are a leading innovator
and developer for many of these clean energy technologies. What would
you do to help implement the Partnership to Advance Clean Energy, one
of our largest bilateral relationships in this area?
Answer. In 2009 Prime Minister Singh and President Obama agreed to
strengthen United States-India cooperation on energy and climate change
through a number of bilateral and multilateral initiatives. One of
these initiatives is the U.S.-India Partnership to Advance Clean Energy
(PACE), which seeks to improve energy access and promote low-carbon
growth through the research and deployment of clean energy
technologies. PACE includes bilateral public-private projects that have
advanced the goals under the CEO Forum.
If confirmed, I would continue to promote and encourage the sale of
U.S. technology to India to meet India's ambitious targets for the
deployment of renewable energy, energy efficiency, and other clean
energy solutions in support of the National Export Initiative. Over the
next 10 years, India is expected to be one of the largest sources of
new solar capacity and other clean energy solutions. India will look to
the United States to supply the most advanced solar technology in the
world.
If confirmed, I would continue the Embassy's strong support of the
Energy Cooperation Program, a public private partnership in PACE that
leverages the U.S. private sector to promote commercially viable
project development and deployment in clean energy and energy
efficiency.
The United States also has the opportunity to shape India's clean
energy market through financing and investment. If confirmed, I would
fully support the efforts of the Overseas Private Investment
Corporation, Export-Import Bank, and U.S. Trade and Development Agency
to promote U.S. clean energy exports and ensure U.S. companies can play
a significant role in developing India's clean energy market.
Largely due to clean energy contracts, India has become the largest
loan portfolio for the Overseas Private Investment Corporation and will
soon constitute the largest portfolio for the Export-Import Bank. If
confirmed, I would continue to advocate for the sale of U.S. technology
in clean and renewable energy and energy efficiency to keep India as
the top destination for U.S. Government-supported sales. Finally, if
confirmed, I would help bring to fruition the Joint Clean Energy
Research and Development Center that will bring together industry and
academic experts in the United States and India to mobilize $100
million in funding for clean energy research to benefit both countries.
Question. What is the status of the TAPI pipeline, particularly
with respect to securing Western multinational involvement in pipeline
operation and the associated gas field development in Turkmenistan?
What is the status of plans between Pakistan and India to jointly
develop the Daulatabad gas field in Turkmenistan? What is the
administration's position on these plans? Pakistan has reportedly
proposed a uniform transit fee for the import of gas under the TAPI
pipeline project, which it would receive from India and pay to
Afghanistan. What is the administration's position on the pipeline
transit fee? What are its economic implications?
Answer. Since the TAPI Intergovernmental Agreement was signed by
the Presidents of Turkmenistan, Pakistan, and Afghanistan and the
Minister of Petroleum and Natural Gas of India in December 2010, the
parties have been negotiating gas sales and purchase agreements. We
believe these agreements may be finalized in the next few months. All
four TAPI parties welcome the participation of international oil
companies (IOCs) in the project, although there are differing views on
exactly what the role of the IOCs would be. There has been some
erroneous reporting on development of the gas field that will feed
TAPI. Although the Daulatabad field had initially been selected, the
current plan is for the gas to come from the South Yolotan/Galkynysh
gas field. Although we understand that both Pakistan and India would
like to participate in development of the gas field feeding TAPI, we
are not aware that any agreements have been reached. We believe the
prospects for the TAPI project would be enhanced if an IOC, perhaps
working together with Pakistani and Indian companies, were involved
along with Turkmengaz, the Turkmen Government gas company, in
developing the gas field that would feed the TAPI pipeline. We have
advocated for American companies to play this role. The transit fee and
other commercial issues are a matter for negotiation among the TAPI
parties and the companies that ultimately compose the consortium that
will build and operate the pipeline, so it would be premature for us to
comment on the transit fee. If realized, the TAPI pipeline could help
meet India's fast growing need for natural gas and also foster regional
economic development.
Question. What steps is the administration taking to implement the
New Silk Road initiative, consistent with the recommendations put forth
by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee December 2011 report on
``Central Asia and the Transition in Afghanistan''?
Answer. The report on ``Central Asia and the Transition in
Afghanistan'' put forth by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in
December 2011 recommended that U.S. policy should ``translate the New
Silk Road (NSR) vision into a working strategy for the broader region
beyond Afghanistan.''
In 2011, high-level engagement on the New Silk Road (NSR) vision
supported this recommendation by achieving broad international
consensus on the need to promote greater economic integration
throughout Afghanistan, Central Asia, and South Asia. India has been
particularly vocal in endorsing publicly this New Silk Road vision. In
2012, we plan to take additional concrete steps to operationalize the
NSR concept, focusing on the expansion of energy, trade, and transit
between South and Central Asia, with Afghanistan at its heart. We will
also capitalize on people-to-people linkages that support the NSR
vision, such as follow-on activities related to the 2011 Women's
Economic Symposium in Bishkek, promotion of regional commerce
associations, and enhanced cooperation with multilateral organizations
active in the region such as the Organization for Security and
Cooperation in Europe and OECD.
______
Responses of Hon. Nancy J. Powell to Questions Submitted by
Senator Richard G. Lugar
Question. As a growing oil consumer, India plays an increasingly
important role in global oil markets. However, since India is not in
the OECD, they also are not formally party to oil crisis response
mechanisms. In your view, should the United States advocate for full
Indian membership in the International Energy Agency?
Answer. Noting India's growing weight as a major energy consumer
(No. 2 in the non-OECD world) and as part of a broader USG effort to
integrate India into institutions of global governance and multilateral
cooperation, we continue to encourage India's growing cooperation with
the International Energy Agency (IEA). At present, there are several
prerequisites for IEA membership, such as OECD membership, adherence to
shared IEA principles and a requirement of 90 days of strategic
petroleum stocks (for emergency response). We have been working with
India on energy security through the U.S.-India Energy Dialogue and
other bilateral mechanisms and support India's Enhanced Engagement
program with the OECD, with a view toward eventual IEA membership for
India. India should have a seat at the table with the world's major
consumers to coordinate on a possible collective response in the event
of a major oil supply disruption, exchange views on key energy
dynamics, and discuss energy security issues.
Question. The Indian economy offers tremendous opportunities for
U.S. trade and investment in both conventional energy and clean energy
technologies. Yet, numerous obstacles exist from pricing controls to
local content requirements. Is the administration playing a role in
spurring pricing reform in the oil and gas sector, which allow
investors are reasonable return on investment? What is the
administration doing to encourage the liberalization of the Indian
power markets? Please describe local content requirements in renewable
energy, and the administration's position on those rules.
Answer. Energy and climate change cooperation is a strategic pillar
under the U.S.-India Strategic Dialogue, and the Energy Dialogue is the
main bilateral platform to advance our efforts to improve energy
access, infrastructure development, regulatory frameworks, and energy
security. During Prime Minister Singh's November 2009 visit to
Washington, he and President Obama announced a Memorandum of
Understanding on clean energy, now known as the U.S.-India Partnership
to Advance Clean Energy (PACE). PACE incorporates an ambitious energy
agenda, focused on bilateral cooperation on energy security, climate
change, clean energy research, shale gas, and private sector
participation in India's energy sector.
Department of Energy Deputy Secretary Poneman traveled to India in
July 2011 for the most recent meeting of the Energy Dialogue, which
included senior-level representatives from Indian Government ministries
in the energy sector, including petroleum and natural gas, and new and
renewable energy. Both sides noted the importance of appropriate policy
and regulatory frameworks in improving energy policies and energy
access. We have engaged with numerous Indian Government ministries,
including the Ministry of Commerce and Industry and the Ministry of
Renewable Energy on local content requirements both during policy
development and during policy implementation. U.S. companies, such as
Azure Power Ltd. and First Solar, are active players in India's solar
market. India has become the largest loan portfolio for the Overseas
Private Investment Corporation and will soon become the largest
portfolio for the Export-Import Bank, largely due to clean energy
development financing. The Export-Import Bank has financed 75 million
dollars' worth of solar power generating projects in India and is
considering loans worth an additional $500 million to support India's
growing solar infrastructure. The U.S. Department of Commerce
facilitated expanded trade and commercial partnerships in clean
technology products through a November 2011 trade mission.
As India's solar industry matures, Indian regulators are revising
their regulations for the industry. If confirmed, I would work with the
Indian Government to ensure that India's regulations continue to allow
access to products manufactured by U.S. companies so that India can
enjoy the best technologies at the lowest prices.
Question. India has the sought the support of the U.S Government in
securing a permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council. Can
you give us an update on efforts between the U.S. and Indian
Governments to promote greater cooperation on U.N. and multilateral
measures generally?
Answer. India has partnered with the United States at the U.N. and
other multilateral fora on several key issues, including its support in
February 2012 for a (ultimately unsuccessful) Security Council
resolution calling for an end to the current violence in Syria.
Moreover, India has joined the United States four times in support of
International Atomic Energy Agency Board of Governors votes on Iran's
nuclear program and has been a strong proponent of a Fissile Material
Cut-Off Treaty at the Conference for Disarmament. Given India's status
as a current member of the U.N. Security Council, and its historic role
as one of the leading providers of U.N. peacekeeping troops, we have
welcomed the opportunity to increase our bilateral exchanges on these
issues, including the Government of India's decision last March to
resume the bilateral U.S.-India Peacekeeping Joint Working Group. India
also participates with the United States in a wide range of East Asian
multilateral forums, including the ASEAN Regional Forum and the East
Asia summit, where Indian Prime Minister Singh met with President Obama
last fall. Consistent with the administration's foreign policy
``pivot'' to Asia, we look forward to continuing to consult with India
closely on issues affecting the Asia-Pacific region and the globe.
Question. The United States and India have pledged to work together
to share knowledge and technology as part of an ``Evergreen
Revolution'' to extend food security in India as well as to countries
in Africa. This partnership includes plans to increase agricultural
productivity, reduce trade barriers, and develop long-term sustainable
economic development. Can you give us an update on these efforts and
describe what further steps can be taken to achieve food security for
the greatest number of people?
Answer. As one of our strategic partnership countries, India is
actively engaged in our food security efforts, and is itself a driver
of global solutions in food security. Through the Partnership for an
Evergreen Revolution, the United States and India are working together
to leverage expertise to enhance weather and climate forecasting for
agriculture, improve food processing and farm-to-market links, and
partner for global food security in Africa.
As a key regional player, India is an active partner in our efforts
to make sustained and accountable commitments to fight against global
hunger, address the longer term challenges of global food security, and
build future markets. USAID is currently transforming its relationship
in India to highlight Indian innovations which may have global
applications. On his recent trip, USAID Administrator Raj Shah launched
the Confederation of Indian Industries (CII)-Food and Agriculture
Center of Excellence (FACE) event which aims to develop a partnership
strategy for expanding rural business hubs to eastern India, and then
to Africa. Developing the 30 hubs in eastern India and promoting the
adoption of agrobusiness hubs for agriculture growth globally,
including in Africa, will expand innovations in post-harvest
technologies and establish greater food safety/security standards. If
confirmed, I will support private sector partnerships such as the CII-
FACE initiative, which will play a catalytic role in transferring
innovations to improve food security in India and Africa. The U.S.
Government and the Government of India are currently exploring
opportunities to train African participants from Kenya, Liberia, and
Malawi at Indian universities and research and technical institutes in
mutually agreed capacity building programs. I believe Indian private
sector and civil society hold great promise in advancing innovations
and leveraging resources which can improve development outcomes.
Question. How can the United States play a constructive role in the
India Pakistan dialogue? As Ambassador, what could you do to increase
cooperation in the areas of security and intelligence sharing between
the United States and India?
Answer. The United States has always welcomed dialogue and better
relations between India and Pakistan. The pace, scope, and character of
the dialogue are for Indian and Pakistani leaders to decide.
We applaud the dialogue between India and Pakistan on bilateral
issues, including on expanding economic contacts. The latest rounds of
dialogue have produced concrete steps to improve relations in ways that
will directly benefit the Indian and Pakistani people, particularly on
easing barriers to trade and commerce. It is our hope that this process
of normalization in both directions, including the eventual extension
of most-favored-nation status by Pakistan and the reduction of
nontariff barriers by India, will lead to expanded economic opportunity
and stability for both countries that also could serve as a much-needed
catalyst for regional integration.
With respect to security cooperation with India, homeland security
and counterterrorism cooperation are areas where our partnership with
India now operates at unprecedented levels. If confirmed, I will
continue to encourage a close, productive, and cooperative relationship
with India in these areas that includes regular and frequent exchanges
of information. We are committed to providing India full support in
ongoing counterterrorism investigations, through continued exchanges
between designated agencies and by bringing the perpetrators of the
2008 Mumbai terrorism attack to justice, which killed Americans along
with citizens of many other countries. We remain deeply concerned about
the potential of another terrorist attack--in India, the United States,
and elsewhere in the world--and are working very closely with our
Indian and Pakistani colleagues to prevent such an incident.
Question. What steps is the administration taking to pressure the
Pakistan Government to bring those responsible for the November 2008
Mumbai terrorist attacks to justice? What further steps would you
suggest be taken?
Answer. We continue to press Pakistan to bring those responsible
for the 2008 Mumbai attacks--which claimed the lives of six Americans
among the scores of innocent victims--to justice. Moreover, we have
stressed to Pakistani authorities the dangers of Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT)
and the importance of efforts to disrupt the group's activities. We
also remain concerned about the potential of another terrorist attack--
in India, the United States, or elsewhere in the world--and are working
closely with our Indian and Pakistani colleagues to prevent such an
incident. We have a close, productive, and cooperative relationship
with India on counterterrorism that includes regular and frequent
exchanges of information. We are committed to providing full
cooperation and support in ongoing counterterrorism investigations,
through continued exchanges of information between designated agencies
and by bringing the perpetrators of the 2008 Mumbai terror attack to
justice. Homeland security and counterterrorism cooperation are areas
where our partnership with India operates at unprecedented levels.
Question. The Indian Government has traditionally been slow to open
its doors to foreign investment. How can we advance the ability of U.S.
companies to invest in India? There are regulations now permitting
foreign single brand retailers to operate in India. How can we further
discussions with India to allow a broader range of retail industries to
fully operate in India?
Answer. We encourage India to have an open and welcoming
environment to foreign investment including investment from the United
States. We are always looking for new ways to support U.S. businesses
overseas and facilitate opportunities for investment that India needs
to support its development goals, particularly in infrastructure.
Though businesses interested in investing in India do face some
challenges, we are encouraged by the Indian Government's intention to
liberalize investment into some sectors, including retail. One
mechanism we have to directly advance the ability for U.S. companies to
do business or have a level playing field when they invest in India is
continued negotiations on and completion of a bilateral investment
treaty (BIT). A BIT would deepen our economic relationship with India
and provide important protections to investors of each country. If
confirmed, I will encourage India to continue making progress on
economic liberalization, which supports jobs and growth in both our
countries.
Question. We have had on-and-off negotiations with India on a
bilateral investment treaty. How would completion of such a treaty
advance the ability of U.S. companies and enterprises to invest in
India?
Answer. We had very positive Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT)
technical discussions with our Ministry of Finance and Ministry of
Commerce counterparts last October, and are looking forward to the next
round of discussions being scheduled for this spring. High-standard
BITs like that which we hope to conclude with India can encourage
investment by improving investment climates, promoting economic
reforms, and strengthening the rule of law. Completion of the BIT could
provide investors in India and the United States increased market
access; protections that guard against discriminatory, arbitrary, or
otherwise harmful treatment of investments; and legal remedies for
breaches of the treaty. If confirmed, I will encourage continued,
robust engagement to work together to conclude a BIT that will support
our efforts to promote economic growth and job creation, and to advance
our strategic engagement with India.
Question. In India there is a large community of exiled Tibetans,
led by the Dalai Lama and the new democratically elected Kalon Tripa
(whom the Tibetans refer to as their Prime Minister), which has been
hosted by the Indian Government for many years and which receives some
funding from the United States. Will you include this programmatic
assistance in your oversight of U.S. programs in India, and will you
meet with His Holiness Dalai Lama and the Kalon Tripa to discuss issues
of mutual concern?
Answer. We appreciate the fact that India for many years has
provided a welcome reception for refugees from Tibet. The State
Department, through the Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration
(PRM), oversees U.S. assistance to the Tibetan refugee population in
India and Nepal. In India, support has centered around humanitarian
assistance for Tibetan refugees in the area of new refugee arrivals,
health, and education. PRM also funds two Tibetan Refugee Reception
Centers in New Delhi, and Dharamsala, as well as a transit center in
Kathmandu, through regular contributions to the Tibet Fund ($2.3
million in FY11). The USG is in the process of increasing support for
Tibetan settlements in India and Nepal through a USAID-funded grant to
support organic agriculture and livelihood development. The U.S.
mission to India supports the Tibetan Scholarship Program through a
congressionally mandated grant to the Tibet Fund. Mission India has
been and will remain involved in supporting this assistance.
Like previous Ambassadors to India, if confirmed, I plan to
continue the tradition of engagement on Tibetan refugee issues,
including meeting with His Holiness, the Dalai Lama, as an
internationally recognized religious leader and Nobel Laureate, and
recipient of the Congressional Gold Medal.
Question. What high-level exchanges have occurred between our
governments regarding the status of liability protections for U.S.
nuclear exporters to India? What further steps would you suggest to
encourage greater cooperation on this issue? And more broadly, what is
current state of our energy dialogue with New Delhi?
Answer. Completing our civil nuclear cooperation partnership is
central to both our nations' long-term prosperity and India's future
energy security. Senior executive branch officials from State, Energy,
Commerce, and the White House have raised our concerns with their
counterparts in the Indian Government over the past year. Prime
Minister Singh agreed last November to host a delegation of U.S.
officials and private companies to discuss our concerns and to find a
way ahead ``within the four corners'' of Indian law. We heard clearly
in this first meeting India's commitment to ensuring a level playing
field for U.S. companies, which was reiterated during Foreign Secretary
Mathai's early-February visit to Washington. Our companies are
interested in continuing our discussions on liability as well as in
making tangible progress on commercial arrangements this year. If
confirmed, I will continue our engagement at all levels on this
matter--political, legal, and commercial--and believe we will make
measurable progress this year.
______
Responses of Hon. Nancy J. Powell to Questions Submitted by
Senator Robert P. Casey, Jr.
Question. Although international conventions place liability for
nuclear accidents solely with the operators of nuclear reactors,
current Indian law would also make suppliers potentially liable.
American companies like Westinghouse that wish to provide peaceful
nuclear technology to India could be held at unreasonable liability
levels, and maintain that they can not bid on Indian nuclear contracts
until the liability law is changed. Meanwhile, French and Russian
companies, which might not have the same reservations with respect to
the liability law, are aggressively pursuing this market.
Based on the United States assessment of the Indian
political situation, how possible is a change in Indian
liability law?
As Ambassador, what specific steps will you take to ensure
that U.S. companies are able to compete for this critical
market?
Answer. Completing our civil nuclear cooperation partnership is
central to both our nations' long-term prosperity and India's future
energy security. Senior executive branch officials from State, Energy,
Commerce, and the White House have raised our concerns with their
counterparts in the Indian Government over the past year. Prime
Minister Singh agreed last November to host a delegation of U.S.
officials and private companies to discuss our civil nuclear
cooperation and to find a way ahead ``within the four corners'' of
Indian law. We heard clearly in the first meeting of this group India's
commitment to ensuring a level playing field for U.S. companies. Indian
Foreign Secretary Mathai reiterated this during his early-February
visit to Washington, declaring at Center for Strategic and
International Studies, that American firms will be provided a level
playing field, and the Indian Government is prepared to address
specific concerns within the framework of the law. We have remained
engaged and must now take practical steps to advance our cooperation
with Foreign Secretary Mathai. Our companies are interested in
continuing our discussions on liability as well as in making tangible
progress on commercial arrangements this year. If confirmed, I will
continue our engagement at all levels on this matter--political, legal,
and commercial.
Question. Despite mounting international support for isolating the
Iranian regime, India continues to not cooperate fully in sanctioning
Iran. While it has taken steps to diminish its financial and energy
ties with Iran, it continues to do a limited amount of business with
the country.
What is the United States doing to translate India's stated
opposition to a nuclear-armed Iran into concrete action aimed
at preventing the regime's acquisition of a nuclear weapon?
As Ambassador, how will you work to increase India's
commitment to isolating the Iranian regime? What specific steps
will you encourage India to undertake in the near term to
demonstrate this commitment?
Answer. India is very cognizant of the significant regional
implications that would result from Iran acquiring a nuclear weapon,
and Prime Minister Singh has stated on multiple occasions that an
Iranian nuclear weapons program would be unacceptable to India.
Moreover, India has voted four times with the United States in the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Board of Governors on Iran's
nuclear program and consistently has called on Iran to fulfill its
international obligations as a nonnuclear weapon state under the
Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and comply with EU and UNSC
resolutions. If confirmed, I will work closely with my counterparts in
India to ensure that our governments continue to send a strong message
to Iran that its behavior is unacceptable and carries serious
consequences. Already, Indian companies have, to the best of our
knowledge, ceased activities such as selling refined petroleum products
to Iran. However, Iranian oil continues to represent a significant--
though steadily declining--share of Indian oil imports. If confirmed, I
want to work closely with Indian officials to identify and encourage
alternative sources of imported oil that also will help to ensure
India's energy security for the future.
Question. Despite the high demand for physicians in many areas of
the United States, Indian physicians have encountered difficulty in
obtaining their J-1 visas to enter the United States. Hospitals in
underserved areas of Pennsylvania have benefited greatly from their
experience with visiting Indian physicians, but undue delays in issuing
visas have prevented some physicians from entering the country.
What steps is the United States taking to improve the
efficiency of the J-1 visa process for foreign physicians,
particularly those with agreements to work in Medically
Underserved Areas?
As Ambassador, how will you work to ensure that Indian
physicians with the required licenses and certificates are able
to obtain visas and enter the United States in a timely manner?
Answer. Upon completion of a J-1 medical residency program
sponsored by Educational Commission for Foreign Medical Graduates, many
physician applicants who wish to adjust to an H-1B status in order to
work in a U.S. hospital must obtain a waiver of the 2-year residency
requirement required by INA 212(e). Once an applicant completes the J-1
waiver application adjudication process with the Waiver Review
Division, it forwards any favorable recommendations to U.S. Citizenship
and Immigration Services (USCIS), which has the authority to grant
waivers. The Department is committed to completing these decisions
within 4 to 6 weeks, so that applicants can receive a timely decision
from USCIS.
Currently, Consular Team India works diligently to facilitate all
legitimate travel to the United States. We have not experienced any
significant delays in issuing
J-1 visas to Indian physicians with the appropriate licenses,
certificates, and documents. We anticipate strong future growth in visa
demand in India and will continue to focus on leveraging our resources
and expertise to maintain our short appointment wait times, currently
less than 10 days across the country, and efficient handling, with 97
percent of cases processed by the next business day. Although we
recommend that everyone apply early, any visa applicant who urgently
needs to travel can request an expedited visa appointment.
NOMINATIONS OF FREDERICK D. BARTON, WILLIAM E. TODD, AND SARA MARGLIT
AVIEL
----------
TUESDAY, MARCH 13, 2012
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Foreign Relations,
Washington, DC.
----------
Hon. Frederick D. Barton, of Maine, to be an Assistant
Secretary of State (Conflict and Stabilization
Operations) and to be Coordinator for Reconstruction
and Stabilization
Hon. William E. Todd, of Virginia, to be Ambassador to the
Kingdom of Cambodia
Sara Margalit Aviel, of California, to be United States
Alternate Executive Director of the International Bank
for Reconstruction and Development
----------
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:05 a.m., in
room SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Tom Udall
presiding.
Present: Senators Udall and Corker.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. TOM UDALL,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW MEXICO
Senator Udall. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee will
now come to order.
Let me welcome our nominees who are here this morning: the
Honorable Frederick D. Barton, of Maine, to be Assistant
Secretary of State for Conflict and Stabilization Operations
and also the Coordinator for Reconstruction and Stabilization;
the Honorable William E. Todd, of Virginia, to be Ambassador to
the Kingdom of Cambodia; and Ms. Sara Aviel, of California, to
be the United States Alternate Executive Director of the
International Bank for Reconstruction and Development.
We meet this morning to consider these three nominations,
which are important to achieving the smart power goals of the
United States--Ambassador Frederick Barton to be Assistant
Secretary of Conflict and Stabilization, as I have said, and
the Honorable William Todd and Mrs. Sara Aviel. All of these
nominees play a crucial role in promoting the smart power of
the United States.
In 2009, Joseph S. Nye Jr., a Harvard professor, former
Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security and a
former chair of the National Intelligence Council, wrote a
piece in Foreign Affairs titled, ``Get Smart: Combining Hard
and Soft Power.'' In this piece, he began with a statement by
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who, at her confirmation
hearing, stated: ``America cannot solve the most pressing
problems on our own, and the world cannot solve them without
America. We must use what has been called smart power, the full
range of tools at our disposal.''
Joseph Nye Jr. would conclude in his piece that, ``The
United States can become a smart power by once again investing
in global public goods, providing things that people and
governments in all quarters of the world want but cannot attain
on their own. Achieving economic development, securing public
health, coping with climate change, and maintaining an open,
stable international economic system all require leadership
from the United States.
``By complementing its military and economic might with
greater investments in its soft power, the United States can
rebuild the framework it needs to tackle tough global
challenges. That would be true smart power.'' And he ended
there.
The three nominees we are considering today will all serve,
if confirmed, at the front lines of smart power for the United
States. Since the earliest days of our republic, our
Ambassadors have served at the tip of the spear of our
diplomatic mission, using smart power when it was simply known
as diplomacy.
Our Ambassador to Cambodia will continue the long legacy of
past Ambassadors to the region. The formation of the
International Bank for Reconstruction and Development was one
of the early tools the United States employed immediately after
World War II to help promote stability and development across
the globe.
The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development
has been responsible for fostering economic development and
stability in developing countries, improving lives, and working
to prevent conflict through economic development before it
occurs. The Alternate Executive Director of the International
Bank for Reconstruction and Development plays a key role in
tackling the World Bank's development goals.
And today, we will also consider the nominee to fill a new
position, the Assistant Secretary of State for Conflict
Stabilization Operations and Coordinator for Reconstruction and
Stabilization. These new positions present many opportunities
to improve coordination between agencies from within the State
Department to respond to conflicts and prevent them from
occurring.
So we welcome our nominees today, and as I am going to--if
Senator Corker wants to make any opening, or we can go directly
to your statements. Feel free to introduce family members that
are here and any description you have of them. I know some of
you have some family members that have some history either with
the Department or service overseas. And we very much appreciate
the sacrifice we know that the entire family makes in these
kinds of positions.
And with that, Senator Corker, if you want to say a few
words, welcoming, and then we will proceed to the witnesses.
STATEMENT OF HON. BOB CORKER,
U.S. SENATOR FROM TENNESSEE
Senator Corker. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The chairman knows I don't make a lot of opening
statements. But we welcome each of you and certainly your
families. Sometimes the families can have greater impact than
the nominees. But we thank you all.
I know that Ms. Aviel has been in our office several times
since last fall. I may not stay for a lot of questioning after
your original testimony, but we will follow up with other
questions.
But we thank all of you for your willingness to serve in
this way and coming before us today, and I look forward to your
statements.
Senator Udall. Thank you.
And please, your full statement will be in the record. So
we're asking you to just address the committee for 5 minutes at
this point. And why don't we start with Mr. Barton?
STATEMENT OF HON. FREDERICK D. BARTON, OF MAINE, TO BE AN
ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF STATE, CONFLICT AND STABILIZATION
OPERATIONS, AND TO BE COORDINATOR FOR RECONSTRUCTION AND
STABILIZATION
Ambassador Barton. Great. Thank you very much, Senator
Udall. Thank you, Senator Corker. It is great to be here today.
I would also like to give a special thanks to your
colleagues, Senator Kerry and Senator Lugar, for their path-
breaking work in this conflict and crisis space. They have been
pushing for us to do what we are trying to do right now for a
number of years, and happy to have this opportunity, if
confirmed.
I would also like to thank the SFRC staff. They have been
working this issue for as long as I have been around, and would
to say that since my father was on this staff many, many years
ago, it is great to be back in this place. I think he might be
making it here, but he is 91, and sometimes he will move at his
own pace, I find. But he is an old friend of Bertie's and
others. And so, it really does feel good to be back here.
My deepest thanks to President Obama and Secretary Clinton
for giving me this opportunity and, obviously, to Ambassador
Rice for having called upon me to serve in New York.
Mine is a lifelong commitment to public service, and the
advancement of peaceful democratic change is what I have been
trying to do for the last 18 years. Obviously, much of that
foundation is built on the service of my parents, and it has
been reinforced by my wife, Kit Lunney, who is here, and our
daughter, Kacy, who is serving the public in her own way as
well.
So it is great to have everybody here today. I have heard
``break a leg'' more often in the last 24 hours than I have
probably in the rest of my life, so.
Senators, you have my written testimony. So what I would
like to do is just bring together three of the elements of the
testimony.
First, today's conflicts and crises present fresh
challenges. Whether it is popular revolts, economic collapses,
threats without borders, or hyperemergencies where a
combination of factors come together, we are being challenged
in a very different way. The United States will continue to
play a pivotal, if not a dominant role, and we must be more
ready.
To be more effective, we have to especially expand in the
area of local ownership. And CSO can help by making sure that
the U.S. Government model is built off of an analysis that is
driven by local voices. Second, that has to lead into an
integrated strategy with really clear priorities, two or three
priorities. And then the resources that the U.S. Government has
have to be driven at those particular elements.
We can't be all over the place. We have to answer the
question ``What is most needed?'' rather than ``What can the
United States do?''
And third, I believe that CSO's success in the coming year
is going to be determined by two key elements. Whether we will
have a real impact in two to three places of significance to
the United States, and will we be able to build a trusted and
respected team?
If confirmed, that will be my intent, and I will make sure
that our relationship with the Congress is open and responsive
in every way.
Thank you again for this honor.
[The prepared statement of Ambassador Barton follows:]
Prepared Statement of Frederick D. Barton
Chairman Udall, Senator Corker, and members of the committee, it is
an honor to appear before you today. Thank you for your support in
creating the Bureau of Conflict and Stabilization Operations (CSO), and
to President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton for giving me this
opportunity. Public service is a family commitment, and I am grateful
to my wife, Kit Lunney; our daughter, Kacy; my late mother, Nancy; and
my father, Bob, who served this committee at the end of his career, for
their encouragement.
The State Department's Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review
(QDDR) concluded that ``we must be faster, more innovative, and more
effective than [the] forces of instability and we must be flexible
enough to adapt to rapid changes that occur in conflict.'' To
strengthen our coherence and cohesion in preventing and responding to
conflict and crisis, Secretary Clinton established CSO.
Its mission is to prevent countries' descent into crisis and speed
their emergence from conflict, thereby contributing to a more peaceful,
just world. If we succeed, our investments will save the lives of both
local civilians and Americans. Our work will also save money by
avoiding expensive military interventions, and help produce resilient
societies that contribute to the global economy.
CSO will build on the valuable conflict-related work of its
predecessor, the Office of the Coordinator for Reconstruction and
Stabilization (S/CRS), and other parts of the U.S. Government. This
work has ranged from helping to facilitate South Sudan's referendum on
independence to supporting efforts to stamp out the Lord's Resistance
Army, from working to allay ethnic violence in the Kyrgyz Republic to
helping the Transitional National Council take charge in Libya. CSO is
now looking at engagements on Kenya, Burma, Syria, and northern Central
America.
In its engagements, the Bureau first asks: ``What is most needed?''
And then: ``What can the U.S. do?'' Too often in conflict we begin by
deploying costly tools regardless of whether they are right for the
situation. Critically, solutions must be driven by local dynamics and
actors. As Secretary Clinton has said, our job is to ``work to make
sure a government's first obligation is to its own people.''
CSO will improve our effectiveness by driving a rigorous four-step
engagement process. We must start with an inclusive, joint, independent
analysis, driven by local voices and avoiding predetermined answers.
Second, that analysis should lead to a strategy that identifies a few
main priorities. Third, resources--funding and personnel--should be
directed to address these priorities, consistent with U.S. interests
and capacity. And finally, the process must include ongoing,
transparent measurement, evaluation, and adaptation. That includes
applying lessons that we have learned in places like Afghanistan and
Iraq.
We must partner with those who will make us most effective,
building inclusive teams from the start, making timely decisions, and
ensuring we are all moving in the same direction. CSO works with its
sister bureaus in the Undersecretariat for Civilian Security,
Democracy, and Human Rights, and depends on close partnerships with
USAID, the Department of Defense, and others. It goes without saying
that CSO must act as an accessible and responsive partner with
Congress.
As I met with more than 200 stakeholders in the Department, on the
Hill, and elsewhere, I learned that CSO faces real pressure to prove
itself. If confirmed, I will focus on three goals for the next year:
Bring high-impact engagements to a few strategic places where targeted
prevention and response can be most effective; add innovation and
agility to the approaches we use; and build a respected team and
trusted partnerships.
CSO is already expanding its ability to deploy while shrinking its
overhead, simplifying its structure, consolidating offices, targeting
efforts on key countries, and building a stronger leadership cadre in
the Civilian Response Corps. The Corps is becoming more flexible and
conflict-focused.
In the last 10 years, we have learned the hard lesson that conflict
in even the most remote state can have a serious impact on our national
security. In over 17 years of work in more than 30 of the world's most
unstable places, I have seen that nothing is more wasteful to human
potential than violent conflict. If confirmed, I will bring to the job
my personal dedication to help the United States expand the course of
peaceful, democratic progress for people around the world and ensure
our security here at home. Many lives--within and beyond our borders--
depend on a more timely, efficient, and organized response.
Thank you and I look forward to your questions.
Senator Udall. Mr. Todd, please proceed.
STATEMENT OF HON. WILLIAM E. TODD, OF VIRGINIA, TO BE
AMBASSADOR TO THE KINGDOM OF CAMBODIA
Ambassador Todd. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you,
Senator Corker.
Before I get started, I would like to introduce my wife,
Ann. She has been the inspiration throughout this entire
process. She is probably happier about this day than I am,
getting it over.
I would also like to introduce the heroes in my life, my
parents, Jack and Marie Todd. My dad was a combat helicopter
pilot. He served two tours in Vietnam, won the Silver Star. And
my mother was a career Federal employee. And they basically
gave me the commitment to Federal service. So, thank you.
Senator Udall. Great to have you here.
Ambassador Todd. I will also try to be brief, but it will
be a little longer than my colleague.
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am deeply
honored to come before you today as President Obama's nominee
to be the next American Ambassador to the Kingdom of Cambodia.
I want to thank President Obama and Secretary Clinton for their
confidence in nominating me for this position.
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the kind words on my
background. For the sake of time, I will just highlight my last
two assignments.
As you mentioned, in 2008, I was confirmed as U.S.
Ambassador to Brunei, where I proudly promoted democracy, human
rights, and religious freedom and worked with Brunei to become
a more active player in APEC, ASEAN, and as a contributor to
regional security. I am excited by the opportunity to give back
to the region, if confirmed.
In 2011, I finished a 1-year tour in Afghanistan as
Coordinator of Development and Economic Affairs. In that
capacity, I was responsible for overseeing a $4 billion
development program, managing over 600 Americans, and running
the mission's regional and provincial civilian operations. It
was the most challenging, but rewarding job I have had in my
career, and I would happily do it again if asked.
Mr. Chairman, I believe these past assignments, as well as
the variety of other positions I have held in the Federal
Government over the past 25 years, provide me with the skill
set that will effectively advance our interests in Cambodia.
Cambodia's modern history is one marked by tragedy,
conflict, and survival. Today, however, we see a Cambodia that
is refusing to let its past dictate its future and is looking
to that future with a new sense of confidence and optimism.
Cambodia's economy is one of the fastest-growing economies
in Asia. That growth has created thousands of new jobs. The
Khmer Rouge tribunal secured its first conviction in 2010, and
the trial of case No. 2 is underway, bringing to justice the
people who caused so much pain and suffering.
The HIV infection rate has been reduced by two-thirds.
Death and injuries caused by unexploded ordnances have been
reduced by almost 75 percent, and roads that were once
impassable have been demined and rebuilt. And Cambodia has been
a model partner in our efforts to achieve the fullest possible
accounting of American servicemen missing from the Indochina
war.
These successes have been transformative, but much work
remains, particularly in the areas of rule of law, democratic
institutions, human rights, combating human trafficking, and
corruption. Mr. Chairman, if confirmed, I assure you that I
will continue to take each of these issues head on and will
take the lead in advancing the causes of freedom, democracy,
rule of law, and respect for human dignity.
Mr. Chairman, I would also like to highlight two additional
issues that I will focus my efforts on, if confirmed. First, as
you know, Cambodia is the ASEAN chair this year. As the United
States pivots toward the Asia-Pacific and deepens its
engagement, we will look to ASEAN to play a crucial role in
maintaining and promoting regional peace and security,
coordinating humanitarian assistance and disaster relief, and
fulfilling the region's promise for democracy, respect for
human rights. I see the chairmanship as an opportunity for the
United States to partner with Cambodia, helping where we can
and addressing together challenges when they arise.
Second is the Lower Mekong Initiative, which is designed to
increase cooperation within the subregion for those who live,
work, rely on the Mekong. I believe that as ASEAN chair,
Cambodia can help push this initiative forward by promoting
cooperation on the environment, education, health, and
infrastructure in order to make the region more peaceful,
prosperous, and secure.
In closing, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, if
confirmed, I will dedicate all of my energy and experience to
advance United States foreign policy objectives in Cambodia and
to strengthen the relationship between our two great countries.
I look forward to working with you, this committee, and any
interested Members of Congress to advance our shared interests
in Cambodia.
I would be happy to answer any of your questions. Thank
you.
[The prepared statement of Ambassador Todd follows:]
Prepared Statement of William E. Todd
Mr. Chairman, members of the subcommittee, I am deeply honored to
appear before you today as President Obama's nominee to be the
Ambassador of the United States to the Kingdom of Cambodia. I want to
thank President Obama and Secretary Clinton for the confidence they
have shown in me by nominating me for this position. If confirmed, I
will work closely with this committee and other interested Members of
Congress to advance U.S. interests in Cambodia.
Cambodia's history is marked by tragedy, conflict, and survival.
Today, however, we see a modern Cambodia that refuses to let its past
dictate its future. Although Cambodia is still recovering from three
decades of strife and war, including the atrocities of the Khmer Rouge
era, there are a number of good reasons that Cambodia is imbued with a
new sense of confidence and optimism. Cambodia boasts one of the
fastest growing economies in Asia over the past decade, and it is
reforming and attempting to improve its business and foreign investment
climate. The Khmer Rouge Tribunal, which the United States has
supported since its inception in 2006, secured its first conviction in
2010 and the trial of the surviving leaders of the Khmer Rouge is
underway. These trials are important for accountability and national
healing. Cambodia has also started to combat human trafficking, and its
cooperation with the international community to combat terrorism is to
be commended. Local and national elections in 2012 and 2013,
respectively, offer an opportunity for Cambodia to renew its commitment
to multiparty democracy. In these ways, the Cambodian people are
seeking justice to close the darkest chapter of their recent history
and build a new era of greater prosperity and more capable government
and democratic institutions--and for that I believe they deserve our
support.
Nevertheless, despite the many significant accomplishments of the
past 20 years, Cambodia's development remains a work in progress.
Notwithstanding its strong record of economic growth, Cambodia is among
the poorest countries in the world. Weak rule of law inhibits progress
and threatens the promise of inclusive development. In addition, every
year, hundreds of men, women, and children are killed or maimed by
unexploded ordnance left behind as remnants of war. Food security and
adapting to global climate change represent emerging challenges for the
country. Most significantly, Cambodia's democratic transition is still
unfolding. Although civil society and public media have made important
gains in achieving political space and greater freedoms, much work
still needs to be done to strengthen Cambodia's rule of law, democratic
institutions, and respect for human rights.
U.S. engagement in Cambodia has made--and can continue to make--a
real and lasting difference. Since the United States reestablished
relations with Cambodia in 1993, we have served as a buttress of
support for democratic development and the protection of human rights.
Cambodia's civil society now flourishes due to the strength and
dedication of Cambodians willing to take action to accomplish
extraordinary things. The United States is proud to stand by them and
provide our support. If confirmed, I will ensure that we continue to
take the lead in advancing the causes of freedom, democratic
governance, the rule of law, and respect for human dignity.
In addition to encouraging a more democratic Cambodia, our
bilateral engagement is fostering change in other ways as well. Our
military-to-military ties assist the Cambodian Armed Forces in their
own efforts to professionalize, adhere to international human rights
norms, and contribute to regional and global peace and stability. U.S.
economic engagement helps open doors to increased U.S. investment and
trade--something I believe will be a positive driver of change and
development in Cambodia. Finally, the United States has been intimately
involved in improving the health and livelihoods of Cambodians. If
confirmed, I will work tirelessly to deepen our relationship with
Cambodia in order to achieve greater progress on these and many other
bilateral objectives.
U.S. engagement with Cambodia is increasingly focused on regional
objectives. Like the rest of Asia, Cambodia has welcomed an increased
U.S. commitment to the region and seeks to strengthen its ties to the
United States in order to secure its own future. Over the course of
this year, Cambodia is serving as Chair of the Association of Southeast
Asian Nations (ASEAN), an important collective that has a population of
half a billion people and is already the United States fourth-largest
trading partner. The United States has made clear that as we deepen our
engagement with the Asia-Pacific region, we will look to ASEAN as a
valued partner in maintaining and promoting regional peace and
security, committing to intraregional coordination on disasters and
humanitarian crises, fulfilling the region's promise for democracy and
respect for human rights, and creating economic opportunities for U.S.
business in order to increase exports and create jobs here in the
United States. As ASEAN Chair, Cambodia can demonstrate regional
leadership on these and other critical issues in the ASEAN Regional
Forum and East Asia summit. In addition, the Secretary of State's Lower
Mekong Initiative is fostering cooperation and building capacity on the
``connective tissue'' of the subregion--especially education, public
health, and the environment. We welcome Cambodia's partnership in this
multicountry initiative and its efforts to make the region more
prosperous, secure, and peaceful.
Mr. Chairman, I believe the broad range of experience I have gained
during my 28-year career in public service will assist me in further
advancing our goals with the Kingdom of Cambodia. I have been in the
Senior Executive Service for over 14 years and have had the privilege
of managing a number of the Department's most important and complex
programs. Recently, I finished a 1-year assignment in Afghanistan,
where I was Coordinator of Development and Economic Affairs. I was
responsible for overseeing a $4 billion development program, managing
600 Americans, and running the mission's regional and provincial
civilian operations. It was the most challenging and rewarding job I
have had in my career and I would happily do it again if asked.
From 2008 to 2010, I served as the U.S. Ambassador to Brunei, where
I proudly promoted democracy, human rights, and religious freedom
initiatives. As Ambassador, I worked closely with Brunei to help it
play a more active role in the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum,
in ASEAN, and as a contributor to regional security.
Prior to serving in Brunei, I held several senior positions in the
State Department, including Acting Inspector General. In the Bureau of
International Narcotics and Law Enforcement, I directed global
operations and spearheaded anticrime, counternarcotics, and
antiterrorism programs, as well as initiatives to strengthen rule-of-
law capabilities and institutions all over the world, including
Southeast Asia. During the mid-1990s, I helped develop and implement
the Big and Emerging Market Strategy for the U.S. and Foreign
Commercial Service, which expanded U.S. exports to countries like
China, and opened U.S. Commercial Centers overseas, including three in
Asia.
Mr. Chairman, if confirmed, I will dedicate all of my energy and
experience to advance U.S. foreign policy objectives in Cambodia and
strengthen the relationship between our two countries.
Thank you for giving me this opportunity to appear before you. I
would be happy to answer any questions you may have.
Senator Udall. Thank you.
And Ms. Aviel, please.
STATEMENT OF SARA MARGALIT AVIEL, OF CALIFORNIA, TO BE UNITED
STATES ALTERNATE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE INTERNATIONAL BANK
FOR RECONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT
Ms. Aviel. Chairman Udall, Ranking Member Corker, thank you
for the opportunity to appear before you today.
It is an honor to have been nominated by the President to
serve as the Alternate Executive Director at the World Bank. I
am extremely grateful to Secretary Geithner, Under Secretary
Brainard, and U.S. Executive Director Ian Solomon for their
support.
I also want to thank you and your staffs for taking the
time to meet with me. If confirmed, I look forward to advancing
our shared commitment of making the World Bank a more effective
and accountable organization.
I was blessed to grow up with parents who ingrained in me a
deep respect for other cultures and traditions. For my mother,
who is here with me today, as a professor of international
relations, this was her life's work. And for me, that meant
trips that often included meetings with government and civil
society officials and lessons about local history and politics.
At the same time, my parents instilled in me a deep
appreciation for my country and the tremendous opportunities,
privileges, and responsibilities that come with being an
American.
For my father, it was particularly personal. As a Holocaust
survivor, his childhood was one of horrific deprivation and
suffering that is hard for me to even imagine. So when he told
me that just by being born in this country was like winning the
lottery, I believed him.
So to now come before you with the opportunity to represent
this great country at the World Bank, an institution formed in
the wake of that dreadful war, is a particular honor for me.
American leaders helped create the World Bank in the
recognition that a multilateral institution would advance our
smart power. In a time of high unemployment and tight fiscal
constraints at home, the importance of the World Bank may not
always be readily apparent.
Yet my experience in the administration, both in my current
role as Director of International Economic Affairs at the
National Security Council and National Economic Council and
previously as a senior adviser to Secretary Geithner, has
reaffirmed the belief that support of the World Bank is a
moral, strategic, and economic imperative for our country and
that U.S. leadership at the institution is essential.
The World Bank has played a central role in promoting open
economies that become growing export markets for American
companies. During the global financial crisis, the World Bank
acted quickly, dramatically increasing lending to help protect
the poorest from the worst impacts of the crisis and to restore
liquidity for world trade flows.
As we grapple with how best to support transitions in
places where we have important interests at stake, like
Afghanistan and the Middle East, we find ourselves turning
again and again to institutions like the World Bank. Strong
American leadership is essential. I have seen firsthand how
often we are the driving force for action.
Before joining the administration, my career was focused on
international development. From war widows in Afghanistan to
AIDS orphans in Zambia, I have worked with the world's most
vulnerable people and experienced the successes and challenges
of development firsthand.
As President Obama has said, broad-based economic growth is
the most powerful force the world has ever known for
eradicating poverty and creating opportunity. That
understanding led me to make leveraging the private sector a
focus of my work. Prior to joining the Treasury Department, I
served on the leadership team of a social investment fund that
provided financing to small and medium enterprises in
developing countries.
Another theme that cuts across much of my experience is the
need to demonstrate impact and improve effectiveness through
rigorous evaluations of projects and sharing of best practices.
As a lecturer at Yale University, I brought these experiences
into the classroom as I taught my students to look beyond the
latest development trends to the enormous complexity of
implementation in challenging environments.
If confirmed, I will work diligently to advance U.S.
objectives at the World Bank by serving as a careful steward of
U.S. taxpayer resources and promoting greater accountability,
transparency, and effectiveness.
I have learned invaluable lessons from being a part of
international diplomacy and policy at the highest levels of the
U.S. Government. And those lessons, combined with the hard-
earned experiences of working in some of the most complex
settings, will make me an effective representative and advocate
for U.S. interests at the World Bank.
If confirmed, I look forward to working closely with the
members of this committee and your staff. I have seen firsthand
how congressional involvement can provide leverage to U.S.
negotiators, and I will seek ways to partner together on behalf
of the American people.
Thank you for your consideration, and I look forward to any
questions you might have.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Aviel follows:]
Prepared Statement of Sara Margalit Aviel
Chairman Udall, Ranking Member Corker, members of the committee,
thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today.
It is an honor to have been nominated by the President to serve as
the Alternate Executive Director at the World Bank. I am extremely
grateful to Secretary Geithner, Under Secretary Brainard, and the U.S.
Executive Director, Ian Solomon, for their support.
I also want to thank you and your staffs for taking the time to
meet with me. If confirmed, I look forward to advancing our shared
commitment of making the World Bank a more effective and accountable
organization.
I was blessed to grow up with parents who ingrained in me a deep
respect for other cultures and traditions. For my mother, as a
professor of international relations, this was her life's work. And for
me, that meant trips that often included meetings with government and
civil societyofficials and lessons about local history and politics.
At the same time, my parents instilled in me a deep appreciation
for my country and the tremendous privileges, opportunities, and
responsibilities that come with being an American. For my father it was
particularly personal. As a Holocaust survivor, his childhood was one
of horrific deprivation and suffering that is hard for me to even
imagine. So when he told me that just by being born in this country was
like winning the lottery, I believed him.
So, to now come before you with the opportunity to represent this
great country at the World Bank--an institution formed in the wake of
that dreadful war--is a particular honor for me.
American leaders helped create the World Bank in the recognition
that a multilateral institution focused on reconstruction and
development would advance our strategic and economic interests and
moral values. In a time of high unemployment and tight fiscal
constraints at home, the importance of the World Bank may not always be
readily apparent.
Yet my experience in the administration--both in my current role as
a Director of International Economic Affairs at the National Security
Council and the National Economic Council, and previously as a Senior
Advisor to Secretary Geithner--has reaffirmed the belief that support
of the World Bank is a moral, strategic, and economic imperative for
our country and that U.S. leadership at the institution is essential.
The World Bank has played a central role in promoting open
economies that become growing export markets for American companies.
During the global financial crisis, the World Bank acted quickly,
dramatically increasing lending to help protect the poorest from the
worst impacts of the crisis and to restore liquidity for world trade
flows.
As we grapple with how best to support transitions in places where
we have important interests at stake like Afghanistan and the Middle
East and North Africa, we find ourselves turning again and again to
institutions like the World Bank.
Strong American leadership is essential. I have seen firsthand how
often we are the driving force for action, forging consensus in the
midst of seemingly intractable international disputes.
Before joining the administration, my career was focused on
international development. From war widows in Afghanistan to AIDS
orphans in Zambia, I have worked with the world's most vulnerable
people and experienced the successes and challenges of development
firsthand.
As President Obama has said, broad-based economic growth is the
most powerful force the world has ever known for eradicating poverty
and creating opportunity. That understanding led me to make leveraging
the private sector a focus of my work. Prior to working at the Treasury
Department, I served on the leadership team of a social investment fund
that provided financing to small and medium enterprises in developing
countries.
One theme that cuts across much of my experience is the need to
demonstrate impact and improve effectiveness through rigorous
evaluations of projects and sharing of best practices. As a lecturer at
Yale University, I brought these experiences into the classroom as I
taught my students to look beyond the latest development trends to the
enormous complexity of implementation in challenging environments.
If confirmed, I will work diligently to advance U.S. objectives at
the World Bank by serving as a careful steward of U.S. taxpayer
resources and promoting greater accountability, transparency, and
effectiveness.
I have learned invaluable lessons from being a part of
international diplomacy and policy at the highest levels of the U.S.
Government. Those lessons, combined with the hard-earned experiences
working in some of the most complex settings, will make me an effective
representative and advocate for U.S. interests at the World Bank.
If confirmed, I look forward to working closely with the members of
this committee and your staff. I have seen firsthand how congressional
involvement can provide leverage to U.S. negotiators and I will seek
ways to partner together to advance our shared goals on behalf of the
American people.
Senator Udall. Thank you for your testimony, all of you.
And Ambassador Barton, as--oh, OK. Here, Ambassador Barton,
is this your father who has just arrived here? Please, OK.
Yes, I believe Ambassador Barton's father used to work for
the committee and knows the gentleman here that helps us every
day keep the committee rolling along.
Thank you. Great to have you here today. Great to have you
here.
I am just about ready to start firing a question at your
son. So you arrived right in time. [Laughter.]
Senator Udall. Arrived right in time.
Ambassador Barton, what role, if any, do you foresee for
the CSO Bureau in complementing the work of the recently
created Office of the Special Coordinator for Middle East
Transitions, and how can USAID workers effectively assist
countries in transition, given the enormous political,
economic, and security challenges Arab States are currently
facing?
In what fields could the U.S. Conflict and Stabilization
Operations make the most difference, and would Arab States even
accept this kind of aid?
Please.
Ambassador Barton. Well, first off, in my various meetings
that I have been going around and having, Bill Taylor was one
of the first people that I met with. And he is one of those
people that I feel if we can't work with him, we have no future
in the State Department. He is just a first-rate public
servant, and he is focused mostly on North Africa right now,
and we are definitely working with him on--the CSO Bureau has
already started to work with him on Libya in particular of the
countries that he is working in.
All of these places are so tough and so complicated that
anybody who doesn't look for friends and partners within the
U.S. Government is making a very big mistake. And so, I would
hope that our Bureau, and if confirmed, under my leadership
would fashion a pretty high degree of modesty in terms of both
the challenges of these places and recognizing that we have to
work closely with others.
So we have already had extensive meetings with AID. As you
know, I worked there. I helped to start the Office of
Transition Initiatives, which is, I think, thought of as one of
the really agile parts of the U.S. Government in these places.
We need more assets and resources that are directed the way
that OTI does it. So they are going to be a key partner as
well.
So then, in terms of the welcome, CSO is looking at three
particular country cases right now in the Arab Spring world. We
are trying to work in Libya. We are hoping CSO also has people
working on Syria and on Yemen. And each one of those cases is
so dramatically different.
In Syria, we really cannot--CSO cannot work inside of the
country. So it is all about how do you help to grow the
opposition from within? And I know that a couple of CSO people
have already--
last week were meeting with about 25 representatives of local
governing councils inside of Syria, trying to figure out ways
to strengthen that relationship. And I think that is the way to
move in that space.
Libya is a very different challenge because the U.S.
Government is there. We have an Embassy. We have a mission. The
CSO is already backing up the existing post operation there.
But we are also being asked, CSO is also being asked to
really address the border security issues and the militia
issues, and those are the kinds of strategic concerns that I
hope that the CSO will continue to be focused on.
Yemen, again, is a very different case--much, much more
fragile. Much, much more in transition with its new government.
And in that case, CSO has been asked by the national security
staff to work on the strategic planning process, which is
really underway right now.
So that gives you an idea of sort of the way we would go. I
think we will--the United States help is welcome in most of
these places, as long as it is not too heavy a hand and we
don't take over. And there is no reason to take over because we
don't have that ambition, and we won't be effective if we do.
Senator Udall. Thank you.
Ambassador Todd, there are increasing concerns that
Cambodia's ruling party has become more authoritarian and that
human rights and corruption issues have not been adequately
addressed. Human Rights Watch has concluded that, and I quote
from one of their reports, ``The government of the ruling
Cambodian People's Party, the CPP, continues to use the
judiciary, the penal code, and threats of arrest or legal
action to restrict free speech, jail government critics,
disperse peaceful protests by workers and farmers, and silence
opposition party members.''
What will you do to address these human rights concerns,
and what are the best ways for the United States to work with
the Cambodian Government to improve Cambodia's human rights
record?
Ambassador Todd. Thank you, Chairman.
The overall human rights situation in Cambodia is not good.
There are many, many, many challenges. We consider each one of
those challenges to be a work in progress.
As you mentioned, freedom of speech, freedom of expression
is a problem. There are several others. We have land seizures.
We have titling problems, where today you own something,
tomorrow you don't. And it is subject to political whim.
We have corruption. Transparency International ranked
Cambodia as one of the most corrupt countries in the world.
And then, last, we have a weak and vulnerable judiciary
where the elite believe that they are immune from the law.
I think the ``get well, stay well'' plan is to stay the
course with civil society. It is to promote the political
freedoms that has made America great. It is doing what we do
best in human rights. It is doing what we do best by doing
Leahy vetting.
We also, I think, have a great opportunity with the youth
of Cambodia. Seventy percent of Cambodia is 30 or younger, and
believe it or not, the young--now that I am 50, 30 is young--
they love America. They think that we are the greatest thing
since sliced bread.
And so, if confirmed, what I would like to do is to deliver
the hard messages to the leadership on these human rights
issues and also promote the political freedoms that we hold
near and dear as Americans to all of society, but particularly
the youth.
Thank you.
Senator Udall. Thank you, Ambassador Todd.
Ms. Aviel, in your previous position, you have worked hard
on finding a path forward out of the ongoing financial crisis.
How do you think the World Bank has responded to the financial
crisis, and what do you think the World Bank could have done to
improve its effectiveness?
Ms. Aviel. The World Bank played a very important role in
helping us respond to the financial crisis. By tripling lending
dramatically, it was able to prevent and mitigate the impacts
of the crisis on the poorest. It was able to restore liquidity
for global trade flows.
Financial flows dropped dramatically, and the World Bank
was able to make up some of that difference, which was very
important.
Senator Udall. Thank you.
Senator Corker, if you would like to proceed with
questioning?
Senator Corker. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And thank you again, all of you, for being here and with
your families. And Mr. Barton is used to Senate time, and so he
came here when we would normally start. But you got us going in
good shape, and we are glad all of you are here.
I am going to focus my questions with Ms. Aviel and really
on the World Bank. Mr. Todd, I know we spent some time in
Afghanistan while you were there, and Mr. Barton, certainly I
have known of your past. And Ms. Aviel, you come with very high
recommendations, I might add, and I thank you for being here.
One of the things I guess people might focus on a little
bit is just age and experience. It is a pretty big--I know on
the other hand, you have 32 years a professor of international
studies. And so, probably way beyond both the chairman and mine
as far as experiences.
But your role as the alternate, can you describe what those
responsibilities are to everyone here?
Ms. Aviel. Certainly. The Alternate Executive Director
serves as the deputy to Ian Solomon. The World Bank has an in-
house board of directors, which is sort of an unusual
arrangement, and they meet twice a week at least, and there are
numerous committees.
And so, to have a second person to be able to represent the
United States will enable us to expand the influence of U.S.
leadership at the institution, especially since one of the most
important ways that you can make a difference in these roles is
not actually waiting until things come to the board, but
helping to work through issues beforehand. And so, having two
people appointed by the President, confirmed by the Senate,
enables the Executive Director's office to expand its reach.
I believe that I have had significant experience, that the
credibility that I have had from working in development
settings around the world will enable me to speak with
credibility about development issues on the ground. And I have
also been a part of policy and diplomacy within the Government
at the highest levels, and I have seen very effective U.S.
leadership and----
Senator Corker. And very ineffective U.S. leadership?
Ms. Aviel. And I believe I will take the lessons from those
experiences and be able to represent the United States well.
Senator Corker. Yes. Thank you.
How would you--and I know Mr. Solomon has been there, I
guess, for almost 2 years now. And I don't know what the normal
length of time is for someone to serve in this role. But do you
see a period of time where, in essence, it is almost a
mentoring role, or you will be working closely with him? How
will that relationship be?
Ms. Aviel. Well, I certainly would work hand-in-hand with
Ian Solomon and believe that we both have different expertise
that we will bring to the table. So certainly I would work
closely with Ian Solomon.
Senator Corker. Some of the developing countries really
would like a very different role or a different type of
presidential leadership at the World Bank, and some of them are
saying that we really ought to--because of what the World Bank
does, we should have a group of non-American countries deciding
who the next leader of the World Bank should be. I am just
wondering what your views might be on that?
Ms. Aviel. Senator, I think American leadership has served
the institution well. I think President Zoellick has done a
tremendous job. Secretary Geithner issued a statement a few
weeks ago that the President will be putting a candidate
forward to lead the World Bank soon, and I look forward to
supporting that candidate.
Senator Corker. OK. Did you say the President is getting
ready to nominate somebody in the next few weeks?
Ms. Aviel. That is correct.
Senator Corker. Yes. Very good. Do you know who that is?
Ms. Aviel. I don't. [Laughter.]
Senator Corker. Are you on the short list? [Laughter.]
Ms. Aviel. I promise you, I am not.
Senator Corker. The World Bank provides a lot of financial
assistance to middle-income countries that really could access
financial assistance from other places. There has been some
commentary about that. I am just wondering what your views
might be on the World Bank making loans available to countries
that might seek financing from China or other places just as
easily?
Ms. Aviel. Senator, that is a very important issue. I
certainly would like the World Bank to focus on the poorest.
But two-thirds of the poorest do live in middle-income
countries, and the World Bank has tremendous expertise in
helping to target and encourage broad-based economic growth
that is very relevant for those countries.
The World Bank brings with it important safeguards and
procurement standards that serve as an important model for
those countries in terms of the projects they do across the
board. And so, countries that could access financing from the
capital markets find it an advantage to come to the World Bank
because of the technical expertise and the safeguards that it
provides.
And it is very important that the World Bank serves as this
model of how to finance projects. You have said, as you
mentioned, countries can get financing from China and others,
and it is important that the World Bank serve as an alternative
to China financing because it brings with it much higher
standards. It enables American companies to compete for
procurement contracts. It brings with it environmental and
social safeguards.
So we greatly value the role that the World Bank plays in
ensuring those high standards across the board.
Senator Corker. And then, just my last question, the World
Bank--I know you answered a question from the chairman
regarding how it has handled the financial crisis.
But generally speaking, where would you rank the World Bank
today as it relates to its effectiveness and leadership and
ability overall to address the issues that it is chartered to
address?
Ms. Aviel. Senator, I think the World Bank has proven
itself as a very effective organization. It is one of the
premier development institutions, and you can see that when
international leaders are looking to deal with pressing issues,
such as food security, for example, they look to the World Bank
to lead those efforts because it has such a strong track record
of effectiveness.
That being said, there is always room for improvement. I
think U.S. leadership has played a very important role in
making the World Bank a more accountable and effective
organization, and I would look to continue those efforts.
Senator Corker. Well, to all three of you, thank you very
much for coming today. Thank you for bringing family members
with you, and thank you for being willing to serve in these
positions.
And all are very important. I think in particular the World
Bank is a place, an institution that can certainly play a very
vital role, and I thank you so much for your answers and look
forward to seeing all of you again very soon.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Udall. Thank you, Senator Corker. We really
appreciate you being here today and your insightful questioning
always. Appreciate it.
Senator Corker. Thank you.
Senator Udall. Thank you.
Ambassador Barton, as the United States and its allies
continues to transition to an Afghan-led mission, the role of
the State Department and USAID will increase dramatically. What
do you think needs to be done today to create a smooth and
effective transition in light of the many problems still facing
Afghanistan, including corruption, which I think is still among
the worst in the world? And what is the role envisioned for the
conflict, the CSO operations in Afghanistan in the future?
Ambassador Barton. Thank you, Senator.
CSO is currently focused on trying to help the Embassy, the
military, the U.S. military, and a range of Afghan ministries
to advance their transition planning. That is really--that is
what the Ambassador has asked us to focus on, and that is where
we are concentrating our effort.
We are on a little bit of a glide path ourselves in terms
of leaving Afghanistan. But this particular task seems to be
one that our people are really well suited for. And since we
have been involved with quite a lot of the planning processes
in the last couple years, focusing on this transition planning
is exactly what we need to do.
The toughest part here is obviously to make sure that the
Afghans are in as capable a position as possible as soon as
possible. And that is really what I think we can be helpful
with, and that is where we are going to stay focused.
Senator Udall. Thank you.
Ambassador Todd, while the United States is one of the
largest donors of foreign aid to Cambodia, I understand that
the United States is far behind in foreign direct investment
compared to China. By some measures, China is contributing
foreign direct investment at a rate 10 times of the United
States.
How does this shortfall impact our ability to influence and
conduct diplomacy with Cambodia, and what should the United
States Government do to make up for this shortfall?
Ambassador Todd. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
There is no denying that China is making a full-court press
in Cambodia and throughout Asia. President Obama said recently,
talking about China in the region, that we shouldn't look at
this in terms of a zero-sum game. He said we have strong
bilateral relationships. He said we are a Pacific power.
Last year, Secretary Clinton also announced that this would
be the century for the Asia-Pacific, and we would be pivoting
our resources, both financial resources and human resources,
from Iraq and Afghanistan toward Asia because it is that
important and because they know that this full-court press is
going on.
And so, if I am confirmed, my goal is to obviously
implement the pivot, if you will, of those resources. And I
plan to do it, again, by promoting the political freedoms that
we as Americans hold near and dear, as well as continuing the
great programs that we have in Embassy Phnom Penh.
Thank you.
Senator Udall. Thank you.
The high amount of Chinese foreign direct investment is
changing Cambodia and the region in many different ways. One of
the ways is an increase in environmental degradation. I was
concerned to read a report that the Botum Sakor National Park,
a home to tigers, elephants, and many other species, is being
slowly sold to Chinese investors, including a Chinese real
estate company, which is working to turn 130 square miles of
these forests into a gambling resort.
Is there a way for the United States to work with Cambodia
to prevent or mitigate against such environmental destruction,
and what will be the long-term impacts of losing critical
pristine forest land to the developers?
Ambassador Todd. That is an excellent question, Mr.
Chairman.
Cambodia is one of the poorest countries in the world.
There is a tradeoff between protecting the environment and
promoting economic development. At the mission in Embassy Phnom
Penh, we have many programs that promote the environment.
We have the Lower Mekong Initiative that has an overarching
goal of basically promoting the environment not only within
Cambodia, but through the four other countries. We have a
number of programs that focus on forestry management, watershed
management. We have the President's initiative on global
climate change.
We have a number of programs that address these issues and
try to build capacity with the Cambodians. We also have a
number of programs like Forecast Mekong, which is a climate
change type program that basically takes the data that is
gathered in Cambodia and compares it to other main watersheds
around the world, particularly the Mississippi River.
And if you have 10 minutes, if you Google it, Forecast
Mekong, you have a wonderful video about the effects of global
climate change on the Mekong River basin. One of the things
that it talks about, aside from deforestation and other things,
are the dams that are being created on the Mekong.
And for me as a neophyte in terms of hydraulics on a river,
one of the things that I learned is that the silt and sediment
that comes from the north part of the river basically supports
the southern part of the river. And what it does is it feeds
the fish. It also replenishes the land, if you will, where the
Mekong enters the ocean.
And that is very important because as global climate change
occurs, the predictions are that sea levels are going to rise.
And studies that the Cambodians have had done and the
internationals have done have shown that if the sea level rises
3 feet, the country will be in very, very difficult straits.
The rice crop will be significantly reduced. The population
will have to move. And so, Cambodia is taking this very
seriously, and thus, the U.S. Embassy is taking it seriously.
So, for me, if I am confirmed, there is no more important
thing to do than this because time is of the essence.
Thank you.
Senator Udall. Thank you very much.
Ms. Aviel, the World Bank supports a wide range of projects
around the world, and they often have an environmental
component. Many projects fall within the theme of environment
and natural resources management. These projects fall under the
following categories--biodiversity, climate change,
environmental policies and institutions, land administration
and management, other environmental and natural resources
management, pollution management, environmental health, water
resource management.
How should natural resource conservation factor into the
planning for World Bank projects?
Ms. Aviel. Senator, thank you for that question. It is a
very important issue.
The world's poorest often depend on natural resources the
most for their livelihoods, and they are often the most
vulnerable to environmental degradation and the impacts of
environmental destruction. So it is very critical that the
World Bank factor in environmental considerations and issues
regarding sustainable management of natural resources across
the work that it does.
And so, it does so in two different ways. One is sort of a
defensive approach, making sure that in any project that it
does there is a strong environmental impact assessment that
occurs and that there are strong environmental safeguards to
make sure that any damage the project might do is mitigated.
And then it also does so by having an affirmative
environmental agenda, by working in all of the areas you
mentioned--biodiversity. The World Bank has helped to support
the largest tropical conservation region in the world in
Brazil. It works to help promote sustainable management of
fisheries.
So it works in a variety of different ways to make sure
that the environment and development can go hand in hand, and
it plays a very important role in doing so.
Senator Udall. Thank you for that answer.
One of the keys, it seems to me, is--and it falls in the
area of what we call ``sustainability.'' And I think all of you
realize this, that when we do our development and we work with
other countries that we hope that the projects over the long
term are sustainable. And my next question to you has to do
with the standards and how we reach for that goal of
sustainable development.
What standards does the World Bank have in place to ensure
that projects funded by the World Bank do not facilitate
logging and other resource development that is in conflict with
international agreements and standards? And if confirmed, will
you work to ensure the World Bank does not foster unsustainable
natural resource development practices?
Ms. Aviel. Senator, thank you for that question.
If confirmed, I absolutely commit that I will be an active
advocate for sustainability across the board. The World Bank
has very careful policies in place. It has a forestry policy.
It has safeguards in place to make sure that it does not
contribute to degradation of those resources.
And I would work very hard to make sure that those
standards are upheld and strengthened, if needed.
Senator Udall. Thank you.
Thank you. I guess we don't have any other Senators
attending today and going to ask questions. So you are spared
some additional questions here.
We very much appreciate your testimony, your commitment to
service, and we really look forward to seeing you serve in
these positions and continuing to visit with us on the
committee and with Members of Congress.
So, with that, we are going to keep the record open for 48
hours so that any additional questions can be submitted to you,
and we hope you will get back with us promptly on that.
Senator Udall. And we would hope that the committee will
move expeditiously on these nominees.
And having no further questions, the committee is
adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 10:50 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
----------
Additional Questions and Answers Submitted for the Record
Responses of Frederick D. Barton to Questions Submitted
by Senator John F. Kerry
Question. In your testimony, you stated that CSO must partner with
those who will make us most effective. However, there have been some
concerns that agencies such as the Department of Agriculture and the
Department of Justice will play much smaller roles in the new Civilian
Response Corps. What role do you envision for other agencies and what
steps will you take to ensure that a whole of government approach
continues to be a key element of the program?
Answer. The Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review (QDDR)
calls on the Bureau of Conflict and Stabilization Operations (CSO) to
improve U.S. Government effectiveness in conflict areas. To be more
innovative and agile, CSO is developing a new model for the Civilian
Response Corps (CRC) that will focus its work on conflict-related
issues and expand its access to interagency skills.
Rather than support a larger standing group that can address the
panoply of issues facing a country (a just-in-case model), the Corps
will focus on deploying targeted experts quickly to address priority
issues in conflict (a just-in-time model). This reduction in the size
of the CRC-Active component will help address the need to move
resources toward field operations in a restrictive budget environment.
If I am confirmed, we will seek to build the CRC-Active component
on a leadership cadre made up of those with proven effectiveness in the
field and conflict-focused skills, such as conflict analysis,
prevention tools, contingency planning, and expeditionary operations.
In CSO engagements, the ability to understand conflict dynamics and
U.S. Government responses has proven more important than
reconstruction-related technical expertise.
To tap more specific areas of expertise such as rule of law or food
security, CSO plans to rely more upon its CRC-Standby capacity. The
model will allow CSO to reach more broadly across the Federal
Government to find the right people at the right time.
In addition, CSO will seek to include the widest possible range of
partners, including the interagency, from the beginning of its
engagements. The result should be a single expeditionary team made up
of leaders and experts, rather than the inefficient parallel structures
that previously existed.
This model is the product of extensive analysis and deliberation,
including examination of:
Use of CRC and related personnel from 2005-11, and our
evolving relationship with posts and bureaus seeking our
support;
The QDDR;
A Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Force Review of the Corps
conducted in 2010;
Observation of peer organizations' interagency relations;
and
The work of the transition team designing CSO in summer
2011.
In sum, CSO will maintain a whole-of-government approach, albeit in
a more targeted manner.
Question. As you also noted in your testimony, CSO was established
in order to strengthen our coherence and cohesion in prevention and
responding to conflict and crisis. Please expand on the role you
envision for CSO in conflict prevention, if confirmed. As part of this
discussion, please comment on what role CSO could play in training
other Foreign Service officers in conflict prevention through the
Foreign Service Institute?
Answer. CSO advances conflict prevention through policy, strategy,
and practical applications in conflict/preconflict areas around the
world.
In the policy realm, CSO works with the State Department, National
Security Staff, and other departments and agencies to ensure that the
U.S. Government can identify where creative approaches can head off
violence and channel conflicts toward peaceful solutions. CSO is
already supporting policy initiatives such as Presidential Study
Directive 10 on prevention of genocide and mass atrocities, including
creation of an Atrocities Prevention Board. CSO is also supporting
efforts to make the National Action Plan for Women, Peace and Security
vital and productive. These cross-cutting efforts offer practical ways
to influence how U.S. agencies work to prevent conflict.
In CSO's engagements, the critical first step is analysis. CSO uses
a systematic, participatory approach to capturing local voices and
understanding the deep causes of conflict and community strength.
Through analytical tools, such as the Interagency Conflict Assessment
Framework (ICAF) and Conflict Prevention Matrix, CSO can identify and
build on indigenous resilience so that U.S. policies and programs can
focus on the root causes of the conflicts, and be sustained by our
partner nations.
CSO is exploring innovative ways to help U.S. embassies or host-
nation partners respond to conflicts. Its staff members have a wide
range of skills and experiences from both the government and private
sector. CSO can provide technical advice, research capacity, mediation
and negotiation support, lessons from past experience, and other
assistance. For example, CSO is currently working with an embassy and
host country to design and implement community-based mediation, focused
on gangs. Providing mediation training to local communities, including
gang members, ensures the sustainability of the endeavors.
Since its creation in 2004, the Office of the Coordinator for
Reconstruction and Stabilization (S/CRS) and now CSO has played a
leading role in providing conflict prevention training to Department of
State personnel. We have worked closely with our partners at the
Foreign Service Institute (FSI) to determine the best means--whether
through social media, classroom instruction, or blended learning--of
training Foreign Service Officers (FSO) and other U.S. Government
personnel on mainstreaming civilian security and preventing conflict.
CSO's new Office of Learning and Training (OLT) will continue
working closely with FSI to add further innovation to the approaches we
use when preparing FSOs for response activities across the globe. If
confirmed, one of my priorities will be to expand and institutionalize
conflict prevention and response learning opportunities throughout the
Department.
______
Responses of William E. Todd to Questions Submitted
by Senator John F. Kerry
Question. Cambodia will chair the Association of Southeast Asian
Nations (ASEAN) this year. In what ways will you seek to promote common
interests and values in venues such as the U.S.-ASEAN Leaders Meeting,
the ASEAN Regional Forum, and the East Asia summit in 2012?
Answer. As Chair for ASEAN and its associated multilateral bodies
such as the East Asia summit, the ASEAN Regional Forum, and the ASEAN
Defense Ministers Meeting Plus, Cambodia plays a critical role in
setting the tone and agenda of these bodies over the course of the
year. The United States supports Cambodia's chairmanship and will urge
Cambodia to view 2012 as an opportunity to demonstrate to the world
that it is a responsible leader at home and in the region.
The United States is looking to ASEAN to play a key role in
maintaining and promoting regional peace and security. I see Cambodia's
chairmanship as an opportunity for the United States to partner with
Cambodia, helping where we can, and addressing together regional
challenges within the ASEAN framework. Specifically, if confirmed, I
will work closely with the Cambodian Government to use its ASEAN year
to secure progress on U.S. objectives, such as regional and maritime
security, nonproliferation, humanitarian assistance and disaster
relief, fulfilling the region's promise for democracy and respect for
human rights, and deepening our trade with Southeast Asia to increase
U.S. exports to the region and create jobs in the United States.
Question. A number of well-informed observers contend that a draft
law on associations and NGOs in Cambodia could seriously constrain
their ability to operate. What role does civil society play in
Cambodia, how does the United States support their role, and how would
you encourage the Cambodian Government to protect this important
political space?
Answer. The United States firmly believes that a healthy,
independent civil society is absolutely vital for the advancement of
democracy and prosperity around the world. Civil society organizations
play a key role in promoting respect for human rights, defending human
dignity, and advancing human progress. Cambodia is no exception.
Cambodian civil society organizations contribute to growing grassroots
activism. International NGOs are also invaluable to monitoring
developments in Cambodian society, advancing key protections, and
providing assistance programs. The United States has worked to nurture
these developments.
In December 2011, following a year of intense scrutiny and pressure
by national and international NGOs, as well as public and private
engagement by the United States, Prime Minister Hun Sen announced that
his government would continue consultations with civil society on the
draft law until 2014 if necessary to achieve government-civil society
consensus.
The United States has strongly and consistently expressed in
private and public venues our deep concern for the status of civil
society in Cambodia, and we remain absolutely dedicated to advancing
and protecting civil society and its role in Cambodia's development.
The United States has encouraged the Cambodian Government to consult
with civil society groups on the substance of any future draft law and
has publicly called on the Cambodian Government to reconsider pursuing
any legislation that would hinder the development and important work of
civil society organizations.
The United States is a strong supporter of civil society
organizations in Cambodia, and engages with them in a number of ways.
For example, USAID funding builds political party and civil society
capabilities to improve greater transparency and engagement of citizens
in public policy and political processes. The State Department and
USAID partner with civil society to monitor and report human rights
violations, protect human rights defenders, and increase the capacity
of government institutions and the judiciary. The United States also
works closely with NGOs who are engaged in efforts to improve the
health, safety, and economic well-being of the Cambodian people.
I view our civil society friends as vital partners and, if
confirmed, will work closely with them. I will do everything I can to
protect and support Cambodia's flourishing civil society. If confirmed,
I will make U.S. support for civil society a pillar in every U.S.
foreign policy objective I pursue in Cambodia, including humanitarian
and foreign assistance, political and economic diplomatic engagement,
and security and law enforcement cooperation.
Question. The Lower Mekong Initiative (LMI) is a multinational
effort spearheaded by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to promote
cooperation and capacity-building among the United States and Lower
Mekong Delta countries (e.g., Cambodia, Laos, Thailand, and Vietnam) in
the areas of education, health, environment, and infrastructure. If
confirmed, how would you further the aims of the LMI program? From your
perspective, is the program adequately resourced to meet its
objectives?
Answer. Since Secretary Clinton launched the LMI in July 2009, the
United States has worked in cooperation with Cambodia, Laos, Thailand,
and Vietnam to launch and expand a number of projects designed to
address the pressing transnational environmental and developmental
challenges affecting the communities in the lower Mekong basin. The
United States welcomes Cambodia's partnership in this multicountry
initiative and its efforts to make the region more prosperous, secure,
and peaceful. If confirmed, I will strongly support and advance the
LMI's efforts to nurture and build the ``connective tissue'' of the
subregion by emphasizing the strength of the U.S. commitment to, and
the importance of, the LMI in my discussions with Cambodian officials
as well as by raising specific issues relative to the LMI as they
develop. As likely host of the next LMI Ministerial and Friends of
Lower Mekong donor coordination ministerial meeting, if confirmed, I
will work closely with the Cambodian Government to ensure these
meetings advance the Secretary's vision by identifying tangible areas
to build the capacity of the region and combine our efforts with other
partners.
Overall fiscal constraints in the foreign affairs budget have
placed limits on our ability to increase direct resources for EAP
regional programs, including LMI. However, we are working in close
coordination with a wide spectrum of interagency partners to leverage
and expand existing programs to support our key objectives for this
important initiative. If confirmed as Ambassador, it will be my job to
effectively and efficiently implement the LMI budget in Cambodia.
Question. Section 620M of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961
imposes restrictions on assistance to any unit of a foreign country's
security forces for which there is credible evidence that the unit has
committed gross violations of human rights. U.S. embassies are heavily
involved in ensuring compliance with this requirement.
If confirmed, what steps will you take to ensure that the
Embassy effectively implements section 620M?
In particular, what actions will you take to ensure, in a
case in which there is credible evidence that a gross violation
of human rights has been committed, that assistance will not be
provided to units that committed the violation?
What steps will you take to ensure that the Embassy has a
robust capacity to gather and evaluate evidence regarding
possible gross violations of human rights by units of security
forces?
Answer. Under standard State Department vetting procedures, every
individual and unit proposed for State-funded security assistance or
Defense Department training is vetted, both in Phnom Penh and
Washington, DC, for credible information of involvement in gross
violations of human rights and in strict accordance with U.S. law and
State Department policy. ``Leahy vetting'' is conducted under the
International Vetting and Security Tracking (INVEST) system, the
Department's uniform system for vetting worldwide since January 2011.
In addition to the various internal background checks conducted at the
U.S. Embassy, which uses information the Embassy has amassed from
contacts and open sources, Embassy personnel also check names against a
database maintained by a prominent human rights NGO. This database
tracks human rights violations throughout the country and includes
cases submitted by NGO monitors and contacts in the provinces. In
Washington, the Department of State's Bureaus of Democracy, Human
Rights and Labor and East Asian and Pacific Affairs vet Cambodian
candidates by reviewing information from multiple sources to ensure
that U.S. funding is not used to train individuals or units if there is
credible information implicating them in gross human rights violations.
Senior Department of Defense visitors to Cambodia discuss human
rights issues in their meetings with senior officials of the Royal
Cambodian Armed Forces (RCAF) and Ministry of National Defense (MoND).
The RCAF and MoND are fully aware of our position on gross human rights
violations as it pertains to security training, and all units and
individuals receiving training are required to receive human rights
awareness training prior to the start of any U.S.-funded program.
If confirmed, I pledge to continue strict adherence to U.S. law and
State Department procedures. Where credible information exists of gross
human rights violations, candidates implicated in the violations will
not receive any assistance per the law. I will ensure that adequate
human resources are devoted to properly carrying out local vetting at
the Embassy, and that all Embassy personnel clearly understand the law
and procedures, and that they seek guidance from me and Washington, DC,
if they are unclear about a unit or individual's background or unsure
how to proceed. In keeping with Department practice, I will ensure that
any review takes into account not only the results from the Embassy's
internal background checks, but also credible information gathered from
open sources and by civil society. Finally, if confirmed, I will
regularly and proactively engage the MoND and RCAF to ensure that they
are aware of the law's requirements and implications.
Question. The first trial of the Extraordinary Chamber in the
Courts of Cambodia, an international tribunal set up by the United
Nations and the Cambodian Government to try former Khmer Rouge leaders
of crimes against humanity and war crimes, secured its first conviction
in 2010. A trial of three new defendants began in November 2011. Human
rights groups have pushed for expanding the scope of prosecutions to
include more cases, while Prime Minister Hun Sen has opposed the idea,
arguing that bringing more persons to trial would undermine ``national
reconciliation.'' What are your views on this subject?
Answer. The United States has long supported bringing to justice
senior leaders and those most responsible for the atrocities
perpetrated under the Khmer Rouge regime. The Extraordinary Chambers in
the Courts of Cambodia (``ECCC'' or ``Khmer Rouge Tribunal'') needs to
fulfill its judicial mandate, not only to fulfill its promise to find
justice for the victims, but just as importantly, as a vehicle for
national reconciliation and a mechanism to strengthen the rule of law
in Cambodia.
The RGC and U.N. established the ECCC in 2006, as a national court
with U.N. assistance in order to bring to justice ``senior leaders and
those most responsible'' for atrocities committed under the Khmer Rouge
regime. To date, the ECCC has completed the legal process on one case,
Case 001, and is undergoing deliberations on a second case, Case 002.
Two additional cases (Cases 003 and 004) are currently in the
investigative phase.
In Case 001, the ECCC found Kaing Guek Eav (aka Duch, commandant of
the Tuol Sleng prison, who sent at least 14,000 people to their deaths)
guilty in July 2010 of crimes against humanity and grave breaches of
the Geneva Convention, and sentenced him to 35 years imprisonment. On
February 3, 2012, the Supreme Chambers extended his sentence to life in
prison. The United States welcomed the final outcome as a landmark
moment in Cambodia's efforts to find justice for the atrocities of the
Khmer Rouge era, and for Cambodian national reconciliation.
Case 002, the trial against three surviving members of the Khmer
Rouge's senior leadership, began in November 2011. A fourth defendant
was found mentally incompetent to stand trial, but the ECCC has not yet
released her from custody. Stephen Rapp, U.S. Ambassador at Large for
Global Criminal Justice, calls Case 002 ``. . . the most important
trial in the world,'' given the gravity of the alleged crimes and the
level of the defendants in the Khmer Rouge regime.
In Cases 003 and 004, where investigations are still ongoing by the
Office of the Co-Investigating Judges (OCIJ) of five suspects, the
United States has consistently called on the U.N., the RGC, and all
interested stakeholders to protect the ECCC's judicial independence
from political interference of any kind. I believe the question of
whether a suspect falls within the jurisdiction of the ECCC is a
judicial one, and should be made free from outside interference or
pressure. Therefore, the OCIJ must be allowed to investigate Cases 003
and 004 according to the facts and the law. The United States has
called on the U.N. and the RGC to follow through on their commitments
under the agreement that established the ECCC. If confirmed, I will
clearly advance this message to the government and people of Cambodia,
and will support the United Nations and the ECCC as they attempt to
ensure that nothing is cut short, and that the ECCC's implementing
statute is fully respected.
Question. Following last year's national elections in Thailand,
relations between Cambodia and Thailand appear to be on a more even
footing, including in particular, over the disputed border region that
houses the Preah Vihear Temple. Please provide an update on this
situation and the current status of Cambodia-Thai relations.
Answer. Cambodia's bilateral relationship with Thailand was
complicated in recent years due to unresolved and longstanding border
disputes--including over territory surrounding the Preah Vihear
Temple--that flared up in the first half of 2011. Relations have warmed
significantly since a Puea Thai Party coalition came to power in
Thailand in August 2011, led by former Prime Minister Thaksin
Shinawatra's youngest sister and current Prime Minister, Yingluck
Shinawatra.
The United States does not take a position on the legitimacy of
either side's territorial claims. Since the 2011 border clashes, the
United States has consistently called on both sides to exercise maximum
restraint and take every necessary step to reduce tensions and return
to peaceful negotiations. In this regard, the United States has
supported the efforts of Indonesia as ASEAN Chair in 2011to facilitate
a resolution to the conflict.
While tensions have lessened, the underlying territorial dispute
around Preah Vihear remains unresolved. There is a 1962 judgment by the
International Court of Justice (ICJ) relevant to the dispute; in 2011,
Cambodia asked the Court to interpret that earlier judgment, and asked
for temporary ``provisional'' measures. In July 2011 the ICJ issued a
provisional decision that created a demilitarized zone around Preah
Vihear and ordered implementation of Indonesia's offer to deploy border
observers. Both sides have pledged to implement the ICJ's decision and
are working with Indonesia to develop terms of reference. The ICJ has
authorized both sides to submit further filings as it considers a final
decision on Cambodia's submission, which Cambodia did this month;
Thailand's filings are not due until June 2012. In addition to action
at the ICJ, the two sides are also using existing bilateral dialogue
mechanisms, such as the Joint Boundary Commission and the General
Border Committee to discuss outstanding boundary disputes.
The United States strongly supports Cambodia and Thailand's efforts
to improve their bilateral relationship in all ways.
______
Responses of Sara Margalit Aviel to Questions Submitted
by Senator John F. Kerry
Question. The World Bank Board recently approved the ``Program for
Results'' (P4R) in an effort to streamline its development operations
while improving the accountability of borrowers to produce concrete
results.
Please discuss how you believe the Bank should ensure
community engagement, transparency, and accountability for
specific investments within a P4R program.
Answer. I believe that community engagement, transparency, and
accountability are critical elements to the success of P4R, and all the
work the World Bank is engaged in. If confirmed, I will work with the
Bank to provide affected communities, the private sector, and other
stakeholders with the ability to review and provide input on the
individual program risk assessments, proposed capacity-building
measures, and proposed activities. Upon the project's completion, these
stakeholders should also be informed of the results at the activity
level.
Under a P4R program, the borrower government will make information
available to the public at both the program and project/subproject
level through methods that are appropriate to the scope and nature of
the program.
As part of any P4R program, the World Bank will conduct an
assessment of the borrower country's environmental and social systems,
including the arrangements by which program activities that affect
local communities will be disclosed, consulted upon, and subject to a
grievance redress process. Key considerations during the review will be
whether stakeholders' views and concerns are solicited in an open and
effective manner, and whether these views and concerns are considered
in program design and implementation. If relevant, the World Bank will
identify measures to improve effectiveness.
Relevant stakeholders, including local communities, will be
consulted regarding the findings of these environmental and social
assessments, and the Bank will make both the draft and final
assessments available to the public. In addition, a summary of the
assessments will be disclosedin the Program Appraisal Document (PAD).
Furthermore, Implementation Status and Results Reports (ISRs), which
are available to the public, will provide an overview of progress in
the implementation of the operation, including agreed actions to
improve environmental and social systems performance.
If confirmed, I will engage closely with the Bank to verify that
all P4R programs which are brought to the Board for review have
followed the above guidelines in conducting environmental and social
assessments, in consulting all relevant stakeholders and in providing
adequate disclosure of the assessments and transparency into the P4R
program.
How should the Bank ensure that information reaches the most
affected communities regardless of income or language?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the World Bank to undertake
considerable efforts to provide information to affected communities,
regardless of income or language. World Bank information (documents,
data, materials, projects, or research) is available online as well as
in person at more than 200 locations around the world. In partnership
with universities and other local organizations, the Bank established
these Public Information Services so that local citizens can access
information at the country level. If confirmed, I would encourage the
World Bank to work with local civil society organizations to take
advantage of this information and share it with the communities where
they work.
The World Bank also has a set of guidelines for translation of
documents, publications, and Web content, which call for the
translation of ``country- and project-specific information into the
national language of a country, local languages within a country and/or
language(s) understood by people affected by, or likely to be affected
by, a project.'' I support these guidelines, and if confirmed, I would
work to make sure they are implemented effectively.
In a time when an increasing number of people across the
globe are learning to use new communication technologies to
share information and viewpoints, what can the Bank do to
promote greater community involvement in projects at all
stages--planning, monitoring implementation, and evaluation?
Answer. As was made vivid in the Arab Spring, new communication
technologies are connecting and mobilizing people across the globe. If
confirmed, I would support the World Bank taking advantage of these
tools to promote greater community involvement in its work. The World
Bank is already making impressive strides in this area. President
Zoellick launched the Open Data Initiative, enabling individuals around
the world to access all of the World Bank's rich data. Similarly,
``Apps for Development'' is encouraging innovators around the world to
design new tools for development. There have also been efforts to pilot
the use of SMS technology and social network tools for greater
community and beneficiary feedback and to improve accountability.
Across the board, civil society organizations play an important
intermediary role and if confirmed, I would work to encourage the World
Bank to continue strengthening the role of civil society in its work.
Question. As the Bank has extensively documented, climate change
threatens us all, but it will impact low-income countries and
vulnerable populations the hardest. In addition to doing their part to
reduce greenhouse gases, countries that are the largest contributors to
climate change need to improve the integration of efforts to adapt and
respond to the impacts of climate change.
How will you improve the World Bank's role in integrating
climate change in their development assistance?
Answer. The poor are most likely to depend on natural resources for
their livelihoods and thus suffer the most from environmental
degradation and weather related disasters. Accordingly, it is
appropriate that the World Bank focus on sustainable development
assistance, including helping affected communities respond and adapt to
the impact of climate change. The World Bank already does considerable
groundbreaking research on the climate change-development nexus as
evidenced by its flagship publication, the World Development Report,
which focused on this issue in 2010.
If confirmed, I will urge the World Bank to continue to serve as a
convener and leader on sustainable development. I will encourage the
Bank to continue to support innovative new approaches and products to
address this global issue. Finally, the World Bank should take into
account climate vulnerability and risk management in its country
programs in key sectors including: health, water supply and sanitation,
energy, transport, industry, mining, construction, trade, tourism,
agriculture, forestry, fisheries, environmental protection, and
disaster management.
What measures will you advance at the Bank to support
increasing resilience to the impacts of climate change in
vulnerable countries and within vulnerable populations?
Answer. Adaptation is a critical issue for all countries but
particularly the poorest. Building climate resilience into development
plans, projects, and programs is good practice. If confirmed, I will
encourage the World Bank to continue to build climate change adaptation
considerations into Country Assistance Strategies and apply its
adaptation screening tool to projects and programs to assess and
address potential sensitivities to climate. I will urge the Bank to
conduct further work on sector-specific tools and guidance to address
adaptation in its work.
Question. In a series of papers, the International Energy Agency
has demonstrated that delivering universal energy access for the poor
would require dramatically scaling up off-grid clean energy
investments. Currently, the World Bank Group (including the
International Finance Corporation) is underinvesting in this sector.
Will you push for the Bank to adopt clear metrics to measure
energy access for both grid-tied and off-grid populations, and
for such metrics to be essential components in project
selection?
Answer. A lack of access to energy is a significant constraint to
economic growth and poverty reduction--the two key pillars of the World
Bank's work. The Bank has worked on this issue for a number of years
and, I understand, is committed to improving energy access in its
partner countries. It currently measures and reports on a number of
statistics related to energy (including energy access) in its data
products such as the World Development Indicators. The Bank also
strongly supports the development of a set of sustainable development
goals by 2030 to complement the MDGs for energy, sanitation, water,
oceans, biodiversity, and land. These are sound measures and if
confirmed, I would support continued work on them.
The upcoming Rio+20 Conference provides a platform for the
World Bank Group to make a commitment to delivering on energy
access and increasing off-grid clean energy investments. What
commitments would you push the Bank to make at Rio+20?
Answer. While it is hard to say what the outcome of Rio+20 will be
at this point, the World Bank is actively working for a positive
outcome for the summit. The Bank is participating in the U.N. High
Level Group on ``Sustainable Energy for All'' which is feeding into the
Rio+20 process. In this context the Bank has expressed its support for
the three global energy goals outlined in this U.N. action agenda:
(1) Universal access to modern energy services;
(2) Doubling the rate of improvement in energy efficiency;
and
(3) Doubling the share of renewable energy--all by 2030.
Answer. I understand that the Bank also supports efforts to develop
more sustainable development goals. If confirmed, I would support these
commitments and work with the Bank to follow through on these issues
through its programs, projects, and research.
Recognizing the need to balance the importance of increasing
energy access with access to clean and renewable resources, how
would you move forward an energy strategy at the institution
that would phase out fossil fuel financing while scaling up
investments in clean energy?
Answer. Access to energy and increasing renewable energy and energy
efficiency are all priorities for the United States and the World Bank.
I would expect that any energy strategy at the World Bank would need to
have a strong focus on these priority areas if it were to move forward
with support from the executive board of the Bank. The Bank has already
scaled up investments in clean energy and efficiency significantly. The
World Bank Group has invested $17 billion in low carbon investments
since 2003, of which $14.2 billion were in renewable energy and energy
efficiency.
Question. The administration has made the expansion of U.S. exports
a priority in its economic strategy. Procurement opportunities overseas
in Bank projects could potentially provide billions in revenues for
U.S. firms.
Please describe how you will work with the Commerce
Department to help U.S. firms take advantage of MDB procurement
opportunities and to promote improvements, if necessary, in the
Bank's data management systems to be able to monitor
procurement trends.
Answer. If confirmed, I would make it a priority to conduct
outreach to the private sector to highlight the various ways that
American companies can benefit from the work of the World Bank. While
perhaps the biggest impact comes from the work the World Bank engages
in around the world to create open markets and sound investment
climates, there are also a number of specific opportunities including:
--Debt and equity financing from the International Finance
Corporation (IFC) to support private overseas projects,
including public private partnerships with a development
impact.
--Procurement opportunities both to support the Bank's own needs and
for contracts that flow from sovereign lending or credits under
the Bank's oversight.
--Guarantees for international trade transactions under the Global
Trade Finance Program.
--Political risk insurance provided through the Bank's Multilateral
Investment Guarantee Agency (MIGA).
--Dispute resolution mechanism for issues between American companies
and foreign governments through the Bank's International Center
for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID).
Over the last decade, American companies have received over 2,500
contracts for projects supported by World Bank lending around the
world, totaling more than $1.6 billion. In addition, U.S. firms win an
additional $390 million a year on average in direct contracts with the
World Bank. If confirmed, I would seek to continue and grow this strong
record.
The Departments of Commerce and Treasury have already taken steps
to help U.S. firms pursue MDB-funded procurement opportunities and to
increase the transparency of MDB procurement data and if confirmed, I
will work with both agencies to continue this progress.
Outreach to the U.S. private sector is a key part of this effort to
engage more U.S. firms in MDB activities. For example, the U.S.
Executive Director for the World Bank has traveled around the country
to discuss World Bank procurement opportunities with business and trade
organizations, including a trip earlier this month to Boston where he
met with the New England Council and the Massachusetts Office of
International Trade and Investment.
In response to the Departments of Treasury and Commerce, the World
Bank has increased its own outreach to the U.S. private sector this
year by adding seven more business organizations to its Private Sector
Liaison Officer (PSLO) network. These PSLOs provide local-based
guidance and engagement for U.S. firms seeking World Bank and other MDB
opportunities. This brings the total of PSLOs in the U.S. to 10, more
than tripling the number since the beginning of 2011.
U.S. Executive Director Solomon has been actively engaging with
these PSLOs, and has already visited the new PSLOs in Alabama, Chicago,
New York, and Utah. As one example of the fruits of this effort, the
officer based in Chicago contributed to an 83 percent increase in World
Bank contracts won by Midwest firms. If confirmed, I will work to
assist in this outreach effort with the Commerce Department by taking
advantage of both the PSLO network and the Commerce Department's
network of Export Assistance Centers around the country.
The Departments of Treasury and Commerce have already made progress
to improve transparency of the World Bank's procurement information. At
the Departments' request, the World Bank began to publish procurement
notices for free on its own Web site, www.worldbank.org, at the
beginning of 2011. This important step allows small and medium
enterprises to access these contract opportunities without having to
subscribe to a database service. In addition, if confirmed, I would
work with the Departments of Treasury and Commerce to continue pressing
the World Bank to improve its data on contract awards under World Bank-
financed projects, so that we can better track the benefits accruing to
U.S. firms.
I understand the World Bank will soon be launching a review of its
procurement policy. If confirmed, I will consult closely with relevant
stakeholders including Congress and organizations representing the
private sector to identify potential areas of improvement. I will work
closely with the U.S. Executive Director, other Executive Directors,
the Treasury Department, and World Bank management to incorporate these
suggestions and further strengthen the World Bank's already strong
procurement policies.
______
Responses of Frederick D. Barton to Questions Submitted
by Senator Richard G. Lugar
Question. The CSO Bureau was established as an outcome of the QDDR
and in response to continued requirement for a fundamentally organized
civilian capacity in our lead foreign policy institution to respond to
incipient conflict, conflict and post-conflict situations.
Answer. The Bureau of Conflict and Stabilization Operations (CSO)
was established to address the need for greater cohesion and coherence
to conflict prevention and conflict response.
What role is foreseen for the State Department Bureau of
Stabilization Operations relative to the parallel and redundant
efforts at USAID and DOD?
Answer. The space in which CSO operates is not overcrowded in light
of the dynamic challenges the United States faces in providing conflict
prevention and conflict response in some of the toughest places of the
world. CSO will be at the center of complex conflict-related
situations, whether through integrated strategies, joint analysis, or
suggesting direction of foreign assistance to priority needs. In doing
so CSO will ensure USAID and DOD are brought into the discussions in
the earliest stages.
Where do those two agencies fit into the new construct at
State and how will they interact?
Answer. The partnership that CSO is building with USAID and DOD is
focused on collaboration. An example of this collaboration is
demonstrated through the current review of the 1207 (Conflict
Prevention) program which CSO, F, DOD, and USAID manage. We have agreed
that the funds must be used with more of a strategic focus, moved
faster, and evaluated in-country. We are now moving forward with these
critical partners to capture unobligated 1207 funds to ensure these
shared principles.
What resources will be drawn and what additional resources
and authorities can be drawn upon for the purposes of
responding to CSO requirements?
Answer. CSO expects to influence the focused use of several funds
to address early onset crisis, including Complex Crisis Fund (CCF),
Global Security Contingency Fund (GSCF), Transition Initiative (TI) and
1207 along with other resources. In addition we are in the process of
increasing the percentage of CSO's budget dedicated to deployment.
What additional responsibilities will CSO have should the
President or Secretary deem necessary?
Answer. As CSO proves itself through impact driven-responses we
envision being called upon more frequently by the President, National
Security Staff, and the Secretary of State to drive conflict
prevention, crisis response and stabilization in priority states.
Why does a broader interagency cooperative effort appear to
have been abandoned or scaled back from former recommended
levels as originally intended in the Office of the Coordinator
for Reconstruction and Stabilization?
Answer. To be more innovative and agile, CSO is developing a new
model for the Civilian Response Corps (CRC) that will seek to include
the widest possible range of partners, including the interagency, from
the beginning of its engagements. The result should be an expeditionary
team made up of leaders and experts from all parts of the United
States, interagency, state and local governments, and other sources of
talent.
We believe that this will be more effective and responsive to the
needs of each case and more economical than the current model.
Where and how will a lessons-learned and planning capacity
be incorporated?
Answer. The Office of Learning and Training will serve as CSO's
center of excellence in an organization that is dedicated to constant
learning. The Bureau will also continue to develop new tools and
approaches. Planning, as with conflict prevention, will be integrated
throughout the organization where, in S/CRS, these were separate
offices.
Question. The transition of the United States mission in Iraq and
Afghanistan from a military heavy civil-military operation is complete
in the former and just beginning in the latter. This winding down has
long been perceived as requiring a considerable civilian follow-on
component, which while evidently less robust than originally expected,
is still advisable.
Why would the CSO Bureau reduce the size of the Conflict
Response Corps precisely when the necessity of complex skills
in the civilian sector is so important to sustaining gains made
in both these countries given the drawdown of DOD resources and
personnel that had primary responsibility for programs to be
maintained by the mission?
Answer. The nature of places where CSO is operating is changing.
Rather than the heavy footprint of Afghanistan and Iraq, we see a range
of cases where the United States role is pivotal but not dominant. In
turn, we are focusing on a smaller CRC-Active component which
emphasizes leaders, and a broader approach which expands potential
partners and has a ``pay as we use'' business model like the CRC-
Standby. This will allow us to use our funds more responsibly and
respond with someone who can work independently, such as supporting a
Presidential inquiry in Liberia, or who can lead a small team that
draws on both USG and local resources. To succeed, country cases must
accelerate local ownership and that too will be at the heart of CSO's
emphasis.
What if any skill sets are being reduced or eliminated?
Answer. Over the past few years, the Interagency CRC-Active
component was deployed 39 percent of their time for conflict prevention
work, with the remainder of their time focusing on work not directed by
CSO. CSO is dedicated to building a CRC-Active component based on a
leadership cadre made up of those with proven effectiveness in the
field and conflict-focused skills, such as conflict analysis,
prevention tools, contingency planning, and expeditionary operations.
We will continue to call upon subject matter experts who can help to
bring tangible progress to the early days (0-12 months) of a crisis.
Will the CRC and the Standby be reformulated at lower levels
or is this a short-term retrenchment given the growing pains of
the recent past?
Answer. To tap more specific areas of expertise such as rule of law
or food security, CSO plans to rely more upon its CRC-Standby capacity
and other talent in the United States. The model will allow CSO to
reach more broadly across our country to find the right people at the
right time.
What tools have been sustained from the S/CRS office and
which have been discarded?
Answer. CSO is aggressively working to improve upon what we do
best. We have retained the conflict-related response tools (i.e.,
analysis and integrated strategies to focus resources and programming)
developed by S/CRS and its interagency partners, and continue to build
on that body of knowledge through regular interaction with
international partners, NGOs, academic institutions, etc. One of the
signature analysis pieces, the Interagency Conflict Assessment
Framework (ICAF), is now being rethought and redesigned--and that is
illustrative of the approach we will take.
Question. Administration and Department cooperation has proven
essential to productive efforts in stabilization and reconstruction.
Is the Obama administration fully supportive of the CSO
mission and mandate and how have they demonstrated such support
at the NSC level or in any government agencies?
Answer. The administration, National Security Staff, and Secretary
of State have all signaled the highest levels of support for CSO. In a
``townhall'' speech Secretary Clinton held 2 weeks ago at the
Department, she highlighted CSO's creation and its work as one of the
most important QDDR elements. Secretary Clinton and Under Secretary
Otero have encouraged geographic and functional bureaus to partner with
us to address conflict situations in every part of the world. The NSS
has included CSO in a wide variety of conflict-related policy and
country-specific working groups, ranging from Presidential Study
Directive-10 on prevention of Mass Atrocities to Syria, Libya and other
priority countries.
The newly arrived CSO leadership is building strong relationships
among senior directors at the National Security Staff, USAID, DOD,
along with numerous Assistant Secretaries at the Department of State.
What practical resistance remains to the concept of a bureau
that is a priority but requires the acquiescence and
participation of other bureaus and agencies?
Answer. As CSO begins to prove itself with its impact driven
actions we envision the Bureau will be called upon more frequently to
drive conflict prevention and response efforts around the globe. While
some senior leaders have taken a wait-and-see approach, in general the
response has been welcoming.
In each use, CSO seeks a clear understanding of who is leading the
U.S. effort as conflicts emerge. This initial clarity provides us all
with a center of gravity: someone with cross-cutting authority for the
sprawling network of offices and people involved, who welcomes help and
encourages innovation. With this understanding, CSO then develops a
strategy and drives urgent and practical actions.
What role would you foresee/will CSO have in the case of
another Haiti earthquake that devastates a country of interest
to the United States?
Answer. As a Department of State entity, our focus will be on
political or other ``human'' conflicts. CSO defers to how the Secretary
of State frames a crisis as either humanitarian or political in nature.
It is entirely conceivable that a natural disaster could be the
catalyst for a human/political conflict or a ``hyper complex
emergency'' in which case we would partner closely with USAID, DOD, and
others in developing a coordinated response that addresses both the
humanitarian and conflict dimensions of the situation.
What role, would you envision, will CSO have in the case of
a new political freedom movement in Algeria or Sudan or Cuba?
Answer. CSO would likely play a significant role in the first 12
months. CSO has provided analytical, contingency planning, and project
development support to several geographic bureaus, embassies, or
special envoys in this area. It is imperative to understand the
underlying sources of conflict in a complex crisis--and to plan
systematically for likely scenarios. For example, S/CRS--and currently
CSO--has been a strong supporter of the smooth transition of South
Sudan into an independent country. Our staff has covered literally
every corner of the country beginning before the referendum through
independence. Our Stabilization Teams deployed to extend the diplomatic
reach of the USG at the state and county levels, engaging in
``operational diplomacy,'' to include conflict assessment and
reporting, facilitation of peacebuilding initiatives and engagements
with key local actors to advance conflict mitigation and stabilization
objectives. A key function was to provide early warning of growing
conflict trends at the local, tribal, or provincial level, permitting
the USG and the Government of South Sudan to respond before the
outbreak of violence. As another example, we are currently providing
support to the Bureau for Near Eastern Affairs on expanding the
abilities of the Syrian opposition.
What role, would you foresee, will CSO play in Afghanistan
now and post-2014?
Answer. CSO is focused on transition planning with the host
government, within the Embassy, and with the military command.
What role, would you foresee, will CSO play in an emergent
mass atrocity in Sudan?
Answer. CSO plays an active role in the interagency work on mass
atrocity and genocide prevention, including direct support to the
Office of the Under Secretary for Civilian Security, Democracy, and
Human Rights (J) and the broader J family, CSO's greatest value is
likeliest to be at the earliest possible stage--in anticipating
possible threats or atrocities and helping to provide the tools and
training to better address them.
The presence of CSO Stabilization Teams in the most conflict-prone
areas of South Sudan continues to serve as an important tripwire in
providing early warning on emerging violence and, potentially, mass
atrocities. Beyond simply raising the profile of subnational political
and security threats, CSO staff in the field engage with state and
county officials, tribal leaders, youth, UNMISS and other stakeholders
and have used these relationships to influence behavior, including
dampening tensions, encouraging reconciliation and helping to set
conditions that could prevent violence.
______
Responses of William E. Todd to Questions Submitted
by Senator Richard G. Lugar
Question. Given the widespread concerns about official corruption
in Cambodia, I and many others believe it is imperative that Cambodia
join the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative before oil
revenues begin to flow from its offshore fields, which may be as soon
as next year. Does the State Department share this view, and if so,
what is the U.S. Government doing to encourage Cambodia's participation
in EITI? Is the U.S. providing any other assistance to help Cambodia
productively manage its future oil revenues?
Answer. The U.S. Government continues to encourage Cambodia and
others to join the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative
(EITI). Although Cambodia has yet to join, it has participated in
regional EITI workshops and taken steps to make public disclosures of
its oil revenue. In 2010, the Cambodian Government announced it had
received a total of $26 million in signature bonuses and social funds
from PetroVietnam and Total associated with contracts for offshore oil
exploration. Most significantly, Cambodia has established an
interministerial working group that will publish extractive industry
taxes and revenue, according to the local NGO ``Cambodians for Resource
Revenue Transparency'' (CRRT).
EITI is emerging as a global standard for revenue transparency, an
important component of good governance in the extractives sector. The
United States demonstrated its commitment to this principle in
September 2011, when President Obama announced that the United States
would join EITI. Leading by example strengthens the U.S. position as we
continue to encourage Cambodia and others to join the initiative.
Industry, government, and civil society must work together to promote
greater transparency and fight corruption.
Through our civil society partners, the United States has supported
workshops to assist Cambodian Government officials to better understand
the oil and gas industry. Additionally, we have promoted international
best practices for resource management in our interactions with
relevant government officials.
The United States provides technical assistance to the Cambodian
Government, in the form of financial advisory services from the U.S.
Department of the Treasury, to develop sound financial management
practices. Related to the extractives sector, the team has assisted in
the development and implementation of laws and regulations related to
taxation of the oil and gas and mining industries. Additionally, a
full-time U.S. advisor works with the Ministry of Economy and Finance
to support overall budget reform and increase financial accountability
in Cambodia.
Question. American democracy advocate Ron Abney passed away on
December 31, 2011, without seeing justice for the grenade attack in
Cambodia on March 30, 1997, in which 16 Cambodians were killed, and
scores injured--including Abney himself. Elements of the ruling
Cambodian People's Party (CPP) were reportedly suspected of complicity
in the attack, particularly Prime Minister Hun Sen's bodyguard unit
Brigade 70. What actions will you take to secure justice for the
victims of the 1997 grenade attack, and what impact does impunity for
such crimes have on Cambodia's democratic and legal development?
Answer. The lack of accountability for past crimes, and a culture
of impunity among many of Cambodia's elite, is an ongoing concern for
the United States, and one which, if confirmed, would be a top priority
for me during my tenure as Ambassador. These actions erode confidence
in the legal and political systems. Cambodia's democratic and legal
development is retarded when there is no accountability for past
crimes. If confirmed, I will make the issue of equality before the law,
judicial independence, and accountability for past crimes a major theme
of my engagement with the Royal Government of Cambodia, and I will do
everything I can to assist the victims of the 1997 grenade attack find
justice.
Question. Please describe the process by which U.S. foreign
assistance to Cambodia is evaluated in terms of effectiveness. Identify
every program and project funded in Cambodia for the last 5 years by
the U.S. Government. For each program and project funded by the U.S.
Government during that time period, please state the type of
evaluation(s) which occurred on an annual basis and the findings of
each evaluation.
Answer. U.S. foreign assistance to Cambodia is evaluated in
accordance with performance management best practices, including where
feasible and useful, program evaluation, to achieve the most effective
U.S. foreign policy outcomes and greatest accountability to our primary
stakeholders, the American people. The U.S. Department of State has
recently launched an Evaluation Policy that requires that all large
programs, projects, and activities be evaluated at least once in their
lifetime or every 5 years, whichever is less. Each Bureau in the State
Department identifies the programs, projects, or activities to
evaluate, and is required to evaluate two to four projects/programs/
activities over a 24-month period beginning with FY 2012, depending on
the size, scope, and complexity of the programs/projects being
evaluated. USAID has implemented a similar policy.
The attached annexes represent the past 5 years of summaries of
USAID, CDC, security assistance, and weapons removal and abatement
projects funded by the United States in Cambodia. The State Department
would be pleased to provide a briefing for you or your staff on these
programs and the evaluation mechanisms, if you would like further
information.
[Editor's note.--The annexes mentioned above (Annex 1:
``Evaluation Findings, USAID/Cambodia''; Annex 2: ``Security
Assistance, Evaluation of Effectiveness''; Annex 3: ``Weapons
Removal and Abatement Summary'') were too voluminous to include
in the printed hearing. They will be retained in the permanent
record of the committee.]
Question. Will you meet with opposition leader Sam Rainsy, whether
that be in Cambodia, if he returns or elsewhere?
Answer. If confirmed, I would welcome any opportunity to meet both
ruling party and opposition party figures in Cambodia, including Mr.
Sam Rainsy, regardless of venue.
Question. Former Thai Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra serves as a
key advisor to Cambodia Prime Minister Hun Sen on an intermittent
basis. How does this relationship effect bilateral relations between
Thailand and Cambodia?
Answer. Former Thai Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra served as an
economic advisor to Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen from 2009 to 2010,
and the two figures are widely believed to remain in close contact.
Relations between Cambodia and Thailand have warmed significantly since
a Puea Thai party coalition came to power in Thailand 2011, led by
Thaksin's youngest sister, Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra.
The United States strongly encourages Cambodia and Thailand to
continue to improve their bilateral relationship, which would also help
bolster regional stability.
Question. Please quantify the success of the U.S. Government or
U.S. funded-projects and programs in Cambodia attempting to address
human trafficking.
Answer. Cambodia, once a Tier 3 country, was classified as a Tier 2
country in the State Department's June 2011 report.
The United States has implemented an array of programs to address
human trafficking through USAID, the Department of State's Bureau of
Population, Refugees, and Migration, and the Department's Office to
Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons.
USAID/Cambodia programs to counter trafficking in persons (TIP)
have reached over 7,600 Cambodians in key priority provinces through
information campaigns and training events on safe migration and TIP-
related issues. Participants included local officials, community
change-makers (such as Village Development Committee members), and
students.
In the interest of TIP prevention, USAID assistance has
strengthened employment options and reduced vulnerability to
trafficking of over 920 youth through support for educational
scholarships and vocational training. USAID assistance has also reduced
the vulnerability of nearly 300 families by mitigating pressures for
family members to fall into situations involving unsafe migration,
trafficking, or exploitation.
The program has provided training to 776 government officials and
social workers on victim protection. USAID programs have also supported
over 1,800 trafficking victims through short- and long-term services
provided by shelters, including residential care, educational support,
livelihoods skills training, psychosocial support, and reintegration
assistance.
In the interest of prosecution, USAID supported training for over
500 police officers on TIP, criminal investigation, evidence collection
techniques for trafficking cases and institutionalized trainings within
the Cambodian National Police. We have also trained over 180 judicial
officials on the TIP law and regional and international legal
frameworks to address TIP.
In FY 2011, the Department of State's Bureau of Population,
Refugees, and Migration programmed $300,000 in INCLE funds for
antitrafficking activities in Cambodia, Laos, and Malaysia under its
Southeast Asia regional migration program, implemented by the
International Organization for Migration (IOM). Activities focused on
improving the quality of assistance provided in shelters for
trafficking victims in Malaysia and building the capacity of the Lao
and Cambodian Governments to provide reintegration assistance to
returning trafficking victims. In FY11 in Cambodia, IOM trained 20
central-level Ministry of Women's Affairs (MoWA) officials, 40
provincial-level MoWA officials, and 154 key local leaders, including
village and commune chiefs, on methods to conduct awareness-raising
activities on the risks of irregular migration and the rights and
responsibilities of migrants in Thailand, a major destination for
Cambodian labor migrants. The project also supported two awareness-
raising campaigns in Cambodia's Prey Veng and Kampong Cham provinces
that reached a total of 1,674 people.
The Department of State Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in
Persons (J/TIP) has supported both the U.N. and nongovernmental
organizations to address trafficking in Cambodia.
The United Nations Inter-Agency Project on Human Trafficking
(UNIAP) is partnering with local NGOs to provide psychosocial support
and other services to address trauma and other mental health needs of
victims of sex and labor trafficking. The project is also providing
economic support through training and job placement for victims, as
well as training for staff and raising awareness of the issue. In the
area of prevention, UNIAP successfully integrated an antitrafficking
message into a publication on financial literacy produced by a
microfinance institution. Over 50,000 copies of this publication were
distributed through the microfinance institution's branch offices. In
the area of protection, UNIAP has provided medical services to 20
trafficking victims, legal assistance and advice to 105 victims,
counseling services to 75, and vocational training to more than 20
others. Of particular note is the repatriation assistance to Cambodia
of 65 male Cambodian labor trafficking victims from Indonesia, 18
victims from Malaysia, and 21 victims from Thailand. In terms of
prosecution, UNIAP has assisted with the investigation of 20 TIP cases,
the arrest of eight perpetrators, six of whom have been criminally
charged, and two of whom have been convicted. The traffickers were each
sentenced 8 years in prison and ordered to pay compensation to their
victims.
World Hope International (WHI) provides comprehensive services for
girl survivors of trafficking and rape through an aftercare center in
Siem Reap modeled after a successful aftercare program in Phnom Penh.
Services include short-term shelter, medical and mental health
assessments, art therapy, and assistance with preparing for court
proceedings, with the goal of recovery and reintegration. WHI has
partnered with Cambodia's Ministry of Social Affairs, Veterans, and
Youth Rehabilitation (MoSAVY) to assist approximately 60 girls through
the center, and conducts periodic followup visits to ensure successful
reintegration into their communities.
Additionally, the J/TIP office recently funded Agir por les Femmes
en Situation Precaire (AFESIP) to develop three service centers in
Cambodia. These centers provide trafficking survivors with residential
living space that meets their immediate needs, including medical
evaluations and treatment; psychological counseling to establish and
restore self-confidence and self-esteem; support to family members; and
childcare and parenting skills to residents in order to allow them to
focus on their own rehabilitation. Nearly 550 women and girls received
care across AFESIP's three residential shelters throughout the project
period.
Question. What is the status of relations between the U.S.
Department of Defense and the Royal Cambodian Armed Forces? How is the
human rights record of the Royal Cambodian Armed Forces factored into
decisions by the United States to engage with the Cambodian military?
Answer. U.S. security engagement is a positive driver in deepening
United States-Cambodia relations, and reinforces our efforts to promote
a democratic Cambodia respectful of human rights, dedicated to the rule
of law and transparent governance, at peace with its neighbors, and a
contributor to regional stability.
The United States assists and engages with the Royal Cambodian
Armed Forces (RCAF) in an effort to develop a modern, transparent,
accountable, and professional Cambodian partner that supports U.S.
efforts to maintain regional and global stability, adheres to
international human rights norms, and is integrated into the
international community.
The military-to-military relationship focuses on building capacity
in peacekeeping (with recent deployments to Sudan and Lebanon as
examples), counterterrorism, civil-military operations (including
military medicine and engineering), humanitarian assistance and
disaster relief response, and maritime security. The United States will
also continue to enhance the RCAF's capabilities to meet reform, force
restructuring, and professionalization objectives.
Every individual and unit that participates in U.S.-funded training
is thoroughly vetted, both in Phnom Penh and Washington, in strict
accordance with U.S. law and State Department regulations. For example,
in addition to the various internal background checks conducted at the
U.S. Embassy, using information the Embassy has amassed from contacts
and open sources, Embassy personnel also check names against a database
maintained by a prominent human rights NGO. This database tracks human
rights violations throughout the country and includes cases submitted
by NGO monitors and contacts in the provinces. In Washington, the
Department of State's Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor
implements the Leahy amendment by reviewing information from multiple
resources to ensure that U.S. funding is not used to training
individuals or units implicated in human rights abuses.
Senior Department of Defense visitors to Cambodia discuss human
rights issues in their meetings with senior RCAF and Ministry of
National Defense (MoND) officials. The RCAF and MoND are fully aware of
our position on gross human rights violations as it pertains to
security training, and all units and individuals receiving training are
required to receive human rights awareness training prior to the start
of the program.
Question. Please cite specific examples during the past 3 years
when the United States protested the illegal eviction and ``land
grabbing'' of private citizens, which has occurred at the direction of
Cambodian officials and in violation of Cambodian law.
Answer. The United States has consistently expressed its concerns
about the increasing number of land disputes in Cambodia and the
potential they have to escalate into violent confrontations. These
disputes underscore the importance of clearly delineated property
rights and the need for a dispute resolution system that is independent
and treats all Cambodians equally and according to the law.
The United States has previously joined others in the international
community to urge the Royal Government of Cambodia (RGC) to ensure that
property rights are respected. For example, in 2009, the United States
coordinated and publicized a joint statement that urged the RGC to end
its development of Boeung Kak Lake until and unless Cambodian
authorities and the affected citizens reached a lawful resolution. In
2011, the World Bank suspended new lending to Cambodia until and unless
the RGC satisfactorily resolved the Boeung Kak Lake situation. The
United States, as a shareholder, strongly supported the World Bank's
decision.
In 2012, the United States publicly raised our concerns regarding
land disputes during the eviction of land claimants from the Borei
Keila settlement and continues to call on protestors to refrain from
violence and for security forces to exercise maximum restraint.
The United States, through our USAID mission in Phnom Penh,
provides funding and training to civil society groups that work in the
areas of land and livelihood rights, judicial reform, and legal
awareness.
Question. How do you recommend approaching the plethora of rule of
law challenges and issues within Cambodia? Please assess the success or
failure of the United States on this front in recent years in Cambodia.
What other countries are actively concerned about the rule of law
challenges in Cambodia?
Answer. The United States is concerned about Cambodia's weak and
vulnerable judiciary. Weak rule of law hinders political reform,
encourages an environment of impunity, hinders economic and social
development, and cripples the public's confidence in the political
process. Land rights issues are a tangible example of a larger need for
rule of law for many Cambodians.
Though recent arrests may indicate greater political will in
Cambodia to tackle corruption, the United States continues to encourage
Cambodia to comprehensively enforce its Anti-Corruption Law. We also
encourage Cambodia to write effective, applicable laws and have offered
technical assistance and critical feedback to support those efforts.
If confirmed, I will not only recognize and praise positive
developments, but also make clear our strong position on issues related
to the rule of law and corruption. I will persistently engage with
Cambodian officials and political leaders to stress the vital
importance of the rule of law and the need to create the political will
to build and protect it. At the same time, I believe the United States
needs to continue its robust support for civil society organizations
that actively monitor and promote the rule of law in Cambodia.
Various USAID programs support justice sector reform, including a
project with the Ministry of Justice to improve collection and use of
justice-system data. USAID supports legal education, which is critical
for building the next generation of legal professionals who can promote
rule of law, a key element in democratic transformation. Through a
robust subgrant program, USAID supports civil-society organizations
that engage in human rights advocacy and provide legal aid to indigent
persons.
The United States $11.8 million contribution to the Khmer Rouge
Tribunal (pledged and delivered contributions since 2008) is assisting
the Cambodian people in achieving a measure of justice and
accountability for the atrocities of the Khmer Rouge era. If confirmed,
I will continue to call on the Cambodian Government to respect and
protect the Tribunal's independence with regards to all cases before
the Court.
The U.S. Government is also engaging with Cambodia's military and
law enforcement forces to develop their professionalization and
accountability, thus advancing their respect for the rule of law.
Professional and competent security forces will not only be better
equipped to address transnational threats and domestic criminal
activities, but also be better prepared to support and sustain
democratic institutions.
The United States coordinates closely with other donors supporting
rule-of-law programs and assesses that many of Cambodia's international
partners are concerned about rule of law, given its impact on a broad
spectrum of issues, from the inviolability of contracts for foreign
investors to human rights for Cambodians and myriad other issues. Many
countries are actively concerned about the rule of law in Cambodia,
including Australia, members of the European Union, Japan, Canada, and
South Korea.
Question. In what ways does the United States consult and
coordinate with other major international donors of assistance to
Cambodia?
Answer. The United States consults and coordinates with other major
international donors on a regular basis, through formal and informal
means, and through the strategy, design, implementation, monitoring,
and evaluation cycle of assistance programs. Mechanisms include a
monthly meeting in Phnom Penh attended by heads of development partner
agencies, consultations at the program design and implementation level,
consultative workshops with other development partners, and even the
contributions of resources from other donors to USAID programs.
Formal coordination between development partners and the Cambodian
Government occurs at three levels. First, a consortium of 19 technical
working groups addresses a range of development issues at the working
level. Second, the ``Government Donor Coordination Council'' serves as
a higher level forum for coordination and dialogue between the
Cambodian Government and development partners, with the most recent
such meeting occurring in April 2011. Third, the Country Development
Cooperation Forum (CDCF) is the highest level forum for policy dialogue
among the development partners and the Cambodian Government, is
typically chaired by the Prime Minister, and includes the participation
of Ambassadors and heads of development agencies. The most recent CDCF
was held in June 2010.
Question. Please identify U.S. ``partners'' in Cambodia, receiving
U.S. funds, whom have direct or indirect relations with one or more key
Cambodian official or their family.
Answer. CDC: The implementing partners for the U.S. Centers for
Disease Control's (CDC) Global AIDS Program and Influenza Program
include the Ministry of Health; the National Center for HIV, AIDS,
Dermatology and Sexually Transmitted Infections; the National
Tuberculosis Control Program; the National Institute of Public Health;
the Communicable Disease Control Division; and the World Health
Organization (WHO). Each of these partners is led by a key Cambodian
official (for the Cambodian Government agencies) or has direct
professional ties to such officials (WHO).
USAID/Cambodia: The Cambodia mission of the U.S. Agency for
International Development (USAID/Cambodia) works with local and
international NGO partners to implement programs in democracy, human
rights, elections and political processes, health, education,
agriculture, food security and environment. These partners necessarily
have direct professional relationships with key Cambodian Government
officials.
USAID/Cambodia is aware of only one direct partner receiving U.S.
funds that has a family relationship with a key Cambodian official. The
Chief of Party of the Sustainable Action Against HIV/AIDS in
Communities project, implemented by the Khmer HIV/AIDS NGO Alliance, is
the spouse of an Under Secretary of State with the Ministry of
Commerce.
Ambassador's Fund for Cultural Preservation (AFCP): The United
States is providing AFCP funds to two nongovernmental organization
(NGO) implementing partners that have direct professional relationships
with key Cambodian officials at the Ministry of Culture and/or the
APSARA Authority. The NGOs are the World Monuments Fund (conservation
work at Phnom Bakheng Temple) and Cambodian Living Arts (documentation
of three Khmer music traditions). These grants were awarded through a
standard competitive process that complied with all relevant U.S. laws
and regulations.
English Access Microscholarship Program (Access): The following NGO
implementing partners, which receive Access funding to conduct English-
language education for disadvantaged students, are led by a key
Cambodian official. Grants to these organizations were awarded through
a standard competitive process that complied with all relevant U.S.
laws and regulations.
Cambodian Islamic Youth Association--The director is an
Under Secretary of State with the Ministry of Social Affairs,
Veterans and Youth Rehabilitation, and the deputy is an Under
Secretary of State with the Ministry of Rural Development.
Islamic Local Development Organization--The founder, who is
still a member of the group's Board of Directors, is a
Secretary of State with the Ministry of Social Affairs,
Veterans and Youth Rehabilitation.
Cambodian Islamic Women Development Association--The project
director is an Under Secretary of State with the Ministry of
Women's Affairs.
Cambodian Muslim Development Foundation--The project
director is an Under Secretary of State with the Ministry of
Education, Youth, and Sports.
Other Public Diplomacy Programs: The United States funds American
Corners at Panasasstra University of Cambodia (PUC) in Phnom Penh and
the University of Management and Economics in Kampong Cham and
Battambang, all of which have professional relationships with key
Cambodian officials, mainly with the Ministry of Education, Youth and
Sports. Additionally, the President of PUC is a former Minister of
Education and continues to serve as an advisor to the Cambodian
Government. The United States also provides support for the annual
CamTESOL conference, organized by the private company, IDP, which works
closely with the Ministry of Education on the event.
NADR: Though Nonproliferation, Antiterrorism, Demining, and Related
Programs (NADR) funding, the United States provides grants to
humanitarian demining organizations in Cambodia to remove mines and
other explosive remnants of war (EWR). In addition to mine and EWR
clearance activities, U.S. assistance supports technical training and
public education programs. Implementing partners for these programs
include DynCorp International, the Mines Advisory Group (MAG), the HALO
Trust, and Golden West Humanitarian Foundation. These organizations
necessarily have direct professional relationships with key Cambodian
officials.
IMET/FMF: International Military Education and Training (IMET) and
Foreign Military Financing (FMF) funds are not provided directly to any
Cambodian partner, but government elements led by key Cambodian
officials, including the Royal Cambodian Armed Forces and the Ministry
of National Defense, do benefit from IMET/FMF-funded programs and
projects. All programs and activities are contracted and disbursed in
strict accordance with applicable U.S. laws on competitive bidding.
Question. What are ``best prospects'' for U.S. companies exporting
to Cambodia in the next 3 to 5 years?
Answer. While Cambodia has enjoyed considerable economic growth
over the past decade, it is still among the poorest countries in the
world. Most Cambodian consumers are extremely price sensitive. While
products from China, Vietnam, or Thailand tend to dominate the market
because of their relatively cheaper prices, there are some key areas in
which American products and services are positioned to increase their
market share. If confirmed, I will do everything I can to increase U.S.
exports to Cambodia, including working with the Cambodian Government to
improve the business and investment climate in Cambodia.
Agribusiness and Food Processing: Roughly 80 percent of
Cambodia's population is engaged in the agriculture sector. As
a matter of policy, the Cambodian Government encourages
investment in agriculture, diversification of agricultural
products, and investment in improved irrigation and water
control. The agriculture sector currently relies on outdated
methods of farming and opportunities exist for American
companies to promote higher quality seeds, fertilizers, and
other agricultural inputs in Cambodia. Agricultural equipment,
irrigation systems, and food processing equipment are other
areas with potential for increased U.S. exports.
Construction Equipment and Engineering Services: Cambodia is
rehabilitating its hard infrastructure, including its road
network, and has experienced a boom in residential and
commercial construction over the last few years. Construction
equipment and engineering services will be in great demand for
the foreseeable future. Public works and transportation are a
high priority for the Cambodian Government, which receives
support from international donors.
Tourism Infrastructure and Resorts: Political and economic
stability has enabled Cambodia's tourist sector to mature
steadily over the past few years. Nearly 3 million foreign
tourists visited Cambodia in 2011. Main attractions include the
historical Angkor Wat temple complex in Siem Reap and the
relatively undeveloped beaches along Cambodia's southern coast.
Estimated annual earnings from the sector are more than $1.5
billion, or about 10 percent of total GDP. Collectively, these
conditions present good market opportunities for American
companies to develop hotels and resorts and to supply other
hospitality-related products or infrastructure.
Education: Demand for private or supplementary education
services is high. The majority of Cambodia's population is
school age, and the overall quality of public education is very
poor. Many Cambodians, particularly in the growing middle class
but even for those without much disposable income, are willing
to spend money on education for their children to secure better
opportunities in life. Commercial opportunities exist for
American firms in vocational, specialized, preschool,
elementary, secondary, and post-secondary education resources.
English-language training is also an increasingly attractive
prospect.
Used Cars and Automotive Parts: Cambodia has no public
transportation network, and the majority of people travel by
motorbike or car. Automobile ownership is rapidly increasing,
and the vast majority of cars are imported second-hand
vehicles. The United States is currently the largest supplier
of used vehicles in Cambodia, with the most popular models
being four-wheel drive vehicles and mid-sized Japanese-brand
sedans. Additional export opportunities exist in car
accessories and spare parts.
Question. What level of U.S. funding has been dedicated to
electoral reform in Cambodia over the last 10 years? Do you view this
priority as being a success or failure on the part of the U.S. given
concerns about 2013 elections being ``free and fair''?
Answer. The total value of U.S. Government assistance supporting
civil society and political parties in elections over the past 10 years
is $37,589,997. This assistance has promoted programs critical to
supporting free and fair elections in Cambodia, including political
party training/development, voter education, youth political
empowerment, polling, women's caucuses, candidate debates, and civil
society observation of elections. For over 10 years, the United States
has not provided assistance to electoral management bodies that
administer elections or legal/policy reform issues.
I believe that Cambodia's transition and democratic reform remains
a work in progress and considerable challenges remain. Most observers
assessed that Cambodia's 2008 elections took place in an overall
peaceful atmosphere with an improved process over past elections.
However, observers noted the elections did not fully meet international
standards. Restrictions on the transparency of the electoral
environment include harassment of opposition political parties and
limited space for political debate. The United States believes that
Cambodia's commune elections in 2012 and national elections in 2013
provide opportunities for the Royal Government of Cambodia to
demonstrate to its people and the world that it is dedicated to
multiparty democracy and that it can be a durable and healthy
democracy.
Looking to the 2012 and 2013 elections, if confirmed, I will
continue support for the role of civil society and political parties in
elections. I will also deploy Embassy personnel as election observers
throughout the country and coordinate our efforts with others in
Cambodia and with the international community.
______
Responses of Sara Margalit Aviel to Questions Submitted
by Senator Richard G. Lugar
Question. Your biography indicates that you have never worked in
the World Bank system. How do you think this will impact your ability
to function as a part of the U.S. leadership? What will your priorities
be at the World Bank? What new initiatives would you propose to promote
U.S. priorities at the Bank?
Answer. My experiences at the Treasury Department, National
Security Council, National Economic Council, and in private
international development organizations provide me with a unique
perspective on policymaking at the highest levels of the U.S.
Government and on development issues in the poorest communities in the
world.
To give just a few examples of my experience:
I have been a part of the important community development
projects the World Bank supported in Afghanistan, where CARE
served as an implementing partner for the World Bank's landmark
National Solidarity Program.
As a Senior Advisor to Secretary Geithner, I participated in
and helped manage Secretary Geithner's engagements in six World
Bank spring and fall annual meetings.
As a Director of International Economic Affairs at the
National Security Council and National Economic Council, I have
coordinated with World Bank officials on a range of issues,
from cosponsorship of the South Sudan International Engagement
Conference to projections of Afghanistan's fiscal gap.
These experiences have made me well-versed in the range of
development and policy issues facing the World Bank. If confirmed, I
will arrive at the Bank as a newcomer to the World Bank system like
most of my predecessors. However, I can assure you that I will bring
the relevant experience to the position, as well as the ability to
approach the institution with a fresh perspective and a critical eye
rather than being encumbered by the status quo.
If confirmed, my priority, first and foremost, would be to serve as
a strong fiduciary steward of American taxpayer resources. The United
States is the largest shareholder of the institution, and if confirmed,
it would be my primary responsibility to provide effective oversight.
Second, my focus would be on execution. The World Bank has already
agreed to a number of significant reforms as part of the recent capital
increases and I would work to make sure that these reforms are
implemented quickly and effectively. These include efforts to:
Strengthen financial discipline;
Improve governance and accountability, including promoting
transparency and anticorruption efforts;
Enhance development impact and effectiveness.
Beyond focusing on a comprehensive and careful implementation of
these critical reforms, I would work with the Executive Director to
promote U.S. priorities at the World Bank by:
Encouraging a culture of innovation and learning so that
effective approaches can be brought to scale for greater
impact;
Conducting outreach to the private sector to highlight
procurement and financing opportunities for American companies;
Engaging civil society organizations and other stakeholders
to solicit different perspectives on the impact of the World
Bank and potential areas for improvement.
Question. Your testimony at the hearing overall highlighted and
discussed the stated mission of the World Bank and cast the institution
in a positive light. Your testimony did not address the issue of much-
needed reform in the Bank system. I have been conducting investigations
and holding hearings for 10 years now on serious corruption and lack of
transparency at the Bank. After onsite visits by my staff, I put
forward a report detailing findings and suggesting corrective measures
going forward. Have you reviewed this report and evaluated the
suggested reforms? What measures, in addition to those I suggest, would
you propose to promote transparency and anticorruption? What can the
Treasury Department do to focus more on reform?
Answer. I have carefully reviewed your report and support its
approach. Indeed, I believe my testimony was very much aligned with the
general conclusions in the report--namely that ``the IFIs still serve
U.S. policy interests and leverage American taxpayer dollars'' but that
we must work to improve their accountability, transparency, and
effectiveness.
After reading the report, I actively consulted with colleagues at
the Treasury Department and in the office of the U.S. Executive
Director about its contents and recommendations. I was pleased to hear
that the report significantly helped guide their negotiations regarding
the general capital increases, replenishments, and the corresponding
reforms. For instance, the International Bank for Reconstruction and
Development (IBRD) and the International Finance Corporation (IFC) have
both agreed to increased transfers of their net income to the
International Development Association (IDA) during the IDA-16
replenishment period--a key recommendation in your report. Furthermore,
in the context of the IBRD's general capital increase, shareholders
agreed to greater formalization of these transfers going forward. The
United States also successfully pushed to increase IFC's lending in IDA
countries, as you had recommended.
Also consistent with the recommendation of your report, the United
States, other key shareholders, and the management of the MDBs have all
placed a special emphasis on harmonizing results in recent years. Much
of the agenda has been centered on results measurement systems, such as
that of the International Development Association (IDA). For example,
in the latest replenishment round for IDA completed in May, 2010
(IDA16), reforms to results monitoring and measurement at the country,
program and project levels have helped set a model for other
development partners. I understand that in each of the recent
concessional window replenishments (IDA, the Asian Development Fund,
and the African Development Fund), the United States has pressed for
greater efforts toward harmonization of results frameworks across the
institutions and that the MDBs are responding favorably and actively
engaging with each other on this important objective. If confirmed, I
look forward to engaging with World Bank management on this agenda as I
believe it is central to promoting greater accountability.
Your report also appropriately emphasizes the anticorruption and
transparency agenda. The World Bank has some notable recent successes
to point to, such as the landmark Cross Debarment Agreement that
brought the World Bank and regional development banks together in
linking their actions in response to incidences of corruption in
procurement. Another notable success is the Bank's new access to
information policy, which sets an appropriate new norm of transparency,
with a presumption that all documents are released and a very narrow
exception for sensitive materials.
However, given the amount of money disbursed from the Bank, and the
often challenging environments in which the Bank operates, guarding
against corruption requires constant vigilance. Therefore, if
confirmed, I look forward to working closely with the Treasury
Department and this committee in advancing a robust agenda on
transparency and anticorruption at the World Bank. This includes
supporting a strong Integrity Vice-Presidency with sufficient resources
to carry out its investigations, pressing for better data collection
and reporting on procurement awards under Bank-financed projects, and
greater use of independent, third-party organizations to verify the
results of Bank projects, where appropriate (such as in the Bank's new
Program-for-Results instrument). The World Bank and the Treasury
Department should also continue using their leverage to promote greater
transparency and anticorruption policies across borrowing country
governments by working with them to strengthen their public financial
management systems, publish their budgets, investigate and prosecute
wrongdoing, and where applicable, incorporate the principles of the
Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative.
Question. One of the goals of the World Bank system should be to
``put itself out of business.'' There should be more focus on enabling
governments to generate their own revenue and access to capital
markets. What sorts of guidelines would you propose for moving
countries from being borrowers to becoming donors, particularly the
middle-income countries?
Answer. I agree that the World Bank Group should aim to reduce the
need for its involvement by supporting poverty reduction around the
world including by working with governments to generate their own
revenue for this purpose. The World Bank system has succeeded in
meeting this goal in many countries throughout its history. Since the
founding of the World Bank in 1944, thirty-three countries have
graduated from IBRD borrowing. The list of IBRD graduates highlights
the success of the World Bank in supporting the postwar reconstruction
of Europe (e.g., France, which graduated in 1947); fostering the rapid
post-war development of East Asia (e.g., Japan, 1967; Taiwan 1971;
Singapore, 1975; and South Korea, 1995); and facilitating Eastern
Europe's transition to capitalism (e.g., Czech Republic, 2005 and
Hungary, 2007). Since its founding in 1960, IDA has seen 35 countries
graduate from its assistance including: Botswana, China, Costa Rica,
Jordan, and Turkey.
While graduation rates are roughly the same from IDA and IBRD, it
is also the case that the guidelines for graduation from IDA--per
capita income above an established threshold ($1,175 in FY 2012) and/or
creditworthiness to borrow on market terms--are clearer and more
binding. On balance, I understand the IDA graduation model works
reasonably well. As to IBRD, I believe there are advantages to defining
a clearer graduation policy and principles for Bank engagement in
middle-income countries.
While I do think it is important to encourage graduation, the
United States does have an interest in continued IBRD engagement in
many middle-income countries. Middle-income countries, such as Brazil
and China, have made tremendous strides in development in recent
decades. However, they still account for just under half of the world's
population and are home to two-thirds of people across the globe living
on less than $2 per day. So the World Bank still plays a valuable role
in supporting these countries' efforts to eradicate poverty. World Bank
lending also advances other U.S. policy interests in these countries
including environmental sustainability, sound fiscal management, and
orienting their economies toward greater domestic consumption, which
generates export markets for our firms and contributes to larger global
rebalancing efforts. The high standards for environmental and social
safeguards and procurement policies that the World Bank requires serves
as a model that we would like to see adopted more broadly in these
countries. Moreover, although middle-income countries can often borrow
on international capital markets at favorable rates, they value the
World Bank's unique expertise in long-term development interventions.
Further, even as many of these countries make considerable economic
strides globally, they often remain vulnerable to economic shocks,
which can force them to turn to the World Bank to cushion the blow on
their most vulnerable citizens. For example, South Korea, a country
that had formally graduated from IBRD assistance nearly 20 years ago,
and by virtually any measure, is a success story today, nonetheless was
forced to return to the Bank for assistance during the Asian Financial
Crisis in the late 1990s.
The World Bank and the United States have been successful in
encouraging greater participation of emerging market donors, and if
confirmed, I would continue to press this case. In the last
replenishment of IDA, for example, several middle-income countries such
as China, Brazil, Russia, and Mexico made pledges. To date, traditional
donor contributions from these countries have been very modest. At the
same time, through the IBRD and IFC net-income transfers, as well as
measures such as ``prepayment'' of outstanding IDA loans by countries
like China, middle-income countries played a strong, if indirect, role
in driving the overall increase in the IDA 16 replenishment.
That said, I think these countries should do more in exchange for
the benefits they receive from World Bank assistance. The United States
has long been at odds with many of the middle-income countries on the
issue of loan pricing. If confirmed, I will continue to press for loan
pricing that meets the broader needs of the Bank, both in terms of
protecting the Bank's capital base but also in making important goals
like IDA transfers possible. I also think it is worth exploring the
recommendation in your report to consider charging for advisory
services.
If confirmed, I would consult actively with Congress and other
stakeholders about the appropriate role for the World Bank in middle-
income countries.
Question. The global financial crisis has impacted the world's
poorest regions most severely. The response of the Bank was to seek
greater resources from donor countries, which have also been affected
drastically by the crisis. Could the international financial
institutions have done anything to mitigate the effects of the crisis?
What sorts of studies or reviews would you conduct to make sure that
lessons learned from the crisis of the last few years are used to
better prepare the institutions for any such future occurrences?
Answer. The global economic crisis that began in 2008 threatened to
erase years of progress in developing countries. In response to the
crisis and calls from the G20, the World Bank Group (World Bank,
International Finance Corporation, Multilateral Investment Guarantee
Agency) increased lending to unprecedented levels. Since 2008, the
World Bank Group has committed $196.3 billion to developing countries,
including record commitments in education, health, nutrition,
population, and infrastructure, providing much-needed investments in
crisis-hit economies. These investments also helped restore liquidity
to trade flows, which helped cushion the blow for American exporters as
well.
I strongly support the Bank's robust response to the crisis and I
believe the Bank delivered consistent with its resource constraints--
both in terms of timeliness of its response and the quality of its
interventions. I continue to believe the Bank played a critical role in
mitigating the extent of the crisis, and that the impact would have
been far worse in many countries without the Bank's interventions.
That said, the Bank should and is taking a hard look at its crisis
response efforts to determine where new approaches or instruments might
make sense. In this context, the Bank's Independent Evaluation Group
(IEG) recently completed an extensive review of the Bank's response to
the crisis. The review found that the Bank's lending provided an
important source of stimulus in many countries at a time when many
feared the onset of a global depression. However, the review also found
that the Bank's lending was not always adequately targeted or quickly
disbursing, reducing its overall effectiveness. The GAO also recently
completed its own review of the Bank (and other international financial
institutions) lending during the crisis that drew similar conclusions.
Recognizing the challenges to intervening effectively during a
crisis and as an IDA 16 outcome, the Bank established an IDA crisis
response window (CRW), which should enable IDA to respond more quickly
to economic shocks and natural disasters. If confirmed, I would be
eager to assess the experience with the CRW to determine if it is a
model worth committing to on a permanent basis.
Question. The U.S Government just approved the general capital
increase for the banks. The GCI was conditioned upon certain reforms.
How will you ensure that substantial efforts are devoted to achieving
these reforms? Specifically, how can the Bank better implement
guidelines to maximize international competitive bidding in accordance
sound procurement practices? How can the Bank better ensure protection
for whistleblowers? Will you press the Bank to make available internal
and external performance and financial audits?
Answer. Implementation of the reforms specified in the World Bank
general capital increase legislation is a high priority for the
administration, the Department of the Treasury, and for me personally.
If confirmed, I will work closely with the U.S. Executive Director,
other World Bank Executive Directors, and with Bank management to
achieve these reforms. I will work to make sure that progress is
carefully monitored and tracked under the operating framework that
Treasury lays out in its reporting. If progress falls short, I will
work diligently to press our case with the World Bank and elevate our
concerns within the administration as necessary.
Creating a level playing field, promulgating sound procurement
practices, and maximizing competition is an important part of the World
Bank's approach both for its own sake and because it helps model the
kind of practices countries need to adopt in order to create sound
investment climates and open, growing economies. The World Bank's
Procurement Guidelines and standard documents have been recognized as
international best practice by organizations representing the private
sector. The World Bank's Procurement Guidelines support transparency,
competition, and cost-effective results by requiring measures such as:
Strong international advertising requirements;
Open competition in the contracting process;
Publicly available standard bidding documents for
international competitive bidding.
In January 2011, the World Bank Board approved modifications to its
guidelines designed to further enhance the transparency and efficiency
of the procurement process under World Bank-financed investment
projects. This included, for example, requirements for strengthened
advertising of project bid opportunities and for posting of project
procurement plans. I understand the World Bank will soon be launching a
review of its procurement policy. If confirmed, I will consult closely
with relevant stakeholders including Congress and organizations
representing the private sector to identify potential areas of
improvement. I will work closely with the U.S. Executive Director,
other Executive Directors, the Treasury Department, and World Bank
management to incorporate these suggestions and further strengthen the
World Bank's already strong procurement policies.
With respect to whistleblowers, I believe that a strong
whistleblower protection policy is essential so that employees feel
safe reporting any waste, fraud, or corruption they encounter. In
partnership with Congress, the United States has been a consistent
advocate of strong whistleblower protections at the Bank. As a result,
the World Bank has made substantial progress in adopting and
implementing policies in the area of a whistleblower protection that
substantially embody the best practices applicable to international
organizations including:
Requirements to report suspected misconduct;
Protections against retaliation including provisions for
discipline of any employee who engages in retaliation;
Legal burdens of proof on management, so that if an employee
can show that he or she was subject to adverse action after
reporting wrongdoing at a Bank, management must show by clear
and convincing evidence that it would have taken the same
action absent the reporting of wrongdoing;
Access to independent Administrative Tribunals;
A presumption of reinstatement for dismissed employees;
Provisions for remedies, such as compensatory damages, for
financial losses linked to retaliatory action, legal costs, and
interim relief for whistleblowers in the midst of a review or
investigation.
If confirmed, I would be committed to maintaining these strong
whistleblower protection policies and strengthening them if needed. I
understand the Treasury Department is currently working with the Bank
to see if it can provide relevant data to show how its policy is being
implemented. If confirmed, I would use this information, along with
information gleaned from consultations with employees, Congress, and
other stakeholders, to determine if additional measures are necessary.
Finally, the World Bank now makes available its internal and
external performance and financial audits. In 2009, the Bank revised
and improved its Access to Information Policy, which governs issues
related to the availability of external and internal performance
audits. Previously the Bank had only released certain documents, but
the new policy makes transparency the norm. Documents are presumed to
be released other than in exceptional circumstances, and there is a
new, formal, independent appeals process where members of the public
can seek disclosure if they believe it was wrongfully denied. The World
Bank now makes publicly available a wide range of critical documents
including:
The annual assessment of the Results and Performance of the
World Bank Group;
A yearly update of the Status of Projects in Execution,
which assesses each project's progress;
All internal and external performance and financial audits.
In addition, under the new disclosure policy, borrowers are
required to disclose the audited annual financial statements of
projects as a precondition for doing business with the Bank. The World
Bank discloses the statements upon receiving them.
Strong standards for transparency, protection of whistleblowers,
and procurement processes are all an essential part of making the World
Bank a more accountable organization. If confirmed, I will work to
protect these strong standards and look for additional ways to make the
World Bank more accountable.
Question. The Board of Directors recently approved the ``Program
for Results'' or P4R. This program has met with mixed reviews from
civil society. How will you ensure that this program is implemented
effectively and transparently? How will you monitor for the inclusion
of programs with adverse environmental impacts or adverse impacts on
indigenous people? Will P4R work in conjunction with a country's own
system of transparency? Are there any downsides to this? How can the
Bank make the principles of Integrity Vice Presidency an integral part
of all operations in all units of the Bank?
Answer. The concept of P4R--formally linking World Bank
disbursements to the achievement of development results that are
tangible, transparent, and verifiable--has merits, but I also
understand and share some of the concerns raised by civil society.
Therefore, I strongly support World Bank management's decision to roll
out P4R slowly and with the incorporation of appropriate limits,
evaluations, and oversight.
Specifically, I support the limit of commitments under P4R in the
first 2 years of the program. The limit of 5 percent of annual IDA/IBRD
commitments--which still equates to approximately $2 billion annually--
is sufficient to allow the World Bank and its shareholders to test the
implementation of the instrument and identify and correct any problems
that arise. Any expansion of the program would have to be brought
before the Board.
Countries that participate in the P4R program must first meet
certain social and environmental standards. Civil society groups are
understandably concerned these standards will not be as strong as the
World Bank's environmental and social safeguards--safeguards they have
worked hard to advance at the World Bank and that, if confirmed, I will
work to uphold and strengthen. However, the P4R program has the
potential to provide an incentive for countries to lift their standards
across their entire government as opposed to just projects where the
World Bank is involved, and this could have a significant impact on
advancing environmental and social issues.
I also agree that the exclusion of Category A activities--those
deemed likely to have a significant environmental impact--from P4R
financing is appropriate and welcome the World Bank's unequivocal,
public statements in this regard. The significant risks that such
activities present are best handled through Investment Lending
operations and under the World Bank's well-established social and
environmental safeguard policies.
If confirmed, I look forward to engaging closely with the World
Bank as the initial P4R operations are brought to the Board.
Specifically, I will work with the U.S. Executive Director and World
Bank management to be particularly attentive to the potential for any
adverse impacts of P4R activities on the environment, Indigenous
Peoples and other vulnerable groups. In these circumstances, I would
seek to make sure the World Bank mitigates potential risks adequately
or determines not to move forward with the P4R investment.
I believe that transparency and accountability are key to the
success of P4R, and all the work the World Bank is engaged in. If
confirmed, I will work with the Bank to provide affected communities,
the private sector, and other stakeholders the ability to review and
provide input on the individual program risk assessments, proposed
capacity-building measures, and proposed activities. Upon the project's
completion, these stakeholders should also be informed of the results
at the activity level.
The World Bank's Integrity Vice Presidency's (INT) mandate covers
the entire World Bank Group and is an essential accountability
mechanism of the World Bank. I strongly support the work of the INT and
welcome its continued oversight of World Bank lending under P4R. I also
strongly support the efforts of the United States to incorporate
language into P4R's operational policy stating that INT would have the
right to investigate allegations of fraud and corruption in the program
supported by P4R, including projects financed under the program, not
only those allegations related to Bank financing (i.e., the use of
government funds would be included as well). If confirmed, I will work
in coordination with the Treasury Department to see that this policy is
carefully followed.
Question. In these tough economic times, governments and
institutions generally must be able to accomplish more with the same
resources. What sort of efficiency or cost saving measures would you
recommend to the Bank? What specifically would you suggest for
effective budget discipline in order to ensure that the largest
percentages possible of the Bank's resources are actually going to
fight poverty?
Answer. Budget discipline and efficiency at the World Bank are high
priorities for the U.S. Government and if confirmed, they would be high
priorities for me as well. The United States has supported a flat real
budget for the past 7 years. I believe the Bank should pursue cost
saving wherever possible. I understand that the United States has
consistently pressed for more restraint on issues of compensation,
travel budgets, and general overhead at Bank Headquarters, and if
confirmed, I fully intend to carry forward these positions.
In addition to pushing for specific cost measures, I am very
supportive of the recent structural changes that will enable greater
efficiencies in the future. In 2010, the World Bank adopted a new
financial framework that strengthens budget discipline. Specifically,
for the first time in 2011, the World Bank made major financial
decisions on budget, pricing, and net income transfers at one time
(i.e., in June, which is the end of the Bank's fiscal year), compelling
management and shareholders to consider important budgetary tradeoffs.
For example, if middle-income countries have an interest in an expanded
Bank budget for their country, they should be prepared to make that
case in the context of a discussion that also addresses the role loan
pricing plays in supporting the budget. This is a significant
improvement over previous practice, which was to consider these matters
separately. In addition, the World Bank did, in fact, increase rates on
loans with longer term maturities. As a result, loan prices now cover a
larger share of the World Bank's administrative budget, a practice that
will strengthen the Bank's accountability.
In 2010, World Bank shareholders also agreed to a rules-based
approach to net-income transfers from the hard-loan window (the
International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, or IBRD), to the
concessional window (the International Development Association, or
IDA), a measure that will help make support to IDA more predictable and
sustainable while maintaining prudent reserve levels. IFC's financial
framework also includes a new rules-based approach to help guide the
determination of the size of IFC's pledge to the IDA replenishment in a
manner consistent with IFC's needs and donors' prioritization of IDA
transfers. These agreements further strengthen IDA's financial model
and reduce its dependence on donor contributions.
Although not seemingly directly related to budget discipline, I
believe the concerted focus on results will yield significant
efficiencies over time. If confirmed, I would push to include a cost-
benefit analysis in project evaluations so that we can focus resources
where we get the biggest social return on our investment and eliminate
approaches that do not work. As you rightly state in your report,
funding project evaluations is much more cost effective than continuing
to fund ineffective projects.
If confirmed, I expect I will find additional cost-savings measures
once I am working within the institution. I take my responsibility to
serve as a careful steward of taxpayer resources very seriously and
will work hard to enforce budget discipline at the World Bank.
Question. U.S. leadership at the Bank is required to some degree to
share its positions and voting with the U.S. Congress. Will you commit
to transparency with Congress in the votes taken at the international
financial institutions? What will be your manner and timeframe for
consulting with the U.S. Congress? Will you commit to providing the
Senate Foreign Relations Committee with outdated legislative mandates?
Answer. I know that the Treasury Department is committed to
transparency with Congress and the public, and specifically posts the
votes taken at international financial institutions on its Web site. I
also personally commit to transparency with regards to votes,
legislative mandates, and any other issues of concern to Congress.
If confirmed, I look forward to working closely with Congress. I
believe congressional oversight is critical, and as I said in my
testimony, I have seen firsthand how congressional involvement can
provide leverage to U.S. negotiators. I will work with the Treasury
Department to proactively consult with Congress in a timely manner on
significant issues facing the World Bank and I will seek ways we can
partner together to advance our shared goals at the institutions. In
addition, I will of course be responsive to congressional requests for
my input.
I take legislative mandates very seriously and if confirmed commit
to applying them fully and faithfully. I also commit to providing input
to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee with regards to the impact of
the legislative mandates on U.S. leadership at the World Bank.
Question. Debt relief is provided to countries that claim they
cannot afford to pay back the borrowed sums without extreme hardship.
It should not be taken advantage of by corrupt governments attempting
to escape repayment of sums due. How will you ensure that the debt
relief procedure is not abused? What frameworks currently exist within
the Bank to prevent this?
Answer. The international community came together to support debt
relief as a way of freeing up resources to enable poor and heavily
indebted countries to focus on poverty reduction. In order to make sure
that it is not taken advantage of by corrupt governments trying to
escape their obligations, the World Bank and IMF have established a
robust process with critical safeguards under what is called the
Heavily Indebted Poor Countries Initiative (HIPC).
Specifically, in order for a country to receive full and
irrevocable reduction in debt from the World Bank, a country must:
1. Establish a track record of good performance under
programs supported by loans from the IMF and the World Bank;
2. Implement satisfactorily key economic and social reforms,
and
3. Adopt and implement a poverty reduction strategy paper.
The Board provides key oversight at every stage in this process.
Before a country receives any debt relief, the Board must agree that
the country has established a solid track record of performance on IMF
and World Bank programs, committed to key economic and social reforms,
and put in place a poverty reduction strategy. Before full and
irrevocable debt relief is provided, the Board must agree that the
country remains on track with IMF and World Bank programs and that the
country implemented the agreed economic and social reforms aimed at
poverty reduction.
If confirmed, I would work closely with the U.S. Executive
Director, the other Executive Directors, and the World Bank management
to provide careful oversight of this process and encourage putting in
place a strong set of reforms for countries to meet. For example, I
understand that the principles of the Extractive Industries
Transparency Initiative are sometimes incorporated as part of these
reforms and I would strongly advocate this continue for resource rich
countries undergoing this process.
These rigorous measures advance sound public financial management
and the use of proceeds of debt relief for poverty reduction purposes.
Before the HIPC Initiative, eligible countries were, on average,
spending slightly more on debt service than on health and education
combined. Now, they have increased markedly their expenditures on
health, education, and other social services. On average, such spending
is about five times the amount of debt-service payments.
Question. Some of the inefficiencies in the international financial
institutions could be solved if the various institutions worked more
effectively with each other. How would you encourage the banks to
collaborate and cross-utilize resources with each other and with the
IMF?
Answer. I strongly agree that better coordination between
international financial institutions would strengthen their
effectiveness, save costs, and lead to better outcomes for their client
countries.
There is already coordination on some issues--for instance, the
World Bank has a policy that requires coordination with the IMF prior
to the provision of budget support loans and the Bank and Fund work
closely on public financial management reform.
IDA 16's Crisis Response Window is a good example of an opportunity
that Treasury used to strengthen coordination between the World Bank
and IMF. As a result of leadership from the United States, the Bank
agreed to clear standards for cooperation with the Fund in any use of
the crisis window. If confirmed, I will look to uses of the CRW for
signs of positive cooperation or evidence of problems that need to be
addressed.
Nonetheless, coordination could be strengthened in a number of
ways. First, if confirmed, I would work with Treasury and the Executive
Director to press the Bank to strengthen its coordination with other
IFIs--and other development partners--at the country level. The Bank
strongly endorses the principles of aid effectiveness and has worked in
recent years to improve its dialogue with other donors. However, there
is room for improvement, particularly in fragile and conflict-affected
states that have little or no institutional capacity to work with
donors to harmonize their assistance. In these cases, the Bank needs to
be particularly careful to stick to its areas of comparative advantage,
undertake joint diagnostic and analytical work, and seek to minimize
administrative burdens on fragile states by pooling funding with other
donors.
The United States has successfully encouraged closer collaboration
between IFIs in Arab Spring countries including Tunisia, Egypt, and
Libya. This coordination has been useful for strengthening programs,
including governance reform efforts across the IMF, World Bank Group,
and African Development Bank. If confirmed, I would press for this
coordination to continue over the long term as supporting successful
transitions require sustained efforts.
If confirmed, I would also work to enhance cooperation between the
IFIs at the corporate level. Again, there has been progress in recent
years--strong coordination between the IFC and the private sector
lending arms of the other MDBs on trade finance facilities during the
height of the global financial crisis--but also room for further
improvement. For example, if confirmed, I would urge the Bank to assist
other MDBs in fully and quickly operationalizing the April 2010 cross-
debarment agreement, which would bar firms and individuals found guilty
of wrongdoing at one institution from working with any of the
institutions. The cross-debarment agreement itself was a powerful
example of the IFIs sending a unified message that there is zero
tolerance for corruption and fraud. If confirmed, I would encourage the
World Bank to build on this agreement and work with the other IFIs to
further advance a common anticorruption and accountability agenda.
As mentioned in your report, the World Bank is often expected to
set the standard of practice across the MDBs. If confirmed, I would
encourage the Bank to consult closely with the other MDBs during its
upcoming reviews of procurement policy and environmental and social
safeguards, so that the MDBs feel invested in the World Bank process
and can incorporate the lessons from those reviews in their own review
processes.
If confirmed, I would continue to look for other ways to encourage
coordination and collaboration across all of the international
financial institutions.
Question. It is inevitable that the Bank will have projects in
conflict zones. For some countries, the World Bank has set forth
various conflict guidelines. Would you advise the Bank to
institutionalize such conflict guidelines and if so, how should they be
categorized? What about Iraq and Afghanistan specifically?
Answer. I agree that the Bank needs to have a strong and coherent
strategy with regard to fragile and conflict-affected states. There are
risks to the Bank working in these countries, but the potential reward
of helping these countries stabilize and move away from conflict and
violence is significant.
Therefore, I am pleased that the Bank's engagement with fragile and
conflicted-affected states (FCS) is a priority for the institution. The
selection of FCS as a special theme for the IDA-16 replenishment, the
Bank's World Development Report 2011 on Conflict, Security and
Development, and the Bank's recent establishment of a Global Center on
Conflict, Justice and Development in Nairobi all underscore the Bank's
commitment in this area.
As part of operationalizing the lessons from the WDR 2011, the Bank
will adopt a different approach to the development of Country
Assistance Strategies (CAS) in FCS. Consistent with the lessons that
the Bank has learned in conflicted-affected states across the world,
like the use of its conflict filter in Sri Lanka, CASs for these
countries will identify the stresses that lead to conflict and
violence, assess deficits in key national institutions, and identify
key transitional opportunities that have the potential for breaking
cycles of violence. This is an important way of systematically
factoring the role of conflict into the World Bank's programming, as
was recommended in your report. Afghanistan and Iraq are both
appropriately included in the Bank's list of fragile countries and thus
would be subject to this approach. Given the multifaceted nature of the
conflicts in both countries, I would expect the analysis to be
particularly robust.
Having worked in a number of fragile and conflict-affected states,
including Afghanistan, Iraq, Kosovo, and Uganda, I know how critical
this is. Simple misunderstandings can escalate quickly, but small
positive gestures can also start to rebuild trust. Institutionalizing
conflict guidelines will help guide the Bank in everything from project
design to staffing and will help the Bank become a more effective actor
in some of the world's most difficult countries.
Question. Some country governments are required to seek
parliamentary approval of Bank loans and grants. There have been
indications that this may aid in the fight against corruption and
promote transparency. Do you think that parliamentary approval is a
policy that the United States should promote?
Answer. I certainly believe that the World Bank should take an
expansive view of its stakeholders when it comes to consultation and
engagement in its countries of operation. As a matter of
accountability, the Bank should be engaged with parliaments, as well as
members of civil society and the private sector in these countries.
This is why I believe mechanisms like the inspection panel play such a
critical role in promoting accountability, separate from the
accountability the Bank requires from its direct counterparties,
typically in the finance ministry.
As you suggest, in some cases, a country's laws and practices
define a formal role for parliament in the approval of Bank loans and
projects. In these cases, the Bank has a strong interest in supporting
this process by being responsive to parliamentary inquiries and
generally helping to facilitate parliament's consideration of projects.
If confirmed, where I see signs that Bank management is not playing a
constructive role in these situations, I will be aggressive in holding
them to account.
At the same time, my understanding is that the Bank is limited in
its ability to define the role that parliament should play. The Bank's
Articles of Agreement require a neutral stance on issues related to the
political systems of its countries of operation. My understanding is
that it would be a direct challenge to this requirement for Bank
management, or the United States as a shareholder, to take an active
stance on a separation of powers issued within a country. As a result,
I think the more promising route is to continue to press Bank
management to broadly define informal engagement so that all interested
and affected parties in a country are engaged in the Bank's important
work. If confirmed, I am certainly committed to holding the Bank to
account on this issue.
Question. Do you think there is sufficient coordination between the
banks and U.S. Government development agencies such as AID and MCC? As
a part of the U.S. leadership team for the Bank, how would you engage
to promote better coordination?
Answer. I believe that coordination between the banks and U.S.
Government development agencies is critical for a variety of reasons
including preventing duplication of efforts, sharing lessons learned
and best practices, and maximizing the effectiveness of donor
resources. Coordination is important both in Washington, DC, and in
each of the countries where these institutions work. There is a
significant amount of coordination between the banks and U.S.
Government development agencies on an ongoing basis, including:
A multilateral interagency working group that meets
regularly to review issues of concern at the development banks;
Country-level donor coordination mechanisms;
A variety of working groups and meetings that are organized
around specific topics, such as food security and the Arab
Spring.
A more specific example of how the MDBs work closely to support our
U.S. development agencies is the U.S. Partnership for Growth (PfG)
program. Under the PfG program, the Obama administration pledged to
elevate its relationship with four developing economies that were
exceptionally well posed to do their part to grow their economies,
including El Salvador, Ghana, the Philippines, and Tanzania. In a new
approach to U.S. engagement with these countries, bilateral agencies
worked closely with the MDBs to identify the most important constraints
to growth, and to develop coordinated strategies for tackling these
constraints.
The World Bank also works closely with U.S. bilateral aid agencies
in many countries. Often the World Bank develops the overall project
design and coordinates with other donors who invest in subcomponents of
the master plan. Specific examples include:
The proposed $354.8 million Millennium Challenge
Corporation's (MCC) compact for Zambia, which will be
considered by the MCC Board on March 22, 2012. The project will
help develop water supply, sanitation, and drainage systems in
Zambia. The MCC worked closely with the World Bank, which
helped the Zambian Government develop the sector policy and
institutional reform groundwork. Each component of the MCC
project was developed according to a comprehensive investment
master plan developed with the assistance of the World Bank.
The MCC $434 million compact for the Philippines approved in
August 2010. A key component of the compact was rural community
development, including provision of infrastructure and
services, such as rural roads, schools, and water and
sanitation. The MCC project builds upon the participatory
planning, implementation, and evaluation methodology developed
by the World Bank and the Philippine Government.
A good example of cooperation between the Bank and USAID is evident
in their joint work in support of food security and agricultural
development in sub-Saharan Africa. Over the last 3 years, USAID and the
Bank have collaborated to support a number of African countries in
implementing food security strategies under the Comprehensive African
Agricultural Development Program (CAADP). Specific examples of
collaboration between USAID and the Bank include complementary support
for agriculture development and social safety nets programs in
Ethiopia, agricultural infrastructure in Ghana, and agricultural
productivity programs in Rwanda.
In addition to these specific examples, the USED's office, in and
of itself, serves as a coordination hub, helping to connect not only
employees from across the U.S. Government, but also representatives
from the private sector and civil society with World Bank officials. In
support of this effort, the U.S. Executive Director has built a strong
interagency team that includes representatives from the State
Department, Commerce Department, USAID, and Treasury Department.
Even though there is a significant amount of coordination, I would
expect that there is always room for improvement. I believe the strong
relationships I have throughout the interagency will enable me, if
confirmed, to meaningfully engage to promote better coordination.
Additionally, if confirmed, I will actively support coordination
efforts through formal mechanisms, as well as by regularly sharing
information, seeking input, and continuing to build strong
relationships with interagency colleagues.
Question. As current President Robert Zoellick indicated he is
stepping down, debate has yet again arisen as to whether non-Americans
should be considered for the presidency. What is your opinion on this?
If there were a non-American in the presidency, what issues does this
raise for the U.S.?
Answer. I believe that the World Bank has benefited tremendously
from American leadership over the past several decades. President
Zoellick has been a very impactful leader of the World Bank, helping to
advance critical reforms to make the institution more accountable,
transparent, and effective. The administration has stated that for all
of the international financial institutions it supports an open and
transparent and merit-based process. The United States will put forward
a candidate to lead the World Bank, and I look forward to supporting
that individual's candidacy.
Question. Currently, there is great focus on the size and scope of
the Bank projects in countries deemed significant and far less
evaluation focused on results. Leadership approval is given at the
design stage, but final conclusive results are not presented similarly.
How can we shift greater emphasis to results and therefore greater
accountability?
Answer. It is critical to have a concerted emphasis on impact and
results in order to counteract the natural tendency of organizations to
focus on dollars spent as a measure of success. In my professional
life, I have succeeded in bringing a greater focus on development
results through rigorous monitoring and evaluation of projects around
the world. I look forward, if confirmed, to leveraging my experience
and passion to advance this issue at the World Bank.
A greater focus on results composed a major part of the reforms
that Treasury negotiated as part of the replenishment of IDA.
Accordingly, the World Bank has made a commitment to include results
frameworks with measurable indicators in all projects, all country
assistance strategies, and all new sector strategies. Moreover, the
World Bank committed to report on development results across the
institution using indicators that aggregate standardized data from
projects supported by IDA in seven sectors--education, health, roads,
water supply, micro and small and medium enterprise, urban development,
and information and communication technology. These indicators will be
featured in the IDA Annual Report, as well as reported more regularly
through the Corporate Scorecard.
If confirmed, I will work to further advance this results agenda
wherever possible. I understand that some evaluations are presented to
the Board and I would encourage this practice more regularly. The
design stage of a project is not only the point at which members of the
Board may have the greatest leverage, but it is also where the focus on
results needs to begin. When reviewing projects, if confirmed, I would
seek to ensure that results frameworks and monitoring and evaluation
mechanisms are incorporated into the design of a project. I understand
that the World Bank will soon be undertaking a process to reform its
human resource policies. Part of this will include strengthening
performance evaluation processes and aligning pay with performance. As
was recommended in your report, if confirmed, I would work to advance
reforms that would reward employees for the results they achieve not
the amounts of money they disburse or oversee. Moreover, reforms should
incentivize the achievement of results in challenging environments such
as fragile and conflict-affected countries even if the scale of the
results achieved may be less than what is possible in a large, stable
middle-income country.
I have a deep commitment to promoting greater accountability and,
if confirmed, I would work to find additional opportunities to advance
a results-driven approach at the Bank.
NOMINATIONS OF PAMELA A. WHITE, LINDA THOMAS-GREENFIELD, AND GINA K.
ABERCROMBIE-WINSTANLEY
----------
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 14, 2012
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Foreign Relations,
Washington, DC.
----------
Hon. Pamela A. White, of Maine, to be Ambassador to the
Republic of Haiti
Hon. Linda Thomas-Greenfield, of Louisiana, to be Director
General of the Foreign Service
Gina K. Abercrombie-Winstanley, of Ohio, to be Ambassador to
the Republic of Malta
----------
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 3:05 p.m., in
room SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Robert
Menendez, presiding.
Present: Senators Menendez, Durbin, Rubio, and Risch.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD J. DURBIN,
U.S. SENATOR FROM ILLINOIS
Senator Durbin [presiding]. Good afternoon. This hearing of
the Senate Foreign Relations Committee will come to order.
Today the committee will consider three nominations: the
Honorable Pamela White to be Ambassador to the Republic of
Haiti; the Honorable Linda Thomas-Greenfield to be Director
General of the Foreign Service; and Ms. Gina Abercrombie-
Winstanley to be Ambassador to the Republic of Malta.
Welcome to the nominees, their friends, and family.
I am pleased to stand in for Senator Menendez, my
colleague, for a moment. He will be joining us very shortly. I
will be brief with my introductory remarks, then turn to my
friend and colleague, Senator Rubio, before we give each of you
an opportunity for a brief opening statement. Please feel free
at that time to introduce any family members or others that are
with you today.
I want to congratulate each of you for your nominations. I
am pleased the President has nominated three individuals with
many years of experience who, if confirmed, will serve as the
United States representatives and will be called upon to
implement the policies of our Government, protect and advance
our interests, and help guide our Nation through the challenges
we face around the world.
Before we take your testimony, I would like to start with
the introductions of each of our nominees.
Senator Sherrod Brown of Ohio was planning on being here
this afternoon to introduce Ms. Abercrombie-Winstanley but was
not able to attend because of another committee assignment. I
would ask unanimous consent that his very strong statement in
support of her nomination be included in the record today.
[The prepared statement of Senator Brown follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Sherrod Brown, U.S. Senator From Ohio, in
Support of the Nomination of Hon. Gina Abercrombie-Winstanley of Ohio
to be the United States Ambassador to the Republic of Malta
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to speak in support of
the nomination of the Honorable Gina Abercrombie-Winstanley, of the
great State of Ohio, to be the next United States Ambassador to the
Republic of Malta.
Located in the Mediterranean Sea, the Republic of Malta has been a
gateway between Europe and North Africa. And it has long been a partner
to the United States in promoting and preserving peace and security
around the world.
The relationship between our nations spans from the days of World
War II, when President Franklin D. Roosevelt called Malta, the ``only
tiny bright flame in the darkness--a beacon of hope for clearer days
which have come.''
Today, our relationship has developed as the challenges and
opportunities within the international community have evolved. We share
interests in maritime law enforcement, search and rescue operations,
combating pollution at sea, and enhancing air-space management. And
with turmoil in the Middle East and challenges arising from the Arab
Spring, Malta will once again be a critical partner in preserving
global peace and security.
There are few Americans who are more qualified than the Honorable
Gina Abercrombie-Winstanley, of Ohio, to represent the United States in
this critical country at this critical time.
Born in Cleveland, she attended Cleveland Heights High School,
where she studied Hebrew, an education reinforced by the culture of
Orthodox Judaism that shaped the neighborhood of Cleveland Heights
where she was raised. During high school, she first traveled to the
Middle East on a student exchange trip from 1978-79, coinciding with
Egyptian President Anwar Sadat's historic visit to Jerusalem. After
graduating, she earned a B.A. from George Washington University. She
then became a Peace Corps volunteer in Oman and continued her public
service as a Presidential Management Fellow at the United States
Information Agency. After earning her M.A. in International Relations
at the School of Advanced International Studies at Johns Hopkins in
1985, Abercrombie-Winstanley joined the U.S. Foreign Service.
Her Foreign Service career has taken her from Baghdad during the
Iran-Iraq war, to Indonesia to Cairo, Tunisia to Tel Aviv. In 2002,
during her service in Saudi Arabia, she was the first female Consul
General and during the December 6, 2004, deadly al-Qaeda terrorist
attack on the consulate, she was cited for acts of courage.
Her service abroad representing our country has been exceptional,
as has her service here at home. She has served many vital posts across
our national security apparatus--from the National Security Council to
the United Nations to the State Department, working on challenging
portfolios that include Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, and Jordan. From 1991-
1993 she served as Special Assistant for Middle Eastern and African
Affairs to Deputy and then later, Secretary of State Lawrence
Eagleberger. And from 2008 to 2011 she served as Deputy Coordinator for
Programs and Policy in the Secretary of State's Office of the
Coordinator for Counterterrorism.
Any career as a senior Foreign Service officer is difficult and
demanding, and at the center of the challenging business of diplomacy.
The Honorable Gina Abercrombie-Winstanley, of Ohio, has had a
distinguished and decorated career mastering the delicate craft of that
business. Her extensive knowledge and experience--from her high school
days in Cleveland Heights to a diplomatic career in Washington and
around the world--makes her uniquely qualified to be next United States
Ambassador to the Republic Malta.
Senator Durbin. And I understand that Senator Bill Nelson
of Florida, our colleague, may wish to introduce Ambassador
White. Senator Nelson, please proceed. Welcome to your lovely
wife.
STATEMENT OF HON. BILL NELSON,
U.S. SENATOR FROM FLORIDA
Senator Nelson. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman, and to my
colleague from Florida, Senator Rubio, not only I wanted to be
here, but my better half, Grace Nelson, who is seated right
here in the front row, wanted to be here to say a word about
Pam White and also Linda Thomas-Greenfield, two real
professionals.
We have known Pam longer because we first got to know her
when she headed up USAID in Tanzania and then went to head up
USAID in Liberia where Linda was the Ambassador. And Linda has
just returned to the States for this new appointment just a
couple weeks ago. Pam in the meantime--very unusual that a
USAID top official then goes on and becomes Ambassador. And Pam
has been the Ambassador to The Gambia for the last couple of
years.
Now, why we wanted to be here is that in the good fortune
that we have had--Grace and I--to travel over a good part of
the world, especially the third-world countries. We have seen
extraordinary public service particularly in third-world
countries where a heart for service is so important. And
indeed, that is what we first noticed in Pam. And we saw that
and it was obviously recognized, and then she was sent to
Liberia as the head of USAID and had stellar results in both of
those countries that we had seen her work product. And for that
to be recognized by the State Department and then for her to
ascend to the position of ambassador in another third-world
nation and now for her to be nominated to come to the Western
Hemisphere in the poorest country in the Western Hemisphere,
Haiti, of which Senator Rubio and I particularly have
considerable interest because of such a connection between
Haitian Americans, of which we have a substantial community in
Florida, and the people of Haiti.
Haiti continues to need a lot of help. They are still
coming through the ravages of the earthquake, and Haiti still
needs a lot of help as they try to modernize into a functioning
government. And I think that this present President Martelly is
really trying. We have got to have a strong presence there
representing the United States as he continues to try to reform
that country. And so I could not give you a higher
recommendation for someone to be one of our ambassadors,
particularly to a country that is so important to the United
States as Haiti is in the Western Hemisphere.
I would just say, in passing, about Ambassador Thomas-
Greenfield that her record is stellar. The fact that she has
been there in Liberia, this little struggling country headed by
a woman, Mrs. Sirleaf, Helen Johnson Sirleaf, and how she has
tried to take that country that was so, so accustomed to
corruption and start turning it and how she has been successful
and even so in the point of just being reelected.
So I come here as your colleague to share with you my
personal comments, and I thank you for the opportunity, Mr.
Chairman.
Senator Durbin. Thank you very much, Senator Nelson. You
are obviously invited to stay as long as you can, but I know
your schedule may call you off to another place. But we thank
you for your introductions and testimony today.
I am going to say a few words about each nominee, then give
my colleague, Senator Rubio, a chance, then turn this gavel
over to Senator Menendez. Statements will be made, questions
asked, and we will proceed with the hearing.
I visited Haiti earlier this year. It was not my first
visit. It is sadly the poorest nation in our hemisphere. The
international community showed an amazing outpouring of
generosity after the terrible earthquake, but there is a lot of
work that remains to be done.
I saw a sprawling displaced persons camp in Port-au-Prince,
and I saw what just a small amount of money well spent might
do. An organization, an NGO, known as GHESKIO, invited us to
come over for a tour. We met Dr. Marie Deschamps, and as she
walked me through, she showed me a well that had been drilled
right on her property 600 feet down and was now providing clean
drinking water, which they treated with chemicals to make sure
it was even safer, clean drinking water for 120,000 people. And
she said thank you because America built that well. And I said,
where did it come from? And she explained and I finally
realized it was a program that I had created in the name of
Paul Simon, my predecessor, who wrote a book over 25 years ago
about the shortage of water in the world. And we created the
Paul Simon Water for the Poor Act. We funded it with an amount
which by Federal standards is small change, about $25 million
or $30 million. And I asked her how much did it cost to build
your well, and she said about $28,000 to supply clean drinking
water for 120,000 people in a country that is plagued with
cholera. It is an indication where money well spent can make a
difference, but it is an indication of the dramatic need in a
poor country like Haiti.
Amid these challenges, I have no doubt Ambassador White
will display the commitment and versatility necessary to help
move Haiti forward. She follows a great individual who
represented the United States several times as Ambassador, Ken
Merton. He is really one of the extraordinary public servants I
have met, a hard act to follow, but I know you will do well.
Let me say a final word about your service in Gambia. I
have been trying for years--literally for years--to secure the
release of a Gambian journalist, Ebrima Manneh, who was taken
into custody in 2006 by Gambian security personnel. Shamefully
he was held incommunicado and has not been heard of since. I
fear he may have died in custody.
His disappearance was symbolic of the troubling record of
press freedom in Gambia, and despite request of human rights
organizations and several Senators, the Gambian Government
refused to account for him.
And then early last year, there as a breakthrough when
Gambian President Jammeh formally requested a U.N.
investigation into his disappearance and death. Ambassador
White has been a tireless partner in this effort, and I thank
you so much for standing up for American values in this
request.
Linda Thomas-Greenfield served as U.S. Ambassador to
Liberia, as has been mentioned, since 2008; before that, worked
at the Department of State and the Secretary for the Bureau of
African Affairs, Refugee Counselor. She holds a B.A. from
Louisiana State University and an M.A. from the University of
Wisconsin.
If confirmed Director General of the Foreign Service,
Ambassador Thomas-Greenfield will be responsible for
recruitment, assignment, evaluation, promotion, discipline,
career development, and retirement policies for the State
Department's Foreign Service and Civil Service employees. It is
a big responsibility. Foreign Service officers constantly
embrace new challenges and hardships, including family
separation, and it is important that the Director General is
able to address those needs from personal experience.
Gina Abercrombie-Winstanley has served as Deputy
Coordinator Counterterrorism at the Department of State since
2008. Prior to that, she served as the Director of the Office
of Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, and Jordan at the State Department.
She has also served as Policy Advisor at the Department of
Defense and Director at the National Security Council. Ms.
Abercrombie-Winstanley attained her B.A. from George Washington
University and M.A. from Johns Hopkins.
A seasoned diplomat, her nomination to serve as Ambassador
to Malta is a fitting followup to her work on counterterrorism
efforts and leadership in the Middle East. Malta's role and
counsel during the courageous uprising in Libya was
representative of this tiny nation's large impact on the world.
If confirmed, Ms. Abercrombie-Winstanley will be vital in
reaffirming the strong friendship and partnership between Malta
and the United States.
And before inviting your opening statements, I will turn to
my colleague, Senator Rubio.
STATEMENT OF HON. MARCO RUBIO,
U.S. SENATOR FROM FLORIDA
Senator Rubio. Thank you, Senator Durbin. I appreciate the
opportunity to be here as well on three important nominations.
The first, of course, is to Haiti which I visited for the
first time in January of this year. I am impressed by the
resilience of a people that have faced extraordinary struggles
even before an earthquake, but yet have optimism about the
promise of the future and the opportunity we have working
together with the people of Haiti to help them build that
future for themselves.
There are tremendous opportunities there for the hemisphere
if, in fact, Haiti can turn the corner and build for themselves
a more prosperous society and a more functional government. And
the United States can provide invaluable assistance in that
regard. I think Senator Durbin outlined just one program that
we would like to be involved in, and there are others that are
out there that we are already involved in that have proven to
be a great success. We look forward to hearing from you about
some of your ideas in that regard.
Ambassador Thomas-Greenfield comes very highly recommended,
and from everything I have read in her record, you have a lot
of people speaking very highly of you. And you have a very
important job. In the next few months, you will have the
responsibility of recruiting and assigning, evaluating,
promoting, disciplining, being involved in the career
development and retirement policies. It sounds like a lot of
work. So we look forward to hearing about your plans as well.
And last, but not least, Gina Abercrombie-Winstanley of
Ohio. I have a letter here if I could have unanimous consent to
submit on behalf of Senator Lugar in support of your
nomination.
Senator Menendez [presiding]. Without objection.
Senator Rubio. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I had the opportunity to visit Malta I think in September
of last year. We had gone to Libya. They did not want us to
stay overnight in Tripoli, so we stayed overnight in Malta, got
to meet the leaders there and got to spend some time in the
nation, and grew to really understand its strategic importance
in the region as a gateway between North Africa and the Middle
East and Europe, but also an important ally. Though they are
not a member of NATO, they have been such an important partner
in so many of the operations that NATO has undertaken and I
think will play a critical role in the months to come as the
Libyan people struggle to reach, for example, their own
democratic aspirations. So it is an important relationship. It
is not often talked about.
And by the way, I was also very impressed with their
economic development and their economic prosperity which I
think serves as an example to the region as well.
So, again, it is not a station that people talk about. It
does not wind up in the newspapers a lot. That does not mean it
is not of value and strategic importance to the United States
and to our allies in Europe and in North Africa and in the
region. And so we look forward to hearing your testimony as
well about your plans in regard to that assignment.
So thank you very much, all three of you, for your service
to our country and for being here today.
[The letter to Senator Lugar from retired U.S. Ambassador
Douglas W. Kmiec in support of Gina Abercrombie-Winstanley
follows:]
Pepperdine University,
School of Law,
Malibu, CA, March 14, 2012.
Hon. Richard Lugar,
Ranking Minority Member,
Senate Foreign Relations Committee,
Washington, DC.
Dear Senator: I understand that the Senate Foreign Relations
Committee will today take up the nomination of Gina Abercrombie-
Winstanley, as my successor for the post of U.S. Ambassador to the
Republic of Malta.
I wish to formally encourage the committee to act favorably on Ms.
Abercrombie-Winstanley's nomination.
While the nominee's schedule in preparation did not allow her to
accept my offer of assistance or briefing, and thus, I cannot say that
I know Ms. Abercrombie-Winstanley personally, she is well thought of by
my former DCM, Richard Mills, who is an excellent judge of diplomatic
talent, and it is patent that she has strong credentials as a career
Foreign Service officer.
Of course, I stand ready to be of assistance to the Ambassador-
designate or the Department of State at any time. With the nature of
the entire region being in political transition, it is important for
our new Embassy compound there to be alert and fully functioning.
Senator, I would take it as a kindness if you would submit this
letter of positive endorsement for the record. It is a matter of
completeness and fairness since the committee should draw no adverse
inferences with respect to this dedicated public servant by virtue of
the unfortunate White House silence that both your inquiry, and my own,
received inquiring as to why efforts devoted to interfaith diplomacy
were allowed to be mischaracterized as ``outside the scope of U.S.
interests.'' As you remember, having thoughtfully attended my swearing
in, the President's director of the Office of Faith-based Initiatives
highlighted the significance of interfaith efforts in this pivotal part
of the world as part of the ``special Presidential logic'' behind my
appointment. Given the interest expressed by the ``Arab Spring
nations'' in fashioning new governmental structures of a nature that
will honor democracy and religious freedom, the need for sensitive,
interfaith efforts to promote understanding and respect across the
Abrahamic traditions is greater today than it was 2 or so years ago at
the beginning of my service.
Parenthetically, I am pleased to report that in discussions even
today my dedication to meeting this need did not end with the
conclusion of my own service. While announcement would be premature,
agreement will likely soon be reached establishing a joint program
between several fine U.S. universities (including my home institution
of Pepperdine University which for the 8th consecutive year was ranked
as the number 1 dispute resolution program in the country by U.S. News
and World Report) and the University of Malta. This joint venture will
be devoted to Graduate study in an understanding of Hebraic, Christian
and Islamic traditions as well as dispute resolution methodologies that
can be employed both by State Department personnel and NGOs.
At this positive moment of transition, it is also appropriate for
me to bring to the committee's attention the fine work of the American
and locally engaged staff in the Embassy over the last several years.
As the IG found in the overall high evaluation given Embassy-Valletta,
there were, as I recall, fewer areas needing improvement than there
were inspectors. While it is invidious to single people out by name,
some service was of such impressive dimension, I ask that special note
be made of the work of Lenese Walls, my office administrator, DCMs Rick
Mills, Jason Davis, and Arnie Campbell; our effective and highly
respected Defense Attache (Commander Jane Moraski; Lt. Commanders J.
Phillip Webb, Sean Schenk, and Greg Tozzi); NCIS detailee, Matt
Cummings, and Consular officer Tracy Brown. The work of the Bert
Hernandez and his staff on matters of regional security is most
noteworthy as well and in an appropriate forum deserves commendation.
All of these personnel assisted in maintaining our maritime safety
and security center, and associated search and rescue training,
undertaken in partnership with the Armed Forces of the Republic of
Malta. These preparations, ever observant of the value deeply held by
Malta of constitutional neutrality, became invaluable when it was
necessary to act with dispatch to rescue American personnel from
Embassy-Tripoli along with several hundred citizens of other nations in
the face of the violence that erupted there in February 2011. The
rescue which depended in part upon the diplomatic negotiation of the
use of a private catamaran, was a success noted by Secretary Clinton
personally when she visited Malta this past October. Our rescue
capability was unquestionably enhanced by the generous humanitarian
assistance supplied by Malta to all concerned, and in particular to
those few evacuees who suffered injury in the face of the gale-force-5
storm experienced en route away from the unpredictable shooting
environment on shore.
Finally, I wish to give recognition to the Embassy staff before
your committee for the following matters of some importance as a result
of U.S. initiative between 2009 and 2011:
Completion of a $125.5 million new Embassy compound.
Signing of an enhanced security agreement, training and
equipment with the Malta International Airport.
Signing of enhanced security agreement with Malta Customs,
as well as accompanying training and equipment.
Ratification of the Avoidance of Double Taxation Treaty.
Organized fundraisers for the needs of refugees who landed
in Malta because of the violence in North Africa, including one
memorable event with Actor Martin Sheen who premiered the
movie, ``The Way'' for the humanitarian effort.
Hosted the U.S. Secretary of the Navy and Leadership of the
Sixth Fleet.
Conference on Protection of Intellectual Property.
Drafting of the first strategic plan for north-south
engagement in the Mediterranean.
Planning and instruction associated with U.S.-EU-
Mediterranean Maritime Training Conference.
Support for the resettlement of several hundred migrant
families.
Multiple efforts to advance a fuller understanding of the
usefulness and advantages of SOFA.
Day-to-day meetings and cables with diplomatic counterparts
and the Foreign Minister, as needed.
Welcomed congressional delegation as well as numerous
foreign visitors, including His Holiness Benedict XVI.
Renewal of the visa waiver program.
Secured funding for alternative energy photo voltaic project
at NEC.
Helped institute skills training and English language
courses for the migrant populations, especially those preparing
for U.S. resettlement.
Arranged for White House Chief of Staff Sununu (on site) and
Secretary of State James Baker (via video) participation in the
Mediterranean school of diplomacy conference marking the 20th
anniversary of the end of the cold war and the Bush-Gorbachev
meetings related thereto in 1989.
Made efforts to promote interfaith dialogue and diplomacy
surveys and conference planning.
Promoted with conference presentation and public diplomacy:
gender opportunity and equality.
Successfully arranged with the Prime Minister for a high-
level task force to address human trafficking; negotiated a new
arrest protocol, with the expert assistance of Thomas Yeager,
the Embassy political, economic, and cultural officer, focusing
on identifying the slave trader, rather than prosecution of
coerced victims; Mr. Yeager, by the way, came to the Department
of State after 30 years of service in the U.S. Navy and his
energy, preparation, and judgment reflected both his patriotic
spirit and thorough nature.
Arranged for U.S. educational/public diplomacy visits of
members of the Maltese judiciary as well as leaders of the
major political parties in Malta.
Continued the full utilization of Fulbright scholars in the
life of the Embassy and public diplomacy.
Senator, it was an honor to serve our Nation in the Republic of
Malta. I count many Maltese citizens today as life-long friends, from
President George Abela to
the many who worshipped with me in morning Mass as I sought to visit
the 365 Catholic churches on the main island as well as Gozo. I am
pleased to report that relations between our two nations remain
especially strong. Friendship and cooperation in virtually all matters,
including the serious application of trade sanctions as needed to
address the unfortunate actions in Iran, has been readily offered and
accepted.
I wish Ambassador-designate Abercrombie-Winstanley complete
success, and I know the people of Malta will welcome her, as they did
me, with ``uncommon kindness.''
Respectfully submitted,
Douglas W. Kmiec,
U.S. Ambassador (ret.),
Caruso Family Chair in
Constitutional Law &
Human Rights, Pepperdine
University.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. ROBERT MENENDEZ,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW JERSEY
Senator Menendez. Thank you, Senator Rubio.
Let me start off by thanking Senator Durbin for filling in
for me. I regret that I could not be here at the very start of
the hearing but I had two nominees of President Obama to be
judges for the Federal District Court to present before the
Judiciary Committee.
And I will truncate my opening statement. I appreciate that
he has already introduced the nominees.
I remain concerned about the slow progress in Haiti. I am
concerned about the lack of job opportunities for Hispanics and
other minorities in the State Department and about Malta's
facilitation by the use of its flag and its ports of Iran's
cargo shipping line, IRISL.
You have all been nominated to positions that will allow
you to influence these matters. So I look forward to hearing
your assessments, goals, and objectives and to enter into a
dialogue with you. We have your testimony.
I would ask each of you to summarize your statement in
about 5 minutes or so. Your full statements will be included in
the record.
And with that, Ambassador White, we can start with you and
then move down the line.
STATEMENT OF HON. PAMELA A. WHITE, OF MAINE, TO BE AMBASSADOR
TO THE REPUBLIC OF HAITI
Ambassador White. Thank you very much. It is a great
pleasure to be here today. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am
honored to appear before you today as President Obama's nominee
to serve as the next U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of Haiti.
I am grateful for the trust and the confidence President Obama
and Secretary Clinton have placed in me by nominating me to
this crucial post. If confirmed, I look forward to working with
you on Haiti, a country with which the United States shares
broad and deep and longstanding ties and one that many
Americans, including me, care deeply about.
Mr. Chairman, with your permission, I would like to submit
my written testimony for the record and make a few remarks.
I first want to thank Senator Bill Nelson for the honor of
introducing me to the committee. I am grateful for his support.
Senator Nelson has been to Haiti and he knows its issues well.
That he supports my nomination as Ambassador to that country is
a vote of confidence that I deeply appreciate. Thank you so
much, Senator and Grace.
I understand that some here were at Congressman Donald
Payne's funeral today, and I just want to add he was a hero of
mine and I will miss him and I grieve for him.
I would like to thank my friends and family for attending
this hearing. Some have my front, meaning that they are
watching me this way from afar in Senegal and my parents in
Maine and friends there, and some have my back. That is to say,
they are in this room. My son Patrick, USAID, State friends,
Director Williams of the Peace Corps, and the Spences from
Chicago. And thank you.
Mr. Chairman, for 35 years, maybe even a tiny bit more, it
has been my privilege and my pride to serve the United States.
I began in a tiny village in Cameroon as a Peace Corps
Volunteer. As an officer at USAID, I have served in numerous
countries in Africa. As Mission Director for USAID in Mali, in
Tanzania, and in Liberia, and as Ambassador to The Gambia, I
have worked hard to ensure that diplomacy and development take
their rightful place alongside defense as the core instruments
for promoting United States interests.
And my USAID service took me to Haiti from 1985 to 1990. It
was a troubled period with lots of coups and lots of violence.
But my posting there left me with a deep and abiding admiration
for the people of Haiti. I have seen how courageous they are. I
have seen how hard they work. I have seen the fortitude they
have displayed in bouncing back from political or natural
disasters one after another. The resilience and the dynamism of
its people are among the most valuable resources that Haiti
possesses.
Secretary Clinton has called Haiti ``a test of resolve and
commitment,'' and that challenge extends to the country's
leaders, to its people, to its donors, including the United
States of America. We must never lose sight of the fact that
the success of that country is ultimately in the hands of
Haitians themselves. We must recognize there are no quick fixes
in building capacity in Haiti. It is going to take time.
It is of critical importance that we help strengthen,
expand, and diversify Haiti's private sector. Without a healthy
economy, Haiti will remain poor. It will remain dependent. And
this truth has to drive our collaboration with the private
sector, and our investment in initiatives that are truly
sustainable. It is Haiti's leaders who must foster an
environment conducive to economic development and prosperity
because without responsive, accountable, and transparent
governance, without the rule of law, without the proper laws to
attract investment, without a fully functioning government,
sustained development will not be possible.
If confirmed, I will press Haiti's leaders and its people
on these key matters.
In our efforts to help Haitians build a better future,
attention and support from Congress has been invaluable, and I
thank you for that. If confirmed Ambassador to Haiti, I will
look forward to working with you in addressing the country's
crucial issues.
Haiti is often described as the poorest nation in the
Western Hemisphere, and perhaps in terms of money, it is. But
it is among the richest countries in terms of culture and
history and courage. The great pride the Haitians feel for
their remarkable country makes success not only achievable but
believable. If confirmed, I will work hard with Haitians to
make sure their endless sacrifices and the bravery of the
people who suffered through that horrific earthquake are
rewarded with a better quality of life and with renewed spirit.
I thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ambassador White follows:]
Prepared Statement of Ambassador Pamela A. White
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am honored to appear before you today as
President Obama's nominee to serve as U.S. Ambassador to the Republic
of Haiti. I am grateful for the trust and confidence President Obama
and Secretary Clinton have placed in me by nominating me to this
crucial post. If confirmed, I look forward to working with you on
Haiti, a country with which the United States shares broad, deep, and
longstanding ties, and one that, as we have seen in the past few years
in particular, many Americans care about very deeply.
Mr. Chairman, for 35 years it has been my privilege and my pride to
serve the United States. I began my government service in a tiny
village in Cameroon as a Peace Corps Volunteer. As an officer for the
U.S. Agency for International Development, I have worked and raised a
family in numerous countries, including Ivory Coast, Niger, Burkina
Faso, Senegal and South Africa. As Mission Director for USAID in Mali,
in Tanzania and in Liberia, and as Ambassador to The Gambia, I have
worked hard to ensure that diplomacy and development take their
rightful place alongside defense as the core instruments for promoting
United States interests abroad.
My USAID service also took me to Haiti, where I lived and worked
from 1985 to 1990. It was a troubled period, with coups and violence,
and a legacy of misrule the effects of which are felt to this day. But
my posting also left me with a deep and abiding admiration for the
people of Haiti. I have seen how courageous they are. I have seen how
hard they work. I have seen the fortitude they have displayed in
bouncing back again and again from political or natural disasters. The
resilience and dynamism of its people are among the most valuable
resources that Haiti possesses, and are key factors in United States
involvement with that country.
Those strengths have repeatedly been put to the test in Haiti's
often turbulent history, and seldom more severely than in the 2-plus
years since the devastating earthquake of January 12, 2010. Even before
that catastrophe, in February 2009, Secretary Clinton identified Haiti
as a foreign policy priority and initiated a comprehensive, whole of
government review of the U.S. Government's engagement with that
country. The earthquake, with its staggering human and material losses,
gave added urgency to our efforts.
Secretary Clinton has called Haiti ``a test of resolve and
commitment,'' and that challenge extends to the country's leaders, to
its people, and to donors, including the United States. We must never
lose sight of the overriding fact that, as committed as we are to
Haiti, the success of that country is ultimately in the hands of the
Haitians themselves. We can help plan, encourage, and support, but
goals must reflect the priorities that the government and people of
Haiti have identified, and on which they are leading the way.
In order for Haiti to be able to take the lead, the United States
and other donors must equip key Haitian ministerial and government
institutions with the capacity they need to manage funds, people,
projects, and procurement. If the Haitian Government cannot deliver
basic services to its people, there will continue to be the
inefficiencies and crisis of confidence that have hampered development
for decades. We must recognize that there are no quick fixes or
shortcuts in building capacity in Haiti's governmental and
nongovernmental sectors; the process requires a long-term commitment on
our part.
We must also recognize the risk of spreading our engagement too
thin to have lasting impact. The United States has focused additional
attention on specific sectors and areas, with other donor partners
concentrating on other areas in which they are more specialized. Today,
we are supporting Haiti as partners in four sectors and working in
three defined geographic regions. Together with Haitian and
international partners, we seek to diminish and remove the most
significant impediments that have limited Haiti's economic growth and
development.
Some ask what the United States assistance has achieved, especially
since the earthquake. While progress has been slower than we or the
Haitian people would like, there have been tangible accomplishments.
First, we helped saved lives and ameliorated the worst effects of the
earthquake and the cholera epidemic. As of March 1, the U.S. Government
had built 28,653 transitional shelters in Haiti, repaired 6,002 damaged
houses to shelter 8,102 households, provided hosting support to 26,523
households, and provided rental vouchers to roughly 1,200 households,
thereby housing over 322,000 individuals. These efforts, along with
support from the international community, have reduced the number of
internally displaced people living in camps from roughly 1.5 million to
490,545 since the summer of 2010. In addition, our efforts have removed
2.31 million cubic meters of rubble--almost half of all the rubble that
has been removed.
With Haiti's most pressing humanitarian needs being addressed, the
United States has increasingly shifted its assistance toward the
country's longer term development. Gaps and shortfalls must be filled
in order to foster stability and economic growth in Haiti. The country
requires critical infrastructure, an efficient and reliable energy
sector, a modernized agricultural sector capable of serving both
domestic and export markets, internationally competitive ports, an
accessible system of health care and facilities that goes beyond
meeting emergency needs, and a policing and justice system that serves
the needs of its people. We are working with Haitian and international
partners in a Haitian-designed and -led process to meet those needs.
The United States is responding to Haiti's desire for regional
investments that support the development of economic corridors outside
of Port-au-Prince. In particular, we have targeted some of our most
significant investments in one of Haiti's poorest regions in the North.
Working with partners from the private sector, bilateral and
multilateral stakeholders, nongovernmental organizations, and Haiti's
national government and local governments, we have broken ground on
what will be one of the largest industrial parks in the Caribbean, at
Caracol on the country's north coast. The initiative will transform one
of Haiti's poorest regions, creating 15,000 new jobs that should grow
to 20,000 jobs by 2016. The project also includes new housing
settlements for 25,000 people complete with electricity, water, social
services, and job opportunities nearby. The plans also encompass a
state-of-the-art container port, an upgraded energy system to provide
reliable electricity for 100,000 people and businesses; and
rehabilitated health clinics and reference hospitals in the region. At
the same time as we seek to create opportunities in industry, we are
also working to support the agricultural sector, from which more than
60 percent of Haitians derive income, by increasing farmers' access to
credit and linking smallholder farmers to viable markets and improving
farm incomes and productivity. Our work in the agricultural sector will
also serve to address some Haiti's environmental problems and induce
farmers to remain in rural areas, instead of flocking to Port-au-
Prince.
The examples I have just cited reflect the critical importance the
United States attaches to helping Haiti strengthen, expand, and
diversify its economy. It is indisputable that no long-term development
goals in Haiti can be sustainable without the growth of the private
sector. The people of Haiti need that if they are to see improvement in
their quality of life; the Government of Haiti needs that if it is to
develop a tax base that will allow Haiti and not donors to fund
essential social services. Regardless of our efforts in other areas,
without a healthy economy Haiti will remain poor and dependent, and
this truth has to drive our collaboration with the private sector and
our investment in initiatives that are truly sustainable.
The United States is addressing assistance obstacles from our end,
such as bringing our staffing up to needed levels and providing
additional procurement resources. Our pace of programming is
accelerating. We are working to ensure that requirements such as
environmental assessments and seismic data are met in order to carry
out our projects successfully. We are taking steps to increase local
contracting as more of our reconstruction programs are designed and
awarded, and are making headway in putting solicitations out for
competitive bidding as quickly as possible.
This brings us back to the indispensible ingredient of Haitian
ownership of its recovery. It is Haiti's leaders who must foster a
political, societal, and economic environment conducive to economic
development and prosperity, because regardless of how much stakeholders
invest in Haiti, without responsive, accountable, and transparent
governance; without just application of the rule of law; without new
laws and changes in existing ones to attract investment; and without a
fully staffed and functioning government in every branch, sustained
development will not be possible.
High expectations lifted President Michel Martelly into office. It
will now take hard work and dedicated people on all sides to translate
those hopes into results and help Haiti fulfill its ambitions. The
Parliament's recommendation and President Martelly's recent appointment
of justices to Haiti's Supreme Court provide meaningful leadership to
the judiciary and are cause for hope. We are also encouraged by the
Martelly administration's steps to tackle corruption in the crucial
energy sector. The respected U.S. Government-financed turnaround
management team that his administration appointed to the serve at the
state-owned electric company has already identified $1.6 million a
month in savings by rooting out waste, fraud, and corruption. Last week
the Government of Haiti signed a far-reaching agreement with the
management team to achieve ambitious targets in improving the utility's
financial viability and expand the number of customers served.
The resignation of Prime Minister Garry Conille on February 24
comes as a setback to development, as Haiti once again risks being left
without a fully functioning government able to tackle the many
development challenges it faces. Haiti needs a government fully engaged
in development decisions with the will to make choices and speed up the
formal approval process. Haiti also needs a government that can
reassure donors that it is on the path to strengthening the rule of
law, ending a culture of impunity, showing no tolerance for corruption,
and reaffirming its commitment to democracy by ending the inexcusable
delays in holding elections. This is the moment that requires making
tough choices and putting policy before politics. If confirmed, I will
press Haiti's leaders and its people to show through actions their
commitment to democratic values and a genuine openness to business.
In our efforts to help Haitians build a better future, the
sustained attention and concrete support we have received from Congress
have been invaluable, and I thank you for them. There is widespread
understanding on Capitol Hill of why Haiti is important to the United
States: its proximity to our country, the extensive personal and
historical ties between the two nations, the value of a more stable and
prosperous partner in the Caribbean, the risks posed by potential
trafficking or refugee flows. If confirmed as Ambassador to Haiti, I
look forward to working with you in addressing these crucial issues.
It would be a mistake to understate the scale of the challenges
facing Haiti, or the need for a long-term commitment in order to
achieve lasting progress. But the news from Haiti is by no means all
negative. According to a recent Gallup poll, Haitians rate their lives
better now than they did before the earthquake. Haitians' optimism is
evident in a number of other areas as well, including the highest
confidence in government institutions on record.
Haiti is often described as the poorest nation in the Western
Hemisphere. But it is not when it comes to the resilience and
creativity of its people and its natural economic potential. It is
among the richest in terms of history and culture and courage. The
great pride the Haitians feel for their remarkable country makes
success achievable and believable. If confirmed by the Senate, I will
do my utmost to give Haitians and Americans both further cause for hope
and optimism about Haiti.
Senator Menendez. Thank you, Ambassador.
Ambassador Thomas-Greenfield.
STATEMENT OF HON. LINDA THOMAS-GREENFIELD, OF LOU-
ISIANA, TO BE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF THE FOREIGN SERVICE
Ambassador Thomas-Greenfield. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr.
Chairman and distinguished members of the committee, I am
honored to appear before you today as President Obama's nominee
to be the next Director General of the Foreign Service and
Director of Human Resources at the Department of State.
If confirmed as Director General, I would be responsible
for managing the recruitment, assignment, welfare, professional
development, promotion, and retirement of the Department's
Civil Service, Foreign Service, locally employed staff, and
others who work at the State Department.
Since my return from Liberia as chief of mission just 2
weeks ago and reengagement within the Department, I have been
reminded of the huge breadth of the Bureau's activities. I am
excited by the opportunity to strengthen the security and
prosperity of our Nation by leading and building an effective
civilian workforce.
For 30 years, I have had the pleasure and the honor of
working alongside talented State Department employees serving
at our overseas missions and in the Department here in
Washington and around the United States. I am proud to count
many of them as my friends and all of them as my colleagues.
They, like me, are pleased that the Department of State in 2011
once again ranked in the top 10 among large Federal agencies in
the Best Places to Work in the Federal Government. It really is
a great place to work.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to take the opportunity to
introduce my family: my husband, Lafayette Greenfield, a
retired Foreign Service specialist; our daughter, Lindsay, who
recently joined the 123d Foreign Service Specialist class; and
our son, Deuce, who also grew up in the Foreign Service and now
is in law school. And we are very much a Foreign Service
family.
Of course, the nature of the service has changed
dramatically since I joined 30 years ago, with those changes
accelerated by the events of 9/11. Sixty-five percent of all
State overseas positions are now at hardship posts, and two-
thirds of our diplomats abroad are serving in those difficult
posts. They willingly face hardship and risk for the honor of
serving their country and the opportunity to make a difference.
Like the Secretary, I believe these men and women are some
of the most courageous, hard-working, and capable people I have
ever met. They and their families deserve our support and, if
confirmed, I will work hard to ensure that they have what they
need to do their jobs well.
One of the Secretary's highest priorities is increasing the
size of the State Department's staffing by 25 percent. This is
a hiring initiative known as Diplomacy 3.0, for Diplomacy,
Development, and Defense, representing the three pillars of our
foreign policy.
With 3.0, the Department has been able to fill some of its
vacant positions as well as to fund new positions in support of
our highest foreign policy priorities. It has also enabled us
to double the size of our training complement. In 2011, we were
able to increase the number of positions filled by language-
qualified employees from 62 percent to 70 percent.
Recruiting a talented workforce that is truly reflective of
the diversity of America is also critical to our staffing and I
know important to you, Mr. Chairman. I am eager and I am
energized to lead this effort, and if confirmed, ensure that we
have the skills, the innovation, and diversity necessary to
advance our Nation's interests.
The Department has made a great deal of progress, but more
needs to be done to ensure that the Foreign Service reflects
the face of America. We must continue to work wholeheartedly
toward this goal.
We must also focus on assigning our men and women to posts
and positions where they can best achieve our highest foreign
policy goals. I would note this year that the Department is on
track to fill over 800 positions in Afghanistan, Iraq, and
Pakistan. I have no doubt that Foreign Service employees will
continue to step forward and volunteer for these tough
assignments as they have done in the past. If confirmed, I will
work with others in the Department to help these dedicated
public servants and their families manage these high-stress
assignments.
Over 10,000 Civil Service colleagues provide the critical
Washington base of support, along with 56,000 locally employed
staff worldwide, to keep our embassies and consulates
functioning effectively. If confirmed, I will continue to
develop and manage programs to fully utilize all of our staff,
and I will also work to ensure that they are compensated fairly
for their contributions to our mission.
Foreign Service overseas comparability pay remains a
management priority. This is a basic fairness issue. Foreign
Service employees' base pay should not be reduced when they
serve overseas.
In closing, Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to have the
opportunity to address you and members of the committee, and if
confirmed, I ask for help in ensuring that we are able to
strengthen American diplomacy through our greatest resource,
its people.
I will provide a more detailed written statement for the
record.
Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Ambassador Thomas-Greenfield
follows:]
Prepared Statement of Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield
Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the committee, I am
honored to appear before you today as President Obama's nominee to be
the next Director General of the Foreign Service and Director of Human
Resources at the Department of State. I am gratified and humbled that
President Obama and Secretary Clinton have chosen me for this key
position.
If confirmed, I look forward to rejoining the HR Bureau where I
once served as Staff Assistant 20 years ago. As Director General, I
would be responsible for managing the recruitment, assignment, welfare,
professional development, promotion, and retirement of the Department's
Civil Service, Foreign Service, Locally Employed staff, and others who
work at the State Department. Since my return from Liberia as chief of
mission just 10 days ago and reengagement within the Department, I have
been reminded of the huge breadth of the Bureau's activities. I am
excited by the opportunity to strengthen the security and prosperity of
our Nation by leading and building an effective civilian workforce.
For 30 years, I have had the pleasure and the honor of working
alongside talented, dedicated Foreign Service and Civil Service
employees, Locally Employed staff, Family Members, and contractors
serving at our overseas missions and in the Department here in
Washington and around the United States. I am proud to count many of
them as my friends--and all of them as my colleagues. They, like me,
are pleased that the State Department in 2011 once again ranked in the
top 10 among large Federal agencies in the ``Best Places to Work in the
Federal Government'' ranking. It is a great place to work.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to take the opportunity to introduce my
husband, Lafayette Greenfield, a retired Foreign Service Specialist;
our daughter, Lindsay Greenfield, who recently joined the 123rd Foreign
Service Specialist class; and our son, Deuce Greenfield, who also grew
up in the Foreign Service and is now in law school. I guess you could
say that the Foreign Service is in our blood.
Of course, the nature of the Service has changed dramatically since
I joined 30 years ago, with those changes accelerated by the events of
9/11. For instance, the number of positions deemed too dangerous for
family members to accompany has grown from approximately 200 in 2001 to
over 1,300 today. In addition, 65 percent of all State overseas
positions are now at hardship posts, facing crime, pollution, and other
challenging living conditions. Two-thirds of our diplomats abroad are
serving in those difficult posts. They willingly face hardship and risk
for the honor of serving their country and the opportunity to make a
difference. This puts a tremendous burden on our families.
Like the Secretary, I believe these men and women are some of the
most courageous, hard-working, and capable people I have ever met. They
and their families deserve our support and, if confirmed, I will work
hard to ensure they have what they need to do their jobs well.
One of the Secretary's highest priorities is increasing the size of
State's diplomatic staffing by 25 percent. This is the hiring
initiative known as ``Diplomacy 3.0'' (D 3.0)--for Diplomacy,
Development, and Defense--representing the three ``pillars'' of our
foreign policy strategy.
With D 3.0 hiring, the Department has been able to fill some of its
vacant positions as well as to fund new positions in support of our
highest foreign priority goals. It has also enabled us to double the
size of our training complement, which enabled more overseas positions
to remain filled while replacements received required language and
functional training. Because of this much needed influx in resources
that allows us to train, in 2011 we were able to increase the number of
positions filled by language-qualified employees from 62 percent to
over 70 percent.
Recruiting a talented workforce that truly reflects the diversity
of America is critical to our staffing efforts. I am eager and
energized to lead this effort, if confirmed, and ensure that we have
the skills, innovation, and diversity necessary to advance our Nation's
interests.
Aggressive recruitment outreach including through social media, has
contributed to diversity recruitment gains. For instance, from 2005 to
present African-American takers of the Foreign Service Officer Test
increased 61 percent, Hispanics 82 percent; and women 131 percent. Pass
rates for these groups increased 112 percent, 172 percent, and 131
percent respectively. And, hiring of African-Americans increased 36
percent and hiring of Hispanics increased 43 percent. The Department
has made a great deal of progress, but we must continue to work
wholeheartedly toward this goal.
We must also focus on assigning our men and women to posts and
positions where they can best achieve our highest foreign policy goals.
This year, the Department is on track to fill over 800 positions in
Afghanistan, Iraq, and Pakistan.
I have no doubt that dedicated Foreign Service employees will
continue to step forward and volunteer for these tough assignments, as
they have done in the past. If confirmed, I will work with others in
the Department to help these dedicated public servants and their
families manage these high-stress assignments.
Over 10,000 Civil Service colleagues provide the critical
Washington base without which our embassies and consulates could not
function effectively. Many of them volunteer to go overseas to
difficult posts. They contribute to almost every aspect of the
Department's operations from human rights to narcotics control to trade
to environmental issues. They are also the domestic counterparts to
consular officers abroad, issuing passports and assisting U.S. citizens
in trouble overseas. To maximize our effectiveness, we must increase
our flexibility to deploy employees where most needed. Therefore, we
are creating more opportunities for Civil Service employees to work
overseas.
Of the approximately 56,000 Locally Employed (LE) staff employed
worldwide by all U.S. agencies overseas under chief of mission
authority, nearly 45,000 work for the Department of State. These loyal
colleagues are a key component of our mission. They have been at our
embassies the longest, and they perform dozens of essential functions
that keep our missions open even under the most difficult
circumstances. If confirmed, I will ensure that we continue to develop
and manage programs to fully utilize our local staff. I will also work
to ensure they are compensated fairly for their contributions to our
mission.
Foreign Service Overseas Comparability Pay (OCP) remains a
management priority. This is a basic fairness issue; Foreign Service
employees' base pay should not be reduced when they serve overseas. If
OCP is taken away in the future, we know it will not only impact our
employees' morale and salaries, but also their retirement. I look
forward to working with you, Mr. Chairman, and other members of the
committee to ensure that does not happen.
I am pleased that the Department of State ranks high as an ideal
employer. If confirmed, I will do all that I can to make it an even
better, more ``family friendly'' employer, and more representative of
the face of America.
In closing, Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to have the opportunity to
address you and the members of the committee. If confirmed, I ask for
your help in ensuring that we are able to strengthen American Diplomacy
through our greatest resource--our people. I look forward to helping
the Secretary ensure that the Department and its people are ready to
meet our foreign policy challenges and objectives.
Senator Menendez. Thank you, Ambassador.
Ms. Winstanley.
STATEMENT OF GINA K. ABERCROMBIE-WINSTANLEY, OF OHIO, TO BE
AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF MALTA
Ms. Abercrombie-Winstanley. Mr. Chairman and members of the
committee, it is a privilege to appear before you today as
President Obama's nominee to serve as the United States
Ambassador to the Republic of Malta. I am honored by the
confidence placed in me by President Obama and Secretary
Clinton.
I would also like to thank Senator Brown for his
introductory statement.
If confirmed, I look forward to working with this committee
and the Congress in advancing U.S. interests in Malta.
I am delighted and proud to be accompanied today by members
of my family: my husband, Gerard, and my daughter, Kara. I am
also joined by my brother, John; my sister, Navy captain
retired, Lynne Hicks; and my brother-in-law, colonel retired,
Larry Hicks. I am also supported today by many friends and
loved ones.
My family has personal connections to Malta. My father-in-
law made many stops there as a naval officer during World War
II and my niece studied nursing in Malta at St. Luke's Hospital
for Nursing.
After 27 years in the Foreign Service, I believe my
experience developing and implementing policy on
counterterrorism issues with European, African, and Middle
Eastern partners, as well as advancing U.S. interests on a
bilateral basis in the Middle East, will enhance my
effectiveness as chief of mission, should you decide to confirm
me.
Malta is a valued European partner, often serving as a
bridge between the West and the Middle East. I have a unique
background to strengthen the relationship between the United
States and Malta. This includes my service in the Middle East
as Consul General in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia and tours in Iraq,
Israel, and Egypt, as well as my tenure as Director of Near
East, South Asian Affairs at the National Security Council at
the White House, and as a professional staff member, a proud
one, working for this committee under then Ranking Member
Biden.
Over 50 years ago, Malta's courageous resistance during
World War II prompted Franklin Delano Roosevelt to refer to
Malta as a nation that stood alone but unafraid in the center
of the sea, one tiny bright flame in the darkness. Malta is
small in size but has never backed away from occupying a large
role when history has called upon it. We have seen this
recently in its commendable actions in support of the
aspirations of the people of Libya.
As we recently witnessed, Malta's strategic location in the
Mediterranean Sea is important to both global security and
international commerce. Last February when U.S. citizens and
others were evacuated from Libya to Malta, the Maltese
Government assisted 20,000 evacuees from 90 countries,
including more than 200 American citizens. Maltese officials
and the U.S. Embassy in Valletta worked side by side to arrange
emergency and humanitarian services to meet evacuees as they
arrived in Malta and assist in their onward travel.
Though not a member of NATO, Malta provided emergency
landing services for NATO planes and cooperated closely with
NATO on its maritime embargo. Malta authorized thousands of
overflight requests in support of Operation Unified Protector,
free of charge and at a substantial cost to its ability to
route lucrative commercial traffic.
Malta has offered to be a hub for all humanitarian
assistance to Libya.
On the trade and investment front, the recently ratified
double taxation agreement bolsters the already strong economic
relationship between the United States and Malta by fostering
greater investment in trade. The United States is Malta's
second-largest trading partner outside of the EU. American
firms directly employ over 2,000 people in Malta, not counting
the several thousands who work for U.S. franchises. In the
small nation, that means 1 out of every 50 Maltese workers is
employed by an American company.
Malta shines as a beacon of peace and economic success in
the southern Mediterranean and is ready to provide essential
assistance and know-how to its transitioning North African
neighbors.
As a career Foreign Service officer, my life's work has
been to strengthen our great country's political and economic
ties with other nations and to achieve results through mutual
understanding, communication, and cooperation. If confirmed, I
pledge to do everything I can to lead an Embassy that
represents the finest values of the United States and to
advance American interests by strengthening the bonds between
the United States and Malta.
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, thank you for
this opportunity to appear before you, and I would be pleased
to answer any questions you have.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Abercrombie-Winstanley
follows:]
Prepared Statement of Gina K. Abercrombie-Winstanley
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, it is a privilege to
appear before you today as President Obama's nominee to serve as the
United States Ambassador to the Republic of Malta. I am honored by the
confidence placed in me by President Obama and Secretary Clinton. If
confirmed, I look forward to working with this committee and the
Congress in advancing U.S. interests in Malta.
I am delighted and proud to be accompanied today by my family: my
husband, Gerard, my son, Adam, and my daughter, Kara. I am also joined
by my brother, John, my sister, Lynne Hicks, a retired Navy Captain,
and my brother-in-law, Larry Hicks, a retired Colonel. I am also
supported today by many friends and loved ones. My family has personal
connections to Malta: my father-in-law made many stops in Malta as a
naval officer during World War II, and my niece studied nursing in
Malta at St. Luke's School of Nursing.
After 27 years in the Foreign Service, I believe my previous
experience developing and implementing policy on counterterrorism
issues with European, African, and the Middle Eastern partners, as well
as advancing U.S. interests on a bilateral basis in the Middle East,
will enhance my effectiveness as chief of mission, should you decide to
confirm me. Malta is a valued European partner, often serving as a
bridge between the West and the Middle East. I have a unique background
to strengthen the relationship between the United States and Malta.
This includes my service in the Middle East as Consul General in
Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, and tours in Iraq, Israel, and Egypt, as well as
my tenure as Director for Near East South Asian Affairs at the National
Security Council of the White House, and as a professional staff member
working for this committee under then-Ranking Member Biden.
Over 50 years ago, Malta's courageous resistance during World War
II prompted Franklin Delano Roosevelt to refer to Malta as the nation
that ``stood alone but unafraid in the center of the sea; one tiny
bright flame in the darkness.'' Malta is small in size but has never
backed away from occupying a large role when history has called upon
it. We have certainly seen this most recently in its commendable
actions in support of the aspirations of the people of Libya.
As we recently witnessed, Malta's strategic location in the
Mediterranean Sea is important to both global security and
international commerce. Last February, when U.S. citizens and others
were evacuated from Libya to Malta, the Maltese Government assisted
20,000 evacuees from 90 countries, including more than 200 U.S.
citizens. Maltese officials and U.S. Embassy Valletta worked side by
side to arrange emergency and humanitarian services to meet evacuees as
they arrived in Malta and assisted in their onward travel. In addition,
Maltese authorities waived passport and other entry requirements,
easing the evacuees' burdens.
Though not a member of NATO, Malta provided emergency landing
services for NATO planes and cooperated closely with NATO on its
maritime embargo by providing manifests for Maltese-flagged ships.
Malta authorized thousands of over flight requests in support of
Operation Unified Protector free of charge, and at a substantial cost
to its ability to route lucrative commercial traffic. Malta has offered
to be a hub for all humanitarian assistance to Libya, and as such, the
World Health Organization has asked it to serve as a base for its
shipments.
On the trade and investment front, the recently ratified Double
Taxation Agreement (DTA) bolsters the already strong economic
relationship between the United States and Malta by fostering greater
investment and trade. The United States is Malta's second-largest
trading partner outside of the EU, accounting for approximately 5
percent of total trade, and American buyers account for approximately 9
percent of Malta's total exports. American firms directly employ over
2,000 people in Malta, not counting the several thousands who work for
U.S. franchises. In this small nation, that means one out of every 50
Maltese workers is employed by an American company. These American
businesses continue to grow stronger. For example, in the wake of the
worldwide financial crisis, as a stimulus measure, Malta provided
targeted government assistance of 0.7 percent of GDP to manufacturing
firms in 2009. One of the companies which received assistance, U.S.
parts manufacturer Methode Electronics, not only retained its American
workforce in 2009, but increased employment in its Maltese subsidiary
as well. American investment overseas is vital, and Malta works to the
benefit of both countries.
Malta shines as a beacon of peace and economic success in the
southern Mediterranean, and is ready to provide essential assistance
and know-how to its transitioning North African neighbors. As a career
Foreign Service officer, my life's work has been to strengthen our
great country's political and economic ties with other nations, and to
achieve results through mutual understanding, communication, and
cooperation. If confirmed, I pledge to do everything I can to lead an
Embassy that represents the finest values of the United States, and to
advance American interests by strengthening the bonds between the
United States and Malta.
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, thank you for this
opportunity to appear before you. I would be pleased to answer any
questions that you may have.
Senator Menendez. Well, thank you all very much.
Let us also welcome your family and friends because
service, of course, is a demand upon families, and we
appreciate them being here supporting you.
I will start off the questioning.
Ambassador White, let me ask you. There are many of us who
are frustrated with the progress of reconstruction and of
assistance to the Haitian people despite both our commitment as
a country and the world's commitment. And so as you approach
this assignment, could you share with the committee what you
think are the key obstacles to a more rapid reconstruction and
development in Haiti?
And as part of that, could you talk about political
instability as part of the equation, if you believe that is
part of the equation? I happen to believe it, but I would like
to hear your views on it.
And last, I am just going to lump this all together, but
will repeat it if necessary.
Some of the latest reports about the government
appropriating land seemed to reveal it doing so at the expense
of the most vulnerable populations, and that is upsetting. If
there is going to be land reconfiguration, you would hope that
vulnerable populations would be the beneficiaries.
So could you speak with us a bit about reconstruction and
how we can do this more successfully, what are the obstacles,
how we address them, and go from there?
Ambassador White. Everyone, I do believe, is a bit
frustrated with the slowness of the reconstruction.
But could I just for one second say that Ambassador Merton
and the accomplishments of his team has done in Haiti after
living through that horrific earthquake. When they woke up one
morning, 250,000 bodies were in the street and 10 million cubic
feet of rubble was everywhere in Haiti, and they put on their
boots and they put on their gloves and their staffs did and
many volunteers, many people went down there to help and they
made a difference. I mean, they got 1.2 million people in
temporary shelters. So they got them in shelters. They fed
them. They took care of them.
To this day, they removed half the rubble. And you know,
half of 10 million cubic feet is something to talk about--10
million cubic feet. You can have dump trucks back to back from
Key West to Bangor, ME. That is how many dump trucks that would
take. And that they have taken almost half of that out with the
USG efforts, another million cubic meters were taken out with
wheelbarrows and who knows what by private citizens.
The 1.5 million people were homeless, and today it is
490,000. So well over a million people have been moved from the
tents into something at least better than tents, different
things, but better than tents. And like I said, half the rubble
is gone.
So accomplishments in an incredibly difficult country even
in the best of times, good for them and good for the U.S.
Congress for giving them the money to move forward.
Now, one of the problems, of course, with Haiti is it lacks
capacity. They have not had a functioning government. It took a
long time for Preval to go and for Martelly to get in and then
name a Prime Minister who unfortunately did not last very long.
They are now looking for a new one. So there has been--the key
pieces of government that are needed--the Haitian Government
that are needed--to get this recovery moving quicker have not
been in place very long. And we have got to have that going or
we are going to have trouble making reconstruction and recovery
any faster.
I also think that the humanitarian response drained every
ounce of people's strength for about a year, and then they
started looking toward sort of a longer term recovery. To get
those pieces in motion, especially to get the pieces in motion
if you are going to use Haitian NGOs and Haitian diaspora and
Haitian qualities, that just takes time. There is nothing you
can do about it.
And Ambassador Thomas-Greenfield and I served in Liberia
together and we kind of picked Liberia up from this post-war
disaster, and what do you do and how you do it? And I must say
I think we did a really great thing.
Senator Menendez. So are you telling the committee that
things are going as they should?
Ambassador White. I think that we have got the pieces in
place if we can get the government to work, and that is a big
``if.'' I hope that we can make them do that. I think we can
put some pressure on them to make them do that. I think they
want to make that happen. They want Haiti to succeed. But, yes.
Just in the last month, I keep getting updates on some of
the activities that USAID is doing in Haiti, and I see that
they are awarding contracts, bigger contracts, reconstruction
contracts. A new factory is going to be built in the north. It
is going to come up with 22,000 jobs. There is nothing like
giving people a job that is going to allow them to move the
country forward, but we need the government to move too.
Senator Menendez. So as I listened to your answer, the
government is the biggest obstacle toward the type of further
progress we would like.
Ambassador White. I actually do believe that is true; yes.
Senator Menendez. Ambassador Greenfield, you and I had a
good conversation yesterday, and as I said to you then, Pastor
Suarez called me again and said be nice. And what ensues is not
about you but about the Department. And so I want to visit that
with you on the record.
I believe the State Department has the worst record of the
hiring of minorities, particularly of Hispanics. This is
something that I have been pursuing since my days in the House
on the International Relations Committee. This is something I
have pursued on this committee, and I do not seem to get
anybody's attention.
Now, sometimes for a Senator the only way to get somebody's
attention is to hold up a nominee, and it is not my desire to
do that here.
But it also cannot continue this way. Your predecessor came
before the committee not too long ago and answered a series of
questions. It sounded really great until we went from
percentage terms to actual numbers. And as I shared with you,
in the State Department's Civil Service over the last 3\1/2\
years, we increased the number of Hispanics by four. In 2009
versus today on female Hispanics, we increased the number by
20, but of course, what we started from is incredibly low.
Among the Foreign Service employees, we have similar numbers.
So I will not gauge in percentages anymore because the
percentages always paint a different picture.
And when I listened to those who are in the Foreign Service
from the Hispanic community, I often hear about the challenges
those individuals face not only getting through the test, which
is one thing, but then the subjective element of not being able
to orally communicate effectively, which is incredibly
subjective. Now, with all due respect, if that is the standard
of all ability, then I believe there are many people from our
community who can meet that standard.
So I am trying to get a sense of how you, in this position,
are going to change the course of events because the current
way of doing things is not acceptable. The last census makes
that pretty clear. And so if you could share with me and the
members of the committee how you will go about changing the
course of events in a way that will give me some hope so that
we can vote your nomination out of this committee and on the
floor with the expectation that things will change.
Ambassador Thomas-Greenfield. Thank you, Senator. We did
have a good conversation yesterday, and I can tell you that you
did get my attention such that I was afraid to even give you
those statistics that were in my official testimony, and I
decided I would not give them.
Senator Menendez. I accepted that as what the Department
told you to say.
Ambassador Thomas-Greenfield. Yes.
Senator Menendez. So I get it.
Ambassador Thomas-Greenfield. But you did get my attention.
I had the opportunity to look at these charts on the board,
and unfortunately those numbers in those charts reflect the
reality. And what they reflect is the reality of the challenge
that is going to be before me if I am confirmed by the Senate.
And if I am confirmed as the next Director General, I can
assure you that this will be one of my top priorities as
Director General. And I said to you yesterday I am sure that
all the other Director Generals have said the same thing.
Senator Menendez. They have.
Ambassador Thomas-Greenfield. And you said that to me
yesterday as well. But I am also going to say to you that I do
take this personally. I take it as a personal commitment that I
am making to this committee that I will work diligently to
improve those numbers, and I will not sleep unless those
numbers are improved. I will personally put my own hand on all
of the recruitment policies. I will review those policies to
ensure that if there is anything in the implementation of our
policies that is blocking increasing those numbers, that we
will work to remove those.
I am concerned that these numbers are so low. I am equally
concerned that the African American numbers have gone down
since I joined the Foreign Service 30 years ago.
So we have a lot of work to do, and I will be working with
the staff in the Director General's office, if I am confirmed,
to ensure that when I come before you the next time--in fact,
you will not have to call me. I will be directly in touch with
you to let you know what progress we are making on getting this
done. And I will look forward to working with you and your
staff to get your ideas on how we might move forward to improve
these numbers not just for Hispanics but for all groups.
The Foreign Service is not successful if it does not
represent the face of America. I have had the experience of
being in the Foreign Service for 30 years, and I have seen this
for 30 years. I am in the position now to make a difference,
and I do intend to use my position to make a difference.
Senator Menendez. Well, I appreciate your answer, and there
are one or two things I want to follow up with you, but in
deference to my colleagues, I am going to have them go and we
will come back. But I do appreciate your answer.
Senator Rubio.
Senator Rubio. Thank you.
Ambassador White, when I was in Haiti earlier this year,
one of the major obstacles--and I think I mentioned that to you
when we talked earlier today--one of the major obstacles that I
found to private investment in the country is the absence of a
credible land registry. And there are numerous competing claims
for a plot of land, for example. And so investors, particularly
in Florida, people that are interested in going to Haiti and
doing some sort of investment and business venture, are worried
that there is nowhere to register their property claims. And I
think that is something that the Haitian Government shared with
us as well during our visit.
What ideas do we have? What could the U.S.'s role be in
terms of creating capacity in that regard, both from your
experience in serving there before and your experience around
the world. Have you encountered that? And what is it that we
can do from a capacity-building standpoint? What programs do we
have in place or should we think about putting in place to help
in that regard?
Ambassador White. It is a huge problem. It is a problem in
every country I have ever served in. It was a problem in
Liberia, God knows. It is always a problem because there has
not been any formal system of getting deeds. It has been a
worse system, worse in Haiti, because the little registry that
there was before the earthquake was destroyed during the
earthquakes, and now we are starting not only from zero but
minus-zero.
There has been a small start when they are trying to set up
these communities of just kind of discussion with people in the
communities and deciding, yes, we will on the basis of who
lived there for what amount of time so we can just kind of get
it rolling. But there are several stakeholders, including the
U.S. Government, that are working with the Ministry of Justice,
that are working with the Bureau of Lands that are trying to
map out where these plots are and who owns them and what kind
of paperwork is needed. And this is going to take a while.
But I do think that it is not only the United States of
America like I said, but it is other donors as well. There has
been progress. There will be more progress. There is an
enormous amount of attention from both the Haitian Government
and donors on this issue, and I do see that we are moving
forward. And you are right. It has got to be done.
Senator Rubio. Thank you.
I guess a question for Ambassador Greenfield. I have been
on the committee now for a year, so some of this is new to me.
What are the challenges to recruiting people to be
interested in the Foreign Service in the modern era? I mean, is
it a challenge, when we go on college campuses or across the
country? I read somewhere--maybe it was in your testimony--
about the use of social media and other platforms to get people
excited about it. We have a lot of talented young people around
the world. I think this young generation of Americans are the
greatest connectors and collaborators in world history in terms
of working with other people on things through the use of
social media. What are some of the challenges we face in
getting people interested in Foreign Service other than the
pay?
Ambassador Thomas-Greenfield. I was going to start with
pay.
Thank you for that question. That is an excellent question.
I think some of the challenges are life in the Foreign
Service. It is not just the job of the individual who is being
hired. The whole family becomes part of this, and it is very
hard sometimes for people to make the decision or for families
to make the decision to sacrifice their own lives for a Foreign
Service career of another family member. So I think that is one
of the big challenges.
The other, I think, is the fear of living overseas and
leaving everything behind to go and live in a foreign country
and try to learn the culture and the life of living in a
foreign country.
I think we can address those concerns of people, and we are
attempting to address those concerns because once they come in
the Foreign Service, they see that it is easy. But I think we
have to look in a more strategic way at those life changes that
people are required to make if they go into the Foreign
Service.
Senator Rubio. Thank you.
And, Ms. Winstanley, I have a question actually directly
related to Malta. It is an issue we also encountered when we
were over there. It has to do with the issue of human
trafficking. And I have read some reports where there has been
some--let me begin by saying that I think our relationship with
the Government of Malta is excellent. We are very grateful for
that partnership. We are very grateful for that alliance that
we have and for all the cooperation they have given. By no
means is this a criticism of the government or that alliance,
but a recognition of a problem that by our own trafficking in
persons report we know exists today.
Malta received a tier 2. They are on the watch list status
for a second year in a row. They are both a source and a
destination country for European women that are being subjected
to sex trafficking.
Surprisingly enough--there are multiple sources that say
this--in 2010 the Government of Malta did not even identify a
single victim of trafficking despite very many credible reports
in that regard.
What ideas--and I think from your service elsewhere as
well, but what ideas do we have about helping to address that
issue? Obviously, it is a complicated one. It is a global one.
But given its strategic location as a gateway between the
Middle East and North Africa and the rest of the West, I do not
think that problem is going to get any better unless it is
addressed honestly. So what can we do from the position you are
going to occupy to be of assistance in that regard?
Ms. Abercrombie-Winstanley. Thank you, Senator. A wonderful
question and certainly this would be, if confirmed, one of my
priorities when I arrive in Malta.
The Maltese have had trouble with identifying victims and
we have been working with them to help them do so, as well as
ensuring that they do not hold victims responsible or charge
them for crimes that are directly related to them having been
trafficked. We worked with them for a workshop this past July
to help them identify victims to address that specifically. In
the last couple of months, they also have had a case that they
brought to successful prosecution giving someone a 10-year
sentence for trafficking in persons. This is the first
successful prosecution and shows that they are moving in the
right direction. They have got a chairman of the board to
counter trafficking in persons, and as I said, it will be my
priority when I get there.
Senator Rubio. Thank you.
Senator Menendez. Well, thank you very much.
Senator Durbin.
Senator Durbin. Thanks to all three of you.
Ambassador White, I was recently in Port-au-Prince, as I
mentioned, and I stayed at a nice place and there was a heavy
rainstorm. And the woman who kind of the manager of the
property--we were looking out the window at the rain, and she
said tomorrow morning in Port-au-Prince they will report how
many people died. I said, died? She said, from the rain. I
said, it is a heavy rainstorm but why would people die? She
said, there will be drownings in Port-au-Prince as a result of
rainfall.
The story behind that has a lot to do with the fact that
this country has very little, if any, infrastructure to move
water or sewage for that matter. It is just open. It runs
through the streets and overwhelms residences and drowns
children, that sort of thing.
But there is a second part to the story, and that is what
has happened to Haiti as a country. Lift this up and show it.
It is not difficult to see the border between Haiti and the
Dominican Republic----
Ambassador White. It surely is not.
Senator Durbin [continuing]. Because to the right on this
island of Hispaniola is the Dominican Republic which has had a
serious effort to plant trees. To the left is Haiti where the
trees have just been removed. So when the rain falls, it comes
rolling down these hills and mountains into these cities,
drowning the poor people who live there.
I have tried to put some money in, as I mentioned earlier,
for various projects, and one of them is reforestation in
Haiti. They cannot reclaim this land for agricultural purposes
or any purpose until they deal with that issue. And it is hard
because people chop down every tree they happen to grow because
they need wood for heat when it gets chilly by their standards.
When I brought this up with the previous President, he kind
of laughed at me and said it will never work. I think it has to
work. And when President Martelly weighs this as one of his
concerns, I hope that you will make it one of yours when you
are Ambassador, that we can join in this effort toward
reforestation.
I would like to have your comment.
Ambassador White. Yes. I could not agree with you more. It
will be something that I will look at.
Unfortunately, during the 5 years that I was in Haiti, I
literally saw that happen right before my eyes. It kept coming
lower and lower and lower. They kept chopping more and more
trees. And back in those days, AID tried desperately to stop
it, too, by planting trees, planting trees. They would chop
them down. We would plant. They would chop them down. We would
plant. It was just an endless cycle of wasted money to tell you
the honest-to-God truth.
And so what we have decided to do now are kind of two
things. Well, actually three things.
One, we are going to tie planting of trees to fruit trees
and trees that can actually give a profit, and they sell the
mango or they sell the cocoa or they sell the coffee, whatever.
So there will be less incentive to cut down a tree. That is one
thing.
The second thing is we are going to do some plantings high
up and try to protect them so that they will take root. It
takes maybe 6 months to a year to get the root in there. We are
going to have to use some protection of some fir trees, et
cetera, to keep on the higher levels. The fruit trees will not
grow up there.
But I think the key that we did not use 25 years ago was
that we have got to give a decent substitute for charcoal or
they are just going to keep cutting down the trees because they
need something to cook their food with. I mean, people have got
to eat. So we have got to decide what is that alternate fuel
and how can we use it, how can we introduce it. And we are
starting some pilot programs and using gas, using some
briquettes that are made out of things that are not wood, et
cetera. So I think that is going to have to be the key, that we
are going to find a substitute for the wood so the wood can do
what it needs to do and save the banks from falling into the
ocean and killing people.
Senator Durbin. The other thing that was very obvious--and
you can see it when you catch a plane to go to Port-au-Prince--
is how many Americans and others are literally volunteering
their lives to help these people. It is a noble thing and a
heartwarming thing. But it is frustrating too. There are so
many NGOs stumbling over one another doing this and that thing.
You often wonder if there is any coordination even among
American NGOs about what they are trying to achieve.
There is a second aspect of this. One NGO, in particular,
was close to Senator Mike DeWine of Ohio, and Senator DeWine
made more than 20 trips to Haiti. That NGO was called Hands
Together. It was run by a Catholic priest. They have schools
and orphanages and feeding places and the like. And I visited
them again when I was just recently there. Father Tom does a
great job. He has given his life to this. And he has so many
volunteers and helpers. They do wonderful work with a limited
amount of money.
He sent me an e-mail 2 weeks ago, and his chief of staff
was gunned down right out in front of his school. And he was
heartbroken and ready to give up because security is just
absent from many, many places, Cite Soleil in Port-au-Prince,
for example.
And now we hear from President Martelly, whom I admire and
think has the potential of really adding something very
positive to Haiti, that he wants to create an army. It would
seem that a police force may be more important at this moment
in terms of establishing at least basic law and order in this
island.
What are your thoughts about this notion of a Haitian army?
Ambassador White. Yes; that is an excellent question. Thank
you, Senator.
We struggled with this also in Liberia. Ambassador Thomas-
Greenfield and I, believe me, had many, many meetings with
President Sirleaf on standing up an army, standing up a
functional police force.
I believe that we came to the conclusion then, and I have
certainly come to the conclusion and the administration has
come to the conclusion, that what we need in Haiti and what we
are going to put our resources against is a strong police
force. We need to stabilize the country. We have got to stop
these killings. We have got to stop the rapes of the women. We
have got to stop abuse. And that is not an army's job. That is
a strong police force job. So I feel very strongly about that,
to tell you truth.
And let me just mention that the discoordination, if you
will, of a million NGOs--they want to do the right thing and
their heart is in the right place. Again, we found the same
thing in Liberia. They were pouring in there, especially lots
of Liberian Americans who had spent years and years in the
States and wanted to go back. They started a school here and a
clinic there, and then, oh, they did not have books. They did
not have medicine. You know, what were they doing and who were
they coordinating with?
The minister--the fabulous Minister of Plan there, was my
best friend, now the Minister of Finance, a Harvard graduate--
and I decided that we would in his ministry, in the Ministry of
Plan, start a donor mapping using IT. So we used spatial
technology. It was cutting-edge. We had a picture and we had a
map and we had a little description who was it, what were they
doing, how much were they putting, and were they having any
real impact, success of any kind. It took us 2 years to put it
together, but today he can bring the screen up and he knows
where all these people are. And we are going to do that in
Haiti too.
Senator Durbin. Good.
The last point I will make is that I learned while I was
there that what was once a thriving coffee industry has all but
disappeared in Haiti. Some 10 percent of what was their top
production remains. I have approached a company in Chicago that
sells coffee that they import from all around the world and
asked them if they would make this a special project. There is
not any reason why others could not join them. So perhaps our
insatiable appetite for coffee will lead to some more commerce
coming out of Haiti.
Thank you.
Ambassador White. Thank you. Just so you know, also--now I
am sounding like I am 3 million years old instead of just a
million years old. But in any case, in Tanzania we did a
fabulous coffee project. Starbucks came over and they were
putting coffee--that they used to pay 2 cents a kilo for and
now it is up to like 30 cents. And it is selling like hotcakes.
I do not know why we could not do the same thing in Haiti and
have it that much closer to the United States of America. So I
am with you on that one.
Senator Durbin. Thanks.
Senator Menendez. Thank you, Senator Durbin.
Ambassador Greenfield, let me just go back to you for a
moment. For my friends at the State Department, the charts that
are displayed here show the demographics of America after the
2010 census. And I look at the 2011 State Department figures,
and Native Americans and Hispanic Americans are the only groups
that are underrepresented by population as a percentage of the
population. In the case of Hispanics, when comparing their
representation in the State Department to the size of their
U.S. population, the underrepresentation is pretty dramatic.
And then I look at 2009--and this is why I am a little
upset at the testimony that was given previously--2011 numbers
are worse than 2009 numbers. So we are not only dramatically
underrepresented, we are moving in the wrong direction.
So with that again as the premise of why I have focused on
this so much, I would like to ask, Will you commit to look at
the recruitment efforts outside of traditional schools? I
appreciate those schools from which we have drawn the Foreign
Service. They are some of the greatest schools, but they are
not where a lot of the pools of these diverse communities are
necessarily at. And there are very good schools with very good,
diverse pools that would be maybe helpful in the recruitment
process. Is that something that you can tell me you will do?
Ambassador Thomas-Greenfield. Absolutely.
Senator Menendez. In terms of the oral exam, will you, as
part of your overall review of this process, look at how the
oral exam is being performed in a way that makes it somehow
more objective and less subjective and therefore a filtering
system by which the progress does not take place?
Ambassador Thomas-Greenfield. I have asked that question as
a result of our meeting yesterday to talk to the folks who
administer the oral exam to see how it is administered and to
look at the issues that you have raised. They have assured me
that that is not an issue, that in fact the pass rate of the
oral exam for Hispanics is even with other populations. It is
the written exam that is the issue. But I do assure you that I
will look at both, and if there is a problem, we will work to
fix it.
There clearly is a problem, based on the chart that you
have given me here, with our recruitment efforts. Trying to
figure out where that is and how we address it will be one of
my highest priorities. And I will be relentless.
Senator Menendez. I appreciate that answer.
Something is wrong because your predecessor came in and
told us how many people were recruited, took the test and
passed the test, but then they do not get into the Foreign
Service. So if the hardest part is getting people and then
passing the written test and then they do not enter in the
Foreign Service, there is disconnect there, and what that tells
me is look at the oral exam. But I would be open to learning
that there are other issues.
I always believe that at an institution, it starts from the
top and works its way through the entire process in a way that
leads everyone to understand that there is shared
responsibility to make progress in this effort. Is that
something that you will seek to do within the Department?
Ambassador Thomas-Greenfield. Yes, sir. And we are looking
at all of leadership in the Department because the recruitment
part of it is a big part of it, but it is not all of it. We
also have an issue of mentoring so that we retain the people,
the small numbers of people that we recruit, and that is the
role of our leaders. And I will, as Director General, if I am
confirmed, really drill that into all of our ambassadors, all
of our senior leaders in the Department that they must take
responsibility for mentoring staff who are coming in. One of
the problems that I think that many Hispanics and African
Americans and other minorities have when they come in the
Foreign Service, there are not leaders that they have who
mentor them, and we are going to make sure that that happens as
well. But it is not just my problem. I will make it the entire
Department's problem.
Senator Menendez. Thank you.
I know that this precedes you, but do you know if the
Department has submitted its diversity and inclusion strategic
plan as required by the March 1 memo from the OPM Director,
John Barry?
Ambassador Thomas-Greenfield. It is in final draft, and I
understand it is due on March 16 and it will be turned in by
that date.
Senator Menendez. I know your confirmation has to take
place, but I hope that internally there is a way in which they
can allow for your input so that some of the things we have
talked about might be incorporated in that ultimate memo.
Finally, not on a minority hiring question, but do you
believe that, as the Director General, you are going to have
the authority and the flexibility with respect to the type of
personnel policy that will allow the State Department to deal
with the diplomatic challenges of the rapidly changing world we
find ourselves in?
Ambassador Thomas-Greenfield. I think I will have that
authority and flexibility, but it is not only the role of the
Director General again just with recruiting and retention. It
is a Departmentwide responsibility and there are a number of
entities within the State Department that have responsibility
for some kind of hiring. I would give, for example, the new CSO
Office. The director of that office was here for his hearing
yesterday. They will be looking at how they can bring in people
in a search type of way to deal with emergencies so that if we
do not have people who are already employed, we can bring them
in quickly so that they can address some of our emergent needs.
Senator Menendez. Well, thank you very much for your
answers.
Finally, Ms. Winstanley, I do not want you to think I left
you out of the equation, though I am sure you would be happy to
be left out. [Laughter.]
Senator Menendez. It is not that bad. Ambassador Greenfield
took it all for you. She is going to be a great Director
General.
Let me ask you. I have heard many good things about Malta,
but there is one that as the United States continues to pursue
trying to deter Iran's march to nuclear weapons, is of real
concern to us. And I want to hear that you would make it one of
your priorities if you are confirmed. It is with reference to
Iran's shell game with its cargo shipping line, IRISL. It is an
entity which has been designated by the United States and the
European Union because of its central role in evading sanctions
designed to stop the movement of controlled weapons, missiles,
and nuclear technology to and from Iran. Some 57 ships
designated by OFAC, the Office of Foreign Assets Control of the
United States, the U.N., and the EU continue to fly the Maltese
flag despite their clear connections to IRISL. Thirty-three of
those ships are currently in Iranian ports or have been there
this year.
So I would hope, if you are confirmed, that you will raise
this at the highest levels of the Maltese Government and urge
them to cut business ties to ensure that IRISL is not using
them as a shell process to evade the tremendous efforts that
the Obama administration and this Congress pursued using
peaceful diplomacy tools, which are sanctions, to deter the
Iranians from their nuclear weapons program. Can you make that
commitment to the committee?
Ms. Abercrombie-Winstanley. Senator, I absolutely can make
the commitment that, if confirmed, this will be among my
highest priorities.
The Maltese have taken some steps in the recent past
including agreeing not to reflag any additional Iranian ships.
So they will not be reflagging new Iranian ships. They have
also been supportive of enforcing U.N. sanctions with regard to
Iranian cargo and they have interdicted ships and seized
illegal cargo. So they have taken what we consider some
important steps. They are small steps, what we consider small
wins. We are going to be working for big wins. So this will be
something I will take up at an early opportunity, if confirmed.
Senator Menendez. Thank you.
Senator Rubio.
Senator Rubio. Thank you.
Ambassador White, we talked about this earlier today as
well when the issue of the restavek, which is a concept I was
not familiar with until very recently. For those who are
watching or may be in the audience and do not know what it is,
it is an unfortunate practice of very poor families in Haiti
over the decades to place their children with better-off
families who provide them employment, usually domestically, in
exchange for providing for these children and sometimes even
educating them.
The problem, of course, has been that over the years there
are now people that have taken advantage of that system or have
taken advantage of that problem and make it much, much worse,
as you are aware. A moment ago, Senator Durbin showed us a
picture of the Haitian-Dominican border. In addition to a
deforestation problem on that border, there is the reality that
on that border you can buy a child, that there are children
that are trafficked and sold as child prostitutes both into the
Dominican Republic and in those border towns in that region. It
is a very tragic situation.
As we met with folks in Haiti, one of the solutions that
has clearly been offered is the idea of providing every child--
and it is one of the priorities of the President, President
Martelly, is to provide children educational opportunities. One
of the things that I was struck by during my visit was these
very poor families but children walking to and from school in
impeccable uniforms which is an indication of a real societal
value for education. Families will do anything if they can get
their kids into a school. In fact, we visited one of these
schools. It was called the Institute for Human and Community
Development. They specifically focused on victims of human
trafficking, providing them an educational opportunity.
But there are still challenges along the way. One of the
challenges I found, unfortunately, is that there is the idea
that this is more of a cultural problem than a human tragedy.
And I am not saying that is widespread in the society, but
there are some that view it that way.
The other is as you said, that there is not the
governmental capacity to deal with this. What I thought the
most enlightening approach was the more children they can get
into a school setting, which in my understanding is a very
cost-effective measure, the likelier it will be for these
parents not to put their kids in this environment.
And by the way, not to put the blame completely on the
parents. I mean, there are folks posing as NGO members who are
going into camps and saying they have got jobs for these kids,
and in fact, they are nothing but traffickers who are doing
these horrible things.
So what initiatives can we do in support of that ambition
of providing--given our current set and as your background with
USAID, you are probably even more insightful in this regard.
What can we do in terms of helping the Haitian people build
more capacity in their educational front particularly for
children so that we are accomplishing the dual goals of, No. 1,
creating intellectual and academic capacity, you know,
workforce capacity, in the country, but at the same time giving
these children an alternative and their families an alternative
to the restavek situation? So what are our existing programs
and platforms and what can we build on?
Ambassador White. Thank you very much, Senator.
Yes. In my mind over the years, we have not put enough
emphasis not only on primary education but secondary education.
If a young girl graduates only from primary school, she does
not have a longer life. She does not have a higher earning
wage. She does not have fewer children. If she spends 2 years
in secondary school, then we are starting to make a difference.
So we need to not only concentrate on--not we, the United
States Government, but the donors as a whole because education
happens not to be one of our focus areas, although we are doing
it around some of our development corridors, but we are paying
attention to the national level in certain areas like
curriculum. But we have got to concentrate on education.
We have got to make sure that the police are trained in
recognizing child abuse, and it is different from what the
traditional restavek was supposed to be. It was supposed to be
that someone cared for the children from the rural areas into
the city areas that they could not take care of them in the
rural areas. They could not provide any services. Instead it
has become in many instances just a domestic service and often
abusive.
We just signed a huge contract with several organizations--
three I believe--that are going to look into issues of youth
employment, girl abuse, women abuse, and especially this
restavek story that is going on down there because we all know
that it is untenable from a human rights' point of view.
Senator Menendez. Thank you, Senator Rubio.
Thank you all for your testimony. I want you to know that
you must have a lot of friends because this room is almost--not
quite--but almost as filled as when George Clooney was here
today. [Laughter.]
There are not as many cameras, but there are a fair number
of people here.
Thank you for all of your responses to the questions.
The record will remain open until this Friday. I would urge
the nominees, if you receive a question from any member, that
you answer it expeditiously. It will expedite the process of
your nomination.
And with the thanks of the committee to all the nominees,
this hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 4:15 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
----------
Additional Questions and Answers Submitted for the Record
Responses of Linda Thomas-Greenfield to Questions Submitted
by Senator Richard G. Lugar
Question. Based on your most recent tour as Ambassador to Liberia,
can you share your thoughts on how the State Department could better
train its Foreign and civil service officers to prepare for working in
those environments? What's missing and what do you see as some critical
steps the Department could take to strengthen its focus on prevention
and mitigation?
Answer. One thing I learned is that, as the Secretary observed in
her recent Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review (QDDR), it is
vital that agencies learn to work better together in support of U.S.
development and diplomacy goals. This is nowhere more important than in
countries in which we are working to prevent, mitigate, or respond to
conflict such as Liberia. In Liberia, I practiced the concept of ``one
team, one mission'' that brought all the agencies together. With this
objective in mind, the Foreign Service Institute (FSI) and USAID have
created their first-ever joint courses: a distance learning course on
Development in Diplomacy, and a new classroom course on Partnership in
Development and Diplomacy. Both courses stress the importance of joint
planning and execution of development and diplomacy goals across
agencies, and offer simulated exercises to train Foreign Service and
Civil Service employees how to do such cooperative work in the field.
We also have Area Studies courses that prepare employees from different
agencies for the social, political, cultural, economic, religious, and
governmental dimensions of the countries where they will serve
together.
In addition, the State Department is taking steps to strengthen its
focus on conflict prevention and mitigation. In November 2011 State
announced the establishment of a new Bureau, the Bureau of Conflict and
Stabilization Operations (CSO). The responsibilities of this new Bureau
will be to anticipate major security challenges; provide timely,
operational solutions; build integrated approaches to conflict
prevention and stabilization; and to leverage partnerships with
nongovernmental and international partners.
Question. According to the 2010 Quadrennial Diplomacy and
Development Review, more than 25 percent of State and USAID's personnel
serve in the 30 countries classified as highest risk for conflict and
instability. The QDDR recommended expanding training for all
predeployment staff that are going to those countries. However, class
schedules and deployments often do not line up and Foreign Service
officers are unable to complete the trainings. Distance-learning
courses could fill this gap until there are opportunities for in-depth
and in-person study. What steps will you take to develop a more
comprehensive course offering that includes distance-learning courses
on crisis and conflict prevention and ensure they are offered--and
taken by FSOs?
Answer. FSI is working to revamp its training offerings in this
area with the new CSO Bureau, and can explore the creation of a
distance learning course, which would require both time and resources,
in that context. In recognition of the unique challenges posed by the
growing number of countries with a high risk for conflict and
instability, FSI created a Stability Operations Training Division
focused on predeployment training for employees assigned to
Afghanistan, Iraq, or Pakistan and training in support of conflict
prevention and reconstruction operations. The courses for Afghanistan,
Iraq, and Pakistan are offered on a monthly basis throughout the
transfer cycle to provide every opportunity for employees to attend.
FSI and the staff of Under Secretary of State for Civilian
Security, Democracy, and Human Rights are discussing how the Department
might expand training to employees headed to other countries at risk
for conflict and/or instability. One idea is to use FSI's current
``Foundations in Conflict Prevention and Response'' course, which is
currently directed at members of the CSO Bureau's Civilian Response
Corps, as the basis for a course that would be targeted at any Foreign
Service and Civil Service employees serving in posts where conflict
and/or instability may be an issue.
Question. Within the State Department and USAID there seems to be
virtually no mid- and senior-level career training made available on
crisis prevention. This deficit is problematic for future leaders of
the Foreign Service. How do you think the absence of such courses can
be addressed and what role do you see for yourself in helping to ensure
such training is available?
Answer. The Foreign Service Institute (FSI) and the Bureau of
Conflict and Stabilization Operations (CSO) are working together to
expand the emphasis on conflict prevention in FSI's ``Foundations in
Conflict Prevention and Response'' course, which is directed at the
Civilian Response Corps. FSI and CSO are discussing with the J family
of bureaus ways to offer similar training to all officers deploying to
pre- and post-conflict countries. FSI is also exploring how to
integrate conflict prevention and response training into existing
courses in our Political Tradecraft and Area Studies divisions.
Working effectively in pre- and post-conflict countries requires
strong leadership. As such FSI sends out trainers to conduct onsite
Crisis Management Training at all our overseas missions, with exercises
that include the Ambassador and other senior management. Every post
receives this training at least every 2\1/2\ years. FSI also offers a
classroom course on its campus on ``Leading in a High Threat Post.'' If
confirmed as DG, I will strongly support these efforts and will ensure
that we continue to expand training as needed.
Question. What has been the impact of the U.S Government National
Security Language Initiative in terms of recruitment to the Foreign
Service? How many new FSOs received NSLI grants/training?
Answer. The State Department's programs for high school and
university students launched under the National Security Language
Initiative in 2006 are having a significant impact in increasing the
pool of Americans studying and mastering critical-needed foreign
languages. More than 1,500 American students are participating in these
exchange programs each year. As more of these students finish their
education and develop in their careers, we expect a growing number will
pursue a career in the Foreign Service. In a recent survey of the 2006-
2011 alumni of one of our programs, the Critical Language Scholarship
Program, just over half of the respondents are still in school, while
about a quarter are employed full-time. Of those employed full time,
two-thirds say that their language skills have helped them obtain their
current job. Nearly a quarter of those employed are working in
government service (18 of them working for the State Department or
USAID), while another half are working for nongovernmental
organizations, international organizations, and educational
institutions, furthering their skills and knowledge.
______
Response of Pamela A. White to Question Submitted
by Senator Richard G. Lugar
Question. Are you supportive of the establishment of a United
States-Haiti enterprise fund?
Answer. The United States attaches critical importance to helping
Haiti strengthen, expand, and diversify its economy. No long-term
development goals in Haiti can be sustainable without the growth of the
private sector. This is essential both to improve the quality of life
of the people of Haiti and to develop a tax base that will allow the
Government of Haiti and not donors to fund essential social services.
An enterprise fund on the model of those that have succeeded in Central
and Eastern Europe and funded with sufficient, additional resources is
worth examining and could potentially add to our existing tools for
promoting a healthy private sector in Haiti. These include an active
Development Credit Authority program with local banks for small and
medium enterprise lending; the current discussion for the provision of
assistance to help Haitian financial institutions provide loans to
finance the construction and repair of homes and business; a mobile
money operation with cell phone companies and the Gates Foundation; and
assistance for investment in micro, small, and medium enterprise in
Haiti especially by the Haitian-American diaspora.
______
Responses of Pamela A. White to Questions Submitted
by Senator Robert Menendez
Question. Can you explain what your role and objectives as
Ambassador to Haiti would be, if you are confirmed?
Answer. The United States has a solid strategy for contributing to
the reconstruction and development of Haiti, one that reflects
Secretary Clinton's vision of a more promising future for that country.
If confirmed I will work with all my energy to translate the goals of a
more prosperous and stable Haiti into reality. Because the success of
Haiti's recovery is ultimately up to the Haitians themselves, I will,
if confirmed, work to establish the strong working relations with
Haiti's decisionmakers that will help us expedite that process.
Question. As the United States Government shifts from emergency aid
to longer term development programming, what steps will you take to
ensure this transition is carried out in a way that will not further
marginalize vulnerable earthquake victims? How will you ensure there
are no gaps in the provision of basic services for Haitians who remain
displaced?
Answer. One of the important obligations of the Government of Haiti
is ensuring that its plans for the country's reconstruction work
benefit the widest possible range of citizens. Providing basic services
to Haitians displaced by the earthquake remains a crucial task of the
Government of Haiti. These challenges underscore the importance of
building capacity in Haitian institutions. The United States
coordinates closely with other donors and with Haitian authorities to
help the Government of Haiti take the lead in the country's recovery
and fulfill the key responsibilities of a sovereign government toward
its citizens. USAID will continue to provide basic health services to
over 40 percent of the population.
Question. What progress do you see on the Martelly government's 16/
6 initiative to rehouse 6 camps into 16 neighborhoods?
Answer. The United States fully supports the Martelly
administration's 6/16 initiative, whereby six priority camps located in
public spaces will be closed and their residents reintegrated into the
16 neighborhoods from which they originate. Together with International
Organization for Migration, USAID's Office of Transitional Initiatives
is supporting Mayor Parent's initiative in Petionville, which has
dismantled two camps in two public parks in the heart of the city and
provided camp residents with options--which provided resettlement
assistance to more than 1,300 people.
This initiative builds on lessons learned in Haiti over the last 19
months and works in phases: registration/census of camp residents,
announcement of the program, options counseling with residents,
relocation, and followup after reintegration.
Question. As Ambassador, would you increase diplomatic efforts to
encourage the Haitian Government to adopt comprehensive housing
solutions and ensure the protection needs of vulnerable communities are
integrated into the Haitian Government's 6/16 housing plan?
Answer. The U.S. Government is working with Haitian officials, at
both the national and local levels, and the International Organization
for Migration, which is the lead agency in the camp management cluster,
to find long-term, sustainable solutions for the 490,545 people still
living in precarious situations in displaced persons camps. USAID has
successfully piloted a program to offer choices to camp residents
including housing repairs to structurally sound, existing homes;
installation of temporary shelters; or 1-year rental vouchers. The
majority of IDPs accepted rental assistance and moved out of the camps
voluntarily.
Question. Can you provide an assessment of the adequacy of
information being provided publicly regarding the reconstruction
efforts?
Answer. One of the greatest benefits of the Interim Haiti Recovery
Commission (IHRC) was its public releases to Haitians regarding
reconstruction progress, and the comprehensive report at www.cirh.ht on
the progress of each individual reconstruction project. Now, the
Government of Haiti is working with the Inter-American Development Bank
(IDB) and United Nations Development Program (UNDP) to improve the
government's ability to use information technology to update these
progress reports and to get out information to Haitian citizens about
progress in the reconstruction.
Question. Since the Interim Haiti Reconstruction Commission (IHRC)
has been
allowed to lapse, how effectively are international donors able to
coordinate foreign aid and reconstruction activities with each other
and with the Haitian Government?
Answer. The October 2011 lapse of the mandate of the Interim Haiti
Recovery Commission did present a coordination challenge. In response
to this challenge, the resident representatives of the 12 major public
sector donors (aka the G12), all of whom were members of the IHRC Board
of Directors, have continued their coordination with each other on the
ground and with the Office of the Prime Minister.
Question. How would you suggest improving coordination among donors
and with the Haitian Government?
Answer. The greatest opportunity to improve donor coordination is
through advancing the Government of Haiti's efforts to make it easier,
more routine, and more automated to collect information from donors
using improved information technology. Both the Inter-American
Development Bank (IDB) and the United Nations Development Program
(UNDP) are supporting Haitian Government efforts in this regard. I
helped advance such initiatives and experienced their positive impact
during my tenure in Liberia, and look forward to the success of these
efforts in Haiti, if I am confirmed.
NOMINATIONS OF CARLOS PASCUAL, JOHN STEVENS, AND JACOB WALLES
----------
TUESDAY, MARCH 20, 2012
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Foreign Relations,
Washington, DC.
----------
Hon. Carlos Pascual, of the District of Columbia, to be an
Assistant Secretary of State (Energy Resources)
John Christopher Stevens, of California, to be Ambassador to
Libya
Jacob Walles, of Delaware, to be Ambassador to the Tunisian
Republic
----------
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:50 p.m., in
room SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Barbara Boxer
presiding.
Present: Senators Boxer, Menendez, Coons, Udall, Lugar, and
Risch.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. BARBARA BOXER,
U.S. SENATOR FROM CALIFORNIA
Senator Boxer. Good afternoon, everybody.
Today, the full Senate Foreign Relations Committee meets to
consider three nominees for important posts at the State
Department: Carlos Pascual to be Assistant Secretary of State
for Energy Resources; John Christopher Stevens to be Ambassador
to Libya; and Jacob Walles to be Ambassador to the Republic of
Tunisia.
I am so pleased also to welcome Senator Christopher Coons.
Where is he? Is he here? I will be so pleased--oh, there you
are. [Laughter.]
I am so pleased to see you here. I doubt you are going to
speak from there, Senator. Going to say a few words about Mr.
Walles in short order.
Thank you so much, Senator.
The first nominee we will consider is Ambassador Pascual,
who currently serves as a special envoy and Coordinator for
International Energy Affairs at the Department of State.
Prior to this position, he served as the United States
Ambassador to Mexico and as the Coordinator for Reconstruction
and Stabilization at the State Department. Ambassador Pascual
also served as the vice president and director of the Foreign
Policy Studies Program at the Brookings Institution from 2006
to 2009.
Ambassador Pascual, you have been nominated to lead the
newly established Bureau of Energy Resources at the Department
of State.
And when Hillary Clinton, our Secretary of State, announced
the new Bureau, she aptly stated, ``You can't talk about our
economy or foreign policy without talking about energy. With a
growing global population and a finite supply of fossil fuels,
the need to diversify our supply is urgent.''
And I couldn't agree with her more. So if you are
confirmed, you will be responsible for heightening attention to
urgent global energy needs and helping to formulate effective
U.S. international policy in such fields as biofuels, natural
gas, and renewable energy.
And then our second nominee, John Christopher Stevens,
recently served in Benghazi, Libya, as the special envoy to the
Libyan Transitional National Council, or TNC. Prior to this
post, Mr. Stevens served as the Director of the Office of
Multilateral Nuclear and Security Affairs at Department of
State.
Mr. Stevens is a career member of the Foreign Service.
He joined the State Department in 1991. And I am very proud
to say he is a Californian.
Mr. Stevens, you have been nominated to be the U.S.
Ambassador to Libya. And like so many, I watched in awe as the
Libyan people fought with tremendous courage to bring an end to
the brutal regime of Col. Muammar Gaddafi.
But now the Libyan people are facing another extraordinary
challenge, building a functioning government, civil society
from the ground up. If confirmed, we hope you will be able to
help convince the Libyan people to lay down their arms, to put
aside their differences, continue the hard work of building a
new and better future for Libyan men, women, and children.
And our final nominee is Jacob Walles, who currently serves
as Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern
Affairs. Mr. Walles is also a career member of the Foreign
Service, having joined the Department of State in 1981.
Prior to this post, he was a senior fellow at the Council
on Foreign Relations, and he also served at the U.S. consul
general--as the U.S. consul general and chief of mission in
Jerusalem.
Mr. Walles has been nominated to be the U.S. Ambassador to
Tunisia. And as we all know, the Tunisian people recently
elected the al-Nahda Party into power, which describes itself
as a moderate Islamist party. While many al-Nahda leaders have
made encouraging statements about their commitment to democracy
and a separation of religion and state, we have seen troubling
proposals from some government officials that could push the
country in the opposite direction.
If confirmed, we hope you will work to encourage the
Tunisian Government to continue to build a strong
representative and democratic government that respects the
rights of all Tunisian people, in particular maintains the
extraordinary rights that Tunisia has long offered to women.
So that completes my opening remarks, and I would turn to
Senator Lugar. And when he is completed, we will turn to
Senator Coons.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON RICHARD G. LUGAR,
U.S. SENATOR FROM INDIANA
Senator Lugar. Well, thank you very much, Madam Chairman.
I join you in welcoming our distinguished panel. I would
like to extend a personal welcome to Chris Stevens, who spent a
year on the committee staff in the 2005-2006 timeframe.
He then went to Tripoli as deputy chief of mission during
reopening of diplomatic relations with Libya after 27 years.
For much of that tour, Chris was the charge d'affaires and lead
interlocutor with the Gaddafi government. Chris was assigned
again to Libya exactly a year ago, but this time his post was
to be in Benghazi as the special envoy from our Government to
the Transitional National Council.
Chris has served his country for 22 years on issues related
to North Africa and the Middle East. He served as a Peace Corps
Volunteer in Morocco, and as a Foreign Service officer, he
served tours in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Syria, Jerusalem, and
Libya.
I understand his family is here from Oakland, CA, as the
chairman has pointed out. I hope he will introduce them to the
committee.
Madam Chairman, I valued Chris's knowledge and insight
while he was on my staff, and also have appreciated his
willingness to offer counsel on the situation in Libya over the
past year. I am very pleased the President has nominated a man
whose substantive knowledge, experience, and respected
leadership are so well suited to this posting.
It is also a pleasure to welcome Ambassador Carlos Pascual,
whose distinguished record is well known to the committee. In
particular, I appreciate his efforts to promote the Nunn-Lugar
Cooperative Threat Reduction Program as Ambassador to Ukraine,
and I had the privilege of visiting with him in the Embassy
during that tenure. Through the Nunn-Lugar partnership, Ukraine
is nuclear weapons free.
Carlos also served as the first Coordinator for
Reconstruction and Stabilization, a position I had long
believed was needed to make our policies in post-conflict
situations more effective. Currently, Ambassador Pascual serves
as International Energy Coordinator, a position I prescribed
and was signed into law by President Bush in 2007 with the
primary mission of putting energy at the top of our diplomatic
agenda and better leveraging relevant activities and expertise
across our Government.
America's dependence on foreign oil imports from volatile
and unreliable regimes is one of our foremost national security
vulnerabilities. Iran's threat to shatter global economic
recovery and splinter allied opposition to their nuclear
weapons program by using their oil exports as leverage is just
the most visible example today.
The hundreds of billions of dollars we use to buy oil from
autocratic regimes complicate our own national security
policies by entrenching corruption, financing regional
repression and war, and inflating Defense Department costs.
Given the multiple crises in the Middle East, and the certainty
that threats to oil supplies are not limited to the current
Iran situation, President Obama did not act in our national
interest, in my judgment, when he rejected approval of the
Keystone XL pipeline. Even his own Energy Department says that
Keystone would help lower gasoline prices.
Ambassador Pascual, I understand that you were not involved
in the 1,217 days of Keystone XL analysis or the final
decision. However, you will be responsible for any future
applications and will need to restore confidence in the State
Department's independence from White House politics. I would
like you to share with us today specific steps you will take to
ensure an expeditious review of any new Keystone XL
application.
While broad energy security solutions will take time, I
urge the administration to put in place, now, credible plans to
manage an oil supply disruption. In particular, among the most
significant challenges to enforcing strong sanctions on Iranian
oil is concern over high gas prices.
In addition to steps to increase domestic supply liquidity,
international planning is needed. The administration should
actively accelerate pipeline alternatives around the Strait of
Hormuz and approve Keystone XL. It should work to improve data
transparency and reporting in oil markets, such as prospects
for new production to come online in Iraq, South Sudan, and
Colombia.
It needs to update international emergency response
coordinating mechanisms and it needs to bring two of the
fastest-growing oil consumers, China and India, into that
system. And it should state clearly that restricting trade in
energy is against U.S. interests. In other words, protecting
Americans from oil price spikes takes more than talk of a
release from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.
Ambassador, I would appreciate your assessment of where we
stand on achieving each of these goals.
Finally, Jake Walles has served with distinction over a 30-
year career in the Foreign Service--much of that time focused
on promoting peace and stability in the Middle East. Most
recently he served as Deputy Assistant Secretary of State with
responsibility for Egypt, The Levant, Israel, and Palestinian
affairs.
Given the importance to the United States of Tunisia's
continuing transition to democracy, I am pleased that someone
with his wealth of regional experience and perspective has been
nominated to this post.
I thank you, Madam Chairman, for the opportunity to make
this statement.
Senator Boxer. Thank you so very much.
And now we have the Honorable Chris Coons is going to
introduce Mr. Jacob Walles to be Ambassador to the Tunisian
Republic. And we know that Mr. Walles is from Delaware, and
therefore, this is very appropriate.
Senator, please proceed.
STATEMENT OF HON. CHRISTOPHER A. COONS,
U.S. SENATOR FROM DELAWARE
Senator Coons. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
It is rare that Delaware gets to contribute to the rank of
Ambassador. So I appreciate both you and Ranking Member Lugar
allowing me to make a brief statement of introduction.
I am very proud of Jake Walles, who was not only born and
raised in Delaware until he went off to college at Wesleyan
University, but also attended the same high school that I did.
So there is a double source of pride for our home State.
As you both mentioned, for more than 20 years, Mr. Walles
has served with distinction in the State Department, where he
has played critical roles in Middle East and North African
affairs. He served at the U.S. Embassy in Tel Aviv at the
Office of Special Assistant for the Middle East Process, as
chief of mission in Jerusalem, and now Deputy Assistant
Secretary for Near Eastern Affairs.
In all these roles, he has demonstrated an adept
understanding of developments in a very difficult region and a
unique ability to manage a host of relationships and issues.
In his current position as Deputy Assistant Secretary of
State for Near Eastern Affairs, he has overseen developments in
a time of great regional transition and turmoil. He has a keen
understanding of U.S. interests in the Middle East and has done
a particularly good job briefing committee staff, I am told, on
many regional developments and issues. These experiences will
serve him well as U.S. Ambassador to Tunisia, a country at the
heart of the Arab Spring, which has experienced significant
political transition in the last year.
As Secretary Clinton recently told our committee, the new
Islamist government in Tunisia has demonstrated great promise,
especially with regards to human rights, women's rights, and
economic reform. And it is my hope with your leadership, should
you be confirmed for ambassadorship, that these positive trends
and this emerging new chapter in our longstanding relationship
with Tunisia will continue to mature.
I first met Jake at a dinner more than a year ago now with
Israeli President Shimon Peres. At that dinner, President Peres
said the uniqueness of the United States is that this is the
only great power in history that became great not by what it
took, but by what it gave, by helping other people regain their
independence and their future.
This exemplifies, I think, what makes American diplomacy so
great, helping others through tough transitions. This has been
a real accomplishment of the Arab Spring that we have played a
supportive role, and it is my hope that with your leadership,
Tunisia will one of the best examples of a new government
emerging from a very difficult transition.
I am confident Jake Walles will make a great Ambassador and
continue to make the people of Delaware proud.
Thank you, and thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
Senator Boxer. Thank you so much.
Well, with that, we might as well start with you, Mr.
Walles.
And I would ask each of you, if your family is here and you
would like to acknowledge them, we would be thrilled to do
that. They can stand, and we can give them the proper thanks.
They deserve thanks because you are giving a lot of yourselves
to your country.
Go ahead, Mr. Walles.
STATEMENT OF JACOB WALLES, OF DELAWARE, TO BE AMBASSADOR TO THE
TUNISIAN REPUBLIC
Mr. Walles. Thank you, Chairman Boxer, Ranking Member
Lugar, Senator Coons.
It is an honor to appear before you today as President
Obama's nominee to be the U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of
Tunisia. I am grateful to the President and to Secretary
Clinton for the confidence and trust they have shown in me.
I would also like to thank Senator Coons for coming to
introduce me today. I am proud of my roots in Delaware and
pleased, Senator, that you took the time out of your busy
schedule to join us today.
I have served our country as a Foreign Service officer over
these past 30 years and spent much of my career working on the
Middle East, pursuing our objectives of peace, regional
stability, and economic cooperation. For 4 years, I served as
consul general and chief of mission in Jerusalem.
Most recently, I have overseen U.S. policy in the Near
East, dealing with the changes that have swept the Arab world
in the past year. If confirmed by the Senate, I hope to use
this experience to enhance our bilateral relationship with
Tunisia, where the Arab Spring began just over a year ago.
The people of the United States and Tunisia share over 200
years of history. Only 3 years after the United States declared
our independence, we signed our first agreement of friendship,
cooperation, and trade with Tunisia. In 1805, the Tunisian
Ambassador to the United States had the first known Ramadan
iftar dinner with an American President. Since then, we have
fought together against common enemies and helped each other in
times of need.
This historic bilateral relationship now has a new
touchstone, the momentous events of the Arab Spring that began
in Tunisia in December 2010. The Tunisian revolution triggered
the transformations now underway across the Middle East and
North Africa. It also marked the beginning of a new phase of
cooperation between Tunisia and the United States.
Tunisia is now leading the region into an era of democratic
transition and serving as a model for others to follow. Tunisia
is well-placed to do this, with its history of tolerance and
respect for the rights of women and minorities.
The United States has an interest in seeing that this new
democratic model in the region succeeds. In the words of
Secretary Clinton, ``We should do all we can to assist Tunisia
in realizing a future of peace, progress, and opportunity.''
As we know from our own Nation's history, building a
democracy is difficult and time-consuming. Tunisia's first
steps deserve praise, particularly the constituent assembly
elections held in October 2011, which were the first truly
democratic elections in that country in decades.
I share President Obama's view that we must support a
people that have mustered the courage to stand up for their
rights and who have taken courageous steps toward freedom and
democracy. Just as we supported Tunisia after its independence
in 1956, we have a chance now to support Tunisia's transition
to democracy.
We have a range of tools at our disposal to support
Tunisia's transition. In the interest of time, however, I would
refer you to my full statement, which we have submitted for the
record. I would be pleased to answer any questions that you
might have.
And in closing, Madam Chairman and members of the
committee, I just want to say thank you again for allowing me
today to discuss our interests in Tunisia. I believe that we
have the opportunity of a generation before us, and I am
excited about this new chance to serve our country.
If confirmed, I look forward to working with you, with the
other members of the committee, and with the Congress to
continue to advance United States interests and promote our
relationship with Tunisia.
Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Walles follows:]
Prepared Statement of Jacob Walles
Chairman Boxer, Ranking Member Lugar, distinguished members of the
committee, it is an honor to appear before you today as President
Obama's nominee to be the U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of Tunisia. I
am grateful to President Obama and Secretary Clinton for the confidence
and trust they have shown in me.
I have served our country as a Foreign Service officer over the
past 30 years in advancing American interests abroad. I have spent much
of my career working on, and living in, the Middle East, pursuing our
objectives of peace, regional stability, and economic cooperation. For
4 years, I served as consul general and chief of mission in Jerusalem,
where I successfully managed a growing post in a complex political
environment. Most recently, I have overseen U.S. policy in the Near
East, dealing with the policy ramifications for the United States of
the changes that have swept the Arab world in the past year. If
confirmed by the Senate, I hope to use this experience to enhance our
bilateral relationship with Tunisia, where the Arab Spring began just
over a year ago.
The people of the United States and Tunisia share over 200 years of
history, with rich cultural, economic, and security ties. Only 3 years
after the United States declared our independence, we signed our first
agreement of friendship and trade with Tunisia. In 1805, the Tunisian
Ambassador to the United States became the first to have a Ramadan
iftar celebration dinner with an American President. Since then, we
have fought together against common enemies, pursued the goals of
regional stability, and helped each other in times of need. The United
States operated a robust economic assistance program in Tunisia from
1957 to 1994. And Tunisia has responded in our recent time of need,
offering assistance to address the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico in
2009.
Our historic bilateral relationship now has a new touchstone--the
momentous events of the Arab Spring that began in Tunisia in December
2010. The Tunisian revolution captivated the international community
and triggered the transformations now underway across the Middle East
and North Africa. It has also marked the beginning of a new phase of
bilateral and people-to-people cooperation between the United States
and Tunisia. Tunisia is now leading the region into a new era of
democratic transition and serving as a model for others to follow. The
United States has an interest in seeing that this new democratic model
succeeds in the region. In the words of Secretary Clinton, ``we should
do all we can to assist Tunisia in realizing a future of peace,
progress, and opportunity.'' If confirmed, I will do all that I can to
help Tunisia succeed on this path.
As we know from our own Nation's history, building a democracy is
difficult and time-consuming. That process is rarely without
controversy, setbacks, and sometimes disappointment. But Tunisia's
first steps deserve praise, particularly the Constituent Assembly
elections in October 2011, which were the first truly democratic
elections in that country in decades. In our engagement with the
Tunisian Government we have seen their commitment to meeting the
legitimate aspirations of the Tunisian people.
I share President Obama's assessment that it is incumbent upon us
to support people and governments that have mustered the courage to
stand up for their rights and take courageous steps toward democracy,
despite the challenges and difficulties that lie ahead. Just as we
supported Tunisia shortly after its independence in 1956, now we have a
chance to support Tunisia's efforts to achieve critical goals in its
democratic transition, including accountable governance, economic
growth, and security.
We have a number of tools at our disposal that will allow us to
support their efforts. Shortly after the revolution, the Department of
State marshaled a strong package of assistance for elections and
capacity-building for civil society to advance the rule of law and
promote freedom of expression. With these forms of assistance, we
sought to support the Tunisian people's efforts to contribute to the
national political debate and decisionmaking process and to play
active, constructive roles in their country's political transformation.
If confirmed, I will continue the work that we have already begun in
these areas, drawing on the resources of the Middle East Partnership
Initiative (MEPI) and the U.S. Agency for International Development.
The Tunisian revolution was not only about greater democratic
freedoms, it was also about greater equality and opportunity in the
economic life of the country. The people called for transparency,
anticorruption, and the ability to improve their socio-economic
standing through merit and hard work, rather than through connections
and secrecy. We are sensitive to Tunisia's economic development needs,
and we will do all we can to support them.
If confirmed, I would welcome the opportunity to utilize the
authorities and tools of the entire U.S. Government to help Tunisia
address these needs. As an economic officer in my 30-year Foreign
Service career, I have gained experience to draw on in enhancing our
bilateral economic partnership with Tunisia. I will work with the
Departments of Commerce and Treasury to promote responsible, market-
oriented reforms that will increase Tunisia's attractiveness as an
investment destination and place the country on a solid macroeconomic
foundation. I will work with the Overseas Private Investment
Corporation to facilitate the entry of American businesses and products
into the Tunisian market, and with the U.S. Trade Representative to
maximize the utility of our bilateral Trade and Investment Framework
Agreement and other trade facilitation tools.
Programs are also needed to address the demands of young Tunisians
eager for even more academic exchange and English language training.
Our Fulbright program, previously underutilized in Tunisia, is now in
heavy demand. We also have other tools at our disposal as well, and I
would welcome the opportunity to expand recently developed university
linkages and community college partnerships to build the capacity of
Tunisia's educational system to better prepare Tunisian students for
the demands of the modern global economy.
A prosperous, democratic Middle Eastern country, in which citizens
are free to apply honest effort toward achieving a higher standard of
living, is an important symbol that the age of autocratic and opaque
control of the political and economic environment in the Arab world is
a thing of the past. It is therefore in our interest to work toward
sustainable, inclusive, and free-market economic growth in Tunisia
through a range of mechanisms.
If confirmed, I will also endeavor to promote Tunisia's increasing
engagement with the international community and greater cooperation on
our regional security and foreign policy goals. Tunisia has
demonstrated that it shares our interest in peaceful and cooperative
relations across the Middle East and North Africa region and, if
confirmed, I will continue our efforts to help build Tunisia's capacity
to continue to be a good neighbor. I will work with the Department of
Defense to continue to support the Tunisian military's efforts to
secure the country's borders, improve its strategic planning capacity,
and develop whole-of-government approaches to the national security
challenges that the Tunisians face.
Madam Chairman and members of the committee, in closing I would
like to thank you again for allowing me to discuss ways that we might
advance U.S. interests in Tunisia. I believe that we have the
opportunity of a generation before us, and I am excited about this new
opportunity to serve our country in the critical period ahead. If
confirmed, I look forward to working with you, with the rest of the
Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and with the Congress to continue
to advance U.S. interests and promote our bilateral relationship with
Tunisia. I would be pleased to answer any questions you may have.
Senator Boxer. Thank you so much.
Mr. Stevens.
STATEMENT OF JOHN CHRISTOPHER STEVENS, OF CALIFORNIA, TO BE
AMBASSADOR TO LIBYA
Mr. Stevens. Madam Chairman, Ranking Member Lugar, and
Senator Coons, thank you for the honor of appearing before you
today.
I wish to thank the President for nominating me to serve as
Ambassador to Libya and for the confidence that he and the
Secretary have shown in me.
At your invitation, Madam Chairman, I would also like to
acknowledge my mother, Mary Commanday, and my stepfather,
Robert Commanday, who are visiting from the Bay area this week.
Senator Boxer. Oh, good. Will they stand for us, please?
Welcome.
Mrs. Commanday. Thank you very much.
Senator Boxer. How is it back there?
Mrs. Commanday. We have been here all week. [Laughter.]
Senator Boxer. You have been here all week. I heard it
rained quite a lot, but we need the rain.
Mrs. Commanday. Chris grew up in Larkspur and San Anselmo.
Senator Boxer. No kidding? That is where I raised my
children.
We'll continue this over a cup of tea after. Please
proceed.
Mr. Stevens. Thank you.
It has been a great privilege to be involved in U.S. policy
toward Libya at different points over the past several years,
as Ranking Member Lugar has noted. I first served in Tripoli in
2007 in a country that was firmly in the hands of an oppressive
dictator.
Last March, I led a small team to Benghazi as the special
envoy to the Transitional National Council. It was a time of
great excitement as the Libyan people first experienced
freedom. But it was also a time of significant trepidation for
what might come next.
Should I be confirmed, it will be an extraordinary honor to
represent the United States during this historic period of
transition in Libya. Libyans face a significant challenge as
they make the transition from an oppressive dictatorship to a
stable and prosperous democracy.
Colonel Gaddafi deliberately weakened the country's
institutions, banned even the most rudimentary of civil society
organizations, and outlawed all electoral activity.
During his rule, corruption was rewarded, initiative
discouraged, and independent thought suppressed. To change such
a system will take some time and much effort.
Libya's new leaders must build democratic institutions from
scratch, consolidate control over militias, ensure that all
Libyans are represented and respected in the new government,
and dispose of the country's oil wealth fairly and
transparently.
Despite these difficult challenges, there are some signs of
progress. The interim government is paying salaries and
providing basic goods and services to the Libyan people. It is
reconstituting government ministries, preparing for elections
in June, and ensuring that Libyans throughout the country are
represented by the new government.
Libya's oil production, which is important in stabilizing
world oil prices, is expected to reach preconflict levels by
the end of the year. It is clearly in the United States
interests to see Libya succeed as a stable and prosperous
democracy.
Such an outcome would enhance our security and economic
well-being. It would also serve as a powerful example to others
in the region who are struggling to achieve their own
democratic aspirations.
There is tremendous goodwill for the United States in Libya
now. Libyans recognize the key role the United States played in
building international support for their uprising against
Gaddafi. I saw this gratitude frequently over the months I
served in Benghazi.
If confirmed, I would hope to continue the excellent work
of Ambassador Cretz and his team in assisting the Libyans with
their transition and forging strong ties between United States
and Libyan officials, business communities, students, and
others.
Thank you, and I look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Stevens follows:]
Prepared Statement of John Christopher Stevens
Madam Chairman, Ranking Member Lugar, and members of the committee,
thank you for the honor of appearing before you today. I wish to thank
the President for nominating me to serve as Ambassador to Libya, and
for the confidence that he and the Secretary have shown in me.
It has been a great privilege to be involved in U.S. policy toward
Libya at different points over the past several years. I first served
in Tripoli in 2007, in a country firmly in the hands of an oppressive
dictator. Last March I led a small team to Benghazi as the Special
Envoy to the incipient Transitional National Council. It was a time of
great excitement as the Libyan people first experienced freedom. But it
was also a time of significant trepidation for what might come next.
Should I be confirmed, it will be an extraordinary honor to represent
the United States during this historic period of transition in Libya.
Libyans face significant challenges as they make the transition
from an oppressive dictatorship to a stable and prosperous democracy.
Colonel Qadhafi deliberately weakened the country's institutions,
banned even the most rudimentary of civil society organizations, and
outlawed all electoral activity. During his rule, corruption was
rewarded, initiative discouraged, and independent thought suppressed.
To change such a system will take some time and much effort. Libya's
new leaders must build democratic institutions from scratch,
consolidate control over militias, ensure that all Libyans are
represented and respected in the new government, and dispose of the
country's oil wealth fairly and transparently.
Despite these difficult challenges, there are already signs of
progress. The interim government is paying salaries and providing basic
goods and services to the Libyan people. It is reconstituting
government ministries, preparing for elections in June, and ensuring
that Libyans throughout the country are represented by the new
government. Libya's oil production--which is important in stabilizing
world oil prices--is expected to reach preconflict levels by the end of
the year. Several polls have shown the interim leadership is still
viewed favorably by the majority of the population.
It is clearly in the U.S. interest to see Libya become a stable and
prosperous
democracy. Such an outcome would enhance our security and economic
well-being, through, for example, security cooperation in the region,
steady oil and gas production, and opportunities for U.S. businesses as
Libyans rebuild their country. It would also serve as a powerful
example to others in the region who are struggling to achieve their own
democratic aspirations.
There is tremendous goodwill for the United States in Libya now.
Libyans recognize the key role the United States played in building
international support for their uprising against Qadhafi. I saw this
gratitude frequently over the months I served in Benghazi--from our
engagements with the revolution's leadership to our early work with
civil society and new media organizations. If confirmed, I would hope
to continue the excellent work of Ambassdor Cretz and his team in
assisting the Libyans with their transition, and forging strong ties
between U.S. and Libyan officials, business communities, students, and
others.
As you know, the administration has proposed a modest package of
technical assistance for Libya during the transition period. It is fair
to ask why the United States should provide any assistance at all to
Libya, given the country's wealth. Libya's new leaders have often
stated that the country intends to fund its own operations and
reconstruction, and they are, in fact, already doing so, tapping their
petroleum revenue and other assets of the previous regime.
It is in the U.S. interest to fund a limited number of activities
that address immediate security and transition challenges. These U.S.-
funded programs are aimed at: preventing weapons proliferation;
providing advice to the interim government on elections and other
transitional governance issues of immediate concern; and promoting a
vibrant civil society. A limited investment in the immediate transition
needs of Libya now will pay dividends for a lasting U.S.-Libya
partnership in the years to come, and will help ensure that Libya
contributes to regional stability and security.
Should I be confirmed, it would be a great honor to lead our
Embassy in Tripoli in setting the foundations for a mutually beneficial
relationship with a newly democratic Libya.
Thank you and I look forward to your questions.
Senator Boxer. Thank you so much.
The Honorable Carlos Pascual.
STATEMENT OF HON. CARLOS PASCUAL, OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,
TO BE AN ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF STATE, ENERGY RESOURCES
Ambassador Pascual. Madam Chairman, Ranking Member Lugar,
it is an honor to be here before you today as the President's
nominee to be the first Assistant Secretary of State for the
Bureau of Energy Resources.
I thank President Barack Obama and Secretary of State
Hillary Rodham Clinton for their trust and confidence. I
appreciate the opportunity to submit a longer version of this
testimony for the record.
My 12-year-old boy wishes that he was here. He has a math
test. But he asked me to send you a high-five and a fist bump
for listening to his daddy.
Senator Boxer. That is cute.
Ambassador Pascual. The fact that this position of
Assistant Secretary for Energy Resources has been created is a
testimony to the leadership of the members of this committee,
starting with legislation, Senator Lugar, that you introduced
in 2006 to create a Coordinator for International Energy
Affairs.
Senator Lugar, I remember well the opportunity I had to
introduce you in December 2007 at the Brookings Institution,
where you sketched a comprehensive global energy strategy, and
through such bipartisan cooperation, our oil imports today are
at their lowest levels since 1995.
Secretary Clinton built on these foundations in proposing
to President Obama to create the Bureau of Energy Resources.
The State Department's first Quadrennial Diplomacy and
Development Review concluded that the effective management of
energy resources is fundamental; fundamental to our national
security and economic prosperity. It underscored as well the
importance of diplomatic leadership.
The Department of Energy has unsurpassed technical capacity
and deep relationships with energy ministries around the world.
The Department of Commerce, together with OPIC, Ex-Im, and TDA,
can help convert American energy expertise into business
opportunities. USAID has the capacity to offer technical advice
to bring energy services to deprived populations.
But by working with these agencies to create a strategic
platform for our government, an Energy Resources Bureau can
make more effective use of our resources to safeguard America's
energy security.
The opportunity to be considered for this position is a
high point of my career. While working on the former Soviet
states as Ambassador to Ukraine, as Ambassador to Mexico, and
as vice president of the Brookings Institution, energy security
reverberated in my work. Across these experiences, this lesson
became clear. Governments must set strong, market-based
incentives for the development of energy resources. But the
success of those policies depends on private investment and
strong commercial relationships.
If confirmed in the position of Assistant Secretary for
Energy Resources, I will make it my highest priority to draw on
the expertise in government, the private sector, and the not-
for-profit sector to inform an energy diplomacy strategy
focused on America's energy security.
Hydrocarbons today make up 85 percent of the world's fossil
fuel sources. We must use our diplomacy to ensure that access
to oil, natural gas, and coal, but also to renewable energy is
adequate, reliable, sustainable, affordable for the future.
Today's markets are global. And in today's world, energy
producers and consumers are not adversaries. We both depend on
stable markets to foster global economic growth.
Today, we see the importance of our energy diplomacy as we
implement under the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012,
which was spearheaded by this committee, sanctions to deny
revenue to Iran's nuclear program. Iran has used every
opportunity to threaten actions to disrupt oil markets. The
best immediate counter to these threats is unrelented
engagement with producers and consumers to help facilitate
market relationships that keep supply and demand in balance.
As the State Department's Coordinator for International
Energy Affairs, I have traveled since January to Saudi Arabia,
the United Arab Emirates, Libya, Iraq, Turkey, China, Nigeria,
Angola, and Colombia, and conferred with our European allies.
And we have engaged the world's main energy producers. They
have reinforced to us that they will meet market demand as it
arises.
With those who import Iranian crude oil, we have left no
doubt about our seriousness of purpose. Today, Secretary
Clinton announced that 11 countries--10 that had imported
Iranian crude oil in the European Union, plus Japan--have
significantly reduced their volumes of imports of Iranian crude
oil. Their actions underscore the success of our policy in
strictly enforcing the provisions of the NDAA as passed by the
Congress.
If confirmed as Assistant Secretary for Energy Resources, I
pledge to make the pursuit of good governance and transparency
in the energy sector a central theme of the work that I do. The
Cardin-Lugar amendment to the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and
Consumer Protection Act set a new standard for transparency in
extractive industries, and I hope the regulations expected from
the SEC reflect the clear intent of the law.
As this committee knows, the purpose of American foreign
policy is to make our Nation prosperous and strong.
Energy diplomacy is one of our strongest tools to achieve
the fundamental purpose of our foreign policy. I would welcome
the opportunity to take on this challenge, if confirmed as
Assistant Secretary for Energy Resources.
I look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Ambassador Pascual follows:]
Prepared Statement of Ambassador Carlos E. Pascual
Madam Chairman, Ranking Member Lugar, members of the committee, I
am honored to appear before you today as the President's nominee to be
the first Assistant Secretary of State for the Bureau of Energy
Resources or ``ENR.'' I thank President Barack Obama and Secretary of
State Hillary Rodham Clinton for their trust and confidence. If
confirmed by the United States Senate, I will bring to this position
more than 25 years of practical experience in government and as a
leader in one of the world's most respected think tanks--as well as an
absolute dedication to my country.
The fact that this position of Assistant Secretary for Energy
Resources has been created is a testimony to the vision and leadership
of members of this committee, starting with legislation Senator Lugar
introduced in 2006 to create in the State Department a ``Coordinator
for International Energy Affairs.'' Our Nation is indebted to Senator
Lugar and this committee for keeping energy security at the forefront
of American foreign policy. Senator Lugar, I remember well the
opportunity I had to introduce you in December 2007 at a policy address
at the Brookings Institution. There, you presented the Nation with a
bold challenge to promote strong diplomacy, entrepreneurial innovation,
and energy diversification as a platform for security. Through
consistent bipartisan cooperation and the capabilities of the American
private sector, today we see that U.S. oil imports have been falling
since 2005. We have more oil and gas rigs operating in the United
States today than the rest of the world combined. Our oil imports as a
share of total consumption have declined from 57 percent in 2008 to 45
percent in 2011--the lowest level since 1995.
Secretary Clinton built on these foundations in proposing to
President Obama to create the Bureau of Energy Resources. This Bureau
emerged from the State Department's first Quadrennial Diplomacy and
Development Review (QDDR). The QDDR's conclusions on energy were at the
same time simple and profound: the effective management of global
energy resources is fundamental to our national security and economic
prosperity. Further, it became clear that diplomatic leadership in this
area will strengthen American capacity to use our vast energy resources
in government and the private sector to our national benefit. The
Department of Energy has unsurpassed technical capacity in energy
research and innovation and deep relationships with energy ministries
around the world. The Department of Commerce, together with the
Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC), Export-Import Bank of
the United States (EXIM), and the U.S. Trade and Development Agency
(TDA), have the capacity to help convert American energy expertise into
trade and investment opportunities. USAID has the capacity to bring
technical advice to developing nations seeking to bring energy services
to deprived populations. By working with other agencies advancing
America's international energy interests to forge a coherent strategic
platform that brings together these capabilities, the creation of an
Energy Resources Bureau is a multiplying force. It can make our Nation
stronger and more targeted in our ability to pursue our energy security
goals.
The opportunity to be considered for this position is a high point
in my career, where I have consistently seen energy issues reverberate
in importance. From 1997 to 2004, I had the opportunity to work on the
transition of the former Soviet states to economically independent and
self-sufficient nations. The mismanagement of Soviet energy resources
was one of the very factors that contributed to the collapse of the
Soviet Union. Later, strong U.S. policies--particularly the development
of multiple pipelines--reinforced the independence of the Caspian
states. Internal reform of Ukraine's electric power sector in 2000
created the basis for investments that allowed Ukraine to close the
Chernobyl nuclear power plant. Even in this decade, lack of
transparency in commercial energy relationships has caused gas supply
crises between Russia and Ukraine that have also shaken European
markets. While serving as the Vice President of Brookings, I had the
chance to learn of the dynamic interplay between energy markets and
technological change from cochairing with Daniel Yergin a semiannual
seminar on energy security. Across these experiences, this lesson
became clear: governments must set strong market-based incentives for
the development of energy resources, but the success of those policies
will depend on private investment and strong commercial relationships.
If confirmed in the position of Assistant Secretary for Energy
Resources, I will make it my highest priority to draw on the expertise
in government, the private sector, and the not-for-profit sector to
inform an energy diplomacy strategy focused on America's energy
security. Hydrocarbons today make up 85 percent of the world's fuel
sources. We must use our diplomacy to insure that access to oil,
natural gas, and coal are adequate, reliable, and affordable. We must
use our diplomacy to forge policies that make our energy future
sustainable--both commercially and environmentally. To do this we must
have strong and consistent relationships with energy producers--
producers of all forms of energy in all parts of the world. Today's
markets are global. And in today's world, energy producers and
consumers are not adversaries. We both must understand that stable
markets foster the best climate for global economic growth.
Today we see the importance of our energy diplomacy as we
implement, under the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012,
sanctions designed to deny Iran revenue from petroleum sales, which in
turn fund Iran's illicit conduct. Iran now faces unprecedented and
damaging sanctions applied by the United States and our partners around
the world. Iran has used every opportunity to undermine our efforts by
threatening actions to disrupt oil markets. The best immediate counter
to these threats is unrelenting engagement with producers and consumers
to help facilitate market relationships that keep supply and demand in
balance. Such engagement has been central to my role as the State
Department's Coordinator for International Energy Affairs. Since
January, I have traveled to Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates,
Libya, Iraq, Turkey, China, Nigeria, Angola and Colombia--and conferred
with European allies.
As we have engaged, the world's main energy producers have reacted
in a similar and consistent way: they will meet market demand as it
arises, because producers, like consumers, have an interest in economic
growth that is linked to energy access. In Europe we have seen complete
solidarity as they took action on January 23 to ban all new contracts
for Iranian crude oil and phase out existing contracts by July 1. With
those who import Iranian crude oil, we have left no doubt about our
seriousness of purpose. We have seen a rise in oil prices as countries
work out transitions from Iran to other suppliers. At any given time we
will see production declines in parts of the world, as have occurred
recently in South Sudan and Yemen. But the global relationships we are
forging place us in a position of strength, as a leader in our goals
toward Iran, and as a partner with other key producers in promoting
stable energy markets at price levels consistent with economic recovery
in the global economy.
We have also seen that improved stability and market incentives
create opportunities. Libya has restored over 1 million barrels per day
of production, a testimony to that country's desire to forge a new
future. Iraq in 2011 increased its production of oil by nearly 300,000
barrels per day, and could realistically see another 500,000 barrels
per day increase in 2012. Production prospects are strong from
discoveries on the west coast of Africa, from the presalt fields in
Brazil and of course here in the United States. In a global market of
about 90 million barrels per day, there is not a magic bullet in
achieving energy security. But the converse is also a strength--
diversification in global production adds resiliency. And when
diversification is combined with good business climates and market
incentives for production, then we have a platform for efficient energy
markets and sustainable economic growth. These goals will guide our
energy diplomacy.
Our challenge as well is to look ahead, foster innovation and
investment, assess changing markets and politics, and create business
opportunities. In the United States we have experienced a natural gas
revolution, due to technology and private investment. U.S. natural gas
production grew in 2011--the largest year-over-year volumetric increase
in history--and easily eclipsed the previous all-time production record
set in 1973. We have learned valuable lessons to share on environmental
safeguards, transparency, and regulation. Australia, Indonesia, Russia,
Argentina, and Qatar just to name a few--have vast additional gas
capacity that will come into the market in the coming 5 years.
Increasingly gas is being traded as LNG, potentially changing the very
structure of that market. One can envisage gas trading relationships
not exclusively dominated by point-to-point pipelines that make
consumers beholden to single suppliers. As a resurgent gas supplier,
understanding this market will help us shape the rules--to make them
transparent, predictable, and thus to our commercial benefit. These
changes in global gas markets are fundamental to both our geopolitical
and commercial interests, and to the effective conduct of American
foreign policy.
Business opportunities abound as well in clean and renewable energy
and energy efficiency. American companies are world leaders in wind,
solar, hydro, power transmission, efficient generation, and smart
grids. The scale of this market is huge. The International Energy
Agency estimates that from 2011 to 2035, the world will see $5.9
trillion in new investments in hydroelectric and other renewable power,
$2.8 trillion in coal, gas and oil-fired plants, and $1.1 trillion in
nuclear power. This shift to renewable power is market driven, and
unprecedented in the world's economic history. It is big business.
Fostering market environments to compete in these fields is good for
energy security, and it will generate export markets and American jobs
in a field where we are commercial leaders.
This changing face of global electric power also requires us to
change the lens through which we see energy and economic development.
Access to energy is the strongest driver of economic growth. To achieve
universal access to energy by 2030, developing nations need to invest
hundreds of billions of dollars in power infrastructure, but that is
just 2.5 percent of global private investments in power. The challenge
will be making strategic use of limited public resources to attract
private capital to the markets of developing economies. Already, many
poor people pay more for diesel-generated power than we do. The key to
change is to create viable business models that bring efficient and
reliable power to the poor, to foster their growth, to make it possible
to educate their children, and to bring greater stability to where they
live.
If confirmed as Assistant Secretary for Energy Resources, I pledge
to make the pursuit of good governance and transparency in the energy
sector a central theme for the Energy Resources Bureau. The Cardin-
Lugar amendment to the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer
Protection Act set a new standard for transparency in extractive
industries, and I hope the regulations expected from the SEC reflect
the clear intent of the law. This effort compliments other efforts the
State Department already undertakes, including strong engagement on the
Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative, and a technical
assistance program called the Energy Governance and Capacity
Initiative, which provides advice and assistance to countries with
emerging oil and gas industries, to help those countries manage their
resources and revenues responsibly. Good governance and transparency
will in the end help ensure that resources are used wisely, to the
benefit of all citizens. That is good for economic growth, stability,
and our foreign policy interests.
As this committee well knows, the purpose of American foreign
policy is to make our nation prosperous and secure. We have learned
that in an interconnected world, we advance our security and prosperity
when our friends and allies advance with us. Energy diplomacy is one of
our strongest tools to achieve the fundamental purpose of our foreign
policy. With the wise stewardship of resources, and by fostering
private innovation and investment to expand energy access, we can
ensure that the world's energy resources become a sustained driver of
growth and stability. I would welcome the opportunity to take on this
challenge if confirmed as Assistant Secretary for Energy Resources.
I look forward to your questions.
Senator Boxer. Thank you.
I wanted us to talk about energy because I picked up on
some of Senator Lugar's comments. He and I agree on a lot, but
we don't agree on everything, and that is an area where I just
see the world quite differently. And it makes your job, Mr.
Pascual, very interesting.
But Senator Lugar talked about protecting Americans from
oil price spikes, and I couldn't agree with him more. That is
where we agree. We want to protect Americans from these spikes
at the pump because it hurts, and it hurts us as we are getting
on with our economic recovery.
And my view is I look at the oil companies. They are the
ones who are raising the prices. So I want to know why are they
raising the prices? Are they doing badly? Do they need to make
sure they can maintain?
Well, you look at it. The five big oil companies' profits
went up 75 percent last year. And instead of thanking America
for it, they don't. They push up the cost of a gallon of gas,
week after week, week after week, week after week.
And this is before any troubles were brewing in the Middle
East, brewing worse troubles in Iran. And now, of course, you
add that, and you have got a lot of speculators on Wall Street
that are pushing up the futures. So I would just say in order
to protect American consumers, we should press the oil
companies to not punish the American public as they make record
profits, No. 1. And No. 2, we should use the power that
Congress gave the CFTC to protect, make sure we don't see more
of the speculating.
Now I think the other problem is, as we have seen these
prices go up, we have seen petroleum exports from America go up
by 67 percent over what period was that? Since 2009. We are
exporting American-made petroleum, and we ought to keep it
here.
Now we are importing less. And Ambassador Pascual, you are
right. We are importing less, and why? One reason is fuel-
efficient cars. Thanks to President Obama and bipartisan
leadership in Congress, we are using fuel-efficient cars. That
is really helping us. And moving toward electric, hybrid, and
all the rest.
Less demand. That is good. So less demand for imports. But
if we could keep some of the American-grown oil here, we would
have even less, fewer imports.
So I am not going to ask you anything about what I just
said because it is way too political and it is not in your
portfolio. But I do want to ask you a question that I think is
in your portfolio, Mr. Ambassador.
We are trying to move toward alternatives to imported oil.
Advanced biofuels like cellulosic fuel, algae, I see a lot of
it in our State, Mr. Stevens, and we are making progress. And I
see us as an exporter of these technologies.
Do you, as you look at your portfolio and how it looks at
this, can you talk to us about the potential for America to be
the leader on these alternative fuels? Because the whole world
is thrown off kilter when there are these problems in the
Middle East and so on.
Mr. Ambassador.
Ambassador Pascual. Madam Chairman, thank you for raising
that issue, and it is absolutely essential that we have a
balanced portfolio of energy resources that we look at when we
look at the world economy.
On biofuels, the United States is largest producer of
biofuels. We are the largest exporter of biofuels right now. We
are one of the leading researchers in new technologies in
biofuels.
Interestingly, today, we are exporting biofuels to Brazil,
which is an interesting dynamic that has occurred in the
relationship. We have a particularly strong relationship with
Brazil on the development of biofuels. As a result of our work
together with Brazil, we have been undertaking joint research
projects in Central America and in parts of Africa.
We have worked together in the context of the Global
Biofuels Energy Partnership, which is a broader international
organization that has created standards on the development of
biofuels so that in the process of developing them, we can
assure that they are done in a way that is economically sound,
socially sound, and environmentally sound. And that many of the
questions that have been raised in the past and the tradeoffs
between biofuels and food production don't have to become an
argument for the future because we have clarity in the way that
these issues are assessed and developed.
The critical thing here is that a market in biofuels is
developing internationally. We are a leader in this field. I
would just only underscore as well the importance of the United
States being a leader in other forms of renewable
technologies--in wind and solar and transmission and smart
grids.
And in particular, in the area of smart grids and
information technology, increasingly, the world is going to
have to adopt these technologies to make the best possible use
of the energy sources that are available to them. And this
isn't just a question of an environmental issue. The
environmental part is important, but the export of American
products and goods and services and the creation of jobs in
this wide-open field is one where we have a competitive
advantage.
Senator Boxer. Well, Mr. Ambassador, I really thank you for
your terrific response because I see this as a great growth
sector for America, these clean energy alternatives. Because,
again, the whole world suffers when there is instability in the
Middle East, and this would be a great role for us.
I want to talk about Tunisia for a minute. Well, I want to
talk about the role of religion and politics not just in
America, but in Tunisia. That is a joke.
Anyway, on one side are the Salafists, who adhere to a
strict interpretation of Islam, are calling for a much more
significant role for religion in the country's political
system. On the other side are those who very much want to
maintain Tunisia's historically secular political system.
According to the Agence France Presse, just today thousands
of Tunisians marched in the capital city of Tunis, holding
banners saying, ``Leave my Tunisia free'' and ``Separation of
religion and state.''
Mr. Walles, do you expect to see these protests grow in
size and scope? Are you concerned that both sides could pull
further apart and present significant challenges for this
emerging democracy?
Mr. Walles. Thank you, Senator Boxer, for the question.
I think, as I look at what has happened in Tunisia, they
were the first country to experience a revolution in the Arab
Spring, and they have been going through a process, first of
having elections. Now they are in the process of drafting a
constitution.
What happened in Tunisia is for 30 years, there was a
repressive regime that pretty much suppressed any free
political discourse, and that lid has now been lifted. And
there is this discussion going on in Tunisia about these very
issues.
As they draft a constitution, they have to go through a
process of deciding what form of government do they want? Do
they want a parliamentary system or Presidential system, or a
mixture of that? And what is the relationship between religion
and the state?
And as you said, there are extremes on both sides here, and
we have seen some extremist statements from the Salafists in
particular, but the fact of the matter is that most of the
political discourse and the discussion has been within what is
the proper bounds of a political discussion there.
And the election that they had, the party that got the most
votes was the al-Nahda Party, which is a moderate Islamist
party, as you described them. But they decided to go into a
coalition government with two other parties, both secular
parties, one from the center, one from the left. So there is a
fairly broad range of views within the government.
And each of the parties in the government have talked about
the need to work together and to compromise and to look for
ways to develop a consensus on how you would deal with these
issues. So while there are extreme voices, the bulk of the
Tunisian population is represented by these parties in the
government that are looking for ways to work together.
You mentioned also the rights of women, which is an area
where Tunisia has led the Arab world. They have some of the
strongest protections for the rights of women in their
constitution and in their penal code. And there have been
voices as well, calling for that to be rolled back, but we have
also seen from within the government, and including in the
Islamist al-Nahda Party, talking about the need to maintain
those protections.
So there is a lot of discussion going on, a lot of turmoil
about the way forward. They are going to have to find Tunisian
solutions to these problems.
But as we have approached the Arab Spring, whether it is in
Tunisia or elsewhere, we have always emphasized the importance
of universal values--protection of the rights of minorities,
protection of the rights of women, free speech, freedom of
association, freedom of religion. That is a touchstone for our
approach across the Arab Spring, and I think that also needs to
be the focus of our approach in Tunisia as well.
Senator Boxer. Thank you very much.
I will hold my question for you, Mr. Stevens, until my
second round and call on Senator Lugar.
Senator Lugar. Well, thank you very much, Madam Chairman.
Just to indicate our degree of accord, I would point out
that I have been driving a Prius for the last 6 years.
[Laughter.]
Senator Boxer. Me, too.
Senator Lugar. There we go. So you can understand the
bipartisan outlook we have on these things.
I would say, beyond that, as a corn farmer, I have been
promoting corn ethanol for the last 15 years, and this has
become a very prominent part of the biofuels. I appreciate
there are all sorts of debates about corn ethanol, but
nevertheless, it has displaced maybe 9 percent of the oil usage
that we have in this country, and I hope it will do more.
Let me just say in the Ag Committee, we take up regularly
the CFTC, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, and this
deals with the question of so-called speculations. Others would
just say price finding. But the dilemma illustrated by the oil
price controlled by the CFTC and so forth is that there is
great fear throughout the world, not just in our country, that
the supplies transited through the Strait of Hormuz are likely
to be affected by problems in Iran or elsewhere. Therefore,
with both these possible severe disruptions of supply and the
view of many that the Saudis alone have a reserve capable of
addressing a significant supply decrease in mind, we are in a
precarious predicament in which there could be a huge spike in
price of gasoline in a short period of time, given the foreign
policy questions we are discussing today.
Which gets us back to, Ambassador Pascual, the fact that
essentially these are questions of the security of our country,
but they have a high content of diplomacy that we believe
belongs in the State Department at the highest levels. And in
testimony before this committee during the duration of time I
have served, we have had one hearing after another in which it
was recalled that Franklin Roosevelt and the Saudi monarchs
came to some sort of implicit agreement that we in the United
States needed oil.
They needed also our friendship and, if not, protection.
And attempting to maintain this over the years, of course, has
brought us into the Middle East in many ways, and we have
expended hundreds of billions of dollars over the course of the
years even in times of relative peace in the region just to
keep clearing the path and to making certain that our naval
power was sufficient.
So these are diplomatic considerations that are closely
intertwined with our national defense, that I think these
issues affect all of us. What I simply want to ask you,
Ambassador Pascual, is that given the precarious nature of the
oil situation, as we look at it presently and as reflected in
prices at the pump or any other indicator, what are the
provisions that our country can make?
One of them, obviously, is to use less, conserve and,
therefore, do those things which we can in our buildings, quite
apart from our cars and transportation systems and every other
way that we use fossil fuels or any other sort of fuel.
We can, obviously, as the chairman has suggested, push very
hard for biofuel substitution for almost anything else that
might be there. And we have made great progress.
Indeed, the 59 percent of the oil we were importing maybe a
couple of years ago is down to 50 percent. That is significant.
That is 50 percent, and it gets to the guts of how our whole
economy works at this point, given our international
responsibilities.
So can you outline for us, at least in the work you have
been doing already, prior to assumption of this new position
and confirmable situation, how the State Department looks at
this overall picture now of the prices that are clearly rising
because of fears and the reality that there is very little
reserve left anywhere in the world we could call upon?
Ambassador Pascual. Senator, thank you very much.
This is an issue of great interest to the American people,
and it is of great concern to Secretary Clinton, to the
President, and certainly to members of this committee.
One of the things that we have to recognize is in this
period where there have been rising energy prices and some
degree of speculation in the market, as you and Madam Chairman
have both indicated, Iran has tried to use that opportunity in
every possible way to talk up the potential risk and push
prices up. We have to recognize that that is its intent.
At the same time, the best way to counter that is to be
able to look at all the possible energy sources that we have,
as both of you have indicated, to have diversification in our
energy strategy and policies.
In the United States today, we now have more oil and gas
rigs operating than the rest of the world combined. We have
significantly increased our production of oil. We have
significantly increased our production of natural gas as well,
which is another very important issue to be able to get back
into.
If we look at the situation internationally, there is no
magic bullet that one can use and say that this is going to
resolve the world's energy problems. But it underscores the
importance of having a broad and diversified strategy, and that
is one of the reasons why in my job over the past months, I
have been so busily engaged, for example, in going to the
Middle East and engaging with Saudi Arabia and Kuwait and the
United Arab Emirates.
And in those discussions, it has been interesting to the
extent to which those countries have been reinforcing that they
will respond to market demand. And indeed, even yesterday,
there was an extraordinary meeting of the Saudi cabinet of
ministers at the end of which they said the kingdom will work
individually and in cooperation and coordination with the GCC
and other producers inside and outside OPEC to ensure adequate
oil supply, stabilize oil markets, and bring down oil prices to
reasonable levels.
It is an indication of the changing environment that we
have today where producers and consumers have to have shared
interests. It is why in visits to Iraq, for example, we have
been working with them not only over the past year to help them
increase their production by 300,000 barrels a day, but looking
ahead, developing a strategy and a framework and a relationship
in which we can help them secure their plans of producing
another 500,000.
My colleague to my right already indicated in Libya the
significant recovery that we have seen to 1.4 million barrels a
day and the potential of reaching higher levels by the end of
the year. There are a number of other countries that are
critical to engage in. In our own hemisphere, Colombia, Brazil,
Canada, I would just underscore as significant countries and
contributors to world energy markets.
And the point of this is, is that this issue is not simply
resolved by talking to one country, but by dealing with many
countries in a concerted and strategic way. But at the same
time, undertaking the kinds of actions that you and Senator
Boxer have indicated of reducing our own consumption, ensuring
that we have energy efficiency and fuel efficiency measures to
be able to reduce the demand in the United States.
Senator Lugar. I thank you very much.
Thank you, Madam Chairman.
Senator Boxer. Thank you so much, Senator.
Senator Menendez.
Senator Menendez. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Ambassador Pascual, let me ask you--well, before I do, let
me just say I spoke to Secretary Clinton earlier today when she
informed me of the exemption of the sanctions to the 10
European Union countries and Japan because of those nations'
significant reductions in petroleum purchases from Iran. And as
the author of the sanctions, I support the Secretary's decision
and applaud the action of our friends and allies in the
European Union and Japan for their forthright and expedient
action.
And I think it sends a very clear message to others in the
world about what they will need to do to offset their purchases
of Iranian oil and, hopefully, create stability in the oil
markets.
That, plus the swift determination on Saturday, which is
the financial messaging service provider cutting off services
to the Central Bank of Iran and 30 designated Iranian banks
that are on our list, is having a real impact. And that impact
can be seen through Iran's currency plummeting as well as
Iran's oil shipments in February falling to a 10-year low. This
is exactly what we were trying to achieve.
So that is the good news. The rest of what I want to get a
sense of, since you will be in a key position based on how we
wrote the law, is how do you define significant reduction and
what level of reduction predicated your decision to recommend--
I assume you were part of this process--to recommend the EU and
Japan be exempted from sanctions today?
Ambassador Pascual. Senator, thank you very much. Thank you
for your leadership in passing the legislation. Thank you for
your very encouraging statement.
I think that you hit on the key word in your statement
about how to think about the issue of significant reduction,
which is encouragement, example to others. Japan was a model, a
model in the sense of a country that went through the tragedy
of Fukushima, and at the same time, it worked to build the
national consensus within its political system to underscore
the fact that the threat of Iran was so great that it was
necessary to continue to reduce their imports of Iranian crude.
If Japan was able to do what it did over a course of 4
years, but in particular in the second half of last year,
drastically reducing its imports of Iranian crude oil, that
should be an example to others that they could potentially do
more.
The European Union was another important example in which
they have essentially ended new purchases, new contracts for
Iranian crude oil, and are phasing out contracts, existing
contracts by July 1. In other words, they are going to zero.
The European Union did that for its own reasons, and we applaud
the rationale.
If we had been involved with a country in the negotiation
and had preemptively or ahead of time taken a position on a
specific percentage, we might have actually prescribed a
percentage that was less than what that country was willing to
do. And so, I think, going back to your words, example,
encouragement, example to others.
Here are two examples of what one country and a set of 10
countries, the European Union as a whole, have done. And what
we are looking for is for countries to come to us and tell us
if they believe that they should be in that category that
deserves an exemption. What are the kinds of significant
reductions that they are willing to pursue?
And to engage in a dialogue on that basis in order to be
able to exact what we want through this legislation and I
believe was your intent, which was to deny export markets to
Iran.
Senator Menendez. Well, let me explore this a little bit
more with you. I appreciate your answer, but am not suggesting
that you have a numerical number in mind.
But obviously, from the European Union, which is going to
be zero, to Japan, which is about, what, 30-percent reduction
or a 25-percent reduction?
Ambassador Pascual. The Japanese reduction, the current
reduction is one that is privileged commercial information. But
what is publicly available is that over the last half of last
year, depending on the data source, that seasonally adjusted,
they reduced between 15 and 22 percent.
Senator Menendez. OK. So it seems to me that if the
Japanese, with everything that they faced with the tsunami, the
knocking out of their nuclear power, could in this time period
do what they did that that would be, in my mind, the low mark
for other nations who want to achieve the avoidance of
sanctions. Would you agree with that?
Ambassador Pascual. I think, Senator, that we want to
continue to press for other countries to use these as examples
and be able to present the best case that they can if they
believe that they should be considered.
I think that there are factors that we are going to have to
take into account, including the percentage of their imports
that come from Iran, the impact that they would have on their
national economy, the kind of alternatives that they might have
in the near term to seek other supplies. And on the basis of
that, believe what is the best possible case that we can be
able to work out with these individual countries.
Senator Menendez. Have you already made any determination
about which countries' sanctions will and won't apply at this
point?
Ambassador Pascual. No, sir.
Senator Menendez. Beyond today's announcement?
Ambassador Pascual. The determinations--the only
determinations that have been made are the two that were
announced by the Secretary of State today, the 10 European
countries and Japan.
Senator Menendez. What countries are you most concerned
about in the context of reducing purchases of petroleum from
Iran at this point?
Ambassador Pascual. Sir, there are 23 countries that have
imported crude oil from Iran. Eleven of them were covered
today. Of the remaining 12, I think there is public information
on the overall levels of how much those countries are
importing.
I would rather not go into the question of concern because
what we would really like to see is those countries coming to
us in a way that is open and engaging and shows a coincidence
with the United States and our other partners that we all have
a concern for reducing revenue to Iran and being able to
negotiate and work out with them the best possible circumstance
to reduce their imports.
Senator Menendez. Well, let me just say that as much as I
was complimentary, I think that what was done today was
probably the easy part, to some degree, in terms of determining
these countries. And we applaud them.
But the next tranche is going to be a lot more difficult.
And so, the standards that are set as you move toward the next
tranche of countries that on the list that are not in the
universe that was exempted today is going to be incredibly
important. We are going to be looking to engage with you to get
a sense of the outline of what is an exemption at the end of
the day because that is going to set the standard.
And of course, and I will close on this and wait for the
second round, as the Secretary herself said, when she was
before the full committee, and I asked her if she expected that
significant reduction was every 180 days? And her answer was
``yes.''
So, how we start off is incredibly important in that
regard.
Senator Boxer. Thank you, Senator.
Just we have a vote at 4 p.m., do we not? OK. So we are
going to try to complete this, but I think we will have time
for a second round.
Yes, Senator.
Senator Risch. Yes, Madam Chairman, I will yield back to
you for the second round.
Senator Boxer. Are you sure?
Senator Risch. Positive.
Senator Boxer. OK. I want to ask a question about Libya.
And thank you for taking on this challenge. This is not an easy
time to go over there. I am just very proud that you have
accepted this challenge.
As one who backed the decision to engage in the U.N. no-fly
zone, obviously, there is much to be proud of--the successful
overthrow of Gaddafi and watching the Libyan people try to
build a new government, a civil society from the ground up.
But I want to ask you about something troubling--the
militias that refuse to disarm. Today, there may be up to
200,000 fighters in Libya who are refusing to lay down their
arms despite pleas from the highest levels of the transitional
Libyan Government.
What plans has the Libyan Government outlined to demobilize
militia groups? What steps has it actively taken to implement
those plans? What assistance has the U.S. Government offered?
And just overall, are you concerned that armed militias could
play an intimidating role in the runup to the planned elections
in June?
Mr. Stevens. Thank you, Madam Chairman, for your kind
remarks and for your question.
This is probably the most serious question that Libyan
authorities face right now, the issue of disarming and
demobilizing and reintegrating the militias into Libyan
civilian life. As you said, there are thousands and thousands
of militia members scattered around the country and based in
the capital and Benghazi as well.
The Libyan authorities are grappling with this issue as we
speak. In fact, they already began some months ago in the final
days of the revolution. And the plans that they have put
together have a goal of incorporating some of them into the
security forces, be they the police or the military, and some
of them into civilian life, hopefully, the private sector or
perhaps other civilian government jobs.
In terms of the steps they have taken, they have coalesced
around more than one plan. I have to say it is not as organized
as one might like it to be. But the steps that they are
following involve, first of all, registering the names and
personal data of the militia members, and they have made quite
a bit of progress on this. Long lists of these people, who they
are, where they are from, what skills they have, and where they
would like to fit into Libyan society. So this is the first
step.
And then, beyond that----
Senator Boxer. So, if I can interrupt? So they want to
reintegrate them? Because that is important. Remember in Iraq
what happened? Said no more Baath Party members of the militia,
and they just turned them all away, and that started a whole
what I would say ``civil war.''
So that is very interesting. Thank you for that
information. Continue.
Mr. Stevens. They are very mindful of the Iraq experience,
and in fact, some of them use the phrase ``debaathification''
as something that they would want to avoid. So just to finish
this thought, the next step would be to actually hire portions
of them into the security services and the military and then
direct others into the civilian areas of life, including
training.
Now what are we doing about this? Well, the U.N. is taking
the lead role in organizing the international effort to help in
many of these areas, and one of them is providing advice and
assistance based on other experiences that countries like
ourselves and the EU members have had around the world with
similar situations.
And so, we and the EU and other countries are working with
the U.N. to provide assistance in this area, mainly in the form
of advice.
Senator Boxer. Thank you.
I am just going to give back the rest of my time and call
on Senator Lugar.
Senator Lugar. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
Mr. Walles, Tunisia essentially has not been overlooked by
all the drama going on elsewhere, but there has been an
assumption that democracy and democratic institutions have made
substantial progress. In your opening statement, you
illustrated ways that that is so.
What I am curious about is what the benchmarks for knowing
that, as a matter of fact, these institutions have taken hold?
It was a surprise perhaps to many Americans to begin with that
the Arab Spring began in Tunisia, as this would not have seemed
to have been the logical focal point. But nevertheless, it did
occur, and as the chairman has pointed out, some unusual people
were elected in the legislative process.
What I wonder is just as further observation, many of the
people most celebrated in the Arab Spring were young people
demonstrating in the squares, using Twitter and other forms of
social media. But what seems to have followed is a reimposition
of older people, whether they be religious leaders or elderly
politicians who were not with the previous government. And the
young people do not seem to be playing an increasingly
significant role.
Are we likely to see, therefore, a resumption again someday
of people who feel that they are not getting the fulfillment in
terms of jobs and their lives because even though there has
been a change of regime and supposedly more democracy and human
rights and so forth, somehow or other, they are still coming
out on the short end of it?
Mr. Walles. Thank you, Senator Lugar, for the question.
You know, I have been working the past year on Egypt and a
number of other countries that have been going through this.
Each of these countries is a little bit different, and the
circumstances in each country are different as they proceed.
Tunisia went first, as we noted earlier. And they have had
their election of a constituent assembly. They are now in the
process of drafting a constitution. The constitution, I think,
will be an important benchmark because they are going to have
to grapple with a lot of difficult issues, including the
relation between religion and the state, the role of women,
things like that.
So that is an important thing that we need to watch out
for. Once they have a constitution, they will then elect a
parliament, a permanent parliament. Right now, it is just a
constituent assembly, and then they will also elect a
President. And so, that is another benchmark as well.
In Tunisia, as elsewhere in the Middle East, young people
played an important role in the revolution. I think they will
have to play an important role in the progress to democracy as
well.
There were a lot of reasons why the revolution took place
in Tunisia, why this started in Tunisia, but economic pressure
was an important thing. There is a very high unemployment rate
in Tunisia now, particularly among young people. The
unemployment rate for young people is about 30 percent.
And particularly in the interior areas, which are much more
disadvantaged, there is a very high rate of disaffection among
youth. So that is an area that they are going to have to look
at as well. So it is not just about building these institutions
and the building blocks of the political process. It is also
about building the economic underpinning for that so they can
be a prosperous country as well.
Those are areas that we are going to look to. We have been
supporting. And if confirmed, those are things that I would be
looking at as well.
Senator Lugar. Thank you very much.
I will yield my time to others.
Senator Boxer. Thank you.
We are going to go Senator Menendez, Senator Risch, Senator
Udall.
Senator Menendez. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Ambassador Pascual, just two final questions. There are
energy analysts that are projecting that Iran's oil exports
will fall by as much as 50 percent in the coming months,
meaning that Iran might lose the capacity to export between
800,000 to 1 million barrels per day of oil. Is that estimate
one that you share, or do you have a different one?
Ambassador Pascual. If one looks at the commitments made by
the European Union to eliminate their imports of Iranian crude
oil, if we look at reductions made by Japan, if we look at
other statements that other countries have made, while it is
difficult to predict an exact number, that is in the ballpark
of what countries have been saying that they are going to
reduce in Iranian crude imports.
Senator Menendez. On a slightly different topic, the
Spanish company Repsol has begun to drill in Cuban waters,
despite the fact that Cuba is clearly incapable of mitigating a
leak that would harm U.S. interests in the Caribbean. Does your
office have a role in this project? Have you had conversations
with Repsol on their drilling in Cuba?
Ambassador Pascual. No, sir. My office does not have a role
in this. I have not had conversations with Repsol about this
issue. We have discussed issues with Repsol, particularly to
their imports of Iranian crude oil, which they have actually
now brought to zero.
Senator Menendez. OK. And finally, Mr. Stevens, I have the
families of 32 of 189 Americans who died on Pan Am Flight 103.
And as someone who has been supportive of our efforts in Libya,
but I also believe it is very important, as I told the Prime
Minister when he visited the committee, that in order for Libya
to be able to move forward in its future, it must reconcile
events of the past.
And there are still many of these families who believe that
justice has not been achieved for them. And while their loved
ones can never be replaced, a sense of justice is desired and
is ripe.
So my question is have you met or will you meet with the
Department of Justice about their open Pan Am case before
departing for Tripoli? And is it your understanding of U.S.
policy to continue to actively pursue information about the
bombing and other terror attacks orchestrated by the Gaddafi
regime against U.S. citizens?
Mr. Stevens. Thank you, Senator.
The Pan Am 103 bombing was a horrific act and one that we
cannot forget, and I certainly will keep on my mind when I go
to Libya, if I am confirmed.
I do plan to meet with the Justice Department officials in
the coming days and weeks to discuss their case, which I
understand is ongoing, and I am referring to the criminal case.
And we have, as you know, raised this issue with the interim
Libyan authorities, including during the visit of the Prime
Minister of Libya a week or so ago when you met with him.
So, Senator, absolutely, that would be on the top of my
list of issues----
Senator Menendez. So you will visit with Justice before
going to Tripoli?
Mr. Stevens. Absolutely.
Senator Menendez I appreciate you say you will keep it on
the top of your mind. I would like it to be one of your
priority items in your agenda.
Mr. Stevens. It certainly would be, sir, if I am confirmed.
Senator Menendez. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Madam Chairman.
Senator Boxer. Thank you.
Senator Risch.
Senator Risch. Briefly, we are going to vote in a minute.
So I want Senator Udall to have a chance. But I just have one
question on the import reductions.
I understand that this information is I don't know whether
it is classified or what you call it. But when are we going to
get numbers on this? How can we make a judgment on this without
having actual numbers of what the cutback is going to be?
Ambassador Pascual. Actual data on performance by countries
usually is a couple of months in time lag. What we have seen
already from the European Union is that they have taken legally
binding measures that they cannot execute new contracts. That
is happening already right now.
As a result of that, they are not putting in place any
additional supplies in the supply lines. They have committed to
completely phase out or end existing contracts by July 1.
We have been in regular contact with the European Union to
determine if that has been the case, and indeed, we have seen
from the European Union continued phase-down of all of those
contracts. We have also seen, anecdotally, that as a result of
the measures that have been put in place on prohibitions on
finance and on insurance, especially for ships and for tankers,
that many countries have simply not been able to import Iranian
crude because they can't get ships.
All of these things have actually accelerated the process
of implementation. We are continually analyzing what the
implications might be in terms of the numbers of volumes. But
we, unfortunately, don't actually see that reflected in the
data coming out of countries for a 1-to-2-month time lag.
Senator Risch. How about the Japanese? You spoke of the
European Union.
Ambassador Pascual. The Japanese, as I mentioned, going
forward, the information that they have provided us is
commercially privileged because of the contracts that are
involved. But what is public is what the import trends have
been over the last 6 months of 2011.
And from that, we have looked at different sources of data,
including the International Energy Association, our own
domestic data on actual ship movements, and depending on the
data source, when you look at seasonally adjusted data, they
have reduced imports in the range of 15 to 22 percent.
Senator Risch. What is your level of confidence in that
estimate?
Ambassador Pascual. It is extraordinarily high. It is
recorroborated by every type of data source, both what is
coming out of the country by their customs data as well as
shipping data, which is based on commercially available
information on ship movements, liftings, and unloadings.
Senator Risch. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
I want Senator Udall to have a chance. So I yield my time.
Senator Boxer. Senator Risch, thank you. And thank you for
pressing on that. I think that was very helpful.
Senator Udall, welcome.
Senator Udall. Thank you, Chairman Boxer.
Good to be with you all today.
Mr. Stevens, one of the programs that Gaddafi left behind
was a huge water project known as the Great Manmade River. The
goal of this project was to bring water to arid regions of the
country and improve the agricultural capabilities of the
country. What is the current status of this project?
I know issues have been raised in terms of sustainability
and whether this was a good project or not. Is the United
States supporting the project? What are you doing in terms of
environmental review if you are going to work to move it
forward?
Mr. Stevens. Thank you for the question, Senator.
The Great Manmade River Project, of course, is one of
Gaddafi's legacies. It was actually begun before he came to
power and got its start during oil exploration by an American
company that stumbled on some water out in the desert in
southern Libya.
Since then, it has provided a good portion, if not the
majority of Libya's water supply. Critics say that it is
expensive and that it is a waste, that they are trying to grow
agriculture in areas which they shouldn't. People on the other
side say, well, it is a resource they have, and why shouldn't
they use it?
During my time in Benghazi during the revolution, it
largely continued to work unaffected. There was a brief
interruption at one point, but they since made the repairs that
were necessary, and now it continues to provide significant
water to Libyans, both to cities and to farmers.
We are not providing any sort of assistance at all to this
project. It is strictly funded by the Libyan Government, and
they are using foreign contractors from Korea and Turkey and
other places to help them.
Senator Udall. Thank you.
Ambassador Pascual, one of the issues, and I know you have
heard about it some here from various questions that have come
at you, but is the gas prices and how they are getting out of
hand and how people back home in New Mexico and California and
Indiana, all places across the country, people, you know, why
at this particular time are they spiking?
And I am wondering what, from your standpoint and what
would you do as Assistant Secretary to improve the energy
security of the United States, and what should be the short and
long-term priorities to increase energy stability
internationally?
Ambassador Pascual. Senator, thank you very much.
We had had an opportunity to discuss it, and I think you
put it in exactly the right terms of energy security for the
United States because that is, indeed, what the American people
are looking for.
One of the things that we have underscored throughout this
discussion is that there is no single answer, but it needs a
diversified strategy. That diversified strategy has to include
what we are doing at home, including the measures and the steps
that we have pursued to increase production, where we have had
significant increases in our productions of both oil and gas
over the past 5 years.
It has been important to reduce our consumption and the
kinds of fuel efficiency and other efficiency measures that we
put in place in the United States that have cut consumption.
On the international side, one of the things that we have
done and in my position as Coordinator for International Energy
Affairs that we have been seeking to do is to engage all major
producers and partners to understand what the prospects are for
their production, to understand where there are potential
bottlenecks where we can work together, to engage with energy
companies to understand where we might be able to resolve
issues that allow them to increase their investment and
increase their productive capabilities.
We have spent time working with countries in the Middle
East, and we have had consistent assurances that they will now
respond to market demand. I mentioned yesterday an
extraordinary meeting of the Saudi Cabinet that resulted in a
conclusion that they will continue to produce supplies that
will actually seek to balance out prices on the international
market.
And we have to recognize in the context of this that one of
the things that Iran will do is do everything possible to talk
up insecurity and risk and making statements such as cutting
off the Strait of Hormuz. And when things like that happen, it
creates speculation in the futures markets as well.
And so, it is critical to continue on this all-out front to
provide a sense and perception, but also the reality that
supplies can be available and to do that--and by doing that to
be able to counter the other factors related to the risk and
speculation which could be in the marketplace.
Senator Udall. OK. Thank you.
And one final question for Mr. Walles. The former President
Ben Ali was known to use the domestic security services to
repress dissent in the country. Furthermore, it is believed
that the security services outnumbered the military
considerably, with nearly 200,000 members.
How is the new government dealing with the remnants of the
domestic security services, and what will the United States do
to help improve the human rights situation in Tunisia to ensure
a similar organization is not formed by future governments?
Mr. Walles. Thank you, Senator, for the question.
You are correct that in the past under the Ben Ali regime,
the internal security forces were an instrument of repression
on the population. That is no longer the case, although these
security forces continue to exist. And this is a priority issue
for the new government in terms of how they would reform these
security forces.
Many of the members of the current government, including
the ministers, were imprisoned under Ben Ali or they were
exiled during that period. So they have firsthand experience
with this repression. So they are not, by any means, prepared
to continue that sort of thing.
But in order to make sure it doesn't happen again, they are
going to have to reform the security forces so they are not an
instrument of repression. They are an instrument to provide
security for the people, which is what they should be doing.
In terms of what the United States could do, this is an
area that we have begun to look at a little bit. We have
experience in other places in the Middle East where we have
worked with security forces and helped them reform. I know from
my time in Jerusalem, we began a program like that for the
Palestinians, and that has been a success.
Whether that would apply in the Tunisian case is something
we are going to have to look at. I think the first step will be
for the Tunisian Government to decide what they want to do with
those security forces and how they want to reform them, and
then we can look at whether it would be appropriate for us to
assist in that.
Senator Udall. Thank you very much.
And Chairman Boxer, thank you, and thank you for your
testimony today. I look forward to moving these nominations
forward expeditiously.
Senator Boxer. Senator Udall, thank you so much for coming
here and asking those questions.
And Senator Lugar, thank you so much for chairing this
hearing with me today and for your thoughtful questions.
I want to thank our nominees. They are outstanding. I can't
imagine why we shouldn't act on each and every one of you
expeditiously.
We will leave the record open for 24 hours to accommodate
any of our colleagues who would like to submit written
questions.
And again, we are going to do everything we can to move
forward quickly.
Thank you for making the sacrifices for your country.
And we stand adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 4:05 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
----------
Additional Questions and Answers Submitted for the Record
Responses of John Christopher Stevens to Questions Submitted
by Senator Richard G. Lugar
Question. Please provide detail for the committee on the Libyan
fiscal situation, particularly as it pertains to assets frozen and
unfrozen around the world.
Answer. Libyan authorities recently released the 2012 budget, which
totals 68.5 billion LYD (or $55 billion). According to local press
reports, it is a balanced budget which relies heavily on oil revenues.
In December 2011 the U.N. delisted the assets of the Libyan Central
Bank and the Libyan Arab Foreign Bank. The United States also removed
sanctions on those two government entities, leaving very few assets
frozen under U.S. jurisdiction. Those assets are now available to
Libyan authorities. The Libyan Government has not requested that
sanctions be lifted from the two remaining government entities listed
at the U.N., Libyan Investment Authority (LIA) and the Libyan African
Investment Portfolio (LAIP), pending its reorganization of their
management structures.
Question. You are headed to an Embassy which was greatly damaged in
the revolution. Please describe the Department's plans for rebuilding
your Embassy and facilities.
Has the Government of Libya made any offers to assist in the
reconstruction?
What money has been designated and what planning has been
done by OBO?
What is the plan for consulates, if any?
Answer. Due to the level of destruction at the former Embassy
compound, the Department has established an Interim Embassy until such
time as a New Embassy Compound can be built.
At this time, the Government of Libya has not specifically offered
to assist in the reconstruction of the U.S. Embassy but is engaged with
the Department of State on the issue of land acquisition as we conduct
initial site searches for the New Embassy Compound.
OBO is working closely with Department offices and other agencies
that will be working in the Interim Embassy to ensure that the facility
adequately meets security and operational needs of all tenants.
Evaluation teams have traveled to Libya to review existing facilities
to ensure proper planning and usage of the facilities.
Funding for building the Interim Embassy will come from all
agencies that will make use of the facility. Within the Department, the
Bureau of Resource Management is fully aware of the financial needs
associated with the Interim Embassy.
Currently, the Department is staffing a small office in Benghazi,
Libya, that is responsible for monitoring the pulse of political action
in eastern Libya. However, once national elections have taken place,
the Department will reassess its utility.
Question. Will assignments for Tripoli staff be conducted in a
normal fashion, or are they being given shortened assignments and
special incentive packages?
Answer. There is a temporary incentive package for personnel
assigned to Tripoli now and in the 2012 summer and winter 2012/2013
cycles. The Department will return to a 2-year tour of duty when
security and living conditions normalize.
Embassy Tripoli is operating in extremely difficult conditions.
U.S. Government employees are housed on a secure compound, two to four
persons per bedroom and up to four people per bathroom depending on the
number of personnel. All movements off-compound must be coordinated
with a security package. Due to the limited living space, employees are
not permitted to take unaccompanied baggage, household effects,
consumables, or personal vehicles to post.
The incentives package entails 1-year assignments, with 35 percent
hardship pay, 25 percent danger pay, and the provision of two Rest and
Recuperation (R&R) trips or one R&R and two Regional Rest Breaks (RRB).
This package is being reevaluated as the situation in Tripoli
changes and will be adjusted based on the overall security, stability,
and openness of the situation.
Question. Gas prices for many Americans currently top $4 per gallon
and worldwide the price of a barrel of oil is $107. You stated in the
hearing that Libya expected to be back to prewar levels of oil
production by the end of the year, but would you provide more details
on the status of the Libyan production and export capacity? Are
American firms back fully, and if not, what reasons are they expressing
to you?
Answer. Even though the United States imports little oil from
Libya, restoring Libya's participation in the global oil market will
have the effect of stabilizing supplies, which is important for our
ability to access supplies at an affordable price--a key element of our
energy security policy. Libya is making significant progress in
restoring output to its precrisis oil production level of about 1.6
million barrels per day and is currently producing over 1.4 million
barrels per day, according to the Libyan authorities.
Most of the U.S. firms involved in production in Libya have
reopened their offices in Tripoli and are taking steps to resume normal
operations. U.S. firms have identified both security and logistical
constraints in their meetings with us and we have engaged with the
Libyan authorities on these issues.
Question. If you were addressing American businessmen, what would
you want to tell them about opportunities in Libya? Do you expect to
have a Senior Commercial Officer from the Department of Commerce as a
member of your Country Team to assist American companies interested in
investing in Libya?
Answer. As Ambassador Cretz has so often stated--and the Libyans
have repeated publicly--Libya is now ``open for business.'' U.S.
Embassy Tripoli, in coordination with the Department of State's Bureau
for Economic and Business Affairs, established a series of sector-
specific teleconferences which provide a ``direct line'' for American
companies to the U.S. Ambassador. The Embassy has completed six sector-
specific teleconferences to assist the American private sector identify
commercial opportunities in Libya. These teleconferences have focused
on sectors including infrastructure, security and health care, and have
had upward of 100 participants per call. This program has been such a
success that Secretary Clinton has asked the Department of State to
expand it worldwide. If confirmed, I will continue the program in
Libya, in order to keep U.S. companies abreast of all commercial
opportunities emerging with Libya's political and economic transition.
The demand by the U.S. private sector for commercial opportunities
in Libya is big, and it's only getting bigger. There is also tremendous
demand in Libya for goods and services produced by U.S. companies.
Broadly, there is great need for infrastructure, information and
communications technology, oil and gas services, power generation,
transportation products, and infrastructure, including rail.
I refer you to the Department of Commerce for details on their
staffing plans in Libya and elsewhere. If confirmed, I certainly would
want Department of Commerce representation in the Country Team at
Embassy Tripoli.
Question. What, if any, role will U.S. assistance play in the
security sector reform elements you discussed in the hearing?
Answer. The United States will continue to play a supporting role
to the transitional Government of Libya (GOL) in security sector
reform. We will work with the U.N. Support Mission in Libya (UNSMIL)
and international partners to coordinate our assistance, and if
confirmed, I will assist in these efforts.
Libya's Ministry of Defense (MOD), Ministry of Interior (MOI),
Ministry of Justice (MOJ), and intelligence services are being
reconstituted in the wake of the revolution. Currently, there is
minimal absorptive capacity within the GOL for robust security sector
assistance. The greatest need is for technical expertise to help the
GOL shape its security apparatus and to assist GOL efforts to disarm,
demobilize, and reintegrate (DDR) revolutionary fighters.
UNSMIL and our international partners have taken the lead in
assisting the GOL to implement a DDR process. UNSMIL is diligently
working to facilitate GOL security sector coordination through the
creation of a Libyan national security staff. The U.K. has embedded a
technical expert in the Libyan MOI to assist in standing up a GOL
police force. Jordan has signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU)
with the MOI to train 10,000 new police cadets in basic police
curriculum. The Libyan MOD has launched an assistance coordination
mechanism to keep track of assistance to the armed forces, avoid
duplication and identify gaps. The French have conducted joint maritime
training with the Libyan Navy. Qatar and the UAE have committed to MOD
assistance, but have not had any real engagement or response to date.
UNSMIL is also working closely with the GOL to coordinate the DDR
process. The GOL and UNSMIL report that Libya's Warrior Affairs
Committee has registered 148,000 fighters to date. Assisted by the
international community, the GOL has announced a 3-year plan to
integrate 25,000 revolutionaries into the regular military and 25,000
into the police forces. The remaining revolutionary forces will be
reintegrated into civilian life through initiatives to develop small
and medium business enterprises, or through new educational and
training opportunities.
We aim to support these efforts by deploying targeted security
sector assistance that will focus on bolstering GOL capacity and
leveraging international assistance. In April, the Department's Export
Control and Related Border Security (EXBS) program will fund the
deployment of a team from the Bureau of International Security and
Nonproliferation, Office of Export Control Cooperation, and the
Department of Homeland Security, Customs and Border Protection, to
conduct a 1-week consultation and basic enforcement training overview
for Libyan MOI, MOD, and Customs Officials who will be leading the
efforts to develop and integrate Libya's border security forces. We
introduced the Defense Institution Reform Initiative (DIRI) program to
Libyan Prime Minister El-Keib during his March 2012 visit. If accepted
by the GOL, DIRI will provide a team of experts to advise the MOD on
rightsizing its security forces and integrate rebel fighters into the
Libyan armed forces.
Over the summer, the Anti-Terrorism Assistance (ATA) program will
send an assessment team to evaluate the current capacity of Libyan law
enforcement units that perform counterterrorism functions and to
examine whether and how we can begin offering ATA training in the
coming year.
In late March, we will deploy a security sector transition
coordinator to U.S.
Embassy Tripoli who will coordinate and report on these border security
and MOI training efforts. We are also using the congressionally
notified Presidential Drawdown authority to provide nonlethal personal
equipment to the MOD as it forms a national military capable of
providing protection to the civilians and civilian populated areas
within Libya.
Additionally, funding from the FY 2011 Middle East Response Fund
(MERF) will be used to support a DDR advisor in Tripoli whose focus
will be on reintegrating militias into civilian life through advising
the GOL on creating employment and education opportunities for former
militia fighters.
Question. Libya faces significant needs as it develops its civil
society in this period of transition. The United States is prepared to
assist with training and technical assistance. With oil production at
1.4 million barrels per day and expected to increase--to what degree is
Libyan able to use its own national assets to bear the costs of this
development.
Answer. We do not have detailed information on the exact
expenditures of the Libyan Government in various sectors, including in
civil society. We, however, do have evidence that the government has
taken steps to ensure it has funds to meet the country's needs
including by working to get the production of oil back to prewar
levels. The government has also passed a budget of $55 billion, helping
to ensure that ministries can pursue reform, renovation, and capacity-
building projects.
The Libyans have repeatedly stated they want to pay for the
reconstruction and reform of their country and promote civil society.
In the near term, however, Libya is spending the majority of its
resources on ensuring that salaries are being paid and that basic
services are provided to the Libyan people. The United States and the
international community are currently filling short-term gaps in
priority sectors and funding actors that we believe should receive
assistance independent of the government, including certain civil
society groups and the media.
______
Responses of Jacob Walles to Questions Submitted
by Senator Richard G. Lugar
Question. What, if any, have been the concrete results of U.S.
transition support programs in Tunisia to date? How should the U.S.
Government shape its future foreign aid programs in terms of balancing
objectives related to security, democracy, the economy, and regional
policy? How, if at all, can or should the United States assist with
security sector reform?
Answer. The United States is committed to supporting Tunisia's
transition to democracy and helping to establish a foundation for
political stability and economic prosperity. Since the revolution, we
have committed approximately $197 million from FY 2010 and FY 2011
resources to support Tunisia's transition.
Securing a successful transition to democracy in Tunisia is a key
policy priority for the United States, the importance of which cannot
be overstated. A successful Tunisia will set a clear example for other
democratic transitions underway in the Middle East and North Africa.
Success will require progress in all four areas--security, democracy,
economy, and regional policy. Following the revolution, U.S. efforts
focused heavily on supporting Tunisia's political transition,
especially in the runup to the October 2011 Constituent Assembly
elections. We are now seeking to provide critical support needed to
stabilize the economy and promote broad-based economic growth. We are
also bolstering our efforts to assist Tunisia by promoting regional
stability, countering terrorism, preventing the proliferation of
illicit items, building law enforcement investigative capabilities, and
enhancing border security efforts. Moving forward, we will continue to
work with the Tunisian Government to build its capacity, to support
civil society as they participate constructively in national political
debate, and to support the Tunisian military and civilian security
forces' efforts to improve the rule of law, promote regional security,
and respect the rights of the Tunisian people.
Following the revolution, initial U.S. Government assistance
efforts focused heavily on supporting Tunisia's political transition
and election preparations. This included technical assistance to the
Independent Elections Committee (IEC). We also supported voter
education, facilitated political party outreach to women and youth, and
helped to expand opportunities for women and youth to run for office
and play leadership roles. The Tunisian elections were fair, credible,
and transparent.
Since then, we are developing a robust economic assistance package
that includes programs designed to ease the fiscal strain on the
Government of Tunisia while encouraging private sector investment and
market-oriented reforms. In this regard:
We are finalizing with the Government of Tunisia a loan
guarantee program to support its economic stabilization and
economic reform goals.
Tunisia will benefit from a Millennium Challenge Corporation
(MCC) Threshold Program, which will support policy reform that
can lead to faster growth and generate employment.
We intend to capitalize a U.S.-Tunisian Enterprise Fund with
an initial $20 million to help Tunisians launch small and
medium enterprises that will be the engines of long-term
opportunity.
The Peace Corps will return to Tunisia this year to provide
English language training and programs to help prepare Tunisian
students and professionals for future employment, build local
capacity, and foster citizenship awareness at the grassroots
level.
USAID will implement an Internet Communication and
Technology (ICT) sector development program. We are also
supporting an OPIC franchising facility in Tunisia, as well as
programs focused on developing entrepreneurship and
employability skills.
Our security assistance for Tunisia includes $17.5m in FMF and
$1.854m in IMET in FY12. Our bilateral military relationship, which has
always been good, has grown stronger in the days since the revolution.
We have a regular high-level bilateral dialogue with the Tunisian
military, the Joint Military Commission, during which we share our
respective regional security priorities, assess the Tunisian military's
needs as they support Tunisia's territorial integrity, and discuss ways
to support those needs to serve our mutual bilateral interests.
Security sector reform is also an important priority for the
Government of Tunisia. Prior to the revolution, the Ministry of
Interior was a key player in the regime's oppressive rule. The current
government is aware of that legacy and wants to change it. Tunisia has
a new Minister of Interior, a former political prisoner of the Ben Ali
regime, who is untainted by collaboration with the former regime. He
will lead Tunisia's reform efforts in this critical sector.
The United States stands ready to respond to Tunisian requests for
support in this area. A ready and capable police force that respects
human rights and adheres to the rule of law is critical to the success
of a democratic country.
If confirmed as Ambassador, I would work actively to maintain
programs that address all of these objectives--security, democracy,
economy, and regional policy--in a balanced way.
Question. How would you evaluate al-Nahda's economic policy
platform? To what extent does the coalition government share a common
view of economic policy priorities and how to approach them? What steps
are being taken to promote economic growth and job creation, and to
address socio-economic grievances and regional economic disparities?
Answer. Even prior to the current government's assumption of
office, al-Nahda reiterated its commitment to market-oriented economic
growth.
Further, all political parties currently represented in government
recognize Tunisia's urgent need to attract investment and create jobs.
These are Tunisia's top two economic priorities today, and the parties
are united in their pursuit of those goals.
The coalition partners are working together to develop the details
of a common approach to these challenges, and each party has affirmed
the need for greater accountability, transparency and foundational
reform to make Tunisia's economy more vibrant, inclusive, and
responsive to the global market. They are aggressively courting foreign
direct investment. And they are working together to pass a new budget
to facilitate development in previously marginalized regions of the
country in order to close the developmental divide.
Question. The Peace Corps can be a powerful asset in promoting U.S.
interests and values, particularly among Tunisia's more vulnerable
populations in the interior of the country. How do you intend to
leverage the presence of Peace Corps Volunteers in Tunisia to good
effect?
Answer. The Peace Corps represents an important opportunity to
enhance people-to-people ties between Tunisia and the United States. As
it does in other countries, the Peace Corps will work with the Tunisian
Government to determine programming, priorities, and volunteer site
placement.
If confirmed as Ambassador, I will support the Peace Corps in its
discussions with its Tunisian partners to ensure that Peace Corps
Volunteers reach the most vulnerable populations in the south and
interior of the country, and are meeting the needs of the communities
in which they serve.
______
Responses of Christopher Stevens to Questions Submitted
by Senator Barbara Boxer
Question. According to the United Nations, as many as 6,000
detainees--about three quarters of those arrested during Libya's civil
war--continue to be held in prison facilities run by individual militia
groups operating outside the control of the government.
International human rights groups including Amnesty International
and Human Rights Watch have provided deeply disturbing evidence of what
appears to be widespread abuse.
If confirmed, how will you work to promote the humane
treatment of prisoners in Libya?
Answer. I share your concern regarding continuing reports of
arbitrary detention and prisoner abuse. I, too, find these reports
deeply troubling and, if confirmed, I would continue to raise the issue
at the highest levels of the interim Government of Libya, as I
understand Ambassador Cretz and his team are currently doing.
Ambassador Cretz and his team have stressed the importance that the
United States places on protecting human rights and the specific need
for the Government of Libya to get all detainees and detention
facilities under central government control as soon as possible. Our
Embassy has also joined with other like-minded embassies and
multilateral organizations to press these points, a practice that I
would continue if confirmed.
The interim Libyan Government has made positive statements
regarding its respect for human rights, condemnation of torture, and
commitment to consolidating control over militias and detention
centers, including informal sites where most allegations of
mistreatment originate. We recognize that this will be an important
step in ensuring humane treatment and in establishing registration and
review processes in accordance with international standards, but the
government needs to go further.
If confirmed, I would continue the close contact with the Ministry
of Justice that Ambassador Cretz and his team have maintained. I would
continue to emphasize that the United States stands ready to assist
Libya as it seeks to develop new Libyan judicial and corrections
systems that meet international standards by ensuring due process and
protecting basic human dignity.
I would also continue to promote continued Libyan Government
collaboration with the International Committee of the Red Cross, the
Office of the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees, and the
International Organization for Migration which can provide technical
assistance on protection of migrants and refugees as well as visit
detainees, as our Embassy in Tripoli is already doing.
Question. In November 2011 I held a joint Foreign Relations
subcommittee hearing with my colleague Senator Casey to examine the
role of women in the Arab Spring with a specific focus on Egypt,
Tunisia, and Libya.
If confirmed, will you commit to working to help ensure that
women play a strong, meaningful role in in the political
process in Libya and that their rights are fully protected?
Answer. Libyan women played a vital role in the 2011 civil uprising
and revolution that toppled Moammar Qadhafi. During my time as the
Special Envoy to the Transitional National Council in Benghazi last
year, I had the privilege to meet and work with many inspirational
Libyan women supporting the cause of the people. If confirmed, I am
committed to ensuring that women are encouraged and supported to play a
strong, meaningful role in the political process in Libya and that
their rights are fully protected in law and in practice.
After 42 years of Qadhafi's dictatorship, Libyans have very limited
experience with democracy and an open political process. Most
candidates, both men and women, have no experience in the democratic
realm and the challenge for the Libyan people will be to create a
national dialogue in which all of Libya's diverse population can
participate. A number of Libyan women activists are already urging
strong women's participation in decisionmaking bodies and speaking out
about the importance of electing women in the June elections. Under the
electoral law passed in February of this year, 80 of the 200 delegates
to the interim National Congress will be elected from lists submitted
by political parties. Party lists are required to alternate between
male and female candidates, a process known as the ``zipper quota.''
Observers hope that the law will lead to increased participation by
women in the government. A similar system was used in Tunisia and,
based on that experience, some electoral experts expect that around 10-
15 percent of the Parliament will be comprised of Libyan women. This is
still far lower than women's percentage of the population but is a
start.
Numerous women's groups and women-led organizations have emerged in
Tripoli, Benghazi, and outlying areas since the beginning of the
revolution. A few of these organizations, most of which are led by
women who have management experience working for international
corporations or significant experience outside Libya, have successfully
initiated or completed projects that include a women's rights march to
advocate at the Prime Minister's office, national conferences for youth
and women, a reconciliation campaign, the establishment of women's
centers and holding fundraising events. Many of the women's
organizations are loosely constituted groups with limited
organizational capacity to plan or implement activities beyond charity
functions but have expressed a desire to expand their activities. Both
experienced and inexperienced organizations have begun approaching our
Embassy in Tripoli for assistance with conferences to inform women
about their rights and prospective roles in elections, constitutional
development, civil society, and the economy.
I believe that the United States can help to provide targeted
amounts of technical assistance to help these organizations build up
their capabilities in these nascent stages, as we are already doing
through USAID's Office of Transition Initiatives (OTI) and the Middle
East Partnership Initiative (MEPI). I understand that the United States
is one of the only donors currently providing support to these local
grassroots women's organizations and, if confirmed, it's a priority I
will continue to emphasize.
USAID/OTI has already been providing support to women-led
organizations as well as others that have significant female
participation. USAID/OTI is currently planning initiatives such as:
holding a national workshop on women in elections that will train women
to educate people in their home communities about the importance of
having female representation in the constituent assembly and
constitutional commission; developing a toolkit of materials to be used
in multiple training opportunities; and replicating a successful
women's center that aims to facilitate engagement among women about how
they can engage in political life. In addition to these new activities
being developed, as mentioned above, USAID/OTI has already funded
women's NGOs for the following projects: a constitutional workshop for
government, political, and civil society leaders; a public awareness
campaign to promote reconciliation, unity, and forgiveness as a means
to move the nation toward a peaceful transition; and a youth training
session that included a field visit to a local women's NGO.
MEPI programs in the sphere of women's empowerment include: a
program to help Libyan businesswomen and women entrepreneurs connect
with their counterparts throughout the region; a National Democratic
Institute-led candidate training for a group of aspiring women
politicians; and a small grants and capacity-building program for
several small women-led or women-focused civil society organizations.
These organizations are working to combat discrimination against women,
encourage the participation of Libyan housewives in the political
process, support the advocacy efforts of women with disabilities and
establish a women's training center.
I applaud and support all of these programs and, if confirmed,
would like to continue similar programming in support of women's
political participation and the protection of women's rights in the new
Libya.
______
Responses of Jacob Walles to Questions Submitted
by Senator Barbara Boxer
Question. As you know, the leaders of Tunisia's ruling al-Nahda
Party have stated that they intend to uphold the country's progressive
laws regarding women.
However, many remain concerned about the future of women's rights
in Tunisia, particularly in light of growing calls by hard-liners for
an Islamic State.
Do you believe that al-Nahda will uphold and protect women's
rights? Or are you concerned that they could make modifications
to the country's laws to appease more hard-line elements?
If confirmed, will you commit to working with Tunisia's
leaders to encourage the promotion of women's rights in the
country's new constitution, and to convey the message that
women's rights are critical to security and prosperity in
Tunisia?
Answer. As you note, the leaders of the an-Nahda Party have
affirmed their intention to uphold and protect the rights Tunisian
women are afforded under that country's constitution, as have other
parties represented in Tunisia's current government.
We believe that the majority of Tunisians support the rights
Tunisian women enjoy. Those rights have long been a source of
justifiable pride, and they are essential to Tunisia's future political
and economic success.
Equality under the law is a core tenet of our foreign policy. If
confirmed, I will strongly convey the message that the advancement of
women's rights and political and economic participation are critical to
Tunisia's democracy and prosperity, and that these rights should
continue to be enshrined in the Tunisian Constitution.
Question. As you may know, Tunisia made gains regarding freedom of
the press following the ouster of longtime Tunisian President Zine El
Abedine Ben Ali. In fact, Tunisia rose 30 slots--from 164th to 134th--
on the Reporters without Borders ``2012 Press Freedom Index.''
However, significant problems remain.
1. Reporters without Borders has documented a number of
attacks by Tunisian police on independent journalists.
2. A television station executive is facing trial and
possible jail time for screening the award-winning French film
Persepolis.
3. And recently, the government provoked controversy when it
appointed two individuals associated with the Ben Ali regime to
senior posts in the State media.
Are you concerned about these developments?
If confirmed, will you commit to working to promote freedom
of the press in Tunisia?
Answer. Freedom of the press is an important universal value that
must be respected in order for Tunisia's transition to democracy to
succeed. I understand that our Embassy has already registered with the
highest levels of the Government of Tunisia our concern about these
cases. Tunisia is making progress in its democratic transition, but
such transitions are often difficult and they take time.
If confirmed, I will continue to underscore our belief that freedom
of expression is a fundamental human right and key to Tunisia's
democratic success.
I will also continue our efforts to invest in Tunisia's capacity to
responsibly exercise that freedom, including through training Tunisian
journalists on the fundamentals of responsible, fact-based reporting.
______
Response of Carlos Pascual to Question Submitted
by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin
Question. The SEC will soon issue rules to implement section 1504
of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. How
will you use the example set by the United States on this issue to
further encourage transparency in the extractive sector in other
countries? In particular, in your new role, will you place a priority
on encouraging EU progress on their similar legislation? Also, will you
place a priority on encouraging an extractives transparency agenda
within the G20 and other forums? Please describe your plans and
strategy on this issue.
Answer. As Secretary Clinton underscored in recent testimony, the
State Department will use its full diplomatic capabilities to encourage
transparency in extractive industries around the world. Once the SEC
issues the rules to implement section 1504, if confirmed, we will help
educate other nations about the changes in U.S. law and explain how the
new rules may affect countries and companies around the globe. Already
we have taken advantage of excellent materials written by
nongovernmental organizations on section 1504 and shared them with the
EU and many countries with extractive industries in order to sensitize
them to the legislation, its scope and importance. When the SEC's rules
are issued, we will consult with these transparency organizations and
draw on their materials and other publicly available information. We
will use our extensive network of embassies to educate host governments
and corporations about the existence and application of the Wall Street
Reform and Consumer Protection Act. In addition, if confirmed, I will
work through our posts overseas to help host governments create the
necessary conditions for companies listed in the United States to be
compliant with U.S. law.
The State Department has engaged senior European Union officials on
the Dodd-Frank Act since September 2011 in anticipation of SEC rules.
EU representatives and parliamentarians are well aware of our interest
in creating a common platform for transparency. With issuance of SEC
rules, ENR proposes to engage EU officials on compatibility with
possible EU regulations. Similarly, we will work with the G20 to
advance the principles in Dodd-Frank, building on the strong
anticorruption platform already created in the G20. The Seoul G20 in
2010 set up an Anticorruption Working Group that provides an excellent
vehicle to seek action by others comparable to Dodd-Frank.
Already, the 2010 G20 Seoul Anticorruption Action Plan commits
countries ``to promote integrity, transparency, accountability and the
prevention of corruption, in the public sector, including in the
management of public finances'' and to combat corruption in specific
sectors. We will use the G20 Anticorruption Working Group to drill down
to actionable steps, including in the critical areas of transparency
and integrity in public procurement, fiscal transparency, adoption and
enforcement of laws criminalizing foreign bribery, and public integrity
measures.
Our promotion of transparency around the world is supported by the
example we set here at home. In addition to Dodd-Frank, the President
recently announced our intention to implement the Extractive Industries
Transparency Initiative in the United States. This international effort
results in disclosure by companies of payments they make to
governments, and by governments of payments they receive from
companies. As the United States moves to become an EITI candidate
country itself, we will look to encourage other members of the G20 to
join the EITI as well. Moreover, through the Open Government
Partnership (OGP), we are urging many of the more than 40 countries now
developing national action plans to include EITI or other extractive
industry transparency efforts in their plans.
NOMINATIONS OF TRACEY ANN JACOBSON, RICHARD B. NORLAND, KENNETH MERTEN,
MARK A. PEKALA, AND JEFFREY D. LEVINE
----------
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 21, 2012
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Foreign Relations,
Washington, DC.
----------
Hon. Tracey Ann Jacobson, of the District of Columbia, to be
Ambassador to the Republic of Kosovo
Hon. Richard B. Norland, of Iowa, to be Ambassador to Georgia
Hon. Kenneth Merten, of Virginia, to be Ambassador to the
Republic of Croatia
Mark A. Pekala, of Maryland, to be Ambassador to the Republic
of Latvia
Jeffrey D. Levine, of California, to be Ambassador to the
Republic of Estonia
----------
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:02 a.m., in
room SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Jeanne
Shaheen, presiding.
Present: Senators Shaheen, Cardin, Lugar, and Barrasso.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JEANNE SHAHEEN,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW HAMPSHIRE
Senator Shaheen. Good morning, everyone. My mike does work.
I am delighted to welcome everyone here to the Senate Foreign
Relations Committee hearing to consider the nominations of
Tracey Ann Jacobson to be Ambassador to the Republic of Kosovo;
Richard Norland to be Ambassador to Georgia; Kenneth Merten to
be Ambassador to the Republic of Croatia; Mark Pekala to be
Ambassador to the Republic of Latvia; and, Jeffrey Levine to be
Ambassador to the Republic of Estonia.
I am the person conducting this hearing this morning,
because I chair the European Affairs Subcommittee, and I am
very honored to have the ranking member of the full Foreign
Relations Committee, Senator Dick Lugar, here as part of this
hearing. You are all career diplomats, so you know that usually
there are not a lot of Senators who come to these hearings, and
that that is not a bad thing. [Laughter.]
So we're delighted to be here with all of you today.
Our nominees have been appointed to take on critical
ambassadorial positions in countries throughout Europe and the
Caucasus. Each of these posts will be important in
strengthening U.S. influence and safeguarding American
interests.
I want to congratulate all of you on your nominations and
welcome you and your families here today as we discuss the
challenges and opportunities that you may face as you take on
these new
responsibilities.
Over the last 6 decades, the transatlantic community has
committed itself to building the Europe that is whole, free,
and at peace. The countries represented here today reflect the
progress that we have made and the force for reform that
institutions like NATO and the European Union have played over
the last half century.
However, as we will no doubt hear from our witnesses, the
job is far from done, and we still have many challenges before
us.
Latvia and Estonia are relatively young but active and
influential members of NATO and the EU. As Baltic countries,
they are a testament to the success of the West's open-door
policies and have led the charge among other post-Soviet states
to promote democracy and Euro-Atlantic integration.
In addition, Estonia has recently met its NATO commitments
to spend 2 percent of its GDP on defense, an impressive feat
considering that only three of the 28 NATO countries have met
that commitment in 2011.
Croatia, already a member of NATO, is slated to become the
28th member of the EU next summer. Though it continues to
struggle with economic difficulties and some corruption at
home, Croatia stands as a model for the rest of the countries
of the Western Balkans. And I hope that it will maintain its
leadership in the region and continue to play a positive role
in moving Serbia, Kosovo, Bosnia, and others toward EU
integration.
Since the Rose Revolution in 2003, Georgia has made
tremendous progress on its reform agenda and today seeks full
Euro-Atlantic integration.
It is punching well above its weight, to use a boxing term,
as a NATO partner country in Afghanistan and will soon be the
largest per capita contributing nation in that fight.
Georgia deserves to see some forward movement on its
membership aspirations at the upcoming NATO summit in Chicago.
Still, we must continue to emphasize the importance of
Georgia continuing down the path of democratic reform, and the
upcoming elections will be a critical test for the
sustainability of Georgia's democratic future.
Kosovo faces many daunting challenges beyond its struggle
for international recognition, including unemployment, weak
rule of law, corruption, and challenging relations with its
neighbor Serbia.
Both Kosovo and Serbia have made some difficult yet
necessary decisions to engage each other in technical dialogue
over the last year. The progress made under the EU-sponsored
talks allowed both countries to move further down the path to
future EU membership earlier this year, a welcome development
after some violence in northern Kosovo last summer.
Our diplomats working closely with our European colleagues
must do more to creatively engage on the Serbia-Kosovo issue
and work to find a long-term solution to the challenge of
northern Kosovo.
Again, I want to thank each of you for your willingness to
take on these important and challenging posts, and I will just
introduce each of you briefly, and then I'll turn it over to
you for your testimony.
First today we have Ambassador Tracey Ann Jacobson, who has
been nominated to be the U.S. Ambassador to Kosovo. Ambassador
Jacobson is the Deputy Director of the Foreign Service
Institute. Prior to her tenure there, she served as U.S.
Ambassador to both Tajikistan and Turkmenistan.
Next we have Ambassador Richard Norland, our nominee for
the post in Georgia. Ambassador Norland currently serves as the
international affairs adviser and deputy commandant at the
National War College and was previously the U.S. Ambassador to
Uzbekistan.
We also have Ambassador Kenneth Merten, the President's
choice to be the Ambassador to Croatia. Ambassador Merten has a
distinguished 25-year career in the Foreign Service and has
served throughout Europe, in Central and South America, and is
currently our Ambassador to Haiti.
Mr. Mark Pekala has been nominated to take up the post in
Latvia. Mark is currently a director in the Bureau of Human
Resources and has served previously as the deputy chief of
mission in France and the Deputy Assistant Secretary of State
for Europe. This will be Mr. Pekala's first ambassadorial
posting.
And finally, we have Jeffrey Levine, who has been nominated
to be the U.S. Ambassador to Estonia. Mr. Levine has served in
a number of countries throughout Europe and is currently the
Director of Recruitment, Examination, and Employment at the
State Department. This will be his first ambassadorial posting
as well.
Again, thank you all for being here, for your willingness
to serve, and I hope that you will feel free to introduce any
family or friends who may be here with you this morning.
Ambassador Jacobson.
STATEMENT OF HON. TRACEY ANN JACOBSON, OF THE DISTRICT OF
COLUMBIA, TO BE AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF KOSOVO
Ambassador Jacobson. Thank you. I would like to introduce
the Kosovo desk officer, Wendy Brafman, and my very good
friend, Susan Bauer, from State, Dave Recker from Justice, and
Lt. Zac Schneidt from the Marines, and in absentia, my partner,
David Baugh, who serves at the British Embassy in Kabul.
Madam Chairwoman, Senator Lugar, members of the committee,
I am honored to appear before you as President Obama's nominee
to be the third U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of Kosovo.
I have had the privilege of serving twice as U.S.
Ambassador to Turkmenistan and Tajikistan, where my teams and I
worked successfully on a range of issues, including the
promotion of democracy and human rights, economic development,
and security cooperation. I believe these and other experiences
have prepared me well to be the chief of mission in Kosovo.
This administration, as the one before it, has consistently
made clear its commitment to Kosovo's sovereignty, territorial
integrity, and independence, and its integration into regional
and international institutions. This commitment will be the
guiding principle of my mission as well, if confirmed.
After 4 years of independence, Kosovo has come a long way.
It is now recognized by 87 countries and is a member of the
World Bank and International Monetary Fund. It is likely to
meet another benchmark this year, with the end of supervised
independence and the closure of the International Civilian
Office.
The goal of completing the integration of the Balkans into
a Europe whole, free, and at peace has been an overarching,
nonpartisan approach by successive U.S. Governments since the
1990s. Euro-Atlantic integration remains a top policy priority
in our relationship with Kosovo as with all its neighbors,
because this will promote necessary domestic reform and
regional cooperation.
Kosovo has made several concrete steps toward this future
recently. In January, Kosovo and its partners welcomed the
European Commission's intention to launch a visa liberalization
dialogue. And in March, it welcomed the decision to launch a
feasibility study for a stabilization and association
agreement.
The EU consensus decisions in December of last year and
February of this year mean that all members of the European
Union, even those that have not recognized Kosovo's
independence, see that its progress of the European path is
good for the region and good for Europe as a whole.
Kosovo's relations with its neighbors, in particular
Serbia, are key to regional stability and cooperation. That is
why the United States has fully backed the ongoing EU-sponsored
dialogue between Serbia and Kosovo, which has resulted in
significant achievement since it was launched last March.
The two sides have been able to conclude a series of
agreements that will improve the daily lives of citizens in
both countries, to include the restoration of two-way trade,
mutual recognition of university diplomas, and free movement
across each other's borders.
The political leadership in Kosovo has shown maturity and
foresight in taking some tough decisions to reach these
agreements, which were not without their domestic critics.
I believe this political will is also motivated by an
understanding that Serbia's progress on its European path is
good for Kosovo, too.
The United States has been able to consistently support
Kosovo every step of the way, as it has demonstrated a forward-
looking approach. And if confirmed, I will ensure that we
continue to support Kosovo's positive development.
Kosovo faces a daunting agenda with many pressing reform
priorities. The United States must continue to focus on
Kosovo's progress as a multiethnic democracy, ensuring respect
for the rights of all of its communities--Kosovo Serbs, Roma,
and others--and protection and preservation of their cultural
and religious heritage.
Kosovo's reform agenda also includes tackling corruption,
cementing the rule of law, further developing the energy
sector, removing barriers to business and investment, and
strengthening public administration to improve governance.
NATO's Kosovo Force, KFOR, remains a relevant and crucial
presence in Kosovo, as it helps to maintain, in accordance with
its mandate, a safe and secure environment throughout the
country. Its role has been particularly challenging in northern
Kosovo, where tensions have run high and where hard-line Serb
elements continue to deny Kosovo's authority and full freedom
of movement to the international community.
On occasion, these tensions have escalated into violence,
resulting in injuries to Kosovo troops, including Americans.
Given this situation, it is likely that KFOR staffing will
remain at current levels for the foreseeable future.
A solution to the situation in the north and normalization
of relations requires a durable modus vivendi that respects
Kosovo's sovereignty, takes into account the opinions of the
citizens of the north, and allows both Serbia and Kosovo to
make progress on their respective European paths.
Madam Chairwoman, if confirmed, I will work with you,
members of this committee and Congress, the Government and
people of Kosovo, our European allies, the EU Rule of Law
Mission, NATO, the OSCE, and the U.N., as well as our regional
partners, to meet our shared goal of building a more stable,
democratic, peaceful, and prosperous Balkan region.
I would like to emphasize, as I've done before this
committee before, that, if confirmed, I will not only be
President Obama's representative, but also the leader of an
interagency team, and I will take seriously my obligation to
ensure a positive, productive, and safe environment for the
people of my mission.
Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today,
and I look forward to answering any questions you may have.
[The prepared statement of Ambassador Jacobson follows:]
Prepared Statement of Tracey Ann Jacobson
Madam Chairman, members of the committee, I am honored to appear
before you today as President Obama's nominee to be the third United
States Ambassador to the Republic of Kosovo.
I have had the privilege of serving twice as U.S. Ambassador--to
Turkmenistan and Tajikistan--where my teams and I worked successfully
on a range of issues including the promotion of democracy and human
rights, economic development, and security cooperation. Prior to that I
was deputy chief of mission in Latvia, where my main focus was to
support Latvia's Euro-Atlantic aspirations. I believe these experiences
have prepared me well to serve as chief of mission in Kosovo.
This administration, as the one before it, has repeatedly made
clear its commitment to Kosovo's sovereignty, territorial integrity and
independence, and its integration into regional and international
institutions. This commitment will be the guiding principle of my
mission, if I am confirmed. After 4 years of independence, Kosovo has
come a long way. It is now recognized by 86 countries and is a member
of the World Bank and International Monetary Fund. Kosovo will likely
reach a major benchmark with the end of supervised independence and the
closure of the International Civilian Office this year. The
International Steering Group must first determine that Kosovo has
adopted the constitutional and legislative amendments to ensure that
key principles of the Comprehensive Status Proposal are incorporated
and preserved, and progress on this is well underway.
The goal of completing the integration of the Balkans into a Europe
whole, free, and at peace has been the overarching, nonpartisan
approach of successive U.S. administrations since the 1990s. Euro-
Atlantic integration remains a top policy priority in our relationship
with Kosovo, as with all its neighbors, because this will promote
necessary domestic reforms and regional cooperation. Kosovo has
recently made several concrete steps in its advancement toward this
future. This year, Kosovo and its partners welcomed the European
Commission's launch of a visa liberalization dialogue and the
announcement of its intention to launch a Feasibility Study for a
Stabilization and Association Agreement. The European Union (EU)
consensus decisions taken in February and last December mean that all
EU members, even the five that have not recognized Kosovo's
independence, believe that Kosovo's progress on a European path is good
for the region and for Europe as a whole.
Kosovo's relations with its neighbors, in particular Serbia, are
crucial to regional stability and integration. This is why the United
States has fully backed the ongoing EU-facilitated dialogue between
Kosovo and Serbia, which has achieved significant progress since its
launch last March. The two sides have concluded several agreements that
will improve the daily lives of the citizens of both countries, such as
the restoration of two-way trade, mutual recognition of university
diplomas, and the ability to move freely across each others' borders.
The political leadership in Kosovo has shown maturity and foresight in
making some tough decisions to reach these agreements, which have not
been without domestic critics. I believe the political will shown by
Kosovo's leadership to reach practical agreements with its neighbor is
also motivated by the understanding that Serbian progress on its
European path is good for Kosovo, too. The United States was able to
support Kosovo every step along this way, as it demonstrated maturity
and a forward-looking approach. If confirmed, I will ensure that the
U.S. Government continues that support and backing for Kosovo's
positive development.
In the development of its democracy, Kosovo has a daunting agenda
with many pressing reform priorities. The United States must continue
to focus on advancing Kosovo's progress as a multiethnic democracy,
ensuring respect for the rights of all of Kosovo's communities--Kosovo
Serbs, Roma, and others--and the preservation of their cultural and
religious heritage. Kosovo's reform agenda also includes tackling
corruption, cementing rule of law, further developing the energy
sector, reducing barriers to business and investment, and strengthening
public administration to improve governance.
Like other post-socialist societies, Kosovo still has much to do in
developing the conditions for sustained, private sector-led expansion.
It must reduce redtape, decentralize decisionmaking authority, and--
most importantly--ensure an independent judiciary and efficient court
system to see that investors have legal certainty and timely resolution
of disputes. There are some promising signs: as annual economic growth
continues, spending remains within budgetary limits and inflation is
stable.
NATO's Kosovo Force (KFOR) remains a relevant and crucial presence
in Kosovo, helping to maintain, pursuant to its mandate, a safe and
secure environment throughout the country. Its role has been
particularly challenging in northern Kosovo, where the tensions have
run high, and hard-line Serb elements deny Kosovo's authority and the
full freedom of movement for the international community. On several
occasions, this tension has escalated to violence, resulting in
injuries to several KFOR troops, including Americans. Given this
situation, KFOR will likely remain at current troop levels for the
foreseeable future. A solution to the situation in the north and
normalization of relations require a durable modus vivendi that
respects Kosovo's sovereignty, takes into account the views of the
citizens of the north, and allows both Kosovo and Serbia to proceed on
their respective Euro-Atlantic paths.
Madam Chairman, if confirmed, I will work with you, members of this
committee and Congress, the Government and people of Kosovo, our
European allies, the EU Rule of Law Mission (EULEX), NATO, the OSCE and
the U.N., as well as regional partners to meet our shared goal of
building a more stable, democratic, peaceful and prosperous Balkan
region.
In my current position as the Deputy Director of the Foreign
Service Institute, I have the privilege to mentor students at all
levels from 47 government agencies. So I would like to emphasize, as I
have during previous appearances before this committee, that if
confirmed I will be not only the President's representative to Kosovo,
but also the leader of an interagency team, and I will take seriously
my responsibility to ensure a positive, productive, safe environment
for the people of my mission.
Thank you for the opportunity to appear before this committee
today. I look forward to answering any questions you may have.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you very much.
Ambassador Norland.
STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD B. NORLAND, OF IOWA,
TO BE AMBASSADOR TO GEORGIA
Ambassador Norland. Thank you, Madam Chairman, Senator
Lugar.
First, let me introduce my wife, Mary Hartnett, who's here
with us today. And let me also thank Georgia desk officers,
K.G. Moore and Laura Hammond for their help in preparing me for
this testimony.
It is a privilege to appear before you today as President
Obama's nominee to serve as the U.S. Ambassador to Georgia. I
am honored by the confidence placed in me by the President and
by Secretary Clinton, and if confirmed, I look forward to
working with this committee and the Congress in advancing
United States interests in Georgia.
Madam Chairman, we meet today on the eve of the 20th
anniversary of United States-Georgia relations, which were
established on March 24, 1992. As President Obama noted during
President Saakashvili's visit to Washington earlier this year,
Georgia has made extraordinary progress during this time in
transforming itself from a fragile state to one that has
succeeded in significantly reducing petty corruption,
modernizing state institutions and services, and building a
sovereign and democratic country.
Georgia has also demonstrated itself to be a reliable
partner on issues of importance to the United States and the
international community, such as Afghanistan, nonproliferation,
and trade.
Much works remains to be done, however, as you pointed out.
And if confirmed, I will build on the tremendous efforts of my
predecessor, Ambassador John Bass, and of this committee and
your colleagues in Congress to deepen our partnership with the
Government and people of Georgia in these and other areas.
Of paramount importance, I want to emphasize that the
United States commitment to Georgia's territorial integrity and
sovereignty remains steadfast. The United States will continue
to take an active role in the Geneva discussions to address
security and humanitarian concerns, and to pursue a peaceful
resolution to the conflict. I experienced these challenges
firsthand while serving in Georgia and working on conflict
issues there in the early 1990s. The United States will
continue efforts to persuade Russia to fulfill its 2008 cease-
fire obligations, while also working on the essential task of
improving broader Georgia-Russia relations.
Equally significant will be the strengthening of democratic
institutions and processes in Georgia, especially in light of
parliamentary elections this fall and Presidential elections in
2013.
The elections provide Georgia with an extraordinary
opportunity to realize its first peaceful and fully democratic
transfer of power. Free and fair elections will bring Georgia
closer to Euro-Atlantic standards and integration. To get
there, the Georgian Government will have to build on reforms
made to date to foster greater political competition, labor
rights, judicial independence, and media access.
I strongly believe that advancing our key interests in
Georgia's long-term security and stability is directly linked
to the Government's furthering democratic reforms.
As President Obama indicated, the United States continues
to support Georgia's NATO membership aspirations. The Chicago
summit is indeed an opportunity to highlight Georgia's progress
toward meeting membership criteria as well as its significant
partnership contributions. As you pointed out, Georgia
currently contributes some 850 troops to ISAF and plans to
deploy another 750 troops this fall, which will make it the
largest non-NATO contributor.
As a former deputy chief of mission in Kabul, I am keenly
aware of the importance of our mission to help the Afghan
people and of the hostile environment in Helmand province,
where brave Georgian troops operate without caveats.
Georgian soldiers and their families have also made
extraordinary sacrifices with, sadly, 15 soldiers killed in
action and more than 100 wounded, many severely. The United
States will continue to work with the Georgian Government to
care for the wounded soldiers.
Sustaining robust bilateral security and defense
cooperation with Georgia also will remain a high priority, if I
am confirmed. Our plans for security assistance and military
engagement with Georgia are to support Georgia's defense
reforms, to train and equip Georgian troops for participation
in the ISAF mission, and to advance Georgia's NATO
interoperability.
Both Presidents agreed in January to enhance these programs
to advance Georgian military modernization, reform, and self-
defense capabilities. Economic linkages to the wider world have
long formed the lifeblood of the Caucuses region.
And if confirmed, I will also work to deepen economic and
trade relations between the United States and Georgia.
President Obama took our relations in this area to a new level
in January when he announced the launch of a high-level
dialogue to strengthen trade ties, including the possibility of
a free trade agreement.
In the interest of time, Madam Chairman, my testimony has
been submitted for the record. I will close by saying that,
taken together, these efforts will help bring Georgia closer to
achieving its Euro-Atlantic integration goals. And if
confirmed, I pledge to do my very best to advance U.S.
interests there. Thanks very much for considering my
nomination, and I look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Ambassador Norland follows:]
Prepared Statement of Richard B. Norland
Madam Chairman and members of the committee, it is a privilege to
appear before you today as President Obama's nominee to serve as the
United States Ambassador to Georgia. I am honored by the confidence
placed in me by President Obama and Secretary Clinton. If confirmed, I
look forward to working with this committee and the Congress in
advancing U.S. interests in Georgia. I am pleased to introduce my wife,
Mary Hartnett.
Madam Chairman, we meet today on the eve of the 20th anniversary of
United States-Georgia relations, which were established on March 24,
1992. As President Obama noted during President Saakashvili's visit to
Washington earlier this year, Georgia has made extraordinary progress
during this time in transforming itself from a fragile state to one
that has succeeded in significantly reducing petty corruption,
modernizing state institutions and services, and building a sovereign
and democratic country. Georgia has also demonstrated itself to be a
reliable partner on issues of importance to the United States and the
international community, such as Afghanistan, nonproliferation, and
trade. Much work remains to be done, however, and if confirmed, I will
build on the tremendous efforts of my predecessor, Ambassador John
Bass, and of this committee and your colleagues in the Congress, to
deepen our partnership with the government and people of Georgia in
these and other areas.
Of paramount importance, I want to emphasize that the United States
commitment to Georgian territorial integrity and sovereignty remains
steadfast. The United States will continue to take an active role in
the Geneva discussions to address security and humanitarian concerns,
and to pursue a peaceful resolution to the conflict. I experienced
these challenges first-hand while serving in Georgia and working on
conflict issues there in the early 1990s. The United States will
continue efforts to persuade Russia to fulfill its 2008 cease-fire
commitments, while also working on the essential task of improving
broader Georgia-Russia relations.
Equally significant will be the strengthening of democratic
institutions and processes in Georgia, especially in light of
parliamentary elections this fall and Presidential elections in 2013.
The elections provide Georgia with an opportunity to realize its first
peaceful and fully democratic transfer of power. Free and fair
elections will bring Georgia closer to Euro-Atlantic standards and
integration. To get there, the Georgian Government will have to build
on reforms made to date to foster greater political competition, labor
rights, judicial independence and media access. I strongly believe that
advancing our key interest in Georgia's long-term security and
stability is directly linked to the government's furthering democratic
reforms.
As President Obama indicated, the United States continues to
support Georgia's NATO membership aspirations. The Chicago summit is an
important opportunity to highlight Georgia's progress toward meeting
membership criteria as well as its significant partnership
contributions. Georgia currently contributes some 850 troops to ISAF
and plans to deploy another 750 troops this fall, which will make it
the largest non-NATO contributor. As a former deputy chief of mission
in Afghanistan I am keenly aware of the importance of our mission to
help the Afghan people, and of the hostile environment in Helmand
province where brave Georgian troops operate without caveats. Georgian
soldiers and their families have also made extraordinary sacrifices
with 15 soldiers killed in action and more than 100 wounded, many
severely. The United States will continue to work with the Georgian
Government to care for their wounded soldiers.
Sustaining robust bilateral security and defense cooperation with
Georgia will also remain a high priority if I am confirmed. Our plans
for security assistance and military engagement with Georgia are to
support Georgia's defense reforms, to train and equip Georgian troops
for participation in ISAF operations, and to advance Georgia's NATO
interoperability. Both Presidents agreed in January to enhance these
programs to advance Georgian military modernization, reform, and self
defense capabilities.
Economic linkages to the wider world have long formed the lifeblood
of the Caucasus region, and, if confirmed, I will also work to deepen
economic and trade cooperation between the United States and Georgia.
President Obama took our relations in this area to a new level in
January when he announced the launch of a high-level dialogue to
strengthen trade relations, including the possibility of a free trade
agreement. Through this dialogue our two countries can pursue
cooperation that will benefit both U.S. and Georgian citizens alike.
With the support of Congress we can continue to help Georgia strengthen
rule of law, provide commercial and judicial training, and improve
investment protections through continued U.S. assistance. Finally,
building on Georgia's successful first Millennium Challenge Corporation
(MCC) compact, I will also continue the work being done to develop a
second compact proposal that, if completed, will make significant
investments in the Georgian people through education.
Madam Chairman, taken together, these efforts will help bring
Georgia closer to achieving its Euro-Atlantic integration goals and, if
confirmed, I pledge to do my very best to advance U.S. interests there.
Thank you very much for considering my nomination, and I look forward
to your questions.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
Ambassador Merten.
STATEMENT OF HON. KENNETH MERTEN, OF VIRGINIA,
TO BE AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF CROATIA
Ambassador Merten. Madam Chairwoman, members of the
committee, it is a privilege to appear before you today as
President Obama's nominee to serve as the U.S. Ambassador to
Croatia. I am honored by the confidence placed in me by the
President and the Secretary of State.
If confirmed, I look forward to working with this committee
and the Congress in advancing U.S. interests in Croatia.
I am delighted and proud to be accompanied today by desk
officer, Susan McFee, who is behind me there, and by my wife,
Susan, and my daughter, Elisabeth. Sadly, my daughter, Caryl,
could not get away from university today in Charlottesville to
join us.
We have been a Foreign Service family for over 20 years and
have all felt proud to be given the chance to represent the
United States at postings in Germany, France, the U.S. mission
to the European Union, and three times in Haiti.
As you are aware, my current assignment in Haiti has been
slightly more eventful than we had hoped, but I am proud of the
way my family and my colleagues at the Embassy responded
following the earthquake to come to the aid of the Haitian
people and to evacuate over 16,000 American citizens.
While I hope not to face any similar crises in Croatia, my
experience in Haiti demonstrates that I am an effective manager
of people and resources, critical for any chief of mission.
Our bilateral relationship with Croatia has never been
stronger. In fact, this afternoon, Secretary Clinton will meet
with Foreign Minister Vesna Pusic to discuss our many common
interests and how we will further strengthen our partnership
under Croatia's new government. Just a few weeks ago, Attorney
General Holder met with his Croatian counterpart to discuss our
cooperation on rule-of-law issues. We have a robust military-
to-military relationship. And next month, we will host the
second Brown Forum, a regional conference held in honor of
former Commerce Secretary, Ron Brown, focused on how to create
positive conditions for increased trade and investment among
the United States, Croatia, and the region. And these are only
a few examples to illustrate our strong ties.
Croatia has made remarkable progress in only two decades
since independence, becoming a NATO member in 2009, and now
standing on the threshold of the European Union with full EU
membership expected in 2013. The citizens of Croatia deserve to
be congratulated for all they have accomplished.
Croatia's success in implementing often difficult reforms
and creating a strong democratic society demonstrate that it is
positioned to serve as a role model and a leader in the region
for European and Euro-Atlantic integration.
Indeed, the United States supports the positive decisions
Croatia has made to improve regional cooperation. We also
encourage Croatian leaders to continue their efforts toward
good neighborly relations and to continue working with
neighbors to address bilateral and regional challenges, such as
refugees and transnational crime.
As an international partner, Croatia has proven itself to
be an active and committed NATO ally, as evidenced by its
important contributions to global security, particularly in
ISAF, KFOR, and U.N. peacekeeping missions.
While Croatia has come a great distance in terms of
democratic progress, there is more to be done. The Croatian
economy continues to be challenged by high unemployment and
anemic growth. This reflects both the global economic crisis
and domestic challenges. The recently elected Government
recognizes the urgent need for economic reform, and the United
States will support Croatia's efforts to undertake those
reforms to improve the business and investment climate so that
sustainable economic growth and prosperity can be achieved.
This in turn can be the basis for expanding our economic and
trade relations.
If I am confirmed, I will seek to forge an even stronger
partnership with Croatia, building on the excellent work of our
outgoing Ambassador, James Foley, and our country team in
Zagreb.
My foremost priority as Ambassador will be promoting United
States interests in Croatia while pursuing our goals of
strengthening the rule of law, fighting corruption, promoting
economic growth and prosperity, reinforcing democratic
institutions, and promoting regional security. I will actively
seek to deepen our strategic alliance through NATO, ISAF, the
Adriatic Charter, and other cooperative means.
I will also work closely with our EU partners to help
Croatia complete the few remaining accession requirements. I
look forward to Croatia's celebrating its full EU membership in
2013.
Madam Chairwoman and members of the committee, thank you
for this opportunity to appear before you today. I will be
pleased to answer any questions you have.
[The prepared statement of Ambassador Merten follows:]
Prepared Statement of Kenneth H. Merten
Madam Chairman and members of the committee, it is a privilege to
appear before you today as President Obama's nominee to serve as the
United States Ambassador to the Republic of Croatia. I am honored by
the confidence placed in me by the President and Secretary Clinton. If
confirmed, I look forward to working with this committee and the
Congress in advancing U.S. interests in Croatia.
I am delighted and proud to be accompanied today by my wife, Susan,
and my daughter, Elisabeth. My daughter, Caryl, could not get away from
university in Charlottesville to join us. We have been a Foreign
Service family for over 20 years and have all felt proud to be given
the chance to represent the United States at postings in Germany,
France, at our mission to the European Union and three times in Haiti.
As you are aware, my most recent assignment in Haiti was more eventful
than we had hoped, but I am proud of the way my family and my
colleagues at the Embassy responded following the earthquake, to come
to the aid of the Haitian people and to evacuate over 16,000 American
citizens. While I hope not to face any similar crises in Croatia, my
experience in Haiti demonstrates that I am an effective manager of
people and resources, critical for any chief of mission.
Our bilateral relationship with Croatia has never been stronger. In
fact, this afternoon Secretary Clinton will meet with Foreign Minister
Vesna Pusic to discuss our many common interests and how we will
further strengthen our partnership under Croatia's new government. Just
a few weeks ago, Attorney General Holder met with his Croatian
counterpart to discuss our cooperation on rule-of-law issues, including
Croatia's ongoing efforts to root out corruption and bring suspected
war criminals to justice. We have a robust military-to-military
relationship, which includes a joint NATO unit in Afghanistan and the
State Partnership Program with the Minnesota National Guard. Next
month, we will host the second Brown Forum, a regional conference held
in honor of former Commerce Secretary, Ron Brown, focused on how to
create positive conditions for increased trade and investment among the
United States, Croatia, and the region. And these are only a few
examples to illustrate our strong ties.
Croatia has made remarkable progress in only two decades since
independence and a costly war, becoming a NATO member in 2009, and now
standing on the threshold of the European Union, with full EU
membership expected in 2013. The citizens of Croatia deserve to be
congratulated for all they have accomplished. Croatia's success in
implementing often difficult reforms and creating a strong democratic
society demonstrate that it is positioned to serve as a role model and
leader in the region for European and Euro-Atlantic integration.
Indeed, the United States supports the positive decisions Croatia
has made to improve regional cooperation. We also encourage Croatian
leaders to continue their efforts toward good neighborly relations and
to continue working with neighbors to address bilateral and regional
challenges such as refugees and transnational crime. As an
international partner, Croatia has proven itself to be an active and
committed NATO ally, as evidenced by its important contributions to
global security, particularly in the International Security Assistance
Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan, the Kosovo Force (KFOR), and U.N.
peacekeeping activities. These contributions to regional and global
stability reflect our shared values and the depth of our partnership
with Croatia.
While Croatia has come a great distance in terms of democratic
progress, there is more to be done. The Croatian economy continues to
be challenged by high unemployment and anemic growth. This reflects
both the global economic crisis and domestic challenges, including a
cumbersome bureaucracy and an investment climate that needs to be much
more welcoming to business. The recently elected Croatian Government
recognizes the urgent need for economic reform. The United States will
support Croatia's efforts to undertake reforms to improve the business
and investment climate so that sustainable economic growth and
prosperity can be achieved. This in turn can be the basis for expanding
our economic and trade relations.
If I am confirmed, I will seek to forge an even stronger
partnership with Croatia, building on the excellent work of our
outgoing Ambassador, James Foley, and our country team in Zagreb. My
foremost priority as Ambassador will be promoting U.S. interests in
Croatia while pursuing our goals of strengthening the rule of law,
fighting corruption, promoting economic growth and prosperity,
reinforcing democratic institutions, and promoting regional security. I
will actively seek to deepen our strategic alliance through NATO, ISAF,
the Adriatic Charter, and other cooperative means. I will also work
closely with our EU partners to help Croatia complete the few remaining
accession requirements and look forward to celebrating its full EU
membership in 2013.
Madam Chairman and members of the committee, thank you for this
opportunity to appear before you. I would be pleased to answer any
questions that you may have.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you very much.
Mr. Pekala.
STATEMENT OF MARK A. PEKALA, OF MARYLAND,
TO BE AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF LATVIA
Mr. Pekala. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, distinguished
manners of the committee. It is a genuine privilege to appear
before you today, and I thank you.
I am deeply grateful to President Obama and Secretary
Clinton for their support and confidence in nominating me to be
the next U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of Latvia.
If confirmed by the Senate, I pledge to devote all my
energy to represent the United States to the very best of my
ability and to advance U.S. interests in Latvia, while further
strengthening the partnership between our two countries.
I am fully committed to working closely with this
committee, your staff, and your congressional colleagues to
advance our common objectives and shared agenda.
With your permission, I would like to introduce my wife,
Maria. We are the very happy and proud parents of Julia and
Nora, age 10 and 7, who have spent nearly two-thirds of their
lives overseas while Maria and I have tried our best represent
the American people.
I would also like to introduce and thank Julie-Anne
Peterson, the Latvia desk officer at the State Department.
Over the last 10 of my nearly 25 years of government as
deputy chief of mission in France, deputy chief of mission in
Estonia, and Deputy Assistant Secretary of State responsible
for our bilateral relations with for 15 European countries,
including Latvia, as well as director of the entry-level
division of human resources at the State Department.
I believe that these experiences have prepared me well, if
confirmed, to lead our mission and to exercise American
leadership in Latvia.
Last year, Latvia celebrated the 20th anniversary of
regaining its independence; 2012 will mark 90 years of unbroken
diplomatic relations with our friend and ally.
Since 1991, Latvia has embraced democracy and the
principles of an open market; it is an excellent partner in a
good environment in which to carry out the President's national
export initiative dedicated to supporting U.S. businesses,
increasing U.S. exports, and creating jobs in the United
States.
If confirmed, I will work with United States businesses to
expand their markets into Latvia. United States exports to
Latvia have been rising over the last 2 years, and recent
successful advocacy by Embassy Riga on behalf of the American
companies IBM and Datacard demonstrates that there is scope for
expanded United States investment in the Latvian market.
Latvia was hit extraordinarily hard by the economic crisis,
losing nearly 25 percent of its GDP. But it has proven itself
to be both resilient and innovative in meeting its economic
obligations and finding creative ways to offer its expertise to
its post-Soviet neighbors. After weathering its economic storm,
Latvia is actively contributing to assistance projects in
Moldova, including a rule-of-law program in cooperation with
USAID.
Latvia also provides training for Afghan railroad officials
and is planning to participate in a training program for Afghan
air traffic controllers.
If confirmed, I will work with Latvia to continue this
crucial development engagement.
In 2004 Latvia joined NATO. It is a valued member of the
alliance, contributing approximately 200 troops and police
trainers in Afghanistan. In addition, the Latvian National
Armed Forces have successfully developed a high-demand niche
capability with their Joint Terminal Attack Controller, or JTAC
program.
Latvia is one of only six other allied countries certified
to call in United States close air support on the battlefield.
Standing with the alliance does not come without cost.
Latvia has suffered the loss of four soldiers and had nine
wounded during its years in Afghanistan. We are deeply grateful
for Latvia's contributions and for its decision to remain with
us in Afghanistan until 2014.
As a native of Michigan, I am particularly proud of
Latvia's partnership with the Michigan National Guard, now in
its 20th year. In Afghanistan, Latvia successfully ran an
operational mentoring and liaison team, or OMLT, with the
Guard.
Today, Latvia is once again is teaming up with its National
Guard partners to train soldiers in Liberia, an effort that
underlines not only how far Latvia has come in the 20 years
since its regained its independence, but also its increasing
focus and venturing outside its neighborhood to share the
valuable lessons learned during its evolution from newly
independent country to mature democracy.
Although Latvia has made tremendous strides in democracy
and the rule of law, it is still struggling to come to terms
with some aspects of its past, particularly the legacies of
World War II and Soviet rule.
Latvia has work to do to promote social integration of its
minority populations. We are encouraged to see the Latvian
Government considering measures that would improve integration
of this population. We hope that the recent language referendum
can be used by both sides as a means to open a constructive
dialogue between ethnic Russians and ethnic Latvians.
If confirmed, I hope to use my position as Ambassador to
support outreach efforts to all minority communities in Latvia.
Should the Senate confirm my nomination, I will dedicate
myself to protecting and advancing United States interests in
Latvia.
I thank you again for the privilege of appearing before you
today, and I welcome any questions you may have.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Pekala follows:]
Prepared Statement of Mark Pekala
Madam Chairman, distinguished members of the committee, it is a
genuine privilege to appear before you today, and I thank you. I am
deeply grateful to President Obama and Secretary Clinton for their
support and confidence in nominating me to be the next U.S. Ambassador
to the Republic of Latvia. If confirmed by the Senate, I pledge to
devote all my energy to represent the United States to the very best of
my ability and to advance U.S. interests in Latvia, while further
strengthening the partnership between our two countries. I am fully
committed to working closely with this committee, your staff, and your
congressional colleagues to advance our common objectives and shared
agenda.
With your permission, I would like to introduce my wife, Maria. We
are the very happy and proud parents of Julia and Nora, age 10 and 7,
who have spent nearly two-thirds of their lives overseas while Maria
and I have tried our best to represent the American people.
Over the last 10 of my nearly 25 years of Government service, I
have served as deputy chief of mission in France, deputy chief of
mission in Estonia, and Deputy Assistant Secretary of State,
responsible for our bilateral relations with 15 European countries,
including Latvia, and as Director of the Entry-Level Division of Human
Resources at the State Department. I believe that these experiences
have prepared me well, if confirmed, to lead our mission--and to
exercise American leadership--in Latvia.
Last year, Latvia celebrated the 20th anniversary of regaining its
independence; 2012 will mark 90 years of unbroken diplomatic relations
with our friend and ally. Since 1991, Latvia has embraced democracy and
the principles of an open market. It is an excellent partner and a good
environment in which to carry out the President's National Export
Initiative, dedicated to supporting U.S. businesses, increasing U.S.
exports, and creating jobs in the United States. If confirmed, I will
work with U.S. businesses to expand their markets into Latvia. U.S.
exports to Latvia have been rising over the past 2 years, and recent
successful advocacy by Embassy Riga on behalf of American companies IBM
and DataCard demonstrates that there is scope for expanded U.S.
investment in the Latvian market.
Latvia was hit extraordinarily hard by the economic crisis, losing
nearly 25 percent of GDP in the global economic crisis. But it has
proven itself to be both resilient and innovative in meeting its
economic obligations and finding creative ways to offer its expertise
to its post-Soviet neighbors. After weathering its economic storm,
Latvia is actively contributing to assistance projects in Moldova,
including a rule of law program in cooperation with USAID. Latvia also
provides training for Afghan railroad officials and is planning to
participate in a training program for Afghan air traffic controllers.
If confirmed, I will work with Latvia to continue this crucial
development engagement.
In 2004, Latvia joined NATO. It is a valued member of the alliance,
contributing approximately 200 troops and police trainers in
Afghanistan. In addition, the Latvian National Armed Forces have
successfully developed a high-demand niche capability with their Joint
Terminal Attack Controller (JTAC) program. Latvia is one of only six
other allied countries certified to call in U.S. close air support on
the battlefield. Standing with the alliance has not come without cost;
Latvia has suffered the loss of four soldiers and had nine wounded
during its years in Afghanistan. We are deeply grateful for Latvia's
contributions and for its decision to remain with us in Afghanistan
until 2014.
As a native of Michigan, I am particularly proud of Latvia's
partnership with the Michigan National Guard, now in its 20th year. In
Afghanistan, Latvia successfully ran an Operational Mentoring and
Liaison Team (OMLT) with the Guard. Today, Latvia is once again teaming
up with its National Guard partners to train soldiers in Liberia--an
effort that underlines not only how far Latvia has come in the 20 years
since it regained its independence, but also its increasing focus on
venturing outside its neighborhood to share the valuable lessons
learned during its evolution from newly independent country to mature
democracy.
Although Latvia has made tremendous strides in democracy and rule
of law, it is still struggling to come to terms with some aspects of
its past, particularly the legacies of World War II and Soviet rule.
Latvia has work to do to promote social integration of its minority
populations. Almost a third of Latvia's residents are ethnic Russians,
of whom just under 300,000 are noncitizens. We are encouraged to see
the Latvian Government considering measures that would improve
integration of this population; we hope that the recent language
referendum can be used by both sides as a means to open a constructive
dialog between ethnic Russians and ethnic Latvians. If confirmed, I
hope to use my position as Ambassador to support outreach efforts to
all minority communities in Latvia.
Latvia is also making progress in coming to terms with the horrific
events of the Holocaust, but more needs to be done. The restitution of
private property is largely finished, but we need to see further
progress on compensation for communal and heirless properties. If
confirmed, I pledge to work diligently with the Government of Latvia
and the local Jewish community to address Holocaust legacy and property
restitution issues.
Should the Senate confirm my nomination, I will dedicate myself to
protecting and advancing U.S. interests in Latvia. I thank you again
for the privilege of appearing before you today and I welcome any
questions you may have.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you very much.
Mr. Levine.
STATEMENT OF JEFFREY D. LEVINE, OF CALIFORNIA,
TO BE AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF ESTONIA
Mr. Levine. Madam Chair, members of the committee, it is an
honor to appear before you today as President Obama's nominee
to be the next United States Ambassador to the Republic of
Estonia. I'm grateful to the President and to Secretary Clinton
for the trust they have placed in me.
If confirmed, I will work tirelessly to advance the
interests of the United States and further strengthen the
already deep and productive relationship we enjoy with Estonia.
Madam Chair, with me today are my wife, Janie, and son,
Nick. I'm very fortunate to have a supportive family who has
shared the joys and challenges of my 27-year Foreign Service
career. Nick will be remaining in the United States to start
college, but if I am confirmed, I hope he will share at least
part of this adventure on school breaks.
I also would like to introduce Rodney Hunter, the State
Department's desk officer for Estonia.
For nearly 50 years, the United States refused to
acknowledge the illegal and forcible occupation of Estonia by
the Soviet Union. Their regular statements of support that came
from the White House and Congress served as signals of hope for
Estonians both in Estonia and abroad. Since 1991 and the
reestablishment of Estonia's independence, each American
President and every Congress have continued the support as
Estonia transformed itself from a Soviet satellite to the
strong and reliable democratic ally that it is today.
Estonia is a modern free-market success story. Even during
the worldwide economic crisis, Estonia's fiscal and economic
situation has steadily improved. After more than a year as a
member of the eurozone, Estonia's economic situation is
stronger than ever. In the midst of Europe's economic problems,
Moody's upgraded Estonia's credit rating last year.
Estonia is also sharing the benefits and lessons of its
success with other democracies and nations in transition across
the globe.
Since it became a NATO ally in 2004, Estonia has shown
unwavering support for shared objectives around the world.
Estonian troops served with us in Iraq and continue to operate
without caveats in southern Afghanistan.
Estonia has expressed its commitment to stay on the ground
as the NATO mission transforms into advice and assistance. This
commitment will remain strong, though Estonia has paid a high
price for the service with the lives of 11 of its brave
soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan, the second-highest per capita
loss in Afghanistan of any ISAF partner.
Estonia has also contributed to many other military
missions, including Kosovo, Bosnia-Herzegovina, and the Horn of
Africa. Estonia's military remains a force in transition, but
one that is willing to take on dangerous missions side by side
with American troops.
Our support remains a crucial tool to help Estonia create a
military even more capable of serving alongside United States
forces in the future. Estonian soldiers and officers attend
training in the United States and have proven themselves
accomplished and knowledgeable partners on the ground in
Afghanistan and around the world.
As you noted, Estonia has also committed 2 percent of its
GDP to defense spending, serving as a model for other allies
and sharing the burden of our common security.
Estonia is a world leader in information technology and an
Estonian entrepreneur is the creator of Skype, now used around
the world. It hosts the NATO Cyber-Security Center of
Excellence in Tallinn, which the United States joined
officially in 2011. Estonia's innovative Cyber Defense League
works closely with the Maryland National Guard to boost cyber
security in both our countries.
In joint operations with the FBI and Secret Service,
Estonia has been crucial in bringing a number of cyber
criminals to justice in the United States.
Estonia is also a pioneer in e-governance. In its last
election, one quarter of Estonians voted online; electronic
medical records are fully accessible from any doctor's office;
and its citizens have unprecedented access to information about
their government. Moreover, Estonia has willingly shared this
expertise with more than 40 nations, from Tunisia to India to
the Ukraine.
If confirmed, I will work to continue our strong
cooperation on cyber issues and find ways to leverage United
States support of Estonia's endeavors to ensure that our
assistance to young democracies, like Moldova, for example, is
as effective as possible.
The United States also welcomes Estonia's ongoing efforts
to build strong communal relations among all Estonians,
including the country's sizable Russian-speaking population.
If confirmed, I hope to work closely with my public
diplomacy colleagues in Washington and in the region to further
utilize social media resources to better reach out to all in
Estonia, including the Russian-speaking minority and especially
the young people.
Madam Chair, members of the committee, the history of
relations between the American people and Estonia is one of
trust and mutual support. Just as we stood side by side with
the Estonian people during their difficult past, Estonians
today are at our side as we meet common challenges and seize
joint opportunities.
Estonians are not just dependable allies and strong
partners but also close friends of the American people. If
confirmed, I will dedicate myself to advancing that friendship
and promoting United States interests in Estonia to further our
partnership.
Thank you again for allowing me to appear before you today.
I look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Levine follows:]
Prepared Statement of Jeffrey D. Levine
Madam Chairman, members of the committee, it is an honor to appear
before you today as President Obama's nominee to be the next U.S.
Ambassador to the Republic of Estonia. I am grateful to the President
and to Secretary Clinton for the trust they have placed in me. If
confirmed, I will work tirelessly to advance the interests of the
United States and further strengthen the already deep and productive
relationship we enjoy with Estonia.
Madam Chairman, with me today are my wife, Janie, and son, Nick. I
am indeed fortunate to have a supportive family who has shared the joys
and challenges of my 27-year Foreign Service career. Nick will be
remaining in the United States to start college but--if I am
confirmed--I hope he will share at least part of this adventure on
school breaks.
For nearly 50 years, the United States refused to acknowledge the
illegal and forcible occupation of Estonia by the Soviet Union. The
regular statements of support that came from the White House and the
Congress served as signals of hope for Estonians both in Estonia and
abroad. Since 1991 and the reestablishment of Estonia's independence,
each American President and every Congress have continued this support
as Estonia transformed itself from a Soviet satellite to the strong,
reliable, and democratic ally, that it is today.
Estonia is a modern free-market success story. Even during the
worldwide economic crisis, Estonia's fiscal and economic situation has
steadily improved. After more than a year as a member of the eurozone,
Estonia's economic situation is stronger than ever; in the midst of
Europe's economic problems, Moody's upgraded Estonia's credit rating
last year. Estonia is also sharing the benefits and lessons of its
success with other democracies and nations in transition across the
globe.
Since it became a NATO ally in 2004, Estonia has shown unwavering
support for our shared objectives around the world. Estonian troops
served with us in Iraq and continue to operate without caveats in
southern Afghanistan. Estonia has expressed its commitment to stay on
the ground as the NATO mission transforms into advice and assistance.
This commitment remains strong, though Estonia has paid a high price
for this service with the lives of 11 of its brave soldiers in Iraq and
Afghanistan, the second highest per capita loss in Afghanistan of any
ISAF partner. Estonia has also contributed to many other military
missions, including in Kosovo, Bosnia/Herzegovina, and the Horn of
Africa.
Estonia's military remains a force in transition, but one that is
willing to take on dangerous missions, side by side with American
troops. Our support remains a crucial tool to help Estonia create a
military even more capable of serving alongside U.S. forces in the
future. Estonian soldiers and officers attend training in the United
States and have proven themselves accomplished and knowledgeable
partners on the ground in Afghanistan and around the world. Estonia has
also committed 2 percent of its GDP to defense spending, serving as a
model for other allies in sharing the burden for our common security.
Estonia is a world leader in information technology, and an
Estonian entrepreneur is the creator of the Skype technology now used
around the world. It hosts the NATO Cyber-Security Center of Excellence
in Tallinn, which the United States joined officially in 2011.
Estonia's innovative Cyber Defense League works closely with the
Maryland National Guard to boost cyber security in both our countries.
In joint operations with the FBI and Secret Service, Estonia has been
crucial in bringing a number of cyber criminals to justice in the
United States.
Estonia is also a pioneer in e-governance. In its last election
one-quarter of Estonians voted online, electronic medical records are
fully accessible from any doctor's office, and its citizens have
unprecedented access to information about their government. Moreover,
Estonia has willingly shared this expertise with more than 40 nations,
from Tunisia, to India, to Ukraine. If confirmed, I will work to
continue our strong cooperation on cyber issues, and find ways to
leverage U.S. support for Estonia's endeavors to ensure that our
assistance to young democracies like Moldova, for example, is as
effective as possible.
The United States also welcomes Estonia's ongoing efforts to build
strong communal relations among all Estonians, including the country's
sizeable Russian-speaking population. If confirmed, I hope to work
closely with my public diplomacy colleagues in Washington and in the
region to further utilize ``social media'' resources to better reach
out to all in Estonia, including the Russian-speaking minority and
especially to young people.
Madam Chairman, members of the committee, the history of relations
between the American people and Estonians is one of trust and mutual
support. Just as we stood side by side with the Estonian people during
their difficult past, Estonians today are at our side as we meet common
challenges and seize joint opportunities. Estonians are not just
dependable allies and strong partners, but also close friends of the
American people. If confirmed, I will dedicate myself to advancing that
friendship and promoting U.S. interests in Estonia to further our
partnership.
Thank you again for allowing me to appear before you today. I look
forward to your questions.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you very much, Mr. Levine.
And thank you all for your testimony and for introducing
your family members who are here. We especially appreciate
their being here this morning and their support for the work
that you have been doing and will continue to do.
I know that Senator Lugar has some time constraints, so,
Senator, would you like to begin the questioning?
Senator Lugar. Thank you very much, Madam Chairman.
Let me ask Ambassador Norland, you are aware of the
Cooperative Threat Reduction Program in Georgia in which we
recently have completed a central reference laboratory to
address poten-
tial natural and bioterrorist infectious disease outbreaks
which threaten Georgia, the United States, and others.
This is taking some time and effort, but to my knowledge,
this facility is presently functioning. I would just simply ask
at the outset that you be aware of the project, and likewise be
helpful in working with Georgian authorities to gain the
greatest benefits from this, similar to other laboratories set
up in the area under the Nunn-Lugar program where information
is shared with the United States with the thought of stopping
any potential biological threat.
A specific question comes with regard to NATO, and I
introduced the NATO Enhancement Act, which would encourage
further NATO enlargement and designate all countries expressing
a national interest in joining NATO, including Georgia, as
potential aspirant countries.
As you have studied the Georgian situation in preparation
for your ambassadorship, what is the lay of the land as you see
it? And what steps could the United States take constructively
to help Georgian aspirations?
Ambassador Norland. Well, thank you for both questions,
Senator.
On the CTR issue, let me start by congratulating you for
two decades of work on nonproliferation. These reference
laboratories are sort of a continuation of that work. I am
aware of this kind of project because we had one in Uzbekistan
under way. I'm aware that the one in Georgia was recently
inaugurated. It is an extremely important project, both for
what it represents in terms of nonproliferation issues, but
also in terms of public health, animal disease control, and
things that are important to agriculture.
The Embassy or mission there I understand is supporting the
project actively, and the U.S. Army plans to actually station
some people there to work with the Georgians to make sure the
laboratory properly carries out its functions.
On the NATO issue, also let me thank you and members of the
committee for the tremendous work over the years that you have
done in support of NATO enlargement, and particularly for the
support you're lending to Georgia's NATO aspirations. We
welcome this support from the Congress, and we strongly support
Georgia's NATO aspirations.
NATO has declared that Georgia will be a member, so the
issue really has to do with how and when. There is no single
path to NATO membership. As it stands now, as I understand, the
annual national program and the NATO-Georgia council all their
primary mechanisms through which Georgia and the allies are
pursuing the issue of Georgia's membership.
But a lot of emphasis at the same time is being placed on
steps Georgia is taking already in the direction of membership.
Its contributions to ISAF, which we noted already today, the
steps it has taken on defense reform and modernization, and the
steps which I alluded to regarding democracy and economic
progress. These are all part of the package that go into
meeting the criteria for NATO membership.
As I carried out my consultations, I have become aware of a
serious effort on the part of the administration to use the
Chicago summit to signal acknowledgment for Georgia's progress
in these areas and to work with the allies to develop a
consensus on the next steps forward.
And I can assure you that, if confirmed, carrying that
forward will be an extremely important part of my duties.
Senator Lugar. Well, that is a very, very important
statement. I appreciate your leadership in that area. And you
know you will have the support back here of many of us as you
proceed.
Let me ask you, Mr. Pekala, speaking of the NATO summit in
Chicago, I am reminded of the NATO summit that occurred in Riga
in 2006. I was honored to be the dinner speaker before the day
of the summit and took that occasion to recall that the
previous winter had been one in which natural gas shipments
from Russia to Ukraine had been terminated. That also occurred
in other countries, but it was especially conspicuous in regard
to Ukraine, with ramifications in Germany.
So I suggested that article 5 of the NATO charter really
ought to be expanded to energy security, that warfare in Europe
might not commence through troops marching across territory or
aircraft bombings, but simply by cutting off the gas or cutting
off the oil.
This has been a subject of great importance, obviously not
only to the country that you're going to represent, but its
neighbors, and for that matter, all of Europe is represented
with ideas like the Nabucco pipeline or other smaller projects.
What is the situation now as you perceive it in the country
that you are about to represent--the United States--in Latvia?
What is the energy predicament? And what degree of energy
independence or security does it have?
Mr. Pekala. Senator, thank you for that very important
question. We share your concerns, obviously.
We in the State Department, you, many others, over the past
many years, have been talking to countries in the region about
the importance of diversifying the sources of energy and
diversifying the ownership of the pipelines that bring that
energy to various countries.
The situation in Latvia is evolving. They do understand the
importance of diversity of ownership and supply. They are
subject to a near-Russian monopoly on their gas and oil. But in
other areas, the picture is a lot more optimistic.
Latvia only imports a tiny percentage of its energy, that
mostly from Estonia. They produce most of their own energy
through hydroelectric plants and other means. And they are
working with the other two Baltic States on other means of
renewable energy sources. They are working with Estonia and
Lithuania on a possible nuclear power plant in Lithuania, and
they are talking to Estonia and Lithuania and many other
countries in the region about a possible LNG, a liquefied
natural gas terminal, somewhere in the Baltics, also thinking
about tapping into supplies that might be in Germany and Poland
and elsewhere. And the Latvians, like others, are looking into
shale oil and shale gas as a means of diversifying their supply
and enhancing their independence.
So the good news is that the Latvians clearly understand,
along with you and us and many others, the importance of
diversification, and they are working hard on establishing
means to work hard on that in the 21st century to increase
their independence.
Senator Lugar. I appreciate that response. Obviously, you
are on top of the subject, and I congratulate you.
Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator.
You probably saw us doing some quick whispering up here. We
think we are going have some votes called very shortly, so
Senator Cardin is going to go next, and then I will continue.
We will recess to vote, and then I will come back if there are
still questions.
So, Senator Cardin.
Senator Cardin. Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
What I will do is I will pose a question to all five that I
will ask be answered for the record, so we don't need to take
the time now.
But let me make the point, if I might, and that is, first,
thank all five of you for your public service. And I thank you
for your families. You have all had an incredible career of
public service, and you are continuing that, and we know this
is sacrifice not only for you, but for your families. We
appreciate that very much.
All five of the countries that are represented here have a
lot in common. They are all strategically important to the
United States. We have excellent relationships with all five
countries. And they are countries that we want to continue to
strengthen those ties.
I have the honor of chairing the U.S.-Helsinki Commission,
the Senate chair of the commission. And my question deals with
the highlighting the important role that you can play as
Ambassador to continue the advancements on the human dimensions
of the OSCE.
I particularly mention Estonia, because Estonia has been a
successful country in using the OSCE format in dealing with its
Russian-speaking minority, and I applaud the Estonian
Government. I've been there. I've worked with them, in using
the OSCE to advance the humans rights issues.
[The written answers submitted for the record by Ambassador
Merten, Mr. Pekala, and Mr. Levine follow:]
Ambassador Merten. The OSCE has played a key role in Croatia's
transformation into a NATO Ally and soon-to-be EU member. Evidence of
its progress can be seen in the decision to close the OSCE Office in
Zagreb, truly a success story for the region and the organization. Yet
more work remains. If confirmed, as Ambassador I will strongly
encourage Croatia to continue to meet its OSCE human dimension
commitments on human rights and fundamental freedoms, both for the
citizens of Croatia and so that Croatia can be a model for the rest of
the region. These commitments include protecting human and minority
rights, ensuring civil society and independent media have space in
which to operate, and inviting international election observation.
______
Mr. Pekala. If confirmed as Ambassador, I would work closely with
the Government of Latvia on the full panoply of OSCE activities
throughout its geographic area of activity. We greatly value the work
that the OSCE has accomplished. Both the United States and Latvia share
its goals and objectives. We see Latvia as an excellent partner in
these endeavors and anticipate a robust relationship on these issues in
the future.
In particular, I would urge close cooperation with OSCE
institutions, with the aim of improving transparency. In the context of
the OSCE, Latvia has demonstrated a willingness to share the experience
it has gained through its democratic transition to assist other states
in the region, and as part of OSCE's efforts to support OSCE partner
states in the Mediterranean and North Africa.
______
Mr. Levine. If confirmed, I will work closely with the Government
of Estonia to advance our shared goal of strengthening the OSCE's human
dimension. I believe that Estonia has a deep appreciation for OSCE's
democratization and human rights work, as it benefited directly during
Estonia's own democratic transition. Today, Estonia serves as an
example of transparency, openness, and freedom and works to share its
experience and expertise with other countries in the OSCE region, such
as Belarus and Moldova. Estonia also takes the protection of freedoms
of the press, speech, and Internet seriously, both domestically and
abroad.
Estonia has also worked over the past year to take several positive
steps on its own issues of minority rights and citizenship, and it has
reduced the number of people in the country who lack citizenship. While
there is still some distance to go, Estonia is moving in the right
direction. If confirmed, I will work closely with the Government of
Estonia, as well as through our social media platforms with the public,
to ensure that progress continues.
Let me, if I just might very quickly, mention in Kosovo,
there are challenges. There are serious challenges. Kosovo is
not a member of the OSCE, because of the blockage of a minority
number of countries within the OSCE. But it needs to pay
attention to the rights of all of its citizens, and I will be
asking, Ms. Jacobson, that you pay particular sensitivity to
that in your role, when confirmed, as Ambassador.
As Ambassador, what is the important role that you can play
to continue the advancements on the human dimensions of the
OSCE?
[The written answer submitted for the record by Ambassador
Jacobson follows:]
The Government of Kosovo is not currently a participating State,
but its admission would be welcome in the future. Much work takes place
every day in Kosovo that furthers the OSCE's comprehensive view of
security, especially in the human dimension. Supporting OSCE's efforts
to protect human rights and strengthen democracy will be a critical
element of my mission, if I am confirmed. If confirmed, I would look
forward to working with the OSCE and would also hope to have the same
good partnership with the Helsinki Commission that I enjoyed as
Ambassador to Turkmenistan and Tajikistan. This partnership resulted in
significant achievements, for example in the area of religious freedom
in Turkmenistan.
In Kosovo there has been a lot of progress made in the area of
human rights with regard to protection of all communities, as required
in the Constitution, and some progress has also been made in terms of
bringing to justice those officials who commit abuses.
The GoK is also taking steps to address irregularities and
electoral manipulations which marred Assembly elections in 2010. In
preparation for the next parliamentary elections, a legislative
committee is revising the electoral code, while another committee is
preparing constitutional changes that would allow direct election of
the President. Further, after some criticism of the lack of serious
sentences and fines for people who committed electoral abuses, we have
noted a positive trend since 2011 toward serious sentences and fines
for election fraud; 27 people have been sentenced to terms, and more
than 100 people have been fined.
There also remain concerns about discrimination, for example
against ethnic and religious minorities, disabled persons and members
of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community. Additional
human rights issues included allegations of prisoner abuse as well as
corruption and favoritism in prisons; lengthy pretrial detention;
judicial inefficiency; intimidation of media by public officials and
criminal elements; limited progress in returning internally displaced
persons (IDPs) to their homes; government corruption; trafficking in
persons; and child labor in the informal sector.
Roadblocks established by Serb hard-liners in northern Kosovo have
also seriously restricted basic rights for citizens in the north,
including the free movement of goods, people, and services. Serb hard-
liners have employed violence and intimidation against domestic
opponents and international security forces, which resulted in deaths
and injuries during the year.
Tackling these issues is going to take a concerted international
effort to address, and will require leadership by the United States in
cooperation with Kosovo.
My main question, though, is to Ambassador Norland, if I
might. You've come from Uzbekistan, which is not exactly the
best nation as an example of the advancement of human rights.
Georgia has problems. They are strategically important to us.
They are moving forward in transition. I had a chance to talk
to President Saakashvili when he was here about what he is
doing as far as open and free elections for both the Parliament
and for the Presidency. We know that there are efforts to limit
those who are eligible to run for President, and there have
been statements made by the opposition that they are being
denied opportunities to fairly compete in the national
elections.
So my question to you is--and you can answer this for the
record--that'll be fine--as to what steps you would take as
Ambassador to make sure that Georgia continues its transition
to free and open elections, allowing fair opportunities for
opposition candidates to compete in the election?
And, Madam Chair, I can have those answered for the record.
Senator Shaheen. Well, I would actually like to hear the
answer, so we have a few minutes before we have to recess for
the vote. So perhaps, Ambassador Norland, you can go ahead and
respond.
Ambassador Norland. Thank you, Senator.
And thank you, Senator Cardin, for the question, and for
your work in support of the Helsinki Accords. I am familiar
with that work from when I was with, at the time, CSCE in
Georgia, and the principles that are represented by the accord
are actually principles on the table still today with respect
to the conflict zones in Georgia and also with respect to the
democratic process that you have touched on.
If confirmed, I would seek to develop broad firsthand
knowledge of Georgia's performance with respect to promotion of
rule of law and fundamental freedoms afforded under Helsinki
Accords and to urge the Georgians to take all necessary steps
to ensure they are in full compliance.
Georgia has made progress toward becoming a full democratic
state. The elections this year and the Presidential elections
next year are testimony to that.
But, as you indicate, there are very real concerns. While
there has been real progress, there are real concerns about
what you might call of the level playing field. And there are
reports of harassment of opposition candidates that trouble us
deeply. The role of the so-called chamber of control and party
financing is drawing a lot of concern in Georgia and in the
international community.
I can tell you already our mission is raising these
concerns publicly and privately with the Georgian Government.
And if confirmed, it would be my role to continue to monitor
very carefully Georgia's observance of the principles that we
hold dear. This would be a central priority for my mission.
The United States already spends millions of dollars in
assistance to promote civil society, rule of law, and democracy
in Georgia. And we need to be careful stewards of those funds
to make sure that we are getting the results we're looking for.
Finally, I would just point out, given Georgia's interests,
Georgia's aspirations to NATO membership, and our support for
those aspirations, how these elections are conducted is very
important litmus test, and we will be watching carefully to
make sure that the way these elections unfold are in keeping
with NATO standards.
Senator Cardin. I would just underscore the issue of
qualification of opposition candidates. That has been used in
too many European countries as a way of trying to block
opposition opportunities. I would just urge our presence there
to have the widest possible opportunities for opposition to
effectively be able to compete on a level playing field.
Ambassador Norland. Yes, sir.
Senator Cardin. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you. Would you like to hear a
response from Ambassador Jacobson, too, on the Kosovo issue?
Senator Cardin. Yes, thank you.
Ambassador Jacobson. Thank you for the opportunity.
If I am confirmed, the issue of human rights and promotion
of democracy will be a critical element of my mission, as it
was in my missions in Turkmenistan and Tajikistan. And I would
look forward to working in very close partnership with the
Helsinki Commission, a partnership which I think produces real
results;
for example, our progress on the issue of religious freedom in
Turkmenistan.
In Kosovo, there has been a lot of progress made in the
area of human rights with regard to protection of all the
communities, which is included in the constitution. And some
progress has also been made in terms of bringing to justice
those officials who commit abuses.
The Government is currently working on electoral law in
preparation for parliamentary elections, which could occur as
early as next year, and also looking at constitutional
amendments to allow the direct election of the President.
After some criticism of the lack of serious sentences and
fines for people who committed electoral abuses, we have noted
a positive trend in 2011 toward serious sentences and fines.
And, in fact, 27 people have been sentenced to terms and more
than 100 people have been fined.
There are still serious problems with discrimination,
societal discrimination, for example, against ethic and
religious minorities, against disabled and LGBT people. There
are issues with corruption and rule of law. There are a variety
of issues that are going to take a concerted international
effort, including leadership by the United States in
cooperation with Kosovo, to address.
I would also point out that the human rights situation in
the North is not helped by the existence of the illegal
parallel institutions, which do prevent full human rights; for
example, the freedom of movement.
And these issues would all be critically important to my
mission, if confirmed.
Senator Cardin. I am just pointing out there appears to be
an opening with Serbia as it relates to north Kosovo. There
appears to be a willingness to talk more openly about these
issues, and Serbia is trying to become the leader; chair an
office in the OSCE.
So there is some opportunity, we think, to make significant
progress in this area. And I agree with your assessment. But I
think the United States can play a very important role, and our
Embassy in Kosovo can be a critical partner.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
At this point, we will recess for about 15 minutes while we
vote. And I will return. I'm not sure who else will.
Thank you.
[Recess.]
Senator Barrasso [presiding]. Thank you for resuming this.
We apologize for the fact that there is a vote going on.
Senator Shaheen will be back shortly.
I wanted to first thank all of you for your willingness to
serve, and congratulate you on your appointments, and look
forward to additional discussions.
I'm going to start, if I could, with the nominee to Kosovo.
Ambassador Jacobson, in November last year, I traveled to
Camp Bondsteel in Kosovo. That was my second visit. I spent
Thanksgiving with the troops. We have 23 Wyoming Air National
Guardsmen there. They are members of Detachment 3, the B
Company, 777th Aviation Support Battalion. For the next 6
months, they are going to continue to provide helicopter
support and maintenance to the 112th Aviation Regiment. Also
able to meet at the time on Thanksgiving Day with the Charge
d'Affaires, Michael Murphy, and had a nice visit.
On paper, our forces in Kosovo are classified as the third
responder in support of the peacekeeping operations. However,
we know that more often than not when violence erupts, these
forces become the first responders when Kosovo security forces
and European Union forces can't assist.
So with the drawdown that is occurring there, I just want
to know how we can encourage the people of Kosovo to step up
and provide the type of security that people of Kosovo demand,
expect, and who can we trust to make sure that that happens and
what role you will plan that.
Ambassador Jacobson. Thank you for the question, Senator.
KFOR staffing is currently at about 5,800 troops, which the
United States usually forms around 10 percent. We are what is
known as Gate 2 in terms of the level of staffing. Given the
violence that occurred last summer and the conditions on the
ground, we see the staffing levels remaining relatively
consistent for the near foreseeable future, because KFOR, as
you mentioned, does play an incredibly important role in terms
of maintaining security throughout the country.
In addition to that, KFOR is playing an important role in
terms of mentoring and advising the Kosovo security force,
which has responsibility in four major areas, including civil
emergency, fire suppression, disposal of hazardous materials,
explosive ordnance disposal. And KFOR will continue to play
that role as the Kosovo security force develops.
The commander of KFOR has recommended that the full
operating capacity status for the Kosovo security force. This
is a decision that has to be taken by the North Atlantic
Council. And that decision will inform how we go forward in the
future.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you.
Ambassador Norland, I had a chance to travel to Georgia
with Senator McCain and others, and meet with the President
there. On December 31, 2011, President Obama signed the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012. It
specifically calls on the Secretary of Defense to submit a plan
to Congress for the normalization of U.S. defense cooperation
with Georgia, including the sale of defensive weapons.
If confirmed as United States Ambassador to the Republic of
Georgia, will you be committed to stepping up the United States
defense security cooperation with Georgia and support efforts
to assist in developing Georgia's self-defense capabilities?
Ambassador Norland. Senator, yes. Thank you for the
question. And thanks for your support for Georgia, for NATO
enlargement, and for Georgia's defense capabilities.
I firmly believe that a robust military-to-military
relationship needs to be a part of United States-Georgia
relations. And fortunately, during President Saakashvili's
meeting with President Obama on January 30, I think some
important forward impetus was given to that relationship.
We have already seen approval of a shipment or the purchase
of M4 carbines by the Georgians. There's going to be I think
enhanced focus on support for Georgian defense reforms, for
Georgia's ability to participate in the ISAF mission, and for
NATO interoperability in that regard.
As we speak, the U.S. Marines are wrapping up today an
exercise, Agile Spirit, with Georgian military, in support of
their ISAF presence. The Georgia National Guard here in the
United States has a very important and active relationship with
the military in Georgia. Deputy Assistant Secretary Wallander
from the Department of Defense was there recently, and I
understand a Georgian Deputy Minister of Defense is coming here
next month to pick up the dialogue following the Presidential
meeting here on this issue.
Absolutely, if confirmed, I see it as an essential part of
my mission to develop a robust military-to-military bilateral
defense cooperation arrangement with Georgia.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you, Mr. Norland. I appreciate it.
Ambassador Merten, with regard to Croatia, I'm just
wondering how Croatia has been impacted by the global economic
crisis, and what sort of efforts have been taken by Croatia to
boost its competitiveness, to boost its economic growth, and
how the United States may be involved and helpful in future
efforts.
Ambassador Merten. Thanks so much.
I think Croatia's accession to the European Union, if that
goes forward as planned next summer--summer 2013--will be a
large boon to the Croatian economy.
One of the things I hope to focus on, should I be fortunate
enough to be able to get out to post, is to work with the
Croatians on investment and economic growth issues. I firmly
believe that as a good partner economically, we can work with
them and help them to develop their economy, to develop a
business-friendly environment, which is very welcoming to
foreign investment, particularly American investment.
And, ultimately that is good for the American people,
because a good, strong economic partner in Croatia will help
create and generate jobs here in the United States.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you.
Mr. Pekala, the former President of Latvia is an orthopedic
surgeon, and I'm an orthopedic surgeon. We trained with the
same professors. So we have great relationships unrelated to
all the things that you're going to be doing. But if you ever
get into a pinch, let the orthopedic surgeons come in, and we
can help.
Latvia was significantly impacted by the global economic
crisis. The country's gross domestic product dropped by 17
percent in 2009, unemployment rose to 18 percent in 2010. In
2008, the IMF provided a stabilization loan to Latvia.
What steps is the Government taking in response to the
economic crisis? And what kind of impact will the uncertainty
in the eurozone have on Latvia?
Mr. Pekala. Senator, thank you for that question, and I can
ask former President Zatlers and you, then, if it hurts when
I----
Senator Barrasso. It hurts when you do that, stop doing
that.
Mr. Pekala. Exactly. [Laughter.]
As you well stated, Latvia was hit very hard by the
economic crisis. I mentioned in my prepared remarks that
between 2008 and 2010, as you said, GDP in Latvia went down by
25 percent.
Prime Minister Dombrovskis, starting right away after the
economic crisis hit, undertook a very serious program of
reducing Government expenditures in increasing revenue. And
after 2010, and as you mentioned the IMF, some European
countries, especially Nordic countries, and the European Union,
undertook a lending program to Latvia. With the seriousness of
the Government program, and the assistance from these other
places, Latvia has very impressively rebounded.
Last year, 2011, their growth rate was 5.5 percent, one of
the highest growth rates in the European Union. In the last
quarter of 2011, their growth rate was 5.7 percent, the highest
growth rate in the European Union. They have been very serious
about the measures taken in the government and the economy to
improve.
There is great news on this for Latvia, of course. As you
mentioned, unemployment went down from 20 through 15; it's now
at 12. Still high but going in the right direction.
And there's good news for the Latvians and for us. One of
the elements of the good news for us is that there is really
fertile ground now for increased American investment in Latvia.
That has grown over the last 2 years. Last year it was about
$600 million, a growth of almost 70 percent from the previous
year. And if I am confirmed, I intend to put very high on my
list of priorities enhancing American investment in Latvia.
This creates American jobs. It is good for all of us. Good for
America, good for Latvia.
Another element of the benefit here is that Latvia has now
reengaged and restarted its assistance program in its
neighborhood and beyond. Through the economic crisis, it wasn't
able to do so, it was so strapped. Some Government agencies
lost 40 percent of their budgets, 30 percent of their people,
during the economic crisis. But Latvia's back, and it has
restarted its assistance program.
They are extremely well engaged with Georgia and have been
over many years with the Ministry of Interior and Justice of
the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and the Ministry of Defense,
on what Georgia can do to improve its democratic reforms and
get closer to NATO membership. And they have a very important
assistance program with Moldova, again, to teach the lessons
that they have learned as they have evolved.
So there's good news for Latvia. And we want to be a part
of that and help them and help America at the same time.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you.
Mr. Levine, I want to ask about the energy sector in
Estonia. And I know they have called for diversification of
Europe's energy supplies, the Government of Estonia is looking
at different energy sources to reduce the country's dependence
on Russian gas supply. So I just want to ask you, what kind of
energy resources Estonia has and what progress is being made
toward more energy independence, and what your evaluation is of
the effectiveness of the country's energy independence
strategy.
Mr. Levine. Thank you, Senator.
Estonia is lucky to have large deposits of oil shale, which
provides the majority of its oil and petroleum products. It is
dependent on Russia for gas, which provides about 15 percent of
their energy needs. But so far, that relationship has been
working smoothly.
They have been very much a proponent of a European energy
strategy and, themselves, tried to diversify. As was mentioned
earlier, they are a part of the partnership that is looking at
a nuclear power plant in Lithuania. And working with Finland,
they have been laying cables to connect themselves to the
Finnish electricity grid.
Their expertise in oil shale I think is both an opportunity
for them on the energy front as well as the commercial front.
They have purchased oil shale property in the United States,
about 30,000 acres in Utah, and hope to bring that into
production by 2016, producing about 30,000 barrels a day.
I think that kind of partnership between our two countries
on both energy and technology is one of the benefits that we
can enjoy.
Senator Barrasso. Well, thank you.
And, Madam Chairman, I now note a number of young people in
the audience, obviously family members. And I congratulated
each of the nominees. I also want to thank and congratulate
each of the families. I know that it is a major family
commitment to take on these kind of responsibilities for the
United States.
Thank you, Madam Chairman. No further questions.
Senator Shaheen [presiding]. Thank you very much, Senator
Barrasso. And thank you for bringing reinforcements to keep the
hearing going while I was voting.
I want to follow up on the economic question that you asked
Mr. Pekala, to Mr. Levine, because one of the things--a number
of you mentioned that effect the economic crisis on the
countries that you're hoping to serve. But Estonia, actually,
seems to have weathered the current economic crisis in Europe
much better. To what do you attribute that? What are they doing
right?
Mr. Levine. I believe that Estonia is doing a lot right.
They're viewed as one of the most open, most liberal economies
in the world. And the policies that they have pursued very much
in the free market realm are working for them.
They are back to positive growth. Unemployment is down.
They are followers of Maastricht Criteria. And they have a
relatively small population. And all those factors combined has
led to a real economic success story.
With that said, I would like to see greater commercial and
economic activity between the United States and Estonia in a
way that will benefit both of our economies.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you. You mentioned in your testimony
NATO's Cyber Defense Center of Excellence, which is in Estonia.
Can you comment on what impact that has had on Estonia? And
also on NATO? What lessons have been learned from having that
Center of Excellence there that we may be ought to learn here
in the United States?
Mr. Levine. Thank you, Senator.
Their expertise in cyber security is one of the niches that
Estonia has been able to offer to both the alliance and the
world at large. At the center, they are working on issues
directly related to NATO's internal cyber security, and in
partnership with the Maryland National Guard, they have a
similar program working on the development of cyber security
strategies that are applicable to the society at large.
We do have participants at the center in Tallinn. And it is
viewed as a very successful enterprise.
Senator Shaheen. And many people believe that the 2007
cyber attacks that have made Estonia one of the leaders in
cyber security, because of their need to respond to those
attacks, that those attacks originated in Russia. Can you talk
about how Estonia feels about the current Obama
administration's reset policies toward Russia, and what the
impact of both the 2007 attack and that reset policy have had
on Estonia?
Mr. Levine. Thank you, Senator.
I would characterize the Estonian-Russian relationship as
cool but correct. And our reset provided them a little bit more
space in order to pursue the practical cooperation that they
had with the Russians on things like border control,
immigration.
Outside of that, there isn't a lot of contact between the
two governments. The reset, as I said, it allows them a little
bit more space, but we wouldn't expect their own bilateral
relationship to have any major improvements until there is a
reconciliation of the 50 years of history that they had
together.
It is a very different view of the Soviet occupation, very
different view of what that era was about, is going to be an
obstacle in a closer relationship.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
Ambassador Jacobson, in your testimony, if I can find it
here, you had a really good summary, I think, of what would be
important to resolving the current situation with Serbia. And
you say that a solution to the situation in the North,
normalization of relations, require a durable modus vivendi
that respects Kosovo's sovereignty, takes into account the
views of the citizens of the north, and allows both Kosovo and
Serbia to proceed on their respective paths.
How do we help that happen?
Ambassador Jacobson. Well, I think we have to continue to
engage using the United States leadership with our
international partners, with the government and with the people
of Kosovo, with our regional partners.
One of the examples that I think is useful in this regard
is the Kosovo Serbs who live in the south. And there are
actually a lot more of those in the south than there are in the
north. And they have been able to take full advantage of the
far-reaching protections afforded them both by the
comprehensive status proposal and by Kosovo's own
constitutions.
I'm talking about local self-government and autonomy. I'm
talking about the fact that the Kosovo Serbs in the south
participate in all levels of government, from municipal--and
there are Serb-majority municipalities in the south, all the
way to the national level. And I think this is an important
model.
But just as important is the idea of engagement and
dialogue, and Prime Minister Thaci has said that he and his
government will reach out to community leaders in the north.
This is something that we absolutely promote and encourage.
And if I am confirmed, I will do my best to listen; to
understand the interests of all the stakeholders in this issue;
and to work with our international partners, with the Congress,
and with the government and the people of Kosovo to work toward
that durable modus vivendi based on practical agreements that
make a difference in people's lives that I mentioned in my
testimony.
Senator Shaheen. And is there any evidence that in the
northern part of Kosovo that those parallel structures that you
mentioned are becoming a concern for Serbs who live in that
area?
Ambassador Jacobson. Well, I think recent polling in the
north of Kosovo has indicated that 70 percent of the Serbs that
live up there don't see that Belgrade has any sort of plan for
their future. And this I think is a point. Nobody has any
objections to Serbia providing legitimate, transparent
assistance to Serbs in Kosovo in the areas of health and
education and social welfare. But I don't see that that is what
the illegal parallel structures are providing.
They are, in fact, interested in preserving their own
authority, and in some cases have actually created an
atmosphere of intimidation and fear for those in the north who
do wish to cooperate with the international community and with
the Government in Kosovo.
So clearly, this is an issue that is going to require
sustained engagement, leadership, and contacts.
Senator Shaheen. And is there evidence that that
environment of fear is coming from Belgrade? Or is it coming
from the local Serbs in the northern part of the country?
Ambassador Jacobson. I think an environment of fear is a
complex thing, and without having been there myself, I wouldn't
want to ascribe the origins to it. But it certainly does exist,
and it's something that we have to work toward ameliorating,
both in terms of the security situation on the ground that is
assisted by KFOR and in terms of our diplomatic engagement, and
also in terms of ours assistance programs, some of which have
been hampered in the north by the lack of freedom of movement.
I have in mind some of USAID proposals for infrastructure,
so we have had to focus more on community-building, short-term
job creation. We have in fact created 1,600 jobs.
So this is, I think, the kind of engagement that we need to
continue together with our international partners in the
countries of the region to reduce those levels of tension over
time.
Senator Shaheen. And one of the sources of conflict has
been concern among Serbs about attacks on the Serbian
monasteries that we have seen in the past. Is there a general
acceptance now by the Kosovars that those monasteries are
important historical and religious--I don't want to use the
term ``artifacts''--religious symbols? So accepting their
presence there without destroying them, because obviously that
will continue, until that point happens, that will continue to
be a source of conflict.
Ambassador Jacobson. Well, I think the fact that the
Government of Kosovo has really engaged in this reconstruction
and implementation commission, which was established together
with the Serbian Orthodox Church and the ministries of culture
of both Serbia and Kosovo, to rebuild and repair those
religious buildings that were destroyed in the 2004 riots is
really testament to that fact.
In fact, the Government of Kosovo not only financially
supports that effort but also provides 17 sites with protection
from the Kosovo security force.
Societal discrimination does still exist--I don't want to
downplay that--in Kosovo with harassment or vandalism against
both Serbian Orthodox sites. Also, last year there was
vandalism in a Jewish cemetery in Pristina, which the
Government moved quickly to clean up and denounce.
The Protestants have complained that they haven't been able
to open a cemetery in Decani, and the Islamic community has
protested the ban on headscarves in religious institutions.
So these are all examples that appear in our religious
freedom report. And if confirmed, I would work very hard on
issues of respect for religious diversity.
I've learned through my engagement with religious leaders
at FSI that some of them don't like the word ``tolerance,''
because it indicates that I'm just putting up with you.
So the eventual goal is to produce a requirement that
respects and promotes religious diversity. And I would work
very hard on that issue with religious communities and leaders
and with the government and people of Kosovo, if confirmed.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you very much.
Ambassador Norland, I know that Senator Cardin raised some
concerns about open elections in Georgia and some of the
activities that raise questions about how free the opposition
is to compete in those elections.
Yesterday, the Atlantic Council had a panel discussion here
about NATO and the upcoming summit in Chicago, which as you
point out, and others have, I did in my remarks, Georgia has
aspirations and has been promised membership in NATO,
ultimately.
But one of the points that former Secretary Albright made
yesterday is that there is a connection between rule of law,
and free and open elections, and government values, and
participation in NATO.
And so can you talk about how important an open,
competitive election for Georgia's future, both for continued
support here in the United States and Europe, and also in terms
of NATO acceptance, will be?
Ambassador Norland. Yes, Senator, thanks.
I think that the relationship is pivotal, that Europe and
the United States are closely watching the conduct of these
elections to determine whether they meet the criteria that are
expected of a NATO member country.
There are real concerns about the way certain aspects of
these elections are being conducted, harassment of opposition.
Our goal is to see a level playing field.
We have extended thanks to Congress. We have extensive
assistance programs to try to develop the rule of law, to
promote a civil society, the role of the media.
And it is not that we are focused on any particular
individual. What we are seeking to do is to protect the
integrity and support the integrity of the process. And I think
Georgian officials are beginning to understand that, in fact,
they are being watched, that this is being monitored closely,
and that it is being viewed as a litmus test for their
membership in NATO.
We hope that they will take the right steps.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you. I certainly hope that is the
case as well.
As you remember so well, back in 2008, the Russian--there
was a conflict between Georgia and Russia over Abkhazia and
South Ossetia. There's not a lot that is being heard right now
about what the status of that situation is, except that Russia
has not complied with all of the terms of the agreement that
ended that conflict, or at least created a cease-fire.
So can you talk about whether there any recent measures
that we have taken to encourage Russia to fulfill its
obligations under the agreement?
Ambassador Norland. Well, first of all, let me thank you
for your participation in the Atlantic Council publication on
Georgia in the West, because I think a lot of good ideas are
contained in there, which I know will help guide me, if I am
confirmed.
Senator Shaheen. My staff appreciates your mentioning that.
Ambassador Norland. What happened in Georgia in 2008 was a
tragedy. And I think the entire international community is
seized now with the issue of how do we overcome that tragedy
and find a way to move forward, and, if you will, in a way, to
move back toward the status quo ante.
We continue to object to the presence of Russian troops in
the occupied territories, and we strongly support Georgia's
sovereignty and territorial integrity. These are matters of
principle.
You asked what additional steps can we take now; what is
the prospect for galvanized movement on this? I will know
better if confirmed and able to get out and get a sense on the
ground of what is possible.
But quite clearly, we need to continue to use the forum in
Geneva and other fora to urge Russia to fulfill its 2008 cease-
fire obligations.
There is no military solution to the situation, so the
issue is how do we galvanize out diplomacy. As George Kennan
would say, all measures short of war, to try to address the
situation.
In addition to the talks in Geneva, there's another round
coming up at the end of this month. We can find ways to try to
take steps to, for example, get international monitoring
groups, whether from OSCE, the EU-monitoring mission, or
others, into the occupied territories themselves and not simply
on the margins.
Try to get humanitarian assistance into those areas, and
look for small confidence-building measures that can lay the
groundwork for progress, such as Georgia's no-first-use-of-
force declaration. Hopefully, Russia would reciprocate--the
projects that OSCE is doing with regard to water management in
South Ossetia, or the UNDP's youth projects in Abkhazia.
I think if we approach these issues in a spirit of
transparency with a desire to minimize regional tensions and
find a way forward, I think diplomacy can play a very important
role in getting us out of this mess.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you very much.
Ambassador Merten, you talked about Croatia's EU
membership, which will soon happen, in 2013. Can you talk a
little bit more about how that membership is going to benefit
Croatia? And what might be the impact of that on some of
Croatia's neighbors in the Western Balkans?
Ambassador Merten. Thanks for that question.
I think full EU membership for Croatia opens up, obviously,
a huge market for Croatian producers. It also presents them
with a challenge, however, because they're going to need to
raise the bar of their competitiveness to at least meet the
level of their EU neighbors.
But given Croatia's past performance over recent years, I
am quite confident that the Croatian private sector and
Croatian Government will be able to meet those challenges.
Regarding the rest of the immediate neighborhood, if you
will, I think Croatia sets a good example for the way other
countries in the region can move forward. We have a mature
partnership now with Croatia. We no longer have an AID mission
there. They have made terrific progress. And I think they show
a good roadmap to other countries in the region, to what is
possible.
And I am very optimistic that their EU membership will give
them great opportunities if they are able to take advantage of
them.
Senator Shaheen. I had the opportunity to visit Croatia a
couple years ago with Senator Voinovich when he was still in
the Senate. And as I am sure you are aware, he is beloved in
the Western Balkans. But one of the things we did was to meet
with the Prime Minister at the time who had been very
successful in cracking down on corruption, much more so, I
think, than was anticipated when she took over that job.
Can you talk about the extent to which many of those
reforms are continuing and how big a challenge that continues
to be in the country?
Ambassador Merten. Of course. Thank you.
My understanding is that there continue to be some
challenges in that area. However, I think, as, again, part of
Croatia's EU accession process, they have had to put in certain
safeguards in place. As I understand it, they are still in the
process of doing some of that, so there is some of the
remaining homework, if you will, that needs to be done by
Croatia before they can fully join next year.
We will certainly encourage them, should I be confirmed, in
continuing to meet those requirements and any offers of
assistance or advice that we can offer, I would certainly make
those available.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you very much.
Mr. Pekala, in your testimony, you talked about the effort
to reach out to the minority communities in Latvia.
What kind of things do you have in mind as you're talking
about outreach? What could you do as the U.S. Ambassador, to
help with that effort?
Mr. Pekala. Madam Chairwoman, thank you for the question.
I think we can operate on two levels in Latvia. And if I am
confirmed, I would try to operate on both.
On the overall approach to tolerance and understanding and
dialogue, we, the United States, represent the world's best
example of how multicultural societies can work in terms of
diversity, inclusion, understanding, study, and conferences,
and education, and teaching teachers, and so on.
And we can present the example of how this works in
practice. And Latvians understand that. And of course, they
look to us for some examples.
Under that level, on the ground, the Embassy now in Riga is
very active on bringing people together and helping them
achieve this kind of dialogue and understanding. So when they
have events, they don't include any particular ethnic group and
exclude others; they bring everyone together. And sometimes
they find people haven't met their colleagues who speak a
different language. And they can provide the lubrication and
the mechanism for people to make these connections.
As we all know, there are few things more powerful than
just people-to-people connections. Our Embassy in Riga is doing
a great job on those. If confirmed, I would like to continue
and accentuate and reinforce those.
And we have a simple goal of getting people together, help
them understand each other, help them tolerate and move
together on what will be, eventually, a fully integrated
multicultural society.
Senator Shaheen. Well, as you point out in your testimony,
again, one of those groups are ethnic Russians. And obviously,
given the history, the relationship with Russia has been
challenging.
There are some Latvians who suggest that NATO isn't
prepared to deal with Russia, should conditions between Russia
and its Baltic neighbors deteriorate. Do you share those
concerns? And can you talk about why Latvians might be feeling
that way right now, beyond just the historical context?
Mr. Pekala. Madam Chairwoman, I don't share that view. I
believe that most Latvians, certainly officials and most of the
population, feel that their strategic context, their historic
and geographical connections with Russia, shifted in 2004, when
Latvia joint NATO.
They feel very confident about the article 5 guarantees of
their security in NATO.
I was serving in Estonia on March 29, 2004, when the Baltic
States join NATO. And in Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, this was a
historic moment, a really joyous day when they found that their
security concerns were shared now in an alliance that was not
only throughout Europe but across the Atlantic as well. They
take great comfort and pride in being associated with the
United States and NATO.
They can be very confident of this article 5 commitment. I
think most of them are confident. And we take every opportunity
to demonstrate that. I won't go on and on about Baltic air
policing, but they feel, again, that this is a very real
commitment to their security, a very real undertaking by the
allies, and particularly the United States.
I think they feel pretty comfortable about the security in
the context of NATO and beyond.
Senator Shaheen. Great, and thank you very much for that
answer.
And I'm very impressed that your daughters are still awake.
So, good job, girls. [Laughter.]
Mr. Pekala. Thank you.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you all very much. I have no further
questions.
We will keep the record open for 24 hours in case there are
questions submitted.
And I wish you all great luck in your new roles. And if
this committee can be helpful to you in any way, please let us
know.
The hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:36 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
----------
Additional Questions and Answers Submitted for the Record
Responses of Richard B. Norland to Questions Submitted
by Senator Richard G. Lugar
Question. Little progress has been made in bringing Russia back in
line with its international commitments to withdraw from the breakaway
regions of Georgia, and confidence-building measures across the
administrative boundary line have met with limited success and
enthusiasm. If you are confirmed as Ambassador, what priorities will
you pursue with respect to the breakaway territories of Georgia, in
terms of advocating U.S. policies and bringing greater transparency to
the situation?
Answer. If confirmed, my priorities on this issue will be to
continue to voice U.S. objection to Russia's occupation and
militarization of the separatist Georgian regions of Abkhazia and South
Ossetia and to insist that Russia fulfill its obligations under the
2008 cease-fire agreement, including withdrawal of its forces to
preconflict positions and free access for humanitarian assistance. I
will also support diplomatic efforts by the United States, as an active
participant in the Geneva discussions, to work with the cochairs and
others in pursuit of a resolution to the conflict. In addition, if
confirmed, I will continue to speak out in support of Georgia's
territorial integrity, as the United States did recently in statements
regarding the March 10 illegitimate ``elections'' in the separatist
region of Abkhazia. We will also continue to support strongly Georgia's
efforts to prevent any further recognitions of the occupied
territories.
The United States is supportive of efforts by all stakeholders to
reach a peaceful resolution to the conflict, pursue confidence-building
measures, increase transparency, promote security and stability, and
address humanitarian issues through projects that directly improve the
lives of the communities on the ground. I will support U.S. efforts to
continue to press for full access to the separatist regions by the
European Union Monitoring Mission (EUMM) and international
organizations like the OSCE to increase transparency and address
ongoing humanitarian and human rights concerns there.
Question. Georgia will hold important elections for Parliament and
President over the next year. Where do you see Georgia in terms of
ensuring a free and fair playing field for these upcoming elections?
Answer. The upcoming elections represent an important opportunity
for Georgia to advance its democratic development through its first
formal transfer of power via elections. Georgia has made important
progress on democratic reforms since the Rose Revolution. However, the
United States is concerned about reports of harassment of opposition
party members. The United States is committed to supporting free and
fair parliamentary and Presidential electoral processes in Georgia. The
administration's focus is on contributing to efforts to strengthen
processes and institutions, not to support individual candidates,
specific political parties, or a particular outcome. The United States
will continue to encourage the Government of Georgia to foster a
competitive and pluralistic campaign environment leading to elections
that allow the Georgian people to decide on the leadership that is best
for them. Ensuring free and fair elections is also vital to Georgia
achieving the standards necessary to facilitate its Euro-Atlantic
integration.
Question. During President Saakashvili's visit to the United
States, reports suggested that the administration would be conducting
an ``elevation'' of security cooperation with Georgia that would focus
on territorial self-defense. What tangible changes will this new
emphasis entail?
Answer. President Saakashvili and President Obama discussed
building upon existing successful programs to help the Georgian
military continue its institutional reform and defense transformation
efforts that support Georgia's self-defense, sustain its work with ISAF
in Afghanistan, and help it operate more effectively with NATO. The
Department of Defense and Georgian Ministry of Defense are discussing
specific steps that will help Georgia achieve its goals. The
administration will also work with the Georgian Government under our
existing Charter on Strategic Partnership and Bilateral Defense
Consultations forums to discuss and further develop these concepts,
subject to fiscal constraints on both sides.
Question. What is the timeline for negotiation of a free trade
agreement with Georgia?
Answer. President Obama and President Saakashvili agreed to
increase trade and economic cooperation during President Saakashvili's
visit to Washington earlier this year and agreed to launch a high-level
dialogue to consider how to accomplish this through enhanced trade and
investment frameworks, investment agreements, and the possibility of a
free trade agreement. Initial USTR-led discussions will commence in the
near future, as well as parallel discussions within the U.S.-Georgia
Strategic Partnership Commission's economic working group as early as
this spring.
Question. Some reports have suggested that opposition supporters in
Georgia have been detained. Are these reports correct and what steps
are being undertaken to address this matter?
Answer. We are not aware of any opposition supporters being
detained, although there have been some credible reports of their
harassment. In addition, there are indications that Georgia's new
campaign finance law is being implemented in a manner which is curbing
political speech.
The United States has urged and will continue to urge the
Government of Georgia to foster a campaign environment that is free and
fair and perceived as such by the Georgian people. The Embassy has
worked closely with all interested parties, both inside and outside the
government, and including the opposition, in an effort to achieve a
competitive campaign environment. Our focus is on the process and
ensuring that all qualified candidates and political parties are able
to compete on equal terms; the administration does not support any
particular party or candidate.
Question. Solomon Kimeridze, an opposition supporter, reportedly
died while in custody. Is this report accurate and what is your
understanding of the circumstances of his death?
Answer. Official reports indicate that Solomon Kimeridze died while
in custody of police in the town of Khashuri. As a result of the
investigation by the Georgian Government, I understand new rules
regarding law enforcement monitoring were implemented and the Khashuri
Chief of Police was relieved of his duties due to ``failure to
institute safety norms'' which led to injuries reportedly sustained
from a fall from the third floor to the first floor of the police
building. Embassy Tbilisi personnel met with Ministry of Justice and
Ministry of Internal Affairs officials following the incident to
discuss the ongoing investigation by the Chief Prosecutor's office and
reiterated the importance of an independent and transparent
investigation. The United States has raised rule-of-law concerns with
the Georgian Government and spoken out repeatedly on rule of law and
human rights issues, including concerns about ensuring the judiciary's
independence and even-handed and consistent application of due process
protections.
NOMINATIONS OF SCOTT DeLISI, MICHAEL RAYNOR, AND MAKILA JAMES
----------
THURSDAY, MARCH 22, 2012
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Foreign Relations,
Washington, DC.
----------
Hon. Scott DeLisi, of Minnesota, to be Ambassador to the
Republic of Uganda
Michael Raynor, of Maryland, to be Ambassador to the Republic
of Benin
Makila James, of the District of Columbia, to be Ambassador to
the Kingdom of Swaziland
----------
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:30 p.m., in
room SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Christopher
A. Coons, presiding.
Present: Senators Coons, Udall, and Isakson.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. CHRISTOPHER A. COONS,
U.S. SENATOR FROM DELAWARE
Senator Coons. I am pleased to chair this hearing of the
Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee for Africa, considering
nominees to serve as Ambassador to the Republic of Uganda, the
Republic of Benin, and Kingdom of Swaziland.
As always, I welcome my good friend and ranking member,
Senator Isakson, hopefully as well as some other members of the
Foreign Relations Committee who may join us.
I would like to welcome today our distinguished nominees,
Ambassador Scott DeLisi, the nominee for Uganda; Makila James,
the nominee for Swaziland; and Michael Raynor, the nominee for
Benin. I apologize that ongoing votes and deliberations of the
floor have delayed our start by a few moments. I am grateful
for your patience.
These three nominees bring to the table today a vast array
of professional experience, and I look forward to hearing your
vision for advancing United States interests, values, and
policy concerns in Africa. We will speak about three important
countries in three very different regions of Africa.
Uganda, a country I visited 25 years ago, but have not had
the joy yet of returning to. It is a valued strategic partner
of the United States. Uganda is playing a critical role in
regional efforts targeting Joseph Kony and the Lord's
Resistance Army in close coordination with recently deployed
U.S. military advisers in Central Africa. Uganda is also a
leading contributor to the AMISOM peacekeeping mission in
Somalia and has shown a longstanding commitment to countering
al-Shabaab and other destabilizing forces in the Horn.
The U.S. Ambassador to Uganda will have the challenging job
of continuing that strategic partnership, while urging Uganda
to also improve systems of governance and adopt democratic
reforms. President Museveni has ruled for 26 years, and
government security forces have at times taken a heavy-handed
approach toward political opponents. Also, in my view, a deeply
troubling bill imposing harsh criminal penalties for
homosexuality that is currently making its way to the Ugandan
Parliament, and has been a source of some tension between our
governments.
Last, new discoveries of oil promise to bring new revenue
and economic opportunities to Uganda, but also increase the
importance and urgency of insuring transparency and combating
corruption.
Swaziland, a tiny country on the border of South Africa,
has a long record of stability, and is a top exporter of
textiles to the United States under AGOA. Its constitutional
monarchy has created tension between the dominant royal family
and pro-democracy opposition groups who want the right to form
political parties and participate more directly in governance.
Swaziland has the highest HIV/AIDS infection rate in the
world with more than a quarter of adults suffering from this
infection. Challenges for the new Ambassador will include
working with the government to encourage political freedom and
democratic reform while continuing our effective health sector
funding and partnership.
Last, Benin, a country that Senator Isakson and I had an
opportunity to visit together last year, has made important
progress on governance, and has had two decades of peaceful and
democratic transitions. With vital assistance from the
Millennium Challenge Corporation, Benin has upgraded and
rehabilitated its port, and it remains an important producer of
cotton.
I would be remiss if I failed to mention the important
trade between the Port of Wilmington in my home State and the
Port of Cotonou, making Benin one of the biggest international
trading partners for the State of Delaware.
Benin has the potential to be an even more diversified and
important trading partner with the United States, and I hope
the new Ambassador will work with President Yayi and his
government to increase transparency, combat corruption, and
improve the ease of doing business.
All three nominees before us have had long, distinguished
careers with the State Department and bring a wealth of
experience to these positions. Ambassador DeLisi has 30 years
of Foreign Service experience, is currently the Ambassador to
Nepal, previously served as Ambassador to Eritrea, and deputy
chief of mission to Botswana.
Ms. Mikala James is also a Senior Foreign Service officer
currently serving as Office Director for Caribbean Affairs,
having previously served as Deputy Director in the Office of
Southern African Affairs, and as the principal officer at the
consulate general in Juba.
Last, Mr. Michael Raynor is currently serving as the
Executive Director of the Bureau of African Affairs, where he
oversees support of U.S. policy goals for the Bureau and its 53
overseas embassies, consulates, and offices. He has served
primarily in Africa, including Zimbabwe, Namibia, Guinea,
Djibouti, and Congo Brazzaville.
I look forward to hearing from them after first turning to
Senator Isakson for some opening remarks.
Senator Isakson.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHNNY ISAKSON,
U.S. SENATOR FROM GEORGIA
Senator Isakson. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would ask
unanimous consent that a prepared statement be put in the
record.
Senator Coons. Without objection.
Senator Isakson. And I want to welcome all of you today to
this hearing and do what I always do when people accept posts
that are not necessarily considered the political plums of
assignments around the world. And your sacrifice for your
country is noted and appreciated. And we appreciate your
willingness to serve very, very much.
I have had the occasion to have quite a relationship with
the nation of Benin, which Mr. Raynor and I have discussed. The
Ambassador preceding you, Mr. Knight, has done a phenomenal
job, and I enjoyed visiting with him, along with Senator Coons.
President Yayi has done a remarkable job in terms of
reform, and I have to congratulate and commend Minister of
Justice Ms. Bedo, who is undertaking the prosecution or the
hopeful prosecution of the perpetrators of the murder of the
young Georgian by the name of Kate Puzey, who served in the
Peace Corps and was brutally murdered in Benin for doing the
right thing, I might add.
But I really appreciate the State Department's cooperation
on this. Aaron Williams has been fantastic. Knight has been
fantastic. And I am sure that will continue with Michael
Raynor, and it is my hope that justice will ultimately be done.
I also congratulate Benin on just entering into their
second Millennium Challenge contract with further expansion to
Port Cotonou. That shows that they are working on corruption
issues and other issues that MCC requires for improvement. And
like Senator Coons, acknowledge they will continue to be a
growing trading partner with the United States of America.
I have never had the privilege of going to Swaziland, but I
have read the briefs, and I know it has got a number of
challenges. I know its location is close to South Africa, and a
part of the world I want to get to one day so I can add it to
the list of African countries I visited. And I will be
interested in seeing Ms. James' comment on what alarmed me,
which was the high rate of AIDS infection in Swaziland, which
was 25.9 percent of something we are obviously, because of
PEPFAR and the initiative of President Bush and President
Obama, interested in trying to make a contribution.
Mr. DeLisi, it is a pleasure to see you again. I honor you
for accepting this appointment to Uganda. I look forward to
going to Uganda in the not too distant future. As you note in
your prepared testimony, we have introduced advisors, military
advisors, to help the Ugandan Government and the Democratic
Republic of the Congo in terms of the issues with Joseph Kony
and the Lord's Resistance Army. But that is--you are right in
the garden spot of the Great Lakes Region of all of Africa. The
friendship the United States has with Uganda has grown since
the 1986 election, and we appreciate the improvements in
democracy that have been made there. I look forward to hearing
your comments, not only about our relationship, but also about
any comments you have on Joseph Kony and the advisors we have
deployed in that country.
So, on behalf of the people of Georgia that I represent,
thank you for your willingness to serve the country, and I look
forward to your testimony.
[The prepared statement of Senator Isakson follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Johnny Isakson, U.S. Senator From Georgia
Thank you, Chairman Coons. I am pleased to join you in welcoming
Ambassador Scott DeLisi, Mr. Michael Raynor, and Ms. Makila James to
the committee. I appreciate this opportunity to discuss your
nominations and discuss our bilateral relationships with Benin,
Swaziland, and Uganda. All three countries present many opportunities
and challenges.
Last June, Chairman Coons and I had the opportunity to visit Benin
to engage Benin's Government on the ongoing investigation into the
murder of a young Georgian named Kate Puzey who was killed while
serving as a Peace Corps Volunteer in northern Benin. Finding justice
for Kate and her family has been a priority of mine and I am thankful
for the U.S. mission to Benin and the Government of Benin for their
cooperative efforts and continued dedication to pursuing justice. The
current U.S. Ambassador to Benin, James Knight, has been a great
advocate for the United States, particularly for the Puzey family, and
I have greatly appreciated his efforts during his term.
President Yayi's continuing reform efforts in Benin are helping to
develop its economy and his collaborative efforts with fellow ECOWAS
leaders have seen Benin emerge as a leader on the issues important to
West Africa. In December 2011, Benin was declared eligible for a second
compact with the Millennium Challenge Corporation. This compact would
allow Benin to continue the development of the Port of Cotonou which is
crucial to economic growth for Benin.
While I have not had the chance to visit Swaziland or Uganda, I am
well aware of some of the challenges facing the nominees if they are
confirmed. Swaziland, with the world's highest HIV infection rate, has
been the recipient of much U.S. assistance to turn the tide of the
growth of that rate. As we consider U.S. commitments to global health,
it is important to understand the strategy for implementation of U.S.
global health programs in countries such as Swaziland. Swaziland has
made great strides in increasing its ownership over U.S.-funded HIV/
AIDS treatment programs, and the next Ambassador will be charged with
encouraging the continuation of this positive trend.
President Museveni has been in power in Uganda since 1986 and has
helped to bring stability and democracy to a country that had
experienced years of civil war. However, concerns have been recently
been growing about a deterioration in democratic rights and President
Museveni's increasingly entrenched hold on the Presidency.
Located in the troubled Great Lakes Region, Uganda is crucial to
regional security cooperation. There are currently 100 combat-equipped
U.S. military advisors providing training to the Ugandan military in
their quest to track down and capture Joseph Kony and the Lord's
Resistance Army. I look forward to hearing Ambassador DeLisi's thoughts
on how he plans to continue to engage the Government of Uganda on our
shared interest of regional stability and security.
Thank you again, Mr. Chairman, for calling this important hearing.
I look forward to hearing the testimonies of the nominees.
Senator Coons. Thank you, Senator.
I now look forward to hearing from our nominees, starting
with Ambassador DeLisi, followed by Ms. James, and finally Mr.
Raynor.
Please start, if you would, by introducing your families or
anyone else you would like to recognize that is here in support
of you. And I would like to also start by thanking both you and
your families and circle of friends and supporters for
sustaining your long careers in service to the United States.
Ambassador.
STATEMENT OF HON. SCOTT DELISI, OF MINNESOTA,
TO BE AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA
Ambassador DeLisi. Thank you, Senator, and I am honored to
introduce my wife, Leah, who has been a partner in diplomatic
service to our Nation for decades, and probably a better
diplomat than I am.
With that, Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, I am
deeply honored to appear before you today as the nominee to be
the next United States Ambassador to the Republic of Uganda. I
am grateful to the President and the Secretary of State for
their confidence and their support.
Uganda is a vital partner in a volatile region. As the
major troop contributor to the African Union mission in
Somalia, AMISOM, Uganda has made tremendous sacrifices to
promote peace and stability in the Horn of Africa.
The Ugandan military has also led regional efforts to
counter the Lord's Resistance Army. Although the LRA has not
been active in Uganda since 2006, it continues to cast a wide
shadow across Central Africa. The United States has supported
Uganda's constructive role both in AMISOM and against the LRA.
Most recently, we deployed a small number of U.S. military
personnel to serve as advisors to Uganda's counter LRA forces
and those of other regional partners.
Uganda has also contributed to the peace and development in
South Sudan, Africa's newest nation and Uganda's neighbor to
the north, by providing training and assistance to its civil
service, judiciary, and military.
Uganda stands out not only for its current contributions to
regional peace and security, but also for its own transition
from a state in chaos to one of the region's most stable
nations. When President Yoweri Museveni came to power in 1986,
after decades of violent internal strife in Uganda, he
instituted political reforms and sound macroeconomic policies
that created a more inclusive government and contributed to
steady economic growth.
Against this backdrop, the United States has enjoyed a
close bilateral partnership with Uganda for the past quarter
century. We recognize, however, that we must continue to work
with Uganda to address a number of ongoing challenges in terms
of broad economic development and the nurturing of a democratic
political culture.
On the development front, we have a robust set of programs.
The President's Feed the Future initiative focuses on improving
productivity and incomes in the agriculture sector on which 70
percent of Uganda's citizens rely for their livelihoods.
Another area of focus has been Northern Uganda where we
provided $102 million last year to help the region's people,
including many former LRA abductees, rebuild their lives and
communities.
The health sector is another challenge. Although HIV/AIDS
prevalence rates have decreased from a high of 20 percent in
the 1990s, they have stagnated at around 6 percent for the past
decade. Malaria is another lethal threat in Uganda, causing an
estimated 100,000 deaths per year.
There are also very significant challenges in the area of
maternal and child health. Through the Global Health
Initiative, the President's emergency plan for AIDS relief, the
President's malaria initiative, we are working the Ugandan
Government to improve the quality and accessibility of health
services and to address Uganda's most pressing health concerns.
We recognize, however, that long-term success will require
a significant and sustained commitment from the Ugandan
Government. If confirmed, I will continue to reinforce this
point and seek to build an even more effective partnership with
the Ugandan Government, civil society, and faith-based groups
in the areas of economic development and health.
We are also working to help Uganda strengthen its
multiparty democracy and reinforce its respect for human
rights. Although Uganda's electoral process last year was more
transparent and peaceful than previous elections, it was
carried out on an uneven playing field and fraught with
irregularities. More can be done to improve and empower
Uganda's governing institutions, and we will continue our
efforts in that regard. Likewise, we continue to urge the
Ugandan Government and civil society to respect not just
political freedoms, but also the fundamental human rights of
all individuals.
Finally, Mr. Chairman, if confirmed, the protection of U.S.
citizens and U.S. business interests in Uganda will be one of
my foremost concerns for my team and for me.
In sum, Mr. Chairman, if confirmed, I will seek to
strengthen our partnership with Uganda as a force for regional
peace and security. I will also work with the government and
people of Uganda in pursuit of a healthier, more productive,
and more prosperous society where protection of citizens'
political and personal freedoms is a priority for all.
Achieving these objectives will be critical to Uganda's future
stability and economic growth, as well as its continued role as
an important and constructive regional leader.
I look forward to the opportunity to serve our Nation and
Uganda if confirmed, and welcome any questions that the
committee may have.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ambassador DeLisi follows:]
Prepared Statement of Ambassador Scott DeLisi
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am deeply honored to
appear before you today as the nominee to be the next United States
Ambassador to the Republic of Uganda. I am grateful to the President
and Secretary of State for their confidence and support.
Uganda is a vital U.S. partner in a volatile region. As the major
troop contributor to the African Union Mission in Somalia (AMISOM),
Uganda has made tremendous sacrifices to promote peace and stability in
the Horn of Africa. The Ugandan military has also led regional efforts
to counter the Lord's Resistance Army (LRA). Although the LRA has not
been active in Uganda since 2006, it continues to cast a wide shadow
across central Africa.
The United States has supported Uganda's constructive role both in
AMISOM and against the LRA. Most recently, we deployed a small number
of U.S. military personnel to serve as advisors to Uganda's counter-LRA
forces and those of other regional partners. Uganda has also
contributed to peace and development in South Sudan, Africa's newest
nation and Uganda's neighbor to the north, by providing training and
assistance to its civil service, judiciary, and military.
Uganda stands out not only for its current contributions to
regional peace and security but also for its own transition from a
state in chaos to one of the region's most stable nations. When
President Yoweri Museveni came to power in 1986 after decades of
violent internal strife in Uganda, he instituted political reforms and
sound macroeconomic policies that created a more inclusive government
and contributed to steady economic growth. Against this backdrop, the
United States has enjoyed a close bilateral partnership with Uganda for
the past quarter century.
We recognize, however, that we must continue to work with Uganda to
address a number of ongoing challenges in terms of broad economic
development and the nurturing of a democratic political culture.
On the development front, we have a robust set of programs. The
President's Feed the Future Initiative focuses on improving
productivity and incomes in the agriculture sector, on which 70 percent
of Uganda's citizens rely for their livelihoods. Another area of focus
has been northern Uganda, where we provided $102 million last year to
help the region's people, including many former LRA abductees, rebuild
their lives and communities.
The health sector is another challenge. Although HIV/AIDS
prevalence rates have decreased from a high of 20 percent in the 1990s,
they have stagnated at around 6 percent for the past decade. Malaria is
another lethal threat in Uganda, causing an estimated 100,000 deaths
per year. There are also very significant challenges in the area of
maternal and child health. Through the Global Health Initiative, the
President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, and the President's Malaria
Initiative, we are working with the Ugandan Government to improve the
quality and accessibility of health services and to address Uganda's
most pressing health concerns.
We recognize, however, that long-term success will require a
significant and sustained commitment from the Ugandan Government. If
confirmed, I will continue to reinforce this point and seek to build
even more effective partnerships with the Ugandan Government, civil
society, and faith-based groups in the areas of economic development
and health.
We are also working to help Uganda strengthen its multiparty
democracy and reinforce its respect for human rights. Although Uganda's
electoral process last year was more transparent and peaceful than
previous elections, it was carried out on an uneven playing field and
fraught with irregularities. More can be done to improve and empower
Uganda's governing institutions, and we will continue our efforts in
that regard. Likewise, we continue to urge the Ugandan Government and
civil society to respect not just political freedoms but also the
fundamental human rights of all individuals.
Finally, Mr. Chairman, if confirmed, the protection of U.S.
citizens and U.S. business interests in Uganda will be one of the
foremost concerns for my team and for me.
In sum, Mr. Chairman, if confirmed, I will seek to strengthen our
partnership with Uganda as a force for regional peace and security. I
will also work with the government and people of Uganda in pursuit of a
healthier, more productive, and more prosperous society where
protection of citizens' political and personal freedoms is a priority
for all. Achieving these objectives will be critical to Uganda's future
stability and economic growth, as well as its continued role as an
important and constructive regional leader.
I look forward to the opportunity to serve our nation in Uganda if
confirmed, and I welcome any questions the committee may have.
Senator Coons. Thank you, Ambassador DeLisi.
Ms. James.
STATEMENT OF MAKILA JAMES, OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, TO BE
AMBASSADOR TO THE KINGDOM OF SWAZILAND
Ms. James. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, it is
a great privilege and honor to appear before you today as
President Obama's nominee to be the Ambassador to the Kingdom
of Swaziland.
I am extremely pleased to have my family here with me--my
husband, Louis Welles; my son, Mandela; and several close
friends. They have always provided me with unwavering love and
support throughout my Foreign Service career, and I am most
grateful to them.
Mr. Chairman, if confirmed, I look forward to working with
you and the honorable members of this committee to advance U.S.
interests in Swaziland. I am confident that based on my 24
years in the Foreign Service, I am prepared for the challenges
of leading our efforts to strive for an HIV-free generation,
promote democracy and good governance, support respect for
human rights and the rule of law, and foster sustainable
development in Swaziland.
Swaziland is an extraordinary country and a valued partner
to the United States. As one of the few resident diplomatic
missions in the Kingdom, we have a unique opportunity to engage
directly and to influence the government on issues of shared
strategic interest. We must take advantage of the opportunity
to do so as Swaziland faces an uncertain future.
After decades of absolute monarchy, the government's
initial efforts to expand political freedoms have slowed. Swazi
citizens have limited ability to engage meaningfully in
politics, and basic rights, such as freedom of assembly,
speech, and press are restricted. A deeply traditional society
that prides itself on stability, the Kingdom is beset by modern
problems: fiscal shortfalls, a devastating HIV/AIDS rate, and
the need for political change toward a more inclusive
democratic system. Despite these serious challenges, I am
confident that progress remains possible, and that we must work
diligently to pursue our goals in Swaziland.
If confirmed, I will serve during a crucial moment in Swazi
history. Under my guidance, the U.S. Embassy would continue to
advance democracy in Swaziland by encouraging support for key
government institutions, including Parliament and the
judiciary. We will support civil society, labor unions, the
media, and other institutions that hold the government
accountable, in particular in the run up to the 2013
parliamentary elections, a possible turning point in
Swaziland's future.
I would also work closely with the Government of the
Kingdom of Swaziland and civil society to enhance the status of
women and children--a critical area of engagement to help
address HIV/AIDS and uphold universal human rights. Like many
Swazis, I, too, am convinced that there is no fundamental
tradeoff between democracy and tradition, that Swazis can be
both proud of their culture and proud of their freedom. Perhaps
the greatest threat to Swaziland's future, however, lies in the
health of its people. Swaziland has the most severe national
HIV/AIDS and tuberculosis crisis in the world with a prevalence
rate of 26 percent and a life expectancy of only 43 years.
The United States is helping Swaziland fight the HIV/AIDS
epidemic by providing resources under the President's Emergency
Plan for AIDS Relief, PEPFAR. The PEPFAR budget for Swaziland
has risen from roughly $9 million in 2007 to $33 million in
2011.
To stem the tide of HIV/AIDS and help improve aid
effectiveness, the U.S. Government has signed a Partnership
Framework Agreement with the Government of the Kingdom of
Swaziland that has contributed significantly to Swaziland's
prevention of mother-to-child transmission and HIV/AIDS
treatment programs, amongst some of the most effective in all
of Africa.
The aim now is to strengthen public health and community
systems to sustain the response to the HIV/AIDS epidemic beyond
the PEPFAR program lifespan. If confirmed, I will work to
increase Swazi Government accountability and capacity to combat
HIV/AIDS while promoting Swazi-led efforts to create an HIV-
free generation.
The Government of Swaziland is also challenged by a fiscal
crisis that has hampered its ability to operate effectively. If
confirmed, I will continue our work with the Swazi Government
to promote economic reforms, provide technical assistance, and
encourage fiscal transparency and accountability. In addition,
I will promote labor reform and provide other guidance for
Swaziland to remain eligible for African Growth and Opportunity
Act benefits, and I will advocate for U.S. businesses who are
seeking to enter the Swazi market.
As a rotating chair of regional organizations, including
the Southern African Development community and the African
Union, Swaziland is important to United States interests as it
wields significance influence despite its small size. It is
critical to our regional strategic interests that we ensure
that Swaziland remains stable.
Fortunately, the United States-Swazi bilateral relationship
is strong. There is no greater evidence of our friendship than
the vibrant Peace Corps program through which 66 American
volunteers are currently engaged in community health, HIV/AIDS
prevention programs, and youth development. Encouraged by the
mutual respect our two nations share, and energized by the
challenges that lie ahead, I look forward to serving as
Ambassador to Swaziland if confirmed.
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I want to thank
you for the opportunity to appear before you today, and I will
be happy to answer any questions you have.
[The prepared statement of Ms. James follows:]
Prepared Statement of Makila James
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, it is a great privilege
and honor for me to appear before you today as President Obama's
nominee to be Ambassador to the Kingdom of Swaziland. I am extremely
pleased to have my family here with me--my husband, Louis Wells, and my
son, Mandela. They have always provided me with their unwavering love
and support throughout my Foreign Service career and I am most grateful
to them.
Mr. Chairman, if confirmed, I look forward to working with you and
the honorable members of this committee to advance U.S. interests in
Swaziland. I am confident that based on my 24 years in the Foreign
Service I am prepared for the challenges of leading our efforts to
strive for an HIV-free generation, promote democracy and good
governance, support respect for human rights and the rule of law, and
foster sustainable development in Swaziland. I have spent the vast
majority of my Foreign Service career working in or on Africa. I have
served as Principal Officer in Juba, Southern Sudan; Political Officer
in Harare, Zimbabwe; and Political/Economic Officer in Kaduna, Nigeria;
as well as Desk Officer for Sierra Leone and The Gambia; International
Relations Officer for Africa in the United Nations Security Council;
and a Member of the Secretary of State's Policy Planning Office
responsible for Africa. I believe that my experiences in Zimbabwe, a
country still in transition toward greater democratization, has
especially prepared me to serve as the U.S. Ambassador to Swaziland as
it confronts similar challenges in expanding democracy. My overall
experiences in each of these assignments has prepared me to serve in a
difficult environment and afforded me a broad knowledge of the region
and people.
In my current position as Director of Caribbean Affairs, I have led
my staff in supporting U.S. policy in the 14 countries and several
independent territories for which I am responsible, helping to
strengthen democratic institutions, address major threats to citizen
security, promote human rights, and encourage economic development. I
have also served as Deputy Director and Acting Director of the Office
of Southern African Affairs. These positions, as well as my service in
Juba, have provided me with the important management skills which I
would bring to an assignment as U.S. Ambassador to Swaziland.
Swaziland is an extraordinary country and valued partner of the
United States. As one of the few resident diplomatic missions in the
Kingdom, we have a unique opportunity to directly engage and influence
the government on issues of shared strategic interest. We must take
advantage of this opportunity as Swaziland faces an uncertain future.
After decades of absolute monarchy, the government's initial efforts to
expand political freedoms have slowed. Swazi citizens have limited
ability to engage meaningfully in politics, and basic rights such as
the freedom of assembly, speech, and press are restricted. A deeply
traditional society that prides itself on stability, the Kingdom is
beset by modern problems: fiscal shortfalls, a devastating HIV/AIDS
epidemic, and the need for political change toward a more inclusive
democratic system.
Despite these serious challenges, I am confident that progress
remains possible and that we must work diligently to pursue our goals
in Swaziland. If confirmed, I will serve as Ambassador during a crucial
moment in Swazi history. Under my guidance, the U.S. Embassy would
continue to advance democracy in Swaziland by encouraging support for
key government institutions, including Parliament and the judiciary,
which engender and uphold democratic values. We would also support
civil society, labor unions, the media, and other institutions that
hold the government accountable, in particular in the runup to the 2013
parliamentary elections, a possible turning point in Swaziland's
future. I would also work closely with the Government of the Kingdom of
Swaziland and civil society to enhance the status of women and girls--
critical areas of engagement to help address the HIV/AIDS epidemic,
support poverty alleviation efforts, and uphold universal human rights.
Like many Swazis, I, too, am convinced that there is no fundamental
tradeoff between democracy and tradition, that Swazis can be both proud
of their culture and proud of their freedom.
Perhaps the greatest threat to Swaziland's future, however, lies in
the health of its people. Swaziland has the most severe national HIV/
AIDS and tuberculosis crises in the world, with an HIV prevalence of 26
percent and a life expectancy of only 43 years. The United States is
helping Swaziland fight the HIV/AIDS epidemic by providing resources
under the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, or PEPFAR.
PEPFAR's budget for Swaziland has risen from roughly $9 million in 2007
to $33 million in 2011. To stem the tide of HIV/AIDS and help improve
aid effectiveness, the U.S. Government has signed a Partnership
Framework Agreement with the Government of the Kingdom of Swaziland,
the second-ever agreement of its kind. This Partnership has contributed
significantly to Swaziland's prevention of mother-to-child transmission
and HIV treatment programs, among the most effective in all of sub-
Saharan Africa. The aim now is to strengthen public health and
community systems to sustain the response to the HIV/AIDS epidemic
beyond the PEPFAR program's lifespan. If confirmed, I will work to
increase Swazi Government accountability and capacity to combat HIV/
AIDS, while promoting Swazi-led efforts to create an HIV-free
generation.
Compounding the challenges of the HIV/AIDS epidemic, the Government
of Swaziland is challenged by a fiscal crisis that has hampered the
government's ability to operate effectively. If confirmed, I will
continue our work with the Swazi Government to promote economic
reforms, provide technical assistance, and encourage fiscal
transparency and accountability. In addition, I will promote labor
reforms and provide other guidance for Swaziland to remain eligible for
African Growth and Opportunities Act (AGOA) benefits, and I will
advocate for U.S. businesses seeking to enter the Swazi market. AGOA is
a critically important program in Swaziland that is helping the country
address its serious unemployment rate of 41 percent. Swaziland is a
country that has successfully utilized AGOA and is one of the top
African exporters of textile to the United States. AGOA employs
approximately 15,000 Swazi workers in the textile sector, many of them
women. I would encourage Swaziland to demonstrate the continued
progress required for renewed AGOA eligibility to ensure its continued
access to its trade preferences.
As a rotating chair of regional organizations, including the
Southern African Development Community (SADC), and the African Union,
Swaziland is important to U.S. interests as it wields significant
influence despite its small size. It is critical to our regional
strategic interests that we ensure Swaziland is stable. Fortunately,
the U.S.-Swaziland bilateral relationship is strong. There is no
greater evidence of our friendship than the vibrant Peace Corps
program, through which 66 American volunteers are currently engaged in
community health/HIV prevention and youth development. As the impact of
the Peace Corps Volunteers continues to gradually expand throughout
2012, I would focus on working with the in-country Peace Corps staff to
ensure the effectiveness of this important program--the face of America
throughout much of rural Swaziland--as well as the safety and welfare
of each of the volunteers. Encouraged by the mutual respect our two
nations share and energized by the challenges that lie ahead, I look
forward to serving as U.S. Ambassador to Swaziland, if confirmed.
Mr. Chairman and nembers of the committee, I want to thank you for
the opportunity to appear before you today. I will be happy to answer
any questions you have.
Senator Coons. Thank you, Ms. James.
Mr. Raynor.
STATEMENT OF MICHAEL RAYNOR, OF MARYLAND,
TO BE AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF BENIN
Mr. Raynor. Thank you very much. Mr. Chairman and members
of the committee, I am honored to appear before you today, and
grateful to President Obama and Secretary Clinton for the
confidence they have placed in me as their nominee for
Ambassador to the Republic of Benin.
I am happy to introduce my wife, Kate, my son, Bradley, and
my daughter, Emma. They have all done America proud through
many years overseas, and I could not be more grateful for their
support.
I have focused on Africa during 20 of my 24 years in the
Foreign Service, including 14 years at our Embassies in Congo,
Djibouti, Guinea, Namibia, and Zimbabwe, and 6 years in
Washington, most recently as the Executive Director of the
Bureau of African Affairs. From this experience. From the
service I have gained rich experiences upon which I will draw
to support U.S. interests if confirmed as the next U.S.
Ambassador to the Republic of Benin.
Mr. Chairman and Senator Isakson, I greatly respect the
interest you have taken in Benin. Your visit last June
highlighted important U.S. Government programs, as well as your
strong interest in achieving justice for Kate Puzey, a
wonderful Peace Corps Volunteer who was tragically murdered
just over 3 years ago. The impressive luncheon you hosted last
July for President Yayi and three other West African Presidents
further reflected your significant engagement in the region.
The United States and Benin have a strong relationship
founded on common interests and objectives. Benin is a West
African success story and a proponent of values we Americans
hold dear. Since the early 1990s, Benin's embrace of democratic
pluralism has resulted in multiple free and fair elections,
including peaceful democratic transitions between political
parties. And it continues to buttress its democratic
institutions and procedures.
If confirmed, I will promote U.S. engagement in support of
good governance, accountability, and capacity-building within
the government and civil society.
Benin has a strong record on human rights. Religious
tolerance and freedom of expression are hallmarks of Beninese
society. Benin and the United States have collaborated to
promote women's and children's rights and to counter violence
against women. If confirmed, I will build upon efforts to
protect Benin's most vulnerable populations. This commitment
extends to investing in the health of the Beninese people to
boost maternal and child health, keep Benin's HIV rate in
check, and combat malaria and other diseases.
Benin and the United States share an interest in countering
terrorism and promoting regional stability. Benin's region
presents significant terrorist and maritime security concerns.
Benin participates actively in U.S. international military
education and training programs, and has contributed to United
Nations' peacekeeping efforts in Africa and Haiti. If
confirmed, I will support Benin's capacity to promote regional
and global security.
Since embracing free market principles over 20 years ago,
Benin has pursued economic reforms and diversification. Last
October, Benin completed a $307 million Millennium Challenge
Corporation Compact that improved Benin's port and increased
its citizens' access to entrepreneurial credit, land title, and
legal remedies. Due to this success, and in light of Benin's
commitment to good governance an economic development, Benin
was deemed eligible to develop a proposal for a second MCC
compact. If confirmed, I will work closely with the Government
of Benin toward a second compact, both to enhance Benin's
economic vitality and to promote U.S. commercial opportunities
in Benin.
While Benin is indeed a success story, it faces challenges
to sustaining and building upon its progress. Benin ranks low
on many of development indicators, including measures of
education, health, corruption, personal income, and business
climate. The United States has a strong stake in helping Benin
overcome these challenges, not only for the sake of the
Beninese people, but because of the value that a democratic,
responsible, and economically vibrant Benin brings to the
United States efforts to promote these values more broadly.
When he met with President Obama in Washington last July,
President Yayi reiterated his commitment to building upon
Benin's strengths, addressing its vulnerabilities, and
expanding its positive role on the world stage. If confirmed, I
will work hard to enhance the vital role of the United States
in these efforts.
Any discussion of United States interests in Benin must
sadly include the terrible murder of Kate Puzey, a tragedy not
only for her family and friends, but for all who stood to
benefit from her positive influence on the world. Great good
was brought from this tragedy through the enactment of the Kate
Puzey Peace Corps Volunteer Protection Act last November, but
legal justice is needed as well. The United States continues to
assist Benin in investigating the crime. If confirmed, I will
press efforts to achieve justice and resolution.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and members of the committee, for
the opportunity to address you today. If confirmed, I look
forward to working with you and representing the interests of
the American people in Benin. I am happy to answer any
questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Raynor follows:]
Prepared Statement of Michael Raynor
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am honored to appear
before you today, and grateful to President Obama and Secretary Clinton
for the confidence they have placed in me as their nominee for
Ambassador to the Republic of Benin.
I am happy that my wife, Kate, my son, Bradley, and my daughter,
Emma, are able to join me today. They have all done America proud
through many years overseas, and I couldn't be more grateful for their
support.
I have focused on Africa during 20 of my 24 years in the Foreign
Service, including 14 years at our Embassies in Congo, Djibouti,
Guinea, Namibia, and Zimbabwe, and 6 years in Washington, most recently
as the Executive Director of the Bureau of African Affairs. From this
service I have gained rich experience upon which I will draw to support
U.S. interests, if confirmed as the next U.S. Ambassador to the
Republic of Benin.
Mr. Chairman and Senator Isakson, I greatly respect the interest
you have taken in Benin. Your visit last June highlighted important
U.S. Government programs as well as your strong interest in achieving
justice for Kate Puzey, a wonderful Peace Corps Volunteer who was
tragically murdered just over 3 years ago. The impressive luncheon you
hosted last July for President Yayi and three other West African
Presidents further reflected your significant engagement in the region.
The United States and Benin have a strong relationship founded on
common interests and objectives. Benin is a West African success story
and a proponent of values we Americans hold dear. Since the early
1990s, Benin's embrace of democratic pluralism has resulted in multiple
free and fair elections including peaceful democratic transitions
between political parties, and it continues to buttress its democratic
institutions and procedures. If confirmed, I will promote U.S.
engagement in support of good governance, accountability, and capacity-
building within the government and civil society.
Benin has a strong record on human rights. Religious tolerance and
freedom of expression are hallmarks of Beninese society. Benin and the
United States have collaborated to promote women's and children's
rights and to counter violence against women. If confirmed, I will
build upon efforts to protect Benin's most vulnerable populations. This
commitment extends to investing in the health of the Beninese people to
boost maternal and child health, keep Benin's HIV rate in check, and
combat malaria and other diseases.
Benin and the United States share an interest in countering
terrorism and promoting regional stability. Benin's region presents
significant terrorist and maritime security concerns. Benin
participates actively in U.S. International Military Education and
Training programs and has contributed to United Nations peacekeeping
efforts in Africa and Haiti. If confirmed, I will support Benin's
capacity to promote regional and global security.
Since embracing free market principles over 20 years ago, Benin has
pursued economic reforms and diversification. Last October, Benin
completed a $307 million Millennium Challenge Corporation Compact that
improved Benin's port and increased its citizens' access to
entrepreneurial credit, land title, and legal remedies. Due to this
success, and in light of Benin's commitment to good governance and
economic development, Benin was deemed eligible to develop a proposal
for a second MCC Compact. If confirmed, I will work closely with the
Government of Benin toward a second compact, both to enhance Benin's
economic vitality and to promote U.S. commercial opportunities in
Benin.
While Benin is indeed a success story, it faces challenges to
sustaining and building upon its progress. Benin ranks low on many
development indicators, including measures of education, health,
corruption, personal income, and business climate. The United States
has a strong stake in helping Benin overcome these challenges, not only
for the sake of the Beninese people, but because of the value that a
democratic, responsible, and economically vibrant Benin brings to U.S
efforts to promote these values more broadly. When he met with
President Obama in Washington last July, President Yayi reiterated his
commitment to building upon Benin's strengths, addressing its
vulnerabilities, and expanding its positive role on the world stage. If
confirmed, I will work hard to enhance the vital role of the United
States in this effort.
Any discussion of U.S. interests in Benin must sadly include the
terrible murder of Kate Puzey, a tragedy not only for her family and
friends but for all who stood to benefit from her positive influence on
the world. Great good was brought from this tragedy through the
enactment of the Kate Puzey Peace Corps Volunteer Protection Act last
November, but legal justice is needed as well. The United States
continues to assist Benin in investigating the crime. If confirmed, I
will press efforts to achieve justice and resolution.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, for the
opportunity to address you today. If confirmed, I look forward to
working with you in representing the interests of the American people
in Benin. I am happy to answer any questions.
Senator Coons. Thank you to all three of our nominees
today. I would like to open our first round of questions by
just asking each of you in turn if you would, to broadly
address what you see as the most critical policy objectives for
the United States in your country of appointment, and, in
particular, given our fairly difficult and limited budget
environment in the coming decade, what you see as the means
that you will use to focus our partnership, our assistance with
these three countries to make sure that they are effective, and
what you will be doing to promote trade and responsible
economic development in partnership between the United States
and your countries of appointment.
Ambassador DeLisi.
Ambassador DeLisi. Thank you for the question, Senator. It
is wide ranging.
Certainly in your introductory remarks, you touched on the
key issues, I think, for us in Uganda. They certainly would be
part of what I would address if confirmed. Strengthening and
maintaining the strategic partnership that we have and the role
that they have continued to play in support of bringing peace
and stability to both the Horn of Africa and the Great Lakes
Region is tremendously important. We appreciate the sacrifices
that Uganda has made, especially in Somalia. We want to keep
that relationship vibrant.
But just because we have a strong security partnership does
not mean that we cannot speak candidly and constructively to
our partners about issues of concern, and that includes
democracy and human rights. You have noted that there are
challenges in that arena, and that is something that I think
that we have to address.
And on that front, it is not always about resources. We
have some money that is in our democracy and governance
programs that is intended to address those concerns, but it is
about leadership, and it is about visibility. And I think one
of the things that an ambassador has to do is be the
spokesperson, to be seen as visibly and in a very clear way
demonstrating that we care about these issues. And that is
something that I have tried to do in Katmandu. It is something
that I would try to do as well in Kampala if I am confirmed.
Equally, as we seek to build strong partners in Africa,
prosperous, stable societies, public health issues are
critical. We have a robust budget there. We are not strained
for resources. But I think it is imperative, given that it is a
resource constrained world, that we look at the budget that we
have and that we use it in the most effective way possible;
that we review our programs, make sure they are directed toward
the support of a comprehensive and strategic vision about what
we are doing there.
The other thing that I would hope to be able to do in terms
of addressing our resources and the constraints is to leverage
other people's money. I have found it can be an effective tool
in Nepal and many of the efforts that we launched. We have
provided leadership, but we have not been able to use the
resources from partners in the private sector, other diplomatic
partners, to support the issues of concern on which we have
led, and I would hope we would be able to continue to do that.
In terms of building the economic relations, the trade
relationships, right now we have not a very robust trade
partnership with Uganda. I would like to see that change, but I
know that is not going to be easy. It is about building
infrastructure. It is about addressing some of the fundamentals
within the Ugandan economy that have to be looked at first
before they can be the kind of partner that we might want. And
that is what we are trying to do. We are trying to look at
issues of corruption. We are looking at issues related to
energy. We are looking at ways that we can strengthen the
agricultural sector, which is the heart of the economy, and
that is where we are directing our Feed the Future resources.
We will continue to do all of that. And meanwhile, once I
am on the ground, if confirmed, I will be looking to see what
other opportunities there are for U.S. business, and we will
pursue them as strongly as we can.
Thank you, sir.
Senator Coons. Thank you, Ambassador.
Ms. James.
Ms. James. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
As you know, Swaziland does have a very difficult and
challenging political environment, and so democracy and
governance are very high on the agenda for me, in particular.
It has been a challenge because this is an absolute monarchy.
Political parties are effectively banned, and basic rights have
been severely restricted. Nevertheless, there are some signs of
positive developments which I would want to take advantage of
and really work very hard to engage on.
Swaziland does have democratic institutions. The court
system and Parliament are targets of opportunity that I think
we would want to work very closely on. We try to build capacity
there with the limited program funding that we do have.
I also think it is important that we engage heavily with
civil society and with the government to keep a regular
dialogue open and to underscore that these are priority issues
for the United States Government. As Ambassador, I would be
very visible, very vigilant, in following up on these kinds of
conversations with all parties in the country.
We have very limited democracy and governance funds, and so
it is going to require that we are smart, that we are
efficient, and that we leverage all of our programs, because
within a number of our programs, we have the opportunity to
build good governance capacity.
Within the PEPFAR program, which is very focused on the
Health Ministry and the Finance Ministry, we have an
opportunity to work to build up systems to help address
accountability and transparency issues. Similarly, with the
AGOA eligibility requirements, we have an opportunity to engage
with the government on a regular basis to encourage
anticorruption efforts and political pluralism. So, we have
vehicles there that we will use, even though we do not have
dedicated, significant democracy, and governance funds.
With respect to promoting trade, I would note that
Swaziland has actually benefited very much from the African
Growth and Opportunity Act. They have exported extensively to
the United States, and that is creating a more prosperous
Swaziland. A key ingredient for American businessmen who want
to operate in Swaziland is the need for a market. They need a
purchasing market, and so to the extent that we are using AGOA
to help build up Swaziland's own economy and its own income
there, that is good for the U.S. economy as well.
There is also a very enabling business environment in
Swaziland despite the issues we talked about on the political
front. There is a very good business climate there. Senator
Isakson, as you may know, Coca-Cola has the largest plant on
the continent in Swaziland. They have been there for many years
successfully. They are a good corporation which exercises
social responsibility. They are a role model. And I would want
to engage with them to think about how we could bring in more
businesses there.
So, I think the enabling business environment and working
with the government on labor issues, would support the kinds of
conversations that I would want to have to encourage
businessmen to look at Swaziland.
Senator Coons. Thank you, Ms. James.
Mr. Raynor, if you would.
Mr. Raynor. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First, on your
question with regards to policy objectives, in a nutshell I
would say that I would see, if confirmed, my objective in Benin
to be essentially to solidify and build upon the gains that
Benin has made, and then to look at the obstacles that it faces
to further progress.
As you noted, Mr. Chairman, Benin has established quite a
strong track record in terms of democracy and good governance,
as well as human rights. Indeed, it also has established a good
record with regards to economic structural reforms and
sustained rates of economic growth. As such, it already serves
as something of a role model within West Africa and beyond of a
stable, democratic society.
I think one thing I would do if confirmed would be to
stress in diplomacy and public diplomacy that these attributes
are things that we, the United States, value very highly in
Benin, and they essentially form the cornerstone of our very
positive relations.
And from that basis, I would then engage with the
Government of Benin to look at the obstacles to further
progress and what we may be able to do with regards to formal
aid and otherwise to help the country overcome them. These
obstacles include the need for further progress in areas of
health and education. Also, the business climate. And I think
we would need to look at what we are doing with our formal aid,
and we would have to make sure that evolves in response to
gains made, in response to the Beninese own assessment of their
priorities, in response to what other actors in the donor
community and the international community are engaging on so
that there is complementarity and a sort of a multiplier effect
to our engagement.
Certainly growing Benin's economy, I think, is central to
its interests in the future, and I would certainly look for
ways to leverage and build upon the gains made through the MCC
compact, which, as you noted, Senator Isakson, markedly
improved the Port. It both expanded and renovated it. It also
addressed some of the issues related to the business climate in
the country with regards to access to credit, access to
judicial process.
So, I think those are gains that need to be solidified and
built upon. The prospects of a second compact would also be a
very encouraging prospect. And, more generally, I think we just
need to look for ways to assist in Benin in diversifying its
economy, both diversifying its agricultural sector and its
broader economy.
Senator Coons. Thank you, Mr. Raynor.
Ambassador DeLisi, if I might, one last question this
round, and then I will turn it over to Senator Isakson.
Ambassador DeLisi, have we been doing enough as a nation to
support the pursuit of Joseph Kony and to be actively engaged
in the efforts to end the Lord's Resistance Army? What more
could we be doing? How can we sustain this effort? And what has
the United States been doing to help the communities in
Northern Uganda recover from the impact of the Lord's
Resistance Army?
Ambassador DeLisi. Thank you very much for the question,
Senator, and I would like to thank you and your colleague,
Senator Isakson, and others who passed the resolution yesterday
addressing this issue. The sort of leadership that we have seen
on the Hill, and I do not say this just because I am here
before you today, but this is important. It sends a powerful
message to support what the administration is trying to do in
pursuit of Joseph Kony and his lieutenants.
And, yes, I think we are doing well. I am very pleased with
what I have been able to learn in the few weeks that I have
been reading. I think we have had a very active engagement and
support of our African partners, because this is an African-
driven initiative, and I think that that is a good thing.
But we have been active in support. We have provided over
$50 million in assistance over the past 4 years as we have
pursued this. We have now deployed, as you know, special
operations forces to support, again, our African partners to
give them both the intelligence and operational coordination
that is necessary to make this more effective.
We are looking to partner more effectively with the African
Union, which is it sees now with this issue, and is launching
their own initiative to press forward. And that is good. I
think that will be especially important to us in terms of
standing up the coordination center in South Sudan, giving us a
standing headquarters that we can engage with, but also in
encouraging the regional partners to work together as
effectively as we need.
We can always try to do more, but we know that this is a
daunting task. Kony and his cadre are in an area the size of
the State of California in some of the most inhospitable
terrain, some of the most dense jungle, without roads, without
easy access, not easy to track. This is a long-term effort. But
we believe that the governments of the region and that the
Government of Uganda in terms of its role is committed to
staying the course. I hope that we will be as well.
I know that there is pending legislation that was
introduced in the House that would expand the Rewards for
Justice Program. I think that that would be a tool that would
be very useful for us if we could apply the Rewards for Justice
Program to Mr. Kony and his top commanders, again another step
in the right direction.
We are looking as well to see what we can do in terms of
assisting with one of the greatest challenges, and that is
mobility, and that is something that we will be consulting
with, and I will be talking to colleagues in the Africa command
if I am confirmed, and we will look at these issues in
coordination with colleagues in Washington.
Finally, turning to Northern Uganda, we provided just last
year alone, as I noted in my open remarks, $102 million. We
have seen that close to 95 percent of the people who were
displaced during the conflict, of those 2 million people, 95
percent have now returned to their homes, to their communities,
or are in transitional centers. We are starting to move from
humanitarian assistance to more traditional development
mechanisms. We are working with vocational training, creating
jobs, revitalizing agriculture.
And in that group that we are assisting are many former LRA
abductees. There is over 12,000 who have come out in the past
decade, little more than a decade. And many of them are being
assisted by our programs in Northern Uganda. But we are doing
that in partnership with the Government of Uganda, which has
its own peace recovery and development program for the north,
and they have been funding it, and they are continuing to do so
as well.
And that is the important part that this is in partnership
with Africa and with African nations. I think we are making
good progress. We will continue to do so, I hope.
Senator Coons. Thank you, Ambassador DeLisi. We look
forward to working with you and sustaining our effective
engagement on this issue.
Senator Isakson.
Senator Isakson. Mr. Raynor, I want to sincerely thank you
for your prepared statement and your commitment to the Puzey
family. I want to make sure that statement gets in the hands of
Kate's mom and dad. They will appreciate the fact that you are
carrying on where Ambassador Knight began. Senator Coons and I
are interested in following that and appreciate any
communication along the way you can give to us as the process
of that investigation and hopefully ultimately a trail. But I
want to thank you for your acknowledgment of the gravity of
that situation and your personal commitment to it.
And I might also say, Ms. James, I want to thank you for
mentioning Coca-Cola. Any time somebody mentions the biggest
business for my home State, I am always grateful.
Also, Senator Coons and I visited in Ghana a Coca-Cola
water project. I do not know if you are aware of what Coca-Cola
is doing in Africa, but they are investing millions of dollars
in clean water projects where they put in purification systems,
teach the people how to maintain the system, charge them 7
cents a day for 5 gallons of water, which is the amount of
money necessary to maintain and keep the plant in condition.
And with clean water being the biggest issue, Africa really
has, among many, many issues, I would encourage you to talk
with Coca-Cola about that. But thank you for acknowledging
them.
And thank you for acknowledging the AIDS problem and the
AIDS infection rate. And I would only--I read the governmental
organization of the Kingdom of Swaziland, and it is a kingdom.
It is not a democracy. I mean, any time the King can dissolve
the Parliament, you got one person in charge. And I wish you a
lot of luck with the democracy efforts that you make.
But I would ask that you, for a second, comment on the
fact. One thing Senator Coons and I are working on, every time
we meet with African countries that are in the PEPFAR program,
is to get the governments receiving--who are in PEPFAR to take
over more of the human responsibility of testing and delivering
the retrovirals. The more countries can help--and Tanzania, by
the way, is doing a great job of that now. The more they can
replace the manpower that we have been using through NGOs and
through USAID and through CDC, the more we can put in
retrovirals, but the less the total cost. So, I would
appreciate your comment on that.
Ms. James. Thank you, Senator Isakson.
First of all, I want to thank you back for your kind words.
I look forward to engaging with Coca-Cola. I understand they
are a good corporate partner in the country, and I am very much
interested to see what more we can do with that partnership.
With respect to PEPFAR, PEPFAR is a very successful story
in Swaziland. The program has been active for a while, and it
is really a partnership with the government. Specifically, you
mentioned antiretrovirals. I am really pleased to report that
the Government of Swaziland has basically taken over the
distribution of all the antiretrovirals. So, we are not in the
business of doing that. We are in the business of capacity-
building, working with community organizations, getting more
local engagement in solutions for the orphans and vulnerable
children. The numbers there are just astronomical, about 10
percent of the population.
We are really working at the grassroots level and the
capacity-building level, and the government has taken ownership
of the ARV programs. At least since 2010, they have been solely
in the business of distributing the ARVs. And from all
accounts, it is going well. It is a multifaceted program.
As I said, we also have Peace Corps engaged, and I think
Peace Corps has been doing a great job for us in the rural
areas, and they are working in partnership, one on one with
local leaders in small community centers helping to build life
skills and helping to deal with the needs of orphans and
vulnerable children. And so, we really have a partnership out
in the rural areas through Peace Corps as well as PEPFAR staff
that is working in the major areas engaging with the Ministry
of Health.
So, I thank you, and I look forward to furthering that.
Senator Isakson. Well, I thank you.
Ambassador DeLisi, when you were referring to the north and
humanitarian effort, I guess you were talking about Gulu or
that region of Uganda, is that correct?
One of the big NGOs in Africa is based out of Atlanta. That
is CARE, and their presence, as I understand it, is pretty
complete in Northern Uganda. And I am glad to hear we are going
from humanitarian focus to vocational focus in trying to bring
that area back, which was so devastated by Kony and his people.
On Joseph Kony, I say the same thing to you I said to Mr.
Raynor regarding his passion on the Puzey case. I think it is
very important that America's diplomats and America's
politicians speak forcefully when we see a human tragedy like
what is going on at the hands of Kony. I traveled to Rwanda and
saw firsthand how the world looked the other way. And they paid
no attention to a genocide that was taking place in that
country.
And I think it is important that we as a country be a
leader in focusing when we know there is an injustice. And I
commend you on your passion for that. And when I go to Uganda
later on, I intend to meet both with the military personnel as
well as hopefully yourself or the person that you are
succeeding, one way or another, to try and help in any way we
can in the Congress of the United States to do that.
And one other question on the South Sudan. I have traveled
to Sudan and Darfur and South Sudan, or near South Sudan. We
are grateful that the Comprehensive Peace Agreement was
reached, but we are scared to death that the South Sudan and
the North will get into a civil war like what happened in the
past.
You refer to Uganda's deployment or Uganda's assistance in
South Sudan. Can you elaborate on what they are doing to help
stabilize that area?
Ambassador DeLisi. Senator, I have looked at this somewhat.
I have not looked at it extensively. From what I have seen,
though, I know that Uganda has been a longstanding friend of
the people of the South to begin with, and has supported them
through their struggles, and now supporting them into
independence.
The support at this point in time is largely on two fronts.
One is to build an effective government, so they are working on
establishing the government institutions, the military, the
civil service, all of the things that a nation needs to begin
to function effectively. And this is a challenge when you are
starting from scratch in many ways.
They are also involved very much in the economy of the
region. I know that South Sudan is the major trading partner
for Uganda, and there is a lot that goes on there. But the nuts
and bolts I really cannot speak to at the moment. I would have
to look at that a little bit closer. But this is one of the
areas that I know is going to be extremely important as we move
forward. And, like you, I think we all recognize that this is a
volatile region. The potential for problems is always there,
and it also means the potential for new refugee flows if
problems erupt.
So, it is in our interest and it is in Uganda's interest as
well to try to forestall problems, to look at these things, to
strengthen their regional partners. And that is one of the
things that is so important to us and why our partnership with
Uganda has really mattered. It is something that I will work to
continue to build if confirmed and when I am in Uganda, and I
know that we have to look across the region broadly, not just
at Somalia, not just at Sudan, not just at Joseph Kony, but,
again, many challenges throughout that part of Africa.
And so far, Uganda has been a very good partner for us in
addressing them, and I hope will be able to continue that.
Senator Isakson. Well, I really appreciate your mentioning
it in your remarks because you are being named Ambassador, and
I hope confirmed Ambassador, to Uganda, in fact, South Sudan
may be a major part of your role as you are in Uganda. That is
a very nasty neighborhood, and to the east of South Sudan you
have got Somalia. To the north you have got the North of Sudan,
and you have got the rebels that are fighting, the Janjaweed, I
think they call them, in the Darfur area. So, there is a lot of
potential for an expansion of the bad things that have happened
in West Sudan and in Somalia.
And I think engagement by Uganda, which has been a forceful
player in that portion of Africa, and our support for their
engagement to help the South Sudan go from a fledgling
democracy to a functioning democracy, will be critically
important because if we fail to do that, we will be confronted
with a civil war primarily over petroleum between the north and
the south, and that would be a tragedy.
Let me just conclude my remarks by thanking the spouses and
the families of each one of these nominees because an
ambassador's job is a team effort. Without your support, they
could not do their job. Thank you for your support for these
nominees.
Senator Coons. I have one more round of questions. Thank
you.
If I might, just a few more questions for each of our
nominees today because you each will be representing us, if
confirmed, in countries I think with great and complex
challenges.
Mr. Raynor, if you might, piracy off the coast of Somalia
has received a great deal of deserved attention for a number of
years now. But piracy off of Benin and across the whole West
African region is also a significant and growing challenge.
What could we do to more effectively partner with Benin,
with regional allies, in strengthening maritime security?
Mr. Raynor. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
You are absolutely right. Piracy on the West Coast of
Africa is certainly growing as a problem and a concern, and
Benin has taken actually a leadership role in addressing that.
I think it recognizes the potential impact of piracy on, for
example, its port, which is a major economic driver in the
country.
Therefore, it has taken a lead role in trying to develop a
national maritime strategy that the United States has been
providing technical assistance toward. In addition, I think the
United States can do more to help forge a common strategy
between the states of Central and West Africa who share that
coastline so that there is a coordinated approach and a pooling
of resources.
Senator Coons. Thank you.
Ms. James, AGOA has meant a lot for Swaziland. What can we,
should we be doing to make sure that AGOA is reauthorized in an
appropriate timeline, and what impact do you think it might
have, if, as has sadly often been the case here in the
Congress, we wait right up until its expiration to deal
legislatively with its reauthorization?
Ms. James. Well, thank you, Senator, for the question.
As I noted, AGOA has been very successful in Swaziland. It
is one of the major producers of textiles on the continent
exporting to the United States, and it has had an amazing
impact on the country.
About 15,000 people are actually employed, but each one of
those people supports a very large extended family. So, it has
had a broad impact in the country as well. It has been a source
of stability, and many of those employees are women, and so we
would like to see that kind of a program stay in place. It has
a great impact on the health and the productivity of the
country.
With respect to the annual reauthorization, we have had
some questions and some difficulties with Swaziland's status of
governance, its levels of transparency and questions of
corruption. And the AGOA reauthorization process has been an
entry point for us to engage the government at all levels to
talk about addressing those issues.
We have focused heavily on labor rights and practices, and
I think we can report today that the recent reeligibility
decision to reapprove their AGOA status was a result of the
fact that the Kingdom has made some progress, not a lot of
progress, but progress nevertheless. And we will just keep
hammering away on the areas of concern still to be addressed.
The Government of Swaziland has actually begun to have more
conversations with labor unions and with the international
labor organization. The government has a tripartite standing
dialogue that is ongoing on labor issues. So, this conversation
that we have around AGOA has actually been helping democracy
and labor and human rights across the board.
As you may know, the country depends upon imported fabrics.
It has a third-country preference in place, and that has been
very important, and that has been a helpful thing for the
country. If they were to lose that, it would probably have a
very devastating impact on the ability to continue to operate
as they have with AGOA. So, it is very important that AGOA
remain and that it remains strong with all the elements that
are currently in place.
Senator Coons. Well, it is my hope and intention to support
proceeding to the AGOA reconsideration as promptly as we can
because of concerns that we have already heard from a number of
African Ambassadors.
Ms. James. That is very encouraging to hear. Thank you,
sir.
Senator Coons. Ambassador DeLisi, there was a tragic murder
in Uganda, the killing of a gay activist, David Kato, last
year. And I am concerned about the antihomosexuality bill that
has been introduced and is proceeding in Uganda. It is one of
the more extreme such laws being considered around the world
because it includes the death penalty for homosexual acts.
I think the opposition in the United States is clear. What
do you think are its prospects of passage, and, if adopted,
what are the options you would see in your role as Ambassador?
Ambassador DeLisi. Thank you, Senator. I share your
concern, and, as you know, our Embassy, our government has been
forthright in stating our opposition to the bill.
In terms of its potential for passage, obviously that is a
decision that the people and the legislature in Uganda will
have to make. But I think that I find encouraging several
signs. First, the Ugandan Human Rights Commission has been very
forthright, and has spoken out, and has made it clear that this
bill as written, and I think almost in any form, would be
contrary to both the Ugandan Constitution and violation of the
constitution, and contrary to Uganda's international commitment
and obligations on human rights.
Other NGOs and civil society groups have become much more
vocal and have spoken out strongly on this. I just saw an
article recently in which some of the LGBT organizations said
that their dialogue, that the community dialogue in Uganda, has
become richer as a result of this. And they have seen not an
outpouring of public support, but at least a greater degree of
support for their efforts. And those are promising signs.
I am also heartened by the fact that the Ugandan judiciary
overall has shown consistent support for the rights of all
communities, all the marginalized communities, and that is also
promising.
I hope the bill will not pass. I think most in the
international community would hope that. I think that there are
also many in Uganda who recognize that if the bill passes, that
it has--there is significant potential consequences. The impact
on Uganda's international reputation and standing, the impact
on tourism. They are very proud to have been named as tourist
destination of the year for 2012, and it is the pearl of
Africa. But this is the sort of thing that does have an impact.
And so, they have to look, and I think they are looking, at the
realistic--the practical, pragmatic consequences of this also.
For us meanwhile, I think that the Secretary has made it
clear that while we are absolutely committed on these issues,
we also recognize that it is not always about being punitive or
lecturing; it is about engaging constructively. It is about
educating civil society groups, supporting them. It is about
getting the right sort of debate going, showing people that
when the rights of any community within your country are being
brought under attack, when you are discriminating against any
element within society, all society ends up suffering, and
everyone's rights are ultimately at risk.
Those are the sorts of conversations that we have had that
we will continue to have, no matter what the outcome of the
legislation, even if it is not passed. We need to continue to
be affirmative in our engagement and be good partners as we
discuss these sometimes very sensitive social issues, but
issues that have to be addressed and recognized, and that the
fundamental human rights issues involved here are central to
any engagement with our partners.
Senator Coons. Thank you, Ambassador.
I, last, would be interested in hearing a little more
detail on the regional effort in the hunt for Joseph Kony, how
the Central African Republics, how Sudan and, in particular,
the DRC, have responded, how engaged they are with allowing
Ugandan troops either in their territory or working
collaboratively with them, and what you see as the critical
next steps in this ongoing pursuit to remove Joseph Kony and
his top lieutenants from the battlefield.
Ambassador DeLisi. Thank you, Senator.
I think the regional effort is going pretty well overall. I
had the chance last week--we had our global chief of missions
conference here, and we took advantage of that to sit down with
our ambassadors throughout the region and our leadership in the
State Department to discuss how we are coordinating our efforts
and what we are finding in the respective capitals in the
region.
I think we are seeing very strong support for the overall
goal of bringing Kony and his commanders to justice, and that
is good news because these countries are still being affected.
We see the continuing impact of the LRA in the DRC, and the
CAR, and, to a degree, in South Sudan.
I think that the militaries in these countries are
participating. They are participating actively. Not all of them
have as much to bring to the table in terms of resources as the
Ugandans have, but they have long military experience. But it
is improving. And we are working with those governments in all
four instances to make sure that that partnership is right,
that we are giving them the logistical and other support that
they need to be effective in their efforts to bring Kony to
justice.
Overall, the coordination between the four countries is
good, but there is that concern about Ugandan forces at this
point in time are not entering into the DRC. The DRC asked the
Ugandans to refrain from coming into their sovereign territory.
This was in part due to the elections that were coming in the
DRC; we understand that. I think that is an issue that does
need to be addressed, and I know the two governments, the
governments involved are talking to each other. I know our
Ambassador in Kinshasa is working on these issues as well. I
think that with the AU effort, we will also have perhaps
greater traction in making this happen.
So, I think that we are moving in the right direction. As I
said earlier, if we can find ways to bring the Rewards for
Justice Program to apply here, that could be a good thing. We
will continue to look at issues of mobility, and sit down and
say--figure out what--where we can make the greatest additional
value to this effort in the coming months.
Senator Coons. Thank you, Ambassador.
Senator Isakson.
Senator Isakson. In deference to Senator Udall, who has
arrived, I am going to ask one question and then give him a
chance, if that is all right, Mr. Chairman, to----
Senator Coons. Absolutely.
Senator Isakson [continuing]. Ask a question. But I would--
actually it is not a question. It is an observation.
When the chairman and I were in West Africa, and, in
particular, in Benin, you have got Nigeria, which had its first
``successful''--and I put that in quotes--democratic election
with Goodluck Jonathan. And then you have got Benin, and then
you have got Togo, and then you have got Ghana, and then you
have got Cote d'Ivoire, I think, is the right--if I got my
geography right.
And one of the barriers to their growth or some of the
trade barriers between the countries and the fact that the
roads are not always open, many times are manned by folks who
are collecting corruption fees to let you pass. And so many of
the goods are perishable--poultry, pineapple in particular,
which is so prevalent in the region and which the chairman and
I sat and ate in the middle of a pineapple patch one day, and
it is the best pineapple I have ever eaten in my life. But the
problem is it is highly perishable, and the roads are not that
good. And the barriers to trade are.
Can you share with us some ideas you might have on
expanding the trade between countries on the West Coast of
Africa so they can benefit from their own assets one to
another?
Mr. Raynor. Thank you. Thank you, Senator. You are
absolutely right. It is one of the great hindrances to
development in Africa, the interconnectivity, or lack thereof,
between countries. And certainly these are a lot of countries
that are very close to each other, and that should have very
robust trading relationships, and for infrastructure reasons
and other reasons, do not.
Specifically with regards to infrastructure, it is a
challenge. It is the sort of thing that one could look at as
part of the second phase of the MCC potentially. I think
ultimately it is something that requires collective effort, and
I think perhaps ECOWAS would be a useful partner in that
regard. Certainly President Yayi is very strongly engaged in
ECOWAS. I think issues of economic integration within West
Africa are central to his concerns and ECOWAS, and I think we
would certainly look for opportunities to promote that sort of
dialogue and to look for opportunities to build those linkages,
and eventually those physical linkages, to improve those trade
connections.
Senator Isakson. Thank you very much. And I will defer the
balance of my time to Senator Udall.
Senator Coons. Senator Udall.
Senator Udall. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I very much
appreciate your courtesy, Senator Isakson.
First of all, let me just thank Mr. Raynor for bringing up
Kate Puzey and her--Peace Corps volunteer, her service to the
country. We know she died in Benin, and we ended up honoring
her, I think, in terms of naming a bill after her. And thank
you for bringing her up.
You know, Benin recently completed a successful 5-year
compact with the Millennium Challenge Corporation. How do you
think that Benin and the United States can build off the
successes of this partnership and continue to encourage
economic development?
Mr. Raynor. Thank you, Senator. Yes, indeed, the MCC was
quite successful in proving the port and in addressing certain
aspects of the business climate that have been deficient--
access to credit, access to judicial process.
I think the first and most important thing is to build on
those gains and to make sure they are sustained. I think it is
also important that we look for ways to engage with the
Government of Benin and the people of Benin to boost U.S.
commercial engagement in the country. Part of that will be
looking for opportunities to diversify the economy of the
country, which right now is very heavily dependent on cotton
and to the vagaries of the cotton prices and production. So, I
think it will be important to work with Benin in looking for
ways, both to invite and promote U.S. engagement, and also for
ways that Benin can itself expand its economic base.
I think also part of that is building the human capacity of
the people of the country. Right now you have got serious
challenges with regards to education, with regards to health,
and I think it will be important to continue to build the
capacity of the people to be active agents for their own
material as well as other gains.
Senator Udall. Thank you for that answer. You know, experts
estimate that Uganda's Albertine Basin holds up to 2.5 million
barrels of oil. Accessing this reserve could impact both
Uganda's economy and its environment. What steps can Uganda
take to ensure that should the decision to access it be made,
it is done with respect to this ecologically sensitive area,
and should we be worried that Uganda signed a contract with
China's CNOOC given China's record of environmental degradation
in the region?
Ambassador DeLisi. Thank you very much for the question,
Senator.
First of all, they are moving forward. They have recently
approved the decision to move forward, and you have got three
major companies that will be operating in the Albertine Basin.
One of them is CNOOC.
One of the things that we are doing, and we recognize the
challenges and the potential for this great potential benefit
to Uganda could also become a curse. And we all know that this
is a challenge that has to be addressed.
We are tackling it in a number of ways. USAID has already
engaged on these environmental questions and is working with
the government to talk about if they are going to exploit this
oil, how do you do this in an ecologically sound way, and how
do you protect this tremendous natural resource for Uganda?
Those partnerships will continue I hope. If I am confirmed,
certainly it would be one of my primary interests to see that
they continue.
Equally, USAID, through some of their programs, is working
with civil society because civil society's voice and role in
the managing of this and in holding the government accountable
in looking at these issues will also be important. So, we are
working with them, showing them what has happened elsewhere,
giving them the skills that they will need to address these
questions.
But equally, we are working with the government. And
through our new energy governance and capacity initiative, we
are helping the government to try to build the legal and the
financial framework, the system that they need to manage this
resource in an effective way, to tie the resources that they
are getting to their longer term development goals, and to do
this in a coherent, effective way, to improve communication
between ministries, all of this needs to be done.
I am not familiar with CNOOC's record in terms of their
environmental protection, but I certainly take you at your word
that this is a concern. And no matter who it is, though, any of
these oil companies, as I noted at the outset, this is a very
sensitive environmental region. So, we are attuned to this,
have already been working on this, and will continue to do so,
Senator.
Senator Udall. Thank you. One other question on Uganda. In
2010 and early 2011, Uganda's economy and population suffered
from high food prices, high fuel prices, and high inflation. In
the past few months, it is my understanding that these
indicators have leveled or dropped slightly. Is this a long-
term trend, or is Uganda suffering from issues of chronic food
instability?
Ambassador DeLisi. I think that it--from what I have read,
and, again, I am not yet an expert on all of this. But what I
am seeing and what I am told is that most economists believe
that it will level, that this leveling off will continue, that
the degree of economic growth we are going to see in Uganda
will continue this past year, that it was still 5.8 percent.
Not quite as robust as in earlier years, but still doing well.
The issue of food security, though, is one that we really
have to be cognizant of, and this is part of the reason that
our Feed the Future Program is looking so closely at where we
are going. And it becomes all the more of a concern because of
the high population growth rate in Uganda.
At present, we were looking at a population of 33 or 34
million people, but in 20 years it is estimated that that is
going to be a population of 60 million, and 20 years after that
it will probably be 90 million.
So, food security and the sustainability of agriculture
becomes a crucial factor for us, and this is what we are
starting to look at very careful, I believe, through our Feed
the Future Program. Also increasing agricultural livelihoods,
the whole agricultural process, including agro industries.
Again, if confirmed, this is an area that I think I will work
on because we have to be focusing on this in the days ahead.
Senator Udall. Great. Thank you.
Mr. Raynor, you mentioned that Benin's economy is dependent
on cotton production, and we all know that in some of these
areas, cotton production and this crop have been linked to
degradation of the soil, in turning areas into deserts. And
what I am wondering is, you know, is there a sustainable way to
do this? I mean, is this an environmental threat they should be
worried about? What, how will the United States work with them
in order to bolster their economy, but at the same time make
sure it is done in a sustainable way?
Mr. Raynor. Thank you, Senator. Yes, in fact, Benin has
been seeing cotton yields over time, and that is certainly--
desertification is an aspect of the problem they're facing. I
think that is why one of the things that Benin really does need
to focus on and we need to focus on in our engagement with
Benin is ways for them to diversify their agricultural sector.
Right now, cotton accounts for 40 percent of GDP,
potentially as high as 80 percent of exports in a given year.
So, really a vastly disproportionate bet on one commodity. I
think it would be important for us through USAID engagement,
Peace Corps engagement, there is a component of our Peace Corps
activities that focuses exactly on issues of conservation and
good stewardship of the land. I think we can build upon that.
We can certainly look for additional ways to bring professional
expertise to bear, to help the government understand the
consequences of overreliance on one crop, and to explore
opportunities for diversification.
Senator Udall. Great. Thank you very much.
And, Chairman Coons, good to be here with you. And I once
again, even though Senator Isakson is not here, thank him for
his courtesies on yielding time. And really appreciate all your
hard work on chairing the African Subcommittee. I know you are
working hard at that, and spending time in Africa, and also
doing a lot of visits here with many of the officials that come
through Washington.
Thank you.
Senator Coons. Thank you. And, Senator Udall, I am hoping
you will join us in a future visit to Africa. It would be great
to have your company.
Senator Udall. I look forward to it.
Senator Coons. Senator Isakson is well and widely
recognized for his graciousness and is a wonderful partner in
this work. And our trip to West Africa last year was memorable.
Kate Puzey had Delaware roots. Her father was born in
Delaware, and there has been a lot of attention paid to that
case in Delaware as well. And I am really grateful for Senator
Isakson's focus and leadership on this. And I know it will
produce long-term benefits to Peace Corps Volunteers who serve
all over the world, and who are an important part of our
diplomatic and development presence globally.
If you will forgive me, I need to go preside. We have had a
thorough and full hearing. I am, again, impressed with the
preparation and the professionalism, the dedication and the
willingness to serve of all three of you, as Ambassadors, as
nominees to be Ambassadors. It is my hope that the Senate will
take up your nominations quickly and confirm you.
I wanted to thank Leah, Louis, Mandela, Kate, Bradley, and
Emma, for your patience. And neither Bradley nor Emma fell
asleep. I am quite impressed.
I was quite struck when my own children just two weekends
ago asked me if I knew anything about the Lord's Resistance
Army and Joseph Kony, and whether I was going to do anything
about it. And I reminded them that I chair the Africa
Subcommittee, the Foreign Relations Committee. They all three
expressed quite, you know, they were really rather surprised by
that and were unaware that I did things as I got on the train
and went to Washington in the morning.
So, one of the things that has been most inspiring to me
about the very broad response of tens of millions of Americans
and folks around the world is how many young people have been
inspired and challenged by the issue of the Lord's Resistance
Army and the hunt for Joseph Kony. And it is my hope that
working together, we can engage them, and inform, and sustain
their concern for African-led solutions to African problems,
for an ongoing American engagement in responsible, mutual
development, and for the kind of positive role for the United
States and the world that all three of you have exemplified in
your service, in the Foreign Service.
With that, thank you very much.
The record will be kept open for any members of the
committee who had questions but were not able to join us today.
And this hearing is hereby adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 3:35 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
Additional Questions and Answers Submitted for the Record
Responses of Scott DeLisi to Questions Submitted by Senator John F.
Kerry
Question. Uganda is the youngest country in the world with
approximately 50 percent of the population under the age of 15. If
confirmed, what would your strategy be to engage with the youth of
Uganda?
Answer. I believe it is essential that we continue to engage
effectively with the youth of Uganda, and, if confirmed, I would hope
to emulate what I have done in Nepal in that regard. In Nepal, I have
used social media (principally Facebook) to spark a dialogue with the
more than 13,000 young Nepalis who follow that page. We have used it to
great effect to discuss both U.S. policy and basic issues of
development, governance, and economic growth. In addition, we created a
Youth Council that continues to grow and provides us another platform
from which to reach the youth of Nepal who, as in Uganda, make up a
majority of the population. If confirmed, I would draw on these
experiences, including the funding of civil action and democracy,
building projects through the Youth Council, to deepen our engagement
with the young people of Uganda. I would also build on Embassy
Kampala's current activities, including its outreach to a number of
Ugandan universities and to a group of 30 Youth Advisors drawn from
academia, NGOs, media, and other civil society backgrounds.
Question. Section 620M of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961
imposes restrictions on assistance to any unit of a foreign country's
security forces for which there is credible evidence that the unit has
committed gross violations of human rights. U.S. Embassies are heavily
involved in ensuring compliance with this requirement. If confirmed,
what steps will you take to ensure that the Embassy effectively
implements section 620M?
Answer. Effective implementation of section 620M starts with the
selection of host country candidates for security assistance. If
confirmed, I will ensure that we carefully select units and individuals
for U.S.-sponsored training based on their records and reputations. I
will continue to ensure that Embassy Kampala thoroughly vets all
individuals and units nominated for training before submitting the
vetting requests to Washington for further review. If confirmed, I will
make a point to be engaged in, and closely monitor, U.S.-funded
security sector assistance and training while also ensuring that the
Embassy's vetting of selected candidates continues to occur in a
thorough and timely fashion.
Question. In particular, what actions will you take to ensure, in a
case in which there is credible evidence that a gross violation of
human rights has been committed, that assistance will not be provided
to units that committed the violation?
Answer. The Department of State does not provide training to
individuals or units against whom there is credible information of
gross human rights violations. Leahy vetting is an important tool not
only for ensuring that U.S. funding is not used to train or assist
units or individuals who have committed gross human rights violations,
but also for engaging host country military and security forces on the
need to put in place accountability mechanisms and strengthen respect
for human rights. If confirmed, I will ensure that we take advantage of
any instances where Ugandan candidates do not pass Leahy vetting
requirements to engage the Ugandan Government in a broader discussion
of ways that the Ugandan military and police can strengthen respect for
human rights and institutionalize accountability at all levels.
Question. What steps will you take to ensure that the Embassy has a
robust capacity to gather and evaluate evidence regarding possible
gross violations of human rights by units of security forces?
Answer. If confirmed, I will review the Embassy's vetting process
to see if any changes are needed to make it more efficient,
streamlined, and coordinated across the various relevant sections of
the Embassy. I will ensure open and regular communication between the
Defense Attache Office, Regional Security Office, and Political Section
for the purposes of gathering and evaluating information from a range
of different sources. I will also ensure that our Ugandan counterparts
understand and take into consideration the vetting requirements when
proposing candidates for U.S. security assistance, while at the same
time encouraging them to institute reform where needed to
institutionalize respect for human rights within the military and
security sector.
______
Responses of Makila James to Questions Submitted
by Senator John F. Kerry
Question. Given your previous experience as Director of the Office
of Caribbean Affairs and Deputy Director of the Office of Southern
African Affairs as well as your other posts in the field, what lessons
have most significantly shaped your approach to managing a post like
Swaziland?
Answer. Throughout my 24 years as a Foreign Service officer, I have
served as a Political/Economic Officer in Nigeria, Desk Officer for
Sierra Leone and The Gambia, Political Officer in Zimbabwe, Principal
Officer in Southern Sudan, as well as International Relations Officer
for several Africa-wide positions in the Bureau of International
Organizations Affairs and as a Member of the Secretary of State's
Policy Planning Staff, where I have engaged extensively in promoting
democracy and good governance, respect for human rights and the rule of
law, and sustainable economic development. In each of these positions,
I served in or worked on countries that have had authoritarian or
military regimes, and understand the challenges of engaging with such
governments while also maintaining a robust dialogue with opposition
groups and civil society to support their efforts to press for greater
political rights and freedoms.
One of the most important lessons I have learned in working on
these issues is the necessity to engage all parties to underscore the
mutual rights and responsibilities of governments and their citizens to
promote democracy and development. The United States remains an
influential partner for many African governments. Our values are
respected by their citizens, who look to us to uphold democratic
principles of good governance and universal human rights--critical
elements for ensuring development and stability. My experiences have
also impressed upon me the importance of promoting strong democratic
institutions, particularly parliaments, courts, and independent
oversight bodies to ensure transparency and accountability from every
branch of government. Similarly, my election observation experiences
have underscored the importance of engaging at all levels to help
ensure political pluralism, civic education, and a level playing field
before and after voting takes place.
If confirmed, I would draw upon these experiences to support all
elements of the mission in actively engaging with government and civil
society to help identify opportunities for institutional capacity-
building, promote greater budget transparency, and strengthen oversight
of government activities at every level. A daunting challenge I have
worked on in every post, and which is a concern in Swaziland as well,
is the need to enhance the status of women and children to address the
HIV/AIDS epidemic, alleviate poverty, and protect universal human
rights. I would urge the Mission to work closely with civil society
organizations to expand their ability to participate in dialogue with
their government on these fundamental rights. Each of my assignments
has given me the chance to help promote efforts to expand U.S. exports
and engage with the local private sector to encourage employment and
development. I would draw on my knowledge of the many U.S. Government
agencies responsible for trade and business development, along with
State Department resources, to support American companies in the United
States and the region who are seeking access to the Swaziland market.
My experiences as the Director of the Office of Caribbean Affairs,
in which I am responsible for the management, staff and policies of
U.S. Government missions serving 14 developing countries, along with my
experience as Deputy Director of the Office of Southern African Affairs
and Principal Officer at U.S. Consulate Juba, have provided me with
strong management skills to support the needs of small posts in
difficult environments. I appreciate the importance of using limited
resources wisely in a tight budget environment by seeking efficiencies
and leveraging all available program funds to pursue our goals, as well
as taking advantage of the close proximity of our mission in South
Africa to work with their staff to bring activities to Swaziland. Most
importantly, in a small mission without a significant U.S. security
presence, I have learned to be extremely attentive to the safety of all
Americans employees, as well as U.S. citizens in the country, and to
ensure high morale within the community. If confirmed, I would bring a
positive attitude, broad knowledge of American and African culture, and
a commitment to public service to ensure that Embassy Mbabane is a
strong diplomatic presence representing U.S. values and interests.
Question. Male circumcision programs have encountered difficulties
in Swaziland, although in other countries demand has been very high.
How would you seek to work with the government and civil society in
Swaziland to encourage the uptake of this important HIV prevention
tool?
Answer. The low level of male circumcision in Swaziland is one of
the main drivers of the HIV/AIDS epidemic, and it is imperative that we
do as much as possible to address it. The rapid expansion of male
circumcision is a top priority of the President's Emergency Plan for
AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) Partnership Framework Plan. Since 2008, PEPFAR has
contributed to the circumcision of 36,453 men in Swaziland. In 2011,
PEPFAR and the Swazi Government launched the Accelerated Saturation
Initiative (ASI), which is a comprehensive package of HIV prevention,
care, and treatment services centered on male circumcision. Its target
was to reach 80 percent of 15-49-year-old men within a 1-year period
with male circumcision services (approximately 152,000 MCs). The
initiative, however, has fallen considerably short of that goal,
reaching only 11,331 males.
The main challenge facing ASI has been the low demand for male
circumcision. Many Swazi men fear the pain of circumcision, lack
information about it, or have heard bad stories and myths. To address
these challenges, the PEPFAR in Swaziland will restrategize the male
circumcision program for 2012 based on recommendations from the recent
visit by the Office of the U.S. Global AIDS Coordinator (OGAC) and the
male circumcision Technical Working Group (TWG). Recommendations
focused on augmenting the Government of the Kingdom of Swaziland's
ownership of the male circumcision program in Swaziland and increasing
national leadership. While there was high-level buy-in for the campaign
from the Minister of Health, the Prime Minister, and King Mswati III,
there were challenges with buy-in from mid-level officials. More
research will be done on the health seeking behaviors of Swazis and
exploration of why demand has been low to date, followed by greater
dialogue with local leaders and government management on the
implementation of the male circumcision program moving forward.
Increasing dialogue with civil society would also help the U.S.
Government understand cultural barriers and myths that have resulted in
low demand for male circumcision in Swaziland.
If confirmed, I will encourage the augmentation of the Government
of the Kingdom of Swaziland's ownership and leadership of the male
circumcision program, increase dialogue with local leaders on the
implementation of the male circumcision program, and increase dialogue
with civil society to understand how the program can best overcome
cultural barriers and how the local community can encourage men to seek
male circumcision services.
______
Responses of Michael Raynor to Questions Submitted
by Senator John F. Kerry
Question. Given your experience as Executive Director of the Bureau
of African Affairs and as Management Officer in Namibia, Guinea, and
Djibouti, among other posts, what lessons have most significantly
shaped your approach to managing a post like Benin?
Answer. These experiences have taught me several lessons in
building successful teams, eliciting strong performance, fostering high
morale, and operating effectively in small, isolated, and hardship
posts like Benin.
To maximize operational impact and effectiveness at such a post, it
is essential to engage every element of the mission in establishing
clear goals within the framework of administration priorities, and to
lead employees as an integrated team in pursuit of those goals.
As at my previous posts, many employees in Benin are relatively
inexperienced, including some who are new to the Foreign Service and
others who are performing their current functions for the first time.
In such a context, it is vital that employees receive the guidance,
mentoring, feedback, training, and encouragement necessary to promote
their professional development and to help them be as successful and
happy in their jobs as possible.
From my previous experiences at difficult, remote posts like Benin,
I have learned that it is equally important to attend to issues of
community morale and cohesion: ensuring that working and living
conditions for employees and family members are safe, secure, pleasant,
and responsive to the hardships faced; meeting the health, educational,
recreational, and spousal employment needs of the community to the
fullest extent possible; and promoting opportunities for community
members to benefit both professionally and personally from the dynamic
host-country environment to which they have been posted.
Question. Though Benin is eligible for trade benefits under the
African Growth and Opportunity Act, U.S. imports from Benin are
typically quite limited. Given your previous experience, in what ways
would you seek to increase trade between the United States and Benin,
including efforts to increase U.S. exports to Benin and promote
American business interests?
Answer. The African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) is about more
than trade preferences for African products. By creating tangible
incentives for African countries like Benin to implement the sometimes
difficult economic and political reforms needed to improve its
investment climate, AGOA contributes to better market opportunities and
stronger commercial partners in Africa for U.S. companies. In addition,
AGOA advances African regional economic integration efforts and helps
promote larger markets and creating trade opportunities for U.S.
exports. While Benin alone is a relatively small market that might have
difficulty attracting U.S. companies, the West African market as a
whole is a very attractive destination for U.S. trade and investment.
Over the last several years, Benin has worked hard to increase
trade and investment. If confirmed, I will work with my team at the
Embassy to support U.S. business interests in Benin and work with the
Government of Benin to promote an open business environment. Benin
successfully completed its $307 million Millennium Challenge
Corporation (MCC) Compact in October of 2011 and was selected as
eligible to develop a second Compact. Benin's success with the MCC
program demonstrates its commitment to providing an open and
transparent business climate, protecting both rule of law and sanctity
of contract. One major outcome of Benin's MCC Compact is the
revitalization of its port in Cotonou. With improved efficiency and
infrastructure at the port, we can expect Benin to increase trade
regionally and hopefully attract more trade and investment from the
United States.
NOMINATIONS OF PETER WILLIAM BODDE, PIPER ANNE WIND CAMPBELL, AND
DOROTHEA-MARIA ROSEN
----------
WEDNESDAY, MAY 16, 2012
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Foreign Relations,
Washington, DC.
----------
Hon. Peter William Bodde, of Maryland, to be Ambassador to the
Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal
Piper Anne Wind Campbell, of the District of Columbia, to be
Ambassador to Mongolia
Dorothea-Maria Rosen, of California, to be Ambassador to the
Federated States of Micronesia
----------
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:30 p.m., in
room SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Jim Webb,
presiding.
Present: Senators Webb and Inhofe.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JIM WEBB,
U.S. SENATOR FROM VIRGINIA
Senator Webb. Good afternoon. The hearing will come to
order.
Let me begin by saying we are graced with the presence of
Congresswoman Hochul here, and she has early votes in the
House, so I will be as quick as I can with my opening statement
to allow the Congresswoman to make a statement on behalf of one
of our nominees and then we will get this hearing in the books.
As everyone here knows, the confirmation process for
senatorially approved positions is a very intricate and often
lengthy process. I have gone through it twice myself, first as
Assistant Secretary of Defense and then as Secretary of the
Navy. It begins with the vetting of people inside the executive
branch and then with very detailed examinations of all
different parts of individuals' experiences and qualifications
by committee staff over here. So this is simply the second-to-
the-last hurdle to be overcome before people who have given
great service to our country have the opportunity to do that in
a different, and I am not going to say more important way, but
certainly ``very important to the country'' way.
Today we are hearing the nominations of Ms. Piper Campbell
to be Ambassador to Mongolia, Ms. Dorothea-Maria Rosen to be
U.S. Ambassador to the Federated Sates of Micronesia, the
Honorable Peter Bodde to be Ambassador to the Federal
Democratic Republic of Nepal.
Asia is a vast region with more than half the world's
population and is of vital importance to the United States.
Countries in this region differ economically, culturally, and
in their governmental systems. The pursuit of democratic
governance faces significant difficulties whether in
consolidating a democratic transition or improving public
accountability. However, while Asia's democracies may be
challenged, they are seeking to thrive. Mongolia, Micronesia,
and Nepal are no different.
Mongolia, landlocked between Russia and China on the Asian
Continent, has long sought to maintain its independence,
officially proclaiming it in 1911 from China. Nearly 80 years
later in 1990, Mongolia held its first multiparty elections, a
development in sharp contrast to other countries in the region.
With a population of less than 3 million, it has continued to
pursue a democratic path. This year is President of the
Community of Democracies, an intergovernmental coalition of
democratic countries.
Consequently, the United States has become an important
third neighbor to Mongolia, supporting its democratic
development. This year, we celebrate the 25th anniversary of
the establishment of our diplomatic relations. Because of its
reforms, Mongolia was one of the first countries eligible for
the Millennium Challenge Account initiative. The United States
and Mongolia signed a compact agreement in 2007, worth $285
million, to improve property rights, road infrastructure,
vocational training, and access to energy by 2013.
These two countries also share an important security
relationship. In particular, Mongolia became the 45th nation to
contribute troops to the NATO mission in Afghanistan, providing
training to Afghan national forces, and last year increased its
commitment of troops from 200 to 400. Mongolia has also
supported the six-party process to denuclearize the Korean
Peninsula and bring stability to Northeast Asia.
The Federated States of Micronesia is another important
economic and security partner for the United States. We share a
bond, in part based on our collective history following World
War II when Micronesia became part of the United States-
administered United Nations Trust Territory. In 1979, four
districts of this trust territory united to form the Federated
States of Micronesia, and in 1986, it entered into a Compact of
Free Association with the United States.
The United States and Micronesia share a distinctive
relationship through this compact. The United States provides
economic assistance and security guarantees. Micronesia
provides rights for the United States to operate military bases
in the former territories. Micronesian citizens have the right
to reside and work in the United States as lawful
nonimmigrants, allowing entry into the United States without a
visa. I am interested to know more about the mechanics of this
process and its impact on Micronesia, with a population of some
100,000 people.
Micronesia's geostrategic position is important to the
United States, as well as for the region. The United States is
a key balancing force in the region, and it is incumbent upon
us to strengthen our relationships and promote security and
economic development in the Pacific. It is also important to
note that Micronesia is a democratic partner for the United
States in this region. It is in the United States interest to
support this role in terms of regional democracy.
Nepal, another landlocked country, located between China
and India, is still striving toward a system of democratic
governance. Peace only came to this South Asian nation in 2006
following a decade-long insurgency led by Nepal's Maoists-
Communist Party. At the time of this committee's last
consideration of Nepal, a coalition government had formed and
Nepal faced a considerable task in consolidating its newly
formed parliamentary system.
Currently Nepal is confronting a May 27 deadline for the
completion of its new constitution, and reports of protests
around this event are troubling. Nepal sits in a prominent
geostrategic position with a population of nearly 30 million.
It is in the United States interest to bolster the democratic
process in an inclusive manner and to promote stability within
the country.
Nepal is a threshold country for a Millennium Challenge
Compact and, with further reforms, will become eligible for
this assistance. Such a development would not only promote
economic growth and democratic governance within Nepal, but
would also strengthen the United States-Nepal relationship.
We look forward to discussing these and other issues with
our nominees today.
I would like to begin by welcoming Ms. Piper Campbell, the
nominee to be the Ambassador to Mongolia. Prior to this
assignment, Ms. Campbell was consul general in Basrah, Iraq.
She has also served as Chief of Staff to the Deputy Secretary
of State for Management, as an advisor on Asian issues at the
U.S. mission to the United Nations. Her overseas postings
include Geneva, Croatia, Brussels, Cambodia, and Manila. Ms.
Campbell speaks French, Cambodian, Serbo-Croatian, and
Japanese.
Second, I would like to introduce Ms. Dorothea-Maria Rosen,
the nominee to be the U.S. Ambassador to Micronesia. She is
currently a Diplomat in Residence at the University of Illinois
in Chicago. Her previous overseas assignments include
Frankfurt, Berlin, Stuttgart, Bern, Reykjavik, Bucharest,
Accra, Manila, and Seoul. Ms. Rosen is a lawyer, a member of
the California State Bar, and served in the Army as a JAG Corps
captain. She speaks German, French, and Romanian.
And last, I would like to introduce the Honorable Peter
Bodde, the nominee to be the U.S. Ambassador to Nepal. Mr.
Bodde currently is the assistant chief of mission for
assistance transition at the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad. He
previously served as the U.S. Ambassador to Malawi and as the
deputy chief of mission at the U.S. Embassy in Islamabad. His
other overseas postings include Frankfurt, Hamburg, New Delhi,
Copenhagen, Sofia, and Guyana. He is no stranger to Nepal where
he worked as a budget and fiscal officer as deputy chief of
mission at the Embassy. Mr. Bodde speaks German, Bulgarian, and
Nepali.
Again, I would welcome all of you here today and encourage
all of you to speak English as we go through the hearing. We
have a tremendous respect for all of the linguistic skills that
are at the table.
And Congresswoman Hochul, I am appreciative of you for
waiting for us to finish the opening remarks, and the floor is
yours.
STATEMENT OF HON. KATHY HOCHUL,
U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM NEW YORK
Ms. Hochul. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the
courtesy.
On behalf of a very proud western New York community, I am
honored to introduce nominee Piper Anne Wind Campbell who was
born and raised in Buffalo, NY. I have known Ms. Campbell and
her family, her parents in particular, David and Gay Campbell,
for decades since she was a little girl. I am confident that
her upbringing in Buffalo has prepared her well to handle any
adversity, including any weather she might encounter in
Mongolia. [Laughter.]
A graduate of Georgetown University's School of Foreign
Service, Ms. Campbell focused her undergraduate work on the
Asian region and received a certificate in Asian studies. Later
she received a master's degree in public administration from
Harvard's Kennedy School with a specialization in negotiation
and conflict resolution, certainly skills that will serve her
well in her new capacity.
Ms. Campbell has outstanding professional and academic
qualifications for this post. A senior Foreign Service officer
with 22 years of experience, Ms. Campbell currently serves as
the consul general in Basrah, southern Iraq, one of our largest
and certainly our most trying overseas posts.
She has completed several tours with an Asian focus, as
previously stated, including tours as the deputy chief of
mission in Cambodia, an expert on Asian issues with the U.S.
mission to the United Nations, counselor of humanitarian
affairs in Geneva during the Asian tsunami, and a first tour as
a consular and management officer at the U.S. Embassy in
Manila.
She has demonstrated her skills as a manager in Cambodia
and Basrah, as well as her command over complex policy issues
as Chief of Staff to the Deputy Secretary of State and,
earlier, in war-torn Croatia.
Many years ago as an attorney on the staff of Senator
Daniel Patrick Moynihan, I guided Ms. Campbell in applying for
an internship with the Senator's office. So I also know she
understands the important role the Senate plays in foreign
affairs issues.
The Campbells have instilled in her a belief that we should
look out for our neighbors, not just here in the United States,
but abroad as well. In 2004, her father started All Hands--
hands.org--an organization that assists international
communities affected by national disasters. Working with her
parents, she certainly has a firsthand understanding of the
importance of reaching out to and uniting the global community.
Ms. Campbell has the skills, the energy, and aptitude to
represent the United States in engaging with an important
partner Mongolia. She truly represents all that is good and
noble about public service, and I am confident that she will be
a phenomenal U.S. Ambassador on behalf of our great country.
Thank you very much, and I have to go vote.
Senator Webb. Thank you very much for being with us today,
Congresswoman Hochul.
Just for the record, Daniel Patrick Moynihan was one of my
great political heroes. As you are on your way out the door, I
have to say when I was talking to Bob Kerrey about running for
the Senate, he knew that I had a previous career as a writer,
and he said Senator Moynihan wrote a book every year he was in
the Senate. I have not been able to quite keep up with the
example that he set.
Senator Inhofe. Let me chime in here, too, if I could, Mr.
Chairman.
Senator Webb. Senator Inhofe.
Senator Inhofe. He was born and raised next door to me in
Tulsa, OK. You probably did not know that.
Senator Webb. I knew he was born in Oklahoma. I did not
know that you were in propinquity.
Ms. Hochul. Well, thank you very much.
Senator Webb. Thank you very much, Congresswoman.
I think we will proceed from Ms. Campbell to my left or
your right. Welcome.
Let me make a couple of quick points here. First is that
your full statement will be entered into the record at the end
of your oral statement. Second, please feel free to introduce
anyone who has come to share this day with you, family, people
who are close to you, whatever. And the floor is yours.
Senator Inhofe, did you want to make any kind of an opening
statement before we proceed?
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES M. INHOFE,
U.S. SENATOR FROM OKLAHOMA
Senator Inhofe. Well, yes. It will be very brief.
First of all, I had a chance to speak to Mr. Bodde, and I
appreciate that very much. We have Africa and airplanes in
common. So we had a chance to visit.
And I apologize to you, Ms. Rosen, because we had it set up
and you met with staff because we had a vote during the time
you were in. And I have had a chance to look at both of you and
all three of you and I am very much impressed.
I would only say this. There is one thing that I thought
maybe it is something we can look into. But I noticed, Ms.
Campbell, I think it is the first time in the 22 years that I
have been here that a career person makes political
contributions to candidates, and I have never seen that before.
And I understand that you have made considerable campaign
contributions to candidates. They are checking. I do not think
there is anything illegal about it, but I have just never seen
it before. And that is something that perhaps you can maybe
address during your comments.
That is all.
Senator Webb. Thank you, Senator Inhofe.
Ms. Campbell, the floor is yours.
STATEMENT OF PIPER ANNE WIND CAMPBELL, OF THE DISTRICT OF
COLUMBIA, TO BE AMBASSADOR TO MONGOLIA
Ms. Campbell. Senator Webb, Senator Inhofe, thank you very
much. It is an honor to appear before you as President Obama's
nominee to be Ambassador to Mongolia. I am deeply grateful for
the confidence the President and Secretary Clinton have shown
in me. If confirmed, I look forward to working closely with
this committee to build on the already strong ties between the
United States and Mongolia.
I want to thank Congresswoman Hochul for introducing me.
Although the Foreign Service has taken me far from Buffalo, my
roots there are deep. As the Congresswoman said, she helped
arrange my internship with Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan
whose passion for foreign policy was one of the things that
shaped my path of service which has taken me from the
Philippines to Iraq and many places in between.
The other thing that shaped my path has been the support of
my family, and I want particularly, publicly, to express my
love and gratitude to my parents, David and Gay Campbell, who
are here, along with friends and neighbors from the District
who I am pleased to have sitting behind me. My siblings and
their spouses, my nieces, nephews, and cousins are not here
today but they have actually visited me in every posting that I
have had overseas except for Basrah, and I had to insist that
Basrah was off limits.
Senator Webb. To all your family and friends, welcome. I
know what a big moment this is.
Ms. Campbell. This is an exciting year for United States-
Mongolian relations as we mark the 25th anniversary of the
establishment of bilateral relations. Over that time, our
partnership has grown stronger so that now this relationship
really is about opportunities, particularly on the economic
front where Mongolia's resource-rich economy and significant
growth potential have propelled it to the top ranks of frontier
markets. With large reserves of coal, copper, gold, uranium,
and other minerals, Mongolia has the potential to double its
GDP over the next decade, making it one of the world's fastest
growing economies.
As Mongolia's economy continues to expand, there will be
more opportunities for United States firms. Already Mongolia is
charting a growth path for United States exports that puts it
among the highest of any country in the world. If I am
confirmed, our Embassy will actively practice what Secretary
Clinton calls ``jobs diplomacy'': connecting U.S. industry with
the best possible information and advocating on their behalf.
Current United States programs in Mongolia, the Millennium
Challenge Corporation, as well as USAID, Department of
Agriculture, and the Trade and Investment Framework Agreement,
all are focused on helping Mongolia to diversify its economy,
expand its economic growth, and promote trade and investment.
Any successful market-based economy must operate with
openness and transparency, as well as good governance and
accountability, but these attributes are particularly important
in a situation like Mongolia's where you are seeing such rapid
growth. And although the physical environments in Iraq and
Mongolia are about as different as two countries can be, I
think that my experience working on the oil industry in
southern Iraq will very much shape what I am able to do in
Mongolia.
In the near term, it will be a very important step for the
Mongolian Government to sign the proposed United States-
Mongolia agreement on transparency in international trade and
investment. If confirmed, that would be one of my first efforts
at post, to encourage that.
Last summer, this body passed a resolution recognizing the
increasingly prominent role the Government of Mongolia has
assumed internationally. And Senator Webb, you mentioned that
yourself. Mongolia has dispatched over 5,600 peacekeepers to 15
different peacekeeping operations, has troops now in
Afghanistan, and currently chairs the Community of Democracies.
I spent much of my career representing the United States in
international fora and focusing on conflict situations. And, if
confirmed, I welcome the opportunity to work with Mongolian
officials to advance our shared interests in these globally
important areas consistent with Mongolia's Third Neighbor
Policy--by which it actively engages with the United States and
others while also maintaining good relations with its
neighbors, China and Russia.
Mongolia's decision for democracy in the 1990s was a truly
remarkable development, and the United States has been a
consistent and supportive partner on Mongolia's democratic
path. While the challenges continue, I believe that Mongolia's
tremendous economic potential and increased participation in
multilateral fora bring enormous opportunities for further
strengthening its democracy.
I know that the rest of my statement has been added in the
record, and I thank you very much. I look forward to taking any
questions.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Campbell follows:]
Prepared Statement of Piper Anne Wind Campbell
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, it is an honor to appear
before you as President Obama's nominee to be Ambassador to Mongolia.
I am deeply grateful for the confidence that the President and
Secretary Clinton have shown in me, and, if confirmed, I look forward
to working closely with this committee to build on the already strong
ties between the United States and Mongolia.
I want to thank Congresswoman Hochul for introducing me. Although
my 22 years in the Foreign Service have taken me far from Buffalo, NY,
my roots there are deep. It seemed fitting for Congresswoman Hochul to
be here today as she helped arrange my internship with the great
Senator from New York--a former member of this committee--Daniel
Patrick Moynihan. Senator Moynihan's passion for foreign policy was one
of the things that shaped my path of service, which has taken me from
the Philippines to Iraq, and many places in between.
The other thing that shaped my path has been the support of my
family. I would like publicly to express my love and gratitude to my
parents, David and Gay Campbell; my siblings, Todd, April, and Skip;
and my nieces, nephews, and cousins, who are here. They are an intrepid
bunch, having visited me at almost every overseas post. Indeed, I am
convinced they would have visited me in southern Iraq this past year,
if I hadn't consistently told them that Basrah was off limits.
This is an exciting year for United States-Mongolian relations, as
we mark the 25th anniversary of the establishment of bilateral
relations. Over that time, our partnership has grown stronger. One of
the most exciting things about working in Mongolia, if I am confirmed,
will be that so much of this relationship is about opportunities. Let
me try to explain this better by briefly highlighting some of the key
areas on which I plan to work, should I be confirmed as the next
Ambassador to Mongolia.
Creating opportunities for U.S. businesses in a growing economy:
Mongolia's resource-rich economy and significant growth potential have
garnered international attention and propelled it to the top ranks of
what some call ``the frontier markets.'' With large reserves of coal,
copper, gold, uranium, and other minerals, Mongolia has the potential
to double its GDP over the next decade--making it one of the world's
fastest growing economies. U.S. goods exported to Mongolia increased an
astonishing 171 percent in 2010 over 2009 levels, and in 2011 they rose
above the $300 million mark for the first time. Mongolia continues to
chart a growth path for U.S. exports that ranks among the highest of
any country in the world.
As Mongolia's economy continues to expand, there will be more
opportunities for U.S. firms. If I am confirmed, our Embassy will
actively practice what Secretary Clinton calls ``jobs diplomacy'':
connecting U.S. industry, small businesses, and state and local
governments with the best possible information about opportunities in
Mongolia and advocating on their behalf. I would like to see
strengthened business ties not only in the mineral sector but also in
``downstream'' industries as Mongolia's economy becomes larger and more
complex and as interest in U.S. consumer goods grows. I think it is
important to note that current U.S. programs in Mongolia--the
Millennium Challenge Corporation as well as U.S. Agency for
International Development and U.S. Department of Agriculture activities
and our Trade and Investment Framework Agreement--also are helping
Mongolia to diversify its economy, expand economic growth, and promote
trade and investment.
Any successful market-based economy must operate with openness and
transparency, as well as good governance and accountability--but these
attributes are particularly important in a situation of rapid growth,
especially when driven by a single sector. Although the physical
environments in Iraq and Mongolia are about as different as two
countries can be, I believe that my experience working on southern
Iraq's oil sector and dealing with a region experiencing rapid economic
change provides excellent preparation in better understanding the
issues Mongolia will be confronting and the opportunities rapid growth
can provide for Mongolia--as well as for our growing trade and
investment relationship. Certainly, in the near term, it would be an
important step in the right direction for the Mongolian Government to
sign the proposed U.S.-Mongolia agreement on transparency in
international trade and investment.
Building already excellent international cooperation to mutual
advantage: Last summer, this august body passed a resolution
recognizing the increasingly prominent role the Government of Mongolia
has assumed internationally. Mongolia has participated in the
International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, the Asian Development
Bank, and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development; it
currently chairs the Community of Democracies and will host the next
Ministerial Meeting in Ulaanbaatar; and it has been active in
international peacekeeping from Afghanistan to Darfur and South Sudan,
from the Western Sahara to Chad, in Kosovo, and in Iraq. Mongolia has
dispatched over 5,600 peacekeepers to 14 different peacekeeping
operations since 2002, and runs a unique Training Center for
International Peace Support Operations.
The United States and the Government of Mongolia share a common
interest in promoting peace and stability. I have spent much of my
career representing the United States in international fora and
focusing on conflict situations. If confirmed, I will welcome the
opportunity to work with Mongolian officials to advance our shared
interests in these globally important areas. As one concrete example:
In March of this year, Mongolia's Partnership Plan with NATO was
approved, which will allow for greater cooperation and assistance to
make Mongolia's military compatible with those of NATO allies. Mongolia
already has a history of operating with NATO forces in Afghanistan, a
history that demonstrates its commitment to global responsibility and
security.
Mongolia's ``decision for democracy'' in the 1990s was a truly
remarkable development: Through its competing political parties,
transparent and peaceful elections, and respect for human rights,
Mongolia can serve as a positive role model for other countries in the
region and beyond. A quarter of a century ago, Mongolia's contacts with
the outside world were limited. Mongolia's progress over the last 20-
plus years provides an important and timely illustration of the value
and importance of democratic systems. Mongolia recognizes the value of
engagement with the United States and others in a ``Third Neighbor
Policy,'' while also acknowledging the importance of maintaining good
relations with its two immediate neighbors, Russia and China.
The United States has been a consistent and supportive partner in
Mongolia's journey to democracy. While this journey has included a
number of difficult challenges, I believe that Mongolia's tremendous
economic potential and increased participation in multilateral fora
bring enormous opportunities for further strengthening its democracy
and ensuring that all of Mongolia's citizens have a role to play in
this journey. As Mongolia looks forward to two important elections--
parliamentary elections in June 2012 and a Presidential election in
2013--we will continue our robust engagement with Mongolia on advancing
its democracy, strengthening the rule of law, combating corruption, and
developing its civil society. If confirmed, I will support and increase
these efforts.
U.S.-Mongolian people-to-people engagement: Our current Ambassador
in Mongolia has unearthed documents that seem to show that the first
U.S. citizen visited Mongolia 150 years ago. Although I cannot claim
that U.S.-Mongolian people-to-people engagement flourished without
interruption from that point, the past decade has seen a tremendous
growth in U.S. interest in Mongolia (which was ranked last year by
National Geographic as one of the top 20 places to visit), as well as
Mongolian interest in the United States. I understand that two-way
travel by Mongolians and Americans alike keeps the Embassy's consular
section busy. The visa workload has been growing steadily over the last
5 years. We have facilitated educational and cultural exchange travel,
giving qualified Mongolians the opportunity to experience the United
States and its people. This supports our bilateral relationship and the
many areas of mutual interest I already described. I believe that U.S.
support, both governmental and private, of Mongolia's cultural heritage
sites, media sector, and amazing environment also is linked to
increased U.S. interest--and to all the new associations our ever-more
interconnected world engenders. If confirmed, I also would be delighted
to serve in a country that hosts a vibrant Peace Corps program. Our
Peace Corps Volunteers are among the best grassroots ambassadors for
the United States and its values, and in Mongolia they are having a
major and lasting effect.
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, it would be the highest
honor for me to serve our country as the U.S. Ambassador to Mongolia. I
joined the Foreign Service 22 years ago, coming in with a certificate
in Asian studies from Georgetown University and a fascination with the
region. Secretary Clinton recently predicted that the world's strategic
and economic center of gravity in the 21st century will be the Asia-
Pacific region. She framed one of the most important tasks of American
statecraft over the next decade as locking in a substantially increased
investment--diplomatic, economic, strategic, and otherwise--in this
region. I welcome the opportunity to be on the front lines of that
challenge. If confirmed, I will lead a diplomatic mission of
approximately 200 U.S. and Mongolian employees, representing seven
agencies. I will do my very best to ensure that all members of that
community and their families have the leadership, security, and support
they need to get their jobs done and to engage on behalf of the United
States to work with, and benefit from, the growth and dynamism so
apparent in the Asian region.
Senator Webb. Thank you very much, and your full written
statement will be entered into the record at this point.
Ambassador Bodde, I want to start off by saying I apologize
here. I think I made a mistake in diplomatic protocol. As a
former Ambassador, is it not true that Foreign Service grade is
probably the highest at the table? I should have called on you
first, and I apologize. But welcome. I think you, at least from
your written testimony, have some pretty important folks in the
audience today, important to your personal history.
STATEMENT OF HON. PETER WILLIAM BODDE, OF MARYLAND, TO BE
AMBASSADOR TO THE FEDERAL DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF NEPAL
Ambassador Bodde. Thank you, Senator. No apology needed. I
am honored to be here with my two colleagues. We joined the
Foreign Service together and Piper and I serve in Iraq
together. So it is a great honor.
Mr. Chairman, Senator Inhofe, it is an honor and a
privilege to appear before you today as the President's nominee
to serve as the next United States Ambassador to Nepal. I am
grateful for the trust placed in me by President Obama and
Secretary Clinton. If confirmed, I look forward to working with
the committee and my colleagues in the U.S. Government to
further the interests of the United States in Nepal and in the
region.
I also want to take this opportunity to express my
appreciation for the special efforts the committee has made to
schedule these nomination hearings. Out of respect for the
committee's valuable time, I will keep my remarks here brief
and will submit an expanded statement for the record.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to introduce four generations of
my family this morning: my grandson, Andrew, my daughter,
Sara----
Senator Inhofe. Have them stand up.
Ambassador Bodde [continuing]. My son-in-law, David, who I
note is an Iraq veteran. And Senator Webb, they are all
constituents of yours in Woodbridge, VA.
Senator Webb. We appreciate all of you.
Ambassador Bodde. I would like to also introduce my son,
Christopher, who recently started his career at USAID and my
father, Ambassador William Bodde, Jr. Mr. Chairman, he and I
literally switched seats today. More than 30 years ago, I sat
where he is when he appeared before your predecessor, the late
Senator Paul Tsongas, during my dad's first confirmation
hearing prior to becoming Ambassador to Fiji. Unfortunately,
the press of work in Baghdad has precluded my wife, Tanya, from
being present today. I am very proud of her, and I note that as
a career Foreign Service employee, she has accompanied me on my
tours, including Pakistan and in Iraq.
Senator Webb. Well, Ambassador Bodde, will you please take
a stand here, make a bow? And I will do my best to be easier on
your son than Senator Tsongas was on you. [Laughter.]
Ambassador Bodde. As you may already be aware, should I be
confirmed, this will be my third time representing the United
States in Nepal. Among the lessons I have learned during my
career is that the success of every U.S. mission abroad depends
on a strong interagency effort and a cohesive country team. It
also requires clear goals, strict accountability, adequate
funding, and trained personnel. These same critical concepts
apply to our bilateral engagement and the delivery of
significant levels of U.S. assistance at a critical juncture in
Nepal's development. You have my full assurances that, should I
be confirmed, I will ensure that these concepts are an
essential element of all mission programs. While the generosity
of the American people is great, all of us involved in the
stewardship of this generosity must be accountable for
measuring success and failure.
The primary objective of the U.S. mission in Nepal, of
course, is to promote and protect the interests of the United
States and of U.S. citizens who are either in Nepal or doing
business with Nepal. In addition to that fundamental
responsibility, we are working with Nepal to promote political
and economic development, decrease the country's dependence on
humanitarian assistance, and increase its ability to make
positive contributions to regional security and the broader
global community.
Nepal is one of the poorest countries in the world. It
faces the daunting challenges of consolidating peace after a
decade of civil conflict, writing a new constitution that will
enshrine the values of a new federal democratic republic,
developing its economy, expanding access to health and
education, and improving its poor infrastructure.
Despite these challenges, the Nepali Government has made
significant strides over the last few years. The 10-year civil
conflict is over. The Maoists have not only joined mainstream
politics, but are heading the current government tasked with
completing the peace process. And the government has made a
meaningful commitment to raise living standards and improve the
lives of its people. The United States is an important and
growing partner in this process. Our assistance programs focus
on governance, antitrafficking, private sector development,
basic education and health, disaster risk reduction, and human
rights training. I am also delighted that Peace Corps
Volunteers will be returning to the country in September after
an 8-year hiatus.
Mr. Chairman, if confirmed, I will take a special interest
in the promotion of Tibetan and Bhutanese refugee rights. This
is an issue I dealt with the last time I served in Nepal and it
is one that deserves particular attention.
In closing, I want to note that anyone who represents the
United States abroad has a unique responsibility. More often
than not, we are the only nation that has the will, the values,
and the resources to solve problems, help others, and to be a
positive force for change in our challenged world. Being
nominated to serve as an ambassador representing our Nation is
in itself an incredible honor. With the consent of the Senate,
I look forward to assuming this responsibility while serving as
the next United States Ambassador to Nepal.
Thank you for this opportunity to address you. I look
forward to answering your questions.
Prepared Statement of Hon. Peter William Bodde
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, it is an honor and a
privilege to appear before you today as the President's nominee to
serve as the next United States Ambassador to Nepal. I am grateful for
the trust placed in me by President Obama and Secretary Clinton. If
confirmed, I look forward to working with this committee and my
colleagues in the U.S. Government to further the interests of the
United States in Nepal and in the region. I also want to take this
opportunity to express my appreciation for the special efforts the
committee has made to schedule these nomination hearings.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to introduce four generations of my
family this morning. My grandson, Andrew; my daughter, Sara, who is one
of your constituents in Woodbridge; my son, Christopher--who recently
started his career at USAID--and my father, Ambassador William Bodde.
Mr. Chairman, he and I literally switched seats today. More than 30
years ago, I sat where he is when he appeared before your predecessor,
the late Senator Paul Tsongas, during my dad's first confirmation
hearing prior to becoming Ambassador to Fiji. Unfortunately, the press
of work in Baghdad precluded my wife, Tanya, from being present today.
I am very proud of her and I note that as a career Foreign Service
employee, she has accompanied me to all of my assignments, including
Pakistan and now Iraq.
As you may already be aware, should I be confirmed, this will be my
third time representing the United States in Nepal. Among the lessons I
have learned during my career is that the success of every United
States mission abroad depends on a strong interagency effort and a
cohesive Country Team. It also requires clear goals, strict
accountability, adequate funding and trained personnel. These same
critical concepts apply to our bilateral engagement and the delivery of
significant levels of U.S. assistance at a critical juncture in Nepal's
development. You have my full assurances that, should I be confirmed, I
will provide the necessary leadership to ensure that these concepts are
an essential element of all mission programs. While the generosity of
the American people is great, all of us involved in the stewardship of
this generosity must be accountable for measuring success and failure.
In my current position as assistant chief of mission for assistance
transition in Iraq, as well as in my previous positions as Ambassador
to Malawi and in Islamabad, Frankfurt, Nepal, and Bulgaria, I have had
the opportunity to regularly brief dozens of your colleagues both in
the House and Senate. Such regular interaction--whether at post or in
Washington--is critical to our continued success. Frank exchanges of
accurate information that build trust are essential for the Congress to
make difficult resource and policy choices. Should I be confirmed, I
will make every effort to interact on a regular basis with the members
of the committee and other Members of the Congress and congressional
staff. Nepal is one of the poorest countries in the world; it faces the
daunting challenges of consolidating peace after a decade of civil
conflict, writing a new constitution that will enshrine the values of a
new federal democratic republic, developing its economy, expanding
access to health and education, and improving its poor infrastructure.
Despite these challenges, the Nepali Government has made significant
strides over the last few years: the 10-year civil conflict is over,
the one-time insurgent Maoists have not only joined mainstream politics
but are heading the current government tasked with completing the peace
process, and the Government has made a meaningful commitment to raise
living standards and improve the lives of its people. The United States
is an important and growing partner in this process.
The primary objective of the U.S. mission in Nepal, of course, is
to promote and protect the interests of the United States and of U.S.
citizens who are either in Nepal or doing business with Nepal. In
addition to that fundamental responsibility, we are working with Nepal
to promote political and economic development, decrease the country's
dependence on humanitarian assistance, and increase its ability to make
positive contributions to regional security and the broader global
community. Our USAID program focuses on governance, antitrafficking,
private sector development, basic education, and disaster risk
reduction. Nepal was recently chosen as a threshold country by the
Millennium Challenge Corporation. And in another sign of the progress
Nepal has made since the insurgency ended in 2006, Peace Corps
Volunteers will also be returning to the country in September after an
8-year hiatus. I have seen firsthand the significant impact a single
Peace Corps Volunteer can make. I want to assure you that, should I be
confirmed, I will support this inspiring American outreach program.
If confirmed, I will do my utmost to ensure that Nepal finalizes
its peace process and establishes a stable democracy. Nepal will soon
integrate former Maoist combatants into the Nepal Army, one of the
final steps in Nepal's peace process. Department of Defense programs
are cultivating a professional force that respects human rights and
civilian control. In addition, the Constituent Assembly is working to
complete work on a new constitution by the upcoming May 27 deadline,
grappling with such issues as how to devolve power to newly created
federal states, how to ensure inclusiveness for long-marginalized
ethnic minorities and women, and what form of government to establish.
If confirmed, my previous experience in helping young or challenged
democracies--including, especially, Nepal itself--will serve me well.
Success, however, will require U.S. and international support to
reinforce Nepal's developing democratic system.
On the economic front, Nepal faces significant challenges in the
near term, including energy shortages, poor roads, and a lack of
education, especially for girls at the secondary level. Another problem
is the lack of adequate and suitable employment for Nepal's burgeoning
youth demographic, in which more than 64 percent of the population is
under the age of 30. For me personally, this means the vast majority of
the population was not even born when I completed my first tour there
in 1984! Many villages in the countryside are populated primarily by
the elderly and children, as many working-age Nepali citizens now go to
the gulf countries, India, or elsewhere in Asia to earn a living,
sending back as much as 25 percent of Nepal's GDP in remittances. From
a longer -term perspective, however, the end of the conflict in Nepal
and political stability means the country's leaders can refocus
attention on improving economic opportunities for its citizens--indeed,
this will be crucial for the peace process to be considered successful.
Nepal has genuine opportunities for U.S. exporters and investors in
sectors such as hydropower, agribusiness, tourism, and information
technology. To that end, I will seek to improve the environment for
foreign direct investment.
Nepal also faces ongoing human rights challenges. If confirmed as
Ambassador, I will continue to promote the rights of refugees,
including the large Tibetan and Bhutanese refugee communities in Nepal.
Reducing trafficking-in-persons will be another top priority, working
closely with the government and courageous NGOs such as Maiti Nepal.
Finally, the country is also still coming to terms with the gross human
rights abuses that took place during the conflict, and we are urging
the country's leaders to establish transitional justice mechanisms that
are credible are consistent with best practices and address the
concerns and ensure the rights of the victims.
Weak health systems and disease, including malaria, tuberculosis,
and chronic malnutrition, pose a tremendous obstacle to Nepal's
continued growth. The Nepali Government has been a willing partner in
addressing the challenges of improving access to health care, but
government and public sector capacity remain weak. The United States,
through the President's Global Health Initiative, has played a critical
role in increasing access to treatment and public awareness and in
improving health indicators such as maternal and infant mortality.
Although Nepal is now on track to meet its Millennium Development Goals
in reducing maternal and under-5 mortality rates, there is still much
work to be done. If confirmed, I will be proud to shepherd the
continued growth of these critical programs.
As Nepal continues to develop domestically, it is increasingly able
to play a constructive role in advancing important issues throughout
the region. One example of such contributions is Nepal's continued
deployment of peacekeeping battalions to U.N. missions in Sudan, Iraq,
Congo, and other countries. Kathmandu is also host to the South Asian
Association of Regional Cooperation (SAARC) Secretariat, to which my
predecessor was appointed the lead U.S. Government representative. As
an official observer to SAARC, the United States is encouraging the
development of the organization's leadership in areas of regional
concern such as trade, environment, and disaster risk reduction.
In closing, I want to note that anyone who represents the United
States abroad has a unique responsibility. More often than not, we are
the only nation that has the will, the values, and the resources to
solve problems, help others, and to be a positive force for change in
our challenged world. Being nominated to serve as an Ambassador
representing our Nation is in itself an incredible honor. With the
consent of the Senate, I look forward to assuming this responsibility
while serving as the next U.S. Ambassador to Nepal.
Senator Webb. Thank you very much, Ambassador. And again,
welcome to your family and your friends who are here today.
Your full written statement will be entered into the record at
this point.
Ms. Rosen, welcome.
STATEMENT OF DOROTHEA-MARIA ROSEN, OF CALIFORNIA, TO BE
AMBASSADOR TO THE FEDERATED STATES OF MICRONESIA
Ms. Rosen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Senator Inhofe. I am
honored to appear before you today as President Obama's nominee
to be the Ambassador to the Federated States of Micronesia. I
am deeply grateful to President Obama and Secretary Clinton for
their trust and confidence in nominating me.
I just wish my parents had lived to see this moment. They
would have been as thrilled and as proud as I am.
If confirmed, I look forward to the opportunity to return
to the Asia-Pacific region. I have fond memories of my service
in Korea and the Philippines.
I am an educator, a lawyer, a veteran, a Foreign Service
officer, and a mother. My three children were born while I was
serving overseas and grew up as truly global citizens. All have
graduate degrees and are gainfully employed in California, and
they make me proud every day.
Currently I am the Diplomat in Residence for the Midwest
based out of Chicago. My challenge is to recruit future
generations of Foreign Service officers and to be a resource
and foreign policy expert to students in my region. This
position has a strong public diplomacy component and it
complements my many years of service as a consular officer and
a political officer. Several of my positions, including service
as Deputy Principal Officer in Frankfurt, required a great deal
of interaction with other U.S. Federal agencies. And Frankfurt,
with over 40 regional offices and Federal agencies, is often
cited as an example of how interagency coordination and
cooperation should work. If confirmed, I will seek to apply my
interagency experience, which will be critically important in
the FSM, where so many domestic Federal agencies operate side
by side with foreign affairs and defense colleagues.
The FSM consists of over 600 mountainous islands and low-
lying coral atolls spread over a million square miles of
Pacific Ocean. It is one of the least populated countries in
the world and one of the most isolated. Today the FSM and the
United States enjoy a close relationship based on historical,
moral, and security ties.
The United Nations entrusted the United States with the
administration of the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands in
1947. In 1986, the FSM and the United States signed the Compact
of Free Association, and the FSM became independent. This
compact, which was amended in 2004 to extend economic
assistance for an additional 20 years, provides the framework
for much of our bilateral relationship. Under the compact,
citizens of the FSM can live, study, and work in the United
States without a visa. Mutual security of our nations is an
underlying element of the special relationship between the
United States and the Federated States of Micronesia. The FSM
has no military of its own, and under the compact, the United
States has committed to defend Micronesia as it would our own
territory.
Citizens of Micronesia serve proudly in the United States
military and at a far higher per capita rate than United States
citizens. Many have made the ultimate sacrifice for freedom in
Iraq and Afghanistan, and many have been seriously wounded. I
would like to specifically note that President Mori's daughter
and one of Vice President Alik's sons are currently serving in
the armed forces. If confirmed, I pledge to ensure that these
soldiers and their families continue to receive the recognition
and support they deserve from a grateful nation.
To help achieve the compact goal of economic self-
sufficiency, the United States provides assistance focused on
six sectors: health, education, infrastructure, public sector
capacity-building, sustainable private sector development, and
the environment. And each year, all of the services, programs,
and grants--the amount exceeds $130 million.
If confirmed, I will work with the FSM on compact
development goals, including improving the standard of living
of citizens and reducing dependence on public sector employment
funded by foreign contributions. I will strive to improve the
business climate and fiscal policies, focus on the goals of
greater accountability and implement this assistance based on
well-informed assessments for those on the ground.
If confirmed, I will coordinate closely with the other
Departments involved with these efforts, and I will work to
ensure that assistance is visible, recognized, and complements
efforts in the region.
In closing, I am grateful for the honor and opportunity to
lead the United States mission in Micronesia and work with all
these colleagues on this effort. It is a time of renewed focus
on our role in the Pacific, and I am excited and proud to be a
part of it.
If confirmed, I look forward to working with this
committee, the Congress, and others in the government to
invigorate our relationship with Micronesia. I believe that the
executive and legislative branches will be important to this
endeavor.
I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you and would
be pleased to answer your questions. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Rosen follows:]
Prepared Statement of Dorothea-Maria Rosen
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am honored to appear
before you today as President Obama's nominee to be the Ambassador to
the Federated States of Micronesia (FSM). I am deeply grateful to
President Obama and Secretary Clinton for their trust and confidence in
nominating me.
I wish my parents had lived to see this moment; they would have
been as thrilled and as proud as I am.
If confirmed, I look forward to the opportunity this assignment
will provide to return to the Asia-Pacific region. I have fond memories
of my service in Korea and the Philippines.
My early background was in education, and I went on to study law. I
remain interested in education and rule of law issues. Upon admission
to the New York State Bar, I joined the U.S. Army. As a JAG Corps
captain I had the privilege of serving in the International Law
Division at Headquarters U.S. Army Europe in Heidelberg, Germany. While
in Germany I passed the Foreign Service Exam and have been a member of
the Foreign Service since 1981. My three children were born while I was
serving overseas and are truly global citizens.
Currently, I am the Diplomat in Residence for the Midwest, based
out of Chicago. My challenge is to recruit future generations of
Foreign Service officers and to be a resource and foreign policy expert
to students in my region. This position has a strong public diplomacy
component which complements the many years of service I have had as a
consular officer and political officer. Several of my positions,
including service as Deputy Principal Officer in Frankfurt, required a
great deal of interaction with other United States Government agencies.
Frankfurt was often cited as an example of how interagency coordination
and cooperation should work. We had the advantage of sharing a building
and seeing each other on a daily basis so we developed excellent
working relationships. If confirmed, I will seek to apply my
interagency experience, which will be critically important in the FSM,
where so many domestic federal agencies operate side by side with
foreign affairs and defense colleagues.
The FSM consists of over 600 mountainous islands and low-lying
coral atolls spread over a million square miles of Pacific Ocean. It is
one of the least populated countries in the world. The landscapes are
beautiful and the people are friendly. Today, the FSM and the United
States enjoy a close and unique relationship.
The United Nations entrusted the United States with the
administration of the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands in 1947.
In 1986, the FSM and the United States signed the Compact of Free
Association and the FSM became independent. This compact, which was
amended in 2004 to extend economic assistance for an additional 20
years, provides the framework for much of our bilateral relationship.
Under the compact, citizens of the FSM can live, study, and work in the
United States without a visa. Mutual security of our nations is an
underlying element of the special relationship between the United
States and the Federated States of Micronesia. The FSM has no military
of its own. Under the compact the United States has committed to defend
Micronesia as if it were part of our own territory. Citizens of
Micronesia serve in the U.S. military at a higher per capita rate than
citizens of the United States. Many have made the ultimate sacrifice
for freedom in Iraq and Afghanistan and others have been wounded, some
with life-long injuries. I would like to specifically note that
President Mori's daughter and one of Vice President Alik's sons are
serving in the U.S. Armed Forces today. If confirmed, I pledge to
ensure that these soldiers and their families continue to receive the
recognition and support they have earned from a grateful nation.
To help achieve the compact goal of economic self-sufficiency, the
United States will provide the Government of the FSM over $90 million a
year in direct economic assistance through FY 2023. This assistance is
directed toward six sectors: health, education, infrastructure to
support health and education, public sector capacity building, private
sector development and the environment. Each year, U.S. assistance to
the country--including all federal services, programs, and grants--
exceeds $130 million.
If confirmed, I will work with the FSM to help attain its Compact
development goals; these include a significant increase in the standard
of living of the citizens of the FSM and a reduction in their economy's
dependence on public sector employment funded by foreign contributions.
To reach those goals I will seek to improve the business climate,
fiscal policies, and capacity to govern, while reducing dependence on
foreign assistance. I will also seek to ensure that U.S. assistance
programs are implemented consistent with well-informed assessments from
those on the ground. I will continue to work with others who are
concerned with the economic impact of Compact State migrants on U.S.
states and territories.
If confirmed, I will coordinate closely with the Department of the
Interior, which has primary responsibility for implementing the
compact's economic provisions. I also look forward to working with the
Department of Defense's Pacific Command on continued security and
humanitarian assistance activities in the FSM. I will also continue our
close cooperation with the United States Coast Guard to implement the
Shiprider agreement with FSM and other maritime security arrangements.
These activities strengthen the bonds of friendship that undergird our
entire relationship with the FSM. I will also work to ensure that U.S.
assistance is visible and recognized, and complements the efforts of
other regional donors. If confirmed, my overarching goal will be to
strengthen the positive relationship our two countries have enjoyed for
decades and to support the people and government of the FSM as they
work toward a more prosperous future.
In closing, I can think of no greater honor or opportunity than to
lead the U.S. mission in the Federated States of Micronesia and work
with our valued Micronesian friends and allies on these and other
important issues. It is a time of renewed focus on our role in the
Pacific and I am excited to be part of it. If confirmed by the Senate,
I look forward to working with this committee, the Congress, and others
in the U.S. Government who seek to invigorate our relationship with
Micronesia, across a range of interests relating to security, good
governance, economic and budgetary self-reliance, health, education,
and environmental protection. I believe that coordination between the
executive and legislative branches will be important to this endeavor.
Senator Webb. Thank you very much. Your full written
statement will be entered into the record at this point.
I would also like to point out that the hearing record will
be held open until close of business tomorrow in case other
members of this committee wish to submit questions in writing
or if there are follow-on questions from myself or Senator
Inhofe.
Senator Inhofe, I am going to yield to you for your
questions, and then I will pick up after you are done.
Senator Inhofe. I appreciate that, Mr. Chairman.
And on the issue that I brought up, Ms. Campbell, maybe for
the record you could kind of send me a letter because this is
something I had not seen before. And you might have some ideas
on it, and I will certainly respect those ideas.
Let me ask you, Ms. Rosen. You served some time in Ghana.
Is that correct?
Ms. Rosen. Yes, sir.
Senator Inhofe. In Accra? When was that?
Ms. Rosen. 1989 to 1991, quite some time ago.
Senator Inhofe. I have spent quite a bit of time there and
gone all the way through the Rawlings machine and John Kufuor
and now with the new President. And I see that as a real
shining star in west Africa with some great opportunities. It
has changed considerably since that time.
Ms. Rosen. I understand they have highways. The main street
actually has high-rise buildings.
Senator Inhofe. They do. But Bukom is the same. Does that
mean anything to you? Bukom?
Ms. Rosen. No. I never made it there.
Senator Inhofe. That is the impoverished district. They are
keeping that, I guess, part of their history maybe. I do not
know.
But anyway, I just wanted to say, Mr. Chairman, I have had
the opportunity, of course, to visit with Mr. Bodde at some
length, and I have looked very carefully at all three.
And I have to say this, Ms. Campbell, about the job that
you are taking on. I had occasion to--I have been in aviation
all my life--fly an airplane around the world. I went right
over the area that you will be representing, and your work is
cut out for you. [Laughter.]
Good luck.
But I have looked at the credentials of these people, Mr.
Chairman, and I am in full support of their confirmation. I
look forward to working with all three of you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Webb. Thank you very much, Senator Inhofe. And I
share your confidence in the abilities of these nominees to
fulfill their responsibilities to our country.
Let me start, Ms. Rosen, with something that you and I had
a discussion about yesterday, and it relates to something that
I said in my opening statement, that the citizens of this area
have the right to reside and work in the United States as
lawful, nonimmigrants, allowing entry into the United States
without a visa. And when we were discussing this yesterday--let
me get the exact numbers--I think what we were talking about
was approximately 100,000 citizens in this area. Is that
correct? And 30,000 of which are here. Or is that 100,000
presently living in the area and an additional 30,000 in the
United States?
Ms. Rosen. Yes. The figures I have seen are a little over
100,000 in Micronesia and then approximately 30,000 in the
United States.
Senator Webb. So that would be 130,000--30,000 out of
130,000 roughly?
Ms. Rosen. Roughly.
Senator Webb. Roughly speaking?
And I also understand that this could serve as something of
a pass-through. If you are not from Micronesia and you live in
Micronesia for a certain period of time, you can then--how does
that work? Can you then come to the United States as a citizen?
Ms. Rosen. The compact allows Micronesian citizens to come
without a visa. And they acquire citizenship by birth to a
Micronesian parent. They can also apply for naturalization, but
naturalization in Micronesia is quite--it is actually an act of
Congress. So it does not happen all that often. The President
can naturalize someone based on a bill from Congress, but there
are a number of requirements as well. They require knowledge of
the government and the history and the culture, one of the four
indigenous languages. They have to have resided there legally
for 5 years. So it is rather a lengthy and difficult process to
do. Our colleagues at the Department of the Interior have
indicated that in the past 10 years that it has not occurred.
So it does not seem to be a large number.
Senator Webb. So can you walk us through the mechanics of
Micronesian----
Ms. Rosen. Naturalization?
Senator Webb. No. How a Micronesian citizen would come to
the United States without a visa. Mechanically how does that
work?
Ms. Rosen. They need passports because it is an independent
foreign country. So they would book their flights and go down
with their passport, and if they are citizens, they do not
require a visa. So they could travel to the United States. They
are subject to the ineligibilities. So they would be ineligible
if they were a felon or public charge, but obviously, DHS does
not have the opportunity at port of entry to know all those
things.
Senator Webb. So basically you come back and forth on a
Micronesian passport in the same way as, say, we would do in
Europe, but you can live----
Ms. Rosen. But they can stay.
Senator Webb. They can stay.
Ms. Rosen. They can work. They do not require a work visa.
They do not require any particular visa in order to stay. They
can establish a residence in the United States, but it is a
nonimmigrant status. They do not establish a residency that
leads to citizenship.
Senator Webb. So it is basically free flow.
Ms. Rosen. It is free flow, but again it does not lead to
citizenship, so they would not acquire U.S. citizenship.
Senator Webb. But they could remain here permanently under
the compact.
Ms. Rosen. Yes. There is no time limit.
Senator Webb. What is the principal economic future of the
region? How are we looking at that?
Ms. Rosen. Well, the compact provides funding that is
phasing down. So each year they receive less direct funding
from the compact funds. And the funding goes into the trust
fund, but that is not designed to fully support them in 2023.
So we are encouraging increased development, hopefully in
things that bring income. They do have tuna reserves that are
worth a great deal of money. There is some potential for
tourism, but it is a very isolated location, so there are
difficulties with that. But there is a focus on greater
accountability and focus on the goal of developing sustainable
economic, viable possibilities.
Senator Webb. So right now, in terms of volume of trade,
most of the volume in actual commercial product is the United
States going into Micronesia. Is that correct?
Ms. Rosen. The source of income? Yes, in terms of monetary
income.
Senator Webb. And what are they exporting?
Ms. Rosen. Tuna.
Senator Webb. I look forward to hearing some thoughts about
what----
Ms. Rosen. What they could export?
Senator Webb. Yes, as you take your position out there.
From what I am reading, there is not a lot of commercial
enterprise in Micronesia. Is that fair to say?
Ms. Rosen. That is fair to say. I think the farming is
basically subsistence farming. From my colleagues in
Agriculture, I did not learn of a great opportunity for raising
cocoa or coffee beans.
Senator Webb. I know when I was out there many, many years
ago, the No. 1 export for a long time was scrap metal left over
from all the battles in World War II. Hopefully, if we are
going to have this relationship and if it is going to be such
an open relationship in terms of the citizens involved, we
could put some of our minds together and figure out what
economically might benefit the region in the future.
Ms. Rosen. We do need to try and create opportunity there
so there is less of a need to migrate.
Senator Webb. Ms. Campbell, can you give us your
experiences in this region to date that relate to the
ambassadorship?
Ms. Campbell. Well, both my studies and the beginning of my
professional focus was on East Asia, primarily on Southeast
Asia. So I have lived or worked in Japan, the Philippines,
Cambodia, worked on Indonesia, worked on East Timor. And so I
feel like that combination of experience in East Asia and then
my more recent experience in working more in supporting U.S.
businesses, as I am doing now as the consul general in Basrah,
that that is a good combination, both of a pretty deep
understanding of the East Asian region, but also an
understanding of some of the economic challenges and
opportunities that are going to face Mongolia over the next
decade.
Senator Webb. You have a good bit of experience in the
Middle East as well. Mongolia has been involved in Iraq and
Afghanistan. I think the number that we were provided is they
have gone from 200 to 400 troops, and they also benefit from
our international military education training programs----
Ms. Campbell. That is correct.
Senator Webb [continuing]. And foreign military funds. Can
you give us an idea of how those two realities interact?
Ms. Campbell. Well, it was interesting. When I first
started to speak with people in Iraq about the fact that I had
been nominated for this position, they said, ``oh, yes, we
remember the Mongolians. We remember when they came and sacked
Baghdad.'' [Laughter.]
And then they said, ``oh, yes, and then they came back
about 8 years ago as part of the international effort in
Iraq.'' And so it has been interesting to have that
conversation.
What I understand from my colleagues at the Department of
Defense--and I should also say that one of my first exposures
to Mongolia was actually when I was deputy chief of mission in
Cambodia because we were working with the Cambodian military to
have them go and participate in a military exercise that is
held each year in Mongolia, which is called Khan Quest. And so
we encouraged the Cambodians to go and participate, and when
they came back, the Cambodian military interlocutors were so
positive about what they had seen on the Mongolian side,
including a Mongolian peace training institute which I believe
is unique in East Asia. And so the Cambodians then started to
try to build a training center for peace support missions
similar to what they had seen in Mongolia. So that was one of
the things which piqued my interest in Mongolia.
So Mongolia has participated strongly--Mongolian officers
have participated in training in the United States. Ten percent
of all officers in the Mongolia Army have actually participated
in training in the United States. You also have, as I said, the
Mongolian military having participated in 14 different
peacekeeping operations, primarily in Africa but also in
Europe, in Iraq, and currently in Afghanistan. And so they are
starting to develop some very specific niche expertise which I
think is going to be useful and certainly the assessment of my
colleagues from the Department of Defense is that their
military capabilities, as well as their interest in
participating in these international peacekeeping operations
and efforts like in Afghanistan, where they are increasingly
shifting----
Senator Webb. Do you know the level of our funding for
these two programs as it goes to Mongolia?
Ms. Campbell. The combination of--it is approximately $3
million per year, sir.
Senator Webb. Combined?
Ms. Campbell. That is our FMF. Our IMET is small, and I can
provide you the exact figure. I do not remember it offhand.
Senator Webb. Does that fund their activities in
Afghanistan?
Ms. Campbell. Let me please get a full answer to that and
provide that to you because I believe that their activities in
Afghanistan should be covered under NATO support funds as
opposed to from our direct IMET and FMF contributions.
[The submitted written information referred to follows:]
In FY 2012, the Department of State allocated $875,000 IMET to
Mongolia. IMET funding in FY2011 was $997,000.
The U.S. Government reimburses Mongolia for its predeployment
expenses related to Afghanistan (training, medical preparation,
individual equipment) using Coalition Support Funds (CSF). Mongolia
received $356,118 from CSF in December 2011
(FY 2012 funds) as reimbursement for troop rotation costs incurred in
FY 2010. Expenses incurred during deployment, such as for the care and
feeding of troops in the field, are borne by the Mongolians themselves.
U.S. FMF assistance totaled $3 million in FY 2012 and helps
Mongolia's Ministry of Defense to train and equip units to participate
in international peacekeeping and coalition operations. This includes
acquiring equipment, such as radios and medical gear, that will be used
by Mongolian troops in Darfur, South Sudan, and other future
deployments.
Senator Webb. It is an additional fund as compared to their
national defense budget.
Ms. Campbell. That is correct.
Senator Webb. That would be correct to say. OK.
Ambassador Bodde, this is, I think, your third trip back to
Nepal? Do you have any observations on the differences over the
three?
Ambassador Bodde. Well, each trip has been a different
trip. When I went back the second time, Senator, it was right
after the first restoration of democracy, and I was there for 3
years. I think we had four governments in the 3 years I was
there. I was there for the beginning of the civil strife.
Obviously, Nepal is a much different place than when I arrived
there 30 years ago. Sadly, some of the challenges they face, in
terms of the poverty, the health conditions, while we have made
tremendous progress, our assistance programs have been of great
assistance, there is still a lot of work to be done.
I have to say, having read in preparation for this hearing
for my new position, should I be confirmed, that I am very
optimistic about where things stand. What I have been seeing is
that all of the parties involved now have made a lot of
progress. Even today we got good news that they have agreed on
13 states and how it is going to be.
My concern is that this is only the beginning. They have,
as you mentioned, up until May 27 to have their new
constitution drafted, but once that is done, then comes the
hard work of implementation in terms of the new states, what
their authorities will be, the whole question of revenues, who
is going to have the ability to generate things. There is a lot
of work to be done. So I go back with a lot of experience,
country experience, knowing the culture, knowing many of the
political players there, but it will be a much different
experience than the last two times I was there.
Senator Webb. More optimistic I assume.
Ambassador Bodde. Yes, I am more optimistic.
Senator Webb. Well, I would have to--just as a general
comment as someone who is privileged to chair the subcommittee
and someone who spent a good bit of my life in and out of East
and Southeast Asia including, Ms. Rosen, as we discussed,
having in and out of Micronesia many, many years ago, I am
really impressed by the scope of the language skills that the
three of you combined have. It is an amazing comment, I think,
about the capabilities of our own Department of State.
Ms. Campbell, you particularly, you seem to pick small
countries linguistically, Cambodia, Serbo-Croatian, not that
small, and now Mongolia. How long is the Cambodian language
program? Was that a Foreign Service Institute program?
Ms. Campbell. It was, sir, and I should also say that my
Cambodian is rusty and was never particularly fluent.
Senator Webb. I do not know many people who can speak
Cambodian.
Ms. Campbell. There are so few people who speak Khmer that
even just the effort and being able to navigate simple
conversations was, in fact, extremely useful. What I found was
I had great pronunciation, and so I could work with a teacher
and I, for example, was able to be the emcee for our Fourth of
July and people could understand enough of what I was saying,
could understand me for that. But Cambodian is a unique
language.
Serbo-Croatian actually, interestingly, will be more useful
for Mongolia because the Serbs use the Cyrillic alphabet as do
the Mongolians. So I have got a leg up in at least being able
to read Mongolian, even though I do not at this point have the
ability to decipher it.
Senator Webb. I know having learned Vietnamese largely as
an act of will, but I began by buying the Foreign Service
Institute tapes years ago. One thing that I find is that the
people who have taken those courses develop this defined
vocabulary where you can actually sit down with each other and
speak for hours and nobody around you of that language knows
quite what you are talking about. [Laughter.]
And when they break into slang, you are lost. But it is a
great start.
Well, I want to echo what Senator Inhofe said. I think
these are very strong nominees, not just for the process, but
for continuing to serve our country in this region. And I think
I am on record about as strongly as I can be about how
important this region is to our country and how important we
are to the region in terms of long-term stability that allows
the economies to grow and governmental systems to evolve. And I
am glad we were able to get this hearing in and hopefully to
get all three of you on your way as soon as possible.
Again, to all friends and family, thank you for coming and
sharing this day with us. I think there is maybe one more
hurdle and then we can get you off to do what you are supposed
to be doing for our country.
Thank you.
This hearing is over.
[Whereupon, at 3:20 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
----------
Additional Questions and Answers Submitted for the Record
Response of Hon. Peter William Bodde to Question Submitted by
Senator Richard G. Lugar
Question. Congress has long expressed an interest in the Tibetan
population in Nepal, both those in transit to India and those who
reside there. The Government of China is putting political pressure on
Nepal regarding Tibetans. Will the U.S. Government continue to urge the
Nepali Government to allow the transit of all Tibetan refugees and work
with UNHCR to ensure that Nepali officials, including border personnel,
are properly briefed on the so-called ``Gentlemen's Agreement'' and
relevant international laws? Will the U.S. Government continue to press
for a durable solution to the problem of the long-staying Tibetan
residents without status and for a resettlement program for Tibetans
modeled after the successfully implemented resettlement program for
Bhutanese refugees?
Answer. My predecessors have placed both protecting and finding a
durable solution for Tibetan refugees at the top of the
administration's agenda in Nepal and, if confirmed, it is my firm
intention to keep it there. I am very concerned both by reports of
deteriorating conditions for the long-staying population and by the
drop in the number of new refugees transiting through Nepal to India.
If confirmed, advocacy on behalf of the Tibetan refugees, including
continued adherence to the Gentlemen's Agreement, will be one of my
first and highest priorities.
______
Responses of Hon. Peter William Bodde to Questions Submitted by
Senator Marco Rubio
Question. Nepal is not party to the 2000 U.N. Protocol to Prevent,
Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and
Children. If confirmed, how would you engage the Nepalese Government in
a dialogue to join this important human trafficking treaty?
Answer. Nepal is just now concluding a more than 5-year long
struggle to draft a new constitution and conclude their peace process.
If confirmed, I would use this opportunity to press Nepal to join the
2000 U.N. Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in
Persons, Especially Women and Children. We are partnering with NGOs and
the Government of Nepal to combat trafficking in persons. More needs to
be done, however, and I believe that as the new government stands up,
we will have an extremely important opportunity to make progress on
this issue.
Question. According to the State Department's 2011 Trafficking in
Persons Report, Nepal is a Tier 2 country for human trafficking. Nepal
is mainly a source country for men, women, and children subjected to
labor and sex trafficking. If confirmed, what would be your approach to
encourage the Nepalese Government to take significant steps toward
protecting its own citizens from being trafficked abroad?
Answer. Embassy Kathmandu, through State's Trafficking in Persons
Office, and through USAID, currently partners with NGOs on programs to
combat trafficking in persons in Nepal. These programs, totaling more
than $8.2 million over 3 years, seek to prevent trafficking, assist and
protect the victims of trafficking, and help Nepal's Government to
investigate and prosecute suspected trafficking offenders more
effectively. If confirmed, I will advocate to ensure that this issue
remains high on the U.S. Government's assistance agenda. I believe that
we also fight the scourge of trafficking in persons through our broader
assistance to Nepal. Our initiatives to address food insecurity and
other constraints to development also help address the root causes of
trafficking in persons.
______
Responses of Piper Anne Wind Campbell to Questions Submitted
by Senator Marco Rubio
Question. According to the State Department's 2011 Trafficking in
Persons Report, during the reporting period there were an estimated 525
North Koreans employed in Mongolia as contract laborers despite
concerns that North Korean workers overseas do not appear to have
rights and receive only a fraction of the money paid to the North
Korean Government for their work. If confirmed, what steps would you
take to ensure that the Mongolian Government no longer allows
contracted laborers from North Korea who may have been trafficked into
Mongolia?
Answer. I am very concerned about the situation you describe. The
Department of State and the Embassy in Ulaanbaatar have called on the
Government of Mongolia to address well-documented concerns that North
Korean workers in Mongolia are not free to leave their employment and
receive only a fraction of the money paid to the North Korean
Government for their work. If confirmed, I will again raise these
concerns with Mongolian officials and urge that the practice cease.
Question. The Mongolian Supreme Court's interpretation of
Mongolia's antitrafficking laws confuses judicial officials, resulting
in trafficking offenders to be prosecuted under the lesser offense of
``forced prostitution.'' If confirmed, how would you engage the
Mongolian judicial system to ensure clarity in article 113 of the
criminal code, which prohibits all forms of trafficking?
Answer. On January 19, 2012, the Mongolian Parliament passed the
Law to Combat Trafficking in Persons (LCTP). Subsequently, the criminal
code was also amended to bring certain articles into conformity with
the LCTP, including article 113 (The Sale and Purchase of Human
Beings), which now broadly criminalizes all forms of trafficking in
persons. Our Embassy contributed significantly to Mongolian efforts to
pass the LCTP, including by implementing Department of State-funded
projects with several NGOs that raised awareness about the lack of
judicial clarity, which the LCTP and the subsequent amendments
resolved.
Our next priority is to encourage the Government of Mongolia to
implement this law so that perpetrators of human trafficking are held
accountable with jail time and victims are identified and appropriately
protected. If confirmed, I will continue to urge Mongolia to implement
its law and to address human trafficking fully and effectively.
______
Response of Dorothea-Maria Rosen to Question Submitted
by Senator Marco Rubio
Question. Micronesia is a Tier 3 country according to the 2011
State Department's Trafficking In Persons Report for its failure to
fully comply with the minimum standards to eliminate trafficking and is
not making any efforts to do so. The Federated States of Micronesia
does not have a comprehensive federal antitrafficking law and has never
identified any human trafficking victims in the country despite being a
source country for women subjected to sex trafficking.
If confirmed, what is your strategy to engage the Government
of the Federated State of Micronesia to enact a strong
antitrafficking policy which will address prosecution,
protection, and prevention? What specific steps will need to be
enacted to ensure comprehensive trafficking legislation is
passed?
If confirmed, what key policies need to be in place to
ensure that Micronesia is not listed as a Tier 3 country for
trafficking in place in the next Trafficking In Persons Report?
Answer. Combating trafficking in persons remains a problem in the
Federated States of Micronesia (FSM). If confirmed, I will pay special
attention to and press the FSM to focus on human trafficking issues. On
March 5, 2012, the FSM Congress passed the Trafficking in Persons Act
of 2011 along with two protocols of the United Nation's Convention on
the Rights of the Child. The newly passed legislation allows for the
prosecution of cases involving human trafficking of FSM nationals
occurring within the FSM. The law is also intended to address the FSM's
obligations arising from its accession to the Palermo Protocol and is
the first step toward its obligations to criminalize human trafficking.
The FSM Government continues to make positive strides on
antitrafficking efforts; however much more needs to be done to upgrade
FSM from its current Tier 3 ranking. If confirmed, I will work closely
with the FSM Government to ensure that the new legislation is
implemented quickly and effectively. I will work with the government to
encourage the collection and maintenance of crime data on forced labor
and prostitution. I will work with appropriate officials to ensure that
adequate resources are used for law enforcement training, a critical
component in helping to identify and assist trafficking victims. In an
effort to reach out to local communities, I will also work with the
appropriate NGOs and women's groups to help support and facilitate
comprehensive and visible antitrafficking awareness campaigns.
NOMINATIONS OF EDWARD ALFORD, MARK ASQUINO, DOUGLAS GRIFFITHS, AND
DAVID LANE
----------
THURSDAY, MAY 17, 2012
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Foreign Relations,
Washington, DC.
----------
Edward M. Alford, of Virginia, to be Ambassador to the Republic
of The Gambia
Mark L. Asquino, of the District of Columbia, to be Ambassador
to the Republic of Equatorial Guinea
Douglas M. Griffiths, of Texas, to be Ambassador to the
Republic of Mozambique
David J. Lane, of Florida, to serve as U.S. Representative to
the United Nations Agencies for Food and Agriculture,
with the rank of Ambassador
----------
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:36 p.m., in
room SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Christopher
Coons, presiding.
Present: Senators Coons and Isakson.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. CHRISTOPHER A. COONS,
U.S. SENATOR FROM DELAWARE
Senator Coons. I am pleased to chair this hearing of the
Senate Foreign Relations Committee and would like to welcome my
good friend, Senator Isakson, as well as Senator Nelson, and
our distinguished nominees.
Today we will consider the nominees to be Ambassador to
Mozambique, to Equatorial Guinea, and to The Gambia, as well as
the U.S. Representative for the U.N. Agencies for Food and
Agriculture.
Turning first to the nomination of David Lane as the
nominee for the U.N. Agencies for Food and Agriculture in Rome,
I want to just briefly highlight the crucial role those
agencies play in Africa and throughout the developing world.
The World Food Programme provides lifesaving nutrition in
countries like Somalia, Sudan, Niger, and many other conflict
and famine zones. The U.N. Food and Agricultural Organization
is a key complement to our own Government's Feed the Future
program.
We will also today consider nominations for Ambassador to
three African countries that are all important to our national
interests, including security, trade, investment, health,
governance, and civil rights.
Douglas Griffiths is the nominee for Mozambique, a country
that has recently emerged from a long civil war as a promising
democracy with impressive economic growth. Like many African
countries, it is rich in natural resources but suffers from
high levels of poverty. The next Ambassador will have a number
of challenges in working with the Mozambican Government to
consolidate democratic gains, use resources wisely, and
increase trade with the United States.
Equatorial Guinea where Mark Asquino is the ambassadorial
nominee is an important producer of oil and natural gas with a
GDP of more than $14 billion, but the United States has serious
concerns about human rights protections, lack of political
freedoms, and widespread corruption. President Obiang is
Africa's longest serving and most entrenched political leader,
and opposition parties regularly complain of oppression issues
we will take up today.
Our final nominee, Edward Alford, has been nominated to
serve as Ambassador to The Gambia, a West African country
almost entirely enveloped by Senegal which has few natural
resources and relies on tourism and exporting for its economy.
U.S. interests in The Gambia include concerns about drug
trafficking, human rights, and governance. A number of
Senators, including Senators Durbin and Casey, have repeatedly
raised concerns about the lack of press freedom and the
disappearance and death of journalists critical of the
government. The Gambia is eligible for benefits under AGOA, and
I encourage the next Ambassador to work closely with the
government to increase trade and investment with the United
States.
With that summary, I now turn it over to Senator Isakson
for his opening remarks.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHNNY ISAKSON,
U.S. SENATOR FROM GEORGIA
Senator Isakson. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Alford, Mr. Asquino, Mr. Griffiths, and Mr. Lane,
congratulations on your nomination. We look forward to your
testimony today.
And it is always good to see my dear friend, Bill Nelson,
who is always out when there is a hometown boy being nominated
for anything. So, Mr. Lane, you are fortunate that he is on
your side.
And we welcome the family members of each of the nominees.
Thank you for your support of them in their quest and their
jobs.
This is an important--all three of the African countries
are very important, and they are not the places you get when
you are a big donor to the President. They are places you go
when you care passionately about your country and about the
future of the continent of Africa, and I commend each of you on
your willingness to take those posts on.
And I think Senator Coons agrees with me that we look
forward to being your conduit back here in America when you are
out there on point and think everybody has forgotten about you.
Please use us as a resource to try and help you in any way we
can.
Mr. Lane, let me just say that food security in Africa is
critically important to me. I have traveled to all four of the
countries that will be at the G8 this weekend, Benin, Ghana,
President Mills from Ghana, Tanzania, all coming in to testify
on the issue of food security, which is so critical.
You come very highly recognized by two friends of mine,
Beau Cutter and Helene Gale, and if you can pass that test, you
ought to be pretty good at anything. But they are obviously
delivering on the front through the U.N. Food Programme in
Somalia, Dadaab, Darfur, and other places like that. And food
security in Africa is a critical issue. In fact, there is a
looming potential problem in the Sudan right now, which I am
sure you are aware of as a hot bed. So I will be interested in
hearing from you about those issues and your experience and
hopefully the contribution you want to make to the program.
But I end where I began. Thank you all for your willingness
to serve, and I look forward to being a supporter of each and
every one of you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Coons. Thank you, Senator Isakson.
And I, too, would like to thank your families who will
support you, have supported you, and whom I hope you will
introduce when we get to each of your opening statements.
I would now like to turn it over to Senator Bill Nelson of
Florida. I understand Senator Rubio will be introducing some
comments for the record.
So, Senator Nelson, if you would please.
STATEMENT OF HON. BILL NELSON,
U.S. SENATOR FROM FLORIDA
Senator Nelson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And, Senator Isakson, you are right. When there is a home
Florida person, it is my privilege to be here.
But I am particularly pleased not only that both David Lane
and I are Melbourne High School Bulldogs, but all of his family
that is here today is as well.
And he comes uniquely qualified for this position. You
know, it is not all the time that we get to name an Ambassador
who does not come from the ranks of the Foreign Service. This
particular ambassadorship in Rome to all of the three U.N.
organizations has been people who really have a heart for
hunger and the poor.
Our former colleague from the House, Congressman Tony Hall,
served with great distinction, and he was the one that came to
national prominence when he had the Hunger Committee in the
House and suddenly the House decided they were taking the funds
away from the Hunger Committee and to highlight that that was
the wrong decision in his opinion, he went on a hunger strike.
And the House reversed itself after days and days. And of
course, Tony became uniquely qualified to be in this position
in a previous administration.
So too David is uniquely qualified. He has been coming to
this position, if you all confirm--if we confirm in the Senate,
which I think we will--he comes from the White House where he
has been assistant to the President and counselor to the Chief
of Staff. Before that, he was over at the Bono organization,
the ONE Campaign, where he was the CEO. And during that time,
ONE managed to grow more than 2 million members in over 100
countries on all seven continents.
I think David's passion for poverty, to fight it, and
preventable disease--I think it is remarkable, and I think he
comes to you as an exceptionally qualified person. You know all
the background, how this is a unique position that relates
between the Department of State and those three U.N.
humanitarian agencies. And as we project the interest of the
United States around the globe, this is one of the areas that
we are uniquely capable of distinguishing ourselves because of
our big humanitarian heart to try to help people all across the
globe. And I think David will be a fitting representative for
the United States in leading that effort.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Coons. Thank you, Senator Nelson.
And I understand Senator Rubio, also of Florida, had wanted
to join us but is going to submit a statement for the record.
[The prepared statement of Senator Rubio follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Marco Rubio, U.S. Senator From Florida
Chairman Kerry and Senator Lugar, thank you for the rare
opportunity to introduce to the committee a fellow South Floridian, Mr.
David Lane, for the position of United States Representative to the
United Nations Agencies for Food and Agriculture. I ask that these
remarks be included in the record.
David was born at Mercy Hospital, a storied institution in the
Miami area. Both his parents, George and Mary Lou, were raised in Coral
Gables, a beautiful community of tree-lined streets in the heart of
Miami.
David has had the rare opportunity of participating at all levels
of the policymaking process, from Senate advisor, to Chief of Staff in
a Federal Agency (Commerce Department), to the executive branch as
Assistant to the President and Counselor to the Chief of Staff.
Out of government, David served as President & CEO of the ONE
Campaign from November 2007 to January 2011. ONE is a world-renown
international advocacy organization focused on reforms to public policy
to more effectively combat extreme poverty. At the ONE, he oversaw the
team that sets strategic policy and main initiatives of the
organization.
The combination of these experiences will serve him well as he
takes on the challenge to represent U.S. views at the three leading
U.N. agencies focusing on food security and agricultural development--
the Food and Agriculture Organization, the World Food Programme, and
the International Fund for Agricultural Development.
Despite robust U.S. aid in bilateral and multilateral programs,
food insecurity is a daily concern for millions of people around the
world and a source of instability that impact U.S. interests abroad. As
we speak, a severe food crisis is affecting, once again, the countries
of the Sahel, with the potential to increase tensions in a region
already affected by unrelated political and security challenges.
The U.N. agencies in which he will represent the United States
serve as significant force multipliers to American bilateral efforts.
It is my greatest hope that he will succeed in achieving consensus to
implement the key FAO reforms as highlighted in the September 2011
Government and Accountability Office report on this matter.
In these challenging fiscal years, we all have an obligation to be
good stewards of taxpayers' contributions. As president of ONE, David
has firsthand experience of the need to strategically allocate precious
resources to achieve the greatest results. I wish him every success in
working with other U.S. missions at the U.N. and like-minded nations to
increase fiscal accountability in U.N. programs and strengthen the
agencies' mission with the adoption of free market policies that would
reduce the occurrence of nutritional emergencies in vulnerable aid-
recipient countries.
I appreciate the opportunity to welcome David to this committee,
and I urge the committee to act swiftly on his nomination to be the
next the U.S. Representative to United Nations Agencies for Food and
Agriculture.
Senator Coons. Mr. Lane, I invite you to begin a series of
four opening statements by our different nominees today, and I
would encourage you to begin by introducing and recognizing
your family.
Mr. Lane.
STATEMENT OF DAVID J. LANE, OF FLORIDA, TO SERVE AS U.S.
REPRESENTATIVE TO THE UNITED NATIONS AGENCIES FOR FOOD AND
AGRICULTURE, WITH THE RANK OF AMBASSADOR
Mr. Lane. Thank you, Senator, and thank you, Mr. Ranking
Member.
I should say my four siblings and various nieces and
nephews are here: Tom Lane, John Lane, Susan Davies, and Lisa
Wright. And I am very grateful that they have been able to join
me.
First of all, I should probably say I have a longer
statement, a longer presentation, which as you know, has been
presented for the record. So I am going to try to keep this as
brief as possible.
I do want to thank Senator Nelson for those very kind
words. I am very grateful for his generous introduction.
And I am honored to be the President's nominee for the U.S.
Representative to the U.N. Agencies for Food and Agriculture. I
would like to thank President Obama and Secretary Clinton for
the confidence they have shown in me through this nomination.
I just pointed out that my four brothers and sisters are
here and a few of my amazing nieces and nephews. In front of
them, I would actually like to say a few words about our
parents, George and Mary Lou Lane. They are too frail to travel
to Washington, but I know they are proud that I am being
considered for a position that can help the United States make
a difference for millions of poor people around the world. They
instilled in all of us a deep love of our country and a strong
commitment to serve others. By their example, our parents
taught us the true meaning of compassion, the importance of
service, and the moral necessity of helping those who are less
fortunate than we are. And I want to thank them for their
primary role really in preparing me to serve my country in this
important position, if confirmed by the Senate.
If you do confirm me, I would consider it a great privilege
to serve the American people in pursuit of goals that I know we
all hold dear: alleviating hunger and helping the poor lift
themselves out of poverty through agricultural development. The
United States has many important interests before the U.N. Food
Agencies in Rome, and I am eager to help protect and advance
those interests.
If confirmed, I am committed to helping the U.S. mission,
which has representatives from the Department of State, the
Department of Agriculture, USAID, advance our national
interests in a whole-of-government approach while helping to
make agriculture a major force for poverty alleviation and
economic transformation around the world.
The Food and Agriculture Organization, the World Food
Programme, and the International Fund for Agricultural
Development can and must play a critical role in continuing
recent momentum behind food security. I believe now is the
perfect time for these three important agencies to sharpen
their focus, clarify their roles, and improve their
coordination, and I am optimistic that the U.S. mission in Rome
can work with these agencies and align priorities in such a way
that U.S. policies and investments can have the galvanizing
effect that we all hope to see.
Mr. Chairman and Mr. Ranking Member, I know the fiscal
challenge we face, which is why, if confirmed, I would work to
ensure that U.S. taxpayer-provided resources are used to their
fullest effect and in the most efficient way possible.
Americans are the most generous donors in the fight against
hunger and they deserve vigilance in making sure their tax
dollars are well spent. If confirmed, I will work with the U.N.
Food Agencies to ensure that every penny of U.S. taxpayer-
provided assistance is well spent and that we are doing our
utmost to avoid costly emergencies in the future.
I truly believe that there has never been a more important
time for U.S. leadership on food and agriculture issues at the
U.N. Agencies in Rome and around the world, and I would be
honored to do my part to build on current momentum and help
ensure that we make the most out of this historic opportunity.
I thank you for your time, and I look forward to your
questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Lane follows:]
Prepared Statement of David J. Lane
Thank you, Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the committee.
And thank you, Senators Nelson and Rubio, for your kind introductions.
I am honored to be the President's nominee for the United States
Permanent Representative to the United Nations Agencies for Food and
Agriculture. I would like to thank President Obama and Secretary
Clinton for the confidence they have shown in nominating me for this
important post.
If confirmed by the Senate, I would consider it a great privilege
to serve the American people in pursuit of goals I know we all hold
dear: alleviating hunger and helping the world's poor lift themselves
out of poverty through agricultural development. The United States has
many important interests before the U.N. food and agriculture agencies
in Rome, and I am eager to help protect and advance them. If confirmed,
I am committed to helping the U.S. mission, which has representatives
from the Department of State, USDA, and USAID, advance our national
interest in a whole of government approach while helping to make
agriculture a major force for poverty alleviation around the world.
Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the committee, I believe
there has never been a more important time for U.S. leadership on food
and agriculture issues within the U.N. agencies in Rome and around the
world. This is a time of unprecedented progress in food and nutrition
security, and I want to do my part to sustain the momentum and help
ensure that we make the most out of our historic opportunity. At the
same time, the ongoing lack of food security in regions like the Horn
of Africa and the Sahel continues to drive instability and slow
progress in the development of these areas. With both the opportunity
for accelerated progress and lingering challenges in mind, I appreciate
this opportunity to share my views on how I would contribute to the
fight against hunger, if confirmed.
I hope you will agree that my experience prepares me well for the
responsibilities of the position for which I have been nominated. I
have spent most of my career in nonprofit service, and from 2001 until
2011 I worked to help develop and promote public policies focused on
enabling the world's poor to lift themselves out of poverty.
At the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation I established and led the
organization's East Coast office in Washington, DC, for 6 years. In
this role, I initiated and managed our collaboration with many of the
key actors in the global development field. After we concluded that
mobilizing public support for smart policies could be as important as
making smart programmatic investments, I led the Foundation's senior
leadership team in designing and implementing policy advocacy
strategies. I believe strongly in the importance of data-driven public
policy, and this conviction shaped my approach while leading the Gates
Foundation's policy advocacy work. Driven by the strong evidence that
improved agricultural productivity can have a transformative impact on
rural communities, the Foundation chose to make agriculture a top
priority, and it continues to be a major force helping to improve lives
in poor countries through improved agriculture.
From 2007 until 2011, I was president and CEO of ONE, a nonpartisan
global organization committed to mobilizing public support for
effective development and humanitarian policies. While there, I
constantly heard how important the fight against poverty is to people
all over the world and from all walks of life. In my experience,
Americans from across our society--students, businesspeople, members of
diverse faith communities, Republicans, Democrats--strongly support
effective
efforts--both in terms of cost and impact. Feeding the hungry is
perhaps the most powerful charitable impulse of all. In every sector of
development, people just want to know--and deserve to know--that the
programs they support are making a difference. And they want to know
that our focus is on creating long-term transformation and self-
reliance, not only addressing short-term suffering.
I frequently traveled to Africa during my tenure at ONE. I saw for
myself the critical linkages between agriculture and other aspects of
economic and social development. These linkages confirmed my belief
that smart policies and public investments from developed countries
like ours must build on and work in concert with committed leadership
from developing countries themselves. Without the two working in
concert, investments will not be as effective or transformative.
I am also proud of other roles I've been given the opportunity to
play in my career, especially those in the Federal Government. I
believe my experience as a policy analyst, manager, convener,
negotiator, and integrator of different perspectives would help me
fulfill your expectations for this role.
In addition, I would like to acknowledge the primary importance of
my family in preparing me to serve my country in this important
position, should the Senate confirm me. My parents, George and Mary Lou
Lane, instilled in me a deep love of my country and a strong commitment
to serve others. They were unable to travel to Washington, DC, but I
know they are proud that I'm being considered for a position that can
help the United States make a difference for millions of people. I have
four wonderful brothers and sisters and nine amazing nieces and
nephews, some of whom are here today, and they will all tell you the
same thing: my parents--by their example--taught us the true meaning of
compassion, the importance of service, and the moral necessity of
helping those who are less fortunate than we are.
I am particularly pleased to join my colleagues today who have been
nominated for posts in Africa. Although the U.N. food agencies are
based in Rome, the focus of their work must be in the field, especially
Africa, which remains both the region of greatest concern and a
potential source of long-term solutions. As I'm sure my fellow
panelists know better than I, Africa is the only continent where
agricultural productivity has remained stagnant for the past 30 years.
And yet, there are countries in Africa where agriculture is on the
brink of taking off, responding to strong leadership, smart new
policies, and increased investment. Many believe that if we apply key
lessons learned from recent experience we can dramatically increase
agricultural productivity in Africa in the coming decade. This may
offer the best chance we have to help lift tens of millions out of
poverty and chronic hunger.
In recent years, leaders in both developing and developed countries
have, in fact, reaffirmed the importance of agricultural development
and prioritized it as an area of policy focus and investment. Recent
government-led initiatives--The G8's L'Aquila Food Security Initiative,
The Rome Principles for Sustainable Global Food Security, The AU's
Comprehensive African Agriculture Development Program, the G20's Global
Agriculture and Food Security Program--have given new momentum to the
drive to feed the world's hungry and lift millions of smallholder
farmers out of poverty, and these efforts are beginning to show
results. And civil society/NGO initiatives have long played a critical
role addressing food security. In fact, according to one estimate, in
2008 U.S. NGOs that engaged in development work managed $11.8 billion
in private contributions and gifts-in-kind resources.
Seventy-five percent of the world's poor live in rural settings and
are dependent on agriculture, and most of these are women tending small
plots of land. Studies have shown that growth in agriculture is three-
to-six times more effective than growth in other sectors in raising the
incomes of the very poor. The stakes are very high for getting this
right, and I believe the U.N. food and agriculture agencies can play a
vital role supporting and facilitating the transformation of
agriculture around the world. At the end of the day, I am confident
that the American people will support these efforts if they are having
an impact in a cost effective way.
I would like to say a few words about the U.N. food and agriculture
agencies--the Food and Agriculture Organization, the World Food
Programme, and the International Fund for Agricultural Development. I
realize many of you approach these and other large multilateral
organizations with a fair amount of skepticism, and I believe past
inefficiencies and other shortcomings confirm that we should take a
firm approach to reform and renewal--something that the mission in Rome
is pursuing. But I also believe that these organizations are in a
better position than they've been in a long time to pursue their
missions effectively and efficiently and serve as reliable partners in
combating hunger.
These three agencies--with dynamic leadership and a renewed
commitment to their important mandates--can and must play a critical
role in continuing recent momentum behind food security. I believe now
is the perfect time for these three agencies to sharpen their focus,
clarify their roles, and improve their coordination, and I am very
optimistic that the U.S. mission in Rome can work with these important
agencies and align priorities in such a way that U.S. policies and
investments have the shaping and even galvanizing influence we all hope
to see.
While I am eager for your guidance on how best to advance U.S.
policies and priorities in Rome, there are several issues that I
believe will be important areas of focus if I am confirmed:
(1) Ensuring that the humanitarian responses of the multilateral
agencies are effective and efficient, even in the most challenging
circumstances, while fostering resilience so that affected populations
emerge less vulnerable after emergencies with the goal of breaking the
cycle of disaster and expensive relief.
(2) Building on the progress that has been made on food security in
the past few years by ensuring that these agencies promote increased
investments--both public and private, with a special emphasis on
recruiting new donors--in initiatives and projects that contribute to
developing resiliency and transform rural economies while fighting
poverty.
(3) Ensuring that efforts to reform the Rome-based U.N. agencies
result in modern institutions that reduce redundancies, and are agile
and responsive as well as efficient and transparent.
(4) Using all the modern tools of public diplomacy to ensure that
the leadership of the United States and great generosity of the
American people in support of food and nutrition security and
agricultural development is well understood around the world. This
message is critical in underscoring our commitment to international
peace, security, and development and can contribute to freedom, the
development of democracy, and the promotion of good governance and
market principles worldwide.
(5) Ensuring that all the important day-do-day work of the U.S.
mission I've been nominated to lead--dealing with standards, norms,
international agreements, etc.--is responsive to our national interests
while generating positive results on the ground.
The work of the U.S. mission to the food and agriculture agencies
in Rome is only possible because of the generosity of the American
people you represent and we all serve. The United States leadership in
this space has been in no small part the result of the continued
determination by the branches of the United States Government to
promote food security internationally. For instance, the United States
contributed approximately $1.428 billion to the World Food Programme in
CY 2011, which alone made up 37 percent of WFP's budget. We were the
single largest donor to the FAO in FY 2011, providing an assessed
contribution of $111 million--22 percent of the assessed budget--and an
additional $66.67 million to FAO in extra-budgetary funding, mostly for
emergency programs. We are also the largest donor to IFAD, at $30
million per year.
Distinguished members of the committee, I am filled with pride when
I think of the determination of the American people and the ability of
the United States Government--the legislative and executive branches
alike--to join together to fight hunger worldwide. Since the emergency
broke out last year in the Horn of Africa, in which drought affected
parts of Ethiopia, Kenya, and Djibouti and famine was declared in five
regions of Somalia, the United States has responded with more than $1.1
billion in life-saving assistance, reaching an estimated 4.5 million
people, many of whom would have otherwise died from starvation or
related disease. As the specter of crisis rises once again, this time
in the Sahel, I am sure the American people will continue to be in the
vanguard of fighting it there as well.
As president of the G8 this year and host of the G8 summit taking
place this weekend at Camp David, the United States has been working
with its partners to focus on food and nutrition security in sub-
Saharan Africa. Building on the success of the 2009 G8 L'Aquila Food
Security Initiative and the U.S. Feed the Future initiative, the G8
effort will focus on continuing our commitments to the financial
pledges made at L'Aquila and to following the Rome principles while
also stimulating private investment in agriculture at all scales and
across the agriculture value chain.
Working together, the actions taken by African Governments, the AU,
international partners, private investors, and civil society will
substantially accelerate agricultural growth across the continent and
help more than 50 million people emerge from poverty over the next 10
years. We believe that collectively, we can achieve this goal based on
strong evidence that investments in agriculture--including CAADP
Country Investment Plans and G8 actions--will significantly spur
agricultural growth. This will be accomplished by working with African
leaders to increase private capital investments in African agriculture,
take innovations that can enhance agricultural productivity to scale,
and reduce the risk borne by vulnerable economies and communities. We
know from history and experience that agriculture-led growth resulting
from these types of actions, paying special attention to small-holder
women farmers and to nutrition, is a powerful driver of broader
economic growth and poverty reduction.
Clearly there is a role for the U.N. Rome-based agencies in G8 food
and nutrition security efforts, and, if confirmed, I will work to
ensure that the agencies' contribution is effective, complementary, and
appropriate to their strengths.
Distinguished members of the committee, I know the fiscal
challenges we face, which is why, if confirmed, I would work to ensure
that U.S. taxpayer provided resources are used to their fullest and
with the greatest possible efficiency.
Senator Coons. Thank you so much, Mr. Lane.
Mr. Alford.
STATEMENT OF EDWARD M. ALFORD, OF VIRGINIA, TO BE AMBASSADOR TO
THE REPUBLIC OF THE GAMBIA
Mr. Alford. Thank you, Senator.
Mr. Chairman, Mr. Ranking Member, and members of the
committee, I am honored to appear before you today. I wish to
express my gratitude to the President and to the Secretary of
State for the trust and confidence they have placed in me as
the nominee for Ambassador to the Republic of The Gambia.
I want to recognize my family, represented by my daughter,
Sylvia, who is here to support me.
As a U.S. Foreign Service officer for more than 33 years, I
enjoyed assignments which provided a variety of experiences in
11 different countries, including three assignments in Africa
totaling almost 9 years. I have worked extensively with the
interagency community, especially in recent assignments in
Frankfurt and Baghdad. I have particularly enjoyed mentoring my
younger colleagues and helping them develop their careers. If
confirmed, I believe the variety of my experience and my record
of leadership and fostering mission effectiveness and morale
under often difficult circumstances, will enable me to carry
out the duties and responsibilities of a U.S. Ambassador.
The United States has a close and historic relationship
with The Gambia which has embraced the role of the Peace Corps
in the country since 1967. With 83 Volunteers in-country, the
Peace Corps is the central component of our public diplomacy
and U.S. development assistance. Last year, President Jammeh
showed his gratitude for the Peace Corps by hosting the
commemoration of the 50th anniversary of the Peace Corps and
their 45 years in The Gambia.
The United States has a small diplomatic footprint in
Banjul, but we arguably have more leverage than any other
Western country, thanks to our positive bilateral relationship
and continuing Peace Corps presence.
The U.S. Embassy closely followed the 2011 and 2012
electoral processes and worked to support credible and
independent media and political parties, as well as democratic
processes. Despite shortcomings, the Presidential elections in
November 2011 were adjudged free and fair by several
international and domestic observation teams. While there was
high voter turnout, several organizations expressed concern at
the unlevel playing field for candidates in advance of the
elections.
Promoting human rights remains the top U.S. priority in The
Gambia. The U.S. mission in Banjul maintains a close dialogue
with the government and civil society on the human rights
situation. Continued engagement with Gambian authorities on
press freedom and civil liberties will constitute a central
piece of our bilateral relationship.
If confirmed, I will continue our economic and regional
security partnership with The Gambia. Through The Gambia's
contributions to peacekeeping missions, we have enjoyed a
steadfast partnership in efforts to promote regional stability.
The Gambia also plays a positive role in counternarcotics in
the region, and sustaining these efforts, along with enhancing
the country's maritime security capacity, is another focus of
our diplomacy.
The U.S. Embassy must continue to work with the government
and private sector to facilitate the growth of the tourism
industry and the export of several commodities, including
apparel and fish to the United States under the African Growth
and Opportunity Act.
U.S. staffing in Banjul consists of 13 Embassy officials
and two Peace Corps American staff. If confirmed, I would make
my top concern the safety and security of the nearly 2,000 U.S.
citizens in The Gambia, half of whom at any time are tourists.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to appear
today. I would be pleased to respond to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Alford follows:]
Prepared Statement of Edward M. Alford
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am honored to appear
before you today. I wish to express my gratitude to the President and
Secretary of State for the trust and confidence they have placed in me
as their nominee for Ambassador to the Republic of The Gambia. I want
to recognize my family, represented by my daughter, Sylvia, who is here
to support me.
As a U.S. Foreign Service officer for more than 33 years, I enjoyed
assignments which provided a variety of experiences in 11 different
countries including three assignments in Africa totaling almost 9
years. I have worked extensively with the interagency community,
especially in recent assignments in Frankfurt and Baghdad. I have
particularly enjoyed mentoring my younger colleagues and helping them
develop their careers. If confirmed, I believe the variety of my
experience and my record of leadership in fostering mission
effectiveness and morale under often difficult circumstances will
enable me to carry out the duties and responsibilities of a U.S.
Ambassador.
The United States has a close and historic relationship with
Gambians, who have embraced the role of the Peace Corps in their
country since 1967. With 83 Volunteers in country, the Peace Corps is
the central component of our public diplomacy and U.S. development
assistance. Last year, President Jammeh showed his gratitude for the
Peace Corps by hosting the Golden Jubilee, which commemorated the 50th
anniversary of the Peace Corps and their 45 years in The Gambia. The
United States has a small diplomatic footprint in Banjul, but we
arguably have more leverage than any other Western country thanks to
our positive bilateral relationship and continuing Peace Corps
presence.
The U.S. Embassy closely followed the 2011 and 2012 electoral
processes and worked to support credible, independent media and
political parties, as well as democratic practices. Despite
shortcomings, the Presidential elections in November 2011 were judged
free and fair by several international and domestic observation teams.
While there was high voter turnout, several organizations expressed
concern at the ``unlevel playing field'' for candidates in advance of
the elections. The March 2012 parliamentary elections were also deemed
generally peaceful and fair, but opposition parties boycotted the
election, leaving them with only 5 of the 48 elected seats in
Parliament.
Promoting human rights remains the top U.S. priority in The Gambia.
The U.S. mission in Banjul maintains a close dialogue with the
government and civil society on the human rights situation. The Gambia
has taken significant steps to address trafficking in persons through
enforcement of legislation and the rescue and rehabilitation of
victims. Continued engagement with Gambian authorities on press freedom
and civil liberties will constitute a central piece of our bilateral
relationship.
If confirmed, I will continue our economic and regional security
partnership with the Gambia. Through The Gambia's contributions to
peacekeeping missions, we have enjoyed a steadfast partnership in
efforts to promote regional stability. The Gambia also plays a positive
role in counter narcotics in the region and sustaining these efforts
along with enhancing the country's maritime security capacity is
another important focus of our diplomacy.
The U.S. Embassy must continue to work with the government and
private sector to facilitate the growth of the tourism industry and the
export of several commodities including apparel and fisheries to the
United States under the African Growth and Opportunity Act.
U.S. staffing in Banjul consists of 13 Embassy officials and two
Peace Corps American staff. If confirmed, I would make my top concern
the safety and security of nearly 2,000 U.S. Citizens in The Gambia,
half of whom at any time are tourists.
Senator Coons. Thank you so much, Mr. Alford.
I now turn to Mr. Asquino.
STATEMENT OF MARK L. ASQUINO, OF THE DISTRICT OF
COLUMBIA, TO BE AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF EQUATORIAL GUINEA
Mr. Asquino. Thank you, Chairman Coons, Ranking Member
Isakson. It is a great honor for me to appear before you this
afternoon as the nominee to be the next U.S. Ambassador to the
Republic of Equatorial Guinea. I am grateful for the confidence
that President Obama and Secretary Clinton have placed in me,
as well as for the support of Assistant Secretary of State
Carson. If confirmed by the Senate, I will do my best to uphold
this trust.
Mr. Chairman, please allow me to introduce my wife, Jane.
She is here today. We met and were married almost 2 decades ago
in Bucharest, Romania. Jane has been with me ever since then. I
have been incredibly fortunate to have had her accompany,
support, and inspire me in often difficult and dangerous
postings.
Mr. Chairman, I have spent more than three decades as a
Foreign Service officer, serving in Latin America, Europe,
Asia, and Africa. Presently I am the Executive Assistant and
Chief of Staff in the Office of the Under Secretary for
Civilian Security, Democracy, and Human Rights. There I
supervise a staff of 18 employees who work on these crucial
issues.
I have served in countries including Spain and Romania,
which were in transition to democracy, as well as in oil-rich
nations such as Kazakhstan and Sudan. The knowledge and
experience I have gained in such postings have resulted in my
deep commitment to advancing democracy, human rights, and
transparency.
Today I would like to speak to you briefly about the three
major U.S. foreign policy issues that form the cornerstone of
our bilateral relationship with Equatorial Guinea.
The first is good governance and democracy. Although
Equatorial Guinea is nominally a multparty constitutional
republic, President Obiang's party controls all but one seat in
the 100-member legislature. Equatorial Guinea is the third-
largest producer of oil in sub-Saharan Africa, and has one of
the continent's highest per capita income rates. Despite this,
much of the population lives below the poverty level. Official
corruption is widespread in a country that needs to spend more
on the health and educational needs of its citizens.
Equatorial Guinea was unsuccessful in meeting the
requirements to join the Extractive Industries Transparency
Initiative, or EITI. However, it is considering applying again,
and we support that action. Meeting the conditions to become an
EITI candidate would be one positive signal by the Government
of the Republic of Equatorial Guinea, or the GREG, that it
intends to improve its fiscal transparency through revenue
reporting.
The GREG is investing in major public works projects that
are improving infrastructure. It is also funding public health
programs that have lowered infant mortality and drastically
reduced the incidence of malaria. These are encouraging steps,
and if confirmed, I will urge the GREG to devote more attention
to transparency and governance and continue to invest in its
people.
The second issue is the protection of human rights. In 2010
and 2011, following urgings from the United States and the
international community, the GREG released a significant number
of political prisoners. The GREG in recent years has also made
modest progress in prison conditions and in human rights
training for security forces.
While Equatorial Guinea has taken measured actions to
improve its human rights record, major problems remain. These
include arbitrary arrests, restrictions on freedom of the
press, assembly, and association. Since the 2008 visit of the
U.N. Special Rapporteur for Torture at the invitation of the
GREG, Equatorial Guinea has partnered with the International
Committee of the Red Cross, or the ICRC, to speak out against
torture and call for the prosecution of human rights abusers.
One notable advance, the 2011 signing of a residency agreement
between the ICRC and the GREG, culminated this year with the
opening of the ICRC's fully functioning office in Malabo.
In addition, the GREG recently announced it will revive the
Interagency Commission on Trafficking in Persons. The
government deserves credit for these actions, but Equatorial
Guinea must do more to promote respect for human rights and
also for transparency.
The third issue, briefly, is U.S. national security and
access to energy resources. With close to $14 billion invested
in Equatorial Guinea, United States oil companies are that
country's largest investors, and they have the lead role in oil
and gas exploration and extraction. The United States presently
imports approximately 12 percent of its oil from African
nations in the Gulf of Guinea. For this reason, we have an
abiding interest in the security of this zone.
If confirmed, I will focus on these three issues--
governance, human rights, and national security--and I will
give them my utmost energy and attention. I promise to work
closely with you and the members of this committee.
I thank you very much for the opportunity to speak with you
this afternoon, and I welcome your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Asquino follows:]
Prepared Statement of Mark L. Asquino
Chairman Coons, Ranking Member Isakson, members of the committee,
it is a great honor for me to appear before you this afternoon as the
nominee to be the next United States Ambassador to the Republic of
Equatorial Guinea. I am grateful for the confidence that President
Obama and Secretary of State Clinton have placed in me as well as for
the support of Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs Carson.
If confirmed by the Senate, I will do my best to uphold this trust.
Mr. Chairman, please allow me to introduce my wife, Jane, who is
here today. We met and were married almost two decades ago in
Bucharest, Romania. Jane was there as a Peace Corps Volunteer, and I
was serving at the U.S. Embassy. Since then, I have been incredibly
fortunate to have had Jane accompany, support, and inspire me, often in
difficult and dangerous postings.
Mr. Chairman, I have spent more than three decades as a career
Foreign Service officer, serving in Latin America, Europe, Asia, and
Africa. Presently, I am the Executive Assistant and Chief of Staff in
the Office of the Under Secretary for Civilian Security, Democracy, and
Human Rights. There I supervise a staff of 18 foreign and civil service
employees who work on these crucial issues. I have served in countries
including Spain and Romania, which were in transition to democracy, as
well as in oil rich nations such as Kazakhstan and Sudan. During my
most recent overseas assignment as deputy chief of mission in Khartoum,
I focused on human rights abuses in Sudan. The knowledge and experience
I've gained in such postings have resulted in my deep commitment to
advancing democracy, human rights, and transparency.
Today I would like to speak to you briefly about the three major
U.S. foreign policy issues that form the cornerstone of our bilateral
relationship with Equatorial Guinea.
The first issue is good governance and democracy. Equatorial
Guinea, with a population of fewer than 1 million people, is located in
west central Africa's Gulf of Guinea. Although the country is nominally
a multiparty, constitutional republic, President Obiang Nguema's
Democratic Party of Equatorial Guinea controls all but one seat in the
100-member legislature. Equatorial Guinea is the third-largest producer
of oil in sub-Saharan Africa, and has one of the highest per capita
income rates in Africa. Despite this, much of its population lives
below the poverty level; and official corruption is widespread, in a
country that needs to spend more on the health and educational needs of
its citizens.
Equatorial Guinea was unsuccessful in meeting the requirements to
become compliant with the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative
(EITI). However, it is considering applying once again, and we are
encouraging this action. Meeting the conditions to become an EITI
candidate country would be one positive signal by the Government of the
Republic of Equatorial Guinea (or, GREG) that it intends to improve its
fiscal transparency through revenue reporting.
In regard to the welfare of its people, the GREG has invested in
major public works projects that are improving the country's
infrastructure, and it is also funding public health programs that have
lowered the infant mortality rate and dramatically reduced the
incidence of malaria. These are encouraging steps, and if confirmed, I
will urge the GREG to devote more attention to transparency and
governance and continue to invest in its people.
The second issue is the protection of human rights. In 2010 and
2011, following calls from the United States and the international
community, the GREG released a significant number of its political
prisoners. The GREG in recent years has also made modest progress in
improving prison conditions and providing human rights training for its
security forces.
While Equatorial Guinea has taken measured actions to improve its
human rights record, major problems remain. These include arbitrary
arrests, and restrictions on freedom of the press, assembly, and
association. Since the 2008 visit of the U.N. Special Rapporteur for
Torture, at the invitation of the GREG, Equatorial Guinea has partnered
with the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) to speak out
against torture and call for the prosecution of human rights abusers.
One notable advance, the 2011 signing of a residency agreement between
the ICRC and the GREG, culminated this year with the opening of ICRC's
fully functioning and fully staffed office in Malabo.
In addition, the GREG has announced it will revive the Interagency
Commission on Trafficking in Persons created to enforce its 2004
Trafficking in Persons Law. The government has requested Embassy
Malabo's technical assistance on how best to structure the commission.
This is the first time in recent history that the GREG has taken the
initiative to request assistance to prevent human trafficking, which is
a major problem in Equatorial Guinea. The government deserves credit
for such positive actions, but Equatorial Guinea must do more to
promote respect for human rights.
The third issue is U.S. national security, especially access to
energy resources. During 2003-2006, I served as deputy chief of mission
at the U.S. Embassy in Kazakhstan. There I worked to protect the
commercial interests of U.S. oil companies that were major oil
consortium partners. With close to $14 billion invested in Equatorial
Guinea, U.S. oil companies are Equatorial Guinea's largest investors,
and they have the lead role in oil and gas exploration and extraction.
The United States presently imports approximately 12 percent of its oil
from African nations in the Gulf of Guinea. For this reason, our
country has an abiding interest in the maritime security of this vital,
economic zone.
If confirmed, I will focus on this issue, as well as on the
security and well-being of the 500 U.S. oil company employees and other
American citizens in Equatorial Guinea. I will also be a strong
advocate for U.S. commercial interests.
Mr. Chairman, if confirmed, I will give these three issues,
governance, human rights, and national security interests, my utmost
personal attention and energy. While our dialogue and engagement with
Equatorial Guinea needs to respect its sovereignty and traditions, we
also must be frank in discussing our concerns in each of these areas.
If confirmed, I promise to work closely with you and the members of
this committee.
Senator Coons. Thank you.
Mr. Griffiths.
STATEMENT OF DOUGLAS M. GRIFFITHS, OF TEXAS, TO BE AMBASSADOR
TO THE REPUBLIC OF MOZAMBIQUE
Mr. Griffiths. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member
Isakson. It is an honor to appear before you today as President
Obama's nominee to be Ambassador to the Republic of Mozambique.
I am grateful to the President and Secretary Clinton for the
confidence they have placed in me as their nominee.
I am also thankful for the enduring support of my wife,
Alicia, and our two daughters. Through evacuations,
earthquakes, gunfire, and floods, they have been enthusiastic
and adventurous partners in public service. It is finals week,
so they were not able to travel to be with me, but I expect
through the wonders of Internet, they are here virtually with
me, and they are represented by our dear friends and the
godparents of our children, John and Betty Shippe.
In my 24 years in the Foreign Service, I have served in
Canada, Portugal, Mozambique, Morocco, Switzerland, Haiti, and
Ecuador, gaining broad geographic exposure and solid experience
in management, trade, and the promotion of good governance.
While working in the Africa Bureau at the State Department, I
covered economic issues across Southern Africa. In Haiti,
Ecuador, and Geneva, I had the privilege to serve as charge
d'affaires for extended periods. Mr. Chairman, I believe that
my current position as Deputy Permanent Representative at the
U.S. mission to the United Nations in Geneva where we engage
daily on public health, economic development, and humanitarian
relief is excellent preparation to serve as American Ambassador
to Mozambique.
Mr. Chairman, if confirmed, I look forward to working with
you and the honorable members of this committee to advance
American interests in Mozambique. Following three decades of
conflict, Mozambique has enjoyed peace and stability since the
early 1990s. We commend Mozambique on its progress over the
past two decades and on its more recent steps in addressing
governance concerns since the 2009 elections. As development
depends on good governance and a strong civil society, if
confirmed, my top priority will be to work alongside the
Mozambican people to continue to strengthen democracy and
governance.
In recent years, Mozambique's economic growth has
consistently been among the highest in sub-Saharan Africa,
averaging 6 to 8 percent per year. However, despite this
sustained growth and the quadrupling of gross domestic product
since 1992, the majority of Mozambique's 23 million people
still live below the poverty line. Mr. Chairman, if confirmed,
I will support growth-oriented policies to foster job creation
and poverty reduction, while stimulating broad-based economic
growth. I will also aggressively identify and pursue every
opportunity for American firms.
Sound economic policies and transparent governance will be
increasingly important in Mozambique as the country is poised
to experience a boom in natural resource revenue in the coming
years from recently discovered natural gas and newly developed
coal deposits. For this reason, Mr. Chairman, if confirmed, I
will champion U.S. Government efforts that support sustainable
economic growth throughout Mozambique with a focus on the
poorest areas of the country.
The United States Government is helping Mozambicans boost
the productivity of key crops, reform their agricultural
policy, and improve maternal and child nutrition, with the
ultimate goal of sustainably reducing hunger and poverty. The
$506.9 million Millennium Challenge Corporation Compact is
focused on road construction, water projects, and the land
tenure system.
The United States directs the bulk of our assistance to
improving the health of Mozambicans. The President's Emergency
Plan for AIDS Relief, the President's Malaria Initiative, the
Global Health Initiative, and the Peace Corps are working
jointly toward this goal. If confirmed, I will advance our
vision of creating an AIDS-free generation by reducing the
transmission of HIV/AIDS, boosting the percentage of HIV-
positive Mozambicans on treatment, and encouraging the
Mozambican Government to commit more of its own resources to
improving the health of its people.
Mozambique and the United States share a strong common
interest in promoting regional stability. Mozambique will
assume the Presidency of the Southern African Development
Community this August, significantly elevating its role in
promoting regional stability and economic integration. Securing
the country's long land borders and coastline are indispensible
to economic development in Mozambique and the region at large.
Facilitating the legal flow of goods, services, and people is a
major driver for economic growth, but it must be coupled with
sustained efforts to curb maritime piracy and illegal trade
flows. I will, if confirmed, build upon our partnership with
the Mozambican authorities to promote regional maritime and
border security.
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I want to thank
you for the privilege of appearing before you today. If
confirmed, I welcome the challenge of protecting and advancing
American interests in Mozambique and accept the corresponding
responsibilities of that duty.
I would be happy to answer any questions you might have.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Griffiths follows:]
Prepared Statement of Douglas M. Griffiths
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, it is an honor for me to
appear before you today as President Obama's nominee to be Ambassador
to the Republic of Mozambique. I am grateful to the President and
Secretary Clinton for the confidence they have placed in me as their
nominee. I am also thankful for the enduring support of my wife,
Alicia, and my two daughters. Through evacuations, earthquakes, gunfire
and floods they have been enthusiastic and adventurous partners in
public service.
In my 24 years in the Foreign Service, I have served in countries
of vastly different economic and social circumstances. Through postings
in Canada, Portugal, Mozambique, Morocco, Switzerland, Haiti, and
Ecuador I have gained broad geographic exposure and solid experience in
management, trade, and the promotion of good governance. I also worked
in the Office of Southern African Affairs at the State Department,
gaining invaluable insight into regional issues. In Haiti, Ecuador, and
Geneva, I have had the opportunity to serve as charge d'affaires, a.i.
for extended periods. Mr. Chairman, I believe that my current position
as Deputy Permanent Representative at the U.S. Mission to the United
Nations and Other International Organizations in Geneva, where we
engage daily on public health, economic development, and humanitarian
relief, is excellent preparation to serve as American Ambassador to
Mozambique.
Mr. Chairman, if confirmed, I look forward to working with you and
the honorable members of this committee to advance U.S. interests in
Mozambique. Following three decades of conflict, Mozambique has enjoyed
peace and stability since the early 1990s. We commend Mozambique on its
overall progress over the past two decades and on its more recent steps
in addressing governance concerns since the 2009 elections. The
upcoming 2014 Presidential and parliamentary elections will be key
barometers of democratic freedoms. As development depends on good
governance, if confirmed, my top priority will be to work alongside the
Mozambican people to continue to strengthen democracy and governance in
advance of these elections.
Mozambique's economic growth has consistently been among the
highest in sub-Saharan Africa in recent years, averaging 6 to 8
percent. However, despite this sustained growth and the quadrupling of
Gross Domestic Product since 1992, the majority of Mozambique's 23
million people live below the poverty line, some well below that line.
Mr. Chairman, if confirmed, I will support growth-oriented policies to
foster job creation and poverty reduction, while stimulating broad-
based economic growth. I will also aggressively identify and pursue
every opportunity for American firms.
Sound economic policies and transparent governance will be
increasingly important in Mozambique as the country is poised to
experience a boom in natural resource revenue in the coming years from
recently discovered natural gas and newly developed coal deposits. For
this reason, Mr. Chairman, if confirmed, I will champion U.S.
Government efforts that support sustainable economic growth throughout
Mozambique, including the poorest areas of the country. The U.S.
Government is helping Mozambicans to boost the productivity of key
crops, improve their agricultural policy, and improve maternal and
child nutrition, with the ultimate goal of sustainably reducing hunger
and poverty. The $506.9 million Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC)
Compact is focused on road construction, water systems, and
modernization of the land tenure system.
As the largest bilateral donor to Mozambique, the United States
directs the bulk of our assistance to improving the health of
Mozambicans. The President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, the
President's Malaria Initiative, the Global Health Initiative, and the
Peace Corps are all working toward this goal. If confirmed, I will
advance our vision of creating an AIDS-free generation by reducing the
transmission of HIV/AIDS, boosting the percentage of HIV-positive
Mozambicans on treatment and encouraging the Mozambican Government to
commit more of its own resources to improving the health of its people.
Mozambique and the United States share a strong common interest in
promoting regional stability. Mozambique will assume the Presidency of
the Southern African Development Community in August 2012,
significantly elevating its role in promoting regional stability and
economic integration. Securing the country's long land borders and
coastline are indispensable to economic development in Mozambique and
the region at large. Facilitating the legal flow of goods, services and
people is a major driver for economic growth, but it must be coupled
with sustained efforts to curb maritime piracy and illegal trade flows.
I will, if confirmed, build upon our partnership with the Mozambican
authorities to promote regional maritime and border security.
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I want to thank you for
the privilege of appearing before you today. If confirmed, I welcome
the challenge of protecting and advancing the interests of the United
States in Mozambique and accept the corresponding responsibilities of
that duty.
Senator Coons. Thank you, Mr. Griffiths, and thank you to
our whole panel.
You have attracted, Mr. Lane, interest and support from a
wide range of acquaintances of mine from Max Finberg and John
Doerr, who both send their best, to Dr. Raj Shah, Administrator
of the USAID, who has joined us in the back. There are very
exciting developments over the next few days that Dr. Shah and
I have been in communication about that I know all of us are
eager to hear more about.
So let me begin, if I could, a first round of questioning
by focusing on food and agriculture and food security across
the whole panel.
First, if I might, Mr. Lane, in a difficult international
financial environment and because Dr. Shah is here, how should
the United States and other G8 members, given the impending
conversations, approach the issue of global food security? And
as the largest contributor to the Food and Agricultural
Organization, World Food Programme, International Fund for
Agricultural Development, what factors should we be seeking as
we try and balance building long-term resilience in food
security against emergency humanitarian needs?
Mr. Lane. Senator, thank you. And I want to thank Dr. Shah
for coming. I am pleasantly surprised that he is here.
It has been estimated that by the year 2050, the world
population will be 9 billion people and that agricultural
productivity will have to increase by somewhere between 50 to
maybe 70 percent in order to meet the world's needs for food.
You mentioned the resource constraint that we face, the fiscal
constraint. We cannot get there from here in terms of donor
country providing the investment that is going to be necessary
to achieve those kinds of productivity gains. It is going to be
important for especially developing countries themselves to
step forward with their own prioritization of agriculture
investment but also for the private sector.
And it is not my place to preview the G8 initiatives of the
next couple days. I have, as a nominee, been asked to stay out
of those things. But perhaps Raj would like to come up and
elaborate. [Laughter.]
But I think it is fair to say that the foundation was set
at the Locula summit for public investment. There was, I think,
a $22 billion donor, G8 and other wealthy country commitment
and a
commitment that this Senate and Congress has supported by
the United States of $3.5 billion that I think is starting to
show benefits.
But the really, to me, very important part that I saw from
my time at the Gates Foundation and from ONE is country-owned
plans and country leadership, and that those countries are now
starting to step up. And I think in my role in Rome, it is
going to be important for me to work with my counterparts to be
sure that they are doing their part to meet their own targets
of 10 percent budget for agriculture spending, which is part of
the Maputo targets, but even more importantly, the private
sector investment that is going to be necessary to transform
agriculture. And I have a feeling, a strong sense honestly that
in the next few days that we are going to be hearing much more
about the private sector side of agricultural development, and
I think that is really going to be necessary to get done what
we need done.
Senator Coons. Thank you, Mr. Lane.
If we might, the countries of The Gambia and Equatorial
Guinea, both relatively small countries, but one is, Equatorial
Guinea, resource-rich. In both cases, they need to strengthen
the priority of their focus on meeting basic human needs and on
agriculture. And Mozambique, a very large country, with a lot
of potential in terms of arable land--the targets you
referenced were established in Maputo.
If you might each in turn just speak to how AGOA has or has
not been used successfully by the country to which you have
been nominated to serve as an Ambassador, in what sectors other
than natural resources, extractive industries we might see some
private sector investment from the United States, and in
particular, how we might prioritize food security going forward
in each of your respective countries.
Mr. Alford.
Mr. Alford. Thank you for the question, Senator.
Food security in The Gambia depends very much year-to-year
on the crop. Eighty percent of the people are involved in
agriculture, although agriculture is only 38 percent of the
GNP. I am pleased to note that our Peace Corps is involved in
increasing the productivity there. USAID, working with the
University of Rhode Island and with the World Wildlife
Foundation, is working to improve fisheries. And the U.S.
Department of Agriculture has a project to improve cashew
production, and that is a combined project with Senegal and The
Gambia.
That being said, since 2008, The Gambia's exports have been
limited to clothing and fisheries. And there may be other
sectors in the future, primarily agricultural-based sectors
where we could increase exports. Industry there is minimal now.
Our exports to the country are about $30 million a year and we
import less than $1 million a year. So the scope for increasing
the imports there but primarily agriculture, fisheries, and of
course tourism is a big, big industry there, primarily European
tourists but a lot of Americans go there too.
Senator Coons. Thank you, Mr. Alford.
Mr. Asquino. Are there sectors other than oil and gas that
might be attractive for U.S. investment and how does food
security play into the future for Equatorial Guinea?
Mr. Asquino. Thank you very much for the question, Senator.
As you noted, Equatorial Guinea is a very small country. It
has less than a million people. And yet, it is not independent
in terms of food production. Only 2.2 percent of this GDP comes
from agricultural production. And yet, if you look at the
history of the country, in 1968 when it became independent from
Spain, it was a major producer of cocoa, and it had a thriving
agricultural sector.
So I think to answer your question, AGOA is not running a
program in Equatorial Guinea and we do not have USAID programs
there. But there is great interest, including from U.S.
companies, in developing the agricultural sector. The Chinese
as well have been involved in various projects. And I really do
feel that this is an area where Equatorial Guinea can improve
its production. Almost everything right now is imported.
Inflation runs at 9 or 10 percent every year. So this makes it
very hard for the people of that country, and because of that,
you have nutritional issues as well that are raised.
So if I were confirmed, sir, I certainly would focus on
agricultural investment. I think it is an area where we can,
and we should, be doing more in Equatorial Guinea. Thank you.
Senator Coons. Thank you.
Mr. Griffiths, Mozambique is an enormous country with lots
of natural resources. What is the prospect for food security?
They are an MCC compact partner. What are the major areas of
investment or activity in Feed the Future and in other
agricultural sectors?
Mr. Griffiths. Great. Thank you, Senator, for the question.
And I fully agree that for Mozambique, this is one of the
most important issues, and if confirmed, it is something that I
will devote a lot of attention to.
As in The Gambia, 80 percent of Mozambicans work in the
agriculture sector. Yet, it only makes up 29 percent of GDP. So
Feed the Future is the centerpiece very much for U.S.
Government engagement in this process, and we have already had
some successes and I think we will continue to have more.
You were talking about, or Mr. Lane was talking about,
private sector investment, and we have an example in
Mozambique, an American investor. He is working on agricultural
extension products and in helping families with crop rotation
and with growing food crops interspersed with cash crops like
tobacco that are having an impact. I think we also have to note
the importance of Mozambique to regional food security.
Transport corridors to landlocked countries pass through
Mozambique. So it is important that we focus on these issues.
As to AGOA, they have not made significant use of it. I
would like to highlight two areas. One is cashews where USAID
has worked for a long time in helping Mozambicans take
advantage of processing cashews. They are not sending out raw
nuts. And the second is the Embassy has been very engaged in
working with Mozambique to get turtle excluder devices into
their fisheries so that shrimp can be exported to the United
States.
Thank you.
Senator Coons. I will turn it over to my friend, Senator
Isakson, and note that both of us come from States with long
and broad experience in poultry both in the science of poultry
and in the export of poultry. And so if there is any way we
could be helpful as to the respective countries you will be
serving in, we would be happy to be drawn upon as a resource.
Senator Isakson.
Senator Isakson. Well, thank you, Senator Coons.
Each of you made very positive remarks, which I am going to
try and refer to and your awareness of some of the important
roles that you are going to have in the next couple years.
Starting with you, Mr. Lane, you made an acknowledgment of
the American taxpayers need accountability in terms of U.S.
funds that go into food programs and U.N. programs. As you
probably are aware--I can speak for myself; I cannot speak for
Senator Coons--but in our part of the world in the southern
United States, there has been a growing resentment for the
amount of disproportionate funding of the U.N. that the United
States does through its dues. Now, that is not my statement,
but that is a statement that I deal with.
In terms of U.N. food programs and the three agencies
within the U.N.--I think you said there were three--who deal
with food, what percentage of the cost of that food does the
U.S. taxpayer pay?
Mr. Lane. Sir, as you have indicated in a very good
question, we are the leading funder of all three. In the case
of the World Food Programme, which is a voluntary set of
contributions as opposed to an assessment, usually based on
need, usually based on campaigns for emergency food relief,
this year, in the current year, it is estimated that we will be
37 percent of global funding to the WFP. The FAO slightly less,
and 22 percent of the assessed amount plus different amounts
depending on particular programmatic requirements. It can vary.
And in the case of the International Fund for Agricultural
Development, it is $30 million a year which I think is 11 or 12
percent, but still significant and the leading amount. So it is
quite significant.
I take it as one of my important responsibilities, if I am
confirmed, is to try to leverage our contribution to be sure
that other donor countries are doing their part and to be sure
that developing countries themselves are starting to take
responsibility for their own food assistance.
Senator Isakson. I was recently in Uganda, and I was asked
the question by an NGO with reference to funding of the foreign
affairs budget, what was going to be the top priority. I said,
you know, the foreign affairs budget and the United States aid
overseas is going to go from a compassion-driven appropriation
to a politically driven appropriation. And I do not mean that
in a crass way, but I mean it in a way that I think the
American people are looking for our programs to do more than
just feed the people for a day, but help to teach them to feed
themselves for a lifetime.
I am wondering if you had any ideas on taking that concept
and making it a part or a contingency of the United States
contribution.
Mr. Lane. I do, sir, and I appreciate very much the
question. In fact, I feel badly that Senator Coons has left
because he mentioned this term ``resiliency,'' which is a new
and emerging concept in food policy which I think is extremely
important.
Just if I can take a step back, the WFP provides
humanitarian and emergency relief in situations of conflict or
emergency disaster. The FAO has a different mission which is
more focused on agricultural development, sharing of
information, best practices so that countries can develop their
agricultural sectors and ultimately transform their economies
through economic growth. And I am sure you know, sir, that
agricultural productivity is one of the most effective areas of
economic growth as a stimulus for growth across the economy.
While, on the one hand, my mission in many ways is to keep
the different agencies sticking to their knitting and
responsible to their own areas of responsibility, the blend
between emergency response and development is this concept
called resiliency, which is becoming much more important. and I
think Dr. Shah, Gail Smith from the White House, a number of
others, were in East Africa just this spring where they
launched a new initiative with other international donors
focused on this concept.
So the idea is when we go in, in the case, for instance, of
Somalia to help feed people in a dire situation, are we doing
everything we can from a joint planning point of view and from
a programmatic point of view to prepare for the recovery and
averting a disaster and the next disaster. And there are things
we can do. There are tools we have in terms of livestock
preservation, vaccination, getting livestock to safety, crop
insurance, drought resistant seeds, water management that can
be much more effective because I think from a cost-effective
point of view, as you have indicated, it is the disaster in
humanitarian relief which is the most expensive and is giving a
man a fish as opposed to helping a man to learn to fish. And I
think making this transition will be very important.
Senator Isakson. Well, I want you to understand clearly
that I am well aware of some of our food security and our food
effort go to countries where we have displaced individuals in a
host country who have left a place like Somalia or southern
Sudan or someplace like that.
But I do think everywhere the American people can be aware
that there is a contingency tie--I think Mr. Alford referred to
country-owned plans where we can have a part of that be a part
of our mission. We want to feed the people that are hungry, but
we also want to help the countries to develop agricultural
programs where it will lessen the pressure on the American
taxpayer and improve the plight of that African country.
So you recognized this in your remarks. I wanted to
accentuate the importance of doing that.
And I will go to Mr. Alford for a minute. I think we are
going to do a second round anyway.
And I appreciate your mentioning AGOA. For all of your
benefit, the chairman and I offered an amendment to the bill we
passed earlier this week on the EXIM Bank, which we did not
call up, but we did it to send the signal that America needs to
renew the AGOA act quick, sooner rather than later, and we
think the African Growth and Opportunity Act is an important
partnership between the United States and the entire continent
of Africa. So I appreciate your mentioning it. I know Mr.
Griffiths mentioned it and I appreciate it very much that you
did.
Mr. Asquino, we talked about the new Embassy that is being
built. Is that right?
Mr. Asquino. Yes, sir, that is correct. I would be happy to
speak about that if you would like.
Senator Isakson. I would mainly because my last trip to
Equatorial Guinea, there was a 10-foot hole in the ceiling of
the rented U.S. Embassy and it was raining the day I was there.
[Laughter.]
And I worked hard to try and get the State Department to
raise the priority level of that Embassy. So I would love to
have a report on it.
Mr. Asquino. Well, first of all, thank you for the
question. But I also want to thank you for the support. As you
know from that visit, we have been working out of facilities
that are woefully inadequate and housing that is really
terrible.
We expect that the new Embassy complex, which will include
workspace, a chancery, as well as housing, will be completed by
the summer of 2013. And that is important for a couple of
reasons, sir. In addition to providing people with decent
workspace, there were security issues in that Embassy. We had
to have certain security waivers from our diplomatic security
office in order for us to continue working there. So we will
have far better security when we open the new Embassy.
And the other issue that I would like to raise is our
provision of American citizen services. We have over 500
American citizens, mostly who are connected with the oil
industry, who live and work in Equatorial Guinea. So having a
decent consular section where they can come, where we can
assist them across the board, is enormously important.
So I will end by thanking you, and I will also end by
offering an invitation. We would be deeply honored, sir, if you
could come to the inauguration in the summer of 2013. Thank you
again.
Senator Isakson. Well, I will try and do that, but you
should know my interest is more about your lovely wife having a
good place to stay than it was you having a nice Embassy.
[Laughter.]
Senator Coons. Thank you, Senator Isakson.
It is striking and just a reminder of his dedication to
this work that the good Senator can say on my most recent trip
to Equatorial Guinea, a sentence I suspect is not one widely
said here on this panel. And I agree that keeping your family
and your coworkers secure and providing appropriate support for
Americans and their activities abroad, whether in the Peace
Corps or private sector, is a critical part.
Let me turn, if I could, to some governance and human
rights questions. In The Gambia, there is a troubling and long
pattern of press harassment. There have been some real
challenges in terms of human rights. And current and former
members of this committee, most principally Senator Durbin, but
also Senators Casey and Feingold who previously was the chair,
have been urging the government to allow greater press freedoms
and to account for a missing Gambian journalist, Ebrima Manneh.
The plight of this journalist is widely seen as symbolic of
press harassment there. I did not know if you could comment on
this particular case or if you could tell us something about
what sorts of messages about human rights and press freedoms
you would carry forward as Ambassador.
And then last, it seems to me that Gambia's questionable
human rights records and press freedom has raised real issues
for them in terms of eligibility for Millennium Challenge
Corporation funds. Is there a positive possibility of a
positive outcome here or do you think this will be a
challenging issue for your new service as Ambassador?
Mr. Alford. Thank you for the question, Senator. It will be
challenging. If confirmed, I intend to consistently speak for
press freedom. I do note that the case of the disappearance of
Mr. Manneh--the President Jammeh has agreed to have a U.N.
study group look into that, and I would look forward, if
confirmed, on cooperating with the U.N. and with NGOs and with
the Government of The Gambia to see if we can get clarity in
that case. And press freedom is one of our fundamental beliefs.
If confirmed as American Ambassador, of course, I would speak
consistently and forcefully for press freedom in every case.
Senator Coons. Thank you. We would appreciate your
persistent engagement on that and your reporting back to us any
progress on that particular case and then whether the MCC
provides some positive leverage as well.
If I could to Mr. Asquino, President Obiang is now the
world's longest ruling leader after 33 years, and the
Government of Equatorial Guinea has recently amended its
constitution in ways that many observers believe are designed
to pave the way for his son to succeed him as President. In a
number of other countries throughout the continent, we have
recently seen constitutional changes that similarly led to a
lack of full and fair and open elections.
What sorts of messages as Ambassador would you deliver
about democracy and rule of law?
And last, their most prominent human rights activist was
recently sentenced to 3 years in prison after what seemed to be
a politically motivated trial. What role would you play in
advancing human rights more broadly?
Mr. Asquino. Thank you. You have touched on some very
important issues, Senator.
In terms of President Obiang, what we would seek is for him
to view as his legacy to his country bringing about democratic
reform. This is a country that is faced with some very serious
challenges, both economic and political. And as he looks at his
long time in office, what we have urged him to do, and what we
have offered to partner, is to look at ways to open political
space that will leave for his people a better life in terms of
provision of services, fairer distribution of resources and
also a society in which basic freedoms and liberties are
respected.
I would agree with you certainly on the constitutional
package. It created the position of Vice President, and there
is widespread concern that that referendum was held solely in
order to create that position. So certainly as we look to
municipal elections, which are the next elections coming up in
2013, if confirmed, I would certainly urge for more openness,
giving the one political party there that really is in the
opposition, the Convergence for Social Democracy, a true level
playing field.
And I will finish by talking about Dr. Wenceslao Mansogo,
whom you referred to. He is the Secretary General for Human
Rights within the Convergence for Social Democracy Party. He
was convicted of malpractice. We had an Embassy observer at
that trial. Ambassador Fernandez met with the government and
urged that he be treated fairly and humanely. And when that
sentence was issued on May 7, shortly after that, the U.S.
Embassy and the State Department issued a statement expressing
major concerns about due process for Dr. Mansogo and also for
guarantees of his rights under the constitution of Equatorial
Guinea, which many observers felt he was not afforded.
So if I were confirmed, sir, I would certainly urge that
the President look to his legacy, that he look to ways to leave
a country that is more democratic, and one that provides better
for its people, and also that the opposition be given a chance
to compete in the political sphere.
Thank you, sir.
Senator Coons. Thank you, Mr. Asquino.
If I might, Mr. Griffiths. Former President Chissano was
the first recipient of the Mo Ibrahim Prize, as you may know.
Dr. Ibrahim recently testified in a hearing that we held on
openness, transitions, governance, democracy. And to what
extent has Chissano's legacy helped shape a more positive
political environment for Mozambique and how durable do you
think is the path forward toward multiparty democracy in
Mozambique?
Mr. Griffiths. Thank you very much for the question,
Senator.
That is correct. And sort of in terms of legacy, he was
succeeded by President Guebuza who as finishing his second
mandate and recently there were reports in the press that
President Guebuza had confirmed that he would not seek another
term. I think that is an excellent sign for not only
Mozambique's democracy and stability but also is a symbol to
the region where we have seen Presidents extend their mandates.
I underscored that this would be, if confirmed, my top
priority, and that is not only because of the importance we put
toward governance, but I think as Senator Isakson was pointing
out, the importance of ensuring that people know how to fish.
Institutions matter which is why the Embassy has been focusing
a lot on building up civil society, having a plethora of
voices, people who can express pressure on the executive so
that there are various sources of power. And I think it is very
important to continue working as we have been with
decentralized governments--some of the mayors now are from
opposition powers--to continue working with business groups so
that they too can articulate different points of views.
And civil society has been key in Mozambique in pushing
forward a recently passed series of anticorruption legislation,
which I think puts the country in the right direction. They
have whistleblower protection, which is very important not only
for government but also for trafficking in persons protection.
And there was recent legislation where civil servants have to
declare their revenue.
Thank you.
Senator Coons. Well, thank you.
Nelson Mandela to South Africa, George Washington to our
own country, having founding executives, Presidents, Prime
Ministers who voluntarily relinquish their elected role is a
critical piece in most countries' transition to democracy. And
I hope that you will be able to build regionally on Chissano's
contributions.
Senator Isakson.
Senator Isakson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Griffiths, I mentioned that each of you made comments
that impressed me, and the one that you made in your
presentation about the PEPFAR program was the need for the
countries to use more of their own resources in the delivery of
that program.
You know, PEPFAR is a program a lot of people do not
understand why we are making the investment we are making in
it. But I am reminded of the fact that AIDS came to America
through a flight attendant on a flight from Africa. And if we
had had the type of CDC-type attention in Africa at the time,
maybe that would not have happened, and think of the dollars it
would have saved the American taxpayer and the world. So I
think it is important that we do what we are doing through the
PEPFAR program, but it is essential, as I said to Mr. Lane,
that I can say to the American taxpayer in Georgia that that
program is paying a dividend to the United States of America
and that the countries in Africa are taking more ownership of
it.
I was in Tanzania a few years ago in 2009. They then--now,
this may have changed, but then they were a pretty shining
example. Ambassador Green had been there for a couple of years.
They had taken over most all of the testing, most all of the
delivery, and what we were really doing was providing the
retrovirals, but they were delivering the manpower and
everything else.
I would like for you to comment on your vision of that as
far as your country is going to be.
Mr. Griffiths. Thank you very much for the question,
Senator.
And indeed, I think that is exactly the vision we have for
Mozambique, and I will talk a bit about the program, but if I
may just make a point on the transition. I spoke about the
resource boom that is coming Mozambique's way, and I think it
is essential that we do have these strong institutions in place
so that we can see this transition, as you pointed out, when
the government has more of its own resources that it can put it
to benefit its own people.
We do have a number of very impressive successes in our
PEPFAR program in Mozambique. If I may just cite a few
statistics. In 2003, fewer than 5,000 patients were on
antiretroviral treatment. In 2011, we had 273,000. One other of
those numbers, people on treatment increased 89 percent between
September 2009 and March 2012.
And what our Embassy is focusing on through the interagency
work of the PEPFAR program is really building up the health
care system which was destroyed during the civil war, and that
is going to have a huge impact on rural societies.
We talked a bit about the importance of agriculture, and if
you have a rural health care system that can address the needs
of the population, they can be vectors of growth within the
community as well. And I think our partnerships with faith-
based organizations which have a great deal of credibility in
their communities, our partnership with the Peace Corps, our
partnership with the Department of Defense in helping to ensure
that the military is ready to fulfill its mandate to protect
the long land and sea borders, all of this comes together and
the aim is very much what you signaled, Senator, that we will
be able to transition the responsibility and the funding to the
host government.
Senator Isakson. Well, one thing a lot of people do not
understand is because of PEPFAR, we have gone from a situation
where we were supplying retrovirals to try and prevent to where
now people are living a lifetime of relatively normal and
productive lifetimes on those retrovirals. And so you are going
to have a continuum of care, not just taking care of a pregnant
mother for a few years and having a child born to that pregnant
mother passing away in a few months. That continuum of care is
going to have to be hosted by the countries in which those
people reside because the United States, in a macrosense and in
a longitudinal way, cannot continue to fund all of that. But if
we have turned that paradigm and those countries are taking
more of the ownership of the continuum of care, then it would
be a great legacy for our entire country and what we did for
mankind.
Mr. Asquino, just do me one favor. The next time you see
Mr. Obiang--we had a conversation when I was over there about
the--you know, Marathon Oil helped develop the--I forgot the
wildcatter who found the gas in the Gulf of Guinea, but
Marathon helped do the liquefication plant. Am I not right?
Mr. Asquino. That is correct, sir. There is a $1.5 billion
gas liquefication plant that Marathon funded.
Senator Isakson. Is the son that everybody suspects is the
one the constitution was amended for, the good son that does
the gas and oil or the one that is Malibu on the beach?
Mr. Asquino. Malibu on the beach, sir. [Laughter.]
The other son's name is Gabriel.
Senator Isakson. I have met him. He is a pretty competent
guy, seemed to be anyway.
Mr. Asquino. Yes. That is what everyone says.
Senator Isakson. But I talked to President Obiang about the
fear of the Dutch disease infecting Equatorial Guinea because
they were the poorest. But prior to the discovery of that gas
and oil, they were, I think, the poorest country on the face of
this earth, now as the chairman said, one of the richest
growing economies. But if they are just investing that money in
things and not investing it in their people, then they are
going to have the same thing happen that has happened in most
of the Middle East where they suffer from the Dutch disease and
they do not develop their infrastructure themselves. So tell
him I have not forgotten that conversation, and I encourage him
to invest in his people.
Mr. Asquino. Sir, if confirmed, I certainly will do so.
Thank you.
Senator Isakson. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Coons. Thank you, Senator.
If I might, just a last question or two. I am interested in
and concerned about across all three countries--there were in
the background materials concerns about piracy, about maritime
security, about regional cooperation. And we have varying
degrees of partnership or relationship both military and
diplomatic, relatively modest relations, in one case relatively
broad and strong.
What will you be doing and what do you see as our role in
addressing what is an increasingly regional challenge, all the
way down from Somalia in the case of Mozambique, all the way
across the Gulf of Guinea, in your case in Equatorial Guinea,
and then regionally with narcotrafficking into Europe with The
Gambia? What role can we as a country constructively play in
improving maritime security and in contributing to regional
security across the continent? If you might, Mr. Alford, first.
Mr. Alford. Thank you for the question, Senator.
The Gambia is a relatively poor and resource-poor country.
However, they have been engaged militarily in peacekeeping
operations in Liberia and Sierra Leone, and they have over 400
troops in Darfur now. I think building on this perhaps through
IMET and through training--we are sending the first trainees
down to Botswana for some INL-funded training. I think we can
enhance their capabilities by using our expertise, by working
with them on this. I do note that they are a committed regional
player. They are very active in ECOWAS. I think with a little
more training, maybe a little more resources down the road, I
think they can play an even more constructive role on this.
I would note that they recently seized, within the past 2
years, $1 billion in cocaine with the assistance of the
British, and I think that was the largest cocaine seizure ever
in West Africa. So that is something else we can build on.
Senator Coons. Thank you, Mr. Alford.
Mr. Asquino.
Mr. Asquino. Mr. Chairman, thank you for the question.
Certainly piracy and the rise of militancy in the Gulf of
Guinea are of major concerns to the United States. I had
mentioned in my testimony that some 12 percent of our oil
imports now come from the Gulf of Guinea.
In terms of what the United States is doing in the Gulf of
Guinea, we are working very closely with regional countries,
specifically Cameroon, Gabon, and Nigeria through the Africa
Partnership Station. And this provides training to those
countries, helps them to develop the capacity, but also helps
them to coordinate in terms of their response to those sorts of
threats.
Given the fact, as I said in my testimony, that human
rights really is a top priority in Equatorial Guinea, we do not
have military assistance programs with Equatorial Guinea. But
Equatorial Guinea has worked with us, and we do guide them in
terms of these issues. They themselves started a regional naval
academy in 2009, which is the first regional naval academy for
training on the African Continent. And so they themselves have
been addressing these issues.
Although we do not have programs with them, we have
encouraged them to look to contractors who can help them, and
in recent years, they have improved their own capacity for
naval security.
Senator Coons. Thank you.
Mr. Griffiths, I was struck to see that Somali pirates
seemed to be an issue in Mozambique, and certainly regional
integration and security collaboration, something you referred
to in your opening statement--what role can we possibly play to
strengthen that security regionally?
Mr. Griffiths. Thank you, Senator. Mozambique has the
fourth-largest coastline in Africa. So it is a very important
issue, and not only on the issue of piracy but also in its
capacity to interdict illegal trafficking both of people and of
drugs and other contraband, but also in protecting their
fisheries and protecting the offshore gas exploration that will
be continuing in the northern part of the country. So we have
been working with the Mozambican Navy and we have given 17
rigid hull inflatable boats, providing training, and other
equipment to help them be able to patrol more and have a higher
surveillance of the Mozambican channel. As you mentioned,
helpfully they are working with Tanzania and South Africa so
that the three countries can jointly assist in controlling the
waters off the coast. If confirmed, I would certainly focus on
these issues and see how we could further deepen our
relationships with the Mozambican Government.
Senator Coons. Terrific. Thank you.
Senator Isakson, no further questions?
Senator Isakson. No.
Senator Coons. I just want to thank all four of you for
appearing before us today. I want to thank your families for
supporting you across what has collectively been more than a
century of public service across quite difficult postings all
over the world. I am confident that you will represent the
United States well and that you will advocate for our interest
as a nation and help move forward the values that I think are
our greatest resource in our engagement with the world.
There may be members of the committee who were not able to
join us today who would like to submit questions for the
record. I will keep the record open through next Friday, but in
the absence of any further questions, thank you very much for
your appearance before this committee.
And this hearing is hereby adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 3:39 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
----------
Additional Questions and Answers Submitted for the Record
Responses of Edward M. Alford to Questions Submitted
by Senator John F. Kerry
Question. Given your previous experience as a management officer in
multiple posts around the world, what lessons have most significantly
shaped your approach to managing a post like The Gambia?
Answer. Many years of supervising and leading large and diverse
staffs have prepared me well to lead this small Embassy in a hardship
environment. I have learned the importance of mentoring younger
employees and fostering their career development and the importance of
treating the locally employed staff with respect. I believe in the
importance of integrating State Department Direct Hire employees, local
employees, family member employees, and other agency employees into a
team focused on our mission objectives and that the morale and well-
being of family members is a vital component to managing any mission,
but especially so in a hardship post. On the programmatic side, my
experience in prioritizing finite resources to meet the most critical
mission objectives will serve me well as we focus on democracy, human
rights, and development agendas in tough budgetary times.
Question. According to the State Department Country Report on Human
Rights, Gambia's challenges include restrictions on freedom of speech
and press. Are there ways to utilize new media as a way of increasing
outreach to advance U.S. goals? In your past experience, have you seen
examples of effective uses of new media to support U.S. priorities?
Answer. The State Department is adapting our statecraft by
reshaping our development and diplomatic processes to meet old
challenges in new ways. New media complements traditional foreign
policy tools by using new technology to reach more people and reach
them in a more direct and targeted way. In response to the challenges
outlined in the State Department Human Rights Report for The Gambia, we
are using new media as a means of bolstering freedom of speech and
press while also increasing outreach to The Gambian youth, who
constitute over 60 percent of the population.
Embassy Banjul's Facebook Page is an excellent example of an
effective use of new media to support U.S. priorities. According to the
page statistics, the page is most popular with 25-34 year olds with
broad participation including civil society organizations,
universities, local musicians, even The Gambian talk shows.
______
Responses of Mark L. Asquino to Questions Submitted
by Senator John F. Kerry
Question. Given your most recent position as Executive Assistant in
the Office of the Under Secretary for Civilian Security, Democracy, and
Human Rights, and your previous experience, what lessons have most
significantly shaped your approach to managing a post like Equatorial
Guinea?
Answer. My present position as Executive Assistant in the Office of
the Under Secretary for Civilian Security, Democracy, and Human Rights
has provided me with comprehensive knowledge of the various programs,
resources, and tools the State Department has at its disposal to
promote democracy and address human rights abuses. This knowledge, plus
my overseas experience in engaging constructively on such issues with
tough, nondemocratic governments, would form the basis of the firm,
honest, and goal-oriented approach I would use to direct Embassy
Malabo's interactions with the Government of the Republic of Equatorial
Guinea (GREG) if I were confirmed.
In Kazakhstan, I emphasized to the government the importance the
United States places on transparency in reporting earnings from
extractive industries, especially oil and gas. During my tenure as
deputy chief of mission and Charge d'Affaires, a.i., in Almaty,
Kazakhstan applied to be a candidate for membership in the Extractive
Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI). My productive experience in
working on this key issue with Government of Kazakhstan officials would
shape how I envision leading Embassy Malabo's efforts to encourage the
GREG to create the conditions that would make a reapplication for EITI
membership possible.
Question. In your testimony, you noted that during your most recent
overseas
assignment as deputy chief of mission in Khartoum, you focused on
human rights abuses in Sudan. Though State Department human rights
reports have noted some human rights improvements in Equatorial Guinea
in recent years, serious issues continue to exist. Given your previous
experience, and considering the very limited U.S. aid to Equatorial
Guinea, are there ways to engage the government to support greater
improvements and how would you characterize your approach?
Answer. In Khartoum, I was a forceful advocate with the Government
of Sudan (GOS) on the need for it to allow nongovernmental
organizations (NGOs) and other civil society organizations to expand
their humanitarian assistance to internally displaced persons in
Darfur. If confirmed, I would draw on this experience and provide the
Equatoguinean Government (GREG) with specific areas in which it needed
improvement in its respect for human rights. I would advocate that the
government ease restrictions on international and domestic
organizations to allow them, with government cooperation, to continue
to improve prison conditions, denounce human rights abuses, and ensure
that Equatoguinean citizens are accorded their basic rights, including
due process.
Equatorial Guinea is ranked Tier 3 in the Trafficking in Persons
Report. But on a positive note, the GREG has recently asked for the
United States technical assistance in restructuring the country's
dormant Interagency Commission on the Trafficking in Persons. If I am
confirmed, I would like to further the GREG's restructuring of the
Commission. As noted above, I would raise specific areas for
improvement and inform the GREG what it needs to accomplish to improve
its TIP ranking.
Just as was the case in Sudan, my approach on such issues would be
one of respectful, but firm and deliberate, engagement with Equatorial
Guinea.
______
Responses of Douglas M. Griffiths to Questions Submitted
by Senator John F. Kerry
Question. Mozambique is home to a wide array of natural resources,
but over half its population lives on less than 50 cents a day. Based
on your experience in other posts, how can a government most
effectively try to bridge those gaps rather than falling victim to the
so-called resource curse that has plagued so many other countries? How
can the U.S. Government most effectively assist that sort of genuinely
democratic economic development?
Answer. Strengthening democracy and governance is one of the
highest priorities for the U.S. Embassy in Mozambique. If confirmed, I
will continue to focus on U.S. Government efforts in this area to
include the development of civil society and implementation of
anticorruption legislation. Building strong local institutions and host
government administrative capacity are crucial to Mozambique's long-
term stability and economic growth. Specific to natural resources, I
will continue to encourage Mozambique in its ongoing application
process to the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI).
Moving beyond transparency, I will encourage the Mozambican Government
to adopt a fiscal regime that will govern the responsible management of
natural resource revenues.
Making progress toward more broad-based growth will be a
significant challenge during my tenure, if confirmed. Broad-based
economic growth and poverty reduction are also top priorities of the
U.S. Embassy in Mozambique and U.S. Government initiatives are already
working toward this goal. Through Feed the Future, the U.S. Government
and Mozambique are working to sustainably reduce poverty by improving
key agricultural value chains and supporting the policy enabling
environment for agricultural development. Mozambique will soon take
part in the ``New Alliance to Increase Food Security and Nutrition,''
launched at the Camp David G8 summit in May, which aims to increase
responsible private investments in agriculture. Promoting a more
dynamic private sector is an integral aspect of Feed the Future and the
``New Alliance,'' and will create new jobs and improve livelihoods
across Mozambique.
Additionally, the Millennium Challenge Corporation is working in
the less developed northern provinces of Mozambique--where many of the
natural resources are found--to improve the road and water supply
infrastructure, support farmers, and formalize land tenure
administration. These improvements will create an environment more
conducive to growth across all socioeconomic levels.
Question. Given your previous experience, what management lessons
will shape your approach if confirmed as chief of mission of the U.S.
Embassy in Mozambique?
Answer. My previous postings in places such as Haiti and Geneva
have taught me the true value of the ``whole of government'' approach.
While these postings starkly contrasted in many ways, the teamwork
required to tackle complex crises across U.S. agencies remained at the
core. If confirmed, I plan to harness all of the U.S. Government
resources available at post and in Washington to achieve our mission
goals.
The U.S. Embassy in Mozambique is a fast-growing mission with
employees from seven U.S. agencies spread out across the city in a
number of annexes. If confirmed, I will lead by example in fostering
interagency cooperation by encouraging cross-cutting projects and
activities across the mission.
______
Responses of Edward M. Alford to Questions Submitted
by Senator Marco Rubio
Question. According to the State Department's 2011 Trafficking In
Persons Report, The Gambia is a Tier 2 Watch List country for human
trafficking for its failure to demonstrate increasing its efforts to
address human trafficking over the previous year.
If confirmed, what would be your strategy to encourage the
Government of The Gambia to institute stronger human
trafficking policies?
Answer. Gambia is a ``Tier 2 Watchlist'' source, transit, and
destination country for children and women subjected to trafficking in
persons, specifically forced labor and forced prostitution. If
confirmed, I will encourage the Government of The Gambia to increase
efforts to investigate and prosecute trafficking offenses and convict
trafficking offenders. I will also urge the government to develop an
educational module for police and government officials to distinguish
smuggling from trafficking as well as encourage the government to train
its law enforcement to improve victim identification efforts. In
addition, I will work to support the development of the newly created
National Agency Against Trafficking in Persons to become a strong
partner in combating trafficking in persons in The Gambia. I will also
urge it to complete the promised database that tracks the government's
antitrafficking efforts.
Question. The 2007 Trafficking in Persons Act mandated the
formation of the National Agency Against Trafficking In Persons. This
agency has not entered into formal existence and has not received its
allocated funds from the government.
If confirmed, what steps will you take to ensure that the
government fulfills its obligation for the creation of this
agency?
Answer. Despite limited resources, the Government of The Gambia is
making significant efforts to meet the minimum standards for the
elimination of trafficking in persons (TIP). In December 2011, the
Ministry of Justice launched the National Agency Against Trafficking.
This was in direct response to the 2011 Trafficking In Persons Report,
which expressed concerns about the delayed formation of a national
agency as mandated in the 2007 Trafficking in Persons Act. The new
agency has the lead role in coordinating anti-TIP efforts and its
boards of directors includes representatives from most of the
government agencies that cover TIP-related issues as well as from local
nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) that are active in antitrafficking
efforts. The agency itself has staff and budget assigned to it. If
confirmed, I will work to support the development of this nascent
agency to become a strong partner in combating trafficking in persons
in The Gambia.
______
Responses of Mark L. Asquino to Questions Submitted
by Senator Marco Rubio
Question. According to the State Department's 2011 Trafficking In
Persons Report, Equatorial Guinea is a Tier 3 county for human
trafficking for its failure to make significant efforts to combat
trafficking, despite the government's substantial financial resources.
If confirmed, what is your strategy to engage the Government
of Equatorial Guinea to enact a strong antitrafficking policy
which will address prosecution, protection and prevention?
Answer. Our Embassy in Malabo is working with the Equatoguinean
Government to strengthen Equatorial Guinea's efforts to combat and
prevent trafficking in persons and to assist trafficking victims. Our
mission regularly engages with the Ministries of Social Affairs,
Interior, National Security, Defense and Foreign Affairs, and has
raised the importance of combating human trafficking directly with
Equatorial Guinea (EG) President Obiang. In part due to our
intervention, EG's Director General for Immigration has recently
informed our Embassy that EG will revive its Interagency Commission for
Trafficking in Persons, which was formed when EG passed its trafficking
in persons law in 2004, but which has not met in over 2 years. The
Director General also intends to update EG's National Plan to Fight
Human Trafficking and to begin steps to implement it. He has asked for
U.S. advice on how to revive and structure the Commission. The State
Department's Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons is
actively working with the Embassy on the request. Last week the
Equatoguinean Government cohosted a seminar on trafficking in persons
with the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). While these first
steps indicate a renewed commitment to trafficking issues, I believe
that we must remain engaged with the Equatoguinean Government and
continue to urge the government to take a holistic approach to combat
trafficking. The Under Secretary for Civilian Security, Democracy, and
Human Rights (J) is responsible for overseeing the work of the Office
to Monitor and Combat the Trafficking in Persons
(J/TIP). As Chief of Staff in this Under Secretariat, I am directly
involved in discussions of TIP issues on a day-to-day basis. If
confirmed, I will coordinate closely with J/TIP and continue the
Embassy's dialogue with the Equatoguinean Government to encourage it to
take concrete steps to combat human trafficking. I will strongly urge
it to adopt a robust antitrafficking policy that addresses prosecution,
protection, and prevention.
Question. Public officials are often engaged in human trafficking
and smuggling operations in Equatorial Guinea, which is principally a
destination for children subjected to forced labor.
If confirmed, how would you engage the Equatoguinean
Government in a dialogue on the sensitive subject of government
officials engaging in trafficking?
Answer. The U.S. Embassy in Malabo has maintained a frank dialogue
with the Equatoguinean Government on a range of sensitive issues,
including human rights and trafficking in persons. Our candid
relationship extends to the highest levels, and previous ambassadors
have been able to deliver tough human rights messages to President
Obiang; if confirmed, I will continue this practice. When faced with
credible accusations of official complicity in human trafficking, I
will draw on my extensive experience in combating trafficking in
persons in Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, and Sudan to raise the issue at the
highest levels of government. I understand that the Equatoguinean
Government has generally been receptive to U.S. messages on the
trafficking issue, and has some interest in ending official complicity
in human smuggling and trafficking. In June 2010, an Equatoguinean
court convicted an army officer and two others guilty of human
trafficking and sentenced them to 15 years in prison in connection with
the deaths of several foreign nationals who died of asphyxiation while
being smuggled into Equatorial Guinea.
______
Responses of Douglas M. Griffiths to Questions Submitted
by Senator Marco Rubio
Question. According to the State Department's 2011 Trafficking in
Persons Report, Mozambique is a Tier 2 country for human trafficking.
There are loose Mozambican and South African trafficking networks and
also larger Chinese and Nigerian trafficking syndicates active in
Mozambique.
If confirmed, how would you encourage the Mozambican
Government to investigate the transnational organization crime
element of human trafficking?
Answer. In the 2011 Trafficking in Persons (TIP) Report, the
Government of Mozambique received an upgrade to Tier 2 from Tier 2
Watch List following progress made through its efforts to combat TIP in
2010. Continuing its strong efforts, in 2011 the Mozambican Government
initiated 15 new investigations of trafficking-in-persons cases, and 11
new prosecutions. Eight cases were completed, seven of those resulting
in convictions. These law enforcement efforts occurred under its strong
2008 antitrafficking act and demonstrate the capacity of the Mozambican
Government to address transnational crime.
The Mozambican Government has implemented TIP training programs for
border guards, customs officials, and police officers to help them
recognize and prevent trafficking. If confirmed, I will continue to
encourage U.S. support for this type of training, as well as for other
programs that combat these illegal activities. I will also continue to
encourage progress, specifically to finalize Mozambique's implementing
regulations for the 2008 legislation, develop a formal system to refer
victims to care, and continue to build the capacity of the
antitrafficking police unit.
The Mozambican Government recently began to compile data on
trafficking cases nationwide, a first and significant step toward
understanding TIP crime networks and trends. Parallel to this effort,
Mozambique began drafting a national antitrafficking action plan. The
U.S. Embassy in Mozambique has been assisting in these ongoing efforts.
If confirmed, I will continue to make our assistance in these areas a
priority.
Our International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement (INCLE)
assistance to Mozambique has historically focused on border security.
State is coordinating with USAID to expand the scope of our assistance
to the Attorney General's office with a focus on strengthening
prosecutorial capacity. We also are planning to target assistance to
strengthening the enforcement of customs, antimoney laundering laws,
and detecting and deterring drug trafficking--all initiatives with
direct links to combating human trafficking networks.
Question. The Mozambican Government deports foreign trafficking
victims without screening them for possible victimization.
If confirmed, what steps will you take to ensure that
foreign trafficking victim cases are investigated and that the
victims are treated as victims instead of criminals?
Answer. There are increasing numbers of migrants arriving in
Mozambique from a number of other countries in Africa, particularly
Ethiopia and Somalia, as well as from South Asian nations. The
overwhelming majority of these are economic migrants voluntarily
transiting Mozambique on their way to South Africa.
The government has a national system of Women and Children's Victim
Assistance Units, operating in over 200 police stations throughout the
country, and these Units assist trafficking victims as well as victims
of domestic violence. If confirmed, I will encourage the Mozambican
Government to meet its responsibilities under international conventions
to erect comprehensive screening procedures at its borders, as well as
to increase the capacity of the Victims Assistance Units for the
benefit of foreign trafficking victims.
The Mozambican Parliament recently passed a comprehensive Witness
and Victims Protection Act, which will offer a broad range of
protective measures, including physical protection and foreign and
domestic relocation. This law will have direct application to
Trafficking in Persons (TIP) cases. If confirmed, I will encourage the
Mozambican Government to devote adequate resources to this new act.
NOMINATIONS OF MICHELE SISON, BRETT McGURK, AND SUSAN ELLIOTT
----------
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 6, 2012
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Foreign Relations,
Washington, DC.
----------
Hon. Michele Jeanne Sison, of Maryland, to be Ambassador to the
Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka and to serve
concurrently as Ambassador to the Republic of Maldives
Brett H. McGurk, of Connecticut, to be Ambassador to the
Republic of Iraq
Susan Marsh Elliott, of Florida, to be Ambassador to the
Republic of Tajikistan
----------
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 a.m., in room
SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Robert P. Casey,
Jr., presiding.
Present: Senators Casey, Udall, Lugar, and Risch.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. ROBERT P. CASEY, JR.,
U.S. SENATOR FROM PENNSYLVANIA
Senator Casey. Good morning. Today the Senate Foreign
Relations Committee meets to consider the President's nominees
to serve as Ambassador to the following countries: Iraq, Sri
Lanka, the Maldives, and Tajikistan. I want to thank all of the
witnesses and others who are here with us today for appearing
to discuss challenges in these countries and obviously to
discuss each nominee's work, as well as their work upon
confirmation, and of course, U.S. policy in each of the
countries.
Let me just go through a little bit about each place first
and then we will get to our witnesses, our nominees.
In Iraq, the picture, of course, is mixed nearly 6 months
after the redeployment of United States troops from the
country. We know that political and ethnic divisions remain
sharp as Iraq recovers from years and years of war. The current
government took months to establish in 2010 and a high degree
of mistrust still exists among key political factions. Iraqis
and Americans have sacrificed mightily to support the
democratic process in Iraq. At this critical time, we should
continue to support the political reconciliation among key
players in the country as they work to further deepen the
democratic process.
This unsettled political environment exists within a very
precarious security situation where extremist groups are still
capable of and have launched significant attacks in the
country. Just last week, six bomb blasts across Baghdad killed
at least 17 people mostly in Shia neighborhoods. On Monday, a
suicide bomber killed at least 26 people in Baghdad and wounded
more than 190 in an attack on the government-run body that
manages Shiite religious and cultural sites. While security is
certainly a significant challenge in Iraq and all loss of life
is a tragedy, violence has, in fact, decreased substantially
since the height of the conflict.
With the end of the U.S. military presence in the country
at the end of 2011, Iraq has sought to deepen the roots of its
sovereignty and play a leadership role in the region. Iraq
recently hosted a meeting of the Arab League in Baghdad, a
symbol that it is once again a key player in the region after
years of isolation under Saddam Hussein. With this enhanced
standing in the region, there are serious questions about
Iraq's position on, for example, Syria. While I understand
Iraq's concerns about Syria's stability in a post-Assad era,
the violence over the past year perpetrated by Assad's forces
is inexcusable. Iraq should join with others in the
international community and use its position in the Arab League
to bring increased diplomatic pressure to bear on Mr. Assad.
I also continue to have significant concerns about Iran's
efforts to exert influence in Iraq. I look forward to hearing
the nominee's thoughts on this seminal issue and an assessment
of the United States ability to diplomatically mitigate the
negative effects of Iranian influence in Iraq.
Despite these continuing challenges, there is positive news
in Iraq that we can build upon. This was reflected in a recent
public opinion survey fielded by the National Democratic
Institute, known as NDI. NDI found that 48 percent of Iraqis
believed that Iraq was headed in the right direction. Oil
exports have increased by 20 percent this year to nearly 2.5
million barrels a day. American companies have increased their
presence in Iraq. And, as mentioned, violence levels have, in
fact, decreased. We are seeing signs of progress, but this
progress is delicate and fragile.
In October of last year, the State Department became the
lead U.S. agency in the country. The U.S. Embassy in Baghdad is
the biggest U.S. presence in the world with approximately
16,000 staff and contractors. Questions remain about the State
Department's ability to operate in this still precarious
security environment and handle the significant workload
associated with the processing of billions of dollars' worth of
arms sales to the Iraqi Government. A diplomatic presence of
this size requires sustained oversight from Congress. And I
look forward to continued engagement with our nominee, upon
confirmation, to ensure our footprint in Iraq is the right size
and that we have the right amount of resources to pursue our
interests.
The President has nominated Brett McGurk to represent our
interests amid the myriad significant challenges in Iraq. Mr.
McGurk, perhaps due to his great upbringing in Pittsburgh, PA,
is eminently capable to assume this position. Of course, there
are other reasons for his preparation, but it does not hurt
that you have roots in Pittsburgh. He has been engaged in U.S.
policy in Iraq since 2004, advising every U.S. Ambassador at
post in Iraq. He has an intimate understanding of the political
players and history of Iraq, as well as the role of the United
States in the country since 2004. His unique experience across
two administrations is very good preparation to establish a
leadership vision for the Embassy that reflects U.S.
diplomatic, security, and economic interests. Mr. McGurk is the
right choice at the right time in United States-Iraq diplomatic
relations.
Mr. McGurk, welcome. We will hear from you in a moment.
In Sri Lanka, 3 years after the end of more than a quarter
century of devastating civil war, we also see a mixed picture.
On the one hand, the end of the conflict has led to strong
economic growth, driven by large-scale reconstruction and
development projects, increasing commodity exports, and a
growing tourist industry. However, the war left Sri Lanka with
a legacy of internal displacement, mistrust among ethnic
groups, and of course, insufficient protection for human rights
that have yet to be adequately addressed. According to the
Internal Displacement Monitoring Center, nearly 100,000 people
remain displaced and even more have been unable to repossess
their homes. The military's significant presence in the north
and east of the country poses an obstacle to returning
internally displaced people, as well as to the delivery of
humanitarian aid. Some observers have expressed concern about
the ongoing Sinhalization of ethnic Tamil areas.
Perhaps most importantly, the Sri Lankan Government has
failed to meet expectations with regard to investigating
alleged human rights violations and holding culpable
individuals accountable. International experts have found
credible allegations of serious human rights violations
committed by both sides in the last stages of the war, but the
perpetrators have not been called to account yet for their
crimes. The recommendations of the Lessons Learnt and
Reconciliation Commission, the so-called LLRC, released more
than 6 months ago have yet to be implemented.
I and others remain very concerned about the lack of
accountability for actions taken during the final days of the
war, as well as about reports of ongoing human rights
violations in the country. In March 2011, I led a resolution in
the Senate calling for greater accountability in Sri Lanka, and
in November of that year, I wrote a letter to Secretary
Clinton, along with Senators Leahy and Cardin, calling for an
independent international investigation into the human rights
situation in Sri Lanka. Recent reports by the Department of
State, the U.N., and international human rights groups cite
forced disappearances, arbitrary detention and torture, and
repression of media and political opposition all as ongoing
problems. The United States should continue to work with the
international community to push for greater accountability and
protection for human rights in Sri Lanka.
The Maldives is certainly an important ally of the United
States and we enjoy a productive relationship. In 2008, the
Maldives experienced historic elections which heralded a new
democratic beginning for this small island, and we know that
this year's political unrest has unfortunately threatened to
derail the progress that has been made. The United States
should continue to press for elections as soon as possible to
ensure that the seeds of the democratic process, planted in
2008, are able to flourish.
I welcome Ambassador Sison, and I met the Ambassador during
my visit to the Middle East in 2010 where she was in charge of
our Embassy in Lebanon. I was impressed with her ability to
navigate a complicated and at times, indeed, treacherous
political environment in Beirut. She has also served as
Ambassador in the United Arab Emirates and in a variety of
diplomatic positions in Iraq, Pakistan, India, the Ivory Coast,
Cameroon, Benin, Togo, and Haiti. She will be well prepared for
what I know will be a very challenging assignment in Sri Lanka
and the Maldives.
Ambassador, I know that your two daughters, Alexandra and
Jessica, are in Arizona today. But as they have accompanied you
to seven overseas posts over the years, they deserve special
recognition for their unwavering support for you and for the
country. And we want to recognize that today.
And finally, Tajikistan. Tajikistan's strategic location
and internal instability pose important challenges for United
States policymakers. While the United States operations in
Afghanistan continue, we must rely upon close cooperation with
Tajikistan in order to manage the flow of goods and people into
and out of Afghanistan. This includes bringing materials and
equipment into Afghanistan that are critical to progress there,
disrupting the dangerous flow of narcotics across the border,
and preventing militants from seeking safe haven and causing
instability in Tajikistan.
However, we must balance these strategic priorities with
the need to address serious human rights concerns in the
country. The U.N. Human Rights Council in March 2012 reported
on Tajikistan and revealed worrying trends in human rights,
including reports of repression of media freedom and political
opposition and the use of torture by law enforcement officials.
I am particularly concerned about the reported restrictions on
the rights of women and ethnic and religious minorities, and I
appreciate the work that our dedicated Foreign Service and
USAID personnel are doing in Tajikistan and look forward to
hearing more about how we will advance this work going forward.
The President has nominated Susan Marsh Elliott to be the
new U.S. Ambassador to Tajikistan. Susan, I note that you were
born in Doylestown, PA. I cannot say that that will guarantee
your confirmation, but it will not hurt. [Laughter.]
It certainly will not hurt.
She is currently the Deputy Assistant Secretary of State
for South and Central Asian Affairs. She has served in Russia,
Northern Ireland, Greece, Peru, and Honduras. She also has the
distinction of having been born in Pennsylvania, but I do not
want to put too much weight on that.
I would also like to welcome her son who has joined her
today, Kurt Mitman, for being with her today, and I would also
like to acknowledge Deputy Assistant Secretary Elliot's
husband, Matthias Mitman, who could not be with us today
because he is currently serving as the deputy chief of mission
in our Embassy in Honduras. And please wish him well for us.
Again, I want to thank all of our witnesses for being here.
Madam Ambassador, we will start with you and maybe go from my
right to the left. If you could try to keep your opening
remarks to 5 minutes. If you have a longer statement, that will
certainly be made part of the record, and then we will get to
questions.
STATEMENT OF HON. MICHELE JEANNE SISON, OF MARYLAND, TO BE
AMBASSADOR TO THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA
AND TO SERVE CONCURRENTLY AS AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF
MALDIVES
Ambassador Sison. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, Senator, it is
an honor to appear before you as President Obama's nominee to
be the U.S. Ambassador to Sri Lanka and U.S. Ambassador to
Maldives. I am deeply grateful to the President and to
Secretary Clinton for their confidence in my abilities. If
confirmed, I look forward to working with the committee and
interested Members of Congress to represent the American people
and to advance U.S. goals in Sri Lanka and Maldives.
In my 30 years in the U.S. Foreign Service, I have been
posted as U.S. Ambassador to the United Arab Emirates and as
U.S. Ambassador to Lebanon, as you noted, Mr. Chairman. I also
have considerable experience in South Asia, having served in
India and Pakistan and as Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary
for the South Asia region.
The United States has important interests in both Sri Lanka
and Maldives. Sri Lanka is located along the busiest shipping
lanes in the Indian Ocean, a region emerging as a strategic
arena in which America's enduring interests are increasingly at
play. Sri Lanka has also been a contributor to U.N.
peacekeeping operations. The United States thus recognizes the
importance of maintaining a broad range of partnerships with
Sri Lanka as we encourage a lasting democratic peace in the
country after nearly 3 decades of devastating conflict.
The United States and other international partners have
encouraged the Government of Sri Lanka to pursue the steps
needed to foster genuine reconciliation and accountability.
Although the Government of Sri Lanka defeated the terrorist
organization, Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam, serious
allegations of violations of human rights law and international
humanitarian law committed by both sides at the end of the war
remain to be investigated and have slowed reconciliation.
In March, the U.N. Human Rights Council adopted a U.S.-
sponsored resolution calling on the Government of Sri Lanka to
implement the recommendations of Sri Lanka's own government-
appointed Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission. In
April, the State Department issued its third report to Congress
on accountability in Sri Lanka since the end of Sri Lanka's
conflict in 2009. Achieving genuine reconciliation will require
Sri Lanka to take credible steps to ensure equality and justice
for all Sri Lankans, particularly for those living in the
former conflict areas. Such steps include demilitarization of
the former conflict zones, establishment of a mechanism to
address cases of the missing and detained, and setting a date
for provincial elections in the north. Also critical will be
the achievement of an agreement between the Sri Lankan
Government and the elected representatives of the Tamil
community on devolution of power to provincial institutions.
During a May 18 meeting with the Sri Lankan Foreign
Minister, Secretary Clinton underscored that an enduring peace
is unsustainable without adequate measures to address
reconciliation and accountability. She encouraged a transparent
and public process with regard to reconciliation and
accountability to strengthen confidence inside and outside of
Sri Lanka and to speed the healing of the country. If
confirmed, I stand ready to lead our efforts to support Sri
Lanka as it moves forward and to use U.S. assistance
strategically to promote reconciliation, strengthen democratic
institutions and practices, and foster economic growth
particularly in the north and east, the former conflict zones.
The U.S. Ambassador in Colombo is also accredited to the
Republic of Maldives. In February, following a series of
controversial events and protests, the former Vice President
took office after the resignation of the President. The United
States continues to encourage Maldives to work within existing
democratic institutions to resolve political challenges
peacefully and transparently. The U.S. Government now has a
window of opportunity to step up its engagement in Maldives,
and USAID recently committed funding to assist Maldives in
ensuring that the next round of Presidential elections is free
and fair.
The United States also recognizes the importance of
promoting security in the Indian Ocean. To that end, the U.S.
Coast Guard has provided training to the Maldivian Coast Guard
to improve its ability to respond to threats of piracy, as well
as to combat transshipment of illicit commodities. U.S.
assistance to the Maldives also promotes the development of a
robust ``climate resilient islands'' model.
If confirmed, I plan to consult with Sri Lankans and
Maldivians from all walks of life on how the United States can
best support local initiatives to promote civil society,
protect freedom of expression, and encourage youth exchanges.
It would also be my goal, if confirmed, to engage in vigorous
commercial advocacy in Sri Lanka and Maldives on behalf of U.S.
companies, in support of President Obama's National Export
Initiative.
I would welcome your insights and views, as well as any
questions you might have for me today. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ambassador Sison follows:]
Prepared Statement of Ambassador Michele Jeanne Sison
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, it is an honor to appear
before you as President Obama's nominee to be the United States
Ambassador to Sri Lanka and United States Ambassador to Maldives. I am
deeply grateful to the President and to Secretary Clinton for their
confidence in my abilities. If confirmed, I look forward to working
with this committee and interested Members of Congress to represent the
American people and to advance U.S. goals in Sri Lanka and Maldives.
My 30 years in the U.S. Foreign Service includes postings as U.S.
Ambassador to the United Arab Emirates and U.S. Ambassador to Lebanon.
I also have considerable experience in South Asia, having served in
India and Pakistan and as Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for the
region.
The United States has important interests in both Sri Lanka and
Maldives. Sri Lanka is located along the busiest shipping lanes in the
Indian Ocean, a region emerging as a strategic arena in which America's
enduring interests are increasingly at play. Sri Lanka has also been a
contributor to U.N. peacekeeping operations. The United States
recognizes the importance of maintaining a broad range of partnerships
with Sri Lanka as we encourage a lasting, democratic peace in the
country after nearly three decades of devastating conflict.
The United States and other international partners have encouraged
the Government of Sri Lanka to pursue the steps needed to foster
genuine reconciliation and accountability. Although the Government of
Sri Lanka defeated the terrorist organization Liberation Tigers of
Tamil Eelam, serious allegations of violations of human rights law and
international humanitarian law committed by both sides at the end of
the war remain to be investigated and have slowed reconciliation.
In March, the U.N. Human Rights Council adopted a U.S.-sponsored
resolution calling on the Government of Sri Lanka to implement the
recommendations of Sri Lanka's own government-appointed Lessons Learnt
and Reconciliation Commission. In April, the State Department issued
its third report to Congress on accountability in Sri Lanka since the
end of Sri Lanka's conflict in 2009. Achieving genuine reconciliation
will require Sri Lanka to take credible steps to ensure equality and
justice for all Sri Lankans, particularly for those living in former
conflict areas. Such steps include demilitarization of the former
conflict zones, establishment of a mechanism to address cases of the
missing and detained, and setting a date for provincial elections in
the north. Also critical will be the achievement of an agreement
between the Sri Lankan Government and the elected representatives of
the Tamil community on devolution of power to provincial institutions.
During a May 18 meeting with the Sri Lankan Foreign Minister,
Secretary Clinton underscored that an enduring peace is unsustainable
without adequate measures to address reconciliation and accountability.
She encouraged a transparent and public process with regard to
reconciliation and accountability to strengthen confidence inside and
outside of Sri Lanka and to speed the healing of the country. If
confirmed, I stand ready to lead our efforts to support Sri Lanka as it
moves forward and to use U.S. assistance strategically to promote
reconciliation, strengthen democratic institutions and practices, and
foster economic growth, particularly in the north and east.
The U.S. Ambassador in Colombo is also accredited to the Republic
of Maldives. In February, following a series of controversial events
and protests, the former Vice President took office after the
resignation of the President. The United States continues to encourage
Maldives to work within existing democratic institutions to resolve
political challenges peacefully and transparently. The U.S. Government
now has a window of opportunity to step up its engagement in Maldives,
and USAID recently committed funding to assist Maldives in ensuring
that the next round of Presidential elections is free and fair.
The United States also recognizes the importance of promoting
security in the Indian Ocean. To that end, the U.S. Coast Guard has
provided training to the Maldivian Coast Guard to improve its ability
to respond to threats of piracy as well as to combat transshipment of
illicit commodities. U.S. assistance to the Maldives also promotes the
development of a robust ``climate resilient islands'' model.
If confirmed, I plan to consult with Sri Lankans and Maldivians
from all walks of life on how the United States can best support local
initiatives to promote civil society, protect freedom of expression,
and encourage youth exchanges. It would also be my goal if confirmed to
engage in vigorous commercial advocacy in Sri Lanka and Maldives on
behalf of U.S. companies, in support of President Obama's National
Export Initiative.
I would welcome your insights and views, as well as any questions
you might have for me today. Thank you.
Senator Casey. Thank you, Madam Ambassador.
Mr. McGurk.
STATEMENT OF BRETT H. McGURK, OF CONNECTICUT,
TO BE AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF IRAQ
Mr. McGurk. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Risch,
Senator Lugar. It is a tremendous honor to appear before you
today as President Obama's nominee to become U.S. Ambassador to
Iraq. I am deeply grateful to the President and to Secretary
Clinton for the confidence they have placed in me with this
nomination. If confirmed, I look forward to working closely
with you to advance America's many important and vital
interests in Iraq.
I have had the distinct privilege of serving alongside each
of the last five U.S. Ambassadors to Iraq. I was with
Ambassador John Negroponte in July 2004 when he raised the
American flag to open a U.S. Embassy in Baghdad for the first
time since 1991. Nearly 8 years later, I was with Ambassador
Jim Jeffrey as he led the challenging transition from military
to civilian lead for the first time since the toppling of
Saddam Hussein.
I have also served alongside our heroic military
commanders, including Generals Petraeus, Odierno, and Austin.
The opportunities that are now before us in Iraq exist only
because of the leadership of these individuals and the more
than 1 million Americans who have served there, including the
nearly 4,500 who have paid the ultimate price.
Like too many Americans, I have lost friends in Iraq. If
confirmed, I will do everything in my power, drawing on all the
tools of our foreign policy, to build a lasting partnership
with Iraq that is worthy of their memory and sacrifice.
I believe such a partnership is possible. I also believe,
however, that we are not there yet. There is so much the United
States must do to mitigate risks of backsliding and increase
prospects for consolidating the many gains that we have seen
since the worst periods of the war.
Iraq today is slowing emerging from decades of war,
isolation, and dictatorship. More recently, it faced down, with
American help, a sectarian war that left tens of thousands of
Iraqis dead and millions displaced. The violence threatened to
collapse the Iraqi state and reduced many citizens to their
most basic ethnic and sectarian identities.
This legacy is felt most acutely in the political process.
For the first time in Iraq's modern history, politics is now
the primary arena for engagement among all of Iraq's many
different sects and ethnicities. That is the good news. The bad
news is that their vast differences still threaten to overwhelm
the nascent institutional framework that was established under
the Iraqi Constitution. I am deeply concerned about this
situation.
Iraq's Constitution envisions a united, federal,
democratic, and pluralistic state in which all citizens enjoy
fair representation in local and national institutions. This
vision, however, remains an aspiration. Fear, mistrust, and
score-settling still dominate political discourse. As a result,
Iraqis have sought to supplement the constitutional design with
additional political agreements and accommodations.
I have often been one of the few Americans in the room when
such agreements were being developed. If confirmed, I pledge my
utmost efforts to work with leaders from all political blocs,
to encourage respect for prior agreements, durable compromise,
and constitutional arrangements that help guarantee meaningful
power-sharing and partnership.
These efforts would be guided by the 2008 Strategic
Framework Agreement, which is now the cornerstone of U.S.
policy in Iraq. The SFA is unique in that it structures a long-
term partnership across the fields of defense, energy,
economics, diplomacy, education, and justice. With respect to
the political process, it calls on the United States to help
strengthen Iraq's democracy and its democratic institutions as
established in the Iraqi Constitution.
If confirmed, my mission is clear: to establish an enduring
partnership with a united, federal, and democratic Iraq under
the SFA. As one of the lead negotiators of the SFA, I would be
honored to carry out that charge, together with Iraqi leaders
and close colleagues from across the U.S. Government, many of
whom I have worked with over a number of years.
Going forward, if confirmed, I will seek to organize the
mission around four mutually reinforcing lines of operation:
defense and security, political and diplomatic, energy and
economics, rule of law and human rights.
In the defense and security area, if confirmed, I look
forward to working with our Office of Security Cooperation and
CENTCOM to ensure that we are doing everything possible to
deepen our military defense partnership in Iraq.
In the diplomatic area, if confirmed, I look forward to
working with our Ambassadors in regional capitals, most of whom
I have worked with and admired for many years, to ensure close
coordination of U.S. policies in Iraq and throughout the
region.
In the political area, Iraq is scheduled to hold elections:
provincial elections in 2013 and national elections in 2014. If
confirmed, it will be a central focus of our mission to work in
coordination with the U.N. to ensure that these elections are
held freely, fairly, and on time.
Energy and economics are now foremost priorities. If
confirmed, it will be among my highest priorities to connect
U.S. businesses with emerging opportunities in Iraq and to
refocus Iraqi leaders on the urgent necessity of diversifying
their economy and grappling with national hydrocarbons
legislation.
As the United States pursues its interests in Iraq, we must
never lose sight of our values, including promotion of human
rights, women, and protection of vulnerable minorities.
This is an ambitious agenda, but it should not require an
unsustainable resource base. If confirmed, I pledge to work
with the Congress to establish a diplomatic presence in Iraq
that is secure, strategic, effective, and sustainable. A
focused U.S. mission with prioritized lines of operation
organized around the SFA can enhance our influence and ensure
the agility we will need to advance U.S. interests in a
constantly changing and dynamic environment.
I will also ensure, if confirmed, that precious taxpayer
resources are applied effectively, transparently, and with an
eye toward long-term sustainability.
I have tried to touch upon a number of the issues that I
will soon confront, if confirmed, as the next U.S. Ambassador
to Iraq. For me, there is no more important mission in the
world. I have served across two administrations over 8 years
developing U.S. policy in Washington or executing U.S. policy
in Iraq.
I was with President Bush when we planned a surge of 30,000
U.S. troops under a new strategy to turn around a losing war. I
was with General Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker when we
worked to implement that strategy against tremendous odds. I
later helped manage the transition of our Iraq policy to the
Obama administration under two binding international
agreements. Over the past 2 years, I have answered repeated
calls to return to Iraq and public service at times of crisis.
My eyes are wide open to the risks and challenges ahead.
But I close from where I started. For every challenge, there is
also opportunity and obligation: to honor those lost in this
war or forever changed by it, we must do everything in our
power to build a partnership with Iraq and its people that can
endure and advance United States interests in this most vital
region. If confirmed, that is what I will seek to do.
Thank you and I look forward to answering your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. McGurk follows:]
Prepared Statement of Brett H. McGurk
Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Risch, members of the committee, it is
a tremendous honor to appear before you today as President Obama's
nominee to become United States Ambassador to Iraq. I am deeply
grateful to the President and to Secretary Clinton for the confidence
that they have placed in me with this nomination. If confirmed, I look
forward to working closely with this committee and your colleagues in
Congress to advance America's many important and vital interests in
Iraq.
I have had the distinct privilege of serving alongside each of the
last five U.S. Ambassadors to Iraq. I was with Ambassador John
Negroponte in July 2004 when he raised the American flag to open a U.S.
Embassy in Baghdad for the first time since 1991. Nearly 8 years later
I was with Ambassador Jim Jeffrey as he led the challenging transition
from military to civilian lead for the first time since the toppling of
Saddam Hussein.
I have also served alongside our heroic military commanders
including Generals Petraeus, Odierno, and Austin. The opportunities
that are now before us in Iraq exist only because of the leadership of
these individuals, and the more than 1 million Americans who have
served there--including nearly 4,500 who have paid the ultimate price.
Like too many Americans, I have lost friends in Iraq. If confirmed,
I will do everything in my power--drawing on all the tools of our
foreign policy--to build a lasting partnership with Iraq that is worthy
of their memory and sacrifice.
I believe such a partnership is possible. I also believe, however,
that we are not there yet. There is still much the United States must
do to mitigate risks of backsliding and increase prospects for
consolidating the many gains that we have seen since the worst periods
of the war.
The situation in Iraq today is much different from what I
encountered after first landing in Baghdad in January 2004. Back then,
the road from the airport was known as the highway of death. American
troops offered the only visible security presence. Sovereign authority
was vested in an American administrator. Iraqi ministries were looted
and abandoned shells.
Today, Iraqis are securing their own country. Sovereign authority
is vested in an elected Iraqi Government that serves under a popularly
ratified constitution. And many key indicators are positive: Iraq's GDP
is forecast to increase by double digits over each of the next 3 years.
Its oil production recently surpassed levels not seen in three decades.
Its Parliament recently passed a $100 billion budget, which was praised
by the IMF for its fiscal prudence. The security situation has remained
generally stable.
Such indicators might point the way to a globally integrated Iraq
that is more secure and prosperous than at any time in its history.
This future is now possible, but not inevitable.
The positive indicators I just cited should not obscure the
sobering situation that now confronts Iraq. The country is slowly
emerging from decades of war, isolation, sanctions, and dictatorship.
More recently, it faced down--with American help--a sectarian war that
left tens of thousands of Iraqis dead and millions displaced. The
violence threatened to collapse the Iraqi state and reduced many
citizens to their most basic ethnic and sectarian identities.
This legacy is felt most acutely in the political process. For the
first time in Iraq's modern history, politics is now the primary arena
for engagement among all of Iraq's many different sects and
ethnicities. That is the good news. The bad news is that their vast
differences still threaten to overwhelm the nascent institutional
framework that was established under the Iraqi Constitution. I am
deeply concerned about this situation.
Iraq's Constitution envisions a united, federal, democratic, and
pluralistic state, in which all citizens enjoy fair representation in
local and national institutions. This vision, however, remains an
aspiration. Fear, mistrust, and score-settling still dominate political
discourse. As a result, Iraqis have sought to supplement the
constitutional design with additional political accommodations. An
example of these included the Erbil agreements, which were negotiated
over the course of 5 months in 2010 to serve as a roadmap for a new
government.
I have often been one of the few Americans in the room when such
agreements were being developed. If confirmed, I pledge my utmost
efforts to work with leaders from all political blocs to encourage
respect for prior agreements, durable compromise, and arrangements that
help guarantee meaningful power-sharing and partnership under the Iraqi
Constitution.
This is not simply a policy desire of the United States. It is a
central commitment under the 2008 Strategic Framework Agreement (SFA),
which President Obama has established as the cornerstone of U.S. policy
toward Iraq. The SFA is unique in that it structures a long-term
partnership across the fields of defense, energy, economics, diplomacy,
education, and justice. With respect to the political process, it calls
on the United States to help ``strengthen [Iraq's] democracy and its
democratic institutions as defined and established in the Iraqi
Constitution.''
For Iraqis concerned that the United States might lose interest in
supporting the political process, they need only look to the SFA and
our commitment to its execution. As Secretary Clinton has said, ``The
SFA commits our countries to work together on a range of issues, from
governance and rule of law, to economics, education, energy, and the
environment. And we're committed to following through.'' Such follow-
through will require active and sustained U.S. diplomacy.
If confirmed, my mission is clear: to establish an enduring
partnership with a united, federal, and democratic Iraq--under the SFA.
As one of the lead negotiators of the SFA, I will be honored, if
confirmed, to carry out that charge together with Iraqi leaders and
close colleagues from across the U.S. Government, many of whom I have
worked with over a number of years.
Going forward, we should have no illusions. Building an enduring
partnership with a country that since 1958 defined itself in hostility
to the West will be exceedingly hard. But it is no harder than what we
have done before--and we now have a roadmap.
The SFA provides a common point of reference with the Iraqis and
lends coherence to the U.S. mission in two important ways. First, it
prioritizes U.S. objectives and thus helps ensure that taxpayer
resources are targeted to advance U.S. interests. Second, it
institutionalizes state-to-state relations and thus forces long-term
thinking across U.S. and Iraqi administrations.
I would like to discuss each of these points in turn, as they will
frame my tenure as Ambassador, if confirmed.
PRIORITIZING LINES OF OPERATION
In her introduction to the Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development
Review, Secretary Clinton stated: ``We will eliminate overlap, set
priorities, and fund only the work that supports those priorities.'' In
Iraq, that means immediately directing our precious resources--
including time and personnel--toward four priority lines of operation.
1. Defense and Security Cooperation
The first line of operation is defense and security cooperation. It
would be a mistake to view the withdrawal of U.S. military forces as
foreclosing a military partnership with Iraq. The SFA--which is a
permanent agreement--provides the foundation for enduring defense ties.
Iraq already has the fourth-largest Foreign Military Sales (FMS)
program in the region and ninth-largest in the world. Through FMS, the
Iraqi Government has chosen U.S. suppliers to build the backbone of its
security forces--supporting tens of thousands of American jobs. The
program is now valued above $10 billion and includes over 400 separate
cases that are designed to help build Iraqi self-defense capabilities
through ground power (tanks and radars), air power (pilot training,
helicopters, F-16s, and air defense), and sea power (patrol boats,
support vessels, and threat detection). Importantly, Iraq is now
funding its defense and security needs. Its most recent budget included
$15 billion in defense and security spending--twice the amount Iraq
spent 5 years ago. It is in our mutual interest to ensure that these
funds are spent wherever possible on U.S. manufactured equipment
through our FMS program.
Indeed, FMS sales have been the bedrock for U.S. strategic
partnerships in the region and they can do the same for Iraq. As a
staff report from this committee noted: ``The sale of military
equipment gives us an edge in diplomacy, builds relationships, and
fosters interoperability. But perhaps most importantly, it fills a void
that other countries, including Iran, are more than willing to step
into if left empty.'' FMS cases also ensure appropriate congressional
scrutiny and end-use monitoring to deter and prevent misuse. Of course,
this committee will be called upon to provide critical oversight of
foreign military sales to Iraq. If confirmed, I look forward to working
closely with you to protect and advance U.S. interests through our FMS
program.
The Office of Security Cooperation (OSC-I) is the primary
implementer of U.S. security assistance in Iraq. I have worked closely
with the leadership of OSC-I, Lieutenant General Bob Caslen and Rear
Admiral Ed Winters. If confirmed, I look forward to working with them
to build a streamlined and innovative OSC-I to advance our defense
partnership with Iraq.
This partnership will go beyond arms sales. It might also include
joint exercises, strategic training and doctrinal development, support
for critical infrastructure protection, NATO exchanges, professional
military education, and other programs consistent with an enduring
defense relationship. Iraq's regional integration through military-to-
military partnerships is also an important priority for CENTCOM. This
will remain a challenge, particularly with some GCC states, but as
Iraq's military grows and matures, technical mil-to-mil relationships
may precede--and help set conditions for--diplomatic progress between
Baghdad and GCC capitals.
Additionally, the United States must work with the Iraqi Government
to ensure that al-Qaeda never again secures a foothold in Iraq. While
Iraq's Special Forces are among the most capable in the region, their
effectiveness can be enhanced through cooperation with U.S. technical
experts and advisors. If confirmed, I will work closely with Iraqi
leaders to ensure that we are doing all we can to help Iraqi forces
eliminate al-Qaeda's leadership and uproot its networks from Iraqi
soil.
2. Diplomatic and Political Cooperation
The second line of operation is diplomatic and political
cooperation. Iraq has made diplomatic strides in recent months. It
began to settle a series of long-outstanding disputes with Kuwait
arising from the 1990 invasion. Saudi Arabia named its first ambassador
to Iraq since 1990. Jordan has begun discussions to enhance energy and
economic ties. The Arab League summit in Baghdad signaled Iraq's
gradual reemergence on the regional stage.
But the challenges are immense and growing due to the crisis in
Syria. Syria was one of the main topics of conversation during my
recent assignments in Baghdad. Prime Minister Maliki and other Iraqi
leaders know that U.S. policy is firm: Bashar al-Assad must go. The
longer he remains, the greater the danger to the Syrian people, to the
region, and to Iraq. We have sought to encourage Iraq to support the
Arab League consensus on Syria and demanded full adherence to relevant
U.N. Security Council resolutions. In recent months, the record on
these points has improved; but this matter will require constant
vigilance and resolve.
Iran has tremendous influence in Iraq, sharing a 3,000-kilometer
border, as well as interwoven religious, cultural, and economic ties.
But Iraqis have also resisted Iranian designs. Millions of Iraqis still
bear deep scars--visible and invisible--from a bitter war with its
eastern neighbor. Grand Ayatollah Sistani and the Marjayiya in Najaf
profess a vision of Shia Islam that undercuts the very legitimacy of
the Iranian regime. Iraqis complain about a flood of shoddy Iranian
goods flooding their markets. The vast majority of Iraqis seek to live
in a globally integrated nation, whereas Iran seeks to further isolate
Iraq from the world.
It is between these competing visions--an Iraq that is globally
connected versus an Iraq that is isolated and dependent on Iran--that
the United States retains substantial advantage and influence. Indeed,
our vision for Iraq is one most Iraqis share, and it is codified
throughout the SFA. To be sure, Iraqi leaders now in power have
relationships with the Iranian regime. But they also have relationships
with us. If confirmed, I will seek to enhance a broad range of
relationships across government and civil society that can help Iraqis
resist undue Iranian influence, increase U.S. influence, and advance
our own mutual interests as defined in the SFA.
The relationship with Turkey is increasingly complex. Turkey and
Iraq enjoy booming economic ties and cooperate on counterterror
policies. But recent months have seen rising tension between Ankara and
Baghdad in line with rising tensions in the region. Ankara has also
established unprecedented relations with Iraq's Kurdish leadership in
Erbil, further raising the ire and suspicions of some in Baghdad. In
2007, I was involved in developing a policy to initiate Ankara-Erbil
ties after a series of devastating PKK attacks on Turkish territory. At
the time, these ties were dormant; progress since then shows how
rapidly dynamics can change. Going forward, the United States must
continue to play a mediating role between Ankara, Baghdad, and Erbil.
The greatest threat to Iraq's regional position comes from within.
The divisions among Iraq's political blocs--and increasingly within the
blocs themselves--have led to a perpetual state of political crisis.
Some of this is inevitable. The governing coalition that formed in 2010
includes 98 percent of the elected Parliament--nearly the entirety of
Iraq's political spectrum--and naturally gives rise to rivalry,
inefficiency, and intrigue. But escalating accusations in recent months
present a heightened image of internal discord and open the door to
meddling by outside actors. The withdrawal of U.S. forces--while
increasing Iraq's sense of sovereignty and ownership over its internal
affairs--may have also increased short-term risks of miscalculation and
raised the stakes of lingering power-struggles.
An underlying problem is that Iraq still suffers from a political
system driven as much by individual personalities as institutions. Our
aim, therefore, is to support and strengthen Iraq's democratic
institutions wherever possible. There are some encouraging signs. The
Parliament has at times asserted its independence and reined in the
authority of the Prime Minister, most recently by removing from the
budget a $15 billion investment fund that some believed left too much
discretion to the Executive. Current debates in Parliament include
deliberations over laws to devolve powers to provincial capitals,
impose term limits on the Speaker and Prime Minister posts, and stand
up a new Supreme Court. These are the types of quiet but important
``issues-based'' debates that focus needed attention on what remains an
unfinished constitutional design.
It will also be essential over the next 24 months to help ensure
that Iraq holds scheduled elections--provincial elections in 2013 and
national elections in 2014. Elections may require new laws to allocate
seats in provincial councils and Parliament as well as a new mandate
and membership for Iraq's electoral commission. These matters will be
politically charged and we must do everything possible--working in
close coordination with the United Nations--to help Iraqis prepare for
elections that are free, fair, internationally monitored, and on time.
In the meantime, we must encourage Iraqi leaders to forge solutions
consistent with the Iraqi Constitution. This includes achievement of a
durable solution to Iraq's disputed internal boundaries in accordance
with article 140 of the constitution, and a legal framework for the
development, management, and distribution of Iraq's hydrocarbon
resources.
The United States cannot dictate outcomes. But we can nurture
processes that open channels of dialogue and narrow areas of
disagreement. If confirmed, I will engage national, provincial, and
regional leaders every day--including regular visits to the Kurdistan
region--to do just that.
3. Energy and Economic Cooperation
The third line of operation is economics and energy cooperation.
Secretary Clinton has placed ``economic statecraft'' at the heart of
our foreign policy with an emphasis on harnessing economic forces to
increase our influence abroad and strengthen our economy at home. I
believe Iraq can be a centerpiece of this agenda. As a staff report
from this committee found: ``Given that Iraq's fate will be decided in
large part by the economic growth trajectory it realizes, the top
priority for the U.S. Embassy should be helping American companies do
business in Iraq.''
Some U.S. companies are doing well in Iraq--including Boeing, Ford,
General Motors, and General Electric. U.S. exports to Iraq rose 48
percent in 2011 (to nearly $2.5 billion) and Iraqi consumers have
demonstrated a preference for American goods, including American cars,
which now account for nearly one-third of all vehicles sold in Iraq.
But U.S. exports lag behind China ($4 billion) and the European Union
($5 billion). Given all that we have invested, we must do all we can to
connect Iraq's fast-growing market with U.S. businesses. The Commerce
Department now offers Gold Key services for business-to-business
matchmaking. State and Treasury offer advice and workshops for U.S.
companies. The U.S. Business Council in Iraq seeks to promote private
sector investment. If confirmed, I will endeavor to make such programs
central to the Embassy agenda with a focus on driving investment into
Iraq and supporting American jobs.
The Iraqis must do their part. Iraq's macroeconomic picture is
sound with low inflation and sustainable growth projected over the next
3-5 years. But the country faces dire economic challenges--including
overdependence on oil, weak financial institutions, corruption, and a
dated regulatory structure. Its cumbersome legal environment, excessive
subsidies, and barriers to entry further discourage growth and foreign
investment. By helping the Iraqis address these challenges, the United
States can gain leverage and influence while pursuing mutual goals.
For example, the SFA envisions joint cooperation to help integrate
Iraq into the global economy, including through accession to the World
Trade Organization. WTO accession is a long-term process but it can
help standardize import and export requirements, protect investors, and
signal to the world that Iraq is ready to play by international rules.
Iraq is also a candidate country for the Extractive Industries
Transparency Initiative (EITI), which applies international standards
of accounting and independent audits to deter corruption and boost
confidence in a country's economic standing. Iraq would be the sole
Middle Eastern member of the EITI and it has asked for U.S. assistance
to meet its requirements.
Iraq must also diversify its economy. While there is growth
potential in nonhydrocarbon sectors--including agriculture, housing,
fisheries, tourism, and telecommunications--Iraq is one of the most
oil-dependent economies in the world. Sixty percent of its GDP and
ninety percent of government revenues depend on the oil industry.
Absent diversification, Iraq risks onset of the oil curse with a
bloated state crowding out private investment and ingenuity. On the
positive side, Iraq recently enacted a 5-year $186 billion development
plan with projects for roads, hospitals, housing, sewage, and
electricity plants. USAID and Commerce are working with Iraqi
ministries to reform Saddam-era legal codes. But serious reform will
require a sustained focus by Iraqi leaders with assistance from the
United States, World Bank, UNDP, and the IMF.
The oil sector is booming. Iraq today is one of the few potential
swing producers in the world and has helped stabilize global markets.
In 2011, Iraq produced an average of 2.7 million barrels per day--a 30-
year high--and this year production has increased by another 300,000
barrels per day thanks to improvements in offshore infrastructure.
Under contracts with international oil companies, including Occidental
and Exxon-Mobil, Iraq has set a production target of 10 million barrels
per day by 2020. Key obstacles, however--poor infrastructure,
bottlenecks, bureaucracy, political infighting, and legal uncertainty--
may limit production to half that amount. It is in our mutual interest
to help Iraq overcome these obstacles, and we have begun to do so by
linking U.S. and Iraqi expertise to systematically analyze immediate
problems and think jointly about long-term solutions. If confirmed,
this will be a core Embassy focus.
4. Rule of Law and Human Rights
The fourth line of operation is rule of law and human rights. I
have seen Iraqi judges welcome U.S. assistance as they seek to build an
independent judiciary free from political interference. This is
extremely hard to do, as it was in the early years of our own
constitutional experiment. But it is also important, and, as pressure
on the Iraqi judiciary grows, we must work to deepen and enhance these
relationships. Standing up a new Supreme Court--a requirement of the
constitution that has never been acted upon--can also help further
define legal boundaries that are intended to check and balance power
horizontally (between branches of the federal government) and
vertically (between the federal government, provinces, and regions).
As the United States pursues its interests in Iraq, we must never
lose sight of our values, including the promotion of human rights,
women, and protection of vulnerable minorities. Iraq recently stood up
an independent Human Rights Commission with authority to receive and
investigate complaints from any Iraqi citizen. The U.S. Embassy is now
working with the United Nations and interested Iraqi leaders to help
ensure this commission lives up to its potential.
The protection of vulnerable minorities also requires urgent
attention. We must continue to work with the Iraqi Government and
international partners to maintain a dialogue with these groups and
address their concerns. In particular, the Embassy maintains an open
dialogue with Iraqi officials and Christian leaders to discuss
protection for Christian facilities. This dialogue should continue in
earnest and become institutionalized over the coming months and years.
Programs that promote women in Iraq--including assistance through
Iraqi ministries to widows and training for emerging women leaders--are
low cost and high impact. Secretary Clinton has placed these programs
at the top of our human rights agenda in Iraq.
Refugee assistance rounds out that agenda. This includes the nearly
1.3 million internally displaced (IDPs) since 2006. Iraq has boosted
resources to IDPs, including a fivefold increase in direct grants. U.S.
support includes humanitarian assistance and processing refugees who
wish to enter the United States. Recent changes in the intake criteria
should ease processing of these cases--including through the Special
Immigration Visa program. Iraqis who risked their lives to work with us
should feel welcomed, even as we uphold essential security checks.
INSTITUTIONALIZING RELATIONS
In Iraq today we confront a newly sovereign and assertive nation.
The SFA is designed to account for this inevitability by establishing
an organized partnership centered on high-level Joint Coordinating
Committees (JCCs). Standing up these committees can establish regular
patterns of engagement to widen avenues of cooperation and narrow areas
of disagreement.
Much of this is now underway. In April, the Energy JCC held its
inaugural meeting to discuss how best to increase Iraq's supply of oil
to global markets as well as its emerging electricity and natural gas
sectors. Two weeks ago, the Defense and Security JCC began a structured
dialogue over the contours of a long-term defense partnership. The
Education and Culture JCC now oversees the largest Fulbright program in
the Middle East and the largest International Visitors Leadership
Program in the world.
These JCCs help interconnect our governments, militaries,
economies, cultures, and educational institutions. They are the
institutional foundation for a long-term partnership.
The SFA does not foreclose additional linkages between the United
States and Iraq. For instance, given the increasingly important role of
Parliament as an independent institution, it would be beneficial to
develop linkages between the U.S. Congress and Iraqi parliamentarians.
Additionally, America's close and historic relationship with
Kurdistan and the Kurdish people must be sustained and enhanced. The
U.S. consulate in Erbil is building deep and long-term relationships
with Kurdish officials and civil society leaders. If confirmed, I look
forward to continuing a dialogue with Kurdish officials on issues of
mutual interest, including easing visa processing for travel to the
United States, strengthening economic and educational connections, and
supporting the region's emerging role as a gateway to the broader Iraqi
marketplace.
INSTITUTIONALIZING OUR PRESENCE
If confirmed, I pledge to work with the Congress to establish a
diplomatic presence in Iraq that is secure, strategic, effective, and
sustainable. I will welcome your guidance and continue a discussion
with the Congress on the most appropriate U.S. footprint in light of
U.S. priorities and conditions on the ground. I will also ensure that
the use of precious U.S. taxpayer resources is transparent, effective,
and targeted to advance U.S. interests.
In Iraq today, our size often bears little proportion to our
influence. In my experience, the opposite can be true. Our large size
and contract tail can lead to friction with the Iraqi Government and
misunderstanding among the Iraqi people, thereby depleting diplomatic
leverage and capital. A focused U.S. mission with prioritized lines of
operation--organized around the SFA--can help enhance our influence
over the long term and ensure the agility we will need to advance U.S.
interests in a dynamic and constantly changing environment.
I have tried to touch upon a number of the issues that I would soon
confront if confirmed as U.S. Ambassador to Iraq. For me, there is no
more important mission in the world. I have served across two
administrations over 8 years developing and implementing U.S. policy in
Iraq.
I was with President Bush when we planned a surge of 30,000 U.S.
troops under a new strategy to turn around a losing war. I was with
General Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker when we worked to
implement that strategy against tremendous odds. I later helped manage
the transition of Iraq policy to the Obama administration under two
binding international agreements with the Iraqi Government. Over the
past 2 years I have answered calls to return to Iraq and public service
at times of crisis.
I have always sought to take an empirical and pragmatic approach to
the many complexities we confront in Iraq; and I have based my
assessments on measurable risks to U.S. interests. If confirmed, I
pledge to do the same with you.
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, my eyes are wide open to
the risks and challenges ahead in Iraq. But I close from where I
started. For every challenge, there is also opportunity and obligation:
to honor those lost in this war, or forever changed by it, we must do
everything in our power to build a partnership with Iraq and its people
that can endure and advance U.S. interests in this most vital region.
Senator Casey. Thank you, Mr. McGurk.
Ms. Elliott.
STATEMENT OF SUSAN MARSH ELLIOTT, OF FLORIDA, TO BE AMBASSADOR
TO THE REPUBLIC OF TAJIKISTAN
Ms. Elliott. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Risch,
and Senator Lugar. As the chairman pointed out, I do have
strong ties to the State of Pennsylvania, having been born
there, and my son is a student at the University of
Pennsylvania. But I also have strong ties to Indiana, having
been a graduate of Indiana University and lived in Muncie, IN.
So it is an honor for me to be here in front of you today.
Senator Risch. How about Idaho? [Laughter.]
Ms. Elliott. I do not have any to Idaho.
Senator Risch. But you do eat the potatoes. [Laughter.]
Ms. Elliott. Yes, I do and I love them.
I am very honored to be President Obama's nominee to become
the U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of Tajikistan. I am
grateful for the trust and confidence that the President and
Secretary Clinton have placed in me with this nomination. If
confirmed, I will work closely with you, the committee, and the
entire Congress to advance America's goals and interests in
Tajikistan.
I would also like to thank my wonderful colleagues,
friends, and family who have supported me over my 22-year
career at the State Department.
Since recognizing Tajikistan's independence and
establishing diplomatic relations 20 years ago, the United
States has supported Tajikistan's sovereignty and encouraged
its development as a more prosperous, tolerant, and democratic
society. Shortly after its independence, when I first began
working on Central Asia policy, Tajikistan was in the midst of
a civil war. Today, the people of Tajikistan enjoy peace and
stability. As Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Central
Asia over the last 2 years, I often traveled to Tajikistan and
developed a deeper understanding and appreciation for the
importance of Tajikistan to U.S. foreign policy interests.
Tajikistan shares a long border with Afghanistan. Although
the terrain is mountainous and the infrastructure is not well
developed, Tajikistan plays an important role in the Northern
Distribution Network that brings vital supplies to U.S. and
coalition forces in Afghanistan. Tajikistan also provides vital
air transit routes for U.S. and coalition cargo and military
personnel.
The Government of Tajikistan recently cohosted with the
Government of Afghanistan a successful regional economic
cooperation conference on Afghanistan. The conference achieved
consensus on a concrete set of achievable projects and reform
initiatives that can advance regional integration and provide
new opportunities for private investment in the region. If
confirmed, I will encourage Tajikistan to maintain and expand
where possible this important support.
Narcotics trafficking and terrorism plague Tajikistan's
neighborhood. Over the years, U.S. cooperation with Tajikistan
has grown in addressing this and other transnational challenges
through engagement, assistance, and training. Currently we are
working with the Government of Tajikistan to develop expanded
counternarcotics cooperation with the goal of targeting
organized traffickers, bringing them to justice, and reducing
the flow of narcotics through Tajikistan. If confirmed, I will
work to further strengthen our partnership with Tajikistan to
combat the flow of narcotics and other illicit goods.
Tajikistan is also the poorest country in Central Asia. The
people and the government, though, are working to improve their
economy and aspire to become members of the World Trade
Organization. If confirmed, I will work with Tajikistan to
develop its agricultural sector and to improve the regulatory
environment for foreign investment and trade. If confirmed, I
will also continue encouraging Tajikistan to take steps
necessary to attract U.S. companies to help develop and
diversify its economy with American goods, expertise, and
services.
Secretary Clinton visited Tajikistan in October 2011.
During her visit, she met with the citizens of Tajikistan from
all spectrums of society, from human rights activists to
religious leaders to members of the media. The Secretary
stressed the importance for governments and leaders to provide
space necessary for citizens to have a voice in their
governments, to pursue their aspirations, and promote their
ideas. She also emphasized the belief that an open, democratic,
tolerant society provides a firm foundation for a stable,
secure, and prosperous nation. If confirmed, I will work with
the Tajik Government to take concrete steps toward continuing
the development of this kind of society.
If confirmed, I will also engage the government and people
of Tajikistan to increase not only our bilateral security and
economic engagement, but also continue our dialogue on human
rights, civil society issues, such as allowing freedom of the
press and freedom of religion or belief.
I know that success in all aspects of our engagement
depends on my taking a leadership role in encouraging and
supporting a strong, dedicated Embassy staff that coordinates
closely with the administration, Members of Congress, and if
confirmed, I look forward to continuing this active dialogue
with you as we seek to advance America's interests with the
government and people of Tajikistan.
Thank you and I look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Elliott follows:]
Prepared Statement of Susan Marsh Elliott
Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, thank you for the
opportunity to appear before you today. I am honored to appear before
you today as President Obama's nominee to be U.S. Ambassador to the
Republic of Tajikistan. I am grateful for the trust and confidence that
the President and Secretary Clinton have placed in me with this
nomination. If confirmed, I will work closely with you, the committee,
and the entire U.S. Congress to advance America's goals and interests
in Tajikistan.
I would like to thank all of my wonderful colleagues, friends, and
family who have supported me over my 22-year career at the State
Department. My son, Kurt Mitman, is here today. My husband, Matthias
Mitman, is unable to be here because he is a career Foreign Service
officer serving as the deputy chief of mission at the U.S. Embassy in
Tegucigalpa, Honduras. He encouraged me to join the Foreign Service and
has been my strongest advocate. I would not be here today without his
love and support.
Since recognizing Tajikistan's independence and establishing
diplomatic relations 20 years ago, the United States has supported
Tajikistan's sovereignty and encouraged its development as a more
prosperous, tolerant, and democratic society. Shortly after its
independence, when I first began working on Central Asia policy,
Tajikistan was in the midst of a civil war. Today, the people of
Tajikistan enjoy peace and stability. As Deputy Assistant Secretary of
State for Central Asia for the last 2 years, I often traveled to
Tajikistan and developed a deeper understanding and appreciation for
the importance of Tajikistan to U.S. foreign policy interests.
Tajikistan shares a long border with Afghanistan and has provided
assistance to its neighbor to the south and to U.S. and coalition
efforts to stabilize the security situation there. Although the terrain
is mountainous and the infrastructure is not well developed, Tajikistan
plays an important role in the Northern Distribution Network that
brings supplies to U.S. and coalition forces in Afghanistan. It also
provides vital air transit routes for U.S. and coalition cargo and
military personnel. A stable future for Afghanistan depends on
continued progress to develop the road, rail, and energy linkages with
its Central Asian and other neighbors. Tajikistan cohosted, with the
Government of Afghanistan in late March, the fifth and most substantive
and successful Regional Economic Cooperation Conference on Afghanistan
to date. The conference achieved consensus on a concrete set of
achievable projects and reform initiatives that can advance regional
integration and provide new opportunities for private investment in
this region. Likewise, greater peace, stability, and prosperity in
Afghanistan will contribute to stability and prosperity in Tajikistan
and the other countries of Central Asia. If confirmed, I will encourage
Tajikistan to maintain and expand, where possible, this important
support.
Narcotics trafficking and terrorism plague Tajikistan's
neighborhood. Over the years, U.S. cooperation with Tajikistan has
grown in addressing these and other transnational challenges through
engagement, assistance, and training. Currently we are working with the
Government of Tajikistan to develop expanded counternarcotics
cooperation with the goal of targeting organized traffickers, bringing
them to justice and reducing the flow of narcotics through Tajikistan.
If confirmed, I will work to further strengthen our partnership with
Tajikistan to combat this flow of narcotics, and other illicit goods.
Tajikistan is the poorest country in Central Asia. The people and
the government are working to improve their economy and aspire to be
members of the World Trade Organization. If confirmed, I will encourage
Tajikistan to develop its agriculture sector and improve the regulatory
environment for foreign investment and trade. If confirmed, I will also
continue encouraging Tajikistan to take the necessary steps to attract
U.S. companies to help develop and diversify its economy with American
expertise, goods, and services.
My experience in the Foreign Service has taught me that long-term
peace and stability are only possible when accompanied by respect for
human rights, the rule of law, the fostering of transparent and
democratic governmental and civic institutions, and an open and free
media environment. If confirmed, I will engage the government and
people of Tajikistan to increase not only our bilateral security and
economic engagement, but also continue our dialogue on human rights and
civil society issues such as allowing freedom of the press and freedom
of religion or belief.
The Obama administration has established conditions for
constructive dialogue and trust with the government and people of
Tajikistan. Secretary Clinton visited Tajikistan in October 2011.
During her visit, she met with citizens of Tajikistan from all
spectrums of society--from human rights activists to religious leaders
to members of the media, women leaders, students, and educators. While
there, the Secretary noted that Tajikistan is home to courageous,
dedicated, and talented people who want to help improve the prospects
for Tajikistan's future. The Secretary stressed the importance for
governments and leaders to provide the space necessary for citizens to
have a voice in their governments, to pursue their aspirations, and
promote their ideas. It is also important to ensure fundamental
freedoms, including religious and media freedoms for all people--men,
women, young, and old. We believe that an open, democratic, tolerant
society provides a firm foundation for a secure, stable, and prosperous
nation. If confirmed, I will encourage the Tajik Government to take
concrete steps toward continuing the development of that kind of
society.
I recently participated in the third Annual Bilateral Consultations
with Tajikistan's Minister of Foreign Affairs, hosted in Washington,
DC, by the State Department's Bureau of South and Central Asian Affairs
Assistant Secretary, Robert Blake. In these consultations we discussed
openly and comprehensively a wide range of bilateral and multilateral
interests, including counternarcotics cooperation, regional security,
development assistance, economic development cooperation and human
rights. If confirmed, I will continue working with the Government of
Tajikistan to achieve positive results on these issues and others.
Finally, I know success in all aspects of our engagement depends on
my taking a leadership role in encouraging and supporting a strong,
dedicated embassy staff that coordinates closely with the
administration and Members of Congress. If confirmed, I look forward to
continuing an active dialogue with you as we seek to advance America's
interests with the government and people of Tajikistan.
Senator Casey. Thank you, Ms. Elliott.
Before I get to my questions, we are joined by two ranking
members: the ranking member of our Foreign Relations Committee,
Senator Lugar; and the ranking member of our subcommittee,
Senator Risch. And I think Senator Risch has a statement.
Senator Risch. Why do you not go ahead on the questions? I
will do it later.
Senator Casey. OK. Thanks very much.
Let me start with Iraq, Mr. McGurk. I just have a couple of
questions on this first round. And we will do as many 5-minute
rounds as we can.
I wanted to ask you about leadership, which is a central
concern in any confirmation process, but maybe especially so
for the position that you have been nominated for. There will
be those who say--and I want to have you respond to this--that
you have, based upon your record, broad experience in Iraq,
several time periods within which you have served and you have
been called back for service, as I indicated, under two
administrations. But they will also say that you have not had
the leadership position that would lend itself to the kind of
experience that would prepare you for such a substantial
assignment. And I want you to answer that question because I
think it is an important one in terms of demonstrating your
ability to lead not just an embassy but an embassy and a
mission of this size and consequence.
Mr. McGurk. Thank you, Senator. Thank you for allowing me
to address that, and I would like to do it in really three
ways.
First, leadership of the embassy starts at home at the
embassy. As you noted in your opening statement, I have served
with all five of our prior Ambassadors to Iraq and I have seen
every permutation of the Embassy from the very beginning to
where it is today.
Throughout that process, I have learned and seen and been
involved in what it takes to lead in Iraq, and to lead in Iraq,
you need a really fingertip understanding of the operational
tempo in Iraq, of what it is like day to day, of knowing when
something is a crisis and when it is not, managing morale and
keeping people focused on the goals.
It also takes a team, and if I am fortunate enough to be
confirmed, I would be inheriting a team of extraordinary talent
and depth at the embassy. I have been fortunate to have worked
with every member of the country team in Iraq, one of whom
happens to be sitting to my left, Ambassador Sison. That team
incorporates individuals from across the U.S. Government, just
a whole-of-
government approach from Commerce to Transportation to Treasury
to State to the defense community to the intelligence
community. I have been fortunate and also gratified to learn
that key members of that team have volunteered to stay on for
another year and, if I am confirmed, would serve with me.
As Ambassador, the buck would stop with me. And as I think
I said in the opening statement, I have a very clear vision, in
coordination with the President and the Secretary, of where we
need to take this mission. But I would be working with a very
strong team. Ambassador Steve Becroft, the DCM--I have worked
with him for a number of years. I think we would make a very
unique leadership team in the front office. The Regional
Security Officer, Mark Hunter, has done an extraordinary job
under difficult circumstances. He would be staying on. I have
worked with him for a number of years. It would be my honor to
lead them.
Leadership also in this context--you have to look at
interagency experience because you are leading a whole-of-
government approach. As the senior director for President Bush
in the NSC, particularly at one of the most intense periods of
the war, from the time of planning and implementing the surge
and through the end of his administration, I was at point for
organizing a whole-of-government effort to implement the surge.
Throughout that process, I developed extremely strong
relationships across the entire U.S. Government. I was involved
in setting goals such as negotiating the Strategic Framework
Agreement--that started in March 2007--organizing the U.S.
Government, getting the right team in place, getting the right
people in place, the right inputs in place, and then having an
operational plan leading it through to fruition. That is just
one of many examples of my interagency experience.
And finally, I think one of the most important criterion
for the Ambassador is the relationship with the Iraqis. And one
of the reasons I have been called back into public service to
come back to Iraq a number of times over the last 2 years I
think is due to my unique relationships with the Iraqis. I have
worked with these individuals since I first got to Iraq in
January 2004. I was involved in those early days in the
negotiation of Iraq's interim constitution called the
Transitional Administrative Law, and I dealt with a lot of the
same issues we are dealing with now and a lot of the same
individuals we are dealing with now. I have deep and strong
relationships across the board in the Iraqi Government.
And I was just talking to Ambassador Jim Jeffrey, who just
returned from Iraq, and we were talking about the leadership
question. He said, you know, a lot of it is politics and
personal, and one of the key jobs for the Ambassador is making
sure that the Iraqis--we are working in a seamless way with the
Iraqis so that we can run an effective mission, and that
requires daily interaction and contact at the highest levels of
the Iraqi Government. And that is something that I have done in
Iraq for a number of years.
Senator Casey. Thanks very much. I am almost out of time in
this round, but Madam Ambassador, I will come back to you in a
couple of minutes to ask especially about what I would assert
is a lack of progress in Sri Lanka after the LLRC work that was
done. I will pick up with that.
Senator Risch.
Senator Risch. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
First of all, let me say that, Mr. McGurk, I do not think
anyone can question your knowledge and understanding of what
has happened in Iraq. You have had an incredible amount of
experience there. In fact, I would be hard-pressed, I would
think, to find someone who would have a resume like you would
as far as dealing with that is concerned.
Having said that, Iraq of course is in a volatile, post-
conflict situation, and it is in, probably arguably, the most
unstable region in the world. It is the largest Embassy that we
have anywhere in the world. Last year, the United States spent
about $6.5 billion there and this year it will be about $4
billion there, very substantial amounts, more than my State had
when I was Governor as an entire annual budget.
Also, given the lack of representation that we do not have
today in both Tehran and Damascus, the Ambassador in Baghdad is
going to be responsible for, and have the responsibility for,
the much larger regional context. And the ability to navigate
all of these issues with the right balance and the right
leadership and the right management will certainly be critical
to the success of our Ambassador there. And again, recognizing
the experience that you have had in Iraq, I appreciate that. I
will have to say you are going to be challenged, I think,
inasmuch as the size and the complexity of this operation
confronts you, never having been an Ambassador before. And I
wish you well in that. Certainly the administration recognized
your understanding and abilities to pick you for the Ambassador
there, but as Ambassador, obviously, your responsibilities will
be substantially larger and much broader than what you have
done there before. So I wish you well.
Ms. Elliott, I want to talk briefly about Tajikistan. And
one of the things you did not mention is the relationship
Tajikistan has with Iran, and I think that is a concern to all
of us, particularly when it comes to the purchase of crude oil
from Iran. What are your thoughts in that regard?
Ms. Elliott. Thank you, Mr. Senator. That is actually a
very
important question.
The people of Tajikistan have close cultural ties with the
people of Iran, and of course, they are in the same
neighborhood.
I will say, in terms of sanctions, that we have been
working very closely with the Government of Tajikistan on the
recent Iran Sanctions Act. We have discussed with them at high
levels and we have had an interagency approach. Not only the
State Department but the Treasury Department has visited
Dushanbe to talk with the Government of Tajikistan about this.
We feel that from our discussions that they are very supportive
and will be in compliance with the sanctions, and we look
forward to continuing that discussion with them.
Senator Risch. They are not in compliance with the
sanctions now. Did they give you any timeframe as to when they
would comply with the sanctions?
Ms. Elliott. Well, we have been talking with them and they
are, especially through their banking structure, working on
improving those. And that will be a priority of mine to work
with them to make sure that they do stay and become in
compliance with them.
Senator Risch. Have they given you a timetable?
Ms. Elliott. I have not received a timetable.
Senator Risch. Have you requested a timetable of that?
Ms. Elliott. I believe that we have, but I can get back to
you on that on the specifics of the timetable.
Senator Risch. I will take that for the record.
[The written reply for the record follows:]
Despite misleading reports by Iran-based media, we can confirm that
Tajikistan does not import crude oil from Iran. Relevant Ministries
confirmed to our Embassy that Tajikistan is not purchasing, and has no
plans to purchase, crude oil from Iran and that media reporting was
incorrect. I would also note that, contrary to the Iran-based media
report, there is no rail link to Afghanistan to transport the oil to
Tajikistan nor does Tajikistan have sufficient capacity to refine
significant volumes of crude oil in Tajikistan. Tajikistan also does
not have any pipelines connecting it with Iran.
Though we can confirm that Tajikistan is in compliance with Iran
Sanctions with respect to crude oil, we continue to monitor and engage
with the Government of Tajikistan on other potentially sanctionable
activity. The Government of Tajikistan has responded swiftly when we
have raised activities of concern, including in the financial sector,
and has taken immediate steps to preclude any re-occurrence.
Senator Risch. I am going to yield to Senator Lugar at this
time.
Senator Casey. Thank you, Senator Risch.
Senator Lugar.
Senator Lugar. Thanks, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. McGurk, there was considerable discussion in this
committee, as well as in our Government as a whole, about the
size and the scope of our Embassy in Baghdad after the nature
of our post-withdrawal presence there was made clear. Iraq was
very insecure, and we apparently had ambitions that the Embassy
might be a fulcrum for activities throughout the area, almost a
headquarters for the United States ambitions for democracy and
human rights and so forth throughout the Middle East. However,
we still have that Embassy. It is still huge and it has been
suggested, in addition to the diplomatic employees of the
United States, maybe as many as 16,000 people are affiliated
with it, in a situation where our troops are no longer
providing security on the ground there in the numbers they
were.
I am just simply wondering about your reflections, having
served in all of these capacities through five Ambassadors,
just physically how do you plan to administer this building,
quite apart from the people? I appreciate that this is a
several-chapter answer. But in light of the security
predicaments and increased hostility on the part of the Iraqis
regarding our participation, how do you plan to manage this?
Mr. McGurk. Senator, thank you very much. I have given a
great deal of thought to this. On my last assignments in Iraq,
I participated in almost every internal conversation, both
interagency and in Baghdad, about how not only to plan the
transition after our troops were withdrawing but also how to
get the size down. Quite frankly, our presence in Iraq right
now is too large. There is no proportionality also between our
size and our influence. In fact, we spend a lot of diplomatic
capital simply to sustain our presence. So there is a process
underway now, as you may know, to cut our presence by about 25
percent by next fall. I fully agree with that approach, and I
think we can do more.
It is important to keep in mind the reason we are so big
now is that the transition was planned--it was all contingency
planning. The Department was not quite sure what we would face
in the early months of this year. And so we planned for every
possible contingency. But where we are now I think we need to
really focus, and that is why I had this four-part test. It
will be a test for every program in Iraq. Are we secure? Are
our people safe? Is it strategic? And that means is it a core
priority to advance our national interests. We need to ask that
very directly because we are institutionalizing our long-term
presence now. Is it effective? Are our programs getting
results? That means do they have adequate buy-in from the
Iraqis? And is it sustainable, something we can do for the long
term? If I am confirmed as the next Ambassador, I will put
everything to that test.
In terms of managing the day-to-day operations of the
Embassy, I have also been involved in this because what often
happens is it is not just the internal management. We need to
go discuss something with the Iraqi National Security Advisor,
with the Prime Minister, and I am often doing that shuttling.
As I mentioned in my earlier answer to Senator Casey, I
have a very strong team in Iraq. Steve Becroft, who would be
the DCM and the COO of the shop, I have worked with for a
number of years. We would sit right next to each other. Offices
would be right next to each other. The buck would stop with me
for every single decision, but Steve is a terrific day-to-day
manager of the operation, and I think we would make a very
strong team. But I cannot discount the challenges ahead.
Senator Lugar. Well, I appreciate that answer very much and
the very specific though that you will examine each and every
program, that we probably are overrepresented, and that the
expense of this is enormous. This impact our whole State
Department budget, as you know. So I appreciate that managerial
idea.
Let me ask how you are going to advise Prime Minister
Maliki under the current circumstances in which he is not
getting along well with the opposition, to say the least, and
the Kurds are drifting off by themselves. What are the
challenges for our diplomacy here?
Mr. McGurk. Thank you, Senator. It is a really critically,
critically important point.
I have worked with Prime Minister Maliki for a number of
years and all the Iraqi leaders. And I have worked with him in
his capacity as the Prime Minister. I said in my written
statement I would try to focus now on dealing with the Iraqis
in an institutional way, so dealing with Maliki as a Prime
Minister now. If there was a new Prime Minister tomorrow, I
would have the same, I hope, close working relationship with
him. I have worked with four speakers of Parliament, for
example, to focus on the institutions.
When you are in Iraq and dealing with all sides, there are
different narratives to the political process. The government,
though, was put in place in 2010, as you know. It took 8 months
to put in place. When it finally came together, it represents--
98 percent of the Council of Representatives are represented in
the cabinet. That naturally leads to a lot of inefficiency, a
lot of rivalries, a lot of intrigue, and that is certainly
going on now. Maliki will say that his opposition figures who
are in his Cabinet will not share responsibility for governing.
The opposition figures say Maliki is consolidating power. They
are all right. And we need to work with all of them to live up
to their prior agreements and to work within the constitutional
system to change the process.
You mentioned the Kurds, and this is critically important.
I would plan to visit the Kurdistan region as much as possible.
I would like to be up there, if I am confirmed, at least once a
week because it is the personal interaction between the Iraqi
leaders and the U.S. Ambassador that is so important for
keeping everything stable and for bridging areas of
disagreements. The Kurds are having some difficulties with the
Baghdad Government right now. The Baghdad Government is having
difficulties with the Kurds. The real rivalry is Massoud
Barzani and Prime Minister Maliki. We have to play an important
role in mediating that effort.
I would just leave it at there is a constitutional system
in place now. This is the third Iraqi Government. This is the
second Parliament. The Iraqis are going to fight through their
politics under the constitutional rules that they themselves
have devised. We cannot direct outcomes through that process.
When you try to do that, the unintended consequences are quite
enormous. But we can help bridge differences. We can mediate
back and forth and be constantly actively engaged. And that is
what I would intend to do if I am confirmed.
Senator Lugar. Well, thank you for very comprehensive and
thoughtful answers. I appreciate it.
Senator Casey. Thank you, Senator Lugar.
Senator Udall.
Senator Udall. Thank you, Chairman Casey and ranking
members that are here. Good to see you.
And thank you for the panel being here. I very much
appreciate all of your service to our country.
In April 2012, the Special Inspector General for Iraq
Reconstruction found in his report that there was a record low
amount of casualties for the month of March and a drop in
violence overall in the last few months and specifically
reported that 112 Iraqis died as a result of violent attacks in
the month of March, the lowest toll since the United States
invaded in 2003.
Based on such improvements, do you think that the Iraqi
Government is on the right track to secure its government, and
how has the fact that Iraq is accountable for its own security
changed the security calculus in the country and the U.S.
relationship with Iraq?
Mr. McGurk. Thank you, Senator.
At the very top of my mind is the safety of all Americans
serving in Iraq. I track this extremely closely. Over the
course of this year, we have had, on average, zero to three
attacks a week on the overall U.S. presence, almost entirely
107 millimeter rockets from the Naqshbandi group which is
remnants from the Baathist Party in the north. Fortunately, we
have had no casualties from those attacks. Zero to three
attacks on our presence compared to about 1,000 a week, which I
can remember very well, 5 or 6 years ago. So that is positive.
We want to make sure that that trend continues.
The reason for that trend is there are really five militant
groups in Iraq right now.
First, there is Al Qaeda in Iraq. Al Qaeda in Iraq remains
active. Their operating tempo--they are able to strike every 30
to 40 days. Sometimes those attacks are quite spectacular.
Senator Casey mentioned recent attacks just this past week. Al
Qaeda in Iraq is now striking at a level that is about the same
as it was over the course of last year. The Iraqi Government
has not been able to degrade Al Qaeda in Iraq. That is a
serious concern and we need to work with them on that.
The second group, as I mentioned, is the Naqshbandi group.
They operate in the north around Nineva and Kirkuk, and they
primarily only target us.
Then there are three militant Shia groups. There is Asaib
al-Haq. There is Kataib Hezbollah and the Promise Day Brigades.
The Jaish al-Mahdi, which you might remember, Sadr's army, has
pretty much--is now part of the political process.
Those three Shia militant groups since January 1 have
really gone to ground. And I was just discussing this with
General Mattis, and it is interesting. We are watching it very
closely. Our withdrawal seems to have taken them--their ability
to recruit and sustain operations has really been depleted.
They have almost stopped attacking us.
However, I would not bank on that. I remember very well
when the Iraqi Army went into Basra and we took hundreds of
rockets on the compound from groups that were lying in wait to
strike us. And I watch this very carefully with all of our
assets within the U.S. Government.
In terms of internal security and the Iraqis and being able
to secure their country, they are not doing a bad job. They
secured the capital to host an Arab League summit. They secured
the capital to host the P5+1 talks. That would have been
unheard of 3 to 5 years ago. So they are doing very good
internal security. They remain weak in external security, and
that is where the Office of Security Cooperation under the
Embassy is working very closely with the Iraqis to try to close
some of their capability gaps.
Senator Udall. Thank you. I have another couple of
questions, but I think it will run over if I pursue those right
now.
Senator Casey. Senator, we allow an extra minute.
Senator Udall. OK, well, that is good.
I am changing direction here a little bit. I want to ask
you about the future stability of Iraq and its ability to have
a sustainable water supply in the Tigris and Euphrates River
Basin. This area is considered one of the birthplaces, as you
know, of human agriculture, and their ability to sustain the
ecology of the area has been threatened by increased water use
upstream. And we are seeing this, I think, in rivers across the
region.
How will you work with Iraq's neighbors to develop
sustainable use of water, and how can the United States work to
leverage its scientific and engineering talents, especially
those at the national labs, to find a long-term solution to the
problem?
Mr. McGurk. Senator, it is a really great and overlooked
point. The water situation in Iraq and the region is very
serious. If you look at Iraq's agriculture, it used to be the
bread basket of the world. Today agriculture is approximately,
at best, 20 percent of GDP. But agriculture in Iraq uses 90
percent of Iraq's water. That is not sustainable. And it is to
the point where if we get their agriculture going again, they
are going to have a serious water problem.
Maliki and the Iraqi Government recently hosted a
conference to discuss this with some of the regional neighbors
in Baghdad, and Maliki said we face a real crisis. So the
Iraqis are now seized of it.
We have a common way forward within the Strategic Framework
Agreement because it calls on cooperation between the United
States and Iraq to address issues like this to call on the
expertise--I know there is some of it in New Mexico--from
within our country to help the Iraqis think in a systematized
way. Do they need dams? Do they need to redirect some water
supplies? And to work with Turkey in particular to address this
problem over the long term.
All I will say is it has been overlooked. It has been
overlooked because Iraq has been involved in a fierce sectarian
war. Now that we are coming out of that phase, these very
important issues need to rise to the highest priority within
our Embassy.
Senator Udall. Thank you.
Thank you for your courtesies, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Casey. Thank you, Senator Udall.
Ambassador Sison, I wanted to ask you about the so-called
LLRC in Sri Lanka, the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation
Commission. I have a two-part question. For part one, you heard
me assert that I do not think they have made anywhere near
substantial progress. How do you assess where Sri Lanka is as
it relates to the LLRC, the implementation of the results or
maybe more pointedly the imposition of accountability on
individuals for their actions especially at the end of the
civil war? No. 2, Why have the United States and other
countries in the international community not insisted upon an
independent investigation, and will they?
Ambassador Sison. Thank you, Senator.
The Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission
recommendations were, of course, front and center as a topic
when the Sri Lankan Foreign Minister met with Secretary Clinton
last month here in Washington. We have asked the Government of
Sri Lanka to provide regular and public updates on the
implementation of what is the government's own commission,
particularly with regard to demilitarization of the north, to
setting a date for provincial elections in the north, focus on
human rights protections, including increased space for civil
society to operate, increased focus on media freedom.
I agree we do need to see in more specific terms benchmarks
met on the recommendations of the action plan set out by the
LLRC.
Senator Casey. As a result of that meeting, were we
enlightened by it or were there any indications that there is
progress, momentum, results, deadlines? Because it has been 6
months and the concern here is obvious. It is about human
nature when you have that kind of internal conflict and a
winner, in this case the Sinhalese side of the debate. They
have power and they have set up their commission. The question
is, Will they ever be able to implement recommendations, and
should we, in fact, have an international independent
investigation?
Ambassador Sison. Senator, not just the United States but
many international partners, of course, voted in March in
Geneva at the Human Rights Council on a U.S.-sponsored
resolution on reconciliation and accountability. There has been
an international call for progress on both reconciliation and
accountability because one cannot have true reconciliation,
genuine reconciliation without that accountability. There are
credible, serious allegations, I completely agree, of crimes
committed by both sides in terms of violations, I should say,
of international human rights law and international
humanitarian law.
So we do look for near-term progress, benchmarks to be met,
particularly on setting a date for the provincial elections in
the north, specifically demilitarization in the north. And if
confirmed, Senator, I can absolutely commit to you and to your
colleagues that human rights issues, protection of the ability
of civil society and the media to do their job, will be on the
top of my agenda. I do believe that we can have constructive
engagement and at the same time principled engagement that
keeps human rights protections, rule of law at the forefront.
Senator Casey. Look, I know this has been a priority, but
when people see almost no progress on the implementation of
recommendations, this question of an international
investigation is going to present itself continually. And I
realize it is sensitive. It is a difficult question for the
administration.
But I would say two things. No. 1, it is not going to go
away until the world sees results. So the question will not go
away. And No. 2, I would urge you, upon confirmation, to use
every bit of energy and persuasion and cajoling and anything
else you can bring to bear on the leadership in Sri Lanka to
get results because in the end people are not going to be
satisfied until we see those results, meaning progress on the
recommendations.
Senator Risch.
Senator Risch. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. McGurk, you commented about the Kurds, and I am
interested in that and I would like to pursue that a little bit
further.
It seems to me, as an outsider looking at this, the Kurds
seem to be doing very well on their own. The construction that
is going on there far outstrips what is being done in Baghdad
and other parts of Iraq. They just seem to be progressing.
Having said that, it would seem to me that they are being
left alone to a degree because of the--for lack of a better
word--chaos down south. What is your view as to what is going
to happen as this thing--the rub right now you blamed on
personalities I think I picked up from your statement. But I
think it is going to go deeper than that. Once Baghdad gets its
act together and they see what is happening with the Kurds and
the Kurds--as is pointed out, they are moving away and are
happy to move away and seem to be doing very well moving away.
I do not think that is going to set very well with Baghdad as
time moves on. Can I get your thoughts on that?
Mr. McGurk. Thank you, Senator. And it is far deeper than
personalities, so I do not want to leave that impression. These
issues are--some of them are centuries in the making and it
could take centuries to really resolve for good.
Between the Kurds and the Arabs, there is obviously an
issue on what the call the disputed internal boundaries. That
still remains unresolved. You have my commitment, if confirmed,
to work through the process that is designed through article
140 of the constitution--and the U.N. will play a role in
that--to get the sides together to begin discussing in a
serious way an equitable resolution to the disputed internal
boundaries.
Also, nothing could go further to stem these centrifugal
forces that you are discussing than agreement on national
hydrocarbons legislation. That is agreement on the management,
the distribution of their national patrimony. We have made a go
at that over the years, made some progress in 2007, and had a
package of laws that were pretty close.
On my last trip in Baghdad, even in the midst of a
political crisis, I found a new urgency among some of the key
players to return to the table on the issue of national
hydrocarbons. If I am confirmed, that will be one of my central
priorities to do everything we possibly can. Again, we cannot
dictate the outcome but we can do shuttling and figure out
where are the areas of agreement that we can build on and where
can we narrow areas of disagreement because without consensus
on how to manage the national hydrocarbon resources,
centrifugal forces can accelerate, and I am deeply concerned
about that. And I think focusing on the 140 process and on the
hydrocarbons legislation will be very important.
Senator Risch. Do you think the parties are amenable to
that resolution?
Mr. McGurk. Some of them are and some of the are not. There
is a lot of division within the Kurdish region and there is
division in Baghdad among all of the many parties. And one of
the key things to do is to try to find the leaders who are in a
compromising frame of mind to work sometimes behind closed
doors to build compromise, and it can be very difficult. I
cannot underestimate the challenges of this issue. The Kurds
want to develop their resources in their region, and under the
constitution, they have a right to. In Baghdad, they want to
develop the resources in a national way in which the Baghdad
Government has a say, and under the constitution, as they read
it, they have a right to. What we need to do is find a
compromise within the constitutional framework.
My hope is that as Iraq's oil production is increasing--and
it is one of the good news stories in Iraq right now. They are
producing around 3 million barrels a day for the first time
really in 30 years. Iraq's own estimates--they want to get up
to about 10 million barrels a day by 2017. As I said in my
written statement, we do not think that they will meet that.
Probably it may plateau at about five. But still as these
resources are being developed, there is a new sense that
something has to be done with a consensus for how these
resources are going to be managed and the profits and the
revenues shared. It is one of the most central issues on the
domestic political agenda.
Senator Risch. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Casey. Senator Udall.
Senator Udall. Thank you.
You, with Senator Risch, discussed this whole issue of
hydrocarbons. It has been reported that Iraq has the goal of
doubling its oil output over the next 3 years. And I think in
the long term they want to reach a total of 12 million barrels
per day, which, as you know, Mr. McGurk, would be pretty
incredible in that region. That would put them up there with
Saudi Arabia. Do you believe Iraq is on track to achieve this
goal, and what has helped Iraq improve its successful increase
of petroleum output over the last year?
And in particular, I am interested in while we were there,
there were lots of reports that the security was not good
enough for oil companies from around the world to move in and
do the job and get the oil back online. But apparently now, I
mean, they are going up dramatically. I think they are up past
what it was from the invasion, and they look like they are very
aggressive. I know you are not an oil expert, but I mean, you
are over there talking to them and you have been over there a
while. Do you have a sense of where they are headed on oil
output?
Mr. McGurk. Thank you, Senator. We addressed this briefly
in your office, and I am fortunate for the chance to develop it
further here.
There were two key events in 2007 and 2009 that have really
led to this major increase in oil. In 2007, during the surge
period, we really convinced the Iraqis that they have a single
point of failure and a national security problem in how their
oil is exported. It is really exported through the Basra oil
terminal called the ABOT, and if you go out there, it is kind
of like the movie ``Water World'' or a Mad Max movie. It is
very vulnerable and it is old and rusting. And were that
terminal to fail, Iraq would not be able to export oil other
than through the north in the Ceyhan pipeline, but about 80
percent goes through the south.
So a plan was put in place. And General Petraeus was part
of this and Ryan Crocker was part of really urging the Iraqis
to do this with the Oil Minister at the time, Sharastani, to
develop new offshore infrastructure. And these are called
single-point moorings. Foster Wheeler had a big role in the
engineering feat in actually pulling this off.
The first single-point mooring started delivering oil in
February and it immediately increased Iraq's oil by 200,000
barrels a day. Other single-point moorings in the gulf are
scheduled to open over the course of this year. It is a major
engineering feat. There will be setbacks, but it could increase
Iraq's oil--just those single-point moorings--by 2.5 million
barrels a day. It is a tremendous story from 2007 and getting
the Iraqis to where they are now.
The second piece were the bidding rounds in 2009 where
Iraq, for the first time, invited international companies in to
bid for their fields. It was a success. And it was very
difficult because I used to hear from Iraqis in 2004, 2005,
2006 and say you really got to get international companies in
here. There was this fear of a kind of nationalist backlash if
they got companies in to drill and to help the Iraqis produce
their oil. But it happened in 2009. They drove a very hard
bargain. But because of those contracts, there is now
international companies. BP, Exxon Mobil, Occidental, the
Chinese Lukoil are drilling and helping the Iraqis develop
their resources.
So very briefly, where do we go from here? The Iraqis still
are not thinking in terms of a system and how to really get
their oil going. Sometimes they do not have the right pumps in
place. They do not have the right water pressure to come in and
get the oil out of some of their older fields. And we have been
working closely with the Iraqis. And Ambassador Jim Jeffrey has
really raised this to the top of our embassy priority. He has
done an incredible job with it through the Joint Coordinating
Committee, the SFA. We now have very deep ties with the Iraqis.
They recently had their inaugural meeting here in Washington
with our Department of Energy with Carlos Pasqual at the State
Department and showing the Iraqis how to think in terms of a
systematized way to develop the oil resources. A number of do-
outs came from that meeting, and we are now following up.
But it is an important way how under the SFA we can talk to
the Iraqis about high-level strategic issues and how we can
cooperate both whole-of-government and within our private
industry. And getting our private industry harnessed and into
Iraq is going to be really critical. And through the oil sector
and through the energy sector, there is a gateway for doing
that.
Senator Udall. Thank you for that answer.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Casey. Thank you, Senator Udall.
Senator Lugar.
Senator Lugar. Ms. Elliott, I would like to pursue further
just for our own knowledge of what is occurring in Tajikistan
presently. How would you describe the relations of that country
with Russia, for example, or with China or other countries that
may have strategic interests there?
Ms. Elliott. Thank you, Mr. Senator. That is a very good
question.
Having been a former country of the Soviet Union and also
sharing a border with China, Tajikistan I believe shares very
good relationships with those countries, but they also share
good relationships with us. As I mentioned in my statement, we
have good cooperation with them on the Northern Distribution
Network, and they are doing a lot to help their neighbors to
the south and also to help in fighting crime and narcotics.
We believe that it is not a zero sum game in Central Asia
and that the countries of Central Asia need to keep good
relations with their neighbors and with Russia. We have also
had good cooperation. I have served in Embassy Moscow, and our
Assistant Secretary Blake, as part of our annual bilateral
consultations--we have consulted in the region. So I would say
that the situation is very good, that Tajikistan shares good
relations with its neighbors. And we look forward to continuing
those strong relationships, and if confirmed, I will make that
a priority.
Senator Lugar. Well, you have described in your opening
statement a civil war that occurred there, the resolution of
that, and the beginnings at least of a government that
apparently aspired to democratic tendencies. But try to
describe the evolution of that government. To what extent is
there a sharing of power between the branches? How active is
the legislative branch, and how active are persons who are
demanding human rights and the recognition of minorities and
what have you? What is the lay of the land in terms of
political progress there?
Ms. Elliott. Well, that is also a very good question and
one that concerns us because I think in the 20 years of its
independence, we have not perhaps seen the growth of civil
society and the growth of democracy that we would have liked to
have seen. This is something that the Obama administration has
engaged on. As I mentioned in my statement, Secretary Clinton
visited Tajikistan, and part of the reason she visited was to
be able to engage with civil society but also to engage with
the government on the need for expanding human rights,
expanding freedom of the press, expanding freedom of religion.
There is one independent Islamic party that participates in the
Parliament in Tajikistan.
However, I would say that we need to do more to open civil
society there and to improve the human rights of the people of
Tajikistan. And again, if confirmed, this will be one of my top
priorities. We do have national security interests there, but
our interest in improving the human rights and the rights of
the people of Tajikistan are also extremely important.
Senator Lugar. The reason I asked these questions in that
order is that clearly there are influences governmentally from
China and from Russia, quite apart from historical problems in
Tajikistan. We have, as you have illustrated, our own ideas
about what would be ideal for the people of the country and
espouse those, and Secretary Clinton's visit is a good, high-
profile example. I am just curious in terms of the complexity
as we weigh in diplomatically with regard to our thoughts about
their governance, while at the same time hoping for support in
Afghanistan or elsewhere where they can be helpful. This
requires diplomacy with really a high degree of tact, I
suspect, and recognition of the cross currents historically as
well as presently.
Has there been a trend, would you say, toward the human
rights aspect and toward developments that we would find more
compatible with our ideas of governance?
Ms. Elliott. Well, as I mentioned, I do not think that the
trends have been perhaps as extensive as we would have liked in
the 20 years of Tajikistan's independence. I think one thing we
have to remember is they do not share the same history of
democracy that we do. They are a young country, and I believe
that they are working toward improving the human rights
situation there. They just recently passed a law that would get
rid of the laws that make criminalization of libel which will
help journalists there. So we have seen some progress. Some
journalists who had been arrested have been released, but there
is still a lot of work to be done.
And I would say that Russia does have interests in
Tajikistan. They have a military base there. Their concern, I
think, is for security and for stemming the flow of narcotics
from Afghanistan.
So if confirmed, I think we will continue to work on that
and make it a priority and to work not only with Tajikistan but
with the neighbors to make sure that we are all moving and
helping them to move in the right direction.
Senator Lugar. Well, I thank you for your answers and
likewise for your experience in that area.
Thank you.
Senator Casey. Thank you, Senator Lugar.
I will go another round and others may as well, but I know
we are coming to the end of our hearing.
Ms. Elliott, I wanted to ask you about the Northern
Distribution Network, and I will hold that in abeyance just for
a moment to get to Mr. McGurk on special immigrant visas. If a
citizen of Iraq has helped American forces in ways that put him
or her at substantial risk, we expedite their visas pursuant to
the Special Immigrant Visa program. And as I said, these are
individuals that live under threat today. I know that the
process has been expedited and that the United States has
admitted as many applicants in fiscal year 2012 as it did in
all of 2011. So there is progress. But there is still a
backlog.
And the question I have for you--I do not know if you have
a number, but if you do not, if you can get it to us. The
number of cases of special immigrant visas--how many of those
are in the pipeline for the so-called principal applicants? And
No. 2, how many cases are pending for applicants through the
direct access visa process?
Mr. McGurk. Thank you, Senator. This issue is very
important to me and it is a very personal issue to me. I had
the opportunity to discuss it in some depth with Senator Cardin
when I visited him in his office.
I have known Iraqis in Iraq who have worked with us and
lost their lives. I have known Iraqis who have got into this
program and never came out of it or were never able to get a
visa. And I have known Iraqis who have resettled in the United
States. It is very personal to me.
As you may know, we also have to have security checks to
make sure that the American people are protected. That is also
first and foremost.
There is a substantial backlog, which as you said in your
statement--it is absolutely right. We have now over the first
half of this year admitted more SIV cases into the United
States than we did all of last year, and I have been told that
the numbers for the third quarter look to be substantially
higher. I think this year so far the number is about 850.
Senator, I will get you the exact figures on the number of
cases that are being processed now and the backlog.
[The written reply for the record follows:]
This issue is very important to me and it's a very personal issue
to me. While serving in Iraq I have known Iraqis who have worked with
us and lost their lives. I have known Iraqis who have got into this
program and never came out of it. They were never able to get a visa
and I have known Iraqis who have resettled in the United States.
As you may know, we have security checks to make sure that the
American people are protected; that's first and foremost. There was a
substantial backlog which, as you've said in your statement, is
absolutely right. We have now over the first half of this year admitted
more SIV cases into the United States than we did all of last year, and
I have been told that the numbers for the third quarter look to be
substantially higher. Through the end of March 2012, the Department had
already issued 865 SIVs to Iraqis, up from a total of 706 such visas
issued to Iraqi citizens in FY 2011. Preliminary counts for April and
May of this year show 1,733 additional SIVs have been issued. If
confirmed, I pledge to continue working to increase these numbers as
much as possible.
Mr. McGurk. Since I saw Senator Cardin, I visited with
Samantha Power at the National Security Council, the national
security staff, who has done a terrific job in streamlining the
processing of these cases and making sure that we have the
personnel and the right resources directed to process them
effectively and efficiently. The Embassy plays a key role in
that, and we have increased our staff there to make sure that
these cases can be processed from the initial point of entry at
the Embassy. And if I am confirmed, I pledge to you I will do
everything I possibly can to make sure that these cases are
processed efficiently, with reasonable security checks to make
sure that the American people are protected, but that Iraqis
who have worked with us who wish to come to our country feel
welcomed, that they know where they stand in the process, and
that they know they are taken care of. I will do everything I
possibly can to make this program effective.
Senator Casey. Thank you very much.
Ms. Elliott, I wanted to ask you about the Northern
Distribution Network on two levels. No. 1, the importance of it
is so apparent as we draw down in Afghanistan and need to get
supplies, equipment, and so much else through that network. Can
you assess where we are as it relates to the role played by
Tajikistan? No. 2, How will you, upon confirmation, prioritize
and focus on the importance of Tajikistan's help for us in the
Northern Distribution Network?
Ms. Elliott. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Tajikistan has played a very important role in the Northern
Distribution Network which, as you rightfully mentioned, has
become extremely important in getting vital supplies to our
troops in Afghanistan. Likewise, it will play an extremely
important role in taking equipment out of Afghanistan as we
begin to lessen our military presence there.
I have worked closely with the Government of Tajikistan on
these issues. While Tajikistan does not have a developed rail
network like some of the other countries in Central Asia, they
have been very supportive and played a vital role in the part
of the Northern Distribution Network that I would call the KKT
route. It is Kazakhstan, Kyrgzstan, and Tajikistan. The
capacity is not great because we have to truck things through
the mountains of Tajikistan. However, we have had a very good
success rate with very low loss of cargo, no pilferage, and we
have gotten a lot of cooperation from the Government of
Tajikistan on that. And President Rahmon indicated to Secretary
Clinton when she met with him that he wants to continue to
support us in that area because, as I think the Government of
Tajikistan and the people of Tajikistan realize, in order to
have a safe and prosperous Tajikistan, we need to have a safe
and stable and prosperous Afghanistan.
Senator Casey. Thank you very much.
My time is up for this round. Senator Udall, Senator Risch,
Senator Lugar, anything?
Senator Udall.
Senator Udall. I would just ask one final question here.
Since the invasion displaced Saddam Hussein's Sunni
governing structure, or whatever you want to call it there, one
of the major issues has been this divisive conflict between
Sunni and Shia. And we have seen it in terms of talk of a civil
war and all the various bombings and suicide bombings that have
gone on.
What is your assessment of how the current government is
moving to integrate Sunnis into the government at all levels,
whether it is high positions in the government or people that
held kind of bureaucratic positions and were not necessarily
involved in all the atrocities and things? What is your
assessment about how they are performing on the integration?
Mr. McGurk. Thank you, Senator. Senator Casey referenced an
NDI poll which shows that there is still this vast gap in
perceptions of the government between Shia and Sunnis. Among
Sunnis, according to this poll, it has increased in recent
months, but it has increased from about 10 percent to only 30
percent of Sunnis would see this government favorably.
The current government has a lot of work to do in this
area. We can track it through the percentages of military
officers. The last order of battle I saw, Sunni officers were
about 13 percent overall. That is below the population figure.
In this current round of political negotiation and debate,
it has been very interesting because there has been a real
shakeup in different alliances. So Muqtada Sadr, for example,
who was seen as the face of the Shia Jaish al-Mahdi group which
was involved in a lot of atrocities during the sectarian war,
is now aligning with a lot of Sunnis in kind of an Iraqi
nationalist view, and that is interesting and something to
watch.
The Sons of Iraq is also something we need to watch very
closely. So far, about 70,000 have been incorporated into
government positions. About 30,000 Sons of Iraq are still
manning checkpoints. They are getting paid under the current
budget. I have been told under the current budget, they get
paid about $300 a month, which is slightly below the per capita
GDP. But that needs to continue because one of the indicators,
if you look at academic studies of precursors of renewed or
reignited civil war, is militant insurgent groups beginning to
coalesce and reform. And I think making sure the Sons of Iraq
are continued to be taken care of will be very important. So
far the government has kept most of its promises on that, but
we need to watch it.
So obviously, Senator, these Sunni-Shia cleavages are
extremely deep. There is the overhang now of a very bitter
sectarian war which the Iraqis are still overcoming. We need to
help them overcome it, and we need to remind the current
government every day that they need to do what they can to make
Sunnis feel like they are a full part of the process.
Senator Udall. Thank you.
Senator Casey. Thank you, Senator Udall.
Mr. McGurk, Ambassador Sison, Ms. Elliott, we thank you for
your testimony, for your prior service, and for your
willingness to serve yet again in tough assignments.
And I want to make sure for the record I say this, that we
are going to keep the record open--and I know I and others will
have more questions--for 48 hours for questions. That is a
short window, but I want to make sure that members of the
committee knew that.
We are grateful for your presence here and for your
testimony.
And we are adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:25 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
----------
Additional Questions and Answers Submitted for the Record
Responses of Michele Jeanne Sisson to Questions Submitted
by Senator John F. Kerry
Question. Section 620M of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961
imposes restrictions on assistance to any unit of a foreign country's
security forces for which there is credible evidence that the unit has
committed gross violations of human rights. U.S. embassies are heavily
involved in ensuring compliance with this requirement.
If confirmed, what steps will you take to ensure that the Embassy
effectively implements section 620M? In particular, what actions will
you take to ensure, in a case in which there is credible evidence that
a gross violation of human rights has been committed, that assistance
will not be provided to units that committed the violation? What steps
will you take to ensure that the Embassy has a robust capacity to
gather and evaluate evidence regarding possible gross violations of
human rights by units of security forces?
Answer. Our current engagement with Sri Lanka takes many forms--
economic, humanitarian, cultural, and military--and helps us move
forward our agenda of fostering a peaceful and stable Sri Lanka by
improving human rights, democratic governance, reconciliation, and
accountability. We take very seriously credible allegations of abuses
of international human rights law and violations of international
humanitarian law at the end of the conflict, as well as ongoing abuses.
If confirmed, I will continue to urge full accountability for
individuals on both sides of the conflict alleged to be responsible for
those violations and a demilitarization of civilian affairs. Mindful of
human rights concerns, the administration is pursuing measured military
engagement with the Sri Lankan Government commensurate with our
security interests in the region. This engagement includes human rights
or humanitarian components and is in accordance with Leahy vetting
policy and law. Assistance and engagement is not now, nor will it be,
undertaken with units or individuals associated with credible
allegations of abuses of international human rights law or violations
of international humanitarian law. As always, adequate resources, along
with Embassy Colombo and State Department staff, will be assigned to
undertake the full Leahy vetting procedures in all applicable cases.
Question. If confirmed, what specific steps will you take to
encourage the Government of Sri Lanka to implement the recommendations
of the Lessons Learned and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) report,
given the Sri Lankan Government's apparent intransigence in pursuing
national reconciliation and reducing human rights violations over the
past 3 years? If Sri Lanka continues to ignore international calls to
seriously pursue reconciliation and accountability, what steps would
you recommend for U.S. policy toward Sri Lanka?
Answer. The United States successfully sponsored a United Nations
Human Rights Council Resolution in March 2012 that calls on the Sri
Lankan Government to take concrete steps toward reconciliation and to
address alleged human rights violations during the final stages of the
country's conflict. Secretary Clinton invited Foreign Minister Peiris
to Washington May 18 to discuss the way forward on reconciliation and
accountability in Sri Lanka in the post-UNHRC resolution environment.
The Secretary stressed the importance of making progress on the
recommendations made by Sri Lanka's own Lessons Learnt and
Reconciliation Commission and the importance of providing regular and
public updates to all Sri Lankans and to the international community.
We now look to Sri Lanka to take the necessary steps to achieve
reconciliation and accountability for the alleged abuses that occurred
in the final months of the conflict, while ensuring respect for human
rights and institutionalizing democratic governance. If sufficient
progress is not made, however, there will be pressure to look at
international mechanisms.
An important opportunity to review progress will come this fall,
when Sri Lanka is scheduled for its Universal Periodic Review before
the U.N. Human Rights Council on the status of human rights in Sri
Lanka, then again next March, when the U.N. High Commissioner for Human
Rights will brief the Council on Sri Lanka's progress on
reconciliation, accountability for human rights abuses, and
implementation of the recommendations from Sri Lanka's LLRC. In the
time preceding these two critical review opportunities, we will
continue our vigorous engagement with the Government of Sri Lanka, as
well as India and other international partners, to foster true
democracy, reconciliation, and accountability in Sri Lanka.
Question. How do you assess the state of democracy in Sri Lanka,
given increasing threats against journalists and limited press
freedoms, limited provincial powers and no timetable for provincial
elections in the north, ongoing disappearances of individuals with
impunity, continued military presence in the north, and ongoing human
rights concerns and violations? What future actions might the United
States take bilaterally and multilaterally to push Colombo on these
issues? Are there any economic or trade measures you would favor
employing?
Answer. We are deeply concerned by reports of ongoing human rights
abuses and an erosion of democratic institutions and practices, and
continuing to engage the Government of Sri Lanka on these issues would
be one of my highest priorities. There has been progress in some
discrete areas, particularly in regards to the return of people
displaced by the conflict to their homes, demining of the former
conflict regions, building of transport infrastructure, schools and
hospitals, and in the reintegration of former combatants.
There are, however, ongoing issues that concern us, such as the
shrinking space for civil society, military involvement in civilian
affairs and restrictions on freedom of expression and other fundamental
rights. There is also much that remains to be done to achieve genuine
reconciliation, democratic governance, and accountability. Sri Lanka's
Universal Periodic Review of its human rights situation will occur in
November under the auspices of the U.N. Human Rights Council. This
should be an excellent opportunity to evaluate Sri Lanka's current
human rights record and progress towards achieving reconciliation and
accountability.
Solutions that come from the Sri Lankans themselves are most likely
to have the greatest impact and also help strengthen Sri Lanka's
democratic institutions, including defending space for its long-
established civil society. We would, therefore, first like to see the
Sri Lankans implement the LLRC's recommendations, and establish an
independent mechanism to investigate the credible allegations that the
LLRC failed to address, both of which could directly help achieve
lasting reconciliation and democratic governance. We are looking to Sri
Lanka to take the necessary steps to achieve reconciliation,
accountability and respect for human rights and democratic processes,
and are not considering economic or trade measures at this time. If
sufficient progress is not made, however, there will be pressure to
look at international mechanisms.
______
Response of Michele Jeanne Sisson to Question Submitted
by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin
Question. What bilateral measures has the United States taken to
highlight its concerns about the human rights situation on Sri Lanka?
Given a sense that existing measures have not been effective, what
future actions might the United States take bilaterally to push the
Colombo to resolve its domestic conflict? Are there any economic or
trade measures you would favor employing?
Answer. The United States successfully sponsored a United Nations
Human Rights Council Resolution in March 2012 that calls on the Sri
Lankan Government to take concrete steps toward reconciliation and
investigate alleged human rights violations during the final stages of
the country's civil conflict. Secretary Clinton invited Foreign
Minister Peiris to Washington on May 18 to discuss the way forward on
reconciliation and accountability in Sri Lanka in the post-UNHRC
resolution environment. The Secretary stressed the importance of making
progress on the recommendations made by Sri Lanka's own Lessons Learnt
and Reconciliation Commission and the importance of providing regular
and public progress updates to all Sri Lankans and to the international
community.
We are looking to Sri Lanka to take the necessary steps to achieve
reconciliation, accountability and respect for human rights and
democratic processes, and are not considering economic or trade
measures at this time. If sufficient progress is not made, however,
there will be pressure to look at international mechanisms.
An important opportunity to review progress will come this fall,
when Sri Lanka is scheduled for its Universal Periodic Review on the
status of human rights, then again next March, when the U.N. High
Commissioner for Human Rights will brief the Human Rights Council on
Sri Lanka's progress on reconciliation and implementation of the
recommendations from the LLRC.
Biographic note: I have been a resident of the State of Maryland
since 1962, and I appreciate your interest in this matter.
______
Responses of Michele Jeanne Sisson to Questions Submitted
by Senator Robert P. Casey, Jr.
Question. The United Nations Human Rights Council Resolution passed
a resolution in March 2012 that calls on the Sri Lankan Government to
investigate alleged human rights violations during the final stages of
the country's civil war. The United States strongly supported this
resolution, which was a positive step toward greater accountability for
perpetrators of abuses.
What is the United States strategy for further action on
accountability in international bodies, particularly at the Human
Rights Council? How is the administration using the resolution to push
further action on LLRC recommendations and wider accountability? How
are you planning to engage with India to build on its important vote
for the resolution?
Answer. Secretary Clinton invited Foreign Minister Peiris to
Washington May 18 to discuss the way forward on reconciliation and
accountability in Sri Lanka in the post-UNHRC resolution environment.
The Secretary stressed the importance of making progress on the
recommendations made by Sri Lanka's own Lessons Learnt and
Reconciliation Commission and the importance of providing regular and
public progress updates to all Sri Lankans and to the international
community. We are looking to Sri Lanka to take the necessary steps to
achieve reconciliation and accountability for past abuses while
ensuring democratic governance and respect for human rights now. If
sufficient progress is not made, however, there will be pressure to
look at international mechanisms.
An important opportunity to review progress will come this fall,
when Sri Lanka is scheduled for its Universal Periodic Review on the
status of human rights, then again next March, when the U.N. High
Commissioner for Human Rights will brief the Human Rights Council on
Sri Lanka's progress on reconciliation and implementation of the
recommendations from Sri Lanka's Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation
Commission Report. In the time preceding these two critical review
opportunities, we will continue to coordinate with India and other
international partners to encourage, reconciliation and accountability
in Sri Lanka.
Question. The United States and the Maldives enjoy a strong
bilateral relationship. However, the small country faces several
significant challenges, including serious environmental concerns and
recent political unrest that has threatened to upset the country's
democratic progress.
What do you consider the most pressing issues facing the Maldives
at this time? Apart from participating in global climate change
initiatives, what might the United States do to help support
Maldivians? Do you view recent regime change in Maldives as having been
a coup d'etat, as described by former President Nasheed or as a self-
initiated resignation, as claimed by his opponents? How should the
United States respond to former President Nasheed's call for more U.S.
pressure in support of democratic institutions in Maldives?
Answer. Former President Nasheed resigned from office under murky
circumstances. He was succeeded by his own Vice President, Mohamed
Waheed. Maldives' Parliament continues to function and a civilian,
democratic government continues. Former President Nasheed, current
President Waheed and others have agreed to a Commission of National
Inquiry to look into the circumstances surrounding the transfer of
power. The United States, India, U.N., Commonwealth and others are
supportive of Maldives' own efforts to resolve questions about the
transfer of power through this mechanism.
Our Embassy in Colombo is engaged with all the parties in Maldives
to foster dialogue, respect for democratic procedures and the rule of
law. Assistant Secretary Blake, who was formerly Ambassador to Sri
Lanka and Maldives, is also personally engaged. In addition, State
currently has one person from our Conflict and Stabilization Operations
Bureau on the ground in Maldives, working across political divisions.
USAID has committed funding to assist Maldives in ensuring that the
next round of Presidential elections is free and fair and we are
working with Maldives to find additional ways to support its rule of
law and justice sector.
______
Responses of Michele Jeanne Sisson to Questions Submitted
by Senator Richard G. Lugar
Question. In December 2009, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee
released a bipartisan staff report entitled ``Sri Lanka: Recharting
U.S. Strategy after the War.'' The report contained eight recommended
action points for the Obama administration related to Sri Lanka. What
is the status of the administration's response to each of the points of
recommendation? http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CPRT-111SPRT53866/pdf/
CPRT-111SPRT53866.pdf
Answer. The administration's policies toward Sri Lanka seek to
balance U.S. interests in reconciliation and accountability with
economic, security, and strategic interests. Since the end of the
conflict in 2009, we have provided robust demining assistance, worked
with the U.N. and other international organizations to support the Sri
Lankan Government's resettlement of more than 300,000 displaced
persons, designed many USAID-sponsored democracy and governance
programs and public diplomacy programs to create and enhance people-to-
people links across Sri Lanka, and worked to provide needed training
for Sri Lanka's judicial sector. The administration, of course,
vigorously enforces existing laws concerning visa applications and loss
of citizenship. We are continuing to work with the Peace Corps in the
hope that the Peace Corps can return to Sri Lanka in the future and
resume its invaluable work.
Question. If confirmed, how will you most effectively deal with Sri
Lankan officials representing U.S. geostrategic interests while
advocating accountability for the wide range of human rights violations
for which the Sri Lankan Government is allegedly responsible?
Answer. Our unwavering support for human rights, democratic
governance, reconciliation, and accountability informs our principled
engagement with Sri Lanka in all areas. However, we remain cognizant of
our security interests, which include the security of the Sea Lines of
Communication and counterterrorism, for which Sri Lanka is an important
regional partner. If confirmed, I will continue to press Sri Lanka to
address issues related to reconciliation and accountability, including
those highlighted in the 2009 Senate Foreign Relations Committee
bipartisan staff report ``Sri Lanka: Recharting U.S. Strategy after the
War'' while seeking areas of common ground on U.S. geostrategic
interest.
Question. Please inform the committee as to the use of the American
Center in Sri Lanka. What is the volume of activity during the past
year and how does that compare to the preceding 4 years? In addition,
what is the range of activities occurring through the Center and what
are the priorities of the Center's focus?
Answer. The American Corners in Kandy and the post-conflict area of
Jaffna, Sri Lanka, were opened in 2005 and 2011, respectively. The U.S.
Embassy in Colombo reports they have both enjoyed a noticeable increase
in activities and visitors over the past several years and particularly
throughout 2011.
The American Corner in Kandy focuses on programs for youth and
education. Over 5,500 people visited the Corner in Kandy this past
year, a marked increase from 3,200 visitors in 2010, for student
advising, film screenings, book readings, and video conferences with
the Embassy featuring monthly public lectures from Colombo. In 2011 the
American Corner in Kandy organized an environment program for students
in collaboration with the Ministry of Education, social media training
for our newly created Youth Forum, HIV/AIDS awareness program in
collaboration with educational authorities, and a discussion series on
current affairs for teachers. The number of programs increased from 16
in 2010 to 40 in 2011.
The American Corner in Jaffna opened in January 2011 and also
focuses thematically on programs that help rebuild communities in the
post-conflict environment. Entrepreneurship and education programs are
targeted at vulnerable populations, such as war widows and youth whose
education has been interrupted by the civil conflict. Over 6,500 people
have visited the American Corner in Jaffna. The American Corner hosts
school orientation programs, public lectures by visiting Embassy staff
and U.S. citizens, and a summer camp program for children of
orphanages. The American Corner organized an outreach program with
``Shadows of Change'' visual theater for over 3,000 students from nine
Jaffna schools. The program included a workshop for students that led
to the formation of the Jaffna Youth Forum, which now meets at the
Corner every month to discuss community issues. Future programming
includes English teaching, entrepreneurship workshops for rural young
women seeking self-employment, and psychosocial training for youth.
The American Center at the U.S. Embassy in Colombo aims to educate
Sri Lankans about the United States through its ample library and film
offerings, and to bring to Sri Lanka timely and topical subjects of
importance to the United States. The American Center in Colombo
recently commemorated World Press Freedom Day by hosting a panel
discussion in which journalists, editors, and activists discussed the
Sri Lankan perspective on the emergence of citizen journalism and how
inadequate access to quality information undermines media freedom. The
Center also hosted an American water specialist to discuss water
management and a local attorney to raise children's awareness of
intellectual property rights. Upcoming events will include a
celebration of World Environment Day, a presentation on implementing
international conventions on women's issues, and a monthly storytelling
program.
Question. During the war, what countries or political and other
entities were providing material or other support to the LTTE and what
was the nature of their respective support?
Answer. To best address your question, I respectfully offer to
arrange a classified briefing on this subject, with the appropriate
Department officials.
Question. What is the status of the military relationship between
the United States and Sri Lanka? Do you see opportunities for expanding
that relationship and if so, under what circumstances or conditions?
Answer. Our current engagement with Sri Lanka takes many forms--
economic, humanitarian, cultural, and military--and helps us move
forward our agenda to foster a peaceful and stable Sri Lanka by
improving human rights, democratic governance, reconciliation, and
accountability. Mindful of human rights concerns, the administration is
taking measured steps to maintain military engagement with the Sri
Lankan Government commensurate with our security interests in the
region, and engagement is in accordance with Leahy vetting policy and
law. These include demining, disaster assistance, sea-lane security,
and antipiracy. We take very seriously credible allegations of
violations of international human rights law and international
humanitarian law at the end of the conflict. We continue to urge full
accountability for individuals on both sides of the conflict alleged to
be responsible for those violations. We also continue to urge
demilitarization of civilian affairs. Any consideration of an expansion
of our military relationship could only be undertaken in response to
demonstrable improvements in the protection of human rights, democratic
governance, and accountability.
Question. From your perspective, what is going particularly well
with the reconciliation process after the war? What are two specific
concerns related to the status of reconciliation and what do you
envision as your role, if any, related to these challenges?
Answer. There has been significant progress in several areas in the
aftermath of Sri Lanka's long conflict, chief among them the
resettlement of the majority of internally displaced persons and the
rehabilitation and reintegration into civilian life of thousands of
former LTTE combatants. Much still remains to be done, however. As
Secretary Clinton and other senior State officials have urged, we would
like to see progress on further demilitarization in the former conflict
zones in the North and East, the provision of basic services to
returnees, provincial elections before the end of the year, answers
regarding the fate of the missing for their loved ones, and further
progress in implementation of the recommendations of Sri Lanka's own
Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission. If confirmed, my role,
like that of Ambassador Butenis and other senior State Department
officials such as Assistant Secretary Robert Blake, would be to
continue to press vigorously to achieve these goals.
Question. If confirmed, will you meet with Sri Lankan journalists
to receive an update on the status of intimidation and challenges
confronting journalists?
Answer. Yes. If confirmed, I will engage directly with journalists,
civil society, and NGOs to listen to their concerns and monitor trends
affecting fundamental rights including freedom of expression in all its
forms. Our deep concern over this issue is why we highlighted the
disappearance of political reporter and cartoonist Prageeth Ekneligoda
during World Press Freedom Day. We have called on the Government of Sri
Lanka to credibly investigate his disappearance and call on the
Government of Sri Lanka to take the steps necessary to create space for
journalists to work without fear of violence or persecution, including
by ending impunity for attacks and intimidation against journalists.
Question. What other countries do you view as ``like-minded'' with
the overall U.S. foreign policy emphasis related to Sri Lanka and
Maldives?
Answer. We have been working closely with a number of international
partners to achieve our policy goals both in Maldives and Sri Lanka.
For example, the U.S.-sponsored resolution promoting reconciliation and
accountability in Sri Lanka that passed with 24 votes in favor, 15
against, and 8 abstentions during the March 2012 session of the United
Nations Human Rights Council had 39 cosponsors in addition to the
United States (cosponsors need not be voting members of the Council).
Notably, India voted in favor of the resolution, a departure from its
usual policy of abstaining on country-specific resolutions and a strong
statement of support for increased action by Sri Lanka to achieve
reconciliation and a lasting peace.
We coordinate closely with the Commonwealth Ministerial Action
Group and the United Nations to resolve the ongoing political stalemate
Maldives.
Question. What countries are presently contributing resources to
demining operations in Sri Lanka and what would you project to be the
total dollar value of international contributions toward this effort?
Answer. Demining in Sri Lanka is an important initiative for the
Department of State, as it enables the timely resettlement of
internally displaced persons and provides the foundation for the
reconstruction and rehabilitation process. Funding provided by the
Department of State is directly contributed to international
nongovernmental agencies. This funding is augmented by several
international donors, including contributions from the Government of
Japan, the United Kingdom's Department for International Development,
and the Australian Government. The Department of State does not track
the total dollar value of international contributions. However, since
FY 2003 the State Department has contributed $27,962,000 to demining
efforts in Sri Lanka.
Question. What is the status of U.S. exports to Sri Lanka and in
what sectors do you envision opportunity for future export growth?
Answer. Sri Lanka is currently the 80th-largest goods trading
partner of the United States with $2.4 billion in two-way goods trade
in 2011. Sri Lanka was the United States 114th-largest goods export
market in 2011. U.S. goods exports to Sri Lanka were $302 million in
2011, up 72 percent ($128 million) from 2010. U.S. exports to Sri Lanka
consist primarily of wheat, civilian aircrafts, machinery and
mechanical appliances, medical and scientific equipment, electrical
apparatus, plastics, and paper. If confirmed, I will work to increase
U.S. exports to Sri Lanka and Maldives under President Obama's National
Export Initiative. The tourism, infrastructure, transportation, and
energy sectors of Sri Lanka's economy currently hold the most
opportunity for growth, and Embassy Colombo is actively advocating for
several U.S.-based bids in these sectors. I have a strong track record
in economic initiatives and received an Honorable Mention in 2008 for
the Charles E. Cobb Award for Initiative and Success in Trade
Development for my work as chief of mission in the United Arab
Emirates.
Question. According to the Congressional Research Service, U.S.
exports to Maldives ``more than doubled from $20 million in 2008 to $45
million in 2011.'' What is the basis for the doubling of exports in a
short time period? What are future best sector prospects for U.S.
exports to Maldives?
Answer. U.S. exports to the Maldives received a boost in October
2009 when the United States and Maldives signed a Trade and Investment
Framework Agreement (TIFA). Maldives was subsequently granted
Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) trade benefits in December
2009. The economic team at our Embassy in Colombo has worked vigorously
to support the National Export Initiative, and has adopted a three
pronged strategy to increase market access, outreach to encourage U.S.
exports, and commercial advocacy. U.S. exports to Maldives increased by
58 percent in 2011. Areas of opportunity for U.S. businesses in the
Maldives include tourism, construction, and simple export-oriented
manufacturing, such as garments and electrical appliance assembly. If
confirmed, I will work to increase U.S. exports to Sri Lanka and
Maldives under President Obama's National Export Initiative. I have a
strong track record in economic initiatives and received an Honorable
Mention in 2008 for the Charles E. Cobb Award for Initiative and
Success in Trade Development for my work as chief of mission in the
United Arab Emirates.
Question. Please provide details/quantify the Maldives challenge
with rising sea levels.
Answer. As an island nation as well as a developing country,
Maldives faces significant challenges related to climate change. The
islands of the Maldives lie primarily between 1 and 1.5 meters above
mean sea level. The IPCC fourth assessment report, the leading
international assessment on climate change, in 2007 estimated average
global sea level rise at between 0.18 and 0.59 meters by 2090-2099.
Many peer-reviewed studies since then have raised these estimates. Any
of these scenarios threaten damage from storm surges, land erosion, and
salt water intrusion in the coming decades. Of particular concern are
the likely impacts associated with saltwater intrusion on freshwater
supplies, increasingly damaging extreme weather events, and sea level
rise and related land erosion negatively impacting infrastructure,
livelihoods, and key economic sectors, including tourism.
To address this vulnerability, the United States invested $3
million in FY11 through USAID to support an adaptation program that
aims to improve access to drinking water supplies and enhance
resilience to climate change. The program provides assistance to the
Maldives on climate change adaptation strategies, with special emphasis
on integrated water resources management. Future USAID assistance will
focus on climate resilience and water security in support of the
Maldives' ongoing work related to water and sanitation service delivery
to the islands.
______
Responses of Michele Jeanne Sisson to Questions Submitted
by Senator Marco Rubio
Question. According to the State Department's 2011 Trafficking in
Persons Report, Sri Lanka is a Tier 2 country for trafficking. There
was evidence of government complicity in trafficking through bribes and
political connections for brothels.
If confirmed, how will you engage government officials to confront
corruption in combat trafficking crimes? How will you encourage the
government to investigate and prosecute government officials who are
complicit in human trafficking offenses?
Answer. We have been working closely with the Government of Sri
Lanka on sex trafficking and labor trafficking issues. The Government
of Sri Lanka takes these issues seriously and has taken steps to
address their trafficking problems. Most notably, the government is
working with International Organization for Migration to develop victim
identification procedures. We have directly engaged with the Government
of Sri Lanka on their Trafficking in Person's Action Plan and the
government has already begun to implement the plan. Even with this
progress, trafficking in persons remains an issue of great concern. I
have considerable experience in this area and was named 2005
Trafficking in Persons Ambassador of the Year for my work to combat
human trafficking in United Arab Emirates. If confirmed, I will ensure
that it remains a priority for U.S. Mission Colombo.
Question. A 2011 Human Rights Watch Report noted that over one-
third of Sri Lankan domestic workers in Jordan are physically abused by
their employer, 11 percent were sexually assaulted, 60 percent not paid
any wages and over 60 percent had their passports confinement. These
are abuses which indicate trafficking for forced labor.
If confirmed, how will you assist the Sri Lankan Government in
monitoring the foreign labor recruiting agencies which employ Sri
Lankans abroad?
Answer. I share your concerns on trafficking in persons and forced
labor in Sri Lanka, where over 1.7 million citizens are employed
outside their country. The Government of Sri Lanka has taken steps to
monitor labor recruiting agencies which employ Sri Lankans abroad, most
notably, by recently convicting two labor recruiters for fraudulent
recruitment--a key contributor to forced labor. Our Embassy in Colombo
has coordinated with other U.S. Missions and the Department to provide
information and assistance to the Government of Sri Lanka to respond to
specific cases and to help the Government of Sri Lanka address the
trafficking issue generally. I have considerable experience in this
area and was named 2005 Trafficking in Persons Ambassador of the Year
for my work to combat human trafficking in United Arab Emirates. If
confirmed, I will work closely with the Government of Sri Lanka, The
International Organization for Migration, civil society, and other
interested parties to increase protection for their citizens from
domestic and international labor abuse.
______
Responses of Brett H. McGurk to Questions Submitted
by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin
Question. Special Immigrant Visas (SIVs) for Iraqi employees of the
United State: As you know from our earlier conversations, I am very
concerned about delays in the processing of Special Immigrant Visas
(SIVs) for those Iraqis who risked their lives to work for us in Iraq--
particularly those who were living and working on our bases and have
been ``cut loose'' since our withdrawal last December. How can SIV
processing be expedited? What can be done to offer protection to those
who are literally in hiding and on the run inside Iraq as they await
issuance of their visas?
Answer. This issue is very important and personal to me. It will
receive my close attention, if confirmed. Since we met in your office,
I have spoken with the leading U.S. officials who have been working to
address delays in processing of Special Immigrant Visas (SIVs) for
Iraqis who have risked their lives to work with us. The State
Department is working closely with our interagency colleagues to
streamline the SIV application process, eliminate redundant
requirements, and accept electronic submissions wherever possible. If
confirmed, I will work to ensure that the Embassy is staffed to manage
applications efficiently and in a manner that provides fair process to
our Iraqi partners while also ensuring necessary background and
security checks to protect the American people. In recent months,
strides have been made in eliminating the backlog of Iraqi SIV cases
pending security screening. Over the first half of this year, the State
Department issued more SIVs to Iraqis than during all of FY 2011. In FY
2011, the Department issued 706 SIVs to Iraqi citizens. By the end of
March 2012, the Department already had issued 865 SIVs to Iraqis.
During April and May 2012 alone, it issued an additional 1,733 SIVs to
Iraqis, based on preliminary data. Thus, the trend appears to be a
positive one, and now we must ensure it continues. If confirmed, I am
committed to working diligently with our interagency partners to
balance the safety of American citizens with the aspirations of Iraqis
who risked their lives to work with us, and now wish to resettle in our
country.
Question. Iraq and the Extractive Industries Transparency
Initiative (EITI): According to the World Bank, Iraq possesses a proven
143 billion barrels of oil, and high oil prices and increasing exports
should enable Iraq's GDP to grow by about 12 percent in 2012. It is
therefore critical that the Government of Iraq implement an effective
and transparent process for handling and accounting for these rapidly
increasing revenues. Iraq has been an Extractive Industries
Transparency Initiative (EITI) candidate country since 2010 and is
supposed to complete the requirements to become a ``compliant'' country
later this year. What are the prospects for this happening?
Answer. The Board of the Extractive Industries Transparency
Initiative (EITI) accepted Iraq as a candidate country on February 10,
2010. Iraq has until August 9, 2012, to undergo EITI validation to
determine whether the country is compliant. Iraq issued its first EITI
report in December 2011, reporting $41 billion in revenues from oil and
gas exports in 2009. Iraq's second report, covering 2010, is expected
on schedule by the end of the year. Iraq has hired one of the approved
international validation companies to conduct its validation exercise,
a highly detailed procedure to reconcile national revenue and company
payment figures for extractive industries. We believe the Iraqi
authorities are committed to the EITI process.
The United States strongly supports Iraq's efforts to become EITI
compliant. Iraq is one of only two countries in the Middle East to have
sought EITI compliant status and holds the largest reserves of any
country seeking this status.
Revenues from crude oil exports account for approximately 95
percent of Iraqi Government revenues, so the EITI reconciliation
exercise is tightly tied to the overall transparency of Iraqi
Government revenues. All Iraqi oil export revenues flow through the
accounts of the Development Fund for Iraq at the New York Federal
Reserve and are subject to audit by Iraq's governmental auditing and
internal control body, the Committee of Financial Experts. Iraq
publishes its annual budget. The 2012 budget was reviewed by experts
from the International Monetary Fund.
In September 2011, the State Department's Bureau of Near Eastern
Affairs awarded a $1million grant to Revenue Watch Institute to broaden
and strengthen Iraqi civil society working on EITI issues and to
support a more robust implementation process. As stated in my written
testimony, helping the Iraqis to meet the requirements of the EITI
would be among my top priorities if confirmed. ``By helping the Iraqis
address these challenges, the United States can gain leverage and
influence while pursuing mutual goals.''
______
Responses of Brett H. McGurk to Questions Submitted
by Senator John F. Kerry
Question. The State Department has long promised faster action to
resolve the issues surrounding the delays in approving Special
Immigrant Visas for Iraqis who supported the U.S. effort in Iraq after
the 2003 invasion.
(a) How many SIVs have been issued, by fiscal year, since
the inception of the program?
Answer. The chart below details how many Special Immigrant Visas
(SIVs) the Department of State has issued to Iraqi applicants under
both the Section 1059 and Section 1244 programs since implementation in
FY 2007. FY 2012 numbers are preliminary:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Principal Derivatives Totals
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2007............................................................ 431 383 814
2008............................................................ 518 449 967
2009............................................................ 1,448 1,385 2,833
2010............................................................ 951 1,091 2,042
2011............................................................ 322 384 706
2012*........................................................... 1,137 1,461 2,598
-----------------------------------------------
Totals.................................................... 4,807 5,153 9,960
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Applications through May 31, 2012.
(b) How many applications have there been, by fiscal year?
Answer. The chart below details the number of approved I-360
immigrant visa petitions received by the State Department's National
Visa Center (NVC) from USCIS for Iraqis applying for the Section 1059
and Section 1244 SIV Programs. FY 2012 numbers are preliminary:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Iraqi section Iraqi section
1059 approved 1244 approved Combined total
I-360s I-360s
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2007......................................................... 650 0 650
FY 2008......................................................... 149 48 197
FY 2009......................................................... 139 1,614 1,753
FY 2010......................................................... 10 1,025 1,035
FY 2011......................................................... 2 2,398 2,400
FY 2012*........................................................ 0 659 659
-----------------------------------------------
Totals.................................................... 950 5,744 6,694
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Applications through May 31, 2012.
(c) How long is the average processing time (as measured by
application filing date until the date visa issuance or notice
of denial) for such applications, by fiscal year?
Answer. Processing SIVs involves a number of different steps, many
of which are outside the control of the State Department's Bureau of
Consular Affairs. As a result, I understand that the Department does
not have general statistics on processing times for SIVs. I understand
there were significant delays in returning clearances on SIV cases in
FY 2011, but there has been improvement on processing times in FY 2012.
The State Department's internal standards require scheduling interviews
60 days from the receipt of the application. As the numbers of SIVs
issued to Iraqis in FY 2012 indicate above, our interagency partners
have made significant strides in eliminating the backlog of Iraqi SIV
cases pending security screening. This progress allowed us to cut the
backlog of Iraqi SIVs pending final action (issuance or refusal of the
visa application) by 50 percent since March. In late February, 2,832
Iraqi SIV applications were pending security vetting. A little over 3
months later, that number has fallen to 1,388.
We owe it to those Iraqis who have worked with us to ensure that
this program runs as transparently as possible while also maintaining
essential security checks to protect the American people.
(d) How many are pending as of June 1, 2012?
Answer. As of June 6, 2012, there were 1,388 Iraqi SIV applications
pending security clearances.
(e) How many have been denied by fiscal year? Please list
the reasons for denial and the corresponding number of visas
denied for each reason, by fiscal year.
Answer. In order to provide this detailed information that you have
requested on refusals, we are currently running a customized query
through our files. The query will take several days to complete and
will provide a detailed response as soon as possible.
Question. The Police Development Program in Iraq has been the
subject of continued revision and reduction since the State Department
took control of the program in late 2011. What type of information did
the Defense Department provide to the State Department when it turned
the program over? How many Iraqi Police have been successfully trained
under State Department control? In which cities are U.S.-trained Iraqi
Police located and what are the metrics for evaluating their abilities?
How has the prevalence of crime and violence changed in those cities as
a result of the presence of U.S.-trained Iraqi Police?
Answer. As noted in my testimony, if confirmed, I will work with
the State Department and the Congress to ensure that our diplomatic
presence in Iraq is secure, strategic, effective, and sustainable. This
same rubric will apply to individual programs, including the Police
Development Program (PDP). If confirmed, I look forward to working
closely with the Congress and the State Department to revise and
restructure any program that does not meet this test. I understand the
PDP is currently undergoing a review in light of present conditions in
Iraq. I strongly support this and another initiative as we work to
streamline our overall mission and presence in the country.
I was not involved in the planning or development of the PDP. But I
have been informed that the Department of Defense (DOD) and the State
Department consulted closely during the transition period on an
informal basis, and that DOD provided some operational readiness
assessments to the State Department prior to closing out its programs.
I have also been informed that the PDP was designed to provide
senior levels of the Iraqi Police Services and Ministry of Interior
with the management, leadership, and technical skills necessary to
manage and maintain Iraq's internal security and support the rule of
law. With a focus on mentoring and advising, the program does not train
large numbers of Iraqi Police as the DOD-led mission had since 2004.
The DOD police training program trained Iraqi Police throughout the
country. The PDP is focused on Ministry of Interior (MOI) and police
leadership based in Baghdad and Erbil,\1\ and our advisors have
traveled on occasion to other provinces.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Basrah hub of the program will be closed by the end of June
following the mutual agreement of the U.S. and Iraqi Governments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The PDP seeks to provide the necessary tools for the MOI to build
an effective police force that supports the rule of law through a set
of nine goals that complement the MOI's strategic goals. To pursue
these goals the PDP developed an approach based on police functions,
such as investigations, criminal intelligence, and border security,
each of which has supporting objectives and indicators that guide
advisors in their engagements. The program is linked to a Performance
Monitoring Plan, which is implemented through a monitoring and
evaluation staff.
While the security situation in Iraq has generally improved, I have
been informed that the Department does not have records of individual
police who were trained by DOD, and it is difficult to identify a
causal link between the training and levels of crime and violence.
Unlike the DOD program, the PDP was never intended to provide training
in basic skills to large numbers of police, including the individual
responders whose presence may deter criminal activity. The program is
intended, instead, to help Iraqis advance strategic institutional
capacity to, and senior management of, key institutions. For example,
our advisors helped establish an Iraqi interagency executive
development committee, and work with the Iraqi Police leadership to
address the ongoing problem of determining jurisdiction at crime
scenes.
As noted above, if confirmed I look forward to participating in the
ongoing review of this program to ensure that it is structured to
advance U.S. interests on a sustainable basis.
Question. The Lebanese Hezbollah-associated militant Ali Musa Daq-
Duq was transferred to Iraqi custody in late 2011 and released shortly
thereafter. What were the legal provisions that prevented the United
States from transferring Daq-Duq to another detention facility outside
of Iraq? Does the United States have any credible information that Daq-
Duq is now involved with or materially supporting any U.S.-designated
Foreign Terrorist Organization?
Answer. I was not responsible for this case during my time in Iraq
in 2011 and I was not involved in deliberations internally or with the
Iraqi Government on whether and how to transfer Daqduq to another
detention facility outside of Iraq. However, I have been informed that
Daqduq was transferred to Iraqi custody in December due to the
expiration (on December 31, 2011) of the 2008 Security Agreement. Under
that agreement, the Iraqi Government had legal custody of Daqduq and we
were physically holding him at their request and in accordance with
Iraqi law. Per the expiration of the agreement, we had no legal basis
for holding Daqduq and his transfer out of Iraq required the full
consent of the Iraqi Government pursuant to existing laws.
It is my understanding that Daqduq currently remains in Iraqi
custody. As the Secretary has stated, Daqduq is a dangerous individual
and his release could have a detrimental effect on U.S. interests. I
believe strongly that Daqduq should be held accountable for his crimes
and, if confirmed, I will work closely with Iraqi leaders to explore
all legal options to pursue justice in this case.
Question. The Iraqi Government has recently threatened U.S. oil and
gas companies who have attempted to develop fields in the Kurdish
region and in southern Iraq.
(a) How is the U.S. Embassy facilitating the exposure of
U.S. companies to opportunities in Iraq?
Answer. The State Department and the U.S. mission in Iraq are
engaging in a vigorous outreach effort to help US firms identify
opportunities in Iraq. These opportunities are significant and growing.
While the obstacles to doing business in Iraq remain very challenging,
one private consulting firm has reported that during 2011, U.S.
companies concluded investment and commercial deals worth $6.9 billion
USD, up from $2 billion in 2010. Moreover, U.S. exports to Iraq
increased by nearly 50 percent from 2010 to 2011.
The State and Commerce Departments and the U.S. mission in Iraq are
working hard with our partners to help U.S. businesses overcome key
entry barriers, such as identifying Iraqi Government procurement
opportunities, screened Iraqi business partners, and vetted security
firms to operate in a safe and effective manner on the ground in Iraq.
Last November, the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad hosted 83 U.S. firms and
universities at the U.S. pavilion at the Baghdad Trade Fair, the first
official U.S. presence at Iraq's flagship trade fair in more than 30
years. In March, the State Department--with participation via
videoconference by our Embassy in Baghdad and consulates in Erbil and
Basrah--hosted an event for over 100 companies to explain how to
address the challenges of doing business in Iraq. Looking forward, I
understand the Embassy plans activities that will highlight
opportunities for U.S. firms in areas such as housing, electricity, and
water infrastructure.
Boosting trade and investment ties between the United States and
Iraq is in the interests of both countries. If confirmed, one of my
highest priorities will be to ensure that U.S. companies have every
opportunity to benefit from this new and potentially very wealthy
market.
(b) How does the U.S. Embassy ensure that U.S. oil and gas
companies are protected under international conventions on
investments?
Answer. Iraq is not yet a signatory to major conventions on the
protection of international investment, such as the New York Convention
of 1958 on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards.
Our Embassy continues to press the Government of Iraq to participate in
these conventions. Indeed, such participation is very much in Iraq's
interests and is essential to attract the foreign direct investment
that Iraq so badly needs. If confirmed, I will certainly take every
opportunity to encourage the Iraqi Government to join appropriate
international investment protection agreements like the New York
Convention. With respect to investment protection in the energy sector,
in the case of irreconcilable disputes, Iraq's oil contracts typically
have provisions for international arbitration.
The Embassy, in cooperation with the Department of Commerce's
Commercial Law Development Program, is working also to strengthen
investment protection under Iraqi law by assisting Iraq to develop
specialized commercial courts. The first such court opened in 2010 and
others are planned.
I believe that harnessing the U.S. private sector can be one of our
strongest levers of influence in Iraq over the months and years to
come. This is why, as noted in my testimony, outreach to, and
facilitation for, U.S. businesses in Iraq will be one of the top
mission priorities, if confirmed.
Question. There have been allegations in the press regarding e-mail
exchanges between you and Gina Chon, a reporter for the Wall Street
Journal. (http://cryptome.org/2012/06/mcgurk-chon/mcgurk-chon.htm)
Please explain the nature of your e-mail exchanges with Ms. Chon using
your State Department e-mail address.
Answer. On the morning of June 5, 2012, the day before my
confirmation hearing, personal e-mails between me and my now beloved
wife, Gina, were made public by others without authorization. They
appear to be a printed copy of an e-mail exchange that took place 4
years ago. The State Department has not authenticated the e-mails. I do
not recall sending some of the statements that have been quoted in the
media. My wife does not recall receiving them. But I take full
responsibility for my relationship with Gina and for our exchange of
personal messages.
These e-mails appear to have been sent from my State Department
blackberry, the only reliable way to communicate at the time in Iraq.
Personal e-mail accounts were not available on handheld devices and
incidental personal use from an official account is authorized under
State Department regulations (5 FAM 723).
The printed exchanges reflect a series of personal messages from
shortly after we first met. At times, they contain flirtatious banter,
but also my adherence to professional boundaries. I did not share
sensitive information with Gina. I was a source for her stories only
when formally briefing media organizations as I did often over the
course of 2008. As an investigation by the Wall Street Journal found,
there is ``no evidence that her coverage was tainted'' by our
relationship, which was then in its earliest stages.
Regarding my relationship with Gina, I take full responsibility for
my conduct. By the summer of 2008, I had been in and out of Iraq
regularly for 4 years. I had a difficult time when home connecting with
those who had not served there. My marriage fell apart and friendships
suffered. Gina, who had also been in and out of Iraq since 2004, became
the love of my life, is now my wife, and I would not be here without
her.
Media coverage of the e-mails rests on inaccurate assumptions. For
example, one oft-cited exchange refers to a dinner at the home of an
Iraqi official. This official often hosted large gatherings, attended
by political leaders, journalists, and civil society figures. When I
determined that this particular dinner was invite only, I made clear
that Gina's attendance was ``no go.'' Another oft-quoted statement of
mine says: ``If treated to many glasses of wine, you could be the
chosen vultures'' (plural). This was a joke, written in response to
Gina's description of an evening with her colleagues from multiple news
organizations involving ``many glasses of wine''--something that was
rare in Baghdad at that time.
When it came to official activities or information, I wrote
clearly: ``Can't tell you about it, of course.'' In short, when read in
context, the e-mails contain instances of inside humor and sarcasm but
also observed professional boundaries.
At the time of these personal messages, my assignment was to secure
follow-on security arrangements with the Iraqi Government and a broader
strategic framework for U.S. relations with Iraq. That mission was not
compromised and was achieved under extremely difficult circumstances
and immense pressure. As the last three Ambassadors shared with the
committee last week, my professional experience makes me ``uniquely
positioned to build on all that America has sacrificed over this past
decade and to establish the strongest possible relationship between our
two countries.''
Four years have passed since the date of these leaked e-mails. I am
now happily married and have spent much of this period either in Iraq
or in New York where I was working on Iraq issues in academia. I am
grateful that the current and two former Ambassadors believe I have
``the right vision for leading the mission and [that I] enjoy the full
trust and confidence of the current leadership team at the Embassy.''
As I shared with the committee in my testimony, I have a coherent plan
for leading the mission and I look forward to the committee judging my
candidacy on the merits.
Question. Section 620M of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961
imposes restrictions on assistance to any unit of a foreign country's
security forces for which there is credible evidence that the unit has
committed gross violations of human rights. U.S. embassies are heavily
involved in ensuring compliance with this requirement. If confirmed,
what steps will you take to ensure that the Embassy effectively
implements section 620M? In particular, what actions will you take to
ensure, in a case in which there is credible evidence that a gross
violation of human rights has been committed, that assistance will not
be provided to units that committed the violation? What steps will you
take to ensure that the Embassy has a robust capacity to gather and
evaluate evidence regarding possible gross violations of human rights
by units of security forces?
Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure that the Embassy fully complies
with the State Department's legal obligations pursuant to the Section
620M of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, also known as the Leahy
law, for its programs in Iraq. The State Department screens all
candidates for Department-funded training courses and other assistance
for gross human rights violations pursuant to standard Leahy vetting
procedures. Specifically, I will ensure that Embassy Baghdad continues
vetting recipients of U.S. security assistance through the INVEST
(International Vetting and Security Tracking) system, which is used for
all countries whose security forces are proposed for assistance from
the United States
I will also, if confirmed, engage with the Government of Iraq when
human rights concerns related to Iraqi security force units arise, and
will inform the Iraqi Government if funds are withheld from any units
pursuant to the Leahy law. The U.S. Embassy will continue working with
the Iraqi Government and promoting the importance of respecting human
rights through diplomatic means.
______
Responses of Brett H. McGurk to Questions Submitted
by Senator Richard G. Lugar
Question. Hopes for a stable power-sharing government in Iraq in
the wake of the U.S. troop withdrawal last year have faded. Prime
Minister Maliki gives every appearance of a man seeking absolute
power--levying charges against his main Sunni rival and refusing to
implement power-sharing agreements.
What is your plan for engaging opposition parties
effectively to ensure U.S. influence remains strong in a post-
Maliki Iraq?
Answer. To help ensure that Iraq remains on the course envisioned
in its own constitution--a united, federal, democratic, and pluralistic
state--we must work to engage with and strengthen Iraq's institutions.
As explained in my written testimony, there are examples of the
Parliament acting as an independent check on executive authority. The
United States can work to encourage ``issues based'' alliances within
Parliament, which can help Iraq transcend a political culture dominated
by ethnosectarian blocs. The most recent political dispute has seen
interesting cross-sectarian alliances. The Sadrist bloc, for example,
has joined with members of Iraqiyya and the Kurdish alliance to
pressure the Prime Minister. At the same time, the Prime Minister has
built alliances with key Sunni constituencies from within Iraqiyya to
pressure his opponents. If confirmed, I will plan to engage every
political bloc on a neutral basis and seek to build on areas of
agreement and narrow areas of disagreement. It will be important to
ensure that channels of communication remain open between all parties--
especially between Baghdad and Irbil. My approach, if confirmed, will
be active personal engagement. We cannot dictate outcomes but we can
and must facilitate dialogue, search for opportunities for compromise,
and then seize on those opportunities. Finally, if confirmed, I will
encourage the Iraqis to remain focused on their scheduled elections--
local elections next year and national elections in 2014. It will be
essential for Iraq's democratic trajectory to ensure that these
elections take place freely, fairly, and on time.
Question. One of the challenges to stability in Iraq remains the
stalled process to settle territorial disputes between the Kurds and
Iraq's Arabs. What more can the United States do to play a constructive
role in helping the parties get beyond this impasse?
Answer. We continue to support a durable solution to Iraq's
disputed internal boundaries (DIBs). This includes supporting the
United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq's (UNAMI) efforts to
reconvene the High Level Task Force or any other mechanism that will
bring national and provincial leaders together to look for a long-term
resolution to Iraq's disputed internal borders. We continue to make
clear (and UNAMI agrees) that a referendum regarding resolution of
DIBs, including ultimate administrative control over the province of
Kirkuk, should confirm a political settlement negotiated by
stakeholders before a vote can take place. The proposed census, which
article 140 of the Iraqi Constitution also calls for, remains on hold
primarily due to disagreements among parties in the north on codifying
ethnicity in disputed areas. We also encourage a potential UNAMI role
in mediating these disagreements to find common ground. As noted in my
testimony, I believe article 140 continues to provide the roadmap for a
durable solution but the United States must remain actively engaged to
build compromises around the many questions that article 140 does not
answer, or (in most cases) leaves to resolution at a later date.
Security in the DIBs region is the responsibility of the Iraqis.
However, we will continue to play a mediation role when asked to ensure
relevant national and provincial leaders find a diplomatic solution to
any territorial or other security-related disputes in the DIBs. We will
also continue to provide security training and rule of law programs to
complement the high-level dialogue. Our Office of Security Cooperation
and its relationships with top Iraqi security officials will also have
a central role to play in maintaining a peaceful settlement in these
areas.
As noted in my testimony, if confirmed, I also will visit the
Kurdistan region regularly to ensure face-to-face interaction and to
strengthen regular bridges of dialogue between Baghdad and Erbil. I
have been personally involved in helping to resolve flashpoint disputes
in the DIBs and it will remain a central priority of mine, if
confirmed, to ensure that our engagement is regular and continuous to
dampen any potential conflicts far before they can begin.
Question. The drawdown of U.S. forces challenges our ability to
confront the terrorist threat posed by al-Qaeda in Iraq. How effective
are the Iraqi Security Forces in meeting this threat and what role is
the United States prepared to play in strengthening their capabilities?
Answer. As I noted in my testimony, al-Qaeda in Iraq retains the
capacity to launch attacks--mostly directed at Iraqi civilians and
Iraqi security forces--approximately every 30-40 days and the level of
attacks this year are consistent with those in the first half of 2011.
Since the U.S. withdrawal, Iraqi Special Forces have demonstrated the
capacity to locate and take down AQI cells, as seen earlier this year
following a series of AQI attacks in Anbar province (focused in the
Haditha area). While Iraq's Special Forces are among the most capable
in the region, their effectiveness can be enhanced through cooperation
with U.S. assistance. If confirmed, I will work closely with Iraqi
leaders to ensure that we are doing all we can to help Iraqi forces
eliminate al-Qaeda's leadership and uproot its networks from Iraqi
soil.
Question. Iran's influence in Iraqi affairs remains a significant
concern, and Iran's support for Shiite factions in Iraq has been long
established. As Ambassador to Iraq you must be able to represent U.S.
strategic regional objectives amidst this volatile relationship.
How will you leverage your relationships with Iraq's leaders
to forward key U.S. objectives on Iran, such as
nonproliferation, sanctions, state-sponsorship of terrorism,
and human rights?
Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure that our key objectives on
Iran, such as those related to nonproliferation, sanctions, state-
sponsored terrorism, and human rights, are part of our dialogue with
the senior leaders of the Iraqi Government as well as with leaders
across the political spectrum. The United States also will continue to
support the development of democratic institutions in Iraq that serve
the needs of the Iraqi people and withstand Iranian political
influence. In addition, Iraqi outreach to neighboring states and with
other countries in the region will keep Iraq oriented toward its Arab
neighbors through improved diplomatic and commercial ties, as opposed
to relying on Iran to make progress in these areas. I will also ensure
open and regular channels of communication between my office in Baghdad
and our ambassadors in regional capitals, most of whom I have worked
with for many years. I've found that such regular communication can be
essential to identifying opportunities and advancing U.S. interests in
the region.
As I noted in my testimony, Iranian efforts to influence Iraq in a
negative manner are balanced by the simple fact that Iraqis vigorously
defend their independence and sovereignty. Years of conflict during the
Iraq-Iran war have led the Iraqi people to be deeply distrustful of
Iranian intentions. Also, followers of Shia Islam in Iraq, led by Grand
Ayatollah Sistani, maintain different views from those in Iran with
regard to the appropriate role for religious figures to play in
politics. If confirmed, I will make clear that the U.S. Embassy is open
to engagement and dialogue with all Iraqis of good will to include, in
particular, the Shia religious leadership in Najaf.
In 2007 and 2008, I was involved in planning and preparing for
trilateral talks with Iranian diplomats in Baghdad. I was also an
active participant in regional engagement efforts, to include the U.N.-
sponsored neighbors conferences between 2006 and 2008, which included
Iran. I have learned first-hand Iran's tactics and levers of influence
within Iraq and I will align the mission, if confirmed, in a manner
that helps our Iraqi partners build an independent state free of such
interference. The centerpiece of this will be the Strategic Framework
Agreement, which envisions a globally integrated Iraq--precisely the
opposite of what Iran desires.
As noted in my testimony, helping the Iraqis expand their oil
sector will be essential to Iraq's development, stabilizing global
markets, and retaining pressure on the Iranian regime. This will also
be a top priority, if confirmed.
Furthermore, we must harness the power of U.S. private industry,
one of our strongest levers of influence that remains yet undeveloped.
The demonstrated Iraqi desire for U.S. firms to help build the backbone
of their security forces, airlines, and energy sector gives us a good
foundation for this effort.
On the specific issues of sanctions and state sponsorship of
terrorism, I plan to continue working with Iraq's key politicians and
leaders not only to preserve the hard-won security and political
progress for which I saw Iraqis sacrifice their lives, but also to push
for more progress in developing a sound and independent political
system that can successfully counter Iran's nefarious influence and
meddling. It is worth noting the role of the Iraqis as host for the May
23 P5+1 talks in Baghdad. The Iraqis demonstrated a clear interest in a
peaceful, diplomatic resolution to international concerns about Iran's
failure to meet its obligations with respect to its nuclear program.
This is an important step for the Iraqis as they resume their place in
the international community and learn to conduct their own foreign
policy.
Finally, I remain committed to incorporating human rights into my
engagements with all Iraqi politicians and throughout the various
spheres of Iraqi society--relying on Iraq's own constitution as the
centerpiece of my argument. It is not enough to have security and
prosperity. For Iraq to reach its full potential, all Iraqis must enjoy
the right to freedom of expression, worship, and the right to political
participation. We saw Iraqi exercise their political will at the ballot
box in March 2010. The time will come for them to return to the polls.
As I emphasized in my testimony, ensuring that these future elections
happen freely, fairly, and on time, will be essential to securing
Iraq's democratic gains.
Question. The crisis in Syria continues to dominate the region. As
we look to the Arab League and other regional partners to play a
stronger role in pressing Bashar al-Assad to cease the violence, what
is your assessment of the role that Iraq's leadership can play in this
regard and in stopping spill-over effects from further destabilizing
Iraq?
Answer. The Iraqi Government follows a general foreign policy of
nonintervention in the affairs of neighboring countries. When it comes
to Syria, however, Iraq has a mixed record. In August 2009, the Iraqi
Government blamed Syria for a series of bombings and sought Arab League
and U.N. Security Council assistance for an investigation. More
recently, the Iraqi Government has acted hesitatingly in the wake of
unfolding events in Syria. After at first retaining a neutral stance,
the Iraqi Government has more recently said publicly that the Syrian
President's dictatorship must come to an end and that the days of one
party rule in Syria are over. On June 2, Iraq joined the Arab League in
its most recent condemnation of the Syrian Government's continued
violence against civilians, including the massacre in Houla. Iraq's
concern regarding the situation in Syria is driven by fear among Iraqi
leaders that a sudden collapse of the Assad regime could lead to a
sectarian upheaval that could spill over Iraq's western border. The
United States will continue to urge Iraq to call for the immediate
departure of Assad, and to support a political solution to the crisis
in Syria, as outlined by U.N.--Arab League Joint Special Envoy Annan's
six point plan and UNSCRs 2042 and 2043.
As for what I can do from Baghdad: if confirmed, I will (1) remain
constantly engaged with U.S. ambassadors in regional capitals and at
the highest levels of the White House and State Department and (2)
ensure the Syria situation is assessed and approached
multidimensionally within Iraq: with the Central Government, with the
Kurdistan Regional Government, and with the tribes of western Iraq. It
will be essential to seize opportunities where they exist and to ensure
that the Iraqi Government both adheres to its Security Council
obligations and remains within the Arab League consensus on the Syria
situation. As I stated in my testimony, all Iraqis must know: ``U.S.
policy is firm: Bashar al-Assad must go. The longer he remains, the
greater the threat to the Syrian people, to the region, and to Iraq.''
Question. Our Embassy in Baghdad is our largest. How sustainable is
that posture and what is your assessment of plans to reduce U.S.
civilian staff in the wake of the military withdrawal?
Absent attractive incentive packages (such as ``linked
assignments'') what steps would you take to ensure that you get
the best people to take assignments in Iraq?
Answer. As I noted in my testimony, the current size of the Embassy
reflects an ``all contingency'' plan that was developed in light of the
uncertainties facing our mission over the early part of this year. Now
that we are 6 months into the first year without a substantial U.S.
military presence, we are able to plan for a more institutionalized and
sustainable presence. If confirmed, my aim will be to build a mission
that is secure, strategic, effective, and sustainable. This will
require a consolidation of our footprint and a reduction in personnel.
We are also moving to a posture that allows us as much as possible to
live off the local economy, decreasing dependence on offshore contract
firms. I believe the current planned reductions are a good start in
this regard.
Iraq remains a difficult environment for American employees of all
agencies. The Department of State expects a full package of incentives
to remain in place for the next several years, although there may be
some alterations. If confirmed, I will work with the Department to
ensure that service in Iraq produces a record of achievement that is
not overlooked in promotions, awards, and assignments. I will also
endeavor to recruit those who have served Iraq in the past to draw on
the nearly decade of experience our Foreign Service professionals have
in the country. To succeed in Iraq we will need the best people, with
the most experience, operating on the ground.
Question. Please respond to the following questions with regard to
the Special Immigrant Visa (SIV) Program for Iraq:
(a) Please provide the number of Iraqi SIVs that have been
issued, by fiscal year, since the inception of the program;
Answer. The chart below details how many Special Immigrant Visas
(SIVs) the Department of State has issued to Iraqi applicants under
both the Section 1059 and Section 1244 programs since implementation in
FY 2007. FY 2012 numbers are preliminary:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Principal Derivatives Totals
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2007............................................................ 431 383 814
2008............................................................ 518 449 967
2009............................................................ 1,448 1,385 2,833
2010............................................................ 951 1,091 2,042
2011............................................................ 322 384 706
2012*........................................................... 1,137 1,461 2,598
-----------------------------------------------
Totals.................................................... 4,807 5,153 9,960
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Applications through May 31, 2012.
(b) Please list the number of applications, by fiscal year,
since the inception;
Answer. The chart below details the number of approved I-360
immigrant visa petitions received by the State Department's National
Visa Center (NVC) from USCIS for Iraqis applying for the Section 1059
and Section 1244 SIV Programs. FY 2012 numbers are preliminary:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Iraqi section Iraqi section
1059 approved 1244 approved Combined total
I-360s I-360s
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2007......................................................... 650 0 650
FY 2008......................................................... 149 48 197
FY 2009......................................................... 139 1,614 1,753
FY 2010......................................................... 10 1,025 1,035
FY 2011......................................................... 2 2,398 2,400
FY 2012*........................................................ 0 659 659
-----------------------------------------------
Totals.................................................... 950 5,744 6,694
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Applications through May 31, 2012.
(c) Please list the average processing time for an SIV, by
fiscal year.
Answer. Processing SIVs involves a number of different steps, many
of which are outside the control of the State Department's Bureau of
Consular Affairs. As a result, I understand that the Department does
not have general statistics on processing times for SIVs. I understand
there were significant delays in returning clearances on SIV cases in
FY 2011, but there has been improvement on processing times in FY 2012.
The State Department's internal standards require scheduling interviews
60 days from the receipt of the application. As the numbers of SIVs
issued to Iraqis in FY 2012 indicate above, our interagency partners
have made significant strides in eliminating the backlog of Iraqi SIV
cases pending security screening. This progress allowed us to cut the
backlog of Iraqi SIVs pending final action (issuance or refusal of the
visa application) by 50 percent since March. In late February, 2,832
Iraqi SIV applications were pending security vetting. A little over 3
months later, that number has fallen to 1,388.
We owe it to those Iraqis who have worked with us to ensure that
this program runs as transparently as possible while also maintaining
essential security checks to protect the American people.
(d) Please list the total number of pending SIV applications
as of June 1, 2012.
Answer As of June 6, 2012, there were 1,388 Iraqi SIV applications
pending security clearances.
______
Responses of Brett H. McGurk to Questions Submitted
by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin
Question. Special Immigrant Visas (SIVs) for Iraqi employees of the
United States: As you know from our earlier conversations, I am very
concerned about delays in the processing of Special Immigrant Visas
(SIVs) for those Iraqis who risked their lives to work for us in Iraq--
particularly those who were living and working on our bases and have
been ``cut loose'' since our withdrawal last December. How can SIV
processing be expedited? What can be done to offer protection to those
who are literally in hiding and on the run inside Iraq as they await
issuance of their visas?
Answer. This issue is very important and personal to me. It will
receive my close attention, if confirmed. Since we met in your office,
I have spoken with the leading U.S. officials who have been working to
address delays in processing of Special Immigrant Visas (SIVs) for
Iraqis who have risked their lives to work with us. The State
Department is working closely with our interagency colleagues to
streamline the SIV application process, eliminate redundant
requirements, and accept electronic submissions wherever possible. If
confirmed, I will work to ensure that the Embassy is staffed to manage
applications efficiently and in a manner that provides fair process to
our Iraqi partners while also ensuring necessary background and
security checks to protect the American people. In recent months,
strides have been made in eliminating the backlog of Iraqi SIV cases
pending security screening. Over the first half of this year, the State
Department issued more SIVs to Iraqis than during all of FY 2011. In FY
2011, the Department issued 706 SIVs to Iraqi citizens. By the end of
March 2012, the Department already had issued 865 SIVs to Iraqis.
During April and May 2012 alone, it issued an additional 1,733 SIVs to
Iraqis, based on preliminary data. Thus, the trend appears to be a
positive one, and now we must ensure it continues. If confirmed, I am
committed to working diligently with our interagency partners to
balance the safety of American citizens with the aspirations of Iraqis
who risked their lives to work with us, and now wish to resettle in our
country.
Question. Iraq and the Extractive Industries Transparency
Initiative (EITI): According to the World Bank, Iraq possesses a proven
143 billion barrels of oil, and high oil prices and increasing exports
should enable Iraq's GDP to grow by about 12 percent in 2012. It is
therefore critical that the Government of Iraq implement an effective
and transparent process for handling and accounting for these rapidly
increasing revenues. Iraq has been an Extractive Industries
Transparency Initiative (EITI) candidate country since 2010 and is
supposed to complete the requirements to become a ``compliant'' country
later this year. What are the prospects for this happening?
Answer. The Board of the Extractive Industries Transparency
Initiative (EITI) accepted Iraq as a candidate country on February 10,
2010. Iraq has until August 9, 2012, to undergo EITI validation to
determine whether the country is compliant. Iraq issued its first EITI
report in December 2011, reporting $41 billion in revenues from oil and
gas exports in 2009. Iraq's second report, covering 2010, is expected
on schedule by the end of the year. Iraq has hired one of the approved
international validation companies to conduct its validation exercise,
a highly detailed procedure to reconcile national revenue and company
payment figures for extractive industries. We believe the Iraqi
authorities are committed to the EITI process.
The United States strongly supports Iraq's efforts to become EITI
compliant. Iraq is one of only two countries in the Middle East to have
sought EITI compliant status and holds the largest reserves of any
country seeking this status.
Revenues from crude oil exports account for approximately 95
percent of Iraqi Government revenues, so the EITI reconciliation
exercise is tightly tied to the overall transparency of Iraqi
Government revenues. All Iraqi oil export revenues flow through the
accounts of the Development Fund for Iraq at the New York Federal
Reserve and are subject to audit by Iraq's Governmental auditing and
internal control body, the Committee of Financial Experts. Iraq
publishes its annual budget. The 2012 budget was reviewed by experts
from the International Monetary Fund.
In September 2011, the State Department's Bureau of Near Eastern
Affairs awarded a $1million grant to Revenue Watch Institute to broaden
and strengthen Iraqi civil society working on EITI issues and to
support a more robust implementation process. As stated in my written
testimony, helping the Iraqis to meet the requirements of the EITI
would be among my top priorities if confirmed. ``By helping the Iraqis
address these challenges, the United States can gain leverage and
influence while pursuing mutual goals.''
______
Responses of Brett H. McGurk to Questions Submitted
by Senator Robert P. Casey, Jr.
Question. In July 2010, U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Jim Jeffrey said
the following on Iran's role in Iraq during his confirmation hearing
``Iran attempts to exert its influence through financial and political
backing for political parties, high-level engagement with Iraqi
leaders, and support for Shia militant groups. But, we should recognize
that Iran's efforts continue to run into the natural independence of
Iraqis.''
(a) Do you believe that this analysis still holds? How does
Iran exert its influence in Iraq today?
Answer. Yes, this analysis still holds. As noted in my written
testimony, ``Iran has tremendous influence in Iraq, sharing a 3,000
kilometer border, as well as interwoven religious, cultural, and
economic ties.'' Iran largely failed, however, in its efforts to create
Iraqi Shia extremist militia groups capable of driving U.S. forces from
Iraq, as these groups publicly pledged to do time and time again. Over
the course of this year, the three primary Shia extremist groups have
largely gone to ground--although we must retain a vigilant eye on their
activities. Iran's influence is now primarily economic and political;
and this is where we must focus our efforts to push back: through
active political engagement, strengthening our economic and commercial
ties with Iraq (including private sector engagement), and deepening our
permanent ties--in education, defense, culture, commerce--under the
Strategic Framework Agreement.
(b) How has Iraq recently exhibited its natural independence
against influence from Iran? What can we do to help support
that ``natural independence''?
Answer. I have been involved in a number of conversations with
Iraqi leaders to push back against nefarious Iranian influence. Last
summer, when U.S. troops were coming under fire from Iranian-backed
extremist groups, Embassy Baghdad pushed for Iraqi Security Forces to
move into Maysan province to protect our people and detain those
responsible. The Iraqi security forces did and the attacks nearly
ceased. Iraqi leaders have also sought to ensure a growing supply of
oil to international markets which is not in Iran's interest. The Shia
religious leadership in Najaf professes a vision of Shia Islam that
undercuts the legitimacy of the Iranian regime. And, of course, Iraqi
security forces (with our help) defeated Iranian-backed militia groups
that had been controlling much of Basrah in the spring of 2008. This
was a major turning point in Iraq's trajectory. Furthermore, as I noted
in my testimony, ``The vast majority of Iraqis seek to live in a
globally integrated nation, whereas Iran seeks to further isolate Iraq
from the world. It is between these competing visions--an Iraq that is
globally integrated versus an Iraq that is isolated and dependent on
Iran--that the United States retains substantial advantage and
influence.'' Our vision for Iraq is one that most Iraqis share and it
is codified in the Strategic Framework Agreement.
Having stronger, effective government institutions will also
support Iraq's ability to withstand Iranian political influence. We
continue to support the development of democratic institutions in Iraq
that serve the will and needs of the Iraqi people. In addition,
developing stronger ties with other neighbors and the larger Middle
East region will temper Iraqi ties to Iran. We are urging all of the
regional players to engage directly with the Iraqi Government. Iraq's
hosting of the Arab League summit in Baghdad was a significant and
positive step in Iraq's integration into the region. Iraq is resolving
longstanding issues with Kuwait and also building political ties as
well as exploring economic/energy cooperation with other GCC states and
Jordan. Finally, encouraging military-to-military engagements between
Iraq and GCC states will be one of my top priorities at the Embassy, if
confirmed.
Question. Iraq has unique concerns with respect to the unrest in
Syria. The ongoing violence and apparent failure of Annan's peace plan
has increased calls for greater regional efforts to remove Assad from
power and support a democratic transition in Syria.
What do you make of the Iraqi relationship with Syria and
how will you use your position to urge the Iraqi Government to
play a more constructive role bilaterally and through the Arab
League to bring about a democratic transition in Syria?
Answer. The Iraqi Government follows a general foreign policy of
nonintervention in the affairs of neighboring countries. When it comes
to Syria, however, Iraq has a mixed record. In August 2009, the Iraqi
Government blamed Syria for a series of bombings and sought Arab League
and U.N. Security Council assistance for an investigation. More
recently, the Iraqi Government has acted hesitantly to unfolding events
in Syria. After at first retaining a neutral stance, the Iraqi
Government has more recently said publicly that the Syrian President's
dictatorship must come to an end and that the days of one party rule in
Syria are over. On June 2, Iraq joined the Arab League in its most
recent condemnation of the Syrian Government's continued violence
against civilians, including the massacre in Houla. Iraq's concern
regarding the situation in Syria is driven by fear among Iraqi leaders
that a sudden collapse of the Assad regime could lead to a sectarian
upheaval that could spill over Iraq's western border. The United States
will continue to urge Iraq to call for the immediate departure of
Assad, and to support a political solution to the crisis in Syria, as
outlined by U.N.-Arab League Joint Special Envoy Annan's six point plan
and UNSCRs 2042 and 2043.
As for what I can do from Baghdad: if confirmed, I will (1) remain
constantly engaged with U.S. ambassadors in regional capitals and the
Iraq and Syria policy teams at the State Department and (2) ensure the
Syria situation is assessed and approached multidimensionally within
Iraq. It will be essential to seize opportunities where they exist and
to ensure that the Iraqi Government both adheres to its Security
Council obligations and remains within the Arab League consensus on the
Syria situation. As I stated in my testimony, all Iraqis must know that
``U.S. policy is firm: Bashar al-Assad must go. The longer he remains,
the greater the threat to the Syrian people and to the region, and to
Iraq.''
Question. Despite efforts to expedite processing of Special
Immigrant Visas (SIV) for Iraqis who assisted the United States
Government during the war, there continues to be a significant backlog
of visas. In the meantime, applicants are under threat and some have
been killed for their work with U.S. forces.
(a) How many cases of SIV principal applicants are currently
in the pipeline? How many principal applicants have been
granted SIVs since the beginning of 2012?
Answer. As I noted in my testimony, addressing the delays in
security vetting of Iraqi SIV applications is an issue I take
personally. I have known Iraqis who lost their lives after cooperating
with us and others who have either resettled in the United States or
never had an application processed. It is my understanding that in
recent months, the United States has streamlined the application
process to conform with existing laws and ensure reasonable security
checks while also eliminating redundant requirements and accepting
electronic submissions wherever possible. We are seeing some progress
in eliminating the backlog of Iraqi SIV cases pending security
screening. As of June 6, there were 1,388 Iraqi SIVs applicants whose
visas were pending security clearances. Over the first half of this
year, the State Department issued more SIVs to Iraqis than during all
of FY 2011. In FY 2011, the Department issued 706 SIVs to Iraqi
citizens. By the end of March 2012, the Department already had issued
865 SIVs to Iraqis. During April and May 2012 alone, the Department
issued an additional 1,733 SIVs to Iraqis, based on preliminary data.
If confirmed, I pledge my utmost efforts to ensure that the Embassy is
appropriately staffed to efficiently process SIV applications, and to
ensure as much as possible that Iraqis who have worked with us and wish
to resettle in the United States undergo a fair process with reasonable
security checks.
(b) How many cases are pending for applicants through the
direct access visa process? How many direct access visas have
been granted since the beginning of 2012?
Answer. Approximately 40,000 Iraqis have pending applications for
the direct access in-country refugee resettlement program in Iraq. Of
that number, more than 25,000 Iraqis are pending case prescreening and
their required in-person interviews with the Department of Homeland
Security. Since FY 2007, we have admitted more than 8,200 direct-access
Iraqi applicants to the United States from Iraq. Of that number, we
admitted more than 530 from Iraq in FY 2012. If confirmed, I will
ensure close cooperation from the Embassy and through the interagency
to process these cases as rapidly as possible while maintaining
reasonable security checks. It will be a priority to ensure that Iraqis
who worked with us feel welcomed not only at the U.S. Embassy in their
capital city but also in the United States.
(c) What is your plan to recognize the bravery of these
individuals by further expediting this backlog of applicants?
Answer. The SIV program was implemented in Iraq as a means to both
recognize and provide protection for those Iraqis who risked their
lives, and the lives of their families, to further U.S. goals in Iraq.
The best solution for helping those in danger awaiting SIV and refugee
processing is continued swift processing of their applications,
including the security vetting process. Ensuring the success of these
programs will be a top priority, if confirmed. As I stated in my
written testimony: ``Iraqis who risked their lives to work with us
should feel welcomed, even as we uphold essential security checks.''
______
Responses of Susan Marsh Elliott to Questions Submitted
by Senator John F. Kerry
Question. Section 620M of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961
imposes restrictions on assistance to any unit of a foreign country's
security forces for which there is credible evidence that the unit has
committed gross violations of human rights. U.S. embassies are heavily
involved in ensuring compliance with this requirement.
If confirmed, what steps will you take to ensure that the
Embassy effectively implements section 620M?
In particular, what actions will you take to ensure, in a
case in which there is credible evidence that a gross violation
of human rights has been committed, that assistance will not be
provided to units that committed the violation?
What steps will you take to ensure that the Embassy has a
robust capacity to gather and evaluate evidence regarding
possible gross violations of human rights by units of security
forces?
Answer. Urging the Government of Tajikistan to improve its human
rights performance will be one of my top priorities, if confirmed as
Ambassador to Tajikistan. Embassy Dushanbe already routinely conducts
Leahy vetting in accordance with the requirements of section 620M of
the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961. Still, given the importance of
human rights monitoring, I would lead a review of our Leahy vetting
procedures to ensure we are conducting these reviews based on the most
complete information. Such efforts could include leveraging the growing
reach of the Internet; maintaining steady contact with activists, NGOs,
journalists, and others; increasing outreach to local police and
government contacts; and encouraging victims and their families to come
forward. If confirmed, I will continue our coordinated work with the
Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor in Washington and maintain
use of the International Vetting and Security Tracking (INVEST) system
to maximize the breadth and depth of our vetting activities.
I cannot speculate broadly on hypothetical cases of gross
violations of human rights, as each case is unique, but I can pledge to
follow U.S. law: If our coordinated vetting processes reveals credible
information that a member or unit of the security forces is responsible
for gross violations of human rights, the Embassy will prohibit that
unit or individual from receiving assistance. We will use the tools at
our disposal, including end use monitoring and our bilateral security
agreements, to ensure U.S. assistance is never provided to those
committing such violations.
Question. Does Russia have plans to redeploy its troops to the
Tajikistan-Afghanistan border following NATO's post-2014 withdrawal
from Afghanistan? If so, what implications does that have for U.S.
policy in the region? Would the United States support such a Russian
deployment?
Answer. I cannot speak to Russia's long-term intentions with regard
to border guard deployments on the border between Tajikistan and
Afghanistan following NATO's withdrawal from Afghanistan. It is
conceivable that Russia may desire to redeploy troops to the border
given Russian concerns over the large volume of Afghan origin narcotics
that transit Tajikistan en route to Russia. Russia has had a Border
Advisory Group in Tajikistan ever since their main forces left in 2005,
but neither country characterized these advisers as ``troops.''
Any potential deployment must take into account the sensitivities
of Tajikistan. On a number of occasions in the past, Tajikistan has
refused to permit Russian troops along the border. While I cannot
speculate on the potential U.S. reaction to Russian deployments, we
fully respect Tajikistan's sovereign right to determine the best course
forward on foreign policy matters.
______
Response of Susan Marsh Elliott to Question Submitted
by Senator Robert P. Casey, Jr.
Question. While U.S. operations in Afghanistan continue, we must
rely on close cooperation with Tajikistan in order to manage the flow
of goods and people in and out of Afghanistan. However, we must balance
this strategic imperative with our serious concerns about human rights
in the country, including the repression of media freedom and political
opposition and restrictions on the rights of women and ethnic and
religious minorities.
How are we pushing the Government of Tajikistan to rectify
these abuses? Are discussions of human rights with Tajik
officials effective in producing positive change? If not, what
else could we be doing?
Answer. Promoting and protecting freedom of the press, the rights
of women, religious and ethnic minorities is an integral part of our
engagement with the Government of Tajikistan. We consistently raise
these and other human rights issues with all levels of the government.
In May 2012, Assistant Secretary Robert O. Blake, Jr., hosted the
third round of U.S.-Tajikistan Annual Bilateral Consultations (ABC),
which served as a vehicle to frankly discuss our wide range of
bilateral issues. Our delegations to the ABCs regularly include
representatives of the Department of State's Bureau of Democracy, Human
Rights and Labor, Office of Central Asian Affairs, and Office of
International Religious Freedom, the Office of Central Asia in the
Office of the Secretary of Defense, and the U.S. Agency for
International Development. In addition to meetings with officials of
the Government of Tajikistan, when in-country, Assistant Secretary
Blake and I regularly meet with civil society, including human rights,
business, and political leaders to discuss these issues.
The goal of the ABCs is to increase the level of our engagement. We
see opportunities for progress in all areas of our dialogue over the
coming year, including strengthening respect for human rights and
religious freedom, promoting democratic governance, and enhancing the
rule of law. In our interactions with the Government and people of
Tajikistan, we seek to ensure Tajikistan continues to be a stable
country with secure borders and an improving economic climate.
When Secretary Clinton visited Tajikistan, she stressed the
importance for the governments and leaders to provide the space
necessary for citizens to have a voice in their government, to pursue
their aspirations, and promote their ideas. If confirmed, I will work
hard to convey to the Government of Tajikistan the importance of an
open, democratic, tolerant society which can provide a firm foundation
for a secure, stable, and prosperous nation.
______
Response of Susan Marsh Elliott to Question Submitted
by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin
Question. Does the Tajik Government respect human rights, in your
view? Has trafficking in persons decreased? Are there political
prisoners in Tajikistan? How should the United States address human
rights problems in Tajikistan?
Answer. The Government of Tajikistan has a great deal of work to do
on the human rights front but their engagement on this issue has
recently increased. The most significant human rights problems included
torture and abuse of detainees, restrictions on freedoms of expression
and religion (especially regarding the prosecution of journalists and
repression of faith groups), and violence and discrimination against
women. We continue to remind Government officials that a free and open
exchange with the public is in the government's interest and a sign of
a modern state.
During the 2011 Trafficking in Persons reporting period,
encompassing the 2010 cotton harvest, the Government of Tajikistan took
strong measures to prevent forced child labor in the cotton harvest,
including disseminating widely a directive that ordered the enforcement
of existing prohibitions against forced labor and accrediting and
assisting NGOs to monitor the cotton harvest. These actions in part
resulted in Tajikistan's upgrade from Tier Two Watch List to Tier Two
in the 2011 (and most recent) TIP Report. During the last cotton
harvest, the government continued these efforts, fulfilling the first
recommendations in the 2011 TIP Report.
We have repeatedly recommended that the Government of Tajikistan
vigorously investigate and prosecute suspected trafficking offenses,
especially those involving forced labor, and convict and punish
trafficking offenders, including local officials who force individuals
to participate in the cotton harvest. We also raise frequently the need
for the Government of Tajikistan to continue to educate school
administrators and teachers about Tajik laws against forced labor of
children.
On the issue of political prisoners, according to the State
Department's 2011 Human Rights Report, Tajik authorities claimed that
there were no political prisoners and that they did not make any
politically motivated arrests. Opposition parties and local observers
claimed, however, that the government selectively prosecuted political
opponents. Due to lack of transparency there is no reliable estimate of
the number of political prisoners.
Promoting and protecting basic freedom is a key USG interest. In
May 2012, I participated in the third U.S.-Tajikistan Annual Bilateral
Consultations, hosted by Assistant Secretary for South and Central Asia
Robert O Blake, Jr., which served as an additional vehicle to frankly
discuss the wide range of bilateral issues--including human rights.
During the discussions, we expressed concern about restrictions on
religious freedom such as the Parental Responsibility Law and
reiterated continued need for the Government of Tajikistan to improve
its human rights record. At the ABC and in other settings, we encourage
the Government of Tajikistan to explore ways to combat violent
extremism through the promotion of human rights--including religious
freedom--in Tajikistan.
I can assure you that I will continue to raise these issues as a
top priority in Tajikistan, if I am confirmed as Ambassador.
______
Responses of Susan Marsh Elliott to Questions Submitted
by Senator Marco Rubio
Question. (1) According to the State Department's 2011 Trafficking
in Persons Report, Tajikistan is a Tier 2 country for human
trafficking. Tajikistan serves as a source country for sexual
exploitation and forced labor. The annual cotton harvest has been a
concerning event where numerous instances of forced labor of children
occurs.
If confirmed, what is your strategy to combat the use of
forced labor during the annual cotton harvest?
(2) There have been reports where school aged children were forced
to pick cotton during the harvest but government officials did not
prosecute the teachers and farmers involved.
If confirmed, how do you plan on addressing the issue of
enforcement of antihuman trafficking laws, particularly in
cases of forced labor during the cotton harvest?
Answer. During the 2011 Trafficking in Persons reporting period,
encompassing the 2010 and 2011 cotton harvests, the Government of
Tajikistan took strong measures to prevent forced child labor in the
cotton harvest, including disseminating widely a directive that ordered
the enforcement of existing prohibitions against forced labor and
accrediting and assisting NGOs to monitor the cotton harvest. These
actions in part resulted in Tajikistan's upgrade from Tier Two Watch
List to Tier Two. During the last cotton harvest, the government
continued these efforts, fulfilling the first recommendations in the
2011 TIP Report. The International Organization on Migration's (IOM)
2012 ``Report on the 2011 Tajik Cotton Harvest,'' which was released in
March 2012 and funded by the Department of State's International
Narcotics and Law Enforcement Bureau, noted that the Tajik Government
took action on reported cases of forced child labor during the cotton
harvest.
We have repeatedly recommended that the Government of Tajikistan
vigorously investigate and prosecute suspected trafficking offenses,
especially those involving forced labor, and convict and punish
trafficking offenders, including local officials who force individuals
to participate in the cotton harvest. We also raise frequently the need
for the Government of Tajikistan to continue to educate school
administrators and teachers about Tajik laws against forced labor of
children.
If confirmed, I will vigorously raise with the Government of
Tajikistan the issue of enforcement of antihuman trafficking laws,
particularly in cases of forced labor during the cotton harvest. Also,
I will follow closely our assistance in this area to ensure that it is
achieving the intended results.
NOMINATIONS OF RICHARD MORNINGSTAR, TIMOTHY BROAS, AND JAY ANANIA
----------
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 13, 2012
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Foreign Relations,
Washington, DC.
----------
Hon. Richard L. Morningstar, of Massachusetts, to be Ambassador
to the Republic of Azerbaijan
Timothy M. Broas, of Maryland, to be Ambassador to the Kingdom
of the Netherlands
Jay Nicholas Anania, of Maryland, to be Ambassador to the
Republic of Suriname
----------
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:49 p.m., in
room SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Jeanne
Shaheen, presiding.
Present: Senators Kerry, Shaheen, Menendez, Cardin, Lugar,
and Barrasso.
The Chairman. The hearing will come to order. I am going to
exercise the prerogative of being the Chair with the ranking
member's consent and start the hearing, even though I have
asked Senator Shaheen, who is now here, to chair the hearing.
And what I will do is recognize Senator Shaheen to formally
open the proceedings, and then we will go from there.
Senator Shaheen [presiding]. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Since it is your committee, you can start whenever you are
ready, and I appreciate that and apologize for being late.
We are here today to consider the nominations of Richard
Morningstar to be United States Ambassador to Azerbaijan, Mr.
Timothy Broad to be the United States Ambassador to the
Netherlands, and Mr. Jay Nicholas Anania to be the United
States Ambassador to the Republic of Suriname.
And, Mr. Chairman, I do not know if you would like to go
ahead and do the introductions, and then I have an opening
statement since I know you have to go on.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN F. KERRY,
U.S. SENATOR FROM MASSACHUSETTS
The Chairman. I appreciate that. I have to go on to another
meeting and appreciate that enormously.
First of all, thank you for letting me say a few words and
for chairing this. I really appreciate it. And I am very
pleased that the President has nominated such strong candidates
to serve as Ambassador to Azerbaijan, the Netherlands, and
Suriname.
Jay Anania has served as a career Foreign Service officer,
which we always welcome here, to take on chief of mission
roles. He served in a variety of important and challenging
posts, most recently at our Embassy in Baghdad. And he is a
highly qualified nominee, and I know he is going to be an
excellent Ambassador in Suriname. We look forward to confirming
you.
Tim Broas comes to us from a long and very distinguished
career in the private practice of law. For the last 3 years,
various legal associations have listed him as one of the best
lawyers in America, and some even have given him the super
lawyer's award. No doubt this experience will be put to good
use as he takes the post in The Hague because the Dutch proudly
refer to themselves as the international legal capital of the
world. We are very fortunate that he has agreed to serve on
behalf of our country.
I have known Tim for many years, and I can tell you that he
is as decent and humble as he is passionate about serving his
country. He embodies not just the accomplishments to which
every American should aspire, but he is a living example of the
kind
of compassion and strength that we expect from our Nation's
diplomats.
I will say on a personal note I know he is a quintessential
family man. This September he will celebrate his 27th wedding
anniversary with his wife, Julie, herself an accomplished
lawyer. And together they have raised three extraordinary
children: Emily, Allison, and Mattie, who are here today with
him. I got to know Emily when she was an intern in my
Washington office and during her years at Dartmouth College. It
is a testament to things unseen that Emily is still here with
us today. As a freshman when many of the rest of the freshman
classes were agonizing over what courses to take or clubs to
join, she was diagnosed with leukemia, and anyone who knows her
will understand that she is a fighter. Through courage, grit,
and sheer determination she stared down adversity and keep her
dreams afloat. And Tim never let go during that process. He was
there every step of the way with compassion and grace and a
unique sense of humor that is always leavening in those
stressful moments.
Tim and I share a mutual appreciation for Bruce
Springsteen. Back in 2004 when my Presidential campaign was in
full swing, ``the Boss,'' who campaigned with me, wrote an op-
ed that I think sums what is best about Tim. This may be the
first confirmation hearing at which ``the Boss'' is quoted on
behalf of the nominee, he wrote, ``It's through the truthful
exercise of the best of human qualities, respect for others,
honesty about ourselves, faith in our ideals, that we come to
life in God's eyes. It is how our soul as a nation and as
individuals is revealed.''
So I can tell you that in him I think the President has
nominated a man of the highest integrity who will represent
this Nation with honesty, with respect for other people, and an
unwavering faith in our ideals.
Finally, I am delighted to introduce an old friend from
Massachusetts, Richard Morningstar, to serve as our Ambassador
to Azerbaijan. I have known Dick Morningstar since I entered
politics in Massachusetts, and I have worked with him now for
decades. Many times he has answered the call to serve our
country in various posts, and he is now doing so once again in
a post where I believe our country, and the President need his
skills far more than he needs the job. He will bring the right
intelligence, commitment, and broad experience, including
profound regional experience to this task.
Ambassador Morningstar currently serves as special envoy
for Eurasian energy at the State Department, where he has
worked tirelessly and with great skill to enhance Europe's
energy security and assist the Caspian and Central Asian
countries to find new routes to the market. It is a position of
strategic importance to the United States, and it is the kind
of position that Dick has excelled in.
In the interest of time, I am not going to detail his long
list of previous accomplishments, but I will say for the record
that he has served as Ambassador to the European Union, a
Special Advisor to the President and Secretary of State for
Caspian Basin energy diplomacy, Ambassador and Special Advisor
to the President and Secretary of State for the newly
independent states of the former Soviet Union, and, above all,
he had the good sense to be born and educated in Massachusetts.
It is a pleasure to welcome him here today. And I
understand that his wife, Faith, and his daughter, Jill, and
son-in-law, Al Fitzpayne, are also in attendance. So we welcome
all them here this afternoon. And a quick shout out to Dick's
son, Tim, and his wife, Liz, who also did a terrific job of
helping me back in 2004.
Before I wrap up, I just want to underscore that really no
issue may be more important to us than stability in the south
Caucasus than a lasting and peaceful resolution to the Nagorno-
Karabakh conflict. And as cochair of the OSCE Minsk Group, the
United States is committed to a comprehensive peace settlement
that is going to require sustained engagement and political
will. And I know Secretary Clinton's recent travel to the
region underscores our determination to move forward on this
issue.
So, Ambassador Morningstar, your nomination could not be
more timely, and I want to say personally that I am grateful
for your continued dedication to public service, and grateful
for your friendship and support.
I urge my colleagues to support all three of these nominees
and hope we can move them as expeditiously as possible. Thank
you, Madam Chairman, very much.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you very much, Senator Kerry. We
very much appreciate the fact that you are able to be here at
the start of this hearing. And I also want to recognize Ranking
Member Lugar, who is the ranking member on the full committee,
and thank him for being here as well. Would you like to make
any kind of a statement following the Chair?
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD G. LUGAR,
U.S. SENATOR FROM INDIANA
Senator Lugar. My statement would simply be that I am
delighted with the remarkable quality of the candidates that
are in front of us today. I have had the special privilege to
work with Ambassador Morningstar and look forward to his
testimony. And we will have questions for him in due course.
We are grateful to all three of you for coming to our
hearing and for your public service.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you very much, Senator Lugar.
I have a very brief statement that I will make before
turning it over to the ranking member of this subcommittee,
Senator Barrasso, for his statement before we finally turn it
over to you all. So you have a brief reprieve before we begin
asking you questions.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JEANNE SHAHEEN,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW HAMPSHIRE
Senator Shaheen. I want to start by congratulating each of
you on your nominations. We all thank you for taking on these
very important jobs and look forward to hearing from you this
afternoon.
I also want to just make sure that you take the
opportunity, if you would like, to introduce any family or
friends that you have here with you. I see a big crowd, so that
says to me you must have lots of people who care about you and
this nomination here with you. So feel free to do that. We ask
a lot of our diplomats and their families, and we know that
service abroad is sometimes very challenging, and it is very
important to have the support of your families.
First on the agenda today, the committee will examine our
relationship with Azerbaijan, a critical partner for the United
States in the strategically vital Caspian region. This year
marks the 20th anniversary of diplomatic relations between the
United States and Azerbaijan.
Azerbaijan is currently a U.N. Security Council member,
and, as such, recently attended the NATO summit in Chicago. It
has made important contributions as a NATO partner for peace
country in Iraq, in Kosovo, and in Afghanistan. And today it
remains a key point for the transport of troops and supplies
into and out of Afghanistan. And, of course, as Senator Kerry
mentioned earlier, it has massive energy supplies. Azerbaijan
is also a crucial component of the Southern Corridor with those
energy supplies to bolster our energy security in Europe.
Human rights remain a concern in Azerbaijan, and I was
pleased to see that this was a point that Secretary Clinton
made when she visited there recently. It was also encouraging
to see a prominent opposition activist who was released from
prison prior to the Secretary's visit. And I hope that others
who are being detained there for simply expressing their views
will be released soon as well.
Unfortunately, violence has once again flared up over the
conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh in recent weeks. I am concerned
about the escalating tension in this region and call on all
sides to peacefully resolve the dispute and comply with the
1994 cease-fire agreement. There is no military solution to
this conflict, and continued violence could be a disaster for
both sides. Diplomacy, under the auspices of the Minsk Group,
will be key to any peaceful and sustainable resolution that
turns the page on the violence of the past.
Our second nominee and the second issue that we will
consider this afternoon is United States policies with respect
to the Netherlands. And I understand that there are some
representatives here from the Dutch Embassy. We do apologize
for the timing of the hearing because it is coming in a direct
conflict with the soccer championship game against Germany, so
we are impressed that you are here. And, Mr. Broas, we are
going to have to ask you about this game before this hearing
ends.
But as a founding member of NATO and a strong member of the
European Union, the Netherlands is obviously a critical and
important ally that shares wide-ranging interests and values
with the United States. Dutch troops have been very valuable
contributors to the engagement in Afghanistan where they fought
in some of the toughest southern provinces of that country.
Today Dutch troops provide support to the police training
programs that are run by the EU and NATO, and they are one of
the strong active participants in the joint development of the
F-35 fighter program. And they were the first non-U.S. NATO
ally to offer a contribution for the European phased adaptive
approach missile defense plan.
Netherlands, like so much of Europe, has been hit hard by
the global downturn and the ongoing debt crisis in Europe. And
as a member of the eurozone and one of the few AAA credit
rating countries left in Europe, the Dutch will need to play an
important role in working toward a resolution in Europe that
addresses both debt and growth throughout the continent.
Finally today we will be assessing U.S. relations with the
Republic of Suriname, a young South American country which
gained its independence from the Netherlands in 1975. Suriname
is a constitutional democracy with two decades of continuous
democratically elected civilian governments. With an economy
dominated by mineral and energy deposits, a number of U.S.
mining companies have a strong presence and an interest in the
country.
Perhaps one of the biggest challenges for the United States
and Suriname remains drug trafficking. The country is a transit
point for cocaine and other illegal narcotics, and the United
States will need to deepen relations with Suriname if we are to
curb illicit trafficking and strengthen rule of law in this
region of the world.
I will not do any more to introduce our three nominees as
Senator Kerry did that very eloquently. So I will now call on
Senator Barrasso for his opening remarks.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN BARRASSO,
U.S. SENATOR FROM WYOMING
Senator Barrasso. Well, thank you very much, Madam
Chairman, and I would like to also congratulate each of the
nominees who are before us today. These are very important
nominations for our country and for our future. Each of these
positions is important to fostering vital relationships and
promoting U.S. national interests. There are some real
challenges ahead. It is important that the United States
continue to be a strong leader across the globe.
Should you represent our Nation as a U.S. ambassador, it is
important for each of you to provide strong stewardship of
American taxpayer dollars, demonstrate professionalism, and
good judgment, and vigorously advocate for the priorities of
the United States. So I look forward, Madam Chairman, to
hearing the goals from each of these individuals with regard to
the countries that they will be moving to, and for whom they
will be representing the United States, and then all of your
plans for achieving those goals.
So I join you, Madam Chairman, in congratulating each of
you on your nomination, and would like to extend, as you did, a
warm welcome to all of the families, and congratulate them as
well.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you very much. I will ask each of
you to give us your testimony before we open it up for
questions. And we will start with Ambassador Morningstar and
just go right down the table. So, Ambassador.
STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD L. MORNINGSTAR, OF MASSACHUSETTS, TO
BE AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF AZERBAIJAN
Ambassador Morningstar. Thank you very much, Madam
Chairman, and thank you for your comments, with which I fully,
fully agree. And also thank you to the other distinguished
members of the committee for the privilege of appearing before
you today as President Obama's nominee as the United States
Ambassador to Azerbaijan. I am grateful for the opportunity to
testify.
I would like to particularly thank Senator Kerry and
Senator Lugar for their very kind comments. And, Senator Lugar,
I truly appreciate your support over the years. And I think
that even going back to the 1990s when we were working on the
Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline, that our policy in the Caspian
and in the Caucasus region has been truly bipartisan. And
because of that, I think we have been able to achieve a lot
over the years.
I am also humbled by the confidence that the President and
Secretary Clinton have placed in me, and if confirmed I look
forward to working with this committee, other Members of
Congress, and your staffs to advance the interests of the
United States in Azerbaijan.
I would like to briefly introduce my wife, Faith, who has
been such a strong support during all of my government
wanderings--and my daughter, Jill, who actually has served very
capably as the recipient of my wife's vents during all of my
government wanderings, and my son-in-law, Al Fitzpayne, whom
some of you may know well because he is now the Assistant
Secretary for Legislative Affairs at the Treasury Department.
And also our three oldest friends are here today, and that is
Sally Fowler, Dr. Jay Kaufman and Susie Kaufman. And we are
certainly glad that they are here as well.
Long before my current position as the Secretary's Special
Envoy for Eurasian Energy, and before my appointment as the
United States Ambassador to the European Union, I served as
special advisor to the President and Secretary of State for
assistance to what were then called the newly independent
states of the former Soviet Union. One of the primary goals
during that time was the stabilization and development of the
entire south Caucasus region, a goal that we continue to pursue
today.
I have vivid memories during the 1990s of working through
my office to supply fuel oil and wheat to Georgia and Armenia
to help them through some very difficult winters. And over the
years, I have made several trips to all three Caucasus
countries.
This year, the United States and Azerbaijan celebrated the
20th anniversary of the establishment of our diplomatic
relationship. This milestone is an opportunity to take stock of
how far we have come in the three core areas of importance to
the relationship: security, which also includes the Nagorno-
Karabakh situation, energy and other economic issues, and
democratic and economic reform.
The United States has long recognized Azerbaijan as a
stalwart partner on international security. Following the
attacks of September 11, 2001, then Azerbaijani President
Heydar Aliyev was among the first to extend a hand of support
in our time of need and to offer close cooperation in our
efforts to combat terrorism. That cooperation continues to this
day. American and Azerbaijani soldiers have served together in
Kosovo and Iraq, and they now serve together in Afghanistan.
Azerbaijan has shown a continued commitment to the allied
effort in Afghanistan, including its vital role as a
transportation route in the Northern Distribution Network for
supporting NATO's operations in Afghanistan.
The United States and Azerbaijan have also enjoyed 20 years
of cooperation on energy security, as has already been
mentioned. The Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline, which I worked on
in the past, and the development today of the Southern Corridor
for gas, represent powerful symbols of Azerbaijan's pursuit of
closer Euro-Atlantic integration and global commitment to
energy security, a key part of our strategy to diversify energy
routes and sources for European markets.
But Azerbaijan's integration into the West can and must
expand well beyond pipelines. The United States must also
continue to work with Azerbaijan on advancing democratic and
economic reforms, including promoting respect for the rule of
law, transparency, and fundamental freedoms. There is no
question that Azerbaijan is located in a tough neighborhood,
facing real pressures. However, democratic reforms are
essential to Azerbaijan's long-term security and prosperity. It
is in Azerbaijan's own interest to undertake these reforms,
both to ensure long-term stability and to unleash the full
potential of its people. As Azerbaijan advances along this
path, our bilateral relationship will become even stronger.
As Madam Chairman has said, the Secretary of State last
week, while in Baku, made a strong statement affirming our
commitment to working with Azerbaijan to advance respect for
human rights and fundamental freedoms, and how important those
issues are. And if confirmed, I will do everything in my power
to help Azerbaijan succeed in developing as a strong,
independent, and modern democracy.
To achieve a more secure and prosperous future for the
region, there is no higher priority for the United States than
the peaceful settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. As a
cochair of the OSCE Minsk Group, the United States continues to
assist the sides to achieve a peaceful, lasting, negotiated
settlement of the conflict based on the principles of the
Helsinki Final Act, including the nonuse of force or threat of
force, territorial integrity, and the equal rights and self-
determination of peoples. If confirmed, I will support the
administration's commitment at the highest levels to achieve
this goal. I will also support the efforts of the U.S. cochair,
Ambassador Robert Bradtke, as we work closely with the sides to
reach a settlement. Only a negotiated settlement can lead to
long-term peace and stability in the region.
Finally, Madam Chairman, our wide range of shared interests
intersects with many of the United States highest foreign
policy priorities, but there is still much that we can do to
bring our governments, our societies, and our people even
closer together.
Madam Chairman, thank you very much for considering my
nomination, and I look forward to getting into a lot more
detail on the questions.
[The prepared statement of Ambassador Morningstar follows:]
Prepared Statement of Richard Morningstar
Thank you, Madam Chairman, and distinguished members of the
committee, for the privilege of appearing before you today as President
Obama's nominee to be the next United States Ambassador to Azerbaijan.
I am grateful for the opportunity to testify this afternoon, and I am
humbled by the confidence that President Obama and Secretary Clinton
have placed in me. If confirmed, I look forward to working with this
committee, other Members of Congress, and your staffs to advance the
interests of the United States in Azerbaijan.
I would like to introduce my wife, Faith, who has joined me here
today, along with my daughter, Jill Morningstar, and son-in-law, Al
Fitzpayne.
Long before my current position as the Secretary's Special Envoy
for Eurasian Energy, and before my appointment as U.S. Ambassador to
the European Union, I served as Special Advisor to the President and
Secretary of State on Assistance for the Newly Independent States of
the Former Soviet Union. One of the primary goals during that time was
the stabilization and the development of the entire South Caucasus
region--a goal that we continue to pursue today. I have vivid memories
during the 1990s of working through my office to supply fuel oil and
wheat to Georgia and Armenia to help them get through some difficult
winters. Over the years, I made several trips to all three Caucasus
countries.
The United States stands only to gain--and to reap benefits well
into the future--from an Azerbaijan that is peaceful, democratic,
prosperous, and strategically linked to the United States and our
European allies. Azerbaijan has enormous potential.
This year, the United States and Azerbaijan celebrated the 20th
anniversary of the establishment of our diplomatic relationship. This
milestone is an opportunity not only to appreciate the depth of our
cooperation, but also to take stock of how far we've come in the three
core areas of importance to the relationship: security, energy, and
democratic and economic reform. The administration believes we must
intensify our cooperation in these areas and work together to resolve
the ongoing challenges that the region continues to face.
The United States has long recognized Azerbaijan as a stalwart
partner on international security. We remember that following the
attacks of September 11, 2001, then-Azerbaijani President Heydar Aliyev
was among the first to extend a hand of support in our time of need and
to offer his country's close cooperation in our efforts to combat
terrorism. That cooperation continues to this day. American and
Azerbaijani soldiers have served together in Kosovo and Iraq, and they
now serve together in Afghanistan. Azerbaijan has shown a sustained
commitment to the allied effort in Afghanistan, including its vital
role as a transportation route in the Northern Distribution Network for
supporting NATO's operations in Afghanistan. Thousands of flights have
crossed Azerbaijan's airspace en route to Afghanistan, and thousands of
containers have departed Baku in support of the International Security
Assistance Force. The United States works closely and productively with
Azerbaijan on the U.N. Security Council, where this year Azerbaijan
began its first-ever term as a nonpermanent member.
The United States and Azerbaijan have also enjoyed 20 years of
cooperation on energy security. In my current position as Special Envoy
for Eurasian Energy, I work closely with Azerbaijan. The Baku-Tbilisi-
Ceyhan pipeline, which I worked on in the past, and the development
today of the Southern Corridor for gas represent powerful symbols of
Azerbaijan's pursuit of closer Euro-Atlantic integration and global
commitment to energy security--a key part of our strategy to diversify
energy routes and sources for European markets. If confirmed, I will
continue to work with Azerbaijan to diversify its energy routes and
bolster its critical energy infrastructure protection. But Azerbaijan's
integration with the West can and must span well beyond pipelines.
The United States must also continue work with Azerbaijan on
advancing democratic and economic reforms, including promoting respect
for the rule of law, transparency, and fundamental freedoms. There is
no question that Azerbaijan is located in a tough neighborhood, facing
real pressures. However, democratic reforms are essential to
Azerbaijan's long-term security and prosperity. It is in Azerbaijan's
own interest to undertake these reforms, both to ensure long-term
stability and to unleash the full potential of its people. And as
Azerbaijan advances along this path, our bilateral relationship will
become even stronger. An independent judiciary, a free media, a vibrant
civil society, political pluralism, competition through free and fair
elections, and respect for fundamental freedoms are essential
components of any democracy, and we need to work together to increase
the pace of Azerbaijan's development in these areas. The Secretary of
State last week, while in Baku, made a strong statement on these
issues. If confirmed, I will do everything in my power to help
Azerbaijan succeed in developing as a strong, independent, and modern
democracy.
To achieve a more secure and prosperous future for the region,
there is no higher immediate priority for the United States than the
peaceful settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. As a cochair of
the OSCE Minsk Group, the United States continues to assist the sides
to achieve a peaceful, lasting negotiated settlement of the conflict
based on the principles of the Helsinki Final Act, including the Non-
Use of Force or Threat of Force, Territorial Integrity, and the Equal
Rights and Self-Determination of Peoples. If confirmed, I will support
the administration's commitment, at the highest levels, to achieving
this goal. I will also support the efforts of the U.S. cochair,
Ambassador Robert Bradtke, as we work closely with the sides to reach a
settlement. The President, Secretary of State, and Ambassador Bradtke
have made major efforts to facilitate a settlement. We must continue
these efforts. Only a negotiated settlement can lead to long-term peace
and stability in the region.
Madam Chairman, if I am confirmed, I will have the great honor of
advancing a relationship that has progressed, steadily and
uninterrupted, for the 20 years since Azerbaijan declared its
independence. Our wide range of shared interests intersects with many
of the United States highest foreign policy priorities. But there is
still much we can do to bring our governments, our societies, and our
people even closer together.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you very much.
Mr. Anania.
STATEMENT OF JAY NICHOLAS ANANIA, OF MARYLAND, TO BE AMBASSADOR
TO THE REPUBLIC OF SURINAME
Mr. Anania. Madam Chairman and members of the committee, I
am pleased to appear before you today. I am grateful for the
confidence Secretary Clinton placed in me and deeply honored by
President Obama's nomination to serve as United States
Ambassador to the Republic of Suriname.
I am extremely pleased that my wife, Lourdes, and parents,
Joan and Edward Anania, are with me here today. Lourdes and I
have shared the challenges and pleasures of the Foreign Service
since 1984, and we have served together during six overseas
postings. I could not have reached this stage in my career
without her love and support.
I would also like to recognize my mother, Joan, whose own
foreign affairs career was cut short by the discriminatory
policies that applied to women in the 1950s. Thankfully women
no longer have to resign if they decide to marry. She first
inspired me to consider a Foreign Service career.
My father, who was born and raised in Portsmouth, NH, also
set a positive example of public service with his U.S. Army and
Department of Defense civilian career.
While representing the United States abroad in such diverse
places as Mexico, Jordan, Cuba, the United Arab Emirates,
Germany, Hong Kong, and currently in Iraq, I have drawn on my
experience as an American to encourage people to see that
working together helps make progress possible. Although
countries cannot immediately change the legacy of centuries, a
commitment to human rights, decency, and a shared future by all
sectors of society, without regard to ethnicity or religion,
can help a nation in its efforts to overcome legacies of the
past.
If confirmed, I look forward to representing the United
States in Suriname, one of the most ethnically and religiously
diverse countries in the world. The ancestors of Suriname's
people hail from various regions, including some where I have
served, and their customs and religious beliefs reflect the
world's diversity. If confirmed, I look forward to working with
the many communities of this remarkable nation.
My first priority would be protecting the safety and
welfare of Americans in Suriname, both private citizens and the
official community. If confirmed, I will work with the Suriname
Government to adopt policies and promote development that
increases American investment and tourism between our two
countries.
If confirmed, I also plan to work to strengthen democracy
and transparency in government. Suriname has made real progress
in the 21 years since the reestablishment of civilian rule, and
in 2010, Suriname held its fifth consecutive free and fair
national election. It is very much in the United States
interests that Suriname remains a stable democratic partner,
and if I am granted the opportunity to serve there, one of my
highest priorities will be to advance that goal.
The United States, Suriname, and other nations in the
region share a vital interest in protecting the rule of law.
People cannot feel secure if they do not have a legal system
they can count on. Close cooperation between duly constituted
law enforcement institutions in both countries and strengthened
law enforcement capabilities are important shared interests.
Suriname has made progress in its battle to stop trafficking in
persons, arms, and narcotics, and stands to benefit greatly
from bilateral and regional assistance under several U.S.-
sponsored programs, including the Caribbean Basin Security
Initiative.
Under our CBSI partnership, Suriname will receive
significant assistance to improve port security, provide
technical training to its law enforcement officers, combat
money laundering and financial crimes, and develop biometric
screening measures for its ports of entry.
Suriname remains a key partner for the United States in our
efforts to promote citizen security in the Caribbean. The
administration is working with partner countries to protect the
global environment, and to combat the dangers posed by
pollution, and the risks of climate change. Some of the people
of Suriname, heirs to a wonderful rain forest and other natural
areas, see ecotourism as one way to demonstrate that these
environments are worth protecting from destruction by clear
cutting, or illegal logging, or mining. If confirmed, I will
work hard with the Surinamese to help protect their wonderful
natural environment, a goal I firmly believe is in both the
interests of the United States and of the people of Suriname.
Suriname is a land of significant natural resources from
bauxite and gold to untapped petroleum reserves. Free trade is
a key part of the economic engine that drives progress and
growth, and it
is in our interest to increase our trade and economic ties with
Suriname.
If confirmed, I look forward to representing the United
States in Suriname, working with you, and your colleagues in
Congress on behalf of the administration, while also working
closely with the government and people of Suriname in a genuine
spirit of cooperation and mutual respect.
I would be happy to answer any questions you might have.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Anania follows:]
Prepared Statement of Jay Anania
Madam Chairman and members of the committee, I am pleased to appear
before you today. I am grateful for the confidence that Secretary
Clinton has placed in me, and I am deeply honored by President Obama's
nomination to serve as United States Ambassador to the Republic of
Suriname.
I am extremely pleased that my wife, Lourdes, and parents, Joan and
Edward, are with me here today. Lourdes and I have shared the
challenges and pleasures of the Foreign Service since 1984, and we
served together during six overseas postings. I could not have reached
this stage in my career without her love and support. I would also like
to recognize my mother, Joan, whose own foreign affairs career was cut
short by the discriminatory policies that applied to women in the
1950s. Thankfully, this particular policy no longer exists, and women
no longer have to resign from the Foreign Service if they decide to
marry. She first inspired me to consider a Foreign Service career. My
father also set a positive example of public service with his U.S. Army
and Department of Defense civilian career.
While representing the United States abroad in such diverse places
as Mexico, Jordan, Cuba, the United Arab Emirates, Germany, Hong Kong,
and currently in Iraq, I have drawn on my experiences as an American to
encourage people to see that working together helps make progress
possible. Although countries cannot immediately change the legacy of
centuries, a commitment to human rights, decency, and a shared future
by all sectors of society without regard to ethnicity or religion can
help a nation in its efforts to overcome legacies of the past.
If confirmed, I look forward to representing the United States in
Suriname--one of the most ethnically and religiously diverse countries
in the world. The ancestors of Suriname's people hail from various
regions, including some where I have served, and their religious
beliefs also reflect much of the world--Christianity, Hinduism, Islam,
and the oldest continuous Jewish community in the Americas. If
confirmed, I look forward to working with the many communities of this
remarkable nation.
My first priority would be protecting the safety and welfare of
Americans in Suriname--both private citizens and the official
community. If confirmed, I will work with the Suriname Government to
adopt policies and promote development that increases American
investment and tourism between our two countries.
If confirmed, I also plan to work to strengthen democracy and
transparency in government. Suriname has made real progress in the 21
years since the reestablishment of civilian rule, and in 2010 Suriname
held its fifth consecutive free and fair national election. It is very
much in the United States interest that Suriname remains a stable
democratic partner, and if I am granted the opportunity to serve there,
one of my highest priorities will be to advance that goal.
The United States, Suriname, and other nations in the region share
a vital interest in protecting the rule of law. People cannot feel
secure if they do not have a legal system they can count on. Close
cooperation between duly constituted law enforcement in both countries,
and strengthened law enforcement capabilities, are important shared
interests. Suriname has made progress in its battle to stop trafficking
in persons, arms, and narcotics. Suriname stands to benefit greatly
from bilateral and regional assistance under several U.S.-sponsored
programs, including the Caribbean Basin Security Initiative (CBSI)--a
multiyear, multifaceted initiative that complements the Central
American Regional Security Initiative and the Merida Initiative in
Central America and Mexico. Under our CBSI partnership with Government
of Suriname and other Caribbean neighbors, Suriname will receive
significant assistance to improve port security, provide technical
training to its law enforcement officers, combat money-laundering and
financial crimes, and develop biometric screening measures for its
ports of entry. Suriname remains a key partner for the United States in
our efforts to promote citizen security in the Caribbean.
The administration is working to protect the global environment and
to combat the dangers posed by pollution and the risks of climate
change. An important part of this effort is working cooperatively with
other countries around the world. Some of the people of Suriname, heirs
to a wonderful rainforest and other natural areas, see eco-tourism as
one way to demonstrate that these environments are worth protecting
from destruction by clear-cutting or illegal logging or mining. If
confirmed, I will work hard with the Surinamese to help protect their
wonderful natural environment, a goal that I firmly believe is in both
the interest of the United States and of the people of Suriname.
Suriname is a land of significant natural resources, from bauxite
and gold to untapped petroleum reserves. Free trade is a key part of
the economic engine that drives progress and growth, and it is in our
interest to increase our trade and economic ties with Suriname.
If confirmed, I look forward to representing the United States in
Suriname, working with you and your colleagues in Congress on behalf of
the administration, while also working closely with the government and
the people of Suriname in a genuine spirit of cooperation and mutual
respect.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Mr. Anania. I am pleased to
hear about your New Hampshire roots, too.
Mr. Broas.
STATEMENT OF TIMOTHY M. BROAS, OF MARYLAND, TO BE AMBASSADOR TO
THE KINGDOM OF THE NETHERLANDS
Mr. Broas. Madam Chairman, Ranking Member Barrasso, and
distinguished members of the Senate Foreign Relations
Committee, thank you for the privilege of appearing before you
today. I am deeply grateful to President Obama and to Secretary
Clinton for their support and confidence in nominating me to be
U.S. Ambassador to the Kingdom of the Netherlands. If confirmed
by the Senate, I pledge to devote all my energy to represent
the United States to the best of my ability.
If you will permit me, I would like to introduce the
members of my family who are here: my wife, Julie Broas, who is
from Indiana and worked for Senator Lugar as an intern many
years ago; my daughter, Emily Broas, who recently graduated
from Dartmouth College; my daughter, Allison Broas, a senior at
Boston College; and my daughter--my youngest daughter, Madeline
Broas, fresh from her high school graduation this weekend, and
bound for Hanover, NH, to follow in her sister's footsteps to
Dartmouth. I am happy they could join me today. They have been
patient, steadfast, and loving supporters of me throughout this
process for which I am forever grateful.
I would also like to thank Senator Kerry for his kind words
and his gracious introduction. He is right about the
Springsteen connection, and it is something I will never live
down, proudly.
Madam Chairman and fellow Senators, all of you know well of
the United States long and strong relationship of the
Netherlands. The United Provinces of the Netherlands was the
second nation to officially recognize the United States when
the Dutch Government accepted the credentials of U.S. Minster
John Adams on April 19, 1782. Since then, the Netherlands has
remained one of our oldest and most reliable diplomatic
partners.
More recently, the Dutch have become one of our strongest
economic and trade partners, as well as one of the world's most
generous development and donor nations. They are our ninth-
largest trading partner and the third-largest foreign direct
investor in the United States.
From 2000 through 2010, the Netherlands was the No. 1
destination in the world for U.S. direct investment, far ahead
of Canada, Mexico, Singapore, and Japan. Clearly for a country
barely the size of Rhode Island with only 16 million people,
the Netherlands punches well above its weight. If I am
confirmed, I will work tirelessly to maintain and improve our
strong economic and trade relations with the Netherlands,
consistent with the administration's goal to increase exports
and create new jobs.
Our strong relations find harmony on many levels beyond the
economic and diplomatic. The Netherlands works closely with the
United States to promote security, stability, and justice
throughout the world through military support and development
aid, support of our strongest allies, and condemnation of our
most threatening enemies, and hosting the international
tribunals to litigate and resolve the world's most complex and
difficult legal conflicts.
Indeed I had occasion to invoke the jurisdiction of the
International Court of Justice in The Hague during my legal
career on behalf of an American client seeking to recover
property and funds confiscated in 1979 by the Iranian regime.
That same Iranian regime is now threatening to upend worldwide
peace and stability in an attempt to obtain nuclear weapons and
threaten the security of its neighbors. The international
community is united to impose sanctions on the Iranian
Government, and our European partners are crucial to this
effort. If confirmed, I will work tirelessly to ensure that our
Dutch allies remain shoulder to shoulder with us as we strive
to hold Iran to its international obligations.
The Netherlands has risen to the global security challenges
of our time and join with the United States and other countries
as an active contributor to international security missions. As
Senator Shaheen said, the Netherlands contributes to the NATO
mission in Afghanistan, and it currently provides the flagship
for NATO's counterpiracy mission off the Horn of Africa. The
Netherlands has also participated in the alliance's Libya
mission. We remain thankful for Dutch commitment to these
missions.
The United States and Netherlands are committed to
combating terrorism and preventing violent extremism. The Dutch
counterterror program, which they published in 2011, follows
closely plans developed in the United States and the United
Kingdom. The Dutch agree that we must never lower our vigilance
against the grave threat of terrorism, and that it is important
to work with at-risk populations to make sure that young people
do not become alienated and susceptible to radicalism. If I am
confirmed, I will use the Embassy's resources to reach out to
key populations in the Netherlands along these lines.
The Netherlands and the United States also share a strong
commitment to the political participation of women. The
Netherlands supports President Obama's Presidential challenge
on women's political and economic participation. If confirmed,
I pledge to advance our collaboration with the Netherlands to
promote women in politics and business.
The United States and the Netherlands also share an
important commitment to green energy. If confirmed, I will
build on the close cooperation our Embassy has forged with the
Netherlands on alternative energy and environmental
sustainability.
Madam Chairman, I have spent over 30 years representing
clients in a wide variety of complex criminal and civil
disputes. While some involved only money and sums small and
large, others involved my clients' liberty and freedom and
often his or her livelihood. I have managed teams of lawyers,
clients, and consultant on cases both large and small, all with
the goal of reaching the most favorable result for my client.
Along the way, I have encountered legal, factual, and
managerial minefields of every possible type, some predictable
and some from out of nowhere.
In all of these cases, I was called upon to make critical
decisions and manage diverse personalities and points of view.
If I am confirmed, I will draw upon this management experience
when I assume leadership of the team at the Embassy in The
Hague.
Let me close with a personal story. I am one of nine
children born to the late William Broas and Anita St. Germain.
My only regret here today is that neither of my parents is here
to see their son appear before your committee to seek
confirmation as an ambassador. They would have been very proud.
My father, of Dutch descent, served honorably in the
Marines in the Pacific theater during World War II. My mother
lived in Paris until her father, confronted like all French
citizens by the Nazi invasion and occupation of France, put
her, along with her mother and her five siblings, on a small
boat to New York. She eventually met my father after the war,
and one of the many things that bound them together was their
profound love for the freedom they found in the United States.
The experience of my parents and the love they felt for and
showered on this country left a lasting lesson with me. I
always believed that if I ever had the chance to serve our
country, I would do so whenever the call came. When President
Obama asked me to be our next Ambassador to the Netherlands,
the country of my father's ancestors, I could almost hear my
parents echoing my affirmative reply. If I am confirmed, I will
be guided at all times by the pride and love of country that my
parents instilled in me from a young age.
Thank you for your time, and I look forward to answering
any of your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Broas follows:]
Prepared Statement of Timothy Broas
Madam Chairman, Ranking Member Barrasso, and distinguished members
of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, thank you for the privilege
of appearing before you today. I am deeply grateful to President Obama
and Secretary Clinton for their support and confidence in nominating me
to be United States Ambassador to the Kingdom of the Netherlands. If
confirmed by the Senate, I pledge to devote all my energy to represent
the United States to the best of my ability.
If you will permit me, I would like to introduce the members of my
family who are here today. My wife, Julie Broas; my daughter, Emily
Broas, who recently graduated from Dartmouth College; my daughter,
Allison Broas, a senior at Boston College; and my youngest daughter,
Madeline Broas, fresh from her high school graduation this past weekend
and bound for Hanover, New Hampshire to follow her older sister's
footsteps at Dartmouth. I am happy they could join me today. They have
been patient, steadfast, and loving supporters of me throughout this
process, for which I am forever grateful.
Madam Chairman and fellow Senators, all of you know well of the
United States long and strong relationship with the Kingdom of the
Netherlands. The United Provinces of the Netherlands was the second
nation to officially recognize the United States when the Dutch
Government accepted the credentials of U.S. Minister John Adams on
April 19, 1782. Since then, the Netherlands has remained one of our
oldest and most reliable diplomatic partners. More recently, the Dutch
have become one of our strongest economic and trade partners, as well
as one of the world's most generous development aid donor nations. They
are our ninth-largest trading partner and the third-largest foreign
direct investor in the Unites States. From 2000 through 2010, the
Netherlands was the number one destination in the world for U.S direct
investment, far ahead of Canada, Mexico, Singapore, and Japan. Clearly,
for a country barely the size of Rhode Island with only 16 million
people, the Netherlands punches well above its weight. If I am
confirmed, I will work tirelessly to maintain and improve our strong
economic and trade relations with the Netherlands, consistent with the
administration's goals to increase exports and create new jobs.
Our strong relations find harmony on many levels beyond the
economic and diplomatic. The Netherlands works closely with the United
States to promote security, stability, and justice throughout the world
through military support and development aid, support of our strongest
allies and condemnation of our most threatening enemies, and hosting
the international tribunals to litigate and resolve the world's most
complex and difficult legal conflicts.
Indeed, I had occasion to invoke the jurisdiction of the
International Court of Justice in The Hague during my legal career on
behalf of American clients seeking to recover property and funds
confiscated in 1979 by the Iranian regime. That same Iranian regime is
now threatening to upend worldwide peace and stability in its attempt
to obtain nuclear weapons and threaten the security of its neighbors.
The international community has united to impose sanctions on the
Iranian Government and our European partners are crucial to this
effort. If confirmed, I will work tirelessly to ensure that our Dutch
allies remain shoulder to shoulder with us as we strive to hold Iran to
its international obligations.
The Netherlands has risen to the global security challenges of our
time and joined with the United States and other countries as an active
contributor to international security missions. For example, the
Netherlands contributes to the NATO mission in Afghanistan and
currently provides the flagship for NATO's counterpiracy mission off
the Horn of Africa. The Netherlands has also participated in the
alliance's Libya mission. We remain thankful for Dutch commitment to
these missions.
The United States and the Netherlands are committed to combating
terrorism and preventing violent extremism. The Dutch counterterror
program, which they published in 2011, follows closely plans developed
in the United States and the United Kingdom. The Dutch agree that we
must never lower our vigilance against the grave threat of terrorism
and that it is important to work with at-risk populations to make sure
that young people do not become alienated and susceptible to
radicalism. If I am confirmed, I will use the Embassy's resources to
reach out to key populations in the Netherlands along these lines.
The United States and the Netherlands also share a strong
commitment to political participation of women. The Netherlands
supports President Obama's Presidential Challenge on Women's Political
and Economic Participation. If confirmed, I pledge to advance our
collaboration with the Netherlands to promote women in politics and
business.
Additionally, the United States and the Netherlands share an
important commitment to green energy. If confirmed, I will build on the
close cooperation our Embassy has forged with the Netherlands on
alternative energy and environmental sustainability.
Madam Chairman, I have spent over 30 years representing clients in
a wide variety of complex criminal and civil disputes. While some
involved only money, in sums small and large, others involved my
client's liberty and freedom and often his or her livelihood. I have
managed teams of lawyers, clients, and consultants on cases both large
and small--all with the goal of reaching the most favorable result for
my client. Along the way I have encountered legal, factual, and
managerial minefields of every possible type, some predictable and
others from out of nowhere. In all of these cases I was called upon to
make critical decisions and manage diverse personalities and points of
view. If I am confirmed, I will draw upon this management experience
when I assume leadership of the team at the Embassy in The Hague.
I have also had the pleasure of serving as a board member on a
number of nonprofit institutions, including Partners in Health and the
Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. If confirmed, I will
draw upon these experiences in my work in the Netherlands, which is
such an important partner in promoting democracy, human rights,
developmental aid, and economic growth around the world. The
Netherlands understands, as does the United States, that military and
diplomatic efforts are not the only tools for combating instability;
development plays a very important role. If confirmed, I pledge to
advance U.S.-Dutch cooperation on democratic development, from Belarus
and Ukraine, to the Middle East, and North Africa.
Let me close with a personal story. I am one of nine children born
to the late William Broas and Anita St. Germain. My only regret here
today is that neither of my parents is here to see their son appear
before your committee to seek confirmation as an ambassador. They would
have been very proud. My father, fittingly of Dutch descent, served
honorably in the Marines in the Pacific theatre during World War II. My
mother lived in Paris, France, until her father, confronted like all
French citizens by the Nazi invasion and occupation of France, put
her--along with her mother and her siblings--on a small boat to New
York. She eventually met my father after the war and one of the many
things that bound them together was a profound love for the freedom
they found in the United States. The experiences of my parents and the
love they felt for and showered on this country left a lasting lesson
with me. I always believed that, if I ever had the chance to serve our
country, I would do so whenever the call came. When President Obama
asked me to be our next Ambassador to the Netherlands, the country of
my father's ancestors, I could almost hear my parents echoing my
affirmative reply. If I am confirmed, I will be guided at all times by
the pride and love of country that my parents instilled in me from a
young age.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you very much. Thank you all for
your testimony.
I would like to begin with you, Ambassador Morningstar.
Senator Kerry, you, and I all mentioned Secretary Clinton's
recent trip to Azerbaijan, and her concerns that she raised
about human rights abuses there. And, as you point out, that is
not a new development in the country. It stretches back to at
least 2005 when two brothers--Aliyev brothers--were jailed for
political reasons, and they remain in prison there, despite two
decisions from the European Court of Human Rights that their
arrests were unlawful, and their trials were procedurally
deficient. And this is just one example of the troubling abuses
of human rights that have come out of Azerbaijan.
Can you talk about whether you think conditions there are
getting better or worse, and then the opportunities you would
have as Ambassador to address these kinds of abuses?
Ambassador Morningstar. It is hard to gauge and measure
improvements. There have been changes in the laws. Those laws
have to be implemented, and we have to work closely with them
with respect to that.
The case that you mentioned is something that has been of
concern to us, and, as I understand it, has been raised on a
continuing basis since 2005. It was positive that Bakhtiyar
Hajiyev, another prisoner who was released just prior to the
visit of Secretary Clinton, is on parole right now. We have to
continue to watch that case. And Secretary Clinton actually met
with her during her visit, which was very positive and
emphasized her concern for the issues. We have to deal with
these cases on a case-by-case basis. We will. That will be one
of my prime responsibilities if I am confirmed.
I also think that it is very important that we not just
say, hey, you know, you ought to do better in this and it is
important. We have to be able to convey how much it is in their
interest to make changes, and to open up society, and to
create, hopefully, greater stability within the society.
One final point is, and that I will be very much involved
in, during the work that I did in the 1990s coordinating our
programs in the former Soviet Union, I spent a lot of time,
and, in fact, tried to reshape our programs to emphasize more
building civil society from the bottom up. And I think that is
going to be the, in the longer term, the best way that we are
going to see improvement in Azerbaijan.
And one of the things that I am committed to do if I am
confirmed is to look at every program that we have there and to
work with USAID and other agencies, and with the our Embassy to
try to determine what really helps and what does not. What can
we do to improve the situation? And try to use some of the
experience that I have had from the past to help bring that
about.
Senator Shaheen. I think that is terrific, the kind of
thing we ought to be doing everywhere. You talked about helping
or trying to help convey the message that it is in the interest
of Azerbaijan to open up and to understand why supporting
institutions, rule of law, human rights is good for them. That
is one specific way that you can help do that, looking at those
programs and what works. Are there other ways beyond just kind
of job owning that you will have the opportunity to do as
Ambassador that can help convey those messages?
Ambassador Morningstar. I think it is important to convey
the message that the relationship between Azerbaijan and the
United States and Azerbaijan and Europe, for example, will be
even stronger if we recognize these things. I know that Senator
Cardin, who was here a moment ago, is very interested in the
whole transparency issue.
There has been some progress in Azerbaijan in that area.
They are a member of EITI, the Extractive Industries
Transparency Initiative. That can work hand in hand with the
Cardin-Lugar bill, which would require the disclosure of
project payments and so on. And I think these kinds of
activities are going to make it even more possible for Western
companies, international companies, to be involved in
Azerbaijan, to be able to do so without threat of corruption
and the like, and will help over a period of time to pull
Azerbaijan further toward models and values that we consider to
be important. And we have to just keep being imaginative and
working in every area that we possibly can in a constructive
way to make progress.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you. I am going to come back to this
because I am running out of town. But on Nagorno-Karabakh, we
are seeing tensions flare there again. Can you talk about what
the resolution of this dispute would mean and how some of the
other players in the region might be either helping or trying
to disrupt an effort to resolve the dispute?
Ambassador Morningstar. I cannot imagine any specific thing
that could help create more stability within the whole Caucasus
region than resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh issue. From the
standpoint of creating regional growth, from the standpoint of
creating more political stability, it is extremely important.
I will give you an example in a very specific way. I get
asked the question all the time, why cannot Armenia participate
in the Southern Energy Corridor? Well, the fact of life is that
it is impractical because of the dispute with Azerbaijan. If
Nagorno-Karabakh were ever settled or resolved, Armenia could
become a full-fledged member working on energy infrastructure,
on energy transit, and the like to its great benefit, and to
Azerbaijan's great benefit and to the region's great benefit.
That would be one example.
Another example. I have to believe that Nagorno-Karabakh is
a huge distraction when there are other critical security
issues within the region that Azerbaijan faces. The issue of
Iran becomes greater every day with respect to Azerbaijan, the
whole Caspian Sea area. There are any number of issues. And
resolution of Nagorno-Karabakh would allow Azerbaijan to focus
even more on some of the other political and security issues
that are critically important. I could go on and on. I will
stop there, but obviously it would be a very good thing.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you. I am out of time.
Senator Lugar.
Senator Lugar. Thank you very much, Madam Chairman. I thank
you, and I thank my colleague, Senator Barrasso, for yielding
this time.
Ambassador Morningstar, just last week President Obama made
the rare step of endorsing the trans-Anatolian gas pipeline
known as TANAP. TANAP would be a major new gas pipeline
transiting Turkey and would be largely financed by Azerbaijan.
TANAP would replace the need for the proposed Nabucco trunkline
section within Turkey, but it would require pipelines to carry
gas from Turkey's Bulgarian border onward to Europe, such as
through a scaled-down version of Nabucco.
There are several rival pipeline proposals to carry Caspian
gas to Europe, and each may have some economic credibility. But
they vary greatly in strategic benefit and whether they warrant
U.S. Government backing. Specifically, our first priority must
be to help relieve our Eastern European allies from their
overdependence on Russian gas, and, in doing so, not subject
them to European energy companies heavily influenced by
Russian-state controlled companies.
Transit decisions made by a BP-led consortium developing
Shah Deniz gas and the Government of Azerbaijan will directly
impact U.S. policy, including the extent to which projects in
the Caspian warrant consideration as strategically important to
the United States, vis-a-vis our sanctions regime on Iran.
Could you please clarify the administration's position
following the President's comments on TANAP, and describe what
have been the primary delays in gas projects advancing in the
years since you and I attended the Nabucco treaty signing in
Ankara? In short, has the United States endorsed TANAP?
Ambassador Morningstar. Thank you very much for the
question, Senator Lugar. First of all, let me briefly outline
what our policy has been over the last couple of years.
It became apparent to us that, at least in the first
instance, there is probably not enough gas to make a full 31
bcm Nabucco pipeline commercially viable. The Shah Deniz
consortium as a result of that is looking at three
alternatives. And by the way, I might add that there will
ultimately be plenty of gas, but not in the first instance. So
they are looking at two possible smaller pipelines with respect
to Central and Eastern Europe, the so-called southeast Europe
pipeline and a scalable Nabucco pipeline, and then one of the
pipeline projects to Italy, the trans-Adriatic pipeline.
Our position is that any of those pipelines--the
administration's position has been that any of those pipelines
can work and would be acceptable with two conditions--one that
gas be supplied to the vulnerable countries in the Balkans, and
second, that there be concrete guarantees that any such
pipeline could be expanded, which will absolutely be necessary
as more gas becomes available.
I think that the TANAP pipeline could be very helpful in
this way. A final decision will not be made until mid-2013 as
to the actual size of the pipeline, but by having a dedicated
pipeline across Turkey, that will make it more possible to be
flexible and to be able to adjust the size of what can then be
taken into Central and Eastern Europe. So I see it as very
positive.
There is a commitment on the part of Turkey and Azerbaijan
to get an agreement completed by the end of June. You know what
that has been like over the last few years, and hopefully that
will happen. But it will happen certainly at some point, and I
think we should support it strongly.
Senator Lugar. Well, I thank you for that expert testimony
based on years of working through those problems.
Another priority issue. As you know, the Nunn-Lugar
Cooperative Threat Reduction Program has been involved in
Azerbaijan for a number of years. And recently the focus has
been on Caspian energy security and biothreat discussions. I
would simply like to ask that you make this work a priority in
Azerbaijan when you assume your new responsibilities in Baku,
and would ask if you have any thoughts as to how to advance
this cooperation when you arrive in Baku.
Ambassador Morningstar. Excuse me. The first few words?
Senator Lugar. The Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction
Program and the bioweapons threat.
Ambassador Morningstar. It is something that I would, if
confirmed, certainly want to look at. And it relates to, I
think, a very interesting policy issue that we have with
respect to Azerbaijan, which is how to work through our
security assistance to Azerbaijan without in any way--and I
emphasize: without in any way--affecting the balance with
respect to Nagorno-Karabakh and giving any advantage to
Azerbaijan with respect to that situation.
And I think that we need to work very carefully to
determine in what areas we can help, including areas relating
to things like maritime security, counterterrorism, and
training in various ways. And we have to do it in a way in
which we are extremely careful. But given the security
situation in that area, as you so well know, we have to look at
all these issues, and I will if confirmed.
Senator Lugar. I would like to commend your efforts to
advance many critical initiatives as the special envoy for
Eurasian energy. Key initiatives such as the Unconventional Gas
Technical Engagement Program and opening the Southern Corridor
from the Caspian in Eastern Europe, offer opportunities to
promote economic growth and shift power dynamics in energy
markets in favor of the United States and our allies.
The special envoy position was created by Secretary Rice at
the urging of Vice President Biden and myself, and it was
propelled with the strong support of Secretary Clinton. Several
former Soviet states will come under tremendous pressure from
Russia, and energy is a primary point of leverage.
I am hopeful you will join me today and encourage the
continuation of the special envoy role following your departure
to Baku. But more to the point, will the special envoy for
Eurasian energy continue to report directly to the Secretary of
State given the creation of the new Energy Bureau?
Ambassador Morningstar. You have touched upon an issue that
is obviously being discussed within the State Department right
now. I can promise you that the functions of our office, my
present office, will continue, and we are working to determine
what that structure should be. And obviously your points, as
always in the energy area, will be very important, and we will
continue to work with you and your staff with respect to that
issue.
Senator Lugar. I thank you for your assurance.
Madam Chairman, I have four more questions I would like to
submit for the record, if possible.
Senator Shaheen. Absolutely, without objection.
Senator Lugar. Senator Barrasso.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
If I could, Ambassador Morningstar, just to continue--a
continuation on the line of questioning from Senator Lugar in
terms of energy as a point of leverage. Increased development
of gas supplies in Azerbaijan can play an important role in
helping to diversify European gas supplies. However, it is
going to be vital that the development of energy resources not
benefit Iran. In Baku, you are going to be about 100 miles from
the border with Iran. When you take a look at the map of
Azerbaijan and Iran, there is about 100 miles of border between
the two.
So can you give a little bit about how Iran is involved in
Azerbaijan's gas supply, energy sector, and what we can do to
try to prevent Iran in terms of gaining technical or financial
benefit from any projects that may be going on?
Ambassador Morningstar. First of all, the best thing that
we can do is develop a Southern Corridor and to develop routes
that to go to Europe, because if we are not successful in
developing those routes, then Azerbaijan will find other
options as to where that gas may go, which one theoretical
option or possible option is obviously Iran.
There is right now, I would say, a minor relationship
between Iran and Azerbaijan with respect to gas. That includes
the fact that gas cannot be supplied directly to the separated
Azeri province of Nakhchivan. Basically the gas has to get
there through Iran, and there is a swap arrangement with Iran
that allows that to happen. And at least at this point--at
least I am not aware of any alternatives.
You may be referring also to the fact that in the original
Shah Deniz I project, since its inception in 1996, there is a
10-percent ownership interest, and I might say, passive
ownership interest, by NICO, which is a subsidiary of the
National Iranian Oil Company.
And our position on that--it presents frankly a very
difficult policy issue. The Shah Deniz project is a critical
project because
it is what will allow Azeri gas to get to Europe, but yet there
is a 10-percent ownership interest by an Iranian company. But
we believe that if that project were not able to go forward
because of that 10-percent passive interest, that the
ramifications would be a lot worse than Shah Deniz moving
forward, because what it would mean is that the project would
be left with partners who would not be particularly friendly,
and that that gas would end up going to different places, which
we would obviously want to avoid.
I know it is now being considered in legislation as to how
to take this into account. I do not discount for a second what
a difficult policy issue that is, but, you know, we are
certainly hopeful that we will not find ourselves in a
situation in which we shoot ourselves in the foot. And in the
meantime, we will do everything we can to minimize the
participation of the Iranian company in this project, which is
now a very passive investment.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you very much.
Mr. Broas, I want to start off. I enjoyed the story of your
parents. My dad would have been 95 today. He would have been
shocked, surprised, and very pleased, and I know your father
would be not shocked, but very pleased to see you here today in
front of this committee. So thank you for mentioning that.
I did want to ask you, historically the Dutch have been
strong supporters, I always thought, of European integration.
But they voted 2005 against a European Union constitutional
treaty. Can you just give us your overview, your thoughts, and
understanding of the view today of the people in the
Netherlands regarding the European Union?
Mr. Broas. Thank you, Senator. Thank you for your comments.
Is that good?
Senator Barrasso. Much better.
Mr. Broas. OK, sorry. As you know, the Dutch were one of
the founding members of the EU, and they are strong supporters
of the EU, and I do not doubt for a minute that they will
continue to be a strong supporter of the EU. And if confirmed,
as an ambassador, I will certainly advocate the
administration's position that they should continue to be a
part of the EU.
You are right that lately there have been some political
dustups and some disagreements. And, in fact, we all know that
there is a caretaker government in charge right now, and they
are waiting for elections in September to see whether they can
form a new government. And all I can say, Senator, is that if
confirmed, I will advocate the administration's position, and
do my best to see that the Dutch remain a part of the EU and a
supporting member of the EU.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you, I appreciate it.
And then, Mr. Anania, your father is here. And, you know,
looking at your parents while you were talking about them, your
mom was looking on with skepticism, but your dad, that was one
of the proudest fathers I have ever seen, and it was great to
watch him watch you talking. So thank you, and congratulations.
I want to talk about the relationship with Venezuela and
how would you characterize Suriname's relationship with
Venezuela? What type of influence does Venezuela have in
Suriname?
Mr. Anania. Yes, thank you, Senator. That relationship is
of great interest to the administration, and President Bouterse
has, in fact, at times made some rhetorical statements in favor
of joining the Venezuelan-led ALBA Union. However, the rhetoric
fortunately has been quite different than the actions of the
government, and so far they have taken no steps to join ALBA.
On the other hand, Suriname is the recipient of some modest
quantities of oil via the PetroCaribe program that Venezuela
runs. So we continue to watch that relationship very carefully.
It is a friendly relationship between the two countries. There
is a Venezuelan Embassy in Suriname.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you. My time has expired. Thank
you, Madam Chairman.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
Senator Menendez.
Senator Menendez. Thank you, Madam Chair. And
congratulations to all of the nominees on their nominations.
The focus of my questions are with you, Ambassador
Morningstar, as you might guess. I appreciate the fact that
this is probably not the assignment you were looking for and
that you were happy doing what you were doing. This is
something that the Secretary has asked you to do, so I
understand that. But it is also an opportunity to discuss
policy issues vis-a-vis your nomination here.
Last week, Secretary Clinton was touring the South
Caucasus, and her visit to the region coincided with an
escalation of cease-fire violations by Azeri forces, including
a cross-border incursion that killed three Armenian soldiers
and wounded five others, as well as a breach along the Nagorno-
Karabakh line of contact. These actions confirm, in my view,
the threat by the President of Azerbiajan that Armenia will
live in fear.
I look at that statement, ``Armenia will live in fear,''
and I look at the speech that was given in an official state
address to his people, in which Azerbaijan's President, Aliyev,
stated that, ``Our main enemies are Armenians of the world.''
Now if confirmed, what steps will you take to address this
ongoing problem along the line of contact? And do you think
that, based upon those types of statements, that proposed sales
of military hardware to be used in conjunction with the
Azerbaijan's military helicopter fleet is really in the
national interests of the United States?
Ambassador Morningstar. Well, first of all, let me just
preface my comments with just one thing. I want to make very
clear that I am very happy and excited to go to Azerbaijan, and
it is a country that is extremely important to our national
interests. And so I am looking forward to being there.
Senator Menendez. Duly noted.
Ambassador Morningstar. Second, when I am in Baku, if I am
confirmed, and when I deal at the highest levels of the
government, whether it be with the President or the Foreign
Minister, or the like, I will follow administration policy and
work also with Bob Bradtke, our Nagorno-Karabakh negotiator,
very closely.
I think it is fair to say that, and I will say, that any
language that is counterproductive, you know, such as the
language that you have said, that any actions by any party that
bring about loss of life, as the Secretary of State said last
week, create increased tension, can create escalation that can
have unpredictable and unforeseeable consequences and make even
more difficult the task of achieving a settlement in Nagorno-
Karabakh.
I will do everything that I can, looking at it from the
Azerbaijan side of things, if confirmed, to discourage that and
talk about how unacceptable that is. And I think that goes
without saying. And it is important. I think it is critically
important. I do not think any party should inflame the
situation by either unhelpful rhetoric or by escalating
tensions through actions that result in the tragic loss of
life.
With respect to the question of the sales of military
hardware, it raises a difficult issue, but something that we
have to pay incredibly close attention to. We have to comply
strictly with the waiver provisions under section 907. I think
we also have to recognize that Azerbaijan does live in a
difficult neighborhood. There are increasing tensions with
respect to other neighbors, particularly Iran. And that we have
to provide, I think, security assistance, possibly military
assistance, in ways that cannot be used to exacerbate any
situation with respect to Armenia or Nagorno-Karabakh. And I
think we have to do that--we have to be very strict in doing
that. But that still would allow us to do some things that are
important, whether it be maritime security in the Caspian,
whether it be cooperating on counterterrorism with respect to
Iran, with respect to some of the other things we do. I fully
appreciate your concern.
Senator Menendez. Well, I did not hear President Aliyev say
his main enemy or security concern is Iran. He said his main
enemy or enemies are Armenians of the world. And so when we are
talking about giving military or selling military hardware to
the Azerbaijanis, I think about what the Helsinki Final Act's
bottom lines are. When I asked a similar question to former
ambassador-designee, Mr. Bryza, because there had been another
incident where four Armenians had been killed. He reiterated
the three pillars of the Helsinki Final Act: nonuse of force or
the threat of force, the principle and territorial integrity,
and equal rights and self-determination of people. Well, nonuse
of force or the threat of force, obviously that gets enhanced
by giving military hardware to the Azerbaijanis, especially
when they say our major enemy is the Armenians of the world.
I have a real problem with us going ahead and selling
military hardware to Azerbaijanis based upon what has happened.
He did not say the Iranians are their threat.
Let me ask you, if I may, with the indulgence of the chair,
two other questions. One is, why was Azerbaijan's demolition of
the Christian Armenian cemetery in Djulfa not included in the
State Department's international religious freedom report? Do
you know?
Ambassador Morningstar. No, I do not know, but I can say
that if I am confirmed and if I go to Baku, I will make every
effort to visit that cemetery, that any kind of desecration
such as that is, you know, unacceptable, outrageous. And I will
do my best to get there and see it.
Senator Menendez. So do I take your response to mean--and
correct me if I am wrong--that if confirmed, you will
personally travel to Djulfa to investigate the destruction of
the cemetery?
Ambassador Morningstar. I will make my best effort.
Senator Menendez. Well, I would assume that your best
effort would only be impeded by the Azerbaijanis not letting
you go. I want to try and understand what your best effort is.
You are going to do everything possible to go.
Ambassador Morningstar. Yes.
Senator Menendez. OK. Second, what specific steps will you
take if confirmed and if you have the opportunity to go, which
I would expect you should be, to have the cemetery preserved as
a protected holy site?
Ambassador Morningstar. I think that it is important as one
of our major priorities to press for religious freedom in
Azerbaijan. It is not an all-negative record. They have been
helpful with respect to some communities, but not others. What
we need to do is to take very strong positions as an
administration and in Baku if I am there to protect the rights
of the Armenian church as well as to rectify the situation with
respect to the cemetery. And that would be a major part of the
agenda.
Senator Menendez. Well, I appreciate that answer. Finally,
I do not expect you to answer differently than have previous
nominees before this committee. But I do have to ask you
whether or not you contest any of the facts of what transpired
in 1915 as it relates to 1.5 million Armenians who were
brutally massacred or marched to their deaths in the waning
days of the Ottoman Empire.
Ambassador Morningstar. No, I do not.
Senator Menendez. Thank you, Madam Secretary. I look
forward to following up with Ambassador Morningstar.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you. I am going to give Ambassador
Morningstar a little break here and----
Ambassador Morningstar. No, it is fun.
Senator Shaheen [continuing]. Focus on the other two
nominees for a few minutes.
Mr. Broas, I want to start with you because as you
mentioned and Senator Barrasso mentioned, the Netherlands
currently has a caretaker cabinet. Its government is one of
those that has fallen as the result of the fiscal crisis in
Europe and disagreements over what the austerity measures mean
there. The caretaker cabinet that is currently in power agreed
on an emergency austerity deal, but elections are coming up in
September, and it raises the prospect that a new Parliament
might withdraw support for that agreement.
Can you talk about what the implications of that might be
for the Netherlands, and the ripple effect that might have
throughout the rest of Europe, and also whether we have an
official policy on whether we are going to urge the country to
support the current austerity deal that has been advocated in
Europe, or whether we will have any statement at all relative
to that?
Mr. Broas. Thank you, Senator. I do not know what the
administration's position will be, and I will just wait for the
elections to see what happens in September. So I do not know
sitting here today what position I will be advancing, if I am
confirmed as Ambassador.
The eurozone crisis that we are all reading about and
hearing about is being felt very deeply in the Netherlands. We,
of course, the United States, we are not a member of the
eurozone. We do not have a say in this. We do not have a vote.
But we have a huge stake in this. As you know, the EU is our
biggest trading part-
ner, so the outcome of these negotiations is critical to the
United
States. And if I am confirmed to be an ambassador, I will
certainly strongly and diligently advance and advocate the
position of the administration, to the extent it takes a
position with respect to the austerity measures being advanced
by the rest of the EU.
Senator Shaheen. Certainly I would think that one of our
positions is that we hope the Europeans will move expeditiously
to do everything they can to address the crisis there. And I
appreciate that they have been working toward it. But as you
point out, there are significant implications for the inability
to positively respond to the crisis, not only for Europe, but
for the United States and for the rest of the world.
Mr. Broas. And, Senator, I fully expect the Netherlands, as
one of the few AAA-rated sovereign debt countries in the EU, I
fully expect them to be a leader in these negotiations, and
that the rest of the EU will look to the Netherlands for
support and leadership.
Senator Shaheen. And have they taken that kind of a role to
date? Have they been aggressive?
Mr. Broas. To my knowledge, they have been--in light of
their caretaker government situation, they have been fairly
neutral lately. That is my understanding.
Senator Shaheen. OK. One of the things that you pointed out
in your testimony is the importance of the trade relationship
between the United States and the Netherlands. And certainly
even in my home State of New Hampshire, there is a very
important bilateral trade relationship with the Netherlands.
Can you talk about what role you might play as Ambassador, as
the top U.S. official in the Netherlands, to help promote that
trade relationship?
Mr. Broas. Certainly, Senator. Thank you for the question.
As I said in my opening statement, they are one of our biggest
and most reliable trading partners. And as you know, the Port
of Rotterdam is the biggest port in Europe. So many things
transship through Rotterdam and through the Amsterdam airport
that it is a huge trading center, and it remains one of the
biggest investors in the United States. And vice versa we are
one of the biggest investors in the Netherlands.
As Ambassador, if I am confirmed, I will certainly have an
open door and welcome the Dutch companies, to meet with them,
and advance, and advocate for them to continue and to increase
their trade relationships with all of our States and vice
versa. I will have an open door to American companies. As you
know, there are 2,100 U.S. companies with offices in the
Netherlands, and they are all doing business with Dutch
companies and Dutch consumers. And so I will have an open door,
and I will welcome commercial opportunities from the
Netherlands and from the United States to maintain that trade
relationship.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you. So it is fair to say that you
will commit to making commercial ties and business advocacy a
top priority.
Mr. Broas. That is going to be one of my top priorities,
absolutely, Senator.
Senator Shaheen. Great, thank you. You pointed out that the
Netherlands was a founding member of the EU. It is also a
founding member of NATO, and has been a significant contributor
to the alliance. It has participated in supporting the
operations in Libya, and, as we mentioned both of us in our
testimony, supporting our operations in Afghanistan, although
their role there has changed. It is the first non-U.S. NATO
ally to contribute to the alliance's new missile defense
system. And it also participating in the multinational program
to develop the F-35 joint strike fighter, something that has
been a very important priority in this country, though not
without its detractors and not without controversy.
Can you talk about the opportunity that you will have as
Ambassador to learn more about what is going on with the
development of the joint strike fighter, and the cooperation
that you might advocate for the continued effort toward
development of the plane, and what role you see for the joint
strike fighter in the Netherlands?
Mr. Broas. Thank you, Senator. Yes, I would be happy to.
As you know, the Dutch have invested over a billion dollars
since 1997 in the joint strike fighter program, and the
research, and the development. And they remain one of the key
contributors to the development and construction of the joint
strike fighter. If I am confirmed as Ambassador, I will
certainly advance the administration's position to have the
Dutch continue to contribute to the development of the program
and to commit to purchase as many of the planes as possible
once constructed.
They have committed, so far to my knowledge, to buying 2,
but they have also had discussions about buying as many as 85.
And as Ambassador, I am going to advocate very strongly that
they purchase at least 85.
Senator Shaheen. Good, we appreciate that. As we are
talking about NATO, I had the opportunity to be in Chicago for
the NATO summit, and it was, I thought, a great opportunity for
those countries who have participated in NATO to point out the
continuing relevance of our alliance, how important it is to
our transatlantic partnership, and to so many other countries
around the world.
And one of the things that has been challenging,
particularly as we deal with the fiscal issues that we are
facing both in Europe and the United States, are the resources
that are needed to continue NATO's role in the world. One of
the things that was touted in Chicago and that is talked about
to address those fiscal challenges is the new Smart Defense
Initiative that is being promoted.
Can you talk about how this concept of pooling military
resources is being received in the Netherlands? And it is my
understanding that the Dutch have agreed to purchase new
refueling tankers with the French and the Germans and to share
those aircraft. And can you talk about how that is being
received as well?
Mr. Broas. Yes, thank you, Senator. Yes. At the Chicago
meetings on NATO, the Dutch did commit, as did several other
members of the EU, to adopting the smart defense approach,
employing technology and missile defense as the top priorities
for the future of NATO's alliance. My understanding is that
they have also agreed to replace the older Hawk missiles with
the Patriot missiles, and that that is something they have
committed to.
My understanding is that the Dutch are very enthusiastic
and very actively considering all of the commitments and
discussions that were in Chicago, and that they are very
enthusiastic about the Smart Defense Program.
Senator Shaheen. That is great. Thank you. I think, as you
point out with the Dutch and was touted in Chicago, that smart
defense is something that makes sense as we try and figure out
how to use our limited resources. I think we are all concerned
that it not become an opportunity for countries to contribute
less than their fair share to NATO as well. So I will just say
that for the record and not ask you to respond to that.
I want to go now to Suriname. And, Mr. Anania, you pointed
out that--you mentioned the new President of Suriname who was
elected in 2010. And only as we were preparing for this hearing
did I learn how controversial he has been, that he was
convicted in absentia by the Dutch for smuggling cocaine in
1999, that he has been on trial over the past 4 years for the
1982 killing of 15 prominent political opponents, although he
denies any direct involvement in those killings. The likelihood
of any conviction appears slim given that the national assembly
has now approved an amendment granting amnesty to offenses
committed between 1980 and 1992.
The U.N. High Commission on Human Rights and Amnesty
International have both called for the amnesty law to be
reversed, and there was a large silent march there in April
2012 to protest the law.
Given the controversial trial, the issues surrounding the
President, can you comment on the state of democracy and the
rule of law in Suriname and whether there are any efforts under
way to urge a repeal of that amnesty law?
Mr. Anania. Yes, Senator. Thank you for the question. It is
a very important issue of great concern to the people of
Suriname at the moment, and you are right to highlight it with
your question.
First of all, the United States certainly expects Suriname
to actively participate in the Western Hemisphere region's
general consensus supporting democracy and human rights, and we
certainly do look with concern upon these most recent actions.
The President was democratically elected. It is a coalition
government that he leads. He has a solid majority in their
national assembly. But nonetheless, his past is checkered, and
he previously did lead a military coup against the civilian
government. So we continue to be very concerned about any
actions that the government might take to infringe upon, in
this case, an independent judiciary.
In fact, the national assembly did pass an amnesty law
which would apply to the murders which took place in 1982.
However, the court proceeding has not been terminated, and so
at this point the people of Suriname are very carefully
discussing the situation. And I think you are right to be
concerned that the prosecution will end; however, it has not
yet ended, and the court is still considering it.
So for that reason, the Embassy and the administration
continue to encourage the Government of Suriname to respect the
separation of powers within its democratic structures in
keeping with its own constitution.
Unfortunately, the Constitution of Suriname calls for the
creation of a constitutional court, but there has never been
one created. And this has further exacerbated the situation and
made it difficult to determine what the outcome of this
particular amnesty law or what impact it will have on the trial
will be.
Senator Shaheen. And are there other areas where there are
concerns about human rights violations and rule of law in
Suriname?
Mr. Anania. Well, in general, the Bouterse government does
generally respect the rule of law and human rights as they seek
to improve Suriname's infrastructure and economic conditions.
However, Suriname is a middle-income country, probably trending
toward the low end of that scale, and it is quite a large
country with not a lot of people in it. So its borders are
porous, and the ability of the government to enforce law
throughout the country is often very limited. And so there
certainly are documented cases of human rights abuses, which
have taken place within Suriname. Particularly there is a large
informal and, in many cases, illegal gold mining sector, which
operates within the interior of the country. And most of the
people who are working in that sector are coming from other
countries, particularly Brazil.
And so the administration does have concerns about
potential trafficking in persons both for labor or the sex
trade, and we continue to engage with the Government of
Suriname, which has made progress in these areas. They have a
fairly good legal regime. There have been some limited
prosecutions. And if confirmed, I pledge to you that we will
continue to follow these issues closely, and beyond that, seek
to assist and advise the Government of Suriname to combat these
gorges, which unfortunately do exist in the country.
Senator Shaheen. The porous borders also make drug
trafficking a bigger concern. And certainly we have assisted
Suriname in fighting drug trafficking, and by training antidrug
units, police officers, and custom officials. Is there evidence
that cooperation has been effective?
Mr. Anania. I would say, yes, there is, but the effect is
limited, it must be said. As I noted, Suriname is a country
with modest means. The government does not have large law
enforcement resources. It is a very large country. So while
they do have generally a free and independent judicial system,
and while they have prosecuted successful many small-time drug
traffickers, there is continuing concern that there might be
larger scale activities undertaken either unknown to the
government or possibly even with the connivance of some
officials.
We do have a Drug Enforcement Agency office at the Embassy.
It is quite active. And I am pleased to have learned that the
relevant law enforcement entities in Suriname do cooperate
closely with us. They participate in many of our training
programs. And they are very grateful for the support that we
offer. And we have, in fact, increased the dollar value of the
programs within Suriname, so I would say that this is a bright
spot in the relationship.
Senator Shaheen. And given that it has had mixed success,
are we looking at trying to do anything differently? Is
Suriname looking at trying to do anything differently? Is there
an effort to get more buy-in from the population there to
address the issues around drug trafficking, or do we think
continuing the program as it has existed is what is warranted?
Mr. Anania. Well, again, we have to speak of limited
resources both on the part of the Government of Suriname, but
also from the United States. I was pleased to see that we have
increased our training dollars fairly significantly. It should
be up to about a million dollars. But I think we have to
restrain our expectations for the impact that such a small
amount of money could have in a place like Suriname, which,
after all, is a very wild country.
Senator Shaheen. One of the things that I understand is
that President Bouterse is making strengthening ties with China
a priority. Have we seen an increase in influence on the part
of China in the country? And are there ways in which we should
be cooperating or working together to try and look at where
there are areas of mutual interest that we could cooperate on,
the United States and China, in Suriname?
Mr. Anania. Well, that is an important development in the
economy history of Suriname. China is very interested in
Suriname as they are in many other countries of the world
because Suriname does have such a large array of natural
resources. So, in particular, logging and mining industries are
very attractive to China, and they have obviously devoted some
significant resources to building a strong relationship with
Suriname.
There are also political elements of that because Suriname
continues to support a one China policy, which has, of course,
for many years been a major priority for the Government in
Beijing.
In terms of cooperation, that is actually an interesting
question, and there may be some areas in particular.
Unfortunately in many cases, extractive industries lead to
damage to the environment, and that is very much a concern in
Suriname. I mentioned informal mining that goes on,
particularly gold mining. The price of gold is very high now,
and there has been an influx of informal/illegal gold miners.
And they have caused great environmental degradation because,
in particular, I understand that these operators use quantities
of mercury in their gold mining operations, and this poisons
rivers and destroys the environment.
There is also concern frankly that some Chinese companies
may not be interested in preserving the environment, and,
therefore, may go in and clearcut forests, rain forests in
particular, or otherwise cause damage to the environment. And
this is, of course, not an issue that is solely confined to
Suriname. This is an issue in many countries in Africa and
elsewhere in Latin America as well. So it remains to be seen if
we could find common ground.
I must also say, building on one of the earlier questions,
that I definitely believe that promoting U.S. industry and
economic ties between our countries would be extremely
important. And in this area, I guess we could say that China
may be the competition, and I would certainly, if confirmed,
work to advance the argument that having United States firms
working in Suriname would, in fact, be more likely to result in
protection of the environment.
Senator Shaheen. Well, thank you. You make a very important
point. And as you suggest, China is investing in a lot of parts
of the world, and we need to think about how we are affected by
that growing influence around the world.
Ambassador Morningstar, there are two issues I want to
raise with you before closing out the hearing that have not
been explored in the kind of detail that I had hoped. One is
Iran, and several people have mentioned Iran. But can you talk
about how concerned you are about Iran's influence in
Azerbaijan, and how extensive that is, and what approach we
might take to counteract the influence that Iran is having in
Azerbaijan?
Ambassador Morningstar. Thank you. I think it is a really
important question, and Iran is a concern, and it is a concern,
I believe, to the Azeri Government. I think they have made that
very clear. And they are concerned about the influence that
Iran is having internally within Azerbaijan.
We also have to recognize that Azerbaijan is in a difficult
situation. Iran is a neighbor. To some extent, I think it has
to walk a tightrope. At the same time, they recognize the
dangers. And I come back to the point, and not to reiterate too
much, but they are looking for our help with respect to Iran,
and that we do have to provide help from the standpoint of how
from a civil society standpoint they can deal with the Iranian
situation, but also from the standpoint of security assistance.
And that is recognizing that--
I said this before to the questions from Senator Menendez--that
we have to very strictly draw the line with respect to
assistance that can be in our interest and helpful to
Azerbaijan as opposed to assistance that could be used with
respect to the dispute with Armenia.
Now that is a difficult line to draw, but we have to make
every effort to draw that line in working with Congress and
working with the Senate and your staff to ensure that that
happens. And I think there is a lot we can do. I believe that
when I get there, that is going to be a very major issue, if
confirmed.
Senator Shaheen. It is interesting to me that Azerbaijan
has
recently agreed to purchase 1.6 billion dollars' worth of
Israeli-made weapons. And there was a March Foreign Policy
article that reported that Azerbaijan has likely given Israel
access to its military bases for activities targeting Iran,
though I think it is important to point out that both countries
have denied that report.
So can you talk about how we should we view this weapons
deals between Azerbaijan and Israel, and what that growing
military relationship between the two countries signals for
Iran?
Ambassador Morningstar. Well, I think we obviously have to
watch it very closely. Israel is our close friend and ally, and
Azerbaijan is another close friend.
I do not think at this point, at least the best information
I have, we do not know much about that arms agreement and what
it entails, how much it really does entail, and so on. And I
think we need to learn more about it. But it is incumbent upon
us, to the extent that there is a relationship that grows, and,
again, recognizing that they have denied some of the more
explosive allegations with respect to their cooperation, that
we need to work closely with both countries to understand what,
if anything, is really happening.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you. I want to thank all of you for
agreeing to take on this responsibility and for your testimony
today. I think we will keep the record open for, what, another
24 hours?
Voice. Yes, 48 hours.
Senator Shaheen. For another 48 hours in case any questions
come in from the committee.
But at this time, I would like to close the hearing and,
again, congratulate you all. And we look forward to working
with you in your future roles in these ambassadorship posts.
Thank you.
[Whereupon, at 4:24 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
----------
Additional Questions and Answers Submitted for the Record
Responses of Richard Morningstar to Questions Submitted
by Senator Richard G. Lugar
Question. Just last week President Obama made the rare step of
endorsing the Trans-Anatolia gas pipeline, known as ``TANAP.'' TANAP
would be a major new gas pipeline transiting Turkey and would be
largely financed by Azerbaijan. TANAP would replace the need for the
proposed Nabucco trunkline section within Turkey, but it would require
pipelines to carry gas from the Turkish-Bulgarian border onward to
Europe such as through a scaled-down version of Nabucco.
There are several rival pipeline proposals to carry Caspian gas to
Europe. Each may have some economic credibility, but they vary greatly
in strategic benefit warranting U.S. Government backing. Specifically,
our first priority must be to help relieve our Eastern European allies
from their overdependence on Russian gas, and, in doing so, not subject
them to European energy companies heavily influenced by Russian state-
controlled companies.
Transit decisions made by the BP-led consortium developing Shah
Deniz gas and the Government of Azerbaijan will directly impact U.S.
policy, including the extent to which projects in the Caspian warrant
consideration as strategically important to the United States vis-a-vis
our sanctions regime on Iran.
Please clarify the administration's position following the
President's comments on TANAP and describe what have been the
primary delays in gas projects advancing in the years since you
and I attended the Nabucco Treaty signing in Ankara? In short,
has the United States endorsed TANAP officially?
Answer. President Obama sent a letter to President Aliyev
congratulating Azerbaijan at the 19th Annual Caspian Oil and Gas
Conference. The letter did not specifically mention TANAP but rather
recognized the critical importance of Azerbaijan in the role of the
Southern Corridor and the signing of gas transit agreements between
Azerbaijan and Turkey.
It has become apparent that there is not sufficient gas to fill a
full scale Nabucco pipeline by 2017-18. By the early to mid 2020s,
there will likely be sufficient gas from Azerbaijan and possibly
Turkmenistan and Iraq. The United States supports any commercially
viable pipeline that brings Caspian gas to Europe provided the
following two conditions are met: (1) a significant portion of the gas
must be supplied to our friends and allies in the Balkans and elsewhere
in Central and Eastern Europe, which are particularly dependent on a
single source of gas; and (2) the pipeline must be expandable, so that
additional sources of gas can be accommodated once they become
available. TANAP could play an important and valuable role in bringing
Caspian gas to Europe.
Delays in opening the Southern Gas Corridor have stemmed primarily
from the difficulty of reaching agreement among all of the stakeholders
on what export route will best address their commercial and political
interests. In my role as the Special Envoy for Eurasian Energy, I have
been working diligently on this issue and continue to work closely with
all the companies and parties involved to achieve energy security for
Europe as soon as possible. With the recent progress in narrowing down
potential routes, it appears likely that the Shah Deniz Consortium will
reach a decision on a final export route within the next year.
Question. As you know, the Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction
Program has been involved in Azerbaijan for a number of years.
Recently, the focus has been on Caspian energy security and biothreat
discussions. I'd like to ask that you make this work a priority in
Azerbaijan when you assume your responsibilities in Baku.
Please indicate how you will advance this cooperation when
you arrive in Baku.
Answer. The Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) Program
has been a critical component of our security assistance to Azerbaijan,
serving as a vivid example of how our assistance to Azerbaijan bolsters
vital U.S. interests in the region. Just this month, the Defense Threat
Reduction Agency (DTRA) conducted a successful training session for
Azerbaijani officials in Baku on combating proliferation of weapons of
mass destruction (WMD). If confirmed, I pledge to ensure that these
efforts remain a priority at the U.S. Embassy in Baku.
In another prominent example of our CTR cooperation with
Azerbaijan, DTRA Director Kenneth Myers traveled to Azerbaijan last
year to attend the opening of a new state-of-the-art disease-monitoring
laboratory. The construction of the laboratory was financed by the U.S.
Government within the framework of DTRA's Cooperative Biological
Engagement Program (CBEP); the lab was the first of 10 regional
diagnostic labs to be opened within the framework of this program,
which aims to secure dangerous pathogens, promote disease reporting and
response, and advance research on pathogens and potential
countermeasures. United States-Azerbaijan cooperation has also led to
the renovation of two national level diagnostic laboratories for the
Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Agriculture, bringing the
facilities, equipment, and procedures of these institutes up to
international standards. In addition to the upgrades to Azerbaijan's
physical infrastructure, the CBEP has completed numerous training
events and cooperative research projects, building skills among
Azerbaijani scientists in areas such as biosafety, biosecurity,
laboratory techniques, epidemiological analysis, and international
research standards.
The CTR program also had a successful partnership with Azerbaijan's
maritime security forces in bolstering Azerbaijan's capacity to secure
its interests in the Caspian. An interagency effort continues to
address Critical Energy Infrastructure in the Caspian, and this issue
will remain a priority for the Embassy.
If confirmed, I will look forward to continuing these critical
efforts to enhance Azerbaijan's capacity to reduce, eliminate, and
counter the threat of WMD, a vital U.S. interest.
Question. Ambassador Morningstar, I would like to commend your
efforts to advance many critical initiatives as the Special Envoy for
Eurasian Energy. Key initiatives such as the Unconventional Gas
Technical Engagement Program and opening the Southern Corridor from the
Caspian to Eastern Europe offer opportunities to promote economic
growth and shift power dynamics in energy markets in favor of the
United States and our allies.
The Special Envoy position was created by Secretary Rice at the
urging of Vice President Biden and myself, and it was propelled with
the strong support of Secretary Clinton. Several former Soviet states
still come under tremendous pressure from Russia, and energy is a
primary point of leverage. The constant presence of a high-level U.S.
Envoy demonstrates U.S. commitment to these countries and to energy
security at little taxpayer expense.
I am hopeful that you will join me today in encouraging the
continuation of the Special Envoy role following your departure to
Baku. But more to the point, please indicate whether the Special Envoy
for Eurasian Energy continue to report directly to the Secretary of
State given the creation of the new Energy Bureau.
Answer. Thank you for the support you have given to addressing
energy security challenges generally, as well as in Europe and Eurasia
particularly. As you know, Secretary Clinton has appreciated your
leadership on the integration of energy security with American foreign
policy, as these issues directly affect our national security and
prosperity. Secretary Clinton has tasked the Assistant Secretary of the
Energy Resources Bureau and, until his confirmation in the interim, our
Coordinator for International Energy Affairs, Carlos Pascual, to lead
our energy issues in Europe and Eurasia to ensure that we sustain the
highest level of attention in the Department, while mobilizing the full
support of the Energy Resources Bureau. Ambassador Pascual will
continue to report to the Secretary directly on these matters.
Question. Good governance of oil and gas resources and revenues is
fundamental to the future prosperity and democratic development of
Azerbaijan. I have had several conversations with President Aliyev on
this topic, and he has professed his intention to pursue the ``Norway
model'' in transparency and spending of revenues.
To that end, the State Oil Fund of Azerbaijan has made remarkable
progress. However, more needs to be done, particularly to account for
SOCAR's [State Oil Company of Azerbaijan] revenues and to improve civil
society involvement.
The Cardin-Lugar amendment will require many oil companies
operating in Azerbaijan to disclose payments through SEC filings. If
confirmed, what will be your priority areas to further improve
transparency in Azerbaijan, and how will you advocate for the purposes
of the Cardin-Lugar amendment?
Answer. Advocating for transparency and compliance of international
standards and U.S. laws will be a key priority in engaging both the
public and private sector at all levels in Azerbaijan. Azerbaijan was
the first country to complete Extractive Industries Transparency
Initiative (EITI) validation, with the Board finding Azerbaijan EITI
compliant in February 2009. Azerbaijan will be up for revalidation in
2014, and we will continue to monitor its compliance and place
consistent emphasis on the importance of EITI and the Cardin-Lugar
amendment, which is an extremely valuable complement to EITI. Once the
SEC issues final regulations, the Embassy will work with the Government
of Azerbaijan to create the necessary conditions for companies listed
in the United States to be compliant with U.S. law.
Azerbaijan has also signed on to the Open Government Partnership
(OGP), a global partnership between governments and civil society in
which governments commit to an action plan to promote transparency and
fight corruption and submit to independent monitoring on their progress
in carrying it out. If confirmed, I will continue to work closely with
both the government and civil society groups to help Azerbaijan carry
out its commitments under the OGP.
Question. What is your view of the Nabucco West proposal? Is
Nabucco West premised on TANAP becoming a reality? Would the 2009
Intergovernmental Agreement still be valid for Nabucco West?
Answer. The United States supports any commercially viable pipeline
that brings Caspian gas to Europe provided the following two conditions
are met: (1) a significant portion of the gas must be supplied to our
friends and allies in the Balkans and elsewhere in Central and Eastern
Europe, which are particularly dependent on a single source of gas; and
(2) the pipeline must be expandable, so that additional sources of gas
can be accommodated once they become available.
There will ultimately be large amounts of gas to ship through
Georgia and Turkey to Europe. We believe that TANAP could be an
excellent project, because it would be a dedicated pipeline across
Turkey that would provide greater flexibility as more gas becomes
available. Nabucco West, however, is not necessarily premised on TANAP
becoming a reality. The parties are discussing how best to utilize the
Nabucco IGA as part of the project.
Question. What is your view of the Southeastern Europe Pipeline
(SEEP) proposal? If reports are correct that SEEP would rely on much
existing infrastructure, how would it be able to handle additional gas
supplies, if Iraq or Turkmen gas comes online in the future?
Answer. A full Nabucco pipeline may not be the first pipeline, but
ultimately there will be significant gas available in the future from
Azerbaijan and possibly Turkmenistan and Iraq. The South East European
Pipeline (SEEP), as well as the two other pipelines being considered
(Nabucco West and the Trans Adriatic Pipeline (TAP)), are still in the
running. We would support SEEP, or any commercially viable pipeline
that brings Caspian gas to Europe, provided the following two
conditions are met: (1) a significant portion of the gas must be
supplied to our friends and allies in the Balkans and elsewhere in
Central and Eastern Europe, which are particularly dependent on a
single source of gas; and (2) the pipeline must be expandable, so that
additional sources of gas can be accommodated once they become
available.
The final architecture of SEEP is not yet clear. The expandability
of SEEP to handle potential future volumes of gas from countries beyond
Azerbaijan is an important question, and one that we will be examining
closely as the process of choosing an export route for Shah Deniz gas
proceeds.
______
Responses of Richard Morningstar to Questions Submitted
by Senator Barbara Boxer
Question. According to news reports, on June 4-7, at least eight
Armenian and Azeri soldiers were killed during fighting along the
border of Armenia and Azerbaijan. In a troubling development, the
fighting--which reportedly began after Azeri forces attempted to
penetrate Armenian lines--took place at the same time that Secretary of
State Hillary Rodham Clinton was visiting the region.
If confirmed, how will you respond, publicly and privately,
to new acts of aggression that now extend beyond the Nagorno-
Karabakh region into the Armenian-Azerbaijani border area?
How will you specifically work to ensure that the
Azerbaijani Government respects the Organization for Security
and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) Minsk Group negotiated cease-
fire?
Answer. As a cochair of the OSCE Minsk Group, the United States
remains committed at the highest levels to assisting the sides of the
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict to reach a lasting and peaceful settlement.
During her recent visit to the region, Secretary Clinton made clear
that these cycles of violence must end and that the sides should
exercise restraint, comply with their obligations under the 1994 cease-
fire agreement, and take the steps necessary for peace. The Secretary
also expressed concern about the danger of rising tensions, which could
have unpredictable and disastrous consequences.
If confirmed, I will work with U.S. Minsk Group cochair, Robert
Bradtke, and engage at the highest levels of the Azerbaijani Government
to urge respect for the cease-fire and strengthen its implementation.
Question. Last year, then-Ambassador Matthew Bryza attempted to
visit the Armenian cemetery of Djulfa to investigate the 2005
destruction of Armenian Khachkars, or burial monuments. The desecration
of one of the oldest and largest Armenian cemeteries was an affront to
religious freedom and was criticized by the European Parliament and
international archaeological bodies. Disturbingly, the Azerbaijani
Government denied Ambassador Bryza's request to visit the site.
If confirmed, will you commit to attempt to travel to Djulfa
to investigate the destruction of the cemetery? What steps will
you take to ensure that other religious sites and monuments in
Azerbaijan are protected?
Answer. The United States has publicly condemned the desecration at
Djulfa and reiterated our concerns to the Azerbaijani Government on
this issue, urging a transparent investigation of the incident. Despite
our requests to visit the Djulfa Cemetery, local authorities have so
far refused permission to do so. If I am confirmed, I pledge to make
every effort to visit the cemetery at Djulfa. I will also amplify our
concerns to the Government of Azerbaijan and stress the need to respect
and safeguard Armenian religious and cultural sites in Azerbaijan.
As a strong proponent of preserving world cultural heritage, we
urged Azerbaijan and Armenian to work with UNESCO to investigate the
destruction of these cultural monuments.
Question. I am deeply concerned by recent reports of attempts by
Iran-linked operatives to kill foreign diplomats, including American
Embassy employees and their families, in Azerbaijan. According to news
reports, U.S. Embassy officials in Azerbaijan have been alerted to
plots against employees at least three times in the past 2 years.
I am also troubled by inadequate security at the U.S. Embassy
building in Baku. According to a 2007 report by the Office of the
Inspector General report, the Embassy is ``lodged in a 100-year-old
building and has an unprotected annex 30 minutes away through horrific
traffic.'' For the safety of our citizens serving in Azerbaijan, it is
imperative that the Embassy go through the Compound Security Upgrade
Program and relocate. In her recent visit to Azerbaijan, Secretary
Clinton reminded President Aliyev about the need to build a new, state-
of-the-art chancery, which has been under negotiation with the
Azerbaijani Government for more than 10 years.
What will you do to protect U.S. Government employees--
particularly regarding threats from Iran--and how do you intend
to communicate to the Azerbaijani Government the urgency of
this situation?
What are the existing obstacles to relocating the Embassy
and when do you expect that a new facility could be ready?
Answer. If confirmed, my highest priority as Ambassador will be the
safety and security of our staff and their families in Baku. Our
security cooperation with the host government is a key component of
that effort. Azerbaijani authorities have announced the arrest of a
number of individuals since the start of this year for allegedly
plotting attacks against foreign interests in Azerbaijan. We are
appreciative of our cooperation with the Government of Azerbaijan and
we continue to work closely with Azerbaijani authorities to provide for
the safety and security of our Embassy and personnel in Baku.
The upgrading our Embassy facility in Azerbaijan must be the
highest priority, both to improve security and to provide a larger and
more modern workspace similar to our other embassies throughout the
region. As part of this ongoing effort, we have been working to obtain
property for a New Embassy Compound in Baku, fully compliant with
current security standards.
Even in my role as Special Envoy for Eurasian Energy, I have raised
the issue with President Aliyev in the strongest possible terms. And
while in Baku earlier this month, the Secretary also conveyed to the
Azerbaijani Government the importance of accelerating the process
toward building a modern, secure, state-of-the-art chancery in Baku.
If confirmed as Ambassador, I will continue to stress the
importance of this effort to the government and do everything possible
to surmount the remaining obstacles and ensure that this project
becomes a reality.
Question. In February, Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev stated in
a public speech that was later posted on his Web site that
``[Azerbaijan's] main enemies are Armenians of the world.''
Statements such as the one above foment anti-Armenian sentiment in
Azerbaijan, which exacerbates existing tensions and makes it
increasingly difficult to reach a permanent peace agreement regarding
the Nagorno-Karabakh region.
If confirmed, what will you do to work with the Azerbaijani
Government to counter anti-Armenian sentiment and to further a
meaningful peace process?
Answer. The United States has joined with the other Minsk Group Co-
Chairs to urge that all sides show restraint in their public statements
and on the ground to avoid misunderstandings and unintended
consequences. Secretary Clinton reiterated these points during her
travel to the region earlier this month, and if confirmed I will
reinforce this message at the highest levels of the Azerbaijani
Government.
As Secretary Clinton and the other Foreign Ministers of the OSCE
Minsk Group Cochair Countries noted in a joint statement earlier this
year, a new generation has come of age in the region with no first-hand
memory of Armenians and Azeris living side by side, and it is important
to emphasize that prolonging these artificial divisions only deepens
the wounds of war. If confirmed, I will make the case that
irresponsible rhetoric is unacceptable and undermines our efforts to
achieve a peaceful settlement of the conflict. I will urge the
Azerbaijani Government to show restraint in its rhetoric and to prepare
its people for peace, not war.
Question. Congress has enacted legislation known as ``Section 907''
prohibiting U.S. assistance to Azerbaijan until it meets a number of
conditions, including taking demonstrable steps to cease ``offensive
uses of force against Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh.''
Yet just last week, the Azeri military was involved in a violent
attack that left three Armenian soldiers dead.
Furthermore, the Azeri Government continually threatens to resolve
the conflict by force. According to The Economist, the Azeri
President--Ilham Aliyev--threatened war to resolve the Nagorno-Karabakh
conflict in nine separate speeches in 2010 alone.
Is the Government of Azerbaijan fully meeting the conditions
of section 907?
Do you support continuing to waive section 907, as the
administration has done for the last several years?
Should the U.S. Government be providing military aid to the
Government of Azerbaijan at the same time that it is committing
acts of aggression and threatening renewed war against both
Nagorno-Karabakh and Armenia?
Answer. Since 2002, the President has waived section 907 on an
annual basis. Deputy Secretary Burns signed the 2012 waiver on behalf
of President Obama again this year. If confirmed, I will support the
appropriate application of this waiver authority and any and all other
statutory requirements that dictate the conditions of U.S. assistance
to Azerbaijan, including section 907.
Azerbaijan is an important security partner for the United States
and our assistance to Azerbaijan is provided in this context, helping
to further common objectives including counterterrorism, border
control, and maritime security. Azerbaijan has over 90 troops stationed
in Afghanistan and provides critical support for U.S. and coalition
aircraft bound for Afghanistan. U.S. assistance to Azerbaijan has
enhanced Azerbaijan's interoperability with NATO and U.S. forces and
advances vital U.S. security interests in the region.
If confirmed, I will advocate for assistance programs in areas that
serve these key U.S. interests while ensuring that our security
assistance cannot be used for offensive purposes against Armenia and
does not undermine ongoing efforts to negotiate a peaceful settlement
between Armenia and Azerbaijan.
Question. As you know, a goal of U.S. policy in the South Caucasus
is to foster regional cooperation and economic integration. Yet,
Azerbaijan continues to undermine U.S. efforts in the region.
For example, in May 2011, Azeri President Aliyev stated in his
Republic Day address, ``As far as Armenia is concerned, we will
continue to make efforts to isolate Armenia from all regional projects.
We do not hide it. This is our policy.''
How will you address Azerbaijan's continued attempts to
isolate Armenia?
How will you work to promote regional cooperation and
economic integration?
Answer. The only path to peace, stability, and prosperity in the
region is a lasting, peaceful settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh
conflict. As a cochair of the Minsk Group, the United States remains
committed, at the highest levels, to helping the sides achieve this
outcome. If confirmed, I will emphasize to Azerbaijan's leadership that
it is in Azerbaijan's interest to accelerate efforts toward peace and
regional economic integration.
As part of this effort, the United States and the other cochairs
have proposed confidence-building measures, including humanitarian and
people-to-people contacts, which should be used to promote mutual
understanding among peoples of the region. The sides have agreed to
pursue such measures, and if confirmed, I will urge the Azerbaijani
Government to move forward with these vital initiatives to help move
the region toward peace.
A peaceful resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict would also
allow the essential and long overdue integration of Armenia into the
vital energy routes and infrastructure that are developing across the
region. If confirmed, I will make the case in Baku that Azerbaijan
stands only to gain from such an outcome.
______
Responses of Richard Morningstar to Questions Submitted
by Senator Robert Menendez
Question. Do you support the proposed sale of military hardware to
be used in conjunction with Azerbaijan's military helicopter fleet for
border surveillance and ``police-type'' activities? What message would
this sale send to the Azeris about cross-border incursions and what
message does it send about U.S. even-handedness or seriously
encouraging Baku to agree to Minsk Group cochair demands that it remove
its snipers from the ``line of contact'' in the Nagorno-Karabakh
region?
Answer. The United States reviews all license applications in light
of our international commitments and U.S. laws. In this specific case,
I understand that the applicant seeking the Department's approval for a
proposed license agreement has now requested that the Department remove
Azerbaijan from the sales territory of the agreement. The Department
will honor this request from the applicant when it delivers the
statutory notification of the sale to Congress.
If confirmed, I will ensure that our security assistance to
Azerbaijan cannot be used for offensive purposes against Armenia, and
does not undermine ongoing efforts to negotiate a peaceful settlement
between Armenia and Azerbaijan.
As a cochair of the OSCE Minsk Group, the United States remains
deeply committed to assisting the sides of the Nagorno-Karabakh
conflict to reach a lasting and peaceful settlement. We reiterate at
every opportunity that there is no military solution to the conflict,
and that only a peaceful settlement will lead to security, stability,
and reconciliation in the region.
Question. Baku has rejected successive appeals by the OSCE and the
U.N.
Secretary General to withdraw its snipers from the line of contact.
Armenia and the Nagorno-Karabakh leadership have consistently said they
will withdraw their snipers provided Azerbaijan agrees to do the same.
What will you do to convince Azerbaijan to support the Minsk
Group and U.N. Secretary General's call to pull back snipers,
as both Armenia and the Nagorno Karabakh Republic have agreed
to do?
Answer. If confirmed as Ambassador, I will support our U.S. cochair
for the OSCE Minsk Group, Ambassador Robert Bradtke, in his efforts to
work with the sides to achieve a lasting, peaceful resolution to the
conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh. I will urge the highest levels of the
Azerbaijani Government to take steps--including the withdrawal of
snipers--to improve the atmosphere for negotiations, prevent
unnecessary casualties, and strengthen implementation of the cease-
fire. I will emphasize at every opportunity that there is no military
solution to the conflict, and that only a peaceful settlement will lead
to security, stability, and reconciliation in the region.
Question. Why wasn't Azerbaijan's demolition of the Christian
Armenian cemetery in Djulfa included in the State Department's
International Religious Freedom Report? Will it now be documented in
future editions of this report?
Answer. The incident remains of great concern to the Department,
and if confirmed as Ambassador, I will raise the issue frequently and
forcefully with the Azerbaijani Government. I will also review reports
of the incident and its relationship with the International Religious
Freedom Report.
The United States has publicly condemned the desecration at Djulfa
and called for a transparent investigation. If confirmed, I pledge to
make every effort to visit the cemetery and will emphasize the need to
respect and safeguard Armenian religious and cultural sites in
Azerbaijan.
Question. Will you, if confirmed, personally travel to Djulfa to
investigate the destruction of the Djulfa Armenian cemetery? What
specific steps will you take, if confirmed, to see the Djulfa Armenian
cemetery restored or preserved, to the extent possible, as a protected
holy site?
Answer. If I am confirmed, I pledge to make every effort to visit
the cemetery at Djulfa, including pressing for permission from the
appropriate authorities if needed. I will also amplify our concerns to
the Government of Azerbaijan and stress the need to respect and
safeguard Armenian religious and cultural sites in Azerbaijan.
The United States has publicly condemned the desecration at Djulfa
and reiterated our concerns to the Azerbaijani Government on this
issue, urging a transparent investigation of the incident. Despite our
requests to visit the Djulfa cemetery, local authorities have so far
refused permission to do so.
Question. If confirmed, will you commit, during your trips to
Washington, DC, to consult with members of the Senate Foreign Relations
Committee and other Senators regarding United States-Azerbaijani
relations and the issues raised during your confirmation hearing?
Answer. If confirmed, I will be happy to meet with members of the
Senate Foreign Relations Committee, other Senators, and their staffs to
discuss United States-Azerbaijan relations and the issues raised during
my confirmation hearing. I will also be available for any consultations
at any time in Baku.
Question. If confirmed, will you commit, during your trips to
Washington, DC, to consult with the leaderships of the Azerbaijani and
Armenian American communities regarding the issues raised during your
confirmation hearing?
Answer. Yes. If confirmed, I would look forward to visiting and
meeting with members of the Azerbaijani- and Armenian-American
communities both in the United States and in Azerbaijan, as my
predecessors have done before. If I am confirmed, I would also be happy
to meet with both communities prior to leaving for Baku. It would be a
valuable opportunity to understand and respond to their concerns,
update them on the status of the United States-Azerbaijan relationship,
and to exchange views on a wide range of issues.
Question. The administration's position has been that the
resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh issue and the normalization of
relations between Turkey and Armenia are on separate tracks. The former
Ambassador to Baku since leaving that post has contested that
assessment and said that we need to manage the two processes together.
What is your view of the path to resolving each of these
issues? Should Baku have a role in negotiations between Armenia
and Turkey?
Answer. Our interest is in seeing Armenia and Turkey heal the
wounds of the past and move forward together in a shared future of
security and prosperity. Our policy is guided by this goal. The United
States strongly supports the efforts of Turkey and Armenia to normalize
their bilateral relationship, and has urged the parties to ratify the
normalization protocols without preconditions. We believe the ball is
in Turkey's court.
We have consistently emphasized that there is no linkage between
the protocols process and the Nagorno-Karabakh negotiations. These are
two separate processes.
As a cochair of the Minsk Group, the United States remains firmly
committed to achieving a peaceful, negotiated settlement of the
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict based upon three core principles of the
Helsinki Final Act: the nonuse or threat of force, territorial
integrity of states, and equal rights and self-determination of
peoples. If confirmed, I would work with U.S. Minsk Group Cochair
Robert Bradtke and engage at the highest levels of the Azerbaijani
Government to support these efforts.
Question. Over the past decade, strategic energy projects launched
with U.S. support in the South Caucasus have created long-term
development opportunities for most of the nations in the region.
However, these initiatives have not benefited Armenia, due to Turkish
and Azerbaijani policies. Ongoing attempts to isolate Armenia from
regional projects, such as the Azeri-proposed rail bypass of Armenia,
also run counter to stated U.S. policy goals of regional cooperation
and economic integration.
What concrete steps will be taken to eliminate the Turkish
and Azeri blockades of Armenia and Azerbaijan's continued
pattern to try and isolate Armenia?
Answer. The United States believes that the only path to peace,
stability, and prosperity in the region is a lasting, peaceful
settlement of the Nagorno Karabakh conflict. A settlement of the
conflict would have a profound impact in promoting regional cooperation
and economic integration. As a cochair of the Minsk Group, the United
States remains committed, at the highest levels, to helping the sides
achieve this outcome.
To support this goal, the United States and the other cochairs have
proposed confidence-building measures, including humanitarian and
people-to-people contacts, which would promote mutual understanding
among peoples of the region. The sides have agreed to pursue such
measures, and if confirmed, I will emphasize to Azerbaijan's leadership
at the highest levels that it is in Azerbaijan's interest to accelerate
efforts towards peace and regional economic integration.
One of the many unfortunate consequences of the conflict is that
Armenia has been precluded from participating in regional energy
projects and other projects. A peaceful resolution of the Nagorno
Karabakh conflict would allow the essential and long overdue
integration of Armenia into the vital energy routes and infrastructure
that are developing across the region. If confirmed, I will make the
case in Baku that Azerbaijan stands only to gain from moving the region
forward toward peace, prosperity, and stability.
The United States also strongly supports the efforts of Turkey and
Armenia to normalize their bilateral relationship, and has urged Turkey
to ratify the normalization protocols without preconditions. We have
consistently emphasized that there is no linkage between the protocols
process and the Nagorno-Karabakh negotiations. These are two separate
processes.
Question. You testified before the Senate Foreign Relations
Committee in 2009 that ``At the heart of our policy is the belief that
energy security is best achieved through diversity--diversity of
suppliers, diversity of transportation routes and diversity of
consumers.'' On the one hand the United States values the Azeri
relationship because of role the Azeris play in providing alternative
sources to Russian oil and gas to Europe and Israel and on the other
hand the Azeris are continuing to provide natural gas to Iran.
What is U.S. policy regarding Azerbaijan's gas supply
relationship with Iran? How crucial is Azerbaijan to securing
alternative energy supplied for Europe? What specific actions
can be taken to integrate Armenia into regional energy
initiatives?
Answer. We work closely with Azerbaijan on energy security, and we
share Azerbaijan's goal of establishing a Southern Corridor for natural
gas exports to Europe. Azerbaijan plays a key role in our efforts to
promote a diversity of energy routes and sources for European energy
consumers. The government in Baku clearly recognizes the benefits that
multiple routes to market would bring to Azerbaijan.
The Shah Deniz gas field and potential future developments in
Azerbaijan are critical to European energy security, particularly for
those countries that are largely reliant on a single source. Azerbaijan
has been an active and willing strategic partner for both the United
States and Europe in efforts to achieve this important goal. If gas
from Shah Deniz does not go to Europe, Azerbaijan would be forced to
sell it to Iran, Russia, or further east.
It is our policy to minimize the gas supply relationship between
Azerbaijan and Iran, and if confirmed, I will advance this policy. We
are aware that Azerbaijan has a swap relationship with Iran whereby
Azerbaijan provides gas to Iran in exchange for Iranian gas supplies to
the exclave of Nakhchivan. At present, there is no alternative to
supply gas to this isolated region of Azerbaijan.
If confirmed as Ambassador in Baku, I will emphasize to the
government the benefits that Azerbaijan stands to gain from a peaceful,
lasting settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, which is the best
path toward regional cooperation and economic integration. A peaceful
resolution of the conflict would allow the integration of Armenia into
the vital energy routes and infrastructure that are developing across
the region.
Question. By all account the human rights situation in Azerbaijan
has declined significantly over the last year. President Aliyev has
been in power since 2003. Do you see him become more entrenched and
less tolerant of dissent?
Answer. Advancing respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms
in Azerbaijan continues to be a key pillar in the bilateral
relationship. As the Secretary said during her recent visit to Baku,
``The United States remains strongly committed to working with the
government and people to advance respect for human rights and
fundamental freedoms.'' She urged the government to respect its
citizens' right to express views peacefully, including dissenting
views, and to release those who have been detained for doing so in
print or on the streets or for defending human rights. If confirmed as
Ambassador, I will reinforce this vital message at the highest levels
of the Azerbaijani Government.
We continue to believe that respect for these rights is essential
for promoting the sort of dialogue between citizens and their
government that forms the basis for positive change and the deeper
development of a culture of democracy in any society. The United States
continues to raise these concerns privately and publicly, including
concerns about many specific cases. For example, last year, following
the authorities' efforts to thwart the gathering of opposition groups
in Baku, we urged the Azerbaijani Government to uphold its own
international commitments to the rights of all its citizens to freedom
of assembly and freedom of expression, which are guaranteed under the
Azerbaijani Constitution, and which are enshrined in OSCE agreements to
which the government has committed.
The 2013 Presidential election will be an opportunity for the
government to demonstrate its commitment to these fundamental freedoms,
and the United States will continue strong diplomatic and assistance
efforts to encourage such progress.
Question. In an official state address to his people, Azerbaijan's
President Aliyev stated that ``our main enemies are Armenians of the
world.'' Last year, Azerbaijani citizens were questioned, on national
security grounds, simply for suspicion of having voted for Armenian
artists in a Europe-wide singing contest. Also, in August 2011, the
head of Azerbaijan's Presidential Administration's Political Analysis
Department Elnur Aslanov told a gathering of hundreds of Azerbaijani
students, who were studying abroad, that Ramil Safarov, who was
convicted of murdering an Armenian with an axe while he was sleeping in
his dorm room in Hungary, is an inspiration and ``give[s] special
spirit to Azerbaijani youth.''
What plans do you have for confronting Azerbaijan's official
anti-Armenian rhetoric?
Answer. If confirmed, I will make the case that inflammatory
rhetoric is unacceptable, dangerous, and undermines our efforts to
achieve a peaceful settlement of the conflict. As a cochair of the
Minsk Group, the United States has repeatedly called on all sides to
show restraint in their public statements and on the ground to avoid
misunderstandings and unintended consequences. Secretary Clinton
emphasized this message during her travel to the region earlier this
month, and if confirmed I will urge the Azerbaijani Government to show
restraint in its rhetoric and to prepare its people for peace, not war.
As Secretary Clinton and the other Foreign Ministers of the OSCE
Minsk Group Cochair Countries noted in a joint statement earlier this
year, a new generation has come of age in the region with no first-hand
memory of Armenians and Azeris living side by side, and it is important
to emphasize that prolonging these artificial divisions only deepens
the wounds of war.
NOMINATION OF DEREK J. MITCHELL
----------
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 27, 2012
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Foreign Relations,
Washington, DC.
----------
Hon. Derek J. Mitchell, of Connecticut, to be Ambassador to the
Union of Burma
----------
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:35 a.m,. in
room SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Jim Webb,
presiding.
Present: Senators Webb, Inhofe, and Rubio.
STATEMENT OF HON. JIM WEBB,
U.S. SENATOR FROM VIRGINIA
Senator Webb. The hearing will come to order.
The committee meets today to consider the nomination of
Ambassador Derek Mitchell to be U.S. Ambassador to Burma, also
known as Myanmar. The nomination of Ambassador Mitchell comes
at a historic turning point in Burma's political transition and
in our relations with that country. I would say this is one of
those moments we will look back on clearly as a historic
turning point.
And when such moments occur, history teaches us that we
must act in a clear and decisive manner. I am pleased that the
administration has responded to positive changes within Burma
by upgrading our diplomatic relations to this proper status.
Three years ago when I visited Burma in August 2009, I can
safely say that few were considering this prospect. My visit
was the first visit to Burma by a Member of Congress or a
national leader in more than 10 years. The country was locked
in isolation, keeping its government, military, and people from
exposure to the international community.
Aung San Suu Kyi remained under house arrest. Numerous
other activists remained in prison. Conflicts with ethnic
minority groups continued and challenged the unity of the
country. The prospects for reform opening up and economic
development looked bleak, while the potential for increased
isolation and tighter sanctions seemed likely.
Yet during that visit, one could clearly see the promise of
a different future. My own interactions with leaders in the
military government, as well as with Aung San Suu Kyi,
suggested that with international support and faith, Burma
could begin a different path.
In September 2009 with my support, the administration
redirected U.S. policy to engage directly with the government,
which began sending positive reciprocal signals. Then Foreign
Minister Nyan Win visited New York for the U.N. General
Assembly and made a private visit to Washington, DC.
The next year, the government announced that elections
would be held. And on November 7, 2010, the country held
elections for national and regional Parliaments with the
participation of multiple political parties. By all accounts,
these elections were neither completely free nor fair, but they
represented a step toward a new system of governance, a step
that many of Burma's regional neighbors have not yet taken.
Additionally, in March 2011, the military government
officially transferred power to the civilian government led by
President Thein Sein. In his first year of office, President
Thein Sein released more than 620 political prisoners, released
more than 28,000 prisoners, and reduced the sentences of all
prisoners by 1 year. He began a series of economic reforms to
prepare the country for trade and investment. Also during this
time, the Parliament passed new labor and peaceful
demonstration laws, amended the political party laws, and
enabled the National League for Democracy to conclude that they
would participate in the next elections.
During my August 2009 visit, I specifically observed to
Burmese Government officials that at a time when Aung San Suu
Kyi was still under house arrest, in order for elections in
Burma to be perceived as credible, she and her party should be
offered the opportunity to participate fully and openly in the
process. Her release in November 2010, the government's
compromise on the political party laws, and Aung San Suu Kyi's
decision to participate in the April parliamentary bielection
of this year demonstrates the political reconciliation taking
place within that country.
Over the past year, many people across the world have
followed Aung San Suu Kyi's dramatic transformation from a
prisoner under house arrest, to a political candidate, and now
to Member of Parliament. As an elected official in the national
legislative body, she's now in a position to work within the
government to formally affect the reconciliation process.
In the bielection, the NLD won 43 out of 45 seats, making
it the largest opposition party in the Parliament, and placing
it in a position to advance policies that support democratic
transition.
While much needs to be done to solidify this transition,
the combined efforts of President Thein Sein and MP Aung San
Suu Kyi have moved the country forward toward promised
democracy. I respect them both for their courage, and for their
commitment to their country, and also for their foresight in
accomplishing political reforms ahead of economic reforms. They
have led the country on a different path than many of their
neighbors in the region, and we all hope they remain successful
in those efforts.
And I think a couple of comparisons are useful given the
jurisdiction of this subcommittee. First, within China,
democratic activists and ethnic minorities, such as Tibetans or
Uighurs face the threats of constant surveillance, detention,
and repression. The State Department estimates in its ``Country
Reports'' of 2011, ``Tens of thousands of political prisoners
remain incarcerated, some in prisons, others in re-education
camps or administrative detention.'' Notably, China's Nobel
Peace Prize winner, as opposed to Aung San Suu Kyi, Liu Xiaobo,
remains incarcerated.
China has no free elections. Its leadership transition this
year will not be influenced by popular vote. The Freedom House
``Freedom in the World Report'' for 2012 notes that China is
``trending downward in its protection of political freedoms and
civil liberties.'' In the 2012 ``Freedom of the Press Report,''
North Korea is the only country ranked below China for its lack
of freedoms of the press. Yet no one is advocating at this time
that we impose economic sanctions on China.
The United States lifted its trade embargo against China 41
years ago. It continues to promote U.S. investment there. Last
year, our trade totaled $530 billion, making China our second-
largest trading partner.
Second, consider Vietnam, with which I have had a
continuous relationship since I was a 23-year-old Marine
serving there during the war, and over the past 21 years have
participated regularly and continuously in rebuilding the
relations between our two countries.
The United States lifted its trade embargo in Vietnam in
1994. Our total trade has grown from $6.9 million in 1993 to
$21 billion last year. Vietnam has never had popular elections
for its leaders or allowed opposition parties. Concerns about
censorship of the media, restrictions on the freedom of
religion, or detention of political prisoners have not prompted
the United States to restrict our trade with Vietnam. In fact,
our policy has been based on the premise that increased trade
will promote rule of law, transparency, and political freedom.
Otherwise, we would not be negotiating a significant trade
agreement with Vietnam at this moment, the Trans-Pacific
Partnership.
This is not to single out China or Vietnam for opprobrium.
On the contrary, it is simply to point out the need for
consistency in the logic of those who argue for overly punitive
restrictions as we develop our relations with Burma.
Let us not forget that this country has had two peaceful
national elections within the last year, released hundreds of
political prisoners, negotiated cease-fire agreements with 12
ethnic minority groups, reduced censorship of the media, and
supported the development of an effective political opposition.
This is a country whose political system remains a challenge,
but where positive conduct calls for reciprocal gestures.
We should never take our concerns about political freedoms
or individual rights off the table. We should make these
concerns central to our engagement with all countries,
including with Burma, as I mentioned. But we should also be
promoting economic progress to sustain the political reforms
that have taken place. It is time to make our policies
internationally consistent with our principles.
As was evident during my visit to Burma in April of this
year, there is general enthusiasm in the country, but there is
also some skepticism inside Burma that Burma and the United
States will be able to pull this thing off. People need to see
and believe that the government is working for them and that
our government is sincerely dedicated to seeing further change.
I believe that President Thein Sein and other government
leaders are sincere in their efforts, but they need our support
in building a better foundation for the government and economy
to deliver results to their people. For this reason, it is ever
more important that our sanctions policies not inhibit this
development. In fact, we should take pains to incentivize this
development.
Initial steps have been taken. In February, the United
States granted a partial waiver to allow international
financial institutions to conduct assessment missions in Burma.
On April 17, the Treasury Department issued a general license
for educational and nonprofit institutions to support
development and humanitarian projects. On May 17, Secretary
Clinton announced that the ban on U.S. investments and export
of financial services would be suspended, a move that has the
potential to jump-start United States private sector
engagement. However, more than 1 month later, the Treasury
Department has not issued a general license for companies to
begin this process.
In April before this subcommittee, OFAC Director Adam
Szubin testified that the main categories of sanctions imposed
by statute or Executive order can be lifted by the President
via licenses, rescission of Executive orders, or issuance of
waivers on national security. Further, he noted that Executive
decisions to remove sanctions can still target and blacklist
the assets or activities of people which they refer to as ``bad
actors'' from their previous military junta so that they will
not benefit from economic relations with the United States.
I believe this is the right approach to take. I have
supported the steps taken thus far, but I believe more needs to
be done. Time is of the essence here. If we do not act
proactively and soon, we will lose a critical window of
opportunity to influence development of financial governance
inside Burma. It is critical to implement the decisions that
have been announced and to continue to ease additional
sanctions, such as the ban on imports.
Ambassador Mitchell, as the special representative and
policy coordinator for Burma, has been well situated to observe
and influence American policy across agencies during this
period of transition. And now if confirmed, he will have a
unique opportunity to strongly impact this new approach and to
identify new means to incentivize and aid reform. I will look
forward to hear your ideas and suggestions on this matter.
And now I would like to recognize Senator Inhofe.
STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES M. INHOFE,
U.S. SENATOR FROM OKLAHOMA
Senator Inhofe. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think you are
aware of it, but they may not be, that as chairman and ranking
member of EPW, Barbara Boxer and I are in the middle of our
final negotiations right now as we speak on the highway
reauthorization bill. So I am going to have to leave to go to
that. But this is very significant. There are some things that
I am concerned about, and so I thank you for holding this
hearing.
This is kind of historic. This is the first time we will be
sending an ambassador there in, what, 20 years, I guess, since
1992. So I want to welcome Ambassador Mitchell, and I
understand that we are going to be able to talk in my office
tomorrow. We can elaborate a little bit more on this subject.
But as you know, I am very interested in the ability of our
American oil and gas industry to compete for business in Burma
as soon as possible. Unfortunately, that has not yet happened,
and in the meantime, European Union oil and gas companies have
been there since the suspension of the EU sanctions against
Burma last April. And, of course, China and Russia are already
there.
Senator Webb and I wrote a letter on May 4, 2012, to
Secretary Clinton, which stated that it would be a strategic
mistake to exclude the U.S. petroleum industry in the
suspension of U.S. sanctions in Burma. Her response on May 23
was encouraging, I thought anyway, when she wrote that certain
sanctions would remain, but there was no mention that the
American oil and gas firms would be excluded.
I have heard rumors, however, that there is an intent by
this administration to ``carve out'' the American petroleum
industry from doing business in Burma by slow rolling and
issuing of licenses to this industry by the U.S. Treasury
Office of Foreign Assets Control.
I reiterate that this or any other carve-out strategy would
be a strategic mistake. I believe that U.S. companies,
including the oil and gas companies, can play a positive role
in the effort by demonstrating high standards and responsible
business conduct and transparency, including the respect for
human rights in Burma.
And I am sure that maybe you can, during your opening
statement, could tell me whether or not you agree. And I hope
so because this is a direct quote from the State Department,
response to my question for the record from our hearing on
Burma back on April the 26th. And I could not be more in
agreement.
So I thank you again, Mr. Chairman, for holding this
nomination. I look forward to hearing your opening statement
here, but as I say, since we are in what I consider to be a
very significant breakthrough with the highway reauthorization
bill, I will have to be leaving early. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Webb. Thank you very much, Senator Inhofe.
Ambassador Mitchell, welcome. Just for the record,
Ambassador Mitchell currently serves a special representative
and policy coordinator for Burma with the rank of Ambassador.
Prior to this appointment, he served as a Principal Deputy
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Asian and Pacific Security
Affairs. He also worked as a senior fellow at the Center for
Strategic and International Studies, a Special Assistant in the
Department of Defense, a senior program officer at the National
Democratic Institute.
Ambassador Mitchell has a master's degree from the Fletcher
School of Law and Diplomacy, and a bachelor's degree from the
University of Virginia.
And I understand your wife is here with you today. We would
like to welcome her.
Ambassador Mitchell. Yes, my wife is right here.
Senator Webb. And appreciate both of your dedication to
public service.
And, Ambassador, welcome, and the floor is yours.
STATEMENT OF HON. DEREK J. MITCHELL, OF CONNECTICUT, TO BE
AMBASSADOR TO THE UNION OF BURMA
Ambassador Mitchell. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman,
Senator Inhofe, members of the committee. I am honored to
appear before you today as the President's nominee to serve as
the U.S. Ambassador to Burma, the first in more than two
decades.
I am humbled by the confidence that President Obama and
Secretary of State Clinton have shown in me with this
nomination. Mr. Chairman, I know you take a particularly keen
personal interest in the situation in Burma, as you have
discussed, and I commend all you have done during your tenure
to advance the relationship between our two countries.
Mr. Chairman, it was almost exactly a year ago that I sat
before you and this committee as the President's nominee to
serve as the first special representative and policy
coordinator for Burma. I noted in my testimony then the many
challenges facing Burma and our bilateral relationship. As you
said, no one would have thought possible the remarkable
developments that have occurred since then. Ongoing reform
efforts have created an opening for increased engagement
between our two countries, and instill the sense of hope among
millions inside and outside Burma who have worked and
sacrificed so much for so long for real change.
During my time as special representative, I traveled to the
country many times and was able to have open and candid
conversations with the government in Naypyitaw and
representatives from all sectors of society. I was able to
discuss a full range of perspectives on the complexity and
diversity of the country, and I thank these interlocutors for
their hospitality and their candor.
I have traveled throughout East Asia and Europe to share
ideas and coordinate policy approaches. This included meetings
with the many men and women in Thailand who have worked
tirelessly along the border with Burma for decades to provide
the humanitarian needs of Burmese migrants and refugees. With
so much attention focused on developments inside Burma, we
should not forget the work of these committed individuals.
I have, of course, spent many hours with Daw Aung San Suu
Kyi. As we all know, Daw Suu Kyi remains a uniquely iconic
figure inside and outside Burma. Upon helping bring her country
to this point, she has now entered the field as an elected
politician to help guide its next steps toward a secure,
democratic, just, and prosperous future. If confirmed, I look
forward to many more opportunities for discussions with her
about her country and about how the United States can assist
its progress going forward.
Perhaps the most important development of the past year,
again, as you suggested, Mr. Chairman, in fact has been the
partnership between Daw Suu Kyi and President Thein Sein.
President Thein Sein has proved to be a remarkable figure. We
should never forget to recognize his extraordinary vision and
leadership and the many reformist steps he and his partners in
government have taken over the past year, steps that have
clearly reflected the aspirations, indeed sacrifices, of
millions of brave Burmese over many years.
At the same time, we have no illusions about the challenges
that lie ahead. As Secretary Clinton has observed, reform is
not irreversible, and continued democratic change is not
inevitable. We remain deeply concerned about the continued
detention of hundreds of political prisoners and conditions
placed on those previously released, lack of the rule of law,
and the constitutional role of the military in the nation's
affairs.
Human rights abuses, including military impunity, continue,
particularly in ethnic minority areas. Recent sectarian
violence in Rakhine State demonstrates the divisiveness in
Burma cultivated over many decades, if not centuries, that will
need to be overcome to realize lasting peace and national
reconciliation in the country.
We have been quite consistent and direct in public and
private about our continuing concerns about the lack of
transparency in Burma's military relationship with North Korea,
and specifically that the government must adhere to its
obligations under relevant U.N. Security Council resolutions
and its other international nonproliferation obligations. If
confirmed as Ambassador, I will continue to make this issue of
highest priority in my conversations with the government and be
clear that our bilateral relationship can never be fully
normalized until we are fully satisfied that any illicit ties
to North Korea have ended once and for all.
As the Burmese Government has taken steps over the past
year, so, too, has the United States in an action-for-action
approach. Each action we have taken in recent months has had as
its purpose to benefit the Burmese people and strengthen reform
and reformers within the system. This engagement should
continue and expand. If confirmed, I will do my part in the
field to support a principled approach that effectively marries
our values with our broader national interests.
Most recently, as you know, Mr. Chairman, Secretary Clinton
announced a broad easing of restrictions on new investment and
the exportation of U.S. financial services to Burma. As she
stated in May, ``We look forward to working with the business
sector as a new partner in our principled engagement
approach.'' If confirmed, I will promote U.S. business
interests in Burma while ensuring companies understand the
complex environment in which they will be engaging, and the
important role they can play in promoting American values and
interests in the country.
It is clear to me from my discussions inside the country
that the Burmese people admire U.S. products, standards, and
principles. Staying true to them promises to serve both our
public and private interests going forward. And I think that
would address Senator Inhofe's questions about the carve outs
and such. She had talked about a general license that hits all
sectors equally, no carve outs according to sector.
Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, as the special
representative and policy coordinator for Burma, I made it a
priority to provide regular briefings and consultations on
Capitol Hill. I also urged the Burmese Government to open its
doors to congressional visitors so they may see the changes on
the ground for themselves. I believe the administration and
Congress have formed an effective, bipartisan partnership on
Burma policy. It is critical to maintain this partnership going
forward. Should I be confirmed, I will make every effort to
continue to reach out to interested members and staffs, and
hope to see you all regularly on our doorstep in Rangoon.
Let me conclude by taking this opportunity to extend my
utmost appreciation to my many partners within the executive
branch with whom I have worked over the past year as special
representative, including at USAID, Treasury, Commerce, DOD,
the White House, and, of course, at State.
In particular, I want to commend the excellent career
officers, interagency representatives, and locally engaged
staff members at our Embassy in Rangoon whom I have gotten to
know during my visits. This team has proved again and again to
me that we have people of the highest quality in Rangoon and in
the Department. They have responded superbly to a rapidly
changing tempo of operations in the field, and have done so
with professionalism and skill. If confirmed, I will make it a
priority to ensure they have the tools and the direction
necessary to continue serving our interests in Burma in an
exemplary fashion and be proud of the work they do for our
country every day.
Thank you for considering my nomination. I will look
forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Ambassador Mitchell follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Derek Mitchell
Mr. Chairman, and members of the committee, I am honored to appear
before you today as the President's nominee to serve as the U.S.
Ambassador to Burma, the first in more than two decades. I am humbled
by the confidence that President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton
have shown in me with this nomination. Mr. Chairman, I know you take a
particularly keen personal interest in the situation in Burma, and I
commend all you have done during your tenure to advance the
relationship between our two countries.
It was almost exactly a year ago that I sat before you and this
committee as the President's nominee to serve as the first Special
Representative and Policy Coordinator for Burma. I noted in my
testimony then the many challenges facing Burma and our bilateral
relationship. No one would have thought possible the remarkable
developments that have occurred since a year ago. Ongoing reform
efforts have created an opening for increased engagement between our
two countries, and instilled a sense of hope among millions inside and
outside Burma who have worked and sacrificed so much for so long for
real change.
During my time as the Special Representative and Policy Coordinator
for Burma, I traveled to the country many times. The government in
Naypyitaw provided excellent hospitality and demonstrated a willingness
to have open and candid discussions with me on each occasion. I also
want to thank the many other interlocutors--political party officials,
civil society representatives, ethnic minority and religious leaders,
former political prisoners, business executives, international
diplomats and nongovernmental representatives, and many local
citizens--for opening their doors to me to discuss a full range of
perspectives on the complexity and diversity of Burma.
I have also traveled throughout East Asia and Europe to share ideas
and coordinate policy approaches. This included meetings with the many
men and women in Thailand who have worked tirelessly along the border
with Burma for decades to provide for the humanitarian needs of Burmese
migrants and refugees. With so much attention focused on developments
inside Burma, we should not forget the work of these committed
individuals who help those in need. I am confident that these and many
other committed individuals will join ongoing efforts inside the
country when conditions are right.
And of course I have spent many hours with Daw Aung San Suu Kyi. As
we all know, Daw Suu Kyi remains a uniquely iconic figure inside and
outside Burma. Upon helping bring her country to this point, she has
now entered the field as an elected politician to help guide its next
steps toward a secure, democratic, just, and prosperous future. I look
forward to many more opportunities for discussions with her about her
country and about how the United States can assist its progress going
forward.
Perhaps the most important development of the past year, however,
has been the partnership forged between Daw Suu Kyi and President Thein
Sein. President Thein Sein has proven to be a remarkable figure. We
should never forget to recognize his extraordinary vision and
leadership, and for the many reformist steps he and his partners in
government have taken over the past year. These actions have clearly
reflected the aspirations, indeed sacrifices, of millions of brave
Burmese.
At the same time, we have no illusions about the challenges that
lie ahead. As Secretary Clinton has observed, reform is not
irreversible, and continued democratic change is not inevitable. We
remain deeply concerned about the continued detention of hundreds of
political prisoners and conditions placed on those previously released.
The rule of law requires an independent and effective judiciary. The
constitutional role of the military in the nation's affairs is
inconsistent with traditional democratic principles of civil-military
relations.
Human rights abuses, including military impunity, continue,
particularly in ethnic minority areas. Although there may be some hope
for an end to the violence and establishment of serious dialogue on
fundamental political issues, mutual mistrust between the government
and ethnic minority groups runs deep and a long road lies ahead. Recent
sectarian violence in Rakhine State demonstrates the divisiveness in
Burma cultivated over many decades, if not centuries, that will need to
be overcome to realize lasting peace and national reconciliation in the
country.
We have been quite consistent and direct in public and private
about our continuing concerns about the lack of transparency in Burma's
military relationship with North Korea, and specifically that the
government must adhere to its obligations under relevant United Nations
Security Council Resolutions and its other international
nonproliferation obligations. If confirmed as Ambassador, I will
continue to make this issue of highest priority in my conversations
with the government, and be clear that our bilateral relationship can
never be fully normalized until we are fully satisfied that any illicit
ties to North Korea have ended once and for all.
As the Burmese Government has taken steps over the past year, so
too has the United States in an action-for-action approach. Each action
we have taken in recent months has had as its purpose to benefit the
Burmese people and strengthen reform and reformers within the system.
Most recently, Secretary Clinton announced a broad easing of
restrictions on new investment and the exportation of U.S. financial
services to Burma. As she stated in May, we look forward to working
with the business sector as a new partner in our principled engagement
approach. If confirmed, I will promote U.S. business interests in Burma
while ensuring companies understand the complex environment in which
they will be engaging and the important role they can play in promoting
American values and interests in the country. It is clear to me from my
discussions inside the country that the Burmese people admire U.S.
products, standards, and principles; staying true to them promises to
serve both our public and private interests going forward.
As the Special Representative and Policy Coordinator for Burma, I
made it a priority to provide regular briefings and consultations with
Capitol Hill. I also urged the Burmese Government to open its doors to
congressional visitors so they may see the changes on the ground for
themselves. I believe the administration and Congress have formed an
effective, bipartisan partnership on Burma policy. It is critical to
maintain this partnership going forward. Should I be confirmed, I will
make every effort to continue to reach out to interested Members and
staffs, and hope to see you all regularly on our doorstep in Rangoon.
Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, let me conclude by taking
this opportunity to extend my utmost appreciation to my many partners
within the executive branch with whom I have worked over the past year
as Special Representative--including at USAID, Treasury, Commerce, DOD,
the White House, and State. In particular, I want to commend the
excellent career officers, interagency representatives, and locally
employed staff members of our Embassy in Rangoon whom I have gotten to
know during my visits. This team has proved again and again to me that
we have people of the highest quality in Rangoon. They have responded
superbly to a rapidly changing tempo of operations in the field, and
have done so with professionalism and skill. If confirmed, I will make
it my priority to ensure they have the tools and direction necessary to
continue serving our interests in Burma in an exemplary fashion and be
proud of the work they do for our country every day.
Senator Webb. Thank you very much, Ambassador Mitchell. And
since I know Senator Inhofe has to leave fairly quickly, let me
begin with a question that I know that Senator Inhofe also will
want to address. And then I will get into the more general
policy issues that I would like to hear from you about.
In a recent speech before the ILO, Aung San Suu Kyi stated,
and I am going to quote, that ``The Myanmar Government needs to
apply internationally recognized standards, such as the `IMF
Code of Good Practices on Fiscal Transparency.' Other countries
could help by not allowing their companies to partner with the
MOGE, the state-owned oil company, unless it signed up to such
codes.''
This raises a number of questions, first, about
standardization of policy from the United States, and, second,
about officials of a foreign government basically telling us
where we should allow our economic interests to apply once we
lift sanctions.
It is my understanding that the United States does not
require countries to endorse this code or other standards as a
prerequisite for U.S. investment. In fact, I asked my staff,
you know, whether there were other countries that did not
adhere to this code, and among them are China, New Zealand,
Singapore, South Africa, and a number of other countries. So it
does not seem like this is a standard United States policy as a
prerequisite.
And then, second, there is a concern about our being told
from the outside where we should allow our companies to invest,
and that goes directly to Senator Inhofe's question.
So could you clarify this matter from your understanding of
her statement and what our policy should be?
Ambassador Mitchell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The issue of
MOGE is one that we are looking very carefully at. We have
concerns about this enterprise and its transparency and the
corruption that is associated with it through reports that we
have. And, of course, there is corruption and lack of
transparency throughout the economy, the current economy in
Burma. There are particularly concerns here with connections to
the military and such.
We obviously are going to be careful, and we should be
careful, as we stated, that however we engage, that we do so
with the highest standards of transparency, that we are
contributing to reform inside the country, that we are
contributing to the highest values, and that we model the type
of behavior that we like to see broadly by U.S. companies and
by others.
This particular issue, when it comes to the general
licenses that are being debated and discussed, obviously it is
on the agenda and being looked at. There are no decisions made
on this particular question. Clearly, we want to see others
raising their level to the standards that not just the American
companies so that we are on a level playing field. And as we
looked at the general license, we understand the balance
between competitiveness and the standards that we want to set.
So this is an ongoing question. There is nothing I can say
here definitively on this because it is an ongoing internal
discussion--interagency discussion that applies to the general
license that will come out.
But, as I said before, we are not looking to exclude any
sectors from this, but we are trying to make the balance very
carefully.
Senator Webb. Would you agree that standards that are
applied should be the same standards that the United States
applies in other countries?
Ambassador Mitchell. Yes, absolutely. And I know under
Dodd-Frank and under Cardin-Lugar as well, there are certain
standards there that Dodd and Lugar is law, and we want to act
consistent with that, and do not want to--we think that we are
looking to do is complementary with those types of standards.
We are encouraged, I should also say--I mean, I want to add
here that the Burmese Government has also taken steps itself in
terms of transparency and talked about signing up for the EITI,
the Extractive Industry Transparency Initiative. There is going
to be a delegation coming in at the end of the July, and there
have been public statements saying they are interested in more
transparency in the extractive industries, including oil and
gas.
It is very encouraging. I think it is our role to encourage
that, to continue to educate. And I see things moving in the
right direction. And Aung San Suu Kyi could certainly play a
role inside the country in doing that so that, as you say,
everyone has a level playing field.
But I would never dismiss what she says from our thinking.
I mean, she is obviously a unique figure representing the
people in the country, and she represents the values that we
care about. So we will make our own decisions, but we take her
thoughts on this as an ongoing conversation that we will have
with her.
Senator Webb. Thank you. I would--let me just summarize
my--what I think is my agreement with you here. The United
States sets the standards of transparency of our own business
environment. You know, I took American companies into Vietnam
for 2\1/2\ years in the mid-1990s. We had the laws that we have
to obey. And it is a little delicate to say that an official
from any foreign government should be telling us what sectors
that we should invest in and not invest in.
And, Senator Inhofe, I know you have a question here.
Senator Inhofe. I appreciate that very much. Let me--first
of all, Senator Webb and I signed a letter back on May 4. I
would like to have that part of the record.
Senator Webb. Without objection, it will be entered into
the record at this point.
[The letter referred to follows:]
U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC, May 4, 2012.
Hon. Hillary Clinton,
Secretary of State, U.S. Department of State,
Washington, DC.
Dear Secretary Clinton: We write you to express our strong belief
that it is imperative for the United States to act in a clear,
proactive manner to facilitate reforms in Burma through the lifting of
economic sanctions. This recommendation is based on years of
interaction with the countries of East Asia, including visits to the
region and to Burma and meetings with its top leadership, as well as
the testimony received at the East Asian and Pacific Affairs
Subcommittee hearing of April 26, 2012, regarding ``U.S. Policy on
Burma.''
We are mindful that the European Union (EU) announced on April 23,
2012, that it is suspending all sanctions against Burma, except for an
arms embargo. Other countries that share our political philosophy,
including Japan, have enacted similar measures. The countries of the
Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) have embraced recent
political reforms in the country and are unanimously in favor of
immediate changes in economic policies. In short, the United States
alone is left holding the most restrictive sanctions on Burma, banning
visas, imports, exports, financial services, foreign assistance, and
assistance by international financial institutions.
In response to questions raised at the hearing last week, Office of
Foreign Assets Control Director Adam Szubin testified that the main
categories of sanctions imposed by statute or executive order can be
lifted by the President via licenses, rescission of executive orders,
or issuance of waivers on national security. Further, he noted that
executive decisions to remove sanctions can still target and blacklist
the assets or activities of specific ``bad actors'' from the previous
military junta so that they will not benefit from economic relations
with the United States. These decisions do not require legislation;
importantly, they can also be reversed, should the situation in Burma
deteriorate.
We understand that as part of its review of sanctions policy, the
Administration is considering lifting sanctions sector by sector, with
the possibility that sanctions may be retained on individual industries
such as petroleum. We believe that this would be a strategic mistake.
The United States should not be picking winners and losers in our
economic engagement abroad, but rather should be encouraging the
business community as a whole to take on the risk of investing in human
development in Burma. Their involvement can foster an open, transparent
business environment that supports the rule of law and a level playing
field for foreign investment.
Progress in Burma toward the goals we all share--greater freedom
and prosperity for the people of Burma--is ultimately tied to the
sanctions that are in place. Unlike some other countries in the region,
most notably China and Vietnam, Burma's new leadership has moved
forward with political change ahead of economic change. It is important
to note that Daw Aung San Suu Kyi herself, speaking as an elected
representative of the government of Burma, publicly announced her
support for the EU's decision to suspend sanctions in response to
democratic reforms in the country. The process of reform in Burma is
still far from complete, but the positive steps that have been taken
should be met with a positive response from our own government.
It is also important to note that the lifting of sanctions on Burma
does not equal the establishment of full trading relations. The U.S.
trade embargo with China was lifted 41 years ago, but permanent normal
trade relations were granted only 12 years ago and continue despite
ongoing concerns about the detention of political prisoners, repression
of religious activity and lack of representative government. Burma has
a long way to go, but its leaders--notably President Thein Sein and
Aung San Suu Kyi--should be acknowledged for their concrete efforts to
take the country in a different direction.
At this critical moment, it is imperative that our policy toward
Burma be forward thinking, providing incentives for further reforms and
building the capacity of reformers in the government to push for
additional change. We urge the Administration to take action under its
own authority, and seize this opportunity to support the Burmese people
in their efforts to form an open, democratic government that respects
and protects the rights of all.
Sincerely,
Jim Webb,
United States Senator.
James M. Inhofe,
United States Senator.
Senator Inhofe. All right. We will have a chance to talk
about this tomorrow, but I want to get three questions just in
the record here and get your responses. It will be very brief.
You talked a little bit about the state-owned oil company
there, and I have heard some things concerning their lack of
transparency. And I would only say, do you not think that our
involvement, the United States, in oil and gas there could add
transparency to the system?
Ambassador Mitchell. I would say, Senator, yes. I think our
engagement with them, again, through EITI and other methods can
help model the type of behavior and help with this.
Senator Inhofe. I appreciate that. Now there is no one who
has more of an intimate knowledge of Burma than you do and the
people. And I would only say that if the United States
Government decided not to allow our oil and gas companies to
operate there, would those resources go undeveloped, or would
they--the companies, some other countries take up that slack?
Ambassador Mitchell. Well, I think it has been demonstrated
from the past the countries will likely take up the slack. But
there may be some areas where the United States is uniquely
able to exploit. But clearly there are other countries that are
ready to pick up the slack.
Senator Inhofe. OK, I appreciate that. And last, do you
agree that the U.S. oil and gas companies are more transparent
and generally operate in a more free market manner than
Chinese, Russian, and many other nationally owned oil
companies?
Ambassador Mitchell. Well, Senator, I am not an expert on
that. I believe American companies overall exhibit higher
standards than other countries.
Senator Inhofe. I think that is right, and that is good
enough.
Senator Webb. Thank you. Thank you, Senator Inhofe. And let
me reclaim my time and ask a couple of questions before we go
to Senator Rubio.
As you recall, in my opening statement I mentioned the
comparison with political and economic situations in China and
Vietnam. And, again, not as a suggestion that we impose
sanctions on those two countries, but to try to put what we are
doing here into some sort of consistent standard.
I actually held a hearing a couple of years ago on the--
what I was calling the situational ethics in American foreign
policy where we tend to focus on different countries in
different ways, depending on power relationships and economic
relationships and where we really need to have a common
standard.
And I think we have something in the recent developments in
Burma that is fairly unique, and that is that a governmental
system has made a political decision to liberalize, to take a
great risk before the economic systems are liberalized, before
sanctions are raised. And as I mentioned, in China we lifted
sanctions 41 years ago. We have proceeded under the hope and
the assumption that liberalized economy might encourage a
liberalized political system. I think the results in that so
far are pretty mixed.
As I mentioned to you, Nobel Prize winner Liu Xiaobo, if I
am saying his name right, is still incarcerated while, you
know, we have had a positive journey with Aung San Suu Kyi.
China has no free elections. Freedom House report for 2012
notes that China is trending down in terms of its political
freedoms and civil liberties.
If you look at a listing of the 40 countries in East Asia
and the Pacific, China is above only North Korea and actually
tied with Burma in terms of media openness. And yet we are not
suggesting, and I am not suggesting, that we should alter our
economic policies. The same principle applies with the comments
that I made about Vietnam.
So what are we doing here that would be inconsistent with
what we are doing in China, places like China and Vietnam, and
what is the rationale?
Ambassador Mitchell. Well, it is hard for me in this
position to comment on broader policy with Asia. It is not my
role, I suppose. But I think you take each context
individually. I think the Burma context has been one where they
had a closed system for a long time. They had a unique set of
human rights challenges over a consistent period of time, and
there are individuals like Aung San Suu Kyi there who have
served as a beacon of change, and have represented a certain
type of leadership inside the country.
And I think what we tried to do in Burma, we will have a
debate on what succeeded and what did not. But I think we tried
to have that system changed through pressure, and then over
time through more engagement. I think the combination of the
two has worked.
And I think, as I suggested in my testimony, and I think
you also suggested, this is not irreversible, that we are only
a year into this or several--you know, about a year into this.
And we need to support the reformers, but also I think be very
careful about rushing forward too fast. But at the same time, I
think we are doing remarkable things and changing remarkably
quickly ourselves and our policy.
So I think the path that we are on has proven to have been
constructive, have served our interests, served our goals,
served our values. And I do not see us moving too fast or too
slow. I think it is just right, and I think we can--this is an
ongoing issue. And I think if the Burmese continue, time will
tell. If Thein Sein and his partners continue on this path and
show more progress, then we will be looking at the
infrastructure that is there of sanctions, regulations, and
such over time.
Senator Webb. Well, let me just respond with the personal
view that I do not think that there has been any greater
challenge in this area in my adult life than Vietnam. Burma has
a situation where when we examine the inequities that occurred,
we have the ability to personalize them because of Aung San Suu
Kyi's unique situation. But look at the aftermath of the
Vietnam war, with more than a million Vietnamese jumping into
the sea, including my wife's family, by the way. A Stalinist
state was clearly taking over that was subsidized by the Soviet
Union. A tremendous division inside our own country that had to
be overcome before we began to repair relations.
I was one of those--I think as you and I have discussed
before--I was one of those who was very opposed to lifting the
trade embargo against Vietnam until the mid-1990s after Japan
lifted their trade embargo. And just kind of similar to what
Senator Inhofe just said, after Japan lifted their trade
embargo toward Vietnam, the sensibility of keeping one just
lost its place. And the idea was for us to move in in a more
proactive way, and I think it has had enormously positive
results.
And there is a moment in time here, and I totally agree
with you that we are on unchartered ground, but we have seen
clear gestures from President Thein Sein and the people he is
trying to work with, not just simply in terms of opening up
trade relations, but in attempting to learn more about
democratic systems from which they were basically firewalled
for 20 years.
So I hope we are going to approach this issue with a sense
of being proactive, of incentivizing the positive conduct so
that we do not lose this moment here and then have people
sitting around and saying, well, see, we said this was not
real. I mean, this very well could be a great change, and to
the benefit of our country, their country, and also the region.
And let me ask you your thoughts in terms of the motivation
of the present government. Do you see the main momentum in this
present government as pro-democracy, pro-change?
Ambassador Mitchell. Mr. Chairman, I think you have to pick
and choose within the government. I think there is--the people
I meet with, many of them seem quite committed to real change.
The Lower House Speaker of the Parliament, Thura Shwe Mann, has
been remarkable in his desire, for instance, to have exchanges
with the Congress here. And he has gone around to India, and
Britain, and, I think, Germany, and sought to learn about
legislative processes and how to build an institution--a
parliamentary institution. He has empowered that institution
remarkably, more than we ever would have expected a year ago.
I think you have, again, the President himself and some
other partners and certain ministries that are very much
committed to a very progressive agenda. Where it leads we do
not know. We just do not know. We do not know how long this
leadership will last. We do not know. As you say, expectations
are high. We do not know if they can fulfill their remarkable
challenge or fulfill the goals given the remarkable challenges
they face.
I completely agree with you, and this administration
completely agrees with you, that this is a window of
opportunity. And Aung San Suu Kyi, people in the opposition,
former political prisoners have been released. They all say we
must go in and support this government and Thein Sein to try to
keep reform going. There is no question about that. I think we
have taken those steps to empower the reformers, to help the
people of Burma to try to institutionalize the change as best
as possible.
But as long as the constitution is as it is, which I
mentioned in my opening testimony, the military has a unique
role to play, which is not consistent with democratic values.
The civil-military relationship is not consistent with what you
want to see in a democracy. Until those fundamentals change,
you do have the question of whether this can revert or whether
the military or others associated with it can reverse what is
going on.
So we have to be careful, but I do not think there is any
question through or rhetoric publicly or through our activities
privately and otherwise that we are on the side of reform. We
will partner with them. We will work with them on this, and I
should say work with the international community, which is
extremely important. It has a tremendous interest in helping
Burma. We need to coordinate effectively so that we are doing
it in the most productive way possible. And that has been my
job, and that will continue to be my job if confirmed on the
ground.
Senator Webb. Would you say that the opposition parties in
Burma are legitimately now a part of the government?
Ambassador Mitchell. I do not know what legitimate would
mean in this case. I mean, the elections in 2010 were not
credible. There are political parties. I mean, they allowed the
National League for Democracy to register, which is obviously a
very positive move. There are some parties in some ethnic areas
that were not able to take part in even the most recent
elections. In the most recent elections, just 7 percent of the
legislature were up for grabs.
So there is still much more that needs to be done on the
democratic development side and the civil society side, and,
again, to really embed this. The rule of law, the balance of
power, the activity of civil society, all this needs to be
ingrained. The right things are being done, the right words.
But time will tell whether it really takes hold or not.
Senator Webb. Would you say there are legitimate opposition
parties in China?
Ambassador Mitchell. In China? I think I can say pretty
honestly, probably not, no. There are not.
Senator Webb. Well, we have something to build on, which is
really the point I am trying to make. And I hope we do not lose
this moment.
Senator Rubio.
Senator Rubio. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ambassador
Mitchell, welcome and thank you for your service to our
country. I want to build on the topic you touched upon.
The length between economic openings and political openings
are two separate things sometimes. And I think it is important
to draw that distinction because I think where we can make the
biggest influence, not just in Burma, but in all countries
around the world, is toward this direction of a political
opening. Ultimately it is the right of people to choose any
economic model they want. But it is the political opportunities
that are most important.
And I think is a unique opportunity for our country to use
our sanctions as a leverage point, for lack of a better term,
to help bring about or continue to encourage political
openings. And so I wanted to walk through with you some of the
challenges that we face in that regard with this specific case.
The first is, I was struck by a statement that President
Sein made back in 2011 where he said there were no political
prisoners in Burma, that all prisoners have broken the law. I
do not think that would be our position.
What is the best estimate that we have in terms of the
existence of political prisoners? Has that thought process
changed? Where do we stand from his point of view and from our
point of view on the existence of political prisoners and their
prospects?
Ambassador Mitchell. Thank you, Senator. The President last
year did say the traditional view has been the traditional view
of the government publicly. And he stayed consistent with that
publicly. But to be honest, in private discussions with the
government, they acknowledge, however they call them--prisoners
of conscience--there are various words or phrases you can use.
We were talking in the same terms, and we saw that when we
engaged with them on lists, the types of people we were talking
about that were in because of political moves and such. They
took it very seriously. They continue--from what I understand,
even today they take it very seriously. They have released more
than 500, up to 600 back last May, and then last October, and
then this past January, including the most--the leaders of the
movement.
Senator Rubio. So how many are still in?
Ambassador Mitchell. So we think there are still hundreds.
There are different lists out there. Our list has several
hundred in it, and we have been sharing this with the
government. There is an exile group along the Thai border who
has several hundred. I think theirs is in the 400 range. Aung
San Suu Kyi has her list. And now we are all bringing this to
the government.
Senator Rubio. When you say ``released,'' are they all back
in the country? Were they exiled? What is the status of----
Ambassador Mitchell. They are back in the country. They
were not released unconditionally; they had for the most part,
sign. But they are not released unconditionally in the sense
that they were--there is still a section 403, I think it is.
But they are actually acting as if they are normal citizens in
the country. They are not restrained from--in fact, some of
them ran for office last April. They are forming civil society.
Senator Rubio. What are the conditions?
Ambassador Mitchell. I am sorry?
Senator Rubio. What are the conditions of their release?
Ambassador Mitchell. Well, they just said--it was not
unconditional in the sense of--if they have--if they commit
another crime of some kind, they could be put back in prison
and their sentence is resumed. That is on paper. We are
watching that very closely. We are making it clear to them we
want to see this unconditional. It is still a Damocles sword
hanging over their head that is unacceptable that I think is a
cloud that they feel psychologically. But in practice, we have
been encouraged that they have not been constrained.
The one area I would say that is different, though, they
have not been able to travel as freely as I think we would like
to see.
Senator Rubio. Within the country.
Ambassador Mitchell. Well, no, I think outside the country.
Senator Rubio. Oh, outside.
Ambassador Mitchell. Some have tried to, and there have
been difficulties getting passports here and there. But we have
been working on this issue. It could be as much an issue of
internal bureaucracy because they are not a very efficient
government yet. But we will work on these issues. It is not
over and done with just because they are released.
Senator Rubio. The second issue, which is related to all of
this, is just this terrible history of trafficking in persons
that has existed there. Burma has historically been Tier 3
ranking. I think they have been upgraded to a Tier 2. I know
the President last year--our President--suspended, if I am not
mistaken--I had it here in my notes--suspended or waived
Section 110 of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act with
respect to Burma, meaning certain sanctions would not be
applied.
I am curious to know two things, because it sounds from
what I have read that what they are doing on trafficking is all
aspirational. What specifically have they done? And it is not
just trafficking. They have this horrible problem with child
soldiers being conscripted into the armed services. I want to
talk about the armed services in a moment.
But what exactly have they done that has been so promising
to move them from a Tier 3 to a Tier 2 and lead to the waiving
of these Trafficking Victims Protection Act sanctions. What
have they done? What exactly has happened with regards to child
soldiers and trafficking and persons that justify this?
Ambassador Mitchell. There is no question there continues
to be severe challenges in the country on forced labor, and
child soldiers, and the rest. And the Tier 2 Watch List does
not mean that they are given a blank slate on this. What it
says is they are moving in the right direction.
I was with Ambassador Cdebaca, who is our Ambassador
responsible for trafficking in persons. I was with him in Burma
in January. And he went in with very low expectations of what
he could get from the Burmese, and it was remarkable actually.
He talked about this when he released the most recent report,
how they had done a lot internally. They had books and tabs of
what they were doing on this issue, particularly on trafficking
outside the country, of trafficking in Thailand, trafficking
into China. But they also were looking at some issues of forced
labor internally.
Since then, and this is what Ambassador Cdebaca had pressed
very heavily. There was a law in place from 1907 when the
British were there--it is colonial. It is the Village and Towns
Act that gave the authority to the government to force labor,
to requisition labor for official purposes. And what Ambassador
Cdebaca said, you need to get rid of this law. This is official
sanction for doing this. You need to get rid of the official
sanction. And they did that. They did that in March. So it was
actually a fairly substantial move where they took action to
say it is not official policy. We are going to work on this.
And what has been very encouraging, I can tell you
privately, that they were very happy about being moved up to
the Tier 2 Watch List. They felt that was at least recognition
that they were trying to deal with these issues. And they said
next year we want to be off the list. How can we get off the
list? So this is not done.
Senator Rubio. What was our answer? What did we tell them
when they said that?
Ambassador Mitchell. Oh, we said we will work with you on
the types of things we need to see, including on forced labor,
including on child soldiers, including accountability for what
is going on. So we were going to--we will say you want to get
off the list.
Senator Rubio. My time is running out. I had one more
question, so I do not want to belabor this point. But I am very
interested to know specifics of what they are doing, what they
have done, and what we expect them to continue to do on this
issue, because--and I am not accusing them of this. I am, quite
frankly, not as aware, and that is why I am asking. But there
are cosmetic things that people do to show, and then there are
real things that they do on trafficking.
My last concern, and I think it is a broader issue, is the
military continues to be unaccountable to the civilian
leadership. It seems to me from my reading--I have never
visited there--that the military in particular has and many
officers in the military have benefited greatly from the crony
nature of the economy.
Here is my concern, how big of an impediment in your
observation is it to have this continued existence of this very
powerful military not accountable to civilian leadership still
be able to step in at any moment and stop this progress? And
what are your general thoughts on where that is headed, and how
much willingness there is from the civilian areas in government
to deal with it.
Ambassador Mitchell. Well, as I said, it is imbedded in the
constitution. As long as that is imbedded in the constitution,
it raises questions about how far they are going to go for
democratic reform. And they have said repeatedly privately and
publicly we are committed to democracy and democratic change.
But as long, as you suggest, that the military remains able to
act with impunity and has a unique position in the affairs of
the nation that is not democratic, then that raises questions.
And I think that has been raised repeatedly as a concern, and
we will continue to focus on that.
Having said that, I think we need to bring the military in
and continue to talk to them about how they see themselves
playing in this road to reform.
The final thing I will say on trafficking in persons, we
can get Ambassador Cdebaca to come up and talk to you about his
observations specifically on Burma, what he sees and what he is
not seeing. I do not mean to whitewash. There are obviously a
lot of concerns that remain, but it is just that they are
making some progress, and we just took them out of a Tier 3
kind of closet and put them in a Tier 2 watch list so we can
work more closely with them.
Senator Webb. Senator Rubio, before we leave you, or before
you leave us, I would like to add on to what you just said
about this TIP list.
We have been working on this from our staff for 4 years
now. And my strong view, and we have communicated to Secretary
Clinton on more than one occasion, is that the entire process
for developing these TIP lists is fundamentally flawed. What
they do in their evaluations is they rank a country against
itself year by year rather than compared to an international
standard. And the benchmark that they use most frequently is
the number of legal actions and the number of legal procedures
that have been put into place in order to address the issue.
And you have these unexplainable disparities country by
country where you have advanced governmental systems, like
Singapore and Japan or Tier 2 Watch Lists, and then last year
we had Nigeria, which was Tier 1, because in 1 year they had
increased the number of legal actions rather than, you know,
the actual state of these trafficking issues inside their
country.
And we got literally a blast from the foreign ministry of
Singapore about this when they were downgraded talking about
how the United States had the audacity to give itself a Tier 1
with all of the trafficking in persons that goes on here with
respect to immigration policies and these sorts of things.
So I would welcome the opportunity to have a discussion and
show you what we have done on this in terms of remedial
legislation. I think it is really--countries around the world
do not understand the numbers that are coming out of it.
Ambassador, Senator Rubio mentioned another issue that I
would like to get your clarifications on, and that is the
numbers of prisoners and the release process, because from what
we have been hearing is this present government has been
attempting to address these issues name by name. In other
words, if they are given specific names, that they are doing
for the most part a good job of trying to separate political
prisoners from others who might have committed recognizable
criminal offenses.
And, in fact, yesterday I was speaking with my friend and
yours, Thant Myint, who is just back from a visit in Bangkok.
And he was saying to me--back in Bangkok from a visit inside
Burma. And he was saying to me that this is a priority over the
next 2 months for their government to try to review the lists
as they are being furnished in an attempt to clear the slate.
Is that your impression of what is going on?
Ambassador Mitchell. I have heard the same, and we are
going to take advantage of that window to put our list forward
and encourage them to take that step. I think it will be a very
positive step.
And I do think there are people in the government quite
serious about it. Whether they call them political prisoners or
common criminals, we do not care. We want these people out
because they should not be incarcerated.
Senator Webb. You can legitimately in any country have
someone who has committed acts that are not political acts and
still be a political person who is incarcerated.
Ambassador Mitchell. That is right. There are different
definitions that people have, but I think we will stand by our
definition of what we consider a political prisoner and seek to
get them released unconditionally.
Senator Webb. All right. I wish you the best. I am very
grateful that we are going to have you, barring some
unfortunate incident that I do not think is going to occur over
the next 24 hours, I think we are going to be very grateful to
have you serving as our Ambassador in this very unique and
historic time.
It is our intention to try to move this nomination before
the end of the week. For that reason, I am asking any members
of the subcommittee who wish to get you questions for the
record to do so by close of business today, and appreciate your
rapid turnaround so that we might request that your nomination
be moved before the end of the week.
Also we have statements from the Chamber of Commerce and
the U.S. ASEAN Business Council that will be entered into the
record at this time.
And, Ambassador, we again appreciate your willingness to
continue in public service.
Ambassador Mitchell. Thank you.
Senator Webb. This hearing is closed.
[Whereupon, at 11:30 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
----------
Additional Questions and Answers Submitted for the Record
Responses of Hon. Derek Mitchell to Questions Submitted
by Senator Richard G. Lugar
Question. What role, if any, can the United States play in Burma's
national reconciliation? In the wake of ongoing change within Burma,
please describe the strategy being implemented by the United States to
communicate with each of the ethnic groups and their respective
militias, and/or encourage such an effort by the United Nations.
Answer. Burma's national reconciliation, which will address key
political, economic, and cultural issues among the central government
and ethnic groups, must be driven by the Burmese people themselves to
be successful in the long term. Secretary Clinton, myself, and other
U.S. Government officials have met with ethnic groups and their
representatives in Burma, throughout the region, and in the United
States. Our embassies in the region maintain regular contact with U.N.
agencies, international NGOS, and ethnic groups along Burma's borders
and inside the country to gauge their concerns and seek current
information on the ongoing political process and cease-fire
negotiations.
We also meet with Burmese Government officials and consistently
convey at the highest levels that, while we understand the sensitivity
of the national reconciliation questions, the United States stands
ready to assist in effective and appropriate ways to establish a
durable solution for peace. We also strongly encourage the Government
of Burma to work cooperatively with ethnic groups to find peaceful,
lasting solutions to their conflicts and, in the meantime, to negotiate
cease-fire agreements by which all sides will abide.
Additionally, in light of ongoing conflict and tensions in ethnic
minority areas, including Kachin State and Rakhine State, we urge the
government to allow unfettered humanitarian access to Internally
Displaced Persons (IDPs). We regularly contact U.N. offices and local
and international NGOs operating in Burma to provide assistance to
those most in need. In March 2012, we provided $1.3m to UNHCR to assist
Kachin IDPs in the areas of protection, nonfood items, and shelter/camp
management. We also collaborate closely with our international partners
and the donor community to work with the Burmese Government and ethnic
groups to encourage and strengthen the cease-fire negotiations and
political dialogue.
Question. Have United States officials raised concern with North
Korea regarding the country's military and technological exports to
Burma, and collaboration with the Burmese military? Are submarines
among the exports from North Korea to Burma?
Answer. In our broader bilateral engagement with the North Koreans
and with regional partners, we have consistently raised our concerns on
proliferation activities. We also consistently raise with the Burmese
Government at the highest levels our concerns over military ties with
North Korea, and stressed the importance of full and transparent
implementation of UNSCRs 1718 and 1874 which prohibit all purchases of
military equipment and weapons from North Korea. We take all reports of
military trade between the two countries very seriously. We would be
happy to offer you a classified briefing to fully address any questions
regarding military ties between Burma and North Korea.
Question. Have United States officials raised concerns with China
regarding North Korea's military and technological exports to Burma,
and collaboration with the Burmese military? Have United States
officials raised specific concerns to China regarding reports of
transshipment of military-defense cargo to Burma from North Korea via
China?
Answer. We regularly, and will continue to, address a broad range
of proliferation issues, to include links to Burma, with our partners
in the region, including China.
Question. Please provide a list of political prisoners (or
combination of lists of prisoners), which the United States uses as a
point of reference in discussions with the Government of Burma.
Answer. We have attached a current list of political prisoners. We
consulted with key political parties and civil society organizations in
Burma, including members who are former political prisoners and will
continue to have ongoing conversations to ensure we have the most
accurate and up-to-date information.
[Editor's note.--The list of political prisoners mentioned
above was too voluminous to include in the printed hearing
therefore it will be maintained in the permanent record of the
committee.]
Question. When does the United States anticipate that IAEA
officials and inspectors will travel to Burma?
Answer. We have regularly urged Burma to improve its cooperation
with the IAEA, particularly in support of concluding an Additional
Protocol (AP). Universalization of the AP was an important aspect of
the 2010 NPT Review Conference Action Plan, which was adopted by
consensus and with Burma's support. In addition, the same commitment
was made by the 10 ASEAN States at 2011 U.S.-ASEAN's Leaders Summit.
While the Government of Burma has indicated a willingness to consider
an AP, we have no indication that it has initiated the necessary
consultations with the IAEA.
Question. How do you envision American institutions of higher
learning contributing to the overall reform process within Burma?
Answer. American institutions of higher learning, as well as
private foundations and other nongovernment entities, can effectively
contribute to the overall process of reform in several ways. Many such
institutions are already contributing. One way is to establish faculty
exchanges to send American professors to Burma and bring Burmese
professors to the United States in order to modernize and reinvigorate
the Burmese system of higher learning. Another way is to promote
leadership and management training for Burmese diplomats and government
officials to develop their capacity to lead both in Burma and at the
international level. Additionally, hospital to hospital exchanges or
collaborations help ensure the availability of high-quality medical
treatment for the people of Burma.
The State Department has been encouraging American institutions to
make their own fact-finding trips to Burma to assess opportunities to
assist on higher learning activities. Many U.S. educational
institutions are considering establishing campuses in Burma or
partnering with Burmese educational institutions. We will work, along
with our Embassy in Rangoon, to facilitate their efforts. We encourage
these institutions to take into serious consideration the views of
their Burmese counterparts who, for example, have identified a great
demand for English Language Teaching.
Question. What are the benchmarks that when achieved, the United
States will favor international financial institutions providing
technical and financial assistance to the Government of Burma?
Answer. The administration has carefully calibrated its approach on
international financial institutions (IFIs) under the ``action for
action'' framework articulated by Secretary Clinton to encourage
continued progress on economic and political reforms in Burma. The
Secretary of State waived the portion of the Trafficking in Persons
(TIP) sanctions that applied to IFI assistance, which remains operable
until September 30, 2012. The TIP waiver gave U.S. Executive Directors
(USEDs) at the IFIs limited flexibility to support those assessment
missions and limited technical assistance to Burma that did not require
a Board vote. Burma moved up this year in its TIP Ranking from Tier 3
to Tier 2 Watch List and will not be subject to TIP sanctions in 2013.
However, USEDs are currently directed to vote ``no'' on IFI
financial assistance to Burma, based on existing legislation, including
several Burma-specific laws (section 570 of the Burma Freedom and
Democracy Act and section 7044 (b) of the FY12 Foreign Operations
Appropriations Act) . The FY12 Appropriations Act contains no criteria
for Burma to meet, nor does it provide waiver authority of any kind for
these laws.
We assess that the critical priorities for IFI engagement with
Burma at this time include assessment, technical assistance, and
capacity-building, but that conditions are not yet appropriate for IFI
lending to Burma. IFI engagement in Burma, which Aung San Suu Kyi
supports, can be a valuable tool of United States foreign policy,
particularly in encouraging economic reform in Burma
Other major shareholders are already beginning to discuss the
preparation of multilateral development bank (MDB) country assistance
strategies, and options for the clearance of Burma's arrears to the
MDBs and to certain bilateral creditors. Although the United States
will vote ``no'' on any IFI operations that require a Board vote, the
United States cannot unilaterally prevent the IFIs from engaging with
Burma, and a strong international consensus is emerging in favor of
deeper IFI engagement to cement the positive direction of economic
reforms undertaken by President Thein Sein.
The administration is not seeking congressional action on directed
vote mandates at this juncture, but it is possible to envisage a future
need for the United States to effectively guide IFI engagement in Burma
in a manner that meets our shared objectives through the flexible
exercise of its voting power.
Question. What evidence exists that Burma's Commander in Chief,
Gen. Min Aung Hlaing and his senior officers support political reform
in Burma and are willing, at some future time, to accept civilian
control over the military and relinquish the military's privileged
status as provided for in Burma's constitution?
Answer. During my time as Special Representative and Policy
Coordinator, I met with Commander in Chief Min Aung Hlaing, Defense
Minister Hla Min, and other senior military officials. In those
discussions, these officials expressed support for the political reform
process initiated by President Thein Sein. Min Aung Hlaing stressed his
intention to make the military a responsible, respected, and
professional force, and stated that the armed forces no longer wanted
responsibility for governing the country. While the internal dynamics
and debates within the military are relatively opaque, and we have
ongoing concerns about the authority granted to the military under
Burma's constitution, to date, the military has not intervened or taken
any other overt action to derail the political and social
liberalization that has taken place over the past year.
There are no guarantees, however, that the military in the future
will remain supportive of continued political reform, accept de facto
control of its affairs by civilian authorities, or relinquish its
privileged status under Burma's Constitution. Such steps will be
necessary for a full democratic transition and will continue to be
factors in U.S. assessments of Burma's reform process.
Question. What are the benchmarks that when achieved, the United
States will initiate military-to-military interaction with Burma? Once
those benchmarks are met, what will be your recommendation(s) as to the
specific type of military-to-military contact?
Answer. Increased military-to-military ties with Burma would enable
greater insight into the Burmese military, and offer opportunities,
consistent with U.S. values and interests, to promote a professional,
respected, and responsible military force. We have started this process
of engagement by renewing joint cooperation on efforts to recover
remains of U.S. personnel from the World War II era, suspended in 2004,
and the visit of a National War College student delegation to Burma in
early May.
Continued violence and human rights abuses against civilians,
including women and children, in Kachin and Shan states, and questions
about the Burmese military's relationship with North Korea are the
major constraints on further development of military-to-military ties.
Question. What is the timetable for the completion of guidelines
for a general
license to authorize new investment and the waiver needed to authorize
financial transactions with Burma--as announced by the administration
last May?
Answer. We are moving forward through an interagency process to
complete the steps necessary to implement President Obama and Secretary
Clinton's May 17 announcements on easing sanctions on the export of
financial services and on new investment. Procedurally we expect to
take several steps to ease the ban on new investment in Burma,
including by exercising statutory waiver authority and issuing a
general license to authorize such investment. We will also seek a
separate general license to ease the prohibition on the exportation of
financial services to Burma.
We seek to ensure our sanctions easing measures support our overall
policy objectives of transparency and accountability and are
comprehensible for both the Burmese people and the business community.
We will continue to pursue a calibrated approach in our engagement with
Burma and will work to promote responsible investing practices.
Question. What is the administration's perspective on the status of
the Rohingyas? What steps have been taken to address the challenges of
injury and death to the Rohingyas resulting from the policies of the
governments of Bangladesh and Burma? By name and title, who are the
lead State Department officials on matters related to the Rohingyas?
Answer. The administration has, and will continue to, express
serious concern at the continuing discrimination, human rights
violations, violence, displacement and economic deprivation affecting
numerous ethnic minorities in Burma, including the stateless Rohingya
ethnic minority in northern Rakhine state. We have consistently called
upon the Government of Burma to take immediate action to bring about an
improvement in their situation, to recognize the right of the Rohingya
to nationality, and to protect their human rights.
Soon after sectarian violence broke out in early June between
Buddhist ethnic Rakhine and Muslim minorities, including ethnic
Rohingya, in Burma's Rakhine state, Secretary Clinton issued a
statement condemning the violence and urging authorities to conduct a
timely investigation into attacks and a dialogue among all key
stakeholders to promote greater religious and ethnic tolerance and
understanding.
Embassies Rangoon and Dhaka continue to work in close coordination
to monitor the situation in Rakhin state and along the Burma-Bangladesh
border and have met with relevant ministers from the respective
governments to note our concern and to encourage both governments to
work with the international community to restore peace and to provide
protection and assistance to those individuals fleeing the violence. We
continue to urge the Government of Bangladesh to respect the principle
of nonrefoulement as these persons may be refugees or have other
protection needs. We remain deeply concerned and, and if confirmed, I
will continue to call for restraint, an end to violence, and the
upholding of principles of nondiscrimination, tolerance, and religious
freedom.
In the State Department, several bureaus and offices track the
Rohingya population in Burma and the region, including the Bureaus of
East Asia and Pacific Affairs; South and Central Asia Affairs;
Population, Refugees, and Migration; Conflict and Stabilization
Operations; and Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor. Senior principals
including Assistant Secretary Campbell, Assistant Secretary Posner,
Assistant Secretary Barton, and Assistant Secretary Richard, office
directors, program officers, and embassies related to the above-
mentioned offices work in coordination with the international community
to not only address the current violence, but also to develop
comprehensive durable solutions to address the Rohingya situation.
Question. Officials of Thailand have discussed the forced return of
thousands of displaced person to Burma who fled to Thailand. Have U.S.
officials discussed
this situation with Thai authorities and what is the present position
of the Thai Government?
Answer. U.S. officials in Thailand and Washington have consistently
reinforced with Thai leaders our firm belief that refugees from Burma
should only return voluntarily, and when they can do so safely and in
dignity. Secretary Clinton raised this issue with Foreign Minister
Surapong on June 12. The Foreign Minister, as well as Thai officials
from both civilian and military agencies, confirmed to us that the Thai
Government will avoid the forcible return of Burmese refugees back to
Burma, that there is no timeline for return, and return will only occur
when conditions are right in Burma. We will continue to monitor the
situation and reinforce our message as appropriate.
Question. Some Burmese leaders have been accused of committing or
ordering international crimes of humanity against ethnic minorities
within Burma. How should these allegations be addressed to ensure
accountability and to facilitate reconciliation within Burma? Does the
administration support a Commission of Inquiry?
Answer. We consistently prioritize concerns with human rights
violations and, in our engagement with Burmese Government officials and
members of civil society, we have underscored the importance of
establishing a mechanism for accountability. We view the establishment
of a national human rights commission in Burma in September 2011 an
important first step, and we have encouraged the government to draw on
international expertise to ensure the impartiality and the credibility
of the commission.
As Secretary Clinton noted during her November visit to Burma, the
United States supports an appropriate mechanism to ensure justice and
accountability. We believe it is important to support the Burmese
Government, the political opposition, and civil society in pursuing
their own approach toward achieving these objectives. An inclusive
process that comprises key Burmese stakeholders is required for a
sustainable mechanism to ensure accountability.
Question. Has the United State held discussions with the Government
of India and the government of Mizoram state to help identify and
address protection of the Chin?
Answer. India is not a signatory to the 1951 U.N. Refugee
Convention, but all refugees, along with foreign residents, tourists,
and migrants, are covered by the Foreigners Act. The Indian Government
does not afford refugee status to any group.
U.S. Consulate officers from Kolkata have met in Kolkata and in
Aizawl with members of Burma's ethnic Chin population and with groups
assisting the Chin in Mizoram. During visits to the state, consulate
officers consistently raise the Chin issue with members of local
government and civil society. Most recently, the Consul General used a
June meeting with the Chief Minister to encourage the government of
Mizoram and the Government of India to provide more assistance to this
population.
The State Department will continue to engage with UNHCR on
indentifying durable solutions for Burma's ethnic Chin, including
resettlement.
______
Responses of Hon. Derek Mitchell to Questions Submitted
by Senator Marco Rubio
Question. Beyond the anecdotes provided in the 2012 Trafficking in
Persons
Report, what specific steps or measures has the Burmese Government
taken to move from Tier 3 to Tier 2 Watch List in the 2012 TIP report?
Answer. Burma's record on human trafficking, including forced labor
and the use of child soldiers, has been a concern for many years. The
ILO and other international observers assessed that the government had
used the colonial-era Village Act and Towns Act of 1907 to legally
sanction forced labor. The government's moves to repeal these
antiquated acts, however, and to replace them with a new law that
explicitly prohibits forced labor as a criminal offense, were in direct
response to U.S. Government requests, and attest to a stronger
commitment to cooperate more closely with the United States on human
trafficking issues.
Several other significant and unprecedented steps in advancing
political reforms corrected Burma's legal framework vis-a-vis human
trafficking:
An interministerial working group on trafficking in persons
introduced best practices through collaboration with
international partners. As a result, we have seen improved
victim protection measures.
Authorities undertook significant efforts to address the
cross-border sex trafficking of women and girls; inaugurated a
national hotline to respond better to public complaints of all
forms of human trafficking that has since led to the rescue of
57 victims of trafficking; and launched an antitrafficking Web
site in February 2012.
Earlier this year, the government signed a framework
agreement with the ILO that commits it to developing and
implementing an ambitious new plan of action to eradicate
forced labor in the country by 2015.
The government's cooperation with the ILO also achieved progress in
addressing conscription of child soldiers in the Burmese military. Of
324 complaints of forced labor in Burma that the ILO received in 2011,
236 involved alleged conscription of children for military service. For
the first time in several years, the Ministry of Defense provided data
on military personnel disciplined for forced labor offenses: four
officers and 37 enlisted personnel were punished for ``improper
recruitment.''
The Ministry of Labor also took a number of unprecedented steps to
prevent forced labor of Burmese citizens at home and abroad. In late
2011, the Deputy Minister of Labor negotiated with the Thai Government
for the placement of a labor attache at the Burmese Embassy in Thailand
and the opening of five labor assistance centers in Thailand. The
centers, which the Thai Government has not yet approved for opening,
will help expatriate Burmese workers with obtaining Burmese identity
documents and other assistance.
Through several visits by the Special Representative and Policy
Coordinator for Burma, Ambassador Derek Mitchell, and Ambassador
CdeBaca from the Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons,
the United States engaged relevant ministries and security forces in
Burma to express our concerns and guide the government toward progress
in meeting achievable goals.
We recognize there is still much to be done, and Burma's Tier 2
Watch List ranking reflects serious deficiencies. We also remain
concerned with continued reports on conscription of child soldiers. We
will build upon the foundation we have laid with the government to
cooperate on these issues as well as collaborate with Aung San Suu Kyi,
who has highlighted the issue of human trafficking as an essential
issue to resolve.
Question. What are the measures that the Burmese Government must
meet for Burma to remain off the Tier 3 list in the 2013 TIP Report?
Answer. In order to avoid a Tier 3 ranking in the 2013 TIP Report,
the Burmese Government must avoid backsliding on its improvements to
date and begin to make progress on implementing a series of
recommendations that the Department of State provided in the 2012 TIP
Report:
Complete and implement the terms of the International Labor
Organization (ILO) action plan for the elimination of forced
labor offenses perpetrated by government employees,
particularly military personnel.
Take additional measures to confront the unlawful
conscription of children into the military and ethnic armed
groups, including the criminal prosecution and punishment of
offenders.
Increase efforts to investigate and sanction, including
through criminal prosecution, government and military
perpetrators of internal trafficking offenses, including child
soldier recruitment and other such crimes.
Actively identify and demobilize all children serving in the
armed forces.
Continue improving U.N. access to inspect recruitment
centers, training centers, and military camps in order to
identify and support the reintegration and rehabilitation of
child soldiers.
Cease the arrest and imprisonment of children for desertion
or attempting to leave the army and release imprisoned former
child soldiers.
Enhance partnerships with local and international NGOs to
improve victim identification and protection efforts, including
victim shelters.
Develop and implement formal victim identification and
referral procedures.
Focus more attention on the internal trafficking of women
and children for commercial sexual exploitation.
Question. At the hearing, you mentioned an interest by Burmese
authorities to take measures that would lead to their removal from the
TIP Report's Tier 2 Watch List. What specific measures would the
Department of State expect Burma to take in order to accomplish this?
What type of monitoring will the State Department do to ensure these
measures are followed?
Answer. Each Trafficking in Persons Report narrative contains
specific recommendations for a government to consider implementing over
the coming year toward achieving a favorable tier ranking. In addition
to the country-specific recommendations within the TIP Report
narrative, the Department of State provided the Government of Burma
with an action plan that is derived from these recommendations. The
State Department delivered the action plan to the Government of Burma
on June 19. Both the action plan and accompanying recommendations are
aimed at providing authorities with guidance related to the minimum
standards outlined in the Trafficking Victims Protection Act. In order
for Burma to be removed from the Watch List, its Government must make
progress on these recommendations.
To help the government achieve its goal of a more favorable tier
ranking, we will build on our strengthened engagement, including
upgraded diplomatic ties, to work with relevant ministries and
authorities on the necessary criteria it must address. We will outline
procedures and recommendations from our Trafficking in Persons report
and seek progress on core concerns specific to Burma. The Department's
Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons, in partnership
with the Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs and the U.S. Embassy
in Rangoon, will assess the Government of Burma's progress in achieving
the action plan items through direct discussions with authorities,
soliciting feedback from nongovernmental organizations and monitoring
media coverage of these issues.
______
Prepared Statement of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the world's largest business
federation, representing the interests of more than 3 million
businesses of all sizes, sectors, and regions, as well as State and
local chambers and industry associations, is pleased to have the
opportunity to submit this statement for the record to the Senate
Committee on Foreign Relations in connection with today's hearing on
the nomination of Derek Mitchell to be United States Ambassador to
Burma.
The Chamber has been very encouraged by political and economic
developments in Burma over the past year. Badly needed political and
economic reforms in that country are moving forward, in many cases at a
pace faster than most observers had expected. Following the landslide
victory by the opposition National League for Democracy in the April 1
elections, there is, for the first time in many years, a genuine sense
of hope for the future.
It is patently in U.S. interest that the process of reform and
liberalization in Burma continue. The Chamber has therefore strongly
supported the U.S. Government's responses to developments there,
including Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's visit last December, the
upgrading of diplomatic relations, and the announcement that some U.S.
economic sanctions will be eased.
Many observers question whether the changes in Burma are
irreversible. That is the wrong question; little in this world is truly
irreversible. The momentum is currently behind reform, but the process
will not be linear. As with most major changes, reform of the economic
and political system in Burma is fraught with formidable challenges,
and there is ultimately no guarantee of success. Therefore, U.S. policy
should be geared toward supporting and strengthening the hand of the
reformers. Strategic engagement by the U.S Government, as well as by
leaders from the nonprofit and business sectors, is vital to
solidifying and broadening these reforms.
For these reasons, we are pleased that the Senate is considering
the nomination of Derek Mitchell as U.S. Ambassador to Burma. It has
been 20 years since the United States last had an Ambassador in Burma,
and his appointment further demonstrates U.S. sincerity in its
commitment to ongoing engagement with that country. If we are to have
meaningful dialogue and interaction with Burma, there is no substitute
for the presence of an ambassador.
U.S. Chamber representatives visited Burma last month and had
discussions in Naypyidaw with a broad range of officials, including the
Ministers of Finance, Health, Construction, National Planning, and
Energy, and the Vice Ministers of Commerce and Railways. In Rangoon,
the Chamber met with economic and political advisors to the President,
among others.
The message was clear and consistent: They want U.S. investment
because they recognize that U.S. companies bring with them a respect
for the rule of law and high standards of corporate governance. Leaders
understand that these are essential elements for sustained economic
growth.
In those meetings, we detected no illusions on the part of anyone
we met about the daunting challenges the country faces. Burma is
woefully short of technical skills as well as skilled manpower across
every part of the economy from the health care system to the financial
sector. They need and want help, and they know it, and they freely
admit it. And the United States is in a position to offer that help.
Its realization of the difficulty of the path forward is has not
deterred Burma from moving down that path. Indeed, the commitment to
reform is genuine, and in the view of the Chamber executives who
recently visited, it is not a question of pro- vs. anti-reform, but
rather a question of the pace of reform. The pace of reform relates
directly to the question of capacity.
U.S. business community involvement can play a crucial role here.
U.S. companies not only create jobs, but they bring capital,
technology, training, community development, high standards for
protecting the environment and respecting human rights and the rule of
law that will build a foundation for sustained economic growth. Without
this foundation, development and improved standards of living for the
people of Burma (or any other country) is simply not possible.
How do we build this foundation? Most immediately, the lifting of
financial services and investment sanctions--as promised by Secretary
Clinton on May 17--will be essential to the sustainable expansion of
the Burmese economy and the successful operation of any U.S. business
effort. Currently, U.S. companies are unable to conduct many basic
research efforts that would enable them to even formulate plans to
operate there. Lifting the financial services and investment ban is a
prerequisite for enabling any U.S. business to work in Burma. A basic
financial services infrastructure is a prerequisite for creating an
environment in which businesses can invest, and where other promising
sectors, such as tourism, can flourish.
Secretary Clinton's announcement generated great enthusiasm on the
ground in Burma, as the Chamber executives who were there at the time
saw firsthand. However, it is disappointing that the announcement has
not been followed by action. Movement is needed quickly to issue a
general license that is needed to authorize new investments in, and
financial transactions with, Burma, consistent with the Secretary's May
17 announcement.
This license should apply across the board to all industry sectors
and should avoid burdensome reporting requirements or onerous
preconditions on any sector. For example, suggestions to restrict
engagement with Burma's State-owned oil company, Myanmar Oil and Gas
Enterprise (MOGE) would result in a de-facto investment ban. In Burma,
like many other countries around the globe, foreign investors are
legally required to enter into joint ventures with state-owned
companies. Our standard should continue to be to limit engagement with
those entities on the prescribed list of prohibited entities and
persons known as Specially Designated Nationals (SDN) who have been
unjustly enriched in the past, have violated other statutes such as
counterterrorism, money laundering, proliferation, counternarcotics
proscriptions or who are owned by the military. MOGE has not been
listed for any of these violations and is not controlled by the
military. Instead, MOGE reports to the civilian-controlled Ministry of
Energy.
Effectively prohibiting American companies from dealing with MOGE
will only ensure that non-American companies continue to capture
additional energy projects. It will not lead to greater transparency
over natural resource revenues.
American companies have been at the forefront of a decade-long
global effort to promote greater transparency around the flow of
natural resource revenues, i.e. the Extractive Industries Transparency
Initiative (EITI). Some 35 nations are now implementing countries in
this initiative and participate with other stakeholders from industry,
international financial institutions and civil society; 14 countries
have achieved ``compliant'' status with the EITI disclosure standard.
The United States has recently applied to join EITI. American companies
can and will encourage Burma, as they have encouraged other countries,
to join this initiative, which provides the capacity not only to
implement the disclosure standard, but to develop the institutions to
manage public expenditures over the long term. If the U.S. Government
goal is to promote transparency, then our policy should strongly
support U.S. companies entering the natural resource space, and
engaging with MOGE and the government to embrace EITI.
But these are only first steps. What is needed is a broader and
longer term vision about the future of the U.S. relationship with
Burma. That vision must address how we can sustain support for a reform
process that will likely take many years, see fits and starts, and
encounter challenges both foreseen and unforeseen.
That vision must also consider a plan for more comprehensive easing
of economic sanctions. Over the past few months, all the major
economies that had sanctions in place against Burma have now suspended
or eliminated them. A sanctions regime that was multilateral is now
unilateral.
As the U.S. Chamber of Commerce has pointed out repeatedly, tying
the hands of U.S. companies simply ensures that our competitors fill
the void, as they are already doing. As a result, the jobs which could
go to American workers will instead go to their counterparts in Asia,
Europe, and elsewhere. U.S. companies are already starting from a
disadvantage, as numerous entities from other nations have
substantially stepped up their activity in recent months.
For example, the AFP noted in a June 19 article that Myanmar has
recently signed a series of oil and gas exploration deals with
companies from Hong Kong, Switzerland, Malaysia, India, Thailand,
Indonesia, and Russia. In recent weeks, a flurry of business
delegations from Japan, Singapore, and many European countries have
visited the country. Not only have other governments eased sanctions,
but many, such as those in Japan and Europe, in fact are helping and
partnering with their industries to get them into Burma. Similar
efforts on the U.S. side, perhaps led by the Commerce Department, would
be helpful.
Ironically, slow-walking the implementation of the administrative
steps necessary to suspend sanctions on new investment and financial
transactions will not increase transparency, advance respect for human
rights, or slow economic activity. It will only mean that U.S.
companies that push for better governance and transparency are not
involved in shaping the corporate culture and norms that are formed as
Burma's private sector is invigorated.
Moreover, the easing announced last month does not limit U.S.
policy options. The United States can renew the investment and
financial services sanctions should conditions in Burma deteriorate.
Other sanctions remain in place and in some cases would require
legislative action to undo. Thus, their removal will be neither quick
nor easy.
In addition, the SDN list provides a way to ensure that business
dealings do not enrich those parties responsible for Burma's decades of
suffering, and that those honest entrepreneurs seeking a way to connect
with the outside world are not kept in isolation due to the actions of
others. This list could be made more accessible and user-friendly, but
we are not recommending its elimination. Many countries around the
world have individuals and entities on this list, so it is not unique
to Burma, and it serves a very important function.
However, our long-term vision must take into account those
sanctions and restrictions which are unique to Burma. We need an open
and honest dialogue in which we can discuss the efficacy and utility of
some of the remaining sanctions and their impact on the Burmese people.
From the Chamber's discussions on the ground, it is clear that a
U.S. presence is welcomed in Burma and in a sense, the U.S. is pushing
on an open door. A U.S. commercial presence will serve our economic,
political, and strategic interests, and will help the people of Burma.
The past 20 years have been a dark chapter in Burma's history. We
believe that Burma is trying to turn the page, and the United States
must support this process. Deepening our engagement with that country
is an important way to do so.
______
Prepared Statement of Alexander Feldman, President, US-ASEAN Business
Council and Frances Zwenig, President, US-ASEAN Business Council
Institute, Inc.
The US-ASEAN Business Council and the US-ASEAN Business Council
Institute, Inc are pleased to have the opportunity to submit a
statement for the record to the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations
in connection with today's hearing on the nomination of Derek Mitchell
to be United States Ambassador to Myanmar.
The US-ASEAN Business Council is the premiere advocacy organization
for U.S. corporations operating within the dynamic Association of
Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). ASEAN represents nearly 600 million
people and a combined GDP of USD $1.5 trillion across Brunei
Darussalam, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, the
Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam. The Council's members
include the largest U.S. companies working in ASEAN, and range from
newcomers to the region to companies that have been working in
Southeast Asia for over 100 years.
The US-ASEAN Business Council Institute, Inc is a charitable
organization whose purpose is to enrich the opportunities for
strengthened and deeper engagement by U.S. companies in ASEAN through a
variety of educational activities and capacity-building. Broadly
defined, this mission also supports humanitarian activities and
community engagement to help improve the lives of people in ASEAN where
the Council's companies work; support for programs to preserve and
expand knowledge about the rich cultural and art heritage of the region
in the U.S. and of the U.S. in ASEAN; and other initiatives in the
fields of education, governance and rule of law, health, the
environment, trade, commerce and investment that the Council's members
may propose from time to time.
The Council and its members have been very pleased to see the
forward motion in the reform process that has taken place in Myanmar
over the past year. This reform has been not only political, as Myanmar
has held elections which have included key opposition groups and has
expanded the political space for open, sometimes critical dialogue, but
also economic, as Myanmar has taken the long-overdue step of allowing a
managed floating exchange rate, invited in foreign investment, and
begun the process of privatizing state-owned enterprises. President
Thein Sein has promised further reforms, and Myanmar has indicated it
will continue the process of releasing political prisoners.
These reforms are not irreversible, and need support from all
corners in order to be successful. The presence of a U.S. Ambassador
will make a substantial difference in the amount of influence the
United States can wield in encouraging further reforms.
The Council supports without qualification the confirmation of
Derek Mitchell for the position of U.S. Ambassador to the Union of
Burma, or Union of Myanmar. Ambassador Mitchell brings experience from
his years of government service in the Congress and in the executive
branch which will prove invaluable in this position, and is very well
qualified for the job. He has demonstrated his commitment and energy to
finding a way forward in this rapidly changing environment, and has the
temperament, ability, and insight which this challenging position will
require. The Council has long believed that the cause of improving the
lives of Burmese people was ill-served by the lack of an American
Ambassador to Myanmar and the subsequent U.S. insistence that Myanmar
downgrade its diplomatic representation in Washington, DC. Levels of
representation matter and impact the quality of dialogue, access to key
decisionmakers, and quality of information about one another's country.
With representation restored to normal levels, we hope the guidance to
the Embassy to provide the full array of assistance to American
individuals and companies seeking to undertake projects with civil
society and business with business and government partners will be
adopted. Currently, as this committee knows, the Embassy's ability to
provide any assistance to individuals or companies seeking to do
business is constrained by State Department policy.
U.S. companies bring best practices in governance, corporate
responsibility, safety and environmental standards. We believe they can
make an important contribution to the new legal and fiscal frameworks
now under discussion, but they must have access to good information as
the insights that an active diplomatic presence can provide. We urge
the State Department to update their guidance to the Embassy to be
consistent with the May 17 announcement by Secretary Clinton that the
United States is suspending sanctions on new investment and financial
transactions with Myanmar.
The Council is also very encouraged that the administration has
decided to suspend sanctions and allow economic engagement. The Council
has long believed that engagement can be more effective than isolation
in effecting positive change.
The next vital step will be the issuing of a general license that
will allow U.S. business to begin to work in Myanmar. Secretary
Clinton's May 17 announcement of the suspension of certain sanctions
has emboldened reformers, but it must be backed up with action. It is
essential that a general license authorizing new investments in and a
waiver authorizing financial transactions with Myanmar are issued soon,
and that both apply equally across all industry sectors.
Currently, potential U.S. investors remain in limbo, unable even to
perform basic research functions while their competitors move forward
aggressively. A June 19 article by the AFP indicated that Myanmar has
signed oil and gas deals with numerous companies from Asia and Europe,
and large delegations of foreign companies have made numerous visits.
Each day puts U.S. companies further behind.
Major U.S. companies, including iconic brands like council members
the Coca-Cola Company and GE, have indicated that they intend to pursue
opportunities in Myanmar once they are allowed.
A key example of the level of business interest in Myanmar is the
excitement surrounding the Council's first Business Mission to Myanmar,
which will take place in July. Despite the challenges that will face
companies looking to do business in Myanmar, 37 leading U.S. companies
have agreed to join the mission. The companies participating in the
mission include 5 of the Fortune 10, and represent all sectors. Top
firms in health care, manufacturing, infrastructure, financial
services, energy, and ICT are interested in the opportunities offered
by the opening up of Myanmar's economy.
During their visit to Yangon, the delegates will meet with a wide
spectrum of the key figures in Myanmar's evolution: key government
ministers, members of opposition groups like the NLD, NDF, and the
88'ers, and members of civil society. They will participate in meetings
with U.S. Government officials who will travel to Myanmar as part of
the State Department delegation which will also visit Myanmar. The
business mission will include a panel of NGOs who will describe the
conditions they face in operating on the ground, and share their
knowledge and experience on the best way for U.S. companies to help
move Myanmar forward. Those NGOs will include: PACT, Proximity Designs,
Marie Stopes International, and World Vision.
Connecting Burmese citizens to the wider world of global business
will be a vital step in helping them build the civil society that will
enable them to move Myanmar from the list of failed states into being a
member of ASEAN's success story. The Council encourages maintaining,
regularly updating, and providing easy to use access to the Specially
Designated Nationals list as a way to ensure that business dealings do
not enrich those parties responsible for Myanmar's decades of
suffering, and that those honest entrepreneurs seeking a way to connect
with the outside world are not kept in isolation due to the actions of
others.
U.S. companies can create the jobs and economic base needed for the
government to jump-start the economy and meet the expectations of the
people. U.S. companies bring with them respect for the rule of law,
corporate governance structures including adherence to the Foreign
Corrupt Practices Act, intellectual property rights, and labor
standards unmatched in the world. U.S. companies can and do provide
capacity-building, training, and respect for the environment, as well
as projects to engage with communities where they work to a
substantially greater degree than most of their competitors from other
nations. These Corporate Social Responsibility projects include
globally successful education, public health, and environmental
programs. U.S. companies look forward to vastly expanding their
presence in Myanmar.
These are programs which are already clearly reported and
documented, and which major U.S. companies view as part of their
competitive advantage. Burdensome reporting requirements surrounding
CSR work in Myanmar will have the effect of making it more difficult
for companies to bring in existing successful programs, and will act as
a barrier to entry for small and medium-sized enterprises.
In addition to the efforts of its members, the US-ASEAN Business
Council Institute performs a variety of CSR functions. Those efforts
have included facilitating and supporting flood relief in Thailand and
will include expanding the Council's training program for small and
medium-sized enterprises throughout ASEAN.
Myanmar has already been the location of one of the Council's key
CSR efforts; the restoration of the Musmeah Yeshua Synagogue. Rangoon
was once the home of a thriving Jewish community consisting primarily
of Jews from Iraq, Iran, and India. Musmeah Yeshua Synagogue was built
in 1893-1896 to serve the growing Jewish population, which, at its
peak, numbered about 2,500 individuals. During World War II, and, in
the years following, most of the Jews in Burma fled to other countries.
The Burmese Government's nationalization of businesses in 1969 caused
further migration.
As a result of the community's dwindling numbers, the synagogue has
limited funds to support itself. Even before the May 2008 cyclone, the
building was in desperate need of restoration and the historic Jewish
cemetery nearby was slated to be destroyed by the city. Cyclone Nargis
only made the situation more desperate. This historic building still
serves as the religious center for Jews visiting Myanmar. Without
restoration and maintenance, this unique piece of history would have
been lost.
Moses Samuels and his family are among the few Jews in Myanmar.
Moses is the Trustee of Musmeah Yeshua Synagogue. Cyclone Nargis rocked
the beautiful synagogue, shattered its windows, and destroyed its roof.
Without assistance, the Jewish community of Myanmar would have been
unable to restore and maintain its place of worship. Even with its own
Nargis damage, the Jewish community--led by Moses's son Sammy--
organized several aid missions to help their fellow Burmese in the
hard-hit Delta.
The US-ASEAN Business Council Institute, Inc., the US-ASEAN
Business Council's 501(c)(3) tax exempt organization, obtained a
license from the United States Department of the Treasury's Office of
Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) to raise funds for the maintenance and
restoration of Musmeah Yeshua Synagogue in Yangon, Myanmar. With the
OFAC license, the Council achieved a number of things:
Raised funds to complete restoration and necessary
maintenance of the synagogue;
Raised funds for the synagogue's monthly expenses consisting
of utilities, salaries for workers, and various miscellaneous
expenses;
Raised funds for the maintenance of 700 historic graves and
for the construction and maintenance of the new cemetery.
It is unquestionable that U.S. companies are at a disadvantage to
foreign competitors who are already operating in Myanmar. Jobs that
could be created in the U.S. are instead going to other nations. We
hope this testimony will help to show some of the vital and necessary
CSR projects that the Burmese people will be denied by the absence of
U.S. companies.
We believe Derek Mitchell has a firm grasp of these issues and the
importance of welcoming Myanmar back into the global fold.
We respectfully urge his swift confirmation.
NOMINATIONS OF GENE A. CRETZ, DEBORAH R. MALAC, DAVID B. WHARTON,
ALEXANDER M. LASKARIS
----------
THURSDAY, JULY 12, 2012
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Foreign Relations,
Washington, DC.
----------
Hon. Gene Allan Cretz, of New York, to be Ambassador to the
Republic of Ghana
Deborah Ruth Malac, of Virginia, to be Ambassador to the
Republic of Liberia
David Bruce Wharton, of Virginia, to be Ambassador to the
Republic of Zimbabwe
Alexander Mark Laskaris, of Maryland, to be Ambassador to the
Republic of Guinea
----------
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 3:05 p.m., in
room SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Christopher
A. Coons, presiding.
Present: Senator Coons.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. CHRISTOPHER A. COONS,
U.S. SENATOR FROM DELAWARE
Senator Coons. I am pleased to call to order this
nomination hearing of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee
for the Ambassadors for Ghana, Zimbabwe, Liberia, and Guinea.
As always, I am grateful for the supportive service of my good
friend and ranking member, Senator Isakson of Georgia, as well
as other members of the committee. Senator Isakson and I were
just on the floor together where we had a series of three
votes, and he wanted me to express his apologies. He hopes to
join us briefly, but he may well not be able to join us here
for this hearing today. He has been a diligent and reliable
partner and has attended literally every single hearing from
beginning to end we have had so far. So he wanted me to make
those apologies at the outset given the exigencies of trying to
make his flight home.
I want to welcome and thank our distinguished nominees,
Ambassador Cretz, the nominee for Ghana, David Wharton, who is
the nominee for Zimbabwe, Deborah Malac, who is the nominee for
Liberia, and Alexander Laskaris, the nominee to serve in
Guinea. All four of you bring to the table a vast array of
relevant experience in Africa and around the world, and I look
forward to hearing your vision for how to advance U.S. foreign
policy objectives in these countries.
Last year, Senator Isakson and I traveled to Ghana, which
has experienced remarkable growth and has placed it amongst the
top 10 fastest-growing economies in the world. Despite the
persistent challenge of widespread poverty, Ghana is largely
seen as a regional model for good governance, democracy,
stability, and economic success. And I look forward to hearing
from you about how we will continue to utilize our resources to
encourage greater U.S. trade investment in Ghana, which
presents, I think, great opportunities for American business.
As I mentioned at our last subcommittee hearing, I am
disappointed that the U.S. Department of Commerce chose not to
replace the U.S. commercial service officer, formerly posted in
Accra. And I believe it is one of many examples why the
administration needs to be better coordinate its strategy for
promoting economic engagement with Africa among the many
agencies responsible for this task.
Zimbabwe is sadly at the other end of the spectrum from
Ghana when it comes to democracy and good governance as
demonstrated by the fact President Mugabe has been in power
more than 32 years. Since 2009, a transitional coalition
government has worked toward reform and power-sharing, mediated
by SADC, which is proven to be one of the more effective
regional organizations in Africa. While Zimbabwe's political
environment remains volatile, the GPA has led to a period of
stability and recovery, relatively speaking, after many years
of violence and collapse.
I look forward to hearing about how the international
community can encourage the constitutional reform process and
progress that SADC has made with the Global Political
Agreement. I am hopeful all political parties will soon agree
on a draft constitution that can pave the way toward successful
future elections.
Since its historical elections in June 2010, Guinea has
begun to emerge from decades of authoritarianism toward a more
open and democratic system, but there are very significant
challenges which remain. Legislative elections have been
delayed due to disagreements about elections management and
distrust. Tensions that escalated during the 2010 elections
remain central today, but there also has to be accountability
for abuses carried out by the military and government. And
Guinea must implement economic reforms to reduce corruption,
including in its mining sector where increased transparency and
certainty could open the door to increased investment and
trade.
Finally, we turn to Liberia, which has experienced economic
growth, improved rule of law, and increase stability since the
civil war there ended in 2003. In my view, much of Liberia's
progress can be attributed to strong leadership, and I am
hopeful President Johnson Sirleaf will continue to build on
gains made combating corruption and strengthening governance in
her second term. I was honored to join the Secretary of State
at her second inaugural.
As the U.N. Peacekeeping Force continues its drawdown,
Liberia must continue to focus on building its security and
justice sectors, especially the police. Increased recent
violence on the border with Cote d'Ivoire underscores the
importance of security sector reform.
As I mentioned, in all four countries, we have before us
four strong nominees. Since 2008, Ambassador Gene Cretz has
served as the United States Ambassador to Libya. He is the
current nominee to serve in Ghana. He has previously overseen
the closing and reopening of the U.S. Embassy and significant
transition that followed the fall of Gadhafi. Previously,
Ambassador Cretz served as DAS in the Bureau of Near Eastern
Affairs, in addition to posts in Tel Aviv, Damascus, Beijing,
and New Delhi.
David Wharton is the nominee to be Ambassador to Zimbabwe.
He is currently serving as the Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Public Diplomacy in the Bureau of African Affairs following
posts in Guatemala, Tanzania, Nigeria, and Kenya.
Alexander Laskaris is the nominee to be Ambassador to
Guinea, who most recently served as counsel general at the U.S.
consulate in Erbil, Iraq. He has previously served as DCM at
Embassies in Kosovo and Burundi, as well as postings in Angola,
Botswana, and Liberia.
Finally, last but not least, Deborah Malac is the nominee
to serve as our next Ambassador to Liberia, currently serving
as Director of the Office of East African Affairs. I have a lot
I want to talk to you about. Previously Ms. Malac served as DCM
at the U.S. Embassy in Ethiopia, as well as important posts in
Senegal and Bangkok and South Africa and Laos and in Cameroon.
I am very pleased to welcome all four of today's
distinguished nominees and look forward to your opening
statements.
Senator Coons. I would, in the absence of Senator Isakson--
do we expect Senator Isakson? We're not sure.
Voice. The latest I heard was he was going to try to join
us later.
Senator Coons. OK. If at some point Senator Isakson's
evolving schedule allows him to drive by, please let me know
and we will interrupt wherever we are.
I would like to invite, in turn, each of the four nominees
to introduce your family, your supporters, your friends, anyone
you would like to recognize who might be watching us by
Webcast, which is increasingly common. And after that, in
order, we will then turn to your opening statements. If we
might just simply go in order from right to left.
Ambassador Cretz.
Ambassador Cretz. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to
introduce my wife, Annette, my daughter, Gabrielle, my son,
Captain Jeffrey Cretz of the Air Force National Guard Unit, you
will be pleased to know, out of Newcastle, DE.
Senator Coons. Wonderful. I look forward to talking with
you.
Ambassador Cretz. My daughter-in-law, Meghan, and my
daughter's fiance, Justin, as well as friends, the Ludwig
family, who recently came from Tunisia, and they will be
heading to Cambodia.
Thank you.
Senator Coons. Thank you, Ambassador.
Ms. Malac.
Ms. Malac. I would like to introduce my husband, Ron Olson,
my daughter, Katharine, my oldest son, Nicholas, and my younger
son, Gregory, who are here today.
Thank you.
Senator Coons. Thank you, Ms. Malac.
Mr. Wharton.
Mr. Wharton. Thank you, Senator. I am honored to introduce
my wife, Julia, and my son, Sam, who I believe has the proxy
vote for our other two children, Sarah and Turner, who could
not be here today, but they wanted to be. And to my parents if
they are watching on Webcast from North Carolina.
Thank you.
Senator Coons. Thank you, Mr. Wharton.
Mr. Laskaris.
Mr. Laskaris. Senator, I was in Iraq until Saturday of last
week, so this is kind of in a hurry, so my family is watching
on the Web throughout the United States and in the old country.
Senator Coons. Thank you so much for joining us today. I am
grateful for your willingness to serve. And just at the outset,
I would like to thank your families, both the parents or
extended families, that made possible your personal commitments
to public service in what, in many cases, have been difficult
or challenging posts, which are exactly the sorts of places
where American values are shown most clearly. And to your
families who are with you today or who are watching by Web. I
am just grateful for their support for your service. None of
you serve alone. You are all sustained by a network of family
and friends. And so I just join, I know, with my ranking
minority member, who always also makes this comment, to express
our gratitude for your careers of public service and for your
families who support you.
I would like to now invite each of you to make an opening
statement to the extent you would like to.
Ambassador Cretz.
STATEMENT OF HON. GENE ALLAN CRETZ, OF NEW YORK, TO BE
AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF GHANA
Ambassador Cretz. Mr. Chairman, thank you. I am honored to
appear before you today and grateful to President Obama and
Secretary Clinton for the confidence they have placed in me as
their nominee for Ambassador to the Republic of Ghana.
As I mentioned, I am joined today by my wife, Annette, my
son, Jeffrey Cretz, and my daughter, Gabrielle, whose love and
support have carried me throughout my 31 years in the Foreign
Service. Without them I would not be here today.
In addition, I would note that my son has honorably served
his country through three deployments to Afghanistan and the
Middle East.
My journey began as a Peace Corps Volunteer in Kabul,
Afghanistan, before joining the Foreign Service in 1981. I have
served in Islamabad, Damascus twice, New Delhi, Tel Aviv twice,
Beijing, Cairo, and most recently as United States Ambassador
to Libya. If confirmed as the next U.S. Ambassador to the
Republic of Ghana, I will draw upon these experiences to
advance U.S. interests in Africa.
I am very proud of the role the United States played to
help the courageous people of Libya gain their freedom from the
42-year dictatorial rule of Muammar Gadhafi. One only has to
visit Libya today to witness a people breathing freedom for the
first time to realize how important our efforts were.
Ghana is a good news country as President Obama stated in
his remarks during President Mills' March visit to the Oval
Office. A democracy since 1992 and an economic success story
with GDP growth rates reaching a historic high of over 13.5
percent in 2011, and sustaining a growth rate of at least 8
percent in 2012, Ghana's record of achievements speaks for
itself.
Having successfully completed its first $547 million
Millennium Challenge Corporation Compact in February, Ghana is
eligible to receive its second compact focused on improving
access to reliable power. We have seen the Ghanaian people
benefit from improved schools, health services, roads, and
basic infrastructure as a result of sound macroeconomic policy
and debt relief. If confirmed, I will maximize the talents and
skills of Embassy personnel, advance existing USAID programs,
and implement a second MCC Compact, if approved.
United States exports to Ghana have grown 186 percent over
the past 5 years, and two-way trade is expected to reach an
all-time high, surpassing the $2 billion mark in 2012 as Ghana
continues its impressive economic development. Companies such
as GE, IBM, Baker Hughes, Cargill, Archer-Daniels-Midland
Company, and others are investing in Ghana precisely because
Ghana is a model for economic development in West Africa. I
look forward to ensuring that the promotion of U.S. commercial
interests remains an integral part of our statecraft.
Home to a lively, free media, an apolitical military, and
blessed with cocoa, gold, mineral reserves, and natural
resources, Ghana is setting the standard for democracy and
economic development on the continent of Africa. If confirmed,
I will explore new and innovative approaches to expand
commercial ties between the United States and Ghana.
Ghana has held five free and fair national elections since
1992, and witnessed two peaceful transitions from one political
party to another in 2000 and 2008. National and legislative
elections are scheduled for this December. And if confirmed, I
expect to witness Ghana achieve its sixth consecutive peaceful
and transparent democratic election.
The people-to-people links made strong through more than 50
years of a continuous and vibrant Peace Corps presence,
Fulbright, Humphrey, Community College Initiative, and Kennedy-
Lugar Youth Exchange and Study student exchange programs, and
military cooperation through our International Military
Education and Training Program, the Africa Contingency
Operations Training and Assistance Program, the State
Partnership Program with the North Dakota National Guard, and
Africa Command's Africa Partnership Station are among the
initiatives I will continue to advance if confirmed.
Ghana and the United States share an interest in countering
terrorism and promoting regional stability. It is one of
Africa's premier peacekeeping partners. If confirmed, I will
support Ghana's capacity to promote regional and global
stability. This includes combating escalating drug trafficking
and human trafficking. Protecting the safety and welfare of
U.S. citizens will be a top priority.
Political power in Ghana remains highly centralized, and
Ghana faces challenges in managing its oil resources. With a
GDP per capita of $1,286 in 2010, Ghana is a lower middle-
income country. The Government is committed to a path of
reducing Ghana's aid dependency in the medium to long term.
U.S. developments are
focused on maintaining sustainable, broad-based economic growth
through initiatives such as Feed the Future and the Partnership
for Growth.
President Obama chose Ghana as the site for his historic
speech in 2009 about a new moment of promise for Africa. Ghana
is living up to that promise, and our continued cooperation
will enhance the partnership further.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and members of the committee for
the opportunity to address you today. If confirmed, I look
forward to working with you in representing the interests of
the American people in Ghana. And I am happy, of course, to
answer any questions you have.
[The prepared statement of Ambassador Cretz follows:]
Prepared Statement of Gene Allan Cretz
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am honored to appear
before you today, and grateful to President Obama and Secretary Clinton
for the confidence they have placed in me as their nominee for
Ambassador to the Republic of Ghana.
I am joined today by my wife, Annette, my son, U.S. Air Force
Captain Jeffrey Cretz, and my daughter, Gabrielle, whose love and
support have carried me throughout my 31 years in the Foreign Service.
Without them I would not be here today. In addition, I would note that
my son has honorably served his country through three deployments to
Afghanistan and the Middle East.
My journey began as a Peace Corps Volunteer in Kabul, Afghanistan,
before joining the Foreign Service in 1981. I have served in Islamabad,
Damascus (twice), New Delhi, Tel Aviv (twice), Beijing, Cairo, and most
recently as United States Ambassador to Libya. If confirmed as the next
U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of Ghana, I will draw upon these
experiences to advance U.S. interests in Africa. I am very proud of the
role the United States played to help the courageous people of Libya
gain their freedom from the 42-year dictatorial rule of Muammar
Qadhafi. One only has to visit Libya today to witness a people
breathing freedom for the first time to realize how important our
efforts were.
Ghana is a ``good news'' country as President Obama stated in his
remarks during President Mills' March visit to the Oval Office. A
democracy since 1992 and an economic success story with GDP growth
rates reaching a historic high of over 13.5 percent in 2011, and
sustaining a growth rate of at least 8 percent in 2012, Ghana's record
of achievements speaks for itself. Having successfully completed its
first $547 million Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) Compact in
February, Ghana is eligible to receive its second compact focused on
improving access to reliable power. We have seen the Ghanaian people
benefit from improved schools, health services, roads, and basic
infrastructure as a result of sound macroeconomic policy and debt
relief. If confirmed, I will maximize the talents and skills of Embassy
personnel, advance existing USAID programs, and implement a second MCC
Compact, if
approved.
United States exports to Ghana have grown 186 percent over the past
5 years, and two-way trade is expected to reach an all-time high,
surpassing the $2 billion mark in 2012 as Ghana continues its
impressive economic development. Companies such as GE, IBM, Baker
Hughes, Cargill, Archer-Daniels-Midland Company (ADM), and others are
investing in Ghana precisely because Ghana is a model for economic
development in West Africa. I look forward to ensuring that the
promotion of U.S. commercial interests remains an integral part of our
statecraft. Home to a lively, free media, an apolitical military, and
blessed with cocoa, gold, mineral reserves, and natural resources,
Ghana is setting the standards for democracy and economic development
on the continent of Africa. If confirmed, I will explore new and
innovative approaches to expand commercial ties between the United
States and Ghana.
Ghana has held five free and fair national elections since 1992,
and witnessed two peaceful transitions from one political party to
another in 2000 and 2008. National and legislative elections are
scheduled for this December, and if confirmed, I expect to witness
Ghana achieve its sixth consecutive peaceful and transparent democratic
election. The people-to-people links made strong through more than 50
years of a continuous and vibrant Peace Corps presence; Fulbright,
Humphrey, Community College Initiative (CCI) and Kennedy-Lugar Youth
Exchange and Study (YES) student exchange programs; and military
cooperation through our International Military Education and Training
Program, the Africa Contingency Operations Training and Assistance
Program, the State Partnership Program with the North Dakota National
Guard, and Africa Command's Africa Partnership Station are among the
initiatives I will continue to advance if confirmed.
Ghana and the United States share an interest in countering
terrorism and promoting regional stability. Ghana is one of Africa's
premier peacekeeping partners. If confirmed, I will support Ghana's
capacity to promote regional and global stability. This includes
combating escalating drug trafficking and human trafficking. Protecting
the safety and welfare of U.S. citizens will be a top priority.
Political power in Ghana remains highly centralized and Ghana faces
challenges in managing its oil resources. With a GDP per capita of
$1,286 in 2010, Ghana is a lower middle-income country. The Government
is committed to a path of reducing Ghana's aid dependency in the medium
to long term. U.S. development efforts are focused on maintaining
sustainable, broad-based economic growth through initiatives such as
Feed the Future and the Partnership for Growth. The G8 New Alliance for
Food Security and Nutrition, announced by President Obama under the
U.S. G8 Presidency, strongly supports private sector investment in
agricultural development and nutrition; and Ghana is one of the first
three countries where the New Alliance will be launched. If confirmed,
my priority will be to work with the Government of Ghana to enhance
Ghana's economic vitality and to promote U.S. commercial opportunities
in Ghana.
President Obama chose Ghana as the site for his historic speech in
2009 about ``a new moment of promise for Africa.'' Ghana is living up
to that promise, and our continued cooperation will enhance the
partnership further. As one of only four countries in the world
selected for the Partnership for Growth, I intend to work closely with
our Ghanaian partners to support Ghana's development efforts, not only
in the areas of power and credit as highlighted in the Joint Country
Action Plan, but also in areas such as food security and health.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, for the
opportunity to address you today. If confirmed, I look forward to
working with you in representing the interests of the American people
in Ghana. I am happy to answer any questions you have.
Senator Coons. Thank you very much, Ambassador Cretz.
And thank you for your service and for Jeffrey's service.
And I look forward to further questions.
Ms. Malac.
STATEMENT OF DEBORAH RUTH MALAC, OF VIRGINIA, TO BE AMBASSADOR
TO THE REPUBLIC OF LIBERIA
Ms. Malac. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, I am honored and
pleased to appear before you today as President Obama's nominee
to be the next United States Ambassador to the Republic of
Liberia. I would like to thank the President and Secretary
Clinton for the confidence and trust they have placed in me by
nominating me for this position.
As I mentioned earlier, I would like to recognize the
presence of my husband, Ron Olson, and my three children,
Nicholas and Gregory and Katharine. I am deeply grateful for
their unstinting love and support, and without it, I certainly
would not be sitting here today.
Mr. Chairman, I have been privileged to spend the last 31
years representing the United States as a member of the Foreign
Service. The majority of my career has been spent working in
Africa and on African issues, starting with an assignment to
Cameroon in 1981. That assignment was followed by assignments
to South Africa, Senegal, and Ethiopia, interspersed with time
in Washington to work on issues, such as South Africa's
transition to democracy, East African issues, agricultural
trade and development, and food security.
Mr. Chairman, the United States and Liberia share a strong
relationship rooted in our historical ties and preserved
through our mutual commitment to democracy, human rights, and
economic prosperity. We have always been a friend to the
Liberian people, and our commitment is demonstrated through our
robust foreign assistance. If confirmed, I will continue to
strengthen our bilateral relationship and leverage our
resources to help Liberia overcome its challenges to
development.
Mr. Chairman, it has been 9 years since the end of
Liberia's 14-year civil war, and Liberia has taken significant
steps to develop democratically and economically.
Last fall, Liberia held its second free, fair, and
transparent national election since 2003. The success of these
elections demonstrated Liberia's strong commitment to
democracy. President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf was reelected to her
second and final term, and she has laid out an ambitious agenda
to move Liberia forward. If confirmed, I will work to pursue
key shared priorities that include improving the investment
climate, increasing access to education, reducing the
unemployment rate, and encouraging reconciliation.
Liberia has made progress, but it still faces many
challenges. It remains one of the most impoverished countries
in the world, with most Liberians having limited access to
health care, education, or other government services. There is,
however, growing investor interest in Liberia, and over the
past several years, Liberia has negotiated nearly $16 billion
in foreign investment. If confirmed, I will leverage our
existing resources, most notably our robust USAID programming,
to help the Government of Liberia ensure that all Liberians
have access to basic rights and services.
I will also encourage the Government of Liberia to continue
to create an environment that is conducive to business and
investment because sustained economic growth is essential to
reducing poverty and stabilizing the country.
Preserving security in Liberia is a priority of both the
Liberian and U.S. Governments. The United States has been a
major player in security sector reform, and we will continue
this role even as a reconfiguration of United Nations Mission
in Liberia Forces takes place. If confirmed, I will work with
the Government of Liberia to encourage it to take the necessary
steps to continue to build the capacity of its security sector.
Addressing reconciliation is also important to the future
stability of Liberia. President Sirleaf is committed to
reconciliation, and has appointed fellow Nobel Peace Laureate
Leymah Gbowee to lead Liberia's new national reconciliation
initiative. As this process moves ahead, it will be important
that all Liberians participate actively and have their voices
heard.
As a partner, the United States can play a supportive role,
offering technical or logistical support to the Government of
Liberia's efforts. We understand, however, that this process
must be Liberian-led and Liberian-owned.
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to address you
today. If confirmed, I look forward to working with you to
represent the interests of the American people in Liberia. And
I am happy, of course, to answer any questions you may have.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Malac follows:]
Prepared Statement of Deborah Ruth Malac
Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Isakson, and distinguished members of
the committee, I am honored and pleased to appear before you today as
President Obama's nominee to be the next United States Ambassador to
the Republic of Liberia. I would like to thank the President and
Secretary Clinton for the confidence and trust they have placed in me
by nominating me for this position.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to take the opportunity to recognize my
husband, Ron Olson, and my three children, sons, Nicholas and Gregory,
and daughter, Katharine. I am deeply grateful for their strong and
unstinting support; without it, I would not be seated here today.
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I have been privileged
to spend the past 31 years as a member of the Foreign Service, working
abroad and here in Washington. The majority of my Foreign Service
career has been spent working in Africa and on African issues, although
I started my career expecting to focus on issues such as the former
Soviet Bloc and missile throw-weights. Instead, the Department of
State, in its infinite wisdom, sent me to Cameroon, and I was hooked.
That first assignment was followed by assignments to South Africa,
Senegal and Ethiopia interspersed with time in Washington to work on
South Africa's transition to democracy, East African issues,
agricultural trade and development and food security. For the past
year, I have served as the Director of the Office of East African
Affairs. If confirmed, I look forward to the opportunity to return to
West Africa.
Mr. Chairman, the United States and Liberia share a strong
relationship rooted in our historical ties and preserved through our
commitment to democracy, human rights, and economic prosperity. We have
always been a friend to the Liberian people and our commitment is
demonstrated through our robust foreign assistance. If confirmed, I
will continue to strengthen our bilateral relationship and leverage our
resources to help Liberia overcome its challenges to development.
Mr. Chairman, it has been 9 years since the end of Liberia's 14-
year civil war and Liberia has taken significant steps to develop
democratically and economically. Last fall, Liberia held its second
free, fair, and transparent national election since 2003. The success
of these elections demonstrated Liberia's strong commitment to
democracy. As a result, President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf was reelected
to her second and final term, and has laid out an ambitious agenda to
move Liberia forward. If confirmed, I will work to address the key U.S.
priorities, which also are priorities of the Government of Liberia, and
include improving the investment climate, increasing access to
education, reducing the unemployment rate, and encouraging
reconciliation.
Through a $15 million Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC)
Threshold program, Liberia is taking the right steps to advance
development and economic growth. Liberia's Threshold Program focuses on
improving land rights and access, increasing girls' primary education
enrollment and retention, and improving Liberia's trade policy and
practices. If confirmed, I will work closely with the Government of
Liberia to encourage progress on its MCC Scorecard indicators so that
Liberia can be eligible for a MCC Compact in the near future.
Though significant progress has been made, Liberia still faces many
challenges. Liberia remains one of the most impoverished countries in
the world, with most Liberians having limited access to health care,
education, or other government services. There is, however, growing
investor interest in Liberia and over the past several years Liberia
has negotiated nearly $16 billion in foreign investment. If confirmed,
I will leverage our existing resources, most notably our robust USAID
programming, to help the Government of Liberia ensure that all
Liberians have access to basic rights and services. I will also
encourage the Government of Liberia to continue to create an
environment conducive to business and investment, as sustained economic
growth is key to reducing poverty and stabilizing the country.
Preserving security in Liberia is a priority of both the Liberian
and U.S. Governments. The U.N. Secretary General has recommended
reducing the United Nations Mission in Liberia's (UNMIL) troop levels
from 7,900 to 3,750 over 3 years while increasing the U.N. police
levels by up to three Formed Police Units. The United States has been a
major player in security sector reform and will continue this role when
UNMIL's reconfiguration takes place. If confirmed, I will work with the
Government of Liberia to encourage it to take the necessary steps to
continue to build the capacity of its security sector. It will be
important that the United States, Liberia, and UNMIL and other donor
countries work closely together so that when a reconfiguration does
occur, the gradual handover of security responsibility from UNMIL to
Liberia will be handled properly.
Addressing reconciliation will also be important to the future
stability of Liberia. The conviction of former Liberian President
Charles Taylor for his role in the Sierra Leone civil war brings to the
forefront the need for Liberia to address the wounds left open from its
own civil war. President Sirleaf is committed to reconciliation and has
appointed fellow Nobel Peace Laureate Leymah Gbowee to lead Liberia's
new national reconciliation initiative. As this process moves ahead, it
will be important that all Liberians participate actively and have
their voices heard. As a partner, the United States can play a
supportive role, offering technical or logistical support to the
Government of Liberia's efforts. We understand, however, that this
process must be Liberian-led and Liberian-owned.
Last, my highest priority, if confirmed, will be the protection of
Americans and American business interests, including mission personnel,
living and traveling in Liberia.
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, thank you for the
opportunity to address you today. If confirmed, I look forward to
working with you in representing the interests of the American people
in Liberia. I am happy to answer any questions.
Senator Coons. Thank you, Ms. Malac.
Mr. Wharton.
STATEMENT OF DAVID BRUCE WHARTON, OF VIRGINIA, TO BE AMBASSADOR
TO THE REPUBLIC OF ZIMBABWE
Mr. Wharton. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. I am
honored to appear before you today, and grateful to President
Obama and Secretary Clinton for the confidence that they have
placed in me as their nominee for Ambassador to the Republic of
Zimbabwe.
And as I expressed before, I am also deeply honored by the
presence of my wife and my son here, and their representation
of others in my family. My family has represented the United
States well in our five overseas assignments, and have been a
tremendous support to me. So I thank them for that.
Having been raised myself in a family full of stories
about, and respect for, the people of Africa, which is a legacy
of my grandparents' 35 years as missionaries there, and having
raised our own children in Africa during previous Foreign
Service assignments, the possibility of returning to Zimbabwe
to lead the United States mission is a privilege that is full
of personal, as well as professional, meaning for my wife and
me.
With full recognition of the complex challenges Zimbabwe
faces, I am optimistic about that country's future, and I know
that the United States has an important role to play in helping
the people of Zimbabwe build a just, free, and prosperous
nation.
Though battered by more than a decade of political strife
and economic decline, Zimbabwe retains a foundational human and
physical infrastructure upon which it can build a strong
future. And it is in the interest of the United States to be a
partner in that process. If confirmed, I will continue the work
of building productive and respectful relationships with all
Zimbabweans of goodwill. And I will look forward to working
with the representatives of other friends of Zimbabwe,
especially countries in the SADC region in supporting progress
on the Global Political Agreement and on the SADC roadmap to
elections.
The United States has shown our abiding concern for
Zimbabwe through the nearly $1 billion in humanitarian relief
and health-related assistance we have provided just in the last
6 years. But we need to move the relationship beyond aid. The
people of Zimbabwe are fully capable of feeding themselves, of
meeting the nation's health and education needs, of building a
dynamic political system, and restoring their nation's economy.
Zimbabwe can and should be a nation of economic opportunities,
of respect for the rule of law, and the rights of all people.
Those are the values that reflect the core beliefs that
Americans share with the people of Zimbabwe, and those are the
values that we should pursue together.
United States policy in Zimbabwe is not about regime
change. Only the people of Zimbabwe have the right to choose
their government. Our policies support principles, not parties
or people. However, when the right to self-determination is
denied, the United States cannot stand idly by. We will always
stand up for the rights of Zimbabweans to speak, write, read,
meet, and fully participate in their nation's political
processes. That was United States policy in 1980 when we were
the first nation to recognize an independent Zimbabwe, and it
continues to be our policy. We will not always agree with the
Government of Zimbabwe, but we will always attempt to maintain
a respectful and open dialogue.
The United States stands ready to alter the current
restrictions on the relationship with Zimbabwe and to forge
stronger economic and political ties. Full implementation of
the Global Political Agreement, progress on the Southern
African Development Community's roadmap, and well-managed and
credible electoral processes should be triggers for the United
States to open a much more dynamic relationship with one of
Africa's most important countries.
If confirmed, I will give special attention to the welfare
of American citizens in Zimbabwe, and to meeting with people
from across the rich spectrum of Zimbabwe's society, making an
assessment of the situation there, and offering recommendations
on the best way forward.
As we continue to urge democratic development, we must also
continue to invest in the people of Zimbabwe in order to
preserve the human capital that is needed to rebuild Zimbabwe
in the years ahead. I have faith that with this support, the
people of Zimbabwe will find the best path forward and pursue
it successfully.
Thank you again for the chance to appear before you, and I
will be happy to answer any questions you may have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Wharton follows:]
Prepared Statement of David Bruce Wharton
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, thank you. I am honored
to appear before you today, and grateful to President Obama and
Secretary Clinton for the confidence they have placed in me as their
nominee for Ambassador to the Republic of Zimbabwe.
Having grown up in a home full of stories about and respect for the
people of Africa--a legacy of my grandparents' 35 years as missionaries
in what was then the Belgian Congo--and having raised our own wonderful
three children in Southern Africa during previous Foreign Service
assignments in South Africa and Zimbabwe, the possibility of returning
to lead a U.S. mission is a privilege that is full of personal as well
as professional meaning for my wife and me.
With full recognition of the complex challenges Zimbabwe faces, I
remain optimistic about the country's future and believe that the
United States has an important role to play in helping the people of
Zimbabwe build a just, free, and prosperous nation. The trajectory of
Zimbabwe's last 15 years should not obscure the nation's tremendous
potential. Though battered by more than a decade of political strife
and economic decline, Zimbabwe retains a foundational human and
physical infrastructure upon which it can build a strong future. It is
in the interest of the United States to be a partner in that process
and, if confirmed, I will continue the work of building productive and
respectful relationships with all Zimbabweans of goodwill.
The United States has shown its deep and abiding concern for
Zimbabwe through the nearly $1 billion in humanitarian relief and
health-related assistance we have provided just in the last 6 years.
There is no more explicit expression of our support for the people of
Zimbabwe than our standing by them through their times of greatest
need. But, we need to prepare to move beyond a relationship defined by
aid. The people of Zimbabwe are fully capable of feeding themselves,
meeting the nation's health and education needs, building a dynamic
political system, and restoring what was once one of the strongest
economies in Africa. Zimbabwe can and should be a nation of economic
opportunities, of respect for the rule of law and the rights of all
people. Those are values that reflect the core of what Americans share
with Zimbabweans and that we should pursue together.
U.S. policy in Zimbabwe is not about regime change. Only the people
of Zimbabwe have the right to change their government. Our policies
support principles, not parties or people. However, when the right to
self-determination is denied, as it has been in Zimbabwe through
restrictions on citizen rights, through political violence, and
fraudulent and mismanaged elections, the United States cannot stand
idly by. We have taken principled steps to demonstrate our concern
about the actions of those responsible for, and those who profit from,
miscarriages of the promise Zimbabwe offered at independence. We will
always stand up for the rights of Zimbabweans to speak, write, read,
meet, organize, and fully participate in their nation's political
processes.
If confirmed, I will work to enable Zimbabwe to become a just,
prosperous, and democratic state that meets the needs of its people,
contributes to development in the region, and plays an important role
in world affairs. That was U.S. policy in 1980 when we were the first
nation to recognize Zimbabwe's independence, and it continues to be our
policy. We will not always agree with the Government of Zimbabwe, but
we will always attempt to maintain a respectful and open dialogue.
The United States stands ready to alter the current restrictions on
our relationship with Zimbabwe and to forge stronger economic and
political ties.
The full implementation of the Global Political Agreement, progress
on the Southern African Development Community's roadmap toward
elections, and well-managed and credible elections will be a trigger
for the U.S. to open a much more dynamic relationship with one of
Africa's most important countries. The United States remains open and
willing to work with the government to support free and fairly
elections.
If confirmed, I will give special attention to the welfare of
American citizens in Zimbabwe and to meeting with people from across
the rich spectrum of Zimbabwe's society, making an assessment of the
situation there and offering recommendations on the best way forward.
As we continue to urge democratic development, we must also continue to
invest in the people of Zimbabwe--the health, education, humanitarian
aid, and business development work--to preserve the human capital
needed to rebuild Zimbabwe in the years ahead. I have faith that with
this support, once given the opportunity to communicate, organize, and
express their will, the people of Zimbabwe will find the best path
forward and pursue it successfully.
Thank you for the chance to appear before you and I would be happy
to answer any questions that you might have.
Senator Coons. Thank you, Mr. Wharton.
Mr. Laskaris.
STATEMENT OF ALEXANDER MARK LASKARIS, OF MARYLAND, TO BE
AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF GUINEA
Mr. Laskaris. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am deeply honored
to appear before you today, and very grateful to President
Obama and Secretary Clinton for the confidence they have placed
in me as their nominee for Ambassador to the Republic of
Guinea.
For my family and me, this is another milestone in our
American dream and our American journey, both of which began in
the chaos of post-World War II Greece. My presence here today
is made possible by the land of opportunity that embraced my
late father in 1946 and my mother in 1960.
I approach an assignment in the Republic of Guinea, if
confirmed, knowing that Guinea has sent a large number of
immigrants to the United States originally via the horrors of
the African slave trade, but later in the manner of my parents,
young people seeking better lives for themselves and their
future children. Indeed a walk down 125th Street in Harlem
today shows part of a prospering and vibrant Guinean-American
community with which I will be actively engaged, if confirmed.
Together with this diaspora, a large community of returned
Peace Corps Volunteers, former missionaries, and other
dedicated Americans, serve as committed advocates for Guinean-
American relations and for the welfare of the Republic of
Guinea.
My first exposure to the African Continent was during a 2-
year stint as a volunteer high school teacher in a township
parochial school in Galeshewe, South Africa. It was 1989 and
1990, and in those 2 years, I lived the miraculous democratic
transition led by men and women of good will. As hitchhiking
was my only means of travel, I missed Namibian independence by
a few days, but still managed to absorb the career lesson that
even the most momentous political changes can take place
peacefully and democratically.
My first exposure to the Republic of Guinea was quite the
opposite from the inspiration of South Africa. I arrived in
Monrovia, Liberia, my first Foreign Service posting in 1991, as
the countries of the Mano River Union were falling into chaos
and violence. The Guinea I first encountered was host to some 1
million Liberian refugees. Its armed forces served in the West
African peacekeeping force, then known as ECOMOG. And its
government sought to avoid the abyss from which Liberia and
Sierra Leone are only now emerging. This experience suggests to
me that if confirmed, I will be working in a country that both
supports us and needs our support.
The Republic of Guinea has recently been in the headlines
for the best reasons: real democratic progress after a
succession of dictators. But the story behind the headlines
reveals the longstanding social and economic challenges that
impoverish the country and stymie its development.
Have also served in Botswana, Angola, and Burundi, my
experience in a number of African conflicts tells me that past
performance is indeed an indicator of future performance when
it comes to countries emerging from dictatorship and civil
conflict. To break the cycle, to keep the Republic of Guinea
from lapsing back into authoritarianism, we need to be part of
the architecture of democracy, supporting all three branches of
government plus media and civil society. We need engagement
with the military to professionalize the force and bring it
firmly and irrevocably under elected civilian authority. We
need to be engaged in poverty relief and disease eradication,
as well as in responsible mineral exploitation and sustainable
agriculture.
The Republic of Guinea achieved a landmark election in
2010, its first free and fair democratic Presidential campaign.
President Alpha Conde, who spent decades advocating for
democratic change, emerged as Guinea's first ever
democratically elected head of state, ending 50 years of
despotic rule and military repression. However, Guinea's
transition to a fully functioning democracy will not be
complete until the long-anticipated legislative elections are
held. I do not need to remind this chamber on the importance of
the legislative branch to sustainable democracy. If confirmed,
I will have no higher priority than helping Guinea to seat a
new legislature and then helping that branch of government to
fulfill its critical role--its critical institutional role.
In the Republic of Guinea, we have a willing but
technically limited partner on regional and international
issues. If confirmed, I will work with the Government of Guinea
on a coordinated approach to regional crises in Mali and
Guinea-Bissau. I will do my best to strengthen cooperation on
counterterrorism and counternarcotics issues, as well as other
forms of transnational crimes, such as trafficking in persons
and money laundering. I will also make promoting the safety and
welfare of U.S. citizens my highest priority and seek out
commercial opportunities for U.S. companies.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to address you
today. If confirmed, I look forward to working with you in
representing the interests of the American people in Guinea.
And I am happy to answer any questions you might have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Laskaris follows:]
Prepared Statement of Alexander Mark Laskaris
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am deeply honored to
appear before you today, and grateful to President Obama and Secretary
Clinton for the confidence they have placed in me as their nominee for
Ambassador to the Republic of Guinea.
For my family and me, this is another milestone in our American
journey and our American dream, both of which began in the chaos of
post-World War II Greece. My presence here today is made possible by
the land of opportunity that embraced my late father in 1946 and my
mother in 1960.
I approach an assignment in the Republic of Guinea--if confirmed--
knowing that Guinea has sent a large number of immigrants to the United
States . . . originally via the horrors of the African slave trade, but
later in the manner of my parents, young people seeking better lives
for themselves and their future children. A walk down 125th Street in
Harlem shows part of a prospering and vibrant Guinean-American
community with which I will be engaged, if confirmed. Together with
this diaspora, a large community of returned Peace Corps Volunteers,
former missionaries, and other dedicated Americans serve as committed
advocates for Guinean-American relations and for the welfare of the
Republic of Guinea.
My first exposure to the African continent was a 2-year stint as a
volunteer high school teacher in a township parochial school in
Galeshewe, South Africa. It was 1989 and 1990, and in those two years,
I lived the miraculous democratic transition led by men and women of
goodwill; as hitchhiking was my only means of travel, I missed Namibian
independence by a few days, but still managed to absorb the career
lesson that even the most momentous political changes can take place
peacefully and democratically.
My first exposure to the Republic of Guinea was quite the opposite
from the inspiration of South Africa. I arrived in Monrovia, Liberia--
my first Foreign Service posting in 1991--as the countries of the Mano
River Union were falling into chaos and violence. The Guinea I first
encountered was host to some 1 million Liberian refugees; its armed
forces served in the West African peacekeeping force, known as the
Economic Community of West African State Monitoring Group or ECOMOG;
and its government sought to avoid the abyss from which Liberia and
Sierra Leone are only now emerging.
This experience suggests to me that--if confirmed--I will be
working in a country that both supports us and needs our support. The
Republic of Guinea has recently been in the headlines for the best
reasons--real democratic progress after a succession of dictators--but
the story behind the headlines reveals the longstanding social and
economic challenges that impoverish the country and stymie its
development.
My experience in a number of African conflicts tells me that past
performance is indeed an indicator of future performance when it comes
to countries emerging from dictatorship and civil conflict. To break
the cycle, to keep the Republic of Guinea from lapsing back into
authoritarianism, we need to be part of the architecture of democracy,
supporting all three branches of government plus free media and civil
society. We need engagement with the military to professionalize the
force and bring it firmly, irrevocably under elected civilian
authority. We need to be engaged in poverty relief and disease
eradication, as well as in responsible mineral exploitation and
sustainable agriculture.
The Republic of Guinea achieved a landmark election in 2010, its
first free and fair democratic Presidential campaign. President Alpha
Conde, who spent decades advocating for democratic change, emerged as
Guinea's first-ever democratically elected head of state, ending 50
years of despotic rule and military repression. However, Guinea's
transition to a fully functioning democracy will not be complete until
the long-anticipated legislative elections are held. I do not need to
remind this chamber on the importance of the legislative branch to
sustainable democracy; if confirmed, I will have no higher priority
than helping Guinea to seat a new legislature and then motivating that
branch of government to fulfill its critical institutional role.
In the Republic of Guinea, we have a willing but technically
limited partner on regional and international issues. If confirmed, I
will work with the Government of Guinea on a coordinated approach to
regional crises in Mali and Guinea-Bissau; I will do my best to
strengthen cooperation on counterterrorism and counternarcotics issues,
as well as other forms of transnational crimes, such as trafficking in
persons and money laundering. I will also make promoting the safety and
welfare of U.S. citizens my highest priority and seek out commercial
opportunities for U.S. companies.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, for the
opportunity to address you today. If confirmed, I look forward to
working with you in representing the interests of the American people
in Guinea. I am happy to answer any questions.
Senator Coons. Thank you, Mr. Laskaris. Thank you to all
four of you for those thoughtful, concise, well-rounded
summaries of the challenges facing you in the posts to which
you go, and for helping me gain some further insight into the
things that motivate you to this. Whether it is a family
history of missionary service, or personal experience as a
Peace Corps Volunteer, or personal experience teaching in a
township in South Africa, it is always helpful. You know, I get
these profiles and backgrounds. It is always helpful to see and
hear the personal experience. And the fact that, literally, you
have spent decades in the Foreign Service across the region and
across the world further leavens my respect for your
willingness to serve.
I am going to ask a series of questions that sort of
looking at the interplay between security, democracy, and
economic development. And I am interested in a variety of
issues. How can we most effectively partner with these nations?
How can we work with regional institutions? And what are the
things we are doing right, doing wrong. And I will just ask a
series of questions in order, if I might.
I have about 20 minutes, and unless another member of the
committee surprises by showing up at this point, I am simply
going to keep asking them. I do not think we need to limit me
by minutes or rounds or anything like that. We are not used to
having that much freedom here.
So if I might, Ambassador Cretz, first, I think you are the
one nominee who referenced on the security sector both IMET and
the state partnership. I am quite interested to hear from you
in the future how you think the State partnership between, I
think it is the North Dakota National Guard. Is it North or
South Dakota?
Ambassador Cretz. North.
Senator Coons. North Dakota and Ghana. If I am not
mistaken, there is a North Dakota National Guard State
Partnership with Ghana. And this is something I have discussed
with General Hamm as well as with some of the leaders of the
National Guard Bureau. Our own Delaware General Vavala is the
current chair of the adjutant's nationally.
I think there is a lot of potential for the State
Partnership Program, particularly in nations where you have
militaries where accepting civilian rule, as is the case in
Guinea, transitioning out of great conflict, as is the case in
Liberia, have a lot to offer.
If you have any comments for me about how our IMET work or
the State Partnership Program with the National Guards could be
more effective, or what promise you think it might hold, I
would appreciate that.
Ambassador Cretz. Mr. Chairman, I think that, first of all,
the relationship with AFRICOM is a very important one.
And having worked very closely with General Ward and now
over the past year and a half with General Hamm, I am fairly
aware of the different kinds of activities that AFRICOM can
bring to bear.
We do have a close relationship with the military in Ghana.
They are apolitical. They are very professional. They have been
a bulwark in terms of the peacekeeping efforts, whether through
the African Union ECOWAS or the U.N. throughout the region and
throughout the world, in fact.
I think there is a great deal of opportunity to expand
that. I think we have seen already that those countries that
take advantage of our IMET programs, we find those people
return to their countries very respectful certainly of the U.S.
military, and certainly wanting to get more of U.S. expertise.
So I think with respect to the relationship and the better
coordination that we could do with the States, I certainly am
willing to look at how we can develop that relationship
further. I think that the National Guard units, of which my son
is a member, especially in Delaware, bring to bear a lot of
expertise that these countries can use in coping with the
various crises, et cetera. And certainly given the issues that
Ghana faces, for example, in the explosion of drug trafficking
throughout the region, in terms of the problems in the Gulf of
Guinea with piracy, et cetera, that there will be ample scope
to expand that relationship between our military in the State,
AFRICOM, and the Guinean Army as well.
Senator Coons. Well, thank you. I will be interested to
stay in touch about regional security, training, what ECOWAS is
hoping to do and able to do. I think your experience in Libya
will be particularly relevant here. And I think AFRICOM has the
opportunity as a combatant command that does not have a lot of
legacy assets that is relatively new to be a leader in how we
imagine a new relationship for security with the whole region,
where we can deploy assets, such as the National Guard, that
have not really been utilized with the strength that I think is
possible here.
You mentioned in your statement new, innovative processes
for economic growth. And I am particularly in and concerned
about our economic relationship with Ghana. I think it is very
strong. I am hopeful that the second MCC compact will be quite
successful. If I remember correctly, you mentioned it is around
power and power generation.
I would be interested in what you see as the opportunities
and limitations for economic growth with Ghana. They have had
some challenges with extraction recently in terms of their oil
discoveries. So, if you would, just to what were you referring
in terms of innovative economic development procedures? And how
do we make sure that Ghana does not follow the path of Nigeria,
but instead is more like Norway? And what are the developmental
issues you see tackling?
Ambassador Cretz. Right. Well, I think, Mr. Chairman, that
we--first of all, I think there is a great opportunity for
American businesses to invest and trade in Ghana. And just as I
have throughout my career, and especially in the last several
years in terms of positions when I have had the ability to
interact with American companies, this will be a main priority
certainly of mine should I be confirmed and take over the
mission.
I think we have a lot of tools available to help Ghana
improve what--even the dramatic improvements that they have
made in trade and investment and in developing their economy
over the past several years. We have the Africa Growth and
Opportunity Act. We have the West Africa trade hub. We have the
MCC, as you said. And I think the idea with the MCC is that we
are going to be able to have a more mature relationship as we
discuss the possibility of having a second MCC pact with Ghana
because it will follow on the agrarian reforms that were
undertaken in the first pact. Only this time we are asking them
to pay a certain amount of the funding, and we are also asking
them for some policy reform as part of that compact. So I think
that that would be a very possible, very fruitful area for
cooperation.
The Partnership for Growth is also a very important aspect
of the economic tools that we can utilize to help Ghana in this
way because what it does is with no specific funding, it
basically lays out a framework whereby the United States
Government adopts a whole of government approach to helping
Ghana develop its economy, and says that, look, if you have
certain issues, you have certain problems within your economy
that need to be improved, such as access to credit, the power
infrastructure.
We as the United States are willing to take a look at the
various kind of policy changes, adaptions, or see what
flexibility we have in response to policy changes that you are
willing to take as well.
And I think at the end of the day, if you look at the
various economic tools that we have to work with Ghana, what
they do is they help open--improve the climate in Ghana so as
to make it easier and more attractive for American companies
and others to come in to help them with their infrastructure.
So I think there's tremendous opportunity. And, you know,
as you mentioned, the loss of the FCS officer is a blow, there
is no doubt. And I experienced the same thing in Libya where
Libya is on the verge of an explosion in terms of American
business, especially to help them rebuild after 42 years of the
devastation of Gadhafi's rule. And we lost that officer.
But there are ways, you know. I leave it to the Department
of Commerce colleagues to explain what the rationale behind it
is. But we did try to find other ways to do it. But at the end
of the day, given the importance of helping these countries
move forward, and given the importance of having American
business, and help these countries, and invest in them, that
the Embassy--other parts of the Embassy and the mission are
going to have to pick up the slack because we cannot do without
commercial advocacy and getting American trade, you know,
increased, especially in a country like Ghana, which is poised
for even more great success in that area.
Senator Coons. I agree. Thank you, Ambassador Cretz. And I
look forward to staying in contact as you support their work in
preparation for the December elections, and as you further
develop and implement the second MCC. There is also a long-
standing relationship between Delaware actually and GMSA--
Delaware State University's leadership and GMSA, which provides
critical career training for certain mid-level managers. And
Ghana is also of real interest to me.
If I might, Ms. Malac, given the limitations of time, I
will move to each of you, if I might.
I am very interested in the National Reconciliation
Initiative which you referenced. Given your prior experience,
you, I know, can give some insight into how it is similar to or
different from the reconciliation commissions that Kenya is
currently sort of winding up, one that really was largely a
regional model in South Africa and different others in other
countries. What do you see as the prospects for reconciliation
through this reconciliation initiative, and how will you
support it as Ambassador?
Ms. Malac. Thank you, Senator. We are still waiting for the
fuller details on what this newest initiative is going to look
like, and we expect that that will be forthcoming very soon. It
appears to be something that will look different than the
Truth-in-Reconciliation Commission, for example, that has been
held before. So at this point, it is very difficult for me to
give you any sort of real insight into any estimate of what
might happen or how it might play out.
I think, as I said in my comments, the role that the United
States can really play is to, as appropriate, and where we can
find ways to do so, to provide technical and/or logistical
support in order to ensure that those kinds of constraints do
not prevent the process from going forward. But it certainly is
critical that is a nationwide effort and that Liberians from
all parts of the country and all factions are able to
participate and feel that they can do so.
Senator Coons. And security sector reform, as you
referenced, as the U.N. presence is drawn down, given some
recent incidents in the border with Cote d'Ivoire, and given
the tragic national history, what more can we and should we be
doing, and to what extent will we be taking advantage of some
of the partnerships that Ambassador Cretz also referenced as
being relevant to Ghana?
Ms. Malac. Security is a huge concern for both us and for
the Liberian Government. I mean, given the history that the
country has, it is clear that we need to continue to be
vigilant in the security sector.
I do believe that the Government of Liberia has certainly
responded appropriately after the recent incident, has worked
with the Government of Cote d'Ivoire, both through UNMIL and
through UNOSE, to take steps to move more forces into the
region, to try to at least shut down some of that cross-border
activity.
But it is going to be an ongoing challenge. It is something
that we are going to have to watch as UNMIL starts this
drawdown, and certainly President Sirleaf has expressed her
concern about this phased withdrawal. There will be a
requirement for very close coordination both between the United
States, the Government of Liberia, UNMIL, and other donors who
are active in this sector to ensure that this all happens in a
very manageable and responsible fashion. It is going to be
still a long process to get to the point where we have enough
capacity within Liberia itself to provide for its own security.
But if confirmed, certainly this will be a very high
priority for me and will be something that I suspect will take
a great deal of my time and energy.
Thank you.
Senator Coons. Mr. Laskaris referenced the vibrant Guinean
diaspora community. There is certainly a strong Liberian
diaspora community that just by coincidence has a strong
footprint in the State of Delaware. The last time I saw
President Johnson Sirleaf, I was referencing that there was a
reunion of an Episcopal high school from Liberia that has folks
from all over the United States, as well as two very large
family reunions happening in Delaware of Liberians.
I think this is an important emerging strategy for economic
development, helping access American entrepreneurship,
financing, export opportunities. What advantage will you take
of the tools available to an ambassador? You mentioned $16
billion, if I am not mistaken, in foreign direct investment in
Liberia.
I was very concerned at my first meeting with President
Johnson Sirleaf about her comments about the Chinese and their
very sizable infrastructure investments, her desire for
partnership with the United States, but our very real lack of
available programs or resources outside of MCC or Partnership
for Growth.
What advice would you have for me about how we might
strengthen those opportunities, and what do you hope to do as
Ambassador?
Ms. Malac. Thank you, Senator. Well, you have raised
several very good issues here.
I think on the diaspora side, there is, in fact, a program
through--both through UNDP, and USAID itself provides some
funding to help try to match individuals and organizations
within the diaspora with Liberia to bring particular skills or
expertise to bear in different sectors. And so certainly this
is actually something I just learned about in the last couple
of days, and have great interest in, and will certainly make it
a priority to find out more about this program, having worked
with other countries where we have a vibrant diaspora--Somalia
comes to mind.
We believe very firmly that they can play a role in a
country like Liberia in a post-conflict situation where there
is so much need and so much to be done. So I can assure you
that at least in that regard, we are looking--I would be
looking, if confirmed, to build some of those bridges and work
to support efforts that the Government of Liberia itself has
put into place to try to tap into that diaspora expertise
because there is a lot of potential there.
As for the Chinese, they are a relatively small presence,
as it were, in Liberia compared to some places on the
continent. But, of course, they are looking, as they always
are, to enlarge that footprint. They are currently working on
World Bank grants to build road infrastructure in Liberia. I
mean, again, there is a lot to be done in terms of
infrastructure building, so there is lots of room for everyone.
You can have my pledge that if confirmed, I will do
everything I can to identify opportunities for U.S. business,
not just in the infrastructure arena obviously, but in all
aspects of the economy
because there is potential there, I think, for U.S. businesses.
And we are only at the beginning end of that.
But we are seeing progress in that regard. U.S. presence on
the economic side has been steadily increasing, and I can
assure you if confirmed, that it will be a high priority for
me.
Thank you.
Senator Coons. Thank you. Mr. Wharton, Zimbabwe is
certainly a nation with great economic potential that has gone
through one of the worst economic collapses we have seen in
recent history. I have in my office--what is it?
I think it is a $100 trillion bank note. My kids thought it
was fake. Sadly, it is not. My sense is they have sort of
clawed
their way back out by largely adopting the U.S. dollar's
working currency.
I would be interested in hearing what you view--I
appreciated your statement that our policy is not regime
change, but rather the opportunity for self-determination.
There have been calls from other of our allies at SADC and U.N.
and others for us to either review or relax our sanctions. On
what conditions and at what timeline do you think we would
consider that, and then how will you support appropriate
political progress, hopefully forward progress in Zimbabwe?
Mr. Wharton. Thank you, Senator. I think that, in fact,
those are key issues in the relationship between the United
States and Zimbabwe, and in Zimbabwe's way forward.
One of the problems with sanctions that I am sure you are
aware of is that they have turned into talking points for the
ruling party in Zimbabwe.
I do not think, though, that the evidence supports the
thesis that American sanctions have hurt Zimbabwe's economy. I
note that the Zimbabwe Democracy Economic Recovery Act has been
in force for 11 years now, but in the last 3 years, Zimbabwe's
economy has grown by 7, 8, 9 percent per year. Per capita GDP
has grown about 5 percent a year. And the agricultural and
mining sectors have grown by nearly 50 percent.
So I think that the key to continued economic development
in Zimbabwe actually has more to do with economic policies in
Zimbabwe, and establishing a sort of transparent framework and
rule of law that will encourage investors, businesses, and
Americans, I hope among them, to take another look at Zimbabwe.
I believe that the individual sanctions that we have placed
on about 120 individuals and about 70 entities have had an
effect. And, again, I would cite recent economic growth as an
indication that these specific sanctions and travel
restrictions have not hurt the larger Zimbabwean economy.
I believe, though, that we do need to make it clear that
our policies are flexible. They are not static. And we should
be able to adjust them in response to democratic progress and
progress on the rule of law on the ground in Zimbabwe.
Some of the benchmarks that I think would be important I
mentioned in my statement: continued progress on the Global
Political Agreement, clear progress toward the SADC roadmap on
elections. And one of the things that I think would be
especially important would be an express commitment from the
Government of Zimbabwe to welcome international as well as
national election monitoring groups, groups that could come in
6 months or even a year before the election to take a look at
and certify, essentially build international confidence that
the people of Zimbabwe have, in fact, had the right to choose
their own government.
So those are some of the benchmarks that I think would be
critical as we look at adjusting our own policy.
Senator Coons. Thank you. Forgive me because I am greatly
interested in the transition in Zimbabwe. I have to go preside
over the body, the Senate, in 7 minutes. And so I am going to
turn to Mr. Laskaris for a final question, if I might.
I was just interested to read about the Guinean mining code
of 2011 and some of the other changes that they are making in
the direction of post-security sector reform and economic
reform. What do you think are the most important steps Guinea
can take to stabilize and secure its transition toward both
rule of law and predictability and civilian supervision of the
military? And what do you think are going to be the most
important steps you will take as Ambassador in these areas?
Mr. Laskaris. Well, thank you, Senator. I think one thing
we have learned in the Africa Bureau over the last two decades
is that elections are necessary, but not sufficient, for
democratic development. We held a successful election, but we
realized that what I call the architecture of democracy needs
to follow along with that.
And so let us start on the security side. One of the few
forms of military assistance that we did not suspend as a
result of the coup in Guinea is a security sector reform
advisor who is embedded in the Guinean ministry of defense. And
that person works with regional, with donors, and local
counterparts trying to devise the policy moving forward on
reforming the security services. And that is specifically
professionalizing it, bringing it firmly and irrevocably under
the control of elected civilian authorities, improving its
human rights record, improving its civil military relations.
I think we need to give the Government of Guinea a very
clear roadmap on the conditions under which IMET would be
resumed. And if we do that, I will report faithfully back to
the Department and let the Washington policy community make a
determination as if those conditions had been met. If those
conditions are met, I would recommend moving to an IMET
program, what we used to call expanded IMET, which is the focus
on civil military relations, professionalization of the force.
As I mentioned in my statement, Senator, Guinea has been a
reliable and consistent troop contributor to regional
peacekeeping, both under the ECOWAS umbrella and under the
United Nations umbrella. I think it is an area of real mutual
interest that we get the Guinean Armed Forces into the
peacekeeping function through ACODA and through subregional and
international means.
So, again, given a roadmap to the Government of the
Republic of Guinea, if they meet the conditions for resumption
of that kind of aid, I think we need to be looking at Guinea as
a troop contributor and folding it into broader Africana
activities on the continent.
On the rule of law side, sir, No. 1, I think there is a
national reconciliation commission in Guinea. From what I can
tell, it really has yet to be fleshed out. It has really yet to
function. I think one of our key priorities as donors, as the
United States Government, is to end the culture of impunity in
Guinea, and you do that through a transitional justice
mechanism. It can be the Truth-in-Reconciliation Commission
model of South Africa or the Rwandan Cachaca model of tribal
justice.
Guinea is an overwhelmingly Islamic country. It can come
through the institutions of Islam. It can come through the
indigenous tribal institutions of the country. What the United
States thinks of that is less important than what the Guineans
think of the legitimacy of that process. So if confirmed, I
will get out there and try to work within the context of
Guinean culture to find something that the Guinean people
regard as a legitimate means of addressing the crimes of the
past.
On the question of the mining law, specifically, and
drawing on your question to my colleague about China, I think
the United States mining industry should welcome free and fair
competition on a level playing field. So I think it is my
obligation as chief of mission, if confirmed, to make sure the
regulatory system is free, it is transparent, and it meets the
world-class standard, is capable of attracting world-class
companies, including those from the United States.
Senator Coons. Thank you, Mr. Laskaris.
Mr. Wharton, Ms. Malac, Ambassador Cretz, I am deeply
interested in the issues we have raised today and wish I could
dedicate more time to it. One of the things I have not done as
a Senator is be late to preside, so I hope to maintain that
now.
Jeffrey, thank you for your service. I am a past honorary
commander of the 166th, and I hope that if there is anything my
office or I could do to support you, you will let me know.
To everyone from the families of these four very talented
nominees, thank you for being with us here today. And I look
forward to hearing from you as you serve as our Ambassadors in
very important regions. I know Senator Isakson and I really
enjoy serving together and intend to travel regularly to Africa
in the years ahead. It is my hope to continue on this
subcommittee for some time, and so developing relationships and
knowing how we can support and sustain you in your very
important work is of real value to me. And I believe I also
speak for Senator Isakson in that regard. We are both very
grateful for your willingness to serve.
We will keep the record open for a week for any member of
the committee who may wish to submit questions for the record.
Senator Coons. We are otherwise for today adjourned.
Congratulations.
[Whereupon, at 4 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
NOMINATIONS OF MARCIE RIES, JOHN KOENIG, MICHAEL KIRBY, THOMAS
ARMBRUSTER, AND GRETA CHRISTINE HOLTZ
----------
WEDNESDAY, JULY 18, 2012
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Foreign Relations,
Washington, DC.
----------
Hon. Marcie B. Ries, of the District of Columbia, to be
Ambassador to the Republic of Bulgaria
John M. Koenig, of Washington, to be Ambassador to the Republic
of Cyprus
Hon. Michael David Kirby, of Virginia, to be Ambassador to the
Republic of Serbia
Thomas Hart Armbruster, of New York, to be Ambassador to the
Republic of the Marshall Islands
Greta Christine Holtz, of Maryland, to be Ambassador to the
Sultanate of Oman
----------
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:35 p.m., in
room SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Jeanne
Shaheen, presiding.
Present: Senators Shaheen, Menendez, and Barrasso.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JEANNE SHAHEEN,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW HAMPSHIRE
Senator Shaheen. Good afternoon, everyone. Welcome. I am
pleased to open these nomination hearings this afternoon and
pleased to be joined by Ranking Member Senator Barrasso from
Wyoming.
Today the Senate Foreign Relations Committee considers the
nominations of Marcie Ries to be the U.S. Ambassador to
Bulgaria; John Koenig to be the Ambassador to Cyprus; Michael
Kirby to be the Ambassador to Serbia; Thomas Armbruster to be
Ambassador to the Marshall Islands; and Greta Holtz to be
Ambassador to Oman.
We have a wide variety of posts under consideration today
and an impressive panel of Career Foreign Service nominees.
Each of you will be critical in helping to meet U.S.
responsibilities and protecting American interests throughout
Europe, the gulf, and the Pacific.
First on the agenda today, the committee is going to
examine our relationship with Bulgaria, and as some of you may
have already heard, this afternoon there was an explosion in
Bulgaria on a bus carrying tourists from Israel. It killed at
least seven civilians and wounded many more. Early reports
suggest that this was a suicide bomb attack likely aimed at
innocent Israeli civilians. If true, it represents the kind of
cowardly attack that has been condemned by civilized society
across the world. We must all stand together to strongly
condemn those individuals responsible for the attack and to
hold accountable any associated terrorist organizations or
nations who played a role in this heinous and senseless
violence against innocent civilians.
There have been a number of attempted attacks against
Israeli diplomats in recent months around the world, and if
this explosion proves to be a similar attack, it will be part
of a troubling pattern that should not be accepted by the
international community. I am confident that the United States
will do everything in its power to work with Bulgarian and
Israeli officials to fully investigate the attack and reveal
those responsible. And when we get to the question and answer
portion of this afternoon's hearing, I will ask the nominee to
be Ambassador to Bulgaria if she would comment.
As a relatively new member of the NATO alliance, Bulgaria
has contributed significantly to the military and training
effort in Afghanistan and it continues to provide the United
States with several of its military bases for joint training
exercises in Southeast Europe. As one of the poorest countries
in the European Union, Bulgaria faces serious issues with
respect to organized crime, corruption, and trafficking which
need to be more robustly addressed.
This afternoon we will also consider U.S. policies with
respect to the Republic of Cyprus, a critical ally of the
United States and an EU Member State that took over the
rotating Presidency of the European Union this month. As I and
26 other U.S. Senators attested to in a letter to President
Obama last fall, the U.S.-Cyprus friendship remains an anchor
of American foreign policy in the strategically important
Mediterranean region, and our relationship is based on shared
traditions of freedom, democracy, and a market-based economy.
In fact, one of the strongest components of our bilateral
relationship is the active and vibrant Hellenic-American
community in the United States, and if you will forgive me for
being parochial, particularly in my home State of New Hampshire
where we have the highest percentage of Hellenic Americans in
the country.
The ongoing division of Cyprus has lasted for far too long,
and a fair and lasting reunification agreement which benefits
all Cypriots is in everyone's strategic interest. I hope the
United States will continue to encourage all parties, including
Turkey, to work toward a fair resolution.
We will also discuss U.S. relations with Serbia, a
critically important country in the challenging region of the
Western Balkans. Serbia's most recent elections have brought
new leadership to the country with Tomislav Nikolic and his
Serbian Progressive Party winning the Presidency and leading
the new parliamentary coalition there. The new leadership has
committed to continue the previous administration's path toward
EU integration. I hope that Belgrade will make progress in the
ongoing dialogue with Kosovo and will be a constructive partner
with the international community in Bosnia. I share the
concerns of our State Department over recent comments by
Serbia's new leadership denying the Srebrenica genocide, and I
would urge the Nikolic administration to do more to promote
reconciliation rather than divisiveness at this important time
for the Western Balkans.
Today we will also consider America's relationship with the
Marshall Islands, a country in the northern Pacific that has
long had a unique free association agreement with the United
States since it gained its independence in 1986--the Marshall
Islands, obviously, not the United States. The Marshall Islands
also provide a critical missile defense base for the United
States in the Pacific.
And finally today we will examine U.S. policies with
respect to Oman, a strategically located sultanate in the
Persian Gulf. The United States has long had a constructive
security partnership with Oman, and despite some important
political reforms over the course of the last several decades,
protests in the early part of last year highlight the
importance of the United States doing more to encourage the
sultanate to continue to open up its political process and give
the people of Oman a voice in its government.
Now, before introducing our panel, I will turn over the
chair to the ranking member, Senator Barrasso, for his
statement.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN BARRASSO,
U.S. SENATOR FROM WYOMING
Senator Barrasso. Well, thank you very much, Madam
Chairman. And I would like to associate myself with your
remarks about the act of violence in Bulgaria and the senseless
loss of life of Israeli citizens. So I appreciate your comments
and we know it is a heartfelt and great concern.
Today the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations meets to
consider five positions from different areas around the globe.
Each of your nominations is important to fostering vital
relationships and promoting U.S. national interests. There are
real challenges ahead, and it is important that the United
States continues to be a strong leader across the globe. Should
you represent our Nation as a U.S. Ambassador, it is important
that each of you, No. 1, provide strong stewardship of American
taxpayer dollars; No. 2, demonstrate professionalism and good
judgment; and No. 3, vigorously advocate for the priorities of
the United States.
I look forward to hearing your goals for each of these
countries and your plan for achieving them, and I join Madam
Chairman in congratulating each and every one of you on your
nominations. And I want to extend also a warm welcome to all of
your family and friends who are here joining you today.
Thank you, Madam Chairman.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Barrasso.
Today we have five distinguished nominees with wide-ranging
experience and expertise. All five members of our panel are
career members of the Foreign Service who have served
extensively in leadership posts around the world and here in
Washington. Together the panel represents over 14 decades of
experience working in the Foreign Service. And I must say none
of you look old enough to--even combined--represent 14 decades.
That is a very long time.
But first, going from right to left--at least my right to
your left--up first we have Ambassador Marcie Ries, nominated
to be the United States Ambassador to Bulgaria. Ambassador Ries
is currently the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of State
for Arms Control, Verification, and Compliance and has
previously served as the United States Ambassador to Albania.
Next, we have John Koenig who is nominated to be our
Ambassador to the Republic of Cyprus. Mr. Koenig most recently
served as the political advisor to the Allied Joint Force
Command in Naples and as the Deputy Chief of Mission in Berlin.
We also have Ambassador Michael Kirby, the nominee to be
the United States Ambassador to Serbia. He is currently the
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Consular
Affairs and previously served as the United States Ambassador
to Moldova.
Mr. Thomas Armbruster has been nominated to be the United
States Ambassador to the Marshall Islands. He is currently a
diplomat in residence at City College in New York and was
previously the consul general at the United States consulate in
Vladivostok, Russia.
And finally today we have Greta Holtz, the nominee to be
our Ambassador to Oman. Ms. Holtz is the Deputy Assistant
Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy in the Bureau of Near
Eastern Affairs, and prior to that, she was the director of
provincial affairs at the United States Embassy in Baghdad.
Congratulations to each of you on your nominations. We
thank you for taking on these important jobs and look forward
to hearing from you this afternoon.
And I would just ask when you are testifying, if you would
feel free to introduce any family or friends who are here with
you. We understand that we ask a lot of your families when you
are serving in our diplomatic core, and we want to have the
opportunity to thank them as well for their service jointly
with you. So I thank all of you.
I am actually going to begin this afternoon with Ms. Holtz
because we are still expecting some people in the audience, and
so we are going to left to right. So if you would begin with
your testimony.
STATEMENT OF GRETA CHRISTINE HOLTZ, OF MARYLAND, TO BE
AMBASSADOR TO THE SULTANATE OF OMAN
Ms. Holtz. Thank you very much, Madam Chairman and
distinguished members of the committee. I thank you for the
opportunity to appear before you today.
I am very honored to be President Obama's nominee to serve
as Ambassador to the Sultanate of Oman. I deeply appreciate the
confidence that the President and Secretary Clinton have shown
in me.
If confirmed by the Senate, I will employ the full range of
our diplomatic tools to help achieve our goal of a stable,
secure, and democratic Middle East. I will work with our Omani
partners on counterterrorism, counterproliferation, and
encourage their efforts to promote transparency,
accountability, and reform. With our private sector partners, I
will encourage expansion of the commercial ties between the
United States and Oman, together with efforts to diversify the
Omani economy through the development of entrepreneurship and
the additional empowerment of women and youth. Finally, I will
work with the Government of Oman to promote the growth of
independent civil society and deepen the people-to-people
engagement that we have between our two countries.
Thank you very much, Madam Chairman, for allowing me
recognize my family. I have here today with me my husband,
Paco; our two daughters, Victoria and Alexandra; and a dear
friend Annie. Our son, Anthony, is in music camp in Michigan
and cannot be with us today.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you. Can we just ask you all if you
would raise your hands? Great. Thank you.
Ms. Holtz. Thank you very much.
I want to thank them for their endless support through
accompanied and unaccompanied tours in Saudi Arabia, Yemen,
Tunisia, Syria, Turkey, and Iraq. They have loved our tours
together in the region and have been stoic during long
separations.
The United States and Oman have shared a strong and dynamic
relationship since the earliest days of our Nation's history.
This bond dates back to 1790 when the Boston brig Rambler
entered the port of Muscat. In 1833, the United States and Oman
concluded a treaty of friendship and navigation.
The United States and Oman enjoy an excellent security
relationship and work together to pursue shared regional
strategic objectives, enhanced border security, and freedom and
safety of navigation in vital shipping lanes. Operation
Enduring Freedom, Operation Iraqi Freedom, and other
contingency operations have benefited from Omani support and
cooperation. The Omani military is well trained, pursues a
focused strategy, and is regarded as one of the most
professional armed forces in the region. If confirmed, I will
work hard to broaden and deepen the decades-long security
relationship between the United States and Oman.
From the United Nations to the Gulf Cooperation Council and
the Arab League, Oman has played an active and helpful role in
multilateral diplomacy. In neighboring Yemen, Oman invests
significant resources in a strategy of stabilization through
political engagement, development aid, and humanitarian
assistance. Oman is a strong partner of the United States in
countering terrorism and extremism in the Arabian Peninsula.
Since Sultan Qaboos bin Said came to power in 1970, Oman
has made dramatic gains in its development, emerging as a
modern state with first-class infrastructure and modern
educational institutions. In the 2010 U.N. Human Development
Report, Oman ranked No. 1 out of the 135 countries studied for
progress in the previous 40 years in human development which
focuses on education, access to quality health care, and other
basic living standards.
The sultan has demonstrated his ongoing interest in
partnering with the institutions of higher education around the
world, including our own. In 2011, Oman established a new
scholarship program through which more than 500 young Omanis
have enrolled in higher education in the United States. Last
October, the sultan funded an endowed professorship of Middle
East studies at the College of William and Mary.
Madam chairman, with your permission, I will end my oral
testimony here and submit the rest as my written statement.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Holtz follows:]
Prepared Statement of Greta Christine Holtz
Madam Chairman and distinguished members of the committee, I thank
you for the opportunity to appear before you today.
I am honored to be President Obama's nominee to serve as Ambassador
to the Sultanate of Oman. I deeply appreciate the confidence that the
President and Secretary Clinton have shown in me. If confirmed by the
Senate, I will employ the full range of our diplomatic tools to help
achieve our goal of a stable, secure, and democratic Middle East. I
will work with our Omani partners on counterterrorism and
counterproliferation, and will encourage their efforts to promote
transparency and accountability. With our private sector partners, I
will encourage expansion of the commercial ties between the United
States and Oman together with efforts to diversify the Omani economy
through the development of entrepreneurship, and the empowerment of
women and youth. Finally, I will work with the Government of Oman to
promote the growth of independent civil society, and deepen people-to-
people engagement between our two countries.
I would like to pause for a moment, Madam Chairman, to recognize my
husband, Paco Cosio-Marron, our children, Victoria, Alexandra, and
Anthony, and my sister, Carla Holtz, who are with me here today. I
thank them for their endless support through accompanied and
unaccompanied tours in Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Tunisia, Syria, Turkey, and
Iraq. They have loved our tours together in the region, and have been
stoic during long separations.
The United States and Oman have shared a strong and dynamic
relationship since the earliest days of our Nation's history. This bond
dates back to 1790, when the Boston brig Rambler entered the port of
Muscat. In 1833, the United States and Oman concluded a treaty of
friendship and navigation.
The United States and Oman enjoy an excellent security
relationship, and work together to pursue shared regional strategic
objectives, enhanced border security, and freedom and safety of
navigation in vital shipping lanes. Operation Enduring Freedom,
Operation Iraqi Freedom, and other contingency operations have
benefited from Omani support and cooperation. The Omani military is
well-trained, pursues a focused strategy, and is regarded as one of the
most professional armed forces in the region. If confirmed, I will work
hard to broaden and deepen the decades-long security relationship
between the United States and Oman.
From the United Nations to the Gulf Cooperation Council, and in the
Arab League, Oman has played an active and helpful role in multilateral
diplomacy. In neighboring Yemen, Oman invests significant resources in
a strategy of stabilization through political engagement, development
aid, and humanitarian assistance. Oman is a strong partner in
countering terrorism and extremism in the Arabian Peninsula.
Since Sultan Qaboos bin Said came to power in 1970, Oman has made
dramatic gains in its development, emerging as a modern state with
first class infrastructure and modern educational institutions. In the
2010 U.N. Human Development Report, Oman ranked No. 1 out of the 135
countries studied for progress in the previous 40 years in ``human
development,'' which focuses on education, access to quality health
care, and other basic living standards.
The Sultan has demonstrated his ongoing interest in partnering with
institutions of higher education around the world, including our own.
In 2011 Oman established a new scholarship program through which more
than 500 young Omanis have enrolled in higher education in the United
States Last October, the Sultan funded an endowed professorship of
Middle East Studies at the College of William and Mary.
Oman has made important strides in promoting women's rights and
participation in public life. Omani women serve in elected and
appointed political offices, including two Cabinet posts. In 2005 Oman
was the first Arab country to appoint a woman as Ambassador to the
United States, the Honorable Hunaina Al Mughairy, who remains a pillar
of Washington's diplomatic community. Omani women comprise over 40
percent of university students, though female illiteracy remains a
significant problem. The Government of Oman is making an effort to
strengthen legislation that will enhance the resources available for
women and children in health and education. The State Department's
Middle East Partnership Initiative (MEPI) has, for many years,
supported training and other programming for Omani women, and if
confirmed, I look forward to enhancing those efforts.
The Sultan took quick action to respond to demands by the Omani
public for greater civic participation early last year. There were
elections for the country's Consultative Council, a Cabinet shuffle
that incorporated several members of the elected Council into
leadership positions in government, and programs to address
unemployment. If confirmed, I will encourage Oman, our friend and
partner, to continue to respond to the hopes and aspirations of its
people.
Economic and commercial ties between our two countries are growing
rapidly across a variety of sectors. U.S. exports to Oman were over
$1.4 billion last year, and bilateral trade volume is up over 50
percent since January 2009, when the U.S.-Oman Free Trade Agreement
came into effect. If I am confirmed, I will place a high priority on
ensuring that U.S. companies have the support needed to pursue new
commercial opportunities in Oman.
The important cultural connection between our two countries was
demonstrated recently by the 2011-2012 inaugural season of the Royal
Opera House in Muscat. Over the past year, world-renowned American
artists such as Wynton Marsalis,
Yo-Yo Ma and Renee Fleming shared the great American performing arts
tradition with sold-out audiences in Muscat. The Kennedy Center will
continue its partnership with the Opera House in the coming season, in
which American artists will headline nine performances. If confirmed, I
look forward to encouraging a blossoming cultural relationship.
I would also like to assure you that, if confirmed, my highest
priority will be protecting the safety and security of the dedicated
men and women at our mission, as well as all Americans living in,
working in, and visiting Oman.
Finally, if confirmed, I also look forward to welcoming the
committee's members and staff to Muscat. Madame Chairman, thank you for
this opportunity to address the committee. I look forward to your
questions.
Senator Shaheen. That would be great. Thank you.
Mr. Armbruster.
STATEMENT OF THOMAS HART ARMBRUSTER, OF NEW YORK, TO BE
AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF THE MARSHALL ISLANDS
Mr. Armbruster. Thank you very much, Madam Chairman and
members of the committee. It is a pleasure to appear before you
today as President Obama's nominee for the Republic of the
Marshall Islands as United States Ambassador. I am thankful for
their confidence and would welcome the chance to work with you,
this committee, and other Members of Congress, and would be
honored to advance American interests in the Pacific.
I would like to introduce my wife, Kathy, and son, Bryan,
who are here with me and Kathy's mom, Kitty Chandler, and also
my brother, Chris, and his daughter, Natalie. They have joined
me on this career path from Hawaii to Finland, to Cuba, Russia,
Mexico, Tajikistan. We have all got a lot of mileage.
The Marshall Islands is a key partner in the United States
deepening commitment in the Pacific. Secretary Clinton said:
``One of the most important tasks of American statecraft over
the next decade will be to lock in a substantially increased
investment--diplomatic, economic, strategic, and otherwise--in
the Asia-Pacific region.'' And in just a few weeks, Assistant
Secretary Campbell and Admiral Haney will travel to the
Marshall Islands underscoring our commitment to the region.
The United States and the Marshall Islands have a close and
special relationship. The Marshall Islands, as you said, Madam
Chairman, became part of the U.N. Trust Territory of the
Pacific Islands under the administration of the United States
after World War II, and in 1986, the Compact of Free
Association came into force and the RMI, Republic of the
Marshall Islands, became an independent state. Accordingly,
citizens of the RMI can live, study, and work in the United
States without a visa. The compact obliges our two countries to
consult on foreign policy, and I am happy to say that the RMI
has an excellent voting affinity with the United States in the
United Nations, sharing our positions on many contentious
issues, including human rights and Israel.
Under the compact, the United States is committed to
defending the Marshall Islands. The RMI has no military of its
own, and Marshallese citizens serve in the U.S. Armed Forces,
volunteering at a higher rate than citizens from any individual
State. And Jefferson Bobo was the first Marshallese cadet to
graduate from the U.S. Coast Guard Academy in May 2011.
As mentioned, Senator, the Marshall Islands hosts the U.S.
Army's Ronald Reagan Ballistic Missile Defense Test Site on
Kwajalein Atoll, known as USAKA. The base is the country's
second-largest employer. And I met with General Formica and his
talented and dedicated team at the Space and Missile Defense
Command in Huntsville. I know what an important job they have.
The test site plays a significant role in the U.S. missile
defense research, development, and testing network. It is used
to monitor foreign launches, provides deep-space tracking, and
is an ideal near-equator launch site for satellites. If
confirmed, I will work to maintain the strong relationship
between USAKA and the Marshall Islands Government and promote
USAKA's beneficial role for affiliated Marshallese communities.
The United States and the Marshall Islands have a
developing economic relationship. To help achieve the goal of
self-sufficiency, the United States will provide the Government
of the RMI over
$60 million a year in assistance through 2023. The majority of
our assistance goes toward health, education, environment, and
a jointly managed trust fund will serve as a source of income
after that grant assistance expires in 2023.
Despite our aid, Marshallese citizens struggle with health
issues, unemployment, and social problems. More has to be done
to prepare young Marshallese for today's global economy. I
believe education is the key. If confirmed, I intend to do
everything I can to ensure that our programs are effective and
will lead the country team in a whole-of-government approach.
If confirmed, I will draw on my experience from postings
throughout the world to work cooperatively with Marshallese
officials and society. We have a lot of interagency departments
in the Marshall Islands, and I will be happy to work with them
to coordinate that effort.
The Marshallese are great Pacific navigators, and I am sure
we can chart a course together. I would like to continue the
great work Ambassador Martha Campbell is doing with her staff
of 39 officers, local staff, and guards.
Thank you, Madam Chairman, for your consideration, and I
welcome questions later.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Armbruster follows:]
Prepared Statement Thomas Hart Armbruster
Madam Chairman, Ranking Member Barrasso, members of the committee,
it is an honor to appear before you today as President Obama's nominee
to be the U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of the Marshall Islands
(RMI). I am thankful to President Obama and Secretary Clinton for the
confidence shown in me by this nomination. If confirmed, I would
welcome the chance to work with you, this committee, and other Members
of Congress to advance American interests in the Pacific.
I would like to introduce my wife, Kathy, and son, Bryan, who along
with our daughter, Kalia, have traveled every step of my career path
from Hawaii to Finland to Cuba, Russia, Mexico, Tajikistan, and New
York serving the United States in the Foreign Service.
The Marshall Islands is a key partner in the United States
deepening commitment to the Pacific. Secretary Clinton said: ``One of
the most important tasks of American statecraft over the next decade
will be to lock in a substantially increased investment--diplomatic,
economic, strategic, and otherwise--in the Asia-Pacific region.''
The United States and the Marshall Islands have a close and special
relationship dating back to the end of the Second World War, when the
Marshall Islands became part of the U.N. Trust Territory of the Pacific
Islands under the administration of the United States. In 1986, the
Marshall Islands and the United States signed the Compact of Free
Association and the RMI became an independent state. This Compact,
which was amended in 2004 to extend economic assistance for an
additional 20 years, provides the framework for much of our bilateral
relationship. Under the Compact, citizens of the RMI can live, study,
and work in the United States without a visa. The Compact obliges the
two countries to consult on matters of foreign policy, and the RMI
Government has an excellent voting affinity with the United States in
the United Nations, sharing our positions on many contentious issues,
including on human rights and Israel.
Mutual security of our nations is an underlying element of the
special relationship between the United States and the Republic of
Marshall Islands. Under the Compact the United States has committed to
defend the Marshall Islands as if it were part of our own territory,
and the RMI has no military of its own. Marshallese citizens serve in
our Armed Forces, volunteering at a higher rate than citizens from any
individual state. Jefferson Bobo was the first Marshallese cadet to
graduate from the Coast Guard Academy in May 2011. He will do his part
to defend global peace and security, in peacekeeping missions, in U.S.-
led combat operations, and in patrolling the world's waterways. If
confirmed, I will work closely with the host government and the
Marshallese people to ensure such mutual benefits of our close
relationship are widely recognized.
The United States also enjoys complete access to Marshallese ports,
airports, and airspace, a vital asset for our defense and security
needs. The Marshall Islands hosts the U.S. Army's Ronald Reagan
Ballistic Missile Defense Test Site on Kwajalein (known as USAKA). The
base is the country's second-largest employer, second only to
government services. I met with General Formica and his talented and
dedicated team at the Space and Missile Defense Command Headquarters in
Huntsville and know how important their work is. The test site plays a
significant role in the U.S. missile defense research, development, and
testing network. It is used to monitor foreign launches and provide
deep-space tracking and is an ideal near-equator launch site for
satellites. Under the Amended Compact, the United States has access to
Kwajalein through 2066 with the option to extend until 2086. Continued
access is important, but as important is a good relationship with the
Marshallese. If confirmed, I will work to maintain the strong
relationship between USAKA and the Marshall Islands Government and to
promote USAKA's beneficial role for affiliated Marshallese communities.
The United States and the Marshall Islands also have an important
economic relationship. To help achieve the Compact goal of economic
self-sufficiency, the United States will provide the Government of the
RMI over $60 million a year in economic assistance through FY 2023. The
majority of this assistance is provided as grants directed toward six
sectors: health, education, infrastructure to support health and
education, public sector capacity-building, private sector development
and the environment. In addition, U.S. federal agencies operate more
than 20 different government programs in the Marshall Islands. Another
very important aspect of the Compact is a jointly managed Trust Fund
that will serve as a source of income for the Marshall Islands after
annual grant assistance expires in 2023. If confirmed, I will promote
economic development and strongly advocate that the Marshallese work
vigorously toward economic self-sufficiency, which is one of the
primary goals of the Compact, as Amended.
Maintaining a solid partnership requires work on both sides.
Education is a priority sector under the Amended Compact, but more has
to be done to prepare young Marshallese for today's global economy.
Despite our aid every year, Marshallese citizens are struggling with
health issues, unemployment, and social problems. It is in our interest
to help the Marshall Islands become more self-reliant and retain their
talented and ambitious citizens to foster development and economic
growth at home. As I mentioned, many U.S. Government agencies are
working to advance those goals. If confirmed, I intend to do everything
I can to ensure that our programs are effective in achieving their
objectives and will ensure that the interagency is also working
harmoniously in a ``whole of government approach.''
If confirmed, I will draw on my experiences from postings
throughout the world to work cooperatively with Marshallese officials
and society. For example, joint efforts like the Border Liaison
Mechanism that I cochaired with my Mexican counterpart were effective
in coordinating policy. In Moscow, as nuclear affairs officer, I
coordinated with a range of U.S. agencies to safeguard Russia's nuclear
materials. And in negotiating an emergency response agreement with
Russia, I forged a close relationship with the Russian negotiator to
have that agreement signed and in force to the benefit of both
countries.
If confirmed, I will work closely with colleagues in other Pacific
countries to advance U.S. interests regionally. In that spirit I led a
counternarcotics team
from Tajikistan to Kabul and a business delegation to Konduz,
Afghanistan, to strengthen regional ties to the benefit of the United
States in Central Asia. Furthering citizen services, I currently serve
as an auxiliary police officer with the New York Police Department in
Manhattan and I have assisted Americans in prison in Cuba, Mexico, and
Russia.
If confirmed, my interagency experience will be a critical asset in
the RMI, where so many domestic federal agencies--such as the U.S.
Postal Service, the Federal Aviation Administration, and the National
Weather Service--operate side by side with foreign affairs and defense
colleagues. If confirmed, I will work closely with these agencies, and
particularly with the Department of the Interior, which has primary
responsibility for implementing the Compact's economic provisions, to
ensure that assistance efforts are appropriately coordinated and
implemented with transparency and accountability.
Working in several embassies around the world, I know how critical
local staff is to our success. Our mission in the Marshall Islands
depends, not just on the written text of the Compact of Free
Association, but also on creating a bilateral relationship based on
partnership and mutual respect between Marshallese and the American
people. The Marshallese are great Pacific navigators and I'm sure we
can chart a course together. If confirmed, I will work hard to ensure
that my staff has the resources and support it needs to meet our
mission in the Marshall Islands. I would like to continue the great
work Ambassador Martha Campbell is doing with her staff of 39 officers,
local staff, and guards.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
Ambassador Kirby.
STATEMENT OF HON. MICHAEL DAVID KIRBY, OF VIRGINIA, TO BE
AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF SERBIA
Ambassador Kirby. Thank you, Madam Chairman. It is a
privilege to appear before you today as President Obama's
nominee to serve as United States Ambassador to the Republic of
Serbia. I am honored by the confidence placed in me by the
President and Secretary Clinton. If confirmed, I look forward
to working with this committee and the Congress in advancing
United States interests in Serbia.
I am pleased to have my wife, Sara Powelson Kirby, here
with me today. Foreign Service families are unsung heroes and
true diplomats themselves. My wife and daughters, Katherine and
Elizabeth, neither of whom could be here with me today, have
been living, working, and going to school overseas for most of
their lives, serving as examples of American values to their
friends and colleagues.
I would also like to note the presence of my mother,
Dolores Kirby. She has been a great help to my siblings and to
me. She also contributed greatly to the career of my father who
was in the Foreign Service for 30 years.
I had the privilege of serving for the past 4 years as the
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary in the Bureau of Consular
Affairs of the State Department. Prior to this, as U.S.
Ambassador to Moldova, I worked with my team to manage a range
of issues, including the frozen conflict in Transnistria,
improving the climate for multiparty democracy, furthering U.S.
business interests, and trying to reduce corruption. I believe
these experiences have prepared me well to serve as chief of
mission in Serbia.
The Serbia-United States relationship is 130 years old. In
fact, we marked the anniversary on July 5. Our cooperation,
friendship, and close commercial ties are anchored by a vibrant
Serbian diaspora community here in the United States. While our
ties were strained in the 1990s, for the past 12 years, we have
worked with successive Serbian governments to overcome recent
challenges and to build a new, strong partnership with a
country that we see as critical to regional stability.
Over the past 4 years, the United States has worked closely
with the outgoing government to help Serbia realize its goal of
attaining candidate status in the European Union. We now look
forward to helping Serbia meet the standards the European Union
has set out in order to obtain a start date for accession
negotiations. Serbia has made significant progress by
undertaking democratic reforms and strengthening institutions
to solidify the rule of law. In addition, the military services
have undergone fundamental restructuring with the goal of
building a modern, civilian-directed force that can play a
positive, stabilizing role in the region. Serbia joined NATO's
Partnership for Peace with our support, and its military has
established a robust cooperation with ours. Its partnership
with the Ohio National Guard serves as a model for the region.
Together, the United States and Serbia have made significant
strides in recent years to repair and rejuvenate our
relationship, and if confirmed, I look forward to working with
President Nikolic and the new government, once constituted, to
build on this strong foundation and continue to deepen our
partnership.
While much progress has been made in Serbia, Kosovo remains
a significant challenge to our bilateral engagement. We have
made clear that on the matter of Kosovo, we can agree to
disagree on Kosovo's status as an independent state. We
understand that for now Serbia will not recognize the Republic
of Kosovo. However, we have also made clear that Serbia must
begin to come to terms with today's realities and move toward
normalizing its relationship with Kosovo. As the European Union
stated in its council decisions in December 2011 and
subsequently confirmed, Serbia's path into the EU passes
through normalization of its relationship with Kosovo. This is
in Serbia's interest, as it is the only way to ensure the
Kosovo issue does not continue to interfere with Serbia's
relations with its neighbors, the EU, or the United States.
If confirmed, I will also seek to bring resolution to two
important challenges to our bilateral relationship. The
murderers of the three Bytyqi brothers, New York residents who
were executed by Serbian Ministry of Interior personnel in
1999, have never been prosecuted. The U.S. Government cannot
accept that the murderers of three of its citizens go
unpunished. Likewise, those who authorized the attacks on the
United States and other Western embassies in February 2008 have
never been arrested. While we welcome the recent indictments of
12 of the perpetrators who participated in the attack on our
Embassy in Belgrade, we also expect Serbia to thoroughly
complete its investigation and ensure that all who were
involved are brought to justice regardless of their rank or
position.
This is a challenging agenda but it is also achievable. If
confirmed, I am committed to working to make this vision: a
Serbia at peace with all of its neighbors, firmly set on a path
of European integration.
Thank you once again for granting me the opportunity to
appear before this committee today, and I look forward to your
questions.
[The prepared statement of Ambassador Kirby follows:]
Prepared Statement of Michael D. Kirby
Madam Chairman, Ranking Member Barrasso, and members of the Senate
Foreign Relations Committee, it is a privilege to appear before you
today as President Obama's nominee to serve as the United States
Ambassador to the Republic of Serbia. I am honored by the confidence
placed in me by both President Obama and Secretary Clinton. If
confirmed, I look forward to working with this committee and the
Congress in advancing U.S. interests in Serbia.
I am pleased to have my wife, Sara Powelson Kirby, here with me
today. Foreign Service families are unsung heroes and true diplomats
themselves: my wife and daughters, Katherine and Elizabeth--neither of
whom could be with me today--have been living, working, and going to
school overseas for most of their lives, serving as examples of
American values to their friends and colleagues. I would also like to
note the presence of my mother, Dolores Kirby. She has been a great
help to my siblings and me. She also contributed greatly to my father's
more than 30-year Foreign Service career.
I have had the privilege of serving for the past 4 years as the
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary in the Consular Affairs Bureau of
the State Department. Prior to this, as U.S. Ambassador to Moldova, I
worked with my team to manage a range of issues, including the frozen
conflict in Transnistria, improving the climate for multiparty
democracy, furthering U.S. business interests, and trying to reduce
corruption. I believe these experiences have prepared me well to serve
as Chief of Mission in Serbia.
The Serbia-United States relationship is 130 years old--in fact, we
marked its anniversary on July 5. Our cooperation, friendship, and
close commercial ties are anchored by a vibrant Serbian diaspora
community here in the United States. While our ties were strained in
the 1990s, for the past 12 years we have worked with successive Serbian
governments to overcome challenges and build a new, strong partnership
with a country that we see as critical to regional stability.
Over the past 4 years, the United States has worked closely with
the outgoing government to help Serbia realize its goal of attaining
candidate status in the European Union. We now look forward to helping
Serbia meet the standards the European Union has set out in order to
obtain a start date for accession negotiations, the next step in the
process leading to EU membership. Serbia has made significant progress
by undertaking democratic reforms and strengthening institutions to
solidify the rule of law. In addition, the military services have
undergone fundamental restructuring with the goal of building a modern,
civilian-directed force that can play a positive, stabilizing role in
the region. Serbia joined NATO's Partnership for Peace with our
support, and its military has established a robust cooperation with
ours. Its partnership with the Ohio National Guard serves as a model
for the region and has helped to encourage civilian partnerships
between Serbia and the State of Ohio. I take great pride in the Ohio
roots of my parents--both native Clevelanders--and will seek to deepen
the Ohio-Serbia bonds. Together, the United States and Serbia have made
significant strides in recent years to rejuvenate our relationship, and
if confirmed I look forward to working with President Nikolic and the
new government, once constituted, to build on this strong foundation
and continue to deepen our partnership.
Our economic ties also continue to grow. An economically prosperous
Serbia can serve as an engine for the region. Like many countries
around the world, Serbia is suffering from the consequences of the
global recession. But Serbia has enormous economic potential, including
a well-educated and talented workforce, which make it a potentially
attractive source for foreign direct investment by U.S. as well as
European companies. Over the past several years, with assistance from
the EU and the United States, Serbia has undertaken real economic
reforms designed to demonstrate its commitment to long-term economic
growth and harmonization with EU norms. There is still much work left
to be done, however, to streamline the process of doing business,
reduce bureaucratic impediments, and combat the corrosive consequences
of corruption. The United States has worked closely with the Serbian
Government to aid this effort, particularly in supporting the
implementation of the government's anticorruption strategy and action
plan. If confirmed, I look forward to continuing this work.
While much progress has been made in Serbia, Kosovo remains a
significant challenge to our bilateral engagement. When Vice President
Biden visited Belgrade in May 2009, he emphasized that the United
States wanted to move beyond the recriminations of the past and looked
toward the future, to a fully European-integrated Serbia partnering
with us in the pursuit of common interests in the region. We understand
that, for now, Serbia will not recognize the Republic of Kosovo.
However, we have also made clear that Serbia must begin to come to
terms with today's realities and move toward normalizing its relations
with Kosovo. As long as there is instability in the region, Serbia and
all the other countries of the region are held back from realizing
their full potential. As the European Union stated in its Council
decisions in December 2011 and subsequently confirmed, Serbia's path
into the EU passes through normalization of its relationship with
Kosovo. This is in Serbia's interest, as it is the only way to ensure
the Kosovo issue does not continue to interfere with Serbia's relations
with its neighbors, the EU, or the United States. And it is in the
interest of Kosovo Serbs, as it will improve the daily lives of
citizens, irrespective of ethnicity, on both sides of the border.
Serbia needs to understand that Kosovo's status and border are decided
and that partition is off the table. At the same time, we have assured
Serbia that the United States, in partnership with the EU, will remain
vigilant in working with the Kosovo Government to ensure that the far-
reaching rights of Kosovo Serbs are fully protected under Kosovo's
Constitution and laws.
If confirmed, I will also seek to bring to resolution two important
challenges to our bilateral relationship. The murderers of the three
Bytyqi brothers, New York residents who were executed by Serbian
Ministry of Interior personnel in 1999, have never been prosecuted. The
U.S. Government cannot accept that the murderers of three of its
citizens go unpunished. Likewise, those who authorized the attacks on
the U.S. and other Western embassies in February 2008 have never been
brought to justice. While we welcome the recent indictments of 12 of
the perpetrators who participated in the attack on our Embassy in
Belgrade, we also expect Serbia to complete a thorough investigation
and ensure that all who were involved are brought to justice,
regardless of their rank or position.
This is a challenging agenda, but it is also achievable. If
confirmed, I am committed to working to make this vision a reality: a
Serbia at peace with all of its neighbors, firmly set on a path of
European integration.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
Mr. Koenig.
STATEMENT OF JOHN M. KOENIG, OF WASHINGTON, TO BE AMBASSADOR TO
THE REPUBLIC OF CYPRUS
Mr. Koenig. Madam Chair, thank you very much. Members of
the committee, thank you for giving me the opportunity to be
with you here today. It is a great honor to appear before you.
It is also my great honor to be nominated by President Obama to
serve as the next Ambassador of the United States to the
Republic of Cyprus. If confirmed, I look forward to working
with the committee and Congress to advance the interests of the
United States in Cyprus.
I would like to introduce my wife, Natalie, who has joined
me here today, along with my sons, Theodore and Alexander, and
my Cyprus desk officer, Lindsay Coffey from the State
Department. I would also like to mention my friends, Bob and
Ellen Cory and Will Embrey, who have attended this hearing
today.
My wife and sons have been living, working, and going to
school overseas for much of their lives. We look forward to
serving our Nation overseas once again. Both of my sons started
school in Cyprus and they, like Natalie and me, have fond
memories of the island and its people.
I believe the 28 years I have spent in the Foreign Service
have helped prepare me for this important assignment. I served
previously in Cyprus, an experience which I believe will
enhance my effectiveness as chief of mission, if I am
confirmed.
In addition, my two tours in Greece deepened my
understanding of regional issues. From my time spent working at
the U.S. mission to NATO and as political advisor to the Allied
Joint Forces Command in Naples, I understand the importance of
NATO in maintaining peace and stability throughout Europe and
beyond.
If I am confirmed, my top priority will be to support
efforts to reunite Cyprus into a bizonal, bicommunal
federation. The longstanding division of the island must come
to an end through a just and lasting settlement. Since 2008,
the leaders of the Greek Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot
communities have made important progress in the Cypriot-led
negotiations under the auspices of the U.N. Good Offices
Mission coordinated by Special Advisor Alexander Downer.
However, much more must be done to end the de facto division of
the island. Although this is a Cypriot-led process, the United
States will remain actively engaged. The reasons are clear. The
status quo is unacceptable. It threatens effective NATO-EU
cooperation and affects regional stability and also remains an
obstacle to Turkey's EU accession process, which the United
States and this administration have long supported.
If confirmed, I look forward to continuing to build our
bilateral relationship with the Republic of Cyprus and
strengthening cooperation in our many areas of common interest.
I am pleased to see increased investment by U.S. companies in
Cyprus especially in the energy sector. Our countries have also
been working together to safeguard Cypriot cultural heritage,
prevent pillaging, and stop the illegal trafficking and sale of
antiquities. In addition, Cyprus has been a generous host for
an increasing number of U.S. Navy ship visits, which has driven
growing cooperation in antiterrorism and port security.
The Republic of Cyprus is facing a number of challenges:
assuming the rotating Presidency of the European Union,
responding to the European financial crisis, and managing newly
discovered natural gas resources. Although Cyprus has the
third-smallest economy in the EU, its financial sector is
heavily exposed to Greek debt. If confirmed, I will work
closely with the Government of Cyprus to explore ways the
United States can assist Cyprus as it seeks to meet these
challenges. We must also work together to address serious
issues such as possible terrorist threats and trafficking in
persons.
The administration recognizes the Republic of Cyprus' right
to develop its Exclusive Economic Zone. We believe that its oil
and gas resources, like all of its resources, should be
equitably shared between both communities in the context of an
overall settlement. The discovery of natural gas underscores
the urgent need for a settlement, but it need not hinder the
talks.
I also look forward to engaging the Turkish Cypriot
community. If confirmed, I will be accredited to one
government, that of the Republic of Cyprus. That said, we need
to maintain a constructive relationship with the Turkish
Cypriot community. I am pleased that they share our goal of
peaceful reunification of the island. We must continue to work
with them to help prepare for reunification by strengthening
civil society and reducing economic disparities across the
island.
Madam Chair, members of the committee, if I am confirmed,
my foremost priority will be promoting United States interests
in Cyprus while working to advance a comprehensive settlement.
The United States stands only to gain from a reunited Cyprus
that is peaceful, prosperous, and fully benefits from EU
membership.
Thank you for this opportunity to appear before you. I
would be pleased to answer any questions you may have later.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Koenig follows:]
Prepared Statement of John M. Koenig
Madam Chairman and members of the committee, thank you for giving
me the opportunity to be with you here today. It is a great honor to
appear before you. It is also my great honor to be nominated by
President Obama to serve as the next Ambassador of the United States to
the Republic of Cyprus. If confirmed, I look forward to working with
the Committee and Congress to advance the interests of the United
States in Cyprus.
If you will permit me, I would like to introduce my wife, Natalie,
who has joined me here today, along with my sons, Theodore and
Alexander, and Cyprus desk officer, Lindsay Coffey. My wife and sons
have been living, working, and going to school overseas for much of
their lives. We look forward to serving our Nation overseas once again.
Both of my sons started school in Cyprus, and, like Natalie and me,
have fond memories of the island and its people.
I believe that the 28 years I have spent in the Foreign Service
have helped prepare me for this important assignment. I served
previously in Cyprus, an experience which I believe will enhance my
effectiveness as Chief of Mission, if I am confirmed. In addition, my
two tours in Greece deepened my understanding of regional issues. From
my time spent working at the U.S. Mission to NATO and as political
advisor to the Allied Joint Forces Command in Naples, I understand the
importance of NATO in maintaining peace and stability throughout Europe
and beyond.
If I am confirmed, my top priority will be to support efforts to
reunite Cyprus into a bizonal, bicommunal federation. The longstanding
division must come to an end through a just and lasting settlement.
Since 2008, the leaders of the Greek Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot
communities have made important progress in the Cypriot-led
negotiations under the auspices of the U.N. Good Offices Mission and
coordinated by Special Advisor Alexander Downer. However, much more
must be done to end the de facto division of the island. Although this
is a Cypriot-led process, we will remain actively engaged. The reasons
are clear. The status quo is unacceptable. It threatens effective NATO-
EU cooperation and affects regional stability, and also remains an
obstacle to Turkey's EU accession process, which the United States and
this administration have long supported.
If confirmed, I look forward to continuing to build our bilateral
relationship with the Republic of Cyprus and strengthening cooperation
in our many areas of common interest. I am pleased to see increased
investment by U.S. companies in Cyprus, especially in the energy
sector. Our countries have also been working together to safeguard
Cypriot cultural heritage, prevent pillaging, and stop the illegal
trafficking and sale of antiquities. In addition, Cyprus has been a
generous host for an increasing number of U.S. navy ship visits, which
has driven growing cooperation in antiterrorism and port security.
The Republic of Cyprus is facing a number of challenges: assuming
the rotating Presidency of the European Union, responding to the
European financial crisis, and managing newly discovered natural gas
resources. Although Cyprus has the third-smallest economy in the EU,
its financial sector is heavily exposed to Greek debt. If confirmed, I
will work closely with the Government of Cyprus to explore ways the
United States can assist Cyprus as it seeks to meet these challenges.
We must also work together to address serious issues such as possible
terrorist threats and trafficking in persons.
The administration recognizes the Republic of Cyprus' right to
develop its Exclusive Economic Zone. We believe that its oil and gas
resources, like all of its resources, should be equitably shared
between both communities in the context of an overall settlement. The
discovery of natural gas underscores the urgent need for a settlement,
but it need not hinder the talks.
I also look forward to engaging the Turkish Cypriot community. If
confirmed, I will be accredited to one government, that of the Republic
of Cyprus. That said, we need to maintain a constructive relationship
with the Turkish Cypriot community. I am pleased that they share our
goal of peaceful reunification of the island. We must continue to work
with them to help prepare for reunification by strengthening civil
society and reducing economic disparities across the island.
Madam Chairman and members of the committee, if I am confirmed, my
foremost priority will be promoting U.S. interests in Cyprus while
working to advance a comprehensive settlement. The United States stands
only to gain from a reunited Cyprus that is peaceful, prosperous, and
fully benefits from EU membership.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
Ambassador Ries.
STATEMENT OF HON. MARCIE B. RIES, OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,
TO BE AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF BULGARIA
Ambassador Ries. Madam Chairman, Ranking Member Barrasso,
members of the committee, it is an honor to appear before you
today as President Obama's nominee to serve as the United
States Ambassador to the Republic of Bulgaria. I am grateful
for the confidence placed in me by the President and by
Secretary Clinton.
The United States and Bulgaria share a very strong
partnership and friendship both between our governments and our
peoples. If confirmed, I will work with Congress and this
committee to further strengthen the relationship and to advance
United States interests in Bulgaria.
I am delighted and proud that my husband, Charlie, who was
a fellow officer in the Foreign Service for more than 30 years,
as well as my son, Alexander Ries, and his friend, Susan Ziff,
are here with me today. My mother, Mona Berman, who is a
continuing inspiration to all of us, plans to accompany me to
Bulgaria if I am confirmed. Although unable to attend this
hearing, I would also like to mention my daughter, Meredith,
who was along on postings in Ankara, Brussels, and London.
While it was an honor and a privilege for us together to
represent our country abroad, I am especially grateful for my
family's encouragement, even when I was posted without them in
Kosovo and Albania, and for their unswerving support when my
husband and I were assigned together in Baghdad.
This summer marks the 109th anniversary of diplomatic
relations between Bulgaria and the United States. This is worth
noting because our relationship with Bulgaria, a member of NATO
and the European Union, exemplifies the sort of transatlantic
cooperation that has been the cornerstone of our common
security. Bulgaria has generously contributed to NATO and EU
missions, notably in Afghanistan. If confirmed, I will apply my
prior experience, especially as Principal Deputy Assistant
Secretary for the Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs, to
further enhance our security cooperation with Bulgaria.
I learned during my time as chief of mission in Pristina
and Ambassador to Albania that ensuring the rule of law is both
fundamental and a long-term endeavor. Bulgaria has made
progress in rule of law, including taking important steps to
pursue judicial reform, combat corruption, and fight organized
crime. Bulgaria's new asset forfeiture legislation is a
positive example of such progress. However, much more needs to
be done, and if confirmed, I will do my best to support
Bulgarian efforts to move forward via robust law enforcement
cooperation and engagement with the Bulgarian Government and
civil society.
The Roma population in Bulgaria, as elsewhere in Europe,
has not fully benefited from Bulgaria's progress. The Bulgarian
Government has launched a new integration strategy and worked
with civil society to develop an action plan. If confirmed, I
will work hard with the Bulgarian Government and the Roma
communities to support and encourage effective implementation.
Bulgaria has taken noteworthy steps toward diversifying and
securing the country's energy supplies while protecting the
local environment. If confirmed, I will make working with the
Bulgarian Government, business, and civil society toward
achievement of this goal a high priority.
Bilateral trade with Bulgaria jumped from US$429 million in
2010 to $672 million in 2011. This includes a 33-percent
increase in U.S. exports directly supporting American jobs.
In conclusion, Bulgaria is a country with great potential
for economic advancement, a proud history going back to ancient
times, and warm feelings toward the United States. If I am
confirmed, I will work with Congress and this committee to
expand and develop the strong partnership we have with
Bulgaria, building on the fine work of outgoing Ambassador,
James Warlick, and our country team at U.S. Embassy Sofia. As
Ambassador, my highest priorities will be to advance U.S.
interests in Bulgaria, including working together to counter
organized crime and corruption, promoting economic growth and
prosperity in both our countries, and strengthening security
cooperation both bilaterally and within the NATO alliance.
Madam Chairman, and members of the committee, thank you for
this opportunity to appear before you. I would be pleased to
answer any questions that you may have.
[The prepared statement of Ambassador Ries follows:]
Prepared Statement of Marcie B. Ries
Madam Chairman, Ranking Member Barrasso, and members of the
committee, it is an honor to appear before you today as President
Obama's nominee to serve as the United States Ambassador to the
Republic of Bulgaria. I am grateful for the confidence placed in me by
the President and by Secretary Clinton. The United States and Bulgaria
share a very strong partnership and friendship, both between our
governments and our peoples. If confirmed, I will work with Congress
and this committee to further strengthen the relationship and to
advance U.S. interests in Bulgaria.
If you will permit me, I would like to introduce my family members
who are here with me today. I am delighted and proud that my husband,
Charlie, who was a fellow officer in the Foreign Service for more than
30 years, as well as my son, Alexander Ries, and my mother, Mona
Berman, are with me today. Although unable to attend this hearing, I
would like to mention my daughter, Meredith, who was also along through
postings in Ankara, Brussels, and London. While it was an honor and a
privilege for us to represent our country abroad, I am especially
grateful for my family's encouragement even when I was posted without
them in Kosovo and Albania, and for their unswerving support when my
husband and I were assigned together to Baghdad in 2007 and 2008.
This summer marks the 109th anniversary of diplomatic relations
between Bulgaria and the United States. This is worth noting because
our relationship with Bulgaria, a member of NATO and the European
Union, exemplifies the sort of transatlantic cooperation that has been
the cornerstone of our common security, freedom, and prosperity.
Bulgaria has generously contributed to NATO and EU missions, including
in Afghanistan, Kosovo, Bosnia, Libya, Georgia, and off the coast of
Somalia. If confirmed, I will apply my prior experience in NATO and EU
matters, especially as Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for the
Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs, to further enhance our
cooperation with Bulgaria. I will also encourage Bulgaria's efforts to
develop a military that is modern, deployable, and fully interoperable
with its European and American partners.
Our relationship with Bulgaria is based upon much more than
security cooperation. Bulgaria's experience transitioning from
authoritarian rule to democracy and persevering through many challenges
is commendable and provides positive lessons for others making
democratic transitions. Today, Bulgaria plays a constructive role in
promoting stability in the Western Balkans and supporting emerging
democracies in the Middle East and North Africa, including by sharing
these lessons.
I learned during my time as Chief of Mission in Pristina and
Ambassador to Albania that ensuring the rule of law is both fundamental
and a long-term endeavor. Bulgaria has made progress in rule of law,
including taking important steps to pursue judicial reform, combat
corruption, and fight organized crime. Bulgaria's new asset forfeiture
legislation is a positive example of such progress. However, more needs
to be done, and if confirmed I will do my best to support Bulgarian
efforts to move forward via robust law enforcement cooperation, the
Open Government Partnership, and engagement with the Bulgarian
Government and civil society.
The Roma population in Bulgaria, as elsewhere in Europe, has not
fully benefited from Bulgaria's progress. The Bulgarian Government has
launched a new integration strategy, worked with civil society to
develop an action plan, and is organizing a resource framework. If
confirmed, I will work with the Bulgarian Government and the Roma
communities to support and encourage effective implementation.
Bulgaria has taken noteworthy steps toward diversifying and
securing the country's energy supplies while protecting the local
environment. If confirmed, I will make working with the Bulgarian
Government, business and civil society toward achievement of this goal
a high priority.
Bilateral trade with Bulgaria jumped from 429 million U.S. dollars
in 2010 to 672 million in 2011. This includes a 33-percent increase in
U.S. exports, directly supporting American jobs. Though Bulgaria is a
small market of 7.3 million consumers, there are considerable
commercial opportunities due to an educated work force and a strong
work ethic, membership in the European Union, and approximately 7
billion euro in EU funds to be spent in the coming years on
infrastructure development and modernizing the country's institutions.
In conclusion, Bulgaria is a country with great potential for
economic advancement, a proud history going back to ancient times, and
warm feelings toward the United States. If I am confirmed, I will work
with Congress and this committee to expand and develop the strong
partnership we have with Bulgaria, building on the fine work of
outgoing Ambassador James Warlick and our country team at U.S. Embassy
Sofia. As Ambassador, my highest priorities will be to advance United
States interests in Bulgaria, including working together to counter
organized crime and corruption, promoting economic growth and
prosperity in both our countries, and strengthening security
cooperation both bilaterally and within the NATO alliance.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you all very much for your
testimony.
Ambassador Ries, I would like to give you an opportunity to
comment on the crime that was perpetrated against innocent
Israeli victims today in Bulgaria. I know that reports are
still coming in. So it is difficult to get the facts, but I do
want to ask you if you would like to comment.
Ambassador Ries. Thank you very much, Madam Chairman.
Of course, I do not want to get ahead of the people who are
on the ground in Bulgaria and who have direct access to the
information, but I certainly do want to add my voice to all
those who would condemn such attacks on innocent people in the
very strongest possible terms. And certainly all of our
thoughts and prayers are with the family and friends of the
victims, as well as with the people of Israel and the people of
Bulgaria.
I am certain that our Embassy in Baghdad will offer to
assist their counterparts in any way possible, as I would do in
the same circumstances.
Thank you very much.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
As I indicated in my statement and I am sure you are aware,
this is one in a series of troubling attacks. Well, in January
there was a package found on a bus carrying Israeli tourists
from Turkey to Bulgaria. I wonder, are you confident that the
Bulgarian local police will work closely with us and with
Israel in trying to get to the bottom of these attacks and that
they have the technical expertise to be able to engage in this
kind of investigation?
Ambassador Ries. Madam Chairwoman, yes. I do believe that
we will certainly work very closely with the Bulgarians to
attempt to get to the bottom of this matter. We enjoy very
strong law enforcement cooperation with the Bulgarians on a
continuing basis. That includes training and all kinds of
exchanges and work together, and I am sure that that will be
helpful as we work together to get to the bottom of this.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
Mr. Koenig, in your testimony, you mentioned the new
natural gas find off the coast of Cyprus, and as I understand
it, the President of Cyprus has committed to sharing this
resource with all Cypriots, including the Turkish Cypriot
community. And as you point out, this is another critical
reason for the Greek and Turkish communities on Cyprus to come
together to find a just resolution to the divisions in Cyprus.
Unfortunately, Turkey has called on the major international
oil and gas companies to withdraw their bids to seek a license
for development of those gas deposits in Cyprus saying it will
not allow exploration to go ahead and threatening to ban those
companies from Turkish energy projects.
Can you tell us whether you agree that the discovery of
natural gas within Cypriot waters could, with some leadership,
help to bring a resolution to the division in Cyprus? And can
you put the Turkish response in context for us? Are you
concerned that Turkey's response will contribute to a further
deterioration of relations between Turkey and Cyprus? And
finally, how can the United States and our EU counterparts work
to help as this situation unfolds?
Mr. Koenig. Thank you, Madam Chair.
This is, indeed, a very important discovery and a very
important new factor in the region, the presence of these
resources in the offshore area in the eastern Mediterranean.
We believe that the existence of this new resource, these
new riches in that region should spur the parties to think of
new ways of cooperation, and we very much appreciate President
Christofias' statements that he is interested in sharing this
resource with all the people of Cyprus with both communities.
We see that as important to realize in the context of an
overall settlement of the Cyprus issue.
With regard to our position on the EEZ and Cyprus' right to
exploit resources in the EEZ, we have been very clear, and I
think that has helped a great deal in responding to the actions
of others, including Turkey. Cyprus is exploiting these
resources in a manner that is cooperative with Israel. We
recognize Cyprus' right to delimit the EEZ and to enter into
such bilateral arrangements. So the clarity that we have
expressed on this, I think, has been unmistakable.
The administration is very pleased to see that American
companies are engaged in the exploration and development of
these resources and other energy opportunities in Cyprus. I
believe the administration is committed to supporting these
companies in their work, as we do with other companies
interested in such situations, and if I am confirmed, I will
certainly support those efforts very energetically.
Senator Shaheen. Well, so can you elaborate a little more
on Turkey's reaction and what additional response might be
needed either to reassure the companies who would like to bid
on these projects or Cyprus that we are serious about engaging
on this issue and helping to make sure that the development can
occur in the waters around Cyprus?
Mr. Koenig. Yes, Madam Chairman. The United States has
engaged with--first, let me say that the United States does not
believe that any country in the region or any party involved in
the situation on Cyprus should do anything to heighten tensions
or to create new problems. The situation on Cyprus is already
difficult enough. So we have been engaging with Turkey and with
others on this very consistently and hope that our message is
understood.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
Senator Barrasso.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
If I could start, Ms. Holtz. I wanted to visit with you a
little bit about Iran sanctions and wondering if Oman is
complying with United States sanctions, international sanctions
against Iran. If not, how would you address the issue with the
Government of Oman, and what is Oman's current relationship and
economic ties and trade endeavors with Iran?
Ms. Holtz. Thank you very much, Senator, for that question.
Oman is a regional player. It is a member of the Gulf
Cooperation Council, Arab League, and as a regional player, it
shares our concerns about Iran's destabilizing activities,
including their acquisition or attempt to acquire nuclear
weapons capability. They are compliant and supportive of the
international sanctions on Iran. They are deeply concerned, as
are we, about the tensions and instability in the region. So
they have been a very effective partner for the United States
in addressing those issues.
Oman does have a unique relationship with Iran given its
geographic proximity and its policy of having good relations
with its neighbors. But as we see the tensions in the region
increasing, it has been very beneficial for the United States
to have a partner like Oman who is able to de-escalate some of
the tensions that are out there because of Iran. So if I am
confirmed, I will continue to work very hard to partner with
our Omani ally on Iran's destabilizing role in the region.
Senator Barrasso. Because I had some concern. I understood
there was an agreement signed between Oman and Iran and they
had some joint military operations together last year. Is my
understanding correct?
Ms. Holtz. Yes, they did sign an agreement and I believe
they held one exercise.
Senator Barrasso. OK, thank you.
Mr. Armbruster, in terms of United States priorities in the
Marshall Islands, you mentioned Secretary Clinton and some of
the comments that she had made. So I just wonder what the top
three United States priorities are with respect to the Marshall
Islands and what initiatives you might have to implement them.
Mr. Armbruster. Thank you, Senator.
And now with Secretary Clinton breaking travel records,
maybe she will visit the Marshall Islands.
The top three priorities, I would think--the first would be
our strategic relationship. The Marshall Islands is a good
friend of ours in the United Nations, and in terms of our
Pacific strategy, I know that the Defense Department is talking
about rebalancing and looking at the Pacific as a very
important part of their overall global strategy. So the USAKA
base and the strategic part I think would be the first
priority.
Second would be education. The Marshallese are not able to
compete globally and the education system needs work frankly.
Many Marshallese migrate to the United States, and if they are
coming to the United States, I think they have to be better
prepared to work here and contribute, as I know that they can.
And the third priority, Senator, I think would be something
that I know you are interested in and that is health. They have
some challenges: dengue, Hansen's disease, TB, and so on. But I
have received good news that we are working on telemedicine to
try to take care of some of their health challenges in the
Marshall Islands, and that would be something that, if
confirmed, I would work very closely with my colleagues on.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you.
Ambassador Kirby, recent reports indicate that Serbia's new
President is seeking to clarify some of the agreements
previously signed by the previous government with Kosovo. Do
you believe that Serbia is going to go back on any of the
agreements signed between Serbia and Kosovo, and what steps are
you going to take to ensure the new government remains
committed to negotiations from a previous administration?
Ambassador Kirby. Thank you, Senator.
If confirmed, I would--the agreements that were reached
were never fully implemented in any case. We will have a
dialogue because Serbia is committed. The new President has
said that he is committed to getting Serbia into the EU. That
path leads through a more normalized relationship with Kosovo.
So I think, working with our European partners, we would stress
that the United States is firmly committed to Kosovo with its
borders, and I think that that would give us a lot of leverage.
Senator Barrasso. Ambassador Ries, during Secretary
Clinton's trip to Bulgaria in February, she stressed the
importance of energy security and energy independence for the
country of Bulgaria. Can you talk a little bit about why energy
independence is so important for Bulgaria and for the broader
European energy sector?
Ambassador Ries. Thank you for the question, Senator.
We believe that energy diversity both of sources and routes
for supply is very important for Bulgaria, as it is for all of
the countries in the region. Bulgaria has had some discussions
with other countries in the region about interconnectors. We
are encouraging them to pursue those discussions with respect
to sources of supply. We are encouraging them to pursue sources
such as from the Caspian area and to look at unconventional
sources of gas.
Senator Barrasso. I believe Bulgaria currently has a
moratorium on shale gas exploration and production. Do you
believe that they should maybe lift that moratorium as a way to
diversify their energy supply?
Ambassador Ries. You are correct, Senator. They do have a
moratorium on shale gas exploration, and they have appointed a
parliamentary committee to examine the question. Eventually
they will need to make a decision, which should be based on
economic factors, environmental factors, and research and
scientific matters. It will be their sovereign decision, but we
are encouraging them to take all those things into account.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you.
Mr. Koenig, when you think about Cyprus and the two
distinct solutions that are often mentioned as ways to resolve
the dispute, either reunification or complete partition, does
the administration back either of these options? And if not,
what solution does the administration support?
Mr. Koenig. Senator Barrasso, the administration strongly
supports the efforts to reunify the island as a bizonal,
bicommunal federation, and we are very, very supportive of the
effort that is Cypriot-led and is being coordinated by the U.N.
Secretary General's Good Offices Mission.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you.
My time has expired, Madam Chairman. Thank you very much.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
Senator Menendez.
Senator Menendez. Thank you, Madam Chairlady.
Congratulations to all of you on your nominations.
First, I want to say my thoughts and prayers are with those
Israeli citizens who died today in Bulgaria and those who are
injured.
And I want to ask you, Ambassador Ries, even though I know
these are unfolding events, so I do not expect you to have
information. But on the broader question of Bulgaria, do you
view them as a cooperative security ally of the United States
vis-a-vis Iran?
Ambassador Ries. Senator, I think that Bulgaria is a very
good and effective security partner for us. In addition, I
mentioned earlier that they are deployed in Afghanistan. They
are also in Kosovo, in Bosnia. They mustered a frigate on short
notice for the situation in Libya and Georgia and off the coast
of Somalia. They voted with us on the Iraq war. I do not have
any specific information to speak to the question that you
asked, but I must say that as a security partner, the
Bulgarians really are very effective.
Senator Menendez. We have a wide range of interests as it
relates to Iran. As the author of the sanctions on the Central
Bank of Iran, I am concerned that some countries are not
cooperating with us in that regard. I am also concerned, within
the context of today's attack, how seriously the Bulgarians
take to the whole question of our efforts to ensure that Iran
does not achieve nuclear weapons. Are they in concert with us,
do you believe?
Ambassador Ries. Senator, I cannot speak for the Bulgarians
myself, but----
Senator Menendez. I am asking for your observation of them,
not for their official view.
Ambassador Ries. Yes, sir. I think that would be consistent
with the positions that they have taken on many of these
subjects and their willingness to stand with us in all of these
other conflicts which they have done in the past.
Senator Menendez. We look forward to your being able to
follow up on this and I will be looking forward to having a
conversation with you when you are on the ground.
Ambassador Ries. Yes, sir. I would look forward to that.
Senator Menendez. Mr. Koenig, I am very interested in
Cyprus. I have spent a good part of my time both on the House
International Relations Committee and on this committee
addressing this issue. Thirty-eight years after the occupation
and invasion, it is beyond the mindset of anyone to believe
that we would still be in this set of circumstances today. And
so this assignment in my mind is incredibly important to the
national interests of the United States. Cyprus has been a good
ally of the United States in critical times when we have needed
them, including providing refuge for our citizens at different
times. And so I want to get a sense from you of your positions
on a number of issues. I listened to your responses earlier.
Let me go through a series of questions.
No. 1, I assume that you believe that the solution to the
Cyprus issue must be based on a Cypriot-run, Cypriot-determined
basis and that our goal, as with the Cypriots, is to have a
single sovereignty with an international personality, a single
citizenship with independence and territorial integrity
safeguarded and comprising all of those elements that are
relevant in Security Council resolutions. Is that the view that
you would take with you to Cyprus if you are confirmed?
Mr. Koenig. Yes, sir, that is. These are the principles
behind the bizonal, bicommunal federation as well.
Senator Menendez. Now, how do you view the two new
conditions laid out by Turkish Cypriot leader Eroglu 2 weeks
ago that talks can only resume if there is an introduction of a
deadline for negotiations and the lifting of embargos placed on
Turkish Cyprus?
Mr. Koenig. Sir, we do not see any reason why talks cannot
resume immediately. We do not want to set artificial deadlines
or anything like that. We think it is important that the
parties work toward a solution as soon as possible but that
there is no need to impose artificial deadlines on these talks.
And these other issues regarding Turkish Cypriot contacts with
the outside world--these are subjects that can also be
discussed in the framework of these discussions that we would
like to see resumed as soon as they can.
Senator Menendez. So I look at that view, and then I look
at the continuing colonization, I will call it, of northern
Cyprus. I am sure that you are aware that in 1974 the
demographic composition of Cyprus was estimated to be about
506,000 Greek Cypriots and about 118,000 Turkish Cypriots.
Today the demographic composition of the Republic of Cyprus is
estimated to be 672,000 Greek Cypriots, 89,000 Turkish
Cypriots, and 200,000 to 500,000 Turkish citizens transferred
by Turkey to live permanently in Cyprus.
Do you feel that Turkey's efforts to colonize the north
constitutes a violation of article 49 of the Fourth Geneva
Convention which states, ``the occupying power shall not deport
or transfer parts of its civilian population into the territory
it occupies''?
Mr. Koenig. This is clearly a very, very important issue,
sir, and it is one of the tragic consequences of the division
of the island and the events of 1974 which all of us lament so
greatly.
The administration sees the best way to resolve this issue
is to actually achieve a settlement based on a bizonal,
bicommunal federation which would deal with the question of who
really belongs on the Island of Cyprus, who has an entitlement
to citizenship, who----
Senator Menendez. I still see tens of thousands of people
who were never there, who have no history with the Island of
Cyprus and I see them from Anotoli and elsewhere, and there is
no family background, no roots, no hereditary background here.
And all we have is an enormous transfer of people. How do we
expect there ever to be a solution?
It seems to me that part of what we should be saying is
that there should be a ceasing of the colonization of northern
Cyprus because, if not, at the rate that we are going, it will
almost make it impossible for us to work with the real Cypriots
in my mind, Turkish Cypriots and Greek Cypriots, who I think if
we left to their own devices, would find a solution. But if you
are going to get hundreds of thousands of people transferred
and at the rate we are going, that is where we are headed, then
how do we achieve our goals here?
Mr. Koenig. I recognize that this is a very sensitive
issue, a very big challenge. I would be very interested in
knowing more about your views. If confirmed, I would like to
get out to the island and maybe we could discuss this further
and we could look at ways that we can be helpful.
Senator Menendez. With the chair's indulgence, let me ask
you. Are you aware that the Turkish leadership in the north has
rejected the Council of Europe's request to conduct an
islandwide census to accurately determine the current
demographic composition of the island's population?
Mr. Koenig. Yes, I am aware of that, Senator.
Senator Menendez. So you are aware that they have rejected
that.
Now, I can only assume that one would reject a census
because the very essence of my question is the concern that is
being driven here. Are you aware of recent press reports in the
news which illustrate that thousands of remaining Turkish
Cypriots have been demonstrating against Turkey, some of them
actually carrying banners that read ``Ankara, get your hands
off of our shores.'' Are you aware of those press reports?
Mr. Koenig. Yes, sir, I am aware of those press reports.
Senator Menendez. You said earlier that while you will only
be credentialed to one country and that is the Republic of
Cyprus, the only one that is internationally recognized and the
only one that we recognize as the United States, you also said
that it is important to have meetings with the Turkish
community in the north. Will you focus those meetings also with
Turkish Cypriot groups?
Mr. Koenig. Yes, of course, sir. All of our efforts--all of
these contacts are focused on our effort to support--on the
administration's effort to support reconciliation and
reunification of the island.
Senator Menendez. Also, if I may, Madam Chair, I have
concerns that for some time while you are the Ambassador, there
is going to be a host of people who are there with different
interests. I hope that when you become the Ambassador, you will
come to your own independent conclusions. In my many visits, I
have often found that there is somewhat of a historical bias
here in which there is an inbred view versus looking at the
view from where we are today, all of the pertinent factors
considered. So I hope when you become the Ambassador, presuming
that you get confirmed, that you will commit to the committee
to go there with an independent view. Of course, you will have
a staff to talk to, but I want to hear from you that you are
going to approach the many issues that we have in Cyprus with a
fresh, independent view, and while you may listen to the views
of existing staff at the Embassy, you are going to come to your
own independent judgment as to what is the set of circumstances
that bedevils us after 38 years. Is that something that we can
get you to commit to the committee?
Mr. Koenig. Yes, Senator. Of course, I will go there with
an open mind, and I will do my best to reach sound judgments
based on everything that I learn there. And I also look forward
to staying in touch with you and others on the committee to
help me understand the Cyprus situation.
Senator Menendez. And my very last question is will you
commit to the committee that, if confirmed, you will engage
with the Cypriot diaspora here in the United States prior to
your departing to Cyprus to get some of their perspectives.
They are very much engaged with their original homeland. They
are U.S. citizens who have every right to express a point of
view. Is that something that we would expect of you?
Mr. Koenig. Absolutely, sir. If confirmed, I would be very
eager to do that to understand the points of view of people who
are deeply committed to this issue and have in many cases felt
the pain of the situation on the island.
Senator Menendez. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Menendez.
Ambassador Kirby, last year I had the opportunity to travel
to Serbia to represent the U.S. Senate at the OSCE
Parliamentary Assembly, and during that trip, I went for a day
to Bosnia and, while I was there, participated in a very moving
ceremony on the 16th anniversary of the Srebrenica massacre
which commemorated the nearly 8,000 Bosniac men and boys who
were killed in that awful event.
And I have been very troubled to see some of the statements
from Serbia's new President claiming that these acts were not
genocide. In fact, as you know, the International Criminal
Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia has confirmed with some of
its verdicts that the events of Srebrenica were genocide. I
think it is important that that not be denied.
And so I wonder if you could give us your perspective on
how you think we should interpret these recent statements from
President Nikolic and where Serbia might be on the efforts to
continue the reconciliation with Bosnia and the impact on the
stability there in Bosnia.
Ambassador Kirby. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
President Nikolic's comment both on Srebrenica and,
frankly, also on Vukovic were unhelpful, and that was, of
course, of concern to the administration. I would note that his
statements subsequently, particularly related to his
inauguration, were much more helpful. He has said useful things
in terms of wanting to cooperate in the region. I think he got
off on the wrong foot by saying things that were troubling in
the region and troubling here and inconsistent with the
international community's view.
But I think we can work with him. I think that we will have
conversations certainly, if confirmed. I will share your
concerns, note that you were there. But we have to move
forward. Serbia plays a very important role in the region and
long-term stability in the region rests also through a good
dialogue with the President and the future government.
Senator Shaheen. And can you talk about how those comments
were viewed in the Republic of Srbsca and Bosnia and whether we
should be concerned about potential mischief there as the
result of the change in administration in Serbia?
Ambassador Kirby. Of course, I was here at the time.
Senator Shaheen. Right.
Ambassador Kirby. And certainly, if I am confirmed, I will
get a better view of that.
There are a variety of opinions in Serbia, as there are in
many places, but I would note that the recent election results
supported parties that were committed to a European trajectory,
committed to joining the EU, and I think with that commitment
comes an understanding that they have to deal with and go
beyond what happened in the past in the breakup of the former
Yugoslavia. So I think that they were unfortunate but I think
we can work with the government. We will. We have to move
forward and he has said some positive things since then that we
should also balance with that.
Senator Shaheen. You talked about the importance of making
progress on Kosovo in terms of the EU admission. Are there
other challenges that face Serbia that will be important as it
works to be welcomed into the EU?
Ambassador Kirby. Well, I think the first challenge they
have right now is very difficult economic conditions. They have
unemployment of over 25 percent and they have youth
unemployment that is in some cases double that. They have some
poor regions in the country that have to come forward and
prosper more economically. So that for the new government is
going to be a very important step.
Clearly there are issues of corruption, not just in Serbia
but in the region, and they will have to deal with that and to
make more effective government. The corruption impedes good
governance. And so those, I think, are a couple of the items
that I think are most important that have to come along with EU
membership, and EU membership and that kind of stuff can help
it along, help it forward.
Senator Shaheen. And is there a reason to be hopeful about
the potential to address some of the economic challenges facing
Serbia?
Ambassador Kirby. Well, first, I am optimist. I think we
have to be. There is a number of countries that are going
through difficult times in Europe. Serbia had launched itself
on an export-driven growth that has not done so well in the
last year as there have been problems in the region between
Greece, Spain, Italy, and other countries in the EU. But I
think that the idea of using private industry and private
development to spur the economy is the right idea. So I think
there is some optimism there, but I think it is related also
to--some of their troubles are related not just domestically
but to the international situation.
Senator Shaheen. Well, as you point out, Serbia is very
important in the region. I have been a friend of Serbia since I
arrived here. I have shared the interest and seen it succeed
and will continue to do everything that I can as chair of this
subcommittee to support those efforts.
As we are talking about the financial challenges facing
Europe, Mr. Koenig, I know that you are watching Cyprus very
closely because it became the fifth country in the eurozone to
apply for financial support. Can you assess for us their
current economic situation? You talked about the relationship
with Greece and the amount of Greek holdings in Cyprus that
have affected their economic situation, but can you elaborate a
little bit on that?
Mr. Koenig. Yes, thank you, Madam Chair.
The Cypriot financial sector grew very, very rapidly during
the last decade, and one of the places where large Cypriot
banks were heavily exposed was in Greece so that the
consequences of the serious problems, things like the so-called
haircut and so forth in the Greek economy have been felt very,
very strongly in Cyprus. And this has created big problems on
the balance sheets of two of the largest three Cypriot banks.
This is one of the reasons why Cyprus did become the fifth
country to seek a eurozone bailout arrangement. Those
discussions between Cyprus and the troika, the EC, the European
Central Bank, and the IMF, are still underway, but those are
the reasons why there is such an acute situation in Cyprus.
They also need to undertake reforms, and that would be part of
an EU bailout package.
Senator Shaheen. So should we be comfortable that Cyprus is
moving forward to take those steps to address the
recommendations from the EU, or are there going to be obstacles
in trying to get that done?
Mr. Koenig. We should encourage them I think--and I will do
that if confirmed--to take these tough decisions about reform,
but the current discussions are the right framework in which to
sort out the requirements in order to take advantage of the
European support funds.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
Ms. Holtz, you mentioned in your testimony the role of
women in Oman. I wonder if you could talk about what is
currently going on in terms of women's participation in Omani
politics and government. Has there been progress? Should we be
pleased about what is happening there or should we be
concerned?
Ms. Holtz. Thank you very much, Madam Chairman. I
appreciate your asking this question because I think it
highlights the importance that the U.S. Congress and the
American people place on women's empowerment for our allies and
friends and throughout the world.
I believe that the sultan, since he took over in the 1970s,
has opened his society and has really advocated for an equal
role for women. They have the right to vote. They run for the
Majles, the Parliament equivalent. The Omani Ambassador to the
United States is a woman. Forty percent of the college students
in Oman today are women. Oman is a traditional society. So
there are areas for improvement, but they have equal treatment
under the law.
So I think that, if I am confirmed, of course, I will
advocate for greater participation, work with the Government of
Oman on its reform goals, work closely with the NGO partners
that we have in Oman, the civil society advocates who also
advocate for a greater role for women. We have the Middle East
Partnership Initiative office in Oman which for many years has
done work to empower women, education of women.
So I think the trajectory is very good. The intention is
there. The sultan of Oman gave an interview this February
wherein he said that men and women are like the two wings of a
bird, and without one wing, the bird cannot fly. So I think
that shows his intention. But, you know, additional progress
can be made, absolutely.
Senator Shaheen. And you said that women are equal under
the law. Do we see that, in fact, in things like ability to
inherit ownership of property, rights to divorce, and being
able to have children in divorce that are able to stay with the
mother?
Ms. Holtz. So thank you very much for the question.
I am not an expert yet on Omani law. They have many
different types of law. They have civil law. They have sharia
law I am not yet familiar with what part of that law would
apply to women. If I am confirmed, I will, of course, welcome
further engagement from you on these issues and advocate for
equal rights under all parts of the law.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
Mr. Armbruster, as you know, the United States has provided
the Marshall Islands with compensation for damages stemming
from nuclear weapons testing in the 1940s and 1950s. Can you
tell us what the current status is with respect to compensation
for those affected by radiation as a result of the tests that
were done there and also, if you could, speak to the ongoing
effort to address monitoring of citizens who have been exposed?
Mr. Armbruster. Yes. Thank you, Madam Chair, for that
question.
The United States has provided full and final compensation
for the Pacific Island nuclear series of tests that took place
in the 1940s and 1950s, some 67 nuclear explosions. The
Marshallese asked for a review of that compensation package
asking that we look at changed circumstances, and the State
Department did review the claims and determined that the
circumstances had not changed. So in terms of the compensation,
that package has been paid.
However, we do, through the compact of free association,
have ongoing payments and assistance to the Marshall Islands in
a range of programs. The last nuclear test took place some 50
years ago. So there are survivors who are monitored and whose
health is screened very thoroughly by the Department of Energy.
So it is a legacy and a problem that we review with the
survivors, and I think it is something that I know Ambassador
Campbell has taken part in the commemorations of the
anniversary of those tests. But as far as the compensation
package itself, that has been settled, Senator.
Senator Shaheen. And are there issues that have occurred in
the next generation of people who were exposed?
Mr. Armbruster. Senator, I am not aware of issues that I
could speak to authoritatively about issues, but I know that it
is a very small population, some 60,000 people. And the health
issues that are most prominent now are often lifestyle issues,
obesity, as I mentioned TB, dengue, those types of challenges,
but that is a question that I will become more fully informed
on.
Senator Shaheen. Well, I know that the Marshall Islands is
already experiencing the effects of climate change and that it
is having an impact on rising sea levels, contamination of
water, damage to homes and crops. Are we taking steps to help
the Marshall Islands citizens cope with these effects of global
warming, and are there any actions that you have heard that you
think we should be taking that we are not?
Mr. Armbruster. Thank you, Senator.
I know that it is a very strong concern of the Marshallese.
They took part in the recent Rio summit. So they have reached
out to many partners, including the United States, in having a
look at this issue. We are fortunate to have in the State
Department the Office of Oceans, Environment, and Science, and
we have very strong experts who can work with the Marshallese
on these questions. Whether the programs in place right now are
considered sufficient by the Marshallese, I do not know, but I
know that that would be one of the top issues that we would be
working on.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
Mr. Armbruster. Thank you.
Senator Shaheen. Ambassador Ries, Senator Barrasso raised
the question about energy for Bulgaria, and in March Bulgaria
canceled a project to build two Russian nuclear reactors in the
country. Can you elaborate on the reasons for the cancellation
of this project and both the impact that it might have had on
Bulgaria's relationship with Russia, as well as the energy
requirements and where the source of that energy is going to
come from in the future?
Ambassador Ries. Senator, the Bulgarians did decide this
year not to continue the project of building the Belene nuclear
power plant. They came to this decision after some
consideration and I am sure a thorough examination of the
economic factors involved in going ahead with it. As I
mentioned, we have been encouraging very strongly energy
diversity in Bulgaria which would include further development
of their nuclear capacity. They do have another nuclear plant
at Kosloduy, and I imagine that they will be using that one as
well.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
You talked about the rule of law challenges facing the
country. The EU has suspended funding to Bulgaria due to some
of the ongoing corruption concerns in the country. Can you
explain what those suspensions were for and whether we should
expect to see further suspensions from the EU or whether
Bulgaria is moving to address some of those issues of
corruption that have been raised?
Ambassador Ries. Bulgaria has, with the EU, a cooperation
and verification mechanism through which Bulgaria has an
ongoing dialogue with the EU about rule of law issues. As it
happens, the EU has just issued a report on 5 years of
Bulgaria's performance under this mechanism. It just came out
today, and I have not yet seen the complete report. It
discusses a number of areas of concern.
I must say that the Bulgarian Government itself has
identified rule-of-law matters as of concern to them and
certainly of civil society. And one of the good things that has
happened as a result of this is that there is a robust public
discussion of rule-of-law matters.
I cannot speak to penalties that have been assessed. I do
not have any specific information on that. I would be glad to
look into it. But certainly having this relationship with the
EU, this dialogue has had several positive effects. One is, as
I mentioned, that there is a broad discussion in the society of
these matters, and certainly any improvements that accrue as a
result of this mechanism will be all to the good.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
In response to Senator Barrasso, I think you talked about
some of the military cooperation between Bulgaria and the
United States, and I do want to acknowledge, before we close
our discussions, the contribution that Bulgaria has made to the
NATO efforts in Afghanistan. I know that has been very
important to the United States and we very much appreciate
that, and I hope you will share that, when you are confirmed
and you get to Bulgaria, with the people of the country.
Ambassador Ries. Yes, ma'am, I certainly will.
Senator Shaheen. I just have one final question for you,
Ms. Holtz, before closing the hearing, and that is with respect
to regional cooperation in the gulf because at a GCC leadership
meeting in May, Saudi Arabia proposed a plan to strengthen the
political unity of the GCC members and that move would
indirectly give the Saudis greater control over the GCC. Can
you let us know what the Omani position was with regard to the
Saudis' plan, and do they support that? Are they signed on or
do they have some concerns about it?
Ms. Holtz. Thank you, Madam Chairman. A very good question.
Oman has occasionally taken a somewhat independent role and
voice in the GCC deliberations and decisions, and I believe in
this case that they are still debating the issue but have
concerns about the relative weight that the other gulf
countries apply within the GCC role. So we are in a constant
dialogue with all the GCC partners about the security
architecture and beefing up the regional capacity to deal with
issues as a political union, as a security union. So, yes, you
are correct that Oman has occasionally been somewhat
independent in that body. They support the strategic goals of
the GCC, of course: regional stability, resolution of conflict,
de-escalation of tensions, and all those things.
Senator Shaheen. And does our State Department think that
the Saudis should have greater control over the GCC?
Ms. Holtz. I do not think we have taken a position on that
at all. I think we want to enhance the ability of the GCC to
address the issues regionally, but I do not think that we have
indicated that any one particular GCC member should be dominant
over the rest.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
Well, thank you all very much for your testimony this
afternoon, for your willingness to take on these new
challenges.
And I will just announce that the record for this hearing
will be open until close of business tomorrow. So there may be
other questions that come in during that time.
Again, thank you all. Thank you to your families.
And the hearing is now ended.
[Whereupon, at 4: p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
----------
Additional Questions and Answers Submitted for the Record
Responses of Greta C. Holtz to Questions Submitted
by Senator John F. Kerry
Question. The U.S.-Oman Free Trade Agreement entered into force in
January 2009. In a review of the potential effects of an FTA with Oman,
the U.S. Trade Representative indicated that the FTA would likely have
negligible impact on U.S. employment.
Since its implementation in 2009, how has the FTA changed
the nature and level of trade between Oman and the United
States?
What categories of trade have seen the greatest growth, and
how have the U.S. and Omani economies been affected by the FTA?
Answer. Bilateral trade volume has grown by over 50 percent since
the FTA was implemented, from $2.2 billion in 2008 to $3.6 billion in
2011. U.S. exports to Oman were up 56 percent in the first quarter of
2012, measured year on year. U.S. firms are involved in large-scale
cooperative construction projects, such as Oman's new international
airport. The FTA has enabled U.S. firms to export high-quality products
at very competitive prices. U.S. chemical exports increased 196 percent
from 2008 to 2011 while U.S. agricultural exports increased 176 percent
in the same time period. Embassy Muscat is facilitating joint ventures
in health care, port development, and marine research. If I am
confirmed, continuing to promote American businesses in Oman will be
one of my priorities. In addition, I will work with the Omani
Government on full implementation of the agreement.
Question. The Sultan of Oman has been leading his government
through a series of political reforms for many years, including a
parliamentary election in 2011.
How much progress has the Omani Government made in securing
political and civil rights for its citizens and ensuring that
Omani leaders are accountable to their citizens?
How can the United States continue to facilitate the gradual
reforms already underway?
Answer. In 2010, a United Nations Development Program report ranked
Oman No. 1 globally in human development over the previous 40 years. In
addition, Sultan Qaboos has addressed Omani citizens' requests for a
more active role in government by appointing seven members of the
Majlis al-Shura, or Consultative Council, to the Cabinet in 2011.
Immediately following the 2011 Council elections, he granted the
Council new fact-finding and regulatory powers. The Sultan has raised
the level of government accountability by replacing several ministers
and enhancing the State auditing institution's power of review, as well
as increasing the authority of elected representatives to call
ministers to account for performance. Increased women's participation
in government is also an encouraging sign.
If confirmed, I will work with the Omani Government to actively
expand and strengthen civil society and political participation,
judicial reform, media independence, and progress on gender issues.
______
Responses of Thomas H. Armbruster to Questions Submitted
by Senator Richard G. Lugar
Question #1. Please provide a copy of the minutes of the meetings
of the Joint Economic Management and Accountability Committee for
calendar 2009, 2010, and 2011.
Answer. Thank you for your question. The documents you requested
are maintained by the Department of Interior. I refer you to them for
this request.
Question #2. Please describe the nature of the U.S. Department of
the Interior and the U.S. Department of State relationship in the
Marshall Islands. In what area(s) does the Interior Department take the
lead in matters involving the U.S. Government and the Marshall Islands?
Answer. The U.S. Department of the Interior and the U.S. Department
of State enjoy a unique and productive relationship in the Marshall
Islands. This interagency cooperation is critical to continuing
progress in our engagement with the Marshall Islands. As Chief of
Mission, the Ambassador oversees the overall bilateral relationship
with the Marshall Islands, and is responsible for all executive branch
employees while in the Marshall Islands. Under the terms of the Compact
as Amended, the Department of the Interior is responsible for
administering most financial assistance provisions under the Compact.
The Ambassador confers frequently with the Department of the Interior's
Grant Management Specialist working in the Embassy as well as other
Interior officials in Hawaii and Washington, DC, on issues related to
oversight of Compact assistance as well as policy issues such as the
financial impact of Compact State migrants on U.S. jurisdictions. The
Director of Insular Affairs at the Department of the Interior chairs
meetings of the Joint Economic Management and Financial Accountability
Committee and the Trust Fund Committee for the people of the Republic
of the Marshall Islands.
Question #3. Please provide a list of U.S. Government civilian
positions, by Departments/other entities, in the Marshall Islands.
Answer. The U.S. Embassy employs 39 individuals, including four
direct hire U.S. State Department employees, one direct hire
representative from the Department of the Interior, and one Personal
Services Contract employee of the U.S. Agency for International
Development. The remaining 33 are local-hire Embassy employees, 17 of
which are the guard force. The Department of Energy employs 22 local
hire employees in the RMI at its office in Majuro, 2 employees in
Kwajalein,and 13 local workers in Rongelap, Utrik, Bikini, and Enewetak
(including full-time, part-time and casual field workers). Marshallese
citizens staff the whole body counting facilities in Majuro, Rongelap,
and Enewetak. The National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA) funds one position to manage the regional NOAA weather station
in Majuro. The U.S. Department of Agriculture has one local hire
position in the RMI to manage the agency's housing loan program.
On Kwajalein, the U.S. Army Installation on Kwajalein Atoll is led
by 14 uniformed members of the U.S. military and 39 Army civilians. The
remaining workers on the installation include 778 U.S. contractors and
873 local Marshallese workers.
Question #4. U.S. grant assistance to the Marshall Islands under
the Compact targets the areas of education, health, infrastructure,
public sector capacity-building, private sector development, and the
environment.
What mechanisms are in place in each sector to provide
transparency and
accountability in the use of U.S. funds?
Answer. The Department of the Interior employs one full-time grant
oversight officer, working out of the U.S. Embassy in Majuro, to ensure
that Compact funds are properly managed and reported. In addition, the
Department of the Interior's Office of Insular Affairs in Honolulu
sends representatives to Majuro every quarter to review accounting
reports and ensure all funds are properly administered.
Articles V,VI, and VII of the Agreement Concerning Procedures for
the Implementation of United States Economic Assistance provided in the
Compact, as amended, of Free Association Between the Government of the
United States of America and the Government of the Republic of the
Marshall Islands (the Fiscal Procedures Agreement) stipulate the
mechanisms that are in place in each sector of the Compact, as amended,
to provide transparency and accountability in the use of U.S. funds.
Requirements under Article V include the submission by the
Government of the Republic of the Marshall Islands (GRMI) of a Medium-
Term Budget and Investment Framework (MTBIF) and amended every 3 years;
the submission of an annual proposal for the division of the annual
economic assistance among sectors; and annual U.S./RMI Budget
consultations in July of each year prior to the Annual JEMFAC Meeting
in August of each year.
Article VI stipulates the Standards for Financial Managements
Systems, Quarterly Financial Reporting Requirements, Annual Financial
Reporting Requirements, Accounting Basis, Period of Availability of
Grant Funds, and Procurement Regulations.
Article VIII requires that the GRMI conduct a yearly financial and
compliance audit, within the meaning of the Single Audit Act, as
amended (31 U.S.C. 7501 et seq.), More detailed information can be
found in the attached sections of Articles V, VI, and VIII of the
Compact's Fiscal Procedures Agreement.
Question #5. During the last 3 years what have been the areas of
greatest progress in anticorruption efforts in the Marshall Islands
pertaining to the flow of U.S. funds, and other areas as well?
Answer. Although more work remains to be done, the Republic of the
Marshall Islands (RMI) have worked to improve capacity and
accountability for the flow of U.S. and other bilateral funds. In 2011,
the RMI identified $539,888 in fraudulent transactions involving U.S.
federal grants, and the RMI Office of the Attorney General continues to
prosecute the individuals involved. These prosecutions--the first in
RMI history related to misuse of foreign donor assistance--send an
important message that the country is committed to improving
accountability. In 2012, the RMI also increased the staffing of the
Office of the Auditor General and has begun conducting performance
audits and other regular audits of public accounts.
Question #6. During the last 3 years, what are the other major aid
donor countries with which United States officials have had direct
discussions to coordinate and to promote sustainable development in the
Marshall Islands? Please provide a comparison, by country, of aid
provided to the Marshall Islands.
Answer. The United States, through our Embassy in Majuro, routinely
consults with the other largest bilateral donors--Taiwan and Japan--
resident in the Marshall Islands and Australia, resident in the
Federated States of Micronesia, as well as with multilateral
organizations such as the Asian Development Bank and the United Nations
Development Program. The United States has also, on occasion, met with
and discussed donor issues with other nonresident diplomatic
representatives visiting the Republic of the Marshall Islands (RMI),
such as New Zealand, the European Union, France, and Sweden. Embassy
officials have information suggesting the RMI also receives donor
assistance from Israel and the United Arab Emirates, but we have not
had the opportunity to meet with their representatives, who are not
resident in Majuro. In December 2011, the RMI hosted a Development
Partner Meeting for bilateral and multilateral donors.
The RMI does not currently have an office to coordinate donor
assistance or provide a breakdown of assistance received by country. A
recent recommendation from the Pacific Islands Forum during a 2012
visit was the creation of an aid management unit with a mandate to
monitor aid flows and develop and implement a development assistance
policy to better coordinate international donor assistance.
Followup to Question #1. Does the State Department not have a copy
of the minutes of the meetings referenced even though the Department is
represented on the JEMFAC?
Answer. The Department of the Interior holds the final, official
copies of the minutes of JEMFAC meetings. The Department of State is on
the board of the committee, and we collaborate closely with the
Department of the Interior in oversight of RMI funding. The Ambassador
attends JEMFAC meetings as an observer.
As a result of Senator Lugar's request and followup question, the
Department of State consulted with the Department of the Interior about
releasing copies of the meeting minutes requested. The Department of
the Interior has no objection to releasing the documents through the
Department of State to Senator Lugar, and the minutes of the meetings
have been attached.
[Editor's note.--The JEMFAC meetings documents mentioned above were too
voluminous to include in the printed hearing therefore they will be
maintained in the permanent record of the committee.]
______
Responses of Marcie B. Ries to Questions Submitted
by Senator Benjamin L. Carden
Question. The situation of the Roma may present the most serious
human rights issues in Bulgaria.
First and foremost, are you prepared to speak out and speak
out publicly in the event of significant intraethnic violence
of the kind that erupted before the local elections last fall?
Answer. In reaction to the protests, the administration strongly
encouraged efforts by the Bulgarian Government authorities to ensure
respect for the rule of law and the protection of all citizens. If
confirmed, I will continue to vigorously advocate for respect for the
rule of law, and in the event of significant incidents of interethnic
violence, to condemn them publicly.
Question. Bulgaria, like a number of other countries, has failed to
adequately
ensure that all of its Romani citizens have proper identity documents.
Separately, Bulgaria has also failed to adequately regularize the legal
status of significant amounts of housing in which Roma live. It now
appears that these two problems are spiraling together to create yet a
third: a new law requires people to own property or have a tenancy
agreement in order to get identity documents, and without identity
documents, they can't vote. I don't have any indication that the
disenfranchisement of Roma was an intended consequence, but it is a
terrible result.
Will you engage with Bulgarian authorities on all three of
these issues: identity documents, regularizing housing, and
voting rights for Roma?
Answer. As Secretary Clinton told young Roma leaders when she met
with them in Sofia on February 5, protecting and promoting the human
rights of Roma everywhere has long been a personal commitment of hers
and remains a priority for the Obama administration. If confirmed, I
will advocate for nondiscrimination and equal protection of all
citizens, including the Roma, and will encourage strong, effective
Romani civil society capable of advancing and defending its own
interests.
______
Responses of Michael D. Kirby to Questions Submitted
by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin
Question. I want to thank the State Department for keeping the
unresolved case of the Bytyqi brother murders on the bilateral agenda.
What steps will you take as Ambassador to ensure justice in
this case?
There are other unresolved cases from the late Milosevic era
as well; do you believe the Interior Ministry should be
targeted for reform that would remove the holdovers from the
1990s and deny them their current protection from prosecution
for past crimes?
Answer. The ongoing failure of Serbian authorities to investigate
adequately, and hold accountable those responsible for the murder of
the Bytyqi brothers continues to pose a challenge to the deepening of
our bilateral relationship. Secretary Clinton, Deputy Secretary Burns,
and other senior officials have urged Serbian authorities to bring
those responsible to justice, including most recently Assistant
Secretary Philip Gordon during his July 8-9 visit to Belgrade.
The failure of the Serbian Government to prosecute not only those
who ordered and carried out the Bytyqi killings, but also those who
permitted the attack on our Embassy in Belgrade in 2008 and those
responsible for such crimes as the murder of Slavko Curuvija in 1999--
who was shot and killed not long after he testified before the Helsinki
Commission in 1998--is deeply troubling. The United States will
continue to advocate strongly for justice in these cases. These
failures point to continuing weaknesses in the rule of law in Serbia, a
critical criterion for Serbia's advancement in the EU accession
process.
The United States expects the Serbian authorities to take necessary
steps to investigate properly these cases, to continue undertaking
necessary reforms within the Interior Ministry to break down this
``wall of silence,'' and to ensure that those complicit in Milosevic-
era crimes are brought to justice. If confirmed, I will make it a
priority to seek justice in these cases.
Question. What can we be doing now to ensure that Serbia will not
abuse its chairmanship of the OSCE in 2015 to advance its own national
agenda in the Western Balkans? Given the longstanding OSCE focus on
Roma, will we use the upcoming 2015 chairmanship as a mechanism to
press Serbia to respect the rights of Roma, especially as authorities
address the housing disputes which recently have increased tensions and
led to violence?
Answer. Each OSCE Chairman-in-Office is expected to uphold the
values, principles, and institutions of the OSCE during its
chairmanship. The United States will expect no less from Serbia. The
2014 Chairman-in-Office, Switzerland, is working closely with Serbia to
establish continuity across their two chairmanships. We expect that
their proposed program of work will focus on the core issues facing the
organization, including how to ensure and enhance our collective
efforts to meet the OSCE's commitments in an era of tight budgets. In
addition, during Serbia's chairmanship, Switzerland will appoint a
Swiss envoy on Balkan issues to avoid any perceptions of a conflict of
interest, given Serbia's vested interests in the region, in particular
in Kosovo and Bosnia and Herzegovina, which currently host the OSCE's
two largest field missions.
Chairing the OSCE is Serbia's opportunity to demonstrate it is
ready to take a position of leadership in world affairs. This also
means leading by example. Living up to its OSCE commitments will show
all concerned that Serbia is ready for its chairmanship, and if
confirmed I will engage at all levels of the Government of Serbia to
assist them in this endeavor.
The United States will expect Serbia to live up to its commitments
in the human dimension, including those that concern minority
populations such as Roma. This administration remains committed, a fact
reinforced by Secretary Clinton's announcement that the United States
will be an observer in the Decade of Roma Inclusion, to continuing to
champion the human rights of members of the Roma minority and reminding
Serbia and other OSCE participating states of their commitments to
protect and promote the inclusion of Roma.
______
Response of Greta C. Holtz to Question Submitted
by Senator Robert P. Casey, Jr.
Question. Oman is one of our closest allies in the Persian Gulf,
and also maintains a friendly relationship with Iran.
How does Oman balance relations with the United States and
Iran?
How does Oman support U.S. and international policy on Iran,
including compliance with sanctions?
If confirmed, how will you work with Oman on Iran?
Answer. The Sultanate of Oman is one of our oldest and most
dependable friends in the Arab world. Oman values its close
relationship with the United States and has expressed its appreciation
for U.S. cooperation on a range of issues. With a longstanding policy
of maintaining open avenues of communication and working relations with
all of its neighbors, Oman has also served as a helpful interlocutor
between the United States and Iran in the past. The Omanis have
conveyed to Iran the possible consequences of its behavior. We work
with Omani officials on issues related to Iran. The Omanis share our
concern about a nuclear Iran and have cooperated with the United States
on U.S. and international sanctions.
TheGgovernment of Oman has made it clear that it is in Oman's
national interest to maintain peace and security in the region. This
includes keeping the region free of a nuclear-armed Iran and other
Iranian provocations. Oman also shares the interest of the United
States and the international community in maintaining the free flow of
commerce and freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz, which falls
within Omani territorial waters, as well as other international
waterways. As a member of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) and the
Arab League, Oman has been supportive of initiatives such as the U.S.-
GCC Strategic Cooperation Forum, which promotes regional collaboration
on issues of strategic importance to the region, such as the threat
posed by Iran.
If confirmed, I will employ the full range of our diplomatic tools
to deepen our engagement and enhance cooperation with Oman in order to
achieve our national security objectives of regional stability and
resolution of regional conflicts.
______
Response of John M. Koenig to Question Submitted
by Senator Robert P. Casey, Jr.
Question. Negotiations between the Greek and Turkish Cypriot
communities have stalled, and some have suggested the hope for a
settlement is low. Prospects for a settlement have suffered as a result
of Turkey's objections to the Republic of Cyprus's plans for energy
exploration and threats to boycott EU activities involving Cyprus as
rotating EU president. Concerns have also been raised about non-Cypriot
Turkish citizens who have settled on the island in the past 20 years,
changing the island's demographics. This group has become a key issue
in the negotiations.
What is your assessment of these concerns?
What is the future of reunification negotiations, and if
confirmed how would you work with the Cypriots to encourage a
negotiated settlement between the two communities?
Answer. If confirmed, I will support the United Nations' efforts to
work for a negotiated settlement that addresses the human rights of all
concerned in a balanced manner. I will also exert all possible efforts
to support the process, which is the only practical way to resolve the
many critical issues between the communities.
A comprehensive settlement plan will need to address issues of
citizenship and residency on the island. The administration believes
that a settlement plan dealing with these and other questions needs to
be worked out between the communities, with United Nations support, and
needs to be acceptable to majorities in both of the island's
communities. The Cypriot-owned and Cypriot-led process provides the
best way forward to achieve a just and lasting settlement. Greek
Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot leaders must demonstrate courage and
ingenuity to achieve convergences on the difficult issues before them.
The United States urges both sides to engage constructively and find
ways to bridge differences.
NOMINATIONS OF JAMES B. CUNNINGHAM AND RICHARD G. OLSON
----------
TUESDAY, JULY 31, 2012
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Foreign Relations,
Washington, DC.
----------
Hon. James B. Cunningham, of New York, to be Ambassador to the
Islamic Republic of Afghanistan
Hon. Richard G. Olson, of New Mexico, to be Ambassador to the
Islamic Republic of Pakistan
----------
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:07 a.m., in
room SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. John F. Kerry
(chairman of the committee) presiding.
Present: Senators Kerry, Menendez, Casey, Udall, Lugar,
Corker, Rubio, and Isakson.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN F. KERRY,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW MASSACHUSETTS
The Chairman. The hearing will come to order. Good morning.
We apologize for beginning a few minutes late, but since
this is our wrapup week, there are more meetings going on than
there are hours and available moments to get to them, I'm
afraid.
We're delighted to welcome everybody here to consider the
nominations of two distinguished career Foreign Service
officers who are selected to serve in the very important posts
of Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Ambassadors James Cunningham and Richard Olson are very
experienced and talented diplomats, and I am convinced, as I
think the committee is and will be, that they bring the
combination of intelligence and experience, diligence,
necessary for both of these critical assignments.
Obviously, today's hearing comes at a pivotal moment. All
you have to do is pick up the newspapers any given day in the
last few weeks, and Afghanistan and Pakistan are, as usual,
swirling around in them.
The signing of the strategic partnership agreement earlier
this year marked the beginning, not the end, of a new phase of
U.S. engagement in Afghanistan. And as international
conferences from Istanbul and Bonn to Chicago and Tokyo have
made clear, the world is not going to simply walk away from or
abandon its investment in a stable Afghanistan.
Our task now is to leverage our commitment into a
sustainable transition that prevents Afghanistan and the region
from backsliding into widespread ethnic or sectarian violence.
A coordinated political, security, and economic transition
will be challenging. And as we move forward, there are several
key steps that we need to focus on.
First and most important, we must prepare now for the
Afghan elections in 2014. Ultimately, it is the political
transition that will determine whether our military gains are
sustainable, and the strength and quality of the Afghan state
we leave behind will be determined by that political
transition.
Our role should not interfere in domestic politics. It is
critical that Afghans must pick their leaders freely and
fairly. But we should make clear that we will only support a
technical process that is transparent and credible. Selection
of an accountable, independent election commission,
transparency in new election laws, and early preparation of
voter lists are all critical steps for Afghans in order that
they have a voice and a choice in the election.
Just as important, our political strategy has to go beyond
reconciliation in order to support a national consensus among
key Afghan stakeholders. Too many Afghans are preparing to
fight to secure their interests, instead of uniting for the
good of their country. I think we need to send a strong message
that the United States supports a comprehensive political
process that is fully inclusive, transparent, and respectful of
the rights of all groups, including women and ethnic
minorities.
Facilitating a political transition also requires us to
consider how to best build and sustain the Afghan Army and the
police in order to leave behind a force that can independently
secure key terrain. And there are a lot of questions about the
viability of that, needless to say.
We have 2 years to lay that foundation for a force that is
responsive to the needs of its people.
And it's interesting, as I talk to leaders in Pakistan, you
get a difference in stated interests about the size and scope
and capacity of that force. And obviously, there is a
connection to those interests with respect to each country's
choices that it is making right now.
So we need to continue to focus on combating corruption, on
emphasizing respect for human rights and rule of law. We also
need to focus our assessment tools on creating an affordable
and sustainable effective force.
As we begin to build or as we build, and as the Afghans
gain confidence about their future, we also need to move in the
areas of economic development and stability.
Despite the progress that was made in Tokyo to pledge $16
billion in donor aid through 2015, Afghanistan could very well
still face a major economic crisis. And we've made significant
development achievements over the past decade, but I think
everyone would agree the gains are fragile. Sustaining them is
going to require continued investments and an Afghan Government
that itself can generate sufficient revenue.
Our development approach must also take into account
Afghanistan's worsening humanitarian crisis and the immense
need of vulnerable populations. So obviously, there's no
shortage of challenge here.
Finally, our strategy has to continue to reflect the
interconnectedness of the region's challenges, from Central
Asia to Iran to India to Pakistan.
I've said a number of times before, but I believe it even
more so now, that what happens in the region, in the region as
a whole, will do more to determine the outcome in Afghanistan
than any shift in strategy. And Pakistan, in particular,
remains central to that effort.
It's no secret that last year was a very challenging one in
our relationship, in the United States-Pakistan axis. Many
Pakistanis believe that America will simply once again abandon
the region, as we did after the fall of the Soviet Union, which
is one reason why Pakistan continues to hedge its bets and rely
on certain insurgent groups for strategic depth.
The result has been a counterproductive back-and-forth,
point and counterpoint, that undermines what really ought to be
a more cooperative relationship. And we see that in today's
newspaper stories about accusations regarding Afghanistan-based
insurgent initiatives in Pakistan.
I'm pleased that the recent developments with Pakistan have
led to the reopening of the critical NATO supply lines. And
despite many of our frustrations and setbacks, serious
policymakers on both sides understand that we have more to gain
by finding common ground and working together on areas of
mutual concern. And those are, clearly, from fighting terrorism
to facilitating economic development.
I think we also need to point out that Pakistan has
suffered grievously at the hands of al-Qaeda, the Taliban, and
affiliated terrorist groups. Some 38,000 Pakistani citizens and
more than 6,000 Pakistani Army and security forces have died
from terrorist incidents since 2001.
Pakistan is also facing a massive economic and energy
crisis. And political infighting and election-year politics
complicate efforts to address deteriorating situations. And
none of us are unfamiliar with those kinds of dynamics even
here at home.
For years now, we've been trying to work with Pakistan to
create a stable economy. And that's why our committee led the
effort with the Kerry-Lugar-Berman bill. It's why Senator Lugar
and I have fought for continued investments in the long-term
relationship that is based on mutual goals.
Often, the reward for diplomats who succeed in difficult
postings with long odds is tougher assignments with longer
odds. And our nominees today are no exception to that rule.
James Cunningham has already served a tour in Afghanistan,
most recently as Deputy Ambassador in Kabul. He's uniquely
placed, I think, to lay the foundation for our coordinated
political, security, and economic transition.
And I want to note that the Ambassador's wife, Leslie, and
I think his daughters, Emma and Abigail, are here today, and we
welcome both of them, all of you, all three of you. Thank you.
It's particularly good to see him again here. I've been
with him in Kabul and before that, when he was serving as our
Ambassador to Israel, and delighted to welcome him back here.
Richard Olson served most recently as the coordinating
director for development and economic affairs in Kabul. And I
am confident that his experience in Afghanistan and previous
leadership in the Middle East will serve him well as he works
to strengthen our relationship with Pakistan.
So we're very pleased to welcome them here today.
Also, I think, Ambassador Olson, your daughter is here. Am
I correct? Isabella? She's interning in Senator Udall's office.
Delighted to have you here. You've got an inside track on
the seating and other things, too.
So we really thank you for your service, and we
particularly thank your families for their service, because
everybody is part of this. And no one recognizes that more than
this committee, I think.
Senator Lugar.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD G. LUGAR,
U.S. SENATOR FROM INDIANA
Senator Lugar. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I join the chairman
in welcoming the distinguished nominees and their family
members this morning.
The Foreign Relations Committee is taking up these
nominations at a critical time. It is important to avoid gaps
in leadership that could diminish the effectiveness of our
policies toward Afghanistan and Pakistan.
We look forward to hearing the administration's assessments
of the situation in those countries and its plans for moving
forward.
American policy in Afghanistan has been evolving on the
margins. Troop levels are anticipated to be reduced in the
coming months, and we have seen some narrowing of the mission.
However, the United States continues to spend enormous sums in
that country on national building objectives that ultimately
may contribute little to U.S. vital interests.
We need a clear explanation of what metrics must be
satisfied to achieve the original intent of the mission to
prevent Afghanistan territory from being used as a terrorist
safe haven. It is essential that Afghanistan is viewed in the
broader strategic context and that our policy there is not
determined by political optics or inertia.
If we reapportioned our worldwide military and diplomatic
assets without reference to where they are now, it is doubtful
that a rational review would commit so many resources to
Afghanistan. The country is important, but does not hold that
level of strategic value for us, especially at a time when our
Nation is confronting a debt crisis, our Armed Forces have been
strained by repeated combat deployments, and we are attempting
to place more emphasis on East Asia.
Further, we know that al-Qaeda has a far more significant
presence in Pakistan than in Afghanistan. To the extent that
our purpose in Afghanistan is to confront the global terrorist
threat, we should be refocusing resources on Pakistan, Yemen,
Somalia, parts of North Africa, and other locations.
In this context, the question becomes how to transition to
an efficient strategy for protecting our vital interests in
Afghanistan over the long term that does not involve massive,
open-ended expenditures and large American military
deployments.
The Pakistan side of the border has a fundamentally
different dynamic. Despite the death of Osama bin Laden, al-
Qaeda and other terrorist groups maintain a strong presence in
the country. There is no question that the threat of these
groups, combined with worries about state collapse, conflict
between India and Pakistan, the safety of the Pakistani nuclear
arsenal, and Pakistan's intersection with other states in the
region, make it a strategically vital country worth the cost of
engagement.
But the contradictions inherent in Pakistani society and
government necessitate that we apply intense oversight to
ensure that our assistance and diplomacy advance our
objectives.
Our Ambassador will be the critical player in evaluating
whether our programs in Pakistan are working and contributing
to a genuine partnership between our two countries.
It is worth noting that in 2011, almost 3,200 Pakistanis
died in terrorist-related incidents. Despite our differences,
our countries have strong incentives to cooperate on economic
and security issues.
I appreciate the sacrifices that our nominees have made on
behalf of U.S. national security, and I applaud the commitment
they are showing in accepting these very challenging
assignments. I thank the chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Lugar, very much.
Ambassador Cunningham, if you'd lead off, and then
Ambassador Olson. We appreciate, again, thanks for being here.
Your full statement will be placed in the record, as if
read in full, and we look forward to your summary.
STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES B. CUNNINGHAM, OF NEW YORK, TO BE
AMBASSADOR TO THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF AFGHANISTAN
Ambassador Cunningham. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman,
Ranking Member Senator Lugar, members of the committee. Thank
you for the opportunity to appear before you today as President
Obama's nominee to be the United States next Ambassador to the
Islamic Republic of Afghanistan.
I'm truly honored that President Obama and Secretary
Clinton have placed their trust in me. And I look forward, if
confirmed by the Senate, to working closely with you to advance
America's interests in Afghanistan, and I will welcome frequent
opportunities to consult with you.
For the past year, I've been serving as Deputy Ambassador
at U.S. Embassy Kabul, supporting Ambassador Ryan Crocker in
leading a mission of some 1,100 dedicated staff from 18 U.S.
Government agencies. I fully intend, if confirmed, to follow
his example of maintaining the closest possible cooperation
between the civilian and the military efforts in Afghanistan
and of pursuing a whole-of-government approach to the important
challenges before us.
Under Ambassador Crocker's outstanding leadership, we have
achieved a great deal over the past year, including completion
of our historic strategic partnership agreement, which will
guide our enduring partnership now and beyond the end of
transition in 2014.
The strategic partnership and the successful NATO summit in
Chicago and the Tokyo conference send a clear message to the
Afghan people and to the region that Afghanistan will have the
support of the international community and of the United States
in the years ahead.
If confirmed, I will build on this successful diplomatic
campaign, underscoring our commitment to help build an
Afghanistan that will contribute to stability in the region and
never again be a source of international terrorist threat to
the United States.
On September 11, 2001, I was the Acting Representative to
the United Nations in New York. The next day, I told the
members of the U.N. in the Security Council and in the General
Assembly, on behalf of the United States, that the 9/11 terror
attack was not just an attack on the United States, but an
attack on all, of whatever religion or nation who share the
values on which our global community rests.
That struggle between terror and those values continues
today and will, unfortunately, continue for some time to come.
In Afghanistan, we are turning a page. Over the past
several months, we and our Afghan and international partners
have created an unprecedented, yet sustainable, framework of
support for Afghanistan consisting of a web of bilateral and
multilateral commitments.
Our strategy for a stable Afghanistan has five elements:
transitioning to Afghan responsibility for security in 2014,
training Afghan National Security Forces, building an enduring
partnership with Afghanistan, supporting Afghan reconciliation,
and promoting regional stability and economic integration.
At the Lisbon summit in 2010, with our allies and partners,
we established the timeline for security transition. And as
foreseen, the Afghans are taking on responsibility for
security, with Afghan security forces taking the lead now in
providing security for some 75 percent of the population.
Afghan security forces will reach their full surge strength
soon and are becoming increasingly capable, despite the many
obstacles to be overcome.
At the Bonn conference in December last year, Afghan
leaders presented to the international community the outlines
of a strategy to ensure Afghanistan's stability beyond the
troop drawdown. And in turn, the international community
committed to supporting Afghanistan throughout a transformation
decade, from 2015 to 2024, with the aim of ensuring continued
security, economic, and democratic gains after the transition.
In May of this year, President Obama and President Karzai
signed the strategic partnership agreement, which provides a
long-term framework for relations between the United States and
a fully sovereign Afghanistan.
Secretary Clinton's announcement during her July 7 visit to
Kabul that the President had designated Afghanistan a major
non-NATO ally was another signal of our commitment.
At the NATO summit in Chicago, NATO and its ISAF partners
noted that, come mid-2013, we will shift to a support role as
the Afghans step forward to lead. The United States reaffirmed
our commitment to Afghan security beyond 2014, and the
international community committed to providing the Afghan
security forces the support and funds they need for
sustainment.
The Afghan Government also recognized that NATO and its
partners have a crucial role to play in training, advising, and
assisting the Afghan security forces and invited NATO to
continue its support after the ISAF mission concludes at the
end of 2014.
In order to address support for Afghanistan's development,
growth, and governance, the international community gathered in
Tokyo on July 8 to further define the concept of mutual
accountability and assure Afghanistan of continued economic
assistance. The Japanese announced that the international
community had pledged $16 billion in aid over the next 4 years,
sufficient to cover Afghanistan's fiscal gap as identified by
the World Bank.
Of equal importance was the adoption of a mutual
accountability framework, which affirmed that international
assistance to Afghanistan is not unconditional, that the Afghan
Government must act decisively to ensure that the returns on
the international effort are sustained and irreversible.
That must include, as Secretary Clinton observed, fighting
corruption, improving governance, strengthening the rule of
law, and increasing access to economic opportunity for all
Afghans, especially for women.
So today, the pieces of a long term, enduring support
structure for Afghanistan's continuing progress and development
are now in place. This makes clear to Afghans and to the region
that the security transition does not mean we are abandoning
Afghanistan. And the Taliban appear to be taking notice.
For the first time in a decade, they are debating and
signaling an openness to negotiations. The sole purpose of U.S.
support for reconciliation is to create the conditions for
inclusive national dialogue among all Afghans about the future
of their country.
We have been consistent, along with our partners, about the
necessary outcomes of any negotiation. Insurgents must break
ties with al-Qaeda, renounce violence, and abide by the Afghan
constitution, including the rights afforded to women and
minorities. And we have been clear about steps the Taliban
should take to signal their interest in a peace process.
So the Taliban face a clear choice: They can dissociate
from international terrorism and enter an Afghan peace process,
or face increasingly capable Afghan National Security Forces
supported by the United States and our allies.
And also key to Afghanistan's future stability will be a
credible and inclusive Presidential election in 2014, followed
by a constitutional transfer of power.
President Karzai has repeatedly affirmed his commitment to
a peaceful constitutional transition of power at the end of his
second term. All Afghans, whatever their gender, ethnicity, or
religion, have much to gain from a successful political
transition and should support it.
The United States is committed to working with
international partners to support the Afghans as they choose
their next leader.
Mr. Chairman, I will not play down the difficulties, but
many, many Afghans are working hard every day for a better
future, and we will continue to support the Afghan Government
and people, now and after the 2014 elections with a new
President, in the hard work needed to bring the security,
development, and stability which the Afghan people so earnestly
desire and deserve after decades of violence.
I would be honored, with the consent of the Senate, to lead
the U.S. mission in Afghanistan in the important work of
enhancing the security of the United States and of helping
Afghanistan make further progress toward that vision of the
future.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and members, I look forward to
your questions.
[The prepared statement of Ambassador Cunningham follows:]
Prepared Statement of James B. Cunningham
Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Lugar, members of the committee, thank
you for the opportunity to appear before you today as President Obama's
nominee to be the United States next Ambassador to the Islamic Republic
of Afghanistan. I am truly honored that President Obama and Secretary
Clinton have placed their trust in me. I look forward, if confirmed by
the Senate, to working closely with you to advance America's interests
in Afghanistan. I will welcome frequent opportunities to consult with
you, as I know many of you have spent a great deal of time working on
Afghanistan in recent years and I have had the pleasure of meeting
several of you in Afghanistan and during my previous assignment as U.S.
Ambassador to Israel. We appreciate that so many of you are willing to
travel to Afghanistan to see firsthand the conditions on the ground,
and we welcome your future visits.
For the past year I have been serving as Deputy Ambassador at U.S.
Embassy Kabul, supporting Ambassador Ryan Crocker in leading a mission
of some 1,100 dedicated staff from 18 U.S. Government agencies. I fully
intend, if confirmed, to follow his example of maintaining the closest
possible cooperation between the civilian and military efforts in
Afghanistan and of pursuing a ``whole of government'' approach to the
important challenges before us. Under Ambassador Crocker's outstanding
leadership we achieved a great deal over the past year, including
completion of our historic Strategic Partnership Agreement (SPA), which
will guide our enduring partnership now, and beyond the end of
Transition in 2014. The SPA, and the successful NATO summit in Chicago
and the Tokyo Conference, send a clear message to the Afghan people,
and to the region, that Afghanistan will have the support of the
international community, and of the United States, in the years ahead.
If confirmed, I will build on this successful diplomatic campaign,
underscoring our collective commitment to help build an Afghanistan
that will contribute to stability in the region, and never again be a
source of international terrorist threats to the United States.
On September 11, 2001, I was the Acting Representative to the
United Nations in New York. The next day, I told the members of the
U.N. on behalf of the United States that the 9/11 terror was not just
an attack on the United States but an attack on all, of whatever
religion or nation, who shared the values on which our global community
rests. That struggle between terror and those values continues today,
and will, unfortunately, continue for some time to come.
In Afghanistan, we are turning a page. Over the past several
months, we and our Afghan and international partners have created an
unprecedented yet sustainable framework of support for Afghanistan,
consisting of a web of bilateral and multilateral commitments. As the
President said in his May speech to the nation from Bagram Air Base,
our core goal in Afghanistan is to defeat al-Qaeda and prevent
Afghanistan from ever again becoming a safe haven for terrorists. Our
strategy for a stable Afghanistan has five elements: transitioning to
Afghan responsibility for security in 2014; training Afghan National
Security Forces (ANSF); building an enduring partnership with
Afghanistan; supporting Afghan reconciliation; and promoting regional
stability and economic integration. Our task will be to ensure that the
successes and outcomes of the three surges: military, civilian and
diplomatic, which have accomplished so much over the last 18 months,
are consolidated as Afghanistan assumes full security responsibility
and embarks on the ``transformation decade'' agreed at Bonn.
At the Lisbon NATO summit in 2010, with our allies and partners, we
established the timeline for security transition. Transition is
progressing, with three of the five tranches underway. As foreseen, the
Afghans are taking on responsibility for security, with Afghan security
forces taking the lead now in providing security for some 75 percent of
the population. Afghan security forces will reach their full surge
strength soon, and are becoming increasingly capable despite the many
obstacles to be overcome.
In Istanbul in November 2011, Afghanistan's neighbors and near-
neighbors--with our support--began a much-needed dialogue on regional
issues, including security, counterterrorism, and economic cooperation.
At the Bonn conference in December 2011, Afghan leaders presented to
the international community the outlines of a strategy to ensure
Afghanistan's stability beyond the troop drawdown. In turn, the
international community committed to supporting Afghanistan throughout
a ``transformation decade'' from 2015-2024, with the aim of ensuring
continued security, economic, and democratic gains in the post-
Transition period.
In May 2012, President Obama and President Karzai signed the
Strategic Partnership Agreement (SPA), which provides a long-term
framework for relations between the United States and a fully sovereign
Afghanistan. Secretary Clinton's announcement during her July 7 visit
to Kabul that the President designated Afghanistan a Major Non-NATO
Ally was another signal of our commitment.
At the NATO summit in Chicago in May, NATO and its ISAF partners
welcomed the progress being made on Transition, and noted that, come
mid-2013, we will shift into a support role as the Afghans step forward
to lead. The United States reaffirmed our commitment to Afghan security
beyond 2014, and the international community committed to providing the
Afghan security forces the support and funds they need for sustainment
after 2014. The Afghan Government also recognized that NATO and its
partners have a crucial role to play in training, advising, and
assisting the ANSF, and invited NATO to continue its support after the
ISAF mission concludes by the end of 2014.
In order to address support for Afghanistan's development, growth,
and governance, the international community gathered in Tokyo on July 8
to further define the concept of mutual accountability and assure
Afghanistan of continued economic assistance. The Japanese announced
that the international community had pledged $16 billion in aid over
the next 4 years, sufficient to cover Afghanistan's fiscal gap as
identified by the World Bank. Of equal importance was the adoption of a
``Mutual Accountability Framework,'' which affirmed that international
assistance to Afghanistan is not unconditional: the Afghan Government
must act decisively to ensure that the returns on the international
effort are sustained and irreversible. Afghanistan's partners, who want
so much to help, made clear that their ability to sustain support for
Afghanistan depends upon the Afghan Government delivering on what it
must do, particularly in the area of governance, to preserve and build
on the gains of the past decade.
I want to quote Secretary Clinton in Tokyo: ``The future of
Afghanistan belongs to its government and its people. And I welcome the
clear vision presented by President Karzai and the Afghan Government
today for unlocking Afghanistan's economic potential by achieving a
stable, democratic future. That must include fighting corruption,
improving governance, strengthening the rule of law, and increasing
access to economic opportunity for all Afghans, especially for women.''
Today, the pieces of a long term, enduring support structure for
Afghanistan's continuing progress and development are now in place. We
have made clear to Afghans, and to the region, that the security
transition does not mean we are abandoning Afghanistan. And the Taliban
appear to be taking notice. For the first time in a decade, they are
debating and signaling an openness to negotiations. The United States
supports Afghan peace efforts, aimed at a responsible settlement of the
conflict. The sole purpose of U.S. support for reconciliation is to
create the conditions for an inclusive national dialogue among all
Afghans about the future of their country. We have been consistent
about the necessary outcomes of any negotiation: insurgents must break
ties with al-Qaeda, renounce violence, and abide by the Afghan
Constitution, including the rights afforded to women and minorities.
And we have been clear about steps the Taliban should take to build
confidence, and signal their interest in a peace process. So, the
Taliban face a clear choice: they can dissociate from international
terrorism and enter an Afghan peace process, or face increasingly
capable Afghan National Security Forces supported by the United States
and our allies.
Looking to the future, there is much more to do to strengthen
Afghanistan's institutions, to ensure a smooth political transition in
2014 consistent with Afghanistan's Constitution, and to build regional
support for a stable, prosperous, secure Afghanistan in a stable,
prosperous, secure region.
Also key to Afghanistan's future stability will be a credible and
inclusive Presidential election in 2014, followed by a constitutional
transfer of power. President Karzai has repeatedly affirmed his
commitment to a peaceful, constitutional transition of power at the end
of his second term. All Afghans, whatever their gender, ethnicity or
religion, have much to gain from a successful political transition, and
the United States is committed to working with international partners
to support the Afghans as they choose their next leader.
I will not play down the difficulties. But many Afghans are working
hard for a better future, and we will continue to support the Afghan
Government and people, now and after the 2014 elections with a new
President, in the hard work needed to bring the security, development,
and stability which the Afghan people so earnestly desire and deserve
after decades of violence. I would be honored, with the consent of the
Senate, to lead the U.S. mission in Afghanistan in the important work
of enhancing the security of the United States and of helping
Afghanistan make further progress toward that vision of the future.
I want also in this testimony to highlight some of the substantial
gains Afghanistan has made over the last decade in partnership with the
United States and the international community. Today, over 8 million
Afghan children are enrolled in school, a third of them girls, compared
to just less than a million in school, nearly none of them girls, in
2001. Sixty percent of Afghans now have access to basic health care
facilities--a sixfold increase as compared to 2002--and a recent public
health survey showed average life expectancy has increased from 42 to
62, and infant mortality was cut in half. Nearly two-thirds of Afghans
have phones, and expanded radio and TV access is facilitating
information flow and connecting Afghan society. Approximately 100,000
Afghan women have benefited from microfinance opportunities and our
funding supports 17 protective service facilities for women and
children. And since 2006, our rule of law programs have trained over
20,000 professionals working in the Afghan criminal justice system
including prosecutors, defense attorneys, judges, investigators,
corrections personnel, and social workers.
With your continued support, our bilateral civilian assistance to
Afghanistan that has helped to achieve these results will continue to
facilitate economic stability, encourage responsive governance, and
sustain the social gains made over the last ten years. The critical
principles underlying our work are ``sustainability'' and ``mutual
accountability.'' Our resources will align with Afghan priorities, lay
the foundation for a successful security transition, bolster viable
sectors of the economy to build economic self-reliance, and promote
critical sectors of the Afghan economy, including agriculture and
extractives. Our programs will continue to strengthen the legal system
and law enforcement, and we will redouble our efforts to increase the
participation of women in all aspects of Afghan society. The Tokyo
mutual accountability framework also called for a greater portion of
our funding to be directly conditioned on specific reforms via an
incentive mechanism. We remain committed to the goal of providing at
least 50 percent of our development assistance through the Afghan
Government and believe the systems we have put in place will promote
transparency and accountability.
We all recognize that corruption challenges loom large in
Afghanistan and, if confirmed, I will continue to urge the government,
in its own vital interest, to aggressively pursue anticorruption
policies. I will also continue to make every effort to ensure that the
assistance which the American people have so generously provided is
used wisely and effectively, with the maximum degree of confidence that
it is serving the intended purpose. It is also important to note that
Afghanistan is making progress on key transparency reforms to
facilitate economic growth, including significant progress toward
Extractive Industry Transparency Initiative (EITI) compliance and World
Trade Organization accession. And while there is still much work to be
done, the Afghans have taken steps toward holding accountable those
responsible for the Kabul Bank crisis, permitting the IMF to restart
its relationship with Afghanistan in November of last year, a decision
which was reaffirmed in late June by the IMF Executive Board. The
United States is also continuing to assist the Afghans in disrupting
the opium trade as a funding source for Taliban and insurgent actors.
Private sector growth in Afghanistan, both through domestic and
international investment, will be key to building Afghanistan's
economic self-reliance throughout the Transformation Decade. We believe
that the Secretary's vision for a ``New Silk Road'' will gradually
transform South and Central Asia through a network of transit, trade,
investment, energy, and increased people-to-people ties.
A critical next step in our partnership with Afghanistan will be
the conclusion of a Bilateral Security Agreement (BSA), which we expect
will supersede our current Status of Forces Agreement for the long
term. Like the SPA, the BSA will be a negotiation between equal
partners and sovereign countries to create an agreed, updated framework
in which to implement the security cooperation and assistance committed
in the Strategic Partnership. There will be tough issues, but both
sides are committed to work together and we have built strong
relationships and partnership through the SPA.
Post transition in 2014, the Department of State envisions
maintaining an enduring presence in Afghanistan. We have learned
lessons from Iraq and seeking a balance between an appropriately sized
mission able to effect U.S. policy and current budget realities. We
plan to maintain an Embassy in Kabul and presences in four regional
centers that will signal our commitment to the Afghan people, support
effective diplomacy and avoid the perception of regional favoritism. We
are embracing a whole of government approach in our planning with the
goal of leveraging all USG capabilities across agencies and avoiding
redundancies. The staffing levels will be scaled appropriately for the
civilian mission in Afghanistan and in relation to other global
priorities.
Ultimately, the gains of the last decade must be sustained by the
Afghan people themselves. The processes of transition and continued
economic, political and social development must be Afghan-led, and we
are seeing Afghanistan taking increasing responsibility for its future.
Afghanistan will continue to face significant challenges, but we have
created the regional and international context for a political
settlement of the Afghan war and a gradual and responsible handover of
authority to Afghan National Security Forces.
The Chairman. Thank you, Ambassador Cunningham.
Ambassador Olson.
STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD G. OLSON, OF NEW MEXICO, TO BE
AMBASSADOR TO THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF PAKISTAN
Ambassador Olson. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Senator
Lugar, members of the committee, I thank you for the
opportunity to appear before you today.
I'm honored by President Obama's decision to nominate me as
United States Ambassador to the Islamic Republic of Pakistan,
and I deeply appreciate this demonstration of confidence by
President Obama and Secretary Clinton.
I look forward, if confirmed by the Senate, to working
closely with you to advance America's interests in Pakistan.
I have been privileged to serve in the Foreign Service
since 1982. I have worked many of these years in the Islamic
world, including most recently as Ambassador to the United Arab
Emirates just prior to my service in Afghanistan as the
coordinating director for development and economic affairs.
Through my career, I've been thankful for the support of my
family, especially my wonderful daughters, Anna and Isabella,
who, as you noted, Senator, Isabella is here today.
Senators, I do not need to tell you how important Pakistan
is to the United States. The United States has a clear interest
in supporting a stable, sovereign, and democratic Pakistan at
peace with itself and with its neighbors.
Continued engagement with Pakistan is necessary to pursue
the strategic defeat of al-Qaeda. Engagement is necessary to
promote peace and stability in Afghanistan, to encourage
regional stability, and to support political and economic
stability within Pakistan itself. Instability in Pakistan would
undermine what we are trying to achieve in the region.
Pakistan faces many challenges. It is located in a tough
region, continues to face economic stagnation, and is home to a
burgeoning population of nearly 200 million people, the
majority of whom are under the age of 25.
Pakistan has its own challenge in combating extremists that
have killed over 30,000 soldiers and Pakistani citizens. But
Pakistan is also a country with great potential, vast natural
resources, and a talented, resilient people.
As you know, the last several years have been extremely
difficult for United States-Pakistan relations. As Secretary
Clinton has said, our relationship with Pakistan is not always
an easy one, but it is important for both of our nations.
Throughout the past year, despite many challenges, we have
continued to engage the Pakistanis at the highest levels. We
are committed to putting this relationship on a more stable
footing.
The reopening of the NATO supply lines provides a renewed
opportunity to increase cooperation on our many shared
interests. And I would like to note in this regard that today
in Islamabad our Charge d'Affaires, Mr. Hoagland, signed a
memorandum of understanding with the Pakistani Ministry of
Defense on the reopening of the ground lines of communication,
NATO ground lines of communications, formalizing that opening.
If confirmed, I hope to build on this opportunity to
identify and refine our shared interests with Pakistan and find
practical, effective ways to work together to achieve them.
Those shared interests are many.
We share an interest in combating the extremists that
threaten both of our countries. Tragically, the Pakistani
people have suffered greatly from the extremist violence in
their country. They have lost more troops and civilians to acts
of terror than any other nation. But there has been cooperation
between our nations.
As President Obama has noted, we have captured or removed
from battlefield more terrorists on Pakistani soil than from
anywhere else. We could not have done that without Pakistan's
assistance.
We also share an interest in supporting political stability
and security in Afghanistan. As President Obama said on May 2,
we want Pakistan to be a full partner in supporting Afghan
peace and stability in a way that respects Pakistan's
sovereignty, interests, and democratic institutions.
Pakistani officials have told us repeatedly that, more than
any other Nation, they have a vested interest in seeking a
stable, secure Afghanistan.
Promoting democratic and economic stability in Pakistan is
also in our shared interest. Pakistan's upcoming general
election will mark the country's transition of power from one
civilian government to another, the first in Pakistan's
history.
We also share an interest in combating the use of
improvised explosive devices, and we are engaged in discussions
on this critical issue, including on ways to increase border
controls to restrict the flow of IED precursors.
Unlocking Pakistan's economic potential by supporting
private sector growth and expanding trade and economic
cooperation across borders is central to creating jobs for
Pakistan's dynamic people.
Progress on normalizing trade relations between India and
Pakistan will have a tremendous impact on increasing regional
economic cooperation in line with Secretary Clinton's vision
for a new Silk Road linking the economies of South and Central
Asia.
And our continuing civilian assistance, which is focused on
five priority sectors--energy, economic growth, stabilization
of the border areas, education, and health--also helps promote
a secure, stable, democratic Pakistan and stimulate economic
growth over time.
If confirmed, I will consult regularly with the Congress,
and particularly with this committee, which has played a vital
role over the years in supporting our goals in Pakistan, from
the generosity of the Kerry-Lugar-Berman civilian assistance
authorization to numerous trips to Pakistan to help the
Pakistani leadership and your counterparts understand how the
American people view Pakistan and this complex and challenging
region.
Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, please allow me to
reiterate how deeply honored I am to have been nominated as
United States Ambassador to the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. I
thank you for considering my nomination and would be pleased to
answer any questions.
[The prepared statement of Ambassador Olson follows:]
Prepared Statement of Richard G. Olson
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I thank you for the
opportunity to appear before you today. I am honored by President
Obama's decision to nominate me as the U.S. Ambassador to the Islamic
Republic of Pakistan, and I deeply appreciate the confidence President
Obama and Secretary Clinton have in me. I look forward, if confirmed by
the Senate, to working closely with you to advance America's interests
in Pakistan.
I have been privileged to serve in the Foreign Service since 1982.
I worked for many of those years in the Muslim world, including most
recently as Ambassador to the United Arab Emirates, just before I went
to Afghanistan as the Coordinating Director for Development and
Economic Affairs. Over the years and through these positions, I have
worked closely with senior leadership of the State Department and other
national security agencies, and look forward to continuing those
relationships in promoting U.S. interests in, and ties with, Pakistan.
I am grateful for the continuing support of my family, especially my
wonderful daughters Ana and Isabella.
I don't have to tell you how important Pakistan is to the United
States. The United States has a clear interest in supporting a stable,
sovereign, and democratic Pakistan at peace with itself and its
neighbors. Continued engagement with Pakistan is necessary to pursue
the strategic defeat of al-Qaeda. Engagement is necessary to promote
peace and stability in Afghanistan, to encourage regional stability,
and to support political and economic stability in Pakistan.
Instability in Pakistan would undermine our goals in the region.
Pakistan faces many challenges. It is located in a challenging
region, continues to face economic stagnation, and is home to a
burgeoning population of nearly 200 million people, the majority of
whom are under 25. Pakistan has its own challenge in combating
extremists that have killed almost 30,000 soldiers and Pakistani
citizens. But Pakistan is also a country with great potential, vast
natural resources, and talented, resilient people.
As you know, the last several years have been extremely difficult
for U.S.-Pakistan relations. As Secretary Clinton has said, our
relationship with Pakistan is not always an easy one, but it is
important for both of our nations. Throughout the past year--one that
has been marked by events including the May 2 raid against Usama Bin
Laden and the November 26 Salala cross-border incident that resulted in
the deaths of 24 Pakistani troops and the subsequent closure of the
Ground Lines of Communication--we have continued to engage the
Pakistanis at the highest levels. We are committed to putting this
relationship on more stable footing.
The reopening of the NATO supply lines provides a renewed
opportunity to increase cooperation on our many shared interests. If
confirmed, I hope to build on this opportunity to identify and refine
our shared interests with Pakistan, and find practical, effective ways
to work together to achieve them.
Those shared interests are many.
We share an interest in combating the extremists that threaten both
of our countries. Tragically, the Pakistani people have suffered
greatly from the extremist violence in their country. They have lost
more troops and civilians to acts of terror than any other nation. But
there has been cooperation between our nations. As President Obama has
noted, we have captured or removed from the battlefield more terrorists
on Pakistani soil than anywhere else. We could not have done that
without Pakistan's assistance.
We also share an interest in supporting political stability and
security in Afghanistan. As President Obama said on May 2, we want
Pakistan to be a full partner in supporting Afghan peace and stability
in a way that respects Pakistan's sovereignty, interests, and
democratic institutions. Pakistani officials have told us repeatedly
that, more than any other nation, they have a vested interest in seeing
a stable, secure, Afghanistan.
Even as the U.S.-Pakistan bilateral relationship has faced
challenges, we have been encouraged by the enhanced dialogue between
Afghanistan and Pakistan on reconciliation. As Afghanistan and Pakistan
intensify their bilateral dialogue, including through restarting the
Joint Peace Commission, all parties need to focus on concrete steps to
support Afghanistan. This includes squeezing insurgents--most notably
the Haqqani Taliban Network--which threaten to spoil nascent Afghan
reconciliation efforts, and which target Afghans, as well as U.S.
personnel.
We will continue to encourage Afghanistan-Pakistan cooperation
through the Core Group, which Secretary Clinton convened for the first
time at the Ministerial level on the margins of the Tokyo Conference.
At the July 8 Ministerial-level Core Group meeting in Tokyo,
Afghanistan, Pakistan, and the U.S. reiterated that the surest way to
lasting peace and security for Afghanistan and the broader region is
through an Afghan political process of peace and reconciliation for
Afghanistan. The three countries underscored that this process should
be supported by Afghanistan's neighbors and by the international
community. The meeting resulted in the first joint U.S.-Afghanistan-
Pakistan call for the Taliban to enter a dialogue with the Afghan
government, and reaffirmed Pakistan's commitment to respond to Afghan
requests with concrete support that would advance peace efforts.
Promoting democratic and economic stability in Pakistan is also in
our shared interests. Despite the current internal political turmoil,
Pakistan's upcoming general election it will mark the country's first
transition of power from one civilian government to another--the first
in Pakistan's history.
We also share an interest in combating the use of improvised
explosive devices, and we are engaged in discussion on this critical
issue, including on ways to increase border controls to restrict the
flow of IED precursors.
Unlocking Pakistan's economic potential by supporting private
sector growth and expanding trade and economic cooperation across
borders is central to creating jobs for Pakistan's dynamic people.
Progress on normalizing trade relations between India and Pakistan will
have a tremendous impact on increasing regional economic cooperation in
line with Secretary Clinton's vision for a New Silk Road linking the
economies of South and Central Asia. And our continuing civilian
assistance, which is focused on five priority sectors--energy, economic
growth, stabilization of the border areas, education, and health--also
helps promote a secure, stable, democratic Pakistan, and stimulate
economic growth, over time.
If confirmed, I look forward to working with the enormously
talented team at our Embassy in Islamabad and our three consulates in
Lahore, Peshawar, and Karachi, and our team in Washington. We will
energetically work with members of the Pakistani Government, business
community, and civil society to promote security and prosperity in
Pakistan, Afghanistan, and throughout the region, and to improve the
image Pakistanis have of the United States and the American people.
I will also consult regularly with Congress, and in particular this
committee, which has played an important role over the years in
supporting our goals in Pakistan, from the generosity of the Kerry-
Lugar Berman civilian assistance authorization to numerous trips to
Pakistan to help the Pakistani leadership and your counterparts
understand the concerns--and also the empathy--the American people have
about Pakistan and this complex and challenging region.
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, please allow me to
reiterate how deeply honored I am to have been nominated as the U.S.
Ambassador to the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
The Chairman. Thank you very much, Ambassador Olson.
Let me make my excuses early here. We have a competing
meeting in the Finance Committee on the tax extenders, which I
need to attend shortly. And I think Senator Casey is going to
chair at the point that I do that. I appreciate his willingness
to do that.
And I apologize to our witnesses.
But let me ask you, Ambassador Olson, if I can, obviously,
you are well aware of the crosscurrents here on the Hill with
respect to the relationship with Pakistan. And I have met
recently with Ambassador Rehman and others, just to try to talk
it through. And obviously, they are well aware, and I think
this most recent step to reopen is an effort to try to settle
things down.
But some people in Congress, I think ill-advisedly, but
nevertheless, some people in Congress are advocating a more
precipitous kind of reaction to the current state of affairs.
Some want to suspend aid. Some don't think there's a value to
it, et cetera.
So could you state to the Congress, as you go over there,
which you will, as Ambassador, how you see that, why that would
be
ill-advised in your judgment, and what you see as the stakes,
and also, importantly, the things you see the Pakistani's doing
that are helpful to us, notwithstanding the difficulties we've
had in the relationship?
Ambassador Olson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I think that our relationship with Pakistan is critical to
our national security interests, primarily in the area of
counterterrorism cooperation.
Over the past decade, thanks in significant part to
cooperation from Pakistan, we are in the position of virtually
eliminating
al-Qaeda as a threat to us. And I think that we want to
continue to formulate a relationship that allows us to
strengthen counterterrorism cooperation.
I was also, Senator, very pleased that in your opening
remarks you mentioned the perception of many Pakistanis that
the United States had disengaged in the 1990s. And I think
that's a very
important backdrop for our relationship today.
I think Pakistanis, in the government and outside, are very
concerned about what will happen in Afghanistan post-2014. And
as Ambassador Cunningham indicated, we have put in place over
the last year some very strong measures for assuring Afghans,
and, indeed, the region, that we will be engaged after 2014.
I think this is also the great significance of the Kerry-
Lugar-Berman assistance, that it provides assistance on a
predictable basis; it provides a stable basis for an ongoing
relationship.
I think that if we can continue to emphasize to the
Pakistanis our engagement over time, it will be possible to
build the kind of productive relationship based on mutual
interests that will serve us over the long term.
The Chairman. And what do you think the Pakistani attitude
is now about the so-called Haqqani Network?
Ambassador Olson. Well, sir, with regard to the Haqqani
Network, first of all, I think this is one of the toughest
challenges that we face. And I would say, at a personal level
as well as a professional level, I have been in Embassy Kabul
for the last year. I was at the Embassy on September 13 and
April 15, the two attacks that took place. So I have a certain
amount of skin in the game, for this particular issue.
And we do know, of course, that the Haqqanis are based in
north Waziristan. But the question is how we will address the
challenge represented by the Haqqani presence.
We have already taken some actions against the Haqqani
Network on a whole-of-government basis. As you know, key
Haqqani Network leaders have already been designated as foreign
terrorists, sanctioning their travel and their finances. And
the question of the designation of the network as a foreign
terrorist organization is with Secretary Clinton right now.
I can assure you, Senator, that this will be a primary
focus of my activities and diplomatic engagement with the
Pakistanis, to encourage further measures against the Haqqani
Network, further squeezing of the Haqqani Network.
The Chairman. Well, I look forward to connecting with you
when I get out there, and I appreciate your observations on it.
It's worth a lot more conversation, obviously, but thank you
for that.
Ambassador Cunningham, I assume you had an opportunity to
read Dexter Filkins' piece in the New Yorker. Can you comment
on the recurring number of articles that seem to be appearing
talking about how Afghans are planning for the fight and laying
the groundwork for a longer confrontation as we draw down,
rather than engaging in the fight for the democratic process
and the rule of law and other things?
Can you give us your sense of that state of play at this
point?
Ambassador Cunningham. Sure, Senator, thank you.
I think what we're seeing and have seen for a while, as
Ambassador Olson said, there are a lot of people in this
region, in Afghanistan, hedging their bets about the future.
I think the talk of rearming and reforming of militias is
overstated. But the temptation is there, and the uncertainty
about how various groups will advance their interests in the
future is very much on the table.
That's why I said in my statement, and as you said in
yours, the upcoming political transition is really vitally
important. As I said in my statement, it's not an issue of one
party or another.
It really is an issue for all Afghans and all Afghan
political actors to take a really hard look at the significance
of the upcoming elections and the political transition and what
that means for Afghanistan's future and for the unity of the
country and of the body politic.
We're already working on that, in consultations with
members of the international community and with Afghans across
the political and civil society spectrum. And it's something
that I regard as a key element and a key task for all of us who
are interested in Afghanistan's future, and getting the concept
right that the way forward in Afghanistan has to be one of a
political process, including, hopefully in due course, the
Taliban or elements thereof. And it cannot be a future that
resorts to internal conflict or based on armed conflict between
various elements of Afghan society.
The Chairman. Do we have sufficient leverage? Are there
ways in which we could increase our initiatives in that regard?
Or are we kind of locked in, because of the drawdown?
Ambassador Cunningham. I think our leverage is quite
substantial. I think the logic is there. I think Afghans across
a broad spectrum see that there's a tremendous amount at stake
in the coming years. We will still have a crucial role in all
the elements of our strategy--political, military, and
economic--not just we, the international community more
broadly.
And one of the core messages that comes out of all of these
meetings and discussions that we've been having, most clearly
at Tokyo, is that Afghans' international partners are
absolutely united behind the proposition that the political
process going forward needs to be credible and needs to produce
a peaceful transition.
The Chairman. Well, thank you. Thank you very much,
Ambassador.
Thank you, both of you, and I look forward also to seeing
you out there.
Senator Lugar.
Then Senator Casey will chair.
Senator Lugar. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I'm very pleased that you, Ambassador Cunningham, and you,
Ambassador Olson, are willing to undertake these
responsibilities. I have confidence in both of you.
And the confirmation process, therefore, offers an
opportunity for us to discuss Pakistan and Afghanistan, to
obtain more information for our committee and for the public.
Ambassador Olson, I want to raise this question broadly.
According to recent State Department country reports on
terrorism, deadly, brutal attacks within Pakistan itself
amounted to well over 3,000 Pakistanis killed in 2011 alone.
The threat of violent militant groups is pervasive. No part of
Pakistan is spared. Suicide and armed attacks occurred in the
coastal city of Karachi, the business capital of Lahore; the
FATA capital of Peshawar; as well as in the tribal areas
adjoining Afghanistan.
How does the Pakistani Government classify this threat? How
does the Pakistan Government work to address the internal
threat to life and government institutions these terror groups
represent? To what extent can you distinguish between our
efforts, the United States efforts, to support their efforts to
combat internal terror threats and the regional threat
emanating from Pakistan's safe havens that is our primary
concern?
Ambassador Olson. Thank you, Senator Lugar.
I agree entirely with your assessment about the nature of
the challenge that Pakistan faces internally. And I think we
have seen a great shift in the Government of Pakistan's
approach over the past few years to dealing with the internal
threat that is represented by the terrorist groups that you
describe.
There was a time in the not-too-distant past when the
Pakistani army was primarily deployed along the frontier with
India. It is now very heavily deployed internally and
especially in the area around FATA and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa
province, to deal with the insurgent threat. And, of course, I
think we're all familiar with the counterinsurgency operation
in Swat a few years ago.
I think that we have recognized and, indeed, supported this
change. And thanks to the generosity of the Congress, we have a
variety of funding mechanisms providing security assistance to
build the capability of the Pakistani forces, particularly in
counterinsurgency operations, moving them away from a focus on
heavy armor toward lighter counterinsurgency operations.
There have been challenges with the security assistance
program, but I will look forward to working with you and
members of other committees to see what we can do to remove
some of the obstacles and move forward on those important
security assistance programs.
Senator Lugar. To what extent does this violence, the loss
of life, undermine any potential for civil governance in
Pakistan? What are the ramifications on governance of the
country itself?
Ambassador Olson. Well, Senator, I think that the Pakistani
Government does face many challenges, and it has faced
challenges, for instance, in the last year with regard to the
floods.
I would say that there are some sinews of strength in
Pakistani society. There is a very active civil society, which
picks up a considerable amount of the slack.
For historic reasons, the Pakistan military is a very
strong institution and has been involved in building capacity.
Our assistance program, of course, our civilian assistance
program, and especially the Kerry-Lugar-Berman funds, are very
much focused on building up some of the capacity of the
civilian government, particularly in the all-important area of
energy and economic growth, and also in stabilization,
particularly road-building in the areas closest to the Afghan
border.
I think all of these programs have been effective, but I
take on board the point that has been made that we need to
exercise diligent oversight and report back to you on the
effectiveness of those programs.
Senator Lugar. While teetering on the brink of insolvency
on some occasions, Pakistan appears to forgo considerable
revenues, including those associated with transit trade. Though
Pakistan has signed a transit trade agreement with Afghanistan
that was intended to allow direct transit of goods between
Central Asia and South Asia, there has been little progress in
actual trade across Pakistan and, thus, considerable revenue
and jobs continue to be lost.
What is the status and prospect of finding permanent
alternative trade routes, such as through Iran? Is the road-
rail infrastructure through eastern Iran fully operational and
capable of transferring the vast iron ore India and others will
seek to export from rich mineral deposits in Afghanistan? What
is the total estimate of revenue lost to Pakistan during the
closure of the NATO ISAF resupply routes?
What is the concentration of focus when it comes to trade
and other sources of income in the country?
Ambassador Olson. Thank you, Senator. Yes, I agree with you
that the Afghan-Pakistan Transit and Trade Agreement has not
fully lived up to its potential. It's a very important step,
potentially. And it's one that I was somewhat involved in
supporting in my previous position.
I have, in fact, traveled to Islamabad last fall to meet
with Pakistani officials to urge further implementation. There
have been a variety of technical factors that have yet to be
worked out between the Pakistani and Afghan governments. And I
will certainly pursue that, if confirmed, with great vigor.
I think that with regard to the regional trade, one of the
most promising things that we have seen out of Pakistan in
recent years is the liberalization of trade with India. And as
we all know, the Indian economy is experiencing a period of
rapid expansion.
Pakistan has granted most-favored-nation status to India
and has moved to liberalize its trade from a so-called positive
list--that is to say, a restrictive list--to a negative list,
one that limits only certain strategic goods.
This is all to the good. And I think we want to encourage
further progress in the economic dialogue and commercial
relationship between India and Pakistan.
Senator Lugar. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Casey [presiding]. Thank you, Senator Lugar.
I want to commend both Ambassador Cunningham and Ambassador
Olson for their continuing service. These are tough
assignments, and we're grateful for their service, and of
course that of their families, because when you serve, they
serve with you, in one form or another.
Ambassador Cunningham, I'm resisting the temptation to say
how great it is that you were born in Allentown, PA.
Ambassador Olson, New Jersey's pretty good, too.
I want to start with Pakistan, and I'll provide a little
bit of a backdrop as a predicate to my question. It's about
this issue of IEDs and the precursor elements.
In your testimony, Mr. Ambassador, you say on the second to
last page of your testimony, ``We also share an interest in
combating the use of improvised explosive devices, and we're
engaged in discussion on this critical issue, including on ways
to increase border controls to restrict the flow of IED
precursors.''
And I'm happy to see that in your statement.
Most Americans know what IEDs are and the horrific impact
they have on our troops and also on civilians the world over.
They may not be as familiar with the precursor ingredient, the
calcium ammonium nitrate flowing from Pakistan into Afghanistan
and becoming the central element in that explosive capacity.
I've spent a lot of time on this issue, as have many
Members of Congress. The administration has worked very hard on
this. I just spoke to Secretary Clinton yesterday about it, and
she and the whole team at the State Department have worked very
hard.
I wanted to get your sense of it, because when I was in
Pakistan last August for 3 days, in every meeting that we had--
I was there with three other United States Senators--and in
every single meeting, whether it was then-Prime Minister
Gilani, whether it was with President Zardari, with General
Kayani, the army chief, wherever we were, we brought this up.
And they knew we were coming, in a sense. They were prepared
for the question. They would address the question, express
their solidarity with us on this issue, because they've lost a
lot of civilians in this horrific nightmare.
And then they went another step by providing us with a
briefing by their Interior Ministry, outlining their written
strategic plan, and then expressing determination to implement
what they had written down on paper.
We said, when? Is this weeks away? Is it months away? They
said it's within months. Basically, that was their answer.
So I was expecting sometime in the fall we'd see some
measure of progress, or maybe it would take a little longer,
maybe we'd be into 2012 by the time they really made progress.
To date, in my judgment, there's been almost no progress
made, or no substantial progress made, and you see it in every
state. Pennsylvania has lost 79 troops in Afghanistan, more
than half of those from IEDs.
So I ask you, in light of that bad news I just outlined,
that unfortunate recent history, what can you do in your new
posting and what will you do in literally the first couple of
weeks after you get there, to press the Pakistan Government on
at least one fundamental point: It is in their interest, as
much as it's in our own interest, to stop the flow of ammonium
nitrate, to reduce the chances that more of our troops or their
civilians will be blown up by these horrific explosions?
Ambassador Olson. Senator Casey, thank you very much, both
for the question, and I do want to acknowledge the central
importance of IEDs and countering the precursors. I am coming
out of a year in Afghanistan, and I certainly appreciate the
enormous cost that these devices have brought about.
I also want to thank you for spending 3 days in Pakistan,
and making the effort to make the trip out there, and to spend
a significant amount of time. It's always greatly appreciated
when Senators do that.
I do think we share a common interest, and I agree with
your assessment, Senator, with the Pakistanis on countering
IEDs. They have suffered heavy losses on both their military
forces and among civilians from IEDs.
There is a slight distinction, as you're well aware,
because most of the IEDs they encounter are actually generated
not from the calcium ammonium nitrate, but from, I guess,
military-grade explosive devices, which they have found, which
have been leaked out into the marketplace.
But that said, I think the fundamental interest is the
same, and I think there are ways that we can pursue it.
I will work closely with my team, if confirmed, with the
DOD elements, and with the civilian aspects of the mission, to
develop an approach for approaching the government, as you
note, in the early days of my tenure, if confirmed, to follow
up on this and to report back to you.
Senator Casey. What is your sense as to the reason why
there hasn't been progress made? And I realize the relationship
doesn't help here. The relationship is an impediment to them
making progress on IEDs. But I can't tell you how many times
the promise was made to us, as representatives of our
government, promising over and over again that they would make
progress.
I want to get your sense of what you believe to be the
reason why they haven't made progress on this.
Ambassador Olson. Well, Senator, I think this is probably
an issue where it would be best for me to go out and attempt to
get the ground truth on this and come back to you. My very
preliminary sense on this is that, as you note, there have been
relationship issues that have perhaps added some friction
overall and prevented some movement forward on this.
I think there is also the question of calcium-ammonium-
nitrate production in Pakistan. It is not illegal to produce
it, because it has agricultural use. So I think that that may
present a domestic political issue, but that's a very
preliminary sense. I would like to get out, if confirmed, on
the ground and report back to you.
Senator Casey. And I'll talk to you more later about
General Barbero's work, who, as you know, has spent a lot of
time on this. And we can both benefit from his experience.
Thanks very much.
Senator Corker.
Senator Corker. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And thank you both for your public service. I know Mr.
Cunningham and I had a lot of time yesterday in the office. I
appreciate that.
I understand, Ambassador Olson, we're going to be doing the
same here in just about a hour.
So thank you both for your service and for your bringing
your families.
And if any of us wanted to be hard on you, it's hard to do
in front of daughters. So thank you all for being here.
I know that you all are currently working together--is that
correct?--or have, in Kabul, spent some time together. And I
know, as we travel through Afghanistan, multiple trips, our
military operators there are most concerned about fighting a
war in Afghanistan that's being controlled out of Pakistan. And
I think that's been the greatest frustration to our military
leaders.
And I know you all have certainly experienced those
comments and concerns.
Which of the two jobs, as you all talk, do you consider to
be the most difficult, Pakistan or Afghanistan? Seriously. I
don't want a long paragraph, but, seriously, which of the two
do you consider to be most----
Ambassador Olson. Senator, Jim Cunningham was my boss in
Kabul, so I'm going to let him answer that, if that's all
right. [Laughter.]
Ambassador Cunningham. It impossible to say. They are both
challenging positions in challenging times.
Certainly, being Ambassador to Pakistan, a country that's
so large and so vexed with so many problems, has got to be a
really significant challenge. But my task in a country that is
at war, and where we are fighting along with our Afghan and
international partners, is a challenge of--I don't think you
can rank them--but it's a challenge of a different order.
Senator Corker. Several years ago, I guess, we embarked on
something called AfPak. It was called the Holbrooke doctrine.
As we talk with people in both countries, but especially
Pakistan, I think Pakistan viewed that whole approach to be
very offensive. I mean, looking at Pakistan through the eyes of
Afghanistan was pretty offensive, I think, to the folks in
Pakistan. And we really don't have a relationship in Pakistan.
It's more of a long-term relationship. It's more of a
transactional relationship. It's almost a pay-to-play kind of
relationship. And it's been that way for a long, long time.
And so, to Mr. Olson, as we deal with a country that
basically the military controls and the elected leaders are,
candidly, not particularly effective, how do we, as Members of
Congress--you talked about Congress' generosity. It's really
the American taxpayer that's footing this bill and is quite
frustrated with the Pakistan at present.
How do we leverage our relationship with them, since it is
more of a transactional relationship, not one that's really
built on good will? How do we leverage the resources that we
have to cause Pakistan to act, ``in ways that we would like to
see them act''?
Ambassador Olson. Thank you, Senator. That's an excellent
question.
I think that we have to remember that our relationship with
Pakistan goes back quite a ways. It goes back right to the
beginning of the Pakistani state.
For 65 years, we've had a relationship. It has had some ups
and downs during that period, but there have been periods of
very close and very intense partnership, probably most notably
in the 1980s. And, of course, that was a relationship that
centered around Afghanistan.
And I think I would agree with you that Pakistanis have
perhaps some concern about being labeled AfPak. But at the same
time, I think the long-term status of Afghanistan is enormously
important to Pakistanis, and it's one of the critical questions
in our relationship.
I think that what our interest is with Pakistan over time
is building a more stable relationship, one that is focused on
our mutual interests, but takes account of the fact that the
United States and the international community are not going to
disengage from Afghanistan.
The great fear amongst many in the region, amongst--I
certainly heard this from my Afghan friends when I was serving
there, and I think it's true in Pakistan as well--is that the
international community will repeat the experience of 1989 to
1992, when, having accomplished the withdrawal of the Soviet
forces from Afghanistan, the international community turned
away and disengaged.
And that had a severe cost, particularly in Pakistan, where
a generation of military officers who had previously served
with the United States and trained in U.S. institutions no
longer had that opportunity. And we are, frankly, paying a cost
in our relationship now, because many of those officers are now
general officers and have not been exposed to us in a way that
their predecessors were.
So I think that all of the work that Ambassador Cunningham
described that he and Ambassador Crocker have been doing over
the past year on the strategic partnership agreement,
solidifying the future of Afghanistan, will have an enormously
reassuring effect on Pakistani sensibilities.
And certainly, that will be my priority, to have that
strategic level discussion about the United States not
disengaging from the region.
Senator Corker. But it seems to me that--and, again, I
realize the, ``elected leadership of Pakistan'' is more than
weak.
It seems to me that they continue to do those things that
only are in their self-interests, which obviously we as a
country do in many cases, too. But the very issue that Senator
Casey is mentioning but also multiple other issues, it just
seems they are concerned about Afghanistan. They're concerned
about India, not having any influence there, because they're
such a narrow country and it's at their rear, and that's
really--they'd rather it be destabilized, would they not, than
India have any influence there?
Ambassador Olson. Senator, on the question of this has been
a doctrine that the Pakistanis, over the years, have talked
about, strategic depth, the idea that Afghanistan represents
strategic depth against a potential conflict with India.
My sense is that the Pakistani military and the Pakistani
Government have moved away from that. Foreign Minister Khar has
made some public comments about moving away from the doctrine
of strategic depth. Chief of the Army, Staff General Kayani,
has redeployed his forces internally to deal with the internal
threat, and heavily toward the border with Afghanistan to deal
with the threats emanating from that region.
So I think there is a basis at a strategic level for some
further discussion with the Pakistanis, and I think that these
are, frankly, positive developments that we would want to
encourage as Pakistan looks to its strategic position.
Senator Corker. So I realize that we as a country need to
continue to be involved with Pakistan and I know that the
notion of just cutting off all aid is not a particularly good
way of staying engaged with Pakistan.
But on the other hand, I think just to continue as we have
been going is also not a good route. So sometimes Congress can
be helpful to people like you by doing certain things that make
certain things that cause you to be able to talk with them
about the fact that if things don't change then Congress will
continue doing X.
What are some of those things that we might do prior to you
being over there, to help us leverage Pakistan, which again, I
understand what you're saying about relationships down the road
and building on it, and how they're looking to our engagement
in Afghanistan. I understand all those things.
But at present our relationship is very transactional.
So how do we--you know, do we have the physician there who
aided us with Osama bin Laden who is in prison? I mean, how do
we get them to act in a way that's very different than they're
now acting on things that are very important to us?
Ambassador Olson. Thank you, Senator.
I think we need to focus on the core areas of mutual
interest, and I think this is primarily in the counterterrorism
area. As I noted, I think we have made enormous progress
against al-Qaeda over the past decade, and we are within grasp
of shutting down al-Qaeda. I think that has got to be our
primary strategic objective.
And I think we need to have some very candid and direct
discussions with the Pakistani Government about the question of
the safe havens and the Haqqani Network.
But I think it's important that that discussion take place
against the context of some predictability in the overall
relationship. And that is what I would be hoping to, if
confirmed, bring to the relationship, some sense that we want
to move away from a more transactional relationship to one that
is based on a longer term policy of engagement.
And I think that the assistance that has been so generously
provided by, as you note, by the American people has had a
significant role and potentially has a significant role in the
future on stabilizing that relationship and showing that our
interests are not short term but, rather, long term.
Senator Corker. Well, our interests are in our interest.
I will say, I know we're taking too much time. I thank you
for your generosity. I thank both of you for your service. I
look forward to talking to you.
And look, we have an election that is going to be over here
soon, and regardless of what the outcome is, in many ways there
is a clean slate, if you will. There won't be the issue of
dealing with who did what when. We'll have, in many ways, a
clean slate, no matter what the outcome is.
I would just ask that both of you continue to be totally
transparent with us. And the fact is that we candidly have
leaders in both countries that are extremely difficult to deal
with, and, candidly, in many cases, are not working in ways
that are beneficial to us.
And I hope, as you continue to talk with us, you will
continue to be as transparent as you were in our office, Mr.
Cunningham, and as you will be, I'm sure, in the next hour. We
look forward to your service.
Thank you.
Senator Casey. Thank you, Senator Corker.
I wanted to turn to some questions for Ambassador
Cunningham. Maybe two broad areas, and in the less than 7
minutes we have in the question period we probably don't have
enough time, but we can further amplify them in questions for
the record.
I wanted to ask you first about women and girls in
Afghanistan. At one level or by one measure, we could assert
that, over roughly the last decade, significant progress has
been made. When you just do the one metric, which I think has a
lot of meaning and value, which is the number of girls in
school, it was almost zero or in the area of almost no girls in
school a decade ago. Now maybe as much as a third or more of
the millions of Afghan children that are in school are girls.
So that's a great measure of progress.
And also, the participation of women in the Government of
Afghanistan has also been a significant measure of progress.
The concern, though, is that even as that progress is marching
forward, and even as President Karzai speaks to this issue,
that those gains will be diminished or maybe even wiped out as
a result of a reconciliation process that results in a
conclusion after negotiations where women are set back, if not
to where they were, but at least to a place where the gains
would be substantially eroded.
Ambassador Cunningham, you might remember--I know we have a
lot of meetings and I don't expect you to remember this--but
when we were there, we had a meeting with women
parliamentarians. And they were inspirational on a lot of
levels.
We think politics here is tough. Over there, it's a lot
tougher when your life is at stake, very often.
One of them I remember in particular was Fawzia Kofi.
She talked about her father and her husband participating
in politics, both killed in the process. And yet here she was
sitting, talking to us about her own involvement and her own
focus on the future of being involved in politics in
Afghanistan.
I just wanted to get your sense of not just where we are,
but how our strategy can prevent the dramatic erosion of those
gains.
Ambassador Cunningham. That is an important issue, Senator.
Before I comment on it, though, I wanted to thank you for
your focus on IEDs. We discussed this when you were in
Afghanistan in August. They are now the killer of choice in
Afghanistan for both military and, very horrifically, for
civilians. They are a real challenge, so I appreciate your
focus on that.
Women. We have something called the Woman of Courage Award
in the Department of State that the Secretary gives every year.
For the last, I think, 5 or 6 years that the award has been
given, an Afghan woman has been a recipient of it. I think
there are about 10 a year from around the world.
We had a reception hosted by Ambassador Crocker to welcome
this year's recipient, who is a politician and a media person
in Kandahar. An absolutely incredible woman. And we had the
other previous recipients of the award and a number of women
from Kabul and the region for this event. And in that event,
Ambassador Crocker said quite perceptively that to be a woman
in public life in Afghanistan--any woman--is a woman of
courage. And that is the case.
It's a marvel to meet with these people and to hear their
stories and their sense of determination and commitment, as you
did meeting with the parliamentarians.
They have literally invested their lives and their personal
safety and that of their families, in many cases, in taking up
a public role, whether it is in business or even teaching or
working in a health clinic or being a politician. And there are
a lot of female politicians now in Afghanistan, including at
the provincial and district level, as well as the national
level.
Several female ministers, deputy ministers, President
Karzai's deputy chief of staff is a woman. And they've worked
hard to create this space and to create the space for those who
are coming after them.
And it is particularly inspiring to meet with women who are
in universities now, and coming out educated, looking for
opportunities, sometimes with the support of their families,
but many times not.
Which is a long way of saying, a lot has been invested in
bringing Afghanistan's women into--those who can and who want
to--bringing them into society in a constructive way. And we've
played, I'm proud to say, the United States has played a
significant role in this. We have programs across the board,
everything from education to midwifing to teaching business
skills, entrepreneurial skills, language, information
technology, educating women about the law.
There is actually a good law in Afghanistan that prohibits
violence against women, if it's enforced. And we contribute to
a network of shelters that, unfortunately, are necessary in
Afghan society, but extremely valuable in providing refuge for
women who, for whatever reason, can't stay with their families
or their husbands.
So a tremendous amount has been accomplished in this area
over the last years. It is one of the significant success
stories and a real tribute, again, to the American people, that
we've supported that.
The United States, as well as, again, our international
partners through a series of declarations, have made very clear
that these gains are not to be rolled back. They're protected
under Afghan law and the constitution. It's a cardinal
principle for us in discussions about reconciliation and about
the future of Afghanistan. And I expect that will continue--I'm
sure that will continue to be the case and will certainly be my
point of view, if I'm confirmed as Ambassador.
Senator Casey. Well, thanks very much. And I know that
Secretary Clinton has not just spoken to this over and over
again, but has made that a central focus of her work, and we're
grateful for that.
I'm out of time. I want to turn to Senator Menendez.
Senator Menendez. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you both for your long service to our country.
Ambassador Cunningham, my understanding of the President's
goal was to shift from a military mission to an assistance
mission in Afghanistan, in hopes of creating a functioning
government that helps rebuild lives and institutions. We have
done that elsewhere, but with, from my perspective, a much more
committed partner.
I look at the special inspector general for Afghanistan
reconstruction's new report that suggests a significant portion
of about $400 million investment in large-scale infrastructure
projects in Afghanistan designed to win support from local
governments may be wasted because of delays and weaknesses in
planning and execution such that those programs might not be
completed until American troops leave or have already left.
And then I look at a commitment by the United States of
more than $90 billion to development in Afghanistan, and the
administration requesting $9 billion for aid and development in
2013.
And I look at all of this, and I say, given the continuing
problems with instability and corruption, how do we justify and
expect that we will, if we were to commit to those funds,
effectively use those funds toward the development of a
sustainable economy in Afghanistan, something that I could go
to taxpayers back in New Jersey and say this is worthy of our
support and it's going to be well spent, based upon the
experience we've had so far?
Ambassador Cunningham. That's also an important issue,
Senator, and thank you for raising it.
Yes, we have a very broad, and have had a very broad,
assistance and development program in Afghanistan. The specific
issue of the Afghan infrastructure fund that you referenced, we
have some differences of view with the inspector, with SIGAR,
as we often do, but we also agree with many of the
recommendations that they've made.
This was an innovative program that tried to do something
new, which is bring together several different U.S. entities
that had not been cooperating particularly well with each
other, and to try to use this fund to bridge the difference
between what normally had been short-term infrastructure
projects designed to influence the counterinsurgency campaign,
and longer term infrastructure that's really necessary for
stability and longer term growth, particularly with roads and
electric power.
This has taken longer to get underway than we would have
hoped, but it has brought together a whole-of-government
approach to doing this. And the program is constantly being
reviewed and in each iteration has gotten better in terms of
the coordination, oversight, and evaluation of sustainability
going forward.
So while it will stretch out longer than was originally
intended, we are working hard to make it as effective as
possible and make the best use of the funds that we have been
given for a very important purpose. And one of those purposes
is to link together the power networks in the north and the
south of Afghanistan, so Afghans and their economy have the
electrical power that they need.
To the question principle of the worth of the assistance
that we have provided and will be providing in a lesser amount
going forward, I understand very well that this entails
sacrifice on the part of all of our taxpayers, Americans and
the others who are supporting these efforts. But it has
produced results and will continue to produce results.
It is really an investment on preserving the gains that we
have made on the field at great cost through our own efforts on
security and the efforts that the Afghans are increasingly
taking on on security.
Afghanistan is a very poor country. Under the best of
circumstances, it would be still a very poor country with
tremendous problems. Our work in development assistance is part
of our campaign to prepare an Afghanistan which can stand on
its own feet in a way that it has stability that is sustainable
over time. And this goes to the point that Senator Lugar raised
about what our enduring vital interest is in Afghanistan.
Senator Menendez. I don't want to interrupt. I've let you
go on at length. I wanted to hear your answer, but here's my
problem. I understand our goals, but we have an administration
in Afghanistan that undoubtedly is significantly corrupt. We
have an administration in Afghanistan for which we have seen
wasted amounts of money.
So if Afghanistan is going to be a ward of the United
States for over a decade, and we're going to spend $90 billion
and maybe more, at least--at least--there should be an
expectation that there should be greater transparency, greater
efficiency, less corruption. And unless there are benchmarks to
do that, I don't see how, in fact, we can continue to make this
long-term, open-ended commitment without a concurring response.
And I know that we have some responsibilities because we
went in there. But by the same token, there are
responsibilities by the Afghan Government to be responsive,
transparent, honest, and more efficient.
And I just don't get the sense that we pressure in terms of
accomplishing those goals as much as we are committed to giving
money.
And so I'm hoping that, if you are to be confirmed, that
there is a strong commitment here not just for us to give, but
for us to get, at the end of the day.
Would it be my understanding that that is going to be part
of your drive here?
Ambassador Cunningham. Absolutely. I've been in Afghanistan
for the past year and it is, as Ambassador Olson knows, it is a
daily part of not just our business with the Afghan Government,
but of everybody's business with the Afghan Government.
And one of the key outcomes of the series of international
meetings that I discussed earlier, and especially the Tokyo
conference, is putting clearly on the record that there is
precisely this expectation on the part of the people who are
supporting Afghanistan, who want to support Afghanistan, but
need to see that real progress is being made, particularly on
dealing with corruption and governance issues.
And in what's called the mutual accountability framework,
there are specific things laid out that are expectations that
the government will address. And as we speak, my colleagues
still in Kabul are meeting with the Afghan Government about how
those elements are going to be addressed going forward. And
it's very much the kinds of thing you said: greater
transparency, greater accountability.
We're doing that internally in our own processes, to make
sure that we know where American assistance is going and what
it's being used for. And we will absolutely be insisting that
the Afghan Government produce greater transparency and
accountability in its own part.
Senator Menendez. Well, Mr. Chairman, I see the time has
expired. I have one more question, if I may, to Ambassador
Olson.
Senator Casey. Sure.
Senator Menendez. I just want to make a comment.
For myself, I have been supportive, but it is not an open-
ended support, just speaking for one member.
I have to see the movement toward those elements, and I
cannot continue at a time in which we face such enormous
challenges here at home to vote for billions of dollars that at
the end of the day do not lead toward a more open, transparent,
honest process, at a minimum, at a minimum.
Ambassador Cunningham. I understand.
Senator Menendez. Ambassador Olson, just in a similar
light, Senator Corker and I had, a while back, looked for some
benchmarks as it relates to our assistance in coalition support
funds to Pakistan.
You know, in my view, it's incongruous to provide enormous
sums to the Pakistan military via the coalition support funds
unless we're certain that the Pakistanis are committed to
locate, disrupt, and dismantle terrorist threats inside of
their border.
My understanding is this new deal that we've cut with
Pakistan to permit the transport of military resupply convoys
also promises to deliver more than a billion dollars in delayed
military aid.
What commitment are we getting in return, beyond the
convoy, that the Pakistani military will cease support to
extremist and terrorist groups and prevent al-Qaeda, the
Taliban, and associated terrorist groups from operating within
the territory of Pakistan?
All I hear is about the Pakistanis seeking an end to the
drone attacks that have been the one successful effort and
turning it over to them.
You know, again, if we're going to be providing billions of
dollars, then what is the commitment, the concurrent
commitment, here?
Ambassador Olson. Thank you, Senator, for the excellent
question.
With regard to the coalition support funds, as you know,
this is a reimbursement for expenses incurred in support of the
coalition activities. And my understanding of the process is
that the Pakistanis submit certain expenditures for our review,
and we review them very carefully, and we do not in any way
accept all of those expenditures. In other words, we're very
careful to make sure that they are in line with our own
standards and our own criteria for the expenditure.
With regard to the overall question of the Pakistani
support for counterterrorism, I think the record of the last
decade shows that we have had substantial cooperation from the
Pakistanis on the question of al-Qaeda in particular. I mean,
we are virtually within grasp of defeating al-Qaeda as an
organization.
A lot of that, as President Obama has indicated, is due to
support from the Pakistani Government.
In addition, the Pakistani Government is very concerned
about the internal threat from insurgents and extremist
organizations. The Pakistani Army has been effectively
redeployed. Many of
the units that used to be on the Indian border have now been
redeployed internally for dealing with the threat coming from
extremists.
On the question of drones, Senator, as you well know, the
President has said that we will go after extremists and those
who threaten us wherever we find them. It's beyond the level of
classification for this hearing to discuss those programs in
any great detail. But I will, if confirmed, continue to follow
the President's direction on the question of defending our
national interests.
Senator Menendez. So I take it that what you're telling me
is that we're satisfied with the Pakistani response?
Ambassador Olson. Senator, I think that there is more that
can be done, absolutely. And I think that, particularly with
regard to the Haqqani Network, this is a very difficult issue.
I am coming at this from having served at Embassy Kabul for the
last year. I was in the Embassy on September 13 and April 15
when the attacks took place that originated from the Haqqani
Network out of North Waziristan.
We are looking at all the ways that we can, as the whole of
the U.S. Government, attack the question of the Haqqani Network
and its support. We have already designated a number of
individuals.
I will certainly, if confirmed, take it as a central
responsibility, and the most urgent of my responsibilities, to
continue to press the Pakistanis for further action on the
Haqqani Network in every way possible.
Senator Menendez. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your
courtesy.
Senator Casey. Thank you, Senator Menendez.
We're at the end of the hearing. We want to thank both of
our witnesses for your testimony and for your continuing
commitment to public service in especially these difficult
postings, and we again thank your families.
The record will be open until noontime tomorrow for
Senators to submit questions.
And unless there is nothing further, we're adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:40 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
----------
Additional Questions and Answers Submitted for the Record
Responses of James B. Cunningham to Questions Submitted
by Senator John F. Kerry
Question. In April, my staff shared in writing significant concerns
about the
Afghanistan Infrastructure Fund (AIF) with the administration,
cautioning against investing in new, large-scale infrastructure
projects that the Afghans would not be able to sustain. To date, there
has been no response to the inquiry. This week, the Special Inspector
General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) released a report
reaching similar conclusions for FY 2011 AIF projects.
Answer. The administration is committed to the effective use of
United States resources for activities in Afghanistan. Your committee's
input has been integrated into our joint planning efforts under the
Afghanistan Infrastructure Program and we would be happy to provide an
updated informational briefing at the earliest opportunity. We should
note that we do not agree with many of the conclusions of the SIGAR
audit and our concerns were voiced in multiple annexes of the report.
The Afghanistan Infrastructure Program and Fund were conceived as tools
in the counterinsurgency campaign with ancillary development impacts.
We disagree with SIGAR's assertion that extension of the project
timeframes will have a negative effect on the counterinsurgency
campaign and development. It has been our experience that all stages of
infrastructure projects (which provide essential services the
insurgency could never offer) have a positive impact. The planning
stage of these long-term projects gives clear assurance of the enduring
commitment of the United States to the people of Afghanistan, the
construction phase creates employment and helps stabilize conflict
areas; and final completion opens the way for greater economic
opportunity. We have provided below specific answers to your question
on the execution of infrastructure projects in Afghanistan.
Question. What is the timeline for installing the third turbine at
the Kajaki dam? How many additional megawatts of energy will this add
to the grid for Kandahar, and at what cost per megawatt? What is the
total cost estimate for bringing the third turbine online, including
security costs incurred by U.S. and coalition forces?
Answer. The third turbine at Kajaki Dam is conservatively scheduled
to be operational by the end of 2014 and will add 18 megawatts (MW) of
electricity to the southern electrical power grid, for a total
generation at Kajaki of 51 MW. The Government of Afghanistan and USAID
estimate production costs of electricity at Kajaki to be 1.5 cents per
kilowatt-hour (or $15 per MW-hour) including operation and maintenance
costs. The estimated cost to install the new turbine at the Kajaki dam
is $85 million, including the cost of security, logistics, and camp
support. Based on initial planning, we expect 8-10 MW of the power
generated by the new turbine to reach Kandahar, while the remaining
electricity will be distributed in Sangin and Helmand Valley.
Question. When will the North East Power System (NEPS)--South East
Power System (SEPS) connection come online? Could the NEPS-SEPS
connection destabilize the grid in Kabul, and if so, what happens then?
Answer. USAID will use the Power Transmission Expansion
Connectivity (PTEC) Project as the mechanism to construct the
connection between Afghanistan's Northeast Power System (NEPS) and
Southeast Power System (SEPS). This ``NEPS-SEPS Connection'' includes
approximately 500 kilometers of transmission line and seven
substations. The current completion date for the project is September
2016. According to the results of the recently completed feasibility
study for the PTEC project, the connection of the northern and southern
power grids is technically feasible and will not result in the
destabilization of either grid. The study identified priorities for
synchronization and reactive power compensation in and around the Kabul
load center. Overall, conclusions of the study supported the planned
system expansion, which is also consistent with the Afghan Energy
Master Plan (funded by the Asian Development Bank, currently in draft).
Question. What is the sustainment plan for the Kandahar Power
Bridging solution given that SIGAR found ``that more sustainable
sources will not be available to replace the Kandahar Bridging Solution
until well beyond 2014?
Answer. The Kandahar Bridging Solution currently provides
approximately 28 MW of diesel generated power to the SEPS system. The
Department of Defense plans to use the Afghanistan Infrastructure Fund
(AIF) to provide diesel fuel through 2014, adjusting expected
requirements to account for new sources of power as they come online in
southern Afghanistan. As indicated above, the third turbine at Kajaki
is expected to come online by the end of 2014 which will relieve some
of the burden on the current diesel generators for Kandahar. The
connection of the northern grid to southern Afghanistan will bring
additional power (between 25 MW to 70 MW, depending on multiple
variables). At a minimum, the grid-based power from NEPS will displace
the current diesel generation, but is not estimated to be fully
operational until 2016. In the meantime, we are working with the
Government of Afghanistan and the Department of Defense to improve the
performance of the Kandahar grid to reduce technical and commercial
losses. We are also working with the Afghan National Utility on a plan
to manage diesel fuel and increase revenue collection. In addition, we
are exploring ways to incentivize revenue generation in southern
Afghanistan by giving paying customers priority to diesel-generated
electricity.
Ultimately, sustainability of the electrical grid in Afghanistan
depends on the capacity of the Afghan National Utility, which has made
great strides in the last few years and continues to improve its
operations. USAID is working with the Afghan National Utility at both
the national and local levels to better define the capital investments
needed over the near and long term, the costs of operation and
maintenance, and the technical, human, and financial resources needed
to meet these obligations.
Question. What steps are being taken to address frustrations
expressed by the local population for destruction of their property for
the Nawa to Lashkar Gah road AIF project?
Answer. We are implementing the Afghanistan Infrastructure Program
in close coordination with local officials of the Afghan Government to
ensure local popular support for all projects and proper compensation
by the government to the citizens impacted by construction. For
instance, the Department of Defense worked with local officials to
ensure proper procedures were followed in compensating residents for
loss of their land due to the construction of the Lashkar Gah road. We
have contacted our local government partners for the project and will
make sure citizen concerns are addressed.
Question. For each FY 2011 and FY 2012 AIF project, please submit
(1) a realistic estimate of costs necessary to sustain the project, the
planned source of such funding, and an assessment of the reliability of
the planned source; (2) evidence that estimated sustainment costs have
been provided to the Afghan Government and that the Afghan Government
has committed to sustain the project; and (3) a joint assessment of the
capacity of the Afghan Government entity responsible for sustaining the
project.
Answer. It is difficult to accurately estimate sustainment costs
before project plans are finalized and bids are received for
construction. The costs for operation and maintenance of infrastructure
projects will be supported by a combination of funds from the
international community and the Afghan Government. We continue to meet
with the Ministry of Finance and line ministries to improve their
capacity to generate revenue and budget for future maintenance. We are
happy to provide as much information as we can on this subject and have
attached the previously provided approaches for sustainment for each
project funded with AIF to this document.
Question. Please provide background on the Afghanistan
Reintegration Program (ARP), including the strategy and an assessment
of efforts to date.
Answer. The Afghan Peace and Reintegration Program (APRP) was
established by President Karzai on June 29, 2010. Representatives of
the international community endorsed the APRP at the July 2010 Kabul
Conference. The Afghan Government then issued a ``Joint Order'' on
September 6, 2010, that gave detailed instructions to ministries and
provincial governors on how to implement the APRP. The High Peace
Council (HPC) was established in October 2010. This body is responsible
for providing advice to the President and for guiding, overseeing, and
ensuring APRP implementation.
The APRP seeks to enable local agreements where communities,
supported by GIRoA, reach out to insurgents to address their
grievances, encourage them to stop fighting, and rejoin their
communities with dignity and honor. To date, the program has brought in
over 5,000 fighters, allowing them to rejoin their communities by
pledging to renounce violence, support the political process, and
contribute to their communities.
Question. Of the $50 million authorized for ARP for FY 2012, please
explain why only $616,000 has been obligated as of March 31, 2012, and
how and when the remainder of the funds will be obligated.
Answer. The Department of Defense (DOD) provides funds in support
of the APRP through Afghan Reintegration Program (ARP) and can provide
further information on funding and execution of those funds.
Question. As I said during my opening statement, ``we must prepare
now for
Afghan elections in 2014. Ultimately, it is the political transition
that will determine whether our military gains are sustainable and the
strength and quality of the Afghan state we leave behind will be
determined by that political transition. Our role should not interfere
in domestic politics. It is critical that Afghans must pick their
leaders freely and fairly. But we should make clear that we will only
support a technical process that is transparent and credible. Selection
of an accountable Independent Election Commission, transparency in new
elections laws, and early preparation of voter lists are all critical
steps for Afghans in order that they have a voice and choice in the
election.''
Please describe the U.S. strategy to prepare for a credible
Presidential election in 2014, including how we will ensure
that elections will be held in 2014 and not delayed or moved
earlier and how we will ensure that the technical process is
transparent and credible.
Answer. We have and will continue to support the democratic process
in Afghanistan in accordance with the Afghan Constitution. An orderly
and legitimate constitutional political transition through Presidential
elections in 2014 is key to future Afghan stability. This political
transition is first and foremost a question for the Afghan Government
and people, but we stand ready to support and assist them. We recognize
the importance of strengthening Afghanistan's democratic institutions
in the lead up to the 2014 political transition and beyond, and it is a
key component in our U.S.-Afghanistan Strategic Partnership Agreement.
Additionally, we will continue to work with international partners to
provide appropriate support, including to Afghanistan's electoral
institutions.
The Tokyo Declaration and President Karzai's July 26 Executive
order both outlined that the Presidential election will take place in
2014, and the International Election Commission (IEC) has indicated its
plans to hold the elections on time in spring 2014, as mandated in the
Afghan Constitution.
The U.S. Government made significant contributions to the 2009 and
2010 elections, including programming to strengthen the IEC and
Electoral Complaints Commission (ECC). We plan to continue this line of
effort for 2014. We plan to support the election management
institutions and strengthen their capacity to administer legitimate
elections, including supporting the IEC to hire qualified and impartial
election officials; providing logistics support to the IEC; assisting
the IEC in establishing a credible and cost-effective voter registry;
and assisting in identifying and allocating polling locations in
accordance with Afghan laws.
Question. What are the key steps that the Afghan Government must
take to ensure a credible election in 2014?
Answer. One of the key challenges the Afghan Government faces in
advance of the 2014 election is the passage of needed electoral
reforms. The Afghan Parliament is currently considering electoral
reform legislation that would determine how IEC commissioners are
appointed and would spell out the duties of the IEC commissioners. We
support this Afghan discussion and are encouraged that civil society
groups and political actors are engaged in a wide-ranging public debate
on measures to improve the electoral process, including promoting
checks and balances to enhance the independence of the IEC and ECC.
The IEC and other Afghan officials still need to identify the
precise date of the election in 2014. As part of the Tokyo Declaration,
the Afghan Government committed to announcing the election date by
January 2013, which will enable sufficient preparation time for
security, logistics, and candidates.
Question. What must the Afghan Government and international
community do in 2012 to lay the groundwork for a legitimate political
transition in 2014?
Answer. Through 2012, it will be important for the Afghans to
continue working to pass a revised electoral law and the IEC Structure
Law. Through a revised electoral law, the Afghans can establish a
credible electoral complaints body with a clear mandate. The
international community will focus on providing the technical
assistance needed to help the Afghans strengthen their electoral
process.
Question. The Electoral Complaints Commission (ECC) of Afghanistan,
which played a key role in detecting fraud in the 2009 election and
forcing a recount, is reportedly facing a loss of its independence
because it may be subsumed by the Ministry of Justice. As the U.S.
Ambassador to Afghanistan, would you support the continued independence
of the ECC? If so, what steps will you take to ensure its independence?
Answer. An independent electoral complaints mechanism is critical
for advancing the credibility and legitimacy of the election. Under
current Afghan law, the ECC is established 120 days prior to the
election and its activity ends 2 months after the certification of
election results. The IEC submitted its recommendations for the draft
electoral law to the Ministry of Justice on June 11, and under his July
26 Executive order, President Karzai ordered the Ministry of Justice to
complete its review of the electoral law within 2 months.
Question. If confirmed, will you create a position similar to that
held by Ambassador Tim Carney in 2009 to lead Embassy Kabul's election
efforts? Why or why not?
Answer. Ambassador Tim Carney's efforts helped to focus and
coordinate U.S. Government efforts in preparing for the 2009
Presidential election. At this time, we are still discussing our senior
staffing needs for the 2014 Presidential election, taking into account
the level of resources and the importance of Afghan ownership during
transition.
Question. In your opening statement before the committee, you
stated that the Japanese announcement at the Tokyo conference on July
8, 2012, that the international community had pledged $16 billion in
aid over the next 4 years was ``sufficient to cover Afghanistan's
fiscal gap as identified by the World Bank.''
Please clarify exactly how donor pledges will sufficiently
cover an estimated $16 billion fiscal gap, given that pledges
are not actual dollars until and unless funding has been
obligated by donors, a great deal less than 100 percent of
donor aid will go toward financing the Afghan state and its
budget, and development aid in Afghanistan largely does not go
directly to the Afghan state. Has the World Bank confirmed that
the donor pledges in Tokyo are sufficient to cover
Afghanistan's fiscal gap?
Answer. At the July 8 Tokyo Conference, the international community
agreed to support Afghanistan over the next 4 years with assistance
pledges totaling $16 billion, according to an informal Government of
Japan tally. As noted in the U.S.-Afghanistan Strategic Partnership
Agreement, which Congress supported in a nonbinding resolution on July
31, we will consult closely with Congress on a yearly basis to seek
appropriate funds to ensure that the United States provides sufficient
assistance to maintain our hard-won gains in security and development
in Afghanistan. We were pleased that commitments made at Tokyo indicate
that our international allies have pledged to contribute an increased
percentage of Afghanistan's civilian assistance needs, which means that
our own share of civilian assistance levels as a percentage of overall
international civilian assistance to Afghanistan is decreasing. Donors
also recommitted at Tokyo to find ways to put more assistance on
budget, or channeled through the Afghan Government in transparent ways,
consistent with Busan outcomes, such that our assistance will have a
greater impact and be better aligned with Afghan national priorities.
Prior to Tokyo, a joint IMF and World Bank debt sustainability analysis
found that Afghanistan's nonsecurity budgetary requirements would be
between $3.2 and $3.9 billion annually, inclusive of on- and off-budget
expenditures.
Question. In light of the Tokyo conference and commitments, what
changes will take place in how USAID and the State Department will
obligate funds in Afghanistan to help meet Afghanistan's fiscal gap?
Answer. The Tokyo Declaration and Framework outlines ways in which
donors will change their approach to providing assistance to
Afghanistan through greater accountability, increased predictability,
and incentive mechanisms. Working closely with our congressional
partners, we will adjust how we request and obligate funds in
Afghanistan following Tokyo. At Tokyo, donors agreed that additional
work will need to be done to continue improving the effectiveness of
civilian assistance. At Tokyo, donors also agreed that we should
reenergize the Joint Coordination and Monitoring Board (JCMB) as the
key coordinating mechanism between donors and the Afghan Government. We
agree that donors and the Government of Afghanistan must improve
coordination to ensure that pledged funds are utilized most
effectively, are allocated to the highest priorities, and are
supportive of sustainability. The JCMB will be the primary means to
follow up on the mutual accountability commitments made in Tokyo.
Based on commitments reaffirmed at Tokyo, we will attempt to
provide up to 50 percent of development assistance through the Afghan
budget, and ensure that at least 80 percent of our assistance is in
line with Afghan national priorities. The Tokyo Declaration also
encourages donors to provide increasing levels of assistance through
incentives programs, such as those in the World Bank-run Afghanistan
Reconstruction Trust Fund (ARTF).
Question. What percentage of FY 2012 funds is going through the
national budget of the Afghan Government (``on-budget'')? What
percentage of FY 2013 funds is estimated to go on-budget?
Answer. We expect approximately 45 to 50 percent of FY 2012
development assistance will be placed on-budget. Development assistance
encompasses most of our Economic Support Funds, but does not usually
include security, humanitarian, stabilization, or law enforcement
funding. Prior to placing funds on-budget multiple safeguards are put
in place. These include:
Risk Assessments to determine whether an Afghan ministry or
institution has the structures and processes in place to
appropriately manage U.S. Government funds
Agreements with clear and achievable goals and objectives,
provisions for incremental funding, along with audit and
inspection rights, for each project or activity implemented.
For FY 2013 we intend to similarly pursue a responsible on-budget
program. Percentage of funds placed on budget will be dependent on the
final appropriation.
Question. What percentage of FY 2012 funds is aligned with the
Afghan Government's National Priority Programs (NPP)? What percentage
of FY 2013 funds is estimated to be aligned with the NPPs?
Answer. We have determined that nearly 80 percent of our
development assistance is already in line with Afghan national
priorities, as defined in Afghanistan's National Priority Programs
(NPPs). Post Tokyo, we are now engaged in an evaluation to determine
our precise program alignment to NPP deliverables.
Question. In your opening statement, you stated that
``international assistance to Afghanistan is not unconditional.'' In
light of the mutual accountability framework and commitments made in
Tokyo, please describe specifically what conditions will be attached to
U.S. civilian assistance in Afghanistan going forward, excluding funds
obligated by the United States to the World Bank's Afghanistan
Reconstruction Trust Fund (ARTF) incentive program.
Answer. Donors continue to define specific criteria related to
Tokyo commitments. Once we have determined what conditions will be
attached to civilian assistance--over and beyond the incentive
structures already in place in the ARTF and other similar programs--we
will coordinate with you to ensure full transparency. The mutual
accountability framework includes specific, measurable reform goals for
the Government of Afghanistan and the international community. Progress
toward these goals will be regularly evaluated through the JCMB and
other meetings with participation from Afghan civil society, and
findings will be made available to the public. The international
community was clear at Tokyo that lack of progress on these reform
goals, especially those related to the rights of women, would make it
difficult to justify large assistance budgets and could result in
decreased levels. Our regular consultations with Congress about the
annual assistance requests for Afghanistan will include a discussion of
specific progress toward the goals of the Tokyo Mutual Accountability
Framework.
Question. How much of FY 2011 funds was obligated to the ARTF's
incentive program? How much is planned to be obligated for FY 2012? FY
2013?
Answer. In FY 2011, the United States provided $371 million to the
ARTF; $166 million of that contribution was not ``preferenced'' to
specific programs, and will be distributed among the existing ARTF
incentive program, recurrent cost funding, and program funding. In
2011, the World Bank's ARTF did not provide incentive program funding
to the Government of Afghanistan due to the absence of an IMF country
program. For 2012, the U.S. plans to contribute $300 million to the
ARTF, and the fund is planning a $50 million incentive fund, increasing
to $150 million in 2013, with the intent of applying more funding
toward incentive-based approaches in coming years.
Question. Please describe the plans to manage Afghanistan's fiscal
gap starting in 2016.
Answer. The Tokyo Declaration recommends holding a Ministerial to
review progress on Tokyo mutual accountability in 2014. At that
conference, we expect that we will also review Afghan efforts to
prioritize fiscal needs, as well as Afghan efforts to increase revenue
generation. Now, and particularly post-Transition, the Afghan
Government will define how to best address its fiscal gap based on an
assessment of its needs at that time, as it describes in its pre-Tokyo
strategy ``Towards Self Reliance.'' At Tokyo, donors were clear that
civilian assistance levels would diminish through the Transformation
Decade, as the Afghan Government increasingly takes responsibility for
its own fiscal sustainability.
Question. Beyond the extractive industries sector, what are the
Afghan Government's plan to raise and collect revenue?
Answer. The IMF country program for Afghanistan calls for the
application of a Value Added Tax (VAT) in an effort to capture
additional revenues for the Afghan Government, with a goal of reaching
15 percent of GDP by 2015. For the first time, the Afghan Government
recorded revenues of over $2 billion this year. The Afghan Government
also realizes that it must make reforms that attract private sector
investment and encourage economic growth. As Afghanistan's economy
grows, the country should collect more revenues in real terms.
Question. What is your perspective on the Afghan Government's
recent rejection of the mining law? What implications does it have for
U.S. support to develop the extractive industries sector?
Answer. We understand that the Afghan Cabinet has reviewed proposed
revisions and additions to the mining law, and that Cabinet members
requested additional time to review and understand these complex laws
and amendments. We understand that many of the proposed amendments to
the current mining law, if approved, would create a more attractive
business environment for potential international investors. We are
encouraged that the Cabinet is closely reviewing the law, with the
understanding that the passage of a widely accepted law is important to
attract foreign direct investment to the mining sector and the Afghan
economy. This is an Afghan-led process and we recognize the Afghan
Government's desire to ensure that revenues from the extractive sector
benefit the Afghan people in a transparent manner.
Question. What has the United States accomplished in its goal of
reducing corruption in the Afghan Government? If confirmed, what
approach do you intend to take on this issue, and how, if at all, would
your approach differ from that taken previously?
Answer. We and the Afghans recognize that corruption challenges
loom large in Afghanistan. It is in Afghanistan's own interest to
aggressively pursue anticorruption policies and we continue to
underscore the importance of these efforts in our engagements with the
Afghan Government.
Before the Tokyo Conference on July 8, the Afghan Government
published a strategic vision for the transformation decade entitled
``Towards Self-Reliance,'' in which governance issues play a prominent
role. In this strategy, the Afghans Government pledged to meet 17
governance indicators defined at Tokyo in five key areas: governance
capacity and accountability; anticorruption; budget planning and
execution; rule of law; and economic governance. Many of these pledges
are defined in the Tokyo Mutual Accountability Framework, which the
international community and the Afghan Government are working to make
specific and actionable.
Just recently, on July 26, President Karzai issued a Presidential
decree detailing an expansive plan to combat corruption with specific
instructions. This follows a June 21 speech to a special session of
Parliament during which President Karzai made clear that he would like
anticorruption to be part of his legacy.
Afghanistan is making progress on key transparency reforms to
facilitate economic growth in specific areas. Afghanistan has made
significant progress toward Extractive Industry Transparency Initiative
(EITI) compliance and World Trade Organization accession. EITI
compliance will be important for Afghanistan in the coming years to
ensure that it equitably and transparently uses the significant
revenues it expects from the mining and extractives sector.
The Afghans have also taken steps toward holding accountable those
responsible for the Kabul Bank crisis, permitting the IMF to restart
its relationship with Afghanistan in November of last year. This
decision was reaffirmed in late-June by the IMF Executive Board. The
Afghan Government has affirmed its commitment to hold those involved in
the Kabul Bank scandal accountable and has instituted a process that
requires all shareholders to take part in a combination of civil and
criminal proceedings. This process should result in continued asset
recoveries and prosecutions. The Afghan central bank is also in the
process of implementing wide-ranging financial sector reforms as
defined under the IMF country program.
If confirmed, I will continue to hold the Afghan Government
accountable to the pledges made in the Mutual Accountability Framework.
I will encourage the Afghans to make meaningful progress on
anticorruption efforts and I will do everything possible to ensure that
U.S. assistance funds are used appropriately.
Question. According to the Special Inspector General for
Afghanistan Reconstruction's July 30, 2012, report, the U.S. Congress
has appropriated more than $52 billion to support the Afghan National
Security Forces (ANSF). Current projections to sustain the ANSF exceed
$4 billion a year.
Through what security assistance authority does the
administration plan to fund the ANSF in years to come?
As the U.S. mission in Afghanistan slowly transitions to a
civilian-led effort, will the administration continue to
request funding through the Afghan Security Forces Fund or will
it seek to shift assistance toward traditional mechanisms such
as Foreign Military Financing and International Education and
Military Training?
Answer. No decisions have been taken on future funding that would
change the current model with the Department of Defense taking the lead
in the training and funding of the Afghan National Security Forces
(ANSF). As transition progresses, we will make assessments on whether
and when State should seek a greater role in funding the ANSF and make
appropriate requests.
Question. Although the ANSF has shown progress in certain
capabilities, there are still serious questions about its ability to
operate autonomously, without the aid of coalition forces. The ANSF
still confronts significant problems of illiteracy, high attrition, and
corruption. U.S. Government assessments and metrics are focused on
creating the force rather than on transition. NTM-A has not issued a
useful public report on ANSF development since 2011.
Please explain how the administration's current assessment
metrics determine whether the ANSF has the will to fight and
the ability to hold together a coherent force representing the
central government.
Answer. Regarding metrics, the Department of Defense (DOD) provides
metrics that assess capability milestones across the Afghan National
Army (ANA) and Afghan National Police (ANP). DOD also provides a
quarterly Progress Report on Stability and Security in Afghanistan that
assesses the ability of the ANSF. Overall, we have seen growing
confidence of the ANSF during this 2012 season in responding capably
and largely independently to complex insurgent attacks in Kandahar,
Wardak, Kabul province and Kabul city. The ANSF are also increasingly
capable of taking the lead for some of the most complex missions--
including a recent successful night air assault planned and led by
Afghans, comprising over 50 Afghan commandos and four MI-17s flown by
Afghan pilots. While the ANSF continues to need ISAF support in
enablers, their operational effectiveness is increasing and the 352,000
ANSF target later this year will provide a solid foundation as the
transition of provinces continues through December 2014. As the
coalition continues the drawdown to our sustainment level, the NATO
Training Mission Afghanistan (NTMA) is developing the leadership and
technical skills within the ANSF that can support independent
operations by the end of 2014.
Question. What do recent assessments of the Afghanistan Local
Police (ALP), the Afghan Public Protection Force (APPF), and the
Counter Narcotics Police of Afghanistan (CNPA) say about their
effectiveness, and what are the plans to sustain these forces?
Answer. The Afghanistan Local Police (ALP), the Afghan Public
Protection Force (APPF), and the Counter Narcotics Police of
Afghanistan (CNPA), on the whole, have performed admirably and continue
to develop capabilities to secure Afghan. The majority of Afghans have
a favorable view of the ALP program, which is providing security in
rural regions that lack regular ANP or ANA. As it stands, the Ministry
of Interior and DOD approved manpower ceiling is 30,000 ALP in a
program to last no more than 5 years. There are currently less than
half that number of ALP operating in Afghanistan. The Afghan Ministry
of Interior will formalize the continuation of ALP beyond 2015.
With regards to the APPF, we respect the sovereignty of the Afghan
Government and its right to regulate the provision of security services
within Afghanistan. The APPF is part of the overall transition to
Afghan security lead by 2014 and the program has taken longer than
expected to develop the institutional support for the APPF, while guard
hiring, training and employment are steadily increasing. Although APPF
is overseen and managed through the Ministry of Interior, the APPF
operates as a State-owned enterprise, under which its own revenues will
support the force in the future.
As a law enforcement component of the Ministry of the Interior, the
CNPA follows a strategy, codified within their Ministry Development
Plan (MDP) that was developed and is being implemented by DOD-funded
entities (NTM-A/CSTC-A). The U.S. Government focuses its evaluation and
assessment activities of the effectiveness of its programs in building
capacity, and in enabling an independent CNPA. As such, the current
monitoring and evaluation activities take into account measures of both
the transfer of knowledge to the specialized investigative personnel,
as well as to the CNPA administrative personnel. Oversight of the
infrastructure components of the programs is conducted by an onsite
Contracting Officer's Representative (COR) and Government Technical
Monitor (GTM). These individuals are continuously reviewing and
evaluating the contractor's performance in maintaining the basing
facilities so that when the Afghan's are ready for a full transition,
they receive the high-quality platforms necessary for success.
Question. With the continued drawdown of coalition forces, how will
the United States sustain a coherent and competent ANSF? What actions
is the administration undertaking to ensure the international community
shares in continued burden of sustaining the ANSF?
Answer. As pledged at the NATO summit in Chicago, NATO will
continue to lead a post-2014 Train, Advise and Assist mission designed
precisely to develop a competent and coherent ANSF as they take the
lead throughout the country. At Chicago, ISAF Allies and Partners also
joined the Afghan Government in pledging around $1 billion so far in
financial support to a post-2014 ANSF. The Afghan Government has
pledged to provide at least $500 million a year beginning in 2015 and
progressively increasing its share over time. We will continue to urge
countries, particularly those in the region who have a strong stake in
Afghanistan's security, to provide funding to the ANSF. This will be
critical to secure the gains the ANSF has made and ensure a sustainable
future for the security force.
Question. What is your assessment of the political sustainability
of the ANSF post 2014, given the difficulties of recruiting and
retaining Pashtun officers and the overwhelming dominance of non-
Pashtun groups within the ANA officer corps?
Answer. Within the ANA officer corps, the NATO Training Mission
Afghanistan (NTMA) has directed recruitment in a way that reflects the
ethnic and regional demographics of Afghanistan, including Pashtuns. As
NTMA continues to train officers over the next years, they will
continue to seek these targets and develop a cohesive ANA officer
corps, reflective of Afghan society.
______
Responses of Richard G. Olson to Questions Submitted
by Senator John F. Kerry
Question. Section 620M of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961,
commonly known as the Leahy amendment, provides guidance for U.S.
embassies regarding the collection, use, and public disclosure of
information relating to gross violations of human rights by units of
foreign security forces. Among other things, the law requires that if
the Secretary of State has credible information that such a unit has
committed such a violation, U.S. training, equipment, or other
assistance to that unit must cease, unless the foreign government is
taking effective steps to bring the responsible members of the unit to
justice. The law has a mandatory provision that requires the U.S.
Government to notify the foreign government if the United States
decides to withhold training, equipment, or other assistance pursuant
to the law. The law also requires the Department of State to take
affirmative steps to piece together available information and to work
to identify security force units responsible for violations.
(a). If confirmed, please describe the steps you would take:
(1) to ensure that the law is implemented effectively,
including to vet units to determine their eligibility to
receive training, equipment, or other assistance; and (2) to
ensure your Embassy receives information that such a crime may
have occurred.
Answer. The Department of State ensures full compliance with the
Leahy law in Pakistan. Embassy Islamabad has a process in place to vet
security force units and individuals before they receive U.S.
assistance to ensure they are not implicated in any gross human rights
violations. This process is led by an in-country vetting coordinator
and an interagency team, which reviews all potential recipients,
including security force units, of training and other assistance.
(b). If confirmed, please also describe the steps you would
implement to ensure: (1) that the people of Pakistan are aware
of the law and the commitment of the United States to avoid
providing training, equipment, or other assistance to units
that commit human rights violations; (2) that persons in
Pakistan with credible information about human rights
violations have a means to provide that information to the U.S.
Embassy so it can be considered in vetting units; and (3) that
the Embassy staff is affirmatively seeking to identify security
force units responsible for human rights violations and not
simply waiting to receive information?
Answer. Addressing human rights abuses by Pakistan's security
forces continues to be a key part of our bilateral dialogue with
Pakistan. We regularly engage the civilian government and Pakistani
military and police officials on human rights abuses, including any
report of extra judicial killing. We have been clear with the
Pakistanis that such practices will not be tolerated and that we expect
Pakistan to investigate credible allegations of human rights abuses and
take appropriate action to deal with these abuses. If confirmed, I will
continue to press the Government of Pakistan to take action against
human rights violators. I will also continue to ensure Embassy
Islamabad's compliance with the Leahy law, including offering
assistance to the Government of Pakistan to help identify and prosecute
members of security forces who commit violations.
(c). The law also requires that if any training, equipment,
or other assistance is withheld the U.S. Government offer
assistance to the maximum extent practicable to help identify
and prosecute members of security forces who commit violations.
If confirmed, will you fully implement this requirement of the
law and help Pakistan end impunity for human rights violations?
Answer. Regarding the vetting process, Embassy Islamabad has a
Human Rights Officer who actively collects information on reported
human rights abuses, which is reported in the Department's annual Human
Rights Report and is incorporated into the vetting process. Embassy
Islamabad, in coordination with the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights &
Labor (DRL), complies with a vigorous vetting system to ensure that
security force recipients of U.S. assistance have not committed human
rights abuses. The International Vetting and Security Tracking (INVEST)
system is used to monitor all requests for assistance to members of
foreign security forces. The vetting process is as follows:
Embassy Islamabad enters those individuals or units
nominated for training or assistance into the INVEST system,
and uses governmental, nongovernmental, and media resources on
human rights abuses in Pakistan to vet the candidates. The
Embassy also undertakes checks with local police and government
for other derogatory information. Should any credible
derogatory information be uncovered, the Embassy may deny or
suspend the individual or unit from assistance.
If there is a need for further review of information, DRL
assembles a broader team of Department representatives to
determine the credibility of the information and determines
whether assistance should be denied or authorized. Posts are
automatically notified of final Leahy vetting results through
INVEST.
If confirmed, I plan to continue this process and will look for
opportunities to improve the effectiveness of our procedures.
(d). If confirmed, we ask that you provide this committee
along with the Senate Appropriations Committee on Foreign
Operations (SACFO) the steps you have taken to implement the
steps you have identified in response to these questions after
you have been at the Embassy for 6 months.
Answer. If confirmed, I will also look for opportunities to expand
our efforts to engage the Pakistani public about credible human rights
violations by its security forces and explore how we could increase the
mission's ability to proactively seek information regarding potential
violations. I will continue U.S. support for bolstering Pakistani
institutions that are responsible for investigating and prosecuting
these allegations.
I will continue to keep the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and
the Senate Appropriations Committee, Subcommittee on Foreign Operations
informed of our progress.
Question. The Center for Global Development's July 2012 report
``More Money, More Problems: A 2012 Assessment of the U.S. Approach to
Development in Pakistan'' found that ``despite improvements in
individual projects and agencies, the government-wide development
strategy for Pakistan still lacks clear leadership, mission,
transparency, and adequate exploitation of nonaid tools.''
(a). If confirmed, please describe the steps you will take
to clarify the mission, increase transparency, and measure
progress.
Answer. There are significant challenges to implementing U.S.
assistance to Pakistan. We have recognized, however, that we can and
must do a better a job of informing the United States and Pakistani
public of the accomplishments and goals of our civilian assistance
program. One of my top priorities, if confirmed as Ambassador, would be
to work closely with USAID, the Department, and other interagency
partners engaged in international development in Pakistan to further
increase transparency and ensure our assistance is deployed
effectively.
We have already taken extensive steps to clarify our mission. In
February 2011, State and USAID reviewed all civilian assistance to
Pakistan and streamlined our investment to have maximum impact on our
national security objective of supporting a stable, secure, and
prosperous Pakistan. Following consultations with the Government of
Pakistan on its top development priorities, the result was a concerted
effort to focus our assistance into five priority sectors: energy;
economic growth, including agriculture; stabilization, mainly of the
border areas; education; and health. This framework is available online
in strategic documents such as the ``Afghanistan and Pakistan Civilian
Engagement Status Report,'' available at: http://www.state.gov/
documents/organization/176809.pdf.
We are identifying key goals for each of these five sectors and
quantifiable metrics so that we can concretely measure progress. These
metrics will be available online in the coming weeks. USAID has already
increased the amount of detailed programmatic information available on
its website to include disbursement data and will be increasing the
amount of detail on the Web site over time.
I also appreciate the work of think tanks in informing our efforts
in Pakistan, including that of the Center for Global Development. If
confirmed, my team and I will review their ideas for performance
improvements and adapt as appropriate.
(b). Would you support establishing a multilateral trust
fund to channel some Kerry-Lugar-Berman funds? Please explain
why or why not.
Answer. The United States has previously contributed funds to the
Multi-Donor Trust Fund (MDTF) in Pakistan, a mechanism to fund projects
in Pakistan's border regions. In the past, the Government of Pakistan
has expressed some reservations about establishing MDTFs for assistance
to the rest of Pakistan, but we would consider channeling U.S. civilian
assistance into a MTDF if the Government of Pakistan were supportive.
(c). Would you support cofinancing with other donors that
have proven track records, such as the British development
agency (DFID) on education projects? Please explain why or why
not. What steps would you take to amend USAID regulations to
allow for greater flexibility to use funds for cofinancing?
Answer. The United States has previously cofinanced assistance
initiatives with other donors. For example, following the 2010 floods,
the United States contributed $190 million to Pakistan's Citizens'
Damage Compensation Fund. We have discussed the potential for
additional cofinancing opportunities with organizations like DFID and
if confirmed, my team and I will look for logical opportunities to do
so in the future. USAID regulations are not an obstacle to cofinancing
arrangements.
(d). If confirmed, what steps would you take to encourage
longer staff rotations, hire more experienced development
staff, and hire experienced Pakistanis at the Embassy and USAID
Mission in Islamabad, Lahore, Karachi, and Peshawar?
Answer. I recognize that shorter tenures of service in Pakistan
create challenges in achieving all aspects of the mission's work. If
confirmed, I am personally committed to recruiting and retaining top
talent for the entire Pakistan country team, including recruiting for
key positions staff who will agree to serve for longer tours.
Currently, approximately 20 percent of USAID staff extend their tour to
two or more years. I will work with the State Director General and
USAID's Deputy Assistant Administrator for Human Resources to encourage
longer rotations and hiring experienced staff.
As an example of progress already achieved, USAID/Pakistan's top
three employees--the Mission Director and his two Deputies--all
acquired extensive experience serving as Mission Directors in other
countries before they came to Pakistan. USAID/Pakistan has also
undertaken extensive efforts to hire experienced local staff in
Islamabad, Lahore, Karachi, and Peshawar to take on critical positions.
However, harassment and security issues pose challenges to our ability
to recruit and retain talent for mission local staff for all agencies,
including USAID.
Question. The administration recently released more than $1.1
billion in reimbursements through Coalition Support Funds to the
Government of Pakistan. Pakistan also receives security assistance
through mechanisms such as the Pakistani Counterinsurgency Capability
Fund, Foreign Military Financing, International Military Education and
Training, and Nonproliferation, Antiterrorism, Demining, and Related
Programs. Given the often strained bilateral relationship between the
United States and Pakistan, how will the administration continue to
leverage security assistance to ensure that the Government of Pakistan
is acting in the best security interests of the United States?
Answer. Pakistan's cooperation on our key counterterrorism concerns
has continued despite the turbulence of the past year. Sustained U.S.
and Pakistani counterterrorism efforts have seriously impacted the
leadership of al-Qaeda (AQ) and degraded the organization's ability to
operate against us and our troops. Pakistan has continued to conduct
counterterrorism operations in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas
and Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa, including ongoing missions in North and South
Waziristan, Mohmand, and Orakzai. Pakistan military liaisons continue
to staff border coordination centers in Afghanistan and work with their
U.S. and Afghan counterparts to improve the effectiveness of border
operations against militants. The Pakistan Navy also participates
regularly in multinational maritime security operations.
U.S. security assistance strengthens the counterterrorism and
counterinsurgency capabilities of Pakistan's security forces, and
promotes closer security ties with the United States. Specifically, we
are using security assistance to enhance Pakistan's ability to secure
its borders and increase its counter-IED capabilities. These
capabilities are central to promoting stability in the region post-
transition, and critical to U.S. national interests. As we begin to
draw down coalition forces in Afghanistan, it is vital that Pakistan
security forces have the ability to conduct targeted operations against
insurgent safe havens that remain a threat to the United States,
Pakistan, and the region.
As a matter of policy, we continue to review and calibrate the
delivery of security assistance to Pakistan to ensure it is in line
with our shared objectives and commensurate with levels of Pakistan's
cooperation. This allows us to responsibly deliver security assistance
to Pakistan in support of our key national security interests and
shared interests with Pakistan. If confirmed, my team and I will
continue to regularly monitor all security assistance programs to
verify that they are consistent with the broader U.S.-Pakistani
relationship, and reflective of the level of Pakistani cooperation,
including with the U.S. military presence on the ground.
Question. India and Pakistan have taken some encouraging steps in
recent months to improve relations and to reduce the risk that disputes
between the two countries could spark a nuclear showdown. But as long
as those arsenals exist, that risk continues. Please identify concrete
actions that you believe the United States should take in the coming
months and years to build greater confidence and transparency between
the two countries regarding their nuclear arsenals, and to further
reduce, if not eliminate, the risk that future crises could result in
nuclear use.
Answer. We welcome the steps that India and Pakistan have taken
toward improving their bilateral relations and encourage continued
progress. We see great importance in both countries taking steps to
reduce the risk of nuclear weapons use. Indian and Pakistani officials
met in December 2011 to discuss conventional and nuclear confidence
building measures as part of the wider dialogue between the two
countries.
These are actions that ultimately India and Pakistan must take
themselves, but we continue to encourage both sides in their efforts.
There are also many opportunities for cooperation on this issue through
``Track Two'' channels that enable experts from India, Pakistan, and
the international community to share ideas and best practices, and to
engage in informal diplomatic dialogue.
______
Responses of Richard Olson to Questions Submitted
by Senator Richard G. Lugar
Question. While teetering on the brink of insolvency, Pakistan
appears to forgo considerable revenues, including those associated with
transit trade. Though Pakistan has signed a Transit-Trade Agreement
with Afghanistan that was intended to allow direct transit of goods
between Central Asia and South Asia there has been little progress in
actual trade across Pakistan and thus considerable revenue and jobs
continue to be lost.
(a). What is the status and prospect of trade finding
permanent alternative routes, such as through Iran?
Answer. We have seen progress in working with our Pakistani
counterparts to promote transit trade with Afghanistan. While South
Asia is poorly integrated economically, the Pakistani Government has
realized that future economic prosperity depends on greater economic
integration with Afghanistan and India, and has made efforts to expand
its trade and investment relations with both countries. In 2010,
Pakistan and Afghanistan reached agreement on the Afghanistan-Pakistan
Transit Trade Agreement (APTTA), which is meant to expedite transit and
customs processing for trade between Afghanistan and Pakistan. Despite
entering into force in 2011, both sides have struggled to implement
APTTA because of technical and political challenges. In January 2012,
the Afghan and Pakistani Finance Ministers agreed to a framework for
resolving the remaining issues. Recently, the two sides indicated their
intention to convene technical level coordination meetings to discuss
treaty implementation. Additionally, the joint statement released by
Prime Minister Ashraf and President Karzai in late July announced the
intent of the two sides to pursue the extension of APTTA to include
Tajikistan.
We continue to support Pakistan's economic integration in the
region through the New Silk Road and are encouraged by the concrete
steps India and Pakistan have taken to normalize trade relations.
Pakistan's cross-border trade with India has increased to $2.7 billion
per year from just $300 million per year a decade ago. To further this
growth, the Pakistani Cabinet approved in February a 1,209-product
``negative list'' of goods from India, replacing the previous
``positive list'' which had allowed import of fewer than 2,000 tradable
items.
The implementation of APTTA should help Afghanistan and Pakistan
recover trade that was diverted through other countries including Iran
while the ground lines of communication were closed by enabling faster
border processing and by improving the predictability of transit along
the routes. Businesses and commercial carriers in Pakistan and
Afghanistan have indicated that if the situation were to improve, they
would prefer to resume or expand their trade across Pakistan because it
covers a shorter distance over less difficult terrain.
(b). Is the road/rail infrastructure through eastern Iran
fully operational and
capable of transferring the vast iron ore India and others will
seek to export from rich mineral deposits in Afghanistan?
Answer. However, we have not assessed Iran's road and rail capacity
for this purpose. We continue to work with the Government of
Afghanistan to promote the development of infrastructure required for
the exportation of its resources.
(c). What is the total estimate of revenue lost by Pakistan
during the closure of the NATO/ISAF resupply routes (GLOC)?
Answer. We do not have a good estimate of the revenue lost by
Pakistan due to the GLOC closure. All of the cargo that travels along
the Pakistani GLOCs is transported by privately owned Pakistani freight
forwarding companies. While it is clear that the Government of Pakistan
lost revenue by the closure, private businesses were more directly
impacted.
Question. According to the 2011 State Department Country Reports on
Terrorism, brutal and deadly terror attacks within Pakistan itself have
amounted to well
over 3,000 Pakistanis killed in 2011. The threat of violent militant
groups is pervasive, and no part of the Pakistan is spared. Suicide and
armed attacks occur in the coastal city of Karachi, the business
capital of Lahore, the frontier capital of Peshawar, as well as in the
tribal areas adjoining Afghanistan.
How do the Pakistan Government and the people of Pakistan
classify this threat?
How has the Pakistan Government worked to address the
internal threat to life and governing institutions that these
terror groups represent?
Distinguish to the extent possible between our efforts to
support Pakistan
efforts to combat internal terror threats, and the effort
toward the regional threat emanating from Pakistan safe havens?
Which is our primary concern?
Answer. The United States and Pakistan have vital, shared strategic
interests in the fight against terrorism and, since the 9/11 attacks,
Pakistan has been an important counterterrorism partner of the United
States. Pakistan recognizes the threat that extremists pose to its own
security and to regional security; more than 35,000 Pakistanis,
including over 14,000 Pakistani security personnel, have been killed or
injured by terrorist attacks or in counterterrorism and
counterinsurgency operations.
There are over 120,000 Pakistani troops deployed to the
Afghanistan-Pakistan border region conducting counterterrorism and
counterinsurgency operations to address the threat posed by groups such
as al-Qaeda and the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP). The Pakistani
Government is also working to improve the capacity of Pakistan's
security forces and the capacity of the Pakistani Government as a whole
to combat terrorism and to conduct counterinsurgency operations. To
this end, the U.S. Government has provided training and assistance, for
example, through our Pakistan Counterinsurgency Capability Fund and the
Antiterrorism Assistance program. This includes training for bomb
detection, crime scene investigation, airport and building security,
and maritime protections. We also assist with judicial and
prosecutorial training, to bolster the ability of the Pakistani legal
system to deal with terrorism cases.
More broadly, Pakistan generally continues its cooperation with us
on al-Qaeda--whose defeat is our core national security objective in
Afghanistan and Pakistan. As President Obama has said, ``We have been
able to kill more terrorists on Pakistani soil than just about any
place else. We could not have done that without Pakistani
cooperation.'' The importance of this fact cannot be overstated. As
both the President and Secretary Clinton stated after the death of
Osama bin Laden, our close counterterrorism cooperation with Pakistan
has put unprecedented pressure on al-Qaeda and its leadership.
We are focused on doing more with Pakistan, including helping it
implement the April 2012 Parliamentary recommendation that Pakistani
territory is not to be used for attacks on other countries and all
foreign fighters are to be expelled. We are also seeking greater
cooperation with Pakistan on addressing the threat posed by improvised
explosive devices (IEDs) which pose a significant threat to Pakistani
civilians and security personnel as well as to U.S. and partner forces
across the border in Afghanistan.
At the same time, we have to continue to apply pressure on the
Pakistanis to go after groups like the Haqqanis and Lashkar-e-Taiba,
which are a threat to regional stability. We will continue to insist on
improved cooperation to eliminate the continuing threats emanating from
Pakistan. We are using our diplomatic and assistance tools to press
that point.
Question. While the Haqqani network has been implicated in attacks
on U.S. entities in Afghanistan, including the Embassy in Kabul, and
multiple diplomatic entreaties of the Pakistan Government by U.S.
officials have yielded little assistance, there is an obvious gap in
our ability to address this threat.
What role and function does the Haqqani network play in the
tribal areas, including from a social and economic perspective?
Is targeting the Haqqani network a redline that has been
explicitly expressed by Pakistan authorities?
Have there been any inferences by Pakistan officials that
some agreement can be made regarding the Haqqani? If so, what
are the terms?
Under what conditions would the Haqqani network be targeted?
Similarly, why is the Quetta Shura able to operate so openly
in Balochistan? Is targeting Queta Shura explicitly redlined by
Pakistan authorities?
Answer. The Haqqanis have an extensive business and criminal
network which operates primarily in the Loya Paktia region of
Afghanistan and portions of North Waziristan, Pakistan. This includes
legitimate business activities, for example those related to the
construction sector (some of which are also used as fronts for illicit
activities), and criminal activities, such as extortion and kidnapping.
The diversity and extensiveness of the Haqqanis' activities makes it
both an influential powerbroker and a feared actor.
In April 2012, Pakistan's Parliamentary Committee on National
Security stated that Pakistan's territory shall not be used for any
kind of attacks on other countries and all foreign fighters shall be
expelled from Pakistani soil. We have underscored to the Pakistani
Government the importance of following up on these recommendations with
concrete steps to squeeze the Haqqanis, the Quetta Shura, and other
groups to include sharing intelligence about Haqqani operations, taking
action to close and dismantle extremist camps and operational
locations, and controlling its movement along the border with
Afghanistan. At the same time, ISAF continues to target Haqqani
operatives on the Afghan side of the border, such as Sher Mohammad
Hakimi on August 4.
Question. The Pakistan Business Council submits a list of suggested
reforms to the Pakistan Government through the Finance Minister each
fiscal year.
To what extent are the United States and other donors,
including the multilaterals, supportive of this effort and
what, if any, similar efforts are recognized?
What is the U.S. assessment of these efforts in mobilizing
reform?
What sectors and what percentage of the economy are assessed
to be significantly influenced by the Pakistan military?
Answer. Pakistan's economy remains resilient but unstable. Economic
reforms, especially in energy, revenue collection, and fiscal
management, must be implemented to unlock its potential. We support the
reforms proposed by the Pakistan Business Council to change the tax
structure and widen the taxation base, which if enacted, would revive
business confidence and help put the Pakistani economy on track to
achieve the consistent growth needed to provide employment for its
growing population, more than half of which is under 25 years of age.
Engagement on economic reform is therefore an important part of our
relationship with Pakistan. For example, we are currently negotiating a
Bilateral Investment Treaty with Pakistan, which we believe will spur
U.S. investment and encourage transparency in Pakistani Government
decisionmaking. We also support the efforts of business associations
and civil society to encourage economic reform.
In addition to our bilateral efforts, the IMF and the multilateral
development banks remain actively engaged in Pakistan, and work to
advance economic reforms needed to support stabilization and
development. We participate in the Friends of Democratic Pakistan
(FODP) group, which has produced reports and roadmaps for the reform on
post-conflict reconstruction requirements in the tribal areas and the
energy sector.
While the Pakistani Government has made some progress toward
implementing necessary reforms to achieve more market-based electricity
prices, reduce subsidies, and expand revenue collection, these steps
are not enough to resolve Pakistan's macroeconomic instability.
Political will is necessary to overcome entrenched interests. While
business associations have spoken in favor of reform, they
traditionally have not been strong advocates. We support efforts by the
U.S. Chamber of Commerce through its NGO affiliate to strengthen the
voices of these business associations.
The Pakistani military is both a significant employer and consumer
in Pakistan, and as such plays a central role in driving Pakistan's
economy, particularly in the energy, agriculture, and transportation
sectors. We do not have an estimate of the percentage of the economy
influenced by the military, but it is significant. Two well-known
examples of state-owned and ``private'' service providers are: (1) the
National Logistics Cell, a military-controlled logistics company that
manages transportation and border infrastructure, and (2) the Fauji
Foundation, one of the largest energy conglomerates in Pakistan, with
interests in fertilizer, cement, food, power generation, gas
exploration, financial services, employment services, and security
services. These entities, and others like them, employ retired military
personnel.
Question. The United States declaration of intent to shift its
focus toward Asia and the Indo-Pacific region as introduced by the
President in January and reinforced in the region by the Secretary of
Defense recently provided considerable opportunity for India's
important role.
What if any increased commitment has India made to help
regionally, especially in Afghanistan, as it relates to this
opportunity?
What if any redline does the U.S. assess exists in Pakistan
as it relates to India's assistance and investment in
Afghanistan?
What impact has been noted in Pakistan by the SECDEF
encouragement of India to act in Afghanistan?
Answer. India shares our goal of a stable, secure, and prosperous
Afghanistan, and has made significant commitments toward that end. As
South Asia's largest economy, India is a natural partner to promote
long-term stability and economic development in Afghanistan.
India's commitments were formalized in the Indo-Afghan Strategic
Partnership Agreement (SPA) signed in October 2011. In May, Indian
External Affairs Minister Krishna and Afghan Foreign Minister Rassoul
launched the India-Afghanistan Partnership Council to implement the
SPA. The council is comprised of joint working groups on economic
cooperation, political and security issues, capacity development and
education, and civil society.
On the security front, India provides training to several Afghan
National Security Forces (ANSF) officers each year. As Secretary
Panetta noted during his June trip to India, we appreciate India's
ongoing training of ANSF officers in India, and we hope India will
continue its support for the ANSF up to and beyond the 2014 security
transition.
We also appreciated the Indian Government's role in hosting the
June 28 New Delhi Investment Summit on Afghanistan, which attracted
broad participation from companies in the region and around the globe
to promote stronger commercial ties and regional integration along the
New Silk Road. A number of American companies attended the summit.
India has pledged a total of around $2 billion in economic
assistance to Afghanistan since 2001. During President Obama's November
2010 visit to India, he and PM Singh announced joint projects in the
areas of agriculture and women's development. Indian assistance has
focused primarily on agriculture and infrastructure projects--including
the Parliament building in Kabul, the Salma dam, and several roads and
power lines. An Indian state-owned consortium plans to invest over $10
billion in developing the Hajigak iron ore deposit in Bamiyan Province.
In July, India announced that it will offer 600 scholarships to Afghan
students over the next 5 years to study at Indian universities.
Now that both the United States and India have signed Strategic
Partnership Agreements with Afghanistan, we aim to enhance coordination
and cooperation with both countries through the new India-Afghanistan-
United States trilateral mechanism announced by Secretary Clinton and
EAM Krishna at the June 13 U.S.-India Strategic Dialogue.
Some Pakistanis have voiced concerns about India's role in
Afghanistan, including after Secretary Panetta's visit to India.
Pakistan is principally concerned with India's security-related
assistance and training of ANSF, and fears that India's military will
one day put ``boots on the ground'' in Afghanistan. Even so, we are
encouraged by the ongoing dialogue between India and Pakistan on a wide
range of mutual priorities, and note that Pakistan has significantly
improved its own commercial relations with India over the past year and
a half, which we believe is an important element of deepening regional
economic cooperation in the wider South and Central Asian region.
______
Responses of James B. Cunningham to Questions Submitted
by Senator Richard G. Lugar
Question. With the upcoming Afghanistan elections as the preeminent
governance milestone in Afghanistan's national reemergence as a
sovereign and independent country there are considerable steps that
remain in achieving a reasonably free and fair election.
(a). Will the U.S. Embassy elevate and prioritize the
preparation for national elections upon which international
donor assistance so depends?
Answer. We will continue to support the democratic process in
Afghanistan in accordance with the Afghan Constitution. An orderly and
legitimate constitutional political transition through Presidential
elections in 2014 is critical to future Afghan stability.
(b). With regard to the next national election cycle in
Afghanistan, where will the U.S. focus its assistance and
according to what agreement and milestones with Afghan
officials?
Answer. The 2014 political transition is first and foremost a
question for the
Afghan Government and people, but we stand ready to support and assist
them. We recognize the importance of strengthening Afghanistan's
democratic institutions in the lead up to the 2014 political transition
and beyond, and it is a key component in our U.S.-Afghanistan Strategic
Partnership Agreement.
The Strategic Partnership Agreement describes Afghanistan's
commitment to free, fair, inclusive and transparent elections, as well
as recognizing its need for electoral reforms to reinforce democratic
development. The Tokyo Declaration and President Karzai's July 26
Executive order both outlined that the Presidential election will take
place in 2014, and the Independent Elections Commission (IEC) has
indicated its plans to hold the elections on time in spring 2014, as
mandated in the Afghan Constitution. President Karzai also assigned the
IEC to prepare an election platform and comprehensive electoral
schedule within 3 months, which will enable sufficient preparation time
for security, logistics, and candidates well before the 2014
Presidential election.
The U.S. Government made significant contributions to the 2009 and
2010 elections, including programming to strengthen the IEC and
Election Complaints Commission (ECC). For 2014, we plan to continue
support for these election management institutions to strengthen their
capacity to administer legitimate elections, including hiring qualified
and impartial election officials; providing logistics support to the
IEC; assisting the IEC in establishing a credible and cost-effective
voter registry; and assisting in identifying and allocating polling
locations in accordance with Afghan laws. In addition, the U.S.
Government will continue its support for Parliament, civil society
organizations, election monitors, political parties, media, and women's
organizations to help build their capacity to understand and
participate in the electoral process.
(c). Given your response to the question above, what will
other partner entities and donors likewise be responsible for
in preparation for the elections?
Answer. While this is an Afghan-led process, we will continue to
work with international partners to coordinate our support, including
to Afghanistan's electoral institutions, as well as ensuring civil
society organizations, election monitors, political parties and media
play a role to ensure elections are fair and inclusive. Additionally,
United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) will be
central in coordinating the international community and engaging with
Afghan authorities on the elections.
(d). Given the integral role in transition of power of
independent electoral complaints and adjudication mechanisms
such as in Mexico, it appears the Afghan Electoral Complaints
Commission is facing a loss of its independence and will thus
lose the important positive influence it had in detecting fraud
in the past. Will the U.S. Embassy work to maintain such a
capable and independent entity in Afghanistan?
Answer. An independent electoral complaints mechanism is critical
for advancing the credibility and legitimacy of the elections. Under
current Afghan law, the Elections Complaints Commission is established
120 days prior to the election and its activity ends 2 months after the
certification of election results. The Independent Elections Commission
submitted its recommendations for the draft electoral law, which
includes a revision of the electoral complaints mechanism, to the
Ministry of Justice on June 11. Under his July 26 Executive order,
President Karzai ordered the Ministry of Justice to complete its review
of the electoral law within 2 months. The U.S. Government is following
this process closely. Afghans have a strong interest in a credible
complaints process as a component of free, fair, inclusive and
transparent elections.
Question. The transfer of the Mazar e-Sharif consulate building
from our own use to that of a leased facility has left in question the
likelihood of establishing a consulate in that part of the country.
(a). How important is it to our national interests to
establish a full-fledged consulate in this part of Afghanistan?
Answer. In 2009, Secretary of State Clinton approved the opening of
a consulate in Mazar-e Sharif. The city is a stronghold of the former
Northern Alliance and is comprised largely of Tajik, Uzbek, and Turkmen
ethnic communities. Along with its political influence, Mazar is also a
major commercial, energy, and industrial center. Mazar sits on a
strategic transportation hub linking Afghanistan and Uzbekistan by road
and railroad. The ethnic communities, which include members of the
political opposition, have come to expect a U.S. permanent presence in
the North. Neglecting this region would alienate traditional allies who
are concerned that U.S. support for reconciliation with the Taliban
will result in the abandonment of minority rights in favor of majority
Pashtun interests. India, Iran, Pakistan, Russia, Tajikistan,
Turkmenistan, Turkey, and Uzbekistan all have consulates in Mazar. We
understand Germany, which has had a robust role in northern Afghanistan
in the last decade, is also considering opening a consulate there.
(b). What role would each proposed/existing U.S. consulate
play in our relations with Afghanistan and the region?
Answer. The Department of State's enduring presence plan for
Afghanistan's civilian mission post-2014 consists of the Embassy in
Kabul and four regional platforms in Kandahar, Herat, Mazar-e Sharif
and Jalalabad. This residual civilian presence will be a visible sign
of American resolve and vigilance. An enduring presence countrywide is
the most effective way to further our strategic goals of disrupting and
defeating terrorists, promoting regional stability, fostering good
governance, and ensuring economic growth. The ``hub and spoke'' mission
will promote the reintegration and reconciliation of former insurgents,
monitor and report on political and social trends that impact Afghan
stability and democracy, and work to strengthen the Afghan Government's
capacity to govern, deliver services to the population and enforce rule
of law.
(c). What is the timeline and prospect for the U.S.
consulates in Afghanistan as we observe and glean lessons from
our Iraq experience, including the continuing contraction
there?
Answer. Drawing on lessons learned from Iraq, the Department of
State has utilized a ``whole of government'' approach in planning our
enduring presence with a goal of leveraging all U.S. Government
capabilities across all agencies to avoid duplication and redundancy.
In each location we have colocated or will colocate with interagency
partners.
(d). How does our relationship in Afghanistan over the next
10-20 years compare with Iraq over the same period?
Answer. Our planned relationship with Afghanistan is well described
in the Strategic Partnership Agreement, which is echoed by
international agreements reached at the NATO summit in Chicago and
Tokyo Conference on Afghanistan, which lay out mutual commitments
between the Government of Afghanistan and the international community
for continued reform and sustained international assistance. On our
likely relationship with Iraq over the next 10-20 years, I am not in a
position to reflect upon that. However, I can say that we are applying
lessons we have learned from Iraq to Afghanistan.
Question. The United States has had the preeminent responsibility
for the training and equipping of the Afghan National Security Forces.
(a). Provide a breakdown of current ANA capacity in defense
of Afghanistan, including the number and ethnic makeup of the
enlisted, senior enlisted and officer corps; the critical
equipment and respective shortfalls in critical equipment; the
current general dispersal of the force around the country and
their responsibility for current operations. Extract further
the ethnic breakdown by faction and identify their region of
influence within Afghanistan and neighboring areas.
(b). Provide a breakdown of the current ANP capacity in
securing the population of Afghanistan, including the number
and ethnic makeup of the enlisted and officer corps as well as
that of the Ministry of the Interior.
(c). Provide a breakdown of the LDP by province, including
the number and associated training of forces. Include any
additional formal security elements trained or being trained to
cooperate with the Government of Afghanistan.
Answer. The NATO-led NATO Training Mission Afghanistan (NTM-A) has
the lead for the training, advising, and equipping of the Afghan
National Security Forces. NTM-A is led by a three-star U.S. general who
is dual-hatted as the commander of the U.S. training command, Combined
Security Transition Command-Afghanistan (CSTC-A).
(a). The Afghan National Army (ANA) currently has approximately
185,000 personnel as of June, 2012. Overall, the ethnic breakdown
reflects the demographics of Afghanistan and NTM-A supports the Afghan
Ministry of Defense's (MOD) recruiting efforts to maintain the balance
throughout the forces. According to the U.S. Department of Defense's
April 1230 Progress Report on Security and Stability, NTM-A and the MOD
also continue efforts to recruit southern Pashtuns as well as improve
the overall ethnic balance of the ANA. Using the MOD and NTM-A-agreed
definition for Southern Pashtuns,\1\ this ethnic segment comprised 6.6
percent of enlisted recruits during the reporting period. Despite
persistent efforts, the impact of the initiatives in the south remains
marginal due to the security situation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Southern Pashtuns are defined as belonging to the following
tribes: Ghilzai, Durrani, Zirak, Mohammadzai, Barakzai, Alikozai,
Achakzai, Popalzai, Panjpao, Alizai, Ishaqzai, Tokhi, Hotaki, Khogiani.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NTM-A and CSTC-A continue to procure equipment and invest in
capital and infrastructure expenditures through 2014, when investment
funding requirements are expected to finish and costs will revert
solely to recurring equipping needs. As additional equipment becomes
available, NTM-A will continue to fill corps units to 100 percent.
The ANA is regionally disbursed throughout Afghanistan, but mobile
in order to respond to operational needs as they develop. Their
regional placement is based on MOD coordination with the International
Security Assistance Force (ISAF) to target the insurgency and provide
critical Afghan National Security Force (ANSF) units to lead operations
and security in three tranches of transitioning provinces and
districts, covering 76 percent of the Afghan population.
(b). The Afghan National Police (ANP) have an estimated 146,000
personnel as if June 2012. NTM-A/CSTC-A work closely with the Ministry
of Interior to ensure the ANP generally reflects the ethnic makeup of
local communities, which is enhanced by the fact that ANP often serve
in the area where they join the force. However, when aggregated at the
national level, Tajiks are significantly overrepresented in the force,
Pashtuns are represented proportionally to the Afghan population, and
Hazara, Uzbeks and others are underrepresented to varying degrees.
(c). At this time, State, the Department of Defense and NTM-A are
not involved in a force known as Local District Police (LDP). The
Afghan Local Police (ALP) are village-based security forces
administered by the Afghan MOI and trained through U.S. Special
Operations Forces. As of April, the ALP totaled 12,660, with an
approved ceiling of 30,000 police. The MOI has approved 99 districts
for ALP units, largely focused along the ring road in the south and
east, but also operating in the north and west.
Question. The ``New Silk Road'' effort by the USG has shown some
prospect for attracting economic development interest around the idea
of moving goods/trade overland between central and south Asia.
(a). What infrastructure requirements are there to
facilitate such a trade corridor and through what transit
points in Afghanistan and Pakistan are there?
Answer. The State Department views the New Silk Road vision as an
organizing principle for long-term development and sustainable economic
security for Afghanistan with a focus on regional integration and
private sector engagement. It does not consist of a single list of
projects, but is rather a framework used to inform broader decisions
about U.S. assistance. Expanded trade corridors are an important
regional initiative consistent with the New Silk Road vision.
Infrastructure requirements to implement these trade corridors are
planned and coordinated between governments and donors through regional
initiatives, including the Regional Economic Cooperation Conference on
Afghanistan (RECCA), the South Asian Association for Regional
Cooperation (SAARC), and the Central Asia Regional Economic Cooperation
(CAREC) program. Afghanistan's policy paper ``Towards Self Reliance,''
presented at the recent Tokyo Conference, confirmed their commitment to
apply modern systems and approaches to facilitate transit and trade
among regional neighbors.
CAREC, funded by the Asian Development Bank, has identified six
trade corridors in Central Asia, with Afghanistan situated at the heart
of two corridors, consisting of existing and planned infrastructure.
The State Department and USAID will initially focus primarily on
Corridor 5 (from India to Pakistan, through Afghanistan, and into
Central Asia via Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan to China) as a proof of
concept, while simultaneously looking for opportunities to remain
engaged in Corridor 6 (from Afghanistan through Uzbekistan and
Kazakhstan and on to Europe).
(b). What is the status of these infrastructure elements?
Roads/rail/terminals/cold storage/security/customs and duty/
fuel etc.
Answer. The Fifth RECCA, held in March of this year, identified a
number of infrastructure projects that will improve regional trade
links. These include the Afghan Rail System, the Salang Tunnel and
Bypass Road, the E-W Road Corridor, and the Kabul-Jalalabad-Peshawar
Highway. These projects are currently in the planning or construction
phases. The first phase of the Afghan rail system, connecting the
economic hub of Mazar-e-Sharif to Uzbekistan, became operational
earlier this year.
USAID, coordinating with the State Department, has begun a process
to realign its assistance priorities in Central Asia and South Asia to
support the New Silk Road vision. The primary initial focus of this
realignment will be support of cross-border trade and transit along
CAREC's Corridor 5, including through technical assistance to improve
the regulatory environment and increase private sector engagement. The
Department of State and USAID will also work to engage with
international financial institutions to encourage investments in cross-
border energy projects, such as CASA 1000 (involving the Kyrgyz
Republic, Tajikistan, Afghanistan, and Pakistan).
(c). Describe the existing corridor that runs through
eastern Iran and its condition and planned improvements as well
as any additional routes?
Answer. Trade routes to Iran through Islam Qala and Zaranj involve
greater distances, significant logistical challenges, and higher
transit costs relative to comparable transit trade routes through
Pakistan. However, these routes have seen increased use following
persistent trade disruptions between Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Afghanistan and Pakistan are in the process of resolving disagreements
and fully implementing the Afghanistan-Pakistan Transit Trade Agreement
(APTTA), which will ensure a harmonization of trade policies. The lower
barriers facilitated by APTTA make routes through Pakistan more
attractive for Afghan traders who are currently undertaking transit
trade through Iran. We will continue to work with both sides to
encourage these efforts.
(d). What are the associated revenues for current trade
through this alternative Iranian route and what are the
projected revenues associated with a corridor that incorporates
the Transit Trade Agreement between Pakistan and Afghanistan?
Answer. While we are making significant improvements in the customs
capacity for trade across the Iranian border, we have limited data at
present. We have not performed an analysis of trade revenues comparing
the Iran routes with the Pakistan routes under the scenario of a fully
functional APTTA, but we expect that APPTA, once implemented, will
significantly increase Afghanistan's trade revenues.
______
Responses of James B. Cunningham to Questions Submitted
by Senator Robert P. Casey, Jr.
Question. As we move toward the 2014 Presidential elections, the
Afghan electoral process continues to be a major source of concern. In
particular, I am concerned that neither the Independent Electoral
Commission (IEC) nor the Electoral Complaints Commission (ECC) can be
trusted to ensure a fair and transparent process. Afghan authorities
need to take steps now to reform these institutions and create public
confidence in the process.
(a). As Ambassador, how will you work to increase the
independence of Afghanistan's electoral institutions,
specifically the IEC and the ECC, in advance of the 2014
elections?
Answer. We have and will continue to support the democratic process
in Afghanistan in accordance with the Afghan Constitution. An orderly
and legitimate political transition through Presidential elections in
2014 is key to future Afghan stability. This political transition is an
internal Afghan process, but we stand ready to assist them in any way
we can. We recognize the importance of strengthening Afghanistan's
democratic institutions in the lead up to the 2014 political transition
and beyond. As such, it was a central component in our U.S.-Afghanistan
Strategic Partnership Agreement. Additionally, we will continue to work
with international partners to provide appropriate support, including
to Afghanistan's electoral institutions.
The Afghan Parliament is currently considering electoral reform
legislation that would determine how the Independent Election
Commission (IEC) commissioners are appointed and what their duties are.
We support the Afghan legislative process and are encouraged that civil
society groups and political parties have engaged in a debate over what
would be appropriate checks and balances to enhance the independence of
the IEC and Electoral Complaints Commission (ECC). We also note that
the Afghan Government has committed to holding ``free, fair, inclusive,
and transparent'' elections in both the U.S-Afghanistan Strategic
Partnership Agreement and the Tokyo Declaration.
The U.S. Government made significant contributions to the 2009 and
2010 elections, including programming to strengthen the IEC and ECC. We
aim to continue this line of effort for 2014. We plan to support the
election management institutions and strengthen their capacity to
administer legitimate elections, including supporting the IEC to hire
qualified and impartial election officials; provide logistical support;
establish a more credible voter registry; and to identify and allocate
polling locations in accordance with Afghan laws.
In the Afghan public sphere, a wide-ranging and public discussion
is already taking place on the reforms needed to improve the electoral
process. Actors across the political spectrum are having public
dialogues debating electoral reforms, including in the Independent
Election Commission, political parties, and civil society
organizations.
(b). How will you work to encourage the participation of all
of Afghanistan's
diverse ethnic groups in the electoral process, and how
important will this be for the success of the political
transition and political stability?
Answer. We recognize that only an inclusive political process,
acceptable to all Afghans regardless of ethnic background or gender,
can bring lasting peace to Afghanistan and the region. Everyone must
feel they have a stake in the outcome and a responsibility for
achieving it.
We have engaged and will continue to engage with all legitimate
political actors in Afghanistan. We regularly meet with Afghan leaders
both in and out of government. We continue to stress to the Afghan
Government the importance of inclusive, credible, transparent, and
constitutional elections as the 2014 elections will be key to shaping a
peaceful and democratic future for Afghanistan. The Afghan Government
includes members of all ethnic groups and backgrounds, including
members of the former Northern Alliance, the Afghan Parliament, and the
High Peace Council. Similarly, a successful political transition will
need to equally encompass all Afghans--including opposition groups,
women, and civil society.
Question. A new report by the Special Inspector General for Afghan
Reconstruction indicates that two major U.S. funded infrastructure
projects, designed to build popular support for the Afghan Government,
demonstrate a long-term commitment to the Afghan people, and improve
relations between NATO forces and Afghan civilians, are severely behind
schedule and are unlikely to be completed before the 2014 troop
drawdown. In addition to costing taxpayers $400 million, the projects'
delays may jeopardize key counterinsurgency goals.
(a). Why have these projects been so severely delayed, and
what additional costs will be associated with the longer
project timeline?
Answer. Over the last 18 months, the Department of State has worked
closely with the Department of Defense and the U.S. Agency for
International Development to identify, design, and execute projects
funded by the Afghanistan Infrastructure Fund (AIF). The Afghanistan
Infrastructure Fund is a new authority designed to improve the
coordination and execution of infrastructure projects in Afghanistan to
maximize counterinsurgency and development impact. Establishing the
management processes and structures has taken time, but at this point
we feel strongly that the new authority has greatly improved
interagency coordination and communication with the Government of
Afghanistan on infrastructure projects that contribute to the future
stability of the country. Infrastructure development in a war zone is
never easy; several projects have been delayed because we took
additional steps to notify, manage, and execute activities to ensure
proper accountability. We also revised project procurements to attract
cost-effective bids and to ensure that implementing agencies had the
staffing necessary to properly oversee the work. These projects were
never tied to the schedule for the troop drawdown.
Project costs increased from initial estimates following receipt of
the first bids from qualified vendors. Despite these delays, we expect
to complete on time the AIF transmission line project for southern
Afghanistan.
(b). What is your assessment of the impact of these delays
on the projects' goals of improving public perceptions of the
U.S. and Afghan Governments, particularly in light of the
planned timeline for drawing down international troops?
Answer. We do not agree with the SIGAR's assertion that extension
of the project timeframes will have a significant negative effect on
the counterinsurgency and the development impact. It has been our
experience that all stages of infrastructure projects, which provide
essential services that the insurgency could never offer to the Afghan
people, have a positive impact. The planning stage of these long-term
projects gives clear assurance of the enduring commitment of the United
States to the people of Afghanistan. The construction phase creates
employment and helps stabilize conflict areas. Final completion opens
the way for greater economic opportunity.
The United States Government is working hard to make sure our
investments in Afghanistan are sustainable. In our discussions with the
Committee on Foreign Relations staff, we have looked for ways to
improve the sustainability of projects under the Afghanistan
Infrastructure Fund (AIF). In order to increase ownership and develop
the capacity of the Afghan Government to sustain these projects,
several AIF projects will be implemented on-budget, or through the
Afghan Government. Though the AIF was conceived as a counterinsurgency
program, it provides positive impacts for Afghanistan's economic
development. We believe that the Government of Afghanistan's
involvement in the implementation of these infrastructure projects
improves sustainability of projects. However, ensuring proper oversight
and financial accountability for these projects has added time to their
implementation.
______
Responses of Richard G. Olson to Questions Submitted
by Senator Robert P. Casey, Jr.
Question. Haqqani Network.--The Senate approved legislation last
week that would require the State Department to report on whether the
Haqqani network should be designated a Foreign Terrorist Organization.
I traveled to RC East last August where the Haqqani Network has been
responsible for the deaths of American service members. The Haqqani
Network manufactures IEDs used against our troops and has conducted
suicide attacks in Kabul. These are terrorist acts. However, the
Haqqanis could play spoilers if they are not included in political
negotiations to bring hostilities to a close.